BOOK 39 Page 13041 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 15, 1996, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Mollie Cardamone, Vice Mayor Gene Pillot, Commissioners Jerome Dupree, David Merrill Nora Patterson, and Gene Pillot, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Mollie Cardamone 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. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, MARCH 1996, THOMAS C. (T.C.) PARSONS, SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER, PUBLIC SAFETY #1 (0052) through (0171) City Manager Sollenberger requested that Russell Pillifant, Commander, Support Services Bureau, Public Safety Department, and Thomas Parsons, Support Services Division Manager come before the Commission. Commander Pillifant stated that Mr. Parsons is 20-year City employee who continually looks for ways to benefit the City and to improve the level of service provided to the Sarasota Police Department's fleet; that Mr. Parsons recently revised the process for disposing tires which has eliminated the need to utilize man-hours to stack, load, and transport tires from the Service garage on Beneva Road to the City garage located on 12th Street; that locating a dumpster at and disposing of the tires from Beneva Road was considered but would have cost the City approximately $2,500 annually; that through persistent research to resolve the problem, Mr. Parsons located a company which will come to Beneva Road and pay the City $1 for each tire; that Mr. Parson's extra effort and foresight will gain the City approximately $500 in revenue for the disposal of tires from the Public Safety Department; that Mr. Parsons is truly an employee who serves with "Excellence and Pride. 1 Mayor Cardamone presented Mr. Parsons with a plaque and a certificate as the March 1996 Employee of the Month in appreciation of his unique pertormance with the City of Sarasota; and congratulated him for his outstanding efforts. Mr. Parsons recognized his wife, daughter, and neighbor who were present in the audience. 2. PRESENTATION RE: DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD AND THE CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT FOR EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL REPORTING #1 (0171) through (0330) City Manager Sollenberger stated that due to the highly qualified personnel in the City's Finance Department, the City has received two prestigious awards from the Government Finance Officers Association; that the City has received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1994; that publishing an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, whose contents conform to program standards and satisfy generally accepted accounting principles, is required to receive the Certificate of Achievement, which the City has received for the past 14 consecutive years; that receipt of the CAFR assists the City in obtaining an excellent bond rating which is beneficial to the City. City Manager Sollenberger requested that David Flatt, Accounting and Payroll Manager, and Judith Wallace, Payroll Supervisor, join him before the Commission. Mayor Cardamone read and presented to Mr. Flatt and Ms. Wallace the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Accounting; and thanked them for their hard work. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City of Sarasota has also received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994; that publishing a budget document which meets program criteria as a policy document, financial plan, an operations guide, and communications medium is required for a governmental entity to receive the budget award, which the City has received for the past five consecutive years. City Manager Sollenberger requested that Christopher Lyons, Deputy Finance Director, join him before the Commission. Mayor Cardamone read and presented to Mr. Lyons the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award; and thanked him for his efforts. 3. PRESENAYTVION RE: FLORIDA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION DESIGNATING CHRISTOPHER H. LYONS, DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR AS A CERTIFIED GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICER #1 (0330) through (0423) Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that on November 17, 1995, Christopher Lyons, Deputy BOOK 39 Page 13042 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13043 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Finance Director, sat and passed a five-part comprehensive examination prepared by the National Government Finance Officers Association; that the examination included Accounting and Financial Management, Budgeting and Capital Management, Cash Management, Debt Management, and Financial Management; that currently, only 69 of 1,800 eligible individuals in the State of Florida have achieved the Certified Government Finance Officer Designation. Mr. Mitchell read and presented to Mr. Lyons Certified Government Finance Officer Designation Certificate #68; and expressed his congratulations. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City of Sarasota is fortunate and honored to have 2 of the 69 Statewide recipients employed in its Finance Department; that Mr. Mitchell received his Certified Government Finance Officer Designation in 1994. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Commissioner Merrill, as the immediate past mayor, was not in attendance when the Commission was reorganized on April 12, 1996; and expressed his personal appreciation for the excellence in leadership and the knowledge of procedure former Mayor Merrill brought to the Commission. Commissioner Dupree stated that serving on the Commission while David Merrill was Mayor has been a pleasure. Commissioner Merrill stated that he was honored to have had the opportunity to serve as mayor. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES RE: APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1996, AND MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 1, 1996 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0423) through (0453) Mayor Cardamone asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the special City Commission meeting of March 27, 1996, and regular City Commission meeting of April 1, 1996, are approved by unanimous consent. 5. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE (CRC) - AUTHORIZED THE CRC TO CONTINUE DEVELOPING LANGUAGE FOR THE CHARTER AS PRESENTED FOR A TWO-YEAR ELECTED-MAYOR OPTION AS WELL AS FOR A FOUR-YEAR ELECTED-MAYOR OPTION; APPROVED PLACING A CHARTER AMENDMENT WITH THREE OPTIONS ON THE BALLOT: 1) RETAINING THE EXISTING SYSTEM, 2) CHANGING TO A MAYOR ELECTED TO A TWO-YEAR TERM, AND 3) CHANGING TO A MAYOR ELECTED TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM; APPROVED PLACING REFERENDUM OUESTION ON THE SEPTEMBER BALLOT (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0459) through (1600) Lou Ann Palmer, Chairman, Charter Review Committee (CRC), came before the Commission and recognized the following CRC Committee members who were present in the audience: Karen Matteson, Vice Chairman; George Dietz, Bruce Franklin, and Virginia Haley. Ms. Palmer explained in detail the following substantive actions taken by and recommendations of the CRC: Eliminated further consideration of a strong mayor form of government. Recommend a requirement that all elected officials of the City of Sarasota be residents for a period of not less than one year in the specific district for district seats and within the City for a period of not less than one year for at-large seats. Recommend a residency requirement as a future condition of hire for Charter officials, including the city attorney, the deputies of Charter officials, and department heads of the City Administration, with the term department heads being defined by the Commission and referenced by ordinance. Recommend performing evaluations on all three Charter officials, including the city attorney, not less than annually and presenting such at a public meeting. Separate the provision into two sections: 1) addressing the evaluations of the city manager, city auditor and clerk, and city attorney, and 2) addressing compensation of the city manager, city auditor and clerk, and city attorney if hired in-house. Recommend revisions to Article III, Sec. 5, Filling of Vacancies, which include: 1) providing a mandate for a special election within 75 days if a vacancy occurs within the first three years of a commissioner's term, 2) providing for a Commission appointment within 21 days if the vacancy occurs within one year prior to the expiration of the commissioner's term or the governor is authorized to appoint a qualified elector to serve the remainder of the unexpired term, 3) providing for a qualifying period of candidates, 4) providing for proclaiming a sole qualified candidate as elected, and 5) providing for the swearing into office of the new commissioner. Recommend revisions to Article IV, Sec. 10, Relationship of City Commission with Administration to indicate lines of demarcation between the duties of the city commissioners to legislate and set policy and the duties BOOK 39 Page 13044 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13045 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. of the city manager, city auditor and clerk, and city attorney to carry out such policies. Recommend the city auditor and clerk and a city attorney hired as a permanent employee of the City be employed by written contract. Recommend annual compensation for city commissioners equivalent to two-thirds of the salary authorized by the Florida Statutes, Chapter 145.031, for the population group III. (Commissioner salary would increase from $15,750 to $16,890 if the formula were applied FY 95/96.) Recommend a provision to address vacancy in candidacy. Recommend a requirement for the mayor to present a state of the city message. Recommend a provision to address reapportionment of districts and require within one year of publication of each decennial census a review of the number of residents in each of the three districts. Ms. Palmer stated that the CRC voted to extend the schedule of meetings through May 30, 1996, as necessary, to complete Charter revisions and to address the Administrative Code, rules of procedure, procedures for evaluating Charter officials, and enabling ordinances and resolutions. Ms. Palmer continued that recent media reports which have indicated the CRC is recommending a change to November elections and a change to an elected mayor form of government are inaccurate; that the following are the CRC's recommendations on those issues: Recommend maintaining the City election cycle which currently exists in the Charter (March). Recommend the City Commission present the public a referendum with two options: 1) the existing commission/city manager form of government, and 2) a commission/city manager form of government with a mayor elected at large. Ms. Palmer stated that an outline of the elected-mayor option proposed by the CRC has been provided in the Agenda materials; that direction from the Commission regarding presenting the public with two options for form of government is requested prior to the CRC's continuing to develop language for the Charter regarding the elected-mayor option. Vice Mayor Pillot referred to the following contained in the CRC's proposal for the elected-mayor option: Cycle #1 Two at-large, one district. One at-large (Mayor). Other at-large 4 year term. One district 4 year term. Cycle #2 One at-large (Mayor). Other two districts 4 year terms. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the elected-mayor option would retain the existing electoral system of three district commissioners and, in essence, two at-large commissioners; that after the phase-in is completed, district commissioners would continue to be elected to four-year terms; however, the two at-large commissioners would no longer run for two seats with four-year terms but for one seat designated for a mayor elected at-large to a two-year term and for one seat designated for an at-large commissioner elected to a four- year term. Ms. Palmer stated that is correct; and referred to and explained the following phase-in for the elected-mayor option as proposed by the CRC: 1997 One at-large mayor (2 years) One at-large commissioner (4 years) 1999 One at-large mayor (2 years) One district commissioner (2 years) * Two district commissioners (4 years) 2001 One at-large mayor (2 years) One at-large commissioner (4 years) One district commissioner (4 years) 2003 One at-large mayor (2 years) Two district commissioners (4 years) Ms. Palmer stated that in 1999, the City Commission would have to determine which district will run for a two-year term; that reducing the term of one district commissioner from four to two years one time is necessary to prevent four commissioners from continually being elected in the same cycle. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to authorize the CRC to continue developing language for the Charter as presented for a two-year elected-mayor option and to place the option on the ballot. Commissioner Patterson stated that providing the public with the option of having an elected mayor is supported; however, a four- year term is supported; that historically, quality people have run and achieved City office; that the risk of a person serving as mayor perpetually running for office would be great if the elected BOOK 39 Page 13046 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13047 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. term is only two years; that a two-year elected mayor may not be in the best interest of the City. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to amend the motion to include providing the public with the option of a mayor elected to a four-year term. Commissioner Patterson stated that beginning the term of a two-year elected mayor in 1999 rather than in 1997 would provide all existing commissioners who ran with the expectation of one day serving as mayor an opportunity to serve as mayor under the existing rotational system. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that if the amendment and motion pass, the three options on the ballot would be as follows: 1) no change, 2) change to a mayor elected at-large to a two-year term at each election and one at-large commissioner elected to a four year term in odd years, or 3) change to a mayor elected at-large to a four- year term. Commissioner Patterson stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone asked if placing three options on the ballot creates a problem? City Attorney Taylor stated that structuring an alternate ballot question is difficult, but has been done in the past; that assistance from the Supervisor of Elections will be requested to structure the ballot question properly. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the ballot question could be structured in two parts; that the question of whether or not a change is supported could be asked in the first part; that a no answer would end the questioning; that a yes answer would direct the voter to choose a two-year or four-year term for an elected mayor. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to amend the motion to include that the phase- in for an elected mayor begin in 1999. Ms. Palmer stated that beginning the phase-in of an elected mayor in 1999 rather than 1997 would create problems; that two at-large commissioners will each have been elected to four-year terms in 1997. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the second amendment to the motion to begin the phase-in of a two-year elected mayor in 1999. Motion failed (0 to 5): Dupree, noj Merrill, no; Patterson, no; Pillot, no; Cardamone, no. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the first amendment to include a mayor elected to a four-year term as a third option on the ballot. Motion carried (4 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the main motion as to authorize the CRC to continue developing language for the Charter as presented for a two-year elected-mayor option as well as for a four-year elected-mayor option and to place a Charter amendment with three options on the ballot: 1) retaining the existing system, 2) changing to a mayor elected to a two-year term, and 3) changing to a mayor elected to a four-year term. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the City Attorney working with the Supervisor of Elections will develop the language for the ballot. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the main motion. Motion carried (4 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that she has followed the Charter Review process and was impressed by the quality discussions held by the CRC; that the CRC has done an excellent job. Commissioner Patterson continued that the CRC has recommended including in the existing Charter language a requirement for the mayor to present a state of the city message; that several outgoing mayors have chosen to make a state of the city messagei however, other outgoing mayors have chosen to allow the incoming mayor to discuss hopes for the coming year, which usually includes reference to achievements attained during the preceding year; that a rotational mayor should have the opportunity to make such a choice; however, requiring an elected mayor to make a state of the city message would be appropriate; that perhaps the CRC could further discuss that issue. Mayor Cardamone stated that she also questions whether placing such a requirement in the Charter is appropriate. Ms. Palmer stated that the CRC has not developed a recommendation as to which election the referendum regarding Charter changes should be placed; however, she is personally concerned with placing the referendum on the November ballot, which will include the Presidential Election; that placing the Charter changes on the September ballot would be more appropriate. BOOK 39 Page 13048 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13049 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to request that the Charter amendment referendum be held in September 1996. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the motion is subject to approval of and an appropriate date in September being determined by the Supervisor of Elections. Commissioner Merrill asked the advantages of placing the referendum on the September versus the November ballot. Ms. Palmer stated that the Presidential Election is scheduled for November 1996; that the election of County Commissioners, State Legislators, and Congressional Officers and other items of significance will be placed on the November ballot; that election in September is a primary election, but not the Presidential primary; that the Charter amendment would be more visible and receive more attention on the September ballot; that placing the referendum on the November 1996 ballot would make phasing-in a new electoral system in 1997 difficult for the City Auditor and Clerk as the qualifying period for the municipal election begins in January 1997. Commissioner Merrill stated that the greatest voter participation occurs at the November election; that voter participation at the September primary may be minimal; that the desired result may not be achieved by placing the referendum on the September ballot. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the City issues are placed at the end of the ballot; that drop-off voting is more likely to occur on longer ballots; that the November ballot is more lengthy than the September ballot. Mayor Cardamone asked for an appropriate time the Commission could consider holding a joint workshop with the CRC. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that submittal of the ballot question to the Supervisor of Elections is required 45 days prior to the election date; that the primary is held on the first Tuesday in September; that the City Commission is required to adopt an ordinance setting forth the full text of the Charter amendment; that public hearings for first and second reading of the ordinance will be required in late June and early July; that early June would be appropriate if the City Commission intends to schedule a joint workshop with the CRC to discuss the final Charter revisions. Ms. Palmer stated that language has been drafted for the majority of the CRC's recommendations; that the issues on which Commission direction was received will be the focus of the next two CRC meetings; that the language in certain provisions will have to be expanded to apply to a two-year and four-year elected mayor; that hopefully, a final, revised Charter document will be completed for submission to the Commission by its second meeting in May. Mayor Cardamone stated that a joint workshop between the City Commission and the CRC should be scheduled for the end on May or beginning of June. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion to request that the Charter referendum question be held in September 1996 on the appropriate date determined by the Supervisor of Elections. Motion carried (4 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the Commission appreciates the efforts put forth by the Charter Review Committee members. 6. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: ROSEMARY DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27 AND MARCH 26, 1996 = RECEIVED THE REPORT OF THE REGULAR ROSEMARY DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 27 AND MARCH 26, 1996; REFERRED REPORTED ITEMS TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR REVIEW (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (1600) through (1930) Donald Hadsell, Director of Housing and Community Development, and Daniel Bilyeu, Chairman, Rosemary District Redevelopment Advisory Board came before the Commission. Mr. Bilyeu stated that the Rosemary District Redevelopment Advisory Board has held six meetings thus far; and presented the following items from the Board's regular meetings of February 27 and March 26, 1996: Purchase of 419 Central Avenue Mr. Bilyeu stated that the Board recommends that Staff be authorized to investigate the possibility of purchasing the J. Lancer building located at 419 Central Avenue using Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) funds to assist in the redevelopment efforts in the area. Commissioner Patterson asked if the intent is to purchase and demolish the property? Mr. Bilyeu stated no; that the property would be used in accordance with the CBDG funds restrictions, thus providing the City with some control over the development of the property. Fourth Street Improvements BOOK 39 Page 13050 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13051 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Bilyeu stated that businesses along Fourth Street are experiencing problems with parking; that the Board recommends that Staff be authorized to investigate improvements for parking along Fourth Street and/or evaluate the possibility of off-street parking on vacant property, i.e., 1367 Fourth Street. Land Banking Mr. Bilyeu stated that the Board recommends that Staff be authorized to investigate and obtain permission to make land banking plans for the Rosemary District, which could temporarily be used for parking. Mission Harbor Site Mr. Bilyeu stated that the Board recommends that a Request for Proposals (RFP) be developed and submitted as soon as possible to the nine hotels which had previously expressed an interest in locating a notel/conference center in Sarasota. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to receive the report of the regular Rosemary District Redevelopment Advisory Board meetings of February 27 and March 26, 1996, and to refer the items presented to the Administration for review. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the City of Sarasota does not own the Mission Harbor property; therefore, the City Manager would have to discuss the Board's recommendation with the County Administrator. City Manager Sollenberger stated that is correct. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone asked if the attendance problems experienced on the Board have been resolved? Mr. Bilyeu stated that a new meeting time has been established which should improve the attendance of Board members. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Commission has established a policy whereby members of advisory boards are asked to resign for excessive absenteeism; that attendance by all members at meetings is important. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that one member of the Rosemary District Redevelopment Advisory Board underwent major surgery several months ago. 7. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 3, 5, 6, 7,8, 9, AND 10 - APPROVED; ITEM NOS. 1, 2, AND 4 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (1930) through (2860) Commissioner Patterson requested that Item No. 1 and 4 be removed for discussion. Mayor Cardamone requested that Item No. 2 be removed for discussion. 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Tournament Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota Youth Baseball Club, Inc., regarding the presentation of the Amateur Athletic Union National Tournaments to be held at the Sports Complex, August 2-11, 1996 and approximately the same time period in 1997 5. Approval Re: Award of contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with John Haylett & Co., Inc., Sarasota, Florida, (R.F.P. #96- 48) to provide independent financial advisory services to assist the City in developing and implementing strategies to meet its financial needs 6. Approval Re: Award of contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with GRI of West Florida, Inc., Tampa, Florida, (R.F.P. #96-38) in the amount of $115,060 for the removal, disposal (including asbestos abatement) and re-roofing of the Municipal Auditorium 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to reassemble the South Sarasota Traffic Abatement Study Task Force to assess the impacts of the Southside Village Improvement Project and the Phase I of the Traffic Abatement Project 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor to execute the Lido Key Beach Renourishment Project FDER Consent of Use for State Lands Agreement 9. Approval Re: Rejection of Westra Construction Corporation's Bid #96-60, in the amount of $926,119.30 for the City Wide Sewer Rehabilitation Project (Phase IIA) 10. Approval Re: Award of contract to Frederick Derr & Company, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, in the amount of $38,227.00 for the completion of the Municipal Sidewalk Project, Phase IV On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 3, 5, BOOK 39 Page 13052 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13053 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 1. Approval Re: Use of Mobile Home for a anager's/Caretaker's Residence at Bobby Jones Golf Complex 4. Approval Re: Acquisition of Gary L. and Linda L. Wisener's mobile home located at Street 12, Lot 18, Sarasota Mobile Home Park, in the amount of $22,604.26 Commissioner Patterson stated that the total expenditure of locating a manager's/caretaker's residence at Bobby Jones Golf Complex (BJGC) is approximately $33,000; that the police report contained in the Agenda material indicates numerous, frequent police responses to the BJGC; that relocating a mobile home to the site would be less expensive than constructing a home; however, the benefits of locating a residence on a 300-acre site are not clear. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the crime problem experienced at the Complex is of concern; that the request to construct a residence on site, submitted by the Complex manager for budget consideration last year, was not included in the budget submitted to the Commission for approval; that the construction costs would have been substantial; that the proposal to purchase and relocate a mobile home to the BJGC is an economical alternative to provide on-site presence in an effort to deter some of the burglary and vandalism which results in property damage directly impacting the City's revenue. Ray Grady, Manager, Bobby Jones Golf Complex, came before the Commission and stated that the canals and tributaries leading into Phillippi Creek prevent vehicular access from approximately 75% of the surrounding perimeter of the 325-acre BJGC; that the vandalism resulting from vehicular access onto the golf courses is occurring primarily in the area located to the east of the clubhouse in the vicinity of the Heron's Run Apartments; that the installation of chain link fences and gates has not been effective; that four-wheel trucks accessing the greens destroy the fencing; that damage to the greens often render the course unplayable; that locating a residence between the British and American courses would provide a direct line of site from the residence to the clubhouse; that the headlights of vehicles driving on the course late in the evening or early in the morning would be detected; that as the manager, he is frequently called to the BJGC at all hours of the night and on holidays, i.e., Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve; that a large portion of his off-duty time is spent meeting police or addressing problems at the facility; that a lighted, visible residence on the eastern side of the complex would reduce vandalism and provide him with quick access to the entire complex. Commissioner Patterson asked if Mr. Grady will be the person occupying the residence? Mr. Grady stated that he and his family will reside in the double- wide mobile home. Commissioner Patterson stated that reviewing police reports in six months and again one year after occupancy should indicate whether or not the on-site residence is effective in reducing the crime problems. Mayor Cardamone stated that a similar program initiated by the Sarasota County School Board for on-site residences has successfully deterred criminal activities at large school campuses. Commissioner Dupree asked if police safety will be provided for the residence? Mr. Grady stated that the police have responded within 5 to 10 minutes to each of the 183 incidents reported over the past four years. The following people came before the Commission: Richard Roehr, 2475 Wood Street (34237) and Aubrey Bowers 3624 Pin Oaks Street (34232), representing the Bobby Jones Advisory Committee. Mr. Bowers stated that last year, when construction of a home was being considered, the Bobby Jones Advisory Committee unanimously voted in favor of the City's providing a manager's residence at the BJGC; that the City would be following a proven course of action to remedy problems common to many public facilities; that the physical improvements and financial successes the BJGC has experienced in recent years is a direct result of Mr. Grady's tireless efforts; that the City should assist Mr. Grady in having some semblance of a home life while still maintaining the necessary supervision that a seven-day business requires. Mr. Roehr stated that the expenses the BJGC is currently incurring due to vandalism could be curtailed through the on-site presence of the manager at the property. 2. Approval Re: Authorize the sale of remaining Augustine Quarters property to the Community Housing Corporation (CHC) for $25,000 Mayor Cardamone stated that Item No. 2 was removed at the request of the Community Housing Corporation. The following people came before the Commission: BOOK 39 Page 13054 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13055 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Jack Conway, President and Beverly Scott, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Community Housing Corporation (CHC); Jim Grauley, Senior Vice President, NationsBank Community Development Corporation; and Donald Hadsell, Director of Housing and Community Development. Mr. Conway distributed to the Commission a packet consisting of a conceptual site plan identifying the lots to be acquired from the City for Phase II of the Leon Avenue Redevelopment, highlights and accomplishments achieved in Phase I, a project time line indicating key dates, and before/after photographs comparing the former Augustine Quarters with the Leon Avenue Neighborhood Redevelopment. Ms. Scott stated that in April 1994, a Redevelopment Plan and Lot Sale Agreement was approved by the City Commission; that in August 1994 the rezoning and replatting of the former Augustine Quarters was completed; that in September 1994, the Leon Avenue Redevelopment Company (LARC) was formed and marketing efforts for Phase I began in October; that construction of the first homes on the 15 lots acquired from the City through a Sale and Mortgage Agreement in December 1994, began in January 1995; that in May 1995 construction and bank closings on the first three homes were completed; that construction on Phase I continued; that the final 4 of the 15 homes in Phase I are currently under construction and should be completed by July 1996. Ms. Scott continued that the most rewarding aspect of the project has been working with and viewing the happiness expressed by the people who have purchased the homes. Mr. Grauley stated that the City is requested to execute a Sale and Mortgage Agreement with the LARC for the remaining five lots of the former Augustine Quarters property; that the LARC has contracted to acquire additional adjacent parcels from private property owners which will enable the construction of 10 homes on the Phase II lots; that construction of Phase II homes is scheduled to commence in August 1996 and be completed by early 1997; that a total of 25 homes will have been provided when Phases I and II are completed. Mr. Grauley continued that the Community Housing Corporation is a great asset for the City of Sarasota and a great partner for a financial institution; that the results of the CHC's efforts are visible throughout Sarasota; that the City should be congratulated for its innovation in making and following through on a commitment which will greatly benefit the community; that NationsBank will continue to work as part of the joint venture and also on other aspects of development in the neighborhood; that NationsBank has already made an investment in excess of $1 million through the Community Development Corporation and construction lending which is anticipated to double by the completion of Phase II. Mr. Conway stated that Sarasota is committed to revitalizing neighborhoods and investing in families; and complimented the efforts of City Manager Sollenberger and Mr. Hadsell in making the project a reality. Mr. Hadsell stated that over the three-year period prior to the City's acquisition of the former Augustine Quarters, the City received 814 calls for police response and more than 100 calls requesting fire/rescue services at the site; that the cost to the City for public safety services to the former Augustine Quarters exceeded $26,000 annually. Mr. Hadsell continued that the LARC and CHC constructed and sold houses to individuals wishing to locate in the Leon Avenue Neighborhood; that the City contributed to the project by providing sidewalks and driveway aprons to facilitate the new housing, arranging for increased lighting in the area, and permitting the CHC to use for down payment assistance the $100,000 sales price included in Phase II of the Redevelopment Plan. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the partnership between the City, the LARC, the CHC, and the Leon Avenue Neighborhood Association has been successful. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that dedication, expertise, hours of work, and success are qualities best represented by Jack Conway. Commissioner Dupree stated that the redevelopment of the Leon Avenue property formerly known as Augustine Quarters has been extremely successful; that he and the occupants are pleased with the housing which has been provided. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City is gratEful and excited about the CHC accomplishments of the past and future. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, and 4. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 8. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 96R-879) ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 96R-880) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (ORDINANCE NO. 96-3910) - ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (ORDINANCE NO. 96-3925) - ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 96-3921) - ADOPTED: ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 96-3939) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (2860) through (3120) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. 96R-879, 96R-880, and proposed Ordinance Nos. 96-3910, 96-3925, 96-3921, and 96-3939 by title only. BOOK 39 Page 13056 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13057 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution 96R-879, accepting Abatement of Nuisance and Cost Reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of lien against the property described in each abatement report for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only) 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution 96R-880, accepting reports of abatement of nuisances, and costs incurred, pertaining to the demolition of buildings or structures in accordance with the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code as adopted by the City; directing the assessment of liens against the real property upon which such costs were incurred; providing for the recording of said assessments in the City's Assessment Book for Local Improvements" and in the Official Records of the Clerk of Circuit Court in and for Sarasota County; providing for the accumulation of interest on said liens; etc. (Title Only) 3. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3910, to vacate an alley lying between Block A and Block B, revised plat of Court House Subdivision; and an approximately 22 foot wide strip of Ringling Boulevard Spur, lying between Main Street and Ringling Blvd (main thoroughfare) adjacent to Block A of the revised plat of Court House subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 48 of the Public Records of Sarasota County, Florida; and a portion of Links Avenue lying easterly of and adjacent to Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 15, subdivision of Block G and Block H of map of Sarasota, as recorded in Plat Book A, Page 57, Public Records of Sarasota County, Florida and lying westerly of a portion of Block A and B of the revised plat of Court House Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 48 of the Public Records of Sarasota County, Florida; all vacations lying west of Washington Boulevard; lying south of Main Street; lying east of S. Osprey Ave; and lying north of Ringling Boulevard (main thoroughfare); more particularly described herein; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 96-SV-01, Joel Freedman, AICP, for Theatre Associates by BBK) 4. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3925, to vacate right-of-way located in the northeast corner of the Ringling Bouleyara/Ringling Spur intersection; said aforementioned right-of-way includes concrete sidewalk and a portion of the easternmost travel lane of the Ringling Spur; more particularly described herein; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 96-SV-04, Joel Freedman, AICP, representing Theatre Associates by BBK) 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3921, providing for the conditional rezoning of previously annexed property from RMF-1 Sarasota County Zone District and RSF-3 City of Sarasota Zone District, to RMF-1 City of Sarasota Zone District on the entire parcel of real property described as follows: a parcel of land lying on the east side of South Tuttle Avenue between Arlington Street and Hillview Street; said parcel is known as the Evangelical Free Church of Sarasota with a street address of 1899 South Tuttle Avenue; granting Final Site and Development Plan Approval for Application 96-PSD-A; etc. (Title Only) (Petition Nos. 96-CO-01 & 96- PSD-A, Gary W. Hudson, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Evangelical Church of Florida) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 96-3939, amending Chapter 1, Sarasota City Code by deleting the requirement that all members of the Administrative Staff of the City, the City Manager, the City Auditor and Clerk, the City Attorney or their representatives who may be asked to give evidence as part of a duly advertised public hearing, be first duly sworn; providing for the administration of the oath at public hearings on matters quasi-judicial; setting forth findings; providing for the severability of parts hereof; etc. (Title Only) On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 6 inclusive. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Mayor has requested she not vote last on every item; therefore, roll-call votes will be taken alphabetically with the names rotated for sequential votes. Mayor Cardamone requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. BOOK 39 Page 13058 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13059 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3935, AMENDING CHAPTER 24, PERSONNEL, ARTICLE II, PENSIONS, DIVISION 4, GENERAL EMPLOYEES, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, AMENDING SECTION 24-98, TO AMEND TRUSTEE ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (3120) through (3310) Douglas Taylor, Chairman, General Employee's Pension Board, came before the Commission and stated that currently, the General Employees' Pension Code provides that Board members shall be deemed to have resigned from the Board after missing two consecutive, regular meetings unless the absence is excused by the other Board members; that the proposed ordinance amends the Code to have elected or appointed Board members removed from membership for failure to attend three consecutive, regular meetings, or at such time that the member's absences exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of all meetings in a year; that the purpose of the proposed amendment is to eliminate "excused" absences while allowing Board members one additional, successive absence. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3935 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3935 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3935 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3917, AMENDING CHAPTER 24, PERSONNEL, ARTICLE II, PENSIONS, DIVISION 3, POLICE, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA: AMENDING SECTION 24-83, COST-OP-LIVING ADJUSTMENT, TO PROVIDE FOR ANNUAL COBT-OF-LIVING PAYMENTS AFTER RETIREMENT AND BETWEEN AGE 51 AND AGE 55; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #1 (3325) through (3460) John Schultz, Chairman, Police Officers' Pension Board came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 95-3917 amends the Police Officers' Pension Code by simplifying. and clarifying the language which provides for the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) ; that currently, retired police officers are not eligible to receive a COLA until age 55, although normal retirement is at age 50 with 25 years of service; that the proposed ordinance amends the Code to pay a 13th check each February to retired police officers not eligible for the regular COLA increase; that the 13th check is an annual lump sum calculated in the same way as the regular COLA increase; however, unlike the COLA, the increase is not added into the base pay. of the monthly retirement check; that the 13th check provision will be funded from the Reserve Fund for Future Benefit Improvements established with excess earnings in the Pension Fund; that the City contribution will not be affected; that the proposed ordinance guarantees perpetuity by providing a safety valve provision by which the amount issued will be reduced proportionately if the sum total of the 13th checks exceeds 3.5% of the balance of the Reserve Fund. Mr. Schultz continued that historically, the practice of the Board has been to return all gains realized by the Pension Fund to the City, as the City has the final responsibility of maintaining the actuarial soundness of the Police Officers' Pension Fund; that in fiscal year 1992/93, the Board placed $475,684 of excess earnings in reserve to improve benefits; that the amount represents less than 1% of the total value of the Fund, which was $63.6 million as of September 30, 1995; that as a result of the March 18, 1996, Commission meeting, the Board adopted a policy which states that all or a portion of the investment gains each year will not be reserved for future benefits; that the Board may periodically request the City Commission to review the funding level of the Fund to determine if additional benefits can be granted. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3917 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3917 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3917 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes. 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3924, TO VACATE A PORTION OF SERENA STREET LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF LOCKWOOD RIDGE ROAD JUST SOUTH OF JOLSON DRIVE AND NORTH OF FRUITVILLE ROAD BETWEEN PROPERTIES HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 140 AND 220 NORTH LOCKWOOD RIDGE ROAD: SAID PORTION OF SERENA BOOK 39 Page 13060 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13061 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. STREET RUNS EASTERLY TO THE WEST RIGHF-OF-WAY LINE OF BEE- THOVEN AVENUE; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 96-8V-03, PETITIONER JOEL FREEDMAN, AICP OF BISHOP & ASSOCIATES REPRESENTING JAMES RUTLEDGE) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #1 (3470) through (3868) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission, referred to a zoning/subdlivision map displayed on the overhead projector, and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3924 vacates an unpaved, unopened portion of Serena Street, 50 feet in width by 750.89 feet in length, which is located between Lockwood Ridge Road and Beethoven Avenue; that the street vacation is associated with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (95-PA-07) adopted in July 1995 relating to an office/park development; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) at its meeting dated February 7, 1996, recommended approval to the Commission of the street vacation subject to the petitioner: 1) at his expense, relocating the 8-inch force main which existing in the Serena Street right-of-way, 2) granting new easements for the relocated force main, 3) granting the necessary easement to Florida Power & Light (FPL), and 4) complying with the special conditions of Ordinance No. 95-3872, which requires enhanced buffering having a minimum width of 50 feet. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3924 on first reading. Joel Freedman, AICP, Bishop & Associates, representing James Rutledge, Petitioner, came before the Commission and referred to a conceptual site plan displayed on the overhead projector to identify the area requested for the street vacation, the area being retained by the City, and the relocation of the force main; and stated that vacating the requested portion of Serena Street will allow for the lands north of the vacated street to be incorporated into a single parcel fronting Fruitville Road. Mr. Freedman stated that the additional depth created by the assemblage of the parcel will provide for flexibility and efficiency with design of the office park, will allow for significant buffering between the residences to the north of the proposed office park development, and will result in construction of a higher quality office park development. Mr. Freedman continued that during the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, the petitioner agreed to establish an area 50 feet in width along the northernmost property line of the subject property for a utility easement and landscape buffer; that the city's utility easement will be 20 feet in width; that the petitioner will provide a 30-foot landscape buffer to the south of the utility easement; that the easement for FPL has been drafted; that the existing FPL poles will be relocated when the development process begins; that the City's utility easement will be granted prior to second reading as required; that discussions have been held with Dale Haas, the City's Senior Utilities Engineer, regarding the options available for relocating the force main; that one option discussed was the developer's reimbursing the City for installation of the 8" force main. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3924 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3924 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3924 on first reading. Commissioner Dupree asked if further rezonings will be necessary for the proposed development to proceed? City Manager Sollenberger stated that the necessary processes have been completed. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes. 12. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3930, TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE FROM RMF-4 ZONE DISTRICT TO CRT ZONE DISTRICT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: LOTS 1 THRU 15, BLOCK 5, INCLUDING THE PORTION OF VACATED EAST TO WEST ALLEY WITHIN INWOOD PARK FIRST ADDITION SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK A, PAGE 23, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 96-DPR-04 FOR ALL OF BLOCK 5, INWOOD PARK FIRST ADDITION PERTAINING TO THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED PROPERTY BEING REZONED TO THE CRT ZONE DISTRICT AS WELL AS PROPERTY CURRENTLY ZONED CG ZONE DISTRICT, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WALGREENS STORE AND OTHER RETAIL/COMXERCIAL USE: SUBJECT SITE HAS A STREET ADDRESS OF 333 NORTH WASHINGTON BOULEVARD AND 1947 FRUITVILLE ROAD: MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NOS. 96-CO-03 & 96-DPR-04 PETITIONERS JOHN W. MESHAD AND THOMAS DABNEY, II, REPRESENTING THIRD STREET AFFILIATES) = PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH THE ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE A REPORT AT SECOND READING REGARDING ACCESS RESTRICTIONS AND A REVISION TO SECTION 5-2; AUTHORIZED BOOK 39 Page 13062 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13063 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATION TO INVESTIGATE PERMITTING AUTHORITY FOR STATE ROADS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SARASOTA (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #1 (3868) through #2 (1480) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission, referred to a zoning/subdivision map to identify the subject property, and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3939 conditionally rezones the parcel of land lying east of Gillespie Avenue between Fruitville Road and Fourth Street from Residential, Multiple-Family (RMF-4) to Commercial Residential Transition (CRT) i that Development Plan 96-DPR-04, filed in conjunction with the conditional rezoning, includes the portion of the site which is currently zoned Commercial General (CG) and proposes development of two structures: a Walgreens store of approximately 13,900 square-feet and an unleased structure of approximately 7,500 square feet; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) at is meeting dated March 6, 1996, found the proposed development plan consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and recommended approval of the conditional rezoning (Petition No. 96-CO-03) to the City Commission subject to the following: 1. the project driveway on Fourth Street being restricted to left-turn in/right-turn out only; 2. the proposed Gillespie Avenue opening on Fruitville Road being restricted to right-turn in and right-turn out; 3. the applicant installing "No left turn" signs at the intersection of Gillespie Avenue and Fruitville Road in both directions; 4. the access points onto Gillespie Avenue from the site being signed to prohibit right-turn out; 5. the project driveway on U.S. 301 being restricted to right-turn in, left-turn in, and right-turn out only; 6. water and sewer service relocations being constructed by the developer; 7. an easement for City-owned utilities being provided prior to construction; and 8. a concrete semi-diverter being constructed for the two accesses on Gillespie Avenue. Commissioner Merrill asked the route a person residing on 7th Street at Gillespie Park would take to return home from the proposed Walgreens store. Vice Mayor Pillot left the Commission Chambers at 7:44 p.m. Ms. Robinson stated that the resident would egress onto Gillespie Avenue, travel south on Gillespie Avenue, turn right onto Fruitville Road, make a U-turn at Links Avenue, turn left onto U.S. 301, and enter 7th Street off of U.S. 301. Commissioner Patterson stated that Gillespie Avenue continues north to 10th Street; and asked why the resident would exit the site and travel south on Gillespie Avenue? Commissioner Merrill stated that the PBLP recommended right-turns onto Gillespie Avenue be prohibited. Ms. Robinson stated that is correct; that the access points onto Gillespie Avenue from the site will be restricted to left-turn only. Commissioner Merrill asked if the restrictions proposed by the PBLP represent good planning techniques? Ms. Robinson stated that technically the project could be developed without all the restrictions; that protecting the neighborhood from the encroachment of commercial uses is important; that a reduction in restrictions could be supported if sO desired by the neighborhood. John Meshad and Thomas Dabney, II, representing Third Street Affiliates, Petitioners, came before the Commission. Mr. Meshad stated that the Gillespie Avenue restrictions were not recommended to the PBLP by the City's Engineering or Planning Staff; that those restrictions were added as an amendment to the PBLP's motion to approve Development Plan 96-DPR-04; that the petitioners consented to the condition without an opportunity for full review; that subsequent to the PBLP public hearing, discussions were held with neighborhood representatives who agree that the condition makes access to and from the neighborhood difficult for residents and should be eliminated; that few motorists would attempt to make a right turn onto Gillespie Avenue, unless their intent is to access the neighborhood; that more direct routes are available to motorists travelling to the east, north, or west from the site; and requested that the Commission consider eliminating the Gillespie Avenue restrictions. Mr. Meshad referred to Section 5-2 of the proposed ordinance which required utility relocation prior to the issuance of the first building permit; stated that addressing the utility relocation during construction would be more cost effective; and requested that the language be revised as follows: the petitioner shall complete the utility relocation prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. BOOK 39 Page 13064 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13065 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3930 on first reading; that the revisions requested by the petitioners have not been reviewed by Staff; that favorable consideration of the requests by the Commission could be subject to a supportive Staff report being received at second reading. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Mr. Allison V. L. Jones, 145 Bearded Oaks Drive (34232), stated that he owns property on Gillespie Avenue in the vicinity of the area proposed for the Walgreens; that the petitioner is closing three existing curb cuts directly onto Fruitville Road, funneling traffic from the proposed site onto Gillespie Avenue, and sending the traffic in one lane onto Fruitville Road; that access points into the site off of Fruitville Road is being limited to one, Gillespie Avenue; that the existing curb cuts which were successfully utilized by the Old Heidelberg Castle should be retained. Mr. Jones continued that a report consisting of various documents was submitted for the record at the PBLP public hearing on Petition No. 96-CO-03; that his arguments regarding a previous vacation of the subject parcel and his opposition to the traffic impacts to Gillespie Avenue and 4th Street from the development as proposed are outlined in the report. Commissioner Patterson asked if the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) mandated the closing of the curb cuts on U.S. 301 and Fruitville Road? Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the subject portion of Fruitville Road is still a City street; that the FDOT requirement applies only to U.S. 301; that the Sarasota City Plan recommends no driveways onto Fruitville Road; that motorists entering or existing driveways along major thoroughfares tend to cause an interruption of thru traffic. Vice Mayor Pillot returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:56 p.m. Mr. Jones stated that the three existing curb cuts would provide for greater access than the one exit proposed off of Gillespie Avenue. Linda Holland, President, Gillespie Park Neighborhood Association (GPNA), 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236), stated that members of the GPNA met with the petitioners to review the preliminary site plan; that the issues raised included landscaping, traffic, and trash receptacles; that the main traffic issue raised was cut-through traffic if a left turn from the development onto 4th Street was permitted; that the petitioners answered and addressed the issues and concerns raised at the meeting; that a general consensus in support of the development was reached on the proposal which did not include restricted turns onto Gillespie Avenue. Ms. Holland continued that Gillespie Avenue continues north from 4th Street to 6th Street, stops, and continues off of 6th Street to 10th Street; that motorists travelling north on Gillespie Avenue would do sO to access the neighborhood surrounding Gillespie Park; that 4th Street provides a direct route to Orange Avenue which would promote a natural path for cut-through traffic. Ms. Holland further stated that the proposed positioning of the structures provides for better visibility at the intersection of U.S. 301/Fruitville Road; that the proposed Walgreens will be within walking distance to a neighborhood which has many residents who are elderly and families with limited transportation; that hopefully, the operation of the convenience store at the corner of U.S. 301 and 5th Street, which has caused continuous problems for the neighborhood, will no longer continue after the Walgreens is developed; that the Walgreens is anticipated to have a positive impact on the neighborhood. E.W. Babb, 1886 Bahia Vista Street (34239), stated that his comments are directed more towards the general problem the City experiences with regard to State roads, i.e., U.S. 301 and U.S. 41; that the State mandates that the City approve a comprehensive plan but does not provide for local control of ingress and egress from properties onto State roads; that the City should pursue the process by which the FDOT can delegate permitting authority to local government entities which requires the applicable procedures of the local government entity be followed. Wallace Murray, 1919 4th Street (34236), stated that he is the Vice President and on the Board of Directors for the West Coast Center Church located on the corner of 4th Street and U.S. 301; that the West Coast Center also owns property at 411 and 419 4th Street, which abuts the subject property; that the police often respond to complaints of prostitution and drug-related activities occurring in the area surrounding the subject property; that purse snatchings have occurred in the Church parking lot; that the closing of Gillespie Avenue between Fruitville Road and 4th Street makes police pursuit of offenders difficult; that the West Coast Center supports the petitioners' request for reopening Gillespie Avenue; that the proposed development will have a positive impact on the adjacent neighborhood and will serve the community well. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. BOOK 39 Page 13066 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13067 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3930 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3930 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3930 on first reading, subject to the Administration meeting with the petitioners and other interested parties to discuss potential changes to the ingress/egress on the site and reporting back to the Commission at second reading. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the petitioners and speakers have commented on the possibilities of improving the ingress/egress on the site. Commissioner Patterson stated that the petitioner also requested an opportunity to relocate the water/sewer utilities during construction by providing the easement to the City prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy rather than prior to the issuance of the building permit; and asked if the intent of the motion was to include a report back on that issue at second reading. Vice Mayor Pillot stated yes. Commissioner Dupree stated that the Administration should be directed to investigate the potential of obtaining permitting authority for State roads. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City may have a right to pursue permitting authority under the Florida Administrative Code; however, a separate motion should be made if the Commission intends to direct the Administration to pursue that issue. Commissioner Merrill stated that the proposed development is not a regional mall; that the majority of the proposed Walgreens' customer base will come from the adjacent neighborhood; therefore, easy, free access to and from the neighborhood should be provided; that eliminating the restrictions on 4th Street should be considered as consideration is given to eliminating restrictions on Gillespie Avenue; that the egress prohibiting left turns onto 4th Street is to the east of Gillespie Avenue; that permitting right turns from the site onto Gillespie Avenue would also permit left turns onto 4th Street; that further consideration should be given to prohibiting left turns onto Fruitville Road; however, prohibiting left turns onto U.S. 301 is wise; that restricting regional traffic through neighborhoods is favored; however, the traffic generated by the proposed development will not be regional; that free access similar to that provided for his neighborhood to the Midtown Plaza is favored for the proposed development. Commissioner Dupree stated that a large amount of the customer base will come from outside the adjacent neighborhood; that numerous motorists travel on Fruitville Road and U.S. 301; that a Walgreens' at the proposed location will provide a needed service to other neighborhoods situated between U.S. 41 and U.S. 301. Commissioner Patterson stated that residents from Siesta Key neighborhoods will not use a Walgreens at the proposed location; however, traffic will be generated from neighborhoods further than a few blocks away from the site; that the Administration should provide a recommendation at second reading without a Commission directive. Commissioner Merrill stated that the traffic accessing the site off of U.S. 301 or off of the first driveway on Gillespie Avenue from Fruitville Road would not be neighborhood generated; however, the majority of the traffic which would travel north on Gillespie Avenue or west on 4th Street would be residential traffic; that forcing all the vehicles from the site onto roadways which are already congested is another traffic-related issue. Mayor Cardamone stated that providing no ingress/egress onto Fruitville Road is inappropriate; that traffic signalization promoting thru traffic causes a mass of vehicles to travel as a group when a traffic signal is green, thus periods of time during which no vehicles travel occur when a traffic signal is red; that permitting access to the site from Fruitville Road would be appropriate. Mayor Cardamone continued that as currently proposed the route to the neighborhood from the site would be to exit south on Gillespie Avenue, turn right onto Fruitville Road, and turn right onto North Osprey Avenue. Commissioner Patterson asked if the petitioner originally requested an access onto Fruitville Road? Mr. Daughters stated that the issue could have been discussed during the initial meetings between Staff and the petitioners; however, the site plan he reviewed did not include an access onto Fruitville Road. Commissioner Patterson asked for comment by the petitioner. Mr. Dabney came before the Commission and stated that Staff encouraged the existing driveways onto Fruitville Road be closed and access onto Gillespie Avenue be provided if an opening of Gillespie Avenue were to be pursued; that the petitioner would gladly include a mid-block access to the site on Fruitville Road. Commissioner Patterson stated that providing an access point on Fruitville Road is favored; that the restaurant use formerly on the BOOK 39 Page 13068 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13069 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. site generated more interruption of thru traffic on Fruitville Road in terms of ingress/egress than a Walgreens will. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the motion as to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3930 on first reading, subject to the Administration's meeting with the petitioners and other interested parties to discuss potential changes to the ingress/egress on the site, reviewing the petitioners' request to revise Section 5-2 of the ordinance so the utility easement is required prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, and reporting back to the Commission at second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Dupree and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to authorize the Administration to investigate the potential of obtaining permitting authority for State roads located within the City of Sarasota. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes; Cardamone, yes. 13. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3929, TO CONDITIONALLY REZONE FROM OPB ZONE DISTRICT TO RMF-4 ZONE DISTRICT; AND TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 96-PSD-D TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY (ACLF) WITH SUPPORT FACILITIES TO BE KNOWN AS "THE GARDENS" ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY: SUBJECT SITE LIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FRUITVILLE ROAD JUST WEST OF BENEVA ROAD AND EAST OF BOBBY JONES APARTMENTS, WITH A STREET ADDRESS OF 3470 FRUITVILLE ROAD; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NOS. 96-CO-04 & 96-PSD-D, PETITIONER DIANE PENN, REPRESENTING DARTMOOR PROPERTIES AND THE GARDENS, INC. = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5) #2 (1490) through #2 (2042) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 96-3929 conditionally rezones the parcel located at 3470 Fruitville Road from Office, Professional and Business (OPB) to Residential, Multiple Family (RMF-4); that the parcel is approximately 700 feet west of Beneva Road on the south side of Fruitville Road across from Bailey Road; that in conjunction with the rezoning request, Preliminary Site and Development Plan 96-PSD-D has been filed to construct a 132-unit assisted care living facility with support facilities, which will not include a medical facility; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) at its meeting dated March 6, 1996, found the proposed conditional rezoning (Petition No. 96-CO-04) and the proposed preliminary site and development plan consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and the Tree Protection Ordinance and recommended approval to the City Commission, subject to the petitioner granting the necessary utility easements when application for a building permit is filed. Diane Penn, representing. Dartmoor Properties and The Gardens, Inc. Petitioners, came before the Commission and stated that in October of 1995 the Department of Elders Affairs changed the term Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF) to Assisted Living Facility (ALF). Ms. Penn stated that the development proposed is like no other ACLF existing in Sarasota or neighboring counties; that the facility is not designed as a nursing home but as a facility for younger, healthy senior citizens; that the 132 apartments will have no kitchens but will be more spacious and economically priced that comparable facilities; that the residents will be encouraged to participate in the continuous, daily activities scheduled; that vans on-site will provide transportation to a variety of events; that the building will encompass a large atrium area providing various outside activities including an exercise pool, therapy pool, lawn sports, vegetable and flower garden areas, and a parklike setting with fountains and a central gazebo for entertainment; that the lower level of the facility will function as a quasi-hotel entrance, including a large living room, private- use rooms, a concierge, and a tour desk/marketing office for interviewing prospective tenants and families; that the administrative offices, recreational facilities, and storage facilities will also be located on the lower level; that a 24-hour security station will be located in the 40-foot by 80-foot glassed front lobby and also at the southeast corners of the second and third floors where the tenants will reside; that the proposed development will be a low-to-medium level in-care facility; that physicals will be performed to determine whether a prospective tenant qualifies under the independent residence or assisted care guidelines. Commissioner Merrill stated that the site plan reflects the dumpster location on the east side of the property facing Fruitville Road; and asked if the dumpster could be relocated to the rear portion of the property? Ms. Penn stated that an enclosed structure will be constructed; that the dumpster will not be visible from Fruitville Road. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 96-3929 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3929 by title only. BOOK 39 Page 13070 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13071 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 96-3929 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. The Commission recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:40 p.m. Mayor Cardamone stated that Vice Mayor Pillot was not feeling well and asked to be excused from the remainder of the meeting. 14. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS = ADMINISTRATION TO RESPOND AT THE APRIL 16, 1996, WORKSHOP TO ALLEGATIONS OF POLICE HARASSMENT MADE BY LUCINDA BRAZEL; RESCINDED MOTION OF APRIL 1, 1996, TO UNDERTAKE NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT U.S. 41 AND BAHIA VISTA STREET; REFERRED THE USE OF MISSION HARBOR SITE FOR A SPECIAL EVENT TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR A REPORT BACK (AGENDA ITEM VI) #3 (0000) through (0150) The following people came before the Commission: Lucinda Brazel, 908 Myrtle Street (34234) stated that she is reporting an instance of police harassment which has been previously discussed with Commissioner Dupree and Commissioner Patterson. Commissioner Dupree stated that the situation has been discussed with him at least three times. Ms. Brazel stated that one Sunday afternoon she contacted the Sarasota Police Department for assistance in removing a man who became violent after she allowed him to enter her house; that Officer Christopher Born responded to the call and met her in the Publix parking lot from which the call for assistance had been placed; that Officer Born yelled at her, refused to help with the situation, and left her standing in the parking lot; that later that night the violent man placed a pillow over her head and brutally raped her; that Officer Born should have arrested the man in accordance with a previously-issued court order; that the next morning she told the man she had an appointment; that the man was arrested in her car when she informed the State Attorney's Office of the incident; that Gordon Jolly, Chief of Police Services Bureau, Public Safety Department, was informed about the situation; that Lieutenant Lewis White told her that four police officers would swear that she refused help when officers had responded to calls at her house in the past, which is not true; that the police harassment began after her discussion with Police Chief Jolly and occurred every time she left the house. Ms. Brazel continued that a police car pulled up behind hers at a drive-in automatic teller machine; that the officers inside the police car blew the horn for a long time and scared her; that on Saturday, April 6, 1996, Officer Born and another officer followed her and parked in front of her house; that both officers were laughing; that Officer Born held his hand up, made it look like a gun, and mimicked with his mouth "pow"; that the incident caused her to go to the emergency room; that the situation changed after she started taking pictures; that during the past week she has been followed by other police officers, against whom complaints will not be filed as she believes they are being used; that the American Civil Liberties Union wants a complete report including the pictures; that two talk shows are requesting an appearance from her to discuss the harassment; that she has no other recourse for action. Commissioner Patterson stated that after speaking with Ms. Brazel and reviewing a memorandum which responded to inquiries made by Commissioner Dupree regarding this issue, the Administration was requested to prepare an updated memorandum; that making a judgement in a circumstance such as this is difficult for the Commission. Ms. Brazel stated that when the events of April 6, 1996, were reported to the dispatcher, she was told that Officer Born could not have been the officer at her house because he was on a call; that the harassment always occurs during the afternoon shift; that no one bothers her earlier in the daytime. Commissioner Dupree stated that Sergeant Brenda Redden, who is in charge of the afternoon shift, has offered to discuss with Ms. Brazel the difficulties being reported. Ms. Brazel stated that all Police Officers cannot be followed around. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the matter should be referred to the Administration for review and a response. Mayor Cardamone stated that a serious charge has been brought to the Commission in a very public setting; that everyone is sorry for the way Ms. Brazel feels; that the Administration should respond as soon as possible. Commissioner Merrill stated that he agrees a response should be made; that allegations as to police officer behavior have been broadcast for over five minutes; that the Director of Public Safety or the Police Chief should have an opportunity to respond to the issue as to the veracity of the allegations and inform the public about what is being done. BOOK 39 Page 13072 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13073 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, came before the Commission and stated that a proper response cannot be provided without the opportunity to review the issue. City Manager Sollenberger stated that a report containing the most recent information will be prepared and Director Lewis and Police Chief Jolly will respond at the conclusion of the Crime Plan Workshop which will be televised tomorrow evening at 7 p.m. Commissioner Merrill stated that a response tomorrow evening is not his preference but is acceptable; that allegations have been made against the entire Sarasota Police Department; that if the City is at fault, it should be acknowledged and corrective actions made public; that if the City is not at fault, an alternate account of the events needs to be described; that both sides of a story are necessary for a difference to be recognized; that a public response to public allegations is necessary. Linda Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236), representing the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations and the Gillespie Park (GPNA) Neighborhood Association, read into the record the following letter: The Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations, currently representing 19 City neighborhoods, discussed at its April 6 meeting the action (the City Commission) took on April 1 to instruct the Administration to negotiate a settlement of the lawsuit involving rezoning of the property at U.S. 41 and Bahia Vista Street owned by E.W. Morton, Jr., George Dietz, Robert E. Windom, and James Ritchey. The Coalition voted unanimously to express deep concern and dismay with (the City Commission's) decision. What was particularly disturbing was the dismissal of the time, effort, and expense the Avondale and other neighborhoods incurred in providing expert witnesses and testimony at the public hearing. The Coalition is extremely puzzled by such action, as the primary goal of the City Commission for the past three years has been the preservation and protection of neighborhoods. This year it was the unanimous, top priority of each Commissioner. If the goal setting process and results were never intended to be upheld, (that intent should have been made) clear to the public. Since its formation in 1990, the Coalition has been honest and respectful in dealing with the City Commission. We were disappointed that the majority of the Commission did not talk with the neighborhoods prior to making its decision. Ms. Holland stated that the Commission's decision to undertake settlement negotiations was discussed by the GPNA on April 10, 1996; that the members were reminded of a petition which had been submitted to develop a strip center at U.S. 301 and 6th Street; that as with the Walgreens proposal, the petitioner was requesting the use of residential property for a retention area; that the neighborhood strongly opposed the use of the residential property as proposed and prevailed; that subsequently, four new affordable homes were built on that propertyi that the Commission sitting at that time respected the neighbors' desire to maintain the character of the neighborhood and supported the position of the people who would be living in the neighborhood, day-to-day. Ms. Holland requested that the City Commission reconsider the action taken by the Commission to undertake settlement negotiations with BVP Associates. Jencie Davis, 1420 Fifth Street (34236), stated she supports the position of the Avondale neighborhood; that the Commission should have waited for a decision from the Second District Court of Appeals (DCA) prior to undertaking negotiations for settlement. Georgia Nicholson, 1839 Alta Vista Street (34236), stated that petition filed for development of the property at the corner of Bahia Vista Street and U.S. 41 has been a controversial issue; that commercial water retention on residential property, increased traffic on neighborhood streets, and preservation of neighborhoods are concerns of the neighborhood; that after the Commission denied the petitioners' rezoning request, the petitioners appealed to the Circuit Court and prevailed; that the City Commission voted in favor of appealing the issue to the Second DCA; that an appeal was filed with the Second DCA; that now, is not the time to undertake negotiations for settlement; that the Commission should await the Court's decision. Robert Painter, Director, First National Art, Inc.. 1247 Twelfth Street (34230), stated that First National Art is a nonprofit 501(c) (3) organization, which in November of 1995 held a daytime family event featuring native American art on the Mission Harbor site; that the neighbors, including the Unity Church, appreciated the clean-up of the site which was performed prior to and after the event; that several thousand school children were invited to attend the Zuni cultural performance; that no alcohol was served, no police were called, no streets were closed, and no out-of-town promoters benefitted from the event; however, the City notified the County not to schedule another event on the site because the property is zoned residential: that an exception is requested to permit an event to be held again on the site this year from November 21 through November 24, 1996; that the event will close each day at 5 p.m. with only a brief preview event and silent auction to be held on the evening of November 21; that commitments from exhibitors have been made; that the event will benefit the Sarasota economy. BOOK 39 Page 13074 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13075 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Painter continued that property at 12th Street and U.S. 41, owned by Charles Githler, has been offered as an alternative site for the event; however, that site also has a zoning problem. Mr. Painter further stated that other similar sites are not available for use in the foreseeable future; and requested assistance by the Commission in permitting the nonprofit organization to schedule the community event on one of the two desirable, convenient, and affordable sites. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the matter should be referred to the Administration; that Commission action may be required at a future date. Commissioner Patterson asked if Mission Harbor site had been rezoned to its earlier zoning, which was commercial? City Manager Sollenberger stated no; that the Commission approved a policy amendment to the Sarasota City Plan which will provide for a rezoning of the property to Commercial, Central Business District (C-CBD) without another Comprehensive Plan process; that a provision is being drafted in conjunction with the Land Development Regulations (LDRS) to provide for temporary use permits; that the matter will have to be reviewed and a report provided back to the Commission. E. W. Babb, 1886 Bahia Vista (34239), stated that the April 1 Commission vote regarding settlement negotiations on Petition No. 94-C0-06 indicates a majority of the Commission now believes the City should reach a compromise with the developers rather than following through with a previous decision to deny the rezoning request and to appeal the court decision which overturned that denial; that during the public hearing on Petition No. 94-CO-06, no Commissioner suggested that a compromise might be an alternative to voting on the issue; that the Commission directed a compromise with BVP Associates be undertaken without information from the Staff, the PBLP, or the neighbors being considered; that to suggest a compromise after a rezoning request has been denied by the Commission is in effect a request for a recision by the losing side, which is not proper under Roberts Rules of Order; that the Administration should consider addressing a compromise between the parties prior to the case being heard by the City Commission for land use requests against which a large number of citizens have spoken in opposition before the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) i that attempting a compromise before the Commission makes a potentially litigious decision would be more appropriate as the positions of the parties would be clearly outlined. Mr. Babb continued that the majority decision by the Commission to deny a particular land use and to appeal a subsequent court ruling should not be questioned; that minority objections only weaken the City's position and current or subsequent litigation; that the time to compromise is before not after a Commission decision to appeal has been made; that the issue of whether a City Commission must accede to the statements of an administrative staff and an appointed board is vital to the City's development process; that the Commission's right to legislate should not be compromised; that advisors and advisory boards are just that, advisory, as specifically stated in the Zoning Code. Mr. Babb requested that the Commission let the appeal process continue and not to undertake negotiations with BVP Associates at this time. Isabel Norton, 1500 North Drive (34239), requested that the Commission reconsider settling at this time with the developers of the residential and commercial property on the corner of Bahia Vista and U.S. 41; that development of the commercial section of the property is not the issue with which she takes objection; however, allowing the expansion of the commercial zoning into the residential section is offensive; that the City has the right to require the owners of the property to adhere to the current delineation between property zoned commercial and property zoned residential, including the maximum use of buffers required between the two zonings; that the Commission's changing its initial position sets a dangerous precedent and threatens neighborhoods who have worked hard to maintain existence against growth, traffic, and commercial encroachment; that the requirements dealing with the abutment of residential and commercial property were established for a reason and make no sense if the Commission makes exceptions to these codes and regulations, particularly in this case after standing firmly in favor of neighborhood preservation; that the Commission's change in position and attitude sends a message to other developers that all that is necessary to achieve what is requested is to threaten a lawsuit. Virginia Haley, 1646 South Orange Avenue (34239), stated that the Commission's right to make decision on rezonings and land use issues is not an issue which can be resolved through settlement negotiations; that the Circuit Court ruling in essence stated that neighborhoods who cannot afford to hire professionals to attend the pre-meetings, i.e., casual luncheons or Staff meetings at City Hall, or the PBLP public hearings, do not have a voice; that the Avondale neighborhood expended funds and hired professionals who provided testimony only before the Commission; that the Commission was provided competent, substantial evidence from those professionals and made statements on the record in defense of their positions prior to voting; that the Commission should proceed with the appeal process. BOOK 39 Page 13076 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13077 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Kafi Benz, 3084 Air Gate (34378), representing. Indian Beach Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association, was no longer in the Chambers. Audrey Lucker, 729 Taylor Drive (34236), representing Lido Key Residents Association, stated that others have stated most of what she wanted to sayi that the Commission paid for the appeal and should wait for the results; that thinking the Commission is required to accept the PBLP's recommendation regarding land uses is disconcerting; that the Commissioners are elected officials; that the Commission should be the decision-makers regarding land use changes. Ms. Lucker continued that the City has over $1 million dollars reserved for beach renourishment; that attempts have been made to contact legislators in Tallahassee regarding the lack of funding in the State budget for beach renourishment in Sarasota; that messages were left at the offices of State Senator John McKay, and State Representatives Shirley Brown and Lisa Carlton; that a list of others with whom contact should be made will be forwarded to her from Senator McKay's office; that during her inquiries to State officials she was informed the City needs matching Federal funds to obtain State funds; that Longboat Key does not meet that criteria but will receive State funding. City Manager Sollenberger stated that as he understands, Longboat Key will provide a fifty percent local match; that the rationale of the Legislature is not fully understood but unconscionable; that Lido Beach is in the worst condition he's seen in seven years. Ms. Lucker stated that the beach area is quickly eroding; that little beach area remains; that the utilities located under Benjamin Franklin Drive may soon be threatened; that tourists come to Lido Key for the beaches; that the local economy is very dependant upon tourist trade and the tourist tax; that tourists will soon stop coming; that something has to be done; that the next Lido Key Residents Association meeting is scheduled for April 20, 1996; that letters and petitions will be forwarded to Tallahassee; that assistance from the City Commission is necessary to convince the Legislature of the severity of the problem which Sarasota is experiencing. Commissioner Paterson stated that the offices of each of the members of the Local Delegation were visited while she was in Tallahassee last week; that pleas for beach renourishment funding were expressed; that similar pleas should be put forth by the other Commissioners; that neighbors and neighborhood leaders should also contact the legislators who have been elected to represent the Sarasota citizens. Commissioner Patterson continued that the Legislative Session began last week; that amending the proposed budget once presented is difficult; that funding for Sarasota was not included in the budget presented; that she feels let down by the City's lobbyist; that the request for funding could have been amended from $2 million to $1.5 million if the City had made aware of the 50% match issue. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Representative Brown has indicated an amendment to the budget will be introduced; that constituents' contacting each of the legislators about the importance of Lido Beach is imperative; that the State of Florida receives over $600,000 annually in sales tax revenues from the businesses operating along Benjamin Franklin Drive; that the City's share of the sales tax is a mere pittance by comparison; that the State has not realized the financial issues at risk. Larry Button, 801 South Boulevard of the Presidents (34236), stated four locations of Walgreens stores are listed in the Sarasota telephone directory, not including one newly constructed Walgreens or the two proposed Walgreens referenced earlier in the meeting; that the Commission's decision to undertake settlement negotiations and abandon the appeals process taxpayers have financed without awaiting the Second DCA's decision is appalling and is the worst decision a Commission has ever made. Mary A. Kumpe, 1564 Bay Point Drive (34236) representing 1000 Friends of Florida, stated that she is Vice President of 1000 Friends of Florida, a Statewide organization dedicated to maintaining sound planning in Florida; that approximately four hundred members locally belong to 1000 Friends of Florida; that Bob Parks from Haggard and Parks in Miami, Allan Watts of Cobb, Cole, and Bell in Daytona, Dr. Lenore McCullagh from Jacksonville, Victoria Tschinkel, the former Secretary of Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) in Tallahassee, and Dr. John De Grove, a national land use expert, comprise a litigation subcommittee which screens referred cases for Statewide implications and reports to the Board of Directors for 1000 Friends of Florida; that the organization becomes involved only in cases with Statewide implications; that the Circuit Court opinion rendered regarding the litigation on the Morton, Dietz, Windom, and Ritchey property was reviewed; that the subcommittee unanimously recommended the Board to take appropriate action to assist in any appeals filed by the City; that the organization's legal staff assisted the City's legal staff in preparing the case before the Second DCA; that the issue is no longer a local dispute over zoning; that the issue relates to the power of a local government to make informed judgments regarding where and when development is allowed to occur rather than being bound by the advisory recommendations of a planning board and staff; that 1000 Friends of Florida believe the Circuit Court ruled in error; that an alternative decision by. a higher court could benefit all the cities BOOK 39 Page 13078 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13079 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. and counties of Florida; that neither the Commission nor the developers may settle a matter which goes to the heart of the City Commission's role in sound planning for the future of the community; that the Commission should most carefully consider its course of action regarding this important issue. Brenda Patten, 1862 Alta Vista Street (34236), stated that she is a resident of the Avondale neighborhood and is a land use attorney in Sarasota; that she supports the comments of residents throughout the city who have come to speak regarding the Commission's decision to consider the proposed Walgreens settlement; that she agrees with the position of the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations; that settling litigation at this late date is of no advantage to the City or the neighborhood; that settlement may harm the City in future rezoning; that the Circuit Court has ruled the City Commission must vote in favor of the PBLP's and City Staff's recommendation unless the City Commission proves the advisory recommendations wrong, which is not the law in Florida and should be overturned; that future zoning decisions of the Sarasota City Commission will be vulnerable to legal attack if the Circuit Court ruling stands; that time, money, the time of the City Attorney, and other Staff resources have been invested in the Walgreens case; that the Commission should not give up now; that in February 1995 many long hours of testimony occurred during the public hearings on Petition No. 94-CO-06; that the Commission's decision to deny the petition was supported by substantial, competent evidence and testimony from professional planners, traffic engineers, professional architects, land use attorneys, a landscaper, a former County Planning Commissioner, and many others; that many neighbors provided testimony about traffic, noise, and land use issues from observation of facts and personal experiences; that the Third District Court of Appeals recently ruled in Metropolitan Dade County VS. Bloomenthal that the testimony of citizens, based on facts within their own personal knowledge, is considered substantial, competent evidence. Attorney Patten continued that at the public hearing on February 21, 1995, three Commissioners voiced serious objections to the proposed rezoning and site plan; that those objections are not resolved by the proposed settlement. Attorney Patten referred to a transcript of the February 21 public hearing and read the following objections raised by Commissioner Merrill: I would vote to support the petition unless there was overwhelming evidence to support denial; such overwhelming evidence does exist and this particular site plan must be denied. The site plan violates the existing land use pattern of transitional zoning, it fails to adhere to intent of the commercial office park zoning. It is out of character with the surrounding uses. It would adversely affect location property values. It fails to conform to the zoning code and it lacks a specific plan to mitigate the traffic impacts. This site plan would violate the existing conditional land use pattern along U.S. 41. If the predominate use of this site were office, as provided for in the Commercial Office Park (COP) District transitional zoning would be maintained against the adjacent single family areas. The site plan fails to comply with Section 8227 of the zoning code, the maximum lot coverage exceeding the required amount by seventy percent. Attorney Patten stated that nothing is proposed to the Commission in the settlement offered by the petitioners which resolves those issues. Commissioner Merrill asked to see his comments; and read the following from the transcript: I am especially concerned that our City preserves private property rights guaranteed in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution; that he sought to make sure that government's regulation of land is based on sound planning and the regulation of property is not arbitrary; that the ability of property owners to use their land is not based on a popularity contest with neighbors; that when our Comprehensive Plan Zoning Code declares that a certain use is appropriate on a given property, that you should be allowed, even in the face of neighborhood opposition to do sO. this evening the issue of whether or not to change the zoning on a parcel of land is being considered, the zoning for which, for six years our Comprehensive Plan has indicated would be appropriate. Commissioner Merrill stated that the judge obviously did not find his arguments very convincing; that perhaps the judge focused on the introductory comments more than the later comments. Bruce Myer, 1011 Bayou Place (34236), representing Bay Point Park Association, stated that statements made by previous speakers regarding the City's settling the lawsuit with Morton, Dietz, Windom, and Ritchey are supported by the Bay Point Park Association. Brad Gaubatz, 1918 Irving Street (34236), stated that he is a resident of the Avondale Association and a local, registered BOOK 39 Page 13080 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13081 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. architect; that the points raised by those speaking before him were well stated; that hopefully Commissioner Dupree has read thoroughly the accounts and the hours of testimony given regarding Petition No. 94-CO-06; that the issue should have been reviewed prior to Commissioner Dupree's voting on such an important issue. Mr. Gaubatz requested that the Commission reconsider its position regarding undertaking a settlement with BVP Associates. Thorning Little, 534 Columbia Court (34236), stated that he is a board member on the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations, a downtown neighborhood home owner, and an architect; that as an architect, the following disparities were identified during his initial review of the site plan for the Bahia Vista and U.S. 41 property: The use of the storm water retention onto the residentially zoned portion seemed to be stretching the developers' ability to over impact the conditions and development of the property to allow a much greater density on the commercial portion and to use the adjoining residential portion for part of the burden of the development. The buffers proffered as part of the site plan included a fence, which was not on the westerly side of retention area but on the easterly side of the retention area to the rear of the proposed building and plans for landscape vegetation were interrelated with the fence. The drive-thru area of the facility, proposed as a 24- hour operation, was located at the rear of the buildings, adjacent to the single family properties. Mr. Little stated that the approach the developer has taken is unfair to the abutting neighborhood; that the City's undertaking a settlement or compromise with the developers of the Bahia Vista Street/U.S. 41 property will make proponents of development take greater risks thinking that severe residential opposition can be overcome by a favorable Staff position, a favorable PBLP recommendation, or an appeal to the Circuit Court if denial occurs at the Commission level; that appellate judges, who have been dealing with many other types of case studies or who are not well educated in land planning areas or not as highly specialized in land planning areas as developers or land planning attorneys, would have difficulty being fair or correct and may be more prone to approving developers' interests; that although his work as an architect would increase as a result of developers' increased risk taking, his residence, located less than two blocks always from a major thoroughfare, could adversely be affected in the future. Mr. Little continued that the Commission should take what the speakers have said to heart. Martha J. Ardren, 632 Golden Gate Point (34236), representing Golden Gate Point Association (GGPA), stated that the GGPA supports the efforts of the CCNA in requesting the City Commission to complete the appeals process; that other neighborhoods could indirectly be affected if the Circuit Court's ruling regarding the proposed Walgreens development is allowed to stand; that the Commission has identified neighborhood preservation as a priority goal; that the quality and strong sense of community developed in Sarasota neighborhoods should be preserved; that the Commission should listen and answer the pleas of the neighborhood people; that the neighborhood residents will support Commissioners who support them. Michael Melnick, 1931 Irving Street (34236), stated that he urges Commission reconsideration of settlement and allowing the legal process to continue; that approximately 100 people have spoken in objection to the Walgreens development; that no one except for the developers and their attorneys and land planners have supported the project; and asked to whom should the Commission should listen? John Browning, 1376 Harbor Drive (34239), stated that the Commission previously voted to expend taxpayers' dollars to appeal a decision in support of an historic City neighborhood; that the Commission's retreat from the perceived intent to support and enhance local, residential neighborhoods saddened him; that the Commission is viewed as selling out City neighborhoods by premature capitulation, neighborhood crony-ism, or worse, the fear of losing a lawsuit; that the advantage the Commission expected to gain through negotiations is not understood; that the City should look toward consolidation if the elected officials are willing to "cave- in" to influential business leaders in the community; that the City will soon cease to exist without good, viable neighborhoods. Mr. Browning continued that Commissioner Dupree was elected overwhelmingly by his constituency to represent District 1 neighborhoods; that Commissioner Dupree's "me-too" vote was viewed as the weak following the strong; that, hopefully, Commissioner Dupree will re-evaluate the real basis of voting and having adequate background knowledge to make his own decision; that as the editorial of the Pelican Press stated, the Commission's action on this issue "could well silence the voices of any neighborhoods hoping to protect their homes and investments"; that the Commission's action could also help to drive those residents who have strived to preserve and enhance what is good about Sarasota, out of Sarasota. Teresa Carafelli, 1838 Alta Vista (34236) representing Avondale Neighborhood Association, stated that the Commission who has BOOK 39 Page 13082 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13083 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. reversed its decision once is being asked to reverse its decision again; that the Commission does not appear to be listening to the public; that one Commissioner is reading, one is writing, one went home with a cold; that the public is approaching the Commission under Citizens' Input about a very important issue; that the Commission should pay attention; that the April 1, 1996, Commission decision to undertake negotiation settlements with BVP Associates was first viewed as an April fool's joke; that she was shocked to learn it was not. Ms. Carafelli requested that the Commission rescind the motion to undertake settlement negotiations. Devin Rutkowski, 1920 Laurel Street (34236), stated that the Commission has shown much support for the efforts of the Laurel Park Neighborhood Association; that the Commission's decision to undertake negotiations with BVP Associates shocked him; that a bad precedent is being set; that he was particularly disappointed by Commissioner Merrill's vote and perplexed by Commissioner Dupree's vote; that Commissioner Dupree previously abstained from voting on items pertaining to issues which occurred prior to his term; that the magnitude and seriousness of the Walgreens issue warranted a similar abstention; that one cannot help but wonder if the Commission would have voted in favor of undertaking settlement negotiations with, e.g., an anti-growth group such Growth Environmental organization (GEO) with Dan Lobeck as the petitioner. Commissioner Dupree stated that in response to Ms. Carafelli's statements, his writing pertained to the item being presented; that he was listening very carefully as he wrote; that the last vote of the Commission on this issue was not based upon any attempt to sell out the neighborhoods; that the Commission voted to undertake negotiations for settlement with a final vote to be taken when recommendations were presented by Staff; that he was fairly well informed on the issues raised by the neighborhood when he cast his vote, e.g., inconsistencies with the land use, impacts of a 24-hour store, and traffic generated by entrances at Bahia Vista and Prospect Streets; that the intent of his vote was to possibly gain acceptance by the developers of the neighborhood's demands; that several videos and additional information have been reviewed since April 1, 1996; that the comments made by speakers regarding his knowledge of the subject is of concern; that the fact that his vote has brought the neighborhoods closer together is consoling as one of the Commission's objectives is to unite City neighborhoods. Commissioner Dupree continued that the direct inquiry made by Ernie Babb was appreciated; that Mr. Babb was the only member of the public who asked him directly about his vote on April 1, 1996; that fear of a lawsuit is something with which an elected official must become accustomed; that the Staff or PBLP had not put forth a recommendation regarding the settlement negotiations; that he voted in favor of an item which was required to come back before the Commission for a final vote; that a settlement which was not in the best interest of the abutting, residential neighborhood would not have been supported. Commissioner Patterson stated that the issue is broader than a rezoning of one piece of land; that the outcome of the City's appeal to the Second DCA has Statewide implications regarding the rights of the Sarasota City Commission and other commissions to make land use decisions in the future; that undertaking settlement negotiations prior to the Court's ruling on the City's appeal is not appropriate; that the ramifications of letting the Circuit Court's ruling stand is realized by the members of the Avondale neighborhood; that the Avondale neighborhood is willing to take their chances and await the Court's ruling; that the Commission should too. Commissioner Merrill stated that the City's losing a lawsuit is what changed his position regarding this issue; that designation of an Impact Management Area (IMA) is purely a political process during which the Commission acts in a legislative capacity; however, during the public hearing process on Petition No. 94-CO-06 the Commission was required to sit in a quasi-judicial capacity; that the Commission's voting on the legal issue was delayed until a subsequent meeting to provide the Commissioners an opportunity to meet with the City Attorney, find out what legal arguments were appropriate, and to develop an argument as the basis of a particular position being taken; that he felt the arguments he made on the record supported his position against the proposed petition; that the appellate judge thought otherwise; that some of his arguments have been negated in the letter of settlement put forth by BVP Associates; that many of his traffic arguments related to the second building, which the petitioners have offered to eliminate; that the language in the City's Zoning Code pertaining to the Commercial Office Park (COP) District does not include intents; that the Sarasota City Plan does not mandate many of the transitional land uses which he has supported; that locating a Walgreens at the corner of Bahia Vista Street/U.S. 41 is not viewed as beneficial to the City; however, the City lost in court and continuous appeals are not supported. Commissioner Merrill continued that other neignborhoods will not be indirectly affected by a settlement with the developers; that a purely political process is required to designate a parcel an IMA; that neighborhoods fearing commercial rezoning, e.g., at Gulf Stream Avenue, could fill the Commission Chambers with opposing residents, and a political decision not to designate the property as an IMA would most likely be made; that the Commission does not expend substantial time on controversial rezonings related to IMAs. BOOK 39 Page 13084 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13085 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the City was unsuccessful at the Circuit Court level; that the City could also be unsuccessful at the Second DCA level; therefore, the Commission's taking a risk-adverse position is appropriate; that attempting to identify and address the objections raised about the site plan proposed would be better than being forced by the Court to accept the site plan the Commission originally denied; that the neighborhood's "all or nothing" attitude is surprising; that the letter from the petitioners was not "the" settlement; that the Sarasota City Plan designates the property eligible for COP zoning; that undertaking settlement negotiations provides an opportunity to identify and resolve the issues which are most offensive to the neighborhood. Commissioner Patterson stated that discussion regarding settlement negotiations with BVP Associates was not an agendaed item; and asked if the Commission can legally take a vote on the issue? City Attorney Taylor stated that a Commission vote is permitted; that items which are raised during Citizens' Input are often referred to the Administration for review. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to rescind the following motion of April 1, 1996: to undertake settlement discussions with BVP Associates with exact language and an Administration's recommendation being brought back at the regular City Commission meeting of May 6, 1966. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Commission has heard from some of Sarasota's finest, most caring neighborhood people; that the Commission would be doing a disservice to the community by not reacting to the request brought forth; that Commissioner Dupree's clear explanation of his vote cast at the April 1 meeting is appreciated, but may still not be understood by the community; that Commissioner Dupree's responding favorably to the comments and questions directed at him by the speakers would please the community; that development of the property on the corner of Bahia Vista/U.S. 41 has been a highly controversial issue for many years; that the issue literally encouraged her to run for office; that during the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, the developers and attorneys for the developers were the only people who spoke in favor of designating the property as an Impact Management Area (IMA); that although the Commission Chambers was filled with neighbors who opposed approval of the Amendment, a motion passed to amend the Sarasota City Plan; that no neighborhood representative has ever spoken publicly in favor of proposed commercial developments on the subject site; that one major difference between the Walgreens proposed and approved for development at the U.S. 301/Fruitville Road intersection and a Walgreens proposed at the U.S. 41/Bahia Vista Street intersection is that Bahia Vista Street is a 20-foot wide residential street whereas U.S. 301 and Fruitville Road are major thoroughtares; that the Commission has an opportunity to rescind the motion to undertake negotiations with BVP Associates regarding the proposal at Bahia Vista Street previously denied by the Commission and to wait for the Second District Court of Appeal's ruling which could have Statewide implications. Commissioner Dupree stated that he has never forgotten the platform on which he ran for office; that economic development and the development of businesses are supported; however, the development of neighborhoods is a stronger priority; that each City neighborhood's needs and problems should be considered and appropriately addressed by the Commission. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated that motion as to rescind the motion of April 1, 1996, to undertake settlement discussions with the exact language and an Administration's recommendation to be brought back at the regular City Commission meeting of May 6, 1996. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (3 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 96-3931, AMENDING CHAPTER 16, SARASOTA CITY CODE, RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, TO REQUIRE THAT SOLID WASTE CONTAINERS AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS CONTAINERS BE REMOVED FROM THE CURB OR ROADSIDE NO LATER THAN 8:00 A.M. ON THE DAY FOLLOWING THE DATE OF COLLECTION: PROVIDING FOR A $25.00 FINE FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE REOUIRED TIME FOR REMOVAL OF CONTAINERS; CLARIFYING THE REQUIREMENT THAT WASTE CONTAINERS AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS CONTAINERS BE STORED IN SIDE OR REAR YARDS AND NOT FRONT YARDS; DECLARING THAT A FRONT YARD SHALL MEAN THE YARD AREA EXTENDING FROM THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE RIGHF-OF-WAY REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #4 (0100) through (0510) Timothy Litchet, Manager of Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that at the March 4, 1996, public hearing on proposed Ordinance No. 96-3931, the City Commission requested a response at second reading as to why the Administration does not favor permitting 36 hours for retrieval of trash receptacles from the curb; that the proposed ordinance as drafted accomplishes the goal of having the trash receptacles removed from the curb for the maximum, reasonable amount of time during the week; that the proposed 36-hour language will accomplish the goal of requiring removal of trash receptacles from the curb twice a week, but for a minimum amount of time; that neighborhood BOOK 39 Page 13086 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13087 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. preservation has been listed as a top City Commission goal; that the 36-hour proposal will make logical enforcement efforts difficult; that administrative regulations are being drafted which will provide flexibility for the Administration to excuse citations issued, e.g., if documentation can be provided that the recipient was out of town or unforeseen circumstances prevented the retrieval of the trash receptacle; that the neighborhoods targeted during Staff's recent public information efforts included the Rosemary District, Central Avenue, Gillespie Park, Laurel Park, East Sarasota, and residences on Browning Street and Midwest Parkway; that 60+ Staff hours have been devoted to distributing 562 flyers and explaining in person to residents the City's desire to have the trash receptacles retrieved in a timely manner. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends adopting proposed Ordinance No. 96-3931 on second reading as originally drafted. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Commission will be perceived as "condo commanders" if the ordinance is adopted as drafted. Commissioner Patterson stated that although she feels somewhat like a "condo commander," the ordinance as drafted will be supported. Commissioner Patterson asked for the process by which a citation is served. Mr. Litchet stated that violators who receive a citation in the mail will have the option of appealing the citation or paying the fine. Commissioner Patterson asked if the citations issued will inform a person who was out of town that the citation can be waived if validating documentation is presented to the Administration? Mr. Litchet stated no. Commissioner Patterson stated that many people will admit guilt for leaving a trash receptacle at the curb while out of town and forward the $25 fine to the City; that the City will keep the fine; however, others will choose to contact the City and be informed of the waiver; that approving an administrative regulation of which only some people are informed and able to take advantage is not fair to the public. Mayor Cardamone stated that she disagrees with Commissioner Patterson; that hundreds of phone calls will be received if the City includes notice of the waiver provisions on the citations; that residents who are out of town should make arrangements for the retrieval of their trash receptacles or pay the fine when a citation is issued. Commissioner Patterson stated that the public should be informed if the administrative regulations will include a waiver for residents who are cited for leaving trash receptacles at the curb while out of town. City Manager Sollenberger stated that based on the discussion at the table, the administrative regulations will not include a waiver for residents who are out of town. Commissioner Dupree stated that waiver provisions should not be referenced on the citation; however, the recipient could be encouraged to contact the Administration if the citation was issued in error; that certain reasons provided by a recipient may be valid. Commissioner Patterson stated that the citation could indicate the Administration should be contacted if any questions are raised regarding the citation issued. Mr. Litchet stated that the citation clearly indicates the number which recipients can call to obtain information, the serving inspector's name, and the right to appeal; that a citation form will be forwarded to the Commission for review. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 96-3931 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Dupree and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 96-3931 on second reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: HUDSON BAYOU DREDGING PROJECT = AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATION TO PURSUE WCIND FUNDS AND TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROJECT AS SCHEDULED; ESTABLISHED A LIST OF PRIORITIES FOR WCIND FUNDING (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #4 (0520) through (1350) Alexandrea Hay, Assistant city Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that on April 2, 1996, the following people attended a meeting held to review possible funding sources for the Hudson Bayou Dredging Project and the project schedule: John McCarthy, Sarasota County Natural Resources Department; Chuck Listowski, West Coast Inland Navigation District (WCIND) i Dave Davis and Jim Toale, Property Owners; Mollie Cardamone, City Commissioner; V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance; Michael BOOK 39 Page 13088 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13089 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Connolly, City Attorney's Office; Mark Alderson, Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program; Richard Winters and herself, City Engineering Department. Ms. Hay stated that various funding sources have been reviewed; that WCIND is the only potential funding source identified for which the project may be eligible. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends: 1) authorizing the Administration to continue pursing WCIND funds and 2) authorizing the Administration to continue with the project as outlined in the revised schedule of events contained in the Agenda material. City Manager Sollenberger continued that as a secondary measure the Commission is requested to prioritize the list of City projects for which WCIND applications have been filed. On motion of Commissioner Merrill and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation. Commissioner Patterson stated that the motion should include the Commission's prioritizing of the projects. City Manager Sollenberger distributed and explained the following list of grant applications submitted to WCIND, prioritized as recommended by the Administration: CITY-INITIATED 1. Continued funding for removal of sunken boats in Sarasota Bay $ 30,000 2. Whitaker Gateway Park Seawall 100,000 3. Equipment for Police Dive Teams 87,000 4. Hudson Bayou Dredging/Restoration Project 150,000 OTHER Pelican Man $ 49,520 SARASOTA COUNTY Restrooms at Centennial Park $125,000 City Manager Sollenberger stated that the first priority refers to the City's intent of establishing a protocol to obtain WCIND funding annually to mitigate the cost and unfair burden placed upon city taxpayers for the removal of sunken boats in Sarasota Bay; that the second priority is part of the overall development plan for Whitaker Gateway Park; that the third priority refers to the purchase of underwater communication equipment for police dive teams; that Hudson Bayou Predging/Restoration Project has been listed as the fourth priority; that the restrooms at Centennial Park is a County application; however, approval by the City Commission would be required as to the design and location of the restrooms; that $125,000 may not be sufficient funding to construct restrooms; that the specifics of the Pelican Man application are not known. Mayor Cardamone asked if funding for the Whitaker Gateway Seawall could be delayed until next year? Duane Mountain, Streets, Landscape Maintenance & Solid Waste Manager, and Angie Brewer, Grants Consultant, came before the Commission. Mr. Mountain stated that unfortunately, funding for the Whitaker Gateway Park project was not received as anticipated; that WCIND funding is being pursued as an alternative source to replace the loss in funding; that a grant applied for through the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program (FRDAP) could be jeopardized if construction of the seawall is delayed. Ms. Brewer stated that the City has successfully applied for two FRDAP grants, one which is in the process of being awarded and one which was executed in September 1994; that the City's reimbursement through the 1994 grant is subject to elements of the Whitaker Gateway Park project, i.e., the boating dock which will be attached to the seawall, being completed by September 1996; that the City successfully applied for and received a grant through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Program for FY 95/96; that the City's second application filed for FY 96/97 was not awarded because the Federal appropriations for the Program have been suspended until at least FY 98/99; therefore, the City has applied for grant funding through the Florida Boater Improvement Program (FBIP) and WCIND in an attempt to replace the funding anticipated through the Land and Water Conservation Fund Program. Commissioner Patterson stated that Whitaker Gateway Park has 300 feet of waterfront; that the issue of the dock being attached to the seawall is understood; that perhaps 200 of the 300 feet of seawall could be built and when the project is completed the remaining waterfront developed as a bayou area for canoe/kayak launching; that several Commissioners and members of the public have expressed interest in a portion of the waterfront being retained as a beach area. BOOK 39 Page 13090 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13091 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. Mr. Mountain stated that the issue has been reviewed by Staff on several occasions; that a beach area would experience a substantial erosion problem; that tidal action against the existing seawall is severe; that not only could grant funding be jeopardized, but the rest of the park could be jeopardized if the seawall were removed in certain areas; that a step-down dock will be constructed to provide for launching of small canoes and kayaks. Commissioner Patterson stated that an opportunity to rest a canoe or kayak on the shore will not be provided; that retaining a portion of the existing seawall may provide an opportunity for a small beach area. Ms. Brewer stated that in the last two years, the master plan for the Park has been reviewed numerous times; that creative writing has been performed to retain eligibility of grant funding on the project as the Plan has been revised to incorporate suggestions and comments; that replacement of the seawall is a stipulation of the permit which allows construction of the dock; that a final decision on the position and the length of the seawall in conjunction with the dock attached will have to be determined by early summer; that the engineers and architects are making every effort to incorporate an area for canoe/kayak launching. Commissioner Patterson asked for an explanation of the importance of underwater communication for police dive teams. John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, came before the Commission and stated that areas in which the teams are diving are not clear; that the communications equipment is new technology which has just become available; that divers will be able to communicate with other divers as well as out-of-water personnel as hazardous areas, i.e., rock pits, canals, and bayous, are being searched for contraband, weapons, or disposed bodies. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Hudson Bayou Dredging Project is a serious neighborhood issue; that the surrounding property owners have pursued a Special Assessment Taxing District to fund the project; that the problems being addressed by the dredging project were not caused by the surrounding neighbors, but from activities occurring upstream; that the Hudson Bayou Dredging Project should be higher on the priority list. Mayor Cardamone asked if the diving equipment could be purchased through Law Enforcement Trust Funds (LETF)? Director Lewis stated that the purchase of equipment would be eligible under the LETF guidelines; however, adequate LETF dollars are not available. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City has operated efficiently without the diving equipment; that funding for the diving equipment could be delayed until next year; that the Hudson Bayou Dredging Project is in need of funding this year prior to finalization of the Special Assessment Taxing District. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Dupree, it was moved to amend the motion to include that the City's priorities be established as follows: 1. Continued funding for removal of sunken boats in Sarasota Bay $ 30,000 2. Whitaker Gateway Park Seawall 100,000 3. Hudson Bayou Dredging/Restoration Project 150,000 4. Equipment for Police Dive Teams 87,000 5. Support the County's application for Restrooms at Centennial Park Commissioner Merrill asked for the Administration's recommendation regarding the amendment. City Manager Sollenberger stated that officer safety is an important issue; that a change in the priorities is not recommended. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion to amend. Motion carried (3 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson restated the main motion as to: 1) authorize the Administration to continue to pursue WCIND funds and to continue with the project as outlined in the Schedule of Events dated March 6, 1996, and 2) to revise the Administration's list of priorities for City applications to WCIND to reflect Hudson Bayou Dredging as the third priority, Equipment for Police Dive Teams as the fourth priority, and Restrooms at Centennial Park as a fifth priority as a statement of support for the County's application. Mayor Cardamone called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried (3 to 1): Dupree, yes; Merrill, no; Patterson, yes; Cardamone, yes. 17. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA = ADMINISTRATION TO INVESTIGATE MAINTENANCE OF THE PORTABLE RESTROOMS AT CENTENNIAL PARK: DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA; CANCELLED APRIL 29, 1996, JOINT CITY COMMIBSION/NENIOAK TASK FORCE WORKSHOP (AGENDA ITEM X) #3 (1350) through (1780) BOOK 39 Page 13092 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13093 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON: A. stated that complaints have been received that the portable restrooms currently located at Centennial Park are not being well maintained; that the County is responsible for maintenance at Centennial Park; and requested that the Administration investigate the issue and contact the County if necessary. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the issue will be addressed. B. stated that the City Commission's input is considered advisory when the Board of County Commissioners determines the distribution and use of impact fees collected by the County on behalf of the City; that a legal opinion received from the City Attorney indicates the City has an ability to collect its own impact fees; that consideration of terminating the City's agreement with the County for collection of impact fees would require a public hearing process before the City Commission; that the City of North Port has substantially lower impact fees than those assessed by the County; that the City of Sarasota is a developed area with infrastructure in place; that terminating the agreement with the County may be advantageous to the City's attracting desirable projects and affordable housing developments; and asked if the Commission has an interest in pursing the issue? Commissioner Dupree and Mayor Cardamone stated yes. Commissioner Merrill stated that he does not have an interest. Commissioner Patterson stated that an item will be agendaed for discussion at a future Commission meeting. COMMISSIONER DUPREE: A. stated that the Newtown Task Force will not be prepared to make a presentation to the Commission as planned; and requested that the joint workshop between the City Commission and the Newtown Task Force scheduled for April 29, 1996, be cancelled. Mayor Cardamone stated that holding the workshop an hour preceding a regularly scheduled meeting with a short agenda should be considered when the workshop is rescheduled. B. stated that he was impressed with the Administration's report regarding the Sarasota Quay and efforts of the Sarasota Police Department to address the problems brought forth by neighboring residents. City Manager Sollenberger stated that an update on the Police Department's efforts will be presented at the Crime Plan Workshop tomorrow evening. Commissioner Patterson stated that she is interested in hearing more about the recommendation to prohibit people under the legal drinking age from entering bars and nightclubs wearing arm bands. COMMISSIONER MERRILL: A. stated that he has a scheduling conflict and will not be able to attend the Tourist Development Council (TDC) meeting on Thursday, April 18, 1996; and asked if another Commissioner is interested in attending the meeting? Mayor Cardamone and Commissioner Patterson stated that they would be out of town. Mayor Cardamone stated that the TDC will be discussing the issue of requesting the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners to increase the tourist development tax by one cent to support a conference center; that the City Commission should be represented at the meeting. MAYOR CARDAMONE: A. requested that a joint workshop between the City Commission and the Charter Review Committee be scheduled. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson suggested that scheduling the meeting be discussed at the end of agenda for the Crime Plan Workshop tomorrow evening. B. stated that the response received from the Administration regarding the construction occurring on the South Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41) was not acceptable; that the sidewalks at all the intersections with traffic signalization along South Tamiami Trail have been torn up for the past four weeks as the concrete traffic poles are removed and replaced with the modern standard; that pedestrians and bicyclists are forced to walk out into the street to pass the construction; that a woman pushing a baby carriage was viewed walking out onto U.S. 41 to turn the corner and cross Bahia Vista Street; that two elderly people on three-wheeled bicycles experienced difficulty at the northwest corner of Bahia Vista Street and U.S. 41 when attempting to pass over a hole in the street which was filled with water; that City barricades are positioned in the areas referenced; that she views the situation as a major liability to the City. BOOK 39 Page 13094 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. BOOK 39 Page 13095 04/15/96 6:00 P.M. 18. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (1790) There being no further business, Mayor Cardamone adjourned the regular meeting of April 15, 1996, at 11:02 p.m. Arelis L Cerele MOLLIE C. CARDAMONE, MAYOR ATTEST: Ill & Rabensin BILLY E.CROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK