HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-10-08 - City Commission Regular Meeting MinutesN
7A
P. O. BOX 25010
TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320
FIRST CLASS MAIL
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
WEDNESDAY. OCTOBER 8, 1980
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
specific 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 Counc-il's attention after
publication.
TAMARAC UTILITIES -- WEST
1. Operations - Status Retort - Discussion and possible action,
2. Public Service Commission Refunds - Discussion and possible
action on request for authorization to rent computer equip-
ment software.
PRESENTATIONS
LO/8-Pg.3-Report
jiven by City Mgr.
LO/8-Pg.31
Pabled to 10/22/
80 meeting.
3. Community Service Veterans Counseling - Presentation by
0/8-Pg.3-Right
Mr. Harry May.
iranted to use
ncl.Chambers Thur
4. Consent Agenda - Items listed under Item #4, Consent Agenda
are viewed to be routine and the recommendation will be en-
acted by one motion in the form listed below. There will
0/8-Pg.17
be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is
) thru e)tabled
�)thru
desired, then the item(s) will be removed from the Consent
j ) approved.
Agenda and will be considered separately.
a) Minutes of 5/21/80 - Reconvened Regular Meeting -
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 7/15/80 - Special Joint Public Hearing with
Planning Commission - Comprehensive Plan - Approval
recommended by City Clerk.
c) Minutes of 8/5/80 - Reconvened Regular Meeting -
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of 9/4/80 - Special Meeting - Eastside Utility
Budget - Approval recommended by City Clerk.
e) Minutes of 9/26/80 - Special Meeting - Architect Inter-
views - Approval recommended by City Clerk.
f) Alan F. Ruf - Consulting City Attorney - 10/3/80 -
Amount to be determined.
g) Heathgate-Sunflower Homeowners Association Clubhouse
Recreation Classes - $10.00 - 1979/80. Approval recom-
mended by City,Manager.
J
h) Brown, Wood, Ivey, Mitchell & Petty - Bond Attorneys -
9/26/80 - $65,000.00 - Approval recommended by the City
Attorney. Funds to be taken from the Construction Fund
in trust to the Fiscal Agent - Central Plaza Bank of
St. Petersburg.
i) Tropical Gardens Nursery - Rezoning Petition #11-Z-80
request to be withdrawn from further consideration by
petitioner.
j) Jewish War Veterans - Street Name Resolution recom-
mended to be removed from Agenda.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
5. Police Athletic League - Carnival - Discussion and possible
action to waive all Building Department permit fees and
occupational license fees.
6. Com ensation Adjustment for Probationary Exem t Employees -
Report by City Manager - Discussion and possible action.
7. Bid Award - Report of Jet Rodde_r Truck - Tem . Reso. #1648-
Discussion and possible action to awa
rd a bid for steelwork
to repair a jet-rodder truck at Utilities West.
Dis-
cussion and possible action.
program -- Status Report - Dis-
8. American Video Expansion
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 2:00 P.M.
9. Sam Rosenkrantz - Rezoning Petition #29-Z-80 -- Discussion
and possible action to rezone Lot A of Woodland Lakes Plat
on the west side of Lagos de Campo Boulevard north of
Sandpebbles from R-4A to R-3, by Temp. Ord. #824. First
Reading.
10. Tamarac Town Square - Limited Parking Waiver Petition
#32--Z-80 - Discussion and possible action on request to
grant a waiver to Code Section 18 for a proposed shopping
center to be located on the west side of 88th Avenue north
from 81st Street to Southgate Boulevard, by Temp.Reso.#1649
PA(;F TWn_
/8-Pgs.11,12,13
L auth.to hold
rn. 11/26/80, fees
.ived.
/8-Pg.28
:ople prev.exemnt
p.less than 6
�s.to rec.7% Inc
1/8-Pgs.4,5-Bids
j ected,C,Mgr.
th.go out rebid.
/8-Pgs.23,24,25
action taken.
:port by Jan
-undacte .
8-Pgs.18,19
roved on first
ding.
8-Pgs.19,20,21
led to 10/22/8(
tina.
11. Perrera -- Special Exception - Petition #33-Z-80 - Discuss ion 10/8-Pg.22
and possible action to permit a restaurant in a B-1 zoning Tabled.
district in a proposed shopping center east of Duff's Plaza
by Temp. Reso. #1650.
12. Mannino - Special Exception - Petition #36-Z-80 - Discuss ion 10/8-Pg.22
and possible action to permit on -premises consumption of Adopted w/2:00 PN
beer and wine at Mannino's Restaurant, in the Plaza del Sol Closing,License
Shopping Plaza, by Temp. Reso. #1651. not assign. or tran
13. Handicap Parking Regulations - Temp. Ord. #810 - Discussion 0/8-Pg.22
and possible action to amend Code Section 18 referring to Adoptd.on second
penalties for violation of handicap parking regulations. reading.
Second Reading.
14. Tamway/Graystone - Rezoning Petition #27-Z-80 - Discussion 0/8-Pgs.22,23
and possible action to rezone the southwest corner of 84th pt.on 2nd &
Terrace and Lagos de Campo Boulevard from S-1 to R-4A, by final reading.
Temp. Ord. #812. Second Reading.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
15. Fairways III - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Site Plan
b) Development Review Agreement
c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement
d) Landscape Plan
0/8-Pgs.25,26,27
Approved.
Approved.
Approved.
Appvd. with
3d.of six trees.
I
PAGE THREE.
16. Granek Properties -- Rezoning Petition #23-Z-80 - Discussio 10/8-Pgs.2,3
and possible action on a request to rezone the west side Tabled,2 wks.
of State Road 7, extending north from Commercial Plaza to extension grtc
the City limits, by Temp. Ord. #802. First Reading.
(Tabled from 9/10/80)
17.
Drainage Augmentation - Bid Award - Temp. Reso.#1758 -
0/8-Pgs.13,14,
Report by Engineering Dept. - Discussion and possible
5,16-Adopted.
action to award a bid for this project in the Western area
Bid awarded to
of the City.
ripple R for
147,404.55.
18.
Cummings Project - Discussion and possible action on:
0/9--Pg. 1, 2
a) Plat - Temp. Reso. #1652
oAddantedg•eee.
b) 3 Development Review Agreements
)Ap vd.sub
xh.A attacLd,
19.
Sartori Project - Discussion and possible action on:
0/8-Pg.2
Tabled.
a) Plat - TemE._ Reso. #1653
b) Development Review Agreement
LEGAL AFFAIRS
20.
M_ontwood - Vacation of Rights -of -Way - Discussion and pos-
0/8-Pgs.29,30
sible action on:
) Approved, a:
mended.
a) Temp. Reso. #1654 Tract 47 - North Golf Course
)thru f) with-
b) Temp. Reso. #1655 - Tract 57
drawn by
c) Temp. Reso. #1656 - Tract 68
petioner for
d) Tem . Reso. #1657 - Tract A - North Golf Course
resubmission.
e) Temp. Reso. #1658 - Tract G - South Golf Course
f) Tema. Reso. #1659 -- Tract J - South Golf Course
21.
Site Plan - Plat Presentation - Tea. Ord. #714 - Discus-
10/9-Pgs.2,3
sion and possible action to prohibit review of site plans
pvd. on lst
hg.as
not accompanied by plats. First Reading.
amended
22.
Parking
ate_-„g ons - Temp. Ord. #784 - Discus-10/8-Pgs.28,29
sionand�possible action to amend Code Section 18 by Appvd.on lst
modifying minimum parking requirements in various zoning rdg.as amended
districts. First Reading.
23. Private Streets -- Temp. Ord. #809 - Discussion and pas- 10/9-Pg.3
sible action to amend Code Section 20 by permitting privat Tabled to
streets in all residential zoning districts. First Reading 10/22/80 mtg.
24. Bonding Re uirements - Temp._Ord. #811 - Discussion and 10/9-Pg.3
possible action to amend Code Section 24 by requiring Lpproved on ls-
public improvement bonds and warranty bonds be for off- reading.
site improvements only in the public right-of-way. First
Reading.
25. Illegal Parking Ticketing Procedure - Temp. Ord. #818 - 10/9-Pgs.3,4
Discussion and possible action to amend Section 15 by Appvd.on lst
establishing a ticketing procedure for non-compliance with reading as amex
Article I of this Section. First Reading.
26. Right -of -Way Maintenance Responsibility - Temp. Ord. #822--110/9-Pgs.4,5
Discussion and possible action to require property owners ppvd.on lst
to maintain the unpaved right-of-way abutting their rdg.as amended
property. First Reading.
27. Fraternal Order of Police - Contract - Temp. Reso.#1660 - 10/8-Pg. 31
Discussion and possible action to approve a two --year dpt.,City Mgr
contract and authorizing the appropriate City Officials & Cty.Clk. to
to execute same. execute.
PAGE FOUR.
28. Woodmont - Tracts 74 and 75 - Private Streets - Tem.Reso. 10/8-Pg.2
#1661 - Discussion and possible action to approve Stipula- Tabled to
Lion #4 to Case #72-11731 and authorizing the City Attorney 10/22/80 mtg.
to execute same on behalf of the City.
29. Congregation Mi2dal,David - Discussion and possible action 10/8-Pg.5
,
concerning a House of Worship, resentation b
.Fleisher.
REPORTS 33. City Hall Addition - Architect
Selection
30. City Council Discussion and possible action
to rank the architects for nego,
31. City Manager tiations as required by the
32. City Attorney ---------------Competitive Negotiations Act.--
R-3
R-4A
S-1
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-5
Low Density Multiple Residential
= Planned Apartments
= Open Space/Recreational
= Neighborhood Business
= Planned Business
= General Business
= Two -Story Professional Office Buildings
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the 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.
CITY OFW ; y
XX:§i2
TAMARAC
ARILN
CITY CLERK
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
34. John Abbaticchio Warehouse - a) Site Plan, b) Landscape Plan,
c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. Discussion and Possible
Action.
35. Spring Lakes Community Recreation Parcel - Revised Site Plan for
Sunshade.
36. Spring Lake II Water & Sewer Developers Agreement.
37, Medical Arts Building - a)'Site Plan b) Landscaping Plan
c) Water & Sewer Developers Agreement.
38. Phoenix Companv Develoment Agreement - Correction to Item 3B of
Development Agreement on page 3.
1.(a) Turnpike Force Main Crossing.
39. Medicare Supplement Charges Under Health Insurance -
Discussion and Possible Action.
0/8-'Pgs.17,18
-M.Schiff
-Craven 'Thom.
-Peabody &
Childs.
0/9-Pg.5-
ncl.indic.Cit,
roceed with
ezonings out-
ide land sect.
10/8-Pgs.27,2f
a)appvd.b)App�
c)appvd.w/2.5
ERC's.
10/8-Pgs.16,1"
Approved.
10/9-Pgs.5,6,,
Tb1//d.1pp0/22/3380.
Tb'1d. 10� =Pg. "
Tabled.
10/9-P s 7 , !3
Correcgto rte.
B on Pg.3 app�
10/8-Pg.4
City. auth. Wm. HE
& Stoner to
pro.w/design
not to exceed
$7000;also to
proc.w/Grant
application.
0/9-Pgs.9,10
ust disc.No
ction.
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 1980
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Falck called the meeting to order on Wednesday,
October 8:,jM980 at 9:30 A.M., in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter W. Falck
Councilman Irving 11. Disraelly
Councilman Marjorie Kelch
Councilman Irving Zemel.
ALSO.PRESENT:
City Manager Edward A. Gross
City Attorney Arthur M. Birken
Ass't. City Clerk, Carol Evans
Clerk/Steno, Mimi Reiter
ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Vice Mayor Helen Massaro
MEDITATION & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Falck called for a Moment
of Silent Meditation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Falck reviewed the schedule of items and times involved on the
agenda.
34. John Abbaticchio Warehouse - a) Site Plan, b) Landscape Plan,
c Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. Discussion and Possible Action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION
See page 27)
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT the Item concerning
discussion and possible action in regard to the John Abbaticchio
Warehouse. Councilman Disraelly SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
35. Spring Lakes Community Recreation Parcel - Revised Site Plan for
Sunshade.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
See page ' 1G)
Councilman Zemel MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT a request for approval
of Spring Lakes Community for permission to erect a sunshade in the
recreation area. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
36. SDrin2 Lake II Water & Sewer Developers Agreement.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT an Item concerning
Spring Lakes II Water & Sewer Developers Agreement. Councilman
Zemel SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: Councilwoman Kelch AYE
Councilman Zemel AYE
Councilman Disraelly NAY
Mayor Falck AYE
1. a) Turnpike Force Main Crossing.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Councilwoman Kelch was interested in discussion.
See page 4) It was determined the item would be considered
under 1. a).
37. Medical. Arts Building - a) Site Plan b) Landscaping Plan
c Water & Sewer Developers Agreement.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT.
(See page 30)
--1-
iniSiSn
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT an Item regarding
the Medical Arts Building - a) Site Plan b) Landscape Plan
c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement.
Councilwoman Kelch explained the material was on hand, and it was
not on the agenda through'an oversight.
Councilman Zemel SECONDED the Motion.
Councilman Disraelly said it was an inopportune time to review a
Site Plan at this late date. He stated he did not think the material
should be received at a late date and Council be requested to handle
everything involved. He thought there should be time for review.
VOTE: Councilwoman Kelch AYE
Councilman Zemel AYE
Councilman Disraelly NAY
Mayor Falck AYE
City Attorney Birken explained at the previous Council Meeting the
Phoenix item was considered, and in reviewing the developers agreement
he noticed there was one blank which he felt Council would want to
give him guidance on so it can be filled in and executed and recorded.
Mr. Birken said the blank concerned the distance from McNab Road
that fast-food restaurants had to be. The City Attorney suggested it
be agendized so they can proceed with the agreement.
38. Phoenix Company Development Agreement - Correction to Item 3B of
Development Agreement on page 3.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION
See Minutes 10/9)
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT the Phoenix Company
Development Agreement.
Councilman Disraelly inquired if they had to go back into the Minutes
to determine what the discussion was on that item, City Attorney Birken
said he did not remember any discussion on that point as far as the
distance was concerned, otherwise he would have put a figure in the
blank space when he prepared the Agreement originally.
ounce man Disraelly questioned >what figure Mr. rk Bien a.nti.ciDated. Mt.
Birken said a staff recommendation could be available when the Item
came up that afternoon.
Councilman Disraelly SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE ALL VOTED AYE
TV Woodmont - Tracts 74 an - Private Streets - Temp. Reso. #1661 -
Discussion and possible action to approve Stipulation #4 to Case
#72-11731 and authorizing the City Attorney to execute same on behalf
of the City.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Item #28 Tabled until 10/22/80, request of,Developer.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED that Item 28 on the 10/8/80 Agenda be
TABLED until the next regular Council Meeting. Councilman Zemel
SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
19. Sartori Project - Discussion and possible action on:
a Plat - Temp. Reso. #1652.
b) Development Review Agreement.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Item #19 Tabled at request of Petitioner.
VOTE
Councilman Disraelly MOVED to TABLE Item #19, Sartori Project.
The Motion was SECONDED by Councilwoman Kelch.
ALL VOTED AYE.
16. Granek Properties Rezoning Petition 23-Z-80. Temp. Ord. 802.
Rezoning Petition -Z- - Discussion and posse e action on a request
to rezone the west side of State Road 7, extending north from Commercial
Plaza to the City limits, by Temp. Ord. #802. First Reading.
-2-
1 r) /Q /Q
SYNOPSIS OF.A TION: Tabled to 10./2.2/80._meeting..Tro weeks extension granted.
VOTE
Councilwoman Kelch explained up until that morning there was a lack
of the receipt of certain necessary documents and it was felt con-
sideration of the item should be delayed in order to have a legal
opinion. Councilwoman Kelch asked the City Attorney to discuss
the ramifications as they apply to the applicant if such action was
delayed. She noted it is a first reading on a zoning petition.
The Item was originally tabled from 9/10/80.
City Attorney Birken said the regulations do provide the zonings
have to take place within a certain amount of time and if not,
unless extended by the applicant or the City Council, actually would be
considered as a denial. The City Council can by its own motion ex-
tend the time period not to ekceed 60 days, and that would be appro-
priate if Council so desired, Mr. Birken stated.
City Attorney Birken said the document called "imposition of Land
Restrictions" was delivered to his office in its present form on
Monday, however he had not reviewed it until that morning. He said
he saw problems with the document as presently written.
Councilwoman Kelch said she would move to table the Item when it is
called. Mayor Falck called the Item.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED that Rezoning Petition #23-Z-80 relating to
the applicant, Granek Properties, be given a time extension for
an additional two weeks for clarification of certain legal documents
in connection with the request. Councilman Zemel SECONDED the Motion.
ALL VOTED AYE.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED that the
#23-Z-80, Item #16 on the Agenda
be tabled until the next regular
SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
TAMARAC UTILITIES - WEST
consideration of the Zoning Petition .
of 10/8/80 relating to Granek Properties
meeting, 10/22/80. Councilman Disraelly
1. Operations - Status Report - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Report given by City Engineer.
Mr. Keating stated everything is working well at the Utility Plant.
The existing problems are small and are being handled expeditiously
by the staff.
Mayor Falck inquired about the remodeling of the surge tank, whether
it is on schedule.' The City Engineer replied it is pretty much on
schedule. He said copies of the two proposals that had been received
and recommendation he had made to the City Manager for awarding a
contract for cleaning the surge tank should have been received by
Council. Mr. Keating said this would'be done in a two or three
day periocf after the contractor is notified to proceed. Immediately
after the surge tank is cleaned they will advertise for the cleaning
of Plant No. 3 and that will take place shortly thereafter.
Councilman Disraelly inquired if either of the contracts would have to
be approved by Council. The City Manager said they had been approved
on an emergency basis at the last Council Meeting. The low bid will
be accepted.
Councilman Disraelly asked about McNab Road. City Engineer Keating
explained the McNab Road situation is such that the County has issued
a change order to the contractor and he has proceeded, the water line
is on site and based on the last letter received by Mr. Keating from
the Consulting Engineers it appears there may not be an additional
charge for mobilization.
Councilman Disraelly indicated he had spoken with Mr. Nolan the previous
day and there will not be a charge for mobilization. Mr. Keating said
the additional charges the City is paying are only to install the 24"
force main versus the 12" force main and the City is not penalized for
-3--
1 A / 0 / on
delaying the contractor.
Councilman Disrae!IV said the chance o Oer 7.7174 ch,.l - oi nai_l,= -,,as to t,A.
$ 72 , 000. will come in at approximately $45 , 500 , because the pipe is being
c-hanged from cement to bituminous coated ductile iron, which has a
tremendous saving. Also the valves will be comparable valves to
the Zurich which were in a delayed delivery status. Councilman Dis-
raelly stated the City will save about $27,000. The City Engineer
said he had not heard that. Further, Mr. Keating stated cement coated
pipe is not used for force main installations. Councilman Disraelly
read from a letter written to Henry Cook which said Bergeron had taken
a chance and ordered the water main which has arrived and is stored on
site; the City of Tamarac has acted expeditiously approving the force
main changes thus decreasing the anticipated lead times. The letter
also stated WHS, Consulting Engineers will accept the bituminous coated
ductile iron pipe in lieu of cement -lined pipe in order to expedite
delivery, and also accept comparable valves in lieu of the Zurich in
order to expedite delivery.
Councilman Disraelly said he had discussed the matter with the Consulting
Engineer and he indicated the change order would reduce the cost from
$72,000. to $45,500.
Mayor Falck said that was much more favorable than the previous discussion.
City Engineer Keating mentioned that with regard to the force main that
had to be installed across the turnpike, the Consultant recommended and
he concurred with him, if the City goes through the normal grant appli-
cation steps it wiILtake 8 months to a year. The cost of the design of
the facilities is approximately $6,000. The Consultant indicated the
State of Florida has allocated $120,000,000. for this type of work and
he has recommended that the City spend the $6,000. to design the facili-
ties and go forward with a grant for the construction.
I. a)Turnpike Force Main Crossing.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT as Item a) under
item i, the matter of discussion and possible action in regard to
designing facilities for the Turnpike Force Main Crossing. Council-
man Zemel SECONDED the MOTION.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED that the City authorize Williams, Hatfield
and Stoner to proceed with the design of the Turnpike Force Main
Crossing in order to shorten the time period to have these facilities
in operation and for a better opportunity to receive a federal grant
for this construction. The amount to be paid for the design is not
to exceed $7,200., and Williams, Hatfield & Stoner is authorized to
proceed with the Grant Application. Councilman Zemel SECONDED the
Motion.
VOTE; ALL VOTED AYE.
City Manager Gross requested that Item #7 be heard since it deals with
the Utility Company.
7. Bid Award - _p. o. #1648 -- Discussion
and possible Raction otodawa ��debyTruck Temp. R - es
T a d for steelwork to repair a jet-rodder
truck at Utilities West.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Bids rejected. City
Manager authorized to go out for rebid.
City Manager Ed Gros said neither bidder bid as per the specifications,
therefore the City does not have any bids on the project and Mr. Birken
asked that the City Council allow the City Manager to rebid the Item.
Councilman Disraelly asked if it would be possible to save time by
having the City Engineer attempt to negotiate the bid at a price below
$5,000. City Attorney Birken said he would recommend going out for
rebid since.there are no satisfactory bids.
-4-
10/8/80
/lc
1 elIIW
Councilman Zemel MOVED that
additional proposals for the
Tamarac Utilities, and that
for the work be rejected.
the City Manager be authorized to seek
purchase of a jet rodder truck for
the bids received prior to October 8, 1980
Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
ALL VOTED AYE.
The City Manager said he would like to have the City Engineer discuss
the problem he has with the bid bonds.
City Engineer Keating explained one of the problems with the bids
received for the jet rodder truck modifications was the fact the
proposals required bid bonds and performance bonds for the work.
The nature of the work is such the Contractors that would be interested
in doing it are relatively small and indepandent and do not have the
facilities or desire to go through the paperwork and hassle with bonds.
Mr. Keating suggested to Council that the subsequent bid for this work
not include the requirement for the bid bond or the performance bond.
The satisfactory completion of the work would be guaranteed by the fact
the contractor would not be paid until the work is complete and acceptable
to the City Engineer's office.
Mr. Birken said performance bonds are required by state law in certain
conditions. If there is a situation where a performance bond is
required, the City must require it. The City Attorney said reference
to bid bonds, the purchasing agent would have authority to prepare
specifications and if he did not want to include the bid bonds it would
be acceptable.
Mr. Birken said he would give a copy of the statute with regard to
performance bonds to the purchasing agent. Further, the City Attorney
explained jobs under a certain amount can be excused by the govern-
mental authority under certain conditions. However, the statute has
to be followed.
29. Congregation Migdal David - Discussion and possible action concerning
a House of Worship.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Presentation by Herman Fleischer.
City Attorney to reply by letter with his recommendations.
SEE PAGES 7,8,9.10 FOR VERBATIM OF ITEM
CONGREGATION MIGDAL DAVID.
_5_
W
10/8/80
/lc
m
-6- 10/8/80
1j
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL.MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 1980.
VERBATIM OF ITEM #29 - Congregation Migdal David
MAYOR FALCK: Item #29, Congregation Migdal David - Discussion and
possible action concerning a House of Worship. Councilman Zemel
C/M ZEMEL: We have a representatives of Congregation Migdal David,
Mr. Semp, who I believe is the Vice President and the President of
the congregation who would like to address us this morning.
MR. FLEISvHER:Your honor, Mr. Mayor, ladies and gentlemen of the City
Council, good morning. I ' just want to refresh.
CLERK: Give your name for the record.
MR. FLEISCHER- Herman Fleischer Ok
CLERK: Yes
MR. FLEIS2HER We appeared before the Council on June ]]th and
explained to the Council that we were meeting at Mr. Kirstein's house,
a group of people to pray together. At the time we said that we needed
a place, a piece of property, or a building where we could have
meetings andform a congregation so that we could have our religious
services. The Council, I got the impression at that time favorably
impressed and told us that they would help us in every way possible
to get a piece of land or possibly a building. They went so far as
to send us a very nice letter and a enclosed map suggesting where
we might possibly find a place to worship. You will see, if you
wish to see the map or letter, we will show it to you. And we followed
up on these particular areas that they suggested in here and we
didn't get anything that would serve the purpose. Because we are a
religious orthodox synagogue and our problem is that we have to find
a centrally located place where all our members could go within walking,
reasonably walking distance, as we do not ride on the Sabbath.
we have information at the present time that on the corner of
University and Southgate there is a tremendous building about to take
place and we understand that one of the properties to be built there
is a bank. Now, as a general rule a bank has a conference room and
they usually allow a synagogue or religious institution to use that
room on the Sabbath or a Saturday or a Sunday morning for their
religious purposes and we feel that if this bank were to be built,
we don't know who they are as yet, they would give us a place to
conduct our services. Because the American Savings Bank has offered
us a place on Oakland Park Blvd. we can't accept it because it's
riding distance, and we can not walk that far, so we very nicely
had to reject the offer, which of course would have been perfect for
US. We have been in touch with a Mr. Leonard of Lenar! who is going
to do some building in the area and he sent us back a letter which I
would like to read to the Council to indicate our sincerity in trying
to find a house, a place to form a House of Worship.
"I am in receipt of your letter of March 17 inquiring about the
possibility of acquiring land for an orthodox Hebrew synagogue in
the area we willbe developing in the western part of Tamarac. We are
presently in the preliminary stages of our land planning process, and
I have informed our land planners of the need for land for religious
purposes. As soon as our plans are better formulated one of our
people will be in touch with Mr. Herman Fleisher to discuss the
congregations specific needs. Thank you for your interest, very
truly yours, Lennar Corp., Leonard Miller, President."
As of this moment, Council is well aware, they have not started
their building in the area, so of course this thing will have to be
in abeyance until they get ready to do so. As I said before we are
an orthodox group of people who wish to further all of our traditional
and possibly better the area because of it. There is no orthodox
synagogue in the immediate vicinity and the need for one to carry on
traditional Jewry is very great in the area. We are under
tremendous hardship and tremendous pressure from people who wish to
IVr
follow the faith properly and we haven't any particular area as
yet where we can form a particular synagogue to meet. We meet
at Mr. Kirsteins house to pray together on a Sabbath morning for
two hours. This is the sum and substance of what this particular
meeting, congregation, or whatever you wish to call it consists of.
We do not have any other services except we meet on High Holy Days
also. We are not a money place. All monies contributed are
donations, it is not run in the normal sense of a congregation where
monies are paid. The monies are set aside for either charitable
purposes or hopefully at some future date get a piece of land so we
could built it, a congregation or a temple. Under no conditions
is the group, congregation, whichever you wish to refer to it, run
as some kind of a business organization. It is strictly a gathering
of people who wish to pray together. And as I need not remind the
Council, under the first ammendment of our wonderful constitution
we have freedom of worship, which is what we are doing in this
particular instance.
Now, on either side of where we meet are neighbors who do not
object, in fact have told us that if need be they would be more than
willing to appear here before the Council to explain that they do not
object in any form or fashion, in fact they think that it is wonderful
that people would get together to pray and observe their religion.
We are also interested in knowing what is the sudden complaint
and to realize to what extent we are putting ourselves out in order
to observe our faith and the hardships that we labor under. Some
people walk as far as two miles to get to our synagogue, which I needn't
tell you in the Florida heat is quite a sacrifice. Now there'd been
a complaint last year, we understand, about meeting at Mr. Kirstein's
house and we were then informed by the Association of Section 23 that
as long as you invite people in to pray together it is perfectly
permissable for them to meet and to pray and worship in whatever form
or fashion they see fit. To just return to what I started out at the
beginning to say, the Council was very favorable when we appeared here
last and indicated by their cooperation that there was no problem
with us meeting on the Sabbath morning for a particular service we
hold for the two hours. We do not form any large groups because all
we have as a general rule is between 10 and 15 people at the most that
attend our particular meetings. So we fail to see what form or
fashion we could in any way hinder anybody or cause anybody any
inconvenience. I want to thank the Council for their kind consideratior
and we.
C/M ZEMEL: I would like to verify some points with you for the
knowledge of the general public who may not be aware of this.
.In orthodox Jewry, is there not a requirement for a minimum of ten
men to form a quorum commonly known as a Minyon in order to pray.
MR. FLEISCHEI} Yes
C/M ZEMEL: And isn't it so that in general fashion people who would
be forming the Minyon are not really sure individually whether there
will be ten people, so there is possible to have as many as fifteen
couple coming to that Minyon?
MR. FLEISCHER Yes it is possible
C/M ZEMEL: And this is a daily prayer routine and has nothing to do
with the synagogue or the temple.
MR. FLEISYHE� No, it is just that for instance, people are observing
an anniversary, a death anniversary, or if there mourners that have
to say a Kaddish prayer for a year. The only way that this can be
done according to Jewish Tradition isif you have a Minyon, a quorum.
And that is ten people, so there are certain things that when you
worship, or when you pray. For instance on the Sabbath when you pray
together you read from the Torah Scrolls. In order to read from the
Torah Scrolls, you must have a quorum of ten people.
C/M ZEMEL: Are you aquainted with a Mr. Elmer Donner?
MR. FLEISGBE?: Yes, I know the man.
C/M ZEMEL: Are you aware that he complained to the Council and to
the City?
MR. FLEISCHER: No sir, I'm not. This is the first I hear of it.
C/M ZEMEL: Alright, he said, 9501 N.W. 80, I'm reading out of context.
MR. FLEIS CHER: Yes, I know where the man lives.
C/M ZEMEL: This home is in as a residential area and being used as
a temple known as Congregation Migdal David, and the attached two
newspaper ads.
Side#2 MR. FLEIS CHER: Regarding the newspaper ads if you will please note
its donations. The money is a donation and it is not sold tickets.
If anybody came at any time and wanted to attend a service and did
not want to give a donation, they willgladly be accepted and allowed to
attend a service and were not rejected on the basis that you don't pay
you cannot go, this is your admission. That's not so. The donation
is a voluntary thing.
C/M ZEMEL: Ok
C/W KELCH: I just wanted to remind the gentleman that the matter
of donations or money is in no way connected in any way shape or
fashion to the question involved. This does not enter into the matter
of establishing a House of Worship. I'm sure you may or may not be
aware that the vast majority of people who belong to any branch of
the Christian faith do not have any such arrangement within their
community, everything is voluntary. So it does not enter into it.
The matter that this becomes very sensitive is because our City code
very definitely prohibits a House of worship in an R-1 zoned district
and there are certain elements which would make it possible, that is
the distance from this house or from the roof, a roof structure, as
it is called. Otherwise we would, we cannot grant in any way or permit
a situation which is against our own laws. We would be breaking
the law to so do. However, I feel that if you are not an established
congregation as such, that you are simply meeting to pray, that there
may be some way that we could ask our City Attorney to examine the
situation to permit you to continue under these circumstances. And
I would like to do so, I think all of us would like to do so. You
must understand sir that, when we make a deviation from our code,
or we permit something, we are opening the door to other similar,
not similar. situations, but to other Houses of Worship which simply
could not be tolerated in a residential. neighborhood. Just, if you
will bear with me in one instance I will tell you, of course this
complaint did not come to me, I didn't handle it, I want you to
krmw that. In the area where I live a very short time ago, we had
a Jamaican gentlemen who procured a house in an R-1 district which
is where I live. He posted a sign on the outside of his house
indicating that he was connected with a church, obviously of highly
fundamental nature and one which has very extensive exuberance
connected with its congregation. People reported this, a citation
was issued, and the gentlemen changed his plan and did not open
his church in his home. You can see that this would be a highly
objectionable thing for the people living close by. It doesn't
apply in your case. But what I'm saying to you is that we cannot
give an authority to break the law. I would lake to suggest that
Mr. Birken take this matter under advisement and if he can at all
possibly find something to adjust the situation to allow you to
continue, other than that I see no alternative to your complying
with the request of the City's zoning ordinance enforcement.
MR. FLEISCHER Thank you Mrs. Kelch, may I
MAYOR FALCK: Mr. Birken first.
BIRKEN: I would just like to point out that Houses of Worship are
permitted in R-1 districts and one option that could exist if the
House of Worship wanted to continue to apply for a variance to the
Board of Adjustment because there are certain distance requirements
WE
10/8/80
ij
M
certain other requirements in the regulation to which they could
be asked to be waived due to a hardship and the Board of Adjustment
would be the final decision making body in that regard. If they
wanted to take another approach it would certainly be possible if
they were not a House of Worship but individual people getting together
to pray and
C/W KELCH: That's what I had in mind.
BIRKEN: ads in the paper, or to call themselves a congregation then
certainly the City is not interested stopping people of any religious
persuasion from getting together and praying together.
C/W KELCH: Yes, this is exactly what I meant.Arthur and I would like at
this time to get the concurrence of the rest of the Council that the
good offices of the City Attorney be made available to this congregation
to offer them some relief in their situation.
C/M ZEMEL: I think that we have reached the point where we understand
what the problem is, there is no problem. The problem is your way
of praying, your path to God and your orthodox religion, you must
have a minimum of ten people, there is nobody in the world who is going
to try and stop you if you do, I'll be the first one to be on your side,
working with you.
The City Attorney made a good suggestion, Councilwomen Kelch of course
expressed herself very well, and I think that rather than getting
deeper and deeper into it, we're now at the point where I think that
we can help you in any possible way we shall.
MR. FLEISCHER: May I thank the Council and say that as I understand
it, as of this moment, everything is status quo until we are further
informed by the City Council what the situation will be?
MAYOR FALCK: By the City Attorney
MR. FLEISCHER: By the City Attorney, I'm sorry.
Is that the way we're leaving it?
C/W KELCH: Well., No, I'm sorry, we have the indication that we must
have something by October 10th or they would be forced to put you, you
know, restrict you, so if you will comply with the request of the
City Manager.
MR. FLEISCHER: I got the impression on October loth was the reply date,
not necessarily that this thing would come to a conclusion .
C/W KELCH: Mr. would you clarify your memo far him?
MR. GROSS: It is basically a reply date at which time I would have
to come to Council for further action. If the Council wishes at this
point, however, from what I get from the Council at this point is that
you want to give them the opportunity, to afford them the opportunity
to either do one of two things. Either to go for variance in front
of the Board of Adjustment or if they wish to cease and desist as
such as they're new doing and just worship as they will in their own way.
C/M ZEMEL: It's very simple I think, at this point, before we get
very involved here, it is getting very complex. Nobody is going to
arrest your Minyon, ok. That is the important thing. Nobody is going
to come and arrest your Minyon. Your Minyon can be fifteen people.
MR. FLEI°(�HER: And we will be informed.
MAYOR FALCK: By the City Attorney.
MR. FLEISCHER: By the City Attorney.
C/M ZEMEL: Thank you very much.
MR. FLEISONER: Thank you all.
-10
ift
PRESENTATIONS
3. Community Service Veterans Counsel
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Granted right
to use Council Chambers on Thursday
with other considerations.
- Presentation by Mr. Harry May.
Mr. Harry May addressed Council. Mr. May stated he is the Veterans
Council service man for the Tamarac Community Services. He read
a Petition that he felt was necessary at the present time. Mr. May
said four and a half years ago he was appointed as Veterans Counselor
under the Community Services. Mr. May explained the services done
by the Community Services Veterans Counseling, in assisting veterans
to obtain the fullest benefits under the Veterans' laws.
Mr. May questioned if it is the desire of the City Council or any or
a few of the City Council to do away with the Veterans Counseling
Service in the City of Tamarac. He questioned if it was because he
was non -political. Mr. May said soon after the elections he was told
there was no room for the group in City Hall and he was to be moved
to other quarters. Mr. May stated he was the only service that was
moved to quarters that were unfit and untenable to continue his service.
Mr. May also told Council there was no advertising to notify veterans
of his location were promised, and was not done. Only through word
of mouth could veterans find him, he stated.
Mr. May requested that he be permitted to use the West Conference Room
every Thursday morning from 9 AM to 12 Noon, and resume his services
and be given the same courtesy as applies, such as a steel cabinet
to hold the supplies necessary for the work to be continued,
Finally, Mr. May stated he wanted to make it clear the benefits he
is able to provide are benefits to the City of Tamarac as a whole.
Mr. May said he hoped a decision would be made in his favor.
Councilman Zemel stated there is no one who doesn't agree Mr. May's work is
of the greatest benefit to the veterans of the City, and the widows of
veterans. Councilman Zemel said there is a problem of space and the
City will be expanding to make space. Councilman Zemel said it was the
City Manager's decision there was no room, the engineer had to have room
to do his work properly.
Councilman Zemel stated he had discussed this with the Mayor and
Thursday is a bad time. Every second Thursday morning is pre -agenda
meetings in the West Conference Room. Councilman Zemel said he could
let Consumer Affairs use his office on Monday or Friday and allow the
Veterans to have the use of the West Conference Room on those days.
Councilman Disraelly agreed Mr. May is doing a great job. He suggested
the Council Chamber be made available to the Veterans Group on Thursday
mornings, from 9 AM until Noon.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED that the Veterans Counseling Service be
granted the right to use the Council Chambers on Thursday mornings
from 9 until Noon with the use of a desk and chairs and that the City
Manager provide them with storage space. Councilman Zeme1'SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
Mayor Falck offered the use of his office for storage and Councilman
Zemel stated he would purchase a filing cabinet for the Veterans
Counseling.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
5. Police Athletic League- Carnival -- Discussion and possible action
to waive all Building Department permit fees and occupational license
fees.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: PAL authorized to
hold carnival Nov. 26-30, at 57th St.
and University Drive, with certain
conditions. Permit and Occupational
license fees waived.
City Manager Ed Gross noted that Council has received a memo from the
Police Chief regarding Item #5. The Police Chief and Sonny Gentile
were present to answer questions, he said.
-11-
10/8/80
/lc
I
Councilwoman Kelch requested that Council hear from the Police Chief.
However, it was pointed out the Chief was present to answer questions.
Councilman Disraelly explained Sonny Gentile would make the request of
Council.
Councilwoman Kelch stated she had received nothing from PAL requesting
anything, or indicating what the proposal'is.
Sonny Gentile, President of the PAL stated he was under the impression
all he had to do was send a memo to the City Council in order to have
the Annual Carnival. Councilwoman Kelch stated she received no backup
whatsoever.
Mayor Falck said since Council has not received the information sent
to him, he would like to read the request into the record.
"Tamarac PAL is planning its annual fund-raising carnival on November 26,
27,28,29 and 30, 1980. The Carnival would once again be located at
57th Street and University Drive. We respectfully request City Council
to waive all fees for any permits and licences that may be required.
Attached hereto find Certificate of Insurance naming the City as Co --insured
as well as Mr. Orovitz. We are expecting a letter of authorization shortly
from Mr. Orovitz and will submit it to the Council upon its receipt.
The members of PAL Organization would like to take this opportunity
to thank you for your cooperation. (signed) Sonny Gentile."
The Mayor said the insurance certificate has been examined and found to
be in order. Also, Mayor Falck stated he has in his file communication
from the City Attorney addressed to the Mayor and Council dated September
29, 1980. Councilwoman Kelch indicated other members of Council had
that letter.
Councilman Disraelly requested copies of the PAL letter; the Mayor
agreed they would be furnished.
Councilman Zemel inquired of Sonny Gentile whether there would be
games of chance or gambling. Mr. Gentile said there would be no
gambling whatsoever. He said he did not wish to raise money that way.
Mr. Gentile said the previous year the Carnival ran for four days and
raised over $4,000. He discussed the plans for the Carnival, rides,
Ferris wheel, kiddie rides, merry-go-rounds and that sort of thing.
There will be food concessions, and rings around bottles, and throwing
hoops into baskets where the prizes are dolls and there will be no
alcohol or beer on the premises and two police officers will be hired,
also one fireman is hired.
Councilman Zemel questioned the games, such as bottle stack -ups where
there is very little chance of winning. Mr. Gentile said they do not
have that type of games at all. He explained the types they have.
Mr. Gentile said PAL receives $10.00 a day for each booth. The rest
of the income comes from the rides, and advance ticket sales. He
described the income PAL receives in detail.
Councilman Disraelly expressed concern about children spending money
in the games with very little opportunity to win anything. Mr. Gentile
said the children spend their money mostly on rides, it is the adults
who play the games, and they know they are being taken. Mr. Gentile
said he watched the games to make certain they were all right..
Councilwoman Kelch inquired if the terms of the contract were that the
PAL take the whole package; Mr. Gentile said they were. Mayor Falck
indicated he had attended the PAL Carnival the previous year and he
found nothing wrong with it.
Councilwoman Kelch expressed concern about Chief McIntosh's letter
stating another law enforcement agency might possibly come in and
find something - she asked Chief McIntosh and the City Attorney if
arrangements could be made to supervise or control any activities
that might be against Broward County laws or State laws.
Chief McIntosh stated he supports the Police Athletic League, but the
unfortunate aspect is he knew nothing about the Carnival until he saw
the Council Agenda. He said he is against Carnivals because he has
had a great deal of experience with them and they bring drifters and
crime always increases in the area of a carnival. Chief McIntosh
discussed the games where the bottles are not set up properly and the
things on the shelf are weighted, and he is against those things. They
can be rigged, and there is no way to control it. He also said he
understood they walked out of the City last year with $40,000. in profit
-12- 10/8/80
/lc
J
which was money taken away from people who didn't get anything for that
money. Chief McIntosh said he realized the PAL needed the money to
provide something for the children and it is unfortunate they had no
chance to discuss the matter before it had gone too far. Chief McIntosh
indicated if the Carnival is authorized he will do everything in his
power to "live with it" and he would do everything within his power to
stay on top of it and to make sure those things will not happen, but
unless someone is at every stand 100% of the time, it can't be totally
controlled. Councilman Zemel said he was sure the Police Department
can take care of any situation that comes up.
Chief McIntosh commented that PAL is not a Police Department function.
Councilman Zemel said it was a Police Department sponsored function.
Chief McIntosh said hopefully when this comes around next year they
can make other plans. He said he would like to ask that off duty
police officers be hired to give the needed coverage, because with
the police department short-handed he can not station people at the
Carnival. He stated he would like a minimum of 4 Police Officers on
hand each day of the Carnival. Sonny Gentile agreed, and he said
before the booths were set up he would check to make certain they are
not rigged and he will close them down if they are not run properly.
Mayor Falck thought they should also give the Chief authority to close
any games he feels are not proper.
TAPE Councilwoman Ketch brought up the matter of the condition Mr. Orovitz
SIDE had made for the use of his property, which is that the lot be cleared.
#3 Sonny Gentile said PAL would take care of it. Councilwoman Kelch said
Public Works could not be authorized to clear the lot. Mr. Gross ex-
plained the City is not a party to the contract. Sonny Gentile stated
City Personnel will not be used for anything. He also stated he will
have four policemen at the Carnival and if the chance booths are not
run right he will shut them down.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED that the PAL be authorized to hold a
Carnival November 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 (five days) located at
the corner of University Drive and 57th Street; with the minimum
of four off -duty police officers being hired for every hour that
the Carnival is open, that the Chief of Police be given authority
to close any games that he feels are in violation of normal ethics
and that the condition of the property is to be handled by PAL and
is to be restored to a clean condition within three days after
November 30th so that it is in a sightly situation. Further,
that fees for the Occupational License and for the permit fees be
waived, however the Chief Building Official shall make the proper
inspections and prevent any rides from operating if they do not conform
with the safety specifications. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the
Motion. (Note: C/M Disraelly requested copy of Motion go the Chief
McIntosh and Chief Bldg. Official)
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
C0124UNITY DEVELOPMENT
17. Draina e Augmentation -- Bid Award - Temp. Reso. #1758 - Report
by Engineering Dept. - Discussion and possible action to award.a bid
for this project in the Western area of the City.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Temp. Reso. #1758 RESOLUTION NO. D- g`PASSED
Ado ted. Bi awar ed to Triple R in amount
of,U47,404.55. for 103rd Ave. City to go
out for bid for balance of work.
Mayor Falck informed Council Mr. Nolan was present at the Meeting and
also they have a communication from the City Attorney relating to the
matter. A number of discussions had been held and Mayor Falck said
hopefully the awarding of the bid can be considered in order to get
something started.
Councilman Disraelly commented thatintbememo from the City Attorney
dated October 6, 1980, the�City Attorney explained the language is
clear in the Charter and it is so important he had an independent
review and came to the same conclusion. Councilman Disraelly questioned
that certain funds had been put into the Capital Improvement areas which
the Council thought would be able to be used. Now it is indicated even
those at some future date will not be able to be used.
13-
iV/r/go
1-01
City Attorney Birken said he would strongly suggest if Council wants
to make a major expenditure that there be a referendum. Further, he
said there is no problem going out for bid for different projects
separately and if the total of all different projects exceeds the 2-1/2%
that is one thing - but to put it all together and have the total cost
exceed that 2-1/2% is a major problem, he thought.
Councilman Zemel noted there is nothing to preclude going out for bid
for the total package - they can not spend more than 2-1/2% on one bid.
The City Attorney said they can spend more than 2-1/2% of the budget on
drainage for the fiscal year; the City can not spend it on one bid
project. Councilman Zemel asked if there was anything to preclude the
City from using the bids; Mr. Birken replied there was not. He said
it was split up so the Council could choose what they wanted to. Tony
Nolan explained the 2-1/2% would amount to $183,400. at this time.
City Manager Gross said it was imperative for the Council to look at
the total picture because most of the work involved is greater than
the $183,000. Unless there is a Charter change a great deal of the
most important work, the older work, will not be able to be done.
Mr. Gross said if need be the matter should be brought up for the March
Election so the City can go ahead and do the remaining drainage work
that is involved. Costs are going to be higher and a great deal of
money is involved, Mr. Gross pointed out.
Councilman Disraelly said based on the October 7 letter which lists
five projects, there is only one that individually exceeds the $183,000.
Mr. Gross pointed out the sixth project is $300,000. and there are
others after that which are very expensive. Councilman Disraelly said
at the moment they are discussing five projects.
Consulting Engineer Tony Nolan stated the projects are significantly
reduced from what they were in the bid package. To address the problem
areas most critical concern and keep the total contract at less than
$700,000. - each outfall system in its own right is in excess of the
limitation - only portions of those outfall systems are being done in
order to do something in the major areas of concern. Mr. Nolan showed
a chart of the City's existing drainage system. Superimposed on it was
the drainage system put out to bid. Mr. Nolan explained the Chart and
said in each instance those put out for bid have been reduced in scope.
in order to come under the $700,000 limit. Mr. Nolan said his question
to Council, in all fairness to the initial intent of solving the problems
as quickly as possible, is: The proposal was set up so that each one
of the drainage systems was an independent system and effectively bid
on independently. He said the wording of the proposal is such that it
may be defendable, or stated they do have separate bids on each outfall
system, each is total and listed as far as time of construction, as far
as mobilization and things of that nature - so effectively they are
independent bids although they are contained in one package. The question
was posed to City Attorney Birken by Councilman Disraelly, that even
though they are in one bid package, can they be broken down into these
individual bids. City Attorney Birken stated he would need to look at
the specifications carefully to be able to give an answer to that
question as to whether in fact the City can take the position they
have separate bids for the various projects and he could report back
to Council on the question, if they want it pursued.
Councilman Zemel inquired of Tony Nolan if he remembered whether there
was an all -or -none clause in the general specifications. Mr. Nolan
said he believedthere was that type of clause, but he believed there wem
specific references to the City's ability to award in any grouping they
chose.
Mayor Falck said he saw nothing wrong with moving ahead with the
recommendation dated October 7, 1980, assuming that the breakdown
does conform with the legal requirements of the City and indicated
by the City Attorney. The Mayorindicated that there was a question
in his mind relating to the $201,000. but the other four of them
posed no question to him. Councilman Zemel noted if it is broken
down that way at least they could proceed with those four and perhaps
85th Street can be broken down into two projects.
Mayor Falck pointed out if it was necessary to wait until March there
would be additional cost - Councilman Disraelly pointed out it would
then be into the rainy season again, whereas now it is the dry season
in which to work. He pointed out in the rainy season the time limits
-14-
10�g1f o
A.e.
may be well extended. Consulting Engineer Nolan said as soon as the
ground water table reaches its maximum in the rainy season there will
be difficulty from several standpoints. He noted the restoration
problems will be more acute and the contractors working conditions more
severe. He stated both of those factors would enter into the bid price
and also Mr. Nolan said placing it out to bid a second time would in-
fluence the bidders prices upward. Mr. Nolan stated that the time is
right from a construction standpoint and he believed the City had
obtained low bids on the work. Councilman Disraelly noted that in
Item #3 R&R was not the low bidder, but on the totalpackage he was
many thousands of dollars below everyone else. Mr. Nolan replied ghat
he bowed to the City Attorney's wisdom as far as the legal requirements
of the City and his determination whether each one is bid as a separate
project, the City Attorney would have to make the decision in that regard.
City Attorney Birken stated the way he read the specifications and going
over them again quickly, it appears that it is written with the intent
of awarding something to one contractor - the low contractor, totally.
He said that is where the problem is. If it was possible to award
separate bids to separate contractors he would see no problem with the
Charter, as long as the 2-1/2% was not exceeded for any one project.
However, that did not seem to be the intent of the specifications and
Mr. Birken said there may be a problem.
Councilman Disraelly asked if each job can be handled as an independent
bid. Mr. Nolan said they were separated into specific areas of concern,
and it is almost like an aggregate of bids awarded to one person. Mr.
Nolan said by the language in the proposal essentially an award can be
made of any portion of the project Council wants. Councilman Disraelly
said there are 17 bids and they are only accepting 5 at the present time.
The City Attorney said only one can be accepted and they may have to go
out for bids for any of the others. He clarified the statement by
explainingthey can accept any number as long as the total does not exceed
the $183,000. and the way the specifications are written, each one of
the bids cannot be classified as $183,000.
Councilman Zemel MOVED that the Williams, Hatfield & Stoner recommenda-
tion be accepted to accept a bid for drainage improvement in Westwood
Community 6, 103rd Avenue; that the award be made to Triple R Construction
Company for the total price of $147,404.55.
.............
Councilman Disraelly questioned that for the same amount of money three
projects could be cleared up. Councilman Zemel said looking at order of
problem and flooding and the recommendation of the Consultant, it is
103rd Avenue, Westwood 6.
Mr. Nolan said there are two areas in the list of five areas that affect
the maximum number of people. The first is McNab Road and 88th Avenue.
The other area is listed as #4 in Westwood Community Six. Mr. Nolan
said that is one of the key problem areas, and again is the major
collector street for Westwood Community Six. Mr. Nolan said the other
areas are of concern and commented on the various areas and their
effect on the people. Councilman Disraelly stated the concern is that
they can spend the money for one area or three areas - Mr. Nolan said
essentially two areas since Five is an extension of Three. Councilman
Disraelly said since McNab Road is one where heavy traffic is concerned
when it rains he thought it was #1.
City Attorney Birken said he would suggest the Council authorize new
bids and that they go out immediately and probably only three or four
weeks would be lost, at the most. Mr. Nolan agreed with the City
Attorney.
Councilwoman Kelch questioned if a cost and time factor is being addressed,
in connection with the items presented, there would be less problem with
going out for rebidding on the one item for $147,000. than by going to
three items - 1, 3 and 5. Mr. Nolan said it would be essentially the same.
Councilman Disraelly inquired if some of the
when rebidding into two units instead of one
entirely possible 81st Street could be built
change order completed. Councilman Disraelly
three instead of one - would it be less to go
said it really does not matter very much.
-15-
items could be broken down
- Mr. Nolan said it is
to a point and then by
asked if they went with
out to bid for - Mr. Nolan
10/8/80
/lc
J
Councilman Disraelly asked the Consulting Engineer if he would recommend
item 4, or as a consultant recommend 1, 3 and 5. Mr. Nolan replied he
would recommend item #4 first, and come out immediately with another
proposal for the next areas.
Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
City Attorney Arthur Birken read Temp. Resol. #1758 by title.
Mayor Falck requested that be included in the MOTION. Councilman Zemel
agreed.
Councilwoman Kelch, SECONDER, also agreed.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
VOTE.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED the City Manager be authorized to go out
for bid for construction with specifications prepared by Consulting
Engineer for drainage improvements throughout the City with bids to
be handled in such manner that they conform with City ordinances.
Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
ALL VOTED AYE.
Councilwoman Kelch noted they obviously have a situation where the
Charter is leveling upon the City something which is not good business
practice and is costing the City money and addressed to a matter under
consideration for some time and all have agreed is totally essential
in nature and she would like to be informed of all of the details
concerning this and if there is a recommendation for an amendment to
the Charter or whatever may be in the best interest of the City
she would like it provided at the present time.
City Attorney Birken commented there are two questions involved, the
drainage monies and also recreation and building funds. He said a
referendum will resolve the matter, or a Charter amendment. Mr.
Birken indicated the referendum would probably be more favorably
looked upon, than amending the Charter. The City Attorney clarified
his statement to the effect he meant a referendum on the spending
of the money.
Councilwoman Kelch suggested they get something on the road before
being faced with another situation where thev think evervthinq is readv
to go and then realize they are being hampered on all sides. Council-
woman Kelch requested Mr. Birken to make recommendation so they can
take steps to correct the situation.
Councilman Disraelly said there would have to be a Charter change.
Councilman Zemel pointed out to the City Attorney the clause in the
Charter reference to salaries for the Council and Mayor. Councilman
Zemel discussed the salaries, saying they are 9(� per household per
year and a Charter change would bring them to 27q per year per
household. He said there should be a change in the Charter.
35. S rin .,La.ke,- -Recreation Parcel=__Revised Site Plan for S shade._
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved.
Councilman Zemel explained Council has a request from Spring Lakes
Community for approval of revised site plan for a sunshade in the
recreation area. Inasmuch as there is no effect on vehicular circu-
lation, a Planning Commission review is not required. Councilman
Zemel stated Council has a memorandum from the Director of Community
Development which indicates the plan meets all applicable ordinances
and staff recommends approval. Also, all fees have been paid.
Councilman Zemel MOVED that Spring Lake Revised Site Plan for Sunshade
be approved. Councilman Disraelly SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
IK:�
10/8/80
/lc
77
4. Consent Agenda - Items listed under Item #4, 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 discus-
sion 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 5/21/80 - Reconvened Regular Meeting.
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 7/15/80 - Special Joint Public Hearing with Planning
Commission -- Comprehensive Plan - Approval recommended by City Clerk.
c) Minutes of 8/5/80 - Reconvened Regular Meeting - Approval
recommended by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of-__9/4/$0 - Special Meeting - Eastside Utilitv Budget -
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
e) Minutes of 9/26/80 - Special Meeting - Architect Interviews --
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
f) Alan R. Ruf - Consulting City Attorney - 10/3/80 - Amount to
be determined. $680.00.
g) Heathgate-Sunflower Homeowners Association Clubhouse Recreation
Classes - $10.00 - 1979/80. Approval recommended byCity Manager.
h) Brown, Wood, Ivey, Mitchell & Petty - Bond Attorneys - 9/26/80 -
$65,000.00 - Approval recommended by the City Attorney. Funds
to be taken from the Construction Fund in trust to the Fiscal
Agent - Central Plaza Bank of St. Petersburg.
i) Tropical Gardens Nursery - Rezoning Petition #11-Z-80 - request
to be withdrawn from further consideration by petitioner.
j) Jewish War Veterans - Street Name Resolution recommended to
be removed from Agenda.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a thru e - Tabled.
j - Approved.
Councilman Disraelly inquired about Item g). City Manager Gross said
it was for the Recreation Building, to be able to use it for Recreation
Programs.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED that Items a) thru e) be tabled and Items
f) thru j) be approved. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
ff us J140-910
33. City Hall Addition - Architect Selection - Discussion and Possible
Action, -to rank the.arc itects for negotiations as required by the
Competitive Negotiations Act.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Ranked as follows: 1) Michael Shiff & Assoc.
Craven Thompson and Associates 3) Peabody and Childs
Mayor Falck explained for the benefit of Council there were two
sessions held, one session three of the individuals or firms who
had submitted proposals were interviewed; the second session the
other three were interviewed. Councilwoman Kelch, Councilman
Zemel and Mayor Falck were the Council Members in attendance at
the last meeting. Mayor Falck explained they were ready to rank
order the three architects.
Councilwoman Kelch asked the City Attorney what would be the best
form for the Motion - City Attorney Birken said a Secret Ballot
could not be taken, however they could each state and discuss their
preferences and then someone could make a motion.
Councilwoman Kelch stated her personal preferences in order. 1) Michael
.Shiff & Assoc. 2) Craven Thompson and Associates 3) Peabody and
Childs.
Councilman Zemel expressed his preferences: 1) Michael Shiff & Assoc.
2) Craven Thompson and Associates. 3) Haack & Crawford.
Councilman Disraelly said he was out of town at the time of the
second Meeting, and would make no comment.
Mayor Falck stated his personal preference 1) Michael Shiff & Assoc.
2) Craven & Thompson 3) Peabody & Childs.
-17-
10/8/80
/lc
The Mayor further commented he felt Shiff did an outstanding job
in knowing what the City had in the way of money and the way the
monies could best be used by the City. Craven & Thompson did some-
thing similar to that, and the attitude of Peabody & Childs was
such that the Mayor felt they were a large type of construction,
but he still wanted to make them part of the record.
TAPE Councilwoman Kelch MOVED that the selection for Architects for
SIDE Negotiations as required under the Competitive Negotiations Act
o(e_ as follows: 1). iii-me Siiiff & rissoci.ates , 2) CraveLl-Ta0h1pS0Li
Associates, Inc. 3) Peabody & Childs. Mayor Falck gave the
gavel to Councilman Disraelly and SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE.
Councilman Disraelly returned the gavel.
MEETING WAS RECESSED FOR LUNCH TO 2:00 P.M.
TAPE MEETING CALLED TO ORDER, ROLL CALL TAKEN.
SIDE
#5 MEMBERS PRESENT
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Councilwoman Ketch
Councilman Disraelly
Mayor Falck
9. Sam Rosenkrantz - Rezoning Petition #29-Z-80 - Discussion and possible
action to rezone Lot A of Woodland Lakes Plat on the west side of
Lagos de Campo Boulevard north of Sandpebbles from R-4A to R-3, by
Temp. Ord. #824. First Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Temp. Ord. #824
approved on first reading.
Councilman Disraelly read Temporary Ordinance #824 by title.
Thom Lira explained Lot A is a small parcel - 1/2 acre - wedged in
between the existing Sandpebbles Townhouses and the Concord Village
Tract. He said the problem is that R-4A is really for three-story
garden apartments that will have more than one building on a tract
of land. He said the planned development of the tract will be a
two-story five -unit building and R-3 fits it perfectly.
Mr. Lira stated the Land Use Plan allows ten units to an acre, and
the planned building comes out to about 9.4. Mr. Lira showed the
sketch and site plan and explained he thought the Planning Commission
did not quite understand what they were trying to accomplish when
they recommended denial of the rezoning. Mr. Lira explained if
the zoning were to remain R-4A the setbacks are so restrictive the
tract of land would be unusable. R-3 would allow building exactly
what they want and opens it up a little more, Mr. Lira said.
Councilwoman Kelch asked if the reason also was because of other
restrictive setbacks that apply in R-4A that would not apply under
R-3. Mr. Lira said that is correct - if the R-4A setbacks are used
everything is pushed into the center of the tract and he felt the
R-3 is much more aesthetic.
Councilman Disraelly inquired about the Recreation Area - Mr. Lira
said it will just be a pool with an open deck. He said it was too
small to consider an S-1 area. However, the pool will be owned
jointly by all homeowners, and tentatively will be handled as a
condominium.
The Mayor opened the Hearing to the Public, no one wished to comment
and the hearing was closed to the public.
-18-
10/8/80
/ lc
Councilman Disraelly MOVED that Petition 29 Z 80,
824 be approved to rezone from R-4A to R-3, Lot A
on First Reading. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
Temporary Ordinance
of Woodlands Lakes
Motion.
10, Tamarac Town Square - Limited Parking Waiver Petition #32-Z-80 - Dis-
cussion and possible action on request to grant a waiver to Code Section
18 for a proposed shopping center to be located on west side of 88th ave.
north from 81st Street to Southgate Boulevard, by Temp. Reso. #1649.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to
10/22/80 Meeting to resolve
questions.
Councilwoman Kelch read Temp. Rego.#1649 h title,
Councilman Zemel was in attendance.
Wayne Zufelt representing the Petitioner, spoke on the item. He said
if Council wished to have him go over the intent of the Petition he
would do so. Councilwoman Kelch indicated it would be a good idea
to explain the item for the Public who were present.
Mayor Falck opened the Public Hearing.
Harold Newman, President of Westwood Community 5 Association addressed
the Council. He requested that the Council deny the Petition granting
a limited waiver. Mr. Newman stated from what he observed on the Site
Plan he was of the opinion the plan was a shopping center, however what
he sees is not a shopping center but a huge parking lot. Mr. Newman
said the layout is the most complicated ever received for the City of
Tamarac. Mr. Newman discussed the background of the parcel and said
when he had objected to the zoning of the property years ago he was
told he would ultimately be glad to have a shopping center near the
homes. Mr. Newman spoke of the traffic hazards that would be involved
driving through the maze of parking in the proposed shopping center.
He further stated the plan is not only a hazardous parking plan, but
is excessive in requiring more than 800 parking spaces for a Center of
that size.
Mr. Newman noted the waiver had been denied two weeks previously by the
Planning Commission. He objected to the 90 degree angle parking shown
on the plan and he said granting the parking waiver would be detri-
mental to public safety, health and welfare of the citizens of the City.
Mr. Newman urged Council to deny the waiver.
Commissioner Carl Alper, Planning Commission, said he opposed the
Petition for waiver of the parking requirements at Tamarac Town Square.
He said the petitioner is asking Council permission ta.cl o
an illegal act. Mr. Alper stated Council did not have a legal right
to grant such a request. He said the Code stated the Planning Commission
shall recommend - not may recommend - and the City Council may waive
the provision and allow zero degree or 90 degree parking where an
unusual circulation hardship would exist by adhering to the strict
application of that section, and providing the waiver would not be
detrimental to the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the
City. Therefore, Mr. Alper explained there must be a recommendation
by the Planning Commission that a waiver be granted and a finding by
Council that a circulation hardship would exist if they adhere to the
law strictly and the additional finding if a waiver is granted the
failure to grant it would be detrimental to the Health, Welfare &
Safety of the Citizens.
Mr. Alper stated when the Petition came up before the Planning Commission
only the Petitioner spoke for it, the Public spoke against it. All
members of the Planning Commission spoke against it and the Planning
Commission voted to deny the waiver. The condition the Planning Commission
shall recommend the waiver was not met he said. Mr. Alper said the
law states before a waiver can be granted, the Planning Commission shall
recommend - and that condition was not met.
Mr. Alper said he believedthe Plan submitted to Council is slightly
different from that one submitted to the Planning Commission. Mr.
Alper said the duty of the City Council is to strictly be guided
by its own rules and to obey its own laws. Commissioner Alper said
he believed Council should deny the waiver for parking at Tamarac
-19-
10/8/80
/lc
Town Square, Petition #32-Z-80.
Mr. Walberg, Section 23 stated the Planning Commission at its Meeting
September 17 concurred to deny the request for a Waiver. The reason
for the denial was the 90 degree parking which is determined to be
unsafe. There are no conditions other than caused by the developer
which would be substantial justification to permit the waiver in
accordance with the Tamarac Code.
Mr. Walberg informed Council that Chairman Beutner of the Planning
Commission, upon looking at the Plan, recognized immediately that it
should not be approved. Mr. Walberg showed the areas on the plan
where the 90 degree parking would be hazardous, and discussed the
various locations.
In conclusion, Mr. Walberg stated the 90 degree back-to-back parking
is in violation of the City Code,as shown on the Site Plan is hazardous
to drivers, pedestrians and therefore the overall potential risk of
adversely affecting the health, safety and welfare must be of prime
consideration by the Council for refusing to grant the waiver. He
stated the Council has the responsibility to the Citizens of Tamarac
and others to prevent any potential hazardous conditions.
Mr. Wiener addressed the Council. He stated the Petition should be
denied. He said he represents the Civic Committee of the Tamarac
Democratic Club as well as residents of Section 23 and they both
have the same concern, the welfare and safety of the residents. Mr.
Wiener said all citizens would be in jeopardy if the Ordinance is set
aside. He asked that Council use good judgment and deny the Petition.
No one else from the Public wished to speak on the Ordinance and the
Public Hearing was closed.
Councilman Zemel agreed with the residents and said he could find no
hardship that had been described and he inquired what the hardship
is - Wayne Ztifelt said according to the limited waiver - it is
required to allow any 90 degree parking. In the Site Plan they had
designed 90 degree parking in the perimeter areas only, and in
the rear to promote two way traffic for on -site circulation. He said
one-way traffic on the site would mean tremendous travel distance from
one area to another.
Councilman Zemel asked how this is detrimental to the health and welfare
of the people. Mr. Zufelt said the Code does not stipulate 90 degree
is not permitted - it is permitted with a waiver.
City Attorney Arthur Birken said the Acceptance Provision in 18-9 speaks
that the application shall set forth the hardship claimed by the appli-
cant, and the hardship may not be self-imposed. Councilman Disraelly
said the Resolution before Council stipulates that a hardship exists -
and there is no indication of what that hardship is, other than it is
difficult to get the required number of spaces without going to 90
degree parking.
Wayne Z of elt said the intent behind the 90 degree parking is to promote
two-way traffic. Councilman Disraelly said there are certain places
he could agree with 90 degree parking - such as behind the building
for employee parking - however, the concern is the 90 degrees on Pine
Island Road, because there are people in two-way parking on a two-way
road and when one backs out of 90 degree parking he does not have
the ability to see an oncoming car from either direction until he has
gone back approximately 12 feet and is already in the traffic lane
before he can see anyone approaching him on his blind side. Councilman
Disraelly discussed other hazardous areas at the entry on the south
and in front of the restaurant off an entrance on Pine Island Road.
He stated he was mostly concerned at the areas on Pine Island Road
where people are going to enter. Councilman Disraelly said before he
could approve the Plan he would want a traffic engineer to certify to
him that when he turned a corner he would not be hit by another car.
He said he did not want an architect or planner to tell him that, he
wanted to hear it from a traffic engineer,he felt the matter to be too
important.
Councilwoman Kelch MOVED to TABLE Item #10, Limited Parking Waiver,
Petition 32-Z-80, the Public Hearing having already been held; that
it be tabled to the next regular meeting 10/22/80 to explore all of
the angles that were presented to Council.
-20-
10/8/80
/lc
A
1-1
C/M Disraelly com%nted on the Motion, and requested a consensus from a
Traffic Engineer as part of the consideration for the tabling.
Councilman Disraelly said the Plan before them should show an update
and revision on it over the one that had been presented to the Planning
Commission. The City Attorney said the Plan would have to go back to
the Planning Commission before action can be taken on it.
Wayne Z ufelt asked that the matter be tabled and he would like to
discuss it with the City Attorney relative to whether or not it had
to go back to the Planning Commission. Councilman Disraelly said he
wanted to read the Minutes of the Planning Commission and read a state-
ment from a Traffic Engineer, before he would consider it. Also, he
would want an indication of hardship.
Councilman Disraelly SECONDED the Motion to TABLE for a two -week period
in order to resolve: a) Reason for hardship;b)Input of traffic engineer
and certification as to parking; c) Review of Planning Commission
Minutes; d) Revised site plan.
VOTE: Councilwoman Kelch AYE
Councilman Zemel NAY
Councilman Disraelly AYE
Mayor Falck AYE
Commissioner Alper said regardless of the Traffic Engineering Report,
a hardship must be shown, according to Tamarac law.
Councilman Zemel stated the reason he voted NAY is because none of the
Council are qualified to be engineers and to take it upon themselves
to move buildings or change parking spaces and following corrections
it should go back to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Falck said that can be done by Council at the next meeting if
it so desires.
Wayne Z ufelt inquired if the survey by the traffic engineer was for
a specific area Councilman Disraelly replied it was for the whole
project.
Mr. Walberg, Section 23 inquired if the Plan should not go back to the
Planning Commission automatically, because failing to do so is obviating
the need for the Planning Commission giving input on the revised drawing.
Mayor Falck said Council would make that determination. Councilman
Disraelly explained the City Attorney will advise Council on the matter.
11. Perrera - Special Exception - Petition #33-Z-80 - Discussion and
possible action to permit a-restaurant�•in a B-1 zoning district in
a proposed shopping center east of Duff's Plaza. by Tem orar
Resolution #1650.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled pending
conformance with Ord. 80-62.
City Attorney Arthur Birken read Temporary Resolution #1650 by title.
Mr. Frank Perez represented the Petitioner. In reply to a question
from the Mayor, Mr. Perez stated the restaurant would be more than
100' from any residence. City Attorney Birken reminded Council an
Ordinance had been passed this year requiring restaurants in B-1 to
have special exception approval. The restaurant must be 100' from
the nearest residence, there must be prior approval of means and
method of waste collection by the City Council, and the Plan
for control, reduction or elimination of offensive odors should be
submitted with the application for special exception to the City.
The City Attorney noted he did not see that material in his back-up
and wondered if it exists. Those are criteria for granting a special
exception, he explained.
TAPE
SIDE Mayor Falck opened the Public Hearing. No one from the public wished
#6 to speak and the Public Hearing was closed.
Mayor Falck suggested, in view of the comments made by the City Attorney,
that there be a Motion to table Item 11.
-21-
10/8/80
/lc
Councilman Disraelly MOVED to TABLE Petition 33-Z-80, Temp. Reso. #1650,
based upon the input of the City Attorney concerning conformance with
Ordinance 80-62. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
12. Mannino Special Exception - Petition #36-Z-80 - Discussion and possible
action to permit on -premises consumption of beer and wine at Mannino's
Restaurant, in the Plaza del Sol Shopping Plaza, by Temp. Reso. #1651.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted with 2 AM closing RESOLUTION NO.g PASSED
license not assign able or transferable.
City Attorney Arthur Birken read Temporary Resolution #1651 by
title.
VOTE
The Mayor opened the Hearing to the Public. No one wished to comment,
and the Public Hearing was closed.
Councilman Disraelly asked if the restaurant was presently opened.
Mr. Mannino said they presently are open from 4 PM to 9 PM. He said
he intends to open for lunch. In reply to Councilman Disraelly's
question, Mr. Mannino stated the wine and beer would only be served
with meals.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED ADOPTION of Petition 36-Z-80, Temporary
Resolution 1651, allowing him to have beer and wine with a 2 AM local
time closing; and that this is not assignable or transferable. Council-
man Zemel SECONDED the MOTION.
ALL VOTED AYE.
13. Handicap Parking Regulations - Tem . Ord. #810 - Discussion and possible
action to amend Code Section 18 re erring to penalties for violation
of handicap parking regulations. Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted on ORDINANCE NO. D-Q- d PASSED.
Second and Fina Reading.
City Attorney Arthur Birken read Temporary Ordinance #810 by
title.
Mayor Falck opened the Public Hearing. No one wished to speak on the
subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
Councilman Zemel MOVED that Temporary Ordinance #810 be approved
on Second Reading. Councilwoman Kelch SECONDED the Motion, with
addition of words "and Final" after word "Second".
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
14. Tamway/Graystone - Rezoning Petition #27-Z-80 - Discussion and possible
action to rezone the southwest corner of 84th Terrace and Lagos de Campo
Boulevard from S-1 to R-4A, by Temp. Ord. #812. Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted on second ORDINANCE NO.4:- -4 PASSED.
and final reading.
City Attorney Arthur Birken read Temporary Ordinance #812 by
title.
Mayor Falck Opened the Public Hearing.
Melanie Reynolds inquired if there is any agreement or covenant that
assures the property will be recreation and not used to build additional
apartments. City Attorney Birken stated a covenant was submitted and
-22-
10/8/80
/lc
copies were furnished to Council. Ms. Reynolds inquired if the same
space that was S-1 will be used for recreation. Councilman Disraelly
explained the approval granted on first reading said the Council
wanted a Covenant in recordable form which would be voluntarily offered
and he had not seen it. City Attorney Birken said it had been received
and distributed to Council on the previous Friday. Councilman Disraelly
was given a copy of the Covenant to examine.
City Attorney Birken said the Covenant covered what had been requested
by Council at the previous meeting. However, he pointed out in previous
developments which were approved by the City, something was also required
from the Developer, not only that the property would be used for recrea-
tional purposes but that the recreational facilities would be conveyed
at no cost to the subsequent owners of the condominium. That was not
requested at the last meeting.
Councilwoman Kelch asked if it was possible to approve the Zoning with
a condition, Mr. Birken replied that they may want to consider it when
the Site Plan comes in.
Mayor Falck inquired if anyone else wished to speak on the subject -
No one appeared, and the Public Hearing was closed.
Councilman Disraelly MOVED APPROVAL of Petition 27-Z-80, Temporary
Ordinance #812, from S=l to R-4A, Second and Final Reading. Council-
woman Kelch SECONDED the Motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
8. American Video - Expansion Program - Status Report - Discussion
and possib e action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: No Action
Ta en. Report Ey Jan Brundage.
C.oundiman Disraelly asked City Manager Gross what the status of the
installations are. Mr. Gross suggested this be discussed with Mr.
Brundage.
Mr. Jan Brundage, President of American Video addressed the Council.
He said the purpose of the Meeting is to report to them the progress
of cable TV construction in the City.of Tamarac since September 26,
1979. Prior to that time, American Video had already started the
main trunkline from University Drive east on Commercial to ultimately
serve Sections 3 through 7, he said. Mr. Brundage explained on October
2, 1979 pole attachment permits were submitted to FP&L and Southern
Bell for Lakes North and South and Sections 1 & 2. Underground
construction started in late October and early in November when
approvals were received from FP&L and Southern Bell. Section 1 was
completed January 21, 1980, Section 2 on February 5, 1980 and Lakes
North on March 20, 1980. Lakes South was delayed until July 14, Mr.
Brundage reported, due to the County Road work on Commercial Blvd.
and Prospect Road.
Mr. Brundage also discussed the work in Mainlands 8 and 9 which were
started early in February 1980 along with Sections 3 - 7. Both projects
were shut down in March due to extreme resistance to Cableing by the
residents. Isles of Tamarac and Westwood 7 were started Feb. 11 and
will be activated within five weeks. Mr. Brundage mentioned the prob-
lems of easements, refusal of residents to let crews through, harassment
from Tamarac City Officials, Tamarac Police Department, the Residents,
etc.
Councilman Disraelly asked Mr. Brundage to explain the harassment. Mr.
Brundage quoted from a memo to him dated September 29, 1980 from the
Plant Manager. "In my fourteen years in cable I have never experienced
a new build situation that would begin to parallel what we have en-
countered on this project. As you know, at this time we have ongoing
construction projects in four locations throughout Broward County. In
any one month our engineering department does not run into as many
problems or obstacles in the other three locations as we do in Tamarac
on a typical construction day. Over the last eight to ten months I
have talked to literally hundreds of Tamarac Residents and time and
again the same topic dominates the conversation - 'I have nothing
against your company or the way you're going about your work, but I
-23-
10/8/80
/lc
I
M
am on a very limited, fixed income and could not afford your services
if they were made available to me.so why should I inconvenience myself
to let you run your cables through my yard to service someone else'."
Mr. Brundage said they have invested almost $300,000. in Tamarac's
new construction area during the present year and have gained less
that sixty new subscribers.
Mr. Brundage quoted a memo from his Sales Manager in which he said
the sales marketing had been completed in Sections l & 2 with extremely
poor results. The letter also described the negative reaction of the
people in those areas resulting in 30 sales out of 246 homes, or 12%.
Mr. Brundage noted the results are out of line with the 62% sales
results in the Lauderhill section, Mr. Brundage said his two best
sales people had been used in Tamarac and both offered similar stories
regarding the people.
Mr. Brundage explained in late February after encotinter-ing belligerence
from residents, and poor sales results, that a meeting was held with
Mayor Falck and City Manager Gross. The problems were outlined and it
was suggested residents vote whether they wanted cable or not. Mr.
Brundage said each Section President was contacted. Of 2,940 homes
polled, less than 200 people wanted cable TV available. 93% do not
want cable TV in their Section.
Mr. Brundage stated they are continuing in Westwood and Woodmont where
interest there is acceptable. Interest in picking up in Section 23,
he added, and another vote will be taken up in December or January.
Mr. Brundage stated the only way American Video can grow, is to have
more customers. In the meantime, American Video and the City Council
will have to wait for the attitude to change.
Councilman Disraelly inquired as to Mr. Brundage's statement concerning
harassment by City Officials. Mr. Brundage said Public Works Depart-
ment had sketchy locations which in some cases were inaccurate on the
main water lines. That caused a great deal of expensive digging. Mr.
Gross said the plans still have not been received from Tamarac Utilities.
Mr. Brundage said the City Engineering Department accused American Video
of covering up a catch basin. Mr. Brundage stated they had. to meet with
Engineering to show them the catch basin was overgrown with roots.on two
occasions. The second time the Asst. Engineer agreed they had not caused
the problem.
Mr. Brundage cited another example where they had been held up for one
and a half weeks for a road cut, even though American Video had a permit
from the County since it was a County road. Mr. Gross said anything
within the City is City, there are no County roads - Rick Scheller
said he would look up the street, it was one the County said they
maintain and they issued the permit. Further, Mr. Brundage said
Arthur Gottesman, a member of the Planning Board told the crew he
was a City Official and they had no right laying cable in the utility
easements, and Mr. Gottesman went to City Hall to check it out and
learned they did have the right, however it slowed work down. Mr.
Brundage added that police officers shut down their crews at 2 AM
even though all permits were in hand. American Video had decided on
an early morning hour since heavy traffic would be encountered during
the day. They were threatened with arrest, and was costly for American
Video, Mr. Brundage stated. Building Inspector Ben Eigner asked
American Video to move their construction plans up seven months so
his home could be serviced - Mr. Brundage said they refused because
of the tremendous amount of building construction going on and it would
totally destroy anything. The next day Mr. Eigner shut them down in
Tamarac and told them not to come back until they had a 1-D County
Electrical license. The County Ordinance said that type of Ordinance
did not pertain to them and Mr. Eigner said it made no difference, and
they were to stay out of Tamarac.
Councilwoman Kelch noted she had only had one individual approach her
on the subject of cable TV.
Mayor Falck asked Mr. Brundage for copies of the memorandums and matters he
discussed. Mr. Brundage agreed. Councilman Zemel asked for a copy
of Mr. Brundage's report of the incidents he discussed. Mr. Brundage
agreed to furnish such a memo.
-24-
10/8/80
/lc
A
r-1
Councilman Disraelly suggested there are certain areas in the City
that were cabled when developed. Mr. Brundage said that is possible.
Councilman Disraelly explained to Mr. Brundage the City gets the
complaints about American Video, but they do not receive the informa-
tion regarding the problems American Video has with the people.
Councilman Disraelly noted he had discussed with Mr. Brundage the
problem in condominiums where all, or a certain percentage, are re-
quired to hook-up to the Cable and the last franchise stated the
company agrees to extend its lines and service to all applicants
for television service whose dwellings and places of business are
located within the City and who in good faith have signified their
willingness to subscribe to such television service. However, it
does say the installation of extensions will be at the expense of
the company except where such extension will require unreasonable
or uneconomical expenses by the company considering the potential
service revenue derived therefrom. Mr. Brundage said that is the
situation in some of the condos and areas where they are at the
present time. He went into the financial problems for the company
and the problems of getting new customers. Mayor Falck said he
receives comments from people who do not know the cable is in. Mr.
Brundage said a direct mail program will be going out in thirty to
forty-five days listing all of the services.
Mayor Falck inquired if there had been a good response to the News
Network, Mr. Brundage said it had been excellent.
Mr. Brundage told Council he had a problem obtaining permits. Mr.
Gross said the records were checked and the application was brought
in two days ago and was issued that morning. So there is no hold up
in the City. The Mayor explained the City was trying to be helpful.
Mr. Gross said the City is still getting two or three calls a week
about cable going out in the Sunflower areas - Mr. Brundage said
power goes out four or five times a week in that area and they
are working with FF&L on the matter.
Council thanked Mr. Brundage for his report.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
15. Fairways III - Discussion and possible action on:
a Site Plan
TAPE b) Development Review Agreement
SIDE c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement
#7 d) Landscape Plan
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Site Plan approved
Su ject to conditions. b) Development Rev.
Agreement Approved. c) Water & Sewer dev.
Agreement Approved. d) Landscape Plan
Approved with addition of 6 trees.
a) Councilwoman Kelch said in view of the fact they received notice from
the City Attorney there was an impediment in the restrictions and
covenants she wished to know if it was anything that would hold up
action.
Thom Lira explained the condominium documents had already been filed
and it is already in the documents the property will be owned by the
residents and he will submit a copy of those documents at the request
of the City Attorney. Mr. Lira said a revised Site Plan will be
brought in for the Recreation Area. He said an affidavit can be pro-
vided at that time concerning the area being conveyed to the Association.
City Attorney Birken asked if they paid the fees and are not getting
any credit for the Recreation Area. Mr. Lira said that is right.
Mr. Lira read a statement giving a breakdown of the fees that had
been paid: Recreation Fees - $24,180.; Purchase of Water Retention -
$7052.; $130. Per Acre Drainage Assessment- $523.90; First Month's
interest on the ERC's - $729.38; Plan Review by the City's Consulting
Engineer - $500.; Total - $32,925.28 which has already been given to
the City Clerk.
Councilman Zemel noted Larry Keating had computed the $529.30 for
the drainage and Mr. Lira had $523.90. The figures were checked and
Mr. Lira's amount of $523.90 was correct.
-25-
10/8/80
/lc
Mr. Lira stated that a separate Developer's Agreement has been drawn
for the recreation, water retention and--arainage improvements, wFiicKi
has been executed. He also indicated that the Agreement shows all
the ERC's which are required for the development, and will be financed
for one month and then pay the full purchase price of $62,000. Fie
said this involved 60 units, with combinations of one and two bedrooms,
and 2 1/2 for the recreation parcel. This, he said, would handle the
pool and the restrooms.
The City Attorney informed Council that the Developer's Agreement
and the Water and Sewer Agreement were in order, and satisfactory to
him.
C/M Disraelly requested that the curbing be installed for the entire
length of Lagos de Campo, on the south side, and not only for the
entryway. This would extend the curbing to 84th Terrace, he said.
Mr. Gross felt that the City Engineer should review the area, as to
whether curbing should be installed, due to the drainage on the road-
way.
C/M Zeme1 indicated that requests for site plan approval should not
be confined to a particular Council person, but presented to all the
City Council members, in order for it to be completely understood.
C/M Disraelly reviewed the items, by stating that the entire length
of the south side of Lagos de Campo to be curbed, through 84th Terrace,
and the bullnose. Also, that a median cut would be installed on
84th Terrace, with a deceleration lane, and be bullnosed on either
end of the west side of the median, with the west side of 84th Terrace
being curbed. The deceleration shows a narrow concrete strip, he said,
to which Mr. Lira responded that it would be solid concrete, because
the width of the road does not permit anything else, and is designed
for DOT standards; also, adding that any muck they can get, will be
put into decorative berming.
C/M Disraelly indicated that everything built into the recreation area
will be deeded or convenarted to the Homeowners Association, and is to
be a part of the Condo documents.
Mr. Lira said that part of the purchase price of the unit will include
common ownership of the facilities and the land. He also noted that
dumpsters will be located in the center of the buildings, with striped
hash markings in the parking area; and paper storage will be provided.
C/M Disraelly MOVED for approval of the site plan, subject to:
1) Curbing of median for entire length of Lagos de Campo Blvd. on
the south side, plus entry, to 84th Terrace and bullnoses.
2) Median cut on 84th Terrace bullnoses on either end of west side
of me(I.ian, faith crest side of Bath Terrace curbed.
3) Applicant agreed that any muck will be used for decorative berming.
4) Anything that is included in the Rec area will be deeded or dedi-
cated to the Homeowners Association, and is to be a part of the
Condo Documents.
5) Applicant agreed to provide facilities for paper storage.
C/W Kelch SECONDED the motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
b) Mr. Birken said the Development Review Agreement covers the recrea-
tion, drainage, also, providing for additional work to be performed
by the developer, with reimbursements to the developer, by the City,
upon completion. He also stated that he is in receipt of fully
executed copies of the Agreement by Tamway-Graystone.
VOTE:
C/M Disraelly MOVED for the approval of the Development Review Agree-
ment, which was signed October 2, 1980, also authorizing the proper
officials to execute this Agreement. C/W Kelch SECONDED.
ALL VOTED AYE.
c) The City Attorney advised that the Water and Sewer Developers Agree-
ment was standard, with execution by the developer, and no mortgagee
is involved.
C/M Disraelly felt that inclusion should be made for 60 units plus
2.5 ERC's for the recreation area.
IRWIN
10/8/80
mr/
i
Mr. Bixken indicated that there were no time payments on the rec
areas, but was only for residential areas.
Mr. Lira said that he submitted a check for the first month's interest,
and would make the necessary fee adjustment with the Finance Department.
which would be $2500, minus $11.67 times 2.5.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to accept the Developers Agreement, upon the pay-
ment of the proper difference in fees, to cover the 2.5 ERC's required
for the rec area, and C/W Kelch SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
d) Mr.Lira advised that it was the same document as the site plan, be-
cause it was originally submitted prior to requirement of a separate
document for landscaping. He also noted that it was approved by the
Beautification Committee, subject to the addition of six (6) trees
within the existing R--4A area, with the rec parcel having its own
landscaping requirements.
C/M Disraelly advised of such approval on July 7, 1980 by the Beauti-
fication Committee, for the six additional trees, and so MOVED.
C/W Kelch SECONDED the motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
34.John Abbaticchio Warehouse - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Site Plan
b) Landscape Plan
c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Approved, b) Approved
and c) Approved for 2.5 ERC's, with execution
by proper persons. (See page 1)
a) C/M Disraelly inquired as to maneuverability of the parking lot,
and entry, to which Mr. Cross responded, also advising the amount
of required parking lights involved.
VOTE:
Mr. Cross also indicated the Location was 25 feet off N.W. 22nd
Avenue, on the east side, and south of the existing warehouses.
He introduced Mr. Kilpatrick, the representative for the petitioner.
The City Planner indicated there will be a new dumpster, and built
according to present code regulations, and two flood lights will
be used. He responded to C/M Disraelly's request, by indicating that
lighting should be placed in the rear of the existing building, in
order to give adequate lighting in the parking lot.
Mr. Cross advised that clearance was made with the Fire Chief, by
stating that the hose length will be 325 feet to the northeast portion
of the building, with the southeast corner being 300 feet. He con-
firmed the fact that the ERC's will be paid in the amount of $2500,
drainage fees in lieu of retention, and also cost estimates, with a
check being received in the amount of $3,475.91.
C/M Disraelly MOVED for approval of the site plan for the warehouse,
with Development Review Requirements having been satisfied; also, that
the fees for retention, drainage, ERC's, and engineering has been
paid. C/W Kelch SECONDED.
ALL VOTED AYE.
c) C/M Disraelly said that the Developers Agreement has been received
for 2 1/2 ERC's, with the fee of $2500 having been paid, and then
MOVED for its acceptance, with provisions for signatures by the
proper persons, and C/W Kelch SECONDED.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE.
b) C/M Disraelly
Beautification
He then MOVED
SECONDED.
advised that the Landscape Plan was presented to the
Committee on September 15, 1980, which was approved.
for the acceptance of the Landscape Plan, and C/M Zemel
-27-
10/8/80
mr/
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
6. Compensation Adjustment for Probationary Exempt Employees - Report by
City Manager -Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Those persons previously exempt, due to
Bing employeless than 6 months, will receive the
7% increase.
Mr. Gross said this item relates to a 7% increase that was approved at
the previous meeting, for the employees, with an inclusion in the motion
to delete those employees who are employeed less than 6 months. After
discussions with staff, and input from the employees involved, there
was a request to restate the motion, and would permit those individuals
to be included in the 7% increase.
C/W Kelch felt this was desirable, due to the personnel involved, and
would also interfere with the pay plan, and not establish a precedent,
because it was an across--the--board increase. She MOVED to approve the
increase of 7% for the five (5) individuals concerned; also, that she
found this was included in the budget. (MOTION restated by C/M Disraelly)
C/M Disraelly felt that the number of people should not be mentioned,
and not refer to a particular office, and should be based on reconsidera-
tion of the previous motion. He said that a union employee would have
been given the increment involved, if it was only a matter of being
employed only three days previous.
Tape
Side C/M Disraelly MOVED that those persons who were exempt from the 7%
#8 increase, based on the discussion of those employed less than 6 months,
be now included in the 7% increase, effective 10/1/80. C/W Kelch
SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
LEGAL AFFAIRS
22.Off-Street Parking Regulations - Temp. Ord. #784 - Discussion and pos-
sible action to amend Code Section 18 by modifying minimum parking re-
quirements in various zoning districts. First Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved on 1st Reading,
as amended.
The City Attorney read Temp. Ord. #784, and advised that two ordinances
were prepared by him; with one being drawn, as suggested by Council at
their workshop, and the second one, as suggested by the Planning Commis-
sion and the City Planner.
it was noted by C/M Disraelly that Item numbers 1 through 7 are the
same; and Council concurred with #8, as recommended by the Planning
Commission; Item #9 and #12, as recommended by the City Council; #13
as suggested by the Planning Commission, with the following addition:
a) 1 space per 100 square feet of floor area, and b) Athletic Clubs
indoors, with 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area.
C/W Kelch felt b) should be 1 space per 300 square feet.
It was noted that #15 and #16, should be accepted as recommended by
the City Council; with #s 17, 18 and 20 being approved, as suggested
by the Planning Commission It was indicated by C/M Disraelly, that
the comma should be removed from #17, after the word Private..
C/M Disraelly indicated that #21 be accepted as suggested by the City
Council; with #s 33 and #39 being accepted, as suggested by the Planning
Commission, with inclusion of the word "fixed" in #39, and also #40,
should have inclusion of 25% grassed area.
C/M Disraelly referred to #19, Financial Institutions, which was in the
original planning of the Council bid. He said that effective 1/1/81,
a new ordinance would permit Saving and Loan Institutions to have "NOW"
accounts, and would bring additional people into such institutions, as
10/8/80
-28- mr/
� r �
well as the Commercial Banks, and would recommend that both areas
be one space per 150 square feet.
Barry Eden said that the volume of traffic is unknown for the various
banks, and felt proposed use should be directed to shopping centers,which
differ from free standing buildings, that requires additional parking.
Tape C/M Disraelly said this could be reconsidered prior to second reading.
Side He additionally indicated that #41, #42 and #43 be accepted, as sug-
#9 gested by the City Council; also, #44 be accepted, as suggested by the
Planning Commission.
It was further noted that #47 be accepted, as suggested by the City
Council, with #48 being used, as shown by the Planning Commission;
also, #49 should be accepted, as was suggested by the City Council,
for a minimum of three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
Barry Eden said there were certain recommendations he would submit to
Council, for consideration prior to second reading.
Mr. Cross indicated there was another section of the code, which re-
quires fractional configuration; and, if a shopping center was developed
at minimum parking, excluding handicapped requirements, such as 1 to 200,
all retail, and the bays in the center does not fall within the equal
provisions of 200 square feet, then it would have to be rounded -off.
What occurs, he said, is that the last bay would be penalized.
C/M Disraelly felt that the number of units should be considered, rather
than bay -by -bay, for the total shopping center, but fractional numbers
could be used. He additionally requested that it be considered prior
to second reading.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to amend Code Section 18, based on the original
input of the Council, at its prior workshop, with changes, and the
items not numbered on Temp. Ord. #784, be handled as proposed, and
the suggested changes be incorporated for second reading, as follows:
#8-Planning Commission; #9-City Council; #12--Cit Council;
#13-Planning Commission, with an addition of a) 1 to 100 square feet
of floor area, and b) Athletic Clubs indoors, with 1 to 200 square feet
of floor area; #16-E-Tty Council, 417-Plannin Commission, deleting the
comma, after the word"Private";#18-Planning Commission; #20-Planning
Commission; #21-City Council; #33-Planning Commission, #39-Planning
Commission, with the addition of the word "fixed" after number four (4);
#40-Planning Commission, with the addition of 25% of parking permitted
on the grassed area; #41--C_ity Council, #42-City Council; #43-City
Council; #44-Plannin Commission; #47-City Council; #48-Planning Commis-
sion; #49-CityCouncil.And, all numbers other than these, will be -
the proposed folio, which is headed; Comparison of Proposed Parking
Ordinance, and Existing Parking Ordinance Regulations", will apply for
all numbers that are not included in the aforementioned, with the ex-
ception of #19 - Financial Institutions, where subparagraph b) Savings
and Loan Associations, shall read one (1) space per 150 square feet.
Also, on #22, Golf Course, after 25% of the required parking area may
be grassed, adding the words"within the required area".
C/W Kelch SECONDED THE MOTION. C/M Disraelly said that the comparison
chart, consisting of seven pages, was previously prepared by the Director
of Community Development.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE.
Mayor Falck requested that the City Clerk have this retyped, and pre-
sented to the City Council prior to second reading.
LEGAL AFFAIRS
20. Montwood -- Vacation of Rights -of -Way - Discussion and possible action
on:
a)
Temp.
Reso.
#1654
- Tract
47
- North
Golf
Course
b)
Temp.
Reso.
#1655 --
Tract
57
-
c)
Temp.
Reso.
#1656
- Tract
68
-
d)
Temp.
Reso.
#1657
- Tract
A
- North
Golf
Course
e)
Temp.
Reso.
#1658 --
Tract
G
- South
Golf
Course
f)
Temp.
Reso.
#1659
- Tract
J
- South
Golf
Course
-29-
10/8/80
mr/
J
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:a) Approved, as amended;
b) thru f) Withdrawn by Petition er,for
resubmission.
RESOLUTION NO.R- �SD�p PASSED.
C/M Disraelly inquired of the City Attorney as to $25.00 vacation
fees being paid, at the time of application, which resolution was
adopted on October lst, 1980, to which Mr. Birken indicated that
the request was submitted prior to the establishment of the fees,
and felt that Montwood was notified.
Patrick Brown, appearing for Montwood, responded that the $25.00
fees were not paid, but would gladly pay the fee, per application.
a) The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1654, and explained that the
purpose of vacation of easements was that the applicant will take
the position that roads will never be built on those rights -of -way.
These were dedicated in the early 1900's, and are on either section
or quarter section lines. Roads, he said, have been built near
the areas to be vacated, with some being on golf course right-of-way,
and some on other property that is being developed.
He reminded Council that the Sabal Palm Golf Course has a right-of-
way, although it is near Commercial Boulevard, and has been used for
negotiating or bargaining purposes, but vacation of right -of --way on
the golf course itself, the Council might not be too anxious to do.
He felt that some are golf course property, and other are not.
C/M Disraelly confirmed the fact that the application was for 15
foot rights -of -way, and the west side of the boundary was not being
applied, but only the east side. He did presume that it was original-
ly a 30 foot right-of-way.
Mr. Brown of Tiballi & Brown, felt this. might be an error, because
there was a title objection in an effort to arrange for the sale of
Tract 47. In dealing with this title objection, he said, it was
determined that it ran through the entire section; the west 15 feet
of Section 4, but felt that it should a 30 foot request, and did
believe it was an oversight. Mr. Brown said that they should redraw
the legal descriptions, to include 15 feet on either side of the
section line.
Mayor Falck felt the items should be withdrawn, and could be re-
submitted.
C/M Disraelly MOVED approval of Temp. Reso. #1654, for Tract 47,
with Section 2 subject to adoption by the County Commission, and
Section 3, upon adoption 10/8/80; also, that the petitioner agrees
to pay vacation fees of $25 for each vacation. V/M Massaro SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
Mr. Brown requested that Items b) through f) be withdrawn for re-
submission of the additional 15 feet, and the application fee will
be paid for the Tract which has been approved this day.
37. Medical Arts Building - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Site Plan
b) Landscaping Plan
c) Water & Sewer Developers Agreement
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to 10/9/80 meeting.
Mr. Birken indicated that the mortgagee was to sign the Water & Sewer
Developers Agreement, on Monday, and was not aware as to whether it
has been done. If not, he felt approval could be made subject to this
execution.
Mr. Cross said that the applicant is aware of the fees that are due,
but does not have the check with him this day.
The City Attorney advised that he received the Water. & Sewer Developers
Agreement late, but was acceptable
C/M Disraelly said that because there were no reports received on this
-30- 10/8/80
mr/
� r �
item, and was agendized by consent, he would MOVE that it be tabled
to the recessed meeting of October 9, 1980, and C/M Zemel SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
LEGAL AFFAIRS
27. Fraternal Order of Police - Contract -- Temp. Reso. #1660 - Discussion
and possible action to approve a two-year contract authorizing the
appropriate City Officials to execute same.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTTON:Adopted;with Mayor, RESOLUTION NO.R--'JD 1 PASSED.
City Manager and City Clerk authorized
to execute it.
The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1660.
Tape C/M Disraelly advised that the negotiating team has worked diligently
Side with the Florida State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police, and have agreed
#10 on a contract under which the Police Officers work. The major change,
he said, from the prior year's contract, is in the wages, Article 29,
whereby it includes, effective 10/1/80, a 12% salary increase for each
bargaining unit member; also, effective 10/l/81, an additional 10%
increase. Any member of the bargaining unit, with 20 years of service,
or more, and who is at the top of his range, will receive, on his anni-
versary date, a pay increase of 2%.
He additionally stated that there were no changes in uniform allowances,
holidays, vacations, sick leave, payments towards health insurance, with
no cost changes involved. But, he said, there was some verbiage changes
in areas, and was signed September 30, 1980, by the four members of
the Fraternal Order of Police, based on hand -shakes between the members
of the negotiating teams. He then MOVED for the approval of Temp. Reso.
#1660, and the Mayor, City Manager and City Clerk be authorized to
execute same. C/M Zemel SECONDED the motion.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
TAMARAC UTILITIES - WEST
2. Public Service Commission Refunds -- Discussion and possible action on
request for authorization to rent computer equipment software.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to 10/22/80 meeting.
Mayor Falck said that he received a note indicating that Steve Wood,
the Finance Director, has been advised that a vendor who used an
intermediary to offer their quote, is able to offer another method
of proposal to the City, which would yield a savings of $2,000.00.
This data, he said, will be confirmed in writing, within two days,
and is a significant development, and could alter Mr. Wood's recom-
mendations.
The Mayor suggested that the item be tabled to a reconvened session,
or to the next regular meeting, or could be held at a Special Meeting,
if necessary.
C/M Disraelly MOVED to table the item to the next regular meeting of
10/22/80, and C/W Kelch SECONDED.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE.
MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 6:00 P.M., to THURSDAY, 10/%80,AT2:30 P.M.
J
\N
�,('lam
MAY O
ATTEST:
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
-31-
10/8/80
mr/
M
0-0
Thi public document was promulgated at a cost of $�` or
$/ 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.
--3z-
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL ON .✓a
10/8/80
mr/