Book 35 Page 9407 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 24, 1993 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Gene Pillot, Vice Mayor Nora Patterson, Commissioner Fredd Atkins, Mollie Cardamone and David Merrill (left at 9:25 p.m.), City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Gene Pillot The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 10 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 7:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. CHANGE TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY = APPROVED #1 (0030) through (0049) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Add Approval Re: Authorize Mayor to sign the sub-grant application for the second year continuation of the federal Anti-Drug Abuse sub-grant On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to approve the Change to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 2. PRESENTATION RE: MAYOR'S CITATIONS TO FIRE FIGHTERS WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRE-SAFETY HOUSE TRAILER #1 (0051) through (0554) Mayor Pillot stated that there was an exceptional item with which to start tonight's meeting; that the fire fighters, with considerable support in labor and materials from people from the business community of the Sarasota area, have designed and constructed a Fire-Safety House trailer; that this unit is designed at the size of elementary school children for the purpose of teaching them how to react in different locations in a house in case there is a fire emergency; that many devices have been built into the Fire-Safety House trailer, for example, the bedroom door can be heated soO a child can be taught to use an alternate escape exit if the door is hot, and there is a vibrating device in the bed to alert a deaf child of a fire when they are sleeping; that it is a prototype for educators across the country. Mayor Pillot continued that the Fire-Safety House trailer will be on display next to Selby Five Points Park tomorrow, May 25, and will be dedicated at 2:00 p.m. Julius Halas, Chief of the Fire/Rescue Services Bureau, came before the Commission to assist Mayor Pillot in presenting the citations. Mayor Pillot stated that he wanted to present Mayor's Citations to recognize the following citizens who have distinguished themselves in designing and constructing the Fire-Safety House trailer: Thomas Parsons David Stershic Thomas Denhawm Howard Thomas Neal Elliott Duke Watson Glen Taylor Arnold Gilmore John Jackson Dick Miller Dan Barylski Larry Martini Michael Suarez Lt. Suarez, Training Officer, stated that the Fire-Safety House trailer has a special outside entry light that will flash on and off to alert the Fire or Police Departments which house has an emergency; that the flashing light saves time and allows the fire fighters or police officers to know exactly which house to go to when they have been summoned; and that this flashing entry light is also available to the public. Mayor Pillot asked the family members of those who received citations to stand and be recognized. Chief Halas stated that the Fire-Safety House trailer was a monumental accomplishment in these difficult economic times; that he is confident that lives will be saved as a result of this Fire-Safety House trailer. 3. REPORTS RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 21, 1993 AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 6, 1993 = REPORTS RECEIVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0564) through (0886) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Berta Lefkovich, Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency, came before the Commission. Ms. Lefkovich stated that the following are the actions and recommendations of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency at its Special Meeting of April 21, 1993: Book 35 Page 9408 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9409 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. A. Petition 93-PA-06 2215 Bee Ridge Road to amend Existing and Future Land Use Map 1 to include annexed property for contipuance of Commercial Intensive (CI) or less intensive commercial uses - Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency recommends that the City Commission approve Alternative 1 for Petition 93-PA-06 to add the subject property to existing and future land use maps and create a new map, Future Land Use Map 28, South Gate Annexation IMA (Impact Management Area), to include the petitioner's parcel, identifying, the eligible land use as commercial and identifying the eligible zone district as Commercial Intensive (CI) or less intensive commercial zoning. B. Petition 93-PA-07 - 2239 Bee Ridge Road to amend Existing and Future Land Use Map 1 to include annexed property for continuance of Commercial Intensive (CI) Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency recommends that the City Çommission approve Alternative 1 for Petition 93-PA-07 to add the subject property to existing and future land use maps and create a new map, Future Land Use Map 28, South Gate Annexation IMA, to include the petitioner's parcel, identifying the eligible land use as commercial and identifying the eligible zone district as Commercial Intensive (CI) or less intensive commercial zoning. C. Petition 93-PA-08 1735, Myrtle Street to amend Existing and Future Land Use Map 1 to include annexed property for continuance of Industrial (I) Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency recommends that the City Commission approve Alternative 1 for Petition 93-PA-08 to add the subject property to existing and future land use maps and create a new map, Future Land Use Map 29, Myrtle Street Annexation IMA, to include the petitioner's parcel, identifying the eligible land use as industrial and the eligible zone district as Industrial (I) or Industrial, Light and Warehousing (ILW) or less intensive commercial zoning. D. Petition 93-PA-02 - Thoroughfare Plan Revision - to delete Lockwood Ridge Road (including segments of Conrad and Irving Streets) from Alderman Street to Bahia Vista Street and to delete Hyde Park Street from U.S. 41 to Tuttle Avenue as minor collectors Ms. Lefkovich stated that the'l Planning Board/Local Planning Agency recommends that the City Commission approve Alternative 2 for Petition 93-PA-02 to delete Lockwood Ridge Road (including the connecting portions of Conrad and Irving Streets) from Alderman Street to Bahia Vista Street, from Hyde Park Street from U.S. 41 to Tuttle Avenue as minor collectors from the Thoroughfare Plan of the Sarasota City Plan, and that the 'piecemeal' approach to amending the Thoroughfare Plan not be used in the future. E. Petition 93-PA-01 - Historic Preservation Element proposed element of the Sarasota City Plan which reflects the community goals, objectives, and policies for Historic Preservation Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency recommends that the City Commission approve Alternative 1 transmittal of the proposed Historic Preservation Element with the following modifications: 1. Delete all of the dates identifying a deadline in 1994 and substitute 1995; 2. Delete Policy 4.6; 3. Modify Policy 5.1 to read, ". . The amendments (to the historic preservation section of the Zoning Code) should include modification of owner consent requirements . "; 4. Modify Policy 5.2 as follows: "Enforce the building code to prevent neglect of buildings that ordinarily result in demolition and consider more stringent disincentives on properties that have been illegally demolished or allowed to fall into disrepair by the owner"; 5. Add Policy 7.9 as follows: 1 Evaluate and consider the adoption of the Standard Existing Building Code to encourage preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures"; 6. Modify Policy 8.1 as follows: "Identify and protect or require protection of County, State, and rederally-owned cultural, historic, architectural, and archaeological resources located in the City of Sarasota . Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she did not understand No. 5. Ms. Robinson stated that Mr. Annis had made this recommendation; that the Southern Standard Building Code relates to anything new and the Standard Existing Building Code relates to buildings that are older and might have special conditions so the older buildings might be exempt from some of the newer requirements. Ms. Robinson stated further that Mr. Hewes (Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement) feels there are positives and negatives relative to Book 35 Page 9410 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9411 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. this, but that he does not have a problem with adopting the Standard Existing Building Code. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to receive the report of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's Special Meeting of April 21, 1993. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Ms. Robinson stated that the Historic Preservation Board was conducting a meeting at this time; that if the Commission would like, she could summarize the action of the Historic Preservation Board's Special Meeting of April 6, 1993 for Mr. William Merrill, Chairman, and he could speak at the public hearing. Ms. Robinson stated that the Historic Preservation Board unanimously approved the final draft of the Historic Preservation Plan Element; that the Historic Preservation Board designated Deborah Dart to represent the Board for the Historic Preservation Plan Element; and that it was the consensus of the Board not to delete any language from Policy 5.2 (strictly enforce the Building Code to prevent the neglect of buildings), yet the Board is not going to actively promote iti On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to accept the report of the Historic Preservation Board's Special Meeting of April 6, 1993. Motion carried unanimously (5 to p): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 4. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS INTRODUCTION: GENERAL INFORMATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS NO ACTION REOUIRED (AGENDA ITEM II-A) #1 (0889) through (0984) Ms. Sherry Plaster-Carter, Chief Planner of the Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that the city's Comprehensive Plan has to be amended before annexed properties can be rezoned; that proposed Ordinance No. 93-3700 covers Comprehensive Plan Amendments 93-PA-06, 93-PA-07, and 93-PA-08. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and be sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3700, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT: STATING VARIOUS FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING THE PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THREE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATED: 93-PA-06, 93-PA-07, AND 93-PA-08, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3700 = PASSED ON FIRST READING; PETITION NO. 93-PA-02 APPROVED; PETITION NO. 93-PA-01 APPROVED (1) THE ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED, (2) TRANSMITTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PETITION 93-PA-01 FOR STATE REVIEW, (3) EVALUATING THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF ADOPTION AT BUDGET TIME, (4) EXPANDING POLICY 9.2 (FROM POLICIES 7.1 THROUGH 7.5) TO REFLECT THE VARIOUS POSSIBLE ECONOMIC INCENTIVES THAT WOULD BE APPLIED, AND (5) ADMINISTRATION MODIFYING POLICY 7.5 TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE POINT OF THE PRESERVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND THE MANNER IN WHICH IT WOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED (AGENDA ITEM II-B-1) #1 (1008) through #2 (1680) A. Petition No. 93-PA-06 = to amend Existing and Future Land Use Maps #1 and #28 to include annexed property for continuance of Commercial Intensive (CI) restricted to the existing use or less intensive uses B. Petition No. 93-PA-07 = to amend Existing and Future Land Use Maps #1 and #28 to include annexed property for continuance of Commercial Intensive (CI) restricted to the existing use or less intensive uses C. Petition No. 93-PA-08 = to amend Existing and Future Land Use Maps #1 and #29 to include annexed property for continuance of Industrial (I) D. Petition No. 93-PA-02 - to delete Lockwood Ridge Road (includes segments of Conrad and Irving Streets) from Alderman Street to Bahia Vista Street and to delete Hyde Park Street from U.S. 41 to Tuttle Avenue as minor collectors E. Petition No. 93-PA-01 - Historic Preservation Element - proposed element of the Sarasota City Plan which reflects the community goals, objectives and policies for Historic Preservation Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that everyone who had signed up to speak had requested to address the Historic Preservation Element (Petition 93-PA-01). The following individuals came before the Commission: Mary Ouillin, 407 Cocoanut Avenue, President of and representing the Downtown North Neighborhood Association (DNNA), stated that the Book 35 Page 9412 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9413 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Downtown North neighborhood is the keeper of the beginning of Sarasota since Rosemary Cemetery has the plots where the founders of the City are buried; that the DNNA believes the Historic Preservation Element is very important to the City of Sarasota; that many of the significant buildings that were part of Sarasota's heritage and history have been lost and these are things in which the City should take pride and attempt to preserve; that she believes there should be financial incentives. Javier Suarez, 149 Cocoanut Avenue, President of and representing the Gulf Coast Chapter of American Institute of Architects, stated that he was present in support of the Historic Preservation Element; that the Gulf Coast Chapter of the American Institute of Architects supports approval of the proposed Historic Preservation Plan Element as recently amended and approved by the Planning Board and Historic Preservation Board; that historic properties make important contributions to the quality and variety of the building environment in Sarasota; that the proposed plan element will create opportunities to more effectively preserve the City's remaining landmarks and historic neighborhoods; that the Element as prepared by Clarion Associates, Inc. is a state-of-the-art preservation plan which will enhance identification, evaluation, and protection of Sarasota's historic sites; that several of the stated objectives of this plan promote the identification and designation of conservation districts; that presently the City's Historic Preservation ordinance does not distinguish structures and sites which may contribute to the historic character of a neighborhood, but may not be eligible for designation; that many of the contributing sites and structures are not preserved; that the proposed plan presents an exciting opportunity to preserve important districts within the Cityi that Sarasota can make a choice to be a leader in Southwest Florida in the identification and preservation of our historic resourcesi; that he encourages the Commission to take this positive action and approve the preservation plan element. Kafi Benz, 13084 Air Gate, President of and representing Friends of - Seagate", stated that Friends of "Seagate" is a Sarasota organization that is involved in issues of historic preservation; that she would like to see the recommendation of the Planning Board accepted; that she feels that the City has a right to penalize people if someone illegally demolishes an historic property and she believes this would contribute to the protection of designated historic properties; that her neighborhood supports conservation districts. Linda E. Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue, Vice President of and representing the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association, stated that Gillespie Park supports the Historic Preservation Element particularly due to the inclusion of conservation districts; that she believes the City should search for and find the funding for the Historic Preservation Element because it is a worthwhile expenditure with long-term effects. Devin Rutkowski, 1720 Laurel Street, representing Laurel Park, stated that he feels strongly on the Historic Preservation Element issue; that he is excited about the element because it is a true blueprint and road map for the City to follow since the City has made commitments for revitalization of the City's two innermost downtown neighborhoods which have been identified as historic; that he feels it is unfortunate that the City does not have the funding for the element outlined in the Administration's recommendations; that he feels the City will never have the funding unless the Commission makes it a priority in lieu of some other priority; that the consensus reached on goals by the Commission are as follows: Downtown Area Revitalization No. 1 "Continue Implementation of Improvements for Gillespie/Laurel Parks" No. 3 - "Provide for Housing" Neighborhoods No. 4 = 1 Expand Police Low-Interest Loan Program Citywide" No. 6 - "Increase Owner Occupancy" > No. 7 - "Housing = Support Efforts of CHC" (Community Housing Corporation of Sarasota) No. 9- "Explore Conservation Districts for Gillespie/Laurel Parks" No. 11 -= "Remodeling Loan Program" Mr. Rutkowski stated that it seems obvious to him that every one of these issues should and could be tied to this Historic Preservation Element; that he does not believe the Element would be a very large expenditure for the City in exchange for what will be reaped from it because he feels historic preservation will increase owner occupancy. Brian Bishop, 4370 S. Tamiami Trail, representing Brian C. Bishop Builders, stated that he has resided in Sarasota for 35 years; that the residents have seen structures and history slowly slip away; that it is his opinion that it is of vital interest to Sarasota County to preserve its history; that he encourages the Commission to support the Historic Preservation Element. Jack Notestein, 543 Columbia Court, representing Laurel Park and Washington Park, stated that he is in favor of the City working toward a historical preservation and conservation district for the City; that he feels it would be an incentive for revitalization; that he would like the Commission to adopt the Historic Book 35 Page 9414 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9415 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Preservation Element and feels it will be a step in the right direction. Whit Rylee, 1622 9th Street, stated that he lives in the Gillespie Park neighborhood; that he has been happy with the Historic Preservation Element as it was being developed; that he and others have invested their life savings into downtown Sarasota by rehabilitating historic structures; that the residents of Gillespie Park are looking to the City to provide stability in their neighborhood; that he is discouraged after reading the modifications to the Historic Preservation Element being recommended by the Administration; that the citizens of Sarasota voted 75% to 25% to approve the (amendment to the State Constitution to permit any county or municipality to authorize ad valorem tax exemptions for owners of historic property to encourage the rehabilitation or renovation of such structures, subject to general law) abatement on an increase in taxes for historic structures and he hopes that the Commission will carry out the wishes of the citizens; that he feels the City should "designate" its own historic structures. Martha Hafner, 543 Madison Court, representing Laurel Park, stated that she is present tonight to support the Historic Preservation Element as well as the conservation district; that her neighbors care a lot about their Spanish style homes designed by Owen Burns; that she and her neighbors must drive by unsightly homes on Oak and Laurel Streets owned by absentee landlords with cars parked on the lawns; that she believes the Element will serve to eliminate some of this unsightliness and improve the surroundings of the entire City. Judith Ball, 1859 Lincoln Drive, President of and representing the Sarasota Alliance for Historic Preservation, stated that in May 1992 the Alliance brought Stanley Lowe from Pittsburgh Historic Landmarks to speak to the issue of how preservation had worked to revitalize the entire inner city in Manchester Heights Pennsylvania): ; that through preservation Manchester Heights got Community Development Act funds from builders; that the preservation took no city or federal monies and it brought $36 million into the city in the course of five years; that she feels it is important for Sarasota to have young families move into the downtown core as well as for older people to move back into the downtown to revitalize neighborhoods; and that she would like to see the Historic Preservation Element passed as the Historic Preservation Board has recommended. Berta Lefkovich, 4805 Rilma Avenue, representing the Planning Board, stated that she used to be a renter and she is now a property owner of a condominium because she could not afford a little house in one of the downtown neighborhoods; however, she would prefer to be in one of the downtown neighborhoods; that she is upset about some of the sections the Administration recommends deleting from the Historic Preservation Element, namely 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 3.5; that she believes some kind of economic incentives to owners are needed to allow them to fix up structures. William Merrill, Chairman of the Historic Preservation Board, and Deborah Dart, 1765 Cherokee Drive, member of the Historic Preservation Board, came before the Commission. Mr. Merrill stated that he would like to address each of the nine Administration's Recommended Modifications as follows: 1. Given present staffing levels and work load, delete all of the dates in the policies identifying a deadline in 1994. Mr. Merrill stated that the Historic Preservation (HP) Board and the Planning Board considered deleting all the deadlines as recommended by Staff; however, it was felt that the deadlines were important from a City perspective; that the HP Board recommends moving the deadlines back to 1995; that it was felt that deleting the deadlines entirely takes a lot of the initiative out of coming up with some of the regulations. Ms. Dart stated that the reason for having a date is so that there is an objective to meet; that if there aren't any dates in the element, the City will be less likely to work to achieve anything. 2. Delete policy 4.6 which addresses Preservation Week activities because it is nearly identical to policy 6.1 and this policy is more appropriate under objective 6 which addresses community awareness. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board does not have a problem with this and agrees with this modification. 3. Modify policy 5.1 as follows: € . . The amendments (to the historic preservation section of the Zoning Code) should include definitions, standards for protection of archaeological sites, elimination-ef ewner eensent requirements, improvement and expansion of design standards for review of alteration work and new construction, criteria for designation of conservation districts, clarification of what activities are subject to review, elimination or limitation of use of special exceptions, standards for review of structures in historic districts and conservation districts, and economic hardship procedures. Book 35 Page 9416 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9417 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Mr. Merrill stated that this was not the original recommendation of the HP Board; however, economically speaking, the HP Board would agree to this. 4. Modify policy 5.2 as follows: "Strietly Enforce the building code to prevent neglect of buildings that would ordinarily result in demolition and investigate more stringent disincentives on properties that have been illegally demolished or allowed to fall into disrepair by the owner. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board would agree with this and have no objection. 5. Delete policies 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 which address deferring fees, exempting property taxes and establishing loan programs until such time as the City is in a more fiscally sound position. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board is concerned about this recommended modification; that it is felt that there is enough flexibility in these items to allow the City some slack and the HP Board does not feel these should be deleted; that it had been suggested by someone at the Commission Workshop of January 14, 1993 that the words "where economically feasible" be added to Objective 7 which controls policies 7.1 through 7.8; that the HP Board members are taxpayers and understand the financial straits the City is in; however, these policies allow the City to consider these important issues. 6. Delete policy 7.8 which addresses transferring density from one site to another because it has the potential for creating adverse impacts in areas receiving the additional density. Mr. Merrill stated that policy 7.8 is a zoning incentive rather than a financial incentive; that the HP Board would like the City to at least consider density bonuses, even if they are not mandatory. 7. Modify policy 8.1 as follows: Tdentifyr-desigpate, and promote the preservation and protection of County. State and Federally owned cultural, historic, architectural and archaeological resources located in the City of Sarasota . 7 to be more consistent with language of policy 4.5 regarding City-owned resources and not require designation or protection of County, State or Federally- owned historic resources. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board's recommendation is to delete 4 promote the preservation and protection of . a and replace it with 4. protect or require protection of ."; that State, Federal, and other agencies are subject to the local government's Comprehensive Plan to the extent they have not been preempted by other laws. 8. Add a new policy 7.9 as follows: "Evaluate and consider the adoption of the Standard Existing Building Code to encourage preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board agrees with this recommended modification. 9. Delete policy 3.5 which addresses economic incentives for preservation by considering freezing property taxes, waiving permit fees and establishing a facade grant/loan program until such time as the City is in a more fiscally sound position. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board does not agree with this modification because it is felt that economic incentives should be allowed to be considered. Vice Mayor Patterson asked whether the HP Board supports item 3 to modify policy 5.1 to delete elimination of owner consent requirements from the ordinance. Mr. Merrill stated that the HP Board does not support" this item; however, they do not "object" to this policy being changed. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she has a concern in saying the City will "consider economic incentives" on a broad Citywide basis because there is no quantification of exactly what will be considered; that policy 9.2 is under the objective to "Establish and support economic development efforts . which implies to her those areas of the City that need economic development and could benefit from financial incentives; that she feels policy 9.2 addresses the City's purposes in terms of using historic preservation incentives where they will do the most good. Mr. Merrill stated that he believes policy 9.2 is very important; however, the HP Board felt this policy is limited to conservation and historic districts and there are a number of areas that will not be included in such districts. There was no one else who wished to speak and Mayor Pillot closed the public hearing. city Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3700 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to approve proposed Ordinance No. 93-3700 Book 35 Page 9418 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9419 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. (Petition Nos. 93-PA-06, 93-PA-07, and 93-PA-08) on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Petition No. 93-PA-02 to delete Lockwood Ridge Road (includes segments of Conrad and Irving Streets) from Alderman Street to Bahia Vista Street and to delete Hyde Park Street from US 41 to Tuttle Ave. as minor collectors On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve Petition NO.93-PA-02. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Petition No. 93-PA-01 Historic Preservation Element Proposed element of the Sarasota City Plan which reflects the community goals, objectives and policies for Historic Preservation City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendations concerning the Historic Preservation Element has become more focused since it was originally submitted to the Commission, particularly with regard to the financial overtones; that policy 9.2 would provide for certain financial incentives to be considered for the conservation and historic districts; that he feels the use of conservation districts is an important tool for the City of Sarasota in rounding out the revitalization of the downtown area from Mound Street to 10th Street and from U.S. 301 to U.S. 41. Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of the Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that he wanted to recognize the work of the consultant, Clarion Associates, Inc., who spent over a year working with a variety of neighborhood groups, the City Commission, and advisory boards; that he feels Clarion did a very good job with the Historic Preservation Element. Deputy Planning Director Taylor stated that the proposed Historic Preservation Element sets forth an aggressive plan for the City to pursue in identifying, documenting, protecting, and preserving all of the cultural and historic architectural and archaeological resources; that while this is an optional Element of the Sarasota City Plan, adoption of this Element will obligate the City to make a good faith effort to implement historic preservation outlined in the policies. Mr. Taylor continued that there are uncertainties relative to the costs the Historic Preservation Plan in terms of abating taxes under the Florida Statutes; that there will be a great deal of administration involved as well; that the Administration's recommendations are as follows: Accept the Planning Board's recommendation to transmit for State review and comment the proposed Historic Preservation Element with nine modifications and; Evaluate the economic feasibility of adopting the proposed Historic Preservation Element in conjunction with the budget review process. Deputy Planning Director Taylor stated that the adoption stage public hearing for the Historic Preservation Element is scheduled for November 8, 1993 for first reading; that the Administration recommends the following nine modifications to the Historic Preservation Element: 1. Delete all of the dates in the policies identifying deadlines given present staffing levels and work load. 2. Delete Policy 4.6 which addresses Preservation Week activities because it is nearly identical to policy 6.1 and this policy is more appropriate under Objective 6. 3. Modify Policy 5.1 to delete elimination of owner consent requirements." 4. Modify Policy 5.2 to delete the word 'strictly" thereby not putting an unnecessary burden on the city's Code Enforcement staff and add "and investigate more stringent disincentives on properties that have been illegally demolished or allowed to fall into disrepair by the owner. 5. Delete Policies 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5 which address deferring fees and exempting property taxes. City Manager Sollenberger stated that building permit revenues are down and he does not feel the City is in a position to defer fees; that these types of policies generate administrative costs to the City; that if the Commission has concerns about deleting these policies, he suggests listing them as examples under Policy 9.2. Vice Mayor Patterson asked the City Attorney to clarify the possible prohibition of tax incentives in areas within the TIF (Tax Increment Financing) district for the benefit of those present from the Downtown North neighborhood. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City has existing bond covenants that require and legally bind the City to pay monies into a fund that come from a given source, i.e., the Tax Increment Financing when improvements are made; that the City cannot violate the covenant it owes to the bond holders. Book 35 Page 9420 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9421 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone asked whether the deferment on building permits for a specified period of time, such as five years, would be as costly to administer? Attorney Taylor stated that he did not believe the administration costs would be as great; however, the potential problem could be that after five years the payment is not made; that this is when the administrative costs could become excessive. 6. Delete Policy 7.8 which addresses transferring density. 7. Modify Policy 8.1. Mr. Sollenberger asked that Policy 8.1 be explained in conjunction with Policy 4.5. Deputy Planning Director Taylor stated that Policy 4.5 is where the City will identify and protect municipal owner resources; that Policy 8.1 went beyond this and not only identifies, but also designates and protects County, State and Federally owned resourcesi that the Administration recommends deleting the word "designate" so that the City will not impose any greater restrictions on County, State, and Federal properties than it imposes on itself. 8. Add a new Policy 7.9 to "Evaluate and consider the adoption of the Standard Existing Building Code . . 9. Delete Policy 3.5 which also addresses economic incentives for preservation. Deputy Planning Director Taylor stated that as a result of the discussion tonight, Policy 9.2 would also be modified to add appropriate language to identify the incentives in Policies 7.1 through 7.5 that could be used as examples for providing incentives. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendations as presented, with the exception of Policy 9.2 which would be appropriately expanded (from Policies 7.1 through 7.5) to reflect the various possible economic incentives that would be applied, transmit Comprehensive Plan Amendment Petition 93-PA-01 for State review, evaluate the economic feasibility of adoption at budget time; that the Administration modify Policy 7.5 to make the appropriate point of the preservation of archaeological resources and the manner in which it would be accomplished. Commissioner Merrill stated that he believes Comprehensive Plans have become so voluminous that they become little more than meaningless accumulations of words; that he wants to see the city establish a conservation district in Laurel Park and get to work on it without spending any more money on studies. Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 8. APPROVAL RE: AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR COMPLETION OF THE 6TH STREET CANAL/LAGOON RESTORATION PROJECT = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III) #2 (1682) through (1708) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve extending the contract time for this project. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 9. APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE A SPECIFIC SERVICES CONTRACT TO PROVIDE PRE-AUDIT SERVICES ON AN "AS NEEDED" BASIS FOR E.D.A. FUNDED PROJECTS WITH ANGIE BREWER AND ASSOCIATES. ALSO TO SPECIFICALLY NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THE MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. AUTHORIZE MAYOR, ALONG WITH CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE SAME = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM IV) #2 (1709) through (1744) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration would like Angie Brewer and Associates to administer the City's E.D.A. (Economic Development Administration) funded program; that the city has used Ms. Brewer and her firm extensively on the wastewater treatment grants for the past five or six years. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the contract with Angie Brewer and Associates. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 10. PRESENTATION RE: PLACEMENT OF THE KEN THOMPSON PARK ENTRANCE GATEWAY - PLACED ON AGENDA OF SPECIAL MEETING OF MAY 27, 1993 (AGENDA ITEM V) #2 (1745) through (2607) Architect Jack Whelan and Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, came before the Commission. Mr. Whelan displayed slides of the entrance to Ken Thompson Park to show the problems to be resolved in placing an entrance gateway sign at this location. Mr. Whelan stated that he designed a sign to be placed at the side of John Ringling Parkway at the entrance to Ken Thompson Park as well as a sign that would span Ken Thompson Parkway and displayed these drawings to the Commission. Commissioner Merrill left the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Book 35 Page 9422 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9423 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Mr. Whelan stated that a sign that would span Ken Thompson Parkway would have to be 14 feet high for clearance and 38 feet wide. Commissioner Cardamone stated that large sail boats are trailered to this park and asked whether 14 feet would be enough clearance? Mr. Daughters stated that the City's traffic signals have 17 feet of clearance to the bottom of the signal. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she believes the Commission would be "putting the cart before the horse" by having a grandiose sign installed when the park itself has not been developed, and asked whether Mr. Whelan could present cost estimates on the different types of signs to the Commission. Commissioner Atkins stated that he would like a cost estimate on the cantilevered type entrance sign and the concrete structure presented at the Commission's meeting of May 17. It was the consensus of the Commission to have this item placed on the agenda of a Special Commission meeting of May 27 in order for Mr. Whelan to present cost estimates on the two types of signs discussed. Vice Mayor Patterson asked whether funding was available to improve the actual park? City Manager Sollenberger stated that the park improvements currently include the bike path along John Ringling Parkway from St. Armands Circle to Ken Thompson Park, the roadway that goes into the park, and there is partial funding for the seawall in the park. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she would like to see this property (park) improved sometime in the next ten years, including fishing piers and other things that would enable people to enjoy this land; that she does not want to see any more of the park land deeded away for other uses, because there will not be a park left if more land is deeded to interest groups. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she would like to see the sign spanning the roadway as high as the traffic signals. 11. ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3702, EXTENDING THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION PERTAINING TO THE SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PETITION 91-D FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR FROM THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF SAID APPROVAL, PROVIDING FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE CONDITIONAL REZONING FROM OPB ZONE DISTRICT TO CRT ZONE DISTRICT FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR MEASURED FROM THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 91-D THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: LOTS 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, AND 18, SUB OF LOTS 4, 6, AND 8, BLOCK Y, AND 10 FEET OF VACATED ALLEY LYING NORTH OF LOTS 15 AND 18, PLAT OF SARASOTA SUBDIVISION AS REÇORDED IN PLAT BOOK A, PAGE 6, PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA, ALSO KNOWN AS ROSEMARY COURT, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF PETITION 91-D; SETTING FORTH AMENDMENTS TO THE CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF ORDINANCE NO. 92-3590 PERTAINING TO SAID REZONING; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VI) #2 (2608) through (2697) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3702 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 93-3702 on second reading. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yesi Pillot, yes. 12. APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN THE SUB-GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE SECOND YEAR CONTINUATION OF THE FEDERAL ANTI-DRUG ABUSE SUB-GRANT = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII) #2 (2698) through (2752) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration would like authorization for the Mayor to sign, for the second year, the $260,000 anti-drug abuse sub-grant; that the grant pays for two detectives plus a clerical person in the Financial Investigations Program related to drug trafficking. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the sub-grant application for the second year. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 13. CITIZENS' INPUT (AGENDA ITEM VIII) #2 (2753) through (2755) There was no one signed up to speak. 14. OTHER MATTERS REFERRED THE ADMINISTRATION TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE STATING THAT THE CITY WILL NOT DEED AWAY ANY MORE LAND AT KEN THOMPSON PARK (AGENDA ITEM IX) #2 (2757) through (2884) COMMISSIONER CARDAMONE: A. stated that she would like to request a brief discussion regarding Vice Mayor Patterson's concern of deeding any more land at Ken Thompson Park away. Commissioner Atkins stated that he supports Vice Mayor Patterson's concern; that if any of the facilities on Ken Thompson Park require more land, he believes the tenants will Book 35 Page 9424 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9425 05/24/93 7:00 P.M. have to find alternate sites because the City has given up half of the park now. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she agrees and would like people to be put on notice that the City intends to use the remaining land as a real park. Vice Mayor Patterson asked whether this issue could be placed on an agenda and a resolution written to this effect? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Commission may want to modify the master plan for the site. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to refer the Administration to draft and propose a resolution or ordinance to the effect just discussed. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 15. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM X) #2 (2905) The Special City Commission Meeting of May 24, 1993 was adjourned at 9:48 p.m. - - 1 Mot T GENE M. PILLOT, MAYOR ATTEST: 3illy E Rabnsan BILLY E.CROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK