BOOK 53 Page 24647 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 21, 2003, AT 2:30 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Carolyn J. Mason, Vice Mayor Lou Ann R. Palmer, Commissioners Richard F. Martin, Mary J. Quillin, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Michael A. McNees, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mason The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9(a) of the City of Sarasota Charter at 2:30 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. CITIZENS I INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM I) CD 2:30 through 2:41 The following people came before the Commission: William Whetzel, 2805 Mayflower Street (34231), Coordinator, 'St. John Cemetery, stated that the main cemetery was re-seeded during 2002; that all the pine trees were trimmed to allow for more sunlight; that new plants requiring less care were planted in the cemetery gardens; that mulch was spread along the fence line, gardens, and along the northeast plantings; that the fence along Bee Ridge Road was aligned and leveled; that the Golden City Women's Club planted a new Gold Tree in the northwest garden; that the Golden City Women's Club has plans to bury a time capsule in 2003 in the northwest garden. Mr. Wetzel continued that major improvements were scheduled for completion during 2002; that the intention was the Trustees could then supervise the cemetery; that a good lawn service was procured; that an annual income of over $8,000 was generated; that the maintenance cost is $7,500 annually; that the Sarasota County Tax Assessor separated the cemetery into three sections and increased taxes to $4,000; that the cemetery can no longer be maintained by the Trustees in the same manner as in the past due to the tax increase; that a request is for the City to acquire ownership of the cemetery to eliminate the taxes; that the Trustees have suggested and voted on two alternatives which will ensure adequate care of the cemetery in the future; that the first alternative is for the City to own the cemetery to eliminate the taxes, with the Trustees providing for management and operations of the cemetery; that the Trustees would control the income from the cemetery funds and property rentals and maintenance of the cemetery; that the Trustees consist of three individuals; that two are active and one is not; that the desire is to replace the inactive Trustee with a City employee; that the second alternative is for the City to own, manage, and operate the cemetery. and to dissolve the Trustees. Mr. Wetzel further stated that the T'rustees presently report to a judge of the 12th Judicial Circuit; that preliminary discussions have taken place resulting in a verbal approval of the alternatives presented; that the attorney for the Trustees will prepare the necessary documents; that the Commission is requested. to commit to one of the two alternatives presented at the present time; that the desire is for the cemetery to remain in excellent condition. Mr. Wetzel stated further that the reason for coming before the Commission is the desire to avoid a $1,500 attorney fee; that the attorney will prepare the necessary documents if the Commission will provide a verbal commitment. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission does not discuss issues and make decisions during Citizens' Input but rather can only refer the issues to the Administration. Commissioner Quillin stated that the issue should be referred to the Administration to report back as soon as possible. City Manager McNees stated that the alternatives presented have previously been received; that an answer has not been provided since the issue is not limited to the St. John Cemetery; that other cemeteries present similar issues; that the issues will be discussed with the City Attorney's Office; that a policy decision which is not specific to one cemetery will be provided as soon as possible. Stan Zimmerman, 2469 Novus Street (34237), District 3 resident, stated that in 1998, the State Legislature passed an act which allows Cities and Counties to increase the Homestead Exemption for people over the age of 65 with a household income of less than $20,000 per yeari that the Sarasota Board of County BOOK 53 Page 24648 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24649 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioners passed the increased Homestead Exemption in 2002; that the City is requested to consider adopting the increased Homestead Exemption for seniors living in the City; that the County passed an additional $5,000 Homestead Exemption on County taxes; that all citizens of the City also pay County taxes; that the increased Homestead Exemption would be applicable to all qualifying citizens of the City; that citizens must apply with the Property Appraiser's Office by March 1, 2003, to qualify for the increased Homestead Exemption; that the County has not advertised the increased Homestead Exemption which is the reason for coming before the Commission at the present time; that the televised Commission meeting provides an outreach to the homes of many City citizens; that the financial impact to each qualifying homeowner is a $20 per year tax savings; that the amount is small but substantial to many people falling into the category; that the financial impact to the City by increasing the Homestead Exemption by $5,000 is approximately $50,000 per year; that the City's Finance Director could refine the estimate; that $50,000 is only an estimate; that the financial impact to the City's revenues is not extreme; that increasing the Homestead Exemption provides a clear and pleasant gesture to the senior citizens in the community; that many senior citizens impacted have lived in the community throughout their lives and do not have plans to build luxurious homes; that the senior citizens in the community impacted have dedicated themselves to paying taxes and raising children; that the City has an opportunity to provide a fine gesture; that the Commission must act swiftly; that the deadline to apply for the increased Homestead Exemption is March 1, 2003; that time is available for the Commission to refer the issue to Staff and hold public hearings; that the Commission is urged to act swiftly on behalf of the senior citizens who can use a small but realistic break on property taxes. Commissioner Quillin stated that the increased tax exemption was approved by the voters; that the belief is the Property Appraiser's Office is providing information regarding the increase to citizens currently having Homestead Exemption; that City residents are County residents and will reap the benefit of the increase. 2. APPROVAL RE : MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 16, 2002, AND JANUARY 6, 2003 - APPROVED AS REVISED (AGENDA ITEM II-1,2) CD 2:41 through 2:44 Mayor Mason asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Commissioner Martin stated that the following change should be made to the minutes of the December 16, 2002, Regular Commission meeting for Agenda Item No. V-1 regarding Board Appointments to the Ad Hoc Committee concerning on-Discrimination: In the heading: The name "Dr. Richard Swier" should be changed to "Henry Blyden" to read as follows: Henry Blyden to represent the category of veteran's status In the vote: The vote should be changed as follows: Henry Blyden received 4 votes: Martin, Mason, Palmer, and Servian. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Henry Blyden to the category of veteran's status on the Ad Hoc Committee. Commissioner Servian stated that the votes should be changed in minutes of the December 16, 2002, Regular Commission meeting for Agenda Item Nos. XIII-2 and XIII-3 to remove her name as voting as she had left the meeting prior to consideration of the two items. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to approve the minutes of the December 16, 2002, Regular Commission meeting as revised. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason asked if the Commission had any changes to the January 6, 2003, minutes? Commissioner Servian stated that following change should be made to the minutes of the January 6, 2003, Regular Commission meeting: Agenda Item No. X-A-2: the word "not" should be added to read as follows: : that the understanding is Staff did not make a presentation to the residents BOOK 53 Page 24650 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24651 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Mayor Mason stated that hearing no other changes, the minutes of the January 6, 2003, Regular Commission meeting are approved as revised by unanimous consent. 3. BOARD ACTIONS RE : REPORT RE : CELEBRATE SARASOTA COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF JANUARY 8 AND JANUARY 15, 2003 - RECEIVED REPORTS; APPROVED THE COMMISSION'S S RECOMMENDATION FOR EXPENDITURE OF THE CELEBRATE SARASOTA GRANT FUNDS WITH THE EXCEPTION OR ALLOCATING FUNDS TO THE MULTICULTURAL COMMITTEE EVENT AND CONSIDERATION OF THE REMARKS OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS (AGENDA ITEM III) CD 2:44 through 3:07 Thorning Little, Chair, Celebrate Sarasota Committee (Committee), came before the Commission; referred to Celebrate Sarasota 100th Anniversary (Celebrate Sarasota) stickers and posters displayed on the Chamber monitors; and stated that the hope is the Commissioners have seen the stickers and posters; that a large number of. stickers and posters are available in the City Auditor and Clerk's Office; that the stickers and posters are being picked up and taken to businesses in hopes of being displayed in storefronts; that two posters are designed to provide an inside and outside display in a window. Mr. Little presented the following item from the January 8 and 15, 2003, Committee meetings: Grant Applications Chair Little stated that the Committee met on January 8 and 15, 2003, to review and make a determination as to a recommendation to the Commission to award grant funding to the 21 applicants submitting Grant Applications for Celebrate Sarasota which is as follows: 50s Rock and Roll Sock Hop $5,100 "Hands of Heritage" Celebrate Sarasota Finale 31,000 G.WIZ Rock 1,300 Sarasota Fair Happy Birthday 4,000 High School Renaissance Program Celebration 3,000 Celebrate! Water Conservation Family Festival 1,300 Sarasota Centennial Fishing Tournament 3,400 Special Issue of Laurel Park Newsletter 500 The Greatest Show on Earth Returns 2,000 Tour Children's Fair 500 Dedication of Plaque and/or Tree 500 Celebrating Sarasota's First Homestead 500 WEDU Salutes the City of Sarasota 3,000 Landscaping and Exterior Historical Recognition 300 The Exhibition 2003 100 "Celebrating Sarasota Arts" 600 Towles Court Community Mural 400 Total: $58,000 Mr. Little continued that several Grant Applicants did not meet the criteria established by the Committee SO requested amounts are not recommended; that the Committee placed conditions in the form of stipulations on a number of Grant Applications. Commissioner Quillin stated that the January 15, 2003, deadline will hopefully be extended; that various neighborhoods in District 3 have contacted her indicating the letter announcing the availability of $500 each for neighborhoods to sponsor Celebrate Sarasota events was never received; that consequently, the neighborhoods did not submit a Grant Application but do wish to have activities; that an extended deadline should be advertised especially to the neighborhoods which did not have an opportunity to apply; that some neighborhoods take longer to organize; that some did not meet during December 2002. Mr. Little stated that the twenty-one Grant Applications received by the January 15, 2003, deadline totaled $112,805; that $78,000 in grant money is available; that the Committee reviewed new applications received after the January 8, 2003, meeting; that some Grant Applications were from neighborhood associations; that the Committee reviewed and scrutinized the Grant Applications; that the total amount of funds recommended for award is $58,300, leaving a balance of $19,700; that the remaining balance does not include funds remaining in the budget of approximately $25,000; that desires have been expressed for extending or creating another deadline for parties not having an opportunity to submit a Grant Application; that the Committee desires to extend efforts to contact and spark interest in organizations or groups playing significant roles in the City's history such as the Newtown area and the Jewish community; that the Committee has plans to target specific groups with hopes to involve the groups in the Celebrate Sarasota activities. Commissioner Quillin stated that the neighborhood grants are only $500; that the neighborhoods which are loosely formed should be BOOK 53 Page 24652 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24653 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. contacted; that the Grant Applications were reviewed; that the desire is to present personal recommendations. Commissioner Martin stated that the Committee is thanked for closely reviewing and scrutinizing the Grant Applications; that the Committee has performed well; that the projects are exciting; that the Committee considered the projects and awarded funding carefully and appropriately; and asked for clarification of the funds remaining. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Commission set aside $25,000 for the City Auditor and Clerk to spend at his discretion; that approximately $1,000 has been spent. Commissioner Martin stated that the Committee's work is supported; that extending the Grant Application process is supported; that the outreach efforts to the Newtown community, the African- American community, the Jewish community, and other communities which have made the City great are appreciated and address concerns raised. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that discussions were held with Reverend Willie Holley at the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. celebration regarding the concerns of the level of involvement of the African-American community; that the concern is the African- American community has not come forth with a Grant Application; that Reverend Holley is interested in assisting; that Rabbi Joel Mishkin with Temple Beth Sholom was contacted; that Temple Beth Sholom is the temple for the Jewish community which was in the City located on the corner of Sixth Street and US 301 many years ago; that the temple is still located in the City; that Rabbi Mishkin requested the City Auditor and Clerk be asked to contact the president of the congregation; that the hope is Grant Applications will be forthcoming; that agreement with comments made by Commissioner Martin concerning the Committee's work is expressed; that the Grant Applications were personally reviewed; that scrutinizing the Grant Applications further is not desired; that the Commission requested the Committee to perform the task; that $31,000 has been approved by the Celebrate Sarasota Committee for the Hands of Heritage Celebrate Sarasota Finale submitted by the Multicultural Committee; that the event is important and will be large; that additional information is requested prior to allocating $31,000 to the Multicultural Committee; that a meeting is scheduled with some of the representatives of the Multicultural Committee during the week of January 20, 2003; that the event is supported; however, additional information should be obtained prior to allocating $31,000; that the Commission is requested to consider not allocating $31,000 to the Multicultural Committee for approximately two weeks until additional information is received. Commissioner Servian stated that the scrutiny given the Grant Applications by the Committee is pleasing; that the rejected Grant Applications clearly did not meet the historical and celebratory theme of the criteria established by the Committee; that other Grant Applicants have been requested through a stipulation to collaborate with specific Grant Applicants to form joint events which is a good idea; that the Committee has done a great job. Mayor Mason agreed. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Grant Applications were personally reviewed; that the original Committee raised the idea of a grant program through corporate sponsorships; that the Multicultural Committee was one of the first committees organized; that the Grant Applications do not indicate methods to raise revenue, advertising sales, or corporate sponsors which is a concern; that any allocation of funding is not supported without further disclosure of financing and the provision of more realistic numbers; that more information is required prior to allocating funds; that the Committee is reminded to inform Grant Applicants of the theme of the event which is the City's anniversary of incorporation as contrasted with the City's birthday; that events should surround the City's anniversary of incorporation theme; that the theme is not a Centennial Celebration; that the Centennial Celebration was held in 1986 and celebrated the Scottish landing. Commissioner Quillin referred to the Grant Application for the Sarasota Centennial Fishing Tournament and Fish Fry included in the Agenda backup material indicating any remaining City grant funding would be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Sarasota and stated that any City grant funding should be for specific expenditures and should not be allocated to charitable organizations or nonprofit agencies without the approval of the Committee; that the Grant Applicants should use the Celebrate Sarasota logo; that any plaques installed by neighborhoods during a Celebrate Sarasota event should also include the Celebrate Sarasota logo; that the Multicultural Committee event for the Hands of Heritage Celebrate Sarasota Finale is aiter BOOK 53 Page 24654 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24655 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. October 14, 2003, which is at the end of the Celebrate Sarasota event; that the hope is for a different date; that a copy of the videotape of the broadcast for the event for WEDU Salutes the City of Sarasota's 100th Anniversary should be provided to the City and all the libraries in Sarasota County; that allocating funds to the Towles Court Community Mural is confusing since 100 percent of the cost of materials and labor is being donated; that no backup was provided for the amount requested; that figures which have been personally calculated do not agree with the Committee's recommended amounts. Commissioner Martin stated that some positive suggestions have been made in terms of further review by the Committee; that the Committee should address the suggestions. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to receive the report of the Celebrate Sarasota Committee. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to approve the Commission's recommendation for expenditure of the Celebrate Sarasota grant funds including consideration of the remarks regarding the Multicultural Committee event and other suggestions made. Commissioner Quillin stated that the event for the High School Renaissance Program Celebration includes an essay contest for students to write about the history of Sarasota; that the essay should be on the history of the City of Sarasota; that different personal concerns are held; that the Committee has done well; that the original intent was to establish a maximum on the amount recommended; that amounts over the maximum would have a different processi that a process of accountability should be in place prior to any allocation of funds; that the manner in which the funds are being used should be provided prior to the City's allocating funds; that allocating funds without accountability to the taxpayers is not desired; that the funds being allocated are taxpayer dollars and not dollars being provided by sponsorsi that the people sponsoring the events are the citizens of the City of Sarasota; that every amount allocated through the Committee should go through an accounting process; that the neighborhoods obtaining grants of $500 are aware of the City's bidding and submission process; that other Grant Applicants are not aware of the City's process; that the hope was to review each Grant Application at the present time to obtain consensus on the Committee's recommended amounts. Mayor Mason stated that reviewing each Grant Application at the present time is not desired; that review of the Grant Applications is the Committee's job. Commissioner Servian stated that the understanding is the Committee and the City Auditor and Clerk are responsible for and have control over the Grant Application process; that the process was specifically designed sO the Commission would not be required to review the Grant Applications; that discussions were previously held which raised alternative methods; however, agreement was reached concerning the current process and a vote taken. Commissioner Martin stated that the assumption is the proper oversight is in place which was the Commission's original direction; that the point raised by Commissioner Quillin is respected; that proper accounting and oversight should be in place. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Committee did not discuss the oversight of the processi that the role of the City Auditor and Clerk is to oversee the process. Commissioner Martin stated that the process currently in place is in accordance with the Commission's original direction. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a motion to approve expenditure of funds for all of the Grant Applications with the exception of the Multicultural Committee event is supported; that an additional amount of time is requested to obtain more information concerning the event; and asked for clarification of the motion. Commissioner Martin stated that the intent of the motion is to recognize the point raised by Vice Mayor Palmer concerning the Multicultural Committee event; that the recommended amount of $31,000 is a large expenditure; that more information is necessary; that the intent of the motion is not to approve the amount recommended for the Multicultural Committee event at this time; that the intent of the motion is also for the Committee to address the comments heard at the table, specifically the comments concerning oversight; that oversight of the process is not a BOOK 53 Page 24656 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24657 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. personal concerni that a concern has, however, been expressed by Commissioner Quillin. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the understanding is the intent of the motion is to approve the allocation of the funds as recommended by the Committee with the exception of the Multicultural Committee event. Commissioner Martin stated that is correct. Mayor Mason restated the motion as to approve the Committee's recommendation for expenditure of the Celebrate Sarasota grant funds with the exception of the Multicultural Committee event concerning which more information is requested and with consideration of full accountability for the expenditures. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mr. Little stated that the individual spearheading the Multicultural Committee event has been attending all the Committee meetings and would be glad to make a presentation to the Commission; that a considerable amount of information has been put forward which is not included in the Agenda backup material. 4. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1 AND 3 - APPROVED, ; ITEM NO. 2 - REMOVED AND WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER NEW BUSINESS AS AGENDA ITEM NO. XIII-2 (AGENDA ITEM IV) CD 3:07 through 3:08 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Item No. 2 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Amendment No. 9 to the State Housing Initiatives Program (SHIP) Local Housing Assistance Program (LHAP) and Rental Development Program Guidelines 3. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 03-4437, amending Chapter 24, Article II, Division 2, Fire, of the Code of Sarasota; amending Section 24-21 to provide for definitions; amending Section 24-22 to provide for certain lump sum payments to be defined as salary; amending Section 24-23 pertaining to requirements for service as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Firefighters' Pension Fund; amending Section 24-24 to provide for adjustment of overpayments or underpayments from the Firefighters' Pension Fund; amending Section 24-29 to provide for certain benefits in the event of the death or disability of a firefighter in the performance of duty and for certain benefits in the event of the death of a firefighter not in the performance of duties; amending Section 24-30 to provide for normal retirement under certain circumstances and to repeal provisions pertaining to early retirement; amending Section 24-31 providing for pension benefits; amending Section 24-31 to provide for certain adjustments in limitation required by the Internal Revenue Code or otherwise; amending Section 24-54 to provide for direct transfers of eligible rollover distributions; amending Section 24-38 pertaining to benefits in the event of layoffs, consolidation of fire and rescue service with another agency or voluntary termination; amending Section 24-40 to repeal the power of the Firefighters' Pension Board to recall and re- examine a disability pensioner; amending Section 24-43 pertaining to cost-of-living adjustments and distribution of available funds; amending Section 24-48 pertaining to optional forms of benefits; providing for the repeal of ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of parts hereof if declared invalid or unenforceable; etc. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1 and 3. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 2, will be considered under New Business as Agenda Item No. VIII-3 which will be heard in the evening session. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM NO. 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1577) ADOPTED ; ITEM NO. 4 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4426) ADOPTED : ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4427) ADOPTED; ITEM NO. 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4429) ADOPTED ; AND ITEM NO. 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4430) ADOPTED ; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1579) - REMOVED AND WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS AS AGENDA ITEM NO. VI-2 IN THE AFTERNOON SESSION; ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1556) REMOVED AND WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER NEW BUSINESS AS AGENDA ITEM NO. VIII-3 IN THE EVENING SESSION (AGENDA ITEM IV-B) BOOK 53 Page 24658 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24659 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. CD 3:08 through 3:22 Commissioner Martin requested that Item No. 3 be removed for discussion. Commissioner Servian requested that Item No. 1 be removed for discussion. 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 03R-1577, appropriating $24,000 from the Law Entorcement Trust Fund (110-080) to provide funds for a vehicle expense related to vice/narcotics investigations; etc. 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 03-4426, amending Ordinance No. 94-3784 to allow a parking lot as the principal permitted use of property located on the south side of Magnolia Street midway between the South Tamiami Trail and East Avenue and having a street address of 2050 Magnolia Street; approving Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-50 to allow the construction of an 85 space parking lot on said property; etc. (Title Only) (Application Nos. 02-ROA-09 and 02-SP-50, Applicant, Kiwi Investments) 5. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427, providing for the rezoning of a 3.09 acre parcel of real property from the Residential Multi Family-4 (RMF-4) Zone District to the Waterfront Resort (WFR) Zone District; said parcel being more fully described herein and being located at 2050 Benjamin Franklin Drive on Lido Key (site of the presently existing Half Moon Beach Blue Resort); approving Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 which has been proffered as a condition of this rezoning to permit the construction of a 54 unit luxury condominium; providing for additional conditions of the rezoning and site plan approval as more particularly described herein; etc. (Title Only) (Application Nos. 02-RE-17 and 02-SP-44, Joel Freedman, Applicant, representing Half Moon Beach Club Residences, LLC) 6. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 03-4429, amending the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) as adopted by reference by Ordinance No. 02-4357; setting forth findings as to intent and purpose; amending Article II, Definitions and Rules of Construction; Division 2, Definitions; Section II-201, Definitions; relating to the definitions of: "assisted living facility, " "boundary adjustment plat," completely enclosed building, 'structure, residential," "primary structure, "primary use,' "townhouse, T "sign-related definitions, T "side zoning lot line, I and to delete definitions of "side street zoning lot line" and "street zoning lot line"; amending Article II, Definitions and Rules of Construction; Division 3, Description of Use Categories; Section II- 307, Institutional Use Categories; Subparagraph (G), Private Clubs, and Subparagraph (I), Schools; amending Article IV, Development Review Procedures; Division 2, General Procedures; Section IV-201, Applications and Administrative Review, Subparagraph (A), Pre-Application Conference; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 1, General; Section VI-102, Zone District Map, and General Regulations; Subparagraph (U), Additional Development Standards Applicable to Single-Family Dwellings in RSF-E, 1, 2, 3, 4 and RMF-1, 2, 3 Zone Districts, Subparagraph (5), Landscape Plan Required; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 2, Single- Family Zone Districts; Section VI-203, Residential Use Development Standards; Subparagraph (H), Design Standards, and Subparagraph (I), Other Regulations; Table VI-203, Residential Development Standards in Single-Family Zone Districts; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 5, Commercial Zone Districts; Table VI-501 (A), Primary Uses Allowed in the Commercial Zones, is amended regarding the Commercial Tourist (CT) Zone District to clarify limitations applicable to office uses; Section VI-503, Development Standards; Subparagraph (H), Ground Floor Windows, Subparagraph (5), Adjustments; and Subparagraph (K), Exterior Display and Storage; Table VI-503(A), Development Standards in the Commercial Zones is amended to clarify exterior display and storage requirements; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 6, Production Intensive Commercial Zone Districts; Table VI-603, Development Standards in the Production Intensive Commercial zones, is amended to clarify exterior display and storage requirements; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 7, Special Purpose Zone Districts; Table VI- 703, Development Standards in the Special Purpose Zones, regarding multiple-family density regulations in the C- CBD Zone District; amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability; Division 1, Signs; Section VII- 107, Permits Required, is amended in Subparagraph (D); Section VII-110, sign requirements in particular zoning districts, is amended in Subparagrapns (A), Residential Single-Family Zone Districts, (I), CN, CBN, CND BOOK 53 Page 24660 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24661 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. District, (J), CG, CRT, CGD and CRD Zone District, (K), CI and ICD Zone District, and (L), CP District; amending Article VII, regulations of general applicability; Division 2, Off-Street Parking and Loading; Section VII- 204, Number of Parking Spaces Required and bicycle standards; Subparagraph (B), Automobile Standards; Section VII-206, Off-Street Parking Requirements in Specific Zone Districts; Subparagraphs (A) and (F); Division 3, Transitional Buffers, Landscaping and Vegetation; Section VII-304, Parking Lot Landscaping, Subparagraph (A); amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability, Division 6, Use Standards; Section VII-602 (CC), Accessory Dwelling Units and Section VII-602 (EE), Temporary Uses and Activities; amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability; Division 9, Accessory Structure and Uses; Section VII-903, Residential Accessory Buildings and Structures, Subparagraphs (D), (E) and (F); Section VII- 904, Non-Residential Accessory Uses, Buildings and Structures, Subparagraph (O); amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability; Division 11, Fences; Section VII-1101, Fences and Walls, Subparagraph (J); amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability; Division 14, Miscellaneous Standards; Section VII-1401, Refuse and Recycling Storage Areas; Subparagraph (E) (1); and amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability; Division 16, Annexation; Section VII-1601, Urban Service Boundary; Repealing Ordinances in Conflict; etc. (Title Only) 7. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430, amending the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) as adopted by reference by Ordinance No. 02-4357; setting forth findings as to intent and purpose; amending Article III, Decision Making and Administrative Bodies; Division 9, Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement Department; Section III-903, Jurisdiction, Authority and Duties, to revise the notice procedures for administrative interpretations of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement;, Article III, Decision Making and Administrative Bodies; Division 2, Planning Board; Section III-202, Membership; Terms; Transition; Vacancies; Removal, to add a sixth member to the Planning Board to be appointed by the School Board of Sarasota County as a non-voting member in accordance with the requirements of State law; amending the following sections of the Zoning Code to allow for a Special Master to hear and decide appeals of the administrative interpretations of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement and to hear and grant variances from the terms of the Zoning Code, both in the event final action of the Board of Adjustment cannot be obtained: Article III, Decision Making and Administrative Bodies: Division 3, Board of Adjustment; Section III-303, Meetings, Quorum and Required Vote, to add a new Subparagraph (d); to create a new Division 11: "Special Masters" and to add new Section III-1101, Powers and Duties, Section III-1102, Appointment, and Section III-1103, Rules, Staff and Records, all pertaining to Special Masters; amending Article IV, Development Review Procedures; Division 6, Variances; to add new Section IV-605, Special Master Review and to renumber: Section IV-606, Standards for Review, Section IV-607, Appeal of Decision, and Section IV-608, Expiration or Revocation of Approval; amending Division 7, Administrative Appeals, to create a new Section IV- 704, Action by Special Master, and to provide for the renumbering of Section IV-705, Appeal of Decision; amending Article IV, Development Review Procedures; Division 8, Historic Designation; Section IV-808, Changes to Structures and Historic Designation/Certificate of appropriateness; to revise the notice requirements for certificates of appropriateness regarding historically designated structures; amending Article IV, Development Review Procedures; Division 5, Site Plan; Section IV-501, Purpose and Applicability, to raise the threshold for Administrative Site Plan Approval; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 3, Residential Multiple-Family, Section VI-303, Development Standards, Subparagraphs (D), Height, and (E), Setbacks, to apply a minimum uniform additional setback of 12 feet (at grade or up to 35 feet) for structures located outside of Golden Gate Point; to apply a minimum 12 foot side and rear additional setback and a minimum 8 foot front and waterfront additional setback for structures located on golden gate point; amending Table VI-303, Residential Development Standards for Multiple-Family Zone Districts, to revise the method for measuring maximum building height; amending Article VI, Zone Districts; Division 7, Special Purpose Zone Districts; Table VI- 703, Development Standards in the Special Purpose Zones applicable to the WFR Zone District to revise the method BOOK 53 Page 24662 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24663 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. for measuring maximum building height; and to specify the minimum additional setbacks for structures over 35 feet in height; amending Article VI, Development Standards; Division 3, Residential Multiple-Family: Section VI-303, Development Standards; Subparagraph (H), Building Recess, to delete the requirement for a building recess for structures located on Golden Gate Point; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) Application No. 02-ZTA-06, Applicant, City of Sarasota) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1577 in its entirety and proposed Ordinance Nos. 03R-4426, 03-4427,and 03-4429 by title only. City Attorney Taylor and City Auditor and Clerk Robinson shared the reading of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yesi Palmer, yes; Quillin; yes; Servian, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Consent Agenda No. 2, Item 1, will be considered under New Business as Agenda Item No. VIII-3 which will be heard in the evening session; that Consent Agenda No. 2, Item 3, will be considered under Unfinished Business as Agenda Item No. VI-2 which will be heard in the afternoon session. 6. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - REAPPOINTED JASON BENNETT; ; APPOINTED CARL MEYER (AGENDA ITEM V-1) CD 3:22 through 3:24 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Jason Bennett's term on the Historic Preservation Board has expired; that Mr. Bennett has served one full term and is eligible for and interested in reappointment; that the seat designated for a practicing professional historian or archaeologist has been vacant for some time; that for the appointment, the Historic Preservation Board at its meeting of July 23, 2002, requested the Commission consider appointing a person with expertise in real estate finance and/or real estate development to which the Commission agreed at the October 7, 2002, Regular meeting; that two applications have been received for the seat. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to reappoint Jason Bennett and to appoint Carl Meyer to the seat designated for real estate finance and/or real estate development. Commissioner Servian stated that several telephone discussions have taken place with Mr. Meyer during 2002; that Mr. Meyer is very dedicated to historic preservation and has done a wonderful job in restoring his home; that Mr. Meyer is writing a book relating to historic homes in Sarasota; that Mr. Meyer is a wonderful addition to the Historic Preservation Board. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 7. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA - REAPPOINTED CATHY LAYTON; APPOINTED RICHARD REDDING AND TREVOR HARVEY (AGENDA ITEM V-2) CD 3:24 through 3:31 Mayor Mason stated that the terms of Cathy Layton, Jacquelyn Paulk, and Joseph Hudgins have expired; that all indicated an interest in reappointment; that seven additional applications have been received. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that State law requires the members of the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) Board be nominated by the Mayor with the approval of the Commission. Mayor Mason nominated Cathy Layton. Cathy Layton received 5 votes: Martin, Mason, Palmer, Quillin, and Servian. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Cathy Layton to the SHA Board. Mayor Mason stated that Jacquelyn Paulk is not nominated for reappointment; that Richard Redding is nominated for appointment. BOOK 53 Page 24664 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24665 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Richard Redding received 5 votes: Martin, Mason, Palmer, Quillin, and Servian. Mayor Mason stated that Joseph Hudgins is not nominated for reappointment; that Trevor Harvey is nominated for appointment. Commissioner Martin stated that the nomination of Trevor Harvey in place of Joseph Hudgins is respected but not supported; that Mr. Hudgins is personally known; that a position was held on the Community Development Committee (Committee) during the development of the five-year consolidated plan along with Mr. Hudgins; that Mr. Hudgin's skills were observed while serving on the Committee and are impressive; that Mr. Hudgins has a vast amount of banking knowledge; that Mr. Hudgin's skills apply to some of the intricacies of work which will be addressed by the Sarasota Housing Authority to include an application for a HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI grant; that an assumption for not reappointing Mr. Hudgins is the concern for some of the actions of the SHA Board such as the salary increase for the Executive Director and the failure to provide required maintenance; that some actions taken by the SHA Board are considered a sore point; however, losing Mr. Hudgins at a strategic time is a concern. Mayor Mason stated that Commissioner Martin's decision not to support Mr. Harvey is respected; that the salary increase for the Executive Director is very concerning but is not the reason for not nominating Mr. Hudgins for reappointment; that the decision is based on personal desires for leadership on the SHA Board for the residents of public housing; that lengthy discussions were held with Mr. Hudgins regarding public housing concerns; that the concern for public housing residents is the basis for not nominating Mr. Hudgins for reappointment. Commissioner Quillin stated that the work of the SHA Board is not pleasing; that a personal choice is to dissolve the SHA Board and for the City to take control of the SHA; that the belief is the SHA Board has not provided a service to the citizens of Sarasota; that the issue is not simply a district issue but is a City and County issue; that the manner in which the SHA Board has proceeded is displeasing; that personal displeasure with the SHA Board has been expressed in the past; that the individuals nominated to the SHA Board will not make a difference; that the City should take responsibility for the SHA and dissolve the existing SHA Board. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that agreement is expressed with the points raised by Commissioner Martin concerning Mr. Hudgins; that Mr. Hudgins is an outstanding individual and serves on many committees, including the City's Police Officers' Pension Board and the County Planning Commission; that Mr. Hudgins is extraordinarily well qualified being a banker; however, the Commission has appointed the Mayor as the liaison to the Sarasota Housing Authority; that the Mayor attends the SHA Board meetings and has had the direct relationship between the Commission and the SHA Board; therefore, the Mayor's nomination is supported. Commissioner Servian stated that the concerns raised by Commissioner Martin are shared; that Mr. Hudgin's leadership and guiding responsibility were necessary at the time appointed; that a decision was made not to go forward with the HOPE IV Grant; that the belief is Mr. Hudgins let the Commission and the community down; that the Mayor's nomination of Mr. Harvey is supported; that Mr. Harvey is personally known and respected and will take a leadership role which is sorely needed. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the nomination. Trevor Harvey received 3 votes:, Palmer, Mason, and Servian. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Trevor Harvey to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION RE: CODE ENFORCEMENT AT THE SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPERTIES - DIRECTED STAFF TO: 1) DEVELOP A REPORT CONCERNING CODE ENFORCEMENT AT THE SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY, 2) PROVIDE THE REPORT TO THE SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION, AND 3) SCHEDULE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD ONCE THE REPORT IS COMPLETED (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) CD 3:24 through 3:55 City Manager McNees stated that the Commission directed the Administration to bring back a revised report with additional information regarding concerns raised regarding code enforcement at the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA); that the concern is having a different set of standards for code enforcement for the SHA; that the code enforcement procedures are for the SHA to investigate code enforcement on SHA property which is also inspected by the Federal government to assure adherence to certain standards; that the Commission is requested to provide the BOOK 53 Page 24666 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24667 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Administration with policy direction if the current code enforcement procedures regarding the SHA are not acceptable. Mayor Mason stated that treating SHA property and residents differently than other property and residents in the City is still a concern and is personally considered a problem; that the City should investigate complaints equally; that treating SHA property code enforcement complaints differently is a problem; that confidence is not held in the inspection methods utilized by Federal inspectors at the SHA; that otherwise, housing stock would not be in the current eroding condition, which is the basis for presenting the code enforcement issue; that the current procedures are not satisfactory. Commissioner Servian referred to a November 25, 2002, memorandum from the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, included in the Agenda backup material requesting an opportunity to bring back a proposal for a budget appropriation from the general fund as staffing for the additional responsibilities is not included in the fiscal year (FY) 2002/03 budget and stated that funding may be available from the SHA to pay the City to assume the responsibility of code enforcement for SHA property; that the SHA inspectors are clearly not doing the job the City deems appropriate; that agreement is expressed with the point raised by the Mayor concerning the housing stock; that the housing stock is deplorable and could be corrected through proper code enforcement; that the SHA has funding to perform inspections; and asked if the funding could be transferred to the City for the City to perform the inspections? Mayor Mason stated that a notice was recently received indicating the SHA will experience a 30 percent reduction in funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); that the reduction is approximately $300,000 and will affect the SHA 2003 operating budget. City Manager McNees stated that the SHA would not be removed from the inspection obligation under Federal mandates if the City increased enforcement of SHA property. Commissioner Quillin stated that the November 25, 2002, memorandum from the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, included in the Agenda backup material is appreciated; however, treating SHA property or residents differently than any other City property or resident will not be tolerated; that disappointment is expressed towards Staff if the budget for the Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement Department does not include providing code enforcement for every residential and commercial property in the City; that Staff accompanied her through SHA property in 1999; that photographs of SHA property were taken; that deplorable conditions were seen; that units into which people had moved or were ready to move were in deplorable condition; that the units were infested with roaches; that roach excrement was coming down the walls; that electrical wires were open; that faucets were leaking; that the SHA public housing residents have no relief; that the SHA public housing residents call the City for assistance; that the City refers the SHA residents back to the SHA; that the existing conditions concern the health, safety, and welfare of the City's citizens; that the indication the SHA residents are treated differently and the City has not budgeted funds to protect the health, safety, and welfare of all of the City's citizens is disappointing; that the belief is the current situation is not Staff's intent; that Staff is passionate for the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens; that the City must ensure the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens is protected which is a key issue; that the code violations at the SHA from November 19, 2002, were reviewed; that the code violations indicated do not compare with the conditions personally seen; that people are living in deplorable conditions, which exist even in newly renovated units; that the belief is the units can be brought up to livable standards; that the SHA will address certain conditions if the City uses alternative enforcement measures such as the use of a Special Master; that protecting residents is the basic premise. City Manager McNees stated that the SHA is different; that the SHA is publicly owned, regulated housing which is the reason for different code enforcement for SHA property and residents; that a difference in the code enforcement process is not meant to imply in any way the Administration or Staff believes the residents of the SHA are second class citizens or do not deserve equal protection; that the SHA residents being treated as such is not the intent or philosophy of Staff. Mayor Mason stated that the perception among SHA residents is the City will not assist with code enforcement problems and a telephone call to the City will not make a difference. City Manager McNees stated that the Commission is requested to provide direction for a policy change if the present code enforcement practice is no longer consistent with Commission BOOK 53 Page 24668 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24669 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. policy; that a report including the financial impact of making a change will be brought back; that another item for discussion is the outcome of code enforcement on SHA property if the City imposes violations, fines, Special Master hearings, and penalties on the SHA; that the City has the ability to place liens on private property; that some authority for leverage for repayment of fines exists during the sale of a property or other transaction; that authority for the same leverage does not exist with the SHA; that the philosophies of the code enforcement process are built around privately owned property; that enforcement mechanisms for the SHA will require examination and will be included in the report. Mayor Mason stated that the comments by the City Manager are heard; however, the code enforcement process must be reexamined. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that code enforcement is not guaranteed by the City's imposing violations, fines, Special Master hearings, and penalties on the SHA; that the outcome is not known; that Staff can explain the manner in which the Special Master process operates in the private sector and to discuss funding obstacles in the public sector if desired. Mayor Mason stated that action cannot be taken until discussions between the SHA Board and the Commission take place aiter the Commission provides the Administration with direction; that the Commission should meet with the SHA Board and direct the SHA Board to take action deemed appropriate by the City; that the City owes the SHA residents the same protection as all residents; that the SHA residents are just as much a part of the City as people having many options for places in which to live. Commissioner Quillin stated that leverage does exist; that the SHA requires the City's cooperation concerning the HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI grant sponsored by HUD as well as with many other projects; that if changes are not seen in the future, she will pursue the dissolution of the SHA Board and placing the new SHA Board under a management which will assist in addressing current issues; that people will be taken to visit personal friends living in poor conditions at SHA housing if the severity of the situation is not known; that personal recommendations to improve SHA property have been made since the early 1990s; that the recommendations for improvements are not being addressed by the SHA Board; that the cockroach excrement, rats, open wires, leaking plumbing, and roofs in ill-repair are not the only issues; that the SHA does not provide SHA residents with timeframes for addressing problems; that SHA residents should be allowed to contact the City for assistance if the SHA does not correct the problem after three documented telephone calls; that SHA residents have no one else to contact to address problems; that SHA residents may have no other option but to live in SHA housing; that HUD investigators are taken to units which are in much better condition than the average condition of some units; that the HUD inspections are not random. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the position of the Commission is not to allow second class treatment of any citizen in the City; that the belief is Staff does not wish to allow such treatment; that the problem is finding funding to address code enforcement of SHA property. Vice Mayor Palmer continued that the desire is not for the City to fine the SHA and have conditions continue to deteriorate; that SHA revenues may be decreased by 30 percent during 2003; that the manner in which the SHA will acquire funds to fix problems if funds are used to pay fines imposed by the City is a concern; that the issue must be addressed; that SHA residents should not be treated differently than other City residents; that the question of funding to improve conditions if the SHA is fined is a problem; that the November 19, 2002, report concerning code violations at the SHA indicates two code violations are interior; that the remaining code violations are exterior; that compliance by the SHA is indicated in most instances; that the interior problems have not been corrected as necessaryi that Staff should bring back a report; that a joint meeting with the SHA should be scheduled to discuss resolution of the problem. Commissioner Servian stated that the frustration of the Commission being heard by Staff is not directed at Staff; that Staff is not responsible for the present situation; that the City owes the SHA residents to become involved in any wayi that the City should examine all possible ways to leverage with the SHA; that the Commission can present the exact requests of the City at the joint meeting; that the SHA should be aware of the City's expectations which must be brought to the forefront; that the SHA residents deserve the exact same consideration as anyone living in private housing; that the SHA residents should not be living in unhealthy and unsafe conditions; that the hope is the changes made to the SHA Board at the present time will create a better response; BOOK 53 Page 24670 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24671 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. however, additional extreme measures may be necessaryi that a budget proposal is a good step. City Manager McNees stated that a report will be prepared and will include discussion of the enforcement process; that the report will be presented at a joint meeting with the SHA; that the timing is perfect since two new members have been appointed to the SHA Board; that the joint meeting should be held after the new SHA Board members are sworn in and seated; that the issue can be placed on an Agenda of a Regular Commission meeting as a follow-up if the Commission has specific actions at the Close of the joint meeting. Commissioner Martin stated that a budget must accompany the requested report; that many concerns can be raised; however, the problem relates to funding as well; that the issue surrounds an unfunded mandate down to the local level; that the City must become involved and see the process through if changes are to occur; that the Commission should be honest and upfront with the realization the situation is a monetary problem; that the report should also include consideration and feasibility of the point raised by Commissioner Quillin regarding the idea of the City taking control of the SHA; that the issue is a human as well as a monetary and budget concern; that the concern is Commission intervention without providing funding and tangible ways of addressing the problem. Mayor Mason stated that the points raised by Commissioner Martin make sense; that the SHA has been questioned by Commissioner Quillin concerning the status of the future funding plans for improvements as an alternative to the HOPE VI grant; that nothing has been heard; that a call will go out to the community to provide assistance if the Commission expresses the desired results from the SHA in a joint meeting; that assistance will likely be received from the community if the SHA agrees with the Commission; that the SHA should provide the Commission with future plans for funding improvements. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Commission's request for the report to contain additional budget costs in labor and time is appreciated; that a full accounting of funding for code enforcement for the last three years should be performed; that additional code enforcement has been added throughout the City; that the SHA Board will be made aware fines will be imposed if the SHA does not come into compliance; that the SHA has a reserve fund of over $7 million. Mr. Schneider stated that the Commission could request the SHA Executive Director or have the SHA Board request the SHA Executive Director respond to the report being brought back by Staff prior to the joint meeting; that Staff will prepare the report; that providing the report to the SHA prior to the joint meeting will encourage a productive session in which the SHA will be prepared to respond and will allow for decision-making. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the suggestion for the City to request the SHA Board to request the SHA Executive Director to respond to the report prior to the joint meeting is supported; that the possibility of obtaining private sector assistance should be researched; that the City should reach out to other areas to assist the SHA with the problem; that the City cannot provide or budget enough funding to totally solve the problems; that funding will certainly not come from the Federal Government;, that the HOPE VI grant will provide some assistance if received; however, reaching out to other sources for additional funding is necessary. Commissioner Servian stated that many years have been spent working in banking, with HUD, and with HUD inspectors in public housing; that the desire is not to be a cynic; however, HUD inspectors care very little about the conditions in which people in public housing live; that the concern is more for the collection of rents; that the Commission should not be under the assumption HUD inspectors have concern for the living conditions of people living in the City; that the health, safety, and welfare of the City's citizens is the responsibility of the City. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1579, CREATING THE AD HOC NON-DISCRIMTNATION COMMITTEE : MAKING FINDINGS; CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ; IDENTIFYING THE PURPOSES OF THE COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS RELATED TO OPERATIONS ; STATING A TIME- -LINE FOR PERFORMANCE OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) ADOPTED AS AMENDED (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) CD 3:55 through 4:02 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. 3, was removed from the Consent Agenda by Commissioner Martin and is now Unfinished Business Agenda Item VI-2; that the BOOK 53 Page 24672 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24673 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. item concerns proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579 creating the Ad Hoc Committee concerning on-Discrimination (Ad Hoc Committee). Commissioner Martin quoted Section 1, proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579 included in the Agenda backup material and stated that the following wording is not necessary and should be removed: Each member of the City Commissioner having submitted the names of persons to be appointed to the Committee, Commissioner Martin quoted Section 5, proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579, identifying the purposes of the Committee as follows: The Committee shall commence its deliberations by considering the draft Ordinance presented to the City Commission by the Sarasota Equality Project and the Committee shall endeavor to work within the existing framework of the Sarasota City Code Commissioner Martin continued that discussions were held with the City Attorney concerning proposed additional language; that the Committee should also review compliance with Federal and State laws, regulations, and rules; that Federal and State officials provided suggestions regarding the issue during a recent forum; that a City ordinance concerning non-discrimination should be in compliance with Federal and State laws and regulations; that the City will gain Federal and State support in enforcement and potentially gain funds to enforce non-discrimination in the future; that the City Attorney spoke with Federal and State representatives during the recent forum and discussed the manner in which regulations concerning non-discrimination will be enforced; that additional language indicating the Committee should review compliance with Federal and State laws, regulations, and rules should be included in Section 5, proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579. City Attorney Taylor stated that the following language is suggested: The Committee shall give due consideration to applicable Federal and State laws sO as to enable the City to obtain potentially available assistance, financial or otherwise, from Federal or State sources. Commissioner Martin stated that the language is acceptable. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the first organizational meeting of the Committee will be held, at 5 p.m., January 27, 2003, in the Commission Chambers. Commissioner Servian quoted Section 7, proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579, as follows: the Committee may request that the City Commission provide the services of one or more experts to advise and assist the Committee Commissioner Servian continued that conversations were held with Michael Shelton, who is the Treasurer of the Sarasota Equity Project; that Mr. Shelton is willing to assist the Ad Hoc Committee. Commissioner Quillin stated that the suggestion is excellent. City Attorney Taylor stated that the plan was to utilize Mr. Shelton as a consultant; that Mr. Shelton is also an advocate for a position concerning non-discrimination and prefers not serving in an official capacity; that Mr. Shelton is the author of an important part of the material which may be used to implement the ordinance concerningi non-discrimination, that Mr. Shelton will be made aware of all Ad Hoc Committee meetings and is welcome to attend and participate. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Shelton does not wish being in a position precluding the free expression of personal advocacy; that Mr. Shelton will be a valuable resource to the Ad Hoc Committee. Commissioner Quillin stated that the hope is Mr. Shelton will be considered as an advisor to the Committee since he authored the original non-discrimination language. Mayor Mason stated that Mr. Shelton is offering to serve in an advisory role. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Shelton is offering availability to assist the Committee. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579 by title only. BOOK 53 Page 24674 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24675 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 03R-1579 as amended as follows: Section 1: Delete - Each member of the City Commissioner having submitted the names of persons to be appointed to the Committee and Section 5: Add - The Committee shall give due consideration to applicable Federal and State laws sO as to enable the City to obtain potentially available assistance, financial or otherwise, from Federal or State sources. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. 10. NEW ITEM: UNFINISHED BUSINESS: PRESENTATION RE: : STATUS OF LITIGATION INVOLVING THE RENOVATION PROJECT FOR THE VAN WEZEL PERFORMING ARTS HALL CONTINUED DISCUSSION TO UNFINI: SHED BUSINESS AT EVENING SESSION CD 4:02 through 4:13 City Attorney Taylor stated that a presentation to the Commission was made December 16, 2002, by representatives of Dooley & Mack Constructors, Inc., regarding the renovation project for the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) ; that as a result of the presentation, the City Manager attempted plans to mediate the dispute and resolve the issue without attorneys; that the dispute has taken a new direction; that Legal Counsel for Dooley & Mack requested a mediation with a mediator for February 11, 2003, which is very short notice; that the assumption is the mediation scheduled for February 11, 2003, is in accordance with the mediation the City Manager was attempting to schedule; that immediate action is required since participation in the mediation includes conditions. City Attorney Taylor continued that one condition of participation in the mediation is the City will back away from proceeding towards the ultimate trial of the case which is the desired goal based on input received by the Commission; that the City would be required to cancel a court ordered case status conference scheduled for January 23, 2003, as well as depositions which have been scheduled; that the concept is for the City to focus solely on the mediation; that the inclination is to accept the mediation offer based upon the presentation made; that an additional condition is the City's Special Legal Counsel in the case is not to participate in the mediation which creates an additional set of issues; that the City's Special Legal Counsel has been brought in at considerable expense and is prepared to advise the City based upon his expertise; that not including the City's Special Legal Counsel in the mediation is not a problem; that the Special Legal Counsel would still be available to advise the City outside of the actual negotiations. City Attorney Taylor further stated that the costs concerning the case have become a major issue; that the City Attorney's Office continues to work on the case; that Robert Trohn, the City's Special Legal Counsel, was requested to provide an estimate as to the cost to litigate the case through to trial; that the estimate is detailed; that the Commission will be provided the estimate along with a cover letter; that information believed valuable to the Commission is included in the cover letter; that the desire is to revisit the issue in the evening session to obtain the direction of the Commission; that the Commission should be aware of the cost estimates provided. City Attorney Taylor stated further that the matter is urgent; that action must be taken immediately to file a motion to cancel the case status conference; that choosing to mediate the case may be productive and may produce the desired results or may prolong the matter; that the case could potentially become more expensive. Commissioner Servian stated that the matter should be discussed with the Commission in an out-of-sunshine attorney-client session to afford the opportunity to discuss strategy; that an unfair characterization has been cast indicating the cost of the case has escalated due to the Commission's direction; that the Commission is relying on the City Attorney's guidance to move the case forward; that the Commission was not alone in the decision to enter into the expense; that discussing the case at this time is a concerni and asked the reason the issue was raised at this time rather than in an attorney-Client session? City Attorney Taylor stated that the concern is the limited amount of time available to make a decision; that the preference is for Attorney Trohn to attend the attorney-client session which will take 24 hours to schedule; that discussions concerning the case can proceed in an attorney-client session if the Commission wishes; that the Commission is provided notice at this time as he, as the City Attorney, requires an attorney- client session as required by the State Statutes; that the question of canceling the case status conference still remains; BOOK 53 Page 24676 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24677 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. that the City Attorney's Office will address the problem after a decision is reached as to the manner in which to proceed. Commissioner Servian stated that the situation is urgent; that a decision can be made to schedule an attorney-client session at this time; that having the discussion at the present time is not a comfortable feeling; and asked the length of time necessary to schedule an Attorney-Client session Commissioner Quillin stated that having the discussions at this time is a concern and does not allow for considerable questions relating to strategy. Commissioner Quillin asked if Legal Counsel for Dooley & Mack has provided the offer for mediation in writing? City Attorney Taylor stated no. Commissioner Quillin stated that cancelling the case status conference and depositions will not be supported without a written mediation offer as the issue is too important to the citizens of the community. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a request is for the City Attorney to provide a timeframe for calling an attorney-client session to consider the matter; that the conversation concerning the case should take place in the attorney-client session. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a special meeting must be called to make the announcement of the attorney-client session and then adjourn into the attorney-client session; that the notice requirements will be reviewed to determine if the requirements can be waived due to an emergency; that the Commissioner's calendars will be reviewed for availability; that the item will be placed on the Agenda for the evening session and heard as Unfinished Business. Commissioner Martin stated that the understanding is the case status conference will not be cancelled until a decision is reached in the attorney-client session. City Attorney Taylor stated that the case status conference is court ordered; that a decision must be made within 24 hours to avoid being held in contempt of court. Mayor Mason stated that the City Auditor and Clerk will review the Commissioners' calendars as well as the notice requirements and inform the Commissioners accordingly during the evening session. The Commission recessed at 4:13 p.m. and reconvened at 6:00 p.m. 11. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR 2002, KIM DENAIS, SECRETARY, BUILDING, ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) CD 6:00 through 6:10 Mayor Mason requested that City Manager McNees, Timothy Litchet, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, and Kim DeNais, Secretary, Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement and Employee of the Year for 2002, join her and the Commission at the Commission table for the presentation. Mr. Litchet stated that Ms. DeNais has exhibited exemplary commitment and professionalism in the performance of her job and as a result has been chosen Employee of the Year 2002; that an architect from Clearwater, Florida, recently completed a large project in the Cityi that the architect and developer of the project attributed the timely and successful completion of the project to the level of determination, courtesy, and enthusiasm of Ms. DeNais; that the gracious manner and outstanding work ethic brought to the project by Ms. DeNais has resulted in a future project planned in the City by the developer; that the effort displayed by Ms. DeNais reaffirms the importance of each employee and the economic impact front-line employees can have on the future of the City; that front-line employees interacting daily with customers can and do influence development in the City. Mr. Litchet continued that a customer with a small child requested a variance for a security fence behind her home; that a canal running behind the family home was a cause of great concern; that the deadline for submission for consideration at the next meeting of the Board of Adjustment was missed by one day; that the customer was visibly upset which prompted Ms. DeNais to raise the issue with Staff; that Ms. DeNais insisted upon a sensible approach and the application for the variance be accepted; that assistance was given by Ms. DeNais to the customer in preparing the application for the variance; that the required legal notices and paperwork required were prepared by Ms. DeNais; that the application for the variance was placed on the Board of Adjustment's Agenda; that Ms. DeNais displays BOOK 53 Page 24678 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24679 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. determination to go beyond everyday duties; that the customer was grateful to the City and telephoned Staff to ask if a recognition of Ms. DeNais was possible. Mr. Litchet further stated that the personal attributes of Ms. DeNais are admirable; that courage, common sense, and compassion are qualities of character which have given the City a sense of pride; that Ms. DeNais is an exemplary employee; that City Manager McNees has brought a sense of energy and vitality to the environment at City Hall. Çity Manager McNees stated that Ms. DeNais is solely responsible for numerous achievements; that Ms. DeNais requested training in zoning processes to achieve a higher degree of expertise to accommodate customers more readily and to help alleviate a substantial burden from other Staff; that an additional responsibility now includes field work in the area of regulating commercial vehicles; that service to the people of Sarasota has been clearly demonstrated by Ms. DeNais; that Ms. DeNais is deserving of the Employee of the Year 2002 Award, the highest award the City can bestow on an employee. Mayor Mason presented Ms. DeNais with a Coach-brand watch, a plaque and a certificate as the Employee of the Year Award 2002 in appreciation of her unique performance with the City; and congratulated her for her outstanding efforts and thanked her for serving with excellence and pride. Ms. DeNais expressed gratitude to the Commission, Mr. Litchet and City Manager McNees; and stated that the recognition is appreciated; that Mr. Litchet has been an inspiration as well as a wonderful teacher; that the transition from New Jersey has been a smoother journey as a result of the friendship of the Litchet family; and recognized her parents, Sunda and Val Varas, who had come from New Jersey for the presentation, and her husband, Joe DeNais, also present in the audience. 12. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: : PROCLAIMING JANUARY 25, 2003 AS STRENGTH OF COMMUNITY DAY (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) CD 6:10 through 6:16 Mayor Mason requested Dr. Larry Thompson, President of Ringling School of Art and Design, Kevin Dean, Executive Director of the Selby Gallery, and Karen Patterson, Artistic Director for the Strength of Community Festival, join her at the Commission Table for the presentation. Mayor Mason read the City of Sarasota Proclamation indicating that Strength of Community Day will celebrate the creativity and artistic ability of diverse cultures represented within the City as artists with separate yet interwoven legacies come together in performances and demonstrations exploring the ways in which music, dance, art, and history combine to create one shared legacy for all members of the community and proclaims January 25, 2003, Strength of Community Day and presented the Proclamation to Dr. Thompson, Mr. Dean, and Ms. Patterson. Dr. Thompson stated that the honor is appreciated; that January 25, 2003, will be a day to recognize the diversity existing in the community; that the fabrics of diversity woven together will symbolize the achievements of the community; that the Strength of Community Day Program will be held at the Ringling School of Art and Design. Mr. Dean stated that the program will highlight eclectic American styles in music; that January 25, 2003, will culminate a series of events over the past three years; that workshops will be held; that art, music and theatre will be presented; that various local and international entertainers will be performing. Ms. Patterson stated that the program is a vehicle designed to bring people together; that the community response is appreciated. 13. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE : ADOPTION RE : MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1573, RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF MARY SCIARRETT, ACTIVE CITIZEN OF THE COMMUNITY AND LONG-TIME OWNER OF BRANT' S USED BOOKS = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) CD 6:17 through 6:25 Mayor Mason requested that Commissioner Martin make the presentation. Commissioner Martin stated that the City is one of rich, cultural institutions; that Brandt's Used Books is among those institutions; that Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1573 recognizes the November 23, 2002, passing of Mary Sciarretta, active member of the community and long-time owner of Brant's Used Books, and read Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1573 in its entirety. BOOK 53 Page 24680 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24681 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1573. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. The following family members came forward and were presented with a copy of the memorial resolution appropriately framed on a plaque: Alisa Sciarretta, daughter, Barbara Barone, daughter, William Sciarretta, husband, and Jackie Ricker and Sylvia Blanco, friends. Ms. Ricker stated that she enjoyed both a personal and professional relationship with Mrs. Sciarretta; that a passion for books and literature were gifts bequeathed to the community by Mrs. Sciarretta and read a verse written in her memory. Ms. Blanco stated that the friendship shared with Mrs. Sciarretta was an honor and a privilege; that the emotionality of the past two months has been difficult; that the personal loss has been a learning experience about life and death; that appreciation is extended to the City for honoring a cherished member of the community. Mrs. Sciarretta stated that the Memorial Resolution is a wonderful tribute to the memory of her mother; that appreciation is extended to the City for being a wonderful friend to Brant's Used Books; that gratitude is expressed to the City for the gracious acknowledgment of her mother's life; that gratitude is also extended to the many employees of Brant's Used Books present in the audience for the devotion expressed during this difficult time. 14. PRESENVATION RE: : LAUREL PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO ALLOCATE THE NECESSARY FUNDING FOR THE PREPARATION AND PROCESSING OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IN THE APRIL 2003 AMENDMENT CYCLE TO ALLOW FOR MIXED USE IN LAUREL PARK REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) CD 6:26 through 6:50 Peter deLisser, President, and Diana Hamilton, Member, Board of Directors, Laurel Park Neighborhood Association (LPNA), came before the Commission. Ms. Hamilton stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), created the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification, which was assigned to the City's walk-to- town neighborhoods of Laurel Park, Gillespie Park, and Park East; that in August 1999, the City hired the consulting firm of Duany, Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ) to develop a 20-year master plan for the Downtown area; that two mixed residential neighborhoods, Gillespie Park and Park East, were included in the study; that in May 2000, both the City's Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) and the Historic Preservation Board voted unanimously to recommend the Laurel Park neighborhood be included in the master plan for the Downtown area; that the LPNA Board of Directors voted 6 to 1 in favor of being included in the master plan for the Downtown area; that as a result in June 2000, the Commission voted 4 to 1 in support of a motion to direct Staff to work with the LPNA to develop Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) zoning regulations for the Laurel Park neighborhood based on those developed by DPZ for the master plan for the Downtown area, which was an update to the master plan for the Community Redevelopment Area entitled the Downtown Sarasota: Master Plan for Tomorrow (May 1986); that in the summer of 2000, Staff informed the LPNA of the necessary steps for adoption of the master plan for the Downtown area, which were required before work would begin in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that the procedures to adopt the master plan for the Downtown area would be a year-long process; that the time period of one year was used to educate the residents to assure a more widespread understanding of mixed-use neighborhoods and the master plan for the Downtown area; that the LPNA arranged for Staff to attend neighborhood meetings to discuss the master plan for the Downtown area; that in the fall of 2000, the City adopted the master plan for the Downtown area as the Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020); that a number of amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan were required to implement the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that one of the amendments changed the broad language used to describe the Future Land Use Classifications of the Gillespie Park and Park East neighborhoods; that as a result, the Laurel Park neighborhood became the only neighborhood in the City with the Mixed Residential Euture Land Use Classification. BOOK 53 Page 24682 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24683 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Ms. Hamilton continued that in July 2001, the former President of LPNA met with Staff to discuss options to include the Laurel Park neighborhood in the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that Staff indicated an amendment to the City's Comprenensive Plan was required to implement the TND zoning regulations developed for the Gillespie Park and Park East neighborhoods in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that Staff informed the LPNA of a backlog of projects requiring completion before the amendment could be considered; that Staff recommended the LPNA make a request to the City by the end of 2002 to include an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan for submittal in the April 2003 amendment cycle. Ms. Hamilton further stated that numerous events occurred over the next year; that most notably, the Residential Single Multiple 9 (RSM-9) Zone District which had been in process since 1998 was presented to the neighborhood for consideration; that best efforts were used in preparing the documentation to approve the RSM-9 Zone District; that Staff and the LPNA diligently proceeded to make the RSM-9 Zone District more reflective of the neighborhood character in the areas of setbacks, expanded opportunity for accessory units, removal of the restrictive floor to area ratio (FAR) requirement while retaining the old L-pod design standards, many of which are found in the Downtown Code currently being developed (Downtown Code); that unfortunately, the 9 units per acre density created 121 non- conformities, 32 of which will be alleviated upon rezoning to the 12 units per acre allowable under the Downtown Code. Ms. Hamilton stated further that the current LPNA President contacted Staff in September 2002; that Staff reiterated the requirement for the LPNA to make a request by early January 2003 for an amendment to use the language of the regulations of the Gillespie Park and Park East neighborhoods in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that in October 2002, the LPNA Board of Directors voted 6 to 1 in support of holding a special neighborhood meeting concerning mixed use in the Laurel Park neighborhood to consider if LPNA should seek to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Laurel Park neighborhood; that a meeting of the LPNA was held on November 5, 2002; that the meeting was well attended and careful minutes were kept of all testimony; that on November 26, 2002, the LPNA Board of Directors voted unanimously to request the City amend the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Laurel Park neighborhood to allow for a mix of residential and commercial uses and the adoption of appropriate zoning regulations. Ms. Hamilton stated that the LPNA President informed Staff of this decision on November 4, 2002; that Staff met to discuss the LPNA request on December 16, 2002; and referred to a December 17, 2002 letter from Douglas James, Chief Planner, Planning Department, included in the Agenda backup material indicating: 1. The City's budget for fiscal year (FY) 2002/03 does not include funding to process the amendment. 2. Staff will prepare a budget request and associated work program for submittal to the City Manager. 3. The input of the LPNA will be requested prior to submittal. 4. Work could begin in FY 2003/04 if the budget request is endorsed. Mr. deLisser stated that the Commission directive of July 5, 2000, supported the findings of the PBLP, the Historic Preservation Board, and the outcome of two consecutive votes of the LPNA Board of Directors; that the Laurel Park neighborhood must be included in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 to assure common sense planning for the future; that the current LPNA Board of Directors elected almost one year ago has made an effort to expand the reach of the LPNA and encourage more participation by all residents; that a seminar concerning Robert's Rules of Order was held to facilitate accuracy and order at meetings; that a bulletin board has been installed in the neighborhood park displaying minutes from LPNA Board meetings and postings of pertinent information; that fair and equal representation of each resident is the primary focus of the LPNA; that the frequency of the newsletter has been increased to keep residents informed on a timely basis; that the LPNA Board of Directors voted unanimously to support the request for inclusion of the Laurel Park neighborhood in the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that a very strong consensus has been achieved; that common sense planning for the future is the goal; that a professional approach to meeting the goal is required; that development of applicable zoning regulations offers ample opportunity to define acceptable land uses and the processes by which the land uses can be applied. BOOK 53 Page 24684 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24685 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Mr. deLisser continued that an opportunity has arisen to define compatibility with the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that timing is the real issue; that a directive of the Commission should be acted upon in a timely manner; that further delay allows the implementation of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 around the borders of the Laurel Park neighborhood; that exclusion from the process will have a profound effect on the neighborhood; that the LPNA has adhered to all directives by the Commission, has adhered to the City's suggested timetables, and officially requests an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow for mixed use in the Laurel Park neighborhood. Mr. deLisser further stated that the Commission is petitioned to fund the request this year sO the application can be included in the April 2003 amendment cycle; that the Commission is requested to refer the request to Staff; that a response to the request could be made at the February 3, 2003, Regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Quillin stated that a meeting was held with the LPNA; that the LPNA requested to have the presentation placed on the Agenda; that the Laurel Park neighborhood is in two separate Commission districts; that the issues involving the Laurel Park neighborhood are repeatedly sent to the City before a consensus of the neighborhood is achieved; that many letters and pieces of electronic correspondence have been recently received by the City opposing the request; that a specific remedy is required; that contact should be made with the property owners in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that ballots could be sent to each property owner surveying the preferred option; that the ballots will not be binding; that specific questions such as interest in the mixed use classification could be asked on the ballot; that Staff could formulate the language on the ballot; that a clear, concise answer to the question is required. Commissioner Servian stated that several conversations were held with residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood; that six or more letters, electronic correspondence, and telephone calls in opposition have been received by the Commission; that a neighborhood board may reach a decision which is not compatible with the consensus of the residents; that a clear understanding of the issues involved must be realized within the community before an attempt to survey the residents can be accomplished; that to go forward at the present time is not in the best interest of the community based on the recent information received from residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood. Commissioner Martin stated that an apology is extended to some residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood who were told an opportunity to speak to the issue would be available during Citizens' Input; however, a clarification of the Rules of Procedures governing Commission meetings was requested prior to the meeting; that items on the Agenda cannot be addressed during Citizens' Input; that seven pieces of written correspondence have been received from the following residents and should become part of the record: Bruce Franklin, Dale Parks, Allan Crannitch, Daniel McNichol, Stephen Long, Brian McGuinnes, and Martha Hafner Commissioner Martin continued that the possible development of an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Laurel Park neighborhood should be referred to the Administration; that the long process followed by the LPNA is understood; however, the Commission's actions are limited to referral to the Administration. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the comments by Commissioners Servian and Quillin are appropriate; that meetings were held with Laurel Park residents; that the issue of consensus requires clarification; that consensus does not apparently exist in the Laurel Park neighborhood based on the correspondence received; that disagreement within the neighborhood continues; that the Commission is interested in taking the actions desired by the community, while taking advantage of the expertise offered by Staff; that a decision cannot be made at this time; that the frustration of some residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood is understood; that a significant amount of conversation has occurred; that the suggestion to communicate directly with the residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood is appropriate; that the December 17, 2002, letter from Staff which presents a plan is supported; that the Administration could provide recommendations as to methods to communicate with the neighborhood residents; that the suggestion for inclusion in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 could be included in the City's process and fiscal year budget 2003/2004 (October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004) sO a proposal can be developed for moving forward; that the suggestions made by the Commission are excellent; that referring the issue to the Administration for recommendations on educating the neighborhood residents, BOOK 53 Page 24686 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24687 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. determining a majority neighborhood consensus, and the process to move forward is supported; that the RSM-9 Zone District was only recently approved and represented a significant effort by Staff with significant support from the residents in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that the frustration of the members of the Laurel Park neighborhood who are in favor of inclusion in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is understood; that an effort should be made to achieve consensus in the neighborhood, if possible; that the view of the majority can be determined. Commissioner Quillin stated that referring the issue to the Administration is supported; that education of the residents of the Laurel Park neighborhood is the paramount issue; that noticing is of utmost importance; that input from the residents should be returned to the City as expeditiously as possible; that the property owners are the affected persons and should resolve the issues presented; that the issues have divided the neighborhood; that a conclusion to all the issues is in the foreseeable future; that the matter should be referred to the Administration for development of a program for the education of the residents and achieving consensus in the neighborhood. Commissioner Martin stated that the matter should be referred to the Administration to prepare a proposal encompassing the discussions of the individuals present, along with the various communication received by the Commission regarding the issue. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's unanimous consensus, the matter of an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan for the Laurel Park neighborhood is referred to the Administration. City Manager McNees stated that clarification of the consensus is requested; that the Administration is directed to review the issue and develop recommendations and detailed procedures on proceeding; that the issue includes all commitments and votes by previous Commissions; that understanding the context of previous Commission discussions is important; that historical data relating to the LPNA such as meetings, hearings, and minutes should be analyzed; that circumstances may have changed; that the Commission may desire to reevaluate the entire issue; that beginning the process again may be desirable; that the issue is an open-ended issue requiring study. Mr. deLisser asked if a timeframe has been established for the Administration to present the analysis and recommendations to the Commission? City Manager McNees stated that no promises could be made at this time; that the task before the Administration is a major analysis of complex issues. Mayor Mason asked if the Administration would stay in contact with the LPNA? City Manager McNees stated yes. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan regarding the Downtown Master Plan 2020 have not yet been finalized; that preparing and implementing codes will be a major project; that the adoption of implementing codes will require an extended period of time; that rezoning of property will be the final project; that the problems concerning the direction of the Laurel Park neighborhood can be addressed and resolved during this time period. City Manager McNees stated that the processes for changing fundamental portions of land development regulations are cumbersome; that the process is designed to be difficult as a protective mechanism; that the frustration felt by residents and Staff attempting to navigate the process is understood. Commissioner Quillin stated that the frustrations facing Laurel Park, Ringling Park, or other walk-to-town neighborhoods were unforeseen during the development of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that during the development of the Downtown Master Plan 2020, the inclusion of the walk-to-town neighborhoods in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 was assumed; that the process to amend the Downtown Master Plan 2020 to include the walk-to-town neighborhoods will be long and frustrating; that a consensus of the neighborhoods must be achieved. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that all persons wishing to speak at the public hearings are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have five minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when one minute remains; and repeated for the benefit of those present in the Chambers the Pledge of Public Conduct as adopted by the Commission as follows: BOOK 53 Page 24688 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24689 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another. We will direct all comments to issues. We will avoid personal attacks. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were Sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 15. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: TO SOLICIT PUBLIC INPUT CONCERNING THE CITY OF SARASOTA'S PROPOSAL TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR CERTIFICATION UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING CERTIPICATION PROGRAM = AUTHORIZED STAFF TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR CERTIFICATION (AGENDA ITEM X-A-1) CD 6:50 through 7:03 Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. David Smith, AICP, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that the request is to solicit input concerning the City's proposal to submit an application to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for certification under the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program; that the Florida Statutes require the local governing body to hold a public hearing to obtain public input regarding the proposed certification application; that in 2002, the Florida Legislature created the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program to allow for select local governments to administer their comprehensive plans with reduced State and Regional oversight; that each year the DCA will select up to eight local governments to participate in the program; that the selected governments must demonstrate a commitment to properly directing growth and implementing and enforcing its comprehensive plan; that each selected government will enter into a written agreement with the DCA which will last up to a maximum of ten years. Mr. Smith continued that the benefit to the selected local governments is most amenaments associated with the certified area will not be subjected to review and approval by the DCA; that the amendment processing time will be reduced by approximately seven months; that local governments will be allowed to manage their comprehensive plans with reduced State and Regional oversight; that the recommendation is for the Mayor to sign an application submittal letter and authorize Staff to submit the application to the DCA. Commissioner Martin asked if DCA review would be eliminated in certain cases? Mr. Smith stated that in most cases amendments to cities' comprehensive plans would not require review by the DCA; that amendments would be adopted at the local government level and forwarded to the DCA for record keeping. Commissioner Martin asked if the major change is related to the shortening of the time period for processing an amendment? Mr. Smith stated yes; that the process of review by the DCA would be eliminated; that the time period would be shortened by approximately six to seven months. Commissioner Martin asked if additional advantages or powers are gained by the local government if selected? Mr. Smith stated no; that the main benefit is the shortening of the time period for the amendment process and the reduction in costs for advertising. Commissioner Quillin stated that expediting the government process is favored; that the public should be educated regarding the shortened procedure; and asked for an explanation of the new process including the means to appeal? Mr. Smith stated that the City will continue to hold neighborhood meetings, public hearings before the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), and public hearings before the Commission for adoption of amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan; that amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan will be forwarded to the DCA once adopted; that a provision is in place for challenges; and quoted Section 163.3246(8), Florida Statutes, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: An affected person may petition for administrative hearing alleging that a local government is not substantially complying with the terms of the agreement, using the procedures and timeframes for notice and conditions precedent described in Section 163.3213, Florida Statutes. Such a petition must be filed within 30 days BOOK 53 Page 24690 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24691 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. after the annual public hearing required by paragraph (5) (1). Commissioner Quillin stated that the provision applies to an individual declared as an affected person; that an appeal process should be reviewed and instituted at the local governmental level if a provision is not provided. City Manager McNees stated that the intent of the creation of the Local Government Comprenensive Planning Certification Program is to certify planning departments of high quality which meet professional standards to review amendments at a local level; that the program gives the City local control at both the action and appellate levels. Commissioner Quillin asked if the City will be required to implement an appellate process? City Attorney Taylor referred to Section 163.3246(9) (a), Florida Statutes, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: affected persons may file a petition for administrative review pursuant to the requirements of Section 163.3187 (3) (a) to challenge the compliance of an adopted plan amendment. City Attorney Taylor stated that an affected person is anyone interested in the matter. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program is supported; however, the public should be educated concerning the process for an administrative review. City Manager McNees stated that the DCA will review the City's processes and procedures; that the City will be required to make an agreement with the DCA to meet certain process requirements; that an administrative challenge would be if the City did or did not meet the process requirements; that Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program is about local control. Mr. Smith stated that the main point of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program is to determine if the City can make the correct decision at a local level regarding amendments to City's Comprehensive Plan without review by the DCA. Commissioner Martin stated that the competition for selection will be stringent if the DCA is only choosing eight local governments. Mr. Smith stated that Florida has over 400 local governments; that comment letters from other agencies such as the Department of State are a requirement for the application; that only three other local governments have contacted the Department of State for a comment letter; that the DCA may select only one or up to eight local governments for the program. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the criteria for the application process relates to counties and rural areas as opposed to urban areas; that the criteria must be tailored to fit the City; and asked if the Commission will have the opportunity to review the application prior to submittal? Mr. Smith stated that the written draft is approximately 42 pages with a large number of exhibits; that Staff can provide a copy to the Commission for review. The following person came before the Commission: Joel Freedman, AICP, Freedman Consulting Group, Inc., 1290 North Palm Avenue (34236), stated that the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program is a tremendous opportunity to streamline the process of amending the City's Comprehensive Plan; that Sarasota is a built-out environment; that no one but the City can decide the best way to change the Future Land Use Plan; that City Staff are professional and capable of providing correct information; that he has worked in many cities and counties in Florida; that the number of applications for the program will probably be minimal; that not many cities or counties will be as qualified as Sarasota; that the request is for the City to submit an application for the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to authorize the Mayor to sign an application submittal letter and for Staff to submit the application to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Motion carried BOOK 53 Page 24692 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24693 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 16. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : CONVERSION OF SEMINOLE DRIVE BETWEEN HYDE PARK STREET AND MIETAW DRIVE FROM A VEHICULAR ROADWAY TO A PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARE - APPROVED THE CONVERSION OF SEMINOLE DRIVE BETWEEN HYDE PARK AND MIETAW DRIVE FROM A VEHICULAR ROADWAY TO A PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARE AND AUTHORIZED STAFF TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO DEVELOP A CONCEPT PLAN (AGENDA ITEM X-A-2) CD 7:03 through 8:50 Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested Staff come forward for the presentation. Alexandrea Davis-Shaw, Deputy Director of Engineering/Deputy City Engineer, came before the Commission; referred to Site Option Sketches of the proposed project displayed on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation; and stated that Staff has been working with the McClellan Park Neighborhood Association to improve the existing intersection at Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive; that in July 2001, Staff presented improvement options to the neighborhood; that one option is to construction a median in the area in which Hyde Park Street and Seminole Drive meet; that the McClellan Park Neighborhood Association reviewed the options and requested the construction of a median on a temporary basis; that the temporary median was installed and completed in August 2001; that Staff received the following suggestions during the trial period of the median: Modify the median; - Remove the median; Make the median permanent; and Close Seminole Drive completely. Ms. Davis-Shaw continued that the closure of Seminole Drive was not the original option considered; however, Staff determined Closure would improve safety upon further evaluation of the intersection and the neighborhood circulation; that on May 14, 2002, Staff met with the McClellan Park Neighborhood Association to discuss the input received including the possibility of temporarily closing Seminole Drive to determine the effects on the residents; that Seminole Drive was temporarily closed from June 17 to July 30, 2002; that the Executive Committee of the McClellan Park Neighborhood Association mailed an opinion survey to residents immediately following the closure; that a neighborhood open house was held on September 25, 2002, to discuss the results of the survey and gather additional comments; that one additional suggestion received was to close Seminole Drive to vehicular traffic but not to convert Seminole Drive to a full pedestrian thoroughfare; that access would remain to some of the properties with a green area; however, the flow of other vehicular traffic would be prohibited; that several residents indicated a preference for the City to conduct a second surveyi therefore, on October 2, 2002, Staff mailed a follow-up survey to the residents; that the City's follow-up survey cover letter indicated property owners who submitted a previous vote and were comfortable with the previous vote were not required to complete the City's follow-up survey; that the City's follow-up survey vote was counted for property owners who submitted a previous vote and also submitted a vote on the City's follow-up surveyi that an analysis was complied with the results from both surveys; that the combined results of both surveys are as follows: - 54 votes to convert Seminole Drive from a vehicular roadway to a pedestrian thoroughfare; - 7 votes to construct a permanent median in place of the temporary median at Seminole Drive and Osprey Avenue; 32 votes to remove the temporary median reestablish the original intersection; and 4 votes for a partial closure of Seminole Drive. Ms. Davis-Shaw further stated that on December 18, 2002, a final neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the results of the City's survey, gather additional comments from the neighborhood, and discuss the next steps for the process; that the steps are: 1) to hold a public hearing, 2) to develop a design task force which includes neighborhood representation to determine the design of the park and present the design back to the neighborhood for approval, and 3) to present the design to the Commission; that additional neighborhood concerns included designing the pedestrian thoroughfare for use by emergency vehicles, adequate buffering, sufficient irrigation, and the installation of benches for the proposed linear park; that Staff recommends approving the conversion of Seminole Drive between Hyde Park Street and Mietaw Drive from a vehicular roadway to a pedestrian thoroughfare and establishing a design task force of residents and other interested parties to develop a concept plan for presentation to BOOK 53 Page 24694 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24695 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. McClellan Park Neighborhood Association and the City Commission for approval Commissioner Quillin referred to the McClellan Park Seminole Drive Circulation Modification Chart included in the Agenda backup material and stated that 28 votes were received for Option 1 of the City's follow-up survey; that 37 votes were received for Option 1 of the McClellan Park survey; that adding the votes together would be a duplication of people. Ms. Davis-Shaw referred to the mailing list included in the Agenda backup material and stated that each vote was evaluated separately; that the survey results were added together if a property owner did not vote in both surveysi that the total of 28 votes from Option 1 of the City's follow-up survey and 37 votes from Option 1 of the McClellan Park survey do not equal the total of 54 votes for Option 1 as indicated on the chart; that a few property owners voted in both surveysi that each vote was only counted once. Commissioner Quillin asked the manner in which a vote is counted if the mailing list indicates a vote of Option 1 or Option 2 for the City's follow-up survey as well as a vote for Option 3 of the McClellan Park survey? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the McClellan Park survey vote was counted if a property owner submitted a vote in the original McClellan Park survey and did not submit a vote in the City's follow-up surveyi that the City's follow-up survey vote was counted if a property owner submitted a vote in the City's follow-up survey which is different than the McClellan Park survey; that several property owners indicated a lack of information during the original McClellan Park survey. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City received 67 responses to the City's follow-up surveyi that the results indicated the majority of the votes received were for Option 3 to remove the temporary median and reestablish the original intersection. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that is correct; however, the City's follow- up survey was not the only survey counted. Commissioner Quillin stated that merging two surveys which are not exactly the same is a problem; that numbers become skewed and the results seem compounded. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that City's follow-up survey vote was counted if a property owner changed their vote from the original McClellan Park survey; that the original McClellan Park survey was counted if the property owner did not send in a vote for the City's follow-up survey. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City should have mailed out a survey with a cover letter which indicated a vote was required regardless of the property owner's vote in the original McClellan Park survey; that the results of the City's follow-up survey indicate a majority of the votes are for Option 3 to remove the temporary median and reestablish the original intersection. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the total of the combined surveys indicates the majority of votes are for Option 1 to close Seminole Drive from Osprey Avenue to Oval Drive and construct a linear park; that the City's follow-up survey included four options with attached sketches for the property Owners to visualize each option. Commissioner Quillin asked the number of property Owners surveyed and the number of responses to the City's follow-up survey? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that 145 property owners were surveyed; that 97 property owners responded. Commissioner Martin asked if the Closure of Seminole Drive will be an improvement for traffic safety and circulation? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the closure of Seminole Drive will be an improvement to safety at the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive for two reasons: The difficulty in determining the direction of vehicular traffic exiting Seminole Drive onto Osprey Avenue or Hyde Park Street; and The difficulty for pedestrian movement to cross the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive. The following people came before the Commission: June Cussen, President, McClellan Park Neighborhood Association, 1644 Seminole Drive (34239), stated that McClellan Park is a BOOK 53 Page 24696 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24697 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. walkable neighborhood; that the neighboring Southside Village is expanding in commercial activity; that vehicular and pedestrian traffic are intensifying; that the residents of McClellan Park have voted twice for the closure of Seminole Drive; that the vote is not confusing; that the majority of the neighborhood has spoken and the democratic process has prevailed; that the McClellan Park Neighborhood is in favor of the Closure of Seminole Drive to vehicular traffic; that the residents are appreciative of all the efforts of City Staff; that entering and exiting the neigborhood is the main concern for residents; that five other ways to enter and exit the neighborhood exist; that closing Seminole Drive will not be a problem for accessing the neighborhood; that the neighborhood experienced a decrease in volume and speed of cut-through traffic during the temporary closure period; that cut-through traffic is a problem due to the intensification of commercial activity in the area. Ms. Cussen continued that several of the streets in McClellan Park are curved; that a large number of young children reside in the neighborhood and walk to Southside Elementary School and The School in the Park; that the existing schools generate bicycle and children activity in the area; that cut-through traffic is a danger for the children; that the closure of Seminole Drive will increase pedestrian safety; that parking for the commercial activity in the area is a problem; that the majority of parking is generated by daytime employee parking from the Southside Village; that the City's Engineering Department is assisting the neighborhood in mitigating the parking problem; that a long-term solution to the parking problem is necessary; that the commercial area is growing and will generate additional traffic in the future; that the new commercial development on the corner of Hillview Street and Osprey Avenue is another tavern; that four taverns are within the two block area of Hillview and Hyde Park Streets and Osprey Avenue; that closure of Seminole Drive is necessary to buffer the neighborhood from the increased commercial activity. James Moore, 1779 Seminole Drive (34239), stated that he is one of four property owners directly affected by the proposed closure of Seminole Drive; that the closure is supported; that the increased volume of traific on Osprey Avenue due to commercial development is a concern; that a serious automobile accident recently occurred on South Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41) near Sarasota Memorial Hospital; that the volume of traffic on Osprey Avenue increased significantly as a result of the accident; that several frustrated drivers began to cut through the neighborhood streets to avoid the traffic backup; that the configuration of the roads in McClellan Park is very confusing; that a non- resident can easily become lost; that several drivers attempted to cut through on Seminole Drive and were driving extremely fast through the neighborhood; that several drivers backed into his driveway to turn around and enter back onto Osprey Avenue; that the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive is difficult to enter from Seminole Drive; that the closure of Seminole Drive will result in several amenities such as a linear park, decreased vehicular noise, additional greenspace, and reduced traffic in the neighborhood; that the curved streets in the neighborhood create blind spots for drivers which is a safety issue for children in the neighborhood; that Staff is commended for their skills, patience, and persistence to improve the area; that Ms. Davis-Shaw is very patient and deserves an award for her efforts. John Halliwell, 2105 Mietaw Drive (34239), stated that he agrees with the comments of the previous speaker regarding the efforts of Ms. Davis-Shaw; that the Commission and other Engineering Department Staff are also commended for the support and effort to improve areas within the City; that the closure of Seminole Drive is supported for the safety of his three children, other children, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic; that the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive is confusing; that continuing to work with the various City Departments and a neighborhood task force with the development design and funding of the proposed closure is favorably anticipated; that the City is a great place in which to live. Paul Moran, 2110 Mietaw Drive (34239), stated that his home is near the intersection of Mietaw and Seminole Drives; that the issue of traffic safety at the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive has been addressed; however, traffic safety within McClellan Park is a greater issue; that several children reside in the neighborhood; that the children play in and around the streets; that he originally was opposed to the closure of Seminole Drive; that he would sneak around the barricades during the first week of the closure; that the closure affected his personal freedom; that he later realized the benefits of the decrease in traffic and the increase in safety for the children; that the intentions are not to solve a traffic problem at one end of the neighborhood at the expense of creating a problem at another end; that the support to leave Seminole Drive open is understood; however, closure will be a BOOK 53 Page 24698 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24699 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. significant benefit to the entire neighborhood; that the belief is traffic will not be increased at other ingress/egress points; that the Closure will reduce traffic and parking within the neighborhood; that the most significant benefit will be the increase of safety for the children; that the request is to approve the closure of Seminole Drive. Randy Topjun, 1723 South Oval Drive (34239), stated that he has been a resident of the McClellan Park Neighborhood for 30 yearsi that he was a previous member of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) for the City and the Planning Commission for the County; that additional traffic, directional signage, and confusion occurs when commercial and residential areas are sO close together; that the various options presented for Seminole Drive are appreciated; that Closure of Seminole Drive is a soft approach to reducing traffic and parking in the neighborhood; that the recommendation is for the Commission to approve the closure; that he is not aware of one individual in the neighborhood opposed to the closure. Sam Schackow, 2355 McClellan Park (34239), stated that the closure of Seminole Drive is supported; however, having to take the steps to close Seminole Drive to solve the traffic problem is a shame; that safety is the most important issue; that the closure will alleviate some of the non-neignborhood parking; that the hope is the Commission will determine a long-term solution to accommodate the increased commercia parking in the area; that the success and the revitalization of the Southside Village are supported by the neighborhood; that the services and facilities available within walking distance are a benefit; however, the bi-product of increased property values and increased taxes of the revitalized area is causing a parking problem; that the City may have to reinvest in the area to find a solution to the parking problem; that funding is available in the Local Options Sales Tax (L.0.S.T.) extension, also called the penny sales tax, for the City to purchase the Kolar Autohaus property; that the purchase does not appear to be happening in the near future; that the suggestion is to utilize the Kolar Autohaus project funds for the closure of Seminole Drive. Andrew Dorr, 1770 Oval Drive (34239), stated that the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive is in the oldest neighborhood in Sarasota; that the McClellan Park Neighborhood was founded in 1916; that in 1916, no one envisioned the potential traffic flow of 16,000 vehicles at the intersection; that a recent automobile accident at Arlington Street and South Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41) resulted in the Bayflight helicopter having to land in the area; that a new 14,000 square foot facility which will include a bank and a tavern is being developed near McClellan Park; that Sarasota Memorial Hospital is continuing to thrive; that the closure of the obstetrics program countywide resulted in the only obstetrics unit in Sarasota being located at Sarasota Memorial Hospital; that the new Sarasota Memorial Hospital parking garage is in the process of being constructed; that intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive should conform with standard intersection designs; that the safety of the children in the neighborhood is a primary concerni that the temporary closure resulted in a decrease in traffic for the neighborhood; that the process of the City's follow-up survey was fair and understood; that he responded to the McClellan Park survey and therefore did not respond to the City's follow-up survey; that the total survey results are a fair representation of the wishes of the neighborhood; that the closure of Seminole Drive and neighborhood involvement in the design process is supported; that utilizing the funds allocated for the Kolar Autohaus project for the closure of Seminole Drive is suggested. Commissioner Servian asked if turning Seminole Drive into a greenway is favored. Mr. Dorr stated yes. Commissioner Servian referred to the mailing list included in the Agenda backup material and stated that the results of the City's follow-up survey indicates Mr. Dorr is in favor of Option 3 to remove the temporary median and leave Seminole Drive open. Mr. Dorr asked if the mailing list indicates his address as being 1770 Oval Drive? Commissioner Servian stated no; that the address is 1639 Seminole Drive; that another couple, Andrew and Valerie Dorr, must also reside in the neighborhood. Mr. Dorr stated no; that he and Valerie Dorr reside at 1770 Oval Drive; that the mix-up must be a typographical error; that he is in favor of closing Seminole Drive; that the neighborhood has been working on the issue informally for the past five years; that the Commission directed the Engineering Department to install new medians approximately two years agoi that Ms. Davis-Shaw was assigned to the median project and realized the problems of the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole BOOK 53 Page 24700 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24701 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Drive; that Ms. Davis-Shaw approached the neighborhood with pro-active suggestions to correct the problem; that Ms. Davis- Shaw is commended for bringing the idea and solutions to the neighborhood rather than waiting for the neighborhood to bring the problem to the City. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. Commissioner Martin stated that emergency vehicle access is a concern; and asked the manner in which the concern will be addressed? Ms. Davis-Shaw returned to the Commission table; referred to Site Option Sketches of the proposed area displayed on the Chamber monitors; and stated that the fine details of the design will be developed by a designated task force; that low ground cover material can be installed in the park area; that an emergency vehicle can drive over the plant material if necessary; that openings to the park could be designed wide enough with slightly dropped curbs to accommodate emergency vehicles. Commissioner Martin asked if the plan is to design the area to accommodate emergency vehicle access. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated yes. Commissioner Martin asked if some type of knock down bollard could be installed? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that she is unaware of an attractive bollard; that other options such as removable bollards are available; that the Fire Department has indicated a willingness to assist with determining options acceptable for emergency vehicle access. Commissioner Martin stated that four lots are adjacent to Seminole Drive; and asked if alternative ingress and egress to the lots are available? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated yes. Commissioner Martin asked the amount of funds allocated for the Kolar Autohaus project? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the amount of funding is approximately $335,000. Commissioner Quillin stated that the belief is the amount of funding is approximately $380,000. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the anticipated cost to close Seminole Drive will not exceed the available funds allocated for the Kolar Autohaus project. Commissioner Martin stated that committing to an expensive project without identifying funding is a concern. Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the neighborhood requested similar plant material be installed at the gateway located adjacent to the Kolar Autohaus property; that the designated task force will evaluate some type of simple landscaping for the area. Commissioner Martin asked if enough funding is available to complete the entire project? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed project is pleasing; that the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive is problematic; that the proposed linear park must be handicap accessible and comply with the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); that the pathway for the linear park could be as wide as the pathway in the Park East neighborhood which is 8 feet; that an emergency vehicle traveling over grass could become stuck in mud during the rainy season; that the residential and commercial neighbors will enjoy the proposed linear park; that the survey could have been much simpler. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a suggestion by the Engineering Department to close a street is unusual; that normally the Engineering Department is opposed to road Closures which generally limit road access and have a negative effect on the grid system; and asked the reason the closure was suggested? Ms. Davis-Shaw stated that the neighborhood consists of several entry points; that the maneuvering through the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive is confusing; that safety is the primary factor for the suggestion to close Seminole Drive. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to approve the conversion of Seminole Drive between Hyde Park and Mietaw Drive from a vehicular roadway to a BOOK 53 Page 24702 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24703 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. pedestrian thoroughfare and authorize Staff to work with the neighborhood to develop a concept plan. Commissioner Servian stated that she worked with the neighborhood regarding the proposed project; that several individuals who originally opposed the closure have realized the merit in the safety for pedestrians; that she visits the area frequently to evaluate the parking situation; that the number of children in the neighborhood is significant; that the closure will offer the opportunity for the children to play in the neighborhood and will reduce the confusion at the intersection of Hyde Park Street, Osprey Avenue, and Seminole Drive. Commissioner Martin stated that the one visit to the area is enough to realize the sense in closing Seminole Drive; that a grid system is comprised of right angles which allow for traffic flow to move safely; that in this case, the closure will enhance the grid system; that the proposed linear park is exciting. Mayor Mason stated that the neighborhood involvement is pleasing; that the government process can be unfriendly and frustrating at times; that the neighborhood is applauded for their persistent efforts. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to approve the conversion of Seminole Drive between Hyde Park and Mietaw Drive from a vehicular roadway to a pedestrian thoroughfare and authorize Staff to work with the neighborhood to develop a concept plan. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): : Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. The Commission recessed at 7:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:02 p.m. Mayor Mason requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that the requirements of quasi-judicial public hearings were defined by the judicial process; that during quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that prior to opening the public hearing, Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the subject property; that Affected Persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject property; that no one has filed for certification as Affected Person; that other interested persons will have the opportunity to speak; that speakers may request additional time which, if granted, will be determined at the discretion of the Commission. 17. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4432, TO REZONE 2.5 ACRES FROM THE COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE (CI) AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG) ZONE DISTRICTS (COUNTY ZONING) TO THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (POS) AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT (CGD) ZONE DISTRICTS (CITY OF SARASOTA ZONING) ; SAID PROPERTY HAVING BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ORDINANCE NO. 97-3968; SAID NINE PARCELS BEING LOCATED NORTH OF BEE RIDGE ROAD BETWEEN SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41) ON THE WEST AND SOUTH SHADE AVENUE ON THE EAST, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B-1( (a)) AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4434, TO REZONE t 27.6 ACRES FROM THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY-1 (RMF-1), COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG), AND COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE (CI) ZONE DISTRICTS (COUNTY ZONING) TO THE OFFICE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT (OND) / COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT (CGD), AND INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (ICD) ZONE DISTRICTS (CITY OF SARASOTA ZONING) i SAID PROPERTY HAVING BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ORDINANCE NO. 97-3968; SAID TWENTY-EIGHT PARCELS BEING LOCATED SOUTH OF BEE RIDGE ROAD, , EAST OF SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41), WEST OF SOUTH SCHOOL AVENUE AND NORTH OF MILL TERRACE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, ; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. . (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B- 1 (b)) AND + PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4435, TO REZONE 19.2 ACRES FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY-2 (RSF-2), RESIDENTIAL SINGLE- - FAMILY-4 (RSF-4), RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY-1 (RMF-1), OFFICE PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTIONAL (OPI), COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE (CI), AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG) ZONE DISTRICTS (COUNTY ZONING) TO THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY 2 (RSF-2), RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY 4 (RSF-4), COMMERCIAL BOOK 53 Page 24704 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24705 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. GENERAL DISTRICT (CGD), I OFFICE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT (OND), AND INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (ICD) ZONE DISTRICTS (CITY OF SARASOTA ZONING) ; SAID PROPERTY HAVING BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ORDINANCE NO. 97-3968; SAID THIRTY PARCELS BEING LOCATED NORTH AND SOUTH OF BAY ROAD, WEST OF SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41), NORTH OF GLENGARY STREET AND EAST OF FLORES AVENUE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS i REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, ; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF ; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B-1(c)) AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4436, TO REZONE A t 44 ACRE SITE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY-1 (RSF-1) ZONE DISTRICT (COUNTY ZONING) TO THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY 1 (RSF-1) ZONE DISTRICT (CITY OF SARASOTA ZONING), SAID PROPERTY HAVING BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ORDINANCE NO. 97-3968; SAID PARCEL BEING LOCATED SOUTH OF BAY ROAD AND WEST OF RED ROCK LANE A/K/A 1220 BAY ROAD AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS : REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, ; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (REZONING APPLICATION NO. 02-RE-15, APPLICANT, CITY OF SARASOTA) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B-1( (d)) CD 8:03 through 8:20 City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance Nos. 03-4432, 03-4434, 03-4435, and 03-4436 are to approve the City-initiated rezoning of approximately 50 acres containing approximately 70 parcels; that one consolidated public hearing can occur for all four proposed Ordinances; that the Applicant is the City of Sarasota; that the recommendation is to allow 12 minutes for the City's presentation and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that other interested persons will have 5 minutes to speak; that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the time limits are approved; and requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Mason, Vice Mayor Palmer, and Commissioners Martin, Quillin, and Servian stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing; and requested that Staff come forward for the presentation of the Applicant who is the City. Harvey Hoglund, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission; referred to computer-generated slides of the proposed Zone Districts throughout the presentation displayed on the Chamber monitors; and stated that proposed Ordinance Nos. 03-4432, 03-4434, 03-4435, and 03-4436 pertain to City-initiated Rezone Application No. 02-RE-15 to rezone approximately 50 acres containing approximately 70 parcels previously annexed into the corporate limits of the City by Ordinance No. 97-3968 in the vicinity of Bee Ridge Road and South Tamiami Trail in 1996; that a number of property owners came into the City under pre-annexation agreements prepared by legal Staff for the Public Works Department, that the pre- annexation agreements specified the future zone districts for the properties; that the rezoning process began with examining the pre-annexation agreements. Mr. Hoglund continued that the existing Sarasota County zoning is the Residential Single Family 1 (RSF-1), Residential Single Family 2 (RSF-2), Residential Single Family 4 (RSF-4), Residential Multiple Family 1 (RMF-1), Office Professional Institutional (OPI), Commercial General (CG), and Commercial Intensive (CI) Zone Districts; that the proposed City Zone Districts are the Residential Single Family 1 (RSF-1), Residential Single Family 2 (RSF-2), Residential Single Family 4 (RSF-4), Parks and Open Space (POS), Office Neighborhood District (OND), Commercial General District (CGD), and Intensive Commercial District (ICD) Zone Districts; that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-15 was initiated by Staff on behalf of the City; that two neighborhood workshops were held in March 2002 at Brookside Middle School; that the notification list for the neighborhood workshops included approximately 650 addresses; that 14 individuals attended the first workshop and 7 attended the second; that a draft map which combined the pre-annexation agreements with the designations on the Future Land Use Map was prepared; that several of the classifications remained the same; that the largest discrepancy area is a series of properties which are occupied by duplexes or single family residences located on Hansen Street; that the properties are designated in the RMF Zone District within the Neighborhood Office Future Land Use Classification under the Sarasota County Zoning Code; that the properties are bound by the pre-annexation: agreement unless the owners desired a change; that in June 2002, individual letters were mailed to each affected BOOK 53 Page 24706 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24707 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. owner of record regarding the proposed zone district; that the owners on Hansen Street were provided an option to change to the new OND Zone District; that in 1998, the Neighborhood Office Future Land Use Classification was applied to the properties on Hansen Street as the best transition from the unincorporated Sarasota County area on the south side of Hansen Street and the automotive dealership to the north of Hansen Street; that the residences on Hansen Street can be, converted to office use with a live/work unit under the new OND Zone District; that the three different property Owners on Hansen Street agreed to the change; that letters from the property owners requesting the change are included in the Agenda backup material. Mr. Hoglund further stated that in June 2001, the City adopted revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) which created new zone district classifications; that having the ability to use the new zone district classifications is the reason for the rezoning delay; that the majority of the properties are being changed to the CGD Zone District; that most of the attendees at the workshops were individuals outside the City inquiring about the steps involved in annexing into the City; that at its September 18, 2002, meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing and found Rezone Application No. 02-RE-15 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the standards for review set forth in the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), and voted unanimously to recommend Commission approval of the following four proposed Ordinances: Ordinance No. 03-4432: rezoning of 9 parcels located north of Bee Ridge Road between South Tamiami Trail on the west and south Shade Avenue on the east; Ordinance No. 03-4434: rezoning of 28 parcels located south of Bee Ridge Road, east of South Tamiami Trail, west of south School Avenue, and north of Mill Terrace; Ordinance No. 03-4435: rezoning of 30 parcels located north and south of Bay Road, west South Tamiami Trail, north of Glengary Street, and east of Flores Avenue; and - Ordinance No. 03-4436: rezoning of one parcel located south of Bay Road, and west of Red Rock Lane Mr. Hoglund continued that a discussion occurred with another property owner on Hansen Street after the September 18, 2002, PBLP meeting; that the owner had medical problems at the time of the June 2002 mailing and was unable to follow-up with the option to change to the OND Zone District; that the owner was advised to submit a letter requesting to change to the OND Zone District; that all the properties on the north side of Hansen Street will be in the OND Zone District; that the current public hearing is the first of two required public hearings; that the second public hearing will be held at the February 18, 2003, Regular Commission meeting. Mayor Mason stated that no interested persons have signed up to speak; and closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4432 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4432 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yesi Palmer, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4434 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4434 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4435 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4435 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. BOOK 53 Page 24708 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24709 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4436 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4436 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. 18. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM XI) CD 8:20 through 8:20 There was no one signed up to speak. 19. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: PRESENTATION RE: : STATUS OF LITIGATION INVOLVING THE RENOVATION PROJECT FOR THE VAN WEZEL PERFORMING ARTS HALL COMMISSION NOTICED OF A REQUIREMENT FOR AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION (AGENDA XII) CD 8:21 through 8:30 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the discussion concerning the status of litigation involving the renovation project for the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) is continued from the afternoon session. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City has been asked to participate in a mediation on February 11, 2003, with a condition of ceasing from proceeding toward trial; that the hope is the trial will occur before the end of 2003 if a trial is required; that a court ordered Status Conference regarding discovery issues is scheduled for January 23, 2003; that the recommendation is to participate in the mediation; however, delaying the proceedings may result in additional costs; that the Status Conference order indicates the hearing will occur unless the necessary motions to delay the Status Conference are filed three days in advance; that the three-day advance filing requirement has expired; that the condition of ceasing from proceeding toward trial will not apply to the scheduled Status Conference. Commissioner Servian asked if the Administrative Law Judge would consider an explanation for the reason the three-day advance filing requirement was not met? City Attorney Taylor stated that a motion can be filed regardless of the three-day advance filing requirement; that the Administrative Law Judge will decide the manner in which the Status Conference will proceed; that scheduling an emergency attorney-client session was suggested at the afternoon meeting; that an emergency may not exist since attendance at the Status Conference is required; that the recommendation is to attend the February 11, 2003, mediation and continue to prepare for trial. Commissioner Servian stated that the current meeting is not the appropriate place to discuss litigation strategy and provide direction regarding the litigation; that the current discussions will be available to opposing counsel. Commissioner Quillin agreed and stated that an out-of-sunshine attorney-client session should be scheduled. City Attorney Taylor stated that an attorney-client session should be scheduled to discuss strategy related to the mediation process; that the State Statutes require the City Attorney to announce a request for the session; that for the record, notice is provided to schedule an attorney-client session for the earliest available date. Commissioner Servian stated that delaying discussions regarding strategy for the mediation is not desired; and asked the earliest time available to schedule the attorney-client session? City Attorney Taylor stated that scheduling the attorney-client session during the week of January 20, 2003, is preferred. Mayor Mason stated that she is undergoing a medical procedure on January 24, 2003, and will be unavailable. Commissioner Martin stated that the Status Conference is scheduled for January 23, 2003. City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct. Commissioner Martin asked if Attorney Robert Trohn, City Special Legal Counsel, will be in town to attend the Status Conference? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. Commissioner Martin stated that January 23, 2003, would be an appropriate day to schedule the attorney-client session as Special Legal Counsel will be in town. BOOK 53 Page 24710 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24711 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Quillin stated that she will be available in the afternoon of January 23, 2003. City Manager McNees asked if the opportunity to mediate on February 11, 2003, is lost since the City is unable to stay the Status Conference? City Attorney Taylor stated that an answer is unknown; that the City never had the ability to meet the three-day advance filing requirement to stay the Status Conference; that the hope is an attorney-client session can be held to discuss the process. City Manager McNees stated that the attorney-client session should be scheduled prior to the Status Conference hearing. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City Attorney's Office can conduct the attorney-client session if Special Legal Counsel is not able to attend; that adequate information which has been supplied by Special Legal Counsel will be discussed at the attorney-client session. Commissioner Servian asked the time of the Status Conference. City Attorney Taylor stated that an answer is unknown. Commissioner Servian stated that scheduling the attorney-client session early in the morning on January 23, 2003, prior to the Status Conference is suggested. Commissioner Quillin stated that she is unavailable the morning of January 23, 2003. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the attorney-client session should be scheduled as soon as possible. City Attorney Taylor stated that late afternoon for January 22, 2003, may be possible. 20. NEW BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R- 1578, APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO FUND A MAXIMUM OF $10,000 TO HIRE A SPECIAL MASTER TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF RICARDO RIVERA; : ETC. - ADOPTED AND NEW BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: : PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1576, APPOINTING A SPECIAL MASTER TO HEAR THE APPEAL OF RICARDO RIVERA OF HIS DISMISSAL FROM EMPLOYMENT BY THE CITY OF SARASOTA AS A CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEE; ETC. ADOPTED (TITLE ONLY) (AGENDA XIII-1) CD 8:30 through 8:37 Kurt Hoverter, Director, Linda McKinney, Deputy Director, Human Resources, and Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission. Attorney Singer stated that Ricardo Rivera was scheduled to appear before the Civil Service/General Personnel Board for an appeal of his dismissal from employment as a Police Officer First Class Civil Service Employee by the Cityi that the members of the Board recused themselves from hearing the appeal; that proposed Resolution No. 03R-1578 provides for funding of up to a maximum of $10,000 for a Special Master to hear the appeal; that the Special Master will have subject matter jurisdiction to hear and decide the appeal of Mr. Rivera; that the appeal is complex and involves several documents from the Office of the Sarasota County Clerk of Court and the City's archives; that a significant number of witnesses is from the both the City Attorney's and State Attorney's Offices; that the appeal may take up to four or five days to hear; that counsels for the City and for the appellant have been encouraged to work together to make the hearing as efficient as possible. Attorney Singer continued that the appropriation request for $10,000 is based on an hourly rate for the Special Master of $135 for 5 days; that the Special Master is local and will not require travel expensesi that any remaining funds will be returned to the general fund if the matter is concluded in less than 5 days; that the City Attorney's Office recommends the Commission approve proposed Resolution No. 03R-1578 to fund up to $10,000 for the hiring of a Special Master to hear the appeal of Mr. Rivera contingent upon the adoption of Resolution No. 03R-1576 to hire a Special Master. Commissioner Servian asked if the appellant will reimburse the costs if the City prevails in the matter? Attorney Singer stated that a provision is not provided in the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code) for recouping costs if the City is successful and an appellant is not; that an BOOK 53 Page 24712 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24713 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. individual has the right to an appeal; that requiring the individual to pay the cost of the appeal may raise a due process concern; that individuals employed by the City and terminated for various reasons should have an unencumbered right of appeal. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1578 in its entirety. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 03R-1578. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1576 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 03R-1576. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes. 21. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE : ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CITIZEN TAX OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ON THE PENNY SALES TAX ACCEPTED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM XIII-2) CD 8:37 through 8:39 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 2, was removed from the Consent Agenda by Vice Mayor Palmer and is now New Business Agenda Item XIII-2; that the item concerns the annual report of the Citizen Tax Oversight Committee. Vice Mayor Palmer referred to the Report of the Citizen Tax Oversight Committee for Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2002, included in the Agenda backup material and stated that a response to a number of statements in the report is required; that the report is accurate but may be misunderstood. City Manager McNees stated that a drait response to the report is prepared; that documenting all of the expenditures of the Local Options Sales Tax (L.0.S.T.) extension, also called the penny sales tax to provide a clear understanding to the Citizen Tax Oversight Committee is critical; that the Administration will provide a detailed response to the report. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the intent of removing the item from the Consent Agenda was to ensure a written explanation by Staff to clarify the information would be provided. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to accept the annual report of the Citizen Tax Oversight Committee concerning the Local Options Sales Tax extension, also called the penny sales tax. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 22. NEW BUSINESS : ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1556, A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING CITIZEN GRIEVANCES UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT OF 1990 AND FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW THEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM XIII-3) CD 8:39 through 8:49 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. 1, was removed from the Consent Agenda by Commissioner Servian and is now New Business Agenda Item XIII-3; that the item concerns proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556 providing a procedure for the general public to resolve issues regarding City programs and services under the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA) . Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Kurt Hoverter, Director, Human Resources, and Maggie Sumney, Manager, Employee Relations, came before the Commission. Commissioner Servian stated that a recent discussion concerning the procedure raised questions which was the reason for removing the item; and quoted Section VII, Appeal Process, Exhibit "A" City of Sarasota Americans with Disabilities Act Grievance Procedure (Grievance Procedure) of proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556 as follows: Upon receipt of a written request for an appeal, the Manager shall: 1. Notify the City Manager and request that within thirty (30) days he appoint a panel of three (3) senior BOOK 53 Page 24714 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24715 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. members of unaffected City departments to hear the grievance. Commissioner Servian stated that appointing members of City departments with no outside input such as a member of the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board is a concerni that a panel of three members of City departments may appear one-sided or self- serving to the grievant. Attorney Singer stated that the Grievance Procedure was modeled after the Miami Metro-Dade, Florida, grievance process; that the success or lack of success of the procedure is unknown; that the procedure was submitted by the Manasota Post Polio Group, the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the City, as satisfactory for purposes of settlement; that the matters which will be discussed in the grievance are administrative matters regarding City property, practices, or policies, and the cost to accommodate the issues involved; that having. members of City departments hear the grievance is not a balanced approach but will provide another level to further discuss the grievance; that the appeal process was thoroughly discussed with the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board who suggested themselves as the panel; that the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board is an advisory committee established to evaluate and recommend to the Commission; that the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board is not empowered to make such decisions or determinations which will physically impact the City. Attorney Singer continued that Section VIII, Report to ADA Advisory Board, Exhibit "A" Grievance Procedure of proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556 was added to address the concern regarding any possible bias of the appeal process; that the goal of the grievance process is to keep the procedure simple and quick; that Human Resource Staff will receive the grievance and forward the grievance to the head of the department involved who will attempt to resolve the grievance informally; that the panel of three members of the other department heads will be formed if the grievant is not satisfied; that the entire process should be completed in less than a month; that the matter will be reported to the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board; that the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board can provide a report to the Commission if the findings of the grievance are satisfactory; that the proposed Grievance Procedure is a work in progressi that the procedure can be modified once the number of complaints and the manner in which the complaints are resolved can be monitored; that empowering the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board may be necessary in the future; that Staff will also be updating the - Commission concerning the status of the grievance in addition to the reports provided by the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board. Commissioner Servian stated that the process is understood. Commissioner Quillin stated that the development of the procedure is pleasing; that the Commission experienced a previous issue regarding adapting the Hollywood 20 Theatre complex to meet ADA standards; that several of the complaints regarding the issue came before the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board. Attorney Singer stated that the proposed Grievance Procedure is for complaints in which the City is not in compliance with ADA standards. Commissioner Quillin stated that the procedure is understood; that Hollywood 20 Theatre complex issue was a grievance against the City for its failure to require the Hollywood 20 Theatre complex to be ADA complaint. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the appeal process was a concerni and quoted Section X, Alternative Remedies, Exhibit "A" Grievance Procedure of proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556 as follows: The establishment of this grievance policy shall not preclude nor waive the grievant's right to seek redress under any alternative remedy available. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that other options of remedy are available. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 03R-1556. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yesi Servian, yes. 23. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM XIV) CD 8:49 through 8:58 BOOK 53 Page 24716 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24717 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that the January 15, 2003, meeting of the Economic Development Board was attended; that the wonderful transitions within the City were reported; that other municipalities expressed envy over the City's accomplishments; that the consultant retained by the Economic Development Board attended the January 21, 2003, meeting of the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners to receive and provide input; that a City representative should have been present to provide the City's input. Commissioner Martin stated that he was unable to attend the BCC meeting; and asked if further information is available regarding the City's representation. Commissioner Servian stated that Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, was preparing information for the meeting; that additional information is unknown. Commissioner Quillin stated that a tape of the meeting should be obtained for review. Commissioner Martin stated that another opportunity to attend the south Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting will be available. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a previous discussion with the City Manager occurred; that the City Manager indicated a representative to. formally represent the City would attend the south Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting. City Manager McNees stated that Ms. Hartman was scheduled to attend the January 21, 2003, Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting; that discussions have not occurred with Ms. Hartman since the meeting; that attending the second Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting scheduled in south Sarasota County on January 23, 2003, was anticipated; however, a recent conflict regarding the firefighters pension plan has occurred; that City representation at the January 21, 2003, Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting will be verified. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a City representative should attend the January 23, 2003, meeting of the Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners if a representative did not attend the January 21, 2003, meeting. City Manager McNees stated that a City representative will attend the January 23, 2003, Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting if the January 21, 2003, Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners meeting was not attended. Commissioner Martin stated that Commissioner Servian is a member of the Economic Development Board; and asked if she is able to be an advocate for City in her capacity as a Board Member? Commissioner Servian stated yes; that the information was forwarded to Ms. Hartman to deliver to the consultant for the Economic Development Board; that charrettes are being held throughout the County to solicit information from educational groups, not-for-profit organizations, municipalities, and neighborhood associations; that the process of collecting information is over an eight month period. Commissioner Martin stated that the City has several points to be made and addressed by the Economic Development Board. VICE MAYOR PALMER: A. stated that Tourist Development Council will be unveiling the Nichols Gilstrap long-range plan on February 20, 2003, at 4 p.m. at the Sarasota County Commission Chambers; that the presentation will include the manner in which the Tourist Development Council tax dollars will be expended; that a report will be provided to the Commission; that the long- range strategic plan regarding the arts, beach re- nourishment, and advertising of Sarasota County has been interesting. COMMISSIONER MARTIN: A. stated that on March 1, 2003, the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program will be holding an event called Celebrate Water at Gulfcoast Wonder & Imagination Zone (G.WIZ); that the event is primarily funded by the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) ; that SWFWMD represents 13 counties and holds water BOOK 53 Page 24718 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24719 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. oriented fairs annually; that the intent of the fairs is to bring local water related organizations such as Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium, the Sarasota Garden Club, the Native Plant Society, Marie Selby Botanical Gardens, and various departments within both Manatee and Sarasota Counties together; that the City approved $1,300 through the Celebrate Sarasota Grant to support the event; that additional information will be forthcoming. COMMISSIONER QUILLIN: A. stated that The Salvation Army, Sarasota Corps, is the provider for emergency rental funds for the Community Action Board; that recent data indicates the majority of funding is for City residents. B. stated that a City representative is necessary for the January 31, 2003, Water Planning Alliance Board meeting; that Commissioners Martin and Servian will be out of town and Mayor Mason is not available; that the meeting will include a status report concerning the hiring of a consultant; and asked if Vice Mayor Palmer could attend? Vice Mayor Palmer stated that she will check her calendar and attend if available. MAYOR MASON: A. stated that the next meeting of the Sarasota Housing Authority Board is scheduled for January 22, 2003; and asked if the meeting will be the first for the newly appointed members of the Sarasota Housing Authority Board? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the new members must attend an orientation and be sworn in. Mayor Mason stated that the current Sarasota Housing Authority Board will meet on January 22, 2003; that the Agenda for the Sarasota Housing Authority meeting was recently received. 24. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - REFERRED THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGING THE QUASI- JUDICIAL HEARING PROCESS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR REVIEW; AND REFERRED THE ISSUE OF A $5,000 EXEMPTION FOR SENIOR CITIZENS OVER THE AGE OF 65 WITH INCOMES OF LESS THAN $20,000, TO STAFF FOR REVIEW (AGENDA ITEM XV) CD 8:58 through 9:18 COMMISSIONER QUILLIN: A. stated that several telephone calls have been received concerning the construction slowdown on Lime Avenue; that a construction update and timeline for completion is desired; that a deli on Lime Avenue was informed their driveway apron would be asphalted; that as of January 20, 2003, the driveway apron was not completed; that information concerning the construction timelines should be posted on the City's website. B. stated that the sculpture located at Links Plaza which depicts a golfer and a water jumping jet shooting a golf ball by artist Jack Dowd is missing the golf club; that the water does not have the appearance of a golf ball; that the water should be turned off since the golf club is missing. C. stated that she is a member of the AIDS Manasota Board; that the Red Ribbon AIDS Walk will be held on March 8, 2003, at the Bayfront; that she challenges the Commission to obtain sponsorships and walk for the cause; that a packet of information will be provided to the Commission; that information regarding corporate sponsorship is also available. VICE MAYOR PALMER: A. stated that several applicants have requested Staff to present first during quasi-judicial hearings during the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency meetings; that the Applicant did not add additional information after Staff's presentation; that the suggestion is to refer the possibility of changing the quasi-judicial hearings process to allow Staff to present first in an effort to reduce redundancy and length of the hearing. Mayor Mason stated that hearing no objections, the possibility of changing the quasi-judicial hearing process is referred to the City Attorney for review. BOOK 53 Page 24720 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24721 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. B. stated that Commission agreement is requested to refer the issue of a $5,000 exemption for senior citizens over 65 with incomes of less than $20,000 to Staff. Mayor Mason stated that hearing no objections, the issue of a $5,000 exemption for senior citizens over the age of 65 with incomes of less than $20,000, is referred to Staff for review. C. stated that the Sarasota Film Festival is approaching; that the Main Street Streetscape project and the quality of the sidewalks are a concern. City Manager McNees stated that the Public Works Department will be installing large potted plants in tree holes on the sidewalks; that some of the area is in a state of flux and will be secured and dressed up as much as possible; that a representative for the Sarasota Film Festival have been provided with a 24-hour/7-day a week telephone number to someone with the ability to mobilize Public Works forces in case of an emergencyi; that the City is committed to working with the organization for a successful event. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Staff is commended for quickly hanging the posters for the event. Commissioner Servian stated that the update regarding the Main Street Streetscape project is appreciated; that the unfinished brick work is a concern. D. that a discussion occurred with a member of the Community Youth Development Board regarding the Students Taking Active Roles (STAR) in Sarasota County program; that the lack of student participation is a concern; that a class is beginning which includes several students from Cardinal Mooney, Booker, and Sarasota High Schools; that the hope is the group of students will be eligible for the various City boards in the near Euture. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program is favored; that the criteria for the application process reterences inclusive zoning and the relationship of inclusive zoning with affordable housing; that several seminars have been attended in which inclusive zoning was discussed; that the recollection is the Commission previously requested information regarding inclusive zoning be brought back for discussion; that the criteria promotes the development of low-income housing; that inclusive zoning is a way to develop low-income housing; that a developer could set aside a certain percentage of a development or funding for low-income housing; that samples of the process of inclusive zoning are desired. Commissioner Martin stated that the Sarasota County Openly Plans for Excellence (SCOPE) program is evaluating inclusive zoning; that a sample of inclusive zoning from another community was presented at a SCOPE meeting; that the report from SCOPE can be utilized for discussion rather than giving the task to Staff. Commissioner Servian stated that affordable housing is frequently discussed; that an additional criteria is the manner in which the City protects natural areas and appropriate densities in areas of sensitivity; that removal of the development of a Barrier Island Chapter for the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan) from the City's work program will be presented to the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency on January 22, 2003; that the removal is not supported; that the habited and unhabited barrier islands are sensitive lands. MAYOR MASON: A. stated that a recent discussion occurred with the people active at the Community Garden who are pleased with the City's plan to construct a parking area on Fifth Street; however, the concern is if enough room will be provided for the two sheds at the Community Garden. B. stated that the Amaryllis and Central Cocoanut Park Neighborhoods are actively recruiting new members; that the Amaryllis Park Neighborhood will be hosting a potluck dinner which is unfortunately scheduled during the February 3, 2003, Regular Commission meeting; that both Amaryllis and Central Cocoanut Park Neighborhoods are going door to door for recruiting; that both were involved in the Neighborhoods Grant Program; that such involvement is encouraging. BOOK 53 Page 24722 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24723 01/21/03 2:30 P.M. C. stated that the Action Central Project event was a successi that the development of the Green Market Place is exciting; that the Newtown Redevelopment Office opening and ribbon cutting was well received; that the art exhibit by the Booker Middle School students and the photographic display from the Action Central Project is worth viewing. D. asked the location of the January 28, 2003, Strategic Planning Workshop? City Manager McNees stated that the Strategic Planning Workshop has been relocated to the Boardroom at Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium. 25. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XVI) CD 9:14 through 9:18 CITY MANAGER MCNEES: : A. stated that the Commission will have the opportunity to share ideas of what the City should and must be accomplishing at the January 28, 2003, Strategic Planning Workshop. B. stated that Kevin Schafer, Police Officer First Class, Sarasota Police Department, was involved in a serious motorcycle accident while on duty; that he is conscious and speaking and was admitted to the Bayfront Medical Center; that he had some level of a concussion and a few broken bones in his wrist; that he is in amazingly good condition based on the nature of the accident; that Chief of Police Peter Abbott is taking care of the Schafer family. Mayor Mason stated that she witnessed the accident area; that surviving such an accident is remarkable; and on behalf of the Commission expressed get well wishes to Officer Schafer. Commissioner Quillin stated that a Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning organization (MPO) meeting is scheduled for January 27, 2003, that a representative from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will be in attendance; that the section of Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41) from Bahia Vista Street to Webber - Street in which the accident occurred is dangerous; that several fatalities have occurred in the area; that the City should be working with the State to try to save lives in the area; that she requested crash data from the Administration to present at the MPO meeting. Mayor Mason stated that the same type of dangerous area exists on US 301 from Sixth to Tenth Streets. Commissioner Quillin stated that crash data is requested; that the manner in which to enforce and regulate the speeders should also be evaluated. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, is commended for implementing the recent Bayfront cleanup; that several individuals have notified her they are pleased with the progress. Mr. Schneider stated that other individuals were also involved in the cleanup effort. Commissioner Servian stated that correspondence was recently received applauding the City for the Bayfront cleanup efforts. 26. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XVII) CD 9:18 There being no further business, Mayor Mason adjourned the Regular meeting of the City Commission of January 21, 2003, at 9:18 p.m. CangMasor sr CAROLYN UJ. MASON, MAYOR ATTEST: 3h SRolnon BILLY Ect BINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK 9 0:2 BOOK 53 Page 24724 01/21/03 2:30 P.M.