MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 1996, POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 14, 1996, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Mollie Cardamone, Vice Mayor Gene Pillot, Commissioners Jerome Dupree, David Merrill, and Nora Patterson, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mollie Cardamone The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: GRANT CHECK THROUGH THE FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR WHITAKER GATEWAY PARK = POSTPONED UNTIL NOVEMBER 4, 1996 #1 (0020) through (0059) Mayor Cardamone stated that this item was originally agendaed for the October 7, 1996, meeting which was postponed due to inclement weather; that Representative Shirley Brown was unable to attend this meeting; that the presentation has been rescheduled for the November 4, 1996, regular city Commission meeting. 2. PRESENTATION RE: AWARD FOR PROGRAM EXCELLENCE TO DAVID SOLLENBERGER, CITY MANAGER #1 (0059) through (0145) Mayor Cardamone read in its entirety and presented City Manager Sollenberger with the International City and County Management Association (ICMA) Award for Program Excellence for successful intergovernmental ventures between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County. Mayor Cardamone stated that City Manager Sollenberger was presented the award on October 8, 1996, at the annual ICMA Conference held in Washington, D.C. City Manager Sollenberger stated that his receiving the award would not have been possible without the support and commitment of the City Commission as well as the hard work of the many City employees who made the joint ventures with the County successful; that the recognition is a shared honor; that similar plaques will be presented to the City Commission and the Board of County Commissioners at a later date. Book 40 Page 13678 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13679 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. 3. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0145) through (0157) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Add under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-3, Report Re: Update on the status of the Southside Village Streetscape Project, per the request of Mayor Cardamone On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0157) through (0175) Mayor Cardamone asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the regular City Commission meeting of September 16, 1996, are approved by unanimous consent. 5. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1996 - APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT 96-SUB-02; SCHEDULED COMMISSION WORKSHOP REGARDING COMMERCIAL VEHICLES; WAIVED 30-DAY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW NOVEMBER PBLP REPORT ON DECEMBER 2, 1996 (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0175) through (1523) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Judson Boedecker, Vice Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), came before the Commission. Mr. Boedecker presented the following items from the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of September 4, 1996: Petition No. 96-SUB-02 Mr. Boedecker stated that this is a request for approval of a preliminary plat for a four-lot subdivision named Symphony Court which is located on the west side of Bailey Road, north of Fruitville Road; that at the PBLP meeting of September 4, 1996, the PBLP found proposed Preliminary Plat 96-SUB-02 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and the Tree Protection Ordinance and recommends Commission approval. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve Preliminary Plat No. 96-SUB-02. Commissioner Patterson stated that requiring public hearings before both the PBLP and the City Commission on four lots abutting a street and which meet all the criteria of the zone district seems inane; that development which is clearly a right of the petitioner should be handled by Staff. Mr. Boedecker agreed that Administrative discretion for preliminary plat and final plat approval should be included in the Land Development Regulations (LDRS) Update. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Petition No. 95-CA-03 Mr. Boedecker stated that this is a requests for a Zoning Code amendmenti; that since November 1995, the PBLP has held three Board workshops, two public hearings, and one public workshop to discuss regulation of commercial vehicles in residential zone districts; that the PBLP recommends the Commission: 1) direct the City Attorney to prepare ordinance language consistent with the table of definitions and performance standards proposed by Staff, exempting multi-family uses from the purview of the ordinance and permitting commercial vehicles and trailers used for lawn service in the Residential, Single-Family RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts, with mitigating considerations proffered by Staff, i.e., location of a vehicle behind the building setback line, possible screening/ buffering, and control of noise generated by radios; and 2) set the proposed ordinance for public hearing before the PBLP for formal action and a recommendation to the Commission. Commissioner Merrill stated that the various standards in the table are based on zoning categories; and asked if the PBLP's rationale was that properties in zone districts with the highest density could more easily accommodate commercial vehicles and lawn service vehicles than properties in low-density zone districts? Mr. Boedecker stated yes; that typically properties in the multi- family zone districts are apartment complexes with large parking lots which currently accommodate commercial-vehicle parking without hindering the overall complex. Commissioner Merrill requested further clarification of the PBLP's rationale for recommending different standards for low-density versus high-density RSF zone districts. Book 40 Page 13680 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13681 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Boedecker stated that jeopardizing the residential character, negatively impacting property values, and promoting commercial intrusion in communities classified in the Zoning Code as low- intensity residential areas were concerns raised by various neighborhood associations who provided testimony in support of prohibiting commercial vehicles in the lower-density RSF zone districts; that the PBLP received other testimony that indicated a distinction between the RSF-3/RSF-4 zone districts and the RSF-1/RSF-2 zone districts; that many residents in the higher- density RSF zone districts have small businesses and depend on their commercial vehicles for transportation. Commissioner Merrill asked if the PBLP viewed the majority of people residing in the RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts as supporting the elimination of the prohibition for commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods and the majority of the people residing in the RSF-1 and RSF-2 zone districts as opposing it? Mr. Boedecker stated yes; however, the assumption may be incorrect regarding the RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts. Commissioner Merrill stated that lots with 125-foot street frontage are typically found in the low-density districts and 70-foot street frontages in higher-density districts. Mr. Boedecker stated that the larger lots have more square footage available to accommodate commercial vehicles; however, the expectations of the property owners who feared commercial intrusion and made a substantial investment in purchasing property in a lower density subdivision based on the Zoning Code was an overriding consideration. Commissioner Merrill asked if the PBLP assumed that allowing commercial vehicles in the lower-income neighborhoods would be acceptable? Mr. Boedecker stated no; that the existing ordinance which prohibits commercial vehicles in all RSF zone districts has been uniformly enforced in the low-density neighborhoods; however, a change in circumstance was heard from people operating businesses and residing in the RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts who testified that, historically, commercial vehicles had been parked in those zoning districts and the prohibited use was not recognized until Citywide enforcement of the Code provision began earlier last year. Commissioner Merrill asked if the physical aspects of parking commercial vehicles was analyzed, e.g., whether double-wide driveways exist or if the commercial vehicles are third vehicles at a property? Mr. Boedecker stated that on-street parking is available for third vehicles; however, the PBLP felt commercial vehicles should be parked on site in the driveways. Commissioner Merrill asked if the standards include restricting the location of commercial vehicles, e.g., prohibiting parking on the grass in front of the properties? Mr. Boedecker stated that the PBLP discussed various restrictions; that setting the draft ordinance for public hearing before the PBLP will provide an opportunity for review of the content. Commissioner Merrill stated that permitting commercial vehicles in the lower-density neighborhoods only if enclosed or in a garage but not requiring enclosure of commercial vehicles in the higher-density neighborhoods could be viewed as an aesthetic issue between upper-income neighborhoods, primarily located in RSF-1 and RSF-2 zone districts, and lower-income neighborhoods, primarily & located in RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts; that revitalization efforts have been pursued to improve and make City neighborhoods more attractive to middle-income families; that the notion that the majority of people residing in the RSF-3 zone district support an apparent reduction in property values while the majority of people residing in the RSF-2 zone district oppose it is difficult to accept. Mr. Boedecker stated that additional input from people residing in the RSF-3 and RSF-4 zone districts should be encouraged; that the PBLP received input only from people residing in those zone districts who were in favor of liberalizing the Code provision. Commissioner Merrill asked if the PBLP received input from the Coalition of City Neighborhoods Association (CCNA)? Mr. Boedecker stated yes; that, as he recalls, the CCNA was in favor of a Citywide Code provision stricter than that which the PBLP has recommended. Mayor Cardamone asked for the zone districts applicable in Laurel Park, Gillespie Park, Newtown, and East Sarasota? Ms. Robinson stated that the areas referenced are primarily zoned Residential, Multiple-Family (RMF); that the PBLP viewed multi- family complexes as self-regulating; however, wanted to regulate duplexes as if zoned single-family. Commissioner Patterson stated that apartment and condominium complexes which prohibit on-site parking promote on-street parking commercial vehicles in the public right-of-way. Book 40 Page 13682 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13683 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Boedecker stated that the intent was to allow parking of commercial vehicles in multi-family complex parking lots but to prohibit on-street parking. Commissioner Patterson stated that various areas of the City have RSF zone districts abutting RMF zone districts; that commercial vehicles parked at a small multi-family complex may be eminently visible to the surrounding single-family properties. Mr. Boedecker stated that Ron Annis, PBLP member, made a motion to establish broader geographical areas in the City for implementation of a commercial vehicle ordinance, which would provide for easier code enforcement and to preclude inequity issues in areas where the boundary lines between two zoning districts are located in the same neighborhood; however, the motion failed for lack of a second. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the time and effort expended by the PBLP on the commercial vehicle issue is realized and respected; however, Staff has substantial code enforcement concerns regarding the PBLP recommendations; that referring the issue to the Administration for a report back prior to the Commission's making a decision is recommended. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that an estimate on the quantity of the problem, e.g., the number of people who depend on commercial vehicles as a sole means of transportation, would assist him in making a decision. Commissioner Merrill stated that the assumption that properties in higher-density areas are valued lower, therefore, are the locations in which lower-income tradesmen reside is not universally true; that some properties in the RSF-3 zone district are valued at $160,000; that commercial vehicles are typically prohibited by deed restriction in middle-income subdivisions; that people are beginning to recognize the impact commercial vehicles have on property values. Commissioner Merrill continued that commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods is a critical issue which, if not handled properly, will have major implications, i.e., discouraging City residency either by people who have self-operated businesses or by people who do not want commercial vehicles in their neighborhood; that public input at a hearing is not always reflective of full public reaction; that this issue should be carefully analyzed. Commissioner Dupree asked if recreational vehicles were discussed? Mr. Boedecker stated that recreational vehicles received limited discussion as the Commission previously adopted an ordinance which increased the setback requirements for recreational vehicles; that people testified that the increased setback had a beneficial effect. Commissioner Dupree stated that the number of people who have recreational vehicles and who also rely on a commercial vehicle for transportation should also be considered. Commissioner Patterson stated that Citywide regulation is necessary; that the location of commercial vehicles and signage are specific issues which need address; that the regulating of commercial vehicles is a complex issue; that the PBLP has devoted numerous hours towards the effort; however, the concept recommended by the PBLP is not supported; that expensive homes are being developed in small-lot areas; that permitting commercial vehicles could have a tremendous impact in those areas; that a Commission workshop with Staff should be scheduled to discuss the issue before the City Attorney is directed to prepare an ordinance. Commissioner Merrill voiced support in favor of scheduling a workshop. Mayor Cardamone stated that the minutes of the PBLP have been reviewed; however, a joint Commission/PBLP workshop could be beneficial. Commissioner Patterson stated that the PBLP has discussed the issue in depth and made a recommendation; that input from the PBLP would be welcome; however, the workshop should be for Commission discussion only; that she is interested in hearing concepts Commissioners Dupree and Merrill would propose for Districts 1 and 3. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to schedule a City Commission workshop for Staff input and Commission discussion on the issue of a Commercial Vehicle Ordinance. Motion carried (4 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, no. City Manager Sollenberger stated that a Commission workshop will provide an opportunity for presentation of the Administration's concerns regarding code enforcement. Access/Permitting Function by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Mr. Boedecker stated that the PBLP requested that the City Attorney's office research whether the City of Sarasota: 1) has the ability to deny access to a State road, 2) may forward to the FDOT information as to changing circumstances regarding land use, and 3) could require a property owner to produce a new FDOT permit for ingress and egress based on a change in land use; that a report was received from the City Attorney's Office at the October 2, 1996, PBLP meeting. Book 40 Page 13684 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13685 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Ms. Robinson raised the following issue: Waiver of 30-day requirement Ms. Robinson stated that the Zoning Code requires a minimum of 30 days between the PBLP's taking action and presenting a report to the Commission; that a waiver of the 30-day, requirement is requested to prevent an inequity in processing by allowing presentation of the November 6, 1996, PBLP report at the December 2, 1996, City Commission meeting. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of the waiver. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to waive the 30-day requirement to allow the November PBLP report to be received by the City Commission on December 2, 1996. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 6. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: ADVANCED PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING ACTION OF OCTOBER 2, 1996, ON PETITION NO. 96-SUB-01, FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR HOWARD COURT = APPROVED FINAL PLAT 96-SUB-01 (AGENDA ITEM II-3) #1 (0300) through (1429) #1 (2105) through (2218) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Judson Boedecker, Vice Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), came before the Commission. Mr. Boedecker presented the advanced PBLP report from the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of October 2, 1996: Petition No. 96-SUB-01 Mr. Boedecker stated that this is a request for final plat approval to create a seven-lot subdivision named Howard Court located south of Sixth Street, north of Fourth Street, east of Orange Avenue, and west of Adelia Avenue; that the PBLP found proposed Final Plat 96-SUB-01 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and recommends Commission approval. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of Final Plat 96-SUB-01 subject to certification from the city Engineer. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve Final Plat 96-SUB-01 subject to certification from the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that completion of the items required for Final Slat 96-SUB-01 were inspected and certified by the Engineering Department earlier today. Mayor Cardamone stated that requiring a retention area on previously platted and developed City lots seems unusual. Mr. Daughters stated that the City required construction of a minor retention area; however, the developer voluntarily increased the size of the retention area to protect neighboring properties. 7. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PARKS, RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1996 - RECEIVED; APPROVED LIGHTING OF BASKETBALL COURTS AND DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO ASSIST IN FUNDRAISING EFFORTS AND TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE REGARDING NOISE; POSTPONED - ACTION REGARDING FORMAL PARKING AGREEMENT UNTIL COMPLETION OF THE KEN THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (1523) through (2087) Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance & Solid Waste Manager, and Richard Martin, Chairman, Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board, came before the Commission. Sarasota Sailing Squadron Leasehold Mr. Martin stated that the Sarasota Sailing Squadron is requesting a leasehold expansion in three areas, dock extensions, a boat work area, an expansion of facilities for the youth Sailing Program and the Red Cross Sailing Program, and improvements to the existing % clubhouse and dumpster/recycling area; that the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board is impressed with Squadron's activity and involvement in serving the greater community and supports sailing, which is a low impact activity from an environmental perspective; that the Board unanimously recommends approval of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron's application for a variance, special exception, and leasehold expansion at Ken Thompson Park with the following conditions: 1. Existing pervious surfaces within the leasehold and leasehold addition should forever remain pervious, with the exception of a concrete pad to the boat work area. 2. The depth of leasehold area #2 should be reduced from 150 feet to 100 feet. Said parcel should only be used for Book 40 Page 13686 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13687 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. boat storage and boat activities; no car parking should be allowed. Mr. Martin stated that the Squadron's proposal is compatible with any of the scenarios reviewed to date for the Ken Thompson Park Master Plan and will enhance the overall theme and reputation of Ken Thompson Park as a marine-oriented area. Commissioner Patterson asked if the intent of the Board was to prohibit or discourage vehicular parking in leasehold area #2? Mr. Martin stated that the Squadron requested an expansion of the leasehold to increase the capacity for boat storage; that the Board did not feel providing a fenced area for private parking of members' vehicles would be appropriate; therefore, recommended a reduction in the depth of the leasehold expansion from 150 to 100 feet and retaining the other 50 feet as shared-parking for the park. Formal Parking Agreement with Mote Marine at Ken Thompson Park Mr. Martin stated that Buster Chapin, Senior Planner, City of Sarasota Department of Planning and Development, presented a formal agreement regarding the shared parking area currently utilized by but outside the leasehold of Mote Marine Laboratories; that the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board postponed further discussion on the' formal agreement until after completion of the Ken Thompson Park Master Plan but indicated a shared-parking policy on Ken Thompson Park as a more appropriate means to maximize use of leaseholders land and to maintain a pedestrian-friendly environment. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to postpone action regarding the formal parking agreement until completion of the Ken Thompson Master Plan. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill; yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Lighting of basketball courts Mr. Martin stated that the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board voted unanimously to recommend lighting the basketball courts at Gillespie, Orange Avenue, and Pioneer Parks until park closing times; that notice of the Board's meeting and an invitation to speak on the subject was forwarded to affected neighborhood associations; that input was received from the president of the Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association (GPNA), and a resident who lives adjacent to the basketball courts both of whom supported the project and applauded the City's effort to provide more recreational opportunities for the youth in the community. Commissioner Patterson stated that Dr. Robert Perkins, Executive Director, Selby Foundation, facilitated two Youth Recreation discussion meetings which resulted after numerous community representatives from youth agencies appeared at a publicly noticed discussion between her and Commission Dupree regarding youth activities; that lighting of basketball courts was the only concrete item which resulted from the facilitated discussion meetings; that Dr. Perkins indicated funding from Selby Foundation for lighting of basketball courts may be available; that County Commissioner Jack O'Neil also indicated a potential for County participation in lighting of the basketball courts. Commissioner Dupree stated that valuable information was gained through the facilitated discussion meetings; that he has been working with Linda Holland, President, Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association, to identify potential funding sources to light basketball courts in various City neighborhoods; that a concept to establish competitions between neighborhood basketball teams is being pursued. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Staff of the Sarasota Police Department has raised some concern with potential noise associated with the lighting of basketball courts in the evening. City Manager Sollenberger continued that the Administration recommends: 1) approval of lighting the courts, and 2) directing the Administration to assist in the fundraising efforts and to prepare an ordinance regarding noise at the basketball courts. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve lighting of the courts and to direct the Administration to assist in the fundraising efforts and to prepare an ordinance regarding noise at the basketball courts. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to receive the September 12, 1996, Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board report. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 8. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1. 2, 4, AND 5 = APPROVED: ITEM NO. 3 = REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR NEGOTIATION OF A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT EQUITABLE TO THE CITY (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (2230) through (2610) Book 40 Page 13688 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13689 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson requested that Item No. 3 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Termination of Easement for Southgate Shopping Plaza 2. Approval Re: Human Services Center Property Acquisition/Contract for Sale of Real Estate between Donald G. LaGasse and the City of Sarasota 4. Approval Re: Property swap with compensation to settle legal action against the City and obtain a maintenance access for the ditch along 10th Street between Orange and Osprey Avenues 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Municipal Services and Pre-Annexation Agreement for 4141, Inc. and Robinhood Utilities, Inc. (Site 13-15), a restaurant, a commercial retail store and a vacant duplex lot On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Items 1, 2, 4, and 5. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Highway Landscape Agreement between the State of Florida Department of Transportation and. the City of Sarasota for U.S. 41 medians from north of University Parkway to south of Edwards Drive Commissioner Patterson stated that City maintenance of a median which is not within in the City limits is referenced; and requested clarification. Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance & Solid Waste Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the Sarasota- Bradenton Airport Authority was required to construct a turn lane on U.S. 41 into the USF New College campus in conjunction with the Airport facility expansion; that the Airport Authority, which has been slow to act, recently entered into an agreement with the State of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for construction of medians on U.S. 41 from north of University Parkway to south of Edwards Drive; that the Airport Authority will be responsible for the construction but is required to obtain a maintenance agreement with a local agency before FDOT will issue the necessary permits; that possibilities may exist to have Sarasota County maintain the portion of the project which is clearly outside the City limits; however, as the City maintains the other medians on U.S. 41, entering into an agreement with the Airport Authority to maintain the 600-foot median south of Edwards Drive was viewed as a favorable solution to expedite a project which has been left unaddressed for some time. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the Landscape Plan includes two medians, one within the City limits and one within Sarasota County limits; that the first median starts on U.S. 41 north of University Parkway and continues north underneath the pedestrian overpass at New College, which is the City limits boundary; that a left turn pocket will be provided for access into New College; that the second median will continue on U.S. 41 past General Spaatz Boulevard to Edwards Drive, near the County boundary limit; that a grassy, unattractive island currently exists in the area described. Commissioner Patterson asked if Sarasota County maintains the medians on University Parkway. Mr. Daughters stated yes. Commissioner Patterson asked if Sarasota County has been requested to maintain the median south of Edwards Drive? Mr. Mountain no. Mr. Daughters stated that continuity and the City's higher level of service on the medians along U.S. 41 should be retained; that requesting funding assistance from the County for maintenance of the median may be an option; that a service agreement between the City and the County for a transfer of maintenance services could be pursued. Commissioner Patterson stated that the current level of City median maintenance is not at a high standard; that hopefully a higher level will be achieved after the additional personnel budgeted for the Landscape Maintenance Department are hired; however, large sections consisting of dead and dying plant material have been viewed along the Bayfront and on the medians along north U.S. 41 for months; that conversely, the medians on University Parkway appear well-maintained; that City maintenance of the medians does not guarantee a higher level of service at this time. Mayor Cardamone asked the annual cost associated with maintaining 600-foot median? Mr. Mountain stated that cost figures on such a small area are not available; that landscape maintenance agreements are currently in affect with Sarasota County, e.g., the City assumed responsibility for the Bayfront, and the County will maintain Gateway-whitaker Park once completed; that a similar agreement for the City to maintain the median south of Edwards Drive and the County to maintain an area contiguous to another area in the City already being maintained could be pursued. Book 40 Page 13690 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13691 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to refer the issue to the Administration to negotiate an equitable agreement for the City regarding maintenance on the median outside the City limits. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 9. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 96R-932) ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (2641) through (2859) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 96R-932 in its entirety. 6. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No.: 96R-932, appropriating $9,000 from the One Cent Local Option Sales Tax Fund to fund the construction of a concrete valley gutter at Main Street and Fletcher Avenue to eliminate standing water; etc. Commissioner Dupree asked if approving this item will set a precedent requiring the City to allocate funding in other areas of the City where standing water may be a problem? City Manager Sollenberger stated noi that the Administration views constructing a concrete valley gutter crossing at the Main Street/Fletcher Avenue intersection as an appropriate solution to a longstanding problem; that the deficient retention design utilized during construction of a building in the downtown area allows water to flow onto the public right-of-way; that City efforts in requesting assistance from the building ownership management have been exhausted; that the City cannot require the building owner to correct the problem, which may have resulted through an oversight during site plan approval. Commissioner Merrill stated that assistance has been requested from the building management to resolve a problem the City views was created during construction; and asked the specific location of the building? City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Bank of Boston is located in the building. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 96R-933, ADOPTING APPENDIX D TO THE CITY OF SARASOTA'S 201 FACILITIES PLAN: MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED THERETO, ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (2950) through (3490) Douglas Taylor, Environmental Resources Manager, and Ted Everitt of Angie Brewer and Associates came before the Commission. Mr. Taylor distributed a handout entitled the City of Sarasota 201 Facilities Plan Revisions "Appendix D" Public Hearing. Mr. Taylor stated that the 201 Facilities Plan, completed in 1977, is used by the City uses to solicit grants from State and Federal agencies; that the Plan was revised on October 16, 1995, to include the Downtown Loop and the South Loop projects; that the proposed Appendix D expands the scope of the Urban Reuse Master Plan by specifically including the North Trail Area Reclaimed Water Transmission Main project which assist the City in reducing discharge of treated effluent and provide alternatives to irrigation only of agricultural lands. Mr. Taylor continued that the Downtown and South Loops are currently under construction; and cited the following existing reuse areas: Bayfront Park and Main Street Ed Smith Stadium Complex 17th Street Youth Athletic Complex > Bobby Jones Golf Complex Meadows Country Club Britt Groves Hi-Hat Ranch and Groves Oak Ford Golf Course Mr. Taylor stated that 201 Facilities Plan provides for implementation of transmission mains for urban and agricultural reuse; that the 1995 revision, Appendix C (Downtown and South Loops), and the proposed revision, Appendix D (North Trail area), expand the City's system allowing for transmission of reuse to urban areas; that construction of the facilities is permitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Book 40 Page 13692 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13693 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Taylor referred to a map displayed on the overhead projector to explain the proposed installation route of reuse transmission mains in the North Trail area and the connection to the existing 24" refuse main at 10th Street and Central Avenue; and stated that the North Trail project will provide irrigation opportunitiès for Whitaker-Gateway Park and in the Ringling School of Art and Design area. Mr. Taylor stated that in 1987, the City received a Federal Grant from. the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a reclaimed water distribution project; that an uncommitted balance remains in the grant although the projects originally planned were completed; that in order to apply the remaining grant funds received in 1987 for construction of transmission mains in the urban reuse system, the 201 Facilities Plan must be amended to include the project description and cost for the North Trail Reclaimed Water Transmission Main; that proposed Resolution No. 96R-933 will adopt the 201 Facilities Plan Update Appendix D, adding the project to the grant and allowing for the use of the remaining grant matching funds. Mr. Taylor stated that the North Trail Reclaimed Water Transmission Main Project is estimated at $2,220,000; that the project costs will be funded as follows: Federal Grant Match $1,053,000 City's Contribution $1,167,000 Mr. Taylor stated that $1,159,670 of interest from the 1991 Series Revenue Bonds and $7,330 of funding remaining from the Downtown and South Loop projects will be used as the City's contribution; therefore, wastewater user feés will not be affected. Mr. Taylor continued that the North Trail project will have no negative impacts on the environment; that the City's need to discharge during the rainy season will be reduced as more people utilize the reuse system; that the demand on groundwater withdrawals will be reduced; that no mitigative measures will be required during construction. Mayor Cardamone asked for the length of time anticipated for road "tear up" while the transmission mains are installed? Mr. Taylor stated that segmented construction, as with installation of the Downtown and South Loops, will be used along Central Avenue, Lemon Avenue, and Old Bradenton Road; that one or two segments of two or three blocks in length will be addressed at the same time; that tear up of entire road will not be required; that installation of transmission mains on Lemon Avenue north of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way will be coordinated with the street resurfacing project scheduled. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the City installs reuse lines for future use in conjunction with road construction projects? Mr. Taylor stated yes; that reuse lines were installed as road construction occurred on 12th Street, Tuttle Avenue, and Hillview Street. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 96R-933 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends adopting proposed Resolution No. 96R-933. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 96R-933. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3928, AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF THE ZONING CODE, TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN EXISTING NONCONPORMING USES LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS SHALL BE EXEMPTED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CODE WHICH REOUIRE THE TERMINATION OF NONCONFORMING USES AFTER A REASONABLE AMORTIZATION PERIOD; MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = POSTPONED; REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR REVISION (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #1 (3490) through #2 (2087) Michael Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, came 3 before the Commission and stated that public hearings regarding 30 sites in residential zone districts with nonconforming uses scheduled to terminate on January 10, 1999, were held on October 23 and 30, 1995; that the Commission voted to exempt 12 of the sites from the amortization schedule and to extend the amortization schedule on 1 of the sites for five years; that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 addresses the 13 sites exempted from the 1999 amortization schedule and specifically amends Section 9-5 of the Zoning Code to set forth a process for documenting the existing nonconforming uses and recording notification in the public records. Mr. Taylor continued that the ordinance previously adopted to address three nonconforming medical offices on South Osprey Avenue provides discretion by the Manager of Zoning and Code Enforcement regarding changes in use, e.g., a pediatrician replacing a Book 40 Page 13694 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13695 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. podiatrist has been interpreted as an acceptable transfer in use for a medical office; that negative input from the public has been received regarding the Manager of Zoning and Code Enforcement's determinations; that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 addresses 13 sites with a variety of uses in different areas of the City; that information regarding the existing uses will. be. compiled and documented; that the exemption provision will terminate if a change from the documented use occurs. Commissioner Patterson asked if a change in use of a parallel nature, e.g., from a cabinet maker to a furniture maker, would be prohibited by the proposed ordinance? Mr. Taylor stated that permitted changes in use would be determined based on the information provided and the description of the use recorded on the verification forms; that the uses should be documented carefully; that cabinet making is a form of furniture making, therefore, could be considered a similar use; however, manufacturing is a different use. Commissioner Patterson asked if a cabinet making business could be documented as a light manufacturing use? Mr. Taylor stated that manufacturing is. a broad category; that as currently drafted, the ordinance requires the existing uses be specifically documented and used as parameters to determine eligible changes in use in the future. Mayor Cardamone asked if a warehouse could be used strictly for storage if the use documented is cabinet making? Mr. Taylor stated that storage is also a broad category; that storage of hazardous material versus non-hazardous material would be an issue; that the intent is to document specific uses rather than broad categories. Commissioner Merrill stated that the proposed ordinance references termination of the exemption if the nonconforming use is converted to another use; and asked for clarification of the phrase "another use." City Attorney Taylor stated that a number of standards by which to document the existing use have been drafted in the ordinance; and cited the following from page .4 of the proposed ordinance: (4) The existing nonconforming uses shall be limited to the structures and parking depicted in the survey, and the type of use, number of employees, hours of operation, number of units for hotel use, and gross floor area for commercial use as stated in the verification form. Commissioner Merrill asked if phrase "type of use" refers to uses categorized in the Zoning Code, e.g., office, retail, industrial? City Attorney Taylor stated that he would interpret the reference to uses in the Zoning Code; however, a response from the Manager of Zoning and Code Enforcement, who will be making the interpretations, would be appropriate. Commissioner Patterson stated that many of the nonconforming uses are hotel/motels, which is a clear category of use; and asked the number of sites which could be affected by the specificity drafted in the ordinance? Mr. Taylor stated that the uses in the three warehouses on 20th Street and at 1376 Fourth Street, which is a retail-commercial type use, may be difficult to document. Timothy Litchet, Manager of Zoning and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that the term "use" would be interpreted conservatively; that negative input has been received from the public regarding decisions made on two of the three nonconforming uses on Osprey Avenue; that numerous calls were received regarding an intensification of use by permitting an audiologist to replace a urologist at one of the medical offices; that complaints were also received when a pediatrician hired a substitute pediatrician during a leave of absence; that other interpretations regarding nonconforming uses considered by him as minimal have also been questioned; that he supports limiting the uses for the nonconforming structures to the existing uses documented; that making determinations as to the compatibility of a proposed, comparable use with an existing nonconforming use will be difficult; that requesting a decision on transfer of uses for nonconforming structures from an advisory board, i.e., the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), may be more appropriate than relying on an interpretation made by one individual. Commissioner Patterson stated that a change in use from one medical practice to another medical practice at a medical office should not be considered by the PBLP or the City Commission; that the Manager of Zoning and Code Enforcement should exercise discretion and make those determinations; that the ordinance should not limit the uses to the extent that a rationale decision will be prohibited. Mr. Taylor stated that documenting the use at the warehouse located at 3500 Central Avenue may also be difficult; that Leap Battery currently stores batteries on the site; that a change in use which could allow the storage of tires on the site, although a similar storage item, would raise other issues of concern, i.e., the potential of the tires catching on fire and the type of vehicles accessing the site. Book 40 Page 13696 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13697 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Merrill stated that reference to "use" should be clearly defined for each of the properties; that, for example, a beautician business categorized as retail, which would. permit a future change to another retail use, would not be acceptable; that the beautician and hotel/motel uses should be specific; however, more latitude could be extended regarding uses at the warehouses. Mr. Litchet stated that a list of permitted uses could be established for each of the properties; however, such a list would also be subject to interpretation; that procedures could be established that require notice to neighbors within 500 feet when a petition for a change in use is filed and approved and which provide for an appeal of the Building Manager's interpretation to the Board of Adjustment. Mayor Cardamone stated that changes to nonconforming uses exempted through the public hearing process should be considered at a public hearing; that utilizing the procedure for appeal to the Board of Adjustment could be considered. Commissioner Patterson asked if a request for a change in use, e.g., of an existing nonconforming law office to a medical office, would be considered a quasi-judicial land use decision if brought before the Commission for a public hearing? Sarah Schenk, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated yes; that the process would be similar to approving a special exception; that changes in use were not discussed during the public hearings on the nonconforming uses; that the proposed ordinance was drafted with the existing uses perceived as the only uses permitted. Commissioner Patterson stated that extending some latitude for the uses in the warehouses is not opposed; however, the impacts to the multi-family residences directly across the street, specifically on 20th street, should be carefully considered. Commissioner Dupree stated that documenting the uses on four or five nonconforming sites has been referenced as a potential problem; that Staff should be authorized to develop a proposal to deal with the anticipated problems. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Charles D. Bailey, Attorney, 200 S. Orange Avenue, representing John and Janet Leap, distributed a zoning map and stated that his clients have owned and operated Leap Battery at 3200 Central Avenue since 1976; that the proposed ordinance as drafted is supported. Attorney Bailey cited the following language from page 6 of the proposed ordinance: (d) any nonconforming use of a structure and premises in combination may be changed to another nonconforming use of the same character or to a more restricted nonconforming use, provided that the Manager of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement shall find that the proposed use is equally or more appropriate to the district than the existing nonconforming use and that the relation of the structure to surrounding properties is such that adverse effects on occupants and neighboring properties will not be greater than if the existing nonconforming use is continued. Attorney Bailey stated that the issue is not who will be making the decision but whether sufficient standards have been established upon which the decision maker can reach an objective decision; that the language cited could be refined but should be retained to provide flexibility; that establishing a matrix of uses tied to various impacts and concerns, i.e., peak hour trips or generation of semi-tractor trailer vehicles, should be considered. Attorney Bailey continued that Staff should be commended for their hard work associated with the nonconforming uses. James Toale, Attorney 1605 Main Street Suite #705 (34236) representing David Wilson and Robert and Patricia Fuller, stated that he represents the owners of the warehouse properties located at 1470 and 1480 20th Street; that the properties are currently leased to a packaging manufacturer which uses machinery to fold, cut, and bend cardboard stock; that Wilson Cabinet Shop was previously located at 1480 20th Street; that on October 23, 1995, the Commission voted not to enforce the amortization schedule on his clients' and other properties; that the Commission did not vote to freeze the existing uses at the nonconforming uses in perpetuity. Attorney Toale continued that Section 9-5(d) addresses change in use; that the following language added to Section 9-5(d) in proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 should not be approved: (d) : The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the nonconforming; uses exempted from the termination provisions of Section 9-5(j), as more particularly described in Section 9-5(/) hereof. Attorney Toale stated that establishing a specified list of uses permitted in each of the noncontorming structures is supported; that the structures should not be allowed to become more nonconforming; therefore, filing the cursory site plans required Book 40 Page 13698 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13699 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. under. the proposed ordinance is supported; however, striking the sentence reference which was added to Section 9-5(d) is requested. Vice Mayor Pillot referred to the phrase "or is converted to another use" in subsection (4) in proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 and stated that the following language could be added: which would require more intensive zoning than.t the comparable level of zoning identified for the existing nonconforming use. Vice Mayor Pillot continued that making a list of specified uses at or bélow the comparable level of zoning for the existing nonconforming use, which would be ineligible, could also be considered. Attorney, Toale stated that a similar suggestion was made in his letter to the Commission dated October 10, 1996. Mayor Cardamone stated that the property at 1480 20th Street which was a cabinet making business in October 1995 has since changed use. Attorney Toale stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Pillot requested comment from Mr. Litchet as to whether the suggested language has sufficient specificity to relieve him from making controversial judgements. Mr. Litchet stated that Attorney Toale's letter suggests a similar concept and requests the Industrial, Light and Warehousing (ILW) Zone District with certain uses eligible in the ILW Zone District stricken be applied to the properties at 1470 and 1480 20th Street; that the PBLP has placed conditions on various approvals by specifying permitted uses; however, technology and business uses are continuously changing; that petitions for uses which were not contemplated when conditions were enacted or do not fit a specific category are often received; that a list, although helpful, would not be a cure all. Mr. Litchet continued that subjective judgements based on the broad categories currently existing in the Zoning Code are made daily; that some zone districts, i.e., Commercial Intensive (CI), have intent clauses and eligible uses listed in the Zoning Code; that approximately 95% of the interpretations made on uses for those zone districts are noncontroversial; however, interpretations made on uses in the residential zone districts, where the nonconforming structures are located and for which intent Clauses have not been included in the Zoning Code, are more difficult and create controversy. Vice Mayor Pillot clarified the intent of his suggestion; and stated that if the comparable zone district for a packaging company operating in a nonconforming structure is determined as ILW, only uses eligible under the ILW zone district or a less intensive zone district would be considered as permitted uses at the nonconforming structure in the future; that in addition, a list of specific uses in the ILW and less intensive zone districts which would be prohibited in the nonconforming structure could be developed. Commissioner Patterson stated that she voted against exempting the properties on 20th Street from the amortization schedule; that Attorney Toale has suggested striking various uses from the ILW one district, leaving a list of permitted uses; that all of the uses suggested are not supported; that business machine services and linen supply would generate a greater degree of traffic than a cabinet making shop or a packaging manufacturer; that an outdoor storage yard would create visual impacts greater than the current parking of commercial vehicles on the site; that the issue should be referred to the Administration and a reasonable list of compatible uses developed if a majority of the Commission supports making proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 less specific. Attorney Toale stated that he is willing to work with Staff in developing a list for Commission review. Connie B. Pierce, 1740 South East Avenue (34230), representing Areta's Hair Salon, stated that she is the licensed massage therapist working at Areta's Hair Salon, one of the nonconforming uses exempted from the amortization schedule; that the hair salon is a service business not a retail store; and asked if the proposed ordinance would restrict the use of a licensed massage therapist at the site? Commissioner Merrill stated that the massage therapist was specifically included in the motion passed by the Commission; and provided Ms. Pierce with a copy of the minutes reflecting the Commission's motion and vote. Joanne Heiland, 640 Tremont Street (34242), stated that as owner of the property located at 1376 Fourth Street, she was offered two alternatives: 1) rezoning the property to a Commercial, Residential Transition (CRT) Zone District or 2) continuing the existing use as a permanent grandfathering; that alternative #2 has been requested as the property does not currently meet the criteria for the CRT Zone District; and asked if the proposed ordinance would prevent her from petitioning for a rezoning to the CRT Zone District in the future? Mr. Taylor stated that the property could convert to the CRT zone district in the future if changes to the existing property are made to meet established criteria; that no action taken tonight will inhibit Ms. Heiland's right to petition for a rezoning to the CRT Zone District in the future; that the site is eligible for CRT zoning in the Sarasota City Plan. Book 40 Page 13700 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13701 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance 96-3928 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to postpone discussion of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3928 and direct the Administration to report back with a solution to some of the items of concern discussed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that holding another public hearing will be required if substantial changes are made to Ordinance No. 96-3928. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. The Commission recessed at 8:31 p.m. and reconvened at 8:41 p.m. 12. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3954, AMENDING THE PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS SET FORTH HEREIN; MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED: AMENDING THE REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO SAID AMENDMENT PROCEDURE; SETTING FORTH THE SCHEDULES FOR PROCESSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE 1997 CYCLE AND SUBSEQUENT YEAR; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #2 (2137) through (2412) Paul Costanzo, Chief Planner, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3954 amends the procedures for processing proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan by: 1) revising. the conditions for small scale development activities as amended by the Florida Statutes, 2) moving the time of the required neighbohrood workshops from prior to the Planning Board public hearing to prior to filing an amendment application, and 3) revising the schedules for the 1997 and 1998 amendment cycles. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3954 by title only. Commissioner Merrill returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:43 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3954 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3954 on first reading. Commissioner Patterson stated that a call was received from a member of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency who indicated proposed Ordinance No. 96-3954 had not been reviewed by the PBLP and who referenced a section of the Zoning Code requiring presentation of ordinances to the PBLP; and asked for clarification of the procedure. City Attorney Taylor stated that the proposed ordinance does not amend a section of the Zoning Code but is an exhibit and therefore was not viewed, when prepared, as falling under the requirement for processing amendments to the Zoning Code through the PBLP; that preparing and returning zoning code amendments in draft ordinance form versus memorandum to the PBLP for review was also raised as an issue by Ernest Babb, PBLP member; that the previously established Commission policy regarding drafting by the City Attorney's office of amendments for review by the PBLP will be researched and forwarded to Mr. Babb. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that New Business, Item No. VIII-3, requests consideration in honor Chaplain J.D. Hamel; and requested that Agenda Item No. VIII-3 be moved forward on the agenda and addressed at this time to enable viewing by Chaplain Hamel who is watching from home. Mayor Cardamone stated that there was a consensus of the Commission to move New Business, Item No. VIII-3, forward on the agenda. 13. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: REQUEST TO NAME THE AREA AROUND THE VETERANS MEMORIAL AT THE BAYFRONT IN HONOR OF CHAPLAIN J. D. HAMEL - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #2 (2412) through (2700) Daniel Kunkel, President, Vietnam Veterans of Sarasota/Manatee, Inc.; and Larry Angel, President, Sarasota County Veterans Commission, came before the Commission. Book 40 Page 13702 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13703 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Kunkel stated that formally naming the area around the American Legion War Memorial at the Bayfront in honor of Chaplain J.D. Hamel is proposed in recognition of the many years of service he has provided to Sarasota's veterans, law enforcement officers, firefighters, and citizens; that the park will be formally dedicated during the Veterans Day ceremonies on November 11; 1996, if the City Commission approves this request. Mr. Angel stated that the specific area at the Bayfront requested for designation is bounded on the west by U.S. 41, on the north by Main Street, on the east by Gulf Stream Avenue, and on the south by Ringling Boulevard. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Reverend J.D. Hamel, whom he met 1963 shortly after moving to Sarasota, is the appointed Chaplain to the public safety agencies and has devoted his life to helping people; that to know Reverend Hamel is to begin to get an idea of godliness; that Sarasota has been blessed by Reverend Hamel's presence and will be graced by the addition of his name at a City park. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to dedicate the area around the Veterans Memorial at the Bayfront from Main Street to Ringling Boulevard and U.S. 41 to Gulf Stream Avenue as "Chaplain J.D. Hamel Park" on November 11, 1996. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 14. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3966, DECLARING A MORATORIUM ON THE FILING, PROCESSING, AND CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION PETITIONS; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; IMPLEMENTING THE MORATORIUM FROM SEPTEMBER 27, 1996 THROUGH MARCH 31, 1997: EXEMPTING SPECIAL EXCEPTION PETITIONS THAT ARE ON FILE AND COMPLETE PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 27, 1996; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - DENIED (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #2 (2700) through #3 (1386) City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966 would establish a moratorium on the processing of special exception petitions effective September 27, 1996, through March 31, 1997; that the Planning and Development Department anticipates scheduling the new Land Development Regulations (LDRS) of the City for final adoption in March 1997; that special exception applications which were filed with the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk and determined to be complete as of September 27, 1996, are exempted from the proposed ordinance; that applying the moratorium to an application on which Staff has requested a report or supplemental information was not the intent when the ordinance was drafted; however, the Commission may wish further clarification in the ordinance; that, for example, a petition pending for a church on St. Armands which has been requested to provide supplemental information will not be affected by the adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966. City Attorney Taylor continued that the proposed ordinance affects more than 5% of the land area in the City; therefore, is subject to the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; that the two public hearings required must be separated by a minimum of 10 days; therefore, the second hearing cannot be held at the regular City Commission meeting of October 21, 1996. Commissioner Merrill asked why a moratorium is being proposed? City Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance is a result of the Commission discussion held at the August 27, 1996, workshop; that the LDRs Update process, being developed by consultants Siemon, Larson & Marsh, will substantially the nature of change special exceptions; that the concept being considered is to include many of the uses which currently require a special exception as permitted uses within the zone district; that special use permits which will apply to the land use will be revokable. Commissioner Merrill stated that the term "moratorium" strikes fear in the development community; that the purpose of considering a moratorium is not clear if many of the uses will become permitted uses under different guidelines. City Attorney Taylor stated that a level of frustration at the Commission table has been observed regarding special exceptions associated with historic designations, which is a process anticipated to change drastically during the LDRS Update; that the Administration interpreted a consensus of the Commission to draft an ordinance imposing a moratorium on special exceptions. Commissioner Merrill stated that although he has been a strong opponent of the special exception process associated with historic designations, the majority of the Commission has consciously and continuously voted to allow the process. Mayor Cardamone stated that a Commission consensus had been reached for the City Attorney to draft the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Patterson stated that she had voiced an interest when Mayor Cardamone requested a moratorium; however, such a broad ordinance was not expected; that her concern with special exceptions is specific to items which are not viewed as appropriate and therefore should not be permitted by special exception in a single-family neighborhood; that problems have resulted from special exceptions granted in the past; that Staff has had of difficulties enforcing the conditions placed on the jet ski operator on Lido Key; that the small fine assessed for violations Book 40 Page 13704 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13705 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. has not deterred the activities for which the conditions were placed on the special exception to prevent; that the cooperation and flexibility of the attorney and business owner of the Radisson Lido Beach Resort resulted in a special exception equivalent to a specially permitted ancillary use which could be removed; however, other business owners may not be as amenable to similar conditions; that a three- to four-month delay in processing special exception applications was not viewed as detrimental to the City. Mayor Cardamone stated that the suggestion for a moratorium was made in response an uneasiness associated with approving a special exception by requiring a petitioner to abide by specially permitted use language which had not yet been adopted; that a majority Commission consensus in support of her suggestion was viewed; however, the moratorium suggested. was intended to address irrevocable changes in use not prevent special exceptions, e.g., approving additional height on a building. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he supported having an ordinance drafted for consideration; that the existing Commission will be seated through March 1997; that in lieu of a moratorium, any requests for special exceptions presented during that time could be reviewed based on their merits and denied by the Commission if deemed unacceptable. Commissioner Patterson asked if the City has received any special exception petitions pending a Commission decision on the proposed ordinance? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that two applications were received after September 27, 1996; that the petitioners were informed the applications would be held pending the outcome this evening; that Mote Marine Laboratories has petitioned for a tour boat and Towles Court has petitioned for an open-air dining facility. Mayor Cardamone stated that the special exception process is quasi-judicial. City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Dwain Marquette, 156 Golden Gate Point (34236), representing Percy, Doris, and Beverly Sutton Marquette, distributed a handout and read a prepared speech which referenced the negative impacts the 1974 Citywide downzoning had in devaluing the property his family had purchased on Golden Gate Point, the effects of zoning restrictions which stopped development for over 20 years, the length and expansiveness of the variance process, and concerns regarding an inability to upgrade existing properties on Golden Gate Point to meet hurricane standards. Mr. Marquette requested that the Commission deny the proposed ordinance to impose a moratorium on special expectations and. lower the square-foot requirements and setbacks for land on Golden Gate Point. Charles D. Bailey, Attorney, and Pamela Hower, Urban Planning & Design Coordinator, resenting Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH). Attorney Bailey stated that SMH recently adopted a Master Facilities Plan for the development of health-related facilities between Arlington and Hillview Streets; that SMH intends to seek City approval for the expansion of the hospital core area and for a rezoning to the Governmental Use (G) Zone District; that the Plan also contemplates a limited amount of non-governmental uses for which a special exception will be required; that City and SMH. Staff are presently preparing an interlocal agreement to provide procedures for processing hospital land use approvals; that the proposed ordinance would pose an extreme hardship on SMH if beginning the special exception process, which will take several months to complete, is delayed for six months. Attorney Bailey continued that a moratorium is viewed as unnecessary for reasons stated by the Commissioners as well as the following reasons: 1. The moratorium would affect only special exceptions and not other types of land use approvals. Attorney Bailey stated that a contemplated "significant change" in the special exception process in the LDRS Update has been referenced as the basis for imposing a moratorium on special exceptions; however, review of the LDRs consultant's recommendations also suggests significant changes to other types of approvals, e.g., site and development plan applications, subdivision and platting requirements, zoning map amendments, etc. 2. There is no basis to speculate that changes in the new LDRS ultimately adopted by the City will be more restrictive than the present Zoning Code in terms of application to special exception use categories. Attorney Bailey stated that an editorial recently published in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune viewed special exceptions as a privilege granted to special interest groups when, in fact, special exceptions are a planning tool that enables the City to disallow certain types of uses in certain uses recognizing those same uses may be acceptable in some portions of a zone district; that all Book 40 Page 13706 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13707 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. potential special exceptions should not be affected if the moratorium is being imposed to address specific concerns. Attorney Bailey requested that "G" Zone District special exceptions be exempted from the moratorium if the City Commission determines the moratorium proposed should be adopted or, alternatively, the effective date of any special exceptions granted be deferred until after March 31, 1997, which would allow SMH to at least begin proçessing the special exception in advance of that date. Bruce Franklin, 149 Cocoanut Avenue (34236), stated that he filed the Mote Marine Laboratories' special exception application which has been referenced. Mr. Franklin read a guest editorial, which was not published but had been forwarded to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune in response to the negative editorial recently published regarding the special exception process and referenced the 19 criteria and the quasi* Judicial process by which a special exception filed by a property owner is evaluated to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and private property rights. Mr. Franklin stated that the moratorium was requested by the Commission to address concerns the special exceptions in the Residential, Single-Family (RSF) Zone Districts; that a blanket moratorium places potential burdens on all other property owners in multiple-family, institutional, or governmental zone districts, whose petitions may be for unobjectionable uses, e.g., building height, child care centers, vocational training facilities, medical clinics, or in-door restaurants on the Bayfront; that preventing a perceived problem from worsening while the new LDRS are developed has been referenced as another basis for the moratorium; that the LDRS Update includes the Zoning Code and Engineering Design Criteria Manual and the City is also updating the Sarasota City Plan; that the City's comprehensive review of regulations will include addressing more serious conflicts than the perceived special exception issue; that imposing a moratorium on all development is not acceptable; however, singling out special exceptions on the basis of anticipated substantial changes is arguable. Mr. Franklin continued that the moratorium would result in an effective delay of over one year on uses the City may otherwise wish to promote as filing of petitions would be delayed six months and processing can take four to six months; that beneficial projects such as the Boys and Girls Club facility in Newtown and a potential educational project utilizing the Police Resources Center on Dr, Martin Luther King, Jr., Way would be delayed by a blanket moratorium on special exceptions; and requested that the Commission deny proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966. Joel Freedman, 78 Sarasota Center Boulevard (34240), representing Bay Harbor Club, Inc., stated that Bay Harbor Club, Inc., owns the former Hanson Marine property located on U.S. 41 west of Tamiami Trail in the vicinity of 12th Street; that conditions existing along North Tamiami Trail has made efforts to establish a viable development on the 10-acre parcel difficult; that the proposed ordinance has seriously jeopardized a viable project on which negotiations had started approximately one month prior to the Commission's discussing a moratorium on special exceptions; that the developer is having second thoughts about pursing a project in Sarasota and financial institutions are hesitant to underwrite projects requiring a process which may or may not take six months to complete; that the proposed ordinance references six months as the minimum amount of time required to enact the new LDRs; that reference has been made to the outcome of the LDRS regarding the special exception process, however, no public hearings or workshops on the issue have been held. Mr. Freedman continued that the problems created by approving special exceptions have occurred; however, a moratorium is not appropriate; that the LDRs Update is progressing; that City has competent Staff to provide guidance on denying special exceptions which are not appropriate in a neighborhood; that beneficial projects to the City would be delayed by a moratorium; that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966 should be denied. Commissioner Patterson asked why a special exception would be required to develop the former Hanson Marine property? Mr. Freedman stated that the property is zoned Residential, Multiple-Family (RMF); that the project proposed exceeds the height requirements; that a special exception is necessary to exceed the height; that rezoning the property would not resolve the issue. John E. Brown Attorney 1819 Main Street Suite 1100 (34236), representing St. Armands Lutheran Church, stated that the St. Armands Lutheran Church filed a special exception application earlier this year, which had been reviewed by the Development Review Committee (DRC) and deemed complete prior to September 27, 1996; that the petitioner is working with the neighborhood to develop conditions acceptable to both parties; that supplemental information requested will be submitted next week; and requested that language in the proposed ordinance be modified to clarify the intent expressed earlier by City Attorney Taylor to exclude petitions currently in the process. City Attorney Taylor stated that the ordinance was not drafted to apply to petitions already in the process; however, listing the specific projects which are exempted may be appropriate, if the ordinance is adopted. Book 40 Page 13708 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13709 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Betsy Benac 133 South McIntosh (34243). representing the Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber of Commerce supports the City's efforts to review the LDRs; however, the moratorium proposed is of concerni that delays could occur which would postpone enactment of the new LDRs past March 1997; that she is a land use planner with the firm of Wilson, Miller, Martin, and Peek, Inc.; that changing special exception uses to permitted uses may be a good idea, but the language in the proposed ordinance seems to pre-empt discussions necessary when the LDRs are reviewed; that the problems the City has experienced with special exceptions and the implementation mechanisms are understood; however, adopting a moratorium is a drastic and counterproductive measure; that the special exception process could assist the City in implementing established goals and should be retained while the new LDRS are being developed; that the City is actively seeking redevelopment activities and private investment; that adoption of the moratorium would send the wrong message to those interested in' pursing redevelopment projects; that the City Commission is urged to continue using discretion in reviewing individual special exceptions based on the merits of project and to deny proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966. Kerry Carper, 1937 Golf Street, representing Towles Court, stated that the concept under which Towles Court was developed is dependent on pedestrian traffic; that a small outdoor cafe in a six-plex building is planned to attract people from the neighboring offices and homes and to promote pedestrian traffic and trade in the area; that a moratorium will pre-empt the effort by six months. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3966 on first reading, if the Commission desires a moratorium; however, the real issue of concern seems to be with the inability of the City to revoke a special exception in the event the party to whom a special exception is granted does not comply with standards established at the time of approval; that the Commission's intent is not viewed as precluding approval on other types of special exceptions; therefore, the Administration recommends denying the proposed ordinance and reviewing special exceptions on a case-by-case basis, which will provide the Commission an opportunity to pass those special exceptions deemed beneficial to the City. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to deny proposed Ordinance No, 96-3966. Mayor Cardamone stated that the unintended consequences were not realized at the time a moratorium was suggested; that her intent as to cease approval of special exceptions over which the Commission has no control and cannot be revoked once approved. Commissioner Patterson stated that she will support the motion; that discouraging desirable projects was not her intent when the moratorium concept was supported; however, an inability to revoke uses is not the only problem viewed with the special exception processi that many uses, which she views as inappropriate, are currently permitted by special exception in the RSF Zone Districts, e.g., museums; that residency next to a single-family home operating as chiropractic museum is not perceived as desirable; that the criteria for child-care facilities is also lackingi that child-care facilities can have a devaluing effect on adjacent properties. Commissioner Dupree stated that the motivation for wanting to invoke a moratorium was good; however, the reasons for not invoking such an ordinance are better; that the City should not impede redevelopment or beneficial economic development efforts. Commissioner Merrill stated that denial of the proposed ordinance should not be viewed as a change in the Commission's position to modify the special exception process; that unfavorable decisions have been made in the past; that special exceptions have been inappropriately used with historic preservation and in single- family areas; however, a greater concern is that the proposed ordinance represents the second moratorium the Administration has recommended in the past year; that the workload in the Planning Department was the basis for requesting a moratorium on the submission of Comprehensive Plan Amendments; that limiting growth in the City when the County areas near Interstate 75 are growing fast does not make sense; that developers serve a valid purpose in the community and should not be alienated by the City's continuous consideration of moratorium proposals. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes. 15. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3967, AMENDING CHAPTER 37 OF THE SARASOTA CITY CODE, WATER AND SEWERS, BY EXTENDING THE RANSFER OF IMPACT FEE CREDIT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORGANIZATIONS AND REQUIRING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORGANIZATION TO ENTER INTO A DENSITY TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY TO BE RECORDED IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY AND THE CITY sO AS TO PUT THE PUBLIC ON NOTICE OF THE IMPACT FEE CREDIT TRANSFER; PROVIDING FOR AUTOMATIC REPEAL AFTER THREE YEARS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5) #3 (1386) through (1689) Book 40 Page 13710 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13711 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Ordinance No. 94--3745, which terminates on November 15, 1996, established the impact fee program, which permits non-profit, affordable housing organizations to transfer impact fee credits from one area within the City to another parcel to provide new, affordable homes for low- and moderate-income individuals; that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 extends the impact fee program for an additional three years and makes two substantial changes to the existing ordinance: 1) requires that the locations from which credits are transferred be recorded in the official records of Sarasota County, which will enable any subsequent purchaser to determine the property. has had the impact fee credits reduced by transferring a portion of the credit to another site and 2) expands the impact fee program to permit participation by non-profit organizations that do not receive a City subsidy. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Lonnie Ward 1060 Oregon Court (34236), Sarasota Coalition for Affordable Housing, Inc., stated that he is the president of the Sarasota Coalition as well as the National Coalition for Affordable Housing; that the Sarasota Coalition is working in Newtown to provide housing for low- to moderate-income families; that Ordinance No. 94-3745 provides the impact fee program only for nonprofit organizations that receive financial assistance from the City; that the Sarasota Coalition has reduced density along Central Avenue near 17th Street by converting several duplexes into single- family, owner-occupied housing; that the impact fee structure in the City of Sarasota is one of the highest, if not the highest, in the State; that completing construction on other low-income housing projects is limited without eligibility to receive the impact fee credit; and requested that the impact fee program be expanded to permit nonprofit organizations that do not require a City subsidy to participate in the program. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Oregon Court is one project which was completed by Mr. Ward, whose work has been beneficial to the community; that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 revises the definition of affordable housing organization and includes language which meets the request of the Sarasota. Coalition of Affordable housing. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Dupree and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 on first reading. Commissioner Dupree asked for clarification of the phrase "providing for automatic repeal after three years." City Attorney Taylor stated that the proposed ordinance, as with the existing ordinance, will not exist in perpetuity but has a finite sunset date; that the sunset date drafted in proposed Ordinance No. 96-3967 is November 15, 1999, at which time the impact fee program can again be reviewed and extended by the Commission if so desired. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 16. SCHEDULED PRESENTATION RE: EXPANSION OF THE POLICE RESOURCE CENTER LOCATED AT 1782 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY APPROVED AND REFERRED CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR EXPANSION TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR REVIEW AND APPROPRIATE ACTION (AGENDA ITEM V) #3 (1689) through (2053) Bruce Franklin, President, and Jetson Grimes, Treasurer, Board of Directors, and Willie Mae Sheffield, Founder and Executive Director, North County Educational Assistance Program, came before the Commission. Mr. Franklin referred to and explained a board display depicting a 4,700 square-foot preliminary expansion design for consideration by the City of Sarasota to permit the physical expansion of the Resource Center/Police Sub-station facility located at 1782 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way; and stated that the expansion would provide for the following space needs: Four classrooms, specifically designed for grades 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 A library/resource area A computer room An arts & crafts work area A music room An administrative office area for the Executive Director, Home School Liaison, and the Education Director Book 40 Page 13712 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13713 10/14/96 6:00 P.M.. One counseling office for parent/child individual meetings A storage area Mr. Franklin stated that John Lewis, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police. Department, also on the Board of Directors for the North County Education Assistance Program, has served as a liaison with the City regarding the proposed expansion; that the Program has received a grant through a United Way Grant application and is funded by the Sarasota County Grants and Aid program, Selby Foundation, and other community benefactors; that under the volunteer directorship of Mrs. Sheffield, the program was originated in 1989 by a group of concerned citizens and parents who felt the educational needs of students in the targeted areas, north county and Newtown, were not properly being addressed; that the Program began at the Resource Center/Police Sub-station with two volunteers, 35 students, a pack of notebook paper, and a box of pencils; that currently the Program has a paid staff of 14 part time teachers, reading and math specialists, as well as two consultants who provide technical assistance when needed; that 300 students are serviced at three different sites: the Resource Center, the Community Center in New Town Estates, and at Gillespie Park; that a fourth site will be offered in conjunction with the completion of the Newtown Boys & Girls Club facility; that although satellite programs have been established, the Resource Center remains the operational and administrative headquarters and serves 90 to 100 students per day in one room; that concentrating on and learning a computer software program is difficult for a high-school student when a six-year-old is in the same room learning to read verbally. Mr. Franklin continued that the Resource Center is not used only by the North County Educational Assistance Program but is one of the most utilized facilities in the community; that groups which currently share use of the building include the following: Drug Free Communities Boy Scouts of America Troop. 888 > The Literacy Council > Sarasota County Health Department > The Million Man March Group The Progressive Community Alliance City of Sarasota Police Department Mrs. Sheffield stated that the Program has continuously been operated under over-crowded conditions; that her time has been volunteered over the past seven years to provide a beneficial progràm to students in the community; that assistance by the City of Sarasota in her endeavor is requested by permitting the expansion of the Resource Center. Mr. Grimes stated that he is actively involved in the Newtown community; that the proposed project will enhance the redevelopment efforts which the City is attempting to achieve. Commissioner Dupree stated that the North County Educational Assistance Program is definitely one of the most beneficial programs in Sarasota Countyi that the Program has grown rapidly, every year for the past six years; that students participating in the Program have shown significant increased performance in the classroom; that 100% of the students graduating from the Program have gone on to college or further academic studies. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the conceptual plan for expansion of the Resource Center on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way, pending site plan submittal and identified funding sources, and to refer the item to the Administration for review and appropriate action. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 17. CITIZENS I INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS = ADMINISTRATION TO REPORT BACK REGARDING POLICE RESPONSE TIMES IN THE ARLINGTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD (AGENDA ITEM VI) #3 (2062) through #4 (0169) The following people came before the Commission: Jack and Nancy Gadsby. 2115 Temple Street (34239). representing the Arlington Park Neighborhood Association (APNA). Mr. Gadsby distributed copies to the Commission and read a lengthy prepared speech which referenced his appointment as Crime Watch Coordinator for the APNA, his presidency of the APNA, his representation of over 1,000 residential addresses, and the following: A lack of equitable support for neighborhoods apparent by the Commission vote taken on September 30, 1996, in favor of closing School Avenue between the hours of 7 a.m. and 3 p.m. during school days, which will increase traffic in the surrounding neighborhoods east of Tamiami Trail, although substantial tax dollars were expended to sue Walgreens and appeal the court's first decision because of the perceived increase in traffic in the neighborhood west of Tamiami Trail. Substandard recycle collection service received from Browning Ferris Industries of Florida (BFI). The following ten Police response complaints received he has received as a crime watch coordinator: Book 40 Page 13714 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13715 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. in excess of 30 minutes to respond to an alleged abduction on Shade Avenue in excess of 30 minutes to respond to three drive-by firearm discharges in the vicinities of East Avenue and Hillview Street, two of which occurred from the same vehicle while waiting for the police respond in excess of 45 minutes to respond to a, loud music report at 2039 Hillview Street lack of any response to reports of stolen Kash N' Karry grocery carts little or no response regarding delinquent activities by Sarasota High School students, which is serious enough that the Midtown Plaza management hired a security guard in an attempt to control and address the many shoplifting and auto break-in reports filed inadequate response and lack of communications regarding a bomb threat at a Midtown hotel. lack of traffic enforcement in the Arlington Park neighborhood close to two years to respond to a report of huge and very obvious drug dealing activities. - at 2039- 2059 Hillview Street no response to marijuana activities occurring in the 2100 block of Arlington Street suspected drug activity, a theft ring, illegal aliens, and numerous code violations at 2040 and 2050 Hillview Street upgrading the crime watch police officers' job to that of corporal or sergeant to elevate the level of respect for the neighborhood crime watch efforts. rapport established with the resident manager at the apartment complex on the north side of Hillview Street who has offered his apartment, telephone, coffee, donuts and danish on Friday and Saturday evenings from 9 p.m. to 3 a.m. for use as a neighborhood substation until the City establishes something more permanent. Mr. Gadsby stated that Kash N' Karry has stopped reporting shoplifters as personnel are required to retain shoplifters in custody until the police arrivé, and the police take too long to respond; that as a citizen he expects problems reported to the police will be resolved in an efficient and expedient manner; that he intends to continue frequenting Commission meetings until the problems identified in neighborhood east of Tamiami Trail have been sufficiently addressed. Mayor Cardamone asked if the Administration has plans to work with Mr. Gadsby regarding the issues raised? City Manager Sollenberger stated yes. Mr. Gadsby stated that meetings have been scheduled with Al Hogle, Captain, Sarasota Police Department, and also with a captain in the Sheriff's Office to discuss issues related to the emergency services communications center. Commissioner Merrill stated that consideration should be given to upgrading the rank of the crime watch police officer to achieve a higher priority of devoted resources; that Mr. Gadsby continuously attempts to inform neighbors and governmental agencies and to make Arlington Park a safer and better neighborhood; that at Mr. Gadsby's request, he contacted and informed the property owner of suspicious activity occurring at a rental house near Mr. Gadsby's residence; that the apartment complexes on South Tamiami Trail have been a recurring problem. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that crime prevention is important and desirable; however, the Commission should not direct the promotion or demotion of personnel. Commissioner Merrill stated that higher-ranking personnel rèceive more resourcesi that the idea presented regarding the crime watch officer was interesting and should be considered; that the Administration is not being directed to promote personnel. Mayor Cardamone stated that reference to substandard recycling collection concerns her; that the apartment complexes on Hillview Street have deteriorated over the years; that a call was received from a parent of a young woman residing in the complex who was concerned about the health, welfare, and safety of her daughter who has no option for alternative housing; that assigning the Sarasota Area Burglary Robbery Enforcement (SABRE) unit to this or other areas south of downtown should be considered by the Administration; that the Nuisance Abatement Board has been established to deal with nuisance properties after three predicate crimes have occurred; that problems with police communications are occurring; that the personnel are not aware that John Lewis is the Sarasota City Chief of Police or that Mollie Cardamone is the Mayor; that the slowness in response time, which was feared when consolidation of City Book 40 Page 13716 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13717 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. police communications with the Sheriff's Office was considered, is occurring; that the Administration should report back to the Commission regarding the issues raised by Mr. Gadsby. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Administration's response to the specific instances reterenced regarding police response in excess of 30 minutes is of particular concern to her; that similar yet isolated reports regarding police response time have been received from residents in other neighborhoods. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the dispatchers are under the jurisdiction of the Sarasota County Sheriff and not the Sarasota City Chief of Police; that he voted in opposition of the Emergency Services Communication consolidation; that police officers have referenced difficulties experienced with the dispatchers; however, for every delay in response time referenced by Mr. Gadsby, hundreds of excellent examples of service by City of Sarasota police officers can be provided. Vice Mayor Pillot continued that as a matter of clarification, the City did not sue Walgreens; that the developers of the property at Bahia Vista Street and U.S. 41 sued the City; that the Commission voted 4 to 1, with his dissenting, to appeal to. a higher court after the City lost at the circuit court level; that Mr. Gadsby is one of the most productive citizens in the City of Sarasota; however, Mr. Gadsby's statements would be more effective absent veiled accusations, innuendos, and sarcasm. Commissioner Patterson left the Commission Chambers at 10:35 p.m. Commissioner Merrill stated that Vice Mayor Pillot has been a strong advocator of hiring more police officers; that he has argued the level. of crime is largely independent of police staffing because crime moves around unless saturation policing is reached; however; as high crime areas of the City are targeted, crime is moved to neighborhoods which once were not high crime areas; that the Chief of Police indicates staffing has an effect on response time, which is the issue raised by Mr. Gadsby; that the time may be near that the Commission will have to consider raising taxes and budgeting for additional police officers; however, people in the middle-income neighborhoods will need assurance that additional police will not all be targeted to the areas that routinely have a higher level of crime; that a recent article in Newsweek magazine referenced successful efforts by the mayor of New York City to reduce crime rates by targeting minor infractions of the law; that enforcing minor violations such as stolen grocery carts will send the message that crime at any level will not be tolerated in the City of Sarasota. Commissioner Patterson returned to the Commission Chambers at 10:37 p.m. Commissioner Merrill continued that he is willing to look at the issue of crime; however, hiring additional police officers to target crime in high crime areas without responding with more police in District #3 neighborhoods will invariably increase crime rates in District #3; that redeployment of police by transferring police officers assigned to existing high crime areas or hiring additional police officers should be considered to address the problems with crime occurring in District #3. Kafi Benz, 13084 Airgate (34243) and Sam Schackow. 2355 McClellan Parkway (34239), representing the Coalition of City Neighborhoods Association (CCNA) Community Preservation Committee. Ms. Benz stated that she is making a presentation on behalf of Linda Holland, Chairman, CCNA, who was unable to attend this meeting; that she, from Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores, Mr. Schackow, from McClellan Park, Ms. Holland from Gillespie Park, and Thorning Little from Laurel Park are the neighborhood association representatives who comprise the newly formed CCNA Community Preservation Committee. Ms. Benz stated that 18 neighborhood associations actively participate in the CCNA, which represents more than 9,000 households, comprising almost 40- of the adult City population; and read a prepared speech outlining the objectives of the CCNA Community Preservation Committee to develop a plan to preserve the City and City neighborhoods, provide a positive focus on the issues regarding long-term finances of the City, and to launch a long-term project called the Decade of the Neighborhood. Ms. Benz requested that the Commission delay initiating the study of the City of Sarasota long-range finances and options for providing government services, which could cost thousands of tax dollars, until the voluntary Community Preservation Committee addresses the issues, prepares a progress report, and returns to the Commission on December 16, 1996, with a proposed schedule for workshops together at which the information gathered can be analyzed and discussed. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that given the significance of the study and the purpose of the study, two months is a minimal time delay; and suggested that New Business, Item VIII-1, regarding discussion of the study referenced be moved forward on the agenda and addressed at this time. Mayor Cardamone asked for the wishes of the Commission. Commissioner Merrill voiced support for Vice Mayor Pillot's suggestion. Commissioner Patterson stated that speakers have been patiently waiting to speak under the Unfinished Business item regarding the Book 40 Page 13718 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13719 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Ringling Bridge; therefore, she does not support moving New Business, Item No. VIII-1, forward on the agenda. Commissioner Dupree agreed. Mayor Cardamone stated that her ongoing preference is to follow the agenda as published. 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 96R-936, ADOPTING FORMAL RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CITY COMMISSION MEETINGS; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #4 (0161) through (0904) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Sarasota City Charter Review Committee identified a need and proposed formal rules of procedure for City Commission meetings; that the Committee presented the rules of procedure at a joint workshop with the Commission on May 30, 1996; that proposed Resolution No. 96R-936 adopts the rules of procedure as revised by the City Commission. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that following are the highlights of the proposed rules of procedure: A two-thirds vote of the Commission members present shall be required to add non-agendaed items to the agenda. A majority vote of the Commission members present shall be required to take action on items added under Changes to the Orders of the Day. A two-thirds vote of the Commission members present shall be required to take action on items under Scheduled Presentations on the agenda. The presiding officer, in order to make a motion, shall pass the gavel to his/her immediate right and need not do so to second or debate a motion. There shall be no limit to the number of times a Commissioner may speak to a question. The presiding officer shall request a recommendation from the Administration prior to calling for a vote on a motion. Commission action in response to issues raised during Citizens' Input Concerning City Topics shall be limited to referral to the Administration or placement of an item on a future agenda. A two-thirds vote of the Commission members present shall be required to take any other action. No public input shall be permitted under the following agenda categories: 1) Board Actions, 2) Consent Agendas unless an item is removed by a Commissioner for discussion, 3) Scheduled Presentations, 4) Board Appointments, 5) Remarks of Commissioners, Announcements and Items for Next Agenda, and 6) Other Matters/Administrative Officers. The street name only and not the street numbers of the addresses of persons signed up to speak shall be announced. Public input shall be limited to 5 minutes per person unless nine or more people have signed up to speak on an item, in which case public input shall be limited to 3 minutes. The petitioner at a non quasi-judicial public hearing shall have 10 minutes to make a presentation prior to the opening of the public hearing and shall be afforded 3 minutes for rebuttal after the public hearing is closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a modification is suggested in Rule XII, Adoption, Alteration or Suspension of These Rules; that the rule previously read as follows: These rules of procedure shall be adopted by a majority vote of the entire commission. A two-thirds (2/3) vote of the commission members present is required to amend, waive, or suspend any of these rules of procedure. A two- thirds (2/3) vote of the entire commission is required to rescind any of these rules of procedure. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the recommended Rule XII is as follows: These rules of procedure shall be adopted, amended or rescinded by a majority vote of the entire commission with previous notice or by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the entire commission without previous notice. A two-thirds (2/3) vote of the commission members present is required to suspend any of these rules of procedure Commissioner Patterson stated that Lou Ann Palmer, Chairman, Charter Review Committee, brought to her attention the fact that the language pertaining to the Annual Neighborhood and Goal Setting Meetings does not mention the business community. Commissioner Patterson continued that the rule limiting public input will not work as intended; that the rule includes a limitation of 3 minutes per speaker if more than nine more people Book 40 Page 13720 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13721 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. are signed up to speak; that issues of heightened public concern draw large numbers of people who will be upset by the shortened time limit; that additional speakers may sign up while the public is speaking to an item; that under the rule, the first nine speakers would be allowed 5 minutes; however, additional speakers signing up after speaking has begun would be restricted to 3 minutes. Commissioner Patterson further stated that the Sarasota City Commission allows public input concerning items on which other governmental bodies do not provide the public an opportunity to speak; that a 3-minutes limitation could be imposed on those items while retaining the 5-minute limitation on other items; that members of the public addressing issues of intense public concern should be allowed 5 minutes rather than 3, regardless of the number of people signed up; that the proposed rules of procedure will be difficult to support if the 3-minute limitation is approved. Commissioner Merrill stated that he supports allowing speakers 5 minutes to address issues of community concern. Mayor Cardamone and Commissioner Dupree concurred. Commissioner Patterson stated that the time allotted for a petitioner to present a proposal has been reduced from 15 to 10 minutes and the time for rebuttal from 5 to 3 minutes; that 3 minutes is not sufficient time for rebuttal as a multiplicity of opposing positions may require rebuttal; that petitioners should be allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Charter Review Committee recommended a 3-minute limit for speakers and accordingly reduced the petitioner's presentation time from 15 to 10 minutes for consistency. Mayor Cardamone stated there is a consensus of the Commission to allow the petitioner 5 minutes for rebuttal. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the word "waive" should be included in conjunction with the word "suspend" in the last sentence of the paragraph addressing adoption of the rules of procedure? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone stated there is a consensus to adopt the suggested modification to the rules of procedure and allow speakers 5 minutes for public input. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that petitioners should be allowed 15 minutes to present a proposal. Mayor Cardamone stated that there is a consensus of the Commission to allow 15 minutes for petitioners' presentations and 5 minutes for rebuttal. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission Chambers at 11:02 p.m. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that reference to the annual neighborhood and goal-setting workshops should be deleted from the rules of procedure; that the Commission should invite input from the total community prior to setting goals for the City. Commissioner Merrill returned to the Commission Chambers at 11:03 p.m. Mayor Cardamone stated that the business community regularly presents their views at Commission meetings. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the responsibility of receiving community input should be entrusted to the discretion of the Commission; that flexibility is sacrificed when a statutory matter is placed in a constitutional document; that no interested individuals or community organizations will be omitted from the neighborhood and goal-setting workshops if the meetings are left to the representational responsibility of the Commission rather than insertion in a document. Mayor Cardamone stated that removing the reference to the annual neighborhood and goal setting workshops from the rules of procedures is opposed; that additional language referencing the business community is unnecessary as the views of the business community are regularly presented to the Commission. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that his intent is to delete the entire rule; that the representative responsibility of the Commission will assure input from the entire community is received prior to setting the City's goals. Commissioner Merrill stated that deleting the reference to the annual neighborhood and goal-setting workshops is supported; that governments operate in cycles; that the previous Commission concentrated on business and Downtown redevelopment while the current Commission focuses on neighborhood concerns; however, business development may be the primary focus during the next cycle; that the Commission should not send a negative message inferring that the concerns of the business community are irrelevant; that the rule should include reference to the entire community or indicate a separate meeting will be held with the business community. Book 40 Page 13722 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13723 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that changing the word "neighborhood" to "community" has been suggested by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that deleting the entire reference is preferable; however, changing the word "neighborhood" to "community" is acceptable; that goal-setting workshops are a recent concept based on the Commission's political responsibilities and not a rule of procedure. Mayor Cardamone stated that there is a consensus of the Commission to change the name of the meeting from "neighborhood" workshop to "community" workshop. Commissioner Patterson stated that Rule VII, Order of Business, prohibits the Commission from moving an agenda item to an earlier point in a meeting. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Commission could suspend the rules by a two-thirds vote. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the recommendation of the City Auditor and Clerk. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that adopting proposed Resolution No. 96R-936 as modified is recommended. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 96R-936 modified as follows: 1) the rules of procedures shall be adopted, amended, or rescinded by a majority vote of the entire Commission with previous notice or by two-thirds vote of the entire Commission without previous notice, and a two-thirds vote of the Commission members present is required to waive or suspend any of these rules of procedure, 2) membèrs of the public will be allowed 5 minutes to speak, 3) petitioners during non quasi-judicial public hearings will be allowed 15 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for rebuttal, and 4) the language referencing the annual workshop preceding the Goal-Setting workshop will be changed from Annual Neighborhood workshop to Annual Community workshop,. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 96R-936 by title only. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the rules of procedure will be formalized and inserted into the Commission books for regular and special meetings. 19. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 96R-935, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A REVISED JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA PERTAINING TO THE JOHN RINGLING CAUSEWAY BRIDGE AESTHETIC DESIGN: ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #4 (0905) through (3688) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the Commission approved the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) at the August 19, 1996, regular City Commission meeting, with certain conditions to be clarified; that the conditions requested by the Commission have been included in the JPA; that the following, additional language was inserted by FDOT: 1) the construction costs have been specified at $29,293,000, 2) the cost estimate will be prepared by Figg Engineering, Inc., (FEG), 3) the goal of the project is an aesthetic design concept for a 65-foot, high-level bridge, and 4) the JPA must be executed by the City and FDOT before the Notice to Proceed is issued to FEG. Mr. Daughters continued that the scope of work makes clear the Commission's decision-making authority over the aesthetic design concept. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the referenced amendments by FDOT are the only changes from the document approved by the Commission at the August 19, 1996, regular City Commission meeting? Mr. Daughters stated yes. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if all clarifications requested by the Commission are included and if the primary additional language inserted by FDOT is the reference to a high-level, 65-foot bridge? Mr. Daughters stated yes to both questions; that the JPA has been clarified to assure execution by FDOT and the City prior to the City's issuing the Notice to Proceed to FEG; that the condition is beneficial for the City as FDOT is responsible for reimbursing FEG. Mayor Cardamone asked when the first design charette will be held? Mr. Daughters stated that the first design charette is scheduled for the week of December 9, 1996; that the second design charette is scheduled for the week of February 10, 1996; that FDOT has attached the new schedule to the JPA to facilitate coordination of activities. Book 40 Page 13724 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13725 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. The following people came before the Commission: Richard Storm, 707 South Gulf Stream Avenue (34236), thanked the Commission for bringing the charette process to the City; and stated that a successful charette requires examination of all possibilities; that the Commission originally recommended a low, bascule-style bridge and displayed enormous leadership by opposing FDOT pressure for a high-level design; that FDOT, by limiting the bridge to a 65-foot height, has again obstructed the City's efforts to determine the structural style of the bridge. Mr. Storm continued that the Commission is urged to reject the JPA if a low-profile, bascule bridge is excluded from discussion at the charettes; that the no-build, repair option should remain viable; that the real problem is providing residents of the keys an escape route to the bridge; that Tropical Storm Josephine revealed that flooding and damage on the islands from a heavy storm will not allow residents of Longboat and St. Armands Keys to reach the bridge; that the Commission is asked to allow consideration of all possibilities at the charette. Mark Smith, 5562 Cape Aqua Drive (34242) representing the Gulf Coast Chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), stated that FDOT's requirement of a 65-foot, high-level bridge obstructs discussion of the structure's aesthetic and environmental impact on the community; that the charette in Ft. Lauderdale, organized in opposition to FDOT's proposal for an 85-foot, high-level bridge, produced a design for a 55-foot, low-level bascule bridge; that the bridge designer's hands should not be tied by limiting the size and height of the structure; that David O'Hagan, Professional Engineer (P.E.), Principal, Jon Mueller International (JMI), who was involved in earlier designs for the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge, stated that the budget should be the only condition placed on the City; that the Commission is asked to ensure the designers have as many options as possible. Marcelle Wolf, 445 McKinley Drive (34236), representing the Lido Key Residents Association, stated that the charette concept was produced in the late 1800s when the Beaux Arts designers, architects, and artists in France met to create a plan to effect a partnership between the design community and public community; that the City, after enduring innumerable meetings and discussion, cannot stop after all the progress which has been made; that the charette will provide the opportunity for the community to achieve peace; that the City should decide now to proceed with the charette; that FDOT may not build a bridge if the City dawdles any more. Donald Blivas, 143 Beach Road (34242), President, Foundation for Excellence in Architecture (The Foundation), stated that the Foundation, a non-profit organization with no hidden agenda, is sponsoring and co-hosting the charette with FEG; that the Foundation aspires to help produce the finest bridge for Sarasota; that a charette generating a multitude of ideas and possibilities will produce an excellent aesthetic design concept; that no positive results can be foreseen if the City opposes FDOT's condition of a 65-foot, high-level bridge; that the Commission risks losing funding for the charette by opposing FDOT's firm position on the height of the bridge. Mayor Cardamone asked if a charette should be open to all possibilities? Mr. Blivas stated yes; however, the City risks losing authority over the aesthetic design concept by asking FDOT to subsidize a charette which may produce a aesthetic design concept the State will not construct. Commissioner Patterson stated that time will be wasted if the charette produces a design FDOT has no intention of building; that the charette process has been supported, particularly after FEG, the designer of many notable bridges, was introduced; that although FEG was involved in designing the Sunshine Skyway Bridge, the actual aesthetic design concept was produced by Jon Mueller of JMI; that a newspaper article indicated that several of JMI's designs were withheld from the Ringling Causeway Bridge Aesthetic Task Team; that Jon Mueller and Gene Figg dissolved their partnership in a way which may not be conducive to teamwork; that suggestions and ideas by JMI, employed by FDOT as subconsultants on this bridge project, should be considered and accepted by FEG; that the charette may be divisive rather than constructive, not because of the citizenry, but because of professional tensions between the two professional designers. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to suspend the rules to finish the agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mr. Blivas stated that although the subject has never. been broached, Mr. Figg and Mr. Mueller, whose firm dissolved in 1988, cannot be expected to work together; that existing sketches designed by JMI for the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge should be included in the charette process Commissioner Patterson asked if JMI's designs will be presented at the charette? Mr. Blivas stated yes; that the Foundation will ensure that Mr. Mueller's designs and the two designs produced early in the process by the AIA are presented to charette participants. Book 40 Page 13726 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13727 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that JMI and FEG are both renown for constructing segmental box structural bridges; and asked if JMI will lead the engineering team supervising the construction? Mr. Daughters stated yes; however, he respectrully disagrees with Mr. Blivas; that the City's selection committee, who knew the two men had dissolved a partnership, specifically asked Gene Figg if he would be able to work with JMI; that Mr. Figg assured the selection committee that he can work with JMI; that the selection committee would not have selected FEG if any such problem existed. Commissioner Patterson asked if JMI and Mr. Figg will be able to work together to develop an aesthetic design concept? Mr. Daughters stated yes; that Mr. Mueller spends a great deal of time outside the country and may not become personally involved; however, Mr. O'Hagan, a principal of JMI, has been requested by FDOT to participate in the charette; that the City will have the best of both worlds with both FEG and JMI involved on the project. Commissioner Merrill asked if Jon Mueller, himself, will be involved in the project? Mr. Daughters stated no; that FDOT specifically directed Mr. O'Hagan to participate in the charette process. Commissioner Merrill stated that certain sources have inferred that Mr. Mueller is the only individual capable of creating a great bridge; and asked if FEG is capable of producing comparable results? Mr. Blivas stated yes; that FEG, located in Florida, is renown for conducting the charette process; that the Foundation's goal was to find the best bridge designer who could also conduct excellent charettes; that Daytona Beach and Ft. Lauderdale both recommended FEG; that FEG has conducted charettes and constructed dozens of award-winning bridges throughout the United States; that FDOT recently requested FEG to present a statewide seminar addressing the charette process. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the Commission has received assurance that JMI's designs will be presented at the charette and that the two firms will cooperate; that the Commission will make the final decision on the bridge theme, structural shapes, architectural features, landscaping, lighting and other matters to be resolved at the conclusion of the first design charette as long as the basic structure is a 65-foot, high-level bridge; that FDOT's structural restriction is undesirable; however, a point in the process has been reached at which any further opposition by the City may produce negative results; and asked the possible consequences if the Commission rejects the JPA? Mr. Daughters stated that the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and FDOT approved the 65-foot, high-level bridge requirement three years ago; that the JPA locks the City into producing a design for a 65-foot, high-level bridge; that a Commission request to strike the condition at this time may be granted by FDOT; however, FDOT could also retract the decision to fund the charette and proceed to construct the standard FDOT bridge. Vice Mayor Pillot asked how FDOT may react to a Commission request to delete the condition for a 65-foot, high-level bridge? Mr. Daughters stated that FDOT would most likely withdraw reimbursement for the charette and construct the standard FDOT bridge. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the JPA is before the Commission tonight only due to FDOT's insertion of the condition specifying a 65-foot, high-level bridge; that Longboat Key residents arrived by the busload at the MPO public hearing on the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge; that a majority of the Sarasota community, including those from Lido Key, supported the Longboat Key residents; that he has accepted the inevitability of a high-level bridge; that the matter will be prolonged and the charette jeopardized if the City attempts to delete the condition. Commissioner Merrill stated that administrative and engineering costs are no longer included in the $29.4 million estimate; that the previous FDOT funding of the construction costs was $25 million; that the budget has apparently been increased by $4 million. Commissioner Merrill continued that the final, total cost of the bridge will be over $33 million; that the quainter style of a low-level bridge was originally preferred; however, the MPO has final decision-making power; that sufficient votes on the MPO to approve a low-level bridge do not exist; that the community has accepted the high-level bridge. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the JPA does not prohibit discussion of low-level bridges; however, the City must spend $182,000 to fund the charette if the Commission chooses a low-level bridge design which may never be built; that FDOT placed the condition in the JPA as a matter of prudence and the City would be wise to accept the condition; that the Foundation has ensured the City will receive a truly original signature bridge by bringing together FEG and JMI. Mayor Cardamone asked the purpose of a charette if the segmental box structure has been predetermined? Book 40 Page 13728 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13729 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that a segmental box structure offers many design possibilities; that the Sunshine Skyway and the Daytona Beach Bridges, which are dissimilar in design, are both segmental box structures. Mayor Cardamone stated that exploring all possibilities is the purpose of a charette; that FDOT now insists the structure must be a 65-foot, high-level bridge; that a resident of Bradenton Beach related that flooding on Anna Maria Island during Tropical Storm Josephine made evacuation impossible; that building an expensive bridge will not solve the flooding problems during severe storms; and asked if public outrage should be expected regarding a $30 million price tag for a bridge which cannot be used for evacuation? Commissioner Merrill stated that a low bridge would not solve the evacuation problem either. Mayor Cardamone stated that a $1.9 million repair would allow the existing bridge to function for an additional 20 years; that the City should be able to construct a bridge which functions properly as an evacuation route; that the bridge should have a span long enough so the height does not obstruct the landscape; and asked the height of the roadbed on a 65-foot high, segmental box structure bridge? Mr. Daughters stated that the roadbed would be close to 75 feet. Mayor Cardamone asked where a segmental box structure bridge will land on Bird Key? Mr. Daughters stated that the landing point will not differ from a post and beam or other styles of bridges; that a few feet differential in the depth of the structure will not change the landing point. Mayor Cardamone stated that Longboat Key residents may rightly resent FDOT for spending $30 million on a bridge which does not solve the evacuation problem. Mr. Daughters stated that a proposal to build a second bridge providing an evacuation route from Longboat Key received no support at the MPO; that solving the drainage problems at St. Armands Key and the congestion problem at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Gulf Stream Avenue would do more to alleviate evacuation difficulties. Mayor Cardamone stated that a 45-foot, bascule bridge designed by FEG was recently featured in an article in Smithsonian magazine; that the 45-foot bridge is less expensive than traditional bascule bridges, features an opening for larger boats, and allows most craft to travel underneath without disrupting the traffic flow on the bridge; that FDOT's addition of a clause restricting the City's choice to a 65-foot, high-level bridge immediately following publication of the article appears highly coincidental. Commissioner Dupree stated that the Commission agreed to consider every possibility during the charette process; and asked if evacuation is to be eliminated as a consideration? Commissioner Patterson stated that solving the evacuation problem would cost an additional $30 million; that Commissioner Merrill and she advocated the City's position for a low bridge at the MPO public hearing three years ago; that the entire Longboat Key Commission was present and supported by many island residents, all of whom advocated construction of a high-level bridge; that the MPO mistreated an AIA member who courageously represented the City's position in favor of a low-level bridge; that only seven or eight City residents, including residents of Bird Key whose homes overlook an elevated portion of the proposed bridge, advocated the low-level bridge while 20 to 30 people promoted the high-level structure; that the remainder of the City Commission was not present; that the MPO, which voted 11 to 4 against the City three years ago, will never produce a majority vote for a low-level bridge. Commissioner Patterson continued that the John Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge issue is three years old; that repairing the existing bridge would be less expensive; however, the battle has been lost; that Longboat Key residents and City residents, who regularly commute to the islands and dislike the inconvenience of waiting for the existing bridge to allow through boat travel, swayed the MPO vote; that evacuation was never a relevant issue. Mayor Cardamone stated that the MPO's lack of support for and the vote overturning the City's unanimous position was an unexpected shock; that FDOT is constantly changing the rules by adding conditions with each new presentation to the Commission; that the State is spending an unconscionable amount of money to build a bridge which does not address the problem of evacuation from the keys. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that spending $1.9 million to upgrade the present bridge would be more prudent; however, the Administration has reported that FDOT will not delete the reference to a 65-foot, high-level bridge and will instead proceed to build whatever bridge they choose. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of the current version of the Joint Project Agreement with FDOT by adopting proposed Resolution No. 96R-935. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Resolution No. 96R-935 by title only. Book 40 Page 13730 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13731 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 96R-935 with the assurance of the Foundation for Excellence in Architecture that the bridge designs created by Jon Mueller International and the American Institute of Architects will be presented to the charette. Mayor Cardamone requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, no. Commissioner Patterson asked if Joan Altabe, Columnist for the Sarasota Herald-Tribune and who is present in the audience, could present to the Commission the JMI designs discussed in a recent column? Joan Altabe, Columnist, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, stated that the designs can be obtained from JMI; that FDOT does not have a copy of the bridge design report, a large volume written in August 1995 containing extensive studies conducted by Jon Mueller; that the report was received from Kunde, Sprecher and Associates (KSA), who conducted the study in conjunction with JMI. Mr. Daughters stated that the documents in the newspaper's possession are typical, cross-section sketches of various structural styles and not aesthetic design concepts; that the Administration received the bridge design report containing the sketches on October 8, 1996, and is preparing a memorandum for the Commission describing the report; that three construction-type alternates are presented: 1) a beam and girder structure, 2) a steel structure, and 3) a segmental box structure; that the sketches were never intended as aesthetic design concepts but simply as silhouettes of bridges from a distance. Ms. Altabe stated that the bridge design report contains more than mechanical drawings; that an architectural consultant indicated the 270-foot center span illustrated in the JMI drawings is far more evolved than is suggested by the Administration; that a segmental box structure bridge can have a wider span and be more graceful than a post and beam structure; that Mr. Mueller informed her personally that he participated in creating the drawings and would be glad to complete the work if the Commission would permit. Mr. Daughters stated that cross-section and longitudinal-section views are indicated in the bridge design report and illustrated as examples of typical spans, varying from 250 to 270 feet; that the sketches do not present aesthetic design concepts. 20. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE SOUTHSIDE VILLAGE STREETSCAPE PROJECT = REPORT MADE (AGENDA ITEM NO. VII-3) #4 (3695) through #5 (0198) Mayor Cardamone stated that the Southside Village Streetscape Project is making attractive progress; however, temporary lighting has not yet been installed; and asked if the project work is proceeding on schedule? Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the contractual date for completion of the Southside Village Streetscape Project is mid-January; that Ajax Paving Industries, Inc., the contractor, has estimated the entire project will be completed in December, ahead of schedule; that the Osprey Avenue sidewalk work will begin next week; that the light installation company has promised to install the temporary lights on Hillview Street this week. Mr. Daughters continued that Sarasota Memorial Hospital has hired a contractor to add storm sewers at the intersection of Laurent Place and Hillview Drive; that parking difficulties caused by the hospital's contractor have been corrected; that storm drain pipe is being stored on Laurent Place which will. be blocked off for 10 days due to construction on the street; that Hillview Drive will remain open; that the City continues to hold meetings with neighborhood businesses; that the project is going well and is on schedule. Mayor Cardamone stated that the report is good news. 21. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: STUDY OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA LONG-RANGE FINANCES AND OPTIONS FOR PROVIDING GOVERNMENT SERVICES = ACCEPTED THE CITY MANAGER'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR STUDY (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #5 (0199) through (1218) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to accept the City Manager's memorandum included in the agenda material regarding a Preliminary Plan for Study of the City's Long-Term Financial Capacity to Sustain Itself, with the addition of a Citizen Task Force in Phase I. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Commission has debated various problems in the City; that each Commissioner can show a different set of statistics from which disparate conclusions can be drawn; that a long-term, objective study, presenting all viewpoints, is required; that the City Manager's memorandum suggests a citizens' committee should be appointed in Phase II of the Preliminary Plan; however, the public may wish to participate from the beginning of the study to provide information which may be overlooked. by the Administration. Commissioner Merrill continued that the newly-formed Community Preservation Committee of the Coalition of City Neighborhood Association (CCNA) has requested the opportunity to present an independent study; that the CCNA represents 40% of the adult city Book 40 Page 13732 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13733 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. population, has demonstrated a willingness to gather and analyze information which argues effectively for the city, and should be included in Phase I of the long-term, objective study; that the League of Women Voters have also indicated a desire to be involved in the citizens' committee. Commissioner Merrill further stated that a task force may determine the City's problems can be solved by revitalizing neighborhoods, hiring more Police Officers, spending more money on code enforcement, etc.; that an academic entity retained to provide objective analysis may determine the City must have access to the wealth created outside City limits to maintain the City's role as a business and community center; that appointing representatives of various City groups to serve on a task force will ensure an long- term, objective study incorporating all viewpoints; that a task force, similar to the one appointed for the fire consolidation, should be created. Commissioner Patterson stated that a task force similar to the one assembled for the fire consolidation is not desirable; that the fire consolidation task force, which included County and City residents, was appointed after the Commission had set consolidation as a goal. Commissioner Patterson continued that the League of Women Voters includes non-City residents; that the decision to proceed with a long-term, objective study and formation of a task force providing additional information is appropriate; however, including County residents on the task force is not; that a task force, similar to the Charter Review Committee, and not limited to the CCNA, should be formed; that each Commissioner would choose a limited number of people from the community to sit as a group and examine issues such as annexation and selling the City's sewer capacity. Commissioner Merrill stated that he agrees. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the Administration has presented an excellent proposal for a long-term, objective study; however, a two-month delay is insignificant; that the CCNA should be allowed to present their independent study in December as requested. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to postpone the Preliminary Plan for Study of the City's Long-Term Financial Capacity to Sustain Itself until the first regular City Commission meeting in January 1997 to provide the CCNA's committee an opportunity to present an independent report to the Commission. Commissioner Patterson stated that decisions, such as sharing the City's sewer capacity, will be presented to the Commission soon; that a two-month delay is significant particularly as the CCNA requests two months just to study the issue, prepare a progress report, and return in December with a proposed schedule of joint workshops with the Commission; that the CCNA is requesting the Administration's preliminary research be delayed two months to enable them to produce a plan for procedures; that she is uncomfortable with the proposal. Commissioner Dupree stated that the CCNA should have representation from every neighborhood within the City. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the CCNA's request to gather information does not conflict with the Administration's plans; that the subject of his memorandum is a Preliminary Plan to prepare a study design requiring at least 90 days to assemble; that university-level urban economists must be contacted and information thoroughly researched; that the CCNA can pursue an independent study without affecting the Administration's actions. Mayor Cardamone stated that the CCNA is volunteering to pursue preliminary research; that the Commission may decide on December 16, 1996, when the CCNA presents the initial report if workshop dates should be scheduled. Commissioner Merrill stated that a legitimate study addressing the actions of nationwide communities, the opinions of academicians, and analysis of Federal policy requires resourcesi that the Administration drafted the memorandum in response to a Commission consensus that the City's long-term financial future requires study. Commissioner Merrill continued that the CCNA's representation of 40% of the City's population leaves 60% unrepresented; that the business community, which provides strength and employment to the City, must be included in the task force; that people who own real estate Downtown should also be contacted for input; that the Commission should appoint City residents to a task force in the manner used for the Charter Review Committee; that any independent citizens' committee which chooses to do so can bring data before the Commission prior to the Administration's presentation without hindering the City Manager's progress on a preliminary plan; that the CCNA can develop their independent study without postponing the Administration's activities. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the motion to postpone is counter-productive by obstructing an avenue of research; that the City Manager should be free to contact academia while the CCNA is pursuing an independent study; that the City Manager's research may uncover a hybrid form of regional government suitable for the City; that the city will not receive the same input by restricting the research to one group. Book 40 Page 13734 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13735 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the Administration should coordinate the data-gathering with any group interested in independent research; that the City can gather the data and allow others to analyze the information; that postponing the Administration's preliminary plan is a mistake; that all interested parties should proceed together. Mayor Cardamone requested the main motion be read. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as to accept the City Manager's memorandum with the addition of a citizens' task force in Phase I. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that with the approval of the seconder, he withdraws the motion to postpone the Administration's preliminary plan; that the 40% of the adult City population represented by the CCNA is approximately four times the percentage of voters who elected him to the Commission; that the merit of the proposal and not the identity of the petitioner determines his vote; that the preliminary plan and inclusion of a citizens' task force in Phase I make sense. Vice Mayor Pillot continued that the City Manager's memorandum was misunderstood; that the preliminary plan does not propose contracting with consultants but rather preparing a plan on the best method to contract with consultants. Commissioner Dupree stated that he agrees to withdraw the motion to postpone; that the Administration's recommendation is acceptable; however, a true coalition of neighborhood residents must ensure that every neighborhood is represented; that the coalition, which will be speaking for every neighborhood within the City, should include residents of Newtown and Bayou Oaks. Mayor Cardamone stated that the CCNA welcomes any neighborhood association organized with dues, bylaws, and a board; however, membership in the CCNA is strictly voluntary; that Jack Gadsby represents 1,000 City residents as President of the Arlington Park Neighborhood Association which sends no representative to the CCNA; that the Bayou Oaks Neighborhood Association has made application to the CCNA and the Newtown Neighborhood Association is an occasional attendee; that neighborhood associations cannot be compelled to join the CCNA; that the City should accept the help which is available; that the 18 neighborhood associations forming the CCNA try to represent the interests of the entire City; that a strong City neighborhood association benefits everyone including those who do not join. Mayor Cardamone continued that the motion to postpone was not understood to prevent the Administration from proceeding on the preliminary plan; that the Administration should initiate the preliminary plan to find a professional academic group to help the City organize a long-range, objective study; that the CCNA can present preliminary data in December along with any other group wishing to contribute information; that she is adamantly opposed to consolidation; however, a financial study will be beneficial for the City. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that pursuing an independent study is an option available to any interested party; that the City Manager intends to form a citizens' committee in Phase II; that the City Manager's proposal should be approved without amending or changing the language. Commissioner Merrill stated that a task force appointed by the Commission during Phase I could ask questions of and contribute input to the Administration; that a task force similar to the Charter Review Committee to which each Commissioner appointed a certain number of people has merit and will ensure all viewpoints are heard. Mayor Cardamone stated she supports a task force in Phase II after the Administration presents cost estimates for the long-range, objective study. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to amend the main motion by deleting the words "with the addition of the Citizens' Task Force in Phase I." Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the City Manager will first provide a preliminary plan outlining components and costs of a long-range, objective study; that the Commission can appoint a task force after receiving the preliminary plan and deciding if a study is warranted. Commissioner Merrill stated that he supports the motion and the amendment. Commissioner Patterson stated that approval of the Administration's preliminary plan is not the first step to the City's dissolution; that the Police Department is concerned with repercussions from possible consolidation with the County; that a long-range, objective study will evaluate the City's financial future and provide a responsible approach to the possibility of consolidation which may occur in the distant future. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the amendment as to delete the following words from the main motion: "with the addition of the Citizens' Task Force in Phase I." Amendment carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Book 40 Page 13736 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13737 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as to accept the City Manager's memorandum regarding the Preliminary Plan for Study of the city's Long-Term Financial Capacity to Sustain Itself. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 22. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD - CONFIRMED APPOINTMENT OF LAURAE GENE MALONE (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #3 (1219) through (1431) Mayor Cardamone stated that Dorothy Jones, who was serving in the seat designated for a tenant residing within the Housing Authority's jurisdiction, has resigned from the Sarasota Housing Authority Board; that appointments to the Board are made by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Commission. Mayor Cardamone stated that she interviewed several tenants of public housing interested in serving on this Board; that the candidates presented excellent reasons for wanting to serve; that Laurae Gene Malone, a native Sarasotan who works at Emma Booker School, has raised two beautifully behaved children, is active in the Janie Poe Tenant Association, and has the time and interest to serve on the Sarasota Housing Authority Board; that Ms. Malone is familiar with procedures of board meetings and understands the importance of the seat. Mayor Cardamone stated that she appoints Laurae Gene Malone to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board and requests Commission confirmation of the appointment. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Laurae Gene Malone to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. Commissioner Dupree stated that Ms. Malone is a long-time acquaintance; that Ms. Malone is the president of her tenants' association and may be unable to continue in that position if appointed to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. Mayor Cardamone asked why Ms. Malone could not continue as president of the tenants' association? Commissioner Dupree stated that conflict of interest is an issue. Mayor Cardamone stated that State statutes do not prohibit an individual from holding both seats. Commissioner Dupree stated that Ms. Malone would accomplish more working directly with the tenants than as a member of the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. City Attorney Taylor stated that a conflict of interest is not apparent; that Ms. Malone can resign one or the other position if a conflict is discovered; that further study is required to determine if a conflict exists. Mayor Cardamone stated that Ms. Malone was the best qualified candidate for the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. Commissioner Dupree stated that Ms. Malone has been strengthening the Janie Poe Tenant Association; that time restraints may inhibit her ability to provide equal service to both organizations. Mayor Cardamone stated that Ms. Malone made an independent decision to apply for the seat on the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Dupree, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 23. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - ADMINISTRATION WILL REPORT TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING SAFETY MEASURES FOR SPEED TABLES (AGENDA ITEM X) #5 (1432) through (1672) COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: : A. stated that signage was not installed at the time the speed tables were constructed on Orange Avenue; that the speed tables cannot be seen at night; that a sign or white line may increase visibility. Mayor Cardamone asked if reflectors could be installed at the base of the speed humps. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that signs, covered with bags, were installed prior to constructing the speed humps on the side streets in the Orange Avenue neighborhood; that the bags were removed after the speed humps were constructed; that striping, which can only be applied after the speed humps are constructed, was delayed due to Tropical Storm Josephine. Mr. Daughters continued that reflectors, called raised pavement markers, will be installed at speed table locations; that appropriate striping for the speed tables has not yet been determined. Commissioner Patterson stated that 15 miles-per-hour signs featuring small triangles are not installed for each speed table. Book 40 Page 13738 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Book 40 Page 13739 10/14/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Daughters stated that signs were not installed at each speed table to avoid excess signage. Commissioner Patterson stated that safety measures are necessary. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the speed tables should be identified; that a report will be returned to the Commission. VICE MAYOR PILLOT: A. stated that a merchant located in the Pineapple and Orange Avenues neighborhood wrote to the City regarding drainage problems; that the timely service and cooperation of Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance and Solid Waste Manager, and two other City employees were praised by the merchant. Mr. Daughters stated that the work to solve the drainage problem will begin within the next few days. MAYOR CARDAMONE: A. stated that she will be absent from the October 21, 1996, regular City Commission meeting. 24. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (1673) There being no further business, Mayor Cardamone adjourned the regular meeting of October 14, 1996, at 1:00 a.m. hulutle :5014 MOLLIE C. CARDAMONE, MAYOR ATTÉST: - 3 L &: a rengon BILLY &. ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK -