Loading...
07/16/1996PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER July 16, 1996 Present: Jay Keyes Brenda Harris Nixon Edward Mazur Kemper Merriam Robert D. Bickerstaffe Bernie Baron Frank Kunnen Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member   Scott Shuford Leslie Dougall-Sides Lou Hilton Gwen Legters Central Permitting Director Assistant City Attorney Senior Planner Board Reporter   To provide continuity, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 2:00 p.m. in City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. He outlined meeting procedures and the appeal process. Minutes Approval -- June 18, 1996 Member Nixon requested amendment of the first paragraph under Board and Staff Comments on page 7 to indicate she objected to the way the Police Department handles false alarm citations for residential security systems versus the lack of charge for excessive calls to alcohol related uses. Member Nixon moved to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. Requests for Extension, Deferred and Continued Items B1. (cont. from 6/4/96 & 6/18/96) - Trial Period Review - R.C. Lawler, Inc/Gregory Vance Moore/Debra Ann Delemeester (The Kennel Klub Bar & Grill, Inc) to permit nightclubs, taverns, and bars (change of business ownership) and package sales of beer and wine at 1400 Cleveland Street, Knollwood Replat, Blk 1, Lots 1-4, zoned CG (Commercial General). CU 95-63 Mr. Hilton presented written background information, stating staff recommended approval subject to conditions #1 through #4 as imposed on October 31, 1995. Conditions #5 and #6 regarding signage have been met. Condition #7 imposed today’s trial period review. Ed Armstrong, attorney representing the applicants, clarified the original request had included package sales, but the request was approved subject to the condition that no package sales were allowed. The applicant has adhered to the conditions. He said facilities of this type have been on the subject property continuously for at least 17 years. While problems had been experienced in the past, Mr. Moore has made a concerted effort to upgrade the facility and comply with the seven conditions imposed on the change of ownership approval. Greg Moore, one of the owners, explained what he has done to improve the reputation of the pub, clean up the grounds, and tighten security. He quoted four City police officers who support and regularly monitor the establishment. Mr. Moore and his wife are present continuously during operating hours. Mr. Armstrong reviewed the seven conditions of approval, explaining how each has been met. Referring to condition #7, he explained issues related to compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. He circulated two letters and a petition with approximately 12 signatures of those in support of the subject operation. Questions were raised and lengthy discussion ensued regarding how the applicant has gone about providing parking lot security to meet condition #2. Mr. Moore said he, and doormen who come on duty at 8:00 p.m., walk around the parking lot several times an hour to inspect for unwanted activity and debris. He requested clarification of the condition. While he did not feel the level of business warrants an outside security guard every minute between the specified hours, he will comply if that is the board’s direction. One member expressed concern that frequent calls to inspect alcoholic beverage establishments place an undue burden on police department resources. A suggestion was made for the applicant to put a permanent security guard on the payroll to reduce the frequency of police providing routine security at taxpayers’ expense. Questions were raised regarding Officer Thomas’ March 27 report of a bartender serving alcohol to intoxicated patrons. Mr. Moore related his understanding of the event, stating the bartender in question was well trained and experienced, but is no longer in his employ. He has thoroughly trained his current staff and will send them to a responsible vendor program to be conducted by a local beer distributor. Four persons spoke in opposition to the request, as follows: Clearwater Police Officer James W. Thomas recounted what he observed and the action he took as a result of the March 27 incident. While this is the only time he observed alcohol being served to intoxicated patrons, he had observed apparently intoxicated transients leaving the bar on other occasions while he was responding to calls to an adjacent retail establishment. He said the security person hired by the applicants is a convicted felon on probation for drug related violations. Officer Thomas submitted and explained a computer history detailing 66 police calls to this address from March 27 to the present. He watches the property while on duty and, while the situation has improved, calls for service to this establishment continue to come in. He wished the owners well, but stated it is his duty to keep an eye on the situation and report what he observes. In response to a question, Officer Thomas had not spoken with the officers to whom Mr. Moore referred and had no information about what they may have witnessed. Officer Thomas responded to cross examination by Mr. Armstrong, stating he has not issued any citations related to serving alcohol because that is the responsibility of State ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) personnel. He reiterated he observed one incident of alcohol being served to intoxicated patrons, but has observed intoxicated patrons leaving the bar on other occasions while he was responding to calls to Nature’s Food Patch. It was possible they had not been served in the facility. He did not know which of the calls on the incident report related to the Kennel Klub. He declined to offer an opinion whether the facility is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. In response to board questions, Officer Thomas said the incident report lists the location to which officers are called, but does not specify from where the calls originate. It was not known how many of the calls came from neighborhood residents and how many came from the bar. Asked to review the petition submitted in support of the request, Officer Thomas indicated the addresses appear to correspond with residences in the vicinity. Althea Patterson, representing Second Church of Christ, Scientist, spoke in opposition to the request. They feel the tavern contributes to the problems the church experiences with debris, liquor bottles, and undesirable behavior from people loitering on the church grounds. She wished to ensure children who play and wait for the bus in the church parking lot are protected from tavern activities a block and a half away. She submitted four letters from residents in opposition to the request. In response to a question, she did not know if the vagrants come from the Kennel Klub or the nearby soup kitchen. Upon cross examination, Ms. Patterson said the tavern and its activities cannot be seen or heard from the church. She was aware the establishment is not allowed to have package liquor sales and wanted to ensure that condition is not reversed. Mr. Armstrong stated the applicant is comfortable with the condition prohibiting package sales and pointed out the liquor bottles found on church property could not have come from the Kennel Klub. Edwin Wilson, church member, said he is active in improving the community and works with the police and the homeless. He has observed inebriated people coming from the Kennel Klub and felt alcohol is the biggest problem in downtown Clearwater. He noted the existence of four alcoholic beverage establishments in the vicinity. He stressed objection to package sales and private police protection at public expense. In response to questions, he indicated the majority of the bottles left in the grass and bushes, and broken in the parking lot, come from beer and wine. He felt the new owner has done his best and did not presume the bottles came from the Kennel Klub, but indicated patrons carry bottles out of taverns without being observed by the proprietors. Mr. Wilson responded to cross-examination from Mr. Armstrong, stated he has observed 10 to 15 intoxicated people coming from the tavern during the past year. He acknowledged the neighborhood has improved through community efforts and Mr. Moore was doing his best to help. William Mooney, nearby resident did not want another source of package sales in a community that seems to be seeing a trend toward alcoholism, with transients and vagrants drinking and urinating in public. He was aware the applicant was no longer asking for package sales, but as that aspect of the request was still in the advertising, he wanted to ensure package sales is allowed. In summary, Mr. Armstrong indicated substantial competent evidence has been presented that the applicant has met all conditions of approval. He felt the 17 year continuous use of the property is compatible with the surrounding property. Neighbors in support of the application are closer in proximity than is the church. While the church has legitimate concerns, he indicated the source of those concerns does not appear to originate with the Kennel Klub. Mr. Moore responded to questions, stating beer is served in pitchers and bottles, but no beverage is allowed to leave the property. Concern was expressed the City cannot enforce adherence to the State alcoholic beverage regulations. It was pointed out package sales is allowed three doors away. A suggestion was made for another trial period to monitor the security issue. Mr. Armstrong said the applicant is willing to meet all reasonable conditions and did not agree the applicant should be asked to keep coming back before the board. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding security personnel for the entire property, to reduce the number of times police are needed to respond to calls. Mr. Armstrong indicated this was acceptable to the applicant. Board members offered differing opinions about the duration and style of security policing needed. Ms. Dougall-Sides pointed out the condition does not specify a State licensed security guard must be used. Mr. Hilton suggested a condition the management keeps the grounds cleared of litter and maintained on a daily basis. Some felt the applicant is being asked to adhere to security provisions in excess of what is asked of other businesses. Others felt the City should look into requiring paid security at more alcoholic beverage establishments to reduce the number of calls to City police. In response to a question, Mr. Hilton said this alcoholic beverage use does not meet the separation distance requirement, but was established prior to the current code. Clarification of the application was requested, because the advertising still indicates the applicant is asking for package sales as part of the change of ownership. Mr. Hilton verified package sales has been eliminated from the request. Member Kunnen moved to approve Item B1 subject to continuation of conditions #1 through #4 as imposed October 31, 1995, with #2 being amended to read: The applicant shall provide security personnel whose sole responsibility is to police the parking lot and grounds between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 2:30 a.m. The management of the proposed tavern shall keep the grounds cleared of debris and monitored on a daily basis. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C. Conditional Uses C1. B.J.E., Inc./Pelican Two, Inc./Jammin’z of Clearwater Beach, Inc. To permit nightclubs, taverns and bars (change of business ownership) at 470 Mandalay Ave, Clearwater Beach Park 1st Addition Replat, Blk A, Lots 2-8, Clearwater Beach Park 1st Addition, Blk B, Lots 32-43 and vac alley, and Clearwater Beach Park, Lots 43-48, 65-71, and part of Lot 64, zoned CB (Beach Commercial) and CR 28 (Resort Commercial). CU 96-29 Jim Staack, attorney representing B.J.E. and Jammin’z, explained closing on sale of the parcel has been delayed and he has not received authorization to speak on behalf of Pelican Two. He requested a continuance to the next regular meeting. Member Bickerstaffe moved to continue Item C1 to the meeting of August 20. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C2. Rob Roy Meador, Jr., TRE/David Ray Simmons (D&D Clearwater Food Mart) to permit package sales of beer and wine (new license) at 2999 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Lame’s Survey, part of Tract A, zoned CG (General Commercial). CU 96-30 Mr. Hilton presented written background information, stating staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with three conditions. A question was raised regarding why condition #3 was proposed to cut off alcoholic beverage sales at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Hilton said that is when the applicant had proposed to close the establishment. David Simmons, business owner, said normal operating hours were from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. He has extended hours of operation since filing the application and asked for modification of the condition limiting sales. Condition #3 was deleted because board members did not feel it necessary to restrict the applicants hours of operation. Member Kunnen moved to approve Item C2 subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite building permit, certificate of occupancy and occupational license within six months from the date of this public hearing; and 2) All site lighting shall be equipped with a 90º cutoff mechanism, with the light being directed downward and away from adjoining residential properties and street rights-of-way prior to issuance of the requisite occupational license. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C3. Bay Bazaar Partnership (George’s Bistro) to permit restaurants in excess of 10% of gross floor area of a retail complex at 733 S. Gulfview Blvd, Bayside Shores, Blk C, Lots 1-10, zoned CB (Beach Commercial). CU 96-31 Mr. Hilton presented written background information, stating approval of the application will enable an 800 square foot expansion of George’s Bistro located in the Bay Bazaar retail center. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with three conditions. Jenny Savoretti, one of the restaurant owners, stated they propose to expand their restaurant from 30 to 60 seats, adding two restrooms and bringing additional business to the retail complex. William Kebort, owner of the Bay Bazaar Shopping Center, stated George is a good cook and runs a gourmet restaurant. Mr. Kebort supported the expansion, stating the increased business on the south end of Clearwater beach will benefit fellow tenants and the public. David Tregor, adjacent business owner, spoke in support of the request. He stated George is a valued member of the retail establishment and they want him to succeed. Chris Sakalariou, restaurant patron, stated George and his wife run a fine establishment. The expansion is warranted because of their level of business and the need for indoor restrooms. George’s Bistro receives accolades from all the neighboring business owners and is a nice restaurant to have in the City. A letter from attorney Tim Johnson was submitted in support of the request. No verbal or written opposition was expressed. Member Mazur moved to approve Item C3 subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite building permit, certificate of occupancy and occupational license within six months from the date of this public hearing; 2) All site lighting shall be equipped with a 90º cutoff mechanism, with the light being directed downward and away from adjoining residential properties and street rights-of-way prior to issuance of the requisite occupational license; and 3) There shall be no outdoor entertainment, seating or speakers. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. Annexation, Zoning, Land Use Plan Amendment, Land Development Code Text Amendment, and Local Planning Agency Review Modification of a site plan condition #5 (to allow Wal-Mart Store to remain open 24 hours per day and seven days per week) related to the CPD (Commercial Planned Development) approved on December 19, 1991. D1. 23106 US 19 N, Loehmann’s Plaza Replat, Lots 1-3, Loehmann’s Plaza, Lot 1 (WalMart Stores, Inc./David B. Taheri, TRE (Taheri Family Trust)/Kinko’s of Georgia, Inc./Brandon Nu-West Clearwater, Ltd) Z96-08 ZONE: CPD (Commercial Planned Development) Member Mazur declared a conflict of interest regarding this case and stepped down from the dais. Member Nixon questioned if she has a conflict of interest. As president of the Clearwater Free Clinic, she had requested Wal-Mart to donate storage containers worth approximately $125 dollars to the clinic, before she learned of this item on today’s agenda. While Ms. Dougall-Sides was considering the question, the applicants’ representative said the store manager has agreed to donate the containers regardless of the outcome of today’s hearing. Ms. Nixon remained on the panel. Mr. Hilton presented written background information, stating the applicants worked with staff, the Planning and Zoning Board, and the City Commission while developing the CPD and establishing hours of operation to receive the December 1991 approval. Citizen participation was encouraged and staff worked with the Coachman Ridge Homeowners Association to mitigate the impact of store operations on the adjacent residential neighborhood. Ed Armstrong, attorney representing Wal-Mart Stores, reviewed the history of the property acquisition, rezoning and retail development. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval to the City Commission, subject to 13 conditions regulating how business is conducted on the property. The applicant is asking for deletion of the condition limiting the hours of operation. He indicated Wal-Mart clientele likes the ability to shop at irregular hours, and a 24-hour operation in this heavily traveled commercial corridor is appropriate. Other 24-hour retail establishments exist in the area. The proposal will have no detrimental impact on the adjacent residential area, as very little activity occurs at the rear of the building. A landscaping buffer that died in the last freeze has been replaced and, combined with a wide existing Florida Power easement, will buffer any impacts to the surrounding area. Applicant representatives met with homeowners association leaders to determine what the concerns are, how to address the concerns, and how to be good neighbors. While the meeting was cordial, they could not agree on this request. He said the limitation on hours of deliveries will not change. Clarification was requested which condition is to be deleted. It was indicated the condition limiting the hours of operation is #5 on the site plan and #6 in the December 3, 1991 minutes. No verbal or written support was expressed. A July 14 letter from Coachman Ridge resident Robert Losi was submitted in opposition to the request. Two persons spoke in opposition, as follows: Bob Wignall, President of Coachman Ridge Homeowners Association, spoke in opposition to the request. He submitted a packet containing a July 11 letter of objection he submitted to the City Clerk, a June 17 letter he sent to Coachman Ridge homeowners containing information regarding Wal-Mart’s request, and a two page missive containing background, analysis, a time line for processing Wal-Mart’s current proposal, and a form soliciting residents’ opinions regarding the extended hours of operation. He cited concerns extending hours of operation is not conducive to an upscale neighborhood environment because of noise associated with delivery and garbage trucks, increasing security problems at night, and traffic impacts. The neighborhood situation has not changed and conditions established during negotiations in 1991 are still valid. While the approved hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., he noted Wal-Mart is operating from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The landscaping buffer died in February and was not replaced until today. Referring to the survey sent to the homeowners, he said 78% of the 140 who responded opposed extended hours. Those homeowners closest to Wal-Mart were the most vocal in their opposition. Other 24-hour operations are some distance away, and much smaller than the Wal-Mart store. He felt the terms of the agreement prepared over a two year period would be violated by approval of this request. He was vehemently opposed to any changes to those conditions. He responded to board questions regarding dumpster pickup, site lighting and refrigeration trucks left running all night waiting for the beginning of approved delivery hours. His major concern related to security was discussed. He noted two 24-hour Wal-Marts are located within 15 minutes of the subject property. John McBain, Coachman Ridge resident, offered a historical perspective of how the site plan conditions were developed. He emphasized Wal-Mart was a big part of the decision making process and encouraged the board to uphold those conditions. He said walkways installed for the convenience of neighborhood residents wishing to shop at Wal-Mart could just as easily be used by those trespassing into the neighborhood at night. He felt any increased profits of an all-night operation would be gained at the expense of neighborhood security. Mr. Armstrong stated he wished to save his right to cross examination witnesses for the City Commission hearing of this matter. He responded to the opposition regarding noise, traffic and security. Traffic impacts were addressed by closing Stag Run North and will not changed by extending hours of operation. He indicated the distance from the west side of the store, across the Florida Power easement, to the back property line of the nearest home is approximately 264 feet. As all major store activity occurs on the eastern side of the property, no noise impacts could result. Regarding security, he read from a staff report stating increased nighttime activity in the parking lots would reduce the likelihood of after hours criminal activity. No adverse impacts have been reported as a result of Wal-Mart’s increased hours from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Board discussion ensued and concern was expressed Wal-Mart arbitrarily changed its hours of operations and did not maintain the required vegetation. Mr. Armstrong responded the failure of the landscaping was due to the hard freeze and problems with the irrigation system. Significant repairs were needed and the new landscaping must be maintained. The change in hours of operation was due to a breakdown in communications between Wal-Mart’s corporate headquarters and their real estate department. A question was raised regarding elevation drawings specifying color schemes and architectural features to mitigate the box-like appearance of the type of building typical for this use. Discussion ensued regarding parking lot interior landscaping requirements and what, if anything was done differently at this store. While members did not express concern with extending the hours of operation, it was felt noise considerations should be addressed by closing the western portion of the parking lot at night to preclude truck parking at night. It was indicated the dumpster is owned and maintained by Wal-Mart. Discussion ensued regarding a condition to require replacement of landscaping that does not thrive. The standard site lighting condition was requested. Concerns were expressed with imposing more conditions on the applicant. Mr. Shuford indicated conditions are necessary for provisions over and above the code requirements the board wants the City to enforce. He read suggested language for four conditions discussed by the board. Member Kunnen moved to endorse Item D1 to the City Commission subject to conditions imposed by the Planning and Zoning Board on December 3, 1991 with the deletion of Site Plan Condition #5 (minutes condition #6) regarding hours of operation; adding the following conditions: 1) Dumpster service shall be prohibited between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.; 2) Landscaping shall be continuously maintained, especially on the west side of the site; 3) All site lighting shall be equipped with a 90º cutoff mechanism, with the light being directed downward and away from adjoining residential properties and street rights-of-way; and 4) There shall be no parking of refrigerated or other vehicles which must be parked in a running condition west of the east wall of the Wal-Mart building during the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D2. The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Clearwater and James A. Vogel and Hazel E. Vogel, Applicants, for property located on the east side of Landmark Drive, approximately 650 feet south of Enterprise Road, Clearwater, Florida, legally described as M&B 22.011 in Section 33-29-16. The Development Agreement authorizes the development of up to 34 single family residential units and up to 14,160 sq. ft. of office floor area. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating this item was brought back due to an advertising problem. This is the final version of the development agreement that will be considered by the City Commission this week. Staff recommends endorsement. In response to a question, it was indicated this version was changed to clarify setbacks on page 11 and legal requirements related to annexation and zoning in paragraphs 27 and 34. Member Mazur moved to endorse Item D2 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D3. 2995 Union Street, Sec 05-29-16, M&B 11.01 (Attention Home, Inc.) A 96-23 ZONE: RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential) In a letter dated July 16, 1996, a six month continuance was requested due to extreme time pressures and personal commitments. Member Bickerstaffe moved to continue Item D3 for six months, to a date uncertain. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D4. 20162 US 19 N, Sec 18-29-16, part of M&B 44.04, Sever Park, part of Lot 3. (Asa J. & Katherine G. Lewis) Z96-07 ZONE: From OG (Office General) & RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential) to P (Preservation) Mr. Shuford requested a continuance to the meeting of August 20, 1996. Member Merriam moved to continue Item D4 to the meeting of August 20, 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D5. Resolution 96-48 Downtown Redevelopment Plan Amendment to revise the Plan’s land use plan and project list to include the Winn-Dixie Project. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating this proposal will be located at the northeast corner of Myrtle Avenue and Cleveland Street. He provided copies of the proposed changes to the Downtown Development Plan, including the map extending the commercial area up Myrtle Avenue. These changes are needed to allow use of Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) funds in the redevelopment project. He reviewed zoning charts highlighting the small rezoning area, explaining that a construction time line and budget adjustments will be needed to add a grocery store anchor to the redevelopment plan. Nancy Hansen, representing Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services (CNHS), presented a preliminary site plan. A 48,000 square foot Winn-Dixie with a 6,000 square foot retail center in front is proposed to incorporate several small parcels. The marketplace style store will use Winn-Dixie’s new aesthetic exterior treatment of rose, teal and blue colors. The 24-hour full service store will include a bank, deli, pizza shop, bakery, floral department, service meat and seafood counters, dry cleaner, and pharmacy. Heavy emphasis will be placed on wide landscaping areas, and the use will be buffered from a proposed school to the north. Traffic ingress and egress will be on Prospect and Myrtle Avenues. The retail center will include two incubator spaces to help establish emerging businesses. She said they wish to create this development as a destination in downtown Clearwater, help economic development, and provide many job opportunities for local area residents. She reviewed financing, grant applications, and tax projections. In response to a question, Ms. Hansen said no entrances will be located on Cleveland Street. She responded to questions about configuration of the retail area, and coordinating landscaping and sidewalks treatments into the downtown streetscape. It was not known if the pharmacy will stay open 24 hours. Concern was expressed the parking lot contain sufficient trees to avoid looking hot and barren in the future. Mr. Shuford responded extensive perimeter landscaping will be provided and the development will be scrutinized by the Design Review Board. A question was raised regarding what the City’s financial contribution will be. Mr. Shuford pointed out the tax value increase will add to the tax increment financing going into the downtown redevelopment project. Ms. Hansen explained financing details, stating CNHS will own the project. The CRA will lend $900,000 for 20 years at 3 percent interest. She listed the amounts and sources of acquired and expected grant funding. Winn-Dixie will construct the building and sell it the CNHS at cost, financing the construction at 6 percent interest. CNHS will, in turn, lease the building to Winn-Dixie at market rates. Winn-Dixie will have a 20-year lease with five 5-year renewals. Mr. Shuford clarified that the $900,000 will be repaid, so CRA’s contribution to the project will be 3 percent of the interest on the $900,000 loan for 20 years. Ms. Hansen stressed the project will not proceed unless it can maintain its own cash flow without additional subsidies. One member expressed concerns with public funds being used to subsidize a wealthy commercial venture. If the CRA has money to invest in business, it was felt the investment should be in a number small businesses that would stimulate creation of more businesses. It was indicated the landscaping plan is unacceptable because it lacks trees, and the trend in urban renewal is to place stores toward the street with parking and landscaping behind. It was felt the focus should be on constructing housing to stimulate economic growth, rather than constructing business to stimulate housing. Ms. Hansen responded to concerns, stating the loan is to help CNHS bring down the price of the overall development, not to reduce Winn-Dixie’s cost of doing business. While the focus of CNHS is primarily on housing, they have had a commercial economic development component since 1983. She reiterated market lease rate will be charged to Winn-Dixie. She explained how the western part of Clearwater is drastically under served by supermarkets. CNHS will continue to build houses in the community as lots become available. Studies have shown women who do the majority of shopping, will not park behind buildings for security reasons. Mr. Shuford stated the applicant has addressed front parking concerns by shifting the retail stores to the front corner and providing a large landscaped area along Cleveland Street for farmers’ markets and open air sales, contributing to streetscape activities. He anticipates increasing interest for a residential downtown and felt a grocery store is a good support service. He felt lucky to get Winn-Dixie interested in downtown Clearwater because of the price of land, the difficulties involved in locating in an area without a large amount of residential support, and the uncertainty of the location of the new bridge. In response to questions, Mr. Hansen said, while the number of employees depends on the level of sales, it is estimated 150 employees will be needed to start. Winn-Dixie will have the right to expand up to 60,000 square feet and has the potential to employ up to 250 people. She said the property will stay on the tax rolls and payment of property tax is negotiated in the lease. Isay Gulley, Executive Director of CNHS, offered to conduct a tour for board members to view the improvements to the North Greenwood neighborhood. She stated CNHS is trying to stabilize the community by bringing in better housing opportunities and providing more affordable, good quality services. She expressed concern that the lack of price controls and poor quality goods generally offered by little urban grocery stores are keeping urban residents in economic bondage. With the Highland Avenue store closing, the lower income residents, especially those without transportation, have nowhere to purchase goods. She asked the board to consider the nearby services and how economic development is being addressed in the urban communities. A supermarket at this location will serve more than just the North Greenwood community and will benefit the City as a whole. Member Merriam moved to endorse Item D5 to the City Commission. Members Keyes, Mazur, Merriam, and Baron voted "Aye"; Members Nixon, Bickerstaffe, and Kunnen voted "Nay." Motion carried. D6. ORDINANCE NO. 5958-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending section 32.273 to provide for authority of the Director of Solid Waste to manage solid waste collection, conveyance and disposal; creating Section 42.36, Code of Ordinances, to provide for refuse and recycling container location and enclosure standards; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating the ordinance will regulate the screening and location of dumpsters and recycling containers. A program underway on Clearwater beach uses some of the concepts in this ordinance. Containers throughout the City will have to be brought into conformance by January, 1999. A program was developed by the City Solid Waste department to fairly and effectively retrofit existing containers. Staff recommended endorsement. Mr. Shuford responded to questions and discussion ensued regarding placement of dumpsters in setbacks, interior industrial sites, and near residential areas. He noted a variance or administrative relief could be requested where meeting the code creates a hardship or a problem with site design. Mr. Shuford will review the ordinance parameters to ensure it is consistent and reasonable in industrial areas. He responded to concerns regarding washing out dumpsters, control of runoff from washing dumpsters, and monitoring unauthorized dumpster use. Mr. Shuford requested endorsement, stating he will incorporate language addressing the above discussion into the version that goes to the City Commission. Member Nixon moved to endorse Item D6 to the City Commission with the stipulation staff will address board concerns. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The meeting recessed from 5:00 to 5:12 p.m. D7. ORDINANCE NO. 6062-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Sections 40.365, 40.384, 41.053, Code of Ordinances, to allow car rental uses as a conditional use in the Beach Commercial District and Resort Commercial 28 District, identifying standards for approval of a conditional use application for car rental uses, specifying that conditional use approval of outdoor displays requires compatibility in scale and appearance with surrounding uses without causing an undesirable concentration of such uses, deleting the prohibition of temporary buildings, portable buildings, tents, stands, trailers and vending carts in conjunction with outdoor sales, displays, or storage uses, deleting a restriction in the Downtown/Mixed use district that outdoor sales be limited to vegetable and fruit stands, deleting the requirement for a minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet for outdoor storage in the Downtown/Mixed use district, deleting language prohibiting outdoor sales and displays of boats and vehicles in the Infill Commercial district, and deleting the requirement for a minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet for outdoor retail sales, displays and/or storage in the Infill Commercial district; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating this issue was addressed in January, 1995, but the City Commission did not express interest in pursuing adoption at that time. Staff is bringing the issue forward again due to the number of inquiries received recently regarding establishing car rental businesses in the Clearwater beach area. Staff recommended endorsement for the convenience of the many visitors to Clearwater beach who have shuttled from the airport. Mr. Shuford responded to a question regarding undesirable concentration of car rentals by stating the board will need to determine character and compatibility with surroundings on a case by case basis. It was not known how many car rental businesses are on the beach, but it was indicated at least one is in business without an occupational license or zoning approval. A suggestion was made to allow rental business offices on the beach, leaving the rental cars parked on the mainland for delivery to the beach upon request. Mr. Shuford acknowledged parking requirements will have to be met. While he did not expect to see any large scale car rentals or storage, he felt some on-site storage would be necessary. Member Kunnen moved to endorse Item D7 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D8. ORDINANCE NO. 6063-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Section 40.007, Code of Ordinances, to amend and revise the interpretation of and variance from chapter section by deleting the reference to net density, by deleting the old and adding new requirements for calculations resulting in a fraction; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating this ordinance will clarify language regarding net density calculations. Staff recommended endorsement. Member Kunnen moved to endorse Item D8 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D9. ORDINANCE NO. 6068-96 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Sections 35.11 and 42.34, Code of Ordinances, to specify that density calculations for nursing homes shall be computed on the basis of three residents equals one unit, and parking for nursing homes shall be required on the basis of one space per three persons residing in the facility; providing an effective date. Mr. Shuford presented written background information, stating this ordinance proposes to change language regarding density calculations in nursing homes, to refer to the number of residents instead of the number of beds. Staff recommended endorsement. Member Bickerstaffe moved to endorse Item D9 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D10. Proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report - Louis R. Hilton Mr. Hilton reviewed the history of the report, stating evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan is required every five years. For the past year he has been working on an update and analysis of whether or not Comprehensive Plan objectives were met. After endorsement by the Planning and Zoning Board as the local planning agency, Mr. Hilton will submit this proposed report to the State Department of Community Affairs for sufficiency review. Subsequent amendments will be reviewed by the board and staff before final adoption. Concern was expressed the board could not review the entire report due to its magnitude. Mr. Shuford asked for endorsement to transmit the document to the State so they can comment on the sufficiency of the report. Staff will bring the State’s comments back to the board for discussion and final adoption. Member Kunnen moved to endorse Item D10 to the City Commission and the Department of Community Affairs for review. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Board and Staff Comments Ms. Legters requested readoption of the minutes of June 4, 1996 as corrected on page 5, clarifying board and staff discussion language related to the Morrison’s property. Member Baron moved to reapprove the minutes of June 4, 1996, as corrected by staff. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Shuford reported a series of design workshops will be conducted in cooperation with the Downtown Development Board and the Clearwater Chamber of Commerce. He will mail information to the board regarding these meetings. A community informational meeting and slide presentation is scheduled tomorrow night at the beach civic center regarding the Mandalay Streetscape proposal. Discussion ensued regarding signs and signage requirements that will be discussed at the next design workshop. Member Bickerstaff questioned information on the State Legislature’s Preservation 2000 program. Mr. Shuford suggested inviting an Environmental Management representative to the next meeting to discuss that and other preservation type grants that are available. Member Nixon questioned tree replacement requirements and what recourse the City has when trees are pruned so severely they are no longer viable. Mr. Shuford said those issues are handled on a case by case basis by Environmental and Code Enforcement staff. She questioned how trees are measured and discussion ensued regarding DBH, or diameter at breast height. Ms. Dougall-Sides read DBH standards from the code. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 5:58 p.m.