MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 3, 2000, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: : Mayor Mollie C. Cardamone, Vice Mayor Gene M. Pillot, Commissioners Albert F. Hogle, Carolyn J. Mason and Mary J. Quillin, City Manager David R. Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Cardamone The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9(a) of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:03 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR MARCH 2000, MICHAEL L. WHIDDEN, SR. FOREMAN, PUBLIC WORKS /UTILITIES, WASTE WATER DIVISION #1 (0042) through (0161) City Manager Sollenberger requested that William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, and Michael Whidden, Sr. Foreman, Public Morks/Utilities, Waste Water Division, join him before the Commission. Mr. Hallisey stated that Michael Whidden has been selected as Employee of the Month for March 2000; that Mr. Whidden has been a City employee since 1982, having started at the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that after five promotions, Mr. Whidden is currently Foreman of the Maintenance Staff at the Waste Water Division of the Public Works Department; that Mr. Whidden has a talent for working with wood and has saved the City considerable money by constructing shelves, cabinets and furniture in the Public Works Department and recently assisted with some renovation at City Hall; that Mr. Whidden and Staff are responsible for keeping the City clean by repainting and covering up graffiti on City property; that the City can be proud of Mr. Whidden, known at City Hall as a "Jack of all trades" for the skill and craftsmanship performed. Mayor Cardamone presented Michael Whidden Sr., with a City logo watch, a plaque, and a certificate as the March 2000 Employee of the Month in appreciation of the unique pertormance with the City of Sarasota; and congratulated him for outstanding efforts. Mr. Whidden stated that the recognition is appreciated and introduced the. following family members present in the audience: BOOK 47 Page 19392 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19393 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Anna, wife; Diana, daughter; and Michael, son 2. PRESENTATION RE: PROCLAIMING MAY 19, 2000, AS BIKE-TO- WORK DAY IN SARASOTA, AND THE MONTH OF MAY 2000, AS BIKE MONTH IN SARASOTA #1 (0169) through (0255) Mayor Cardamone requested that John Hartung, Engineering Technician IV and the City's Bicycle Coordinator, and Alexander Boudreau, P.E., Sarasota County's Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator, come before the Commission Mayor Cardamone stated that the Bicycling Safety and Education Association has designated May as National Bike Month for each of the past forty years; that promoting bicycling during the month of May 2000 is an effort to create better health habits, more leisure activity, and an alternative to the automobile; that the Bicycle Ride-To-Work promotion will be held May 19, 2000; read in its entirety the Proclamation declaring May 2000, as Bike Month and May 19, 2000, as Bike-To-Work-Day; and presented the Proclamation to Mr. Hartung and Mr. Boudreau. Mr. Boudreau stated that a bicycle street party will be held Downtown on May 19, 2000; that Central Avenue between First and Main Streets will be closed for the event; that the Bicycling Association and the Downtown Association are working together to make the event a success. 3. PRESENTATION RE: PROCLAIMING APRIL 8, 2000, AS CONNECT FOR KIDS AT THE LIBRARY DAY, AND APRIL 9 THROUGH 15, 2000, AS NATIONAL LIBRARY WEEK #1 (0261) through (0395) Mayor Cardamone requested that Liz Beatrice, Head Librarian for Selby Public Library, come before the Commission. Mayor Cardamone stated that April 9, 2000, will be known as Connect For Kids At The Library Dayi that the event promotes technology and stresses to the youth the importance of reading; that the Selby Public Library provides independent learning opportunities, literacy assistance, and extensions to formal educational programs; read in its entirety the City of Sarasota's Proclamation designating April 9 through April 15, 2000, as National Library Week; and presented the Proclamation to Ms. Beatrice. Ms. Beatrice stated the Selby Public Library and the County Library System appreciate the Proclamation; that the library and All Faiths Food Bank are in partnership; that the fines of overdue books will be forgiven upon the donation of cans of food; that attendance at the library averages 3,000 people daily; that 103,000 people visited the library during the month of February 2000. 4. PRESENTATION RE: CENSUS 2000 STATUS REPORT #1 (0415) through (0719) Michael Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, David Smith, Senior Planner II, Allen Parsons, Senior Planner II, and Casey Pilon, Community Involvement Coordinator for Sarasota County, came before the Commission. Mr. Taylor stated that an update of the current status of the mail-in census responses will be presented; that the census is a US Constitutional mandate which is conducted every ten years and is used for reapportionment in the US House of Representatives; that the census is helpful to cities and communities in determining appropriate locations in the community for schools, hospitals and recreational facilities; that the census provides the basis for allocating Federal and State funds; that each person counted provides between $900 and $1,500 annually to the local community which is received in the form of grants for hospitals, social services, etc.i that two years of work in conjunction with the County and the Census Bureau were required to bring the census program to fruition; that addresses have been updated, new construction references maintained and sheltered and unsheltered sites at which the homeless may be identified; that the involvement of community leaders to stress the importance of the census to the public is important. Mr. Taylor referred to a displayed City map indicating the response rate by location; and stated that the City's overall response rate is 51 percent; that another update will be provided in two weeks. Ms. Pilon stated that individuals who did not receive the census form should call or pick up a form at local supermarkets, libraries and several other locations which have the forms. The Commission recessed at 6:26 p.m. into a Special meeting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. 5. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 20, 2000 = APPROVED #1 (0749) through (0754) Mayor Cardamone asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes? Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the March 20, 2000, Regular Commission meeting is approved by unanimous consent. BOOK 47 Page 19394 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19395 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. 6. BOARD ACTIONS: : REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S (PBLP) REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 1, 2000 - ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE A PRESENTATION BY THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED TO CONSIDER APPLICATION NO. 00-ZTA- 03; AFFIRMED PBLP'S DECISION TO APPROVE APPLICATION NOS. 00-CU-02 AND 00-SP-03; SET SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION NO. 99-SE-03 FOR PUBLIC HEARING SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4218; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-I) #1 (0754) through (1463) Robert Kantor, M.D., Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), and Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission. Dr. Kantor presented the following items from the March 1, 2000, Regular PBLP meeting: A. Application No. 00-ZTA-03 Re: Parking of commercial vehicles and trallers in residential zone districts Dr. Kantor stated that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 00-ZTA-03 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 99-4121 is to amend the Zoning Code (1998) by adding Section VII-203.1.E, Exemptions, regulating parking of commercial vehicles and trailers in residential zone districts; that at its March 1, 2000, meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Application No. 00-ZTA-03 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV-1206, Zoning Code (1998), and voted 3 to 2 not to recommend Commission approval; that the PBLP believes proposed Ordinance No. 99-4121 is too liberal; that the vehicle definitions had considerable opposition from neighborhoods. Commissioner Quillin asked if the PBLP will be providing a report concerning recommendations? Dr. Kantor stated that Staff met with industry representatives whose proposed definitions were unacceptable; that the PBLP requested an additional meeting to determine acceptable definitions. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends setting proposed Ordinance No. 99-4121 for public hearing; that Staff has met with the Ad Hoc Committee appointed to consider commercial vehicles for almost a year; that a July 6, 1999, Commission workshop was conducted; that Staff can go no further. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed ordinance is the result of neighborhood concerns; that the Commission requested the appointment of an ad hoc committee which was comprised of neighborhood and industry representatives; that the PBLP recommends denial based on neighborhood opposition. Dr. Kantor stated that the Ad Hoc Committee presented definitions of. various commercial vehicles, including vans, wreckers, etc.; that the majority of definitions were acceptable; however, the definitions of some trucks caused significant concerns; that the Ad Hoc Committee had worked and compromised for almost a yeari that certain objectionable commercial vehicles would have been allowed which was unacceptable; that some wreckers are large and long; that some of the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendations were unacceptable to the PBLP despite the long and hard work of the Ad Hoc Committee. * Ms. Robinson stated that the Ad Hoc Committee will make a report to the Commission if the proposed ordinance is set for public hearing; that the PBLP considered the proposed ordinance too liberal. Commissioner Quillin stated that receiving a report at the time action is considered would have been helpful. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to set proposed Ordinance No. 99-4121 for public hearing. Vice Mayor Pillot referred to the minutes of the March 1, 2000, PBLP meeting concerning the vote as follows: The motion not to recommend this ordinance carries 3-2. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the two negative votes indicate agreement with the proposed ordinance? Dr. Kantor stated that the meaning of a negative vote is not known; that a "no" vote for a negative motion is very difficult to understand; that a positive motion was made by the PBLP but did not receive a second. Commissioner Hogle stated that the subject of commercial vehicles has been raised at every neighborhood association meeting attended for the past yeari that the public should be provided an opportunity to speak to the issue. Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification of the PBLP's recommendation. BOOK 47 Page 19396 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19397 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Dr. Kantor stated that the PBLP's recommendation is to set the proposed ordinance for public hearing; that everything possible has been done; that the Ad Hoc Committee was appointed, met, and made a recommendation, which the PBLP did not approve. Mayor Cardamone stated that the recommendation is to set for public hearing but not adopt the proposed ordinance. Dr. Kantor stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Ad Hoc Committee worked hard for almost a yeari however, the work did not meet the neighbor's needs; that the motion will not be supported; that the proposed ordinance liberalizes the concept of commercial vehicles beyond anything envisioned; that the City currently has an ordinance prohibiting commercial vehicles in neighborhoods; that the proposed ordinance should not be set for public hearing; that the motion on the table should be defeated; that a subsequent suggestion could be to recommend changes; that a public hearing should not be held until a recommendation more acceptable to the PBLP and the neighborhoods is received. Ms. Robinson stated that the Ad Hoc Committee could make a presentation, followed by Commission direction; that the Ad Hoc Committee spent significant time considering commercial vehicles in neighborhoods. Mayor Cardamone. stated that a presentation is acceptable; that paying for advertising, holding a public hearing, and receiving public input and subsequently sending the proposed ordinance back for additional consideration is a waste of time, energy, money, etc. Commissioner Hogle, as the maker of the motion, with the approval of Commissioner Mason, as the seconder, withdrew the motion. Commissioner Quillin stated that a report from the PBLP would also be appreciated. Dr. Kantor stated that a report will be prepared. B. Application Nos. 00-CU-02 and 00-SP-03 Re: Just Kids of Sarasota, Inc. 1505 and 1511 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Way Dr. Kantor stated that Major Conditional Use Application No. 00-CU-02 and Site Plan Application No. 00-SP-03 as incorporated in proposed Resolution No. O0R-1241 is to allow the construction and operation of the Tiny Tots Daycare/Preschool, a 24-hour child care center for 40 children, consisting of + 2,087 square feet in a Multi-Family Residential-2 (RMF-2) Zone District; that that at its March 1, 2000, meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Application Nos. 00-CU-02 and 00-SP-03 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the tree protection ordinance and to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The child care (center) shall be located as shown on the site plan received by the Planning and Development Department. 2. Applicants shall file a consolidation plat for approval in accordance with the requirements of Section VI-104, Zoning Code (1998), prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Project. 3. Enrollment in the child care center shall be limited to no more than forty (40) children and the use of the outdoor play area of the child care center shall be limited as required by Section VII-602 (G) (5) (a), Zoning Code (1998). : Commissioner Mason asked the location of access to the property? Karin Murphy, Senior Planner II, Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the site has a northern and southern driveway; that the entrance will be from the northern driveway to avoid vehicle stacking into the intersection. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to affirm the PBLP's decision and adopt proposed Resolution No. O0R-1241 at the appropriate time under Agenda Item III-B. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; 1 Cardamone, yes. C. Application No. 99-SE-03 Re: J.H. Floyd Sunshine Manor, Inc. 1755 18th Street Dr. Kantor stated that Special Exception Application No. 99-SE-03 was filed prior to the effective date of the current Zoning Code (1998) to allow a non-governmental use consisting of the expansion of an existing assisted living facility known as Sunshine Meadows and the construction of a new independent living facility which will be known as Meadow Park in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District; that the Commission will consider proposed Ordinance No. 00-4128 to rezone the property to the G Zone District and to approve a site plan for the project at a future public hearing; that at its March 1, 2000, meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Special Exception Application No. 99-SE-03 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Standards for Review set forth in Zoning Code (1974 Edition) and BOOK 47 Page 19398 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19399 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The nongovernmental uses shall be constructed in accordance with the Preliminary Site and Development Plan of Application No. 99-PSD-E 2. Contingent upon the adoption by the Commission of an ordinance for a small scale development activity to the City's Comprehensive Plan . On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to set Special Exception Application No. 99-SE-03 for public hearing simultaneously with proposed Ordinance No. 00-4218. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to accept the report of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of March 1, 2000. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 7. REPORT RE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 8, 2000, AND MARCH 14, 2000 SCHEDULED APPLICATION NO. 00-HD-01 FOR PUBLIC HEARING; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (1463) through (1608) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Thorning Little, Vice Chairman of the Historic Preservation Board, came before the Commission. Mr. Little presented the following items from the February 8, 2000, and March 14, 2000, Regular meetings of the Historic Preservation Board: A. Application No. 00-HD-01 Re: The Perry/Little House and Garage 1920 Adams Lane Mr. Little displayed slides of the structure and stated that Staff from the Sarasota County Department of Historical Resources determined that the structure located at 1920 Adams Lane is a single-family, one-story frame vernacular dwelling built in approximately 1931; that the house is best categorized as a simple example of depression-era frame vernacular architecture but could also be classified as a double-front-facing gable bungalow based upon two original front-facing gable roofs; that the construction is of wood drop siding over a wood frame; that the front facade is dominated by an offset, almost full-width front entrance porch covered by a separate low-pitched front- facing gable roof projecting forward below the main gable roof covering the main block of the house; that both roof planes have wide overhangs with exposed raiter tails and are presently surfaced in metal; that the house rests on a contemporary continuous concrete block foundation which has replaced the original brick pier support system; that the main entrance to the house is reached from the north onto the seven-bay front entrance porch; that the porch was enclosed with jalousie windows in approximately 1953; that in 1995, the jalousie windows were removed and the original screened openings of the porch were filled with large, wood, two-light fixed windows with a two-light fixed transom above; that all the existing 1/1 wood double hung sash windows on the original block of the house with a set of paired windows on the east elevation have been replaced by French doors; that the well-maintained residential structure has recently been substantially rehabilitated and is an example of simple minimalists' architecture dating from and associated with the depression years; that the structure represents the economic climate after the dissolution of the Florida land boom, the 1929 stock market crash and the subsequent economic climate in which very little new construction took place in the City until after World War II; that the few residential structures constructed during the 1930s were simple in design and relatively devoid of ornamentation for maximum cost effectiveness; that in contrast to more elaborately designed, executed and detailed architecture of the 1920s Boom Time years in the City, the structure reflects both the economic and architectural climate of the depression years; that the house continues to relay the original setting, location, design, materials and workmanship to a high degree; that at its meeting of February : 8, 2000, the Historic Preservation Board unanimously recommended historic designation of the house structure located at 1920 Adams Lane, which meets the following criteria listed under Section IV-806 (A) of the Zoning Code (1998): 1. Exemplifies or reflects the broad cultural, political, economic or social history of the City of Sarasota, Sarasota County, the State of Florida, or the United States of America; and 4. Embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of an architectural style or period, or a method of construction. Mr. Little stated that Staff from the Sarasota County Department of Historical Resources determined that the structure located at 1920 Adams is the original two-bay garage remaining on the site just southeast of the residential structure; that the one-story frame structure is covered with wood drop siding on the main facade with hardy plank duplicating the wood drop siding on the BOOK 47 Page 19400 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19401 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. main and side elevations; that a front-facing gable roof covers the structure which rests on a solid concrete slab; that the two original auto bays were filled with two sets of paired two-light, fixed-glass wood doors in 1995; however, the size of the original bay openings have not been altered and are clearly recognizable as originally intended for providing automobile access to the garage; that the style of wood windows filling the former garage bays closely matches the style on the enclosed front porch of the house; that on the east elevation is an aluminum window appearing larger than a window which may have originally have existed; that in addition, three aluminum windows have been installed in the south (rear) wall of the structure; that County Staff indicated the garage appears to have lost some architectural integrity with respect to materials; that no new windows have been installed; that only the rear side of the building has the original siding; that the roof system has been completely reconstructed and the gable ends have been replaced; that County Staff recommended denial of the historic designation request as the structure was not reconstructed to maintain integrity of the original materials; however, at its March 14, 2000, the Historic Preservation Board unanimously recommended historic designation of the garage structure at 1920 Adams Lane which meets the following criteria listed under Section IV-806 (A) of the Zoning Code (1998): 1. Exemplifies or reflects the broad cultural, political, economic or social history of the City of Sarasota, Sarasota County, the State of Florida, or the United States of America. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to set Application No. 00-HD-01 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to accept the report. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 8. REPORT RE: PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE'S REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 14, 2000 = AUTHORIZED APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE CONTRACTS WITH ARTISTS FOR THE ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF ARTWORKS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $54,300 PAYABLE FROM THE PUBLIC ART FUND (AGENDA ITEM II-3) #1 (1608) through (2350) Katherine O'Connell, Chairman, Public Art Committee, and John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission. Ms. O'Connell stated that the Public Art Committee worked for a year to develop the process for a permanent guideline for art acquisitions; that the selection process began four months ago with 400 slides; that four months were spent in review and selection; that 282, then 71, then 32 works of art were selected for further review; that a blind poll technique was utilized; that the artwork was reviewed for artistic content; that artists' names or locations were not considered; that prices were not considered; that after selection of the 32 works of art, the artists, the artists' locations and price were carefully reviewed; that the selection was narrowed to 15 works of art which were heavily scrutinized, including a review by Risk Management; that the artists were contacted to determine maintenance requirements; that five pieces of art were finally selected; that a balance of medium and style was sought; that the types of art will be expanded in the future as additional funds become available. Ms. O'Connell referred to slides of the five selected pieces of art; and stated that the Public Art Committee recommends the acquisition of the following artwork at a total cost of $49,300: Omphalos by Richard Beckman at $12,500, painted steel - 94"x66"x96"; The deceptively simple form has complexity and changes in relation to the viewer's position. The piece should be very exciting as people walk around the piece. The artist indicates the work is of a human scale, creating an empathy with the viewer. Interlocking Love by Bob Fetty at $18,000, bronze - 78"x18"x18": The piece has wonderful movement; and the figurative nature and soft curves make the piece very friendly. The piece symbolizes love, peace, harmony, and tenderness. Mr. Red by David Langley at $5,000, painted aluminum - 7'6"x10'x3': The artist indicates the piece is intended to be light and airy and was inspired by childhood memories. The piece is a delight and will be very popular with figurative and abstract qualities speaking to a wide audience. Exotic #10 by David Peirick at $1,800, painted steel - 68"x30"x8": The piece could be located at many sites along Main Street and is perfectly designed for small, planting space. Samurai by Bruce White at $12,000, anodized aluminum 18'6"x5'6"x14", The material is uniquely ideal for the City's light. The piece will sparkle even on cloudy days. The sweeping arc creates a strong form; however, BOOK 47 Page 19402 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19403 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. the cutouts and texture create a delicate design. The artist is from the City. Ms. O'Connell stated all five artists are from Florida; that the Public Art Committee's search was national with even a few international entries; that an effort was made to disseminate the search in the southeast US and particularly Florida; that having found five excellent pieces of art by Florida artists is wonderful; that the Public Art Committee also recommends $5,000 from the Public Art Fund be approved for the installation of the artwork. Vice Mayor Pillot referred to the Administration's recommendation on the Agenda request as follows: . for a total amount not to exceed $54,300 Vice Mayor Pillot asked if some latitude will be required in the event the installation exceeds $5,000? City Manager Sollenberger stated that the expenditure will be acceptable as long as remaining within the budgeted Public Art Fund; that any deviance can be absorbed; however, the $5,000 is a good estimate. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to authorize appropriate City officials to negotiate and execute contracts with artists for the acquisition and installation of artwork as recommended by the Public Art Committee for a total amount not to exceed $54,300 payable from the Public Art Fund including $5,000 from the Public Art Fund for the installation of the artwork. Vice Mayor Pillot requested that for the benefit of the public, an explanation of the source of the funds be provided. Mr. Burg stated that the Public Art Fund comes from two sources; that the City has budgeted $30,000 each year for several years; that additionally, developers of commercial projects in the Downtown area have the option of contributing one-half of one percent of the construction cost to the Public Art Fund or providing art. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a significant portion of the Public Art Fund is from private sources. Mr. Burg stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin stated that appreciation is extended to the Public Art Committee; that the task was difficult; that some excellent art pieces have been identified; that Samurai is exquisite. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Public Art Committee and Mr. Burg should be commended for the excellent work in advancing the recommendation; that considerable effort was invested in developing the recommendation; that a quality presentation and excellent selections have been provided. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to authorize appropriate City officials to negotiate and execute contracts with artists for the acquisition and installation of artwork as recommended by the Public Art Committee for a total amount not to exceed $54,300 payable from the Public Art Fund including $5,000 from the Public Art Fund for the installation of the artwork. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone stated that the selections provide something for everyone; that good choices and variety have been provided; that congratulations are extended to the Public Art Committee; and asked the anticipated work schedule. Mr. Burg stated that arrangements will take approximately two to three weeks. Mayor Cardamone asked the manner in which locations will be selected? Mr. Burg stated that Staff recommends locating the pieces of art at Five Points Park on an interim basis; that guidance from the consultants developing the update for the Downtown Sarasota: Master Plan for Tomorrow (May 1986) (CRA Master Plan) will be sought for recommending permanent locations to the Commission. Mayor Cardamone asked if the artists' permission to relocate the artwork has been received? Mr. Burg stated yes. Ms. O'Connell stated that detailed budgets for installation costs were sought from the artists; that the $5,000 budgeted should be accurate unless difficulties develop; that the Public Art Committee made an effort to identify something for everyone; that some City open space may change based on the recommendations from the CRA Master Plan update; that the Public Art Committee wishes to assure good placement for the five selections and will wait for the recommendations from the CRA Master Plan update. Mayor Cardamone stated that considering artwork representative of the local community which are whimsical and historical would be appreciated during the next selection process. Ms. O'Connell stated that no such pieces were presented of the original 400 submittals. BOOK 47 Page 19404 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19405 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone stated moving some of the statuary around City Hall to other locations is of interest; that the large statue entitled "Nobody's Listening" is large and imposing; that the City listens to its citizens; that the statuary is good art and is representative of a certain period of time but is not lively; that dispersal would be pleasing. Vice Mayor Pillot and Commissioner Hogle agreed. Commissioner Quillin stated that locating the statuary previously sited in the traffic medians on North Tamiami Trail is of interest; that placing more interactive art in the community is also of interest; that more interactive artwork around City Hall would be pleasing. Ms. O'Connell stated that alternative sites could be considered if desired; that the Public Art Committee was careful to have no more than one piece of art by the same artist in the initial selection; that multiple good pieces from individual artists were reviewed; that more pieces of art could have been purchased from a single artist; however, the Public Art Committee was careful to select from multiple artists; that having more than one artist represented by more than one type of art at City Hall would show the diversity of the City's culture. Mayor Cardamone stated that all the artwork around City Hall was done by one artist, Jack Cartlidge; that a description of his work is displayed in the lobby; that dispersing the artwork and adding new, colorful, interesting pieces is a good idea. Commissioner Mason stated that considering different locations for the artwork at City Hall is supported; however, the public perception is government does not listen; therefore, the sculpture entitled "Nobody's Listening" should be kept as a reminder to keep listening. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the history of the sculpture is a reflection of the early 1960s which was a period of social unrest at the time minorities and/or the oppressed were making an effort to access the establishment but were not being heard. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to accept the report of the Public Art Committee. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the report of the Public Art Committee was the best presentation received during his tenure on the Commission. 9. REPORT RE: CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES ADVISORY BOARD 'S. REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 17, 2000 - REFERRED THE REQUEST TO HIRE AN ADA COORDINATOR TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR A REPORT BACK; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-4) #1 (2350) through (2830) Donald Dawkins, Chairman, Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board, and Duane Mountain, Deputy Director of Public Works, came before the Commission. Mayor Cardamone stated that congratulations are offered for Mr. Dawkins selection as Chairman. Mr. Dawkins stated that the - Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board (Board) had a good year being involved with the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) renovation project, the Ed Smith Stadium and Sports Complex renovations, and access issues at Bobby Jones Golf Course (BJGC) i that the possibility of adding golf carts which meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is exciting, allowing handicapped golfers access; that assistance has been provided to the Selby Botanical Gardens renovations; that the Board represents hundreds of people with disabilities and mobility impairments; that experience has convinced the Board members of a systems failure, which has resulted in the lack of full implementation of the ADA, which was passed by Congress and signed by President George Bush in August 1990; that the City's transition plan has not been updated since 1993; that the Board's goal is to make the City the most heelchair-friendly, universally accessible community in the world; that a personal goal is to make the City the vacation capital of the world for people with disabilities, who have disposable income; that becoming the vacation capital of the world for people with disabilities is a "win-win" situation; that inclusion is a basic American value; that the Commission is requested to assist the Board with implementing the ADA; that the City should have an ADA coordinator who would work with code enforcement to assure every permit pulled and plan submitted is in compliance with the ADA; that some problems have been due to the systems failure; that the Commission is requested to consider hiring an individual with experience in the law, i.e., the ADA, to work with code enforcement to make the City the most accessible City in the US. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the comments are understood and appreciated. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to refer the request to hire an ADA coordinator to the Administration for a report back. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yesi Cardamone, yes. BOOK 47 Page 19406 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19407 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone stated that the understanding was plans were being reviewed by code enforcement for ADA compliance. Mr. Dawkins stated that an example is the Hollywood 20 Theatre project, which generated numerous complaints and concerns and cost a considerable amount of money; that having an ADA coordinator review the plans in the beginning would have avoided the problem. Mayor Cardamone stated that the request should be reviewed and carefully considered; that being known as a landicaped-frienaly City would be good. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the status of the sidewalk curb cuts for wheelchair accessibility. Mr. Mountain stated that funding for a significant number of curb cuts was included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); that currently, curb cuts are handled on an as-needed basis; that the City responds immediately upon receiving a request; that hundreds of curb cuts are required throughout the City; that the CIP funding for retrofitting of curb cuts is for future years. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that once installed, the curb cuts are permanent. Mr. Mountain stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that individuals without disabilities have indicated difficulty crossing intersections at US 41; and asked if traffic signal timing is adequate for persons with disabilities to cross US 41? Mr. Dawkins stated that as a former wheelchair athlete in push marathons, the response is no. Mayor Cardamone stated that traffic signal timing is short. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that extending the length of traffic signal timing for everyone may stop traffic too long; and asked if a second traffic signal button could be installed to provide for more time? Mr. Dawkins stated that the existence of a device with two buttons to stop traffic is not known; however, such a device is possible. City Manager Sollenberger stated that traffic signal timing should be discussed as part of the charrette process being conducted by Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ) which will begin shortly; that a traffic engineering component will be part of the charrette; that extending the time for pedestrian crossing backs up more traffic; however, the City should be pedestrian friendly; that people with wheelchairs and walkers and some people who cross unassisted cannot cross some streets in the light cycle; that traffic signal timing should be considered to achieve a pedestrianized, safe, attractive City. Commissioner Quillin stated that the building codes should be reviewed for the City to become a universally accessible community, i.e., standardization of 32/36 inch doors; that standardization will result in less work in retrofitting; that friends who are wheelchair bound cannot visit her personally as the home is not wheelchair accessible. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to receive the report of the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 10. REPORT RE: SECOND QUARTER REPORT FROM GREATER NEWTOWN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (GNCRC) RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-5) #1 (2830) through (3182) Jetson Grimes, President of the Greater Newtown Community Redevelopment Corporation (GNCRC) Advisory Board, and Cynthia Porter, GNCRC Executive Director, came before the Commission. Ms. Porter distributed reports entitled "Progress Report Second Quarter, Greater Newtown CRC" (Progress Report) ànd "Newtown Planning Charrette, March 18, 2000" (Charrette Report) and stated that the Progress Report is for the second quarter for fiscal year (FY) 1999/2000, some highlights of which include the Youth- Build Program for building houses through the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Florida Front Porch Program; that GNCRC applied for but did not receive designation under the Florida Front Porch Program last year and will apply again in 2000; that immediately after denial last year, a Front Porch Coalition Board (Board) was established; that the Board has been meeting for seven months; that GNCRC has a good chance of receiving Front Porch designation in 2000; that the City's assistance will be necessary; that GNCRC is working hard on the following: the Juneteenth Celebration which starts on June 17, 2000, the Front Porch Program application which is due June 19, 2000, and the Youth-Build Program application which is due June 15, 2000; that GNCRC conducted a Newtown planning charrette on March 18, 2000; and referred to the Charrette Report and Volume 1, Issue 1, SNAP Shots newsletter issued by the Sarasota North Area Plan (SNAP) in September 1997, included with the Progress Report; that SNAP Shots provides a summary of the Newtown charrette held in 1997 and includes the 1997 charrette recommendations, that the Charrette Report includes the results and recommendations from the 2000 Newtown charrette. BOOK 47 Page 19408 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19409 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the report is excellent and was well presented; that receiving the attachments with the Progress Report is appreciated. Vice Mayor Pillot referred to the March 30, 2000, editorial in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune entitled "Newtown's twin goals" and stated that most of the editorial was constructive and positive; however, the last paragraph is destructive, not constructive journalism, bad editorial writing, and not good for anyone; that agreement is expressed with the following from the editorial: There is no place at the table for misperceptions and stereotypes, bureaucratic foot-dragging, or long simmering resentments and apathy. Vice Mayor Pillot quoted the editorial further as follows: the estrangement of Newtown must be consigned to the past. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Newtown is not thought of as being estranged in the community; that the statement is resented; and asked if GNCRC cares to comment concerning any possible estrangement of the Newtown community. Ms. Porter stated that no comment is forthcoming; that the editorial writer attended the Newtown charrette; that a belief exists in freedom of speech; that people have a right to express personal beliefs. Vice Mayor Pillot agreed and stated that the editorial writer may be of the opinion elected officials do not have the same rights; however, personal opinions will not be denied; that neither will hypocrisy be expressed. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to receive the report of the GNCRC. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 11. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,8, 9, 10 and 11 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM II-A) #1( (3183) through (3908) Commissioner Quillin requested that Item No. 8 be removed for discussion. Commissioner Hogle requested that Item No. 9 be removed for discussion. Commissioner Mason requested that Item No. 10 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4220, amending Section 11-2, of the Sarasota City Code and Section 701.4 of the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code regarding interest rates charged on demolition liens; etc. 2. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4221, amending Section 16-53 (d) of the Sarasota City Code regarding interest rates charged on lot mow liens; etc. 3. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4222, amending Section 2-316 (b) of the Sarasota City Code regarding interest rates charged on Code Enforcement liens; etc. 4. Approval Re: Authorize the establishment of a Floodplain Management Plan Committee. 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to negotiate and the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with Clubhouse Publishing, Inc., of Sarasota, Florida, (RFP #00-26L) for the Publishing of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall 2000-2001. 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to negotiate and the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a professional services contract between the City of Sarasota and Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, Inc., (RFP #00-25H) to continue engineering and annual contract services for the Reclaimed Water Utility System. 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the West Coast Inland Navigation District (WCIND) Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Police Chief Jolly. 11. Approval Re: Support the City's participation in the Florida Grapefruit League Association and authorize the expenditure of $2,500 as the City's contribution. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve Consent No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 11. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Uniform Interlocal Agreement between the City of Sarasota, Sarasota County and other Public Agencies for non-emergency use of the Sarasota County 800 MHz Trunked Radio Communication System Commissioner Quillin stated that a report concerning the 800 MHz system would be appreciated; that the information received was BOOK 47 Page 19410 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19411 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. not very encompassing; that the report should include costs for the expensive system. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the Administration will provide a report concerning the system. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve Consent No. 1, Item No. 8. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yesi Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 9. Approval Re: Use of all remaining Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the North Sarasota Improvement Project Housing and Community Development. Commissioner Hogle stated at the March 21, 2000, joint meeting with the Commission and the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) the removal of the fence at the Cohen Way public housing complex was discussed; and asked for clarification. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends using the remaining Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the North Sarasota Improvement Project; that two alleys will be constructed at Cocoanut and Florida Avenues between 11th and 12th Streets; that curbs, gutters and sidewalks for several streets will be installed; that the efforts in north Sarasota will continue as previously approved by the Commission. Commissioner Hogle asked if the neighborhood will receive help in replacing the demolished fence at the Cohen Way public housing complex with a fence meeting the principles of the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) program? City Manager Sollenberger stated that $.5 million was allocated toward improvements at the Cohen Way public housing complex which could be a funding source for the fence. Commissioner Quillin stated that the units on Sixth Street will be renovated; that the fence could be installed at the same time; that the fence could be funded as part of the renovation project. Commissioner Mason stated that the Commission agreed to use CDBG funds to proceed with the North Sarasota Improvement Project; that the City would be reneging on a promise if the agreement is not honored. City Manager Sollenberger agreed and stated that the Administration's recommendation is consistent. Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification of the recommendation. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the request is to fund a fence at the Cohen Way public housing complex from funds allocated for use in the North Sarasota Improvement Project; that previously the understanding was the fence as well as the North Sarasota Improvement Project could be funded; however, the subsequent determination was funding both projects is not possible; that fulfilling the City's first commitment by accomplishing the North Sarasota Improvement Project is recommended; that the fence would be taken into consideration if funds remain. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to use of all remaining Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the North Sarasota Improvement Project Housing and Community Development and to refer to the Administration consideration of a fence meeting the principles of the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) program for the future. Commissioner Quillin stated that a simple motion would be better as the motion on the table is confusing; that CDBG funds were previously diverted from the North Sarasota Improvement Project to fund other projects; that the funding was with the understanding the money remaining from the $83,000 allocated to remove the fence at the Cohen Way public housing complex would be used to finish the project. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to call the question. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to approve the funds and refer to the Administration the issue regarding the fence for the future. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 10. Approval Re: Request of Sarasota Housing Authority(SHA) for the City to forgive payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) of approximately $24,000 for fiscal year 2000 Commissioner Mason referred to the Administration's recommendation included on the Agenda request as follows: Recommend approval as request has negligible impact on the City's budget for fiscal year 2000/01. Commissioner Mason asked for clarification of the word "negligible." BOOK 47 Page 19412 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19413 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the amount of the payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) is $24,000, of which $8,000 goes to the City and $16,000 to the County; that a negligible impact on a General Fund budget of $34 or 35 million will be realized. Commissioner Mason stated that the Commission understood and supported the previous request from the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) to forgive the payment in lieu of taxes as several years were involved; that to see the same request one year later should not be acceptable; and referred to the March 22, 2000 letter from Leon Campbell, Chairman, SHA Board indicating the payment is made from the SHA's day-to-day operational budget; that approving the request is much like rewarding a child for bad behavior; that the City is not helping the SHA fulfill its fiscal responsibilities by forgiving the payment in lieu of taxes; that the lesson will never be learned if the City always forgives the debt. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to forgive the payment in lieu of taxes of approximately $24,000. Commissioner Hogle stated that the request was made at the March 21, 2000, joint meeting with the Commission and the SHA; that the SHA provided a detailed recommendation, which seemed acceptable. Commissioner Quillin stated. that the. same discussion was held last year; that the County is involved in a situation with churches which do not wish to pay taxes and stormwater fees; however, recently a Supreme Court ruling has forced the issue and apparently the problem has been resolved; that a message should be sent to the SHA explaining the need to participate in the community to defray some of the community's expenses; that the SHA is like other non-profit agencies and churches; that a certain amount is paid into the system which helps keep the system going and provides the services such as law enforcement, fire, lighting, public works; that the amount was included in the SHA's annual budget of obligations. Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification of the City's prior experience concerning the payment in lieu of taxes. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the SHA had not paid and requested forgiveness of the payment in lieu of taxes for several years proceeding, which was granted by the Commission; that one reason for the Administration's recommendation to approve the forgiveness is the deplorable condition of the units owned and managed by the SHA. City Attorney Taylor stated that the payment in lieu of taxes is of statutory origin and is provided for in the law; that in the 1960s, a contract was entered into between the City and the SHA which contracted to make the payment in lieu of taxes to defray some cost of the intrastructure for the housing projects; that the SHA is required to pay the payment in lieu of taxes by contract unless excused. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to forgive the payment in lieu of taxes of approximately $24,000. Motion carried (3 to 2): Hogle, yes; Mason, no; Pillot, yes; Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Commissioner Mason has considerable knowledge of the SHA; that her expressed concern is valid. 12. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1260) = ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (ORDINANCE NO. 00-4204) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (ORDINANCE NO. 00-4205) ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (ORDINANCE NO. . 00-4207) ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 00-4210) ADOPTED (AGENDA III-B) #2 (0290) through (0436) 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. O0R-1260, a Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Sarasota to approve Major Conditional Use Application 00-CU-02 to allow a child care center as a major conditional use in the Multiple-Family-Residential-2 (RMF-2) Zone District; said Major Conditional Use to be located on lots 77 and 78, replat of Carver Park unit 2, a/k/a 1505 and 1511 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, as more particularly described herein; said major conditional use is required to be constructed and located in accordance with site plan Application No. 00-SP-03 and is subject to additional conditions as more fully set forth herein (Title Only) 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 00-4204, an ordinance of the City of Sarasota, Florida amending the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Sarasota, Florida (1998 edition) by the adoption of the small scale development amendment more fully described in application 99-PA-05 filed by Sarasota Memorial Hospital; said small scale development amendment consists of an amendment to the future land use map to change the future land use classification of a parcel of property from neighborhood commercial" to "metropolitan regional"; said property being approximately .21 acre in size and located on the north side of Hillview Street between the south Tamiami Trail and Osprey Avenue; stating various findings of fact concerning the adoption of the small scale development amendment; providing for the severability of the parts hereof (Title Only) BOOK 47 Page 19414 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19415 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 00-4205, an ordinance of the City of Sarasota, Florida amending the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Sarasota, Florida (1998 edition) by the adoption of the small scale development amendment more fully described in Application No. 99-PA-07 filed by Sarasota Professional Enterprises II d/b/a Sarasota Pathology; said small scale development amendment consists of an amendment to the future land use map to change the future land use classification of a parcel of property from "single family moderate density" to C community office institutional", said property being approximately .68 acre in size and located at the north west corner of Webber Street and Central Park Drive east of the south Tamiami Trail and adjacent to the existing Sarasota Pathology facility; stating various findings of fact concerning the adoption of this small scale development amendment; providing for the severability of the parts hereof (Title Only). 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 00-4207, an ordinance of the City of Sarasota, Florida amending the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Sarasota, Florida (1998 edition) by the adoption of the small scale development amendment more fully described in Application No. 99-PA-03 filed by J. H. Floyd Sunshine Manor, Inc.; said. small scale development amendment consists of an amendment to the future land use map to change the future land use classification of a parcel of property from "multiple family residential moderate density" and "multiple family residential medium density" to "community office institutional; II said property being approximately . 72 acre in size and located on the north side of 18th street immediately east of the existing J. H. Floyd Sunshine Manor campus; stating various findings of fact concerning the adoption of this small scale development amendment; providing for the severability of the parts hereof (Title Only). 5. Adoption Re: Proposed Ordinance No. 00-4210, an ordinance of the City of Sarasota, Florida amending the Sarasota City Code, Chapter 38, Zoning, Section 38-1, so as to incorporate by reference the Zoning Code (1998), as amended, as part of the Sarasota City Code; setting forth findings as to intent and purpose; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof (Title Only). City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. OOR- 1260 and proposed Ordinance Nos. 00-4204, 00-4205, 00-4207, 00- and 4210 by title only. Commissioner Mason left the Chambers at 8:23 p.m. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Items 1 through 5, inclusive. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; The Commission recessed at 8:23 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Affected Persons and other interested persons wishing to speak are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have 5 minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when 1 minute remains. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 13. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99-4163, AMENDING CHAPTER 8, SARASOTA CITY CODE, ANIMALS, ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL, TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS TO PROHIBIT THE KEEPING OF LIVESTOCK, POULTRY AND RABBITS; PROVIDING FOR AN EXCEPTION FOR RABBITS KEPT AS PETS WITHIN A DWELLING; TO CLARIFY CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE HARBORING OF OFFENSIVE OR DANGEROUS ANIMALS; AMENDING CHAPTER 20, NOISE TO PROHIBIT NOISY ANIMALS; AMENDING CHAPTER 2, SARASOTA CITY CODE, ADMINISTRATION. ARTICLE V. DIVISION 5, CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MASTER TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE AMENDMENTS PROVIDED HEREIN PERTAINING TO CHAPTER 8, ANIMALS; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99-4163 ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-1) #2 (0500) through #3 (1707) City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 amends a portion of the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) pertaining to the regulation of animals; that the proposed ordinance has been prepared at the request of the Commission; that the Commission expressed concern regarding the regulations after receiving complaints the proposed ordinance regulates the keeping of animals in City limits; that the current regulations originate BOOK 47 Page 19416 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19417 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. from an ordinance passed in 1935; that the proposed ordinance was prepared with input from the Police and Building Departments. Mayor Cardamone referred to a January 27, 2000, Interoffice Memorandum from Lieutenant William Wall to Captain M. L. Holloway indicating the property owner at 1934 Datura Street advised at a meeting with Police Department Staff that 45 chickens, 40 rabbits, 8 turkeys, 2 pheasants, and a pygmy goat were maintained at the property which is in a single-family neighborhood on a single- family lot; stated that proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 addresses a specific problem; and asked if the difficulties inherent in adopting an ordinance could be avoided by asking the property owner to eliminate the farm-type setting? City Attorney Taylor stated that attempts have been made to work with the property owner for approximately one year; that nothing has been successfully accomplished; that a prosecution of the property owner is pending in court; that the property owner's legal counsel has challenged the validity of current regulation of maintaining animals; that the Police and Code Enforcement Departments have attempted to accomplish voluntary compliance and have been unsuccessful. Mayor Cardamone stated that a difficult public hearing will be conducted due to a lack of cooperation by the property owner; that an ordinance will likely be adopted which will not satisfy everyone; that the process being undertaken is worrisome. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Police Department currently attempts to abate a nuisance; that the language concerning nuisance should be strengthened if being challenged; that adopting an ordinance prior to the outcome of the pending litigation is a concern; that a definition of nuisance and strong regulations to abate nuisances is desired; that allowing animals as a permitted use for projects for 4-H or other recognized organizations is supported; that a single instance has resulted in preparing a one- size-fits-all ordinance; that postponing the public hearing until after adjudication of the pending lawsuit to determine the standing of the City's current regulation is not a problem. City Attorney Taylor cited Section 8-1, Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) as follows: No person shall keep, harbor, or maintain any animal or fowl within the city in any manner which will cause unsanitary, insalubrious or offensive conditions to arise therefrom, nor shall any individual harbor any permitted animal or vermin whose natural actions and presence are or may be deleterious or harmful to the public health. City Attorney Taylor stated that the current regulation includes specific actions by the Police Department which have proven difficult to follow; that the language of "deleterious or harmful for the public health" is not according to the current legal standard for an ordinance; that the pending litigation falls under the current ordinance; therefore, any changes to the regulation will not affect the outcome of the litigation which will proceed under the regulation in effect at the time of the offense; that the proposed ordinance is designed for easier prosecution; that the method of enforcement is through code enforcement which does not involve the court system. Commissioner Hogle stated that neighbors have been suffering for a long time; that the Police Department has been unable to solve the problem; that the current ordinance is not enforceable regarding the current problem; that the neighbors in the Chambers should be provided an opportunity to speak. Mayor Cardamone stated that one individual's failing to cooperate with neighbors is a concern. City Attorney Taylor stated that a bad case often makes bad law; that writing an ordinance concerning a situation which is not normal or usual may result in many individuals not supporting the ordinance; that writing an ordinance with all the tools necessary for enforcement is difficult; that adopting an ordinance or a public hearing is not required at this time; that a workshop could be conducted if desired. Mayor Cardamone stated that a neighborhood requires the protection of the City immediately due to the lack of cooperation of a property owner. Commissioner Quillin and referred to Section 8-45, Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) as follows: Upon written complaint to the chief of police that complainant is disturbed by noise fowl I the chief of police shall notify the owner or keeper to remove such fowl from the city. Failure to remove such fowl from the city after such notice shall constitute a nuisance. Commissioner Quillin stated that failure to comply will result in declaring the situation a nuisance; however, a definition of nuisance has not been provided; that the manner in which a judge will rule will help determine the inadequacies; that not having a definition of nuisance is a weakness; that placing enforcement under code enforcement which does not work 24 hours a day is a concern; that a concern is an individual will call the Police Department at 2:00 a.m. complaining about animal noises and be told to contact code enforcement; that knowing the outcome concerning the pending litigation is desired; that Staff of the City's Code Enforcement Department and the County's Health BOOK 47 Page 19418 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19419 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Department have visited the property; that no violation was found; that the proposed ordinance may not be appropriate for the needs of the community. Mark Singer, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, entered into the public record a March 24, 2000, memorandum from Lieutenant William Wall to Captain M. L. Hollaway detailing the history and current activity regarding animal complaints at Datura Street; and stated that many communities the City's size have prohibitions against maintaining chickens, poultry, fowl, and/or livestock; that some prohibitions are: Bal Harbor poultry and fowl Boca Raton fowl and livestock Bradenton fowl Brevard County livestock Clearwater fowl and livestock except one kept as a pet Clewiston fowl and livestock allowing 4H displays only in a commercial or industrial area Coral Gables fowl Daytona Beach poultry and livestock Deerfield Beach fowl and livestock allowing two duck and a maximum of six pets Attorney Singer stated that Ft. Lauderdale, Gainesville, Lakeland, New Port Richie, and Tallahassee also have prohibitions against fowl and/or livestock; that maintaining animals is not a novel question in the State; that the reason for defining poultry in the proposed Ordinance is poultry is a more limiting term; that fowl is any bird with wings; that prohibiting pets was not desired; that the proposed Ordinance can be adjusted to remain reasonable in accordance with local and Statewide experience; that the term "pet" is not used in the proposed ordinance as the definition of a pet could be any animal from which the owner draws companionship; that an individual can have companionship with livestock, chickens, ducks, rabbits, etc.i that the language in the proposed ordinance concerning offensive smells and odors is essentially a definition of nuisance; that anything which creates an odor offensive to a reasonable person of normal sensibilities or whose natural actions or presence are or may be deleterious or harmful to health is a violation which by definition is a nuisance; that the proposed ordinance prohibits livestock and poultry but allows rabbits inside a home; that grazing animals and large birds such as emus are prohibited; that allowing rabbits as pets is desired; that Police Department Staff were requested to advise an appropriate number of pets allowed; that a problem is being able to determine the number of pets maintained in a fenced yard; that creating an unenforceable ordinance is not desired. Gordon Jolly, Chief of Police, came before the Commission and stated that the proposed ordinance is the result of a specific problem occurring on a specific street; however, the problem is not unique; that a number of similar problems have occurred over the years; that the existing ordinance criminalizes the activity of maintaining animals; that the case becomes a criminal matter and goes to County court; that harboring a group of chickens will not receive a great deal of attention from a County court judge who is dealing with other criminal issues; that changing responsibility for enforcement from the Police Department to the Code Enforcement Department is a positive aspect of the proposed Ordinance; that a burden is removed from police resources; that the Code Enforcement Special Master process is enabled to provide greater attention to a neighborhood nuisance issue rather than a criminal issue; that the Police Department takes reports concerning code entorcement matters and forwards the reports to Code Enforcement Department, which will follow up the following work day or upon a sworn affidavit of a police officer; that 24- hour enforcement is not a problem; that the proposed ordinance is an opportunity to update a 65-year-old ordinance; that enforcement of violations regarding maintaining animals should not be the responsibility of the Police Department but rather the responsibility of the Code Enforcement Department. Timothy Litchet, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that cross- training efforts between Code Enforcement and Police Department Staff have been discussed; that police officers can be utilized in code enforcement proceedings through an affidavit, saving police resources; that at present, a cooperative environment between the Police Department and the Code Enforcement Department regarding violations exists; that the Special Master system has been effective; that the Special Masters are responsive to neighborhood issues and have a good understanding of City issues and the policies behind City issues; that the same level of attention is not provided at County court prosecutions; that the number of allowed pets is an important issue as access to properties is often a problem; that Staff has limited access to properties; that an ordinance which does not require access to a property is practical; that the proposed ordinance is supported. Attorney Singer stated that rabbits may be kept in a house or a garage which is attached to a house; that rabbits may not be kept in a detached garage. City Attorney Taylor stated that a 4-H project exemption is purposely excluded in the proposed ordinance. William Wall, Police Lieutenant, Sarasota Police Department, came before the Commission stated that no 4-H exemption is included in the proposed ordinance; that the reason is the explanation offered by the property owner was the animals were a part of 4-H project. BOOK 47 Page 19420 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19421 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Chief Jolly stated that the number of animals was large enough to create not only a noise but an odor problem for the neighborhood; that opposition to 4-H does not exist; that the City is a highly urbanized community with neighborhood issues requiring solutions; that action must be taken concerning a situation causing a serious problem in a neighborhood. Commissioner Quillin stated that permits could be issued with conditions; that failure to adhere to the conditions would result in revocation of the permit. Attorney Singer stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin stated that a permit provides the right of access to property to determine the permit holder is in compliance. Attorney Singer stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin stated that permitted uses are effective as revoking permits abates problems. Attorney Singer cited Section 8-2(b) of the proposed ordinance as follows : the city manager or his designee may, by special permit, authorize the keeping, harboring, raising or maintaining of livestock, poultry or rabbits (not within a dwelling) within the city limits. A special permit may only be issued for a specified limited period of time and shall scheduled forth such conditions or requirements as shall be deemed necessary to mitigate the potential adverse effects upon neighboring properties - Commissioner Mason asked if a process has been developed for special permits for keeping animals? Attorney Singer stated that the Administration is responsible for issuing all special permits. Commissioner Mason asked if a process for issuing specials permit will be developed? City Manager Sollenberger stated that a Staff member will be designated to administer the process. Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification of the process to revoke a special permit if conditions are violated. Attorney Singer stated that revocation of the permit is not in the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) i that revocation language can be written in the proposed ordinance if desired; that any permit issued contains revocatory language. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the number of rabbits which may be kept in a home or attached garage? Attorney Singer stated that no limit exists as no limit is imposed on the number of cats or dogs. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that gerbils or ferrets are not considered livestock and are not therefore excluded. Attorney Singer stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Jono Miller, 4535 45th Court (34234), stated that chickens were previously kept in the County; that no complaints were received; that chickens would have been eliminated if complaints had been received regarding the chickens; that the proposed ordinance is a move in the right direction; that the proposed ordinance addresses a performance standard, i.e., unsanitary conditions and odor; that animals and the noise animals create can be a threat; that not specifying which animals are allowable is good; that finding a solution is reasonable; that drifting away from a pertormance base and singling out species creates hardship for the communities; that the proposed ordinance provides harboring or keeping rabbits is unlawful; however, a lawn would provide food for rabbits; that a bush would provide shelter for rabbits; that an individual could be providing food and shelter for rabbits; that focusing on rabbits and not looking at all animals equally is a concern; that language regarding dogs should be changed as wolves kept as pets would be exempt; that "X-rated" establishments on North Tamiami Trail and other neighborhoods may remain; however, the rabbit will have to leave upon adoption of the proposed ordinance; that moving toward a performance based ordinance which is blind to the species of the animals is supported; that a Macaw will make more noise than a laying hen; that an allowable number should be based on the largest litter or clutch size; that the proposed ordinance promotes sprawl as moving to suburban areas is required if keeping outside pets is desired. John Flaherty, 500 Royal Road, Longboat Key, Florida (34228), cited the proposed ordinance as follows: WHEREAS, currently Chapter 8 of the Sarasota City Code prohibits the harboring of offensive or dangerous animals or fowl, the keeping of pigs and hogs, the prohibiting animals, except dogs under certain circumstances, from running at large, and the keeping within a dwelling or place where food is kept, prepared or sold, stables, BOOK 47 Page 19422 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19423 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. stalls, tie-ups, enclosures, coops, or pens for domestic animals or fowl. Mr. Flaherty stated that rabbits may be kept within a home; however, any enclosure, coop, or pen is not permitted; that rabbits should be kept outside in a hutch; that rabbits are gifts for children at Easter, demonstrate animal husbandry techniques and allow children to learn about reproduction; that two rabbits procreate eight rabbits; that young women and men observe the results of mating; that teaching procreation with rabbits is better than with babies from teenage pregnancies; that strides toward eliminating racism have been made; however, deciding which particular species to harbor as personal pets is ridiculous; that people have the right to choose pets; that penalizing all other pet owners is not the proper manner in which to solve the problem. Judy Goeller, 2641 Austin Street (34234), stated that the property owner is personally known; that the reason for the property owner's absence is legal counsel is out of town; that the status of the court case is unknown; that issuance of a citation does not signify a violation of a Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended); that a citation can be issued based on a written complaint by the Police Chief; that no legal determination of guilt has occurred; that expert testimony has not been provided; that the Constitutionality of issuing a citation has been questioned; that the Commission should not take action until a determination has been made regarding the lawsuit; that taking action on the proposed ordinance would be hasty and premature; that the property owner has raised animals for the past 23 years as a family hobby and has contributed to the high family value which is encouraged within the community; that the children's interest in animals has led to 4-H and educational projects regarding animals and other subjects; that observing the 4-H families at the recent Sarasota County Fair was heartwarming and is the type of commitment which should be fostered in the Cityi that considering the impact of a hasty decision is encouraged; that scheduling further hearings on the proposed ordinance with proper representation of animal experts and animal owners to make an informed decision is suggested; that a more appropriate notification could be made prior to another public hearing; that not voting in favor of the proposed ordinance is encouraged. Carlton Noles, 5500 Rollingwood Drive (34232), stated that the proposed ordinance is vague; that a more well-defined ordinance is required in order to determine a violation. Joe Moraca, 2163 Hibiscus Street (34239), stated that attendance is on behalf of his daughter who has two rabbits; that the rabbits are kept in the backyard in a hutch attached to an unattached building and therefore in violation of the proposed ordinance; that turning the daughter into an outlaw is not desired; that an ordinance based on nuisance or with a performance base is supported; that neighbors are not aware rabbits are kept; that the rabbits are quiet compared to dogs and cats in the neighborhood; that a daughter's rabbit is the mother of some of the property owners' rabbits indirectly contributing to the problem. Mayor Cardamone asked if obtaining a permit to keep two rabbits would be a difficulty? Mr. Moraca stated that the difficulty would depend on the process of obtaining a permit; that creating an ordinance which will be selectively enforced is not desired. Terri Mynatt, 3850 Aberdeen Drive (34240), stated that the provision of proper notice to all rabbit Owners in the City is unknown; that hundreds of people with rabbits were observed at the recent Sarasota County Fair; that the feasibility of all rabbit owners obtaining a permit is doubted; that keeping a rabbit inside a house does not make sense; that rabbits should live outside in hutches; that instituting the proposed ordinance selects rabbits as the arch enemyi that barking dogs were continually heard from a neighbor's residence from the owner's property; that personal problems exist between neighbors which is affecting the entire Cityi that the property owner was slandered by the comment the problem is caused by one neighbor who refuses to cooperate; that some fowl were removed at one time; that the property consists of two lots to accommodate the animals. Deborah Barker, 2548 Wood Oak Drive (34232), stated that the property owner's family and children are examples of great parenting, the outstanding County school system and the excellence of Sarasota County's Cooperative Extension 4-H program; that the animals raised at the residence are beautiful show-quality specimens; that the children exhibited animals at the 2000 Sarasota County Fair at which the parents are barn superintendents, a volunteer position which benefited over 100 BOOK 47 Page 19424 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19425 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. 4-H club members; that the property owner's children received numerous awards for the animals exhibited at the Fair and are eligible to compete at the 4-H District and State level; that one of the property owner's children represented the County for the past two years in Washington, D.C., and at the University of Florida and are examples who proudly demonstrate the opportunities the community can offer to youth and of whom civic leaders should be proud; that the children's accomplishments as residents of the City should be a source of pride to the Commission; that the children also show animals and have received awards as members of the American Rabbit Breeders Association, Inc. (ARBA); that great time and effort are involved in raising superior animals; that the children living in the City should be provided the ability to pursue the love of animals; that inadequate notice for public comment was provided; that taking no action on the proposed ordinance is recommended allowing more citizens to attend a future well-advertised meeting to share feelings regarding the necessity of defeating the proposed ordinance. Marybeth Pantzis, 4026 Wood View Drive (34232), stated that the City is making a major response to a conflict between neighbors; that the proposed ordinance will disallow any child or adult from the pleasure of raising small animals either as a hobby, an educational pursuit, or 4-H project; that obtaining a permit to keep rabbits will be time-consuming; that the cost is unknown; that children will not be able to receive bunnies; that rabbits cannot be raised inside a home; that cats escape occasionally into the neighborhood and possibly annoy other neighbors; that keeping rabbits as opposed to cats or dogs is not understood; that barking dogs are more obnoxious than rabbits; that hamsters or gerbils could not be kept under the proposed ordinance; that the manner of enforcing the ordinance is questioned; that the proposed ordinance is out of proportion to the issue; that sufficient notice of the public hearing was not provided; that any action should be deferred until citizens have a chance to address proposed action. Mayor Cardamone stated that the issue is a single-family home with 45 chickens, 40 rabbits, 8 turkeys, 2 pheasants, and a goat, which is out of hand. Commissioner Quillin stated that the property owner admirably removed some of the animals. Mayor Cardamone stated that a long time passed before removal of. some animals. Commissioner Mason stated that a special permit to keep animals is for a limited time. City Attorney Taylor stated that the permit referenced in the proposed ordinance is for special events such as fairs, grand- opening pony rides, etc., and is not to constitute permanent approval for keeping animals; that the proposed ordinance was advertised as required by law; that notice to individual owners of animals is not possible; that notice was published in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune for the time required by Florida Statutes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated for clarification that gerbils and ferrets are allowable. John McGruder, 1937 Datura Street (34239), stated that an apology is : extended to the Commission which has more important issues to discuss; however, the assistance of the Commission is required; that an apology is also extended to the property owners who are attempting to encourage children to learn and grow; however, anger exists toward the property owner in wasting time and funds in order to gain some satisfaction; that the problem commenced 20 years ago; that a son was a friend of the son of the property owner but was withdrawn from the environment due to cruel behavior toward the animals; that the property owner has been very kind to personal family members; that taking a negative position against the family is difficult; however, considerable effort has been expended in understanding and accepting; that the residence has been run down to a quality less than a farm house; that the relocation of the property owner is not desired; however; other neighbors are relocating due to the lowering of property values by the appearance and use of the neighboring property; that support for the property owner has been lost as actions agreed to in a mediation were not performed; that support for the property owner has also been lost since family members have been trapping neighbors' cats and turning the cats in for euthanization; that the right to raise animals in personal residences and yards is defended; however, the present situation is out of hand and must be corrected; that adopting a new regulation would not be necessary if one individual had cooperated; that the situation could have been tolerated for six or seven years until the children grew up if the property owner was reasonable and worked with the neighbors; that action to eliminate farm animals on Datura Street is required. Mary McGruder 1937 Datura Street (34239), stated that the property owner is asking the City to uphold Constitutional rights by allowing raising farm animals as a parenting tool; that a 4-H agent is requesting City homeowners be allowed to raise farm BOOK 47 Page 19426 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19427 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. animals as a learning tool; that neighbors on Datura Street are requesting assistance concerning the right to enjoy working outside on homes, lounge by the pool, have guests for a cook-out, or read a book in the yard without being overcome by overwhelming fermented stench from animal feces and urine of hens, pheasants, rabbits, turkeys, goats, etc., all of which the property owner has owned or is currently breeding and which has occurred for over 20 years; that the property owner's children have won numerous awards for animals; that crowing, gobbling, and bleating is heard all day; that the privilege of raising animals carries responsibilities; that barnyard animals in a city which is no longer in the infant stages of change but is riding high and successfully with years of growth and development creates a dilemma; that the property owner has indicated relocating will be considered if the animals cannot be retained; that neighbors face a predicament in relocating due to being unable to use a yard or installing a pool and worrying about a child or pet being bitten by a rodent; that property values are affected by the detrimental conditions; that a neighbor has a video of maggots breeding in the animal waste on the property; that mice and rats are drawn to the property; that homes on Datura Street are valued from $200,000 to $500,000 in a neighborhood providing specialty shops, Morton's Market, wonderful dining, etc.; that the City is changing and people are investing in the potential of property values; that changing old laws is required; that adopting the proposed ordinance is encouraged. Margaret Lowell, 1841 Datura Street (34239), stated that the Commission's position is not envied; that everyone should be reasonable; that the choice seems between children and parent's being able to have the healthy, wholesome 4-H experience or not being able to have animals; that many children participate in 4-H by reaching agreements with individuals who own farm land east of I-75; that the proposed ordinance will require parents make choices; that reaching agreements with individuals having appropriate facilities would be useful if living within the City limits and maintaining 4-H-type experiences is desired. Mike Geenen, 1947 Clematis Street (34239), stated that for 20 years chickens cackling, roosters crowing, turkeys gobbling, goats bleating have been heard; that the many rabbits in cages have been smelled; that the backyard cannot be enjoyed due to the smells and noise; that the conditions attract mice, rats, and flies posing a serious health hazard and depreciating real estate values; that a strict ordinance to protect neighborhoods is requested. Barbara Maynor, 1910 Datura Street (34239), stated that neighbors have lived with chickens, turkeys, pheasants, quail, peacocks, geese, up to 90 rabbits at a time, roosters, goats, a horse, and a pig for 13 years; that animal feces and urine is smelled walking down the street and depending on the wind in a bedroom, bathroom, and back porch; that the neighborhood is plagued with stable flies which sting and are blood-feeders; that the lifestyle of enjoying outdoor gardening has been altered; that installing a pool and enjoying the backyard is not possible due to the smells; that three neighborhood cats were missing; that the property owner was trapping cats; that one cat was euthanized so cats are kept indoors which will allow the rodent population to escalate; that raccoons, possums, A hawks, and owls are attracted to the environment due to the rodents; that health hazards from the build-up of animal excrement and rodent problems are frightening especially if a flood occurs; that the County Health Department advised a rat problem only exists after a individual has been bitten by a rat; that a City as beautiful as Sarasota should not allow keeping barnyard animals, selling and breeding of rabbits, and the accompanying unhealthy conditions; that Code Enforcement, the Health Department, the Police Department, Department of Children and Families, the City Attorney, and Zoning are all aware of the problem but apparently have no adequate code or jurisdiction to obliterate the problem; that a representative of 4-H advised a part of 4-H's purpose is to add to the community and strongly urged maintenance of clean cages; that a flurry of clean-up activity has occurred on the property within the past 24 hours; that awards may be earned for raising animals; however, the so-called 4-H project has created animosity; that neighbors are afraid for pets' lives as the pets are naturally attracted to the smells and sounds only to become trapped and not returned to owners; that the police has been notified for three years regarding wild turkeys; that the owners would remove the turkeys by Thanksgiving; that no citations or fines were issued; that the police have difficulty enforcing the current code; that no one deserves to live with such conditions due to lack of adequate code or penalty; that in the City's Year of the Neighborhoods, a neighborhood should not have health hazards, animal noises, and smells; that adopting the proposed ordinance without delay with full enforcement is requested; that an apology is extended to pet owners who may suffer due to the proposed ordinance; however, an enforceable ordinance is required for people who get carried away with keeping animals. Keith Wilson, 4-H Agent, 2900 Ringling Boulevard (34237), stated that the turkeys, goats, and roosters have been removed from the property which is clearly an effort to compromise; and asked the number of Commissioners who have visited the property? Commissioner Hogle stated that the property was observed from the street while driving by. Mr. Wilson stated that a decision is being made on a location which has not been investigated. BOOK 47 Page 19428 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19429 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Datura Street has been driven on dozens of times; that the home has not been intruded upon. Mr. Wilson stated that calling the property owner and requesting a tour of the property would not be an intrusion; that a child's career expectations are often shaped by childhood experiences; that inconveniences should not interfere with a positive experience of using the procedure of raising small animals; that new 4-H clubs are forming in Newtown; that many children in Newtown have expressed a desire to work on rabbit projects; that the proposed ordinance will prevent participation in such educational activities in the backyards of residential property; that the City's Vision is a City of Urban Amenities with Small Town Living and Feeling; that the property owner's lifestyle is within the parameters of small town living. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if one of the Hs in 4-H stands for "health"? Mr. Wilson stated yes; that two unannounced visits were made to the property; that a search was made for lack of health and improper care; that none was observed; and asked if the Commission has attempted to smell rabbit feces? Commissioner Quillin stated that rabbits discharge pellets; that rabbits eat grass and grain; therefore, the odor is not as strong as other animals. Mr. Wilson stated that the odor of a rabbit is minimal; that approximately 50 rabbits were on the property and the odor was minimal during a recent visit. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed ordinance indicates a nuisance is smell; that urine usually causes a bad smell; that ensuring adequate water for animals is important; that strong urine smells are usually seasonal depending on breeding season; and asked if the odor would be greater at different times of the year due to breeding season? Mr. Wilson stated yes. Commissioner Quillin asked if the number of rabbits contributed to the bad smell? Mr. Wilson stated that on two visits to the property, 50 rabbits were observed and no odor was apparent; that visiting the property is suggested to determine if a nuisance exists. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the 4-H program is highly regarded and supported; and asked the minimum number of rabbits required for a child to participate successfully in 4-H? Mr. Wilson stated that one rabbit is required to participate in 4-H. Wendy Larson, 3350 South Osprey (34239), stated that while living on Datura Street, windows could not be left open due to bad odors; that the participation of the property owner's family in an ongoing 4-H project was not known; that the family would clean up the property upon being made aware visits were imminent; that rabbits were advertised in the newspaper and sold for profit. Greg Horowitz, 1954 Datura Street (34239), stated that a fence was erected which did not help in reducing the stench; that installing plants along the fence did not reduce the stench; that the family placed the rabbit cages along the fence line away from the family home; that hay is thrown over the rabbit droppings attracting flies and mice; that the existing ordinance regarding maintaining animals is. for a by-gone era; that the proposed ordinance should be fine-tuned to allow children to have one or two rabbits. Cerise Terry, 1873 Datura Street (34239), stated that a pet cat disappeared; that information was later received the cat had been euthanized; that 50 to 90 rabbits are not pets; that having 50 to 90 rabbits on a residential lot is not appropriate. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 on first reading. Commissioner Hogle stated that a very serious problem exists in the Datura Street neighborhood; that the Administration will report back regarding a special permit process; that moving forward with the proposed ordinance is necessary. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if modifying an ordinance making the ordinance less restrictive between first and second reading is permissible? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the Administration can approve one or two rabbits in a hutch outside a home without a public hearing and without charge to a petitioner? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. BOOK 47 Page 19430 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19431 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a 4-H project can exist with one rabbit; therefore, allowing one or two rabbits would not eliminate the 4-H potential. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed ordinance addresses rabbits and other animals; and requested clarification of the impact on individuals who walk around with pet birds. City Attorney Taylor stated that animals in general are not disallowed; that livestock such as horses, pigs, goats, sheep, mules, cattle, emus, pheasants, ostriches, rheas and other like birds are absolutely prohibited as are chickens, ducks, geese, and other like poultry. Commissioner Quillin stated that a performance-based ordinance defines the nuisance and remedies; that the proposed ordinance indicates an animal which creates an odor which is offensive to a reasonable person of normal sensibilities cannot be kept; that reasonable for one person may not be reasonable for another; that eliminating any noxious odors is desired providing relief and remedy for citizens; that barking dogs are a nuisance which should be remedied; that granting special permits for animals is not a problem; that a permit can revoked abating the nuisance if a violation occurs; that an ordinance allowing two rabbits is not desired; that two rabbits may result in more than two rabbits which would be a violation of the proposed ordinance; that conducting a workshop to refine the proposed ordinance is desired; that loopholes which should be tightened up exist in the proposed ordinance. Mayor Cardamone stated that a barking dog ordinance exists. City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin that the proposed ordinance is comprehensive and deals directly with a nuisance and the manner in which the nuisance will be abated. Mayor Cardamone stated that special permits should not be issued for horses, pygmy goats, sheep, etc.; that the problem is with rabbits which are silent; that 50 to 90 rabbits in a backyard setting probably do create odors versus 3 or 4 rabbits in a backyard; that the affected neighbors have indicated no objections to keeping 1, 2, or 3 rabbits but do object to barnyard animals and the great number of animals; that a specified number of allowable rabbits which may be kept in a backyard could be incorporated in the proposed ordinance. City Attorney Taylor stated that the permitting section of the proposed ordinance is intended to apply to fairs, shows of a temporary nature, special events, etc.; that including an allowable number of rabbits will relieve the Administration from potentially issuing thousands of permits. Mayor Cardamone stated that as a child, personal 4-H projects were cooking, clothing, textiles, etc., as animals were not allowed in the City; that raising rabbits may. be important to the development of a child; that the City could allow 2, 3, or 4 rabbits in a hutch in a yard which would not be a problem if no complaints of health hazards or smell are received. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the public hearing could be continued; that Staff could be directed to report back with suggestions; that Staff will review and recommend the permitting process. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that action should be taken immediately; that language in the proposed ordinance should contain more specificity regarding special permits; that special permits are for animals for special events and not for a 4-H animal in a backyard; that allowing a specific number of rabbits should be addressed; and asked if an animal not specifically excluded in the proposed ordinance is allowed? City Attorney Taylor stated yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to amend the motion to: 1) add the following language to Section 8-2(a) (3) of proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163: "provided, however, that up to two rabbits may be kept in a hutch in the backyard" and 2) include detached or attached garages with the Administration and the City Attorney's Office to develop appropriate language for incorporation prior to second reading. Mayor Cardamone asked if the recommended language change presents a problem. City Attorney Taylor stated no. Commissioner Quillin asked if keeping a hutch outside is permissible? Vice Mayor Pillot stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin stated that two rabbits becoming a brood may present a problem. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the rabbits can be removed upon reaching an appropriate age. Commissioner Quillin stated that a single problem in a neighborhood should not limit the ability for children to have good experiences in raising small animals. BOOK 47 Page 19432 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19433 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone stated that no limit is imposed on the number of rabbits allowed in an enclosed structure, resulting in the potential for overcrowding; that not properly cleaning the structure will become a health hazard. City Attorney Taylor stated that the proposed ordinance will contain language which will provide for enforcement. Commissioner Quillin stated that County Animal Services should be called for overcrowded conditions in an enclosed structure. Vice Mayor Pillot asked for clarification of the relevancy of the pending litigation to adoption of the proposed ordinance. City Attorney Taylor stated that the pending litigation is under the current ordinance and will continue to be tried under the provisions of the current ordinance. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to amend. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4163 on first reading as amended. by: 1) adding the following language to Section 8-2(a) (3) of proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163: "provided, however, that up to two rabbits may be kept in a hutch in the backyard" and 2) including detached or attached garages with the Administration and the City Attorney's Office to develop appropriate language for incorporation prior to second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the reason for amending the motion is due to hearing from the 4-H representative that one rabbit is sufficient to participate in 4-H and hearing many neighbors indicate living with a smaller number of animals can be tolerated. 14. NON QUASI- JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4215, AMENDING CHAPTER 24, PERSONNEL, ARTICLE II, PENSIONS, DIVISION 4, GENERAL EMPLOYEES, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, ADDING SECTION 24-116, REEMPLOYMENT AFTER RETIREMENTI ETC. - PASSED ON FIRST READNG (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2) #3 (1744) through (1807) Mayor Cardamone stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 amends Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 4, General Employees, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sarasota, adding Section 24-116 (Pension Code), Reemployment after Retirement. Gary Laubacker, Chairman, General Employee Pension Board, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 amends Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 4, General Employees, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sarasota, adding Section 24-116, Reemployment after Retirement by establishing guidelines by which retiring individuals may be rehired by the City; that according to the Internal Revenue Code, retired individuals can return to original places of employment as long as certain criteria are met; that the purpose of amending the Pension Code is to protect the General Employees' Pension Plan from an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) violation if retirees are rehired by the City; that no cost is associated with the adoption of the proposed ordinance; that the Board of Trustees requests adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone Closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes. BOOK 47 Page 19434 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19435 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. 15. NON QUASI- JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4217, TO VAÇATE THAT CERTAIN WESTERNMOST 3-FOOT PORTION OF THE HUDSON AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY BORDERED ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALDERMAN STREET AND COMMENCING SOUTH THEREFROM FOR APPROXIMATELY 85 FEET AS IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 00-SV-05, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER MICHAEL J. BERKET) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-3) #3 (1808) through (1960) Mayor Cardamone stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 regards Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05 concerning property at the southwest corner of Alderman Street and Hudson Avenue. Shelley Hamilton, Senior Planner II, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05 incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 is a request for the vacation of an approximate three-foot wide strip of right-of-way along Hudson Avenue adjacent to 1646 Alderman Street; that the property owner has agreed to dedicate an easement which will allow the continuation of an existing sidewalk along the south side of Alderman Street adjacent to the property in exchange for the vacation of the Hudson Avenue right-of-way along the eastern property boundary; that existing landscaping and fencing are located in the existing right-of-way for Hudson Avenue; that Staff has indicated no plans to widen Hudson Avenue exist; that the continuation of the sidewalk along Alderman Street will provide a benefit to the public which was one of the criterion reviewed during the request for a street vacation; that at its March 1, 2000 meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV- 1206, Zoning Code (1998), and to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The City of Sarasota hereby retains and expressly reserves unto itself and its successors a utility easement 2. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of Comcast Cablevision of West Florida, Inc. (or) may present written evidence that Comcast Cablevision of West Florida, Inc. has no cable facilities within the portions of public rights- of-way to be vacated . 3. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of GTE Florida Incorporated.. 4. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of Florida Power & Light Company. 5. The Adjoining Property Owner hereby covenants to provide to the City of Sarasota and its successors a pedestrian sidewalk easement for the purposes of allowing pedestrian use over, along and above the northern three feet of the Adjoining Property Owner's property There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the, public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 on first reading. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed. with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): : Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes. 16. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4215, AMENDING CHAPTER 24, PERSONNEL, ARTICLE IL, PENSIONS, DIVISION 4, GENERAL EMPLOYEES, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, ADDING SECTION 24-116, REEMPLOYMENT AFTER RETIREMENT: ETC. PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2) #3 (1744) through (1807) Mayor Cardamone stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 amends Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 4, General Employees, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sarasota, adding Section 24-116 (Pension Code), Reemployment after Retirement. BOOK 47 Page 19436 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19437 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Gary Laubacker, Chairman, General Employee Pension Board, came before the Commission and stated that Proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 amends Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 4, General Employees, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sarasota, adding Section 24-116, Reemployment after Retirement; by establishing guidelines by which retiring individuals may be rehired by the City; that the Internal Revenue Code retired individuals to return to original places of employment as long as certain criteria are met; that the purpose of amending the. Pension Code is to protect the General Employees' Pension Plan from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) violation when retirees are rehired by the City; that no cost is associated with the adoption of the proposed Ordinance; that the Board of Trustees requests adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4215 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Pillot, yesi Quillin, yes Cardamone, yesi Hogle, yes. 17. NON QUASI- JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4217, TO VACATE THAT CERTAIN WESTERNMOST 3. -FOOT PORTION OF THE HUDSON AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY BORDERED ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALDERMAN STREET AND COMMENCING SOUTH THEREFROM FOR APPROXIMATELY 85 FEET AS IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 00-SV-05, APPLICANT CITY OF SARASOTA REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER MICHAEL J. BERKET) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-3) #3 (1808) through (1935) Mayor Cardamone stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 regards Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05' concerning property at the southwest corner of Alderman Street and Hudson Avenue. Shelley Hamilton, Senior Planner II, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05 incorporated into proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 is to request approval of the vacation of an approximate three-foot wide strip of right-of-way along Hudson Avenue adjacent to 1646 Alderman Street, that the property owner has agreed to dedicate an easement which will allow the continuation of an existing sidewalk along the south side of Alderman Street adjacent to the property in exchange for the vacation of the Hudson Avenue right-of-way along the eastern property boundary; that existing landscaping and fencing are located in the existing right-of-way for Hudson Avenue; that Staff has indicated no plans to widen Hudson Avenue exist; that the continuation of the sidewalk along Alderman Street will provide a benefit to the public which was one of the criterion reviewed during the request for a street vacation; that at its March 1, 2000 meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Street Vacation Application No. 00-SV-05 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV- 1206, Zoning Code (1998), and to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions:. 1. The City of Sarasota hereby retains and expressly reserves unto itself and its successors a utility easement 2. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of Comcast Cablevision of West Florida, Inc. (or) may present written evidence that Comcast Cablevision of West Florida, Inc. has no cable facilities within the portions of public rights-of-way to be vacated - 3. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record BOOK 47 Page 19438 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19439 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of GTE Florida Incorporated 4. The Adjoining Property Owner shall execute and record in the Official Records of Sarasota County a utility easement in favor of Florida Power & Light Company 5. The Adjoining Property Owner hereby covenants to provide to the City of Sarasota and its successors a pedestrian sidewalk easement for the purposes of allowing pedestrian use over, along and above the northern three feet of the Adjoining Property Owner's property There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 on first reading. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4217 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes. 18. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1263, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FILED BY THE SARASOTA MANATEE AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO ALLOW A SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION FROM A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT TO PERMIT EXPANSION OF THE SARASOTA BRADENTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICANT NO. 96-DRI-01, APPLICANT SARASOTA-MAATEE AIRPORT AUTHORITY) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1263 (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-1) #3 (1935) through (3417) Mayor Cardamone requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that during quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that prior to opening the public hearing, Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex-parte communications, concerning the subject property; that the recommendation is to allow 30 minutes for the Applicant's presentation and 15 minutes for rebuttal; that the City will have 10 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that individuals certified by the Commission as Affected Persons will have 10 minutes to speak and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that Affected persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject property; 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 cros8-examination; that the following persons have applied for and complied with the rules for obtaining Affected Person status: James Stewart and Scott Picket who are either the owners of property within 500 feet of the property and/or a designated representative of a neighborhood association within 500 feet of the property. Mayor Cardamone stated that the consensus of the Commission is to certify James Stewart and Scott Picket as Affected Persons and to approve the recommendation for speaker timelimits. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the time is 10:30 p.m., and that the meeting should be extended to complete the Agenda. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to extend the meeting to complete the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Commissioner Mason stated that six letters were received which were entered into the record. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that one letter was received from the Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner Quillin stated that letters were received; that at a recent Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) meeting the subject of the extension of the Airport was broached; however, no direct communication occurred. Commissioner Hogle stated that electronic correspondence was received from the Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association (IB/SSA) i that a discussion with Mr. Burt Polishook occurred; that a letter was received from the Chamber of Commerce. BOOK 47 Page 19440 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19441 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone stated that approximately 47 letters were received; that a three-line response was sent to all 47 letters. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Charles D. Bailey, law firm of Williams, Parker, Harrison, Dietz & Getzen, 200 South Orange Avenue (34236), Fred Piccolo, Executive Director, Sarasota/Manatee Airport Authority, Rick Alberts, Vice President, Transportation Solutions, Inc., Noah Lagos, Senior Director of Aviation, Sarasota/Manatee Airport Authority, came before the Commission. Attorney Bailey stated that Pattie Lanier, Vice Chairman, Sarasota/Manatee Airport Authority, is present in Chambers and available to answer any questions. Mr. Piccolo stated that thanks are extended to the City for assistance received a few weeks ago after a tragic incident at the Sarasota/Bradenton International (Airport) and a particular compliment is paid to the Police Chief and the Police Department for the support and professional response. Mr. Piccolo continued that an overview of the projects contained in the Development of Regional Impact Application No. 96-DRI-01 and the importance of the proposals to the Airport and the community is being provided; that the benefits to the community, the enhanced service capabilities, the economic benefit and the environmental impact of the Airport on the community will be evident upon hearing the facts; that the Airport is a unique facility which is difficult to compare to other types of proposals from the private sector or other governmental agencies; that the Airport operates in a different environment than many other governmental agencies; that the Airport receives no ad valorem taxes and therefore functions very much as a private company; that revenue is generated from business activities; that the Airport receives capital grants from the State and Federal governments out of trust fund monies based on taxes on airline tickets and aviation fuel; that an Airport is often compared to an Enterprise Fund; however, most Enterprise Funds such as utilities for water and sewer, provide no choice to purchase water from another city due to lower cost of the water; that a consumer has a choice as to use of an airport; that four other airports in the region compete with the Airport; that the Airport functions in a marketplace similar to private enterprise; that an economic impact study indicates the Airport has a $1 billion annual economic impact on the community; that over 17,000 jobs are derived from the activities at the Airport; that Airport payroll is over $377 million; that 1.5 million passengers utilized the Airport in the past year; that visitors using the Airport bring over $335 million annually into the area; that 14 percent of the business activity in the area is tied to air service and general aviation service at the Airport; that carrier and general aviation services are two of the top 10 factors businesses consider when looking to expand or relocate; that over $500,000 of economic impact will be brought about by the proposed projects; that the proposed projects and the existing Airport will provide over $1.5 billion in economic impact at no cost to the community; that the Airport is a critical element to the future economic vitality of the region; that without a thriving airport, the economic health of the community will be jeopardized; that the main elements of the proposal are: 1. Terminal and parking garage expansion if traffic warrants - Including all contingencies in a document with a 15-year life span makes sense. Presently the Airport is under-utilized; therefore, expansion is not anticipated for quite some time. 2. Develop outparcels - The Airport survives on its own revenue. Existing projects are a residual budget wherein the Airport takes all the non-airline revenue first, and the remaining revenue requirement must be supplied by the airlines. Generating more non-airline revenue allows the airlines to operate at the Airport at less expense, raising the potential of bringing in more airline services. Developing the outparcels will generate more jobs and tax revenue. $1.5 million will be invested in infrastructure, 200 jobs will be generated in the first phase. These funds are comprised of Airport dollars only, and do not include tax dollars. Mr. Piccolo stated that the critical portion of the proposal regards the runway extension which is tied to the air service needs of the community and the ability to compete in a private marketplace; that recent survey data reveals each year over 1 million people from Manatee and Sarasota Counties fly out of Tampa International Airport (TIA) which has a significant economic and environmental consequence for the community; that the runway extension is good for the Airport for the following reasons: : 1. Safety in providing more pavement 2. Current funds availability to complete the project 3. Environmental benefit in terms of noise and pollution Mr. Piccolo stated that aircraft departing from the north will be at a higher altitude, decreasing noise exposure; that aircrait departing from the south cause an increase in noise which will be experienced only in industrial zoned areas which are considered compatible land uses; that no perceptible increase in noise will be experienced in residential communities in the City; that BOOK 47 Page 19442 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19443 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. overall the City will receive less noise than if the runway is not extended due to the height of the departing aircraft at the north end of the runway. Mr. Piccolo continued that a recent study commissioned by the Airport regarding the environmental effects of 1 million passengers per year driving to TIA reveals reducing the amount of diverted passengers by 25 percent will reduce overall vehicle traffic to Tampa by 35 million miles annually, resulting in $1.75 million fewer gallons annually of fuel consumption, reduced nitrous oxide emissions by over 32 million grams or 70,000 pounds, and reduced carbon dioxide by over 200 billion grams or 440,000 pounds on an annual basis, and reduced particle matter by 350,000 grams; that the proposed project has air quality as well as positive noise impact on the community. 4. Meeting the air service needs of the community Mr. Piccolo stated that the physics of flight is not just the thrust of the engine but also the air flow above and below the wings; that as the air becomes warm, more distance from the end of the runway is required for the aircraft to take off; that the Airport has the shortest runway of all 19 airports in Florida; that the Airport's existing fleet is comprised of predominantly 737-, MD80-, and 727-type aircrait which all require more runway length; that the maximum. the aircraft can travel with the existing runway length is 1,500 nautical miles; that one-third of the market is lost due to the runway length; that during hot weather, the runway length often requires an aircraft to leave some seats empty to reduce weight for take-off which reduces profits; therefore, landing at TIA or the Ft. Myers airport with a full load of passengers is more profitable; that an inability to attract international service exists; that improving the Airport is necessary to remain competitive in the marketplace; that the community is not being requested to contribute to the improvements; that the Airport will pay for the improvements. Mr. Piccolo further stated that the proposed project will bring additional tax base, jobs, and economic value to the community; that the Airport and the community are at critical crossroads to compete in a global marketplace which cannot be accomplished without the proposed improvements; that neither the Airport nor the community can afford to stand on the sidelines while surrounding facilities and communities bleed the economic life from the Airport and the community on a daily basis; that Staff and the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), the Tampa Bay Planning Council, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, the Manatee County Commission, and the Sarasota County Commission have unanimously recommended approval of the proposed project; that many local chambers, cities, organizations, and businesses endorse the proposed project; that no negative input has been received regarding the proposed project. Attorney Bailey referred to Section 4 (A) (1) of proposed Resolution No. OOR-1263 which provides for a cash payment of $43,000 from the Airport to the City to satisfy the Airport's obligations under the original Development Order; and stated that the original Development Order in November 1985 required the Airport to pay a proportionate share of improvements to Old Bradenton Road; that the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) does not contemplate the improvements to Old Bradenton Road as the level of service is higher than previously envisioned; therefore, Staff recommended the $43,000 payment; that the Airport is not requesting approval for transportation for any phase other than Phase 1; that outparcel development will occur in Manatee County which will impact the City and unincorporated Sarasota at which time a separate and distinct traffic analysis will be conducted; that since 1988, the amount of area encompassed by the 65 Day- Night Level (DNL), the noise contour deemed to be incompatible with residential development, has contracted from 6.5 square miles to 2.5 square miles; that the reduction is a result of the reduction of Airport traffic and a phasing-in of Stage 3 aircraft which is a quieter generation of aircraft for which the footprint is significantly smaller than the previous Stage 1 and 2 aircraft; that the Airport fleet is currently almost 100 percent Stage 3; that by Federal law, airlines were required to conform to maintaining quieter aircraft; that the majority of the remaining 2.5 square miles remaining in the noise contour is on Airport property; that Longboat Key has requested the Development Order not include any reference to noise abatement terms; that the County elected to avoid a noise abatement issue by not including in the County Development Order any reference to noise abatement; that the draft Development Order contains no reference to noise abatement; that the Airport is in agreement with not including noise abatement language; that Manatee County's Development Agreement does contain noise abatement language; that the Airport will abide by Manatee County's Development Order. Mr. Alberts stated that a noise analysis for the runway extension was prepared following strict guidelines through the DRI process as well as the guidelines of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) regarding land use compatibility; that the 65 DNL contour was developed to identify the areas of significant noise exposure; that other actions are considered to reduce the noise if communities exist within the 65 DNL contour noise barriers; that no residential areas in the City or County exist in the 65 DNL; that a change in noise will be almost imperceptible in the City as a result of the runway extension; that noise is difficult to measure in terms of an individual's reaction to noise. Attorney Bailey stated that some portions of the 65 DNL are in the City limits but not within residential communities. BOOK 47 Page 19444 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19445 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that all agencies which rule on the DRI are listed in the application; and asked if the City is the last agency to grant approval? Mr. Piccolo stated yes. Commissioner Hogle stated that the new jets are very quiet; however, the smaller Lear-type jets are very noisy; and asked if the smaller jets will be required to be quieter? Mr. Alberts stated that the phase-out of the aircraft to a Stage 3 or quieter aircraft applies to all aircraft greater than 75,000 pounds which affects the cargo and air carriers and not general aviation; that the smaller aircraft are gaining the technology of the larger aircraft; that the new smaller aircraft are much quieter. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the runway extension does not contribute additional noise. Attorney Bailey stated that runway extension will lessen noise impact to some degree. Mayor Cardamone requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that the Applicant has provided an accurate description of Application No. 96-DRI-01, a request for a substantial deviation to an existing DRI; that at its March 1, 2000, meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) voted unanimously to recommend approval of Application No. 96-DRI-01 subject to conditions set forth in proposed Resolution No. 96R-1263; that the PBLP found the project consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, on balance and the Standards for Review for DRIs; that pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statues, affected local governments must approve a substantial deviation through issuance of a Development Order; that the Zoning Code (1998) requires a development order be in the form of a resolution. Mr. Hess referred to a drawing displayed on the overhead projector indicating the DRI boundary, the Sarasota-Manatee Çounty line, and the City limits and stated that the City has a small portion of the DRI within the City's boundaries near the southern edge; and referred to a drawing indicating the Noise Contour Map included with the Application which indicates the 65 DNL as the outer contour on the map. Commissioner Hogle asked if any construction will occur in the City? Mr. Hess stated yes; that replacement of a picnic shelter and installation of signs have been constructed; that a Preliminary Development Agreement allows construction of some smaller facilities to occur prior to DRI approval. Mayor Cardamone requested that Affected Persons come forward; and the following Affected Persons came before the Commission: James Stewart, representing DeSoto Park Place, 1100 University Parkway (34234), stated that DeSoto Park Place (DeSoto Park) contains 68 homes and is a member-owned senior community; that a problem with noise from the Airport has existed for many years; that a noise test was conducted 10 years ago on DeSoto Park premises; that subsequent to the test, agreements were made regarding times of flights, etc., to attempt to lessen noise; that living near the airport was tolerable until the Residence Inn (Inn) was constructed adjacent to DeSoto Park; that the Inn runs Chree-quarters of the length of Desoto Park and is three stories high; that a southbound aircraft travelling over the Tri- Par Estates area on the south side of the Sarasota Kennel Club (Kennel Club) sounds as if the aircraft is directly overhead; that due to the construction of the Inn, a unique situation has been created as sound bounces off the Inn and the Kennel Club creating a megaphone effect; that the noise is becoming a health hazard; and read excerpts from studies regarding the negative effects of airport noise. Mr. Stewart continued that DeSoto Park residents' civil rights are being violated; that DeSoto Park is requesting protection from the Commission; that DeSoto Park pays considerable tax dollars; that expansion of the Airport is not opposed; that the Airport is an asset to DeSoto Park; that noise protection is requested; that Staff was requested to provide a noise barrier; that information concerning the noise problem was received from a noise expert; that receiving answers to ten questions will provide proof previous noise tests should not be relied upon as the tests have flaws; that lawsuits have been filed due to flawed sound maps. Mr. Stewart distributed copies of maps to the Commission and indicated discrepancies between an aerial map and a map prepared for a study; and stated that a sound barrier is requested. Scott Pickett, Board Member, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association. 519 North Shore Dive, (34234), stated that the Airport impacts much of northern Sarasota, including the neighborhood the Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association (IB/SSA) represents; that the IB/SSA requests the establishment of a reasonable buffering standard and one operational standard to mitigate the impacts; that the Commission can positively respond to the IB/SSA by placing a condition on the Airport DRI Development Order requiring landscaping improvements in an area located outside the City limits; that a DRI which extends into BOOK 47 Page 19446 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19447 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. three. different jurisdictions is being reviewed; that each jurisdiction has the right to review the entire DRI; that the proposed Development Order contains a number of conditions applying to areas and operations outside the City limits; that IB/SSA is requesting two additional extra-juriedictional conditions in the Development Order; that proposed DRI changes must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that IB/SSA contends the Applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with defining principles, goals, objectives, and action strategies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan; that implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and action by the Commission in enforcing the City's Comprehensive Plan is sought; that four regional impacts on the IB/SSA neighborhood are identified as follows: 1. Aesthetics Mr. Pickett stated that the area of concern is a completely open expanse of grass and asphalt which leaves the terminal, gates, aircraft servicing and numerous other Airport facilities in plain view. Mr. Pickett distributed photographs indicating the open area of the Airport operations and stated that neighborhood aesthetics will not be improved in the existing Plan which is representative of the lack of attention of the Applicant to the issue of neighborhood compatibility. 2. Impacts generated from ground operations Mr. Pickett stated that the neighborhood has been and will continue to be impacted by ground operations of the Airport; that aside from having a full view of intense land-use activity, the pre- and post-flight servicing of aircraft generates considerable noise, impacting the neighborhood; that visual and noise impacts exist; that the Applicant has given no consideration to noise from ground operations; that a landscape buffer will partially mitigate the aesthetic and noise impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the Airport; that the Airport will become busier, ground operations will become more intensive, and impacts from the ground operations will become more intensive. 3. Increases in noisy jet aircraft using runway 422 Mr. Pickett stated that the use of runway 422 by jet aircraft generates considerable noise in the neighborhood; that more aircraft will use runway 422 as the Airport becomes busier; that the IB/SSA requests a general prohibition of jet aircraft using runway 422; that emergency or severe weather conditions are acceptable exceptions to the general prohibition. 4. Gateway to Sarasota Mr. Pickett stated that the proposed DRI is relevant to the gateway to Sarasota; that the University of South Florida/New College (USF/New College) and the Airport are the two properties forming the gateway to Sarasota for thousands of visitors travelling southbound on US 41; that USF/New College has made plans to make numerous improvements along the gateway section of US 41; that USF/New College, the City, and the Airport teamed up to provide landscape improvements in the median strip on US 41; however, a significant area in the gateway section of US 41 fails to provide the important first impression of Sarasota to the visitor; that the Applicant should be required to comply with the following provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan which are applicable to the proposed change to the Airport DRI: To be an attractive and Clean city that is aesthetically pleasing To maximize compatibility between residential and non- residential uses To develop a safe and aesthetically pleasing and efficient transportation network To preserve, protect, and enhance neighborhood aesthetics and identity To promote neighborhood compatibility Mr. Pickett stated that the Zoning Code (1998) contains provisions for landscaping for properties abutting each other which are incompatible and create conflicts and may be reduced or eliminated by appropriate measures; that transitional buffering between incompatible uses minimizes complex and adverse impacts of incompatible development; that a regional Airport adjacent to the IB/SSA's properties is an incompatible development and appropriate buffering should be installed; that the DRI is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the Applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan which should be a requirement. Commissioner Quillin asked the location of the property depicted by photographs previously displayed? Mr. Pickett stated that the photographs were taken from the western sidewalk side of Tamiami Trail in front of the fence which borders the Airport property. Commissioner Quillin asked if the location is in Manatee or Sarasota County? Mr. Pickett stated that the property is in Sarasota County. Commissioner Quillin asked if the property is north of the Shell BOOK 47 Page 19448 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19449 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. gas station? Mr. Pickett stated yes. Paul Thorpe, / Executive Director, The Downtown Association of Sarasota, Inc. (34236), stated that The Downtown Association of Sarasota, Inc. (Downtown Association) supports the Airport's proposed project and runway extension; that the Airport can bring economic development to the community; that flying out of Sarasota is preferable to flying out of TIA; that 20 years ago, the citizens voted to maintain the Airport at Sarasota; that the Airport's efforts are supported; that the Executive Board of Gateway 2000 and the North Trail Association support the Airport expansion. Burt Polishook, Vice President, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association (34236), stated that the expansion of the Airport is supported; however, unintended consequences have occurred in the proposed expansion; that a development plan for 15 to 20 years is being approved; that looking backwards may indicate problems such as aesthetics; that most of the property surrounding the Airport is aesthetically pleasing except for the one area on Tamiami Trail; that the property may be in Sarasota County; however, the property is adjacent to the City; that shrubbery, trees, etc., should be installed at the fence; that noise is a problem; that a level of 65 decibels (dBA) as depicted on a contour map exists; however, the contour map indicates an average over a period of time; that an airplane may actually be at 100 dBA or more; that the noise impact is of most concern; that some noise maps. may be erroneous; that a military jet landed and took off very low and noisily on runway 422 and sounded as if the airplane was going to crash into the neighborhood; that the plane could have landed and taken off on another runwayi that the flight path of runway 422 extends over USF/New College and the Ringling School of Art and Design (Ringling School) and then south along the bayshore to the City; that private planes take off continuously throughout the day; that recently being awakened by a private plane taking off at 6:23 a.m. was not appreciated; that if runways are extended, more traffic will occur; that subsequently, more small planes which do not have sound controls will use runway 422; that control over runway 422 is requested; that the expanded runway will exist for the small jets for take-off, eliminating the requirement to use runway 422; that aesthetics which will also assist in reducing noise and control of runway 422 are requested; that the Airport expansion is supported. William Couch, Acting President, Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce, 1819 Main Street (34236); stated that the Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) supports approval of the Airport's DRI; that the Chamber strongly supports the DRI and the proposed runway extension for the following reasons : 1. The continued economic prosperity of both the City and the County depends on access to convenient and affordable air transportation; that the direct economic impact is in the hundreds of millions of dollars; that from the Chamber's perspective the dollar amount is even larger. 2. Safety for airline passengers and for residents near the Airport are reasons for the Chamber's support; that a longer runway will provide a much safer Airport which is enough reason alone to approve the DRI. 3. The expansion will reduce noise; that berms will be constructed in strategic locations. 4. The improvements will result in improved service and fare reductions as additional carriers are induced to the Airport and a larger variety of aircraft will be able to take off and land. 5. Improved service to the City's local Airport will result in fewer trips to TIA, Ft. Myers Airport, etc. which is an important consideration. Mr. Couch stated that joining the other legislative bodies which have approved the DRI and voting in support of the Airport DRI is encouraged. Don Farr, President, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association, 3301 Bay Shore Road (34234), stated that the IB/SSA fully recognizes the economic contribution of the Airport to the community; that the IB/SSA is fully supportive of the expansion; that recognizing the proposed development is a long-term, significant expansion to continue for 15 to 20 years is important; that the requested modifications to the Development Order are modest; that making the proposed project compatible with surrounding residential neighborhoods is requested; that the Applicant indicated no additional impact on City neighborhoods will result as a result of expansion. Mr. Farr distributed copies of a map indicating the Airport's terminal and gate operations on a portion of Tamiami Trail and stated that the portion of the Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores (IB/SSA) neighborhood closest to the Airport is directly across Tamiami Trail from the gate and terminal operations and the end of runway 422; that runway 422 is not included in the expansion; however, the redirection and increase of Airport traffic will result in more unregulated Stage 3 business aircraft traffic using runway 422; that the expansion will impact the neighborhood, which will be forced to look at and hear the Airport; that modest concessions in the Development Order are requested, i.e., a landscape buffer and some limitation or restrictions on traffic using runway 422; that the Manatee County Commission sought to address the noise and other general concerns of neighbors; that Manatee County residents are more impacted by the DRI due to the proximity to the end of the Airport's main BOOK 47 Page 19450 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19451 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. runway; that the Development Order addresses concerns relating to Manatee County residents; that the IB/SSA testified before the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners (BCC), which chose to shirk the responsibility of including neighborhood compatibility in the Development Order and disregarded the IB/SSA comments; that the BCC addressed compatibility by planting trees in the median on US 41 which does not address the problem; that the Commission is requested not to follow the BCC's actions. Kafi Benz, Director, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association. Box 2900 (34230), stated that her residence is due west of the area; that the IB/SSA neighborhood consists of 100 homes developed in 1947 before jet engines existed; that the homes are nice and well-built; that the neighborhood has tolerated much growth of the Airport without complaints and has developed a good working relationship with the current administration of the Airport; however, the current Development Order fails to provide an appropriate buffer to a neighborhood location; that the City's Comprehensive Plan provides for establishing buffers between neighborhoods and abutting uses of land which are not compatible; that the Airport's industrial-type use and a residential area are two distinctly different uses, that a future well-landscaped new gateway to the City should be extended to buffer the IB/SSA neighborhood; that imposing one condition in the DRI is within the scope of power of the City; that diverse appearances on each side of Tamiami Trail in the Airport area is a disadvantage and contrary to the City goal to encourage the visual appeal of the City; and distributed a copy of a map indicating the area for which buffering is requested. Kerry Kirschner, Executive Director, The Argus Foundation, 1590 Gulf View Drive (34236), stated that as a founder of IB/SSA, the long and contentious history between the IB/SSA and the Airport is well-known; that a major effort to have the Airport moved was underway at the time the IB/SSA was created; that the resolution resulted in an enlightened Airport administration; that unfortunately, the concept of evil is always associated with a DRI; that the presentation is bothersome regarding aesthetics of Tamiami Trail; that the Airport property for which buffering is requested is not in the City limits; that not buffering the area is an issue of public safety; that the ability of the Commission to decide which runways under the FAA's jurisdiction will be open is not known; that the Airport has been an underutilized utility of the community; that unfortunate occurrences may result from progress; however, the relation of the extension of a runway and the construction of a building adjacent to a neighborhood near the Airport resulting in Airport noise being amplified is not understood; that the runway will continue to exist if not extended; that no further noise incursion to the citizens of the City will occur from extension of the runwayi that the runway extension will be in Manatee County; that being opposed to a DRI which will not further impact City residents is questioned; that having been a resident of the IB/SSA neighborhood for 20 years, the impact of noise from aircraft was not experienced on a regular basis; that some problems cannot be addressed by the Commission due to County and FAA jurisdictions. Brenda Patten, Attorney, law firm of Kirk-Pinkerton, on behalf of Core Development, Inc. 720 South Orange Avenue (34236), stated that due to the economic development which the City is currently experiencing, including the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, the Sarasota Bay Club, The Renaissance of Sarasota, and other projects in the City, the community has a need for the improved air service which an expanded Airport facility will be able to provide; that the DRI request of the Airport is supported. Mayor Cardamone requested that the Applicant come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Piccolo stated that noise levels at the Airport will remain the samé if the DRI is not approved; that the runway extension will allow aircraft to fly higher over the neighborhood reducing the noise; that the Airport has not ignored noise; that over $7 million has been expended on noise mitigation in the County; that an additional 357 properties in the County have been added to the Airport's noise mitigation program; that over $20 million has been expended on noise mitigation and an additional $10 million will be expended in the next decade; that the statement the Airport ignores noise problems and solutions is rejected; that the Airport dedicates many dollars to noise issues to the detriment of other Airport projects; that noise barriers will not be effective in the DeSoto Park situation as the residences are too far away from the source of the noise; that Manatee County has noise buffers as residences are located in the 65 DNL or higher area; that if noise barriers would be effective, imposing placement of noise barriers on the Airport would not be necessary but would rather be a portion of the Airport's design. Mr. Piccolo continued that the Airport has a 50/50 runway use program which is adhered to within two or three percent; that testing standards are standards used throughout the US; that every airport in the US is not complying with the law for meeting FAA criteria if the standards for the proposed expansion are incorrect; that the mathematics are not flawed; that approximately $750,000 was expended over the past four years for testing and to insure the data is accurate. Mr. Piccolo further stated that the Airport funded over $1 million for the landscaping and improvement project along Tamiami Trail across from General Spatz Boulevard and the entrance to USF/New College; that the installation of oak trees is in dispute between USF/New College and the Airport; that a meeting with the County Administrator and USF/New College was held; that the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) also BOOK 47 Page 19452 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19453 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. met with representatives of the County and USF/New College; that a $750,000 landscaping proposal is being brought forward; that the aesthetic concerns on the west side of Tamiami Trail should be addressed as the neighbor is actually USF/New College; that the Airport is the neighbor behind the neighbor; that a request was to install a 20-foot-wide berm with a 20-foot-high landscaping between trees and the berm at runway 422; that by law a 20-foot wall cannot be installed at the end of a runway and will not occur; that placing restrictions on runway 422 is Federally preempted; that neither the City nor the Airport can place restrictions on runway use; that the Federal Government controls air space; that the proposed runway expansion will not generate increased traffic on runway 422; that the Airport currently has approximately one-half the air carrier flights as in 1990; that the proposed expansion will not double air traffic; that the air traffic on the main runway will not be so egregious and crowded to divert smaller general aviation traffic to runway 422; that usage of runway 422 will remain as currently exists. Mr. Piccolo stated further that the Airport is one of the nicest- looking, inside and outside, in the Country; that aesthetics are a concern and considerable funds are expended on aesthetics; that no landscaping projects are along runway 422 as height restrictions preclude landscaping; that the use of auxiliary power units (APU) between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. is prohibited; that use of the public address system after 10 p.m. is prohibited; that the Airport has concerns for neighbors; that many aesthetic concerns should be presented to USF/New College; that resolving neighbors' problems is desired by the Airport; that the County approved the DRI not due to false maps but the validity of four years' work in preparing the DRI indicating commitment to the community; that over $20 million has been expended on noise mitigation; that the Airport is aesthetically pleasing and rivals any airport in the Country; that the Airport has attempted to accommodate the community's needs;; however, an Airport makes noise; that other areas in Manatee and Sarasota Counties will experience a greater impact from the proposed expansion than the City. Mr. Alberts stated that personal involvement with noise analysis has existed for 25 years; that Traffic Solutions, Inc., is the consulting firm for Jacksonville, Orlando, Southwest Florida, Miami, Atlanta, and other airports; that the Integrated Noise Model is used for testing which is approved by the FAA and also by the Veterans Administration (VA) and Federal Housing Authority (FHA) for approving home loans; that the Airport is one of the few airports having noise monitors in the field monitoring the noise exposure from aircraft. Mr. Piccolo stated that the monitoring system is a $1.2 million system. Mr. Alberts stated that a model is operated and subsequently fine-tuned to the existing monitoring data; that the contours obtained fit the profile of the noise exposure around the Airport; that only four airports in Florida have a similar monitoring system; that the Airport is fortunate to have the system which adds to the accuracy of work. Attorney Bailey stated that a 20-foot buffer will not be effective against noise from aircraft in the air; that unfortunately, the noise is being ricocheted off buildings as the aircraft is airborne. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the runway extension is likely to lessen noise incursion into DeSoto Park; that the request to restrict use of runway 422 is astonishing; that personal aviation knowledge consists only of how to buckle a seatbelt; that to instruct professionals on the use of runways is ludicrous; that the- Airport cannot control use of runways due to Federal régulations. Mr. Piccolo stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that any further discussion regarding use of runway 422 is a waste of time. Mr. Piccolo stated yes. Commissioner Hogle asked if the Commission has a legal standing to require installation of landscaping along a fence as a condition of the DRI? Attorney Bailey stated that a local zoning issue is associated with the DRI; that a rezoning was sought in Manatee County in connection with the DRI; that the Applicant will appreciate the City's not imposing landscaping requirements as the property is not under the jurisdiction of the City. Mayor Cardamone stated that a good-neighbor policy. of the Airport planting some vines to make the fence more visually appealing is encouraged; and requested Affected Persons come forward for rebuttal. Mr. Stewart stated that several lawsuits regarding noise maps are pending; that one lawsuit charges the Integrated Noise Model developed by FAA (INM) abuse; that the INM model used to produce noise maps is highly susceptible to the athage-in/garhager-ous syndrome; that the Airport and the FAA have a strong incentive to minimize the expected noise impact by using incorrect flight profiles and manipulating the mode; that the FAA prescribes and provides airports with software to produce the mode; that several different forms of noise data are utilized such as runway ground level noise, air-level noise, and fly-over noise; that the mode used will produce an entirely different mapi that the DeSoto Park's problem is runway noise; that the Airport is being given preferential treatment; and played a tape recording of airplane noise. BOOK 47 Page 19454 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19455 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Airport is not being given preferential treatment; that playing a tape recording and increasing the volume does not represent the true volume of noise experienced. Mr. Stewart stated that the runway extension will bring the runway Closer to DeSoto Park; that logic will indicate moving the source of noise closer to an area will result in hearing more noise; that a test can be manipulated; that having the particular data used for a test will allow determination of the type of model produced; that an expert indicated the model used and produced by the Airport is used primarily to determine fly-over noise in the general vicinity; that the average age of DeSoto Park residents is 68 years old; that a health hazard exists due to noise; that placing a buffer along the DeSoto Park property will eliminate the primary source of noise; that relief from noise is requested; that an environmental study should have been conducted prior to building the hotel adjacent to DeSoto Park; that construction of the hotel should not have been allowed; that eliminating runway noise bouncing off buildings will allow residents to live better within the proximity of the Airport; that protection from noise is requested. Mr. Pickett stated that the citation of FAA regulations exempting the Commission's taking action regarding runway use is requested; that the City has jurisdiction regarding landscaping; that the City has the authority to enforce the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the City is reviewing the entire DRI which impacts Sarasota and Manatee Counties; that the City has imposed conditions in the DRI affecting areas outside the City limits; that the Applicant should be required to comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the DRI is a long-term issue and must be lived with for 20 years; that 20-foot walls were not requested; that any FAA approach guidelines are acceptable; that requiring landing clearance is understood; that a 30-foot height limit in medians is known; that height limitations outside the approach area are unknown; that compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan is the burden of the Applicant; that landscaping a bald area will improve the quality of life and aesthetics in the City. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Airport issue has gone far afield and should be put back into perspective; that standards for consideration are as follows: 1. The development is consistent with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted State land development plan applicable to the area; City Attorney Taylor stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) has determined the DRI is in compliance. 2. The development is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; 3. The development is consistent with the report and recommendations of the regional planning agency; and 4. The development is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. City Attorney Taylor stated that if the Commission finds the DRI consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, adopting proposed Resolution No. O0R-1263 is in order. Mayor Cardamone requested that the City come forward for rebuttal. Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that a County Planner is present in Chambers and available to answer questions regarding the County's decision; that the PBLP did not hear the argument concerning the City's Comprehensive Plan presented by the IB/SSA residents; that a decision was reached without the IB/SSA testimonyi; that the Commission may impose a condition regarding aesthetics or compatibility if the Commission determines the Application must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that sympathy with the noise situation is expressed; however, the ability for the City to impose a condition regarding noise impact is a difficult matter as substantial, competent evidence is required to support a condition; that substantial, competent evidence does not exist to support a noise condition. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the PBLP voted unanimously to recommend approval of the DRI request. Mr. Hess stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the PBLP is familiar with the requirements of the City's Comprehensive Plan? Mr. Hess stated yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the PBLP would not have voted unanimously to recommend approval if the DRI is not in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Cardamone asked the PBLP's three conditions for approval of the DRI were determined as a result of Stafi's presentation? Mr. Hess stated yes. Mayor Cardamone stated that the PBLP did not have testimony from IB/SSA regarding the request for a buffer and the restriction of runway use. Mr. Hess stated that is correct. Commissioner Quillin asked the type of buffering which will be BOOK 47 Page 19456 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19457 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. installed on University Parkway? Mr. Hess stated that no buffering will be installed on University Parkway; that the DRI Application does not include any buffering or landscaping along the southern portion of University Parkway. Commissioner Quillin stated that residential properties are located near the Sarasota Kennel Club within the City limits; that a runway will be extended deeper into the City limits. Mr. Hess referred to a map displayed on the overhead projector indicating the City limits and stated that is correct; that the runway will be extended to the southeast. Mayor Cardamone requested Commissioner supplemental remarks, if any, and hearing none, Closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. OOR-1263 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. OOR-1263 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Commissioner Hogle stated that voluntary buffering by the Airport is desired; however, directing the Airport to install buffering is not the City's responsibility. Commissioner Quillin stated that the process of reviewing a DRI includes assuring compatibility with neighborhoods; that buffering can be installed near the IB/SSA neighborhood; that additional landscape buffering on University Parkway is requested. On motion of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to amend the motion to require additional landscape buffering on US 41 and University Parkway in the vicinity of the runway extension. Motion to amend died for lack of a second. City Attorney Taylor stated that any imposed standards must be sufficient to meet particular requirements; that requiring landscaping has no standard with which to comply. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that landscaping would be pleasant; however, including landscaping in a Commission action is not desired as the Airport Administration, Authority, and Legal Counsel have demonstrated over the years considerable effort in citizenship and neighborliness as part of the community; that the community has the most attractive airport personally observed and is a source of pride; that the Airport will continue with the effort of beautification. Mayor Cardamone stated that the good-neighbor policy was to address a fence with no landscaping; that landscaping is a concern as the standards of the Airport are wonderful; that everything about the Airport is gorgeous except for one fence with barbed wire. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote to adopt proposed Resolution No. O0R-1263 on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes. 19. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM 5) #4 (3633) Tim Lampman, 1270 Fifth Street (34236), was no longer present in the Chambers. Kenneth Smiley, III, P.O. Box 6107 (34278), was no longer present in the Chambers. 20. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: MAD DADS PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A t 2000-SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING ON CITY - OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY AND COCOANUT AVENUE - APPROVED THE USE OF THE SITE FOR THE MAD DADS FACILITY (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) #4 (3633) through #5 (0475) Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department came before the Commission and stated that MAD DADS (Men Against Destruction Defending Against Drugs & Social Disorders) proposes to, construct a + 2,000-square-foot building on City-owned property located at the southeast corner of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Way (MLK Way) and Cocoanut Avenue; that the Development Review Committee (DRC) is scheduled to discuss the MAD DADS proposal on April 5, 2000; that the property is in the Commercial Business Newtown (CBN) Zone District which would permit the proposed office building; however, the existing CBN Zone District is not consistent with the Single-Family Land Use Classification on the Future Land . Use Map; that the City acquired the site in part for use as overflow parking for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Park (King Park) at the southwest corner of MLK Way and Cocoanut Avenue; that improvements to King Park including restrooms, a pavilion, concession facilities and a gazebo for community activities were identified for funding from the Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.) extension, also called the penny sales tax; that use of King Park will increase, requiring additional parking after the improvements are made; that King Park currently has 11 parking spaces on site. BOOK 47 Page 19458 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19459 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification of the size of the lot and if the parcel could be used for shared parking? Mr. Hess stated that the lot requested is approximately .5 acre and could be designed to accommodate approximately 62 additional surface parking spaces at 350 square feet per space; that a design has not yet been seen; that a design could be developed to accommodate shared parking; that a large oak tree exists in the south central portion of the lot which should be preserved. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a 2,000-square-foot building will consume approximately 9 percent of the lot; that the balance of the lot could be used for parking, stormwater retention or tree preservation. Mayor Cardamone stated that a 1,000-square-foot, two-story building would consume considerably less of the lot. Mr. Hess stated that the Administration's recommendation is to consider alternative sites as the proposed facility is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition. Mayor Cardamone stated that the lot is adjacent to a park which could be used to enhance the MAD DADS programs. Mr. Hess stated that Staff has no information concerning the MAD DADS programs; therefore, determining the compatibility with the Single-Family Land Use Classification or the park use is difficult. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that MAD DADS is a major, possibly the major, organization encouraging citizenship in the community, which is the most important contribution to Newtown and the entire City; that the proximity to King Park will provide an opportunity for MAD DADS to work with youth in the area; that the Administration's recommendation is respected; however, the location is the best possible site for the best possible function. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve the use of the site for the MAD DADS facility. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that approximately 20,000 square feet of space will be available for parking; that MAD DADS will be pleased to provide shared parking; that shared parking increases the likelihood of finding good clients; that the double use is compatible and physically possible. Commissioner Mason stated that the motion cannot be supported; that the site is parkland and is not large enough for a building with the required drainage and shared parking; that the City is limiting the community's use of the park due to a lack of parking; that the neighborhood is anticipating the building, of a gazebo and the addition of restrooms in the park; that MAD DADS' work is good; however, the City should not give up valuable land adjacent to King Park which was purchased for parking; that the Administration's recommendation to explore alternate sites is supported. Commissioner Hogle stated that having served for years on the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board (Parks Board), empathy with the park-related issues is expressed; that the site was purchased for parking; however, the City is currently redeveloping North Water Tower Park to the north and Mary Dean Park to the southeast, has recently completed Whitaker- Gateway Park, and is improving Pioneer Park; that the City is taking wonderful steps with parks in the neighborhood; that MAD DADS, as a social organization to help the community, complements King Park; that a parking lot will be built as part of the process. Mayor Cardamone stated that a rezoning and site plan approval will be required; that opportunities will be presented to review plans; that several levels of approvals will be required. City Manager Sollenberger stated that procedures must be followed; that land use issues must be considered; that a lease will be negotiated; that Commission approval of use of the site is indicating an intention for future plan approval; that the Administration will work out the details. Commissioner Quillin quoted the minutes of the July 7, 1997, Regular Commission meeting as follows: City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration proposes acquiring the property, razing the building, adjoining the property to the adjacent City-owned parcel, and developing a turf parking area for use during events at Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Park and to provide an aesthetically pleasing open space area which will assist in upgrading the neighborhood. Commissioner Quillin stated that funds were allocated from the L.O.S.T. extension for improvements to King Park; that providing .5 acres and constructing a 2,000-square-foot building may not be a good service for MAD DADS, which has $100,000 for development; that construction costs of $65 per square foot for the building, surface parking, stormwater retention, etc., will be expensive; that the site was purchased with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds; therefore, new applications will be required; that the Commission is requested to vote against the motion and BOOK 47 Page 19460 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19461 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. support the Administration's recommendation to try to identify a more appropriate location; that the Administration should be able to identify an appealing, acceptable site; that the financial sustainability of MAD DADS should be considered; that $100,000 was gifted to MAD DADS; however, no information is available concerning future funding; that the Administration could advise the requested site is the best location after further review. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that 1/21 rather than .5 of an acre is being eliminated; that the motion would not have been made if the use of the site for parking were being decimated; that 9/10 of the site will be available; that less than 1/10 is being used for a purpose which may contribute significantly to the City and Newtown. Commissioner Mason stated that constituents who are concerned about the Commission's actions will be directed to the. voting majority to express concerns. Commissioner Quillin stated that the preference is for Staff to return with a proposed site plan. Mayor Cardamone stated that MAD DADS will be learning the expensive propositions of a rezoning, an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan, etc., and may abandon the project; that a 2,000-square-foot level facility is not required. Mayor Cardamone restated the motion as to make the site available to MAD DADS with the Administration to determine the specifics. Motion carried (3 to 2): Hogle, yes; Mason, no; Pillot, yes; Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes. 21. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY USE AGREEMENT 2000 TO REPLACE EXISTING RIGHT-C OF-WAY USE AGREEMENT FOR PHASES I AND II OF THE PROPOSED RITZ-CARLTON DEVELOPMENT = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) #5 (0475) through (1200) Mayor Cardamone stated that the proposed Right-of-Way Use Agreement 2000 (Agreement) is to replace existing Right-of-Way Use Agreement for Phase I and II of the proposed Ritz-Carlton development. Robert Fournier, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that the Agreement sets out the terms and conditions which must be met for the City to permit improvements within the public rights-of-way consistent with the approved site plans of the proposed Ritz-Carlton development; that the proposed Agreement must be executed by the City, Core Development, Inc. (Core), C. Robert Buford, Ecoventure Residences, II, Ltd., and Celt, Inc. (Celt), as a condition precedent to the effectiveness of Ordinance Nos. 00-4181 and 00-4209, which will be considered under Agenda Items IV-4 and -5, approving rezonings and site plans for the development of Phases I and II of the proposed Ritz-Carlton development; that the approval of the other four signatories of the Agreement has been obtained; that approval for the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Agreement is requested; that some changes to the proposed Agreement have been approved by the parties and are documented in an April 3, 2000, letter from Attorney Patten and a March 28, 2000, letter from s.W. Moore, Esquire, on behalf of Celt to Attorney Patten; however, other changes to the proposed Agreement require discussion; that currently, no portion of the existing right-of-way on First Street or Cedar Point Drive can be closed prior to the submission by the developer of a Roadway Construction Phasing Plan (Phasing Plan) indicating the type and location of the work in the right-of-way and the impairment of access to neighboring properties; that the requested change is to amend the proposed Agreement to authorize the immediate closure of two segments of roadway, specifically the segment of First Street west of the western most access to the One Watergate Condominium (One Watergate) to Cedar Point Drive and the segment of Cedar Point Drive north of the northern most access to One Watergate; that the closure will preclude the passage of vehicles through First Street and Cedar Point Drive to Gulf Stream Avenue; however, access to One Watergate and other condominiums in the vicinity will not be impaired; that utilities are ready to proceed with work to locate and subsequently relocate lines; that a temporary right-of-way use permit has been issued for Cedar Point Drive for the utilities to commence work; that the request is for permanent closure; that the understanding is the developer's representative has communicated with the One Watergate residents who are in accord. Brenda Patten, law firm of Kirk-Pinkerton, came before the Commission and stated that the cable television, water, and electric utility providers must locate and map the utility lines; that the proposal is to fence the area requested for closure and allow all utilities to locate and map the utility lines at the same time; that a meeting was held with One Watergate residents who had no concern regarding the proposal and requested the area be kept closed rather than subsequently reopening and reclosing which would be confusing. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve the immediate closure of the western most segment of First Street and the northern most segment of Cedar Point Drive. Motion carried (4 to 1): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes. Attorney Fournier stated that the Agreement requires Core, the BOOK 47 Page 19462 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19463 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. City, and Celt be co-applicants to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for two curb cuts, one at the new entrance to the Ritz-Carlton Hotel and the second to the new entrance of the parking lot at Denny's Restaurant. Commissioner Quillin quoted the following in the Agreement: 11. the new access to its property from US 41, if permitted by FDOT, shall be restricted to right turns in and right turns out only. Celt further agrees to assist CORE upon request with any application made by CORE to FDOT to allow left turns in and out of the hotel entranceway from and on to US 41. Commissioner Quillin stated that the understanding was no left turns from the development would be permitted. Attorney Fournier stated that Core wished to preserve the right of FDOT to decide if left turns would be permitted and the right to request the ability for northbound traffic to make a left turn in the entranceway; that Celt agreed not to oppose such request; that no condition was extracted by the City to preclude left turns. Commissioner Quillin stated that left turns were discussed by the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP); that the PBLP minutes will demonstrate testimony in opposition to left turns. Attorney Fournier stated that testimony may have been received that left turns would likely not be permitted; however, the City did not extract a condition precluding a request for left turns; that Core may request left turns; that FDOT may or may not permit left turns. Commissioner Quillin stated that the testimony was no left turns would be permitted and quoted the Agreement as follows: 5. Any denial of access to properties in the vicinity shall be temporary and shall be restored as soon as is reasonably possible. 6. (any modifications to the plan required by the City Commission) shall be intended to minimize inconvenience to neighboring residents and businesses and to the general public. Commissioner Quillin stated that interfering with access to private property is a concerni that one suggestion received was leaving the First Street access open as long as possible. Attorney Patten stated that a public hearing concerning access will be held at the April 17, 2000, Regular Commission meeting, if scheduling permits; that the Phasing Plan will be presented to the Commission at the public hearing. Attorney Fournier stated that access issues will be addressed at the public hearing. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Agreement stipulates ahead of time the conditions which will be returned to the Commission; that the private property owners require access at all times at any cost. Attorney Patten stated that property owners cannot be restricted from reaching personal property; that alternate access must be provided. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Agreement provides that any denial of access shall be temporary and shall be restored as soon as reasonably possible. Attorney Fournier stated that some impairment of access during construction was acknowledged, which is the purpose of presentation of the Phasing Plan; that the Agreement provides the Phasing Plan shall be presented at a public hearing; that as currently drafted, Core is required to have the FDOT permits for the curb cuts prior to submittal of the Phasing Plan; that Core finds the condition impractical and wishes to submit the Phasing Plan for public hearing prior to receiving the FDOT permits. Attorney Patten stated that the original Right-of-Way Use Agreement was drafted in 1998; that the thought was Core would immediately file for the FDOT permits; however, the FDOT permit applications have not been filed due to the location of the Bickel House in the right-of-way; that the last opportunity for saving the Bickel House has been eliminated; that waiting until receipt of FDOT permits could delay submission of the Phasing Plan six months; that the public hearing should be held immediately as internal work will commence soon. Attorney Fournier stated that the change is acceptable to the City Attorney's Office. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve the change to the Right-of-Way Use Agreement to eliminate the requirement that FDOT permits for curb cuts be obtained prior to the public hearing on the Phasing Plan. Commissioner Quillin stated that an FDOT permit is not required to work on the interior of the site; that any proposal presented to the Commission would not have to include curb cuts; that a recommendation concerning curb cuts could be presented 'at a future time during the presentation of Phase II of the construction, after a decision concerning the Bickel House has BOOK 47 Page 19464 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19465 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. been made. Attorney Patten stated that is correct; that the Phasing Plan will include projected activities for the next six to eight months; that closing the curb cuts from US 41 or Gulf Stream Avenue is not required for nine months to a year; that periodic updates of the Phasing Plan to the City are required; that the Phasing Plan has been presented to nearby residents and will be updated periodically. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Attorney Fournier stated that surplus parking spaces will be available for the Ritz-Carlton development at the western most end of First Street which will be within the current First Street right-of-way; that the Phase I lender indicated the City should be requested to provide an easement for the parking spaces, which has been added to the proposed Agreement; that the City will be provided an easement over the entranceway to the Ritz-Carlton Hotel at the point of connection with Cedar Point Drive; that the Commission has the authority under the proposed Agreement to require pertormance bonds for the completion of First Street and the connector between Cedar Point Drive and Sunset Drive; that the Administration will recommend the Commission exercise the authority and require the performance bonds; that PBLP was of the opinion the Agreement should be revised to make the pertormance bonds an absolute requirement rather than authorization for the Commission to require submission; that the issue will be addressed at the public hearing concerning the Phasing Plan. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the pertormance bonds will be addressed at the public hearing concerning the Phasing Plan. Attorney Fournier stated that the neighbors are interested in signage upon the Closure of First Street and Cedar Point Drive; that a condition indicating appropriate signage will be installed by the developer subject to the approval of the City Engineer has been incorporated in the Agreement. Mayor Cardamone stated that the City should be positioned to assure completion of the project as soon as possible due to the inconvenience to nearby residences and businesses. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends authorizing the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the proposed Right-of-Way Use Agreement on behalf of the City. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the proposed Right-of-Way Use Agreement on behalf of the City. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 22. ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00- 4208, TO CONDITIONALLY VACATE THAT CERTAIN PORTION OF A TEN-FOOT-WIDE PUBLIC HIGHWAY, ROAD, STREET, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ADJACENT AND PARALLEL TO THE EAST RIGHT- - OF-WAY LINE OF SUNSET DRIVE; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 00-SV-03, APPLICANT ECOVENTURE RESIDENCES II, LTD. A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AS THE OWNERS). = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VI-3) #5 (1200) through (1255) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends adopting proposed Ordinance No. 00-4208 on second reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4208 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 00-4208 on second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yesi Quillin, no. 23. ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00- 4181, AMENDING ORDINANCE 99-4104 BY SUBSTITUTING A NEW SITE PLAN FOR THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION 99-SP-A; PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF THE REAL PROPERTY MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 111 NORTH TAMIAMI TRAIL (SITE OF PROPOSED RITZ- CARLTON HOTEL); APPROVING SITE PLAN 00-SP-04 WHICH HAS BEEN PROFFERED AS A CONDITION OF THIS REZONING TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 270-ROOM LUXURY HOTEL AND ACCESSORY USES TOGETHER WITH A 50-UNIT CONDOMINIUM: PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF THE REZONING AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 00-RE-01 AND 00-SP-04, APPLICANT BRENDA L. PATTEN, ESO. AS AGENT FOR CORE DEVELOPMENT, INC., A KANSAS CORPORATION) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VI-4) #5 (1255) through (1315) BOOK 47 Page 19466 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19467 04/03/00 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4181 concerns a quasi-Judicial matter; therefore, the Administration does not make a recommendation. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4181 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 00-4181 on second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes, Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 24. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4209, PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF THE PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY .76 ACRES IN SIZE AND IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF GULFSTREAM AVENUE BETWEEN SUNSET DRIVE AND CEDAR POINT DRIVE (ALSO KNOWN AS PHASE II OF PROPOSED RITZ - CARLTON PROJECT); APPROVING SITE PLAN 00-SP-09 WHICH HAS BEEN PROFFERED AS A CONDITION OF THIS REZONING TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 80 UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM: PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF THE REZONING AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 00-RE-06 AND 00-SP-09, APPLICANT STEPHEN D. REES, ESO., AS AGENT FOR ECOVENTURE RESIDENCES, II, LTD. A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VI-5) #5 (1315) through (1360) City Manager Sollenberger stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4209 concerns a quasi-judicial matter; therefore, the Administration does not make a recommendation. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4209 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 00-4209 on second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1) : Mason, yesi Pillot, yes, Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes. 25. REPORT RE: ACTIVITIES OF THE THREE ST. ARMANDS ASSOCIATIONS - RECEIVED REPORT #5 (1360) through (1400) City Manager Sollenberger referred to the report entitled "St. Armands Report' n included in the Agenda materials; and stated that the associations representing the St. Armands residents, business owners, and property owners collaborated in developing the report; that the Administration recommends receiving the report. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to receive the report. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 26. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM IX) #5 (1400) There were no Commission Board or Committee reports. 27. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA (AGENDA ITEM X) #5 (1400) through (1460) COMMISSIONER MASON: : A. stated that the activities at the Light Painter Gallery, located on Central Avenue, is disturbing the neighbors; that the Administration is requested to have the Police Department investigate. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a citizen mentioned the problem at the Commission recess; that the matter has been reviewed with the Police Chief, who assured the problem would be investigated. 28. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (1460) There being no Eurther business, Mayor Cardamone adjourned the Regular meeting of April 3, 2000, at 1:10 a.m. on April 4, 2000. hecerecart C MOLLIE C. CARDAMONE, MAYOR AITERROTA S 5: Reb à a 5 <o NSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK 2 BOOK 47 Page 19468 - 04/03/00 6:00 P.M.