MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1993 AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Jack Gurney, Commissioners Fredd Atkins, David Merrill, and Nora Patterson, City Manager David Sollenberger, city Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: Vice Mayor Gene Pillot PRESIDING: Mayor Jack Gurney The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9, of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. PRESENTATION RE: ENGLAND SWIM CLUB TO EXCHANGE KEYS TO THE CITIES WITH MAYOR GURNEY #1 (0030) through (0180) Mayor Gurney recognized the presence from the England Swim Club from the City of Bournemouth and the City of Ealing; Head Coach of London Borough of Ealing Swim Club, Helen Tooley; and Head Coach of Bournemouth Dolphins Swim Team, Laurie Dormer came to the Commission table to present the keys of their cities to the Mayor and Commission. Mr. Dormer stated that the Bournemouth Dolphin Swim Club has 500 hundred members; that two years ago while in Sarasota he and Ms. Tooley met head coach, Jim Miller of the Sarasota Swim Club; that from that acorn, the oak tree of friendship has grown. Mr. Dormer presented Mayor Gurney and the City Commission with a paper weight made of glass handcrafted in Dorsette, England. Mr. Dormer continued that, on behalf of the swimmers, he wished to pay tribute to the work being done in the City; that he can see the beautifying of the Bayfront taking place; that there is obviously a lot of civic pride in Sarasota; that there is a lot to be proud of; and that he would also like to pay tribute to the members of the Sarasota Swimming Club; and that the City of Sarasota should be proud of the hospitality that the Sarasota Swimming Club has extended to them. Ms. Tooley presented a letter of friendship to Mayor Gurney from the Mayor of Ealing and a shield bearing the coat of arms of the London Borough of Ealing. Book 34 Page 8965 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8966 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. 2. PRESENTATION RE: RETIREMENT PLAQUES TO CALVIN C. HILL FOR 21 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH PUBLIC WORKS, SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT: WILLIE F. CLARKE FOR 33 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH PUBLIC WORKS, SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT BEVERLY A. JAISSLE FOR 10 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH THE FIRE/RESCUE DEPARTMENT: JOHN F. STONE FOR 27 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND EDWARD D. WATSON FOR 22 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH PUBLIC WORKS, UTILITIES /WATER DEPARTMENT #1 (0030) through (0425) Public Works Administration Manager, Duane Mountain, came to the Commission table and stated that Mr. Hill has been with the City of Sarasota since 1971; that he was promoted to Senior Foreman in 1978 and has held that position until his recent retirement; that Mr. Hill has always been known as an individual able to get the job done. Mr. Mountain thanked Mr. Hill for 21 years of "getting the job done." Mr. Mountain stated that Mr. Willie Clark has worked for the City of Sarasota for the past thirty three years since being hired in the Public Works Department in 1959; that he was promoted in 1962 and 1970; that he was promoted to refuse equipment operator in 1986 and worked in that capacity until his recent retirement; and that Willie is known for his constant smile and steady performance. Mr. Mountain thanked Willie Clark for brightening their day and a job well done. Mr. Mountain stated that Mr. Ed Watson has worked for the City since being hired in 1970 as a grounds keeper at the Bobby Jones Golf Course; that he also had prior service with the City; that he transferred to the Public Works Department in 1989 as a utility specialist; that during his tenure with the City he has established a reputation as a conscientious employee who is well liked and respected by his fellow employees. Mr. Mountain thanked Ed Watson for a job well done. Public Safety Director John Lewis, Fire Chief Julius Halas, and Police Chief Gordon Jolly came to the Commission table. Chief Jolly stated that Mr. John F. Stone was hired 27 years ago as a police officer and attained the rank of sergeant; that for the last several years Mr. Stone has been heading up the field training officer program; that Mr. Stone's legacy will be carried on by the new officers who owe their field training to him; and that the Police Department has one of the finest field training programs around. Chief Jolly thanked John Stone for his 27 hears of service to the Police Department. Fire Chief Halas introduced Beverly A. Jaissle as an employee of the Fire/Rescue Department for 10 years; that she had started as a dispatcher which is now a fire/rescue telecommunications controller; that she has learned emergency medical dispatching which allows radio/telephone controllers to instruct citizens and save lives when there is an emergency while the rescue unit is on the way. Chief Halas also stated that Ms. Jaissle asked to expedite her retirement in order to save the lay-off of an employee during the last October lay-offs; that Ms. Jaissle is to be commended for that; and that her service has been very much appreciated over the years. Mayor Gurney read the text of the retirement plaques and presented a plaque to each retiree. 3. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0425) through (0500) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated there was a Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Please remove from Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. III A-4, application and related forms for grant from Florida Department of Natural Resources pertaining to the Artificial Fishing Reef Development Project and place it under New Business as Item No. VIII-3, at the request of the City Manager. B. Commissioner Merrill requested that the Citizens' Input item on the agenda be moved up in order that a group of residents from the City may have a chance to speak before it gets late; to move this matter up to precede Board Actions. C. Commissioner Atkins requested that Agenda Item No. V, Scheduled Presentations, regarding Drug activity, etc., at the corners of 22nd, 23rd, 24th Streets and Leon Avenue, be moved up to precede Board Actions. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the Change to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 4. CITIZENS' INPUT - (AGENDA ITEM VI) #1 (0500) through (0685) Louise Porter, 526 S. Pelican Drive, representing Dan Christian, came to the Commission table and submitted a petition to Mayor Gurney as a resident of S. Pelican Drive near Shade Avenue. Ms. Porter stated that the neighborhood has homeless bums living in the area that are setting fires, breaking in, and living on the private Book 34 Page 8967 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8968 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. property of Mr. Lovingood near the railroad tracks on Shade Avenue; that the neighborhood would like them out; that there are a lot of elderly people living there and it is dangerous because of their concerns. Six people in the audience stood up at this time in support of Ms. Porter's statements regarding the neighborhood. Police Chief Jolly came to the Commission table and stated that the Police Department is in the process of working with the Lovingoods to have them enrolled in the trespass program and to make the police officers their agents so that officers entering their property may arrest anyone without approval from the owner to be there if they refuse to leave; that regular foot patrols of the area are being made; that a number of people have been arrested through warrants; and that he will advise the Commission of the progress in this matter. Ms. Porter also stated that the lack of drainage after the summer floods created a flooding problem at the intersection of S. Pelican Drive and Shade Avenue and that the drains are full of mud and have not been cleared in spite of her complaint; and that a number of residents were flooded in this area. There was no one else to speak and the Citizens' Input was closed. 5. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS PRESENTATION RE: DRUG ACTIVITY, ETC. AT THE CORNERS OF 22ND, 23RD, 24TH STREETS AND LEON AVENUE = DOROTHY CLARK AND JESSIE & LAURIE HUBBARD - REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION FOR EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION (AGENDA ITEM V) #1 (0685) through (2265) Henry Moultrie, 2807 Leon Avenue; Leola Hawkins; Sylvia Carey, resident on the corner of 23rd Street and Leon Avenue; Dorothy Clark, 1521 23rd Street; Christine Carter, 1530 23rd Street; Paul Sellers, 1530 23rd Street; came to the Commission table. Jessie and Laurie Hubbard, and Mr. E. J. Ball also came forward. Ms. Clark stated that there is a very serious problem in their community; that numerous attempts have been made to resolve the drug problem and dangers in the area 24 hours per day; that there is no peace; that there is fighting and shooting; that people who do not reside there set up chairs beside the street and drink; that they need help with this; and that this area is encompassed from 24th Street down to 22nd Street which runs into Augustine Quarters. Ms. Clark asked if there was a City Code provision that could take care of this problem. City Attorney Taylor stated that there are state laws and certain City Code provisions applicable to the situation; that this is probably a matter of manpower in the police department rather than laws that applyi that there are laws against the illegal things that are taking place in the area; that it is a matter of observations, complaints and arrests to be made in enforcing the laws. Police Chief Jolly came to the Commission table and stated that this is a matter of manpower allocation; that the Police Department is very much aware that this area is a problem; that during the past year there were 154 calls for service on Leon Avenue in a 7 block area and that 108 arrests were made and 6 search warrants were served in the area; that there has been a substantial amount of narcotics recovered; that Augustine Quarters has been and continues to be one of the crime problems; that he will be glad to address any specific issues regarding this matter; and that he strongly encourages the use of the Neighborhood Watch Program. Ms. Clark stated that they are very aware of the Neighborhood Watch Program; that they call many times but it usually takes thirty minutes or longer if someone does show up; and that usually the offenders are gone by the time the police arrive. Ms. Clark also stated that she had been in contact with a Resource Team officer in December; that she showed him the neighborhood problem areas and the dark areas; that he promised to write a letter to his supervisor about the problems; and that she has never received a copy showing that it has been done. City Manager Sollenberger stated that this particular area was identified as a high priority during the Commission Goal Setting Session; that there has been dialogue with the Community Housing Corporation regarding an approach to acquire the Augustine Quarters property and convert its use; and that he must confer with the City Attorney as to the suggested techniques. Commissioner Atkins stated that there are some special problems in the area; that special efforts must be made to provide relief on a continuing basis; that the property owners should be contacted for an organized effort; that Sarasota County should move toward eradicating illegal substances throughout the entire county; and that all of the law enforcement agencies of the county should be coming together to address community needs. Mr. E. G. Ball came to the Commission table and stated that one of the main problems is that the police ask for information that the residents cannot be responsible to provide; and that residents have not been able to obtain the attention of police officers when attempts have been made to wave them down as they drive by. Ms. Clark asked if speed bumps can be placed on the street in order to deter speeding vehicles. Book 34 Page 8969 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8970 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Mr. Sollenberger asked if this matter could be referred to him for review with staff in order to evaluate the area and make recommendations for relief in this area on a long term basis. Mr. Sollenberger also asked that the citizens appoint a spokesperson so that remedial activities can be coordinated in the neighborhood; that through this contact person Chief Jolly and various City departments may then contact the concerned citizens regarding the procedures in pursuing this matter; and that through the contact person activities may be coordinated to organize the rest of the citizens for meetings with City staff members. Commissioner Patterson stated that she feels that possibly the manpower in this neighborhood is not being effectively used; that the police resource teams should be spreading out to help in this effort; and that a new plan should be drawn up in order to handle this problem. Commissioner Merrill asked Ms. Clark if she knew the difference in responsibilities between the patrol officers and the police car versus the Community Resource Team and the bicycles, and if she knew what each is supposed to do. Ms. Clark stated that the patrol car is looking for suspicious offenders in the neighborhood and that the bicycle patrol would be patrolling the area also and doing the same thing. Commissioner Merrill also asked Ms. Clark which division she felt was more effective. Ms. Clark stated that she felt the foot patrol policemen were much more effective than the police cars; that the bicycle patrols are more effective than the police cars because suspects will run away when they see the police cars; that the drug dealers use bicycles and if the bicycle patrol would wear plain clothes the drug dealers would think that the police were drug dealers. Ms. Clark also stated that they will return to the Commission to update the Commissioners on the progress on this mattero 6. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3568, AMENDING THE SARASOTA CITY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR POLICIES AS TO THE ANNEXATION OF PARCELS INTO THE CITY, MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (2265) through (2383) All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and be sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. Senior Planner, Bill Molnar, came to the Commission table and stated that this ordinance sets out a number of different annexation policies which were part of the package that was reviewed and adopted by the Commission in December of 1991; that this proposed ordinance has to do mostly with the fiscal impact of annexations; that with a municipal service pre-annexation agreement they will end up paying an amount equal to ad valorem taxes until the time that they annex. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 92-3568 by title only. On motion of Commissloner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass on first reading, proposed Ordinance No. 92-3568. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3570, AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONING CODE, TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT ANY NEW PROPERTY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY SHALL BE IN THE RSF-4 ZONE DISTRICT UNTIL REZONING OCCURS, PROVIDING FOR PROCEDURES TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ANNEXED PROPERTY; SETTING FORTH AN EQUIVALENCY TABLE OF ZONE DISTRICTS OF SARASOTA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SARASOTA FOR THE ZONING OF PROPERTY BEING ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS; AMENDING ARTICLE I, ZONING CODE, TO REVISE THE FEE FOR PETITIONS FOR ANNEXATION: MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT: PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #1 (2383) through (2491) Senior Planner, Bill Molnar, stated that this proposed ordinance establishes a new procedure for annexations; that it repeals the existing procedure where everything goes into an RSF-4 residential district; that it establishes a new procedure that goes along with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process; that the fees under the new procedure will rise from $750 to $1,400 to also cover advertising and legal expenses. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 92-3570 by title only. Book 34 Page 8971 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8972 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass on first reading, proposed Ordinance No. 92-3570. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3655, AMENDING CHAPTER 31, PERSONNEL, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA (1971), INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN CHAPTER 24, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA (1986), ARTICLE II, RETIREMENT SYSTEM GENERALLY, AMENDING AND RESTATING ARTICLE II IN ITS ENTIRETY; PROVIDING FOR AMENDED DEFINITIONS: PROVIDING FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE PLAN: PROVIDING FOR A BOARD OF TRUSTEES; PROVIDING FOR FINANCES AND FUND MANAGEMENT: PROVIDING FOR CONTRIBUTIONS AND FUNDING; PROVIDING FOR CREDITED SERVICE; PROVIDING FOR NORMAL AND EARLY RETIREMENT PROVIDING PENSIONS BENEFITS; PROVIDING FOR OPTIONAL FORMS OF PENSIONS; PROVIDING TERMINATION BENEFITS; PROVIDING DEATH BENEFITS; PROVIDING DISABILITY BENEFITS; PROVIDING FOR COMMENCEMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF BENEFITS; PROVIDING FOR A CLAIMS PROCEDURE BEFORE THE BOARD: PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS FROM EXECUTION, NON-ABBIGNABILITZ AND EXECUTIONS: PROVIDING FOR PENSION VALIDITY; PROVIDING FOR AN ACTUARY AND ACTUARIAL TABLES; PROVIDING FOR FORFEITURE OF PENSION BENEFITS UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OR TERMINATION OF THE SYSTEM: PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #1 (2491) through (2622) Public Works Environmental Resources Manager and General Employees Board of Trustees Pension Board Chairman, Douglas Taylor, came to the Commission table and stated that a revision of the Pension Code is being submitted which was composed by the General Employees' Fund Board of Trustees; that the main objective was to update and tidy up the history of the document; that language was added to bring the document in conformance with applicable state and federal laws; and that the end result is no change in cost. Commissioner Patterson expressed appreciation for the long, hard and tedious task that this was for those that followed through and completed the project which began last year. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3655 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to pass on first reading, proposed Ordinance No. 93-3655. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yeso 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3662, AMENDING SECTION 21-2, SARASOTA CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO LOITERING FOR UNLAWFUL PURPOSES sO AS TO ADD THERETO A REQUIREMENT THAT AN ARRESTING OFFICER PROVIDE THE OFFENDER WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE OFFENDER'S CONDUCT PRIOR TO ARREST; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #1 (2622) through (2725) City Attorney Taylor stated that this proposed ordinance was drawn up subsequent to a circuit court judge ruling that the existing loitering ordinance unconstitutional as applied to the case before the court at that point. Attorney Taylor continued that the judge ruled that the arresting officer must first afford a person an opportunity to explain his or her conduct, and that no one can be convicted of violating that ordinance if the explanation given is true and disclosed to be of a lawful purpose. Attorney Taylor stated that this ordinance is to correct that decision and that the City does not necessarily concur with it as being accurate or correct. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3662 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass on first reading, proposed Ordinance No. 93-3662. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 10. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 21, 1992 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I-1) #1 (2725) through (2747) On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting of December 21, 1992. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 11. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 2, 1992 BURNS COURT Book 34 Page 8973 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8974 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. TRAFFIC IMPACT MONITORING REFERRED TO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: PETITION NO. 93-SV-01 - SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING; PETITION 93-SE-03 AFFIRMED PLANNING BOARD'S APPROVAL WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE PETITION SHOULD STATE THE CITY CODE ALLOWANCE ON SEATING ADMINISTRATION DIRECTED TO AMEND THE CITY CODE so THAT FUTURE PETITIONERS IN THE TAD AREA, BETWEEN PALM AVENUE AND FRUITVILLE ROAD, WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR OPEN AIR DINING; PETITION 93-SE-04 AFFIRMED PLANNING BOARD'S APPROVAL WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE GOVERNMENTAL USE BE LIMITED TO A MARINE RESEARCH FACILITY; KEN THOMPSON PARK MODIFICATION TO MASTER PLAN AFFIRMED PLANNING BOARD'S APPROVAL TO PERMIT A NON-GOVERAKENTAL USE IN A G ZONE DISTRICT; REQUEST FOR STUDY TO ELIMINATE PARKING BY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES APPROVED; REPORT OF PLANNING BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 2, 1992 - ACCEPTED (AGENDA ITEMS II-1-A, -B, -C, -D, -E, AND -F) #1 (2747) through (3765) Planning and Development Director Jane Robinson, and Planning Board/Local Planning Agency Chairman Berta Lefkovich, came to the Commission table. A. Monitor traffic impact for Burns Court and surrounding area once the Sarasota Film Society theater is operational. Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board requested that the City Commission instruct the City Engineering Department to monitor the streets in the Burns Court area once the Sarasota Film Society theater is in operation to see if changes in traffic patterns or street markings are needed to regulate traffic movement to the theater. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to affirm the Planning Board's recommendation to refer this matter to the City Engineering Department. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. B. Petition No. 93-SV-01 Request for vacation of Browning Street where it abuts 845 School Avenue, and set for public hearing. Property owned and occupied by the First Church of God. The parcel is approximately 50 feet by 50 feet Dick Naylor, Chairman of the Board, representing First Church of God. Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommends approval of this petition subject to the petitioner granting an easement to Florida Power and Light. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to set Petition No. 93-SV-01 for public hearing. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. C. Petition No. 93-SE-03 1213 North Palm Avenue Request for a special exception to permit open air dining in the TAD zone district. The parcel is approximately 0.102 acres and is located at 1213 North Palm Avenue. (David Sprowles & Carmen Gillett = Carmichael's Restaurant) Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommends approval of Petition No. 93-SE-03 with the stipulation that the open air dining area be limited to 20 seats. Commissioner Patterson asked why the seating was limited to 20 patrons. Ms. Robinson stated that the petitioner requested seating for only 20 patrons and that it is possible that the City Code space requirements would limit it to the same number, based on the limited space available. Mayor Gurney asked why the City is forcing a special exception process when the objective has been to encourage open air dining. Ms. Robinson stated that the Commercial Business District (CBD) policy was changed; that in the Theater and Arts District (TAD) the special exception was left in the policy because there are a lot of residential areas in the TAD area; that the TAD proper, between Fruitville Road and Palm Avenue is basically non-residential now; that this may be an opportunity for the Commission to request a Zoning Code amendment that would allow administrative approval for outdoor dining in the TAD district, between Fruitville and Palm Avenue, and leave the special exception process for areas north of Fruitville Road. Mayor Gurney asked that this matter be directed to administration to amend the code so that future petitioners in the TAD area between Palm Avenue and Fruitville Road will not have to pay for this type of special exception. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Petition No. 93-SE-03 with the stipulation that the capacity limit be changed to state whatever amount the Code will allow rather than limiting the amount to 20 as requested. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. D. Petition No. 93-SE-04 Request for a special exception to permit a non-governmental use in a G Zone District. Book 34 Page 8975 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8976 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. The parcel is approximately three acres and is located at 1703 Ken Thompson Parkway. This is the proposed site for the Marine Mammal Rehabilitation and Research Facility. (Kumar Mahadevan, Ph.D., Executive Director) Ms. Lefkovich stated that this is a request to permit a non-governmental use in a Governmental (G) Zone District; that this is the proposed site for the Marine Mammal Rehabilitation and Research Facility; and that the Planning Board recommends Commission approval of Petition 93-SE-04, with the stipulation that the governmental use be limited to a marine research facility. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission table at 7:25 p.m. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved affirm the Planning Board's approval of Petition No. 93-SE-04 with the stipulation that the governmental use be limited to a marine research facility. Motion carried (3 to 0): Atkins, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. E. Ken Thompson Park Modification to the existing Master Plan Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planing Board recommends that the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Board and the City Commission modify the existing Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park to permit a nongovernmental use in a Governmental (G) zone district; and the previously approved expansion of the Pelican Man's leasehold. Mayor Gurney stated that an arrangement was made for the Pelican Man and Mote Marine to be hooked up to the City's sewer system; that he believes that that has now been extended out to the Sailing Squadron; that the radio station has some type of septic tank collapse or some sort; and asked administration to investigate this matter with regard to the radio station repairing or continuing to use some type of septic tank and if their lines can be hooked up to the City's central system. Commissioner Merrill returned to the Commission table at 7:28 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the administration will check into this matter; that a permit has been obtained by the Pelican Man after a great deal of effort; and that it would not be sensible to continue to allow septic systems in that location. Mayor Gurney stated that if new lines are put in for the new Mote Marine project, then everyone in the area should be encouraged to hook up to the sanitary sewer system. City Engineer Daughters stated that the intention is to construct a lift station as part of the entrance road improvements which will begin this spring; and that this will then provide the capacity for everyone on the island to be hooked up. Commissioner Patterson stated that the owner of a property on Siesta Drive, located just prior to crossing the bridge, was informed by the City that he would have to install a septic tank near the bay; and that she would like for administration to review the most recent details on this situation. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) has been very difficult to deal with; that the City has spent in excess of a million dollars to extend sanitary sewer into north Sarasota; that the whole purpose of that has been for environmental protection by removing the septic tanks; that DER would not provide a permit to hook people up because of the City's current difficulties in meeting the discharge requirements; and that after a great length of time they conceded to hooking up those people who had already built with the expectation of using the sewer line; that the DER has been very unrealistic from an environmental point of view; and that the DER seems to be more of a department of regulation rather than one of environmental protection. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to affirm the Planning Board's recommendation to modify the Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. F. Study to eliminate parking by special exception in residential districts for non-residential uses. Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board recommends that the City Commission direct staff to prepare a study relative to the elimination of the special exception for parking in residential districts for non-residential uses. Ms. Robinson stated that the present provision in the Zoning Code has outlived its usefulness; that if offices need more parking they sometimes request a special exception for parking and end up taking down a house. Ms. Robinson also stated that the Planning Department believes that if there is a need for parking that an area should be put into an impact management area and rezoned. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to direct staff to study residential parking by special exception in connection with non-residential uses. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. Book 34 Page 8977 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8978 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to accept the Planning Board report of their regular meeting of December 2, 1992. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 12. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 1992 - CHAIRMAN COLSON & PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ROBINSON = ADMINISTRATION TO PROCEED WITH MURAL ON ANY ACCEPTABLE WALL; REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ART ÇOMMITTEE'S REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 1992 ACCEPTED (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (3765) through #2 (1790) Planning and Development Director Jane Robinson came to the Commission table. Public Art Committee Chairman, Mr. Frank Colson, and committee member, Ms. Leslie Ahlander, came to the Commission table. Mr. Jack West, Architect, also came to the Commission table. A. Mural - - City Hall Annex Mr. Colson stated that he wished to give a report on the Public Art Committee's (PAC) action on November 24, 1992, regarding Mr. Wyland's proposal to paint a mural on the east wall of the City Hall Annex building that was accepted by the Commission; that the entire PAC committee is present in the chambers tonight; that PAC would like to have further study on this matter; that PAC would like to have seen the artist's presentation; that, in his personal opinion, all of the Commissioners should be supporting local artists by giving them first consideration. Mr. West stated that successful murals adhere to two principles, one of which is that they must be made of durable materials; that good murals are done in stone or brick, terra cotta or ceramics, rather than paint; that the second principle is that the mural should be integrated into the design of the building; that the whole composition surrounding the building such as the sculpture, art work, and landscaping should be part of a unified design; that this mural would be a very big mistake that would hurt the appearance, beauty, and dignity of City Hall. Commissioner Patterson stated that she is confused by PAC's stance on this; that under normal protocol, had the timing been appropriate, it would have been nice to have it reviewed by the PAC first; that, however, the timing did not allow this; and that this is a donated mural. Commissioner Patterson also stated that the most expensive project approved by the Commission that was recommended by the PAC (Memory Path at Selby Five Points Park) was not given to a local artist, and the final product is constructed of ink which will continue to fade; and that the PAC objectives appear conflicting. Mr. Colson stated that a similar proposal for the City Hall Annex building was activated by the Galvin Trust Fund approximately one year ago; that in that particular situation there was an "open artist" concept in which no artist was designated; that the PAC had considered and turned down the proposal primarily to maintain the integrity of the building; and because "plop" art which is applied to a building regardless of the subject matter or quality level, is not necessarily an enhancement as it is assumed to be. Mr. Colson continued that there are also the problems of maintenance that need serious consideration; and that Mr. Wyland's approach would be a spray paint which is less durable; that donations of art are often made for recognition; that this is unjust to the local artists; that donations of art should not be accepted because it undermines the benefits of local professional artists. Ms. Ahlander stated that three commissions to one artist in Sarasota is too much when trying to help local artists; that City Hall should not help artists to sell calendars and reproductions of their work by displaying their work at City Hall; that she does not believe the spray paint that this artist will use will be compatible; that the wall should be properly prepared and the project should not be rushed through because only three days have been allowed for Sarasota by the artist; and that the Commission will be left with whatever the artist does. Commissioner Patterson stated that her concern is that Mr. West, the building's architect, is distressed about the mural; that if she had known that he had previously made those indications, she probably would have had some reservations in the beginning about approving this. Mr. West stated that the quality and compatibility of the mural to the building and the spaces around it, are his only interest; that he could care less where the artist is from; that quality is the main objectivei that the mural must be compatible with the building; and that this mural will not be compatible. Commissioner Merrill stated that he sees a minimal downside to this project; that he sees a strong positive consequence and a potential for the public to really like the work and that he will vote for this issue. Ms. Ahlander asked if other walls may be considered other than just this one particular wall. city Manager Sollenberger stated that the City has undertaken a leadership role in cleaning up Sarasota Bay; that the coming of the National Estuary Program is one of the very important things that has happened in Sarasota; that the City has invested over $40 Book 34 Page 8979 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8980 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. million dollars in wastewater treatment to help improve the quality of Sarasota Bay; that scientists at the estuary program have discussed how much has been accomplished in cleaning up Sarasota Bay by the City's contribution through its reuse system; and that the City is also participating with Sarasota County in a drainage utility. Mr. Sollenberger stated that this is the linkage and the message that is intended to be provided by the artist in those particular paintings; that this is a message that has not been discussed or elaborated upon; and that the city plays a very important role in environmental protection and that the painting will convey that message. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Commissioner Patterson) Mayor Gurney, it was moved to authorize the administration to proceed with the mural for the annex wall by artist Wyland, or on another acceptable wall. Mr. Colson asked the Commission to include in their final decision to have a presentation made to the PAC by the artist. Commissioner Patterson stated that the maker and seconder of the motion would have to do that. Commissioner Patterson called for the vote on the motion. Motion failed (2 to 2): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Gurney, yes; Patterson, no. Commissioner Patterson returned the gavel to Mayor Gurney. Mr. Kevin Costello, 1918 Orchid Street, came to the Commission table and stated that he is a studio artist and writer of art; that donated art should be a consideration by people with an informed opinion; that there are many artists in Sarasota that travel all over the world; that the notion of anyone other than the architect making a decision about the decoration of their architecture demonstrates the ignorance of those responsible for making that decision; that this is a tourist town and to publicly demonstrate the lack of understanding of the art of mural painting on a public building is something that should be questioned. Mr. Costello stated that he realizes, however, that the Commission has made their decision; that he would ask the Commission to pause and reconsider their decision; that if the building has to be painted then let the architect decide on that; that if the Commission wishes to have a donated painting that is fine, but it should not be done on a building created by someone else. Commissioner Patterson stated that the decision was not to put the mural up. Commissioner Atkins stated that it is his understanding that what happened previously with the vote was not to support, based on a two to two vote, the PAC's recommendation to have this matter studied further and to have the artist give PAC a presentation; and that the Commission has not rescinded any of the other previous votes to aprove the mural. Commissioner Patterson stated that her understanding was that the motion was to tell the City Manager to go ahead with this project; that the vote failed; that the Commission is telling the city Manager not to go ahead with this project; and that if there is a different understanding of the vote, then the Commission needs to return to the issue Mr. Sollenberger stated that his understanding is that the two to two vote was a tie which is no action; that there was a previous action by the City Commission which stated that the Commission wished to go ahead with a mural on the east side of the City Hall Annex building; and that he was asked to write to the artist, Mr. Wyland, to express the City's interest in proceeding with the project. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the only portion of the previous vote that would have impacted the previous decision would be to look for another wall. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Commission directed the administration to proceed with arranging with Mr. Wyland for the painting of the mural on the east wall of the annex and the Commission has authorized him to express the City's intent to proceed. Mr. Costello stated that he is asking the Commission to consider another wall if they are going to go ahead with the mural. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to reconsider the previous vote. Commissioner Atkins called for a point of order regarding what is the prevailing side on a tie vote. city Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the prevailing side on a tie vote is the negative side because it did not pass; and that Commissioner Patterson was on the prevailing side. Commissioner Patterson stated that her intent is to support the original motion so that an additional wall may be considered. Commissioner Merrill stated that his original motion was made with the intention of giving latitude to the City Manager in deciding this matter; that this should not come back to the Commission; that Book 34 Page 8981 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8982 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. if the administration feels that no other wall is acceptable then it should move ahead with the previous vote; that this is giving the City Manager more latitude but not preventing him from moving forward with the current project. Mayor Gurney called for a vote on the motion to reconsider. Motion carried (3 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. Mayor Gurney called for a vote on the main motion for administration to proceed with the mural on any acceptable wall. Motion carried (3 to 1): Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to accept the report of the PAC regular meeting of November 24, 1992. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 13. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1 - ITEMS 1 2,3, 5,6, AND 7 = = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEMS III-A-1, -2, -3, -5, -6, AND -7) #2 (1790) through (1820) Mayor Gurney stated that Item No. 4 was pulled from the Consent Agenda in the Change to the Orders of the Day and was placed for discussion under New Business. 1. Approval Re: Coordination of School Planning Interlocal Agreement 2. Approval Re: Purchase contract for mobile home for $10,500 located at Lot W3, Street 2, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383. 3. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed ordinance regulating policy and procedures pertaining to travel, training and related business expenditures for public officials, employees and authorized persons thereby amending Ordinance No. 88-3232 reflecting proposed changes. 5. Approval Re: Authorize Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Award of Contract to Marvin's Garden & Landscape Service, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, for landscape improvements to Bird Key Park - R.F.P. #93-26 6. Approval Re: Amendment to the 1991-1992 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 7. Approval Re: Authorize Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Award of Contract for $14,863 to William Samuels Approved Roofing, Inc. for re-roofing of the Parent Child Care Center Building located at 1742 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jro, Way On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve all items under Consent Agenda No. 1, with the exclusion of Item No. 4. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 14. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2 ITEMS 1, 5, 6, 7, AND 8 APPROVED; ITEM 2 - NO ACTION TAKEN, ITEM 3 - - ADOPTED; ITEM 4 - TABLED UNTIL STRUCTURE BROUGHT UP TO CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS OR DEMOLISHED; (AGENDA ITEMS III-B-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, AND -8. #2 (1820) through (3280) Mayor Gurney requested that Item No. 4 be pulled for discussion. Commissioner Patterson requested that Item Nos. 2 and 3 be pulled for discussion. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-623, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against the property described in each abatement report for the amount stated therein, etc. (Title Only) 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3648, amending Article VI, Zoning Code, pertaining to encroachments in required yards by prohibiting electric fences in all required yards of property located in any zone district; making findings; providing a grace period for implementation of the requirements of this Ordinance; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title only) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3656, extending the approval of the City Commission pertaining to the site and Development Plan for Petition 91-AA for a period of one (1) year from the automatic expiration of said approval; providing for the continuation of the Conditional Rezoning from RMF-1 Zone District to RMF-4 Zone District, for a period of one (1) year measured from the automatic expiration of Site and Development Plan 91-AA for the following described property: the north 249 feet of the south one-half of the northwest one-quarter of the southeast one quarter of Section 16, Township 36 south, Range 18 east, a/k/a 1330 North Lockwood Ridge Road, as more particularly described Book 34 Page 8983 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8984 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. herein; making findings that the extension is warranted under the circumstances; etc. (Title only) (Petition No. 91-CO-4, Johansson) 7. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3657, providing for the designation of the structures located at 1864 Clematis Street, historically known as the Van Arsdale House, as structures of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 93-HD-01, Terry) 8. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3659, providing for the designation of the structures located at 1682 Hawthorne Street, historically known as the Boroom House, as structures of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 93-HD-03, Axe) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 93R-623, Ordinance No. 93-3648, Ordinance No. 93-3656, Ordinance No. 93-3657, and Ordinance No. 93-3659 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Items 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-625 (Special Appropriation No. 706), appropriating $37,226.00 from the Community Redevelopment Agency Fund (TIF) to provide funds for the Bayfront North Esplanade removal of asphalt and re-grassing as authorized by Commission on November 16, 1992 Commissioner Patterson stated that she removed this item in order to declare a conflict of interest because it involves the funding for the removal of the north access road at Bayfront Park; and that her husband's law firm represents Marina Jack. City Manager Sollenberger stated that this matter is simply to reserve the money to handle the removal of the north roadway; that this is earmarking the dollars in the event the City prevails in the suit against Marina Jack; that this only provides the funding to carry out what the Commission has previously voted to do; and that the $37,000 is strictly for the Bayfront project. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 93R-625. Commissioner Patterson left the Commission chambers at 8:27 p.m. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission chambers at 8:27 P.m. and returned at 8:29 p.m. Mr. Elwood S. Levy, 2 Marina Plaza, D-8, came to the Commission table and stated that there is an error in the resolution; that he recalls that there was no action taken by the Commission on November 16, 1992 with respect to the subject matter of proposed Resolution No. 93R-625; that the action that was. taken with respect to the demolition of the north access road and its re-grassing was taken at the Commission meeting of October 19; that at that meeting the Commission voted 3 to 1 to take out the north access road; that it was at the November 16, 1992, meeting, which was cited in the resolution, that Commissioner Pillot stated that his vote was wrong and he made a public declaration of his error which he stated was based on incomplete information, and then moved that the decision be deferred until May of 1993; and that that motion was defeated on a 2 to 2 vote. Mr. Levy continued that the question he wishes to raise is that one of the Commissioners at the meeting in which the road removal was approved, inquired as to the source of the funds for the $37,000 for which a change order had been issued on October 26th; that the given explanation was that part of those monies came from monies to be expended by the Utilities Department on a job which had cost less than anticipated; that the rest was being paid out of Federal Emergency Administration (FEMA) funds from the flood period of last June which were unexpended; that that combination was to make up the $37,000; and that now it appears that the $37,000 is to come out of the Redevelopment Agency Fund of TIF money, which he was lead to understand was then inadequate to fund this amount. Commissioner Patterson returned to the Commission chambers at 8:34 p.m. Finance Director Mitchell came to the Commission table and stated that the date could be in error and that the FEMA money referred to was the suggestion of the Engineering Department, not the suggestion of the Finance Department. Mr. Mitchell continued that the Commission directed the administration to return to the Commission with a cost quote; that, at that meeting, the Engineering Department advised that $37,226 would be required for this project; and that the action of the majority of the Commission was to proceed and return to the Commission with a funding source. Mr. Mitchell stated further that the recommended source by the Engineering Department was no definite answer; that when the administration met as to how to fund the removal of the asphalt it was decided that the best source to recommend to the Commission was the TIF funds which required a special appropriation; and that it Book 34 Page 8985 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8986 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. was the administration's full intent to récommend to the Commission that this project be funded by TIF. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Mr. Levy is correct in stating what took place at the October 19, 1992 meeting. Mr. Sollenberger recommended that this matter be removed from the agenda; that once the lawsuit is settled with Marina Jack the issue can be brought back to the Commission for funding at that time. The Commission agreed with Mr. Sollenberger's recommendation to take no action on this resolution at this time. 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-626 (Special Appropriation No. 707), appropriating $67,000.00 from the Community Redevelopment Agency Fund (TIF) to provide funds for the Bayfront Park excess construction costs Commissioner Patterson asked what the impact would be if the Commission voted no on this appropriation resolution. Mr. Sollenberger stated that this work has already been performed. Commissioner Patterson stated she wished to get this on the public record because she would not vote to support this otherwise; that at this point a "no" vote is meaningless; that she would like to see a funding source identified by the Commission first rather than later. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he agreed; that the change order system is now being modified so that this can be controlled better so as to obviate this in the future. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 93R-626. Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Commissioner Patterson. On motion of Mayor Gurney and second of (Commissioner Patterson passed the gavel to Commissioner Atkins) Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 93R-626. Motion carried (3 to 1): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. Commissioner Atkins returned the gavel to Mayor Gurneyo 4. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 92-3635, conditionally rezone from RMF-5 Zone District to CRT Zone District the following described property: Lots 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20, Block 21, Plat of Sarasota as recorded in Plat Book A, Page 30, Public Records of Sarasota County, Florida; a/k/a 1333/1365 Fruitville Road; more particularly described therein; etc. (Title only) (Petition No. 92-CO-07, Famiglio) Mayor Gurney stated he was concerned about the length of time that a property may continue to remain in disrepair during the code enforcement and permitting process. Building, Housing, Zoning and Code Enforcement Director Bill Hewes came to the Commission table and stated that a permit for repairs allows the permittee six months to begin work; that a minimal amount of work will qualify the permittee for a six month extension on that permit; and that it is possible for properties to remain in disrepair for a considerable length of time. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would be inclined to hear the administration's recommendation on this matter; that the second reading on the rezoning could be held up until such time as a movement toward renovation or demolition of the structure takes place; and that the City will have to litigate to retrieve demolition fees; and that she feels that administration has handled a difficult and confusing problem as well as possible. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Commission is on second reading of the Ordinance at this time; that if the Commission wished to continue second reading that it would be permissible; that in the event that the Commission should choose to deny this rezoning on second reading, or the rezoning would be denied because the ordinance was not adopted on second reading, the only action necessary at that point is to state in the record the grounds for denying it, such as the grounds that were developed by the Planning Department in its recommendation not to support this petition. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to table the second reading of Ordinance No. 92-3635 until such time as the two structures are brought up to code or demolished. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None. 16. NEW BUSINESS - APPROVAL RE: SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3654, AMENDING CHAPTER 30, SARASOTA CITY CODE, TO DELETE CERTAIN STREETS FROM THE LIST OF MINOR COLLECTOR STREETS DESIGNATED THEREIN; MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING; REPORT ON TRAFFIC ABATEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ON HYDE PARK STREET REQUESTED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #2 (3280) through (3410) Book 34 Page 8987 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8988 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to set Ordinance No. 93-3654 for public hearing. Commissioner Merrill asked if the Engineering Department could review, before the next Commission meeting, the area of Hyde Park Street, between U.S. Route 41 and Tuttle Avenue, for the purpose of traffic abatement consideration. Commissioner Patterson stated that Hyde Park Street will have a tendency in the future to take a lot of overflow traffic if it is not protected; and that this is a totally residential street. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 17. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL RE: CONCEPT IN ORDER TO FACILITATE A $4,050 HOME PROJECT SPECIFIC LOAN TO THE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION SIXTH STREET PROJECT CONCEPT APPROVED AS OUTLINED AND THE $4,050 HOME LOAN APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII- 2) #2 (3410) through #3 (0355) Community Development Director Don Hadsell; and Community Housing Corporation representatives Jack Conway and Nick Easton came to the Commission table. Mr. Hadsell stated that this item comes to the Commission as a result of a letter that was received from the Community Housing Corporation (CHC); that the letter requested three items: approval of a concept to construct new housing in the 6th Street/Cohen Way neighborhood; approval of $5,000 from HOME Funds for a project feasibility study; and authorization of $150,000 in HOME Funds for the construction of new housing. Mr. Conway stated that under the HOME Program, up to 15% of the money received by the City must be used by Community Housing Development organizations (CHDO); that the amount from the City of Sarasota is $40,500; that, according to the law, up to 10% of that amount, $4,050, can be used for a project specific loan to determine project feasibility. Mr. Hadsell stated that the administration felt that this item should come back to the Commission for consideration prior to unilaterally moving forward; that regarding the project feasibility loan the administration supports the use of HOME funds for the project set-aside loans subject to the statutory limit of $4,050; that regarding the new construction, CHC is not authorized to use HOME funds for new construction; that however, the law recently changed allowing cities to use funds for new construction although the approval has not yet been received. Mr. Hadsell continued that Community Development Services is presently in the process of receiving approval from HUD for new construction; that they support the concept of using HOME funds for new construction and they are going to continue seeking HUD approval for the $150,000 subject to Commission approval. Mr. Conway stated that several months ago it was reported to the Commission that they had been successful in their application to HUD for a Hope One Planning Grant for the conversion of Cohen Way Public Housing Project to ownership; that that grant will be consummated this month; that it will commence no later than February 1, 1993; that Nick Easton will be the Program Officer supervising that project; and that he will be working with the tenants and with the Public Housing Authority to develop a managément firm or council that will manage the conversion. Mr. Conway continued that they will be preparing an implementation grant application to HUD of significant amounts of money; that the deadline for that is May, 1993; that this is now underway; that one of the objectives is to establish a clear ladder effect that people can move from other projects into this in a systematic manner; that this will give them a posture and an equity in the unit that they are living in and that there is a possibility of moving out of the project to the newly constructed homes. Mr. Conway stated further that there are six lots identified that have no structures and are available; that there are possibly other lots available; and the the construction of new houses can be financed by using HOME funds that the recent legislation made available. Mr. Conway further stated that time is of the essence; that it is very important to get a concept in place; that Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds have been used in other locations to acquire land; that money has been borrowed from the banks for the construction loans; that there is a limited amount of CDBG funds that are usable for this purpose; that the Commission has already expended some of those funds on 5th Street; that a new source of financing is being sought; that Don Hadsell was very effective in bringing together a representative of the Wilson Foundation with the CHC recently; that funds used for land acquisition could be matched up with the use of HOME Funds; and that the two, in combination, will double the capacity to build new houses in the targeted areas. Mr. Conway stated that approvals are needed this week; that one needed approval is from the Commission stating its preparedness to Book 34 Page 8989 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8990 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. allocate $150,00 of HOME funds to be used for construction loans to be repaid and used repeatedly; that the Wilson Foundation has agreed to make available for three years the amount of $110,000 at a modest interest rate of 8%; that they will allow a draw down as needed; that the security of the Wilson Foundation is the commitment of the City to use HOME funds for this purpose whenever the Wilson Foundation money is used for land acquisition; that the Wilson Foundation is prepared to act on this favorably; that all details have been worked out; that they are requesting approval in concept; that they will work with the Community Development Department on the details; and that a report in mid February will be brought back to the Commission. City Manager Sollenberger stated that this is a good concept for financing and producing the housing; that his only concern was the compatibility with the Vision Plan; that Joel Friedman, of Design Studios West, believes that this area is compatible with the Vision Plan discussions thus far; that his suggestion is that any housing sold in the area, particularly where it may be adjacent to commercial property, that people be apprised of the City's plan for the area so that when redevelopment occurs they will be aware of the plan through advance disclosure; that he recommends that the Commission act favorably on the request of the CHC to approve the concept and to approve the committal of HOME Funds; and to approve the loan specific of $4,050 that has been discussed. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the concept of the plan as outlined and the specific $4,050 home loan. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 18. NEW BUSINESS - APPLICATION GRANT FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PERTAINING TO THE ARTIFICIAL FISHING REEF PROJECT - CHANGED TO AGENDA ITEM NO. VIII-3 FROM AGENDA ITEM NO. III A-4 IN THE CHANGE TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - CONTINUE SUPPORT OF PROJECT AND ALLOCATE $5,000 ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) #3 (0355) through (0507) General Services Director Bob Gerkin and Captain Jonnie Walker of Bay Walker Charters, came to the Commission table. Mr. Gerkin stated that the State of Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has issued a call for applications pertaining to grant assistance for next year's artificial reef Development Program; that they are seeking permission to apply for the maximum grant in the amount of $25,000; and that this would be spent to renourish the existing reef sites during the 1993-94 fiscal year. Mr. Gerkin continued that, as a part of the application, DNR is asking the City if they would be willing to provide matching funds if necessaryi that the City has budgeted $5,000 annually in past years as partial funding for this project; that if the grant is received, the existing reef sites will receive the maximum amount of materials for which they have been permitted; and that should the Commission elect to allocate the $5,000 in the 1993-94 budget, it is proposed to be utilized for engineering and permitting of new sites within the bay as recommended by the Artificial Reef Committee. Mr. Gerkin stated that a decision needs to be made at this time as to whether or not the City Commission desires to continue their program, and, if sO, $5,000 should be committed for allocation in the 1993-94 budget and the grant application so noted; and that the deadline for submitting this application is January 13, 1993. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to continue support of this project and allocation of $5,000 in next year's budget. Mr. Walker stated that in previous years the reef sites were randomly chosen by a few fishermen; that since the program has begun the Mote Marine Laboratory and other people have become involved; that scientific study has shown that placing reef sites on top of dredge holes is rejuvenating and bringing them alive; that more than the fishing aspect is being considered now; that the State is possibly allocating money through the Army Corp of Engineers to refill those holes which tend to fill up with toxic waste; and that this is an example of the positive impact that the reef sites have on the bay. Motion carried (4 to 0): : Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. 19. BOARD APPOINTMENTS - NO ACTION TAKEN -= MATTER TO RETURN TO COMMISSION IN FEBRUARY (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #3 (0507) through (0565) 1. Appointment Re: Building/Fire Board of Rules and Appeals. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that when Board appointments were made at the December Commission meeting, that two appointments were made to this Board; that there remained one vacancy for a licensed residential contractor for which there was no application at that time; that he has found a non-City resident applicant that owns property within the City and meets the qualifications; that his name is Mr. Frank W. Howell. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would like a little more time to find a licensed residential contractor who is a City resident. Book 34 Page 8991 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8992 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that she is willing to delay the appointment in order to widen the field. There was a consensus of the Commission to take no action at this time and to request City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to bring this matter back to the Commission table during the first week of February. 20. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTE AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA: ADMINISTRATION TO FOCUS ON LEON AVENUE COMMUNITY PROBLEMS APPROACH TO TELEVISION CALL-IN PROGRAM TO BE WRITTEN EXTENSION OF BUILDING PERMITS AND RELATED ORDINANCES TO BE REVIEWED - ADMINISTRATION TO REPORT ON STATUS OF BALL PROJECT ON CENTRAL AVENUE ADMINIETRATION TO PROVIDE A MID-YEAR UPDATE ON BUDGET PROJECTIONS FOR 1993-94 (AGENDA ITEM X) #3 (0565) through (1253) Commissioner Atkins A. stated that he would like to encourage the administration to work on the Leon Avenue and 20th Streets community problems. Commissioner Merrill A. stated that if the Commission has a television calling and questioning show, will the Commission receive the full impact of the single written questions; that one of the advantages of live call-ins is the editorial comments which disclose the depth of their anger and frustration; that there is the small risk of profanity; and that he strongly suggests that a significant portion of the achievement expected will be obtained by a live call-in show with all of the emotion behind it. Mayor Gurney stated that if he conducts the over-the-phone program that he is concerned about the benefit of anonymity over the phone; that if someone gets vicious over the phone there would be no delay system to circumvent it; that he would hate to see a few people wreck it for everyone and ruin the format in the future by unloading something over the line that might embarrass everyone and cause all of the Commission to have second thoughts about this conversely. Mayor Gurney continued that there must be a control factor when something being said over the air should be terminated; that the control factor on this type of talk show must state who says enough and when the conversation should be terminated; that he would like to have the maiden venture into this be a successful one and not have to be the last one if the first is a disaster; and that he does not mind approaching this with tip-toes. Commissioner Patterson stated that it would be real smart to "tip- toe" approach this; that there is a real danger of turning the Commission meeting into show business which it is not; that the Commissioners are more than happy to have citizen input; and the people who came tonight that thought enough to actually bring their concerns to the Commission table makes an impact that no live call-in show will have. B. stated that the issue of extending building permits should be reviewed; that permits should not be extended when very little work has been accomplished; and that perhaps tighter guidelines could be set for the completion of a substantial amount of work. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would support this matter. Mayor Gurney stated that some action is needed at the Ball project on Central Avenue. Commissioner Atkins stated there has been no progress on this propertyi that whoever is in charge of the status should come before the Commission with a presentation and a plan of attack so that the Commission can make a decision. Mayor Gurney asked the Commission if they wished to extend an invitation to Mr. Ball to update the Commission on his plan for the building. There was a consensus of the Commission to do sO. Commissioner Patterson stated that she agreed with inviting Mr. Ball and that the Commission may need to re-examine some of the ordinances to allow for more latitude. Commissioner Merrill suggested that administration report back on this matter. C. stated that the Commission has discussed having the Sheriff take over some of the items in the City; and that presently it can be argued that the City ordinances cannot be enforced because the Commission has not provided authority to do SO. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to give the Sheriff the authority to enforce City ordinances. Motion carried (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, yes. D. stated that he was informed by the Human Resources Department that he is now covered, free of charge, by the City's health plan; that his concern is that with the City's financial distress that it will appear to increase Book 34 Page 8993 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8994 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. the Commissioners' benefits; and that this action took place without the support of or a motion by the Commission. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to reinstitute the benefit fee for enrolling in the health insurance plan which had been in effect prior to October 1, 1992. City Manager Sollenberger stated that there had been some question regarding the Commissioner coverage rates; that the rates for health insurance were increased; that he requested Human Resources to survey the various elected Boards regarding the health benefits provided to them; that all Boards, with the exception of the Hospital Board have free health benefits provided by the governing agency; and that a memorandum for the Commissioners was prepared regarding this. Mr. Sollenberger stated that when the survey data was presented to him he recommended offering the same benefit to the Commissioners; and that perhaps he should have brought it to the Commission. Commissioner Merrill stated that anytime the Commission changes benefits it should be by an explicit vote; that the cost for adding the five Commissioners is approximately $15,000; that he does not begrudge anyone voting for it; but that it should be legitimately voted on. Mayor Gurney called for a vote on the motion. Motion failed (2 to 2) : Atkins, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Gurney, no. E. asked if the City Manager could provide a mid-year update on the budget projections for next year's budget deficiency; that it should be an issue in the upcoming election; that the previous projection is that ad valorem taxes will need to be increaséd by 20% in order to balance next year's deficit; that it may help to provide the best possible information and the latest update for the campaign; and that he suggests that an update be provided to the Commission. Mayor Gurney A. stated that he had a question about motor homes parking in the new spaces installed on Gulf Stream Avenue; and that the matter seems to have been taken care of already. B. stated that he strongly supports Commissioner Atkins' comments with respect to the problems expressed tonight in the Leon Avenue neighborhood; and that it is time for progress in this area. 21. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS: There were none. 22. ADJOURN #3 (1253) through (END) The Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of January 4, 1992, was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. s Kney dack Gurney, Mayor ATTEST: Billw E Robens 22 Billy Ecobinson, City Auditor and Clerk Book 34 Page 8995 01/04/93 6:00 P.M. FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME--FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE Patterson, Nora Sarasota City Commission MAILING ADDRESS. THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE ON 707 Freeling Drive WHICHI I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: XX, CFY : COUNTY ! OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUNTY NAME OF POLITICAR SUBDIVISION: Sarasota Sarasota City of SArasota DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED. MY POSITION IS: XX- ELECTIVE :1 APPOINTIVE January 4, 1993 WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict ofinterest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particulàr. form is not required by. law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: Aj person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal fother than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest. CE FORMI XB 10-86 PAGE 1 IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. Yous should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, Nora Patterson hereby disclose that on January 4 19. 93 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) X inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of by whom I am retained. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: A resolution (No. 93R-625) was presented to the City. Commission for adoption which appropriated $37,226.00 to remove the North Esplanade Road at Bayfront Park. This removal was voted for by the City Commission on October 19, 1992. At that time, I also declared a conflict of interest due to the fact that my husband's law firm represents Marina Jacks, a marina and restaurant located at the Bayfront. January 6, 1993 Movce Ladoon Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES $112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. CE FORM 8B 10-86 PAGE 2