MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 19, 1993 AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Gene Pillot, Vice Mayor Nora Patterson, Commissioners Fredd Atkins, Mollie Cardamone, and David Merrill, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Gene Pillot The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH = JULY 1993 #1 (0030) through (0139) James Frazier, Battalion Chief, came before the Commission and introduced Fire Fighter Jimmie R. McKinney. Chief Frazier stated that it was a pleasure for him to see Fire Fighter McKinney receive this award; that Fire Fighter McKinney is always eager to take on a new job or to make improvements in existing techniques and procedures. Chief Frazier continued that Fire Fighter McKinney provided a majority of the testing results that earned the City the improved Class 2 fire rating from the Insurance Services Office. Mayor Pillot presented Jimmie R. McKinney with a plaque and certificate for Employee of the Month for July 1993 in appreciation of his unique performance with the City of Sarasota and congratulated him for his outstanding efforts. 2. PRESENTATION RE: THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE" VISUAL DOCUMENTARY OF FIRE FIGHTERS #1 (0140) through (0487) Mayor Pillot stated that at this time a video presentation about fire fighters from the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) would be shown to the Commission. 3. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY = APPROVED #1 (0489) through (0510) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: Book 35 Page 9524 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9525 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. A. Add Approval Re: Memorial Resolution No. 93R-666, recognizing the passing of Dr. Henry Morton before the Approval of Minutes B. Remove Consent Agenda No. 1 Item III-A-4, Approval Re: Authorization for City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for public hearing to deregulate vehicles-for-hire On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 4. ADOPTION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. 93R-666, RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF DR. HENRY MORTON = ADOPTED #1 (0513) through (0632) Mayor Pillot read Memorial Resolution 93R-666 which recognizes the passing of Dr. Henry Morton, an outstanding citizen of the community. Mayor Pillot continued that Dr. Morton came to Sarasota in 1919 from Vermont and became the City's first pediatrician in the 1940s; that Dr. Morton served as the Medical Director for the Children's Medical Service in 1976 where he was instrumental in helping thousands of children with orthopedic handicaps and disabilities. As directed in the Resolution, Dr. Morton's passing will be recorded in the Minutes of the City Commission to remain in the City archives as a lasting tribute and a copy of the resolution, appropriately framed, will be delivered to Dr. Morton's bereaved family. The City Commission paused to recognize the passing of Dr. Henry Morton. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. 93R-666. Mayor Pillot requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES = APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 6, 1993 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0638) through (0649) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of July 6, 1993. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 6. BOARD ACTIONS - REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY ADVANCED PARTIAL REPORT REGARDING PETITION 93-SE-11 AT REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 7, 1993 = AFFIRMED THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL REGARDING PETITION 93-SE-11 (AGENDA ITEM II) #1 (0651) through (0741) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that there is a rule that says that a Planning Board report cannot be given before 30 days after the Planning Board meeting; that the item to be presented is a Special Exception and if not acted upon within 45 days it will be automatically approved; that since the Commission will not be meeting in August, a motion needed to be entertained to suspend the rules before this item could be presented. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to waive the rules to allow this item to be presented by the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Berta Lefkovich, Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency, came before the Commission. Ms. Lefkovich presented the following item from the Planning Board's Regular Meeting of July 7, 1993: A. Petition 93-SE-11 = Special Exception to Permit Open-Air Dining in the CT (Commercial, Tourist) Zone District Ms. Lefkovich stated that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency found Petition 93-SE-11 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and recommends approval. City Manager Sollenberger stated that he recommended affirmation of the Planning Board's action. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to affirm the recommendation of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency with regard to Petition 93-SE-11. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yesi Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 7. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1 = ITEMS 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8,9- APPROVED: ITEM 3 = ACTION POSTPONED UNTIL AFTER A REPORT OF THE OUTCOME OF THE MEETING BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE VERICLE8-FOR-HIRE INDUSTRY IN AUGUST IS GIVEN TO THE COMMISSION: ITEM 4 REMOVED IN THE CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY; ITEM 10 = Book 35 Page 9526 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9527 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A-1, -2, -3,-5, -6,-7,-8, -9 AND -10) #1 (0745) through (1465) Mayor Pillot stated that Consent Agenda No. 1 Item 4 (Approval Re; Authorization for City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for Public Hearing to deregulate vehicles-for-hire, was removed in the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Vice Mayor Patterson requested that Items 3 and 10 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Request to schedule a Joint Public Hearing with School Board and County Commission Concerning Booker High School Traffic Mitigation Alternatives on Monday, November 8, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. 2. Approval Re: Bayfront Improvement Project Final Acceptance of Landscaping 5. Approval Re: Authorize the City Attorney to prepare and Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the First Amendment to Agreement for Engineering Services with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., for the Utility System Rehabilitation 6. Approval Re: Authorize the City Manager to sign the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.) Part 2 Permit Application 7. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 93-3699, modification of Pollution Ordinance (Chapter 27) for compliance to EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Guidelines Section 40 Code of Federal Regulations 8. Approval Re: Schedule the Public Hearing for the John Ringling Bridge Replacement on Monday, September 20, 1993 9. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Warranty Deed for Ken Thompson Parkway, Right-of-Way Dedication On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 Items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Chapter 36 of the Sarasota City Code to delete the necessity for the Police Services Bureau to investigate applicants and issue I.D. cards to operators of taxicabs and other vehicles-for-hire Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she had removed Item 3 because the Administration had removed Item 4 and Items 3 and 4 deal with the same subject; that she does not understand why the Commission is being asked to approve Item 3 and not Item 4 also; that she is not comfortable that the City would back off from investigation of people who are conducting a vehicle-for-hire business. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the business of identification cards is also included in some other sections of the Code; that the Administration intends to propose the revocation of the regulatory functions on vehicles-for-hire but Staff needs to conduct further communication on it. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she believes the Commission should get some input from the industry first as to whether the industry feels a substantial service in the interest of public safety is derived before the City Attorney is directed to prepare the necessary ordinance; that Item 4 which was removed (in the Changes to the Orders of the Day) referenced a Sarasota Countywide vehicles-for-mire policy and she feels a Countywide policy makes sense and would be happy to turn the whole function over to the County if they are willing to assume it. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he has not heard any interest on the part of the County for such a policy; that Item 4 should not have been placed on the agenda. Commissioner Atkins stated that he feels an investigation (of vehicles-for-hire) is an important undertaking and someone should be doing it. Gordon Jolly, Chief of the Police Services Bureau, came before the Commission and stated that the (background investigations) policy was in place prior to his 25 years with the City; that during that time he has not seen any public safety value realized from the expense incurred (by the City); that the City will meet during August with the industry yehicles-for-hire) to try to formulate an alternative policy; that it is felt that the industry should take responsibility for policing itself rather than the expense the city incurs now to conduct the background investigations and the administrative work involved. Commissioner Atkins stated that he agreed that the vehicles-for-nire, industry should police themselves. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she would like to hear the outcome of the meeting (with the industry in August) before voting to have the City Attorney's office spend the time to draft an ordinance. Book 35 Page 9528 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9529 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Chief Jolly stated that he would be glad to report back to the Commission after the meeting with the industry. Mayor Pillot asked what the appropriate action would be for the Commission to take? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Commission should postpone action on this item until after a report is received. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to postpone action on this item until after a report is received. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 10. Approval Re: Authorize the use of L.0.S.T. funds for the acquisition of used mobile homes, in accordance with the Sarasota Mobile Home Park Density Reduction Program Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she thought the Commission had decided during the CIP (Capital Improvements Project) meeting to slow down the purchase of mobile homes in the City (Mobile Home) Park while waiting for the results of some court cases that are slowly making their way to the (State) Supreme Court; that she had anticipated exactly what the Administration has done to take the income from the Mobile Home Park that normally was used to purchase these homes and funnel the income into the General Fund. Vice Mayor Patterson continued that she had not anticipated that as a substitute, the City was going to use funds approved for capital improvements for purchasing these mobile homes; that she does not think the shift of funds is inappropriate; however, she feels there are better things that can be done with the $70,000 that was freed up when the City decided not to place the electric wires underground for the Storeback Program. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration is not proposing any funds into the upcoming budget for any further acquisitions (of mobile homes); that Robert Gerkin (Director of General Services) has a number of tentative agreements to purchase trailers and urges that the City move ahead with these purchases. Commissioner Merrill stated that the court cases referred to by Vice Mayor Patterson are "slowly" working through the courts and he does not want to see the program for density reduction disrupted; that he supports the density reduction that was approved some time ago since the court cases could take years to reach the Supreme Court. Mr. Gerkin came before the Commission and stated that the City has 11 tentative contracts to buy (mobile homes) this year; that the City has 10 days to accept or reject these contracts according to the State law or the owners have the opportunity to sell the homes to someone else; that the (density reduction) program has been pared back and will be presented to the Commission later this week during the budget meetings; however, the Administration is trying to reach a happy medium; that if the Park is going to eventually be closed, the City will have to buy these homes some day. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that her point is that the City will not have to buy these homes eventually; that the City has the right to tell the estates of people who have passed away who lived in this Mobile Home Park to remove the mobile homes. Mr. Gerkin stated that a total of $90,000 in mobile homes will be purchased between now and October 1, 1994, of which $70,000 will be L.0.S.T. (Local Option Sales Tax) funds. Commissioner Atkins stated that he supported density reduction in the past because of safety and the need for roads and more areas for parking as well as for the expansion of Payne Park. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she would like the City Attorney's Office to speak to a memo the Commission received about six months to a year ago in regard to an obligation of the City to purchase a home from an estate as opposed to simply telling them (the estate) to leave the Park. City Attorney Taylor stated that he was asked to look at whether or not the State law which is controlling the need for the City to buy these (mobile homes) is contrary to the rights that occupants of the Mobile Home Park have under the protections of the State Statutes, as opposed to adopting the rule that would require somebody wishing to sell a mobile home outside of the Park which would automatically require removal on sale, thereby allowing the City to meet its density reduction goal; however, at the request of Vice Mayor Patterson, he reviewed the Statutes and stated that it did not appear to him that the same type of rights an individual had who was using the mobile home as a primary residence during their lifetime automatically pass by operation of law or otherwise to an heir of the individual. Attorney Taylor continued that in the situation involving a death, the City does not have to buy the mobile home in order to ask that the home be removed by the new heirs. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1 Item 10. Motion carried (3 to 2): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, no; Pillot, yes. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time the petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak Book 35 Page 9530 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9531 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. has 5 minutes; that he will time speakers and advise them when they have 1 minute remaining. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and be sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3683, AMENDING ARTICLE VIII, DIVISION 2, OF THE ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO CLUSTER HOUSING SUBDIVISIONS TO ALLOW THEM AS PERMISSIBLE BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE RSF-E, RSF-1, RSF-2, RSF-3, AND RSF-4 ZONE DISTRICTS; REVISING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR CLUSTER HOUSING SUBDIVISIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN, AMENDING THE MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS FOR CLUSTER HOUSING SUBDIVISIONS; DEFINING TERMS; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO INTENT AND PURPOSE; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; : ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = DENIED (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (1552) through #2 (0422) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the purpose of this cluster housing subdivision ordinance is to allow more flexibility in siting and orientation of single-family units in an area of three acres or more; that the proposed ordinance does not allow attached units or an increase in density; that for public safety reasons, there is a minimum requirement of 12 feet between single-family detached structures. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and the following individuals came before the Commission: John P. Martin, 547 N. Shore Drive, representing. Sapphire Shores, stated that the Sapphire Shores neighborhood does not desire to have any homes other than single family in their area; that Sapphire Shores is an historic neighborhood made up of very fine homes; that the neighborhood fought this-issue before and do not want any changes in the zoning. John Hargreave no address given, president of and representing the Indian Beach-sapphire Shores Homeowners Association, stated that the Association objects to the Zoning Code changes this ordinance would support for the following reasons: > The proposed changes would drastically change the fabric of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located and in the present harmony and continuity between roadways, lawns, and housing. The rhythm of the neighborhood would change. Where the present system of roadways and sidewalks invite an interaction with neighbors themselves, cluster housing and gated communities separate themselves and carve out of that same community an enclave separate and apart with little or no concern for the harmony of the neighbors. Mr. Hargreave stated that while cluster housing may not change the density limitations, he feels this should be guaranteed before consideration; that the present setbacks in zoning were placed on property to ensure private recreation areas and to provide an adequate absorption of area rainwater and stormwater. J. S. Giles, 738 Corwood Drive, stated that he objected to Cluster housing in the Corwood Park area; that this subject was discussed before and disapproved; that there are all single-family dwellings in the area and feels that it should be kept that way. E. H. Starkel, 744 Corwood Drive, stated that he heard about this (cluster housing) today and said he was not sure what a cluster housing development would look like and asked whether there were any drawings or plans he could see. Ms. Robinson stated that she did not have any drawings because cluster housing would only be allowed by Special Exception so if an applicant came to the City to use this ordinance, a site plan would be needed at the time of application and all the neighbors would be notified at that time of a public hearing. Ms. Robinson continued that there are several sites left in the City that either have wetlands or a nice grouping of trees; therefore, this is an environmental ordinance designed to allow homes to be clustered around these natural features sO that trees wouldn't need to be cut down. Mr. Starkel stated that he does not believe it would be appropriate to permit cluster housing particularly in the Corwood Drive area. Mr. Starkel asked how many stories high the Cluster houses could be? Ms. Robinson stated that the height allowed would be 35 feet which could be two to three stories; that it would not be an increase of what is already allowed in a conventional subdivision. Mr. Starkel stated that the existing homes in the area are all one story and believes allowing two- and three-story houses would be too different for the area and is opposed to cluster housing. Mr. Starkel asked whether the property in question in the Corwood Drive neighborhood would need septic tanks? City Manager Sollenberger stated that there are sewers in the area and the sanitary sewer service would be used. Suzanne Nadeau, 540 45th Street, stated that the property on Corwood Drive has many tall pine and oak trees, as well as gopher tortoises and endangered woodpeckers; that she feels problems such as drainage, traffic on Bay Shore Road, and more crime might come about because of this ordinance; that the area is a designated flood area and she feels two- and three-story structures will look Book 35 Page 9532 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9533 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. like a sore thumb; that she would like to see the area left as it is. Eileen Linxwiler, 337 N. Shore Drive, stated that she wanted to thank the Planning Board for all the help they gave the neighborhood association at a meeting held recently; that Ron Annis, Linda (Silver), and Pam Hower attended the meeting and brought slides of ten possible sites where cluster housing could meet the 3 plus acre qualification; that realistically only five of the ten sites would actually be ready for cluster development and, unfortunately, three of the five sites would affect her neighborhood; that development of the remaining five sites would be questionable. Ms. Linxwiler continued that the neighborhood wanted to know whether there were any laws relevant to archeological digs because one of the sites is an old Indian territory with mounds; that the neighborhood was told that 31 units could be developed on the site and asked if that was correct. Ms. Robinson asked what site Ms. Linxwiler was referring to. Ms. Linxwiler stated that the site she was talking about was the property on Bay Shore Road owned by Mr. (Don) Price. Ms. Robinson stated that she had not calculated it but if Mr. Price could develop 31 cluster houses, then 31 conventional houses could also be developed. Ms. Linxwiler stated that the neighborhood is in favor of saving trees and would like for the Commission to strengthen the Tree Ordinance and not use the issue of saving trees as the crutch to approve cluster housing. Commissioner Merrill stated that "calculated" density takes the square footage of three acres of land. that might be zoned for 4 units per acre and would calculate to a total of 12 units; however, there is a difference on buildable" density because there could be wetlands that could not be built on or minimum lot sizes in the Zoning Code; that "calculated" densities may not change by different layouts but the "buildable" densities could change significantly; that "buildable" densities might go up with cluster housing while the calculated" densities won't change. Garrett Meyer, 700 Corwood Drive, stated that he is concerned about an additional number of cars using the streets in the (Corwood) neighborhood; that Bay Shore Road is a more traveled road than Corwood Drive and if the entrance were on Bay Shore Road, it would not be as bad for the neighborhood. Mr. Meyer continued that his property backs up to Mr. Price's property; that his backyard filled up with water during the June 1992 flood and Mr. Price's land filled up with water at least 8 inches deep. Bob Sherriff, 630 Corwood Drive, asked whether Mr. Price was present? Mayor Pillot stated that he had not seen Mr. Price come in. Mr. Sherriff stated that he understood that Mr. Price might be in France, so this must be an important-issue to him. Mr. Sherriff continued that he understands there are a few parcels of land left in the City of Sarasota and those parcels must be quite important if a meeting of this sort needs to be held in regard to these parcels; that he feels the discussion is about setbacks with zero lines with windows that can look down on his property, and possible ingress and egress onto Corwood Drive; that it seems that an exception on an exception is being asked for and he hopes that the Commission will vote this issue down. Jean-Pierre Knaggs, 620 Corwood Drive, stated that when he came home today, he found his neighbors in a panic; that he bought his house eight years ago specifically because of the neighborhood with its beautiful trees and because it is a safe, quiet kind of place for a family; that he and his wife love their property sO much they are unwilling to destroy two oak trees that are over 100 years old in order to build a swimming pool; that the neighborhood is not a development and each house is unique; that he asks that the Commission not approve this proposed ordinance. Karsten Henckell, 660 Corwood Drive, stated that he had wanted to live in the neighborhood because of the uniqueness and the safety of the area in which to raise his children; that he wanted a lack of traffic; that he feels all of these things will be destroyed if this ordinance is passed and the lot developed in this (cluster housing) manner. Mr. Henckell continued that he had tried to talk to Mr. Price about other ways to develop the plot that would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood that would benefit everybody, such as a park; that he was appalled at Mr. Price's unwillingness to even listen to him; that he does not feel cluster housing would be what is best for the neighborhood or for Sarasota. John Stamper, 660 Corwood Drive, stated that he moved into the neighborhood a month ago; that he feels it is significant that within a few minutes of learning about this public hearing tonight, the entire neighborhood became galvanized into action and came to the meeting; that he did not grow up in Sarasota; however, he was attracted to this neighborhood and to this city for certain reasons. C. Bart Cotten, 875 Indian Beach Drive, stated that he is not basically against cluster housing with some big "ifs"; that he feel it (cluster housing) has its place; that he is not sure whether ten pieces of property are worth worrying about with this diligence; that he feels the density is a little misleading if you take the calculations alone; that he would like the trees and nature on the site saved; that if the City wants a cluster housing ordinance, he feels this ordinance needs fine tuning. Book 35 Page 9534 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9535 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Elizabeth McCall, 964 Alameda Lane, thanked the Commission for allowing everyone to speak tonight and stated that she has lived at her present address since 1945; that one of the possible ten parcels this ordinance could affect abuts her property and another parcel is across the street from her; that if a lot of houses were built on these properties, her tranquility would be disturbed as well as the beauty of the area; that she is concerned that she was not notified that this (cluster housing) was a possibility. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that this particular ordinance did not require notification of the residential areas; however, if this ordinance was adopted and someone applied for a Special Exception, everyone within 500 feet of the property would be notified. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she thinks that a Special Exception written into an ordinance regarding cluster housing in a single-family neighborhood should be required to be noticed (to residents in the area). Kafi Benz, 13084 Air Gate, stated that she is a member of the Indian Beach-Sapphire Shores Association; that she feels everyone is concerned because one person came to the city seeking to manipulate the rules and regulations about a single traçt of land for development or for sale; that this plan was developed on the basis of that person's request even though there aren't people seeking to do this (cluster housing). Vice Mayor Patterson stated that it is her understanding that this ordinance does not enact the ability to do a cluster housing project for any of the sites; that it merely takes an ordinance that is already on the books for cluster housing in higher density single-family residential areas and changes it making the requirements somewhat different and opens it to some of the larger lot areas. Ms. Benz stated that a concern of the neighborhood was that in the future someone might assemble properties and take down houses in order to be able to profit highly; that her neighborhood is especially sensitive to this as something that might happen in the future. Franklin Pfeiffenberger, 4223 Bay Shore Road, stated that early in the 1970s there was an effort to develop the property adjacent to him into garden apartments and almost the whole neighborhood was against this because their neighborhood is unique and wanted it kept that wayi that he has learned from architects and realtors that wherever cluster housing has gone in, the value of properties go down and he does not want that to happen. There was no one else who wished to speak and Mayor Pillot closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3683 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that he feels the issue is whether the Commission feels there should be cluster housing or not; that if the Commission feels there should be cluster housing, he believes this ordinance will provide adequate safeguards. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to deny proposed Ordinance No. 93-3683. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that since March she has requested some language from the City Attorney regarding Special Exceptions and is not pleased to see a request for a Special Exception come to the table tonight when the City is working on eliminating Special Exceptions and asked that the City Attorney's Office proceed with this as soon as possible. City Attorney Taylor agreed (nodded) e 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3696, TO VACATE A PORTION OF SERENA STREET. BEGIN AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SERENA STREET (50 FEET WIDE) AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF BAILEY ROAD (60 FEET WIDE) THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SERENA STREET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF BEETHOVEN AVENUE THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF BEETHOVEN AVENUE TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SERENA STREET THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF BAILEY ROAD, THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, LYING NORTH OF THE STRUCTURE KNOWN AS THE FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 92-SV-02, JAMES-R. KEYS, FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE) = READVERTISE PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3696 FOR A PUBLIC HEARING WITH NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND WITH LANGUAGE ABOUT A IT' TURNAROUND (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #2 (0443) through (1261) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the Planning Board approved this street vacation of a portion of Serena Street. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing. Clyde H. Wilson, 2250 Constitution Boulevard, attorney with Wilson, Johnson, and Jaffer, came before the Commission and stated that he represents Mrs. Sue Levinson, Mr. Lee Butler, and himself as owners Book 35 Page 9536 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9537 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. of approximately two acres of land, at the corner of Serena Street, Lockwood Ridge and Fruitville Roads, or approximately 400 feet on Serena Street. Attorney Wilson continued- that Serena Street is unpaved; that he believes that the description set forth contains a serious ambiguity, if not error, which may have caused the Planning Board to be of the impression that they were dealing with a different piece of property; that the description set forth mentions the "line of Beethoven Avenue"; that the actual vacation is about 100 feet south of the south end of Beethoven Avenue; that he believes it should have stated ". . the east line of Beethoven Avenue as extended. 9 Attorney Wilson stated that by leaving out the words "as extended" would make anyone feel the people driving down what is left of Serena Street would be able to come out onto Beethoven Avenue and on through the residential subdivision and reach Bailey Street; that he believes that it was overlooked that if the street is vacated (as described), it will not be possible to get to Beethoven Avenue because the City and County do not own the area between the north line of Serena Street and Beethoven Avenue. Attorney Wilson continued that Serena Street was put in the plat for a purpose; that the purpose is to aid the development and sale of the Fruitville Road frontage properties (in the area of Serena Street). City Manager Sollenberger stated that it-seems there is a question of technicality to whether the Planning Board's information was properly advertised; that if this is a valid objection, he feels there is a problem that needs to dealt with; that the Administration's recommendation had been to approve this until this objection was raised. Commissioner Merrill stated that the neighbors he has spoken to do not want Beethoven Avenue to be connected to Serena Street; that he supports delaying action on this (street vacation) because he would not want to deny this application without hearing from representatives of the Church of the Nazarene (petitioners). City Attorney Taylor stated that it appears there may have been a misinterpretation, due to work done by the Engineering Department, when the ordinance was prepared because it was thought that the property of Eugene and Carol Altman was Beethoven Avenue through to Serena Street; that he would want to have the Legal Description corrected to ensure that the people that rightfully should have been involved were properly given notice (of the street vacation). Attorney Taylor continued that in order to approve the vacation (of Serena Street), the Commission would have to make one of the following findings: That the street has not been used as such or that any prior use has been abandoned; or A The street is of no benefit to the City and the public; or The closing or discontinuing of the street is in the best interest of the City and the public. Attorney Taylor stated that he recommended that the time be taken to correct the Legal Description and to readvertise because a new ordinance will need to be presented to the City Commission; that he does not believe this issue would have to go back to the Planning Board. There was no one else who wished to speak and Mayor Pillot closed the public hearing. John Coat, Chairman of the Board of Directors for the First Church of the Nazarene, and Kirk Zahniser, came before the Commission. Mr. Coat stated that the First Church of the Nazarene is attempting to purchase the property in question from Eugene and Carol Altman; that he is in agreement with what the City Attorney has suggested; that he would not want to misrepresent the Church and. the Church wants to be a good neighbor to the other property owners. Kirk Zahniser, a member of the Board of Directors for the First Church of the Nazarene, stated that he owned a home that would be affected by the closing of Serena Street; that he believes the general consensus of the neighborhood is in favor of the Church purchasing the property to serve the community that is around it. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that page 2 of the Planning Board's meeting minutes states "As the discussion progressed it was noted that the street was undeveloped and that there were provisions for a 'T' turnaround should the remaining portion of the street be developed; that a letter was in file stating the Church would convey the land for a T' turnaround" and asked the City Attorney to address this issue. Mr. Coate stated that the Church wanted to cooperate in whatever way possible and has committed to a 15 foot high fence as well as the T' turnaround. Attorney Taylor conferred with Attorney Schenk, who had been present at the Planning Board's meeting, and stated that the issue of a 'T' turnaround is not in the ordinance; that Attorney Schenk's recollection was that the action of the Planning Board was to not include this wording in the ordinance. Attorney Schenk came before the Commission and stated that it was her understanding that the Planning Department and the Engineering Department handled the negotiation; that she was asked not to include this (issue of the "T' turnaround) in the ordinance because it was taken care of privately. Book 35 Page 9538 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9539 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that it seemed that the 'T' turnaround could be handled the same way as the vacation of Serena Street; that the same type of rights the City is vacating on Serena Street would instead adhere to this 'T' turnaround to ensure that the City could develop a reasonable access to Lockwood Ridge Road for properties along Serena Street. Attorney Schenk stated that a provision could be added in the ordinance addressing the 'T' turnaround after input from Staff is received as to the intent. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to readvertise proposed Ordinance No. 93-3696 for a public hearing with the new Legal Description and with language about a 'T' turnaround. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3701, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING TERMS : GAME ROOM AND FLOOR AREA -RATIO, AS SET FORTH HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #2 (1264) through (1312) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the new Commercial, Business Newtown (CBN) zoning district has been created and game rooms and floor area ratios are discussed in CBN; that proposed Ordinance No. 93-3701 contains the definitions needed to be a companion to Ordinance No. 92-3665. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3701 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3701 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3703, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE, SECTION 9-10, PERTAINING TO NONCONFORMING USES : PROVIDING THAT NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, THE USE OF WHICH ARE NOT AMORTIZED BY SECTION 9-5(J) ZONING CODE, MAY BE REPAIRED TO A VALUE IN EXCESS OF TEN PERCENT OF THE CURRENT ASSESSED VALUATION OF THE STRUCTURE DURING ANY TWELVE MONTH PERIOD OF TIME; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #2 (1313) through (1370) William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning, Housing and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that this ordinance allows structures that are nonconforming to be repaired to greater than 10% of the value (of the structure) within one year. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3703 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3703 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 12. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3704, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE, SEC. 12-16, PERTAINING TO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS so AS TO PROVIDE THAT AN EXISTING PROPERTY, HAVING AN OFF-STREET PARKING AREA IN EXCESS OF 1,500 SOUARE FEET OR 5 PARKING SPACES, AND WHICH IS NOT ENTIRELY VISUALLY SCREENED BY AN INTERVENING BUILDING OR STRUCTURE FROM AN ABUTTING RIGHT-OF-WAL, SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPING WHEN THE COST OF THE EXPANSION OR ALTERATION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE OR BUILDING IS FIFTY PERCENT OR MORE OF THE ASSESSED VALUE OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE AND THE ADDITION OF THE LANDSCAPING WILL NOT REDUCE THE PARKING SPACES BY MORE THAN FIVE PERCENT; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5) #2 (1371) through (1505) William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning, Housing and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 93-3704 requires the current landscaping requirement for new buildings to be applied to buildings that are being improved to greater than 50% of their assessed value. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. Book 35 Page 9540 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9541 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3704 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3704 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested-that: City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Vice Mayor Patterson left the Commission Chambers at 8:12 p.m. 13. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3705, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE AS TO THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL, BUSINESS (OPB) AND OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL, BUSINESS-1 (OPB-1) ZONE DISTRICTS; PROVIDING THAT THE OPB AND OPB-1 ZONES SHALL BE DEEMED COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS; DEFINING TERMS; AMENDING SECTION 6-29, ZONING CODE, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMERCIAL NATURE OF THE OPB AND OPB-1 ZONES; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-6) #2 (1506) through (1556) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 93-3705 clarifies the fact that the OPB-1 and OPB (Office, Professional and Business) Zone Districts are not residential districts but are commercial districts; that the Planning Board approved this ordinance. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3705 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3705 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes. 14. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3716, AMENDING THE PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING PROPOSED REZONING AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION PETITIONS BY REQUIRING PETITIONERS TO HOLD NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOPS, AS SET FORTH HEREIN; MAKING FINDINGS AS TO NEED; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-7) #2 (1557) through (1712) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 93-3716 was a procedure enacted requiring a neighborhood workshop prior to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and to rezoning and special exception regulations; that this was approved by the Planning Board. Vice Mayor Patterson returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:15 p.m. Commissioner Cardamone asked whether the president of the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations (CCNA) should be considered for notification of a land use change if there were no neighborhood association in a neighborhood; that she is concerned that no specific date is required of notifying neighbors prior to the neighborhood workshop prior to the Planning Board meeting. Ms. Robinson stated that there is a requirement that the meeting must be held 14 days prior to a Planning Board meeting; that administrative regulations needed to be developed and would probably be similar to the regulations that were developed for the Comprehensive Plan neighborhood workshopsi that notification of the CCNA regarding a petition and the neighborhood workshop could be included in this ordinance. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3716 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3716 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Merrill left the Commission Chambers at 8:17 p.m. 15. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3725, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 1296 FIRST STREET, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE I. R. BURNS AND H. H. BELL COMMERCIAL BUILDING, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 93-HD-16, LORRIE MULDOWNEY & J. WHITCOMB RYLEE) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-8) Book 35 Page 9542 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9543 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. #2 (1713) through (1765) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the Historic Preservation Board had approved this petition. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3725 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3725 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 16. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3726, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 3035 BAY SHORE ROAD, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE ASHTON HOME, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 93-HD-15, LORRIE MULDOWNEY & J. WHITCOMB RYLEE) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-9) #2 (1766) through (1805) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the Historic Preservation Board approved this designation and the Planning Department supports this designation. Mayor Pillot opened the public hearing and, as there was no one who wished to speak, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 93-3726 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3726 on first reading. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Merrill returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:20 p.m. 17. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2 = ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-663) = ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-664) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 93R-665) = ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (ORDINANCE NO. 93-3714) = ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 93-3719) - ADOPTED; AND ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 93-3722) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B-1, -2, -3, -4, -5 AND -6) #2 (1806) through (2048) Commissioner Cardamone left the Commission Chambers at 8:24 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. 93R-663 and 93R-664 in their entirety and proposed Resolution No. 93R-665 and Ordinance Nos. 93-3714, 93-3719, and 93-3722 by titlé only. Commissioner Cardamone returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:26 p.m. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-663, appropriating $10,000.00 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to provide funds for educational materials and supplies for the D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Program 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-664, appropriating $1,281.25 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to pay the costs for Battalion Chief Robins to attend the Associated Public Safety Communications Officers Conference (APCO) in New Orleans, LA 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 93R-665, pertaining to the application of Sarasota County for a Management and Storage of Surface Water Permit necessary for the development of the Walton Tract as a new Sarasota County waste disposal site; endorsing the application of Sarasota County upon compliance with all permitting requirements; directing that a copy of the resolution be provided to the Southwest Florida Water Management District; etc. (Title Only) 4. Adoption re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3714, amending regulations pertaining to the placement of newsracks in public rights-of-way by deleting a requirement that newsracks have a uniform dark brown color and by enlarging the maximum dimensions of a newsrack; setting forth findings; providing for severability; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3719, amending Chapter 22, Sarasota City Code, to adopt a Master Plan for Ken Thompson Park, as set forth Book 35 Page 9544 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9545 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. herein; restricting the boundaries of leaseholds within Ken Thompson Park to the boundaries depicted on the Ken Thompson Park Master Plan; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title Only) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 93-3722, annexing certain real property lying contiguous to the city limits into the corporate limits of the City of Sarasota, as petitioned by Gary Hudson, for the Evangelical Free Church of Sarasota, said real property being described as follows: a parcel of land lying approximately 125 feet east of the easterly right-of-way of S. Tuttle Avenue between Arlington Street and Hillview Street; said parcel also known as 1899 S. Tuttle Avenue; more particularly described herein; making findings; redefining the boundary lines of the city of Sarasota to include said real property; etc. (Title Only) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2 Items 1 through 6. Mayor Pillot requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 18. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS PRESENTATION RE: PROPOSED CONF1 ERENCE CENTER = DIRECTED THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE AN APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL AT THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 23, 1993 SUPPORTING A COUNTY FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A CONFERENCE OR CONVENTION CENTER (AGENDA ITEM V-1) #2 (2049) through #3 (0380) Roy Smith and Johnny Hunter, representing the Coalition for Conference Center Study, came before the Commission. Mr. Smith stated that he is president of S.N.A.G. (Sarasota North Action Group) i that S.N.A.G. adopted the concept (of a conference center) as being good for all in Sarasota County; that the Coalition feels the economic impact from new people coming to our City will help increase property values of all northside residents and businesses; that the Coalition is asking that the City Commission give a vote of confidence to the County Commissioners by voting in favor of a feasibility study that would get the conference center off the ground. Mr. Hunter stated that he is Executive Director of the African-American Business Association and publisher of Tempo magazine; that he feels the City needs their slogan to be stepping up in order to keep up"; that he has seen Sarasota grow from a small community to a very large community to the point that the airport has grown to an International Airport which could bring convention planners to the City of Sarasota to make it an even greater place to live; that he feels it would be sensible for the City Commission to give a vote of confidence to the Sarasota County Commissioners to proceed with a feasibility study to determine what economic impact a convention center would have on the community; that the only industry Sarasota has is the tourist industry. Commissioner Merrill asked what specific wording the Coalition would like the Commission to use? Mr. Hunter stated that he understands that the County Commissioners are in a position to move forward to pay for a feasibility study and an endorsement from the City Commission is needed; however, he isnot sure what the exact wording should be; that he knows the County is ready to move forward based on a recommendation from the City. Commissioner Merrill stated that he has long supported a conference center and would support a study by the County; that the only issue to him is to know exactly what the City Commission is to be asking the County Commission and whether anyone has been in contact with any of the County Commissioners to make sure that we (the City Commission) are endorsing what they (the County Commission) want endorsed. Commissioner Atkins stated that he is a member of the Tourist Development Council (TDC) and he is not sure what the County wants because the TDC has endorsed moving forward with a feasibility study. Commissioner Atkins asked whether the County has contacted the Administration to let the City Commission know what is wanted? City Manager Sollenberger stated that he spoke with the County Administrator last week and got the impression that the County Commission would welcome some expression from the city Commission, one way or the other; that it does not seem inappropriate to him for the City Commission to express its- support for the concept of a conference center and support a feasibility study to be undertaken by the County Commission; that he feels the City Commission should express the kinds of things the City might be interested in and address the kind of public purpose to be served by a conference center and the cost benefit analysis and who pays for an analysis and how, as well as what, site selection factors should be involved. Mayor Pillot stated that he is disappointed that a request has not come directly from the Board of County Commissioners. The following individuals came before the Commission: Kate Hansen, 265 Bearded Oaks Drive, representing the Sarasota Opera Association and Charles Holman and Margaret Weiss, stated that the Board of the Opera Association represents many local Book 35 Page 9546 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9547 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. businesses and professions; that the Association believes that a well designed conference center built in Sarasota will enrich the community; that the arts will draw the conference groups here and the conference groups will support and strengthen our performing and visual arts community, which is the basis of uniqueness in Sarasota. Ms. Hansen continued that she also represents a section of the downtown merchants; that some are afraid that the conference center will become a drain on the City budget in its first years; however, it is felt that if the conference center is strategically located to the downtown merchant area, the solidly rented storefronts, the filled restaurants and hotels, the improved tax base, and prosperity of the surrounding areas will in the long run more than compensate for the beginning years of the center; that the result will be a healthier year-round economy. Thomas Spotts, 4001 S. Tamiami Trail, representing Cafe Baci, stated that he feels that the economic development of a conference center would benefit the entire Sarasota/Bradenton area, from the initial employment of the construction of the facility to the long-term employment as well; that various businesses would benefit; that adequate hotel rooms and conference space must be available in order to attract conventions; that he urges the City Commission to recommend to the County Commission that a feasibility study be conducted. Richard Vacar, 6000 Airport Circle, representing the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority, stated that he offers the Airport Authority's support for the convention center concept; that the Authority considers the convention center to be a great conceptual project; however, a study needs to be done to determine the impact of a center; that the Airport Authority intends to send a letter recommending a study to the County Commission and would like to see the City do the same. Don Creason, 1819 Main Street, representing the Sarasota Ballet of Sarasota, stated that the arts have long been one of Sarasota's attractions; that the Sarasota Ballet urges that the City Commission recommend that the County proceed with a feasibility study; that the Sarasota Ballet has been asked to host an international ballet conference and to chair and administer an international ballet workshop but cannot because there is no place to hold it and no place to put the people. Mr. Creason continued that as past president of the largest regional theater organization in the country, he has tried twice to have its convention held in Sarasota but cannot because it would require 1500 hotel rooms as well as accommodations for 250 meetings in a six-day period. Gary Harvey, 1290 N. Palm Avenue, representing Gary Harvey Interior Designer Inc., stated that he has lived and worked in Sarasota since 1962; that he doesn't think that anything could benefit the area any better than the proposed conference center. Joe Hembree, 1390 Main Street, #810, representing the Committee of 100, stated that the Sarasota County Committee of 100 supports a conference center and concurs with a number of previous studies that have been done about convention centers in our area; that the Committee of 100's main focus is economic development so Sarasota's base can be broadened and quality facilities are necessary to accomplish this; that the Committee of 100 worked hard to try to keep Snelling and Snelling Company in Sarasota and a major problem was the difficulty in placing clients in a convenient location as well as difficulty with facilities for hosting their various meetings that were required; that quality facilities will have to be provided if Sarasota wants to attract companies that support the quality of life here. Sister Jennifer X, 1741 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Way, representing the AABA (African-American Business Association, stated that she had sought information-: about.. a possible convention center and found out that it would strengthen the economic development of her community as well as enhance futuristic plans for a Market Square to impact the community as a tourist attraction; that it is felt that a conference center will impact the community with jobs. Robert Levy, 1391 6th Street, stated that he is not opposed to the concept of the convention center; however, he has not heard facts and figures of what impact the center would have on the City in general; that a feasibility study would be necessary to make sure that it would not be for the benefit of a few entrepreneurs with taxpayers carrying losses that may arise. Rosie Turner, 5900 Midnight Pass Road, stated that Sarasota needs a conference center; that conventions are a quiet, clean industry that leave a lot of money in an area; that she is the vice chairman of the Tourist Development Council (TDC) and has been on the TDC for 12 years and half of her time is spent promoting tourism in this area; that some of the County Commissioners are interested in hearing that the City supports a conference center. Larry Marthaler, 655 N. Tamiami Trail, representing the Sarasota Convention & Visitors Bureau, stated that one of the aspects of a conference facility is the need within our own community; that the Shannon Hotel Group on Longboat Key, which employs over 650 people, paid $8,000 to erect a tent on their property for a social function for their employees because there is no place in the City or County of Sarasota to have a function for 670 people in a comfortable surrounding; that the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce has 1700 members and frequently has to turn away members from meal functions because there is no place that can accommodate over 550 people for a sit-down dinner; that the addition of a conference center for the community is another step in the progression of municipal facilities provided by local government; that the construction of Book 35 Page 9548 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9549 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. the conference center could be financed through taxes paid by visitors to this community and not by the residents of the City or the County; that the Convention & Visitors Bureau encourages the City Commission to support the County Commission to proceed with a study. Tramm Hudson, 333 S. Pineapple Avenue, representing the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce, stated that he is Chairman Elect of the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce and is present to speak in favor of the City Commission recommending to the County Commission to further study the Sarasota County's Convention/Conference Center Task Force recommendations; that it is important that the community work together to diversify the job base and provide for the year-round employment of all citizens to assure the prosperity and strength of our local economy; that in 1987 the Chamber of Commerce went on record as supporting a conference center to help balance the economy and even out the erratic employment trends the seasonality that tourism brings; that the 1983 RUDAT (Regional Urban Design Assistance Team) study identified the development of a conference facility as one of six major objectives for improvement of downtown Sarasota. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to ask the City Manager to prepare an appropriate resolution supporting a County feasibility study for a conference or convention center for approval by the City Commission at its Special Meeting of July 23, 1993. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she cannot vote for the resolution as phrased without acceptance of certain modifications; that she believes the reason this particular idea aroused a storm of public protest and anger from the local newspaper is because it appeared to be very site specific and with a size in mind along with a piece of land to be donated by the City; that for her to be in favor of a resolution she would want to see a study that was not site specific; that she would like to know what types of conventions are likely to come to our area because that will determine the size of the center needed; that she would be interested in traffic impact to the City; that the City has only a little bit of land left where the City can develop and if any more future tax stream is dedicated toward a particular concept, it would deepen the financial troubles the City will encounter in future years; that any increase in tax base in the downtown area of the City is now dedicated to the year 2017 and will never help the General Fund budget. Commissioner Atkins stated that a feasibility study would address all of the concerns mentioned; that he thinks if the City starts putting conditions on the feasibility study, it will be just às skewed as the last one. Mayor Pillot stated that he hoped that the feasibility study would be an unbiased one. Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 19. CITIZENS . INPUT -= ADMINISTRATION TO CHECK ON VEHICLES DRIVING HROUGH EASTWOOD PARK AND THE POSSIBLE NEED FOR FENCING AND LIGHTING AT THE PARK (AGENDA ITEM VI) #3 (0381) through (1196) The following individuals came before the City Commission: Jeffrey Harris, 973 Virginia Drive, stated that the old Florida Power & Light (FPL) building (at the corner of Orange Avenue and 10th Street) is slated to be torn down any day; that even though it is the eleventh hour, he wants to ask the Commission to reconsider and intervene in the interest of sensibility; that the building held the generators that pumped the electricity into our City in 1926; that the use of materials and the way the building is constructed in a way that commercial buildings will probably never be constructed again; that it was built with an integrity that will easily last another 100 years; that the.building is eligible for historic designation if the owner (FPL) would apply for it, which FPL has not done; that he understands that FPL has offered to give the building away because of its liability of the substation next door to the building; that the cost of the demolition is $80,000 and he suggests that the Commission save FPL and its customers the price of demolition and a unique part of history as well as what role this building could possibly play in the future. Mayor Pillot stated that Mr. Harris had called him a few days ago and he had instructed Mr. Harris that the authority to decide not to demolish this building is not at this Commission table and asked the City Manager whether he had correctly responded to Mr. Harris. City Manager Sollenberger stated that his recollection is that the City Commission encouraged FPL to demolish the building because of concern about the building's appearance. Mayor Pillot stated that he understood that FPL did not want to spend the money necessary to bring the building into compliance with the Code and the alternative was to tear the building down. City Attorney Taylor stated that there isn't anything in the city's ordinances that would interfere with the property owner's rights to deal with the building as a private property owner. Clarence Brien, 419 W. Cornelius Circle, stated that in pursuing the City's neighborhood improvement program, Eastwood subdivision Book 35 Page 9550 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9551 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. at a curve on East and West Cornelius Circle needs speed bumps to prevent cars from knocking down mailboxes and running across lawns; that speed bumps have proven to be a help on Brink Avenue, Novus Street, Shoreland Drive, and Old Oak Drive, in addition to many others; that he feels speed bumps are a good deterrent to people who do not have respect for people in a neighborhood; that a fence is needed around the neighborhood park to save it for its intended use to deter use bby off-road cycles, ATVS (all terrain vehicles), and go-carts; that on June 24 a camouflaged four-wheel drive Jeep came across the park; that a few lights would discourage late night drivers from circling around and rutting the park. Mr. Sollenberger stated that Asim Mohammed (Assistant City Engineer) could talk to Mr. Brien about the procedures for traffic abatement relative to the speed humps; that the Administration can look at the issues raised by Mr. Brien concerning vehicles going through the park and the need for some type of fencing or obstruction and lighting. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City has laws against vehicles running across public parks; and asked that instead of building a fence to keep vehicles off of it, could the laws be enforced and issue tickets to these people because it might be cheaper than putting a fence around the park. Commissioner Merrill stated that the City cannot pay to have a policeman stationed all day long at this park; that the difficulty is to catch the violators. Vice Mayor Patterson asked the City Manager whether the Commission could get a report from the Police Department on what constitutes the City's traffic force and how many tickets are given out yearly? Mr. Sollenberger stated that this could be addressed tomorrow afternoon when the Commission looks at the Police budget. Kafi Benz, 13084 Air Gate, distributed a copy of a memorandum dated June 25, 1992 from City Manager Sollenberger to the Commission (a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) and stated that ten years ago she made a commitment to become an employee of the City of Sarasota; that last year she was laid off; that she believes that the City of Sarasota, through the City Manager, made a commitment to those employees who were laid off to try to fit them back into the City when there were openings; that she does not believe that the procedure that the City Manager established in the 13 points of his memorandum has been followed adequately for those employees who were laid off; that she would like to request that an affirmative action program be developed to fold back in the employees who have been laid off where they meet the standards; that some employees (laid off) were passed over where the minimum requirements were met. Ms. Benz continued that she understands that the City is looking at the possibility of laying off even more employees; that she feels alternatives should be considered. Mayor Pillot stated that the Commission would be looking at the matter of employment and where the City stands with the budget in the next few days and there will probably be a lot of discussion about lay offs and re-employment. Mayor Pillot asked the Commission whether they would want to hear Agenda Item VIII-1 now since representatives of Sarasota Memorial Hospital were waiting in the audience. It was the consensus of the Commission to move New Business Agenda Item VIII-1 forward for discussion at this time. 20. NEW BUSINESS - APPROVAL RE: CONCEPTUAL HILLVIEW/OSPREY STREETSCAPE PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO DEVELOP AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DIRECTED THE CITY MANAGER TO WORK WITH SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL - S ADMINISTRATION TO DEVELOP THE CONCEPT FURTHER AND DEVELOP AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH THIS PROJECT (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #3 (1208) through (1586) City Manager Sollenberger stated that there has been a lot of discussion about doing a streetscape and storefront program in the Hillview Street/Osprey Avenue area; that an interlocal agreement needs to be developed if the Commission supports the concept. Michael Covert, President and CEO of Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Rick Carlisle, Vice President of Construction Management with Sarasota Memorial Hospital, and Martin Moss, Chairman of the Building and Construction Committee of the Hospital Board, came before the Commission. Mr. Covert stated that about one year ago he talked at a neighborhood advisory council meeting which began the process of how to define the Hospital core to control medical creep" into the neighborhood but still respond to the growth issues; that a "buffer zone' concept may give the businesses an opportunity to expand in an appropriate way that serves the neighborhood and serves the Hospital and at the same time make the neighbors feel comfortable that the growth in their area is reasonable and for the right reasons. Mr. Carlisle displayed a conceptual drawing of the proposed streetscape with landscaped medians, additional parking, special lighting, and appropriate artwork. Mr. Carlisle stated that he had worked with Asim Mohammed (Assistant City Engineer) and Terry Koffrin of the Merchants' Association as well as with the entire Merchants' Association as a groupi that there is a lot of support for this project from the merchants. Book 35 Page 9552 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9553 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Mayor Pillot asked whether the proposed trees in the median of Hillview Street between Tamiami Trail and Osprey Avenue would mean the loss of all of the central parking (that is presently on Hillview)? Mr. Carlisle stated that some of the parking (in the middle of Hillview) would be taken away but the parking would be redistributed with angle parking; that the proposed concept will increase parking by about 40 spaces. Mr. Sollenberger stated that if the Commission supports this etreptscape/Deautification/parking concept, he requests that development of an interlocal agreement begin to implement this. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to direct the City Manager to work with Sarasota Memorial Hospital's administration to develop the (streetscape) concept further and develop an interlocal agreement in order to proceed with this project. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Merrill stated that he wanted to thank the Hospital for its cooperation on the Waldemere Street traffic signalling because it has dramatically reduced traffic on Waldemere Street east of Tamiami Trail. Mayor Pillot passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Patterson and left the Commission Chambers at 9:40 p.m. 21. UNFINISHED BUSINESS = PRESENTATION RE: RELOCATION OF U.S.41 (BAYFRONT DRIVE) TO FRUITVILLE ROAD - TABLED UNTIL HEARING FROM THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION, THE NORTH TRAIL MERCHANTS' ASSOCIATION, AND THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE CONDUCTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #3 (1588) through (2872) Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that Bill Ockert from the Planning Division 'of FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) could not stay and had to return to Bartow; that at the Commission meeting of July 6, 1993 Staff was directed to provide reasons for requesting FDOT to approve relocating U.S. 41 from the bayfront to Fruitville Road since the Sarasota/Manatee MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) decided not to pursue the rerouting within Manatee County and requested the two (Sarasota Commission) MPO members to-bring a recommendation to the MPO as to what the City desires. Mr. Daughters continued that in his memo dated July 12, 1993 to the Commission (a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) he listed five specific things that could be done if U.S. 41 Bayfront Drive was devoted as a City street; however, he feels the main reason for relocating U.S. 41 is to go back to the RUDAT (Regional Urban Design Assistance Team) study recommendation that the downtown be tied closer to the bayfront. Mr. Daughters stated that if U.S. 41 was relocated away from the bayfront, the City could pursue ownership of the land at a later time, if sO desired, to give the City full control of it. Mr. Daughters continued that the recommendation originally discussed is what is being presented again wherein the current U.S. 41 from Gulfstream Avenue near the John Ringling Causeway to U.S. 301 would become a City street; that in lieu of this, the City would give FDOT Fruitville Road, which was formerly 3rd Street, from U.S. 41 to U.S. 301 to reroute U.S. 41. Mr. Daughters stated that FDOT is concerned because the proposed use of Fruitville Road creates some 90 degree left turns in U.S. 41 which are felt to be undesirable; however, some 90 degree left turns already exist on U.S. 41 near DeSoto Mall (in Bradenton); that Staff does not feel the 90 degree left turns are sufficient justification to not relocate U.S. 41 away from the bayfront. Mr. Daughters continued that Staff's recommendation is that the Commission confirm the City's desire to have U.S. 41 from the John Ringling Causeway to U.S. 301 relocated to Fruitville Road and U.S. 301. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that if the City succeeds in this quest, the City will have to take over maintenance of something the State has been maintaining in the past and asked about the expense of this maintenance. Mr. Daughters stated that the maintenance issue was reviewed and the length of roadway to be maintained would be about the same as the section of Fruitville Road that would be taken over by the FDOT; and that there are fewer traffic signals on the portion of U.S. 41 to be relocated than on Fruitville Road; that the City is responsible for maintenance of landscaping because the FDOT does not maintain any landscaping; therefore, he does not feel there would be a significant difference in the annual maintenance costs to the City. Mayor Pillot returned to the Commission Chambers at 9:47 p.m. Mr. Daughters stated that the FDOT has a perpetual easement from the Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) over lands for road purposes similar to the City's perpetual rights to property for operation of roads. Commissioner Merrill asked how relocating U.S. 41 from the bayfront would tie the downtown area to the bayfront better than it is today? Mr. Daughters stated that reducing the speed limit would help in addition to the other items outlined in his memo of July 12, 1993 (mentioned above). Book 35 Page 9554 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9555 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Merrill stated that he does not feel lowering the speed limit will make the road more pedestrian friendly because pedestrians crossing the road will wait for the traffic signals to stop traffic before crossing; that he feels a down side to this issue is that the road will be there for the next generation and some tourists drive on local streets and the portion of the road along the bayfront is the prettiest picture of the City. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that a concern she has is the fate of the oak trees that the City planted (in the medians) along the bayfront; that if this remains a state road, the City may be told in the future to remove these oak trees. City Manager Sollenberger stated that even though there was not formal approval (by the FDOT) for these oak trees, the trees were installed with the knowledge of people who were managing this project for the FDOT; that the FDOT has a new concept to expedite projects called "partnering" and this (bayfront) project was a partnering" project whereby there was a great deal of close coordination between the FDOT and the City of Sarasota. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she thought this Commission had a strong feeling to remove designated U.S. 41 off the bayfront; that she feels this way and believes Fruitville Road is the ideal place to reroute traffic; that she is troubled by the fact that Commissioner Merrill and perhaps other Commissioners are feeling less than strong about this commitment to removal (of U.S. 41 designation along the bayfront). Barbara Cherry, 1701 N. Tamiami Trail, representing Best Western Royal Palms, came before the Commission and stated that she is a member of Gateway 2000 and the North Trail Merchants' Association; that she does not want all the work done to improve the North (Tamiami) Trail area undone; that the bayfront area is the City's big asset as far as tourists are concerned; that businesses on North Tamiami Trail are struggling to survive and she feels a new designation will confuse tourists; that she believes the traffic signals at Main Street and Ringling Boulevard (at U.S. 41) will slow down traffic and does not feel the bayfront portion of U.S. 41 should be relocated to Fruitville Road; that a lot of the merchants on the North (Tamiami) Trail feel the same way. Paul Thorpe, 47 S. Palm Avenue, came before the Commission and stated that he sees a down side to this relocation (of U.S. 41); that he cannot visualize heading south on U.S. 41 and turning left onto Fruitville Road; that he believes it will create a traffic mess between the Fruitville Road and 6th Street traffic lights; that he does not think U.S. 301 should be made into a six-lane highway; that the Downtown Association thinks there should be more study done on this issue before a decision is made. Commissioner Atkins stated that he had been convinced of the advantages of taking U.S. 41 off the bayfront based on what the Commission was told by the Engineering Department; that perhaps the Administration should be given an opportunity to develop their positions on this issue; that the Downtown Association had been the driving force in removing U.S. 41 ten years ago; that he suggests that the Downtown Association, the City Engineer, the City Administration, and the Commission should reconsider the position that was taken and come to a Clear understanding without 11 o'clock position changes no one heard of until now; that if he had to vote now, he supports removing U.S. 41 from the bayfront. On motion of Mayor Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Commissioner Atkins), it was moved to approve the recommendation of the Administration (to confirm the City's desire to have U.S. 41 relocated to Fruitville Road). Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she does not know whether the relocation will affect any major change; that she does not have a problem if anyone wants the final decision delayed until the issue goes back to the Downtown Association and the North Trail Merchants' Association; that what she sees as a value in this proposal is the possibility of telling people that a righthand turn off of Mound Street onto Osprey or Orange Avenues is prohibited and the City could not prohibit righthand turns as long as the road is controlled by the state. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to table this issue until hearing from the Downtown Association, the North Trail Merchants' Association, and the adjacent neighborhoods and another public hearing is conducted. Motion carried (4 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Atkins, yes. Mayor Pillot asked the Commission whether they would want to hear Agenda Item VIII-2 now since John Wilkes has recently undergone surgery and was waiting in the audience. It was the consensus of the Commission to move New Business Agenda Item VIII-2 forward for discussion at this time. 22. NEW BUSINESS - DISCUSSION RE: VAN WEZEL SALES TAX - AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER, WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE VAN WEZEL, TO SET TICKET PRICES FOR THE COMING SEASON 5% GREATER THAN HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED TO DATE, RAISED TO THE NEAREST EVEN 50 CENTS OR ONE DOLLAR (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #3 (2875) through #4 (0810) John Wilkes, Managing Director of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall, and Katherine Schersten, Chairman of the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall Committee, came before the Commission. Book 35 Page 9556 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9557 07./19/93 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City is currently in litigation with the Department of Revenue concerning the sales taxability of admissions to the Van Wezel; that in the past the City Commission has mentioned, and is what he is proposing, that perhaps the City should be charging to cover contingencies in the event the City loses its litigation. Mr. Sollenberger continued that the brochure for the fall season is set to go to the printer within two weeks and he feels a policy decision is needed from the Commission on this issue; that his recommendation is that the (ticket) price structure be increased 7% to provide a contingency (fund) in the event the City loses its litigation; that he wants to make it clear that he is not proposing that the City charge a sales tax. Mr. Wilkes stated that it is felt that the city has a strong case regarding the litigation now in progress on this issue; that ticket prices at the Van Wezel are raised every year to deal with inflationary costs and individual profitability ratios; that he feels that any collection of monies before the final judgement is handed to the City is premature; that he feels such monies should only be collected after the final and binding judgement has beèn made on this issue; that he and the entire Van Wezel Advisory Committee believe that the public will be more sympathetic to additional ticket price increases over and above the annual price increases once there is a definitive answer on this (sales tax) issue; that the City was successful six years ago on this same issue. Ms. Schersten stated that when the Van Wezel Advisory Committee met on June 15, it was decided that the Committee did not want to have any increase added; that at that time the Committee was not aware of the 7% hike on tickets about which the City Manager is talking; therefore, did not address it. Commissioner Cardamone asked for a review of what took place six years ago regarding sales tax. City Attorney Taylor stated that he could not recall exactly what the issue was six years ago. Gibson Mitchell, Finance Director, came before the Commission and stated that his recollection was that around 1983 or 1984 the Department of Revenue did a sales tax audit on the City and went after the City for not charging (sales) tax on Van Wezel admissions; that the City filed the same complaint with the Department of Revenue then that the City has filed now; however, the legal process did not get the issue overturned six years ago but was done by calling certain points of law and administrative regulations to the attention of the right people in the Department of Revenue in Tallahassee; that the Department of Revenue overturned the sales tax audit and released the City; however, this time the Department of Revenue did not release the City. Vice Mayor Patterson asked what the City's current outstanding liability was on this issue? Mr. Mitchell stated that the City's liability was $1,242,000 including penalty and tax as of September 30, 1993 for the period ending June 30, 1991. Commissioner Merrill stated that he did not feel the Commission could make a decision from information gleaned at the Commission table; that the City Manager has evaluated this issue and he feels following the City Manager's advice is what he will do. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to accept the City Manager's recommendation (to increase ticket prices by 7% for a contingency fund). Mayor Pillot asked the City Attorney's Office to elaborate with respect to the research done as to whether this (7%) would jeopardize the City's standing? City Attorney Taylor stated that the State Statutes were clear that if the City actually collected the sales tax, whether the City were still contesting it or not, the City would be obligated to turn the money over to the Department of Revenue in Tallahassee, even if the City wins its case. Mayor Pillot stated that increasing a price by 7% and clearly stating that it is not a sales tax is other than coincidental and asked whether such a move will put thoughts into the minds of the court? city Attorney Taylor stated that if someone tried to bring this (7%) up in a court of law, he would rant and rave over it as not being relevant to what is being considered, but once it's said, it is said. Mayor Pillot asked what the highest single-event ticket price currently is? Mr. Wilkes stated that this coming season the highest ticket price would be $45.00 for Bill Cosby. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that for over a year she has felt strong about protecting the City's liability on this issue; that if the concern is that 7% just happens to be the amount of the sales tax, she suggests that there can be some reciprocal altering of the numbers between what the Van Wezel Staff plans to increases ticket prices to versus the 7%; that an 8% contingency fund could be formed or a 6% contingency fund, realizing that the Van Wezel reserves would have to pay a portion, as long as the total figure adds up; that even if the City gets off the hook of this issue, the City has some serious future liabilities in terms of meeting ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements; that one year's worth of 7% contingency on ticket prices would be a pleasant thing for the City to have to address some of the (ADA) concerns. Book 35 Page 9558 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. : Book 35 Page 9559 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Atkins stated that the contingency fund as presented looks just like a tax to him; that he feels a judge might use the contingency to support an argument against the City; that he believes the patrons of the Van Wezel should pay their way; that he feels the Commission could justify either a 5% or 10% contingency fee. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she was interested in a contingency fund in case the City needs to cover a liability; that she is concerned about determining the "right price" and perhaps ticket prices could be raised an amount that would not create an oddball number such as $48.19. Mr. Sollenberger stated that in light of the discussion, he would like to modify his recommendation that within the Van Wezel Fund there be established a contingency account that would be financed this coming year with a 5% increase in ticket prices. Mayor Pillot asked whether the 5% would be in addition to the price increases already planned by Mr. Wilkes? Mr. Sollenberger stated that was correct. Mr. Wilkes stated that currently all ticket prices end either in 50 cents or an even dollar amount. Commissioner Cardamone stated that if the City Manager has in mind how much he would like this contingency fund to obtain this year, the Commission could give license to the Manager of the Hall (Van Wezel) to raise ticket prices where the Manager felt would produce the contingency fund dollar amount without jockeying a flat 5% increase. On motion of Mayor Pillot (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Patterson) and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to amend the motion to authorize the City Manager, with the Director of the Van Wezel, to set ticket prices for the coming season 5% greater than have been established to date, raised to the nearest even 50 cents or one dollar. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, no. Vice Mayor Patterson called for the vote on the main motion as amended . Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. It was the consensus of the Commission to move Unfinished Business Agenda Item VII-3 ahead of VII-2. 23. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - APPROVAL RE: KEN THOMPSON PARK ENTRANCE SIGN AND MONUMENT = APPROVED RECOMMENDED LOCATION AND DESIGN OF MONUMENT TO BE DEDICATED ON LABOR DAY WEEKEND; APPROVED RECOMMENDED WOODEN ENTRANCE SIGN IF DETERMINED THAT THE WOOD WILL LAST MORE THAN FIVE YEARS (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #4 (0812) through (1477) Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, and Jack Whelan, architect, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that the Commission had directed that a plan for a sign at the entrance of Ken Thompson Park near the highway (John Ringling Parkway) be devised and a monument designed for the plaque somewhere in the actual Park; that it is being recommended that the entrance sign be similar to the carved wood sign installed at the Donald Rohr boat ramps at Centennial Park a year and a half ago which cost $432; that the sign would be approximately 2 feet by 6 feet. Mr. Whelan displayed a map of Ken Thompson Park on the overhead projector and stated that he recommends a monument that is practical using water fountains near the picnic area of the Park. Mr. Whelan displayed an architectural drawing of the proposed water fountain monument to hold the commemorative plaque and stated that the design is for two handicapped-accessible water fountains, one for adults and one for children in wheelchairs; that he proposed to cover the monument in key stones; however, the City Manager had pointed out that it would be very difficult to remove graffiti from the key stones; that the problem with graffiti would have to be addressed before proceeding with this design. Mr. Whelan continued that the cost of the project as presently designed is approximately $9,800. Commissioner Merrill stated that he was concerned about the effects of the elements on a wooden sign over a period of time and suggests that wood signs not be used. City Manager Sollenberger stated that he recommends the monument (as designed) as long as the problem with graffiti is handled. Vice Mayor Patterson asked what the monument would cost without the water fountains? Mr. Whelan stated that it would cost $4,200 less without the fountains. Mayor Pillot asked whether there were any drinking fountains anywhere in this area of the Park? Mr. Whelan stated there were not. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he would like to have the issue of metal versus wood signage reviewed and presented to the Commission at a later date. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the City Manager's Book 35 Page 9560 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9561 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. recommendation (to approve the design and location of the monument). Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Mayor Pillot asked how long it would take to have the monument built and ready, for dedication? Mr. Whelan stated that it would be hard to determine when the monument could be built until he has resolved the problem with possible graffiti. Mayor Pillot asked whether dedication on the weekend of Labor Day would be feasible? Mr. Whelan stated that he thought that could be possible. It was the consensus of the Commission to attempt to have the monument dedicated on Labor Day weekend. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to commission the wooden (entrance) sign if it will last more than five years. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 24. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - PRESENTATION RE: ORANGE AVENUE TRAFFIC ABATEMENT MEDIANS - APPROVED CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION TO SEEK NEW BIDS ON THIS PROJECT AND FOR COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION BY NOVEMBER 1993; DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO SURVEY RESIDENTS ALONG ORANGE AVENUE TO DETERMINE SUPPORT OF SPEED TABLES (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #4 (1478) through (1934) Dennis Daughters, City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that at the Commission Meeting of June 7, 1993 the Commission authorized award of a construction contract for the two landscaped medians on Orange Avenue to Frederick Derr and Company if it could be contracted for an amount not to exceed $38,000 and the lowest price negotiated was $53,184; that it is felt that the prices being quoted by Frederick Derr and Company are extremely high and unreasonable; that it is felt that the project (Orange Avenue medians) should be rebid and the proposal from Frederick Derr and Company and all bids on the median rejected; and that Staff be directed to make necessary modifications to the plans to delete the electrical parts and change one tree to a less expensive tree. Mr. Daughters continued that it is felt that the project could be under construction and completed in November 1993. Commissioner Cardamone asked whether a project of this type is ever done in-house? Mr. Daughters stated that he did not think SO. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the City does not have the Staff capacity for such projects; that he could check with Public Works to determine whether the construction of the medians could be done, but if the landscape crews are made into construction crews, it would take away from maintenance activities. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to approve the City Manager's recommendation to seek new bids on this project (Orange Avenue traffic abatement medians) and try to complete the project within the allotted time (November 1993). Mayor Pillot stated that during his first election he had a great deal of objection to any medians on Orange Avenue and very little support for medians; that he has heard virtually nothing on the subject since that campaign; that during that campaign had answered that he would oppose medians on Orange Avenue and did vote against the medians that exist on Orange Avenue now; that having heard nothing from the public to the contrary to the promise he made in 1989, feels obligated to continue this commitment (to oppose medians on Orange Avenue). Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that she would like to see speed humps become a part of these medians; that she would like to determine what the attitude (of residents) along Orange Avenue would be to adding speed bumps at a later date. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to direct the City Staff to conduct a mailing to find out what the support of the residents in the area is (of Orange Avenue) for putting in speed tables, whether it can be done with this median project or done a year from now, and expanding the project to make it part of the Hospital's proposal for Osprey Avenue and Hillview Street. Commissioner Cardamone stated that in supporting this motion she would want to qualify the impact that might be made on the residential portions of Osprey Avenue. Commissioner Merrill stated that he believes the streetscape medians proposed for Osprey Avenue near Sarasota Memorial Hospital will be a major traffic abatement; that he is concerned about Shade Avenue and the idea of six-laning U.S. 301; that he is concerned about the impact to residential streets east of Tamiami Trail as well. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that Osprey Avenue is a collector street and has some commercial businesses on it and Orange Avenue is a totally residential street. Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Book 35 Page 9562 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9563 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Mayor Pillot asked whether the Commission meeting runs to 11:30 p.m.? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that was correct. Mayor Pillot stated that the remainder of tonight's agenda is not going to be handled in 13 minutes and asked what the Commission wished to do; that two business items remained and the discussion of the audit could be postponed until September. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Administration's recommendation of New Business Agenda Item VIII-4 is to receive the report. 25. NEW BUSINESS = PRESENTATION RE: INTERNAL AUDIT OF THE CITY'S RISK MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT = REPORT RECEIVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-4) #4 (1955) through (1973) On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to receive the report (without discussion). Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 26. NEW BUSINESS = APPROVAL RE: COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) #4 (1975) through (2087) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends that the HOME grant program be amended and that $13,500 be approved for administration. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to amend the H.O.M.E. grant and approve the Community Housing Corporation's (CHC) -request for funds (for administrative expenses) in the amount of $13,500. Commissioner Atkins asked whether the amount was a loan to the CHC? Mr. Sollenberger stated that it was not a loan but a grant allocation of $13,500 for administrative purposes in CHC's capacity as a CHDO (Community Housing Development Organization). Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 27. BOARD APPOINTMENTS DISCUSSION RE: NOMINATE NINE (9) INDIVIDUALS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ADVISORY BOARD NOMINATED J. W. HOWARD, JOHNNY HUNTER, SUE JORDAN, RON MUSTARI, JOANNE S. PRESSLER, AND JONATHAN CHARLES WEISS (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #4 (2089) through (2311) Don Hadsell, Director of Community Development, came before the Commission and stated that the City is to nominate nine people from which the (County) Commission will choose three; that the County has already selected three City residents and three non-city residents; that the City is nominating. the three at-large representatives which means that no one outside the City can become an at-large representative. On motion of Commissioner Atkins and second of Vice Mayor Patterson, it was moved to nominate the following City residents: 1. J. W. Howard 4. Ron Mustari 2. Johnny Hunter 5. Joanne S. Pressler 3. Sue Jordan 6. Jonathan Charles Weiss Mayor Pillot stated that Sue Jordan's address was listed as a P.O. Box and asked whether it would be implicit in the motion that a name would be eliminated if it was found that anyone has mistakenly identified himself or herself? Commissioner Atkins and Vice Mayor Patterson answered yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that his staff checked on the candidates. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she wanted to ask that the Commission support the nomination of a person she asked to apply; that she is concerned that Joanne Pressler's nomination will not be given the consideration from the County she would like it to have when the County makes the selections. Vice Mayor Patterson stated that Commissioner Cardamone might give her candidate some extra consideration by calling the County Commission and make a recommendation on behalf of Ms. Pressler. Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 28. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - DIRECTED CITY MANAGER TO DRAFT A LETTER TO BE SIGNED BY THE MAYOR SHOWING COMMISSION SUPPORT FOR THE FRENCH FILM FESTIVAL TO HOLD ITS GALA ON THE GROUNDS OF THE RINGLING MUSEUM (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (2312) through (2500) COMMISSIONER ATKINS: A. stated that he would like the record to show that Ms. Pressler should be especially recognized on the City's list (of nominations) MAYOR PILLOT: Book 35 Page 9564 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. Book 35 Page 9565 07/19/93 6:00 P.M. A. stated that he had a telephone request followed up by a letter from Lee Warner, Executive Director of the Asolo Center, as follows: "The French Film Festival Gala at the Ringling Museum is a critical part of this major, international event in Sarasota. Our belief is that the members of the City Commission understand the significant benefits this Festival brings to our community and that they share our disappointment of the action of the Museum Board. It would be most helpful, if the Commission holds those opinions, for the Commission to take affirmative action next Tuesday. The action most appropriately would be to request that the Museum Board reconsider its action and join the Festival in presenting the Gala at the Museumo I appreciate your willingness to consider . Mayor Pillot stated that Mr. Warner is asking that the Commission take a stand to request the Museum Board to permit the French Film Festival to have its Gala at the Ringling Museum as they have in the past. Vice Mayor Patterson asked whether a resolution would be appropriate? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that he feels a letter signed by the Mayor stating that official action was taken would be appropriate. On motion of Vice Mayor Patterson and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved that the City Manager draft a letter to be signed by the Mayor on behalf of the Commission showing Commission support for the French Film Festival to hold its Gala on the grounds of the Ringling Museum. Mayor Pillot called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. B. stated that at the Commission's last meeting (July 6) the Vice Mayor had pointed out that Public Safety Director Lewis asked for a delay of the Police Services study and I took exception to this request; that the Commission has received a memorandum from the City Manager dated July 9, 1993 pointing out the fact that Director Lewis had communicated with the City Manager during the time the City Manager was on vacation; that by his strong unpleasant stand had compounded this error; that for this reason, he wished to apologize to Vice Mayor Patterson and to Public Safety Director Lewis for having made statements at the meeting which were incorrect and out of order. Vice Mayor Patterson and Director Lewis accepted the Mayor's apology. 29. OTHERS MATTERS /ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XI) #4 (2501) through (2507) There were no Other Matters from the Administrative Officers. 30. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (2508) The Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of July 19, 1993 was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. n 1A GENE M. PILLOT, MAYOR ATTEST: Billy E Robneon BILLY E.CHOBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK Book 35 Page 9566 07/19/93 6:00 P.M.