Council approved a $137,268 sewer lining contract with Granite Inliner, a utility deal for a Rowan Road medical clinic, and heard Patriot Stogies' pole sign appeal.
16 items on the agenda · 9 decisions recorded
On the agenda
- 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
- 2
Pledge of Allegiance
Council recited the Pledge of Allegiance and observed a moment of silence honoring servicemen and women.
▶ Jump to 0:21 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:21] Could all please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our servicemen and women at home and abroad. [00:00:29] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 3
Moment of Silence
Brief moment of silence observed at the start of the council meeting.
▶ Jump to 0:45 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:45] Thank you. [00:00:46] You may be seated.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 4
Approval of April 19, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes
approvedCouncil approved the minutes from the April 19, 2022 regular meeting.
- motion:Motion to approve the April 19, 2022 regular meeting minutes. (passed)
▶ Jump to 0:50 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:00:50] Next item on the agenda is the approval of the April 19th regular meeting minutes. [00:00:57] Approved? [00:00:57] Second. [00:01:00] Any discussion? [00:01:01] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:01:05] Aye. [00:01:06] Opposed? [00:01:06] Like sign.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 5
Proclamation - AANHPI Heritage Month (by title only)
A proclamation designating the month of May as Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month was read by title only.
▶ Jump to 1:08 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:01:08] Motion passes. [00:01:09] We have a proclamation which is by title only, designating the month of May as Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. [00:01:20] So I'll pass that on. [00:01:21] Next is Vox Pop, for anyone who would wish to address counsel on any issue that is not on tonight's agenda or that is in the consent agenda.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 6Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 1:30
- 7.a
Cultural Affairs Committee Meeting Minutes - January 2022
approvedon consentThe consent agenda, including the Cultural Affairs Committee Meeting Minutes from January 2022, was approved by unanimous voice vote.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda. (passed)
▶ Jump to 19:35 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:19:37] Seeing no one else come forward, I'll close the box pop and we'll go to the consent agenda. [00:19:43] Move for approval. [00:19:45] Second. [00:19:48] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:19:51] Aye. [00:19:52] Aye. [00:19:53] Aye. [00:19:54] Opposed? [00:19:55] Like sign.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 7.b
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Minutes - February 2022
approvedon consentParks and Recreation Advisory Board minutes from February 2022 were approved as part of the consent agenda.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda, including the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board February 2022 minutes. (passed)
▶ Jump to 19:35 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:19:37] Seeing no one else come forward, I'll close the box pop and we'll go to the consent agenda. [00:19:43] Move for approval. [00:19:45] Second. [00:19:48] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:19:51] Aye. [00:19:52] Aye. [00:19:53] Aye. [00:19:54] Opposed? [00:19:55] Like sign.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 7.c
Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval
approvedon consentThe consent agenda, including purchases/payments for City Council approval, was moved, seconded, and approved unanimously by voice vote.
- motion:Motion to approve the consent agenda. (passed)
▶ Jump to 19:35 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:19:37] Seeing no one else come forward, I'll close the box pop and we'll go to the consent agenda. [00:19:43] Move for approval. [00:19:45] Second. [00:19:48] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:19:51] Aye. [00:19:52] Aye. [00:19:53] Aye. [00:19:54] Opposed? [00:19:55] Like sign.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.a
Board Appointment: Robert Marin, Police Pension Board
approvedCouncil considered appointing Robert Marin to the Police Pension Board to fill a city-appointed vacancy created by Al Renato's January resignation. Marin, a recently retired Pasco County Utilities Director with deferred compensation and fiscal policy experience, was recommended by staff for a term running through February 5, 2023. A motion to approve was made and seconded.
- motion:Motion to approve the appointment of Robert Marin to the Police Pension Board.
Pasco CountyPolice Pension BoardAl RenatoRobert MarinPolice Pension Board appointmentterm through February 5, 2023▶ Jump to 19:56 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:19:56] Next item, business items. [00:19:57] Board appointment. [00:19:58] First board appointment on the agenda for your consideration this evening is a board [00:20:06] appointment to the Police Pension Board, which is a five-member board. [00:20:11] Two of the members are city-appointed positions, and this is one of the city-appointed positions. [00:20:23] The other two positions are recommended by the membership of the Police Pension System, [00:20:37] and one member is a mutually agreed-upon member. [00:20:42] The cause of the vacancy is the result of Al Renato's resignation from the board in January. [00:20:51] We are recommending for your consideration Mr. Robert Marin, who has expressed interest [00:20:57] in serving in this position on the board. [00:21:01] Mr. Marin has just recently retired as Utilities Director for Pasco County. [00:21:08] He has a good amount of experience in working on a deferred compensation committee and is [00:21:17] very experienced in working on fiscal policies and managing budgets. [00:21:25] Therefore, we think he's very well-suited for this position, and if you determine that [00:21:33] it is appropriate to recommend his placement on the board, his term of office would be [00:21:41] through February 5th of 2023. [00:21:47] Thank you. [00:21:48] I'll open it up for public comment. [00:21:50] Is Mr. Marin in attendance? [00:21:51] He is not in attendance this evening. [00:21:52] He was unable to attend, Mr. Mayor. [00:21:53] In that case, I'll bring it back to Council. [00:21:54] Move for approval. [00:21:55] Second.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.b
You arrived here from a search for “Nathan” — transcript expanded below
Appeal of Non-Conforming Sign: 6153 Massachusetts, Nathan Pollock
discussedNathan Pollock appealed the city's determination that an existing pole sign at 6153 Massachusetts Avenue (Patriot Stogies) is a non-conforming sign. After lengthy presentation by the applicant disputing staff's interpretation of the Land Development Code and council discussion noting many similar pole signs exist along the same corridor, the matter was discussed but the transcript was cut off before a final decision was rendered.
6153 Massachusetts Avenue8925 Sharon DriveDiscount BeveragePatriot StogiesSail InSpartan ManorTattoos Golf Central HydraulicsThe AsylumChris BowmanDale HallGreg ShoseMr. AllmanMr. DriscollMr. MarinMr. MonahanMr. PalmerMs. MannsMs. VanceNathan PollockTrent ShoseEconomic development funds programLDC Section 13-02 (sign definitions)LDC Section 13-06 (non-conforming structures)LDC Section 13-07-00 (prohibited signs)LDC Section 13-19-00 (commercial business zones sign requirements)LDC Section 14-04-00 (non-conforming use)▶ Jump to 21:56 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[00:21:56] To the maker. [00:21:57] Welcome. [00:21:58] To the second. [00:21:59] Yeah, Mr. Marin brings a breadth of experience and leadership in various past positions, [00:22:08] a recent graduate of our Leadership Academy, Citizens Academy. [00:22:14] Mr. Allman? [00:22:16] No, I think recently at our Volunteer Appreciation Day, there was discussion about the pension [00:22:29] boards and the success that has been had in the equities and the securities and the investments [00:22:36] being made. [00:22:37] I'm a little nervous to see the next report because, you know, year over year, the stock [00:22:41] market is down two or three percent or a couple percent. [00:22:45] So it's important that those assets, which are considerable in both of those funds, are [00:22:53] watched carefully. [00:22:54] And so it's an awesome responsibility, and I'm glad we have someone qualified. [00:23:00] Mr. Monahan? [00:23:01] I'm happy to have him. [00:23:02] I think he's very well qualified. [00:23:03] Mr. Marin, if you're watching, thank you very much. [00:23:07] If there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [00:23:12] Aye. [00:23:13] Opposed, like sign. [00:23:14] Motion passes. [00:23:15] Next is an appeal of a non-conforming sign at 6153 Massachusetts Avenue. [00:23:21] Thank you. [00:23:22] The applicant for this request is Mr. Nathan Pollack, who is in attendance this evening. [00:23:31] Again, the request is in regard to the City's determination that an existing poll sign at [00:23:39] 6153 Massachusetts Avenue is a non-conforming sign. [00:23:44] Mr. Dale Hall will make a presentation in that respect. [00:23:49] Thank you, Ms. Vance. [00:23:51] The sign as it exists on the site is defined by the Land Development Code as a poll or [00:23:58] freestanding sign. [00:24:00] In the sign section of Land Development Code, it lists the requirements in the business [00:24:08] for specific sign types, wall signs, monument signs, real estate signs, and window signs. [00:24:13] And as the property is zone C2, it would fall within the business restrictions of that section. [00:24:21] The issue of poll signs or freestanding signs is not one that's listed as one of the requirements [00:24:29] or is not outlined as a type of sign that would be allowed in that area. [00:24:36] Furthermore, the City's LDC defines a non-conforming use as one in which the structure or land [00:24:44] ceases to be used for a period of 12 consecutive months or a business that doesn't have a local [00:24:51] business tax receipts within that time period. [00:24:55] Staff had done research and found that there had been a 15-month time period that has transpired [00:25:02] between the valid dates of business tax receipts at this location. [00:25:06] And a copy was included in the report for your review. [00:25:12] So staff does recommend that City Council deny the appeal brought forward by Mr. Pollack [00:25:18] and affirm staff's determination that the existing sign is a non-conforming sign and it must [00:25:24] either be brought into conformity with the provisions outlined in the City's Development Code [00:25:29] or removed within 30 days. [00:25:32] We have followed the appeals process as outlined in the signs section of the Code. [00:25:37] It is important to note that the subject property is bordered on the east, west, and north by [00:25:44] county properties. [00:25:46] And I met with Mr. Pollack this morning and talked about the appeal tonight. [00:25:52] And I also gave him this information that was included in your packet this morning. [00:25:58] I'm more than happy to answer any additional questions you may have. [00:26:01] Thank you. [00:26:02] Mr. Driscoll, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a quasi-judicial proceeding and we need to [00:26:09] declare any ex parte communications in an abundance of caution. [00:26:15] I'm going to report that on the 27th of April, I received an email from Mr. Pollack. [00:26:21] And I believe my colleagues probably did, too, because it looked like everybody's address was on it. [00:26:27] I just wanted to make sure that was in the record. [00:26:29] And I see a copy of it also was on the dais for us today. [00:26:38] Mr. Pollack. [00:26:48] Good evening. [00:26:49] My name is Nathan Pollack. [00:26:50] I live at 8925 Sharon Drive here in New Port Richey. [00:26:53] I purchased the building and property at 6153 Massachusetts Avenue on the 22nd of March of this year [00:27:02] from Mr. Greg and Trent Shose. [00:27:06] I'm short, if you don't mind. [00:27:09] And at this time I've been going through the process of trying to understand what the city has said [00:27:14] is a non-conforming sign. [00:27:17] If you don't mind, I saw the message that Mr. Hall provided. [00:27:22] It was a memorandum dated today. [00:27:24] It's the first that I've seen it. [00:27:26] I provided slides I was asked to provide last Friday. [00:27:29] In his memo that addresses my rebuttal, he mentions numerous pieces of code. [00:27:37] If you actually read the code as it's written, and not the way it's written in his rebuttal, [00:27:43] it may suggest something different. [00:27:45] So I just have a question, and that is, is there anywhere in the code, [00:27:50] and this is probably also for the attorney looking at the code or possibly looking at the code, [00:27:54] that states that pole signs or freestanding signs are non-conforming? [00:28:01] Clearly stated, not vaguely suggested, but clearly stated that pole freestanding signs are non-conforming. [00:28:09] Is it anywhere, sir? Mr. Hall? [00:28:14] I don't know if you're allowed to respond. [00:28:16] I thought this was going to be a dialogue. [00:28:18] If I'm wrong. [00:28:19] This is your time to present. [00:28:20] Is it? Okay. [00:28:21] All right. [00:28:22] My misunderstanding. [00:28:23] I would like to hand this to you. [00:28:25] This addresses some of the code that Mr. Hall had in his memo that I was unaware of until today. [00:28:30] Give them to the clerk. [00:28:31] She'll pass them down. [00:28:32] Okay. [00:28:33] Thank you. [00:28:34] Sure. [00:28:35] All right. [00:28:36] So I'm going to stick to my slides first because this is what I presented in response to the determination that my sign was non-conforming. [00:28:43] So if you look here, you see three generations of this pole sign. [00:28:49] It's been around since at least the late 90s. [00:28:51] A friend of mine sent me that one of the Our German Affair. [00:28:55] And he sang there with a nice mullet back in the late 90s. [00:28:59] And just by chance, I happened to receive it in a message. [00:29:03] And then, of course, you see the old sign that was the asylum. [00:29:06] And then you see my new sign, Patriot Stogies. [00:29:09] Now, early on, they told me my sign was non-conforming. [00:29:12] And I said, why? [00:29:14] Because I thought non-conforming was just a bad sign. [00:29:17] You couldn't have it. [00:29:18] But later on, I learned to ask the question, what makes it non-conforming? [00:29:22] And I was told the city doesn't do freestanding signs or pole signs anymore. [00:29:26] There's the definition. [00:29:28] I've had two separate meetings with the city manager. [00:29:30] After the first one, I was told the city would consider an exception based off my location [00:29:35] where I'm surrounded by other businesses with pole signs. [00:29:39] And then if they couldn't give me an exception, [00:29:42] maybe they could give me some time to get established as a business. [00:29:45] Well, then three weeks later, I get an email saying, [00:29:47] I can't help you, get back with the city planner. [00:29:51] So the city planner pointed me to the code 13-19-00, [00:29:56] which was the same thing that Ms. Manns cited as the result. [00:30:00] She sent me an email. I included it in the slideshow if you have a copy of the slideshow. [00:30:07] It's on the next slide. [00:30:11] Okay, so you can see the email. She said, do you want me to send it to you? I said, please do. [00:30:15] And so she said 1319, commercial business zones. [00:30:19] So Mr. Hall's memorandum addresses this specific code, if I'm not mistaken, [00:30:27] but he doesn't go line by line like I do. He makes big references to it, but mine are very specific. [00:30:33] So this is a copy of the letter from the city manager officially stating that my sign was nonconforming. [00:30:41] She didn't cite the reason why. She just said that it was nonconforming. I just want to include that. [00:30:46] So this is a bit muddy. Okay, so I'll just go through it anyway. [00:30:51] So this specific sign code is same business zones. [00:30:55] This is the reason why Chris Bowman in the planning office along with Ms. Manns told me my sign was nonconforming. [00:31:01] It says the following requirements shall apply to office zone and all commercial zones with exceptions. [00:31:08] That was left off of Mr. Hall's memo today. With exceptions. [00:31:12] It doesn't specifically state what those exceptions are, leaving it open to whatever exceptions we need. [00:31:18] But it says such requirements are that a total signage of one and three quarters square feet for each lineal foot, [00:31:28] or based off of the size of the front of your building, it shouldn't exceed those, but whichever one is larger. [00:31:34] My sign based off of that would be allowed to be up to 63 square feet. [00:31:41] My sign is only, it's less than 50 square feet. [00:31:46] So then it's not nowhere in there does it say if your sign is not mentioned here, it's nonconforming. [00:31:51] But this is the reason why they're stating it's nonconforming. [00:31:55] If you could bring that up, please. [00:32:02] Okay, there we go. So then that's a that talks about square footage of a sign. [00:32:06] I don't exceed that. The next one talks about wall signs. [00:32:10] It just describes what the wall signs have to be in order to be conforming. [00:32:13] If they're outside of that, they're nonconforming. [00:32:15] Well, I don't have a wall sign, so it doesn't apply to me. [00:32:18] The next one talks about monument signs are allowed, except for shopping centers. [00:32:22] Well, mine's not a monument sign, so the section again doesn't apply to me. [00:32:26] And I'm not in a shopping center. [00:32:28] Then D talks about real estate signs. [00:32:30] Mine's not a real estate sign. That doesn't apply to me. [00:32:33] If you go to the next slide, please. [00:32:36] This one again talks about multiple monument signs in shopping centers. [00:32:39] Again, not multiple monument signs in front of my building and not in a shopping center. [00:32:44] And then again, it talks about shopping centers, not me. [00:32:48] And then it talks about window signs. I don't have a window sign. [00:32:50] And then it talks about marquee signs. They left that one off the memo, by the way. [00:32:53] But it's in here because I actually put the code in here because that's what matters. [00:32:57] So as I put here at the bottom, it doesn't state that signs not mentioned, [00:33:01] i.e. freestanding or pole signs, which is what mine is, are nonconforming. [00:33:05] Nor that only signs listed here are allowed. [00:33:08] It doesn't say that. [00:33:10] Yet the section is the reason why I'm being told my sign is nonconforming. [00:33:15] The code is very complicated. I understand that. [00:33:21] But I think it's a misapplication of the code to say that my freestanding pole sign, [00:33:26] based off of this code that's been cited, is the reason why my sign is nonconforming. [00:33:32] And then I also referenced the city's purpose, intent, and scope [00:33:36] that talks about not regulating signs more than necessary. [00:33:39] So if you look down my street, this is us looking from downtown. [00:33:43] We've got the river behind us and we're looking towards the little road. [00:33:46] You can see all the signs that are right behind me. [00:33:49] Behind me I have Spartan Manor, whose definition is a pole sign. [00:33:52] Behind them is a Discount Beverage. Their definition is a pole sign. [00:33:56] They're both city, but because they've been around and they're not new, [00:34:00] they're not going through the same rigmarole I am. [00:34:04] If you look towards the river with the little road behind you, [00:34:08] you see the Tattoos Golf Central Hydraulics. That's technically a pole sign. [00:34:13] They're county. [00:34:15] You see the old Asylum sign, which now says Patriot Stogies. [00:34:18] There's that big beautiful billboard sign there. [00:34:21] There's the two Sail In signs. [00:34:23] There's a Spartan Manor sign and a Discount Beverage sign. [00:34:26] So I bring these up because it says create sign districts where appropriate [00:34:30] to reflect neighborhood identity. [00:34:32] My sign is right in line and by definition the exact same signs [00:34:35] as each of the businesses to my left and right. [00:34:39] Not to mention, nothing in the code says that freestanding pole signs are nonconforming. [00:34:45] As I get into the purpose, intent, and scope, this is right out of the city's code. [00:34:50] It says to increase job opportunities. [00:34:53] If I have to alter my sign, I'm looking upwards of $10,000. [00:34:57] That's the quote I was able to get. [00:34:59] The quote came with a caveat that if you start messing with getting an architect involved, [00:35:05] the price is going to go even farther up. [00:35:07] It just depends on what they'll allow. [00:35:10] So modifying the sign is going to be very costly. [00:35:12] That's going to come out of my pocket. [00:35:14] Now, yes, I appreciate Ms. Manns. [00:35:16] She did the due diligence to look at the permits that I applied for and were approved [00:35:23] and said that I meet the criteria to apply for the economic development funds [00:35:27] for some of the projects that I'm doing and said, yes, [00:35:30] maybe that could help me offset the cost of my sign. [00:35:33] But I would actually love to use those funds to maybe put more product on my shelf, [00:35:38] maybe to pay an employee so I'm not tethered to a building while my kids are at baseball, [00:35:42] which I'm missing out right now. [00:35:45] And then the intent. [00:35:48] Allow signs that are appropriate for the zoning district in which they are located and consistent. [00:35:54] Is my sign not consistent? [00:35:55] By definition, those are all pole signs all around me. [00:35:58] I think inconsistency would make me take my sign down [00:36:01] and the opportunity to my first course of action was to cut it down, [00:36:06] pay for a permit to cut it down, pay for a new permit to attach it to my building. [00:36:10] That means it would be parallel with the road, not perpendicular to the road. [00:36:13] And my building is set back further than the buildings to my left and right. [00:36:16] So now if somebody is going to see my sign, they have to be right on top of my building. [00:36:22] I'm just trying to avoid a costly modification to a sign that I feel is unnecessary [00:36:27] and per the city's code doesn't show anything that supports that my sign is non-conforming. [00:36:32] All right, so when it talks about permits, I've been told time and time again [00:36:38] that the city of New Port Richey doesn't do pole signs but write out of their own code. [00:36:42] In the permit section, it talks in number H about freestanding pole signs. [00:36:47] It tells you you need a survey within 24 months and apply for a permit [00:36:52] and you need architectural drawings by a licensed Florida architect [00:36:57] in order to apply to build a freestanding sign. [00:36:59] So my argument would be that if for some reason pole signs or freestanding signs are non-conforming, [00:37:05] why can you still apply per the city's code to build one within the city? [00:37:11] And then I would like to address the memo that Mr. Hall provided [00:37:15] as it is kind of important to the argument. [00:37:18] I provided my slides on Friday, I just found out about this memo today. [00:37:21] So that's why I gave you those packets because I put definitions in there [00:37:24] that he vaguely references or touches on and he might misrepresent [00:37:28] what's actually in the code by definition. [00:37:31] So the first one talks about under the current provisions of the city's land development code, [00:37:36] I believe he's referencing 13-19-0-0, is that correct, sir, in your memo? [00:37:46] Okay, so under discussion on your memo from Mr. Hall, [00:37:52] under his memo that he provided dated today, [00:37:55] you reference in your very first sentence, [00:37:59] only signs allowed for permitted use in commercial districts. [00:38:04] Are you referencing the code 13-19-0-0? [00:38:09] You are? Okay, it does not state in that code that only signs listed here are permitted. [00:38:15] That's added language in this memo that's not in the code. [00:38:20] And it's in there, I gave you folks a copy of the code in the PowerPoint, [00:38:24] if you want to go back to it. [00:38:27] And so, again, right there. [00:38:31] So nothing says that signs that are listed here are the only ones permitted. [00:38:36] It doesn't say that. That's added language. I think it's misleading. [00:38:40] And then it mentions wall signs, monument signs, real estate signs, window signs. [00:38:45] It leaves off marquee signs. [00:38:49] But it doesn't even reference the code verbatim. [00:38:52] It just references a suggestion that something that's not written. [00:38:57] So I'll go on. It says the existing sign at my location is a pole sign. [00:39:02] It's outlined in section 13-0-2, which he's just referencing the definition, [00:39:06] which I also provided to you and mentioned multiple times in the city's code. [00:39:10] And it says, is therefore a non-conforming sign. [00:39:13] Nothing says freestanding signs or pole signs are non-conforming anywhere. [00:39:17] Just because it's defined as a pole sign doesn't say, a caveat, this is non-conforming. [00:39:22] The next section he references is 13-0-6. [00:39:27] And I don't know if I have a spare copy. [00:39:31] It references specifically non-conforming structures. [00:39:35] It doesn't say in the non-conforming structures that pole signs are non-conforming structures. [00:39:40] I think we're trying to attach a definition to my type of sign that's not there. [00:39:45] It talks about being brought into conformity. [00:39:49] And then he talks about section 14-0-4-0-0. [00:39:53] And I put that in your packet as well if you'll look at that one. [00:39:57] He states in his letter the land development code defines a non-conforming use. [00:40:05] It doesn't say that in the actual code. [00:40:11] Bear with me, sorry. [00:40:16] The actual 14-0-0-4 starts off if a non-conforming use, [00:40:22] which means if it was already a non-conforming use after 12 months it would have to be bulldozed. [00:40:27] That's kind of what this is saying. [00:40:29] It's saying that it's already been designated as a non-conforming sign. [00:40:32] Mine's never been designated as a non-conforming sign, not by any code that's listed. [00:40:37] There's no code that supports that my sign is non-conforming. [00:40:42] It also hasn't been cited. [00:40:44] I have emails from the city going back to November, [00:40:47] sending an email to a gentleman who gave the sellers a citation saying that the panels, [00:40:56] the removable panels were removed without a permit. [00:41:01] You don't need a permit to remove removable panels and replace them. [00:41:04] It says it in the code. [00:41:07] But as far as time and time again, I've been arguing this point that what says in the code that my sign is non-conforming. [00:41:14] And then the last thing I'll touch on is that it basically references that my sign is not permitted, [00:41:24] which would suggest that it might be prohibited. [00:41:27] But if you look at the definition of prohibited signs, [00:41:30] I put in here 130700 prohibited signs. [00:41:34] What's not mentioned is freestanding sign. [00:41:37] Now if you look at the downtown zoning district, which we are in, [00:41:41] it discusses what is permitted in the downtown zoning district. [00:41:47] And it very specifically states my type of sign is prohibited in the downtown zoning district. [00:41:53] I'm not there. I'm on the outskirts of the city. [00:41:56] I think this would suggest that my sign is allowed to be where it's at and without having any modifications. [00:42:04] It's in good use. It's been maintained. It's safe. [00:42:08] And if anything, as a business owner, I need the ability to advertise to passersby. [00:42:15] They need to know where my business is, just like any business. [00:42:18] If New Port Richey is a city that cares about small businesses and wants a veteran-owned business, I'm the guy. [00:42:26] And so I'm asking that you guys would reconsider this determination. [00:42:31] Look at the facts that I provided and consider changing the determination that was made [00:42:38] that my sign was non-conforming because again, time and time again, I've stated, [00:42:42] nowhere in the code does it say pole signs or freestanding signs are non-conforming. [00:42:49] Thank you. [00:42:52] Thank you. [00:42:55] Mr. Driscoll, can you give us a definition of pole signs versus monument signs and where they're allowed? [00:43:07] So the code sets out the definition for a freestanding or a pole sign. [00:43:13] And that is included in the definition section. [00:43:19] And it says it's any sign supported by poles, posts, or similar structural members that are placed on [00:43:25] or anchored in the ground and that are independent of any building or other structure. [00:43:31] So this sign does meet that definition. [00:43:35] So I think that's your guidance as to whether the sign meets that particular requirement. [00:43:43] As to the gentleman's comments about it not being stated that they're prohibited, [00:43:49] what the code does provide is that sign standards include every zone in the city as defined by the zoning ordinance [00:43:57] and official zoning map, only signs as described in this section [00:44:02] and as may be described under two other sections regarding temporary signs and exemptions [00:44:07] will be permitted in each particular zone. [00:44:10] And so the zone 1319, the business zone, sets forth the permitted signs [00:44:16] and it does not include a freestanding or a pole sign. [00:44:18] That's why it's a disallowed sign. [00:44:21] But it says there's room for exceptions, is that correct, at the very top of that section? [00:44:32] And it doesn't clearly state that pole signs are not permitted. [00:44:37] Mr. Palmer. [00:44:39] Yeah, I just want to get the sequence of this right. [00:44:42] You've made your appeal and we've taken it back. [00:44:46] And I don't know that I want to participate in a dialogue with you, [00:44:50] but I want to participate in a dialogue with my colleagues, if you would allow. [00:44:54] I mean, if someone asks you a question, that's good. [00:45:00] First of all, very thorough analysis. [00:45:04] And one thing I want to say to our attorney, just to clear it up, is the sidebar discussion [00:45:10] about prohibited signs, no one has said that this was a prohibited sign. [00:45:14] In fact, prohibited signs are not nonconforming signs. [00:45:18] So the argument that this is a nonconforming sign, there's no relevancy to a prohibited sign. [00:45:27] But I get your point. [00:45:30] To your point of exceptions and to the discussion I raised before, it's clear to me that that side of Massachusetts Avenue, [00:45:39] those types of signs are so typical and regular that I would be inclined to recognize that this sign is going to need to be replaced. [00:45:51] But I would like to sort of hold off the, what can I say, the enforcement. [00:46:00] Because as I look through the sign ordinance, as all of my colleagues do, [00:46:04] we're going to see things that are there all throughout our town. [00:46:08] I mean, there are moving waving signs, there are signs which have changing content on them in our downtown. [00:46:17] There is an abundance of discrepancy on the ability for us to manage the signs. [00:46:24] And perhaps due to the fact that we're in the COVID recovery, [00:46:30] as you mentioned that there are incentives and relief that's out there. [00:46:35] It just seems to me that in a neighborhood that's completely common for that type of sign, [00:46:43] and in a county that is all surrounding him, that's not causing it to conform. [00:46:50] That whether we put a time frame on it to allow the business to have an opportunity to survive, [00:46:54] and I'm in favor of that. [00:46:58] I don't disagree with the staff's analysis, but I do respect the fact that you've dug deeper and deeper [00:47:06] and made some arguments that I think pointed out that there could be exceptions. [00:47:12] And you also pointed out that the intent of signs is to help businesses. [00:47:17] And I think you've made a pretty compelling argument. [00:47:19] You've worked hard to come in front of us. [00:47:21] I'd be happy to try to find a path that the attorneys and the staff could live with [00:47:28] that recognizes the condition on that road. [00:47:31] And our hammering you to improve your sign isn't going to do a doggone thing to get the other signs [00:47:37] that are up and down on the county side of Massachusetts to comply. [00:47:42] And I'm sure that a thorough analysis would show that we have a lot of noncompliance. [00:47:49] I mean, even the sign that my brother attorneys have, which is, I hate to rat them out, [00:47:54] but rusty and sitting there on Grand Boulevard right by the bridge is a pole sign. [00:47:58] It's been there forever. [00:48:00] It can stay there forever because we don't want to impact that business to force them to change. [00:48:06] And here we have a guy who's three months behind the 12-month deadline trying to open up a business [00:48:11] and I do have some empathy for that. [00:48:16] So I'll leave that to my colleagues to see if there's a way through this. [00:48:20] Yeah, I would go along with Mr. Altman's recommendation on that. [00:48:24] You know, maybe it gives a time frame to maybe clean up or make it crystal clear in the code what it is. [00:48:32] I know we're trying to, you know, make our properties better. [00:48:35] And, you know, in depth of keeping everything uniform. [00:48:42] But when you look up and down the road and all the other signs are the same exact way, [00:48:46] I would almost think this would be an issue of, you know, talking about boundaries. [00:48:51] How does that happen? [00:48:52] How does that happen when one business is in the middle of all the county businesses? [00:48:56] So, you know, that may be the real discussion. [00:48:59] I don't know. [00:49:00] But I'd be willing to, you know, offset a time period or whatever it is just to give them the benefit of the doubt on that. [00:49:10] Deputy Mayor? [00:49:12] So, you know, a couple of questions. [00:49:14] Mr. Pollack, so this is a building you purchased, right? [00:49:16] Yes, sir. [00:49:17] And this is your first time in the cigar tobacco business? [00:49:23] I did a short internship as I was retiring from the Army at the end of 2021, so just recently. [00:49:30] And so, yeah, I'm a little bit familiar with the business. [00:49:33] And as far as... [00:49:34] And you had a location, though, a storefront? [00:49:37] I just retired from the Army after 20 years. [00:49:39] I came in right out of high school. [00:49:40] I just retired at the end of December and relocated at the beginning of December to New Port Richey. [00:49:45] Well, thank you. [00:49:46] So, you know, the pictures show just how ugly that stretch of roadway is. [00:49:56] And it really is. [00:49:59] And no offense to yours. [00:50:02] I mean, yours looks best of all those, right? [00:50:05] I actually offered to convert mine to look like Spartan Manor, put marble-looking columns around it. [00:50:12] OK, so anyway, here's the... [00:50:17] I know the county has struggled with this. [00:50:20] This is, you know, throughout Pasco County, the county grew quite rapidly without a lot of regulations. [00:50:27] And I know the county has struggled on these same issues. [00:50:34] I actually sat on a county committee that revised the county sign ordinance a number of years ago. [00:50:40] And they're about to do it again, I believe. [00:50:43] But the most compelling argument that you presented, in my opinion, was, does it fit the neighborhood? [00:50:54] Well, clearly it does. [00:50:57] It's not the neighborhood that we strive to create here in the city of New Port Richey. [00:51:04] We do strive to differentiate ourselves from maybe some of our neighbors. [00:51:11] And we are being progressive in trying to step up and improve our city in numerous ways. [00:51:18] And one of that is appearance, and signs affect that. [00:51:22] And I'll respectfully disagree with my fellow councilman here about that we don't have the ability to regulate and enforce our sign ordinances. [00:51:32] I think we do. [00:51:32] I think we have a very active code enforcement crew, and that we can. [00:51:38] It doesn't mean that we stay on top of everyone every single second. [00:51:42] But I think we do have the ability to do that, and I would encourage them to do so. [00:51:49] What I don't know is that, so, you know, the question I would have is, let's suppose that January 1st came around, [00:52:00] county-passed ordinance required all those signs around you to come down. [00:52:05] Now, that may not ever happen, right? [00:52:07] But it does, right? [00:52:10] So my issue is, I lean to allow you to keep the poll there, but I'd like to have it reviewed every two years or something of that nature, [00:52:20] that if one of your neighbors changed, if the county changed the code, [00:52:25] if we saw anything that you would have to be, if I was king making the rules here, is that, hey, if that happens, you've got to fall in line. [00:52:36] And, you know, I don't know if we have that ability to give a provisional exception for a period of time to be upon reviewed again. [00:52:47] I don't know if that's, even if we have that ability. [00:52:50] But that's where I would lean. [00:52:53] I would very much like to see that entire area improve. [00:52:57] And I think you've improved the building. [00:52:59] It looks the building. [00:52:59] I've noticed some of the improvements you've made. [00:53:01] And they don't go unnoticed. [00:53:03] But that's where I am. [00:53:09] Councilwoman? [00:53:09] So I took a drive by there just to see it as well, just so that I could make sure that I could address it a little bit better. [00:53:16] And it is the best sign on the whole strip. [00:53:19] And you have done great things. [00:53:21] And it is looking better there. [00:53:22] And I would tend to agree with the exception. [00:53:24] I mean, you're the type of business that we want. [00:53:26] We want a small business, a veteran-owned business. [00:53:28] That's what we're trying to do. [00:53:29] We're trying to improve and grow our small businesses within the city. [00:53:34] And I do think because of the location of where you are, being city but surrounded by county makes it much more difficult for you. [00:53:43] And as a business owner, I think it's our job to make it a little bit easier for you to do business here. [00:53:49] And I do think that we need to look at the exception to the code. [00:53:53] Or in some way, the rest of my council members have said the same thing, in some way we need to figure out how to make this work for you. [00:54:02] Thank you. [00:54:03] Thank you. [00:54:05] I'm troubled mostly by the fact that you're completely surrounded on three sides by county. [00:54:13] And I am very much aware that the county is actively looking at their sign ordinance. [00:54:23] And what is going to come of that, I don't know. [00:54:29] I can tell you based on a couple of the commissioners that I know that if they have their druthers, [00:54:36] everything in the county will be monument signs that are lower than this dais. [00:54:41] But that remains to be seen whether they will come up. [00:54:46] I like the Deputy Mayor's idea that maybe we could offer [00:54:54] an exception subject to a review every couple of years so [00:55:01] that when the county pushes the issue on the surrounding properties [00:55:07] that you would need to come into conformance at that point. [00:55:12] I will ask Mr. Driscoll, is that something that, to repeat the Deputy Mayor's question, [00:55:18] is that something that we have the prerogative of doing? [00:55:21] I think that's going to get, that type of approach might be a little bit dicey. [00:55:26] But it sounds to me like there's a consensus that you want us to try to come up with some solution legislatively to address this issue. [00:55:35] So if that's what you want, we can come back to you and we can look at that idea more closely, Mr. Mayor, [00:55:41] and as well as some of the others that have been brought up. [00:55:45] I would recommend that you, if that's the direction you want to take, that you entertain a motion to [00:55:54] delay this appeal, postpone this appeal hearing, or suspend the order for [00:56:00] a period of time to give us an opportunity to come back with some ideas on how you can maybe address this legislatively. [00:56:07] And then if it's not addressed through that process, then the order would go into effect and [00:56:12] the appeal would either take place, or if you want to decide the appeal tonight and [00:56:16] decide that his appeal fails, that that decision would go into effect. [00:56:21] So there's a couple of options, but I think what it sounds like you want us to do is come back with something. [00:56:28] But we need to put some finality to what's existing in front of you, and that is this appeal. [00:56:33] So that can either be the appeal can be delayed to another date, or you can decide the appeal, [00:56:39] but have the order suspended for a period of time to allow you to consider some legislative alternatives to address the issue. [00:56:46] And go through your legislative process, which would automatically include the LDRB as well. [00:56:52] Is there a time frame on the delay? [00:56:58] I think we've all mentioned the interest in finding out what the county's going to do. [00:57:02] If you're saying that, which was my first approach, [00:57:10] which was to say I'm tending to agree with the staff, but I'm also feeling that due to the circumstances, [00:57:17] we should stay the enforcement of that for, you know, if we want to do it for a period of years, or until the county acts. [00:57:30] I'm not sure that in several months that we're going to come back, unless you think that legislatively you'll come back and [00:57:35] determine something like doing something to the code that would allow [00:57:41] these two-face signs that are clearly in there, that you can have a sign with two faces on it, [00:57:47] and it doesn't seem to marry it to a monument sign. [00:57:50] But at the same time, I'm understanding that we don't want poles, [00:57:56] and it seems as if the gentleman has tried to come up, as he just even mentioned, [00:58:00] with some kind of other semi-structural or facade to make it look like it's more of a full sign. [00:58:10] So I'm at a loss, unless you tell me we could, how long would we stay this within reason? [00:58:17] My suggestion would be maybe 90 to 120 days would give us enough time to come back with something. [00:58:24] And then through that process, you can revisit that stay if you want to extend it, or if you want to proceed legislatively, [00:58:33] the stay could be continued until the legislature, you know, the legislation runs its course. [00:58:39] So that's my suggestion, is to give us sufficient time to come back if that's the way you feel. [00:58:45] And like I said, you could, so you could, it sounds like what you're proposing is that you would deny his appeal, [00:58:52] but the order denying the appeal would be stayed for a period of, let's say, 120 days, [00:58:57] pending further order of this council based on any future proceedings regarding any legislative changes, [00:59:05] something along those lines. [00:59:06] What would be important would be that something actually happened in that 120 days, [00:59:10] that we're just not kicking the can down the road. [00:59:12] And so what might happen is we might get information about what the county is wanting to do or not wanting to do. [00:59:22] To the owner, I'm not sure that that solves their problem, [00:59:24] because if they need to invest further money into the sign and then know that it's not going to last. [00:59:29] So I'll defer to my colleagues. [00:59:31] I see what perhaps the Deputy Mayor wants to say. [00:59:37] But before you do, I just want to say, I didn't say that the staff couldn't enforce the signs, or if I did, I didn't mean to. [00:59:44] What I meant to say was there are a lot of nonconforming signs popping up all the time, [00:59:50] off-site signs, signs that don't belong here, signs that don't belong there. [00:59:55] And so I muddied the water, I understand. [01:00:00] Yeah, you know, my issue is, you know, we looked at one side of the street, right? [01:00:05] We didn't see the other side. [01:00:06] There's, you know, and we have, so you have neighbors on the sides and we have neighbors [01:00:10] across the street, and it's still the neighborhood. [01:00:13] We're trying to, you know, change the looks of that neighborhood. [01:00:18] And we're being somewhat successful on one side of the street, and we don't have control [01:00:24] so much on the side you are, except for you're a little partial. [01:00:28] So I'm a little bit, I don't want us to take action that grandfathers his sign in for another [01:00:36] 10, 15 years, because I, and we have no idea what the county will do or won't do. [01:00:43] So I don't know that we, you know, we're going to make our decision what they do or what [01:00:49] they say. [01:00:50] It's more like what happens in the neighborhood. [01:00:52] And I, you know, I understand new businesses starting, you know, I don't know if you can [01:00:57] put in your five-year plan, put a new sign up or whatever, but, you know, be the, you [01:01:02] know, be the bell cow along your, along with your neighbors, right? [01:01:06] But we don't know, you know, maybe three months from now, the business next door, you know, [01:01:12] sells, and a new owner comes in, tears a sign down, and all of a sudden now we're, we started [01:01:17] something, and yet we're, you know, we're starting to change, but we're, we got you [01:01:21] grandfathered in. [01:01:22] And that's, that's my fear is that we, we just go too long. [01:01:28] And while I would love to see you take the bullet and start to change, I understand, [01:01:37] you know, where you, where you're coming from, new business and the financial concerns and [01:01:41] thus forth. [01:01:42] So that's why I'd still like to see, somehow, let him get by with what he has now for, you [01:01:51] know, I guess we'll have to study that, if we're going to do it in 90 or 120 days, if [01:01:54] we can do that, but I'm, but I would, if that comes to that point, then I would vote no [01:02:01] to grandfather him in for, you know, next whatever, you know. [01:02:05] I want to see it changed. [01:02:08] I just don't know, I feel for his issues right now to give him some time and for that area [01:02:15] to redevelop. [01:02:16] Right. [01:02:17] And I agree. [01:02:18] I mean, I think, I think we, you know, we want to change, I mean, counties may change [01:02:23] theirs, but we're going to have our own, doesn't necessarily mean they're going to mirror [01:02:26] ours or we'll mirror theirs. [01:02:27] But I think it's just more about, you know, give him a little time to, to move forward [01:02:34] with it and, you know, plan a little later for it. [01:02:37] He, I mean, I mean, the business owner before, I mean, you know, that was just a bad deal [01:02:41] or, you know, they should have really taken care of that. [01:02:45] The business owners are here, the previous business owners are here, and they met with [01:02:51] me along with Mr. Pollack and are, were aware of the fact that they had a non-conforming [01:02:56] sign before Mr. Pollack even purchased the building. [01:03:01] Well I'm going to make a motion that we, that we deny the appeal and give a one-year stay. [01:03:09] Second. [01:03:10] And I just want to say a year because a year gives the gentleman a time to get through [01:03:16] the winter, the next tourist season, we're going into the summer, I know business is [01:03:21] difficult to get started. [01:03:23] Maybe in a year you're either still there and happy and going or, or not and it gives [01:03:28] you a full chance to get your business up and running. [01:03:31] And then, then we're going to make an example out of the other neighbors with your help. [01:03:37] And maybe there's some funds or whatever for sign improvements or whatever when that [01:03:41] time comes. [01:03:42] But it shouldn't be tied to the existing whatever it is you've got going with the city. [01:03:46] Shouldn't have to use that money to improve your sign. [01:03:49] But that's my motion and we have a second. [01:03:51] Mr. Bader. [01:03:52] Second. [01:03:53] No, I'm fine with that. [01:03:54] Deputy Mayor. [01:03:55] Chief Bader made a comment that's gotten me, my head spinning a minute now. [01:04:05] It sounded to me like that, that the previous business owners or the property owners knew [01:04:13] there was a non-conforming sign to the building and that, do we, do we, wait, wait, wait, [01:04:21] sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry. [01:04:22] Okay. [01:04:23] Hang on a second. [01:04:24] So my, so my question is, is, was, was that knowledge known prior to him purchasing the [01:04:30] building? [01:04:31] And my question would be why that wouldn't have been disclosed at that time. [01:04:35] May I speak? [01:04:36] Well, maybe the property owners may not have known until they sat in the room with me. [01:04:40] I see. [01:04:41] And Mr. Pollack, they might not have known in advance of that meeting, but Mr. Pollack [01:04:46] certainly knew before he concluded his closing on the property. [01:04:51] May I add something? [01:04:53] No. [01:04:54] We're on a motion. [01:04:55] I'm sorry. [01:04:56] Yeah. [01:04:57] There's no, it's because to us. [01:04:58] Councilwoman. [01:04:59] Yeah. [01:05:00] So I, I tend to agree with giving him a year to, to live with it, have some business, grow [01:05:06] your business, you know, concentrate on that without worrying about a sign for the whole [01:05:11] year. [01:05:12] And that way you can, and, and wait and see what happens. [01:05:15] I mean, to make him change the sign now when all the other signs there are still there, [01:05:20] it doesn't, it doesn't improve that for us. [01:05:23] It doesn't improve it for the city. [01:05:25] And I think that we are better off to allow him to do business for a year and see how [01:05:29] it goes first. [01:05:31] The, the, the only benefit that I can see in doing the monument sign right now is it [01:05:37] would make that stretch of the road slightly less ugly. [01:05:42] I mean, the county stuff is a mess. [01:05:47] I've driven by it also and it really is. [01:05:51] So I, I don't know that we, we gain anything by putting this gentleman's feet to the fire [01:05:57] immediately. [01:05:58] As part of that, is it my understanding that you want us to look at this from a legislative [01:06:04] standpoint as well or? [01:06:07] Not really. [01:06:08] I mean, the motion was to find this hearing today. [01:06:10] If a year from now we come up and we change the sign ordinance and he doesn't have to [01:06:13] do it. [01:06:15] That's an, that's an issue for us to get you to look at the priorities of what we want [01:06:20] to look at. [01:06:21] And we got a whole bunch of stuff waiting on the queue line as it is. [01:06:25] So I'm not sure. [01:06:26] So that exception would just be for him if the business gets sold, then it would go back [01:06:32] to the regular. [01:06:34] Well, that wasn't in the motion. [01:06:37] So the motion is that the appeal is denied and the order stayed for a period of one year, [01:06:42] period. [01:06:43] Right. [01:06:44] Can I ask a question? [01:06:45] What, what happens at the end of the year? [01:06:47] Then he would have to remove the sign unless legislatively something has changed in the [01:06:51] interim. [01:06:52] So that gives you a year if you want to make some code changes or. [01:06:56] That's right. [01:06:57] So we do want to look at legislative changes. [01:06:58] Well I just, it's not part of this motion is all I'm saying is I certainly, I'm ready [01:07:02] to look at it as well, you know. [01:07:03] Yes, we're here. [01:07:04] It's your pleasure to do what you want. [01:07:06] We just, that's not part of this. [01:07:07] Polistically versus this issue continuing to be the issue to turn us. [01:07:14] I also want to do legislative on individual property parcels. [01:07:22] If we're going to deal with it, let's address it more broadly. [01:07:26] Any other discussion? [01:07:29] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:07:32] Aye. [01:07:33] Opposed, like sign. [01:07:35] Motion passes. [01:07:36] Thank you. [01:07:37] Thank you. [01:07:38] I appreciate it. [01:07:40] Next is a utility service agreement with Premier Health Care Medical Center.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.c
Utility Service Agreement – Premier Health Care Medical Clinic New Port Richey
approvedCouncil approved a utility service agreement for the city to supply water and sewer to the proposed Premier Health Care Medical Clinic, a 24,000 sq ft development on the west side of Rowan Road south of Main Street, outside city limits but in the county service area. An administrative memorandum between the city manager and county administrator grants the city the right to service the property since the county cannot.
- motion:Move to approve the utility service agreement with Premier Health Care Medical Clinic. (passed)
west side of Rowan Road, south of Main StreetPremier Health Care Medical ClinicMorganVanceAdministrative memorandum between city manager and county administratorInterlocal agreement between city and county on utility service areas▶ Jump to 1:07:41 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:07:44] Mr. Morgan. [01:07:45] Please. [01:07:46] Ms. Vance. [01:07:47] The agreement calls out for the city to supply water and sewer to a proposed development [01:07:52] site known as Premier Health Care Medical Clinic. [01:07:56] The existing development site is located on the west side of Rowan Road, south of Main [01:08:01] Street outside the city limits, and it includes the construction of a 24,000 square foot building. [01:08:08] As council is aware, the city and the county have an interlocal agreement that calls out [01:08:14] each agency's utility service areas. [01:08:17] In this case, the subject property is located inside the county service area. [01:08:23] However, the county doesn't have the ability to service the property. [01:08:27] We did attach an administrative memorandum executed between the city manager and the [01:08:32] county administrator that grants the city the right to service this property because [01:08:37] of that. [01:08:39] The service agreement requires the developer to construct the proposed utility system in [01:08:44] accordance with the city utility standards prior to us accepting the system. [01:08:50] And so with that, we would recommend that you approve this agreement. [01:08:53] Thank you. [01:08:54] Any other public comment? [01:08:57] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to council. [01:08:59] Move to approve. [01:09:00] Second. [01:09:01] To the maker. [01:09:04] It was, if we get more customers, that's a good thing. [01:09:09] Second. [01:09:10] Nothing. [01:09:11] Deputy Mayor? [01:09:12] Nothing, sir. [01:09:13] In that case, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:09:18] Aye. [01:09:19] Opposed, like sign. [01:09:21] Motion passes. [01:09:22] Next, 2022 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.d
2022 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project – Consideration for Approval
approvedCouncil approved a proposal from Granite Inliner LLC for the 2022 Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main Rehabilitation Project in an amount not to exceed $137,268.48, using piggyback pricing from a City of Casselberry RFP. The project will install cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) liners in clay sewer pipes across the West Grand, Cypress Knolls, north downtown, and Louisiana/Francis Avenue Park areas.
- motion:Approve proposal from Granite Inliner LLC for the 2022 Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main Rehabilitation Project, not to exceed $137,268.48. (passed)
Cypress Knolls Neighborhood, east side of Rowan RoadFrancis Avenue ParkLouisiana AvenueRio DriveWest Grand Neighborhood / Lafayette AvenueCity of CasselberryGranite Inliner LLCRobert Rivera2022 Sanitary Sewer Lining ProjectCIP (Capital Improvement Program)CIPP (cured-in-place pipe)RFP 2019-04-67Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main Rehabilitation▶ Jump to 1:09:23 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:09:29] Mr. Rivera will be presenting the agenda item as well. [01:09:32] Thank you. [01:09:33] This request of staff for council is to review and approve the proposal from Granite Inliner [01:09:39] LLC for the Sanitary Sewer Gravity Main Rehabilitation Project. [01:09:44] This is in an amount not to exceed $137,268.48. [01:09:50] The proposal contains the same conditions and unit pricings as the current City of Castleberry [01:09:57] contract, or I'm sorry, RFP, number 2019-04-67. [01:10:04] As you know, this is an annual program that the utility does. [01:10:09] It identifies the existing clay pipe that we have, sanitary sewer pipe, that is in need [01:10:14] of lining due to deterioration and cracked joints. [01:10:19] This causes or it allows roots, sand, and groundwater intrusion into our sewer system, [01:10:26] which increases the operating and maintenance cost for the utility. [01:10:31] The scope of this project is the installation of about 2,300 lineal feet of 8-inch cured-in-place [01:10:39] pipe, 685 lineal feet of 10-inch, and 324 lineal feet of 12-inch cured-in-place pipe, [01:10:47] or what we call CIPP. [01:10:50] This is basically where you take a liner, you insert it inside the existing pipe, and [01:10:56] you expand that liner inside the pipe to where, when it's all said and done, you actually [01:11:01] have another pipe inside your existing one. [01:11:06] This is cheaper than conventional construction that requires you to excavate and then to [01:11:12] restore your property when you're in an urban environment underneath the road, those types [01:11:17] of things. [01:11:18] You can use this process in your restoration, costs go away. [01:11:23] For this year's project, we've got a map up here. [01:11:27] We've got the area of the construction will be the West Grand Neighborhood, which is over [01:11:33] to the left. [01:11:34] That's along Lafayette Avenue. [01:11:36] It's the furthest square box to the ... Okay, it's the furthest box to the left. [01:11:46] Cypress Knolls Neighborhood, which is the box over to the right. [01:11:51] That's on the east side of Rowan Road. [01:11:54] Then we have a northern section just north of the downtown area where we have several [01:12:00] pipes. [01:12:01] Then the south end is along Louisiana Avenue, Francis Avenue Park. [01:12:08] It is identified, this project is identified in your current CIP, and we would recommend [01:12:12] that you approve it. [01:12:16] Thank you. [01:12:17] I'll open it up for public comment. [01:12:19] Seeing no one come forward, bring it back to Council. [01:12:23] Move approval. [01:12:24] Second. [01:12:25] To the maker. [01:12:27] I just noticed that Rio Drive is one, so I was going to say, well, that's where you've [01:12:31] got some sidewalk improvements with this new grant that we got, but at the same time you [01:12:35] mentioned you don't have to do any road tear-up, so it kind of took my chance to make something [01:12:41] happen at the same time. [01:12:43] I don't know if those two projects coexist or should be lined up, but any time there's [01:12:49] work on the road, it's always good to work on the road and everything there, but I noticed [01:12:56] that, well, Rio Drive is on there. [01:13:00] Good. [01:13:01] To the second. [01:13:03] So just a couple questions, Robert. [01:13:07] These are all clay pipes that are being lined? [01:13:10] Yes, sir. [01:13:11] So this lining material, I'm just trying to envision how this is, you know, I can see [01:13:20] clay pipes broken and roots going there, and I guess you've got to really go in there and [01:13:23] clean it out before you put the liner in, right? [01:13:26] Correct. [01:13:27] You go in and you clean it out, and then there's actually a tool that can take and grind all [01:13:31] the roots to where you basically clean the inside of the pipe. [01:13:35] So the liner material is made of? [01:13:39] It's polyurethane vinyl, PVC, basically. [01:13:42] And the useful life of that liner is? [01:13:45] In these applications, 60 years, I mean, you're... [01:13:51] Thank you. [01:13:52] Oh, okay. [01:13:53] We're dead before they need to do it again. [01:13:56] That was my question, was going to be how long does it last, so I'm good with it. [01:14:02] Now the infrastructure is good. [01:14:05] Taking a can down the road. [01:14:08] If this is the last time any of us sitting up here will have to do this. [01:14:13] If there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. [01:14:18] Aye. [01:14:19] Aye. [01:14:20] Opposed, like sign. [01:14:21] Motion passes. [01:14:22] Next, we have a quarterly cash and investment performance report.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.e
Quarterly Cash & Investment Performance Report
discussedFinance staff presented the quarterly cash and investment performance report as of March 31, 2022, showing total city cash and investments of approximately $38.3 million across checking, SBA Florida Prime, Florida Municipal Investment Trust, and U.S. Treasury obligations, with a quarter-over-quarter increase of $683,051. A council member suggested moving this report to the consent agenda in the future rather than presenting it publicly.
- direction:A councilmember suggested that future quarterly cash and investment reports be placed on the consent agenda rather than presented publicly. (none)
Florida Municipal Investment Trust FundState Board of Administration Florida Prime Trust FundMr. MayorMrs. FeistCity Investment PolicyQuarterly Cash & Investment Performance Report - Q2 FY2022U.S. Treasury obligations▶ Jump to 1:14:23 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors
[01:14:25] The report, as of March 31st, 2022, will be presented by Mrs. Feist. [01:14:32] Good evening. [01:14:35] As required by the city's investment policy, tonight I will give you a brief summary of [01:14:39] the city's cash and investment performance summary, ending March 31st, 2022, the second [01:14:48] quarter of the fiscal year. [01:14:53] At the close of March 31st, 2022, the city had a total of $38,300,000. [01:15:00] $92,362 in its cash and investment portfolios. [01:15:07] The breakdown is as follows, as presented. [01:15:11] In checking, we had a total of 9.5, 9.6 million, [01:15:15] which made up 25% of total investments. [01:15:19] And I'll elaborate just a little bit [01:15:21] for our new council member. [01:15:23] Our checking account obviously is used [01:15:25] for the city's operations, making vendor payments, [01:15:30] processing payroll, daily operations. [01:15:34] The next part is our investment portfolio. [01:15:37] The city has about 12.5 million invested [01:15:41] in the State Board of Administration [01:15:44] Florida Prime Trust Fund at 32%. [01:15:49] We have about 4.4 million invested [01:15:51] in Florida Municipal Investment Trust Fund. [01:15:53] So both of those are government trust funds [01:15:56] where we own, you know, our money is invested [01:15:59] in a portion of that portfolio, both of those portfolios. [01:16:03] And then finally, we have invested 12 million [01:16:05] in U.S. Treasury obligations, [01:16:07] which makes up 31% of our portfolio for the quarter. [01:16:13] Earned income for the quarter came in at a whopping $1,600, [01:16:19] 1649, and as you can see, [01:16:22] the Florida Municipal Investment Trust Fund [01:16:25] still had a net loss for the quarter. [01:16:28] March actually came in at a net profit, [01:16:31] but January and February, we did have a small loss [01:16:35] based on, you know, economic conditions at that time. [01:16:39] Glad to see that March came in at a profit, [01:16:43] or we earned money in March, [01:16:44] and so we expect the same moving forward in the next quarter. [01:16:53] This provides you a visual of the portfolio breakup. [01:16:58] 31% again in U.S. Treasury bills, 25% in checking, [01:17:03] 33% in our SBA Florida Prime, [01:17:07] and 11% in our Florida Municipal Investment Trust Fund. [01:17:11] So the composition of this portfolio [01:17:14] does meet our investment policy requirements. [01:17:17] And then finally, we have the change [01:17:23] from the previous quarter. [01:17:25] You'll see that in total, [01:17:27] we had an increase of $683,051, mainly in checking, [01:17:33] and that increase is just due to the collection [01:17:35] of the remaining ad valorem taxes, [01:17:38] non-ad valorem assessments, state revenues, [01:17:42] and a reduction in vendor payouts for the quarter. [01:17:46] And that's all I have. [01:17:48] Any questions? [01:17:50] Yes, Mr. Mayor, I would like to suggest [01:17:52] that this particular report be listed [01:17:54] on the consent agenda in the future. [01:17:58] Really, it's nice to know, [01:18:00] but the monies are of all different sources and types, [01:18:04] and to have our finance director explain [01:18:08] the peculiarities of a quarter, [01:18:10] whether or not the taxes came in or whatever, [01:18:15] I think that I'm not sure what the requirements are, [01:18:20] that it has to be addressed. [01:18:22] I appreciate it, but how we're doing this year, [01:18:27] budget to actual, our performance, [01:18:31] which we get every year, and we'll be looking at that. [01:18:35] I just don't see that this information, [01:18:38] it may make someone think that we're super rich, [01:18:41] when we're not, it doesn't identify our liabilities, [01:18:46] or which money is in which account or fund, [01:18:48] and it doesn't have a lot of accounting meaning, [01:18:50] I guess is what I'm saying, but I appreciate getting it. [01:18:54] Thank you. [01:18:55] I don't know that we need to have it publicly described. [01:18:58] Anything else? [01:19:00] In that case, we'll go to communications.
This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9Communications▶ 1:19:03
- 10Adjournment▶ 1:23:55