MINUIES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2004, AT 2:30 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Lou Ann R. Palmer, Vice Mayor Richard F. Martin, Commissioners Fredd "Glossie" Atkins, Danny Bilyeu, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Michael A. McNees, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Palmer The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9(a) of the City of Sarasota Charter at 2:30 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED CD 2:31 through 2:35 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Move New Business, Item No. XVII-1, Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Interlocal Agreement between Sarasota and Manatee Counties, the Cities of Sarasota and Bradenton, the Town of Longboat Key, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) concerning the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program, and place under Consent Agenda No. 1 as Item IV-A-8, per the request of Vice Mayor Martin. B. Add under Unfinished Business, as Item No. VI-6, Discussion Re: Lido Beach Federal renourishment Project, per the request of City Engineer/Director Daughters. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yesi Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. BOOK 56 Page 27300 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27301 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mayor Palmer asked if any Commissioner wished to remove an item from Consent Agenda No. 1 or 2. Mayor Palmer requested that Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. IV-A-8, be removed for discussion. Vice Mayor Martin requested that Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. IV-A-4, be removed for discussion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Item No. IV-A-4 will be considered under New Business as Agenda Item VII-1 which will be heard in the afternoon session; that Item No. IV-A-8 will be considered under New Business as Agenda Item VII-2 which will be heard in the afternoon session. 2. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS: (AGENDA ITEM I) CD 2:35 There was no one signed up to speak 3. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 9 AND FEBRUARY 23, 2004 - APPROVED i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 1, 2004 = APPROVED AS REVISED (AGENDA ITEM II) CD 2:35 through 2:36 Mayor Palmer asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Vice Mayor Martin referred to the following from Agenda Item VI-2 regarding the Whitaker Bayou Master Plan of the minutes of the March 1, 2004, Regular Commission meeting: Vice Mayor Martin asked the number of parcels within the basin which would be assessed to pay for the expenditures? Vice Mayor Martin stated that the subsequent sentence does not respond to the question; that the audio recording of the tape should be reviewed sO a complete answer can be included in the minutes. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no other changes, the minutes of the February 9 and February 23, 2004, Special Commission meetings, and the March 1, 2004, Regular Commission meeting as revised are approved by unanimous consent. 4. BOARD ACTIONS RE: : APPROVAL RE : HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2004 = APPROVED THE EXPENDITURE OF $300 FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEMOLITION FUND FOR MIKKI HARTIG, HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL RESEARCH SERVICES, TO TRAVEL TO TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA, TO APPEAR BEFORE THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT-IN-AID COMMITTEE; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM III-1) CD 2:36 through 2:38 Chris Wenzel, Chairman, Historic Preservation Board, and Harvey Hoglund, Senior Planner, Planning and Redevelopment Department, came before the Commission. Mr. Wenzel presented the following item from the February 10, 2004, Historic Preservation Board: Expenditure to appear before the State Historic Preservation Grant-in-Aid Committee. Mr. Wenzel stated that the Historic Preservation Board voted 6 to 0 to recommend the Commission approve the expenditure of $300 from the Historic Preservation Demolition fund for Mikki Hartig, Historical and Architectural Research Services, to travel to Tallahassee, Florida, to appear before the State Historic Preservation Grant-In-Aid Committee regarding the City's request for grant funding of the Phase III survey of the City's historic resources. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to approve the expenditure of $300 from the Historic Preservation Demolition fund For Mikki Hartig, Historical and Architectural Research Services, to travel to Tallahassee, Florida, to appear before the State Historic Preservation Grant-In-Aid Committee. Motion carried unanimously (5.to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to receive the report of the February 10, 2004, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yesi Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. BOOK 56 Page 27302 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27303 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. 5. BOARD ACTIONS RE: : ACTION RE : PARKS, RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 15, 2004 - RECEIVED REPORT; APPROVED NAMING OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL POOL AT ARLINGTON PARK THE "DOTTIE POWELL POOL' " i DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE CLOSING HOURS AT NORTH WATER TOWER PARK FROM 11:00 P.M. TO 5:00 A.M. (AGENDA ITEM III-2) CD 2:38 through 2:50 Millie Small, Member, Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board, and Duane Mountain, Supervisor of Maintenance and Service, Public Works Department, came before the Commission. Ms. Small presented the following items from the January 15, 2004, meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board: A. Naming of the Instructional Pool at Arlington Park Ms. Small stated that at the November 20, 2003, Board meeting, a petition was presented requesting the instructional pool at Arlington Park Aquatic Center be named in honor of Dottie Powell who was the water aerobics instructor from 1989 through May 2003; that Ms. Powell passed away three months later in August of 2003; that at its January 15, 2004, meeting, the Board voted 7 to 0 to recommend to the Commission the instructional pool at Arlington Park be named the "Dottie Powell Pool." B. Park Closing Times for North Water Tower Park Ms. Small continued that Michael White, President of the Summer Wind Condominium Association, presented letters from the owners of homes which abut the parking lot at North Water Tower Park indicating the owners are concerned regarding the noise, drugs, prostitution, and various other crimes and annoyances occurring in the park; that at its January 15, 2004, meeting, the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board voted 7 to 0 to recommend to the Commission that park closing times be established at North Water Tower Park. Commissioner Servian stated that efforts were previously made to replace the unsightly newsracks in the City; and asked the status of removing the newsracks? V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that modular newsracks will be placed on Main Street east of Orange Avenue upon completion of construction in the area; that the modular newsracks planned for installation in the roadway cutouts on US 41 near the Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport will not be installed as the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will be removing the cutouts; that any new groups of eight to ten newsracks on public property will be replaced with modular newsracks; that the City has no control over newsracks on private property. Commissioner Servian stated that newsracks are often placed in the parking lot at Lido Beach. Mr. Schneider stated that Staff will follow up on the issue; that newsracks should not be placed in the parking lot at Lido Beach. Vice Mayor Martin stated that Dan Bebak, Director of Special Projects, Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc., proposed that a street off Ken Thompson Parkway be named Mina Walther Way in honor of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune columnist, Mina Walther; and asked the status of naming the street? Mr. Mountain stated that the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board endorsed the naming of the street; however, the process for naming a street is handled by the Engineering Department; that the process of naming the street is currently in progress. Commissioner Atkins stated that the maintenance of Pelican Man's Bird Sanctuary leasehold is a concerni and asked if the situation is being monitored to avoid receiving complaints? Mr. Mountain stated that the situation will be monitored; that no complaints or problems have occurred since Mr. Shields passed awayi that the hope is everything is going along fine. Mr. Schneider stated that information concerning the leasehold will be provided to the Commission; that different people are now employed at the Pelican Man's Bird Sanctuary; that Staff will review the situation and determine if any lease violations or issues are occurring. Mayor Palmer asked if any applications have been received regarding the naming of the Newtown Recreation Center? BOOK 56 Page 27304 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27305 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no applications have been received to date. Commissioner Atkins stated that the belief is no applications were solicited; that a name was personally suggested to the Commission previously. Mayor Palmer stated that naming the Newtown Recreation Center should be presented to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board for review. Commissioner Atkins stated that is correct. City Manager McNees stated that the necessity to present naming the Newtown Recreation Center to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board was not previously considered; that the thought was the Administration would present a recommendation to the Commission. Mayor Palmer stated that referring issues to the respective advisory board is appropriate; and continued by quoting the minutes of the January 15, 2004, Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board meeting as follows: She [Chair Maria Price) stated she too was surprised that the Commission has chosen to make their decisions without benefit of our expertise. Mayor Palmer stated that the specific concerns are not known; that clarification of the concerns of the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board is required. Mr. Mountain stated that a letter of clarification will be forwarded to the Commission. Vice Mayor Martin asked if a sign will be placed at the Dottie Powell Pool? Mr. Mountain stated that the petitioners recommending naming the pool will provide a plaque at the pool at the petitioners' expense. Vice Mayor Martin stated that parks in the City are typically closed from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.; however, some individuals exercise in parks at 5:00 to 5:30 a.m.; therefore, closing Water Tower Park from 11:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. is suggested. Mr. Mountain stated that the majority of City parks are closed from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.; that nighttime outdoor activities can be accommodated by changing the closing hours; that the Summer Wind Condominium Association concerns were regarding night hours; that early morning hours are not a concern. Ms. Small stated that the testimony was noise and activity was problematic until approximately 2:00 to 3:00 a.m. Mayor Palmer stated that closing times can be adjusted if an early morning opening of 5:00 or 5:30 a.m. is found unsatisfactory. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to name the instructional pool at Arlington Park the "Dottie Powell Pool." Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to direct Staff to prepare a resolution establishing the closing hours at North Water Tower Park from 11:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yesi Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to receive the report of the January 15, 2004, meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yesi Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3,5, 6, AND 7 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM IV-A) CD 2:50 through 2:51 1. Approval Re: 2003 Annual Board Reports of City Boards. 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Schwartz Farms, Inc., in the BOOK 56 Page 27306 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27307 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. amount of $32,500.00 for the purchase of a parcel of land on the edge of the Schwartz Farm property. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Jim Strickland, sole proprietor, Bid No. 02-58M, for Parcel A-3 Verna Wellfield at an annual rent of $1,070. 4. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Brothers of Holy Cross, Inc., Bid No. 03-24M, for City surplus property, Lots 5 and 6 Howard Court Sarasota. 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a First Amendment to the contract between the City of Sarasota and Rowland, Inc., Bid No. 02-32M, to perform Manhole Rehabilitation services for the City Wide Sewer Rehabilitation Project. 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a First Extension of Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Baskerville-Donovan, Inc., Wilson Miller, Inc., and Boyle Engineering Corporation, for RFP 02-15M Engineer of Record Services. 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor, City Auditor and Clerk, City Attorney and City Engineer to execute the final plat for "The Renaissance of Sarasota Subdivision Replat Project." On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 7. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1728) ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1730) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1733) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-B): CD 2:51 through 2:52 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 04R-1728, adopting a schedule to process an Administrative Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan [a/k/a Sarasota City Plan (1998)] as more fully specified herein; authorizing City staff to proceed in accordance with said schedule (Title Only). 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 04R-1730, appropriating $50,000.00 from the unappropriated fund balance of the General Fund to provide matching grant funds for the Front Porch Owner-Occupied Seniors Housing Rehabilitation Program, etc. 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 04R-1733, appropriating $20,000 from the unappropriated fund balance of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program Fund to provide funds to prepare watershed management plans for Whitaker Bayou, Bowlees Creek, and Phillippi Creek, etc. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 04R-1728 by title only and proposed Resolution Nos. 04R-1730 04R-1733 in their entirety. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes. 8. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : CITIZEN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE = APPOINTED ELMER BERKEL AS REPRESENTATIVE AND MOLLIE CARDAMONE AS ALTERNATE (AGENDA ITEM V) CD 2:52 through 2:54 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Dr. Gene Pillot has resigned as the City of Sarasota's representative on the Citizen Oversight Committee to monitor the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning of the School Board of Sarasota County; that the Citizen Oversight Committee has scheduled a meeting for March 23, 2004; that Dr. Pillot was previously selected for the Citizen Oversight Committee based on his experience with the school system as the former Superintendent of Schools of Sarasota County, his tenure as a Commissioner and Mayor, and his understanding of land use; that Elmer Berkel has agreed to serve as a representative on the Citizen Oversight Committee; that Mr. Berkel worked with the school system for many years, served on the Board of Adjustment, and served as a Commissioner and Mayor; that Mollie Cardamone was a long-time teacher in the City, is familiar with land use, and served as a Commissioner and Mayor; that Mollie BOOK 56 Page 27308 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27309 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Cardamone has agreed to be an alternate representative on the Citizen Oversight Committee. On motion of Commissioner Bilyeu and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to appoint Elmer Berkel as a representative and Mollie Cardamone as an alternate to the Citizen Oversight Committee. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yesi Martin, yesi Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the efforts of Mayor Palmer in identifying qualified individuals to serve is appreciated. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1731, APPROVING APPLICATION NO. 03-SP-42 TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 17 STORY MIXED USE BUILDING CONTAINING 134 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND 6,200 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE SPACE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PALM AVENUE AND MAIN STREET AND HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 1350 MAIN STREET; SAID PROPERTY IS ZONED COMMERCIAL-CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (C-CBD) AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT; THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCORPORATES A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT DENSITY ALLOWABLE WITHIN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT; ; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED WITH CHANGES (AGENDA ITEM VI-1-A) AND SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-4536 TO CONDITIONALLY VACATE A PORTION OF THE MAIN STREET RIGHT OF WAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN PALM AVENUE AND MIRA MAR COURT AND TO CONDITIONALLY VACATE A PORTION OF THE PALM AVENUE RIGHT OF WAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALM AVENUE BETWEEN MAIN STREET AND THE 20 FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ALLEY CONNECTING PALM AVENUE AND MIRA MAR COURT AS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY IF ANY OF THE PARTS HEREOF ARE DECLARED INVALID; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 03-SP-42 AND 03-SV-09, APPLICANT CHRISTOPHER J. BROWN, AS AGENT REPRESENTING SARASOTA MAIN STREET LLC AS CONTRACT VENDEE) - ADOPTED WITH CHANGES (AGENDA ITEM VI-1-B) CD 2:54 through 3:18 Mayor Palmer stated that proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 is to permit the development of a 17 story mixed use building containing 134 residential dwelling units and 6,200 square feet of retail/office space on property located at the southeast corner of Palm Avenue and Main Street and having a street address of 1350 Main Street; that proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 incorporating Street Vacation Application No. 03-SV-09 is to conditionally vacate a portion of the Main Street right-of-way on the south side of Main Street between Palm Avenue and Mira Mar Court and to conditionally vacate a portion of the Palm Avenue right-of-way on the east side of Palm Avenue between Main Street and the 20-foot wide public alley connecting Palm Avenue and Mira Mar Court, with accompanying Site Plan Application No. 03-SP-42; that the Applicant is Christopher Brown, as agent representing Sarasota Main Street LLC as contract vendee. Robert Fournier, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the most significant change to proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 from the March 1, 2004, Commission meeting is a new legal description as an exhibit to the proposed Ordinance; that the Commission decided not to vacate the three feet of right-of-way between the outside surface of the columns supporting the arcade and the face of the curb on the south side of Main Street between Palm Avenue and Mira Mar Court as requested by the Applicant; that 3,700 square feet will be vacated rather than 4,600 square feet as requested; that proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 indicates the proposed project is in compliance with the provisions of the proposed Downtown Code which recommends the installation of arcades, galleries, or awnings; that Section 2 of proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 indicates the conditions regarding relocation of utilities; that a City water line in the existing right-of-way will be relocated to Palm Avenue with larger water lines installed; that the Applicant will be required to grant an easement to Verizon Florida, Inc.; that letters from other utilities indicating no utilities exist in the area must be obtained. Attorney Fournier distributed and read a recommended revision to Section 2(3) (B), Easement for Pedestrians, of proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 as follows: .the Easement Deed given for pedestrian passage through the arcade shall specify standards for ongoing maintenance and repair of the pedestrian areas whether private property or public right-of-way as there will be landscape bulb out areas as indicated in the Staff Report and shall further provide standards for security and for lighting in these BOOK 56 Page 27310 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27311 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. areas. Alternatively, these standards may be set out in a separate agreement. Attorney Fournier continued that standards will be set out in the Easement Agreement or a separate agreement which will be subject to review and approval of the City Attorney's Office prior to recording a notice of effectiveness of the vacation in the Public Records. Attorney Fournier further stated that Section 2 (3) (C) of proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 concerns the three feet of clear space between the outside surface of the column and the curb on the south side of Main Street between Palm Avenue and Mira Mar Court; that a requirement of the proposed Downtown Code is the area must remain clear and unobstructed; that proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 gives the Applicant permission to maintain potted plants, trellises, or other landscaping in the area; however, the landscaping must be removed if the landscaping intrudes on pedestrian access; that Section 3, Effective Date of Vacation of Right of Way, of the proposed Ordinance provides the effective date will be upon the granting of the required utility relocation agreements and easements; that a notice of the effective date of the vacation will be filed in the Public Records. Commissioner Servian asked if relocating and enlarging the water line is a concurrency issue due to the size of the proposed project? William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, came before the Commission and stated yes. Attorney Fournier stated that proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 approves Site Plan Application No. 03-SP-42; that the proposed Downtown Code does not require adoption of a resolution to approve a Site Plan; that adopting a resolution was recommended due to the complexity of the conditions associated with approval of the proposed project and the number of Affected Persons; that a version of the Resolution was generated on March 5, 2004; that a March 11, 2004 letter, was received from a representative of the First United Methodist Church, who was certified as an Affected Person; that conversations were held with the attorney representing the owner of the historic structures adjacent to the proposed project, who is also an Affected Person, and the Applicant's attorney resulting in additional changes to proposed Resolution No. 03R-1731; that the Applicant and the owner of the historic structures conducted a final meeting today, March 15, 2004, the result of which was one additional change to proposed Resolution No. 04R-1371. Mayor Palmer asked if a formal agreement exists regarding the changes in proposed Resolution No. 04R-1371? Attorney Fournier stated yes; that Section 2 of the proposed Resolution concerns compliance with the plans submitted; that the previous plans were date-stamped February 2, 2004; that new plans were submitted and date stamped as the number of dwelling units must be reduced by three units due to the reduction in the area of the vacation of the right-of-way; that language was added indicating the construction staging plan must maintain open alley access to the two adjacent historic structures for the maximum time possible and avoid blocking the alley unless necessaryi that language was added to proposed Resolution No. 04R-1371 to clarify the requirement for a Transportation Demand Management Plan; that the Applicant is required on October 1 of each year for three years subsequent to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy to submit written reports to the City providing information regarding the reduction of single occupant vehicle trips at the site. Attorney Fournier stated that language was added as follows: Section 2(4): Requiring the placement of mirrors and lighted buzzers approved by Staff at the entrance to the garage and the pedestrian crossing; Section 2(5): Changing number of dwelling units from 137 to 134; Section 2(6): Requiring a contribution of $252,500 to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund; Section 2(7): Requiring a contribution of $101,000 to the Transit Trust Fund; - Section 2(8): Requiring approval and execution of a major encroachment agreement by the Commission if any portion of the building encroaches into the right-of- way. Attorney Fournier stated further that language was added to the proposed Resolution to indicate the cost of installation of traffic control devices to protect the pedestrians at the intersection of McAnsh Square and Mira Mar Court will be born by the Applicant; however, the type, the number, and the location BOOK 56 Page 27312 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27313 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. will be specified by Staff; that Staff will consult with representatives of the First United Methodist Church; that the Applicant will be notified within 90 days of the type and estimated cost of the traffic devices; and quoted a March 15, 2004, letter from Robert Cooke of the First United Methodist Church to Attorney Fournier and Staff as follows: Just a note to say thank you to all of those who helped address our safety concerns by making the appropriate changes in this Resolution. It is very encouraging to see first hand that citizens' concerns are heard and addressed. Thank you for your help. Attorney Fournier further stated that the concern of representatives of the First United Methodist Church is to assure the safety devices are installed prior to any blockage of the north end of Mira Mar Court; that traffic will increase at McAnsh Square at the time Mira Mar Court is blocked off; that languàgé was added to the proposed Resolution regarding the imposition of the lowest speed limit allowed by law on Mira Mar Court which will require the adoption of an ordinance; that language was added to the proposed Resolution requiring a Loading Management Plan from the Applicant including full-time on-site personnel to manage and supervise the loading space. Attorney Fournier read for the record the revision of Section 2 (11) (b) of proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 as follows: The Applicant shall cause the contractor for the project or other qualified agent to utilize one or more of the following methods of stabilizing the existing foundations: 1. Grout the foundations of the adjacent historic buildings with protective chemicals; 2. Install a grout curtain wall; or 3. Install a cut-off wall. Applicant shall provide the owner of the adjacent historic structures with a copy of the foundation plans and specifications for Applicant's mixed-use structure and a copy of the Subsurface Investigation Report for the site. The owner of the adjacent property shall in turn submit same to a structural engineer of her choice who shall make a recommendation as to the utilization of one or more of the methods specified above. Applicant and the owner of the adjacent historic buildings shall then attempt to agree on which one or more of the above methods shall be utilized in the event Applicant and the owner of the adjacent historic buildings cannot agree on the methods to be utilized, they shall between them select a structural engineer whose determination of the matter shall be binding. Applicant shall initiate communications with the owner of the adjacent historic buildings for the performance of the stabilization of the foundations of those buildings as described above and shall obtain written permission from the owner for the stabilization method to be utilized in the manner determined herein. In the event that the owner chooses not to participate in the described process and provides that permission, Applicant shall be relieved from the requirements of this subparagraph. If, however, both parties participate and a stabilization method is determined, it shall be performed prior to the commencement of construction. Vice Mayor Martin asked if the new language is acceptable to both parties? Attorney Fournier stated yes; that the phrase "such as through the installation of accelerometers as one method of doing the seismic monitoring" is to the benefit of the historic structures; that Section 2(12) of the proposed Resolution addresses the condition regarding the Applicant's responsibility to pay to restore or repair the historic structures in the event damage occurs due to construction of the proposed project; that the owner of the historic structures and the Applicant determined the Applicant will post a contractor's bond in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney prior to the issuance of a building permit; that the bond will ensure sufficient funds will be available to pay to repair or restore the historic structures if necessary; that a formula is provided to determine the amount of the bond; that appraisers would estimate the cost to restore or repair the structures; that a scrivener's error was corrected to renumber Sections 4, 5, and 6 to 3, 4, and 5 of the proposed Resolution. Attorney Fournier continued that some conditions in Section 4 of proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 are requirements of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that a legal maxim implies the explicit mention of one provision can imply the exclusion of others; therefore, Section 4 was inserted to ensure the perception other sections BOOK 56 Page 27314 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27315 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) did not apply; that Section 5 clarifies to indicate the Certificate of Occupancy referenced is the temporary initial Certificate of Occupancy. Commissioner Servian stated that Section 2(4) of the proposed Resolution provides the Applicant will install mirrors and/or lighted buzzers in pedestrian areas; that both should be installed for hearing and sight impaired pedestrians. Attorney Fournier stated that determining the required safety devices is at the discretion of Staff. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 by title only. Mayor Palmer stated that a motion to approve proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 should include the renumbering of Sections 4, 5, and 6 to 3, 4, and 5 as well as the change in Section 2(11) (b) of proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 with the renumbering of Sections 4, 5, and 6 to 3, 4, and 5 as well as the change in Section 2 (11) (b) of proposed Resolution No. 04R-1731 as indicated by the City Attorney's Office. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Atkins, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 04-4536, with the change to Section 2( (3) (B) concerning the easement for pedestrians as recommended by the City Attorney's Office. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1734, APPROPRIATING $601,210 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND TO PARTIALLY FUND RENOVATION TO CITY HALL AND THE 3Hb FLOOR OF THE ANNEX ; ETC. - ADOPTED ; AUTHORIZED TO PROCEED WITH PHASE I OF THE CITY HALL RENOVATION PROJECT (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) CD 3:18 through 3:51 Mayor Palmer stated that proposed Resolution No. 04R-1734 appropriates $601,210 from the unappropriated fund balance of the Equipment Replacement Fund to partially fund renovation to City Hall and the third floor of the City Hall Annex. Nancy Carolan, Director of General Services, and Peter Horstman, Architect, BMK Architects, came before the Commission. Ms. Carolan stated that proposed Resolution No. 04R-1734 addresses the revised design and construction proposal for City Hall and the City Hall Annex; that the proposal will allow for the following: Remediating the mold infiltration on the third floor of the Annex building; - Remodeling of the vacant space for more efficient use to alleviate overcrowding Replacing and upgrading the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning system (HVAC) for the City Hall complex. Mr. Horstman referred to drawings displayed on the Chamber monitors indicating the third floor of the Annex and stated that the current proposal differs from the proposal presented in October 2003; that renovations will occur in place rather than moving departments to other locations; that the Planning and Redevelopment Department will occupy space in the southern portion of the third floor of the building and the eastern portion vacated by the Human Resources Department; that the Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement Department and the Plans Examiners will occupy the remaining vacant space; that a new space will be created on the second floor for a Staff lounge; that a common conference room will be created on the second floor. Mr. Horstman continued that four additional work stations will be created in the Information Technology Department on the second floor of City Hall; that the City Manager's Office will be relocated to the current Conference Room 109; that a conference room will be relocated to the current City Manager's Office; that the air handler unit will be relocated to alleviate the noise problem; that transom windows will be installed in the perimeter walls in the City Hall building; that a new conference room will BOOK 56 Page 27316 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27317 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. be created on the ground floor of City Hall in the current Staff lounge; that the new conference room will be equipped with audio and video facilities; that a security desk will be installed in the City Hall lobby in an area which will allow monitoring of the Chambers and the new conference room with future camera monitors if required; that the Engineering Department will remain at the present location in the City Hall Annex; that systems furnishings will be installed for future flexibility; that space vacated by the Human Resources Department on the ground floor of the Annex will be converted to a plans, storage, and printing room. Mr. Horstman stated that the budget includes plans for renovating the second floor of City Hall, the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk, and the Finance Department; that the budget is projected as $2.1 million; that the budget is approximately $1,050,000 for the first of two years and $1,050,000 for the second year. Ms. Carolan stated that the budget includes funds to repair the reflecting pool in the City Hall lobby during Phase I of the renovations; that the funding for Phase I is: $235,000 previously budgeted in the fiscal year (FY) 2003/04 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) enhancements, $170,664 previously budgeted from the original bond issue for City Hall refitting, $38,400 remaining in the Federal Building renovation account, and $601,210 appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the Equipment Replacement fund. Vice Mayor Martin stated that Staff in the City Manager's and Commissioner Offices work well as a team although separated by partitions; and asked if the offices will be renovated? Mr. Horstman stated yes; that the office currently designated as the Sister Cities office will be converted to a storage area which will create additional space for Staff of the City Manager's and Commissioner Offices workspace. Vice Mayor Martin stated that installing windows will result in removing bricks from City Hall; that the bricks should be salvaged for future repairs to the building. Mr. Horstman stated that salvaging the bricks is a good suggestion; that the bricks can be used to re-patch the opening on the north side of the building. Vice Mayor Martin asked the intent to prevent moisture intrusion from the exterior of the building? Mr. Horstman stated that investigative work has not occurred as the Commission has not yet authorized funds to perform an analysis to solve the problem. Vice Mayor Martin stated that environmentally friendly furnishings and products should be used; that many items in the proposed budget appear as allowances; and asked if sufficient funds have been allotted? Ms. Carolan stated that a report of specific funds required has been prepared regarding the HVAC enhancements; that the budget does not reflect funds saved through the direct purchase program. Mr. Horstman stated that the budget has been projected based on funds expended on the Federal Building renovation project. Mayor Palmer stated that a ten percent contingency fee is included in the budget; that the seven percent savings on the sales and the ten percent contingency allowance results in significant funds; that the renovation will be completed under budget and timely as the renovation was for the Federal Building. Vice Mayor Martin asked if the renovation for the Finance Department and Office of the City Auditor and Clerk is included in the Phase I or Phase II budget? Mr. Horstman stated that the renovation for additional work is included in the Phase I budget. Commissioner Servian asked the reason $28,000 is required for repair of the reflecting pool in the City Hall lobby? Ms. Carolan stated that a solid piece of granite and a more appropriately sized pump will be installed. Commissioner Servian stated that the budget does not address security. BOOK 56 Page 27318 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27319 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Ms. Carolan stated that employees will be issued a card to access City Hall and the Federal Building; that the City can determine the time to lock the doors. Commissioner Servian stated that security is lacking in City Hall and the Federal Building. City Manager McNees stated that the northern entrance to City Hall on Second Street will be closed with the renovation of the Finance Department sO all entrances to City Hall will be visible from the new security desk; that a conduit will be installed to allow for a closed-circuit television system at the security desk sO the Commission Chambers and other meeting rooms can be monitored. Mayor Palmer stated that normal public access to City Hall or the Annex will not be restricted. Ms. Carolan stated that the buildings will be open to the public during normal working hours. Mayor Palmer stated that the public restrooms on the first floor are in a state of disrepair. Mr. Horstman stated that the restrooms were not considered in the budget; however, contingency funds may be available. Mayor Palmer stated that the hope is renovation of the restrooms will be addressed in the fiscal year (FY) 2004/05 budget process; that the understanding is the contractor has the responsibility to ensure the reflecting pool operates properly; that the reflecting pool has been more non-operational than operational. Ms. Carolan stated that all attempts to repair the pool have been unsuccessful; that some warranties have expired; that the contractor has agreed to charge a reasonable fee to eliminate profiting twice; that the cost of granite is significant. Mayor Palmer stated that the contractor should bear some responsibility for providing proper operation of the pool; that $28,000 for repairs of the reflecting pool is disturbing; and asked if the renovations will accommodate the future use of the City? Mr. Horstman stated that renovation is intended to accommodate the City's five-year needs; that spaces for future use have been designated in the proposed renovation plans; that the use of modular furnishings allows for future reconfiguration and expansion. City Manager McNees stated that no additional space will be acquired; that the renovation will bring substandard workspace up to a modern standard; that the renovation will create better efficiencies; that the renovation will satisfy the City's space requirements for three to five years. Mayor Palmer stated that the City's expectations should not be greater than the renovation can provide. Commissioner Servian stated that allowing warranties to expire on the reflecting pool is surprising. Mayor Palmer agreed. Ms. Carolan stated that the only warranty allowed to expire was for the pumpi that a differently sized pump will be installed to regulate the water flow. City Manager McNees stated that the contractor has been diligently working with the City; that the contractor is not responsible for the original specifications but merely installed the pool; that the process has been a cooperative effort to date; that the pool requires repair whether cost sharing occurs or not. Commissioner Bilyeu asked if signage will be provided in City Hall in Phase I of the renovation? Ms. Carolan stated yes. Mayor Palmer stated that signage should be provided immediately. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that perhaps Phase II budgeting should be considered during the fiscal year (FY) 2004/05 budget process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 04R-1734 in its entirety. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to authorize proceeding with Phase I of the City Hall renovation project and to adopt proposed Resolution No. 04R-1734 to appropriate funds in the amount of $601,210 from the Equipment Replacement Fund. Mayor Palmer requested that City BOOK 56 Page 27320 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27321 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Palmer, yesi Servian, yes; Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes. Mayor Palmer stated that the Administration, the Charter Officials, Mr. Horstman, and Staff are commended for the revision of the proposed renovation which resulted in a reduction of required funds. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: FARMERS MARKET USAGE PERMIT WITH THE DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP OF SARASOTA - APPROVED AS AMENDED TO: 1) ALLOW ONE BOOTH IN THE FARMERS MARKET FOR NOT-FOR-I PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS ON A ROTATING BASIS AND 2) REFLECT SELLING OR SUB-LETTING RIGHTS TO SPACE IS PROHIBITED; ; DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP OF SARASOTA AND THE MAIN STREET MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF PAYMENT FOR HOLIDAY DECORATIONS; APPROVED FOR THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO PAY THE PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES FOR THE FARMERS MARKET (AGENDA ITEM VI-3) CD 3:51 through 4:40 V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the Commission previously directed a Usage Permit be prepared which formalizes the operation of the Farmers Market with The Downtown Partnership of Sarasota (Downtown Partnership); that a Usage Permit was prepared by the City Attorney's Office; that the Usage Permit has been reviewed with the Downtown Partnership; that the belief is agreement has been achieved between the City and the Downtown Partnership; that the entity responsible for payment for City services provided to the Farmers Market is a policy issue which remains unresolved at this time; that direction from the Commission regarding payment for the City services is required; that the Usage Permit can be amended to reflect the responsible party. Mayor Palmer stated that the Usage Permit indicates no activities related to a political campaign or political party may occur at the Farmers Market which is precluded by the First Amendment of the US Constitution; that restricting political activity is a concerni and asked if the language creates an infringement of First Amendment rights? Mr. Schneider stated that the intent is vendor booths cannot be used for political activities. Mayor Palmer stated that public streets are typically used for political campaigning. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the Green Party has been distributing pamphlets at the Farmers Market for several weeks. Mayor Palmer stated that the language in the Usage Permit should be revised to assure consistency with First Amendment rights. Mayor Palmer continued that the Usage Permit indicates space in the Farmers Market cannot be sold; that the indication should be rights to space cannot be sold or sub-let. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Usage Permit will be amended to reflect selling or sub-letting rights to space is prohibited to avoid any misunderstanding. Commissioner Servian stated that caution should be used in separating an individual selling space and an individual selling a business which includes the Saturday operation at the Farmers Market as an inherent part of the business; that the sale of a business cannot be controlled by the City. Mayor Palmer stated that the Commission is not infringing on peoples' rights to sell their businesses; that the agreement should not include such infringements. Mayor Palmer stated that a cost estimate has been received from Public Works; that a cost estimate has not been received from the Sarasota Police Department; that a representative of the Downtown Partnership indicated the expenses for Public Works and public safety would be reimbursed to the City; that the cost of moving the Farmers Market is the responsibility of the City due to circumstances over which the Downtown Partnership and the Farmers Market had no control; however, the annual costs of Public Works and public safety should be the responsibility of the Downtown Partnership. Mr. Schneider stated that no additional police patrols are provided for the Farmers Market; that the Usage Permit places responsibility for any security costs on the Downtown Partnership. Mayor Palmer stated that responsibility for costs for Public Works is not included in the Usage Permit. Mr. Schneider stated that is correct. BOOK 56 Page 27322 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27323 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mayor Palmer asked if the annual public works cost associated with the Farmers Market as indicated by Staff of $11,330 is sufficient? William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, came before the Commission and stated yes. Commissioner Servian stated that the City's assimilating an $11,330 public works expense for an event which generates significant activity in the Downtown is supported; that the Farmers Market is the City's best means of advertising Sarasota; that $11,330 is inexpensive for advertising. Vice Mayor Martin concurred; and stated that the Usage Permit refers to the Farmers Market at the Pineapple Avenue site; that an amendment can be prepared at the time the site is changed; that the understanding is the Commission's decision was to contract with the Downtown Partnership through the end of the year 2004. Mayor Palmer stated that the contract is for one year. Commissioners Bilyeu and Servian agreed. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the Usage Permit does not address liability of vendors. Mr. Schneider stated that the requirement for the vendors to provide insurance is a new requirement requested by the Commission. Vice Mayor Martin asked if the liability insurance policy through the Downtown Partnership covers vendor activities or if the individual vendors will be required to maintain liability insurance? Mr. Schneider stated that Staff considers the Downtown Partnership as the sponsoring agency and the responsible party; that issues between the Downtown Partnership and the vendors are separate issues; that the Downtown Partnership is regarded as the umbrella organization which is conducting the activity and the responsible party to the City. Vice Mayor Martin asked if a non-profit organization's insurance provides coverage for the City, the organization, and the organization's activities? Mr. Schneider stated that the sponsor provides insurance coverage for the event and the activities to protect the City; that the insurance relationship between a vendor and a sponsor is not known. The following people came before the Commission: John Tylee, Executive Director, the Downtown Partnership, 1818 Main Street (34236), stated that finalizing the Usage Permit is pleasing; that the City is requested to continue to provide services to the Farmers Market; that the Downtown Partnership netted approximately $20,000 from the Farmers Market in 2003; that the additional expenditures resulting from moving the Farmers Market will mean a reduced net income of approximately $10,000 with the assumption the Commission will continue to absorb costs as in the past; that the move to Pineapple Avenue was successful thanks to the City and many others; that vendors, customers, and retailers in the area are happy with the new location; that a survey is being prepared for property owners surrounding the Farmers Market area; that improvements will be made such as providing electricity, music, a newsletter, computerization of records and an information booth; that a new booth will be offered to a different not-for-profit organization each week; that providing hand-washing facilities and a dumpster is being considered; that additional costs include the cost of insurance for parking, the portable restroom, signage, advertising for the move to Pineapple Avenue, and the implementation of a comprehensive marketing program. Mr. Tylee continued that individuals are allowed to distribute political information in the Farmers Market; that individuals are not allowed to stand in one area and impede pedestrian flow; that most vendors and events on City streets maintain three levels of insurance: 1) the City has insurance, 2) the sponsor of the event provides insurance, and 3) the vendors maintain insurance; that for the vendors selling food to maintain insurance is important. Ernie Ritz, 1490 Main Street Merchants Association (34236), stated that an information package was previously presented to the Commissioners providing a history of the Farmers Market; that an agreement exists between the Farmers Market and the Downtown Association regarding holiday decorations; that a decision was previously made by the Main Street Merchants Association to accept the responsibility of decorating Main Street; that the renovation of Main Street resulted in 177 new utility poles; that decorating the utility poles will be expensive; that the original agreement BOOK 56 Page 27324 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27325 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. between the City and The Downtown Association provided funds realized from the Farmers Market would be utilized for purchasing holiday decorations; that the request is the Usage Permit address the continuation of providing funds for holiday decorations. Kim Morrison, Farmers Market vendor and a board member of the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market, 529 South Palm Avenue (34236), stated that a February 17, 2004, letter to the Downtown Partnership specifically requested the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market receive input and inclusion in conversations relating to the Usage Permit among other things; that the February 17, 2004, letter was not acknowledged by the Downtown Partnership. Ms. Morrison referred to Item No. 15 of the Usage Permit regarding assignment and stated that the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market is the legal corporation representing the Farmers Market vendors; that the request is the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market name be clearly included in the descriptive copy of assignment of Item No. 15 of the Usage Permit; that the Commission was previously provided copies of a letter the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market submitted to the Downtown Partnership requesting meetings; that no response was received; that the intent of Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market is to have an agreement with the Downtown Partnership in the representation of vendor interests which is difficult with no communication from the Downtown Partnership; that the lack of a restroom and hand-washing facilities was brought to the attention of the Downtown Partnership; however, neither has yet been provided; that the lack of a restroom and hand-washing facilities is a serious issue and possibly a health regulation violation; that attention to both items will be appreciated. Mr. Schneider stated that the City has not engaged in any conversations with Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market organization other than presentations at Commission meetings; that a copy of the Usage Permit was forwarded to Mr. Thorpe, President of the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market organization. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Usage Permit is with the Downtown Partnership; that including the Sarasota Downtown Farmers Market as part of the contractual relationship is not the intent; that the City does not maintain insurance; that the City is self- insured; that liability protection is the business of the Downtown Partnership. Commissioner Servian stated that allowing a not-for-profit booth will raise a concern regarding political organizations as most political organizations are formed as not-for-profit organizations; that the Usage Permit should specifically indicate not-for-profit organizations can maintain booths; however, political organizations should not be able to maintain booths. City Manager McNees stated that the City can disallow political participation during events on City property; that the City is leasing the property for the Farmers Market; that the City's intentions must be made known; that the Commission is requested to provide the Administration direction regarding a preference for use of the Farmers Market. Mayor Palmer stated that use of the Farmers Market should be restricted to the vendors; that pedestrian political activity should not be prohibited. Commissioner Atkins stated that allowing participation of not-for- profit organizations is beyond his personal expectations for the Farmers Market; that pedestrian political activity is supported; that use by only food or craft vendors is the preference. Vice Mayor Martin stated that vendors will often place flyers on a table at a booth. Commissioner Atkins stated that a vendor placing flyers in the booth is not a concerni that allowing a booth specifically for political purposes is not supported. Commissioner Servian stated that the impact of moving the Farmers Market to Pineapple Avenue was a concern of the Burns Court Cinema; that Mr. Tylee agreed to set up a booth at the Farmers Market to solicit subscribers to alleviate some of the negative impacts; that allowing arts and humanities groups to have a booth to highlight activities is supported; that political parties and strict political activity should be restricted but not the free movement of people on the street. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that restroom availability and hand-washing facilities are important; that the transition of the Farmers Market to the new Pineapple Avenue location was excellent. Mayor Palmer stated that restroom and hand-washing facilities are the responsibility of the Downtown Partnership. BOOK 56 Page 27326 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27327 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Atkins asked the location of hand-washing facilities for the past ten years? Mr. Tylee stated that hand-washing facilities at the Lemon Avenue location are available at Mattison's City Grill; that a restroom with a hand-washing feature will be provided; that not- for-profit organizations have requested a booth for one-time events; that allowing a booth for not-for-profit organizations is good for the not-for-profit organizations and the community. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, one booth in the Farmers Market will be allowed for not-for-profit organizations on a rotating basis. Mayor Palmer stated that the issue of payment for holiday decorations must be resolved. Commissioner Servian stated that guidance is required. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the issue of payment for holiday decorations is a valid question. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the issue should be resolved between the Downtown Partnership and the Main Street Merchants Association. City Attorney Taylor stated that the administration of the Downtown Partnership should determine the responsibility for payment of holiday decorations. Mr. Schneider stated that in the 1970s the Commission voted the profits from the operation of the Farmers Market would fund the holiday decorations. Mayor Palmer stated that the original agreement should be continued; that the Downtown Partnership and the Main Street Merchants Association should resolve the issue; that funds should be provided for holiday decorations. City Manager McNees stated that during the 1970s, the Commission linked the holiday decorations and the Farmers Market; that the link can be discontinued if desired; that the Farmers Market is no longer located on Main Street; that a determination as to funding for holiday decorations should be made by the Downtown Partnership and the Main Street Merchants Association. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the Administration is directed to communicate with the Downtown Partnership and the Main Street Merchants Association to resolve the issue of payment for holiday decorations. On motion of Commissioner Bilyeu and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve the Farmers Market Usage Permit with the Downtown Partnership as amended to: 1) allow one booth in the Farmers Market for not-for-profit organizations on a rotating basis; and 2) reflect selling or sub-letting rights to space is prohibited; and directed the Administration to communicate with the Downtown Partnership and the Main Street Merchants Association to resolve the issue of payment for holiday decorations. Mayor Palmer asked if the direction of the Commission regarding the amended language in the Usage Permit is clear? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yesi Servian, yesi Palmer, yes. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to direct the City to continue to pay the public works services for the Farmers Market. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, no. 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: MOTE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER LEASE AMENDMENT APPROVED THE SIXTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH : 1) THE ADDITION OF LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR EVENTS INVOLVING OVER 400 PEOPLE; 2) THE ELIMINATION OF THE RESTRICTION OF LIMITING EVENTS TO FOUR TIMES PER WEEK WITH ATTENDANCE LESS THAN 400; AND 3) A CHANGE IN LANGUAGE REGARDING FUNDS RECEIVED FROM MARKETING CAMPAIGNS (AGENDA ITEM VI-5) CD 4:23 through 4:39 Mayor Palmer stated that the request is regarding regulatory approvals for the Mote Marine Mammal Center and the Sixth Amendment to the Lease Agreement. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the Sixth Amendment to the Lease BOOK 56 Page 27328 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27329 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Agreement has been simplified to provide the City Manager must approve a special event at the Mote Marine Mammal Center. Brenda Patten, Attorney, law firm of Kirk Pinkerton, and Daniel Bebak, Director of Aquarium and Special Projects, Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium, came before the Commission. Attorney Patten stated that plans for a restaurant at the Mote Marine Mammal Center were removed from the previously submitted site plan; that Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium (Mote) agrees to the terms of the Sixth Amendment to the Lease. Commissioner Servian stated that the understanding is the only time approval of the City Manager is required is if a special event is held in the Mote Marine Mammal Center; that the City Manager approval does not apply to the entire leasehold. Mr. Schneider stated that is correct. Commissioner Servian stated that events with 400 or more people in other areas of the leasehold do not require approval by the City Manager. Mr. Schneider stated that is correct. Commissioner Servian continued that the policy is not supported; that the Commission works with groups such as the Landowners, Merchants, and Residents (LMR) Association to ensure any event occurring on the barrier islands is coordinated with each of the major stakeholders; that events held on the entire Mote leasehold should be coordinated with the LMR. Mr. Schneider stated that Mote is not currently required to obtain approval and does not desire to begin a new approval process. Michael Connolly, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the current draft of the Sikth Amendment to the Lease Agreement indicates special event restrictions will become applicable to the entire leasehold if Mote hosts any special event at the new Mote Marine Mammal Center; that subsequent to one special event at the Mote Marine Mammal Center the restrictions apply to any future special event within the entire leasehold; and quoted Section 3, Use of Leasehold, of the draft Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement as follows: In the event Tenant uses the exhibition area of the Ann and Alfred Goldstein Marine Mammal Center for a special event, said use shall trigger the special event restrictions and regulations set forth in this Section. Once a special event is conducted with the Ann and Alfred Goldstein Marine Mammal Center, the restrictions set forth herein shall become effective and shall apply throughout the Leasehold. Attorney Connolly stated that once the restrictions become effective, the restrictions apply leasehold-wide; that one special event in the new Mote Marine Mammal Center triggers the special event restrictions. Commissioner Servian stated that the wording is not understood; that the suggestion is to provide any event with over 400 participants anywhere on the leasehold would trigger the special event permitting process. Attorney Connolly stated that the language provided is based on negotiations between Mote and the Administration. Attorney Patten stated that Mote is complying with the system which has been in place since 1978; that special events are conducted at the Mote site, parking is on-site, and traffic is adequately accommodated; that events are conducted indoors on-site; that use of the Mote Marine Mammal Center for a special event will change the approval process, resulting in the special events criteria taking effect; that approval by the City Manager is required for any event over 400 people; that events involving between 100 and 400 people are limited to four weekly. Commissioner Servian stated that the opportunity to renegotiate the Lease provides an appropriate time to place language in the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement indicating special events involving over 400 people anywhere on the leasehold site should come through the City Manager. Attorney Patten stated that events involving over 400 people will require the approval process which is currently in place. Commissioner Servian stated that the concern is the significant amount of traffic in the area if more than one large event is conducted. Mayor Palmer stated that an event at the Mote Marine Mammal Center will trigger the requirement for approval on the entire site. BOOK 56 Page 27330 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27331 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Attorney Patten stated that approval for events with over 400 people at any location at the Mote site is acceptable. On motion of Commissioner Bilyeu and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to approve the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement with the addition of language to require approval by the City Manager for events involving over 400 people. Mayor Palmer referred to the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement included in the Agenda backup material and stated that Section 3, Use of Leasehold, indicates the exhibit area of the Ann and Alfred Goldstein Mammal Center may be used after operating hours; that Section 3 further indicates the primary use of the exhibit area is to raise funds for the benefit of the tenant; that many organizations meet at Mote for fundraising. Attorney Patten stated that the phrase, "raise funds for the benefit of the tenant,' T modifies the word, "marketing" in the Sixth Amendment to the Lease Agreement as concerns existed regarding sales of merchandise unrelated to Mote; that the phrase refers only to marketing campaigns. Mayor Palmer disagreed; and stated that the language should be changed. Attorney Patten stated that the language of the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement will be changed. City Manager McNees stated that two sets of restrictions are proposed in the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement which are related to: 1) events with more than 400 attendees, and 2) the occurrence of limited special events with between 100 and 400 attendees which is limited to four times per week; that the perception is events with 100 to 400 attendees will require no involvement with the City. Commissioner Servian stated that is correct. On motion of Commissioner Bilyeu and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to extend the meeting until completion of the Agenda. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, no; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Attorney Connolly stated that the Commission is indicating special event restrictions will go into effect if a special event with over 400 attendees occurs anywhere on the leasehold; and asked if restrictions for events with 100 to 400 attendees will be eliminated? Mayor Palmer stated that the restriction is eliminated. Commissioner Servian agreed. Commissioner Servian stated that the Administration should coordinate events with the LMR. City Manager McNees stated that events on St. Armands Circle should be well coordinated; that approvals are limited to ensure events do not overlap and cause traffic congestion and overcrowding; that allowing events seven days per week may trigger the necessity of review; and asked if the Administration will only have to communicate with the LMR for events involving over 400 attendees? Commissioner Servian stated that is correct; that the majority of events at Mote occur in the evening; that daytime events at Mote do not negatively affect the area. City Manager McNees stated that a concern was the creation of the new space had the potential to trigger a significantly higher demand for special events; that the number of events with less than 400 attendees will not be restricted. Attorney Patten stated that an increase in events is unlikely due to the removal of the restaurant from the previously submitted site plan for the Mote Marine Mammal Center. Commissioner Bilyeu asked if Mote has ever been refused approval to conduct an event? Mr. Schneider stated that Mote has never been required to request approval for an event in the leasehold. Vice Mayor Martin stated that no leasehold on Ken Thompson Park has been required to request approval for an event. Mayor Palmer, with the approval of Commissioner Bilyeu as the maker of the motion and Commissioner Servian as the seconder of the motion, restated and called for a vote on the motion to approve the Sixth Amendment to Lease Agreement with: 1) the addition of language to require approval by the City Manager for events involving over 400 people; 2) the elimination of the BOOK 56 Page 27332 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27333 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. restriction of limiting events to four times per week with attendance of less than 400; and 3) a change in the language regarding funds received from marketing campaigns. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: BOBBY JONES ACTION PLAN FOLLOW-UP SUPPORTED THE ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDED IN THE BOBBY JONES GOLF COURSE ACTION PLAN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PROPOSED LIGHTING; DIRECTED THE BOBBY JONES GOLF COURSE ACTION PLAN BE PRESENTED TO THE PARKS, F RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD FOR PUBLIC INPUT FOR PRESENTATION BACK WITH RECOWHENDATIONS: DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO INVESTIGATE THE USE OF SOLAR OR BATTER OPERATED SIGNAGE AT THE BOBBY JONES GOLF COURSE, ; DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMISSION CHANGING THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOBBY JONES GOLF COURSE ADVISORY BOARD TO INCLUDE MEMBERS WITH BACKGROUNDS AS INDICATED (AGENDA ITEM VI-4) CD 4:39 through 5:03 V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission; referred to the Action Plan matrix included in the Agenda backup material and stated that an issue is the Executive Course at the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that a review of the Parks + Connectivity Master Plan indicates the Executive Course may be considered for a park; that appropriate funds should exist prior to the planning process to allow moving forward quickly subsequent to reaching a decision; that $900,000 is included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2004/2005 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); that consideration of additional funding for an east Sarasota park as part of the FY 2004/05 budget process is suggested. Mr. Schneider continued that the issues regarding sale of any portion of the Bobby Jones Golf Course and a different use for the American and/or British golf courses require no further action. Mayor Palmer stated that the issue should be open to the public for complete consideration prior to the Commission's making decisions regarding any alterations or changes to the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board should be included in discussions. Mr. Schneider stated that the issue regarding use of the Executive Course will be referred to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the issue should be referred to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board for discussion and subsequently brought back to the Commission prior to public dialog. Mayor Palmer agreed. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to direct the Administration to refer consideration of the use of the Bobby Jones Golf Course Executive Course to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board and report back to the Commission. Mayor Palmer stated that voting on a motion at this time is a concern since an individual has signed up to speak regarding the issue; that the preference is to defer a motion until the individual has had the opportunity to speak. Commissioner Atkins, as maker of the motion, with the approval of Commissioner Bilyeu, as seconder of the motion, withdrew the motion. Mr. Schneider stated that the issues regarding continuing the current method of operation and the possible change in the mission of the Bobby Jones Golf Course require no further action; that the issues of capital or operations improvements require no further action; that Staff has determined no benefit will be derived in seeking historic designation for the first 18 holes of the golf course, as considerable protections exist due to the Open rratwSeraie Future Land Use Classification; that Staff recommends the City not seek historic designation; therefore, no further action is required. Mr. Schneider continued that Staff is currently in the process of installing signage on 17th Street and Fruitville and Beneva Roads; that electric signs would be expensive; that installation of the signs will be complete by the end of FY 2003/04. Vice Mayor Martin stated that solar-powered signs are available and should be investigated. Mayor Palmer agreed; and stated that Dattery-operated lighting should also be considered. BOOK 56 Page 27334 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27335 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mr. Schneider stated that considering solar or battery-operated lighting will be pursued; that the Commission requested reinstitution of the Bobby Jones Golf Course Advisory Board (Advisory Board); that the Commission requested Staff recommend the types of backgrounds of individuals to comprise the membership. Mr. Schneider referred to his March 8, 2004, memorandum to the Commission regarding the Advisory Board, included in the Agenda backup material; and continued that Staff recommends the Bobby Jones golf Course Advisory Board consist of members with the following backgrounds: Financial management-type related to activities of operation of the Bobby Jones Golf Course; - One or two golfers; Landscape/horticultural; - Neighborhood representative; - Annual fee holder; - Parks and recreation; Environmental; - Planning/marketing, - General contractor/Dulding trades; Facilities management; and Students Taking Active Roles (STAR) in Sarasota County. Mr. Schneider further stated that Staff continues to work with The First Tee Program to better determine The First Tee's requirements for use of the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that Staff will report back to the Commission. Mr. Schneider stated further that the issue of indirect cost allocation is part of the budget process; that to receive Audubon Certification requires determining the cost of making the improvements which would qualify the Bobby Jones Golf Course for Audubon Certification; that a cost benefit package will be presented to the Commission. Philip Morris, 3856 Breezemont Drive (34232), came before the Commission and stated that he has been a resident of Sarasota since 1981, is 85 years old, and enjoys golfing; that the Commission is requested to retain the Executive Course which is a valuable facility; that the Executive Course is frequently played and is well-used throughout the day during the golfing season; that the Executive Course is valuable to older people as the course is shorter; that the Executive Course has all the facilities of a regular course but is shorter; that the Executive Course is also valuable for children beginning to learn to play golf; that fewer and fewer facilities are open to the public; that significant golf courses are being closed for real estate development or are turning private; that the only way to play golf for the general public will be to join a country club if the present trend continues; that joining a country club may cost in excess of $50,000 and approximately $5,000 to $10,000 annually which is not viable for many people; that residents and visitors value the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that the Bobby Jones Golf Course is an important attraction; that the Commission is urged to retain the Executive Course. Mayor Palmer stated that removing the Executive Course is not being considered; that other possible uses in conjunction with the Executive Course are being considered. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to support the Administration's recommended Bobby Jones Golf Course Action Plan with the exception of the proposed lighting and to present the Bobby Jones Golf Course Action Plan to the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board for public input and discussion to bring back recommendations to the Commission. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the Administration is directed to investigate the use of solar or battery-operated signage at the Bobby Jones Golf Course. Mayor Palmer stated that the current Bobby Jones Golf Course Advisory Board is comprised of five members. Mr. Schneider stated that the committee which served informally in the past is comprised of six members. Mayor Palmer stated that seven members with a STAR Board Member is preferred. BOOK 56 Page 27336 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27337 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Vice Mayor Martin agreed. Commissioner Atkins stated that nine members are suggested; that fresh ideas are required; that a representative. of The First Tee and a youth should be appointed to the Bobby Jones Golf Course Advisory Board; that few new members can be appointed as six currently serve. Mayor Palmer stated that a current member will not be automatically appointed to the new advisory board by the Commission. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the current Advisory Board is not appointed. Mayor Palmer agreed. Vice Mayor Martin stated that a STAR member would be a youth. Commissioner Atkins stated that all youths are not STAR members; that young people willing to participate should not be precluded from participating by designating a STAR member. Vice Mayor Martin stated that a having a junior golfer serve on the Advisory Board is a good suggestion. Commissioner Servian agreed. Mayor Palmer stated that a seven member Advisory Board plus one STAR member is possible; that a nine member Advisory Board is also possible; and asked if including a STAR member with eight additional people on the Advisory Board is suggested? Commissioner Atkins stated that nine members is suggested. Mayor Palmer asked if the suggestion is nine members plus a STAR member? Commissioner Atkins stated that a STAR member was not suggested. Vice Mayor Martin stated that nine members including a youth was suggested. Mayor Palmer stated that a youth who is not a STAR member can be appointed to the Advisory Board; and stated that hearing no objections, the Commission's consensus is a nine member Advisory Board will be established. Mayor Palmer stated that the background of the Advisory Board members should be as follows: Financial; Recreation facility management; and Facility users, one of which is an annual fee holder. Commissioner Atkins stated that all members of the Advisory Board should be users of the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that a non-user should not provide advice regarding the operation of Bobby Jones Golf Course. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the Advisory Board should consist of members who are completely objective and not related to the Bobby Jones Golf Course. Commissioner Servian stated that annual fee holders, a junior golfer, and a facility user should be members of the Advisory Board; that someone with a financial background may or may not be a facility user; that a person with financial background is essential. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, a member with lamdscap/lorticultural environmental background is suggested. Commissioner Servian stated that a member from The First Tee should be appointed. Vice Mayor Martin agreed; and stated that a youth and an individual with an environmental background should be appointed. Commissioner Bilyeu asked if a neighborhood representative will be appointed? Vice Mayor Martin stated that an answer cannot be provided. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the application for the Advisory Board can include a question which asks if the applicant is a facility user. BOOK 56 Page 27338 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27339 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Atkins stated that the address and use of the facility can help determine the selection of an applicant. Mayor Palmer stated that the preferred backgrounds provided for Advisory Board members are: Management related to recreational facilities management, Two facility users, one of which is an annual fee holder; Landscape, horticultural, or environmental background; - Financial; - Junior golfer; - The First Tee member; - Environmental science; and Marketing. Raymond Grady, Manager, Bobby Jones Golf Course, came before the Commission and stated that a background in food and beverage may be appropriate. Commissioner Servian stated that food and beverage experience could fall under the recreation facility manager category. Mayor Palmer agreed. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that food and beverage experience may or may not fall under the recreation facility manager category. Commissioner Servian agreed. Mayor Palmer stated that a recreation facility manager with food and beverage experience can be considered. Mr. Grady stated that the listed backgrounds are suggestions for consideration. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to direct the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the Commission changing the composition of the Bobby Jones Golf Course Advisory Board to include members with the following backgrounds: Management related to recreational facilities management; Two facility users, one of which is an annual fee holder; Landscape, horticultural, or environmental background; - Financial; - Junior golfer; - The First Tee member; - Environmental science; and Marketing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yesi Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: : LIDO BEACH FEDERAL RENOURISHMENT PROJECT RE: CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE LITIGATION REGARDING THE ARMY'S FEBRUARY 2, 2004, LETTER ELIMINATING FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN THE RENOURISHMENT PROJECTS - DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO REVIEW THE ANALYSIS AND REÇOMMEND WHETHER OR NOT TO JOIN THE CLASS ACTION; AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER TO DISCUSS AND NEGOTIATE THE ESTIMATED COSTS OF JOINING THE CLASS ACTION SUIT; AND AUTHORIZED THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO PLACE THE MATTER ON THE MARCH 30, 2004, SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA (AGENDA ITEM VI-6) CD 5:03 through 5:10 Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that approximately six weeks ago the Assistant Secretary of the Army sent letters to several communities indicating a change in the Federal Administration's commitment regarding funding for periodic renourishment of beaches; that the City did not receive the letter; however, the Lido Beach Renourishment Project is currently in a feasibility study phase; that the feasibility study was completed 15 months ago, was submitted to the headquarters of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps of Engineers) in Washington, DC, but has not yet been approved; that a meeting occurred with representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers on January 16, 2004, during which a commit tment was made the feasibility study would be completed and the project would receive consideration of the Army Corps of Engineers approval soon; that a meeting was attended in Washington, DC, with the staff of Bob Graham and Bill Nelson, US Senators from the State of Florida, and Katherine Harris, US House of Representatives, 13th Congressional District, at which the staff indicated the Army Corps of Engineers will be BOOK 56 Page 27340 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27341 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. asked the status of approval of the feasibility study; that currently, nothing has been received from the Army Corps of Engineers; that the concern is the Army Corps of Engineers is not communicating with the City to avoid indicating funding for beach renourishment will be discontinued; that the following three options exist to ensure funding for beach renourishment will continue: 1. Pass legislation to force the Federal Administration to obey the law; 2. Pursue legal action; 3. Do nothing. Mr. Daughters continued that pursuing legislation will require approximately one year; that the alternative is to consider joining the potential class action suit; that the law firm of Holland and Knight prepared an in-depth analysis of the elimination of Federal participation in renourishment projects; that Staff recommends the Commission direct the City Attorney's Office to review the analysis and recommend whether or not to join the class action suit; that a question is if the City has standing to join a Class action suit; that Staff recommends the Commission authorize the City Manager to discuss and negotiate the estimated costs of joining the class action suit; that Staff recommends the Commission authorize the City Auditor and Clerk to place the matter on the Agenda of the March 30, 2004, Special Commission meeting. Mr. Daughters further stated that the group contemplating forming a class action suit must receive an answer regarding joining the class action suit by March 31, 2004. Mayor Palmer asked for clarification regarding the phrase "negotiate the estimated costs" as indicated by Staff. Mr. Daughters stated that the costs are not known; that the City would negotiate the City's share. Mayor Palmer stated that more information will be received at the March 30, 2004, Special Commission meeting. Commissioner Servian stated that the Federal Administration should be forced to obey the 1996 Congressional mandate; that ignoring a Congressional mandate is not understood. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendations to: 1) direct the City Attorney's Office to review the analysis and recommend whether or not to join the class action, 2) authorize the City Manager to discuss and negotiate the estimated costs of joining the class action suit, and 3) authorize the City Auditor and Clerk to place the matter on the Agenda of the March 30, 2004, Special Commission meeting. Commissioner Servian stated that the hope is to encourage as many beach communities as possible to join with the City; that beach renourishment is critically important to all the beach communities for tourism revenuei that Sarasota's economy rests on revenue received from tourism. Vice Mayor Martin stated that tourism revenue is important throughout the nation. Mayor Palmer stated that tourism revenue is not an issue indigenous to Florida. Commissioner Servian agreed. Mayor Palmer stated that the Florida League of Cities is disseminating information regarding the elimination of funds for beach renourishment throughout the State; that the hope is the National League of Cities will become involved. Vice Mayor Martin asked if the law firm of Holland and Knight is leading the class action suit? Mr. Daughters stated that between the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association and lobbyist, Howard Marlowe, a request was made for Holland and Knight to prepare an analysis; that Holland and Knight provides lobbying advice for many communities, including Sarasota County; that the network is working. Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 15. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA AND BROTHERS OF HOLY CROSS, INC., I (BID #03-24M) FOR CITY SURPLUS PROPERTY, LOTS 5 AND 6 HOWARD COURT SARASOTA = DENIED (AGENDA ITEM VII-I) BOOK 56 Page 27342 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27343 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. CD 5:10 through 5:14 Mayor Palmer stated that the Item was pulled from Consent Agenda No. 1 and is regarding approval of the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Brothers of Holy Cross, Inc. Vice Mayor Martin stated that on March 20, 2003, Bid No. 03-24M was awarded to Brothers of Holy Cross, Inc., as the highest and most responsive bidder for City Surplus Property, lots five and six located on Howard Court; that the understanding at the time was two houses would be constructed on the property within one year, which has not occurred; that the Brothers of Holy Cross is requesting the City modify the requirement to construct the houses within three years from the time the Commission approves the Agreement, which is a concern; that a high demand for housing sites exists, particularly in the Downtown; that having City owned property vacant without homes for three years is a concern and is the reason for pulling the Item from Consent Agenda No. 1. Nancy Carolan, Director of General Services, came before the Commission and stated that the views expressed by Vice Mayor Martin are shared; that the Brothers of Holy Cross was provided the opportunity to rescind the bid but decided against rescinding the bid and requested a meeting with Deputy City Manager V. Peter Schneider and Staff to discuss the reasons the homes have not beèn constructed; that the financial matters of the Brothers of Holy Cross are subsidized through donations; that donations have been slim; that the Brothers of Holy Cross did not have sufficient funds at the time to begin to construct the two homes; that the intent of the two residential homes is to provide a retirement home for the Brothers of Holy Cross; that the Attorney for the Brothers of Holy Cross met with Staff and requested Staff bring forward the request to modify the bid requirements extending the time to construct the two homes to three years; that the Brothers of Holy Cross would Close on the property on or before May 14, 2004, if the Commission approves the Purchase and Sale Agreement; that the Brothers of Holy Cross would have up to three years from the date of closing to secure a building permit; that the Brothers of Holy Cross will then diligently procure construction of two single family residences which will not take longer than 12 months; that the amount of time is substantial. Vice Mayor Martin stated that Howard Court was conceived and development began more than ten years ago by Jack Conway; that two other lots are already owned by the Brothers of Holy Cross, which are also sitting vacant; that having City owned lots sit vacant with the demand and the need for Downtown housing is not supported. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to deny the Purchase and Sale Agreement Between the City of Sarasota and the Brothers of Holy Cross, Inc. Commissioner Atkins stated that the value of the property and the need for affordable housing in the City is important; that a HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI project is planned; that the developer is looking for property; that waiting four years for the construction of two homes is not supported. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the recollection is other bids were received; that an appraisal of the property should be performed rather than going to the next bidder. Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yesi Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 16. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL RE: : AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN SARASOTA AND MANATEE COUNTIES, THE CITIES OF SARASOTA AND BRADENTON, THE TOWN OF LONGBOAT KEY, THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) CONCERNING THE SARASOTA BAY NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM - APPROVED WITH CHANGES IN LANGUAGE TO SECTIONS 6.2 AND 6.6 (AGENDA ITEM VII-II) CD 5:14 through 5:23 Mayor Palmer stated that the Item was pulled from Consent Agenda No. 1 and is regarding the Interlocal Agreement between Sarasota and Manatee Counties, the Cities of Sarasota and Bradenton, the Town of Longboat Key, the Florida Department Of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) concerning the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program (SBNEP). Mayor Palmer referred to a March 3, 2004, memorandum to the City Manager from Michael Connolly, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, included in the Agenda backup material regarding the SBNEP BOOK 56 Page 27344 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27345 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Interlocal Agreement; and continued that the requirements and financial obligations placed on the City in the Interlocal Agreement are a concern; that the memorandum indicates the following sections of the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement which place financial and/or administrative responsibilities upon the City are a concern: - Section 4.4 which requires a proposed Action Plan within 60 days; Section 5.2(c) which requires the City to transfer all tangible personal property, records and the like to the new SBNEP; Section 6.1 which provides the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for Sarasota Bay (CCMP) shall become a standard by which regulatory actions are taken; - Section 6.2(b) which also requires a conceptual Action Plan with 2 months; Section 6(c) which requires the City to appoint an individual or individuals to serve as its liaison with SBNEP; Section 6(d) which requires the City to annually review and update the Action Plan and the goals thereof by providing supplements to the Action Plan; - Section 6.5 which requires the City to periodically review its regulatory processes to incorporate changes necessary to meet the goals of the CCMP; Section 7.1 which requires an Action Plan within two years; Section 7.2 which requires an annual review of the Action Plan and supplements thereto; and Article 9 which requires funding in the amount of $33,000 per year. Michael Connolly, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that he represents the City; that the intent is to ensure his client makes an informed decision; that the SBNEP will become a separate entity if the Interlocal Agreement is approved; that the SBNEP will no longer be part of the City; that the intent is to ensure the City Manager is aware of responsibilities which would fall upon the Cityi that City Staff would be required to perform the functions such as preparing the Action Plan and other responsibilities; that the intent is to keep his client informed concerning the obligations; that he has no legal objection to the Interlocal Agreement which is indicated in the memorandum; that the intent of the memorandum is to ensure his client is informed. Mayor Palmer asked for clarification regarding the cost and Staff implications. Mark Alderson, Executive Director of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program, came before the Commission, referred to the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement, included in the Agenda backup material throughout the discussion; and stated that Section 4.4, Water Quality Management Consortium Responsibilities, will be clarified; that the Commission adopted Resolution No. 04R-1733 appropriating $20,000 from the unappropriated fund balance of the SBNEP fund to provide funds to prepare watershed management plans for Whitaker Bayou, Bowlees Creek, and Phillippi Creek, which were essentially the management plans due within 60 days under the Water Quality Management Consortium; that basically, the Comprehensive Management Plan which was prepared in 1995 is being refined and will included more detail; that the Water Quality Management Consortium consists of a technical committee which will be overseeing the clean up of Whitaker Bayou, Bowlees Creek, and Phillippi Creek since the three bodies of water have been determined to not meet water quality standards. Mayor Palmer asked if any other bodies of water located in the City have not met water quality standards? Mr. Alderson stated that no other bodies of water have been identified as being impaired under State water quality standards at the present time; that the State water quality standards is the important component; that City Staff is involved and well aware of the responsibility of the Water Quality Management Consortium. Mayor Palmer stated that the additional requirements and financial obligations of the City are the concern. Mr. Alderson stated that no other additional requirements or financial obligations of the City are known at this time. Vice Mayor Martin stated that a seat is held on the Policy Committee of the SBNEP; that the City Manager holds a seat on BOOK 56 Page 27346 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27347 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. the Management Committee of the SBNEP; that issues concerning the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement have been closely followed; that Attorney Connolly previously reviewed the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement. City Manager McNees stated that the belief is the Mayor's concern specifically regards language included in Section 6.2, Responsibilities of all Parties as follows: To that end, each of the Parties hereby agrees to: (a) Determine how it will contribute toward the attainment of the goals including their individual goals and time frames for achieving those goals; (b) Submit no later than two months following the effective date of this Agreement, its conceptual Action Plan outlining the projects, initiatives, and strategies it will undertake over a certain period of time to achieve the goals for Sarasota Bay; (c) Appoint upon execution of the Agreement, an individual or individuals to serve as its liaison with the SBNEP on tracking and coordinating CCMP implementation and submit the individual(s) name (s) in writing to the SBNEP; and (d) Annually review and, where new projects are required to accomplish the goals, resubmit its Action Plan to the Management Board and thereafter the Policy Board in the form of an Action Plan Supplement, and supplement the plan with such details describing the projects it will undertake. City Manager McNees continued that City Staff will not have any responsibility regarding Section 6.2( (b) concerning the Action Plan; that the phrase "each of the Parties agrees to" included in Section 6.2 is confusing; that the City cannot agree to write the Action Plan or some of the other work since the work is the responsibility of SBNEP Staff; that clarification is necessary; that direction from the Commission to clarify the language is suggested; that the following Section 6.6(b), Additional Responsibilities of Local Governments, is not considered possible: Include the goals contained in its applicable Action Plan, as amended from time to time, into the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan) and necessary actions in its capital improvement plans as amended from time to time. City Manager McNees further stated that agreement has not been reached at the Commission table to change the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), except through the comprehensive planning process; that the Commission can agree to consider including goals in the Action Plan in the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the language in the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement should be clarified; that the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement is considered acceptable except for some points which should be clarified. Mayor Palmer stated that the understanding is the Administration believes the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement does not add any requirements to provide additional Staff time or additional costs above the funding of $33,000 per year. City Manager McNees stated that is correct; that no more money or Staff time will be required. Mayor Palmer asked if the concerns of the City Attorney's Office have been answered? Attorney Connolly stated that he does not have concerns. Mayor Palmer asked if the concerns which were identified in the March 3, 2004, memorandum have been appropriately addressed? Attorney Connolly stated yes. Mayor Palmer stated that some minor changes will be made to Sections 6.2 and 6.6 of the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement. City Attorney Taylor asked the person responsible for preparing the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement? Marian Pomeroy, Manager, Finance Depa: rtment, SBNEP, came before the Commission; and stated that the legally adopted Tampa Bay, Tampa, Florida, National Estuary Program Agreement was used as a model for the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement; that some of the parties to the Tampa Bay National Estuary Program Agreement are parties to the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement which assisted in BOOK 56 Page 27348 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27349 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. developing the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement; that the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement was forwarded to all parties for legal review; that the request is the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement be adopted with minor changes to which the SBNEP is amenable; that the SBNEP does not have actual legal advice due to the current quasi-relationship with the various governmental entities; that the SBNEP is relying on all the parties involved to suggest changes; that the changes will be made. Mayor Palmer asked if the changes to the SBNEP Interlocal Agreement are clear? City Attorney Taylor and City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program Interlocal Agreement with changes in language to Sections 6.2 and 6.6. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the Agenda for the atternoon session will be completed during the evening session. The Commission recessed at 5:23 and reconvened at 6:00. 17. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR 2003, LENNY SCHERRY, ENGINEERING TECH III, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT (AGENDA ITEM XII) CD 6:01 through 6:09 Mayor Palmer requested that City Manager McNees, Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering, City Engineer, and Lenny Scherry, Engineering Technician III, Engineering Department, and Employee of the Year for 2003, join her and the Commission at the Commission table. City Manager McNees stated that Mr. Scherry has been recognized by his peers as the Employee of the Year for 2003; that Mr. Daughters and the entire Engineering Department are present in the Chambers to show Staff's recognition of the honor. Mr. Daughters stated that Mr. Scherry has been employed with the Engineering Department for a number of years; that site plans of all the development applications in the City are reviewed by Mr. Scherry in a professional manner; that the Engineering Department is extremely proud of Mr. Scherry's being chosen Employee of the Year 2003. Mayor Palmer stated that the importance of each employee and the economic impact front line employees have on the future of the City are evident from the award; that the City is honored to have Mr. Scherry as the Employee of the Year for 2003; presented Mr. Scherry with a plaque, a certificate, and a check for $100 as the Employee of the Year Award 2003 in appreciation of his unique performance with the City; congratulated him for his outstanding efforts; and thanked him for serving with excellence and pride. Mr. Scherry recognized the following family members present in the Chambers: Len and Carol Scherry, his parents from Ohio, and sister, Lydia, brother-in-law, Allen Kehrer, nephew, Logan, daughter, Vada Marie, and mother- and father-in-law, Nancy and Bob Wilson. Mr. Scherry stated that his parents and the entire Engineering Department are responsible for his being chosen Employee of the Year for. 2003. Mayor - Palmer stated that the employees of the Engineering Department are present in the Chambers to honor Mr. Scherry and requested that the employees stand to be recognized. 18. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: PROCLAMATION OF MARCH 15, 2004, AS JANE CARRIGAN DAY CD 6:09 through 6:13 Mayor Palmer stated that Jane Carrigan has been working hard for the City for years and has served in many official capacities including as President of the St. Armands Residents Association; that Ms. Carrigan is ill and is unable to attend the meeting; that Ms. Carrigan's credo was "If a small island community cannot get along to solve its problems, how can the world?"; and read the Proclamation declaring March 15, 2004, as Jane Carrigan Day in the City. BOOK 56 Page 27350 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27351 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mayor Palmer stated that best wishes, deepest respect, and heartfelt appreciation for the leadership role displayed in improving the community are expressed to Ms. Carrigan. Mayor Palmer recognized the following members of Boy Scout Troop 23 present in the Chambers to work on Civic Merit Badges: Chuck Janson, Robbie Brimm, Philip Hale and Paul Ganyon. 19. PRESENTATIONS RE: : COMMUNITY REPORT CARD FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS (AGENDA ITEM XIII) CD 6:15 through 6:25 Linda Di Gabriele came before the Commission and referred to computer-generated slides of survey results of the community report card for the Performing Arts displayed on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation and stated that the opportunity to present the results of an exciting study regarding the value the City places on the performing arts is appreciated; that the three-year project called the Performing Arts Research Coalition was designed and implemented by the Urban Institute of Washington, D.C.; that ten cities were selected for the surveyi that Sarasota was chosen as part of the second round of cities; that the primary source of the data for the report is from a household survey involving 800 randomly selected residents of Sarasota and Manatee Counties for 20 minute telephone interviews. Ms. Di Gabriele continued that 85 percent of the respondents indicated the arts are important as the arts are enjoyable; that 79 percent of the respondents indicated the arts are thought provoking; that 76 percent of the respondents indicated the arts assist in understanding other cultures; that 72 percent of the respondents indicated the arts are an important social occasion; that interestingly, the residents felt the value of the arts to the community is more important than the importance to individuals; that 83 percent of the respondents indicated the arts contribute to the economy and the understanding of other cultures; that 92 percent of the respondents indicated the arts contribute to the education and development of children; that 87 percent of the respondents believe the arts improve the quality of life in the community. Ms. Di Gabriele stated further that 71 percent of all the respondents have attended a performing arts production in the last 12 months; that 20 percent of the respondents have attended 10 or more performances in the last 12 months; that 78 percent of the respondents had attended the movies; however, a significantly greater number of people had attended performing arts over sporting events; that very little relationship existed between age and attendance of the performing arts events; that 66 to 72 percent of all respondents from the age of 25 and up attended performing arts events; that 53 percent of the households earning less than $25,000 annually attended performing arts events although income has a high relationship to attendance; that a correlation between education and attendance of the performing arts exists; that nevertheless, respondents with a high school education or lower are still attending the performing arts. Ms. Di Gabriele further stated that 43 percent of the respondents indicated the arts in Sarasota had a significant influence in the decision to move to the area; that arts attendees are very much engaged in the community by volunteering generously of time; that the performing arts are perceived as essential to the health of the community by residents whether attending the performing arts or not; that all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds perceive the performing arts as a valuable part of living in Sarasota; that the data should assist the community in making important choices in planning for the future; and distributed copies of the report produced by the Urban Institute as well as a summary of the data. 20. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: RE-DESIGNATION OF US 41 FROM US 301 TO GULF STREAM AVENUE TO AN ALTERNATE ROUTE = APPROVED TO KEEP BAYFRONT DRIVE AS A FOUR-LANE ROADWAY AND ELIMINATE THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE RE- DESIGNATION OF US 41 FROM US 301 TO GULF STREAM AVENUE TO AN ALTERNATE ROUTE (AGENDA ITEM XIV-A) CD 6:25 through 8:56 Mayor Palmer stated that the first Non Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing concerns Staff's recommendation to re-designate US 41 and not to narrow US 41 from four lanes to two; and requested that Staff come forward for the presentation. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering, City Engineer, and Sam Freija, Manager of Traffic Engineering, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that the recommendations of Staff are to: BOOK 56 Page 27352 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27353 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. 1. Keep Bayiront Drive as a four-lane road and proceed with a feasibility study for the re-designation of US 41 from US 301 to Gulf Stream Avenue to an alternative route; and 2. Direct Staff to take action on the selected options and to explore options to fund the re-designation study from City funds. Mr. Daughters continued that the only purpose of the feasibility study is to re-designate US 41 to another location; that no intent exists to eventually change the Bayfront Drive to a two-lane road; that a personal commitment is given not to change Bayfront Drive to two lanes in the future. Mr. Freija stated that Staif is recommending retaining the existing four-lane Bayfront Drive while proceeding with the re-designation of US 41 to an alternate route. Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing. Mr. Freija stated that the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020) prepared by Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company (DPZ) and adopted with revisions on January 22, 2001, has several transportation recommendations, among which is the two-laning of Bayfront Drive; that a Downtown Mobility Study was initiated in March 2002; that the Downtown Mobility Study found the two-laning was a viable alternative; however, extensive public input evidenced no support for the two-laning of Bayfront Drive; that Staff is therefore recommending to maintain the existing four lanes while proceeding with the re-designation of US 41. Mr. Freija continued that the waterfront is isolated with a US route preventing residents of and visitors to the City from being able to create pedestrian interaction between the waterfront and Downtown; that pedestrian enhancement could then be pursued without going through the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT); that the recommendation is to maintain the four lanes of Bayfront Drive and proceed with the re- designation of US 41. Mayor Palmer requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan explain the public hearing sign-up process. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan stated that all persons wishing to speak at the public hearings are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have five minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when one minute remains; and repeated for the benefit of those present in the Chambers the Pledge of Public Conduct as adopted by the Commission as follows: We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another. We will direct all comments to issues. We will avoid personal attacks. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan. Staff indicated the statements previously made regarding the public hearing before the oath was taken were truthful. City Manager McNees stated that during the Downtown Mobility Study, the Administration and Staff became aware the many legitimate objectives and engineering work were being overwhelmed by the issue of whether or not to two-lane US 41; that the issue of two-laning Bayfront Drive should be discarded; that the focus should be on the objectives of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 and the engineering work of the Downtown Mobility Study. Commissioner Servian stated that an objection is registered for the manner in which the public hearing was opened; that the issue of Bayfront Drive is probably one of the most serious issues facing the City; that the public hearing should be opened correctly. City Attorney Taylor stated that the only issue is if the statements made by Staff were truthful; that Staff indicated on the record the statements are truthful which is sufficient legal remedy. Commissioner Atkins stated that the legal order of the proceedings is satisfactory; that the public hearing should proceed. Vice Mayor Martin and Commissioner Bilyeu agreed. Commissioner Servian stated that the statements of the City Attorney concerning the legality of the public hearing are satisfactory. BOOK 56 Page 27354 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27355 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Atkins stated that the proposal raises serious concern; that the alternative route of US 41 will probably be directed to 17th Street; that for the powerful citizens of the City to decide to direct US 41 through Newtown is a travesty; that expanding 17th Street was personally opposed 15 years ago; that 25 to 30 years ago, an attempt to redirect US 41 and US 301 east was made; that the only location available for redirection is through his constituents' neighborhood; that tearing out affordable housing sO a scenic drive can be created for the affluent is unacceptable; that the actions of the Administration, the Engineering Department, and the citizens of the City are disappointing. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the need for a feasibility study regarding the alternatives for the re-designation of US 41 along the Bayfront should be clarified; that further clarification regarding the options for re-designation of US 41 may become apparent at the current meeting; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is supported; that a livable City should be pedestrian friendly; that a City with vitality should be a City which is inclusive with a better connection to the Bayfront; that two-laning US 41 at the Bayfront is opposed; that the solution is neither politically nor financially viable; that a significant number of other options exist; that the City could be more creative to enhance pedestrian crossing and better manage the traffic with the re-designation of US 41; that decisions concerning pedestrian and vehicular traffic could be made in a more direct manner than at present; that the public should be heard at the current meeting; that additionally, other options for re-designation of US 41 should be explored. Commissioner Servian stated that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 has always been supported; that for two years, the suggestion to narrow US 41 has been opposed; that the re-designation of US 41 from Bayfront Drive is also opposed due to the concern of allowing future proposals to come forward with far less scrutiny; that a concern is the re-designation of US 41 would be to 17th Street; that relocating a State or US highway through a residential neighborhood is not acceptable; that significant resources, time, and talent have been invested into the project; that an alternative design of US 41 along the Bayfront would be money better spent; that the effects of the project touches every fiber in the community; that the re-designation of US 41 and the two- laning of Bayfront Drive are not supported. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the statement was made indicating more control will be provided if US 41 is re-designated; and asked if a public hearing process would be required if a future Commission decides to two-lane Bayfront Drive? Mr. Daughters stated a public hearing process would be necessary. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that two-laning Bayfront Drive/US 41 is not supported; that questions exist regarding the re-designation; that public input would be appreciated. Mayor Palmer agreed with many of the statements of the other Commissioners at the current meeting especially regarding the narrowing of the Bayfront Drive from four lanes to two lanes; and stated that the narrowing of the lanes is not supported; that the possible re-designation of US 41 has been an ongoing inquiryi that a future Commission could come back and change any Ordinance or Resolution or amend the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition; that future Commissions will always have the opportunity to make alterations, which is the nature of government; that re-designating University Parkway or an alternate route through Bradenton as US 41 are possibilities; that the citizens using US 41 will use the streets regardless of the name; that tourists most likely will use the designated US 41; that options exist without narrowing US 41 along the Bayfront to two lanes; that the option of considering the re-designation of US 41 should stay open until further information is available; that the opinion appears unanimous regarding the reduction of traffic lanes on Bayfront Drive. City Manager McNees stated that clarification is necessary before further discussion is elicited; that Staff's recommendation regarding re-designation of US 41 is to conduct a feasibility study; that re-designation of US 41 is not the issue at the current meeting; that Staff is making no recommendation to shift traffic anywhere; that the carrying capacity of the streets would remain the same as at present; that the issue of re-designation is simply about local control; that at least three traffic issues on US 41 have not been resolved satisfactorily due to the necessity for FDOT approval; that the objectives of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 can be achieved while preserving the traffic flow; that 17th Street would appear the least likely alternative for a US 41 designation; that the City is attempting to gain control of the Bayfront Drive portion BOOK 56 Page 27356 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 2735'7 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. of US 41; that the opportunity to analyze the legitimacy of alternatives should be provided. Vice Mayor Martin stated that more information concerning the options available with re-designation of US 41 such as managing traffic flow while increasing pedestrian quality would be appreciated. Mr. Daughters stated that the State requires a continuous roadway for State designated roadways; that the State route to the islands from US 301 through Fruitville Road to US 41 is not a clear continuity of State designated roadway. Vice Mayor Martin asked the opportunities available along the Bayfront Drive area if US 41 was re-designated to an alternative route? Mr. Daughters stated that the intent of re-designation of US 41 is to make the area pedestrian friendly; that the complete list of opportunities is not available; that the intent of re-designation is to meet the goals of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the goals could be met if the roadway was under City control; that achieving the goals of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is difficult if Bayfront Drive is still under the control of FDOT. Mr. Freija stated that pedestrian sleeves are another example of enhancements the City could create along the Bayfront; that approval for such enhancements from the Commission would be necessary; that FDOT approval would not be required if US 41 is re-designated. Commissioner Servian asked if FDOT would provide the same level of scrutiny of future changes on the roadway in the event US 41 were re-designated to an alternate route? Mr. Daughters stated that the answer depends on the amount of State or Federal funding sought to do the work; that the Commission would require no approvals from FDOT if the City was not seeking any State or Federal funding; that review by FDOT or the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) would be required if the City was seeking State or Federal funding. Commissioner Servian stated that additional scrutiny adds to the level of safety, additional landscaping, or other requirements the State or Federal agency may require; that the additional scrutiny is necessary on such a major highway which is the only connection between the barrier islands and the mainland; that the re-designation of US 41 is not supported. Mayor Palmer asked the manner in which State Road 780 from the islands would interface if a re-designation of US 41 occurred? Mr. Daughters stated that continuity must exist; that the State route would have to connect to another State or Federal route; that the road to the islands would have to extend to the re-designated roadway if US 41 was re-designated away from the Bayfront and an alternate route was selected. Mayor Palmer asked if the portion of the road designated as State Road 780 coming from Longboat Key into the Downtown would still come under the control of FDOT? Mr. Daughters stated that the portion of the road designated as State Road 780 would be under the control of FDOT. Commissioner Bilyeu asked if FDOT approval is necessary to adjust the traffic light at Gulf Stream Avenue which would make the traffic flow a little easier? Mr. Daughters stated yes. Mayor Palmer recognized Mayor Ron Johnson and Commissioner Robert Dawson from the Town of Longboat Key present in the Chambers. The following people came before the Commission: Harriet Oxman, Former Chairman of the Barrier Islands Transportation Advisory Commission, 340 South Palm Avenue (34236), stated that she resides at the Sarabande Condominiums which overlooks Bayfront Drive and Ringling Boulevard; that a directional sign was suggested at the intersection of US 41 and Mound Street which would read "To Main Street and the Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport Avoid Longboat Key and the Bayfront area"; that implementing the suggestion would have reduced Bayfront traffic; that the new John Ringling Causeway Bridge is beautiful; however, the effectiveness of managing traffic is unclear; that the plan to manage the traffic is not supported; that Henry Ford made the statement, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"; that the Bayfront area should not be changed; that changing the pedestrian walk signal to 25 seconds to make the Bayfront area more pedestrian friendly would be cost effective and simple; that no permission would be required to do SO. BOOK 56 Page 27358 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27359 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Ken Shelin, President of the Bayfront Condominium Association, 770 South Palm Avenue (34236), submitted for the record a Resolution entitled "To Retain the Four Traffic Lanes of the Bayfront Drive and to Improve Pedestrian Access to the Bayfront"; and stated that the Resolution is presented from the Bayfront Condominium Association which asks the Commission to reject any and all recommendations which would ultimately result in the reduction of the number of traffic lanes on the Bayfront Drive including the re-designation of Bayfront Drive as US 41; that no other major north/south or east/west routes through or around Downtown exist which could be used as alternatives for the existing US 41; that lane reductions on US 41 would create congestion points north and south of the Bayfront which will create substantial traffic congestion rather than providing relief; that the funding implications of re-designation for capital improvements and maintenance of the roadways should be considered; that funding will be lost if the Federal and State highway designation is eliminated for the three blocks at the Bayfront; that the City taxpayers will have to bear the burden for capital improvements and maintenance of the roadway; that a global approach to traffic planning is necessary; that a roadway carrying in excess of 40,000 vehicles per day cannot be reduced in carrying capacity by 50 percent and an expectation created for the vehicles to go elsewhere when no alternate roadway exists. Jerry Elden, Member, Board of Directors, the Bird Key Association, Former President of the Bird Key Association, 328 West Royal Flamingo Drive (34236), submitted for the record a petition with 573 signatures requesting the Commission abandon the plan to narrow US 41 along the Bayfront as the narrowing of US 41 and re-routing of traffic to provide additional Downtown parking for a more pedestrian-friendly area will create more traffic, pedestrian, and bicyclist problems; and indicating that other viable options to improve parking and pedestrian movement along the Bayfront exist including closing Gulf Stream Avenue to traffic from US 41 and converting the area to parking only and constructing an aesthetically pleasing pedestrian bridge over US 41 to Bayfront Park; that the proposal to narrow US 41 is vehemently opposed. Mr. Elden also submitted for the record a letter from the Bird Key Improvement Association Board of Directors on behalf of the residents and property owners of more than 500 homes and lots in the Bird Key Subdivision condemning the plan to narrow US 41/Bayfront Drive from the current four lane configuration to the proposed two lanes of significantly slower traffic. Mr. Elden stated that the concern regarding re-designation of US 41 is supported; that the Commission is urged to be careful of the consultants hired; that consultants generally get paid by management and come back with an answer which management desires to hear; that the views of constituents are not heard; that the management of a City or State should listen to the constituents; that the narrowing of US 41 is not acceptable and is based on erroneous input and conclusions. John Tylee, Executive Director, Downtown Partnership of Sarasota (Downtown Partnership) 1818 Main Street (34230), stated that four lanes is supported on Bayfront Drive; that more long-term planning for transportation in the City is also supported; that an assessment of the long-term use of US 41 to University Parkway or perhaps north from Mound Street is necessary; that specific issues such as Bayfront Drive should be analyzed in a broader context; that the long-term use of US 41 from Bradenton to Mound Street will be an issue now and in the upcoming decades. Randy Schweitzer, 674 Mourning Dove Drive (34236), distributed and read a letter dated March 15, 2004, indicating that residency in Sarasota began two years ago; that the rampant development was shocking; that sleeping at night must be difficult as a Commissioner and resident realizing the streets cannot handle the traffic; that the idea of reducing the capacity of Bayfront Drive is ludicrous and would be totally irresponsible to the citizens, tourists, and children; that the published results of a poll of the community on this monumental issue has not been available; that the study should have been done in season; that electric traffic counters should be place on the site to determine the proposed impact; that the Commission was elected to make conscientious, intelligent decisions for the community, not create an unsolvable gridlock by narrowing Bayfront Drive; that many baby boomers are discovering Sarasota and moving into new condominium units; that the popularity of the City will not change now that Inc. Magazine rated the City No. 3 in medium-sized business cities and the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) rated the City as being in the top ten of retirement communities; that the Commissioners should take a closer look at the rampant growth overtaxing the streets, water, and sewer systems before making such an important decision; that before the conclusion of the Commission's terms, the City will have an BOOK 56 Page 27360 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27361 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. extra 20,000 people in season creating total gridlock at the Ringling/US 41/Bayfront intersection; that a comprehensive study of the impact of narrowing US 41 along the Bayfront is necessary. Robert Johnson, representing the Bayfront Condominium Association Traffic Committee, 27 South Orange Avenue (34236), displayed and referred to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Average Annual Daily Traffic for 1997/1998 displayed on the Chamber monitors; and stated that traffic at the Gulf Stream Avenue area did not increase during the two years of the study; that traffic trends from the FDOT estimates Gulf Stream Avenue in the year 2020 will have 58,800 automobiles passing through the intersection; that 51,200 automobiles will pass over the John Ringling Causeway Bridge; that Downtown is the financial district for Sarasota County; that people come into the City every day and night; that 48,000 automobiles cross from Manatee County through University Parkway and US 41; that 51,000 automobiles pass through the US 41 and US 301 junction in front of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune every day; that no feasibility study has been presented to indicate the location of an alternate route to US 41; that US 301 is already saturated; that the 17th Street area is familiar to him as a Representative, a Senator, and a citizen; that FDOT maintenance of a roadway will be lost; that funds for the roundabouts will be lost; that no alternative route for US 41 exists; that the idea to re-designate a portion of US 41 is impractical if not impossible; that the study at the Bayfront area should be limited to pedestrian safety; that tax dollars spent on any other studies would be a waste of funds. Gil Waters, 136 Golden Gate Point (34236), stated that the presentation is for the memory of the Commissioners in the early 1960s who created Bayfront Drive; that Bayfront Drive was created as no other way existed to get from the north to the south, from the east to the west, except along Mound Street which did not yet exist; that Bayfront Drive was built to assist traffic in moving freely through the Downtown area from the north, from the islands, and from the booming south; that Bayfront Drive has been successful; that 45 years have passed; that no alternate routes exist; that having served on the Mobility Advisory Committee, the consultant's alternatives were discussed; that the vote was to retain US 41 as a four lane road and to provide pedestrian overpasses, signalization changes, or pedestrian sleeves to retain the capacity of US 41; that retaining the Federal highway designation on all of US 41 is urged; that US 41 should not become a burden on the citizens of the City which elected the Commission; that funding is available for Federal and State roadways; that the Commission should move forward with the same vision as the former Commissioners during the two terms required to make the Bayfront Drive a reality; that a proposal from the Mobility Now Committee calls for the installation of an additional lane; that the City should follow through with the promises made by the developers of the Ritz- Carlton Hotel and Condominiums; that work should begin on the additional lane as soon as possible. Dan Lobeck, representing Control Growth Now, 2033 Main Street, (34237), stated that the growth management and transportation management policies and plans of the Commission should be changed; that the two alternative proposals presented by Staff and consultants at the current meeting should be rejected; that the entire Downtown Mobility Study should be rejected; that the City is headed for significant traffic problems in the future; that Staff and consultants considered the plan to reduce Bayfront Drive to two lanes as a feasible plan; that reducing the number of lanes on an already overcrowded street is insanity; that Staff indicates US 41 should be re-designated at the Bayfront to give the City the flexibility for alternative proposals without the scrutiny of the Federal or State government; that Staff is unable to answer what alternative proposals are being considered which is a concern; that the alternatives are not indicated due to the anticipated disfavor of the citizens. Mr. Lobeck continued that Staff and consultant recommendations are being taken seriously to re-designate a portion of US 41 which leads to more constriction of US 41 traffic; that the Downtown Mobility Study rejected future growth and traffic rates without taking into account any provisions in the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that a historic growth rate of 2.4 percent was rounded down to 2 percent and arbitrarily reduced to 1.2 percent; that the growth rate figures constitutes the traffic which underlies the Downtown Mobility Study and justifies as feasible the two-laning of the Bayfront Drive as well as the pro-growth policies the Commission is placing on the community; that the Sarasota County Openly Plans for Excellence (SCOPE) program recommended a study to consider eliminating the Traffic Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA); that all the negative consequences of traffic congestion such as air pollution, ambulance delays, accidents, including fatal accidents, damage to tourism, harm to business by delay of deliveries of products and services, increased cost of fuel and maintenance of automobiles, loss of family time to commuters and BOOK 56 Page 27362 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27363 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. others, diminution of the quality of life, and the destruction of what is held valuable in the City are in the hands of the Commission; that the course should be changed at the current meeting; that US 41 should not be re-designated; that the importance of mobility should be recognized while simultaneously enhancing pedestrian use. Albert Moore, 700 Ringling Boulevard (34236), stated that the idea is to make the Bayfront more accessible to pedestrians; that mention was made of controlling the traffic lights to enable citizens to walk across Bayfront Drive; that citizens seem to be able to get across the road without much of a problem; that the re-designation of US 41 is not supported; that additional funds would be required to maintain the road if US 41 is re-designated which is not acceptable; that other alternatives should be explored; that the waterfront areas of other major metropolitan areas which have four lane roads should be visited. Robert Bryant, 700 Ringling Boulevard, Apartment No. 308 (34236), deferred from speaking. Thomas Giannaccini, 11 Sunset Drive (34236), deferred from speaking. Robert Schlanger, Sarasota Bay Club, 1299 North Tamiami Trail (34236), stated that the decision before the Commission involves public safety and the preservation of the scenic value of the waterfront; that Bayfront Drive is a critical link in the road network for the evacuation of the keys and flood-prone areas in the event of a major storm; that emergency vehicles use the Bayfront Drive to respond to calls for medical assistance including transportation to the mainland hospitals from the barrier islands; that several 16 and 18 story buildings are either being planned or built; that many smaller condominium complexes are partially completed; that the new building will increase the population density in the Downtown and create more traffic; that the slightest interruption to the flow of traffic will cause further backups in all directions and interfere with the flow of emergency vehicles; that the Downtown area would be in chaos in the event a hurricane changed course at the last minute and headed toward the City; that the only safe rule to apply is to not place human lives in jeopardy for unnecessary reasons; that improving access to Bayfront Park should not include narrowing Bayfront Drive; that a feasibility study is not supported for re-designation of US 41; that reducing Bayfront Drive to two lanes is not supported; that the effectiveness of the roadway would be reduced as a safety valve for preventing traffic strangulation at the gateway to the City; that converting two lanes of Bayfront Drive to parking would simply add another visual obstacle to the waterfront in the form of various automobiles which would further block the view; that the proposal to conduct the feasibility study regarding the re-designation of US 41 and the plan to reduce Bayfront Drive to two lanes should be eliminated. Jerry Francis, 888 Boulevard of the Arts, No. 506 (34236), stated that retaining four lanes on Bayfront Drive is supported; that the improvement of pedestrian access to the Bayfront is desired by all; that the speed limit should be reduced on Bayfront Drive as well as Tamiami Trail north of Bayfront Drive to Mound Street; that walking across or beside the areas is a frightening experience at the speeds being driven by motorists; that the reduction in speed limits must be strictly enforced; that many ways to enhance the pedestrian environment exist; that the best way is yet unknown; that inquiring of other cities which have dealt with similar situations would be beneficial. Carole Krohn, President, St. Armands Residents Association, 132 North Washington Drive (34236), stated that the Association represents 257 units, houses, etc., on St. Armands Key; that the Board is unanimously against two-laning US 41; that the existing configuration of Bayfront Drive and US 41 should be kept. Bob Tate, Co-Chairman, Mobility Now Traffic Committee, 1111 Ritz-Carlton Drive (34236), stated that the emphasis is on mobility; that many citizens have signed petitions or letters to the Commissioners; that the vast majority are opposed to two laning Bayfront Drive; that reasons exist to be dissatisfied with the Staff and consultants who recommended the idea; that conducting further studies for the re-designation of US 41 to an alternate route would be a waste of public funds; that other major routes such as US 301 and Fruitville Road are built out and functioning at full capacity now; that the statements made by Staff and the consultants are not supported; that the City has a responsibility for the transportation and safe evacuation of the large and growing population of the barrier islands; that a far better investment of public funds would be review of overbuilding which lacks the necessary supporting infrastructure; that the City is simultaneously pursuing two conflicting objectives; that building on every lot right out to the curb lines will create a traffic congested Central Business District; that recent construction on Fruitville Road and US 301 makes widening the roads impossible; that proponents of the conflicting objectives BOOK 56 Page 27364 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27365 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. should be held accountable before the City becomes another overbuilt, traffic congested City; that some relief can be achieved with the recommendations of the Mobility Now Committee which will improve corridor traiiic flow by 60 percent at a nominal public cost of $2 million as opposed to the City's $50 million 20-year plan; that a level of leadership in the City is required which has not been evident recently; that the opportunity is significant for the City; that the City should take advantage of the opportunity; that Staff's recommended Option No. 1 which is to keep Bayfront Drive as a four-lane road and proceed with feasibility study for the re-designation of US 41 is supported; that excessive development should be brought back under control. John Sandefur, 1233 North Gulf Stream Avenue (34236), stated that the opportunity to discuss Bayfront Drive is appreciated; that the area at the Bayfront can be made pedestrian friendly and safe by increasing the walk signal's time to 25 seconds; that Staff's recommended Option No. 1 to keep the four lanes is supported; that re-designation will not decrease the traffic on Bayfront Drive coming from the John Ringling Causeway Bridge or Tamiami Trail, which is mostly local traffic; that the burden of road maintenance and improvement costs would be placed on the City taxpayers if US 41 is re-designated; that the taxpayers will not be pleased to pay for the driving which has been inconvenienced; that government should stop the feasibility studies and should decide at the current meeting to maintain Bayfront Drive at four lanes; that Staff and engineers can then spend time on road designs and proper traffic light synchronization which will increase the current traffic level of service; that the development orders which have been obtained with developers could be jeopardized if US 41 is re-designated; that Option No. 1 is supported. Scott Bushey, 340 South Palm Avenue (34236), stated that consultants have brought forth ideas which cause more problems than are solved at great public expense and over the objections of citizens; that the ideas for the Bayfront in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 should be discarded; that no other north/south artery exists which is capable of absorbing the volume of traffic the planners hope to divert from the route; that the concern for increased residential density and commercial development causing increased traffic congestion is justified; that the planned assurance of the Downtown Mobility Plan for reassurance of help 6 to 10 to 15 years away is of no comfort; that early measures to preserve traffic flow deserve high priority; that other measures are being considered which would reduce the capacity of a key north/south thoroughfare to move traific; that the input from the City is constantly changing and is confusing to the citizens; that improving access to the Bayfront does not require two-laning Bayfront Drive or re-designation of US 41; that bad ideas should be put to rest; that another study should not be authorized regarding re-routing US 41; that a proposal should be adopted which calls for maintaining the present configuration and designation of US 41. David Taylor, 116 South Warbler Lane (34236), deferred from speaking. Beth Dilworth, Director, Lido Key Residents Association, 246 Garfield Drive (34236), stated that property on Lido Beach has been owned by her family for over 50 years; that the Lido Key Residents Association is opposed to the re-designation of US 41 to an alternate route since the opportunity will be opened for one-laning US 41 at the Bayfront; that Andres Duany of Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ) gave no consideration to the barrier island residents in developing the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 gave no consideration to the traffic congestion which would be produced; that suggesting the population of Lido Key, St. Armands Key, Lido Shores, and the Town of Longboat Key travel north for an undisclosed distance and then east to drive in a southerly direction is at best poorly considered; that the residents of the barrier islands are united in the opposition to any maneuver, strategy, plan, or action which would result in US 41 at the Bayfront being terminated as the primary southern route from John Ringling Causeway and Gulf Stream Avenue; that the Commission is respectfully requested to deny the re-designation of US 41. Hart Worzburg, 700 Ringling Boulevard (34236), was no longer present in the Commission Chambers. Liz Alpert, 435 South Gulf Stream Avenue, No. 903 (34236), stated that a presentation concerning the location of the re-designation of US 41 was anticipated; that US 41 to a newcomer looks very nice and functions fairly well except for the pedestrian crossing; that a pedestrian was nearly struck while trying to cross the roadway when a motorist was turning left; that enhancement of the access for pedestrians is necessary; that growth management has been an interest for years; that the transportation issue should be addressed whether US 41 is re-designated or not; that the long- term transportation goals should be addressed to ensure proper management, that a feasibility study would be of assistance BOOK 56 Page 27366 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27367 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. regarding the re-designation of US 41 with public input allowed prior to reaching a final decision. Lorraine Garland, 1252 Center Place (34236), stated that the Commission should hire Mr. Sandefur and Mr. Tate as consultants since both individuals seem to know how to study and solve problems which is needed desperately. Harriett Barber, 4420 Exeter Drive, Longboat Key (34228), deferred from speaking. Bob Einsweiler, 11 Sunset Drive, No. 807 (34236), stated that the Sarasota Herald-Tribune indicated the core issue is whether a pedestrian can easily cross to Bayfront Park from Downtown; that limited support exists for reducing the road to two lanes in the Bayfront area; that the speed limit should be reduced instead; that re-designation of US 41 would be required due to the requirement of two high speeds on all major arterials near Downtown; that re-designation of US 41 and speed reduction are supported; that two different perspectives concerning traffic analysis and management exist; that the typical view is a paradigm of vehicles moving through space; that the implication is the congestion will be reduced through increased capacity; that a new view emerged in the 1950s which totally changed the manner in which traffic is analyzed; that the new view was based on tolerance of traffic congestion by drivers; that drivers change routes when congestion becomes intolerable; that the new view of not being able to build out of congestion was followed by Andres Duany of Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ); that the re-designation of US 41 is supported; that the four lanes is supported if the speed limit is lowered. Fred Bennett, 770 South Palm Avenue (34236), stated that many of the ideas mentioned have been previously heard; that reducing US 41 to two lanes is supported; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is very good; that the recommendation was to make the Bayfront pedestrian accessible; that the only way to make the Bayfront pedestrian accessible is to make US 41 into a two-lane road along the Bayfront; that US 41 should be relocated; that various routes considered in the past are now impractical; that East Avenue has very little traffic and is a possibility; that the citizens on East Avenue should support the relocation once the property values start escalating; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 should be reviewed by the Commissioners; that the initiative should be taken to consider the Downtown Master Plan 2020 now and in the future by re-evaluating the entire issue of US 41. Tim Clarke, Chair, Citizens Advisory Committee of the Mobility Study, 333 North Orange Avenue (34236), stated that the Citizens Advisory Committee supports Staff's recommendation to continue to have Bayfront Drive remain at four lanes; that a study of re-designation of US 41 is appropriate; that the study of re-designation of US 41 should address the number one culprit of traffic congestion on US 41 and Gulf Stream Avenue; that the new John Ringling Causeway Bridge did not ease congestion; that most of the traffic on the John Ringling Causeway Bridge is Longboat Key bound; that serious consideration and discussion of a third bridge to Longboat Key is necessary; that a new bridge is an opportunity to forge new estuaries, create spectacular new recreational amenities, and substantially reduce the traiiic; that consideration of a new bridge to Longboat Key is supported. R.K. Mattern, 2400 Wood Street (34237), stated that a diverse array of opinions have been expressed regarding the re-designation of US 41 by residents of the condominiums which obscure significant parts of the skyline around the City; that the alternative is to build an overpass from the end of the John Ringling Causeway Bridge about six stories up into the skyline sO the residents of the condominiums would have to deal with the traffic; that the other residents of the City must deal with the traffic everyday; that crossing US 41 at his age of 32 years is difficult; that people less agile than himself must have trouble crossing US 41; that the citizens complaining tonight have forgotten the priority given to making the Bayfront accessible during the two years of charrettes held for the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the accessibility of the Bayfront was a significant priority and one of the primary points of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 which deals with pedestrian friendliness for the Cityi that the short-sightedness of the 1962 Commission should not be a convincing example of what the City should do; that the 1962 Commission was responsible for tearing down the original City pier where the arcade existed, for the destruction of the Lido Casino, and for creating Mound Street and Bayfront Drive, which divided a parcel donated to the people of the City for use as a park; that re-designating US 41 in the future will be difficult; that a Bayfront accessible to the pedestrians will be impossible in the future if the traffic predictions are accurate; that re-designation of US 41 is important for the citizens of the City as is lowering the speed limit or possibly reducing the roadway to two lanes. BOOK 56 Page 27368 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27369 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Dean Ducray, 393 Bob White Drive (34236), was no longer present in the Commission Chambers. Ernest Kretzmer, 118 North Polk Drive (34226), was no longer present in the Commission Chambers. Joan Bleinth, 117 Sworblek Lane, deferred from speaking. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Palmer closed the public hearing. The Commission recessed at 8:10 p.m. and reconvened at 8:20 p.m. City Manager McNees stated that representations were made regarding not trusting FDOT to be cooperative; that FDOT is very cooperative and cooperates with the City on many issues; however, the State has a different set of objectives than the City; that the reason the City would be in favor of re-designation of US 41 is due to the different objectives. City Manager McNees continued that the inability to trust the motives of what the professional engineers are recommending should be discussed; that an example indicated a question was not answered correctly by Staff; that Staff did not appear to initially understand the question; that subsequently Staff did collectively answer the question; that many of the speakers in opposition to Staff's recommendations suggested other options such as speed limits, pedestrian sleeves, the timing of stoplights, all of which are not under the control of the City in a direct wayi that the mistrust and questioning of the motives is part of being the City Engineer, or the City Manager, or Staff; that the public policy dialog is being hindered by the mistrust to enable positive discussion about the solutions; that the recommendations of Staff are precisely the recommendations the citizens are suggesting; that Staff is working diligently to implement the recommendations offered; that Staff and the Engineering Department are honorable people and should be defended. City Manager McNees stated further that a significant amount of the research concerning the re-designation of US 41 was done by consultants; that a significant amount of the Mobility Now work was done by a consultant; that experts are hired to bring expertise to the City and are given direction which is perfectly acceptable. City Manager McNees further stated that a number of speakers indicated no study was performed; that a study is what is being recommended; that the question should be asked in an earnest manner before predetermining an answer does not exist. Mr. Daughters stated that the Administration has been performing studies on a step-by-step basis; that the possibility Bayfront Drive will become a burden to the taxpayers for maintenance and operation upon re-designation of US 41 is true; that another road would be given to FDOT which FDOT would maintain; that reducing the speed limit along Bayfront Drive for pedestrian friendliness will be difficult if Bayfront Drive/US 41 remains a State highway; that residents of St. Armands Key can indicate how difficult reducing the speed limit on a State highway can be; that the process would be simpler if US 41 was re-designated along Bayfront Drive and brought under the control of the City. Mr. Freija stated that the City would not lose State or Federal funds upon re-designation of US 41; that Federal funds would be sought for other roadways within the City which are now City roads; that funds were sought, and will be received, for 12th Street; that Federal funds can still be pursued; however, the maintenance funds would be moved to a new US 41 route in the future if US 41 is re-designated; that the segment of Fruitville Road between US 41 and US 301 is a City road rather than a State road; that an extensive list of pedestrian-friendly options have been gathered at the current meeting to explore whether US 41 can be re-designated. Commissioner Servian stated that the speed limit at St. Armands Circle is 25 miles per hour; that the route which runs through St. Armands Circle is a State road; that the speed limit can be lowered on a State road. Mr. Daughters stated that the residents of St. Armands Key desire the speed limit to be lower than 25 miles per hour and the lowered speed limit has not been obtained as the roadway is controlled by the State. Commissioner Servian stated that typical State roads have a speed limit 40 or 45 miles per hour or even higher; that reducing the speed limit to 25 miles per hour was successful; that significant pedestrian improvement could be obtained along Bayfront Drive if the speed limit was reduced to 25 miles per hour. BOOK 56 Page 27370 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27371 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mr. Freija stated that the classification of the roadways differs between two lanes and four lanes; that the road on St. Armands Key is two lanes while the road on Bayfront Drive is four lanes; that the classifications are major and minor arterials, the latter of which do have a State set standard; that reducing the speed limit to 25 miles per hour along US 41 will not likely be obtained; that the Commission can remember how difficult achieving the reduction in the speed limit at St. Armands Circle was; that the City has not been successful in attempting to relocate a sign based on a request from the residents and business people of St. Armands Circle during the last three years in working with FDOT; that the residents have been involved and have requested some gateway signs which have not been approved by FDOT; that re-designation of US 41 would allow the City to work better with the public if the road was not classified as a State or Federal road. Commissioner Servian asked the amount of funding the City receives for maintenance on US 41 along Bayfront Drive? Mr. Freija stated that funds are only received for traffic signals and streetlights; that the amount of funds received from the State for streetlights is not known at this time; that the understanding is the funds received for all 85 traffic signals maintained is approximately $50,000 or $60,000; that the majority of the traffic signals are State traffic signals; that funds are not received by the City for resurfacing or striping the roadway; that FDOT does the resurfacing and striping. Commissioner Servian stated that the City would have the burden of resurfacing and striping Bayfront Drive if US 41 is re-designated. Mr. Freija stated that the City will maintain Bayiront Drive; that hopefully the maintenance by the State would be moved to an alternate route which would be approximately the same length as the current segway of US 41. Commissioner Servian stated that the assumption being made is the alternate route for US 41 would stay within the City limits. Mr. Freija stated that the possibility is the alternate route would be designated outside the City Limits; that the City would incur the full burden of the maintenance expenses if the alternate route were moved outside the City limits. City Manager McNees stated that the questions being asked by the Commission are exactly the questions the feasibility study would consider. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the feasibility study would cost approximately $50,000; that another decision would be made at the conclusion of the feasibility study as to whether re-designation of US 41 would be appropriate. Mr. Freija stated that is correct. Commissioner Bilyeu asked if the matter would be the subject of a public hearing? Mr. Daughters stated that the Commission would most likely desire to hear public input, whether by a public hearing or a public meeting. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to keep Bayfront Drive as a four-lane roadway and proceed with a feasibility study for the re-designation of US 41 from US 301 to Gulf Stream Avenue to an alternative route not to include 17th Street. Motion died for lack of a second. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Bilyeu, it was moved to keep Bayfront Drive in the existing configuration with the existing designation as US 41. Commissioner Servian stated that the four lanes should be maintained along Bayfront Drive as well as the designation as a US highway not only for the funding provided but also for the increased scrutiny required for future development as the health, welfare, and safety of sO many citizens who need to use the portion of the road for evacuation, for hospital access, and for daily transportation is affected. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that a significant amount of funds were spent on the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that Staff is commended for the work done on the Downtown Master Plan 2020, for coming back and realizing significant opposition existed to some recommendations, and for coming before the Commission for a decision; that the Bayfront area was lost in the 1970s with the construction of the condominiums on Gulf Stream Avenue; that the City will not become a pedestrian friendly City until the citizens begin getting out of automobiles, begin car-pooling and taking public transportation, and begin utilizing other forms of public BOOK 56 Page 27372 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27373 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. transit; that keeping Bayfront Drive at four lanes and maintaining the current designation as a US highway are supported. Commissioner Atkins stated that the entire process raises a concerni that the prior motion which was not seconded was intriguing; that US 41 shall not be significantly more expensive to maintain upon re-designation; that the re-designation of US 41 to 17th Street is still a concern due to prior history. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is supported and is inclusive of the type of Downtown and City the citizens desire; that the City has been developed for automobiles instead of people for the last 50 years, which is a travesty; that attempting to Cross US 41 to get to the children's parks is brutal; that the experience should be pedestrian friendly; that the freeways which came through the downtowns in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Portland, Oregon, were imploded in an attempt to get. back the quality of life downtown; that the City does not have to do anything sO radical; that tools which can make a significant difference are available if US 41 is re-designated; that the citizens against two-laning appear to desire a more pedestrian friendly crossing ability; that the speed limit on Bayfront Drive will most likely not be reduced and the signal timing will most likely not be adjusted from 10 seconds to 25 seconds if US 41 remains as currently designated; that solutions such as cross walks, different paving materials, the design of the sleeves, Or even an overpass to make the Bayfront pedestrian friendly are all potential solutions to consider if US 41 is re-designated. Vice Mayor Martin continued that 17th Street should not be re-designated as US 41; that many alternatives exist; that a re-designation of US 41 within the City limits would be the best choice; that the grid within the community would become active if US 41 was re-designated; that other ways to get around the City would be found; that the burden of maintenance would fall on the taxpayers whether through local, State, or Federal taxes; that the effort and passion developed through the charrette process and the creation of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 to have a City which is for people instead of automobiles has been lost at this meeting; that the best way to make a pedestrian friendly city is to design the city sO citizens can get around safely on bicycles, Segways, water taxis, trolleys, or other alternatives; that developing such alternatives which currently require automobiles to get around the City will assist the citizens; that all the choices are lost at the current meeting if the vote is not to re-designate US 41 away from Bayfront Drive; that the passion which was developed during the charrettes will also be lost; that for the young professionals, bicyclists, and pedestrians not to have been at the current meeting to express their support and desire to have a vital Downtown is disappointing; that the discussion was dominated by one point of view and by one set of stakeholders; that many of the citizens at the current meeting are respected, personal friends; however, only one point of view was expressed; that the motion is not supported. Mayor Palmer stated that the decision is difficult; that the alternatives provided by a re-designation of US 41 are numerous; that agreement is expressed with many statements made by Vice Mayor Martin regarding the possibilities of the alterations in the traffic patterns to make Downtown pedestrian friendly; that the transference in the funds received from the State and Federal government upon re-designation of a portion of US 41 is also a concern; that the re-designation of US 41 would most likely occur out of the City limits; that the desire would be for the re-designation of US 41 to Bradenton where the highway divides and goes toward Cortez Road; that a significant amount of opposition exists as the options and ramifications are not known; that the timing is not right to move forward with the feasibility study; that some of the options the City may wish to consider in the future may only be available with the re-designation of US 41; that the information and education provided to the citizens are not to the point where re-designation of US 41 is probable or even possible; that a number of other mobility issues exist; that moving forward with a study which does not have large-scale support in the community is a concern; that looking at re-designation of US 41 without the support of the community would be a waste of funds; that the motion is supported; that the possible re-designation of US 41 will most likely come back before the Commission as views and goals change. Commissioner Servian stated that hundreds of hours and many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent with the development of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is supported; that DPZ is greatly respected; that DPZ also suggested building along the Bayfront, which was rejected; that a recommendation in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is not necessarily the gospel. BOOK 56 Page 27374 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27375 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Mayor Palmer stated that a significant amount of the traffic and a significant amount of the opposition is from Longboat Key residents; that a decision must be made in the future regarding a new bridge to Longboat Key which has been discussed for many years; that constructive traffic ideas would be appreciated by everyone. Commissioner Atkins stated that the previous motion excluding 17th Street from consideration did not indicate 17th Street would not be four-laned; that the bigger picture should be considered as a community and neighborhood; that the mission is to save the neighborhood; that the four laning of 17th Street whether designated as US 41 or not has the same result; that the connection to the livable City and Downtown is immediately cut off which is contrary to everything recommended in the downtown Master Plan 2020. Mayor Palmer restated and called for a vote on the motion to keep Bayfront Drive as a four-lane roadway and eliminate the feasibility study for the re-designation of US 41 from US 301 to Gulf Stream Avenue to an alternate route. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yesi Bilyeu, yes; Martin, no; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 21. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4468, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE A REVISION AND REPRINTING OF THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED.) OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR THE PLACING OF COPIES OF THE SAME ON FILE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK FOR PUBLIC USE, INSPECTION AND EXAMINATION; STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION IN ADOPTING THE REVISION AND REPRINT OF THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED.); PROVIDING THAT PROSECUTIONS BEGUN UNDER THE PREVIOUS VERSION OF THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED.) MAY BE CONTINUED ; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF AND THE PARTS OF THE REPRINTED ZONING CODE (2002 ED.); ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM XIV-A-2) CD 8:54 through 8:56 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that numerous amendments have been made since the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) was adopted on April 29, 2002; that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4468 simply adopts by references a reprinted version of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) which includes the amendments. Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing regarding proposed Ordinance No. 03-4468 adopting by reference the codified version of the Zoning code (2002 Ed.). There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Palmer closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4468 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4468 on first reading. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Servian, yesi Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yesi Palmer, yes. 22. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (03-DA-01) DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 2002 BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA AND MOTE MARINE LABORATORY, INC.; ETC. (APPLICATION NO. 03-DA-01, APPLICANT BRENDA L. PATTEN, 1 ESQ., AS AGENT REPRESENTING MOTE MARINE LABORATORY, INC. L AS OWNER) - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM XIV-B-1) AND QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1643, APPROVING MAJOR CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION NO 03-CU-05 TO ALLOW A LEASEHOLD USE IN THE GOVERNMENTAL USE (G) ZONE DISTRICT CONSISTING OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANN AND ALFRED GOLDSTEIN MARINE MAMMAL CENTER, INCLUSIVE OF RESEARCH OFFICES, CLASSROOM SPACE AND LABORATORIES ; ACCESSORY EXHIBITION AND MEETING SPACE ARE PROPOSED WHICH INCLUDE USAGE FOR PURPOSES OF SPECIAL EVENTS IN SAID FACILITY; ALL OF THE ABOVE TO BE OPERATED BY MOTE MARINE LABORATORY, INC., A FLORIDA NOT -) FOR- -1 PROFIT CORPORATION, AS LESSEE, ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF SARASOTA; SAID LEASEHOLD USE BEING PROPOSED WITHIN KEN THOMPSON PARK, NORTH OF ST. ARMAND - S CIRCLE, EAST OF STATE ROAD 789 (JOHN RINGLING PARKWAY) AND ABUTTING KEN THOMPSON PARKWAY TO THE NORTH (A/K/A 1703 KEN THOMPSON PARKWAY) ; REQUIRING THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 03-SP-33; SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; ETC. - ADOPTED (TITLE ONLY) BOOK 56 Page 27376 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27377 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. AND QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE : PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1690, TO GRANT G ZONE WAIVER APPLICATION NO. 30-GZW-01 REGARDING A WAIVER APPLICABLE TO THE REQUIRED ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED ANN AND ALFRED GOLDSTEIN MARINE MAMMAL CENTER; SAID PROJECT IS PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED UPON CITY OWNED PROPERTY WITHIN KEN THOMPSON PARK, LEASED TO MOTE MARINE LABORATORY, INC. AS DESCRIBED IN SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 03-SP-33; APPROVING G ZONE WAIVER NO. 03-GZW-01 GRANTING A WAIVER FROM THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE 75 PAVED ON-SITE PARKING SPACES UPON THE LEASEHOLD TO SERVE THE ANN AND ALFRED GOLDSTEIN MARINE MAMMAL CENTER, OUT OF A TOTAL OF 144 REQUIRED ON-SITE PARKING SPACES; SETTING FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE G ZONE WAIVER; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 03-CU-05, 03-GZW-01 AND 03-SP-33, APPLICANT BRENDA L. PATTEN, I ESQ., AS AGENT REPRESENTING MOTE MARINE LABORATORY, / INC., AS OWNER) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM XIV-B-2) CD 8:54 through 9:09 Mayor Palmer requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that the quasi-judicial public hearings before the Commission at this time relate to a Development Agreement, a Major Conditional Use, and a Governmental Use (G) Zone District Waiver regarding Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc.; that hearing the three quasi-judicial public hearings simultaneously is permissible. City Attorney Taylor continued that the. requirements of quasi-judicial public hearings were defined by the judicial process; that during quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that prior to opening the public hearing, Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the subject property; that the recommendation is to allow two minutes for the Applicant's presentation and two minutes for rebuttal; that the City will have two minutes for presentation and two minutes for rebuttal; that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person; that other interested persons will have two minutes to speak; that speakers may request additional time which, if granted, will be determined at the discretion of the Commission; that the Applicant and the City will be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and expert witnesses and for cross-examination. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the recommended time limits are approved; and requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Vice Mayor Martin and Commissioners Bilyeu, Servian, and Atkins stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Palmer stated that correspondence was received from Brenda Patten, Attorney, law firm of Kirk-Pinkerton, regarding the possibility of moving the public hearing to an earlier portion of the Agenda and was forwarded to City Auditor and Clerk Robinson; that unfortunately, Attorney Patten was not present to allow hearing the Agenda Item earlier. Mayor Palmer opened the public hearings regarding: 1) Application No. 03-DA-01, a proposed Eirst Amendment to Development Agreement dated September 13, 2002, between the City and Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc., 2) proposed Resolution No. 03R-1643 approving Major Conditional Use Application No. 03-CU-05 to allow a Leasehold Use in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District regarding the Ann and Alfred Goldstein Marine Mammal Center, and 3) proposed Resolution No. 04R-1690 to grant a G Zone Waiver applicable to the parking requirements for the Marine Mammal Center; that the Applicant is Brenda Patten as agent representing Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc. (Mote); and requested that the Applicant come forward. Brenda Patten, Attorney, law firm of Kirk-Pinkerton, and Daniel Bebak, Vice President of Aquarium and Special Projects, Mote, came before the Commission; and stated that Dr. Kumar Mahadevan, Executive Director, Mote, is present in the Chambers audience for questions if desired; that the Applications before the Commission at this time are the same Applications before the Commission at the February 2, 2004, public hearing; that removal of the proposed restaurant use from the Marine Mammal Center and withdrawal of proffers related to the restaurant use are the only changes since the February 2, 2004, Regular Commission meeting; that the restaurant area will instead be used for offices, research and displayi that to avoid repetition, a request is to incorporate her presentation at the February 2, 2004, Regular Commission meeting into the record for the public hearing being held at this time. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objection, the Applicant's February 2, 2004, presentation will be entered into the record. BOOK 56 Page 27378 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27379 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Servian referred to the February 6, 2004, letter to the Commission from Dr. Mahadevan regarding Mote included in the Agenda backup material; and stated that the letter indicates the proposal for the space in place of the restaurant will be utilized by Mote's educational Staff, including college interns, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows; and asked if sufficient parking will be available? Attorney Patten stated yesi that most of the office space will be space made available for existing Mote scientists; that ample parking is available in the main parking area in front of the aquarium. Mr. Bebak stated that a significant number of interns and people working at Mote do not have vehicles and either carpool or ride bicycles to work; that the same amount of parking will remain. Attorney Patten stated that the impact of the restaurant is reduced; that the office uses have less need for parking. Commissioner Servian asked if documents to secure permits regarding the installation of a traffic signal device at the intersection of State Road 789 and Ken Thompson Parkway have been submitted to the Engineering Department? Mr. Bebak stated that Engineering Staff has been kept apprised of the status; that installation of the traffic signal device will begin at the end of May 2004, which is according to schedule. Mayor Palmer requested that Staff come forward for the presentation. Karin Murphy, Redevelopment Specialist, Planning and Redevelopment Department, came before the Commission; and stated that the Applicant has provided a detailed and accurate presentation of the proposal; that a request is to incorporate Staff's presentation at the February 2, 2004, Regular Commission meeting into the record. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, Staff's February 2, 2004, presentation will be incorporated into the record. Ms. Murphy stated that the Applicant submitted a new Site Plan in conjunction with Site Plan Application No. 03-SP-33 after the February 2, 2004, public hearing, depicting the interior revision which removed the restaurant; that the new Site Plan submitted for Site Plan Application No. 03-SP-33 was reviewed and approved by the Development Review Committee (DRC) for compliance with the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that Staff's Summary of Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis relating to the change is included in the Agenda backup material; that the G Zone Waiver request has been changed to reflect the elimination of the 15 parking spaces no longer required; that the Development Agreement has been modified to reference the correct uses and the only amendment is to allow an extension of the installation of the traffic signal to May 2004; that the Mote Marine Master Plan (Mote Master Plan) was distributed to the Commission at a previous public hearing, fulfilling one of the prior conditions of the original Development Agreement. There was no one signed up to speak. Mayor Palmer closed the public hearings; and stated that the Commission will vote on each item separately. On motion of. Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve Development Agreement No. 03-DA-01 dated September 13, 2002, between the City of Sarasota and Mote Marine Laboratory, Inc., etc. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes'; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No.. 04R-1643 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve proposed Resolution No. 03R-1643. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yesi Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 04R-1690 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Bilyeu and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve proposed Resolution No. 04R-1690. Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried BOOK 56 Page 27380 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27381 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. unanimously (5 to 0): Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yesi Atkins, yes. 23. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM XV) CD 9:09 through 9:12 George Peter Ryan, 241 Garfield Drive (34236), stated that he is speaking as an individual and is not representing any particular group or association; that the derogatory comments made by a public speaker about Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, during Agenda Item XIV-A, concerning the Non Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing regarding re-designation of US 41 on the Bayfront to an alternate route are considered a serious problem and are found personally offensive; that he has worked with employees of the City, State, County, and Federal government and has never encountered an individual whose word is worth more than Mr. Daughters; that Mr. Daughters' word is considered final; that Mr. Daughters does not mislead people; that the opening remarks presented by Mr. Daughters are considered sufficient; that Mr. Daughters is personally well known; that a significant amount of work has been conducted with Mr. Daughters; that to make accusations is inexcusable; that the insightful defense provided by the City Manager and Staff's assistance in clarifying the issue are appreciated; that Mr. Daughters is attempting to create something better; that the views expressed by Vice Mayor Martin regarding the subject are shared; that the hope is Mr. Daughters will accept his apology on behalf of a passionate but misguided citizen. 24. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: PARK USE BY PERMIT FOR SPECIAL EVENTS IN PUBLIC PARKS = REFERRED THE ISSUE OF PARK PERMITS TO THE ADMINISTRATION, WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT BACK AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE CONVENIENCE (AGENDA ITEM XVII-2) CD 9:12 through 9:36 City Attorney Taylor stated that the issue concerning park use by permit for special events in public parks is being brought back before the Commission due to questions raised during recent Commission meetings; that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4433 to establish a park use permit system was brought before the Commission at the March 3, 2003, Regular meeting; that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4433 created a new Article II, Chapter 22 of the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code); that proposed Section 22-22, City Code, would have required a special event park permit for any public assembly, picnic, or other event in a public park involving 50 or more individuals or to use a public park during closed hours; that the use of a public park during closed hours would be addressed under proposed Section 22-25, City Code; that the administrative process for considering special event park permits is the same as special permits in Chapter 20, Noise, City Code, incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 03-4416; that proposed Section 22-22(c), City Code, sets forth the criteria for the approval or disapproval of a special event park permit; that proposed Section 22-22(a), City Code, authorizes the City Manager to adopt administrative regulations as deemed necessary to implement the provisions of the proposed section; that the action taken at the meeting was to refer the issue to the Administration for consultation with representatives from the City Attorney's Office, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Gillespie Park neighborhood, and Sarasota County, to specifically address the time periods, and to bring the revision back to the Commission. City Attorney Taylor continued that the minutes of the March 3, 2003, Regular Commission meeting regarding proposed Ordinance No. 03-4433 and Gillespie Park were reviewed; that determining the manner in which to proceed has been difficult perhaps due to the focus of the public hearing which was on a particular park; that the City Manager was consulted concerning the matter; that the purpose of the discussion is to engage the Commission in dialog regarding the manner in which to proceed; that one issue is should an ordinance regarding park use by permit for special events be Citywide; that applying an ordinance to a particular park based upon a set of administrative regulations caused some concerns. Mayor Palmer stated that providing direction regarding the manner in which to proceed is necessaryi that the Commission should first clarify if an ordinance concerning park use by permit for special events in public parks should be brought back; and asked if Commission support exists to bring an ordinance back? Commissioner Atkins stated that removing a particular group from a particular park without having a process is and remains the concern; that the community is respected; that the need for space is respected; that broad based communities should have the freedom to use a park without one entity dominating the park; that specific activities in Gillespie Park were the concerni that the time was not appropriate to consider an ordinance or a permitting processi that he is now prepared to revisit restrictions of park usage; that having a situation in another City park similar to the BOOK 56 Page 27382 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27383 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. weekly feeding service conducted by Gifts from God in Gillespie Park is not the desire. Commissioner Servian stated that focus was only on one park as a result of one group violating the space of a neighborhood every week; that approving an ordinance at the time was not appropriate; that the proposed Ordinance was brought forth due to the activities in Gillespie Park, although not directed at one groupi that an individual from the Gillespie Park neighborhood, Joy McIntosh, brought forth examples from many other cities regarding a Citywide permitting processi that the examples from other cities should be reviewed; that perhaps ideas can be extracted which can be fairly applied but still allow for spontaneous demonstrations. Commissioner Atkins agreed. Commissioner Servian stated that the ability to have spontaneous demonstrations is important, especially during the current times; that having Staff bring back a proposed Ordinance regarding park use by permit for special events in public parks is supported. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the concern regarding use of City parks by a business was personally raised; that the concern is the continuous use of City property by a business such as a church or a hot dog vendor without a permit, license, or an agreement similar to the agreement between the City and the Farmers Market; that a formal agreement should exist for use of public property by a business; that raising the issue concerning a permitting process at this time is fine; however, limiting spontaneous demonstrations such as peace marches is not supported; that limiting freedom of assembly and use of the parks is not the intent and is a concern; that a person or group using a park as a place of business without a usage agreement, permit, lease agreement, etc., is a concern and is the reason for raising the issue. Vice Mayor Martin stated that having Staff bring back a proposed Ordinance addressing park use by permit for special events in public parks is supported. Mayor Palmer agreed; and asked if the process should encompass a specific park or parks Citywide? Commissioner Servian stated that the preference is for the process to encompass Citywide parks. Mayor Palmer, Vice Mayor Martin and Commissioners Atkins and Bilyeu agreed. Mayor Palmer requested that Staff provide specifics regarding the manner in which the Commission should provide direction. City Attorney Taylor stated that City Attorney's Office Staff spent a significant amount of time meeting with outside organizations but felt strongly about the last proposed ordinance which was prepared; that Staff is well aware of the tolerance of the community at the time the last proposed ordinance was presented; that the issue could become problematic. Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the last proposed Ordinance was modeled after the Code of Chicago Park District, Illinois, in which the regulations were upheld by the United States (US) Supreme Court in 2002; that permits work well; that the regulation which requires a special event permit for groups of 50 persons or more desiring to use the parks was upheld by the US Supreme Court since the permit method did not involve censorship and was a content-neutral time, place, and manner regulation of the use of a public forum; that requesting if the nature of the message is religious, political speech, or commercial enters into the protected areas of the First Amendment of Right of Freedom of Expression; that whatever regulation is developed should be content-neutral meaning the question "what is the message" cannot be asked; that otherwise, a court challenge cannot be survived; that the City has current regulations which address commercial vending in City parks and other City property; that the City Code allows commercial vending by agreement; that the problem area concerns non-commercial activities; that a religious organization involved in non-sales such as food or clothing giveaways does not meet the definition of commercial activity since buying and selling is not taking place; however, a message still exists; that Staff presented options; that one option was to prohibit social services in Gillespie Park, which was modeled after the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, regulations, but which is rarely exercised in other areas of the Country; that Fort Lauderdale was taken to court based on the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act which addresses the constitutionality of prohibiting the provision of social services in a park; that under the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act, an alternate location for the service must be identified; that in the Fort Lauderdale case, an alternate location satisfactory to the courts was not ultimately found. BOOK 56 Page 27384 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27385 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Attorney Singer continued that the permit scheme was preferred by Staff, which was considered a good beginning point; that the approach was for a Citywide permitting process; that the parks were classified according to usage levels; that the process was complex but can be revisited; that the proposed regulations originally set out in the last proposed Ordinance included 45 days in advance to apply for a permit, which was scaled down to one day prior to an event; that groups will be required to go to the City Manager's Office and request a permit; that the recommendation is for Staff to bring back the model for the proposed Ordinance and explain the manner in which the model will work to provide a refresher to the Commission; that the Commission can then determine the manner in which to proceed; that the Commission is reminded a considerable amount of discussion took place regarding the problems the City encounters with large groups spontaneously appearing at the Bayfront to engage in political speech; that an issue is if large groups will be permitted to stand on the grass; that the issue cannot be avoided if the permitting process is addressed Citywide; that Staff will bring back a park matrix; that the Commission can then make a decision. Attorney Singer stated further that the Commission is reminded the City has an ordinance which allows the Commission to Close parks on a park by park basis dependent upon Circumstances particular to a specific park which may arise over time; that the City has some parks which have closing hours and some which do not; that the Commission can review the park matrix and decide the principal parks which need protection from large groups; that the Commission could consider an ordinance which will allow the City to require permits for groups of a certain size in particular parks and allow the Commission at any time in the future to include other parks by resolution, providing a degree of flexibility; that the first step is to bring back a park matrix; that reviewing the information regarding the permitting process in other cities would be interesting; that Staff will report back; that case law was previously provided to the Commission; that no new case law has been found; however, an exhaustive survey of case law has not been conducted; that a case law file has been established; that any new case law will be included in the file. Mayor Palmer stated that the minutes of the March 3, 2003, Regular meeting regarding the issues concerning Gillespie Park were reviewed in detail; that a number of issues were raised by Commissioners; that one issue concerned the Sarasota County permit reservation system and the differences compared to the recommended City park permits process; that the issues raised which were more generic to the last proposed Ordinance should be considered as the park matrix is developed; that a significant amount of discussion occurred during the meeting; that starting over from the beginning is not the desire; that the last proposed Ordinance before the Commission was considered a good document; that the issue concerning use of Gillespie Park by one particular group has subsided; that during the March 3, 2003, Regular meeting, the Commission was attempting to address only one particular group in a specific park; that Staff should review the minutes to identify the main issues. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City Attorney's Office has many other issues being addressed at this time; and asked if the Commission has a time expectation to receive the park matrix back? Mayor Palmer stated that the park matrix should be brought back as quickly as is possible considering the City Attorney's Office timeframe; that starting over from the beginning is not necessary; that the City Attorney's Office can contact the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk for scheduling once the issue is ready to be brought back before the Commission; and asked if the Commission finds the non-urgent timeframe acceptable? Commissioner Servian stated that a sense of urgency is not seen as necessary. Vice Mayor Martin stated that allowing ample time is acceptable; and asked if 60 days is considered appropriate? - Mayor Palmer stated that the issue should be brought back before the matter becomes urgent, which is possible; that bringing the issue back within 60 days would be good; however, the City Attorney's Office should determine if the timeframe is acceptable. On motion of Vice Mayor Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to extend the meeting beyond the 9:30 p.m. deadline to complete the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yesi Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the concern at the time the last proposed Ordinance came before the Commission was not the legalities but rather the administrative rules which were undefined and vague; that the entire concern is to properly regulate the use of City parks while recognizing the City parks BOOK 56 Page 27386 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27387 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. are public space; that the administrative process should be simple rather than difficult; that the manner in which the last proposed Ordinance was brought before the Commission seemed difficult; that many issues were difficult to understand; that the administrative rules should have predictability to provide ease of understanding; that any new permitting process should include the manner in which the process will be managed administratively. Vice Mayor Martin continued that a significant amount of input from the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association was received at the time Gillespie Park was originally developed; that a community room exists in Gillespie Park but has never been made available; that restrooms have been constructed; however, access is not provided to people using the park; that the reasons the community room has not been made available to the public have not been provided; that Gillespie Park is a large park yet a significant number of facilities which are regional in nature such as a gazebo were included; that Gillespie Park is a neighborhood park; that a similar situation exists in Whitaker Gateway Park; that the park was planned; that many stakeholders were involved; however, the design was not right; that some grills and facilities were nappropriately placed too close to residential neighborhoods; that some changes were made and Whitaker Gateway Park is functioning very well at this time and is used by many citizens; that the gazebo in Gillespie Park will continue as an issue; that the City should consider if the gazebo in Gillespie Park is appropriate to accommodate a large group; that if not, a different location should be identified; that the question may be difficult; however, the consensus of the Commission is requested to have the future of the gazebo considered in some way. Mayor Palmer stated that a motion to refer the parks issue back to the City Attorney's Office is requested. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Martin, it was moved to refer the issue of park permits to the Administration and have the issue brought back at the earliest convenience. Commissioner Atkins stated that consideration of removal of the gazebo in Gillespie Park is of no interest; that several large group events at Gillespie Park have been attended; that Gillespie Park is not and never has been a neighborhood park; that Gillespie Park is a regional park. Commissioner Servian agreed; and stated that moving forward with removing the gazebo in Gillespie Park is not supported; that many people in the Gillespie Park neighborhood enjoy the gazebo; that the gazebo is utilized for birthday parties, avoiding the sun and rain, etc.; that Gillespie Park is a regional park; that although Gillespie Park is in the middle of the Gillespie Park neighborhood, the park is regionally used. Mayor Palmer stated that the motion on the table does not relate to the gazebo in Gillespie Park. Commissioner Servian stated that Vice Mayor Martin requested consensus regarding the gazebo. Mayor Palmer stated that the gazebo should not be removed from Gillespie Park; that although Gillespie Park is a regional park, the park is heavily used by the Gillespie Park neighborhood; that consensus for removing the gazebo has not been heard from the Gillespie Park neighborhood; that the Gillespie Park neighborhood raised a concern regarding the gazebo at one time due to problems associated with usage; that a different perspective may exist at this time; that Commission consensus has not been heard to remove the gazebo from Gillespie Park. Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion to refer the issue of park permits to the Administration, which will be brought back at the earliest possible convenience. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Bilyeu, yes; Martin, yesi Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. 25. ADDITIONAL CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS: (AGENDA ITEM VIII) CD 9:36 There was no one signed up to speak. 26. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM IX) CD 9:36 through 9:42 COMMISSIONER ATKINS: A. stated that the 2004 Annual Congressional City Conference sponsored by the National League of Cities was attended March 5 through 9, 2004, in Washington, DC; that he spoke with the senior advisor for Katherine BOOK 56 Page 27388 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27389 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. Harris, US House of Representatives, 13th Congressional District; that the HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI grant application was discussed; that lobbying efforts were conducted regarding funding for community parks and considered successful. COMMISSIONER BILYEU: A. stated that a seat is held on the Juvenile Justice Council of the Department of Juvenile Justice; that the Juvenile Justice Council brought forth a three year plan for people to apply for grants; that the majority of people applying for the grants would be within the Zip Code 34234, which is within the City limits on the north side; that the grants must be approved by a municipality or a local government; that Sarasota County could be the responsible municipality to approve the grants; however, the preference is for the City to have the responsibility; that attending the meetings is becoming more exciting; that the hope is the grant program will be successful. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) budget will be adopted on March 22, 2004; that the comments received and support provided by the Commissioners are appreciated. MAYOR PALMER: A. stated that the Council of Governments is changing its focus; that information will be electronically mailed to the Commissioners; that issues and concerns will be discussed with all the various municipalities at the meetings; that the Interlocal Agreement with the School Board of Sarasota County and impact fees were discussed. City Manager McNees stated that Sarasota County approved passage of an educational impact fee Countywide; that the next step will be approval of Interlocal Agreements with each of the local city governments for collection of the impact fees within the municipalities since the collection is tied into the billing process; that the City has billing departments; that some administrative issues exists; that Staff's concerns are if the Interlocal Agreements are practical and if the underlying ordinance regarding the Interlocal Agreement has a potential flaw; that all the affected parties have been notified of the concern; that the hope is to resolve the matter in a simple manner; that the focus of the Council of Governments to make everyone aware of issues is considered productive. B. stated that all the Commissioners at some point during the legislative session are scheduled to travel to Tallahassee, Florida, in support of the ManaSota League of Cities (MLC) lobbying effort; and expressed thanks to fellow Commissioners for participating; that the lobbying effort in Tallahassee is educational and fascinating. C. stated that the Tourist Development Council (TDC) is considering some discussion regarding the conference center at the upcoming March 18, 2004, meeting; that the meeting begins at 4:00 p.m. and will be a live broadcast. 27. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - DIRECTED THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO: 1) CHANGE THE COMMISSION'S RULES OF PROCEDURES REGARDING TIE VOTES AND 2) MEET WITH THE DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO IDENTIFY PROBLEMS WITH ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE; DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO: 1) ASSURE ALL THE CITY'S ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS ARE, CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF FORM, ORGANIZATION, / AND ATTENDANCE, AND 2) PROVIDE A SCHEDULE FOR THE VISIT OF ANDRES DUANY OF DUANY PLATER- ZYBERK & COMPANY ; PROVIDED NOTICE THE MOTION TO DENY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 03-PA-09 AS INCORPORATED IN PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 04R-1707 SUBMITTED BY THE YACHT CENTER LAND COMPANY, LLC, AND HALF MOON BEACH CLUB, LLC, APPROVED AT THE MARCH 11, 2004, SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING WILL BE PLAÇED ON THE AGENDA OF APRIL 5, 2004, REGULAR MEETING TO PROVIDE AN - OPPORTUNITY TO RESCIND (AGENDA ITEM X) CD 9:42 through 10:15 COMMISSIONER ATKINS: A. stated that he was delighted to receive a formal invitation to the Easter Parade extravaganza and gathering which is being led by an illustrious group BOOK 56 Page 27390 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27391 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. associated with Front Porch Florida program sponsored by the Office of Urban Opportunity; and expressed thanks to the group and the entire community for supporting the Easter Parade; that the route of the parade is not known at this time. Mayor Palmer asked if the group is contemplating organizing the same type of activity for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., celebration in 2005? Commissioner Atkins stated that the belief is the group was not requested to organize the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., celebration in 2005; that organization of the Easter Parade is most important at this time; that the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., celebration will likely be addressed after the Easter Parade. VICE MAYOR MARTIN: A. stated that Mayor Palmer previously mentioned the dilemma of a tie vote at the Commission table; that the Board of Adjustment and the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) have addressed the dilemma of tie votes and have changed policies; that in the situation of a tie vote at a Commission meeting, the suggestion is the matter be placed on the Agenda of the next Regular meeting for another vote; that the matter is defeated if a tie vote is reached at the next Regular meeting; that the suggested change in policy provides a second chance and avoids disappointing constituents who may feel a tie vote does not provide full closure; that a change in policy should be considered. Mayor Palmer agreed. Commissioner Atkins asked if the entire issue will be reheard at the next Regular meeting or if another vote will simply be taken? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a motion will be made regarding the matter. Mayor Palmer stated that the Commissloner absent from the meeting at which the tie vote was reached can review the televised broadcast and/or the minutes of the meeting to provide a thorough understanding of the issue. Commissioner Atkins stated that the concern is the extent to which the issue will be brought back. Mayor Palmer stated that the possibility exists the Commission may decide to continue the issue; that a public hearing can always be continued to another Commission meeting; that the suggestion is the issue which is the subject of a tie vote would automatically placed on the Agenda of the next Regular meeting; that the motion would be defeated if a tie vote is reached at the next Regular meeting. Commissioner Atkins stated that the understanding is only a motion will be made at the next Regular meeting. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson asked for clarification if the suggested change only pertains to public hearings or any item on the Agenda? Mayor Palmer stated that a tie vote between two nominees for a City board appointment previously occurred; that only four Commissioners were present; that the appointment was continued until the absent Commissioner was available at the next Regular meeting to break the tie vote; that the situation was truly a tie vote; that the usual situation is two Commissioners vote in favor and two against; that an Ordinance or Resolution cannot be adopted unless three Commissioners vote in favor of an issue. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the preference is the suggested change should apply to all Agenda items; that public input should not be allowed if a tie vote is reached and the item has been, placed on the Agenda of the next Regular meeting. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that a tie vote is rare; that proper parliamentary procedure is suggested which is a continuance in the case of a tie vote; that the suggested change is not considered good government; that a tie vote will not occur if five Commissioners are present. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the suggested change is an automatic continuance to the next Regular meeting. Commissioner Servian stated that the situation of a tie vote is rare. Mayor Palmer and Vice Mayor Martin agreed. BOOK 56 Page 27392 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27393 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a change to the Commission's Rules of Procedure is necessary if the Commission chooses to support the suggested change. Mayor Palmer asked the wishes of the Commission to have the City Auditor and Clerk make the change to the Commission's Rules of Procedure. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the preference is to request an item be pulled from the Agenda if a Commissioner will not be in attendance. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that important items have been pulled from the Agenda in the past if a Commissioner will not be in attendance. Commissioner Servian stated that preparation is impossible in the case of illness. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that support will be provided if the suggested change applies to all Agenda items. Commissioner Servian stated that the suggested change should apply to all Agenda items. Vice Mayor Martin agreed. Mayor Palmer stated that the Commission has reached consensus to have the City Auditor and Clerk make a change to the Commission's Rules of Procedure regarding situations involving tie votes. B. stated that the City's advisory board reports presented earlier on the Agenda were reviewed; that the advisory board reports are not standard or consistent; that one form which would be simpler to review could be used; that the issue has been previously raised many times and should be addressed. Mayor Palmer stated that a request for consistency in the advisory board reports was made in 2003; that hearing no objections, the Administration is directed to assure all the City's advisory board reports are consistent in terms of form, organization, and attendance; that the issue should be placed on an Agenda of a Regular meeting if a vote is required. C. distributed a copy of the application for the All American City designation sponsored by the National League of Cities and stated that work was conducted regarding the application which has gone forward; that the idea was initially initiated by Sarasota County; that Sarasota County Openly Plans for Excellence (SCOPE) actually organized a stakeholders groupi that he was requested to work with the stakeholders group representing the City and other municipalities; that the application is general and speaks to Countywide efforts but specifically mentions the following City initiatives: the Hands of Heritage Festival, the Celebration of the City's 100th Year Anniversary, the amendment to the City's Charter regarding discrimination, Sarasota County Openly Plans for Excellence (SCOPE), the Sarasota-Newtown Comprehensive Redevelopment Plan Through 2020 (Newtown Plan), the Coalition of African-American Leadership (CAAL), the research partnership with Sarasota's New College of Florida, the Community Youth Development, and the Students Taking Active Roles (STAR) in Sarasota County program; that skate parks are mentioned; that a story regarding the Community Redevelopment Area is also included; that the Sarasota/Manatee Continuum of Care, the Chamber of Commerce, the African-American Chamber, and the Latin Chamber were mentioned; that the COEXISTENCE exhibit on the Bayfront is mentioned as well as the 19th Freedom Award banquet hosted by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); that the awards will be announced on April 15, 2004. Commissioner Atkins asked if the application has been submitted? Vice Mayor Martin stated yes. Commissioner Atkins stated that Sarasota Openly Addresses Racism (SOAR) was not mentioned. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the application mentions many minority community initiatives; that every initiative is not mentioned in the application. D. distributed an article from SRQ Magazine entitled, "Dreaming in WiFi"; and stated that the Wide Fidelity (WIFI) technology is interesting and provides wireless connection to the internet; that communication regarding BOOK 56 Page 27394 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27395 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. the ongoing development in the Downtown is a concern; that the City's web site provides information regarding the ongoing development in the Downtown; however, a significant number of business owners in the Downtown do not necessarily have computers or have the ability to access the City's web site; that Richard Swier at Startup Florida has been interested in WiFi technology; that the article indicates Sarasota County and Startup Florida will unveil a pilot WiFi hotspot around Five Points Park in mid-March 2004; that another partnership plans to blanket the Downtown area with a wireless system over the next four to five months at a cost of $80,000 to $100,000; that the technology is interesting; that efforts toward the new technology are taking place in the Downtown of which the Commission was not aware; that the new technology would allow store owners and stakeholders in the Downtown to communicate with the City. Commissioner Servian stated that significant security issues will arise as WiFi technology moves forward; that wireless information can easily be intercepted. Vice Mayor Martin stated that WiFi technology is useful for providing public communication. Commissioner Servian stated that the partnership involved in the WiFi technology has constructed a fire wall to protect information from possible interception; that the technology is complicated and fastening. Vice Mayor Martin agreed. E. stated that the Making Cities Livable Conference is taking place in the City; that the City and Sarasota County will be presenting local initiatives on March 18, 2004, at the County Administration Building between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 12:30 p.m.i that the Sarasota County 2050 Plan, the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020), and the Newtown Comprehensive Redevelopment Plan through 2020 will be presented; that Commissioner Atkins will be involved; that the environmentally sensitive lands effort taking place in the County will be addressed; that the City's neighborhood strategies will be discussed; that the conference will be interesting; that the City has many issues to showcase; that fellow Commissioners are encouraged to attend. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that recommendations included in the Board Reports received by the Commission from the City's advisory boards do not necessary cover everything occurring at the meeting upon which the Commission may choose to take action; that discussions have been held with members of the City's advisory boards; that the feedback heard is the Agenda Request Forms provided in the Agenda backup material only include issues upon which Staff desires the Commission to take action; that the: Agenda Request Forms do not necessary include all issues upon which the advisory board took action; that the Administration is requested research the issue; that all action taken at an advisory board level should come before the Commission for a final decision. B. stated that an electronic mail (email) was sent to the Administration and several other individuals throughout City Hall regarding the proposed City of Sarasota Downtown Code (Downtown Code); that she met with the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce Legislative Issues Committeei that the Committee requested some representatives from the architectural community be provided an opportunity to meet with Andres Duany, Principal, Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ), which developed the Downtown Master Plan 2020, prior to his coming before the Commission; that the reason is to have an opportunity to share concerns, have fears allayed, or make some corrections to the proposed Downtown Code prior adoption; that responses to her email have not been received other than the response provided by Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Redevelopment; that Ms. Robinson indicated the idea was good; that the City is paying for Mr. Duany's visit. City Manager McNees stated that Mr. Duany will not be visiting the City for very long. Mayor Palmer stated that Mr. Duany will be visiting the City for a certain period of time; that the architectural community has some very serious concerns with the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that BOOK 56 Page 27396 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27397 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. whether the City agrees with the concerns is not the issue; that providing an opportunity for Mr. Duany to meet with the architectural community is important; that Mr. Duany is the expert. Commissioner Servian stated that the City has expended considerable funds toward the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that to ignore the critical part of the architectural community would be a disservice; that the architectural community has compiled extremely detailed information regarding concerns; that time required will be limited and will only focus on the concerns. Vice Mayor Martin asked the reason the meeting between Mr. Duany and the architectural community would not be held in a public forum? Commissioner Servian stated that the Commission requested a Commission Workshop with Mr. Duany, which does not allow for public input. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the context of the meeting could be changed. Mayor Palmer stated that the architectural community should have an opportunity to meet with Mr. Duany to discuss concerns; that the results of the meeting will be provided at the Commission Workshop with Mr. Duany. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the reason the meeting would not take place in an open forum is not understood that the charrette which was held with Mr. Duany was an open forum. City Manager McNees stated that access to any of the City's consultants has never been restricted; that the City can assist in facilitating the schedule of meetings with Mr. Duany and the architectural community. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Duany's time can be scheduled by the City if the City is paying for Mr. Duany's visit. City Manager McNees stated that the understanding is Mr. Duany will only be in town for approximately two hours; that the Administration will attempt to facilitate meetings between Mr. Duany and the architectural community. Mayor Palmer stated that a public hearing regarding the proposed Downtown Code will certainly last more than two hours; that the hope was to have Mr. Duany present to hear and respond to the comments from the public. Vice Mayor Martin stated that a public hearing will be held on March 22, 2003; that Mr. Duany will be privy to the video and the minutes of the public hearing as previously agreed; that Commissioner Bilyeu also indicated a desire to meet with Mr. Duany; that a sense of the amount of time Mr. Duany will be spending in the City is necessary. Mayor Palmer stated that Staff is requested to report back with the Mr. Duany's schedule. Commissioner Servian stated that the architectural community is requesting time with Mr. Duanyi that a response would be appreciated. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the idea is good. Mayor Palmer stated that hearing the support of the Commission, the Administration is requested to provide a schedule for Mr. Duany's visit. Vice Mayor Martin stated that Mr. Duany's time should be considered; that the amount of time Mr. Duany will be available should be clarified. COMMISSIONER BILYEU: A. stated that a neighborhood meeting was attended with Mayor Palmer regarding a new school which is proposed at the Pineview School site; that the new school will be called the Phoenix School and will be for eighth, ninth and tenth grade students; that the school's purpose is to provide assistance toward passing Florida's Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT); that the Classrooms will be smaller; that the site plan was reviewed; that the developer will make good use of the land; that the traffic flow will not be a problem since the two existing schools in the area have different opening and closing times than the new Phoenix School; that the neighborhoods in the area have a good understanding of the plans for the school. BOOK 56 Page 27398 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27399 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. B. stated that attendance at the Sarasota County Community Development Advisory Board meetings is discouraging; that the Board is important; that the Board is responsible for addressing fair and low income housing; that members of the Board should be removed and replaced by new members if attendance does not improve. C. stated that a meeting of the Sarasota County Coalition for the Homeless (Homeless Coalition) was recently attended; that 33 people were in attendance; that the meetings are being attended sO more information can be acquired regarding the homeless situation; that the City may be able to provide up front assistance. D. stated that some situations regarding commercial vehicles and canopies have occurred in neighborhoods; that the efforts of the Administration and Staff to assist in resolving the problems are appreciated; that a real estate sign on Prospect Avenue indicates "no deed restrictions"? that Staff held a meeting regarding commercial vehicles and canopies with Realtors for the development; that the original thought was use of canopies to shield signage on commercial vehicles was a good idea; that use of canopies is now causing problems; that a letter to the realtors of the development signed by the Mayor indicating the City does not have deed restrictions is suggested; that land development regulations exist and apply to the development; that the Realtors should be made aware; that people moving into a development believe no restrictions or rules exist if a sign indicates "no deed restrictions. T E. stated that a question is the value of a vacation of sidewalks; that a vacation of public right-of-way was recently approved at Main Street and Palm Avenue; that the value of the square footage of land given up by the City was calculated at $300,000; and asked if the vacated area becomes square footage of the developers' land which can be taxed? City Attorney Taylor stated that the issue has been previously raised; that sometimes the City owns the underlying fee simple title to the property; that most often, the City. simply has an easement which means the City has the right to use the easement; that the property belongs to the person owning the underlying property once the easement is vacated by the City. Commissioner Bilyeu stated that the vacated property, therefore, becomes part of the person's square footage of land and is taxed accordingly. F. stated that the Lions Club facility will be closing; that two or perhaps three neighborhood associations meet at the Lions Club facility; that the Lions Club offers the meeting space free of charge; that research has been conducted regarding the community center building in Payne Park; that a fee is charged to use the Payne Park community center building; that the issue of meeting space available for people will be researched; however, sufficient community meeting areas are apparently not available; that the employee lounge at City Hall is being relocated; that the space could perhaps be used as a community meeting area; that the intent is to assist City neighborhoods with identifying meeting spaces. G. stated that congratulations are extended to Vice Mayor Martin for efforts extended regarding the Making Cities Livable Conference. H. stated that an individual indicated traveling from Stickney Point Road to the Downtown via public transportation took one hour; that the individual resides in San Francisco, California; that good conversation was held regarding public transportation. I. stated that he has developed an ex parte communication form which is stored on his computer; that the form has been completed and provided to the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk to indicate ex parte communications which have taken place; that the Commission should consider using a form to record ex parte communications; that the form will be routinely used to avoid the appearance of being unprepared, which is embarrassing. J. stated that the length of the Commission Agendas is a concern; that not being rushed is important; that he is at the Commission table to perform a job; that the preference is for doing his job in a relaxed manner; that the job of the Commission is important. BOOK 56 Page 27400 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27401 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. K. stated that notice is provided the issue concerning Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 03-PA-09 as incorporated in proposed Resolution No. 04R-1707 submitted by the Yacht Center Land Company, LLC, and Half Moon Beach Club, LLC, which was denied at the March 11, 2004, Special meeting will be placed on the Agenda of the April 5, 2004, Regular meeting, to provide an opportunity to rescind the motion to deny. MAYOR PALMER: A. stated that the Sarasota Openly Addresses Racism (SOAR) forum is scheduled for April 2, 2004, and asked the time and place of the meeting? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the meeting is being held from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Friday, April 2, 2004, at Gulfcoast Wonder & Imagination Zone (G.WIZ); that lunch will be served. B. stated that the Commission should address City advisory board responsibilities; that some City advisory boards have indicated board members are not being treated properly in terms of board reports; that one advisory board member recently indicated the Commission was not requesting information regarding significant issues from the advisory board; that clarification is necessary if communication problems exist between the Commission and the City's advisory boards; that the City Auditor and Clerk should provide information concerning communications problems with the City's advisory boards if existing; that an advisory board training program may be necessary; that board appointments are made; however, board members may not be totally aware of policies and procedures. C. stated that several comments regarding problems with researching documents on the City's web site were heard at the current meeting; and asked if maneuvering through the City's web site is difficult or if the information is simply not available? City Manager McNees stated that an earlier speaker indicated the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020) is not available on the City's web site, which is true; that the document is huge. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 was on the City's web site at one time. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is on the City's web site under the Planning and Redevelopment Department. Commissioner Servian stated that finding documents on the City's web site is difficult. Vice Mayor Martin stated that the Information Technology Department was working on the City's web site on Sunday, March 14, 2004; that some people forwarded electronic mail (email) to him indicating problems with locating documents. Mayor Palmer stated that a request is for the City Auditor and Clerk to meet with the Director of Information Technology to identify problems with access to documents on the City's web site. Commissioner Servian stated that having the City's web site down the day before a Commission meeting is not good timing. Mayor Palmer agreed. D. stated that the points raised by Commissioner Bilyeu regarding ex parte communication are shared; that better records should be maintained if Commissioners. have ex parte communication; that personally, discussions are not held with individuals on either side of quasi-judicial matters, which is considered safe; that the manner in which to document ex parte communications is up to individual Commissioners. 28. OTHER ATERSAIKDISTAIIVA OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XI) CD 10:15 through 10:16 CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that an electronic mail (email) was forwarded to the Commission regarding the April 5, 2004, Regular meeting; that sundown, April 5, 2004, is the beginning of the Passover celebration; that the evening session will not be held; that the afternoon session will likely BOOK 56 Page 27402 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. BOOK 56 Page 27403 03/15/04 2:30 P.M. extend past the 4:30 p.m. ending time; that an ending time of 5:30 p.m. is anticipated. Mayor Palmer asked if beginning the afternoon session early is a possibility? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Agenda for the afternoon session of the April 5, 2004, Regular meeting will be reviewed and the scheduling time will be altered if necessary. Mayor Palmer stated that the evening session of the April 5, 2004, Regular Commission meeting will not be held. 29. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XVIII) CD 10:17 There being no further business, Mayor Palmer adjourned the Regular meeting of the City Commission of March 15, 2004, at 10:17 p.m. LL LOU ANN R. PALMER, MAYOR ATTEST: Billy E Robene-on BILLY E ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK