HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-06-23 - City Commission Regular Meeting Minutes°cr 0 1 O1°
P. 0. BOX 25010
TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320
FIRST CLASS MAIL
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1982
CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 A.M.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF TIME ALLOCATIONS - MOTIONS TO TABLE - The Chair at
this time will announce those items which have been given a spe-
cific time to be heard, and will entertain motions from Council
members to table those items which require additional research.
Council may agendize by majority consent matters of an urgent
nature which have come to Council's attention after publication.
PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS
1. Emp oyee Service Award - Presentation by City Manager StuurmanE
of five-year pin to Robin Meisler, Personnel Director.
2. Service Commendation - Presentation by City Manager Stuurmans
of a service commendation from the City of Lauderdale .Lakes to
the Tamarac Fire Department.
TAMARAC UTILITIES WEST
3. Blast Air, Inc. -- Painting of Water Plant - Discussion and pos-
sible action on:
a) Approval of Change Order No.
increase.
b) Approval, of Pay Estimate No.
1 in the amount of $8,244.50
1 in the amount of $5,526.00.
4. Bid Award - Temp. Reso. #2314 - Discussion and possible action
to award a bid for four submersible sewage pumps and appurten-
ances.
5. Bid Award - Temp. Reso. #2315 - Discussion and possible action
To award a bid for one electronic cash register,
311
6/23-Pg.1,
presentation madE
6/23-Pg. 1,
Presentation madE
6/23-Pg. 2,
a)TABLED to next'
eg.mtg.,b)APPVD.
6/23--Pg. 3,
APPROVED as
sti ulated.
6/23-Pgs.3 & 4,
APPROVEDaward_
Permit Application - Temp. Reso. #2316 - Discussion and pos-- 6/23-APPROVED
sible action to authorize a utility permit application from th Pgs, 3 & 4
Florida Department of Transportation for the proposed construe
tion of an 18-inch force main along the Commercial Boulevard
right-of-way and underneath the Florida Turnpike.
COMMITTEES AND BOARDS C'
6/23-P9. 4,
7. Board of Adjustment - Announcement of one regular term to ex - -announcement of
pire on 7/17/82 and two alternate terms to expire on 7/8/82. vacancies.
If anyone is interested in serving on this board, please con-
tact the City Clerk's office for an application. If existing
board members desire to be considered for reappointment, pleasd
indicate this by memo to the City Clerk's office; however, mem-;
bers will continue to serve until appointments are made by
Council.
PAGE TWO
CONSENT AGENDA
8. Items listed under Item #8, Consent Agenda, are viewed to be
routine and the recommendation will be enacted by one motion
in the form listed below. There will be no separate dis-
cussion of these items. If discussion is desired, then the
item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be
considered separately.
a) Minutes of 4/28/82 - Regular Meeting - Approval recommended by
City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 5/5/82 -Special Meeting - Approval recommended by
City Clerk.
c) Minutes of 5/10/82 - Reconvened Special Meeting - Approval re-
commended by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of 5/10/82 - Special Meeting - Approval recommended by
City Clerk.
e) Alan F. Ruf - Consulting City Attorney - 6/14/82 - $1,125.00 -
Approval recommended by City Attorney.
f) Del Ricco Brothers Construction, Inc. - 1982 Storm Drainage Im-
provements - N.W. 82 Street - 6/13/82 - $23,658.40 - Pay Est-
imate #2 - Approval recommended by City Engineer.
g) Del Ricco Brothers Construction, Inc. - 1982 Storm Drainage
Improvements - Westwood Community 3 - 6/15/82 - $1,323.00 -
Pay Estimate #4 - Approval recommended by City Engineer.
h) Tamarac Plaza Rescission of Parking Waiver - Approval to extenc
the tabling action to the Council meeting of 7/14/82.
i) Financial Federal Savings & Loan Association -'Bond Release -
Approval to extend the tabling action to a future Council meet-
ing.
j) Sunniland Bank - Bond Release - Approval to extend the tabling
action to a future Council meeting.
k) Approval to extend the tabling action of the following items
the Council meeting of 7/14/82:
(1) Sabal Palm Country Club Condominiums
(2) Sabal Palm Golf Course
(3) Sabal Palm Golf Course Clubhouse
1) General Purpose Tractor for Utilities - Approval to reject bid
and allow the City Manager to rebid this item.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
9. Surplus Equipment - Finance Department - Temp. Reso._#2317 --
Discussion and possible action to declare 31 Computer Disc Pak:
as surplus equipment and authorizing the City Manager to seek
bids for the sale thereof.
10. Bike Path Construction - Temp, Reso. #2140 - Discussion and
possible action to approve an agreement with Florida Depart-
ment of Transportation for a bike path on the west side of
University Drive from NW 57 Street to Southgate Boulevard
(tabled from 4/28/82).
11. Broward League of Cities Business - Discussion and possible
action.
6/23-Pgs. 4 & 5
APPROVED Items
C, a) through 1)
C/M Disraelly
commended City
iClerk & her
staff!
r6/23-Pg. 5,
APPROVED authoriz
C/Mgr.to seek
i bids .
6/23-Pgs. 5,6,7
(as outlined in
minutes).
6/23-Pg. 5,
report by C/M
Disraelly
PAGE THREE
PUBLIC HEARINGS .- 2:00 P.M.
12. Bruce Egan - Rezoning Petition#4-Z--82 - Temp- Ord. #987 -
Discussion and possible action to rezone lands ontheeast
side of University Drive extending southward from N.W. 64
Street approximately 872-feet and eastward approximately 450-
feet, from R-3 (Low Density Multiple) to B-1 (Neighborhood
Business). First Reading.
a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Post-
ing and Affidavit of Mailing.
b) Consideration of application.
13. Bruce Egan - Rezoning Petition #5-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #988 -
Discussion and possible action to rezone lands adjacent to
the western boundary line of Mainlands Section 15 (Vanguard
Village), Lots 20 through 30 of Block 237, a parcel measurinc
approximately 50-feet by 872-feet, from R-3 (Low Density
Multiple) to S-1 (Open Space/Recreational). First Reading.
a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Post-
ing and Affidavit of Mailing.
b) Consideration of application.
14. Milton Lavernia, Inc. - Petition #8-Z-82 - Tem . Reso- #2318-
Discussion and possible action to grant two limited waivers
to parking requirements of Section 18 of the Code for a pro-
posed medical office building to be located on the west side
of University Drive south of N.W. 71 Court and in front of
the existing medical office building.
15. Tyler Restaurant Design, Inc. - Petition #11-Z-82 - Temp'
Reso. #2319 - Discussion and possible action to grant a Spe-
cial Exception to permit a restaurant in a B-2 (Planned Bus-
iness) zoning district at McNab Plaza North, 7160 University
Drive, Tamarac.
16. Burglar Alarm - Tem . Ord.,#986 - Discussion and possible
action to amend Section 11 of Ordinance 82-34 to provide for
a filing fee for the processing of appeals tofNotices of
False Alarms. Second Reading.
LEGAL AFFAIRS
17. Burglar Alarm - Temp. Reso. #2306 - Discussion and possible
action to establish a filing fee for the processing of
appeals to Notices of False Alarms.
I6/23-Pgs. 15 & 16
DENIED.
I6/23-P917,
DENIED.
6723--Pgs .17 thru
20, Reso.#2318
granting waiver
for 90°parking
APPROVED. Waiver
req-of 62 spaces
DENIED.
6/23-Pg. 21,
APPROVED.
6/23-Pgs. 21& 22
APPROVED as
amended,
6/23-Pg. 22,
APPROVED.
18. Redistricting Plan - Discussion and possible action on: 6/23-Pgs 9 thru
a) Presentation by the Redistricting Committee of its pro- 13, a)ACCEPTED
posed plan. proposed plan
b) Approval of Temp. Ord. #989 which establishes new Council b) APPROVED
district boundaries. First Reading.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6/23-Pgs.5 & 6,
19. Woodview Tract 38 - Model Sales Facility - Discussion and TABLED to next
possible action to renew a model sales permit for this pro- regular meeting-
ject.
20. Pines III (Woodmont Tract 54) - Model Sales Facility - Dis- 6/23-Pg- 6,
and -Possible
cussion action to renew a permit for the use of APPROVED 6 mos. -
a model sales facility at another location. 7/8/82.
21. Woodmont Tract 64 (LaForet) and Tract 70 (La Reserve) - Model
-Sales Facili - Discussion and possible action to renew a
Permit for a model sales facility for use by both projects.
6/23-Pg. 6,
APPROVED for,6 mos
from 6/24/82.
PAGE FOUR
22. Tropical Gardens Nurser - Temp_ Reso. #2327 - Discussion 16/23-Pgs.31 & 32,
and possible action after review of a limited parking waiver TABLED to 7/28
granted on July 8, 1981, under Petition #8-Z-81. meeting
23. Wellens Furniture Company - Revised Site Plan - Temp. Reso. 6/23-Pgs.30 & 31,
#2328 - Discussion and possible action on a revised site pla TABLE to 7/14
for an addition. I meeting.
24. Isles of Tamarac - Bond Release - Temp._ Reso. 4_2325 -- Dis-
cussion and possible action to release a cash warranty bond
posted for public improvements.
25. Fairways III - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Release of performance bond posted for public improvement
upon receipt of a one-year warranty bond - Temp. Reso.
#2322. ]
b) Acceptance of Bill of Sale for water distribution and
sewage collection system improvements - Temp. Reso. #2323
c) Acceptance of Utility Easement - Temp. Reso. #2324.
26. Curtis Field Plat - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Plat - Temp. Reso. #2326
b) Water Retention Agreement.
(located on the west side of University Drive, north of Tom
Norris Restaurant).
6/23-Pg. 32,
APPROVED release
of $3,000 cash
warranty bond.
6/23-Pgs. 8 & 9,
a)APPROVED, b)
APPROVED, c)
APPROVED.
6/23-Pg. 8,
TABLED to next
regular meeting.
27. F"rybergh
Office Building/Fireman's Fund American Life
- Dis-
6/23-Pgs.28,29 &
cussion
and possible action on:� -
30, a)APPROVED as
a)
Site
Plan - Temp._ Reso. #2320
conditioned, b)
b)
Landscape
Plan
APPROVED as con-
c)
Water
and Sewer Developers Agreement
ditioned, c), d)
d)
Water
Retention Agreement
and e)APPROVED.
e) Warranty Deed for 40-foot right-of-way on University
Drive - Tem . Reso. #2321
(to be located on the east side of University Drive, north
of Tropical Gardens Nursery)
28. Drainage improvements in the City - Discussion and possible
action.
REPORTS
29. City Council
30. City Manager
31. City Attorney
City Council may consider such other business as may come before it.
Pursuant to Chapter 80-105 of Florida Law, Senate Bill No. 368; if a person de-
cides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any
matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the
proceedings, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record
of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is to be based.
CIV OF TAMARAC
Carol A. Evans
Assistant City Clerk
6/23-Pg. 9, C/M
Disraelly reporte(
ponding problems
in Sec.22
Pg.33
Pg. 33
Pg. 34
MTOPO M AO
32. Tamarac Town Square (Southeast
Sho-Dning Center Inc. - Discussion
6/23, Pg. 1,Agen.
and possible action on:
by Cons.,Pg. 23,
a) Petition #16-Z-81 - REquest
for limited waiver to parking requirement
a), b) and c)
of Chapter 18 of the Code -
Temp. Reso. #2030.
APPVD. with
b) Revised Site Plan pertaining
to building modificstions, parking and
changes.
vehicular circulation - Temp. REso. #2195.
c) Construction of sidewalks.
33. Installation of Traffic Signals
- NW 64th Ave. & NW 57 St. and
6/23, Pg. 2,
Agen. by Consent.
Commercial Blvd. and Woodlands Blvd. - Discussion and possible action.
Pg. 13, a) and
b) APPVD.
34. Colony West Executive Course --
Canal Release Requested - Discussion
6/23, Pg. 2,
and possible action. �Y
Agen. by Consent.
Pgs. 13,14 -
City to request
So. Fla. Water
Mgmt. Dist. not
to release,pend.
further review
by the City.
35. Brown & Caldwell - Consulting En sneers -- 201 Program - Discussion and 6/23,Pg. 15,
possible action. Agen. By Consent.
APPVD. hiring of
Brown & Caldwell
for backup to
Wms.Hatf.& Stoner
at fee not to
exceed $2,000.00.
36. Montwood, Inc_. -- Stimulation #3 - Discussion and possible action. 6/23, Pg. 15,
gend. by Consent.
g. 32,TABLED to
ta. of 7/14/82.
37. New Vehicles for Detective Division and Pool Cars - Discussion and 6/23,Pg. 33,Agen.
possible action. by Cons.,Auth.
C/Mgr. to bid for
4 vehicles at
$6,0000. maximum.
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 23, 1982
CALL TO ORDER: V/M Helen Massaro called the meeting to order on Wednesday,
June 23, 1982, at 9:30 A.M. in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Vice Mayor Helen Massaro
Councilman Irving M. Disraelly
Councilman Philip B. Kravitz
Councilman David E. Krantz
ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Mayor Walter W. Falck
ALSO PRESENT: City Manager, Laura Z. Stuurmans
City Attorney, Jon Henning
City Clerk, Marilyn Bertholf
Secretary, Patricia Marcurio, a.m.
Secretary, Norma R. Rayman, p.m.
'Pape MEDITATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: V/M Massaro called for a Moment of
1 Silent Meditation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
V/M Massaro greeted everyone present and announced the time schedule
for specific items.
1. Employee Service_ Award - Presentation by City Manager Stuurmans of
five-year pin to Robin Meisler, Personnel Director.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Five-year pin
was presented by the City Manager
to Robin Meisler; Personnel Director.
City Manager Stuurmans presented a five-year pin to Robin Meisler, Personnel
Director.
2. Service Commendation - Presentation by City Manager Stuurmans of a
service commendation from the City of Lauderdale Lakes to the Tamarac
Fire Department.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Manager
presented a service commendation from
the City of Lauderdale Lakes to Assistant
Chief Ray Briant and Captain Tom Watkins of the
Tamarac Fire Department.
The City Manager read the service commendation into the record and presentee
this to Assistant Chief Ray Briant and Captain Tom Watkins of the Tamarac
Fire. Department.
32. Tamarac Town Square (Southeast Sho in Center, Inc.) - Discussion
and possible action on:
a) Petition #16-Z--81 - Request for limited waiver to parking require-
ments of Chapter 18 of the Code - Temp. Reso. #2030.
b) Revised Site Plan pertaining to building modifications, parking
and vehicular circulation - Temp. Reso. #2195.
c) Construction of sidewalks.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized
by consent. (See Page 23).
1 6/23/82
/pm
C/M Disraelly MOVED that:Tamarac Town Scluare(Southeast Shopping Center)
a) Petition #16-Z-81 - Request for limited waiver to parking requirements
of Chapter 18 of the Code - Temp. Reso. #2030.
b) Revised Site Plan pertaining to building modifications, parking and
vehicular circulation - Tem . Reso. #2195.
c) Construction of sidewalks, be Agendized by Consent. SECONDED by C/M
Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
33. Installation of Traffic Signals - NW 64th Ave. & NW 57th St. and
Commercial Blvd. and Woodlands Blvd.- Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized
by consent. (See Page 13).
C/M Disraelly MOVED to Agendize by Consent the installation of traffic
signalization, discussion and possible action regarding bids for install-
ation of traffic signals at:
a) NW 64th Ave. & NW 57 St.
b) Commercial Blvd. and Woodlands Blvd.
SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
34. Colony West Executive Course - Canal Release Reguested - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized
by consent. (See 15ages 13 & 14).
C/M Disraelly MOVED to Agendize by Consent the canal reservation release
request concerning the Colony West Executive Golf Course, SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
V/M Massaro said she will try to recess the meeting as close to 12:00
noon as possible so that the Welcoming Committee would be able to welcome
the new residents and Council would have an opportunity to meet with them.
3. Blast Air, Inc. - Painting of Water Plant - Discussion and possible
action on:
a) Approval of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $8,244.50 increase.
b) Approval of Pay Estimate No. l in the amount of $5,526.00.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) TABLED
to the next regular meeting,
b) APPROVED for work at Tamarac
Utilities West.
a) The City Manager said she has asked Council to allow for an opportunity
to further review comparing the cost for the City to perform this work
versus the cost proposed by the contractor. She suggested tabling this
until the next regular meeting awaiting a report. C/M Disraelly MOVED
to TABLE Item 3a regarding the Change Order under paint work for the
next Council meeting, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
b) C/M Disraelly MOVED the APPROVAL of Pay Estimate No. 1 in the amount
of $5,526.00 to Blast Air, Inc. for the work at Tamarac Utilities West.
SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
- 2 - 6/23/82
/pm
4. Bid Award - Temp. Reso. #2314 - Discussion and possible action to
award a bid for four submersible sewage pumps and appurtenances.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. R- gg-Z&2 PASSED.
Temp. Reso. #2314 awarding a bid
to D.Q. Whitehair Assoc. in the
amount of $11,176. The City Manager
is to request the City Engineer to submit
a memo to Council indicating what the warranty is.
The City Attorney read the Resolution by title. The City Manager said
the City Engineer has submitted a memo dated dune 16 recommending the
bid be awarded to D.Q. Whitehair & Associates in the amount of $11,176.
She said D.Q. Whitehair was not the over-all low bidder based upon the
tabulation; however, when the adjustments were made based upon the City's
needs and equivalent bases they were only $500 above the other two bidders.
She said based upon the quality and the variables in the City,the City
Engineer's memo should be referenced in the Resolution based upon the
purchasing regulations in the City.
V/M Massaro said the City Engineer's recommendation is supported by the
fact that the recommended pumps appear to have superior warranty for
servicability. C/M Disraelly said he discussed this with the City Engineer
and he indicated that if they went with anyone else they would have to
change the seals and they have enough Whitehair pumps that parts would be
interchangable.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2314 accepting the bid
of D.Q. Whitehair & Associates in the amount of $11,176.00 for the four
pumps involved, indicating that the other two bidders originally did not
meet the specifications. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
V/M Massaro requested that the City Manager have the City Engineer issue
Council a memo showing what the warranty is.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
5. Bid Award - Temp. Reso. #2315 - Discussion and possible action to
award a bid for one electronic cash register.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. PASSED.
Temp. Reso. #2315 awarding a
bid to Sweda International,inc.
for $2,251.
Mr. Henning read the Resolution by title. The City Manager said the
Finance Department staff at Utilities West recommended the award to the
low bidder Sweda International at a cost of $2,251. She said their
warranty period is for one year versus other bidders which only had 90
days.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Reso. #2315 awarding the bid to Sweda
International, Inc. in the ariour_t of c2, 251 . SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
6. Permit Application - Temp, Reso. #2316 - Discussion and possible action
to authorize a utility permit application from the Florida Department
of Transportation for the proposed construction of an 18-inch force
main along the Commercial Boulevard right-of-way and underneath the
.Florida Turnpike.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED
Temp. Reso. #2316 as amended.
RESOLUTION NO. R� :1 %s PASSED.
- 3 - 6/23/82
/pm
Mr. Henning read the Resolution by title. V/M Massaro said at this time
they are not sure whether the County will be installing this force main
as they agreed to but if not, the City will need to do this. C/M Disraelly
asked who the Vice Mayor would recommend as the "appropriate City official"
to sign this and V/M Massaro said she would suggest that it be stated that
"the appropriate City official be authorized to sign".
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of 'Temp. Reso._#2316 regarding the permit
application for the proposed construction of the force main with Section
2 to read "that the appropriate City official is authorized to sign said
permit". SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
7. Board of Adjustment - Announcement of one regular term to expire on
7/17/82 and two alternate terms to expire on 7/8/82.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Announcement
was made of the vacancies.
V/M Massaro said this is simply an announcement ofone regular term to
expire on 7/17/82 and two alternate terms to expire on 7/8/82. She said
if anyone is interested in serving on this Board they should contact the
City Clerk's office for an application, if existing Board members desire
to be considered for reappointment, they should indicate this by memo to
the City Clerk's office; however, members will continue to serve until
appointments are made by Council.
8. Consent Aaenda-
a) Minutes of 4/28/82 - Regular Meeting - Approval recommended by
City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 5/5/82 - Special Meeting - Approval recommended by City
Clerk.
c) Minutes of 5/10/82 - Reconvened Special Meeting -- Approval re-
commended by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of 5/10/82 - Special Meeting - Approval recommended by
City Clerk.
e) Alan F. Ruf - Consulting City Attorney - 6/14/82 - $1,125.00 -
Approval recommended by City Attorney.
f) Del Ricco Brothers Construction, Inc. - 1982 Storm Drainage Im-
provements - N.W. 82 Street - 6/13/82 - $23,658.40 - Pay Estimate
#2 - Approval recommended by City Engineer.
g) Del Ricco Brothers Construction, Inc. - 1982 Storm Drainage Im-
provements - Westwood Community 3 - 6/15/82 - $1,323.00 - Pay
Estimate #4 - Approval recommended by City Engineer.
h) Tamarac Plaza Rescission of Parking Waiver - Approval to extend
the tabling action to the Council meeting of 7/14/82.
i) Financial Federal Savings & Loan Association - Bond Release -
Approval to extend the tabling action to a future Council meeting.
j) Sunniland Bank - Bond Release - Approval to extend the tabling
action to a future Council reetir_c*.
k) Approval to extend the tabling action of the following items to
the Council meeting of 7/14/82:
(1) Sabal Palm Country Club Condominiums
(2) Sabal Palm Golf Course
(3) Sabal Palm Golf Course Clubhouse
1) General Purpose Tractor for Utilities - Approval to reject bid
and allow the City Manager to rebid this item.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED
Items a) through 1). C/M Disraelly
commended the City Clerk and her staff
for their preparation of the minutes.
- 4 - 6/23/82
/pm
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of all items on the Consent Agenda
a) through 1) and he particularly commended the City Clerk's office
for the excellent minutes that were done. V/M Massaro said she would
like to echo C/M Disraelly's statement. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
9. Surplus Equipment - Finance Department - Temp. Reso. #2317 - Dis-
cussion and possible action to declare 31 Computer Disc Paks as
surplus equipment and authorizing the City Manager to seek bids
for the sale thereof.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED
Temp. Reso. #2317.
RESOLUTION NO. R= f� PASSED.
The.City Attorney read the Resolution by title. The City Manager said
Council has received a copy of the memo from the Purchasing office
indicating that they have found in their inventory 31 Computer Disc
Paks that were used in connection with the Burroughs system that are
no longer in use. V/M Massaro asked about the Refund Paks and the
City Manager said the Refund Program has been converted into the Micro
Data Svstem so there is no need for this.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2317 for the sale of
surplus Computer Discs, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
10. Bike Path Construction - Temp. Reso. #2140 - Discussion and possible
action to approve an agreement with Florida Department of Transport-
ation for a bike path on the west side of University Drive from NW
57 Street to Southgate Boulevard (tabled from 4/28/82).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Discussion postponed
for presence of City Planner (See Pages 6 & 7).
V/M Massaro said she would suggest waiting for the City Planner for
further discussion with the City Planner on this item.
11. Broward Lea ue of Cities Business - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: C/M Disraelly
presented the report.
C/M Disraelly said he sent a memo which came to the Voting Delegate for
routing to all Council members. He said at prior meetings they had dis-
cussed the road and bridge tax and the City's monies have been drastically
cut back as to the expected revenue from the County. He said the'City will
be getting 39% of the funding received one year ago.
C/M Disraelly said the City of Coral Springs was very involved in that
problem and they have been in contact with Mr. Kelton of Kelton & Associates
from Deland, Florida. He said Mr. Kelton is an expert in the field of
road and bridge tax, transportation function funding and double taxation.
He said Mr. Kelton met in Coral Springs yesterday to discuss with Coral
Springs and Kurt Volker concerning this subject. He said he would relay
information from this meeting on to Council as soon as he receives word.
He said the Broward League is concerned about this also and this would have
an impact on the City's taxes for this year.
19. Woodview Tract 38 - Model Sales Facilit - Discussion and possible
action to renew a model sales permit for this project.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to next regular
meeting.
- 5 - 6/23/82
/pm
V/M Massaro said before any action should be taken on this model sales
Mr. Grossman should be asked to come in and discuss the delinquency of
Payments that exist on the interest payments for the Water and Sewer
Agreement. She said there is a balance of $2,252.31 on this Agreement
and this should be TABLED until Mr. Grossman is notified that he should
come in and negotiate an Agreement that is agreeable to all concerned.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to TABLE this to the next regular meeting of Council
and that the City Clerk advise Mr. Grossman to make contact with the
City Attorney within the next week in order for it to be put on the
Agenda for the next regular meeting. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
20. Pines III (Woodmont Tract 54) - Model Sales Facility - Discussion
and possible action to renew a permit for the use of a model sales
facility at another location.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED
for 6 months from 7/8/82.
C/M Disraelly MOVED APPROVAL of the permit for Pines III (Woodmont Tract 54
Sales Facility)for a 6 month extension from July 8, 1982,since the last
one was from January 8, 1982. V/M Massaro said this is a model sales
which is at another location and they are paying for two permits and
they are being sold from Cypress III. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
21. Woodmont Tract 64 (LaForet) and Tract 70 (La. Reserve) - Model
Sales Facility -_Discussion and possible action to renew a permit
for model sales facility for use by both projects.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED
for 6 months from 6/24/82.
C/M Disraelly said La Foret is single family 45 units and La Reserve
is single family 47 units. V/M Massaro said there is a different situation
here since only one permit is required here; according to the City
Ordinance anything under 8 units does not require a permit and this is
what is left at La Foret. She said he has been paying 2 permits but is
now down to one.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the extension of the model sales permit for Woodmont
Tract 64 to sell for Tract 64 and Tract 70 for 6 months effective
June 24, 1982. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
10. Bike Path Construction - Temp. Reso._#2140 - Discussion and possible
action to approve an agreement with Florida Department of Transport-
ation for a bike path on the west side of University Drive from NW
57 Street to Southgate Boulevard (tabled from 4/28/82).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: City Planner
gave presentation to Council. (See Page 5).
Richard Rubin said that over the last 45 days there have been 3 or 4
meetings with representatives of the DOT regarding the status of the
bikeway system. He said the bikeway will be going along the west side
of University Drive, the southern point will be McDonalds at Commercial
Blvd. and the northern point will be Southgate Blvd. He said there are
approximately 30 parcels of land involved that the bikeway would be
adjacent to.
The City Planner said it was decided that the proper
Permanent location of the bikeway would be at the property line which
- 6 - 6/23/82
/pm
would be 100' from the center of the road. He said University Dr. has
two different right-of-ways, the older parcels have a 60' right-of-way
and as new properties are platted, the City required an additional 40'
to make it a total of 100' right-of-way.
The City Planner said the bikeway would be better in the second location
since the DOT does not know the final design of University Dr. and the
Vice Mayor is concerned that a roadway might someday replace any bikeway
put in now. Mr. Rubin said the DOT has prepared a plan utilizing the
100' setback wherever possible and the 60' setback when the full width
is not available. He said they have made an agreement that between now
and August they will finalize the plans for the preliminary design of
the bikeway and also for acquiring the additional parcels that are needed
in order to put the bikeway at the 100' line the entire length of University
Dr.
Mr. Rubin said in August and September the City will have to meet with
the various property owners to obtain the additional 40' of right-of-way.
He said after October 1 the DOT will prepare the final design of the
bikeway based upon how much right-of-way the City has acquired with the
ultimate plans to relocate at the 100' line as additional properties are
platted. Mr. Rubin said the good news is that wherever there is an
existing 5' sidewalk along the 100' setback line they only have to increase
this by 3' to make it a full 8' wide which is the minimum Federal require-
ment.
Mr. Rubin said where there is an existing asphalt sidewalk 3' to 5' wide
they would just add another 3' to 5' of asphalt to make it 8' wide. He
said they will, therefore, not be paying the expense for a whole new
system and will be able to utilize existing sidewalks. He said the final
cost will not be determined until the final plans are done and if everything
'ape goes smoothly this project will be started by next spring and completed
2 by the beginning of summer.
Mr. Rubin said the next stage in which the Council would be involved
would be in accepting the Grant from DOT. He said once they have
established a cost estimate and Council determines that the location and
the cost is reasonable, the City Manager will place this on the Agenda
for final review of the Grant Agreement with DOT. C/M Krantz asked what
percentage of sidewalks the City has existing at the present time and
Mr. Rubin said there are approximately 6,000 linear feet of existing
sidewalks compared to the 15,000 linear feet needed to complete this
project.
Mr. Rubin said they hope to utilize at least 1/3 of these existing
sidewalks. V/M Massaro said it should be made clear that the bikepath
is not going where the DOT orginally indicated at 5' from the road; this
was immediately vetoed by Council and will be put back another 40'.
Mr. Rubin said the City was years ahead in requiring developers to donate
the full 40' and V/M Massaro said at a future date when others build
there will be a requirement by the City for those people to rebuild
that area to concrete sidewalks.
Richard Rubin said to clarify further, V/M Massaro is referring to 11
parcels of land for which the City does not have the full right-of-way.
He said the City will meet with those property owners within the next two
weeks; and if one of the owners decides not to give the City the additional
right-of-way then the City will place the asphalt cap at the 60' right-
of-way line temporarily and when that person comes in to plat their
land the City will have them relocate the bikeway at the 100' property
line.
C/M Krantz asked if upon completion of the sidewalk system it will all
be concrete and Richard Rubin said ultimately this will be so. V/M
Massaro said the City Planner should determine what areas; if any, where
no developer at any point would be required to put concrete in and how
much it would cost the. City to do this now. V/M Massaro pointed out that
if the City did this now it would also bring down the cost of the DOT
project.
- 7 -- 6/23/82
/pm
26. Curtis Field Plat - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Plat - Temp. Reso. #2326
b) Water Retention Agreement
(located on the west side of University Drive, north of Tom Norris
Restaurant).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to the
next regular meeting and the City Clerk
was authorized to provide Council with
copies of the letter for their files.
V/M Massaro said there is a problem here that needs to be resolved.
She said she talked with the applicant and told him that it would be
necessary to have some discussion about the fees that are going to be
asked of them for the traffic light and the road construction at
61st St. She said they agreed that this is a problem area and this
requires further discussion.
V/M Massaro said the applicant delivered a letter which she read into
the record.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the Curtis Field Plat item be TABLED to the next
regular meeting and that the City Clerk supply each member of Council
with a copy of this letter for their files. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
25. Fairways III - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Release of performance bond posted for public improvements upon
receipt of a one-year warranty bond - Temp. Reso. #2322.
b) Acceptance of Bill of Sale for water distribution and sewage
collection system improvements - Temp. Reso. #2323.
c) Acceptance of Utility Easement -- Temp. Reso. #2324.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a)APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. R_-�� 7a PASSED.
Temp. Reso. #2322, b) APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. R- ka,-/7/ PASSED.
Temp_. Reso. #2323, c) APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. RZ � PASSED.
Temp. Reso. #2324, private improvements
are not complete and Mr. Kaliff is aware
of this.
a) Jon Henning read the Resolution by title. C/M Disraelly said this
would be subject to releasing $101,000 performance bond in receipt
of a $25,000 warranty bond. He said they have received a letter from
the Toronto Dominion Bank indicating Irrevocable Commercial Letter of
Credit in the amount of $25,341.25 U.S. Funds and they have a report
from the City Engineer that the work was satisfactorily completed.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Tem . Reso. #2322, SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
b) Jon Henning read the Resolution by title. C/M Disraelly said they
have a Bill of Sale Absolute signed by Tamway/Graystone managing
partner and signed also by the City and he MOVED the ADOPTION of
Temp. Reso. #2323 accepting the Bill of Sale Absolute. SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
8 - 6/23/82
/pm
c) Jon Henning read the Resolution. C/M Disraelly MOVED the APPROVAL
of Temp. Reso. #2324 accepting the easement for water and sewer
utilities offered by Tamway and there were no engineering fees
necessary on the public improvements but there are still some costs
on private improvements. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
Mr. Kaliff said there are no fees that are actually due now and the
private improvements would be for the second building. V/M Massaro
commended Mr. Kaliff on his business ethics.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
28. Drainage Improvements in the City - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: V/M Massaro
and the City Engineer will check
McNab Rd. (Section 22) concerning
flooding problems in that area.
C/M Disraelly said they have had some complaints in Section 22 about
flooding and ponding in that area when there is a storm. He said the
problem is that McNab Road was put in higher than 94th Terrace with the
result that the water flows from McNab Rd. down 94th Terrace into 70th
St., 71st St. and is 8" high in some places. C/M Disraelly said in talking
with Ralph Thissen and Larry Keating it may be necessary to put in catch
basins at McNab Rd. and larger drainage pipes may be needed from 71st St.
down into the canal in that area.
C/M Disraelly suggested that V/M Massaro and the City Engineer pursue
this problem. V/M Massaro pointed out that when Commercial Blvd. was
put in they did the same thing and she had them pick up a couple of catch
basins just north of Commercial Blvd. after the first houses on both sides
of the street and this was tied into Commercial Blvd. She said this was
also done at 49th but it was picked up at Commercial in the yard of the
first house and it has been a permanent solution to this problem; the
County did this for the City at no cost.
C/M Krantz asked if the elevation of McNab Rd. affects Lime Bay which is
directly across the street and V/M Massaro said apparently not because
there is a sidewalk there and the elevation of the buildings is different
there. V/M Massaro said she would look into this problem further.
18. Redistrictin Plan - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Presentation by the Redistricting Committee of its proposed plan.
b) Approval of Temp. Ord. #989 Revised which establishes new Council
district boundaries : First Rea ing.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) ACCEPTED
the proposed plan of the Redistricting
Committee, b) APPROVED Temp. Ord. #989 Revised
on first reading.
a) Jon Henning said this was a Temporary Ordinance without changing 'an iota
of the districts to possibly clarify some of the wording of the boundaries;
primarily the 62nd and 63rd St. area between University Dr. and 68th Ave.
dividing Districts 2 and 3. Mr. Henning said he understands that it was
the intention from the beginning that the one subdivision on the north
was to be kept together and the one on the south was to be kept together.
Phil Solomon, Chairman of the Redistricting Committee said as far as the
Redistricting Committee is concerned, they have voted on what they were
given by the City Engineer as legal boundaries and they have fulfilled
their obligations. He said once they have presented the report to Council
then they should take these changes into consideration. V/M Massaro said
at this point they are only going to talk about the original ordinance
and then in discussion something more may be brought out.
- 9 - 6/23/82
/pm
V/M Massaro declared a one minute recess while the City Planner went
to get the new map for the districts in the City and she took this
opportunity to welcome the new residents present and introduced the
City Council, the City Attorney, the City Clerk, the City Manager and
the Secretary.
Phil Solomon said the Redistricting Committee for the year 1982 is now
ready to submit its report and plan on redistricting the City of Tamarac
for Counci:l's approval. He said the Committee believes this plan is a
practical one and they feel it is in the best interests of the electors
of the City of Tamarac at the present time. lie said before submitting
this report the Committee would like to thank Council for their appoint-
ments. lie thanked the City Clerk and members of her office for their
cooperation, he thanked C/M Disraelly for his knowledge and guidance.
He thanked Muriel Davis of the Charter Board for her help and plan, he
thanked Carl Alper of the Planning Commission for his legal knowledge
and guidance.
Phil Solomon thanked Helen Sobol for her help, he thanked Robert Sokol
for his attention to detail. He thanked John Lachmann for his enthusiasm
and Bern Gordon of the City Engineering Department for his maps and the
district boundaries. He thanked the committee for their dedication and
the harmonious atmosphere that prevailed. He said Council should have
received a packet with the plan, map, an explanation of boundaries and
electors in each district. He introduced Muriel Davis to further explain
her plan and map.
The new district map was displayed on the blackboard and C/M Disraelly
suggested displaying the old map as well so that the differences could
be readily seen. Muriel Davis of the Charter Board said she would like
to compliment Phil Solomon on the manner in which he chaired the Redistrict
ing meetings and his constructive ideas. She said that after discussion
the Committee established criteria in setting the districts. She said,
first, they used the number of registered electors in each precinct within
Council districts based on the November, 1981 elections. This information
was provided by the City Clerk, Marilyn Bertholf from the Broward County
Election Office.
She said studies on literature on Congressional Redistricting indicate
that this is the best method rather than the census of population.
Second, boundaries were to be major thoroughfares, contiguous streets and
avenues. Each district was to have as close to 5,500 registered electors
as possible or 25% of these electors. She said they did not reflect
projected future growth; however, they are aware of the imbalance in the
City at the present. She said the growth is mainly to the north and to
the west. She said that since the theory is not to create a"one-man, one -
vote" situation they attempted to adjust the districts as equally as
feasible.
She referred Council's attention to the difference between the two
district maps displayed; in District 1 the present count of registered
electors is 5,022, 22.3% of the entire City. She said they retained all
6 precincts that exist now and added 14H which presently is a precinct in
District 2. She said this increased District 1 by 117 electors making the
total count 5,139 electors, 22.8%.
Muriel Davis said District 2 presently has 4,486 registered electors with
19.9% of the registered voters. They removed from this District, which is
the smallest of the four, precinct 14H partially and transferred this to
District 1. She said to bring up District 2 they added precinct 14R which
has 1,301 registered electors; this made...the total population in District 2
5,670 registered electors, 25.2%.
Muriel Davis said in District 3 the present registered electors is 5,356,
23.8%; to equalize that they removed 14R with 1,301 electors and added
that to District 2. She said to balance that out they added precincts 12J
with 840 registered electors and added 14Y with 825 registered electors.
She said this brings the count in that District to 5,720, 25.4%.
- 10 - 6/23/82
/pm
Muriel Davis said in District 4, which was the largest of all the Districts,
the count presently is 7,652, 34% of the registered voters. She said
to decrease District 4 they removed 12J and 14Y to District 3 and
that brought down the count in District 4 to 5,987, 2.6.6%. She said
this proposal combines Precinct 14H which was divided between District 2
and 1 now into District 1. She said these Districts would be contiguous
and 3 of the Districts would be quite close in the number of registered
electors and the percent of registered electors; the boundaries are
clear and definite and no Council person will be gerrymandered. She said
this map was accepted on May 25 by the Redistricting Committee.
Muriel Davis referred to the new map which was displayed on the board
and she said the descriptions given by the City Engineer show the districts
fairly equal in size if not in shape. Melanie Reynolds said this seems
uneven to her because the lowest number is in District 1 which is fully
developed. V/M Massaro said there is more empty land and there will be
more development there. Melanie Reynolds said she feels this committee
'ape failed to plan for the future and she feels it is strange that District 4
3 is so large and the others are small in comparison.
Phil Solomon said Mrs. Reynolds made the same comment at a Redistricting
Committee meeting and she was invited to bring in a new map and a different
plan that would encompass her thoughts and she failed to do this even
though a special meeting was held awaiting this. Helen Sobol said in
response to future planning, when the committee was started the rules of
order encompassed the fact that they were handling the situation as it
is now because in another five years another redistricting is mandatory.
John Lachmann said as a member of the Redistricting Committee he does
recall that Mrs. Reynolds did come before the committee and she was asked
to present her plan which she never did. Mr. Barnett from the isles of
Tamarac asked to have comparisons made on the maps for the residents.
C/M Disraelly referred to the maps and explained all the changes that
were made.
C/M Krantz pointed out for the benefit of the new residents that even
though the Councilmen come from separate districts the voting is City
wide and election day everyone votes for the Councilpeople regardless
of where they live. V/M Massaro asked C/M Disraelly to refer to the
proposed change that appears in the revised ordinance for clarification.
C/M Disraelly said that in the description and,in the earlier discussion
that took place based on the ordinance,they asked the architect in the
engineer's office to indicate where these divisions were and they
followed them based on the report from Jane Carroll's office.
C/M Disraelly said they followed these suggestions and a couple of questions
arose and it was pointed out by the City Attorney that they were using
the line that divides the two sections rather than the street in one case
so in the revised ordinance that Mr. Henning is presenting is the de-
scription of that line which separates Section 15 in District 3 and the
line separating Section 10 in District 2. C/M Disraelly said the only
other way it could have been done would have been to say those living
on both sides of 63rd St. and those living on both sides of 62nd St. belong
.to Section 10. He said Mr. Henning has proposed that they use that line
which separates Section 15 as the boundary line for that particular area.
C/M Disraelly said this is the only change that was made between the
proposal that was presented by the Redistricting Committee and what is
in the ordinance that has been prepared by his office.
Mr. Henning said this revised ordinance was:carefully written so that
the Redistricting Committee's intent was maintained. C/M Kravitz addressed
his continents to Phil Solomon by saying in District 1 there are only 5,139
registered electors with 22.8%; however, in Districts 2, 3 and 4 they
start with 5,600, 5,700 and 5,900 and the percentages run from 25.2% to
25.4% and 26.6%. C/M Kravitz asked if it could not have been worked out
to reduce some of the other districts and bring District 1 up to a 25%.
Mr. Solomon said in the Committee's judgment it could not be done, they
6/23/82
/pm
did everything possible including listening to the public. Mr. Solomon
said the committee welcomed comments from the public and they called the
newspapers and they felt if possible District 1 should be brought up
to 24% and the difference is when there are 4 districts with
lines in between with open spaces there is the problem of where the
population is dense as opposed to where there are fewer people. Mr.
Solomon said with the computers and legal talent available to them they
found it impossible to divide the districts equally. C/M Kravitz said
on the present districting,District 1 had 22.3% and under the proposed
it would be 22.8% which is only 1/2 of 1% by adding Section 14H for 117
which was taken out of District 2.
C/M Kravitz said with every other district they added 1,300 and 1,600
to make those changes and he questioned if they took part of another
section and added it to 2 and then took part of 2 it would bring all of
it into line at approximately 25%. C/M Kravitz said his point of inform-
ation at this time is if the committee has already discussed
this and taken this into consideration and this was their answer then he
is willing to accept that; however, if they did not go into that then he
would suggest that they reconsider and do something like that to equalize
the 4 districts.
Mr. Solomon said he knows C/M Kravitz's background is that of an
Accountant and there were people on the committee who were qualified
and they went into great detail and if they were to try to take a portion
of different areas they would have spots and then the word "gerrymandering"
would come in. Mr. Solomon said in the best judgment of the committee
this report is the best one they could submit.
C/M Disraelly said as was pointed out by Muriel Davis, this is not a
one-man, one -vote situation and they would try to have the same number
of potential candidates in each district but in order to add any people
to District 1 they would have had to add 1,352 more which would have
brought this back up to 6,400 or 30%. C/M Krantz said if you look at
the new map the lines are pretty straight and there is no gerrymandering
there. C/M Krantz asked Mr. Solomon how many meetings the Redistricting
Committee had and Mr. Solomon said there were a minimum of 8 and there were
7 people on the Committee. Mr. Solomon said there is a deadline to this
Committee and they had to have the report in no later than July 15 but in
the Committee's desire to do this properly they wanted to give the Council
the opportunity to study the report.
V/M Massaro said she personally feels the Committee did a marvelous job
and this was not an easy task. C/M Krantz MOVED that the report of the
Redistricting Committee be accepted and further that the Committee that
worked very diligently be discharged with thanks of the Council and every
citizen of the City. SECONDED by C/M Disraelly. C/M Kravitz said before
he voted he would like to make a statement that the Committee did an
outstanding job but he feels there is time until July 15 and he still
feels that District 1 could get better representation•
VOTE:
C/M Krantz AYE
C/M Kravitz NAY
C/M Disraelly AYE
V/M Massaro AYE
b) Jon Henning read the Ordinance by title. V/M Massaro pointed out that
this is a Revision dated June 23, 1982 of Temp. Ord. #989. C/M Disraelly
MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Ord. #989 adjusting the boundaries of the
election districts;although this is not.,the precise wording that was
presented to Council by the Redistricting Committee, it does carry out
the metes and bounds that were in the concept that they presented. He
said there are no changes in this Ordinance from what the map indicates
but any changes made in the revision are purely for clarification and
since Section 2 provides that the map attended hereto is the official
map there should be no problem with the descriptions here. He said his
MOTION is to ADOPT Temp. Ord. on first reading and any member of the
public can speak on this at the second hearing. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
- 12 - 6/23/82
/pm
Robert Sokol, a member of the Redistricting Committee said the Committee
owes a considerable debt to C/M Disraelly for his outstanding job in
assisting the Committee in reaching its conclusions and to Phil Solomon,
Chairman of the Committee for the excellent job in running the Committee.
33. S' gnal,ization for:
a)gNW 64tInstallation
and57thQSt. - Discussion and possible action.
b) Commercial Blvd. and Woodlands Blvd. - Discussion and possible
action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent (Page 2)
a) APPROVED, b) APPROVED.
a) Authority for the City Manager to qo to bid on the traffic sianal
installation at NW 64th Ave. and 57th St.
C/M Disraelly said this item was discussed at a prior meeting for a
traffic signalization at 64th Ave. and 57th St. and the County indicated
that they would assist with the installation provided that the City
handled the left turn lanes that would be required for the proper signal-
ization at that intersection. He said this work is currently being
done by the Public Works Department and when that is completed the
County will be doing the design work for the installation but the City
must pay for the installation of the traffic lights.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that the City Manager be authorized to solicit bids
for the installation of traffic lights at the intersection of 64th Ave.
and 57th St. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
b) Authority for the City Manager to solicit bids for the installation of
the traffic light for -Woodlands and Commercial Blvd.
V/M Massaro said the traffic light would be supplied by the County along
with all the equipment used and the installation cost would be borne by
the City. C/M Disraelly MOVED that the City Manager be authorized to
solicit bids for the installation of a traffic light at the intersection
of Commercial Blvd. and Woodlands Blvd. He said there is no road con-
struction required because all left turn lanes are in at that particular
area and the engineering will be provided by the DOT. SECONDED by C/M
Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
34. Canal Release_ Requested by Colony West Executive Golf Course -
Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent(Page 2)
City request the South Florida Water Management
District not to release for further City review.
V/M Massaro said this canal reservation is by the Colony West Executive
Golf Course and she said Council does not want to release this for the
present time. She said they should ask the South Florida Water Manage-
ment District to refrain from any release for a period which Council
should decide on. C/M Disraelly said this was Agendized by Consent at
the request of the Colony West owners in order to get a release from the
South Florida Water Management District. He said Council normally turns
to the South Florida Water Managment District to get their input and ask
them to have the Council review it. He said since this was only received
by the Council within the last 24 hours he MOVED that the City request
that South Florida Water Management District not release this canal
- 13 - 6/23/82
/pm
reservation until such time as members of Council have had the opportunity
to review it and the Water Management District is so informed as to its
feeling by the proper City Officials. He said action cannot take place
until July 14 and shortly after that meeting they will be advised as to
Council's feeling. V/M Massaro added that the City Attorney and the
City Engineer should compose a letter to go to the South Florida Water
Management District. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
C/M Disraelly requested that the City Clerk be sure to have this item
put on the July 14 Agenda. V/M Massaro said action should be taken
immediately on this and the City Manager said their letter indicates
that failure to reply within 30 days from the date of their letter, which
would be July 8, could possibly be grounds for approval without the City's
input. V/M Massaro said since the time element is such a crucial factor,
a telephone call following this up is in order and the City Attorney
said he would do this.
V/M MASSARO RECESSED THE MEETING FOR LUNCH UNTIL 2:00.
- 14 - 6/23/82
/pm
TAPE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 2:00 P.M.
#4
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Vice Mayor Helen Massaro
Councilman Irving Disraelly
Councilman David E. Krantz
Councilman Philip B. Kravit2
.ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Mayor Walter W. Ealck
35. BROWN & CALDWELL -- CONSULTING ENGINEERS - 201 PROGRAM - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
V/M Massaro said that there had been a request from the city's consulting
engineers, Williams, Hatfield and Stoner, to hire experts Brown and
Caldwell with respect to the 201 Program update evaluation. C/M Disraell
MOVED to agendize the item for consideration and action. C/M Krantz
SECONDED the MOTION.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
36. MONTWOOD, INC.- STIPULATION #3 - Discussion and Possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
(See Page 33)
V/M Massaro point out a matter which had turned up with the Montwood
Inc. regarding their Stipulation #3. She added that there was some-
thing that was inadvertently left out. She wished to agendize and
discuss possible action on the subject.
C/M Kravitz MOVED to agendize this item. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION.
vnTp.-
ALL VOTED AYE
35. BROWN & CALDWELL -- CONSULTING ENGINEERS - 201 PROGRAM - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED hiring of Brown
& Caldwell for backup and
support to Williams, Hatfield
and Stoner, fee not to exceed
$2,000.00.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to engage the .services of Brown &;..Caldwell, experts
in the field, consulting wastewater engineers from Atlanta, Georgia, to
be available to Williams, Hatfield and Stoner if needed for backup and
support at a fee not to exceed $2,000.00. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION
VOTE ALL VOTED AYE
12. BRUCE EGAN - REZONING PETITION 44--Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #987 -
a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting, and
Affidavit of Mailing.
b) Consideration of application.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
PETITION DENIED.
C/M Disraelly pointed out that they had before them a statement from
Fort Lauderdale News -Sun Sentinel that the advertising had been done
and a certification from the City Clerk that the mailings have been
made and MOVED the acceptance of the Affidavit of Publication, Mailing
and posting. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION.
1TL0 I] =
ALL VOTED AYE
C/M Disraelly said that they had received a letter just a few minutes
ago, dated June 21, 1982 from the law firm of Goldberg, Young and
Goldberg and Borkson, P.A. addressed to Carol Evans, Assistant City
Clerk regarding petitions for rezoning #4-Z--82 and #5-Z-82, Bruce Egan.
He read the letter into the record, which requested that the two petition
be withdrawn from the agenda. (ed. note: letter on file in city clerk's
office) .
-15- 6/23/82
C/M Disraelly asked the City Attorney if these petitions were withdrawn,
would they have to refile a new petition and a new concept site plan and
would they have to go through the Planning Commission again, or was this
just another way of saying they want to postpone this petition until a
later date.
The City Attorney felt that the way it was stated in the letter, "refile
at a later date", he did not think they wished it to be agendized. C/M
Disraelly felt this should be clarified as he wished to have the public
hearing and move on the subject. V/M Massaro asked Mr. Henning,
regardless of the request, if the council still has the authority to
move forward and act on this and refuse the request? The City Attorney
said that they could take that action. He added that if they wished to
take action having agendized it, over his objection, he did not think
that would preclude him from refiling the request at a later date.
The City Attorney said he would treat the letter as a request to continue
the matter, which could be accepted or denied by the council. V/M
Massaro asked if the council should move to accept or deny. The City
Attorney said that would be the next step.
C/M Disraelly added that at the pre -agenda meeting, council had this
letter from Goldberg, Young and Goldberg dated June 18th which was the
day after the pre -agenda meeting, asking for these items to be tabled
again. C/M Disraelly mentioned that he had asked at that meeting that
this be agendized because that was the date to which it had been tabled.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that council proceed with the petition as it is on
the agenda today. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
Mr. Dan Oyler, representing Bruce Egan stated that Mr. Egan wished
those two items to be removed permanently, not just from this agenda.
Jon Henning read the Ordinance by title only. C/M Disraelly pointed
out that this had been advertised as a public hearing, but suggested
to persons in the audience that wished to be heard, that they need not
as he was going to move to deny this petition. He felt he had
sufficient arguments for the Council to get their approval to deny.
Mr. Dan Oyler added that they had had a difficult time when they went
before the Planning Commission and since that time, they had decided
not to go ahead with the rezoning. Tie said he did not care how
council handled it, he just wanted to -make short order of it, to
either withdraw it or they would refile or something. V/M Massaro
told Mr. Oyler that she hoped he understood that this would be a
dead issue, no matter what they wanted to do, any monies that had
been spent, any fees that are due are still due, that whatever they
want to initiate in the future will be right from the beginning. He
said he understood that.
V/M Massaro opened the Public Hearing.
Monsignor Donnelly of St. Malachy's Church said he had serious
objections to this zoning request in view of the fact that they will
deny this petition, he felt he would hold his comments to a later time.
V/M Massaro closed the Public Hearing.
Richard Rubin added into the record and for council's notification
that this petition was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 5,
1982 and that following discussion, Commissioner Becker moved that
the rezoning Petition #4-Z-82 be denied, and there was a 4--1 vote
in favor of the denial.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that Petiton #4-2-82 amending the prior zoning
ordinance be denied and that the petitioner cannot make application
for a minimum period of six months. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION.
► GRIAM
ALL VOTED AYE
-16- 6/23/82
/nrr
13. BRUCE EGAN - REZONING PETITION #5-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #988 -
a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of
Posting, Affidavit of Mailing.
b) Consideration of Application.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
PETITION DENIED
Jon Henning read the ordinance by title only. C/M Disraelly MOVED
the acceptance of Publication, Posting and Mailing. C/M Krantz
SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
V/M�Massaro opened the Public Hearing.
Saul Messinger, Vanguard Village wanted to point out how many
times the people of Vanguard Village had appeared in response to
this petition for rezoning. lie wondered whether this was an
attempt to wear them down.
Monsignor Donnelly, St. Malachy's Church, said regarding this
decision of Petition #5-2-82 he was in opposition to it because
it was connected with Petition #4-Z-82 which would have serious
consequences for the church property. He added that they would
be having a school there and there were objections without going
into it at this time. He felt that since 4-Z-82 was denied, he
thought 5-Z-82 would also be denied. V/M Massaro closed the
Public Hearing.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that Petition #5-Z-82 be DENIED for a period
of not less than 6 months. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
14. MILTON LAVERNIA, INC. PETITION #8-Z-82 - Temp. Reso. #2318 -
Discussion and possible action to grant two limited waivers
to parking requirements of Section 18 of the Code for a pro-
posed medical office building to be located on the west side
of University Drive south of N.W. 71 Court and in front of
the existing medical office building.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVAL of Amended Temp. Reso. #2318 RESO. NO. R-82- PASSED.
for 900 Parking. DENIED Waiver Reauest
for 62 Parking Spaces.
Jon Hennina read the resolution by title only. Richard Rubin,
City Planner gave council a brief background and summary of the
peti.tio.i.
He described the location and surrounding areas involved. He
also informed them that presently the site.is vacant and.undeveloped.
The existing medical office building is approximately 85% rented
at tnis time. It is completed and standing. To they north of this
building is University Hospital.
He added that while Mr. Lavernia was going through the review of
the waiver, he has also been submitting site plans to the city for
approval. Mr. Rubin stated that according to the ordinance of tie
City, the total amount of building that could be placed on this
property, utilizing the parking that could be placed on the front
parcel, would provide for a building to be constructed in the area
that had been outlined on the map. That would be approximately
23�100 square feet. The application today is in two parts. No. 1,
-17- 6/23/82
/nrr
since the building only has half of it that goes on the ground,
it is on columns on the south half, Mr. Lavernia would like to
have permission from council to have 90 degree parking beneath
that building so that he can place parking between columns.
The second application is to receive a waiver of the parking
requirements of the city in order to construct additional
10,182 square foot building which he pointed out on the map.
Mr. Rubin had sent a memo to council informing them that he was
in agreement with the first half of the request for 90 degree
parking as one could not angle park between columns. The Planning
Commission also agreed to recommend this to council. Mr. Rubin
added that as far as the second half of the application,
requesting council to utilize some of the parking spaces that
exist today in the building to the rear to help them account for
the additional building area they wish to place in the front.
He continued that the Planning Commission reviewed the application
and upon recommendation of the City Planner, the planning commission
recommended denying the waiver.
Mr. Rubin tried to clear up the second waiver. He said utilizing
the 9 available spaces in the rear, after
they put more islands in the rear, required by code, there is still
a shortage in the front portion of the building of 8,732 square
feet. If that is divided by the parkinq requirements, the
result would be 61 spaces that they are short. Therefore, the
second waiver is for council to waive 61 spaces so that he could
build in the front of the proposed building along University Drive.
He added that he would actually be shy 70 spaces as he was borrowing
9 spaces from the rear.
Mr. Fred Heidgerd, Attorney for the petitioner, wanted to correct the
last figures;, given the 9 spaces it comes up with a net shortage of 61.
He continued that you put a unified control on the two parcels. if
you borrow the 9 spaces from the rear, it comes up with a net short-
age of 61 spaces, the net waiver request as reflected in the minutes
of the Planning Commission is 61. He added that if the waiver was
granted and pursued, under this waiver request put forth by the
applicant, they would certainly be bound because they are opening
up to development at the new code requirements, under the old
parcel. He continued that if they were utilizing some of the back
parcel they would have to bring it up to code.
Mr. Heidgerd continued that Mr. Lavernia was the contract vendee on the
front parcel and Mr. Ralph "Leonard is the owner
seeking council's discretion under this waiver request in two
segments.
If this application is not granted, it possibly puts this
project in jeopardy and this council might lose a unique opportunity
to deal with these buildings in a common design. He added that what
Mr. Lavernia was suggesting is to join,by cross access agreement,
the two parcels together,
He said that the back building, at the present time, houses medical
specialists, not General Practitioners and there is less of a
load on the parking, but at this time they have run a parking survey
on the back lot. He pointed out that council had in their packet
certain information which has been put together for this parking
survey which reflects different times and the counts on the back
parcel. He said that at the present time there are 215 spaces and
that is.of course,in excess of what they are borrowing and the
parking survey reflects that approximately 43% usage of this back
parking lot. There were also pictures which showed open spaces
in every instance and around the perimeter of the parking space,
not utilized at all.
6/23/82
_18_ /nrr
V/M Massaro questioned how many offices there were in the building.
Mr. Heidgerd answered that there were 21 offices. She questioned
if that was suites or offices. Mr. Heidgerd told her there was a
minimum of 8 rooms per suite. C/M Disraelly added that the suites
were all different sizes, the smallest being 690 square feet and
the largest 2376 feet and they vary, all sizes in between.
Mr. Heidgerd added that there was a letter from the Hospital in
which they heartily endorsed this project. He also pointed out
that this building would be off to the side and would not block
the view of the back building. In the new building
, there was just a net effect of 17 square feet.
He added that there have been ,several changes on the computations
they are up to 63 parking spaces needed. Based on that square
footage, the net effect is 52 parking spaces as reflected in the
diagram, and this includes the parking waiver request, but not
as per the occupational licenses.
Mr. Heidgerd continued that they are ready to move forward and be
bound by any conditions put forth by the council at this time.
He added that what the addition to the building does is make it a
more feasible project. for the developer. He felt it did not provide
a detriment but instead many benefits to this city.
V/M Massaro opened the Public Hearing. No one wished to be heard.
V/M Massaro closed the Public Hearing.
C/M Disraelly asked Jon Henninq since this resolution was for two
waivers, could this be made into two resolutions.
Mr. Henning said it could be written in two different resolutions,
each addressing one waiver request, or one Resolution addressing
both applications.
C/M Disraelly pointed out that he was uncomfortable with two waivers
on one resolution. C/M Disraelly addressed first the waiver for 90
degree parking for a medical building to be erected on the property
east of the "Big Max Plat", if an office building was constructed
there and parking was provided beneath that office building he MOVED
that a waiver be granted for 90 degree parking beneath that office
building. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
C/M Kravitz asked Mr. Heidgerd if it would be of any benefit
to them to get just that approved and the other disapproved if the
council separates them. Mr. Heidgard said that at this point unless
there is a waiver of some number of parking spaces, the project is
doomed. On the other hand, if this project moves forward with some
number of spaces, they would need the 90 degree, so the answer was
yes and no.
V/M Massaro indicated if they get a rejection on the waiver for the
number of parking spaces that they are shy, and they do get 900parking
approved, at least they will know what they are .working with and
perhaps they can redesign the project to be more acceptable.
She could see how this might be helpful
to them in either case. C/M Disraelly said that was the reason for
his motion, because they can then make a determination because we
have not indicated yet what the motion will be on the second phase.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
-19- 6/23/82
/nrr
C/M Disraelly pointed that waivers have been granted on occasion
by council after the fact, when an extraordinary situation was
created requiring a waiver. He added that council has never to
his knowledge granted a waiver before construction of a building.
He added that if they review the minutes of the Planning Commission
of June 2nd, it was indicated by the members of that commission
that the fact that there was an underutilization of parking spaces
in the rear building, a situation that could change, they further
stated that the parking should be above the minimum requirements
to insure that if doctors take in associates, they will be able to
move in. C/M.Disraelly continued that in the review of the parking
hours that was given to them, several of these doctors could have
been performing surgery at the hospital and therefore had no patients
available, but in the normal situation, the council's computation
of six spaces per doctor is not abnormal when one considers that
there is a secretary, a nurse, a doctor each of whom is parking,
then consider one patient in the office, one patient leaving the
office and one patient coming into the office. That was where
they got the six spacesper doctor. He added that it was further
indicated by the Planning Commission that the hardship would be
self imposed because they are requesting that the waiver be granted
in order to build a larger building instead the waiver to come
afterwards.
C/M Disraelly said that it did not seem to him that this council
can in good conscience create a situation that would open the
doors for any developer from this time forward to come in and say
that the council had granted a waiver to somebody to build a larger
building than the ordinance for parking permits, why can't every
developer from this time forward do the same. He added that they
try to make sure that people can park in the city and this is the
rationale behind this., C/M Disraelly said that perhaps they should
review the parking ordinance insofar as the fractions of required
spaces as they currently exist and he asked the City Planner to
review the parking ordinance where it says any fraction requires the
next space and that perhaps they could use a half a space as a
determining factor as to upward and below, so
that they can create a larger ability for parking within the city
ordinances. He felt that should be reviewed at once as it might
have an affect on this particular building if they get a cross
waiver from Big Max to this building.
V/M Massaro asked Mr. Rubin if these fractions would affect this
project. Mr. Rubin answered that when they computed this the back
building had additional parking unassigned, they could lend to the
front building according to the proper legal documents. Mr. Rubin
stated that they had computed each specific doctor in that building
based upon their exact square footage and therefore, there were
fractions involved in the computations and they had to round up to
the next number. He thought perhaps it would be approximately 10
spaces difference. That would mean that they were still about 50
spaces short.
Larry Friedman, Director of Leasing for Fraga International Realty,
developers of McNab Plaza North.,said that for the
council's information his estimate was that the way the ordinance
was written it probably cost them 20 or 30 parking spaces. He added
that that was the difference to them in their ability or inability
to lease to a major restaurant at the present time. He said that
right now they could not.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that a resolution be prepared for the second
half of this requested waiver and that when that petition has been
prepared by the City Attorney that council action shall indicate
that it has been DENIED. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
6/23/82
-20- /nrr
15. TYLER RESTAURANT DESIGN, INC. -- Petition #11-Z-82 - Temp.
Reso. #2319 - Discussion and possible action to grant a
Special Exception to permit a restaurant in a B-2 (Planned
.Business) zoning district at McNab Plaza North, 7160
University Drive, Tamarac.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED Temp. Reso.
#2319
Jon Henning
City Planner
proposed to
South Wing.
on a special
RESO. NO. PASSED.
read the resolution by title only. Richard Rubin,
informed the council that the Tyler Restaurant
go into the McNab Plaza North Shopping Plaza on the
Mr. Rubin felt that all questions normally asked
exception were answered yes.
V/M Massaro opened this to public. No one wishing .to be heard
V/M Massaro closed the public hearing.
C/M Disraelly asked about the distance of the dumpster. It was
pointed out by the city clerk on a sketch that it was right out-
side their back door.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the adoption of Temp. Reso. #2319 granting
Special Use Exception to Tyler Restaurant Design, McNab Plaza
North. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
16. BURGLAR ALARM -
action to amend
for a filing fee
of False Alarms.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED Ordinance
#986
ALL VOTED AYE
Temp. Ord. #986 - Discussion and possible
Section II of Ordinance 82-34 to provide
for the processing of appeals to Notices
Second Reading.
ORDINANCE NO. - bPASSED.
Jon Henning read the ordinance by title only. V/M Massaro opened
this to the public as it was a public hearing. No one wished to
be heard and V/M Massaro closed the public hearing.
C/M Disraelly MOVED. the adoption to Temp. #986 as revised June
18th, 1982 for second and final reading. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
C/M Kravitz said that at first reading he raised a question that
he felt that the residents who are using the system tied into
the Police Department should
have the right if they feel they are being assessed improperly,
that they should be given the privilege to come before the commi-
tee without having to pay a filing fee. V/M Massaro pointed out
that they had revised that on June 18th and it takes care of that
matter. It was changed to read, "a filing shall be paid by the
appellant alarm user to the city upon filing an appeal in an amount
set by resolution of the City Council. The filing fee shall be
refunded to the appellant alarm user upon a final order by the
Burglar Alarm Review Committee reversing the law enforcement
officer's allegation of false alarm".
C/M Kravitz said he realized that, but was going a step further,
sometimes the resident feels they are right and the committee who
handles these appeals feels they are wrong and therefore, they are
going to say that the appeal is not granted and that the $10.00
will stand. He felt on that basis that they should not charge a
filing fee for making an appeal. He added that people pay taxes
for that purpose, to get the protection and he thought that the
committee tries to give them whatever they are entitled to and
he didnot think council should take away their privilege of coming
before the committee because they do not want to pay the $10.00
and it still remains questionable whether they are right or wrong.
V/M Massaro said that that was the actual purpose of this, to
avoid the frivolous appeals that they have corning in, because
they know that they have a false alarm, they admit they did some-
thing that caused the false alarm, they admit that they were
careless, but it doesn't cost them anything, so they come in. If
they were permitted to continue, the city would have to increase
everyone's annual fees to take care of the cost involved in this.
She added that the fair thing was to charge those that were
committing this type of act.
-21-
6/23/82
V/M Massaro added that if he were to read the police reports and
see where they admit it, that they did something to cause that
false alarm and did not take the trouble to use the time that is
permitted by ordinance to cancel that alarm and allowed the police
to come out there where they were jeopardizing . their lives and
the lives of everyone on the streets and where three accidents
have ocurred where police were hospitalized cars were
coapletely demolished. She thought this was a very small fee to
charge for them to make this appeal. She thought they would be
more careful to make sure their appeal has validity before they
file it.
C/M Kravitz understood her feelings and was perfectly in accord
with what she was saying, but he would think that the committee
could handle it like a board of appeals wherein the court has
appeals that are handled strictly by written appeal. They do not
appear before you. He added it was just a written appeal and then
the committee could review it at their time. He added that there
then could be no fee or charge, but the people would feel they have
a right to come up on appeal without having to pay the charge.
V/M Massaro pointed out that they have to write now, and that was
the only way they could make an appeal. C/M Kravitz added that
as citizens they paid taxes for this protection and if they feel
that they are not incorrect, they have a right to be heard and they
should not be penalized by a fee for being heard.
C/M Disraelly added that at the first hearing they spoke about
frivolity in the handling of these previously. He
thought that every committee in the City where the public appears
before them with a written request, there is a fee for handling.
He pointed out the Beautification Committee, Board of Adjustment,
The Planning Commission all require fees in order to be heard, he
thought that this board was of the same type, even though the fee
they were establishing of $10.00 was a small fee, he thought it
would stop some of the frivolity and thought that taxes were not
involved in this at all since there was a fee paid for installation
and it was all part of the same Burglar Alarm Ordinance that they
are addressing.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the adoption of Temp. Ord. #986 as revised
,Tune 18th, 1982. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
COUNCILMAN KRANTZ - AYE
COUNCILMAN KRAVITZ- NAY
COUNCILMAN DISRAELLY-AYE
VICE MAYOR MASSARO -AYE
17. BURGLAR ALARM - Temp. Reso. #2306 - Discussion and possible
action to establish a filing fee for the processing of
appeals to Notices of False Alarms.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: RESO. NO. R - 82 - 1 & ! PASSED.
APPROVED Temp. Reso.
#2306
Jon Henning read the resolution by title only. C/M Disraelly
MOVED the adoption of Temp. Reso. #2306 as revised 6/18/82.
C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
6/23/82
-22- /nrr
TAPE #6 32. TAMARAC TOWN SQUARE -- (Southeast Shopping Center, Ina.) -
Discussion and possible action on:
a) Petition #16-Z--81 - Request for limited waiver to
parking requirements of Chapter 18 of the Code - Temp.
Reso. #2030.
b) Revised Site Plan pertaining to building modifications,
parking and vehicular circulation - Tem12. Reso. #2195.
c) Construction of Sidewalks.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
a) Limited Parking Waiver
APPROVED with changes. Temp. Reso. #2030 RESO. NO. R -261j PASSED.
b) Revised Site Plan
APPROVED with changes RE50. NO. R— g;- v2PASSED.
c) Sidewalk - APPROVED
with changes.
a) Richard Rubin, City Planner said that this was three separate
requests, all three applications had been included on the one
drawing. He informed council that six months ago they had
approved one revision to this project showing one more lane
along 88th Avenue as required by Broward County and this was
the second request for changes. He wished to address each
change separately.
He asked council to note the outparcel that was indicated as
restaurants at the northeast corner of the property, with a
drive in facility. He said that previously the drive in
facility had a curving line, a curving driveway service to
reach it, the city requested and they have agreed to round
out the line and make it a straight shot into the pick-up
window. He added that secondly, related to this restaurant
there was angle parking in the original plan, the proposed
tenants do not accept the angle parking and they ask for a
90 degree parking.. He added that the City had reviewed it and
candidly speaking, he felt that 90 degree parking would be a
better solution than angle at this particular location, since
it would be access to this area from both directions, from the
east and from the northwest.
He said the second area of changes, and it was just brought to
staff's attention 3 or 4 days ago, that was behind the retail
Phase I pavillion there is a 15 x 15 foot refrigerator to be
placed out there to serve a new tenant who is a restaurant.
He added that the owners know that the restaurant will have to
come to council for special exception, but they have requested
a building permit. Fie said city could not issue a permit
until the site plan shows the building which was now on the
drawing. He added that if council approved the project today
they would also be including if they so chose the approval of
the 15 foot square refrigerator unit.
He added the third change relates to the request for a waiver
of angle parking for 90 degree parking.: He said that the reason
the applicant had requested a. change was that the parking behind
the building was for employees only and that the 90 degree parking
would be more convenient and they could put more spaces there.
He is not increasing the size of the building because that had
already been fixed, He added
that the request was just to allow more spaces for more employees
giving them more flexibility. He said that while they were
reviewing this C/M Disraelly had noticed that when trucks come in
these spaces behind Publix, they have a hard time leaving the
center going around the entire shopping center and through the
parking lot to get out to Pine Island Rd. lie added that a turn around
was suggested at the end of the parking bay so that a truck could
turn around and go back out to Southgate Blvd. and if at all
possible, he thought it a better solution than trying to mix the
6/23/82
-23- /nrr
truck traffic with the parking traffic in the front of the center.
He asked Council to recall there were no driveways onto 81st St.
by stipulation with the owners about 3 or 4 years ago, therefore
he would like to keep truck traffic on Southgate Blvd. as much as
possible. He added that the 90 degree parking also continues
along the southside of the property and along the east and the
justification for this, wherever they see 90 degree angle parking
there is two way traffic and when you have two way traffic it is
easier to have 90 degree traffic.
He said that another area where they are requesting 900 degree .angle.
parking was behind the bank which is another outparcel. He added
that in this area his office asked two questions, one, can they
verify by survey that there is adequate back up room with the
spaces .
Secondly,
due to the design in this area he did not believe that 90 degree
angle is justified, therefore the city planner is recommending the
other requests are reasonable, however this one area behind the
bank would be better to leave at angle parking.
He said that they had not received any surveys to verify the 24
feet. He added that the point was very clear, if you have X amount
of room for a drive in service behind a car with angle parking
then you put 90 degree parking in, you need more room behind the
car for the car to back out.
V/M Massaro asked if this plan indicates 24 feet and it has not been
verified, she would like to ask the engineer if he could unequivocally
state that there is 24 feet there. Dan Lovett, engineer answered that
when they started laying out the rock and asphalt, there will be a
24 foot drive there. He added that it was shown on the site plan as
24 feet and if they deviate from that they would be in big trouble.
He added that there was no way he could verify it today as he did
not have the survey, it has not been staked out in the field, but
his plans say 24 feet and if it caused any problem on the board,
they will cancel it and change it back to angle parking, as was
previously on the site plan.
V/M Massaro said that she liked the 90 degree parking there because
then they can park from either direction and when you look at the
way the angle parking is laid out, if they can't park here, they
have to go around. Mr. Lovett said that when they lay it out in
the field and it is less than 24 feet they will go to angle.. He
added that the city planner to go out in the field and check it
with them whenever he would like to do that.
Richard Rubin said the problem was that when they had angle parking
it showed 24 feet but when you go to 90 degree parking, the parking
space rotates around and is obviously going to go farther into the
island, but the island does not show that it has been relocated or
decreased in size. He added that something had to give
and what was going to happen was that the parking space was going
to go farther into the asphalt surface and that was why they asked
them to verify the 24 feet.
Mr. Lovett added that the same would hold true wherever they had
the angle parking. Mr. Rubin added that they had had greater than
24 feet. Mr. Lovett said that when they designed the perimeter
parking, they designed it such, knowing that they might come in for
a limited waiver for the 90 degree, so when they designed it, if
they did come in for their waiver, they could change it to 90 degree,
and not add asphalt. He added when they had it angle parking, angular
parking stalls actually take up more room because they are deeper,
but they had more than 20 feet there. He said that in the field
6/23/82
-24- /nrr
when the City Planner sees the grade stakes, that they are not 24
feet, then they will make them angular, and if they are 24 feet
they would like the right to -put them at 24 feet, if the City
Planner agrees there is sufficient island between them and he
thought the code called for a three foot island separation.
C/M Disraelly asked him then to change the mylar accordingly. He
thought that part of the problem when you look at the width of the
12 foot utility easement, it does not look like 6 foot on either
side. C/M Disraelly added that they would have to give
the city an "as built" and that would show the 24 feet.
Mr. Lovett mentioned that it was not critical to get the 90
degree parking, just that it was a better situation. C/M Disraelly
questioned the total number of parking spaces in the new comput-
ation. Mr. Lovett said"there were 791 parking spaces. Mr. Rubin
said there was a surplus of 81 to cover the restaurants and medical
facilities and so forth. Mr. Rubin continued that he would like
in the motion if the waiver is approved, to state that no additional
building area can utilize those extra spaces that they are permit-
ing. He added that they are allowing 29 extra spaces by this waiver.
C/M Disraelly questioned if this site plan also makes some changes
in the size of some buildings based on the original site plan. Mr.
Lovett answered that there were two segments to the building, 100
feet to 80 feet. He added that they had also dropped 100 feet on
the side of the drug store, and on the retail stores on.the north
side of publix they had reduced the first 8000 feet of retail store
from 100 foot to 80 foot and moved the parking down and then they
reduced a portion of the 13,000 feet area down to 80 feet also.
C/M Disraelly asked if the dumpster in the back of the northern
building in the loading zone, will present a problem? He
added that the garbage man could not come in there when there was
a truck being unloaded. Mr. Lovett said if they wanted him to
move that dumpster, it would not present a problem. fie said he
would move one and two over, and they he would take 2 spaces from
elsewhere and move them over, he did not think he would have to
eliminate any spaces, just move them over.
V/M Massaro questioned the handicapped spaces and what the require-
ments were. C/M Disraelly answered that the law was 1 space for the
first 20 spaces, 1 space for the next 80 spaces and 1 space for the
next 100 spaces a total of 9 handicapped spaces. They had all 9
handicapped.
Mr. Rubin said there were two other.items he would like to discuss
on this item. One item related to the parking lot are the dumpsters
behind the new restaurant, where the 15 x 15 foot refrigerator will
be located, Mr. Oyler,and his client have recognized the need for
more dumpsters in the area, based on various conversations and they
are requesting to be able to red line on the drawing today, one
additional dumpster, in addition to the one that is directly behind
the restaurant, and the one that is in the island just to the west
of it. Mr. Rubin added that they have relocated one dumpster and
in addition to the two that they see now, they would like to take
one dumpster and place it against the building and put another one
to the south of it and then move the parking spaces down, and they
do have room so that they will have room for the extra dumpster.
C/M Disraelly said that then they were changing the turning angle.
Mr. Lovett said it really did not, because the radius of the turning
angle right now is like a circle so that they have the room. They
were just going to move one of the dumpsters. He added what they
would like to do with the extra dumpster out in the parking lot,
6/23/82
-25- /nrr
they did not think that they needed it, at least for the store.
He said it was a little far removed from the store and hard to
get to. He added that they had four others within that area,
and there were only two heavy users, the drug store and the
restaurant in that immediate vicinity, the rest of them are
retail stores. He said that they did not need it now and if
they needed it at some future date, they would like permission
to put it in and not have to come back to council when they did
want to put it in.
C/M Disraelly felt they did need it. He was concerned when he
sees MCNab Plaza now. He added that on the big south building
there was only one dumpster for the whole length of that for
15,000 square feet there was only one dumpster.
V/M Massaro added that retail stores create a lot of trash with
their cartons and things.
Richard Rubin said the Vice Mayor was
concerned with the people living to the west of there, having
access to the shopping center by walking over a sidewalk instead
of having to walk into a. major roadway.
C/M Disraelly asked if they were going to have no trespassing signs
to the north and south of the 100 feet. Mr. Lovett explained that
according to the homeowners, they had a problem since the berm was
put up with sunbathers, fishermen, loiterers on the berm. He added
that they had called the police several times but they cannot come
out to a site unless it is posted. He said he would like to post
two no -trespassing signs on N.W. 81st Street and one on Southgate
Blvd., so if the homeowners catch someone there, they have the
right to call the police department and have them come out and
vacate them from the premises.
Mr. Lovett added that several other things were brought up by the
residents that they will have to comply with or try to comply with,
behind the Publix supermarket. They are going to raise the buffer
with excess fill to a height of more than 6 feet (by court order)
but will still be maintainable.
C/M Disraelly pointed out that at McNab Plaza when a similar
problem occured on 74th Avenue, they put a concrete wall, about
3 feet high, broken with wood slats because the people over
there were concerned about the same thing. They planted some
trees and made a little park which no one intrudes upon. A
similar wall in this location might be the answer.
C/M Disraelly said he was talking about a 3 foot high fence from
the canal to the curbing at Southgate Boulevard. Mr. Lovett
suggested planting a hedge to keep out intruders to which C/M
Disraelly agreed.
Mr. Rubin said that on the sidewalks that will be placed north and
south side of the building on 81st Street and Southgate Boulevard,
there is a typical cross section which the city has requested the
developer put in and sign that he will agree to construct according
to that design. His first question was if that was signed and he
had not seen it yet. V/M Massaro said there was a letter signed to
the effect that the developer will construct the sidewalks accord-
ingly.
6/23/82
-26- /nrr
V/M Massaro spoke'about putting a fence at the headwall and putting
the guardrail out to the curb, but they found that there is a bolt
that goes through the guardrail and through the block that is between
the concrete post and the guardrail and that block must remain there.
She continued that the DOT insists on that. She added that the bolt
that goes through there has a nut on it, and it is a hazard if some-
one is riding along there with a bike they are apt to run into that
and really tear their leg open, so they decided that did not look
like a very good idea, and they decided that the best thing to do
would be to move that guardrail back to the headwall and gain as
much space as they can, she thought they would gain about a foot.
She added that the rest of it would be in concrete, they put concrete
under it and around it, to the curb. V/M Massaro said there is
nothing that can be done about the height and width of the guardrail.
However, due to possible danger to bike riders, would they be willing
to put up a fence there as well as the guardrail. Mr. Lovett said
they would be willing to put a five foot fence there.
V/M Massaro noted that the guardrail that exists at the 81st Street
crossing is in a very good location with plenty of space for at
least a 4 or 5 foot fence from the guardrail to the curb.
She continued that this sidewalk was going to be up above the
existing pavement and they are going to put a type D concrete curb
on the edge of the pavement to protect the end of the sidewalk and
the edge of the pavement. She added that it affords some
protection to the people who are using the sidewalk from the traffic,
and there would be a full sidewalk to the guardrail post.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to APPROVE limited parking waiver Temp. Reso.
#2030 for the Southeast Shopping Center based on the Revised Site
Plan dated June 16, 1982 as redlined today,and that the area to
the west of the bank, if it is changed from 90 degree parking, the
90 degree parking will be reviewed by the City Planner to certify
that there is 24 feet between the island and the proposed parking
bays in back of the bank. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
b) Revised Site Plan
C/M Disraelly MOVED the acceptance of the Revised Site Plan dated
June 16, 1982 with the changes in the west moving two parking
spaces to the north of Publix, adding one dumpster enclosure to
the retail store to the'south of the drugstore area, the moving
of one parking space in that location to provide for it, placing
of a hedge along Southgate Blvd. between the canal and the western
entrance to the site plan. There are no changes that would require
a revision of the development review status sheet. C/M Krantz
SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
-27- 6/23/82
/nrr
c. Sidewalk -
C/M Disraelly MOVED the approval of the new site plan
for the construction of side-
walk on'Southgate Blvd. in conformance with a letter dated June
23, 1982 from Southeast Center signed by Gerald Heiger with the
addition of a 5 foot high chain link fence to be placed south of
the proposed relocated guardrail, not less than 9 gauge, to be
moved to the edge of the existing concrete headwall, the sidewalk
to run from the existing curb and gutter and a new concrete side-
walk on 81st Street between the existing pavement and existing
guardrail with the construction of a new type D gutter at the
pavement. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
27. FRYBERGH OFFICE BUILDING/FIREMAW S FUND AMERICAN LIFE --
and possible action on:
a) Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2320
b) Landscape Plan
c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement
d) Water Retention Agreement
e) Waranty Deed for 40-foot right-of-way on University
Temp. Reso. #2321
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
a) APPROVED Temp. Reso. #2320
T•Tith chanties.
b) APPROVED provided trees on
University Drive are 10' high.
c) APPROVED
d) APPROVED
e) APPROVED Temp. Reso. #2321
Discussic
Drive
RESO. NO. R-/PASSED.
RESO. Tdb. R- ,:t' PASSED.
a) SITE PLAN - Tem Reso. #2320 - Jon Henning read the resolution
by title only. Mr. Rubin showed a rendering of the elevation of a
two story fireman's.insurance building that was being proposed to
be developed by Mr. Fryberqh.
He said they had a very small
site of 100 foot x 300 foot and they have complied with every
regulation of the city.
Mr. Rubin continued that the site plan showed a;6,000 square fcot
building located on the east side of University Drive north of
Tropical Gardens Nursery. .
Mr. Rubin pointed out 27 parking spaces being shown
on the plan, which is required. They are utilizing the
frontage road system along University Drive because this is a
platted parcel that does not have legal access to University Drive.
He added that this was originally platted in 1971 with a limited
access easement and an 83 foot egress ingress
easement to the
north and to the south. He continued that they are going to pave
the driveway south of their building so that there will be a safe
access to the Tropical Gardens paved driveway.
C/M Disraelly questioned if this lined up with Tropical Gardens
paved driveway on the west to which Mr. Rubin said yes.-
There was a temporary permit for a
parking on gravel, and they will be paving their portion of the
asphalt with a 24 foot wide drive across it.
The beautification plan has been reviewed, approved by the committee
the planning commission reviewed the site plan and recommended
approval of it to the city council.
-28- 6/23/82
/nrr
Mr. Rubin said there was a problem with the Water and Sewer
Agreement requiring a change from one E.R.C. which is the
requirement of a 5/8" meter to 2 1/2 E.R.C. based on a 1"
meter.. He added that the fee had been likewise changed from
$1,000.00 to $2,500.00 which has not been changed on the
Development Review Status Sheets.
Mr. Rubin said that in addition, the Broward County Land Use
Plan requires that we cannot issue a permit for any develop-
ment along major arteries unless we have the proper right-of-
way width. He has submitted a warranty deed for the addition-
al 40 feet of right-of-way so that the City would have a total
of 100 feet, as required by the Broward County Land Use Plan
and the City's land use plan.
Mr. Rubin added that today they would also have to pay the
drainage retention fee.
C/M Disraelly questioned an "exit" sign which he thought should
say "stop" instead of "exit". C/M Disraelly's point being that
he would rather have people stop and look both ways, then make
the turn.
C/M Disraelly pointed out that the parking lot light standards were
not shown. Mr. Rubin said he had added a note, but that was
not adequate, they must show the light plan on the site plan.
Mr. Rubin pointed out that there were 3 lights in the rear of
the parking area. He added that there was one on the back
island, one along the walkway, and then one in the island on
the southside.
V/M Massaro mentioned the sprinkler systems. She said that
unquestionably the owner would have trouble with the well,
because no matter what they do to try and keep the rust out,
they won't be able to do it and will have to go to City Water.
She was not pushing that they use city water, but she hated to
see people spending thousands of dollars and then have to
convert it.
V/M Massaro added that it seems the chemicals are too expensive
and there is another type without chemicals but, it does not
work. She said that where there was a canal it was wonderful,
that works fine, but they did not have a canal.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2320 issuing
a development order for Frybergh Office Building which includes
the acceptance of the site plan where there will have been
added three light stanchions for the lights in the parking lot,
and the development review status sheet will show a change of
water and sewer contribution charges in the amount of $2,500.00
and this will be approved upon the receipt of a check for
drainage retention of $1,016.75 and a drainage improvement fee
of $75.40, a total of $3,592.15 which Mr. Frybergh gave a check.
C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
b) LANDSCAPE PLAN
ALL VOTED AYE
Mr. Rubin informed council that landscape plan was approved by
the Beautification Committee on May 17,1982 with a requirement
that trees in the right-of-way be a minimum of 10 feet high.
C/M Disraelly MOVED the APPROVAL of the Landscape Plan provided
that the trees on University Drive be a minimum of 10 feet in
height. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
1 039X
ALL VOTED AYE
-29- 6/23/82
- - .. /nr.r.
c) WATER AND SEWER DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT
C/M Disraelly MOVED the ACCEPTANCE of the Water and Sewer
Developers Agreement with Fireman's Fund America for 2 1/2
E.R.C. for Water and Sanitary Sewer, with payment of the
$2,500.00 fee. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
d) WATER RETENTIO14 AGREMENT
C/M Disraelly said that they had before them a water retention
agreemnt between the City of Tamarac and F & B Investment, Inc.
providing for a payment in lieu of water retention, of $1,016.75
which has been paid, and MOVE the APPROVAL of the Water Retention
Agreement. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
e) WARRANTY DEED FOR 40-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE-
Tem Reso. #2321 -
Jon Henning read the resolution by title only. C/M Disraelly
MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2321 accepting the warranty
deed which is part of this record and has been approved by all.
C/17 Krantz SECONDED.
Jon Henning interjected that the City Clerk has indicated to
him a typographical error in the title, which should be Commercial
Subdivision No. 3 instead of Number 1 on the sixth line, and the
same change on Line 13. V/M Massaro pointed out that the engineer-
ing fee was $1,613.78 and this is still due and they have to pay
that before they can get a permit.
C/M Disraelly complimented them on their site plan, and the
landscape plan and everything coming to Council as well as
anyone has ever done for the City. Mr. Frybergh pointed out that
they were going to contract on another building identical to this
one.
1+A1102F
23. WELLENS FURNITURE COMPANY - REVISED SITE PLAN - Temp. Reso.
2328 - Discussion and possible action on a revised site
plan for an addition.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
TABLED to meeting
of 7/14/82.
Irving Wellens, President of Wellens Furniture Company, had asked
for an extension for a hearing until on or about July 15, 1982,
because of the economic. recession. They have serious intentions
of going ahead with this project, otherwise, they would not have
gone through the expense of site planning. He added that they
would like to ask for an additional extension to January, 1983,
which was the latest prediction of when the economy is supposed to
be on the way up again. He trusted that the members of the Council
will have the understanding, consideration and grant them that
cooperation.
V/M Massaro pointed out that they did not have an approved plan
as yet and they had already extended the site plan approval for
just about a year.
V/M Massaro added that if he had taken care of the obligations
that go along with approval of the site plan, he would have a
year, but he would have to pay the retention fees and council
would have to approve the plan, then they have another year
before they have to take action.
-30-- 6/23/82
/nrr
Mr. Wellens questioned what the cost involved would be. V/M
Massaro informed him it would be approximately $3,600.00 and
a small fee for the 2 acres of $260.00 which would be approx-
imately $3,900.00, Mr. Wellens inquired as to how much time
he had in which to decide on this. C/M Disraelly said the
next council meeting which would be 7/14/82.
Mr. Wellens asked what would happen if he did not comply by
July 14, 1982 and C/M Disraelly answered the site plan would
die. Mr. Wellen said that he now had a clear understanding
of this. C/M Disraelly said if he was going to do it, not to
bring a check for #3,900.00 even, but have the figures verified
first.
C/M Disraelly MOVED that the request of Mr. Wellens have a
final TABLING until July 14, 1982 at which time either the
site plan will come before Council for action, or the site
plan dated 6/18/81 by Community Development is null and void.
C/M Krantz SECONDED.
09 I2W
ALL VOTED AYE
22. TROPICAL'GARDENS NURSERY - Temp. Reso. #2327 - Discussion
and possible action after review of a limited parking
waiver granted on July 8, 1981, under Petition #8-Z-81.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
TABLED to meeting
of 7/14/82.
Jon Henning read the resolution by title only. V/M Massaro
thought they had a problem with this petition. C/M Disraelly
advised Mr. Himber that Frybergh was going to pave 24 feet at
the eastern end of his parking lot. He did not think that they
should have that much paved without the rest of it being paved,
have the other half to be a gravel bed, where he has his
employees parking only, and also used for truck unloading. C/M
Disraelly inquired if he would pave the rest of that lot between
their paving and his right-of-way line.
Mr. Rubin tried to clarify. He informed Council that Mr.
Frybergh was paving, not in the center of his driveway, but the
eastern end. This has caused several things to occur. One was
that it wiped out all the spaces which are east of the parking
area and it created the space in the front, about 35 foot in
depth which is unusual and they know now from
reviewing Mr. Frybergh's plan that this parking area is in the
future right-of-way of University Drive, and they
were never able to get a landscape screen or buffer along the
edge of the parking area which is required by code. The only
thing this drawing does not show is if he has a wood wall or
a fence. The appropriate solution would be to put a hedge and
grass in the area on the east side. He felt that would be an
ultimate design that would be consistant with whatever goes on
with the rest of the property.
V/M Massaro questioned if the right-of-way was established. Mr.
Rubin informed her that it was established on record with Broward
County Trafficway Plan and we have now included our additional 5
foot landscape requirement between the right-of-way and the edge
of our pavement, so the City know*.now that this is where the
internal driveway will be located.
Mr. Himber said if that was the case, he would be losing part of
his property. Mr. Rubin informed him that was why he had only
gotten a temporary approval originally. Mr. Rubin added that the
requirement of the county was an additional 40 foot right-of-way
which would use up all his spaces. Technically today if he came
-31- 6/23/82
/nrr
for a building permit, for this portion, the City would have
to ask him to dedicate that 40 feet in front, just as they did
with Mr. Frybergh, and he could not park along those spaces
anyway.
V/M Massaro pointed out that the city has no control over this,
the County requires it. V/M Massaro said they would table this
until_ he verified this with the County. Mr. Himber stated that
he had worked too hard to buy his property and he was not about
to give it up, unless the County wanted to buy it. He said it
would destroy his complete flow of traffic and his trucking.
Mr. Rubin informed Mr. Himber that the County would fall back
on the answer that they will not court that right-of-way until
such time as there is a principal building put on the property.
V/M Massaro said that ultimately he would have to do it. Mr.
Himber said that sometime down the road someone who buys his
property from him will have to do it.
V/M Massaro added that in the meantime, there were certain things
they had to do to protect the City. C/M Disraelly questioned how
many spaces were involved. Mr. Rubin answered that there were 9
or 10 spaces on each side.
C/M Disraelly said that two things bothered him. He hated to see
that much paved and if Mr. Himber does not want to go the other
way, then the rest of the area should be paved. Mr. Rubin said
that even if Council would give permission, if the County said
they were not looking for the right-of-way today, he only needs
to pave 20 feet and not 35 feet. They could pick up more grass
and get a hedge there to hide the entire 200 feet of cars.
C/M Disraelly asked Mr. Himber if he would be willing to work
with Mr. Rubin in the next month and Mr. Himber said that he
would.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to TABLE to the 2nd meeting in July. C/M
Krantz SECONDED. C/M Disraelly added if he comes back with a
plan on that date.
VOTE:
C/M Krantz - AYE
C/M Kravitz - ABSENT
C/M Disraelly- AYE
V/M Massaro - AYE
24. ISLES OF TAMARAC - BOND RELEASE - TEMP. RESO. #2325 -
Discussion and possible action to release a cash warranty
bond posted for public improvements.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED Temp. Reso.
#2325
RESO. NO. R-82��Z2-'!3 PASSED.
,Ion Henning read the resolution by title only. C/M Disraelly
MOVED the adoption of Temp. Reso. #2325 releasing a $3,000.00
warranty bond for Schmidt Industries. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
C/M Krantz - AYE
C/M Kravitz - ABSENT
C/M Disraelly- AYE
V/M Massaro - AYE
36. MONTWOOD, INC. - STIPULATION #3
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
Agendized by Consent
TABLED to meeting of
7/14/82.
V/M Massaro distributed to Council literature which she wished
the Council to read at their leisure and they will take it up
at the next meeting. She added that this had to do with
Stipulation U . When they came in with Woodmont Tract 59, the
City Engineer had called her in because he was having his men
-32- 6/23/82
/nrr
analyze the various stipulations, to be sure that they are
picking up everything that is required. In Stipulation #3
it had been agreed when that was negotiated that they did
not have to have valley gutters because they wanted as much
green as possible there and they had accepted all our new
designs so that there would be no swale problems or no
drainage problem and it was understood that there would be
no valley gutters. She added that when the stipulation was
written, they forgot that they are required in other parts
of the city in 50 foot right -of --ways.
She said that they had discussed it and it was definitely determined
that they are not required to comply with that. There was a very
definite understanding i,n that Stipulation and they gave a great
deal to the city in retention and different things that they were
not required to do and in good conscience she feels that she has to
admit that it should have been in that Stipulation and it was not.
She added that now if they consider it and think about it, they can
act on it at the next r;ieeting .
C/M Disraelly MOVED to TABLE. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE: C/M
KRANTZ
- AYE
C/M
KRAVITZ
- ABSENT
C/M
DISRAELLY
- AYE
V/M
14ASSARO
- AYE
30. CITY, MANAGER REPORT
City Manager informed council that the additional money Council had
authorized be given to Areawide Agency on Aging will come from her
Professional Services Account as she had no funds available in the
Social Service Account.
29. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
C/M Krantz - No Report
C/M Disraelly - Reported that a presentation will be made within
the week to South Florida Water Management District for acquisition
of a grant for construction of an open entertainment area at Cypress
Creek Commons -Veterans Park.
Second - C/M Disraelly reported the need for new vehicles in the
Police Department - Detective Division. Council Agendized by
Consent as Item #37 to authorize the City Manager to go to bid
for four (4) 1981 or 1982 vehicles at $6,000.00 maximum cost with
certified miles at no more than 100 - Two cars for the Detective
Bureau and two pool cars. The money is to be taken from Federal
Revenue Sharing.
37. NEW VEHICLES FOR DETECTIVE DIVISION AND POOL CARS - Discussion
and possible action:
;YNOPSIS OF ACTION:
iGENDIZED by Consent
authorize City Manager
:o go to bid for 4
_981-1982 vehicles at
1 $6,000.00 maximum
C/M Disraelly MOVED to agendize by consent for discussion right
now. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
C/M
Krantz -
Aye
C/M
Kravitz -
Absent
C/M
Disraelly -
Aye
V/M
Massaro -
Aye
-33- 6/23/82
/nrr
C/M Disraelly MOVED that the City Manager be authorized to go
to bid for four (4) cars, 1982 new cars with the purchasing
agent to draw the specifications at a price not to exceed
$6,000.00 each, or 1981'cars with certified mileage of less
than 100 miles. C/M Krantz SECONDED.
VOTE:
31. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT -
C/M
Krantz -
AYE
C/M
Kravitz -
ABSE.IT
C/M
Disraelly-
AYE
V/M
Massaro -
AYE
Mr. Henning had received a memo from one of the Councilmen,
also back-up from the Police Chief regarding the new Driving
While Intoxicated Statute, which goes into effect July 1, 1982.
He will be responding to Council as to the ramifications to
the City, but the prohibition of that Statute is identical to
what is now in effect. In other words, what you could not do
now, you cannot do after July lst. The City Attorney added
that it meant the unlawful blood alcohol level and driving
while intoxicated, but the penalties were going to be much
stiffer, especially for second and third offenders. There
were some fears as to the ramifications , as to the community
service with the City, he sees no problem with that. He will
be writing to them about that in the next few days, but it was
nothing to be concerned about.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 5:20 P.M.
r
M
ATTEST:
C TY C RK
This pu lic document was promulgated at a cost of $ WS S•0,� or
$ c •& per copy, to inform the general public and public
officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations
by the City Council of the City of Tamarac.
-34-- 6/23/82
/nrr
APPROVED BY
CFTY COUNCIL ON