FORT MYERS BEACH

LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING

OCTOBER 12, 2004

Town Hall-Council Chambers

2523 Estero Boulevard

FORT MYERS BEACH, FLORIDA

 

 

I.          CALL TO ORDER:         The regular meeting of the Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency was called to order on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 at 12:00 Noon by Chair Anita Cereceda.  Ms. Cereceda welcomed all visitors and gave special mention to the Hon. Mayor Bill Thomas.

 

            Members present at the meeting:        Anita Cereceda, Jodi Hester, Harold Huber, Bill McCarthy, Robert Simon, Betty Simpson, Jessica Titus, Hank Zuba.

 

            Excused absence from the meeting:   Jane Plummer. 

 

            Staff present at the meeting:               Town Manager/LPA Attorney Marsha Segal-George, Planning and Zoning Specialist Chris DeManche, Community Development Director Jerry Murhpy.

 

II.         INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:  All those present assembled and recited the Pledge of Allegiance.  The invocation was given by Betty Simpson.

 

III.        APPROVAL OF MINUTES, JUNE 8, 2004:

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Betty Simpson and seconded by Bill McCarthy to approve the minutes of June 6, 2004.

 

            DISCUSSION:   Ms. Simpson questioned the abbreviation “EC” on Page 4 under discussion  the CCCL.  She was told it stands for “Environmentally Critical.”

            Jodi Hester noted that under the discussion of the May 18th meeting on Page 1 the motion to elect a Chair and Vice Chair was made by Ms. Hester, not Ms. Plummer.  It was requested that this be checked and noted in the minutes for the next meeting.

 

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE:  The meeting of May 11th did not have a quorum.  At the next meeting, on May 18th, motion was made by Ms. Plummer (corrected)and seconded by Ms. Simpson that the LPA elect a Chair and a Vice Chair, with the Chair to hold office for no longer than 2 years, rather than having co-chairs.  After discussion, this motion was passed by unanimous vote.  See minutes of May 18th, 2004 for details of the discussion.

 

            VOTE:              Motion was passed by unanimous vote.

 

            APPROVAL OF MINUTES,JUNE 15, 2004:

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Ms. Simpson and seconded by Ms. Huber to approve the minutes of June 15, 2004.

 

            DISCUSSION:   Ms. Simpson referred to Page 2 mid-page and verified that the conversation referred to was correct between Ms. Segal-George and Dan Hughes.  In the 2nd paragraph on Page 5 the lot dimension should read “125 X 112.”  2/3 of the way down the same page, it was Mr. McCarthy who asked for the building height to the top of the spire instead of Mr. McCormick.  Halfway down Page 8 the reference to height above sea level should be 12 ft. 8 inches. 

 

            VOTE:              Motion to approve the minutes with corrections was passed by unanimous vote.

 

            APPROVAL OF MINUTES, JUNE 22, 2004:

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Ms. Simpson and seconded by Mr. Zuba to approve the minutes of June 22, 2004 with corrections.

 

            DISCUSSION:   The name of the gentleman from DCA referred to on Page 4 is Bernard Piawah.

 

            VOTE:              Motion was passed by unanimous vote.

 

            APPROVAL OF MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 21, 2004:

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Ms. Hester and seconded by Mr. Simon to approve the minutes of September 21, 2004 with corrections.

 

            DISCUSSION:   Ms. Hester noted under Member Items and Reports on Page 4 the comments that were inaudible and requested insertion of the following:  “ Ms. Segal-George responded that it was due to the fact that we had completed the Land Development Code and the related costs would not be in this year’s budget.”

 

            VOTE:              Motion was passed by unanimous vote.

 

IV.        PUBLIC HEARING – SCA 2004 00 25 – MOUND HOUSE, 289 CONNECTICUT,     SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS:

            Theresa Schober, Director of the Mound House, came forward and gave a summary of the Staff Report, which included historical information concerning the Mound House and the structures on the property.  She recalled 3 options discussed at CELCAB to provide handicap accessible restroom facilities, with the ultimate selection of modification of the garage as the project to move forward on.  Based on the historical aspects of the property, she explained that this would provide several options including maintaining the views and potentially removing the 1980s addition that presently contains the Caretaker’s Suite and restrooms.  In 2000 the Town’s application for National Historic Registry nomination of this property was denied partly because of the more recent structures.  She pointed out that the swimming pool, which was also a cause for denial, is being removed, and another Certificate of Appropriateness will be coming forward on this project in November.  She described the proposed modification of the 1920s era garage structure as designed by a preservation architect. 

            Ms. Hester asked a question about the Janes Foundation and the louver type window as referenced in the packet.  Ms. Schober explained that this foundation was relatively short-lived because Dr. Janes died in 1949, but the same group of scientists had worked on the property from 1941 on, working with frozen orange concentrate.  The state government purchased property off the Island for this group to work on this and a diversity of other significant research projects.  There is very little documentation on this group. 

            Mr. Zuba asked if the laboratory was intended for public viewing in the future, and Ms. Schober explained that there are 74 volunteers at the Mound House processing artifacts on site, and it is planned to open this for an operating laboratory.  This will be open to the community for both tours and participation.  He pointed out that some of the proposed doors might not be appropriate with public coming through the structure.  He also asked whether fire protection or other mechanical systems interfere with the historical aspects of the structure, and Ms. Schober said that the garage has a peaked roof, providing sufficient space for these elements.  Mr. Zuba also asked about venting.  Ms. Schober explained that the architect has taken all of this into consideration with his design.

            Ms. Cereceda asked about the lack of air conditioning the restrooms, which Ms. Schober explained. 

            The meeting was opened for Public Hearing at this time.

            Ceel Spuhler came forward and said that CELCAB was very delighted with this project.  She noted that providing handicap restrooms is a giant step in the overall Mound House project. 

            Public Hearing was closed at this time.  It was verified with Ms. Segal-George that there need be no second Public Hearing.  Ms. Cereceda then said she would entertain a motion on the item.

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Ms. Hester to approve the request and make a finding that the proposed project has been designated under Chapter 22 of the LDC, and on the basis of Staff analysis the project as approved is in compliance with Chapter 22 of the LDC and the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation.  Motion was seconded by Mr. Zuba.

 

            VOTE:              Motion was carried by unanimous vote.

 

V.         ACCEPTANCE OF THE FILING FOR A HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR 251 PEARL STREET WITH HEARING TO BE SET ON NOVEMBER 9, 2004 AT 12:00 P.M.

            Planning and Zoning Specialist Chris DeManche came forward with this Staff request for acceptance of the filing for this historic designation which he explained will lead to the scheduled Public Hearing.  He recalled that on June 15th the LPA voted 6-2 to select this property for grant funding under the Town’s Historic Preservation Grant Assistance Program.  On June 30th the Council approved the appropriation of $20,000.00 for this property as outlined in the June Staff Report.  He explained that designating this property as a historic resource is a condition for receipt of the grant funds.   

 

            MOTION:          Motion was made by Harold Huber to accept this historic designation request and set a date of November 9, 2004 at 12:00 P.M. for Public Hearing.  Motion was seconded by Jessica Titus.

 

            VOTE:              Motion was carried by unanimous vote.

 

            Ms. Cereceda remarked that the couple who own this house came into her store recently and spoke with her, and are very excited about the project.

 

VI.        LPA MEMBER ITEMS AND REPORTS:

 

            Hank Zuba asked if, in consideration of the Glitch Ordinance on next week’s agenda, there could be some discussion about the conflicts raised between the FAR and other parts of the LDC.  He noted that it seems that in certain instances the FAR is construed as generous, and it conflicts with other parts of the LDC.  Ms. Segal-George advised that there will be such discussion beginning next week.

 

            Jodi Hester suggested that the goals, objectives and policies portions of the Comp Plan be read at Council meetings so that it can be clear to the public why these grants are being approved for these projects.  Ms. Segal-George pointed out that the LPA is also serving as the Historic Preservation Board, and that when projects are approved by the LPA they do not go to the Council, so she was unsure how to place this in front of the Council.  It was also noted by Ms. Hester that while the budget has now been approved and finalized, there were many comments on the grant allocation during the budget meetings, which she felt could have been clarified by the inclusion of these portions of the Comp Plan, which was very clearly written some years ago.  Ms. Segal-George noted that she has been criticized for 4 issues:  (1) Purchase of the Mound House, (2) Purchase of the Newton Property, (3) Short-term rentals, and (4) Historic Preservation and emphasized that in each of those instances she was carrying out Council’s direction.  She stressed that she was not the initiator of these projects, and not only was she told to purchase the properties, she was also given direction to find the funding to do so.  She expressed frustration that she is being disparaged for following Council’s direction, adding that these decisions were made by Council over the past 9 years and are reflected in the Comprehensive Plan, the budgets, and various documents.  She suggested a joint meeting of Council and the LPA to review the Comp Plan.  Ms. Cereceda recalled that the Mound House came out of the first Council, and without a budget Ms. Segal-George was directed to find the funding and buy the property.  Ms. Segal-George agreed with Ms. Hester’s suggestion to create some kind of dialog with Council.  Ms. Hester and several other members expressed appreciation to Ms. Segal-George for her replies to public comment at last night’s Council meeting.  A member recalled a similar controversy over a historical purchase when he was on the council of Oak Park, IL which is now making money.

            Ms. Hester also noted that she will be attending the Financial Planning Institute and will be absent for the November 16ith meeting.

 

            Jessica Titus asked whether anyone had been contacted by a development company offering a $100.00 incentive and lunch.  No one else had receive such a contact.  It was pointed out that LPA members cannot accept such offers. 

            She will become a grandmother again in March.

 

            Harold Huber followed up on Ms. Hester’s suggestion by recommending that portions of LPA meeting tapes be played for Council, and Ms. Segal-George expressed concern that there would be no context.  She recommended that there be a dialog, including those who remember why things were done originally and those who have different opinions now. 

 

            Betty Simpson also complimented Ms. Segal-George on the synopsis she presented at the end of last night’s Council meeting.  She noted that often comments are being made by individuals who are not aware of the background of certain issues.

            She asked about the condition of the Newton House.  Ms. Segal-George advised that a report by Director of Public Services Matt Feeney had been presented to Council and is available to anyone who wants it.  She said there is substantial damage to all 3 of the buildings, with 2 well over 50 per cent damaged.  She noted that the Newton Committee is meeting next week, after which recommendations will go to Council.  She pointed out that with regard to the cottage, the Town is obligated to make repairs as part of accepting the County’s funds on that project.  Estimates on the cost of repair have been obtained.  She is also attempting to obtain a ruling on whether historical properties can be exempted from the 50 per cent rule.  Ms. Segal-George also noted that despite some public statements to the contrary, all public properties had been secured prior to the storm. 

            Ms. Simpson also noted that there had been numerous sofas placed in front of their business for those who needed them, but that someone had taken all of the cushions.

 

            Bill McCarthy noted that after all the stress and tension of recent months since the storms, this has been a pleasant and relaxed meeting.  He thanked everyone.

 

            Anita Cereceda also agreed with comments made to Ms. Segal George, adding to Mayor Thomas that while they have disagreed on many things, she has come to have a deep admiration for him and his tenacity.  She said he has done a very good job in leading his Council and has developed a very rapport with Ms. Segal-George, pointing out the importance of having Staff supported by any board. 

            Ms. Segal-George reminded Ms. Cereceda that she had wanted to bring up the television issue.  Ms. Cereceda pointed out that at public hearings some individuals erroneously believe that issues are being brought up at that meeting, when there have actually been committee hearings and other efforts well in advance of the hearings.  She pointed out that the public can call Council members and Staff at any time, expressing the opinion that some individuals want a more public forum.  As a result, she suggested that other committees’ meetings be televised, such as MRTF and the TMA, as well as the LPA, so that the general public can have the benefit of a better sense of what is taking place on different levels.  Mr. Huber asked about the cost, and Ms. Segal-George agreed that the land use cases would justify televising LPA meetings, but because the Town uses the County’s channel and pre-empts it for Town meetings, and because of the necessity of a Staff member to run the equipment, televising all of the committee meetings would not be feasible.  She said that if the LPA is interested, she will see if this can be allowed.  Mr. Huber noted that a friend and neighbor of his, Jerry Robinson, was in the broadcasting business and might be willing to volunteer for this purpose, as he had volunteered to take pictures after the storm.  Mr. Huber was asked to contact him when he returns from a trip.  Mr. Huber also noted that there are many people on the Island with a variety of talents and skills. 

            Ms. Titus asked whether minutes of all committees could be posted on the website, and she was advised that they are.  Ms. Cereceda pointed out that TV is more passive.  She explained that if the public had more understanding of everything that goes on, they would be less likely to make random statements that are not factual. 

            Several members expressed agreement.  It was also suggested that certain meetings that were expected to include controversial subjects could be chosen to televise.  Delayed broadcasts were also discussed, since the County Commission meets on Tuesday evenings.  Ms. Segal-George observed that the Town has many committees, and that while there has been no desire to obtain the Town’s own channel, the County may require that if there is too much pre-empting.  She also pointed out that the Town only pre-empts on the Island, not the rest of the county, and she added that choosing only certain meetings to televise would come under criticism.  She noted that there had been no reason to anticipate controversy over the budget. 

            Ms. Cereceda modified her statement to say that in view of the evaluation and review process that the LPA will be going through of the Comp Plan and other issues, she felt it would be beneficial to the community to attempt, if possible, whether delayed or otherwise, to televise the LPA meetings. 

            Mr. Huber noted that communications had been a big problem after the storms, saying that the biggest advantage of having the Town’s on channel would be to disseminate such information.  He had been of the opinion that providing the information to the local TV stations would get it out to the public, but later learned that the stations did not always run what they had been given.

 

            Jerry Murphy brought up the issue of informing Council on historic preservation and also asked that a resolution be adopted in favor of acquisition of Babcock Ranch.  Ms. Cereceda asked what authority the LPA has to do this, and Ms. Segal-George advised that it would be more appropriate for Council to do so.  There is a deadline for public acquisition of this property.  Ms. Segal-George recalled that a resolution had been passed by Council on this issue. 

 

VII.       PUBLIC COMMENT:      None.

 

VIII.      ADJOURN:                    Meeting was adjourned at 1:08 P.M.

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Patricia L. Middlekauff

Transcribing Secretary