No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-07-24 - City Commission Reconvened Regular Meeting Minutes5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE • TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 TELEPHONE (305) 722.5900 July 23, 1981 NOTICE OF RECONVENED REGULAR MEETINGS CITY COUNCIL *TAMARAC, FLORIDA There will be a reconvened REGULAR MEETING of the CITY COUNCIL at 8:30 A.M., FRIDAY JULY 24, 1981 and at 900 A.M., MONDAY, JULY 27, 1981 in the Council Chambers of City Hall. 4The following two items were agendized by majority consent at the Council Meeting of July 22, 1981, and may be discussed at either the reconvened Meeting of July 24th, or July 27th. 83. Montwood, Inc. - Review of site plan and discussion and possible action on request to waive fees and bonds for sidewalk. 84. Recreation Board - Appointment of additional members by Temp. Reso. #2015. The following items listed on the July 22, 1981 Agenda were not considered by Council on that date, and will also be heard on July 24th or July 27, 1981. 36. Enforcement of Zoning Regulations - Temp. Ord._#88_6 - Discussion and possible action to designate the official authorized to enforce the zoning regulations within Chapter 28 of the City Code. Second Reading. (tabled from 7/8/81) 39. Site Plan and Development Review Re ulations - Temp. Ord. #878 Discussion and possible action to amend Article II of Chapter 7 of the code to provide procedures for the development of and improvements to real property in the City. First Reading. 45. Concord Village II - Discussion and possible action on: a) Request for extension of final site plan. b) Parks and Recreation Agreement. c) Other outstanding items pertaining to this project, includ- ing Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. 46. H.L.R., Inc. - Rezoning Petition #47-Z-80 - Discussion and pos- sible action to rezone lands located south of McNab Road at N.W. 70th Avenue from R-lB to R-3, by Temp. Ord. #834. First Reading. 47. H.L.R., Inc. - Rezoning Petition #48-Z-80 - Discussion and pos- sible action to rezone lands located south of McNab Road at N.W. 70th Avenue from R-lB to R-4A, by Temp. Ord.#835. First Reading 48. S rin lake II - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for the Recreation Area. 49. Easement Vacation - Woodlands Section 5 - Temp. Reso. #1910 - Diseussion and possible action to vacate a portion of a utility easement on Lot 11, Block 25. (tabled from 6/10/81) 50. Woodlands Country Club - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for the tennis Pro -Shop replacement. 52. F & R Builders - Discussion and possible action on a request to vacate two (2) road rights -of --way pertaining to Stipulation #9: a) Vacation of 60-foot road right-of-way on N.W. 106th Avenue - Temp. Reso. #1983. b) Vacation of 60-foot road right-of-way on N.W. 103rd Avenue - Temp. Reso. #1984. 53. F & R Builders - Discussion and possible action on: a) Approval of Stipulation #10 -- Temp. Reso. #1985. b) Approval of Agreement relating to canal rights -of -way on Tracts 12, 13 and 13A - Tem . Reso. #1986. c) Acceptance of Temporary Canal Access Easement on Tract 12 - Temp. Reso. #1987. d) Acceptance of Temporary Canal Access Easement on Tract 13 - Temp. Reso. #1988. e) Acceptance of Temporary Canal Access Easement on Tract 13A Tem Reso. #1989. f) Acceptance of Easement for Canal Maintenance on Tract 12 - Temp. Reso. #1990. g) Acceptance of Easement for Canal Maintenance on Tract 13 - Temp. Reso._ #1991. h) Acceptance of Easement for Canal Maintenance on Tract 13A - Temp. Reso. #1992. AGENDIZED BY MAJORITY CONSENT - i) Acceptance of Quit Claim Deed for Canal in Tract_12 - Temp. Reso. #2016. J) Acceptance of Quit Claim Deed for Canal in Tract 13 - Temp. Reso. #2017. -k) Acceptance of Quit Claim Deed for Canal in Tract 13A - Temp. Reso. #2018. 54. F & R Builders (Kings Point) - Model Sales Facility - Discussion and possible action on a request to use the model sales facility at Tamarac Gardens. 55. Northwood II - Model Sales Facility - Discussion and possible action to permit a model sales facility. 56. Colony West Country Club - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan b) Landscape Plan c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement d) Acceptance of a golf cart basement - Temp. Reso. #1979. e) Acceptance of a Water and Sewage Line Easement - Temp. Reso. #1980. f) Acceptance of a Drainage Easement - Temp. Reso. #198.1. g) Acceptance of Easement for Flowage Rights - Temp. Reso. #1982. 57. United Federal Savings & Loan -- Temporary Access Road - Discus- sion and possible action on:� a) Revised Site Plan b) Request for waiver to the platting requirements pursuant to Section 20-4 of the Code by Temp. Reso. #1993. c) Landscape Plan 61. Sunmark Industries (Sunny Sunoco Service Station) - Temp-__Reso. #1995 - Discussion and possible action on a request for waiver of platting requirements pursuant to Section 20-4 of the Code. 76. Tamarac Gardens - Performance Bond - Tem . Reso. #1978 - Discus- sion and possible action to call four Letters of Credit posted for public improvements. 77. Versailles Gardens (formerly Colony Club) - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for two spas, three additional shuffleboard courts with trellis covers. handball court, sidewalks and two gatehouses. 78. Fairways of Tamarac - Buildings C & Da- Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action ona revised site plan for a sidewalk to N.W. 84th Terrace and revised parking layout. REPORTS 79. City Council 80. City Manager 81. City Attorney Council may consider such other business as may come before it. CAE/ s s�,, Pursuant to Chapter 80-105 of Florida Law, Senate Bill No. 368: Carol A. Evans If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Ci y Assistant City Clerk Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record the proceedings and for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includ er the testimony ehd evidence upon w4kh the appeal is to be based CITY OF TAMARAC RECONVENED CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 1981 (from 7/22/81) CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Falck called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. Friday, July 24, 1981, in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter W. Falck Vice Mayor Irving M. Disraelly Councilman Philip B. Kravitz Councilman Irving Zemel Councilwoman Helen Massaro ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Laura Z. Stuurmans Asst. City Clerk Carol A. Evans City Attorney Arthur M. Birken Consulting City Planner Richard S. Rubin 56. Colony West Coun Club - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan b) Landscape Plan c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement d) Acceptance of a golf cart easement - Temp. Reso. #1979 e) Acceptance of a Water and Sewage Line Easement - TeM. Reso. #1980 f) Acceptance of a Drainage .Easement - Temp. Reso. #1981 g) Acceptance of Easement for Flowage Rights - TeTrp. Reso. #1982 h) Water Retention Agreement (AGENDIZED BY MAJORITY CO+SENT) SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Approved with conditions_; b) Approved with conditions;­c) Approved; d) Removed from Agenda; e)' Approved; e) RESOLUTION NO. R- PASSED f) Approved; g) Approved subject to addn'l f) RESOLUTION NO. R_ PASSED language by City Attny.; h) Approved (Agendized g) RESOLUTION NO. R--&- PASSED by Majority Consent) Arthur Birken, City Attorney. recommended that the Water Retention Agreement be AGENDIZED. V/M Disraelly MOVED to AGENDIZE Item h) Water Retention Agreement in reference to Colony West Country Club. C/M Zemel SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. a) Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner,began the discussion on the Site Plan. He felt the applicant complied with the City of Tamarac standards, and stated it is a very fine site plan providing a new clubhouse where they have the modular clubhouse at the Colony West Golf Course. Mr. Rubin pointed out that there is adequate parking, retention, and the beautification greatly exceeds the City's standards. V/M Disraelly questioned whetter the water retention area would provide the retention for the area, at which point Mr. Rubin explained that on -site drainage will .go through pipes and come into their existing lake at this point, with proper easements to provide adequate access to this retention system, there is also drainage provided in the street area.C/W Massaro: brought up the fact that the applicant is paying $13,438.25 in lieu of the retention. V/M Disraelly wanted to confirm that there will be a ramp leading up to the second floor, and Mr. Rubin confirmed this and added that this will be the main entrance, but will be one floor up. V/M Disraelly went on to discuss the bag discharge area shown on the site plan, and he asked whether the golf bags will be dropped off on the second floor. The archi- tect for Colony West, Mr. Ed Saar, explained that golf bags would be dropped off at the second level, and the bag handlers would bring them down to the first level by golf carts to the rear north side bag storage area, and could also work in the reverse when the bags are brought back. This will basically be used for guests, since the members will have their bags already stored downstairs. 7/24/81 /ss V/M Disraelly felt that a "right turn only" sign should be placed at the north drive since there is a median opposite it. Mr. Rubin agreed, with this suggestion. - haoppositeodshe felt that :the area marked "ditch" on Lagos de Campo Blvd., which sthe bridge shown on the plan, comes within 15-feet of Lagos de Campo Blvd. on the east side, and requires a guardrail. The other side, she went on to say, should be checked by the City Engineer, and if needed, a guardrail should be installed. C/W Massaro stated that the guardrail on Lagos de Campo Blvd. should be installed immediately. C/W Massaro mentioned that she had asked Irene about $9,200 listed for landscaping and was advised that this amount was for sod only, but C/W Massaro wondered about the $54,000 worth of landscaping that was going to be included in this project. Sid Workman, Consultant for Colony West came up to answer this, by stating that they clarified the interpretation of how the computation of fees would be made. He met with the City Planner this morning, and has agreed to provide a revised landscape budget that will total, approximately $45,000 on which the fee will be based. He went on to state that he will send a letter on Monday to the City Engineer and the City Planner documenting same. C/W Massaro stated that she felt the cost for the sidewalk should be shown as $2.00 per foot, and not the $1.00 indicated. Mr.0 a rey Winningham from Winningham & Lively the project engineer, said he would substantiate the�$1.00 amount, and C/W Massaro recommended it be done with a bonafide contract. C/W Massaro suggested to Council that the Agreement regarding the traffic light on 88th Avenue be approved by the City Attorney, since the County may not be ready to install a light at this location at the time that it will be needed. V/M Disraelly mentioned that there are Australian Pine trees on Lagos de Campo Blvd. which are obstructing traffic. (The south entry into Pine Island Road, on the second tee). He felt they should be trimmed and kept trimmed for line -of - site vision immediately. C/W Massaro said that a 5 foot concrete sidewalk should be installed on Lagos de Campo on the south side adjacent to the property, and the membership of the club agreed that it would be installed. C/W Massaro MOVED that the site, plan be approved subject to: 1. An agreement regarding the traffic light on 88th Avenue for the golf cart crossing which will be subject to the City Attorney's approval. At this time, checks were entered for the following: $13,438.25 for water re- tention; $998.27 for drainage improvement @ $130 an acre; $8,000 for the water and sewage agreement for 8 ERC's. She further MOVED approval subject to an adjustment on the fees for the beautification, landscaping and also adjustment and determination on the cost of sidewalk that can be done before a permit is issued. The guardrail, or guardrails, depending on the de- termination that is made by the City Engineer, but the one on the south side of Lagos de Campo must be put in right away since it is a hazard, which is within 15-feet of the street; must be installed within 120 days. On the other side, a determination must be made by the City Engineer whether it is needed or not. If needed, it should be installed at the same time. The Australian pines must be trimmed, and kept trimmed, for line -of -site vision on Lagos de Campo and Pine Island Road in back of the second tee. Install a "No Left 'Turn" sign at the north exit. The Development Review Requirements appear to have been satisfied other than the approval of the adequacy of solid waste disposal. A contract will be required showing that there is adequate waste disposal. The sidewalk be installed on Lagos de Campo on the south side adjacent to their pro- perty - 5 foot concrete sidewalk - south and east side of what is the right-of-way line. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. Mr. Rubin mentioned the golf cart path of the 18th Hole of the Executive Course over Lot 71 of Westchester back to the clubhouse. Mr. Workman had just showed him that the golf course is under agreement to purchase that lot, and he agreed to come up with a new alignment for the asphalt golf path to keep it away from traffic. Mr. Rubin suggested that this be included in the motion. C/W Massaro included in her MOTION that the golf course should place a new - 2 - 7/24/81 /ss r r■r golf cart path along roadway - re -alignment through Lot 71, subject to staff approval, and it will be necessary that they include it on the site plan. The addition was agreeable to V/M Disraelly who SECONDED the motion. 1+1UMiltil���a�� b) Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner, began to review the Landscape Plan. He felt the Plan greatly exceeds the minimum standards of Tamarac. He believed the 11 items that were to be included on the plan have been added, but he had one question. He wondered whether the applicant had changed the,landscaping in the sodded areas between the parking bays. Mr. Workman stated that he had submitted the new land- scaping plan the day before. Mr. Rubin mentioned that the location of the lighting in the parking area would conflict with the trees within two or three years, and eventually the lighting would be shielded by the trees, and the applicant has agreed to move the lighting away from the trees. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, wanted to con- firm that the lighting will conform with the standards of the parking lot illumination ordinance, and the applicant stated that he understood that he had to satisfy same. (tape side #2) V/M Disraelly wondered whether there would be continuous curbing, at which point everyone inspected the Site Plan. It was determined that the curbing would be continuous and the islands will have individual wheel stops. The parking stalls were what the V/M said he is referring to.The V/M noticed that at the bottom these was a notation that additional parking is to be sodded, and questioned same. It was noted that the total parking spaces available was 266, V/M stated that 67 of these spaces will not be paved. Mr. Workman answered by advising the Council that approx- imately 25% of the required parking will be in grassed areas with bumper stops and markings which is provided for by Code., which will cut down the intensity of the paving. Mr. Rubin noted that this grassed area will be irrigated by impulse heads and will be kept green. V/M Disraelly stated that there will be parking areas on the ramp, which was confirmed by Mr. Workman. C/W Massaro MOVED to reconsider the site plan. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. a) C/W Massaro felt it was okay to have the sodded areas, but that they must be kept maintained, otherwise they will be required to asphalt the area, as required by code. The applicant agreed, and C/W Massaro MOVED to add this item plus the fact that ramp parking will be permitted to the original motion. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE b) The discussion returned to the Landscape Plan, and Mr. Rubin suggested that the approval of this plan include the condition that the optional parking area is to be kept sodded and irrigated. V/M Disraelly MOVED that the Landscape Plan be approved with conditions. The word "additional parking" should be removed from it, since that is part of the required parking, and it should be indicated at the west and east end.parking that it is "sodded parking", and the sodded parking areas must be maintained in good grass con- dition at all times with the sprinklers protected so that there will be no problem, and that the water provided will be rust -free water. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion, and requested that the applicant initial the change on the plan. V/M Disraelly MOVED to add to the Landscape Plan motion that the lighting be placed so that the growth of the trees will not reduce the illumination. C/W Massaro agreed to the addition and SECONDED the motion. c) Arthur Birken confirmed that there is a standard agreement for the Water & Sewer Development which is fully executed, and he sees no problem with same. C/W Massaro MOVED that the Water & Sewer Developers Agreement be approved, and -3- 7/24/81 /ss indicated that the check has been received. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. 1+AJ4XIMAIMMR&W4N��G�`�� d) Pertaining to the Acceptance of the Golf Cart Easement, Temporary Resolution #1979, Mr. Birken, City Attorney, stated that it is for information only and no action is needed on same, and the Resolution was removed fram the Agenda. e) Mr. Birken, City Attorney read Resolution #1980 Acceptance of Water & Sewage Line Easement by title. C7W Massaro MOVED to accept Temporary Resolution #1980 Acceptance of Water & Sewer Line Easement. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. f) Mr. Birken, City Attorney, read Resolution #1981 Acceptance of Drainage Easement by title. C/W Massaro MOVED to adopt.Teltiporary Resolution #1981. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. g) Mr. Birken, City Attorney,read Temporary Resolution #1982 into the record. Mr. Birken then stated that the easement not only pertains to a canal, but also flowage through the pipe. He wanted to approve the language of same. V/M Disraelly MOVED to adopt Temporary Resolution #1982 with the addition of language to be approved by the City Attorney for the flowage through the pipe. C/M Zemel SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. h) Mr. Birken, City Attorney, stated that the Council has the Water Retention Agree- ment, and it is fully executed. C/W Massaro MOVED to accept the Water Retention Agreement. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 57. United Federal Savings & Loan - TenVorary Access Road - Discussion and possible action on: a) Revised Site Plan b) Request for waiver to the platting requirements pursuant to Section 20-4 of the Code by Temp. Reso._#1993. c) Landscape Plan AYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Approved with condition; b) Approved; c) Approved with condition. RESOLUTION NO. R-g/1a�, PASSED Mr. Birken, City Attorney, suggested that the b) item be taken first since every- thing is subject to that item. b) Arthur Birken, City Attorney, read Temporary Resolution #1993 by title. He stated that Council had previously discussed this item, and he felt that at this point in time there was no legal reason not to approve this Resolution. V/M Disraelly MOVED that the Request for Waiver for the Platting Requirements be granted and approved Temporary Resolution #1993. Arthur Birken, City Attorney, read the complete Temporary Resolution #1993. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion. I= _...._. 7/24/81 /ss VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. a) Mr. Richard Rubin began the discussion of the Site Plan, stating that this plan shows a new way of getting to United Federal for eastbound traffic. C/W Massaro asked about the landscaping of the area, and Mr. Rubin answered by stating that this is a separate item. V/M Disraelly MOVED to accept the Revised Site Plan with the condition that the 24 foot asphalt drive have a double yellow line in the center to keep traffic on the correct side of the road. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. c) V/M Disraelly MOVED to accept the Landscape Plan subject to the appropriate cost estimate for the planting and rust -free irrigation used. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 61. Suntnark Industries (Sunny Sunoco)-`l-eip.Reso.ifi�j95-Liscussion ana possible action on request or waiver of piatting requir(�nen pursuant to Section 20-4 of the Code. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled till September meeting. Arthur Birken, City Attorney brought up the fact that in December of 1976 this same request was made and it was denied. C/W Massaro mentioned that a request was made, and it was granted since it was in connection to the sewer, and that was considered an emergency, and Council did concede that it needed to be sited at that time, but she mentioned that since there is no site plan she would be very reluctant to waive any platting requirements. Arthur Birken, City Attorney, mentioned a letter from July 14, 1977 from Martin Johnson, Division Sales Manager of Sunmark Industries to Mr. H.R. Davis of Davis and Assoc., giving authority to proceed with the platting of the property which they own at that location. It was requested,at that time,by the owner for the platting to be prepared, and Mr. Birken went on to state that nothing further was submitted from that date. Bill Afford of Sunmark Industries came forward to state that Sunny Sunoco has not been at that location since last September. He went on to point out that there is a canopy covering the pump island,at this time,which is in a deteriorating condition since it was put up about 13 years ago, and Sunmark Industries wants to replace that canopy because one day it will fall down. In addition, they removed the side island so there wouldn't be an eyesore, but now that construction is completed on Commercial Blvd., they would like to reinstall that island and put a canopy there so the people on Commercial Blvd. can utilize that side island coming in and out and continuing eastbound. At this point in time, they have to come into the service station,if they want to go eastbound, they have to get out on 441, make a U-turn and come back. They're trying to make it more convenient for the people who are in there now and are taking care of the property. C/W Massaro questioned whether there is a full dedication of that area, which was confirmed by Mayor Falck and V/M Disraelly. She felt that there wasn't any great urgency in this matter, and that it could wait until the September meeting. Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner, stated that there would be a need for a revised site plan. He mentioned that,at that time,a revised, beautification plan would also become necessary. He suggested that Council ask the applicant to submit a re- vised site plan for review by the staff in August, and then staff will determine, at that time,if any additional rights of way are needed, etc., and when it is pre- sented to Council in September it will be complete. C/W Massaro agreed with Mr. Rubin. V/M Disraelly brought up the fact of the high pole signs on the property, and asked Mr. Afford if they would be interested in getting rid of the pole signs, and installing a ground sign in accordance with City regulations which would improve the corner. Mr. Afford agreed to changing the signs. -5- 7/24/81 /ss C/M Zemel asked whether there would be any problem in preparing the new plans by September, and Mr. Afford said he didn't believe there would be any. C/W Massaro also wanted to know whether Sunmark Industries had dedicated the right- of-way on Commercial Blvd. and 441, or whether they were paid for it. V/M Disraelly felt that Sunmark Industries should be made to plat so that the City will have control over the beautification. C/W Massaro MOVED that Temp. Reso.#1995 be tabled to the September meeting, if they are ready at that time. C/M Kravitz SECONDED the motion. VOTE. ALL VOTED AYE. 77. Versailles Gardens (Formerly Colony Club) - Revised Site Plan,- Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for two spas, three additional shuffle- board courts with trellis covers, handball court, sidewalks and two gatehouses. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved with conditions. Mr. Richard Rubin, Consulting City Planner stated that this plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission, and approved with several conditions. The first item brought up for discussion was a 5-foot sidewalk along Lagos de Campo Blvd. C/W Massaro wanted to know if Lagos de Campo Blvd. is the only street that this property borders on, to which Mr. Rubin replied that it is the only street. Mr. Rubin brought up the parking area where a separate area was set aside for boat storage. He felt it was a good idea, however, the City Attorney pointed out to him that if there's a possible shortage in parking, a separate area shouldn't be set aside for boats which will prevent cars from parking there. Therefore, he suggested to the applicant that the boat storage area could be placed in a green area, but it cannot take up existing parking spaces. He reconuended that it not be part of the approval today to allow the boat storage area. The third item, Mr. Rubin continued, is that there should be a 10 ft. high fence around the handball court to keep the ball out of the parking area, and they have agreed to that. C/W Massaro pointed out that the plan shows a minimum of 8 feet for the fence, which Mr. Rubin said would be acceptable. V/M Disraelly questioned whether the vehicle parking is now current space, and was told to remove the note. The applicant was asked to initial the change on the site plan. C/W Massaro asked about the Water & Sewer agreement for 3 ERC's. Mr. Rubin stated that they were notified about the need for it. Mr. James Palermo, Attorney repre- senting the developer said that he brought in the Water & Sewer agreement, but was notified that they only needed one ERC by the City Engineer. Larry Keating, the City Engineer, was called down. Mr. Rubin stated that at the end of Fairview Dr., the Fire Chief has requested that signs be placed "For Emergency Parking Only" so the fire trucks can turn around, and they have agreed to that. The striping is indicated on the plan, pointed out C/W Massaro. C/W Massaro asked whether there was any problem with installing the sidewalk. It was agreed by Mr. James Palermo that it would be installed in the public -right -of way. Mr. Rubin noticed that the only other item to cover is a safety wall around the health spas, which is required by ordinance. 9 Mr. Rubin went through the Planning Commission's ccmTents. #2 Emergency vehicle parking signs were done, and the striping is clearly indicated. 43. Included in item 2. #4 Pertains to the ERC's. Mr. Keating, City Engineer, confirmed that one ERC is required since it's the only place that water & sewer service will be used. (tape side #3) It was confirmed that an 8 foot fence will be required around the handball court. V/M Disraelly confirmed that the 4 foot high hedge around the boat area should be -6- 7/24/81 /ss removed. If they come in with a boat storage area, they will put a hedge around it, but it will be a different location. He can still install the hedge,if he wants to, but not the boat storage area. V/M Disraelly wanted to discuss the guardhouse at the southerly entrance, and the gate at the northerly entrance. He felt that the gate at the northerly entrance would serve no purpose since anyone can enter into the parking lot by going through Canongate. There is an entrance into the Canongate lot that enters into their road- way beyond the gate. The Council was advised that,if at all possible, Canorigate is going to see if they can eliminate the one entrance off of Lagos de Campo Blvd., if Versailles Gardens uses total security. V/M Disraelly stated that he drove through Canongate in the morning, and there will be no use for the guardhouse or the gate,they can't prevent cars from entering the way it's set up now. V/M Dis- raelly stated he had a phone call from the President of Canongate objecting to this situation. The Treasurer of Canongate was present and said there might be a big problem pertaining to traffic,they said would come back, if necessary, with further information. The Mayor asked Mr. Palermo if he would be willing to work together with Canongate to resolve this problem, and it was agreed that,if feasible,it would be closed. V/M Disraelly told Mr. Palermo that he would appreciate having the Open House signs removed, one at the corner of McNab and Lagos de Campo Blvd., and one at Lagos de Campo and Colony Club entrance. He said the signs are prohibited in public rights - of -way, and Mr. Palermo agreed to move them. V/M Disraelly brought up the fact that there is a drainage problem in a couple of areas around the clubhouse, and Mr. Palermo agreed to look into it and see what can be done. V/M Disraelly mentioned that there should be a protective rail for the card holder devices so that they can't be knocked over, and it was marked in red on the plan, and initialed by Mr. Palermo. C/W Massaro MOVED the approval of the Revised Site Plan subject to the red markings on the plan, and also subject to a Water & Sewer Agreement for one ERC, being executed by the appropriate required persons, and also subject to the City Attorney's approval. The check for the $1,000 was requested at this time. The applicant has agreed to meet with the people at Canongate and try to resolve the problems that exist there. Install a 5-foot concrete sidewalk on Lagos de Campo Blvd. adjacent to their property, replacing the existing asphalt sidewalk. Prohibited parking of boats in assigned parking areas. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, confirmed the fact that C/W Massaro's motion stipulated that the Water & Sewer Agreement will be executed by the appropriate City officials as well as the applicant. V/M Disraelly cammiented that the beautification along Lagos de Campo is excellent. 78. Fairways of Tamarac - Buildings C & D - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for a sidewalk to N.W. 84th Terrace and revised parking layout. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved with conditions. Mr. William Holte] representing Tamway Graystone Corp, introduced himself. He began by discussing the site plan for Building C revising the parking layout of an exist- ing condominium. He explained that other developers were involved in building this condominium, and Tamway Graystone Corp., as the final developer of same, is trying to correct a problem that was passed down to them. They are trying to change the parking on the side of the C Building so that it will comply with the City Ordinance. They will also be going in front of the Board of Adjustment Committee for a variance to park within the 25 foot set -back in the front of the building. Mr. Holtel pointed. out that the parking lot on the side of Building C is 5-feet away from the building. They intend to remove 3 spots located on the side, and 6 spots in the front have to be relocated. They plan to have diagonal parking in the front of Building C. They will cut into the sod, and move about 30 feet of hedges out to UF© 7/24/81 /ss J the street. line. This will alleviate the problem alongside the C Building, and will also relieve .them of the problem of the 25 foot circulation in front. Mr. Rubin questioned whether there would be curbing, and wondered about the grass area. C/W Massaro mentioned that Tamway Graystone Corp. will be moving the car stops out so that it is the proper distance from the building, and by angled parking in front they will widen the circulating area, so that there will be a full 25 feet there. She stated that they're moving the 3 spots for the same reason. It was confirmed that on the east side three spaces will be removed and the car stops for the remaining two spots will be moved back 5 feet. The edge of the pavement will conform to the code, 12 feet to the car stops. C/W Massaro mentioned that the area where the sod will be installed will have to be irrigated. Mr. Rubin marked this on the plan, and Mr. Holtel in- itialed the item. It was established that the grass will go right up to the edge of the building. V/M Disraelly stated that a hedge should be placed at the end of the grass line, and it was agreed that either a hedge or curb would be needed. C/W Massaro mentioned that if not indicated, the grass area will have to be regraded and the eg grass replaced, and if necessa ry, ary, the light and tree will have to be moved. C/W Massaro requested that Mr. Rubin mark on the plan that all lights and trees must be left in place, or replaced, or relocated in the grass area. C/W Massaro MOVED that the new Site Plan for Building C be approved, and brought out the fact that there is another revised site plan coming in for the relocation Of the three spots since they actually belong on the A & B site plan. The appli- cation has been paid for, and signed, and will be in some time in September. It was established that the two buildings are on one item, and Council went on to discuss Building D. V/M Disraelly brought up the fact that a new sidewalk is being installed to relieve the problem of the dunpster, so that it will be emptied in the street, and there is no problem with parking there. C/W Massaro brought up the fact that the sidewalk should go out to the paved roadway, and might have to be 6 inches thick. Mr. Rubin stated that the side- walk should be level with the roadway. C/w Massaro again MOVED the approval of the Revised Site Plan for Building C & D at Fairways of Tamarac subject to the notations made on the two plans, and initialed by the applicant, and also subject to the review and approval of the Board of Adjustment. V/M Disraelly suggested that the items be specified. Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner, itemized as follows: The review of the Board of Adjustment for the set -back requirement on the south side of the building, should be and was specified in C/W Massaro's motion. 1. On Building D extend the six inch sidewalk to the roadway pavement from their property line. Building C 1. The new sodded area on the east side of Building C shall be irrigated accord- ing to Tamarac Ordinances, and a hedge placed at the east end of the sod. (tape side #4) 2. A concrete curb shall be extended around the landscaped island at the southeast corner of Building C. 3. All lights and trees in set -back area shall either remain, or be relocated, between the new edge of pavement and the right -of -way -line. C/W Massaro mentioned that on the island that has to be curbed, they will have to regrade and replace the grass there. V/M Disraelly mentioned that sprinklers will be needed. Mr. Rabin added to stem 2 that the area inside curbing shall be regraded, sodded and irrigated. C/M Kravitz SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. C/W Massaro asked if the Board of Adjustment was familiar with the item under review, and it was requested that they receive -8- 7/24/81 /ss a copy of the site plan before the meeting, per the Board of Adjustment Chairman. Mr. Rubin will get them a copy of the plan. 76. Tamarac Gardens - Performance Bond - Temp. Reso. #1978 - Discussion and possible action to call four Letters of Credit posted for public improve- ments. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Removed from Agenda as new bonds were received. Mayor Falck informed the Council that Mr. Birken indicated that the Bonds were brought in yesterday, and the only thing that is needed to be done is to remove it from the Agenda. V/M Disraelly MOVED to remove Item #76, Tamarac Gardens, Performance Bond, Temp. Reso. #1978 from the Agenda. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 8A. Temp. Reso. #2015 - Resolution Authorizing City Council to Appoint Members To the Recreation Board Providing An Effective Date. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Held over to July 27, 1981 Meeting. C/M Kravitz recommended that the Council appoint William Payne & Mollie Goldstein, to replace the two members that resigned, to the Recreation Board. These are his nominations. C/W Massaro mentioned that she had heard of an engineer, but was reluctant to submit his name, since she didn't speak to him personally. She had received a message that he called, but didn't have time to return the call. She stated that he is willing to serve on some board, and felt that this would be an ideal place to put a retired engineer. She asked if this could be held over till September. C/M Kravitz mentioned that the Recreation Director felt she needed the replace- ments now. C/W Massaro asked that this Item be held for the Monday Council Meeting, July 27, 1981, and it was agreed to do so. 55. Northwood II - Model Sales Facility - Discussion and possible action to permit a model sales facility. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: (see Page 11) Mr. Julian Bryan, a representative of H.L.R., Inc., who is the petitioner and developer introduced himself. He stated that this item was before the Council approximately 6 months ago, and was approved at that time with the stipulation that certain buildings in use not be constructed, ones within the 300 foot radius. Subsequent to that time, they appeared before the Council with a revised site plan requesting 26 foot lots, rather than 28 foot lots, and that was approved. Today, they are proposing the 26 foot model units directly across the street from the model buildings now there. The entry and parking would remain the same, but they will add units on lot 134-138, which will give them a much better model complex. He stated that Mr. homaner had submitted a letter stating that he would not develop certain buildings. C/W Massaro confirmed that this letter was received. The units they want to build will not be inhabited for the time being, and they voluntarily indicated that units 139-143 would follow within the boundary and would not be constructed. However, he asked that 167 through 171 be allowed to be constructed. V/M Disraelly stated that to get to 167-171, traffic would have to enter at Southgate Blvd. rather than Nob Hill Rd. It was stated that the lots mentioned are accessible by Nab Hill Rd., but Southgate Blvd. would be the easiest road. V/M Disraelly questioned whether there would be a hedge at the east side of 100th Way to prohibit traffic, which was confirmed by the representative. V/M Disraelly confirmed the fact that H.L.R., Inc. wants to build on lots 167 thru 171, and asked if additional parking was provided, to which Mr. Bryan answered no. V/M Disraelly stated that the City's present ordinance is based on the number of models, rather than square footage for parking. Mr. Bryan realized that 25 park- -9"0 7/24/81 /ss r Lam..... _-, ing spaces would be required, rather than the 15 indicated. He went on to say that when the clubhouse is completed, they could try to add the extra spots at that time. V/M Disraelly asked whether this is a single --family development, and was advised that it was zoned R-3 and they're attached units. There are a total of five units, which would require 22 parking spaces. V/M Disraelly asked whether another sales office would be built, to which the reply was negative. H.L.R., Inc. is actually adding two units. They would need a waiver of 7 spaces. Mr. Birken, the City Attorney, stated that the new ordinance requires that traffic circulation in and around be shown, and circle drawn around each model encompassing all property within the distance of 300 feet if it's multi -family, 150 feet if it's single family, and suggested that they might want to add these requirements to the drawing. It was realized that the first requirement was satisfied, and the circle showing the 300 foot set -back was added to the drawing. C/W Massaro mentioned that a 5 foot sidewalk should be required on this property, and stated this will have to be subject to their filing their proper application for rezoning the recreation area to S-1 which should have been done before the first building permit was applied for. It was agreed they would submit the application for rezoning on Monday. Mr. Lon Rubin came to the meeting late and asked to be filled in by his representative. In the meantime another item was taken. 50. Woodlands Country Club - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for the tennis Pro -Shop replacement. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved C/W Massaro stated that this item had been tabled before because it didn't show the necessary septic tank, and permission had to be obtained from the County, which has been done, and the plans seem to be in order. The only problem is that this should have been a $175 fee, continued C/W Massaro, and not the $50 fee, because at the time of application the additional items were not included. C/W Massaro MOVED the approval of the revised site plan subject to the further payment of $125 for the appropriate fee for the revised site plan. C/M Kravitz SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. Payment was received in the amount of $125. 49. Easement Vacation - Woodlands Section 5 - Temp. Reso. #1910 - Discussion and possible action to vacate a portion of a utility easement on Lot 11, Block 25. (tabled from 6/10/81) SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled for receipt of appropriate utility releases Mr. Birken, the City Attorney, read the Resolution into the record. Mr. Birken then brought out problems with the different utility companies pertain- ing to dimensions. Southern Bell seemed to indicate .that they were -not willing to agree to the vacations. He suggested a motion to table the item would be in order. C/W MOVED to table the Woodlands Section 5 Easement Vacation until they come in with the appropriate releases. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Aye C/M Zemel -- ,Absent C/W Massaro - Aye V/M Disraelly - Aye Mayor Falck - Aye 55. Morthy.r%(�-IT - Model Vales Facility. Permit Model Sales Facility. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to 9/9/81 meeting. =Us= 7/24/81 /ss Mr. Lon Rubin, of H.L.R., Inc., returned to the meeting and discussion returned to Item #55, Northwood II. Mr. Rubin stated that they are asking for an amend- ment to an original site plan, which was approved by Council, and if sidewalks were required at the time models are built, they should have been brought up at that time. He mentioned that the sidewalks should be an issue at the time that actual building of units begin. C/W Massaro agreed that sidewalks should have been discussed previously, but went on to say that this is an important issue at this time. Mr. Rubin requested that the Item be tabled for the September meeting since he didn't want the issue of sidewalks attached to same. C/M Kravitz MOVED that Item # 55,,Northwood II, Model Sales Facility be tabled to the September meeting. C/W Massaro brought up the fact that this recreation parcel should have been rezoned before any application was issued, and Mr. Rubin agreed to do this. C/W Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 46. H.L.R., Inc. Rezoning Petition W-Z-80 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands located south of McNab Road at N.W. 70th Avenue from R-IB to R-3, by Temp. Ord. #834. First Reading. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved on first reading from RM-10 Zoning instead of R-3. Second reading on 9/23/81 for submittal of appropriate documents. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, brought up the fact that this item had been discussed and tabled previously, so it was not necessary to read the ordinance. Mr. Birken went on to explain that this request includes more units than are designated for this property on the City's Land Use Plan. There were two checks received in the amounts of $1,350 and $150 covering an application for reserve units which will have to be approved by C'uuncil, but is not on today's agenda. He stated that the Temporary Ordinance could be approved on first reading, and then further action taken when the application for reserve units comes up before the Council, and at that time consider the second reading of the ordinance. Mr. Birken brought up the suggestion that the rezoning could be changed from R-3 and R-4A to RM-10. V/M Disraelly asked what height was allowed for RM-10, and was advised that it is two stories by C/W Massaro. gape side 5) Mr. Birken advised Council in using EM-10 zoning, an applicant can build up to three stories. He went on to suggest that when this item comes up for a second reading, the reserve units be placed on the agenda first for discussion, and then the rezoning can be discussed afterwards. This item must conform with the Land Use Ordinance. It was established that this ordinance would not be effective until the second reading. Mr. Rubin requested that this item be approved on first reading since Council will not be meeting again until September. At that time procedure involved could be resolved along with the issue of reserve units. He agreed to the substitution of RM-10 instead, of R-3. V/M Disraelly suggested that this be discussed at the second meeting of September. V/M Disraelly confirmed the fact that the applicant is requesting R-3 zoning adjacent to Vanguard Village & R-4A to the east. C/W Massaro asked Mr. Rubin whether he would agree to W-10 rezoning with a covenant that the buildings would not exceed two stories or it would revert back to the pre- sent zoning. It was agreeable to Mr. Rubin. V/M Disraelly MOVED to deny the petition for rezoning from R-1B to R-3 submitted by H.L.R., Inc. C/M Kravitz SECONDED the motion. -11- 7/24/81 /ss VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Aye C/M Zemel - Nay C/W Massaro - Nay V/M Disraelly - Aye Mayor Falck - Nay Motion defeated. A representative from Vanguard Village came up to request that Council table this item until September. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, brought up the fact that applications for rezoning must be taken within a specific period of time. Council does not have the authority to table this item. C/W Massaro MOVED to accept Rezoning Petition #47-Z-80 with the condition that it will be RM-10 zoning with the understanding that there will be a covenant for buildings not to exceed two stories and the reserve unit application and anything else the City Attorney deems necessary be submitted to Council at the appropriate time so there will be time for review for the second reading at the September 23, 1981 meeting. Mayor Falck handed the gavel to V/M Disraelly and SECONDED the motion. Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner, asked Mr. Birken, City Attorney, whether the Planning Commission should review the plans before they go to Council, and was told that this should be done. VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Aye C/M Zemel - Aye C/W Massaro - Aye V/M Disraelly - Nay Mayor Falck - Aye V/M Disraelly returned the gavel to the Mayor. 47. H.L.R., Inc. Rezoning Petition #48-Z-80 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands located south of McNab Road at N. W. 70th Avenue from R-1B to R-4A, by Temp. Ord. #835. First Reading. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved on first reading for PM-10 zoning instead of R-4A. Second reading on 9/23/81 for submittal of appropriate documents. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, mentioned that this item was read previously to Council. V/M Disraelly MOVED to deny Petition #48-Z-80. C/M Kravitz SECONDED the motion. VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Aye C/M Zemel - Nay C1W Massaro - Nay V/M Disraelly - Aye Mayor Falck - Nay Motion defeated. C/W Massaro MOVED to accept Rezoning Petition #48-Z-80 Temp. Ord. #835, with the same conditions which applied to Item #46, Rezoning Petition #47-Z-80, which motion moved approval with the condition that it will be RM-10 zoning with the understanding that there will be a covenant for buildings not to exceed two stories and the reserve unit application and anything else the City Attorney deems necessary be submitted -to Council at the appropriate time so there will be time for review for the second reading at the September 23, 1981 meeting. The Planning Ccmnission should review the plans before they go to Council. C/M Zemel SECONDED the motion. VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Aye C/M Zemel - Aye C/W Massaro - Aye V/M Disraelly - Nay Mayor Falck - Aye Mr. Birken, City Attorney, suggested that the applicant set up a meeting with himself and Mr. Richard Rubin, at an early date to prepare the paper work involved. -12- 7/24/81 /ss L 48. Springlake II - Revised Site Plan - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for the Recreation Area. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to July 27, 1981 meeting. Julian Bryan, representative for the petitioner H.L.R., Inc. introduced him- self. He stated that this request is for a revised site plan to change the area of the recreation facilities which was tabled at the last regular meeting so they could show what their exact proposal is and why they saw to increase the recreation area. Mr. Bryan stated that they have already paid $95 per unit for 221 units for which Council had already approved the site plan. He went on to mention that C/W Massaro has requested H.L.R., Inc. to provide Council with a legal description of what they plan to rezone to S-1, which he submitted, which he stated includes 7/10 of one acre. C/W Massaro mentioned she had also requested that the proper dimensions be shown for the clubhouse. The site plan showed 1,250 sq. ft., and it should be 1,416 sq. ft. Mr. Bryan went on to state that this clubhouse will only serve the 48 units in the south portion, and suggested that Council approve this Site Plan with a pro- viso showing this fact. V/M Disraelly stated that if the clubhouse is only going to serve 48 units, it should be submitted that way, and not on one showing 200 units. If there is going to be a second clubhouse, it should be shown on the plan properly. Mr. Bryan answered by stating that this would be the proper way to submit the revised site plan, but doing so would hold up their ability to ccmnence con- struction of the recreation area for the 48 units now there,since there's so much time involved in redoing the plan. C/W Massaro suggested the applicant straighten out all the paperwork necessary, and submit it to Council at the Monday meeting, if they're ready. (tape side 6) Arthur Birken, City Attorney, brought out the fact that the original site plan was for the north parcel and the south parcel, with the recreation area in the center. They now want to designate the recreation area just to the south portion. He cannot see why they can't submit a new site plan for the south portion of Springlake II showing the recreation area for that area only. C/W Massaro MOVED that this item be tabled to the Monday meeting. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. Mr. Rubin, of H.L.R., Inc. wanted to know what specific requirements would be needed on the revised site plan for the second recreation area, and he was advised to take this matter up with Mr. Birken, City Attorney, and Mr. Rubin, Consulting City Planner. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 45. Concord Village II - Discussion and possible action on: a) Request for extension of final site plan. b) Parks and Recreation Agreement. c) Other outstanding items pertaining to this project, including Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a), b), c) - Approved with conditions. C/W Massaro suggested that item a) be held for last. V/M Disraelly wanted to discuss the Water & Sewer Agreement. Mr. Birken, City Attorney stated that a Water & Sewer Agreement was entered into on June 17, 1980 for one year with the stipulation that 25% of the units would be drawn down within that time. Notice was sent by the Utility Dept., however, the units were not paid for and, in his opinion, the agreement is null and void. He went on to state that this agreement provided for contribution charges of $900, 3*Z 7/24/81 /ss however, if the contribution charges were increased, the developer would have to pay the higher amount of $1,000 for any units that were not paid for. Under this agreement, guaranteed revenues would have started two years from the date of the agreement. He went on to point out that yesterday a new document was submitted, which he noticed had some blanks on it, and he sent it to the Engineering Dept. for review. At the present time, there is no Water & Sewer Agreement in existence. In his opinion,the one submitted was not totally complete. He felt the developer was responsible for the terms of the expired agreement, and that the City has lost revenue that would have been paid according to this agreement. V/M Disraelly agreed and stated that the guaranteed revenue portion of the agreement would have begun one year from June 17th, rather than two years if a new agreement is entered into. C/W Massaro suggested that the new agreement be extended for one year from June 17th, the due date for the guaranteed revenue, and the developer would have to pay $1,000 per unit at an interest rate of $11.67. Mr. Lon Rubin acknowledged that the present Water & Sewer Agreement has lapsed. He stated they paid the monthly payments for that period of time. C/W Massaro confirmed that $36,000 in interest fees were made. Mr. Rubin stated that market conditions have forced the project to be delayed, and he's requesting that he be granted some relief in the form of an extension of time in which to pay for certain items. They had one year to pay the park and recreation fee, _and he said he is ready, willing and able to pay that. He .is asking for an and for the 25% of the units. The guaranteed revenue would begin one year from June 17, 1981, the interest charges would continue at the higher rate of $11.67. V/M Disraelly confirmed that the interest charges would begin on June 17, 1981, and the guaranteed revenue would begin on June 17, 1982. C/W Massaro brought up the amount of $7,786 for the cost for pumping station #18. Mr. Rubin said this amount was paid, and waived the obligation of the City to collect same. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, asked Mr. Rubin whether he had closed -on this property, to which he replied no. C/W Massaro mentioned that all recreation parcels would have to be rezoned S-1 before any building permit is applied for. Mr. Birken, City Attorney, reminded Council that there is no guarantee,that they could be in the same position on June 17, 1982, however, the interest will be paid. Secondly, this agreement was with the City and Harlon, Inc., and he suggested that the owner of the property be a party to the new developer agreement. C/W Massaro MOVED that the site plan for Concord Village it be extended for one year from June 17, 1981 to June 17, 1982, and that a new developers agreement be entered into which will indicate that the cost for ERC's is $1,000 each, and that the interest fee is $11.67 a month on each ERC. The same conditions that prevailed in the expired agreement as to the draw down of the units remain the same, that in one year they must draw dawn 25% of the units. The guaranteed revenues would begin June 17, 1982. 25% of the ERC draw down is effective no later than June 17, 1982, but sooner if they want to start construction. The application for the rezoning of the recreation area take place before any building permit can be drawn. The amount of $7,786 for the cost for pumping station # 18 will be borne by the devel- oper and no request for payment be made from the city or any other developer.( The developer has borne the cost of $7,786 at this point). $37,500 is submitted at this time for the parks and recreation fee. The proper City officials are authorized to execute the Water and Sewage agreement, and the agreement be signed by the owner of the property as well as the applicant. V/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. C/W Massaro added that all the conditions included in the original agreement are incorporated into the extension. 1V J4aE�\ly�iL�JY�I� G -14- 7/24/81 /ss MAYOR FALCK ADJOURNED THE MEETING at 1:00 P.M. ATTEST: x z 1�2 ASST. CITY 7=RK MAY This public document was promulgated at a cost of $335.63 or $13.42 per copy, to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considera- tions by the City Council of the City of Tamarac. APPROVE By CIITjTYY COUNCIL ON -15- 7/24/81 /ss