City of Sarasota Planning and Development Division Development Services Department MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY October 30, 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: John Shamsey, Assistant City Attorney Steven R. Cover, Planning Director, Planning Department Ryan Chapdelain, General Manager, Planning Department Gretchen Schneider, General Manager, Development Services Colleen McGue, Chief Transportation Planner Dr. Clifford E. Smith, Jr. RPA, Senior Planner Briana Dobbs, Planner Miles Larsen, Manager, Public Broadcasting Karen Grassett, Senior Planning Technician I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 6:00:00 PM 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 1. Request to move. Staff Topic to top of agenda (Continued from October 2, 2019) III. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY STAFF Sarasota in Motion Update (Continued from October 2, 2019) 6:01:45 P.M. Colleen McGue, Chief Transportation Planner, thanked the Planning Board for the opportunity to provide an update on the status of Sarasota in Motion, a Transportation Master Plan; stated that staff recently finished the first of four phases of the plan, which developed the vision for the plan, based on responses they received on an online survey, and in several workshops and pop-up events; noted that the results indicate that the people who participated would prefer to walk and bike more, and drive less, in the future; added that the responses clustered around six major themes, as follows: create safe streets for all users, create realistic choices beyond automobiles, neighborhood level investment, future ready for transportation technology, align transportation investment with sustainable growth, and prepare for and mitigate the impacts of climate change; presented the vision for the plan, that was unanimously adopted by the City Commission on September 16, 2019; Sarasota is a safe and active community with diverse transportation choices; stated that transportation investments are the result of community values and the outcome is a more Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 2 of 15 resilient, people-oriented City; added that this vision is going to guide the development of the plan; introduced five community values which are going to be used as performance measures, and also used to score and rank future projects; noted that during Phase II of the Master Plan staff is seeking community guidance on identifying areas of opportunity to improve the transportation master plan, and they will use an online interactive map found at sarasoltimmotion.com; the map will be open through the end of November, and the collected data will be analyzed through GIS; pointed out that in addition to the interactive map, the public participated in public workshops held on October 22, 2019, at the Selby Library and at the Selby Newtown Goodwill, as well as pop-up events around the community; noted that, SO far, they have met with New College students, members of the Sarasota Yacht Club, Vision Impaired and Blind Community members who are involved with House Manasota, and staff is meeting with younger members of the community at Trunk and Treat; and added that there are more such events scheduled in November, including Bike-to-Work day, the Hispanic Festival, and the Farmers Market in an effort to talk to diverse audiences. 6:08:16 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich congratulated staff for their work and requested that Chief Transportation Planner McGue forward her PowerPoint Presentation to the PB Members. 6:08:47 P.M. PB Member Morriss stated that in the past there was a cross over between sidewalks and bike lanes; and asked if this is being discussed in detail during the development of this plan, and how is it handled. Chief Transportation Planner McGue stated that it will be site specific; added that the community has expressed a desire for protected bike facilities and that they do not feel safe riding in the current bike lanes or the road, sO staff will be looking into wide Multi-Use Paths around the City, 8 ft to 12 ft wide sidewalk paths depending on the location and the speed of the cars, and also separated bicycle lanes with a barrier separating the cars from the bicycles, where there is room for it; and concluded that it will be a challenge because there is limited road space. PB Member Morris asked if this will include public education relating to the appropriate use of the bike lanes. Chief Transportation Planner McGue stated that education and enforcement are part of this effort. PB Chair Normile requested that the education lessons point out to the cyclists to ring a bell to notify pedestrians who share the path that they are coming, SO as to avoid accidents on the MURTS. Discussion ensued. 6:11:50 P.M. PB Member Gannon asked for additional information on "scenario planning," 1 and how is this part of Transportation Planning. Chief Transportation Planner McGue referred to page 7 of her report, to the llustration entitled Complete Street 2.0, and stated that this is the street design they discussed in their early workshops; and talked about the street of the future with advanced technology, autonomous vehicles, shared used vehicles, scooters, bicycle parking, etc. and how different transportation modes traveling at different speeds can be accommodated on the same street. Discussion ensued. 6:14:40 P.M. PB Member Gannon referred to page 29 of the staff report; and asked how the City will enable citizens to walk safely considering the climate change rising temperatures, if we do Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019. at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 3 of 15 not have street trees. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said that street trees will be part of the conversation. PB Member Gannon stated that street trees need to also be part of the plan and the funding. Discussion ensued. 6:16:48 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti said that, down the road, the implementation of the Transportation Plan will be through Zoning Text Amendments; and asked if staff has a timeline for that. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said that staff is currently working on the timeline for updating the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, they are expecting to bring something to the Planning Board next year, they want to have this plan adopted by the end of next year; and noted that it is a several month process for transmittal of the Comprehensive Plan to the State, and the Planning Board will be included in the conversation. 6:18:16 P.M. PB Chair Normile stated that transportation is a big part of affordable housing, and that 30% of the people are calling for more and better public transportation; and asked how the two issues can work together. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said there are several ways to approach this matter, one is to select certain routes and think about the land uses along those routes, noting the City may have to invest in Public Transportation in order to make it a viable option for the citizens. Discussion ensued. 6:21:41 P.M. PB Member Morriss asked if there is political will for this to happen, and if the City has a lobbying body at the State level. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said that the City is working with a lobbying firm that represents the City both in Tallahassee and in Washington, D.C.; and said Transportation Planning staff have met with the lobbying firm and have pointed out to them the City's transportation needs. Director Cover pointed out that one of the objectives is to identify and secure innovative funding sources that do not rely on federal and state funding, in addition to the traditional federal and state funds, and it is all part of this effort. Discussion ensued. 6:23:42P.M. PB Chair Normile referred to the SCAT presentations to the MPO's Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC); noted that they are uninteresting, and asked if Chief Transportation Planner McGue would work with SCAT to help them make their presentations more interesting. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said that the County has hired a consultant to re-evaluate mass transit in the County and a report is expected soon. PB Chair Normile invited Chief Transportation Planner McGue to present to the CAC. Chief Transportation Planner McGue stated staff will be ready for a presentation to the CAC: ina couple months. 6:26:19 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich asked if sharrows have come up in the survey responses or the pop ups. Chief Transportation Planner McGue said that sharrows are only appropriate for low speed roads, they are meant as a wayfinding for the bicyclists and to inform the drivers that they are sharing the road. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 4 of 15 IV. 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. Legislative Public Hearings 1. Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 19-ZTA-07 (Continued From October 2, 2019): A Proposed City Initiated Text Amendment to the Zoning Code (2002 Edition) seeking to create two new zone districts (RMF-6a and RMF-7a) that maintain the existing 35 and 50 dwelling units per acre density of the RMF-6 and RMF-7 zone districts but limit the height at 45 feet and 65 feet, respectively; provide a parking reduction (5 space/DU) for each multi-family dwelling unit designated as affordable to households with an income at or below 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI); and permit cottage courth housing in multi- family zone districts to provide flexible lot configurations of multiple smaller units. These proposed Zoning Text Amendments are consistent with recommendations from the Blueprint for Workforce Housing Action Plan and also the Local Affordable Housing Incentive Strategy Recommendations of the City of Sarasota Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. (Briana Dobbs, Planner) PB Member Ohlrich asked legal advice regarding the motion for this application; and suggested that the staff proposed motion be broken down to three separate motions, one for each text change, even though the matters may be presented at the same time. PB Member Ohlrich moved the Planning Board consider three motions for the proposed Zoning Text Amendment, one for Cottage Court, one for the RMF-6a and RMF-7a, and one for parking reduction. PB Vice Chair Blumetti seconded the motion. Motion passed by consensus. 6:31:41 P.M. PB Member Morriss noted that the proposed text amendment presents part of the city's efforts to provide affordable housing; and suggested that he would like to see all the efforts towards affordable housing together in a matrix. Director Cover suggested that PB Member Morriss ask staff this question. 6:32:39 P.M. Ryan Chapdelain, General Manager, Planning Department, and Ms. Briana Dobbs, Planner, were sworn, and introduced themselves for the record; General Manager Chapdelain said that the proposed Zoning Text Amendment relates to Attainable Housing Framework and ithas three componentsreduced parking; new zoning districts RMF-6a and RMF-7a; and Cluster Housing/Cottage Court Development; provided background information, including: City Commission's adoption of the "Blueprint for Workforce Housing" on December 3, 2018; the list of future ordinances and initiatives, including attainable housing, presented to the City Commission by Planning staff, on January 22, 2019; and noted that this is part of a comprehensive effort to increase housing affordability in Sarasota; mentioned that in recent projects staff had proposed the reduction of parking requirements for affordable residential units (for a minimum of 30 years) to households with an income at, or below, 120% of the Area's Median Household Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 5 of 15 Income (AMI); and added that the proposed text amendment calls for a reduction to 0.5 space per qualifying unit. 6:38:02 P.M. Responding to PB Vice Chair Blumetti, General Manager Chapdelain noted this parking reduction for attainable housing units currently exists in the North Trail Overlay District (NTOD), and potentially in the Rosemary Residential Overlay District (RROD) that is pending action in December. 6:38:51 P.M. Responding to PB Member Gannon's question, General Manager Chapdelain explained that the term "affordable housing" is used as a generic term and has no definition in the City's Zoning Code; said the term "attainable housing" is defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan as income equal to, or less than, 120% of AMI; "workforce housing" is equal to 140% of AMI for certain programs; and concluded that the parking reduction in the proposed amendment only applies to dwelling units that meet the definition of "attainable housing. H Discussion ensued. General Manager Chapdelain concluded that the only term to be used is "attainablehousing* or the numbers it relates to, "at, or below, 120% of AMI." 6:44:43 P.M. PB Member Morriss asked why everything is related to household income of 120% of AMI, rather than provide incentives on a scale, for example if the housing units for household incomes 40% of AMI have more incentives than units for higher incomes, sO that incentives decrease gradually as the incomes increase, sO that the City will have bargaining power; stated thatiti is an illusion that the City is providing attainable housing; and explained that the housing costs for attainable housing are very close to the costs for market rate housing, because the developers have no incentives to build housing for households of lower incomes. 6:47:22 P.M. PB Chair Normile asked to compare the costs of housing for household incomes at 120% of AMI to the costs of market rate housing; questioned why is the City doing this at all because they are close; and pointed out that market rate housing is not affordable housing and that is the reason for this text amendment. Discussion ensued. 6:56:23 P.M. PB Chair Normile asked Attorney Shamsey if the Planning Board, in a legislative hearing, can make recommendations that are different that the existing legislation. Attorney Shamsey stated that it depends on whether the proposed recommendation is a minor or major change. 6:59:45 P.M. PB Member Gannon noted that the prices for rent are based on the number of bedrooms per unit, rather than the number of] people who will occupy the unit, and asked how is the developer enforcing that the units will be occupied by the intended target households over 30 years. General Manager Chapdelain stated that they will be working with the City, and the City will be doing annual monitoring. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 6 of 15 7:02:28 P.M. PB Member Morriss said that this text amendment affects the entire City, and asked, again, if there is a way to provide the benefits in a gradual manner, on a sliding scale, giving more benefits to units that are affordable to incomes lower than 120% AMI. Planner Dobbs stated that it is possible; and described such a scenario. 7:06:24P.M. PB Chair Normile reviewed the Area Median Income (AMI) & Downtown Sarasota Comparisons in the staff report, noted that the proposed affordable units at 120% AMI are more expensive than some of the market rate units, and asked why staff is proposing ' affordable units" that are as expensive as the market rate units. Discussion ensued. General Manager Chapdelain explained that the AMI is developed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), for each Metropolitan Statistical Area, on an annual basis. 7:13:39 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich moved to find the section of No. 19-ZTA-07 regarding reducing parking requirements for multi-family dwelling units designated as affordable, consistent with the Sarasota City Plan 2030, if the household income is at, or below, 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), and find that it satisfies the standards for review in the Zoning Code, Section IV-1206, and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB Member Morriss seconded the motion. 7:15:41 P.M. Motion passes unanimously (vote 5 to 0). 7:16:04 P.M. General Manager Chapdelain described two new Zoning Districts, RMF-6a and RMF-7a; noted that the private sector will provide workforce housing if they are allowed to have high densities, sO that it can be profitable; added that the existing Multi-family High Density Land Use Classification in the Comprehensive Plan, and its two implementing zone districts RMF-6 and RMF-7, are not currently on maps; noted that existing heights for these districts make them compatible only in the downtown area; and suggested that if the height requirements are modified, and are lowered, then these districts could be used in transition areas between single family uses and another use. Discussion ensued about height compatibility when these zoning districts are used near single family residential, and about design requirements that would prevent these units from becoming tenements after a few years. Responding to PB Member Morriss' questions about design requirements, General Manager Chapdelain said that the affordable housing units in a complex are required to mirror the exterior look of market rate units in the same complex, and that requirement will be enforced during the rezoning process, site plan review, DRC review, Planning Board public hearing(s) and City Commission public hearing(s). 7:25:19 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich asked if staff has considered moderate or low-density zoning districts for affordable housing instead of these two high density zoning districts. General Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 7 of1 15 Manager Chapdelain explained that staff was looking for something denser, but at lower heights; and added that the private sector is interested in higher density, and right now nothing exists, sO staff wanted to provide a mechanism for that. PB. Member Ohlrich asked why not mid-densities, as discussed on page 5 of the staff report. Planner Dobbs stated that what the City needs is the "missing middle," densities of 35 du/acre currently allowable in the RMF-6 District; added that the City also needs higher densities; and concluded that the City needs a variety of high densities SO as to be able to provide affordable housing. 7:28:28 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti said that currently there is no "middle density" in the City, the highest density is 18du/ac, sO he agrees with staff; added that the City should identify and present to the Planning Board the locations where RMF-6 and RMF-7 should go, for the Planning Board to review and consider changes in Land Use categories, as opposed to leaving this up to the developers, because a "super majority" vote is difficult. Discussion ensued. 7:29:58 P.M. PB Chair Normile noted that the units in the proposed new Zoning Districts are not related to household income levels; said that anyone can live there; and asked what size of apartment is anticipated, and what is the enforcement of keeping units at this size if they are not selling. General Manager Chapdelain said they expect the units would be of a smaller size, based on the height restrictions; added that staff hopes that the developer voluntarily provides attainable units, in which case the developer enters in an agreement with the City that the units will remain attainable for a certain length of time; and added that the State does not allow the City to require affordable housing. PB Chair Normile noted that in the proposed new districts the developers will get additional density; and expressed concerns about "spot zoning" setbacks. Director Cover stated that this is not spot-zoning, - and pointed out that what is proposed will not interfere with the provision of sidewalks, because sidewalks must be located on the public right of way. 7:34:01 P.M. PB Member Morriss said that PB Vice Chair Blumetti mentioned the possibility of streamlining the approval process; and asked if staff plans to include something like this in the tool kit for the provision of affordable housing. General Manager Chapdelain said that if the project includes affordable housing elements, it will have top scheduling priority in the review process. PB Member Morriss asked if staff has considered waivers of fees for affordable housing units. General Manager Chapdelain said it can be done. 7:36:05 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti noted that the City can amend the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan to show where theses densities are appropriate. 7:36: 29 P.M. PB Chair Normile asked for the definition of"elements of affordability." General Manager Chapdelain said that this term means that the developer is designating attainable housing units for a certain length of time. PB Chair Normile noted that without that designation, Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 8 of 15 no element of affordability relates to higher densities (just because a development is denser it is not affordable). Director Cover and General Manager Chapdelain concurred. 7:37:15 P.M. PB Member Gannon asked for clarification regarding the process that would follow the adoption of the proposed Zoning Text Amendment. General Manager Chapdelain concurred that it would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which can be initiated either by the private sector or the City and requires 18 months to complete. PB Member Gannon suggested that it would be preferable to have a City initiated amendment, rather than lot by lot. 7:39:33 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich referred to item #10 of the incentive strategies recommendation, relating to public sites suitable for affordable housing, and asked about the map that shows these locations. General Manager Chapdelain said the map was not included in the packet; and explained that the City and the County have set aside funds to develop (on their own, or with a partner) affordable housing units on 27 City owned parcels. 7:40:10 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich referred to page 98 of the Florida Housing Coalition's Blueprint for Workforce Housing report, "Need to Address Neighborhood Opposition and NIMBYism, "of the workforce housing action plan, which refers to the citizens of the City as the reason for the lack of affordable housing in the City, and stated that the contents of this section are disturbing, and she disagrees with them; referred to page 76 of the report, the section entitled "Current Land Development Regulations where it is stated that the City lacks an inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, and adequate incentives for developing workforce housing, and it is dominated by the single family district; and asked staff to address inclusionary zoning and to explain why Sarasota does not have such zoning. General Manager Chapdelain stated that Florida House Bill 7103 prohibits anyone from having inclusionary zoning, and that this Bill was passed after the writing of this report. PB Member Ohlrich noted that the City provides incentives but there is always an "out," where the developers get the incentive but do not deliver on affordable housing; referred to page 77 of the report that states the incentives in the RROD did not deliver workforce housing, and asked what guarantees there are to assure that this will not happen with the proposed revisions in the Zoning Text Amendment under review. General Manager Chapdelain said that there are no guarantees. Discussion ensued. 1:47:43 P.M. PB Member Gannon moved to find the portion of No. 19-ZTA-07 relating to Zoning Districts RMF-6a and RMF-7a is consistent with the Sarasota City Plan 2030, and find that it satisfies the standards for review in the Zoning Code, Section IV-1206, and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB Vice Chair Blumetti seconded the motion. Motion passes with a vote of 4 to 1 (PB Member Ohlrich voted "No.") Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 9 of 15 1:48:48 P.M. General Manager Chapdelain noted that proposed amendment enhances the City's existing regulation for cluster housing, by transitioning it to a cottage court development; said that currently cluster housing is a Conditional Use in both single-family and multi- family zoning districts; added that the proposed amendment allows cluster housing in the multi-family districts, and provides design standards to ensure compatibility; and presented llustrations of cottage court developments. Planner Dobbs explained the concept of cottage court housing developments and introduced characteristics of this concept, including a maximum of twelve detached or semi-detached structures, with a maximum unit size of 1,500 sq. ft., around a common open space or courtyard. General Manager Chapdelain said that there are no guarantees that these will be affordable units. 1:54:07 P.M. PB Chair Normile asked about assurances that the back of the houses do not face the public street. Planner Dobbs explained that in some communities, it is required that the units abutting a public street have an entrance on the public street, something they can include in this amendment. 1:54:15 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti noted that he is not in favor of design standards, but he thinks they are appropriate here; added that this type of housing is more appropriate in a single family district as opposed to a multi-family district, yet it is a Major Conditional Use in the single-family districts; and asked if it can be changed to a permitted use in the single- family districts. General Manger Chapdelain said that the Planning Board may want to recommend that, and also, consider height restrictions, such as a maximum height of 25 ft. instead of35 ft. Planner Dobbs said that ifi iti is an allowable use in single family districts, then they could include additional design standards. Discussion ensued. 1:58:03 P.M. Responding to PB Member Gannon, Planner Dobbs stated that garages are not required because they have a shared parking area. PB Member Gannon asked if this concept can be built in the Rosemary District. General Manager Chapdelain noted thatit would not: make economic sense to build this concept instead of building at the RROD's maximum allowable density and height. PB Member Gannon asked if this would allow prefabricated homes or tiny homes. Planner Dobbs said "No." Discussion ensued. 2:02:53 P.M. PB Member Morriss asked if there is anything in this concept that would supersede existing density standards in single family development. General Manager Chapdelain said that right now they cannot exceed the base density. PB Member Gannon suggested that it should be considered; and asked what the process is to fine tune the density for an application for this concept. Discussion ensued. The Planning Board summarized their discussion topics, as follows: A cottage that fronts on a public street to have an entrance on the public street. Investigate the concept of eliminating the Conditional Use for cottage courts in the single-family residential districts. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 10 of 15 Leave the existing 35 ft. allowable maximum height requirement for court cottage structures in the single-family districts. Cottage Court developments could exceed the based density. 8:10:07 P.M. PB Member Gannon asked if a public hearing is required if the cottage court concept becomes a permitted use. General Manager Chapdelain said there will be no requirement for public hearings if it is a permitted use. Discussion ensued, and the Planning Board agreed to keep this concept as a permitted use in the RSF -3, RSF-4, and DTN districts, unless if the cottage court development increases the base density, in which case it will be considered a Minor Conditional Use. PB Chair Normile asked if someone has the ability to request increased density for the cottage court development. General Manager Chapdelain stated "No." 8:19:12 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich moved to find the portion of 19-ZTA-07 relating to the cottage court concept consistent with the Sarasota City Plan 2030, if a cottage that fronts on a public street has an entrance on the public street; and cottage court developments are allowed in the RSF-3, RSF-4, RSM- 9, RTD-9, and DTN zoning districts as a permitted use, SO long as the density remains the same, but if density is proposed to increase, then they are permitted as a Minor Conditional Use ; and find that it satisfies the standards for review in the Zoning Code, Section IV-1206, and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB Vice Chair Blumetti seconded the motion. Motion is approved unanimously, with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Board Took a Five-Minute Recess. 2. Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 19-ZTA-08 (Continued From October 2, 2019): Proposed Zoning Text Amendment to Zoning Code (2002 Edition) to establish the criteria for Conservation Historic Districts; provide for the development of a Newtown Conservation Historic District as a zoning Overlay District; allow for the historic review of Nationally Designated Historic structures; provide for Variances and Adjustment relief to be granted for Locally Historically Designated structures by the Historic Preservation Board; allow for a Historic Reuse Approval permit process in single family zone districts and Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) to grant Locally Historically Designated structures uses that would not be otherwise allowed in those zone districts; and provide for additional review standards for Florida Master Site File (FMSF) Demolition Stays. (Dr. Clifford E. Smith, Jr. RPA, Senior Planner) Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 11 of 15 8:22:22 PM Dr. Smith introduced himself for the record; provided the history of the proposed Zoning Text Amendment; noted that the Historic Preservation Chapter of the Zoning Code was last updated in February 2009; said that in May 2009 the City adopted the Newtown Conservation Historic District; noted it was included in the Comprehensive Plan as an action strategy but was never codified, which is being done through the proposed amendment; defined the term "Conservation Historic District;" noted that there are more than one such districts in the City; explained how the proposed amendment envisions the creation of such districts; pointed out that the Newtown Conservation Historic District (NCHD) is already established, and that the implementation of the District will be accomplished through a building permit review for a Certificate of Compliance, and explained the procedures to be followed by the Planning Dept.; added that the Planning Department will issue a Certificate of Compliance, or a report of how the subject development under review can mitigate adverse impacts; stated that an application for a Certificate of Compliance, as well as the staff report, will be submitted to the Clerk's Office and to the Historic Preservation Board for review, not a public hearing; noted that if the Historic Preservation Board finds an application not to be in compliance with the NCHD, the applicant may appeal this finding to the City Commission; stated that infill new single family construction in the NCHD will be required to follow certain design standards to make the new construction compatible with the NCHD, including underground utility lines, the front of the building must face the street, the main entrance should face the street; garages and carports should be located back from the front of the house; added that, if the building needs to be elevated to address flooding issues, then the building should be elevated by stem wall toundations and openings beneath the structure; and summarized other sections within the Code that are affected by the NCHD. 8:33:51 P.M. Dr. Smith referred to Citywide Historic Preservation Zoning Text Amendments relating to other Sections of the Zoning Code, as follows: Section IV-805-Nationally Registered Historic Resources - provides for an administrative historic review of building permits affecting nationally registered historic resources; Section IV-816 A - Administrative Variance or Adjustment - information that relates to historic structure, and is currently found in the Code's sections of Variances and Adjustments, it is moved to this section of the Code; Section IV-816-B - Historic Preservation Board Variance or Adjustment - authorizes the Preservation Board to grant Zoning Variances and Adjustments for Locally Designated Historic Structures, sites or an archaeological site; Section IV-823 - Demolition Stay FMSF - providing for waivers from the Historic Preservation Board Review for certain Historic Structures that are degraded beyond reasonable restoration, and there are health and safety concerns; Section IV-808 - Historici reuse Approval for Historic Structures - Providing for permit approvals for Locally Designated historic structures to perpetuate the viable utilization of the historic structure, regardless if the use is a permitted use in the zoning district in which the structure is located; Division 20. - Historic Reuse Permit - Section IV-2001- Purpose and Applicability lists the low impact uses for the reuse of Locally Designated historic structures (as Special Exceptions); and Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 12 of 15 Division 10 - Downtown Zone Districts, - Historic Reuse Permit - provides a list of uses for reuse of Locally Designated historic structures (as Special Exceptions). 8:49:29 P.M. Dr. Smith continued by pointing out that the entire Historic Preservation Chapter in the Zoning Code has been reorganized to provide for a logical progression of the Chapter; eliminate redundancy; and reflect changes in the names of City departments who are being referenced in the text because of their involvement in the procedures for Historic Preservation issues. 8:51:01 P.M. PB Member Ohlrich expressed appreciation to the Historic Preservation Board for their perseverance and for bringing this reorganization of the Chapter forward. 8:52:22 P.M. PB Member Morriss stated that he was part of the Historic Preservation groups in town and he understands the need for historic preservation; addressed the creation of Historic Preservation Districts, and stated that homeowners within the districts could bring lawsuits against the City because they did not participate in the process that created the Districts; added that the proposed amendment has a few "carrots" and a lot of "sticks;" added that the proposed amendment has involuntary compliance for people who did not participate in the process; provided an example where the citizens were opposing the historic designation on their property because it adds costs without real benefit to them; and asked why the City is not offering more incentives. 8:54:49 P.M. Dr. Smith stated that the proposed amendment does not impose a Historic District on anybody; and explained that in order for a property to be locally designated, the owner must apply for it and it must go to public hearing before the Historic Preservation Board, and then the City Commission. Discussion ensued. Dr. Smith explained the process for Nationally Designated Historic Districts, for areas of less than 50 homes, as well as the process for areas exceeding 50 homes; pointed out that in the second scenario, the owners are allowed to opt out of the designation; added that a neighborhood could apply to the Historic Preservation Board to become an overlay district, like the Newtown area; said that they came to the City requesting to become al Historic District, but unfortunately they did not meet certain criteria to become either a National or a Local Historic District, SO the City offered to create a Conservation Historic District, based on the Action Strategies of the Comprehensive Plan, and Newtown accepted the City's offer. Discussion ensued. 9:00:00 P.M. Responding to PB Member Morriss' question, Dr. Smith referred to a number of Codes that provide incentives for historic preservation including FEMA, the Fire Code, the current Zoning Code, and the recently adopted County and City Tax Incentives; and added that they provide incentives for citizens to apply for their structures to be locally designated, because that process includes more reviews, which protects these properties in the future. Discussion ensued, and Dr. Smith assured PB Member Morriss that there is no involuntary participation. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019. at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 13 of 15 9:03:25 P.M. PB Member Gannon referred to the staff report, page 19 of 69, subsection 5., second sentence, which states: 1 However the requirements of section IV-202 (c) (pertaining to notice and hearing) shall not apply..., and asked who is not being notified. Dr. Smith noted that this language is currently in the Code, and it relates to historic preservation activities, such as an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness: (COA), which do not require a public hearing, as opposed to applications for local or national designations of properties, which require public hearings. 9:07:22P.M. PB Member Gannon noted that on page 19 of 69 of the staff report item 6 refers to the Planning Department, but on page 37 of 69 of the staff report item 7 refers to Planning Director. Dr. Smith, as the author of both sections, explained the need for using different terminology in these sections. 9:09:18 P.M. PB Vice Chair Blumetti referred to page 24 of 69 of the staff report and asked if there is a threshold that determines if the request for a Variance goes to the Board of Adjustment. Dr. Smith referred to the staff report, page 25 of 69, item 3, which identifies the types of activities for which the Historic Preservation Board is not authorized to grant variances or adjustments; and said this allows for the Historic Preservation Board for the first time to review variances for Locally Designated historic structures. PB Vice Chair Blumetti expressed concern about unintended consequences. Discussion issued. 9:13:43 P.M. PB Member Morriss suggested that the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board can got to either to the Planning Board or to the City Commission, as a Consent Item, SO that there is a "second set of eyes" reviewing the variance to prevent unintended consequences. Discussion ensued. PB Vice Chair Blumetti stated that he will be satisfied knowing that staff reviews the variance application and prepares a staff report with recommendations. 9:16:10 P.M. PB Member Morris noted that there are City Ordinances that identify the authorities that have the right to grant variances, and asked Attorney Shamsey if there is something that must happen to make the proposed amendment have teeth and not be challengeable. Attorney Shamsey stated that he needs to look further into this matter. 9:17:18 P.M. PB Chair Normile referred to the staff report, page 33 of 69, Section IV-24. Demolition by neglect; and asked how this is enforced. Dr. Smith stated that it is enforced through Code Enforcement. Discussion ensued. PB Member Ohlrich moved to find Application 19-ZTA-08 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan (2030). and find that it satisfies the Standards for Review: in Zoning Code Section IV-1206 and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB Vice Chair Blumetti seconded the motion. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 14 of 15 The motion passes unanimously (vote 5 - 0). V. CITIZEN's INPUT NOTICE TO' THE. 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.) There was none. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (Note: Deletions are SHFICKE-HPONgH; additions are underlined.) 1. September 11, 2019 (Revised) o Page 12 of 12, 7:48:28PM, first sentence should read: "Attorney Connolly said that he does not want to allew invite procedural lawsuits; 9 Page 12 of 12, 7 :50:36 PM, first sentence should read: PB member Ohlrich suggested the following additional revisions in-the-Code to the Rules of Procedures. The Minutes of the PB Regular Public Meeting of September 11, 2019, as revised, were approved by consensus. 2. September 18, 2019 Special Meeting ) Page 12 of 13, 10:16:14 P.M., second paragraph, fifth line should read: I and said the Development Services Director's has interpretation is the bar itself has to be indoors..." Page 7 of 13, 8:13:50 P.M., first paragraph, should read: PB Chair Normile discussed the proposed restaurant and questioned how much financial support the restaurant would provide, and what percentage of the restaurant's revenue that represented. Ms.Reminieeki -0etpriawr $500000-ammaly-eFe-estrants revenue-weuld-ge-te-Selby-Gardens,metingthe-restaurants-anticipated veweweseademiaN Ms. Romineicki stated that they expected to receive approximately $500,000 dollars annually, which would represent 10% of Selby's earned income. She noted that she could not comment on what percentage of the restaurant's income that represented, as that information is confidential. The Minutes of the PB Special Meeting of September 18, 2019, as revised, were approved by consensus. 3. September 25, 2019 Special Meeting The Minutes of the PB Special Meeting of September 25, 2019, were approved by consensus. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting October 30, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 15 of 15 4. October 2, 2019 Special Meeting Page 3 of 20, 6:08:47 P.M., last paragraph, 3rd line, should read: PB Member Ohlrich stated... The Minutes of the PB Special Meeting of October 2, 2019, as revised, were approved by consensus. VII. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY STAFF Items presented arei informational only (no action taken). Any issue presented that may require future action will be placed on the next available agenda for discussion. 1. Sarasota In Motion Update (Continued from October 2, 2019) was moved to the top of the agenda. There were no additional topics. VIII. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY PLANNING BOARD Items presented are informational only (no action taken). Any issuej presented that may require future action will be placed on the next available agenda for discussion. 3:29:20 P.M. PB Chair Normile referred to the scheduling of items for Planning Board meetings and asked what is on the next agenda. Secretary Cover stated that the agenda for the November 13, 2019 PB Regular Meeting includes the Bahia Vista Medical Office Building, The Pines of Sarasota, and Bath & Racquet; and noted Bath & Racquet will take some time because it involves multiple applications. PB Member Ohlrich suggested that at the beginning of an anticipated long public hearing on a project, the Planning Board establish a "Stop Time," 1 after which any remaining items to be discussed on thàt project would be continued to the next PB Meeting, because at 12:30 a.m. is a little late. Secretary Cover said that the meeting will not go to that late hour. Discussion ensued. Responding to PB Chair Normile, Secretary Cover stated that the agenda for December 11, 2019 PB Regular Meeting includes Quay Sarasota Block 6 Major Amendment; Vacation of a Portion of Seed Avenue; Payne Park Village Phase II; and a Parking Zoning Text Amendment, which will take some time. IX. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:33 P.M. bi hhin DE Steven R. Cover, Planning Director EILEEN W. NORMILE, CHAIR Planning Department Planning Board/Local Planning Agency [Secretary to the Board]