MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 16, 1997, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Vice Mayor Jerome Dupree, Commissioners Mollie Cardamone, David Merrill, and Nora Patterson, Deputy City Manager V. Peter Schneider, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: Mayor Gene Pillot and City Manager David Sollenberger PRESIDING: Vice Mayor Jerome Dupree The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:01 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, MAY 1997, AURELIO VAZOUEZ, MOBILE HOME PARK MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR, SARASOTA MOBILE HOME PARK #1 (0035) through (0168) Deputy City Manager Schneider requested that Gary Hudson, Mobile Home Park Manager, and Aurelio Vazquez, Mobile Home Park Maintenance Supervisor, Sarasota Mobile Home Park (SMHP), come before the Commission. Mr. Hudson stated that Mr. Vazquez, employed by the City since 1988, and a resident of the SMHP, was originally hired in a temporary capacity and is now Maintenance Supervisor; that Mr. Vazquez conscientiously maintains the streets and grounds of the SMHP, is knowledgeable of the potable water and waste distribution systems throughout the park, manages the refuse collection system, and provides assistance to residents of the SMHP. Mr. Hudson continued that Mr. Vazquez places maintenance of the SMHP and the Auditorium in a high priority, ensuring the property remains attractive, clean, and aesthetically pleasing; that Mr. Vazquez is a loyal, dependable City employee who serves with excellence and pride. Vice Mayor Dupree presented Mr. Vazquez with a City-logo watch, a plaque, and a certificate as the May 1997 Employee of the Month in appreciation of his unique performance with the City of Sarasota; and congratulated him for his outstanding efforts. BOOK 41 Page 14770 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14771 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Mr. Vazquez expressed his appreciation to the Commission and recognized his wife, Edelmira, and daughter, Martha, who were present in the audience. 2. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY = APPROVED #1 (0178) through (0237) city Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Add under Board Actions, Item No. II-1, Report Re: Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board meeting of June 12, 1997, concerning the proposed Temporary Parking Agreement between Water Club II and the City of Sarasota at Ken Thompson Park B. Add under Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. III A-4, Approval Re: 1997 Community Development Block Grant and HOME Grant C. Remove Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-1, Discussion Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 97-3997, to conditionally rezone from RMF-3 Zone District to TAD Zone District and to approve Development Plan 97-DPR-09 to allow administrative offices on real property at the southwest corner of 6th Street and Cocoanut Avenue with a street address of 521 Cocoanut Avenue, Sarasota, Florida D. Add under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-6, Status Report Re: Legal action concerning the Ringling Causeway bridge replacement E. Add under Board Appointments, Item No. IX-2, Appointment Re: Planning Board/Local Planning Agency On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1997 (AGENDA ITEM I-1) #1 (0238) through (0255) Vice Mayor Dupree asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the regular City Commission meeting of June 2, 1997, are approved by unanimous consent. 4. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PARKS, RECREATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD'S MEETING OF JUNE 12, 1997, CONCERNING THE PROPOSED TEMPORARY PARKING AGREEMENT BETWEEN WATER CLUB II AND THE CITY OF SARASOTA AT KEN THOMPSON PARK MOTION TO REFER TEMPORARY PARKING AGREEMENT TO THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT FAILED (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0257) through (1142) Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance and Solid Waste Manager, and Richard Martin, Chairman of the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board, came before the Commission. Mr. Martin presented the following item from the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board's meeting of June 12, 1997: A. Temporary Parking Agreement - Ken Thompson Park Mr. Martin stated that Staff presented to the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club II Development, Inc.; that the temporary parking agreement will allow construction employees of Water Club II Development, Inc., to park vehicles at Ken Thompson Park for two years during the construction of a Longboat Key condominium development; that 100 vehicles will be allowed to park between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays and one half day on Saturdays; that the construction employees will be transported by bus to the work site on Longboat Key; that the Board voted unanimously to recommend the Commission accept the temporary parking agreement; that the developers' two representatives and Mr. Mountain answered the Board members questions at the last meeting at which Walter Rothenbach, Director, Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Department, and Deputy City Manager Schneider spoke in favor of the temporary parking agreement. Mr. Martin stated that members of the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board offered several recommendations; that constructing the parking lot with a pervious material other than asphalt would expedite stormwater drainage; however, the cost of installing and maintaining a pervious surface is prohibitive; that the Board recommended the developer locate a parking site on the mainland to alleviate traffic congestion on St. Armands Key during the tourist season; however, the Board was informed a parking site on the mainland would be a great inconvenience due to staggered work shifts; that the community would be benefited if the developer proffers to install park amenities such as playground equipment, a mangrove boardwalk, or an exercise path. BOOK 41 Page 14772 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14773 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Mr. Martin continued that the Board unanimously agreed the public will be benefited by Commission approval of the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club II Development, Inc. Commissioner Cardamone stated that much of the City's labor force resides in Manatee County; that traffic should not be routed through City neighborhoods; and asked if the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board addressed the possibility of including in the temporary parking agreement a requirement that construction employees residing in Manatee County must reach the development site via the north bridge to Longboat Key rather than driving through the City and St. Armands Key? Mr. Mountain stated that the developer's representative advised that the majority of construction employees reside in Sarasota County; that the temporary parking agreement could contain a clause requiring construction employees who reside in Manatee County to travel to Ken Thompson Park by way of Longboat Key. Commissioner Cardamone asked the proffers to the City made by Water Club II Development, Inc.? Mr. Mountain distributed and displayed on the overhead projector the Conceptual Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park and stated that Water Club II Development, Inc., is offering to construct a parking lot in the unpaved, overflow parking area adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory. Commissioner Patterson asked where construction employees' vehicles will be parked? Mr. Mountain stated that construction employees' vehicles will be parked in the large open field immediately northeast of the existing boat ramp. Commissioner Patterson stated that an unpaved area adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory, close to the area in which the developer has proffered to construct a parking lot, is currently used for overflow parking by visitors to Mote Marine Laboratory; and asked if the construction employees' vehicles could be parked in the unpaved, overflow parking area rather than the large open field northeast of the existing boat ramp? Mr. Mountain stated that the developers intend to construct the parking lot adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory within the first six months of the temporary parking agreement; that visitors to Mote Marine Laboratory will be parking in the area suggested by Commissioner Patterson, located close to the proffered parking lot, during the six-month period during which the proffered parking lot will be under construction. Commissioner Patterson asked if the construction employees could park in the unpaved, overflow area close to the proffered parking lot adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory after the construction is completed? Mr. Mountain stated yes; that the contract specifies the City's right to restrict the areas within which the construction employees will be allowed to park. Commissioner Patterson stated that visitors to Mote Marine Laboratory should not be inconvenienced; that adding the construction employees I vehicles to the number of visitors' vehicles expected to park in the unpaved, overflow area adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory during construction of the proffered parking lot may be unrealistic; that the open field area, which may not be large enough to accommodate 100 vehicles, is used for special events and community recreational activities; that the construction employees' vehicles should be parked in the unpaved, overflow parking area after the parking lot proffered by Water Club II Development, Inc. is completed and available for parking use by visitors to Mote Marine Laboratory. Mr. Martin stated that the area adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory being proposed for parking for construction employees is used for overflow parking for Mote Marine Laboratory and the Pelican Man Sanctuary during the season; that the leaseholders should not be inconvenienced. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the City will attempt to isolate the construction employees' vehicles in the parking lot adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory after the construction is completed; that the construction employees' vehicles will be restricted to specifically designated, confined areas; that the terms of the temporary parking agreement will be refined and returned to the Commission for final approval. Commissioner Merrill asked if the proposed parking lot will be landscaped? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated yes. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Conceptual Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park indicates a cocoanut palm colonnade along Ken Thompson Parkway; and asked if the cocoanut palm colonnade has been approved by the Commission? Mr. Mountain stated no; that landscaping recommendations will be brought to the Commission for final approval. Commissioner Merrill stated that cocoanut palms, which become unsightly after a freeze, should be used as accent pieces rather than as primary plantings in a colonnade. BOOK 41 Page 14774 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14775 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone asked the amount of funds being offered by Water Club II Development, Inc., and the time frames for completion of the proffered parking lot and use of Ken Thompson Park for parking by construction employees? Mr. Mountain stated that the Water Club II Development, Inc., will construct the parking lot adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory as soon as the contract with the City is finalized; that the parking lot, estimated at $168,000, will be completed to the City's specifications within six months; that the developer's construction employees will be allowed to park at Ken Thompson Park for two years. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the contract can contain a clauses requiring construction employees residing in Manatee County to travel to the development site on Longboat Key via the north bridge to the Key? Deputy city Manager Schneider stated that the City can request Water Club II Development, Inc., to encourage construction employees from Manatee County to travel to the development site by way of Longboat Keyi however, the Commission cannot be assured the construction employees will comply; that most of the construction workers work for sub-contractors rather than the master developer; that cooperation can be sought; however, no guarantee exists that construction employees from Manatee County will travel by way of Longboat Key rather than through the City. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to refer the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club II Development, Inc., to the Administration to negotiate a contract to be returned to the Commission for final approval. Commissioner Patterson stated that the suggestion to require the construction employees to park in the area adjacent to Mote Marine Laboratory rather than the large open field is not intended to cause problems for Ken Thompson Park leaseholders or the developer; that the parking arrangements should be properly controlled by Staff. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the contract will stipulate the City's right to relocate construction employees' vehicles during special events; that the developer has agreed to the City's retaining flexibility over the locations in which parking will be allowed. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the motion is not supported; that leasing parkland for two years is an imprudent policy; that allowing construction employees to park at Ken Thompson Park will generate a traffic burden on the City which should rightly be assumed by Longboat Key; that the developer's willingness to construct a $168,000 parking lot to the City's specifications may be desirable; however, the proposal is unacceptable based on the principle that City parkland should not be sold to provide private parking to commercial entities. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Administration recommends accepting the report of the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board and referring the temporary parking agreement to the Administration to return for Commission approval. Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion to refer the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club II Development, Inc., to the Administration to negotiate a contract to be returned to the Commission for final approval. Motion failed (2 to 2): Cardamone, no; Dupree, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Commission is short one Commissioner at this meeting; that Mayor Pillot's vote at the May 19, 1997, regular Commission meeting indicates that he may have voted to approve referring the temporary parking agreement to the Administration; and asked if any Commissioner would object to the Administration's rescheduling the matter on the agenda for the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting? Commissioner Patterson stated that scheduling the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club II Development, Inc., at the next regular Commission meeting will be the third time the issue has been placed on an agenda. Commissioner Merrill stated that a temporary parking agreement allowing 100 vehicles to park for two years at an active, finished park such as Island Park would not be supported; however, Ken Thompson Park is quiet, peaceful, and relatively unused; that every park requires the construction of utilitarian amenities such as parking. Commissioner Merrill continued that the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board recommended the installation of children's playground equipment and other recreational amenities; that the offer by Water Development II Development, Inc., to construct the $168,000 parking lot will free City funds for investment in recreational amenities benefiting the public; that he would agree that approval should not be granted if a true principle existed; however, no one will be denied the use of Ken Thompson Park during the two years; that the aesthetics of the Park will not be changed; that the open field recommend for use by construction employees is currently used for parking during special events; that many of the open field areas are labeled as overflow parking areas in the BOOK 41 Page 14776 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14777 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Conceptual Master Plan of Ken Thompson Park; that the construction of the parking lot will enhance the Park for the use of the public. Commissioner Merrill further stated that he did not speak to the motion as he was unaware of any controversy; that Commissioners have changed votes on the issue previously; that rejecting $168,000 which could be used to free City funds for recreational amenities at Ken Thompson Park is difficult to understand. Commissioner Cardamone stated that split votes should not be rescheduled to the next regular Commission meeting; that the temporary parking agreement will not be supported based on the principle that City parkland should not be sold. Commissioner Patterson stated that the principle opposing the sale of public parkland is valid; however, concern is minimal as the piece of parkland proposed for temporary parking use is not currently being used for anything except parking; that the issue was referred to the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board whose members are avid protectors of City parkland; that she would have voted against the temporary parking agreement if the Board recommended against the proposed use of Ken Thompson Park; that the item should not be reintroduced on a future agenda by Staff; however, Commissioner Merrill has the right to place the matter back on the agenda for a recission of the vote. Commissioner Merrill stated that he will place the temporary parking agreement between the City and Water Club Development, Inc., on the agenda at a future regular Commission meeting; that the principle against selling parkland is not relevant; that Ken Thompson Park is not being sold; that the proper language is "temporary use"; that no one is recommending the sale of parkland; that the City does not sell parks; that the temporary parking agreement offers a developer temporary use of a park for a limited period of time; that the recommendation is to allow a temporary use permit for a longer period of time than is usually allowed by the temporary use permits regularly issued for the use of Ken Thompson Park; that no sale of any parkland is being considered. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that allowing parking on Ken Thompson Park for two years is unacceptable; that the traffic on St. Armands Key last weekend was extremely heavy; that the problem will be exacerbated if 100 construction employee vehicles are allowed to park on Ken Thompson Park for two years; that the temporary parking agreement will not be supported due to the time factor and the increase in traffic. Commissioner Merrill stated that the petitioner has done a poor job explaining the issue; that the Longboat Key condominium development will be built whether or not the City allows the construction employees to park at Ken Thompson Park; that the increase in traffic will occur whether or not the temporary parking agreement is approved; that approving the temporary parking agreement will have zero impact on the traffic. Commissioner Merrill continued that allowing the use of Ken Thompson Park for parking for two years in exchange for $168,000 is the primary issue; that the temporary long-term parking at the Park is not a concern; that he has supported the temporary parking agreement from the first time the issue was introduced; that the Commission should behave frugally; that the City is attempting to complete the Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park; that rejecting $168,000 due to a principle against permitting temporary use of a City park for two years appears imprudent; that Ken Thompson Park is not used at near full capacity; that most of the property consists of empty fields which are not used currently except for parking during special events; that the petitioner needs to present a better explanation in the future of how the City will be benefited by the temporary parking agreement City. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 2, 3, AND 4 - APPROVED: ITEM NO. 1 - AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATION OR CITY ATTORNEY TO SEEK COMPROMISE REGARDING THE ILLEGAL ENCROACHMENT IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 371 BOBWHITE DRIVE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL PROCEED WITH LEGAL ACTION IF NEGOTIATIONS FAIL TO PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE RESULT (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (1143) through (1670) Commissioner Merrill requested that Item No. 1 be removed for discussion. 2. Approval Re: First Renewal to Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Angie Brewer & Associates, Bradenton, Florida, (R.F.P. #96-82) to provide Pre-Audit and Financial Management Services 3. Approval Re: Award of purchase order contract to David P. Lewis, Palmetto, Florida, (Bid #97-65) for the re-roofing of the Sarasota Mobile Home Park Auditorium 4. Approval Re: 1997 Community Development Block Grant and HOME Grant On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve. Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 2, 3, and 4. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. BOOK 41 Page 14778 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14779 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. 1. Approval Re: Receive report and authorize City Attorney to file suit to cause the property owner to remove the illegal encroachment in public right-of-way at 371 Bobwhite Drive Commissioner Merrill stated that the Administration's reasons for removing an illegal encroachment from a public right-of-way are understood; however, approval of the request to file suit against Maxine and Allyn Carlson, the owners of the property at 371 Bobwhite Drive is difficult. Commissioner Patterson asked if the illegal encroachment can be removed without filing suit against the Carlsons? City Attorney Taylor stated that the columns constituting the encroachment in the public right-of-way exist partially outside and partially inside the boundaries of the private property; that the City would have to encroach onto the private property to remove the columns; that part of the columns existing within the boundaries of the private property would be destroyed as well as those in the right-of wayi that a potential claim for damages against the City can be avoided if the property owners are directed by the court to remove the columns; that the recommendation to file suit is bolstered by a letter received by the property owner's attorney suggesting a lawsuit against the City will be filed if Staff goes onto the private property to remove the columns; that an amicable resolution will be attempted prior to filing the lawsuit against the property owner; however, the Administration has attempted a settlement to no avail; that the City will work with the attorney representing the property owner to attempt to have the encroachment removed without the City or the property owners filing suit. Commissioner Patterson stated that more than one column encroaches on the public right-of-way. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that two columns encroach in the right-of-way; that one column encroaches by 3.4 feet and the other by 11 inches. Commissioner Cardamone asked the dimensions of the columns. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the columns are six feet high and approximately two feet square. Commissioner Patterson stated that a principle is at stake; however, spending thousands of dollars on legal fees to remove two columns appears silly; that a compromise should be attempted by requesting the property owner to remove the column encroaching 3.4 feet on the public right-of-way in exchange for allowing the column encroaching by 11 inches to remain; that a compromise will avoid the problem of having to trespass on private property to remove an encroachment. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Engineering Department often issues permits for encroachments in public rights-of-way; however, the Administration feels a 3.4-foot encroachment into the right-of-way is excessive; that an attempt will be made to resolve the conflict absent legal proceedings; that the Bird Key Residents Association does not object to the encroachment. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the issue regarding the encroachments at 371 Bobwhite Drive was first presented to the Commission at the April 21, 1997, regular Commission meeting at which a great deal of time was expended to resolve the conflict; that the property owners were granted a 60-day extension which expires on Friday, June 20, 1997; that the issue was not expected back at the Commission table as a possible lawsuit against the City; that 11 inches is not as offensive an encroachment as the column which is 3.4 feet within the public right-of-way; that an unusual situation exists in that removal of one column may destroy the entire landscaping scheme. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to authorize the Administration or the City Attorney to seek a compromise by requesting the property owner to remove the column encroaching 3.4 feet into the public right-of-way and allowing the column encroaching by 11 inches to remain with the condition that the City Attorney will pursue legal proceedings in the event the compromise fails. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the City will attempt to achieve a compromise without establishing a precedent which allows uncontrolled use of public rights-of-way. Commissioner Patterson asked if the Administration opposes the compromise? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the compromise is not opposed providing the City maintains control of the public right-of-way. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would support the motion if the compromise were recommended without the threat of legal proceedings. Commissioner Patterson stated that including the warning of legal proceedings in the motion should motivate the property owner to accept the compromise; that the City cannot withdraw from the regulation entirely. BOOK 41 Page 14780 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14781 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the motion will not be supported; that a compromise should have been reached during the 60-day extension granted by the Commission at the April 21, 1997, regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Merrill stated that encroachments in public rights-of-way are prohibited in the Zoning Code; that the Administration has insufficient latitude to negotiate a compromise absent Commission directive to do so; that few property owners will endure months of wrangling with the Engineering Department and the Administration over removal of an encroachment; that a compromise with the property owners should not result in the establishment of a precedent as few property owners can be expected to endure months of Administration antagonism. Commissioner Merrill continued that the column is not being ordered removed for aesthetic reasons; that the landscaping theme is attractive and a safety issue does not exist; that right-of-way use permits are occasionally issued; that the McClellan Park Monuments encroach in a public right-of-way; that the encroachment on Bobwhite Drive occurred by accident and not in defiance of government regulations; that a compromise should be attempted. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion to authorize the Administration or the City Attorney to seek a compromise by requesting the property owner to remove the column which is 3.4 feet within the public right-of-way and allowing the column which encroaches by 11 inches to remain with the condition that the City Attorney will pursue legal proceedings if the compromise fail. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, no; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that inherent in the motion is the direction to the City Attorney to proceed with legal proceedings if the property owners refuse to compromise by removing the column encroaching 3.4 feet within the right-of-way. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 97R-983) ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 97R-988) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (1672) through (1745) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 97R-988 in its entirety and proposed Resolution No. 97R-983 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 97R-983, authorizing the execution of a contract renewal for a Highway Maintenance Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation on behalf of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 97R-988, appropriating $230,000 from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the General Fund to fund the 14th = 19th Streets Drainage Improvement Projects; etc. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 and 2. Vice Mayor Dupree requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. Vice Mayor Dupree requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED BY THE TEN-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE ONE-CENT LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 1, 1999 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2009 - REDUCED THE ALLOCATION OF L.0.S.T. FUNDS FOR PURCHASING ADDITIONAL WATERFRONT PARK PROPERTY FROM $2 MILLION TO $1 MILLION AND REALLOCATED THE $1 MILLION AS $250,000 FOR ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO ARLINGTON PARK, $250,000 FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO SIESTA DRIVE EAST OF U.S. 41 IN SOUTHGATE, AND $500,000 TO BE USED TO PROVIDE MATCHING FUNDS FOR THE SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY'S HOPE VI GRANT APPLICATION: POSTPONED TO THE JULY 7, 1997, REGULAR MEETING THE COMMISBION'S VOTE ON THE FOLLOWING MOTIONS: 1) REDUCE ALLOCATION OF L.0.S.T. FUNDS FOR STREET RESURFACING BY $1 MILLION TO FUND NEWTOWN COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: AND 2) SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REDUCE ALLOCATION OF L.0.S.T. FUNDS FOR STREET RESURFACING BY $250,000 TO PURCHASE PROPERTIES FOR NEWTOWN PUBLIC PARKING LOT DEVELOPMENT: DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO SPECIFY THE ALLOCATION TO VWPAH AS $7.5 MILLION FOR RENOVATIONS AND $2.5 MILLION FOR DEBT SERVICE AND INDICATE THE $2.5 MILLION CONTINGENCY RESERVE SEPARATELY ON THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST, AND SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS ALLOCATED FOR L.0.S.T. FUNDS (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (1779) through #3 (0143) BOOK 41 Page 14782 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14783 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that the ten-year extension of the One-cent Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.) will be placed on the ballot in November 1997; that the City is estimated to receive $52,658.257 in revenue from the L.O.S.T. over the ten-year period beginning September 1, 1999 through August 31, 2009; that the Commission appointed an Ad-Hoc Task Force to review past expenditures of the L.O.S.T., consider a listing of projects developed by the Administration, conduct a public forum to determine projects desired by citizens and neighborhood associations, and prepare a list of projects by priority to recommend to the Commission; that the Task Force held six meetings, one public forum, and a joint workshop with the Commission; that 17 citizens representing themselves or associations spoke to the Task Force and endorsed, made recommendations, or spoke against projects; that recommendations for proposed L.O.S.T. projects were presented by the Task Force at a joint workshop with the Commission; that the Commission subsequently prepared a list of prioritized projects. Mr. Mitchell continued that at the June 2, 1997, Commission workshop, the Commission refined the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T.; that the Commission action at the workshop was confirmed and a public hearing set for this evening at the June 2, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that the list of proposed projects was advertised in the Sunday, June 8, 1997, Sarasota Herald-Tribune; that the Commission should accept input from the public hearing and direct the Administration to prepare the final list of L.0.S.T. projects for submission to the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners and the Council of Governments, the coordinating entity which will convene a joint meeting of the task forces established by the various cities, Sarasota County, and Sarasota County School Board to review past expenditures of L.0.S.T. revenues and recommend potential future projects. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the list approved by the Commission at this meeting will be the final list presented to the County? Mr. Mitchell stated yes. Commissioner Cardamone asked the result if members of the public recommend substantial changes requiring cost estimates? Mr. Mitchell stated that the Administration should be directed to return the cost estimates for newly proposed projects for analysis at a future Commission meeting. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the audience should present cost estimates for any request not included in the current list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. Mr. Mitchell stated that cost estimates for additional projects proposed by members of the public should be presented if available; however; the Sarasota-Herald Tribune advertisement did not advise the public to prepare cost estimates for the public hearing. Commissioner Cardamone asked if another public hearing will be required to address cost estimates for additional projects proposed by members of the public? City Attorney Taylor stated no. Commissioner Merrill stated that the language used in the list of projects advertised in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune is a concern; that $50,000 is recommended to "Expand Parking Facilities" at Arlington Park under the sub-heading of "Neighborhood Improvements" and asked if the wording could be changed to "Parking Facilities"; that the intent of the proposed project is to find ways to control overflow parking during swim meets rather than increase the size of existing parking areas. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Administration recommended to the Commission that the City and the County should find ways to utilize other properties in the vicinity of Arlington Park to provide space for overflow parking during swim meets. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the description of the Arlington Park project could be revised to "Improve parking facilities." Commissioner Merrill stated that the description "Improve parking facilities" is acceptable. Commissioner Patterson stated that the language used to indicate future L.0.S.T. allocations to the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) is a concerni that at the June 2, 1997, workshop, the Commission agreed to designate $7.5 million for renovations, add $2.5 million for debt service of a bond issue to enable the renovations to proceed at once, and provide an additional $2.5 million as a contingency reserve in the event the $3.5 million in L.O.S.T. revenues expected from the County for VWPAH renovations is reduced. Commissioner Patterson continued that the advertisement in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune indicated $12.5 million in L.0.S.T. funds has been allocated to renovate the VWPAH; that potential donors to the Van Wezel Foundation may be aware of the County's commitment of $3.5 million in L.0.S.T. funds to renovate the VWPAH; that potential donors who read the current list of proposed projects indicating the City is allocating $12.5 million in L.O.S.T. funds for the same purpose may mistakenly conclude BOOK 41 Page 14784 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14785 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. $16 million has already been allocated towards the estimated $15 million cost of renovation. Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unable to attend the Commission workshop at which L.O.S.T. funds were allocated for improvements to the VWPAH; that the Commission allocated $7.5 million for renovations, $2.5 million in debt service, and $2.5 million for a contingency reserve; that he convinced the Administration and City Auditor and Clerk to combine the three figures and list a total $12.5 million allocation in the advertisement; that the figures were combined on the assertion that breaking down the total would be confusing to the public; that the list of proposed projects published in the advertisement is a summary of the projects. Commissioner Patterson stated that the list published in the advertisement is the only list of projects that most of the public will see. Commissioner Cardamone stated that L.0.S.T. funds allocated to renovation of the VWPAH should be clarified and broken down. Mr. Mitchell stated that the L.0.S.T. funds allocated to the VWPAH will be broken down to indicate $7.5 million for renovations, $2.5 million for debt service, and $2.5 million as a contingency reserve. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City's share of the estimated amount required to correct the full array of flooding problems on St. Armands Key is estimated at far more than the $1.75 million in L.O.S.T. funds currently allocated for stormwater drainage improvements on the Key; that three telephone calls were received from constituents questioning why Lido Key stormwater drainage improvements are not included on the list of proposed projects advertised in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune; that L.0.S.T. funds for stormwater drainage improvements on Lido Key should have been included on the list. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Commission determined at the June 2, 1997, workshop and regular Commission meetings to allocate $1.75 million in L.0.S.T. funds to stormwater drainage improvements on St. Armands Key; that the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. was advertised in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune in accordance with decisions reached by the Commission at those two meetings. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the Commission allocated $1.75 million for stormwater drainage improvements on St. Armands Key; that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will provide equal, matching funds; that the $3.5 million total will provide 50 percent of the $7 million total estimated cost required to resolve the flooding problems throughout St. Armands Key; that Staff recommended $3.5 million instead of $1.75 million in L.0.S.T. funds should be allocated; that FDOT would then provide the $3.5 million balance necessary to complete all required stormwater drainage improvements to St. Armands Key. Commissioner Patterson asked if the $7 million estimate includes stormwater drainage improvements to Lido Key? Mr. Daughters stated that Commission discussion regarding Lido Key is not recalled; that the stormwater drainage improvements project estimated at $7 million will resolve only the existing flooding problems on St. Armands Key; that stormwater drainage improvements on Lido Key are not included in the figure. Commissioner Cardamone stated that Commission discussion regarding stormwater drainage improvements on Lido Key is not recalled; that Commission discussion at the L.O.S.T. workshop may have mistakenly focused on resolving St. Armands Key flooding problems; that Lido Key flooding problems hinder evacuation efforts and should be addressed as well. Vice Mayor Dupree opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: James Widick, 4615 Summerwind Drive (34234) representing the Sarasota Sky Pilots Disc Golf Club, distributed a document on which a list of proposed improvements to Water Tower Park developed by the Disc Golf Club Proposed Improvements Committee was juxtaposed next to the list of proposed projects recommended by the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force and stated that the budget for each list is $545,000; that restrooms, the highest priority for members of the Disc Golf Club, are not included on the list developed by the Task Force. Mr. Widick continued that many members of the Disc Golf Club are local professional business persons; that Mark McKinney, President of the Disc Golf Club, has a degree in horticulture from the University of Florida and is extremely aware of ecological conditions in Water Tower Park; that many people identified to the Disc Golf Club as interested parties have never visited Water Tower Park; that members of the Disc Golf Club spend at least four days each week in the Park and have a greater awareness of the improvements required to properly develop the Park. Mr. Widick continued that a map of Water Tower Park may indicate 20 acres of unused land are available; however, far less is available for parkland when existing ravines, stormwater drainage ditches, and wetlands are considered; that Duane Mountain, BOOK 41 Page 14786 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14787 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Streets, Landscape Maintenance and Solid Waste Manager, has notified the Disc Golf Club that the members will be included in the process to develop a Master Plan for Water Tower Park; that Deborah Marks, Development Review Facilitator, Planning Department, and representatives of the Bayou Oaks Neighborhood Association, recently visited the Park and were impressed with the improvements achieved by the Disc Golf Club; that the Commission is requested to accept the list of proposed improvements for funding by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. developed by the Disc Golf Club Proposed Improvements Committee in place of the list developed by the L.0.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force. Mark McKinney, 1815 Andrea Place (34235), President, Sarasota Sky Pilots Disc Golf Club, displayed a regulation Frisbee used in the playing of Disc Golf and a magazine cover showing players engaged in the sport and stated that the Disc Golf Club has adopted Water Tower Park through the Keep Sarasota Beautiful Program; that the members, who regularly clean the Park, have received compliments from employees of the Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Department; that the Disc Golf Course has been designed in harmony with the heavily wooded areas of the Park; that rare species of native plants such as orchids growing wild in the Park are protected by the members of the Disc Golf Club. Mr. McKinney continued that the Disc Golf Club holds three major events; that the Ice Bowl Tournament is held every January by Disc Golf Clubs throughout the United States; that the 1997 tournament held by the Sarasota Sky Pilots Disc Golf Club was the third largest in the country and raised several hundred dollars and over 100 pounds of food for the All Faiths Food Bank; that the World's Biggest Disc Golf Weekend is an international event designed to introduce the game of Disc Golf to the public; that many local youths attracted to the sport at Water Tower Park have formed the largest Juniors League in Florida; that the Sarasota Sky Pilots is the fastest growing Disc Golf Club in Florida with a membership which increased from 25 members two years ago to 107 current members; that the Disc Golf Club holds professional tournaments sanctioned by the National Professional Disc Golfers' Association; that in 1996, the current world champion and three former world champions participated in tournaments at the Disc Golf Course at Water Tower Park. Mr. McKinney further stated that restroom facilities are the highest priority project for L.0.S.T. funding at Water Tower Park; that security lighting, more pavilions, playground equipment, picnic tables and barbeçue equipment are needed; that the Disc Golf Club is currently averaging 350 rounds per week representing 700 hours of use per week by Disc Golfers; that at least 100 non-members also use the Disc Golf Course regularly. James Green, P.O. Box 91, Fort Myers (33902) representing the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA), and Jane Grossman, 4580 Ascot Circle South (34235). Mr. Green stated that he represents Abbie Wiess, Inc., a consulting firm, under contract to the SHA to package and submit a Housing opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE) VI Grant to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); that the HOPE VI Grant addresses the rehabilitation of deteriorating. and obsolete housing and seeks matching funds from private entities as well as public organizations; that the strategies of the Rosemary District Redevelopment Advisory Board, Sarasota's Comprehensive Plan, and the development proposal for the Mission Harbor property have been studied; that local service providers, churches, community-based organizations, developers, and the City government will be requested to commit resources; that the matching contribution from the City could include land, Staff time, regulatory considerations such as rezoning, and funds from the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. Mr. Green continued that funds will be requested from HUD for acquisition of properties, relocation of tenants, construction costs, and an economic development plan; that the Commission is requested to commit $1 million to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. to provide matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant; that the HOPE VI Grant will request approximately $6 million from HUD; that most of the recipients in subsidized public housing who will benefit by the HOPE VI Grant contribute daily to sales taxes; that allocating matching funds from the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. would be appropriate; that the SHA is compiling accurate estimates for project costs to meet the July 18, 1997, submission deadline for the grant application. Ms. Grossman stated that all citizens contribute to the L.O.S.T. revenues; that the final award from the HOPE e VI Grant may be more than $6 million as a great amount of funds are available from the Federal government; that the SHA HOPE VI Grant application will be judged on the basis of accumulated points; that matched contributions from community organizations will increase the probability of the HOPE VI Grant being awarded to the SHA; that the partnership between various local entities including the and County governments can lead to the total redevelopment City of North Sarasota; that the SHA is committed to improving the conditions at public housing properties to a higher standard. Lonnie Ward, 1060 Oregon Court (34236), President, the Sarasota Coalition for Affordable Housing and representing the National Coalition for Affordable Housing, stated that the Commission is requested to allocate $3 million from the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. for a plan to achieve commercial economic growth in the Newtown community; that commercial economic growth has deteriorated in the community north of Tenth Street; that BOOK 41 Page 14788 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14789 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Downtown development is appreciated; however, a business corridor also exists in Newtown; that properties on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way should be acquired, banks and credit unions solicited, and financial assistance from the City provided to achieve conditions which will retain monies in the Newtown community; that a North Sarasota/Newtown Chamber of Commerce will be developed to coordinate all community activities. Mr. Ward continued that $3 million funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. is not an unreasonable amount to catalyze commercial economic development in Newtown; that banks have been contacted and the financial requirements understood; that property acquisitions can be deeded to a not-for-profit, community-based corporation established to pursue economic growth for the Newtown commercial district. Tracy Fryer, 4121 Berkshire Drive (34241), representing the Sarasota Sky Pilots Disc Golf Club, stated that the improvements to Water Tower Park proposed by the Disc Golf Club are supported; that her family uses Water Tower Park more than any other recreational facility; that restrooms facilities are a high priority; that a dilapidated swing set is missing two seats; that the roof of the pavilion leaks; that only two picnic tables are available within the 20 acres of the Park; that installing tennis courts as suggested by the L.0.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force may not be the most appropriate use of L.0.S.T. funds; that a great deal of lighting is required to reduce crime and create a safe park for the entire community; that the Commission is requested to accept the list of proposed improvements developed by the Disc Golf Club in place of the list recommended by the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force. Chuck Robertson, 2115 Mietaw Drive (34239), representing McClellan Park, stated that a park should be developed on the property currently occupied by Autohaus Kolar at the corner of Mcclellan Parkway and Osprey Avenue; that the property should adhere to the 1974 amortization schedule and a park be created when the property reverts back to a residential zone district in 1999; that Southside Elementary School has one of the few parks in the Southside of the City; that Red Rock Park, a neighborhood park on Camino Real is in the County; that the Bay Island Neighborhood Association donated a property in the vicinity of the north bridge from Siesta Key for use as an park functioning primarily as a fishing area; that a park at the corner of McClellan Parkway and Osprey Avenue will improve the entire neighborhood; that proposals have been presented regarding the rehabilitation of the existing structure on the Autohaus Kolar property for use by the public for community activities; however, a park is preferable. Commissioner Patterson stated that the community should understand that L.O.S.T. revenues will be generated over a ten-year period of time; that the entire list of proposed projects cannot be completed in the first year; that the time frame for completion of a park at the corner of Mcclellan Parkway and Osprey Avenue is unknown. Mr. Robertson stated that the Autohaus Kolar property should not remain as a blight to the neighborhood for ten years; that the parcel reverts back to a residential zone district in 1999 and should be developed as a park in a timely manner; that neighborhood residents can contribute efforts to complete the project. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the idea of a park on the Autohaus Kolar property was conceived by Dr. Thomas Dickinson; that she suggested neighborhood residents approach the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force to enter into a partnership with the City and include the park on the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. Paul Thorpe, 47 South Palm Avenue (34236), Executive Director of the Downtown Association of Sarasota, distributed a June 12, 1997, letter from the Board of Directors of the Downtown Association supporting the City Commission's efforts to encourage the County Commission to aggressively pursue grant funding to implement a two-trolley, Downtown Main Street Corridor Public Transportation System; that the Downtown redevelopment has created a necessity for additional trolley shuttles; that the Main Street Corridor Public Transportation System will relieve the pressure on Downtown parking when the new Selby Library at Five Points is completed; that L.O.S.T. funds could be used to fund operating costs; that the increased traffic generated by the Hollywood 20 Cobb Theatre Complex could be relieved by trolley shuttle service. Richard Martin, 2347 Arlington Street (34239), representing the Arlington Park Neighborhood Association, distributed a letter and preliminary budget regarding capital improvements, crime prevention, and ecological needs at Arlington Park and stated that Arlington Park is a gem of the neighborhood and the City; that the many recreation amenities are well known but the greenspace, focused around a large pond, comprises the greatest area of the park; that a Master Plan should be created to develop the greenspacei that asphalt paths, benches, and bicycle racks have deteriorated; that native plants have been strangled and displaced by potato vines and Brazilian pepper trees; that use of the greenspace by walkers, bicyclists, dog-walkers, and parents with strollers has increased; that the City has improved Arlington Park neighborhood with traffic abatement measures and sidewalks; that a Master Plan for Arlington Park should be developed in conjunction with Staff, the Sarasota Bay National BOOK 41 Page 14790 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14791 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Estuary Program, the Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) Committee and neighborhood residents; that the proposed preliminary budget consists of 16 items at an estimated cost of $266,200. Paulette Black, 638 Cohen Way (34236), Vice President of Cohen Way Tenants' Association, stated that the Tenants . Association supports the application for a HOPE VI Grant for HUD funds to be used to revitalize Cohen Way Housing Development and the entire Rosemary District; that Cohen Way Housing Development is Close to Downtown and should be beautified; that the HOPE VI Grant will require people on subsidized rent to enter a self-sufficiency program; that people whose housing is not subsidized will be assisted in purchasing or renting homes in the neighborhood; that the Commission is requested to allocate a matching contribution to the HOPE VI Grant to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. Walter Diem, 3435 Clark Road, Apt. 235 (34231), stated that in 1993, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) developed a rail plan which calls for the restoration of rail passenger service throughout Southwest Florida; that a 1993 FDOT report illustrates the existing rail line as intact from Tampa to Bonita Springs; that certain local politicians have approved replacing the rail line to Venice with a paved roadway; that in a September 1995 report, the FDOT rejected local efforts to take the rail line out of service stating the corridor should be reserved for future rail use; that the rail line should not be replaced with a taxpayer-subsidized road which will not reduce pollution or traffic congestion in the City; that the FDOT eliminated the roadway proposed by local officials from future consideration citing neighborhood disruption as a major factor as well as cost and the need to preserve the corridor for future rail use; that the Pelican Press, in an article entitled "Rail Service of the Future," supported retaining the rail line for future rail service and opposed the dismantling of the rail line for use as a paved bicycle path or road; that the Commission is requested to support the restoration and preservation of the Southwest corridor rail line for future rail use. There was no one else signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Dupree closed the public hearing. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Commission has allocated $7.5 million to the street-resurfacing project to be funded by the ten-year extension of L.O.S.T.; and asked if the full amount is required to maintain the current level of street resurfacing? Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance and Solid Waste Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the City does not receive the same amount every year for street resurfacing; that $500,000 was expended for street resurfacing in Fiscal Year (FY) 1996/97; that $900,000 is budgeted in FY 1997/98 and the amount reduced to $300,000 to $350,000 in FY 1998/99. Commissioner Patterson asked if a portion of the funds used to resurface streets has been previously provided by gas tax revenues? Mr. Mountain stated yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that the $7.5 million to be funded from the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. for street resurfacing is an increase over past budgets; and asked if gas tax revenues have been allocated for other uses? Mr. Mitchell stated that gas tax revenues have been generating approximately $1.6 million per year; that the revenues have remained static for many years; however, the figure can fluctuate; that gas tax revenues fund the City's street-lighting program, the costs of which continues to escalate against a fixed-revenue source; that the street-lighting program is currently being supplemented by L.O.S.T. funds. Commissioner Patterson asked if the entire $7.5 million in L.O.S.T. funds currently allocated to the street-resurfacing project will be required to maintain the current level of street resurfacing? Mr. Mountain stated that the entire $7.5 million allocated from L.O.S.T. funds will probably not be required; however, the street-resurfacing budget has not been projected past FY 1998/99; that gas tax revenues, used to fund various projects, are fixed and may not suffice to provide the level of supplemental funding for street resurfacing as in previous years; that the costs of the street-lighting program has increased; that in FY 1996/97, $25,000 in gas tax revenues was budgeted to fund the repainting of traffic signal poles; that the preliminary estimate to paint one intersection exceeds $4,000. Mr. Mountain continued that the City cannot be assured of receiving $180,000 in gas tax revenues each year; that the amount of supplemental funding provided by the gas tax may increase to $400,000, requiring only $350,000 in L.O.S.T. funds to maintain the current level of street resurfacing; that no guarantee exists that gas tax funds will be available in future years; that the $750,000 per year to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T. will allow the City to maintain the current level of street resurfacing without depending on fluctuating gas tax revenues; that the City requires $750,000 per year to maintain the current level of street resurfacing. Commissioner Patterson asked the amount of gas tax revenues used for street resurfacing during each of the last five years? BOOK 41 Page 14792 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14793 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Mr. Mountain stated that $150,000 to $200,000 in gas tax revenues have been used per year. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Commission may decide that other projects are worthy enough to take the risk of reducing the proposed $750,000 per year in L.O.S.T. funds reserved for street resurfacing and reallocate those funds to projects such as Arlington Park improvements; that Mr. Mountain has not, however, provided any assurance that the current level of street resurfacing will continue if the $750,000 per year allocation to that project is reduced. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the members of the Disc Golf Club addressed the absence of restrooms on the list of proposed projects for Water Tower Park developed by the L.O.S.T. AD-Hoc Task Force; and asked why a high priority is not placed on installing restrooms in City parks? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the costs, maintenance, supervision, and security requirements regarding public restrooms in parks are prohibitive; that the City has not initiated capital improvements projects to parks due to the consolidation of the Parks and Recreation Department with the County which has assumed responsibility for implementation of park improvements. Commissioner Cardamone stated that restrooms in parks are difficult to keep clean and secure except in actively managed parks such as Arlington Park; that the Disc Golf Club has not supported the installation of tennis and basketball courts with lights, a fitness trail, walkway lighting, and turf and trees as recommended by the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force; that the L.0.S.T. funds allocated to Water Tower Park should remain within the currently proposed $545,000 budget and a Master Plan developed by Staff and neighborhood residents. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the members of the Disc Golf Club and neighborhood residents understand a Master Plan for Water Tower Park is required; that community input will be incorporated into the Master Plan. Commissioner Merrill stated that the electorate will depend on the list published in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune advertisement to understand the projects for which L.0.S.T. funds have been allocated; that Island, Lukewood, and Payne Parks are listed under the sub-heading of "Recreation" and East Sarasota, Water Tower, Dr. Martin Luther King (MLK), Jr., and Arlington Parks under "Neighborhood Improvements"; that street improvements are listed under both "Transportation" and "Neighborhood Improvements"; and asked for clarification? Mr. Mitchell stated that the projects are listed according to the flow of authority within Staff; that projects falling under the authority of the Engineering Department such as street improvements to Cocoanut Avenue are listed under "Transportation" and those under the authority of the Public Works Department such as Citywide street resurfacing listed under "Neighborhood Improyements"; that the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force requested certain projects be redesignated under different sub-headings for clarification; that certain projects may have been listed under the flow of authority within Staff as originally planned; that the projects can be reclassified under different sub-headings per Commission direction. Commissioner Merrill stated that $7.5 million, the largest budget for a single project, is allocated to street resurfacing but listed under "Neighborhood Improvements" rather than Transportation." Mr. Mitchell stated that the. Task Force requested the allocation to street resurfacing be classified under "Neighborhood Improvements." Commissioner Merrill stated that telephone calls have been received regarding the dearth of proposed projects in District 3; that general category projects such as street resurfacing to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. funds will enhance neighborhoods throughout the City; that flooding problems in Southeast City neighborhoods will be resolved by L.O.S.T. funding allocated to "Stormwater Projects throughout the City"; that a description should be included under general category projects to indicate the geographic locations in which the L.O.S.T. funds have been allocated; that, for example, flooding problems in Arlington Park have been addressed by allocating L.O.S.T. funds to install larger drainage pipes, replace a deteriorating metal pipe with a concrete pipe, and widen the north side of Arlington Canal; that Arlington Canal improvements should be listed under the sub-heading of "Stormwater Projects throughout the City"; that Bellevue Terrace for which L.0.S.T. funds have been allocated to install street underdrains should be listed under the general category project of "Street Underdrains at Various Locations"; that the advertisement in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune indicates $3.5 million allocated to "Curb and Gutter Placement"; however, no indication is provided that, for example, curbs and gutters will be installed on Shade Avenue; that specifying an actual dollar amount is not required; that voters in the Southeast section of the City should be informed that projects in their own neighborhoods will be funded if the November 1997 L.O.S.T. referendum is approved. Commissioner Merrill continued that the equitable, geographic distribution of funding by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. should be clarified to the public; that the list of proposed BOOK 41 Page 14794 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. ada BOOK 41 Page 14795 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. projects should be revised with sub-headings such as "Parks" under which each of the neighborhood park projects could be specified; that the electorate should be assured projects are included for each neighborhood in the City. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the Commission allocated only one half the amount recommended by Staff for stormwater improvements; that convincing voters to approve the November 1997 L.O.S.T. referendum absent specific commitments to individual neighborhoods is difficult; that solving the flooding problems in Arlington Canal has been estimated at $750,000; that the County may allocate funds to install streetscaping on Siesta Drive; however, the City should contribute as well; that urban redevelopment studies stress that cities should invest in neighborhoods which are doing well; that a fairly small dollar amount invested in Siesta Drive near Southgate to install street trees and paint the street-light poles will generate strong voter approval. Commissioner Cardamone stated that although actual dollar amounts should not be indicated, the City should identify and list under the general category projects the specific geographic locations to which L.O.S.T. funds have been allocated. Commissioner Merrill stated that Arlington Park is in shabby condition; that he called Walter Rothenbach, Director, Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Department, regarding the deteriorating asphalt walkway paved by the City in the early 1990s and received a promise that the County would patch the walkway; that potato vines have overrun many of the natural areas in Arlington Park; that the City has rebuilt Gillespie Park, improved Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Park, and built Whittaker Gateway Park, but has not invested any significant funds into Arlington Park; that the City and County share joint responsibility for Arlington Park; however, Gillespie Park, also jointly maintained, has been greatly enhanced by improvements funded and implemented by the City; that Mr. Martin has recommended installing native plantings, repairing the pathway, adding picnic tables, etc.; that the request for L.O.S.T. funds to improve Arlington Park should be considered. Commissioner Patterson stated that she supports allocating $200,000 in L.0.S.T. funds to improve Arlington Park; that members of the public have requested over $4 million for newly proposed projects at this meeting; that funds from the ten-year extension of L.0.S.T. should be allocated to provide matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant application being prepared by the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) for submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); i that the likelihood of obtaining the grant is unknown; however if not obtained this year, application could be made again in the future and a grant probably obtained sometime during the next 10 years; that L.O.S.T. funds allocated to purchase additional waterfront park property can be reduced from $2 million to $1 million; that at least $20 million will be required eventually to curb and gutter every street in the City; that the $3.5 million in proposed L.0.S.T. funds allocated to curb and gutter placement and the $7.5 million for street resurfacing could be reduced. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the application for the HOPE VI Grant requires the City to commit to a matching contribution to ensure the SHA's grant request will win points from HUD; that actual cash funding is not required; that portions of future L.0.S.T. funds allocated to projects in the Rosemary District can be designated as a matching contribution in the application for the HOPE VI Grant; that a specific amount of the funds for pedestrian walkways, bicycle paths, landscaping, and lighting on 6th Street from U.S. 301 and Cocoanut Avenue in the Rosemary District can be reserved for the HOPE VI Grant application; that HUD can be shown the Rosemary District will benefit from the Citywide sidewalks project, curb and gutter replacement, and expansion of the reuse system into the Cohen Way Housing Project; that some of the 600 to 900 trees per year to be planted along rights-of-way can be installed in the Rosemary District and qualify as a matching contribution for the HOPE VI Grant application; that a great deal of funding has already been invested in the Central Avenue streetscaping project. Commissioner Cardamone continued that funds from the ten-year extension of L.0.S.T. currently allocated to Lukewood Park, purchasing waterfront park properties, curb and gutter placement and street resurfacing could be reduced to fund improvements to Arlington Park. Commissioner Patterson stated that reducing allocations committed to other projects by a small amount will provide the $200,000 request for Arlington Park improvements; that requests to improve Siesta Drive and Arlington Park will not require a large expenditure of funds; that the programs to purchase waterfront park properties or resurface streets will not be negatively impacted by a slight reduction. Commissioner Patterson continued that only one half the amount requested by Staff to fund Citywide stormwater improvements has been allocated; that an assessment will be required to fund the other half; that Staff was directed to develop an equitable system of assessment to be returned to the Commission; that the combination of L.0.S.T. funds and assessment fees could fund all the necessary stormwater drainage projects including Arlington Park; that designating L.0.S.T. funds to specific stormwater projects is a concern as each neighborhood considers their flooding problems equally worthy of attention; that neighborhood residents are scheduled to present to the Commission a petition BOOK 41 Page 14796 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14797 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. for the removal of contaminated silt from the North Fork of Hudson Bayou later in the agenda; that stormwater problems should be addressed either through L.0.S.T. funds, an assessment district, or an equitable combination of both. Commissioner Cardamone asked if Staff can clarify stormwater drainage issues? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that a report regarding stormwater drainage issues will be presented at the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Dupree asked if the grant writer preparing the HOPE VI Grant requested in-kind matching contributions such as streetscaping or an allocation of actual cash funding from the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T.? Mr. Green returned to the Commission table and stated that matching funds for grant applications are classified as either passive or active; that allocating a portion of future L.0.S.T. funds already committed to proposed projects would be classified as passive funding for which HUD awards few points; that a higher number of points will be awarded if L.O.S.T. monies are specifically allocated to provide matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant application. Commissioner Cardamone asked the dollar amount the SHA is requesting from HUD? Mr. Green stated that the SHA's HOPE VI Grant application will request approximately 6 million from HUD. Commissioner Cardamone stated that $1 million appears to be an excessive percentage of the $6 million request. Mr. Green stated that the $1 million figure is a preliminary estimate; that the final estimates for rehabilitation, construction, and relocation costs to rehabilitate public housing and improve the surrounding community should be received within two weeks; that the $1 million request for matching funds may be reduced if an analysis of the cost estimates prove the rehabilitation can be accomplished for less than the currently projected amount. Commissioner Cardamone asked if passive funds such as portions of L.O.S.T. funds allocated for 6th Street and Cocoanut Avenue improvements can be included in the HOPE VI Grant application. Mr. Green stated yes. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that the member of the public requesting $3 million to fund Newtown commercial economic development did not specify the proposed projects to be funded. Mr. Ward returned to the Commission table and stated that deteriorating properties should be purchased, condemned, and demolished to provide opportunities for commercial economic development and off-street public parking; that the northeast corner of Dr. MLK, Jr., Way and U.S. 301 could be developed as a shopping center and bank; that Dr. MLK. Jr., Way requires revitalization; that the Newtown community perceives the emphasis placed on Downtown redevelopment south of Tenth Street as excessive while redevelopment efforts north of Tenth Street have been insufficient; that the $3 million funded by the ten-year extension of L.0.S.T. will establish a Newtown Chamber of Commerce and initiate a long-term economic study. Commissioner Patterson asked if a coalition representing existing, active groups in Newtown has been assembled to address commercial economic development? Mr. Ward stated that the segments of the community represented by Jetson Grimes, Carolyn Mason, and Edward James, as well as other Newtown organizations seek the formation of a coalition independent of the City government to plan and control the commercial economic destiny of Newtown. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Commission should specify which of the projects on the list of proposed projects for L.0.S.T. funding should be reduced, the amount of the reduction, and the project to which the funds will be reallocated; that Staff will revise the list of proposed projects according to the Commission's direction. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the proposed projects advertised in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune should not be reduced unless the Commission determines the newly proposed projects warrant the reallocation of funds from the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T.; that she is unsure whether $1 million in actual cash should be reallocated to provide matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant; that the passage of the L.0.S.T. referendum is as uncertain as the chances of receiving the HOPE VI Grant; that no funds will be available for any projects if the November 1997 L.0.S.T. referendum is not approved by the electorate; that the feasibility of writing a grant based on matching funds expected from the possible passage of a referendum is a concern. Commissioner Patterson asked the consequences for the HOPE VI Grant if the Commission allocates funds for the Grant and the L.0.S.T. referendum does not pass? BOOK 41 Page 14798 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14799 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Mr. Green stated that HUD will evaluate the application with the understanding that the L.0.S.T. funds will not be available unless the referendum passes in November 1997. Commissioner Patterson asked if an allocation of future L.0.S.T. funds will be required to submit the HOPE VI Grant application? Mr. Green stated that a matching contribution will provide the SHA's HOPE VI Grant application a competitive edge over other municipalities; however, some cities submit grant applications absent matching funds. Commissioner Patterson asked the amount of funds required to submit the HOPE VI Grant application? Mr. Green stated that the cost estimates for acquisition, construction, etc., required to rehabilitate the City's public housing program will be available within two weeks; that HUD may accept contributions of City-owned land as a matching contribution. Commissioner Merrill stated that none of the allocations for proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. should be reduced; that he recommended only that the general category projects should be broken down to indicate to the public specific neighborhood projects for which the L.0.S.T. funds have been allocated; that funds from the $3.5 million curb and gutter plan and the $1.5 million street-tree program can be used to fund Siesta Drive improvements; that the recommendation is not to reduce the funds allocated to projects approved by the Commission and the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force but to specify, for example, that funds for curb and gutter and streetscaping have been allocated to Lime Avenue. Commissioner Merrill continued that the Commission is regularly criticized for not investing funds in the north side of the City; that approximately $1 million was expended to install medians on Dr. MLK, Jr., Way a few years ago; that an additional $1 million has been allocated for the medians from L.0.S.T. funds; that the proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. include $1,060,000 to improve Myrtle Street, $1,540,000 to improve Bradenton Road with curbs, gutters, streetscape, and walkways; and $200,000 to implement improvements to Dr. MLK, Jr., Park. Commissioner Merrill further stated that voters for whom flooding is a major problem will not approve the November 1997 referendum unless the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. specifies that funds have been allocated for stormwater drainage improvements in their own neighborhoods. Vice Mayor Dupree asked for clarification of the L.O.S.T. funding allocated to the VWPAH? Commissioner Patterson stated that the allocation should be broken out and advertised as $7.5 million for VWPAH improvements, $2.5 million for debt service, and $2.5 million for a contingency reserve; that the $2.5 million contingency reserve may not be required if the Van Wezel Foundation raises sufficient funds to meet the renovations costs. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to reduce the amount of L.O.S.T. funds allocated to purchasing additional waterfront park property from $2 million to $1 million, reallocate the $1 million as $250,000 for additional improvements to Arlington Park and $250,000 for improvements to Siesta Drive east of U.S. 41, and provide $500,000 in matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant application. Commissioner Patterson stated that the $500,000 is specifically intended as matching funds for the HOPE VI Grant application for the Cohen Way project; that providing $500,000 for improvements to Cohen Way in the absence of receiving a HOPE VI Grant is not necessarily advocated. Vice Mayor Dupree called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to reduce the amount of L.0.S.T. funds allocated to the street resurfacing project from $7.5 million to $6.5 million and reallocate the $1 million for future commercial economic development in Newtown. Commissioner Patterson stated that the $1 million should be allocated to organize community groups and individual residents in Newtown into a coalition to develop an economic plan; that the L.O.S.T. funds should be allocated to off-street parking, storefront improvements, and property acquisition. Commissioner Merrill stated that the street resurfacing program is extremely popular among City residents; that no specific plan for commercial economic development of Newtown has been presented; that L.O.S.T. funds cannot be legally used to fund purchase of deteriorating properties for commercial development; that $1.5 million. has already been budgeted to reconstruct the existing medians on Dr. MLK, JR., Way. Commissioner Merrill continued that conditions on Lime Avenue are a concerni that the City must ensure sufficient funds are allocated to East Sarasota to prevent further deterioration of BOOK 41 Page 14800 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14801 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. the Lime and East Avenue neighborhoods; that reducing one of the most popular programs in the City by $1 million and reallocating those funds is difficult; that a Newtown community coalition has not yet been organized; that a formal plan to catalyze commercial economic development does not exist; that L.O.S.T. funds for economic development should be allocated to catalyze commercial improvements in the Lime and East Avenue neighborhoods in the Southeast section of the City; that Lime Avenue also needs an organized business coalition; that a neighborhood immediately east of Downtown with the potential of becoming a problem area should not be neglected. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a formal plan for commercial economic development of Newtown must be developed before any L.0.S.T. funds are expended; that maintaining the current condition of Dr. MLK, Jr., Way costs the City $489,000 per year; that a strong, viable neighborhood project was developed when the City purchased and rehabilitated the Augustine Quarters; that she supports funding projects such as the Augustine Quarters which increase the tax base, contribute positively to the community within a few years, and do not require extensive police services; that a master plan for commercial economic development must be produced before $1 million in L.O.S.T. funds is released; and asked for clarification of the nature of the projects which can legally qualify for L.0.S.T. funding? Mr. Mitchell stated that allocation of L.0.S.T. funds is limited to infrastructure improvements, and police and fire emergency vehicles. Commissioner Cardamone asked if L.0.S.T. funds can be used to purchase properties for public parking lots? Mr. Mitchell stated yes. Commissioner Cardamone asked if L.0.S.T. funds can be used to purchase and renovate properties for commercial development? Mr. Mitchell stated no; that L.0.S.T. funds cannot be allocated to develop a shopping center or renovate storefronts. Commissioner Cardamone asked if L.O.S.T. funds can be used to form a business coalition? Mr. Mitchell stated no; that L.0.S.T. funds can only be used for infrastructure improvements with the exception of purchasing police and fire emergency vehicles. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a streetscape project scheduled to begin next month will improve the lighting, sidewalks, and landscaping on Dr. MLK, Jr., Way. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to substitute the motion allocating $1 million in L.0.S.T. funds to commercial economic development in Newtown by reducing the L.0.S.T. funds to $250,000 and reallocating the amount to the acquisition of property for public parking lots. Commissioner Cardamone stated that many of the commercial economic development projects for which L.0.S.T. funds were requested, for example, storefront improvements, cannot be legally funded by the L.0.S.T. Commissioner Merrill stated that a Staff report should be returned regarding the amount of L.0.S.T. funds necessary to continue the current level of street resurfacing, one of the most popular programs in the City. Commissioner Patterson asked for clarification of the priority placed by the Commission to allocate L.0.S.T. funds to curb and gutter placement? Commissioner Merrill stated that the $3.5 million in L.0.S.T. funds allocated to curb and gutter placement should be used as a starting point from which curbs and gutters will be installed throughout the City; that $3.5 million will not begin to achieve the task; that $100 million may be required to achieve the total long-term goal to curb and gutter the entire Cityi that an assessment program requiring the City to fund half the costs and property owners the other half may be feasible; that the City of Sarasota should be raised to the infrastructure standards expected in a central commercial hub. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to direct the Administration to bring back a report including estimated costs to determine the future allocation of L.O.S.T. funds required to maintain the current street-resurfacing program and postpone to the July 7, 1997, regular meeting the Commission's vote on the following motions: 1. Main motion to reduce the allocation of L.O.S.T. funds for the street resurfacing project from $7.5 million to $6.5 million and allocate the $1 million to Newtown commercial economic development; and 2. Substitute motion to reduce the allocation of L.0.S.T. funds for the street resurfacing project from $7.5 to $7.25 million; and allocate $250,000 to purchase and develop properties in Newtown as public parking lots. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. BOOK 41 Page 14802 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14803 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that Commission support is requested to break out the separate allocations to the VWPAH in the list of proposed projects to be funded by the L.0.S.T. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that hearing no objection, there is a consensus of the Commission that the language addressing the allocation of L.0.S.T. funds to renovate the VWPAH should be revised to specify $7.5 million for renovations and $2.5 million for debt service and to indicate the $2.5 million contingency reserve separately on the bottom of the list of proposals. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that a report including future annual cost estimates of street resurfacing will be returned at the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting. The Commission recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Administration is requested to revise the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of L.O.S.T.; that the neighborhoods and geographic locations in which funds have been allocated for general category projects such as stormwater improvements should be identified; that specific dollar amounts and street names are not required. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that hearing no objection there is a consensus of the Commission to direct the Administration to specifically identify the neighborhoods and geographic locations for which L.O.S.T. funds have been allocated. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 97-4000, ESTABLISHING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY AS REQUIRED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CHARTER OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA (1996); ADDING TO THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES THOSE AREAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1996; SETTING FORTH FINDING; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. - PASSED ON FIRST READING (TITLE ONLY) (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #2 (0144) through (0230) Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4000 adopts the new municipal boundaries including properties annexed in the City in 1996; that the legal description contained in the agenda material was prepared by Darrell E. Gerkin, Professional Surveyor and Mapper. Vice Mayor Dupree opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Dupree closed the public hearing. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 97-4000 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 97-4000 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 97-4000 on first reading. Vice Mayor Dupree requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes. 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 97-4002, AMENDING CHAPTER 33 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR THE IMPOUNDMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES USED TO FACILITATE PROSTITUTION OR DRUG RELATED CRIMES; PROVIDING FOR NOTICE AND HEARINGS TO BE CONDUCTED WITHIN CERTAIN TIME LIMITATIONS; PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF A CIVIL PENALTY FOR THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES TO FACILITATE PROSTITUTION OR DRUG RELATED CRIMES: PROVIDING FOR RECOVERY OF TOWING AND STORAGE CHARGES: PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT:; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING; ADKINISTRATION TO REPORT BACK BEFORE SECOND READING WITH AN ANALYSIS OF STATISTICS REGARDING THE WEST PALM BEACH ORDINANCE (AGENDA ITEM IV-3 #3 (0232) through (1874) Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, and E.J. Whitehead, Captain, Police Department, came before the Commission. Captain Whitehead stated that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 will allow police officers to impound a vehicle suspected of being used to facilitate prostitution or drug-related crimes; that the vehicle would be released upon payment of a civil penalty of $500 in addition to the costs of towing and storage. Captain Whitehead continued that the safety of law-abiding citizens and the quality of life in residential neighborhoods is negatively impacted by cruising vehicles; that Tampa and West Palm Beach recently passed ordinances providing for the impoundment of vehicles and assessment of civil penalties of $500 to the owner of vehicles used for such purposes; that the owner of the vehicle is liable for the costs of towing and storage; that passage of proposed Ordinance 97-4002 should reduce criminal activity and cruising in high-crime areas, provide would-be offenders with an incentive to abandon activities involved with soliciting the services of prostitutes and drug dealers, and allow police officers to impound vehicles based on probable cause; that the proposed ordinance will impose an immediate civil BOOK 41 Page 14804 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14805 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. penalty in addition to the criminal sanctions which sometimes take months to litigate. Vice Mayor Dupree asked for clarification of probable cause? Captain Whitehead stated that, for example, probable cause exists if narcotics are found on an individual stopped by a police officer for a traffic violation or when an undercover police officer is solicited for prostitution services. Vice Mayor Dupree asked the advantage of imposing civil penalties in addition to criminal sanctions? Captain Whitehead stated that imposing a $500 civil penalty will allow the crime to be addressed immediately rather than having to wait many months for the criminal prosecution to begin before which no criminal penalty can be imposed. Vice Mayor Dupree opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Bill Wells, 2928 Meadow Rush Loop (34238), stated that he recently moved from Brooklyn, New York, to Sarasota for the culture, the arts community, and the beautiful beaches; that the problems of one neighborhood will eventually spread throughout the community. Mr. Wells continued that a recent article in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune quoted Elliott Metcalfe, Public Defender, 12th Judicial Circuit, claiming that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 is an overly punitive way to address drug- and prostitution-related problems; that Mr. Metcalfe inferred that most prostitutes are drug users who require treatment; that the decent residents of Sarasota deserve a zero-tolerance level for drug sales; that drug addiction is not a sudden illness; that addicts spend many hours waiting on street corners to purchase drugs from a dealer; that many addicts steal or engage in prostitution to acquire the necessary funds; that prostitution is not a simple matter of conflicting moral standards; that most street-walking prostitutes pass AIDS to customers who subsequently pass the disease to their wives and families; that the City has a moral obligation to protect innocent victims of crimes; that the rest of the country should be apprised that zero tolerance for prostitutes and drug dealers exists in Sarasota; that the decent citizens of the City will appreciate the Commission's action to pass the proposed ordinance. Linda Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236, President, Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association, representing Sarasota Court Watch, stated that she is involved with the newly formed Sarasota Court Watch and serves on the Nuisance Abatement Board, the Sarasota Police Chief's Advisory Board, and as Co-Chairman of the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team. Ms. Holland displayed two large, loose-leaf notebooks filled with copies of case histories of prostitutes and drug dealers and stated that a great number of people drive into residential neighborhoods to solicit prostitutes and drugs; that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 will provide another useful tool for law enforcement; that the responsibility for the crime of prostitution should be distributed to the pimps and customers as well as the prostitutes; that the cruising traffic is detrimental to businesses, residents, children, and property values; that drivers cruising the Gillespie Park neighborhood for prostitutes may be less brazen if a $500 fine is required to release their impounded vehicles. Commissioner Cardamone asked the length of time during which case histories of prostitutes and drug dealers have been compiled in the loose-leaf notebooks? Ms. Holland stated that the information has been accumulated for one yèar. Commissioner Patterson asked if the information relates to cases reviewed by the Sarasota Court Watch Program? Ms. Holland stated yes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that Ms. Holland has suggested to members of the local State Congressional Delegation that prostitution, currently a misdemeanor, should be treated as a felony after the first three arrests; that the suggestion did not receive significant support. Ms. Holland stated that a prostitute was observed actively soliciting on Sixth Street within four or five feet of a neighborhood residence at 7:30 a.m. one morning; that most prostitutes have AIDS; that passage of the proposed ordinance will provide relief to neighborhoods in which prostitution exists as a chronic problem. Tina Riggle, 1743 Eighth Street (34236, representing the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association and Sarasota Court Watch, was no longer in the Commission Chambers. Wolf Weinhold, 2560 Fruitville Road (34237), stated that regulations such as proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 are prone to abuse; that members of the public walking to their vehicles after a Commission meeting could be arrested for probable cause under the proposed ordinance; that anyone lacking a specific reason for driving Downtown after dark could be arrested; that similar BOOK 41 Page 14806 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14807 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. statutes have been abused around the country; that statutes bypassing the basic protections provided to all citizens in the United States (U.S.) Constitution Bill of Rights are often popular with law enforcement; that an ordinance imposing civil penalties offers a simple way to bypass the legal rights provided to citizens in the Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; that a police officer with a personal dislike of an individual can arrest an individual on the basis of probable cause. Mr. Weinhold continued that requiring an individual to pay $500 to release a vehicle from impoundment is an atrocious idea; that the criminal justice system should work more efficiently; that although the Police Department is generally supported, the City should consider the consequences of providing unlimited power outside the traditional boundaries of U.S. law. Commissioner Patterson asked for clarification of due process rights provided in proposed Ordinance 97-4002? Attorney Singer stated that Clear requirements for the seizure of property have been provided by the U.S. Supreme Court; that a post-seizure hearing must be provided within an extremely short period of time; that proposed Ordinance 97-4002 provides the accused the right to appeal the charge within five business days; that the post-seizure hearing must be scheduled within two business days after the appeal is filed; that a person whose vehicle was seized on a Monday evening and on Tuesday, files a request for a hearing, must be scheduled for a Special Master hearing to determine probable cause on Thursday; that the vehicle will be automatically returned to the accused if the hearing is not scheduled within two days. Attorney Singer continued that the post-seizure hearing will be conducted by Lawrence Robinson, an extremely well-respected, prominent attorney who is capable of adjudicating the basis of probable cause; that a guilty finding by the Special Master can be appealed to the courts; that the public's due process rights are protected in the proposed ordinance. Jessie Johnson, 919 Goodrich Avenue (34236), stated that governments sometimes provide too much power to police officers; that prostitution and drug use have existed since the beginnings of mankind; that drug users and prostitutes should be arrested; however, allowing police officers to arrest on the basis of a personal determination of probable cause is dangerous; that police officers sometimes abuse their power. Mr. Johnson continued that his family recently moved into a neighborhood in which drug and prostitution activities are a chronic problem; that the lugs from the tires of his automobile were removed one evening; that the vehicle fell off the wheels onto the ground when he unknowingly attempted to drive away the next morning; that the police advised that no prosecutorial action was available to address the incident; that the city should initiate action upon receiving complaints from the public regarding drug dealers; that many members of the public are afraid to complain due to the large sums of money involved in drug deals; that drug and prostitution activity will continue until neighborhood residents in conjunction with the City expel the offenders from the community. Gilbert Waters, 1588 Hillview Drive (34239), stated that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 is a good ordinance expected to provide valuable assistance to the community. Sandy Vaughn, 2135 Fourth Street (34237), President, Park. East Community Association, and Member, Nuisance Abatement Board, stated that action should be taken to control prostitution and drug activity; that the Police Department recently arrested 57 drug dealers in a wide-spread sweep of the community; that 19 of the 57 individuals arrested had prior records for drug dealing; that children waiting for school buses observe prostitutes and drug dealers at 7:30 a.m.; that the rights of neighborhood residents should be upheld. Jencie Davis, 1420 Fifth Street (34236), stated that a group of children ranging from three to six years of age were playing one day in the vicinity of the Police Resource Center on Central Avenue at which she volunteers; that the children related a story regarding a woman living in the neighborhood who neglects her children and is constantly under the influence of drugs; that the children ran to the house and returned with four small plastic envelopes which were described as drug bags; that she is over eighty years of age and had never seen a drug bag; that the fact of small children being aware of drugs and other sordid activities of negligent adults is a disgrace; that actions should .be taken to protect the upcoming generation. There was no one else signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Dupree closed the public hearing. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 on first reading. BOOK 41 Page 14808 06/16/97 6:00,P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14809 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that appreciation is expressed to Glenda Mock who provided to the Commission an article regarding the Tampa ordinance on which proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 has been modeled; that although seizing property of individuals who have not been convicted of a crime is a concern, a serious problem exists in certain neighborhoods; that the City should utilize any available tool to control drugs and prostitution; that faith exists that the Police Department, the City Attorney's Office, and the Special Master will ensure due process to suspects; that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 should be useful in diminishing the drug and prostitution problems. Commissioner Cardamone asked if statistics are available regarding the success rate of the Tampa and West Palm Beach ordinances? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the information will be provided prior to the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 Captain Whitehead stated that the West Palm Beach ordinance, in effect for six months, has been successfully used during prostitution stings; that approximately $120,000 in civil impoundment fees has been generated in West Palm Beach; that the revenues are expected to decrease as West Palm Beach achieves a reputation for discouraging drug and prostitution activities; that similar results are expected in Sarasota. Commissioner Patterson asked if the West Palm Beach ordinance has been challenged in court? City Attorney Taylor stated no. Vice Mayor Dupree asked who will pay the costs of impoundment, towing, and storage of a vehicle owned by a person found innocent by the Special Master? Attorney Singer stated that the vehicle will be returned and no charges imposed on the owner if the Special Master determines that probable cause did not exist before the arrest. Vice Mayor Dupree asked who will be responsible for the actual towing of the vehicle? Attorney Singer stated that Tri-City Towing, under contract to the City, will tow and store the vehicle; that the contract provides the City will not pay the charges for towing or storage of any vehicle released following a ruling of not guilty by the Special Master; that Tri-city Towing will absorb the cost of towing. Commissioner Patterson asked the penalty to the owner when a vehicle is involved in a drug- or prostitution-relatad offense by a person to whom the vehicle has been loaned? Attorney Singer stated that an "innocent owner" defense is not provided in proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002; that the owner will be held responsible for the civil impoundment penalty, as well as the towing and storage fees for any vehicle loaned to a person arrested on a drug- or prostitution-related charge. Commissioner Patterson asked if the owner of the vehicle will have civil redress against the person who used the vehicle to commit the offense? Attorney Singer stated yes. Commissioner Patterson asked for clarification of forfeiture contraband regulations imposed in drug arrests? Attorney Singer stated that the Florida Legislature has provided for an "innocent owner" defense in the State Forfeiture Contraband Act,; however, the U.S. Supreme Court recently determined in a Michigan case that an innocent spouse has no common law rights if a forfeiture of private property is ordered for criminal actions committed by his/her wife or husband; that although an "innocent owner" defense provision did not exist in the Michigan law, the absence of the provision in the forfeiture law did not invalidate the law; that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an "innocent owner" defense is not a requirement in a State law; that the Administration determined an "innocent owner" defense should not be included in proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002; that the law is stronger without the provision. Commissioner Patterson asked if the Special Master will have discretion to reduce the fine for an individual whose vehicle was used by another party to commit the offense? Attorney Singer stated no; that the Special Master cannot exercise discretion if a finding is made that probable cause existed; that the Special Master will have no ability to lessen the amount of the fine or the towing charges if a drug- or prostitution-related violation is proven at the final hearing; that the $500 civil penalty must be imposed. Attorney Singer continued that a person lending property to another person is liable for the borrower's actions; that an owner who loans a vehicle to a person who subsequently causes an accident may be found liable for the borrower's actions. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the person whose vehicle is impounded will be scheduled before the Special Master within two business days to recover the vehicle? BOOK 41 Page 14810 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14811 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Attorney Singer stated that the Special Master hearing will be scheduled within two business days of the request for the hearing; that the vehicle will be automatically released to the owner if a hearing is not scheduled within two days; that although additional alternate Special Masters may eventually be required, Mr. Robinson has assured the City that he has the time to conduct the hearings; that Richard Ellis, the current Alternate Special Master, will conduct hearings in Mr. Robinson's absence; that additional alternate Special Masters will not be retained until a definite need is proven. Commissioner Patterson asked if the owner of an impounded vehicle can request a postponement of the hearing? Attorney Singer stated yes. Captain Whitehead stated that the owner of an impounded vehicle will be allowed to post bond to continue the hearing; that the bond will be $500 in addition to a $50 administrative hearing fee; that the funds will be returned if the owner of the impounded vehicle prevails before the Special Master. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Administration is requested to provide statistics such as the number of arrests and the decline in drug- or prostitution-related activities related to the progress of the West Palm Beach ordinance. Commissioner Patterson asked if the West Palm Beach ordinance contains an "innocent owner" defense provision? Attorney Singer stated it does not; that Michael Amezaga, West Palm Beach Assistant City Attorney, who drafted the ordinance advised that the ordinance would be weakened by the existence of an "innocent owner" defense provision; that the Tampa ordinance, which contains an "innocent owner" defense provision has not yet been implemented. Vice Mayor Dupree requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote on the motion to pass proposed Ordinance No. 97-4002 on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 97-4006, PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT OF FINES FOR EXCESSIVE FALSE FIRE ALARMS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS AND ENFORCEABILITY OF COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 97-036; PROVIDING FOR AN AFFIRMATIVE FINDING THAT SUCH COUNTY ORDINANCE IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH ANY CITY ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE II, FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION, FIRE ALARMS, SECTION 4-2 THROUGH 4-5, INCLUSIVE, RELATING TO FIRE ALARMS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. = PASSED ON FIRST READING (TITLE ONLY) (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #3 (1875) through (1967) Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Sarasota County Fire Department begins enforcing their Fire Alarm Ordinance in all areas of the County on July 1, 1997; that the existing City regulations must be repealed and a finding made by the Commission to confirm that the County ordinance does not conflict with any City ordinance; that the County's ordinance is similar to the ordinance previously enforced by the Sarasota City Fire Department, provides the same fee schedule for multiple false alarm activations, and does not conflict with any other City ordinances. Vice Mayor Dupree opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Dupree closed the public hearing. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 97-4006 on first reading. City. Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 97-4006 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 97-4006 on first reading. Vice Mayor Dupree requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes. 11. SCHEDULED PRESENTATION RE: CRIME PREVENTION - POLICE SUB-STATIONS - DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO RETURN A REPORT REGARDING ST. PETERSBURG SUB-STATION VOLUNTEER PROGRAM (AGENDA ITEM V-1) #3 (1967) through (2735) Glenda Mock, Jencie Davis, and Linda Holland, came before the Commission. Ms. Mock stated that a group of City residents including Officer Patrick Ledwith, Police Department Liaison with the Crime Prevention Section, Roy Smith, Jack King, Linda Holland, herself, and her husband Tris recently visited two police sub-stations in St. Petersburg; that the sub-stations in St. Petersburg remain open all day; that volunteers operate the sub-stations and conduct street patrols; that volunteers of sub-stations in St. BOOK 41 Page 14812 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14813 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Petersburg have offered to assist the City of Sarasota in recruiting retirees to volunteer in sub-stations. Ms. Davis distributed a St. Petersburg bicycle registration form and a media article regarding the St. Petersburg volunteer Road Patrol and stated that the City of Sarasota is not fully utilizing police sub-stations; that volunteers in St. Petersburg collect utility bills and register bicycles at the sub-stations; that a volunteer unit entitled the "Road Patrol, I issues parking citations and directs traffic at accident scenes; that each St. Petersburg sub-station is equipped with computers and typewriters; that volunteers in St. Petersburg, recruited from condominium residences, retirement centers, and churches, are required to undergo special training. Ms. Holland stated that St. Petersburg sub-stations are an extension of the Police Department and City services; that a City employee acting as a courier will collect and distribute the payments of utility bills to various utilities companies; that a volunteer could perform the same function in the City of Sarasota; that job-service listings posted in St. Petersburg sub-stations offer convenience to job seekers relying on public transportation; that the sub-stations could be utilized as information centers for public notices by the City, neighborhood associations, and community organizations; that St. Petersburg provides a Citizen Concern Forum to which the public writes letters indicating community concerns; that the public input is then routed to the specific department in the City of St. Petersburg government which can resolve the problem; that providing a Citizen Concern Forum in sub-stations in the City of Sarasota could reduce the number of public information telephone calls to the Police Department and the City of Sarasota; that St. Petersburg provides a good role model; that the City of Sarasota's Nuisance Abatement Program was developed on a pre-existing model in St. Petersburg. Commissioner Cardamone asked the number of sub-stations in the City of Sarasota? Captain Whitehead stated that five sub-stations exist in the City. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Administration is requested to review the City's existing police sub-station program to determine if the functional uses of the facilities can be expanded to include activities such as payment of utility bills, posting of job listings, and a Road Patrol program. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that hearing no objection there is a consensus of the Commission to refer to the Administration a review of the St. Petersburg police sub-station volunteer program to determine if the functional uses of City of Sarasota police sub-stations can be expanded to included activities such as payment of utility bills, posting of job listings, and a Road Patrol program. 12. SCHEDULED PRESENTATION RE: NORTH FORK SEGMENT OF HUDSON BAYOU = REFERRED STORMWATER DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR THE NORTH FORK SEGMENT OF HUDSON BAYOU TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR REPORT BACK (AGENDA ITEM V-2) #3 (2500) through #4 (0511) Glenda Mock, Gilbert Waters, and Rex Roten, property owners in the vicinity of the North Fork of Hudson Bayou, came before the Commission. Ms. Mock distributed a report entitled "The Hudson Bayou Stormwater Quality Improvement Program" developed by the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and a petition signed by 87 residents calling for the removal of contaminated silt from the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou. Ms. Mock stated that a silt removal program for the North Fork Segment of Hudson Bayou was originally included in the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.)i that the SWFWMD report indicates the North Fork is polluting Sarasota Bay with stormwater run-off containing heavy metals and sediments; that the North Fork segment is not included in the current dredging project addressing the Main Branch of Hudson Bayou. Commissioner Patterson stated that the petition for the removal of contaminated silt from the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou references Sarasota County as responsible for implementing stormwater drainage improvements to Hudson Bayou; that stormwater improvements to the Hudson Bayou Basin are the City's responsibility; and asked if the actual intent of the petition is to reference the City? Mr. Waters stated that Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, informed the petitioners that Sarasota County has assumed responsibility of stormwater drainage improvements formerly under the responsibility of the City; that the dredging of Hudson Bayou was acknowledged as a City project after the petition had been circulated. Ms. Mock stated that the dredging project currently underway in the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou near SHS is a separate issue and will not include the removal of silt from the: North Fork. Ms. Mock continued that The Bayou and Hudson Oaks condominiums, consisting of 15 units each, six homes, and one retirement home BOOK 41 Page 14814 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14815 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. are located in the vicinity of the North Fork; that environmental contamination has killed all bird and sea life in the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou; that the silt is so thick that the North Fork can be crossed on foot at low tide; that six months ago, the City Manager informed Mr. Waters and Mr. Roten that the North Fork, fed directly by six storm sewers, is one of the most polluted bodies of water in the City; that six different public areas Downtown including parking lots are draining into the North Fork; that in 1984, a private developer dredged the North Fork and placed the contaminated debris on property owned by Mr. Waters who paid to have the contamination removed; that the North Fork should be dredged as soon as possible. Ms. Mock further stated that the property owners in the vicinity of the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou did not contribute to the lead, zinc, and petroleum sludge which has filled the North Fork; that the primary focus of the proposed dredging project is functional, including treatment of stormwater, flood control, the creation of wetlands for the wildlife, and enhancement of the quality of life for City residents. Mr. Waters stated that the North Fork has been recontaminated since the 1984 clean-up; that the Local Option Sales Tax (L.0.s.T.) Ad-Hoc Task Force gave the highest priority to using L.O.S.T. funds to establish a settlement pond at the confluence of all six drainage ditches and pipes which dump untreated storm drainage into the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou. Mr. Waters continued that developers who built new residential housing in the vicinity of the North Fork have adhered to the stormwater treatment regulations required by existing City ordinances; that the only untreated waste currently flowing into the North Fork is stormwater run-off from public streets and parking lots; that the responsibility for treating the City's stormwater run-off should not be assumed by private property owners; that public funds should be equitably distributed to implement the treatment of stormwater run-off; that establishing a settlement pond and treatment facility for stormwater run-off flowing into the North Fork was established as the highest priority on the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T.; however, the North Fork dredging project was not included on the list of proposed projects advertised in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune; that the dredging project may be included in the general category stormwater projects throughout the City; however, confirmation is requested to assure the property owners in the vicinity that the North Fork dredging project is considered as high a priority by the Commission and Administration as it was by the L.0.S.T. Ad- Hoc Task Force. Mr. Roten distributed photographs of the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou and stated that the petition for removal of contaminated silt from the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou, signed by 87 residents of the City, was delivered to the Administration five months ago; that the situation has been exacerbated since photographs were taken one year ago; that the property owners funded the dredging of the North Fork in 1984. Mr. Roten continued that stormwater run-off flows into the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou from five areas in the city indicated in the map attached to the petition; that property owners paying taxes on waterfront property and assessed for stormwater drainage improvements have received no benefit; that the property owners are receiving the effluence from stormwater run-off originating from City parking lots, streets, and other drainage areas; that the North Fork is filled with toxic silt and heavy metals; that a one-half inch step into the silt reveals a black stench; that the force of the effluence from the City's drainage pipe has broken a hole in the seawall in front of Hudson Oaks condominium; that the City has refused to resolve any of the problems. Commissioner Merrill stated that a stormwater drainage improvements project including establishment of a settlement pond is currently underway at the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou but does not address the North Fork. Mr. Waters stated that the City neglected to address the greatest producer of pollution in Hudson Bayou in an effort to clean up the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou; that the stormwater run-off flows down from Downtown parking lots south of Main Street, east on Alderman Street, west on Oak Street, is collected at the end of the North Fork, and then enters into the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou. Commissioner Patterson asked if the settlement basin proposed for the Sarasota High School property addresses stormwater drainage for the North Fork? Mr. Waters stated no; that the stormwater run-off east of U.S. 41 and the miscellaneous run-off along the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou will be addressed; however, the sludge pouring into the North Fork of Hudson Bayou which continues to flow under U.S. 41 into the Main Fork has not been addressed. Commissioner Patterson asked the scope of the dredging project suggested to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. in order to resolve the problem? Mr. Waters stated that an expenditure of $1.75 million in L.O.S.T. funds to install a settlement pond and treatment facility in the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou would resolve BOOK 41 Page 14816 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14817 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. the problem; that the project should be specifically identified in the list of proposed projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T. to explain to the public that all street, parking lot, and industrial waste running into the drainage ditches and the two main stormwater drainage lines on Osprey Avenue, one drainage line on Alderman Street, and one along the American Coastline Railroad tracks, all flow into the North Fork, and ultimately, into the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou; that a specific amount of L.0.S.T. funds should be reserved for the project designated as the highest priority by the L.O.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force; that thirteen property owners should not be burdened by a dredging project which they already funded in 1984, particularly since the stormwater run-off does not originate from those private properties; that he treats the storm drainage on his properties; that newer condominiums have adhered to the settlement and drainage treatment procedures required by the City. Commissioner Patterson stated that Mr. Roten did not own property in the vicinity of the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou in 1984; and asked if Mr. Waters owned property on the North Fork in 1984? Mr. Waters stated yes, he did; that also the developer of Mr. Roten's condominium owned the property, participated in the clean-up, and allocated to Mr. Roten a portion of the cost in the sales price of his condominium. Commissioner Patterson stated that Mr. Roten is an associate in her husband's law firm; and asked if a conflict exists? City Attorney Taylor stated that Mr. Roten is representing himself and not appearing on behalf of the firm; that no conflict exists. Commissioner Cardamone stated that her neighborhood, bounded by the East Fork of Hudson Bayou, attempted for six years to find public funding to dredge the silt contaminating the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou near Sarasota High School (SHS); that the West Coast Inland Navigation District (WCIND), the Manasota Basin Board, Sarasota County, the National Estuary Program (NEP), and the Pollution Recovery Trust Fund all rejected the property owners' request for public funding; that SWFWMD, which is funding the settlement pond at the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou, also refused to fund the dredging project and settlement pond requested by property owners in the vicinity of the East Fork. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the property owners formed an assessment district and used private funding generated by the assessment fees to install a settlement pond to catch the silt in the East Fork to ensure that the water flowing into the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou is clean. Commissioner Cardamone further stated that the request for a settlement pond and treatment facility for the North Fork is as valid as the request made by property owners for public funding to dredge and install a settlement pond at East Fork from which a similar form of contamination is running into the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou; that the silt is noxious, ruins property. values, and is thick enough to cross by foot; that the City should help the property owners in the vicinity of both the East and North Forks of Hudson Bayou; that property owners in the vicinity of East Fork who funded a private dredging project should receive some financial relief if public funding is used to install stormwater drainage improvements at the North Fork; that no private property owner should be expected to clean up silt caused by stormwater run-off flowing from public, commercial, or industrial properties. Mr. Waters stated that the property owners in the vicinity of the North Fork. of Hudson Bayou request information as to whether or not the North Fork dredging project is still included as one of the stormwater drainage improvements projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.O.S.T.; that the L.0.S.T. Ad-Hoc Task Force on which he served recommended the dredging project and settlement pond at the North Fork as the highest priority on the list of proposed projects; that allowing untreated, contaminated stormwater drainage to flow from the North Fork into the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou is a violation of City, State, and Federal laws. Commissioner Patterson stated that the stormwater project for the North Fork was supposed to be funded by an assessment levied by the County on every property in the Hudson Bayou Basin; that although SWFWMD originally intended to contribute to the settlement pond for the East Fork segment of Hudson Bayou, the greater portion of stormwater drainage improvements in the Hudson Bayou Basin were intended to be funded by fees levied on property owners within an assessment district. Commissioner Patterson continued that the assessment fee was substantial; that the average property owner would have been levied over $100 in addition to the current $70 assessment fee; however, the City decided to provide relief to the assessment districts through the L.0.S.T. funds. Commissioner Patterson further stated that the stormwater project for the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou may still occur; however, equitable distribution of L.0.S.T. funds is the primary issue; that property owners who would have been assessed $11 million to fund stormwater drainage improvements throughout the Hudson Bayou Basin will receive relief from L.0.S.T. funding; BOOK 41 Page 14818 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14819 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. that the City could allocate the entire L.0.S.T. budget for stormwater drainage improvements to the dredging project, settlement pond, and treatment facility at the North Fork, relieving North Fork property owners entirely; however, 20 percent of the City has already been burdened with an assessment for which they have been paying for two years. Commissioner Patterson stated further that the property owners in the vicinity of North Fork are requesting the silt be removed at once; that an inequity may have occurred when the property owners in the vicinity of the East Fork were required to establish an assessment district; however, the property owners paid the assessment fee and received no ad valorem or other public funding; that historically in the City, dredging projects have been funded by private property owners; that providing public funding for stormwater drainage improvements in one neighborhood after property owners in other parts of the City have been required to use private funds is a concern; that requiring property owners who do not live on the waterfront to pay an assessment fee for dredging projects benefiting waterfront property owners is also difficult; that a Commission decision is required to determine the manner in which Citywide dredging projects will be publicly funded. Mr. Waters stated that City, State, and Federal laws mandate that untreated stormwater drainage not be allowed to flow into public waters; that the City is responsible for obeying the law Citywide; that a serious problem exists in the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou; that expecting the property owners to privately fund the dredging project at the North Fork is a violation of a City ordinance; that the City has adopted an ordinance which requires property owners to treat the first inch of stormwater run-off flowing from their property; that the ordinance does not exclude the owner of public streets, parking lots, and development projects; that two storm drainage pipes collect stormwater from Osprey Avenue and deposit the run-off into the North Fork in violation of the ordinance; that the North Fork dredging project should be funded by L.O.S.T. funds, a bond issue, or ad valorem taxes; that the City should accept responsibility for treating stormwater run-off flowing from City-owned public properties. Commissioner Patterson stated that a Citywide program should be developed; that the drainage pipes along Osprey Avenue also drain into Cherokee Park, Harbor Acres, etc. Mr. Waters stated that the Commission directed the Administration to return with a report analyzing the proper way to address stormwater drainage if the stormwater program is taken back from the County; that an ad valorem tax or a special benefit district may be necessary to address the problem; that the law states that each property owner must treat the first inch of stormwater before the run-off flows into public waters; that the problem will disappear if the law is obeyed. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that two laws address stormwater drainage treatment; that neither of the laws is applicable; that a City regulation included in the Engineering Design Criteria Manual (EDCM) requires that any new development shall not discharge their water off the property at a greater rate than that which existed prior to the development; that SWFWMD requires the same treatment procedure; that the regulation is not included in a City ordinance. Mr. Daughters continued that Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations regarding lead pollution and general contamination apply only to site-specific industrial waste; that the regulations are not applicable as no industries exist in the vicinity of the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou; that neither the City nor the County have any ordinances requiring the City to dredge the existing silt from the North Fork. Mr. Daughters further stated that a drainage pipe along Alderman Street and a large disiltation chamber to be installed at the headwaters of the North Fork are both included in the list of projects to be funded by the ten-year extension of the L.0.S.T.; that the disiltation chamber will reduce the silting to a great extent; that lead pollution in the North Fork may be caused from stormwater draining from the Main Fork of Hudson Bayou; that no additional lead has been generated in recent years; that the existing lead was discharged many years ago and can be removed by dredging the North Fork. Mr. Roten stated the situation in North Fork is factually different from other areas experiencing stormwater drainage problemsi that property owners in the vicinity of the North Fork paid in 1984 to remove the silt; that North Fork is the only area in the City with five drains flowing into one specific area and leaving sediment thick enough to walk across; that effluent draining from a pipe has physically broken through a seawall in front of a condominium. Mr. Roten continued that residents wish to avoid legal action; however, a legitimate basis exists for action regarding trespass and negligence; that neighborhood residents have drafted a complaint which has not yet been filed; that additional environmental issues exist which could be addressed in the complaint; that property owners have been withholding from filing the legal complaint. Commissioner Patterson asked if an easement for the pipe exists? BOOK 41 Page 14820 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. - BOOK 41 Page 14821 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Mr. Roten stated that an easement may exist across Mr. Water's property. Mr. Waters stated that a six-foot stormwater drainage pipe runs into Hudson Bayou at Novus Street one block south of Alderman Street; that a 60-inch reinforced concrete drainage pipe runs south on Osprey Avenue, turns west on Novus Street, and discharges into the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou in front of Hudson Oaks condominium; that stormwater run-off is routed to flow south into Ohio Street and Osprey Avenue drainage ditches, the Hudson Bayou drainage ditch, and the Atlantic Coastline Railroad drainage ditch; that a great number of drainage ditches, catch basins, and stormwater drains flow into the 60-inch concrete drainage pipe on Osprey Avenue and finally into the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou. City Attorney Taylor stated that legal issues have been presented regarding the North Fork dredging project, originally agendaed as a seven-minute presentation; that he recommends referring the matter to the Administration and the City Attorney's Office for a report back. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to refer the dredging project for the North Fork segment of Hudson Bayou to the Administration and City Attorney's Office. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 13. CITIZENS . INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS: - REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION A REVIEW OF OUTDOOR DINING PERMITS ON PROPERTY ABUTTING OR ACROSS THE STREET FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY; (AGENDA ITEM VI) #4 (0512) through (1859) The following people came before the Commission: Marlow Cook, 444 North Washington Drive (34236), representing the St. Armands Residents Association, distributed a letter from the St. Armands Residents Association and stated that at their June 13, 1997, meeting, the Association resolved to request the Commission to suspend activities allowed under Ordinance No. 94-3815, known as the Sidewalk Café Ordinance; that the ordinance allows permits to be issued for outdoor dining on commercial property which abuts or is located across the street from residential zone districts; that the ordinance provides that any applicant operating a restaurant is entitled to a permit as long as the area for outdoor dining is located on the public right-of-way and no outstanding City liens exist on the property; that the language of the ordinance implies that a permit cannot be denied if the requirements of the regulation are fulfilled. Mr. Cook continued that Ordinance No. 93-3715, applicable to the Commercial, Tourist (CT) Zone District, requires that applications for outdoor dining abutting or across the street from residential zone districts be presented to the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) for approval of a special exception; that a public hearing must be held and the public noticed; that wall heights and hours of operation are specified, outdoor amplified music prohibited, and outdoor seats limited to a specific number under Ordinance No. 93-3715; that an applicant who requests a special exception under Ordinance 93-37815 for outdoor dining and is denied can reapply for an outdoor cafe permit under Ordinance 94-3815; that an outdoor cafe permit can be granted absent a public hearing, public comment, or action by the PBLP; that the integrity of the balance between- CT and residential zone districts has been subverted. Mr. Cook further stated that although outdoor dining is supported by the St. Armands Residents Association, outdoor dining should be prohibited on the eight corners facing single-family residences on North and South Washington Drive, East and West Monroe Drives, and Madison and Adams Drives; that the Commission should pass a moratorium on outdoor dining and include St. Armands Key in the new noise-abatement ordinance regulating outdoor amplified music in Downtown; that a Citywide noise abatement ordinance should be developed; that a committee composed of St. Armands Key residential and commercial property owners should be created to study the issues of outdoor dining and outdoor amplified music. Mr. Cook stated further that a February 27, 1995, memorandum from Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer states that sidewalk cafes will not be permitted in significantly landscaped areas; that outdoor tables and chairs currently occupy many of the landscaped areas indicated on the map attached to the February 1995 memorandum. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Administration is aware of the provisions referenced by the St. Armands Residents Association; that the Building Department is currently processing a pending application under Ordinance No. 94-3815; that the implication that the City has no choice but to issue an outdoor cafe permit when an application is submitted for an establishment located on a public right-of-way and free of City liens is not accurate; that the Zoning Code and the provisions of Ordinance No. 94-3815 contain sufficient language to clarify that any permit issued must serve the interests of the public health, safety, and welfare and that any use which does not do so should not be issued a permit; that the ordinance does not provide an absolute right to receive a permit for sidewalk dining; that Ordinance No. 94-3815 was initially drafted for Downtown; that revisions in the language may be appropriate for application to BOOK 41 Page 14822 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14823 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. the CT Zone District which is in a different situation than Downtown. Commissioner Patterson stated that the number of outdoor café seats permitted on St. Armands Circle is a concern; that at the December 5, 1994, regular Commission meeting the Administration was directed to determine the number of additional parking spaces necessary if all the restaurants on St. Armands Circle were to offer outdoor dining; that the Administration indicates that sidewalk cafes would not be permitted in significantly landscaped areas; that the Administration concluded that 104 additional outdoor dining seats would result necessitating an additional 35 parking spaces. Commissioner Patterson continued that 96 cafe seats have been permitted just in front of Columbia and Cha Cha Cocoanuts; that although the outdoor seating at Columbia and Cha Cha Cocoanuts does not generate a problem, some problems are caused by the volume of the music drifting outside the open doors of Cha Cha Cocoanuts. Commissioner Patterson further stated that the ordinance requires tables and chairs to be placed on the sidewalk four feet from the curb; that sufficient room does not currently exist to place tables and chairs four feet from the curb; that Ordinance No. 94-3815 should be revised to enable the existing café seating in St. Armands Circle to continue on a legal basis. Mr. Cook stated that the St. Armands Residents Association is addressing only those locations on St. Armands Key directly across from residential zone districts and not the circle; that the Association expressly stated that outdoor dining is enjoyed tremendously; however, the eight corners adjacent to residential properties have the potential for generating outdoor café seating as well as the accompanying problems; that restrictions should be placed on commercial establishments directly across from residential zone districts Mr. Cook continued that Ordinance No. 93-3715 permits outdoor dining by special exception; that a wall and certain other restrictions must be included unless a variance is granted from the Board of Adjustment; that Ordinance No. 94-3815 requires only that the tables and chairs be located on the public right-of-way and that no City liens are attached to the property; that no applications for outdoor café permits under Ordinance No. 94-3815 have been denied by the Building Department. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to refer to the Administration to review the permits for outdoor dining on property abutting or across the street from residentially zoned property. Commissioner Merrill stated that outdoor dining on St. Armands Circle is one of the most exciting experiences in the City; that the conflict between establishments abutting or across the street from residential zone districts should be addressed by the Administration. Commissioner Patterson stated that café seating in front of Cha Cha Cocoanuts and the Columbia are not inappropriate although the volume of the band may require control; that Ordinance No. 94-3815 requires locating tables and chairs at least four feet from the curb; that most existing café seating on St. Armands Circle is not in compliance with the regulation and would be eliminated if the regulation were enforced; that sufficient room on the sidewalk does not exist to allow the restaurant owners to comply; that the language of the ordinance should be revised; that Staff should return to St. Armands Circle, take new measurements, and rewrite the distance regulation so the existing café seating complies with the ordinance. Commissioner Cardamone stated that only 104 seats were to be allowed in the entire area when Ordinance No. 94-3815 was originally approved; that the Administration has permitted 96 seats outside just two establishments. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that an application for cafe seating must include a two-scale drawing; that Staff inspects the site to ensure the drawing is accurate; that actual approval is based on the two-scale drawing which indicates the number of requested tables and chairs; that Staff does not visit the sites on a regular basis to determine if seating is located four feet from the curb. Commissioner Patterson stated that sufficient space to place tables and chairs four feet from the curb to comply with the ordinance does not exist on the sidewalk; that the ordinance should be revised. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion to refer to the Administration a review of permits for outdoor dining on property abutting or across the street from residentially zoned property. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Merrill stated that the City should codify the existing conditions on St. Armands Circle to ensure that the number of tables and chairs currently located in the area is made legal. Commissioner Patterson stated that the number of café seats permitted on St. Armands Circle should be limited and issues of BOOK 41 Page 14824 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14825 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. parking and congestion addressed; that the Administration should determine how many seats are currently allowed. The following people came before the Commission: Sandra Kennedy, 1720 Alderman Street/715 Rowe Place (34236) and James Messer, 1740 Alderman Street #15B (34236), were no longer present in the Commission Chambers. James Toale, Attorney, Law Firm of Drymon, Scheb, Toale & Marshall, 1605 Main Court Suite 705 (34236), and Robert Fuller, representing David Wilson and Robert and Patricia Fuller, owners of properties located on 20th Street, came before the Commission. Attorney Toale stated that in October 1995, the City Commission took action to exempt certain residentially zoned sites with existing nonconforming uses from the amortization schedule; that in October 1996, a public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 was held after which the Commission postponed action pending a report back from Staff to address concerns raised regarding future changes in use on the properties; that proposed Ordinance 96-3928 is scheduled for first reading under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-2. Attorney Toale continued that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928, as drafted, does the following: 1. Exempts properties from the amortization schedule. 2. Creates a process to inventory structures as to intensity and type of use, number of employees, hours of operation, etc. 3. Provides an enforcement mechanism if changes in intensity, etc., are determined subsequent to adoption of the ordinance. 4. Prohibits any future change in use. Attorney Toale stated that Items 1 through 3 are supported; however, Item 4 is not viewed as conducive with the direction given by the Commission in October 1995; that the buildings on 20th Street historically were light manufacturing and fabrication facilities; that Mr. Wilson's property, for example, has been used by a screen manufacturing business, a cabinet manufacturing business, and, ironically, since October 1995, as a packaging company operated by Mr. Fuller; that the approval process which has been in effect was followed for the change in use; that the Manager of Building and Zoning made the determination that a packaging company is not more intense than the former cabinet manufacturing business; that a similar determination was made for another property on 20th Street. Attorney Toale continued that passage of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 on first reading is supported with the following language deleted: Section 9-5(1)(4): : or is converted to another use The provisions of Section 9-5(d) shall not apply to the nonconforming uses exempted from the termination provision of Section 9-5(j). Section 9-5(d): The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the nonconforming uses exempted from the termination provisions of Section 9-5(j), as more particularly described in Section 9-5(1) hereof. Attorney Toale stated that modifying the proposed ordinance as suggested would retain the existing process which has been in effect for the past 20 years whereby the Manger of Building and Zoning determines if a new use is more intensive than the prior use or if the new use does not fit the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Patterson asked if the presentation made by Attorney Toale differs from the request for which the City Attorney's Office provided an analysis and recommendation? City Attorney Taylor stated no; that the existing Zoning Code has provided an ability for lateral transfers of nonconforming uses during the amortization period; however, the intent of the lengthy process undertaken by the Commission regarding nonconforming uses was to amortize the uses out of residential neighborhoods; that the Commission directed that a total of 13 residentially zoned sites with existing nonconforming uses scheduled to terminate on January 10, 1999, be exempted from the amortization schedule; that the exemptions were specific to existing uses which the Commission determined were appropriate in the residential neighborhoods; that Attorney Toale is requesting that the 13 properties not only be exempted from the amortization schedule but be allowed to change use in the future based on a determination made by the building administrator; that this would place the building administrator in the difficult position of second-guessing the intent of the Commission. Commissioner Cardamone asked if requests for change in use on the 13 properties could be presented to the Commission for a determination? BOOK 41 Page 14826 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14827 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. City Attorney Taylor stated yes; however, the proposed ordinance would have to be redrafted and another public hearing held. Commissioner Cardamone stated that cabinets may not be in style in the future; that her intent was not to force the property owner of a warehouse structure, e.g., located at the end of a road near a railroad track, to maintain a cabinet manufacturing business on the property; that allowing a change to a similar use should be considered. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Administration may have misinterpreted the direction of the City Commission; that the 13 properties were viewed as special properties exempted from the amortization schedule based on their specific use, which once ceased, would terminate the exemption of a nonconforming use in a residential zone district. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the view referenced by City Attorney Taylor may be appropriate for nonconforming uses operated in structures having residential characteristics. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to extend the meeting past 11:30 to complete the Agenda. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that parameters established to allow for changes in use would have to apply to all 13 properties; that developing specific criteria would be difficult as the types of uses vary; that allowing for changes in use would basically result in a rezoning of the properties; that the formal rezoning process should be followed if the properties will be rezoned; that neighborhood representatives who were told, e.g., the nonconforming use of a cabinet manufacturing business was exempted, may be outraged in the future if the building administrator makes a determination that a similar use is acceptable and then substantially more truck traffic results. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the properties being exempted are located in residential zone districts; that rezoning the properties to the zone district necessary to allow the existing use may not be appropriate. Commissioner Patterson stated that allowing for a change may not be appropriate if rezoning to allow all the various uses permitted in the zone district required, which has uses of equal intensity, is not viewed as appropriate. City Attorney Taylor stated that the 13 properties were not reviewed under a Comprehensive Plan or rezoning process; that Attorney Toale's proposal would result in an exemption from the amortization schedule of not only the documented commercial/industrial nonconforming uses currently existing in the residential zone districts but also an exemption for other future commercial/industrial uses on the sites without proceeding through the formal process required for land use decisions. City Attorney Taylor continued that the Commission could direct the Administration to review the specific uses on the 13 properties and determine if an alternative direction could be pursued regarding some of the nonconforming uses. Commissioner Patterson stated that she voted against exempting the subject properties from the amortization schedule as a cabinet manufacturing business was not viewed as appropriate in a residential neighborhood. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: FIRST READING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3928, AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF THE ZONING CODE, TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN EXISTING NONCONPORMING USES LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS SHALL BE EXEMPTED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CODE WHICH REQUIRE THE TERMINATION OF NONCONFORMING USES AFTER A REASONABLE AMORTIZATION PERIOD; MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF: : ETC. - (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #4 (1860) through (1905) Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that this item was discussed under Agenda Item VI, Citizens' Input Concerning City Topics; that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 was read by title only on October 14, 1996, after the Mayor Closed the public hearing; that a motion was subsequently made to refer the item back to the Administration. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 on first reading. Vice Mayor Dupree requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: NEWTOWN CANAL STORMWATER PROJECT - DENIED APPROVAL OF THE ALTERNATIVE NEWTOWN CANAL STORMWATER PROJECT; DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO FORWARD A LETTER REQUESTING THE COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE ORIGINAL PROJECT BY PIPING THE ENTIRE NEWTOWN CANAL AS PREVIOUSLY COMMITTED IN RETURN FOR BOOK 41 Page 14828 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14829 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. THE LAND THE CITY PROVIDED FOR A STORMWATER POND NEEDED FOR THE 17TH STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #4 (1909) through (2531) Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that an alternative proposal to piping the Newtown Canal was presented by J.P. Marchand, P.E., Deputy Transportation Director, Sarasota County Transportation Department, at the May 19, 1997, joint meeting between the Sarasota City Commission and the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners at which time the County Commission approved the alternative proposal to pursue a channel project and the City Commission directed the City Administration to report back on the proposal which had not previously been reviewed. Deputy City Manager Schneider continued that a report recommending against the alternative proposal has been provided to the Commission; that the Administration recommends the Commission: 1) deny approval of the alternative proposal, and 2) request the County to continue to pursue the original project to pipe the entire Newtown Canal. Deputy City Manager Schneider further stated that a letter has been prepared for the Mayor's signature which will be forwarded to the County Commission if the City Commission accepts the Administration's recommendation. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to: 1) deny approval of the alternative Newtown Canal Stormwater Project, and 2) request the County to continue to pursue the original project by piping the entire Newtown Canal as previously committed in return for the land the City provided to the County for a stormwater pond needed for the 17th Street Improvement Project. Commissioner Patterson asked if the intent of the motion was to approve forwarding a letter to the Chairman of the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners? Commissioner Cardamone stated yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that progress on the Newtown Canal Stormwater Project has been delayed for some time; that reference to the County's pursuing the project expeditiously should be included in the letter. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the letter will be revised. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the six-month construction schedule anticipated with the alternative project presented by the County was enticing; however, the following statement from page 5 of the Administration's report provides a sound basis on which to deny approval of the alternative proposal and to pursue T the original project which would fill in the entire drainage ditch: We believe an 8-foot deep pond with 5 feet of water immediately adjacent to the Boys & Girls Club is not safe. Commissioner Merrill stated that County Staff had referenced various citizens and community representatives who were in favor of the alternative proposal; and asked the degree of input received by the Administration in opposition to the alternative proposal? Mr. Daughters stated that additional meetings were not held subsequent to receiving the information on the alternative proposal from the County; that the analysis and report is based on review of the various documentation provided by the County and the history of the project; that in 1986, the City Commission and certain County Commissioners had a strong desire to have the Newtown Canal piped; that the circumstances have not changed since that time. Commissioner Merrill stated that County Staff gave the distinct impression that significant support for the alternative proposal exists. Commissioner Patterson stated that reference to support from representatives: of the Boys & Girls Club and the Sarasota Police Department is all she recalls. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that John Lewis, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police Department, who attended the April 9, 1997, meeting at which the alternative proposal was presented by the County, when questioned by County Staff, had indicated the concept of a gradually sloped crossing for vehicle traffic and pedestrians would work; however, in reviewing the original intent of the project, which included factors such as reducing safety hazards and eliminating a location for illegal dumping, a determination was made that the various factors would be addressed to a greater degree by the piping project versus the alternative project. Commissioner Merrill referred to a reference in the report that the County seems to have forgotten the community's desires; and asked if the County was contacted following the May 19, 1997, joint meeting? Mr. Daughters stated that the Administration focused on obtaining information from the County regarding the alternative proposal; that the issue was not discussed with County Staff after the information was received and reviewed. BOOK 41 Page 14830 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14831 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Merrill stated that a lack of communication seems apparent; that the use of such strong language as "seems to have forgotten" indicates continued ill will or a poor relationship between the City and County, the basis for which is not understood. Vice Mayor Dupree asked if the issue should be referred back to Staff for further discussion with County Staff? Commissioner Merrill stated yes; that he doubts seriously the County has forgotten the community's desires. Mr. Daughters stated that he is of a different opinion; that he feels the County has intentionally ignored the City's and community's desires for the past seven years. Commissioner Patterson stated that the County appears to have developed a less expensive solution which was presented to the wrong City Staff for approval; that the Engineering Department, which should have been included in the meeting held on April 9, 1997, subsequently identified weakness in the alternative proposal; that the weaknesses, e.g., that locating an 8-foot deep pond adjacent to the Boys & Girls Club will not be safe, should be identified, nicely, in a letter to the County. Mr. Daughters stated that the City has pursued several approaches to get the project completed; that a stronger approach is necessary. Commissioner Patterson stated that an explanation regarding the conclusion reached once the information was referred to the Engineering Department and reference to how the piping project will better address the problems in the area should be included in the letter. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion to: 1) deny approval of the alternative proposal, and 2) direct the Administration to draft a letter to the County Commission requesting that the County continue to pursue the original project to pipe the entire Newtown Canal. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that hearing no objections, Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-4, regarding an update of the Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Task Force, will be postponed to the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: BAYFRONT PARKING PROJECT - REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR FURTHER MODIFICATION (AGENDA ITEM VII-5) #4 (2530) through #5 (0368) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, and Marlena Clair, Engineering Technician III, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that as directed by the City Commission on March 17, 1997, the Bayfront Parking Plan was re-evaluated; that interdepartmental meetings between Staff from the Engineering and Police Departments were held to develop a proposal which was subsequently presented to representatives of Marina Jack, Inc., O'Leary's Sarasota Sailing School, and the Downtown Association of Sarasota; that agreement was reached in favor of the Administration's proposal for three-hour parking throughout the Bayfront parking area, except along the pier leading to Marina Jack and the circle around the fountain leading to Island Park; that the proposal, if approved, will be implemented after the Fourth of July weekend. Mr. Daughters displayed on the overhead projector, referred to, and explained a revised Bayfront Parking Plan which contained elements highlighted as follows: Pink: 83 spaces of three-hour parking, except no parking from 2 to 6 a.m. Green: 346 spaces of three-hour parking with extended parking by permit in all areas unless otherwise designated by other signage Blue: 78 spaces of two-hour maximum parking 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., outer perimeter of Ringling Boulevard cul-de-sac and along rows of pier Orange: 4 spaces for no parking - loading zone Mr. Daughters stated that the following restrictions will remain in effect: Overnight parking (not overnight camping) by permit in Green areas only. Permits issued by Dock Master at Marina Jack only to tenants or visitors of Marina Jack or O'Leary's Sailing School. Recreational vehicles (RVs) and vehicles with three or more axles prohibited in all areas, except North Esplanade and loading zones. BOOK 41 Page 14832 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14833 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Parking around fountain cul-de-sac at Ringling Boulevard prohibited. Authorized vehicles allowed on all landscape areas by City permit only. Commissioner Merrill asked if parking permits will be available to non-tenants mooring in Sarasota Bay who own vehicles? Mr. Daughters stated no; that permits will be issued only to clients and employees of Marina Jack and O'Leary's Sailing School; that the Commission's intent was interpreted as not to provide parking for non-tenants of moored boats in the Bay. Commissioner Patterson stated that she specifically suggested that consideration be given to: 1) providing parking for people who moor but do not live aboard boats in the Bay and frequently go sailing for an entire day, and 2) establishing an appropriate fee, e.g., $30 or $40 monthly, and making overnight parking permits available to non-tenants who moor in the Bay; that the original parking plan provided for overnight parking but in a totally inconvenient area; that the existing ordinance should be enforced if mooring in the Bay is not desired by the Commission; however, if the Commission supports continuation of the activity, a program should be established which will require non-tenants who moor in the Bay and use the parking lot to pay a fee; that the proposed parking plan also does not address parking for families who may want to picnic at Island Park for the entire day; that as presented, the parking plan will not be supported. Mr. Daughters stated that the issues raised by Commissioner Patterson were discussed by Staff; that parking problems have been experienced at the Bayfront during the tourist season; that the total number of parking spaces is not sufficient to accommodate all the desired uses; that as understood by Staff, the Commission did not want to provide parking for people who have boats moored in the Bay, whether live aboards or not; that employees from businesses in the Downtown would take advantage of the parking spaces, as occurred in the past, if long-term parking is provided to allow people to utilize Island Park all day for picnicking and to enjoy the children's fountain. Commissioner Merrill stated that the potential conflict with Downtown business employees would occur only on weekdays; that families tend to recreate more on the weekends; and asked if the regulations on weekdays versus weekends could be differentiated? Mr. Daughters stated that as Parking Enforcement operates 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, the regulations will generally be enforced only five days per week; however, noticing the applicability of the regulations seven days per week will provide for enforcement on Saturday and Sunday if problems occur. Commissioner Cardamone asked for clarification of the Administration's discussion regarding establishing a monthly fee and making overnight parking permits available to non-tenants who moor in the Bay or condominium owners who own two vehicles but are allotted only one parking space at their residences. Mr. Daughters stated that the main groups of users at the Bayfront were identified; that a determination was made that parking for all the users could not be accommodated if sufficient space for the primary users were to be provided; that parking at the Bayfront was intended more for recreational users, e.g., those utilizing boats or the amenities at Island Park, than for condominium owners or people mooring in the Bay. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the Administration recommends approving: 1) the three-hour parking limitations, 2) proposed signage for permit parking, and 3) installation of the signage after the July 4, 1997, weekend. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the proliferation of signage currently installed at the Bayfront is unattractive. Mr. Daughters stated that the number of signs will be reduced if the parking regulations are uniform throughout the area. The following people came before the Commission: Kenneth McMahon, 6433 Hollywood Boulevard (34231), stated that his boat is docked, not moored, at Marina Jack; and asked the type of parking which will be permitted in the green areas based on the revised parking plan? City Attorney Taylor stated that three-hour parking and overnight parking by permit would be permitted in the green areas; that a two-hour parking maximum would be permitted in the blue area. Mr. McMahon stated that boaters, who pay monthly dock fees, are currently required to walk one-half mile transporting items between their vehicles and boats; that the revised parking plan reduces the distance boater will be required to walk. Mr. McMahon continued that consideration should be given to restriping the Bayfront parking lot; that the stripes separating the parking spaces in the green and pink area along Island Park Drive are barely visible. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the issue will be reviewed. BOOK 41 Page 14834 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14835 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone asked if space is available to provide a double row of parking in the pink area? City Attorney Taylor stated that the lease agreement with Jack Graham, Inc., authorized the construction of additional parking along Island Park Drive, as necessary in conjunction with the proposed dock expansion. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the site plan submitted and approved included a widening of the parking lot to provide for two-way diagonal parking. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the additional parking will be constructed at the expense of Jack Graham, Inc.? Mr. Daughters stated yes; that the parking is proposed in conjunction with the construction of the docks proposed on the north side; that the site plan reflects the width of the parking lot expanded toward water; that an additional 108 spaces will be provided, when constructed. Commissioner Merrill asked if the existing ten-foot sidewalk will be relocated closer to the water? Mr. Daughters stated yes. Chris Anderson, 6535 Canary Street (34241), stated that his boat docked at Marina Jack is used frequently with family and friends; that tenants on the northwest dock will still be required to transport items long distances from the green area; that the loading/unloading spaces are further from the northwest dock than the closest space in the green area; that a standardized system allowing tenants to park throughout the entire parking lot by permit or in any parking space for three hours without a permit would be less confusing and is preferable; that parking should not be limited to three hours, particularly for people who utilize the restaurant and amenities on a regular basis. Commissioner Cardamone asked if providing a loading/unloading area adjacent to the pier would be of benefit to the tenants? Mr. Anderson stated yes; however, tenants would still be required to walk a long distance after parking or to retrieve vehicles. Commissioner Merrill stated that the parking problem experienced has not been associated with vehicles parking overnight, at midnight, or on weekends. Mr. Daughters stated that is correct. Commissioner Merrill stated that the proposal could be supported if modified to accommodate parking for people mooring boats in the Bay and people desiring extended use of the amenities on Island Park, e.g., by stipulating enforcement from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday. Commissioner Patterson stated that providing unrestricted parking on the weekends in the area south of the fountain cul-de-sac at Ringling Boulevard could be considered. Commissioner Merrill stated that providing unrestricted parking throughout the entire parking lot should be considered if parking is not a problem during the times referenced. Commissioner Cardamone agreed; and stated that the City is attempting to draw people to the Bayfront; that the parking plan should not be overly restrictive. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Marina Jack restaurant may also be most frequented on the weekends. Mr. Daughters stated that Bayfront parking is heavily used on weekends during tourist season; that a full parking lot has never been observed on weekends during the summer months; that the parking lot is completely full on weekdays during tourist season. Commissioner Cardamone stated that regulations on the blue areas could be enforced as proposed with the green areas exempted on weekends and evenings. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the two-hour maximum parking for the blue areas on the outer perimeter of the Ringling Boulevard cul-de-sac and along the rows to the pier but to exempt the green areas from parking regulations on weekends and evenings. Commissioner Patterson asked if all the parking spaces in the green areas would be available for overnight parking? Commissioner Merrill stated yes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that parking would be allowed in the green areas from Friday at 5 p.m. until Monday at 8 a.m. Commissioner Merrill stated that unrestricted parking in the green areas would also be allowed from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. on weekdays; that people who are moored in the Bay could park overnight but would be required to relocate vehicles before 8 a.m. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the vehicles would actually be allowed to remain in the parking spaces until 11 a.m. as Parking Enforcement personnel would not chalk the tires until 8 a.m. BOOK 41 Page 14836 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14837 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that continued use of a City resource at no cost will result if people mooring boats in the Bay relocate vehicles to another parking area after 11 a.m. and park again at the Bayfront overnight. Commissioner Merrill stated that he is not opposed to establishing a monthly fee and issuing permits for overnight parking. The motion was withdrawn by the maker, Commissioner Merrill, with no objection by the seconder, Commissioner Cardamone. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to refer the issue to the Administration for further modification. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. 17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: STATUS REPORT RE: LEGAL ACTION CONCERNING THE JOHN RINGLING CAUSEWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT = DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH HIRING DAVID LEVIN (AGENDA ITEM VII-6) #5 (0368) through (0589) City Attorney Taylor stated that David Levin of the Law Firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, & Ginsburg, the attorney who assisted neighboring cities to the north regarding, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) bridge issues, is willing to assist the City; however, an ethical problem exists; that the Icard-Merrill law firm will be representing clients before the Commission whose positions may differ from the positions the City will take regarding the bridge; that, in addition, during the time Attorney Levin would be representing the City on the bridge issue, the potential exists that the Icard-Merrill firm will be filing a law suit against the City over a separate issue; that Attorney Levin should not be hired by the City if the City Commission is uncomfortable with the circumstances disclosed. Commissioner Patterson asked for the City Attorney's recommendation. City Attorney Taylor stated that the potential matters referenced would be handled by other attorneys in the firm and should not affect the ability of Attorney Levin, whose talent is desired, to provide the City with proper service. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to direct the City Attorney to proceed with hiring David Levin of the Law Firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, & Ginsburg, to assist the City regarding the FDOT bridge issue. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City Attorney was also requested to review the issue regarding use by the FDOT of the City-owned 4(f) lands on North Bird Key Park and the City Commission's vote on May 1, 1995, which she understood as authorizing continuation of a sidewalk but which the City Engineer has interpreted as including authorization for the west end of the bridge to intrude on the Park land; and asked if a rescission of the motion is necessary? City Attorney Taylor stated that the issue was referred to Attorney Levin for review; that a response should be provided to the Commission within the next two days. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to postpone New Business, Item No. VIII-1, regarding video improvements to the Commission Chambers, and Item No. VIII-3, regarding setting proposed Ordinance No. 97-4005 for public hearing, to the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. 18. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 97-4003, ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE, PROCESSING AND ISSUANCE OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS FOR THE CONBTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL WIRELESS TELECOMXUNICATIONK FACILITIES FOR SIX (6) MONTHS FROM JUNE 2, 1997 TO DECEMBER 2, 1997; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO THE NEED FOR AND PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY SUCH A MORATORIUM PROVIDING FOR EXCEPTIONS; DEFINING TERMS: : PROVIDING FOR A STUDY; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; ETC. - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #5 (0589) through (1170) City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 97-4003 would establish a moratorium on the acceptance, processing, and issuance of development permits for the construction of commercial wireless telecommunication facilities commencing on June 2, 1997, through December 2, 1997, to allow the City an opportunity to enact zoning regulations applicable to such facilities; that no applications are on file at this time; that GTE Mobilnet, which previously received a variance to construct two towers but has not yet applied for building permits, would be exempt from the moratorium. Commissioner Patterson asked the locations at which GTE Mobilnet received a variance to construct telecommunications towers? BOOK 41 Page 14838 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14839 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. City Attorney Taylor stated that the towers are proposed on parcels zoned Industrial, Light and Warehousing (ILW), one which is located on School Avenue and one which is located off of 12th Street; that the Board of Adjustment granted a time extension on the variance as the towers were not constructed within the original time permitted. Commissioner Merrill asked if the Board of Adjustment would be prevented from granting additional variances during the moratorium if the proposed ordinance is adopted? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. The following people came before the Commission: Robert Kersteen, 5303 Commerce Park Boulevard, Tampa (33610). representing GTE Wireless, stated that as a Councilman for the City of St. Petersburg, the kind remarks previously expressed regarding the resource centers in St. Petersburg were appreciated. Mr. Kersteen continued that excluding previously approved telecommunications towers from the moratorium is supported; that the City of St. Petersburg has allowed a 30-foot increase in the height of towers by administrative approval to encourage multiple users on existing or previously approved towers; that the City of Sarasota may wish to consider incorporating a similar provision in the proposed ordinance. Anthony Flores, 501 E. Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa (33602), representing AT&T Wireless Services, stated that the proposed ordinance as drafted indicates the City will not consider any telecommunication facilities; that AT&T Wireless, as a telecommunications carrier, is a service provider and is not in the tower-building business; that providing for the continuation of co-locations, e.g., antenna attachments to existing towers or to buildings, in the proposed ordinance is requested. Mr. Flores distributed for viewing photographs taken in St. Petersburg, Tampa, and Miami Beach, Florida, depicting aesthetically pleasing antenna and building attachments that have not created controversy. Commissioner Patterson referred to the photograph depicting an antenna attached to a water tower in Tampa; and asked the arrangement made regarding maintenance of the water tower, e.g., the process followed when painting is required? Mr. Flores stated that language crafted into the license agreement with the City of Tampa requires joint notification of maintenance projects and shared responsibility for maintenance expenses; that AT&T Wireless notifies and is required to obtain approval from the City of Tampa before changes are made to the equipment; that the City of Tampa notifies AT&T Wireless before tasks are performed so the equipment can be protected; that the cooperative effort has worked well; that similar agreements have been signed with landlords of buildings. Commissioner Patterson asked if the City of Tampa derives revenue from the location of the antenna attachment on the water tower? Mr. Flores stated yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that the contract between AT&T Wireless and the City of Tampa should be reviewed by Staff; that the existing City of Sarasota water towers could potentially be used to accommodate the telecommunications industry if issues of concern can be addressed. Mr. Flores stated that several of the large, responsible, telecommunications carriers, i.e., AT&T Wireless and GTE Wireless have assisted other cities and counties in drafting ordinance and license agreement language that addresses the concerns of the community and the needs of the industry; that a revenue opportunity exists when publicly owned real estate is used by the telecommunications industry for the placement of antenna attachments; that the language drafted in ordinances for Hillsborough and Polk Counties and the Cities of Lakeland and Tampa, which has met the needs of the municipalities and the carriers, will be forwarded to the City Attorney upon request. Suzanne Urash, 1311 North Westshore Boulevard Suite 210, Tampa (33607), representing. Sprint Personal Communication Services (PCS), stated that the positions expressed by previous speakers are supported; that the need to redraft the City's existing telecommunications ordinance to prevent a proliferation of telecommunications towers is understood; however, as a new carrier in the market, Sprint has been licensed to provide service within a specific amount of time and is required to move forward with infrastructure; that co-location is more cost effective than constructing towers; and requested that the City consider the continuation of co-location during the moratorium. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to set proposed Ordinance No. 97-4003 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Dupree, yes. 19. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: BOARD OF RULES AND APPEALS - APPOINTED RALPH HARDESTY, LICENSED ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, FRANK WILLIAMS, LICENSED ENGINEER, AND DOUGLAS BOOK 41 Page 14840 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14841 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. PEREGOY, LICENSED PLUMBING CONTRACTOR TO THE BOARD OF RULES AND APPEALS (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #5 (1150) through (1268) On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation to appoint Ralph Hardesty, Licensed Electrical Contractor, Frank Williams, Licensed Engineer, and Douglas Peregoy, Licensed Plumbing Contractor, to the Board of Rules and Appeals. Commissioner Patterson asked why the Administration is providing recommendations for Board appointments? Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, and David Waugh, Building Official, came before the Commission. Attorney Singer stated that the Board of Rules and Appeals has been consolidated into a nine-member Board; that the Administration is recommending members of former Boards such as the Plumbing Board and the Electrical Board be appointed to one newly consolidated Board of Rules and Appeals; that the individuals recommended for appointment to the Board of Rules and Appeals are members of previous Boards in each discipline. Commissioner Patterson asked if the Administration will continue to recommend appointments to the Board of Rules and Appeals? Mr. Waugh stated that three additional appointments will be recommended by the Administration; that the categories of Licensed Mechanical Contractor, Licensed Fire Sprinkler Contractor, and Licensed Fire Alarm Contractor require appointment upon the finding of suitable candidates; that future appointments to the Board of Rules and Appeals will be recommended and approved by the Commission. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Staff will furnish applications from which the Commission will choose to appoint the membership of the Board of Rules and Appeals. Mr. Waugh stated that Mr. Hardesty, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Peregoy were members of separate Boards for Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Building and Fire. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the motion to approve the appointments of Ralph Hardesty, Licensed Electrical Contractor, Frank Williams, Licensed Engineer, and Douglas Peregoy, Licensed Plumbing Contractor to the Board of Rules and Appeals. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 20. BOARD APPOINTXENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY - DIRECTED CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO REINTRODUCE TRADITION OF PRESENTING CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION TO RETIRING BOARD MEMBERS; POSTPONED VOTE TO JULY 7, 1997, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM IX-2) #5 (1269) through (1433) Vice Mayor Dupree stated that the term of Judson Boedecker has expired; that Mr. Boedecker has served two full consecutive terms and is not eligible for reappointment; that Mr. Boedecker has expressed a willingness to continue serving through the completion of the Land Development Regulations (LDRS) update. Commissioner Cardamone nominated Deirdre Fuller for appointment. Commissioner Merrill nominated Brian O'Connell for appointment. Commissioner Cardamone stated that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson is requested to express the Commission's appreciation to Judson Boedecker for his offer to continue service. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that in the 1980s, Certificates of Appreciation were presented to Board members whose terms had expired; that the Certificate of Appreciation, signed by each Commissioner, was presented to the Board members at regular Commission meetings; and asked if the tradition could be reintroduced and Certificates of Appreciation presented to Judson Boedecker and Ronald Annis, PBLP members whose terms have recently expired? On hearing no objection, Vice Mayor Dupree stated there is a consensus of the Commission to reintroduce the tradition of presenting certificates of appreciation to retiring Board members. Vice Mayor Dupree called for a vote on the nominations. Deirdre Fuller received 2 votes: Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes. Brian O'Connell received 1 vote: Merrill, yes. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that he does not know either of the nominees who should contact and introduce themselves to the Commission. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to postpone the vote to approve the appointment to serve on the PBLP to the July 7, 1997, regular Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 21. REMARKS OF COMMISBIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA: REQUESTED STAFF REPORT REGARDING: POLICE OFFICERS ON MEDICAL AND PRE-RETIREMENT LEAVE AND UTILITY BOX AT THE CORNER OF TUTTLE AVENUE AND DAVIS BOULEVARD; REQUESTED HANDICAPPED ACCESS RAMP AT THE CORNER OF BAHIA Vista STREET AND EUCLID AVENUE (AGENDA ITEM X) #5 (1434) through (1977) BOOK 41 Page 14842 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14843 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONER CARDAMONE: A. stated that appreciation is expressed to Deputy Chief Russell Pillifant for the June 16, 1997, letter to the editor of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune regarding an intensive, three-month investigation of drug dealers culminating in Operation "Sidewalk Sale"; that Operation "Sidewalk Sale" was designed to rid the community of criminals; that statistics including the criminal histories of drug dealers arrested in the raid were revealed in the letter; that the Commission should be apprised of successful operations conducted by the Police Department. Commissioner Patterson asked if reports of major police operations could be presented at regular Commission meetings? John Lewis, Chief of Police, came before the Commission and stated yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that the letter from Deputy Chief Pillifant was a source of pride; that appreciation is expressed to the Police Department for the successful operation. COMMISSIONER MERRILL: A. stated that graffiti is evident on buildings fronting U.S. 301, the Fairway Oaks wall on Fruitville Road, and the sidewalks in Arlington Park. B. stated that the definitions in the ordinance addressing outdoor amplified music in Downtown and restricting decibel levels to 70 should be revised for clarity; that the City Attorney's Office should review and determine if existing definitions should be revised to ensure the ordinance is legally enforceable; that, for example, a "radio" is defined as a sound amplification system; that police radios would be banned after 10 p.m. in Downtown according to the existing terminology in the ordinance; that the City Attorney's Office should proceed to refine the language and redraft the ordinance for Commission approval; that the decibel limits should be reviewed as well. Commissioner Patterson stated that a boom box played at high volume could produce a disturbance as annoying as a nightclub band; that concern has been expressed regarding the possibility of crowd noise being restricted based on decibel readings; however, a raucous degree of crowd noise is as inappropriate as loud music. - L Commissioner Merrill stated that the Commission is supporting rezoning of the Mission Harbor property to the Commercial, Central Business District (C-CBD) Zone District; that a resident watching television in a room with an open window in a condominium in Mission Harbor would be breaking the law under the current noise abatement ordinance; that the City Attorney may advise the Commission that the law would not be enforced in that case; however, the Commission could make every human action illegal and then claim only laws governing inappropriate human actions will be enforced; that the Commission should write laws to reflect what will be enforced; that governments regularly reach arbitrary and foolish decisions; that an ordinance which could subject members of the public to harassment should be redrafted. Commissioner Patterson stated that Staff attempted to limit unintended consequences; that the City Attorney's Office could review the ordinance. City Attorney Taylor stated that Ian Caddie, the sound expert retained by the City to take decibel measurements in the Commercial-Central Business District (C-CBD) Zone District, is compiling a new study of the decibel readings taken by police officers; that the results of the study will be returned to the Commission upon completion; that recommended language revisions in the noise abatement ordinance will be highlighted and returned to the Commission for review. Commissioner Cardamone asked when the new study of decibel readings will be returned? Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that Mr. Caddie will analyze the decibel readings measured by the City during the weekend of June 30, 1997; that police officers will measure decibel levels at locations determined as appropriate by Mr. Caddie; that considerable data will be available for Mr. Caddie's analysis. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she visited Downtown on Saturday evening, June 14, 1997; that the traffic was extremely busy in the vicinity of the Hollywood 20 Cobb Theatre Complex; that Lemon Coast Grille was quiet at 10:15 p.m.; that the Gator Club is playing indoor music and keeping the outside doors closed; that Downtown was alive, healthy, and relatively quiet. Commissioner Merrill stated that Gary Druin, owner of Gary Druin Audio, and a representative of the "Save Downtown Outdoor Music" organization, stated that sound levels exceeded 70, the decibel measurement taken with a sound meter using the decibel-veighting (dBA), on Friday evening in Downtown; that the noise level on Main Street was quiet but illegal. Commissioner Patterson stated that decibel levels measured at over 70 dBA in a quiet area indicates that further analysis is required; BOOK 41 Page 14844 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14845 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. that decibel levels outside an establishment when no music is playing should be determined. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she is interested only in the decibel readings of outdoor amplified music as measured by the new meters purchased by the City. Commissioner Patterson stated that the decibel levels are currently being measured by police officers using City-owned decibel meters; that Downtown music will be eliminated entirely under the noise abatement ordinance if City-owned decibel meters are measuring the sound at 72 dBA when no band is playing; that the 70 dBA limit required by the ordinance should be considered unreasonable if the result is the elimination of all music in Downtown. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that City-owned decibel meters will be used to measure the decibel levels in Downtown and a report returned after consultation with Mr. Caddie. Commissioner Merrill stated that an establishment playing a television during a basketball game should not be in violation of an ordinance. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the owners of the Lemon Coast Grille may increase the volume to the highest pitch as a gesture of defiance. Commissioner Merrill stated that the owners of the Lemon Coast Grille have been advised that they are responsible for the restrictions inhibiting the playing of music in their establishment. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a July 1996, letter from Michael Venafro, one of the owners of the Lemon Coast Grille, to the Bayfront Property Owners Committee promises to cooperate, install baffles, etc. Commissioner Patterson stated that Commission action will be required if decibel levels are measured above the illegal limit of 70 dBA at establishments at which no music is playing. C. stated that no handicapped access ramp exists at the corner of Bahia Vista Street and Euclid Avenue in the vicinity of the residence of a physically active, handicapped person; that the County is responsible for street improvements in the area; that the City should install the ramp or request the County to do so. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City should install the handicapped access ramp. D. stated that railroad companies are rehabilitating and improving railroad tracks in the western United States; that neighborhood residents have opposed the use of the railroad tracks; that rehabilitating railroads for passenger use is a nostalgic idea; however, the nation's railroad lines are routed through residential neighborhoods developed since the demise of the railroads; that railroads should be developed along the center of expressways. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: A. stated that a large electrical or utility box is located at the corner of Tuttle Avenue and Davis Boulevard; that a request has been received from a property owner to hide or reduce the size of the unsightly utility box; that Staff should return a report back. Vice Mayor Dupree and Commissioner Cardamone agreed. B. stated that two police officers are on medical leave, four on pre-retirement leave, and seven out on field training; that the City's police strength is 13 personnel short of the minimum required by the Police Departments Table of Operations; that a report back is requested regarding the status of the police officers on medical and pre-retirement leave including the length of time on leave and the anticipated date of return. 22. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XI) #5 (1978) through (2060) CITY ATTORNEY TAYLOR: A. stated that the draft of an assignment document from the Chicago White Sox assigning their lease agreement with the City to the Cincinnati Reds has been received and reviewed; that a discussion regarding the transfer was conducted with the attorney for the Chicago White Sox; that the final draft of the assignment document will be prepared, signed, and forwarded to the City; that the Cincinnati Reds must provide notice to Plant City by the end of June 1997; that a special meeting to address the issue should be scheduled. Commissioner Patterson asked if the assignment of the Chicago White Sox facilities to the Cincinnati Reds is public knowledge? City Attorney Taylor stated that a Cincinnati, Ohio, newspaper informed the Sarasota Herald-Tribune regarding the assignment. BOOK 41 Page 14846 06/16/97 6:00 P.M. BOOK 41 Page 14847 06/16/97 6: 00 P.M. Deputy City Manager Schneider that a special Commission meeting will be scheduled when the final letter of assignment executed by both the Chicago White Sox and the Cincinnati Reds is received. CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that a workshop addressing the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge is scheduled from 9 to 11 a.m. on July 10, 1997; that the Budget overview Workshop is scheduled at 11 a.m. 23. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (2061) There being no further business, Vice Mayor Dupree adjourned the regular meeting of June 16, 1997, at 1:15 a.m. - Ao . sprur JEROME DUPREE, VICE MAYOR ATTEST: 4 S 13.elly E Ae G e BIBLY1 Edt ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK 0 :