BOOK 50 Page 22393 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 7, 2002, 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 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. 6:01 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: AWARDS FOR DESIGNATION OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC FINANCE OFFICER BY GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA TO GIBSON E. MITCHELL, / FINANCE DIRECTOR, AND CHRISTOPHER H. LYONS, 1 DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR #1 (0050) through (0140) CD 5:59 through 6:03 Mayor Mason requested that Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, and Christopher Lyons, Deputy Director of Finance, join her and City Manager McNees before the Commission table and requested that City Manager McNees make the presentation. City Manager McNees stated that the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) of the Untied States and Canada is a national organization which sets standards and regulates conduct of persons in the public finance profession; that five years ago GFOA instituted a new Certification Program which is a series of five examinations involving the following five areas of finance: 1. Auditing and accounting 2. Cash management 3. Debt management 4. Operating and capital budgeting City Manager McNees continued that the first participants have finally reached the conclusion of the Certification Program and taken the intensive series of examinations; that 192 participants in 50 states have completed the Certification Program and are being awarded certificates which is the equivalent of approximately four certified participants in each state; that two City employees were among the first group of participants and successfully completed the Certification Program which is commendable; that congratulations are extended to Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Lyons for earning the designation of Certified Public Finance Officer; that the accomplishment demonstrates proficiency and specialty within the Finance field; and presented Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Lyons with framed certificates with the designation of Certified Public Finance Officer. 2. PRESENTATION RE: MAYOR'S CITATIONS PRESENTED TO ISABEL RICO MARTINEZ, ALEJANDRA CARREO MUNOZ, CHRISTIAN MAURICIO LOBACO GLORIA AND JORGE MAURICIO HERNANDEZ, VISITORS FROM GUANAJUATO, MEXICO AND MEMBERS OF CASA'S (CENTRO PARA LOS ADOLESCENTES DE SAN MIGUEL DE ALLENDE) TEEN THEATRE TROUPE "ESPACIOS" AND TO COLE CARUSO (SARASOTA), JOANNA HARMON (FT. MYERS/NAPLES), AMANDA ROMERO (TAMPA), DANAE SIMS (SARASOTA) AND CARRIE WILDS (PALMETTO), MEMBERS OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S SOURCE TEEN THEATRE TROUPE, WHO WILL BE VISITING CASA IN MEXICO #1 (0140) through (0355) CD 6:03 through 6:10 Mayor Mason requested that the following people join her before the Commission table: Members of the Espacios" Teen Theatre Troupe: Isabel Rico Martinez, Jorge Mauricio Hernandez, Christian Mauricio, Lobaco Gloria, and Alejandra Carreo Mufioz Members of the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe: Cole Caruso of Sarasota, Danae Simms of Sarasota, and Carrie Wilds of Palmetto KT Curran, Director/Producer, SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe Mayor Mason stated that welcoming the "Espacios" Teen Theatre Troupe to the City was enlightening and is a pleasure. Ms. Curran stated that coming before the Commission is an honor; that launching the global partnership with Centro Para Los Adolescentes de San Miguel de Allende (CASA), in Guanajuato, BOOK 50 Page 22394 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22395 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Mexico, and welcoming members of the Mexican teen theatre group Espacios" is a source of pride; that the SOURCE T'een Theatre Troupe is sponsored by Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida (Planned Parenthood) ; that despite differences in language and geography, both the Espacios Teen Theatre Troupe and the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe are educating the community to make healthy decisions regarding health and sexuality; that topics such as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), teenage pregnancy, safe sex, abstinence, and postponement of sexual behavior are addressed; that the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe will be traveling to collaborate with the "Espacios" Teen Theatre Troupe in Mexico in the Spring 2002. Mayor Mason read the Mayor's Citation in its entirety indicating that CASA is a non-profit health and social services agency which works to strengthen the most disadvantaged Mexican youth and families; that Planned Parenthood has formed a Global Partnership with CASA and has been awarded a grant from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America's International Division to collaborate and exchange cultural information with CASA; that CASA's Espacios" Teen Theatre Troupe is collaborating with Planned Parenthood's SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe to develop an outreach program, including a play in Spanish by the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe, based on tolerance and understanding to promote mutual respect; that the four teen actors of the "Espacios" Teen Theatre Troupe are visiting Florida for a first trip to the United States and will have the opportunity to form lasting international triendships and forge lasting commitments to cultural understanding and international advocacy; that five teen actors of the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe will be visiting CASA in Mexico for the same opportunity; that best wishes for an interesting and rewarding experience for the Mexican teen actors who are visiting the United States and the American teen actors who will visit Mexico are extended; and presented the members of each teen theatre troupe with the Mayor's Citation and presented Ms. Curran with the Mayor's Citation for Joanna Harmon of Ft. Myers/Naples and Amanda Romero of Tampa, other members of the SOURCE Teen Theatre Troupe, who were not present in the Chambers. 3. PRESENTATION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1458, RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF MARGARET "PEGGY" DEACON, A RETIRED LONGTIME EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY AND CITIZEN OF THE COMMUNITY - ADOPTED #1 (0355) through (0490) CD 6:10 through 6:14 Mayor Mason stated that Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1458 recognizes the December 17, 2001, passing of Margaret Deacon, a retired longtime employee of the City and citizen of the community; that Ms. Deacon began working for the City in 1948, leaving in 1957 to become an employee of the Sarasota County Clerk of the Circuit Court, returning to the City in 1973, and serving as the Deputy City Auditor and Clerk until retirement in 1986; that Ms. Deacon was a dedicated City employee and was highly respected by her fellow employees; and read Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1458 in its entirety. On the motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 02R-1458. Mayor Mason 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. Mayor Mason requested that Raymond Deacon, husband, come forward and presented a copy of the memorial resolution appropriately framed on a plaque. 4. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0490) through (0520) CD 6:14 through 6:15 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove under Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. III A-6, concerning the Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Art Center Sarasota, Inc., per the request of General Services Director Carolan. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to approve the Change to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. BOOK 50 Page 22396 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22397 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. 5. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2001, AND THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 2001 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I-1 AND -2) #1 (0520) through (0545) CD 6:15 through 6:16 Mayor Mason asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Mayor Mason stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the December 10, 2001, Special Commission meeting and the December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting are approved by unanimous consent. 6. BOARD ACTIONS RE: REPORT RE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD REPORT OF DECEMBER 11, 2001 SET HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION NO. 02-HD-01 FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0545) through (0650) CD 6:16 through 6:19 Thorning Little, Chair of the Historic Preservation Board, and John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission. Mr. Little presented the following item from the December 11, 2001, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board: Historic Designation Application No. 02-HD-01 634 Gillespie Avenue The Lewinson House Mr. Little stated that at its December 11, 2001, Regular meeting, the Historic Preservation Board held a public hearing to consider Historic Designation Application No. 02-HD-01 and unanimously recommends historic designation of the structure with detached garage located at 634 Gillespie Avenue known as the Lewinson House, which meets the following criteria listed under Section IV-806(A) of the Zoning Code (1998 ed.): 4. Embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of the Mediterranean Revival Style of Architecture as characterized by the stucco exterior, asymmetrical plan, and parapet roofs. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to set Historic Designation Application No. 02-HD-01 for. public hearing and to receive the report of the December 11, 2001, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 7. BOARD ACTIONS RE: REPORT RE: PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE REPORT OF DECEMBER 12, 2001, - RECEIVED REPORT AND AUTHORIZED STAFF TO EXECUTE A LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND GALLERIA SILECCHIA AND THE ARTIST GLENNA GOODACRE FOR THE LOAN TO THE CITY OF THE SCULPTURE "OLYMPIC WANNABES a (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (0650) through (0835) CD 6:19 through 6:24 John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission and presented the following item from the December 12, 2001, Regular meeting of the Public Art Committee (PAC) : "Art in the Park" Project Mr. Burg stated that based on the PAC's recommendation, the Commission at the July 2, 2001, Regular meeting approved accepting the donation of the Glenna Goodacre sculpture entitled "The Olympic Wannabes" with funding provided by a volunteer-Dased organization; that the sculpture will be located at Five Points Park; however, the location may not be a permanent home for the sculpture if the location is determined not in the City's best interest; that on December 12, 2001, representatives from Galleria Silecchia as well as the artist provided a funding status report to the PAC; that the Community Foundation of Sarasota County has agreed to serve as the fiscal administrator of the funds raised for the sculpture entitled "The Olympic Wannabes"; that delays in fundraising due to the events of September 11, 2001, were experienced; that funding in the amount of $67,000 has been received; that commi tments of another $35,000 in pledges have been raised; that the sculpture will cost $180,000 so commit tments for over half the cost have been received; that all costs associated with the placement of the sculpture including installation on the site, any necessary repairs, and insurance will be the responsibility of Galleria Silecchia and the artist; that at its December 12, 2001, Regular meeting, the PAC voted unanimously to recommend to the Commission the City accept the loan of the sculpture for a period of six months with the sculpture located at the site at BOOK 50 Page 22398 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22399 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Five Points Park at which the Doris Leeper sculpture "Garden Sculpture 3" was formerly located and for the Administration to prepare an acceptable loan agreement. Vice Mayor Quillin asked who is responsible for any liability associated with the sculpture? City Attorney Taylor stated that the liability and any necessary repairs are the responsibility of the artist. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if repairing any vandalism to the sculpture is the responsibility of the artist? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to receive the board report of the December 12, 2001, Regular meeting of the Public Art Committee. 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 authorize Staff to execute a loan agreement between the City, Galleria Silecchia, and the artist, Glenna Goodacre, to accept a minimum six-month loan to the City of the sculpture "Olympic Wannabes" which will be located at Five Points Park at no cost or liability to the City. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 8. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, AND 9, APPROVED; ITEM NO. 5 DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP AT 2 P.M., JANUARY 22, 2002, TO DISCUSS THE TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION - (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (0835) through (0985) CD 6:24 through 6:28 Commissioner Palmer requested that Item No. 5 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the First Amendment to Agreement for City Grant Funding between the City of Sarasota and the Downtown Association of Sarasota, Inc., continuing funding for fiscal year (FY) 2000/01 and 2001/02 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the First Renewal to Agreement for Consulting Engineering Services between the City of Sarasota and Dufresne-Henry, Inc., (RFP #00-54H) for services relative to the City's sanitary sewer collection/transmission system for an additional one-year period 3. Approval Re: Authorize Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a design/build contract with the first ranked firm, Cardinal Contractors, Inc., [RFP #01-32M(1)) for the Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Facility Retrofit 4. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Quitclaim Deed by the City of Sarasota to Michael B. Will for a stormwater utility easement for property located at 46 Saint Lucie Avenue 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Interlocal Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County regarding the lease of Fourth Street Station to allow use of office space, a meeting room, and parking for the Professional Standards Division of the Sarasota Police Department 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute two Quitclaim Deeds by the City of Sarasota to the State Department of Transportation conveying right-of-way for the extension of the right- turn lane from U.S. 41 west to Gulf Stream Avenue, which was constructed by Core Development, Inc., 9. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Quitclaim Deed by the City of Sarasota to Michael R. Hays, as Trustee of the Michael R. Hays Revocable Trust, for vacation of a portion of the utility and drainage easements on Lot 4, "The Moorings" at Bay Pointe Subdivision with an address of 1608 Bay Pointe Court On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. BOOK 50 Page 22400 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22401 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. 5. Approval Re: Sarasota Transportation Management Organization (TMO) quarterly status report Commissioner Palmer stated that the information in the TMO quarterly status report and the Commission's expectations regarding the TMO should be discussed; that a recommendation from Staff regarding scheduling a Workshop date to discuss the TMO would be appropriate; that the TMO Executive Director has given his resignation but expressed interest in participating in a Workshop; that the input of the TMO Executive Director would be helpful. Vice Mayor Quillin referred to Section 5, Evaluation, Sarasota TMO Quarterly Report, as follows: Upon completion of the findings for the Downtown Mobility Study, a baseline of transportation can be established for the "State of Transportation Report. " Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the evaluation portion of the TMO quarterly status report is a concern; that the Downtown Mobility Study is not scheduled for completion until 2003; that the future of the TMO should be discussed; that dissolution of the IMO may be a possibility. Mayor Mason stated that placing the TMO quarterly status report on the Agenda as a Consent Agenda No. 1 Item was inappropriate; that a Workshop is supported; and asked if a motion is required to schedule a Workshop? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a Commission consensus is adequate; that a Workshop has not been scheduled prior to the January 22, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the Workshop could be scheduled for January 22, 2002. Commissioner Palmer asked if the TMO Executive Director and members of the Downtown Association of Sarasota are available for a January 22, 2002, Workshop? Kurt Forster, TMO Executive Director, came before the Commission and stated that the January 22, 2002, Workshop will be attended. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's consensus, a Workshop to discuss the TMO will be scheduled at 2 p.m., January 22, 2002. 9. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1453) ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1454) = ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1455) = ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1456) = ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1457) - ADOPTED; ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 02-4345) = ADOPTED; AND ITEM 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 02-4350) ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (0985) through (1330) CD 6:28 through 6:38 Vice Mayor Quillin requested that Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 be removed for discussion. 6. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 02-4345, amending Ordinance No. 98-4051 to reflect the approval and substitution of Site Plan 01-SP-30 for a portion of previously approved Development Plan 98-DPR-B; said site plan pertaining to the 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 (Title Only) (Application Nos. 01-ROA-04 and 01-SP-30, Applicant Joel Freedman, as agent representing JFB Hotel, Inc., as owner) 7. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 02-4350 B-7, providing for the rezoning of a .65 acre parcel of real property from the Residential Multi Family-2 (RMF-2) Zone District to the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District; said parcel being located 100 feet west of Osprey Avenue in the block between Hillview and Arlington Street; approving Site Plan 01-SP-33 which has been proffered as a condition of this rezoning to permit the remodeling of and the construction of an addition to an existing building now known as the Sarasota Medical Building to be renamed Hillview Square; providing for additional conditions of the rezoning and site plan approval as more particularly described herein (Title Only) (Application Nos. 01-RE-11 and 01-SP-33, Applicant Mark Sultana, Denslow Sultana Consulting Group, as agent BOOK 50 Page 22402 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22403 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. representing Douglas Tibbetts and Gary Sligar, as owners) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance Nos. 02-4345 and 02-4350 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 6 and 7. 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. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1453, appropriating $32,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to provide funds for the purchase of the On Target Performance Systems Performance Management Plus. Evaluation Systems and the development of a written job task analysis for each sworn classification, etc. 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1454, appropriating $17,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to provide funds for the purchase and implementation of Behavioral Personnel Assessment Device (B-pad), etc. 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1455, appropriating $39,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funds for police training courses conducted outside the Police Department, etc. 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1456, appropriating $10,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund forfeitures) to provide funds for legal fees and other administrative costs charged to the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund, etc. 5. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1457, appropriating $5,356 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funds for training, supplies, and promotional activity costs for the Crime Prevention Unit, etc. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Consent Agenda No. 2, Items Nos. 1 through 5 concern a total of $74,556 in expenditures from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund (LETF); that activities such as the Court Watch program should be funded through the LETF; that an audit of the LETF should be conducted; 'that a percentage of the LETF should be appropriated for the neighborhoods to assist with crime prevention; that information regarding the manner the LETF can be utilized would be appreciated. Gordon Jolly, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police Department (SPD), came before the Commission and stated that the $39,000 appropriation incorporated in proposed Resolution No. 02R-1455 is for police training courses mandated by the State and conducted outside SPD; that court costs added to fines are collected by the Clerk of the Circuit Court and deposited into the LETF; that the $5,356 appropriation incorporated in proposed Resolution No. 02R-1457 is for training, supplies, and promotional activity costs for the Crime Prevention Unit as specified in the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code) and is from funds deposited in the LETF from court costs specifically designated for crime prevention. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that an update concerning the requirements of the LETF should be provided for the benefit of the new Commissioners; that the proposed appropriations from the LETF are supported; however, information regarding the possible use of the LETF would be helpful; that mandatory appropriations from the LETF were not previously presented to the Commission. Chief Jolly stated that is correct; that SPD was not previously required to present LETF appropriations specified by law; however, the Finance Department requested SPD begin presenting mandated LETF appropriations. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if an update concerning the requirements of the LETF could be presented at a Workshop. City Manager McNees stated that an update concerning the LETF can be provided at the fiscal year 2002/03 Budget Workshop at which time the following questions can be addressed: What is the source of the LETF? - What are the restrictions of the LETF? How were the LETF appropriated historically? Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the LETF is not discussed at the Budget Workshops. BOOK 50 Page 22404 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22405 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. City Manager McNees stated that is correct for previous Budget Workshops; however, the Finance Department believes appropriations from the LETF should be discussed with the Commission. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that mandated LETF appropriations are not discussed at the Budget Workshops. City Manager McNees stated that the LETF will be discussed with the Commission at future Budget Workshops. Commissioner Palmer stated that more information is required regarding the LETF; that discussion during the Budget Workshops is supported. Commissioner Martin asked if legal requirements are involved with appropriations from the LETF. Chief Jolly stated yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. 02R-1453, 02R-1454, 02R-1455, 02R-1456, 02R-1457 in their entirety. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, inclusive. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that all persons wishing to speak at the public hearings are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have five minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when one minute remains. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 10. NON QUASI-JUDICTAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1447, CHANGING THE NAME OF CEDAR POINT DRIVE THROUGHOUT ITS ENTIRE CURRENT LENGTH COMMENCING AT SUNSET DRIVE AND TERMINATING AT RITZ- CARLTON DRIVE TO WATERGATE DRIVE; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 02-SNC-01, APPLICANT EUNICE CONNORS, AS AGENT, REPRESENTING ONE WATERGATE ASSOCIATION, INC. .) ) - ADOPTED; REFERRED THE ISSUE OF AN HISTORIC MARKER FOR THE CEDAR POINT AREA TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-1) #1 (1330) through (1701) CD 6:42 through 6:48 Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission, displayed a map including Cedar Point Drive and surrounding streets on the Chamber monitors, and stated that proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 is a request by One Watergate Association, Inc. (One Watergate), to change the name of Cedar Point Drive to Watergate Drive between Sunset Drive and Ritz-Carlton Drive as better representing the subject street. Mr. Daughters referred to letters dated November 28, 2001, from Kevin Daves, President, Core Development, Inc., and December 10, 2001, from Donald Gunn, Senior Project Manager, Sarasota Tower, Inc., and Watermark Communities, Inc. (WCI), to the City supporting the proposed name change for Cedar Point Drive and stated that neither represented party has an objection to the proposed street name change. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Donald Gunn, 1133 Fourth Street, Suite 101, (34236), Senior Project Manager, Watermark Communities, Inc., stated that WCI is the owner of Sarasota Tower, Inc., which is the developer of the tower residences of the Ritz-Carlton of Sarasota; that the property bordering the subject street in proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 is being developed by WCI; that WCI owns the only property affected by the proposed name change for Cedar Point Drive; that the proposed name change from Cedar Point Drive to Watergate Drive is supported; that a vote supporting proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 is requested. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 02R-1447. BOOK 50 Page 22406 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22407 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin stated that proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 is not supported for historical preservation reasons; that the area near the street addressed in proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 has been known as the Cedar Point area since approximately the 1880s; that the name of Cedar Point was preserved in the street name as the land was developed, filled, tamed, and platted; that history is lost in small ways; that the history of the Cedar Point area will be lost with the street name change. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred and stated an historic marker with the history of Cedar Point can be placed in the area; that the history of the City must be preserved. Commissioner Servian stated that the residents of One Watergate indicate an identity was lost with the closing of Cedar Point Drive at North Gulf Stream Avenue; that the proposed name change from Cedar Point Drive to Watergate Drive is requested to preserve the identity of the area for the affected residents; that an historic marker indicating the history of the Cedar Point area is supported. Commissioner Palmer stated that historic preservation is important; however, the name change recommended in proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447 is not objectionable; that the Cedar Point area should be identified and designated as historic to assure the Cedar Point name is not forgotten. Mayor Mason stated that history must be preserved; that an historic marker would be appropriate to preserve the identity of the Cedar Point area. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote to adopt proposed Resolution No. 02R-1447. Motion carried (4 to 1): Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, no; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to refer the issue of an historic marker for the Cedar Point area to the Historic Preservation Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 11. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4358, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (1998 ED.) REGARDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO INTENT AND PURPOSE; AMENDING ARTICLE II, DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION; DIVISION 2, DEFINITIONS; SECTION II-201, DEFINITIONS, TO CLARIFY THAT THE EXISTING DEFINITION OF "HEIGHT" APPLIES TO "BUILDINGS OTHER THAN SINGLE = FAMILY DWELLINGS"; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF : ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 02-ZTA-01, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA) - PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS TO: 1) EXEMPT AIR- CONDITIONING UNITS INSTALLED IN THE WINDOWS OR IN A WALL FROM THE PROPOSED SCREENING REQUIREMENTS 2) REQUIRE SCREENING ONLY FOR NEW BUT NOT REPLACEMENT OR IMPROVED EXTERIOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT; 3) ALLOW THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDING, ZONING, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT THE DISCRETION, UPON RECEIVING THE RECOMMENDATION: OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, TO REQUIRE A CERTIFIED DRAINAGE PLAN PREPARED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS; 4) REQUIRE A DRAINAGE PLAN ONLY FOR NEW SINGLE-1 FAMILY DWELLINGS OR ADDITIONS CREATING NEW IMPERMEABLE AREAS EXCEEDING 500 SQ. FT.; 5) REQUIRE TREES ONLY FOR NEW SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING 500 SQ. FT.; 6) REDUCE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED TREES TO 2 TREES FOR EVERY 100 FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE, WHERE A MINIMUM OF 1 TREE IS REQUIRED FOR PROPERTIES WITH LESS THAN 100 FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE; 7) REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF THE REQUIRED TREE TO 8 FEET, THE DIAMETER TO 2 INCHES AS MEASURED 6 INCHES ABOVE THE NATURAL GRADE; 8) REQUIRE PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4358 TAKE EFFECT 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL ADOPTION; AND 9) EXEMPT SINGLE- -FAMILY HOMES IN A MASTER-I PLANNED COMMUNITY FROM THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS IF A MASTER LANDSCAPING PLAN IS SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE CITY; (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2) #1 (1710) through #3 (2235) CD 6:48 through 10:13 Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is to approve Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-01; that at the September 4, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission passed on first reading proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 which also concerns regulations regarding the maximum allowed height and other restrictions for single-family homes but would eliminate the height bonus allowed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for structures located in floodplains; that at the September 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission delayed second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 to the BOOK 50 Page 22408 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22409 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting to allow the preparation of an alternate ordinance which more adequately addressed the concerns of the public; that the Single-Family Dwelling Height Task Force (Task Force) formed to study and analyze the outstanding concerns and issues and to prepare an alternate ordinance; that the Task Force met regularly for two months and submitted a recommendation to the City during late November 2001; that at the time, the Task Force recommended eliminating half of the FEMA height bonus, establishing a daylight plane, and requiring the screening of outdoor mechanical equipment, a drainage plan, and the planting of trees in the front yards of new single-family homes. Mr. Hess continued that at the December 5, 2001, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) meeting, the Task Force presented the recommendations to the PBLP, which voted 3 to 1 to recommend approval to the Commission with modifications exempting master planned communities from the drainage plan requirements, eliminating applicability to small additions to a home, revising the transitional period, eliminating regulations pertaining to non-conforming structures, and deleting Stafi's mandatory review of the proposed regulations in nine months; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 includes the PBLP's modifications to the Task Force's recommendations; that a new method for measuring the maximum allowed height of single-family dwellings will be established if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that approximately half of the previous FEMA height bonus would no longer be allowed in many circumstances; that a 45-degree daylight plane would be established above the recovery elevation from the property line for a single-family home; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 also requires the screening of outdoor mechanical equipment such as air-conditioning compressors and pool pumps; that a drainage plan will also be required; that homeowners would also be required to plant a certain number of trees in front yards based on the size of the property. Mr. Hess further' stated that at the December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission approved setting proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 for public hearing and indicated further revisions should be drafted prior to the public hearing; that a specific concern was the impact on affordable housing; and referred to the December 21, 2001, memorandum from Staff and the attached Summary of Alternatives included in the Agenda backup material indicating the following additional Staff recommendations concerning proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358: 1. Exempt air-conditioning units installed in the windows or in a wall from the proposed screening requirements; 2. Require screening only for new but not replacement or improved exterior mechanical equipment; 3. Exempt single-family dwellings with less than 2,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of air-conditioned space from the proposed screening requirements; 4. Require the preparation and sealing of a drainage plan by a professional engineer; 5. Require a drainage plan only for new single-family dwellings or additions creating new impermeable areas exceeding 500 sq. ft.; 6. Require trees only for new single-family dwellings or additions exceeding 500 sa. ft.; and 7. Reduce the number of required trees for every 50 feet of street frontage to provide 1 tree is required for 0 to 50 feet of street frontage, 2 trees for 51 to 100 feet of street frontage, and 3 trees for street frontage greater than 100 feet. Commissioner Servian stated that the requirement for a professional engineer (P.E.) to prepare a certified drainage plan was not recommended by the Task Force; that Staff subsequently included the requirement in the recommendations presented at the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting; that the PBLP recommended the requirement be removed; however, the requirement was reinserted by Staff and presented at the December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting at which time the Commission directed Staff to remove the requirement for a P.E. certification; that once again, Staff has reinserted the requirement for a P.E. certification despite the Commission's direction; that requiring a P.E. to prepare a certified drainage plan is costly and poses a negative impact to the construction of affordable housing in the City; that the Task Force never recommended requiring a P.E. to prepare a certified drainage plan but desired only a drainage management plan approved by Staff; and asked the reason the requirement for a P.E. to prepare a certified drainage plan was included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358? Mr. Hess stated that a P.E. is the only professional authorized by the State to certify and seal an official drainage plan; that incorporating a requirement for a certified drainage plan in the BOOK 50 Page 22410 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22411 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Zoning Code (1998 ed.) should correspond to the State's legal requirements. Commissioner Servian stated that the Task Force only recommended a drainage management plan and not a certified drainage plan; that the City currently requires a drainage. management plan and not a certified drainage plan on a case-by-case basis for the construction of single-family homes; that Staff can now require and approves the drainage management plans submitted to the City; that a certified drainage plan has not been required previously; that the requirement for a certified drainage plan should be omitted from proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Timothy Litchet, Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Entorcement, came before the Commission and stated that Staff devoted significant time and efforts to discussing the proposed requirements for a drainage plan; that a certified drainage plan should be required; that the City could be sued or involved in litigation between two neighboring residents due to a dispute the drainage management of stormwater runoff; that the requirement for a P.E. to prepare a certified drainage plan will alleviate much of the City's liability if a legal dispute arises concerning stormwater runoff and drainage; that the City does not usually require a certified drainage plan; that only a drainage management plan is typically required and is reviewed and approved by Staff; that Staff should be allowed the flexibility to require a certified drainage plan if the potential for litigation exists; that the majority of properties do not require a certified drainage plan; however, the potential exists for a neighbor of a new single-family dwelling home to file a lawsuit in which the City is named a party or otherwise involved; that the City has recently required a certified drainage plan for new single-family homes and major additions to homes located in the floodplain. Commissioner Palmer asked if Staff can currently require a certified drainage plan if a concern for litigation or liability exists? Mr. Litchet stated yes; that Staff should be allowed flexibility to require a certified drainage plan prepared by a P.E. if necessary; however, a certified drainage plan will not be required for the majority of new single-family homes or major additions and remodeling projects. Commissioner Servian stated that allowing Staff the flexibility. to require a certified drainage plan if necessary is supported; however, a certified drainage plan prepared by a P.E. should not be required for all new single-family homes and especially for affordable housing projects. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Jane Carrigan, 101 North Adams Drive (34236), Charles Githler, 374 South Shore Drive (34234), James Cooney, 720 Garfield Drive (34236), President, Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations (CCNA), Carl Abbott, 2846 Riverside Drive (34234), and Rick Carlisle, 3225 South Osprey Avenue (34236), representing the Task Force. Mr. Abbott read from a prepared statement indicating that the Task Force recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 on first reading during the current meeting; that the Task Force developed the majority of the concepts and provisions of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the members of the Task Force include a planner, an architect, an attorney specializing in FEMA regulations, an attorney specializing in community affairs and development, a waterfront homeowner, and other concerned citizens; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 constitutes a broad effort to achieve a compromise and consensus on many important and controversial issues; that the vested rights of property owners will be preserved if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that an important goal of the Task Force was to ensure the compatibility of single-family homes in a neighborhood and to preserve a neighborhood's existing character; that the issues of the maximum allowed building height, noise, daylight plane, stormwater runoff, and landscaping were addressed by the Task Force; that the recommendations were prepared for the entire City; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will not negatively impact property valuès in the City. Mr. Cooney stated that many citizens, PBLP members, and Commissioners previously indicated the issue of compatibility within existing neighborhoods was very important and must be addressed; that another concern was the determination of the reference leyel utilized to determine the maximum allowed height for a single-family home; that the specific concern was the deliberate placement of fill on neighboring lots to raise the reference level and thus the maximum allowed height of a single- BOOK 50 Page 22412 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22413 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. family home; that in addition, the concern was neighboring homes built on fill would yield a greater reference level and maximum allowed height than neighborhood homes built on stilts with a lower recovery elevation; however, the proposed method for determining the reference level, maximum allowed height, and recovery elevation was recommended to ensure the compatibility of a new single-family home with adjacent homes; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will result in the construction of new- single family homes similar to adjacent homes if adopted; that the proposed method is not easy to utilize but will ensure the compatibility of new single-family homes constructed in the City's neighborhoods. Mr. Carlisle stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 contains much stricter regulations concerning the maximum allowed height of single-family homes than proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that at the September 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, the Commission indicated proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 would be adopted if a better alternative was not provided by the December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is not preferred by the majority of citizens and professionals in the City; that the Task Force attempted to forge a compromise of the outstanding concerns and issues regarding the regulation of the height of single-family homes; that the desire was to recommend a solution accepted communitywide; that an effort was made to achieve unanimity on each issue and to address every outstanding or remaining question or concern; that many compromises resulted; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not perfect; however, no regulation will ever be accepted by all citizens; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will be accepted and supported by the definite majority of citizens. Mr. Abbott concurred and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is not workable and will not be supported by a majority of citizens and professionals in the City; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 represents a significant effort to achieve a compromise which will be supported by the definite majority of City residents. Mr. Githler stated that many waterfront homeowners are present in the Chambers to observe the outcome of the current public hearing; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is not acceptable and proposes to restrict the maximum allowed height of single- family homes to 35 feet above natural grade; that only one floor of livable space would be allowed in many circumstances if proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is adopted; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 constitutes a taking; that the recommendations of the Task Force represent a reasonable compromise; that not all citizens will be thoroughly pleased with but will abide by the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that his home is located in a floodplain; that the maximum height of his home would be reduced by four feet if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted and his home is subsequently destroyed by a major disaster and must be rebuilt; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 does not present arbitrary regulations and will apply to the entire City. Mr. Githler continued that many of the property lots in the City are irregularly shaped; that the construction of single-family homes on more narrow but longer lots represents a significant problem for neighborhood compatibility; that new single-family homes are being constructed directly up to the property lines at a significant height on such lots and are not aesthetically pleasing; that the Task Force attempted to draft recommendations which addressed the City's existing compatibility problems and complied with FEMA regulations; that another concern was screening mechanical equipment which is a significant disturbance in many neighborhoods; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will enhance the quality of life and compatibility in the City's neighborhoods; that not every provision of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is personally supported; however, proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 was developed by a broad and diverse constituency and represents the best possible resolution of the community's concerns. Mr. Githler further stated that other citizens have recommended regulating the maximum allowed height of single-family homes according to the size of a lot; that constructing a large single-family home on a large lot is not as unseemly as the construction of a large single-family home on a very small lot; that at the December 5, 2001, PBLP meeting, a PBLP member indicated a concern for the proposed method to determine the maximum allowed height; that varying the maximum allowed height by the size of the property lot should be examined and is reasonable. Ms. Carrigan distributed copies of and read a January 7, 2002, letter from John Browning, Task Force Member, to the Commission concerning proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 indicating that the current meeting could not be attended due to a prior commitment; that apologies are offered for the absence; that proposed BOOK 50 Page 22414 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22415 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Ordinance No. 02-4358 is supported and should be adopted; that he has worked for several years to encourage the City to adopt regulations concerning the construction of oversized houses in established neighborhoods, stormwater runoff onto neighboring properties, and the screening of noisy mechanical equipment; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should be adopted and applied to all City residents and neighborhoods; that the efforts of the Task Force were bipartisan in nature, are supported, and constitute a diverse, communitywide effort to provide a solution to a serious problem; that the efforts and assistance of Staff to facilitate and revise proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 are appreciated; that the foresight of the Commission to suggest the development of a citizen-based solution is also appreciated; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is supported by the definite majority of City residents, was lauded by the local media, and should be adopted; that no solution will ever be perfect or supported by all citizens; however, proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 represents a significant achievement to attain a communitywide compromise on a very controversial issue. Ms. Carrigan stated that a few citizens recently indicated proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would negatively impact property values if adopted; however, cities such as Albuquerque and Santa Fe, New Mexico, adopted restrictive maximum allowed heights for single-family homes but continue to experience significantly increasing property values; that the most expensive property in the United States (US) is located on Canyon Road, New Mexico, near Sante Fe, and has significant maximum height restrictions for single-family homes; that Sarasota was recently designated as the seventh best city in the US by Money Magazine and should have appropriate maximum height restrictions. Mr. Abbott stated that David Levin is also a Task Force Member but could not attend the current meeting; that Mr. Levin also supports adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 and is an attorney specializing in FEMA regulations; that the efforts and assistance of Staff in working with the Task Force are appreciated; that the Task Force also recommends reducing the required number of trees for new single-family homes; that the City should have simple uniform landscaping requirements which further unify the aesthetic perception and ambiance; that a few citizens indicated the tree requirements would negatively impact the construction of affordable housing; that the Task Force is recommending a reduction in the required number treès as previously indicated by Staff; that the Task Force also recommends reducing the minimum size of the required tree to 8 feet in height, 2 inches in diameter as measured 6 inches above the existing grade; that such a tree can be purchased from local stores for approximately $125; that another recommendation is to exempt master-planned communities which have submitted drainage and landscaping plans to the City from the landscaping and drainage requirements. Mr. Abbott distributed copies of and referred to illustrations of three hypothetical examples entitled "Height Study A, 1I "Height Study B," and "Height Study C" indicating the allowed maximum height and daylight plane for single-family homes according to the recommended regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 and stated that Height Study A is an example of a proposed single-family home surrounded by adjacent homes which are constructed above ground level on stilts; that the reference level is determined according to the average height of the grade of the abutting properties, which is ground level at 5 feet above sea level in Height Study A; that the recovery elevation is the baseline for the measurement of the maximum allowed height for a single-family home and is calculated at half of the height difference between the reference level, in this example ground level or 5 feet above sea level, and the FEMA minimum flood elevation, which in this example is 19 feet above sea level; that for Height Study A, the recovery elevation is calculated by first obtaining the difference of the FEMA minimum flood elevation of 19 feet and the reference level of 5 feet, which yields a 14-foot difference; that the 14-foot difference is then halved to result in a recovery level of 7 feet. Mr. Abbot requested additional time to speak. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's consensus, the Task Force will be allowed additional time to speak. Mr. Abbott stated that Height Study A represents an extreme example which will probably not apply to most City single-tamily homes; that half of the difference between the reference level and FEMA minimum flood elevation is 7 feet in Height Study A; that the recovery elevation is 7 feet above the: reference level or 12 feet above sea level; that the maximum allowed height of 35 feet for single-family homes is then measured from the recovery elevation of 7 feet above the reference level and 12 feet above sea level. BOOK 50 Page 22416 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22417 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian asked if the recovery elevation equals half of the difference between the reference level and the FEMA minimum flood elevation? Mr. Abbot stated yes; that according to Height Study A, the recovery elevation is 7 feet above the reference level or a total of 12 feet above sea level; that a variance can be obtained if abutting properties are constructed at a grade higher than allowed by the Zoning Code (1998 ed.); that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 indicates variances should be allowed to build a single-family homes at a similar height to the abutting homes and thus ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if property owners can also seek approval of a special overlay district to allow the additional height in such a circumstance? Mr. Abbott stated yes; that a special overlay district could override any prevailing or current regulations pertaining to the maximum allowed height of single-family homes; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will be applied to the entire City; that Height Study B is an example of a proposed single-family home surrounded by abutting homes constructed on raised fill above the ground level of the property; that in Height Study B, the reference level is determined according to the average height of the filled grade or reference level of the abutting homes, which is 12 feet above sea level despite the natural grade level of the property at 5 feet above sea level; that the FEMA minimum flood elevation is 19 feet above sea level; that the recovery elevation is first calculated by determining half of the difference between the FEMA minimum flood elevation of 19 feet and the reference level of 12 feet, which equals 3.5 feet; that 3.5 feet is then added to the 12-foot reference level to determine the recovery elevation of 15.5 feet above sea level and 10.5 feet above the natural grade level of the property; that the 35-foot maximum height allowance is then measured from the recovery elevation of 15.5 feet above sea level and 10.5 feet above the natural grade level; that the recovery elevation is therefore determined on a sliding scale according to half the difference between the reference level determined by the grade levels of the abutting properties and the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Mr. Abbott continued that Height Study C is an example of a property with a natural grade level of 5 feet above sea level and abutting properties constructed on fill at an average of the FEMA minimum flood elevation of 19 feet above sea level; that according to Height Study C, the reference level is the same as the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the recovery elevation would also be 19 feet above sea level as no difference exists between the reference level and the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the maximum allowed height for the proposed structure would be 14 feet of non-livable space above the natural grade and 35 feet of livable space above the FEMA minimum flood elevation for a total of 49 feet measured from the natural grade level to the midpoint of the roof. Commissioner Servian asked if the maximum allowed height for single-family homes would always be 35 feet? Mr. Abbott stated yes; that the intent was to ensure the compatibility of the construction of new single-family homes in all City neighborhoods. Mayor Mason stated that the proposed Daylight Plane and Related Regulations for Single Family Dwellings proposed zoning text amendment (Alternate Proposal) was recently submitted to Commissioners; and asked if the Task Force has reviewed the Alternate Proposal to establish the maximum allowed height of single-family homes according to the size of the property lot? Mr. Abbott stated no; that the Task Force has not reviewed the proposal. Mr. Cooney stated that the Alternate Proposal was personally reviewed; that the intent of the Task Force was to ensure any property owner would always be able to construct a minimum of two floors of air-conditioned, habitable space; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will preserve the vested rights and property values of current property owners and will ensure compatibility in the City's neighborhoods; that the Alternate Proposal indicates the maximum allowed height should be 50 percent of the width of the lot; however, many of the City's existing property lots are irregularly shaped; that the Alternate Proposal does not specify if the larger or smaller dimension of an irregularly-shaped lot should be deemed the width of a lot; that an example is an undeveloped lot located on Tyler Drive across from his home which is only 40 feet in width at one point but 200 feet in width at another point; that the Alternate Proposal is unclear if a home could be constructed at BOOK 50 Page 22418 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22419 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. a maximum height of 20 or 100 feet from the natural grade level; that many City lots are irregularly shaped or are very small; that measuring according to the dimensions of the property is not appropriate for many lots in the City; that many lots would become unbuildable if the Alternate Proposal becomes a City regulation. Mr. Abbott stated that the Task Force met for several months and frequently several times a week; that an open public meeting was held at least once a week; that the Task Force reviewed the regulations pertaining to the maximum allowed height for single- family homes from several local urisdictions; that a thorough and comprehensive effort produced proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that alternative proposals will always be presented to the City; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should be adopted prior to reviewing alternative proposals and can always be revised in the future; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is not acceptable and is too strict. Commissioner Martin asked if the total livable space according to Height Study A is 28 feet? Mr. Abbott stated yes. Commissioner Martin stated that 28 feet is sufficient livable space to construct a two-story, single-family home. Mr. Githler stated that the maximum allowed height is measured 35 feet from the recovery elevation to the amidpoint of a pitched roof or to the top of a flat roof; therefore, additional livable space could be obtained if a single-family home with a pitched roof is constructed. Mr. Abbott stated that the Task Force recommends maintaining the 30-day phase-in period after final adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Lawrence Saslow, 541 Norsota Way (34242), Kafi Benz, P.O. Box 2900 (34230), and Robert Lindsay, 1504 Gulfview Drive (34236). Mr. Saslow distributed copies of and referred to the proposed Daylight Plane and Related Regulations for Single Family Dwellings proposed zoning text amendment (alternate proposal) and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will negatively impact property values in the City if adopted; that the requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 of screening for outdoor mechanical equipment, a drainage management plan, and the installation of trees on properties being developed are supported; however, the proposed maximum allowed height and daylight plane regulations are not supported; that the problem perceived by many community residents is not the height but the size and bulk of certain single-family homes in proportion to the lot and the neighboring homes; that the alternate proposal allows the construction of 35 feet of habitable space, provides for increased setbacks, and includes a maximum impermeable surface requirement; that a previous speaker indicated the alternate proposal proposed a height limitation at 50 percent of the width of a property; that the recommendation is 50 percent of the average width of the property; that the proposed relationship between the average width of a property and the maximum allowed height of a single-family home can be reduced or increased as desired by the Commission; that the primary intent is to implement a uniform standard for the entire City; that a 35-foot-tall, single-family home is not perceived as large if constructed on a 200-foot-wide lot. Mr. Saslow continued that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would not allow the single-family homes which are currently being constructed on waterfront properties; that the average waterfront lot in the City costs approximately $1.5 million; that the average single-family home constructed on a waterfront lot costs approximately $2 million; that the total average cost for a new waterfront, single-family home is approximately $3.5 million; that the City benefits significantly from the construction of single-family homes valued at $3.5 million; that in most cases, the previous single-family home is valued at approximately $500,000 for tax purposes; that the City's tax revenues typically increase 6 to 7 times for a particular waterfront property if such a new single-family home is constructed; that the City's potential tax revenues will be decreased if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted. Mr. Saslow further stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 only allows the construction of two stories of habitable space with 8-foot ceilings; that no habitable space can be constructed within the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that a single-family home constructed at sea level may only be allowed 25.5 feet of habitable space; that 2 feet of habitable feet is required to construct the floor support system; that only 23.5 feet of habitable space remains; that an additional 2 feet of habitable space is required for the second-story ceiling and floor supports; that a 12-foot pitched roof would consume an additional 6 feet of habitable space; that as a result, only 15.5 feet of habitable space could be constructed; that only two BOOK 50 Page 22420 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22421 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. 8-foot stories can be constructed; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 does not allow sufficient habitable space; that potential buyers will no longer desire to purchase property in the City; that the City's potential tax revenues will be reduced; that the City will ultimately be required to raise taxes or reduce the quality and frequency of public services; that citizens will eventually vote to disband the City if property taxes become too high; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be adopted but is preferred to proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355; that an alternate ordinance should be drafted which neither discourages the development of waterfront properties in the City nor decreases the City's potential tax revenues. Mr. Lindsay stated that he neither supports nor opposes the alternate proposal and is not representing the PBLP; that the PBLP has not reviewed or discussed the alternate proposal; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 proposes to regulate the height of single-family homes based upon the actions of abutting property owners; that a uniform regulatory standard is not proposed; that as a result, defending proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will be difficult; that a direct, logical relationship cannot be determined between the community's concerns and the proposed method for determining the maximum allowed height of single-family homes; that on a 100-foot-wide lot, increasing the side-yard setbacks by 1 foot results in a loss of approximately 80 sa. ft. of floor space per floor, which is approximately half the size of a small room; that a 2-story home would lose 160 sq. ft. of floor space, which is still considerably less than losing the right to construct an additional floor. Mr. Lindsay continued that the existing setbacks could be increased without severely restricting the ability to construct additional floors; that an additional 5 feet could be added to the required setbacks for single-family homes; that requiring an additional 5-foot setback would result in a 12 percent loss of floor space for each floor; that the majority of new single- family homes will lose very little floor space if revised prior to construction; that setbacks are a uniform standard which can be easily interpreted by residents, architects, and Staff; that the proposed method to measure the maximum allowed height of a single-family home is neither clear nor easily interpreted; that a definite maximum height should be established which utilizes a uniform standard; that regulations concerning the maximum allowed height for single-family homes should be adopted as soon as possible; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not acceptable, is very complicated, and will not be easily interpreted by residents or Staff; that other proposals should be considered. Ms. Benz stated that the alternate proposal was submitted to the Task Force but was not discussed until after a recommendation was provided to the City; that she and Mr. Saslow requested to participate on the Task Force but were denied membership; that the potential delay to incorporate major revisions to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 was discussed with Staff; that Staff indicated major revisions to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 could be expedited by the Commission or follow the typical processing schedule; that any major revisions to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would require resubmission to the Development Review Committee (DRC), which could review the revisions to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 and provide a recommendation at the February 6, 2002, PBLP meeting if expedited; that an advanced PBLP report could be provided at the February 18, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the first public hearing for proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as revised could occur at the March 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the second reading and final adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 could occur at the March 18, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that delaying adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 to March 18, 2002, is not a significant delay. Ms. Benz continued that the suggested revisions to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would not be reviewed by the DRC until February 6, 2002, if not expedited; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as revised would then be submitted for the March 6, 2002, PBLP meeting; that the first public hearing for proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as revised would occur at the April 1, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the second reading and final adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as revised would occur at the April 15, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that delaying the adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 until April 15, 2002, is also not a significant delay; that implementing regulations concerning the maximum allowed height of single-family homes is a very important issue which requires careful consideration and caution; that a delay of four months is acceptable to ensure the appropriate regulations are adopted and implemented; that regulations must be adopted which are easily understood and interpreted by residents, builders, architects, and Staff; that the alternate proposal establishes simple uniform standards for setbacks, the BOOK 50 Page 22422 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22423 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. maximum allowed height of single-family homes, impermeable surface limitations, a daylight plane, the screening of outdoor mechanical equipment, drainage requirements, and encroachments; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 requires significant revisions and is not appropriate as currently drafted; that complete and thorough regulations should developed for uniform and consistent application by Staff. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a flyer entitled "Citizens Alert Urgent Notice" was recently mailed to many citizens and indicates proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 was ill conceived and would lower property values, reduce tax revenues, result in increased ad valorem taxes, inhibit new home construction in the City, and reduce support for businesses and charities located in the City if adopted; that any citizen has the right of free speech to mail important information to fellow citizens; however, the flyer did not indicate the persons or parties responsible for the mailing; and asked if Mr. Saslow was responsible for mailing the flyer? Mr. Saslow stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the source utilized to collect citizens' addresses to mail the flyer? Mr. Saslow stated that the source utilized to collect citizens' addresses is a private and personal matter and will not be disclosed to the public. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the reason the source will not be provided? Mr. Saslow stated that personal mailing lists have been developed during previous years to support political candidates and local party activity; that citizens' addresses were collected from the personal mailing lists. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the personal mailing lists were developed utilizing citizens' addresses provided by the County Supervisor of Elections Office? Mr. Saslow stated that the specific source of citizens' addresses will not be disclosed. Barbara Hunt, 2452 Main Street (34237), representing the CCNA, distributed copies of and read a January 7, 2002, letter to the Commission from the CCNA indicating that the CCNA is compromised of representatives from 26 City neighborhood associations; that the development of regulations concerning the maximum allowed height of single-family homes has been supported by the CCNA for more than five years; that at the January 5, 2002, CCNA meeting, the CCNA voted unanimously to support proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as currently drafted. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the January 7, 2002, letter represents an official action of the CCNA? Ms. Hunt stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the President of the CCNA did not but should have signed the January 7, 2002, letter. James Cooney, 720 Garfield Drive (34236), President, CCNA, stated that the letter will be signed immediately and represents an official action of the CCNA, signed the letter, submitted the letter for the public record. Gerald Elden, 670 Mourning Dove Drive (34236), stated that input was provided to the Task Force concerning the recommendations to the City; that the requirements for drainage management and the screening of outdoor mechanical equipment are supported; that Sarasota is the most desirable City in which to live in Florida; that the beaches and waterfront are not the primary reason residence in the City has become very attractive; that the primary reason is the growth and development of the City since the 1920s; that the City was only a small, rural municipality in the 1920s and was not very desirable at the time; that the City's cultural and arts attractions, restaurants, art galleries, hotels, condominium developments, and assisted living facilities are among the primary attractions for residents and tourists; that the City was not previously but is currently an internationally-recognized destination; that City's developments and attractions will also appeal to many residents in the future. Mr. Elden continued that the type of desired residence varies from an assisted living facility, a condominium, a second home, to a primary home; that a waterfront property is the most desired and attractive type of residence; however, no potential resident will desire to construct a 28-foot-tall, single-family home on a waterfront property which costs approximately $1.5 million; that a megahouse has not been defined; that the majority of current and potential waterfront residents do not desire a single-family home with only 8-foot ceilings; that many older homes in the City have ceilings lower than 8 feet and are not desirable; that the City is growing and progressing; that BOOK 50 Page 22424 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22425 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. significant public funds were spent opposing progressive developments such as the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge and protecting obsolete structures such as the Karl Bickel House and John Ringling Towers, which were replaced by the Ritz-Carlton Hotel and Condominiums; that significant tax revenues are generated from the construction of large homes and developments. Mr. Elden further stated that he is currently constructing a new home on Bird Key while living at his current residence since 1992; that his tax payment to the City will double after the new home is constructed and the current home is sold; that limiting the construction of single-family homes in the City will decrease property values and ultimately tax revenues; that residence in the City will no longer be attractive; that the City's progress should not be reversed; that the construction of new large single-family homes and developments should be encouraged. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Elden currently lives on Bird Key; and asked if Bird Key is a deed-restricted community which limits the maximum allowed height of single-family homes to 35 feet above the height of the street curb? Mr. Elden stated yes. Commissioner Servian stated that the minimum height allowed by proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is 35 feet; that the difference between the recovery elevation and the FEMA minimum flood elevation is then added to the 35 feet. Mr. Elden stated that is not a correct interpretation of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the interpretation of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is correct. Commissioner Servian concurred. Edward Sarbey, 102 North Warbler Lane (34236), stated that clarification of the proposed method for determining the maximum allowed height of single-family homes would be appreciated. Commissioner Servian stated that the difference between the recovery elevation and the FEMA minimum flood elevation is added to the 35-foot maximum height allowed for single-family homes to determine the total height of a new structure; that an example is a property located in FEMA Flood Zone V at a reference level of the existing grade of 5 feet above sea level and required to construct habitable space only above the 19-foot FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the proposed recovery elevation of 14 feet is determined by subtracting the 5-foot reference level from the 19-foot FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the 14-foot difference is halved to determine a 7-foot recovery elevation; that the 7-foot recovery elevation is added to the reference level of 5 feet above sea level for a total of 12 feet above seal level; that the maximum allowed height of 35 feet is measured from the recovery elevation of 7 feet - above the reference level and the existing grade; however, the total height of the structure could be 42 feet including the 35-foot maximum allowed height and the 7-foot difference between the reference level at the existing grade and the recovery elevation. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred. Mr. Sarby stated that the proposed method for determining the maximum allowed height of single-family homes is confusing and not easily interpreted; that another concern is ensuring the City continues to progress and promote economic development; that the City's regulatory authority requires a balancing act between ensuring safety and compatibility while promoting economic development; that the value of waterfront properties is important and contributes significantly to the City's tax revenues; that restricting the maximum allowed height of single- family homes could reduce the City's potential tax revenues in the future; that alternate concepts for restricting the height of single-family homes have been proposed and should be examined prior to adopting proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the City should not adopt any regulations without ensuring the best possible regulatory method is implemented; that a few months do not constitute a significant delay for an important and controversial issue; that the proposed regulations should also be easily understood and establish a uniform standard for the entire City; that the screening, drainage, and landscaping requirements are supported communitywide and should not be revised; that the continuing community concern is the proposed height and size restrictions; that a delay should be allowed to ensure regulations are adopted which are reasonable, easily interpreted, and supported communitywide. Mr. Sarby continued that another primary concern is the event of a casualty loss incurred due to a major storm or hurricane; that BOOK 50 Page 22426 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22427 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. property owners should be allowed to reconstruct the previous building if destroyed; that the vested rights of property owners should be preserved for a casualty loss; that the City's current development regulations may not allow the reconstruction of a home constructed according to previous development regulations; that as a result, the reconstructed home may not comply with the existing architectural and aesthetic character of the neighborhood; that property owners should be allowed to reconstruct the home as desired at the time of purchase; that a provision preserving the vested rights of property owners should be incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 prior to adoption. Ira Barsky, 1157 West Way Drive (34236), resident of the Lido Shores Neighborhood, stated that clarification should be provided concerning the vested rights of property owners if a casualty loss occurs; that his existing home was designed by Tim Seibert, a renowned local architect of the Sarasota School of Architecture, and was constructed during the early 1970s; that the home is very unique and is a landmark in Sarasota; that the investment to purchase and renovate the house is substantial; that the house is located approximately at sea level, is exposed to the Gulf of Mexico, and is taller than 35 feet; that his home could not be reconstructed as currently exists if destroyed after proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted and becomes effective; that the desire is to maintain and reconstruct the house as currently renovated; and asked if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would allow reconstruction as currently renovated if destroyed as a casualty loss? Commissioner Servian stated that the ability to reconstruct the house is not known. Mr. Barsky stated that the property is approximately 2 acres in area; that he could not rebuild his house if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that the requirement is to construct the habitable space above the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the home has received historic designation? Mr. Barsky stated no. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City has no regulatory authority concerning the FEMA requirement to build habitable space above the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Timothy Litchet, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that rebuilding the home would first require a determination of the reference level based on the average height of the abutting properties at the natural grade; that many of the homes in the Lido Shores Neighborhood are constructed at a similar elevation to the home. Mr. Barsky stated that only one of the two abutting properties is constructed at the same grade. Mr. Litchet stated that the average height of the abutting properties above the natural grade would be utilized to determine the reference level; that the requirement would be to establish the reference level at the difference between the first abutting property at the same grade and the second abutting property at a higher grade up to the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the recovery elevation would then be determined by calculating half of the difference between the reference level and the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the total allowed height to reconstruct the home would be determined according to the 35-foot maximum allowed height from the recovery elevation and the remaining height between the recovery elevation and the existing grade; however, the FEMA requirement to construct habitable space above the FEMA minimum flood elevation would apply; that the buildable space would be reduced by difference between the recovery elevation and the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Commissioner Servian stated that is not correct. Mr. Abbott stated that only the habitable, air-conditioned space is reduced according to the difference between the recovery elevation and the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the maximum allowed height is measured from the recovery elevation to the midpoint of a pitched or gabled roof; that additional habitable space could be constructed in the roof area of a home with a pitched roof; that the actual height of the home could exceed the maximum allowed height according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 if a pitched roof is constructed. Mr. Litchet concurred and stated that the 35-foot maximum allowed height is measured from the recovery elevation to the midpoint of a pitched roof or the top of a flat roof; that the habitable space must be constructed above the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the maximum height of the habitable space is determined by subtracting the difference between the recovery elevation and the FEMA minimum flood elevation from the 35-foot maximum allowed height for single-family homes. BOOK 50 Page 22428 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22429 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Mr. Barsky stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would not allow the construction of the home as currently renovated. Mr. Litchet stated that the City has no regulatory authority concerning FEMA's requirements; that FEMA requires the construction of habitable space above the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the City cannot grant an exemption from FEMA ' S requirements. Mr. Barsky stated that the habitable space of his home could not be reconstructed above the FEMA minimum flood elevation according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that another concern is the insured value of his home; that a monthly premium is paid for a homeowners' insurance policy, which is based upon the cost to replace and restore his home; that property owners will no longer be able to determine the type of or cost for a replacement home if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that the impact on homeowners' insurance policies is not clear; that the home would not have been purchased if similar regulations were in effect at the time; that no assurances are provided to property owners to recover any investments in a home; that the resale value of the home will be negatively affected if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that no individual will purchase a home if the right to replace the home as purchased is not preserved; that as a result, property values will be reduced significantly; that many waterfront property owners pay a significant amount of property taxes; that he currently pays $45,000 for property taxes; that the significant cost of property taxes is reasonable and acceptable if the right to reconstruct an existing home is preserved and the property and replacement value is definitely known; that the property value of his home will not be easily ascertained if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that the significant expense for property taxes will also be unacceptable. Mr. Barsky continued that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 also does not clearly resolve the issue of neighborhood compatibility; that almost all homes in the Lido Shores Neighborhood are similarly constructed; that the homes would no longer be similar if one of the homes were destroyed and reconstructed according to the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the new home would not be compatible with the existing neighborhood; therefore, adopting proposèd Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not logical if the City desires to ensure compatibility in existing neighborhoods; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 requires significant revisions; that the City will be sued by many parties if the proposed regulations are implemented; that the litigation will be expensive; that property values will be diminished; that the City's growth and progress will be inhibited; that he and the majority of his neighbors and friends would not have decided to live in the City if similar regulations were in effect at the time. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that more restrictive regulations are in effect in several other local jurisdictions in Florida; and asked if the habitable space of any home in the floodplain could be reconstructed below the FEMA minimum flood elevation according to the City's current regulations? Mr. Litchet stated no; that FEMA requires the construction or reconstruction of the habitable space of any home above the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Mr. Barksy stated that is correct; however, he would be allowed to reconstruct the habitable space of his home up to 35 feet above the FEMA minimum flood elevation according to the City's current regulations. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 allows a significant recovery elevation from which to calculate the maximum allowed height; that the majority of the homes constructed many years ago require significant and expensive renovations and improvements; that many homeowners would desire the opportunity to significantly redesign and improve the design of a destroyed home. Mr. Barsky disagreed and stated that a significant investment was made to renovate his home as currently exists. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the current FEMA requirements do not allow the reconstruction of habitable space below the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Mr. . Barsky stated that his current home could be reconstructed above the FEMA minimum flood elevation if the City's current regulations are maintained; that his neighbor recently constructed an aesthetically pleasing home above the FEMA minimum flood elevation. Commissioner Servian stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 allows the reconstruction of existing homes destroyed by fire at the same height as the average of abutting properties. BOOK 50 Page 22430 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22431 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Ronald Greenbaum, 1175 West Way Drive (34236), resident of the Lido Shores Neighborhood, stated that the efforts and hard work of the Task Force are appreciated; however, all the Task Force's recommendations are not supported; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 may reduce the City's potential tax revenues and property values; that he has lived in his current home for almost 20 years; that his home is 45 feet in height; that the property taxes and homeowners' insurance policy for his home are very expensive; that he should be allowed to reconstruct his home as currently exists; that the vested rights of property owners must be preserved; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be adopted. Pete Rhodes, 3251 Higel Avenue (34242), resident of Siesta Key, stated that his current home was designed by Carl Abbott, a renowned local architect and Member of the Task Force; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would not allow the reconstruction of his home; that in particular, the third story could not be. reconstructed; that the property values of larger existing homes may actually be increased if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that many existing homes are larger than allowed for new homes according proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; however, the value of other properties would be significantly decreased; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will not improve the value of anything except the quality life for a few individuals; that many homeowners will be economically disadvantaged; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be adopted and does not ensure compatibility in the City's neighborhoods; that the construction or reconstruction of any new home would result in an incompatibility with the surrounding homes according to current FEMA regulations; therefore, ensuring compatibility in the City's neighborhoods should not be a primary goal or concern. Mr. Rhodes continued that his home is located on Siesta Keyi that 20 years ago, the homes on Siesta Key were all single-story bungalows constructed at the existing grade near sea level; that the first two-story home constructed on Siesta Key was considered incompatible; that the quality of life on Siesta Key would not haye improved significantly if the City and the County had attempted to preserve all the single-story homes; that the City's tax revenues would not have increased significantly if larger homes had not been constructed on Siesta Key and other waterfront and island properties during subsequent years; that the quality and quantity of the City's services would not have increased if the larger homes and similar developments had not been constructed; that the City should not seek to preserve a bygone era but must allow economic development and progress to proceed; that a few citizens will always be negatively impacted by economic development and progress; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 does not offer an economic benefit to any citizens and should not be adopted. Dick Angelotti, 228 Seagull Lane (34236), resident of Bird Key, stated that he has been actively involved in the community as a homeowner and a businessman during the previous 20 years; that he has also been actively involved with many local non-profit organizations and charitable institutions; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 may negatively affect non-profit organizations; that wealthy citizens provide the majority of donations to and revenues of non-profit organizations; that many wealthy citizens would not have desired to purchase property and reside in the City if similar regulations were in effect previously; that the City should continue to attract wealthy individuals who pay a significant amount of property taxes; that property taxes are paid to Sarasota County, the School Board of Sarasota County, and the City; that wealthy individuals are responsible for a significant portion of the funding of public and non-profit services; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will discourage wealthy individuals from residing in the City if adopted. Mr. Angelotti continued that many megahouses are aesthetically pleasing and contribute significantly to the overall aesthetic perception of the City; that the City approved of the construction of the 87-foot-tall John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge and should not prohibit the construction of megahouses under the guise of compatibility and conformity; that the local construction industry will also be negatively affected if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that the construction of new homes would be reduced; that Ca'd'Zan, the former home of John Ringling, is an important local structure but would not have been allowed if similar regulations were in effect at the time; that citizens should be allowed to construct as large a home as financially feasible; that the affluence and prosperity of a community is reflected in the size and architectural character of local single-family homes; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be adopted. Thorning Little, 524 Columbia Court (34236), referred to and displayed a hand drawing of hypothetical single-family homes BOOK 50 Page 22432 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22433 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. constructed according to the current regulations and the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 allows additional height for the construction of a,single-family home with a pitched roof; that currently, the City allows the construction of new single-family homes at a height of 35 feet above the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that the 35-foot height is measured from the bottom lowest horizontal structural member supporting habitable space; that a floor support system is typically two feet in height; that according to the City's current regulations, an individual is allowed to construct 35 feet of habitable space and could construct a 2-story home consisting of a 2-foot floor support structure, a 14-foot ground floor, a 2-foot ceiling and floor support structure, and a 10-foot second floor; that a 16-foot first floor and 12-foot second floor could also be constructed for a flat-roofed home with a parapet according to the City's current regulations; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4348 will significantly reduce the allowed habitable space for new homes in the floodplain; that few individuals will desire to purchase expensive waterfront properties if only a small home can be constructed; that many properties will lose up to 7 feet of allowed habitable space, which is a significant amount. Mr. Little continued that architects have faced and resolved many complications due to the FEMA requirements for floodplain areas; that many Older coastal neighborhoods in Florida consist of single-story homes with 8-foot ceilings such as the homes located on Bird Key; that architects previously designed a common frame roof which could be constructed inside an existing pre-fabricated truss roof to raise the ceiling height two feet; that according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358, many 2-story homes could still be constructed with 12- to 10-foot ceilings; however, many individuals will choose to construct flat-roofed single-family homes with parapets to utilize the maximum allowed height; that the alternate proposal is not significantly different from proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the changes recommended in the alternate proposal could be incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 without requiring resubmission to the DRC. Mr. Little further stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will significantly reduce the allowed habitable space for homes in the floodplain; that one story is not a significant difference in the perception of a single-family home but is significant in terms of habitable space; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not required; that allowing a maximum height of 35 feet above the FEMA minimum flood elevation is neither a significant height nor aesthetically displeasing; that the proposed requirements for increased setbacks, the screening of outdoor mechanical equipment, and drainage and landscape plans are supported and should be adopted; that larger homes should be allowed on larger properties provided increased setbacks are required. John Abom, 350 South Polk Drive (34236), displayed a hypothetical example of single-family home located in FEMA Flood Zone A in the floodplain and read from a prepared statement indicating that the opportunity to address the Commission is appreciated; that in FEMA Flood Zone A, the FEMA minimum flood elevation is only 13 feet above sea level; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 does not require the measurement of the maximum allowed height from the existing grade in floodplains; that the FEMA minimum flood elevation is measured from sea level and not the existing grade; that an example is a property located in FEMA Flood Zone A, 8 feet above sea level, and 55 feet in width; that the ground floor level would be located approximately 16 feet above sea level including the 13-foot FEMA minimum flood elevation and a 3-foot floor support structure; that the total height of the structure could be constructed from the existing grade at 8 feet above sea level and would be 40 feet according to the City's current regulations, which allow a maximum height of 35 feet measured from the applicable FEMA minimum flood elevation; that according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358, a recovery elevation of 2.5 feet would be allowed; that the maximum allowed height of 35 feet would be measured from the recovery elevation; that the total height of the structure would be 37.5 feet above the existing grade; that a difference of only 2.5 feet in height results and is not significant; that a 4-story structure with 8-foot ceilings could be constructed. Mr. Abom continued that a 6-foot setback is required for a property lot 55 feet in width; that a 4-story structure setback only 6 feet would tower above neighboring homes and is not aesthetically pleasing; that a strict daylight plane must be established to ensure such structures are not constructed; that Sanibel and Naples, Florida, have very strict height and daylight plane requirements for single-family homes which did not decrease property values or tax revenues; that Sanibel only allows a maximum height of 35 feet measured from the existing grade to the ridge of the roof; that Naples allows a maximum height of 30 feet measured from the FEMA minimum flood elevation BOOK 50 Page 22434 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22435 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. to the ridge of the roof; that the regulations in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 measure the 35-foot maximum height from the recovery elevation to the midpoint of the roof and represent a more generous maximum allowed height than either Sanibel or Naples. Mr. Abom further stated that Sanibel requires a daylight plane starting at 20 feet above the existing grade; that Naples requires a daylight plane starting at 15 feet above the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 requires a daylight plane measured from the recovery elevation, which is still less than required by Naples or Sanibel; that the proposed regulations are not too restrictive; that property values and future tax revenues will not decrease; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should be adopted. Tom Nunan, 5280 Huntingwood Court (34235), representing Habi tat for Humanity for Humanity, Sarasota, Inc. (HFH), stated that HFH was founded in 1986; that a concern with the original requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 was for screening outdoor mechanical equipment, landscaping, and drainage management; however, the revised Staff recommendations indicated in the December 21, 2001, memorandum from Staff and the attached Summary of Alternatives are acceptable and supported; and read a prepared statement indicating that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 would apply to the construction of single-family homes Citywide if adopted; that the regulations will apply to the affordable housing developments constructed by HFH; however, the concern is only the regulation of megahouses in the City; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be applied to affordable housing; that lower income families will be negatively affected by proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the original screening, landscaping, and drainage requirements for megahouses will pose an economic burden to and should not apply to affordable housing; that a uniform standard should not be applied Citywide; that affordable housing developments must be encouraged in the City. Mr. Nunan continued that the drainage and stormwater runoff problems for megahouses do not apply to affordable housing; therefore, the same mitigation requirements should not be applied to or required for affordable housing as for megahouses; that HFH is currently constructing an affordable housing development named Beacon Place West; that the County's drainage requirements were incorporated in the design to ensure existing houses were not impacted by stormwater runoff; that Beacon Place West replaces an undesirable undeveloped area; that the drainage of single-family structures should be regulated according to the relationship of the footprint of the home to the area of the building site; that a standard for impervious surfaces must be established; that drainage standards must be easily understood and interpreted and should not negatively impact affordable housing. Mr. Nunan further stated that installing a few trees is not a significant expense for a wealthy individual; however, lower income families can barely afford to purchase the affordable housing constructed by HFH; that every effort is made to reduce costs while maintaining the quality of construction; that costs must be conserved; that the requirement to install trees will pose a significant cost to affordable housing; that the City and County currently lack a sufficient amount of affordable housing; that the construction of affordable housing must not be further discouraged; that Staff's recommendations to reduce the screening, drainage, and landscaping requirements are supported. Jane Shea, 614 Beverly Drive (34234), President, Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Association (IBSSA), read from a prepared statement indicating that the efforts of - the Task Force in developing proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 are appreciated; that IBSSA supports the adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the construction of megahouses must be limited; that the existing character and compatibility of the City's neighborhoods must be preserved; that the City's neighborhoods must be protected; that adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not be delayed; that minor revisions could be incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 if desired; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 must be adopted as soon as possible; that new residential construction must be compatible with the existing homes located in a surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Shea continued that the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood is architecturally diverse and contains small, single-story homes located on small property lots and also large mansions; that until recently, large homes were only constructed on large lots; however, large homes are now being constructed on disproportionately small lots; that the Bayfront must be preserved; that the construction of megahouses should not be allowed to erode the Bayfront shoreline; that regulations restricting the construction of megahouses must adopted as soon as possible and have always been supported by IBSSA; that any proposed regulations should ensure compatibility in City BOOK 50 Page 22436 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22437 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. neighbornoods, restrict the maximum allowed height based upon the lot size, and establish a standard for impermeable surfaces; that a special overlay district will be sought for the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood which imposes strict height and compatibility regulations; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is supported and should be adopted as soon as possible to protect all City neighborhoods. Bill Korp, 765 Tyler Drive (34236), stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 contains a provision which allows the approval of currently pending development applications according to the land development regulations applicable at the time a particular application was filed; that many older homes were constructed with tall ceilings; that his previous home was over 40 years old and contained tall ceilings; that many of the homes constructed during the 1970s were prefabricated and have only 8- foot ceilings; that his proposed home will have a shell driveway, which is a pervious surtace; that stormwater will not be diverted to neighboring properties; that a fence and not a solid wall will be constructed between his proposed home and the neighboring properties; that the proposed screening requirements are supported; that noise disturbances should be prohibited in the City's neighborhoods if possible; that the local economy recently entered a recession; that builders and architects are more desperate to construct new homes; that any design will be facilitated and may not be compatible with an existing neighborhood; that Habitat for Humanity, Sarasota, Inc., is concerned with the City's proposed regulations to limit the construction of megahouses; that the regulatory effort is too far reaching and should be reexamined. Reid Farrell, 1703 Bay View Drive (34239), was no longer present in the Chambers. Margaret Wise, 1233 Hillview Drive (34239), was no longer present in the Chambers. Judson Boedecker, 1607 North Drive (34239), Vice President, Habitat for Humanity, Sarasota, Inc. (HFH), stated that Commissioners and the public are personally invited to the 11 a.m., January 10, 2002, groundbreaking ceremony for Jordan's Crossing, which is an HFH affordable housing development. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Jordan's Crossing will be located on Eighth Street near Tuttle Elementary School. Mr. Boedecker stated that is correct; that the efforts of the Task Force and Staff to address the comments and concerns of HFH are appreciated; that the City must ensure affordable housing is not negatively affected by proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that a previous indication was a certified drainage plan prepared by a profession engineer (P.E.) would not be uniformly required; that a certified drainage plan prepared by a P.E. would be a significant expense for an affordable housing development; that Staff should be allowed flexibility to require a certified drainage plan if required; however, a certified drainage plan should not be uniformly required and is not necessary for affordable housing developments such as Jordan's Crossing, for which a master drainage plan was developed. Mr. Boedecker further stated that HFH values landscaping and designs affordable housing developments according to the existing trees on a property; that the footprint of a home is designed and relocated prior to construction to accommodate existing trees; that the intent is to preserve as many existing trees as possible; that Jordan's Crossing is a master-planned community; that a master tree protection plan was submitted and was approved by the City; and asked if master-planned communities will be exempted from the proposed landscaping requirement if a master tree protection plan is approved by the City? City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 does not currently include an- exemption from the landscaping requirement for master-planned communities with an approved master tree protection plan. Mr. Boedecker stated that such an exemption should be incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 prior to adoption; that a credit should be allowed for existing or transplanted trees; that the tree installation requirement should be based on the size of the lot; that Staff's previous recommendations are supported; however, only one tree should be required for lots over 75 rather than over 50 feet in width; that another concern is the type of tree required; that a smaller more inexpensive tree should be required; that HFH attempts to maintain a very low construction cost to ensure low income families can purchase a home; that the smaller tree proposed by Staff will cost approximately $125; that the smaller tree proposed by HFH would only cost approximately $60; that $65 is a significant expense for low income families; that an exemption for homes under 2,000 sa. ft. of habitable space was BOOK 50 Page 22438 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22439 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. proposed by Staff and is supported; that no HFH affordable home is constructed greater than 2,000 sa. ft. of habitable spacei that the consideration and support of the Commission are appreciated. Sam Schackow, 2355 McClellan Parkway (34239), President, Chapman & Associates, Inc. (Chapman), stated that previous speakers indicated property values would decrease if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that Chapman is a large real estate appraisal company and has four offices in Florida; that one of the Chapman offices is located in Fort Myers, Florida, and performs real estate appraisals in Sanibel, Florida; that an associate responsible for conducting real estate appraisals in Sanibel was contacted recently to discuss the impact of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 and similar regulations on property values; that the associate indicated no negative impact to property values occurred after the City of Sanibel adopted strict regulations on the maximum allowed height of single- family homes; that the property values continue to rise in Sanibel despite the strict development regulations; that the City cannot be sure property values will not be impacted if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; however, the existing evidence from Sanibel indicates strict height regulations will not decrease property values. Mr. Schackow continued that another concern was the limitations for the design of a new single-family home if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; however, the Task Force included Members from construction and architectural design firms; that in particular, Carl Abbott served as a Member of the Task Force and is a nationally-renowmed architect; that the Task Force exerted significant efforts to ensure the design potential for single- family homes was not severely circumscribed; that Mr. Abbott's support for proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 sufficiently indicates no severe design limitations will be imposed; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 encourages property owners to construct new homes which are compatible with the existing neighborhood and represent significant contributions to the City; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should be adopted. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. The Commission recessed at 8:53 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 on first reading with the following modifications: 1. Exempt air-conditioning units installed in the windows or in a wall from the proposed screening requirements; 2. Require screening only for new but not replacement or improved exterior mechanical equipment; 3. Exempt single-family dwellings with less than 2,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of air-conditioned space from the proposed screening requirements; 4. Allow the Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement the discretion, upon receiving the recommendation of the Building Official, to require a certified drainage plan prepared by a professional engineer on a case-by-case basis; 5. Require trees only for new single-family dwellings or additions exceeding 500 sa. ft.; 6. Reduce the number of required trees to 1 tree for every 50 feet of street frontage, where 1 tree is required for 0 to 50 feet of street frontage, 2 trees for 51 to 100 feet of street frontage, and 3 trees for street frontage greater than 100 feet; 7. Reduce the height of the required tree to 8 feet, and the diameter to 2 inches as measured 6 inches above the natural grade; and 8. Require proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 take effect 30 days after final adoption. Commissioner Palmer stated that the Task Force's recommendation differs from the motion. Commissioner Servian stated that the Task Force also recommended exempting master-planned communities from the landscaping requirement if a master landscaping plan was submitted to and approved by the City. Commissioner Servian, as maker of the motion, with the approval of Commissioner Palmer, as the seconder, amended - the motion to exempt single-family homes in a master-planned community from BOOK 50 Page 22440 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22441 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. the proposed landscaping requirements if a master landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the City. Commissioner. Palmer stated that the Task Force also recommended reducing the number of the required trees to only 1 tree for lots with 100 feet or less of street frontage and 2 trees for lots with greater than 100 feet of street frontage. Commissioner Servian stated that the intent was to include the Task Force's recommendations in the motion. Commissioner Palmer stated that the allowed amount of habitable space should be clarified; that in particular, the allowed amount of habitable space according to Height Study A is not Clear. Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that the hypothetical home in Height Study A has a reference level of 5 feet above sea level, a recovery elevation of 12 feet above sea level, and a FEMA minimum flood elevation of 19 feet above sea level; that the 35-foot maximum allowed height is measured from the recovery elevation; that the habitable space of the hypothetical home could include a 2-foot ground-floor support structure, an 11-foot ground floor, a 2- foot, second-story support structure, a 9-foot second floor, an additional 2-foot ceiling and roof support structure, and an additional 8 feet of habitable space in the attic if a pitched roof is constructed; that according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358, three stories can be constructed for a home with a pitched roof. Commissioner Palmer asked if the 35-foot maximum height is measured from the recovery elevation to the midpoint of a pitched roof? Mr. Hess stated yes. Commissioner Palmer asked if habitable space could be constructed in the attic space if a pitched roof is developed? Mr. Hess stated yes; that habitable, air-conditioned space could be constructed in a single-family home developed with a pitched but not a flat roof. Commissioner Palmer stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 encourages the development of single-family homes with pitched roofs; that pitched roofs are preferred to flat roofs; that additional habitable space will be allowed for single-family homes with a pitched roof. Mr. Hess concurred. Commissioner Martin asked if Height Study A represents the most limiting regulatory possibility for the construction of a single- family home according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358? Mr. Hess stated yes; that Height Study A is a hypothetical example of the construction of a single-family home located at the lowest allowed finished grade level in FEMA Flood Zone V, with a 19-foot FEMA minimum flood elevation, and with abutting properties also located at the lowest allowed finished grade level; that only a few waterfront properties would be similar to the example included in Height Study A. Commissioner Martin asked if nearly all single-family homes in the City could be reconstructed with two stories of habitable space with tall ceilings if destroyed after proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted? Mr. Hess stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Height Study A does not represent the most restrictive possible example; that a few properties in the City are located below sea level; that as a result, a few older homes were constructed on a finished grade below sea level; that the FEMA requirements are very restrictive and encourage the construction of homes on fill rather than stilts; and asked if the garage of a home can be located below the FEMA minimum flood elevation? Mr. Hess stated yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not. too restrictive and allows the construction of a garage and other non-habitable space below the FEMA minimum flood elevation; that non-habitable space can include a workspace and storage; that a concern is the proposed method for determining the maximum allowed height for a single-family home; and asked if other local jurisdictions in Florida utilize a similar method? Mr. Hess stated no; that the proposed method to determine the maximum allowed height according to a reference level and a recovery elevation is unique. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Height Studies A, B, and C are unclear and will not be easily interpreted by potential homeowners, architects, or builders; that any examples for proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should include the current language BOOK 50 Page 22442 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22443 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. of and references to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.); that the City has strict land development regulations; that the City should adopt regulations which are clearly understood and easily interpreted; that the definition of the reference level does not include a direct relationship to the natural, existing grade; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 defines the reference level according to the finished grade of abutting properties. Mr. Hess stated that a definition of the term "finished grade" is included in the Zoning Code (1998 ed.). Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the term "finished grade" directly corresponds to the reference to the term "at grade" included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358? Mr. Hess stated no. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that residents, architects, builders, and Staff will experience significant difficulties if attempting to interpret the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as currently drafted; that the language should be concise. Vice Mayor Quillin distributed copies of and referred to a map of the City's floodplain in the FEMA Flood Zones A and V from the Environmental Protection Chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan); and continued that Height Studies A, B, and C concern only the construction of homes in the floodplain. Mr. Hess stated that the proposed reference level will apply Citywide; that the proposed recovery elevation will apply only to single-family homes located in the floodplain. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the reterence level is always determined by the natural grade? Mr. Hess stated no; that the reference level is determined according the average height of the abutting properties at the finished grade. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that very few properties in District 3 are located in the floodplain; that the majority of properties are located in older, established neighborhoods and subdivisions such as the Paver Park Neighborhood; that many of the existing neighborhoods and subdivisions were constructed in thè 1960s; that the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should only apply to properties located in the floodplain. Mr. Hess stated that Staff has not discussed limiting the applicability of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 only to properties located in the floodplain; that the Task Force proposed applying the regulations Citywide; that alternative proposals were previously examined and proposed to limit regulations only to properties located in the floodplain. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should apply only to properties in the floodplain and not Citywide; that single-family homes located in the floodplain are more expensive; that lower- and middle-income families will be negatively affected by the requirements; that an example is a family which recently purchased a small home in the Arlington Park Neighborhood; that the family renovated the home to include an additional bedroom and bathroom; that the addition was larger than 500 sq. ft.; that the family would not have been able to afford the addition if regulations similar to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 were in effect at the time; that many families desire to purchase and renovate a small home to conserve costs; that the additions are normally larger than 500 sa. ft.; that an addition to a home should require the submission of a drainage plan or the planting of additional trees; that the regulations of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should not apply to properties located outside of the floodplain. Vice Mayor Quillin continued that a specific pitch angle should be required for roofing in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that the pitch angle of a roof also determines the angle at which stormwater runoff is projected onto a neighboring property or home; that a mitigation strategy should be required such as the installation of stormwater diverters or guttering; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will negatively affect the majority of homeowners in District 3; that the landscaping requirement is an additional concern; that many properties in District 3 contain a significant number of older trees and do not have significant space in the front yard to construct an addition and add the required trees; that many properties already have a sufficient number of desirable trees; that the landscaping requirement should be deleted from proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that many of the smaller homes in the City are located on small lots with a sufficient number of trees in the front yard; that the requirement should not be solely for the front yard; that Habitat for Humanity, Sarasota, Inc., requested exempting properties with less than 75 feet of right-of-way frontage from the landscaping requirement; that the City should encourage the purchase and renovation of existing homes; that residents should not be BOOK 50 Page 22444 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22445 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. discouraged from renovating existing homes which remain compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; that lower- and middle-income families will be negatively affected if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted as proposed. Commissioner Martin stated that a credit should be established for properties which already have existing trees in the front yard. Mr. Hess stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 currently includes a credit for existing trees which meet the size requirements; that the credit is a one-for-one credit for the . existing trees; that a suggestion was for a credit of two required trees to one existing tree. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the landscaping requirement should be eliminated from proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Commissioner Martin stated that many small bungalows and homes are located in the City and are only 800 to 900 sq. ft. in size on a small lot; that an addition larger than 500 sa. ft. could not be incorporated into the majority of such homes; that additions are usually much smaller than 500 sq. ft. Vice Mayor Quillin disagreed. Commissioner Palmer stated that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is still under consideration and includes a provision to increase the requirement to rebuild a destroyed home from 50 percent of the assessed value to 75 percent of the market value; that the provision was not included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 but is included in the Phase II Amendments to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) (Phase II Amendments), which will be considered initially at the January 16, 2002, Commission Workshop; that the market value of a home is usually greater than the assessed value; that changing the requirement from 50 percent of the assessed value to 75 percent of the market value represents a considerable increase; that most homes damaged by a fire or a major storm could be renovated to the previous condition; however, a home completely destroyed in a casualty loss could not be reconstructed exactly to the previous condition and height. Commissioner Palmer continued that the Phase II Amendments also include a provision regulating the allowed ratio of impervious to pervious suriaces for certain zone districts; that the proposed standard varies between 60 and 75 percent of the ratio of impervious to pervious surface according in the Single-Family Residential (RSF) Zone Districts; that the standard varies based upon the allowed intensity of land uses for each particular RSF Zone District. Commissioner Servian stated that the intent of the Task Force was to provide protection from excess stormwater runoff, loud outdoor mechanical equipment, and incompatible construction to all City residents; that everyone has a right to sleep peacefully at night and live next to a neighbor who does not flood and damage a neighbor's property with excess stormwater runoff; that the concern was to preserve the existing character and peacefulness of the City's neighborhoods; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should apply Citywide. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that many recently-constructed improvements to homes in District 3 included the installation of outdoor mechanical equipment such as a pool pump; however, the majority of the improvements concerned the remodeling and expansion of an existing small home by lower- and middle-income families; that the desire of most families is to increase the habitable space of a home and not to add a pool or similar accessory; that a few homeowners in District 3 are even adding a second floor to an existing home; that larger outdoor mechanical equipment should be screened; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will negatively impact the majority of residents in District 3; that the City should ensure lower- and middle-income residents are allowed to renovate and expand an existing home; that many retirees and working-class residents live in District 3 and should not be negatively affected if possible; that the height of megahouses must also be regulated; that the landscaping requirements will pose an undue burden on many residents in District 3 and are not required; that the concern was only to limit the height of new megahouses. Vice Mayor Quillin continued that the property values in District 3 have increased significantly during recent years; that the City does not currently have a significant amount of affordable housing; that the City must ensure adequate housing is also provided for middle-income residents in the City; that many young families live in District 3; that young families and workers must be attracted to the City to ensure continued growth and should not be unduly burdened with unnecessary regulations; that the 500-sq.-ft. requirement should be eliminated from proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. BOOK 50 Page 22446 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22447 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin stated that the motion should be revised if necessary; that an explanation should be provided for each of the modifications to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Commissioner Servian referred to the December 21, 2001, memorandum and attached Summary of Alternatives and stated that Staff recommends revising the screening requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 to exempt air-conditioning units installed in windows or through a wall and to require the screening of new exterior mechanical equipment only; that optional recommendations are to exempt non-elevated air-conditioning units and single-family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of air-conditioned space from the screening requirements; that only the optional recommendation to exempt single-family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of air-conditioned space was included in the motion. Commissioner Martin asked if the new equipment refers to equipment purchased only for a new use and not replacement equipment? Commissioner Servian stated that is correct. Mr. Hess concurred. Commissioner Martin stated that the reasoning to exempt single- family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of Air-conditioned space is understood and supported; that the exemption was proposed to ensure affordable housing is not negatively affected; that the December 21, 2001, memorandum also indicates the cost to construct the appropriate solid screening would range between $500 and $1,000 per wall; however, based on personal experience, the required solid screening could be constructed for $100 to $150 per wall. Commissioner Servian concurred. Commissioner Martin stated that the cost of $100 to $150 per wall is reasonable; that every City neighborhood should be protected from loud outdoor mechanical equipment; that the same provisions should apply to all single-family homes in the City regardless of size. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to amend the motion to eliminate the exemption, for single-family homes with less than 2,000 sq. ft. of air-conditioned space from the screening requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Commissioner Martin stated that the modifications to the drainage requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 as currently drafted are supported; that the modification to allow Staff flexibility to require a certified drainage plan prepared by a professional engineer (P.E.) only on a case-by-case basis as determined by Staff is supported; that the reasoning for the modifications to the landscaping requirements should be explained; that Staff's recommendation was to require the installation of trees for single-family homes or additions exceeding 500 sq. ft. and is supported; that three optional recommendations were also provided by Staff; and asked the optional recommendation desired? Commissioner Servian stated that the optional recommendation to reduce the number of required trees to 1 tree for every 50 feet of street frontage, where 1 tree is required for 0 to 50 feet of street frontage, 2 trees for 51 to 100 feet of street frontage, and 3 trees for street frontage greater than 100 feet, and to reduce the height of the required tree to 8 feet and the diameter to 2 inches as measured 6 inches above the natural grade is included in the motion; that an exemption from the proposed landscaping requirements was also included in the motion for single-family homes in a master-planned community if a master landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the City. Commissioner Palmer stated that the optional recommendation included in the motion was not supported by the Task Force, which supports the optional recommendation to reduce the number of required trees to 1 tree for every 50 feet of street frontage and exempt lots with 50 feet or less of street frontage, with no tree required for 0 to 50 feet of street frontage, 1 tree for 51 to 100 feet of street frontage, and 2 trees for street trontage greater than 100 feet. Commissioner Servian stated that the intent is to require 2 trees for each 100 feet of street frontage and a minimum of 1 tree for properties with less than 100 feet of street frontage. Mr. Hess stated that the appropriate optional recommendation was not incorporated in the motion. Commissioner Servian, as maker of the motion, with the approval of Commissioner Palmer, as the seconder, amended the motion to reduce the number of required trees to 2 trees for every 100 feet of BOOK 50 Page 22448 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22449 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. street frontage, with a minimum of 1 tree required for properties with less than 100 feet of street frontage. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that an exemption from the tree requirement should be allowed for properties with street frontage less than 75 feet; that no undeveloped lots in the City have a street frontage less than 50 feet; that many undeveloped lots in established neighborhoods have street frontage between 50 and 75 feet; that many of the undeveloped lots have mature trees. Commissioner Servian stated that many of the undeveloped lots in the City do not have any trees. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to amend the motion to exempt lots with 75 feet or less of street frontage from the landscaping requirements. The amendment failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Servian stated that the motion also included requiring proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 take effect 30 days after final adoption. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the amendment to the motion as to delete the exemption for single-family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of air-conditioned space from the screening requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the amendment will not be supported; that a 2,000-sq.-ft. home in the City is not very large; that an exemption from the screening requirements should be allowed for homes with less than 2,000 sq. ft. of air-conditioned space; that lower- and middle-income residents will be negatively affected if the exemption is not included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; that larger mechanical equipment is required for larger homes; that the mechanical equipment required for smaller homes is not as large or as loud. Commissioner Martin stated that central air-conditioning units were recently installed in two smaller homes; that the cost to install a new central air-conditioning unit in a small home ranges between $4,000 and $5,000; that an additional $100 to $150 per screening wall is not a significant expense; that outdoor mechanical equipment can also be installed in a back yard; that according to proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358, a homeowner is not required to screen outdoor mechanical equipment if located in the back yard. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the amendment to delete the exemption for single-family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of air-conditioned space from the screening requirements of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358. Amendment carried (3 to 2): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, no. Mayor Mason requested that the City Auditor and Clerk restate the motion as amended. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as amended as to pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 on first reading with the following modifications: 1. Exempt air-conditioning units installed in the windows or in a wall from the proposed screening requirements; 2. Require screening only for new but not replacement or improved exterior mechanical equipment; 3. Allow the Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement the discretion, upon receiving the recommendation of the Building Official, to require a certified drainage plan prepared by a professional engineer on a case-by-case basis; 4. Require trees only for new single-family dwellings or additions exceeding 500 sa. ft.; 5. Reduce the number of required trees to 2 trees for every 100 feet of street frontage, with a minimum of 1 tree is required for properties with less than 100 feet of street frontage; 6. Reduce the height of the required tree to 8 feet, the diameter to 2 inches as measured 6 inches above the natural grade; 7. Require proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 take effect 30 days after final adoption; and 8. Exempt single-family homes in a master-planned community from the proposed landscaping requirements if a master landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the City. Commissioner Palmer asked if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 currently includes an exemption from the drainage requirements for BOOK 50 Page 22450 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22451 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. single-family homes in a master-planned community if a master drainage plan was submitted to and approved by the City? Sarah Schenk, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 includes an exemption from the proposed drainage requirements for single- family homes in a master-planned community with an approved master drainage plan. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the efforts of the Task Force to develop proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 are appreciated; however, a few of the regulations included in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 are neither appropriate nor desired; that lower- and middle-income residents will be negatively affected if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted; that the City must ensure affordable housing is not negatively impacted; that $150 for a screening wall is a significant expense for many residents; that owning a home represents a significant investment; that many of the provisions of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 should apply neither to single- family homes with less than 2,000 sa. ft. of air-conditioned space nor to additions to an existing home; that the majority of citizens support adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358; however, adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will not be supported as affordable housing and lower- and middle-income residents will be negatively affected. Mayor Mason stated that the efforts of the Task Force are appreciated and commended; that the Task Force should have been allowed additional time to examine and debate the Alternate Proposal; that no regulations will ever be supported by all citizens; however, a serious attempt should be made to resolve the outstanding issues; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will not be supported unless additional time is allowed the Task Force to examine the Alternate Proposal. Commissioner Servian stated that the Task Force held at least two meetings every week; that an open public meeting was held at least once per week; that meetings were held from September 14, 2001, through the end of October 2001; that every speaker was allowed the opportunity to address the Task Force at the open public meetings; that the Alternate Proposal was not provided to the Task Force until after the meetings ended. Mayor Mason stated that the concern was not the manner in which the meetings of the Task Force were facilitated; that the concern is allowing the Task Force additional time to review the Alternate Proposal. Commissioner Palmer stated that the Task Force represented many community interests; that a megahouse owner, a renowned local architect, a respected local contractor, and neighborhood activists participated on the Task Force; that at the September 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, Commissioners clearly indicated proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 would be passed on second reading and adopted if a more comprehensive ordinance was not drafted and presented to the City; that proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 is very restrictive, is still under consideration, and will be adopted if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is not passed on first reading; that very few citizens support adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355; that the efforts of the Task Force are commended and represent a tremendous accomplishment; that citizens were provided adequate opportunity to attend the meetings and to address the Task Force. Commissioner Palmer continued that the City will never be able to adopt regulations which satisfy all citizens; that developing regulations on the height of single-family issues has been a controversial issue in the City for many years; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 can be revised in the future if required; that Staff will provide an evaluation of the effects of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 on the community nine months after adoption; that the Commission made a commit tment to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 if better regulations could not be drafted and adopted; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 will not negatively affect the costs to construct affordable housing and should apply Citywide; that all City residents should be entitled to protection from loud outdoor mechanical equipment, excessive stormwater runoff, and an incompatible neighboring homes; that proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 contains fair and equitable regulations; that neither property values nor the quality of life in the City's neighborhoods will be diminished if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358 is adopted. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion restated as amended by the City Auditor and Clerk and requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3 to 2): Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, no; Palmer, yes; Quillin, no. 12. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM V) #3 (2255) through (2433) CD 10:14 through 10:18 BOOK 50 Page 22452 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22453 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. The following person came before the Commission: Charles Senf, 2346 Pelican Drive North (34237), read into the record a prepared statement indicating City employees are an important human resource and should be treated with respect and honor; that employees have continually provided the City with excellent work and have earned respect and honor; that the City pays healthcare insurance premiums for employees and retirees hired prior to October 1, 1993; that employees and retirees have fulfilled employment agreements; therefore, the City should honor promises indicated to employees; that the Finance Department is trusted with managing the healthcare insurance fund and protecting and growing the assets; that the City chooses to be self insured and is thus obligated to manage the fund properly and provide required coverage; that the City should not impose the cost of coverage on employees who can only choose from City-offered healthcare insurance plans. Mr. Senf continued that the Commission should approve a motion to direct the City Manager to ensure the current practice of paying healthcare insurance premiums for each healthcare option for eligible employees and retirees continues; that the Commission should also ensure spousal and family coverage co-pay and deductible increases are held to the lower of the cost-of-living increase from the prior year or the most recent across-the-board pay raise. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: : PROPOSED DESIGN BY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR U.S. 301 FROM U.S. 41 TO UNIVERSITY PARKWAY PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT STUDY PROJECT - APPROVED INCORPORATING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) #3 (2434) through (3336) CD 10:18 through 10:35 Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, and Benjamin Walker, Project Manager, US 301 Widening Project, and Civil Engineer, District One, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that FDOT is conducting a Project Development and Environment Study (PD&E) for roadway improvements on US 301 from Wood Street to south of University Parkway; that at the December 3, 2001, Workshop, the Commission expressed concerns regarding the design presented; that a computer-generated slide presentation has been prepared and will be presented if desired; and distributed a list of Staff's recommendations concerning US 301 improvements as follows: Traffic Signal Color 59 out of 69 signals are bronze, therefore, no change in color is recommended. US 41 Intersection A third US 41 southbound lane is recommended. Project Impact Matrix Corrections were made to the previously submitted project impact matrix as necessary. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way (Dr. MLK Way) intersection - FDOT will coordinate with City Staff during the design phase. Median opening between 17th Street and Desoto Road - Full access at 21st and 32nd Streets and limited access at 19th, 23rd, and 30th Street between Myrtle Street and Northgate Boulevard and between 17th Street and Desoto Road will be provided. Pond aesthetics, median landscaping, and wider sidewalk from Oak Street to Main Street - FDOT will coordinate with City Staff during the design phase. Level of Service at Oak, 12th, and 17th Streets Acceptable levels of service (LOS) will not be met from 2015 through 2025; therefore, Staff will pursue future improvements through the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) funding process. Roundabout at Fruitville Road intersection - A possible roundabout will be analyzed during the FDOT Downtown Mobility Study. US 301 improvements between Ringling Boulevard and Main Street - FDOT will coordinate with City Staff during the design phase Pedestrian refuges, i.e., center medians/islands - FDOT will coordinate with Staff during the design phase. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that time and effort need not be wasted studying a proposed roundabout at the intersection of Fruitville Road and US 301 as adequate space is probably not available; that Staff's list of recommendations answers several personal questions. BOOK 50 Page 22454 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22455 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Mayor Mason asked if signage on Dr. MLK Way is included in the PD&E study? Mr. Daughters stated that the type of signage and traffic signal poles utilized along Dr. MLK Way will not change; however, the signage and traffic signal poles will be relocated at the time Dr. MLK Way is widened from four to six lanes. Mayor Mason asked if the type of signage and traffic signal poles will be consistent along the Dr. MLK Way corridor? Mr. Daughters stated yes. Mr. Walker stated that the proposed roundabout for the intersection of US 41 and US 301 was carefully considered; that the current intersection borders Luke Wood Park which should not be negatively impacted; that businesses adjacent to the intersection could be impacted if the park is not impacted; that a preliminary analysis indicates the conflicting movements of US 301 and US 41 will not be eliminated by installing a roundabout. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Luke Wood Park is already ruined; that adjacent businesses should not be impacted; that studies concerning eliminating the traffic problems of the intersection of US 301 and US 41 should continue. Commissioner Martin stated that Staff's list of recommendations for improvements includes stormwater retention pond aesthetics and median landscaping; that currently the perimeter stormwater retention ponds are fenced. Mr. Walker stated that some stormwater retention ponds constitute a nuisance and must be fenced; that City Staff will be significantly involved in the design stage of the projects; that all reasonable requests for stormwater retention pond aesthetics and landscaping maintenance will be considered by FDOT; that FDOT's right-of-way budget includes the level of landscaping aesthetics available. Commissioner Martin stated that FDOT's cooperation with the City is appreciated. Mr. Daughters stated that the City has previously been successful in removing fences from the perimeter of stormwater retention ponds; that stormwater retention ponds can be constructed without being fenced; however, some stormwater retention ponds will be fenced due to lack of funding to acquire adequate right-of-way. Mr. Walker stated that adjacent rights-of-way are considered in determining stormwater retention pond locations. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that stormwater retention ponds should be linked with the 20 Year Master Plan for an Interconnected System of Parks, Open Spaces, and Landscape Elements (Parks Master Plan); that FDOT and the City should find creative ways to install stormwater retention ponds. Mr. Daughters stated that the PD&E study is a corridor study; that landscaping and stormwater retention pond aesthetic details will be determined during the design phase. Commissioner Martin stated that aesthetics are important; that the City should be beautified as traffic improvements are made; that opportunities for greater and more pleasing aesthetics should be taken; that stormwater retention pond and landscaping aesthetics are important. Mr. Daughters stated that FDOT commits a specific amount of funds for landscaping; that the City may install some landscaping to maximize use of the funds; that funds can also be leveraged through grants. City Manager McNees asked the amount of FDOT funds allocated for landscaping? Mr. Walker stated that FDOT budgets approximately $200,000 per mile for landscaping purposes. Commissioner Palmer stated that FDOT will participate in creating greater pedestrian friendliness in the improvements to Ringling Boulevard and Main Street; that FDOT and City interaction is required in changing the configuration of road layouts. Mr. Daughters stated that FDOT is committed to creating pedestrian friendliness; that meeting the level of service (LOS) requirements at specific intersections is a concern of Staff; that the LOS for new roads and intersections must be adequate for the traffic volume; that analysis indicates the required LOS for Oak, 12th, and 17th Streets will not be met from 2015 through 2025; that Staff will pursue future improvements through the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) funding process. BOOK 50 Page 22456 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22457 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Palmer stated that the proposed median access management is supported and appreciated; that Staff recommends adding one continuous southward lane to the intersection of US 301 and US 41 and asked if FDOT agrees with the recommendation? Mr. Walker stated yes; that FDOT believes the addition of one continuous southward lane on US 41 will ease southbound traffic congestion. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve the proposed design for the U.S. 301 from U.S. 41 to University Parkway Project Development and Environment Study project including Staff's recommendations as follows: Traffic Signal Color - Retaining the bronze signal color US 41 Intersection - Adding third US 41 southbound lane Project Impact Matrix Correcting the previously submitted project impact matrix as necessary Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way (Dr. MLK Way) intersection FDOT's coordinating with City Staff during the design phase. .= Median opening between 17th Street and Desoto Road Providing full access at 21st and 32nd Streets and limited access at 19th, 23rd, and 30th Streets between Myrtle Street and Northgate Boulevard and between 17th Street and Desoto Road Pond aesthetics, median landscaping, and wider sidewalk from Oak to Main Street - FDOT's coordinating with City Staff during the design phase Level of Service at Oak, 12th, and 17th Streets - Staff's pursuing future improvements through the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) funding process Roundabout at Fruitville Road intersection - Analyzing possible roundabout during the FDOT Downtown Mobility Study US 3-01 improvements between Ringling Boulevard and Main Street FDOT's corridinating with City Staff during the design phase Pedestrian refuges, i.e. center medians/islands - FDOT's coordinating with Staff during the design phase. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FOR CITY GRANT FUNDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA AND GREATER DOWNTOWN SARASOTA ACTION TEAM, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,959 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 = APPROVED AND ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 02R-1459, APPROPRIATING $24,542.29 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE GREATER DOWNTOWN SARASOTA ACTION TEAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 AS DIRECTED BY THE COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 17, 2001, ETC. - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) #3 (3345) through (3642) CD 10:36 through 10:40 City Manager McNees stated that the Commission requested at the December 17, 2001, Regular Commission meeting a special appropriation be presented indicating the funding provided to the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT) for fiscal year (FY) 2001/02, which is proposed as follows: Amount Source $3,815.21 Approved Neighborhood Grant 7,601.00 Proposed Neighborhood Grant 24,542.79 Unappropriated Fund Balance $35,959.00 Total Amount Requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 02R-1459 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 02R-1459. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yesi Mason, yes Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. BOOK 50 Page 22458 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22459 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to approve the agreement for City grant funding for the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team in the amount of $35,959 for fiscal year 2001/02. Vice Mayor Quillin referred to the December 6, 2001, interoffice memorandum from Deputy City Manager Schneider to City Manager McNees concerning GDSAT funding included in the Agenda backup material and stated that previous funding for GDSAT was intended as one time only; that further GDSAT funding will not be supported; that organizations should not depend on the City for funding; that grants are available for organizations such as GDSAT and should be researched; that the current funding is from the lapsed salary of the previous Director of Neighborhoods. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that funds are not available in the budget to continue funding organizations such as GDSAT; that further GDSAT funding will not be supported. Commissioner Palmer stated that GDSAT understands future funding must come from sources other than the City. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to approve the agreement for City grant funding for the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team in the amount of $35,959 for fiscal year 2001/02. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 01-4342, AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 163.511, FLORIDA STATUTES, WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, FLORIDA; ETC. SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING (AGENDA ITEM VI-3) #3 (3643) through #4 (0051) CD 10:41 through 10:42 V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the January 7, 2002, Commission Workshop concerned the creation of Special Business and Residential Neighborhood Districts (NIDs); that the Commission is requested to set proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 authorizing the creation of NIDS for public hearing. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to set proposed Ordinance No. 01-4342 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 01-4355, REGARDING ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 01-ZTA-03, AMENDING THE METHOD FOR THE CALCULATION OF HEIGHT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND THEIR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND AMENDING REGULATIONS REGARDING THE REPAIR OR RESTORATION OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY USES AND NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 01-ZTA-03, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA) CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY 22, 2002, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM VI-4) #4 (0052) through (0091) CD 10:42 through 10:43 On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to continue second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 01-4355 to the January 22, 2002, Regular Commission meeting at which time proposed Ordinance No. 02-4358, also concerning height for single-family dwellings, will be scheduled for second reading. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 17. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE : REQUEST FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO PREPARE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE FORMER CITY OF SARASOTA WATERWORKS BUILDING LOCATED AT 1025 NORTH ORANGE AVENUE CONSISTENT WITH CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS, CODES AND THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR 'S STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO: 1) ADDRESS THE GIFTS FROM GOD MINISTRIES REQUEST FOR LAND AND 2) DETERMINE A METHOD OF STABILIZATION TO PREVENT FURTHER DETERIORATION OF AND PREPARE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR RENOVATION AND INTENDED USE OF THE FORMER CITY WATERWORKS BUILDING (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #4 (0092) through (2140) CD 10:43 through 11:39 BOOK 50 Page 22460 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22461 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that citizens have indicated concern regarding the fate of the former Waterworks Building located at 1025 North Orange Avenue; that the County will not be purchasing the Waterworks Building for use as a fire station and museum; that interest has been expressed by several parties to purchase the Waterworks Building and to restore the Waterworks Building for use as an office; that the Administration should prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for redevelopment of the former Waterworks Building consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code), the Zoning Code (1998 ed.), the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code), and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Guidelines; that the RFP should indicate the desire is specifically for restoration of the Waterworks Building. Mayor Mason stated that the understanding was the City intended to allow Gifts From God ministries to use the Waterworks Building site and asked the date potential buyers contacted the Vice Mayor with the desire to purchase the Waterworks Building? Vice Mayor Quillin stated that three or four inquiries have been received in recent years. Mayor Mason asked the reason the remaining Commissioners are unaware of the potential buyers? City Manager McNees stated that only one potential buyer has formally indicated interest in purchasing the Waterworks Building; that the interest was expressed to him today; that discussions have been held previously with Gifts From God ministries concerning use of the Waterworks Building site; that both selling the Waterworks Building for commercial use and allowing Gifts From God ministries to use the site may be feasible; that a broad RFP can be issued allowing any entity with an interest in the Waterworks Building the opportunity to submit a proposal providing the Commission with a wealth of options for determining the best and highest use of the Waterworks Building. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that an initial presentation concerning the Waterworks Building was made to previous Commissioners as well as her and Mayor Mason subsequent to the decision by the County Fire Department. Mayor Mason stated that the County's decision not to purchase the Waterworks Building was known; that the interest of other potential buyers was not known. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the public is unaware the County decided not to purchase the Waterworks Building; that the Waterworks Building is falling into disrepair; that historical buildings must be salvaged. Mayor Mason stated that she sits on the State's Historical Preservation Advisory Committee and is a proponent of historical preservation; that intentions have been expressed by the City to Gifts From God ministries which should be honored. City Manager McNees stated that a meeting with Gifts From God ministries was previously held during which interest in the Waterworks Building site was expressed; that offering property to the first party to express interest is not encouraged; that an open RFP process in which all interested parties are provided the opportunity to propose concepts for the Waterworks Building is encouraged; that an open RFP process allows the Commission to determine the highest and best use for the Waterworks Building. Mayor Mason concurred and stated that the Administration should inform the Commission at the time potential buyers express interest in purchasing City property in future instances. City Manager McNees concurred. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred and stated that organizations such as Gifts From God ministries should not assume use of the Waterworks Building site will be granted simply by asking; that surplus property must be identified and an RFP issued; that the Waterworks Building has not been committed to any entity; that the proposal from Gifts From God ministries is not and has never been supported; that many City surplus properties are available which should be reviewed. Commissioner Martin stated that Gifts From God ministries has not indicated an interest in using the Waterworks Building; that Gifts From God ministries is interested in using a portion of the Waterworks Building site; that a solution can be reached; that an open RFP process is supported; that the proposal from Gifts From God ministries is also supported; however, the highest and best use for the Waterworks Building should be determined. BOOK 50 Page 22462 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22463 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that having the Waterworks Building placed on the tax rolls and receiving tax revenue from the property will be beneficial to the City. Commissioner Martin stated that the map of surplus City property included in the Agenda backup material is confusing. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the area at 10th Street and Orange Avenue designated on the map is the Waterworks Building site. City Manager McNees stated that another 0.9-acre site further north on Orange Avenue on the map is also surplus City property. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred and stated that the 0.9-acre site is an easement which should be retained by the City. Commissioner Martin stated that confusion exists; that several parcels, existing buildings, and footprints are indicated on the map; that the RFP issued should be broad and open-ended. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a proposal to refurbish or rehabilitate the Waterworks Building will be significantly supported. The following people came before the Commission: Kurt Lucas, 1012 North Orange Avenue (34236), distributed copies of the "Existing Condition Survey of City Waterworks Building" survey completed by Barger & Dean Architects, Inc., (Barger & Dean) in November 1997 and stated that he owns JKL Design Group (JKL) which is a commercial interior design firm leasing office space across the street from the Waterworks Building; that the Waterworks Building is deteriorating daily; that portions of the roof have collapsed into the Waterworks Building; that a City landmark is being lost; that current JKL design projects include work for the National Parks Service in Washington, D.C.; that he is 100 percent confident JKL can preserve the Waterworks Building; that he is personally attached to the building; that the desire is to purchase and restore the Waterworks Building for national prominence and City pride; that JKL would relocate into the Waterworks Building if purchased; that Barger & Dean estimated a cost of $507,000 for restoration in 1997; that funds will not be solicited from the City for renovation; that the current request is to approve the RFP process for the Waterworks Building. Commissioner Palmer stated that the Barger & Dean survey is dated November 1997; that the cost estimate is likely no longer accurate. Mr. Lucas concurred and stated that the intent is to convey JKL understands and welcomes the opportunity to restore the Waterworks Building. Paul Mercier, County Commissioner, 935 Indian Beach Drive (34234), Wayne DeLair, 1937 8th Street (34236), and Michael Butterfield, 369 Dolphin Shores Circle, Nokomis, (34275). County Commissioner Mercier stated that the desire is to discuss the Waterworks Building; that the Waterworks Building is a commercial site; that the City should not jeopardize the ability to sell and preserve the property; however, different intentions were previously expressed to Gifts From God ministries. County Commissioner Mercier continued that Gillespie Park residents requested he address the Commission concerning a permanent solution to the City's homeless situation; that the right of citizens to meet in City or County parks is understood and supported; that the former Director of Redevelopment and Development Services presented the opportunity to use the Waterworks Building site to Gifts From God ministries for consideration; that other locations have been visited; however, the Waterworks Building location is best suited for Gifts From God ministries. County Commissioner Mercier stated further that the homeless situation is a national problem; that the County's human services must be upgraded; that citizens and government can be part of the problem or part of the solution; that government moves slowly; that Gifts From God ministries has waited through Commission resignations, two Commission elections, one City Manager retirement, one City Manager search, and one community redevelopment executive to propose and discuss use of the Waterworks Building site with a full and complete Commission and Administration; that a sample lease was presented to and reviewed by Gifts From God ministries. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the person presenting Gifts From God ministries with a sample lease? BOOK 50 Page 22464 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22465 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Mr. Butterfield stated that the City Attorney's Office presented him with a copy of a sample lease. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the policy issues concerning leases of City property should be established at the Commission table. County Commissioner Mercier stated that individual meetings were held with City Commissioners; that Gifts From God ministries will not obstruct the right of the City to sell and financially benefit from the Waterworks Building; however, the sudden influx of potential buyers is a concern; that Gifts From God ministries is searching for a neutral place to meet; that Mr. Butterfield is a significant resource for addressing the homeless situation; that referral to Mr. Butterfield is given at the time homeless concerns are presented to the County; that the methods chosen to resolve the homeless situation are a reflection of a community's moral character. Mr. DeLair stated that significant time was spent in previous years working with Strom Thurman and the Clean Florida campaign; that a significant partnership such as demonstrated in the City should be embraced rather than discarded; that eiforts to clean and restore a building are not necessary if no people are available to go into the building; that Gifts From God ministries fosters the self-worth of homeless people; that several homeless people will be encountered during his drive home this evening; that Mr. Butterfield has accomplished significant goals and helps people; that the sudden influx of potential buyers for the Waterworks Building is a concern; that the homeless situation must be resolved; that the City's leadership is requested and desired; that Gifts From God ministries can only do so much; that citizens support resolving the homeless situation; that Mr. Butterfield has garnered medical and legal assistance for the City's homeless residents; that being informed the City's intentions with the Waterworks Building have changed without notice is a concern; that dignified communications must be developed to properly inform parties if intentions change; that Gillespie Park residents respect the quality of life of all individuals; that the City should seize, upon the partnership opportunities available. Mr. Butterfield stated that his background is in architecture; that individual meetings were held with each Commissioner; that the sudden influx of potential buyers of the Waterworks Building is surprising; that the original intent of the Commission was understood differently; that the greater good should be served; that both a charitable and commercial use may be developed at the Waterworks Building site; that Gillespie Park residents have worked diligently to be good neighbors and help resolve the homeless situation; that the life-changes and economic impact resulting from the help of Gifts From God ministries is self-evident; that possible alternate sites for Gifts From God ministries have been proposed and will be happily considered if meeting certain requirements; that the desire is to continue being a good neighbor; that Gifts From God ministries is a grass-roots effort; that use of the Waterworks Building by Gifts From God ministries will assist the City's poor as well as the homeless; that use of the site will facilitate providing food for hungry children; that use of the Waterworks Building would enable Gifts From God ministries to meet the poor and homeless at the point of need. Mr. Butterfield continued that Gifts From God ministries provides over 12,000 meals served by over 150 volunteers; that funds are not being solicited from the City; that 42 vehicles have been supplied to the poor and homeless of the City; that funds are raised for a first and last month's rent along with security deposits to obtain housing for the City's poor and homeless; that furniture is provided; that self-worth is instilled in the City's poor and homeless who then become economically viable; that individuals who have been helped by Gifts From God ministries become volunteers; that local hospitals, legal counsels, food providers, the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association (GPNA), the City, and the County have come together to work for Gifts From God ministries to resolve the homeless situation; that the request made for .5 acres of land at the Waterworks Building site is for important uses; that Gifts From God ministries provide help at the point help is needed; that the City's homeless and poor congregate at the Waterworks Building site requested by Gifts From God ministries; that greater assistance will be provided if Gifts From God ministries can meet the City's poor and homeless at the place the City's poor and homeless congregate; that the desire is to construct a supervised community park at the Waterworks Building site to Eurther the work of Gifts From God ministries. County Commissioner Mercier stated that the cost of restoring the Waterworks Building has been estimated at $750,000; that the Waterworks Building contains asbestos; that the Waterworks Building site has many environmental concerns; that Gifts From God ministries has acted diligently and in good faith with the BOOK 50 Page 22466 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22467 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. City for use of the Waterworks Building; that the desire is to move forward. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the issue of providing sample leases to the public will be addressed with the Administration at a later date. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the sample lease provided was a copy of a lease the City holds with another not-tor-profit organization; that the lease is public record; that distribution of the sample lease did not involve any legal work for the City Attorney's Office. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that receiving a copy of the sample lease distributed to Gifts From God ministries would be appreciated. Thorning Little, 524 Columbia Court (34236), stated that the Historic Preservation Board is aware of the discussions between the City and Gifts From God ministries for use of the Waterworks Building; that moving forward with the determined use for the Waterworks Building. is supported; that the Waterworks Building is in disrepair and should be preserved; that provisions for historic designation of a structure in disrepair are available; that steps must be taken prior to historic designation on a dilapidated building including building stabilization; that the current zoning status of the Waterworks Building should be considered; that issuance of RFPsS for other properties similar to the Waterworks Building has been difficult due to the existing zoning of the buildings; that a water tower with significant historical purpose was demolished at the Waterworks Building site without being considered for designation by the Historic Preservation Board; that the Waterworks Building is not receiving proper attention in relation to the integrity of the building and site; that the issues of railroad siding, tax incentives, and not-for-profit organizations are impeding the real issue of expeditiously saving the Waterworks Building and site; that the use of the property is not of as much concern as the expeditious saving of the property while the opportunity is available; that swift decisions must be made. Mayor Mason asked if the Waterworks Building is historically designated? Mr. Lucas stated that the Historic Society informed him the Waterworks Building is included on : the National Register of Historic Places. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Waterworks Building has been nationally but not locally designated as historical. Commissioner Martin stated that Gifts From God ministries brought the use of the Waterworks Building to his attention first; that the desire is to address the good faith request by the Gifts From God ministries first; that keeping the City's word with the Gifts From God ministries is important; that Gifts From God ministries should be given assistance to secure a location if the Waterworks Building is determined for another purpose not involving Gifts From God ministries; that the disrepair of the building is a concern; that the City must expeditiously stabilize the Waterworks Building to prevent further deterioration; that issuance of an open RFP is supported. Commissioner Servian concurred and stated that Gifts From God ministries brought the use of the Waterworks Building to her attention first as well; that information shared and discussed with Gifts From God ministries was in good faith; that other potential buyers for the Waterworks Building were not known; that the desire is to assist Gifts From God ministries in securing a mutually beneficial site; that the work of Gifts From God ministries is appreciated and commended; that the homeless situation is serious and must not be ignored; that historic preservation is supported; that the Waterworks Building should be restored; however, assisting Gifts From God ministries is also desired. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that many other sites have personally been identified to Gifts From God ministries; that Gifts From God ministries has turned down each possible site proposed; that former Commissioners attempted to deny citizen access to Gillespie Park; that access to Gillespie Park was supported at that time; that Gillespie Park residents are attempting to rid the Gillespie Park neighborhood of homeless people which is a concern; that Gifts From God ministries desires to serve the needs of the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association rather than benefit the poor and homeless; that disruptive homeless people are found in Gillespie Park Neighborhood as well as Main Street; that alternative sites have been offered to Gifts From God ministries; that Gifts From God ministries duplicates the services of Resurrection House; that only one public service BOOK 50 Page 22468 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22469 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. organization is necessary; that Gifts From God ministries only operates from 3 to 6 p.m. on Sunday serving meals to the City's poor and homeless; that interest in the Waterworks Building expressed by parties other than Gifts From God ministries has been discussed at the Commission Table at previous meetings; that the former City Manager consistently indicated the County was searching for funding to purchase and rehabilitate the Waterworks Building each time asked about the site's status; that several potential buyers have expressed interest in purchasing and restoring the Waterworks Building in recent years; that the information is not new; that issuance of an open RFP is supported; that the desire is to restore the Waterworks Building; that allowing Gifts From God ministries to use the Waterworks Building site is not supported; that WWSB-TV Channel 40 (Channel 40) does not support allowing Gifts From God ministries to use the Waterworks Building site; that many alternate locations, including sites located on the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) property, have been suggested to the Gifts From God ministries but were rejected; that an RFP should be issued; that Gifts From God can submit a proposal; however, the desire is to facilitate the best interest for the entire community. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to extend the January 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting past the 11:30 p.m. deadline to complete the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Quillin, it was moved to refer issuance of a Request For Proposal (RFP) for renovation and use of the Waterworks Building to the Administration. Motion failed for lack of a second. Mayor Mason asked the location of the SHA property suggested for use by Gifts From God ministries? Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the park adjacent to the SHA was suggested. Mayor Mason stated that the area is a public park. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the area requested by Gifts From God ministries at the Waterworks Building is also a park; that Gifts From God ministries indicated a desire for open park space to construct a building. Commissioner Palmer stated that Gifts From God ministries will erect a tent rather than construct a building. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that Gifts From God ministries desires to construct a building. Mayor Mason stated that the understanding is Gifts From God ministries will construct an open pavilion on the determined location; that the information concerning the number of potential interested buyers of the Waterworks Building was surprising; that she had no prior knowledge of the interest of any entity other than Gifts From God ministries in the Waterworks Building site; that Gifts From God ministries has worked diligently with the Administration to secure use of the Waterworks Building site; that she suggested Gifts From God ministries approach Channel 40 regarding the desired use of the Waterworks Building site as Channel 40 is an adjacent business owner; that better communication between Staff, the Administration, and the Commission is desired; that Gifts From God ministries does excellent work in the City; that the City's poor and homeless will not utilize Gifts From God ministries* services if Gifts From God ministries is located too far away; that the City should assist Gifts From God ministries in securing a location to provide services; that many of the City's homeless do not utilize Resurrection House's services; that several organizations working towards resolving the homeless situation are necessary and desired rather than just one; that the Historic Society is a good source of funding to restore the Waterworks Building; that historic preservation is supported; however, assistance must be provided to Gifts From God ministries. City Manager McNees stated that meetings with Gifts From God ministries concerning the Waterworks Building included discussions of possible obstacles and likely issues in presenting the proposal to the Commission; that the number of potential buyers for the Waterworks Building property was learned this evening; that only one interested buyer other than Gifts From God ministries was identified this afternoon prior to the current meeting; that the Administration has not neglected to inform the Commission of interested parties as the interested parties have just this day been identified to the Administration; that the historic preservation opportunity is unique to the Waterworks Building; that the City owns other BOOK 50 Page 22470 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22471 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. vacant properties which may provide other opportunities; that both commercial and charitable purposes may be determined for the Waterworks Building site; that the services which Gifts From God ministries will require such as water and sewer can be found in other locations; that an RFP open to all proposals can be created and issued. Commissioner Palmer concurred and stated that a mutually beneficial use is desired for the Waterworks Building; that for the Commission to discuss an item, the item must be placed on the Agenda sO the surprising new information is justified; that a potential location on 17th Street for Gifts From God ministries has been identified through personal discussions with the Deputy City Manager; that issuance of an RFP is supported; that a commi tment should be made to securing a beneficial location for Gifts From God ministries. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the City provides 90 percent of the County's social services; that the County should have greater participation in the provision of social services; that several of the City's social service organizations began very small and have grown; that Gifts From God ministries has received many suggestions and refused alternate sites; that Gifts From God ministries desires the Waterworks Building site only; that committing the City to appeasing the desires of Gifts From God ministries is not supported; that Gifts From God ministries should work with other social service organizations in the City; that significant time has been spent in suggesting alternate sites for Gifts From God ministries which have been rejected. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to direct the Administration to address the Gifts From God ministries request for land and determine a method of stabilization to prevent further deterioration of and prepare a Request for Proposal for renovation and proposed use of the former City of Sarasota Waterworks Building located at 1025 North Orange Avenue. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Public Works Department has surveyed the deterioration of the Waterworks Building. 18. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: 2002 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES - APPROVED 2002 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES FOR PRESENTATION TO THE JANUARY 11, 2002, COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #4 (2141) through (2679) CD 11:40 through 11:51 Mayor Mason stated that the City's 2002 legislative priorities were discussed at the September 4, 2001, Regular Commission meeting and are as follows: 1. Ad Valorem Taxation of Municipal Property Public Property such as county-owned sports stadiums are constitutionally exempted from ad valorem taxation; however similar properties owned by municipalities are not in accordance with a decision by the Florida Supreme Court affirming the 1994 amendment to Section 196.012 (6), Florida Statutes, which exempted such municipally owned properties from ad valorem taxation as unconstitutional. The requirement, if unchanged, will cost the City $50,000 in ad valorem taxes for fiscal year (FY) 2001/02 for Ed Smith Sports Stadium. Subsequent to the court ruling, the State Legislature created a task force to consider taxation of seaports and to report back by October 2001 with recommendations concerning the possibility of placing a constitutional amendment before the voters to grant municipalities the same exemptions as counties for publicly owned stadiums. The City's position is such a measure should be decided by referendum of the voters. 2. Swimming Pool Safety Act, aka, the Preston de Ibern Makenzie Merrian Act The law conflicts with the City's adopted zoning regulations concerning fences and walls in the waterfront setback. While alternatives for a four-foot high fence can be used, the options other than fencing require local officials to interpret the law for application in a uniform manner between governmental jurisdictions. State building officials were required to develop a set of guidelines for implementation of the law which places local officials in the position of potentially being exposed to liability due to the numerous interpretations required. The City's position is the role of the local building official should not be to create regulations and standards to assure the law works. The legislation should be repealed or modified BOOK 50 Page 22472 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22473 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. sO the intent is clear and the implementation measures are well defined. 3. Red Light Running Red light running caused over 9,000 crashes, 12,000 injuries, and 126 fatalities in the State in 1999 at an estimated cost of $380 million. Legislation to enable the automated enforcement of red light violations has been before the State Legislature several times during the past six years without success. Three states and several local jurisdictions throughout the country have the enabling legislation in force now. The United States Department of Transportation has studied the effectiveness of automated red light enforcement, and the results indicate red light violations and related crashes are reduced by up to 60 percent at intersections at which automated réd light enforcement is being utilized. Enabling legislation for automated red light enforcement is part of the legislative agenda for the Florida Police Chiefs Association, and is supported locally by the Sarasota Community Traffic Safety Team as well as Sarasota County Government, and the Cities of Sarasota, Venice, and North Port during the 2001 Legislative Session, and should be passed in the 2002 Legislative Session. Mayor Mason continued that the item was placed on the Agenda to determine any additions to the legislative priorities prior to the January 11, 2002, Council of Governments meeting. Vice Mayor Quillin referred to the December 29, 2001, Sarasota Herald-Tribune article entitled "Why Are Drugs So Much Cheaper In Canada?" and stated that the State should utilize its buying power to purchase prescription drugs in volume; that the City's healthcare insurance plans are self-insured; that the cost of prescription drugs is a significant problem; that supporting the State's purchase of prescription drugs in volume should be an additional legislative priority. Commissioner Palmer distributed a Manasota League of Cities (MLC) pamphlet including the MLC 2002 legislative priorities and stated that the MLC supports many legislative priorities; that supporting too many legislative priorities may be difficult. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission should determine the final 2002 legislative priorities at the current meeting so a presentation can be prepared for the January 11, 2002, Council of Governments meeting. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City has determined three 2002 legislative priorities. Mayor Mason stated that additions can be made to the City's list of legislative priorities if the additions are made during the current meeting. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Commission may wish to consider adding the following MLC 2002 legislative priority: Code Enforcement Liens Legislation to add code enforcement fines as liens to ad valorem tax bills of delinquent property owners, creating a effective mechanism for recourse in code enforcement problem cases and an effective tool to aid in cleaning up neighborhoods. Vice Mayor Quillin asked the manner in which delinquent code enforcement liens would be added to ad valorem tax bills? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that an explanation can be provided at a later date; that the Commission may also wish to consider adding the following MLC 2002 legislative priorities: Language Modifications to Chapter 171, Florida Statutes Legislation to enable cities and counties to better define and remedy problems associated with enclaves, substandard pockets of delivery of urban services, and annexation issues in general. Capital Dollars versus Operating Dollars for Bus Systems Legislation to provide flexibility in the use of Federal dollars for operating transportation systems . City Auditor and Clerk Robinson continued that other MLC 2002 legislative priorities which can be considered include community college funding, reclaimed water and water reuse, and opposition to authority over solid waste rates and billboard amortization. Commissioner Martin asked the method of lobbying the MLC 2002 legislative priorities to the local legislative delegation? BOOK 50 Page 22474 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22475 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Palmer stated that the MLC will present the MLC 2002 legislative priorities in Tallahassee, Florida; that the MLC 2002 legislative priorities will be formally adopted by the MLC. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the MLC members sends two representatives at a time to Tallahassee so MLC representatives are constantly in Tallahassee during the legislative session; that legislative priorities may change as bills are passed or denied; that the majority of MLC legislative priorities stem from the legislative priorities adopted by the Florida League of Cities (FLC) in November 2001. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City's legislative priorities are included in the MLC 2002 legislative priorities. Commissioner Martin stated that the Commission can reference support of the MLC 2002 legislative priorities as a fourth City legislative priority. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the City's legislative priority for a Swimming Pool Safety Act and the State's power to purchase prescription drugs on a volume basis is not included in' the MLC 2002 legislative priorities. Commissioner Martin stated that the Commission can reference support of the MLC 2002 legislative priorities as a fourth legislative priority for the City. Mayor Mason stated that the MLC 2002 legislative priorities indicated by the City Auditor and Clerk can be added to the City's legislative priorities. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that several of the MLC 2002 legislative priorities are not applicable or beneficial to the City. Mayor Mason stated that the MLC 2002 legislative priorities indicated for consideration by the City Auditor and Clerk are applicable and beneficial to the City. Commissioner Palmer stated that the MLC 2002 legislative priority concerning growth management and school planning will be a controversial legislative issue which the City should support. City Manager McNees stated that the Deputy City Manager recommends opposing further dilution of the City's àuthority in relation to the creation or administration of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's consensus, the City's three legislative priorities will be presented in Tallahassee during the Legislative Session as determined at the September 4, 2001, Regular Commission meeting, in addition to a legislative priority concerning opposition of any legislation further diluting the City's authority to create or administer Tax Increment Financing Districts as well as specific Manasota League of Cities 2002 legislative priorities as follows: Language Modifications to Chapter 171, Florida Statutes Legislation to enable cities and counties to better define and remedy problems associated with enclaves, substandard pockets of delivery of urban services, and annexation issues in general. Growth Management: School Planning - Legislation to encourage coordination between local governments regarding planning and siting for school facilities while respecting the autonomy of municipal comprehensive planning decisions and holding local school boards accountable for school planning decisions. Code Enforcement Liens Legislation to add code enforcement fines as liens to ad valorem tax bills of delinquent property owners, creating an effective mechanism for recourse in code enforcement problem cases and an effective tool to aid in cleaning up neighborhoods. Capital Dollars versus Operating Dollars for Bus Systems Legislation to allow flexibility in the use of Federal dollars for operating transportation systems. Community College Funding Approval of the Florida Board of Education's 2002/03 request for funding the Florida Community College System of an amount equal to a 2.5 percent average increase, based upon an average enrollment increase of 5 percent. Reclaimed Water and Water Reuse - Legislation to support the utilization of reuse if economically, BOOK 50 Page 22476 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22477 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. environmentally, and technically feasible as well as measures that encourage reuse as possible. Authority Over Solid Waste Services - Opposition to legislation to impose restrictions on local government's ability to regulate construction and demolition materials as well as impair existing solid waste franchise agreements. Billboard Amortization - Opposition to legislation to remove the authority for local governments to amortize, or phase out, billboards. Commissioner Palmer stated that a elecommunications tax issue concerning the assignment of a telecommunications tax to municipalities and counties according to zip codes is a concern. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a study commission was created which is investigating the assignment of elecommunication tax by zip codes. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City has zip codes overlapping into the County which could be a problem. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that legislation concerning the elecommunications tax was passed in 2000. Commissioner Palmer stated that the distribution of future elecommunications taxes is based upon zip codes; that a concern is the possibility of overlapping zip codes between the City and the County; that determining the appropriate governmental entity to receive the revenues may be difficult; that the intent is to bring the concern of the proper distribution of the revenue to the attention of Staff for any necessary action. Vice Mayor Quillin referred to the Financial Status Report as of September 30, 2001, from Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, issued on December 11, 2001, as follows: These two Excise Taxes [the Electric Excise Tax and the Telecommunications Tax] accounts (sic) for most of the increase in this category [Utility Excise Taxes]. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the recent change in the telecommunications tax was from a percentage basis to a flat rate; that the City was unsure of the effect on revenues. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the legislation concerning the telecommunications tax included a hold harmless clause sO local governments would not receive less revenues. 19. BOARD APPOINTMIENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: CIVIL SERVICE/GENERAL PERSONNEL BOARD - REAPPOINTED DOROTHYE SMITH AND GILBERT LEACOCK (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #4 (2680) through (2710) CD 11:52 through 11:52 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the terms of Dorothye Smith and Gilbert Leacock on the Civil Service/General Personnel Board expired in May 2001; that the reappointments were not brought forward in May 2001 due to the new proposed Personnel Rules and Regulations which eliminate the Civil Service/General Personnel Board and establish a Special Master process; however, the reappointments should be made due to the length of time necessary to adopt new Personnel Rules and Regulations; that both Ms. Smith and Mr. Leacock are eligible for and expressed interest in reappointment. On motion of Commissioner Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to reappoint Dorothye Smith and Gilbert Leacock to the Civil Service/Seneral Personnel Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 20. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM IX) #4 (2710) CD 11:52 There were no Commission Board or Committee reports,. 21. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - ADMINISTRATION WILL: 1) PROVIDE A FINAL AGENDA FOR THE JANUARY 14, 2002, COMMISSION RETREAT BY JANUARY 9, 2002; 2) PROVIDE A COPY OF FEDERAL BUILDING RENOVATION SCHEDULE; AND 3) PLACE THE FUNDING REQUEST FOR SARASOTA COURT WATCH, INC., ON THE AGENDA FOR THE JANUARY 22, 2002, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (2710) through (3219) CD 11:52 through 12:02 BOOK 50 Page 22478 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22479 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. VICE MAYOR QUILLIN: A. referred to a December 27, 2001, Interoffice Memorandum from Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, regarding the lack of an eastbound to northbound left turn at the intersection of Lemon Avenue and 10th Street into the WWSB-TV Channel 40 (Channel 40) parking lot and stated that telephone calls have been received concerning the safety of the forced U-turn at Lemon or Orange Avenue for eastbound traffic to access the Channel 40 parking lot; that each Department Head should drive northbound on Lemon Avenue and attempt to make the U-turn into the 10th Street Channel 40 parking lot to experience the difficulty; that the Interoffice Memorandum indicates an eastbound to northbound left turn would be utilized only 8 out of every 45 entrances into the parking lot; that the "No Left Turn" sign should be removed as sO few left turns would be attempted; that the Administration should re-evaluate the forced U-turn which is a safety hazard and develop a better solution. B. stated that the Sarasota Herald-Tribune recently ran an article indicating the fine for unlawful parking downtown is $88; that the fine was determined by the Commission as no more than $75; that the Administration should review the situation to assure the correct fine is being assessed. C. stated that a December 27, 2001, Pelican Press article entitled "Ringling Bridge Light Plan Could Threaten Sea Turtles" indicates the proposed lighting for the John Ringling Causeway Bridge Replacement replacement bridge) will endanger sea turtles; that the lighting plan for the replacement bridge is a personal priority; that an update of the replacement bridge lighting plan would be appreciated. City Manager McNees stated that a December 7, 2001, letter from Kenya Leonard, County Environmental Specialist, was received indicating the County is concerned the skyglow created by the replacement bridge lighting will disorient sea turtle hatchlings; that PCL Civil Contractors, Inc. (PCL), previously indicated the County's concerns regarding sea turtles would be addressed and recently assured the concerns can be resolved; that a meeting with PCL has been scheduled at which time the concerns regarding sea turtles will be finally resolved. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the Commission should be informed of discussions concerning the replacement bridge lighting plan. Commissioner Martin stated that the lighting consultant should be present at any future meetings with PCL concerning the replacement bridge lighting plan. Vice Mayor Quillin concurred and stated that the lighting consultant has never met with the Commission concerning the replacement bridge lighting plan. City Manager McNees stated that the meeting scheduled with PCL is to determine the reasons protection of sea turtles has not been considered as promised rather than discussing the replacement bridge lighting plan. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the lighting consultant was requested to and did not attend either Commission meeting concerning the replacement bridge lighting plan. D. stated that an update and review of the Personnel Rules and Regulations was promised two years ago; that a final recommendation has not yet been presented to the Commission. E. stated that a discussion of the Commission's Rules of Procedure should be included on the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat Agenda. F. stated that the State should use its buying power to purchase prescription drugs for the benefit of State and local governments healthcare insurance programs; that the City should take an active role in encouraging the State to purchase prescription drugs on a volume basis; that the cost of prescription drugs is rising significantly. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that a discussion of Florida's Govermment-in-the-Sunshine Law would be appreciated during the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat. BOOK 50 Page 22480 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 50 Page 22481 01/07/02 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Quillin asked if the Commission will receive a copy of the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat Agenda prior to January 14, 2002? City Manager McNees stated yes; that the Commission will receive a copy of the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat final Agenda on January 9, 2002. Commissioner Palmer stated that the City Auditor and Clerk and the City Attorney should be provided with and review the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat Agenda prior to finalization. City Manager McNees stated that the City Auditor and Clerk and the City Attorney contributed to the creation of the January 14, 2002, Commission retreat Agenda and are aware of the contents. COMMISSIONER PALMER: A. stated that a status report concerning the Federal Building would be appreciated. City Manager McNees - stated that a copy of the Federal Building renovation schedule will be provided to the Commission. B. stated that a status report concerning the public pool at Lido Beach would be appreciated. City Manager McNees stated that the County has been informed the decision to keep the public pool at Lido Beach open is the City's decision; that a status report will be provided at a later date. C. stated that additional funding for Sarasota Court Watch, Inc., (Court Watch) was to be included on the current Agenda but was not. City Manager McNees stated that Court Watch did not submit the requested financial figures in sufficient time to meet the Agenda deadline; that the Court Watch funding request will be included on the Agenda of the January 22, 2002, Regular Commission meèting. 22. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (3220) CD 12:02 There being no further business, Mayor Mason adjourned the Regular meeting of January 7, 2002, at 12:02 a.m. Caudypel aAG CAROLYI J.I MASON, MAYOR ATTEST: BilWE Robune 4 BILLY EPROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK % BOOK 50 Page 22482 01/07/02 6:00 P.M.