CITY OF SARASOTA Development Review Division Development Services Department MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Planning Board Terrill Salem, Chair Members Present: Dan Clermont, Vice Chair Members Damien Blumetti, Michael Halflants, Kathy Kelley Ohlrich Planning Board Members Absent: City Staff Present: Mike Connolly, Deputy City Attorney Steven Cover, Planning Director [acting secretary] Lucia Panica, Director of Development Services Alison Christie, AICP, Development Review Senior Planner Tom Sacharski, AICP, Development Review Senior Planner Amy Pintus, Development Review Planner John Nopper, Coordinator, Public Broadcasting Karen Grassett, Sr. Planning Technician, Development Services 1:49:48 P.M. I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL PB Chair Salem callled the meeting to order. Planning Director Cover [acting as Secretary to the Board] called the roll. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE DAY There were no changes to the order ofthe day. 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. Reading ofthe Pledge ofConduct Acting Secretary Cover read the Pledge of Conduct. Attorney Connolly recommended time limits for the presentations that will follow; and administered the oath to those wishing to testify at the public hearings. PB Chair Salem requested disclosure of any ex-parte communications. There were none. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 2 of 16 B. Quasi-Judicial Public Hearings 1:52:20 P.M. 1. Cigar Paradise (354 St. Armands Circle): Site Plan. Application No. 22-SP-10 and Major Conditional Use Application No. 22-CU-02 are a request for Site Plan and Major Conditional Use approval to develop a twelve-seat beer and wine bar and cigar store in an existing 1,130 square foot retail space with a street address of 354 St. Armands Circle. The parcel has a Future Land Use Classification of Metropolitan/Regional #7 and is zoned Commercial Tourist (CT). (Alison Christie, AICP, Development Review Senior Planner) Applicant Presentation: Mr. Kody Johnson, COO of Cigar Paradise Corporation, and Ms. Yaite Ruiz, CFO of Cigar Paradise Corporation appeared. Mr. Johnson stated the request is for Site Plan and Conditional Use approval for a 12-seat bar at 354 St. Armands Circle in the Commercial Tourist (CT) zone district; presented a graphic depicting the location; said the bar would be beer and wine only and operate in conjunction with a high-end retail store that is permitted in the CT zone district; noted a variance has been granted to allow the bar to operate within 500' of residential; discussed the surrounding businesses on St. Armands Circle; stated the owners operate a similar operation in downtown St. Petersburg that is also located in a high-end retail area; presented photos of the St. Petersburg operation; pointed out the bar is paired with retail rather than being a standalone bar; said concerns were expressed at the Community Workshop regarding outside smoking; and stated no outdoor seating will be provided. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned if there was residential near the St. Petersburg location and if sO if there have been any issues; and asked how the air handling system will mitigate the indoor smoke. Mr. Johnson stated the St. Petersburg location is connected to a condominium and as a result there is residential above and behind their operation; said there have been no negative experiences; and described the negative pressure HVAC system that will be used that will clean the air before it is exhausted; and pointed out the same system is used at the St. Petersburg location that is connected to residential and there have been no complaints. PB Member Ohlrich noted concerns were expressed at the Community Workshop regarding cigar smell permeating into the neighboring shops; and asked if the applicants were willing to proffer that the doors will remain closed at except fori ingress, egress, and deliveries. Mr. Johnson stated an air curtain could be installed if necessary; and pointed out the HVAC system does not allow smoke to permeate outdoors. Discussion ensued. PB Member Ohlrich questioned if cigar smoke could permeate the crawl space; asked if the applicants had talked to the clothing store next door; and asked if Mr. Johnson would be surprised that there are issues with other cigar bars. Mr. Johnson stated the architecture is designed such that all walls and openings are sealed; said the same system is used at the St. Petersburg! location with no: issues; said if an issue arose the Architect and Engineer would be brought in to resolve it; and pointed out their design plan is different than most other cigar bars. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 3 of 16 PB Member Halflants asked if a Conditional Use would be required for the cigar store only; ifthe Conditional Use was due to the desire to serve alcohol; and pointed out there are other retail establishments in the area that serve alcohol. Mr. Johnson confirmed the Conditional Use was necessary for the serving of alcohol and acknowledged there are other establishments in the area that serve alcohol. PB Member Blumetti stated he had questions regarding smoke pollution onto the sidewalk however those have been addressed. PB Chair Salem questioned if there would be outdoor seating and if not, will they wish to provide that in the future. Mr. Johnson stated no outdoor seating is proposed; pointed out the Conditional Use approval is only needed for the 12-seat bar; and said they were willing to proffer there will be no outdoor seating. 2:08:54 P.M. Staff Presentation: Development Review Senior Planner Christie appeared and stated the request is for an 1130 commercial tenant space at 354 St. Armands Circle; said the site is zoned CT and the Future Land Use Classification is Metropolitan Regional 7; said the applicants are proposing a 12-seat beer and wine bar within a cigar retail store; noted the cigar store is permitted by right however the bar requires Conditional Use approval; stated the location is an existing building and no changes to the building, pedestrian or vehicular access or parking is proposed; stated a Community Workshop was held on November 29, 2021 and there were eight citizens in attendance; said concerns were raised regarding the potential for cigar smoke to affect the neighboring shops and businesses, outdoor seating; and the sale of liquor; pointed out the applicants have proffered there will be no outdoor seating or liquor sales; noted a variance to allow the use within 40 of residential was approved by the Board of Adjustment; said the DRC signed-off on July 12, 2022 and the traffic review found the project to be di minimis; and stated staff found the request meets all development standards and recommends approval with the conditions listed. PB Member Ohlrich questioned how many cigar stores are permitted in the City; stated she knows of a couple noting both are in end units; asked if all cigar stores are required to have the HVAC system the applicants are proposing; wondered if existing cigar stores have the same HVAC system; and questioned if being located in the middle of a stretch of shops is different than being in an end unit. Development Review Senior Planner Christie stated she was unsure ofl how many cigar stores are permitted; pointed out the HVAC system the applicants will use is not a code requirement; said she is unsure if other cigar stores use the same HVAC system; and stated staff reviewed the proposal, and noted the proposed HVAC goes above and beyond code requirements. PB Member Halflants asked if staff is looking at allowing bars by-right in logical places with the need for Conditional Use approval. Development Review Senior Planner Christie stated that would require a zoning text amendment and could potentially be looked at in the future. Minutes of the! Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 4 of 16 PB Member Blumetti questioned if outdoor seating is alllowed by-right. Development Review Senior Planner Christie stated it is allowed with an approved Sidewalk café Permit; and pointed out the applicants had proffered no outdoor seating. PB Member Blumetti asked if cigar smoke outside is allowed by-right also. Development Review Senior Planner Christie confirmed that was correct. Discussion ensued. Development Services Director Panica appeared and pointed out a Sidewalk Café Permit can only be obtained if the use: is a restaurant SO if no food is served the Sidewalk Café Permit would be denied. Discussion ensued. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned if the City has a limit on the number of bars allowed. Development Review Senior Planner Christie stated if a use is permitted by-right the City cannot deny it; pointed out those that are not permitted by-right are review on a case-by-case basis; and noted the approved variance was for the distance between the bar and residential versus another bar. Discussion ensued. Applicant Rebuttal: PB Member Ohlrich stated she had a question for the applicants. Mr. Johnson and Ms. Ruiz appeared. PB. Member Ohlrich pointed out that during the Community Workshop the applicants had stated they would not allow customers to smoke a cigar outside their establishment; and asked how that could be implemented. Mr. Johnson stated signage would be put up. PB Member Blumetti questioned how prohibiting smoking in the right-of-way is possible. Attorney Connolly stated it probably can't be prohibited in the right-of-way. Ms. Ruiz discussed the other locations of Cigar Paradise noting the efficiency of the same type of HVACsystem at those locations. 2:25:41 P.M. PB Member Halflants made a motion to find that Major Conditional Use 22-CU-02 is consistent with Section IV- 906 of the Zoning Code and that Site Plan 22-SP-10 is consistent with the Tree Protection Ordinance and meets the applicable criteria of Section IV-506 of the Zoning Code and to recommend to the City Commission approval of the petition subject to the conditions listed. PB Member Ohlrich stated she would second the motion if the additional condition that the door remain closed is added. PB Member Halflants stated he didn't feel it necessary and cited concerns with how to enforce that condition. PB Vice Chair Clermont seconded the motion. Discussion ensued. PB Member Halflants agreed to amend the motion to include the additional condition. Attorney Connolly reiterated the motion would be to approve with the five conditions listed by staff and the additional proffer by the applicant. PB Vice Chair Clermont stated he was in favor on the project; said he called two other businesses that are adjacent to a different smoking establishment and said there were no complaints; said the HVAC system works; and noted there have been no issues at Cigar Paradise's other locations. The motion passed 5-0. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 5 of 16 2:29:41 P.M. 2. 99 Bottles (1445 Second Street): Site Plan Application No. 22-SP-16, Major Conditional Use Application No. 22-CU-03, and Minor Conditional Use Application No. 22-MCU- 02 are a request for approval of revisions to previously approved Site Plan Application No. 18-SP-13, Major Conditional Use Application No. 18-CU-03, and Minor Conditional Use Application No. 18-MCU-02 to remove all previously approved proffered stipulations. The subject parcel has a street address of 1445 second street and is located within the Downtown Core (DTC) zone district. (Tom Sacharski, AICP, Development Review Senior Planner) Attorney Connolly called on the forty-eight persons that had applied for Affected Person status. The following were present and therefore granted Affected Person status: In person: Cheryl Walker, Curtis Ridolf, Tom Walker, Katie Berkey; Larry Shapiro, Sharon Prizant, Felicia Hall, Andrew Hall, Martina Schmidt, Diane Blinn and Judy Jenkins. Via Zoom: Charles & Laura Maniglia, Jerrold Berman, Carol Isaacs, Andrew Pecorella, Rachel & James Ory, Margaret Gale, Carol Hartz, Rita Aughey, Ann Moran. 2:36:47 P.M. Applicant Presentation: Scott Rudacille, Attorney for the applicant, and Mark Tuchman, owner appeared. Attorney Rudacille presented a graphic depicting the location of the site, the inside of the existing business, and the outdoor seating area; noted the site is zoned Downtown Core; discussed the intent of the Downtown Core zoning; reviewed the previous approvals from 2018; said the proffers that were previously agreed to restricted the hours of operation; prohibited outdoor seating, outdoor music, and a stage; required the opening adjacent to the right-of-way be a man door; and prohibited serving or selling "hard" liquor. Attorney Rudacille stated the request is to remove the restrictions on thehours of operation, noting the business will comply with the City's S requirements; to eliminate the prohibition of outdoor seating, noting outdoor seating has been allowed under the City Manager's COVID emergency order and there have been no issues; to eliminate the prohibition of outdoor music, noting the required Sidewalk Café Permit for outdoor seating prohibits outdoor music; eliminate the prohibition to serving or selling liquor, noting if Mr. Tuchman pursued the liquor license required for serving/selling hard liquor he would have to obtain additional Conditional Use approval; and said in response to concerns expressed by the neighbors the applicants agree to maintain the prohibition of a stage and the requirement for a man door. Attorney Rudacille pointed out as ai result the only actual change will be the restrictions on the hours of operation; said the applicants agree with staff's s analysis; and requested the Planning Board recommend approval. PB Member Blumetti questioned if the outdoor seating was a change also; and asked if there have been any complaints. Mr. Tuchman stated the existing outdoor seating permitted under the COVID emergency order would be maintained via a Sidewalk Café Permit; pointed out he is unable to obtain a Sidewalk Café Permit if the proffer of no outdoor seating is in place; and said he is not aware of any complaints. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 6 of 16 PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned if food is currently served; how 99 Bottles would differentiate from the establishment next door; if the establishment next door was permitted to have outdoor music; and if the establishment next door as alllowed to stay open past 11:00 p.m. Mr. Tuchman stated he serves food seven day per week; stated removal of the proffers would put him on a level playing field with the establishment next door; pointed out neither he or the establishment: next door were permitted to have outdoor music since that is prohibited under the required Sidewalk Café Permit; and said the establishment next door could stay open past 11:00 p.m. if they choose to. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned why the proffers offered previously were no longer acceptable. Mr. Tuchman stated after being in business for 3 %2 years he realized he had handcuffed himself. PB Vice Chair Clermont stated a major concern of the neighbors is sound and asked why eliminate the proffer for outdoor music. Mr. Tuchman reiterated that the required Sidewalk Café Permit prohibits outdoor music. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for outdoor music to be permitted in the future. PB Member Blumetti questioned if music is permitted indoors. Mr. Tuchman confirmed that it is. PB Chair Salem questioned why the proffers were originally made; and how long Mr. Tuchman has been in this type of business. Mr. Tuchman stated he was classified as a bar/tavern by the city; said his business is in fact licensed through the State as a restaurant; stated City staff had recommended the proffers; and said he agreed to because as a layperson he didn'tknow any better; and stated he has been in this type of business for fifteen years. Discussion ensued. PB Member Blumetti questioned if 99 Bottles was required to have a minimum of 51% of its profits be in food sales. Mr. Tuchman pointed out that is only applicable for establishments that sell spirits. Discussion ensued. PB Member Ohlrich stated she was on the Planning Board in 2018 and said the proffers resulted from hypothetical issues; and asked if any of those hypothetical issues had come to fruition. Mr. Tuchman stated they had not. 2:55:04 P.M. Staff Presentation: Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski appeared; stated the request is to amend the previous approval by removing the proffers; stated the applicants have submitted proffers that would keep the prohibition of a stage and the requirement for a man door in place; corrected a statement in the staff report noting operating hours under a Sidewalk Café Permit as limited by the business hours and the noise ordinance rather than the permit itself; pointed out there are no changes to the previously approved site plan; said the DRC signed-off on the project on 6/21/22; stated the proposal meets the applicable Standards for Review; and stated staff recommends approval with the addition of the two proffers submitted by the applicant. PB Member Ohlrich stated she did not see those two additional proffers in the sample motions and questioned if those would be added to staff's recommendations. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski noted the proffers were submitted after Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 7 of 16 the staff report was published and confirmed those should be part of a recommendation of approval. PB Member Blumetti questioned if there have been any complaints. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski stated there have been two made by Mr. Tuchman to the police regarding vagrants. PB Vice Chair Clermont asked what the City's thoughts were regarding the removal of proffers. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski stated those requests are analyzed on a case-by-case basis; pointed out the bar/tavern classification is broad; and said in the case of 99 Bottles staff feels the request is reasonable. Attorney Connolly noted the Zoning Code anticipated that need could occur and contains provisions for minor and major amendments; and pointed out minor amendments are reviewed administratively while major changes must gol back through the public hearing process. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned what limitations are placed on outdoor music. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski pointed out outdoor music is not permitted under a Sidewalk Café Permit. PB Vice Chair Clermont pointed to Mattison's as an example. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski pointed out Mattison's is on private property. PB Vice Chair Clermont stated the business could potentially be open until 2:30 a.m.; said the city could potentially change the ordinance and allow outdoor music; and asked how to ensure the outdoor music is not occurring at that hour. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski stated that issue would be addressed at the time of the ordinance amendment. Discussion ensued. 3:04:05 P.M. Affected Persons: The following Affected Persons appeared in opposition citing concerns with noise and operating hours: In person: Cheryl Walker, Curtis Ridolf, Tom Walker, Larry Shapiro, Sharon Prizant, Felicia Hall, Andrew Hall, Martina Schmidt, Diane Blinn and Judy Jenkins. Via Zoom: Charles & Laura Maniglia, Jerrold Berman, Carol Isaacs, Andrew Pecorella, Rachel & James Ory, Margaret Gale, Carol Hartz, Rita Aughey, Ann Moran. Attorney Katie Berkey appeared, stated she represents the 100 Central Condominium Association; distributed two graphics depicting the Pedestrian Activity Zone from the City's sit/lie ordinance and a street view of the area of 2nd Street impacted by the proposal; stated they appreciate the applicant's compromises regarding the stage and man door proffers; said the public hearing was not noticed property as: it lacked specific details of the proposal; said the staff report provides that the Sidewalk Café Permit restricts operating hours which is incorrect; stated removing the proffers makes the use incompatible with the surrounding neighbors; discussed the Pedestrian Activity Zone graphic noting 99 Bottles is far removed from that zone; discussed the canyon effect on 2nd Street in the area; stated the mixed-uses in that area are primarily residential and low impact retail; stated the proffered hours of operation are compatible; said the concerns of the neighbors are unchanged from 2018; said the removal of the proffers will have a cumulative negative impact on the surrounding neighbors; pointed out if the proffers are removed there will be no protections if future revisions to the Sidewalk Café Permit and/o or noise ordinances occur; contended the City does not enforce the noise ordinance; stated any future owners of 99 Bottles are required to sign and record Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 8 of 16 an affidavit that they will comply with the proffers; said keeping the outdoor music and sale of hard liquor proffers would be no more burdensome that opening the Conditional Use back up; stated they disagree with the staff report; requested all existing proffers be kept in place; and questioned what ADA protections are in place in the Sidewalk Café Permit. PB Member Blumetti, clarifying an earlier statement, stated it is not the intent of the code that bars/nightclubs be located on Main Street; asked when the structure at 100 Central was built and if it meets current hurricane standards; questioned if there is an issue with the structure noting noise should not be getting in; pointed out there have been no complaints; and questioned what the actual versus perceived issues are. Attorney Berkey stated the fact there have been no complaints shows the proffers are working. Discussion ensued. 4:15:04 P.M. StaffRebuttal: Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski appeared and noted the original conditions were proffered by the applicant, the only staff condition was ther requirement for the man door; pointed out the man door requirement was not proposed to be removed; stated the Conditional Use and Sidewalk Café Permits were both revocable; said the DTC zoning is the same as that on Main Street and read the definition of DTC zoning into the record; responding to a comment from a citizen stated while it is important to keep the downtown area attractive to: residents, it is also important to keep the downtown area attractive to business with the appropriate restrictions; pointed out establishments in the area that have outdoor music operate on private property; and said the ADA requirements for Sidewalk Café Permits are outlined in the regulations and are reviewed by City Engineering staff. Discussion ensued. PB Member Ohlrich questioned what conditions are specific to this use and what conditions would be passed on to a new establishment. Attorney Connolly stated the Zoning Code requires a new owner to file an Affidavit acknowledging they are subject to the conditions. Discussion ensued regarding restrictions on hours of operation related to a Sidewalk Café Permit versus hours of operation restrictions in the DTC zone district; and the provision of adequate space along the sidewalk to allow for a wheelchair and double stroller to pass each other. PB Member Blumetti questioned how the sound ordinance is enforced and if any: issues have been reported. Development Review Senior Planner stated the Police Department enforces that ordinance; and said there have been no reports specific to this location. Discussion ensued regarding processes for filing a complaint, tracking complaints, warnings, fines, etc. PB Member Halflants questioned if the applicant would still be prohibited from playing music outdoors if the: request is granted. Development Review Senior Planner Sacharski reiterated that outdoor music is not permitted under the Sidewalk Café Permit. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 9 of 16 4:30:08 P.M. Applicant Rebuttal: Attorney Rudacille and Mr. Tuchman appeared. Attorney Rudacille clarified the only change that will actually occur if approved is the option to stay open later; stated there in nothing that will impact noise levels; and pointed out a restaurant that serves beer and wine is allowed by right at this location without limitations. Mr. Tuchman stated the resident's concerns are rooted in assumptions; said he has proven he is respectful of the neighbors and will continue to be; and stated he is only looking to have the same opportunities as other businesses in the Downtown Core zone district. PB Member Blumetti noted there was a lot of ambiguity when the original approval occurred; questioned the average prices and maximum occupancy; pointed out the clientele does not get unruly; and it is unlikely the establishment will stay open until 2:30 a.m. every night. Mr. Tuchman stated the average price of a glass of beer or wine is $9.50 and the maximum occupancy is 42. Discussion ensued regarding the current restrictions on the hours of operation. Responding to a question from PB Member Blumetti, Mr. Tuchman stated he was open to restriction the closing time to earlier than 2:30 am however wishes to have the option to be open later than 11:00 pm. PB Member Halflants pointed out that outdoor music will still be prohibited; and noted there is not room for a band or audience on the sidewalk. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned what the current closing time is on weekends. Discussion ensued. Attorney Berkey appeared and responded to PB Member Blumetti's previous question regarding the structure at 100 Central stating she spoke with the Property Manager who said the building is up to code however residents can still hear noise with the windows closed; reiterated the noise and sidewalk café ordinances could be modified in the future; and requested the PB keep the previous requirement that the door can only be used for ingress, egress and deliveries. PB Vice Chair Clermont referred to the Pedestrian Activity Zone map presented by Attorney Berkey and stated that map illustrates that Main Street is different than the other locations within the Downtown Core zone district. Attorney Connolly stated the map is not relevant to this discussion as it is not a zoning regulation. 4:44:11 P.M. PB Chair Salem closed the public hearing. Attorney Connolly pointed out two motions are needed, one for the Major Conditional Use and one for the Minor Conditional Use; and noted the Major Conditional Use motion is a recommendation to the City Commission while the Minor Conditional Use does not go before the City Commission. PB Member Ohlrich asked where it is appropriate to include the additional proffers added tonight. Attorney Connolly stated those should be included in both motions. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 10 of 16 PB Member Blumetti asked if future changes to the noise ordinance would come before the Planning Board. Attorney Connolly stated proposed changes to the noise and/ or sidewalk café would be considered by the City Commission only. PB Member Halflants made a motion to find that Major Conditional Use 22-CU-03 is consistent with Section IV- 906 of the Zoning Code and that Site Plan 22-SP-16 is consistent with Section IV-506 of the Zoning Code and Tree Protection Ordinance to recommend to the City Commission approval of the petitions subject to the two conditions listed and the two proffers made at the meeting. PB Member Blumetti seconded the motion. PB Member Halflants stated there is no room for outdoor music even in the event the noise and/or sidewalk café ordinances are modified; said Mr. Tuchman has a proved record; noted activity on the street provides for additional security in the area. PB Member Blumetti stated he agreed; said he sympathizes with thei neighbors however does not feel this establishment will be problematic as he has proven to be a good neighbor; and said the flexibility is needed. PB. Member Ohlrich stated she was on the Planning Board in 2018; said there was some concerns and ambiguity about the operation; said Mr. Tuchman has proved to be a good neighbor; and said she felt the request is appropriate. PB Vice Chair Clermont stated he would not support the motion; said the current operation is successful as it is; and stated the applicant had agreed to the original proffers in order to receive approval however now wants a do-over. PB Chair Salem stated the applicant had claimed the City said the proffers were needed in order to receive approval; said Mr. Tuchman claimed he was a layman although he has fifteen years of experience in this type of business; said proffers should be in perpetuity; stated the Planning Board will be setting a precedenceifapproved, and state he does not support the motion. PB Member Ohlrich stated there is a process to amend proffers and that process has been followed; noted in 2018 there was a lot of concern relating to a business on Main Street; pointed out any future owners would have to come back before the Planning Board in order to change the type of business or the proffers; and stated the hypotheticals the original proffers were based on have not proven to be true. The motion passed 3-2 with Vice Chair Clermont and Chair Salem voting no. PB Member Ohlrich made a motion to find that Minor Conditional Use 22-MCU-02 is consistent with Section IV- 906 of the Zoning Code and to approve the petition subject to the two conditions listed and the two proffers made at the meeting. PB Member Blumetti seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 11 of 16 4:57:48 P.M. 3. Sarasota Memorial Hospital Oncology Rezone (1500 & 1540 South Tamiami Trail): Rezone Application No. 22-REN-05 is a request for Rezone Without Site Plan approval to: rezone subject parcels with street addresses of 1500 & 1540 South Tamiami Trail from Commercial General (CG) zone district to Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) zone district. 1500South Tamiami Trail is currently occupied by A3,124 square foot building, and 1540 South Tamiami Trail is currently occupied by a 4-story, 45,468 square foot medical facility and associated parking area. No changes are proposed at this time. (Amy Pintus, Development Review Planner) Applicant Presentation: Attorney Victoria Gray, Williams Parker; Attorney Dan Bailey, Jr., Williams Parker; Mr. Tom Perigo, Director of Architecture & Construction Services, Sarasota Memorial Hospital; Mr. Ryan Brady, Stantec; and Ms. Laura Wilson, Stantec, appeared. Attorney Gray presented a graphic depicting the location of the parcels; stated the request is to rezone two parcels from the Commercial General (CG) zone district to the Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) zone district; pointed out the Future Land Use Classification of the parcels is Metropolitan Regional 8 and the only implementing zone district is SMH; noted the zoning of the surrounding parcels; stated a variance to the minimum yard setback has been approved; and said a Community Workshop was held on May 17, 2022 and no one from the public attended. Attorney Bailey noted a Site Plan application for the parcels will follow. Mr. Brady pointed out the Site Plan application has been submitted and is scheduled for review at the 9/21/22 Development Review Committee meeting. PB Member Ohlrich questioned if there have been any changes to the Urban Open Space. Attorney Bailey stated there have been no changes; and pointed out additional Urban Open Space will be provided as part of this project and the next project for the Doctor's Gardens site on the agenda today. PB Member Ohlrich stated her concerns regarding the Urban Open Space relate to the required amenities not being provided; said that creates a code compliance issue that staff had previously stated they would investigate; said she had heard nothing; and asked if she should file a complaint with Code Enforcement. Discussion ensued. Attorney Connolly stated Director Panica has agreed to look into the matter. Responding to a request from PB Chair Salem, Mr. Brady presented a graphic depicting the Urban Open Space on the SMH campus. Discussion ensued. Attorney Bailey invited staff to meet with him on-site to discuss. PB vice Chair Clermont questioned what the height of the parking garage would be. Mr. Brady stated that was part of the Site Plan review. Discussion ensued. PBI Member Halflants pointed out the surrounding zoning and confirmed the applicants were rezoning the parcels to the SMH zone district. Attorney Bailey pointed out that is the only implementing zone district. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 12 of 16 5:10:39 P.M. Staff Presentation: Development Review Planner Pintus appeared and stated the applicant's statements were all correct; confirmed the SMH zone district is the only implementing zone district; stated the approved variance was for a 9.5' setback along Tamiami Trial; said the DRC signed-off on the project on July 22, 2022; noted the existing parking garage: is 49; stated the proposed parking garage could be up to 120. PB Member Ohlrich stated staff always stated in an application for Rezone Without Site Plan that there are no impacts; said that means the PB Members have to consider the most intense use possible under the zoning; and stated the staff report should disclose the maximum use. Development Review Planner Pintus stated those details are reviewed as part of the Site Plan process; and pointed out the proposed Site Plan for these parcels was submitted after her staff report for this item was complete. Discussion ensued. 5:15:00 P.M. Citizen Input: Ms. Mary Price appeared and stated her family has been residents of Arlington Park for many years; stated her concerns regarding traffic; said the surrounding streets are narrow and there are flooding issues; and said the SMH representatives have not adequately communicated with the neighbors. 5:18:51 P.M. Applicant Rebuttal: Mr. Perigo reiterated this is a Rezone Without Site Plan application; said SMH holds meetings with the surrounding Neighborhood Associations; and pointed out SMH representatives are scheduled to speak at an Arlington Park Neighborhood Association meeting in the near future. PB Member Ohlrich questioned if SMH still had a Citizen Advisory Committee. Mr. Perigo confirmed SMH has a Neighborhood Advisory Council. Discussion ensued regarding citizen involvement. PB Member Blumetti stated he believed the majority of the traffic is from employees and asked if shifts could be staggered to help relieve congestion. Mr. Perigo discussed SMH's employee's shifts and management of staff hours. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned what the benefits of the expansions to the hospital are for both the hospital and the community. Mr. Perigo discussed the history of SMH since the early 1960's; said most old building cannot be renovated as they would not meet code; and stated space is needed to provide services, noting people are travelling to Tampa to receive oncology services. PB Vice Chair Clermont asked what would happen if the associated Site Plan that will come before the PB in the future was denied. Attorney Bailey noted the other locations for SMH services in the area. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 13 of 16 Staff Rebuttal: PB Member Ohlrich requested staff address her concerns regarding the Urban Open Space requirements. Development Review Planner Pintus appeared; pointed out Community Workshops are not required for Site Plan applications; and stated staff notifies associated Neighborhood Associations of development submittals in their areas. Director Panica stated staff has evaluated the status of the Urban Open Space requirements; and said she would follow up with PB Member Ohlrich regarding those findings. PB Member Halflants made a motion to find Rezone 22-REN-05 consistent with Section IV-1106 of the Zoning Code and recommend approval of the Rezone to the City Commission, subject to the condition proposed by staff. PB Member Ohlrich seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. 5:33:47 P.M. 4. Doctor's Gardens (1880 Arlington Street): Rezone Application No. 22-REN-06 is a request for Rezone Without Site Plan approval to rezone subject parcel with a street address of 1880 Arlington Street from Office, Professional and Business (OPB) zone district to Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) zone district. The 1.2-acre site is currently occupied by a 25,940 square foot building that is proposed to remain. No changes to the site are proposed at this time. (Alison Christie, AICP, Development Review Senior Planner) Applicant Presentation: Attorney Victoria Gray, Williams Parker; Attorney Dan Bailey,Jr., Williams Parker; Mr. Tom Perigo, Director of Architecture & Construction Services, Sarasota Memorial Hospital; Mr. Ryan Brady, Stantec; and Ms. Laura Wilson, Stantec, appeared. Attorney Gray presented a graphic depicting the location of the parcels; stated the request is to rezone the site from the Office Professional Business (OPB) zone district to the Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) zone district; pointed out the Future Land Use Classification of the parcel is Metropolitan Regional 8 and the only implementing zone district is SMH; noted the zoning oft the surrounding parcels; stated there is no proposed Site Plan at this time; said two variances for the existing building have been granted previously; and said a Community Workshop was held on May 17, 2022, one citizen attended, and there were no comments or questions. PB Member Ohlrich stated she has concerns regarding the Urban Open Space requirements. PB Vice Chair Clermont questioned what the future plans are. Mr. Brady stated a Pre- Application conference with the DRC was recently held; and stated a formal Site Plan application would be submitted in the near future for a Research & Education Center, a parking garage, and green space. PB Vice Chair Clermont asked how the traffic impacts would be managed. Mr. Perigo stated the site would be used for seminars, etc. and there would be no daily traffic impacts. PB Member Blumetti asked if the existing building could be saved. Discussion ensued. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 14 of 16 5:38:37 P.M. Staff Presentation: Development Review Senior Planner Christie appeared; stated the Applicant's presentation was correct; noted the previously approved variances are for the front setbacks of the existing building; stated the traffic analysis found the proposal to be di minimis; noted an additional traffic analysis would be performed for the Site Plan application; and stated staff found the proposal meets the Standards for Review and recommends approval with one condition as noted in the staff report. 5:39:45 P.M. Citizen Input: Ms. Mary Price appeared and stated she did not feel SMH was transparent with the neighbors; and discussed her concerns regarding traffic. 5:43:17 P.M. Applicant Rebuttal: Attorney Bailey and Mr. Perigo appeared and provided their cell phone numbers to Ms. Price noting she could contact them at any time. PB Chair Salem asked if a mailer could be sent. Mr. Perigo stated the notices are sent by the city; and pointed out he is scheduled to speak at the Arlington Park Neighborhood Association meeting at the end of the month. Discussion ensued. 5:45:01 P.M. Staff Rebuttal: Development Review Senior Planner Christie appeared and clarified that the City sends a mailer to citizen's that own property within 500 of the subject site; pointed out the notice for a Rezone Without Site Plan does not provide specifics; and stated when an associated Site Plan is submitted the appropriate Neighborhood Association(s) are notified of the submittal and again when the public hearing is scheduled. PB Member Ohlrich stated she has received many of those notices and just tosses them out; and suggest staff should add a sentence to the notice that the Neighborhood Association President should share the information with their members. Development Review Senior Planner Christie stated that could be done. Discussion ensued. 5:49:36 P.M. PB Chair Salem closed the public hearing. PB Member Ohlrich made a motion to find Rezone 22-REN-06 consistent with Section IV-1106 of the Zoning Code and recommend approval of the Rezone to the City Commission, subject to the condition proposed by staff. PB Vice Chair Clermont seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. 5:50:30 P.M. 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.) Minutes of thel Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 15 of 16 Attorney Connolly noted three citizens had signed up to speak regarding a proposed development at 2750 Bahia Vista Street; pointed out a legislative public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for that project is scheduled for discussion at the 9/29/22 Special Planning Board meeting, and a quasi-judicial public hearing regarding the associated rezone and site plan applications will be on a future PB meeting agenda; expressed his concerns noting any citizen input would be considered ex-parte communication regarding the quasi-judicial public hearing; advised the PB members to not discuss the project at this time; stated the public testimony will taint the PB creating an issue where if the project is denied the owner will appeal based on the violation of due process rights; and advised against the citizens providing testimony at this meeting. There was no citizen input. 5:54:04 P.M. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. July 13, 2022 The minutes were approved as submitted by consensus. 5:54:24 P.M. VII. 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. Acting Secretary Cover stated there are two items on the agenda for the 9/29/225pecial PB meeting; noted the agenda for the 10/12/22 PB meeting was heavy; and said staff had asked the PB members if they could start earlier on 10/12/22 and were waiting for a couple of responses. Discussion ensued. The PB members agreed by consensus to start the 10/12/221 PB: meeting at 9:00 a.m. Attorney Connolly noted the 11/9/22 PB: meeting agenda is anticipated to be heavy as well. 5:57:00 P.M. VIII. 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. PB Member Ohlrich stated at the July PB meeting there was discussion regarding requiring realistic images be required as part of an application for development; said she had requested the issue be placed on today's agenda and it was not; stated since then discussion have taken place regarding 3D imaging; and requested the status of those discussions. Acting PB Secretary Cover stated the Planning Department was working with the Development Services Department on the issue; and noted the additional cost to the developers. Development Services Director Panica stated staff has been requesting the graphics be provided; noted staff cannot make that a requirement at this time; and said she would advise the PB at their October meeting if the provision of realistic graphics/images can be made a requirement. PB Member Ohlrich requested the issue be placed on a PB meeting agenda in the near future. Director Panica stated 3D modeling is being considered. Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting September 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in the Sarasota City Commission Chambers Page 16 of 16 PB Member Ohlrich stated the staff report for an application for a Rezone Without Site Plan states there will be no impacts because no development is proposed at that time; noted as a result the PB members have to consider the most intense use possible; and requested staff reference what development is possible under the proposed zone district. Discussion ensued. Director Panica stated staff will add clarification in the responses to the criteria; and pointed out a table depicting the uses and development standards for the existing and proposed zone districts is provided in the staff report for comparison purposes. PB Member Halflants stated over a year ago he had submitted some proposed zoning text amendments and asked what the status of those is. Discussion ensued regarding the process for Zoning Text Amendment applications. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:04:44 P.M. the Sh Myra Schwarz Terril'Salem, Chair General Manager and Secretary to the Board Planning Board/Local Planning Agency