CITY OF SARASOTA Planning and Development Division Development Services Department MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Planning Board Eileen Normile, Chair Members Present: Damien Blumetti, Vice Chair Members Patrick Gannon, David Morriss, Kathy Kelley Ohlrich Planning Board Members Absent: City Staff Present: Mike Connolly, Deputy City Attorney Steven R. Cover, Planning Director, Planning Department Gretchen Schneider, General Manager, Development Services Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services Dan Ohrenstein, Assistant City Engineer David L. Smith, AICP, Manager, Planning Department Jim Koenig, AICP,Senior Planner, Planning Department John Nopper, Coordinator, Public Broadcasting Karen Grassett, Senior Planning Technician I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 6:00:00 P.M. PB Chair Normile called the meeting to order; Planning Director Cover [as Secretary to the Planning Board] called the roll; and read the Pledge of Conduct. II. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE DAY There were no changes. III. LAND USE ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC HEARINGS NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: At this time anyone wishing to speak at the following public hearings will be required to take an oath. (Time limitations will be established by the Planning Board.) A. Reading ofthe Pledge of Conduct B. Legislative Public Hearings 1. Bath & Racquet Club (2170 & 2104 Robinhood Street) [Continued From 11/13/19): Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 18-PA-02 is a request to amend the City of Sarasota Comprehensive Plan by changing the Future Land Use Map classification of the property located at 2170 Robinhood Street and 2104 Robinhood Street, known as the Bath & Racquet Club, from the Community Office/Institutional Future Land Use classification and the Community Commercial Future Land Use classification to the Multiple Family (Medium Density) Future Land Use classification. Applicant is requesting to rezone the property and redevelop the site. (Jim Koenig, AICP, Senior Planner) Minutes of thel Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 2 of 18 C. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearings 1. Bath & Racquet Club (2170 & 2104 Robinhood Street) [Continued From 11/13/19): Rezone Application No. 18-RE-02, Site Plan Application No. 18-SP-15 and Major Conditional Use Application No. 18-CU-04are: a Request for Rezone, Site Plan approval and Major Conditional Use approval to redevelop the Bath & Racquet Fitness Club site currently located in the Office Neighborhood District (OND) zone district and the Intensive Commercial District (ICD) zone district with street addresses of 2170 Robinhood Street and 2104 Robinhood Street. Applicant is seeking to rezone the site from OND and ICD to the Residential Multiple Family 4 (RMF-4) zone district. Applicant is also seeking approval of a Major Conditional Use to allow for continued operation of the Bath & Racquet Fitness Club on the site and Site Plan approval to remove 21 existing outdoor tennis courts, the outdoor practice half court and to renovate the existing facility and construct up to 207 residential units (including affordable/attainable units) in 10 new buildings and a single level structure with ground level parking and 10 tennis courts above. (Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services) Attorney Connolly stated that, in the November 2019 Planning Board Meeting, the Planning Board commenced the public hearing for the four-part Bath and Racquet Club application, which includes Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 18-PA- 02, Rezone Application No. 18-RE-02, Site Plan Application No. 18-SP-15 and Major Conditional Use Application No. 18-CU-04; added that, sO far, the Planning Board has heard the Applicant S case-in-chief, and the City's case-in-chief, and now they will hear from the people who applied for affected person's status; summarized the time limits for presentations; and administered the oath for all who intend to speak in this public hearing. 6:04:32 P.M. Affected Persons: 1. Jan A. Norsoph, representing the Riverwood Court HOA, and residents along Mill Terrace - stated his qualifications for being an expert witness; spoke in opposition to the applications based on not meeting the review criteria for compatibility with existing single family neighborhoods, and consistency, as defined in the Sarasota City Plan and as required by the Sarasota Zoning Code Standards for Review; pointed out the negative impacts of the proposed development on the existing residential neighborhood, in regards to traffic circulation, and intensity of development; and made recommendations to improve compatibility. 6:27:50 P.M. Discussion ensued. Responding to PB Members' questions, Mr. Norsoph said that his clients should talk about their meetings with the applicants and whether they have discussed their concerns and negotiated recommendations; clarified that, unlike information in the support material, his clients now support the existing zoning designation with a maximum allowable density of 91 units/acre, which yields 121 units; Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 3 of 18 explained his recommendation for a larger setbackon the southeast corner of the site; and offered traffic circulation recommendations. Attorney Connolly called the individuals who were granted Affected Person status at the November Planning Board meeting to testify. 2. Paula Rees - not present 3. Cheryl Boldin - gave her time to Mr. Norsoph 4. Nicholas Crutcher-Stevens - resident on Mill Terrace -= spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about traffic circulation, safety, drainage, the park, and the intensity of the proposed development. 5. Arvezine Miller not present 6. Marget Shanahan- gave her time to Mr. Norsoph 7. Karen Guttridge spouse of James Guttridge resident - Riverwood Court - spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about safety and compatibility. 8. Brennan Troyer - not present 9. Benjamin Cannon - President of Riverwood Court POA, representing 140 residents; spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about compatibility, intensity, scale, and traffic. 10. Sally Miller - resident - spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about the proposed road along the south boundary of the property. Attorney Connolly noted that the people who spoke this evening were also present at the public hearing last month; and called the names of the following persons who had applied for Affected Person status, but were not in attendance last month: Ronald Solt, Linda Solt, Paul Scianca, Shauna Stevens, Lucy Manuel, Greg Haarer, Jesse Coleman, Daniel Jones, James Boldin, Richard Garton, Mary Brown, James Bourgoin, James Guttridge, Daniel Shanahan, Marisol Duarte, Harlan Adolphson, Charles Holbrook, Virginia King, and Jody Lynn Sayre. Mr. Bourgoin is present and will testify with the general citizenry. Ms. Stevens and Mr. Bolden were present, but they offered their time to Mr. Norsoph. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 4 of 18 11. Daniel Shanahan- resident = does not oppose redevelopment under its current zoning; expressed concerns with high density, traffic circulation, and the location of the trash collection facility. Citizens Input: PB Chair Normile called Jack Stevens, Paula Reese, and Kevin Becker, but they were absent. 12. Barbara Bourgoin - resident - spoke in opposition- expressed concerns about incompatibility with existing development. 13. Tom Bedford - resident- spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about incompatibility with existing neighborhood, traffic, and intensity. 14. Pam Bournival - resident- spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about public safety, density, intensity, and height. 15. Becky Bedford - resident- spoke in opposition. 16. Pamela Lion - resident - spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about incompatibility with surrounding neighborhood, and traffic. 17. Susan Chapman - resident- spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about incompatibility. 18. Sigi Moriece- spoke in opposition; expressed concerns about incompatibility; and stated that it is her understanding that the original owner wanted this to remain a tennis club. PB Chair Normile disclosed that she had ex-parte communications regarding this project. 7:24:57 P.M. Staff Rebuttal: Jim Koenig, AICP, Senior Planner, Planning Department, Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services, Dan Ohrenstein, Assistant City Engineer, and Dr. Jason Collins, ADEAS-Q introduced themselves to the record. Senior Planner Koenig spoke about the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, consistency, and compatibility; pointed out that the Future Land Use Plan provides for transition; added that multifamily at this location is more compatible than retail or general commercial uses; noted that Objective 3.3 of the Comprehensive Plan provides review criteria for Rezonings and Conditional Uses, but not Comprehensive Plan Amendments; and explained that the proposed buildings could not be located in the center of the property because the existing tennis courts are there. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 5 of 18 7:29:55 P.M. Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein stated that there were two traffic reviews, the first was for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which compared the traffic for what could be built on the site based on the existing land use, and the traffic based on the proposed land use; said the study concluded that that the impact was diminimis; noted that the second traffic review was required for the site plan, which concluded that the impact was not diminimis, and therefore the City ordered a traffic study; pointed out that study is included in the materials; discussed School Avenue through traffic and pedestrian accessibility; and stated that drainage will be examined as the process moves along. 7:32:42 P.M. Dr. Collins referred to the traffic connection and explained that the intent was to redo the circulation around Trader Joes, to mitigate impacts, however, if that is not acceptable, there is physical capability to lengthen the turn lane on US-41; clarified that his job was to evaluate, not change, the site plan, and in doing SO they provided conditions which were accepted by the applicant; and emphasized the importance of a connection to School Avenue and the upgrade of School Avenue, both of which are off- site improvements. 7:36:02 P.M. Manager Panica stated that staff proposed a traffic separator to prevent people driving East on Olentary; noted that this is not a commercial use, rather a tennis club is an institutional use; and pointed out that the existing land uses and zoning adjacent to the residential uses include industrial uses, sO staff thought that RMF-4 would be more compatible with the adjacent residential uses. 7:38:13 P.M. PB member Morriss had questions about the density. Senior Planner Koenig explained that the existing FLU, Community Office Institutional, and the proposed FLU, Multi Family Medium Density Residential both allow 25 du/acre. Senior Planner Koenig pointed out however, that the Comprehensive Plan specifically states current zoning must be taken into account and that the existing underlying Zoning District allows up to 9 du/acre. Attorney Connolly explained that the Planning Board is reviewing at the same time both a Legislative Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Quasi-Judicial Rezoning. Discussion ensued. 7:43:46 P.M. PB Member Morriss asked who pays for the improvements to the left turn lane on US 41. City Engineer Ohrenstein said the applicant pays for it. Responding to PB Member Morriss' question, Manager Panica read the characteristics of an institutional use. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 6 of 18 7:46:09 P.M. PB Member Gannon discussed the longevity of the Tennis Club; asked about thei impact of Glengary if it continued westbound as a one-way road. Dr. Collins explained that it improves the circulation for the applicant's site. PB Member Gannon asked about impacts on pedestrian traffic if Glengary remained one way. Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein responded that it would exacerbate other concerns on Trade Joe's 's property and other commercial uses along US 41, therefore Glengary could not be one-way. 7:51:49 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti referred to the Floor/Area Ratio and the building coverage for the existing OND Zone District, and pointed out that it would result in double the intensity of the buildings on this site; discussed allowable setbacks and their compatibility with the existing land uses; and asked if the site was to be developed under existing zoning, would staff recommend the use ofSchool Avenue. Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein said that School Avenue would be necessary for ingress and egress. 7:53:52 P.M. P.B. Chair Normile referred to the traffic and asked why the analysis does not address 100 peak hour trips, since the property is not in the Downtown or Newtown areas. Dr. Collins stated that the threshold for a small-scale traffic study VS. a traffic concurrency off-site study is if the peak hour trips are less than 100 trips, which is the reason a small- scale study was done for this application. Discussion ensued. PB Chair Normile referred to the left turn lane; suggested to prohibit U-Turns at that light; and asked who would be paying for improvements on the left lane. Dr. Collins pointed out that it would require coordination between FDOT and the City. PB Chair Normile pointed out that FDOT has lost some of its funding for work programs. Discussion ensued. PB Chair Normile expressed concerns about the traffic stopping on US 41 due to the proximity of Trader Joe's driveway to the intersection. Dr. Collins stated that this portion of US 41 is busy and congested due to the signal at US4 41 and Bee Ridge Road; and noted according to State Statutes, developers cannot be required to mitigate beyond the impacts of their development. Discussion ensued. 8:08:22 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti asked if this site were developed based on the existing zoning, which allows 162,000 sq. ft. of non-residential space and 9 du/acre, would that create a better or worse traffic situation. Dr. Collins responded that it would be worse, particularly at peak hours. Responding to PB Vice Chair Blumetti's questions, Manager Panica stated that if applicants were to remove the tennis courts from the middle of the development they would have to replace this impervious space with another use; and noted that the site has reached 24.9% land coverage and the applicants cannot add any more buildings. 8:09:42 P.M. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 7 of 18 Responding to PB Chair Normile's question, Dr. Collins stated that data collection for the Traffic Circulation Study was done on January 15, 2019. Discussion ensued regarding the methodology that was used. Dr. Collins explained that they evaluated the peak hour, peak season, and total build out conditions in the year 2022. 8:12:42P.M. Applicant Rebuttal: Kelly Klepper, Kimley Horn and Associates, stated that the proposed land use classification is a transition, according to the current Comprehensive Plan, because there is a reduction in the densities and intensities of land uses; pointed out that the applicants are proffering additional stipulations that will limit the development and redevelopment of the site; reviewed the revised proffered Site Plan (12/11/2010); pointed out that the maximum height of 60 ft on far west of the site, down to a low of 36: ft; there are enhanced buffers and a wall on the south and the east, there are increased setbacks, and affordable housing for 30 years according to City policy; noted that they have had seven meetings, when only two are required, and that they have scheduled a neighborhood park design workshop on January 15, 2020; and concluded that should the Planning Board wish to see a two-way street on the north boundary, the applicant will say "yes." 8:16:01 P.M. Philip DiMaria spoke about the step back component of the design of the structures, as well as their maximum building height; stated that the original proposed heights were 60ft. on the west boundary, 28 ft. for the building in the interior to match the existing club, 48 ft. for the interior buildings to the south, and the wrap around buildings on south and east are 361 ft.; noted that they are modifying their proffers, and the buildings within 75 ft. of the south and east boundaries will be three stories in maximum height; pointed out that the denser and lusher vegetation is located along the eastern boundary of the development; added that the setbacks are in excess of what is mandated; spoke about their enhanced landscape buffer; compared peak hour trip generation for allowable by right land use development and the proposed development; discussed existing circulation, proposed traffic circulation, cut through traffic; and spoke of the pedestrian circulation with sidewalks provided where pedestrian circulation is safe. 8:24:04 P.M. Mr. Cianfaglione pointed out that there is a lack of accessible parks in this area; stated that some of the most beloved parks in Sarasota are small parks similar to the park they are proposing; discussed the 5-minute walk to parks and amenities; spoke about stormwater improvements, and noted that the applicants are required by the City, the County, and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) to manage runoff on-site; referred to affordable housing, and noted that they have modified their proffer SO that 5% of the units are affordable to incomes of 80%AMI, and 10% of the units are affordable to incomes at 100% AMI, for 30 Years; spoke of compatibility with surrounding land uses; and summarized the reasons for which the Planning Board should approve the applications. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 8 of 18 8:26:12 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich referred to the accessibility of the neighborhood park to the residents east of the development; stated that she does not support the proffer of"up to 30 years," for affordable housing, she would rather see "30 years," and the applicants agreed to make that change; and discussed options of how to exit from Trader Joe's parking lot. 8:32:10 P.M. Responding to PB Member Morriss' question, the applicants stated that they do not intend to use fill because the property meets FEMA requirements; said that the site was developed long time ago, and overtime, grass clippings have impacted the drainage along the south boundary, but the engineer partners will develop the site to drain properly and to meet all state and local requirements. 8:33:30 P.M. PB Member Gannon referred to the longevity of the Tennis Club; and asked for a plan showing the number and type of the proposed tennis courts. The applicants stated that there are eight courts on grade (clay courts) and 10 courts on the covered parking (raised courts). PB Member Gannon asked about the ownership of the courts and asked for clarification as to who will use the courts, if the units are condominiums, and who is responsible for the court maintenance in the future. The applicants said it would be the responsibility of the Club. 8:37:17 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti asked what would have to be eliminated if the density were reduced 9 du/acre. The applicants said they would have to eliminate the park, the affordable housing, and the improvements on Liberty Avenue; said they would have more courts and probably develop a different type ofl housing product; pointed out that they would not be before the Planning Board this evening if they could have a different development and a viable product using existing zoning; concluded that the result would be that the Club goes away, and the site being developed with multi-family housing; pointed out that would still require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment; and stated that the owner wants to keep the Club. Discussion ensued. 8:41:53 P.M. PB Chair Normile requested clarification about the revised affordable housing proffer to strike the words "up to;" and asked if the owners will pay for the queuing lane. The applicants said that they will work with FDOT and the City and if thatis a requirement at the end of the day, the ownership team agrees to paying for the queuing lane; stated that an extension of 34f ftis an adequate distance for transition; and concluded that they can accommodate what Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein and Dr. Collins have discussed. PB Chair Normile referred to the westbound traffic exiting Glengary, and the distance between Glengary and the one-way street. The applicants noted that the current distance is 305 ft., the queueing that is anticipated will be 280 ft. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 9 of 18 8:44:43 P.M. PB Member Gannon referred to Club membership. The applicants clarified that the affordable housing unit occupants, and all the unit owners, will have free membership to the Tennis Club. 8:46:04 P.M. Attorney Connolly recommended the Planning Board discuss the items in the following order: the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Rezone, and last the Site Plan and Conditional Use. 8:46:36 P.M. PB Chair Normile closed the public hearing. 8:48:00 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti moved to adopt a motion to find Petition No. 18-PA-02 consistent with the requirements of Sarasota City Plan 2030, and is in the public benefit or interest, and recommend to the City Commission to transmit the proposed amendment to the state review agency, to adopt the petition. PB Member Gannon seconded the motion for discussion. 8:48:40 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich stated that she does not support out-of-cycle Comprehensive Plan Amendments because she thinks they weaken the plan, and, in this case, it is precedent setting, and she will not support it. 8:49:09 PM. PB Member Morriss stated that there was a lot of discussion about the maximum of 25 units per acre, but Senior Planner Koenig's explanation about existing zoning made him decide not to support the Plan Amendment. 8:49:32 P.M. PB. Member Gannon stated that he will support the motion, because there is no change in the density between the existing and proposed Future Land Use designations. 8:50:02 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti stated that the relatively low density of this development is most certainly compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods; added that the affordable housing and the Club membership is a much needed element for the project, and the for the City; added that open space is not required in the OND district, and the park would not be there if the Future Land Use is not changed to RMF-4; noted the Minutes of thel Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 10 of 18 importance of the scale of the housing, because there is need for smaller housing units in the City; referred to the fact that the OND has 50% building coverage which is much more intense than the proposed 25% building coverage; and concluded that all of these are the public benefits of the proposed development. 8:51:55 P.M. PB Chair Normile stated that she will not support the Plan Amendment even though she appreciates the affordable housing, the park, the School Avenue connection; explained that she is concerned about compatibility and real safety concerns on US41 and Glengary, and School Avenue, but she thinks that lower density is more appropriate at this location. 8:5:06 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti stated that the Planning Board may be intimidated by Comprehensive Plan Amendments; pointed out that any development on this site will have to use Glengary and School Avenue; and added that what they can build on the site by right is more intensive if you consider the non-residential uses. 8:56: 29 P.M. PB Member Morriss argued that the access would limit the intensity of the development. 8:56:55 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich called the question. The motion for approval failed with a vote of 2 to 3 (PB Members Morriss and Ohlrich, and PB Chair Normile, voted "No.") 8:57:36 P.M. Attorney Connolly referred to Section III. 203 of the Zoning Code, which states that the affirmative vote of three members of the Board shall be necessary to take official action; and noted that there are two affirmative votes, sO an alternative motion is needed. 8:57:52 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich moved to adopt a motion to find Petition No. 18-PA-02 is not consistent with the requirements of Sarasota City Plan 2030, and is not in the public benefit or interest, and recommend that the City Commission not transmit the proposed amendment to the state review agency, and not adopt the petition. PB Member Morriss seconded the motion. The motion for denial is approved with a vote of 3 to 2 (PB Member Gannon and PB Vice Chair Blumetti voted "No.") 8:59:18 P.M. Minutes of thel Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 11 of 18 Attorney Connolly pointed out that there is a revised recommended motion in this evening's packet with changes in the proffers, and he suggested that the Planning Board looks at the recommended staff motions for 18-RE-02. 8:59:47 P.M. PB Member Morriss moved to adopt a motion to find Rezoning 18-RE-02 inconsistent with the applicable sections of the Zoning Code and deny the request. PB Member Ohlrich seconded the motion. The motion to deny Rezoning Petition 18-RE-02 was approved with a vote of 3 to 2 (PB Member Gannon and PB Vice Chair Blumetti voted "No."). 9:01:14 P.M. PB Member Morriss moved to adopt a motion to find Site Plan Application No. 18-SP- 15 and Major Conditional Use Application No. 18-CU-04 inconsistent with the applicable sections of the Zoning Code and deny the request. PB Member Ohlrich seconded the motion. The motion to deny Site Plan Application No. 18-SP-15 and Major Conditional Use Application No. 18-CU-04 was approved with a vote of 3 to 2 (PB Member Gannon and PB Vice Chair Blumetti voted "No."). 9:03:46 P.M. The Planning Board Took a 5-Minute Recess. 2. Quay Sarasota Block 6 Major Amendment (333 N. Tamiami Trail): Site Plan Application 19-SP-10 is a request for Site Plan approval to amend a previously approved Site Plan (Application No. 17-SP-18) for an 18 story multi-use building located in the Downtown Bayfront (DTB) Zone District with a street address of 333 N Tamiami Trail by increasing the height of the cooling towers on the roof by six feet for a total height of 250'9". (Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services) 9:07:02 P.M. Applicant Presentation: Attorney Charles D. Bailey, III, of Williams, Parker, Agent, introduced for the record himself and Mr. John Harper, Kolter Development Executive, representing the applicant and owner of Block 6; stated the applicants were there to discuss a Major Amendment to the Site Plan for Quay Sarasota Block 6, which was unanimously approved by the Planning Board a year ago on April 11, 2018; pointed out that the revision is to the height dimension shown on the approved Site Plan to allow the accommodation of the HVAC equipment on the roof of the building; explained that when they prepared the Site Plan Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 12 of 18 they did not know the type of HVAC system and the specs; noted that this is an important housekeeping item for the Site Plan; said that the subject parcel is 1.8 acres within the 14.7-acre Sarasota Quay project; added that the Planning Board approved the Site Plan in April 2018, for an 18 story tower, with 73 units, and a restaurant; added that, since then, they have received their foundation approval and building permit for the vertical improvements; said construction has commenced and they have topped off the building; stated that they are seeking to revise approved Site Plan Sheets A-300 to A- 303, showing the exterior elevations at a height of 244 ft. 9i in. without the cooling towers, to show the height of the envelop for the cooling towers at a height of 250 ft. 9 in.; pointed out that the request meets the standards of the applicable Sections of the Zoning Code; stated that staff recommends approval with seven conditions, all of which were imposed on the original site plan, and the applicants agree with them; and respectfully requested Planning Board approval. 9:16:07 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich stated that this was not an error but a housekeeping item that the applicant knew they would have to address later, after they knew the specific dimensions of the cooling tower. Attorney Bailey stated that they knew they would place the equipment on the roof, but they did not have yet the exact dimensions of the equipment. 9:17:50 P.M. Responding to PB Member Morriss' question, Mr. Harper stated that there is an architectural element around the cooling towers, like a screen. PB Member Morriss asked about the historic structure on the Quay site. Attorney Bailey stated that the Belle Haven must be renovated, rehabilitated and must have received a Certificate of Occupancy prior to Block 6 receiving a Certificate of Occupancy; added that on November 12, 2019, they requested from the Historic Preservation Board a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow renovations, the request was approved unanimously,and the companion building permit may have already been issued. 9:19:36 P.M. PB Member Gannon pointed out that the enclosure for the cooling tower will be visible from the north view. Mr. Harper referred to the elevation and stated that the cooling tower is 3'6" high, and what is seen is the enclosure, which is 6. Attorney Bailey illustrated that the towers will not be visible from the top floors of their nearest neighbors, the Ritz-Carlton Hotel. PB Member Gannon asked about neighboring developments on the north of the Boulevard of the Arts, and Mr. Harper said that they are further away than the Ritz-Carlton Hotel. 9:21:58 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti asked why this meeting was not scheduled in November. Attorney Bailey stated that the application was subject to newly adopted State procedural requirements. Discussion ensued regarding the new review procedures and the Zoning Code requirements. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 13 of 18 9:27:04 P.M. Staff Presentation: Manager Panica introduced herself for the record; explained the reasons for which this application came to the Planning Board this evening; noted that the Site Plan elevations indicated that the height of the building is 244 ft. 9 in., and the cooling towers were not included on the original Site Plan; said that the revised elevations show the approved height and the proposed increase in height; stated that no other revisions are requested; pointed out that the petition has been approved by the DRC and meets all applicable development Standards for Review in the Zoning Code; stated staff has provided a recommendationfor approval with conditions;noted that the conditions were approved by the Planning Board with the original Site Plan; and stated a correction is needed to Condition 8, to replace the March 12, 2018 date with November 12, 2019. 9:29:07 P.M. Responding to PB Member Ohlrich's question, Manager Panica confirmed that the nine conditions with the recommendation for approval of this Major Amendment were approved by the Planning Board, when the original Site Plan was presented, with the exception of the date correction mentioned earlier; and added that she has indicated which of the prior conditions have already been met. 9:29:52 P.M. PB Member Gannon referred to an email he sent to Manager Panica asking if the project is in compliance with all applicable agreements, one of which is the MURT Agreement; pointed out that it is asking for the Temporary MURT to be completed concurrent with the completion of the horizontal improvements of the property, and that no portion of the existing MURT should be removed or disturbed in connection to the development of the property until the Temporary MURT has been completed; added that he understands that the exiting MURT's pathway through the Quay property has been disturbed and removed, and there is no Temporary MURT; and asked how this project can be found in compliance. Manager Panica clarified that this project abuts the Scenic MURT not the Bayfront MURT, and the Temporary MURT is for the Bayfront MURT, SO this project has nothing to do with the Bayfront MURT. PB Member Gannon stated that the applicants for this project also signed the Bayfront MURT Agreement. Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein stated that the Quay location is very busy at this time; and listed all the projects that are in process at this time. PB Member Gannon stated that he realizes there is an alternate path on US41,h however the Agreement calls for a temporary path on the Quay property; and asked how this is applied to this petition. Manager Panica stated that Condition 8 relates to building permits. 9:36:19 P.M. Attorney Connolly agreed with Manager Panica and explained that Condition 8 requires the developer to develop the site according to the submitted plans; and stated the MURT Agreement is not related to this project, and it is therefore not applicable. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 14 of 18 9:40:14 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich asked what can be done to correct the situation. Attorney Connolly stated that if there is a violation of the Agreement, the City Commission must decide if they want to sue and if SO direct the City Attorney's Office staff to do SO. PB Member Morriss asked who is supposed to police these things in the City. Discussion ensued. 9:41:46 P.M. PB Chair Normile asked who keeps count of the trip credits. Assistant City Engineer Ohrenstein stated that his office keeps track of them, and the information is included in the reports. 9:44:41 P.M. Applicant Rebuttal: Attorney Bailey clarified that the subject site belongs to New Grande Residences who are not party to the original Development Agreement or to the MURT Agreement; explained that they signed the Joinder to indicate that they agree to have their property depicted on the plan attached to the MURT Agreement; he listed all the projects that are in process at this time, and he said that he will work with staff. Discussion ensued. 9:48:28 P.M. PB Member Morriss moved to find Site Plan 19-SP-10 consistent with the Tree Protection Ordinance and Section IV-506 of the Zoning Code and approve the Site Plan subject to the Conditions 1 through 9. Motion was seconded by PB Vice Chair Blumetti. Motion is approved unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. 3. Payne Park Village Phase 2 (0 School Avenue): Subdivision Final Plat Application No. 19-SUB-01 is a request for approval of a Final Subdivision Plat for Phase 2of the project known as Payne Park Village located in the Downtown Edge (DTE) Zone District on the east side of South School Avenue, south of Ringling Boulevard. The proposed Plat is for 48 attached and detached fee simple single family residences. The development has Site Plan approval for 135 residential units through previously approved Application Nos. 16-DA-02, 16-ROA-01, and 16-SP-10. Phase 1 received approval of 18- SUB-01 for 87of the 135 attached and detached fee simple single family residences. Phase 2 consists of 48 of the 135 approved residential units on the northern half of the site. (Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services) 9:49:05 P.M. Attorney Connolly called Mr. Myron Nickel, who had filed an application for affected person status. Mr. Nickel was not in attendance therefore he was not granted affected person status. Attorney Connolly recommended presentation time limits. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 15 of 18 Applicant Presentation: Mr. Travis Fledderman, PE, Stantec, the Engineer on record for this project, introduced to the record himself and Mr. Joseph Kelly, PSM, of Stantec, the surveyor for Plot A; stated that this evening they will talk about Phase 2 of Payne Park Village; said that the original Rezone and Site Plan were approved in March 2017, and Phase 1 was platted in April 2018; stated that Phase 2 is a 2.53 acre tract, and has 48 units; added that all public infrastructure has been completed for Phase 1, including parallel parking on School Avenue, and the drainage improvements across School Avenue; and referring to the Master Site Plan for Payne Park Village, pointed out the location of Phase 2. 9:51:52 P.M. Mr. Kelly noted that the area of Phase 2 is a replat of Tract 800, also called "Future Development Tract" on the earlier Master Site Plan. PB Vice Chair Blumetti noted that in the Downtown Edge Zoning District (DTE) the maximum allowable front yard setback is 10-ft., and the plans show 12.5 ft. Mr. Fleddermen responded that all the setbacks are consistent with the Site Plan approved in 2017. PB Vice Chair Blumetti pointed out that the sidewalk stops abruptly near the north edge of the property and asked if it is supposed to connect around. Mr. Fleddermen explained that it stops because Shopping Way, which is located north of the subject property, is a private driveway, it belongs to another owner, the Richmond Group who are developing the old Publix, and the applicants cannot make any modifications. Discussion ensued. Staff Presentation: Lucia Panica, Manager of Development Services, introduced herself for the record; stated that the subject property is 2.35 acres, which is part of a 9.9 acre project; said it is zoned Downtown Edge (DTE) and School Avenueis classified as a primary street; noted that in 2017, the 9.9 acre project received Site Plan, Rezone, and Development Agreement approval for 135 detached and attached single family dwelling units on Parcel 1, and two development options on Parcel 2; explained that the 135 single family dwelling units are fee simple residential units, and therefore Site Plan approval is required; pointed out that the subdivision plat of the 87 of the 137 residential units for Phase I have been approved; stated that the applicant is requesting Subdivision approval for Phase 2 consisting of the 48 remaining dwelling units; added that the project meets all the applicable development review standards of the Zoning Code, has received DRCs sign-off, and has been reviewed and approved by the City surveyor; and stated that staff recommends approval of the application. 9:57:23 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich requested clarification about the information shown on pages 81 - 128 of the packet. Manager Panica responded that the information relates to the metes and bounds of the different subdivision lots, which is a requirement for a subdivision. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 16 of 18 9:58:09 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti referred to the 3-ft buffer and asked if they need to have a wall. Manager Panica referred to Sheet LS-01, Landscape Development Plans Tree Removal and Protection, 09/08/2017, as revised on May 2018, and 10/29/2019, and stated that they are required to provide a 6-ft. board on board, 100% opaque fence. 9:59:28 P.M. PB Chair Normile closed the public hearing. PB Member Gannon moved to find Subdivision 19-SUB-01 consistent with Section IV- 1007 of the Zoning Code and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB Member Ohlrich seconded the motion. Motion was approved unanimously, (vote of 5 to 0). IV. CITIZEN's INPUT NOTICETOTHE PUBLIC: At this time Citizens may address the Planning Board on topics of concern. Items which have been previously discussed at Public Hearings may not be addressed at this time. (A maximum 5- minute time limit.) 10:00:33 P.M. Pam Bournival - resident- said that there are rumors discussions are occurring about the length of public hearings and the length of time it takes to complete projects, and she asked the Planning Board not to reduce the time of the public hearings, and to remember that the people have the right to speak, and must have enough time to present their views. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. October 30, 2019 Minutes of October 30, 2019 were adopted by consensus. 2. November 13, 2019 Page 14 of 21, 8:22:40, first line should read as follows: "PB Member Gannon referred to affordable housing and noted that the originally it was.. Page 12 of 21, 8:35:08 P.M., beginning of the paragraph should read as follows: "PB Vice Chair Blumetti referred to compatibility. Discussion ensued about the definition of building coverage; the maximum building coverage fer-theOND emingadsitit-whehs50-455-0:04, in the OND zoning district is 50%, in the OCD: zoning district is 45%, and in the RD zoning district is 40%.. 1 Page 15 of 21, 8:51:13 P.M., first line should read as follows: Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 17 of 18 PB Vice Chair Blumetti stated that good practices eallfer-theaffordalble/attainable minind-atianiaymeesye the Blue Print for Workforce Housing states that it should bei inj perpetuity or 30 years.somethingjust to consider. Minutes of November 13, 2019, as revised, were adopted by consensus. VI. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY STAFF Items presented are informational only (no action taken). Any issue presented that may require future action will be placed on the next available agenda for discussion. 10:07:19 P.M. Director Cover and Manager Panica presented PB Members with options for scheduling site visits with staff. Discussion ensued. Manager Panica will provide the Planning Board with a schedule of times for the rest of the year. PB Members will sign up for the times they prefer. VII. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY PLANNING BOARD Items presented are informational only (no action taken). Any issue presented that may require future action will be placed on the next available agenda for discussion. 10:13:59 P.M. PB Member Gannon thanked PB Chair Normile for her superb Chairmanship for the past year. PB Member Morriss read a prepared statement, thanking PB Chair Normile for her Chairmanship. PB Chair Normile said it was an honor to serve on the Planning Board, thanked PB Members and staff, and offered advice. 10:17:45 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich asked about the status of the changes to the Rules of Procedures for the Planning Board. Manager David Smith stated that it will be on the next Planning Board's Agenda. PB Member Ohlrich asked where is it written that proceedings, agendas, discussions and motions made during a duly called advisory committee meeting, in this case the Planning Board Meeting, can be disregarded by staff, if they disagree with the motions of the Planning Board. Director Cover requested to move on to the next topic. PB Chair Normile stated that it warrants further discussion. Director Cover stated not tonight. PB Member Ohlrich agreed. VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 10:22:49 PM PB Chair: PB Chair Normile nominated PB Vice Chair Blumetti and all other PB Members seconded the motion and agreed by consensus. PB Vice Chair: Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 18 of 18 PB Member Morriss nominated PB Member Ohlrich and PB Chair Normile seconded the motion. All members agreed by consensus. IX. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:24 P.M. B1 Steven R. Cover, Planning Director Damien Blimetti, Chair Planning Department Planning Board/Local Planning Agency [Secretary to the Board]