CITY OF SARASOTA Planning and Development Division Neighborhood and Development Services Department MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Planning Board Jennifer Ahearn-Koch, Chair Members Present: Chris Gallagher, Vice Chair Members Robert Lindsay, Mort Siegel, and Vald Svekis City Staff Present: Michael Connolly, Deputy City Attorney David Smith, General Manager, Neighborhood & Development Services Courtney Mendez, AICP, Senior Planner Ryan Chapdelain, Chief Planner Miles Larsen, Manager, Public Broadcasting Karen Grassett, Sr. Planning Technician I. CALLI MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Ahearn-Koch called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. and General Manager Smith [as Secretary to the Board] called the roll. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if there were any changes to the order of the day. General Manager Smith requested the addition of a discussion regarding the City's email policy as the first item. The Planning Board agreed by consensus. II. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE DAY 1. City Email Policy General Manager Smith stated at their regular meeting last week the City Commission asked staff to remind all advisory board members of the City's email policy that they are to use their City issued email account for all City business. Mr. Smith stated forms are available for the Planning Board members to sign acknowledging they understand and agree to abide by the policy, and requested those forms be signed and submitted by each member by the end of the meeting. Mr. Smith noted the importance of the issue due to the Sunshine Law. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if email received via Facebook needs to be forwarded to their City email accounts. Attorney Connolly stated only if the email is in connection with an issue that will likely come before the Planning Board in the foreseeable future. Chair Ahearn-Koch noted the difficulties in controlling mail that is received, both physically and electronically. Attorney Connolly stated the subject matter rather than the source is what matters, noting if a public records request was made the City's IT Department would do all the work in gathering the information requested, however, if information was kept in a personal account the recipient rather than the City would be responsible for providing that information. Chair Ahearn- Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 2 of 9 Koch stated to be safe she would forward all of her emails to her City account, and questioned what if she didn'tread an email and deleted it. Attorney Connolly stated any email in connection with City business must be retained. PB member Lindsay stated Board members could be subpoenaed and would have to deliver their hard drive for someone to examine which would include all personal information as well. Chair Ahearn-Koch stated she is not necessarily responding, just receiving, and noted there could be items in her junk mailbox as well SO she will just forward everything to her City email account. Attorney Connolly reiterated emails should be forwarded only if it relates to City business. PB member Lindsay questioned if an email that is generally published such as daily emails from the Observer need to be forwarded. Attorney Connolly stated newspaper articles are not necessarily related to City business and noted that if an IT person has to respond to a public records request and can't locate everything the issue winds up before aj judge. PB member Lindsay stated the amount of work involved in retaining the required information is unfortunate noting his personal account only holds SO many emails before he has to create new folders and move the information over. PB member Lindsay further stated everyone needs to understand that as a Board member they are subject to their personal computers being subpoenaed and investigated. Attorney Connolly stated that is true only if there is probable cause to believe that public documents are there that were not supplied. PB member Svekis questioned if messages left on home answering machines had to be kept. Attorney Connolly stated voice messages are considered public records if they relate to City business. PB member Lindsay questioned how that is any different than having a discussion on the street with someone. Attorney Connolly stated the courts have determined verbal conversations are not documents, however voice mail is like a written document that transmits data from Person " A" to Person "B". Chair Ahearn-Koch noted that also applies to text messages. PB: member Siegel stated he had heard the City Commission's conversation regarding paying for Susan Chapman's S legal fees and stated it is incumbent that the City Commission and/ or City Manager let all advisory board members know that the City will not pay their expenses, that the message needs to be conveyed clearly, and that no matter how many courses advisory board members take they don'tt tend to look over their shoulders due to their inclination that everyone is honest. PB member Siegel further stated the City needs to fess up that it can'tafford to pay these expenses and needs to develop a way to deal with these things. PB member Siegel stated a lot has been left out of the discussion and there are things that can be done, noting there are two aspects to the issue, he supports the concepts under the Sunshine Law, he agrees with Bob Lincoln, however the implementation needs explored. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if there is a time limit to forward emails to the City account. Attorney Connolly stated ASAP. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if an email is received that contains both City business and personal information, could the portion relating to personal information be deleted. Attorney Connolly stated you could be putting yourself at risk because a forensic expert could determine information had been deleted and it would be the responsibility of the recipient to prove what information had been deleted. Chair Ahearn-Koch stated there is no way to control what people send, that the email could contain personal information, and forwarding the entire Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 3 of 9 email puts everything out to the entire world. PB member Lindsay Stated one could be easily entrapped by someone wanting to sabotage a project or neutralize a person in favor of a project, etc. by planting something not easily recognizable as City business, stating the issue has been taken to the point of being unreasonable and noted all private communications can be opened up to unreasonable search and seizure. PB member Svekis stated he felt the only solution is a tightening of the definition by legislators, noting sooner or later a Board member is going to incur legal fees that the City won't cover and stated that would be a blow to advisory boards. PB member Lindsay further stated the need for a constitutional amendment that required the State legislator's: records be subject to the same laws, noting they would have a lot better understanding of the issues. PB member Siegel stated the issue has gotten out of hand in this community and that while he is not questioning anyone's S right to make a request the structure and concept of complying need to be examined. PB member Lindsay stated the Planning Board members need to be particularly concerned since they make decisions that have big financial impacts sO they are most likely, after the City Commission and City staff, to be targeted. PB: member Lindsay stated he is serious about the need for a petition to make the legislators subject to the laws. Chair Ahearn-Koch noted if anyone is part of any Facebook or Twitter discussions and receives notice that someone has participated in your discussion those too must be forwarded to the City email account. Attorney Connolly stated only if it relates to City business. PB member Svekis questioned what happens if the internet service provider puts an email into the SPAM folder and you never see it. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if anyone should be copied on emails forwarded to the City accounts and noted maybe the State legislators should be. PB member Lindsay stated it would be best to not get involved in Facebook, etc. discussions unless you absolutely have to. PB member Svekis stated the simple answer is to retire. PB: member Siegel stated a lot of people will think that way and look at what that would do to the town. 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 oft the Pledge of Conduct Secretary Smith read the Pledge of Conduct aloud. Attorney Connolly reviewed quasi-judicial hearing procedures and the recommended time limits for the petitions. Board Members agreed to the time limits. Attorney Connolly requested disclosure of any ex-parte communications. PB Chair Ahearn-Koch stated she had a brief discussion with Kelly Kirschner regarding Concordia Lutheran Church. Chair Ahearn-Koch also spoke with Attorney Connolly regarding the 5th Street parking lot application, noting the property owner next door is a client of hers. Attorney Connolly advised Chair Ahearn-Koch that she did not need to recuse herself from voting on the application. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 4 of 9 The oath was administered to all intending to speak regarding the petitions on the agenda. Attorney Connolly stated no applications for affected person status had been received. B. Non Quasi-ludicial Public Hearings 1. SARASOTA FORD EASEMENT VACATION (707 S. WASHINGTON BLVD): Application 14- SV-01 proposes to vacate an abandoned utility easement located approximately 90 feet south of the northerly property line of the Sarasota Ford parcel. (Courtney Mendez, AICP, Senior Planner) Staff Presentation: Senior Planner Mendez appeared and stated while the process is the same as a street vacation this is actually for an easement vacation. Senior Planner Mendez stated the easement is in place for a water main that ran through the Sarasota Ford property, noting the Planning Board had approved a site plan on the same property about one month ago. Senior Planner Mendez stated the easement being vacated was granted in 1971, in 2006/2007 a new water line was constructed along the northern boundary of the property and a new easement was granted, the easement being vacated now was not abandoned at that time even though the line was fully closed, the issue was identified as part of the site plan review, and noted this is a cleanup item. Senior Planner Mendez stated the line remains in place and removing that in the future would be at Sarasota Ford's expense, the application was reviewed based on the criteria for street vacations, and staff recommends approval with one condition. PB: member Svekis questioned if the pipe was still there, what the diameter is and what material the pipe is constructed of. Senior Planner Mendez stated the pipe was still in place however she does not know the size or materials. PB member Svekis stated it is incumbent to turn that over to Ford before ten mustangs drop into a hole. Senior Planner Mendez stated the City Utilities Department has confirmed the water line was properly abandoned and there is no chance it will be used for public purposes. Senior Planner Mendez noted by vacating the easement the City is absolved of any responsibility. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned why the easement was not vacated in 2006. Senior Planner Mendez stated she and Tim Litchet had met with the Utilities Director and no one is sure why that was not done, noting the majority of the staff from that time period has since retired. Applicant Presentation: Larry Weber, Weber Engineering, appeared and stated Senior Planner Mendez had covered everything and stated he was happy to answer any questions. Citizen Testimony: There was no citizen input. Chair Ahearn-Koch closed the public hearing. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 5 of 9 PB member Lindsay made a motion find Street Vacation 14-SV-01 consistent with Section IV-1306 of the Zoning Code and recommend to the City Commission approval of the Street Vacation subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall relinquish any City liability associated with any utilities and related infrastructure abandoned on the property as a result of the vacation. The abandoned water main may remain in situ following the vacation, with any future costs for related repair or removal to be borne solely by the property owner. PB member Siegel seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. C. Quasi-ludicial Public Hearings 1. CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH (2185 WooD STREET): Applications 13-SP-12 and 13-CU-06 propose to construct two additional restrooms and additional storage totaling 763 sq. ft. as an addition to Willer Hall, located on the southwest portion of the property. (Courtney Mendez, AICP, Senior Planner) PB Chair Ahearn-Koch noted a revised staff recommendation sheet was distributed and verified all the members had reviewed the information. Applicant Presentation: Mr. James Thomas appeared representing Concordia Lutheran Church and offered to address any questions from the Planning Board. PB member Svekis stated he was bothered by the fact the narrative and drawings do not match, noting the narrative states two stalls per gender are proposed while the drawings show four stalls per gender. Mr. Thomas stated the proposal was always for four stalls and he was not sure how the error occurred. Staff Presentation: Senior Planner Mendez appeared and stated the application is for a Site Plan and Conditional Use, a 763 sq ft addition for restrooms and facilities and storage area is proposed, a public hearing is required due to the fact the proposed addition exceeds 500 sq ft, and that while the proposal is for a small addition a full analysis was performed. Ms. Mendez stated page three contains a table that shows the breakdown of the criteria reviewed and noted the proposal complies with all the criteria. Ms. Mendez stated the existing RSF-4 zoning allows for the required conditional use, no additional parking is required, the use is consistent with the Future Land Use Classification, and noted the findings applied to both the Site Plan and Conditional Use. PB: member Svekis stated he was curious about the no parking signs at the property boundary and questioned if there was a problem. PB member Svekis questioned if the signs belong to the church or neighbors? Mr. Thomas appeared and stated there are apartments next door and there was a problem with those tenants parking on the Church property SO the Church put up the signs to keep them off their property. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 6 of 9 No citizens or affected persons spoke. Chair Ahearn-Koch closed the public hearing. PB member Siegel made a motion to find Site Plan 13-SP-12 consistent with Section IV-506 of the Zoning Code, find Conditional Use 13-CU-06 consistent with Section IV- 906 of the Zoning Code, and recommend to the City Commission approval of the petitions, subject to the conditions recommended by staff. PB member Svekis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. PBS Svekis noted due to the roof line you can't tell an addition is even being added. PB member Gallagher stated he liked the way the plans bring symmetry to the building. 2. 5TH STREET PARKING LOT REZONE (1433 5TH STREET): Rezone application 13-REN-02 proposes to rezone a 0.36 acre City-owned property from Governmental (G) to Downtown Edge (DTE). (Courtney Mendez, AICP, Senior Planner) Staff Presentation: Chief Planner Chapdelain appeared and stated on June 3rd the City Commission authorized staff to move forward with an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) for the potential sale and redevelopment of the City owned parking lot as well as the Community Garden site. Chief Planner Chapdelain stated the rezoning of the parking lot is required due to the existing zoning of "G" (Government), with the idea being to bring the zoning of the property into conformance with surrounding properties that are zoned Downtown Edge (DTE), noting the property was not included in a previous rezoning of the Rosemary District. Chief Planner Chapdelain noted a community workshop was held which no one attended however general correspondence received indicates support from area stakeholders. Senior Planner Mendez appeared and stated a good portion of the Rosemary District was rezoned to Downtown Edge (DTE) in 2005 and was followed-up with the rezoning of the remaining portion in 2010. Senior Planner Mendez stated staff at that time had requested the Government zoned properties not be included and noted this rezoning would level the playing field whether developed by the City or a private developer. Senior Planner Mendez stated the rezoning encourages both equity and a consistent product, was reviewed by staff using the same criteria as any other rezoning proposal, and has been found consistent with the future land use and standards for rezoning. PB member Svekis questioned how large a McMansion condo is, noting the property can be developed with up to five stories with potentially no setbacks, is 16,000 sq ft and the transportation concurrency review states 7,800 sq ft of retail and 7,800 sq ft of office space which leaves four open floors for 4 condos. PB member Svekis questioned the size of the condos noting the need for density in that area and stated on the surface the use would be very elitist. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page7of9 Senior Planner Mendez stated while 100% coverage with five stories may be technically allowed that does not necessarily mean that can actually be achieved. PB member Svekis stated five stories can be developed by right, the concurrency analysis was performed on two stories and questioned how the uses on the remaining 3 floors would change the outcome of the analysis. General Manager Smith stated he had performed the analysis noting the Urban Edge classification calls for a 50/50 split and the analysis was based on that. PB member Svekis stated the Rosemary District is a developing area and the City needs the density to add to the tax base rather than more elitist development. PB member Gallagher stated he had done a project in the area noting by the time height, density, and parking requirements are considered one does not get to fully develop five stories with full lot coverage. PB: member Svekis questioned if the first level could be parking. PB member Gallagher stated while that is possible there are other restrictions due to the property being located on a primary street. PB member Lindsay questioned if the review of the rezoning was based on the maximum that could be built. General Manager Smith stated the traffic consultant has stated there are no traffic concerns in the Rosemary area, noting the concurrency analysis was a requirement. PB member Lindsay reiterated his point stating since no specific site plan is being considered the analysis must be based on the maximum use allowed. PB member Svekis stated his concerns due to the tremendous potential in developing the property and reiterated the need for density rather than elitist development. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if staff had considered rezoning the property to Downtown Neighborhood Edge and questioned the zoning of the neighboring residences. Senior Planner Mendez stated the Downtown Neighborhood Edge zoning was available however spot zoning or isolated zone districts are discouraged noting everything other than the Fire Station in the area is zoned Downtown Edge. PB Chair Ahearn-Koch stated she thought it would be a good opportunity to implement the Downtown Neighborhood Edge district. PB member Svekis questioned if the rezoning is approved would the numbers used in the traffic concurrency analysis be a requirement. Senior Planner Mendez stated those numbers were only used for the traffic analysis and are not a condition of approval noting her analysis was based on the maximum potential development of the site with no restrictions due to there not being an associated site plan. No citizens or affected persons spoke. Chair Ahearn-Koch closed the public hearing. PB: member Gallagher made a motion to find Rezone 13-REN-02 consistent with Section IV-1106(a) of the zoning code and recommend approval to the City Commission. PB member Siegel seconded the motion. PB member Gallagher stated he felt staff had thought this through and the rezoning was the right thing to do in terms of zoning and incentives to make things happen in Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 8 of 9 the area. PB: member Svekis stated due to the prime location it is a great opportunity to increase density while allowing for smaller units. The motion carried unanimously. IV. CITIZEN's INPUT There was no citizen' s input. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. November 13, 2013 Chair Ahearn-Koch stated she thought the minutes were fantastic and wanted that on the record. The minutes were approved by consensus. VI. PRESENTATION OF' TOPICS BY STAFF General Manager Smith stated he felt the Planning Board's workshop earlier in the day with the City Commission was good, noted all the proposed topics were not addressed, and stated he would contact the City Manager's office regarding scheduling a date/time for future discussion. VII. PRESENTATION OF TOPICS BY PLANNING BOARD PB: member Lindsay requested all pictures included in their packets be dated whenever possible. Chair Ahearn-Koch questioned if she was permitted to comment on that. Attorney Connolly stated she could. Chair Ahearn-Koch stated she thought that was an excellent suggestion. PB member Svekis stated during the last meeting the discussion was the Planning Board could not discuss things among themselves if the issue is not on the agenda and stated he feels that is unreasonable. Attorney Connolly stated that was an over exaggeration of what was discussed, that the Sunshine Law in general requires that the Planning Board, as a public body, has to give public notice of things they are going to discuss, however that does not mean things can'to come up during the course of a meeting. Attorney Connolly stated recent amendments to the Sunshine Law require before acting on any proposition the public has to be heard SO anything requiring action needs to be put on a future agenda. Items such as recommending staff put dates on pictures can be discussed. PB member Svekis requested clarification that discussions can occur as long as no action is being taken. Attorney Connolly verified that is correct. VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS General Manager Smith stated no member can serve two consecutive terms as Chair or Vice Chair and that Mr. Lindsay may not have been on the Board long enough. PB member Lindsay questioned what the by-laws said. Attorney Connolly stated the by- laws state the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson shall be elected for a one-year term and the Board shall elect its Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson from members who have had prior service on the Board. Attorney Connolly stated due to Mr. Lindsay's previous terms Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting December 11, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page9d of9 on the Planning Board he is qualified and confirmed members cannot serve consecutive terms as Chair or Vice Chair. PB member Siegel made a motion that Chris Gallagher be elected Chair. PB member Svekis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. PB member Siegel made a motion that Vald Svekis be elected Vice Chair. PB member Gallagher seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. CGL aid2Smak David Smith, General Manager - Integration Chris Gallagher, Chair Neighborhood & Development Services Planning Board/Local Planning Agency [Secretary to the Board]