Regular City Commission Meeting

---- pages 41-70 ----

(Page 1) BOOK 51 Page 22809 03/04/02 6:00 P.M.

"Strong Mayor" would have a line-item veto; that the US President would love a line-item veto; that the "Strong-Mayor" proposal is a "boss-hog" referendum; that the referendum would result in another layer of bureaucracy and cost $4 to $6 million in the 12-year period; that the "Strong-Mayor" proposal does not provide accountability, leadership, or responsibility; that Bradenton and Sarasota were first visited in 1945; that the cities were not very different at the time; that in 1945, Sarasota adopted the Commission-Manager form of government while Bradenton retained the Mayor; that 57 years later, a difference is obvious; that people such as Elmer Berkel, Rita Roehr, Reverend Jerome Dupree, Nora Patterson, and Mollie Cardamone are known and have served the City responsibly; that no one should give up benefits of progress; that the voters should not give up the City's form of governance to backwards foolishness; that as a political science major, the "Strong-Mayor" proposal is perplexing and puzzling, particularly considering previous personal experience in having lived 120 miles from Mayor Daley's Chicago and 10 miles from Mayor Barry's Washington, D.C.; that people who do not understand history are forever doomed to repeat history; that the voters are urged to vote against the March 12, 2002, referendum; that the Commission's time is appreciated.

George Peter Ryan, 241 Garfield Drive (34236), representing the Lido Key Residents Association, read a prepared statement indicating that Sarasota is a wonderful city; that to have become so wonderful with an inadequate form of government is surprising and amazing; that the Lido Key Residents Association voted unanimously to vote no on the March 12, 2002, referendum; that all City voters are encouraged to vote no; that any undecided voters should vote no; that the residents of the Lido Key Residents Association will vote against the referendum; that members of other residents' associations are urged to vote no; that City voters will defeat the "Strong-Mayor" proposal; that the City deserves a dynamic Commission and a professional, capable City Manager which the City has at the present time.

14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION TO ISSUE THE RFP FOR DESIGN/BUILD OF A SKATEBOARD PARK AT PAYNE PARK - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1)

(Page 2) V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that at its February 4, 2002, Regular Commission directed the Administration to identify potential site alternatives for the skateboard park; that the Commission also emphasized the need to construct a skateboard park in the near future; that Staff developed a list of potential site alternatives and prepared a matrix included in the Agenda backup material which lists criteria with which to evaluate the sites; that the sites were evaluated as having a positive or a negative impact on a particular site; that two time schedules have also been provided: 1) the timeframe for constructing a skateboard park on a design/build approach and 2) the timeframe on a broader approach which would include a number of policy options.

Mr. Schneider stated that a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the design/build of a skateboard facility at Payne Park will be advertised if the Commission so directs; that a second RFP has been developed which offers the potential for more operational and management options; that the more comprehensive RFP should be utilized if options other than a City operated and managed skateboard park is desired; that based upon previous Commission action, the recommendation of the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board (Parks Board), and community input, Staff recommends approval of the RFP for the design/build of a skateboard park at Payne Park.

Commissioner Martin asked for clarification of requirement for 12 months for design/build approach compared to the 18 months for the broader approach to build the skateboard park.

Mr. Schneider stated that the extra six months is in evaluating the initial submittals; that a number of variations from different contractors would be expected; that a consistent understanding and an evaluation criteria would be required to allow for the Commission's approval; that contract negotiations may be more complex in the broader approach than in the design/build approach.

Commissioner Martin stated that the broader approach has a 40-day longer construction period; and asked for clarification of the longer construction period.

Mr. Schneider stated that more services may be provided in the broader approach than in the design/build approach; that rentals

(Page 3) and small food areas may be proposed; that hopefully, the broader approach will include provisions to make the skateboard park a viable commercial venture to minimize the City's continuing financial support.

Commissioner Palmer asked if both RFPs can be advertised to receive a determination of the most appropriate action for the City.

Mr. Schneider stated that the second RFP also includes the first RFP.

Commissioner Palmer stated that the timeframe is not automatic; that the additional six months will not be in addition to the 18-month timeframe in the broader approach.

Mr. Schneider stated that the timeframe provided is the best estimate at this time; that the City would attempt to compress the timeframe but would like to present a reasonable estimate.

The following people came before the Commission:

Maddy Nelson, 2219 Wood Street (34237), stated that building a skateboard park is supported; that a boisterous few are attempting to push the skateboard park location to Payne Park without questions; that problems will result if skateboarding is confined to Payne Park; that the past Commission must have had the same concerns as an ordinance was passed which banned skateboarding in the City limits; that certain problems are likely to surface such as unsupervised skateboarding in the neighborhoods, unsafe skating practices such as skating in the park walkways or sidewalks which puts others at risk, noise, and liabilities; that the argument of Payne Park being close to the Sarasota Police Department (SPD) and therefore not likely to experience problems is not valid; that SPD should not be expected to oversee the park; that the rules, regulations, and supervision should be instituted prior to building the park; that the location should be further away from the City, closer to the children, and easier to access as the Coalition of City Neighborhoods Association (CCNA) has recommended; that two skateboard parks should be built, one for the younger children and one for the older children with certain times open for all-age skating and times set for special events; that hopefully, the Commission can make an informed decision; that the skateboard park should not just be forced into the Payne Park

(Page 4) location only to find problems develop later; that the children of the City deserve better.

Clarence Brian, 419 West Cornelius Circle (34235), stated that the subject of a skateboard park is not new; that the presence of young people to discuss the skateboard park issue is pleasing; that more young people should attend Commission meetings; that at one time, suggestions were made to use the eastern portion of Whitaker-Gateway Park near US 41 for a skateboard park; that persons traveling on US 41 at a great rate of speed would not be bothered by skateboarders; that the eastern portion of Whitaker-Gateway Park was suggested as only a sidewalk is currently present in the location; that the skateboarders would not have bothered the picnickers utilizing the park; that the use of Whitaker-Gateway Park for skateboard was proposed quite a few years ago; that a skateboard park site was discussed with the students at Sarasota High School; that a large turnout of young people occurred; that most of the young people indicated a skateboard park would be utilized; that skateboarding down the library steps is not supported; that delaying the decision to construct the skateboard park in Payne Park is not supported; that the John Ringling Causeway Bridge Replacement has finally commenced; that the skateboard park should not be delayed; that the concession stands can be constructed once the skateboarding facilities are in place and after the youth prove the skateboard park will be used and not abused.

Richard Sheldon, 526 South Osprey Avenue (34236), stated that many in the community believe Payne Park is the best location for a skateboard park; that almost all the children who utilize a skateboard park are brought to the park by parents; that any location would be a possibility if parents are bringing the children to the park; that utilizing the Payne Park location for the skateboard park is pleasing; that additional private funding is available to assist in the building of the skateboard park at Payne Park.

David Malinsky, 2050 61st Street (34243), stated that a free, public skateboard park is supported; that the voice of the majority suggests Payne Park is the best choice for a skateboard park for the City and County; that the skateboard park has been discussed, re-discussed, and over discussed; that the important concern at the current meeting is to proceed with the plans to construct the skateboard park at Payne Park; that the project should commence immediately; that Payne Park is the location of

(Page 5) choice; that Payne Park is the best site available; that providing a location for skateboarding is long overdue; that the perfect site which is Payne Park has been already provided; that the City should begin by constructing one skateboard park; that skateboard parks are easily constructed with skill levels for all ages; that separate parks for separate skill levels and ages is not required; that separation of people with a common interest are not supported; that the time to act on the construction of the skateboard park is now if not yesterday.

Philip Chiocchio, 460 South Shore Drive (34234), stated that a skateboard park was owned and operated 25 years ago; that the concern for skateboarding is unfounded; that the noise generated in a skateboard park was not from the skateboarding enthusiasts but from the spectators; that skateboarding is an exciting sport; that any recreational facility will draw spectators who will have a good time; that the Commission is urged to approve the Payne Park location for the skateboard park; that the State has a long history in the sport of skateboarding; that many skateboarding moves were developed by native Floridians; that skateboarding is a huge industry; that the Commission is urged to use leadership in approving the skateboard park at Payne Park.

David Reynolds, 232 Park Trace Boulevard, Osprey (34235), stated that he moved to the City 2 1/2 years ago from England and is a student at the Ringling School of Art and Design; that a use of free time; that the City does not currently have a place for skateboarding; that Payne Park is a suitable location for a skateboard park; that skateboarders must travel to Tampa and Clearwater, Florida, to skateboard; that a skateboard park located in the City would be pleasing for the area's youth; that the building of a skateboard park should commence immediately.

Ryan Nyquist (34235), stated that City has grown since 1978 when residency was established; that the Payne Park location for a skateboard park is supported; that no skateboarding is allowed in the downtown area; that a large population of youth attempt to skate in the downtown area; that a skateboard park would alleviate the attempts to skateboard in the downtown area; that many individuals would benefit from the Payne Park location of the skateboard park.

(Page 6) Millie Small, 1208 Bellflower Street (34232), stated that providing a skateboard park for the youth of the community is supported; that the youth have grown old waiting for a skateboard park; that after a meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Advisory Board (Parks Board), a youth approached and indicated 18 years have been wasted waiting for a skateboard park; that another youth has been calling the City asking for a skateboard park since 11 years old and is now 29 years old; that the youth will be too old to skateboard before too long; that the time has arrived to make the young people who enjoy skateboarding into law-abiding citizens; that young people in the community are breaking the law in attempts to have fun skateboarding; that young people are accustomed to skateboarding Downtown; that the Payne Park area is strongly supported; that the building of the skateboard park should commence as soon as possible.

Stan Zimmerman, 2469 Novus Street (34237), stated that his residence on Novus Street is approximately two blocks from Payne Park; that the Novus Street neighborhood is no stranger to noise due to Sarasota High School; that cheering for football, baseball, and soccer games is often heard; that the Novus Street neighborhood is the wrong neighborhood in which to live if noise is a problem; that skateboarding will not go away no matter the building or location of a skateboard park; that a child of four years of age is on a neighborhood street every day for two to three hours per day with a skateboard; that the child may be a champion in the future; that the child skateboarding in the street would be better off skating in a park; that a skateboard park does not yet exist for the child who resides only a block away from the proposed skateboard park at Payne Park; that the youth in the audience are referred to as "kids"; that the youth would be better named as "under-served citizens"; that the youth may not be property owners and may not be paying property tax; however, the youth are citizens of the community who wish to recreate legally and safely; that an ideal location for a skateboard park exists at Payne Park; that the advantage of Payne Park is the site location and the opportunity to develop a site on which little development exists at this time; that no facilities currently exist in Payne Park; that a facility may be easily constructed due to the lack of buildings on the property; that Payne Park is the right place; that now is the time; that the constituency requires service and has been waiting for a skateboard park forever; that the commencement of construction of the skateboard park at Payne Park is strongly requested.

(Page 7) On motion of Commissioner Martin and second of Commissioner Palmer, it was moved to approve and direct Staff to issue the Request for Proposal for the design/build of a skateboard park at Payne Park.

Commissioner Martin stated that the shortest timeframe possible for the construction of the skateboard park in Payne Park is supported; that precluding the option of private development of the skateboard park is not supported; that additional time to study every available option is supported; that the skateboard park should be constructed as soon as possible; that other skateboard parks have been evaluated; that the type of activity involved in skateboarding is known; that skateboarding is a family activity involving spectators; that a skateboard park is a safe place and many expressed fears are unfounded; that the funding for the skateboard park has not yet been completed; that one-third to one-half of the funding is currently allocated; that budget workshops will commence in July 2002; that funding sources will be reviewed at that time; that naming privileges will be available for private individuals who wish to share in the interest of providing the skateboard park for the young and young-at-heart in the community; that commencing construction of the skateboard park is supported.

Commissioner Palmer concurred and stated that the construction of a skateboard park at Payne Park is supported; that allowing additional time to consider a private/public partnership if necessary is supported; that hopefully, the Administration will adhere to the wishes of the Commission to support an allowance for additional time; that individuals who wish a public partnership may be waiting for the Commission to move forward so a concept may be presented; that a private/public partnership which would not extend the length of time for construction and issuance of the contract is supported; that living adjacent to the Cardinal Mooney High School, football game nights can be very noisy; that moving closer to Cardinal Mooney High School is being considered; that the sounds of the youth are enjoyed; that the noise from the skateboard park will not be at a disturbing level; that the study concerning parks connectivity will evaluate the necessity for the City to modernize facilities and update City amenities to the 21st century; that modernized facilities are not currently available; that skateboard parks and other type facilities catering to the youth are required; that facilities for people of all ages must be provided; that the time to move forward with the skateboard park is past; that

(Page 8) Payne Park is an appropriate location for a skateboard park; that the skateboard park at Payne Park may not be the only skateboard park the City will construct but must be the first.

Vice Mayor Quillin stated that a skateboard park has been personally supported for years; that the Payne Park location for the skateboard park is not supported; that various skateboard parks in the region have been evaluated; that more than one skateboarder cannot be mixed; that more than one skateboard park will be required; that former Mayor and Commissioner Albert Hogle obtained $100,000 in funding which may only be utilized in Payne Park; that limiting the allocation of funding to one area is disappointing; that a passive skateboard park is planned but has been fought; that the skateboarders do not support a passive park; that the Staff report concerning the options available for the skateboard park is disappointing; that a large amount of information was personally provided to Staff; that information from various developers of skateboard parks regarding various types of construction materials was obtained and presented to Staff; that the types of materials have changed from the original skateboard parks; that one recent publication indicates materials currently available for the construction of a skateboard park are three layers of surface, 12-gauge galvanized steel base over-layered with one-half inch polyurethane for noise reduction, and topped with a skate light pro-riding surface; that skateboarders prefer the feel of wood and enjoy the metal for some of the stunts.

Vice Mayor Quillin continued that the RFP indicates the skateboard park at Payne Park will be constructed of cement; that a recently built skateboard park in North Port, Florida, encountered some problems with the cement; that the City is only planning a facility for skateboarders; that many skateboard parks are developed to allow in-line skating and bikes at certain times in the facility; that a facility must be available at the skateboard park to manage the park; that a private or public/private partnership of the skateboard park is supported; that the results of Staff's efforts are disappointing; that other locations are available.

Vice Mayor Quillin further stated that residents of the Sarasota Mobile Home Park (SMHP) still live in Payne Park; that the City is under an obligation to maintain the SMHP until closed; that mobile home owners continue to live at SMHP; that the surrounding neighborhood to Payne Park is not completely supportive of the skateboard park; that the community would like a good park for the

(Page 9) children to utilize; that the City has three acres adjacent to the Bobby Jones Sports Complex on 17th Street which could be dedicated to the sport of skateboarding; that the youths in the audience would support a skateboard park built on the 17th Street site if polled; that the timeline indicated in the RFP is incorrect; that a skateboard park can be constructed in less than a year; that the proposed RFP is not in the best interest of the City; that the motion will not be supported.

Mayor Mason stated that constructive and creative begging for funding will be personally provided; that the motion is supported.

Commissioner Martin asked the manner in which the RFP was developed.

Mr. Schneider stated that the specifics of the RFP were developed from the community workshop held at Sarasota High School; that the specifics listed in the RFP were provided by the participants of the community workshop; that the participants indicated an interest in a concrete surface; that the City would not be adverse to evaluating other types of surfaces if the Commission wishes.

Commissioner Martin stated that the best park with the resources currently available should be provided; that the area identified for the skateboard park is not the area developed as greenspace east of the tennis courts; that the skateboard park would be constructed in an area further to the east of the tennis courts.