City Council Meeting Minutes January 21, Draft. City of Clearwater. City Hall 112 S. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL

Transcription

1 City Hall 112 S. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 21, :00 PM Special City Council Meeting - U.L.I. Recommendations Council Chambers City Council Page 1

2 Roll Call Present: 5 - Mayor George N. Cretekos, Vice Mayor Doreen Hock-DiPolito, Councilmember Bill Jonson, Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton and Councilmember Jay E. Polglaze Also Present: William B. Horne II - City Manager, Jill S. Silverboard - Assistant City Manager, Rod Irwin, Assistant City Manager, Pamela K. Akin - City Attorney, Rosemarie Call - City Clerk, and Nicole Sprague Official Records and Legislative Services Coordinator To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Unapproved 1. Call to Order Mayor Cretekos The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. 2. Citizens to be heard re items not on the agenda None. 3. City Manager Reports 3.1 Provide direction to and appoint the Charter Review Committee. The City Charter requires a Charter Review Committee be appointed at least every five years, appointments to be made in January preceding an election. The Charter also requires there be at least 10 members, all of whom must be Clearwater residents. At the time of appointment, the Council provides direction to the Committee regarding items the Council would like the committee to consider. In response to a suggestion, concerns were expressed that appointing eleven members would be too small of a group and not reflect the community's diversity and would not ensure those individuals who recently participated in Clearwater 101 the opportunity to serve. Vice Mayor Hock-DiPolito moved to appoint thirteen members. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Discussion ensued with council consensus to appoint Jane Bongo, Rosemarie Kibitlewski, and David Loyd. Page 2

3 Vice Mayor Hock-DiPolito moved to appoint Nino Accetta, David Allbritton, Brian Aungst, Jr., Jane Bongo, Karen Graham Cunningham, Dirk Curls, Leann DuPont, Bud Elias, Rosemarie Kibitlewski, David Loyd, George Mantzaris, Konrad McCree, and William Sturtevant. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3.2 Provide an overview of ULI Advisory Panel Report Priority (P) Implementation Items. At the September 29, 2014 Council Work Session, staff and Council had an initial discussion of the results of the recent ULI Advisory Panel Report concerning redevelopment opportunities in the Downtown and East Gateway areas. The discussion was informed by a preliminary staff analysis, outlining the major issue areas within the Report and recommending a process/schedule for moving forward in developing an implementation strategy to address the multiple conclusions/recommendations in the Report. As a result of that discussion, staff noted the following: Council concurred with the staff recommendation that the scope, importance and detail of the Report conclusions/recommendations warranted a Special Work Session, held in the evening to allow maximum public attendance (held on November 12, 2014); Staff was requested to develop a more detailed, item by item staff analysis of the conclusions/recommendations in the Report, including costs, timeframe and Work Program impact, to inform and guide the council discussion and direction to staff on Report implementation at the Special Work Session. There was no consensus to move forward with the significant Bluff/Waterfront Master Plan effort at this time, pending clarification of the CMA (Clearwater Marine Aquarium) and Greenlight projects affects on the planning effort; There was consensus to move forward at this time with development of the North Marina Special Area Plan; There was consensus to move forward with the Boating Master Plan; There was consensus that the Implementation Matrix developed for council consideration at the Special Work Session identify those items in the Report that lend themselves to early implementation, within Page 3

4 existing legislative authority and resource (low hanging fruit). The Implementation Matrix was developed within these Council-indicated parameters. However, the scope, cost and staff work program impact of addressing the 48 individual action items in the report simultaneously would be extremely costly and disruptive of the overall work program of the City. Therefore, staff believes a more feasible approach to implementation may be to identify initiatives, balanced across the implementing departments, which could reasonably be commenced within the first 90 days of implementation. Those items recommended are indicated by a bold (P) next to the item on the Implementation Matrix and on the Priority items Only matrix. They would be, of course, in addition to those items indicated to be underway or ongoing in the matrix. At the conclusion of the November 12, 2014 Special Work Session City Council indicated concurrence with the staff-recommended Priority (P) items and indicated support for the City Manager s intent to move forward with implementation of the Priority (P) items, while at the same time requesting further information on cost, scope, deliverables and timetable for each Priority (P) item on the matrix. The Program Summary for each Priority (P) item is in response to that request. Staff looks forward to council direction whether the proposed priority projects meet council expectations, or whether modifications/additions/deletions are desired. Assistant City Manager Rod Irwin provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the implementation plan for ULI recommendations and reviewed priority items. In response to questions, Mr. Irwin said the festival core in the East Gateway could be used as a temporary use focal point for the food culture. The mercado structure would have a full-time market capacity that would complement the festival core and the recently approved community garden. Mr. Irwin said during Council's visioning process it was identified that Economic Development's brand was different than the City's overall brand and may need different materials to market key properties. Staff anticipates completing the marketing materials by March. Staff wants to reach out to the real estate brokers regarding the larger parcels in the downtown area that are currently under private ownership. Mr. Irwin said social and electronic media will be a main component. The Library's Maker Space was under contract before the ULI study but included as a priority because of its ability to bring people to the area and available resources. Activities would include Page 4

5 online training courses and technology meetings. Staff anticipates the Incubator would be driven by the private sector. As it relates to the repurposing of the Main Library, staff is considering those uses allowed by the current restrictions outlined in the City Charter. Mr. Irwin said the ULI study provided a concept that looked at available resources that could activate the interharbor, such as a ferry service. Staff will research lighted bridge projects in other areas and provide Council with options before a Call to Artist is pursued. Mr. Irwin said staff has been looking into the 1 million cup program and will report to Council in March regarding what model fits in Clearwater. The model used in Sarasota was a private initiative, while the one in St. Petersburg was initiated by a grant from the Mayor's office. One individual supported continuing streetscaping efforts in the East Gateway area and reviewed recent redevelopment and beautification efforts by local merchants and property owners. One individual supported lighting the Clearwater Memorial Causeway Bridge. One individual supported the creation of a council appointed stakeholders committee, the creation of a Master Plan for the Bluff and Waterfront, and beginning the Master Plan process now. It was suggested that the Charter Review Committee not be utilized for the Bluff Master Plan. One individual expressed concerns with inability to attend meetings if the stakeholders group would not be subject to the Sunshine Law and supported lighting bridges from underneath. A kayak launch at the Seminole Boat Ramp was suggested. One individual supported more residential development in Downtown. Discussion ensued with comments made that many of the components will require engaging the private sector. Support was expressed for a climate controlled mercado and pursuing the Bluff Master Plan now. In response to a comment, the City Manager said Council deferred any action on the Master Plan. Staff did not provide a timeframe but could revisit the recommendation if directed. In response to a concern regarding the North Marina Master Plan, Mr. Irwin said the proposed 9-month timeline also considered seeking resolution on the High and Dry proposal and engaging the School Board regarding opportunities for the North Ward School site. These discussions will take some time and may not occur sooner 9 months. Page 5

6 Mr. Irwin said the stakeholders group was envisioned as a general group who exchanged information among the key players, not a citizens advisory group on the Bluff Master Plan. There was council consensus to schedule a council meeting on April 13, 2015 for a quarterly report. 3.3 Discuss ULI Recommendation for Creation of Stakeholder Advisory Group. The ULI Panel Report recommended creation of an umbrella advisory group with representation from all the other stakeholder organizations and civic groups to create a forum for the discussion of issues with the City and their development partners that involves a cross section of community interests. However, there has been concern expressed by some Downtown organization members that the Public Meetings Law limitations on a city-created committee structure could discourage participation, due to the restriction on members discussing issues among themselves, which a city-created committee has before them for consideration. This is felt to be particularly relevant in the Downtown, due to frequent multiple memberships on Downtown committees and the fact that the organization agendas/topics would mirror the issues discussed by a ULI Report focused committee. Additionally, some sentiment has been expressed that the restrictions of the Public Meeting Law could discourage the frank expression of opinions and/or discussion of sensitive issues necessary to achieve the objectives of the ULI Study and Downtown redevelopment. At the November 12, 2014 Special Work Session staff committed to review options for a committee structure and make same available to the Council for consideration at the January 21, 2015 Special Work Session. In response to questions, the City Attorney said the Sunshine Law requires meetings to be noticed and records kept. If Council does not appoint a group, the individuals would not have any status or official role. Individuals or groups may provide input at any public hearing. Groups organized to report to the City Manager or the Economic Development Department would be subject to the Sunshine Law. Assistant City Manager Rod Irwin said staff anticipates this group would be composed of representatives from the private sector (i.e., development community, civic, etc.) to meet periodically and exchange issues. One individual suggested that Council ask individuals active throughout the community for feedback on proposed recommendations. One individual requested that Downtown property and business owners Page 6

7 be included in the committee process. One individual supported appointing non-residents to the stakeholders group in an effort to seek new ideas. One individual suggested appointing individuals for specific areas (i.e., N. Marina, Downtown, East Gateway, etc.) to discuss ideas. Discussion ensued with support expressed for a council appointed group with suggestions made that an additional group may be needed to implement the plan. A concern was expressed that Downtown lacks a unified vision. It was suggested that a facilitated public meeting be held to create a unified vision and identify those individuals who wish to serve on the council appointed committee. There was no consensus to create a unified vision. Mr. Irwin said ULI envisioned a forum to discuss issues with the City and development partners that involves a cross section of committee interest. The vision is a separate matter Council may pursue. The Stakeholders group would act as a sounding board to Council regarding proposed recommendations. The Council recess from 8:16 p.m. to 8:21 p.m. Staff was directed to initiate discussions with Brian Aungst, Jr., member of the external group comprised of Clearwater Regional Chamber and Clearwater Downtown Partnership representatives who reviewed the ULI recommendations, regarding what they anticipated the Stakeholders Group role should be and report findings and scope of purpose for the proposed advisory group to Council at the March 5 council meeting. 4. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Mayor Attest City Clerk Page 7