MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 19, 1994, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: : Mayor Nora Patterson, Vice Mayor David Merrill, Commissioners Fredd Atkins, Mollie Cardamone and Gene Pillot, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Nora Patterson The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR NOVEMBER 1994 - PETER GURDA, ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN IV, ENGINEERING DEE PARTMENT, WITH 14 YEARS OF SERVICE #1 (0033) through (0132) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, Alexandrea Hay, Assistant City Engineer, and Peter Gurda, Engineering Technician IV, joined Mayor Patterson before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that Peter Gurda has served the City with excellence and pride for many years; that recently, as Project Inspector during the demolition of the Helmsman Marine building where Centennial Park now stands, Peter went beyond the call of duty to save two marble plaques that are of great historic value to the City; that the two marble plaques were the original plaques mounted on the towers of the Old City Hall site; that the plaques will proudly be placed on the Historic Display as part of the Main Street Improvement Project between Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41. Mayor Patterson presented Mr. Gurda with a plaque and certificate for the Employee of the Month for November 1994 in appreciation of his unique performance with the City of Sarasota and congratulated him for his outstanding efforts. 2. PRESENTATION RE: RECOGNITION OF CITY OF SARASOTA EMPLOYEES FOR 1994/1995 UNITED WAY CAMPAIGN ACHIEVEMENT #1 (0133) through (0391) William C. Davenport, Director of Human Resources, and the Departmental Team Leaders for United Way joined Mayor Patterson before the Commission. BOOK 37 Page 11214 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11215 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that the City of Sarasota has raised $20,217 for the United Way Campaign this year; that the funds raised exceeded the goal of $17,132. Mr. Davenport stated that this year's campaign has been the most successful employee campaign in the history of City of Sarasota employees; that a dramatic improvement was realized over last year's campaign and the City's goal was exceeded by 18 percent. Mr. Davenport recognized Thomas Janning and Kris Hayes, United Way of Sarasota County representatives present in the Commission Chambers who contributed many hours to making the campaign at the City of Sarasota a success. Kris Hayes, representing Rebecca Allen, Campaign Chairman, United Way of Sarasota County, came before the Commission and stated that the City of Sarasota has tremendously supported the 38 local United Way agencies; that over 74,000 people were assisted last year. Ms. Hayes presented the Mayor with a plaque recognizing the City's Achievement in the United Way Campaign. Mayor Patterson presented Recognition Certiticates to the following Departmental Team Leaders: Florine Blake, Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement Nancy Curry, Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall Phil Lieberman, Planning and Development Department Karen Lusk, Engineering Department Cynthia Mazak, Public Safety Department Karen McGowan, City Auditor and Clerk's Office Joan Rola, Human Resources Department Andrew St. John, Public Works Department V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, accepted certificates for Marney Dean, Ed Smith Stadium; and Pastelle Roate, Information Services. Robert Gerkin, Director of General Services, accepted a certificate for Kim Lambert, General Services. John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, accepted certificates for Eve Vahl, Police Bureau, and Ida Mae McNeely, Fire/Rescue Bureau. Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, accepted a certificate for Carol Milburn, Finance Department. Andrew St. John, Public Works Operations, accepted certificates for Kim Motsinger and Delbert Rawlinson, Public Works Department. Mayor Patterson presented awards to representative of the following departments which had the highest level of payroll deduction participation: City Auditor and Clerk's Office = 538 participation Human Resources Department - 64% participation Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement - 598 participation Mayor Patterson presented the award for most significant improvement to the Engineering Department whose contributions during this year's campaign exceeded 3 times the amount raised last year. 3. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY = APPROVED #1 (0391) through (0430) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove under Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. III A-4, Approval Re: Lease Agreement between Patrick Ball and the City of Sarasota for property located at 513 North Central Avenue to provide office space for the Housing and Community Development Department, per the request of Deputy City Manager Schneider. B. Add to Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. III B-6, Approval Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-792, Lido Key Beach Restoration Project, per the request of City Manager Sollenberger. C. Add to New Business, Item No. VIII-3, Approval Re: Advanced Planning Board Report Publix Supermarket, Petition Nos. 95-SE-03 and 95-PSD-A, pursuant to Section 3-13 (2) of the Zoning Code, per the request of City Manager Sollenberger On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 5, 1994 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0426) through (0437) Mayor Patterson asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Hearing no objections, Mayor Patterson stated that the minutes of the regular City Commission meeting of December 5, 1994, were approved by unanimous consent. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2,3,5, AND 6 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (0444) through (0793) BOOK 37 Page 11216 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11217 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson requested that Item No. 6 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Annual Performance Evaluation of the City Manager and City Auditor and Clerk 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Professional Services Contract with Boyle Engineering Corp. (RFP #95-17), for the South Loop Reclaimed Water Transmission Main 3. Approval Re: Authorize the acquisition of the property located at 1865 Laurel Street 5. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3846, amending the Sarasota City Code, Chapter 33, Traffic and Motor Vehicles, Article III, enforcement of regulations, to permit not only officers to issue parking citations but others who have been lawfully sO designated; expanding the time to answer a parking citation from 48 hours to 14 days; assessing delinquency fees for failure to respond to parking citations; raising the threshold authorizing wheel locking to the existence of outstanding parking citation fines totaling fifty dollars or more, including late fees, and requiring the delinquent citations be at least thirty days old; deleting the City Auditor and Clerk's authority to summons violators who fail to pay parking citation fines; appointing the Code Enforcement Special Master for the City to conduct a post-wheel-locked hearing; increasing the wheel locking fee from twenty dollars to thirty-five dollars; increasing the towing fee from twenty-five dollars to seventy-five dollars; expanding the authorization for wheel locking to include cars parked within city-owned parking lots; amending Article IV, Stopping, Standing or Parking, Division 1, Generally, to provide that vehicles parked on two-way streets must be parked with the right hand wheels along the right hand curb; clarifying the use of the term "Adjacent parking space"; amending Article IV, Stopping, Standing or Parking, Division 4, Fines for Parking Violations, by deleting reference to the City Auditor and Clerk because parking enforcement is now administered by the Parking Violations Collections Division; revising the form to be used for parking violation citations; revising the form to be used for the notice of wheel locking; providing for the severability of the parts hereof if declared invalid; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Items 1 through 3 and 5. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 6. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3847, amending Chapter 16 of the Sarasota City Code, Recycling and Solid Waste, Article II, Collection and Disposal of Recyclable materials and solid waste, to amend the imposition of charges per month for the collection of solid waste; amending Chapter 37, water and sewers, Article II, rates and charges, to amend the unit of measurement for gallonage charges for water consumed; to amend the assessment of monthly unit service charges; to provide that water and sewer service shall be disconnected for non-payment sixty days after rendition of the delinquent bill; to provide the City Manager with discretion to lengthen the time period prior to disconnection; to specify the rate of interest assessed on unpaid water and sewer service bills; providing that a lien against property for unpaid water and sewer bills shall be discretionary, rather than mandatory; providing conditions for letters of credit in lieu of a cash deposit; providing for severability of parts hereof if declared invalid; providing for repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. Mayor Patterson stated that the proposed ordinance gives the City Manager total discretion to waive payments of water and sewer bills; that a certain latitude has previously been shown to City residents; that judgement calls are necessary; however, guidelines or comments on what the City Manager's discretion shall be should be included in the ordinance. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the proposed ordinance does not allow the City Manager to waive payments; that he has not and does not intend to waive utility payments; that discretion with regard to payments has been exercised; that the proposed ordinance amends the Code to reflect the past practice; that a procedures manual in the Utilities Department will specify the parameters for use of discretion. Mayor Patterson stated that an expression of the Administration's intent should appear in the ordinance; that she does not support setting the proposed ordinance as drafted for public hearing; that the ordinance lengthens from 30 to 60 days the payment period for disconnection; that the proposed language allows for an extension beyond that 60 days; and cited the following language: Sec. 37-25. Failure to pay charges. BOOK 37 Page 11218 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11219 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. The City Manager shall have discretion to lengthen the time prior to disconnection upon establishment by the customer to the City Manager of facts creating a hardship to justify an extension of the time. The City Manager shall be solely responsible to determine if an adequate hardship has been established and the City Manager's opinion shall be final. Commissioner Cardamone asked how often the City Manager has to address these types of situations. Mr. Sollenberger stated that delinquency situations arise; that the Administration attempts to arrange satisfactory payment agreements to avoid disconnection in situations involving illnesses, small children, etc.; that the utility service is disconnected if there is a default on the terms specified in the agreement. Gil Leacock, Director of Public Works, came before the Commission and stated that approximately two situations arise monthly. Commissioner Pillot stated that the language is appropriate for the following reasons: 1. every consideration should be given to families in special circumstances prior to disconnecting services; and 2. the City Manager is entrusted with the responsibilities for operating a business with millions of dollars and hundreds of employees every day; that, by comparison, the proposed discretionary responsibility is relatively minor. Commissioner Atkins stated that the City Manager needs the flexibility to deal with situations that arise; that restrictive language would hinder the City Manager's flexibility. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that a provision to address this situation is not currently in the ordinance; that including a provision may increase the number of requests for extensions occurring monthly. Mayor Patterson asked Mr. Sollenberger if he would be making the determinations? Mr. Sollenberger stated that he would designate that responsibility to the Utilities Department. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 6. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, no. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-780) - ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 95R-790) = ADOPTED, ; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 95R-791) = ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (ORDINANCE NO. 94- 3829) - ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 95-3833) = ADOPTED; ITEM 6 (RESOLUTION NO. 95R-792) = SEE ITEM 31, "OTHER MATTERS, L AGENDA ITEM XI" (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (0794) through (0915) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. 95R- 780, 95R-790, 95R-791, 95R-792, and Ordinance Nos. 94-3829 and 95- 3833 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-780, reaffirming the Commission's desire for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to restore passenger railroad service to the Sarasota-Bradenton area; etc. (Title Only) 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-790, determining to make public improvements and defray the whole or any part of the costs thereof by Special Assessment; stating that the nature of the proposed improvement is to acquire certain designated real property and construct thereon a surface parking facility; designating the property to be sO improved; stating the part or portion of the costs thereof to be paid by Special Assessment; stating the manner in which said assessment shall be paid; stating when said assessments are to be paid; stating what part, if any, shall be apportioned to be paid from the general improvement fund of the City; designating the lands upon which the Special Assessment shall be levied; stating the total estimated cost of the improvement; directing the City Auditor and Clerk to cause this Resolution to be published; etc. (Title Only) 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-791, fixing a time and place at which the owners of property to be assessed or any other persons interested therein may appear before the City Commission and be heard as to the propriety and advisability of making improvements in the nature of a surface parking facility on and adjacent to Fillmore Drive, as to the cost thereof, as to the manner of payment therefore, and to the amount thereof to be assessed against each property sO improved; etc. (Title Only) 4. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3829, annexing certain real property lying contiguous BOOK 37 Page 11220 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11221 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. to the City limits into the corporate limits of the City of Sarasota, as petitioned by Atlee A. Schlabach, for Atlee A. Schlabach, Inc., said real property being described as follows: a parcel of land being the South 89.90 feet by 76.97 feet of Lot 13, Fulmer Subdivision, First Addition, as recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 4, Public Records of Sarasota, Florida, with a street address of 2921 Floyd Street; more particularly described herein; making findings; redefining the boundary lines of the City of Sarasota to include said real property; etc. (Title Only) 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3833, amending Article VII, Chapter 33, Sarasota City Code, revising the designation of certain streets where through truck traffic is prohibited as more particularly set forth herein; making findings as to need; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title Only) 6. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-792, requesting that the local legislative delegation support the City's request for State funding for the Lido Beach Restoration Project as their priority for legislative action during the 1995 session; etc. (Title Only) On motion of Commissioner Pillot, and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 5 inclusive. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE : PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SOUTHSIDE VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (0960) through (1984) Asim Mohammed, Assistant City Engineer; Rick * Carlisle, Vice President, Facilities Development; Marty Moss, Board Member, and Michael Colvert, President, Sarasota Memorial Hospital; and Kenneth Natoli, Landscape Architect, came before the Commission. Mr. Carlisle stated that in February 1994 the City entered into an interlocal agreement with Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) to make streetscape improvements to the Southside Village Neighborhood Commercial District, including Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue; that conceptual plans for the project have been reviewed and supported by the Southside Village Merchants Association, the Sarasota Memorial Hospital Neighborhood Advisory Committee, residential neighborhood groups, City Staff, SMH staff, and the SMH Board of Directors; that the firm of Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., was retained to provide design services on the project; that the City obtained an Intermodel Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) grant to subsidize the City's portion of funding; that the project will be constructed by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT); that the conceptual plans which were coordinated with the FDOT officials have received preliminary approval from the FDOT; that pursuant to the interlocal agreement, the next step in the process is to hold a public hearing and have the City Commission consider approval of the conceptual plan. Mr. Natoli stated that five major objectives guided the conceptual plan process: 1) beautify the village and upgrade the image of the neighborhood, 2) encourage investment in storefront upgrades, 3) scale the street to create a human scale environment, 4) increase parking, and 5) improve bicycle/pedestrian access. Mr. Natoli gave a detailed overview and slide presentation on the elements of the Southside Village Conceptual Plan which included a 5-foot median, angle and parallel parking, 12.4-foot sidewalks with intermittent planting for trees, and 3-foot wide bicycle lanes on Hillview Street; sidewalks with intermittent planting for trees ranging from 9 to 13 feet, angle parking on the east side and parallel parking on the west side of Osprey Avenue. Mr. Natoli stated that the conceptual plan meets the desires of all the advisory groups, conforms to City standards, and includes the following features: Total parking at 170 spaces, an increase of 30 spaces over existing Substantial increase of green, non-paved space; mostly grass, with low ornamental ground covers used in high visibility areas; that Florida Yard Program policies will be incorporated wherever possible. 200 additional trees BOOK 37 Page 11222 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11223 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. 60 new light features, tall area lighting in the Center and smaller pedestrian lights on the side, cost effectively designed to address the safety issues. Mr. Natoli stated that negotiations are currently being held with FDOT on items such as the proposed left turn lane; that some parking spaces may be impacted to meet FDOT standards; that Commission approval of a plan which shows local support will assist in the FDOT negotiations. Mr. Natoli continued that the preliminary cost estimate for the Conceptual Southside Streetscape Project is $913,000; that $860,000 of funding is available; that an item entitled, "Potential additional funds from FDOT" amounting to $53,000 was included under the available funds category; that the amount is not currently budgeted and will require further appropriations from the FDOT. Commissioner Cardamone asked for an estimate of how many parking spaces could be lost with regard to the proposed left turn lane? Mr. Natoli stated that adequate space has to be provided for vehicles to stack in the left turn lane; that significant stacking does not occur at the site currently; that the loss of parking spaces should be minimized if engineering studies can document minimal stacking; that the required left turn lane length will determine how many parking spaces will be lost. Mr. Mohammed stated that the FDOT has shown flexibility on this issue; that providing FDOT with proper documentation will allow the City to retain minimal median lengths, and, therefore, more parking spaces. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if the street light poles on Hillview Street will be replaced? Mr. Natoli responded, yes. Mr. Mohammed gave a brief overview of the schedule and stated that if the conceptual plan is approved tonight, plans will be completed and forwarded to FDOT; that the joint project agreement, developed by the Attorneys representing the City, SMH, and FDOT, will take several months to complete; that a joint project agreement between the City, SMH, and FDOT is necessary for two reasons: 1) to transfer the City and SMH shares of funding to the FDOT, and 2) to maintain a certain amount of control over the project and represent the interest of the City businesses on Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue as to when the project will begin; that the project will be constructed by the FDOT and bid by their central office in Tallahassee for which a three-month delay is anticipated; that construction is scheduled to begin in January 1996; however, the City will have the flexibility to have the project begin in April 1996, at the end of the season, if the merchants sO desire. Mayor Patterson stated that funding will be available in July 1995; and asked why construction cannot start at that time? Commissioner Cardamone stated that the project has been in the works for over EWO years and should be fast-tracked to begin prior to 1996. Mr. Mohammed stated that the City has negotiated with FDOT on the quickest, possible time frame to begin the project; that the FDOT is not normally involved in streetscape projects; that this project will be the first constructed under the program from which the funding was obtained. Mr. Natoli stated that the FDOT process is specific and lengthy. Commissioner Cardamone requested that a legend explaining the symbols indicated on the plans be provided to the Commission at future presentations. Mr. Mohammed stated that the information will be provided to the Commission when the final plans are presented to the Commission for approval in approximately four months. Vice Mayor Merrill asked for comment by a SMH representative regarding a potential impact to traffic. Mr. Colvert stated that he does not anticipate a negative traffic impact; that the project stemmed from SMH efforts to: 1) demarcate the medical area from the residential area and allow for continued residential growth, and 2) continue to upscale and develop the area for safety and the betterment of the business and residential communities; that SMH has tried to accommodate all affected parties in the process; that the project has been designed to enhance traffic flow; that the number of parking spaces available has been increased. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she appreciates the inclusion of the Florida Yard Program in the design of the landscaping; that the amount of grass, which requires maintenance and fertilization, should be minimized. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Jim Toale, representing SMH Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC), stated that the conceptual plan was a collaborative effort bet tween SMH and City Staffs, the merchants and residents of the area; that the consultant's contract included public meetings during which a series of compromises regarding the parking requirements and the aesthetic appeal were reached; that cost efficiency was a factor in the project design. BOOK 37 Page 11224 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11225 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if the NAC anticipates any traffic impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods? Mr. Toale stated that the project represents a potential for improvement in traffic flow and the parking problems experienced on the surrounding streets. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to approve the Southside Village conceptual plan with the caveat that the plans proceed as quickly as possible. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson stated that members of the public have requested that Item VII-4 be moved forward to be addressed at this time, and asked for comment by the City Manager. Mr. Sollenberger stated that it would be appropriate. There was a consensus of the Commission to move Item VII-4 forward and hear both Hudson Bayou related items simultaneously. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE : PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 95R-781, STATING THE CITY OF SARASOTA'S INTENTION TO USE THE UNIFORM ME THOD OF COLLECTING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR DREDGING OF HUDSON BAYOU AS SET FORTH IN F.S. 197.3632, BY COLLECTING THE ANNUAL INSTALIMENTS THROUGH THE TAX COLLECTOR OF SARASOTA COUNTY PURSUANT TO THE ANNUAL TAX BILL OF THE ASSESSED PROPERTY; : STATING THE NEED FOR THE LEVY OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT; PROVIDING A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE REAL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE LEVY; PROVIDING FOR MAILING A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE SARASOTA COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER, THE SARASOTA COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; : ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) AND 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: : HUDSON BAYOU DREDGING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT = ACCEE PTED THE REPORT ON "BAYOU DREDGING THROUGH COOPERATION", APPROVED THE PROCEDURE OUTLINED IN THE REE PORT BY WHICH NEI IGHBORHOOD DREDGING PROJECTS MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED; APPROVED THE AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT ENGINEERING BE TWEEN THE CITY AND THE HUDSON BAYOU RESTORATION JOINT VENTURE; ; AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT ENGINEERING; APPROVED ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PROJECT AS A PRIORITY FOR WCIND FUNDING. (AGENDA ITEM VII-4) #1 (1984) through #2 (0200) City Manager Sollenberger stated that in October 1994, the Commission directed the Administration to determine the feasibility of creating a Special Assessment District to fund the cost of the dredging of Hudson Bayou. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, stated that a report on the methodology for which bayou dredging can be accomplished through a special assessment district has been included in the agenda packets; that various individuals from City areas have contacted the City with an interest in having their bayou or boat basin dredged; that the proposed process requires the neighborhood to provide funding for the engineering costs; that based on the engineering study and permitting agency determination, the City would begin the Special Assessment procedures; that the engineering costs would not be reimbursed to the neighborhoods if the special taxing district failed; that the process would continue if the special taxing district passes; and the special assessed tax would be included on the annual property tax bill for a fixed period of time; that the procedure included in the report could be used by other neighborhood projects in the future; that the Administration recommends the Commission accept the report and approve the procedure for use in other areas. Mr. Daughters continued that the neighborhood abutting Hudson Bayou between Osprey Avenue and U.S. 41 is seeking to have that portion of the bayou dredged, and pay for the project through a special assessment district, with the City as their agent for the engineering, permitting, contracting and governmental application processes; that an agreement for Project Engineering between the City and the Hudson Bayou Restoration Joint Venture has been developed. Mr. Daughters distributed an amended draft of the Agreement for Project Engineering and clarified the following two changes which were made: The term "Project Engineering Work I has been replaced by the term "Preliminary Project Engineering Work. As such, "post-dredge surveying" has been deleted from the definition. Paragraph 7, Reimbursement, has been amended to clarify that the $2,6 639.34 previously contributed by a core group within the Joint Venture will likewise be credited in the event the special assessment district is created. Mr. Daughters stated that Paragraph 3, Deposit Fee, includes a sum of $13,750 which is a not to exceed amount; that cost proposals for the work have not yet been received; that the sum will most likely be reduced. Mr. Daughters continued that approval by the Commission of the Agreement for Project Engineering between the City and Hudson Bayou BOOK 37 Page 11226 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11227 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Restoration Joint Venture and authorization for the Mayor to execute the same is recommended. A map of the Special Assessment District boundaries comprised of properties fronting on Hudson Bayou was displayed on the overhead projector. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is as follows: 1. Accept the report on "Bayou Dredging Through Cooperation" 2. Approve the procedure outlined in the report by which neighborhood dredging projects may be accomplished. 3. Approve the Agreement for Project Engineering between the City and the Hudson Bayou Restoration Joint Venture. 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement for Project Engineering. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Jim Toale, representing the Hudson Bayou Joint Venture, recognized the members of the Hudson Bayou Joint Venture (HBJV) in the Commission Chambers and stated that extensive meetings have been held with City Staff; that 90 percent of the property owners have pledged participation in the proposed special assessment district; that the members have no objection to the content of the Agreement for Project Engineering; that the HBJV has no comment on the method for Uniform Collecting; that the actual assessment and allocation of the assessment will be discussed at a future public hearing, hopefully, in the summer of 1995; that establishing a Commission priority for West Coast Inland Navigation District (WCIND) grant funds for this project is requested; that the availability of matching funds will be known and the net allocation to the property owners can be estimated before the next public hearing if the City files the appropriate applications. Rodney Desborg, 3935 U.S. 301 North, asked if this public hearing will set forth the boundaries for the Special Assessment District? Mr. Sollenberger stated that Resolution 95R-781, Exhibit "A", provides the legal description of the boundaries of the real property to be subject to the levy that will be incorporated for the Special Assessment District. Mayor Patterson stated that the boundaries of the Special Assessment District will be established once the Commission votes affirmatively for the proposed resolution. Mr. Desborg stated that he owns the office professional building located on the parcel indicated as 1090 on the Assessment District mapi that the portion of Hudson Bayou abutting of this property does not need to be dredged; that he has no need for a navigable waterway and would like to be removed from the Special Assessment District; that dredging will damage the mangroves which abut the entire side of his parcel. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the purpose for dredging Hudson Bayou is to create a navigable waterway or to remove silt? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the purpose is primarily to dredge for navigational purpose; however, exempting a property at this time would be premature; that approving the resolution with the properties as proposed does not mandate that Mr. Dresborg's property will be part of the Special Assessment District; that the procedure includes a future request of the Commission to authorize engineering services; that the engineer will prepare and provide the Commission with technical data upon which a decision regarding Mr. Dresborg's request can be based. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Dresborg's property is included in the proposed resolution; however, there is ample opportunity for adjustment after the issue is studied. Mr. Sollenberger stated that is correct; that the boundaries will be established for the purpose of the City's intention to use the uniform method of collection; that if the engineering studies show that the dredging will not provide a benefit to the subject parcel, the Commission could delete the property from the Special Assessment District. City Attorney Taylor stated that the State law requires a specific sequence to utilize the assessment process; that a certain number of months of lead-in time is necessary to implement assessments; that the details of the project are unknown at this time; that the property cannot be included at a later date; that the details concerning the methodology of assessments and the amount of assessment are subject to the engineering. study, Administration recommendation to the City Commission, public hearings, etc.; that a determination on what benefit the subject property will receive will be made at that time; that the assessment could be extremely low if a minor benefit is documented or exempted if there will be no benefit received. Mayor Patterson stated that Commission is being advised to leave the subject property in the proposed Special Assessment District; that there will be a review of benefit to the individual parcels and ample time to address the possibility that Mr. Dresborg may receive no benefit. BOOK 37 Page 11228 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11229 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Dale Shumaker, 1835 Lincoln Drive, representing himself and several neighbors, stated that he is a 30-year resident and willing to pay his share to clean up Hudson Bayou; however, the Sarasota Herald Tribune, Sarasota Garage and properties east of U.S. 41 have also contributed to the 1-foot thick silt and other objects currently found in the Hudson Bayou; that open City sewage pipes drain directly into the Hudson Bayou; that all parties that have contributed to the problem should pay their share to resolve it. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the City of Sarasota does not discharge sewage; however, a break in the line with less than a 50,000 discharge was experienced at the bridge at U.S. 41 early in 1994; that the line was repaired promptly. Lincoln Drive residents, Ted Stremper and Don Lawrence, had signed up to speak, but waived their time. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. Mr. Daughters; Alexandrea Hay, Assistant City Engineer; and Rick Winters, Engineering Technician V, came before the Commission. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Toale requested the City to express a priority with regard to WCIND matching funds for this project; and asked if the City currently has any priorities? Mr. Daughters stated that the Engineering Department does not currently have pending or anticipate pursing future applications; that the City has applied and received approval for WCIND funds associated with the New Pass Seawall project. Ms. Hay stated that the application for WCIND funds for the seawall was made in April and received in December. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the application can be filed immediately? Ms. Hay stated that the application can be prepared and filed; however, applicants are not asked to make a formal request before the County's Advisory Board until May. Commissioner Pillot left the Commission Chambers at 7:26 p.m. Mayor Patterson stated that some other project that the City may have might not get funded if the Hudson Bayou dredging project is made the City's priority; that making this project a priority is a serious decision and will require lobbying and substantial efforts by the City's Engineering Department. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the relationship of this project with the National Estuary Program (NEP) and Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) make the Hudson Bayou dredging an attractive project for WCIND funding; that the City has no other priorities for WCIND funding; therefore, the project should merit high on the consideration. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Hudson Bayou has been identified as a major source of the pollution of the Sarasota Bay; that the Hudson Bayou dredging will assist the clean up effort of Sarasota Bay on which the community has greatly focused; that the Commission should make the requested project a priority. Mayor Patterson asked if a method of assessment has been determined regarding the amount each property will be assessed? Commissloner Pillot returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:28 p.m. Mr. Daughters stated that several discussion have been held; that the property value assessments received from the County and the waterfront footage figures are being reviewed as a potential basis; that benefits other than the navigational benefit may be gained; however, no final decision has been reached. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the neighborhood will have an opportunity to speak to that issue? Mr. Daughters replied, yesi that the Administration has been working closely with the property owners and will continue to do so. Mr. Daughters stated that, in response to a comment from Mr. Shumaker, the project proposed at the Sarasota High School is a major retention pond which would severely reduce or eliminate the silt emanating from that portion of the City to the Hudson Bayou in the future. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 95R- 781 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot, and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 95R-781. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation to: 1. Accept the report on "Bayou Dredging Through Cooperation" 2. Approve the procedure outlined in the report by which neighborhood dredging projects may be accomplished. 3. Approve the Agreement for Project Engineering between the City and the Hudson Bayou Restoration Joint Venture. BOOK 37 Page 11230 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11231 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement for Project Engineering. 5. Expedite the request for WCIND funding. Mayor Patterson asked the maker if the intent of Item #5 was to create a priority? Commissioner Pillot, as maker, responded yes. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 81 ROOM MARRIOTT COURTYARD INN ON THE FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY: SAID PROPERTY LIES APPROXIMATELY 130 FEET EAST OF DESOTO PLACE AND APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET WEST OF ROYAL PALM AVENUE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF UNIVERSITY PARKWAY (FORMERLY DESOTO ROAD) WITH A STREET ADDRESS OF 850 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY (PETITION NO. 94-PSD-S, MCKIBBON BROTHERS, / INC.) APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #2 (0200) through (0414) Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission, displayed the PS&D on the overhead projector, and stated that this is a petition to permit the construction of an eighty-one room Marriott Courtyard Hotel on the property zoned Commercial Office Park (COP), approximately three acres in size, located at 850 University Parkway; that the project is part of the 11-acre, phased development for which rezoning was approved in July 1992; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) recommended approval (4-1); that the opposing vote cast by Chairman Annis related to his concern with the trees on the site; that trees of significance were not noted during the field siting; that removal of brush and smaller trees will provide for a better evaluation at which time prominent trees can be marked for preservation. Commissioner Cardamone asked for clarification of the entrance way to the property. Mr. Taylor stated that one access road opposite the entrance to the Sarasota/Bradenton Airport has been provided for the entire 11-acre site. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval. Jerry Cox, representing Petitioner McKibbon Brothers, Inc., came before the Commission and stated that the petitioner's intent is to develop a Marriott Courtyard Inn on the subject property; that the required package has been submitted for Commission review; that meetings have been held with the adjoining property owners and there are no apparent problems; that applicable codes and regulations for standard development will be incorporated; that consideration of their petition is requested. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Diane Verrelli, Property Manager for the Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport, read the following statement from the Sarasota/Manatee Airport Authority, a copy of which she presented to the Commission: Sarasota/Manatee Airport Authority is pleased to offer our support to the Marriott Courtyard Inn development project. The Marriott Corporation is a first-class operation and the decision to locate a Courtyard Inn in close proximity to the Airport will provide much needed hotel and meeting space. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. On motion of Commissioner Pillot, and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Preliminary Site and Development Plan 94-PSD-S. Commissioner Cardamone asked for the number of employment positions generated by the development? Mr. Cox came before the Commission and stated that 20 to 26 employees are anticipated for the 24-hour rotation of three shifts. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3845, TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT THE USE OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE (IN A TAD ZONE DISTRICT) AS AN "INN" AND TO APPROVE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO ALLOW 16 ROOM/SUITES, A MANAGER'S OFFICE AND A RESTAURANT (UNDER 3000 SQUARE FEET) TO SERVE CONTINENTAL BREAKFASTS TO GUESTS; SAID PROPERTY LIES ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL AT FOURTH STREET, A/K/A 332 NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-PSD-B, BARBARA STEPHENS) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #2 (0414) through (0552) Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that this is a petition to permit BOOK 37 Page 11232 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11233 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. modification to previously approved Petition Nos. 90-C0-06 and 90- DPR-02 to allow an Inn and restaurant with retail sales items to be located at 332 North Tamiami Trail in the Theater and Arts Zone District (TAD) ; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency found Preliminary Site and Development plan (PS&D) 95-PSD-B consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed changes in use to the City Commission. Commissioner Cardamone left the Commission Chambers at 7:45 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of proposed Ordinance 95-3845. Commissioner Cardamone returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:46 p.m. Barbara Stephens, Petitioner, came before the Commission and stated that she intends to use the Inn and Art Gallery as a place for individuals to stay and view art work created by local artists. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3845 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot, and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3845 on first reading. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yesi Merrill, yesi Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 12. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3841, TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE FROM RMF-5 ZONE DISTRICT TO G ZONE DISTRICT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: LOT 11, BLOCK 12 AND LOT 11, BLOCK 13, ST. ARMANDS DIVISION OF JOHN RINGLING ESTATES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 30 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THAT PORTION OF FILLMORE DRIVE VACATED BY ORDINANCE 95-3842 AND, / APPROVING PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 94-R IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SURFACE PUBLIC PARKING LOT IN A G ZONE DISTRICT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 94-CR-CO-10, CITY OF SARASOTA) - PASSED ON FIRST READING; PUBLIC HEARING TO BE REOPENED AT SECOND READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5-A) AND 13. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3842, TO VACATE A PORTION OF FILIMORE DRIVE (80 FEET WIDE) EXTENDING FROM THE SERVICE ALLEY TO THE WEST OF LOT 11, BLOCK 12, AND THE SERVICE ALLEY NORTHWEST OF LOT 11, BLOCK 13, TO THE INTERSECTION OF MONROE DRIVE AND S. ADAMS DRIVE, LYING WITHIN THE ST. ARMANDS DIVISION OF JOHN RINGLING ESTATES SUBDIVISION, PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 30 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 94-CR-SV-03, CITY OF SARASOTA) - PASSED ON FIRST READING; PUBLIC HEARING TO BE REOPENED AT SECOND READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5-B) AND 14. PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO PERMIT A PUBLIC SURFACE PARKING LOT, A NON-GOVERMENTAL USE, IN A G ZONE DISTRICT ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: LOT 11, BLOCK 12 AND LOT 11, BLOCK 13, ST. ARMANDS DIVISION OF JOHN RINGLING ESTATES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 30 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA: MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 94-CR-SE-05, CITY OF SARASOTA) = WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION; NO ACTION NECESSARY (AGENDA ITEM IV-5-C) #2 (0550) through (1821) City Manager Sollenberger stated that this will be the first binding action with regard to the proposed off-street parking lot on St. Armands. Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that four petitions are currently before the Commission for approval: 1. The rezoning of the multi-family property, located at 58 Fillmore Drive and 48 Adams Drive, to the Governmental (G) Zone District; 2. A preliminary site and development plan (PS&D) in conjunction with Item #1; 3. Vacating the segment of Fillmore Drive which bisects the two, triangular pieces of property; 4. A Special exception to allow a parking lot in a "G" Zone District. City Attorney Taylor stated that a question was raised subsequent to placing the Special Exception petition on the agenda as to why the City needed a special exception to allow a parking lot which is an appropriate use on government-owned property; that there was a misinterpretation at some point that the parking lot would be BOOK 37 Page 11234 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11235 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. privately owned; that approval of a special exception is not necessary; that he recommends withdrawing the item from the agenda. Mr. Taylor stated that Items 1 through 3 have been recommended for approval by the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP); that PBLP members Lindsay and Annis had concerns with the conditional rezoning and whether the Tree Protection Ordinance was adequately addressed; that the Administration has met with the neighborhood associations to address those issues of concern. Mr. Sollenberger stated that Staff met with the various associations as recommended by the PBLP; that adjustments to their satisfaction have been made on the PS&D; that the Administration recommends favorable Commission action on the three referenced items. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing on Ordinance Nos. 95-3841 and 95-3842. The following people came before the Commission: Martin Rappaport, Co-Executive Director of the Commercial Landowners Association of St. Armands (CLAS); Lou Mettler, President of CLAS, and Nancy Cook, President of the St. Armands Residents Association, came before the Commission and stated that that this is the first time in the history of Sarasota that the City and the merchants, landowners, and residents of St. Armands have worked in unison to solve a much recognized problem; that the plan before the Commission tonight solves the deficiency of parking for St. Armands while providing the residents the privacy which they deserve; that the commercial landowners have voluntarily agreed to a burden of self-imposed tax for the next 20 years in an effort to work together with the City as partners toward a brighter future for the community as a whole; that the City's progress on a Fillmore Drive parking facility has been appreciated and should be commended; that City Engineering and Public Works Department representatives have created an improved plan for the site; that many trees will be saved, additional oaks and palms will be planted, and a much improved statue area has been created in the southeast corner; that the project is supported with the recommendation that the proposed 2.5-foot buffer plantings between the parking lot and a residential area be maintained at a 3.5-foot height to provide those residents with a more aesthetically pleasing view. Mr. Rappaport presented the Commission with a joint letter of unanimous support from: Commercial Landowners Association of St. Armands, Inc., St. Armands Residents Association, and St. Armands Merchants Association. Mayor Patterson stated that the changes mentioned do not appear to be reflected in the PS&DS contained in the Commission packet. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that a single PS&D sheet revised to accommodate the concerns of the three associations should have been included in the Commission's packet; that additional, existing cedar trees were saved, more trees were added to the facility, and the southeast corner of the statutory area was reconfigured; that a couple of parking spaces were lost, but significant landscaping was added; that the canopy trees along the outside parameter were relocated. Alexandrea Hay, Assistant City Engineer, came before the Commission and exhibited and explained the before and after design sketches as the Landscape Plan, Design W.0. #5502, was displayed on the overhead projector. Mr. Daughters stated that Engineering Staff met with representatives from the three associations and the Engineering Consultant on November 8, 1994, to address the concerns voiced at the November 2, 1994, PBLP meeting regarding saving existing trees and providing additional buffering; that a follow-up meeting was held with the same parties on December 9, 1994, to review the changes and verify that the previously agreed upon modifications had been made; that the plan shown on the overhead projector is what the Commission is requested to approve. Commissioner Pillot stated that the official plans which will govern this project will be those that have been agreed by four parties, the owners, residents, merchants and the City; that whether the Commission has the PS&D in possession or not, it will drive the project. Ms. Cook stated that the St. Armands Residents Association has not seen or given final approval on the revised PS&D; that the concept was approved, but a final document was not received; that the Association wants to have documentation of the modifications. Mayor Patterson asked if all items except the specific PS&D could be approved? Mr. Sollenberger stated that PS&D approval is necessary to move forward on the bidding process. Mayor Patterson asked if a copy of the plans shown on the overhead projector would meet with Ms. Cook's satisfaction? Commissioner Cardamone stated that she thought the plans included in the Agenda packets incorporated those modifications and were what the Commission would be asked to approve; that the time over the weekend she spent studying those plans was wasted since they are not the plans requested for approval. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the St. Armands Residents Association's concern stems from the situation which occurred regarding the landscaping BOOK 37 Page 11236 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11237 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. of the parking lot which replaced the parking garage; that the Association was involved in the landscaping plans, however, the landscaping did not materialize as discussed and the fire station wall does not provide an aesthetically pleasing view. Mr. Rappaport stated that the parking lot to which Commissioner Cardamone referred was not completed as a unified effort between the merchants, landowners, and residents; however, the proposed project is; that the merchants and landowners are also not happy with the landscaping and lighting at the other parking lot; that the subject will be brought before the Commission for discussion at a later date. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City Auditor and Clerk has advised her that the plans showing the modifications can be provided before the second reading of the ordinance. Mr. Sollenberger stated that a number of the issues related to the other parking lot are currently being addressed; and asked Mr. Daughters for comment. Mr. Daughters stated that Staff has been working with Ms. Cook in this regard; that additional landscaping will be added along the periphery of the parking lot and along the wall of the fire station; the painting of the north wall of the fire station will increase the related aesthetics; that deflectors will be installed on the lights which currently reflect toward the residential homes; that the lighting issue will be further addressed. Mayor Patterson asked for clarification of the basic planting which will provide the screening height of the 3.5 foot buffer? Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Florida Yard Program should be recognized for use with this project. Ken Natoli, Landscape Architect, firm of Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, came before the Commission to explain the plantings proposed for the project and stated that large oak trees will have east palaka hollies, flowering trees, and cabbage palms between them; that the majority of the hedge will be dwarf burford holly with dwarf ixoras on the edges; that the hedges will be planted at 2 feet and reach 3.5 feet in height over time. Mayor Patterson stated that the plan includes only 35 dwarf burford hollies. Mr. Natoli stated the actual plans include over 100 burford hollies. Mayor Patterson stated that between first and second reading duplicates of the plan and an accurate legend should be forwarded to the residents; that the intent of the Commission is for the residents to be satisfied; however, she is concerned with the time frame associated with the project. Mayor Patterson stated that passing the item on first reading and continuing the public hearing to second reading would provide the Commission with the opportunity to hear from the residents prior to final adoption. City Attorney Taylor and City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that continuing the public hearing would be procedurally acceptable. Jack Peffley, representing St. Armands Merchants Association (SAMA), stated that numerous studies conducted by the City over the past twelve years have shown a deficit of 400 parking spaces on St. Armands; that 72 additional parking spaces were attained through the diagonal parking established in 1992; that the new parking lot constructed in 1994 added 71 more parking spaces; that the parking lot proposed is necessary to meet the minimum standards recommended by the survey consultants; that the efforts of David Sollenberger, City Manager, Gibson Mitchell, Finance Director, and Richard Taylor, City Attorney, in developing the taxing district as well as the efforts of Dennis Daughters and the Engineering Staff are appreciated; that he urges Commission approval of the project. Betsy Hannan, 444 Monroe Drive, stated that she resides directly across the street from the proposed parking lot; that she fully endorses the project; however, she has the following concerns: 1. Maintenance of the landscaping and plantings. 2. Unknown objects which may be located under the property proposed for the parking lot. Ms. Hannan stated that weeds are growing wild at the parking lot on the corner of Madison and Adams Drives; that unknown pipes were located under the proposed property which prevented the planting of trees in the area between the street and the sidewalk. Mayor Patterson asked if Ms. Hannan's concern was relative to piping, etc., or environmental issues? Ms. Hannan stated that apartments were formerly located at the site; that her concern is with additional unknown piping, etc., which may be found under the ground. Mr. Daughters stated that relative information has been requested and provided from all the utility companies; however, the possibility remains of finding unknown items during construction; that the possibility is minimized with regard to this project since very little digging, only for the retention basin, will be associated with this project. Mr. Daughters stated that the pipeline referenced by Ms. Hannan is a City sewage forced main of which the City is aware; that the oak trees were relocated and replaced with palm trees whose roots will affect the water line as would oak tree roots. BOOK 37 Page 11238 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11239 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone asked if impervious surfaces were considered? Mr. Daughters stated that the parking lot surface will be asphalt; that the landscaped areas will be the only impervious surface; that experiences with impervious parking areas throughout the City have not been favorable for high frequency use. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance Nos. 95- 3841 and 95-3842 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot, and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance Nos. 95-3841 and 95-3842 on first reading and to reopen the public hearing on second reading. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yesi Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 15. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS RE: 1995 VISION PLAN FOR EAST SARASOTA NEI IGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION (AGENDA ITEM V-1) #2 (1821) through (2419) deJoly Matthews, President of the East Sarasota Neighborhood Association (ESNA), came before the Commission and stated that she has been entrusted to speak on behalf of the residents of the ESNA with regard to obstacles relating to the ESNA's 1995 Vision Plan which includes making progress toward achieving a neighborhood park and recreation center, streetscapes, a jogging trail along the railway such as the successful Rails to Trails project in Venice, sidewalks, and a Lime Avenue Business Association; that many other neighborhoods have received positive attention and funding from the City; that the ESNA is looking forward to similar response and assistance from the City; that the ESNA has been instrumental, in conjunction with the City's code enforcement efforts, in getting absentee landlords to clean up and properly maintain their properties although much improvement is still needed; that the City's effort in this regard have been appreciated. Ms. Matthews continued that members of the ESNA have become interested in City- government issues since Commission decisions greatly affect the members of the ESNA; that the ESNA residents have come to understand the importance of voting in all elections, especially locally; that various ordinances and plans being made by the City of Sarasota are counterproductive to the ESNA's goals, i.e., the recent Ordinance No. 94-3792 which allows adult bookstores to move into their neighborhoods; that the ESNA is appalled at the disregard the City has shown to the residents by changing the distance requirements on an ordinance which was already too lenient; that a 24-hour adult book and video store, XTC Super Center, located into their neighborhood within three weeks of the change; that the Executive Board of the ESNA requested a response from the City Manager, Mayor Patterson, and the Commission as to the speed this store was able not only to apply for and receive permits to open this type of business, but also to renovate the store itself, and gain full-page ads in newspapers which seek their advertisement at least one month in advance of the issues being published; that the ESNA has not received a reply to date and the City's lack of response has upset citizens; that she is seeking an explanation on how this establishment moved into the neighborhood sO quickly after the ordinance was changed; that the ESNA views the speedy procedures and subsequent permitting of the establishment to be contrary to the norm; that the ESNA requests an investigation and public disclosure of all procedures leading to the movement of this particular and other such establishments into their neighborhood. Ms. Matthews further stated that the City's Vision Plan is perceived to be a double-edged sword; that the formidable plan to make a superhighway run right through the ESNA neighborhood, without input from the residents of the affected neighborhoods, is shocking and appalling; that the wage has not been determined in association with the many jobs which will be created by the reconstruction planned for the Downtown North area whose residents are part of The Common Ground; that the planned movement toward the "big city" atmosphere is in opposition to that which brought most of the residents to the area in the first place; that many low paying jobs are located in the East Sarasota neighborhoods; that the plans should support maintaining family-oriented neighborhoods and provide jobs with higher wages; that the type of development which has been proposed with limited public input from the citizens who will be directly affect by the reconstruction only seeks to destroy neighborhoods, not support them; that only the corporate business owners, banks and real estate industries will benefit; that the ESNA members have felt ignored. Ms. Matthews added that the ESNA boasts over 1,000 eligible voters and the support of several large neighborhood associations who fear the possibility of similar conditions as occurring in the East Sarasota neighborhoods will occur in their neighborhoods; that as the president of the ESNA, she has pledged to work hard for the benefit of all residents to make their neighborhood a better place in which to live. City Manager Sollenberger presented Ms. Matthews with a letter dated December 5, 1994, which was forwarded to Mr. Jon Susce in response to the zoning for the XTC Super Store. BOOK 37 Page 11240 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11241 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that no ordinance was in place that forbid adult book and video stores from locating within the City; that the Commission directed the Administration to develop the strictest ordinance that could legally withstand a court challenge; that the distance requirement adopted was never made laxer since there was no previous distance requirement; that the ESNA requested the distance be changed to 2,000 feet; that the Administration and Attorney, based on other case laws, advised that 1,000 feet was the largest distance that could be legally defended in court. Ms. Matthews stated that the ESNA would like to request further review of the ordinance in that areas further north of the ESNA be considered for the location of adult use businesses. Commissioner Cardamone asked Ms. Matthews if she attended the Commission deliberations on the adult use ordinance? Ms. Matthews stated she had not. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the entire ordinance could be thrown out and adult use businesses could potentially proliferate if the City is challenged and loses; that four adult uses opened for business while the Commission was deliberating on the issue. Commissioner Cardamone encouraged Ms. Matthews to stay involved with the Commission sO that she can properly represent her association. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the City was served papers earlier in the day by the owner of an adult use establishment who is specifically challenging the City's ordinance. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the parkway which was originally included in an early draft of the Vision Plan was deleted by the Commission; that the document now references considering an alternative to the east of U.S. 301. 16. SCHEDULED PRESENTATION RE: NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH AND CRIME STOPPERS (AGENDA ITEM V-2) #2 (2420) through (2494) Sister Jennifer X, President of the Dr. Martin Luther King (MLK) Neighborhood Improvement Association Inc., came before the Commission and stated that the Sarasota North Action Group (SNAG) has been granted the use of a resource center to assist in curbing the crime in neighborhoods; that the joint effort between SNAG and the police department has been very effective; that she is interested in obtaining information to create a similar operation in the MLK community. City Manager Sollenberger stated that a member of the Police Services Bureau would be designated to discuss the issue further with Sister Jennifer X. 17. CITIZENS - INPUT (AGENDA ITEM VI) #2 (2495) through (2886) The following people came before the Commission: Mike Bessette, representing Crime Stoppers, 2071 Ringling Blvd., stated that the Crime Stoppers Program offers their support to Sister Jennifer X. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Bessette's contact information will be forwarded to the Administration. Paul Babbage, President of Orange Avenue Trailer Park, stated that George Ray is privately constructing a road on the former 16th Street right-of-way; that the City voted unanimously on April 19, 1993, to vacate the land; that the fence has been erected in the back and side of the park adjacent to the parking lot owned by HRS; that this has reduced vagrant and trespassing activities; that work on the road began in August 1994; that the curbings were installed on September 9; that two or three days have been spent on the actual construction of the road; that a water pipe at the intersection of Orange Avenue and the 16th Street right-of-way has to be relocated by the City further into the ground; that no work to this end has been completed; that the right-of-way currently becomes and remains a swamp for several days after it rains; that this creates an inconvenience and jeopardizes public safety access to residents on 16th Street. Mr. Babbage requested Commission assistance in rectifying the pipe situation. Mayor Patterson stated that is in every one's best interest to rectify the situation. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration will review the situation and contact Mr. Babbage. Devon Rutkowski, 1920 Laurel Street, stated that many great things have happened in Laurel Park over the past year; and thanked the Commission and the City for their support of the acquisition of the property at 1865 Laurel Street; that the purchase of the property will add to the excitement anticipated for his neighborhood in the year to come. 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: AMENDMENT TO TRI-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY JOHN RINGLING CENTER FOUNDATION, INC. AND FIRST SUNSET DEVELOPMENT INC. - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1-A) AND 19. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3822, TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE CERTAIN BOOK 37 Page 11242 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11243 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE JOHN RINGLING TOWERS SITE CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 1.86 ACRES FROM THE CG ZONE DISTRICT TO THE RMF- 5 ZONE DISTRICT; APPROVING PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN PETITION 94-B PERTAINING TO THE JOHN RINGLING TOWERS SITE AS WELL AS CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY COMPRISING A TOTAL OF 11.27 ACRES; SAID PROPERTY BEING LOCATED AT 111 NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 94-CO-02, FRANKLIN AS AGENT FOR FIRST SUNSET DEVELOPMENT, INC. - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1-B) AND 20. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3844, AMENDING THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO INCENTIVES TO DEVELOPMENT OF PARCELS INCLUDING A HISTORIC HOTEL, AS SET FORTH HEREIN; REVISING REGULATIONS AS TO THE REALLOCATION OF DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE SAME PARCEL AS THE HISTORIC HOTEL AS AN INCENTIVE TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC HOTEL; PROVIDING THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF SAID INCENTIVE SHALL NOT CAUSE THE MAXIMUM DENSITY OF ANY NEW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO EXCEED THE DENSITY WHICH WOULD BE PERMITTED IF THE ENTIRE PARCEL WERE VACANT LAND; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (ATTORNEY GEORGE DIETZ AS AGENT FOR FIRST SUNSET DEVELOPMENT, INC.) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1-C) #2 (2886) through #3 (0884) City Attorney Taylor stated that the following issues were left unresolved at the public hearing held in November: 1. The Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's approval of the project was subject to a deeding of property from First Sunset Development, Inc., to the John Ringling Centre Foundation (JRC) for anticipated parking; that this provoked issues involving surface water retention, cross easements between the two parties, and holding capacity for the ponds. City Attorney Taylor stated that the issues have been resolved and approved by the technical staff. 2. The two-party agreement between the JRC and First Sunset Development, Inc., included language relating to the full disclosure and acknowledgement by the City of a waiver of the funding goal as between the JRC and First Sunset Development, Inc. City Attorney Taylor stated that an amendment has been made to the two-party agreement to remove the language the Commission found objectionable. 3. Amendment to the tri-party Agreement between the City, First Sunset Development, Inc., and the JRC. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Agreement still obligates First Sunset Development, Inc., sO long as it owns the Towers/Bickel property, to demolish the historic structures if any one of the specified events occurs; that one of the specified events requiring demolition by First Sunset Development, Inc., is the failure of the JRC to raise $3 million for rehabilitation of the historic structures by December 31, 1994; that the fundraising goal is not a condition to the deeding of the property; that First Sunset Development, Inc., would be required to accomplish the demolition of the historic structures if the JRC fails to raise $3 million by December 31, 1994. City Attorney Taylor continued that the Agreement has been simplified as it relates to the emolition/asbestos identification and abatement sO that there are no time periods which need to elapse; that the submitted cost estimate of $300, 000 was endorsed by the Administration and shall be the first of estimated amounts used for the purposes of demolition; that a mechanism for the funding has been established; that the tri-party Agreement, as amended, would require the following at the time of the real estate transaction closing: 1) First Sunset Development, Inc., directly escrow $250,000, to secure the demolition/asbestos abatement, and 2) JRC provide an irrevocable letter of credit from an approved financial institution to secure the remaining $50,000 of the emolition/asbestos removal costs; that the asbestos report is not final as of this date; that the amendment to the tri-party agreement requires that the JRC increase the letter of credit should the final asbestos report have the effect of increasing the cost of asbestos removal and disposal. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to approve execution of the tri-party agreement, and adopt proposed Ordinance Nos. 94-3822 and 95-3844 on second reading. Commissioner Pillot asked if the three parties involved agree with the Administration's recommendation? City Attorney Taylor stated that the document had been signed by all three organizations; that the two ordinances were at the behest of the JRC and First Sunset Development, Inc. Commissioner Pillot stated that he supports the project with the exception of the density issue which was an issue during his 1993 electoral campaign; that any density created by the historic structures will generate traffic-related increases, etc.; that in accordance with the historic preservation ordinance, new structures built on the 11.27 parcel will be permitted to utilize the allowable density had the entire parcel been vacant; that for consistency and in keeping with previous commitments that the BOOK 37 Page 11244 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11245 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. increase in density is not appropriate, he requests that separate motions be made on the items. Mayor Patterson stated that she had raised concerns with the title passing to the JRC prior to the fundraising deadline date; however, the memorandum from City Attorney Taylor states that if the Commission passes the two ordinances tonight, the earliest date on which title would pass from First Sunset Development, Inc., to the JRC would be on January 18, 1995; that First Sunset Development, Inc., would therefore remain the responsible parties for demolition if the fundraising deadline is not attained; that this changes her attitude with regard to allowing future latitude on an extension of the deadline. Mayor Patterson asked the following questions: 1. How much of a commitment has been made or is necessary from the Petitioners that the deed won't change hands until January 18? 2. When will the Administration present the report of dollars raised by the JRC for evaluation by the Commission? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the report will be provided at the January 17, 1995, Commission meeting; that the obligation to raise the funding is December 31, 1994; that the information will be forwarded by the JRC to the City Administration by close of business on January 5, 1995. City Attorney Taylor stated that his memorandum reflected comments made at the Commission table during the public hearing process and in meetings held whereby First Sunset Development, Inc., representatives expressed the position that passing title to the property would not be in their best interest until the appeal time to challenge the actions taken by the Commission tonight expired. Mayor Patterson stated that only 24-hours will separate the presentation of the Administration's report and the expiration of the 30-day appeals time; and asked if she should have a comfort level with that? City Attorney Taylor stated that contractual obligations exist; that the amendment to the tri-party agreement was developed to eliminate any question concerning adequate funding available to secure the demolition obligation the JRC undertakes upon receiving title to the property; that the City is adequately secured from a legal standpoint in terms of the dollars it would cost to accomplish the demolition/asbestos abatement. Mayor Patterson stated that the City Attorney secured the City's interest as to who pays for the demolition as requested by the Commission; however, she is not comfortable; that she passed the items on first reading with the understanding that an update on the fundraising goal would be provided to the Commission at this meeting; that such information has not been provided; that she is not supportive of the package at the moment. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the information will be reviewed by the Finance Department upon receipt; that in accordance with the tri-party Agreement, if the funding is not adequate or appropriate, notice will be served for the parties to commence with demolition; that his decision could be overruled by the Commission on January 17, 1995. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot it was moved to approve the execution of the amendment to the tri- party Agreement. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 94-3822 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 94-3822 on second reading. Mayor Patterson asked for the effect of proposed Ordinance No. 94- 3822? City Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance rezones from Commercial General (CG) to RMF-5 District that portion of the properties on which the historic structures are located; and approves the Preliminary Site & Development Plan which has been presented in support of the project. Mayor Patterson stated that she is not certain at which point to express her displeasure by voting, "no"; that her discomfort is with the transfer of the property without documentation as to the level of fundraising to date; that she will vote "no" on the transfer of density (Ordinance No. 95-3844) since that proposed ordinance modifies the code to allow the density to transfer to eight acres rather than nine acres as originally stated; that she realizes her logic is not impeccable. City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 94-3822 is a site-specific ordinance which was heard by the Commission as a quasi-judicial processes; that proposed Ordinance No. 95-3844 is of more general application throughout the community; that a clear statement of grounds based on evidence presented should be voiced if - a "no" vote is to be cast on proposed Ordinance No. 94-3822. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously BOOK 37 Page 11246 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11247 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 95-3844 on second reading. Mayor Patterson asked with regard to the 24-hour time gap on the transfer of title if the Commission would be dealing with First Sunset Development, Inc., should the JRC's fundraising be insufficient on the deadline? City Attorney Taylor stated that he is not certain the City would be dealing with First Sunset Development, Inc., unless First Sunset Development, Inc., were willing to stipulate to that effect; that the Agreement allows 60-days after notice is received from the City Manager in which to accomplish the demolition; that an event that triggers a change of responsibility is the passage of title to the property; that the 30-day appeals period would be the only impediment to the transfer taking place; that the City Manager has attempted to secure the dollars necessary to demolish the buildings in the event the JRC would refuse to do SO. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City Attorney's answer was not Clear. City Attorney Taylor stated the answer is "no"; that he cannot assure the Commission that First Sunset Development, Inc., would be the party that would accomplish the demolition; that the title could be transferred during the 60-day period after which notice is received to demolish the buildings. City Attorney Taylor continued that the First Sunset Development, Inc., and the JRC representatives should be requested as to what they are willing to stipulate if the Commission has real concern relating to this issue; that the issue has to do with a contractual obligation as opposed to a rezoning obligation. Commissioner Cardamone stated that if the financial documentation is provided to the Commission on January 17 showing a deficit, who holds the deed is not of concern; that it is not her business. Commissioner Pillot agreed. Commissioner Atkins stated that the Commission will have immediate access to the financial documentation provided to the City Manager on January 5, 1995. Mayor Patterson stated that she may have reviewed the fundraising dollars and felt comfortable if an update had been received tonight as expected; that the JRC previously provided a complex, verbal presentation of the dollars raised to date; that the dollars as reflected in the minutes were no more comprehensible; that a letter was sent from the City to the JRC requesting a hard copy of the financial material presented; however, no documentation has been received. Mayor Patterson continued that the foundation which has worked incredibly hard to accomplish a task will present the Commission with as good an interpretation of the fundraising goal as they can; that the Commission will receive a request to extend the deadline if the fundraising goal is not met; that she has always been prepared to extend that deadline if necessary; however, First Sunset Development, Inc., has no stake in the rehabilitation of the historic structures and is attempting to sell the property. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she does not understand the need for fundraising knowledge until December 31, 1995; that which party will demolish the buildings is not important as long as the dollars have been secured should demolition be necessary. Commissioner Pillot stated that he will not support this historic preservation ordinance; that his reasons relating to density issues were stated earlier; that he does not support expending public funds to do SO, but strongly supports the preservation of the JRT and the Bickel House; that he hopes demolition is not necessary; that the incredible hard work and improvements accomplished by the JRC to date was witnessed during a recent tour of the JRT; that he will vote for an extension of the fundraising deadline if a request is received by the JRC; however, he will vote against the motion on the table because of the density issue explained earlier. Mayor Patterson stated that she will vote against the motion for reasons different than those expressed by Commissioner Pillot; that the commitment of the City to historic preservation has been addressed by allowing a transfer of density to another site in order to preserve an historic structure; that she is not sure how she would vote on an extension if the property changes hands. Commissioner Pillot stated for clarification that his support of an extension is for the JRC and their efforts. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, no; Patterson, no. 21. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN #94-M TO PROVIDE SAFE GRADE CROSSING OF SCHOOL AVENUE BY STUDENTS APPROVED ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION ITEM 3; APPROVED ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1 AND 2 WITH REVISIONS; ADDED AND APPROVED ITEM 4 TO DELAY CONSTRUCTION OF HATTON STREET UNTIL TRIAL TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE CONDUCTED WITH THE CHOSEN ALTERNATIVE IN EFFECT (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #3 (0861) through (1120) BOOK 37 Page 11248 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11249 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the direction of the Commission at the November 21, 1994, Commission meeting, was for him to report at tonight's meeting when a full report and solution recommendai tion will be made for a final decision regarding the safe at-grade crossing of School Avenue in conjunction with the Sarasota High School Campus project; that a bias toward action rather than continued study is recommended; that this approach contemplates selecting the preferred alternative, implementing and evaluating it, and, thereafter, making appropriate adjustments; that if this approach is not acceptable to the Commission, the Engineering Department estimates that additional traffic information studies would cost approximately $25,000; that adequate information is available to the City to identify solutions and potential traffic pattern impacts; that the recommended approach places a preference on the use of dollars for implementation rather than further study. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to proceed with the following steps: 1. Engineering Department identify and evaluate several alternatives and meet with affected interests at a staff level to discuss, receive input, and refine for presentation to a joint meeting of the City Commission, School Board and County Commission. Allow 120 days. 2. Conduct a joint public hearing of the City Commission, School Board, and County Commission to receive input on identified alternatives as per the interlocal agreement. Thereafter, the boards should discuss the input received with the final decision reserved to the City Commission. Allow 60 days. 3. Authorize Phase Two of the interlocal agreement to move ahead with negotiating implementation matters concerning the preferred alternative. Commissioner Cardamone asked if traffic counts will be performed on School Avenue prior to implementation of a solution and subsequently to substantiate whether the solution is working? Mr. Sollenberger replied, yes. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the solution offered by the City Manager is a short-term solution as recommended by the Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC) ? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Commission's action was interpreted as preferring an alternative that would not close School Avenue and preferring an at-grade crossing; that the solution would be developed based on that interpretation. Commissioner Cardamone stated that when the Commission voted to approve the Preliminary Site and Development Plan (PS&D) 94-M for the SHS project, she understood the intent to be that some immediacy would be given to finding a solution to safely cross students when the school opens; that she did not intend for that solution to be the final solution relating to School Avenue; that she assumed the motion addressed a short-term solution; and asked for comments by other Commissioners as to whether it was assumed they were voting on a short-term or long-term solution? Commissioner Pillot stated that at-grade protection must be provided; that the question remaining is how can that be best accomplished; that Dan Kennedy, SHS Principal, and Dr. Charles Fowler, Superintendent of Sarasota County Schools, supported closing School Avenue during school hours, including summer school hours; that a neighborhood association representative voiced acceptance to such an alternative; that the alternative which can most easily be modified should be chosen first from two or more alternatives having merit to solve the problem. Commissioner Pillot continued that closing School Avenue during school hours makes good sense since: 1) traffic could flow 19 or more hours of a 24-hour day, 2) the solution could be monitored daily, and 3) safe movement of students back and forth across the street would be provided; that SHS has an intermittent bell schedule; that closing the street for 7 minutes every 50 minutes would be ineffective; that he favors taking immediate action without additional traffic engineering studies to close School Avenue during school hours with the start date, exact hours, and crossing mechanisms to be determined between the Superintendent of Schools and the City Manager or their designees and to monitor the solution continually; that changes requiring a major capital outlay such as the proposed Hatton Street extension should be temporarily postponed until technical data including traffic counts on Shade Avenue, Wood Street, and other potentially affected streets can be provided for evaluation. Commissioner Pillot further stated that he is looking for a short-term solution to be monitored sO that data can be provided in support of a long-term solution. Commissioner Atkins stated that he is concerned with closing streets for student crossings; that a similar process was held regarding Booker High School and Orange Avenue; that the City would not have a problem if the School Board designed the SHS campus to be compatible with City streets; that he will not support closing School Avenue for any extended period of time; that student crossings can be managed safely by school-crossing guards and a control light; that payment for the school-crossing guards should be reimbursed to the City by the School Board. Mayor Patterson stated that a future Commission could modify any solutions made, therefore, with the exception of the potential Hatton Street extension, none of the alternatives implemented would be permanent. BOOK 37 Page 11250 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11251 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the cost for constructing the proposed extension of Hatton Street was within the School Board's budget and far less expensive than many of the alternatives considered by the NAC; that Commissioner Pillot offered one reasonable alternative; that a solution which could be most easily modified and creates the least disruption should be chosen; that several approaches for an at-grade crossing are available; that the NAC does not have credibility with the businesses and residents of the neighborhood areas; therefore, input should be sought directly from the interested parties. Vice Mayor Merrill continued that providing an : at-grade crossing similar to that at Booker High School with crossing guards and a traffic light, or closing School Avenue during school hours are two feasible, potentially permanent, alternatives; that both options should be developed and presented to the public for input on a preference; that time is not an issue; that the correct decision should be. Vice Mayor Merrill further stated that the NAC decisions were associated with short-term/long- term solutions; however, the Commission does not label decisions as short-term or long-term; that any solution may not be permanent; that decisions made by the Commission to solve a problem can be changed subsequently if they do not work; that the process outlined by the City Manager should be followed. Commissioner Cardamone stated that her question as to whether the Commissioners thought they were voting on a short-term or long-term solution when they cast their votes has not been answered. Mayor Patterson stated that Commissioner Pillot stated that he regards the solution as a short-term solution, but may accept it as a forever solution, and has an open mind to looking at other solutions at a later date; that Commissioner Atkins expressed his view of the solution as a permanent decision; that Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the solution would be permanent although there is no such thing as a permanent solution by an elected body. Mayor Patterson continued that she also believes there is no such thing as a permanent solution; that a street Closure is not a proper item of discussion for a tri-party public hearing; that the proposed Hatton Street extension may be the determinant of how permanent the solution is and bringing that item along with the various alternatives discussed to the tri-party agreement would be appropriate; that more data would be necessary for her to consider closing a street; therefore, the selected alternative would be a long-term solution until more data is available; however, any long- term solution could be changed given the appropriate traffic information. Commissioner Cardamone asked the following questions: 1) why the Administration selected 120 days to complete the objectives of recommendation Item #1 when the new school will not open for 1.5 years? 2) who are the respective interests outside of the tri- party agreement that the Administration would discuss the alternatives? 3) why 60 days in addition to the 120 days was included under recommendation Item #2? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the School Board has questions regarding Hatton Street; that providing the School Board with answers as soon as possible would be appropriate; that he feels 120 days is adequate time for the City to work with School Board and County Staffs and identify parties in refining alternatives; that an extension to the 120 days could be requested from the Commission if the Administration finds that amount of time to be insufficient. Mr. Sollenberger continued that 60 days was to allow latitude in which to schedule the public hearing between the three parties. Commissioner Pillot stated that deciding how to provide safety in the most efficient, effective, and least disruptive way for hundreds of students crossing the street is not something the general public should decide; that the general public does not have the information that the Superintendent of Schools, the principal of SHS, the City Engineer, or other individuals directly involved with the problem have; that public preference for the various alternatives is not of concern to him. Commissioner Pillot continued that the issue of crossing students safely does not need to be brought for discussion at the tri-party meeting, however, the construction of a street does; that the Superintendent of Schools and the City Manager can make the decisions on a safe at-grade crossing. Commissioner Pillot further stated that the statement, "Engineering Department identify and evaluate several alternatives, I as contained in recommendation Item #1 is speculative; that traffic counts of 4,000 cars were disputed as being taken at an inappropriate time; that the data and opinions previously presented on the issue have been speculative; that appropriate traffic counts relating to how many cars turn onto Wood Street, how many trucks travelling School Avenue are inconvenienced, etc., could be produced if data is collected in the actual condition of some at-grade crossing of students; that construction of a street or other more permanent solutions could be supported after such data were collected; that Vice Mayor Merrill has stated that construction of a Hatton Street extension between Shade and School Avenues would not require much funding and should just be built; that one dollar is more than zero dollars; that the decision to build a street should not be based on speculation; that the least disruptive at-grade crossing solution should be implemented first to provide accurate traffic counts on the surrounding streets and other areas of traffic concern prior to BOOK 37 Page 11252 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11253 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. making a decision on Hatton Street. Commissioner Pillot added that safety is of more concern to him than convenience. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that experts will design the alternatives to be equally safe; that public input will be requested as to which alternative and its associated inconveniences would be preferred; that safety is not being compromised; that either alternative mentioned tonight can work. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation. Motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Patterson requested that Dr. Fowler come before the Commission. Dr. Fowler stated that John Wesley White, County Administrator; David Sollenberger, City Manager, and he met and were made aware of the recommendation before this Commission meeting; that he agrees that experimental data with regard to the traffic impacts of the chosen at-grade crossing should be gathered; that the School Board's primary concern is with the safe crossing of 1200 students back and forth across School Avenue; however, the traffic impact was also addressed by the NAC. Dr. Fowler continued that Hatton Street is included in the PS&D; that the School Board intends to design and bid the cost of construction; that the proposal to implement the least expensive and least disruptive alternative to determine experience has merit; and asked where the extension of Hatton Street from School to Shade Avenues would fit into the procedure if experimental data will first be gathered? Dr. Fowler stated that the School Board intends to stand by the interlocal agreement and the PS&D approved by the Commission as a partner in the process. Commissioner Pillot stated that two alternatives have been mentioned tonight: 1) closing School Avenue during school hours, and 2) providing periodic crossings with crossing guards; that the SHS Principal previously stated that the first alternative would be acceptable; and asked if the second alternative would be acceptable if one or more crossing guards were on site to stop traffic and cross the students during school hours? Dr. Fowler stated that support for the first approach is better from the School Board's perspective; that accomplishing a safe crossing would be the primary consideration regarding the second approach; that the School Board currently reimburses the City for payment of school crossing guards on Orange Avenue at Booker High School; that the cost factor for multiple school crossing guards out of the School Board's annual operating budget would also be a factor for consideration of the second approach in comparison to other approaches; that he is willing to explore both options. Commissioner Pillot asked Dr. Fowler if revising the Administration's recommendation for Item #1 as follows would be acceptable to meet the needs of the school system? 1. Engineering Department in conjunction with School Board officials evaluate two alternatives: A) closing School Avenue during school hours; and B) providing crossing guards and/or signals and meet with affected interests at a staff level to discuss, receive input, and refine for presentation to a joint meeting of the City Commission and School Board. Dr. Fowler stated that the School Board is engaged with the County regarding the entire recreation area in conjunction with the school/park site intentions; that the County should remain in the process. Mayor Patterson stated that the Hatton Street extension was included on the PS&D without engineering review; that the intent was to include an obligation that may or may not be insisted on by the Commission at a later date; that she anticipates a disruptive impact to the traffic flow in the neighborhood from either of the mentioned alternatives or any other solutions to safely cross students on School Avenue; that providing an extension to Hatton Street between School and Shade Avenues could be substantially less disruptive than the original Hatton Street realignment suggested by the NAC, even if a future decision is made to close School Avenue; that the Hatton Street extension could minimize the impact of a partial closure of School Avenue on surrounding neighborhoods; that consideration of a street closure at a future date would not be prohibited; that the Hatton Street extension would provide the latitude to Close a portion of School Avenue as an experiment to determine what the actual impact would be; that the Hatton Street extension as a means of dissipating traffic should be examined by the engineers. Dr. Fowler stated that all members of the School Board were present during the public hearing at which the Commission approved PS&Ds 94-M and 94-N; that no School Board member objected to the Hatton Street extension during the Commission meeting or at a subsequent School Board meeting; that the School Board is obligated to construct the extension of Hatton Street between School and Shade Avenues; however, the School Board does not want to commit funds to begin the design work and bid the construction if other factors, as discussed tonight, will be added; that timing as to when the School Board should make financial commitments to the costs associated with the Hatton Street extension is an issue of concern. BOOK 37 Page 11254 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11255 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that she wants the item examined by the City engineers and the School Board; that she is not telling the School Board to "get out their shovels." Mayor Patterson stated asked if the City is reimbursed for the payment of crossing guards at schools other than Booker High School? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the school-crossing guards are included as part of the City's Police Services Bureau budget; that Orange Avenue is the only instance where the School Board reimburses the City for school-crossing guard expenditures since it is a unique campus-crossing situation. Mayor Patterson stated that payment for school-crossing guards is another dual taxation issue; that the City pays for school-crossing guards within the City and again for a portion of the school- crossing guards in the County through County taxes. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that neighbors who send their children to SHS are concerned about the school; that he hopes the adversarial tone experienced with the Booker High School situation does not develop; that a more positive role should be taken. Mayor Patterson stated that somewhat of an adversarial aspect has been associated with this issue; that the three parties should recognize that they are working together on mutual assets. Mayor Patterson requested further discussion on the Administration's recommendation. Commissioner Pillot suggested the following revisions: Item #2: substitute the word, "identified" with the words, "the two." delete the words, "as per the interlocal agreement." delete the words, "allow 60 days" Commissioner Pillot stated that the School Board representatives and City Administration will complete the process in a timely manner; therefore, a 60-day limit is not necessary. Commissioner Pillot suggested the addition of the following item: Reaffirm the willingness of the School Board to construct the Hatton Street extension, but delay any expenditures until data have been gathered based on the trial alternative with the length of the trial to be determined in steps one and two. Mayor Patterson stated that she would support inclusion of the suggested item; however, data should be gathered on many surrounding streets. Commissioner Pillot stated that is the intent. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the impact level of disruption to the neighborhoods is not really an engineering issue; that residents of Wood and Bay Streets would be upset and would start selling their homes if a neighborhood is negatively impacted; that the Hatton Street extension will be essential even if the minimal, seven-minute closing alternative is chosen. Mayor Patterson stated that data gathered through trial may not be necessary; that the City engineers could view the alternatives and predict whether the Hatton Street extension is feasible. Commissioner Pillot stated that engineers cannot predict human nature. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Hatton Street extension should be delayed until traffic counts are performed and analyzed; that the Hatton Street extension would address traffic travelling on School Avenue and turning east, but not the traffic turning west to access U.S. 41; therefore, the turns could not properly be predicted; that traffic counts to establish baseline data need to be performed prior to the initation of any solution. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the two mentioned alternatives generate the same effects; that an intermittent closing of the street will generate the sense of a full Closure during the school hours since drivers will not want to chance getting stopped for five or seven minutes; that vehicles will stack-up to Bahia Vista Street if the traffic counts previously presented are accurate. Commissioner Atkins stated that he has personal experience dealing with the Booker High School situation; that drivers anticipate the changing of classes and make a decision whether to travel the route and endure the delay or travel alternate routes; however, children do not cross the street in five or seven minute intervals; that the crossing of Orange Avenue is conducted with crossing guards and a traffic light; that many children meander to the point of crossing; that the crossing guard lets vehicles pass while the children are gathering at the side of the road; that traffic is not halted for the entire class-change period. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the populations at the two high schools differ; that population at SHS is larger and the distance the children have to travel will be further than that of Booker High School; that the lunch schedule at SHS begins at approximately 10:30 a.m. and continues through 1:00 p.m.; that a large portion of BOOK 37 Page 11256 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11257 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. that time period would warrant closure of the street for student crossings every 20 minutes. Mayor Patterson asked Dr. Fowler to quantify the number of children currently crossing at Booker High School and estimated to be crossing at the new SHS campus? Dr. Fowler stated that more of Booker High School, proportionately, is located on the west side of Orange Avenue; that the SHS campus will have language arts, mathematics, and social sciences on the east side of School Avenue with the remaining classes on the west side; that the total population at Booker High School is currently 1,100 - 1,200; that the total population at SHS is approximately 2,000. Mayor Patterson stated that seven-minute closures, as described by Commissioner Cardamone, would be more disruptive than simply closing the street during school hours; however, the alternatives should be taken to a joint public hearing for input. Mayor Patterson asked Commissioner Pillot regarding his proposed additional item whether gathering data by performing an experimental closure of School Avenue on various days for a set number of hours would suffice as a trial? Commissioner Pillot stated that considerably less data would be collected if an experimental closing on School Avenue was attempted for 3 days versus 33 days; that the traffic results could be skewed by chance of an activity, i.e., a dinner or luncheon function at Michael's on East; that such an experiment would be better than speculating, but the best approach would be to perform traffic counts while the street is closed, with guards and lights or during the specific school hours, for an extended period of time of sequential days. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she agrees. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that turning left onto Bahia Vista Street from School Avenue is difficult during rush hour since there is no traffic signal; that many of the vehicles travelling south on School Avenue during rush hour typically take Tami Sola or Bay Streets to cross over and access the traffic light at Shade Avenue to travel east on Bahia Vista Street; that closing School Avenue at the SHS campus area would deny access to Tami Sola Street and divert all those vehicles to Bay Street; that construction of the Hatton Street extension would provide a preferential route for the traffic which would otherwise be turning down neighborhood streets; that four-way stop signs could be placed at Novus, Wood, and Bay Streets; that the proposed Hatton Street extension would be beneficial for the neighborhoods by relieving additional traffic and eliminating current traffic on the neighborhood streets between School and Shade Avenues. Mayor Patterson stated that Vice Mayor Merrill's comments bolster the point previously made by School Board Attorney Dan Bailey that the City, along with the County and the School Board, should bear a portion of the construction cost associated with the Hatton Street extension; that the County Parking Garage generates traffic in that area therefore the County should contribute; that the School Board should certainly bear the burden if the Hatton Street extension is a logical solution to mitigate the effects of any type of street closing; however, there may be a fairness in the City contributing toward the construction costs if a positive incremental effect on the surrounding City neighborhood streets will be realized. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the 250,000 square-foot County Judicial Building scheduled for construction will increase traffic in the referenced neighborhood areas; that ignoring the SHS campus, the traffic solution for the neighborhood would be to install a traffic signal at School Avenue and Bahia Vista Street to encourage the current and newly generated traffic to continue toward that intersection rather than crossing over to Shade Avenue; however, such a solution is not feasible in conjunction with an at-grading crossing on School Avenue at the SHS campus; therefore, the Hatton Street extension is necessary to keep the additional traffic off of Shade Avenue and the other surrounding neighborhood streets; that the business and economic growth of the area should be considered and planned for; that he is not against the City contributing toward the construction of Hatton Street; that Hatton Street is an essential street to alleviate traffic impacts to the neighborhoods. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she does not understand how Vice Mayor Merrill views Hatton Street as anything less than a direct funnel to Shade Avenue. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the traffic activity currently taking place on Bay Street would be diverted to Hatton Street; that stopping to make a hard right turn is a traffic abatement measure; that the issue of realigning Hatton Street in an "S" curve to connect School and Shade Avenues was not supported because "S" curves are a traffic measure used to move traffic volumes smoothly. Mayor Patterson stated that a motion should be made on this item. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation for Item #1 revised as follows: Engineering Department in conjunction with School Board officials evaluate two alternatives: A) closing School Avenue during school hours; and B) providing crossing guards and/or signals intermittently when students are crossing BOOK 37 Page 11258 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11259 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. and meet with affected interests at a staff level to discuss, receive input, and refine for presentation to a joint meeting of the City Commission, School Board and County Commission. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation for Item #2 revised as follows: Conduct a joint public hearing of the City Commission, School Board, and County Commission to receive input on the two alternatives. Thereafter, the boards should discuss the input received with the final decision reserved to the City Commission. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation for Item #3 as worded. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot it was moved to add and approve an Item #4 as follows: Reaffirm the willingness to construct Hatton Street from School Avenue to Shade Avenue, but delay any expenditures until data are gathered during the trial of the accepted alternative with the length of the trial to be determined in steps one and two above. Motion died for lack of second. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she supports the concept; however, the wording, "reaffirm the willingness to construct" does not have a clear intent. Commissioner Pillot stated that total faith and assurance cannot be placed on good intentions which often go "by the board" unless they are put in writing. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission cannot reaffirm others willingness; that Dr. Fowler has expressed the willingness of the School Board; however, she does not know if there is a willingness of the City or County Commissions at this point. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to add and approve an Item #4 as follows: Delay expenditures on the construction of Hatton Street between School and Shade Avenues until data are collected once the selected alternative for crossing student has been put into effect with the length for that collection of data to be determined in steps one and two previously approved above). Commissioner Cardamone asked if the motion implies that the street would not be constructed if the data collected shows the Hatton Street extension is unwarranted? Commissioner Pillot stated that is his intent. Mayor Patterson stated that Administration and Commission evaluation of the data collected is implicit prior to making a decision on construction. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, no. Mayor Patterson stated that she has concerns similar to those of Vice Mayor Merrill with regard to constructing the school first and experimenting with the traffic and the street subsequently. Dr. Fowler stated that his attorney is not present and asked if City Attorney Taylor could explain the effect the action taken by the Commission would have on the School Board receiving a Certificate of Occupancy, specifically, if the buildings could be occupied if the road as indicated on the PS&D approved by the Commission does not exist? City Attorney Taylor stated that he is not familiar with the School Board's statutory processes; however, the intent of the Commission as addressed during the public hearing process was not to hinder the ability of the School Board to begin construction. Mayor Patterson stated that the PS&D could be modified accordingly if Dr. Fowler presented documentation of the School Board's reaffirmation to construct the road. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the delay of construction of the road will provide the opportunity for the retention ponds and the County's sewer lines, as discussed at a previous meeting, to be properly located; and that she feels better that data will be provided to support the need prior to constructing a street. BOOK 37 Page 11260 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11261 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that one of the results of the process as delineated in Items #1 and #2 will be a determination of the time during the school year when a final decision on the collected data will be made. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the second phase of the interlocal agreement includes discussions and negotiations as to how aspects of the project will be implemented. Commissioner Pillot and Commissioner Cardamone cited portions of the November 21, 1994, minutes which reflect the Commission's intent not to delay the School Board's project. Mayor Patterson stated that it is clear the Commission does not intend to delay in any way the opening of the new SHS buildings. Mayor Patterson stated that an issue regarding medians on Orange Avenue at Booker High School was postponed during the first tri- party meeting specified in the interlocal agreement; that the issue was not further addressed; and asked if that issue had been resolved? Dr. Fowler stated that the issue was related to circulation of school buses at the loading/unloading area; that Commissioner Atkins' and City Staff have proposed an alternative; that the NAC is being reconvened to review the alternative; that the School Board will subsequently respond to City Staff; that perhaps a resolve to the issue could be presented at the next tri-party meeting. Commissioner Atkins stated that his understanding of the situation is different than that expressed by Dr. Fowler; that he was told the School Board was going to do what was planned originally. Dr. Fowler stated that is not correct; that School Board staff has been directed to bring the most recent drawing provided by City Staff to the NAC for their specific input. Mayor Patterson stated that a report back on the issue at the tri- party meeting would be appropriate. 22. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: SELECTION RE: : CONSULTANT FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS UPDATE = SELECTED SIEMON, LARSEN AND MARSH (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #4 (1124) through (1685) V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, stated that on November 14, 1994, the City Commission held a workshop to hear presentations from three firms that had been short-listed to review and update the City's Land Development Regulations (LDRs); that the top two firms received tie scores; that the Commission requested that those two firms submit additional information on projects similar to what is anticipated for Sarasota and examples of graphics; that the supplemental information received from Henigar and Ray, Inc., and Siemon, Larsen, and Marsh as well as a copy of the San Bernadino, California, Zoning Code was placed in the City Commission Office on December 5 for Commission review. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the contract will include a clause to prohibit the selected firm from performing work in the City of Sarasota after a period of time? Mr. Schneider stated that a contract has not yet been negotiated; that during the interviews, the firms were agreeable to that stipulation; that he does not anticipate a problem with including such a clause in the agreement. Commissioner Pillot asked if the Administration has any preferential recommendation? Mr. Schneider stated that the Commission desired to make the selection; therefore, Staff has not provided a recommendation; that the original group of respondents was narrowed to three and presented to the Commission for interview; that the preliminary back-ground checks performed on the three firms were positive. Mayor Patterson stated the original consideration of a consultant resulted in a two to two tie; that Henigar and Ray, Inc., who gave an impressive presentation, received her vote; however, after reviewing their approach, she preferred Siemon, Larsen, and Marsh. Commissioner Pillot stated that he did not hear the presentations personally but has viewed the video tape; that he intends to vote. Commissioner Cardamone stated that her total points for each of the firms were within two; that she has no strong preference toward either firm. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot it was moved to approve the selection of Siemon, Larsen, and Marsh. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 23. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: COMPUTERIZED TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM - REPORT RECEIVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-5) #4 (1309) through (1710) Glen Ivey, P.E., Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District Construction Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that he last appeared before the Commission in September; that the computerized traffic signal system involves completion of two projects referred to as the "B" and "C and D" contract packages; that the "B" package involves approximately 60 BOOK 37 Page 11262 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11263 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. intersections in the City of Sarasota; that the "C and D" involves 80 intersections throughout the City and County; that since his last update, certain damages and repairs to the system have been made; that the seven-day functional testing of the system was performed with unacceptable results; that unidentified, intermittent communication problems are reoccurring; that the required, operational City Staff training was scheduled several times, but for various reasons, either the schedule of the City employees or the contractor's preparedness, the training was cancelled; that the 60-day burn-in period has not occurred since the 7-day operational test was not successful; that a lengthy punchlist remained to clean-up the work which had not been performed until recently. Mr. Ivey continued that the FDOT sent the contractor a notice of intent to default because of the contractor's nonpursuit to complete the project; that the contractor was declared delinquent in progress of the project and depositions were taken in preparation for the contractor's delinquency hearings which were scheduled for January 5 and 6, 1995; that the contractor requested and received a postponement of the hearing until March 21, 1995; that last Friday, the contractor, who must have realized it was in his best interest to finish the project, sent fifteen people to begin the clean-up of the punchlist and investigation of the reoccurring problem with the communication; that the contractor's resources are to be on site until completion; that the contractor will work through December 22, take time off for the holidays, and resume work on December 28, if necessary. Mr. Ivey further stated that a field review of the system was recently performed; that the timings were fine tuned and entered into the system; that the following items remain regarding package "B": completion of the punchlist; resolution of the unidentified communication problem; performance of operational training for City Staff, currently scheduled for January 22; re-performance of the seven-day operational tests; and performance of the 60-day burn-in period. Commissioner Cardamone asked what portion of the City is included in the "C and D" package? Mr. Daughters came before the Commission and stated that he does not know the exact boundaries at this time; however, the locations are generally in the north and east sections of the City; and that a different contractor is performing the work on the "C and D" package. Mayor Patterson passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill and left the Commission Chambers at 11:10 p.m. Mr. Ivey stated that the "C and D" package contractor has resumed work; that the system is operational with time-based coordination; that the southern portion of the "C and D" package located in the County is fully operational on phone modem; that the "B" package contractor has been instructed to provide and install the communication cables for use with the "C and D" package sO communication can be established in the northern regions of the City to the City's computer center and also be established with the County's computer center on Cattleman Road; that field review and fine tuning of the timings of the "C and D" package is anticipated by the end of January, with the 60-day burn-in to occur subsequently. Mr. Ivey continued that completion was previously anticipated for April 1995, which is still achievable; that the time frame is feasible if the contractor lives up to the commitments he recently made to the FDOT. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the citizens have been impatient the last couple of months; that many comments have been received regarding the progress with the traffic light signalization and that the lights are too long, too short, and not "smart." Mr. Ivey stated that hopefully, many of the problems currently experienced will go away with completion of the project; that while it may take longer to get onto the system, once the cycle is accessed, vehicles will travel a further distance in a shorter amount of time. 24. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: ADVANCED PLANNING BOARD REPORT - PUBLIX SUPERMARKET, PETITION NOS. 95-SE-03 AND 95-PSD A, PURSUANT TO SECTION 3-13 (2) OF THE ZONING CODE - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) #4 (1713) through (1736) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that this item was added to the agenda under Changes to the Orders of the Day; that action is necessary to waive the 30-day requirement between the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) and Commission meetings to allow the Publix Supermarket development at Crossroads Shopping Center to meet the necessary construction schedule. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to waive the 30-day time period between PBLP and Commission actions. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Mayor Patterson returned to the Commission Chambers at 11:13 p.m. BOOK 37 Page 11264 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11265 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. 25. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH CHAPTERS OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES TO DETERMINE WHAT REVISIONS ARE NEEDED IN ORDER TO SUCCESSFUILLY RESOLVE DUAL TAXATION ISSUES = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #4 (1750) through (1877) Mayor Patterson stated that she requests Commission support to authorize the City Manager to expend funds for researching the avenues available for the Commission to change the Florida Statutes in order to win a law suit on issues such as the Sheriff's Road Patrol issue; that the Florida League of Cities and the City Commission have not been successful in lobbying on the dual taxation issues since the appropriate approach to change the Florida Statutes is not known; that the Florida League of Cities is interested in participating to find out what is necessary to develop an appropriate bill to eliminate the dual taxation issues suffered by cities. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of the request. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the request. Commissioner Pillot stated that the State should become involved since it is a Statewide issue; that he would like to see the Florida League of Cities in concert with the City of Sarasota on this issue. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 26. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: PROCEDURE FOR PLACEMENT OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA UNDER "SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #4 (1856) through (1875) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the recommended procedure is as follows: 1. Items will be agendaed as Scheduled Presentation only upon the consent of the City Manager or one or more City Commissioners. If the recommendation to place the item on the agenda comes through the City Manager, staff will review and provide the Commission with a report with the Agenda Request. 2. Citizens' comments will not be allowed under the "Scheduled Presentations" portion of the Agenda. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the procedure recommended by the City Auditor and Clerk and City Manager for "Scheduled Presentations." Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yesi Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 27. BOARD APPOINTMENT RE: HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD = APPOINTED CHARLES WILLIAMS; REAPPOINTED GARY HOYT (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #4 (1886) through (2063) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the terms of Arthur S. Hardy and Gary Hoyt have expired; that Mr. Hoyt has expressed an interest in reappointment; that Mr. Hardy does not wish to be reappointed; that this appointment is made by the Mayor with the approval of the City Commission. Mayor Patterson distributed a copy of the announcement published when Charles E. Williams joined Charlie Ann Scott's law firm; and stated that the announcement provides a summary of Mr. Williams' qualifications. Mayor Patterson stated that she requests Commission affirmation on the appointment of Charles Williams to replace Arthur Hardy on the Housing Authority Board. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to affirm the appointment of Charles Williams to the Housing Authority Board. Commissioner Atkins stated that Mr. Williams resides in Manatee County; and asked why a Manatee County resident should be appointed to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board? Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Williams' residence is just outside the Sarasota County boundaries; that he practices law within the City of Sarasota on Main Street; that he is an attorney with a substantial interest in the City who is interested in serving; that the Housing Authority Board has requested appointment of an attorney; that Mr. Williams is a qualified attorney who has a stake in the City. Commissioner Atkins asked what stake in the City does Mr. Williams have? Mayor Patterson stated that he practices law in the City and has for some time. Commissioner Atkins stated that Sarasota County residents should be appointed to the City's boards. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. BOOK 37 Page 11266 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11267 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that she recommends the reappointment of Gary Hoyt to the Housing Authority Board. On motion of Commissioner Pillot: and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to affirm the reappointment of Gary Hoyt to the Housing Authority Board. Commissioner Atkins stated that Mr. Hoyt experiences a continuing conflict regarding his architectural work and the Housing Authority Board; that Mr. Hoyt should resign and work as an architect for the Housing Authority Board rather than attempting to do both. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Hoyt has not been paid for services by the Housing Authority Board; that he has received payments from the Community Housing Corporation; however, he has not voted on items for which he received payment. Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 28. BOARD APPOINTMENT RE: FIREFIGHTERS PENSION FUND BOARD OF TRUSTEES REAPPOINTED BILLY ROBINSON; APPOINTED KENNETH BAILEY (AGENDA ITEM IX-2) #4 (2063) through (2372) Mayor Patterson stated that the terms of Billy E. Robinson, City Auditor and Clerk and John J. Driscoll, Commission appointees will expire January 1, 1995; that both have expressed an interest in reappointment. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to reappoint Billy Robinson and John Driscoll to the Firefighters Pension Board of Trustees. Mayor Patterson stated that the normal procedure is to provide the Commissioners an opportunity to nominate individual candidates when there is more than one application for a seat. The motion was withdrawn by the maker, Commissioner Pillot, and the seconder, Vice Mayor Merrill. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to reappoint Billy Robinson to the Firefighters Pension Board of Trustees. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson asked Commissloner Pillot if he is nominating John Driscoll for reappointment? Commissioner Pillot stated that is correct; however, he respects the contributions that Kenneth Bailey could make to the Board; that his original motion was made because the Commission, more often than not, has reappointed board members who have had successful service and. expressed an interest in continuing to serve. Mayor Patterson stated that she nominates Kenneth Bailey; that she respects Mr. Driscoll and the substantial amount of time he has contributed to the Board; however, the seat for which nominations are being taken is intended to be a City taxpayer representative, independent of the Fire Department, and the personnel that benefit from the decisions made by the Board; that she has been informed that Mr. Driscoll is the step father-in-law of the Fire Union representative who is also the Chairman of the Firefighters Pension Board; that she would prefer the City taxpayer representative not to have family ties which may make it difficult to vote independently on decisions. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that his general position is that a member should not be removed from a board unless poor performance has been documented. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Driscoll's performance has not been poor; that she finds his family ties to create a conflict and would prefer to have someone independent, as intended, in the seat; that the Sarasota/Manatee Professional Firefighters and Paramedics Union representatives Neil Elliot and David Stershic originally recommended Mr. Driscoll for appointment which the Commission accepted; however, the Commission was not told of the close family relationship. Mayor Patterson called for votes in favor of the reappointment of John Driscoll: Atkins, yes; Pillot, yes. Mayor Patterson called for votes in favor of the appointment of Kenneth Bailey: Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson announced the appointment of Kenneth Bailey to the Firefighters Pension Board of Trustees. Mayor Patterson stated that letter will be sent to Mr. Driscoll thanking him for his service and explaining the Commission's concern with his conflict of interest. 29. BOARD APPOINTMENT RE: POLICE OFFICERS PENSION FUND BOARD OF TRUSTEES - REAPPOINTED BILLY ROBINSON AND ROY MCBEAN (AGENDA ITEM IX-3) #4 (2372) through (2389) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the terms of Billy E. Robinson, City Auditor and Clerk and Roy McBean, Commission BOOK 37 Page 11268 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11269 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. appointees will expire January 1, 1995; that both have expressed an interest in reappointment. Commissioner Pillot stated that more than one application for each seat has not been received for appointment. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to reappoint Billy Robinson and Roy McBean to the Police Officers Pension Fund Board of Trustees. Motion carried unanimously (5 to * 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson stated that it now 11:30 p.m. and asked the wishes of the Commission. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to extend the meeting to complete "Remarks of Commissioners. I Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Atkins left the Commission Chambers at 11:31 p.m. 30. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - FLORIDA YARD PROGRAM PRESENTATION TO BE REFERRED TO THE PARKS RECREATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD; : CITY MANAGER TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS MADE BY JOHN WESLEY WHITE IN THE EDITORIAL REGARDING COUNTY-PROVIDED BENEFITS (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (2426) through (3297) COMMISSIONER CARDAMONE: A. stated that the Florida Yard Program is a program which uses native, drought-proof plantings and involves little use of pesticides, fertilization, and water; that she requests that the Commission consider endorsing the Florida Yard Program, a direct result of the National Estuary Program regarding bays, which has been successtully piloted in Hillsborough County. Mayor Patterson stated that the item should be placed on a future agenda for discussion. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that a Florida Yard Program representative could make a presentation before the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board. Mayor Patterson stated that there was consensus to have a presentation on the Florida Yard Program scheduled before the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board prior to discussion by the Commission. B. stated that the improper presentation regarding the Preliminary Site and Development Plan 94-R for the Fillmore Drive Parking structure disturbs her; that the plans provided to the Commission which did not address the merchants and residents concerns could have been inadvertently approved; that the Administration should take more time to make sure the Commission receives accurate information. MAYOR PATTERSON: A. stated that an editorial was published in the newspaper that had John Wesley White, County Administrator, enumerating how the City benefits from County services, i.e., the stormwater drainage utility, actually paid for by the City, and construction of Tuttle Avenue, actually part of a dual taxation lawsuit settlement; that the City's consulting work on sales tax figures is being questioned by the County by the validity of the State data being challenged; that Mr. White offered an analysis which was self-serving since he chose people whose occupational licenses he decided were likely to be paying sales tax, yet, every rental office pays sales tax; that the City is a major area in the County for offices. Mayor Patterson continued that she requests Commission support to direct the City Manager to write a letter in response to the editorial. Commissioner Pillot stated that Mr. White left out salient facts; however, he would "let sleeping dogs lie" rather than direct the City Manager to respond. Mayor Patterson stated that she does not agree; that the City's whole involvement on the dual taxation issue is not to "let sleeping dogs lie.' I Mayor Patterson continued that Mr. White's letter, without counter response to explain the facts, makes the City appear to be whining regarding City residents paying for Sheriff Road Patrol; that the City's Administrator should respond to the County's Administrator in a non-combative manner to clarify the points necessary; that support from the Commission and the Administration on this item is necessary in accordance with a commitment made to address the inequities related to the Sheriff Road Patrol issue. Commissioner Pillot stated that rebuttable in newspapers serve little purposei that the City Manager can respond if he deems it appropriate; that the relationship between the two Administrators should not be lessened; that he would prefer the City Manager not respond. BOOK 37 Page 11270 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 37 Page 11271 12/19/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone stated that both sides were not adequately presented in the newspaper article; that she would prefer that the City Manager send a light-hearted response as a general letter to the editor; and asked for comment by the City Manager. City Manager Sollenberger stated that particular information regarding the sales tax issue raised by Mr. White should be obtained prior to any response being made; that the analysis provided by Mr. White based on occupational licenses was not appropriate; that occupational licenses are not related to sales tax; that the article was faxed to the Breen Consortium firm, the consultants that prepared the study for the City; that he is awaiting a response; that the article did not mention the Sheriff's Road Patrol that the City taxpayers are paying for; that the Sarasota Herald Tribune has editorialized the inequity of that subject on two occasions urging the County Commission to correct the situation. Commissioner Cardamone stated that there is a matter of timing involved in making a replyi that a reply to the article, excluding the sales tax issue, should be made if a response is not immediately received by the Breen Consortium. Mayor Patterson stated that the public needs to be educated and informed if the City is to be successful in changing the inequities locally on a political level; that leaving Mr. White's comments unanswered could be damaging; that she will respond if the City Manager will not. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he expects a timely answer from the Breen Consortium; that he wants to discuss the issue with the consultant's prior to responding; that a response can be made in a timely manner. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. White, in a letter to the City Manager, stated that an issue is being thrown into the discussion of providing sewer services to unincorporated areas that doesn't belong there; that she thinks the issue is relevant; that the City, for some years, has had a practice of requiring either a pre- annexation agreement to provide sewer service if the properties were not contiguous or direct annexation if properties were contiguous and payments in lieu of taxes for provision of sèwer services; that in order to move ahead on the provision of sewer services to large sections of unincorporated Sarasota, the City will have to depart from the policy; that what she threw on the table was a mechanism where, for a concession of something that has long been an unfairness, the City could consider waiving that policy; that to say it is unrelated ignores the fact that the City has had this policy and will no longer be able to annex property; that this issue needs to be addressed in the Commission's positions. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the issue enters into the political realm; that the editorial written by Mr. White was political; therefore, the response should be by a politician rather than the City Manager. Commissioner Pillot stated that he agrees. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she accepts that point of view. Mayor Patterson stated that the half-facts introduced by the County Administrator should be made facts by another Administrator. 31. OTHER MATTERS /ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS - CORRECTED CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2 TO INCLUDE APPROVAL OF ITEM 6 (AGENDA ITEM XI) #4 (3297) through (3339) CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that the motion on Consent Agenda No. 2 was to approve Items 1 through 5; that Item 6, proposed Resolution No. 95-792 on Lido Beach Restoration, was added to Consent Agenda No. 2 under Changes to the Orders of the Day; and asked if the Commission's intent was to approve Items 1 through 6? On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to correct the approval of Consent Agenda No. 2 to include Item 6, which was inadvertently omitted. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 32. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (3340) There being no further business, Mayor Patterson adjourned the December 19, 1994, Regular meeting at 11:51 p.m. euset NORA PATTERSON, MAYOR ATTEST: 13icly E Rabenson BILLY E7-ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK BOOK 37 Page 11272 12/19/94 6:00 P.M.