MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 2001, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Carolyn J. Mason, Vice Mayor Mary J. Quillin, Commissioners Richard F. Martin, Lou Ann R. Palmer, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Designate Michael A. McNees, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mason The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III; Section 9(a) of the City of Sarasota Charter at 6:04 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: MAYOR'S CITATION PRESENTED : TO PAMELA DORWARTH, CITIZEN DISABILITY ADVOCATE, FOR HER LONG AND DEDICATED VOLUNTEER SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SARASOTA #1 (0000) through (0250) CD 6:02 through 6:10 Mayor Mason requested that Vice Mayor and Pamela Dorwarth join her and the Commission before the Commission table for the presentation. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that she worked with Ms. Dorwarth on the 10th Anniversary of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) celebration; that Ms. Dorwarth brought the community together for the anniversary for the enactment of the Citizen's with Disabilities Act; and read in its entirety the Mayor's Citation to Ms. Dorwarth indicating that Ms. Dorwarth spent two terms of three years each on the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board, serving as Member, Vice Chair, and Chair; that Ms. Dorwarth advocated for the construction of a sidewalk on Lockwood Ridge between 12th and 17th Streets providing safe passage for residents of Orchard Place of Sarasota and others; that Ms. Dorwarth also advocated to additional seating and a reachable autograph area for the disabled at Ed Smith Sports Complex Stadium; that Ms. Dorwarth originated the idea of a tactile map for the new Selby. Libraryi that Ms. Dorwarth instituted and facilitated educational lectures concerning Florida's disabled parking laws for the City, the County, interested members of the public, and the Sarasota/Manatee BOOK 50 Page 22276 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22277 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) as well as successfully implemented a maximum disabled parking fine of $250 throughout the district; that Ms. Dorwarth has been appointed to the Florida Human Rights Advocacy Council, the Florida Building Code Accessibility Council, the Special Task Force on Voting Accessibility, the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged, and was requested to rewrite the second edition of the Secretary's American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notification Program; that Ms. Dorwarth has been named State ADA Liaison and Disability Rights Advisor for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; that Ms. Dorwarth has been awarded the Sarasota County Community Environmental Service Award and the Transportation Disadvantaged State Volunteer of the Year for 2001; that Sarasota County proclaimed a "Pamela Dorwarth Day"; that Ms. Dorwarth is a member of the MPO's Citizens Advisory Commission, the Sarasota County Community Action Board, the Sarasota/Manatee County Vocational Interagency Council, the Sarasota County Commission on the Status of Women, the Sarasota Transportation Disadvantaged Coordinating Board, the Sarasota County Community Traffic Safety Team, the Sarasota Citizens Public Transportation Advisory Board, is the ADA Grounds Agent for the Selby Botanical Gardens Advisory Council and Associate Liaison for the Disabled Parking Law for the ADA Working Group, and is a member of the Board of Directors for Children's Haven and Adult Community Services and the Glasser/Schoenbaum Human Services Center. Ms. Dorwarth thanked the Commission for the recognition; and stated that work on the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board would continue if not for the term limits; that the citizens of the City have been friends and a great support. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Ms. Dorwarth will continue in her efforts to raise awareness for the disabled. 2. PRESENTATION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF ANNAMAE SANDEGREN #1 (0250) through (0470) CD 6:10 through 6:17 Mayor Mason requested that Vice Mayor Quillin join her before the Commission table to make the presentation. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1451, recognizes the December 9, 2001, passing of Annamae Houston Sandegren, an outstanding citizen of Sarasota and read Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1451 in its entirety indicating that Ms. Sandegren and her late husband, Andrew, were active in civic affairs; that Ms. Sandegren served as president of the former Mental Health Association : of Sarasota County, now the Mental Health Community Centers, Inc., Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, and the Republican Women's Club of Sarasota; that Ms. Sandegren served as the chair of the Junior League of Sarasota Sustainers and viçe chair of the Interfaith, Interracial Committee; that Ms. Sandegren organized the Republic Women's Club and was parliamentarian. at the time of her death; that Ms. Sandegren was a member of the Sarasota County Historical Commission and the Sarasota Opera Board; that Ms. Sandegren was one of the five founders of the Fine Arts Society and the New College Library Association and the founding president of the Ringling School of Art Library Association and the Better Government Association; that Ms. Sandegren was one of the three founders of the Van Wezel Foundation, was : a 14-year member and chair of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Committee; that Ms. Sandegren co-chaired the campaign to raise money for the $20 million. VWPAH renovation; that Ms. Sandegren will be remembered as passionate and possessing an infectious laugh and incredible spirit. On the motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1451. Vice Mayor Quillin requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. The following family members were presented with a copy of the memorial resolution appropriately framed on a plaque: Anne and Steve Judd, daughter and son-in-law. Mayor Mason stated that a summons to the home of Ms. Sandegren was recently received; that the title of Mr. or Mrs. is always used when speaking with elders; that the community stature of Ms. Sandegren was daunting; that Ms. Sandegren requested her given name be used; that the word which best describes the complexity of Ms. Sandegren is the word "icon"; that the word "icon" does not even do justice; that the community has been enriched by the work of Ms. Sandegren; that Ms. Sandegren will be missed by the community and the Commission; that the grief of the family is shared. Ms. Judd expressed appreciation to the Commission. BOOK 50 Page 22278 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22279 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. 3. APPROVAL RE : MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 2001 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I-1) #1 (0470) through (0484) CD 6:17 through 6:18 Mayor Mason asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Mayor Màson stated that hearing no changes, the minuces of the December 3, 2001, Regular Commission meeting are approved by unanimous consent. 4. BOARD ACTIONS RE: : REPORT RE: : ADVANCE PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REPORT OF DECEMBER 5, 2001, REGARDING ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 02-ZTA-01 RELATED TO THE HEIGHT OF SINGLE - FAMILY HOMES AND ASSOCIATED ISSUES OF DAYLIGHT PLANE, DRAINAGE, TREES AND NOISE RECEIVED REPORT; SET ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 02-ZTA-01 FOR PUBLIC HEARING (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0484) through (1820) CD 6:18 through 6:54 Robert Lindsay, Chair, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), and Jane Robinson, Director of Planning, came before the Commission. Mr. Lindsay stated that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is to approve changes to the Zoning Code (2000) concerning single-family dwellings including the addition of definitions for height, reference level, minimum flood elevation, and recovery elevation as well as development standards applicable to single-family dwellings in certain zone districts establishing maximum height, daylight plane regulations, requirements for screening and noise abatement for outdoor mechanical equipment, drainage plans, landscape plans, and encroachments into the required side-yard setback; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 amends regulations for the repair and/or restoration of nonconforming structures in general; and referred to the minutes of the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting included in the Agenda backup material indicating the PBLP found Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), satisfies Section IV-1206, Standards for Review, Zoning Code (2000), and voted - 3 to 1 to recommend Commission approval as amended. Mr. Lindsay continued that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is the result of a dialogue between the Single-Family Dwelling Height Task Force (Task Force) and the Commission; that negative feedback regarding Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 was received from the public at the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting; that in retrospect, Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 should have been considered further by the PBLP due to some problems; that two other PBLP members voted in favor of. Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that he voted in favor of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 sO the process could proceed; that portions of the Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 are supported; that one PBLP member was absent from the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting which presented a problem. Mr. Lindsay further stated that the daylight plane regulation of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is supported; that the drainage. and landscape plan requirements as applied to all single-family zone districts appears excessive; that a drainage and landscape plan may be necessary in the - Single- Family Residential-1 (RSF-1) Zone District, Single-Family Residential-E (RSF-E) Zone District, and perhaps the Single- Family Residential-2 (RSF-2) Zone District for individuals who are building larger homes on larger lots; that the drainage and landscape plan would be an exceptional burden on neighborhoods with smaller, more affordable houses; that the maximum height requirement is not supported; that the height of an individual house is established based on the height of the neighboring house's foundation according to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that no connection, between the height of a house and the adjacent house would exist if measured by the height of the neighboring houses foundation; that a personal opinion is being rendered at the current meeting due to concerns with Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that another PBLP member shared the same concerns. Commissioner Servian stated that the text relating to the drainage and landscape plan has been removed from Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Mr. Lindsay stated that the text regarding the drainage and landscape plan is still in the draft of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. BOOK 50 Page 22280 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22281 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian stated that the text regarding the drainage and landscape plan should have been removed; and asked for the PBLP's definition of the term substantial" regarding trees in the landscape plan portion of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Mr. Lindsay stated that trees are very expensive; that requiring a certain height and caliber of tree can become expensive if transplantation rather than replacement of trees is required; that for example, individuals will be more likely to donate trees rather than donate funds for tree transplantation services in a project like Habitat for Humanity International (HFH).; that individuals will be forced to transplant trees which may have a questionable ability to survive once moved; that a certain percentage of loss is expected in transplanting trees; that initially, an ordinance was developed to deal with the concern regarding megahouses; that the concern for megahouse has developed into other areas and regulations affecting zoning districts which were not part of the discussion by the Task Force. Commissioner Servian stated that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 established the grade from which to measure the height of a house; that the average elevation of the abutting lots is utilized to establish the grade level to assure compatibility with neighboring houses; that the height of the foundation establishes the grade point from which to measure. Mr. Lindsay stated that. the measurement would make sense if taken from natural grade; that the measurement proposed in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is based on an artificial grade or finished grade after fill has been placed on the property; that allowing an individual to build a bigger house because the neighbors have utilized artificial fill to elevate the lot is unacceptable; that a neighbor would be penalized on the size of a house if an individual chooses to build a house on stilts. Commissioner Servian asked the manner in which an individual would be penalized if a neighbor built a house on stilts? Mr. Lindsay stated that for example, the measurement points would be increased by six feet if a measurement is taken from the adjacent lots and six feet of fill was added to the lots; that the higher elevation does not address the compatibility of the house which would be built; that a taller house could be built between two lots built on fill than on a lot on which the measurement is from natural grade; that the community's concern is the overall height of the structure; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 regulates the overall height of the structure but not compatibility with adjacent structures. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that voting to recommend Commission approval of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 sO the process could proceed is disturbing; and asked- if the belief of the PBLP is some of the prior expressed concerns could be clarified prior to proceeding with an ordinance? Mr. Lindsay stated that the votes of the two members who favored the ordinance were firm; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 was supported on balance due to the desirability of the daylight plane regulations; that review of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 after the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting revealed problems with othèr areas of thè text; that approval of Zoning Text Amendment No. 02-ZTA-01 would not now be supported. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the language regarding the maximum height could be clarified? Mr. Lindsay stated that the proposed language is clear; that the only potential problem is determining the grade of fenced-in property with no access for surveying purposesi however, the grade of a neighboring house could probably be estimated; that the regulation for measuring grade in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 does not make sense; that the Commission should request clarification from the PBLP and/or the Task Force to develop a better method of height regulation if the Commission wishes to limit the height of megahouses; that regulating the height of the house's roofline by the height of the foundation of the adjacent property does not make sense; that determining the height of a house with artificial grading encourages individuals to use artificial fill on property which is undesirable from the PBLP's perspective. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a tour was taken recently of several neighborhoods; that houses could be in valleys due to the method of calculating grade if the proposed regulations are adopted. BOOK 50 Page 22282 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22283 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Lindsay stated that compatibility of houses located across the street from possible megahouses is not considered in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that all the waterfront houses in some neighborhoods have been developed to a maximum height of 52 feet; that the 52-foot height includes the 35-foot maximum height allowed by the City for single-family residential structures, the 12-foot height bonus allowed by Federal Emergency Management Agency for properties located in flood zones, and an additional 5 feet for the sloped roof; that the houses are not compatible with the houses across the street which are one and two stories; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 only addresses adjacent property. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the PBLP could have addressed compatibility of the properties across the street for Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01? Mr. Lindsay stated that a different formula than the formula proposed in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 to measure the grade of a house would be required for a more fair and rational criteria; that the Commission must mandate a review to arrive at a different formula to measure grade; that other megahouse ordinances have been before the Commission and were not passed; that further work will be required if the formula to measure the grade is not acceptable to the Commission. Mayor Mason asked if Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 can be sent back to the PBLP if negative public input is received? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. Commissioner Servian stated that the PBLP member who voted against Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 was clear the reason for the negative vote was, due to making a living appraising multi-million dollar homes; that lack of support was based on a personal issue with Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that a decision based on. personal opinion instead of the criteria for approval is offensive. Mr. Lindsay stated that the reasons for the PBLP member's dissenting vote as indicated at the meeting speaks for itself. Commissioner Servian stated that the reason for the dissenting vote should be clarified. Mr. -Lindsay stated that the dissenting PBLP member clarified the points found unacceptable in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to receive the advancé report of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to set Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 for public hearing. Commissioner Palmer stated that the problem with Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is the burden imposed on affordable housing; that the landscape plan requiring three 12-foot trees with three-foot calipers on each lot could be too expensive for affordable housing; that changes to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 are not being proposed; however, possibilities for considerations are: On a 50-foot or less lot require one tree On a 50- to 100-foot lot require two trees On a lot over 100 feet require three trees Commissioner Palmer continued that the changes to the landscape plan may assist with maintaining affordable housing; that removing the requirement for a professional engineer certification from the drainage plans for houses either not in flood areas or for affordable housing may be an option; that homes built on elevated property could create problems for neighbors; that an exception from the certification requirement could be made for some single-family zone districts or for substantial improvements which do not alter the footprint of the structure; that a 50-foot addition is a substantial improvement; however, the footprint of the structure may not be altered; that the regulation of outdoor mechanical equipment would impact the replacement of existing air conditioning units; that a standard replacement of an air conditioning unit should not require a change in the wall structure of an established structure; that the possibilities are only suggestions; that the measurement of grade can be altered numerous times without satisfying everyone; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is better than proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355; that the process of adopting a megahouse ordinance should proceed; that the concepts BOOK 50 Page 22284 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22285 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. included in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 have been delayed by past Commissions and discussed repeatedly; that adjustments to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 are an option; that an additional concern is the nine-month timeframe after which the megahouse issue would be again brought before the Commission if concerns arise; that hopefully, Staff would come before the Commission if problems with any of the City's regulations occur. City Manager Designate McNees stated that Staff will address the Commission if any problems with City regulations occur. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a delay of a megahouse ordinance is displeasing; that the concerns of Commissioner Palmer are shared; that Staff should review Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 and make any recommendations or changes to the language as required; that the Commission should not be writing ordinances; that affordable housing is a concern; that certain areas should be exempted from compliance with Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that older neighborhoods have existing trees which should be preserved rather than the City ordering the planting of trees in yards; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 should be workable for everyone, not just the communities located on the islands; that Staff is requested to refine Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 if the Commission is in agreement. City Manager Designate McNees stated that Staff has heard the Commission's individual concerns throughout the process; that portions of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will perhaps affect affordable housing if applied too broadly; that Staff has already drafted a significant amount of language to make Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 more explicit to assure appropriate application. Commissioner Servian stated that the Task Force approached the megahouse concerns with a broad-based instead of a waterfront- regulation perspective; that the megahouse concerns apply to all houses in the City; that sensitivity to the needs of the community were paramount in the discussion; that Staff, not the Task Force, suggested professional engineer involvement in the drainage plan; that the goal of the Task Force was to prevent problems for adjacent properties if rebuilding or substantial additions to a house occurs; that the concerns regarding the landscaping plan are legitimate and may need to be addressed again; that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is supported and long overdue. Commissioner Martin stated that the concerns regarding megahouses are significant; that the current direction of the discussion is pleasing; that the public process is lengthy; that setting Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 for public hearing is supported; that Staff refinement of the language will be helpful. Mayor Mason stated that the discussion concerning Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is pleasing; that the Commission has the responsibility for moving Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 forward for public hearing. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City Attorney's Office already has some recommended changes to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Sarah Schenk, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the language to address the definition of reference grade level if a surveyor could not access abutting property has been draited; that the drainage plan certification requirement was removed from Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that the replacement of an existing air conditioning unit will not trigger the new requirements for the structure wall indicated in the outdoor mechanical equipment regulation; that a meeting is scheduled with Staff to drait language; and asked if the Commission wishes to exempt certain areas? Commissioner Palmer stated yes. Commissioner Servian asked if the certification requirement for a professional engineer for the drainage plan was removed? Attorney Schenk stated that removal of the certification requirement was debated at the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting but was not included in the motion for approval to send to the Commission. Commissioner Servian stated that the certification requirement should be removed from Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Commissioner Palmer asked if the Commission can make alterations to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 after being BOOK 50 Page 22286 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22287 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. set and advertised for public hearing as long as the ordinance is not being made more stringent? Attorney Schenk stated that changes may be made to details in an ordinance. City Attorney Taylor stated that an ordinance should be re- advertised if the body of the ordinance is substantially changed and misinformation is supplied to the public; that most titles are general in nature and unless significant changes are made should not pose a problem to the advertisement. Commissioner Palmer asked if a problem would arise if increasing rather than lessening the impact on individual houses occurs? Attorney Schenk stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if a workshop should be held prior to the public hearing? Attorney Schenk stated that any proposed changes or alternatives will be communicated to the Commission. City Manager Designate McNees stated that the ordinance based, on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will be heard two more times; that Staff will assist in drafting changes to the language; that options for changes to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will be brought before the Commission. Commissioner Servian asked if Staff could continue to work with the Task Force which created the basis for Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01? * Attorney Schenk stated that Staff will be consulted for the initial draft language of changes to Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that the Planning Department will meet with the Task Force. to review the language. City Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will be advertised for Public Hearing on January 7, 2002; that assembling the Task Force before the holidays may be difficult; that the City Attorney's Office, Staff, and other interested parties will work together to complete the required changes immediately sO the changes do not affect the advertised titlé. Commissioner Palmer asked if the public hearing could be scheduled for the January 21, 2002, meeting? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that information can be exchanged between Staff and individual Commissioners if the meeting is scheduled for January 21, 2002; however, a workshop at which Commissioners could exchange ideas would be better. City Manager Designate McNees stated that a workshop can be scheduled if the Commission wishes. Vice Mayor Quillin statèd that scheduling an hour workshop to discuss Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 would save time. Mayor Mason stated that a workshop is not supported. Commissioner Palmer asked if an extra couple of weeks to refine Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is appropriate? Commissioner Servian stated that additional time is not required; that minor changes are being discussed at the current meeting; that the Task Force would appropriate the necessary time to assist Staff in refining Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 for completion within the next two weeks. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to set Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, AND 16 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (1820) through #2 (0005) CD 6:54 through 7:31 Commissioner Palmer requested that Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 be removed for discussion. Vice Mayor Quillin requested that Item No. 7 be removed for discussion. Mayor Mason réquested that Item Nos. 5, 11, 13, and 15 be removed for discussion. 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Maintenance Agreement between the BOOK 50 Page 22288 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22289 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. City of Sarasota and Calpac, Inc., for the Lido Beach walkover at the Radisson Lido Resort 8. Approval Re: Rental Development Program Policy Guidelines and Amendment No. 7 to the SHIP Local Housing Assistance Program 9. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Habitat for Humanity Sarasota, Inc., for Community Development Block Grant in the amount of $160,000 for the project in the 2000- 2001 Action Plan to develop a stormwater facility in the Jordan's Crossing development for approximately 68 homes for low-income families 10. Approval Re: Proposed schedule for review and adoption of Phase II Zoning Code Amendment Project 12. Approval Re: Municipal Services and Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Hobart and Juanita Worley for water service for property located at 1802 South Brink Avenue 14. Approval Re: Monthly activities : report from the Downtown Association 16. Approval Re: Monthly report on the activities at the Urbaçulture site On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve. Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 16. Motion carried unanimously (5'to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 1. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4352, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 6, Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board, to add a sixth member to the board as a student youth representative; declaring that four (4) members shall constitute a quorum; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. 2. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4353, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 7, Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board, to add an eighth- member to the board as a student youth representative; declaring that five members shall constitute a quorum; specifying votes required to take action; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. 3. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4354, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 3, the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall Advisory Board, to add a seventh member to the board as a student youth representative from the STAR Program; declaring that four members shall constitute a quorum; specifying votes required to take action; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. 4. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4355, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 1, Public Art Committee, to add a sixth member to the board as a student youth representative from the STAR Program; declaring quorum requirements, specifying numbers of votes required to take action; specifying votes required to take action; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. Commissioner Palmer stated that Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1 through 4 address the same topic which is to appoint participants in the Student Taking Active Roles in Sarasota County (STAR) program to the Citizens with Disability Advisory Board, the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board, the Public Art Committee, and. the Van Wezel ) Performing Arts Hall Advisory Board; that the County has many boards in which STAR youth members participate; that two of the boards are concerned with upsetting the balance of the established quorum by adding a member; that proposed Ordinance Nos. 02-4352, 02-4353, 02-4354, and 02-4355 essentially amends the quorum réquirement for each of the boards; that upsetting the balance of the quorum for the boards is not supported; that an even vote may occur if a board has an even number of membersi; that the suggestion is to eliminate the student's vote from the count if a tie vote is reached, thereby, eliminating the vote from the decision; that the situation of a tie vote does not occur frequently. Commissioner Palmer continued that the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Board has a vacancy and is the only board which requires applications for vacant seats be rèviewed by the BOOK 50 Page 22290 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22291 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Board prior to Commission approval; that removal of the review requirement is requested of the Commission; that each of the boards referenced in proposed Ordinance Nos. 02-4352, 02-4353, 02-4354, and 02-4355 will be visited for input prior to the public hearings; that the advertisement of proposed Ordinance Nos. 02-4352, 02-4353, 02-4354, and 02-4355 with the suggested changes as follows would be supported: The quorum would not change but in the event of a tie vote the student vote would not count; and, Elimination of the requirement of the VWPAH Advisory Board applications prior to Commission approval. Commissioner Palmer further stated that the students selected for the boards should have a certain talent to contribute to the board; that the suggested changes should be made prior to the advertisement for the public hearings of proposed Ordinance Nos. 02 4352, 02-4353, 02-4354, and 02-4355. Commissioner Martin asked the language suggested for removal from the VWPAH Advisory Board rules. Commissioner Palmer stated that the language suggested for removal is in Section 2-281 (b), Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code) quoted as follows: Except with respect to the student youth representative at such time as normal termination vacancies occur on the VWPAH Board, such vacancies shall be filled by the City Commission as follows. At least four months prior to the creation of a vacancy on the VWPAH Board, the vacancy shall be appropriately noticed to the community as a whole. Applications for the vacancy, along with a brief biographical description of the candidate for the vacancy shall be submitted to the City Auditor and Clerk at least three months prior to the creation of the vacancy. The City Auditor and Clerk shall distribute photocopies of the application to all members of the VWPAH Board in a timely fashion sO the application can be discussed at the regularly scheduled monthly meeting of the VWPAH Board at least two months prior to the creation of the vacancy. Commissioner Palmer stated that the language in Section 2-281 (b), City Code i's awkward; that notice to the public is supported; however, the review by the VWPAH Advisory Board is abnormal. Commissioner Martin asked if the recommendation is to remove Section 2-281 (b), City Code. Commissioner Palmer stated that the recommendation is not to remove the requirement for notice to the public but rather to remove the reviewing requirements of the VWPAH Advisory Board. City Attorney Taylor stated that * a section of the City Code relates to the Public Art Committee (PAC) and has been amended; that a duplicate section exists in the Zoning Code (1998 ed.), which was adopted after the City Code; that' the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) ordinance expressly repealed any ordinances in conflict; that the section of the City Code which relates to the PAC will be repealed; that the ordinance must be brought before the Development Review Committee (DRC) and the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) prior to being set for public hearing due to the inclusion in the Zoning Code (2000) even though it has to do with a committee. Commissioner Servian asked if the student vote could count less than another member. City Attorney Taylor stated no. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the composition and mission of all boards should be reviewed; that numerous issues regarding board rules require review; that student representation on certain boards is supported; that the Citizens with Disabilities Board operates pursuant to Florida Statutes and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) laws; that the members of the Citizens with Disabilities Board must assure all actions comply with laws; that the STAR youth members should hold an advisory position on some boards; that the student vote could be recorded but not counted; that the purpose of the STAR program should be. training for City government; that for STAR youth members to participate as voting members prior to resolution of board issues and proper training of board members is uncomfortable. Mayor Mason stated that the enthusiasm of a voting student board member was experienced while serving on the Children and Youth Services Advisory Committee (CAYSAC); that the input. of the student was helpful in the decision-making process. Pamela Sumner, Chair, Public Art Committee (PAC), came before the Commission and stated that she is speaking not only as an BOOK 50 Page 22292 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22293 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. individual but as the PAC Chair with the full support of the PAC; that a letter dated December 13, 2001, indicating the PAC concerns with the STAR program was sent to the Commission; that PAC would welcome a student participant from the STAR program; that the input and participation of a STAR youth member in full discussion is supported; that a great deal could be learned by the STAR youth member from the PAC while attending site visits, learning the decision-making process of the PAC, and watching as developers and artists present to the PAC; that the qualifications of the STAR youth member is a concern; that the qualifications of the current PAC members include backgrounds in architecture, engineering, museum work, design, and working as artists and artists' representatives which are fairly. specialized qualifications; that previous Commissions chose the current members of the PAC from a number of other qualified candidates; that presumably, the current members of the PAC have more of the qualifications the Commission was seeking to balance the PAC. Ms. Sumner continued that the équal vote of a member who is enthusiastic but with no qualifications is disturbing; that the balance of a five-member board is delicate; that fortunately, the PAC usually brings to the Commission either a unanimous or a 4-to-1 vote which has not always been the case; that the concern is not for the sixth member making a 3-to-3 tie vote which would become a 3-to-2 vote under the suggested changes but rather if a member is absent and a painful 2-to-2 split vote occurs; that a 2-to-2 split vote indicates the motion does not pass; that the issue would then be revisited and a vote taken at a later date with the ability to pass or deny the motion with a larger majority; that a 2-to-2 split vote with only 4 members present would indicate the STAR youth member would hold the swing vote which the PAC finds disturbing; that pressure from outside forces such as developers, individual artists, or individuals with an agenda are often endured by PAC members; that a question is the manner in which the STAR youth member will handle the pressure; and asked if the Commission would consider putting a non-voting STAR youth member to fully participate in all other aspects of the PAC process up to and excluding the right to vote? Commissioner Servian stated that the comments are appreciated but offense is taken; that her oldest son has been given state and national recognition as an artist since middle school; that several other students would surely be qualified to bring a different perspective to the City's Public Art process; that the learning process is mutual; that a 14-year-old cousin has been in a wheelchair with Spina Bifida since the age of three and would know more about being disabled than many adults who have recently become disabled; that voting youth members should be included on the boards. Commissioner Martin stated that the concerns of the PAC are legitimate; that the suggested changes would address some of the concerns; that eligibility criteria for the STAR youth members can be established if sO desired; that the Commission can also choose not to appoint a STAR youth member if applications are displeasing; that. solutions which address the concerns can be found; that the youth can also be teachers; that many boards have a citizen-at-large member who may not have the specialized. education or expertise of the other board members but who provides knowledge. of a common man or woman or a youth perspective which is valuable to the boards. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. Commissioner Palmer asked if the motion includes the suggested changes? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson asked if language as to the expertise of the STAR youth member should be drafted? Commissioner Martin stated that the Commission has discussed meeting with and evaluating the advisory boards; that the issue of expertise could be addressed at that time. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Commission practice of approving items without refining concerns is a problem; that the criteria of all the boards requires a review; that the STAR program is. exciting; however, having voting members without expertise on boards is disturbing; that the concern is for proceeding with the STAR program and refining at a later date; that training sessions are required for new board members; that the date of the last training session for any, of the boards is unknown. Commissioner Palmer stated that the County boards which utilize the STAR program require expertise yet STAR youth members contribute to the boards; that a number of young people have as much knowledge as the Commission. BOOK 50 Page 22294 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22295 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restate the motion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 with changes to indicate adding a student representative will not affect the quorum and if a tie occurred. the student representative vote would not count; and stated that the change to the VWPAH Board review would require a separate motion. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yès. Commissioner Palmer stated that eliminating the review by the VWPAH Advisory Board could be addressed at a later date. City Attorney Taylor stàted that a separate ordinance would e required for the suggested change to the review of the VWPAH Advisory Board. 5. Approval Re: Award a formal contract to Apac-Florida, Inc., and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the contract between the City of Sarasota and Apac-Florida, Inc., (Bid # 01-72M) for the 2001 Pavement Milling & Resurfacing Project Mayor Mason stated that milling prior to the resurfacing of Orange Avenue, Osprey Avenue through Gillespie Park, and Links Avenue was performed at the same time; that the general public was angry at the amount of time between milling and paving; that a written contract is requested which indicates milling of City streets slated for resurfacing in the same vicinity at the same time will not occur. William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, came, before the Commission and stated that the current resurfacing contract has a performance specification which indicates the contractor can mill only a certain number of streets before resurfacing; that the milling of all of the streets slated for resurfacing in one area will not be allowed. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the problem with the: last resurfacing project was the. excessive length of time, possibly one to two months, between the milling and the resurfacing of the streets; and asked the length of time between the milling and resurfacing of a street and if the contract indicates the milling to resurfacing timeframe? Mr. Hallisey stated that the contract specifies the timeframe; however, the exact timeframe is not known at this time, possibly five days from milling to resurfacing; that the exact timeframe will be provided to the Commission. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Mayor Mason, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 5. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yesi Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Quitclaim Deed and Release by the City of Sarasota to Hi Hat Ranch, L.L.P., for approximately 200 acres in the northeast corner of the ranch bordering Fruitville Road being sold to Mote Marine Laboratory Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a map was not provided in the backup material for Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 7; that the location of the areas impacted by the Quitclaim Déed and Release by the City to the Hi Hat Ranch, L.L.P. is unknown. William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, came before the Commission and stated that the Hi Hat Ranch property is from Fruitville to Clark Roads; that the 200-acre parcel is in the northeast corner and abuts Fruitville Road. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the 200 acres contains stormwater retention facilities, fields which are sprayed with reclaimed water, and other City operations; and asked the impact to the City operations located in the area? Mr. Hallisey stated that the impact to City operations is restricted to the ridge-and-furrow irrigation system; that infrastructure such as overhead irrigation or underground pipeline, etc., is not impacted; that the Quitclaim Deed and Release to the Hi Hat Ranch will remove 200 acres from the ridge-and-furrow irrigation system which is strictly ditches and culverts cut through the 200 acres; that the City ridge-and-furrow BOOK 50 Page 22296 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22297 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. irrigation system will be disconnected in the 200 acres and Mote. Marine Laboratory will develop the land. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that. a map would have been helpful. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 7. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 11. Approval Re: Authorize the administration to negotiate a contract with the first ranked firm and Baskerville-Donovan, Inc., (RFP #02-02M) for the Gillespie Avenue Improvement Project Mayor Mason stated that the Agenda backup material was not helpful in explaining the Gillespie Avenue Improvement Project (Project); and asked the Project's purpose? Rick Winters, Engineering Technician V, Engineering came before the Commission and stated that the Project is the reconstruction of Gillespie Avenue from 21st to 18th Street and also a small section from 21st to 20th Street that dead-ends into the Newtown- Drainage Canal. Mayor Mason asked if the area a project encompasses could be better described in the Agenda backup material in the future? Vice Mayor Quillin concurred. Commissioner Palmer concurred and stated that better Agenda backup material has been requested of the Administration; that Consent Agenda. items would not require discussion if better backup material is provided. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a map would be helpful, especially to the new Commissioners. Mr. Winters stated that better Agenda backup material will be provided in the future. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No: 11. Motion carried unanimously (5 to-0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 13. Approval Re: Award a formal contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract between the City of Sarasota and Aqua Services, Inc., (Bid #02-03M) for the Ed Smith Stadium Sewer. Line Replacement Mayor Mason asked if the proposed sewer line replacement for the Ed Smith Stadium will fix the current plumbing problems? Patrick Calhoon, Sports Facilities Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the major sewer line problem is being addressed; that sewer line problems on the other side of the Ed Smith Stadium should be addressed at a later date; that PVC pipe was not utilized in the existing plumbing; that the cast iron pipe currently in place rusts and decays which caused the current sewer line problems. Mayor Mason stated that the Ed Smith Stadium sewer. line replacement project is the. first step in a solution to the sewer line problems. Mr. Calhoon stated that is correct; that the sewer line problem has. been the most major problem experienced at the Ed Smith Stadium in the last three to four years. Mayor Mason stated that the commencement of the Ed Smith Stadium sewer line replacement is pleasing. Mr. Calhoon concurred. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 13. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 15. Approval Re: Monthly activities report from the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT) Mayor Mason requested Jennifer Wilson, Neighborhood Coordinator, Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT) join her before the Commission and stated that the GDSAT personifies teamwork; that the Commission is proud to publicly recognize the work which the GDSAT has accomplished and continues to accomplish for the City. BOOK 50 Page 22298 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22299 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Ms. Wilson stated that the recognition and support of the Commission is appreciated. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 15. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUFION NO. 02R-1449) ADOPTED, ; ITEM 2 (ORDINANCE NO. 01-4355) = CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY 7, 2002, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #2 (0005) through (0215) CD 7:31 through 7:38 Commissioner Palmer requested that Item 2 be removed for discussion. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1449, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against all real or personal property owned by the violator for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 02R-1449 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. 1. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. 2. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355, regarding regulations pertaining to the height of single-family dwellings and their accessory structures; amending regulations as to the repair or restoration of nonconforming structures, nonconforming accessory uses and noncontorming accessory structures; setting forth findings as to intent and - purpose; amending Article II, Definitions; Sec. II-201, Definitions; to revise the definition of "height, single-family dwellings and their structures" and "height, buildings othèr than single-family dwellings and their accessory structures"; specifically the height for single-family dwelling units and their accèssory structures would be calculated as the vertical distance above natural grade to a specified point, rather than from finished grade; the provision in the existing definition of "height" allowing measurement of height in flood prone areas to be measured from the required minimum floor elevation is deleted;- Article V, vested rights and nonconformities; Sec. V-103, nonconforming structures; subparagraph E, is amended as to regulations for the repair or restoration of nonconforming structures which have been destroyed or damaged; Sec. V-105, nonconforming accessory uses and accessory structures, subparagraph D is amended regarding regulations for the repair or restoration of nonconforming accessory uses and nonconforming accessory structures which have been destroyed or damaged; amending Article I, General Provisions; Sec. I-105, transitional rules; subparagraph A to add a new subsection 1 to. address the processing of complete applications for development approval pending on the effective date of this ordinance; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) Commissioner Palmer stated that Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. 2 is the second reading of the proposed megahouse ordinance initially passed at the September 4, 2001, Regular Commission meeting; that a proposed ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will be set for public hearing on January 7, 2002. On motion of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved : to continue second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 regarding Zoning Text Amendment Application No: 01-ZTA-03 to the January 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Motion failed for lack of second. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 should have second reading at the February 18, 2001 Regular Commission meeting; that proposed Ordinance No. 4355 can be denied if the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is adopted. BOOK 50 Page 22300 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22301 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a February 2002 second reading date will not be required if the public hearing for the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is held at the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting and the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is held at the January 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is set for public hearing at the January 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated no; that the decision was to have the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 ready for public hearing in two weeks. Commissioner Servian stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 should be available as a backup in the event the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 develops a problem; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 should be, brought back concurrent with the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that an appropriate date to have the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is unknown; that the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 could be addressed concurrently with. the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Commissioner Palmer stated that further consideration of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 would not be required if the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is set for public hearing at the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting and the second reading at the January 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Staff indicated that the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 could be prepared for the January 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; therefore, a second. reading at the February 18, 2002, Regular Commission meeting would be preferable. Mayor Mason stated that clarification of the date the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 will be brought before the Commission would be appreciated. City Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance will be brought before the Commission at the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 should occur at the February 4, 2002 Regular Commission meeting. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to postpone the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 to the February 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Servian asked for clarification of the best method to assure proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 can be considered in the future if desired; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 must be adopted if the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is not adopted. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the two ordinances cannot. be in conflict. City Attorney Taylor stated that the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 will merely be delayed if the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01 is adopted; that if no action is taken on the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01, the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 would not be before the Commission until the February 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 should be concurrent with the ordinance based on Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01. Vice Mayor Mason stated that the two ordinances would be in conflict. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 can be placed under Unfinished Business sO the public hearing on the ordinance based- on Zoning Text Amendment Application. No. 02-ZTA-01 may be held. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to set Consent Agenda No. 2, Item. No. 2 for the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Motion carried (4 to 1): Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. BOOK 50 Page 22302 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22303 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. 7. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4345, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 98-4051 TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL AND - SUBSTITUTION OF SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 01-SP-30 FOR A PORTION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 98-DPR-B; SAID SITE PLAN PERTAINING O CONSTRUCTION OF A 95-UNIT HOTEL ON PROPERTY ZONED COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (C-CBD) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL AND THE BOULEVARD OF THE ARTS (FORMERLY 6TH STREET) TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS THE RENAISSANCE OF SARASOTA (APPLICATION NOS. 01-ROA-04 AND 01-SP-30, APPLICANT JOEL FREEDMAN, AS AGENT, - REPRESENTING JFB HOTELS INC., AS OWNER) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-1) #2 (0248) through #3 (0372) CD 7:38 through 9:11 City Attorney Taylor stated that Rezone Ordinance Amendment Application No. 01-ROA-04 and Site Plan Appiication No. 01-SP-30 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 are to approve an amendment to previously approved Ordinance No. 98-4051 and to substitute Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 for the portion of the previously approved Site Plan accompanying Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B for a hotel at the intersection of North Tamiami Trail and Boulevard of the Arts; that the recommendation is to allow fifteen minutes for the Applicant's and the City's presentations and ten minutès for rebuttal; that individuals certified by the Commission as Affected Persons will have ten minutes to speak and five minutes for rebuttal; that Affected Persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject property; that other interested persons will have five minutes to speak; that Phillip Dasher, representing the Bayfront Condominium Association (BCA) has filed for certification as an Attected Person; that the BCA is a property owner within 500 feet of the mixed-use development known as the Renaissance of Sarasota Renaissance project). On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve certification of. the Affected Person and the timelimits recommended by the - City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Commissioner Palmer stated that ex parte communications were previously identified at the November 5, 2001, Regular Commission meeting at which time the Applicant requested to return to the Commission with a revised plan at a later date; and asked if ex parte communications should be disclosed again? City Attorney Taylor stated that previously disclosed ex parte communications do not require repeating. Mayor Mason stated that conversations have been held with the City Auditor and Clerk and Staff. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that communications with the City Auditor and Clerk and Staff are not ex parte communications. Mayor Mason stated that the conversations are indicated for inclusion on the record. Vice Mayor Quillin and Commissioners Martin, Palmer, and Servian stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Joel Freedman, AICP, Freedman Consulting Group, agent for JFB Hotels, Inc. (JFB), came before the Commission, displayed graphics of the 95-unit Holiday Inn Express proposed for development on Lot 2 of the Renaissance of. Sarasota subdivision, commonly referred to as the Renaissance of Sarasota project Renaissance project), thanked Staff for assistance in addressing the multiple concerns of citizens and the Commission including the pedestrian interface of the proposed Holiday Inn Express with the surrounding streets, and stated that comments and materials presented at the November 5, 2001, Regular Commission meeting are included in the Agenda backup material. Mr. Freedman continued that three major changes were made to the retaining wall facing Boulevard of the Arts at the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that one major change is the addition of an aesthetically pleasing entrance into the proposed Holiday Inn Express from Boulevard of the Arts; that decorative grates will be added to the retaining wall; that the retaining wall will be made of decorative cut stone; that areas of the exposed retaining wall will be aesthetically pleasing; that the BOOK 50 Page 22304 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22305 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. decorative grates will be placed along the retaining wall on both Boulevard of the Arts and US 41; that landscaping will provide visual appeal; that the retaining wall will be ten feet above grade; however, a berm will be installed to assure the retaining wall will be no more than seven to eight feet at the maximum height; that the retaining wall will be broken by the landscaping and the two entrances to the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that public art will be placed at the intersection of Boulevard of the Arts and US 41; that preliminary discussions were held with Jorge Blanco to continue the sculptures of "The Runners" or for the commission of another compatible sculpture for placement on the site; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will be a $7- to 8-million building which will bring a $30,000-plus commission for public art. Mr. Freedman referred to a displayed graphic of Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 of the proposed Holiday Inn Express indicating the location of the dumpsters along the inside of the retaining wall along US 41 and stated that the dumpsters will be enclosed and covered by a flat white roof; that the dumpsters will not be seen by patrons of the proposed Holiday Inn Express or by residents of the Renaissance of Sarasota; that the dumpsters will be enclosed at the request of the Renaissance of Sarasota; that mechanical equipment will be located on the roof and will not be visible; that the main air conditioning (AC) units will be located on the roof, will not make excessive noise, and will not drip down the sides of the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that individual controls will be placed in each room; however, the AC units will not be window units. Mr. Freedman referred to a displayed graphic sketch of the US 41 side of the proposed Holiday Inn Express indicating the actual colors of the proposed Holiday Inn Express and stated that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will be attractive and will not be a typical motel; that the developers are spending a significant amount to construct a state-of-the-art Holiday Inn Express. due to the location; that all Commission, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), and Staff concerns have been addressed; that the resolutions are indicated in the Agenda backup material. Commissioner Servian stated that the dumpsters will face US 41; that trash pickup is noisy; ànd asked if the time for trash pickup and plans to mitigate the noise of trash pickup have been determined? Mr. Freedman stated that mitigation of noise from trash pickup has not been discussed; that Holiday Inn Express personnel will be required- to access the dumpsters from the enclosed area for trash pickup; that trash will be picked up during business hours. Commissioner Servian stated that trash being picked up in the early morning is noisy. Mr. Freedman stated that trash pickup will be during business hours; that the trash is picked up by the City; that an agreement can be reached between the City and the developer for a mutually beneficial trash pickup time. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that City trash pickup begins at 7:30 a.m. Commissioner Palmer asked if a colored representation of the elevation on the Boulevard of the Arts side of the proposed Holiday Inn Express is available? Mr. Freedman stated no; that the colors on the Boulevard of the Arts side of the proposed Holiday Inn Express will be the same as the colors indicated on the graphic sketch representing the US 41 side of the proposed Holiday Inn Express. Commissioner Palmer asked if. the paint colors will be the same on both sides of the proposed Holiday Inn Express? Mr. Freedman stated yes. Mayor Mason stated that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will crowd the Renaissance project site; that the presence of sO many buildings cheapens the Renaissance project site; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is proposed for a pivotal City intersection which is a gatewây to the Rosemary District and the City. Mr. Freedman stated that all requirements for the Commercial, Central Business District (C-CBD) Zone District have been met; that the developer is in total compliance with the agreement the City had with the Wynnton Group, Inc. (Wynnton) as the original property owner; that the developer is spending significant funds on the proposed Holiday Inn Express due to the location; that the City will be proud of the proposed Holiday Inn Express constructed. BOOK 50 Page 22306 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22307 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason stated that the concern regarding the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not the legality but rather the aesthetic view for the adjacent neighborhood. Commissioner Martin stated that the color of the retaining wall does not coordinate with the proposed Holiday Inn Express building; that the wall appears constructed of a gray or off-white stone. Mr. Freedman stated that the retaining wall will be color-coordinated with the building. Commissioner Martin asked if the retaining wall is made of an off-white stone? Mr. Freedman stated yes. Commissioner Martin asked if the grates on the retaining wall will be a coordinated contrasting color? Mr. Freedman stated yes; that the grates will be color-coordinated with the awnings at the entrance. Commissioner Martin asked if the color of the awnings is blue-green or blue-gray? Mr. Freedman stated that the awnings are blue-gray. Commissioner Martin asked if the grate is made of wrought-iron? Mr. Freedman stated that the grates are made of a painted molded aluminum; that the developers are pleased with the proposed Holiday Inn Express; and thanked Staff for the significant assistance provided in developing a mutually attractive and desired Holiday Inn Express. Mayor Mason requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Karin Murphy, AICP, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission, displayed computer-generated slides throughout the presentation, and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 concerns the 95-unit Holiday Inn Express proposed for development on Lot 2 of the Renaissance project; that the Renaissance project is a mixed-use development; that the Renaissance project property was originally rezoned to the Commercial, Central Business District (C-CBD) Zone District; that Ordinance No. 02-4345 incorporates the original Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B depicting the location, design, and use of the complete Renaissance project; that Phase I plans included minor revisions under the Zoning Code (1981 as amended) which required shifting the building footprint; and referred to computer-generated slides indicating the original concept plan and Phase I with angled buildings approved by the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), the administratively approved changes, the original CRA approved platted lots including the condominium building on Lot 1 and the proposed hotel for Lot 2. Ms. Murphy continued that the original building footprint has changed, the direct pedestrian connections to the surrounding neighborhood has been eliminated, the approved landscape plan of a park-like setting has been changed to the retaining wall and the parking garage; that the proposed changes may have an effect on the initial finding of consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan) as approved with the conditional rezoning. Ms. Murphy referred to computer-generated slides indicating the above-ground and below-ground parking on the US 41 side of the proposed Holiday Inn Express and stated that original Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B did not include pedestrian connections along Boulevard of the Arts; that Staff's initial concerns regarding compatibility and impact included visual and physical linkages with the surrounding area, the gateway location, and softening the pedestrian-level front yard and street edge; that elimination of the restaurant reduces the mixed-use integration - of the site; that the restaurant was eliminated to increase pedestrian connections; that original Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B did not include access from Boulevard of the Arts, eliminating the opportunity for integration with the adjacent neighborhood; that capital improvements near the site including the addition of paver brick and improved streetlighting and landscaping along US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts have been completed; that the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH), the Florida West Coast Symphony (FWCS), and the Municipal Auditorium are within walking distance of the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that Staff indicated at the November 5, 2001, Regular Commission meeting changes could be made to the proposed Holiday Inn Express for better integration with the adjacent neighborhood and an increased aesthetic quality and pedestrian experience. Ms. Murphy continued that the PBLP recommended denial of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 at the October 3, 2001, PBLP BOOK 50 Page 22308 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22309 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. meeting based on the Staff report and evidence in the record; and referred to the Agenda backup material, indicating the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a second public hearing on December 5, 2001, for reconsideration and found Rezone Ordinance Amendment No. 01-ROA-04 and Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 consistent with the City's. Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, the standards for review set forth in Sections IV-1106 and IV-506, Zoning Code (1998 ed.), and the Tree Protection Ordinance, and voted 3 to 1 to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: The Holiday Inn Express shall be constructed in conformity with Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 date stamped November 13, 2001. Except as specifically modified hereby, Ordinance No. 98-4051 shall remain in full force and effect. The two parking spaces Located beside the up ramp depicted on Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 date stamped November 13, 2001, shall be identified as employee only" spaces to decrease the turnover of these spaces and improve safety, and the Applicant shall provide a pressure pad and sensor or similar safety device to reduce potential contlicts between vehicles backing out of these spaces and vehicles utilizing the parking garage ramp. Ms. Murphy continued that the original proposed Holiday Inn Express site plan included a false door on the retaining wall; that the original retaining wall was solid and high; that the new staircase and decorative features allow better integration with the adjacent neighborhood and an aesthetically pleasing view; that shifting the building footprint increased the difficulty of building on the site. Commissioner Martin asked for clarification of the type of AC units. Ms. Murphy stated that the AC units are a hybrid system which include compressor vents inside the rooms; however, the main mechanical system will be located on the roof; that window or wall units will not be utilized; that hotel patrons will have individual room controls through a unified AC system. Commissioner Martin stated that the noise generated by the AC units will be minimal. Ms. Murphy stated that is correct; that the AC units will not drip down the walls; that a November 21; 2001, letter from David Branch, Chief. Executive Operator (CEO), JFB, included in the Agenda backup. material indicates and describes in detail the AC units which will be used. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the manner in which stormwater runoff will be handled? Ms. Murphy stated that stormwater will be controlled through a master system; that the City has stormwater connections at the intersection of US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the intersection of US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts is very wet; that stormwater collection should be well-connected for the Renaissance project. Ms. Murphy stated that Engineering has indicated a soil analysis may be conducted at the time of construction permitting to assure stormwater retention meets all requirements. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the stormwater from the proposed Holiday Inn Express site will be collected through a master system, which includes two ponds in front of The Renaissance condominiums; that stormwater is treated and flows through a cross-pipe installed by the developer at US 41 entering a stormwater retention lagoon on Sixth Street. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that stormwater will be collected in the ponds located in front of The Renaissance condominiums. Mr. Daughters stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the two stormwater retention ponds do not appear large enough to contain all stormwater for the Renaissance project site. Mr. Daughters stated that the stormwater retention ponds were designed to retain stormwater for three-fourths of the Renaissance project site; that the stormwater in the northeast corner of the Renaissance project site drains in the opposite direction. BOOK 50 Page 22310 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22311 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian asked if the height of the retaining wall along Boulevard of the Arts was lowered subsequent to the original Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B for the proposed Holiday Inn Express? Ms. Murphy stated that the retaining wall height has not changed; that the retaining wall graduates down from the corner to zero grade at the entrance to the proposed Holiday Inn Express. Commissioner Servian stated that the maximum height of the retaining wall is 7 to 8. feet. Ms. Murphy stated that the height of the retaining wall depends on the location being measured; that 7 to. 8 feet is the maximum height for the retaining wall from grade. Commissioner Servian asked the current height limitation for a retaining wall? Ms. Murphy stated that the retaining wall is part of the parking garage structure rather than independent of the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that height limitation does not apply to an inclusive structure; that the underground parking lies behind the retaining wall. Commissioner Servian asked if Staff has experience with the recommended AC units? Ms. Murphy stated no; that the assumption is similar types of AC units are utilized at the hotels near the interstate such as The Hampton Inn. Commissioner Servian stated that individual controls will be located in the rooms; that the AC units will not protrude from the walls.. Ms. Murphy stated that is correct. Commissioner Palmer stated that Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B created concern over consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan and asked if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan? Ms. Murphy stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 was determined consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan at the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting; that changes in Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 will.. enhancé compatibility and integration with the adjacent neighborhood; that other avenues could have been explored prior to changing the building footprint; however, the best development possible has been planned for such a crowded site; that - determining the best devèlopment possible is difficult without the completed City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020) and the City of Sarasota Downtown Code (Downtown Code); that Staff considers proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 as compatible and integrated as possible with the adjacent neighborhood; that the focus of the changes has been on the Boulevard of the Arts side; that several proposals have been received for property across the intersection of US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts; that the paver brick along US 41 and Boulevard of the. Arts provides a good sense of space; that the differences in Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B and the new Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 are substantial and worthy. Commissioner Palmer stated that an entrance to the proposed Holiday Inn Express will be located on Boulevard of the Arts; that residents in the adjacent neighborhood are concerned about the lack of neighborhood integration of the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that the former false doorway was not aesthetically pleasing; that the proposed changes are functionally and visually pleasing; that proposed Holiday Inn Express patrons can walk to nearby restaurants and establishments such as The Quay. Mayor Mason requested that the Affected Person come forward; and the following Affected Person came before the Commission: Phillip Dasher, 926 Boulevard of the Arts (34236), representing the Bayfront Condominium Association (BCA) and the Sarasota County Bicycle/Pedestrian Committee, stated that the Renaissance project site was - promised to the adjacent neighborhood for construction of a library; that subsequently, an integrated mixed-use development was promised to the neighborhood for thé Renaissance project site which was not constructed either; that the BCA membership is completely against forcing construction of the proposed Holiday Inn Express on such a small site; that the actual construction of the complete Renaissance project site is unknown and is a concern; that an application has already been submitted for the sale of the remaining two lots on the Renaissance project site; that the Renaissance project site has become a real estate sale rather than an integrated development;- that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not as integrated with the adjacent neighborhood as the Applicant would have the Commission believe; that the rear of the proposed Holiday Inn BOOK 50 Page 22312 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22313 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Express will face US 41; that the addition of stairs may be more aesthetically pleasing than before; however, the retaining wall is 12 feet above the sidewalk on US 41; that the. retaining wall is not the wall of a parking garage but rather the wall of an outside parking lot; that The Renaissance condominiums will look directly over the outside parkingi; that no other retaining wall on US 41 is 12 feet tall; that the parking lot is directly over the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not edestrian-triendly, and referred to Division 11 Fences, Section VII-1101, Fences and Walls (A) and (G), Zoning Code (1998 ed.) as follows: (A) Fences, walls, and hedges up to a màximum of six and one-half (6 1/2) feet in height are permitted in the front, rear, and side setbacks in all zone districts (G) The height of a fence shall be measured as the highest point above natural grade on either side of the fence. Mr. Dasher continued that the retaining wall should not be included as part of the parking garage; that passersby will see a 12-foot wall and the back of a dumpster; that the stairs do not provide public access and the gate will be locked with access for proposed Holiday Inn Express patrons only; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is a fortress; that changing the footprint of a building is a major change and requires a full public hearing process which was not held; that the public and adjacent neighborhood deserve to receive the development promised; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is a poor gateway for the entrance to the City, is a third-rate hotel, and will be sO jammed onto the property off-street parking is required; that the number of parking spaces included in the parking garage is unknown despite repeated questions to Staff. Mr. Dasher stated further that the fate of the remaining two lots of the Renaissance project site is unknown and is a significant concern; that the original site plan and the proposed site plan are very different; that the adjacent neighborhood desires integration and deserves to: receive the promised development; that neighborhoods are held hostage by large developers who do not heed the Zoning Code (1998 ed..) and the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly and is not a suitable main connection for the Multi-Use Recreational Trail (MURT); that bicycle lanes on Boulevard of the Arts do not continue onto US 41; that sidewalks will be heavily trafficked; that site distance and design criteria are specifically detailed in the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Plans Preparation and Design Manual, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and the American Planning Association Design. Manual; that the public trusts the City to facilitate construction of mutually. agreed upon developments; however, the, trust is broken repeatedly; that the Applicant will present further options and a revised site plan if the Commission desires; that the minor changes made to Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B still do not provide an attractive development for the intersection of US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts. Mr. Dasher further stated that the inclusion of a locked gate at the Boulevard of the Arts entrance for the protection of the proposed Holiday Inn Express. is offensive and ludicrous; that the restaurants and lobbies of the Hotel Associates of Sarasota, Ltd. (Hyatt Sarasota),and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel- Company, L.L.C. (Ritz-Carlton), are accessible to pedestrians; that the Commission is requested to assure the citizens of the City receive promised developments; that the constructed development should be an addition to the adjacent neighborhood's gateway rather than a rear-facing proposed Holiday Inn Express with only a 12-foot-tall retaining wall, parking garage, and dumpsters visible; that the Renaissance project originally called for gardens, restaurants, and pools. Mayor Mason requested that other interested persons come forward; and the following interested persons came. before the Commission: Jeffery Oldenburg, 6240 Uplands Boulevard (34243), stated that he has been a Çity resident for over two decades, is involved in three neighborhood associations, and owns three properties in the Cityi: that the properties owned are in close proximity to the proposed development; that a significant vestèd interest is held in the development of the Renaissance project site as well as in redevelopment of US 41; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will not integrate with the adjacent neighborhood, is a direct assault on the rehabilitative work of the adjacent neighborhood, and is not supported; that the Applicant has purchased the most valuable piece of property in the Rosemary District and is proposing to wall in the development; that the rear-facing proposed Holiday Inn Express will be a visual blight to neighborhood residents and passersby and will likely devalue the Renaissance of Sarasota; that for the highest and best BOOK 50 Page 22314 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22315 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. possible use at the most notable intersection between Palm Avenue and the Manatee County line to be the back end of a proposed Holiday Inn Express is baffling. Mr. Oldenburg continued that the estimated value of other areas such as 19th Street or 28th Street and US 41 is a concern; that the blight which residents have diligently struggled to eliminate will be encouraged by the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that the City should assure Downtown projects are of the highest quality to assure developers will purchase the many for-sale retail properties along US 41 for $25 a square foot; that the construction of a Holiday Inn Express will not further the redevelopment of US 41; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is similar to a shiny penny; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is new and shiny but has nominal lasting value; that the neighborhood will gentrify and residents will soon wonder the reason the City allowed such an undesired development; that the Commission should not allow construction of the proposed Holiday Inn Express on the Renaissance project property; that the coming developments for the Renaissance project site are a concern; that two outcomes for the proposed Holiday Inn Express are possible: 1. The Commission can determine inconsistency with Wynnton's original proposal yet still pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345, or 2. The Commission can determine inconsistency with Wynnton's original proposal and refer proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 back to the PBLP for revision more consistent with Wynnton's original intent and vision of the Renaissance project. Mr. Oldenburg stated further that view space above all City-owned property on the Bayfront was sacrificed for the Renaissance project; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express does not integrate with the adjacent neighborhood, causes visual blight, and is unacceptable; that constructing the proposed Holiday Inn Express. will result in an inadequate valuation of the location; that the Commission should deny proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345. Charles Githler, 1258 North Palm Avenue (34236), stated that agreement with Mr. Dasher concerning land use was never expected; that John Harshman, President, Harshman & Company, Inc., representative for Wynnton, was involved in the sale of the : Renaissance project property and should- be commended; that Joel Freedman, AICP, Vice President, Bishop and Associates, has worked well with the PBLP, Staff, and has represented him personally on previous projects; that as a. partner owning the Hyatt Sarasota and developer of Beau Ciel Condominiums, Wynnton is his landlord in accordance with a temporary parking agreement; that he has been an owner of the Hyatt Sarasota since 1994; however, the proposed Holiday Inn Express is a concern for several reasons. Mr. Githler continued that residents in the. adjacent neighborhoods, members of the disbanded Gateway 2000, and the other co-owners of the Hyatt Sarasota have indicated the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not supported; that the density of the Renaissance project site is excessive and crowded; that requiring structured parking underneath a limited-service hotel is unusual; that limited-service hotel developers follow the discipline of the requirements of limited-service hotels such as the limited-service hotels near the Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport which include nicely landscaped areas and surface parking; that the graphic representations of the proposed Holiday Inn Express are excellent and planned by wonderful local firms; that the Wellesly Inn limited-service hotel also had excellent plans; however, limited-service hotels rarely generate the' funds necessary to maintain the areas as well as full-service hotels.. Mr. Githler stated further that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not compatible with the adjacent neighborhood and surrounding area; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will not enhance north US 41; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not part of the vision of a redeveloped north US 41; that the Hyatt Sarasota and Beau Ciel represent over $100 million of development on Boulevard of. the Arts; that a proposed Holiday Inn Express should not be sandwiched between the Ritz-Carlton, Hyatt Sarasota, and Beau Ciel; that the entrance to Downtown, the Ritz-Carlton, the Hyatt, and Beau Ciel will be a proposed Holiday Inn Express which is not even at the level of a Holiday Inn; that the Commission should request other applicants be considered for the Renaissance project hotel site; that other developers can provide a more compatible use which would not create such a density problem. Stephen Mehas, General Manager, Hotel Associates of Sarasota, Ltd. (Hyatt Sarasota), stated that his position is awkward as he operates a full-service hotel in the immediate neighborhood; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express would provide overflow BOOK 50 Page 22316 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22317 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. rooms for convention parties booked in the Hyatt Sarasota which is attractive; however, the proposed Holiday Inn Express is incompatible with the neighborhood; that the North Trail Association and Gateway 2000 actively participated in attempting to eliminate property such as the proposed Holiday Inn Express. Mayor Mason requested the Applicant come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Freedman referred to the architectural plans for Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30, and stated that stormwater will be collected through the master stormwater retention system as Staff indicated; that the retaining wall measured from the six-foot grade at US 41 would be 10 feet tall without the planned berm; that the retaining wall measured from the 6-foot grade at US 41 will be 7 to 8 feet with the planned berm; that the retaining wall will graduate down from US 41 to the entrance of the proposed Holiday Inn Express to grade; that JFB is not part of nor connected to Wynnton; that Wynnton sold the proposed Holiday Inn Express site LO JEB under the agreements Wymton had with the City; that JFB worked to develop the proposed Holiday Inn Express from Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B which was approved for Wynnton; that JFB should not be penalized for concerns about previously approved Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B; that JFB's proposed Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 is in complete compliance with the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) and approved Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B; that JEB has enhanced Development Plan No. 98-DPR-B which should be pleasing; that JFB has considered and incorporated suggestions by the Commission and the adjacent neighborhood in the proposed Holiday Inn Express. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B was the plan considered by the Commission at the time the original response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) was received from Wynnton? Mr. Freedman stated that Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B was approved by Staff and the Commission for Wynnton subsequent to receipt of the development plan submitted in response to the RFP. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B was approved by the Commission? Mr. Freedman stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that two exits onto Boulevard of the Arts were never approved. Mr. Freedman stated that the out-parcel is established through designation of the two exits onto Boulevard of the Arts; that the eastern limit of JFB's purchased parcel was determined by a party other than JFB; that JFB purchased a specific piece of propertyi that resolving access issues, hotel design, and grade discrepancies was difficult; that the engineering of the proposed Holiday Inn Express site was difficult; that the retaining wall is part of the proposed Holiday Inn Express building; that the C-CBD Zone District allows zero setback; that JFB is legally able to construct the proposed Holiday Inn Express directly on the property line according to C-CBD Zone District regulations; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 indicates a zero setback is desired; that concessions have been made by Staff and JFB to reach a mutually beneficial middle ground for construction of the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that' JFB is requesting the ability to control the Boulevard of the Arts entrance to the proposed Holiday Inn Express which is not an unusual request; that the Boulévard of the Arts entrance will not remain guest-only activated forever; that the Boulevard of the Arts entrance will become a rully-functionang entrance as business grows. Mr. Freedman continued that C-CBD Zone District regulations allow JFB to construct a retaining wall directly on the property line; however, JFB agreed to soften the property lines * surrounding the proposed Holiday Inn Express through landscaping and a more decorative and friendly retaining wall; that JFB and Staff have reached mutually beneficial agreements; that Holiday Inn has major branch holdings in and is an asset to the area and is a reputable hotel chain; that development on the site should be expedited; that the delays have been lengthy; that development should move forward; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express will add needed hotel space in the City; that JFB has acted in good faith, is. in total compliance with all regulations, and has revised Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 several times to assure Commission, Staff, and neighborhood concerns were considered and resolved; that JFB requests the Commission approve Ordinance No. 02-4345 as JFB has met and resolved all concerns and acted in good faith. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the parking avallability? BOOK 50 Page 22318 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22319 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Freedman stated that a total of 122 parking spaces are available, 30 of which are on a secondary lot included on the proposed Holiday Inn Express site. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the parking garage for the Renaissance of Sarasota will not be used. Mr. Freedman stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that additional property for parking was purchased from Wynnton by JFB. Mr. Freedman stated that is correct; that 92 parking spaces are located directly on the proposed Holiday Inn Express site; that an off-site parking agreement is not required. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the secondary parking lot will be mutually used by the entire Renaissance project? Mr. Freedman stated ciat a common use parking easement has noi been established yet. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the proposed Holiday Inn Express entrance on Boulevard of the Arts will be locked and if pedestrians and residents of the adjacent neighborhood will be able to access the proposed Holiday Inn Express through the Boulevard of the Arts entrance to make hotel reservations? Mr. Freedman stated that JFB requests control of the Boulevard of the Arts entrance for an unspecified period of time; that the entrance will be open for full-access as business increases and the proposed Holiday Inn Express becomes a. settled establishment; that the entire ground floor of. the proposed Holiday Inn Express was redesigned sO the front desk would have control access of both the US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts entrances. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that she will be unable to use the Boulevard of the Arts entrance to make reservations at the proposed Holiday Inn Express as the entrance will be guest-only activated. Mr. Freedman stated that JFB requests the ability to control access to the proposed Holiday Inn Express through the Boulevard of the Arts entrance. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that access control can be managed through internal security. Mr. Freedman stated that security will be obtained for the proposed Holiday Inn * Exprèss; that Vice Mayor Quillin's opinion is understood and respected; however, JFB requests control of the Boulevard of the Arts entrance; that JFB would like to begin construction in February 2002; that construction is anticipated to last 10 months; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is anticipated to open for business during the 2003 season. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that construction will occur during the 2002 season. Mr. Freedman stated that JFB would like to open the proposed Holiday Inn Express for business by the 2003 season. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the number of months anticipated for construction? Mr. Freedman stated 10. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the average room rate of the proposed Holiday Inn Express? Geoffrey Pflugner, Attorney, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, representing JFB, came before the Commission and stated that the average room rate for the proposed Holiday Inn Express is $88 per night. Mayor Mason requested that the Affected Person come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Dasher came before the Commission and stated that a concern is the locked doorway entrance into the proposed Holiday Inn Express on US 41. Vice Mayor Quillin stated she is not concerned about the locked doorway entrance. Mr. Dasher. stated that the adjacent neighborhood is concerned about the locked doorway entrance into the proposed Holiday Inn Express on US 41; that the retaining wall is not part of the proposed Holiday Inn Express building; that parking and loading ramps are located directly inside the retaining wall on Boulevard of the Arts; therefore, the retaining wall is not structurally part of the proposed Holiday Inn Express. BOOK 50 Page 22320 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22321 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a parking garage is located underneath the proposed Holiday Inn Express and the retaining wall. Mr. Dasher stated that the parking garage is not located under the retaining wall on Boulevard of the Arts. Mayor Mason stated that rebuttal is timed; that Commission comments should be held until after the allotted time has passed. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 indicates the parking garage is located under the proposed Holiday Inn Express and the retaining wall. Mr. Dasher stated that the area underneath the retaining wall stretching to the proposed Holiday Inn Express building. is hollow; that the area is a deck and is not filled in; that the adjacent neighborhood and' Lie CiLy ilas significantly invested in the Renaissance project property, has given up streets, and has provided stormwater retention beneath streets. Mr. Freedman came before the Commission and referred to the architectural plans of Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 indicating the underground parking and the boundaries of and entrance into and exit from the underground parking located underneath the proposed Holiday Inn Express and the retaining wall. Mr. Dasher stated that he is corrected; however, the proposed Holiday Inn Express is inappropriate for the area and is crowded onto a small site; that traffic and transportation studies have not been discussed in relation to the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) requires traffic and circulation studies be completed prior to construction of a development; that a circulation study has not been conducted; that the Staff report includes gaps and deficiencies; and asked the reason the Development Review Committee (DRC) report includes a disclaimer? City Manager Designate McNees stated that Staff can reply during Staff rebuttal. Mr. Dasher, stated that the question is important and should be answered; that Staff reports should never include a disclaimer, and quoted from the Development Review Committee Sign-Off Sheet as follows: Signatures by Department representatives do not imply endorsement, confer approval, or certify compliance with applicable codes Mr. Dasher asked the reason for the disclaimer? City Attorney Taylor stated thât the development review process is in place to assist applicants beginning the review approval process; that the development review process is preliminary and does not indicate definitive approval of any application. Mayor Mason requested that Staff come forward for rebuttal. Ms. Murphy came before the Commission and stated that the dèvélopment review process is preliminary; that the development review approval only indicates an. applicant has met the requirements to enter the public hearing process; that the Applicant identified the number and location of parking spaces; that cross-access parking easements for the secondary parking lot for the Renaissance project site were reviewed by Staff; that correspondence was received from three City residents opposed to the proposed Holiday Inn Express and was providèd to the City Auditor and Clerk for the record; that Staff has always been concerned about walling in the proposed Holiday Inn Express and, fought. for a. pedestrian connection on Boulevard of the Arts; that Development Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B created many problems for Staff including no prohibitions on phasing, subdividing, or requesting. modifications afforded to all developers; that JFB has the right to request changes; that Staff reviewed the proposed Holiday Inn Express for 95 units which is allowed by all original agreements; that the type of hotel is not within Staff's purview; that Staff determined gateway access on Boulevard of the Arts would be difficult for the City to monitor; that Staff assumes the Boulevard of the Arts access will become a full-access entrance in a short time. Commissioner Martin asked the width of the sidewalk on Boulevard of the Arts? Ms. Murphy stated that the width of the Boulevard of the Arts sidewalk is 8 feet, 6 inches. Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. BOOK 50 Page 22322 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22323 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to pass on first reading proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 incorporating Rezone Ordinance Amendment No. 01-ROA-04 and Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-30 to develop a 95-unit Holiday Inn Express as part of the Renaissance of Sarasota subdivision. Commissioner Martin stated that the construction of a Holiday Inn Express for the - proposed hotel site of the Renaissance project is disappointing; that the dream of Wynnton's original Renaissance project was elegant; that the design of the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not standard or typical and includes many enhancements; that Staff's fight for a better design and neighborhood integration is appreciated; that the fight is difficult without a Downtown Code or fully-adopted Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the approval process has been slow and delayed; that JFB acted in good faith and responded well to Commission, Staff, and neighborhood concerns; that a good compromise has been reached; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 will be supported. Commissioner Palmer concurred; and stated that a' Holiday Inn Express is not the desired hotel for the Renaissance project site; that the original Renaissance project designed by Wynnton was extraordinary and has since been dramatically changed; that decisions cannot be based on personal preference but must be based on substantial and competent evidence indicating consistency with the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) requirements; that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 amendments include a vested rights clause indicating the City and the Commission agree to honor rights bestowed upon property owners complying with existing codes; that changes cannot be supported based on personal opinions; that JFB acted in good faith and resolved most concerns; that Staff provided significant work and expertise in assisting JFB; that proposed Ordinance No: 02-4345 is supported by substantial and competent evidence and complies with existing requirements; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 will, be supported. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that she previously resided on Cocoanut Avenue and Fourth Street; that the dreams of the neighborhood for the Renaissance project site were shared; that residents have worked diligently to- clean-up the neighborhood for years; that the Renaissance project : site was originally purchased for the construction of a new library; that the neighborhood proved its worth to the County; that promises to the neighborhood and community. were broken; that Wynnton promised construction of the project presented to the neighborhood in Development, Plan Review No. 98-DPR-B; that moving a building footprint is not a minor change; however, the mistakes cannot be rectified; that identifying the move of a building footprint as a minor change will not be: supported during her tenure as Commissioner; that future building footprint changes will be presented to the Commission through the required public hearing process; that the City should not conduct business in' a clandestine manner; that the City has implemented and planned capital improvement projects for the adjacent neighborhood; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 is not pleasing, not desired, and was not promised to the community; however, personal opinion cannot be the basis of a vote; that the guest-only activated Boulevard of the Arts entrance must be opened; that residents in surrounding areas should be able to enter the proposed Holiday Inn Express through the Boulevard of the Arts entrance to make hotel reservations; that sécurity measures can be implemented to protect the proposed Holiday Inn Express; that the entrance can be locked outside of business hours; however, the neighborhood is currently being walled off. Vice Mayor Quillin continued that the. concerns of hotels such as the Hyatt Sarasota and the Ritz-Carlton in the immediate area are understood; however, a hotel affordable to the average citizen is desired; that many people cannot afford the Hyatt Sarasota or Ritz-Carlton but could afford the, average daily rate of the proposed Holiday Inn Express and still be within walking distance of Downtown; that the City has experienced an influx of condominium construction costing $200,000 and upi that her family and many residents could not afford high-priced condominiums; that the good faith of the Applicant and JFB is appreciated; that the proposed Holiday. Inn Express should make greater efforts to interact with the adjacent neighborhood; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 will be supported. Commissioner Servian concurred; and stated that the changes made to the Renaissance project proposed by Wynnton are unfortunate; that the City must move forward despite the changes; that the lack of neighborhood integration is a concern; that the City is attempting to become more neighborhood- and pedestrian-friendly through the Downtown Mater Plan 2020 and the Downtown Code; that BOOK 50 Page 22324 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22325 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. density on the Renaissance project site is a concern; that a Holiday Inn Express hotel will not add to the enhancement of north US 41; that JFB has worked in good faith to make the proposed Holiday Inn Express development as pleasing as possible to the City and the neighborhood; that Staff has worked diligently to assure the. best development possible is constructed on the site; that the proposed Holiday Inn Express is not desired; that the desire is for a development which opens its arms to rather than turns its back on the City and neighborhood; however, proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345. complies with all existing regulations and therefore will be supported. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote to pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345 on first reading. Motion carried (4 to 1): Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yesi Mason, no. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Administration should contact wynnton LO request a presenlation" to the * CRA prior to subdividing the remaining. lots on the Renaissance project property; that the CRA should be aware of further development on the Renaissance project property; that the current direction of development is not pleasing and does not meet the intent of the original agreement. Mayor Mason concurred. Commissioner Palmer concurred and stated that Wynnton should present the development intentions of the remaining Renaissance project property to the CRA; that the future of the remaining parcels is a concern. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's consensus, the Administrâtion is directed to request Wynnton make a presentation to the, CRA prior to subdividing the remaining parcels of the Renaissance project property. The Commission rècessed from 9:10 p.m. to 9:27 p.m. 8. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4350, TO REZONE A 65-ACRE PARCEL OF PROPERTY CONSISTING OF FOUR LOTS BETWEEN HILLVIEW AND ARLINGTON STREETS FROM RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY (RMF) -2 ZONE DISTRICT TO THE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) ZONE DISTRICT AND TO APPROVE SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 01-SP-33 TO PERMIT THE REMODELING OF AND ADDITION TO AN - EXISTING STRUCTURE PRESENTLY KNOWN AS THE SARASOTA MEDICAL BUILDING (APPLICATION NOS. 01-RE-11 AND 00-SP-33, APPLICANT MARK SULTANA, DENSLOW SULTANA CONSULTING GROUP, AS AGENT FOR DOUGLAS TIBBETTS AND GARY SLIGAR, AS OWNERS) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-2) #3 (0376) through #3 (2023) CD 9:27 through 10:16 City Attorney Taylor stated that Rezone Application No. 01-RE-11 and Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 are to conditionally rezone a .65-acre parcel of property consisting of four lots between Hillview and Arlington Streets from the Residential Multi Family (RMF)-2 Zone District to the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District; that Site Plan Application - No. 01-SP-33 proposes the remodeling of and addition to an existing structure presently known as the Sarasota Medical Building; that the Applicant is Mark Sultana, Denslow Sultana Consulting Group, as agent for Douglas Tibbetts and Gary Sligar, as owners; that the recommendation is to allow fifteen minutes for the Applicant's presentation and five minutes for rebuttal and ten minutes for the City's presentation and five minutes for rebuttal; that individuals certified by the Commission as Affected Persons will have ten minutes to speak ànd five minutes for rebuttal; that - Affected Persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject property; that Linda Dickerson, an adjacent property owner, has filed for certification as an Affected Person as an adjacent property owner within 500 feet of the proposed development but has not signed up to speak; that other interested persons will have five minutes to speak. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, i,t was moved to approve the timelimits proposed by the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yesi Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin it was moved to approve certification of Linda Dickerson as an Affected Person. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. BOOK 50 Page 22326 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22327 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason, Vice Mayor Quillin, and Commissioners Martin, Palmer and Servian stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Mark Sultana and Thomas Denslow, Denslow Sultana Consulting Group, Inc., agents for Douglas Tibbetts and Gary Sligar, came before the Commission, displayed a picture of the existing Sarasota Medical Building and a model of the structure representing the proposed renovations, including the required setback and interior parking lot landscaping. Mr. Sultana stated that the existing Sarasota Medical Building is located at the intersection of Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue; that the existing Sarasota Medical Building will be known as Hillview Square; that the existing building and the rear adjacent parking lot are owned by the Applicant; that the existing Sarasota Medical Building was constructed in the 1950s and renovated for the first time in 1970; that the rezone request will provide another renovation to update the building in accordance with current community design and aesthetics; that a 20-foot front-yard setback would be left if renovation is completed as the building currently exists; that the building footprint remains; that the roof covering will be removed, the existing brick covered with stucco, and storefront windows and doors will be added to encourage retail and restaurant development; that the existing walls and structural systems including the roof, structural columns, slabs and footings will remain intact; that the mechanical and electrical systems will be updated to comply with current codes; that the rezoning from the Residential Multiple Family (RMF)-2 to the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District is requested to provide consistency between the rear parking lot and the building; that 1,400 square feet of additional new building space is proposed to replace space lost inside the building; that a corridor will be created for pedestrians parking in the rear parking lot to access the retail, office, and restaurants along the storefront without walking around the entire building. Mr. Sultana continued that entries will be depressed to create three one-story decorative towers for aesthetic purposes; that awnings to protect pedestrians from inclement weather will be installed along Hillview Street. and Osprey Avenue as Staff requested; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 complies with existing and proposed future codes; that the - existing Sarasota Medical Building includes retail and medical offices; that the rezone request will allow restaurant, retail, and medical offices; that the front, side, and back facades are aesthetically pleasing; that the towers, awnings; cornices, and stucco are decorative features enhancing the existing structure.. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the location of the proposed pedestrian corridor? Mr. Sultana stated that the proposed pedestrian corridor will be located between the proposed Hillview Square and neighboring businesses to the north. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the proposed pedestrian corridor will be located from the rear parking lot to Osprey Avenue. Mr. Sultana stated that is correct; that the neighborhood is pedestrian-friendly, that the Applicant's desire was to increase the padestria-friedlinass of the proposed Hillview Square; that the Applicant was not required to construct the proposed pedestrian corridor. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the proposed pedestrian corridor will be a tunnel or if entrances into storefronts will be provided from the pedestrian corridor? Mr. Sultana stated that glass storefronts will abut the proposed pedestrian corridor. Vice Mayor Quillin statèd that the proposed pedestrian corridor will likely include gates at the entrance and exit which will be closed at times. Mr. Sultana stated that is correct; that the Sarasota Police Department (SPD) requested the Applicant monitor the use of the gates; that the gates may be locked closed during the evening if problems arise; however, the gates may also be locked open if problems do not occur. Mr. Denslow stated that the gates can be locked open during the day and locked closed during the evening. Commissioner Servian asked if the gates are interior or exterior? BOOK 50 Page 22328 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22329 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Sultana stated that the gates are located at the entrance and exit of the proposed pedestrian corridor. Commissioner Servian asked if entrances will be provided from the proposed pedestrian corridor into retail stores? Mr. Sultana stated that entrances from the proposed pedestrian corridor into retail stores are not indicated on Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 as the proposed pedestrian corridor is not long. Commissioner Servian asked if skylights will be constructed across the top of the proposed pedestrian corridor? Mr. Sultana stated yes. Mayor Mason requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Allen Parsons, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission, displayed pictures and maps relating to the proposed Hillview Square. project, and stated that Rezone Application No. 01-RE-11 includes proffered Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33; that the proposed Hillview Square project is located at the northwest intersection of Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue; that the parcel is "L" shaped; that the proposed Hillview Square project is in the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification which çan be implemented through the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District; that the existing RMF-2 Zone District is a zoning enclave and is not an implementing district for the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification; that the proposed Hillview Square project is currently in both the CN and RMF-2 Zone Districts; that the front section of the property is currently in the CN Zone District; that the rear parking lot is in the RMF-2 Zone District; that Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 depicts improvements to the façade of the building; that 1,400 square feet will be added on the western side of the building, part of which is located in the RMF-2 Zone District; that the rear parking lot on the north side of the building, has 69 parking spacesi that the exit from the parking lot to the North was recommended to allow only a right-turn onto Arlington Street. Mr. Parsons referred to the Agenda backup material indicating the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing on : November 14, 2001, and found Rezone Application No. 01-RE-11 and Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, the, standards for review set forth in Sections IV-1106 and IV-506, Zoning Code (1998 ed.), and the Tree Protection Ordinance, and voted unanimously to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The redevelopment of the rezoned property and the adjacent CN property to the east shall proceed only in conformity with the site plan filed with Application No. 01-SP-33. The site plan and all related development and construction plans for the new building shall be in compliance with the plans labeled Hillview Square and date stamped October 17, 2001, by the Planning Department. All final building plans shall be subject to full review for compliance with applicable codes and development plans by the Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement. 2. The site shall comply with the non-residential site lighting standards found in Section VII-1402. 3. The Site Plan is to be reconfigured to force traffic east bound from the parking lot onto Arlington Street through the use of a physical traffic control device such as curbing. Mr. Parsons continued that Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 is compatible with the existing land use pattern in the area for both commercial and office uses along Osprey Avenue and Hillview Street; that the RMF-2 zoning enclave directly to the south of the site will be eliminated; that the Board of Adjustment granted two variances to the Applicant on October 31, 2001, including the building setback and the percentage of landscaping in the parking lot to be provided; that the Applicant is providing 7 percent interior landscaping and the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) calls for 10 percent interior parking lot landscaping; and referred to Site Plan Criteria No. 5 as follows: - adequate provisions for vehicular access and traffic circulation (both, internal and external to the project) Mr. Parsons stated further that a traffic study was conducted for the site finding an acceptable level of service is expected with the proposed land uses; that the traffic study also BOOK 50 Page 22330 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22331 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. recommended the addition of a driveway point onto Arlington Street; and referred to Site Plan Review Criteria No. 6 as follows: proposed development, design, and layout provides for safe and efficient pedestrian circulation. Mr. Parsons further stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 achieves several exemplary objectives for pedestrian circulation and is pedestrian-oriented; that a continuous storefront façade with street-level storefront windows will be created along both Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue; that the proposed Hillview Square project is low-scale and provides awnings for both coverage and enclosure; that the rear parking de-emphasizes the parking Iot; that the proposed pedestrian corridor increases the exemplary pedestrian integration of the proposed Hillview Square project; that a Sarasota County Area Transportation (SCAT) bus station is located at the corner of Osprey Avenue and Hillview Street; that picycie racks are provided on the proposed Hillview Square storefront sidewalk; that the October 5, 2001, interoffice memorandum from Leonard Scherry, Engineering Technician, to Jane Robinson, Director of Planning, included in the Agenda backup material concerns the dedication of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way to the City by the Applicant; that the Commission should determine if dedication of the right-ot-way is desired. Vice Mayor Quillin asked for clarification of the location of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way. Mr. Parsons referred to a displayed graphic of Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33 indicating the Osprey Avenue right-of-way and stated that the Osprey Avenue right-of-way is 65 feet long. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission, referred to the Applicant's model of the proposed Hillview Square, and stated that Osprey Avenue currently has seven and one-half feet of sidewalk; that only 1.5 feet of the sidewalk is within the public right-of-way; that the remaining sidewalk. is private propertyi that Staff recommends requesting right-of-way dedication of public right-of-way for the remaining six feet; that citizens currently utilize the sidewalk significantly: that 1.5 feet is not sufficient width for a sidewalk if the Applicant determines the right-of-way should be used for private purposes only and decreases the size of the sidewalk. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Applicant was previously willing to dedicate the Osprey Avenue right-of-way to the City. Mr. Daughters stated previous discussions with the Applicant have indicated a willingness to dedicate the Osprey Avenue right-of-way, Mr. Parsons referred to Section 4 of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 as follows: The site plan and all related development and construction plans for - the new building shall be in compliance with the plans labeled Hillview Square Building Renovation received by the Planning Department and date stamped October 17, 2001. Mr. Parsons continued that the date indicated in Section 4.of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 will be updated prior to second reading to reflect site plan, construction plans, and related development will remain in compliance with the changes proposed at the November. 14, 2001, PBLP meeting and incorporated in site plans date stamped November 27, 2001. Commissioner Martin stated that neighborhood and residential compatibility is always a concern with new . development; that the property adjacent to the rear parking lot is residential. Mr. Parsons stated that an apartment complex and single-family residential homes are located on the Hillview Street side of the proposed Hillview Square project; that a 6.5 masonry wall and a 7-foot landscape buffer are proposed for construction in the rear parking lot of the proposed Hillview Square project. Commissioner Martin asked the side of the buffer wall on which the landscaping will be placed? Mr. Parsons stated that the landscaping will be located on the east side of the buffer wall. Commissioner Martin asked if the east side of the buffer wall is the parking lot side? Mr. Parsons stated yes. Commissioner Martin stated that the residents will be faced with the blank side of the buffer wall. BOOK 50 Page 22332 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22333 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Parsons stated that is correct; that currently no wall exists between the parking lot and the apartment complex. Commissioner Martin asked the material proposed for construction of the buffer wall? Mr. Parsons stated that the buffer wall will be stucco. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the.buffer wall must be masonry? Mr. Parsons stated that the answer is not known. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a decorative 3-foot wrought iron wall was constructed as a buffer on a previous rezone; that little setback is available between the. wall and the apartment complex; that solid buffer wàlls have been constructed around previous developments reducing air circulation and lighting; that Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles should be applicable as well. Commissioner Servian stated that a solid buffer wall should be desired between residences and the proposed Hillview Square project as a restaurant will be constructed in the proposed Hillview Square project; that a solid wall will help mitigate restaurant-associated smells and noise; that landscaping is desired on the residential side of the buffer wall. Commissioner Palmer asked the type of lighting which will be installed to avoid upsetting the neighborhood. Mr. Parsons stated that examples of the decorative lighting are included in the Agenda backup material; that the lighting is directed down to avoid upsetting the neighborhood. Commissioner Palmer. stated that the examples of the lighting fixtures included in the Agenda backup material were indicated for use in the islands in the parking lot, and asked if lighting is only required in the islands of the parking lot? Mr. Parsons stated that the lighting fixtures will also be installed on the western boundary of the proposed Hillview Square project in which the landscape buffer will be planted. Timothy Litchet, Director, Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) requires a 6-foot solid wall be constructed as a perimeter buffer; that the wall must be solid stucco; that the Commission can request the Applicant landscape on either side of the wàll if the residential side is preferred. Commissioner Servian stated that restaurant noise is loud, and asked the location of * the air conditioning (AC) units and the exhaust vents as well as the hours of operation for the restaurant. Mayor Mason stated that the Applicant will answer questions during rebuttal. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Commission has the ability to request the Applicant landscape on the residential side of the buffer wall. Mr. Litchet stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that landscaping can be placed on both sides of the buffer wall. Mr. Litchet stated that is correct; that the main concern is the reduction of landscaping which results in placing landscape buffers on both sides of a buffer wall; that lush landscaping on one side of the buffer wall is preferred over sparse landscaping on both sides. Commissioner Martin asked if the adjacent property owners were present at neighborhood meetings concerning the proposed Hillview Square project and if concern was express regarding the buffer wall? Mr. Parsons stated that the adjacent property owner of the apartment complex is also the owner of the proposed Hillview Square project property. Commissioner Palmer asked if the adjacent single-family residential property owners have expressed concern regarding the buffer wall? Mr. Parsons stated that the attendance of adjacent single-family property owners at the neighborhood meetings is unknown; that concerns expressed during the neighborhood meetings were related to hours of operation, traffic, and employee parking on residential streets. BOOK 50 Page 22334 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22335 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason requested that the Affected Person come forward. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Affected Person did not sign up to speak and is not present in the audience; that no interested persons have signed up to speak. Mayor Mason requested the Applicant come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Sultana and Mr. Denslow came before the Commission. Mr. Sultana stated that the adjacent apartment complex property owner also owns the proposed Hillview Square project property; that the Applicant desires the buffer wall be located on the property line as maintenance of landscaping is easily forgotten if not in direct sight; that Staff has indicated satisfaction with the buffer wall located on the property line; that examples of the lighting fixtures are included in the Agenda backup material; that lighting is projected towards the parking lot and away irom the adjaceht property owners; that the current obtrusive lighting will be replaced with more elegant fixtures; that the restaurant hours of operation will be as follows: Monday through Friday from 12 p.m. noon to 11 p.m. Saturday and Sunday from 12 p.m. noon to 12 a.m. (midnight) Mr. Sultana continued that the retail and office hours of operation will be as follows: Retail 10:00 to 5/6 p.m. Office Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Mr. Sultana stated further that the restaurant will probably be busiest during the : evening; that the retail and office parking available during the day will be free for evening restaurant parking; that the AC units will be located on the roof of the proposed Hillview Square project; that three of the existing AC units: will be retained and the remaining AC units will be upgraded; that the duct-work inside the proposed Hillview Square project will be replaced and upgraded. Commissioner Servian asked the location of the restaurant exhaust vents? Mr. Sultana stated that the restaurant exhaust vents will be located on the roof over the, restaurant kitchen; that parapets will be installed on the roof in several places to help screen the exhaust vents and mitigate noise. Commissioner Servian stated that the adjacent apartment complex is owned by the proposed Hillview Square project property owner; however, ownership of either property could change in the future; therefore, the buffer wall should be softened. Mr. Sultana stated that the Applicant strongly desires softening and lowering the buffer wall; however the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) requires a 6-foot solid stucco wall. Commissioner Servian stated that noise will not be mitigated by the buffer wall regardless of the height and material utilized for construction; and asked if outdoor dining is intended for the restaurant? Mr. Sultana stated yes; that future provisions were made to allow outdoor dining on the Hillview Street side of the proposed Hillview Square project. Commissioner Servian asked if sufficient room is available for outdoor dining? Mr. Sultana stated that the Hillview Street sidewalk is significantly wider than the Osprey Avenue sidewalk; that sufficient room is available for planting trees, opening restaurant doors, and arranging single, tables for dining outside. Commissioner Servian asked if sufficient room is available for outdoor dining subsequent to the dedication of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way? Mr. Sultana stated that the right-of-way dedication will be only four feet; that a dedication of six feet would intrude into the proposed Hillview Square project building; that the Applicant has agreed to dedicate the Osprey Avenue right-of-way through either an outright gift to the City or by granting a right-of-way easement. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Applicant will decide the method of dedication of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way prior to the end of the public hearing. BOOK 50 Page 22336 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22337 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Sultana stated that the Applicant has agreed to the Osprey Avenue right-of-way dedication; that only a determination of the method of right-of-way dedication remains. Commissioner Palmer stated that the method of right-of-way dedication must be resolved prior to second reading. City Attorney Taylor stated that the method of right-of-way dedication will be determined and incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 prior to second reading. Commissioner Palmer asked if the restaurant hours of operation are proffered? Mr. Sultana stated yes; that the proffer of restaurant hours of operation was provided to Staff and indicated on Site Plan Application No. 01-SP-33. Commissioner Paimer stated that the restaurant iours of operation are not indicated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350. Çity Attorney Taylor . stated that the restaurant hours of operation will be included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 prior to second reading. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the number of seats anticipated for the restaurant? Mr. Sultana stated that the kitchen will require 1,500 square feet; that the exact number of seats available for the restaurant is not known; that 150 square feet per. space is the method by which the City calculates available seating. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that 190 seats are available for the restaurant. Mr. Sultana stated that is likely. accurate. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the City and particularly the adjacent neighborhood. have significant parking problems; that employees of neighborhood businesses park on residential streets which is the subject of frequent complaints. Mr. Sultana stated that the current Sarasota Medical Building parking lot has 42 parking spaces; that the proposed Hillview Square project will increase parking by 27 for a total of 69 parking spaces; that the Applicant has met all City requirements and requests. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Applicant's efforts to comply with Staff requests is appreciated; and asked the location of employee parking? Mr. Sultana stated that employees will park in the proposed Hillview Square project parking lot. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the increase in parking spaces is for employee use. Mr. Sultana stated that the parking space increase is intended for employee parking as well as additional customer parking. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the increased parking will provide only enough space for employee parking as retail, restaurant, and office businesses will be added to the existing office and restaurant business; that the Applicant would prefer installing a three-foot buffer wall topped with three feet of decorative wrought iron instead of a 6-foot buffer wall. Mr. Sultana stated that the Applicant strongly desires construction of a buffer other than a 6-foot solid stucco buffer as a different wall would be significantly more aesthetically pleasing; however, the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) requires a 6-foot solid,stucco masonry wall. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a special exception can be granted for construction of a different wall as has been granted previously in a rezoning request from the CN Zone District to the Office, Professional and Business (OPB) Zone District. Mr. Sultana stated that the current request is to rezone from the RMF-2 Zone District to the CN Zorie District. Commissioner Martin stated that the Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement previously indicated to the Commission reasons the 6-foot solid stucco buffer wall is required. Mr. Sultana stated that the current rear parking lot of the Saràsota Medical Building has only 2 percent landscaping; that the rear parking lot for the proposed Hillview Square project will include 10 percent landscaping; that the total proposed Hillview Square lot will have 18 percent landscaping including BOOK 50 Page 22338 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22339 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. deciduous trees creating shading, landscape islands, and the landscaped 7-foot buffer across the rear property line. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Arlington Street exit has been redesigned to allow right-turn only exiting. Mr. Sultana stated that is correct; that the Arlington Street redesigned exit exceeded the PBLP requirements. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the possible Arlington Street left-hand turn exit was a significant concern of the adjacent neighborhood; and asked for clarification of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way dedication. Mr. Sultana stated that dedication of six feet of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way would intrude into the proposed Hillview Square building; that a portion of the right-of-way in front of the proposed Hillview Square project is owned by the Applicant; that the City has requested dedication of the. Osprey Avenue right-of-way extending to the columns in front of the proposed Hillview Square project building; that the actual right-of-way is 4 feet, 9 inches wide; that the Applicant is willing to dedicate the Osprey Avenue right-of-way to the City. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the City Attorney will include the method of right-of-way dedication in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 prior to second reading; that dedication of the right-of-way to the City is important for long-term maintenance. Mr. Sultana stated that improvements will be made to the Osprey, Avenue right-of-way; that the Applicant is willing to dedicate the Osprey Avenue right-of-way which is valuable land. Commissioner Martin stated that the width of the. Osprey Avenue right-of-way which will dedicated is confusing; that the Applicant indicates 4 feet, 9 inches up to the face of the columns in the front of the proposed Hillview Square project will be dedicated; that the Director of Engineering indicates 6 feet from the right-of-way will be dedicated. Mr. Sultana stated that the footing of the columns in front of the proposed Hillview Square project building cannot be located in the right-of-way and must be included within the proposed Hillview Square project property line. Commissioner Palmer stated that the exact width of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way proposed for dedication to the City can be clarified at the second reading. Mr. Daughters stated that the Applicânt indicated the correct width of the Osprey Avenue right-of-way; that the Osprey Avenue right-of-way will be dedicated from the edge of the City's right-of-way to the face of the columns in front of proposed Hillview Square project building. Commissioner Martin stated that the right-of-way will be dedicated from the edge of the City's right-of-way to the face of the columns in front of proposed Hillview Square project building. Mr. Daughters and Mr. Sultana stated that is correct. Mayor Mason requested Staff come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Parsons stated that Staff has no rebuttal. Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to pass, on first reading proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 including the proffered restaurant hours of operation, the dedication of the Osprey Avenue right-ot-way, and compliance with the site plan, construction plans, and related development indicated in site plans date stamped November 27, 2001. Mayor Mason réquested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the proposed Hillview Square project will be located in a unique area; that the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) should be revised for consideration of decorative buffers in certain zone districts to enhance the neighborhoods; that solid walls are not attractive buffers in neighborhoods. City' Manager Designate McNees stated that many people have signed up to speak concerning the City's Medical and Dental Health Insurance Plan (healthcare plan) under Citizens' Input; BOOK 50 Page 22340 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22341 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. that the Commission should either allow the Administration to provide a brief presentation prior to Citizens' Input or consider Unfinished Business, Item No. 4, a status report concerning the healthcare plan, prior to Citizens' Input; that many rumors and other inaccurate information have been circulating among the City's employees and the public recently; that an opportunity should be provided to allow clarification of the Administration's position concerning the healthcare plan; that the Commission could also continue the current Agenda as scheduled if desired. Commissioner Servian stated that the Administration should be allowed to. provide a presentation prior to Citizens.' Input. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Commission should consider Unfinished Business, Item No. 4, prior to Citizens' Input. On motion of - Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Paiméi, it was moved to consider Unfinished Business, Item No. 4, prior to Citizens' Input. Commissioner Martin stated that a concern is a few persons signed up under Citizens' Input to speak to a City topic unrelated to the healthcare plan; that persons signed up to speak to other topics should be allowed to address the Commission prior to proceeding with discussion of the healthcare plan. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a few people have signed up to speak to a City topic other than the. healthcare plan; that a motion to change the order of the Agenda requires the support of two-thirds of the Commission. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Martin, no; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: STATUS RE: UPDATE ON CITY HEALTH INSURANCE FOR 2002 - REPORT PROVIDED (AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-4) #3 (2230) through #4 (1935) CD 10:16 through 11:38 City Manager Designate McNees stated that a significant amount of correspondence concerning the City's Médical and Dental Health Insurance Plan (healthcare plan) has been recently submitted to the Administration from active and retired City employees and the public; that much of the correspondence indicates the Administration submitted a formal proposal to the Commission concerning retired employees' costs for participation in the healthcare plan; that no proposals concerning retired employees' costs for participation in the healthcare plan during 2002 have been presented or submitted to the Commission by the Administration; that any other indication is either disingenuous or misinformed; that no specific changes have been proposed for retired employees; that a proposal and recommendation concerning the City's budgeted funding for retired employees' costs for participation in the healthcare plan will be presented to the Commission during April 2002; that the healthcare plan is currently insolvent and must be fortified for future years; that a personal letter was provided to each retired City employee and indicated all retired employees will be notified and a series of public meetings will be facilitated to discuss any proposed changes to the costs for pàrticipation in the healthcare plan prior to the presentation of any formal proposal to the Commission; that the. input of retired employees will be considered seriously prior to proposing any change to the premiums charged for participation in. the healthcare plan; that a promise is to incorporate retired employees' questions, concerns, and input into any proposal to change any costs or benefits of the healthcare plan; that the current item concerns a status report regarding negotiations with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union No. 173 (Teamsters), and the Police Benevolent Association (PBA). Gibson Mitchell, Director, Finance, and William Campbell, Director, Human Resources, came before the Commission. Mr. Campbell stated that Staff met with PBA representatives in a collective bargaining session on December 4, 2001, and with PBA representatiyes and Teamsters on December 12, 2001, to discuss the status of the healthcare. plan; that an additional collective bargaining session is scheduled with PBA and Teamsters representatives for December 20, 2001; that the recommendation is to continue the current premiums charged to active and retired City employees during. 2002 unless a change is negotiated during collective bargaining; that enrollment in the healthcare plan for 2002 for active employees will commence on December 19, 2001; that non-represented active General Employees will be offered the TeamHealth Healthcare Maintenance Organization TeamHealth) as an option; that active employees represented by the Teamsters and the PBA will not be offered participation in TeamHealth; that during the collective bargaining session, PBA and Teamsters representatives indicated BOOK 50 Page 22342 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22343 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. participation in TeamHealth was not desired; therefore, the recommendation is not to offer TeamHealth to active employees represented by the Teamsters or the PBA. City Manager Designate McNees stated that the healthcare plan will be continued to 2002 as currently administered; however, design changes to the healthcare plan will be presented to the Commission after collective bargaining is concluded; that significant changes to the healthcare plan are required; that a long-term solution to the insolvency of the healthcare plan must include a program for encouraging employees to maintain a healthy lifestyle and therefore reducing utilization of the healthcare plan; that any proposed changes will be designed to reduce the City's costs for maintaining the healthcare plan for employees; that reducing the overall costs to the healthcare plan is in the best interests of active and retired employees in addition to the Cityi that design changes and premium modifications to the healthcare plan will probably be recommended during February 2002; that sufficient time is required to complete collective bargaining negotiations and. discuss the proposed changes with active employees; that the existing premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance payments will be continued to 2002; that non-represented general employees will be provided an opportunity to participate in TeamHealth. if desired; that the PBA, and Teamsters indicated participation in TeamHealth was not desired. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if a committee will be formed to develop a proposal concerning changes to the healthcare plan? City Manager Designate McNees stated that a committee will be formed to develop a proposal concerning changes to the healthcare plan for fiscal year (FY) 2002/03; that the committee will consist of representatives from the PBA, the Teamsters, non-represented General Employees, the Administration, the Department of Human Resources, the Finance Department, and retired General and Sarasota Police Department employees and former City firefighters. Commissioner Martin asked the reason the PBA and Teamsters did not desire an option to participate in TeamHealth? Mr. Campbell stated that the PBA and Teamsters did not indicate a reason for declining participation in TeamHealth. City Manager Designate McNees concurred. Commissioner Martin asked if the PBA and Teamsters representatives or the represented employees decided to reject an option to participate in TeamHealth. City Manager Designate McNees stated that the parties responsible for the decision to reject participation in TeamHealth are not preçisely known; that an election supporting rejection of an option to participate in TeamHealth was not held for the represented employees. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the City will begin enrolling active employees in the healthcare plan for 2002 as maintained for 2001? City Manager Designate McNees stated that is correct; that the City will begin enrolling employees in the healthcare plan for 2002 starting December 19, 2001; that non-represented General Employees will be provided an opportunity to participate in TeamHealth. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if non-represented General Employees will be offered participation in TeamHealth, the Exclusive Provider Organization (EPO), and the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) healthcare plans as well as the City's Dental Insurance Program? City Manager Désignate McNees stated yes. Commissioner Martin asked if the 2001 premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance requirements will only be maintained until April 2002? City Manager Designate McNees stated yes. The following people came before the Commission: Joan Donnelly, 1255 Gulfstream Avenue (34236), Attorney, representing the General Employees; distributed copies of and read from 'a prepared statement indicating that City employees hired prior to October 1, 1993, were promised free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that many employees elected employment with the City at a lower salary due to the healthcare benefits promised during retirement; that some employees declined other employment offers due to the promised healthcare benefits; that all employees hired prior to October 1, 1993, planned retirement and a budget based upon the promise of free participation in the healthcare plan and a pension throughout retirement; that she is a retired teacher and is also provided a pension and free participation in a healthcare plan; that her former employer continues to honor the BOOK 50 Page 22344 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22345 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. promise of a pension and free participation in a healthcare plan; that a employer's promises to its employees must be kept; that free participation in the healthcare plan was promised to recruit and retain employees. Attorney Donnelly continued that during 1993, free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement was discontinued as a benefit for newly hired employees; that at the September 20, 1993, Regular Commission meeting, former Mayor and Commissioner Gene Pillot proposed discontinuing the benefit of free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement for future employees but also grandfathering current active and retired employees at the time as well as current active employees who might be laid off but rehired; that also at the September 20, 1993, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission voted unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 93R-674 which discontinued free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement for employees hired on or after October 1, 1993; however, Resolution No. 93R-674 also indicated the promise of free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement would be maintained for employees hired prior to October 1, 1993; that the Commission should not approve any changes to the healthcare plan which treat retired and active employees separately; that active and retired employees should be dealt with fairly, equally, and collectively; that the City honored the commitments to residents of the Sarasota Mobile Home Park; that the City's promises to its employees must also be honored; that the City should reassure employees their sacrifices were worthwhile; that employees' sacrifices earned the promised benefit of free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the City's commitments to all employees for paid retirement healthcare benefits should be reaffirmed. Benita Saldutti, 510 Denarvaez Drive, Longboat Key (34228), and Pension Plans Administrator, read from a prepared statement indicating that she has worked for the City since 1982, likes her current position, and has always been proud to work for the City; that speaking out against her employer is not desired; however, the Administration previously indicated retired employees will be charged for participation in the healthcare plan; that charging retired employees a cost to participate in the healthcare plan represents a break in the City's promise to: provide free participation during retirement; that increasing employees' costs for the. healthcare plan is unacceptable no matter the date the costs are imposed. Ms. Saldutti referred to a December 14, 2001, letter from Staff to the PBA concerning the healthcare plan and continued that the December 14, 2001, letter indicates the Administration supports forming a committee to review design changes to the healthcare plan and would be composed of one Teamsters representative, one PBA representative, one representative for retired employees, and five representatives appointed, by the Administration; that employees have repeatedly requested the formation of committee to examine changing the healthcare plan; that a representative from the Office of the City :. Auditor and Clerk was not recommended; that the proposed composition of the committee is not appropriate; that the Administration should appoint five of the eight members of the committee; that all employees are united to ensure equity is maintained; that the committee should be composed of one Teamsters - representative, one PBA representative, one representative of the former City Firefighters currently working for the County, two representatives appointed by the Administration, two representatives appointed by the City Auditor and Clerk, and two representatives for retired employees, who account for approximately one-third of all participants in the healthcare plan; that the Commission should ensure the City's promises to employees.are maintained. Donna Whitney, City employee, stated that she has worked for the City for 12 years but previously worked in the private sector; that employment with the City was chosen partially due to the beauty of the City but primàrily due to the free healthcare benefits promised to employees during retirement; that medical costs are rising rapidly; that the City promised free healthcare benefits to employees; that the Administration is attempting to deny the provision of free healthcare benefits to employees; that during the current meeting, Vice Mayor Quillin indicated the City does not like broken promises; that the City made a promise to employees hired before October 1, 1993, to provide free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the City should keep its promises; that employees serve with excellence and pride and provide a significant contribution to the success of the community; that free participation in the healthcare plan is an important part of the retirement benefits promised to employees; that the healthcare plan is currently operating at. a deficit; that the management of the healthcare plan is not the responsibility of employees; that the Administration is responsible for ensuring the proper management of the healthcare BOOK 50 Page 22346 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22347 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. plan; that employees' benefits should not be reduced due to mismanagement of the healthcare plan; that the City previously provided additional funding to important projects or community organizations; that employees are an important ingredient to the City's success; that the City's promises to the employees should be honored. Joseph Munyak, retired Sarasota Police Department (SPD) Officer, representing the Sarasota Municipal Retired Employees Association (SMREA), read from a prepared statement indicating that the opportunity to address the Commission is appreciated; that the people of the United States have repeatedly honored the sacrifices of police officers and firefighters since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; that the City is not properly honoring the sacrifices of its police officers, former firefighters, and other public servants by reducing or eliminating healthcare benefits; that the funds reserved to ensure the solvèncy of the healthcare plan have been mismanaged; that SPD Officers and former Firefighters entered employment with the City due to the promise of free participation in the healthcare plan throughout active employment and retirement; that the City also promised to allow any eligible dependents to participate in the healthcare plan at a reasonable cost; that all retired and many active employees planned retirement according to a budget which included free personal participation and payment of a reasonable cost for dependent participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the Administration's proposals do not adequately weigh the impact increased costs or premiums will have on retired and many active employees. Mr. Munyak continued that the City has not provided sufficient information concerning the insolvency and mismanagement of the healthcare plan; that employees are expected to pay increased costs to ensure the future solvency of the healthcare plan; that the City previously indicated employees were considered a burden; that now, employees are expected to shoulder the burden of ensuring the solvency of the healthcare plan which is a responsibility of the Administration; that at the July 21, 1993, Commission Budget Workshop, Staff indicated retired employees' healthcare claims increased $178,000; nowever, the Administration recommended the transfer of $120,000 from the funds reserved to ensure the solvency of the retired employees' participation in the healthcare plan to fund water and sewer operations; that the management of the City's finances is not satisfactory and requires increased scrutiny; that employees are not responsible for the mismanagement of the healthcare plan; that employees hired on or after October 1, 1993, have the opportunity to offset the increased costs for participation in the healthcare plan by delaying retirement, participating in the Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP), or contributing to an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) or similar secure investment; that many retirement and investment options available to current employees were not offered. prior to his retirement from SPD in 1987; that police officers do not contribute to Social Security and were allowed only a few years to contribute to an IRA prior to retirement; that the majority of retirees will not be able to bear the financial burden of increased costs for participation in the healthcare plan. Jimmie Thomas, 1508 Cocoanut Avenue (34234), stated that he served as an employee at the time Commissioners served as volunteers and were not paid during the tenure of former City Manager Ken Thompson; that City employees were promised free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the current meeting was opened with a prayeri however, God does not view liars favorably; that the City's promises to employees must be maintained; that a career of hard work was personally provided to the Cityi that many dangerous situations such as hurricanes were endured during active employment; that some employees did not live into retirement; that the City is indicating the health of its employees is not important; that Commissioners would seek medical care if ill; that employees must be provided adequate healthcare and have dedicated a lifetime of service to the City; that the. Commission should ensure the City's promises are maintained. Mel Walp, 4135 Deerfield Drive (34233), representing SMREA, deferred from speaking. Lee Kovacs, 2876 Poplar Street (34236), and City employee, read from a prepared statement indicating that the City has approximately 1,400 active and retired employees, including employees transferred to the County; that the City currently has 1,400 unhappy employees; that 1,400 unhappy citizens or business owners united under a common cause or concern would receive immediate mollification; that the indication is citizens are significantly more important than employees; that the Administration's proposal to increase employees' costs for participation in the healthcare plan constitutes breaking an important promise to employees; that employees deserve better treatment and cannot break a promise to the City and expect to continue employment; that City residents will begin to wonder which promises may be broken in the future if the City cannot BOOK 50 Page 22348 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22349 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. honor the promises to its employees; that the Commission should ensure the City's promises to its employees are honored; that as quoted in the "Bits and Pieces" Magazine, Volume R, No. 52, Theodore Hesburgh, former President of the University of Notre Dame, once said the following: "My basis principle is that you don't make decisions because they are easy, you don't make them because they are cheap, you don't make them because they are popular, you make them because they are right." u Ms. Kovacs continued that the opportunity to speak to the Commission is appreciated. Andrew Saint John, 1150 Charlotte Avenue (34237), was no longer present in the Chambers. Karen McGowan, Deputy City Auditor and Clerk, Office of the City Auditor and Clerk, read from a prepared statement indicating that the Commission should bring all employees to whom a promise was made to the table to forge a reasonable solution to employee and retiree healthcare insurance; that the Commission should also find a way the City can keep the promises made to its employees, including those hired before October 1, 1993, as well as its retirees; that the City has always kept its promises to employees and retirees; that the, Commission has the opportunity to do the honorable thing and allay the fears. of everyone: employees, retirees, and others affected who would like assurance the promises made and honored for over 40 years will be kept; that at the current meeting, the Commission is requested to reaffirm the commitments made by management to its employees and recognized by former Commissions are important and will continue to be honored; that the Commission should treat all affected employees fairly and equitably and should bring all affected employees, both past and present, into the discussions. Madelyn Nelson, 2219 Wood Street (34234), and City employee of 16 years, stated that increasing the costs for dependant participation in the healthcare plan is a significant concern; that the costs for dependent coverage increased significantly during recent yearsi that employees will no longer be able to afford dependent coverage if the City continues to increase the costs significantly each year; that all City employees should be treated equally. Ken Henderson, 1479 Bay: Point -Drive (34236), stated : that he addressed the Commission at the December 3, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, concerning the issue of the solvency of the healthcare plan; that he considers himself an owner of the City as a property owner and taxpayer; that the solvency of the healthcare plan offered to employees is a serious problem; that governing and managing the City are difficult. to differentiate and define but are easily judged by citizens; that the City's ability to govern and manage is judged according to the anticipation of and preparation for certain problems such as the solvency of. the healthcare plan; that the City failed to anticipate and prepare for the increased costs to the healthcare plan; that Commissioners should never indicate à tax increase will never occur; that growing communities require tax increases to fund the increasing costs for providing public services to an increasing population; that otherwise, the community is not growing and is retracting; that Sarasota is not a dying but a growing and thriving community. Mr. Henderson continued that citizens concerned with tax increases could be informed the active and retired employees are responsible for the City's financial situation; however, the employees do not deserve blame for the City's increased costs to provide public services to the community; that employees train hard, work hard, perform well, and serve with excellence and pride; that employees' service to the community is rarely questioned; that many employees sacrifice personal freedoms to provide public service to residents and visitors; that the employees should not be forced to fund the City's mismanagement of the healthcare plan; that citizens should support and honor the City's employees; that typically, citizens only honor employees after death; that citizens should honor employees while living; that the mismanagement of the healthcare plan is considered embarrassing and should be resolved fairly and equitably; that the City should stop breaking its promises; that all relevant information should be presented for public scrutiny during development of a solution to the problem; that unions should not be required to represent the employees; that the City * should negotiate directly with employees as a fair and equitable partner; that a decision should not be made to maintain or lower the millage rate only to preserve one's. position as Commissioner; that Commissioners are and represent the citizens and owners of the City; that the Commission must keep the City's promises and resolve the issue equitably. John Agen, retired SPD Officer, President, Fraternal Order of Police, and Board Member, SMREA, read from a prepared statement BOOK 50 Page 22350 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22351 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. indicating he served the City for 26 years and previously addressed the Commission at the December 3, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, to voice a concern for the solvency of the healthcare plan; that employees serve faithfully for many years in exchange for the promise of free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the City also promised to provide dependent coverage in the healthcare plan at fair and equitable rates; that the Administration removed the issue of changes to the healthcare plan from the Agenda of the December 3, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, at which approximately 25 retired and active employees voiced concerns for ensuring funding for the healthcare plan during Citizens' Input; that equitable participation in the healthcare plan is an important issue to employees; that all employees are united in seeking the Commission's assurances the City's promises will be kept; that during the current meeting, Vice Mayor Quillin indicated promises to the City should not be broken; therefore, Vice Mayor Quillin should support the employees. Mr. Agen continued that the City Hall facilities and grounds were viewed while waiting to address the Commission; that City Hall is well maintained; that many employees contributed to the héalth of the City and maintenance of City Hall; that a statue is currently located in the west courtyard of City Hall; that the statute was sculpted in 1967 by Jack Cartlidge, is entitled "Nobody's Listening, and appropriately describes the manner in which the City is currently treating active and retired employees; that the Commission should provide reassurances, to employees at the current meeting and should pledge to work with the Administration and employees to develop a solution; that the insolvency of the healthcare plan did not occur overnight; that developing a solution to the problem, will also not occur overnight. Al Woodle, Captain, SPD, stated that he has served the City for over 27 years; that all City employees should be dealt with equally in developing a solution to the problem; that the City should not negotiate a separate solution for retired employees; that the City should collectively negotiate a solution with retired and active employees; that many of the City's employees are routinely subjected to hazards such as fires, natural disasters, and dangerous individuals during employment; that employees accept the hazards posed during public service to the City in exchange for a secure retirement; that public employees are subjected to increased. health risks; that a few. employees sacrificed their lives during service to the community; that the medical expenses for public servants are generally more expensive than citizens not. exposed to similar hazards; that the average life expectancy of a police officer in the United States is 59 years of age; that employees should not be considered a burden on the City; that the exposure to increased hazards is accepted by employees, who serve the community with excellence and pride; that the healthcare plan was designed to cover active and retired employees and to fund the increased healthcare costs attributed to public employees. Mr. Woodle continued that a few disabled SPD Officers and the widows of deceased SPD Officers retired on a pension which was not increased concurrently with inflation; that as a result, many retirees are barely surviving; that between 1979 and 1998, inflation outpaced the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) provided to City pensions by approximately 30 percent; that the. City has not provided any additional COLAS to ensure pensions are equitably providéd to retired employees and the widows of deceased employees; that the Administration indicatéd all employees' costs for participation in the healthcare plan would be increased; that many retired employees cannot afford even a minor cost for participation in the healthcare plan; that TeamHealth was also presented as an alternative to the EPO and PPO healthcare plans and represents the least financial cost for employees; however, representatives for TeamHealth indicated only 40 percent of Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) employees choose to participâte; that the remaining SMH employees remain skeptical of TeamHealth and choose to participate in other healthcare plans at an increased cost; that the City should question and reexamine the adequacy of TeamHealth as a viable alternative healthcare plan; that TeamHealth does not provide the employees the option of seeking the services or advice. of a specialist outside of the provider network; that allowing a choice of services and specialists must be added to TeamHealth to ensure proper healthcare is provided to employees; that the City must fulfill its promises and continue to provide reasonable and equitable healthcare to its employees; that a price should not be placed on the value of the City's employees. Jim Frazier, retired City Firefighter, Vice Chair, Retired City Firefighters' Association (RCFA), stated that the Administration's comments are appreciated; that a decision should be delayed until the problem is adequately examined by employees and the public; that many former City firefighters are present in the Chambers; that the RCFA is opposed to any attempt or plan to charge retired employees any fees for participation BOOK 50 Page 22352 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22353 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. in the healthcare plan or any significant increase in the fees for dependent participation; that the City promised employees hired before October 1, 1993, free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that the decision to accept and continue employment with the City was based upon the provision of healthcare benefits; that he currently has two children in college and another child in middle school; that a significant increase in the costs for participation in the healthcare plan would be impossible to fund on his current pension and retirement budget; that he is healthy and could return to work to earn the required income to fund the increased costs; however, the majority of retired employees are not healthy enough to return to work and do not possess a means to fund the increased costs for participation in the healthcare plan. Mr. Frazier continued that during the current meeting, Vice Mayor Quillin indicated the City disliked broken promises; that the impact of a broken - promise can be very significant; that a committee should be formed to examine the problem further; that the RCFA supports the PBA's position to maintain the current level of benefits for a full year through 2002 to provide sufficient time to investigate the causes of the insolvency of the healthcare plan thoroughly; that an, equitable and sensible solution must be developed; that the City's employment records should be reexamined; that the City's promise to provide free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement should be included in many employment records; that the City should keep its promises to employees. Jason Olson, 4212 Winthrop Street (34236), stated that his wife was hired to worked for the City on October 12, 1972 but was transferred to the County upon the consolidation of the Parks and Recreation Department;, that his wife has provided 29 years and two months of public service and always anticipated retirement on October 12, 2002, with thirty years of public service; that for nearly thirty years, he and his wife assumed the City would keep its promise to provide free participation in the healthcare plan during retirement; that his family's. funds were budgeted well for thirty years to ensure a secure retirement based upon the City's promises; that his wife has' served the City faithfully; that all employees deserve the benefits promised by the City and earned during several years of hard work; that the City's recent actions are shameful; that approximately 1,400 employees are unhappy and worried; that the Commission should take action immediately and maintain the City's promises. Carol Olson, 4212 Winthrop Street (34236), and former City employee, stated that she supports her husband's comments; that she based her career on the City's. promises to employees; that the City refers to the general inflation rate to provide salary increases to employeesi however, the general inflation rate does not correspond to the City's increase in the costs for dependent participation in the healthcare plan; that the City's recent increases in the cost for dependent coverage dramatically outpaced the general inflation rate; that City has, also not provided adequate increases in the annual COLAS of retired employees pensions to correspond to the inflation rate; that Sarasota is a wealthy community; that the City's tax base and revenues are not decreasing; that nationwide profits for health maintenance organizations (HMOs) increased approximately eight percent during the previous yeari however, the costs for providing medical services also increased; that as a result, many people cannot afford medical services; that the' Commission represents the leadership of the Cityi that employees must look to the Commission to provide a solution; that the City is a family-oriented organization; that the Commission should employ the City's resources to properly manage and ensure the solvency of the healthcare plan; that the City should also develop a program to insure HMOS and medical care providers are not unduly profiting from employees' illnesses. Charles Kevin Senf, 2346 Pelican Drive (34237), stated that the Administration's statements during the current meeting are not completely accurate; that the Administration did provide a proposal to the Commission concerning recommended premiums and costs for. participation in the healthcare plan; that offering TeamHealth and charging active employees increased premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance payments represents a fait accompli for retired employees once approved for active employees; that significant, correspondence was personally submitted to Commissioners, the Administration, and Staff responsible for managing the healthcare plan; that neither a response to the correspondence nor accurate data concerning the management of the healthcare plan have béen provided; that the desire is to compare the costs for the healthcare plan with the City's ad valorem tax assessments; that the Administration indicated the costs to maintain the healthcare plan increased 238 percent during the previous ten years; that the figure is meaningless unless compared with the City's ad valorem tax revenues, which have increased significantly during the same BOOK 50 Page 22354 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22355 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. period; that the relative costs for the healthcare plan should be examined; that the City's calculations concerning the proposed costs for the healthcare plan have not been provided; that the Commission should examine if a violation of the Florida Sunshine Law has occurred. Mr. Senf continued that the financial historical data of the status of the healthcare plan received from Staff was dated November 29, 2001; hcwever, Staff indicated the serious nature of the status of the healthcare plan during the July 2001 Commission Budget Workshops; that four months lapsed before a detailed analysis of the healthcare plan was conducted; that administrative expenses and excess insurance costs for the healthcare plan rose approximately 669 percent during the previous three years; that the overall increase in expenses for the healthcare plan only rose 232 percent during the same period; that the administrative costs for managing the healthcare plan increased twice as much as the overall expenses to : tha healthcarc plan; that the increased administrative expenses should signal the healthcare plan is not properly managed; that certain calculations and statistics were requested from the City but were not provided; that all information should be provided to employees. Jesse Hubbard, Sr., 1522 23rd Street (34234), stated that many people have already criticized the inaction of the Commission; that no employee should not be described as an "undue burden" on taxpayers; that the City should not make promises which cannot be kept; that the Commission should keep the City's promises; that prices increase regularly; however, the majority of employees subsist on a pension which has not increased with the annual inflation rate; that the costs for medication outpaced the inflation rate; that an undue burden on the taxpayers is subsidizing approximately $23 million for repairs to the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH); that the repairs were proposed at a lesser cost; that on several occasions, the City transferred funds from the reserve funds for the healthcare plan for other projects; that he worked for the City for many years; that the City promised to provide free participation and charge a reasonable cost for dependent participation in the healthcare plan while actively employed and during retirement; that the indication was the City would take care of his family if he took care of the Cityi that he served the City faithfully and worked very hard for many years; that he continued to the serve the City even though partially disabled; that the City has previously broken promises to : employees; that-he convinced other employees to continue with the City despite the broken promises. Mr. Hubbard continued that the City should not retract the few promised benefits currently offered to active and retired employees; that a strict budget was planned and must be maintained during retirement; that the desire is to sustain a modest lifestyle; that the costs for food and housing have not increased substantially; that medical costs have increased substantially; that the City must ensure active, and retired employees are not forced into poverty; that the active employees hired on or after October 1, 1993, must also be considered; that forcing employees hired on or after October 1, 1993, to accept increased costs for participation in the healthcare plan will eventually force all active and retired employees to pay increased costs. Scott and Susan Bouley, 335 W. Cornelius Circle (34232).. Mr. Boulay stated that he is a former SPD Officer who retired due to a work-related injury; that a significant head injury was sustained during service to the City; that he served the City for eight years prior to the injury and would continue active sèrvice for the City if the disability no longer continued; that participation in the PPO ensured proper healthcare was provided; that six years of uncontrolled seizures were endured due to. the injury; that a tumor was discovered which was attributed to the injuryi that : many rounds of chemotherapy and radiation treatments were also endured and stopped the seizures; that a significant amount of medication is consumed daily and is very expensive; that regular appointments are held with oncologists and neurologists to ensure other tumors or cancer does not result; that Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs) are regularly conducted and cost approximately $1,200 each; that radiologists charge approximately $600 to interpret the results of each MRI; that employees are responsible for paying 10 percent of most costs; that the proposèd increases for employee premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance payments are irresponsible and not justified; that many active and retired employees will not be able to afford the cost of participation in the healthcare plan if increased. Mr. Boulay continued that employees must be allowed to choose their own doctors and specialists to ensure the best possible medical services are provided; that the doctors and specialists provided by an HMO such as TeamHealth would not have provided any flexibility to ensure the best possible service is provided; BOOK 50 Page 22356 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22357 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. that six different doctors and specialists were visited prior to receiving the best possible medical service; that the five previous doctors attributed the seizures to sleep deprivation; that his current doctor attributed the seizures to the head injury, discovered the tumor, and proscribed a successful treatment; that the City originally sent him to a doctor specializing in workers' compensation who did not provide the correct diagnosis; that he was forced to visit and choose among several doctors and specialists until the proper diagnosis was provided; that TeamHealth will not allow employees the flexibility to choose their own doctors and ensure proper medical service is provided; that healthcare should not be provided to employees based upon costs but upon the quality of service; that he would be currently serving the City if the injury were not sustained. Ms. Boulay read from a prepared statement indicating that she has served SPD for over 15 years and was promised free participation in the healthcare plan during active employment and retirément; that free participation in an excellent healthcare plan was the primary reason for accepting and continuing employment with the City; that the salary provided by the City is meager and is not most employees' primary reason for accepting and continuing employment; that she has served the City well and faithfully; that the rights to free participation in the healthcare plan and a decent pension have been earned; that she has lived in the City for 41 years; that the City has developed rapidly and successtully during her life; that the hard work of the employees is a primary reason for the City's success; that the. City must keep and not break its promises to employées; that the honor and integrity of the City must not be defiled; that she is also a cancer survivor and may have died if participation in the PPO was not allowed; that employees must have the right to choose their own doctors and specialists; that medical service should not be provided by a profit-seeking organization. On motion of Vicé Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to extend the current meeting- past 11:30 p.m. to complete the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin; yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. John Lewis, retired Chief of Police and Director of Public Safety, stated that service as Chief of Police commenced during 1989; that an important issue during 1989 was : the. redevelopment and rehabilitation of property along US 41 in North Sarasota; that at the time, the Commission ensured residents and business owners were provided the proper resources to spur redevelopment; that the Commission's actions were pleasing; that the Commission has also supported the efforts of and provided resources to residents to rejuvenate the Gillespie Park Neighborhood successfully; that employees were utilized to ensure the success of many redevelopment efforts and assistive projects; that the Commission has successtully provided assistance and funding for a significant number of worthy causes and projects; however, the actions of the current Commission are not pleasing; that a reassurance, should be provided to active and retired employees; that the efforts of the employees to. oppose increasing the premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance payments are supported; that the employees depend on the City's promises to plan retirement; that. many employees endured injuries during service to the City and will require regular medical service for the remainder of their lives; that employees are only requesting the City keep its promises to employees; that employees should be treated the same as residents and business owners. Mr. Lewis continued that the Administration's comments concerning a committee to consider and examine proposed revisions to the healthcare plan are welcomed; however, a committee is not required; that public hearings are not required; that further negotiations are not required; that only the affirmative vote of three of the five Commissioners is required to direct the Administration to ensure the City's commitments to employees are honored and the promised benefits provided. Maxine McLawhorn, 2541 Browning Street (34237), referred to and read a December 3, 2001, letter from Mariyana Stamey, former Deputy City Auditor and Clerk, indicating that she was recently made aware the Administration is recommending changes to the healthcare plan; that retired employees include General Employees, SPD Officers, and former City Firefighters; that employees were hired in the 1960s with a promise of free medical insurance for life; that pension and insurance benefits were outlined in the Employee Benefit Handbook which each employee received at the time they came into the Personnel Department, now the Department of Human Resources, to sign upi that in 1961, Robert McLelland, Director of Personnel, Edward Hoyt, Director of Pension and Assistant City Manager, and herself as supervisor prepared the Employee Benefit Handbook; that the company of Alexandra and Alexandra assisted in the preparation of the BOOK 50 Page 22358 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22359 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Employee Benefit Handbook; that employees were recruited and informed of the "free medical insurance"; that in the 19.60s, people came to work for the City due to the great retirement benefits and not the salaryi that during her 31 years with the City, she served as Risk Manager and Deputy Auditor and Clerk and was involved directly with the City's cost of medical insurance; that the cost of medical insurance has been discussed numerous times over the years; that in 1993, the policy was changed; that a policy cannot be changed if a policy was not already in effect; that approximately 85 percent of retirees will be on Medicare in the next five years with the change instituted in 1993; that the medical insurance costs will decline dramatically; that approximately 200 retirees earn less than $1,000 a month and should not be expected to pay a premium or medical insurance if not. allowed to anticipate or plan for the increased expense; that the Commission should not accept the recommendation to change retired employees rights to free healthcare benefits. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the time required to form a committee to examine proposed changes to the healthcare plan? City Manager Designate McNees stated that the committee should be formed during January 2002; that a recommendation must be developed for the FY 2002/03 budget. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the recommended composition of the committee should be changed. City Manager Designate McNees stated that a formal recommendation - concerning the composition of the. committee was neither developed nor presented to the Commission. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the composition of the committee should be determined as soon as possible. City Manager Designate McNees stated that additional time should be : allowed to prepare a recommendation concerning the composition of the committee. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Ms. Saldutti provided a recommendation concerning the composition of the committee; that the committee should be composed. of one Teamsters representative, one PBA representative, one representative of the former City Firefighters currently working for the County, two representatives appointed by the Administration, two representatives appointed by the City Auditor and Clerk, and two representatives for retired employees; that a representative for non-represented General Employees should also be included on the committee and could be appointed by the Administration; that the committee should be formed as soon as possible; that the Administration, City Auditor and Clerk, PBA, Teamsters, and retired employees should provide the recommended representatives to the City as soon as possible; that many employees are familiar with the problems of the. healthcare plan and could be provide valued input to the committee. City Manager Designate McNees stated that forming the committee is a responsibility of the Administration and will occur as soon as possible; that additional time must be allowed to develop a formal recommendation concerning the composition of the committee; that. the committee will be equitably composed. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the committee must be equitably composed; that the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk and former City Firefighters should be represented on the committee. Mayor Mason stated that employees must continue to provide input concerning the healthcare plan to the Commission at every opportunity; however, the current item concerns only a status report; that no action will be taken at the current meeting; that a formal recommendation was not provided to the Commission; that no Agenda backup material was provided for the current. item; that employees should continue to provide input to the Commission; that she is a retired employee; that Commissioners are responsible for making a very difficult decision; that sufficient time must be allowed to examine the problems with the héalthcare plan and to develop an equitable solution. City Manager Designate McNees stated that many rumors have been circulating concerning a potential change to the healthcare plan; that many figures and statistics concerning the healthcare plan were also circulated; however, a formal proposal to change the healthcare plan has not been presented to the Commission for action; that all previous studies and analyses have been withdrawn to allow additional time to examine the healthcare plan further; that no information is being hidden from employees or the public; that employees will be incorporated in the decision-making process to develop a solution. Commissioner Palmer stated that the input provided at the current meeting must be considered seriously; that many issues BOOK 50 Page 22360 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22361 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. require resolution; that the committee should be formed as soon as possible and be broadly based; that the committee should be composed as recommended by Ms. Saldutti; that all affected parties must be equitably represented on the committee; that the problems with the healthcare plan must be resolved equitably and fairly. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission promises the problems with the healthcare plan will be resolved equitably and fairly. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Administration should be sure to provide all information to employees and the public; that the committee must be formed as soon as possible to ensure all information is openly provided to employees and the public; that the committee should be formed before Janyary 1, 2002, and should be composed as recommended by Ms. Saldutti. City Manager Designate McNees stated that the Commission must examine two issues; that the first issue concerns funding for the healthcare plan during FY 2002/03; that all options must be reviewed and a recommendation developed to minimize the Çity's cost to manage and administer the healthcare plan; that the committee must commence deliberations during January 2002 to ensure a recommendation is provided by June 2002 for incorporation in the FY 2002/03 budget, which will be presented to the Commission during July 2002; that the second issue concerns the provision of any information obtained by the City during 2001; that another committee could be developed to ensure all information is provided to the public; that the Administration is willing to perform any task or project assigned by the Commission. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the committee could resolve both issues. 10. CITIZENS - INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM V) #4 (1935) through (2360) CD 11:38 through 11:47 The following people came before the Commission: Michael Ellegion, 7350 South Tamiami Trail (34231), representing the Citizens' League for Environmental Awareness and Response (CLEAR), stated that environmental concerns were previously presented at the November 19, 2001, Regu'lar Commission. meeting; that a particular concern was the increased number of "chemtrails" over the City; that chemtrails are different from contrails, which are the dispensation of ice particles behind airplanes; that the occurrence of red tide in Sarasota Bay and the Gulf of Mexico has also not been adequately addressed in the local community; that nurses have indicated the number of respiratory illnesses increases as the occurrence of chemtrails increases; that many people are no longer considering moving to Florida due to the increased frequency of red tide outbreaks and other environmental pollutants; that Florida's increased environmental problems reduce tourism and the quality of life in Sarasota; that the City should be concerned with the increasing environmental problems; that documentation : of chemtrails over the City was provided at the November 19, 2001, Regular Commission meeting; that a similar presentation was provided to the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners (BCC) ; that David Mills, BCC Chair, indicated military airplanes may be responsible for the chemtrails over the City and was a concern for the Federal Government; that the military and the City's airspace are responsibilities of the Federal Government; however, the response was inappropriate; that the City and the County should be concerned with any action of the military or Federal Government which affects the environmental health of the local community; that citizens are encouraged to research chemtrails; that CLEAR is obtaining sufficient data and information to initiate a class-action lawsuit. against the Federal Government; that the City is encouraged to support the lawsuit; that in the future, citizens may wonder if the City properly responded to or neglected to act against chemtrails and other environmental problems. Manuel Chepote, 358 South Washington Boulevard (34236), was no longer present in the Chambers. Dennis Kowal, 508 Osprey Avenue (34236), stated that during the current meeting, a recommendation was presented concerning allowing students to participate on the City's advisory boards through the Students Taking Active Roles (STAR) Program; that in particular, the recommendation was to allow a STAR student to vote and participate on the Public Art Committee (PAC) ; that STAR student participation on the City's advisory boards should be as an intern and not as a full board member; that students should not be allowed to vote and should participate in an educational capacity only; that students do not possess the requisite experience and qualifications to participate meaningfully on the City's advisory boards; that students are encouraged to participate and take an active role in local BOOK 50 Page 22362 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22363 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. government; however, students should not be allowed to vote on important City advisory boards. Mr. Kowal continued that the offer to' donate the public art project entitled PHOTON II to the City was offered at the October 16, 2000, Regular Commission meeting; that the City did not accept the offer; that a nine-foot-tall version of PHOTON II was recently constructed and offered to the City for temporary display at Five Points Park; that the Galleria Silecchia originally intended to purchase the smaller version of PHOTON II but recently withdrew the purchase offer; that the offer to temporarily display the smaller version of PHOTON II on City property was subsequently presented to the PAC; however, PAC members provided a rude and inappropriate response to the offer; that Galleria Silecchia offered to temporarily display other artwork on City property; that the other artwork is for sale but will be displayed on City property; that displaying for-sale artwork on public property is not appropriate; that other recent PAC acticns are a concern; that the three of the recent artworks selected by PAC have already fallen into disrepair; that the PAC voted 2 to 2 in support of PHOTON II; that a 2-to-2 vote fails; that the actions of PAC members should be examined; that correspondence was submitted to the Administration, which provided an excellent response; that the desire is to read the correspondence to the Commission; that the previous Administration never responded to his inquiries; that the new Administration is commended for responding promptly to his inquires and concerns regarding PAC's actions. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: REFER GREATER DOWNTOWN SARASOTA ACTION TEAM (GDSAT) FUNDING REQUEST TO THE CITY'S REGULAR BUDGET PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION APPROVED FUNDING OF $24,542.79 FOR GDSAT FOR THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 (AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-1) #4 (2360) through #5 (0025) CD 11:47 through 12:12 City Manager Designate McNees stated that Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT) has previously received City funding through the Neighborhood Grant Program but was instructed to seek regular funding in the City budget; that important community organizations and projects should be furded through the City budget and not continue to receive special appropriations throughout the year; that GDSAT received several special appropriations during the previous year; that the Administration's recommendation" will always be 1 to direct important community organizations to seek funding in the City budget and not periodically during the year. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that GDSAT is requesting a. total of $35,959 in City funding for fiscal year (FY) 2001/2002; that GDSAT is designated to receive $11,416.21. in Neighborhood Grant Program funds; however, only $3,815.21 in Neighborhood Grant Program funding was approved at the August 6, 2001, Regular Commission meeting; that the furiding request is. only $24,542.79 if the $11,416.21 in Neighborhood Grant Program funds are actually appropriated; that the original funding agreement was allocated for a 20-month period. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the minutes of the April 17, 2000, Regular Commission meeting should have been included in the Agenda backup material; that meeting minutes should always be provided of the Commission's previous actions on a particular item; that a list of GDSAT's itemized. expenditures was not included in the Agenda backup material; that the proposed GDSAT budget increases the salary of the Neighborhood Coordinator from $31,000 to $40,521 without justification; that the City should hire additional Staff for the Department of Neighborhoods instead of funding a GDSAT Neighborhood Coordinator which only serves three City neighborhoods; that a detailed audit or financial accounting of GDSAT's revenues and expenditures was also not. included in - the Agenda backup material. Mr. Schneider stated that the financial information included in the Agenda backup material was prepared and submitted by GDSAT and not Staff. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the minutes of the April 17, 2000, Regular Commission meeting should have been provided in the Agenda backup material to assist the recently elected Commissioners; that at the April 17, 2000, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission indicated funding should only be provided to GDSAT once; that GDSAT received additional funding through the Neighborhood Grant Program. City Manager Designate McNees stated that the minutes of the April 17, 2000, Regular Commission meeting were reviewed by the Administration and Staff, should have been included in the Agenda backup material, and indicated the Commission approved funding for one year but not only for a single instance. BOOK 50 Page 22364 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22365 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Palmer stated that GDSAT is a valuable and important community organization; that community organizations should seek regular funding through the City budget and not on a special basis; however, GDSAT may cease operations if funding is not provided prior to approval of the FY 2002/03 budget. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Mayor Mason, it was moved to provide funding in the amount of $24,542.79 to GDSAT for the remainder of fiscal year 2001/02. Eric Roe, P.O. Box 951 (34230), Treasurer, Sandra Vaughn, 2135 4th Street (34237), Board Member, and Jennifer Wilson, 435 Seeds Avenue (34237), Neighborhood Coordinator, GDSAT, came before the Commission. Ms. Wilson stated that documentation of all GDSAT expenditures was provided to Staff; that GDSAT has attempted to acquire funding from other local jurisdictions and community foundations; that the William G. and Marie Selby Foundation indicated GDSAT should seek. annual funding in the City budget as many important services are provided to City residents; that the Community Foundation of Sarasota County previously provided funding to GDSAT; that additional funding was requested through the Neighborhood Grant Program as recommended by Department of Neighborhoods Staff; that the intent was not to acquire the required funding in an inappropriate manner; that the. concern was providing funding to ensure operations and services continue; that a salary increase is proposed for the Neighborhood Coordinator but will be eliminated if sufficient funds are not received. Ms. Vaughn stated that GDSAT applied to receive Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Funds; however, due to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the funding priorities for LLEBG funds were altered to emphasize domestic security concerns; that LLEBG funding was not provided to GDSAT; that GDSAT is actively seeking alternate funding sources and conducting fund-raising activities; that GDSAT provides many important services to many neighborhood residents in the City and the County. Mr. Roe stated that an itemized list of all GDSAT expenditures was provided to the Departments of Neighborhoods and the Finance Department; that the original intent was only to seek City funding once; that the anticipation was significant funds would be received. from the. LLEBG and the Neighborhood Grant Program; that the funding priorities of the LLEBG were recently revised due to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; that LLEBG funding was not awarded; that the rules for the Neighborhood Grant Program were also changed recently; that funding is being sought from other sources; however, significant funding is required to ensure operations continue for the remainder of FY 2001/02; that important services are provided to City residents. Commissioner Servian asked how long GDSAT can operate if only the $11,416.21 is awarded from the Neighborhood Grant Program? Mr. Roe stated that GDSAT operations and services could only be provided until May 2002; that the City cannot provide funds for FY 2002/03 until October 1, 2002; that no GDSAT services would be provided from May through September 2002. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that GDSAT was originally designed as a volunteer program and not a full-time community organization; that GDSAT should be incorporated into the Department of Neighborhoods as a City program if annual funding is provided regularly; that the City is but should not be providing funding for GDSAT staffing. Mr. Roe stated that GDSAT is mostly a volunteer organization. Vice Mayor Quillin. stated., that during the April 17,. 2000, Regular, Commission meeting, GDSAT representatives indicated funding, would only be, sought once. Mr. Roe stated that is correct; however, the budgeted funding sources for FY 2001/02 are no longer available to GDSAT. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Selby Public Library provides assistance to community organizations seeking grant funding; and asked if the assistance was sought from the Selby Public Library to secure grant funding? Mr. Roe stated no. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that grants could be obtained with the assistance of the Selby Public Library to provide funding for GDSAT's programs and services but not staffing. Ms. Vaughn stated that GDSAT's programs cannot be facilitated without proper staffing. BOOK 50 Page 22366 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK: 50 Page 22367 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that GDSAT's programs could be facilitated and continue with volunteer staffing. Mayor Mason asked the funding source for the requested appropriation? City Manager Designate McNees stated that the unapproriated balance of the General Fund is the funding source for the requested appropriation; that GDSAT provided proper justification of all expenditures during FY 2000/01; that the Administration would have informed the Commission if the provided funding was not appropriately utilized. Mayor Mason stated that the FY 2001/02 City budget has already been approved and cannot be changed; that GDSAT's services and programs are excellent and important to the community; however, the City is faced with other pressing issues such as the insolvency of the Medical and Dental Healthcare Insurance Plan healthcare plan) which will require the City's remaining reserve funds. Ms. Vaughn stated that the City was provided GDSAT's budget and an itemized list of expenditures; that GDSAT could apply for further funds through the Neighborhood Grant Program; that an attempt will be made to secure additional LLEBG funding if allowed. Mayor Mason stated that the desire is to provide GDSAT sufficient funding; however, the unappropriated balance of the General Fund should not be utilized until adequate funding for the healthcare plan is ensured. Commissioner Martin stated that the services and programs offered by GDSAT are very important to City residents; that GDSAT participated actively in the process to develop the City's Neighborhood Action Strategies; that the staffing of the Department of Neighborhoods has been decimated recently; that GDSAT performed many of the functions and services provided by the Department of Neighborhoods; that as result of. the Staff vacancies in the Department of Neighborhoods, significant funding should remain unspent; that the. City must honor the Neighborhood Action Strategy commitments promised to neighborhood residents through the Department of Neighborhoods; that GDSAT should seek funding as part of the regular budget process; that the long-term funding for GDSAT should only be discussed during consideration of the FY 2002/03 City budget; however, funding could be provided to GDSAT from the excess funds of the Department of Neighborhoods to ensure operations are sustained until FY 2002/03. City Manager Designate McNees stated that excess funding remains in the budget of the Department of Neighborhoods due to position vacancies; that in particular, full funding was provided for the position of Director of Neighborhoods, which has been vacant for approximately six months; that the unspent salary and benefits allocated for the Director of Neighborhoods position could be utilized to provide funding to GDSAT for the remainder of FY 2001/02 and minimize the impact to the General Fund. Commissioner Palmer stated that any unspent funds due to attrition in the Department of Neighborhoods should be utilized to provide funding to GDSAT; that the City cannot afford to lose the important services and programs GDSAT provides citizens; that GDSAT must be funded for the remainder of FY 2001/02; that GDSAT must actively pursue other funding sourcesi that significant City funds will be required to resolve the problems with the healthcare plan; that GDSAT will probably not receive significant City funding for FY 2002/03; that the accomplishments of GDSAT are renowned and outstanding; that GDSAT has demonstrated a significant commitment to revitalizing the Rosemary District and the Park East and Gillespie Park Neighborhoods and should be provided the requested funding. Commissioner Servian concurred and stated that GDSAT would have received the majority of the required funding for FY 2001/02 if the LLEBG funding priorities had not been significantly revised to ensure domestic security after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; that the Department of Neighborhoods staffing has not been adequate in recent months; that as a result, the City has not been able to provide proper assistance to secure additional funding sources for GDSAT; that any unspent funds for the Department of Neighborhoods should be utilized to provide funding to GDSAT for the remainder of FY 2001/02; that GDSAT is an excellent community organization which provides many important services and programs for citizens; that the City should ensure GDSAT continues to operate for the remainder of FY 2001/02. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that utilizing unspent funds from the Department of. Neighborhoods to provide funding for GDSAT will be supported; that the City has many neighborhoods with volunteer organizations working for neighborhood revitalization; that a volunteer community organization should not receive regular City BOOK 50 Page 22368 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22369 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. funding; that providing regular funding to GDSAT will establish an undesirable precedent; that an office should be provided in the Department of Neighborhoods for the use of all neighborhood residents and volunteer organizations; that GDSAT is seeking funding for the position of Neighborhood Coordinator; that the City should not provide regular funding for staffing a volunteer community organization; that the City should hire additional Staff if further community services are required for the neighborhoods; that the City must exercise greater control of the community services offered to neighborhood residents; that GDSAT provides services and programs primarily to three City neighborhoods; that many City neighborhoods desire funding to facilitate a volunteer organization; that providing funding for GDSAT, for the remainder of FY 2001/02 will only be supported if appropriated from any remaining unspent funds from the Department of Neighborhoods; and asked the amount of unspent funds in the Department of Neignborhoods? City Managor Designate McNees stated that the only romaining unspent funds - are due to the vacancy of the Director of Neighborhoods position; that the amount of the unspent funds for the Director of Neighborhoods position is approximately the same as the amount requested by GDSAT; that the annual salary of the Director of Neighborhoods ranges between $40,000 and $50,000; that the City appropriates additional funds to pay for certain taxes and benefits; that the total annual salary ranges between $65,000 and $70,000 with benefits and other taxes; therefore, the unspent amount probably ranges between $30,000 and $35,000 as the Director of Neighborhoods position has been vacant for six months; that the Commission should approve the appropriation from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund to fund the GDSAT request; that all unspent funds for the Director of Neighborhoods position and any other vacant Staff positions are transferred to the unappropriated balance of the General Fund; that the amount of the GDSAT funding request and the unspent funds should be nearly identical; that any difference between the two amounts is probably only a minor amount; that the Commission will be informed of the exact amount if a difference occurs. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the funding amount proposed for GDSAT? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated $24,542.79. Mayor Mason called for vote on the motion to provide funding in the amount of $24,542.79 to GDSAT for the remainder of fiscal year 2001/02. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: : REFER SARASOTA COURT WATCH, INC. FUNDING REQUEST TO THE CITY' S REGULAR BUDGET PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION = DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT FUNDING REQUIRED TO FUND THE BASIC OPERATIONS OF SARASOTA COURT WATCH, INC., FOR THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 AND TO PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION AT THE JANUARY 7, 2002., REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-2) #5 (0025) through (0460) CD 12:12 through 12:26 V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before thé Commission and stated that Sarasota Court Watch, Inc. (Court Watch) : is requesting $98,451 for the remainder of fiscal year (FY) 2001/2002; that Court Watch has already received $13,416.21 from Neighborhood Grant Program for FY 2001/02; that Court Watch received $43,672 in City funding during FY 2000/01; that Court Watch should also be encouraged to submit any further funding requests for the FY 2002/03 City budget. Eric Roe, P.O. Box 951 (34230), Linda Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236), and Tina Riggle, 1743 Eighth Street .(34236),- Program Director, Court Watch, came before the Commission. Ms. Riggle stated that many Court Watch volunteers are present in the Chambers. Mr. Roe stated that Court Watch was formerly a program facilitated by the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT); that Court Watch and GDSAT are simultaneously seeking official designation as non-profit organizations; that FY 2001/02 funding for Court Watch was not provided by several organizations as previously planned; that in particular, all budgeted funds were not provided from the Neighborhood Grant Program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG), and the Law Enforcement Trust Eund (LETF); that LLEBG and LETF funds were reallocated for domestic security due to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; that $98;451 is requested to provide funding for the remainder of FY 2001/02 and will provide funding for the positions of Program Director and Administrative Manager; however, the proposed budget could be BOOK 50 Page 22370 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22371 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. reduced significantly if required; that the position of Administrative Manager was budgeted specifically to provide assistance in seeking local, State, and Federal grant funding for Court Watch. Ms. Holland stated that she is a founder of Court Watch; that Ms. Riggle should be commended for dedicated efforts to improve Court Watch and facilitate an important service to the community; that all judges in the County are aware of and respect Court Watch's accomplishments; that Court Watch ensures career - criminals are provided the maximum sentence upon conviction; that the Court Watch FY 2001/02 budget was based upon the reasonable expectation grant funding would be provided from the Neighborhood Grant Program and the LLEBG; that the rulès for providing funding through the Neighborhood Grant Program were recently revised; that the revisions reduced Court Watch's ability to secure the budgeted funds through the Neighborhood Grant Program; that the funding priorities for the LLEBG were altered due to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; that as a result, LLEBG funding was not provided to Court Watch for FY 2001/02. Ms. Holland continued that additional City funding could be provided from other sources; that the Neighborhood Grant Program is funded with half of the revenues collected from the Vehicle Impoundment Program (VIP); that the remaining VIP funds are provided to the Nuisance Abatement Board; that a portion of the VIP funds should be reallocated to provide annual funding to Court Watch; that VIP funds are collected due to criminal activity; that Court Watch monitors criminals during the judicial process. to ensure the maximum sentence is imposed upon conviction; that a direct relationship exists between the VIP and Court Watch; that annual funding should be provided for Court Watch with VIP funds; that the purpose of the LLEBG is to reduce crime and improve public safety; that LLEBG funding is awarded if the grant funding will be. utilized to reduce crime and improve public safety; that Court Watch is eligible to receive LLEBG funding as assistance is provided during the adjudication of violent offenders and as an important link between community residents and law enforcement officers has been established through Court Watch; that LLEBG funding will be requested for FY 2002/03; that the Sarasota Police Department (SPD) is responsible for recommending the projects or organizations to receive the City's portion of LLEBG funding; that the Commission approves SPD's recommendations; that Court Watch was originally recommended for LLEBG funding by SPD; that. LLEBG funding was anticipated for FY 2001/02 but was not provided due to the September 11; 2001, terrorist attacks; that Court Watch's operations will cease soon if additional funding is not provided; that funding for staffing is required to manage Court Watch and coordinate volunteer activities. Commissioner Palmer stated that Court Watch is an important community organization which provide valuable services to citizens; that additional funding must be provided to ensure Court Watch continues basic operations for the remainder of FY. 2001/02; however, the entire amount requested cannot not be funded as the City must conserve funds due to the problems with the Medical and Dental Health Insurance Plan; and asked the proposed funding source for Court Watch? City Manager Designate McNees stated that the proposed funding source is the unappropriated fund balance of the General Fund; that the Administrative Manager position could be postponed until FY 2002/03; that the proposed salary of the Administrative Manager is $36,000; that approximately $9,000 is also budgeted for additional income taxes and benefits for the Administrative Manager position. Mr. Roe stated that $13,000 would only allow Court Watch to operate until February 2002; that approximately $32,000 will required to continue basic operations. until October 1, 2002; that an : exact amount is not known. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the proposed Court Watch budgets for FY 2001/02 and FY 2002/03 are included in the Agenda backup material and include expenditures for rent and utilities costs for office space; and asked the reason office space is required? Mr. Roe stated that Court Watch currently operates from Gillespie Park Neighborhood SPD Substation (GP Substation) that an new office space will be required if a second staff member is hired. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the reason Court Watch cannot continue to operate at the GP Substation?" Mr. Roe stated that the GP Substation cannot provide Court Watch sufficient office space for two staff members; that the proposed expenditure for rent and utilities is $6,000 for FY 2001/02. BOOK 50 Page 22372 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22373 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that additional office space will not be required for the remainder of FY 2001/02 if the Administrative Manager position is not funded. Mr. Roe concurred and stated that some expenditures could be eliminated from the FY 2001/02 budget if only basic operations are funded. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the exact costs to provide for only basic operations at the GP Substation should be estimated. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to direct the Administration to determine the exact funding required to fund the basic operations of Sarasota Court Watch, Inc., for the remainder of fiscal year 2001/02 and to provide a recommendation at the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Commissioner : Paimer stated" that the City cannot afford to provide the requested $98,451. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred and stated that a percentage of LETF funds should be utilized for crime prevention and public safety in the City's neighborhoods; that LETF funds were provided to the Drug-Free Communities for Neighborhood Development, which provides services mostly in Sarasota and Manatee Counties and not specifically in the Cityi that LETF funds should not be utilized for programs which mostly benefit the residents of Sarasota and Manatee Counties; that Court Watch is based in the City and provides an important service for the City's neighborhood residents; that LETF funds should be provided to Court Watch in the future. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes.. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 01-4342, AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF SPECIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 163.511; FLORIDA STATUTES WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, FLORIDA; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE A COMMISSION WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 01-4342 AND THE CREATION OF SPECIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN THE: CITY (AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-3) #5 (0460) through (1210) CD 12:26 through 12:48 Commissioner Palmer referred. to an October. 8, 2001, memorandum regarding the proposed Special Neighborhood Improvement District (NID) for St. Armands Circle and proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 included in the Agenda backup material and stated that difference between a NID and a Business Improvement District (BID) is unclear; that further information concerning the differences between a NID and a BID would be appreciated; that the proposed NID would, be limited to an 2.00 mill increase over the City's millage rate in the affected area; that the millage rate increase could affect the 10.00 mill maximum limitation for the City's millage rate; that three directors will be appointed by the Commission to manage the NID; that a requirement is the three directors shall be residents in the NID; however, only businesses are located in St.. Armands Circle; that the provisions for management of the proposed NID are not clear; that the City should be able to terminate the proposed NID after ten years if. desired; that the Commission should be responsible for authorizing the NID budgets; that many concerns and questions are held with the proposed NID. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that NIDs were only recently approved by the State; that Commissioners can provide any concerns or. questions to the Administration at the current meeting sO a written response can be provided for each question or concern. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that all responses should be provided to Commissioners' questions or concerns prior to setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing. Commissioner Servian stated that a concern is the definition of a resident of a NID; that many commercial property owners own multiple properties in many areas while residing elsewhere; that the functions, responsibilities, and powers of the proposed NID should be clearly defined; that in particular, the notice requirements concerning the type of funded projects in the proposed. NID should be well defined. City Attorney Taylor stated that NIDs were only recently authorized by the State and are very complicated jurisdictions to understand; that the powers of the proposed NID must be clearly defined by the Commission prior to adoption of proposed BOOK 50 Page 22374 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50- Page 22375 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Ordinance No. 01-4342; that the City Attorney's Office will examine all issues further and provided a recommendation at a future meeting. Commissioner Servian stated that any issues regarding the creation of a NID in the City should be resolved prior to setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing; that a Commission Workshop could be scheduled to discuss the proposed NID; that the City should establish clear and concise regulations concerning the creation and operation of a NID prior to approving the proposed NID for St. Armands Circle; that many neighborhood associations in the City are discussing the potential to create a NID. Martin Rappaport, 1241 Tree Bay Lane (34232), Executive Director, and Sam Norton, 4648 Stoneridge Trail (34232), Attorney, law firm of Norton, Gurley, Hammersley and Lopezi Public Association, representing the Commercial Landowners Association- of St. Armands, Inc. (St. Armands Landowners Association), came before the Commission. Attorney Norton stated that the current item concerns setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 would allow the establishment of NIDS in the City; that the proposed NID could be established after Ordinance No. 01-4342 is adopted; however, a: NID can also be established by referendum; that the St. Armands Landowners Association has already obtained the required signatures from affected property owners to petition for a referendum to create the proposed NID; that several outstanding legal issues were discussed with the City Attorney's Office prior to the current meeting; that a response could be provided to any concern or question if desired. Commissioner Palmer stated that the hour is currently late; that approving the creation of NIDs in the City is a complex issue which requires further analysis to obtain a thorough understanding; that a Commission Workshop should be scheduled to discuss the creation of NIDs in the City. Mayor Mason concurred and stated that Commissioners should have a thorough understanding of the subject of any proposed ordinance prior to approving a public hearing. City. Attorney Taylor concurred and stated that proposed Ordinance-, No. 01-4342 is to allow the creation of NIDS in the City in general and not just the proposed NID for St. Armands Circle; that allowing the creation of NIDS could have many consequences for the City; that not all of the consequences are currently understood; that in particular, the impact' of a NID on the 10.00 mill maximum limit for the City's millage rate must be clearly understood prior to granting approval; that another concern is if NID boundaries overlap or the impact of multiple NIDs in the same area; that NIDS were only recently authorized by the State; that the Florida Departmènt of Community Affairs (DCA) is responsible for supervising the NIDS and was recently contacted to discuss the creation of NIDS in the City; that few precedents of the creation of NIDS currently exist; that Commissioners should have a thorough understanding of. the powers, responsibilities, and functions of a NID prior to setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing; that the City Attorney's Office recommends holding a Commission Workshop to discuss allowing the creation of NIDs in the City; that action to set proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342. for public hearing could be scheduled for the Regular Commission meeting which occurs immediately after the scheduled Commission Workshop. Mayor Mason stated that a Commission Workshop should be scheduled to discuss the creation of NIDS in the City. Attorney Norton stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 should be set for public hearing as soor as possible; that the St. Armands Landowners Association has been pursuing the creation of the proposed NID for several years; that the desire is ensure the ad valorem tax assessment of the NID is levied for 2002. Mr. Rappaport read from a prepared statement indicating that the creation of the proposed NID was initiated several years ago at the recommendation of Staff; that the concept is to allow St. Armands Circle property owners to levy additional taxes on themselves for use in the proposed NID; that the intent is to ensure necessary projects are funded at the time required; that during 1990, a study was conducted by Visibility, Inc. (Visibility), which suggested a plan for further developing and marketing tourism and the arts in Sarasota; that Visibility reçommended the. City boost efforts to market tourism. and arts to attract visitors to the community; that the beaches and waterfront areas were specified as the major tourist attractions; that Visibility also indicated the community had not employed significant resources to improve tourist BOOK 50 Page 22376 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22377 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. attractions; that the observation remains true in 2001; that St. Armands Circle remains an obscure tourist destination due to the community's poor marketing efforts. Mr. Rappaport continued that West Palm Beach, Florida, Aspen, Colorado, Scottsdale, Arizona, and Naples, Florida, are well known as tourist attractions offering significant shopping opportunities and are well marketed; that St. Armands Circle is well planned and has a natural ambience; that Money Magazine reported Sarasota as one of the best places to the live in the United States; that St. Armands Circle should be properly marketed as a top tourist destination but has lacked the proper funds, projects, and landscaping for designation as a ationally-recognired attraction; that during the previous eight years, the St. Armands Landowners Association cooperated with the residents and merchants of St. Armands Key ànd the City to ensure the construction of two new parking lots; that during the previous year, the St. Armands Landowners Association çooperated with the City to install modular newspaper racho, : additional public benches and waste containers, new sidewalks, and handicapped ramps on St. Armands Circle; that several months ago, a median neckout was installed at the south end of Boulevard of the Presidents at St. Armands Circle and significantly enhanced pedestrian safety; that the City is currently completing the installation of new and improved street lighting on St.. Armands Circle; that the St. Armands Landowners Association cooperated with the City to. coordinate the future capital improvements required for St. Armands Circle. Mr. Rappaport further stated that many important projects for St. Armands Circle have been accomplished through successful cooperation with the City; however, many other important projects are required; that a particular project is the construction of median neckouts at the three other intersections of St. Armands Circle to further enhance pedestrian safety; that the City cannot afford to fund the construction of the median neckouts at this time; that the St. Armands Landowners Association would also like to facilitate the playing of classical music in the Commercial, Tourist (CT) Zone District to add to the ambience at St. Armands Circle; that paver crosswalks should bê installed at all pedestrian crossings at St. Armands Circle; that improved landscaping should be installed at the entrances to St. Armands Circle; that City maintenance services should be supplemented with other uniformed personnel specifically employed to maintain St. Armands Circle; that the St. Armands Landowners Association will" cooperate with the City to ensure St. Armands Circle is promoted and maintained as a top national tourist destination; that the St. Armands Landowners Association is requesting the City allow the establishment of a NID for St. Armands Circle; that an additional ad valorem tax assessment will be paid by St. Armands Circle property owners to ensure the required projects are funded, constructed, and properly maintained. Mr. Rappaport stated further the property owners, residents, and merchants have accomplished many important projects in cooperation with the City; however, many other important projects must be funded and constructed for St. Armands Circle; that St. Armands property owners, residents, and merchants should not be required to seek City assistance and funding each time a problem arises or a project is required; that Staff previously indicated the St. Armands Landowners Association could seek incorporation as a BID; that NIDS were recently approved by the State and are requested; that NIDS have been successfully implemented in New York City; that the desire is to improve St. Armands Circle; that the intent is to work with the City as a partner to create a suçcessful NID for St. Armands Circle. Commissioner Palmer stated that the efforts of the St. Armands Landowners Association to seek any means to improve St. Armands Circle are appreciated; that all community or neighborhood organizations or associations are encouraged to seek any possible means to improve the City. Mr. Rappaport stated that only the City and not the County has sought to improve St. Armands Circle and is commended for cooperating with St. Armands Key property owners, residents, and merchants to construct important projects. Commissioner Palmer stated that Commissioners should have a thorough understanding of the requirements to allow the creation of a NID prior to setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing; that a Commission Workshop should be held to discuss allowing the creation of NIDs in. the City; that allowing the creation of the proposed NID will necessitate allowing the creation of any NID; that the Commission Workshop should be held as soon as possible; that. the. proposed NID should be facilitated if possible. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the efforts of the St. Armands Landowners Association to seek the creation of a BID or NID are BOOK 50 Page 22378 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22379 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. commended; that the City should facilitate the creations of BIDS or NIDS if possible; however, the proposed NID is not clearly understood; that conflicting information is included in the October 8, 2001, memorandum from City Attorney's Office to the Administration concerning the creation of the. proposed NID; that a Commission Workshop should be held to discuss the creation of BIDs and NIDs in the City. Mr.. Rappaport stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 should be set for public hearing as soon as possible. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the date by which proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 must be adopted? Attorney Norton stated that all requirements for creating the proposed NID must be completed by June 2002; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 is. not required; that a referendum to approve the proposed NID could be conducted among the affected residents and - proposed owners; : that the: requircd amount of signatures has been obtained to require a referendum. Mr. Rappaport stated that the affected residents and property owners can approve a referendum to implement a NID; that a NID can also be implemented if a municipality allows creation by adopting an enabling ordinance. Attorney Norton stated that the desire to ensure all Commissioners comprehend the powers, responsibilities, and functions of the proposed NID is understood; that the City will not lose any control over the area of the NID; that the Commission will approve NID budgets and will appoint the three NID directors. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to direct the Administration to schedule a Commission Workshop to discuss proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 and the creation of Special Neighborhood Improvement Districts in the City. City Manager Designate McNees stated that a Special Commission meeting could be held immediately following the Commission Workshop to allow the Commission to set proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing; that another option is setting proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing at the Regular Commission meeting immediately following the Commission Workshop. City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 should not be set for public hearing until drafted as desired by the Commission; that significant questions concerning the powers, functions, and responsibilities of a NID remain unresolved and require further analysis by Staff to provide a recommendation to the Commission; that the Commission must ultimately provide direction concerning the powers, functions, and reéponsibilities allocated to a NID; that Commissioners should thoroughly understand all consequences which could result if a NID is approved; that allowing the creation of the proposed NID will allow the creation of other NIDs in the City. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to direct the Administration to schedule a Commission Workshop to discuss proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 and the creation of Special Neighborhood Improvement Districts in the City. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yesi Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: : SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4349, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE CHAPTER, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CHAPTER AND THE RECREATION/OPEN SPACE CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA [A/K/A SARASOTA CITY PLAN (1998)1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 01-PA-02 AS MORE FULLY SPECIFIED HEREIN; : SAID AMENDMENT IS INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT THE AMENDED AND RESTATED COMMUNITY PLAN 2020) CONFORMS TO. THE SARASOTA CITY PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1969; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 01-PA-02, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA) - ADOPTED PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4349 ON SECOND READING WITH THE ADDITION OF THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG) ZONE DISTRICT AS AN INTERIM IMPLEMENTING ZONE DISTRICT TO THE SUMMARY OF CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE DOWNTOWN URBAN MIXED-USE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION (AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-5) #5 (1210) through (1580) CD 12:48 through 12:57 Douglas James, Chief Planner, and David Smith, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission. BOOK 50 Page 22380 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22381 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. James referred to the December 14, 2001, memorandum from Staff to the Commission concerning responses to the issues and questions raised during the December 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting to consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02 and proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 included in the Agenda backup material and stated that the December 14, 2001, memorandum attempts to provides answers to the concerns and questions raised during the September 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting; that Staff is willing to provide an answer to any further questions or comments. Commissioner Palmer stated that a concern is the vested rights of Sarasota Ford, Inc. (Sarasota Ford); that during the August 20, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission approved adding the Commercial General (CG) Zone District as an interim implementing zone district for the Downtown. Urban Mixed- Use Land Use Classification in Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02; that the Sarasota Ford Property is decignated in the Downtown Urban Mixed-Use Land Use Classification; that the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02 with the CG Zone District as an interim implementing zone district; however, the CG Zone District was subsequently removed as an interim implementing zone district in response to the DCA Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report; therefore, Sarasota Ford will be designated as a non- conforming use and a zoning enclave upon implementation of Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02; that the City's previous commitment to Sarasota Ford should be maintained; that the CG Zone District should again be included as an interim zone district in the Summary of Classifications for the Downtown Urban Mixed-Use Land Use Classification. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to add the Commercial General (CG) Zone District as an interim implementing zone district to the Summary of Classifications for the Downtown Urban Mixed-Use Land Use Classification to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 for incorporation on second reading. Motion carried (4. to 1): Martin, yesi Palmer, yesi Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 on second reading with the addition of the Commercial General (CG) Zone District as an interim implementing zone district to the Summary of Classifications for the Downtown Urban Mixed-Use Land Use Classification. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that many important legal issues were, raised at the December 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting which have not been adequately addressed; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 should not be adopted until all outstanding legal issues are resolved; that the December 14, 2001, memorandum provides inaccurate responses, to other important concerns and issuès raised at the December 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting; that Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02 should have been delayed, significantly revised, and submitted to the DCA with the proposed Historic Preservation Chapter for the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan); that further simplifications of Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02 are required to ensure the public thoroughly understands the proposed amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan which implement important portions of the City of Sarasota, Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020); that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is a very important long-term plan; that many outstanding issues remain unresolved; that the concern is an Administrative Appeal will be filed which prohibits the implementation of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. 01-PA-02 should have been resubmitted to the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) for further analysis; that the PBLP did not previously conduct a thorough review of the proposed revisions in response to the DCA Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report; that adopting proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 on second reading is not supported. Commissioner Palmer stated that the December 14, 2001, memorandum adequately addresses the concerns and issues raised at the December 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting; that Staff's efforts. to prepare written responses quickly but thoroughly are remarkable and commended; that the Staff is excellent; that certain issues will always be raised; that the City must proceed with implementing the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that changes can be made to the Downtown Master Plan 2020 and the City's Comprehensive Plan in the future if required; that Staff's efforts to carefully and thoroughly respond to all concerns and issues are commended; that all major outstanding issues were resolved. BOOK 50 Page 22382 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22383 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin concurred and stated that Staff's efforts to prepare thorough * and accurate responses quickly are appreciated; that the major outstanding issues were addressed and resolved; that certain objections will always be raised to the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that Staff's responses were satisfactory; that certain parties will always threaten to challenge the City legally or administratively: that certain issues will be resolved upon the further refinement and final adoption of the City of Sarasota Downtown Code, formerly known as the SmartCode, Draft, January 2001. Mayor Mason Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 02-4349 on second reading with the addition of the Commercial General (CG) Zone District as an interim implementing zone district to the Summary of Classifications for the Downtown Urban Mixed-Use Land Use Classification and requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1): Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yesi Palmer, yes; Quillin, no. 15. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE AND SALES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA. AND CAROL L. AND HARVEY VENGROFF FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 650 CENTRAL AVENUE DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS OF THE VENGROFF PURCHASE AND SALES AGREEMENT AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND TO EXERCISE THE REVERTER CLAUSE (AGENDA ITEM NO. VII-1) #5. (1580) through (2320) CD 12:57 through 1:15 Timothy Litchet, Director, Department of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that during the current meeting, Commissioners indicated any major change to a site plan should be presented to the Commission for approval; that the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) was revised to require Commission approval of a major change to a site plan; that the Administration also expects Staff to strictly abide by the City's regulations; that the Vengroff Purchase and Sale Agreement (Vengroff Agreement) is with Carol and Harvey Vengroff for property located at 650 Central Avenue; that the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreement was violated; that Site Plan Application No. 00-SP-31 and Rezone Application No. 00-RE-18 were approved by the Commission at the December 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting; that a building permit- was issued for the approved project on April 20, 2001; that the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreement was approved at the September 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting and required the Vengroffs to commence construction within 90 days of the date of the - issuance of. the building permit; that a reverter clause is included in the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreement and provides the Vengroffs must complete construction 15 months after the issuance of the building permit which is July 20, 2002. Mr. Litchet continued that preliminary site clearing commenced immediately after the building permit was issued; that after four months, construction ceased on the property; that Mr. Vengroff was notified on August 28, 2001, of Staff's concern for the cessation of construction activities; that construction had not proceeded past site clearance; that Mr. Vengroff submitted revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 on September 25, 2001, which significantly revised the. scope of the original project. approved by the Commission; that upon submission of the proposed revisions, only ten months remained until the July 20, 2002, construction deadline; that Mr. Vengroff was informed on October 23, 2001, the proposed changes were not minor; that the Vengroffs hired a new architect, who met with Staff and indicated the original design was too difficult to construct and the new design oriented the proposed housing away from Central Avenue; that the original design was approved by the Commission for the of. the for a - very important. project redevelopment Rosemary District; that the proposed design changes are significant; that the revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 require resubmission to the entire Development Review Process; that the project cannot be constructed by July: 20, 2002, if resubmitted to the entire Development Review Process; that the Commission could approve a second amendment to the Vengroff Agreement to allow an additional delay of construction if desired. Mr. Litchet further stated that the Vengroffs provided the original designs for the project to Staff for the current meeting; that the proposed revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 differ significantly from the original design; that the elevations of the project were changed substantially; that as a result, the aesthetic perception of the project is very different; that the stairways to the building from the parking lot were changed significantly; that the interiors of the majority of the units were altered; that the building elevations adjoining Central Avenue were changed dramatically; that the BOOK 50 Page 22384 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22385 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. proposed revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 were also discussed with Planning Department Staff and the Development Review Committee, who concurred with the recommendation for resubmission to the entire Development Review Process; that : a second amendment to the Vengroff Agreement will be required to allow resubmission to the Development Review Process. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City has two roles in the matter: property owner and regulator; that the decision to interpret the proposed revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 as a major change was a regulatory action and is not under review at the current meeting; that the Commission should only decide if approving a second amendment to the Vengroff Agreement or enforcing the provisions of the original and the First Amendment to. the Vengroff Agreement is desired. Harvey Vengroff, 5135 Riverwood Drive (34231), Mary Marsh Lasseter, 3702 First Avenue West, Bradenton (34205, and Michael Semrinec, 2023 Constitution Boulevard- (34231), came before the Commission. Mr. Vengroff stated that during 1996, the Rosemary District required significant rehabilitation; that the City and Rosemary District residents desired redevelopment projects; that the proposed project sought to provide a significant redevelopment opportunity for the Rosemary District; that the Sarasota School of Arts and Sciences was also designed and constructed and initiated the redevelopment of the Rosemary District; that after the property was purchased from the City, securing financing for the project took a year; that the majority of local and regional banks did not believe the Rosemary District could be successtully redeveloped and would not offer. financial assistance; however, financing was eventually obtained; that an environmental analysis was required; that oil was discovered on the property; that an additional $35,000 was required to remove and replace the existing soil on the property to ensure proper cleanup. Mr. Vengroff continued that the costs for construction of the original design increased tremendously since presented to the Commission; that a new architect was hired to reduce the costs for construction; that the intent of the project is to offer affordable housing to Rosemary District residents and business owners; that the increased costs of construction would have increased the price of housing and office space beyond affordable housing rates; that the desire - is to rent office space at $12 per square foot and housing units between $550 and $600 per month; that the projected construction costs were too expensive; that the design was revised to reduce construction costs; that the proposed revisions utilize the original building footprint and are consistent with the character of the Rosemary District. Mr. Semrinec stated that a building permit was issued on April 20, 2001; however, construction was ceased after Staff indicated the original design was not compliant with the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ; that the revisions were proposed to ensure ADA compliancei that the original building elevations were 18 inches above the existing sidewalks; that a requirement of the Vengroff Agreement was to construct buildings immediately up to the existing property lines along Central Avenue; that to comply with ADA standards, an 18-foot ramp must be constructed from the existing sidewalk to the building entrance; that the proposed revisions provided handicapped accesses into the buildings from Central Avenue, the parking lot, and at both ends of buildings; that additional public spaces were designed for the second floor of the buildings and near the parking lot; that public space was only previously designed along Central Avenue. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that at the December 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission indicated further extensions and delays would.. not be allowed; and asked the reason an explanation was not provided at the time the difficulties occurred? Mr. Vengroff stated that the desire was to construct the project as originally planned; that the required revisions were only proposed recently. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the proposed revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31 should have been presented to the City much earlier. Mr. Vengroff stated that the City approved a building permit which did not allow the construction of the original design; that the City was informed immediately after the proposed revisions were: completed. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the scope of the original project was changed significantly. BOOK 50 Page 22386 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22387 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mr. Vengroff disagreed and stated that the original building footprint will be utilized; that only the access points into the proposed buildings were revised. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that as property owner, the City should enforce the reverter clause provided in the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreement. Mr. Litchet stated that the building permit was issued to ensure compliance with the construction schedule established in the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreementi, that the original design could have been: constructed; that the Vengroffs were repeatedly informed of Staff's concerns upon the cessation of construction; that no replies were provided until a new design was presented; that the proposed revisions to Site Plan No. 00-SP-31.: represent major changes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the property is a blight to the Rosemary District; that construction was initiated - on the property but not sustained; that the unfinished construction is not aesthetically pleasing; that several Commissioners sought a response from the Vengroffs; however, a response was not provided. Mr. Vengroff stated that renters have already been secured for the building; that all proposed commercial space has already been pre-leased; that the majority of the housing units are pre- leased; that majority of the original design was not changed; that the building will still be constructed on the original footprint; that the only. significant changes were the removal of certain terraces and balconies for the housing units. Vice Mayor Quillin disagreed and stated that the terraces and balconies added to the ambience of the proposed building and connect the project to the existing character of the Rosemary District; that the City's primary intent in selling the property was to secure a project which corresponded to the existing character of the Rosemary District. Mr. Vengroff concurred and stated that the intent is construct a building which corresponds to the existing character of the Rosemary District. Commissioner Palmer stated that she served as a member of Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) at the time Rezone Application No. 00-RE-18 and Site Plan Application No. 00-SP-31 were recommended to the Commission for approval; that a primary conçern of the PBLP and the Commission was to ensure the proposed construction schedule was strictly observed; that at the December 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission clearly indicated the construction scheduled must be observed or the reverter clause would be enforced; that the Vengroffs agreed the construction schedule would be observed or the property would be resold to the City in accordance with the First Amendment to the Vengroff Agreement; that the requirement was to complete construction 15 months after the building permit was issued. Mr. Vengroff stated that the original building can be constructed as permitted by the City. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to direct the Administration to enforce the provisions of the Vengroff Purchase and Sales Agreement and the First Amendment and to. exercise the reverter clause. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 16. BOARD APPOINTMENT: : APPOINTMENT RE: : HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD - REAPPOINTED CHRISTOPHER WENZEL AND APPOINTED NAN PLESSAS AND BEN ELLINOR (AGENDA ITEM NO. VIII-1) #5 (2320) through (2656) CD 1:15 through 1:20 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the terms on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board of Craig Holliday, who occupies the seat designâted for a citizen at large, Norman V. Sharrit, Jr., who occupies the seat designated for an architect, and Christopher Wenzel, who occupies the seat designated for a member of the local finance or business community, expired during November 2001; that Mr. Holliday and Mr. Sharrit have served two full terms and are not eligible for reappointment; that Mr. Wenzel. is eligible for and has expressed an interest in reappointment; that three seats are open on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Commissioner Palmer nominated Christopher Wenzel for reappointment to the seat designated for a member of the local finance and business community on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. BOOK 50 Page 22388 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22389 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nomination. Christopher Wenzel received 5 votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the reappointment of Christopher Wenzel to the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Vice Mayor Quillin nominated Nan Plessas to the seat designated for an architect on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nomination. Nan Plessas received 5 votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Nan Plessas to the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Commissioner Martin nominated Ben Ellinor to the seat designated for a citizen at large on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the majority of the City's historic designations of important structures are in District 1; that that a representative of District 1 does not currently serve on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board; and nominated Kelly Moselle to the seat designated for a. citizen at large on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. Commissioner Martin stated that Mr. Ellinor was nominated due to significant previous experience with historic preservation; that Mr. Ellinor previously served as the Vice Chairman of the Gadsden County, Florida, Historical Society, authored a thesis recommending historic designations for economic revitalization, and was recommended by several citizens; that Mr. Ellinor resides in District 3. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nominations. Ben Ellinor received 4 votes: Martin, yes; Pamer, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the concern is providing representation from all Commission Districts on each City advisory board; that Ms. Moselle was initially nominated to ensure proper representation on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board; however, Mr. Ellinor's qualifications. are excellent; that the quality of the applicants for the Historic Preservation Advisory Board was generally exçellent; therefore, she will change her vote, making Ben Ellinor's appointment unanimous. Ben Ellinor received 5 votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Ben Ellinor to the seat designated for a citizen at large on the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. 17. BOARD APPOINTMENT: : APPOINTMENT RE: VAN WEZEL PERFORMING ARTS HALL ADVISORY BOARD REAPPOINTED WALT CANNON, ERNEST RICE, AND MICHAEL PENDER, JR. 1 AND APPOINTED RICHARD LOBO (AGENDA ITEM NO. VIII-2) #5 (2565) through (2670) CD 1:20 through 1:22 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the terms on the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Board of Joe Angeleri, Walt Cannon, Ernest Rice, and Michael Pender, Jr., expired in November 2001; that Mr. Angeleri has served two full terms and is not eligible for reappointment; that Mr. Cannon, Mr. Rice, and Mr. Pender are eligible for and have expressed an interest in reappointment; that Section 2-282 of the City Code requires four members of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Board be City residents; that Section 2-281(b) of the City Code requires distribution of copies of the applications for appointment to the VWPAH Advisory Board: for review and recommendation; that the VWPAH Advisory Board recommended the appointment of Jose Garnham to the VWPAH Advisory Board; however, Mr. Garnham subsequently withdrew his application from consideration for appointment to the VWPAH Advisory Board. Commissioner Palmer nominated Walt. Cannon, Ernest Rice, and Michael Pender, Jr., for reappointment to the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Board. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nominations. Walt Cannon, Ernest Rice, and Michael Pender, Jr., each received 5 votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. BOOK 50 Page 22390 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22391 12/17/01 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason announced the reappointments of Walt Cannon, Ernest Rice, and Michael Pender, Jr., to the VWPAH Advisory Board. Commissioner Palmer nominated Richard Lobo for appointment to the Van Wezel Performing Arts' Hall (VWPAH) Advisory Board. Commissioner Palmer stated that Mr. Lobo is very involved with the local media and is well known by Downtown business and property owners and merchants; that Mr. Lobo's business experience will be a significant benefit to the VWPAH Advisory Board. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nomination. Richard Lobo received 5 votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Richard Lobo to the VWFAI Adviosry Bcard. 18. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM IX) #5 (2670) CD 1:22 There were no Commission Board or Committee reports. 19. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA (AGENDA ITEM X) #5 (2670) through (2925) CD 1:22 through 1:25 COMMISSIONER PALMER: A. stated that the Administration should provide a report concerning the status of the Lido Beach Pool at a future meeting. MAYOR MASON: A. stated that the recent efforts of the Nuisance Abatement Board to act aggressively against local nuisances in North Sarasota are appreciated. Commissioners Palmer and Servian and Vice Mayor Quillin concurred. COMMISSIONER MARTIN: A. donned a Christmas cap and stated that Commissioners and Staff are wished a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. 20. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (2925) CD 1:25 There being no further business, Mayor Mason adjourned the Regular meeting of December 17, 2001; at 1:25 a.m. osln CAROLYN J." MASON, MAYOR ATTEST: > SCTA < V p - > B ty & Ro 1 e 2 BILIAY BROBNSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK 7 /3 a 3 O . BOOK 50 Page 22392 12/17/01 6:00 P.M.