HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-10-10 - City Commission Regular Meeting MinutesRECORD OF COUNCIL ACTIONS/DISCUSSION
CITY OF TAMARAC
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1989
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.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 research.
Council may agendize by majority consent matters of an urgent
nature which have come to Council's attention after
publication.
INTRODUCTION
1. PRESENTATION by Mayor Abramowitz of a proclamation
designating October, 1989, as "SPINAL HEALTH MONTH".
FINAL ACTION:
PRESENTATION was made to Dr. Mattera.
CONSENT AGENDA
2. Items listed under Consent Agenda, Item 2, are viewed to be
routine and the recommendation will be enacted by one
motion in the form listed below. If discussion is
desired, then the item(s) will be removed from the Consent
Agenda and will be considered separately.
City Clerk
a. MOTION TO APPROVE the minutes of the following City
Council meetings:
1. 8/24/89 - Special Meeting
2. 9/08/89 - Special Meeting
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED 2.a.1. and 2.a.2.
b. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales permit and
waiver of the 300--foot distance requirement for
issuance of certificates of occupancy for LAKES OF
CARRIAGE HILLS for a six-month period from 11/13/89 to
5/13/90.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
Page 1
10/10/89
2. c. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales permit
for VERSAILLES GARDENS for a six-month period from
10/22/89 to 4/22/90.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
d. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales and
a inistrative office and waiver of the 300-foot
distance requirement for issuance of certificates of
occupancy for WOODMONT TRACT 74/75, Site Plan #2, for
a six-month period from 10/28/89 to 4/28/90.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
Engineering/Utilities
e. MOTION TO APPROVE rejection of all bids received under
Bid #89-51, Additions to Water Treatment Plant, TUW
Project 86-14B, due to insufficient CIAO funding.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
CONSIDERATIONS
General Administrative
3. MOTION TO APPROVE final release of retainage in the amount
of 4,602,06 to Thomas W. Ruff & Co. of Florida for
furnishings supplied to the Tamarac Municipal
Complex/Police Facility.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
4. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on minimum square footage
requirements in residential areas.
FINAL ACTION:
City Council wishes to have a study and survey completed of
the surrounding cities. City Manager to report on time
frame for completion.
ORDINANCES
General Administrative
5. MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1457 on first reading adopting
and enacting a new Code for the City of Tamarac.
FINAL ACTION:
REMOVED at the City Manager's request.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:30 P.M.
Community Development
6. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. _Ord. _#1443 on second
reading to amend Chapter 21 of the Code to provide for
regulation of all signs within the City.
FINAL ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 0-89-31 PASSED.
Public Hearing was held. APPROVED on second reading.
Page 2
10/10/89
7. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1444 on second
reading to amend Section 28-171 of the Code pertaining to
distance requirements for delicatessens and restaurants in
special exception requirements.
FINAL ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 0-89-32 PASSED.
Pu lic Hearing was held. APPROVED on second reading.
S. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1446 on first
reading to amend Chapter 18 of the Code pertaining to off
street parking.
FINAL ACTION:
Motion to Approve defeated.
RESOLUTIONS
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:30 P.M.
Community Development
9. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Reso. #5561
concerning a request by THE PALMS INTERNATIONAL MARKET for
a special exception to permit the operation of a
delicatessen in COMMERCIAL PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER at 5355-
5357 N. State Road 7, which is zoned B-2 (Planned
Business). Petition #25-Z-89
FINAL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. R-89-261 PASSED.
Public Hearing was held. APPROVED.
Public Works De artment
10. MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Reso. #5560 authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute an agreement with
Broward County pertaining to Trafficways Illumination on
Rock Island Road from Commercial Boulevard to NW 44 Street.
FINAL ACTION:
REMOVED at City Manager's request.
OPEN PUBLIC FORUM
11. OPEN PUBLIC FORUM - Any member of the public who wishes to
a dress the City Council at this time must, in advance of
the item, give his/her name and address to the City Clerk.
REPORTS
12. City Council
13. City Manager
14. City Attorney
15. MOTION TO ADOPT Tem . Reso. #5569 authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute an agreement with
Carla Coleman for consultant services for review of the
City Charter.
FINAL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. R-89-262 PASSED.
APPROVED.
Page 3
10/10/89
16. MOTION TO APPROVE various seminars and courses to be
attended by certain members of the Fire Department during
Fiscal Year 1989/90.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
17. MO_TION TO ADOPT Temp. Reso. #5568 approving the use of
BROOKWOOD PLAZA for a craft fair to be sponsored by Kit N'
Kaboodle, 7160 W. Mc Nab Road, from 10/28/89 through
10/29/89.
FINAL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. R-89-263 PASSED.
APPROVED.
18. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on hearing date for
Westport Development of Regional Impact (DRI).
FINAL ACTION:
Hearing date was set for an evening meeting on Thursday,
December 21, 1989, at 7:30 p.m.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The City Council may consider and act upon such other business
as may come before it.
In the event this agenda must be revised, such revised copies
will be available to the public at the City Council meeting.
Pursuant to Chapter 286.0105, Florida Statutes, if a person
decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with
respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, 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 based.
J �
Carol A. Evans
City Clerk
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Wednesday, October 11, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. - Public_ Hearing
on the Comprehensive Plan and other
items.
1
Page 4
10/10/89
CITY OF TAMARAC
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1989
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Abramowitz called this meeting to Order on
Tuesday, October 10, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers.
MEDITATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Abramowitz called for the
Pledge of Allegiance followed by a Moment of Silent Meditation.
DDVaV"M.
ABSENT AND EXCUSED:
ALSO PRESENT:
Mayor Norman Abramowitz
Vice Mayor Dr. H. Larry Bender
Councilman Bruce Hoffman
Councilman Henry Rohr
Councilman Jack Stelzer
Mike Couzzo, Acting City Manager
Richard Doody, City Attorney
Carol A. Evans, City Clerk
Karen Bushe, Special Services
Secretary
Mayor Abramowitz announced that there would be a Special
Council meeting held tomorrow night (Wednesday, October
11, 1989) at 7:30 P.M. to hear the scheduled Public
Hearings.
Mayor Abramowitz wished the residents a very Happy New
Year.
INTRODUCTION
1. PRESENTATION by Mayor Abramowitz of a proclamation
designating October, 1989, as "SPINAL HEALTH MONTH".
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
PRESENTATION was made to Dr. John Mattera.
Mayor Abramowitz read the proclamation and presented it
to Dr. John Mattera.
Dr. Mattera said he was proud and honored to accept the
proclamation from the City on behalf of his patients and
staff.
ORDINANCES
General Administrative
5. MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1457 on first reading adopting
and enacting a new Code for the City of Tamarac.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
REMOVED at the City Manager's request.
* V/M Bender MOVED to REMOVE Temp Ord. #1457 from the Agenda
* at the City Manager's request, SECONDED by C/M Hoffman.
Page 1
10/10/ 89--pw
VOTE:
RESOLUTIONS
Public Works Department
ALL VOTED AYE
10. MOTION TO ADOPT Teem. Reso. #5560 authorizing the appro-
p into City- officials to execute an agreement with Broward
County pertaining to Trafficways Illumination on Rock Island
Road from Commercial Boulevard to NW 44 Street.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
REMOVED at the City Manager's request.
* C/M Rohr MOVED to REMOVE Temp. Reso. #5560 from the Agenda
* at the City Manager's request, SECONDED by V/M Bender.
ffsy"
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
ALL VOTED AYE
18. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on hearing date for
Westport Development o Regional Impact (DRI).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
AGENDIZED by Consent. (SEE PAGES 5 and 21 for Final Action)
* V/M Bender MOVED to AGENDIZE this Item by Consent as Item 18,
* SECONDED by C/M Rohr.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
CONSENT AGENDA - ITEM 2 a. through e.
City Clerk
2. a. MOTION TO APPROVE the minutes of the following
C—,-ty CCouncil meetings:
1. 8/24/89 - Special Meeting
2. 9/08/89 - Special Meeting
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED 1 and 2.
b. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales permit
and waiver of the 300-foot distance requirement for issuance
of certificates of occupancy for LAKES OF CARRIAGE HILLS for
a six-month period from 11/13/89 to 5/13/90.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
c. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales permit for
VERSAILLES GARDENS for a six-month period from 10/22/89 to
4/22/90.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
d. MOTION TO APPROVE renewal of a model sales and admini--
str t e office and waiver of the 300-foot distance
requirement for issuance of certificates of occupancy
for WOODMONT TRACT 74/75, Site Plan #2, for a six-month
period from 10/28/89 to 4/28/90.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
1
11
1
Page 2
10/10/89-pw
1
1
Engineering /Utilities
e. MOTION TO APPROVE rejection of all bids received under
B8id 9-51, Additions to Water Treatment Plant, TUW
Project 86-14B, due to insufficient CIAC funding.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
* C/M Hoffman MOVED to APPROVE the Consent Agenda, Item 2 a.
* through e, SECONDED by C/M Rohr.
VOTE:
CONSIDERATIONS
General Administrative
ALL VOTED AYE
3. MOTION TO APPROVE final release of retainage in the amount
of $4,602.06 to Thomas W. Ruff & Co., of Florida for
furnishings supplied to the Tamarac Municipal Complex/
Police Facility.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
* C/M Rohr MOVED to APPROVE this Item, SECONDED by C/M Hoffman.
City Manager Kelly said this request was for approval of
the final release of the retainage for all of the
furnishings that were provided for the Police Facility.
He said the furnishings were reviewed and approved after
installation by the designer and Broward Sheriff's Office
Commander McIntosh,
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
4. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on minimum square footage
requirements rn residential 1 areas.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
Cry Council wishes to have a study and
survey completed of the surrounding
Cities. City Manager is to report on the
time frame for completion.
C/M Hoffman said he would like a study and survey done
regarding the best possible use of square footage for
residential areas. He said he was not convinced that the
City Code addressed this matter appropriately. He said
he would like to review a study and survey in order to
determine what would best serve the City. He asked that
the City Council direct the City Manager, City Attorney
and Community Development Department to meet regarding
this item and report to the City Council regarding the
period of time it would take to review this matter. He
said he did not want this matter to proceed for several
months.
Mayor Abramowitz said he was very interested in this
matter because it was needed in the City.
C/M Rohr and V/M Bender agreed with C/M Hoffman's
suggestions.
Page 3
I
10/10/89-pw
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not object to the City
Council receiving as much information as possible before
acting on a matter.
C/M Hoffman said he would like to see a report submitted
by the City Manager as soon as possible regarding the
time frame for the survey and study. He said he wanted
staff to realize that this matter needed to be resolved
as soon as possible.
City Manager Kelly said he would meet individually with
the City Councilmembers regarding the time needed for
this matter. He said the City's staff had a very tight
time frame this year because of the budget restraint;
therefore, outside assistance may be needed.
General Administrative
15. MOTION TO ADOPT Temp
pr-'i e Cityy officials
Coleman for consultant
Charter.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
Reso. #5569 authorizing the appro-
to execute an agreement with Carla
services for review of the City
RESOLUTION NO. R-89-262 - PASSED
City Attorney Doody read Temp. Reso. #5569 by title.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Reso. #5569, SECONDED by
C/M Rohr.
City Manager Kelly said this matter has been discussed
several times during the past several months. He said
because of the Legislative Session, Carla Coleman was not
able to assist the City in reviewing the Charter until
this time. He said Ms. Coleman was the Director of
Governmental Relations of Florida Atlantic University and
previously served as a Senior Research Associate for the
FAU/FIU Joint Center. He said he worked with Ms. Coleman
on the Charter Review Board for Broward County.
City Manager Kelly said the proposal submitted to the
City by Ms. Coleman was to do a complete review the
Charter, meet with the Charter Board, City Council and
staff, individually and as a Body. He said Ms. Coleman
projected to have the study completed by January 2, 1990
and the cost would be approximately $3,000.00. He said
$1,500.00 would be paid when the agreement was approved
and $1,500.00 would be submitted after the study was
completed.
City Manager Kelly said this study was long overdue and
it would provide a professional perspective to the City.
Mayor Abramowitz said he understood that Ms. Coleman was
very qualified to do this study and he was looking
forward to Ms. Coleman's report.
Weboom
ALL VOTED AYE
16. MOTION TO APPROVE various seminars and courses to be
attended by certain members of the Fire Department during
Fiscal Year 1989/90.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
1
1
1
Page 4
10/10/89--pw
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE this Item, SECONDED by C/M Rohr.
City Manager Kelly said during the budget process, the
City Council approved travel for the Fire Department to
various seminars. He said the approximate cost was
$2,400.00 and the majority of the allocation would be
expended for the travel to the National Fire Academy in
Emmittsberg, Maryland. He said the Academy paid for the
overall costs; however, the City paid the costs for
travel and part of the meals.
City Manager Kelly said any travel of a Department that
would pertain to overnight accommodations had to be
approved by the City Council. He said some members of
the Fire Department would be attending the Academy this
month and the request was for City Council approval of
the expenditure for the allocated funds.
VOTE:
Community Development
ALL VOTED AYE
17. MOTION TO ADOPT Tem Reso. #5568 approving the use of
P BROOKWOOD LAZA oor�a craft fair to be sponsored by Kit N'
Kaboodle, 7160 W. McNab Road, from 10/28/89 through 10/29/89.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. R-89-263 - PASSED
APPROVED.
City Attorney Doody read Temp. Reso. #5568 by title.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Reso. #5568, SECONDED by
* C/M Hoffman.
Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City Planner, said the request was
from Kit N' Kaboodle to hold a craft fair at Brookwood
Plaza on October 28 and 29, 1989. She said there would
be 25 tables provided for the participants and the Plaza
was aware that the applicant provided a Hold Harmless
Agreement and Certificate of Insurance to the City. She
recommended approval of this request.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
Community Development
18. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on hearing date for
Westport Development of Regional Impact (DRI).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
AGENDIZED by Consent on Page 2.
Public Hearing was scheduled for Thursday,
December 21, 1989, at 7:30 P.M.
Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City Planner, said the City
received an application for development approval, which
was referred to as the Westport Development of Regional
Impact (DRI). She said this was for land development in
the south half of Land Section 7 and was proceeding under
Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes. She said this law
required that the City and South Florida Regional
Planning Council, act on a proposed Development Order.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the South Florida Regional
Planning Council and City staff have been in the process
of reviewing the proposed application of development with
Page 5
10/10/89-pw
the applicant since March, 1989, to determine the
sufficiency of the application.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the South Florida Regional
Planning Council issued a Notice of Sufficiency late last
week and, under the Statute, the City Council must set a
Public Hearing date for the reading of the Development
Order after the Sufficiency Statement was issued.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the substance or the
sufficiency of the application was not to be discussed at
this time. She said the action at this time was for a
Public Hearing date and Chapter 380 stated that the
Hearing must be advertised at least 60 days before the
Hearing was held. She said the Hearing could be held on
December 21, 1990; however, this was a day meeting and
she recommended that the Hearing be set for January 10,
1990, at 7:30 P.M. because the Hearing had to be held in
the evening.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the applicant's Counsel was
present and indicated that they would like to have the
Public Hearing held prior to the closing business of the
year, which would be December 31, 1989.
Mayor Abramowitz asked why Mrs. Carpenter -Craft suggested
that the Hearing be held on January 10, 1990, as opposed
to December 21, 1989.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said although staff has been
involved in the review of the DRI applications in the
past, they have had sole responsibility as the lead
person. She said she would prefer that staff be given
more time to review the Development Order because it was
the only DRI that the City may have. She said there was
no point after 7 months of sufficiency to rush the action
within a 60 day period.
City Manager Kelly said this matter was very important
and the South Florida Regional Planning Agency felt that
things would go smoothly. He said staff hoped that
everything would go smoothly and they would have the time
to review the Development Order sufficiently by December
21, 1989; however, this could not be guaranteed. He said
staff wanted to make sure that their recommendations to
the City Council was in the best interest of the City.
City Manager Kelly said the City Council meeting of
December 21, 1989, could be changed to an evening
meeting. He said he discussed the costs for staff to
review the Development Order and the applicant did not
object to paying for those costs; however, the cost
factor was the concern of staff but the time needed to
review the application was also a concern.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if the City had to wait 60 days to
call a meeting on this matter and Mrs. Carpenter -Craft
said the Statutory minimum for advertisement was 60 days.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if staff could review the
application sufficiently by December 21, 1989, and Mrs.
Carpenter -Craft said the South Florida Regional Council
would meet with staff and present to the City and
applicant the conditions that were to be in the
Development Order.
1
1
u
Page 6
10/10/89-pw
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the appointed Body would meet
on November 6, 1989, to approve, deny or revise staff's
proposal. She said the applicant would prepare a
proposed Development Order and submit it to the City for
its review, comments and/or revisions. She said staff
would like to review the Development Order at least 14
days before the Hearing so a substantial review could be
done and finalized by all involved.
Ed Stacker, Attorney from Ruden, Barnett, McClosky,
Smith, Schuster and Russell, said his firm was the
Counsel for the applicant of the Development Order. He
said this issue was very important to his client and he
was requesting action that would not compromise the
process or the position of the City's staff. He said
staff has been very cooperative through the process and
there were several agencies that reviewed the applicant
for development approval.
Attorney Stacker said the Development of Regional Impact
was a proposed development of such magnitude that would
impact other jurisdictions; therefore, a State and
Regional review was needed. He said there were several
entities and agencies, including the City, that have been
reviewing the application for several months.
Attorney Stacker said the South Florida Regional Council,
who implemented several disciplines, determined that the
application was sufficient and the procedural step was
for the local government to now publish a public notice
within 60 days.
Attorney Stacker said he was asking the City to recognize
the applicant's request for business reasons to act on
the Development Order before 1990. He said the applicant
was willing to work with the City's staff in this review
and he suggested that a Public Hearing be set for
December 21, 1989 at 7:30 P.M., and, if necessary,
additional Public Hearings could be called.
Attorney Stacker said the applicant was meeting with the
South Florida Regional Council on October 17, 1989,
regarding a preliminary conditions meeting. He said the
boilerplate provisions would be provided and, on October
20, 1989, another meeting with the South Florida Regional
Council would be held in which a final report and
recommendation would be submitted. He said the South
Florida Regional Council would be meeting on November 6,
1989, to finalize their vote on the staff assessment.
Attorney Stacker said he understood the City's desire to
have an evening meeting and he would not try to avoid
this. He asked that the City Council agree to authorize
and enact the Statutory requirement to hold a meeting
within 60 days, which would be December 21, 1989. He
suggested that the City Council schedule December 21,
1989, as an evening City Council meeting. He said
nothing precluded the City from advertising and holding a
public hearing on December 21, 1989, and, if an agreement
was not in order at that time, the applicant could
request another hearing date. He said the applicant
could not accomplish the goal without the City's
cooperation in setting the meeting.
Attorney Stacker said he felt that a sufficient review
could be done within this time frame.
(SEE PAGE 21 for Final Action)
Page 7
10/10/89-pw
At 7:25 P.M., Mayor Abramowitz RECESSED this meeting and
RECONVENED at 7:30 P.M. with ALL PRESENT.
PUBLIC HEARING - 7:30 P.M.
ORDINANCES
Community Development
6. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1443 on
second read ni g to amend Chapter 21 of tFe' Code to provide
for regulation of all signs within the City.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 0-89-31 - PASSED
Pudic Heard g was held.
APPROVED on second reading.
City Attorney Doody read Temp Ord. #1443 by title.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE Temp Ord. #1443 on second reading,
* SECONDED by C/M Hoffman.
C/M Hoffman said since the first reading of this
Ordinance, there have been revisions; however, there may
be matters to consider in the future. He said before the
City Council considered this matter, there were several
omissions in the Ordinance, such as Page 6, should
include, "pavement adjacent to the sign".
City Attorney Doody said his concerns were that there may
be an existing measurement stated in the Ordinance;
however, he would review this matter.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if C/M Hoffman's changes could be
included in the Motion and City Attorney Doody said this
would depend on the number and severity of the changes.
C/M Hoffman said Page 16, fourth paragraph, "be" should
be added to "shall "be" equal to the cost removal". He
said Page 18(d)(1), "above the road measured at the edge
of the pavement adjacent to the sign", should be added.
He said Page 23(b)(3), "shall not exceed 6 feet in
height", should read, "shall not exceed 6 feet in height
from the side of the road".
City Attorney Doody said he would prefer that amendments
be brought back and C/M Hoffman said these were not
amendments but changes that should have taken place after
the first reading.
C/M Hoffman said Page 27(5), should state, "all
elevations should be measured from the paved side of the
road adjacent to the sign".
C/M Rohr suggested that the changes be listed and
incorporated in the Motion and Mayor Abramowitz said he
did not object to the revisions; however, he did not want
them to create problems in the future.
C/M Hoffman said the revisions were not changes but
corrections and Mayor Abramowitz asked if the corrections
could be made without complications.
City Attorney Doody said the Motion could be to Approve
the Ordinance reflecting the changes submitted by C/M
Hoffman.
:
10/10/89-pw
* V/M Bender MOVED to AMEND his Motion for Approval of Temp.
* Ord. #1443 to include the changes recommended by C/M Hoffman,
* C M Hoffman AMENDED his Second.
V/M Bender said C/M Hoffman's recommended changes would
assist the enforcement of the Ordinance because the
measurements would be easier from the edge of the road as
opposed to trying to figure where the crown of the road
would be.
Mayor Abramowitz Opened the Public Hearing.
Bill Lastrom, Attorney for Baers Furniture, said his
concern was with the existing signs that would be
non -conforming; namely, Baers Furniture. He said the
draft was submitted to him this morning; therefore, he
did not have a significant time to review it.
TAPE 2
Attorney Lastrom said the non -conforming Ordinance;
particularly, the one year clause for compliance, would
invite litigation against the City. He said he has
several on -going litigation cases with the Cities of Fort
Lauderdale and Plantation. He said there has been a
comprise solution with the City of Plantation to avoid
their automatic enforcement of the Ordinances requiring
landowners without compensation to take down their signs
and replace them with new signs. He said the case law
was very doubtful that the City had authority to enter
into retroactive Ordinances.
Attorney Lastrom said he was more concerned about the
businessman's perspective because the signs cost between
$10,000.00 to $50,000.00 to replace. He said in some
instances, there would be buildings closer to the highway
because the highway was widened. He said there was a
clause allowing waivers to be requested by the City
Council for certain circumstances; however, in the past,
when hardship was not defined in the Ordinance, it
eliminated the hardships of economics, which were
self-created because a person gave up property as
dedication.
Attorney Lastrom said the people that were not conforming
with the Ordinance may not have been given specific
notice that non -conforming signs had to be replaced
within one year; therefore, they were not in attendance.
He said this was very important and he did not have the
opportunity to participate during the Sign Advisory Task
Force meetings because he was not informed of the
meetings until recently.
Attorney Lastrom said the business community may not be
aware of the height size and setbacks and he suggested
that Page 33, Section 21-12(a), be deleted and (b) become
(a) .
C/M Hoffman asked when the Baer Furniture sign was
erected and Attorney Stacker said approximately 15 years
ago.
C/M Hoffman said there was a Sign Ordinance in effect for
4 years prior to this Ordinance, which would have made
that sign a non -conforming sign. He said the sign should
have been in compliance 8 months ago; however, in
consideration of review of the matter and the Ordinance
may be amended, the City waived the enforcement of the
previous Ordinance.
Page 9
10/10/89--pw
C/M Hoffman said if this Ordinance was not approved, the
sign would have to be changed to conform with the
existing Sign Ordinance. He said Attorney Lastrom's
argument was not appropriate because the sign has been
non -conforming for four years.
C/M Hoffman said the City posted and advertised their
meetings for the public and it would be unreasonable for
the City to be expected to send a special invitation to
everyone that may not be conforming.
Attorney Lastrom said by making the suggested change in
the Ordinance, the City would repeal the prior Ordinance
which would have an adverse affect on the business
community.
C/M Hoffman said there were several eyesores in the City
and, in order to implement Attorney Lastrom's suggestion,
the Ordinance would not be effective. He said the people
who have caused the problems in the City would not change
unless the City enacted and enforced an Ordinance of this
type.
C/M Hoffman said a business person who had to provide
additional expenses to come into compliance with the
Ordinance would feel that they were being singled out.
He said based on information from other Cities, this
would not be an unusual situation because the Cities had
the right to correct and enforce the Ordinances. He
asked City Attorney Doody for his comments.
City Attorney Doody said he felt the Ordinance was valid
or he would not have allowed the action by City Council.
He said there was criteria for hardship in the Ordinance,
the Ordinance consisted of many changes and there was
room to fine tune it. He said there was a waiver
provision and, if Attorney Lastrom's client met the
hardship provision, this waiver process could be used.
City Attorney Doody suggested that Attorney Lastrom
submitted written recommendations to the City Council
regarding changes.
Mayor Abramowitz said when the Sign Advisory Task Force
was created it consisted of a member from the Chamber of
Commerce, businessmen, sign companies and staff. He said
staff was directed to beautify the City when reviewing
and revising the Sign Ordinance. He said he heard
several complaints regarding businesses having signs in
compliance and businesses across from them not having
appropriate signs. He said these complaints were valid.
Mayor Abramowitz said C/M Hoffman stated that there was
an existing Sign Ordinance which allowed 5 years for
compliance; however, the businesses did not comply with
the Ordinance. He said the proposed Sign Ordinance was
enforceable in the best interest of the City and, if
there were grievances from the businesses, there were
avenues available for the businesses to take.
C/M Hoffman said when the Sign Advisory Task Force was
created, the Code Enforcement Department was ready to
write citations because the conformity time had expired.
He said the Sign Advisory Task Force requested that the
City Council declare a moratorium pending the adoption of
a new Sign Ordinance. He said this was requested to
allow businesses, such as Baers Furniture, to have an
additional year for compliance when they were already
Page 10
10/10/89-pw
granted 5 years to comply. He said if the business would
have conformed to the previous Ordinance, they would have
been in conformance with the proposed Ordinance. He said
the Sign Advisory Task Force was very careful in
protecting the businesses that conformed to the existing
Ordinance.
Attorney Lastrom said his concern in a non -compensation
Ordinance was because the City Council could change the
Ordinance at any time. He asked the City Council to
allow the businesses to review the proposed Ordinance
before voting it.
Edgar Pryor, First National Tax Services, said his
business had a sign on the west side of State Road 7,
south of Commercial Boulevard. He said in reviewing the
Ordinance, he found that his sign would have to be
removed. He said the sign was worth approximately
$10,000.00 and he was never informed about the revised
Ordinance. He said he accidentally found out about the
revisions two weeks ago and he received the draft of
October 3, 1989, today.
Mr. Pryor said the draft referred to a Sign Advisory Task
Force and other efforts by the City to enact a new Sign
Ordinance. He said he was never informed about this
matter and there were not that many non -conforming signs
in the City. He said if the Ordinance was enacted, the
non -conforming sign owners would be informed to remove
their signs.
Mr. Pryor said it was unfortunate that the City did not
do this at the beginning of the process. He said he was
never given the opportunity to meet with the Sign
Advisory Task Force. He said the last time he was aware
that there may be a change in the Sign Ordinance was
several years ago and, during this time, non -conforming
signs were grandfathered in. He said he assumed that his
sign would be grandfathered in; however, he found out
tonight by C/M Hoffman that there was an existing Sign
Ordinance enacted, which rendered his sign as
non -conforming. He said he was not aware of this matter
and was not given the opportunity to give input on the
matter.
Mr. Pryor said there were several sign owners that were
not given the opportunity to express their concerns
because it was shrouded in secrecy. He asked if it was
proper to place a businessman in a position where a
$10,000.00 sign had to be removed without giving him the
opportunity to speak on it.
Mr. Pryor asked that the City allow the businesses to
meet with staff and inform the City of their objections
and concerns. He said this would provide a reasonable
compromise that would be sufficient to everyone involved.
He said if there were signs in the City that were not
attractive, the sign owners should be allowed to meet and
decide how the problems could be corrected, then
recommend a solution to the City.
C/M Hoffman said the Sign Advisory Task Force has been
meeting for one year and the meetings were advertised.
He said the businesses have had a year to comply with the
previous Sign Ordinance, request a waiver, or recommend
revisions of the Sign Ordinance. He said to ask the
businesses who caused the eyesore to present a solution
to the City was not the way to correct the problems.
Page 11
10/10/89-pw
C/M Hoffman said the only criticism the City had
regarding the Sign Ordinance, until tonight, was that it
was not restrictive enough. He said people suggested
that all ground signs be eliminated, as was done in the
City of Coral Springs. He said this was not implemented
because the Sign Advisory Task Force felt that this would
not be fair to the businesses.
C/M Hoffman said the City did not want to cause people
undue hardship; however, a sign with fourteen colors and
25 to 30 feet in the air, it was not the image the City
wanted to have in its business section. He said the
businesses could petition the City Council to make
changes; however, this was how and why the Sign Ordinance
was created.
C/M Hoffman said the Sign Ordinance was not created in
secrecy and one of the members of the Sign Advisory Task
Force was affected by this Ordinance.
Mr. Pryor said the person C/M.Hoffman referred to was a
neighboring business and Mayor Abramowitz asked if this
was the first time Mr. Pryor became aware that there was
a Sign Advisory Task Force. Mr. Pryor said he did not
know about the proposed Sign Ordinance until two weeks
ago.
Mr. Pryor said when the City advertised for meetings,
they were placed in the legal notices of the paper. He
said he did not read legal notices and C/M Hoffman said
there has been information in the news section several
times.
Mr. Pryor said he did not doubt this; however, he never
read this information. He said he was sure that there
were several businesses in the City that had
non -conforming signs.
Mayor Abramowitz said a compilation did not exist in the
City at this time and Mr. Pryor said this would occur
very soon. Mayor Abramowitz said this would occur once
Code Enforcement began issuing citations for
non -conforming signs.
Mr. Pryor said the City could have compiled the list of
non -conforming signs before the Ordinance was presented
for approval, which would have afforded the businesses
the opportunity to confer. He said the City of Coral
Springs barred signs by deed restriction and nobody in
the City of Coral Springs was asked to trash a $10,000.00
sign because there were never such signs.
Mr. Pryor said a merchant residing in the City of Coral
Springs knew what signs they had to erect. He asked that
the City Council allow the business owners to provide
their input on the matter. He said the City Council had
every right to pass an Ordinance of this type and all he
was asking was that the City allow the businesses
affected by the Ordinance to express their concerns.
Mr. Pryor said he discussed this matter with that member
of the Sign Advisory Task Force a few days ago and the
member believed that he did not have to remove the sign.
He said when the member agreed to the findings of the
Sign Advisory Task Force, he was under the impression
that all he would have to do was reduce the height of the
Page 12
10/10/89-pw
sign to 12 feet. He said he informed this member that
the sign had to be eliminated. He suggested that the
City Council ask this member if this was true.
Marty Riefs, Representative of Lennar Homes, Inc., said
he was concerned with the non -conforming community
directional and identification signs in the existing
residential areas. He said Page 29 of the Ordinance
indicated that the size of the sign would be determined
upon the width of the right-of-way. He said if a
right-of-way was 60 foot wide, it was indicated that the
base sign area shall be 28 square feet. He said the
definitions did not indicate anything for a base sign
area; however, there was a definition for a sign area.
He asked if the 28 square feet would be the definition of
a sign area.
Mr. Riefs said the sign area was not the overall square
footage of the overall sign. He said communities placed
their identification signs on a sign median; therefore,
he was asking if 28 square feet pertained to the actual
size of the sign placed on the structure.
C/M Hoffman said 28 square feet was the actual size of
the structure and 28 square feet could be used for all of
the letters, if needed. He said the structure was the
sign and Mr. Riefs would be entitled to 28 square feet on
each side.
Mr. Riefs said on this basis, the existing signs of the
communities would be appearing before the City Council
for a waiver because the signs may exceed 28 square feet.
C/M Hoffman said in preparing the Ordinance the Sign
Advisory Task Force insisted that the people have the
right to appeal for a waiver. He said the Sign Advisory
Task Force felt that the City Council should hear
hardships and make a decision in granting a waiver. He
said it was realized that everyone would not be satisfied
and that someone would have a hardship.
Mayor Abramowitz Closed the Public Hearing with no
further response.
Mayor Abramowitz said the City tried very hard to be fair
and equitable to all segments of the residents when
preparing the Ordinance. He said he was concerned with
the City becoming a State Road 7 by Broward Boulevard.
He said several people informed him, justifiably, that
their business was located across the street from a
hodge-podge sign and the City was asking their business
to beautify its sign.
Mayor Abramowitz asked the City Manager to designate
someone in the Building Department to hear hardships and,
if needed, bring the concerns before the City Council.
He said he felt that the waiver provision in the Code may
create a lot of work for staff for signs that were not
actually hardships. Fie said many of the existing
non -conforming signs were non -conforming several years
ago and the signs could not continue to be
non -conforming. He said the City would do everything
they could to be fair to those hardship cases; however,
the priority of the City was to make the City beautiful
by having the signs conforming. He said in order to meet
Page 13
10/10/89-pw
the demands of the City, some people would be hurt;
however, the City would do the best it could in judging
the hardships individually.
C/M Rohr said when he became a Councilmember 4 years ago,
there were several discussions regarding beautification
in the City; however, beautification has been a topic for
several years. He said the City Council had to make
decisions in the best interest of the City and there was
no way the City could assist the businesses in
compensating for the removal of non -conforming signs
because of budgetary reasons.
C/M Rohr said there came a time when compliance had to be
mandated and for many years the City allowed
non -conforming signs, which has multiplied and magnified
the signage in the City. He said the City Council wanted
to begin beautifying the City as opposed to continuing
the non-conformance.
City Manager Kelly said he was a member of the Board of
Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and he suggested
that the business community who were not active with the
Chamber of Commerce become active because it was a Board
that tried to reach out to the business community. He
said the three business people serving on the Sign
Advisory Task Force were not arbitrarily selected by the
City; however, the Chamber of Commerce designated members
to the Sign Advisory Task Force.
City Manager Kelly said the Chamber of Commerce had a
newsletter for their members which provided a great deal
of information regarding the proposed Sign Ordinance. He
said the businesses that were not active with the Chamber
of Commerce should consider becoming active with them
because it was an assistance to the businesses.
City Attorney Doody said he did not feel that the comment
regarding the challenge of the Ordinance not being
properly advertised was legitimate; however, he suggested
that the City Council adopt the Ordinance subject to C/M
Hoffman's recommended changes. He said there was an
amendment to the Ordinance suggested by staff and he
would incorporate that amendment in the Ordinance and
bring it back to the City Council for approval.
C/M Hoffman said the Ordinance could be approved as
written and amendments could be brought back to the City
Council in the future for further consideration. City
Attorney Doody said this was his suggestion.
* V/M Bender WITHDREW his Motion to Approve Temp. Ord. #1443
* subject to the changes recommended by C/M Herman, and C M
* Hoffman WITHDREW his Second.
* C/M Hoffman MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Ord. #1443 as written,
* SECONDED by C/M Rohr.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AXE
7. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1444 on
second reading to amend Section 28-171 o the Co e pertaining
to distance requirements for delicatessens and restaurants in
special exception requirements.
Page 14
10/10/89-pw
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 0-89-32 - PASSED
Public Hear ni g was held.
APPROVED on second reading.
City Attorney Doody read Temp. Ord. #1444 by title.
* C/M Rohr MOVED to APPROVE Temp Ord. #1444 on second reading,
* SECONDED by V/M Bender.
Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City Planner, said this request
was to change the requirements for restaurants and
delicatessens concerning the distance between the
structure in which the restaurant or delicatessen was
located to the nearest residential property line. She
said presently, a free standing building was required to
be 100 feet from the nearest residential property line
and a tenant in a multi -tenant building was subjected to
the requirement that any part of the structure in which
the restaurant or delicatessen was located must be no
less than 100 feet from the nearest residential property
line.
Mrs. Carpenter --Craft said if a tenant in a multi -tenant
building was in a portion of the building which was 300
feet away but, the structure was still within 100 feet of
the residential property line, the restaurant or
delicatessen could not operate at that location.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the proposal was to allow
language that the free standing building or the bay in a
multi -bay building be 100 feet from the nearest
residential line. She said the Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Ordinance at their September
6, 1989 meeting and she recommended approval.
Mayor Abramowitz Opened the Public Hearing.
Bill Lastrom, Attorney, asked what the definition for
delicatessen was under the City's Code. He said he
wondered if this would pertain to premade sandwiches from
a sandwich machine or for sale elsewhere.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the Code did not define a
delicatessen per se. She said the Code indicated
"kitchen" in the definition of a restaurant and
delicatessen. She said "kitchen" was an on -premises
facility for the preparation of food, included but not
limited to, sinks, stoves, ovens, refrigerators,
preparation tables, packages and storage equipment used
in the on -site preparation of food.
Mayor Abramowitz said if the foods were not placed in a
microwave on the premises, it did not constitute a
restaurant or delicatessen. He said if the food was not
prepared on the premises, it was not considered as a
restaurant or delicatessen.
C/M Hoffman said the Ordinance would be liberalizing the
Code because the Code presently stated that a free
standing building must be 100 feet away from a
residential property line. He said the Code presently
indicated that if a restaurant or delicatessen business
wanted to locate in a strip shopping center in a bay
1,000 feet away from a residential property line, it
would not be permitted because the edge of the building
may be closer than 100 feet.
Page 15
10/10/89-pw
C/M Hoffman said the Ordinance was trying to permit a
restaurant or delicatessen in a bay that was not closer
than 100 feet from a residential property line.
TAPE 3
Mayor Abramowitz Closed the Public Hearing with no
further response.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
8. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1446 on
-first read n� g to amend CTapter 18�the Code pertaining to
off street parking.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
Public Hear ni g was held.
DENIED.
City Attorney Doody read Temp Ord. #1446 by title.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Ord. #1446, SECONDED by
* C/M Hoffman.
Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City Planner, said the Planning
Commission recommended approval of this change. She said
the City received an application for a multi -family
development and staff was informed that the parking
requirements were more stringent in size than any of the
surrounding Cities. She said this was varied and Tamarac
did have larger spaces than the surrounding Cities. She
said the City required parking spaces to be 10 foot by 20
foot for multi -family and commercial developments. She
said the surrounding Cities required 9 foot by 18 foot.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said staff proposed several changes
to the parking Code, which staff did not consider to be
comprehensive in nature. She said for residential
parking in multi -family areas, staff was proposing 9 feet
in width and 18 feet in length, except for parallel
parking. She said for non-residential spaces, staff was
proposing that the spaces remain 10 feet in width and 18
feet in length. She said in multi -family residential
areas, the condominium association or rental manager
could police where there were large vehicles parked in a
9 foot space; however, this could not be done in a
non-residential development; therefore, a 10 foot width
was being recommended.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said staff recommended that
handicapped parking space requirements be reenforced and
she said the following language was being added, "under
minimal amount of parking in multi -family areas the
requirements of handicapped spaces in multi -family
residential areas shall be in conformance with the South
Florida Building Code, 1984 Broward County Edition, as it
may be amended from time to time.".
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said this language was being added
because certain applicants were finding the requirements
for multi -family confusing and were calculating it
substantially less than what was required in the Building
Code. She said the Parking Code authorized waivers but
did not define hardship and this Ordinance would require
applicants to be provided a cross parking agreement or
that the uses of the site would be limited by those on
Page 16
10/10/89-pw
the site plan to uses which could be accommodated by the
available parking. She said the Ordinance provided a
description of hardship as it was defined in other
Sections of the Code and she recommended approval of the
Ordinance.
C/M Hoffman said he listened to the Planning Commission
meeting when this Item was brought before them. He said
there was discussion regarding the requirement of a
double or single line for the spaces. He asked what the
difference would be. He said he would prefer a double
line; however, he would like to know why the Planning
Commission recommended the double line clause be removed
from the Ordinance.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said ultimately, the entire
Commission did not approve of the double line clause
being removed from the Ordinance; therefore, the change
was not implemented. She said the difference was
psychological as opposed to feasible. She said if the
space was 9 feet wide, it was measured from center line
to center line of the stripe. She said the notion was
that double lines reenforced where the cars were supposed
to be; however, a double or single line did not change
the width of the parking space.
Mayor Abramowitz Opened the Public Hearing.
Marty Riefs, Representative of Lennar Homes, Inc., said
the concern expressed at the Planning Commission meeting
was that many of the residents were elderly and the
double stripe would result in a 9 foot width being
reduced to an area of 7 feet and 10 inches. He said a
stripe was four inches on both sides and the measurement
would occur from the center line between each stripe;
therefore, the width of 9 feet would actually be reduced
to 7 feet and 10 inches.
Mr. Riefs said the concern was that the residents may
have difficulty in removing their cars and he felt it
would be better for the residents to have a 9 foot area
as opposed to a 7 foot and 10 inch area. He said this
was why the Planning Commission was ask -ad to consider
eliminating the double line clause from the Ordinance and
allow the existing single stripe.
Mayor Abramowitz said staff felt that double striping
should be used and Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said after Mr.
Riefs' comments, she realized that the Planning
Commission did approve the elimination of the double line
clause. She said this Hearing was advertised before the
Planning Commission took action; therefore, the Ordinance
before the City Council was the same Ordinance that the
Planning Commission considered. She said the Planning
Commission did change the Ordinance to single line.
C/M Rohr asked if he would be voting on single or double
line parking spaces.
City Attorney Doody said the Ordinance before the City
Council contained a double line parking clause. He said
the advertisement for this Ordinance indicated double
line parking spaces; therefore, the title had to be
readvertised if the action would be for single line
spaces.
C/M Hoffman said he felt it would be easier to park in
spaces with double lines.
Page 17
10/10/89-pw
C/M Rohr said every area he has seen had single lines and
he asked if the Code called for a double line; however,
single lines were being implemented.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the Ordinance would change the
single line requirement to a double line requirement.
She said the reason the matter was advertised as a double
line was because there would be a site plan before the
City Council and, in order to accommodate the request,
this Ordinance was advertised before the Planning
Commission meeting. She said the Ordinance would have
been changed to a single line as requested by the
Planning Commission if it had not been previously
advertised for the City Council.
C/M Rohr said he went to several places that had double
line parking spaces and the double lines provided more
spacing between the cars. He said he did not agree with
reducing the lines if it would create a lesser space for
the cars.
V/M Bender said the space would remain 9 feet in width
regardless of whether the lines were double or single.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said parking spaces in the
surrounding Cities were 9 feet in width with a double
line. She said double line spaces gave the drivers a
feeling of larger space when, in fact, it was the same
width as a single line parking space.
C/M Rohr asked if the drivers had to restrict themselves
to the inside lines or be allowed to park on the inside
line without receiving a parking ticket.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the only time a ticket would be
issued was on a public street. She said most of those
spaces were parallel and were not affected by the
Ordinance.
City Attorney Doody said the existing Code provided for
single line parking spaces and, if the City Council
wanted single line spacing, the double line requirement
in the proposed Ordinance could be struck from the
Ordinance because it was less stringent than what was
advertised. He said the City Council could make changes
less than what was advertised.
C/M Rohr asked if the existing areas with single line
parking spaces have to change the spaces to double lines
if the City Council approved the Ordinance with a double
line requirement.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the existing areas would have
to comply with double line parking spaces when they came
in for a permit to restripe their spaces.
C/M Rohr said there would probably be several existing
communities that would be restriping within the next year
and this was an additional cost.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the communities would probably
find this as an advantage because they would be gaining
parking spaces because of the decreased size.
C/M Rohr said his condominium area has had enough parking
with single stripes and he was not looking forward to
additional costs for double striping.
Page 18
10/10/89-pw
Mayor Abramowitz asked Mrs. Carpenter -Craft what her
recommendation would be on this matter and Mrs.
Carpenter -Craft said if she had to recreate the Code
requirements, she would not change the striping issue;
therefore, she would continue with single striping. She
said the issue was changing the parking spaces from 9
foot by 18 foot and staff complicated the change by
thinking that a double stripe would aid in people's
understanding that the spaces would be smaller. She said
staff felt the double striping was better; however, the
requirement was not worth denial of the Ordinance.
C/M Hoffman said staff felt the double stripe was better;
however, because there were objections, staff was not
recommending double striping.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said she was not suggesting that
double striping be eliminated from the Ordinance because
of the objections. She said Mayor Abramowitz asked her
for her professional opinion and, in order to pass the
Ordinance by October 18, 1989, the double line striping
amendment would not have been implemented.
C/M Hoffman asked Mrs. Carpenter -Craft if she felt it was
better to have double striped parking spaces and Mrs.
Carpenter -Craft replied, yes.
Irving Lopatey, Resident, said he lived in a
condominium
for approximately 15 years and he understood
that
double
lines would assist the residents in parking
straighter.
He said there were several condominiums that
were
very
strict with the residents that parked over a
said the business papers indicated that there
line.
was
He
a trend
for larger cars and he felt that double stripping
would
create problems.
Mayor Abramowitz Closed the Public Hearing with no
further response.
Mayor Abramowitz said he was looking at this requirement
from a safety perspective. He said he felt that a double
stripe would be confusing and he would prefer to see
single striping. He said the City Council had to decide
if the striping should be single or double.
C/M Rohr said he favored single striping.
C/M Hoffman said he favored double striping and he was
not sure that the spaces should be reduced. He said this
matter was presented but never discussed and he was not
convinced that the parking spaces had to be smaller. He
said the larger spaces were more feasible and safer for
the residents. He said he would prefer the existing
parking space sizes with a double stripe.
V/M Bender said predicated upon the fact that the City of
Coral Springs used double spacing effectively, he would
prefer double spacing.
Mayor Abramowitz said he was in favor of the Ordinance,
except the clause requiring double striped parking
spaces. He said he favored single striped parking
spaces.
C/M Rohr said the question before the City Council was
having a 9 foot parking space with double line striping.
Page 19
10/10/89-pw
C/M Hoffman said he would vote for the 9 foot parking
spaces with double line striping.
City Attorney Doody said if there was a tie vote, the
Motion on the floor would fail as per Roberts Rules of
Order.
VOTE: Mayor Abramowitz - Nay
V/M Bender - Nay
C/M Hoffman -- Nay
C/M Rohr - Nay
Mayor Abramowitz asked City Manager Kelly to direct the
Community Development Department to review the Ordinance
and bring it back to the City Council with staff's
recommendation.
C/M Hoffman asked if different parking spaces could be
provided in different zoning districts and Mrs.
Carpenter -Craft replied, yes; however, the Code did not
indicate the areas by district.
C/M Hoffman asked if this could be done and Mrs.
Carpenter -Craft said the Ordinance was providing for the
different zoning areas.
RESOLUTIONS
Community Development
9. PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION TO ADOPT Temp. Reso. #5561
concerning a request by THE PALMS INTERNATIONAL MARKET for
a special exception to permit the operation of a delicatessen
in COMMERCIAL PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER at 5355--5357 N. State
Road 7, which is zoned B-2 (Planned Business). Petition
#25-Z-89
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
Public ear ni g was held.
APPROVED.
RESOLUTION NO. R-89-261 - PASSED
City Attorney Doody read Temp. Reso. #5561 by title.
* C/M Rohr MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Reso. #5561, SECONDED by
* C/M Hoffman.
Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City Planner, said the request was
for a special exception to operate a delicatessen at
Commercial Plaza. She said the center was zoned B-2
(Planned Business) and was designated commercial on the
Tamarac Land Use Plan map. She said the Zoning Code
allowed a delicatessen with a special exception
conditioned upon the following:
1. Bay contained in the delicatessen shall be 100 feet
from the nearest residential property line.
2. The delicatessen must have an approved method of
waste collection and applicant provide a copy of
his contract with Southern Sanitation.
3. A plan for control and reduction or elimination of
offensive odors was required and the applicant
submitted this information.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the Planning Commission
recommended approval at their September 6, 1989 meeting
and she recommended approval.
fl
Page 20
10/10/89-pw
F-1
f]
Mayor Abramowitz Opened and Closed the Public Hearing
with no response.
VOTE:
AGENDIZED BY CONSENT
Community Development
ALL VOTED AYE
18. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION on hearing date for
Westport Development of Regional al Impact (DRI).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
AGENDIZED by Consent on Page 2.
Public Hearing was scheduled for Thursday,
December 21, 1989, at 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Abramowitz said Kelly Carpenter -Craft, City
Planner, indicated that she preferred to hold the Public
Hearing on this Item on January 10, 1990 at 7:30 P.M.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the applicant suggested that
the Public Hearing be held on December 21, 1989, at 7:30
P.M. and staff would agree with this providing it was
understood that if there was a problem, the Item could be
deferred until a later date.
Ed Stacker, Attorney for the applicant, said he was
requesting that the City Council hear this Item on
December 21, 1989, at 7:30 P.M. and, if there were any
problems, the Item could be deferred until a later date.
C/M Hoffman asked if the first City Council meeting would
be held in the morning as opposed to the evening to
accommodate the request for the meeting to be held on
December 21, 1989, at 7:30 P.M.
Mrs. Carpenter -Craft said the City Council could hold
their regular meeting during the day and reconvene the
meeting at 7:30 P.M.. She said December 21, 1989 was
close to the Holiday Season and there may be other things
occurring.
Mayor Abramowitz suggested that a Motion be made to hold
the December 21, 1989 City Council meeting in the evening
as opposed to the morning.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE the City Council holding their
* second meeting of December on Thursday, December 21, 1989
* at 7:00 P.M. and, at 7:30 P.M., a Public Hearing for the
* Westport Development of Regional Impact would be scheduled,
* SECONDED by C/M Hoffman.
VOTE:
OPEN PUBLIC FORUM
11. OPEN PUBLIC FORUM
There were no public speakers.
REPORTS
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS -- No Reports.
ALL VOTED AYE
Page 21
10/10/89-pw
13. CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Kelly said he would be taking a vacation
tomorrow to celebrate his parents' 54th Wedding
Anniversary and he would not be returning until Monday,
October 15, 1989. He said Mike Couzzo, Director of
Public Works/Parks and Recreation, would be Acting City
Manager.
Mayor Abramowitz wished City Manager Kelly's parents a
Happy Anniversary.
14. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT - No Report.
With no further business, Mayor Abramowitz ADJOURNED this
meeting at 10:10 P.M.
NOA14AN ABRAMOWITZ, MAY
CAROL A. EVA9S, CITY CLERK
"This public document was promulgated at a cost of $143.40 or $17.93 per
copy to inform the general public, public officers and employees of
recent opinions and considerations of the City Council of the City of
Tamarac."
CITY OF TAMARAC
APPROVED AT MEETING OF / ate- �f
City Clerk
I
Page 22