BOOK 52 Page 24089 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 2002, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Carolyn J. Mason, Vice Mayor Lou Ann R. Palmer, Commissioners Richard F. Martin, Mary J. Quillin, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Michael A. McNees, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mason The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9( (a) of the City of Sarasota Charter at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE : EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR SEPTEMBER 2002, JEAN BERKEY, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT CD 6:01 through 6:04 Mayor Mason requested that Vice Mayor Palmer, City Manager McNees, Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, and. Jean Berkey, Administrative Assistant, Finance Department, and Employee of the Month for October 2002, join her and the Commission at the Commission table for the presentation. Mr. Mitchell stated that during the presentation of Employee of the Month, the City has the opportunity to honor employees; that Ms. Berkey has worked for the City for 14 years, having begun her career in the City Manager's Office and subsequently transferring to the Finance Department in 1999 as the Administrative Assistant to the Finance Director; that Ms. Berkey has been a breath of fresh air for the entire department; and possesses a great understanding of software programs enabling her to undertake any task, including supporting four managersi; that one of Ms. Berkey's most demanding roles is to assist the Finance Director; that Ms. Berkey's willingness to assist in any task results in a productive and friendly environment in which to work; that Ms. Berkey serves the Finance Department and the City with excellence and pride; that Ms. Berkey was also the April 1996 Employee of the Month during her tenure in the City Manager's Office; that presenting Ms. Berkey the award for Employee of the Month for October 2002 is an honor. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Ms. Berkey serves the City with excellence and pride; read the Employee of the Month plaque in its entirety, presented Ms. Berkey with a City-logo watch, a plaque, and a certificate as the October 2002 Employee of the Month in appreciation of her unique performance with the City of Sarasota; and congratulated her for an outstanding effort. City Manager McNees stated that the Finance Department receives frequent awards for the quality of the work product; that much of the work required to achieve the awards is by people like Ms. Berkey who work in supportive roles and who also deserve much of the credit. Ms. Berkey recognized her husband and her best friend present in the audience; stated that that working with the other City employees, especially the City employees in the Commission Office and the City Manager's Office as well as the family in the Finance Department, is a pleasure; and thanked the City for the recognition. 2. PROCLAMATION RE: : PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 20 THROUGH 26, 2002 AS FLORIDA CITY GOVERNMENT WEEK CD 6:04 through 6:06 Mayor Mason requested that Vice Mayor Palmer join her for the presentation. Vice Mayor Palmer read in its entirety the proclamation of October 20 through 26, 2002, as Florida City Government Week indicating that City government is the government closest to most citizens and the one with the most direct daily impact upon the residents, is administered for and by the citizens, and is dependent upon the public commitment to and understanding of the many governmental responsibilities; that City government officials and employees share the responsibility to educate the public concerning the benefits of public services; that Florida City Government Week is an important time to recognize the significant role played by City government in citizens' lives, and is also an important opportunity to convey to all citizens of the community the ability to assist in shaping and influencing the branch of government Closest to the people; that the Florida League of Cities (FLC) and member cities have joined together to teach students and other citizens about municipal government through a variety of different projects and BOOK 52 Page 24090 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24091 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. information; that citizens of the community can shape and influence government through civic involvement; that all citizens are encouraged to become actively involved and participate in City government for the betterment of the community. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Florida City Government Week is sponsored annually by the FLC to emphasize the importance of citizens' involvement with government; that recently, an individual indicated citizens are not responsible for government; however, citizens are responsible for government which is comprised of the people; that the Commission only represents the people; that encouraging citizen involvement in government during City Government Week helps keep the nation strong; that the challenge is for citizens to volunteer in government or to encourage local student involvement in government activities; that local government is the branch which affects all citizens. Vice Mayor Palmer continued that appreciation is extended to Commissioner Quillin for adding the Proclamation to the Agenda; that buttons and bumper stickers celebrating Florida City Government Week are available in the Commission Office for anyone interested. 3. PRESENTATION RE: : MAYOR' S CITATION RECOGNIZING THE MANAGEMENT AND STAFF OF FIRST WATCH RESTAURANT CD 6:06 through 6:07 Mayor Mason requested that Vice Mayor Palmer join her at the Commission table for the presentation. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the week of October 14, 2002, began the celebration of the City's 100th Year Anniversary Celebration; that representatives from the City's six Sister Cities visited and toured the City and participated in the celebrations; that due to unexpected events, First Watch Restaurant on short notice was requested and enthusiastically accommodated the City by providing an outstanding breakfast to the delegation of the Sister Cities Association during its visit; that the Staff and Management of the First Watch Restaurant quickly and efficiently met the requirements of the Sister Cities Association and assisted in the success of the ceremony and tour; that the actions of First Watch Restaurant is an example of the members of the business community providing assistance to City government; and read in its entirety the Mayor's Citation commending the Staff and Management of the First Watch Restaurant. 4. PROCLAMATION RE: : RECOGNITION OF THE BROWNING FAMILY AND JOHN B. BROWNING, JR. FOURTH GENERATION DESCENDENT OF THE SCOTTISH "ORMISTON" COLONISTS, JOHN B. AND JANE GAULT (KERR) BROWNING, WHO PERMANENTLY SETTLED IN SARASOTA WITH THEIR FAMILY ON DECEMBER 27, 1885 CD 6:08 through 6:17 Mayor Mason requested that Commissioner Quillin join her at the Commission table for the presentation. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City is celebrating it 100th Year Anniversary; that the Celebrate Sarasota Committee wishes to recognize families, businesses, etc., for contributions to the 100 years of success in making the City prosper; and requested that John Browning, Jr., and his wife, Vivian, join her and the Commission at the Commission table for the presentation. Commissioner Quillin continued that on October 14, 2002, the Cities of Sarasota and Dunfermline, Scotland, signed a Sister Cities Agreement, which was an exciting event; that in 1885, a group of Scots came to the City to settle; that in August 1885, John Browning, Sr., who lived in Paisley, Scotland, saw an article concerning the State of Florida in the Edinburgh, Scotland, newspaper; and quoted the newspaper article as follows: e Wonderful new town of Sarasota on Sarasota Bay in the richest and most beautiful section of the entire State of Florida Commissioner Quillin further stated that Mr. Browning, Sr., became interested in the City of Sarasota; and continued quoting the newspaper article as follows: A man does not have to work hard for a living. He can plant an orange grove at little expense and, in a few years, the trees will be bearing and the fruit can be sold at a handsome price. The ground sO fertile and the climate sO warm in Sarasota that two bountiful crops of vegetables can be grown each year. The town is small but very modern. The people can truly live an idyllic existence. Commissioner Quillin stated further that approximately 51 people including John Browning, Sr., and his wife, Jane Gault (Kerr) BOOK 52 Page 24092 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24093 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Browning, joined an expedition sponsored by the Florida Mortgage and Investment Company and paid $100 for 40 acres and a lot in Town; that the expedition landed in Sarasota Bay on December 27, 1885, and found dirt streets, one or two buildings, no houses, and one of the coldest winters in recent memoryi that most of the people left; however, Mr. Browning, Sr., who had owned a lumber company in Scotland and was a master woodworker, and his family stayed; that Mr. Browning, Sr., the great-grandfather of Mr. Browning, Jr., helped build some of first buildings in Sarasota and stayed active in the community doing general contracting until his death in 1913; that the son of John and Jane Browning, Alexander Browning, kept the family history and helped assure the history of the first permanent settlers was maintained; that John Bowie Browning, father of John Browning, Jr., was in the contracting and real estate business and became employed by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune as the first Circulation Manager and subsequently as the Advertising Manager; that in 1939, Mr. John Bowie Browning was employed as a Sales Manager by Radio Station WSPB, which is located on Ken Thompson Park, and subsequently became Manager and Vice President; that Mr. John Bowie Browning had three children, Alexander, John, Jr., and Helen, served on the City Council from 1941 to 1945, was a member of the Sarasota Parks Board, and served in various civic organizations; that John Browning, Jr., served on the Board of Adjustment for seven years and is active in the neighborhood and community; that having Mr. Browning, Jr., and his family remain in the City is a source of pride. Mayor Mason read in its entirety a Plaque recognizing the Browning Family and John Browning, Jr., on the occasion of the City's 100th Year Anniversary Celebration and stated that John Browning, Jr., is a fourth generation descendent of the Scottish Ormiston Colonists, John and Jane Gault Kerr Browning, who permanently settled in Sarasota with their family on December 27, 1885; that the contributions of the Browning family are appreciated. Mr. Browning stated that the recognition of the Browning family is appreciated; that his efforts upon coming back to the City after being away have been directed to engaging in activities to help the City and the City's continued growth. Mayor Mason recognized Rich Craven, Fire Marshall, Penndelboro, Lux County, Pennsylvania, firefighter for 30 years, and brother of Commissioner Servian, present in the audience. 5. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED CD 6:17 through 6:25 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Add under Consent Agenda No. 2, Item No. III B-4, Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 03R-1547, appropriating $1,616 from the Unappropriated Fund balance of the General Fund to provide funding for expenses of a S.0.A.R Working Group to hold a Town Hall meeting entitled Dialogue on Discrimination on October 29, 2002, per the request of Commissioner Martin. City Manager McNees presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: B. Add under Board Actions, Item No. II-2, Report Re: Celebrate Sarasota Committee, per the request of City Manager McNees. C. Add under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-3, Approval Re: Proposed letter by the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association to the Florida Communities Trust naming the City as co-signer for a Grant Award Agreement with the Friends of "Seagate" Inc., per the request of City Manager McNees. City Manager McNees stated that the proposed letter to Florida Communities Trust is requested by the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association in support of a grant application for land acquisition in the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores neighborhood; that the proposed letter could have been on the Agenda for the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; however, some indication is the letter must be received by the Florida Communities Trust the week of October 21, 2002. City Manager McNees continued that the Commission requested reports from the Celebrate Sarasota Committee at the second Regular Commission meeting of each month; that the Chair of the Celebrate Sarasota Committee is present to provide a brief report if desired. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that items should placed on the Agenda in a timely fashion; and asked the reason the items must be on the Agenda of the October 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. BOOK 52 Page 24094 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24095 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin stated that S.0.A.R. (Sarasota Openly Addresses Racism) forum is scheduled for October 29, 2002; that funds remained from the allocation for the 2002 S.0.A.R. Symposium in the fiscal year (FY) 2001/02 budget; that the hope is to utilize the unallocated funds for the S.0.A.R. forum; that not carrying over the unallocated funds from the S.0.A.R. Symposium was not previously realized; therefore, a reappropriation of the funds for FY 2003/03 is required; that requesting the funds at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting would have been too late. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if the other items could have been placed on the Agenda for the October 21, 2002, Regular Commission meeting earlier? City Manager McNees stated that the plan was to have the letter requested by IBSSA on the Agenda for the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the IBSSA indicated action is required at this time for receipt by Florida Communities Trust for grants review the week of October 21, 2002; that the Administration had questions concerning the deadline for grants review but agreed to add the item to the Agenda on behalf of IBSSA. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the necessity to place the item on the Agenda was known earlier; that the item concerning the letter requested by IBSSA and the report by the Celebrate Sarasota Committee could have been placed on the Agenda earlier. City Manager McNees stated that an agreement was reached with the City Attorney at 1 p.m., October 21, 2002, to include the item concerning the letter on the Agenda; that he has been in meetings since that time; that the effort is to accommodate IBSSA; that the Commission is not obligated to add the item to the Agenda. Commissioner Quillin stated that funds are allocated for S.0.A.R. in the FY 2002/03 budget. Mayor Mason stated that is correct; however, the funds requested are unallocated funds from the FY 2001/02 budget for the 2002 S.0.A.R. Symposium. Commissioner Quillin stated that the funds will be taken from the General Fund, reducing reserves rather than from another budgeted item; and asked if a problem is created by taking the funds from the amount allocated to S.0.A.R. in the FY 2002/03 budget? Mayor Mason stated yes. Commissioner Martin stated that the forum is to support the S.0.A.R. Symposium; that the forum is being conducted by a working group developing from the 2002 S.0.A.R. Symposium; that the funds in the FY 2002/03 budget for S.0.A.R. should not be impacted by the forum. Commissioner Quillin stated that utilizing the funds for the forum is not a concern; however, the funds will be taken from the General Fund reserves; that the preference is to take the funds from an item in the FY 2002/03 budget and allocate additional funds from the General Fund later if necessary; that the amount is not significant. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the concern is not the items but rather the manner in which the items were placed on the Agenda; that none of the items are necessarily opposed; however, the City Auditor and Clerk, the City Manager, and the City Attorney should assure items are placed on the Agenda as expeditiously as possible rather than waiting until just prior to a meeting. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yesi Mason, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the majority of the unallocated funds for S.0.A.R. were from donations of the public. Commissioner Quillin stated that an accounting of the S.0.A.R. expenditures was not previously received; therefore, the receipt of significant donations from the public was not previously known. 6. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2002, AND THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 7, 2002 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I-1, -2) CD 6:25 through 6:26 Mayor Mason asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Mayor Mason stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the September 26, 2002, Special Commission meeting, and the BOOK 52 Page 24096 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24097 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. October 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting are approved by unanimous consent. 7. BOARD ACTION: REPORT RE: : PARKS, RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2002 - RECEIVED REPORT; NOMINATED MARIA PRICE TO THE SARASOTA COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD ; REFERRED THE ISSUE OF PARKING BOAT TRAILERS AT CENTENNIAL PARK TO THE ADMINISTRATION TO RESEARCH POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL SITES AND FUNDING; DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (2002) TO INCLUDE THE TREE PROTECTION REGULATIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PARKS, / RECREATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD (AGENDA ITEM II-1) CD 6:26 through 6:46 Kenneth McMillen, Chair, Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board (PREPAB), and Timothy Litchet, Director of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement, and Duane Mountain, Public Works Capital Projects Manager, came before the Commission. Mr. McMillen presented the following items from the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board's meeting of September 19, 2002: A. Boat Trailer Parking Areas at Centennial Park Mr. McMillen stated that concern has been expressed by the public concerning the lack of boat trailer parking at Centennial Park; that the PREPAB voted unanimously 5 to 0 with two members absent to recommend research of the possibility of identifying funding for the purchase of additional property in proximity to Centennial Park for use as boat trailer parking; that the Executive Director of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH), provided the PREPAB a summary of past efforts to include boat trailer parking in the VWPAH/Civic Center lot and indicated many options have been discussed and several implemented with little or no success; that purchasing additional land on Tenth Street could be considered if funding could be obtained. Commissioner Servian asked if the possibility of offering valet and shuttle service has been considered? Mr. McMillen stated that a valet and shuttle service has been suggested. Commissioner Servian stated that the boat trailer parking could be moved to the Sarasota Fairgrounds, for example; that boat owners could call ahead and have the trailers waiting upon their arrival. Mr. McMillen stated that the possibility could be considered for special events or special weekends, which cause the primary problem. Commissioner Servian stated that a valet and shuttle service would eliminate the expense of purchasing property. Mr. McMillen agreed and stated that the suggestion will be considered. Commissioner Quillin stated that the corner of Tenth Street and Cocoanut Avenue is owned by the Cityi that a lift station is constructed on the site. Mr. Mountain stated that is correct; however, the entire corner is not owned by the City. Commissioner Quillin stated that using the site for boat trailer parking may not be the best use for the site; that utilizing the Sarasota Fairgrounds would require an Interlocal Agreement; that transporting boat trailers through the City to the Sarasota Fairgrounds may not be ideal; that attempting to find additional parking in the vicinity is supported; that some parking may be available at the VWPAH during the summer months. Mr. McMillen stated that the VWPAH parking lot is full most evenings; that the concern is a boat owner returning late to pick up a boat trailer; that parking is at a premium for all the facilities at the Civic Center complex. Commissioner Quillin stated that the suggestion concerns the availability of parking in the summer; that the parking could be available for boat trailers between certain hours; that boat trailers could be towed if remaining beyond designated hours; and referred to the minutes of the September 19, 2002, PREPAB meeting as follows: Other comments included a suggestion that the lawn bowling group be moved to another suitable location. BOOK 52 Page 24098 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24099 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Quillin stated that the location of the lawn bowlers should not be disturbed. Mr. McMillen stated that no recommendation is being made to relocate the lawn bowlers. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the parking at the Civic Center complex will be considered as part of the Cultural District Master Plan Study; that the possibility of approaching Florida Power and Light (FP&L) to utilize FPL property directly north of Centennial Park was recently discussed with Staff. B. City's Representative on the Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Mr. McMillen stated that the PREPAB voted unanimously 5 to 0 to recommend the nomination of Maria Price to serve as the City's representative on the Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, subject to the approval of the Commission. Mayor Mason stated that hearing no objections, the nomination of Maria Price to the Sarasota County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is approved. C. Proposed Tree Protection Ordinance Mr. McMillen stated that the PREPAB voted unanimously 5 to 0 to recommend the Commission accept the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance dated August 26, 2002; that the PREPAB's reaching an agreement during the last several years has been difficult, primarily due to the grand tree aspect of the ordinance; that only one tree, the Live Oak, has been identified as a grand tree, which is a personal concerni that reason for only identifying one grand tree is the City does not have adequate Staff to regulate, inspect, and reinspect additional grand trees; that the request is to appropriate adequate funds in the next budget sO additional trees can be designated as grand trees, including native trees and some exotics such as larger ficus trees and banyans; that the City has a beautiful tree canopy; that the trees on streets, parks, and neighborhoods should be protected; that the PREPAB recommends adopting the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance with the stipulation additional grand trees can be added in the future; that a personal favorite is the Slash Pine which is a beautiful tree; that not many Slash Pines are left in the City. Mr. McMillen continued that his term expires at the end of 2002, having served as Chair for two years and member for an additional four years; and thanked the Commission for the opportunity to serve on the PREPAB. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Mr. McMillen's service is appreciated; that Mr. McMillen has provided wonderful leadership for the PREPAB; that the PREPAB should request Commission authority to seek grants through the Administration if desired; that the City does not have an arborist on staff any longer as Lisa Goodson has left the City's employi that the City has not hired Staff with expertise and is therefore lacking in the area of expertise; that a discussion was held with the City Manager concerning the possibility of hiring an individual with certification who can help Staff of the Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement and Public Works Departments and the PREPAB in dealing with trees; that the PREPAB's work on the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance is excellent as a beginning and should be moved forward as recommended; that additions to the regulations will probably be required in the future; that the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance is not the end but rather the beginning. Commissioner Quillin stated that Ms. Goodson was an excellent employee; that adding an individual with certification who can help Staff of the Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement and Public Works Departments and the PREPAB in dealing with trees is a good idea; that . some people on Staff have good knowledge; and asked if a certified arborist will be hired as a replacement? Mr. Mountain stated that Ms. Goodson had other responsibilitles; that the City was fortunate to have had a certified arborist on Staff; that a decision has not been made as to hiring a replacement. Commissioner Quillin stated that the preference is to train in- house Staff and assist employees in obtaining certification; that cross-training could be beneficial. Commissioner Servian referred to the minutes of the September 19, 2002, PREPAB meeting as follows: * She [Marie Small] also questioned why Selby Gardens is exempt. Tim Litchet and Kenneth McMillen agreed that the exemption is based on the fact that Selby is a botanical garden; that Selby Gardens knows more about trees than we do and are unlikely to do anything to hurt trees. BOOK 52 Page 24100 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24101 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian stated that the reason for the exemption is understood and asked if Selby Gardens requested the exemption and, if SO, the reason? Mr. Litchet stated that Selby Gardens requested the exemption due to the unique situation and the different types of trees at Selby Gardens; that Selby Gardens is interested in having more flexibility than may be provided by the City's regulations; that Selby Gardens is of the opinion their Staff understands the requirements for the various types of trees; that the request was received some time ago. Commissioner Servian stated that the basic purpose of the Tree Protection Ordinance is to protect trees from removal; that Selby Gardens would not likely be removing trees. Mr. Litchet stated that Selby Gardens may occasionally remove and redo plant materials; that the thought is Selby Gardens has unique requirements as a botanical garden which is different than a commercial development; that the experts at Selby Gardens are more qualified than anyone the City would probably hire; that Selby Gardens will not likely do anything contrary to the intent of the Tree Protection Ordinance. Commissioner Servian stated that the question can be explored further as the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance is considered in the future. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the PREPAB indicated confusion about the Ken Thompson Park Master Plan; that the Commission previously requested the Administration move forward with a proposal concerning uses at Ken Thompson Park, particularly as one use may be changing in the near future; and asked if a proposal concerning the uses at Ken Thompson Park will be presented to the Commission in the near future. City Manager McNees stated no; that the City has a Capital Improvement Program for Ken Thompson Park; that the users at Ken Thompson Park have begun to meet for the first time to discuss plans for Ken Thompson Park; that Staff has not advanced the development of a Ken Thompson Park Master Plan since the Commission's initial direction. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the Commission unanimously directed the development of a Ken Thompson Park Master Plan; and asked if the development of a Ken Thompson Park Master will be included in the Strategic Plan? City Manager McNees stated that the Commission has provided the direction. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a timeframe for development should be determined and asked if the Administration will provide an anticipated timeframe in the near future? City Manager McNees stated that a timeframe cannot be provided at this time; that the issue is scheduling; that the development of a Ken Thompson Park Master Plan has not been the highest priority; that an estimated timeframe will be provided. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to receive the report of the September 19, 2002, meeting of the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that an infrastructure plan has been developed for Ken Thompson Park; and asked if a Request for Proposal will be developed or if the Ken Thompson Park Master Plan will be prepared by Staff? City Manager McNees stated that the City's requirements for the project must be determined; that the area on City Island outside of Ken Thompson Park is built out; that the City has a Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park; that many of the private sector users have master plans for the leasehold being utilized; that the only area on City Island which may become available is the property on which a radio station is currently located; that a large-scale consultant study to define a master plan for an area which is almost all used may not be the desired direction; that the specific outcome desired should be determined; that the intent is not to avoid the issue; however, an immediate response is not possible. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to refer the issue of parking boat trailers at Centennial Park to the Administration to research possible additional sites and funding. BOOK 52 Page 24102 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24103 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin stated that a concern is overburdening Staff; that the understanding is the direction is not being prioritized or a timeframe imposed. Mayor Mason stated that is correct. City Manager McNees stated that a recollection of the understanding in the future would be appreciated. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending the Zoning Code (2002) to include the tree protection regulations recommended by the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 8. BOARD ACTION: : REPORT RE : CELEBRATE SARASOTA COMMITTEE APPOINTED ARNOLD BURNS; APPROVED THE RECOMMENDED BANNER DESIGN AND THE INCREASED BUDGET FOR BANNERS OF $12,645; PLACED AN ITEM CONCERNING A $25,000 BUDGET ON THE AGENDA OF THE NOVEMBER 4, 2002, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-2) CD 6:46 through 7:04 Thorning Little, Chair of the Celebrate Sarasota Committee, came before the Commission and presented the following items: A. Board Appointment Mr. Little stated that the Celebrate Sarasota Committee (Committee) initially elected Pete Estes as Chair; that Mr. Estes had to resign from the Committee due to other activities and commitments; that Arnold Burns indicated an interest in serving on the Committee; that Mr. Burns' nomination is presented to the Commission for approval. Commissioner Quillin stated that Mr. Burns is active in the Sarasota County Historical Society. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to appoint Arnold Burns to the Celebrate Sarasota Committee. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. B. Banners Mr. Little displayed three sample banners for display along major traffic arteries and City gateways in association with the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration on the Chamber monitors; and stated that a quorum was not present at the October 17, 2002, Committee meeting to make a selection from among the three sample banners; that the hope was to have the selection finalized some time ago sO the banners could be ordered and displayed as soon as possible; that the Committee originally voted unanimously to recommend Commission approval of $12,460 for banners; that the selected design will cost an additional $185 for a total of $12,645; that the cost includes 100 banners and 50 display brackets; that some of the banners will be installed at locations which already have display brackets; that Commission approval of the $12,645 expenditure is requested. Mayor Mason asked the locations at which the banners will be displayed? Mr. Little stated that the banners will be placed at gateways to the City and the Downtown, in commercial districts, including the commercial areas along Hillview Street, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way, etc., Southgate Shopping Center, and St. Armands Circle. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve the recommended banner design and the increased budget for banners of $12,645. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Commissioner Quillin asked the date by which the banners will be done. Mr. Little stated within two weeks. C. Meetings and Reports Mr. Little stated that the Committee is comprised of ten members; that three were in attendance at the last meeting; that distribution of meeting notices has been problematical in the past; that assuring a quorum at each meeting is critical; that BOOK 52 Page 24104 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24105 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. his office is coordinating a system to assure distribution of meeting notices; that a presentation concerning Committee activities will be made at the second Regular Commission meeting of each month. D. Budget Mr. Little stated that a request was presented at the October 17, 2002, Committee meeting for the City Auditor and Clerk to have available $25,000 from the amount budgeted for the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration for minor expenditures such as plaques, pins, tie tacks, bumper stickers, calendars, postcards, and other items; that many opportunities are presented to distribute memorabilia for the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration; that the three members in attendance at the October 17, 2002, Committee meeting had a consensus to recommend Commission approval of a $25,000 fund from which expenditures could be made with the approval of the City Auditor and Clerk; that the recommendation was also the City Auditor and Clerk would provide an accounting of the expenditures. Commissioner Martin asked if any limitation would be placed on the amount per expenditure? Commissioner Quillin stated that the standard City limitations would apply. Mr. Little stated that the Committee would receive an accounting of the expenditures. City Manager McNees asked if $25,000 of the $100,000 allocated for the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration would be allocated to a cost center with the City Auditor and Clerk as the designated signatory; and asked if the City Auditor and Clerk would be petitioned for permission to use the funds? Mr. Little stated that the funds would be available for City- related events; that the Committee has developed forms to register an event; that a single-page grant proposal has been developed for use by individuals seeking funding for non-City events. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the item should be placed on the Agenda of the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting for clarification and further consideration. Mayor Mason asked the wishes of the Commission? Commissioner Servian stated that the item should be placed on the Agenda for the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Quillin stated that some of the issues with expenditures such as plaques could be explained. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the item could be on the Consent Agenda at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting if clarified. Mr. Little stated that expenses have been incurred; that for example, the intent is to produce approximately 21 historic plaques. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to place an item concerning a $25,000 budget on the Agenda of the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the requirement for the Committee to approve expenditures could be left unchanged; that the Commission previously adopted a motion to present every expenditure to the Committee for a recommendation to the Commission; that the Commission probably is more comfortable with the adopted motion. Commissioner Martin stated that the desire is not to become overly bureaucratic; that requiring approval of small expenditures to wait a month for presentation to the Committee and the Commission may not be desirable; that creating a fund for small expenditures makes sense; however, $25,000 is a lot of moneyi that a maximum expenditure could be established. Mr. Little asked if a lesser amount which could be increased later if necessary would be more acceptable; that a sense of urgency desires the fund be in place sooner rather than later to operate in a more timely fashion. Mayor Mason passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Palmer and left the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Servian stated that the reason for the difficulty is not understood; that the City Auditor and Clerk can handle requests concerning the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration; that BOOK 52 Page 24106 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24107 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. the funds should be allocated; that the City Auditor and Clerk should be allowed to manage the fund and make decisions as to appropriate allocations. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the motion is to allow time to provide additional clarification. Commissioner Quillin stated that the funding for the plaque presented earlier in the meeting came from the budget of the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk as no funds are allocated for the City's use to purchase memorabilia, gifts for dignitaries, etc.; that $100,000 was budgeted for the 100th Year Anniversary Celebration; that the Committee could request the funds from the City Auditor and Clerk; that the City Auditor and Clerk provided the funding for the plaque sO the first plaque could be presented; that no recognition will be presented if the approval is delayed until next meeting. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the budget of the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk can be reimbursed; that the item should be clarified and placed on the Agenda of the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. Mr. Little stated that the understanding was $25,000 was carried forward from fiscal year (FY) 2001/02 and $100,000 was budgeted for FY 2002/03; and asked for clarification of the funding available. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the $25,000 from FY 2001/02 was not carried forward and would require reappropriation by the Commission. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the item should be discussed further and brought back to the Commission. Commissioner Martin left the Chambers at 7:03 p.m. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to receive the report of the Celebrate Sarasota Committee. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0): Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Committee may wish to display a sample of the banner at City Hall once the design is finalized; that the design is excellent. Commissioner Martin returned to the Chambers at 7:04 p.m. 9. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, AND 7- APPROVED ; ITEM NO. 2 - REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION UNDER NEW BUSINESS AS ITEM NO. VIII-2 (AGENDA ITEM III-A) CD 7:04 through 7:06 Commissioner Quillin requested that Item No. 2 be removed for discussion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Item No. 2 will be considered under New Business as Item No. VIII-2. 1. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 03-4421, amending the Sarasota City Code (1986) Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 3, the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall Advisory Board, to add five members to said board; specifying that seven members shall be residents of the City of Sarasota; three members shall be residents of Sarasota County, but not the City of Sarasota; one member shall reside in Manatee County; one member shall represent the STAR Program; and one member may be a Life Member; etc. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to negotiate a contract with the firm, Kise, Straw and Kolodner, Inc., (RFP #02-50M) for an amount not to exceed $38,809 to select a qualified consultant to conduct Phase I of a Survey of Historic Resources 4. Approval Re: Revised Rules of Procedure for the General Personnel and Civil Service Board 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Second Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between Sarasota County and the City of Sarasota regarding the Total Consolidation of Stormwater Management and the Bahia Vista/Lockwood Ridge Floodplain Reclamation Project (Levee Project) 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Third Amendment to Agreement BOOK 52 Page 24108 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24109 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. between the City of Sarasota and Clarke Advertising and Public Relations, Inc., for public relations services to expand the scope of services to include the PIER Program as a mechanism for educating Sarasota and Manatee County children about Sarasota Bay 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Thirteenth Amendment to Agreement for Engineering Services between the City of Sarasota and Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc., to conduct the 2002 Annual Beach and Offshore Monitoring of Lido Key's beach, as required by the City's Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit for the 2001 Interim Beach Nourishment project and for the 2002 "White" Sand Project. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. 10. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 02-1543) - ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1544) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (ORDINANCE NO. 02-4405) - ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1547) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) CD 7:06 through 7:10 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 02R-1543, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against all real or personal property owned by the violator for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only) - 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 03R-1544, re- appropriating from the Penny Sales Tax fund $201,112 of unencumbered funding from 2001-2002 for East Sarasota Parks, as established by the Capital Improvement Program, and re-appropriating from the General Fund $20,000 of unencumbered funding from 2001-2002 for Phase I of a survey of the City's Historic Resources. 3. Adoption Re: proposed Ordinance No. 02-4405, providing for the rezoning of a 5,497 square foot parcel of real property from the Commercial Intensive (CI) Zone District to the Commercial-Central Business District (C- CBD) Zone District; said parcel being more fully described herein and having a street address of 1419 Fifth Street; approving Site Plan Application No. 02-SP- 31 which has been proffered as a condition of this rezoning to permit the renovation of an existing building historically known as the Ace Theater; providing for additional conditions of the rezoning and site plan approval as more particularly described herein; etc., (Title Only) (Application Nos. 02-RE-13 and 02-SP-31, Applicant Richard Garfinkel, AIA, as agent representing Alain and Louise Huin) - 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 03R-1547, appropriating $1,616 from the unappropriated fund balance of the general fund to provide funding for expenses of a S.O.A.R working group to hold a Town Hall meeting entitled Dialogue on Discrimination on October 29, 2002. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 02-1543 and proposed Ordinance No. 02-4405 by title only and proposed Resolution Nos. 03R-1544 and 03-1547 in their entirety. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 4, inclusive. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that all persons wishing to speak at the public hearings are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have five minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when one minute remains; and repeated for the benefit of those present in the Chambers the Pledge of Public Conduct as adopted by the Commission as follows: BOOK 52 Page 24110 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24111 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another. We will direct all comments to issues. We will avoid personal attacks. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 11. NON QUASI- JUDICIAL SECOND PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4403, ADOPTING THE CITY OF SARASOTA- NEWTOWN COMPREHENSIVE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN THROUGH 2020 AS AN URBAN INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 163.2517 (3). FLORIDA STATUTES; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE URBAN INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-1) CD 7:10 through 7:30 Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, and Andrew Baker, Principal of A.A. Baker and Associates, came before the Commission. Ms. Hartman stated that the formal adoption of the City of Sarasota-Newtown Comprehensive Plan Through 2020 (Newtown Plan) is exciting for Staff and for the future of the Newtown community; that the process began in October 2001; that multiple public forums were held in the Newtown community; that the City received a planning grant from the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to develop an urban infill and redevelopment plan for the Newtown neighborhood and as a result the Newtown Plan has been prepared; that at its October 7, 2002, Regular meeting, the Commission held the first public hearing to formally adopt the Newtown Plan and passed proposed Ordinance No. 02-4403 on first reading; that the State Statutes require two public hearings to adopt an urban infill and redevelopment plan; that the second public hearing is before the Commission at the present time; that the support and staying power of the community through the process is appreciated; that the efforts of the residents who voiced concerns are recognized; that the Administration recommends adopting proposed Ordinance No. 02- 4403. Mr. Baker stated that the efforts of the Commission, the City Manager, Staff, and the public are acknowledged and appreciated; that the members of the Newtown community are not shy about providing input; that an effort to incorporate public comments into the process was made; that the Newtown Plan is evolving and comments will be continually received; that the goal is to provide an electronic copy of the Newtown Plan which will allow flexibility to make changes; that flexibility is encouraged as new development ideas come forward; that positive development in the Newtown community will complement the greater Sarasota community. Vice Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Robert Atkins, 803 Goodrich Avenue (34236), resident of the Gillespie Park neighborhood, stated that a sign was posted in Newtown by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) which indicates: We will not forget . Mr. Atkins quoted a speaker at the October 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting as follows: We should not dwell in the past . Mr. Atkins further stated that he will not forget either; that doing things which have always been done but then expecting a different result will not work; that during the last five years, over $1.5 million has been invested in Newtown; that Athletic USA and Goodwill initially planned to operate retail stores in Newtown; that Goodwill closed its retail store; that the Athletic USA store has left Newtown; that a $100,000 grant was given to assist in renovating the exterior storefronts of Newtown with matching funds from a local bank; that at the present time, the only improvement seen is fresh paint; that the funds allocated to Newtown have been heard referenced as mere crumbs from the table; that Newtown has received far less crumbs compared with Gillespie Park and other communities; that Newtown has achieved much more with less than other communities; that the Florida Front Porch Program is supported as long as a plan exists to monitor the expenditure of funds; and quoted the BOOK 52 Page 24112 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24113 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. following statement from a Sarasota resident and business leader: My community is fine and this community is not fine. Mr. Atkins stated further that much work remains; that the community with heart and hope is trying to accomplish the work; that the Commission and the community should be held accountable; that in 1999 Newtown received some high profile corporate backing; that the corporation was to build a Newtown market plaza; that one of corporation's board members and a business development coordinator was to assist local vendors with occupational licenses so the corporation could hold an open-air market on weekends; that in addition, 15-week business development courses were scheduled for those interested in becoming entrepreneurs; that the outcome is not known; that great enthusiasm was generated in 1999 similar to the current enthusiasm; that the enthusiasm is well founded; however, the government has an obligation to link funding with results; that the results cannot be determined at the present time; that energy, time, and money has been expended to develop the Newtown Plan; that the Commission should consider the consequences of having the same fox guard the hen house. Reverend Willie Holley, P.O. Box 1024 (342301, representing the Coalition of African-American Leadership (CAAL), stated that attending the second public hearing to formally adopt the Newtown Plan is thrilling; that initially he came to thank the Commission for providing support since 1999; however, a call was made for accountability by the community to develop a comprehensive redevelopment plan with safeguards to ensure accountability, that the negotiations which have occurred to bring a redevelopment office to the Newtown area will satisfy expressed concerns since the office will be managed by the City and staffed by City employees who will be responsible for overseeing the fiscal and operational aspects of the Newtown Plan; that Goodwill had a mission change which has been very positive since the mission change brought the Mayor to the community; that issues raised with the Commission were convoluted in the past and are now easily communicated; that he has never been referenced as a fox but is willing to guard the hen house and will do his best to account to the Commission for everything which occurs; that leadership will continually be provided in Newtown; that every question will be answered; that the Commission will be provided with any requested documentation to prove accountability, that the NAACP sign which was displayed in Newtown during Governor Jeb Bush's visit was unauthorized; that the media reports concerning the sign were unfortunate; that as the President of the local NAACP, he assures the sign was not sanctioned by the local, state, or national NAACP offices; that corrective action will be taken toward the individual posting the sign; that the Commission is requested to support the Newtown Plan to redevelop the Newtown community once and for all. Reverend Jerome Dupree, 1432 17th Street (34234), representing the Sarasota African American Chamber of Commerce, stated that he has been a part of the activities surrounding the Newtown Plan since inception; that a request was made in the beginning of the process for the involvement of the Coalition of African- American Leadership; that personal participation in discussions were ongoing; that a spokesperson has been designated who has performed a marvelous job and has also been a lead watch-dog; that the actions of everyone involved in the Newtown Plan have been monitored; that in doing sO, great things have been seen and heard; that unity exists which did not exist in the past; that no reason exists to believe the unity will cease; that individuals involved have worked very hard; that the unity is pleasing; that the Newtown Plan will be overseen during implementation; that he is proud of the people of the Newtown community for attending various meetings which were held at the Newtown Community Center; that citizens attended the meetings not only to consume the food provided but also to make the desires of the community known; that much work is ahead; that being involved with the Commission as well as the individuals involved in the process is pleasing; that together the very best job will be accomplished for the people in the Newtown community; that he has been a City resident for 64 years and has assisted in every way possible; that a former student indicated he should be relaxing; however, no one should be relaxing until everyone in the City has the same kind of opportunities and everyone is on the same or similar economic level; that no one has time to relax or rest or take a recess but should instead continue to move forward; that the Commission and Staff will continue to perform the best possible job; that personal efforts BOOK 52 Page 24114 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24115 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. will be extended to assist; that Reverend Holley, the Commission, and Staff are commended for doing an excellent job. There was no one else signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Palmer closed the public hearing. Ms. Hartman and Mr. Baker came forward. Mr. Baker stated that accountability and monitoring are most important for the success of plan and project development; that short-term, middle-term, and long-term actions in the Newtown Plan identify suggested departments which should be responsible for implementation of strategies; that the particular department and responsible individuals can be held accountable for implementation and the actions which have been suggested; that an office in the Newtown community with City Staff who are responsible also provides opportunities for the success of the project; that a personal goal has been to ensure a good product and project; that the desire to see growth and development in the Newtown Plan brought before the Commission is encouraging and will provide the basis for a successful future. Ms. Hartman stated that moving forward with the Newtown Plan and doing good for the community is personally pleasing. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the leadership provided by CAAL is appreciated. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4403 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 02-4403. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. 12. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4408, PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF 222 PARCELS OF PROPERTY IN THE LAUREL PARK NEIGHBORHOOD FROM THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY 3 (RMF-3), THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY REVITALIZATION (RMF-R), THE GOVERNMENTAL USE (G), AND THE OFFICE PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS (OPB) ZONE DISTRICTS TO THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE MULTIPLE-9 (RSM-9) ZONE DISTRICT WHICH PRESCRIBES A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF NINE DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE ; SAID PARCELS BEING LOCATED IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY MORRILL STREET ON THE NORTH; BY ALDERMAN STREET AND BROTHER GEENAN WAY ON THE SOUTH; BY RAWLS AVENUE ON THE WEST; AND BY JULIA PLACE AND LAFAYETTE COURT ON THE EAST; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2 (a)) AND NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4409, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA TO DELETE ALL REFERENCES TO THE LAUREL PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT; TO REPEAL THE LAUREL PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY TO REMOVE THE LAUREL PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND TO PROVIDE THAT ALL PROPERTIES PREVIOUSLY SUBJECT TO THE LAUREL PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS SHALL NO LONGER BE SUBJECT TO SUCH REGULATIONS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ORDINANCE 98-4078; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 02-RE-14 AND 02-ZTA-05, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2 (b)) CD 7:31 through 8:31 Vice Mayor Palmer stated that proposed Ordinance Nos. 02-4408 and 02-4409 concern a City-initiated rezoning and an amendment to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) respectively; and requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Allen Parsons, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-14 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4408 is a City-initiated rezoning to implement the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification for the Laurel Park Neighborhood by applying the newly created Residential Single Multiple-9 (RSM-9) Zone District to all the properties in the Laurel Park Overlay District. Mr. Parsons referred to an aerial photograph of the Laurel Park neighborhood indicating the primarily residential character of the Laurel Park neighborhood and the Future Land Use Map of the Laurel Park neighborhood indicating the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification; and stated that two other neighborhoods in the BOOK 52 Page 24116 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24117 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. City are designated in the same Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification: Gillespie Park and Park East; that a change to the Urban General Land Use Classification for both neighborhoods is included in an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), which is associated with the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan has been challenged; that the settlement agreement to the challenge should be coming before the Commission shortly; however, none of the changes proposed as part of the settlement agreement affect the currently proposed change in the Laurel Park neighborhood; that the Laurel Park neighborhood would be the only area left in the City with the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification once the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan is approved. Mr. Parsons referred to a map of the Laurel Park Neighborhood present zone districts displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated that the area subject to the rezoning is encompassed by the area south of Morrill Street, east of Rawls Avenue, north of Alderman Street, and Brother Geenan Way on the south, west of Lafayette Court and Julia Place; that presently the properties in the area are subject to the requirements of the Laurel Park Overlay District; that each of the properties within the neighborhood have an underlying zone district and additionally an overlay district which primarily includes the Residential Multiple Family 3 (RMF-3), Residential Multiple Family Revitalization (RMF-R), and Office Professional Business (OPB) Zone Districts; that the rezoning will implement the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification by applying the recently created RSM-9 Zone District to the properties presently subject to the Laurel Park Overlay District; that a companion Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-05 has been filed to amend the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) to delete all references to the Laurel Park Overlay District, repeal the Laurel Park Overlay Standards, and amend the Official Zoning Map of the City to remove the Laurel Park Overlay District. Mr. Parsons stated that the Laurel Park Neighborhood Association (LPNA) has an extended history of advocating for special tools and protections to preserve and enhance the unique character of the Laurel Park neighborhood; that the LPNA worked with Staff to develop the RSM-9 Zone District; that documents are on file in the Planning Department which date back to 1994 at the time the LPNA was researching and advocating an amendment to the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance to allow Conservation Areas; that the concept behind Conservation Areas was to designate certain areas, including the Laurel Park neighborhood, with identifiable attributes embodied in architecture, urban design, and history as Conservation Districts, which would then have development regulations aimed towards the preservation of neighborhood character, affordable housing, and protection from inappropriate development; that the work continued to 1997 at the time the City hired a consultant to work with the Laurel Park residents and the LPNA to develop a new overlay zone district applicable to the Laurel Park neighborhood; that the resulting Laurel Park Overlay District was adopted as part of the City's updating of the Zoning Code (1998 Ed.). Mr. Parsons continued that the intent and purpose of the Laurel Park Overlay District was to enhance the residential character of the historic Laurel Park neighborhood and also apply additional regulations which supercede the underlying zone districts; that the additional requirements superceded setback and building height requirements and added mandatory design standards such as underground utilities, front porch requirements, garages only allowed behind the front facade of the primary structure, fence height, and multiple-ramily development oriented towards the street; that in addition, the Laurel Park Overlay District had non-mandatory design guidelines; that the guidelines were meant to encourage new construction within the neighborhood to achieve desired items such as roof pitch, roof materials, foundation skirting, window openings, front door styles, etc.; that in 1998 the City also adopted the City's current Comprehensive Plan; that the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan involved significant citizen participation; that the Laurel Park neighborhood was classified as in the Mixed Residential Euture Land Use Classification; that no implementing zone district for the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification existed until April 29, 2002, at the time the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) was adopted; that the RSM-9 Zone District was created specifically to achieve consistency with the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification and exists as the one implementing zone district for the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification other than the Government Use (G) Zone District which is an implementing zone district for all Future Land Use Classifications. Mr. Parsons further stated that in addition, the RSM-9 Zone District was drafted to include elements of the Laurel Park Overlay District; that the design standards were included to further enhance and preserve the neighborhood character; that during the adoption of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) and at the BOOK 52 Page 24118 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24119 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. request of the LPNA, the Commission directed Staff to bring back implementing legislation for the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification to rezone all the property to the RSM-9 Zone District; that the proposed rezoning encompasses approximately 46 acres comprised of 222 parcels; that 214 of the 222 parcels would be rezoned from the RMF-3 Zone District which has an allowable maximum density of 13 dwelling units per acre; that six parcels would be rezoned from the RMF-R Zone District which has a maximum allowable density of 35 dwelling units per acre; that one parcel would be rezoned from the G Zone District and one parcel would rezoned from the OPB Zone District; that the maximum density allowed under the RSM-9 Zone District is less than the present zone districts; that the proposed rezoning creates some non- conforming uses, for example, an office use on Osprey Avenue and also creates some non-conforming structures which exceed allowable density. Mr. Parsons stated further that Article V, Division 1, Vested Rights and Nonconformities, Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), speaks to the protection of property rights and the recognition historic uses, structures and developments assist in defining Sarasota's character; that non-conformities are created when zone districts or regulations change; that generally the intent of new zone districts or regulations is to guide future uses and development consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that under the RSM- 9 Zone District, all legally existing uses and structures are allowed to continue in perpetuity; that any non-contorming structure or use which is destroyed beyond 75 percent of market value is required to meet the standards of the RSM-9 Zone District when rebuilt; that the standard for compliance with new regulations was raised in the adoption of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that the standard for compliance in the Zoning Code (1998 Ed.) was 50 percent of the assessed rather than market value. Mr. Parson stated that areas of inconsistency exist between the standards of the RSM-9 Zone District and the Laurel Park Overlay District; that the RSM-9 Zone District reduced the minimum lot size required for an accessory dwelling; that the Laurel Park Overlay District required a minimum 10,000 square foot lot size to build an accessory dwelling unit; that the RSM-9 Zone District reduces the minimum 10,000 square foot lot size down to 4,840 square feet to build an accessory dwelling; that the size of the accessory dwelling unit has also been increased from 500 square feet under the Laurel Park Overlay District to 600 square feet under the RSM-9 Zone District; that building setbacks in general have also been reduced; that the front setback has been reduced from ten feet to five feet; that a maximum setback now exists of no more than 20 feet; that a five-foot setback exists for side and rear yards; that a floor-to-area ratio (FAR) of .5 is in the Laurel Park Overlay District; that an FAR is typically a standard for non-residential type structures; that a .5 FAR indicates if a lot is 10,000 square feet, the largest square footage of a building allowed on the site would be 5,000 square feet; that a .5 FAR is eliminated as part of the zoning text amendment which would eliminate the Laurel Park Overlay District. Mr. Parsons referred to the Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analyses of Proposed Zoning Text Amendment Application included in the Agenda backup material and stated that on balance Staff recommends approval of Rezone Application No. 02-RE-14 and Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-05; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing on September 18, 2002, and recommended 4 to 1 to approve the rezoning of the affected property with the exclusion of a property at 1840 Morrill Street owned by Coastal Recovery Centers, Inc.; that Coastal Recovery is a treatment facility; that the PBLP's ultimate recommendation was due to the public nature of Coastal Recovery; that the Coastal Recovery parcel is currently in the Residential Multiple Family Revitalization (RMF-R) Zone District which allows for 35 dwelling units per acre; that the RMS-9 Zone District allows nine dwelling units per acre; that a 22-unit apartment complex currently exists on the Coastal Recovery property; that Coastal Recovery has a settlement agreement with the City executed in 1996 limiting the number of persons who receive treatment and stay at the facility to 14; that the particular site is approximately .7 acres in size; that a number of rebuilding scenarios exist if the existing structure were destroyed beyond 75 percent of market value; that a maximum of six dwelling units would be allowed; that six dwelling units could also be divided into six individual single-family units and also have six accessory dwelling units for a potential total of 12 units; that the PBLP recommended approval of the rezoning of the Laurel Park neighborhood except for the Coastal Recovery property which will remain in the RMF-R Zone District; that the PBLP also recommended approval of Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-05 which would eliminate the Laurel Park Overlay District from the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) and the Official Zoning Mapi that Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of the entire Laurel Park neighborhood, not excluding the Coastal Recovery property. BOOK 52 Page 24120 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24121 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Quillin asked if proposed Ordinance No. 02-4409 reflects the PBLP's recommendation? City Attorney Taylor stated no; that the language in proposed Ordinance No. 02-4409 can be revised if the Commission desires to include the PBLP's recommendation. Vice Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Bonnie Wagner, 1714 Devonshire Lane (34236), owner of lots 20, 22 and 24, Block G, lots seven and eight, Burns Sub-Division, stated that the lots have been owned for approximately 37 years; that the property was rezoned in 1984 to the RMF-R Zone District along with two other parcels of property on the north side of the property which extends from Oak Street to Devonshire Lane; that her property remains in the RMF-R Zone District, allowing 26 units per acre; that the proposed rezoning reduces the allowed units per acre to less than eight, which is unacceptable; that lowering the number of allowed units will cause a reduction in revenue, create a hardship, and will not be tolerated; that over $30,000 and months of time have been spent trying to resolve issues concerning her property; that rezoning the rest of the neighborhood is not a concern; that deed restrictions do not currently exist on her property or on the surrounding properties; that rezoning the property is tantamount to the creation of deed restrictions which may not be legal; that living in a deed-restricted community is not desired. Ms. Wagner continued that the property was originally rezoned as the City filled in a drainage ditch and built a road at the end of Devonshire Lane; that a barrier was constructed which held the water back and consequently turned her property into a retention pond for 20 years, which is a violation of her civil rights; that 20 years have been spent attempting to have the City fix the problem; that the City refused, which is also a violation of her civil rights; that the right to live in peace and in safety on her property is addressed in the US Constitution; that the City repaired a nearby road in 1997 causing her property to flood again; that the situation actually became amusing; that a properly filed US Land Patent exists on her property; that any realtor will attest a US Land Patent is Federally protected property; that the only person allowed to enter her property without an invitation is a US Marshall but only with a warrant; that Code Enforcement personnel entering the property and coming through the front door through force to inspect her home is a violation of civil rights; that rezoning her property will not be tolerated; that being left alone is desired; that the Commission is respectfully requested to remove her property from the rezoning of the Laurel Park neighborhood, which is actually the Burns Sub-Division and is indicated as such on her deed. Susan Kane, 300 and 310 South Osprey Avenue (34236), stated that the recommendation to rezone to the RSM-9 Zone District is disappointing; that she and her husband have created a wonderful live-work situation as therapists; that few resident owners will be inclined to live on South Osprey Avenue which is a main corridor to the Downtown area, unless encouraged by live-work situations; that changes and improvements are seen since moving to the area; that great expense and hope were placed into the property owned, expecting the area to attract like-minded people and continue to come alive; that live-work is the most promising future for the Laurel Park area of South Osprey Avenue; that not addressing live-work situations in the RSM-9 Zone District is unfortunate. Diana Hamilton, 229 South Osprey Avenue (34236), stated that Coastal Recovery has requested exclusion from the rezoning to the RSM-9 Zone District being considered for the Laurel Park neighborhood; that Coastal Recovery's basis for the exclusion is if a loss of more than 75 percent of the structure occurs through disaster the nine units per acre restriction in the RSM- 9 Zone District would create an undue hardshipi that Coastal Recovery performs a public service; however, a request from Brandy Lee Apartments for exclusion from RSM-9 Zone District would most likely not have come before the Commission; that the Brandy Lee Apartments are historical unlike the Spanish Oaks, E1 Verona, or Twin Oaks Apartments which have no historic or architectural significance; that in the event of such a loss, Coastal Recovery could replace the Brandy Lee Apartments with six or seven three-Dedroom townhouse units with accessory units in the back, which would be more than enough beds to house the allowed 14 clients and would provide for a more friendly neighborhood outcome; that a scenario could exist for Coastal Recovery to decide to sell, leaving Laurel Park with an out-of- place 32-unit apartment building protected by the City's Comprehensive Plan; that detaining implementation of the RSM-9 Zone District to allow for further consideration of Coastal Recovery's request is not a good idea; that Laurel Park has been BOOK 52 Page 24122 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24123 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. without an implementing zone district for far too long; that some aspects of the RSM-9 Zone District do not meet the desires of many interested in the possibility of mixed-use as reflected in the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that the Commission is requested to deny Coastal Recovery's request and allow the implementation process to continue; that the Commission is reminded the Laurel Park Neighborhood Association (LPNA) Board of Directors came before the PBLP and supported the RSM-9 Zone District; that the hope is the Commission will deny Coastal Recovery's request. Jeff Russell, Attorney, law firm of Abel, Band, Russell, Collier, Pitchford and Gordon, Chartered, 240 South Pineapple Avenue, (34236), representing Coastal Recovery; Jerry Thompson, PhD, Chief Operating Officer, Coastal Recovery Systems, 3830 Bee Ridge Road (34233), representing Coastal Recovery, and Joel J. Freedman, AICP, Freedman Consulting Group, Inc., 1290 North Palm Avenue, (34236), representing Coastal Recovery. Attorney Russell stated that the Commission is requested to affirm the recommendation made by the PBLP to exempt the Coastal Recovery property from the rezoning of the Laurel Park area which is currently in the RMF-R Zone District; that 22 units exist on the Coastal Recovery property; that the RMF-9 Zone District would allow six units or potentially less. Dr. Thompson stated that Coastal Recovery provides behavioral health care services primarily to residents of Sarasota who have chronic, persistent, and severe mental illness and who cannot receive services in the private sector; that the facility at 1840 Morrill Street has existed since the purchase of the property in 1996; that the property consists of two separate components, the Audubon House and independent living units; that the Audubon House is a level-two, residential treatment facility which is for clients residing at the facility requiring 24-hour assistance; that 14 people currently reside in the facility; that the other units are categorized as independent living; that all the units are presently occupied by Clients receiving behavioral health care services from Coastal Recovery; that the clients occupying the independent living units are functioning at an independent level; that replicating the property elsewhere due to the proximity to the Downtown and to City and County services would be impossible; that the proximity to the Downtown and to City and County services is extremely important to the Clients residing at the Audubon House and independent living units; that a negative impact on the ability to generate funds could exist if Coastal Recovery were forced to become a non-contorming use; that Coastal Recovery's funding sources closely review balance sheets; that a dramatic decrease in the value of the property would conceivably have a negative impact on the ability to raise funds which is the rationale for coming before the Commission to request exclusion from the proposed rezoning. Mr. Freedman stated that the location of the property is unique, abutting the southern boundary of the Central City Land Use Classification; that north of the parcel is Morrill Street and the Central City Land Use Classification; that Coastal Recovery has existed on the property since 1996; that the services provided by Coastal Recovery will not impact the overall implementation of the goals and objectives of the RSM-9 Zone District for the Laurel Park neighborhood. Attorney Russell stated that the concept of the property being sold to a private developer and becoming a private apartment building is viable; that a 22-unit complex in the vicinity of the Downtown is an incentive and would be difficult to reproduce elsewhere at a reasonable cost; that a promise cannot be made the property will not be sold; that Coastal Recovery's intent is to remain at the present location; that the issue previously raised indicating the possibility of construction of townhouses is not practical or realistic; that a 22-unit property rezoned to allow four to six units will cause a reduction in value and reduce the balance sheet, which is relied upon for grants and obtaining contracts with State agencies since the property is classified as an asset; that the Coastal Recovery property is of great benefit to people and cannot be reproduced anywhere else in the City. Commissioner Martin stated that the current building contains 22 units and asked if Coastal Recovery has only 14 clients? Dr. Thompson stated that Coastal Recovery has only 14 clients in the level-two residential treatment facility; that the other units are considered independent housing and are occupied by people receiving behavioral health care services from Coastal Recovery. Commissioner Servian asked if the agreement limits the number of clients to 14? Dr. Thompson stated that State licensure limits the number of clients to 14 in the Audubon House residential treatment facility; that the clients living in the other units are clients BOOK 52 Page 24124 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24125 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. able to live independently but have chronic mental illness and are receiving services from Coastal Recovery; that the clients function at a higher level than the clients in the level-two residential treatment facility. Commissioner Servian asked if the other 22 Clients can find housing elsewhere if the Coastal Recover property were destroyed? Dr. Thompson stated that the clients would have difficulty finding new housing; that the housing provided for the clients by Coastal Recovery could never be replicated; that the Coastal Recovery clients have difficulty finding and maintaining residences anywhere in the City and the County, particularly with the recent closure of the G. Pierce Wood Memorial Hospital. Attorney Russell stated that the only difference between the RMF-R Zone District and the proposed RSM-9 Zone District is density; that allowing the Coastal Recovery property to remain in the RMF-R Zone District will not impact the Laurel Park neighborhood. Devon Rutkowski, 324 Julia Place (34236), stated that a settlement agreement was signed with Coastal Recovery in 1998 after 18 months of protracted negotiations; that the agreement included a promise not to expand; that Coastal Recovery attended a Laurel Park Neighborhood Association (LPNA) Board of Directors meeting 12 months ago requesting an additional 15-bed expansion; that the LPNA Board did not support the request at the time; that no reason exists for Coastal Recovery's request for exclusion from the RSM-9 Zone District; that the 14-bed licensed portion of the facility can easily be replicated in the case of a loss; that enough land is available to duplicate the facility if necessary; that the Commission is encouraged not to exclude the property owned by Coastal Recovery from the rezoning; that the RSM-9 Zone District is supported. Mr. Rutkowski referred to photographs displayed on the Chamber monitors illustrating buildings constructed during the same time period as the Coastal Recovery building; and stated that one building is a 1970s era building with 12 units on 20,000 square feet of land and is the by-product of the RMF-3 Zone District which is being eliminated; that, unfortunately, an 8-unit building on 11,000 square feet of land would not be allowed and would now require 38,000 square feet of land to replicate under the new RSM- 9 Zone District; that a four-unit building would require half an acre under the new RSM-9 Zone District; that the four-unit building of four one-bedroom, one-bath apartments currently exists on 5,500 square feet of land; that a two-family or duplex on 5,500 square feet of land would require approximately 10,000 square feet of land in the RSM-9 Zone District; that the RSM-9 Zone District is primarily for single-family residential use; that a secondary use is multi-family with a caveat requiring 4,840 square feet of land per dwelling unit; that the requirement is fascinating since the City, for some reason, requires the purchase of more land in Laurel Park for multi-family use; that land in the City is rare and very expensive as contrasted with the suburbs in which land is plentiful and inexpensive; that the belief is multi-family dwellings will not be constructed in Laurel Park under the RSM-9 Zone District any time soon; that the RSM-9 Zone District has been anticipated for four years, is considered a good change, and is accepted; however, the Commission is requested to consider the RSM-9 Zone District as a stepping stone which some day soon will be included in the future Downtown Code receiving the benefits of New Urbanism; that for the first time in the history of the City, the RSM-9 Zone District allows the construction of garage apartments; that the proposed RSM-9 Zone District is supported; that the Commission is requested to adopt the proposed RSM-9 Zone District without granting the requested exclusion of the Coastal Recovery property; that the Commission is requested to view the RSM-9 Zone District as an interim measurei that excellent New Urbanism type buildings will be constructed in Laurel Park some day soon in accordance with the future Downtown Code. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that the City come forward for response. Mr. Parsons came forward and stated that in response to questions raised by public speakers, any restrictions regarding a US Land Patent and the effect on any potential rezoning of the property are not known; that some non-residential uses on Osprey Avenue are allowed by special exception; that the uses run with the land subject to any conditions; that the RMF-R and RSM-9 Zone Districts are different; that one difference is the design standards of the Laurel Park Overlay District have been transferred to the RSM-9 Zone District; that setback and density requirements are different; that the Mixed Residential Future Land Use Classification was sought by the community to restrict the number of dwelling units to nine units per acre; that the RSM-9 Zone District allows for nine dwelling units per acre. BOOK 52 Page 24126 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24127 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Mr. Parsons referred to a letter from Brian McInnis, President of GMN Corporation and owner of 404 South Osprey Avenue, who was unable to attend the meeting, and stated that the property owner requests an exemption from the proposed RSM-9 Zone District; that the property is an historic apartment building constructed in 1926 and comprised of 12 living units on an approximate 25,000 square foot parcel. Mr. Parsons stated that Staff's recommendation is to approve the proposed rezoning to the RSM-9 Zone District; that the options are to include all properties in the RSM-9 Zone District or provide an exemption for certain properties; that two public hearings are associated with the rezoning; that a decision to exempt properties must be reached at the current time or at the next public hearing scheduled for November 18, 2002, if desired. Commissioner Servian asked the legal ramifications concerning the exemption requested by Coastal Recovery, the property owner of 404 South Osprey Avenue, and Ms. Wagner, the property owner of 1714 Devonshire Lane, if the properties are included in the rezoning? City Attorney Taylor stated that all the properties are currently included in the rezoning; that to the extent the individuals believe a valid challenge exists to the action, the property owners would be put to the test of seeking legal recourse; that the letter concerning the exemption of 404 South Osprey Avenue requires further review; that the Wagner property is familiar as issues concerning the property have come before a number of previous City Commissions; that a lawsuit involving allegations the City had destroyed the value of the property was pending at one time. Robert Fournier, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the parcels have not been individually examined; that 222 parcels are included in the rezoning which is one reason the rezoning was treated as a legislative rezoning rather than a quasi-judicial proceeding; that the rezoning is City-initiated and includes more than ten acres; therefore, the State Statutes require the local governing body which is the Commission to hold a second public hearing; that 30 days was deliberately left between the two public hearings sO an opportunity would be available to review a particular parcel if people come forward and request an exemption; that a suggestion is to include the properties desiring exemption at the present time; that Staff could report back specifically as to the impact on specific parcels at the second public hearing; that the Commission could make a decision concerning specific parcels at the second public hearing. Commissioner Servian stated that to clarify, Staff will bring back information pertaining to the legal exposure concerning the properties requesting exemption. Attorney Fournier stated that is correct; that the information brought back will be based in part on the impact and the study conducted by the Planning Department to determine the net effect. Commissioner Quillin stated that changing the Laurel Park pocket park from the G Zone District to the RSF-9 Zone District is not desired; that all park lands should be kept in a designation which the City can protect. Attorney Fournier stated that the reason the pocket park is being recommended as part of the rezoning is not known. Mr. Parsons stated that the Commission's direction was to rezone the entire Laurel Park Overlay District; that Staff proceeded as directed and did not weigh which parcels should be included or not. Commissioner Quillin asked if keeping the pocket park in the G Zone District is a concern? Mr. Parsons stated no. Commissioner Martin stated that providing special exemptions to the RSM-9 Zone District is a concern; that the Coastal Recovery property could yield approximately six units if rebuilt under RSM-9 Zone District; that each unit could have an accessory unit which would be a total of 12 units. Mr. Parsons stated that the configuration of the Coastal Recovery parcel was reviewed and is practically set up for 50-foot wide lots which is the requirement in the RSM-9 Zone District; that six units as well as six accessory units could be accommodated and permitted; that Coastal Recovery's argument is the undesirability of the configuration of six single-family homes versus the current configuration; that the number of structures and the number of unrelated persons allowed to live in each structure could potentially be beyond the current 14 clients allowed. Commissioner Martin stated that the restrictions concerning the opportunity to rebuild were changed from 50 to 75 percent destroyed and from assessed to market value; that the reason for BOOK 52 Page 24128 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24129 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. relaxing the restrictions was to avoid grandfathering; that Staff should not be required to perform additional work; and quoted the letter from the property owner of 404 South Osprey Avenue as follows: : all parties affected should be given equal consideration and treatment. Commission Martin stated that all parties are being treated equally and fairly in the proposed rezoning. There was no one else signed up to speak and Vice Mayor Palmer Closed the public hearing. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4408 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4408 with the exception of the Laurel Park pocket park which is in the G Zone District on first reading. Commissioner Quillin stated that the building at 404 South Osprey Avenue was built in 1926, is historic, and is comprised of 12 living units on a 25,000 square foot parcel near Downtown; that the operations at both the property at 404 South Osprey Avenue and the Coastal Recovery site can continue under the proposed rezoning; that the owners are concerned a disaster such as fire or other natural disaster could reduce the number of allowable living units; that the reduction of allowable replacement units would adversely affect the value of the properties and may have an impact on the ability of the current owners to continue with or to secure future financing on the properties; that the issue was raised at the PBLP public hearing in September 2002; that the Coastal Recovery building is not an historic building; that the building at 404 South Osprey Avenue is very old and obtaining financing is difficult; that the rezoning is supported; however, Staff is requested to bring back an economic impact study to examine the possibilities of exemptions for some of the historic structures or some existing uses; that people invest in property and make improvements to further development and use; that exempting the Laurel Park pocket park is pleasing. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the Laurel Park neighborhood has worked very hard with the City over many years to make positive changes; that the rezoning may not be perfect but is a step in the appropriate direction; that the RMF-R Zone District was originally implemented to increase residential capacity in the Downtown area by providing additional living units; that admittedly, the RMF-R Zone District did not work, was not a good idea, and should be reversed; that the RSM-9 Zone District is a good proposal and the motion is supported; however, the existing buildings remain a concern; that individuals who disagree are encouraged to come before the Commission at the second public hearing on November 18, 2002. Vice Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion and requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Palmer, yes. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Ordinance No. 02-4409 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 02-4409 on first reading. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): : Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes. The Commission recessed at 8:31 p.m. and reconvened at 8:42 p.m. 13. PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4415 TO REZONE + 23.5 ACRES OWNED BY THE SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL BOARD LOCATED WITHIN THE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL LAND USE CLASSIFICATION IN THE SARASOTA CITY PLAN FROM THE GOVERNMENTAL USE (G), COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG), OFFICE PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS (OPB) AND MEDICAL CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONAL (MCI) ZONE DISTRICTS TO THE SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL (SMH) ZONE DISTRICT; SAID PROPERTY BEING GENERALLY BOUNDED ON THE EAST BY SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41); ON THE WEST BY OSPREY AVENUE; ON THE NORTH BY FLOYD STREET i AND ON THE SOUTH BY PORTIONS OF ARLINGTON STREET AND HILLVIEW STREET; APPROVING SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 02- SP-28 DEPICTING A PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE TO SERVE THE CAMPUS OF SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY REZONED TO THE SMH ZONE DISTRICT HEREIN; SAID PARKING GARAGE TO BE LOCATED ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY SOUTH BOOK 52 Page 24130 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24131 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41) ON THE EAST, LAURENT PLACE ON THE WEST, ARLINGTON STREET ON THE NORTH, AND HILLVIEW STREET ON THE SOUTH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 02-RE-12 AND 02-SP-28, APPLICANTS CHARLES D. BAILEY, JR. / ESQ. AND DANIEL K. MCDANIEL, AS AGENTS REPRESENTING THE SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL BOARD) PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-1) CD 8:43 through 10:39 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-12 and Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 pertains to + 23.5 acres comprising the campus of Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH); that the requirements of quasi-judicial public hearings were defined by the judicial process; that during quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that the named parties to the proceedings are the Applicant, which is the Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, the City, and Affected Persons; that Affected Persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject property; that Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the subject property; that five individuals represented by Stephen Rees, Esquire, of the law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, P.A., have filed for certification as Affected Persons as follows: Dr. Marc Grinberg; Doctors Gardens Association, Inc.; Dr. Mahfouz El Shahawy; Dr. Gregory Dickinson; and Dr. Leonard Slazinski. City Attorney Taylor continued that a sixth individual, Dr. John Strausser also filed for certification as an Affected Person and will be appearing on his own behalf; that the recommendation is to allow 25 minutes for the Applicant's and the City's presentation and 10 minutes for rebuttal; that the attorney representing the five individuals certified by the Commission as Affected Persons will have 20 minutes to speak and 10 minutes for rebuttal; that the sixth Affected Person, Dr. Strausser, will have 10 minutes to speak and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that other interested persons will have 5 minutes to speak; that speakers may request additional time which, if granted, will be determined at the discretion of the Commission; that Applicants, the City, and Affected Persons will be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and expert witnesses and for cross- examination; that Commission approval of the time limits is required. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the time limits are approved. City Attorney Taylor stated that the six applications for Affected Persons status have been reviewed; that all six applicants qualify as an owner/resident within 500 feet of the subject property and may be accepted as Affected Persons; that Commission certification of the Affected Persons is required. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that hearing no objections, the six applicants are certified as Affected Persons. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan stated that two individuals who identified themselves as Affected Persons have signed up to speak: Attorney Stephen Rees on behalf of the five Affected Persons and Richard Mercier; that Dr. Strausser did not sign up to speak. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Richard Mercier is not an Affected Persons identified by the City Attorney. City Attorney Taylor stated that Mr. Mercier is a witness and does not require certification as an Affected Person. Vice Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing for proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 to rezone + 23.5 acres owned by Sarasota County Public Hospital Board classified as in the Metropolitan Regional Land Use Classification in the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan); and requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Commissioner Martin stated that discussions have occurred with Shannon Snyder, President, and Faye Rice, members of the Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Association, regarding the neighborhood impact of the proposed development. Commissioner Servian stated that correspondence and a meeting has occurred with Dr. Dickinson. BOOK 52 Page 24132 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24133 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Quillin stated that a Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Association meeting was attended in which the proposed development was discussed. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that electronic mail and correspondence occurred with Faye Rice, member of the Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Association. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that the Applicant come forward. Dr. G. Duncan Finlay, Chief Executive Officer, SMH, Charles Bailey, Jr., Esquire, law firm of Williams, Parker, Harrison, Dietz & Getzen, representing Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, Daniel McDaniel, Director of Architecture and Facilities for SMH, and Steven Tindale, P.E., AICP, of Tindale Oliver and Associates, Inc., came before the Commission. Dr. Finlay stated that the success in recent years of SMH is attributed to patient and employee satisfaction; that improving the parking situation at SMH is vital to continued success; that everyone is aware of the parking problem at SMH; that he practiced at SMH from 1972 to 1996; that his commitment to making SMH a real part of the community is the reason for taking the position of CEO; that SMH recently was named one of the top 100 hospitals in the nation for care in cardiac and vascular disease; that he is available for questions if desired. Attorney Bailey stated that Daryl McLain of Barger and Dean Architects, Inc., and Millard Yoder, P.E. of WilsonMiller, Inc., are available in the audience for questions if desired; and recognized Martin Moss, Chair, and Phyllis Cobb, First Vice Chair, Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, present in the audience. Attorney Bailey stated that Alan Roddy is appearing on behalf of the SMH's Neighborhood Advisory Council and will speak later in the presentation. Attorney Bailey referred to computer-generated slides throughout the presentation and stated that Sarasota County Public Hospital Board is seeking to rezone + 23.5 acres comprising most of the SMH campus; that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-12 is to rezone the first parcel in the SMH Zone District which will eventually apply to the entire SMH campus; that the campus area is north of Hillview Street, west of US 41, south of Floyd Street, and east of Osprey Avenue; that the companion Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28 is for approval of construction of a parking garage on a small portion of the SMH property and renovation of the Medical Arts Building; that in 1998 the SMH property was designated as in the Metropolitan Regional Land Use Classification in the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the designation created potential inconsistencies between the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code (1998 ed.); that in March 2000, the Commission adopted Ordinance No. 00-4202 enacting the SMH Zone District; that the development standards for the SMH Zone District were specifically prepared for the SMH campus and will be applied exclusively to the location. Attorney Bailey continued that a previous SMH Master Plan contemplated a more ambitious plan to include a Women's and Children's Center on the site formerly occupied by an Amoco station and the Sugar and Spice Restaurant; however, the project is not being pursued; that new leadership at SMH is pursuing a less ambitious plan to address the parking deficiency issue; that a generous area north of Hillview Street has been set aside for open-space during the process of determining not to demolish the Medical Arts Building; that the open-space, no-build area is 100 feet south of the right-of-way of Arlington Street and 285 feet to the west of US 41; that renovations to the Medical Arts Building result in an encroachment in several areas of the building; that a variance has been obtained from the Board of Adjustment; that a variance was also sought to construct aesthetic enhancements to the proposed parking garage and a slight encroachment of a dedicated right-of-way on Hillview Street to provide angle parking; that the Board of Adjustment granted the variance with a condition any additional revisions must come before the Board of Adjustment; that additional revisions have occurred regarding the construction of a loop road leading to the parking garage; that the loop road was originally proposed as a one-way road; that the revision provides for two-way traffic; that the revision will be brought before the Board of Adjustment in November 2002, assuming the Commission approves the proposed project. Attorney Bailey stated that several issues and concerns may be raised before the Commission regarding the proposed project; that one issue concerns the maintenance of Arlington Street; that the proposed project provides a portion of Arlington Street will be for one-way traffic; that SMH has stipulated a commitment to ensure the roadway will remain unobstructed and signage will not suggest any type of closure of Arlington BOOK 52 Page 24134 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24135 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Street; that a second issue of permitting left turns on US 41 for eastbound traffic on Arlington Street may be raised; that SMH has stipulated to participate in an effort to address the issue if desired by the Commission; that a third issue concerns congestion at the intersection of US 41 and Hillview Street; that a fourth issue is traffic concerns of the neighborhood to the east of US 41; that SMH is willing to work with the neighborhood and consider suggestions from the Commission; and a fifth issue is neighborhood intrusion west of Osprey Avenue. Mr. McDaniel stated that a parking study to evaluate parking demand for the SMH campus was completed in the spring of 2001; that filling the existing SMH parking structures by 10 a.m. is not unusual; that the study indicates SMH is much busier in the winter months; that 1,300 parking spaces will be necessary at SMH by 2005; that the proposed parking garage is actually smaller than the size recommended by the consultants conducting the study; that the proposed garage is seven stories high and would provide 1,060 parking spaces; that a 1,300 space parking garage would be an eight- or nine-story structure; that the proposed parking garage is a three-bay garage similar to the large SMH garage on Lasula Court with a central entrance and a sloped-ramp section; that a police substation is included in the design of the garage; that the study indicated additional parking spaces along Hillview Street are necessary to maintain a positive balance of parking spaces available to merchants and customers; that the plan is to demolish the building which currently serves as a substation for the police and provide additional parking spaces off Hillview Street; that the new police substation will be constructed in a visible location on the ground floor of the proposed parking garage and will include an emergency exit out of the garage for disaster situations; that a second floor area will be constructed for the SMH security office; that three high-speed elevators will be designed to serve all seven floors. Mr. McDaniel continued that planning to mitigate the impact of the garage on the neighborhoods has begun; that the construction of the garage is a pre-cast design which is largely assembled off-site and brought in during off hours at night; that the site circulation will change; that a large section of Hillview Street will be rebuilt to provide for additional capacities at the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41; that the installation of a roundabout at the intersection of Hillview Street and Laurent Place will provide for the safest flow of traffic to the proposed development; that the main entrance to the proposed parking garage will be from Laurent Place to a newly constructed loop road which will outlet onto Arlington Street; that the four-story Medical Arts Building is approximately 55,000 square feet; that traffic circulation on the Arlington Street side of the Medical Arts Building will be one-way for the limited section between the newly constructed loop road and Laurent Place; that the one-way circulation will provide for the better handling of valet traffic; that sufficient stacking space and three lanes for vehicles are provided. Mr. McDaniel further stated that stormwater drains will be installed at the intersection of Hillview Street and Laurent Place, which is an ideal location for construction of a roundabout in an effort to mitigate flooding conditions on Hillview Street; that a large stormwater vault will be constructed below the proposed parking garage; that water will be directed into the vault prior to reaching flood stage on Hillview Street; that the stormwater design will mitigate troublesome afternoon storms affecting the area along Hillview Street. Mr. Tindale referred to a map of the north and south parking densities of the SMH Campus displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated that results of the traffic study conducted indicate 83 percent of the traffic enters the north campus while 17 percent of traffic enters the south campus; that the goal is to balance the traffic between the north and south campusesi that the proposed parking garage and additional lanes on Hillview Street allow for 60 percent of the traffic to circulate through the north campus and 40 percent to circulate through the south campus; that the proposed project solves parking deficiency and traffic circulation problems for the SMH campusi that the proposed roundabout provides plenty of lanes and accessibility to the proposed development; that the total number of valet lanes on Arlington Street is critical to circulation. Attorney Bailey stated that SMH entered into two Interlocal Agreements with the City several years ago regarding parking; that the Interlocal Agreements require SMH to submit an annual report to the City Manager; that SMH will comply; that in previous years, the only entrance to SMH was from Arlinglton Street; that the previous shift of traffic circulation to the north to Waldemere Street has reached capacity; that the goal is to balance the traffic circulation. BOOK 52 Page 24136 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24137 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian stated that pre-cast segments of the parking garage will be brought to the site at night to alleviate construction traffic during the daytime; however, the noise at night will be far more intrusive to the neighborhood during sleeping hours. Mr. McDaniel stated that most of the pre-cast segments are cast in a plant off-site and could be transported to the proposed development during the night rather than during the day; that pouring of concrete and actual construction will not occur during the night. Commissioner Servian asked the location to which the police substation will be relocated during the construction of the new substation. Mr. McDaniel stated that the police substation will remain in the existing location until the new substation is constructed. Commissioner Servian stated that the installation of fire sprinklers is not included in the Agenda backup material; and asked the reason fire sprinklers are not being installed in a seven-story parking garage? Mr. McDaniel stated that installing fire sprinklers in the proposed parking garage would cost approximately an additional $30,000; that the height of the proposed parking garage does not require installation of fire sprinklers; that SMH is voluntarily installing fire sprinklers in the occupied areas of the development such as the police substation and the SMH security office; that the SMH insurance carriers were consulted and did not offer any offsetting reduction in premium to cover the additional cost of the installation; that the installation of the fire sprinklers is not required by the applicable regulations. Commissioner Servian stated that a seven-story parking garage with numerous vehicles could be a potential hazard if one car explodes; that not being offered an offset by the insurance carrier is shocking. Commissioner Quillin stated that the existing location of the police substation is for the benefit of the neighborhood; and asked if the new substation will include meeting rooms for the benefit of the public? Mr. McDaniel stated that the new police substation includes facilities to accommodate the public; that the substation does not have a large auditorium setting but is sufficient and visible enough to accommodate the needs of the public. Commissioner Quillin stated that the new police substation location is only visible to one street and is not in a commercial area; and asked the amount of square footage of meeting space in the new police substation? Mr. McDaniel stated that the meeting space is similar to a conference rather than a classroom setting. Commissioner Quillin stated that the police substation is for the community and should include a large meeting facility. Mr. McDaniel stated that SMH has a conference room available to the public on Waldemere Street. Commissioner Quillin stated that the SMH conference room has been visited; that parking for the area is difficult; and asked for clarification regarding the one-way section of Arlington Street. Mr. McDaniel stated that the main change is a one-way traffic flow to the west on Arlington Street beginning at the intersection of the new loop road east of the existing Medical Arts Building through to the intersection of Laurent Place and Arlington Street; that the traffic circulation around the Medical Arts Bullding will be counterclockwise. Commissioner Quillin stated that traffic will be unable to access Arlington Street eastbound from Osprey Avenue. Mr. Tindale stated that is correct. Mr. McDaniel stated that Arlington Street can be accessed eastbound by the new loop road. Commissioner Quillin asked the manner in which the area will be designated as a one-way section? Mr. McDaniel stated that signage will be installed; that the design of the intersection of Arlington Street and Laurent Place will appear as a channeling restriction to prevent traffic flow in the eastbound direction. Commissioner Quillin asked if the area will be clearly designated as valet parking? Mr. McDaniel stated yes. BOOK 52 Page 24138 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24139 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Quillin asked if any covering will be installed over the valet section or from the parking garage to the Medical Arts Building? Mr. McDaniel stated that covering is not included in the proposed development; that an aerial cover would require construction at the fourth floor of the garage and connect to the Intensive Care Unit of SMH. Commissioner Quillin asked if a covering could be constructed to connect the proposed parking garage to the Medical Arts Building? Mr. McDaniel stated that a covering to connect the parking garage and the Medical Arts Building is possible in the future. Commissioner Quillin asked for clarification of the requirement of SMH to provide the City with an annual report. Attorney Bailey referred to an August 22, 2002, memorandum, to Harvey Hoglund, AICP, Senior Planner II, from Sam Freija, Traffic Engineer, City of Sarasota, included in the Agenda backup material indicating certain accomplishments of the 1991 Interlocal Agreement between SMH and the City; that the Interlocal Agreement requires SMH to submit an annual report to the City which has unfortunately not been provided in the past; that SMH will be submitting an annual report to the City each year in the future to fulfill the requirement. Commissioner Quillin stated that a copy of the annual report should be provided to the neighborhood associations and the Coalition of City Neighborhoods Association; that providing the information is good for everyone. Attorney Bailey stated that the report could be provided to the City's Neighborhoods Department for distribution. Commissioner Quillin referred to a July 18, 2002, memorandum, to William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, from Phillip Smith, ASLA, of David W. Johnston Associates (DWJA) Landscaping Architects, indicating the number of trees being removed from the public right-a-way and stated that several thousand dollars of taxpayers money for landscaping to beautify the area is being removed; that an exact amount is unknown; that the ability to relocate the trees to an alternative City site is unknown; that the concern is several species of existing plants do not transplant well. Attorney Bailey stated that SMH contributed to the existing landscaping. Mr. McDaniel stated that the character of the landscape in the proposed median will remain similar to the existing landscape. Commissioner Quillin stated that 60 or more trees are being removed. Commissioner Martin stated that Staff indicated the requirements of the Tree Protection Ordinance are met as the landscaping plan proposes the installation of 94 new trees including 27 live oaks at least 14 feet in height when planted. Commissioner Quillin stated that the trees being removed from the right-of-way should be relocated to another location in the public domain; that hopefully, Staff will assure the relocated trees will be planted in neighborhoods and/or public spaces. Attorney Bailey stated that additional trees will be planted on SMH property and also in public spaces; that the concern regarding the public right-of-way is understood. Commissioner Quillin asked the location of the bus stop and shelter? Mr. McDaniel stated that the bus stop is south of the parking garage on US 41; that the Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) does not intend to install a bus shelter. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City has an agreement with The Lamar Company, L.L.C. (Lamar), to provide bus shelters; that a bus shelter would be appropriate at the bus stop for SMH, which will be used by SMH employees and visitors of SMH patients. Attorney Bailey stated that SMH has no problem with the installation of a bus shelter; that SCAT indicated a bus shelter would not be installed. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City can request the installation of a bus shelter. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that another bus stop at the main entrance to SMH is utilized by most people going to SMH; that the BOOK 52 Page 24140 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24141 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. bus stop south of the parking garage on US 41 is an additional bus stop. Mr. McDaniel stated that a major bus stop exists at Waldemere Street at the main entrance to SMH; that WilsonMiller met with SCAT, which indicated a bus shelter would not be installed. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the appropriateness of a bus shelter should be considered. Commissioner Quillin stated that neighborhood residents are also interested in a bus shelter. Mr. Yoder stated that neighborhood residents requested a concrete slab between the sidewalk and the curb be installed at the bus stop as part of the project; that a concrete slab is indicated in the plans for the project. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a bus shelter may be required if enough activity is generated at the bus stop; that SMH and SCAT should consider the installation of a bus shelter. Mr. Yoder stated that the question was raised with SCAT due to the consideration regarding site distance at the road intersections in the area; that the concrete slab will be installed as part of the project. Mr. Tindale stated that the plans were to extend the stacking lane on Hillview Street east of US 41 by 350 feet into the neighborhood; that a request was received during the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting to reduce the length of the stacking lane; that as result, the stacking lane was reduced to 185 feet; however, the shorter distance restricts the ability to construct a median; therefore, the stacking lane may be extended to allow construction of a median; that the final design will be for a stacking lane of between 185 and 350 feet with an attractive median; that the effort is to reduce the impact in the neighborhood while creating a nice landscaped area. Mr. McDaniel referred to a design sketch of the revised design of Hillview Street east of US 41 indicating 125 feet of left turn storage with a 60-foot taper for a total of 185 feet and stated that the sketch indicates the minimum design for the stacking lane. Mr. Tindale stated that the 60-foot taper allows for only a minimum median and is created for low-speed traffic; that extending the taper will be required if additional landscaping is desired in the median; that the optimum design will be created depending upon the City's objectives. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the problem with the revised design is the median is directly across from a driveway at an office building; that traffic from the office building could not turn west to US 41 and would be required to go east into the neighborhood; that SMH should have conversations with the neighborhood property owners; that reducing the stacking lane from 350 feet is a positive step. Mr. Tindale stated that adequate flexibility has been incorporated into the design to accommodate the interests of the neighborhood residents and property Owners and the City; that the effort is to obtain the City's approval with a stipulation to meet the City's requirements on Hillview Street. Commissioner Servian asked if the parking garage has rooftop parking? Mr. McDaniel stated yes. Commissioner Martin asked the elevations of the parking garage? Mr. McDaniel referred to a display board of the elevations of the side-view of the proposed seven-level parking garage viewed from Hillview Street; and stated that the parking garage will be constructed of pre-cast concrete segments; that projections of decorative metal grillwork on the side of the parking garage are designed to mitigate the mass of the façade; that the side facing US 41 will receive similar decorative treatment. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a study conducted by SMH indicated 1,300 additional parking spaces would be required by 2005; that the proposed parking garage will create 1,066 parking spaces; and asked the justification for construction of a parking garage which is limited in terms of projected parking requirements for the future? Mr. McDaniel stated that SMH made a conscious decision not to maximize utilization of the site; that options to move non- essential ambulatory services off campus rather than to continue to intensify the campus are being considered. Dr. Finley stated that many activities can be moved off campus, for example medical tests for rehabilitative purposesi; that a BOOK 52 Page 24142 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24143 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. conscious effort is being made to relocate such activities; that SMH currently has sites on University Parkway and Blackburn Point Road; that the hope is to develop a site in south Sarasota County in the near future. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the question was based on SMH's study as to future requirements; that SMH's agreement to relocate and retain the police substation for a period of time is not memorialized in proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415; that a condition the police substation will remain in the parking garage as long as appropriate should be considered; and asked if SMH has any objections? Dr. Finley stated no. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the traffic congestion in the Downtown area has been the topic of significant discussion; that the City has created the Transportation Management Organization (TMO) to address the problem of traffic congestion; and asked if SMH will agree to participate in the TMO as a condition of approval of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415? Dr. Finley stated yes. Vice Mayor Palmer referred to the design sketch of the stacking lane on Hillview Street; stated that the design may be revised further; and asked if SMH will agree to meet with neighborhood residents and property owners and City Staff to finalize a design which is agreeable to all parties involved prior to second reading? Attorney Bailey stated that normally second reading of a proposed ordinance is at the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that SMH must also present the request for variances to the Board of Adjustment. Attorney Bailey stated that second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 could be delayed until after the meeting of the Board of Adjustment, which is scheduled for October 30, 2002. Mr. McDaniel stated that the design can be finalized within two weeks. Attorney Bailey stated that a meeting was held with neighborhood residents and property owners after the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting; that progress was made. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that some changes have occurred to the overall project; and asked if SMH is agreeable to meeting with neighborhood residents and property owners? Attorney Bailey stated yes. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Harvey Hoglund, AICP, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-12 is to approve a rezoning of 23.5 acres of the SMH campus from the Governmental Use (G), the Commercial General (CG), the Office Professional Business (OPB), and * the Medical Charitable Institutional (MCI) Zone Districts to the SMH Zone District; that the campus is generally bounded on the north by Floyd Street, the south by Hillview Street, the west by Osprey Avenue, and the east by US 41; that the accompanying Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28 has been proffered as a condition of the rezoning and includes a proposed parking garage at the northwest corner of US 41 and Hillview Street. Mr. Hoglund continued that at its September 4, 2002, meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing and found Rezone Application No. 02-RE-12 and Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the standards for review set forth in the Zoning Code (1998 Ed.), under which the applications were filed, and the Tree Protection Ordinance, and voted unanimously to recommend Commission approval of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4399 subject to the following conditions: 1. All related development plans for the proposed parking garage shall be in compliance with those labeled "Sarasota Memorial Hospital Hillview Street Parking Garage"; 2. The Applicant shall submit an interim parking plan for the existing parking spaces to be displace during the construction of the parking garage; 3. The Applicant shall submit a letter from the Department of Community Affairs determining the development is not required to undergo review as a Development of Regional Impact; 4. The Applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan for approval by the City; BOOK 52 Page 24144 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24145 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. 5. All existing trees to be removed from the public right- of-way shall be relocated by Applicant to another site which is suitable to the Cityi 6. The Applicant shall dedicate the following generally described property for public right-of-way purposes: (a) Sufficient property along the northern boundary of Hillview Street between Laurent Place and south US 41 to accommodate angle parking on both sides of the westbound lane of Hillview Street and the proposed roundabout at the Laurent Place intersection; (b) Sufficient property along Laurent Place to accommodate proposed roadway flares; (c) Sufficient property along the west side of south US 41 between Arlington and Hillview Streets to enable construction of an exclusive right lane turn onto Hillview Street; 7. Applicant shall provide a public right-of-way easement for the proposed driveway to be constructed between Laurent Place and Arlington Street; 8. The following road improvements shall be constructed by the Applicant at the Applicant's sole expense: (a) Reconstruct approximately 245 feet of Hillview Street to provide a new left turn lane, additional landscaping, and traffic calming improvements as an entrance into the abutting neighborhood; (b) Reconstruct Hillview Street between south US 41 and Laurent Place to provide diagonal parking; (c) Add a southbound right turn lane on south US 41 between Arlington and Hillview Streets; (d) Construct a roundabout at the intersection of Hillview Street and Laurent Place; (e) Move the southbound bus stop on South Tamiami Trail to a new location north of Hillview Street; 9. Applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City committing the Applicant to provide all road improvements; 10. A plan for directional signage shall be submitted by the Applicant to the City for review and approval; 11. The Applicant shall conduct a nighttime test of interior lighting to verify the lighting will not cause excessive glare to motorists on adjoining streets; 12. Applicant shall present the approved revised Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28 to the Board of Adjustment; 13. Applicant agrees to submit an annual status report to the City Manager concerning Transportation Demand Management Strategies; 14. Applicant shall maintain access for westbound traffic via the westbound bypass lane on Arlington Street unimpeded; 15. Applicant shall place no signage on Arlington Street to create an impression to motorists the street is closed to through traffic; 16. The City and the Applicant shall consider channelization to discourage left hand turns north onto US 41. Mr. Hoglund further stated that the SMH Zone District was craited specifically for SMH and was designed to establish a series of dimensional standards including setbacks, no-build areas, and height limitations; that the height limit on the block on which the parking garage will be constructed is 150 feet; that the proposed parking garage is 67.5 feet; that decorative elements on the parking garage are required on the east and south sides and will also be constructed on the west side sO the three sides open to public view will have a decorative element similar to other decorative elements on the SMH campusi that adhering to the requirements of the no-build area was a problem due to the right- of-way improvements on Hillview Street and US 41 requiring dedications; that the SMH campus was shrunk due to the dedications required for the rights-of-way; that the parking garage cannot be compressed further due to the depth of parking spaces on the latitudinal side and the slope on the longitudinal side; that the footprint of the parking garage cannot be altered; that the Board of Adjustment approved variances to allow a reduction in the no- build area; that the transportation improvements in the area necessitated the variances; that the neighborhood on the north side of Hillview Street will obtain an attractive park-like area in which the live oaks will be concentrated; that significant discussion concerning the side of the campus facing Hillview Street occurred at the time the SMH Zone District was conceived; that some City Staff were of the opinion any building should be BOOK 52 Page 24146 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24147 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Close to the street with storefronts at the ground level; that the concept was opposed by the neighborhood, which desired the type of treatment proposed in the project as presented; that SMH's design team did a good job of meeting the neighborhood's requirement. Mr. Hoglund stated further that most of the discussion at the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting concerned circulation issues and the impact on the rights-of-way including the removal of the trees, which were installed at public expensei that little mention was made of the SMH Zone District; that the Commission is being requested to approve a rezoning of 23.5 acres and the site plan for the project; that City Staff met with the landscape architect to assure the trees would not be discarded but rather utilized and replaced in kind with trees replicating the existing landscaping; that staff of the Engineering and Planning Departments served as non-voting members of SMH's Neighborhood Advisory Council and were involved in the evolution of the project; that the neighborhood process required by the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) is a different process; that SMH's Neighborhood Advisory Council is a small number of people whereas the normal process requires notice to individual addresses within a prescribed distance; that two City- sponsored neighborhood meetings were held, the latest in July 2002; that opportunities have been available for participation through SMH's Neighborhood Advisory Council or the City-sponsored neighborhood meetings. Mr. Hoglund distributed copies of the design sketch of the portion of Hillview Street east of US 41; and stated that the revised design was SMH's response to neighborhood concerns; that the Sarasota Police Department (SPD) has been involved in discussions with SMH since the inception of the project; that closing the existing police substation and building a new police substation in the parking garage is viewed as a progressive step by SPD; that the SPD is supportive of the project; that formalizing the agreement concerning the police substation is a good idea. Dennis Daughters, Director of ngineering/City Engineer, and Sam Freija, Traffic Engineer, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that Engineering Staff spent significant time working with SMH and SMH's Neighborhood Advisory Council to make the project the best possible and is satisfied with the final proposed design; and cited Section 5 (h) (i), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415, as follows: [The Applicant shall] Reconstruct approximately 245 feet of Hillview Street, east of South Tamiami Trail (US 41) to provide a new left turn lane and add landscaping and traffic calming improvements as an entrance into the abutting neighborhood. Mr. Daughters stated that the wording is supported; that the 245 feet should be changed to 200 feet; that the word "gateway" should be added after the word "entrance"? that a presentation of a specific plan would not be required prior to second reading if Section 5 (h) (i), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415, as written with the suggested revisions is adopted; that Section 5 (h) (i), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415, as revised provides the necessary flexibility to work with SMH, the neighborhood residents and property owners, and other interested parties; that more than two weeks will probably be required to develop a specific proposal; that the plans would become part of the construction drawings. Mr. Freija stated that time will be necessary to work with the abutting property owners; that the median as currently proposed could not be landscaped and will block westbound traffic from a driveway of an abutting property, resulting in an increase in traffic into the neighborhood; that westbound traffic from another driveway on the north side of Hillview Street will be blocked if the median is extended further east; that the effort is to develop a plan which is acceptable to most people by shortening the stacking lane and accommodating the median requested by the neighborhood; that neighborhood meetings and agreement with abutting property owners will be required; that westbound traffic will probably be blocked from one driveway; that developing an acceptable design will require several meetings. Commissioner Quillin asked if the problem could be mitigated by installing a new driveway rather than blocking westbound traffic from one driveway? Mr. Daughters stated that exploring different suggestions is the reason Staff believes additional time is required; that all alternatives should be considered; that the hope is to develop a design which will be pleasing to most interested parties. Commissioner Servian stated that another possibility is to split the median. Commissioner Martin asked if the City has all the required right- of-way in the vicinity? Mr. Daughters stated yes. BOOK 52 Page 24148 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24149 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Affected Persons come forward; and the following Affected Persons came before the Commission: Steve Rees, Attorney, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, representing the six Affected Persons, Richard Mercer, traffic engineering consultant, and Richard Bass, real estate appraiser and planning consultant, came before the Commission. Attorney Rees stated that the following Atfected Persons are represented: Doctors Gardens Association, Inc., including Dr. Marc Grinberg, Dr. Thomas Kelly, Dr. John Sullivan, Dr. Richard Rehmeyer, Dr. Gil Heitman, and Dr. Kenneth Liszewski; Dr. Mahfouz El Shahawy; Dr. Gregory Dickinson; and Dr. Leonard Slazinski. Attorney Rees continued that Dr. Dickinson appeared at the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting both with legal counsel representing Doctors Gardens, Inc., as well as individually addressing neignborhood concerns; that his clients own property at the western end of Arlington Street; that previously, SMH had a different vision plan for the expansion of the SMH campus, which included efforts to acquire his clients' property and vacate Laurent Place from Arlington Street to Hillview Street; that his clients raised strong objections to the efforts; that the proposed condemnation action to acquire his clients' property did not occur. Attorney Rees continued that SMH reconsidered the vision plan, resulting in the project currently presented; that the original vision plan also included a proposal to vacate Arlington Street from Laurent Place east to US 41, which would have had material and detrimental effects on his Clients' property values and access to the properties; that a legal, planning, and appraisal analysis of the adverse impact vacating Arlington Street would have had on his client's property was developed; that in early 2002, a dialog was entered with SMH; that SMH agreed not to consider requesting a vacation of Arlington Street from Laurent Place east to US 41 after debate of important land use issues; that subsequently, the focus was to develop the best possible site plan addressing issues of transportation safety, access, and circulation; that as a demonstration of unity, he appeared before the Board of Adjustment on behalf of the Affected Persons to support the variances requested by SMH; that the Board of Adjustment was advised issues related to the site plan concerning transportation access, circulation, etc., would be presented to the PBLP and the Commission; that an appearance was made at the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting to memorialize the clients' concerns and to inform the PBLP of two additional stipulations which should be added but were not included in Staff's report; and cited proposed Section 5, Ordinance No. 03- 4415, which were recommended to and approved by the PBLP as follows: (n) Applicant shall maintain access for westbound traffic via the westbound bypass lane on Arlington Street unimpeded. (o) Applicant shall place no signage on Arlington Street or at its intersection with South Tamiami Trail (US 41) to create an impression to motorists that Arlington Street is closed to through traffic.. Attorney Rees continued that vacating the portion of Arlington Street is not part of SMH's proposal; however, a concern was traffic management should not create a de facto vacation of the portion of Arlington Street; that Sections 5 (n) and (o) resolve his clients' concerns regarding traffic management and are integral to approval of the site plan; and cited Section 5(p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415, as follows: The City of Sarasota and the Applicant shall consider channelization or other appropriate means to discourage left hand turns north onto South Tamiami Trail (US 41) from Arlington Street Attorney Rees stated that strenuous objections are raised to Section 5(p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415; that the Commission's review of the minutes of the September 4, 2002, PBLP meeting will demonstrate no discussion providing competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the necessity for the stipulation; that no empirical data concerning past, present, or future transportation safety issues was provided to indicate two-way traffic at the intersection should be discouraged; that the stipulation leaves the represented Affected Persons out of subsequent consideration of measures which may discourage left hand turns north onto South Tamiami Trail; that the stipulation attempts to condition any action on the emergency medical vehicles and the Florida Department of Transportation; that no further changes should be made in the overall site plan or the traffic circulation plan and accesses BOOK 52 Page 24150 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24151 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. without the involvement and consent of his clients; that the Commission is requested to either: 1. eliminate the stipulation 2. consider the matter at the time the parking garage is operational with notice to his clients 3. return the stipulation through the public hearing process as a substantial change under the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) Attorney Rees continued that no evidence has been presented at the PBLP or in the testimony at the current meeting concerning the necessity for Section 5(p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415; that his Clients as practicing physicians and the patients served have the option of using the two-way eastbound section of Arlington Street to make a turn to proceed either northbound or southbound on US 41; that the desire is to preserve the option; that the Affected Persons have no objection to the rezoning or the site plan provided the proffered stipulations are included in the adopting ordinance with the exception of Section 5 (p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that other interested persons come forward; and the following interested persons came before the Commission: Mary Ciner, 1714 Waldemere Street, (34239), stated that the neighborhood meeting regarding the proposed development was attended; that she has no objection to the rezoning; however, the traffic impact to the neighborhood as a result of the proposed parking garage is a concern; that her current residence is west of Osprey Avenue on Waldemere Street; that additional traffic into the neighborhoods from the northwest will cut through Waldemere Street; that reducing the speed limit on Waldemere Street is not a solution; that dispersing an additional 700 cars through the neighborhoods once Arlington and Hillview Streets become congested is a concern. Phyllis Cobb, First Vice Chair, Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 1827 Hibiscus Street, (34239), stated that the Sarasota County Public Hospital Board has worked very hard with the neighborhoods and City and SMH Staffs to determine the best possible solution to handle the traffic impact into the neighborhoods; that people inevitably become sick and come to SMH; that the proposed development is the best solution to serve the public; that the number of out-patients and in-patients to SMH has increased; that the hope is the rezoning and the proposed parking garage will be approved by the Commission. Alan Roddy, 1827 Hibiscus Street, (34239), stated that he has been a member of the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council for one year and is present on behalf of the Chair, Isabel Norton; that the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council unanimously supports Rezone Application No. 02-RE-12 and Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-28; that the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council has been active since 1988; that 27 meetings which involved the proposed development have been held since 1997; that previous members of the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council have included former Mayor Molly Cardamone, Mary Kumpe, Jill Toale, and Rob Patten; that the current members of the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council are: Denise May, Eddie Morton, Sam Schackow, Marion Almy, Fletcher Bennett, Belinda Coffrin, Gary Dickinson, Miles Millwee, Georgia Nicholson, Laurie Pike-Adkins, and himself; that members are representative of business owners and residents of the proposed development area; that the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council has been involved in SMH's operation and development plans since 1988; that the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council is pleased with SMH's commitment to involve the neighborhoods and preserving the open-space on Hillview Street; that the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council supports the adoption of and incidental variances necessary to conform to the SMH Zone District; that concerns have been expressed regarding traffic volumes and circulation; however, SMH has provided an excellent solution to accommodate the concerns; that the belief is the neighborhoods will benefit from the proposed parking garage, additional off-street parking spaces for the public, proposed open-space, additional landscaping, stormwater improvements, and the new police substation; that SMH's willingness to work with the neighborhoods on the incidental issues and temporary inconveniences during construction is appreciated; that the hope is for Commission approval of the proposed development. Carol Ann Davis, Sarasota, Florida (34239), stated that she is a current resident of the Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood east of US 41; that the possible increased traffic flow eastbound on Hillview Street as a result of the proposed garage is a concern; that the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41 should be constructed similar to the intersection of Waldemere Street and US 41; that eastbound traffic on Hillview Street should be restricted to north or south turns on US 41; that vehicular traffic will avoid US 41 if allowed to continue eastbound on BOOK 52 Page 24152 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24153 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Hillview Street; that traffic will increase in the neighborhoods. Shannon Snyder, President, Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Association, 1985 South Jefferson (34239), stated that SMH has presented a good plan for increased parking; however, the traffic flow from Hillview Street into the neighborhoods is a concern; that SMH's attempt to work with the neighborhoods is commended; that the timing of westbound traffic entering into SMH is shorter than eastbound traffic; that the result will be additional traffic into the neighborhoods; that the area on US 41 between Webber and Bahia Vista Streets is built out; that eastbound traffic through the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41 is currently filtering through the neighborhoods; that the parking garage is supported; that the issue is preserving the neignborhoods and avoiding coming back before the Commission in two years due to dramatic traffic problems in the neighborhoods; that the SMH is commended for attempting to find a solution; that the same design to prevent eastbound traffic at the intersection of Waldemere Street and US 41 should be implemented at the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41; that the design will prevent cut through traffic into the neighborhoods and still accommodate traffic circulation for SMH; that the proposed project on the SMH campus is complimented; however, the amount of traffic impacting the neighborhoods is a concern and should be addressed; that SMH is a gem of the community and as valuable as the beaches of Sarasota. Commissioner Quillin referred to the design sketch of the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41 displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated that the proposed intersection will include two northbound turn lanes, one southbound turn lane, and one eastbound lane at the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41; that traffic into the neighborhood seems limited as indicated by plans for Hillview Street. Mr. Snyder stated that traffic is Dumper-to-bumper in the mornings on Hyde Park Street; that 200 tickets were recently issued by the Sarasota Police Department (SPD) for the area; that a problem exists in the area; that the traffic signal cycle at the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41 indicates additional time for traffic to cross US 41 compared to turning north or south; that restricting the eastbound traffic from Hillview Street into the neighborhoods was proposed to SMH; that SMH indicated such a proposal is a safety issue dictated by Federal Department of Transportation (FDOT) regulations; that the limitations of SMH are understood; that the solution should be to preserve the neighborhood. Commissioner Quillin asked if the traffic signal is shorter on the westside than the eastside of Hillview Street? Mr. Snyder stated that the traffic signal is shorter for traffic traveling westbound on Hillview Street. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if the Southeast Sarasota Neighborhood Association is willing to work with SMH, the SMH Neighborhood Advisory Council, and the businesses of the area to attempt to resolve the issue? Mr. Snyder stated yesi that all parties involved have been willing to find a solution; that delaying the proposed development is not the intent; that the intent is to address the neighborhood issues and concerns; that the current design will result in a problem for the neighborhoods. Commissioner Martin stated that SMH is current shuttling employees from the parking lot at Tuttle Avenue and Bahia Vista Street through the neighborhoods; that the proposed parking garage will eliminate the shuttling and will result in a positive effect for the neighborhoods. Mr. Snyder stated that maintaining the agreement regarding traffic management will also eliminate several of the problems which have existed. Richard Bass, 1687 Spring Creek Drive (34239), stated that applying the concept of restricting traffic eastbound as is done at the intersection of Waldemere Street and US 41 to the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41 is not the solution; that people will travel through the neighborhoods as a shortcut regardless of the direction of the intersection; that a driver will turn north onto US 41 and turn east onto Hawthorne Street if restricted at the intersection of US 41 and Hillview Street; that the area bounded by Waldemere and Hillview Streets and US 41 and East Avenue is designated as in the Neighborhood Office Future Land Use Classification which is not built out; that the existing apartment buildings will probably be redeveloped to offices; that the most logical uses will be medical related; that severing the Hillview Street connection is not the solution; that the traffic on Hyde Park Street is unrelated to the traffic on Hillview Street; that traffic will continue on BOOK 52 Page 24154 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24155 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. all side streets unless the streets are completely blocked; that his family owns a residence on the east side of Hawthorne Street; that traffic will cut through the neighborhoods once businesses are developed on Hillview Street; that studying the traffic circulation in the area should continue; that no testimony has been presented to indicate a significant increase in the number of trips east and west on Hillview Street into the neighborhood; that a discussion of the issue should be in a future Commission workshop. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that no decision will be made at the present time; that the intent of the public input is to discuss issues and concerns which must resolved. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that the Applicant come forward for rebuttal. Attorney Bailey, Mr. McDaniel, and Mr. Tindale came forward. Attorney Bailey stated that the City's Engineering Staff is indicating speed should not be at the expense of accuracy; that the preference is to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 with Section 5 (h) (i) as modified by Engineering Staff; that SMH has worked with City Engineering Staff and will defer to Staff's decision; that the original proposal was more expensive than the current proposal; that SMH would be concerned about deferring second reading pending resolution of the design of Hillview Street east of US 41 due to the magnitude of the concerns expressed; that the best possible solution should be developed for the benefit of the neighborhood and the public; that SMH will reconstruct Hillview Street in the manner determined best by the City; that SMH does not object to deleting Section 5(p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415. Mr. Tindale stated that the increase in traffic at SMH was projected; that some additional traffic will result to the neighborhood west of SMH; that the statistics were reviewed with neighborhood residents; that SMH has undertaken a number of mitigation efforts; that the residents in the neighborhood west of SMH found the increase in traffic acceptable; that no additional mitigation is possible; that the neighborhood residents were of the opinion everything possible had been done to minimize the traffic headed west and maximize the improvements in orienting SMH toward US 41; that traffic capacity will increase significantly, that traffic is being moved toward US 41. Attorney Bailey stated that SMH will defer to City Engineering Staff and will abide by the Commission's wishes concerning traffic east of US 41. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Affected Persons come forward for rebuttal. Attorney Rees stated that the Affected Persons represented have no rebuttal. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that the City come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Hoglund, Mr. Daughters, and Mr. Freija came forward. Mr. Daughters stated that City Engineering Staff has no concerns with deleting Section 5(p), proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415; that the development of landscaped medians is envisioned on US 41 from Downtown to Bee Ridge Road; that the actions to resolve the design of Hillview Street east of US 41 do not have to occur prior to second reading of the proposed Ordinance; that a suggestion heard at the public hearing was not to allow cross traffic on US 41, which was a surprise; that the suggestion had not been heard previously; that meetings have been ongoing for a lengthy period of time; that the suggestion is not supported and is against the principles of New Urbanism which the City has been pursuing. Mr. Freija stated that Tindale-Oliver conducted an Origin and Destination (O&D) Study and found 7 percent of the traffic from SMH travels east into the neighborhood; that the through movement on Hillview Street eastbound is being improved; that the movement to US 41 northbound will be improved by the reconstruction of Hillview Street east of US 41; that recommending no eastbound movement will be difficult in the area; that the overall level of service must be maintained for the intersection for capacity purposes; that any displaced eastbound traffic on Hillview Street will move to Waldemere Street, which would not please abutting residents. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that City Staff, SMH, and the neighborhood residents and property owners must resolve the issues. BOOK 52 Page 24156 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24157 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Martin asked if Staff supports changing a portion of Arlington Street to one-way traffic? Mr. Freija stated yes; that the reason for the change to one-way traffic is to minimize the conflict points with pedestrians, valet parking, and through traffic movement. Mr. Daughters stated that the loop road will be dedicated as a public road with public access. Mr. Freija stated that Tindale-Oliver should present the information concerning the volume of the traffic entering the neighborhood to the east of SMH. Mr. Tindale came forward and stated that significant time was spent to assure the neighborhood was being treated fairly; that the license tag number of every vehicle leaving SMH was recorded for an 8-hour period to determine the percent of SMH traffic entering the neighborhood; that only 6 percent of the traffic from SMH goes across US 41 and through the neighborhood to the east; that 2,500 license tags were recorded; that only 6 percent or 161 vehicles penetrated the neighborhood; that 2,506 vehicles were counted coming to SMH; that 8 percent penetrated through the neighborhood to the east of SMH; that the data demonstrates a significant number of vehicles are not traveling to SMH through the neighborhood to the east; that SMH is not a major player in the traffic going through the neighborhood to the east. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if the same will be true once the parking garage is constructed? Mr. Tindale stated that some additional vehicles will be added to the neighborhood traffic upon completion of the parking garagei that the projection is some small percent of the additional vehicles will travel through the neighborhood to the east of SMH; that SMH has indicated a willingness to participate in any abatement program in the neighborhood to the east of SMH to the extent of any contribution to the traffic problem; that SMH has been honest with the nearby neighborhoods and has provided data; that the residents from the nearby neighborhoods indicated no restrictions should be imposed to crossing US 41 at Hillview Street; that a significant amount of time was spent in studying the role SMH plays in neighborhood traffic, the role of the traffic light, and the additional traffic at the intersection of Hillview Street and US 41; that the general opinion is not to restrict movement. Vice Mayor Palmer requested Commissioner supplemental remarks, if any, and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 on first reading with the stipulation Sarasota Memorial Hospital participate in the Transportation Management Organization, the agreement concerning the police substation be formalized, and Section 5 (p) be deleted from the proposed Ordinance. Sarah Schenk, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that following are conditions the Commission may wish to consider adding to proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 as a result of the comments during the public hearing: Section 5(e) Add a requirement that Sarasota Memorial Hospital agrees to replace any trees which die within two years after replanting Section 5(h) (i) Change 245 feet to 200 feet and add a reference to the word "gateway" Attorney Schenk cited Section 5(i) as follows: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for Site Plan Application 02-SP-28, Applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City of Sarasota, committing the Applicant to provide all road improvements Attorney Schenk stated that the details of the road improvements to Hillview Street east of US 41 can be added to the written agreement; and cited Section 5 (m) as follows: In accordance with the Interlocal Agreement for Implementation of Traffic Mitigation Phase II dated August 28, 1991 between the City of Sarasota and the Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, Applicant agrees to submit an annual status report to the City Manager concerning Transportation Demand Management Strategies. BOOK 52 Page 24158 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24159 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Attorney Schenk stated that a requirement could be added for SMH to submit the annual report to the Department of Neighborhoods if desired. Commissioner Servian as the maker of the motion with the approval of Commissioner Martin as the seconder stated that the additions and changes to proposed Ordinance No. 03-4415 indicated by Attorney Schenk are incorporated into the motion. Commissioner Quillin stated that the anticipation is City Staff, SMH, and the neighborhood residents and property owners will work together to resolve the design of Hillview Street east of US 41. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the main issue is the neighborhood residents and property owners will work with SMH and City Staff concerning the design of Hillview Street east of US 41; that the design should be brought back prior to second reading if possible; however, if not, the Commission understands a rationale will be presented; that SMH has agreed to any design recommended by the City. Vice Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion and requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll- call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. 14. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM VI) CD 10:39 through 10:42 Stan Zimmerman, 2469 Novus Street (34237), stated that several years ago, he appeared before the Commission and requested approval to act on the Commission's behalf concerning the request by the Sarasota Sailing Squadron to create a mooring field at City Island; that good news which has already been reviewed with City Staff will be presented to the Commission; that a letter of clearance has been received from the Department of Community Affairs after 15 months of protracted negotiations; that the permitting process can now proceed sO the goal of approval of a mooring field for use by the Sarasota Sailing Squadron can be achieved; that the permit will be issued in the City's name; that upon issuance of the permit, the City can decide if to proceed to implement the mooring field. Mr. Zimmerman continued that at the October 7, 2002, Regular meeting, the Commission instructed Staff to prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) to proceed with a similar endeavor at Bayfront Park; that subsequently, City Staff called and requested assistance with the process; that an attempt will be made to arrange a meeting with stakeholders, principals, and individuals with greater experience and knowledge of mooring issues sO the problem can be defined prior to developing an RFP; that determining the problem prior to hiring a consultant to address the problem seems wise. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: : AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF PUBLIC PARKS - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) CD 10:42 through 11:32 Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission, referred to an October 4, 2002, memorandum to the Commission indicating the parameters of legally defensible regulations pertaining to the use of public parks with consideration of the US Constitution protections of free exercise of religion and freedom of expression; and stated that the US Supreme Court has firmly established public parks have been held in trust for the use of the public and for time immemorial have been used for purposes of assembly, communication of thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions; that the focus of US Supreme Court decisions is a park is a traditional public forum for expression; that any regulations contemplated should not exclude communications of a particular type of content but rather must coordinate multiple uses of limited space; that the October 4, 2002, memoranda discusses the impact of the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was passed in 1998 following a similar enactment by Congress, and various First Amendment issues. Attorney Singer continued that only two Florida cases interpret the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act; that one case is Abbott versus the City of Fort Lauderdale; that the City of Fort Lauderdale passed a park rule prohibiting the provision of social services at beaches, in particular, a feeding program similar to the service being provided in Gillespie Park; that the park rule was challenged; that the challenge ultimately went to the District Court of Appeal concerning the question of compliance by the City of Fort Lauderdale with the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act by identifying a suitable alternative location; that the District Court of Appeal remanded BOOK 52 Page 24160 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24161 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. the case back to the trial court to determine if the site selected by the City of Fort Lauderdale was suitable; that the trial court found the selected site was not suitable; that the City of Fort Lauderdale appealed the determination to the District Court of Appeal and lost; that the feeding program is continuing at the beach in the City of Fort Lauderdale; that the City of Fort Lauderdale could not prohibit feeding programs since the required suitable location was not in compliance with the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Attorney Singer further stated that Gifts from God engages in feeding programs regularly on Sunday afternoons at the Gillespie Park pavilion; that an alternative was brought before the Commission to lease property on Tenth Street for the feeding program but was not approved; that the Commission should consider the implications of the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment prior to adopting any regulations; that traditionally local governments and the National Park Service have dealt with problems associated with freedom of expression in the parks through permitting requirements; that in January 2002, the US Supreme Court upheld the municipal park district regulations and the process by which the regulations were adopted and implemented in Chicago, Illinois; that the regulations serve as a model for park regulations suitable for any government; that the Chicago municipal park district regulations require any group over 50 to obtain a permit to assemble in a public park. Attorney Singer stated further that recommendations concerning the scope of the regulatory activity are: Option 1: Amend Chapter 22, Parks and Recreation, Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code) to create a new section which would prohibit the use of parks for business or social service purposes. Option 2: Amend Chapter 22, Parks and Recreation, City Code, to create a new section to establish rules and regulations applicable to all parks within the City which would require any group of persons over a fixed number to obtain a permit from the City to use a park and establish general criteria for the issuance of the permit. Attorney Singer stated that the criteria for Option 2 includes but is not limited to providing for: 1. Authority to the City Manager to determine the location, hours, scope, sanitary requirements, litter control based on number of persons participating, and other reasonable conditions for the use of the park prior to issuing the permit; 2. A specified time period for review to issue the permit and to provide for appeals of denial; 3. Denial of a permit for events involving expressive activity in which the event would pose a clear and present danger to public health and safety; 4. Revocation of a permit for violation of permit terms; 5. Authority to deny future permits for a specified period for continued violation of permit restrictions. Attorney Singer continued that alternatively, Chapter 22, City Code, could be amended to provide authority for the Commission to enact by resolution park regulations and requirements for the issuance of permits for groups over a certain size for specific parks located in the City with criteria for the issuance of permits similar to those included in Option 2. Attorney Singer further stated that regulations pertaining to noise will be addressed through the permitting process; that Staff will bring back regulations for permits including the necessary specific criteria; that the intent is to control the activities enabling a cooperative coordinated use of public parks to avoid allowing one group or entity to usurp the use of a park; that a group of 50 wishing to utilize Laurel Park would be denied through the permitting process since Laurel Park is too small; that First Amendment rights would not be violated since a suggestion would be offered to use another nearby park which could accommodate a large group; that the permitting process will address the type of activity requested and determine the appropriateness under the specific circumstances; that the rules governing the permitting process will consider the park is for everyone and not for one groupi that alternative days or locations for activities within a park can be suggested. Attorney Singer stated further that the recommendation is to authorize the City Attorney to draft an ordinance regulating the use of public parks, with the authority of the City Manager to BOOK 52 Page 24162 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24163 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. establish any rules and forms necessary to implement the ordinance. Commissioner Servian asked if the number of times an activity can occur or a permit holder can have an event in the same park in any given year is being considered as part of the regulations? Attorney Singer stated that park regulations reviewed do not address limitations of the number of times an activity can take place; that limiting the number of times a certain activity can take place is not a goal; however, no one will have an exclusive right to any City park. Commissioner Quillin stated that the situation in Gillespie Park is no longer a religious event but is a commercial enterprise; that evidence was provided the events were advertised over the internet; that abuses should not be tolerated in any public park. Attorney Singer stated that most communities have park permit requirements; that the time has come for the City to create a permitting process for parks. Commissioner Quillin stated that the number of people attending a gathering could potentially exceed the number allowed in the issued permit and asked if controls will be developed to address permit violations? Attorney Singer stated that permit violations are an enforcement issue which will be addressed by the Sarasota Police Department (SPD). Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the remaining Agenda items will extend the meeting past 11:30 p.m. and asked the wishes of the Commission? On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to complete the current Agenda Item No. VII-1 and Item No. VII-3, concerning the request from the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association, and schedule any remaining items for the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. City Manager McNees stated that the other Agenda items could be considered if Item Nos. VII-1 and -2 are completed prior to 11:30 p.m. Arthur Karco, no address provided, stated that Gifts from God performs an admirable service for the homeless; that he was a former business owner and is now homeless due to a traffic accident; that Gifts from God reached out and provided food and clothing; that Gillespie Park is centrally located and is convenient for Gifts from God to provide services to the homeless; that Gifts from God provides a positive rather than negative way of living; that a problem will be created and will worsen if the activities and services provided by Gifts of God are forced to stop; that Gifts from God has provided him with a positive attitude, enabling him to begin a business after health problems are addressed. Jennifer Wilson, 435 Seeds Avenue (34237), representing the Greater Downtown Sarasota Action Team (GDSAT), stated that a festival was held in Gillespie Park on September 28, 2002; that a special permit was required for the event; that the permitting process was simple; that a $200 charge was incurred for additional trash receptacles and $130 for portable toilets; that the Commission is requested to adopt rules which will include parks in the Park East neighborhood as well. Linda Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236), stated that a permitting process for special events exists and is used for any special event occurring in City parks; that the reason the permitting process is not being applied to the Gifts from God activities in Gillespie Park is puzzling; that the existing permitting process can be equally applicable to all the City's parks for any event over 50 people. Tammy Burns, 2936 Dick Wilson Road (34240), representing Gifts from God, stated that she and her husband and children have served at Gillespie Park with Church in the Park; that the hope was to teach children that the less fortunate have a heart and a soul and should be respected; that the children have learned from the experience with Church in the Park and look forward to assisting with the services every Sundayi that the children wished to come before the Commission to speak but are viewing the meeting on television due to the lateness of the meeting; that the Commission is requested to allow the services provided by Church in the Park to continue; that the children will not understand the reasons for discontinuing the services; that the Commission is requested to assist in providing an explanation to BOOK 52 Page 24164 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24165 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. the children if the Church in the Park is not allowed to continue. Todd Smith, 3940 Red Rock Way (34231), representing Gifts from God, stated that he and his wife and four children serve at Church in the Park on Sunday afternoons; that his children are 16, 14, 9, and 7 years old; that the two youngest children were present to speak but have returned home due to the late hour; that homeless people are treated poorly by society; that the situation is unfortunate; that someone must reach out to the homeless; that the problems of the homeless are deep rooted; that no one cares or displays any love toward the homeless; that Gifts from God offers a smile and a caring and helpful atmosphere; that many people from different organizations come to serve as well; that an explanation of government operations was being provided to his children; that government makes decisions which are fair; that the concerns of the Gillespie Park homeowners are understandable and respected; that the solution is an alternative location; that Gifts from God does not have funding available to purchase land to construct a building; that no revenue source exists; that the Commission is requested to consider all options which allow the Church in the Park Ministry to continue and which meet the requirements of the City and residents of the Gillespie Park neighborhood. Helen Meijer, 8133 Shadow Pine Way (34238), representing Gifts from God, distributed and read a prepared statement indicating that she has been a volunteer with Gifts from God for approximately four years; that Gifts from God and serving the poor and homeless is not a hobby but is her life; that God has provided her with the ability to unconditionally love the homeless and destitute at all times and under all circumstances; that most of society has little use for the people who are served at Gillespie Park; that the people can at times be a nuisance; that the homeless and poor people are not wanted in most neighborhoods or in Gillespie Park; that the homeless and poor people will not disappear if Gifts from God and the volunteers are banned from Gillespie Park; that many wonderful agencies and rehabilitation facilities in the City assist many people; that individuals who do not attempt to improve or change according to agency rules are no longer assisted; that the organizations try to change behavior, assist with clothing, addiction, and prepare some individuals to reenter the workforce; however, only God can change hearts; that Gifts from God assists many poor and homeless people who are no longer being assisted by other agencies; that the individuals remain on the streets in the Downtown area and in the same neighborhoods; that some are apprehended by the police and jailed; that taxpayers pay the cost of incarceration; that the people are released back into the homeless situation and the scenario is repeated. Ms. Meijer continued that the City is performing a great disservice if Gifts from God's access to Gillespie Park is restricted; that God through the volunteers with Gifts from God Ministries is changing lives; that the stomachs and spirit of people who have nowhere else to go are being fed; that unconditional love is provided; that the Gifts from God organization and volunteers welcome everyone from executives to people considered as the bottom of the barrel in society; that with God's help, the volunteers love and change the people; that people become better citizens and hearts grow softer and kinder. Ms. Meijer further stated that issues concerning City ordinances, land, buildings, and other regulations are not known; that the people living on the streets are known by name; that the homeless camps have been visited and antibiotic creams have been applied to spider bites; that blankets have been provided as well as tarps to cover the few belongings; that the homeless and poor living on the streets are known personally and are loved; that people have been seen moving from life on the streets into a new more productive life; that the Commission is requested to assist in allowing Gifts from God and the volunteers to provide the unique and unconditional love and service which no one currently provides to make the City a better place in which to live. Floyd Kyles, 1220 Cocoanut Avenue (34236), stated that Gifts from God Ministries found him on the benches in Gillespie Park as a drug addict and alcoholic; that he was found by Michael Butterfield who indicated Gillespie Park would be a wonderful place to start a ministry; that a promise was made to change if the ministry was conducted every Sunday at Gillespie Park; that Gifts from God is located in the right place; that God brought him to Gifts from God; that the ministry has brought him from a dark and desperate situation to being able to hold his head high; that the Commission is requested to understand his relationship with Gifts from God; that Gifts from God changes lives; that in the past while strolling in the Gillespie Park and partaking in drugs and alcohol, he noticed the park had a lot of history; that history should be made in Gillespie Park at the present time. BOOK 52 Page 24166 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24167 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Carl Kurtyka, 5706 Bent Oak Drive (34232), stated that he is a volunteer and his wife works full time for Gifts from God; that the fruit of what occurs in the lives of people who have been changed by Gifts from God Ministries is experienced on a daily basis; that the differences Gifts from God makes is immense; that tears were seen in peoples' eyes at the time a single mother was handed keys to a used vehicle which was donated to the ministry; that the single mother can now drive to work and pick up her children from daycare; that in 1995 he came to Sarasota from a Florida State Prison; that an experience with God took place in prison; that 12 years of his life were spent in prison; that every Sunday, slowly but surely, peoples' lives are being changed; that the truth is the poor and homeless will remain in the park if the services provided by Gifts from God is not allowed to continue; that no one will be offering hope, a hand of fellowship, or an encouraging word; that the desire is not to come across as a bleeding heart; however, men and woman have personally been seen who are addicted to crack-cocaine and alcohol, have been turned around by Gifts from God, and now have jobs and apartments for the first time in 20 or 30 years; that the individuals have ceased living on the streets and are trying to become viable citizens in Sarasota; that Gillespie Park would be free from the poor and homeless if Gifts from God were supported; that a unified effort would result in new improved lives for the poor and homeless in Gillespie Park; that an alternative location should be provided; that the services of Gifts of God should continue due to the needs of the people; that a flag and sign indicating God Bless America are displayed at City Hall; that tickets for the Rolling Stones are advertised for sale; yet, the homeless go hungry. Michael Butterfield, 369 Dolphin Shores Circle, Nokomis (34276), stated that the Commission and the homeless are loved; that Gifts from God is not a commercial enterprise but rather a faith-based non-profit charity; that the limited funds raised are placed back into the community; that 200 apartments will be furnished during 2002; that Gifts from God pays for the food provided and is not a business; that many hours have been spent in the Commission Chambers listening to testimony; that many additional hours have been spent reviewing testimony trying to ascertain the problem; that a revelation was experienced after the October 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the revelation is the picture being painted is not necessarily true; that the Commission is requested to come to Gillespie Park at 3:30 p.m. on Sunday to witness first-hand the activities taking place and to interact with the volunteers, talk to the people at the park, serve some food, drink lemonade, and see the peoples' behavior as well as the condition of the park; that discussions with each Commissioner can be held concerning the activities witnessed if desired. Bill Holland, 800 Gillespie Avenue (34236), stated that he resides across from Gillespie Park and is directly affected by groups using the park; that one of the groups has effectively taken the use of most of the passive park from the residents of the neighborhood every Sunday for several years; that the Gillespie Park neighborhood requires relief from groups using City parks on a constant and ongoing basis for money-making or ministerial needs to the detriment of the residents who enjoy quiet green space; that a permit process establishing regulations for the use of City parks is necessary; that the regulations should include limited use by any one group, limited location of the activity within the park, limited use of amplified music or speech, and sanitary requirements including litter and food service control; that the use and abuse of the City's parks should be a concern for everyone; that the abuse occurring in Gillespie Park could take place in any City park in Sarasota. Shawn Fulker, 1881 Sixth Street (34236), stated that a previous speaker indicated the situation in Gillespie Park may not be necessarily true; that the testimony presented at the October 7, 2002, Regular Commission meeting was reviewed; that the comments indicated fights and commercial activities were taking place on Sundays in Gillespie Park; that videotapes of the activities prove fights were taking place and a large number of people were in attendance; that the activities taking place in Gillespie Park are not being exaggerated; that the activities have continued for four years; that the Gillespie Park neighbors are exhausted; that the reason Gillespie Park is a focal point for the activities is questioned; that testimony presented indicates the location of the park is important and homeless people will remain in Gillespie Park with or without the services provided by Gifts from God; that approximately 15 to 20 homeless people may be in the park Monday through Saturday; however, on Sunday 150 people attend the services at Gillespie Park which affects the neighborhood; that alternative locations which are more centralized could be utilized for the activities; that the services provided by Gifts from God would not be limited if held at another location. BOOK 52 Page 24168 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24169 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Servian asked if the reason the City of Fort Lauderdale lost the lawsuit was the alternative location was significantly inconvenient to the prior location? Attorney Singer came forward and stated that the location described in the legal pleadings seems similar to the large grass parking area to the north of Ed Smith Stadium; that the location is four miles from the previous location at the beach and is closer to North Broward County; that a community was four miles north of the location and the City of Fort Lauderdale believed the location was equidistant; however, the testimony indicated no infrastructure of transportation was available for the people to get to the location; that the location was too far to reach by walking; that the location did not have plumbing, facilities, or shelter; that the activities performed at the prior location could not be duplicated at the new location; that the trial court determined the new location was not suitable; that no other reasonable location was available. Commissioner Servian asked if the City of Fort Lauderdale has an ordinance which requires permits for activities taking place in public parks? Attorney Singer stated that the issue was not researched. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to authorize the City Attorney to draft an ordinance regulating the use of public parks. Commissioner Quillin stated that the permitting process will control potential situations such as the activities taking place in Gillespie Park and will protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Commissioner Servian stated that as policy makers, the Commission has a responsibility to provide for the safety and welfare of all citizens; that children should be told regulations are established to protect every citizen including the homeless person on a park bench in desperate need of help as well as the person who owns a home directly across the park; that everyone must be protected; that a permitting process which regulates the activities in all City parks for all groups is the fairest way to address the issue. Commissioner Martin stated that balance and tairness for all is desired; that a special permitting process currently exists; that limitations on the use of Ken Thompson Park were established due to concerns raised by residents; that the use of the park has changed due to the imposed limitations; that the community has people in need and the Commission should keep hearts engaged; that the permitting process will address alternative space to provide a continuing opportunity for Gifts from God; that the motion is supported; that the hope is the permitting process will achieve balance and fairness for everyone in the community but at the same time respect the need of the homeless. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the intent is not to throw groups out of any particular location 100 percent of the time; that the intent is to create regulations in City parks which allow the free exercise of religion and freedom of expression but also regulate activity sO all citizens may have the opportunity to use and enjoy the City's parks. Vice Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion to authorize the City Attorney to draft an ordinance regulating the use of public parks. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: PROPOSED LETTER BY THE INDIAN BEACH SAPPHIRE SHORES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST FOR THE CITY TO AGREE TO BE NAMED AS A CO-SIGNER ON A GRANT AWARD AGREEMENT TO THE FRIENDS OF " SEAGATE" INC. = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM NO. VII-3) CD 11:32 through 11:34 City Manager McNees referred to a proposed letter to Florida Communities Trust concerning Friends of Seagate Inc., and stated that the letter indicates the Commission is interested in supporting the acquisition of the Friends of Seagate, Inc., project site and is willing to assume management of the site in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the Florida Communities Trust grant application; and quoted the following language from the proposed letter: The City of Sarasota is willing to provide any other assurances to the Florida Communities Trust as is deemed necessary to adequately protect the public interest. City Manager McNees continued that the language is a concerni that the additional assurances have not been defined; however, BOOK 52 Page 24170 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. BOOK 52 Page 24171 10/21/02 6:00 P.M. the Commission will not be required to sign the grant agreement if the grant is awarded and the grant agreement is unacceptable. Kafi Benz, P.O. Box 2900 (34230), representing Friends of Seagate Inc., deferred from speaking. Charles Hegener, 637 40th Street (34234), representing Friends of Seagate Inc., deferred from speaking. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to approve the letter to the Florida Communities Trust regarding the management plan grant award for Friends of Seagate, Inc. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yesi Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. 17. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XIII) CD 11:34 There being no further business, Vice Mayor Palmer adjourned the Regular meeting of October 21, 2002, at 11:34 p.m. Camhd CAROLYN IJ. MASON, MAYOR ATTEST: Bulhy & Re - 7 BILLY E.0 ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK