MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16, 1992 AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Jack Gurney, Vice Mayor Gene Pillot, Commissioners Fredd Atkins, David Merrill and Nora Patterson, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None 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 6:01 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. CHANGE TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY #1 (0033) through (0048) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Add a presentation for Special Recognition to Dr. Kay Glasser upon her retirement as a member of the Sarasota School Board. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve the Change to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 2. SPECIAL RECOGNITION OF DR. KAY GLASSER #1 (0050) through (0259) Mayor Gurney stated that since it had been Vice Mayor Pillot's idea to recognize Dr. Kay Glasser, he was turning this item over to him. Vice Mayor Pillot presented Dr. Kay Glasser to the audience and thanked Mayor Gurney for giving him the privilege to represent him in recognizing a very dear friend. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Dr. Glasser has been one of the most creative contributors and one of the most determined doers of projects that Sarasota has seen in a long time; that Dr. Glasser has been doing an outstanding job on the School Board for the last 14 years. Book 34 Page 8829 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8830 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot presented Dr. Glasser with a Mayor's Citation in appreciation for her contributions to the School Board and the community and congratulated her for her outstanding efforts. Dr. Glasser stated that she was deeply indebted to this City Commission beçause were it not for their foresight, the Human Resource Center would not have become a reality. The City Commission recessed at 6:10 p.m. and convened into a Joint Workshop Meeting with the Longboat Key Town Commission (see appropriate minutes) . The Joint Workshop adjourned at 6:48 p.m. and reconvened as the City Commission. 3. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR OCTOBER 1992 - CAROLYN J. MASON, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT #1 (0261) through (0389) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, introduced Carolyn J. Mason and stated that she was pleased to nominate Ms. Mason as Employee of the Month; that she is awestruck by the community inspired energy Ms. Mason has because inherent in the planning process is a need to reach out and communicate with the community. Sherry Plaster, Chief Planner of the Planning and Development Department, stated that Ms. Mason has gone to an incredible degree to bring the Newtown community into the planning process; that you cannot plan any area of the City without good communications and Ms. Mason brought this to the process. Mayor Gurney presented Carolyn Mason with a plaque for Employee of the Month for October 1992 in appreciation of her unique performance with the City of Sarasota and congratulated her for her outstanding efforts. 4. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 2, 1992 = APPROVED WITH CHANGE (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0393) through (0425) On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting of November 2, 1992. Commissioner Patterson stated that she feels the vote on page 11 of the Minutes was recorded incorrectly; that she thought the votes of Merrill and Pillot were reversed. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he had voted "no" on that item instead of "yes" as stated. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that he would see that the correction was made. The maker and seconder of the motion agreed that the Minutes are approved with the one change to be made as noted. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the motion with the change noted. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1 = ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, AND 8 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEMS IV-A-1, -2,-3, -4,-5,-6,-7, AND -8) #1 (0427) through (0683) Mayor Gurney requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the purpose for Consent Agendas and to give a synopsis of each item under the Consent Agenda. Mr. Robinson replied that items under Consent Agenda No. 1 are considered routine matters; that if a Commissioner desired to do sO, he/she could request that an item be removed for discussion before voting; that Consent Agenda No. 2, consisted of resolutions and ordinances that required a roll call vote. Mr. Robinson proceeded to give a synopsis of each item under Consent Agenda No. 1. Commissioner Patterson requested that Item Nos. 3 and 6 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor to execute a consent order regarding Ed Smith Stadium Complex 2. Approval Re: Amendments to the leases of Gulfwind Marine by extending the eastern boundary by thirty (30) feet, and to the Mote Marine lease by moving the boundaries of the mammal rehabilitation facility thirty (30) feet east 4. Approval Re: Authorize Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a temporary construction easement for an additional 24-month term with the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) to provide a site for one of their Regional Observation and Monitoring Program (ROMP) well arrays on the City's property near Storage Pond "A" at the Hi Hat Ranch 5. Approval Re: Authorize sale of City-owned property (Part of Lot 6, Blk 2, P.0.S., Cross Street and Ringling Boulevard) - 1520 Ringling Boulevard 7. Report Re: Status of Affordable Housing Program Plan/Revolving Land Acquisition Fund status report to purchase lots and/or houses throughout the city for construction of homes for low and moderate income residents Book 34 Page 8831 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8832 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute easement deed for the construction, operation and maintenance of surface and underground electric facilities on the undergrounding of FPL lines along the alley between 1st Street and Main Street On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 3. Approval Re: Three-year extension of Financial Advisor Consulting Agreement with John Haylett & Company, Inc. Commissioner Patterson stated that this is a consulting agreement with John Haylett & Company for $25,000 a year for his financial advice; that John Haylett occupied the position of Director of Finance with the City before his retirement and she wanted to know whether the present Director of Finance, Gib Mitchell, and Mr. Haylett's qualifications were the same; that she wanted to know whether the City really needed to retain Mr. Haylett as a financial advisor. Commissioner Patterson asked what advice Mr. Haylett provides that the City could not get in-house. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Mr. Haylett assembles the bond issues that the City sells; that most cities use financial advisors to package the bond deals and to handle a lot of the negotiation; that if a bond issue is sold during the year, the $25,000 that Mr. Haylett would ordinarily be entitled to is credited against the bond issue; that it is his recollection that the City would not pay the $25,000 to Mr. Haylett in any year that a bond issue is floated; however, bond issues have been floated every year since he has been with the City and he expects that that will continue to be the case. Gib Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that when Mr. Haylett was the Director of Finance, the City's financial advisor was William R. Hough & Company in St. Petersburg; that financial advisors deal with the bond markets constantly, whereas he only deals with them when the City is ready to go to the bond market. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 Item 3. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 6. Approval Re: Purchase contract for a mobile home for $13,200 located at Lot W4, Street 5, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in accordance with Resolution No. 90R-383 Commissioner Patterson stated that she pulled this item because it is a purchase of a mobile home and she wants to know what the funding source is. Mr. Sollenberger stated that it is in the Sarasota Mobile Home Park (S.M.H.P.) budget; that there is $200,000 allotted for such purchases. Commissioner Merrill asked why there were two appraisals done on this property. Robert Gerkin, Director of General Services, came before the Commission and stated that it is the set practice to get two appraisals for all purchases of mobile homes at the S.M.H.P. in excess of $10,000; that the owner got a higher appraisal and the City got a lower appraisal. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 Item 6. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2 = ITEM 1 = ADOPTED ON SECOND READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-1) #1 (0686) through (0715) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3638 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 93-3638, amending the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act; stating various findings of fact concerning the preparation and adoption of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; adopting by reference four amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Designated: 92-PA-03, 92-PA-06, 92-PA-07, and 92-PA-09, and a works program, as more particularly described herein; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of parts hereof; providing for reading by title only; and providing for an effective date On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. Mayor Gurney requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time the petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. Book 34 Page 8833 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8834 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and be sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3614, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE BY REVISING THE MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDICAL OFFICES, MEDICAL CLINICS, AND URGENT CARE CENTERS, AS SET FORTH HEREIN; MAKING FINDINGS; SETTING FORTH EXEMPTIONS; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0745) through (1116) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that this was a City Commission initiated proposal; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency did not approve the proposal; however, the Planning Staff did approve it; that it is a more restrictive parking standard in zone districts that allow medical offices. Ms. Robinson continued that the Commission had asked that doctors' offices that already exist be allowed to be grandfathered in perpetually. Mayor Gurney asked whether there was anyone from the Planning Board who could tell the Commission why they did not approve this proposal. Berta Lefkovich, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency Vice Chairman, came before the Commission and stated that her recollection was that the Planning Board felt that the changes would not be that significant as to the amount of parking spaces that would be added. Ms. Robinson stated that there are four or five additional opportunities on South Tamiami Trail where new offices could occur and Staff felt this proposal would be helpful in containing parking in the hospital core area. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would like to see this ultimately addressed with a parking permit program. Mayor Gurney asked why the amount of square feet per parking space outlined in the proposed ordinance was not consistent; that it seemed the square footage varied depending on what zone district they were in. City Attorney Taylor stated that the wording for medical offices is designated with "(a)' " and that wording for "Other businesses, professional offices," etc. is designated with 11 (a.1)"; that the "Other businesses," etc. are already in the Zoning Code and was not part of the assignment before the Board; that those are not being changed in the sense that a new standard is being implemented; that for those types of uses (Other businesses, professional offices, etc.) they are being restated because the material is being moved from one location in the Zoning Code to a new location dealing with medical offices; that the reason the square footage is different for "Other businesses, 1 etc. is because the uses are different from medical offices and always have had a different parking standard than medical offices. Commissioner Patterson asked why reference to "ambulatory surgical centers" was moved from "medical or dental offices" to "other professional or business offices." Ms. Robinson stated that their research shows that ambulatory surgical centers do not have as many surgeries as a doctor would who has two or three patients visit his office. Commissioner Patterson stated that may be true but she feels the ambulatory surgical centers would probably require more staff. Ms. Robinson stated that the research done by her staff did not find that to be true; however, it could be checked into further. 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. 92-3614 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve proposed Ordinance No. 92-3614. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3637, PERTAINING TO THE DESIGNATION OF A WATER SKI AREA BY THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, STATE OF FLORIDA, AND THE REQUIREMENT CONTAINED THEREIN THAT PERTAINING TO MANATEE PROTECTION WITHIN THE WATER SKI AREA; AMENDING CHAPTER 10, BEACHES AND WATERWAYS, SARASOTA CITY CODE, sO AS TO IMPLEMENT MANATEE PROTECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING = DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO WORK WITH THE SKI-A-REES AND RESIDENTS REGARDING THE USE OF LOUD SPEAKERS FOR THE SHOWS (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (1117) through (2778) City Attorney Taylor stated that over time there have been a number of speed limits placed on the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) and waters adjacent to it; that when the Florida Department of Natural Resources passed Rule 16-N-22.026, they excluded from their area of rule making an area designated as a water sports area within the City of Sarasota, which we associate with the activities of the Ski-A-Rees; that this area was exempted from the limitations that were being imposed in that portion of Sarasota Bay, as long as the local jurisdiction (the City of Sarasota) would pass its own local regulation designed to provide for the protection of manatees. Book 34 Page 8835 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8836 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Mayor Gurney stated that he was troubled about jet skis being operated in the seagrass beds if the City does not prohibit people from doing SO. Attorney Taylor stated that one of the things that was considered by the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Board that put this ordinance together was calling for the marking of the water ski area; that the Police Department feels that too many markings in the bay can create its own problem; that the Police Department feels that this proposed ordinance is enforceable; that as a matter of enforcement, the Police Department is concerned with marking large expanses of water intermittently by some form of marker or "Keep Out" device because it is difficult to put enough markers out so that an area is sufficiently covered where seagrass beds might exist. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he has great confidence in and respect for the formal Ski-A-Rees organization; that they have always demonstrated responsibility, good citizenship, and respect for the environment; however, he is concerned about the casual water sports enthusiasts who, with all good intentions, would be ignorant of the manatee area and may not see the signs posted. Attorney Taylor stated that he feels education of the public is an essential part of the process; that the Police Department had talked about the City developing an education program which at least included signage for boaters at all of the boat ramp sites to put people on notice of restrictions. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the National Estuary Program (NEP) has a seagrass signage program; that one of the purposes of that program is to provide public information about measures that can be taken to improve the quality of Sarasota Bayi that Mark Alderson, Director of the NEP, is going to appear before the Commission at its first meeting in December and the issue of public education could be discussed with him at that time. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. Larry Brunner, 2814 River Pine Way, and Kevin Winkelmeyer, 4448 Denice Lane, representing the Ski-A-Rees, came before the Commission. Mr. Brunner stated that he is a 15-year member of the Ski-A-Rees and it is the 40th anniversary for the Ski-A-Rees; that the Ski-A-Rees is a water ski and boating safety club; that they recommended placing buoys in the area, having a second rider in boats to act as a lookout for manatees, and using a wide-angle mirror when pulling a water skier. Mr. Brunner asked whether the Commission would allow them to run a video about the Ski-A-Rees to show the dedication and structuredness of their program. It was the consensus of the Commission to view the video. Mr. Brunner stated that the Ski-A-Rees would like to see all the grass flats buoyed off so that a novice to the area would know where they are. Mr. Winkelmeyer stated that he is President of the Ski-A-Rees this year; that the club has over 125 members; that they have never had an incident with manatees; that they work with charitable organizations in the community to promote water skiing as well as show some kids a good time and raise some money for these charities; that they have worked with the Special Olympics for about eight years; that they also work with the Easter Seals group. Mr. Winkelmeyer continued that this year they had an opportunity to work with a group called Project Cure; that this group is for cancer-stricken children; that a group of children came to Sarasota for a dream weekend and the Ski-A-Rees helped organize it; that they also work with the Boy Scouts in earning merit badges. There was no one else to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3637 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3637 on first reading. Commissioner Patterson stated that she had been visited by Jean Hendry, who lives at 1456 John Ringling Parkway, today who gave her a letter and asked that it be read into the record tonight; that Ms. Hendry is asking that the Commission modify the permission given to the Ski-A-Rees. Commissioner Patterson read the following letter from Ms. Hendry into the record: Re: the designation of an area on the southeast side of Ken Thompson Park for water skiing "When you designate the above area for skiing, I ask you to rule out the use of loud speakers or other broadcast systems by the Ski-A-Rees or others. They could use signboards instead. The City must exercise their responsibility for protecting a residential area from intrusions by commercial or other offensive activities. This particular situation is a direct consequence of the creation of the habitat by the City of Sarasota. The protecting blotter of trees and other growth was removed, which left my home of 23 years exposed to assault and bombardment from the noises coming from Gulfwind Marine, Mote Marine Laboratory, and the Ski-A-Rees loud speakers. Book 34 Page 8837 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8838 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. I will have no defense from the attacks on my home and my ability to enjoy life as it once was prior to the habitat. The frequency of the meets and public exhibitions will inevitably increase. The noises emanating from City Island already make my residence almost untenable. When the nice weather allows an open house, it is untenable if any of the organizations are using loud speaker systems. And I must say that when the winds are coming from the east, even you would feel assailed. It is brutal! Thank you for your kind attention and consideration." Jean Hendry Commissioner Patterson stated that she feels when the Ski-A-Rees are having an exhibition, some loud speaker activity may be necessary to enlighten the public as to what is happening; however, she feels that during practice perhaps the use of loud speakers could be discontinued. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he, too, had a conversation with Ms. Hendry today and she had asked for some consideration; that perhaps the Administration could discuss with the appropriate representatives of the Ski-A-Rees how they might minimize the use of amplified announcements; that there may be some middle ground for cooperation that can be reached with respect to Ms. Hendry and others in the area. Commissioner Merrill stated that he supported the concerns of Commissioner Patterson and Vice Mayor Pillot regarding the impact of the use of loud speakers because he feels it is a valid concern. Commissioner Atkins stated that he did not feel the Ski-A-Rees could adequately describe their shows using placards; that loud speakers are necessary. Mayor Gurney stated that he feels the Administration and the Ski-A-Rees should discuss this problem and work out a compromise with the residents in the area. Mr. Winkelmeyer stated that the Ski-A-Rees had written a letter and physically delivered copies of it to every residence that they thought their speakers might affect and asked them for feedback and to call with their concerns; that they would be glad to contact Ms. Hendry and attempt to work out a compromise on the issue of the loud speakers. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3641, EXTENDING THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION PERTAINING TO THE SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PETITION 90-W FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF SAID APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE CONDITIONAL REZONING FROM RMF-2 ZONE DISTRICT TO COP ZONE DISTRICT, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR MEASURED FROM THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 90-W FOR THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST OUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 36 SOUTH, RANGE 17 EAST LESS THE SOUTH 310 FEET THEREOF, AND LESS R.O.W. FOR DESOTO ROAD, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE AUTOMATIC EXPIRATION OF PETITION 90-W: REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM II-3) #1 (2779) through (2884) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that this is a customary privilege that is allowed in the Zoning Code; that when an applicant would like to have an extension for one year, for whatever reason, it is to be voted on by the city Commission; that due to illness and the economy, the applicant requests a one-year extension; that the location is on University Parkway. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. Attorney Michael Furen, representing petitioner, stated that he had signed up to answer any questions the Commission might have. It was the consensus of the Commission that they did not have any questions on this item. There was no one else to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3641 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3641. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3642, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 1828 GROVE STREET, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE EDWARD H. KNIGHT HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC Book 34 Page 8839 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8840 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 92-HD-16, HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM II-4) #1 (2885) through (3262) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that this petition was approved both by the Planning Staff and the Historic Preservation Board; that the structure is located on the south side of Grove Street and the nomination is for the house only. Al Barrett, Senior Planner, displayed slides of the property for the Commission. Victoria "Mikki" Hartig, petitioner, came before the Commission and stated that she is representing Debra Rock, the owner of the Edward H. Knight house; that it is a one-story craftsman style bungalow; that the nomination is for the main structure onlyi that the structure has an L-shaped plan and construction is of weatherboard over frame resting on concrete block piers; that the most dominant feature of the home is its full-width screened front porch with knee wall, wood floor, and square wooden posts; that the main structure features the original pressed metal roof and utilizes both a jerkinhead and a cross gabled roof with boxed eaves; that the house features all of its original 1/1 double hung sash windows, front twelve light door, and single light glass paneled side door. Ms. Hartig continued that the garage features a side gabled roof; however, it was damaged by fire in 1985 and the nomination is not for the garage; that the Historic Preservation Board agreed that the house meets criteria "A" in that it "exemplifies or reflects the broad cultural, political economical, or social history of the City of Sarasota" of the 1930s. 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. 93-3642 by title only. Commissioner Merrill stated that his concern is the fact that the Statement of Significance states that the structure has "minimal adornment or decoration"; that just because something is a reflection of hard economic times, he feels that doesn't mean it warrants a certain amount of significance. Ms. Hartig stated that the Depression era buildings were built with very little adornment and detail because it would have cost more money; that Sarasota recognizes the mansions of the 1920s; however, she feels the City also needs to recognize and have a fair representation of 1930s structures on the registers. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve proposed Ordinance No. 93-3642. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3643, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 310 SOUTH OSPREY AVENUE, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE FREDERICKSON HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 92-HD-17, HARTIG) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM II-5) #1 (3264) through #2 (0514) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the Planning Staff believes that the house is designatable, but not the garage; that the Historic Preservation Board voted in favor of designating both the house and the garage. Vice Mayor Pillot asked why the Staff felt the garage was not designatable. Ms. Robinson stated that Al Barrett, Senior Planner, had researched the property and felt that the garage had been altered and was in poor condition. Mr. Barrett displayed slides of the property for the Commission. Victoria "Mikki" Hartig, petitioner, came before the Commission and stated that she represents Susan and Joseph Kane in the petition for historic designation for the Frederickson House; that it is a one-story bungalow; that the garage is quite deteriorated, but there is the intention to rehabilitate it; that the house has an L-shaped plan and construction is of pine on concrete block piers and decorative concrete blocks are used for underskirting; that the two most dominant features of the house are its front porch with knee wall and its front gable; that the main structure features a shingled cross gabled roof and the garage has its original metal roof; that all of the windows in both structures are original; that bath fixtures and wall and floor tile are original to the house; that both the exterior and interior of the house and garage have had no alterations or modifications over the years, except for the resurfacing of the roof of the main structure. Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot and left the Commission Chambers at 8:02 p.m. Ms. Hartig continued that she feels this house meets the criteria for significance under criteria "A" as it represents the "economical history of the City of Sarasota and the United States" in its simplicity of design; that the Frederickson house and garage represent the economic climate after the dissolution of the Florida Land Boom and the subsequent years of the Depression; that she feels it also meets criteria "D" in that it "embodies distinctive, visible characteristics of an architectural style or period." Book 34 Page 8841 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8842 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot returned the gavel to Mayor Gurney when he returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:05 p.m. Vice Mayor Pillot asked whether Ms. Hartig knew what the owners' plans are for the house since it is located where it may lend itself to other kinds of uses. Ms. Hartig stated that the house is for sale now and has a pending contract on it; that the buyers under contract are petitioning for a Special Exception; however, if this pending sale does not go through, the owner will still seek the historic designation. Vice Mayor Pillot asked what use the buyer intended for the property. Ms. Hartig stated that the buyer intended to use it for a therapy practice. Ms. Hartig continued that the Commission had earlier expressed a concern that since a Special Exception is pending, this historic designation was only so the buyer could get the Special Exception; that for the record she has a letter from the current owner that states that they may exercise the option to withdraw it should this sale not go through. Commissioner Merrill stated that he feels the Commission should determine if this building "exemplifies" something worth being exemplifled; that he feels exemplifying something negative does not necessarily mean it is something we want to keep; that the Statement of Significance states that it is "simple in design and devoid of ornamentation reflecting the hard economic times"; that he doesn't feel it is a structure that would exemplify something the City would want to preservei that he feels the house should remain a residence. Mayor Gurney stated that he agrees with Commissioner Merrill in that the house should remain a residence; that he feels the Commission should be dealing with the zoning in that neighborhood. Mayor Gurney opened the public hearing. Berta Lefkovich, 4805 Rilma Avenue, came before the Commission and stated that she used to live in this neignborhood; that there were problems with this house when it was used as a rental property; that she wanted to remind the Commission that precedent had been set in the neighborhood years ago when Livingston Otis got historic designation and a Special Exception for the first house on the south side of Oak Street close to Orange Avenue, across from the Woman's Exchange; that that was a bigger building on a smaller lot for a similar type of establishment and it worked out quite well for the neighborhood; that she feels not every house that has historic value is a grand house; that this has always been a modest neighborhood and this house reflects this neighborhood. There was no one else to speak and the public hearing was closed. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3643 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve proposed Ordinance No. 93-3643. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, no; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 12. PRESENTATION RE: PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR MARINA JACK INSTRUCTED THE CITY MANAGER TO DELAY THE DESTRUCTION OF THE NORTH ACCESS ROAD AT THE BAYFRONT FOR ONE WEEK; THAT THE CITY MANAGER IN CONCERT WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF MARINA JACK REPORT BACK TO THEM AT THE SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING ON NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ON A POTENTIAL COMPROMISE (AGENDA ITEM III) #2 (0520) through (3458) Commissioner Patterson stated that she would not be voting on any votes taken on this issue because she has a conflict of interest since her husband's law firm represents Jack Graham and Lee Sullivan. Lee Sullivan, representing Jack Graham, Inc., Attorney John Strickland, and Jack Graham came before the Commission. Commissioner Patterson left the Commission Chambers at 8:25 p.m. Mr. Sullivan read the following statement: "In the event that you are unwilling to revisit the issue of postponing the removal of the north access parking area, and recognizing that the City may have other priorities and objectives, we would in the alternative like to pursue a settlement of the parking issue that could meet the City's objective of decreasing the presence of asphalt in favor of grass. We understand that there is a system of strengthening the foundation under grass that has been successfully demonstrated to permit vehicular traffic on the grass without damage to the soil base. It is my understanding that there is a representative from Design Studios West available here tonight to address the more technical aspects of the system as well as the scope of the proposal, and if this idea is acceptable to you, after listening to their presentation, then barring your unwillingness to reconsider postponement of the north access demolition, we would like to ask that the Commissioners authorize the City Administration to install the system and develop regulations for the use of the proposed area for valet parking by Marina Jack on a basis that is mutually acceptable to the City Manager and Marina Jack. We feel that the respective interests of the City and Jack Graham, Inc. could be adequately served under this arrangement and ask that you give this proposal your consideration. We would ask that whatever action you take on this issue, that you direct that the demolition of the north access road not begin until the mutually agreeable arrangement between ourself and the City Manager is reduced to writing. We pledge our Book 34 Page 8843 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8844 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. immediate attention to this task, expecting that this could be accomplished within the week. This is very important to us." Mike Flanegin and Russell Moore from Design Studios West (DSW) came before the Commission. Mr. Flanegin distributed copies of a drawing of the area in question with the portion highlighted to show the area where the soil base under the grass could be strengthened. Mr. Moore stated that one of the major objectives of the bayfront project was to eliminate the asphalt in the northern part of the area; however, they recognize that there are existing lease requirements and commitments for parking with Marina Jack; that they felt it was in everyone's best interest to try to come up with a solution that would solve both of the objectives; that a temporary parking situation was discussed and a mechanism that could accomplish this is turf paving; that turf paving is not meant to be used for permanent parking. Mr. Flanegin stated that one solution being suggested that is both affordable and effective is a system called Geoweb; that it is a subbase material made out of plastic which is filled and then the sod is laid directly over the material; that this type of system can be irrigated; that it is not designed to have vehicles drive on it on a regular basis; that there are other systems that are used if vehicles are going to drive on it on a daily basis. Mr. Flanegin continued that their proposal is to have the stabilized area run between an area where 50 cars could be parked on each side of the stabilized area; that in order to hold down the cost, this solution does not plan for the cars to actually park on the stabilized area. Mayor Gurney asked whether it would be better for the actual parking area to be reinforced. Mr. Flanegin stated that, cost aside, reinforcing the whole area would be the better solution. Commissioner Patterson returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:32 p.m. Mr. Moore stated that this reinforcing system requires a good base and they are trying to capitalize on the fact that the existing asphalt area has a good solid road base; that since the solid road base is already in place, it would be an opportune time to install a reinforcing system under the grass. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City has known that Marina Jack has had a concern from the very beginning about the parking situation shown on the Master Plan when it was presented by DSW; that the City Engineer has stated that he is concerned that the frequent usage of the area for parking will not hold up, and that there may be a conflict at the intersection of the entrance to the parking area at Main Street and the deceleration lane. Mr. Sollenberger continued that he feels the issue is whether the Commission wants to compromise on this matter with Marina Jack or not. Mr. Sollenberger stated that if the Commission does want to work out a compromise, he feels some rules and regulations would have to be worked out; that he feels the following are areas where rules would need to be defined: restrict parking on the stabilized area to valet only have the entrance to the valet area sufficiently north of Main Street so that a vehicle could be pulled in and a chain put in place by the valet so as to restrict any other use limit use of this parking area to peak demand times, perhaps during the season and when there are special events regulate hours of use so that sufficient sunlight is allowed to enable the grass to grow Mr. Sollenberger stated that he feels if these types of measures were incorporated into a permit it might be a workable situation; that such a permit should be revocable if it was abused by Marina Jack or if the City found that the system was not working; that the cost for installing a reinforcing system is approximately $15,000 and he is not sure from where the funding would come. Mr. Sullivan came before the Commission and stated that they feel this parking area would be needed most from February through April; that limiting parking from 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. would not be a problem, but they would also need to use the area in the evening from about 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.; that he is concerned about having it be on a "permit" basis that could be revocable at will by the City. Paul Thorpe, 47 South Palm Avenue, representing the Downtown Association of Sarasota, came before the Commission and stated that the Downtown Association is in favor of giving consideration to keeping the north access road open; that they feel it is an important road to have open since it is the access from the islands into the Island Park area; that the Downtown Association also feels that the parking area is good for the community since it is a bayfront park. Woody Levy, 2 Marina Plaza, D-8, came before the Commission and stated that he lives on the waterfront and also has a condominium on Gulfstream Avenue and feels he should speak to the Commission about this issue; that he is speaking for himself as a member of the public; that he supports the modest request of Marina Jack to defer any action on the demolition of the north access road until the Commission is able to ascertain the effect of the new bayfront park with respect to the parking needs of the community; that with regard to the number of parking spaces at the bayfront, according to his figures, when the project is completed, there will be 33 less marked and unmarked parking spaces than there were before the project started; that his figures include 400 marked spaces and 175 Book 34 Page 8845 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8846 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. unmarked for a total of 575 before the project was undertaken; that if the project is completed in accordance with the existing plan that includes the demolition of the north access road, there would be only 435 marked spacesi that if the project is completed but the north access road parking is not eliminated, there would be 542 spaces which would still be 33 less than before the project was undertaken; that the whole purpose of the project is to attract more people to the bayfront and attracting more people will mean more parking needs; that he feels a tour bus will not be able to maneuver if the north access road is destroyed; that if the north access parking is demolished and after a year it is determined that the parking is inadequate, will the City then rebuild the road; that he feels the Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to the public; that he urges the Commission to follow the prudent course and delay demolition for six months to allow an opportunity to find out what effect the bayfront development has on the public's need for parking. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved that the City delay the removal of the north access road until the first meeting of the Commission of May 1993, at which time we will have had several months post-completion and the tourist season will have ended, and ask the City Administration to monitor the use during the period of time after the completion of the project until May 1993 and report their findings to the Commission for further action. Motion failed (2 to 2): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Gurney, no. Mayor Gurney stated that the Commission voted on a Master Plan of the bayfront project that showed the asphalt removed and he feels that to do otherwise would betray the public's trust. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he finds Mr. Levy's logic impossible to refute; that he feels the people of the City are open minded when more information is made available to them. Vice Mayor Pillot moved to reconsider the previous vote. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Jack Graham came before the Commission and stated that on July 23, 1964 an agreement was entered into by the City; that if the Commission repudiates this agreement and its conditions, he would not want the City's bonds. Mr. Graham advised the Commissioners to read the lease agreement. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot) and second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved that the Commission instruct the City Manager to delay the destruction of the area for one week; that the City Manager in concert with the representatives of Marina Jack report back to them when the Commission meets in a Special Meeting on November 23, 1992 on a potential compromise situation. Mayor Gurney stated that he will support a compromise as long as the compromise removes the asphalt. Commissioner Merrill stated that he feels the heart and soul of Sarasota is the bayfront; that as public space it is a terrible design because it is a public space that has a major highway going through the middle of it and the real heart and soul of the space is a parking lot. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he feels the heart and soul of Bayfront Park is the restaurant, the shops, the boats, the beauty of the water, Island Park, the fishing opportunities given to tourists, and a good deal of green space being improved; that he feels that the parking lot is the lifeblood that allows the heart and soul to live. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved to amend the motion to eliminate the reference to delaying the removal of the asphalt. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that since he made the original motion, he feels the amendment wipes out his motion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that he feels the original motion is a two-part motion and if the reference to delaying the removal of the asphalt is deleted, the second part of the motion regarding reaching a compromise would still be intact. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he is unwilling to limit the scope of the compromise because something good might come out of it. Vice Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the amendment to the motion. Motion failed (2 to 2): Atkins, noi Gurney, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, no. Vice Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the main motion. Motion carried (3 to 1): Atkins, yes; Gurney, yes; Merrill, noi Pillot, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot returned the gavel to Mayor Gurney. 13. CITIZENS' INPUT (AGENDA ITEM V) #2 (3465) through #3 (0586) Mayor Gurney requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the Citizens' Input process. Mr. Robinson replied that at this time, any citizen can sign up to speak and come before the Commission to discuss any issues, with a five-minute time limit. Richard Weintraub, 1750 Hawthorne Street, came before the Commission and stated that four weeks ago there were six houses that were proposed for historical designation; that five of the houses were approved and one was not; that the houses were given no Book 34 Page 8847 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8848 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. time for a presentation and his house was the one that failed; that his house cost $170,000 and it is not a shack; that the Historic Preservation Board had voted unanimously to approve his house; that he feels the Commission should not have made a decision on his house based on no presentation; that he feels it was a misuse of the Commission's power; that his representative should have been allowed 15 minutes to describe and discuss the merits of his property; that he would like the Commission to rescind the vote on his property or at least allow the presentation on it to be heard. Mayor Gurney stated that he had to take some blame for the lack of a presentation being heard that night since he chaired the meeting; that there was an urgency expressed to him to move quickly through the six houses on the agenda; that he had not anticipated there would be a difficulty with any of the six houses under public hearing; that he feels the decision on Mr. Weintraub's house was a hasty one. Commissioner Merrill asked the City Auditor and Clerk what action the Commission could take as a result of the earlier action. Mr. Robinson stated that he would recommend, based on the fact that the petitioner did not have an opportunity to make a presentation, the Commission ask him to readvertise it for another public hearing so the presentation could be made. On motion of Commissioner Merrill (Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot) and second of Mayor Gurney, it was moved to rescind the Commission's motion to deny proposed Ordinance No. 92-3630. Commissioner Patterson stated that she felt the Commission should hear the petitioner's presentation. Mayor Gurney stated that he feels the motion rights a wrong. Commissioner Merrill stated that the presenter usually reads to the Commission what is in each of their books; that he went by this house and spoke to the owner and is willing to change his vote because of the credibility of that person. Vice Mayor Pillot asked Mr. Robinson what happens if this motion passes. Mr. Robinson stated that if the motion passes, the denial is removed and the item is brought back with a closed public hearing tonight to either vote on or not to vote on the ordinance. Vice Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Gurney, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, no; Pillot, yes. Victoria "Mikki" Hartig came before the Commission and stated that the house at 1750 Hawthorne Street is significant due to the architectural detail and excellent execution; that it has a detailed stucco finish on the outside; that it is an example of the boom time Spanish eclectic architecture; that it is a bungalow with wood casement windows, French doors, and hardwood floors; that it is in excellent condition. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 92-3630 on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS = APPROVAL RE: SPECIAL EXCEPTION PETITION NO. 92-SE-11, TO PERMIT OFF-STREET PARKING IN A RMF-4 ZONE DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FRUITVILLE ROAD AND GOODRICH AVENUE = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) #3 (0588) through (0719) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that this issue pertains to a lot on the northeast corner of Fruitville Road and Goodrich Avenue to be used for parking; that the concern had been that the City's Future Land Use Comprehensive Plan called for this area to be Commercial Residential Transition (CRT) ; that the Commission had directed Staff to come back to discuss the technicalities of doing this. Ms. Robinson continued that this would require a rezoning and a Zoning Code Amendment and it would take approximately three months. City Manager Sollenberger stated that one of the concerns regarding this issue expressed at the regular meeting of November 2, 1992 was that if the property was not rezoned, it might not receive the same taxation from the Property Appraiser's office, but the Planning Department has checked and found that it would be assessed the same as commercial parking regardless of the zoning; that he recommends that the Special Exception be granted because the rezoning is cumbersome in this case because it would call for an amendment to the Zoning Code prior to any consideration of rezoning; that RISCORP (Risk and Insurance Services Corporation) is becoming a major employer in the downtown area; that RISÇORP has a need now for the parking space and is currently submitting an offer to purchase a larger building in the downtown area; that RISCORP plans to increase its employment by 150 employees. Mr. Sollenberger continued that he feels it is important for the City to accommodate the interests of a business which wishes to be in the downtown area and to expand and to move ahead with this on the Special Exception basis. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve Special Exception Petition No. 92-SE-11. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. Book 34 Page 8849 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8850 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS = REPORT RE: LIGHTING OF ALLEYS IN THE DOWNTOWN NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) #1 (0720) through (1405) City Manager Sollenberger stated that he could not make a recommendation until he hears the presentation from Florida Power & Light (FPL) ; that the Downtown North Neighborhood Association (DNNA) discussed the approach that he had suggested to the Commission last week to determine if there was any interest of the neighbors having lights attached to their propertyi that he feels the Commission should hear what the result of the DNNA discussion was and then he will make a recommendation to the Commission. Rick Chalker, representing FPL, came before the Commission and stated that he had talked with Mr. Sollenberger and Duane Mountain, Public Works Administration Manager; that Mr. Mountain and he had walked around the area with a representative of the DNNA; that they have looked at the three alleys in question, from 3rd Street to 6th Street from U.S. 41 to Cocoanut Avenue. Mr. Chalker stated that they were looking at how to light these alleys for the citizens that live there; that with regard to installing street lighting or other types of lighting, there are certain rules and regulations that he has to follow called a tariff; that the tariff is put out by the Public Service Commission, which is what FPL operates under. Mr. Chalker continued that those guidelines state that if lights are removed prior to certain periods of time that the utility be reimbursed for the cost of the installations; that toward that end and knowing that there was a project that was being discussed for that area that might entail the removal of these lights in a relatively short period of time, he wants to make the City aware that if the lights are installed and then removed anytime within the contracted period, per the tariff FPL would have to charge the City for whatever costs would be entailed in that installation and removal. Mr. Chalker stated that the cost to remove 12 lights that FPL had agreed upon with the City to install in that area ahead of time would be $14,680; that because of tree conditions in one of the alleys, FPL had worked with the City to install the lights underground and the City was to provide the trenching and the backfill and FPL would then install the street lights with an underground service so that a lot of trees would not have to be cut down; that the estimate on the City's part to do the trenching, most of which will have to be done by hand because of other utilities in this easement, was approximately $10,000; that if the lights are removed after the first year, the City would be looking at a first year investment of about $24,680. Mr. Chalker continued that he looked at another tariff which is for leased lights which FPL normally installs for customers; that leased lights normally point toward the customers' homes because that is the way that the tariff reads; that that option would cost approximately $24,500. Mr. Chalker continued that another alternative might be to install the lights on the customers' homes; that he had looked at the following scenarios: 70 watt high pressure sodium vapor directional fixtures 100 watt high pressure sodium vapor directional fixtures - two incandescent flood lights Mr. Chalker stated that the cost for these types of lights would be from $5,100 to $5,800 for one yeari that that includes the cost for the electricity and an approximate cost of $315 to have them installed on the customers' homes; that the only drawlack to this situation would be that since most of this area is not owner occupied, service would be discontinued when people move out and the lights would be out of service. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he found it difficult to be worried about investing money in street lights because in a year or so the homes and lights might be torn out; that it doesn't bother him because of the multi-million dollar project proposed on this land. Commissioner Merrill stated that he had read an article in The Wall Street Journal today that said that downtown urban malls don't make money and the government subsidizes them for millions of dollars; that he feels the City should install the street lights and not worry about having them be removed in a year or so and take care of the residents. Mr. Chalker stated that he wanted to make sure the city was aware of costs that could come up with the early removal of these lights; that he did not want to catch the Commission unprepared on this. Mary Ouillin, 407 Cocoanut Avenue, representing the DNNA, came before the Commission and stated that the issue of street lights came back to the DNNA; that these alleys are only in a specific area and do not encompass all of the Downtown North neighborhood; that 5th Way off Central Avenue does not have lighting and it is important that lighting is installed there also because it is on the other side of McKown Towers; that it is the citizens who are important and the citizens have expressed concern about the lack of lighting. Ms. Quillin presented petitions (on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) requesting lighting now from residents in the subject area. Ms. Quillin continued that the Commission had approved installation of these lights in February 1992; that the neighborhood had not asked for these lights, but a recommendation through the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and the Sarasota Community Oriented Problem Elimination (SCOPE) task teams when they identified a problem; that Book 34 Page 8851 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8852 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. none of the owners who do live there would agree to having City property placed on their houses. Ms. Quillin presented a copy of a letter from the Vice President of Executive Properties Realty of Sarasota (a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) stating his support of the City installing street lights in the alleys noted; that Executive Properties Realty pays $15 per month for security lights on his property with FPL and he only signs a one-year lease; that this project was supposed to have been completed in six months and it has now been nine months and there are still no street lights in the alleys; that the DNNA requests that the Commission direct the City Manager to proceed with this project as soon as possible. Mr. Sollenberger stated that based on what he has heard tonight he feels the City should proceed with the FPL lighting program if the Commission gives its approval. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve proceeding with the installation of street lights by Florida Power & Light in the subject areas of Downtown North. Mayor Gurney stated that Ms. Quillin is scratching the surface of a problem that is virtually all over the downtown neighborhoods; that there are many more streets and alleys that also need to be addressed. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. Ms. Quillin asked how long it would be before the lights are installed. Mr. Chalker stated that he would have to check on the availability of lights and contact Mr. Sollenberger tomorrow with the information. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - APPROVAL RE: MIGRANT FARMWORKER REPORT = COMMENDED THE REPORT AND APPROVED ADKINISTRATIONUS RECOMMENDATIONE (AGENDA ITEM VI-3) #3 (1408) through (1737) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Bill Molnar, Senior Planner, came before the Commission. Ms. Robinson stated that in anticipation of the Joint City/County Commission Meeting on November 19, 1992, they wanted to give the City Commission a preview of the Migrant Farmworker Report and recommendations; that at the last Joint Meeting in February 1992, it was decided to create an intergovernmental team to explore the issues and problems and present recommendations to both local governments, to evaluate the appropriateness of existing densities, investigate the use of migrant residential facilities as defined in Chapter 381 State Statutes, develop an amendment to the County's Comprehensive Plan, and address the economics of providing agricultural labor housing in the vicinity of their work. Ms. Robinson continued that they have addressed all of these issues except for the last two which are County issues that the County needs to address; that Bill Molnar is the author of the report and is prepared to give you a presentation on the recommendations. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to commend the report and approve the Administration's recommendations to request that the Sarasota County Commission proceed as follows: 1) remove existing language in the "Migrant Housing" section during the upcoming APOXSEE Update; add language that recognizes the growth of migrant farmworkers in the County and calls for the establishment of a "Migrant Farmworker Program"; 2) remove existing one unit per 160 acres requirement for agricultural and associated zones be replaced with a one unit to 5 acre density limit; and 3) establish a "Migrant Farmworker Program' I that addresses housing and transportation funding sources as outlined within the report. Mr. Molnar stated that he had received a fax from the County Planning Department which said that they would put migrants within a Special Exception; that the Planning Department is going to propose that to the County Commission tomorrow; that the Special Exception would allow six units per acre. Mayor Gurney stated that on page 15 the report recommends that a "formulation of a Migrant Program to be housed within the County Administration"? that he does not have a problem with that as long as the City has representation as part of it. Mr. Molnar stated that he feels that comment could be made at the Joint Meeting on November 19, 1992 as well. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. Commissioner Atkins left the Commission Chambers at 10:26 p.m. 17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - APPROVAL RE: SHADE AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT = APPROVED THE 60% PLANS EXCEPT FOR SPEED HUMPS TO BE CONTINGENT UPON A SECOND ACTION BY THE COMMISSION AND Book 34 Page 8853 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8854 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. AUTHORIZED PROCEEDING WITH THE FINAL PLANS AND BIDDING PHASE (AGENDA ITEM VI-4) #3 (1738) through (2756) Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, John Minder and Bill Houghton, representing Minder & Rhodes Engineering Corporation, came before the Commission. Mayor Gurney passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Pillot and left the Commission Chambers at 10:27 p.m. Mr. Daughters stated that Mr. Minder was providing some handouts (a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) and Mr. Houghton would make the presentation on the work effort that has been accomplished thus far on the construction plans for Shade Avenue from Bahia Vista Street to the railroad tracks near Novus Street; that they would like the Commission's comments and recommendations on the plans and authorization to proceed through the final design and bidding phase; that the next time this issue is presented to the Commission would be for recommendation for award of contract. Mr. Houghton stated that the typical cross section they chose for this project would be for two 12 foot lanes with curb and gutter on both sides and sidewalks on both sides of the road; that the existing roadway has some small areas that do have curb, but the majority of it does not have any curbs; that to get the two 12 foot lanes there will be some areas that will have to be increased in width varying from one-half foot to a foot on either side of the road. Commissioner Atkins returned to the Commission Chambers at 10:29 p.m. Commissioner Merrill asked what the elevations from the curb to the sidewalks will be because a lot of that area has a fairly steep slope along the edge. Mr. Houghton stated that at 60% completion of plans they have not set the final sidewalk elevations at the right-of-ways. Commissioner Merrill stated that he feels where the sidewalk is put will be a big issue; that if the sidewalk is put back toward the property line, sidewalks will go up and down hills or people's yards will have to be cut quite a bit; that he feels the sidewalk needs to be put right at the back of the curb in a lot of the areas and have the sidewalk be six feet wide. Mr. Daughters stated that that is an option that can be looked at. There was a consensus of the Commission to have the consultants check into having a six foot sidewalk directly behind the curb. Vice Mayor Pillot returned the gavel to Mayor Gurney when he returned to the Commission Chambers at 10:32 p.m. Commissioner Patterson asked about the speed humps shown on the drawing. Mr. Daughters stated that the speed humps were not an item that was previously approved by the Commission or addressed in the preliminary plan; that they are shown on the drawing at the location the consultants would recommend placing them in the event the Commission decides they would be necessary. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would like to see the speed humps included in the bid contingent upon the School Board's approval of them. Commissioner Patterson stated that she felt input on speed humps should be received from the residents in the area before the Commission decides to do it. Commissioner Merrill stated that neighborhood meetings on traffic abatement could be held with the neighborhood; that speed humps are a reminder to drivers that they are supposed to be going slow. Commissioner Atkins stated that he is concerned that the issue of speed humps near schools and hopes it will not become a standard the City goes by. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the 60% plans except for speed humps to be contingent upon a second action by this Commission and that we authorize the proceeding with the final plans and bidding phase. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS = APPROVAL RE: SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 92-3621, AMENDING THE SARASOTA CITY CODE (1986), CHAPTER 33, TO ADD A NEW ARTICLE VIII TO CREATE A RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. = SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING (AGENDA ITEM VI-5) #3 (2760) through (2851) Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the Commission had directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for the residential parking permit program; that the Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed ordinance and is in agreement with the format it is in; that the recommendation is to set this matter for a public hearing. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to set proposed Ordinance No. 92-3621 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 19. NEW BUSINESS = APPROVAL RE: CONCEPT OF MURAL TO BE PLACED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CITY HALL ANNEX BUILDING = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #3 (2853) through (2875) Book 34 Page 8855 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8856 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Pillot asked whether all of the Commissioners had viewed the proposed work. The Commissioners all stated that they had viewed it. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the mural. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Gurney, yes. 20. BOARD APPOINTMENTS = (AGENDA ITEM VIII) #3 (2876) through (2877) There were no board appointments. 21. REMARKS OF COMMISBIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA = INSTRUCTED THE CITY ENGINEER TO ADVISE THE COMMISSION OF THE COST FOR INSTALLING AN EIGHT FOOT SIDEWALK FROM U.S. 41 TO THE HUDSON BAYOU BRIDGE = INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO CHECK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF CLOSING STREETS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA ON SATURDAYS TO ALLOW RESTAURANTS TO SERVE FOOD FROM BOOTHS ON THE SIDEWALKS = INSTRUCTED THE CITY ENGINEER TO PROVIDE THE COMMISSION A STATUS REPORT WITH AN ANTICIPATED DATE OF INSTALLATION OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT GOLDEN GATE POINT (AGENDA ITEM IX) #3 (2875) through #4 (0253) COMMISSIONER ATKINS: A. stated that he wanted to invite the Commissioners to go down Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Way in the near future and see the new activities going on in the community relating to the new store fronts which are being done with help from the City as well as the proprietors; that he wanted to thank the Commission for "sticking" with the community on this. COMMISSIONER MERRILL: A. stated that as part of the bayfront plan, the Commission had approved building an eight foot sidewalk from Selby Gardens to Orange Avenue; however, another sidewalk in the area that is in need of attention is from U.S. 41 to the Hudson Bayou Bridge; that he feels that area of sidewalk needs to be widened to eight feet also. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would like to take a look at the area before making a decision and she would also like to know what the expense would be for such a project. Commissioner Merrill stated that if there was a consensus of the Commission, they could instruct the City Engineer to check into the cost that would be involved to answer Commissioner Patterson's question. It was the consensus of the Commission to instruct the City Engineer to advise the Commission of the cost for installing an eight foot sidewalk from U.S. 41 to the Hudson Bayou Bridge. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: A. stated that a friend who was at one of the outdoor areas in downtown during the French Film Festival mentioned that having the streets around Selby Five Points Park closed was charming because it allowed the restaurants to serve food on the sidewalks; that she wondered whether this might be something the City should discuss with the Downtown Association to see whether the merchants would be interested in doing this on a more regular basis instead of only for special events. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that it might be a good idea as long as it did not impact parking. City Manager Sollenberger stated that he would check on this; that during opera season it might create a conflict. Commissioner Merrill stated that another street he feels might also be considered would be closing Lemon Avenue on Saturday mornings from the Farmers' Market to Pineapple Park. Mr. Sollenberger stated that there are several antique shops facing Lemon Avenue that would be impacted. Deputy City Manager Pete Schneider stated that the City has instituted a policy whereby two-thirds of the businesses have to approve the closing of a street. It was the consensus of the Commission to refer the possibility of this matter to the Administration. B. stated that she is not willing to spend $9,000 for Voice Mail for the Commission and she hopes it will not go forward without a vote. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he is not in favor of that expenditure either. VICE MAYOR PILLOT: A. stated that he wanted to thank City Auditor and Clerk Robinson for the report on vacancies coming up for the Advisory Boards; that the report was well done and informative. Mr. Robinson stated that he still needs applications for these vacancies. Vice Mayor Pillot asked whether the Commission was going to hold firm on its decision to not consider non-City residents for these vacancies because he would not encourage people who are not City residents to apply if that is the case. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would always vote "no" to non-City residents for vacancies to Advisory Boards. Book 34 Page 8857 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8858 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Mayor Gurney stated that he feels it is always desirable to get a City resident; however, rather than have vacancies go unfilled, he would approve non-City residents. Commissioner Patterson stated that she was not ready to approve non-City residents yet because the Commission takes the advice of these Advisory Boards seriously; that if someone had a business in the City, owned property in the City, or lived in the City, she would be in favor of them. Commissioner Atkins stated that he felt they should try to appoint a City resident, but if that is not possible, he would support a County resident. MAYOR GURNEY: A. stated that he had received a letter from Ms. Suzanne Galle, which reads as follows: "I am very much pleased with all the efforts made to beautify our shoreline. It is a great undertaking. What I want to ask you, would it be possible to have the trees trimmed too? I am a resident at 707 S. Gulfstream Avenue, Apt. 205, overlooking the Bay. When I bought this apartment four years ago, I had a view of the water through the trees. Now the two big trees have grown so wide, that they not only obstruct my view, but also suffocate the three palm trees that were planted between them. I hope you will fulfill my request, it is not such a big expense and all my neighbors on the first and second floor will be grateful to you." Mayor Gurney stated that he lives on the fourth floor of a condominium on Gulfstream Avenue that also looks out into trees; that he feels they need to be trimmed. Commissioner Patterson asked how trees could be trimmed so that everyone on the first, second, third, and fourth floors can see through them. Mayor Gurney stated that he knew there would not be an unobstructed view of the Bay, but some of the trees do need to be trimmed. Commissioner Patterson stated that there was a big difference between trimming trees and thinning trees out a little bit; that it requires expertise to thin trees. Mayor Gurney stated that he knows Commissioner Patterson is knowledgeable about this matter and he would show her the trees in question. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the City does not have a regular tree trimming program and it can be quite expensive; that he feels the Commission will need to look at a tree trimming program as it relates to street lighting if the City is interested in greater illumination. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City may need to develop a budget for tree maintenance. B. asked whether the traffic light at Golden Gate Point was going to be a reality and when. City Engineer Daughters stated that they will be going out to bid on this in a few weeks. Mayor Gurney asked whether they could anticipate the light being installed by the end of the year. Mr. Daughters stated that traffic signals take a longer time from award of contract to actual installation because of the supply of the materials, sO he does not feel it would be by the end of this year; that the bidding process would take longer than that; that he could work up a schedule based on what they know now. Mayor Gurney stated that he would like to have a report that would provide a date specific or very close to a date specific. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he would like a copy of that report also. Mr. Daughters stated that he would provide the Commission with a copy of the report. 22. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS = CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ADVISED THE COMMISSION OF A NEED FOR A SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING FOR THE 50-YEAR VISION PLAN - APPROVED HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED NUDITY ORDINANCE AT ITS REGULAR MEETING ON DECEMBER 21, 1992 (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (0254) through (0343) CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that he wanted to advise the Commission that a Special Commission meeting would need to be called for Joel Freedman from Design Studios West (DSW) to present the three alternatives for the 50-year Plan; that January 8 had been suggested for that meeting from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he would be out of town on that date and would be returning on January 10. Mr. Robinson stated that he would check the schedule for an alternative date. B. asked whether all the Commissioners were going to be present for the December 21 regular meeting. The Commissioners stated they would all be present. Mr. Robinson stated that that is when the nudity ordinance will be brought for a public hearing. Commissioner Atkins asked which nudity ordinance. Mr. Robinson stated that it is the one similar to the St. Johns ordinance. Commissioner Atkins stated that he would like to wait to hold the public hearing until after the New Year. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to postpone the nudity hearing for three months. Book 34 Page 8859 11/16/92 6:00 P.M. Book 34 Page 8860 11/16/92 6:00 P.M... Vice Mayor Pillot stated that he has been receiving a lot of telephone calls from residents who are asking for this ordinance as soon as possible and he is not in favor of delaying it. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would prefer a four-year delay. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the public should be given an opportunity to speak on this and if she is not in favor of it, she can vote against it at that time. Mayor Gurney called for the vote on the motion. Motion failed (3 to 2): Atkins, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Gurney, no. City Attorney Taylor stated that the proposed ordinance would be distributed to the Commission tomorrow. CITY MANAGER SOLLENBERGER: A. stated that he wanted to remind the Commission of the Joint Meeting with the County Commission on Thursday, November 19, 1992. 23. ADJOURN = (AGENDA ITEM XI) #4 (0364) The Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of November 16, 1992 was adjourned at 11:12 p.m. Ku JACK GURNEY, MAYOR ATTEST: e / illy & Rabenson BILLY E/ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK 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 WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: 707 Freeling Drive XCrTY i: COUNTY 11 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUNTY NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: Sarasota Sarasota City of Sarasota DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS: November 16, 1992 -X ELECTIVE 13 APPOINTIVE 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 of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular 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: A 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 (other 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 ofthe 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 reçording 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 FORNI *B 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 November 16 19. 92 (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 vote was taken to delay the removal of 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. More hihiou Date Filed 4bs/32 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