Book 34 Page 8884 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 7, 1992 AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Jack Gurney, Vice Mayor Gene Pillot (arrived at 6:08 p.m.), Commissioners Fredd Atkins, David Merrill, and Nora Patterson, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Jack Gurney The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9, of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0030) through (0057) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated there were two Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove from SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS, ITEM NO. V-2 regarding Fire Truck No. 43 and Fire Station No. 4 modifications, at the request of David Stershic. B. Remove Scheduled Presentations, Item No. V-3, regarding racism in the City Building Department, at the request of Dr. James. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. C. Mayor Gurney requested that Scheduled Presentations, Item V-1, regarding the National Estuary Program be moved forward on the agenda to follow the first two presentations. There was no objection to this additional change. 2. PRESENTATION RE: REPORT ON SARASOTA'S ASSISTANCE TO SOUTH FLORIDA AFTER HURRICANE ANDREW - REPRESENTATIVES FROM CITY POLICE, FIRE AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS AND 1ST BATTALION 116TH FIELD ARTILLERY FLORIDA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD #1 (0090) through (1310) Mayor Gurney stated that he requested this presentation because. he felt that this information would provide useful information for the City in considering emergency preparedness strategies for the future. Alex Hernandez, City Public Works Shop Foreman; Randy Stulce, Battalion Chief, City Fire/Rescue Department; Frank Puder, City Police Department; and Major Greg Moore, 1st Battalion, 116th Field Artillery, National Guard, came to the Commission table. Mr. Puder stated that six officers from the City Police Department, along with a contingency from Sarasota County of approximately 22 officers, assisted local law officials in the devastated Homestead area for seven days with curfew and law enforcement, and distribution of food, water, and supplies. Mr. Puder also stated that he feels it is imperative that people living on the water have a team in place to manage relief efforts that would follow any type of storm or disaster. Vice-Mayor Pillot arrived at 6:08 p.m. Mr. Puder continued that communication was a major problem; and that management of a relief effort would be of paramount importance in preparing for something of this nature. Mr. Stulce stated that the Fire-Rescue Department took nine fire fighters, some of which were cross trained in various aspects such as fire fighting, emergency, medical service, hazardous materials, and search and rescue practices; that their initial assignment was search and rescue; that their aid was very welcomed; that they were the first outside agency in many areas that the victims saw during the first three days after the storm; that they were located in the heart of the Cutler Ridge, Homestead Area; that the additional help of Alex Hernandez with his spanish speaking ability was of crucial assistance to the operation; and that a Fire Department mechanic was also very helpful and greatly needed at times. Mr. Stulce also stated that their help was very much needed; that they spent five days in the area; that the Fire-Rescue Department appreciates the Commission's approval of allowing them to render aid to Homestead; that he feels if Sarasota experiences a similar disaster that an outpouring will arrive in the same way that it was given in the Metro-Dade area; and that there is a lot to be learned from this. Mr. Hernandez stated that his team of four from Public Works consisted of Joe Bryant, Public Works foreman; Mike Strehler, Heavy Equipment Operator; and Roscoe Gill, Heavy Equipment Operator; that they took two dump trucks, a payloader, a motor home, hand tools, etc.; that the team's job was to pick up as much debris possible so that the streets of Key Biscayne could remain passable; that Book 34 Page 8885 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8886 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. residents and village officials were very happy to see them; that the knowledge and experience gained from assisting other communities places Sarasota in a much better position to deal with disasters. Major Moore stated that Colonel Nick V. Capitano, Commander of First Battalion 116th Field Artillery Florida Army National Guard, and the 425 Guardsmen serving in that unit, thanks the Commission for the opportunity to speak of their involvement in the Hurricane Andrew aftermath. Major Moore also stated that on August 24, 1992, Hurricane Andrew blasted into South Dade County at 4:52 a.m.; that the destruction looked like a nuclear blast without the radiation; that the devastation was mainly due to the fact that the structures consisted of mobile homes and unregulated code structures; that 90% of homes and businesses were severely damaged and destroyed; that 57 people died; that nearly 250,000 people were rendered homeless; that 1.5 million people were without electricity; and that the cost to south Florida is estimated at $20 billion dollars. Major Moore continued that the Florida Guardsmen were the first to respond; that everyone was ready to serve; that the guard was initially assigned security missions; that infantry, artillery, air defense, cavalry, military police, everything was called upi that guard engineer units were called to move debris; medical and communication units were called up; maintenance and transportation outfits; mobile kitchen trailers were set up; that, in summary, the National Guard had over 6,300 people called up for active duty; that, in addition to all other assistance provided from all over Florida that they were still overwhelmed with the problems; and that the president then called in the Tenth Mountain Division and the 82nd Airborne Division to help with humanitarian work. Major Moore stated further that the National Guard's basic guideline for providing assistance to city, county and state agencies is called Military Support to Civilian Authorities (MASCA) i that the basic services such as food, water, medicine, and power were like gold during the first 72 hours; that there were problems connecting the goods with the people; that these matters need to be addressed; that Colonel Capitano wished to extend to the City of Sarasota the Guard's desire to give the City full cooperation in emergency planning; that they will spend whatever time the City administration would like for them to review the general and specific details of emergency support because it could happen here and they wished to be ready to support. City Manager Sollenberger stated that this was a very generous offer on behalf of Major Moore and that this matter will be taken up with the National Guard and that John Lewis, Public Safety Director, will arrange for the Guard to be involved with City personnel in order to improve their response plan to such a disaster. Commissioner Atkins stated that he was in the Miami area just prior and subsequent to Hurricane Andrew; that it was much more devastating than the Hurricane Hugo damage done to South Carolina; that his brother lives in the area; that he feels that not everything that can be done has been done; that perhaps some follow up should take place; that he thanks the City employees for contributing care packages for his brother. Mayor Gurney presented certificates of appreciation to the 1st Battalion 116th Field Artillery Florida Army National Guard, the City Police Department, City Fire Rescue Department, and the Department of Public Works from the City of Sarasota, on behalf of the Commission and the administration. 3. PRESENTATION RE: CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO RON NOURSE FOR SAVING A LIFE AT THE BOBBY JONES GOLF COURSE ON OCTOBER 9, 1992 = MAYOR GURNEY #1 (1310) through (1395) Mayor Gurney presented a certificate of appreciation to Mr. Ron Nourse on behalf of the commission, the administration and the citizens of Sarasota, to commend Mr. Nourse for the critical role played in saving a human life by administering cardio-pulmonary resuscitation to Mr. Lawrence Brinkley at the Bobby Jones Golf Course. Mayor Gurney stated that this decisive action averted a possible tragic loss to family and friends; and that the City Commission extends its sincere appreciation and thanks to Mr. Nourse for his skillful response to danger in time of emergency. 4. PRESENTATION RE: SARASOTA BAY PROGRAM = TECHNICAL FINDINGS MARK ALDERSON, DIRECTOR = (AGENDA ITEM V-1) #1 (1310) through (2180) Mr. Mark Alderson, Director, and Dave Tomasko, Senior Scientist, both of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program, came to the Commission table. Mr. Alderson stated that a lot of hard work by the community went into the Bay Management Improvement Options paper; that this is part of their "Framework For Action" (FFA) report that will be formally released to the community in March, 1993; that these improvement options came from approximately, $2.5 million dollars of technical work conducted on the Bay, as well as citizen advisors. Mr. Alderson stated that that there are five major issues that need to be addressed regarding the improvement of Sarasota Bay and its Book 34 Page 8887 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8888 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. recreational opportunities; that the two major items seen with regard to pollution are stormwater and wastewater; that data indicates that nitrogen contribution is a very important pollutant; that the sources are wastewater, stormwater, rainfall and base flow; that these contributions vary in different regions; that there are also elevated levels of toxic substances such as lead, zinc and copper; traces of pesticides and PCB's; that the level of toxins are of ecological risk levels; and that the pollution should be thought of as both nutrients such as nitrogen and toxic substances, which mostly come from stormwater. Mr. Alderson stated that much of the nutrient pollution comes to the lower part of the Bay particularly, from the Phillippi Creek area; that the most degraded areas are in Little Sarasota Bay and in the Palma Sola area of the Bay; that these areas have very reduced circulation and the pollutants tend to build up; that, however, the area off of the city of Sarasota has seen a tremendous improvement as a result of Manatee County treatment operation improvements and the City's advance waste treatment; and that private treatment plants should be targeted with regard to pollution control strategy. Mr. Tomasko stated that there are areas with possible nitrogen load reduction; that in the upper part of the bay wastewater is being very effectively dealt with; that the improvements to the Manatee wastewater treatment system has reduced the load by approximately eight times with secondary treatment and agricultural and urban reuse; that in the central part of the Bay there are further reductions of loading by ten times; that there is a dramatic reduction of loads by the City's plant; that private utilities in the area are loading more nitrogen into Whittaker Bayou than the City's treatment plant; that stormwater is the major load into that particular area; and that indirect discharges are a greater water quality problem than direct discharges. Commissioner Patterson left the Commission table at 6:50 p.m. Mr. Tomasko continued that many of the smaller utility plants do not function well and that 30% of them overflow and discharge fluid into certain areas; and that the greatest potential for water quality improvement is in the southern part of the bay. Mr. Alderson stated that since the City's treatment operation is presently at 50% of its capability that there may be opportunities between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County in some kind of joint effort to potentially help solve some of the Bay problems with regard to nitrogen loading; that Sarasota County is currently designing a waste treatment facility on Bee Ridge Road; that perhaps this plan could be expanded to its full opportunities; that Phillippi Creek is by far the number one source of nitrogen load to Sarasota Bay at the present time; that a lot of nitrogen is being spread through lawn care and individual use of fertilizersi and there may be opportunities to seek reductions through voluntary efforts with the nurseries and chemical companies. Mr. Tomasko stated that Sarasota Bay is above the state average in terms of lead, copper and zinc and is very much above the Florida average for lead; that 90% of the lead comes from stormwater runoff; that zinc comes from the rainfall; that lead can be acted on; that Hudson Bayou has the highest shellfish lead concentration in the country; and that lead can be dealt with through stormwater control structures. Mr. Alderson stated that there are 44 management options on the table; that their job during the next year is to package these for consideration by the community; that the problem can be dealt with; that he believes their plan is realistic; that if there are joint efforts between the local units of government, a significant improvement can be made; that over the past three years, nitrogen loads have been reduced by approximately 32% bay wide as a result of the Manatee County operation improvements and the City of Sarasota; that this equals approximately 72% of the source problem; and that they are seeing a response in the system as a result of these reductions. Mr. Alderson added that septic tanks are regulated by HRS in the State of Florida; that the Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) does not permit septic tanks; that nitrogen loadings from septic tanks are not regulated; that the same is true for private treatment plants that are on percolation ponds and drain fields which are also not regulated as strongly by DER; that, therefore, Sarasota County has not had to deal with the same type of issues; and that major improvements could be made through joint efforts. Commissioner Patterson returns to the table at 7:00 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3601, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LYING CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY LIMITS, INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA AS PETITIONED BY GEORGE AND GLORIA CHURCH, SAID REAL PROPERTY BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: A PARCEL APPROXIMATELY 108 FEET BY 94 FEET LYING ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF BAY ROAD AND S. TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41) FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE UNION 76 STATION, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN: MAKING FINDINGS; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA TO INCLUDE SAID REAL PROPERTY; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 92-ANNEX-02) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) A N Book 34 Page 8889 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8890 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3608, TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE FROM CI ZONE DISTRICT SARASOTA COUNTY TO CI ZONE DISTRICT CITY OF SARASOTA, REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: A PARCEL APPROXIMATELY 108 FEET BY 94 FEET LYING ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF BAY ROAD AND S. TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41), A/K/A 3902 s. TAMIAMI TRAIL, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE UNION 76 STATION: ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 92-CO-05, GEORGE AND GLORIA CHURCH) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1 #1 (2180) through (2400) Mayor Gurney requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and be sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. Planning Director Jane Robinson came to the Commission table and stated that the Planning Board found the proposed zone (CI) consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval to the Commission; and that Planning staff supported the rezoning as well. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 92-3601 and proposed Ordinance No. 92-3608. There was no one to speak and Mayor Gurney closed the public hearings. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 92-3601 by title only. On motion of Vice-Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 92-3601 on first reading. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 92-3608 by title only. On motion of Vice-Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 92-3608 on first reading. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 6. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3621, AMENDING THE SARASOTA CITY CODE (1986), CHAPTER 33, TO ADD A NEW ARTICLE VIII TO CREATE A RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCE IN CONFLICT; ETC. PASSED ON FIRST READING CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND ORDINANCE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE NECESSARY FOR WEIGHING COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL IMPACT CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND ORDINANCE TO STATE THAT PETITION COMES TO THE COMMISSION TABLE PRIOR TO THE CITY MANAGER CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND ORDINANCE TO STRIKE THE FEES (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #1 (2400) through #2 (1135) City Engineer Daughters, Joe Pizzalato, Engineering Technician, and Vivian Hawthorne, Parking, Enforcement Division came to the Commission table. Mr. Daughters stated that in response to numerous neighborhood complaints to restrict the commercial and institutional parking intrusion into City neighborhoods a study was prepared to analyze various alternatives; that the permitted parking program is the one that was chosen for recommendation; and that neighborhood input was considered in the study. Mr. Daughters stated that the process of the program is as follows: that upon receipt of a petition representing 70% of the owners or occupants in a neighborhood sector or by initiative of the City Commission itself, a study would be conducted to determine if the area qualifies for a designation as a residential parking permit area; a workshop would be scheduled in the neighborhood to inform the residents of the findings of the study; if the criteria is met, the neighborhood concerns would be discussed and the neighborhood would be informed of the costs involved in the permit program; alternatives to the permit program would also be discussed at that time; then the City Manager would review the data collected and if the number of "on street" parking spaces occupied by vehicles from outside of the neighborhood equals or exceeds 15% of the available parking spaces, the City Commission may designate the neighborhood as a residential parking area; if approved by the Commission, the residents will be advised in writing and forwarded application forms. A maximum of two decals per property will be issued to the residents; the yearly fee of $12 per resident would provide for two vehicles; residents may also purchase up to two visitors parking permits at $2 each per month; Book 34 Page 8891 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8892 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. event related parking permits may be purchased at $2 per month; the Public Works Department will then install the signage; the Parking Enforcement and Police Departments will enforce the program; violation of parking without a permit will be subject to a $20 fine. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. Mr. Ernie Babb, 1896 Bahia Vista Street, representing himself, came to the Commission table and stated that this ordinance will create an administrative monster; that if the traffic exceeds an unspecified limit the City erects "no parking" signs; that this is done to facilitate the traffic flow with no regard to roadway or street classification; that the first two "whereas" Clauses in this ordinance would be true for general traffic in a residential district as well as the parking, and the City should address both issues; that the third "whereas" should establish residential areas and define the prohibition for all encroachment; that the fourth "whereas" is not relevant to this ordinance; and that the fifth and sixth "whereas" clauses just sound nice. Mr. Babb also stated that the lack of space is the root of the problem and it is not addressed by this ordinance; that the neighborhoods should not be made responsible for the inequities in their area nor should they incur additional expense and bureaucratic red tape to park in front of their property; and that it seems a much simpler solution would be to designate which areas are residential and then implement traffic abatement measures. Mr. Babb continued that the Commission should not enact a cumbersome, bureaucratic response to a problem, but correct the cause of the problem, and institute neighborhood designations, and institute neighborhood traffic and parking controls. William L. Carman, III, 6901 Poinsettia Avenue, came to the Commission table and stated that he represents the St. Armands Merchants Association and several St. Armands residents; that he is reading a letter from the president of the St. Armands Merchants Association, stating that they request exemption from the neighborhood parking by permit program until the City establishes adequate parking for the business area; that several parking studies since 1966 have all indicated the lack of sufficient parking spaces to handle the needs; and that to implement such a program would be very detrimental to the business community. Mr. Carman read a letter from Jim McDonald of Charley's Crab Restaurant stating that this program would be devastating to St. Armands Circle and would create a parking space deficit in the area. Mr. Carman read two other letters from residents of St. Armands Circle which were opposed to the proposal of restricting parking on St. Armands. There was no one else to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 92-3621 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 92-3621 on first reading. Commissioner Patterson stated that the ordinance was not clear whether or not City officials maintained options to say yes or no and that she is concerned about this because there are areas of Sarasota where substantial problems would be created when such a program is instituted. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Ordinance was designed to meet a problem within residential areas; that the emphasis of the draft is on "spill over" parking within the residential neighborhoods; that there may be reasons for weighing a commercial area against a residential area; that that aspect of the problem was not built into the ordinance; and that the ordinance was not prepared in a manor of listing criteria to follow in turning it down in cases where there are two competing interests. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he has been opposed to this ordinance since its inception and he has not heard anything to change his mind; and that this ordinance does not solve the problem. Mayor Gurney stated that it does not seem fair to force people to pay money to park in their neighborhood; that, however, it may force commercial interests to take steps in coping with the parking problem; that it may force problem solving in some of these areas; and that the decision will return to the Commission to weigh the situation. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved that this ordinance be amended between first and second reading to include whatever language is necessary to allow the Commission, with the help of staff recommendations, to weigh the potential effect of instituting in each neighborhood that the Commission vote on the commercial versus residential impact, so that in difficult situations it does not become imperative by City ordinance to provide this program. Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance does not require designation; that his concern regarding the full impact of the various scenarios that might be presented is that the ordinance Book 34 Page 8893 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8894 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. should be clarified to set forth the various matters which the Commission may consider in making determinations; that if these revisions create any material change to the ordinance he would like to have it readvertised; that if the revisions turn out to be clarifications of the material already in the ordinance he would feel comfortable bringing it back for approval on second reading without re-advertising. On motion of Commissioner Merrill (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot) and second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved to amend the motion a second time to delete the fees for the resident. Motion failed (3 to 2): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, no; Pillot, noi Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot passed the gavel back to Mayor Gurney. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the first amendment to the motion regarding the commercial versus residential impact. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the main motion in its present form may be impossible to implement due to the lack of a definition of a district. City Attorney Mark Singer came to the Commission table and stated that all residential zones are districts; and that the size of the petition may come in different sizes. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to amend the ordinance to state that any neighborhood petition would have to come to the Commission table first to determine its appropriateness before being rejected or forwarded to the City Manager for further consideration. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that other ways to solve the problem should be explored. Commissioner Patterson stated that she doubts a doctor will seek out alternative parking where it is free; and that she is in favor of the $12 fee so that people will take petitioning for this matter seriously before doing SO. Mayor Gurney called for a vote on the main motion. Motion carried (3 to 2) : Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Gurney; yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to amend the ordinance to strike the fees. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, noi Merrill, yes; Patterson, no; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3636, REGULATING THE PLACEMENT OF NEWS RACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY: IMPOSING SAFETY STANDARDS; PROVIDING A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE; ESTABLISHING DEFINITIONS: IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION: IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS FOR LOCATION AND PLACEMENT; PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL OF NEWS RACKS FOUND NOT IN COMPLIANCE PROVIDING FOR INDEMNIPICATION: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY: REQUIRING THAT A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE BE SENT TO THE DISTRIBUTOR OF EACH NEWSPAPER, MAGAZINE OR OTHER NEWS PERIODICAL PLACED IN NEWS RACKS WITHIN THE CITY; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH DELINEATED CHANGES - SECOND READING DELAYED UNTIL SECOND COMMISSION MEETING IN JANUARY, 1993 CITY MANAGER TO RETURN WITH REPORT ON REASONABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR CONCRETE PADS (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #2 (1135) through #3 (1545) City Attorney Taylor stated that the first news rack ordinance was brought before the Commission in 1983; that the latest regulation came before the Commission in February and did not pass; that a number of media sources gave considerable input asking for a self regulatory type of program; that the ordinance contained a permitting process and regulated the quantity of news racks allowable; that administration considered other alternatives which were based loosely upon a similar ordinance in Naples, Florida; that this ordinance drops out of the regulatory scheme a number of the more time consuming and difficult aspects of regulation such as the permitting process; that this ordinance does not attempt to determine how many racks should be allowed at particular locations; that it uses a relatively minimal number of standards; that this ordinance is submitted as a less severe regulation than anything previously; and that it does deal with the same subjects that the City does regulate. Commissioner Patterson left the Commission table at 8:09 p.m. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission table at 8:10 p.m. Mr. Al Barrett, Chief Planner, came to the Commission table and stated he surveyed the news racks that had been surveyed earlier in the yeari that these new racks were in the downtown, St. Armands and Lido Beach areas; that generally, the situation is slightly improved; and that there are indications that the news racks have been cleaned up and organized. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. Book 34 Page 8895 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8896 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Mr. Alan Lillie, 35 N. Shore Drive, Vice Chairman of and representing the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Agency Board (PREPAB) as Vice Chairman, came to the Commission table and stated that he would like to read a letter from the PREPAB to the Commission. Commissioner Patterson returned to the Commission table at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Lillie stated that the PREPAB has long been concerned about the random placement of news racks on public property and has sO reported to the Commission; that it previously supported proposed Ordinance No. 92-3536 which was never enacted; that it now strongly supports this proposed Ordinance No. 92-3636 and urge its adoption; that the following specific changes are also recommended to improve or strengthen the ordinance: Item C on page 2 Suggest adding the words "the North Trail Gateway to the city" after the words, "St. Armands Circle Business area." Item A on page 4 Strongly endorse the single color dark brown requirement, and suggest that an industrial standard paint color number be specified for color uniformity. Item F, on page 5 - - In the second and seventh line of this paragraph, suggest substitution of "public land" in place of "public right of way." Section 30-132 on page 5 - The requirement for groups of racks to not exceed 8 feet in length without a gap of 3 feet between groups has been omitted; that some sort of limitation as to length of groups is included in most ordinances and is felt necessary. Section 3, on page 8 The date of April, 1992 was intended to be April, 1993 but it might be better to state a period of time such as 60 to 90 days from the effective date of ordinance Commissioner Merrill returned to the Commission table at 8:15 p.m. Mr. Lillie continued that a considerable amount of time, effort and money was spent to beautify the median strip on the Boulevard of the Arts; that you should be able to see a lovely view of the bay there; that instead you get a view of a considerable number of news racks; that the number used to be 11; that it increased to 13 at one point; and that the latest number is 15. Mr. Lillie stated further that another glaring example of this is at the Sarasota Tourist Bureau and up and down the North Trail where news racks are located in many places; and the PREPAB urges the Commission to please pass this ordinance to enhance the City. Mr. Stan Whitty, 801 S. Tamiami Trail, representing the Sarasota Herald Tribune, came to the Commission table and stated that a year ago a group of newspaper representatives met with the Commission to discuss this problem; that the same group is here tonight representing almost all of the newspapersi that there was an understanding that a workshop would be put together by the city to address the needs of the City; that he and his colleagues addressed each of the locations that were addressed by the City at that time; that the library refused them permission to move the news racks in that area; that they were trying to respond to the Commission's requests; that he and his colleagues addressed each of the problem locations, as well as others, on March 8th; that they moved racks around, leveled them, and broke them up, such as at the Tourist Information Center; that he advised Mayor Gurney of this and asked him to advise him if there were any other problem locations; and that no one has called him since that time indicating any problems. Mr. Whitty stated that they are trying to be responsive; that the Tribune wonders what it will cost to administer and enforce such an ordinance; that the size of the rack mentioned in the ordinance is one inch smaller than any rack that is presently on the street; that this will ultimately cost the citizens and businesses of Sarasota; that the Tribune told the city they would work together and they think they have; and that they will handle any problems that they are made aware of. Mr. Whitty stated that he is in favor of some kind of standardization but that newspapers have an identity established by colors; that this is something that can be worked on together and if the City would give them a chance they will be more than happy to police it themselves; that there are a number of areas that need to be reviewed in order to avoid possible problems with the specifics of the ordinance such as with regard to wheelchair passageway requirements, concrete pad locations, and locations in general. Mayor Gurney stated that a period of time has passed and that he purposefully waited to see what the newspapers would do; that he wanted to see how serious everylody was about cleaning up the problem; that there are some real aesthetic concerns here; that it is unfortunate that there are very unattractive situations in the City; and that he wonders why the newspapers did not take care of this themselves instead of the City Commission having to bring them to the table to get this done. Commissioner Patterson asked if anyone on staff has in fact checked on the clearance for a wheel chair. City Manager Sollenberger stated that that could easily be identified and wording correctly Book 34 Page 8897 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8898 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. substituted in the ordinance; and that this is what seems to be the critical issue. Mayor Gurney left the Commission table at 8:43 p.m. Larry Coleman, 519 13th Street, W. Bradenton, representing the Bradenton Herald, came to the Commission table and stated that he is appearing in a non-confrontational manner for the purpose of speaking against the proposed ordinance; that the basis upon which he appears was offered in February and is offered again tonight; that it seems that the major objective is to aesthetically improve and enhance the community through ordinances and regulations on the placement, size, condition, colors, etc., of news racks; and that there are constitutional limitations on what can appropriately be enacted by both federal and state constitutions. Mayor Gurney returned to the Commission table at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Coleman continued that he suggests that by working with a task force as was offered when he appeared before, that objectives can be achieved on a much large extent than through legislation; that there has been no contact by the City staff to the media requesting corrections; that it takes communication both ways; that he believes the City will see a response from the industry seeking to compromise or find a solution for the problem; and that there are alternatives to legislation that can be more effective for the objectives that the Commission seeks to achieve. Mr. Coleman stated further that changing the color is a considerable cost impact; that there is currently in the State Statutes, Chapter 316, regulations that preclude the placement of any object in public right of ways that are used either by traffic or pedestrians; that the City does not need to preclude the obstruction of such traffic since it can be enforced without an ordinance; that when newspaper representatives last met with the Commission in February it was passed by the Commission that there would be a workshop between the industry and staff; that that never took place; and that they are here to work with the City Commission in order to achieve objectives. Emmett Kilpatrick, St. Petersburg, representing St. Petersburg Times, came to the Commission table and stated that he was here in February of this year when this subject was discussed; that the St. Petersburg Times wants to cooperate with the City, the public, as well as other publications; and that it is their desire to be good citizens in the community. Mr. Kilpatrick also stated that when he was last here he committed to be responsive to specific requests related to placement of news racks; that he left his telephone number with the City; that there have been no telephone calls from representatives of the City regarding specific problems or complaints; that the St. Petersburg Times has worked in cooperation with the other newspapers and in direct response to direct requests from the public to resolve specific issues that have arisen; and that they are continuing to address and resolve such concerns and are certainly willing to do so. Carol LoCicero, P.O. Box 1288, Tampa, Florida, representing the Tampa Tribune, came to the Commission table and stated that the distribution of newspapers through news racks is protected by the first amendment; that it is also important to evaluate the area of placement of news racks to determine what type of protection the rack is entitled to; that traditional areas of public forum are entitled to greater protection than private property; that this ordinance deals with first amendment activity in a highly protected place; that before a regulation can affect that activity it must be determined that a substantial government interest exists; that what has mainly been discussed tonight is aesthetics; and that based upon case law, that is not the kind of substantial governmental interest that generally supports a news rack ordinance of this nature. Ms. LoCicero stated that it will cost approximately $15,000 for the Tampa. Tribune to repaint its new racks; that there will be lost revenues during the time that racks are being painted; that the chaining has been done for safety purposes but this is something that can be worked on; and that there is an unrepresented constituency tonight in that the placement of news racks is governed by where the people in this city purchase their newspapers; that these are areas that the public patronizes; that the task force is a good solution to the concerns of everyone; that she would like to see input from the city in the future; that every previous concern expressed was addressed; and that that can be anticipated in the future. George Hooper, 6704 Benjamin Road #500, Tampa, Florida, representing USA Today, came to the Commission table and stated that his Tampa office handles the west coast of Florida; that the blue and white colors on their racks are a trademark and cannot be painted over; that it would cost $270 per location to satisfy the dark brown color requirement; that in Naples, Florida, their organization abided by the ordinance in certain areas; and that there is an 800 number on all of the racks for customers to call regarding any problems and these calls are handled rather quickly. Mr. Hooper stated that in the last year his organization has not received any complaints from the City of Sarasota concerning placement; that they are willing to work with the City; and that the placement is determined by the customer sales. Gene DePoris, Jr., 1970 Main Street, representing West Coast Woman publication, came to the Commission table and stated that a lot has happened in the industry since nearly a year ago when they met last Book 34 Page 8899 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8900 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. with the City; that there have been places that still need fixing; that there are anomalies everywhere; and that there have been cases where news racks have been promptly moved subsequent to complaints. Mr. DePoris continued that there are economic problems with the small newspapers in this town; that the past couple of years have been brutal to the publishing industry; that the entire retail community relies upon the media to get their messages out; that without them sales do not take place. Mr. DePoris stated further that he has seen ample evidence of self policing taking place; that changing the color of the boxes will cost approximately $25,000 and another $5,000 to remove and replace them; that if he completely replaces his boxes with new ones it will cost $150,000; that it would be ludicrous to charge for West Coast Woman in the City of Sarasota and give it away for free in the County; that the only alternative to penalizing the citizens or the retail establishment in this community would be for him to take a loss himself; and that this is not what business is all about, especially during a recession. Mr. DePoris added that other remedies are legal ones such as going out of business, suing, or absorbing incredible costs; that regardless of the outcome of a lawsuit, the costs will still be passed on; that problem news racks can be moved; that if there are problems then let his organization know; that the Commission should not take a chance of putting an industry and the people dependent upon it in turmoil just to play aesthetics; and that that is counterproductive to everyone. Johnny Nugent, 460 N. Tamiami Trail, representing Normandy Inn, came to the Commission table and stated that the row of racks located outside the tourist center looks dreadful; that he accepts the challenge of the Bradenton Herald's constitutional lawyer; that if they would take their racks off of the street he will sell their paper; that there should be plenty of other merchants to accommodate the public and place the newspaper in their enterprise; that the racks at Midtown Plaza are now in the public right of way; and that he understands that he cannot plant a tree in the right-of-way and he does not understand why news racks can be placed in the right-of-way. Larry Marthaler, 655 N. Trail, representing. himself, came to the Commission table and stated that up until about two or three years ago there were no news racks in front of the Visitor's Bureau Center; that one came and then the number multiplied to 26 news racks that have formed an impenetrable barricade between the diagonal parking and the sidewalk in front of the Visitor's Center and along the Exhibition Hall area; that he placed notices in the machines asking people to cooperate by moving them; that nothing happened and he tried again and nothing happened; that he then moved them out of the public's way; that two of the publications whose boxes were chained to poles did go out immediately and remove them to the other area; and that he still does not like them there. Mr. Marthaler continued that this morning there were 81 newspaper vending machines within one block of St. Armands Circle; that the City spent thousands of dollars to develop the median on the Boulevard of the Arts and there are 16 vending machines right at the end where there should be a view; that the constitution does not give publishers the right to trash the community; that he urges the Commission to support this ordinance. There was no one else to speak and Mayor Gurney closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3636 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass on first reading proposed Ordinance No. 93-3636 with the appropriate specific changes such as the height of boxes or. widths of clearance so that they conform to reality. City Attorney Taylor summarized the specified changes, including Mr. Lillie's comments, as follows: > Paragraph 2, Subsection C pertaining to the unregulated placement of news racks should be changed to state the North Tamiami Trail as the Gateway to the City Page 4, under Subsection A the uniform dark brown finish should be more specific and provide a nomenclature to identify a particular color Page 5, Subsection F - the reference in the second and seventh lines to "public right of way" should be more inclusively defined as "public land" Page 6, number 8 - the reference to "public area" should be changed to "public land" Page 8 the compliance date of April 1, 1992, should be corrected to 1993; and legal judgement will determine if a specific number of days to comply should be stated Page 4, Subsection B - the reference to "four (4) feet in height" needs to be "fifty inches" for at least one newspaper's news rack Book 34 Page 8901 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8902 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Wheelchair widths to be reviewed by the Engineering Department to recommend an appropriate number less than 6 feet Sidewalk passageway requirements to be researched Commissioner Atkins stated that the newspapers and their group and the City administration did not get together to try and work out this matter as it was originally decided that it would be; that that process should be given an opportunity to work before going into this ordinance; that he will vote against it; and that he proposes that the Commission return to what it should have completed and give it an opportunity to work. Commissioner Patterson stated that she will support the ordinance with the delineated changes; that she does not want to be so restrictive on the footage that concrete pads are forced to be poured unnecessarily; that she is concerned about pedestrian passageways and wheelchairs being able to pass on the sidewalk; that a reasonable measurement can be arrived at; that she will vote for this matter as long as the width of the sidewalk is reduced to a reasonable amount as determined by the Engineering Department; and that all the changes that she believes are reasonable are addressed. Attorney Taylor stated that he has no problem with changing this ordinance between the first and second reading without re-advertising since this is an attempt to accommodate the public input received on behalf of the media tonight. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would like to return to the media industry and ask them for proposals on how the aesthetic concerns can be resolved; that he heard no proposals tonight; that there are strong concerns regarding the aesthetics; that he would like to see a uniform color; and that he would support the workshops on this issue. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the administration to report back on whether or not asphalt surfaces would be a reasonable substitute for concrete pads in some areas. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he would report back when the matter returns to the Commission. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the Commission to discuss the possibility of delaying the second reading of this ordinance until the second meeting in January in order to allow the newspaper media an opportunity to consult with City staff and return to the Commission at second reading with some good alternatives for the Commission to consider. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would support delaying until the second meeting in January. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would support delaying until the second meeting in January out of general courtesy. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to delay the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3636 until the second Commission meeting of January, 1993. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he requested a change be made on: Page 6, section (i) that the building permit be obtained from the City Manager rather than the Building and Zoning Department; that this will give him the organizational ability to allocate that function. There was a consensus of the Commission to accept Mr. Sollenberger's request for change. Mayor Gurney called for a vote on the amendment to the motion to delay second reading until the second meeting in January, 1993. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that it was his intent to place the burden and responsibility on the representatives of the newspapers to contact the City Manager and establish a mutually agreeable time, place and agenda to discuss possible superior recommendations that can be brought to the Commission on second reading; that the City Manager is not to initiate the workshop; and that this would be an administrative workshop and not to include the Commission. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the main motion to pass on first reading proposed Ordinance No. 93-3636 with changes. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3651, AMENDING CHAPTER 16, RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, ARTICLE II, COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS AND SOLID WASTE, DIVISION I, RECYCLING, SECTION 16-22, FEES FOR RECYCLING TO PROVIDE THAT THE ENUMERATED FEES CHARGED TO COMMERCIAL USERS FOR RECYCLING SERVICES SHALL BE THE MAXIMUM FEES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #3 (1545) through (1615) Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that the existing ordinance sets the rate which Browning-Perris Industries (BFI) can charge for recycling; that this is a non-exclusive franchise; that other recycling firms are offering a lower rate; that BFI is set by ordinance at a fixed rate; and that this ordinance allows BFI to Book 34 Page 8903 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8904 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. charge less in order to be competitive with other commercial recycling companies. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and Mayor Gurney closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3651 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3651, amending Ordinance No. 92-3606, on first reading. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot left the Commission table e 9. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 1992; MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16, 1992; MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 23, 1992 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #3 (1615) through (1630) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the minutes of the Special City Commission meeting of November 9, 1992; minutes of the Regular City Commission meeting of November 16, 1992; and the minutes of the Special City Commission meeting of November 23, 1992. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot returned to the Commission table. 10. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 1992, AND REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4- 1992 REPORT ACCEPTED; SPECIAL STUDY RE WEEKLY RENTALS APPROVED; PETITION NO. 93-SE-01 = SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING, SPECIAL EXCEPTION 92-SE-07 - DINNER BOAT DENIED AND REMAINDER OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING; LOCAL ROADS - STUDY AUTHORIZED: ORDINANCE NO. 92-3624 (TREE PROTECTION) ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE CHANGES AND SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING; ORDINANCE NO. 93-3648 (ELECTRICAL FENCES) SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #3 (1630) through #4 (0655) Planning Director Robinson and Planning Board/Local Planning Agency Chairman Berta Lefkovich came to the Commission table. A. Special Study Weekly Rental Rates Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommends to the City Commission to direct staff to proceed with a study regarding the regulation of weekly rental rates in the City as mentioned in Deputy Planning and Development Director Taylor's letter to the Planning Board of October 13, 1992; and that this was assigned a top priority. Ms. Lefkovich stated that this study would be a part of the Planning Board's housing needs analysis that is in process; that this is to be completed in the spring; that this matter concerns residential properties that are rented on a week to week basis; and that this creates a transient type of residency area which creates problems. Ms. Robinson stated that there are a number of matters that need careful consideration here and that the matter needs to be carefully studied. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the weekly rentals study as part of the Housing Needs Analysis Study. Commissioner Atkins stated that he would like for administration, during this study, to be sensitive to the needs of people who would have no place to stay if they had to stay more than one week at a time. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. B. Petition No. 93-SE-01 A request to permit a counseling facility for dependency recovery in a historically designated structure located at 310 South Osprey Avenue Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommends adoption of Petition No. 93-SE-01 with the following stipulations: A City approval of this structure as per 92-HD-17 historic designation site required to have five marked spaces for automobiles for group meetings and be able to accommodate ten automobiles by staking the parking or providing additional marked spaces; and all parking constructed according to City Engineering design criteria office permitted one sign not to exceed nine square feet; and shall be designed consistent with the historic character of the site Book 34 Page 8905 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8906 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. establish a one way entrance from Morrill Street, a one way exit to Osprey Avenue, and angle parking on the site On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to accept the recommendation of the Planning Board. Commissioner Patterson stated that changing a land use without notice and hearing from the neighborhood that it adjoins does not seem consistent with the Commissions's policy and that she does not wish to see this happen without a public hearing. Commissioner Merrill stated that it is critical to hear from the neighborhood regarding such a major effect on land usage that is similar to a rezoning; that perhaps something better could happen on this street; and that the current vision plan should be allowed to go all the way through to the end on this. Mayor Gurney stated that he would prefer to go to public hearing on this matter; that it would allow an opportunity to have the owner speak to the Commission regarding any possible plans for this property; and that this type of zoning matter has been a problem for a long time. Commissioner Merrill stated that administration has recommended denial of this petition; that traffic congestion could become a problem on this street; that having strangers come to the business would have an adverse impact on the neighborhood as far as safety; and that these are reasons for the Commission to deny this matter. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to amend the motion to set this matter for public hearing (this matter will be brought back at a public hearing with a motion on the floor to approve it). Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Gurney; yes. C. Special Exception 92-SE-07 - - Master Special Exception for the Quay Basin Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommended in their meeting that the Planning Board incorporate the Revised Management Plan into the Petition; that the Board is very favorably impressed with the efforts made to produce the Revised Management Plan and believe it is a good step towards the management of the bayfront. Ms. Robinson stated that the Planning Department recommends that the dinner boat be denied and that a public hearing be set for the balance of the proposed Special Exception 92-SE-07 for the Quay Basin. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve Ms. Robinson's recommendation. Motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Gurney stated that perhaps this matter could be handled through another process other than the Special Exception process. Attorney Taylor stated that this process needs to move forward as initiated unless the petitioner desires to do otherwise since the process is on the books and available for such use. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot) second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved to accept administration's recommendation to deny the dinner boat and to set for public hearing on the remainder of 92-SE-07 at the first Commission meeting of February, 1993. Vice Mayor Pillot called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot passed the gavel back to Mayor Gurney D. Level of Service Local Roads Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board requests that the Commission authorize the Engineering and Planning Departments to draft a traffic mitigation program to be incorporated in the land development regulations and possibly the Sarasota City Plan. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot, and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to affirm the Planning Board's recommendation to authorize Engineering and Planning Departments to draft a traffic mitigation program. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. E. Revised Ordinance No. 92-3624 Tree Protection Ordinance Vice Mayor Pillot left the Commission table at 10:15 p.m. Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board found the proposed Ordinance No. 92-3624 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan; that the Planning Board recommends Commission approval of the ordinance subject to the following stipulations: that variances be granted when the site development area is sacrificed in order to save trees identified in the ordinance add the carrotwood tree to the prohibited tree list include the notes regarding alternatives to the barricade Book 34 Page 8907 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8908 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Commissioner Patterson) second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved to set Revised Ordinance No. 92-3624 for public hearing. Commissioner Patterson asked for input regarding the difference between a "grand tree" and the other protected trees. Building, Housing, Zoning and Code Enforcement Director Bill Hewes came to the Commission table and stated that a little more effort is required for grand trees; that, however, if it is standing in the way of infrastructure or the structure itself it can be removed, but the applicant must make all reasonable efforts to relocate the structure in order to preserve the grand tree; that it is not the intention of the ordinance to say that after one has made reasonable effort to relocate the infrastructure that there was no instance where one could remove a grand tree; and that there are cases when one can remove a grand tree. Vice Mayor Pillot returned to the Commission table at 10:23 p.m. Commissioner Merrill stated that this ordinance is very ineffective; that a grand tree would come down for a parking lot by this ordinance; that the burden of this ordinance falls on the general public and not the developers; that this ordinance should focus on the real problem which is with the developers cutting down the grand trees; and that the homeowner should be able to decide what tree to have in their back yard. Vice Mayor Pillot left the Commission table at 10:30 p.m. Mayor Gurney stated that the City of Tampa seems to have the toughest of tree ordinances; that it was used as a model for the state ordinance; that circumstances were cited which developers had to cancel their plans to cut down grand trees due to their ordinance; and asked if this was different from that ordinance. Mr. Hewes stated that the wording of the Tampa ordinance is included in this ordinance; and that he recalls making no changes to the wording. Commissioner Patterson stated that her concern is on page 11, number "H"; that between now and the time that this matter is set for public hearing, that Mr. Hewes and the City Attorney should reassure themselves and herself that this does not apply to a grand tree; that her personal preference would be to take the point system back up so that the exceptional tree is taken more into consideration; that there seems to be pretty good protection for the other trees; that she would like something to be really strong on the grand trees so that builders are forced to go for a variance. Commissioner Patterson stated that she does not support the banning of carrotwoods and cuban laurel trees; that these trees do not need to be a protected tree; and that it feels intrusive to expand the list beyond the environmentalists" recommendations. Mr. Hewes stated that he gathers from the Commissioners that they wish the ordinance to indicate a larger size for the grand trees and to tighten up the restrictions on the removal of a grand tree. Vice Mayor Pillot returned to the Commission table at 10:35 p.m. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if a homeowner could be saved the $30 permit fee by having an occupationally licensed tree service attest that the tree is dead. Commissioner Patterson suggested that administration could return with a recommendation on this matter at the public hearing. Commissioner Patterson called for the vote on the motion, and stated that administration shall set this matter for public hearing at the earliest reasonable time. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Commissioner Patterson passed the gavel back to Mayor Gurney. F. Proposed Ordinance No. 93-3648 = Pertaining to electrical fences Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board found the proposed Ordinance No. 93-3648 consistent with the City Plan; that the Planning Board recommends approval by the Commission of the ordinance with the stipulation that the language sufficient to cause shock" be added in Section 6-15. City Attorney Taylor recommended that the present description is sufficient and suggested that it be left that way. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to set Proposed Ordinance No. 93-3648 for public hearing, without the words, "sufficient to cause a shock." Motion carried (4 to 1) : Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to accept the report of the Planning Board/Local Agency's Special Meeting of October 21, 1992, and Regular Meeting of November 4, 1992. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Book 34 Page 8909 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8910 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. 11. REPORT RE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10, 1992 = REPORT ACCEPTED; PETITION 93-HD-01 - = SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PETITION 93-HD-02 SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING: PETITION 93-HD-03 SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING; PROPERTY TAX INCENTIVES FOR HISTORICALLY DESIGNATED STRUCTURES PLANNING STAFF TO RESEARCH AND REPORT BACK (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #4 (0655) through (0850) A. Petition 93-HD-01 1864 Clematis Street Planning Director Jane Robinson and Chief Planner Al Barrett came to the Commission table. Ms. Robinson stated that the Planning staff and the Historic Preservation Board recommended that the main structure and garage be designated as historic and the administration recommendation is to set for public hearing. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to set Historic Designation Petition 93-HD-01 for public hearing. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. B. Petition 93-HD-02 - - 495 McKinley Drive Ms. Robinson stated that the Planning staff and the Historic Preservation Board recommended that the main structure and attached structures be set for public hearing; and that the administration recommendation is to set for public hearing. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to set this matter for public hearing. Commissioner Patterson stated that she understood that this property is under contract with a buyer who wishes not to set for historic designation; and that the City might be cautious about this situation. Mr. Barrett stated that there is a disagreement and a demolition permit on file for this structure from the potential buyer; that the owner has filed for the historic preservation; that there have been two serious offers to relocate the house but there is potential damage for a rear sea wall. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, no; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. C. Petition 93-HD-03 1682 Hawthorne Street On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to set Petition 93-HD-03 for public hearing. Mr. Barrett stated that this petition includes a fish pond that is original and is part of the set up of the back yard as much as the well house and the pump house are; that the ordinance does not allow sites to be designated; and that the fish pond is original and is defined as a structure in the historic preservation ordinance. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. D. Property tax incentives for historically designated structures Ms. Robinson stated the Historic Preservation Board recommended that staff be directed to research the proposed exemption for historic preservation and fiscal impact and report back within a 60 to 90 day period; and that the administration's recommendation supports that. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to direct staff to research this subject and its fiscal impact. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to accept the Historic Preservation Board report of their Regular Meeting of November 10, 1992. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. 12. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEMS 1 THROUGH 12 - - APPROVED; CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK DIRECTED TO REVISE AGENDA ANNOUNCEMENT UNDER CONSENT AGENDA NO 1, NOTE TO THE PUBLIC (AGENDA ITEMS III-A. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, AND 12) #4 (0850) through (1100) Mayor Gurney requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the purpose for Consent Agendas. Mr. Robinson replied that items under Consent Agenda No. 1 are considered routine matters; that if a Commissioner desired to do so, he/she could request that an item be removed for discussion before voting; that Consent Agenda No. 2, consisted of resolutions and ordinances that required a roll call vote. Mayor Gurney requested that Item 3 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Cooperative Funding Agreement with the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and the Manasota Basin Board Book 34 Page 8911 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8912 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute a License Agreement with the School Board of Sarasota County, for parking at Tuttle Elementary School for Stadium events 4. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc., for engineering services relating to the design of a ground storage tank 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute an amendment to a contract with Smally, Wellford and Nalven, Inc., for services for the "Design of Sanitary Sewer Extensions" engineering 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Second Amendment to the funding agreement between the Community Housing Corporation and the City of Sarasota 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute the 1992-1993 Community Block Grant Amendment Development 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute contracts with three firms, Engineer Associate, Inc., Weber Engineering & Mosby Inc., and Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Surveying, Inc., for surveying services for the Neighborhood Sidewalk Projects 9. Approval Re: Purchase contract for mobile home for $10,500 located at Lot W2, Street 3, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383 10. Approval Re: Purchase contract for mobile home for $8,500 located at Lot W4, Street 3, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383 11. Approval Re: Purchase contract for mobile home for $16,000 located at Lot W4, Street 6, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383 12. Approval Re: Purchase contract for mobile home for $15,000 located at Lot W1, Street 5, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383 On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Items 1, Merrill, and 4 through 12 inclusive. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, 2, Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. yes; 3. Approval Re: Proposed Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota Ski-A-Rees Mr. Robert Bresciani, 1943 City Island, representing Sarasota Ski-A-Rees, came to the Commission table and stated that the Sarasota Ski-A-Rees have representatives present for any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Bresciani stated that a letter was faxed to the neighbors surrounding the Ski-A-Rees' leasehold which addressed the noise problem; that the loudspeakers will be repositioned more towards the audience and the Ski-A-Rees property, rather than across the bay; that there are only twenty shows during the entire year; and that they are willing to work with the neighbors in any way possible. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 3. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Vice Mayor Pillot asked that in the agenda material made available in the audience that the "Note to the Public" under Consent Agendas should state that if a citizen wishes to speak to matters on the Consent Agenda they should make that known to a Commissioner who may decide whether or not he or she wishes to pull the item for discussion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson agreed that this could be added to the agenda material. 13. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-617) = ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-616) ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-620) ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 92-3614) ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 92-3630) = ADOPTED; ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 93-3641) = ADOPTED; ITEM 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 93-3642) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEMS III-B, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, AND 7) #4 (1100) through (1225) Commissioner Patterson left the Commission table at 11:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 93R-617, proposed Resolution No. 93R-616, Proposed Resolution No. 93R-620, Proposed Ordinance No. 92-3614, Proposed Ordinance No. 92-3630, Proposed Ordinance No. 93-3641, and Proposed Ordinance No. 93-3642 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-617, amending Resolution No. 89R-214, pertaining to the Citizens With Disabilities Advisory Board to change the membership of said Board to require a five member board; etc. (Title Only) Book 34 Page 8913 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8914 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution 93R-616, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against the property described in each abatement report for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only) 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No.. 93R-620, appropriating $7,905.00 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund purchase of new and replacement furniture and computer equipment for the Police Services Bureau and the Internal Services Division; etc. 4. Adoption Re: Second Reading of proposed Ordinance No. 92-3614, amending the Zoning Code by revising the minimum off-street parking requirements for Medical Offices, Medical Clinics, and Urgent Care Centers, as set forth herein; making findings; setting forth exemptions; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. 5. Adoption Re: Second Reading of proposed Ordinance No. 92-3630, providing for the designation of the structure located at 1750 Hawthorne Street, historically known as the Frances Teate House, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasotaj etc. 6. Adoption Re: Second Reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3641, extending the approval of the City Commission pertaining to the Site and Development Plan for Petition 90-W for a period of one year from the automatic expiration of said approval; providing for the continuation of the conditional rezoning from RMF-2 Zone District to COP Zone District, for a period of one year measured from the automatic expiration of Site and Development Plan 90-W for the following described property: the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 1, Township 36 south, Range 17 east less the south 310 feet thereof, and less R.O.W. for DeSoto Road, as more particularly described herein; setting forth findings as to circumstances of the automatic expiration of Petition 90-W; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) 7. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3642, providing for the designation of the structure located at 1828 Grove Street, historically known as the Edward H. Knight House, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 92-HD-16, Hartig) On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. II, items 1 through 7 inclusive. Motion carried (4 to 0): : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. 14. CITIZENS' INPUT: (AGENDA ITEM VI) #4 (1225) through (1400) Mr. Milton S. Gurvitz, 1111 N. Gulfstream Avenue, representing One Watergate and himself as a professional in the neighborhood, came to the Commission table and stated that if the problem of parking with a single office is over-burdening the streets around the City that the Commission should think what would happen if all of that is put into an adult aggregate living facility on that small spot in a cul-de-sac which one cannot get out of now at the John Ringling Towers; that he lives and works in the neighborhood; that his office is opposite the Opera House. Commissioner Patterson returned to the Commission table at 11:02 p.m. Mr. Gurvitz stated that a 700 occupant adult congregate living facility with nearly 1,500 working there would bring nearly 2,000 cars into the area; that he cannot understand why the City would have an adult congregate living facility in an area that is barely passible now for parking and traffic; that he does not think the towers are worth that unless one could build on the rest of the property; that the prospect of saving the towers and sacrificing the people around it is ridiculous; and that we will ruin ourselves if we start loving things and buildings instead of the people around us. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: EXTENSION OF RINGLING COMMONS BUILDING PERMIT AND TEMPORARY SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE SALES CENTER BULDING PERMITS, ALL RELATED APPROVALS, AND TEMPORARY SPECIAL PERMIT FOR RINGLING COMMONS PROJECT EXTENDED FOR 180 DAYS, THROUGH JUNE 7, 1993, AND PARTIES ACCOUNTABLE TO SCHEDULE SUBMITTED ADMINISTRATION REQUESTED TO QUANTIFY THE DENSITY MATTER (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #4 (1400) through #5 (0275) Commissioner Atkins left the table at 11:07 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that representatives from First Sunset and the John Ringling Towers Centre Foundation are present to report to the Commission regarding their progress; that this afternoon it was learned that they have reached agreement on a short term lease; that they have also signed an agreement which Book 34 Page 8915 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8916 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. imposes certain fund raising obligations upon the Foundation; and that it provides for the transfer of the property, plus cash contributions, provided the fund raising activities are successful; that a schedule has been developed which lists the sequence of the development permit proceedings required through the City; that administration is recommending that permits be extended for 180 days, through June 7th; and that the parties be held accountable to the schedule submitted. Mr. Sollenberger continued that by being held accountable this is not a rigid adherence to every milestone, but rather that they have a guideline as to their goals; and that if they miss their projections they will need to explain to the Commission when they report on their progress in the future. Mr. George Dietz, Attorney, representing First Sunset Development Corporation; Ms. Susan Hanson, Vice President of First Sunset Development Corporation; Mr. Don Smalley, President of John Ringling Towers Centre Foundation (JRTCF); and Ms. Deborah Dart, Vice President of the JRTCF came to the Commission table. There was a consensus of the Commission that Agenda Item VII-1 (Ringling Commons), and Agenda Item VII-2 (Civic Center Improvements) be addressed in the remainder of this meeting and the remaining agenda items be addressed at a later date. Mr. Dietz stated that after serious negotiations for quite a period of time that the Foundation and First Sunset entered into two written documents; that one is a short term lease which extends initially from extension time to extension time through December of next year; and that for certain conditions precedent it could be extended for an additional year; that the organizations have entered into an agreement which incorporates a fee simple deed to the property and a long term lease; and that much depends on the outcome of future discussions with this Commission relative to a modified development plan as to which of the two documents would eventually be entered into in between the parties. Commissioner Atkins returned to the Commission table at 11:10 p.m. Mr. Dietz stated that they are requesting the Commission for an extension of time on the existing permits, the existing variances, and the existing development plan; that assuming that is granted as recommended by administration, the organizations will then commence work on the proposed amendment to the City's historic preservation ordinance; that preliminary work has been done on the site plan for the development of this property; that the site plan would incorporate the Karl Bickel Home, the John Ringling Towers (JRT), as well as the remaining property to the west; that there is a total of approximately 11 acres of which a little more than 2 acres would eventually be transferred to the Foundation for the preservation of JRT and the Bickel Home. Mr. Smalley stated that the legal agreements have been finalized; that the fund development committee has been organized; that a fund development strategy with reasonable goals has been prepared; that a marketing and promotion strategy has been developed as well as a stabilization and security program for the building; that a speaker's bureau has been established to involve the community; and that there is an ongoing refinement of construction costs with regard to contractors, engineers and architects. Mr. Smalley also stated that they will soon be publishing a booklet of the development and business plan for the project; and that they are ready to begin their major fundraising effort. Vice Mayor Pillot asked what the timetable is by which a decision will be made whether or not the JRT will be preserved. Mr. Smalley stated that it has been agreed to have two milestones; that one is a year from now; that they plan to have a million dollars in contributions, commitments, and in-kind services; and thatthe other milestone is the year following that to have two more million; that the deadline is December, 1994 to have the approximate three million dollars to do the first project; and that this is set out in the agreement. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if this goal of December, 1994 is agreed upon for setting aside any Code Enforcement policies; that the Commission should go on record regarding its decision on whether or not the Commission has agreed to allow the condition of the building to continue for at least two years before any further action is taken on the building. Mr. Sollenberger stated that his understanding is that the Commission would be postponing any further action against it as a hazardous building which could result in its demolition; that, however, keeping the building and grounds orderly, secure, and safe, that this type of Code Enforcement will continue; and that this is how administration has pursued it. Commissioner Atkins stated it was his understanding that the Commission was granting extensions for 12 months at a time in order to confirm whether or not the $1 million plateau has been reached; that the Commission would reevaluate at that time based on the Foundations's ability to raise the money; and that if the first 12 month goal was reached that they would be given another 12 months. Mr. Smalley stated that two years is needed to raise the funds; and that the rezoning and site plan approval process will be taking place during that same period. Book 34 Page 8917 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8918 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson asked if the fiscal contribution from the developer is included in the million dollars. Mr. Smalley stated that that amount was in addition to the million dollars. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would like to see the community's commitment in this project. Mr. Smalley stated that their agreement with the bank is to have solid commitments and not just window dressing. Commissioner Patterson stated that her second concern is that the piece of land that JRTCF is being given is insufficient to have parking that services the structures that are being saved; and that she has heard only vague terms on this. Mr. Smalley stated that the agreement speaks to arranging to share the parking garage at a future date, at a cost; and that they will not need this funding for the first part of the work. Mr. Sollenberger suggested that in order for the Commission to have an opportunity to review the documents that this matter be continued until the next meeting; that the permits could be extended for a few more weeks during that time; that the Commission would then have an opportunity to review these documents and feel more comfortable in taking action on the recommendations. Mr. Dietz stated that the existing approvals would have to be extended; that he would like for the Commission to be giving some thought to the time schedules that have been prepared for the presentation of various matters; that a tighter time frame had been submitted; that they would like to use the City's schedule which is somewhat more liberal; that this will give a little more time if needed; that the time frames are goals and are not iron clad; and that he recommends that the Commission adopt the City's schedule rather than the one originally submitted. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he would like to get one factor on public record; that it is to be understood that the only density that will be approved for the total project, including the restaurant, the towers, etc., will be that which the owners of that acreage have legally in their grasp today if they tore down all the. buildings on the property; that if the structures are renovated and put to use that the appropriate City personnel would establish for those structures the equivalent amount of density that would be attributable to them based on the use to which they are being put as restored structures; and that the remainder of the existing total density would then apply to new structures; that this is his position and he would suggest that this be clarified; and that if this matter comes to the table while he is still a Commissioner that his vote will be to distribute the existing density which the ownership enjoys under current ordinances and regulations that they could use if it was all torn down; and that the maximum density could be distributed among the structures there in the appropriate manner. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission table at 11:42 p.m. E. Zachary Miller, 1111 N. Gulfstream Avenue, representing One Watergate Association, came to the Commission table and stated that he is a recent emigree to Sarasota; that the residents of One Watergate, Sunset Towers, and Lawrence Pointe are confronted with this ongoing problem; that after carefully reading and analyzing he has come to the conclusion that the cart is being put before the horse; that neither he or any of the residents of One Watergate with whom he has spoken are adversarial to the development of the property or the retention and rehabilitation of the Bickel House and the JRT; and that the Commission has an important obligation to the current residents in this area to evaluate the effect of these proposals that are now made in a very informal way and the effect it will have on the people already living in the area. Mayor Gurney left the Commission table at 11:45 p.m. Mr. Miller continued that the City is focusing on a Fifty Year Vision Plan; that if this proposal proceeds as presently it will create such a horrible position with respect to traffic at that intersection and in the immediate neighborhood that all the visions will go down the drain before they get a chance to City's be brought to fruition; that his suggestion is that this Commission extend a permit to the present owners of the property to move ahead with all deliberate speed to take advantage of that portion of the ground on which they can build the type of housing that they are proposing; and that the very devoted and vigorous JRT Foundation move forward with fundraising. Mr. Miller stated that the exposition of options presented leaves out any consideration for the present residents in the immediate area; that he would recommend that the Commission extend this permit for three months or for six months, with a very clear cut understanding that the bank, the owner, and the developer have got to move ahead on the buildable portion to some degree to show good faith and the JRT Foundation should proceed with their efforts to raise approximately $12 to $14 million; that one cannot rehabilitate a building in that condition from the first two floors and work up; that the whole thing should be done from the top down; and that he sincerely requests consideration of his guidance. Mayor Gurney returned to the table at 11:47 p.m. Commissioner Merrill returned to the table at 11:50 p.m. Mr. Miller stated that he has not seen or heard of an economic feasibility report, study, projection, pro forma, or otherwise, Book 34 Page 8919 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8920 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. from anyone on this project; and that the developers made their deal and they should make the best of it without causing the citizens of Sarasota to suffer. Milton S. Gurvitz, 1111 N. Gulfstream Avenue, representing himself and One Watergate, came to the Commission table and stated that the people who have the control of the tower now are quite arrogant; that a fence has been placed across the sidewalk; that they have complained to all of the relevant City agencies that this fence is illegal; that nothing has happened; that they have planted shrubbery in front of the sign that states, "Cars Have To Stop Here"; that nothing has happened; and that he and other members of One Watergate have made formal complaints to the City. Mayor Gurney stated that administration will need to look into this matter. Vice Mayor Pillot that he would like to encourage clarifying the issue regarding whether or not the total density should be shared among the existing and the new structures or if the Commission is going to allow the total allowable to be transferred to the rear, plus JRT; and that this should be clarified so that the owners and developers know what the ground rules are. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot, and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to accept the City Manager's recommendation to extend the building permits, all related approvals, and the temporary special permit for the Ringling Commons project for 180 days, through June 7, 1993, and to hold the parties accountable to the schedule submitted. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Mayor Gurney asked administration to quantify the numbers on the density matter for the Commission's consideration. Attorney Taylor stated that the six month period recommended by the City Manager was simply a comfortable period of time to bring before the Commission each of the petitions that the property owner wishes to process under existing codes sO that the property can be developed in accordance with the owners ultimate plan for the approximate 11 acres; that administration takes no position on these issues; that the items in his memorandum list the required procedures for making the changes necessary in order to develop the property; and that it is no guarantee of anything. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: CHANGE IN DRAINAGE CONCEPT FOR THE CIVIC CENTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - ALTERNATE PLAN FOR RAISED MEDIANS APPROVED - ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #5 (0275) through (0523) City Engineer Dennis Daughters came to the Commission table and stated that the Commission approved the 60% construction plans for the Civic Center Project; that since that time there have been discussions and a growing concern about what was approved; that swales or inverted medians were approved in the Van Wexel parking lot area; that the consultants were requested to evaluate alternatives; that the alternate now recommended for approval is a raised median in the parking lot; that there is an extra cost to that as well as an extension of the schedule. Mr. Daughters stated that funding has been found to balance the extra cost; that the schedule works out that the waterfront park and the seawall replacement would be moved further ahead in time; that the recommendation is that the Commission now approve this change in concept which is basically raised medians with grass on the small berms; and that the recommendation is also to direct administration to negotiate an amendment to the professional services contract. % Bruce Rankin and Joe O'Neill of Smally, Wellford & Nalven, came to the Commission table and stated that the drainage basins have very gentle slopes; that they would flood for only about five hours before draining; that it will not look like a pond or hole; and that it will be a usable lawn area except when it rains. E Mr. Rankin added that the other drainage basin is very shallow and that it will retain water for approximately five hours only; and that the medians will be crowned. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve the alternate recommendation for raised medians in the Van Wezel parking lot. Motion carried (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney; yes. Book 34 Page 8921 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8922 12/07/92 6:00 P.M. 17. ADJOURNMENT (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (0523) through (0545) There was a consensus of the Commission to reconvene this meeting on Thursday, December 10, 1992, immediately following the workshop meeting. The Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of December 7, 1992, was adjourned at 12:10 p.m. until December 10, 1992. : - 24y Jafk Gurney, Mayor ATTEST: Billy E Robnsen Eilly E obinson, City Auditor and Clerk