Mayor-Commissioner Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence.

Transcription

1 MINUTES CITY OF INDIAN ROCKS BEACH REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING The Indian Rocks Beach Regular Commission Meeting was held on Tuesday, July 23, 2013, in the City Commission Chambers, 1507 Bay Palm Boulevard, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida. Mayor-Commissioner Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. PRESENT: Mayor-Commissioner R.B. Johnson Vice Mayor-Commissioner Joanne Cookie Kennedy Commissioner Terry Hamilton-Wollin Commissioner Phil Hanna Commissioner James A. Labadie City Attorney Maura J. Kiefer City Manager Brently Gregg Mims City Clerk Deanne B. O Reilly Finance Director Daniel A. Carpenter Planning and Zoning Director Danny E. Taylor Public Services Director Dean A. Scharmen OATH OF OFFICE City Manager Brently Gregg Mims. 1. RESOLUTION NO Establishing the tentative millage rate for Fiscal Year 2013/2014. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Florida Statutes, the City has received Form DR- 420, Certification of Taxable Value, from the Pinellas County Property Appraiser. In order for the Property Appraiser to mail out TRIM notices, the City Commission is required to set a tentative millage rate. The tentative millage rate is recommended to be mills. The Finance Director advises that the current rolled back rate would be based on the proposed valuation of $778,008,976 for the City of Indian Rocks Beach. Page 1 of 26

2 ANALYSIS: Pursuant to Section (4)(d), F.S., once the tentative millage rate is set, in no event may the final millage rate that is adopted in September exceed the millage rate tentatively adopted; however, it may be lower. This recommended millage rate of mills is the same as the current fiscal year. In fact, FY 2014 will be the sixth consecutive year that this millage rate has remained steady at mills. City Attorney Kiefer read Resolution No by title only. Finance Director Carpenter advised the tentative millage rate of mills represents the sixth year in a row for the City of Indian Rocks Beach maintaining the same millage rate and is the rate in the Proposed Budget Fiscal Year submitted to the City Commission. Finance Director Carpenter made the following announcement: The first public hearing to consider the tentative millage rate and tentative FY2013/2014 budget will be held on Wednesday, September 4, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers at 1507 Bay Palm Boulevard, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida. Mayor Johnson opened the meeting to public comment and seeing and hearing no one wishing to speak closed, the public comment for this agenda item. MOTION MADE BY VICE MAYOR KENNEDY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANNA, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO ESTABLISHING THE TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/2014 AT MILLS. Mayor Johnson reiterated the following announcement: The first public hearing to consider the tentative millage rate and tentative FY2013/2014 budget will be held on Wednesday, September 4, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers at 1507 Bay Palm Boulevard, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida. 2. REPORTS OF the Pinellas County Sheriff s Office. Lieutenant Joseph Gerretz introduced all the deputies assigned to Indian Rocks Beach as of July 18, Page 2 of 26

3 Lieutenant Gerretz recognized Sergeant Kelly Bush and Detective Crystal McGill, noting they are two of the Department s most recent promotions who were recently assigned to the City. Community Policing Deputy Dunham reviewed the June 2013 Crime Analysis Report, and advised that individuals were arrested in connection with The Walsingham Bridge graffiti and the graffiti at Portofino s Restaurant, 2721 Gulf Boulevard. Community Policing Deputy Dunham announced that a Public Safety Day has been scheduled for Saturday, August 24, 2013, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m., in Kolb Park. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. th Nancy Obarski, 708 Beach Trail, #B, commented that on the 4 of July, she saw deputies advising people on the beach this was a no alcohol beach; and at the same time, there some rowdy pot smokers that slipped under the radar screen. She stated the alcohol ban on the beach, while it might be well intentioned, is making some of the residents rather miserable. She asked what are the options other than the old days of selective enforcement. Also, exceptions are granted to organizations and for weddings on the beach who need to serve alcohol on the beach, and sometimes the groom and/or bride are th not residents. She stated on October 12 (Oktoberfest), when people are drinking on the beach, she, as a resident who pays taxes here, will not be able to do the same. She suggested consideration of allowing alcohol on the beach and noted law enforcement would still have every option to focus on people who are abusing alcohol and can be arrested for several things. She stated if a resident lives on the intracoastal waterway, they can sit on the end of their dock and enjoy a cocktail, but she cannot do that. She stated if she sits on her deck, the dunes keep her from seeing the Gulf-of-Mexico. William Dotson, 1 Windrush Boulevard, #74, spoke regarding the alcohol on the beach issue, and stated he sees people drinking up and down the beach when he walks at night. He stated there is a rule here that is selectively enforced on different days, and it is difficult to enforce for the deputies. He suggested a discussion on a future agenda. th Phil Wrobel, Avenue, commented he agreed with Ms. Obarski on the alcohol issue. He stated he hoped there will be discussion about the YMCA Summer Camp regarding exclusive use of certain areas of Kolb Park. Page 3 of 26

4 Mayor Johnson advised the plan was to let the new City Manager get familiar with the YMCA Summer Camp Program so it is not on this agenda, but will be soon. Mr. Wrobel thanked the Sheriff for introducing the Indian Rocks Beach deputies to the public and the City Commission, which is something that has not happened in years, and he hopes this will get back to the community deputies. He commented that Community Policing Deputy Dunham is doing a great job, however, he is not doing anything different than the City s deputies used to do prior to a few years ago. Mr. Wrobel stated he did not make it to the budget meeting, but he hopes that the Community Policing Deputy position ($70,000 to $90,000) is not in the budget again. He stated the City is already paying more than $850,000 to the Sheriff s Office for law enforcement services. He stated if the deputies are coming in like this and ready to be part of the community again and go back to the community patrol of before and getting to know the people, then there is no need for the Community Policing Deputy. He stated he knows the City lost some great deputies from the 1990's and some other great ones all along. He hopes the Community Policing Deputy position is not in the budget, stating that money can be spent somewhere else in the City. th Ray Berger, Avenue, welcomed City Manager Mims to the community. Paul Jenkins, Crabby Bill s of Seafood, welcomed City Manager Mims to the community. 4. ORGANIZATIONAL REMARKS. Phil Wrobel, on behalf of the IRB Homeowners Association, welcomed City Manager Mims to the City. 5A. REPORTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. None. 5B. REPORTS OF THE CITY MANAGER. Finance Director Carpenter presented the May and June Financial Reports. 5C. REPORTS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. Page 4 of 26

5 COMMISSIONER HANNA: Welcomed City Manager Mims. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Advised the meeting for the Keegan Clair Business Kiosk is scheduled for July 29, 2013, at 2:15 p.m., in City Hall Conference Room. Requested the discussion of the alcohol on the beach be a future agenda item. CONSENSUS TO PLACE THE DISCUSSION OF ALCOHOL ON THE BEACH ON A FUTURE AGENDA, AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET, AS A WORK SESSION ITEM. th Reported that there is trash on 24 Beach Trail, stating there is a nasty T-shirt hanging from the utility lines. th Expressed concern that with July 4 being in the middle of the week, people continued to have fireworks the rest of the week that caused trash of all kinds to accumulate all week long. N Mayor Johnson stated he also noticed the fireworks continuing for several days on the beach so at that point, it might be a matter of more law enforcement at night. Reported on her meeting with Mike Meidel, Director of Pinellas County Economic Development Department, regarding economic development in Indian Rocks Beach. She stated that the Pinellas County Economic Development Department is more than happy to assist the City. She suggested coming up with a plan to present to the County Commission for mixed-use and so forth. It was her impression they want a consensus from the City Commission possibly in the form of a resolution to be clear on what the City wants and then they will go to work on it. N Planning and Zoning Director Taylor commented they did talk about what is known as the County Parking Lot, 2309 Gulf Boulevard, that never came about and the possibilities for that property, which is in the B zoning district. When the County purchased the property, they did not research the Indian Rocks Beach Zoning Codes to know that a stand-alone parking lot would not be allowed. He explained the City could make an amendment to the Zoning Code if that is a desire, but there has been no discussion on that. He noted the current zoning (business) is about the best possible zoning for a parking lot and mixed-use. However, the first step would be for the City Commission to have a consensus and then somehow communicate that to the County Commission about opening the dialogue about doing something with that property. Page 5 of 26

6 N N Mayor Johnson asked what preparatory work needs to be done to get to that stage where the City Commission comes to a consensus or approves a resolution to send a message to the County. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor stated there needs to be a formal communication, either in the form of a letter or resolution, identifying certain points the City Commission wants to bring up to start the dialogue because right now it is a government-owned property in a significant location in Indian Rocks Beach that has a fairly good value. As government owned property produces no tax revenue for the County or the City so it is in everyone s mutual best interest to try to do something with it. There are a number of possibilities to be explored, but someone needs to take that first step. COMMISSIONER HAMILTON-WOLLIN: Stated she would like to know what the USF Study indicated for that area, which would be a good starting point. She has learned recently the Portofino property, 2721 Gulf Boulevard, has sold, and it is exciting that there might be a possibility for some real life in that area. COMMISSIONER LABADIE: th Also expressed concern regarding the trash after July 4, but noted that this community has always taken care of that and he appreciates it. He suggested the fireworks continuing was because of the rain this year, and he does not know how to stop the fireworks. MAYOR JOHNSON: Announced the City Commission Budget Work Session on August 1, 2013, beginning at 4:00 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers. Advised a letter was received from the owner of Sweet D Lites, 301 Gulf Boulevard, commending Building Official Weigner regarding his assistance. Noted the Pinellas Suncoast Fire and Rescue District recently received the District of the Year Award from the Florida Association of Special Districts. 6. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS. None. 7. CONSENT AGENDA: A. CONFIRMING ACTION TAKEN during the June 28, 2013 Special City Commission Meeting. Page 6 of 26

7 B. APPROVAL OF the May 28, 2013 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. C. APPROVAL OF the June 18, 2013 Special City Commission Meeting Minutes. D. APPROVAL OF the June 11, 2013 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. E. APPROVAL OF the June 28, 2013 Special City Commission Meeting Minutes. F. APPROVAL OF the June 25, 2013 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. G. RESOLUTION NO Amending Resolution No ; providing for the establishment of signatories on behalf of all checking accounts for the City; providing for the City Manager; the City Clerk; the Finance Director; the Mayor- Commissioner; and the Vice Mayor-Commissioner to be said signatories. H. RESOLUTION NO Designating Commissioner Terry Hamilton-Wollin to serve as the City s voting delegate at the th 87 Annual Florida League of Cities Conference on August 15-17, 2013, in Orlando, Florida. City Attorney Kiefer read the Consent Agenda, consisting of Agenda Item Nos. 7A through 7H. MOTION MADE BY VICE MAYOR KENNEDY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTING OF AGENDA ITEM NOS. 7A THROUGH 7H. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL BY ACCLAMATION. 8A. RESOLUTION NO /BOA CASE NUMBER QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING. Providing for variances to Code Section (5)(f)(4)(i) for side yard setbacks of 2 feet, 6 feet, and 3.5 feet; a variance to Code Section (5)(e)(1)(i) of 58 feet to the minimum lot size; a variance to Code Section (5)(e)(2) of 23 feet to the minimum lot width; in order to replat an existing lot, for property located at 1600 Gulf Boulevard, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida, and legally described Indian Beach Re-Revised, Blk 22, Lot 12 less RD on E. [Official Publication Date: July 10, 2013.] Page 7 of 26

8 SUBJECT: Variance requests to Code Section (5)(f)(4)(i) for side yard setbacks of 2 feet, 6 feet and 3.5 feet; a variance to Code Section (5)(e)(1)(i) of 58 feet to the minimum lot size; a variance to code section (5)(e)(2) of 23 feet to the minimum lot width for 1600 Gulf Boulevard, (Lot 12); legally described as Indian Beach Re-Revised, Block 22, Lot 12 less road on East. There are two separate applications submitted in connection with these two properties: 1600 and 1602 Gulf Boulevard. The two applications, the proposed variances and the two parcels are interrelated and, to some extent, contingent upon one another. BOA RECOMMENDATION: Unanimous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the variance review criteria of Section 2-152, staff recommends approval of all five variance requests for this property. OWNER: AGENT: LOCATION: ZONING: Michael and Tina Chapman Cindy Hoover 1600 Gulf Boulevard (Indian Beach Re-Revised Block 22, Lot 12 Less Road on E) CT Commercial Tourist Surrounding Uses and Zoning Direction Existing Use Zoning Category North Residential CT East Residential Gulf Blvd South Residential CT West Residential CT BACKGROUND: This is an unusual property given the configuration of the two structures as they sit on the two separate lots. The southernmost structure sits th at a 45 degree angle from the 16 Avenue beach access and Gulf Boulevard. Most of the structure sits on lot 12 (1600 Gulf Boulevard). A portion of the structure encroaches across the property line into lot 13 (1602 Gulf Boulevard). The Chapmans own both 1600 and 1602 Gulf Boulevard and desire to sell In order to do so, they must revise the property lines such that each structure sits on its own lot. Page 8 of 26

9 A proposed boundary survey is included with the variance applications depicting the shape of the properties after they are subdivided. At the present time both lots are substandard in size. The minimum lot size for a single family house in the CT zoning district is 5,808 square feet. Each of these lots measures 5,750 which is 58 feet less than the standard lot size. Both lots are legally nonconforming with respect to size. And, the requested variances simply affirm this fact. No change in size is proposed for either lot. In order for each structure to adequately sit on its own property, a zigzag property line is proposed to divide the two parcels, mindful of the existing location of the two structures and the corresponding setbacks. Hence, multiple setback variances are proposed. Also, in order to accommodate the zigzag dividing property line, variances are needed for the minimum lot width. Sec Variances. (a) Generally; criteria for granting variances from the terms of subpart B. (1) The board of adjustments and appeals shall make recommendations on and the city commission shall decide variance applications will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of subpart B will result in unnecessary and undue hardship. In order to recommend or decide any variance from the terms of subpart B, the board or the city commission shall consider each of the following: a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. The structure at 1600 Gulf Boulevard (Lot 12) encroaches 12½ feet across the existing contiguous property line. Evidently this makes financing very difficult for the majority of buyers. b. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant did not create the special conditions or circumstances. c. Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by subpart B to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. Many properties are bought and sold with financing in Indian Rocks Beach. d. Literal interpretation of the provisions of subpart B would deprive other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of subpart B and would work unnecessary and undue hardship upon Page 9 of 26

10 the applicant. The literal interpretation of the provisions of Subpart B would deprive the property owner from selling the adjacent property (Lot 13). e. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, structure or building. This is the minimum variance to allow the owner to sell the property construct the addition as desired. f. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of subpart B, and such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or be otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Granting the variance will allow the owner to replat both properties making them sellable. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT: A notice was mailed by first class mail to the property owners within one hundred and fifty feet in any direction of the subject property on July 8, Notice was posted on the subject property on July 8, 2013 per the Code of Ordinances. PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE: No correspondence was received. Pursuant to a legal notice published in the July 10, 2013-edition of the Neighborhood Times Section of the St. Petersburg Times, as evidenced by an affidavit of publication, filed with the City Clerk, a public hearing was held on Resolution No City Attorney Kiefer read Resolution No by title only. Mayor Johnson inquired if any City Commission Member needed to disclose any ex-parte communications regarding this application; to which City Commissioner Hanna, Commissioner Hamilton-Wollin, Vice Mayor Kennedy, and Mayor Johnson all stated, for the record, they had visited the property. Commissioner Labadie stated he was familiar with the property. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. Upon the request of Mayor Johnson, all persons planning to give testimony during the public hearing were duly sworn in by the City Clerk. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor presented the Agenda Item and explained the two variance requests on the agenda are related. The first is 1600 Gulf Boulevard, and it is a request for five separate variances, and the second is at Page 10 of 26

11 1602 Gulf Boulevard, and it is a request for four variances. The two properties have two variance requests in common related to lot size and lot width and the other differences are related to side yard setbacks. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor made a PowerPoint Presentation, depicting photographs of the property, an aerial view, a survey, and a site plan. He stated the applicants are requesting five separate variances as read by the City Attorney in the title of Resolution No The structure on 1600 Gulf Boulevard sits at something of a 45 degree angle from the side property lines and actually encroaches onto the other property at 1602 Gulf Boulevard. The property lines are drawn as rectangles and the middle property line goes underneath the house on the south side. The attempt is to develop a variance such that this property can be replatted into two separate properties. Both properties are owned by the same owner, and they would like to sell 1602 Gulf Boulevard; however, in order to sell and secure financing, there needs to be a separate piece of land for 1602 Gulf Boulevard, and if both variance requests with all nine variances are granted, then they will be able to do that. The lots are non-conforming being 58 feet less than the minimum lot size, and they did succeed in not changing the lot size even though something of a zigzag lot line had to be developed between the two properties in order to divide them. The other part of the request is the variance to the lot width. The other three parts of the first variance have to do with the side yard setbacks required at 7.5 feet and the dimensions are stated in the report and shown on the drawings. Commissioner Labadie inquired regarding the size of the lots. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor explained the square footage of each lot remains the same in order not to increase the degree of nonconformity of either lot. Mayor Johnson asked if there is any downside to granting the variances into the future even though it does, in the short term, offer a solution to the current owner. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor stated he does not see anything and noted the first concern in dividing property is to ensure both pieces have access from a road, which is not a concern in this case. They are not changing the square footage, just making a portion of the lot more narrow, but all things considered, they have come up with the best and most logical solution given the goal. Page 11 of 26

12 Tina Chapman, 1600 Gulf Boulevard, applicant, explained the reason for the variance requests is that after purchasing both properties and doing many renovations to the one house with the intent in the mid to short term to sell the property. She stated it has been a difficult process, and they were not made aware of the encroachment until after closing on the property. She explained financing cannot be obtained on the property because of the encroachment issues, and no one knows how to resolve the issue except for the solution being presented here. She noted there is a letter from their lender in support of redrawing the property lines so that they are both sellable in and of themselves. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. Nancy Obarski, 708 Beach Trail Drive, #B, asked how long the property has been like this and how did it get this way. She understands the problem, and it is a creative solution, but she does not know how a person can buy a property without a title search showing that kind of issue. Gordon Obarski, 708 Beach Trail Drive, #B, commented this is a good way to fix a problem and he supports the variance. Seeing and/or hearing no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR KENNEDY, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO /BOA CASE NUMBER , PROVIDING VARIANCES TO CODE SECTION (5)(F)(4)(I) FOR SIDE YARD SETBACKS OF 2 FEET, 6 FEET, AND 3.5 FEET; A VARIANCE TO CODE SECTION (5)(E)(1)(I) OF 58 FEET TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE; A VARIANCE TO CODE SECTION (5)(E)(2) OF 23 FEET TO THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH; IN ORDER TO REPLAT AN EXISTING LOT, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1600 GULF BOULEVARD, INDIAN ROCKS BEACH, FLORIDA, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED INDIAN BEACH RE-REVISED, BLK 22, LOT 12 LESS RD ON E. ROLL CALL: HANNA KENNEDY HAMILTON-WOLLIN LABADIE JOHNSON Page 12 of 26

13 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8B. RESOLUTION NO /BOA CASE NUMBER QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING. Providing for variances to Code Section (5)(f)(4)(i) for side yard setbacks of 1.6 feet and 6 feet; a variance to Code Section (5)(e)(1)(i) of 58 feet to the minimum lot size; a variance request to Code Section (5)(e)(2) of 23 feet to the minimum lot width, in order to replat an existing lot, for property located at 1602 Gulf Boulevard (Lot 13) Indian Rocks Beach, Florida; and legally described as Indian Beach Revised, Block 22, Lot 13 less road on East. [Official Publication Date: July 10, 2013.] SUBJECT: A variance request to Code Section (5)(f)(4)(i) for side yard setbacks of 1.6 feet and 6 feet; a variance to Code Section (5)(e)(1)(i) of 58 feet to the minimum lot size; a variance request to Code Section (5)(e)(2) of 23 feet to the minimum lot width, for property located at 1602 Gulf Boulevard (Lot 13); legally described as Indian Beach Revised, Block 22, Lot 13 less road on East. NOTE: There are two separate applications submitted in connection with these two properties: 1600 and 1602 Gulf Boulevard. The two applications, the proposed variances and the two parcels are interrelated and, to some extent, contingent upon one another. BOA RECOMMENDATION: Unanimous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the variance review criteria of Section 2-152, staff recommends approval of all the variance requests for this property. OWNER: AGENT: LOCATION: ZONING: Michael & Tina Chapman Cindy Hoover 1602 Gulf Boulevard (Indian Beach Re-Revised Blk 22, Lot 13 Less RD on E) CT Commercial Tourist Surrounding Uses and Zoning Direction Existing Use Zoning Category North Residential CT East Boulevard Gulf Boulevard South Residential CT Page 13 of 26

14 West Residential CT BACKGROUND: This is an unusual property given the configuration of the two structures as they sit on the two separate lots. The southernmost structure sits at a 45 degree angle from the 16th Avenue beach access and Gulf Boulevard. Most of the structure sits on Lot 12 (1600 Gulf Boulevard). A portion of the structure encroaches across the property line into lot 13 (1602 Gulf Boulevard). The Chapmans own both 1600 and 1602 Gulf Boulevard and desire to sell In order to do so, they must revise the property lines such that each structure sits on its own lot. A proposed boundary survey is included with the variance applications depicting the shape of the properties after they are subdivided. At the present time both lots are substandard in size. The minimum lot size for a single family house in the CT zoning district is 5,808 square feet. Each of these lots measures 5,750 which is 58 feet less than the standard lot size. Both lots are legally nonconforming with respect to size. And, the requested variances simply affirm this fact. No change in size is proposed for either lot. In order for each structure to adequately sit on its own property, a zigzag property line is proposed to divide the two parcels, mindful of the existing location of the two structures and the corresponding setbacks. Hence, multiple setback variances are proposed. Also, in order to accommodate the zigzag dividing property line, variances are needed for the minimum lot width. Sec Variances. (a) Generally; criteria for granting variances from the terms of subpart B. (1) The board of adjustments and appeals shall make recommendations on and the city commission shall decide variance applications will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of subpart B will result in unnecessary and undue hardship. In order to recommend or decide any variance from the terms of subpart B, the board or the city commission shall consider each of the following: a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. The structure at 1600 Gulf Boulevard (Lot 12) encroaches 12½ feet Page 14 of 26

15 across the existing contiguous property line. Evidently this makes financing very difficult for the majority of buyers. b. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant did not create the special conditions or circumstances. c. Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by subpart B to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. Many properties are bought and sold with financing in Indian Rocks Beach. d. Literal interpretation of the provisions of subpart B would deprive other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of subpart B and would work unnecessary and undue hardship upon the applicant. The literal interpretation of the provisions of Subpart B would deprive the property owner from selling the adjacent property on Lot 13. e. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, structure or building. This is the minimum variance to allow the owner to sell the property construct the addition as desired. f. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of subpart B, and such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or be otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Granting the variance will allow the owner to replat both properties making them sellable. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT: A notice was mailed by first class mail to the property owners within one hundred and fifty feet in any direction of the subject property on July 8, Notice was posted on the subject property on July 8, 2013 per the Code of Ordinances. PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE: No correspondence was received. Pursuant to a legal notice published in the July 10, 2013-edition of the Neighborhood Times Section of the St. Petersburg Times, as evidenced by an affidavit of publication, filed with the City Clerk, a public hearing was held on Resolution No City Attorney Kiefer read Ordinance No by title only. Mayor Johnson inquired if any City Commission Member needed to disclose any ex-parte communications regarding this application; to which City Page 15 of 26

16 Commissioner Hanna, Commissioner Hamilton-Wollin, Vice Mayor Kennedy and Mayor Johnson all stated, for the record, they had visited the property. Commissioner Labadie stated he was familiar with the property. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. Upon the request of Mayor Johnson, all persons planning to give testimony during the public hearing were duly sworn in by the City Clerk. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor presented the Agenda Memorandum and made a PowerPoint Presentation, depicting photographs of the property, an aerial view, a survey, and a site plan. He explained the variance request is the mirror image of the request in Resolution No , and stated the applicants are requesting four variances. The first variance has to do with the lot size, the second with the lot width, and two variances related to side yard setbacks with the dimensions as shown in the agenda package. Tina Chapman, 1600 Gulf Boulevard, applicant, explained this variance request is the mirror image of the previous case presented. This will eliminate the encroachment onto the property, which allows for both properties to be sellable in the future. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. Seeing and/or hearing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMILTON-WOLLIN, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO /BOA CASE NUMBER , PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES TO CODE SECTION (5)(F)(4)(I) FOR SIDE YARD SETBACKS OF 1.6 FEET AND 6 FEET; A VARIANCE TO CODE SECTION (5)(E)(1)(I) OF 58 FEET TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE; A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CODE SECTION (5)(E)(2) OF 23 FEET TO THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, IN ORDER TO REPLAT AN EXISTING LOT, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1602 GULF BOULEVARD (LOT 13) INDIAN ROCKS BEACH, FLORIDA; AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS INDIAN BEACH REVISED, BLOCK 22, LOT 13 LESS ROAD ON EAST. ROLL CALL: HANNA KENNEDY Page 16 of 26

17 HAMILTON-WOLLIN LABADIE JOHNSON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8C. ORDINANCE NO SECOND AND FINAL READING PUBLIC HEARING. Providing for a text amendment to the Infrastructure Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the City of Indian Rocks Beach Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance No ; providing for a Water Supply Facility Work Plan. [Official Publication Date: July 10, 2013.] SUBJECT: Second reading of Ordinance No , updating the Infrastructure Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the Comprehensive Plan related to SWFWMD s required water supply facility work plan. LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMENDATION: Approval STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval The City of Indian Rocks Beach is a retail water customer of Pinellas County. IRB does not own its source of water. It also does not own the treatment system or the water distribution system which lies beneath City, County, and State roads and streets. IRB residents purchase water from Pinellas County. Pinellas County obtains its water from Tampa Bay Water. About 18 months ago, the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) adopted an updated Regional Water Supply Plan. Pinellas County has since developed a Ten-Year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan. Florida Statute Section requires all local governments to amend their comprehensive plans accordingly. Staff has reviewed correspondence from Pinellas County and has communicated with SWFWMD about what Comprehensive Plan amendments would satisfy the requirements of F.S Page 17 of 26

18 SWFWMD requires that the City use SWFWMD s population projections. These projections differ from US Census figures. SWFWMD s numbers include tourist population. Pursuant to a legal notice published in the July 10, 2013-edition of the Neighborhood Times Section of the St. Petersburg Times, as evidenced by an affidavit of publication, filed with the City Clerk, a public hearing was held on Ordinance No City Attorney Kiefer read Ordinance No by title only. Mayor Johnson opened the pubic hearing. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor presented the Agenda Memorandum and explained this is the second reading of Ordinance No amending the Comprehensive Plan. He explained after the first reading, the ordinance was forwarded to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and comment and has been returned with comments including from the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) commending the City for the action. He explained that it really is not applicable to Indian Rocks Beach since the City does not have source or treat water, but does distribute water; therefore, the action needed to be taken and the ordinance passed. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearings and seeing and/or hearing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. MOTION MADE BY VICE MAYOR KENNEDY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANNA, APPROVED ORDINANCE NO , ON SECOND AND FINAL READING, PROVIDING FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF INDIAN ROCKS BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO ; PROVIDING FOR A WATER SUPPLY FACILITY WORK PLAN. ROLL CALL: HANNA KENNEDY HAMILTON-WOLLIN LABADIE JOHNSON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Page 18 of 26

19 8D. ORDINANCE NO SECOND AND FINAL READING PUBLIC HEARING. Providing for a text amendment to the Capital Improvement Element of the City of Indian Rocks Beach Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance No ; providing for the annual update of the Capital Improvement Element. [Official Publication Date: July 10, 2013.] BACKGROUND: This is the annual statutorily required update to the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The numbers contained in this document replicate those found in the budget adopted by the City Commission in September The Local Planning Agency reviewed this Comprehensive Plan amendment on March 21, 2013, and unanimously recommended approval. Pursuant to a legal notice published in the July 10, 2013-edition of the Neighborhood Times Section of the St. Petersburg Times, as evidenced by an affidavit of publication, filed with the City Clerk, a public hearing was held on Ordinance No City Attorney Kiefer read Ordinance No by title only. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor presented the Agenda Memorandum and explained this is the annual update to the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Florida Statute. This effectively mirrors the last adopted budget and the capital element of that budget. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. Seeing and/or hearing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER HAMILTON-WOLLIN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO , ON SECOND AND FINAL READING, PROVIDING FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF INDIAN ROCKS BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO ; PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL UPDATE OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT. Page 19 of 26

20 ROLL CALL: HANNA KENNEDY HAMILTON-WOLLIN LABADIE JOHNSON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8E. ORDINANCE NO FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. Amending Chapter 98, Signs; Article III, Regulations; Division 1. Generally; Section , Political signs; deleting limitations on the number of political, or noncommercial, signs located on private property; deleting the durational requirements imposed on political signs before and after election dates; prohibiting political signs on city property and rights-of-way. [Official Publication Date: July 10, 2013.] BACKGROUND: Former City Manager Coward and City Clerk O Reilly asked City Attorney Kiefer to review certain provisions of the sign ordinance related to political and noncommercial signs on private property. The issue was reviewed by the City Commission on March 12 and April 9. The following changes are included in the amended ordinance: 1. Delete the limitation on the number of political signs on private property. 2. Delete the 45/5 day rule. 3. Prohibit the placement of political signs on City property, roads, streets and rights-of-way. Pursuant to a legal notice published in the July 10, 2013-edition of the Neighborhood Times Section of the St. Petersburg Times, as evidenced by an affidavit of publication, filed with the City Clerk, a public hearing was held on Ordinance No City Attorney Kiefer presented the Agenda Memorandum and noted this is the first reading and public hearing for this ordinance. The proposed ordinance has been discussed by the City Commission, and has been reviewed and recommended approval by both the Planning and Zoning Board and Local Planning Agency. The changes as agreed upon by the City Commission were Page 20 of 26

21 made. The goal was to make the ordinance constitutionally infirm and not infringe on anyone s right of expression or speech. Mayor Johnson commented the changes provide for allowing signs on private property, but preventing the signs on public property, roads, right-of-ways, and so forth. Mayor Johnson opened the public hearing. th Ray Berger, Avenue, requested an explanation of deleting the durational requirements after the election date. City Attorney Kiefer explained that before the change, the ordinance required political signs to be removed within five days after the election, and that when it is noncommercial speech, the freedom of expression, and rights of free speech in the Federal and State Constitutions pretty much would allow someone to have a political sign. Mr. Berger stated political signs on commercial property, up and down the street, should be taken down at a certain point in time. He stated at the end of street where he lives, there is a grocer with all those signs on the corner and asked if those signs should be taken down; it is almost a hazard for turning sometimes. City Attorney Kiefer explained the City still will regulate the location of the signs, and they have to be a certain distance from the curb and so forth. Seeing and/or hearing no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Johnson closed the public hearing. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER HAMILTON-WOLLIN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO , ON FIRST READING, AMENDING CHAPTER 98, SIGNS; ARTICLE III, REGULATIONS; DIVISION 1. GENERALLY; SECTION , POLITICAL SIGNS; DELETING LIMITATIONS ON THE NUMBER OF POLITICAL, OR NONCOMMERCIAL, SIGNS LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY; DELETING THE DURATIONAL REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED ON POLITICAL SIGNS BEFORE AND AFTER ELECTION DATES; PROHIBITING POLITICAL SIGNS ON CITY PROPERTY AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY. ROLL CALL: HANNA Page 21 of 26

22 KENNEDY HAMILTON-WOLLIN LABADIE JOHNSON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9A. RESOLUTION NO Authorizing the City Manager to enter into agreements for health insurance coverage with Public Risk Management of Florida Health Trust Blue Cross Blue Shield Plan 3359 and an optional health insurance plan (HMO Blue Care 42). BACKGROUND: Public Risk Management of Florida (PRM) is a public entity risksharing pool dedicated to making insurance both available and affordable for its members. Currently, it provides the City with property/casualty/workers compensation and health coverage. The City of Indian Rocks Beach has been a member of the PC pool since 2000 and of the health pool since 2009, and has benefitted significantly from its loss control, insurance, and employee benefits programs. The health insurance coverage is up for renewal in July and renewal quotes have just been received. ANALYSIS: The IRB renewal quote for FY for the PRM health insurance is flat with no increase in cost over the current FY premium. The way the PRM health pool is structured, the 41 members are divided into three groups each year based on their individual group s loss ratio. The members with a loss ratio (claims paid to premium paid) better than 10% of the pool average will receive up to a 6% reduction to the pool s base rate increase (this year 3.3%), and the members with a worse loss ratio (more than 10%) will receive up to a 6% increase to the pool s base rate. All those within 10% will receive the pool average. This is done to ensure that incentives remain for each member to control costs to the greatest degree possible, but if a member should experience a bad year, their increase is capped at the base rate plus 6%. For FY the IRB loss ratio was very favorable and the pool s base rate increase of 6% was reduced to 0%. A higher level health plan, with no deductibles or coinsurance and reduced outof-pocket maximums is again available to employees for FY Such plans are more costly and optional buy-up plans are generally not available to groups as small as ours (under 100 participants). However, since we are in the PRM pool, we do have the ability to offer an optional plan, and given that cost Page 22 of 26

23 increases are paid for 100% by the employee opting for the coverage, staff recommends making such plans available. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City of Indian Rocks Beach renew its group health insurance coverage with the PRM Group Health Trust for Plan 3359, Blue Options 3359 for FY ; It is recommended that the City of Indian Rocks Beach offer an optional health insurance coverage plan, PRM s HMO15, Blue Care 42, to be selected by those employees who so desire said coverage and the employee will pay all associated increased costs from this selection over and above the Blue Options 3359 coverage plan. City Attorney Kiefer read Resolution No by title only. Finance Director Carpenter presented the Agenda Memorandum explaining that Resolution No seeks approval for the annual renewal of the employee health care package; the single largest cost benefit provided to the employees of Indian Rocks Beach. Finance Director Carpenter explained a couple of years ago, the City joined the Public Risk Management pool in order to mitigate the past and current increasing costs of providing health care benefits, which has been successful by diluting the City s small group along with 55 other cities belonging to the pool and has helped smooth some of the otherwise larger bumps should the City have shopped for the small group. He advised the group had a good year and the pool overall had a good year resulting in the City being able to obtain 0% renewal rate that is pay for the same insurance with the same benefit to the City s employees for 2014 at the same cost as the current year. Finance Director Carpenter noted he has not seen this happen in twelve years and does not expect to see it again unless something within the industry changes dramatically. Finance Director Carpenter advised staff recommends approval of the renewal of the health insurance package for employees and their dependents at the 0% increased rate for Mayor Johnson opened the Agenda Item to public comment. There was no public comment. Page 23 of 26

24 MOTION MADE BY VICE MAYOR KENNEDY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANNA, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO , AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE WITH PUBLIC RISK MANAGEMENT OF FLORIDA HEALTH TRUST BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD PLAN 3359 AND AN OPTIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN (HMO BLUE CARE 42). MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. ORDINANCES, first reading: None. 11A. DISCUSSION OF variance application fee for Resolution No /BOA Case No , 1218 Beach Trail. BACKGROUND: On May 28, 2013, the City Commission heard a request for a variance from the required setback from the seawall for a property located at 1218 Beach Trail. At issue was some misunderstanding between the applicant and a former Indian Rocks Beach Building Official as to the depth of the setback. Plans approved in 2007 indicated a setback from the seawall of 25 feet when, in fact, the required setback is 35 feet from the seawall. An addition was allowed to be constructed in 2007 based on the then Building Official s understanding that the setback from the center of the seawall for properties fronting the Gulf of Mexico was 25 feet. Kathryn C. Helmus, agent for Linda Pfaelzer, initially submitted a site plan in April of this year in application for a variance from the seawall setback for Ms. Pfaelzer s property on the Gulf of Mexico at 1218 Beach Trail. When he started to review the application materials, especially the site plan, he noticed that the setback from the seawall was noted on the plans as 25 feet, and he called this error to the attention of Ms. Helmus. The site plan was then revised to show the correct setback of 35 feet. It then became apparent that construction had been allowed in 2007 based on the assumption and misinformation that the setback from the seawall was 25 feet. The action taken by the City Commission on May 28, 2013, to approve only a portion of the variance then being requested, effectively affirmed the variance given by the Building Official in The fee paid in 2013 paid for the variance granted in Planning and Zoning Director Taylor presented the Agenda Memorandum. Page 24 of 26

25 Mayor Johnson commented that it should have been done back then and was not, and when the applicant came around this time and wanted to go further, the City Commission said no, but it needed to be made whole at this point. Commissioner Labadie stated the City made it whole in correcting what was possible. His concern in this matter was the fact that the resident had to pay another $ to request a variance, which could not be granted. It was not her mistake from the beginning and the way she found out was to spend $ to find out that the mistake had to be corrected that the City originally created. He felt in all fairness to the resident that the City in good faith should refund her $ Mayor Johnson asked if Planning and Zoning Director Taylor is saying the owner would have had to come forward anyway back then for a variance. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor stated if the City had the correct information in 2007, and if they had wanted to persist with what they wanted to do, then in 2007 they would have paid a $ fee in order to proceed with the variance request. Mayor Johnson stated they were renovating the house and making major changes and part of what they were rebuilding was out in front of the front setback, and they would have had to ask for a variance back then and paid the fee the same as it is now; it is actually just a delay in payment. Commissioner Labadie stated when he reads that an official misinterpreted the setbacks from the Gulf of Mexico as 25 feet, and when someone in the City is misinterpreting something, then the City needs to accept that. He stated it just concerned him that the resident had to pay another $ to find out originally it was wrong, and she was not going to get the variance request she paid for. Mayor Johnson clarified the applicant did not pay another $400.00, just $ this time. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor reiterated the applicant did not pay anything in 2007, just $ in 2013 for the process she went through. Commissioner Labadie stated he was under the impression the applicant had paid twice; once in 2007 and once in Page 25 of 26

26 Commissioner Hanna commented the confusion comes in whether the City Official made a mistake or not and that is a separate issue, but he was only going on the information he had at the time, but the citizen did not have to pay for the first one. Commissioner Labadie expressed appreciation for staff taking the time to clarify the issue. Vice Mayor Kennedy asked if this property owner has approached the City to do anything else on the property. Planning and Zoning Director Taylor stated the builder has asked about a different property, but not this subject property. Mayor Johnson opened the agenda item to public comment. There was no public comment. No action was taken on this agenda item. 12. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. None. 13. OTHER BUSINESS. None. 14. ADJOURNMENT. None. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER HANNA, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LABADIE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:30 p.m. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL BY ACCLAMATION. August 13, 2013 Date Approved R.B. Johnson, Mayor-Commissioner Attest: Deanne B. O Reilly, MMC, City Clerk Page 26 of 26