BOOK 53 Page 24555 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 2002, AT 2:30 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Carolyn J. Mason, Vice Mayor Lou Ann R. Palmer, Commissioners Richard F. Martin, Mary J. Quillin, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Michael A. McNees, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mason The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9(a) of the City of Sarasota Charter at 2:30 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY = APPROVED CD 2:30 through 2:31 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove Approval of Minutes, Item No. II-1, Minutes of the Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of December 16, 2002, per the request of City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. B. Add under Commission Presentations, Item No. VIII-4, Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1575 re: recognition of the passing of Dale Shields, known as "The Pelican Man. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 2. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM I) CD 2:31 through 2:32 The following individual came before the Commission: Ian Black, 2 North Tamiami Trail (34232), representing Action Central, stated that he has previously communicated with the Commissioners via electronic mail but is taking the time to personally come before the Commission at the present time to provide a reminder for two ground-breaking events taking place on January 11, 2003, from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m., on Central Avenue north of Tenth Street; that all members of the community are invited and particularly the Commissioners to celebrate neighborhood growth and renewal at the kick-off party for the Action Central Revitalization Project and the Sarasota Green Marketplace, which is an environmentally conscious market organized by Green World Cafe; that the hope is the Action Central Revitalization Project will set a new model for neighborhood revitalization as work with the City continues to rejuvenate a somewhat forgotten portion of Central Avenue between Tenth and Fifteenth Streets; that the Mayor will be present for the ribbon-cutting and dedication ceremony being held at 10 a.m.; that local children from Harvest Tabernacle and the local neighborhood will combine with the artists in the community to paint a mura.l and sign which will eventually mark the gateway to the Action Central Community. Mr. Black stated that the hope is Commissioners will take time to attend the event and witness the exciting new approach to urban renewal. 3. BOARD ACTIONS RE: REPORT RE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF DEÇEMBER 10, 2002 SET HISTORIC DESIGNATION APPLICATION NO. 03-HD-01 FOR PUBLIC HEARING; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM III-1) CD 2:32 through 2:33 Christopher Wenzel, Chair of the Historic Preservation Board, and John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission. Mr. Wenzel presented the following item from the December 10, 2002, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board: Historic Designation Application No. 03-HD-01 1770 North Tamiami Trail: The Twin Motel Mr. Wenzel stated that Historic Designation Application No. 03-HD-01 is for property located at 1770 North Tamiami Trail, BOOK 53 Page 24556 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24557 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. historically known as the Twin Motel; that the County Department of Historical Resources staff determined the property possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, and association and is of historic significance; that at its December 10, 2002, meeting, the Historic Preservation Board held a public hearing and voted 4 to 0 with Member Little abstaining to recommend Commission approval based on Section IV-806 (A)1, Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) as follows: 1. Exemplifies or reflects the broad cultural, political, economic or social history of the City of Sarasota, Sarasota County, the State of Florida, or the United States of America Mr. Wenzel stated that the Twin Motel exemplifies and reflects the broad cultural, economic and social history of the City of Sarasota by its representation of a World War II era motel. Mr. Burg stated that Staff recommends setting Historic Designation Application No. 03-HD-01 for public hearing. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to set Historic Designation Application No. 03-HD-01 for public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to receive the board report of the December 10 I 2002, Regular Historic Preservation Board meeting. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian; Mason, yes. 4. BOARD ACTIONS RE: : REPORT RE: : COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADVISORY BOARD' S REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 2002 = APPROVED TO TRANSFER 3.17 ACRES OF PUBLIC PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 15 THROUGH 24, THE LEMON AVENUE PARKING LOT, 1 FROM THE CITY TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, i RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM III-2-A AND -B) CD 2:33 through 2:42 Marsha Wood, Chair of the Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board, Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, and David Cardwell, Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Special Legal Counsel, came before the Commission. Chair Wood presented the following item from the December 17, 2002, meeting of the CRA Advisory Board: Transfer of 3.17 acres of public property known as lots 15 through 24, the Lemon Avenue parking lot, located at First Street and Lemon Avenue. Chair Wood stated that the potential for redevelopment of approximately 3.17 acres of public property was discussed by the CRA Advisory Board; that the Commission can expedite the process by transferring the ownership of the public property to the CRA; that the public land is in the Community Redevelopment Area; that the CRA can publish a Notice of Invitation to submit proposals and Disposition of Real Property for the 3.17 acres of public property and explore redevelopment potential within the Community Redevelopment Area to further the objectives of the plan for the Community Redevelopment Area also known as the City of Sarasota, Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020); that the CRA Advisory Board recommends the Commission transfer approximately 3.17 acres of public property to the CRA for disposition. Chair Wood continued that the CRA Advisory Board has been operating for approximately four months; that a presentation of a preliminary concept plan for the Sarasota Downtown Center also known as the Whole Foods project for the approximately 3.17 acre site was presented at the December 17, 2002, meeting; that the CRA Advisory Board raised some very difficult questions at the meeting which could not be answered at the time; however, the CRA Advisory Board was enthusiastic and reached consensus to instruct Staff to move forward on the project by developing a more definitive Term Sheet than presented at the meeting; that the hope is the Term Sheet will lead to a Development Agreement; that a motion to keep the proposed project moving was approved unanimously; that the report being presented at the present time will advise the Commission of the findings of the meeting. Attorney Cardwell stated that the CRA Advisory Board was very anxious to begin projects; that the Whole Foods project is the first project undertaken by the CRA Advisory Board; that additional projects have been presented; that the Commission is requested. to appreciate the undertaking of the first project of the CRA Advisory Board; that being first can be advantageous and disadvantageous; that the process will likely include both advantages and disadvantages; that the CRA Advisory Board was pleased with the proposed project and Term Sheet presented; that BOOK 53 Page 24558 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24559 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. the proposal from the Developer, Casto Southeast, is consistent with the tenets of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the Term Sheet is the result of an attempt to structure the terms of the project between the CRA and the Developer; that the Term Sheet is a work in progress. Attorney Cardwell referred to the Term Sheet previously presented to the CRA Advisory Board and stated that a number of opening disclaimers exist in the opening paragraph; that disclaimers provide a beginning; that the goal in developing the initial Term Sheet was to establish a framework for the project; that additional detail is being prepared which includes arriving at numbers as well as testing and validating numbers; that the Term Sheet includes a request from the Developer for the conveyance of certain property currently owned by the City which has been used as parking lots to the Developer to become part of the overall project site; that in addition, the other portion of the project consists of privately owned property which will be conveyed to the project in a manner which has not yet been determined; that the desire going forward is for maximum flexibility; that a revision to the State Statutes exists allowing a CRA to convey property to a developer through a fair market value process; that fair market value is being used as a basis for the process; that the desire is for the CRA to begin the process rather than the City; that the State Statutes indicate a City and its CRA can convey property back and forth for no consideration and with no formalities; that to authorize the CRA to publish a Notice of Invitation to submit proposals and Disposition of Real Property for the 3.17 acres at the present time does not mean the conveyance would take place; that a conveyance to the Developer will not take place until a Development Agreement is in place; that the hope is to have a Development Agreement in place without having to wait 30 days; that the project is on a very tight schedule due to the lease agreement between Whole Foods and the Developer; that simultaneous conveyances are desired; that the first step in the process is to make the property available for the project; that the action of transferring ownership of the property will be reversed if the project does not come to fruition. Commissioner Quillin stated that reversing the action if the project falls through is not desired; that the desire is development of the area; that conveying the 3.17 acres to the CRA is supported; that the Community Redevelopment Area is designed for redevelopment. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to transfer approximately 3.17 acres of public property known as lots 15 through 24, the Lemon Avenue Parking Lot, from the City to the Community Redevelopment Agency. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to receive the report of the December 17 I 2002, Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board meeting. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian; Mason, yes. The Commission recessed at 2:42 p.m. into a Special meeting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and reconvened at 2:54 p.m. 5. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, AND 14 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM IV-A) CD 2:54 through 2:54 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute Agreement No. 03CON000030 (Attachment 1) between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an agreement between the City of Sarasota and the County of Sarasota regarding a grant from the West Coast Inland Navigation District to allow for the reimbursement of funds expended by the City of Sarasota for the removal of derelict vessels within the City limits that may cause a safety hazard to persons or marine life. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Sarasota Convention and Visitors Bureau for an additional one-year period with an option to renew for the last four years of the term originally contemplated in the 1993 Lease Agreement. 4. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Usage Permit between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota Military Academy, Inc., to use the City-owned parcel of real property located just west of Orange Avenue immediately adjacent to the BOOK 53 Page 24560 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24561 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. north of the railroad right-of-way which crosses Orange Avenue just slightly to the north of Tenth Street. 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an agreement between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County Public Hospital Board regarding the relocation of the police substation. 6. Approval Re: Award a contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the contract between the City of Sarasota and Lovin Construction, Inc., (Bid No. 02-60M) for the construction of speed tables on an as-needed basis. 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Geyer-Dickinson, a Florida General Partnership, pertaining to proposed annexation of a 35,000 square foot parcel contiguous to the City limits. 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an agreement for roadway improvements between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County Public Hospital Board. 9. Approval Re: Ratification of Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. (PBA), dated December 26, 2002, to amend and modify the two existing Contract Agreements between the City of Sarasota and the PBA. 10. Approval Re: Authorize the Director of Human Resources to sign the renewal of stop-loss insurance through RMTS Associates, L.L.C., effective January 1 through December 31, 2003. 11. Approval Re: Proposed 2003-2004 Budget Calendar. 12. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to negotiate a contract and the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract between the City of Sarasota and CartéGraph Systems, Inc., to replace the obsolete database application used to track maintenance records on equipment and vehicles serviced by the City. 13. Approval Re: Authorize staff to proceed with Zoning Text Amendments for the first cycle in 2003. 14. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Second Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between Sarasota County and the City of Sarasota regarding Design and Construction Management Services for the St. Armands Drainage Improvement Project. On motion of Commission Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 through 14, inclusive. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yesi Mason, yes. 6. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2 ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1564) ADOPTED ; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1565) = ADOPTED ; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1568) ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1570) - ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1571) = ADOPTED; ITEM 6 (RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1574) = ADOPTED; ITEM 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4420) -= ADOPTED ; ITEM 8 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4423) = ADOPTED, ; AND ITEM 9 (ORDINANCE NO. 03-4424) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-B) CD 2:55 through 3:01 1. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1564, approving Major Conditional Use Application No. 02-CU-13 to allow the renovation and expansion of an existing church in the Multiple Family Residential-2 (RMF-2) Zone District on property located at 1680 18th Street, as more particularly described herein; requiring the expansion of the existing church be constructed in accordance with approved Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-40; setting forth conditions of approval; etc. (Title Only) (Application No. 02-CU-13, Applicant McAllister General Contractors, Inc., as agent for Bethlehem Baptist Church, Inc., owner). 2. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1565, granting G Zone Waiver Application No. 02-GZW-07 regarding a waiver applicable to property located on the northeast corner of Bradenton Road and 36th Street at 3530 Bradenton Road; said property being owned by the City of Sarasota upon which an existing fire station is located and operated by Sarasota Countyi said property being located in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District; said waiver consisting of a waiver of ten (10) feet from the required twenty (20) foot combined side-yard setback adjacent to 36th Street to enable BOOK 53 Page 24562 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24563 01/06/03 2:30 P.M.. the replacement of the existing fire station with a new fire station; approving Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-54 depicting the proposed new fire station; setting forth terms and conditions of approval; etc. (Title Only) Application Nos. 02-GZW-07 and 02-SP-54, Applicant, Peter Horstman, AIA, or Barger & Dean Architects, Inc., as Agent, for Sarasota County Public Works, Building Construction Services). 3. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1568, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against all real or personal property owned by the violator for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only). 4. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1570, appropriating $10,000 from the unappropriated fund balance of the Community Redevelopment Trust Fund to provide funding for an economic feasibility study and legal fees for the Sarasota Downtown Center Project, etc. 5. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1571, appropriating $165,000 from the West Coast Inland Navigation Contribution to provide partial funding to replace 256 feet of seawall on the westerly end of Tenth Street adjoining the Coast Guard Auxiliary, etc. 6. Adoption Re: Resolution No. 03R-1574, appropriating $18,750 from the Department of Juvenile Justice Fund (191) to provide funds to the Mayor's Drug Free Communities to pay for work performed during the last three months of the 2001-02 Department of Juvenile Justice Grant period, etc. 7. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4420, amending Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 3, Police; amending Section 24-76, Credited Service for Military Service Prior to Employment; amending Section 24-77, Prior Police Service; amending Section 24-81, Special Provisions and Limitations Federal; amending Section 24-83, Miscellaneous Provisions; amending Section 24-90, Direct Transfers of Eligible Rollover Distributions; providing for severability of the parts hereof if declared invalid; repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith; etc. (Title Only). 8. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4423, to amend Chapter 21, Offenses, Article VII, Advertising, to create Sections 21-161 and 21-162 to Prohibit Advertising Vehicles and Watercraft; setting forth findings as to intent and purpose; providing definitions; setting forth exceptions; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title Only). 9. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4424, amending Ordinance No. 98-4051 to reflect the approval and substitution of Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-43 for a portion of previously approved Development Plan 98-DPR-B; said Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-43 pertains to the completion of a mixed-use project commonly known as the Renaissance of Sarasota located on property bounded on the west by North Tamiami Trail, on the east by Cocoanut Avenue, on the south by Boulevard of the Arts (formerly Sixth Street), and on the north by the Players Theatre; Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-43 does not include the existing residential condominium located on lot 1 of the plat of the Renaissance of Sarasota and does not include lot 2 shown on said plat which is the now vacant southwest corner parcel of the property; providing for the repeal of ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) (Application Nos. 02-ROA-08, 02-SP- 43, and 01-SUB-02, Applicant Joel Freedman AICP, as agent representing the Sarasota Renaissance Limited Partnership as owner). City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. 03-1570, 03R-1571, and 03R-1574 in their entirety and proposed Resolution Nos. 03R-1564, 03R-1565, and 03R-1568, and proposed Ordinance Nos. 03-4420, 03-4423, and 03-4424 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 9, inclusive. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. City Manager McNees stated that Kurt Hoverter, the new Human Resources Director, is present in the Commission Chambers and should be recognized and welcomed; that Consent Agenda Item BOOK 53 Page 24564 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24565 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. No. 1, Item 9, concerning ratification of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. (PBA), dated December 26, 2002, to amend and modify the two existing Contract Agreements between the City of Sarasota and the PBA, was approved by the Commission after Mr. Hoverter's being employed for only seven hours; that the Administration is excited about having Mr. Hoverter on board; that Mr. Hoverter brings a diverse and high quality background to the City. Kurt Hoverter, Director, Human Resources, came before the Commission and stated that he is pleased and excited about his new position with the City and thanked the Commission for the recognition and welcome. 7. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : PARKS, RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD REAPPOINTED ROBERT GOREVAN; APPOINTED BRUCE RINKER (AGENDA ITEM V-1) CD 3:02 through 3:11 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Kenneth McMillen's and Robert Gorevan's terms on the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board have expired; that Mr. McMillen has served two full terms and is therefore not eligible for reappointment; that Mr. Gorevan is eligible and has expressed an interest in reappointment; that two applications have been received. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Gorevan has had some scheduling conflicts in the past and asked if the conflicts are ongoing? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that conversations were held with Mr. Gorevan during the month of December 2002; that Mr. Gorevan indicated in early December 2002 a conflict may exist but did not provide any further notification of a continuing conflict. Vice Mayor Palmer nominated Robert Gorevan for reappointment. Commissioner Servian stated that the nomination of Robert Gorevan is supported. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nomination. Robert Gorevan received five votes. Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the reappointment of Robert Gorevan to the Parks Board. Commissioner Martin nominated Bruce Rinker for the open seat. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the nomination of Bruce Rinker is supported. Commissioner Quillin stated that the applications received are impressive but preference is given to a City resident and nominated Richard Clapp. Commissioner Servian stated that the nomination of Richard Clapp is supported. Commissioner Martin stated that having served on the Parks Board, an important factor to consider is having an individual with a scientific background which is the case with Mr. Rinker; that a long-term goal has been for the Parks Board to have representation from environmental institutions such as Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium and Marie Selby Botanical Gardens (Selby Gardens); ; that Mr. Rinker is an Ecologist and Director of Research and Conservation at Selby Gardensi; that the staff of Selby Gardens was personally requested to bring forward a nomination; that the desire to appoint a City resident is respected; however, Mr. Rinker spends many hours in the City and is deeply aware of the City's needs. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the Board Membership Qualifications and Other Requirements, outlined in the Parks Board Summary indicate the following: a) The membership of the Board shall consist of persons who possess the technical, professional, financial, business or administrative skills necessary to accomplish the work of the Board b) Unless provided otherwise, the Board shall include persons who reside within the City, unless business qualifications or a special expertise warrants an exception to the residency/Property ownership criteria. BOOK 53 Page 24566 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24567 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Vice Mayor Palmer continued that Mr. Rinker's special qualifications and expertise warrant an exception to the residency criteria; that Mr. Rinker will lend tremendous expertise to the Parks Board; that the nomination for Mr. Rinker is strongly supported. Mayor Mason stated that the nomination of Mr. Rinker is supported. Commissioner Quillin stated that the desire is for City residents or property owners as Board Members on the various City advisory boards; that the exception for a Board member from Mote Marine has been made; that Mr. McMillen resided in District 2; that currently three members are from District 2 including Mr. McMillin's seat, two are from District 3, one is from District 1, and one resides outside the City; that Mr. Rinker has excellent credentials; however, the Commission is reminded to maintain balance within the Board and to maintain favorable representation from all areas of the City; that having a significant portion of non-City residents serving on Boards is a concern; that Board members who are not City residents may not understand the desires of City residents. Commissioner Servian stated that Mr. Clapp's application came forward as a result of discussions held with the Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Association (IBSSA); that the IBSSA is actively involved in beautification; that Mr. Rinker's credentials are far superior to many applications previously received; that Mr. Rinker's credentials will lend remarkable expertise to the Parks Board; however, Mr. Clapp is encouraged to stay in touch with the Commission; that the makeup of the Parks Board could change; that an opening may exist in the future if Mr. Gorevan has problems fulfilling his duties; that Mr. Clapp is thanked for submitting the application; that the application will remain on file; that the nomination of Mr. Rinker is supported. Mayor Mason called for the vote on the nominations. Bruce Rinker received five votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Bruce Rinker to the Parks Board. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Mr. McMillen has served as Chair on the Parks Board for six years; that a request is for special recognition of Mr. McMillen's efforts at the next Regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Quillin stated that the plan is to recognize all members of the City's advisory boards which would be the appropriate time to recognize the efforts of Mr. McMillen. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the plan is to recognize all of the members of the City's advisory boards after all the replacements have been addressed. 8. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : VAN WEZEL PERFORMING ARTS HALL BOARD - APPOINTED JERRY ROUCHER (AGENDA ITEM V-2) CD 3:11 through 3:12 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Helen McBean's term on the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) Board has expired; that Ms. McBean has served two full terms and is therefore not eligible for reappointment; that four applications for the vacancy have been received. Vice Mayor Palmer nominated Jerry Roucher. Commissioner Martin stated that the nomination of Jerry Roucher is supported. Commissioner Quillin stated that the nomination of Jerry Roucher is supported. Commissioner Martin stated that additional applications have been received; that Mr. Jonker is personally known; that other positions will become available in the future; that consideration of the additional applicants, should positions become available, is desired. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the applications will remain on file. Mayor Mason asked for the nominations and, hearing none, called for the vote on the nomination. Jerry Roucher received five votes: Martin, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Mason, yes. BOOK 53 Page 24568 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24569 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Mayor Mason announced the appointment of Jerry Roucher to the VWPAH Board. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE LIDO POOL (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) CD 3:12 through 3:42 Mayor Mason stated that the item concerning the Lido Pool was placed on the Agenda at the request of Vice Mayor Palmer and Commissioner Servian. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the first report provided by Staff at the November 18, 2002, Regular Commission meeting regarding the cost, restoration, and refurbishing of the Lido Pool, as well as the replacement, renovation, and estimated budget of the renovation was requested and provided as additional Agenda backup material; that the Lido Pool eplacement/Removation Estimated Budget is $400,000; that funding sources of $326,000 have been identified, $125,000 of which is identified as being provided by the County; that the County has not been formally contacted for additional funding; that the options concerning the Lido Pool were discussed at the September 17, 2002, Joint Sarasota City and County Commission Special meeting; that two County Commissioners supported contributing approximately $200,000; that the County should be contacted again; that replacing the Lido Pool should move forward; that funding will likely be received; that raising private funds has been discussed; that a significant amount of funding is currently available to commit to the project; that the pool should be opened as soon as possible; that the rationale for moving the project forward has been supported and provided. Commissioner Servian stated that personal concerns and desires concerning the Lido Pool are very strong and are well known; that the pool has not been operational since September 14, 2001, through no fault of the citizens but a result of neglectful management and lack of maintenance of the facility which was compounded by the wrath of Tropical Storm Gabrielle; that the Lido Pool was in a decrepit condition prior to the arrival of Tropical Storm Gabrielle; that the City owes the residents who used the Lido Pool and should be responsible for bringing the Lido Pool back in-service as soon as possible; that the funding is short by $75,000; that pressure should be placed on the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners to come forward with the funding; that the County has not contributed any funding toward maintenance for the Lido Pool since 2002; that the County has an obligation to provide the funding; that the Lido Pool will be the centerpiece for the Lido Beach area and will be replaced in the same location; that the public will not be served by holding up the replacement of the Lido Pool; that the long-term master plan of the Lido Beach area is a separate issue which can be addressed in conjunction with the replacement of the Lido Pool; that the Lido Pool should be opened as soon as possible with as much of the historic value being retained as possible; that certain elements of the Lido Pool which are in poor condition such as the diving platform could possibly be funded through the Sarasota Historical Society. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Administration was directed to begin the process to proceed with construction of the Lido Pool at the December 16, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that the existing Lido Pool cannot be saved; that the realization is the Lido Pool will not be the pool in which she swam as a child; that reconstructing the Lido Pool and having further construction around the pool at a later date is not desired; that the Task Force which was formed to consider the Lido Pool should have a time limit of 60 days to bring forth recommendations; that a new Lido Casino will not be built; that recommendations being brought back will incorporate a new pool; that the original tower for the diving platform should be saved, restored, and placed somewhere on the property as a lookout tower; that the diving platform is very attractive; that a commemorative plaque should be placed in remembrance of the Jack Betz Pool and the Lido Casino; that the design should also incorporate the sea horses which were on the original property; that a contact is available to create reproductions of the sea horses; that the construction should be done at one time; that constructing a pool as soon as possible and then performing more construction at a later date is not a good idea; that performing construction all at once will cut the costs of pool decking; that performing the construction of the area all at once is practical; that the Task Force should bring back a plan within 60 days; that the costs will then be evident; that funding is currently short; that discussions should take place with the County concerning the County's contribution of funding toward the pool; that special appropriations of funding to improve the area is supported; that the present Lido Pool is a disgrace to the City; that the Lido Pool is not appealing and is not conducive to enjoyment; that the Lido Pool was enjoyed as a child and young adult; that the Lido Pool cannot be saved; that being practical is the desire at the present time; that the Lido Pool and Lido Beach area should be addressed as a complete project. BOOK 53 Page 24570 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24571 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Martin stated that a significant amount of feeling and emotion surrounds the issue concerning the Lido Pool; that the memories and emotions of fellow Commissioners are respected; however, moving forward with the project at the present time is not supported; that the process has involved a Task Force and a Town Meeting; that a Task Force and a Town Meeting originally made sense; that the options presented by the Administration for the Commission to consider made sense; that performing a portion of the construction does not make sense; that the project should be well thought out and performed in a grand manner; that the remarks of Commissioner Quillin are supported and make sense; that sufficient funding is not available at the present time; that informal discussions have been held with the County indicating the County may not contribute over $125,000; that additional funding may be identified but will likely be from funding which has been committed to other City projects; that sufficient funding is not available; that a significant number of questions exist; that the Task Force can assist with the questions, obtaining funding, and achieving consensusi that constructing the pool at the present time may compromise the larger portion of the project and may not address issues as to the reasons the pool has not been utilized in the pasti that the pool, aside from the present condition, is obscured, unattractive and uninviting; that $400,000 is not sufficient funding to address the changing rooms which are in poor condition or the unattractive landscaping and fencing; that $400,000 will only construct the pool; that the Task Force should move forward and bring back information and ideas; that the project should be addressed as a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) in the fiscal year (FY) 2003/04 budget; that the stand taken concerning the Lido Pool issue is with full respect of fellow Commissioners' desires concerning the project. Mayor Mason stated that the differing opinions of fellow Commissioners concerning the Lido Pool project are respected; that the comments made by Commissioner Quillin regarding the Task Force and constructing the project at one time are supported; that the desires of Commissioner Servian and her constituents are also respected; however, allowing the Task Force to bring back a plan concerning the Lido Pool and Lido Beach area is in the best interest of all City residents. Commissioner Servian stated that a reason not to proceed on both fronts is not understood; that the Task Force was formed in November 2002; that the Administration was directed to work with the Task Force; that the work which is being performed by the Task Force is not known; that the Task Force should be able to respond with a plan for the Lido Pool within 30 to 45 days; that the Commission should take action to enable Staff to move forward with constructing the Lido Pool; that including the project in the CIP will cause a year to year and a half delay in construction of the pool; that an additional year and a half delay is an excessive length of time to expect citizens to wait due to the Commission's desire to construct the project as a whole; that constructing the project as a whole is a good vision; however, the Task Force and Staff can work together to have the project completed in a timely fashion; that Staff is requesting a motion sO the process can begin to replace the pool. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the comments made by Commissioner Servian are supported; that the concept is to open the pool as soon as possible; that the Task Force has indicated the concern was to have the pool operational as soon as possible; that the overall plan for the Lido Pool and Lido Beach area is long term and will not occur overnight; that the intent is for the Task Force to bring forth ideas and information; that Staff can develop a proposal, a plan, and an established design; that bids have not been requested; that the bid process will take time; that the hope was the pool would be open by Labor Day weekend in September 2003; that individual Commissioner's opinions are respected; however, moving forward with construction of the Lido Pool is supported; that the Lido Pool is an integral portion of future endeavors in the Lido Beach area; that the location of the Lido Pool will not change; that the present location of the Lido Pool makes sense; the delaying the plans and construction of the pool is not in the best interest of the community; that the Task Force will require more than 60 days to compile ideas to bring forth a short-range as well as a long-range plan; that the preference is to move forward with the construction and opening of the Lido Pool and then to review the Task Force's recommendations for long-range plans which will include all the amenities for the project. City Manager McNees stated that the issue regarding the Task Force requires clarification; that a Task Force does not exist at the present time; that at the time Staff raised the issue with the Commission, Staff recommended to move forward with either the reconstruction or restoration of the pool immediately and follow up with a Task Force; that the Administration informed the Commission the only urgent issue was getting the pool operational; that an urgency did not exist for developing a long-term master plan for amenities in the Lido Beach area; that at the December 2, 2002, Regular Commission meeting, the Administration, pursuant to the Commission's direction, indicated a Task Force would be BOOK 53 Page 24572 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24573 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. constituted after the December 2002 holiday season, beginning in January 2003; that the Commission did not direct the construction of the pool; that the Commission's preference was to hear an item later in the Agenda from a private group who had formed a Lido Pool Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Chris Blue, George Peter Ryan, President, Lido Key Resident's Association, and Arnold Berns, President, Sarasota Historical Society; that the Ad Hoc Committee made a presentation at the meeting; that the Commission took no action. Chris Blue, 1844 Oak View Drive (34232), representing Lido Key Residents Association and the Sarasota Historical Society, came before the Commission and stated that he is confused; that a significant number of challenges face city governments; that the City is being faced with a challenge; that the Commission is thanked for focusing time and attention on the Lido Pool; that the Commission's efforts are appreciated by members of the Lido Key Residents Association and the Sarasota Historical Society and his mother; that the Lido Pool is an obvious point of contention which is shocking; that the original Ad Hoc Committee supports moving towards the construction of the Lido Pool; that opening the Lido Pool as soon as possible is the desire and is important; that a number of proprietorships on Lido Key are losing money as a result of the closure of the Lido Pool; that individuals are concerned about a lack of momentum; that losing momentum will cause the pool to become filled with sand and become part of the beach; that the pool will be forgotten; that the project should move forward as a grander master plan or as a separate component is supported; that 30 to 60 days is ample time for the Ad Hoc Committee or a Task Force to provide a rendering and recommendations for reconstruction of the Lido Pool; that a decision is required at the present time if the Lido Pool is to open by Labor Day weekend in September 2003; that proprietorships experiencing difficulties with rental properties on Lido Beach have voiced support and a willingness of being financially supportive of reconstruction of the Lido Pool; that the hope was an Ad Hoc Committee would have already addressed local proprietorships" willingness to contribute funds and support the construction of the Lido Pool; that the efforts of the Commission are appreciated. Mayor Mason asked the length of time necessary to compile a Task Force? City Manager McNees stated that forming a Task Force will not take long; that 60 to 90 days is estimated as the time the Task Force will require to bring forth final results; that reconstructing the pool was the original issue of urgencyi that the issue was expanded to include a long-term master plan for the site; that the long-term master plan was not urgent but was a good concept; that a community desire for enhancing the site was revealed; that the issue has now come full circle; that reconstructing the pool is a priority; that reconstruction of the pool was not included in the FY 2002/03 budget and was not a part of the Commission's previous discussions concerning priorities; that reconstruction of the Lido Pool as well as development of a long-term master plan for the site are now urgent priorities; that the Administration will establish the reconstruction of the Lido Pool and the long-term master plan for the site as high priorities if the Commission desires. Mayor Mason stated that construction of a new pool is supported; that making the decision to construct the pool while simultaneously creating the Task Force is supported if the time frame to create the Task Force is not long; that the Task Force can bring forth some solid recommendations for the long-term master plan for the site by the time the pool is complete. Commissioner Quillin stated that the previous comments arose as the $400,000 cost does not include additional decking, a new fence, or additional amenities; that public input should be received concerning all issues; that the Task Force should address all the issues; that the decking around the pool should be larger and should tie into existing areas; that people should be able to sit and drink coffee while someone is doing laps in the Lido Pool; that the buildings on the site have deficiencies for which the County is responsible; that the County has not addressed or remedied the deficiencies; that $400,000 is just for a pool; that the cost covers a hole in the ground with water; that additional amenities and ideas such as preserving the tower for the diving platform should be addressed by the Task Force; that moving forward with the project in the same manner as the Skateboard Park project is not desired; that costs of $600,000 for the Skateboard Park project did not include landscaping, restrooms, or any additional amenities; that projects become lost in translation; that Lido Beach is too important to the City; that Lido Beach is the City beach; that the Task Force can report back with suggestions for improvements to existing amenities; that more decking could be poured for a possible cafe; that the County's Lido Beach vendor may be able to expand; that the sea horses from the original Lido Casino could be incorporated into the design; that the cost of $400,000 does not include landscaping or a new fence; that a chain-link fence is not desired; that a decorative BOOK 53 Page 24574 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24575 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. type fence around the area would be appropriate and would make the area appealing; that people will use the pool if the area is attractive and appealing; that the belief is the Task Force can address all the issues within 30 to 60 days; that funding is not available to add additional amenities at the present time; that allowing a Task Force to address the issues will be more cost effective; that the Lido Pool can easily by constructed by Labor Day weekend in September 2003. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to direct the Administration to replace the Lido Pool. Commissioner Servian stated that discussions concerning the reconstruction of the Lido pool would not be taking place if the pool was not inoperable as a result of Tropical Storm Gabrielle; that the Commission would have moved quickly to reopen the pool if a pump had failed; that the Commission is repeatedly addressing the issue after 16 months; that a long-term master plan if available to the Commission would take years to complete since funding is not available; that most of the funding is available to move forward with the reconstruction of the Lido Pool; that the belief is all the funding will be available upon commencement of the construction; that the County owes the City additional funding for maintenance which was not performed; that private individuals have stepped forward indicating a willingness to contribute funds to further the opening of the pool; that the Lido Pool will be the cornerstone of the Lido Beach area; that amenities such as restrooms, changing areas, and a snack bar are available on the site; that the amenities are not in the best shape; however, improvement of the existing amenities cannot be solved at the present time or over the next 60 days; that a nice rendering of desired amenities may be brought forth by the Task Force within a six-week timeframe; however, funding sources are not available to address the desired amenities; that the majority of the money is in place for reconstruction of the Lido Pool; that reconstruction of the Lido Pool should move forward and the discussion should cease. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the comments made by Commissioner Servian are supported; that the issue has been sufficiently discussed and the Commission should move on. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to direct the Administration to replace the Lido Pool. Motion carried (3 to 2) : Martin, no; Palmer, yes; Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if a Task Force will still be created to address the long-range master plan for the Lido Pool and Beach area? City Manager McNees stated that the Commission has directed the Administration to create a Task Force to address the long-range master plan for the Lido Pool and Beach area. The Commission recessed at 3:41 p.m. and reconvened at 6:00 p.m. 10. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR DECEMBER 2002, MARGARET (PEGGY) J. SAWYER, SR. ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN, OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) CD 6:03 through 6:07 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Manager McNees, Don Hadsell, Director of Housing and Community Development, and Margaret Sawyer, Sr. Accounting Technician, Office of Housing and Community Development and Employee of the Month for December 2002, join her at the Commission table for the presentation. Mr. Hadsell stated that the Office of Housing and Community Development is a joint City/County operation; that Ms. Sawyer has volunteered to serve as the Department's United Way representative, representing both City and County employees; that Ms. Sawyer also graciously took over the task of preparing payroll in the absence of the Department's Administrative Assistant. Mr. Hadsell continued that Ms. Sawyer assisted the County Property Control staff during the annual inventory audit; that all County assets were identified; that Ms. Sawyer processes accounts payable for the Department, assists with accounts payable for grant projects, and assists the City in being a financially responsible City government by ensuring City accounts and County accounts are accurately maintained; that Ms. Sawyer is an excellent volunteer, served many volunteer hours at the first United Way Treasure Hunt Extravaganza, and eagerly steps forward to work on employee events such as decorating the City Hall lobby for the holidays, selling hot dogs for the United Way, and helping fellow employees as necessaryi that Ms. Sawyer is very gracious and always has a smile, making customers feel very welcome and appreciated; that Ms. Sawyer pays attention to detail to ensure all the numbers are accurate. BOOK 53 Page 24576 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24577 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Vice Mayor Palmer presented Ms. Sawyer with a City-logo watch, a plaque and a certificate as the December 2002 Employee of the Month in appreciation of her unique performance with the City; and congratulated her for her outstanding efforts and thanked her for serving with excellence and pride. Ms. Sawyer stated that the recognition is appreciated; expressed gratitude to the Commission, Mr. Hadsell and City Manager McNees as well as fellow employees Mary Jackson, Grant Specialist, Jane Hindall, Program Manager, Office of Housing and Community Development, and Debbie Horst, Manager, Department of Finance; and recognized her son, David Tousignant, and friend, Dave Johnston, present in the audience. 11. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: MAYOR' S CITATION TO CAROLYN FISHEL FOR COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER WORK (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) CD 6:07 through 6:11 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Carolyn Fishel join her and the Commission at the Commission table; read in its entirety the Mayor's Citation recognizing Carolyn Fishel as an exemplary citizen of the City, as evidenced by her desire to serve her neighbors and other City residents in many volunteer capacities which benefit the public and improve the quality of life for people in the community; and presented Ms. Fishel with the Mayor's Citation appropriately framed on a plaque. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Ms. Fishel is a dedicated employee and neighbor; that Ms. Fishel serves the Arlington Park Neighborhood Association as President; that Ms. Fishel is an asset to the City; that Ms. Fishel is well liked and has always been willing to assist co-workers, many of whom are present in the audience; that Ms. Fishel is an inspiration bringing humanity and leadership to the community on a daily basis. Ms. Fishel stated that the recognition is deeply appreciated; that acceptance of the Mayor's Citation is on behalf of all volunteers in the City; that the honor will be forever remembered. 12. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: ADOPTION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1572 RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF JOHN R. MILTON - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) CD 6:11 through 6:15 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Doris Pompey-Milton, wife of John Milton, and their daughter, Darlene Milton, join her and the Commission at the Commission table for the presentation. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1572 recognizes the December 17, 2002, passing of John Milton, active citizen of the community and member of the Civil Service/General Personnel Board, and read Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1572 in its entirety. On the motion of Mayor Mason and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1572. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. Ms. Milton stated that she and her family appreciate the City's honoring her husband. 13. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: ADOPTION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1575, RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF DALE SHIELDS, KNOWN AS "THE PELICAN MAN", ACTIVE CITIZEN OF THE COMMUNITY AND FOUNDER OF THE PELICAN MAN' S BIRD SANCTUARY - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-4) CD 6:15 through 6:20 Vice Mayor Palmer requested that Mona Schonbrunn, PhD, Vice President, now President of Pelican Man's Bird Sanctuary, join her and the Commission at the Commission table for the presentation. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1575 recognizes the January 2, 2003, passing of Dale Shields, known as "The Pelican Man," for his community service involving over two decades of work with injured and ailing birds, his inspiration and legacy which will be appreciated by future generations, and is recognized for being named as one of President George Bush's "1,000 Points of Light," 17 and read Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1575 in its entirety. On the motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 03R-1575. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. BOOK 53 Page 24578 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24579 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. The following family members came forward and were presented with a copy of the Memorial Resolution appropriately framed: Debra and Steven Reed, daughter and son-in-law, and Tara MacGillivray, granddaughter. Ms. Reed stated that the Memorial Resolution is a wonderful tribute to the memory of her father; and thanked the City for being such a good friend to The Pelican Man's Bird Sanctuary. 14. COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE: CITY'S NEW WEBSITE (AGENDA ITEM VIII-5) CD 6:23 through 6:34 Ramin Kouzehkanani, Director, Information Systems and Technology, and Shawn Fulker, Assistant City Auditor and Clerk, Media Operations, came before the Commission. Mr. Kouzehkanani referred to Slides of the City's website on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation, and stated that the City's new website was brought online on January 3, 2003; that the website has undergone a complete transformation, including a more citizen-friendly interface, additional on-line services, and the Citizen Response Management function; that a short announcement and demonstration for public awareness will be provided. Mr. Kouzehkanani continued that the enhancements to the City's new website are being refined; that the new website offers a wide variety of resources to citizens and visitors; that many more adjustments are anticipated in the near future. Commissioner Quillin referred to a specific reference on the website indicating "100 Year" and asked if the reference is to the City's 100th Anniversary? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the wording will be changed along with other items which require fine-tuning. City Manager McNees stated that the City's new website is a work in progressi; that the City's website is in the infancy stage. Commissioner Servian stated that in observing the City's new website, some information appears out of date or incorrect and asked the manner in which the "At Large" Commissioners will be shown, for instance, on a map depicting the District Commissioners? Mr. Kouzehkanani indicated that each commissioner of a district along with the At Large Commissioners will be depicted on a map of the City's voting districts; that the technology to display the particular type of map required is not available at this time. Mr. Fulker stated that visiting the site and noting additions or deletions desired by the Commissioners is an excellent way to fine-tune the website; that the website will begin to express the image intended if refined based on communications from Commissioners and Staff. City Manager McNees stated that many people have been working diligently for new web-presence for the City; that the website will remain a "work in progress" for some time; that the City's new website represents a significant transformation from the previous website; that the City's intent for the website is to portray and identify the City as a modern, progressive organization; that Staff has captured the essence of a trendy, cosmopolitan cityi that the marketing strategy has been successful. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City logo should appear on the hardhat of the engineer pictured on the front page of the website; that the "David" logo is not in traditional City logo form; that utilizing as many identifying features of the City as possible would be appropriate. Mr. Eulker stated that graphics and similar artwork is being designed to add to the website; that the website is intended to reach a broader audience in the future; that the ability to convey information about the City and the utilization of City services in an attractive and expedient manner is the goal. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the new website is an excellent accomplishment; that congratulations are extended to Staff of the Information and Systems Technology and Media Operations Departments for the diligence and ingenuity demonstrated on behalf of the Cityi and asked if a direct link to local newspapers is available on the website? Mr. Fulker stated that Staff is currently researching local media links; that various neighborhood associations have been linked to the website; that the anticipation is organizations such as the BOOK 53 Page 24580 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24581 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Chamber of Commerce and other organizations will request linkage to the website. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that all persons wishing to speak at the public hearings are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have five minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when one minute remains; and repeated for the benefit of those present in the Chambers the Pledge of Public Conduct as adopted by the Commission as follows: We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another. We will direct all comments to issues. We will avoid personal attacks. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 15. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R-1561, APPROVING APPLICATION NO. 02-PA-13 REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SARASOTA CITY PLAN TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF A 2.07 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 2500 CENTRAL AVENUE FROM THE MULTIPLE FAMILY-MODERATE DENSITY FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF AN 11.50 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 2200/2201 JANIE POE DRIVE AND 1485 22ND STREET FROM THE MULTIPLE FAMILY-MODERATE DENSITY FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO THE MULTIPLE FAMILY-MODERATE DENSITY FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION; AND TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.12 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1912 N. ORANGE AVENUE FROM THE MULTIPLE FAMILY-MEDIUM DENSITY FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION; THE CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF ALL THREE PARCELS ARE INTENDED TO ALLOW THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA TO REDEVELOP THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES WITH RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE HOPE VI GRANT APPLICATION TO BE FILED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, ; AUTHORIZING THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 02-PA-13, APPLICANT, CITY OF SARASOTA) = ADOPTED ; REFERRED THE AREA ALONG ORANGE AVENUE TO THE PLANNING STAFF AND PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY (PBLP) FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN APPROPRIATE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION (AGENDA ITEM X-A-1) CD 6:32 through 7:18 Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that Staff come forward. David Smith, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission, referred to computer-generated slides displayed on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation, and stated that proposed Resolution No. 03R-1561 is to approve Plan Amendment Application No. 02-PA-13 amending the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), to change the Future Land Use Map; for three parcels owned by the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA), which is the Applicant; that proposed Resolution No. 03R-1561 authorizes transmittal of the proposed amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and other state and regional agencies for review and comment prior to adopting the amendment; that a public hearing for adoption can be held in approximately four months once the comments from the DCA are received; that the three parcels consist of: Site A which is a 2.07 acre parcel located at 2500 Central Avenue south of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way (Dr. MLK Way) and is part of the Janie Poe public housing complex; Site B which is a 11.50 acre parcel located at 2200/2201 Janie Poe Drive and 1485 22nd Street; and Site C which is a 1.12 acre parcel located at 1912 North Orange Avenue and is part of the Orange Avenue housing complex. Mr. Smith continued that the Multiple Family-Moderate Density Future Land Use Classification allows for multi-family development of up to nine residential dwelling units per acre; that the Multiple Family-Medium Density Future Land Use Classification allows for multi-family development of up to 25 residential dwelling units per acre; that the SHA is proposing to change Site A from the Multiple Family-Moderate Density to the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification which allows for retail and office type uses as well as second-story live/work residential uses; that the SHA is proposing to change Site B from the Multiple Family-Moderate Density to the Multiple BOOK 53 Page 24582 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24583 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Family-Medium Density Future Land Use Classification to allow for multiple-family development at a greater density than the existing complex; that the SHA is proposing to change Site C from the Multiple Family-Medium Density to the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification to allow for live/work type uses; that the uses can also include apartments with owner residences above; that all three parcels are currently in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District. Mr. Smith further stated that the proposed changes to the Future Land Use Classification of the three parcels will allow the SHA to redevelop the properties with residential and non-residential mixed-use developments consistent with the 2003 HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI Grant application which will be submitted in the near future; that the SHA plans to provide new housing for a variety of income levels, from very low- and low- to middle-income; that new homes will be a mix of rental and privately-owned units; that the SHA also plans to provide for live/work or business/residential opportunities along Dr. MLK Way and Orange Avenue; that Sites A and B are consistent with the City of Sarasota-Newtown Comprehensive Redevelopment Plan Through 2020 (Newtown Plan); however, Site C is inconsistent with the Newtown Plan in which the conceptual future land use map indicates Orange Avenue as single-family uses; that Staff will revise the Newtown Plan during the fiscal year (FY) 2003/04 amendment cycle to reflect the proposed change if approved. Mayor Mason stated that the conceptual future land use map rather than the Newtown Plan will require revising. Mr. Smith stated that is correct; that the proposed amendment will not negatively impact the adopted levels of service; that the only non-public benefit of the proposal concerns Objective 2 Maintaining the Existing Housing Stock, City's Comprehensive Plan, as follows: The City will continue to encourage the private sector to conserve, maintain and enhance the existing housing stock, including historic structures and sites. Mr. Smith continued that the housing stock of the existing complexes is not in good condition; that the proposal will allow for redevelopment of the complexes to provide a better quality of housing. Mayor Mason referred to the aerial photograph of the proposed parcels displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated that Site C appears to include the SHA maintenance facility and existing housing units which front Orange Avenue. Mr. Smith stated that is correct; that on balance, the application is in the public benefit; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing at its December 4, 2002, Regular meeting and voted unanimously by a 4 to 0 vote to recommend Commission approval of Plan Amendment Application No. 02-PA-13 and transmittal to the DCA; that Staff recommends adopting proposed Resolution No. 03R-1561. Mayor Mason requested that the Applicant come forward. Rudy Vazmina, SHA Executive Director, and William Merrill, Attorney, legal counsel to the SHA, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, came before the Commission. Attorney Merrill referred to a zoning map of the three parcels displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated that the property to the north along Dr. MLK Way and to the immediate east which surrounds Site A is in the Commercial Business Newtown (CBN) Zone District; that property to the west is in the Residential Multiple Family 2 (RMF-2) Zone District; that the area to the west of Site C is in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District with Orange Avenue Park to the south. Attorney Merrill referred to the map of the currently adopted Future Land Use Map Classifications displayed on the Chamber monitors and continued that the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification allowed uses such as Value Cleaners, Coin Laundry, Mount Calvary Missionary Baptist Church, and J & L Barbecue are directly to the north of Site A; that directly to the west of Site C is the Orange Avenue Grocery Store which is not indicated as a Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification; that the Orange Avenue Park is to the south and the Roy McBean Boys and Girls Club of Sarasota is to the east of Site C; that several commercial facilities exist near the three proposed parcels. Attorney Merrill further stated that the application accomplishes the statutory duty of the SHA to provide decent, safe, and sanitary living conditions for persons below income median levels by improving housing stock, providing additional housing stock, and providing economic opportunity for low-income BOOK 53 Page 24584 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24585 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. individuals; that the proposal will provide new housing stock by increasing the density and allowing the SHA to demolish the old housing and construct new housing with additional units; that the proposal will also provide new housing for a variety of income levels with a primary focus on low income; that the proposed designation of the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification for Sites A and C will allow a mixed-use of residential and light commercial such as live/work; that the elements of redevelopment proposed for the subject parcels are directly linked to the HOPE VI Grant application process; that the proposed development patterns are the type of developments desired under the HOPE VI Grant which suggest live/work and higher densities to allow for development of additional units; that City Staff recommended approval of Plan Amendment Application No. 02-PA-13 which achieves and furthers the public benefit; that City Staff indicated the elimination of existing housing stock as one issue of non-public benefit; that the housing stock in some areas should be replaced; that since the housing stock is being replaced and not eliminated, the benefit should not be viewed as a loss to the public; that the PBLP recommended approval of Plan Amendment Application No. 02-PA-13 and transmittal to the DCA; that the proposal furthers the public benefit for the City and the current SHA residents; that the request is to approve Resolution No. 03R-1561. Commissioner Quillin asked if Site C includes the old meeting room and maintenance facility of the SHA. Attorney Merrill stated yes; that Site C also includes other existing structures. Commissioner Quillin stated that Orange Avenue Park is to the south of Site C and the J.H. Floyd Rehabilitation Center is to the east; that First Step of Sarasota is to the south of Orange Avenue Park; and asked the reason the proposed request did not include the entire length of property fronting Orange Avenue Park to the east of Site C? Attorney Merrill stated that the proposed request is presented from a practical perspective; that the understanding is the City does not desire a large of amount of commercial use for the area near Site C; that providing enough room to replace residential units was a concerni that the additional areas could be rezoned in the future. Commissioner Quillin stated that the area fronting the north side of the Orange Avenue Park is an ideal place for live/work situations; that the intent of the City is the property of the Orange Avenue Grocery Store, including the parcels to the south which front Orange Avenue, will be commercial uses. Attorney Merrill stated that the SHA does not own the parcels to the south of the Orange Avenue Grocery Store; however, the SHA can consider proposed changes to the parcels to the east of Site C on a future application; that the area was not excluded by design; that the request for Site C is a good transition for the neighborhood with the existing commercial uses to the west. Commissioner Quillin stated that the area to the east of Site C is a lovely location for live/work; that a doctor could have an office on the first floor and live upstairs. Attorney Merrill stated that the elements of the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020) which apply to the Downtown Core can be applied to Site C. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a live/work situation makes sense for Site A which fronts Dr. MLK Way; that Site C is designated as in the Multiple Family-Medium Density Future Land Use Classification; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is designated as in the Multiple Family-Moderate Density Euture Land Use Classification; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store could therefore be non-conforming; that a more residential character for the area is desired; that Andres Duany, Principal, FAIA, Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company (DPZ), developer of the Downtown Master Plan 2020, described different intensities of live/work. Vice Mayor Palmer quoted the Planning Board Minute Excerpts of the December 4, 2002, PBLP meeting, included in the Agenda backup material as following: that the Housing Authority plan carries the live-work ideas in the Downtown Master Plan forward throughout the City even through that plan did not specifically apply in this area. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the City has adopted standards to protect the area from excess commercialization; and asked if the SHA intends to exceed the live/work standards of the Downtown Master Plan 2020? BOOK 53 Page 24586 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24587 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Attorney Merrill stated that the City has a unique opportunity to work with the SHA; that over intensification of areas can be evaluated as plans come forward; that the request is to allow commercial use for Site C in an effort to enhance the HOPE IV Grant application and provide live/work at a low intensity level. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that commercial use for Site C is not opposed; that the questions are to clarify the intentions of the SHA regarding different levels of intensity for live/work in the area; that consistency with all applicable standards is desired. Attorney Merrill stated that the SHA is open to suggestions; that site plans have not been developed; that the request is one of the first steps for the HOPE VI Grant application process. Mayor Mason asked the reason the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is not classified as in the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification? Mr. Smith stated that discussions were held with Staff regarding the reason the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is not classified as in the Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification; that Staff indicated the desire for more of a residential character for the area and designated the Multiple Family- Moderate Density Future Land Use classification for site; that the vision for the future is the Orange Avenue Grocery Store will go away; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store can continue to exist until redevelopment occurs; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is currently in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zone District and considered a zoning enclave which is consistent with the Future Land Use Map; that the use is also consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; however, over the long-term, the vision is the Orange Avenue Grocery Store will transform into a residential use. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store was missed at the time the Commission was approving the Future Land Use Mapi that the neighborhood surrounding the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is in a transition area; that several institutions such as the J.H. Floyd Rehabilitation Center and Pines of Sarasota will continue to operate beyond the next 25 years; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is heavily utilized by the neighborhood and keeps the neighborhood viable; that the current classification of the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is not good urban planning; that the area is an ideal location for light commercial uses to provide services to the neighborhood; that the demise of a neighborhood occurs if services such as the Orange Avenue Grocery Store move out and individuals have to drive rather than walk to simply buy milk; that the area to the east of Site C is ideal for addition mixed-uses. Commissioner Quillin referred to a December 16, 2002, letter from the DCA to the City regarding a notice of non-compliance concerning the FY 2000/01 Annual Financial Report requirement and asked if the requirement has been met? Attorney Merrill stated yes. Mr. Vazmina stated that SHA Staff responded to the notice; that the financial information has been addressed; that an audit of the SHA which is part of the criteria for compliance has been processed and approved; that the SHA has provided the information to the Federal Government and is following through on the matter. Commissioner Quillin stated that the notice of non-compliance relates to the State. Mr. Vazmina stated that the issues are interrelated. Commissioner Quillin asked if the SHA is currently in compliance? Mr. Vazmina stated that the SHA is complying with the request for compliance. Mayor Mason asked the process for the Commission to revisit the proper classification for the Orange Avenue Grocery Store Property on the Future Land Use Map? Mr. Smith stated that the Commission can direct Staff to process an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to reconsider the particular site during the next available annual amendment cycle; that the City has learned significantly from DPZ's idea of mixed- uses such as retail near residential areas which were presented subsequent to the adoption of the current Future Land Use Map in 1998. Mayor Mason asked for clarification of the area to which Commissioner Quillin is referring? BOOK 53 Page 24588 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24589 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Quillin stated that the area which should be consistent with the Downtown Master Plan 2020 is south of the Orange Avenue Grocery Store; that the area east of Site C which is also owned by the SHA should be changed from the Multiple Family- Medium Density to Neighborhood Commercial Future Land Use Classification. Mayor Mason stated that the properties south of the Orange Avenue Grocery Store include a private residence, a duplex, and land owned by Children First. Commissloner Quillin stated that the change would allow a developer to develop the property into neighborhood commercial uses. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the issue will not be resolved at this time; that directing Staff and the PBLP to reevaluate the area is suggested. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. Commissioner Quillin stated that the SHA should notify the City at the time compliance with the DCA is achieved. Mayor Mason stated that the State will notify the City of such compliance and passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Palmer. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1561 by title only. On motion of Mayor Mason and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 03R-1561 authorizing transmittal of Plan Amendment Application No. 02-PA-13 to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review and comment. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes. Vice Mayor Palmer passed the gavel back Mayor Mason. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to refer to Staff the classification of the specific site along Orange Avenue on which the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is located. City Manager McNees stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan was developed under Old Urbanism; that one area of Downtown has been developed under New Urbanism; that several areas of the City are not consistent with the philosophies utilized for Downtown; that the suggestion is for the Commission to identify and prioritize areas which should be reevaluated during the planning process rather than selectively choosing areas at different times. Mayor Mason agreed but stated that selectively choosing the Orange Avenue Grocery Store site and providing concrete direction at this time is desired. Commissioner Quillin concurred; and stated that the area in which the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is located is part of the Enterprise Zone and is a critical area for redevelopment within the next few years; that Staff should review the entire area. Vice Mayor Palmer asked for clarification of the area referenced in the motion? Commissioner Quillin stated that the intent of the motion is to refer the Orange Avenue Grocery Store site and the surrounding area to Staff to reevaluate. Mayor Mason requested that the City Auditor and Clerk restate the motion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as to refer the particular area along Orange Avenue as discussed to Planning Staff and the PBLP. Commissioner Quillin stated that the name of the street on the north side of Orange Avenue Park is unknown; that the street may even be an alley; that the intent of the motion is to include the street/alley area. Commissioner Martin stated that the order of priority for Planning Staff and the PBLP is a concern; that a discussion was held with members of the Laurel Park Neighborhood Association regarding inclusion in Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the 2000 Commission promised the inclusion; that the Laurel Park neighborhood will not be included until 2004; that the philosophy of the City Manager should be considered; that the Commission should be aware BOOK 53 Page 24590 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24591 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. of promises made; that some order of priority should be determined. City Manager McNees stated that the issue seems to be assurance the Orange Avenue Grocery Store will not be in any jeopardy; that the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is not in jeopardy; that the store has an existing legal use with no momentum or activity which would cause the store to lose the use; that an urgency to protect the store is not necessary; that the issue can be addressed in a larger more meaningful way through the planning process; that the risk is not saving the store; that the risk is if the City misses other areas by only addressing individual areas. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that selectively choosing one area at this time does not preclude the Commission from looking at other areas on a larger scale during the planning process. City Manager McNees stated that the Commission should deal with the Agenda Items and not add items to the work program which arise in the midst of discussing other items. Mayor Mason agreed but stated that the Commission should have the ability to select certain sites as necessary. Commissioner Quillin stated that the area surrounding the Orange Avenue Grocery Store is part of the Enterprise Zone which is a time-sensitive area; that waiting to look at the area on a larger scale is not desired; that the SHA is pursuing the HOPE VI Grant; that incentives are necessary for private enterprises to become excited about the area; that Staff should make recommendations as to possible changes to the Future Land Use Map to provide incentives for the area. Commissioner Martin stated that the question should be called. Vice Mayor Palmer agreed. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion as restated to refer the particular area along Orange Avenue as discussed to Planning Staff and the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency. Motion carried (4 to 1): Martin, no; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. 16. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4429, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED .) AS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO. 02-4357; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO INTENT AND PURPOSE; AMENDING ARTICLE II, DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION, ; DIVISION 2, DEFINITIONS; SEC. II-201, DEFINITIONS; RELATING TO THE DEFINITIONS OF: "ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY" "I BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PLAT" / " COMPLETELY ENCLOSED BUILDING" -S STRUCTURE, F RESIDENTIAL T / "PRIMARY STRUCTURE" I "1 PRIMARY USE" n TOWNHOUSE" "SIGN-RELATED DEFINITIONS", " SIDE ZONING / LOT LINE" AND TO DELETE DEFINITIONS OF "SIDE STREET ZONING LOT LINE" AND " STREET ZONING LOT LINE' " ; AMENDING ARTICLE II, DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION; DIVISION 3, DESCRIPTION OF USE CATEGORIES; SEC. II-307, INSTITUTIONAL USE CATEGORIES; SUBPARAGRAPH (G), PRIVATE CLUBS, AND SUBPARAGRAPH (I), SCHOOLS; AMENDING ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES; DIVISION 2, GENERAL PROCEDURES; SEC. IV- 201, APPLICATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW, SUBPARAGRAPH A, PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE; AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 1, GENERAL; SEC. VI-102, ZONE DISTRICT MAP, AND GENERAL REGULATIONS; SUBPARAGRAPH U, ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SINGLE- -FAMILY DWELLINGS IN RSF-E, 1, 2, 3, 4 AND RMF-1, 2, 3 ZONE DISTRICTS, SUBPARAGRAPH 5, LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED, : AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 2, SINGLE-FAMILY ZONE DISTRICTS; SEC. VI-203, RESIDENTIAL USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; SUBPARAGRAPH H, DESIGN STANDARDS, AND SUBPARAGRAPH I, OTHER REGULATIONS; TABLE VI-203, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN SINGLE - FAMILY ZONES; AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 5, COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICTS; TABLE VI-501, A, PRIMARY USES ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONES, IS AMENDED REGARDING THE COMMERCIAL TOURIST (CT) ZONE DISTRICT TO CLARIFY LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO OFFICE USES; SEC. VI-503, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; SUBPARAGRAPH H, GROUND FLOOR WINDOWS, SUBPARAGRAPH 5, ADJUSTMENTS; AND SUBPARAGRAPH K, EXTERIOR DISPLAY AND STORAGE; TABLE VI-503-A, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONES ARE AMENDED TO CLARIFY EXTERIOR DISPLAY AND STORAGE REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 6, PRODUCTION INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICTS; TABLE VI-603, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE PRODUCTION INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ZONES, ARE AMENDED TO CLARIFY EXTERIOR DISPLAY AND STORAGE REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 7, SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONE DISTRICTS; TABLE VI-703, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONES, REGARDING MULTIPLE - FAMILY DENSITY REGULATIONS IN THE C-CBD ZONE DISTRICT; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY DIVISION 1, SIGNS; SEC. VII-107, PERMITS REQUIRED, / IS AMENDED IN BOOK 53 Page 24592 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24593 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. SUBPARAGRAPH D; SEC. VII-110, SIGN REQUIREMENTS IN PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICTS, IS AMENDED IN SUBPARAGRAPHS A. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, I. CN, CBN, CND DISTRICT, J. CG, CRT, CGD AND CRD ZONE DISTRICT, K. CI AND ICD ZONE DISTRICT, AND L. CP DISTRICT; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY; DIVISION 2, OFF- STREET PARKING AND LOADING; SEC. VII-204, NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED AND BICYCLE STANDARDS; SUBPARAGRAPH B, AUTOMOBILE STANDARDS; SEC. VII-206, OFF-S STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN SPECIFIC ZONE DISTRICTS; SUBPARAGRAPHS A AND F; DIVISION 3, TRANSITIONAL BUFFERS, LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION; SEC. VII-304, PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING, / SUBPARAGRAPH A; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY; DIVISION 6, USE STANDARDS; SEC. VII- 602, CC, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND SEC. VII-602, EE, TEMPORARY USES AND ACTIVITIES; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY DIVISION 9, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND USES; SEC. VII-903, RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, SUBPARAGRAPHS D, 3 AND F; SEC. VII-904, NON-RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORI USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, SUBPARAGRAPH O; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY, ; DIVISION 11, FENCES; SEC. VII-1101, FENCES AND WALLS, SUBPARAGRAPH J; AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY; DIVISION 14, MISCELLANEOUS STANDARDS; SEC. VII-1401, REFUSE AND RECYCLING STORAGE AREAS; SUBPARAGRAPH E, 1; AND AMENDING ARTICLE VII, REGULATIONS OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY; DIVISION 16, ANNEXATION, ; SEC. VII-1601, URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY; ; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-A-2) AND NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4430 AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED.) AS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO. 02-4357; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO INTENT AND PURPOSE; AMENDING ARTICLE III, DECISION MAKING AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES; DIVISION 9, BUILDING, ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT; SEC. III- 903, JURIS SDICTION, AUTHORITY AND DUTIES, TO REVISE THE NOTICE PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDING, ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT; ARTICLE III, DECISION MAKING AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES; DIVISION 2, PLANNING BOARD ; SEC. III-202, MEMBERSHIP; TERMS ; TRANSITION; VACANCIES; REMOVAL, TO ADD A SIXTH MEMBER TO THE PLANNING BOARD TO BE APPOINTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF SARASOTA COUNTY AS A NON-VOTING MEMBER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE LAW; AMENDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW FOR A SPECIAL MASTER TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDING, ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND TO HEAR AND GRANT VARIANCES FROM THE TERMS OF THE ZONING CODE, BOTH IN THE EVENT FINAL ACTION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CANNOT BE OBTAINED: : ARTICLE III, DECISION MAKING AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES: DIVISION 3, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ; SEC. III-303, MEETINGS, QUORUM AND REQUIRED VOTE, TO ADD A NEW SUBPARAGRAPH D; TO CREATE OF A NEW DIVISION 11: "SPECIAL MASTERS" AND TO ADD NEW SEC. III-1101, POWERS AND DUTIES, SEC. III-1102, APPOINTMENT, - AND SEC. III-1103, RULES, STAFF AND RECORDS, ALL PERTAINING TO SPECIAL MASTERS; AMENDING ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES; DIVISION 6, VARIANCES; TO ADD NEW SEC. IV-605, SPECIAL MASTER REVIEW AND TO RENUMBER: SEC. IV-606, STANDARDS FOR REVIEW, SEC. IV-607, APPEAL OF DECISION, AND SEC. IV-608, EXPIRATION OR REVOCATION OF APPROVAL; AMENDING DIVISION 7, ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS, TO CREATE A NEW SEC. IV-704, ACTION BY SPECIAL MASTER, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RENUMBERING OF SEC. IV-705, APPEAL OF DECISION ; AMENDING ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES; DIVISION 8, HISTORIC DESIGNATION, ; SEC. IV-808, CHANGES TO STRUCTURES AND HISTORIC DESIGNATION/CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS; TO REVISE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS REGARDING HISTORICALLY DESIGNATED STRUCTURES; ; AMENDING ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES; DIVISION 5, SITE PLAN; SEC. IV-501, PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY, I TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, ; AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION 3, RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE- FAMILY; SEC. VI-303, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SUBPARAGRAPHS H, HEIGHT AND E, SETBACKS, TO APPLY A MINIMUM UNIFORM ADDITIONAL SETBACK OF 12 FEET (AT GRADE OR UP TO 35 FEET) FOR STRUCTURES LOCATED OUTSIDE OF GOLDEN GATE POINT; TO APPLY A MINIMUM 12 FOOT SIDE AND REAR ADDITIONAL SETBACK AND A MINIMUM 8 FOOT FRONT AND WATERFRONT ADDITIONAL SETBACK FOR STRUCTURES LOCATED ON GOLDEN GATE POINT ; AMEND: ING TABLE VI-303, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR MULTIPLE- FAMILY ZONE DISTRICTS, TO REVISE THE METHOD FOR MEASURING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT; - AMENDING ARTICLE VI, ZONE DISTRICTS; DIVISION .7, SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONE DISTRICTS; TABLE VI-703, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONES APPLICABLE TO THE WFR DISTRICT TO REVISE THE METHOD FOR MEASURING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT; ; AND TO SPECIFY THE MINIMUM ADDITIONAL SETBACKS FOR STRUCTURES OVER 35 FEET IN HEIGHT; AMENDING ARTICLE VI - BOOK 53 Page 24594 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24595 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; DIVISION 3, RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE- - FAMILY; SEC. VI-303, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; SUBPARAGRAPH H, BUILDING RECESS, TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A BUILDING RECESS FOR STRUCTURES LOCATED ON GOLDEN GATE POINT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 02-ZTA-06, APPLICANT, CITY OF SARASOTA) - PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH CHANGES (AGENDA ITEM X-A-2) CD 7:18 through 8:16 Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that Staff come forward. Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4429 is to amend the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) by addressing scrivener's corrections as detailed in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06; that several mistakes and omissions require correcting; that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 is also to amend the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) with the following substantive changes incorporated in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06: Notices of Administrative Interpretations: clarifies and revises the notice procedures for administrative interpretations of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement; School Board Representation on the Planning Board: provides for the School Board to appoint a non-voting member to the Planning Board in accordance with the requirements of state law; Board of Adjustment Special Master Process: establishes the Special Master process for appeals of administrative interpretations and variances in the event final action by the Board of Adjustment cannot be obtained; - Historic Preservation: revises the notice reguirements for certificates of appropriateness; Threshold for Administrative Site Plan Approval: allows one small addition to a maximum of 500 square feet each five years to commercial buildings (1/5 years) without public hearings. Mr. Hess stated that current regulations require a public hearing if a building exceeds 5,000 or 10,000 square feet depending on the location of the building; that a small addition will require a complete public hearing process; that a recent 200 square foot addition to the South Gate Plaza required a public hearing processi that the change would avoid such a process. Mr. Hess referred to a zoning map of the City displayed on the Chamber monitors and continued that the most notable substantive changes incorporated in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06 are: Additional Setback Provisions in the Residential Multiple Family 4 (RMF-4), Residential Multiple Family 5 (RMF-5), Residential Multiple Family 6 (RMF-6), Residential Multiple Family 7 (RMF-7), and Waterfront Resort (WFR) Zone Districts: applies a minimum uniform additional setback for structures located outside Golden Gate Point; specifies minimum uniform and waterfront additional 12 foot setbacks for structures located on Golden Gate Point; specifies a 12 foot side, and an 8 foot front and waterfront additional setback for structures located in Golden Gate Point; and Building Recess Provisions on Golden Gate Point: deletes conflicting provisions regarding building recess and additional setbacks for structures on Golden Gate Point. Mr. Hess stated that effective June 28, 2002, building recess requirements were enacted for Golden Gate Point which included problematic language; that the problematic language will be deleted and replaced with the new setback language as previously indicated; that at its October 1, 2002, Regular meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing and found the substantive changes incorporated in Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the standards set forth for review in Section IV-1206, Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), and voted unanimously to recommend Commission approval; that Staff recommends passing proposed Ordinance Nos. 03-4429 and 03-4430 on first reading. The following people came before the Commission: BOOK 53 Page 24596 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24597 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Brent Parker, Architect, 136 Golden Gate Point (34236), President of the Golden Gate Point Association, and stated that the City has attempted to correct the zoning regulations since 1998; that prior to 1998 Golden Gate Point had a building height maximum of approximately 65 feet plus a 10 foot bonus for parking with special exceptions of up to 180 feet; that in 1998 the City revised the zoning regulations to allow a building height to 90 feet and increased the base setback of a building from 20 to 25 feet; that 5 feet is significant since properties on Golden Gate Point are small; that the intent was to increase the view corridors between the tall buildings to afford the interior properties a view of the Bayfront; that the regulations resulted in a convoluted sloping calculation of height; that everyone desires simplicity; that in February 2002, the Commission passed a Citywide additional setback of 12 feet; that Commissioner Quillin raised the issue of one size may not fit all at the time of discussing the additional setbacks; that a 12 foot setback may be appropriate to Golden Gate Point; that 8 feet may be a more appropriate setback; that the comment was brought back to the Board of the Golden Gate Point Association for discussion; that someone on the Board suggested a 12 foot setback if two structures abut; however, an 8 foot setback may be more appropriate if a structure abuts a street or waterfront; that the Commission tabled the Golden Gate Point discussion during March 2002 and revisited the issue during April 2002; that he presented the comments of the Board of the Golden Gate Point Association to the Commission during the April 2002 discussion; that some additional comments at the time indicated the suggestions were a good idea; however, the Commission Band-Aided the issue by enacting the Citywide 12 foot setback; that Golden Gate Point residents later discovered a 12 foot recess rather than an additional 12 foot setback had been which created; that to build a tower the structure had to have a recess of 12 feet; that a technical violation would occur if the structure recessed more than 12 feet; that such a project could seek relief through the Board of Adjustment; that the Board of Adjustment has received a significant number of variances since 1998 and is not the place for policy making; that the Golden Gate Point Association is supportive of quickly correcting the substantive changes to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that a project came before the Board of the Golden Gate Point Association during the summer of 2002 with several requests which were consistent with the 8 and 12 foot proposed setbacks; however, the proposed project also requested a 3 foot setback on the waterfront which was opposed by the Board of the Golden Gate Point Association; that the Board of Adjustment ultimately granted the 3 foot setback plus an increase of lot coverage from 25 to 35 percent; that the Commission is encouraged to support the proposed substantive changes for Golden Gate Point. Mr. Parker continued that from the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) to the present Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), the side-yard setback has been substantially greater; that the front and waterfront setbacks are slightly less; that the current regulations allow for a 10 story parking garage; that the new language which limits the height of a parking garage to 25 feet below the first habitable floor is supported. Stephen Rees, Attorney, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, Attorney, 2033 Main Street, Sarasota (34237), stated that he is a resident of the City and has practiced law within the City for more than 30 years; that his intent is to provide corroborating comments and offer suggestions regarding the provisions regarding Special Masters for matters as a result of a deadlock by the Board of Adjustment and the manner in which to determine the additional setbacks both within and outside of Golden Gate Point; that he was associated with the previous speaker on projects within Golden Gate Point beginning in 2001 through 2002; that the configuration and size of the aggregated lots comprising the developed parcel necessitated relief through a variance by the Board of Adjustment to permit a reasonable development to occur on the property; that he has participated in the discussions among the Golden Gate Point property owners; that a consensus is the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) provide a more workable, realistic, and practical solution which should allow the majority of the properties to have a reasonable opportunity for development and lessen the necessity for variances; that seeking variances from the Board of Adjustment may still occur; however, the number of and the substance amount of variances may decrease; that the same is true relative to the suggestion of a standardization of additional setbacks on properties outside of Golden Gate Point; that the City has experienced difficulty in administering the formula and methodology under the prior provisions concerning the determination of additional setbacks; that the recommendation by Staff defines a rational, fixed method and provides uniformity through the zone districts for the additional setbacks; that the recommendation also provides property owners and developers with a more realistic understanding of the requirements for development within the City; that the development community will BOOK 53 Page 24598 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24599 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. accept the setbacks as reasonable, thus reducing the number of petitions before the Board of Adjustment. Attorney Rees continued that he previously had the misfortune of being before the Board of Adjustment regarding two deadlocked matters; that the action sought could not be approved in the affirmative due to the lack of a participating member in a two-to-two deadlock which prevented official action; that the provision to continue a deadlocked matter and send the matter to a Special Master for a de novo hearing is supported; and referred to Section III-1101, Powers and Duties, Division 11, Special Masters, Article III, Board of Adjustment, draft Ordinance No. 03-4430, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: A Special Master shall have the authority to affirm, reverse or modify the written decision or interpretation appealed from, sO long as such action is in conformity with the terms of these Land Development Regulations.. - Attorney Rees stated that the Commission is requested to consider the following revised language: A Special Master shall have the authority to affirm, reverse or modify the written order, decision, determination, or interpretation appealed from, sO long as such action is in conformity with the terms of these Land Development Regulations.. Attorney Rees referred to Section III-1101, Powers and Duties, Division 11, Special Masters, Article III, Board of Adjustment, draft Ordinance No. 03-4430, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: - a Special Master shall have the powers of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement to make such order, requirement, decision or determination as may be required with regard to appeals. Attorney Rees stated that the Commission is requested to consider the following revised language: a Special Master shall have the powers of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement to make such order, decision, determination, or interpretation as may be required with regard to appeals. Attorney Rees referred to Section IV-605, Special Master Review, Division 6, Variances, Article IV, Development Review Procedures, draft Ordinance No. 03-4430, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: the Special Master or Alternate Special Master assigned to hear the petition... Attorney Rees stated that the body of the draft Ordinance identified the Special Master as either the Code Enforcement Special Master or Alternates; that continuing to refer to both the Special Master or Alternate Special Master is not necessaryi that the body of the draft Ordinance sometimes references the Special Master or Alternate Special Master and sometimes only references the Special Master or only the Alternate; that a suggested solution to the reference is to only refer to the Special Master; that the earlier definition of Special Master in the Draft Ordinance is inclusive of the Alternate. Attorney Rees referred to Section IV-605, Special Master Review, Division 6, Variances, Article IV, Development Review Procedures, draft Ordinance No. 03-4430, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: Action taken by the Special Master to deny a variance shall be documented in a final order. Attorney Rees stated that the draft Ordinance lacks a method by which a final order is delivered to the petitioner; that the Commission is requested to consider the following revised language: Action taken by the Special Master to deny a variance shall be documented in a final order, executed by Special Master, and mailed to the petitioner. Attorney Rees referred to Section IV-704, Action by Special Master, Division 7, Administrative Appeals, Article IV, Development Review Procedures, draft Ordinance No. 03-4430, included in the Agenda backup material as follows: under the provisions of Section III-303(D), the Special Master or Alternative Special Master assigned to hear the petition.. BOOK 53 Page 24600 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24601 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Attorney Rees stated that the Commission is requested to consider the following revised language: under the provisions of Section III-303(D), the Special Master assigned to hear the petition... Mike Adams, Architect, 306 Golden Gate Point (34236), President of the Alta Mer Association and representing the other five residents residing at Alta Mer, and a Board of Director of the Golden Gate Point Association, stated that a number of individuals have contacted him in the past 4 to 5 days regarding a lack of understanding of the revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that an annual association meeting is scheduled for February 1, 2003; that the Commission is requested to delay final action concerning the proposed revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) affecting Golden Gate Point until someone from the City can explain the revisions to the attendees of the annual meeting; that parking garages or structures do not currently exist on Golden Gate Point; that parking drives density and density drives parking; that the reason for the lack of parking garages or structures on Golden Gate Point is the regulations for developing such facilities prior to 1998 did not make sensei that the height was limited to such a point a developer did not desire to take up the space with a parking structure; that regulations prior to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) limited building height to 75 feet which included a parking structure; that the revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) indicate a provision to allow a building height of 115 feet with up to 25 feet of parking; that the revision is a 50 percent increase in height and 100 percent increase in parking density; that the possible impact to Golden Gate Point is significant; that the request is for the Commission to consider limiting parking at a single grade level instead of allowing parking to double; that 25 feet of parking allows for the possibility of two covered levels of parking and a third uncovered level; that parking drives density; that an increase in density for Golden Gate Point is not desired. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Mason closed the public hearing. Mr. Hess returned to the Commission table and stated that the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) currently provides for an unlimited amount of parking structure height; that building height in the RMF-4, 5, 6, 7 and WFR Zone Districts begins measurement at the first habitable floor; that for example, if the first habitable floor is above a 4 or 5 level parking structure, the 90 foot height restriction is measured at the first habitable floor above the parking structure; that Staff was concerned about the possibility of constructing such a building; that the revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) limit a parking structure height to 25 feet prior to beginning the 90 foot measurement at the first habitable floor. Commissioner Servian stated that taking final action prior to' Staff's explaining the revisions to the residents of Golden Gate Point at the annual meeting scheduled for February 1, 2003, is a concern. Mr. Hess stated that Staff is willing to attend the annual meeting and explain the proposed revisions; that the second reading of the proposed Ordinances would ordinarily occur at the next scheduled Regular Commission meeting which is January 21, 2003; that the second reading could be deferred for two or four weeks if the Commission desires. Commissioner Servian stated that deferring second reading until Staff can explain the revisions to the residents on Golden Gate Point would be fair; that the residents should have the opportunity to know the impact of revisions. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Commission will not have the opportunity to take any action based upon input from the neighborhood once the public hearing on first reading is closed; that continuing the public hearing until Staff has the opportunity to explain the revisions to the residents on Golden Gate Point is recommended if the Commission desires input only from the neighborhood; that Zoning Text Amendments occur in cycles on a semi-annual basis; that the process could be delayed; that the suggested changes as indicated by Attorney Rees regarding the Special Master process are reasonable. Commissioner Servian asked the impact on Staff if the public hearing is continued until Staff has the opportunity to explain the revisions to the residents of Golden Gate Point? Mr. Hess stated that the recommendation is to continue the public hearing to the February 3, 2003, Regular Commission meeting if the Commission intends to postpone the issue; that the understanding is several of the other revisions are somewhat urgent; that some individuals are anxious to resolve the issue of the additional setback in a timely manner; that the Special Master proceedings BOOK 53 Page 24602 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24603 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. should be in place as soon a possible; that deferring the matter beyond mid-February 2003 is not recommended. Commissioner Servian stated that moving forward with the public hearing is not desired until the residents of Golden Gate Point fully understand the impact of the revisions; that the urgency regarding the other revisions not related to Golden Gate Point is understood; that the Golden Gate Point revisions are limited in scope; that the residents must have the opportunity to understand the repercussions. Commissioner Quillin asked if the revisions regarding Golden Gate Point could be removed from the public hearing process and deferred until February 2003 and the remaining revisions be approved? Mr. Hess stated that removing the revisions regarding Golden Gate Point would require a separate ordinance and re-advertising. Commissioner Quillin stated that the majority of the proposed Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06 should be approved and implemented as soon as possible. Mr. Hess concurred. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City has had to wait for years for some of the changes; that paying for additional advertising regarding the Golden Gate Point issues is supported; however, delaying some of the revisions is not desired; that deferring only the revisions regarding Golden Gate Point until February 2003 is supported. Commissioner Servian stated that the additional expense to re- advertise is understood; however, the expense of not delaying the revisions to Golden Gate Point and the residents not fully understanding the repercussions of the revisions could be greater. City Attorney Taylor stated that the semi-annual cycle for zoning text amendments is an internal procedure; that several of the issues regarding the current Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) should be resolved as soon as possible for the sake of the Building, Housing, and Code Enforcement Department; that the revisions regarding Golden Gate Point could be severed from proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 between first and second reading; that a separate ordinance could be developed for consideration at a later date. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4429 by title only. Commissioner Quillin asked for clarification regarding delaying the proposed Ordinances and if the issues regarding Golden Gate Point would have to go through the entire zoning text amendment process again? Commissioner Servian stated that the residents of Golden Gate Point requested the public hearing be delayed until an opportunity to speak to Staff had occurred. Commissioner Quillin stated that the representatives from Golden Gate Point should come forward again. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the revisions related to Golden Gate Point are referenced in proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 and not proposed Ordinance No. 03-4429. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4429 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes. Mayor Mason asked if the issues regarding Golden Gate Point should be resolved prior to the reading of the title? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the title would be significantly shorter if the references to Golden Gate Point are not included. City Attorney Taylor stated that hearing from the representatives from Golden Gate Point at this time is recommended. Mr. Parker and Mr. Adams came forward. Mr. Parker stated that the timing of a delay is a concerni that the existing regulations in the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) regarding recesses is messyi that he has two clients with projects waiting for the revisions to pass; that he is aware of five other projects of developers who are not his clients also pending; that the delay could be until the summer of 2003 if the' revisions regarding Golden Gate Point must go through the zoning text amendment process and be heard by the Development Review Committee (DRC), the PBLP, and the Commission another time. BOOK 53 Page 24604 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24605 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Servian stated that the Golden Gate Point residents requested a postponement of the public hearing for one month to allow Staff to fully explain the repercussions of the revisions; and asked the reason the revisions concerning Golden Gate Point must go through the zoning text amendment process again? Mr. Parker stated that delaying first reading until February 3, 2003, and second reading until February 18, 2003 is acceptable; however, the zoning text amendment process must begin again if the residents of Golden Gate Point desired changes to the proposed revisions. Commissioner Servian stated that the Golden Gate Point residents' desire to make changes to the revisions is an assumption. Mr. Adams stated that is true; and asked the manner in which requests for changes would be handled? Commissioner Quillin stated that changes would have to go through the zoning text amendment process. Commissioner Servian stated that changes to the revisions could take months; that anyone wishing to develop on Golden Gate Point would have to deal with the existing regulations of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) during the delay, which is the risk involved in changing the revisions. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the concern is understood; however, delaying the public hearing is not desired. Commissioner Servian stated that the discussion seems to imply a conflict among the members of the Golden Gate Point Association; that the Golden Gate Point Association should have voted on the revisions prior to this time. Mr. Parker stated that in April 2002, the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Point Association voted on the revisions regarding setbacks; that the proposed regulations concerning parking structures have not been discussed by the Board. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the current Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) does not limit the height of parking structures. Commissioner Quillin stated that the revisions will limit a parking structure to 25 feet. Mr. Parker stated that the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Point Association voted on the revisions regarding the setbacks in April 2002. Mr. Adams stated that the setbacks are not the problem; that the impact of the parking structure is not understood. Commissioner Quillin stated that that the current Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) does not limit the height of parking structures. Mr. Adams stated that is correct; however, several laypersons do not understand the concept; that the regulations prior to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) limited building height to 75 feet which could include ground level of parking under the building; that no one would build a parking structure under such a regulation; that the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) limits building height to 90 feet above parking; that a developer could construct 4 or 5 levels of parking and then construct 90 feet of habitable space above the 4 or 5 level of parking. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the proposed revisions will restrict a parking structure to 25 feet. Mr. Adams stated that is correct; however, the regulations prior to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) for parking structures were practically restricted to grade level. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the regulations prior to the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) for parking structures no longer exist; that if the proposed revisions are not adopted, the height for parking structures on Golden Gate Point is unlimited under the current Zoning Code (2002 Ed.). Commissioner Servian stated that the understanding is the Board of Directors for the Golden Gate Point Association approved the revisions in April 2002. Mr. Parkers stated that the Board of Directors for the Golden Gate Point Association approved the setbacks only; that the revisions regarding parking were not discussed. Commissioner Servian stated that the regulations concerning parking are more restrictive with adoption of the revisions. BOOK 53 Page 24606 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24607 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Mr. Parker stated that he advised Staff of the problem regarding the unlimited parking issue; that Staff later created the language which limited parking structures to 25 feet; that the opinion of Mr. Adams is respected; that the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) should be corrected at this time; that evaluating the possible restriction to one level of parking can be accomplished at a later date. Commissioner Servian stated that she was under the impression the proposed Zoning Text Amendment had not been discussed by the Board of Directors for the Golden Gate Point Association. Mr. Parker stated that only the setbacks were discussed. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the only issue which has not been fully discussed is the height of parking structures; that the height of parking structures is being reduced rather than increased; that the reduction is a benefit to Golden Gate Point. Mr. Parker stated that the Board of Directors for the Golden Gate Point Association has not had the opportunity to discuss the proposed Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 02-ZTA-06 since publication. Mayor Mason stated that the public hearing may have to be reopened; that the proceedings are not setting a good example for the other public hearings. Mr. Hess stated that Staff's recommendation is to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 on first reading and set second reading not earlier than February 3, 2003, sO the revisions can be enacted in a relatively short period of time; that the current Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) includes some unworkable language which must be corrected as soon as possible; that the height limit for parking structures is being reduced and additional setback provisions are being clarified; that additional changes can be made during the next semi-annual cycle of zoning text amendments if Golden Gate Point wishes the Commission to consider additional changes aiter Staff makes a presentation on February 1, 2003. Commissioner Servian stated that the recommendation is reasonable. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4430 on first reading with the following revised language recommended by Attorney Rees: Section III-1101. Powers and Duties, Division 11, Special Masters, Article III, Board of Adjustment: A Special Master shall have the authority to affirm, reverse or modify the written order, decision, determination, or interpretation appealed from, sO long as such action is in conformity with the terms of these Land Development Regulations.. Section III-1101. Powers and Duties, Division 11, Special Masters, Article III, Board of Adjustment: . a Special Master shall have the powers of the Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement to make such order, decision, determination, or interpretation as may be required with regard to appeals. Section IV-605. Special Master Review, Division 6, Variances, Article IV, Development Review Procedures, shall refer to all references of Special Master or the Alternate Special Master as "Special Master" Section IV-605. Special Master Review, Division 6, Variances, Article IV, Development Review Procedures: Action taken by the Special Master to deny a variance shall be documented in a final order, executed by Special Master, and mailed to the petitioner. Section IV-704. Action by Special Master, Division 7, Administrative Appeals, Article IV, Development Review Procedures: under the provisions of Section III-303 (D), the Special Master assigned to hear the petition... Commissioner Servian asked if the second reading will occur at the February 3, 2002, Regular Commission meeting? Commissioner Quillin stated that the scheduling of second reading is not related to the motion on the table. BOOK 53 Page 24608 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24609 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yesi Quillin, yes. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to postpone second reading of Ordinance No. 03-4430 until the February 3, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. City Attorney Taylor stated that postponing second reading will only delay the process; that any major changes would require beginning the zoning text amendment process again; that developing new language for minor changes could also cause a further delay. Commissioner Martin asked if part of Ordinance No. 03-4430 could be pulled from second reading if residents of Golden Gate Point attended the public hearing on February 3, 2003, and convinced the Commission not to adopt the portions of the revisions relating to Golden Gate Point? City Attorney Taylor stated that the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Martin stated that the reason to postpone second reading is not understood. Commissioner Servian stated that postponing second reading is to provide the residents of Golden Gate Point with an opportunity to hear the impact the revisions will have on their neighborhood prior to adoption. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the concern is understood; however, delaying second reading will not accomplish anything; that the revisions will provide more restrictions for the neighborhood; that delaying second reading is not supported; that enacting Ordinance No. 03-4430 as soon as possible is desired; that parking structure height will be limited to 25 feet; that additional changes can be evaluated during the next semi-annual zoning text amendment cycle; that delaying something which is beneficial to Golden Gate Point is not desired. Commissioner Servian stated that delaying second reading will provide the opportunity to let the residents hear the impact of the revisions to their neighborhood prior to adoption of the proposed ordinance; that the question should be called. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to postpone the second reading of Ordinance No. 03-4430 until the February 3, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Motion failed (3 to 2) : Martin, noi Palmer, no; Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. Commissioner Martin stated that communication with the individuals affected by the revisions should be evaluated; that the Commission should not be placed in such a predicament in the future. Commissioner Servian stated that the City should go to the affected association, hold a meeting, and discuss any issue affecting a very specific area of the City. City Manager McNees stated that the specifics of the setbacks were discussed and a vote taken by the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Point Association; that the parking structure height limitation was developed by Staff due to a request from Golden Gate Point residents; that individuals were not excluded from the process; that input has been provided throughout the process. Commissioner Servian stated that the understanding is Staff did make a presentation to the residents of Golden Gate Point regarding the impact of the revisions to the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.). Mayor Mason requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that the requirements of quasi-judicial public hearings were defined by the judicial process; that during quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that prior to opening the public hearing, Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the subject property; that Affected Persons are individuals especially interested in the proceedings due to proximity to or other special interest in the subject propertyi that other interested persons are allowed to speak; that speakers may request additional time which, if granted, will be determined at the discretion of the Commission; that Applicants and the City will be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and expert witnesses and for cross-examination. BOOK 53 Page 24610 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24611 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. 17. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO 03-4426, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 94-3784 TO ALLOW A PARKING LOT AS THE PRINCIPAL PERMITTED USE OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAGNOLIA STREET MIDWAY BETWEEN THE SOUTH TAMIAMI TRAIL AND EAST AVENUE AND HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 2050 MAGNOLIA STREET; APPROVING SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 02-SP-50 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 85-SPACE PARKING LOT ON SAID PROPERTY; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 02-ROA-09 AND 02-SP-50, APPLICANT, KIWI INVESTMENTS) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B-1) CD 8:16 through 8:27 City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4426 is to approve Rezone Ordinance Amendment Application No. 02-ROA-09 and to substitute Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-50 for previously adopted Ordinance No. 87-3080 incorporating Site Plan 87-M to allow construction of an 85-space parking facility in place of a previously approved office building; that the Applicant is Kiwi Investments, L.L.C. (Kiwi), that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person; that the recommendation is to allow 15 minutes for the Applicant's presentation and 7 minutes for rebuttal; that the City will have 7 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that other interested person will have 5 minutes to speak. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the time limits are approved; and requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Mason, Vice Mayor Palmer, and Commissloners Martin, Quillin, and Servian stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. John Dart, Attorney, law firm of Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster, and Russell, representing Kiwi Investments, L.L.C., and Debbie Marks, Planning Associate, Land Resource Strategies, Inc., came before the Commission. Attorney Dart referred to computer-generated slides of the proposed project displayed on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation and stated that the property is located on the south side of Magnolia Street midway between South Tamiami Trail and East Avenue and is currently in the Office, Professional Business Zone District; that Southside Baptist Church is to the north, a recently constructed medical facility to the west and the old NationsBank building which currently houses the Social Security Administration offices to the south; that the request is to amend the existing conditions on the property to allow use as an 85-space parking facility to service the surrounding properties; that an office building approved on a previously proffered site plan was never constructed; that at its December 4, 2002, Regular meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing and found Rezone Ordinance Amendment Application No. 02-ROA-09 and Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-50 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 edition, (City's Comprehensive Plan), the standards set forth for review in the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), and the Tree Protection Ordinance, and voted unanimously by a 4 to 0 vote to recommend Commission approval subject to the following condition: Site, development and construction plans shall be in conformity with the plans labeled Magnolia Street received by the Planning Department on November 12, 2002... Commissioner Martin referred to the site plan of the proposed project displayed on the Chamber monitors and asked if the area will be one combined parking facility? Attorney Dart stated yes; that cross-access easements are throughout the parking facility. Commissioner Martin asked the location of the ingress and egress for the parking facility? Ms. Marks referred to an architectural rendering of the proposed project displayed on the Chamber monitors and stated the ingress and egress to the parking facility will remain the same; that the location is on Magnolia Street. Commissioner Martin stated that the understanding is the Southside Baptist Church will have the ability to utilize some of the proposed parking facility. Ms. Marks stated that several spaces have been allocated for use by Southside Baptist Church. Mayor Mason requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. BOOK 53 Page 24612 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24613 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Karin Murphy, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4426 pertains to property located on the south side of Magnolia Street with a street address of 2050 Magnolia Street; that a parking issue for the area began at the time the old NationsBank building was remodeled which began the selling off of parking in the area for redevelopment; that Staff became concerned and began to monitor the parking area as result of the remodeling and changes of internal uses of the old NationsBank building; that the medical facility of the Center for Digestive Diseases was also being developed and desired to utilize some of the parking area to the east; that the goal was to ensure an adequate inventory of parking for the surrounding area; that Staff allocated and assured properly signed spacesi that the property was previously anticipated as an area for a medical/office facility; that a neighborhood meeting was held to address issues and concerns; that the proposed project is consistent with City's Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that the Applicant has addressed Staff's concern for an adequate parking inventory, adequate lighting throughout the site, and proper signage to direct individuals to designated areas; that proposed changes to the existing Southside Baptist Church facility will be presented to the PBLP on January 8, 2003, and will be before the Commission in February 2003. Commissioner Martin stated that the minute excepts from the December 4, 2002, regular PBLP meeting included in the Agenda backup material indicate an extensive buffer will be installed toward the neighboring residences; and asked if an "extensive buffer" means a "enhanced buffer"? Ms. Murphy stated that the Applicant designed a greater buffer than required and received tree credits for preserving existing trees; that lighting is balanced with the enhanced buffer for safety. Commissioner Martin asked if the lighting will be directed inwardly toward the parking facility and not outwardly toward the neighborhood? Ms. Murphy stated yes. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan stated that no interested persons have signed up to speak. Mayor Mason requested that the Applicant and the City come forward for rebuttal. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan stated that neither the Applicant nor the City has any rebuttal. Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4426 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4426 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that Deputy City Auditor and Clerk McGowan proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yesi Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes. 18. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE : PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 03-4427, PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF A 3.09 ACRE PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY 4 (RMF-4) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE WATERFRONT RESORT (WFR) ZONE DISTRICT; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND BEING LOCATED AT 2050 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN DRIVE ON LIDO KEY (SITE OF THE PRESENTLY EXISTING HALF MOON BEACH CLUB RESORT) ; APPROVING SITE PLAN APPLICATION NO. 02-AP-44 WHICH HAS BEEN PROFFERED AS A CONDITION OF THIS REZONING TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 54-UNIT LUXURY CONDOMINIUM; PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF THE REZONING AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NOS. 02-RE-17 AND 02-SP-44, APPLICANT, JOEL J. FREEDMAN, REPRESENTING HALF MOON BEACH CLUB RESIDENCES LLC.) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM X-B-2) CD 8:27 through 8:48 City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427 is to approve Rezone Application No. 02-RE-17 with accompanying Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 for property located at 2050 Benjamin Franklin Drive on Lido Key; that the Applicant is Joel Freedman, Principal, Freedman Consulting Group, agent for the Half Moon Beach Club Residences, L.L.C.; that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person; that the recommendation is to allow 15 minutes for the Applicant's presentation and 7 minutes for rebuttal; that the City will have 7 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that other interested person will have 5 minutes to speak. BOOK 53 Page 24614 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24615 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the time limits are approved; and requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Mason, Vice Mayor Palmer, and Commissioners Martin, Quillin, and Servian stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Mason opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Joel Freedman, Principal, Freedman Consulting Group, agent for the Half Moon Beach Club Residences, L.L.C., and Stephen Rees, Attorney, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, came before the Commission. Mr. Freedman stated that Chuck Jones, AIA, Principal, CGH Architects Planners, Inc., the project architect, and Jay Tallman, Real Estate Broker, U.S. Assets Group, the project developer, are present in the audience and available for questions if desired. Attorney Rees stated that he is present on behalf of both Half Moon Beach Club of Sarasota, L.L.C., the owner of the property, and Half Moon Beach Club Residences, L.L.C., the contract purchaser of the property; and recognized Mr. Tallman present in the audience; that both he and Mr. Freedman have had the privilege of working with Mr. Tallman on several projects such as the Beau Ciel project through the U.S. Assets Group; that U.S. Assets Group is associated with other projects such as the development called Vizcaya at Longboat Key and a project in Sarasota County, east of Interstate 75 on Fruitville Road called Debrecen Development; that such developments are providing new code compliant housing in substitution for older housing, institution, and commercial activities; and asked if any Affected Persons or members of public have signed up to speak? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no one has signed up to speak. Attorney Rees stated that he has practiced law within the City since 1972; that he is familiar with the currently adopted Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) and the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan); that he participated in the preparation of the application and the process through the Development Review Committee (DRC) and the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP); that Rezone Application No. 02-RE-17 with accompanying Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the concurrency management regulation of the City, the zoning regulation of the Waterfront Resort (WFR) Zone District, and the general standards and regulations of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that the Staff report and the recommendation from the PBLP reaffirms consistency and addresses specific points such as neighborhood compatibility, scale, design, orientation, and public benefit; that variances are not required for approval and conditional uses are not incorporated; that the primary use sought is multiple-family dwelling condominiums; that highlights of the site plan include building elevations, beauty, design symmetry, and compatibility with pre- existing residential developments to the north and south of the project. Mr. Freedman referred to architectural renderings of the proposed project displayed on the Chamber monitors throughout the presentation and stated that the most significant design of the project is the two distinct structures consisting of 54 units; that one structure will be orientated toward the Gulf of Mexico and contains 20 units; that the other structure is oriented toward Benjamin Franklin Drive facing the Bay and contains 34 units; that the density of the site allows for construction of 55 units; that 126 parking spaces are provided which exceed the required 108 parking spaces; that 122 of the 126 parking spaces are under the two buildings; that the proposed structure will include a drop-off area and various grade-level amenities; that a single access point to the development is from Benjamin Franklin Drive which is an improvement to the two access points of the existing facility; that the Applicant has voluntarily provided a 12-foot wide sidewalk along Benjamin Franklin Drive; that a swimming amenity will be provided on the Gulf side at grade level; that variance approvals are not necessary since the entire project is behind the 150 Gulf front setback requirement; that the side-yard setback is calculated under the complicated formula of the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.); that the minimum setback is 20 feet for each side of the parking level with a building coverage of 25 percent; that the design of the buildings is intended to appear airy with a sort of West Indies type of style and openness; that the drop-off area will be designed to appear very tropical; that the facility will be called the Orchid Beach Club; that an environmental consultant has been retained to develop a beach replanting plan and has been in contact with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regarding sea BOOK 53 Page 24616 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24617 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. turtles and sand dunes; that U.S. Assets Group is an experienced developer and understands the requirements of the State law. Attorney Rees stated that the Commission is requested to approve proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427. Commissioner Quillin stated that the requirement of local laws and ordinances concerning sea turtles must also be met. Attorney Rees agreed. Commissioner Servian asked if public beach access will be provided? Mr. Freedman stated no; that the buffers will prohibit pedestrians from walking along the sides of the development to the beach. Commissioner Servian asked if a staging area for construction equipment has been determined? Mr. Freedman stated that a construction plan is being developed and must be filed prior to the issuance of a building permit; that the U.S. Assets Group is responsible and has not received any past complaints regarding construction equipment. Commissioner Servian stated that the timing of the continuous concrete pour may be a problem; that the understanding is the start time for the continuous pour will be at 3 a.m.; that the developer is requested to communicate with the resident associations in the neighborhood sO the community can be prepared for construction noise. Mr. Freedman stated that the request is reasonable. Commissioner Servian stated that the travel route for the construction equipment should be through the center of St. Armands Circle to Benjamin Franklin Drive and not through residential areas. Mr. Freedman agreed. Mayor Mason requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Allen Parsons, Senior Planner II, Planning Department, came before the Commission; referred to computer-generated slides throughout the presentation; and stated that the proposed project is located on the south end of Lido Key with a street address of 2050 Benjamin Franklin Drive; that the proposal of Ordinance No. 03-4427 is to rezone + 3.09 acres from the Residential Multiple Family 4 (RMF-4) to the Waterfront Resort (WFR) Zone District; that Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 has been proffered as a condition of the rezoning; that the plan is to demolish the existing Half Moon Beach Club Resort Hotel and replace the demolished structure with two 10-story condominium towers consisting of 54 units over one level of parking; that the site is designated in the Resort Residential Future Land Use Classification; that the existing RMF-4 Zone District and the proposed WFR Zone District are implementing Zone Districts of the Resort Residential Future Land Use Classification. Mr. Parsons continued that public facilities will be available; that transportation impacts have been deemed de minimus; that the Applicant is required to meet all applicable environment regulations including Sarasota County Ordinance No. 97-082 concerning sea turtles; that the standards for review set forth in the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.), have been satisfied; that the proposal is to make use of the full height allowed under the WFR Zone District; that the present RMF-4 Zone District allows for a building height of up to 70 feet; that the WFR Zone District allows for a building height of up to 110 feet; that additional setback provisions of the WFR Zone District have been met; that a 10 foot sidewalk rather than a 12 foot sidewalk will contribute to the creation of the west Bayfront multi-use recreational trail (MURT) in the area; that the Applicant exceeded the required 8 foot wide sidewalk in the right-ot-way in front of the development; that the Applicant's environmental consultant submitted a beach planting plan which incorporates the elimination of some nuisance species and enhanced beach dune planting; that the existing building was constructed in 1959; that the Sarasota County Historical Resource Staff indicated the 1959 existing building at the location is somewhat significant as a post World War II resort hotel and requested plans and photographic documentation of the structure; that the Applicant has complied with the request. Mr. Parsons continued that Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 has been proffered as a condition of approval; that at its December 4, 2002, Regular meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing and voted unanimously by a 4 to 0 vote to find Rezone Application No. 02-RE-17 and Site Plan Application No. 02-SP-44 consistent City's Comprehensive Plan, and the Tree Protection Ordinance and to recommend Commission approval subject to the following conditions: BOOK 53 Page 24618 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24619 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. 1. Prior to issuance of any City building permits for any activity also subject to Federal or State permits, the Applicant shall provide copies of the issued Federal or State permits 2. Applicant shall submit a "Construction Staging Plan" to the City which shall require approval [of the City] - . 3. Prior to the issuance of a certiticate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall provide documentation to the City of compliance with the City of Sarasota Resolution No. 99R-1135 and Sarasota County Ordinance No. 97-082 which provides for the protection of marine turtles. 4. During marine turtle nesting and hatching season, as defined in Sarasota County Ordinance No. 97-082, all beach furniture and recreational equipment shall be removed from the beach one hour after sunset. Mr. Parsons continued that Staff recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427 on first reading. Commissioner Servian asked if the sea turtles regulations require bringing lawn, pool, and patio furniture indoors during sea turtle season. Mr. Parsons stated that removing all beach furniture and recreational equipment from the beach one hour after sunset is a condition of proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427. Commissioner Servian stated that recent legislation concerning sea turtles may or may not include a requirement to remove all beach furniture and recreational equipment from the beach one hour after sunset; that sea turtles have become caught in lawn furniture on Lido Key, which is a problem. Mr. Parsons stated that the specifics of recent legislation concerning sea turtles is unknown; however, proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427 includes a condition to remove all beach furniture and recreational equipment from the beach one hour after sunset. Mayor Mason requested that other interested persons come forward. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no interested persons have signed up to speak. Mayor Mason requested that the Applicant and the City come forward for rebuttal. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that neither the Applicant nor the City has any rebuttal. Mayor Mason requested Commissioner supplemental remarks, if any, and hearing none, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 03-4427 on first reading. Mayor Mason requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Martin, yes. 19. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM XI) CD 8:48 through 8:51 The following people came before the Commission: Nancy Shoemaker, 1765 Cherokee Drive (34239), referred to a January 6, 2003, letter to the Commission, distributed at the beginning of the Commission meeting, and stated that she is present on behalf of herself and her familyi that the family owns property on the northeast corner of East Avenue and Fruitville Road; that the letter requests the Commission consider moving the Downtown Urban Mixed Use boundary 55 feet northward on the western 200 feet of the block north of Fruitville Road between East Avenue and Audubon Place; that the understanding is such a change would alter the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition (City's Comprehensive Plan); ; that the family's attorney, Alan Roddy, of the law firm of Matthews, Eastmore, Hardy, Crauwels, and Garcia, P.A., has advised such a request is legal; that the request was brought before the Commission at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting; that City Staff indicated the change could be accomplished through a small scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment; that upon closer review, the change cannot be handled in such a way. Ms. Shoemaker continued that the law firm of Matthews, Eastmore, Hardy, Crauwels, and Garcia, P.A., desires to move to the BOOK 53 Page 24620 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24621 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. location; that the hope is to develop an a 10,000 square foot southern-styled building which would benefit the area; that discussions have been held with the present and past presidents of the Park East Neighborhood Association; that both seem to favor the possible development; that a presentation will be provided at the January 13, 2003, regular Park East Neighborhood Association meeting. Ms. Shoemaker further stated that granting the request is the first step to the possible rezoning of the property; that the Commission is urged to consider the request which will be a positive change for the neighborhood. 20. NEW BUSINESS: : ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 03R- 1569, APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO FUND THE REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE BROWNFIELD SITE LOCATED AT 2046 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY; ETC. - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM XIII-1) CD 8:51 through 9:06 Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, came before the Commission, referred to computer-generated slides throughout the presentation, and stated that in January 1999, the City was successful in obtaining an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Targeted Brownfield Grant in the amount of $200,000 for the 18-acre site located at 2046 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Way (Dr. MLK Way); that the funds were utilized for Phase I, on-site testing, and Phase II, documenting specific contaminates on the site including, but not limited to, environmental impacts to soil, soil vapor, and groundwater; that the Phase II documenting report, also known as the Site Assessment Report was submitted on March 6, 2002, by the City to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP); that the FDEP issued specific comments to the Site Assessment Report which required additional site assessment work and an additional response from the City; that the City subsequently prepared an Site Assessment Report Addendum; that the FDEP received and approved both the Site Assessment Report and the Site Assessment Report Addendum on November 6, 2002, and advised the City to submit a Remedial Action Plan; that the City sent the FDEP a request for an extension to submit a Remedial Action Plan; that the FDEP agreed to an extension to March 1, 2003; that the estimated consultant cost to begin the preparation of the Remedial Action Plan is $10,000; that proposed Resolution No. 03R-1569 is to appropriate $10,000 from the unappropriated fund balance of the General Fund to provide funding for the Remedial Action Plan required by the FDEP; that the City currently has an environmental consultant of record with Public Works Department who could perform the work. Commissioner Quillin asked the amount of benefit the City will receive from the consultant for $10,000? Ms. Hartman stated that the City will receive the Remedial Action Plan. Commissioner Quillin asked for clarification of the Remedial Action Plan. Mr. Hartman stated that the Remedial Action Plan is the action the City will take to clean up the site; that spreading a layer of fill dirt on the site was one action suggested in both the Site Assessment Report and the Site Assessment Report Addendum; that spreading a layer of fill dirt on the site is costly and may not be necessary; that the Remedial Action Plan consultant will work with Staff to try to develop a project consistent with the desires of the Commission for the location. Commissioner Quillin stated that spreading a layer of fill dirt on the site is not supported; that other ways to remediate the contaminates which have been found in the area exist. Ms. Hartman stated that spreading a layer of fill dirt on the site is one suggestion; that fill dirt may not be the only solution; that a consultant is necessary to determine alternatives; that the FDEP is expecting the City to comply with the next step to develop the Remedial Action Plan. Commissioner Quillin stated that a previous recommendation was to construct a commercial warehouse on the site which was not desired; and asked if the consultant will provide a list of alternatives which will be consistent with the City of Sarasota- Newtown Comprehensive Redevelopment Plan Through 2020 (Newtown Plan)? Ms. Hartman stated that the site is in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District and designated as in the Open Space-Recreation- Conservation Future Land Use Classification which should be taken into consideration at the time the options of the Remedial Action Plan are explored; that rezoning the property will be time consuming; that the City is still responsible for the clean-up of the site and maintaining a reporting requirement to FDEP. Commissioner Quillin asked if grant funding is available? BOOK 53 Page 24622 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24623 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Ms. Hartman stated that grant funding is not available for the Remedial Action Plan. Commissioner Quillin asked if grant funding is available for the steps after the Remedial Action Plan? Ms. Hartman stated that a brownfield grant is available; however, the immediate step is for the City to move forward with appropriating $10,000 for a consultant to develop the required Remedial Action Plan. Commissioner Martin asked if the deadline to hire a consultant is March 1, 2003? Ms. Hartman stated that a report must be submitted on January 15, 2002, to the FDEP explaining the action taken at this time; that the March 1, 2003, extension is to hire a consultant and bring the consultant up to date concerning the situation; that the consultant will propose a length of time to prepare the Remedial Action Plan. Commissioner Martin stated that the amount of benefit the City will receive for $10,000 is a concern; that discussions have occurred with individuals experienced with brownfield sites who have indicated the cost will be considerably more than $10,000; that the City is aware of the location of the contamination on the site; that the City does not desire a consultant for $10,000 to propose an expensive solution; that an economical solution to remediate the site and possible uses for the property is desired; that specific direction to the consultant should be provided; that $10,000 seems low for a Request for Proposal (RFP) at the end of the Remedial Action Plan. Ms. Hartman stated that the City has had a three-pronged relationship concerning the site which includes the FDEP, the City, and an outside agency leasing the site; that subsequently the lease arrangement expired on July 20, 2002; that the environmental consultant on record with the City has provided an estimate of slightly under $10,000 to develop the Remedial Action Plan report to successfully comply with the FDEP requirement; that the belief the amount is appropriate. Commissioner Martin stated that the Remedial Action Plan report must not only satisfy the FDEP but also satisfy the Commission; that spending additional funds later is not desired. City Manager McNees stated that the Remedial Action Plan will not provide an economic development footprint; that the Remedial Action Plan will only provide technical options to remedy the existing contamination; that the Remedial Action Plan can then be utilized to assist in the next step to identify an economic development footprint. Ms. Hartman agreed. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission never designated the area as a brownfield; and asked if the intent is to designate the area a brownfield in the future? V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the question of designating the area as a brownfield has been raised in the past; that past opinions have indicated both positives and negatives to the designation; that the approach was not to designate the area but rather to assess the area for clean-up; that a determination to designate the area can be made based on future plans and funding availability for brownfield redevelopment. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 03R-1569 in its entirety. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to adopt proposed Resolution No. 03R-1569. Commissioner Martin referred to the December 20, 2002, letter from David Gerard, P.E., Waste Cleanup Section, Southwest District, FDEP, to V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, included in the Agenda backup material and stated that the letter indicates the Remedial Action Plan is due on March 1, 2003; and asked if the Remedial Action Plan will be completed by March 1, 2003? Ms. Hartman stated that the letter triggers many reporting dates; that the FDEP will be notified of the Commission's action to hire a consultant to develop the Remedial Action Plan and the City's attempt to move forward; that another extension will be requested; that the deadline of March 1, 2003, may not be enough time to develop the Remedial Action Plan report. Mayor Mason stated that the City has not designated the area as a brownfield; that referring to the area as a brownfield causes confusion and should be discontinued. BOOK 53 Page 24624 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24625 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Servian asked the consequences if an additional request for an extension is denied? Ms. Hartman stated that the additional extension is anticipated; that a report will be provided to FDEP of the City's efforts to move forward. Commissioner Servian stated that the deadline of March 1, 2003, for the Remedial Action Plan is very specific. Ms. Hartman stated that the original deadline was December 30, 2003; that the consultant can provide a realistic time for completion of the Remedial Action Plan which can be forwarded to FDEP for another extension. City Manager McNees stated that the City will submit a report by March 1, 2003, if another extension is not received; that the thoroughness and completeness of the report may be in question; however, receiving a second extension is anticipated. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to adopt proposed Resolution No. 03R-1569 and requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Palmer, yesi Quillin, yesi Servian, yesi Martin, yes; Mason, yes. 21. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: : AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA AND TINDALE- -OLIVER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TO PROVIDE PARKING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN AND AUTHORIZE STAFF AND CONSULTANT TO PROCEED WITH PHASE 1 THROUGH A PORTION OF PHASE 3 OF SECTION 1 IN FISCAL YEAR 2002/03 AND PROCEED WITH THE BALANCE OF PHASE 3 OF SECTION 1 AND PHASE 4 OF SECTION IN FISCAL YEAR 2003/04 CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF THE REMAINING $53,155.02 IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2003/04 BUDGET = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM XIII-2) CD 9:06 through 9:32 Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, Sam Freija, Transportation Engineer, Engineering Department, and Robert Wallace, Project Manager, Tindale-Oliver and Associates Tindale-Oliver), came before the Commission. Mr. Freija stated that in August 2002, a Request for Proposal (RFP) was published for a consultant to develop the Downtown Parking Master Plan; that six submittals were received; that a committee consisting of Staff from the Public Works, Engineering, and Downtown Redevelopment Departments selected Tindale-Oliver as the first ranked parking consultant; that at its October 7, 2002, Regular meeting, the Commission authorized negotiations with Tindale-Oliver; that several negotiation meetings were held between the Consultant and the City which led to revisions of some of the phases in the Scope of Services, included in the Agenda backup material as Exhibit A to the Agreement for Downtown Parking Master Plan Consultant Services; that Staff recommends a motion to: 1) approve the agreement between the City and Tindale-Oliver to provide Parking Consulting Services for Downtown Parking Master Plan, 2) authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement, and 3) authorize Staff and the Consultant to proceed with Phase 1 through a portion of Phase 3 of Section 1 in FY 2002/03 and proceed with the balance of Phase 3 of Section 1 and Phase 4 of Section 2 in FY 2003/04, contingent upon the approval of the remaining $53,155.02 in the FY 2003/04 budget. Commissioner Martin asked the reason the cost increased by 30 percent? Mr. Freija stated that Staff estimated the range of the original Scope of Services as $150,000 to $200,000; that the cost for Geographic Information System (GIS) was not included; that the consultant indicated utilizing GIS would be better for the City in the future. Commissioner Martin asked if the revisions to the Scope of Services is the reason for the increase in the cost of the study for the Downtown Parking Master Plan? Mr. Freija stated that the entire increase is not solely due to the GIS. Commissioner Martin asked for clarification as to the other revisions to the Scope of Services which caused the increase? Mr. Daughters stated that Staff estimated a range of $150,000 to $200,000 based on the Scope of Services; that the City has never completed a parking study; that the range was an estimation; that the conclusion was to budget the low end cost of $150,000; however, $200,000 should have been budgeted; that all six responses to the RFP were close to $200,000; that the reason for the increase in the cost was the estimate was wrong at the time of budgeting. BOOK 53 Page 24626 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24627 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that a number of questions regarding the Scope of Services have been discussed with Staff; that some provisions in the Scope of Services are a concern; and asked for clarification as to the discussion groups indicated in the Scope of Services? Mr. Freija stated that the discussion groups will consist of stakeholders and individuals interested in Downtown parking in general; that the discussion group can include any member of the public and is not specifically limited. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the discussion groups are identified in Phases 1 and 2 of the Scope of Services included in the Agenda backup material; that specific presentations or updates to the Commission regarding progress are not included; that a requirement to report to the Commission on a regular basis seems unclear. Mr. Freija stated that a presentation of the progress of the Downtown Parking Master Plan including a schedule will be presented prior to beginning each Phase; that a Commission workshop will also be conducted between Phases 1 and 2; that Staff will obtain Commission consent prior to proceeding with each Phase. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that obtaining Commission consent prior to proceeding with each Phase is basically procedural; that the Downtown Parking Master Plan should be developed based on the City of Sarasota, Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020). Mr. Freija stated that the Downtown Parking Master Plan is based on the Downtown Master Plan 2020 but will not be a 20-year plan. Vice Mayor Palmer referred to the City of Sarasota Scope of Services Downtown Parking Master Plan included in the Agenda backup mat terial and stated that the Scope of Services addresses the forecasting of the amount of parking necessary in 5 years to FY 2008 and 10 years to FY 2013; that the Scope of Services also includes the preparation of a 5 and 10 year development plan for the Cityi that a draft financial plan will be developed to include operating revenue, expense, and debt projections through FY 2013; that developing some parking structures by FY 2008 and FY 2013 is a possibility; that the parking structures constructed in FY 2013 must have operating revenue, expense, and debt projections beyond FY 2013; that the needs of the City should be evaluated beyond FY 2013; that the timeframe of the Scope of Services is a concern; that the Scope of Services appears to end at FY 2013; that a parking structure may be developed in FY 2013; that future financial projections would be required; and asked for clarification of the timeframe. Mr. Daughters stated that the Downtown Parking Master Plan is a 10 year study rather than a 20 year study, but is based on the Downtown Master Plan 2020 which is to FY 2020; that projects for completion within a 5 and 10 year timeframe will be recommended; that parking is very specific and difficult to forecast beyond 10 years which is the reason for a 10 year plan; that the advantage of the current proposal is the GIS will provide the City the tools necessary for Staff to develop projections for the future at any time; that Staff will have the ability to develop projections annually if the Commission desires; that the financial projections will be based on the parking needs for 5 and 10 year increments. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the 10 year projection must go beyond FY 2013. Mr. Wallace stated that the financial analysis will evaluate cash flow to the end of the debt service period to assure adequate funds are identified; that the operating plans will be for two 5 year increments; that a plan will indicate which projects should be developed for the 5 year period and the 10 year period; that the cash flow analysis for the debt service will be prepared based on a payback period of the bonds of 20 years or the payback period obtained. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Downtown Parking Master Plan will project far into the future; that the original intent for the Downtown Parking Master Plan was derived from the Palm Avenue Project and the number of parking spaces the City is going to allow in the Downtown area; that the City may arrive at a point of not allowing additional parking spaces in the Downtown area; that off-site mitigation and park 'n ride facilities will be required; that the hope is vehicles may not be in the Downtown area in 10 years; that the Downtown area is built out; that taking one year to complete the Downtown Parking Master Plan is beyond belief; that the issues are simple; that land use, City-owned vacant land, and private/public parking should be inventoried; that at some point, the parking maximum is reached and off-site mitigation is necessaryi that the Scope of Services does not include such a determination. BOOK 53 Page 24628 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24629 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Quillin continued that the City must move quickly; that the Downtown Parking Master Plan is necessary for decisions affecting different areas of Downtown; that the City must have the information to provide incentives for desired development in the Downtown area; that the City may not have a year to wait for the Downtown Parking Master Plan; that specific parking information is necessary for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Advisory Board to make decisions and negotiate development agreements; that surface parking in the Downtown area is unrealistic; that parking structures and off-site mitigation should be evaluated; that the CRA Advisory Board cannot wait one year for the results; that the Downtown Parking Master Plan is time sensitive and market driven, which is the reason a motion was made to allocate funding for the parking study out of the General Fund with payback after the current fiscal year; that the concern is completion of the Downtown Parking Master Plan is not moving quick enough; that the calculation of determining the number of public or private spaces the City will allow in the Downtown area is basic; that Ringling Boulevard, Fruitville Road, and Gulf Stream Avenue are not appropriate areas for additional parking spaces; that the long- term plan is understood but will not help the CRA Advisory Board make decisions. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to approve the agreement between the City and Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc., to provide Parking Consulting Services for the Downtown Parking Master Plan, authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute the agreement, authorize Staff and Consultant to proceed with Phase 1 through a portion of Phase 3 of Section 1 in fiscal year (FY) 2002/03 and proceed with the balance of Phase 3 of Section 1 and Phase 4 of Section 2 in FY 2003/04 contingent upon the approval of the remaining $53,155.02 in the FY 2003/04 budget. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the Downtown Parking Master Plan should be completed more quickly if possible; that a one year period is too long; that advancing funds from the unappropriated fund balance to complete the Downtown Parking Master Plan sooner may be necessary; and asked if the study could be completed more quickly than one year? Mr. Wallace stated that the parking study can be conducted in approximately eight months; that the results of inventory and future demand will be completed in the first four months and presented at a Commission workshop; that the purpose of the Commission workshop is for the Commission to provide direction and assist in refining approaches such as off-site mitigation and elevated garages. Commissioner Quillin stated that an eight month timeframe is acceptable. City Manager McNees stated that the ending of FY 2002/03 is very close to an eight month timeframe; that decisions must be made prior to the completion of the Downtown Parking Master Plan; however, as few decisions as possible should be made in the absence of the complete parking study. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if the Administration will continue to work on speeding up the timeframe and request appropriate funding if necessary? City Manager McNees stated yes; that the lapse of a fiscal year will not stop the progress of the Downtown Parking Master Study. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if the Administration will provide a recommendation to alter the funding if necessary? City Manager McNees stated yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that the presentations regarding the GIS may require rescheduling; that the Downtown Parking Master Study is time sensitive; that the City has already waited six months; that the Downtown Parking Master Study is an important part of the Downtown Master Plan 2020. Mr. Freija stated that Staff is also anxious to proceed with the Downtown Parking Master Study; however, the peak of the tourist season is close; that the Downtown Parking Master Study will be a model for the City to utilize in the future; that collecting data in January 2003 which is nearing the peak of the season is not desired; that Staff is aware of the concerns of the Commission; however, the Scope of Services clarifies and specifies the manner in which the parking study will be conducted; that an inventory report will be provided; that a parking study is site specific and not conducted on an annual basis as is a traffic study; that the parking study must be accurate from the beginning to project the future; that the City is very close to the peak of the tourist season. Commissioner Quillin stated that holding up the Downtown Parking Master Study due to the peak of the tourist season is a BOOK 53 Page 24630 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24631 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. significant concern; that discussion groups can begin working at this time. Mr. Freija stated that gathering the information from the discussion groups at this time and collecting data in February and March 2003 is Staff's intent. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion to approve the agreement oetween the City and Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc., to provide Parking Consulting Services for the Downtown Parking Master Plan, authorize the Mayor and the City Auditor and Clerk to execute the agreement, authorize Staff and Consultant to proceed with Phase 1 through a portion of Phase 3 of Section 1 in fiscal year (FY) 2002/03 and proceed with the balance of Phase 3 of Section 1 and Phase 4 of Section 2 in FY 2003/04 contingent upon the approval of the remaining $53,155.02 in the FY 2003/04 budget. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to extend the meeting past the 9:30 p.m. deadline to consider Agenda Item XIII-3. Motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Quillin stated that Agenda Item XIV, Commission Board and Committee Reports, and Agenda Item XV, Remarks of Commissioners, should also be considered. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved to extend the meeting past the 9:30 p.m. deadline to complete the Agenda but not to extend the meeting beyond 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Quillin stated that consideration of Agenda Item XIV, Commission Board and Committee Reports, and Agenda Item XV, Remarks of Commissioners, may extend beyond 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Servian stated that the Commission changed the meeting time in an effort to complete the meetings at a more reasonable hour. Commissioner Quillin stated that the meeting should be continued to allow completion of the Agenda and asked for Clarification of the motion. Commissioner Servian stated that the motion is to extend the meeting past the 9:30 p.m. deadline to complete the Agenda but no later than 10:00 p.m. Mayor Mason called for a vote on the motion. Motion failed (3 to 2): Martin, no; Palmer, no; Quillin, no; Servian, yes; Mason, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Palmer and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to extend the meeting past the 9:30 p.m. deadline to complete the Agenda. Motion carried (3 to 2): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, no; Mason, no. Commissioner Martin stated that the intention is to complete the Agenda by 10:00 p.m. 22. NEW BUSINESS: RESCISION RE: : MOTION ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 18, 2002, TO DENY PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4407 = RESCINDED MOTION; ADOPTED PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 02-4407; DIRECTED STAFF TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE TO DETERMINE IF BANK DRIVE- -THROUGH FACILITIES WILL BE ALLOWED UNDER ACTION STRATEGY 4.13, FUTURE LAND USE CHAPTER, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ALSO CALLED THE SARASOTA CITY PLAN, 1998 EDITION, AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND TO AMEND THE ZONING CODE (2002 ED.) TO CODIFY THE PROCEDURE AT THE TIME OF ADOPTION OF THE NEW DOWNTOWN ZONE DISTRICTS (AGENDA ITEM XIII-3) CD 9:35 through 9:55 Mayor Mason stated that in the absence of any objections, William Merrill, III, Attorney, Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen and Ginsburg, P.A., representing the Challengers to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 edition (City's Comprehensive Plan), is requested to come forward. Mayor Mason stated that the Commissioners' opinions regarding the motion to deny proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407 approved at the November 18, 2002, Regular Commission meeting are deeply respected; and read a prepared statement indicating that more expense associated with additional litigation is not in the best interest of the citizens of the City at the present time and the Commission should exhaust all efforts to mediate the matter, which has not yet occurred. Mayor Mason passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Palmer. BOOK 53 Page 24632 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24633 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. On motion of Mayor Mason and second of Commissioner Servian, it was moved to rescind the motion of November 18, 2002, to deny proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407. Attorney Merrill came before the Commission; referred to a January 6, 2003, letter distributed to the Commission prior to the meeting concerning the challenge to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan; and stated that the Challengers to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan have attempted to identify a final opportunity to resolve the issues surrounding the challenge rather than continue with the expense and time of litigation and the resulting discord in the community; that the Challengers believe resolving the issues is important sO the business community, the citizens, and the City can avoid the problems associated with other controversial issues such as the John Ringling Bridge replacement; that a good beginning to the New Year of 2003 is to make a renewed effort to trust one another and to try to work together to come to a solution to the challenge to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the Challengers authorized settlement of the dispute in accordance with the proposed settlement language of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407 as revised which was passed on first reading at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting. Attorney Merrill continued that as part of the proposed settlement, the Commission is requested to direct Staff to develop a new procedure sO a conceptual development project including a drive-through facility on a primary street other than Main Street can be approved during the initial stages of the development review process; that the new procedure will assure developers and Owners the time and expense of an entire process could be avoided if potential obstacles are discovered early in the development review process; that a certainty of approval of design during the initial stages of the development review process will alleviate concerns among developers and ownersi that the development of a procedure would be up to the Commission; that the Challengers would like to have input; that additionally, the Commission approved a motion at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting to direct Staff to develop an economic fiscal analysis and a detailed scope of services. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that of utmost importance at present is acceptance by the Challengers of the Commission's action at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting with the following changes to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan: the language concerning automobile drive-through facilities is changed from "will" to "may" - the limit on the height of the two 18-story buildings which can be allowed is changed to 180 feet the height of the five existing buildings is limited to the current height as measured in feet Vice Mayor Palmer continued that additionally, the development of a procedure to consider drive-through facilities early in the development review process is being requested. Attorney Merrill stated that is correcti that the Challengers are not interested in establishing requirements at the present time; that the current meeting is not the appropriate forum to establish procedures; that Staff could consult with the Commission, the Challengers, and other interested parties to develop an appropriate procedure. Commissioner Servian stated that the efforts of the Challengers and citizens who participated to move forward in the best interest of the City are commended; that a protracted administrative hearing process is not necessary; that the City and the Challengers should not spend a large amount of money on continued contention; that 2003 is the beginning of a new year; that having everyone work together for the betterment of the community to settle the challenge at the beginning of the New Year of 2003 is appropriate; that a motion may not have been made concerning the economic fiscal analysis; however, the intent was for the Administration to work with the Challengers concerning an economic fiscal analysis. Commissioner Servian continued that the design of drive-through facilities should be not be incorporated in the City's Comprehensive Plan, in which case the proposal can be supported; that a positive result has been achieved, which is pleasing. Attorney Merrill stated that the reference to a motion concerning an economic fiscal analysis and detailed scope of services may have been a mistake. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the direction concerning the economic fiscal analysis was not incorporated in a motion; that BOOK 53 Page 24634 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24635 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. the January 6, 2002, letter references a motion as well; that clarification is required. Attorney Merrill stated that apologies are offered; that the incorrect reference is not intentional. Commissioner Quillin stated that a discussion concerning economic fiscal analyses is recalled; that the City is currently conducting economic fiscal studies, including studies for the proposed Whole Foods project and the Downtown Parking Master Plan previously approved at the current meeting; that many actions will be taken to assure the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020) is successful; that language concerning drive- through facilities should be included in the City's land development regulations for the Downtown area; that the proper process in adopting changes should be followed to assure consistency; that Staff was contacted after the vote at the November 4, 2002, Regular Commission meeting and informed a Special Commission meeting would be requested if the Challengers would agree to the language the Commission approved; that time is sometimes required to work out problems; that the City, the Challengers, and many other citizens wish to settle the challenge sO projects can proceed; that a Downtown Parking Master Plan is being developed; that a number of other studies are in progress; that sincere gratitude is expressed to all participants responsible for resolution of the issues. Commissioner Martin stated that appreciation is extended to the Challengers and Attorney Merrill for bringing the Commission the desired resolution; that the Commissioners are thanked for having faith in the implementation of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the Mayor is also thanked for recognizing a crucial point in the process. Commissioner Martin continued that the motion will be supported; that key elements of the Downtown Master Plan 2020 are the creation of a pedestrian experience on the street and the manner in which buildings meet the street; that the regulations concerning drive-through facilities and stepbacks are the two key components; that not obtaining the desired result concerning drive-through facilities and stepbacks could have resulted in a loss of the soul of the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the resolution achieved the desired result; that the Commission's concerns to encourage development while protecting the quality of life can be addressed through the land development regulations for the Downtown area; that achieving a resolution to the challenge early in 2003 is a gift to the community; that working cooperatively in the future will be more enjoyable than has been working at opposing aims; that the news of resolving the challenge is good. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the resolution is pleasing; that the delay in developing appropriate land development regulations for the Downtown area has been a continuing concerni that delay could result in negative development activity; that the Challengers are applauded for bringing forward the proposed resolution to accept the Commission's actions; that the hope previously expressed was the Challengers would trust the Commission and accept the word "may" rather than "will"; that the Commission was previously committed to working in good faith to develop procedures to resolve outstanding issues; that the Challengers, the Commission, and the members of the community do not want to be held hostage to an administrative hearing which would continue the process for a long time; that the participation of everyone is appreciated. Vice Mayor Palmer called for a vote on the motion to rescind the denial of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Quillin, yes; Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Vice Mayor Palmer asked for clarification of the next step. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the denial of proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407 has been removed; that the Commission can make a motion to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 02-4407 on second reading if desired. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Mayor Mason, it was moved to adopt Ordinance No. 02-4407 on second reading. Vice Mayor Palmer requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Palmer, yes. Commissioner Servian stated that appreciation should be extended to Cathy Layton for her efforts. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that appreciation should also be extended to Debra Jacobs and several others. Attorney Merrill asked if a motion will be made concerning a review procedure for drive-through facilities? BOOK 53 Page 24636 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24637 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Commissioner Quillin stated that a review procedure for drive- through facilities should go through the normal process. Robert Fournier, Attorney, City Attorney's Office, came before the Commission and stated that suggested language was drafted in anticipation of a Commission request for a motion. Commissioner Quillin stated that a request could be made for the Administration to work on developing a procedure; that one element of the land development regulations for the Downtown area should not be considered separately. Attorney Merrill stated that the suggested motion is to direct Staff to consider developing a procedure. Mayor Mason asked the suggested motion? Attorney Fournier quoted the suggested motion as follows: Move to direct Staff to establish a procedure in which the determination of whether or not to allow a drive-through facility under Action Strategy 4.13 of the Future Land Use Chapter will be made at the commencement of the development review process for the primary use of the financial institution and to amend the Zoning Code to codify this procedure at the time of adoption of the new Downtown Zone Districts. On motion of Mayor Mason and second of Vice Mayor Palmer, it was moved as suggested by the City Attorney's Office. Commissioner Quillin stated that the development of a review procedure should be referred to the Administration. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the motion is to direct Staff to consider the issue while developing the land development regulations for the Downtown area and is in good faith as an indication the Challengers' concerns will be considered. Commissioner Martin stated that the intent is to indicate good faith; and asked if Staff has any concerns with the motion? Attorney Fournier stated that Planning Department Staff has reviewed the suggested motion and did not indicate any concerns. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Commission should have input prior to Staff's presenting recommendations; that new drive- through facilities should be designed similarly to the drive- through facility in the parking garage at Northern Trust Bank; that drive-through facilities should be governed by design criteria; that the Administration should be directed to include the review of drive-through facilities in the normal process; that no one has indicated an interest in developing a bank drive- through facility at the present time. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that bank drive-through facilities are currently allowed. Commissioner Quillin stated that directing Staff to develop the procedure immediately is not supported. City Attorney Taylor stated that a suggestion is not being made to expedite development of any procedure; that the motion was prepared to implement the procedure referenced in the January 6, 2003, letter from the Challengers; that the motion is to refer the development of procedures to Staff, to proceed on a normal basis, and to bring back recommendations to the Commission for approval as part of the proposed land development regulations for the Downtown area. Commissioner Quillin stated that the language of the motion could be modified as to refer to Staff for a recommendation or report back to the Commission for discussion as part of the land development regulations for the Downtown area. Attorney Fournier stated that the motion does not indicate the development of the procedure should be expedited but rather will be included in the development of the land development regulations for the Downtown area. Commissioner Quillin stated that the motion will not be supported as the phrase "direct Staff" is used rather than "refer to Staff." On motion of Mayor Mason and second of Commissioner Martin, it was moved to call the question. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Mason, yesi Quillin, yesi Servian, yes; Palmer, yes. Vice Mayor Palmer restated the motion as to direct Staff to establish a procedure to determine if drive-through facilities for the primary use of a financial institution will be allowed under BOOK 53 Page 24638 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24639 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Action Strategy 4.13, Future Land Use Chapter, City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, at the commencement of the development review process and to amend the Zoning Code (2002 Ed.) to codify the procedure at the time of adoption of the new Downtown Zone Districts. Motion carried (4 to 1): Martin, yes; Mason, yes; Quillin, no; Servian, yesi Palmer, yes. 23. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM XIV) CD 9:54 through 9:57 VICE MAYOR PALMER: A. stated that the Commission is requested to review individual schedules for availability for travel to Tallahassee, Florida, to lobby the State Legislature concerning the Manasota League of Cities (MLC) 2003 Legislative Priorities; that MLC is compiling a list of available dates for members of the Commissions belonging to MLC to travel to Tallahassee; that the funds for travel will come from the Commissioners' travel budgets; that available dates should be submitted; that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson has the schedule for the legislative sessions; that the schedule of available dates will be compiled on January 9, 2003; that the Commission is requested to seriously consider the list of available dates; that all sessions will not be attended; that Commissioners are encouraged to find time to travel to Tallahassee. Commissioner Martin asked if the available dates are the months of January and February 2003? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the list of available dates should include the months of March and April 2003. COMMISSIONER MARTIN: A. stated that he sits on the Leadership Council of the Manatee/Sarasota Continuum of Care which is a homeless service and serves as a coordination umbrella for Sarasota and Manatee Counties; that the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the implementation of a Management Information System (MIS) by the fall of 2004; that the MIS will be an intake procedure to acquire information to assist in providing services efficiently and without duplication; that implementation of the MIS is moving forward; that Manatee County has appropriated some funds to share in the cost; that Sarasota County is represented on the Leadership Council and is pursuing funding; that various local foundations are being pursued for additional funding; that the MIS will be a software system to manage intake information for not only homeless services but all social services; that the new software program will be more efficient, allow for better provider service, and will make a significant difference in the provision of social services in the future. 24. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, / ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO REVIEW THE ISSUE OF A STREET VACATION FOR SIXTH STREET AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION; DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO ASSIST WITH OBTAINING FUNDING FOR STORMWATER MITIGATION AT JORDONS CROSSING; REFERRED TO THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK, AND IF NECESSARY, THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DETERMINE IF ONE OR BOTH OF THE REGULAR COMMISSION MEETINGS CAN BE ELIMINATED DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2003 (AGENDA ITEM XV) CD 9:57 through 10:13 COMMISSIONER QUILLIN: A. stated that the Sarasota Sister Cities Association (SSCA) signs are posted on Fruitville Road and on US 41; that the signs have not been updated in quite some time and are also unattractive; that Sister City Dunfermline, Scotland, is not included on the signs; that the signs should be updated and be made more attractive; that the signs cannot be read by passersby unless traveling at a low rate of speed; that Sister City signs posted in other Cities are attractive, distinctive, and are not the green Florida Department of Transportation signs. B. stated that she and the Mayor recently attended the dedication at Jordons Crossing which is a Habitat for Humanity community; that the community has eight new families moving in; that she has been very involved in the project and has many concerns about the neighborhood; that Sixth Street has not been vacated BOOK 53 Page 24640 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24641 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. between Brink and Rhodes Avenues; that regular telephone calls are being received since the houses are being constructed and the City has not vacated Sixth Street; that Sixth Street requires stop signs to avoid potential accidents; that the City should initiate a vacation of Sixth Street from Tuttle Avenue to Brink Avenue; that support for vacating Sixth Street was received from the residents in the development; that having Sixth Street as a through-street is not desired; that the area between Tuttle and Dodge Avenues is also not desired as a through-street by the neighbors; that a through-street between Tuttle and Dodge Avenues would not be in the best interest of the neighborhood; that the Administration is requested to review and address the situation; that vacating Sixth Street and the area between Tuttle and Dodge Avenues will appease the neighborhood; that the lots would then be available to Habitat for Humanity for construction; that the area on Brink Avenue could remain as greenspace; that the neighborhood is very concerned about the vacation of Sixth Street; that a significant amount of additional cut-through traffic is occurring since the City has not vacated Sixth Street; that the Avalon Neighborhood has a traffic committee; that traffic warrants have been met on Eighth Street; that the traffic committee is attempting to acquire more signage for Tuttle Elementary School; that the issue is substantial for the neighborhood; that Commission consensus is requested for the Administration to bring back a report for the vacation of Sixth Street and the area between Tuttle and Dodge Avenues. Mayor Mason stated that similar comments were personally received at the dedication. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the issue was previously brought before the Commission; that maintaining the grid system is the concern; that people will utilize other streets if City streets are vacated; that the problem will become continuous and is the reason the vacation of Sixth Street did not take place; that the issue is not simple. Commissioner Quillin stated that traffic data has since been received; that Sixth Street will become another traffic cut- through similar to Eighth Street; that both streets will be cut- throughs through two neighborhoods; that the hope is a solution can be found; that discussions with Staff will be held; that Aspinwall Street provides additional roadway; however, Sixth Street is causing a great deal of concern in the area. Mayor Mason stated that referring the issue to the Administration is supported. City Manager McNees stated that a suggestion is to direct the Administration to bring back a recommendation which will allow further review of the issue rather than bringing back a street vacation. Vice Mayor Palmer and Commissioner Servian and agreed. Commissioner Quillin stated that a street vacation is the desire. Mayor Mason stated that hearing the Commission's majority agreement, the Administration is directed to review the issue of a street vacation for Sixth Street and bring back a recommendation. B. stated that Habitat for Humanity is building on land which was providing drainage for three different basins; that the area was basically for storage or transmission of stormwater; that drainage from the Avalon neighborhood is now draining into the new development which is the responsibility of the City, the County's Stormwater Environmental Utility (SEU), and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). ; that the City has $165,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to contribute to the $330,000 which Habitat for Humanity will be required to fund to deal with stormwater mitigation; that some additional CDBG funds may be available for the project; that a request is for Commission consensus to direct the Administration to assist with identifying funding for the stormwater mitigation which totals approximately $330,000; that a shortage of approximately $170,000 exists; that Staff may be able to assist with obtaining funding. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that directing the Administration to assist with obtaining Eunding is supported. Commissioner Servian agreed. BOOK 53 Page 24642 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24643 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission's majority consensus is to direct the Administration to assist Habitat for Humanity with obtaining funding for stormwater mitigation. COMMISSIONER MARTIN: A. stated that honoring advisory board members with a plaque was raised in an earlier discussion; that discussion took place at one time for having an event at the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) to recognize advisory board members. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the original goal for the event was for the fall of 2002. Commissioner Martin stated that a request is to have the ceremony to honor advisory board members in the spring of 2003. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the ceremony could be held in March 2003. B. stated that the VWPAH Board has been expanded; that applications have not been received for the seats for south Sarasota County or Manatee County; that the Commission is requested to assist in bringing forward applicants who may be appropriate to fill the seats; that the desire is to have the VWPAH Board fully staffed. Vice Mayor Palmer stated that the VWPAH Executive Director indicated some individuals have expressed interest in the seats. Commissioner Martin stated that the VWPAH Executive Director recently indicated nothing definitive has been heard from any of the individuals who previously indicated an interest in serving. VICE MAYOR PALMER: A. asked the status of the Ad Hoc Committee concerning Non- Discrimination? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a resolution will be presented at the January 21, 2003, Regular Commission meeting to formally appoint the members to the Ad Hoc Committee and to assign the duties; that the hope is the first Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be the week of January 21, 2003. Vice Mayor Palmer asked if all of the individuals appointed have been notified? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated yes. B. stated that discussions were held in 2002 concerning eliminating a meeting during the month of August 2002; however, two meetings were held; that scheduling requirements dictate addressing the issue in advance; that a request is for consensus to refer the issue to the City Manager, the City Auditor and Clerk, and if necessary, the City Attorney to determine if one of the meetings can be eliminated during the month of August 2003. Commissioner Quillin stated that some issues which may be brought forward are not known in advance. Vice Mayor Palmer agreed but stated that issues can be appropriately scheduled if the schedule for August 2003 is addressed far enough in advance; that the issue was raised too late in 2002. Commissioners Martin and Servian agreed. Mayor Mason stated that the Commission's consensus is to refer the issue to the City Manager, the City Auditor and Clerk, and the City Attorney, if necessary, to determine if one or both of the Regular Commission meetings can be eliminated during the month of August 2003. C. stated that the City Attorney's Office is requested to provide a report outlining the final and formal disposition of the challenge to the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. COMMISSIONER SERVIAN: A. stated that Peter Abbott, Police Chief, Sarasota Police Department (SPD) is doing a wonderful job; that many outstanding and positive comments have been received from the community concerning the increased enforcement on north US 41 and the increased presence of foot patrol officers in the Downtown; that people are suddenly contacting the City and indicating police officers are being seen patrolling in areas never seen in the past; BOOK 53 Page 24644 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. BOOK 53 Page 24645 01/06/03 2:30 P.M. that the increased patrol and public enthusiasm should be attributed to Police Chief Abbott; that the SPD Staff meetings are now a little longer and a little more contentious; that Police Chief Abbott is not allowing business as usual which may have occurred in the past to continue; that the increased enforcement is appreciated. B. stated that the vagrancy problem along the Bayfront is a concern; that vagrancy is being addressed but remains problematic; that vagrants are continuing to use the beachfront next to Selby Gardens as a personal party beach; that the vagrants are tying bicycles to the signs along the road; that an effort is being made to clean up the area; however, compelling reasons exist to raise the issue at the present time; that citizens continually telephone the City and complain about the problem. MAYOR MASON: A. stated that the Commissioners were provided with information and an invitation to attend the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Dr. MLK) breakfast and the associated events; that a memorial march will not be held in 2003; that the County is having a presentation for the North County Library at the site immediately after the Dr. MLK breakfast; that the organizers would not have time for the memorial march. B. stated that the Administration is requested to bring back a report regarding concerns raised concerning code enforcement at the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) ; that she is not satisfied with the information previously provided. City Manager McNees stated that the Administration reported the status of code enforcement at the SHA; that Staff will provide further information as an Agenda item at a future Regular Commission meeting if the Commission wishes; that the Commission's direction is requested. Mayor Mason stated that the issue of code enforcement at the SHA should be placed on the Agenda for the January 21, 2003, Regular Commission meeting; that the concern is having two sets of standards. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Administration's report regarding code enforcement was received; that the problem with the report was the violation could not be identified; that code violations for other areas are identified; that the report did not include the actual violation; that the item should be placed on the Agenda for the January 21, 2003, Regular Commission meeting. 25. OTHER ATTRS/APMTISTATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XVI) CD 10:13 through 10:14 CITY MANAGER MCNEES: A. stated that the efforts of the bargaining unit members represented by the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. (PBA), to amend and modify the two existing Contract Agreements between the City of Sarasota and the PBA are appreciated; that 116 members voted in favor of the contract with only seven members opposed; that the efforts throughout the negotiation are appreciated; that the negotiations were positive; that the outcome is pleasing. CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that Shawn Fulker, Assistant City Auditor and Clerk, Media Operations, is a member of the National Guard and has been called to active duty for a one-year period in support of US defense efforts and will be leaving for duty the week of January 13, 2003. 26. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XVII) CD 10:14 There being no further business, Mayor Mason adjourned the Regular meeting of the City Commission of January 6, 2003, at 10:14 p.m. aal CAROLYN J. NASON, MAYOR ATTEST: BilkE Robexesor BILLY ECh ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK BOOK 53 Page 24646 01/06/03 2:30 P.M.