HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-01 - City Commission Regular Meeting Minutesn
'e[ O R,�p
P O. 60X 25010
-TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320
FIRST CLASS MAIL
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1983
(RECESSED FROM WE R SDAY,'NOVEMBER 23, 1983) .DNE,... .
It has been determined that, due to the Thanksgiving holidays,
the Regular City Council Meeting to be held on Wednesday,
November 23, 1983, will be opened at 9:30 A.M. and is expected
to be immediately recessed to 9:30 A.M., Thursday-, December 1,
1983.
CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 A.M.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF TIME ALLOCATIONS - MOTIONS TO TABLE - The Chair
at this time wi 1 1 announce those items which^ ha've_'_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.
PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS
1. Em to ee Service Awards - Presentation by City Manager
Stuurmans of a five-year pin to Marie Eney and a ten-year pi
to Robert Logan of the Police Department.
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
2. Planning Commission - Temp. Reso. #2926 - Discussion and pos-
sible action to appoint one regular member and one alternate
member.
CONSENT AGENDA
12/1 - Pg. 3
Awards & Pins
presented.
12/1 - Pg. 3
APPROVED-Apptd.
Arthur Gottesman
& EI.Larry Bender
3. Items listed under Item #3, Consent Agenda, are viewed to be 12/1 - Pg. 12
routine and the recommendation wi 1 1 be enacted by one motion APPROVED items
in the form listed below. There will be no separate dis- a) thru m)
cussion of these items. If discussion is desired, then the REMOVED n), then
item(s) wi 1 1 be removed from the Consent Agenda and wi 1 1 be TABLED to a
considered separately. future meeting.
a) Minutes of 9/19/83 - Reconvened Regular Meeting -
Approval recommended by City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 9/28/83 - Regular Meeting - Approval re-
commended by City Clerk.
c) Minutes of 10/6/83 - Special Meeting - Approval recommend
ed by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of 10/25/83 - Special Meeting - Approval re-
commended by City Clerk.
e) Alan F. Ruf - Consultant City Attorney - 11/18/83 -
$3,010.00 - Approval recommended by City Attorney.
PAGE TWO
f) Mitchell Ceasar - Grants Consultant - Retainer for
November, 1983 - $1,250.00 - Approval recommended by
City Manager.
g) Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. - Consulting Engineer -
10/18/83 - Project 1710-13, Statement 6 - $547.70 -
Approval recommended by City Engineer.
h) Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. - Consulting Engineer -
11/2/83 - Project 1710-15, Statement 2 - $3,982.50 -
Approval recommended by City Engineer.
i) Muller, Mintz, Kornreich, Caldwell, Casey, Crosland &
Bramnick, P.A. - Labor Counsel - 11/7/83 - $171.88 -
Approval recommended by City Manager.
j) Shailer, Purdy & Jolly - Counsel for contraband forfeit-
ures - Services for October, 1983 - $470.54 - Approval
recommended by City Attorney.
k) Edna L. Caruso, P.A. - Counsel for Woodmont Tract 44
Appeal - 11/4/83 - $8,109.14 - Approval recommended by
City Attorney.
1) Police Department - Approval of a contract with the
International Association of Chiefs of Police concerning
Promotional examinations.
m) Woodmont Tract 59 - Acceptance of Water & Sewer Bill of
Sale - Approval to extend the tabling action to a future
meeting.
n) Investment Committee - Appointment of members - Approval
2/1 - Pg. 12
REMOVED; then
to extend the tabling action to a future meeting. TABLED.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
4.
Bid Award - Cypress Creek - Temp_. Reso. #2894 - Dis-
12/1 - Pg. 14
_Commons
cussion and possible action to award a bid for the inStalla-
tion of fixed pier boat slips, docks and gangway (tabled from
10/26/83).
TABLED.
5.
Tamarac Park - Discussion and possible action on concept plan
for a recreation bui 1 di ng .
12/1 -Pg. 11
Authorized City
6.
Broward Lea ue of Cities Business - Discussion and possible
Plnr to proceed.
12/1 - Pg. 14
a c t i o n.
Repts by Mayor
Falck, C/M
- -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Kravitz and
C/M Krantz.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 2:00 P.M.
7.
The Courtyard of Tamarac - Special Exception Petition #1 8-Z-83
Tem . Reso. #2927 - Discussion and possible action on a re-
quest for Special Exception to allow a restaurant in Bays 6
and 7 of Building C at Lakeside Plaza, 5435 and 5437 North
State Road 7, Zoned B-1 (Neighborhood Business).
12/6 -Pg. 5
APPROVED, subj
to planting as
outlined.
12/6 -Pg. 5
APPROVED, with
conditions.
8. The Courtyard of Tamarac - Special Exception Petition #19-Z-83
Temp. .�Reso. #2928 - Discussion and possible action on a re-
quest for Special Exception to allow on -premises consumption
of beer and wine in conjunction with a proposed restaurant in
Bays 6 and 7 of Building C at Lakeside Plaza, 5435 and 5437
North State Road 7, Zoned B-1 (Neighborhood Business).
9.
Appointments of residents by City Council - Temp. Ord. #1073 -
Discussion and possible action to provide that all people
appointed by the Council to boards and committees in the
future shall be residents of the City of Tamarac and registers
voters. Second Reading.
2/1 - Pg. 19
APPROVED, as
Amended on Secnd
&Final Rag.
A
PAGE THREE
10. Burglar_ Alarm User Fees - Temp. Ord. #1075 - Discussion and ' 12/1 -- Pg. 24
Possible action to amend Subsection 14-64 3) of the Code to APPROVED on
repeal provision prohibiting pro -rated fees for alarm user Second & Final
permits. Second Reading. Readin .
LEGAL AFFAIRS
11. Burrgl_a_r Alarm User Fees - Temp._ Reso._#2912 - Discussion
and
alarmuser
(tabled possible permit edfrom 11/gpro-Fated half -year fee for
permits /83).
12/1 - Pg. 31.
APPROVED fee
of $25.00.
12. Parking �n and possiblegonUnpaved Lands -- Tem.. Ord. #1077 - Discussion 12/1 Pg. 2
__
to amend Section 1 5-4 of the Code to TABLED for a
prohibit parking of vehicles on unpaved portions of publ i c 13 Workshop Mtg.
or privately owned lands. First Reading.
13. Build.ing Permit Fees - Temp... Reso. #2929 - Discussion and
Possible action to revise the Schedule of Building Depart-
ment permit fees.
14. Tamarac Town Square - Temp. Reso._#2938 - Discussion and
Possible action on amended Stipulation #15.
15. Special Assessment for Southgate Gardens Condominiums and
Cardinal Industries Property - Discussion and possible
action on the special assessment for construction of an
8-inch water line along Southgate Boulevard between NW 71
Avenue and University Drive (Public Hearing held 9/14/83)
(tabled from 10/26/83).
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
16. �_Ulass - Revised Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2930 - Dis-
cussion and possible action to approve a revised site plan
for a room addition to Unit 19A located at 6541 NW 99
Avenue.
17. -Lakes of Carriage Hills - Model Sales Facilij - Discussion
and possible action to renew a model sales permit for
facility located at 6180 Rock Island Road.
18. Bishop Tracts - Discussion and possible action on:
a Tract 26 located on the west side of NW 88 Avenue, south
of NW 81 Street)
1) Development Order - Temp. Reso. #2941
2) Plat - Temp. Reso. #2934
3) Development Review ^Agreement
4) Development Agreement - Temp. Reso. #2935
b) Tract 31 (located on the west side of NW 88 Avenue,north
and west of NW 77 Street)
1) Development Order - Temp. Reso. #2942
2) Plat - Temp. Reso. #2939
3) Development Review Agreement
4) Development Agreement _ Temp. Res.o. #2940
19. Exxon Service Station - Discussion and possible action on:
a Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2931
b) Landscape Plan
c) Water and Sewer Development Agreement
d) Water Retention Agreement
e) Utility easement for fire hydrant - Temp. Reso. #2932
f) Warranty deed for additional right-of-way on NW 88
Avenue - Temp. Reso. #2933
(to be located at the southwest corner of Southgate Boule-
vard and NW 88 Avenue)
12/6 - Pg. 1
APPROVED, as
amended.
12/1 - Pg. 16
TABLED until
executed.
12/1 - Pg. 16
Authorization
given to engage
Wms, Hatfield
Stoner to pre --
are documents
12/6 - Pg. 1
TABLED.
12/1 - Pg. 30
TABLED to
12/14/83.
12/1 - Pg. 13
TABLED.
12/6 - Pg. 2
TABLED, at
request of
petitioner.
20. Patio Homes at Fairmont - Model Sales Facility - Discussion 12/1 - Pg 29
and possible action to renew a model sales permit ( tabled TABLED to Secon
from 1 0/ 26/ 83) . mtR in Januarv.
PAGE
21. Lakeside artment p s1_Lakeside Plaza - Temp_._ Ord. #1071 - Dis
cussion and possible action on vacation of a road right-of-
way on the west side of State Road 7, at the north City
limit line, adjacent to these projects. Second Reading.
(Public Hearing held 11/9/83).
22. Lakeside at Tamarac - Revised Site Plan - TemE. Reso.#2914-
Discussion and possible action to approve a revised site
plan for a fence on the north property line (tabled from
11/9/83). _
23. Home Construction Warrant Bond - Temp. R_eso. #2937 - Dis-
cussion and possible action to release a...bond posted as a
warranty against defects for a home located at 8701 Banyan
Court.
24. Drainage Improvements in the City - Discussion and possible
action.
REPORTS
25. City Council
26. City Manager
27. City Attorney
12/6 - Pg.
Falck-will
attend Cnty
Pub. Hrng.
re: Water
MRmt. Dist..
City Council may consider such other business as may come before it.
Pursuant to Section 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 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 based.
CITY OF TAMARAC
Carol A. Evans
Assistant City Clerk
RECONVENED MEETING AND WORKSHOP
Monday, 11/21/83 - 9:30 A.M. - Reconvened Council Meeting - West Conference Room
10:00 A.M. - Workshop Meeting - West Conference Room
Progress Report by Miller & Meier on Municipal
Facilities
Following are the residential and commercial zoning districts in the City:
R-1
- Single Family Residence
B-2
- Planned Community Business
R-IB &
B-3
- General Business
R-IC
- One -Family Dwelling
B-5
- Limited Business District
R-2
- Two -Family Dwelling
B-6
- Business District
RD-7
- Two -Family Dwelling
S-1
- Open Space/Recreational
R-3U
- Row House
I-1
- Institutional
R-3
- Low Density Multiple Dwelling
M-1
- Light Industrial
RM-5
- Residential Multi -Family
M--2
- Medium Industrial
Dwelling.
A-1
- Limited Agricultural
RM-10
- Planned Apartment
A-5
- Agricultural/Excavation
R-4A -
Planned Apartment
T-1 -
Trailer Park District
R-5 -
Motel/Hotel
B-1
- Neighborhood Business
FOUR
12/6 - Pg. 4
Added a)?'.b
APPROVED;.
c) APPROVED
on Second &
Final Rea,7.4_n
12/6 -P3
Added a)&b)
) APPROVED
.s amended
) APPROVED
2/1 - Pg,. Z,1
PPROVED
and releaoc.
2/1 - Pg.
eport will
vailable
ext week.
2/6 - Pg. 6
/M Massaro-
rfc Light at
1st & 88th
-2/6 - Pg. 6
,tr f rm A.Ruf
-e : FOP_ AFmt .
_7/6 - Pg. 6
o P., e o��
PAGE FIVE
28.
University Drive - Temp. Reso. #2943 - Presentation by
2/1 - Pg. 3
Commissioner Craft and Mitch Ceasar.
UPROVED as
mended.
2/1 - Pg. 14
29.
Em to ent of Larry Ferretti as Personnel
p �n y _ e el Director - Discussion
PPROVED effec.
_ _
and possible action.
2/5/83 at
35,665.58, witk
--r probation.
- - -
30.
SPri�lake_IT - Disposition of�Warranty Bond_ - Temp. Reso. ��2945 -
2/1 - Pg. 15
APPROVED as amnc
_ .
Discussion and possible action.
2/1 - Pg. 15
31.
of Warranty TUW - Discus-
Concord Village - Disposition II__ Bond -
APPROVED proce-
iures in memos;
Sion and possible action.
and refund of
ldg 6 to be
applied_to_Bldg
.
Final Paywent to PHK for Aquatic Wee _ q d Services - Discussion and
_ _�
2/1 - Pg. 15
possible action.
Auth. payment of
13,600
to PHK
33.
Ashmont/Kin s Point - Amended Water and_ Sewer Developers Agreement
2/6 - Pg. 6
Discussion and possible action.
ABLER nxt mt
2/1 - Pg. 39
34.
Recreation Fund -- Discuss -ion and possible action.
/Atty to resrh
f referendum
s re wired.
35.
Proclamation for Anti. -Defamation League - Presentation of a
2/1 - Pg. 11
froclamation
proclamation by Mayor Falck and Councilman David Krantz.
resented.
36. Florida Power & Light - Initiation of Rezoning Procedure -
Discussion and possible action.
37. City Attorney Salary - Temp. Reso. #2944 - Discussion and possible
action.
2/1 - Pg. 35
uth. FP&L to
ove for rezng
f proposed sitc
2/6 -- Pg. 5
PPROVED incr.
o $49,500 plus
2.400 car allwr
CITY OF TA.MARAC, FLORIDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 1, 1983
(RECONVENED FROM NOVEMBER 23, 1983)
Tape CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Falck called the meeting to order on Thursday,
1 December 1, 1983, at 9:30 A.M. in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter. W. Falck
Vice Mayor Helen Massaro
Councilman Philip B. Kravitz
Councilman David E. Krantz
Councilman Jack Stelzer
ALSO PRESENT
Laura Z. Stuurmans, City Manager
Jon M. Henning, City Attorney
Carol A. Evans, Assistant City Clerk
Patricia Marcurio, Secretary
MEDITATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Falck called for a Moment
of Silent Meditation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Falck greeted everyone present and read the times assigned
to specific items into the record.
28. University Drive - Temp. ^Reso. #2943 - Discussion and possible
action.T
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Pages 3 through 10).
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent the item concerning University
Drive and Commissioner Craft and Mitch Ceasar will make a presentation
on this. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
\1nTF
ALL VOTED AYE
29. Employment of Larry Perretti as Personnel Director - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 14 Y --
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible
action concerning,consideration and recommendation of the City Manager
for the employment of Larry Perretti as Personnel Director. SECONDED
by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
30. Springlake II - Disposition of Warranty Bond - Temp. Reso. #2945 -
Discussion and possible action on calling the warranty bond.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 15).
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible action
on the possibility of calling the warranty bond if the repairs are not
made by the stipulated date, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
vnTF-
ALL VOTED AYE
12/l/83
/pm
31. Concord Village II - Security_ Deposits - TUW - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
(See Page 15).
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible
action the security deposits for Concord Village II, SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
32. Final Payment to PHK for Aquatic Weed Services - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 15).
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible
action. on final payment to PHK for aquatic weed services, SECONDED
by C/M Krantz.
A112M
ALL VOTED AYE
33. Ashmo_n_t/_Kings Point - Amended Water and Sewer Developers
Agreement - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
leld for Reconvened Meeting on 12/E/83.
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible
action on the amended Water and Sewer Developers Agreement, and
she asked if this is agendized it be held for discussion at the
scheduled Reconvened Meeting on Tuesday, 12/E/83, SECONDED by
C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
LEGAL AFFAIRS
ALL VOTED AYE
12. Park_iDj on_ Unpaved Lands - Temp. Ord. #1077 - Discussion and
possible action to amend Section 15-4 of the Code to prohibit
parking of vehicles on unpaved portions of publicly or
privately owned lands. First Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED for
a Workshop Meeting.
C/M Stelzer MOVED to TABLE this Item for a Workshop Meeting,
SECONDED by V/M Massaro.
Vr)TP
ALL VOTED AYE
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
34. Recreation Fund - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Pages 39, 40 & 41) .
C/M Stelzer MOVED to Agendize by Consent discussion and possible
action on the Recreation Fund, SECONDED by V/M Massaro.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
- 2
12/1/83
/pm
PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS
35. Proclamat_ion for Anti -Defamation League - Presentation of
Proclamation by Mayor Falck.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 11) .
C/M Krantz MOVED to Agendize by Consent presentation of a
proclamation for the Anti -Defamation League, SECONDED by VIM
Massaro.
vnTF-
ALL VOTED AYE
1. Employee Service Awards - Presentation by City Manager
Stuurmans o ..
f a five-year pin to Marie Eney and a ten-year
pin to Robert Logan of the Police Department.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Manager
presented the respective pins.
The City Manager presented a five-year pin to Marie Eney and a
ten-year pin to Robert Logan of the Police Department. VIM
Massaro commended Marie Eney for her services on the Burglar
Alarm Committee and Officer Logan for his service to the Department.
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
2. Planning Commission - Temp. Res_o. #2926 - Discussion and pos-
sible action to appoint one regular member and one alternate
member.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. R-83- PASSED.
appointing Arthur Gottesman as a
regular member and Herman Larry
Bender as an alternate member to the
Planning Commission.
C/M Stelzer read the Resolution into the record and VIM Massaro
MOVED nomination of Arthur Gottesman as a regular member to the
Planning Commission for a term to expire on 4/15/85, SECONDED by
C/M Stelzer.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
VIM Massaro nominated Herman Larry Bender as an alternate member
to the Planning Commission, SECONDED by C/M Krantz. C/M Stelzer
nominated Bernard Newman, SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE: C/M
Stelzer
- Bernard
Newman
C/M
Krantz
- Herman
Larry
Bender
C/M
Kravitz
- Herman
Larry
Bender
VIM
Massaro
- Herman
Larry
Bender
Mayor Falck
- Herman
Larry
Bender
VIM Massaro MOVED APPROVAL of Temp._ Reso. #2926 appointing Arthur
Gottesman as a regular member for a term to expire 4/15/85 and
Herman Larry Bender as an alternate member for a term to expire
on 4/15/84. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
vnTF-
LEGAL AFFAIRS
ALL VOTED AYE
28. Unive
rsity Drive - Temp. Reso. #2943 - Presentation by
Commissioner Craft and Mitch Ceasar.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 1). APPROVED as amended. RESOLUTION NO. R-83- _PASSED
Presentation given by Commissioner
Craft and Mitch Ceasar.
- 3 - 12/1/83
/pm
The following is a verbatim transcript from the Regular Council meeting of 12/1/83
(Recessed from 11/23/33), Item 28, Agendized by Consent.
Ma,Yor Falck: Now, to demonstrate to Commissioner Craft who has just recently entered the
room, we are just about on schedule and have agreed to hear the Item in which he is
interested and we will call that Item which was Agendized by Consent this morning, which
is Item #28. We will turn it over to the Vice Mayor.
V/M Massaro: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I, of course, as usual, slipped up a little bit, would you
please have two copies of this made immediately? We do have a Resolution and that was
to be adopted and I did promise Commissioner Craft and Mr. Ceasar that I would show them...
or give them copies of it so that if any corrections were needed then we'd be in a position
to take care of it.
Jon Henning: Do you want me to put this title on the record?
Moor Falck: Please.
Jon Henning: Temp. Resolution #2943. A Resolution expressing a need for widening University
Drive State Road 817) through the City of Tamarac, providing for a permanent eight (8)
foot wide bikeway along the western two hundred (200) foot right-of-way line of University
Drive and withdrawing Tamarac's request for bikeway construction funds assistance from
State of Florida Department of Transportation.
V/M Massaro: Mr. Mayor, I would ask that we not take action on this Resolution until
such time as Commissioner Craft and Mr. Ceasar have had an opportunity to look at it
this morning, it will be done within the next few minutes, but it is most important: that
they find it in order and acceptable so that it will not conflict with what efforts they
are making on our behalf so if Mr. Craft can be...I think Mr ... you wanted to be heard
first? We have had several meetings, Mr. Mitch Ceasar and Commissioner Craft as well as
Representative Tom Gustafson and Richard Rubin and myself. They are here this morning
to make a report on what has been achieved so far.
Mitch Ceasar: Thank you, Vice Mayor. What I'd like to do is break this, basically,
into two parts because it does involve the construction of University Dr. The first
aspect will be the design aspect, the second, which Commissioner Craft will talk about
will be the actual construction of the road aspect, because that's the way the money is
broken down, it's easiest to remember it that way. First of all, let me explain or
remind Council that the cost of both the design and construction,if successful,will be
approximately 2-3/4 million dollars. The original estimate was 3 million dollars for
the entire project, we think it will be slightly less than that, but around 2-3/4 million.
V M Massaro: Excuse me, that 2-3/4 million, will that include the drainage, and...
Mitch Ceasar: I believe that's the total cost of design and construction, yes.
V/M Massaro: All right.
Mitch Ceasar: Let me also allow Council in on the situation in the broad sense of it
first, and that is that this project is more or less like a domino game in the sense
that you line up all the different things that have to be done and if one of them falls
the wrong way, the whole project caves in. In that sense that if something happens,
obviously the first step is designing, if you don't get past getting the design money,
you don't get to the construction aspect. Conversely, if you get past design money,
some approval isn't forthcoming from a State or Federal agency, then again it caves in.
So, it's a very perilous journey is what I'm saying and there is a multitude of steps
that goes into design, there's probably a dozen steps just in the design aspect for the
design money. And then, there's a multitude of steps in the construction, we have to
keep watch continually that none of the steps go awry because if they do the whole
project goes. That's the way the roads go.
V/M Massaro: And that we move cautiously, is that what you're trying to advise?
Mitch Ceasar: Very cautiously and also with great care in that we keep tabs not only
on our projects but other projects so that we don't get bumped in place of them so there's
a lot of different aspects that we will try to outline to you today and will continually
outline. It's very, very involved. We're going to try to simplify as best as we can.
The first is on the design aspect and that was approximately $200,000 and $250,000 just for
the design aspect of the road, the drawings and so forth.
- 4 - 12/1/83
/pm
Mitch Ceasar: Now, originally, we had gotten some bikepath money, about $120,000 or so
approximately. We have found out through some intermediaries, one of them being Tom
Gustafson, who is the Transportation Chief for the House of Representatives, that
approximately $50,000 has been utilized thus far towards that end. That would, theoretically
leave.approximately $70,000 of their money, not of ours, $70,000 of theirs, that would
be available, again, theoretically. What we must do is several -fold. First, we must
get DOT to agree to use that money that is for the design aspect, in other words transfer
that $70,000 or so from one fund to a different fund. That is not the easiest thing,
obviously, to do because they had designated for a certain use, we want them to change
that use from one fund totally to another bucket, into another fund. We must get them
to agree to do that. I will be working a considerable amount of time on that aspect
through local and State DOT as well as some other individuals to see if we can convince
them. Again, this is Step 1, if you don't get past Step 1 you don't go to Step 2. We
must get them to do that. To do that, we must also eliminate the bikepath as they had
outlined. I know the City has been talking about that anyway, we must get the City to
agree to do that Number One, and then after that, that's Step 1, Step 2 is to go to
DOT, confirm the amount of money that's available. Step 3 would, theoretically, be to
get them to approve the transfer of the money.
V/M Massaro: Now, before you go on, Mitch, I want to state that's what the Resolution
is going to come before us today. You will have a chance to read it but that's exactly
what steps the Council are going to be considering this morning and I hope you would
point out too that in...when Representative Gustafson checked about what the possibility
of transferring that money, they said it hasn't been done but that doesn't mean that
it wouldn't be considered and that it might be done. Is that correct?
Mitch Ceasar: I would phrase it that it's a possibility. If it wasn't, I wouldn't be
here. But by the same token, as you pointed out, it's not something that's done every
day, nor done easily. Of that theoretical $70,000 that's left, we feel the design cost
will be between $200,000 and $250,000, thus, there's a gap of approximately $180.000 that
has to be paid in either by the City or the County or some funding source. What we
are trying to do is get the County to fund that $180,000. Now, I'm going to break
that down for you in a minute but what that means, obviously, is that the up -front
cost of the design, which would be 1/4 million dollars approximately, if we could
accomplish that, would not be costing the City anything. We'd be taking $70,000 from
DOT and the difference from the County if we could get it from both those sources.
Again, if one of the sources falls then the whole thing falls, you have to get each
step. The way we try to get that would be from the County Impact Fee designation
and what that would be ... I'll give you an example. Dick Rubin had written a report
and I had echoed it a few weeks later as an example, Woodmont. There was money collected
on Impact Fees from Woodmont and we then...Dick Rubin had tracked it and found out
that that Impact Fee was not only not spent in that immediate area, it wasn't even
spent in Tamarac. So, what we're trying to do is tap that County Impact Fee bucket
that was in the past sometimes spent outside the City and get the 1money to 1) be spent
in Tamarac and 2) get the money to be spent for a specific purpose. You know you could
get it back in the City but they want to spend it elsewhere so it's two -fold, get it
in the City and get it for this specific purpose. Another problem as you know and as
Dick Rubin has pointed out, and as I have pointed out and others have, is that, Univer-
sity Dr. widening was not designated for that widening until the year 2000. That
designation was done basically by the County and/or interchangeably the MPO, the
Metropolitan Planning Organization. What we're going to do to cure, for that, and
is several -fold, first, Commissioner Craft,as our area County Commissioner, several
days ago got himself placed on the MPO by the County Commission. So, now we have
somebody on the County Commission to more or less, you know, look after our thoughts
and our interest. What also will be done is obviously Commissioner Craft and myself
and Dick Rubin will be working with County staff, Commissioner Craftsignificantly
more so than the two of us, to try to further that end. Our last possibility is if we're
fortunate enough to get the DOT money transferred and if we're fortunate enough to get
everything changed around with MPO and so forth, then what we have to look at, which
is a final kind of asterisk step is that, do we want the County, the County staff, if
we get the money, to design, to do the design work. The reason for that would be we
would have to spend some time investigating whether they could do it a little faster
and a little cheaper and then if we determine that and we've already received the
money, then at that point, we have to work on the staff and County Commission to get
them to agree to want to do the job. So, those in a very simplified fashion, believe
it or not, are the steps in reference to getting with the County, with reference to
getting design money. All those steps just pertain to the $200,000 to $250,000 necessary
for the design. Now, that leaves approximately 2-1/2 million dollars necessary for
road construction and I'm going to let Commissioner Craft detail that for you.
5 - 12/1/83
/pm
V/M Massaro: Before you leave I want to pinpoint something. When you said the last
statement, "If the County Commission want to do the job"...that's the funding point
isn't it? We will at that point be asking for the funding of University Dr....
Mitch Ceasar: No. That would be once we already have the money, then we would be just
trying to designate who would do the work and we'd ask the County at that point, or we
would determine whether we thought they could do it faster and a little less expensive
and then if we determine they could, then we'd have to get them to agree to want to do
the job. Being we already had the money previous to that step.
V/M Massaro: Oh, you're talking about the funding being accomplished before we get to
that last.—.-.
Mitch Ceasar: Correct.
V/M Massaro: Thank you.
C/M Krantz: I have one question, Mitch, the 2-1/2 million dollars, is that a complete
figure for everything on that construction? It would be a complete figure?
Mitch Ceasar: Basically, Dick,would you agree?
Dick Rubin: Once the preliminary drawings are finalized...
Mayor Falck: Use the mike, please.
VIM Massaro: Yes, because I'd like this verbatim so that we can keep up with it.
Dick Rubin: Council, as you know, we're investigating the various sources of funds now
and all the steps necessary which Mitch tried to outline. Until they do preliminary
drawings, they can't come up with a fine number for that, so that's based upon other
roadways in the area.
C/M Krantz: Comparable figures.
Dick Rubin: Yes.
V/M Massaro: I think that's why Mitch said 2-1/2 to 2-3/4 million.
Mitch Ceasar- Well, actually I think it will be about 2-3/4 for the entire project
of which about 2-1/2 million is construction and about 1/4 million is designing. That's
why I thought by breaking it down it makes it a lot more ... it makes it easier to
digest the situation.
Massaro: Palatable.
Mitch Ceasar: Without further ado, let me give you the other part of the group,
Commissioner Craft.
V/M Massaro: We're very happy to have you here.
Commissioner Craft: Thank you, it's good to be back home in West Broward but you need
not applaud. Keep in mind that you all are paying me $38,000 a year for what I do.
Good morning, it's a pleasure to see you, Mayor and members of the Council. I think
Mitch has pretty well characterized our task force. It's ah... I think Mrs. Massaro
said "It's doable". We think it is. We've outlined something on the order, what was
it Mitch, 27 steps that we have to get through and we got through the first 3 or 4 or 5
pretty well successfully. So it looks doable. I don't want to be ... I'm cautiously
optimistic, and we'll never lose sight of the fact that somebody can change the rules
anywhere along the line or they can simply say "Well, we don't want to do it that way"
and at that time, that's when we'll come back to you all and say, "Hey, we need your
help with lobbying these people". The road you're talking about, up until the time I
came out and talked to you all and Mitch and Dick got to working on it, was set up
through in -funds. "In -funds" means that the money comes from a certain pot and that
pot only has like 6.3 million dollars a year in it. What we've done, as of November
loth, we've gotten the MPO and the others to agree to take this portion of University
Dr.. out of that funding pot and put it into an entirely separate one. We're going to have
the funding that we're seeking now, we're gonna look for it, not through the MPO
because there's a list of 20 and there's only money for 3. We're going to look for it
through the FAP fund. That's Federal Aid Primary. That will upgrade this University
- 6 - 12/l/83
/pm
Commissioner Craft:Cont'd.
Boulevard stretch substantially and the rest of it as well. It's critical that we
will be moving through all this now to get the Federal Highway Administration to agree
that University Dr. and, incidentally, two other roads in Broward County, should come
under the FAP. The Florida Primary Fund... Federal Primary funding in order to get us
into the big pot where the big bucks are. I'm pleased that we've had some progress
and very satisfactory progress on that. Good news! We have the right-of-way'
Dick Rubin sat down with our people at the County level and they examined every square
inch of right-of-way that we need. There was some question about whether or not we
had it. We don't have this much right-of-way which would allow us to build six lanes
plus a bikepath plus this plus that plus ... but we do have this much which comes to,
I forget what it is...120 feet or something like that all the way through the section
in question. We do not have and the Gods be praised for this, we don't have a right-
of-way problem ..
Vf M Massaro: No. Praise the Council for the past years and our foresight.
Commissioner Craft: O.K. That's an excellent point. The County has been taking some
land, you all have been taking some land and it's just exactly that foresight that
keeps us from a two or three year right-of-way acquisition problem. So, we've got
the right-of-way in hand. The next step that I'll be working with Mitch on is making
sure that the Federal Highway Authority people do approve of making this ... of use of
this big pot of money certifying that it's Federal Primary rather than in -fund. As
a backup position, as I think Mitch indicated a minute ago, I was appointed to the
MPO on Tuesday of this week so we'll have a voice in there if by chance we should
need a voice in there. There's another task that we'll have and it may prove to be
a challenge, that is, not only is University Dr., but as I mentioned earlier, two
other roads will be designated or recommended to be designated as Florida Primary
funded roads. That means we're going to have an effort required to see to it that this
one comes out very, very high on that list of roads to be funded from the Florida
Primary Funds and we don't get sidetracked by somebody who's pushing for some other
roads in the County.
V M Massaro: That's where you may be needing some assistance from members of Council
or someone.
Commissioner Craft: If and when that happens we certainly will be on the phone with
you either directly or through Mitch.. We'll let you know within the hour if it looks
like we're going to have to go into heaa to head competition with some other road some-
where else in Broward County. I think it's, with all respect, I think it's about time
for West Broward to get a little bit of fair share. It took me two years to get
University...no, to get 441 and Oakland Park Blvd. scheduled for widening, it's two
million dollars just to widen that intersection. We've got that off for this year.
This is, for me personally, a very high priority project. The following then,
following Mitch, Mitch has indicated that there are essentially two different elements
to this. One, the design element and second, the construction element. It gets
involved now and I have condensed all this as much as we possibly can and still give
you the information. In 85/86, DOT has scheduled 15 million dollars to prepare the
preliminary engineering to resurface the road and then, in the following year, in the
86/87 time frame, DOT plans to accomplish the resurfacing for $670,000. So, down
the road, our goal is going to be again to try to get DOT to agree to use that
$670,000 plus $15,000, $685,000, not for resurfacing of the existing but for expansion
of the existing. And we'll use the argument that rather than spending some money to
resurface, it's much better to spend that plus some more to widen. That changes the
numbers a bit because we're using working numbers now of 2-1/2 miles and a million
dollars a mile, 2.5 million dollars. If we can get them to assign that $685,000
against the $250 and maybe put a little something on top, that would reduce the amount
of money required to something like $1,815,000. It's possible and this is ... we're
really looking way out in the future now...it's possible the County might be able to
contribute toward that and obviously we don't want to use City funds. We'll .use
County funds if we've designated it as Federal Primary but if it comes to that, we'll
have as a potential fall -back position. One other thing...
VIM Massaro: At that point, is that when you'll need the MPO influence, if it comes
down to where County...
Commissioner Craft:
V/M Massaro: O.K.
Commissioner, we're going to need everybody on this one. U.K.?
- 7 - 12/l/83
/pm
Commissioner Craft; O.K.? But, we're looking a year down the road now and we're just
trying to anticipate all the things that can be done so that we can,as we run into
Tom Gustafson at the Christmas cocktail parties, we just mention to him casually how
important this project is to the City. That pretty much completes what we've prepared
for today. We world hope, can't promise, but we would hope that we will accomplish
enough in our list of 27 things that have to be done, perhaps to come back and speak
with you again before the end of January or early February, along in that time frame,
if that's acceptable to you all.
Mayor Falck; Sure, it's fine with us.
Commissioner Craft: We want to keep you posted on how it's going and from time to time
just make an informal report here to you on another...what is today, Thursday? Why
do you all meet on Thursday?
Ma or Falck: We don't. We meet on Wednesday but because of the Thanksgiving holiday
we changed it.
Commissioner Craft: Oh, O.K., I wondered about that.
V/M Massaro: We recessed to today.
Commissioner Craft: Is there anything that I can...
Mayor Falck: Any questions? We appreciate your coming out and we think it would be
wonderful for you to keep us posted, we'll work with you and give you our support in
this long-awaited project.
Commissioner Craft: Two other things I want to address. One, somewhat frivolous, I
noticed that when I drive in everyone and his brother has reserved parking space but
the district Commissioner, Either that means you don't like me, which I don't think
is the case ... or I don't come here often enough.
C/M Krantz: You don't come here often enough.
Commissioner Craft: I don't come here often enough, so I was going to suggest, Mayor, I'll
come more often if you.'11 put a parking space there.
Mayor Falck: We'll ask the City Manager to do something about that for you. She
knows you're coming, she'll put a sign out there for you.
Commissioner Craft: Is it appropriate then, that we address the Resolution now?
Mayor Falck: Yes. Well, it needed a Motion...
V/M Massaro: Have you had an opportunity to look at it?
Commissioner r f : Yes, I have and I do see a flaw, not a flaw, you all might reconsider
improving it. Can we address it...it's the very last Page, Section 3. "That the City
of Tamarac respectfully requests that the Florida DOT exchange the allocation of funds
for construction of said bikeway for funding in an equal amount to the higher priority"...
could we insert, "design element of the" and what I'm trying to do by suggesting this
change...
V/M Massaro: After the word "priority"?
Commissioner Craft: Yes, Commissioner. In order that we stress to these people that we
want them to shift this money not toward construction of the road, like in 5 years down
the road, we want them to shift it to the immediate need of the design element.
V/M Massaro: How do you want that worded exactly?
Commissioner Craft: Well, if... following the word "priority", you inserted the language,
"design element of the", that would do it. Mitch, do you concur in this?
Mitch Ceasar: I do but I have one other correction beyond that.
Commissioner Craft; O.K. fine. This is the only thing that I caught. I just don't want
them to..
- 8 - 12/l/83
/pm
V/M Massaro; Yes, that's sensible, that makes sense.
Commissioner Craft_: That's all I had, then, let me step back, I believe Mitch has
something.
MayorFalck: O.K. fine, thank you very much, Commissioner, we appreciate it.
Mitch Ceasar: One other point, on a legality... also, in Section 3, "The City of Tamarac
respectfully requests that the Florida Department of Transportation exchange the
allocation of funds for construction of said bikeway for funding in an equal amount"...
basically, we want to say, "in an amount equal to the availability of what's left"...
V/MMassaro. "In an amount equal.:."
Mitch Ceasar: I could rephrase that but we want to say "equal in an amount to those
funds still available" would that be about right?
Commissioner Craft: Yes, you might want to just use the term"remaining funds".
V/M Massaro: "in an amount equal to..."
Mitch Ceasar: "equal to those funds still remaining"?
V/M Massaro: O.K., Jon?
Jon Henning: Lawyers never agree.
Mitch Ceasar: Lawyers never agree that's why we're lawyers.
V/M Massaro: Because they've used some of it, Jon.
Commissioner Craft: Yes, we had 150, I think we used...
Mitch Ceasar: We determined that they've used approximately $50,000 and we want to say
equal to the amount of those funds still left, we don't want them to get picky and say
"well, you're Resolution says equal amount..."
V/M Massaro: "equal to the amount still remaining" is what he said.
Mitch Ceasar: Right. It's a technical point but I'd hate to be caught on a technicality,
to be honest about it.
Jon Henning: "equal to the remaining amount", is that what you want to put in?
Mitch Ceasar: "equal to amounts still remaining...."?
C/M Krantz: Remaining amounts ... same thing.
Mitch Ceasar: What do you have?
QM Stelzer: We're just speaking of sticking in "in an amount equal to the remaining
amount"...it's double amounts...
Mayor Falck: Let's don't spend the rest of the morning trying to correct something that
we ought to be...
Mitch Ceasar; Here, let me read this, this is what I originally said..."for funding in
an amount equal to those funds still remaining".
C/M Krantz: That covers it.
Mayor Fa„lck: Is it all right with you?
Jon Henning: Fine.
Mayor Falck: I need a Motion to approve the Resolution as amended.
V/M Massaro: Mr. Mayor.
9 - 12/1/83
/pm
Mayor Falck: Yes, m'am.
VM Massaro: I MOVE the ADOPTION of Temporary 2943 as amended.
C/M Krantz: SECOND.
Mayor Falck: We have a MOTION, we have a SECOND, discussion on the MOTION.
Jon Henning: May I just... strictly for the record, so that you all understand a small
sideline of what this Resolution does. Obviously, we want to have the widened project.
By this Resolution, the City is saying that it is not seeking outside funding for the
bikepath. It could pursue the bikepath, continue the bikepath through local funding,
but is not seeking this through outside agencies for funding, is that correct?
V/M Massaro: We do intend to....this...does this require it ... or do we have to have
another rdinance to require them?
Jon Hennin : Well, that's something separate. That's in the process but that will be
local funding.
V/M Massaro: All right, Mr. Mayor, I want to just take the opportunity to thank Mitch
Tape and Commissioner Craft for taking the time to come here this morning. I felt that it
2 would be better than a report from me...I think it would be more comprehensive and
they do so much work other than the meetings we have that it puts them in a position
to even enlighten Richard and I so that we know exactly whats going on and I'm grateful.
Thank you very much, gentlemen.
Mitch Ceasar: Also, as a side note, I will be in memo form, in my monthly memo, I'll
be as best I can detailing exactly what we talked about here so you'll have a somewhat
permanent record of it which will be great to refer to.
V/M Massaro: I'm asking our City Clerk to do this verbatim, so it will save you some
work..
Mitch Ceasar: Well, I'll still submit it anyway.
Mayor Falck: Fine. I think you should refer to it in your report.
Mitch Ceasar: Thank you.
for Falck: Do we have a Second on that?
Carol Evans: Yes, sir, we do.
Mayor Falck: We're ready to vote, we have a MOTION, we have a SECOND, discussion?
Call the question, please.
Carol Evans: C/M Stelzer Aye
C/M Krantz Aye
C/M Kravitz Aye
V/M Massaro Aye
Mayor Falck Aye
- 10 - 12/1/83
/pm
PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS
35. Proclamation for Anti -Defamation League - Presentation of a
proclamation by Mayor Falck and Councilman David Krantz.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 3).
C/M Krantz read the proclamation into the record and presented this
to Messrs. Carl Alper, Norman Karr and Bill Leichter, representing
the Anti -Defamation League.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL
5. Tamarac Park - Discussion and possible action on concept plan
for a recreation building.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: The City Planner
was authorized to proceed as outlined.
Richard Rubin said at the last meeting it was agreed that a sat-
ellite center could be placed at Tamarac Park to serve the needs of
the Park. He said the drawing in the backup shows a 6,000 square
foot building which would permit 260 residents to use that building.
at one time. He said the drawing shows on the ground floor an active
area with toilets to serve the needs of the building, the second
floor would be an office area and meeting rooms. He said the cost
estimate of approximately $200,000 is still valid and Council is being
requested to allocate up to $220,000 into a special account for this
facility. He said the second page of the memo of 11/29/83, under
Item 10, has specific items that are suggested.
Mr. Rubin said although this is a concept plan,it was
felt that this was needed to make a decision; however, if Council
were to vote to proceed with the project, they would have to come
back before Council with a site plan, etc. He said this would just
give the authorization to prepare the final documents. V/M Massaro
asked if there was an agreement that authorized Mr. Rubin to prepare
this and Mr. Rubin said this is Item 9 on the memo, and is based on
6-1/4% of the cost of the building which includes all plans. Mr.
Rubin said this would include everything except a survey.
1) V/M Massaro MOVED to authorize appropriate members of the staff
and the Consultant City Planner to implement "in-house" construction
of a satellite center at Tamarac Park in accordance with plans pre-
pared on 11/18/83. The total cost is not to exceed $220,000 and
all changes to plans will require additional approval by Council.
C/M Kravitz asked Mr. Rubin when'the construction of this structure
could be completed and Mr. Rubin said by September, 1984. C/M
Kravitz SECONDED the MOTION.
Vickie Beech, resident, asked if this amount of money would include
everything and Mr. Rubin said yes, this is a maximum figure.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
2) Mayor Falck said Item #2 is authorizing the Finance Department to
place $220,000 of Parks and Recreation Funds into a special con-
struction account for the satellite center. V/M Massaro MOVED to
APPROVE, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
12/l/83
/pm
3) Mayor Falck said Item #3 is authorizing the Building Official to
act as a General Contractor. V/M Massaro MOVED to APPROVE, SECONDED
by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
4) Mayor Falck said Item #4 is waiving all formal bidding requirements.
5) V/M Massaro said she objects to this and she feels that up to $2,500
they can get 3 written proposals but over $2,500 should be approved
by Council. Mr. Henning noted that each time the bid process is
used would effect the completion date. C/M Kravitz MOVED Items #4
and #5 together, that all bids under $2,500 do not have to go to
bid under the supervision of the City Manager and bids over $2,500
have to be approved by Council. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
Melanie Reynolds, Charter Board member asked if it were not true that
any amount of work over $100,000 must go out to competitive bidding
under State law and Mr. Henning said this would be true if it were
not handled by "in-house" staff. Alice Norian, citizen, said an
attorney's opinion is not the law.
VOTE: ALL VGTLD AYL
CONSENT AGENDA
3. Consent Aqenda
a) Minutes of 9/19/83 - Reconvened Regular Meeting - Approval
recommended by City Clerk.
b) Minutes of 9/28/83 - Regular Meeting - Approval recommended
by City Clerk.
c) Minutes of 10/6/83 - Special Meeting - Approval recommended
by City Clerk.
d) Minutes of 10/25/83 - Special Meeting - Approval recommended
by City Clerk.
e) Alan F. Ruf - Consultant City Attorney - 11/18/83 - $3,010.00
Approval recommended by City Attorney.
f) Mitchell Ceasar - Grants Consultant - Retainer for November,
1983 - $1,250.00 - Approval recommended by City Manager.
g) Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. - Consulting Engineers --
10/18/83 - Project 1710-13, Statement 6 - $547.70 - Approval
recommended by City Engineer.
h) Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. - Consulting. Engineers -
11/2/83 - Project 1710-15, Statement 2 - $3,982.50 - Approval
recommended by City Engineer.
i) Muller, Mintz, Kornreich, Caldwell, Casey, Crosland & Bramnick,
P.A. - Labor Counsel - 11/7/83 - $171.88 - Approval recommended
by City Manager.
j) Shailer, Purdy & Jolly - Counsel for contraband forfeitures -
Services for October, 1983 - $470.54 - Approval recommended
by City Attorney.
k) Edna L. Caruso, P.A. - Counsel for Woodmont Tract 44 Appeal -
11/4/83 - $8,109.14 - Approval recommended by City Attorney.
1) Police Department - Approval of a contract with the Inter-
national Association of Chiefs of Police concerning promotional
examinations.
m) Woodmont Tract 59 - Acceptance of Water & Sewer Bill of Sale -
Approval to extend the tabling action to a future meeting.
n) Investment Committee -- Appointment of members - Approval to
extend the tabling action to a future meeting.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
aT through m). Item
for discussion and
to a future meeting
APPROVED Items
n) was removed
then was TABLED
with no date given.
C/M Kravitz MOVED to APPROVE Items a) through m), removing Item n)
for discussion and possible action, SECONDED by C/M Stelzer.
vnTF:
ALL VOTED AYE
- 12 - 12/1/83
/pm
C/M Kravitz said this has been pending for some time and he MOVED
to TABLE this Item to no later than the next meeting and if there
are no further applications, those already received would be
considered. V/M Massaro said they have waited this long to fill
these vacancies because they are waiting for qualified persons in
this field. C/M Krantz said the committee is functioning presently
with three members and V/M Massaro MOVED to ADOPT subsection n)
as it stands, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
18. Bishop Tracts - Discussion and possible action on:
a Tract 26 (located on the west side of NW 88 Avenue, south
of NW 81 Street)
1) Development Order - Temp. Reso. #2941
2) Plat - Temp. Reso. #2934
3) Development Review Agreement
4) Development Agreement - Tem . Reso. #2935
b) Tract 31 (located on the west side of NW 88 Avenue, north
and west of NW 77 Street)
Development
Order
2 39 9' Reso. #2942
2) Plat
3) Development Review Agreement
4) Development Agreement - Temp. Reso. #2940
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED until
all matters are resolved.
Mayor Falck asked if all matters concerning this were resolved and
V/M Massaro said there are problems existing. C/M Stelzer MOVED to
TABLE this Item until all matters are resolved. Thom Lira, represent-
ing Justus Homes of Florida, Inc. said they are requesting consider-
ation at this time.
V/M Massaro said she is asking for a tabling action because there
are several questions on these projects concerning the retention.
She said the County requirements state that the water retention can-
not tie directly into the canal and they require a pollutant -retardant
catchbasin with a weir in it. She said the City has not,required this
in the past and it appears that the City's Ordinances may be in conflict
with what the County and the South Florida Water Management District
Tape are requirina. She said this requirement demands a greater percentage
3 of retention than the Ordinance of 5%. She said this must be examined
further.
Mr. Lira said it is impossible to work the formula of the County and
the South Florida Management District without a site plan and to meet
the current City Code they have reserved, on the base of the plat,
a minimum 5% of the site for retention. He said these are perimeter
plats, therefore, they do not have a site plan as yet. V/M Massaro
said there is a problem with the traffic light that is being required
there. She said Mr. Lira, on behalf of his clients, voluntarily
offered a contribution of $10,000 for the traffic light and since then,
the County is requesting an impact fee of $40,000 for the traffic
light;.therefore, this must be resolved. She said the location of
this traffic light is another matter for discussion with the County.
She MOVED this Item be TABLED until all matters are resolved. SECONDED
by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
- 13 - 12/1/83
/pm
4. Bid Award - Cypress Creek Commons - Tem . Reso. #2894 - Dis-
cussion and possible action to award a bid for the installation
of fixed pier boat slips, docks and gangway (tabled from 10/26/83).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED at the
request of the City Manager.
Laura Stuurmans said she would request tabling of this Item since
they are still awaitina word on the extension from the State. C/M
Kravitz MOVED that this Item be TABLED, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
6. ^ roward League of Cities - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Reports by
ayor a c M Kravitz ana C/ivi Krantz.
C/M Kravitz said he has read in the newspapers how active the League
is in the 201 Program and he is awaiting minutes of the last meeting..
C/M Krantz said he and C/M Stelzer attended the last meeting held on
11/17/83. The guest speaker was Bill Morgan, representative of NCMD,
the National Center for Municipal Development, which is a lobby for
municipal governments in Washington. They coordinate local govern-
ment interest with regard to Federal legislation. They represent
the National League of Cities with regard to national funding for
local cities. They mainly focus on grants and in this connection,
they work directly with Congressional representation.
Mayor Falck said he was successful in getting the Board to set up a
committee to make an analysis of the Board's activities;
1. they should coordinate the inventory of equipment within
municipalities.
2. Tamarac has benefited in the past utilizing the extra curbing
equipment available through Lauderhill.
3. Three municipalities, including Tamarac, spent some money trying
to get a report and review on computer equipment. The League
could have coordinated this with one report and one fee.
4. since the fee is based on the amount of grant received, there
are opportunities that need to be explored.
5. in Florida, there is available a complete printout on all grant
availability and this needs to be taken advantage of.
29. Perretti Personnel Director - Discussion
Employment of Larry_ Pe.._etti as i
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 1). APPROVED employment of Larry
Perretti as Personnel Director effective
12/5/83 at a starting salary of $35,665.58
with a probation period of 1 year.
The City Manager said she sent Council a memo dated 11/30/83 which
recommended Larry Perretti as Personnel Director. She said Mr.
Perretti has had intensive personnel administration and labor relations
background and she requested Council's approval. C/M Krantz said he
was impressed with Mr. Perretti's resume and he MOVED to APPROVE
the City Manager's recommendation to employ Larry Perretti as
Personnel Director effective Monday, 12/5/83 at a starting salary
of $35,665.58, with a 1 year probation period. SECONDED by C/M
Stelzer.
Mayor Falck said he was impressed with Mr. Perretti's resume as well
and he is in favor of this. He said there is a need for the City
to improve public relations and Mr. Perretti will be an asset in this
area.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
- 14 -
12/l/83
/pm
30. 5pringlake II _ Disposition of Warranty Bond - Temp. Reso.
#2945 - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent. RESOLUTION NO. R-83- ?j/ PASSED.
(see Page 1). APPROVED as amended.
V/M Massaro said the Engineering Department has some remedial work
to be done at this project and this has not been completed. She
said the City Engineer has asked that the Motion include that if the
repairs are not completed or an extension has not been provided by
12/7/83, he be authorized to call the bond. If the work is completed,
the release of the warranty bond should come back to Council. Mr.
Henning read the Resolution by title and;V/M Massaro MOVED that the
City Engineer be authorized to call the bond. Mr. Henning said in
Section 2, the appropriate City officials are authorized to call the
bond in the amount of $68,506.37 posted to guarantee public improve-
ments associated with this project if the remedial repairs are not
completed on or before 12/7/83 or if the bond has not been extended
by that date. He said in Section 3 it reads, that said bond be
released if remedial repairs are accomplished on or before 12/7/83.
V/M Massaro said she objects to Section 3, if the remedial work is
completed she requested there be a memo from the City Engineer that
the work has been completed to his satisfaction and then Council
can take action on this. Mr. Henning said Section 3 should be
stricken and Section 4 should be renumbered to Section 3.
C/M Kravitz MOVED to APPROVE Temp. Reso. #2945 as amended, striking
Section 3 and Section 4 becomes Section 3, SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
32. Final Payment to PHK for Aquatic Weed Services - Discussion
and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent.
See Page 2). The —Finance Director was
authorized to make payment of $3,600
to PHK.
The City Manager said she submitted to Council a report which details
a difficulty that was experienced at the time that they changed the
aquatic weed contractor. She said PHK had a contract with the City
for a three year period of time and under the terms of that award they
were to be paid a flat fee of $1,800 per month. They had also sub-
mitted at the same time, a bid for a two year award in the amount of
$2,400. She said the City changed contractors in order to develop
more inclusive aquatic weed and ditch bank control this year, the
services of PHK were dropped. She said this reduced the period of
time that they had been doing work for the City to a 24 month period.
She said they claimed, because of the difference between a 36 month
award and a 24 month award that they would lose $7,200. She said
the City reviewed the contract and after negotiations, that figure
was brought down to $3,600 which she feels would be an equitable
sum and she requested Council's approval.
V/M Massaro MOVED that the Finance Director be authorized to make
the payment of $3,600 to PHK, Inc., SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
31. concord and possible Disposition
isio n. of Warrant, Bond - TUW - Dis-
cussion II Dis o_sitio
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by Consent
See Page 2 ..APPROVED the procedures as
outlined in the City Manager's memo of
11/28/83 and John Letter's memo of 11/23/83.
Also, the refund of Bldg. 6 should be applied
to the increased deposit of Bldg. 5.
- 15 - 12/l/83
/pm
The City Manager said this clarifies the record of the action taken
in October, 1983 and authorizes the City to make the reduction to
those units that have been charged a higher fee between December of
1982 and October, 1983.. She said, at the same time, staff is re-
commending that the sales model complex, which is Bldg. 5, be in-
creased to the appropriate amount. She said HLR has a deposit on
Bldg. 6 that is higher and would be reduced, therefore, this would
be a trade-off in the monies. She said it does eliminate the con-
fusion when the developer transfers responsibility to the association
who then must increase this.
V/M Massaro MOVED to adopt the procedure as outlined in the memos
and not to issue a check on Building 6 unless it is to apply the
refund of Building 6 towards the increase required in Building 5.
SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE: C/M Stelzer
Aye
C/M Krantz
Absent
C/M Kravitz
Aye
V/M Massaro
Aye
Mayor Falck
Aye
The City Manager said following her memo to Council on 11/28/83, she
had the Finance Department check to see if there were any other areas
affected by the new Resolution in October and there were approximately
11 more accounts scattered throughout the City. She said these will
come to Council by subsequent memorandum.
LEGAL AFFAIRS
14. Tamarac Town . Square - Temp_._Res_o. #2938 - Discussion and pos-
sible action on amended Stipulation #15.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED until
it is executed.
Mr. Henning read the Resolution by title and said at this point
he does not have the executed Stipulation from the Tamarac Town
Square; however, he has had several conversations with Dan Oyler,
who is representing them and they agree to the substance of this
Stipulation. V/M Massaro MOVED to TABLE this Item until this is
executed by a signature from them. SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
15. Spe_c_i_al Assessment for Southqate Gardens Condominiums and
Cardinal Industries
Property Discussion and possible action
on the special assessment for construction of an 8-inch water
line along Southgate Boulevard between NW 71 Avenue and
University Drive (Public hearing held 9/14/83) (tabled from
10/26/83).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Authorization was
given to engage Williams, Hatfield &
Stoner, Inc. to prepare the necessary
documents as outlined.
V/M Massaro MOVED to engage Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. to
prepare the necessary documents for the Special Assessment District
and to determine the method of the assessment. The cost of this work
is to be added to the Special Assessment District so that it will be
all inclusive and will be of no cost to the City. SECONDED by C/M
Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
V/M Massaro said Jim Brady, of Cardinal Industries, has indicated
that the hold up has been due to some discussions with the South
Florida Water Management District.
- 16 - 12/l/83
/pm
13. Building Permit Fees - Temp. Reso. #2929 - Discussion and pos-
sible action to revise the schedule of Building Department
permit fees.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to the
Reconvened meeting on 12/6/83.
V/M Massaro MOVED to TABLE this Item to the Reconvened meeting on
12/6/83, SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
Not
ALL VOTED AYE
Mayor Falck recessed the meeting until 2:00 P.M.
- 17 - 12/1/83
/pm
BLANK PAGE
-18- 12/1/83
/rb
MAYOR FALCK CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 2:00 P.M. AND ALL WERE
PRESENT.
PUBLIC HEARI14GS
9. Appointments of Residents by_City Council - Tem . Ord. #1073 -
Discussion and possible action to provide that all people
appointed by the Council to boards and committees in the
Tape future shall be residents of the City of Tamarac and registered
4 voters. Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED as ORDINANCE NO. 0-83- 50 PASSED
Amended on Second and Final Reading.
City Attorney Jon Henning read the,Ordinance by title.
C/M Kravitz said that as liaison to the Chamber of Commerce,
he would state it is his opinion that Temp. Ord. #1073 actually
specifies that the business people in the City who are not
residents of Tamarac, are being deprived of serving on advisory
boards, committees and commissions. He said he goes along with
the idea that the residents of the City should have their say
in the City. However, those individuals who work in Tamarac
should be identified in the Ordinance and have their say as well.
C/M Kravitz said it is his suggestion that the portion of Article V
in the Ordinance which refers to members; should not be deleted,
and that the City Attorney insert the words, "with the exception of
business people" so that these individuals can serve on committees
although they are not residents of the City.
C/M Krantz said that the residents of the City have a vested
interested in the community. He said for example, an individual
could own a home that is worth $50,000.00, $75,000.00 or $100,000.00.
However, the business people in the City also have vested interest
in the City in considerably higher amounts than a homeowner does.
He said in the Chamber of Commerce, there are doctors, lawyers,
dentists, accountants and other professionals who also have a large
vested interest in the City; yet the Ordinance being proposed
at this time would exclude those individuals from serving on
committees.
C/M Krantz said if those individuals are willinq to
serve, the Ordinance should include people who have businesses,
whether that business be professional, retail, wholesale, etc.,
to give those people the opportunity to serve on a committee.
C/M Stelzer mentioned that there is a valuable member of the
Beautification Committee who would be affected by this Ordinance.
C/M Krantz said the individual referred to is already on the
Beautification Committee and therefore, would not be affected
by this Ordinance.
C/M Stelzer said that when the term of this individual expires,
he would have to be taken off the Committee if this Ordinance is passed.
C/M Kravitz said that is correct.
Mayor Falck opened the public hearing.
Mrs. Florence Bochenek, Chairman of the Beautification Committee,
stated that Mr. Bill Sutter is a most valuable asset to this
Committee and he certainly has vested interest, in the City and
brings in money to the City. However, he would be taken off
the committee when his term expires, if the Ordinance is passed.
Mrs. Bochenek said there are many individuals who are in the same
position as Mr. Sutter and also have a financial interest in the
City as well as the interest of the City at heart. She feels these
people should not be discriminated against. She said she can
-19-- 12/1/83
/rb
appreciate that Council does not wish individuals to serve
on a committee who have no interest in the City at all.
However, when a person has a business in Tamarac,
that individual certainly does have an interest in the City.
Mrs. Bochenek said she hopes that the Council
can see their way to include in the Ordinance, that business
people in Tamarac be permitted to serve on committees.
Mr. Ray Baade, member of the Beautification Committee and
former Chairman, said he is strongly opposed to the
proposed Ordinance. He said at this time there is ra
parallel in the present City Code, which provides under
Article II, for the Beautification Committee to be composed of
residents of the City or principal owners of businesses
in the City. Mr. Baade said he feels this provision covers
what was pointed out by C/M Kravitz, C/M Krantz and C/M Stelzer, fie
said perhaps what is required in order to properly address this
matter is to change the provision for membership in all other
City committees and boards by usinq similar wording. Mr. Baade
said this is covered in Section 6-3 in Article II of the Code
which states, "Active members serving on the Beautification
Committee shall consist of residents of the City._.or principal
operators of a business in the City or the spouses of such operators".
Mr. Baade stated that by restricting membership to residents,
the Ordinance would exclude people who have as much, if not
more, interest in Tamarac than the non -working retired residents.
Business people have made an investment in their enterprise.
He said he knows of one case where an individual who is serving
on a committee has more than three-quarters of a million dollars
invested and these people expect to make a livelihood from their
investments. Residents who have made investments in their homes
do not expect a financial return to provide income for a livelihood.
Mr. Baade said for example, when Mr. Bill Sutter was urged to
join the Beautification Committee upon his expression of
interest, he was welcomed, as it was felt Mr. Sutter would provide
input from the business community which would help to overcome
some of the tunnel vision that the other members of the committee
might have been utilizing in the approach to business requests
regarding beautification.
Mr. Baade stated - he would strongly urge that this Ordinance
as written be defeated.
V/M Massaro said she would recommend that wording be added to
the Ordinance stating "shall be residents and registered voters
in the City or be the principal operators of a business or be
the spouses of those individuals".
C/M Krantz said he would like the Ordinance to be as broad as
possible, and it is his suggestion that the wording be, " or.
those with principal businesses in the City". C/P4 Krantz said
that would include professionals, stores, etc. however, he
feels spouses should not be included.
V/M Massaro said there are occasions where an operator of a
business is unable to serve on a committee, but his wife would
have the time to serve; and she is sure those individuals would
be equally as concerned.
C/M Krantz agreed.
C/M Stelzer inquired about the wording,
V/M Massaro said this would refer to the
not the employees.
"principal businesses".
owners of businesses, and
-20- 12/1/83
City Attorney Henning said that the language in the Ordinance
would be "principal operators of a business" as that is the
wording for the Beautification Committee.
Mr. Ray Munitz, resident, suggested that the word "owners"
be substituted for "principal operators".
The City Attorney said he is thinking about the new Richway
Store, which would have a General Manager; and that individual
would certainly have an interest in the City.
Mr. Miinit7 said that there are some individuals
who are not residents of the City or principal operators or
owners of a business, but they do have a certain area of
expertise because of their background.
V/M Massaro said she feels those individuals should not be
included; and Councilmen Kravitz, Krantz and Stelzer agreed.
Mrs. Vickie Beech, resident, said she feels this would be a
wonderful opportunity to create a cohesiveness between the business
community and the residents. She said she is sure there must be
a lot of expertise that would be constructive to the City if those
individuals were permitted to serve on some of the City boards.
This would also indicate that the City is concerned not only with
its own merits, but with working as a team.
Mrs. Melanie Reynolds, resident, said it should be noted that
all residents who may be electors are not taxpayers as there
are residents who are renters and they are electors but do not
pay taxes. Mrs. Reynolds said she feels this should be considered.
Mr. Sid Wortman, resident, said he is in favor of the Ordinance
as amended today.
Mr. Bill Sutter of Sutter/Ace Hardware, stated that as a member
of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and the
Vice Chairman of the Beautification Committe, he feels it would
be in the best interest of the City to permit the business
people in the community to serve on committees. This would
give those individuals an opportunity to express themselves on
the various things that are happening in the City.
Mr. Sutter stated that the amended Ordinance would be
welcomed by the business community of Tamarac.
Mr. Nicholas Camerano said that as an alternate member of the
Beautification Committee, he would state that he is in agreement
with all that has been said today in favor of permitting the
business people to engage in the business of the City. He said
he feels that Mr. Sutter lends something extra to the Beautification
Committee since he has a business in the City of Tamarac.
Mr. Jack Holmes, President of the Chamber of Commerce, stated
that he would like to mention - since he is a newspaper
publisher in various cities, he often has the opportunity to
speak with people from other cities. At such times, he
always mentions that Tamarac is a very unique City because there is
input from so many of the people within the City. Mr. Holmes
said he feels this is one of the reasons Tamarac functions
as well as it does. When there is input from the people of
the community, there is better government.
Mr. Holmes said it is his opinion that to exclude the business
people from having a say in the City would be a big mistake.
The public hearing was closed.
-21- 12/l/83
/rb
V/M Massaro MOVED to Amend Temp. Ord. #1073 under Article V
after "registered voters in the City" to add, "or be the owner
or principal operator of a business in the City or the
spouses of such owners or operators". SECONDED by C/M Stelzer.
City Attorney Henning said there is to be similar language in
the title on the third to last line.
C/M Kravitz said the Ordinance states that these individuals
be residents and registered voters. He said it has been
his experience that there are many people living in Florida
who are residents and own their own homes, but are not registered
voters since they still have a residence up north, for tax purposes.
He said the Ordinance would exclude those people from serving
the City and he feels this should be considered before the
Ordinance is passed.
V/M Massaro mentioned that there might also be owners of businesses
who are not registered voters in the City.
C/M Kravitz said he is wondering whether "registered voters"
should be mentioned in the Ordinance at all; and V/M Massaro
stated she feels this should not be mentioned in the Ordinance.
C/M Stelzer said Council should consider also, the fact that
there are a lot of snowbirds in the City who are residents
but not registered voters. He said Council does not want
snowbirds to serve on committees since those individuals
would only be able to operate four or five months a year.
V/M Massaro said those individuals would not be appointed;
and C/M Kravitz agreed.
C/M Krantz mentioned the fact that the City receives many
applications on which there is no indication whether an individual
is a snowbird or not; and Mayor Falck said this question can
be added to the application.
C/M Stelzer said if the words "registered voters" are included in
the Ordinance, it would not have to be included in the application
and snowbirds would not apply.
V/M Massaro said that would exclude the business people and
C/M Stelzer said business people are voters generally in other
Cities.
City Attorney Henning explained that the way the Ordinance is
written, it is intended to be that residents are registered
voters in the City of Tamarac. Ile stated that when this
Ordinance was written, a new Article and a new area in the Code
which is, "Committee Rules and Procedures" was created and he assumes
the Ordinance pertaining to this committee would
be the new procedure and would pertain to all
committees. He said discussions were held for the past several
months concerning changes that Council wishes to make in all
committee procedures; and this is the first section in that
Article.
Mr. Henning said it is not necessary that Council pass this
Ordinance today. It was written as he was instructed to cover
only residents and registered voters in the City of Tamarac.
If Council does not pass the Ordinance today, the status quo
would remain and a Workshop could be scheduled for the
purpose of determining how this should be handled.
-22- 12/1/83
/rb
The City Attorney said he has a few thoughts on this subject.
One of them is that the Council has been trying to have
uniformity and may want to treat all the committees
the same. On the other hand, there may be some committees
such as the Beautification Committee, which was singled out
earlier.. that Council might wish to be comprised of residents and
business people. Other committees
might not be desired that way. Another alternative would be
that Council might prefer that the majority of members be
residents, but leave it open so there can be contributions from
the business public. Therefore, there are a lot of alternatives
and at the present time, there is no existing language in the
Code so Council is not compelled to fix anything. If the status
quo is satisfactory, but Council wishes to think abou-c this and
possibly add to it, that can be done. Council can pass this
Ordinance as it is written, or it can be passed as Amended.
Mayor Falck said it is his suggestion that Council pass this
Ordinance as discussed today, with an amendment added to it.
He feels that Mr. Henning's thoughts are proper and the other
aspects of this matter can be looked at as time progresses.
However, as the residents have expressed themselves and there
were no comments from the Council to the contrary, he feels
it is not necessary to delay this.
V/M Massaro MOVED to delete the words, "Registered voters in the
City". SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
Mayor Falck said that from time to time, Council is approached
by people who have no interest in the City, and are not residents
or business people in the City. Those individuals apply for positions on
the boards that make decisions which vitally affect the residents
of the City and the business people as well. He said he is
sure that initially, not much thought was given to the business
community..
The Mayor said Mr. Holmes touched on an important subject relating to
Publi hea_r_inas. When Arthur Birken first came in as the
City ttorney, one of the first things he said was that he felt
if the City wanted to do the residents of Tamarac a service,
a second hearing should be added before final passage of an
Ordinance. If Council so desired, they could have three public
hearings. There already were two public hearings on the Ordinance
discussed today, and there were no complaints about anything.
He said he feels this procedure helps to accomplish things because
nobody can think of all the things that should be done at any
given time. Mayor Falck said he shares Mr. Holmes' feelings
that Tamarac is a unique City because the residents are encouraged
to present their points of view, and this is a very important
part of Tamarac's progression as a City.
City Manager Stuurmans said that to adjust the legislation
to reflect the change made in Article V of Temp. Ord. #1073,
the title and the third "Whereas" need to be addressed.
Also, Council may wish to say, "have sufficient applications
from City residents and members of the business community".
City Attorney Henning said the third"Whereas" clause could be
stricken.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
-23- 12/1/83
/rb
10. Burglar Alarm User Fees - Temp. Ord. fl075 - Discussion
and possible action to amend Subsection 14-64(3) of the
Code to reoeal provisions prohibiting pro -rated fees for
alarm user permits. Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED on
cSec:ond and Final Reading.
ORDINA14CE NO. 0-83-,jZ ASSED
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Ordinance by title.
Mayor Falck opened the public hearing. There was no response
and the public hearing was closed.
V/M Massaro MOVED the adoption of Temp. Ord. #1075. SECONDED by
C/M Kravitz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
21. Lakeside Apartments/Lakeside Plaza - _Temp. Ord_. #1071 -
Discussion and possible action on vacation of a road
right--of-way on the west side of State Road 7, at the north
City limit line, adjacent to these projects. Second Reading.
(Public liedring held 11/9/83) .
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to
reconvened meeting of Tuesday,
12/6/83 .
Mayor Falck stated that this item is being heard at this time be-
cause it has an effect upon the Public..Hearings on Items
#7 and #8, The Courtyard of Tamarac.
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Ordinance by title.
V/M Massaro stated that several changes were made in connection
with the vacation of this easement. On November 9, 1983, Council
tabled action on the Second Reading of this Ordinance. On
November 16, 1983, the attorney for the petitioner, sent a letter
to the City withdrawing the petition and requesting that the
vacation apply to Lot A only, which is time commercial parcel.
V/M Massaro said if the right-of-way is not vacated, the petitioner's
parking setback will not conform to Code. On November 28, 1983,
she attended a conference between the City Attorney, City Engineer,
City Planner and various representatives of the petitioner.
Consideration was given at that time to possible solutions to
the various problems that existed. It will be required that the
entire east/west fifteen feet of the south side of the road
right-of-way be vacated, leaving the north half as an open ditch.
V/M Massaro said this road right-of-way has been used as a drainage
ditch for County property. It serves the trailer pai.k and property
to the north which is in the County. She said she is still concerned
about the drainage ditch on the north side of this right--of-way.
It is possible that it will work out all right upon completion of
the examination of the various documents that have since been
presented to the City as a result of the conference: It will
require going back to the original request dated September 27, 1983
countermanding their letter of November 16, but will also require
graphic exhibits that can be read as the one attached to the original
letter requesting the vacation is illegible. V/D1 Massaro said she
is sure the petitioner will have no problem doing this.
V/M Massaro stated that the City accepted a drainage easement on
October 26, 1983 and she feels this action should be rescinded
before the item is completed. In order to have time to prepare
--24- 12/1/83
/rb
and coordinate everything properly, she feels this item should
be tabled to the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 6,1983
and that there also be included on that date, an item to rescind
the drainage easement which was accepted by Council on October 26,
1983.
V/M Massaro said there are other aspects to this which are not
necessary to discuss today. Primarily, most of the documents
requested have been presented within the last few days,
but nobody has had the opportunity to examine them yet. She
said her main concern is the drainage ditch. There is a sketch
which indicates this might work out properly, but Council needs
to determine what the water elevation is.. There are other
things which need to be checked out and she said she feels action
should be deferred until. Tuesday so that everything can be in
order before a final decision is made.
Mr. Dave Hardin, representing the petitioner, said it is'his
understanding that all the documents have been presented to the
City and he is wondering whether Council might consider the two
restaurant items at this time.
V/M Massaro said she will recommend to Council that these two
items also be considered on Tuesday as she feels Council should
not act upon any of these items until everything is in order.
C/M Stelzer mentioned that the City Attorney wrote a letter
November 30,.1983, in which he recommended that Council approve
the Agreement upon the execution by the developer. That would
cover this completely and he is wondering why the item is being
tabled.
Mayor Falck mentioned that there are a number of new exhibits
which need to be reviewed.
Mr. Henning said that a few meetings ago, there was a request to
revise a site plan to provide for a fence which was to run along
some residential apartments and block a ditch or canal. There
was additional investigation concerning this ditch or canal.
The City Attorney stated that Lakeside Plaza/Lakeside Apartments
is at 441 just north of Commercial Boulevard and the site plan
shows a picture of the plat. At the front, there are several stores
and at the back, there is a large apartment complex. Along
the north line, there is a thirty foot right--of--way and in
the middle of that is the City Limits. Fifteen feet south of
the City Limits is the property line for this project, which
runs several hundred feet.
Mr. Henning stated that the road right-of-way had been excavated
at least fifteen years ago to be a drainage ditch which runs
dead end down the street and does not connect anything in particular,
but goes into the turnpike.
The City Attorney said there was a concern as to what to do with
this ditch, as well as what the condition is of the water in it,.
how the slope should be and whether a fence is actually needed
to protect the apartment residents behind the ditch. Mr. Henning
said all these concerns are covered in the Agreement.
--25- 12/1/83
/rb
Mr. Henning said there is a brick fence or concrete wall
which runs perpendicular to the drainage ditch and separates
the commercial area in the front from the apartments in the back.
The brick wall is'the dividing line in the considerations
wherein the front commercial portion is being treated in one
way and the back residential portion in another. Therefore,
two exhibits are attached to the Agreement as Exhibits 2 and
3. When copies of the picture mentioned by V/M Massaro
is received, it will be attached to the Agreement as Exhibit 1.
The exhibits show an overview of how it is intended to develop
the slope.
Mr. Henning explained that the ditch in the commercial area will
be covered up, sodded and sprinkled. The back portion of it,
which goes further west than the wall and separates the residential
area from the commercial area, will be sloped since there is a
very sharp decline at present. The slope will also be graded
and sodded. There is still a question of whether there should
be a fence but the slope will be much safer and aesthetically
pleasing and will be consistent with the Code provisions and
with the desires of the City staff.
City Attorney Henning said that if the City permits the vacation
of the right-of-way, the City will actually be giving the
developer fifteen feet of additional property since this strip
of land which runs along the property will then belong to the
developer. It will not be the City's property or public property.
He said as part of this, it is anticipated that the developer
will maintain the south bank of the ditch; and this is actually
what the Agreement covers.
Mr. Henning said there is a question as to whether or not it
is actually necessary to move forward to get a vacation of
the right -of --way from the County. Council hopes to accomplish
this on Tuesday and it is his recommendation that the City move
forward to request this from the County as well. This would
take several months, but the City will not hold this up to
obtain County approval. The City Attorney stated it is.
suggested in the Agreement that the City cooperate in the vacation
of the right-of-way and hopefully Council will approve it, after
which it will be applied for at the County. If necessary, there
is a provision that there will be a covenant running with the
land and recorded in the public records, regardingg the fact that
the developer agrees to maintain the slope the way it is designed
and in accordance with the City Code.
City Attorney Henning said that since the City is considering
giving the land to the developer, it would have to be maintained
by the developer. If there is a covenant, the developer would
have to maintain the land in the slope it was designed. This
actually might be more restrictive than the City would desire.
Mr. Henning said there is a slight difference in the corporate
makeup of the organization of the ownership of the front parcel
and the back parcel. In essence, they are the same people and
are all represented by Mr. Hardin, but there is a legal technicality
as to why there are three different parties in the Agreement.
-26- 12/1/83
/rb
Mayor Falck said this has been pending for a number of years
and the City had been involved in this situation at the time
the State and the County were working on State Road 7. He
said he thought the situation had been straightened out at that
time but it was not. In addition, when Lakeside was originally
considered, their representative was before Council and
certain things were accomplished which should have taken care
of the matter that is before Council today. The Mayor said he
feels this is the last opportunity the City will have to do
something about this situation.
V/M Massaro asked Mr.Hardin whether an attempt was made to
have the drainage ditch hooked up to the County system at 441
and he said he discussed the matter twice last week with
Mr. Roy Reynolds of the County and Per. Reynolds sent a County
representative to look at the drainage ditch. It is the opinion
of the County that it is not necessary to drain this into the
County system and it is their inclination to let it go since
it seems to be working for the property owners and would not
improve the County system in any way. Therefore, they do not
want to be involved in it.
V/M Massaro said she can certainly understand that the County
would not want to have any maintenance responsibilities for the
drainage ditch, but she is asking whether an attempt has been
made to hook the drainage ditch into the County system at 441
and the developer could fill it in, at least part way, to provide
a better retention area than exists at this time.
Tape Mr. Hardin said an attempt was not made to .accomplish that
5 since it is not the intent of the petitioner to drain into this,
although it could be done. The trailer park drains into
it, and the applicant feels he should not fill the ditch and
tell the trailer park owner to drain somewhere else. The applicant
would not want to build a drainage system for the trailer park either.
City Attorney Henning said that V/M Massaro has suggested that
a few changes be made to the Agreement. One'of the changes is
that the grass be seeded or sodded and this will be done.
It was also suggested that the Agreement state there is to be a
sprinkler system, and this was done. Lastly, according to past
discussions, there was to be a six-foot fence; and .now that there
will be a slope, the fence might not be needed.
Mr. Henning said that in light of these changes, he has prepared
some new top pages.for the_Agreement, and these pages were
distributed to Council.
V/M Massaro MOVED to table this item to the reconvened meeting of
Tuesday, December 6, 1983 at approximately 3:00 P.M. SECONDED by
C/M Kravitz. ,.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
22. Lakeside at Tamarac - Revised Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2914
Discussion and possible action to approve a revised site plan
for a fence on the north property line (tabled from 11/9/83).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to reconvened
meeting of Tuesday, 12/6/83 at approximately
3:00 P.M.
V/M MOVED to table this item to the reconvened meeting of Tuesday,
December 6, 1983 at approximately 3:00 P.M. SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
-27- 12/1/83
/rb
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. The Courtyard of Tamarac - Special Exception Petition #18-Z-83 -
Temp. Reso. #2927- Discussion and possible action on a re-
quest for Special Exception to allow a restaurant in Bays
6 and 7 of Building C at Lakeside Plaza, 5435 and 5437 North
State Road 7, Zoned B+-1 (Neighborhood Business).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Public Hearing held.
TABLED to re&bnvened meeting of Tuesday,_ T
12/6/83
City Attorney Jon. Henning read the Resolution by title.
Mayor Falck opened the public hearing.
Mr. Carlos Granados stated that he is one of the owners of
The Courtyard of Tamarac and at this time there is a restaurant
for which a Special Exception is requested. He said he feels
this has no bearing upon the item relating to the drainage ditch
discussed today.
Mr. Granados said that at one time, V/M Massaro requested there
be some twenty -foot trees at the apartments, to act as an additional
buffer for the cooking odors from the restaurant. He said
a revised site plan has been submitted which reflects these twenty
foot trees along the entire border of the residential property line
to the commercial parcel. He said he feels everything required
for the approval of the Special Exception has been provided
and he would ask Council to consider this item separately.
The public hearing was closed.
V/M Massaro said she is not against the restaurant and a revised
site plan and revised Beautification plan have been submitted,
and as soon as they are reviewed, action can be taken. She said
she feels Council should not approve a Special Exception until
such time as the basic work is in order.
V/M Massaro MOVED to table this item to Tuesday. SECONDED by C/M Krani
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
8. The Courtyard of Tamarac - Special Exception Petition #19-WZ--83 -
Temp. Reso. #2928 - Discussion and possible action on a request
for Special Exception to allow on -premises consumption of beer
and wine in conjunction with a proposed restaurant in Bays 6
and 7 of Building C at Lakeside Plaza, 5435 and 5437 North
State Road 7, Zoned B-1 (Neighborhood Business).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Public Hearing held.
TABLED to-reconvenedmeeting of Tuesday, 12/6/83
Mayor Falck opened the public hearing.
Mrs. Florence Bochenek, Beautification Committee Chairman, said
she was happy to hear the suggestion regarding the twenty -foot
trees.
The public hearing was closed.
Mr. Carlos Granados stated for the record,
that it is his opinion this .item should be considered separately
as the apartments in the back are a separate legal entity. He said
the revised site plan which was submitted was for the apartments
and not for Lakeside Plaza. The revised Beautification plan was
also for Lakeside Apartments and not Lakeside Plaza.
-28- 12/1/83
/rb
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Resolution by title.
V/M Massaro stated that Item #21, which is the vacation of the
road right-of-way, does have an affect upon the commercial
piece of property; and Item #21 was tabled to the reconvened
meeting of Tuesday.
V/M Massaro MOVED to Table Temp. Reso. #2928 to the Tuesday
meeting.
SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
17. Lakes of Carriage Hills - Model Sales Facilit -- Discussion
and possible action to renew a model sales permit for a
facility located at 6180 Rock Island Road.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: See
Pages 30 and 31.
C/M Kravitz mentioned there is a past due item in the amount of
$2,763.80 which is due the City.
Mr.Robert Daurity, building contractor for Lakes of Carriage
Hills, stated that he is not aware of this past due item.
V/M Massaro stated that this amount represents guaranteed
revenues and this is the first month they are due. Payments
vere made previously for a specific number of ERC's. The
original agreement had become two years old and Lakes of Carriage
Hills is responsible for guaranteed revenues on the entire project
after two years on a monthly basis. The Vice Mayor said she feels it
would be appropriate at this time for the City Manager to check with
the Finance Department for more complete information.
20. Patio HUltles at Fairmont - .Model Sales Facility - Discussion and
possible action to renew model sales permit(tabled from 10/26/83)
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to second
meeting in January. If guaranteed revenues
are not brought up to date by then,
they will be in default.
C/M Kravitz stated that there are guaranteed revenues which are
past due in the amount of $260.50, interest on CIAC's in the
amount of $2,380.68, 25% takedown on ERC's at $1,530.00 each,
which would be $8,415.00 or at $1,500.00 each, which would be
$8,250.00.
Mr. Eugene Toll, President of Patio Homes at Fairmont, stated
that it was not anticipated when the agreements were signed,
that these would be two difficult years. He said revenues and
fees are paid, generally through financing and financing is based
upon sales of units. Models are needed to sell these units.
Mr.- Toll said he has a closing on December 15 and 16 on this
particular piece of property and the fees are included in the
loan commitment.
V/M Massaro MOVED that the time be extended to the second
meeting in January with the understanding that if.guaranteed revenues
are not brought up to date by that time, they will be in default.
SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
-29- 12/l/83
/rb
17. Lakes of Carriage Hills - Model Sales FaciliLZ -- Discussion and
possible action to renew a model sales permit for a facility
located at 6180 Rock Island Road.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to regular meeting
of 12/14 83(See also Pg. 29).
- City Manager Stuurmans explainea that the amount of $2,763.80
was billed during the month of October and was due on November 3,
1983. Payments had been made regularly on 33 units. However,
for the period of November 3, 1983 to November 21, 1983, payment
was due for the balance of the 433 units and therefore, the
amount of $2,763.80 is currently due for all 466 units.
Mayor Falck said he would suggest postponing this item to Tuesday,
so that the matter can be straightened out.
V/M Massaro said there is a problem relating to this project.
Council is aware that there is an option agreement which ties in with
the rezoning. On January 1, 1984, the rezoning will either be
approved or disapproves and if the rezoningj is riot coi<<pleted by
that time, the option becomes effective.
V/M Massaro stated that there is a letter of credit for the
work on the lakes and public improvements. This is covered
by a bond for $160,265.00 which expires on January 19, 1984
unless the work is completed by that date. She said she does
not feel the work can be completed by then and the City might
be reluctant to extend the bond if the rezoning is not resolved.
The Vice Mayor said she feels the applicant is ready to resolve
this as a second agreement has been entered into,
However, she understands they are having a problem with Florida
Power & Light as relates to permanent parking over the.easement.
The City would have no objection to that, but Florida Power & Light
must grant permission for it.
V/M Massaro said the City has some obligations concerning the
letter of credit and time is of the essence. This is a different
situation than the customary letter of credit and certain
notifications must be given. Therefore, she said she would
suggest that no action be taken on the model sales facility
until the next regular meeting for progress on the option
agreement for rezoning as if the, _area cannot be used for
parking, the size of the building would have to be reduced
and this could become economically unfeasible.
Mr.Glenn Smith, representing Lakes of Carriage Hills, said
he would like some clarification relating to the letter of credit
as it pertains to the model sales facility.
V/M Massaro . explained that Council is unable to act upon
the model sales facility because that building is part of the
option agreement. The option agreement concerns the rezoning
of the, parcel, and failing to rezone the parcel, the City has
the option of purchasing the land for $10.00 according to the
option agreement. The model sales building is a part of the
parcel, and Council is not in a position to renew the permit
for the model sales facility until such time as the rezoning
aspect is resolve'd and the City receives payment of approximately
$112,000.00 which is owed for parks and recreation fees.
V/M' Massaro further explained that the letter of credit will expire
on January 19 for the excavation of the lakes and
the public improvements. Normally, it is easy for the City to
extend a letter of credit, but it will not be a simple matter
until the rezoning is resolved.
Mr..Smith said the problem is with Florida Power and Light,
as the situation has not yet been resolved. He feels they
are close to reaching an agreement but it is.taking longer than
anticipated.
The Vice Mayor said the City will try to -be of assistance in this
matter and Mr. Smith suggested a meeting be held next week
for that purpose.
-30-- 12/1/83
/rb
City Attorney Henning stated that there is an agreement based
upon some recreation fees. The development had a total recrea-
tion fee of $300,000.00 and all of that was paid with the
exception of $112,000.00, which will be due on a future date.
As collateral, a certain tract of land which also contained the
model sales office, was posted. If the $112,000.00 is not paid,
the City could execute the foreclosure or buy the land for $10.00.
Under the agreement, the option can be acted upon between
January 1, 1984 and April of 1984. The City cannot exercise this
option before January 1, 1984 as there are some things which
could preclude the City from taking the land.
Firstly,the agreement could be extended, which Mr. Henning said
he is not suggesting. Secondly, the payment of the fees could
be made. There might also be some language to the effect that if
Council entertains the rezoning before January 1, 1984, it could
be precluded.
V/M Massaro said these monies would have to be paid fifteen days
after the final vote.
Mr. Henning explained that nothing could happen before January 1,1984
which would permit the City to take the land. He said lie would
caution Council that under the circumstances, he would not recommend
the extension of the model sales permit beyond January 1, 1984.
lie further explained that the letter of credit has to do with the
canal situation. Apparently there is a substantial amount of work
required and it seems unlikely it would be accomplished by
January 19, 1984.
V/M Massaro stated that there are certain conditions to this
letter of credit which are different from the customary letter
of credit. There are requirements which must be met by the City
and she has requested that the City Attorney check the documentary
credit numbers and the commerce publications as to the specific
rules and regulations. The City does not.want to suddenly find
that the City has defaulted in the requirements of the letter of
credit; and therefore, the City is reluctant to extend the letter
of credit until the entire situation has been ,resolved.
Mr. Smith said he sees no problem with this, with the exception of
the Florida Power and Light situation.
V/M Massaro stated that if Council takes no action today, there
is nothing to preclude Lakes of Carriage Hills from continuing
the use of the model sales office until such time as Council
does take action.
V/M Massaro MOVED that the item on Lakes of Carriage Hills
regarding the model sales facility be tabled to the next regular
meeting. SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE:
LEGAL AFFAIRS
ALL VOTED AYE
11. Burglar Alarm User Fees - Temp. Reso. #2912 - Discussion and
possible action to permit a pro -rated half -year fee for alarm
user permits (tabled from 11/9/83).
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION.
to allow . pro -rated
fee of $25.00 after
APPROVED,
half -year
July 1.
RESOLUTION R-83-_�3 Z,� PASSED
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Resolution by title and stated
that the number of the Ordinance which was passed today should
be inserted on line 9 of Section 1 of this Resolution.
-31-- 12/1/83
/rb
V/M Massaro stated .that discussions were held relating to
pro -rating fees for alarm users, but it was felt this would
conflict with the occupational license fees and create a lot
of work for the Finance Department. Therefore, it was decided
to follow the procedure of the occupational licenses which
is to pro -rate the fee to half -year or $25.00, to simplify the
bookkeeping.
V/M Massaro MOVED the adoption of Temp. Reso. #2912 to allow
proration for six months. Anything after July 1 would require
payment of half the fee, which is $25.00. SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
19. Exxon Service Station - Discussion and possible action on:
a) Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2931.
b) Landscape Plan
c) Water and Sewer Development Agreement
d) Water Retention Agreement
e) Utility easement for fire hydrant - Temp. Reso_ 42932
f) Warranty deed for additional right-of-way on NW 88 Avenue -
Temp. Reso. #2933
(to be located at the southwest corner of Southgate Boulevard
and NW 88 Avenue)
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) through f)
TABLED to reconvened meeting of
Tuesday, 12/6/83.
a) City Attorney Jon Henning read the Resolution by title.
C/M Stelzer stated that the reverse side of Page 4 of the
Development Review Status sheet lists five numbered items
on .which there are ten or twelve conditions, and he is
wondering whether these conditions have been taken care of.
Mr. Dave Oshinski representing Exxon Service Station, said
that numbers 1 and 2 have been submitted for review.
Item number 3 has been prepared and two copies have
been submitted to Mr. Bob Foy. County approval is necessary
for this item. Item number 4, which is the water and sewer
agreement, water retention agreement, fire hydrant easement
and warranty deed, have all been submitted. Mr. Oshinski
said he is assuming Item number five will be discussed at this
time.
Mr. Richard Rubin, City Planner, said the proposed Exxon
Service Station will be constructed at Southgate Boulevard
and NW 88 Avenue, which. is zoned B-3. This will be on .92
acre.; The. site plan for this station was approved by the
Council several years ago and at this time a revision is
requested, as shown on the site plan before Council today.
Mr. Rubin said that as C/M Stelzer mentioned, Page 4, Item 3
indicates that the City staff is requesting that the right hand
turn lane be included in the drawing and constructed with the
overall development. The City has not received a positive
reply from the applicant on this item, and he would ask
Mr. Oshinski at this time if the applicant would agree to this.
Mr. Oshinski said the applicant would agree to construct the
right turn lane and they would like to do this in conjunction
with the construction of the service stati dn. He initialled the site
plan to this effect.
Mr. Rubin explained that the reason Item number 5 is on the
agenda is because the original site plan for the filling station and
shopping centershowed a parking lot connecting the shopping center
to the service station by a driveway between the two. The City
staff had made that recommendation, after which the Planning
Commission felt it was not necessary and requested the applicant
remove it from the site plan. However, the staff would still like
to see the driveways connected and would ask the applicant's
representative what is felt to be the most reasonable solution
to this situation from a professional standpoint.
Mr. Rubin explained that the revised site plan shows a driveway
at the south end and another driveway twenty feet further away going
to the shopping center 4nd it . might be more appropriate
to narrow the south driveway to one way, going out only
and allow the other driveway to have an entrance into the station
.to. connect the two sites so people would not have to go out
to get back in. The width of the asphalt along the roadway
would also be reduced.
V/M Massaro said the applicant had expressed a desire to permit
the double driveway at the south end so that the people who
bypass the first driveway would have an opportunity to enter
the station through the second driveway. She said she feels
the applicant should decide what is preferred since the company
has experts in these matters and are in a better position to
know what would best serve them. The Vice Mayor said a tremendous
amount of money goes into these stations and she therefore, feels
that Council should permit Exxon to make this decision. As
far as the City is concerned, she thinks Council would approve
either method as this would serve the people well who want to go
to the shoppina center from the aas station or enter the station
from it. She said this would affect the beautification
but would allow for a narrower driveway, which would add some
beautification
Mr. Oshinski stated that the applicant would prefer
the driveway as is, but is flexible on the issue. At the
original hearing, he said it was requested the driveway be
installed and this was done. However, when the Building and
Zoning Department reviewed the plan, it was requested that
Exxon remove the driveway, and that was done. Mr. Oshinski
explained that the Exxon stations generally have an entrance
and an exit to the primary street, and in this case that would
be NW 8$ Avenue; and this is the way it is preferred.
Tape Mr. Carl Alper of the Planning Commission said that Item 5
6 indicates Council must determine the right of the Exxon station
to install service bays. The Planning Commission approved
the site subject to that right. He said Council is familiar with
the Bishop Agreement which states that the Exxon station should
be used for only the sale of gasoline. There is some language
in the Bishop Agreement which might not be definite enough, but
Exxon understands that language.
Mr. Alper said the Stipulation states, "The City of Tamarac
agrees that subject to the provisions of the Stipulation, said
site will -be approved by the City of Tamarac as a gasoline
service station site. Any further use of the gas station
classification shall be expressly prohibited".
Mr. Alper mentioned that discussions were held between the
Planning Commission and the Exxon representative, at which
time the Planning Commission was informed that this station
would be strictly self-service and there will be no repairs,
oil, grease jobs or anything of that sort and there will not
be full service. Therefore, the site was approved by the
Planning Commission with the condition that automobile repairs
or lifts will not be permitted.
Mr. Alper said his main concern is contamination. There was
an item in the Newsletter wherein a question was asked as to
whether fish caught in Tamarac canals are edible; and it was
stated that the waterways are contaminated because of the
pollution of the groundwater that feeds into the canals.
This contamination is caused by oil drippings, spills, etc.
which originate at gasoline stations as these drippings
go into pipes which lead to a canal. Mr. Alper said if
there were less oil and grease, it would be better for the
City and if the City does not permit bays in gasoline stations,
there would be much less contamination.
V/M Massaro said when the Stipulation was discussed, the
concern was. that they have nothing at the station other than
what is customarily at a gasoline station, since there
are some stations that put in restaurants and food as well
as other things. In fact, some of the service stations have
regular grocery stores on the premises.
V/M Massaro said the Stipulation stated that Tract 22 will
remain B-3, or no more restrictive than B-3 and that it may
be developed and maintained for any use permitted at the time
of the execution of the Stipulation by the City of Tamarac
under Ordinance #77-25.
V/M Massaro said she feels Exxon did reserve their rights under
the Stipulation to have a full gasoline service station,, and
she sees no reason to prohibit them from having the rights which
are permitted under the Stipulation; and in fact, she does not
think Council can stop them. The Vice Mayor said as tar as
pollution is concerned, there are laws which must be followed
and they do have to have the oil catchers, etc. If they do
not abide by the laws, it would soon be noticed and they would
be cited for it.
Mr. Alper said the agreement states specifically that there
shall be no'further extension of this classification. As
far as the pollution is concerned, everybody intends to do a
good job, but the State of Florida is the fourth worst in the
country with regard to pollution. The City has the obligation
not to trust people and the burden should be upon them and not
upon the City.
V/M Massaro said the laws are for that purpose. She said she
would also like to point out to Council that within the Stipulation
there was another gasoline station involved and they built the
same type of service station the Exxon people intend to build.
Mr. Alper said that instance was not with regard to Tract 22.
It was with respect to another tract; and it was specifically
stated that Tract 22 is to be limited.
V/M Massaro asked whether fees will be paid today for water
retention in the amount of $1,610.00, drainage improvements in
the amount of $119.60 and water and sewer in the amount of
$7,650.00.
Mr. Oshinski said payment will not be made today for these fees,
as the intention was to present the fees at the time the permits
are received.
V/M Massaro stated that all fees must be paid before approval
is granted, and this is the policy and procedure of the City.
Mr. Lineberger, representing Exxon, said the voluntary
contribution of $20,000.00 toward the traffic light can be
presented today. He said the normal procedure for the payment
of fees is that the contracter would write a check to the Citv
and he in turn, invoices Exxon. The contractor was under the
impression that his check would have to be presented at the
time permits are picked up. He said-"txxon.is willing to present
the payment for the fees at any time.
V/M Massaro asked whether the checks could be presented to Council
on Tuesday, as this item could be tabled to a recessed meeting
to be held on Tuesday. Mr. Lineberger said the checks will be
presented Tuesday.
Mr. Richard Rubin stated that the drawings omitted a note that
there will be a thirty -inch berm along 88 Avenue; and V/M Massaro
said this will be taken up at the time the beautification plan
is reviewed.
34- 12/1/83
/rb
36. Florida Power & Light -.Initiation of Rezoning,Procedure --
Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by
Consent. Authorization given to
FP & L to move for rezoning of
proposed substation site.
City Attorney Henning said he recently sent a memo to Council
concerning Florida Power & Light. During the last several weeks,
the City staff, particularly he and the City Manager, have had
discussions with representatives of Florida Power & Light.
He said Mr. Tim Taylor of Florida Power & Light is present today
to answer any questions raised by Council; or perhaps Council
would prefer to agendize this item for Tuesday's meeting or for
any other time.
The City Attorney said Council will recall that some time ago
a discussion was held and Ordinances were proposed to amend the
City Code to provide for a substation on property that is owned
by Florida Power & Light. This property is on the south side of
Southgate Boulevard, adjacent to the Woodmont golf course.
Mr. Henning said Florida Power & Light had insisted that they need
a substation to serve this general area of the City and that the
substation should be located in the City of Tamarac as the power
lines are already there to tie in to the substation. It was, he said,
Council's recommendation at that time perhaps the substation
should be on the north side of the street but Florida Power & Light
was reluctant to pursue it at the beginning. However, they did
pursue it and their experts have been working on this possibility.
At this time, there is a proposal to build the substation
adjacent to the canal, or on the north side of the street since
Council was not anxious to have the substation built adjacent to
the golf course.
Mr. Henning explained that Florida Power & Light have already
started to work on the plans and that would entail several things.
Firstly, the land is not owned by Florida Power Light as was
the 'land that they originally proposed to use. However, there
is no change required in the Code. A rezoning would be required
as well as a land use amendment. This would not involve the
County and would be just for the City. In addition, the sale of
the land is involved and the problem with the land is that there
is a very restrictive covenant encumbering it whereby Florida
Power & Light has the right to specify how the land is used if
they do not use it themselves.
City Attorney Henning said that in essence, Council needs to
discuss the move toward a zoning change, a possible land use
amendment, a possible sale of the proposed land, a site plan
review and landscaping plans. He said originally Florida Power
& Light had requested building the substation directly across
the street from their existing land, which is about the second
or third pole east of 88 Avenue.. He said the City has given
this some consideration and would prefer to use the first pole
east of 88 Avenue to keep the substation closer to the corner.
It would be directly across from the Taravella High School and
not toward the Coral Springs residences on the other side of
the C-14 canal. Mr. Henning said he does not feel there will be
an objection from the high school.
Mr. Henning said extensive.landscaping is anticipated which
would be incorporated into an attractive entranceway into
Tamarac coming southbound from Coral Springs. He said City
Manager Stuurmans had mentioned the possibility of having the
City install landscaping or that there be an installation of
landscaping on the west side of 88 Avenue since the Florida
Power & Light landscaping will be on the east side and this
would make for a very attractive intersection.
-35- 12/1/8 3
/rh
Mr. Henning said the site is still being surveyed and it is
approximately 700 or 800 feet running east. It would not go
right up to the corner and it is anticipated the City would
keep somewhere between 50 to 100 feet along the corner and
Florida Power & Light would take the first pole and go down
about 700 or 800 feet.
City Manager Stuurmans said it should be noted that Florida
Power & Light does need 100 feet west of the first pole for the
installation. There would still be a remainder of approximately
fifty feet between the piece of property they require and
88 Avenue.
City Attorney Henning said the design of the substation is such
that there must be certain installations on the ground on both
sides of the first pole and there cannot be a fence there.
He said the property will be surveyed and at this time a preliminary
review is taking place to inform Council what staff has discussed
with the Florida Power & Light representatives.
C/M Krantz asked why the substation will be moved one pole to the
west and Mr. Henning explained that the land originally owned is
two or three poles to the east and to build across the street from
that, there would not be the anticipated entranceway to the City.
He said representatives of the Coral Springs City Manager's Office
were at the Tamarac City Hall to check this all out since there
was a concern that the location might be hazardous. However,
, moving the substation toward the Taravella High School, took
away,a lot of the concern.
C/M Krantz asked how the high school feels about this;and Mr.
Henning said he does not think it will be a problem.
City Manager Stuurmans said the location originally proposed
in September or October, would chop up the use of the balance of
the strip by the City. V/M Massaro said it would also cut the
proposed park in half.
Mr. Carl Alper said he is wondering why the substation will be
moved closer to residences when there were originally objections
to it being near a golf course.
V/M Massaro said the substation will be nowhere near homes
and C/M Krantz said the substation will be moved only one pole
east of 88 Avenue where it will begin, and it will then continue
east.
Mr. Tim Taylor, representing Florida Power & Light, said Mr. Henning
is attempting to bring Council up to date as to the willingness on
the part of Florida Power & Light to compromise and move the
proposed substation to the corner of 88 Avenue at Southgate
Boulevard, in order to utilize the landscaping as an entrance to
the City. He said when Florida Power & Light was before Council
last month, approval was given to proceed with the Concept Plan.
At this time, an attempt is being made to work out some of the
details relating to initiating a rezoning, as well as the paper
work for the acquisition.
V/M Massaro said Florida Power & Light had indicated that they
need title to the corner and would maintain it.
City Manager Stuurmans explained that Florida Power & Light had
agreed they do not need the property. The property line of the
substation would end prior to the corner which the City intends
to use as a welcoming point into the City and Florida Power & Light
intends to participate in the landscaping of the area.
-36- 12/1/83
/rb
Mr. Taylor said the Vice Mayor had mentioned she did not
think there was sufficient property for the substation.
However, Florida Power & Light has found there is from 130
to 150 feet from the 88 Avenue road right-of-way to the first
pole. Of that, Florida Power & Light would require 100 feet
and there would probably be a 30 to 50 foot piece of property
from the road right-of-way to the edge of the property which
Florida Power & Light hopes to acquire.
City Manager Stuurmans said if an agreement cannot be reached
on that point, the installation would have to be moved down
to the second pole to begin the project and that would present
the same problem of breaking up the land.
Mr. Taylor said Florida Power & Light hopes to acquire the 700
foot piece of property although they will not fence out to the
edge of the 700 feet. There will be a setback for the fence
and then the landscaping. He said actually there might be 100
feet from the road right-of-way until there is a fence.
V/M Massaro said she is assuming that the beautification will
be outside the fence; and Mr. Taylor said it will be.
Mayor Falck commented this would eliminate the problem.
C/M Krantz asked what type of fence will be used; and V/M Massaro
said it will be either a six or eight foot chain link fence.
City Manager Stuurmans stated that one of the necessary steps
to facilitate this entire arrangement is for the City to have
the property appraised. She said Florida Power & Light have had
the site appraised but she feels the City must obtain an
appraisal,and she is having the necessary documents gathered
together and intends to utilize the services of the firm that
did the work for the City on the Sludge Farm.
V/M Massaro said she had noticed that in the Florida Power & Light
appraisal, the forty foot right -of --way in the rear was
eliminated. The City had inquired about whether Florida Power
& Light could move back into this right-of-way and V/M Massaro
said she is wondering whether they discussed this with the
South Florida Water Management District, as suggested, in order
to obtain permission to back into the forty feet.
Mr. Taylor said that discussions were held between Florida Power
& Light and the South Florida Water Management District as to
whether they owned the forty feet or whether they owned only an
easement. It was learned that the South Florida. Water Management
District does own the entire forty feet and they would not grant
permission for Florida Power & Light to utilize five or ten feet
of the forty feet.
City Manager Stuurmans inquired whether it would be appropriate
at this time to agendize an item for Council to authorize Florida
Power & Light to initiate the sale of the City property once it
has been appraised as well as to initiate the rezoning.
City Attorney Henning said firstly, there would be a contract
for the sale which would recite that there could not be
a purchase of the land unless the property is rezoned. The
contract would be presented to Council for consideration and
approval. There will also be the rezoning matter and the City
Manager could move forward to obtain the appraisal„ Unless
there is an objection from Council, this matter could be placed
on the agenda.
City Manager Stuurmans said the City will also require a metes and
bounds from the surveyors for advertising purposes.
-37- 12/1/83
/rb
V/M Massaro asked whether an application can be made at
this time for the rezoning; and Mr. Henning said it can be
done with Council's authorization.
Mayor Falck asked what the time element is for the City to
grant permission for Florida Power & Light to initiate the
rezoning; and Mr. Henning said the City owns the land and can
authorize the vendee to move for a rezoning. Otherwise, the
City would have to do it as Florida Power & Light could not
move forward for a rezoning without the City's authorization
to do so.
Mayor Falck asked whether there is a specific period of time
in which this must be accomplished if the City does authorize
Florida Power & Light to move forward. Mr. Henning said it
would be a substantial period of time, perhaps a year or six
months.
City Attorney Henning said it would be appropriate at this time
for Council to grant permission to Florida Power & Light to
move forward for a rezoning, if Council so desires.
V/M Massaro MOVED to Agendize By Consent, the authorization to
Florida Power & Light to start the procedure of rezoning.
SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
V/M Massaro MOVED to authorize Florida Power & Light to act on the
City's behalf, as agent, to move for a rezoning of the proposed
substation site on the north side of Southgate Boulevard.
SECONDED by C/M Kravitz.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
16. Spyglass - Revised Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2930 - Discussion
and possible action to approve a revised site plan for a
room addition to Unit 19A located at 6541 NW 99 Avenue.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to either
reconvened meeting of Tuesday, 12/6/83
or future
meeting, pending receipt of letters
from owners of Units 16D and 16E stating
they do not object to the addition.
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Resolution by title.
V/M Massaro stated that the law requires there be a 15-foot setback
from the property line-, but at Spyglass there are no property
lines. She said there is a sketch which indicates there is to
be an addition of a 13-foot room,but there will not be 15-feet
from the adjoining property. She said this 13-foot room addition
would not permit the people in Unit 16D to build.anythirg.
at all.
City Attorney Henning inquired as to whether there is a patio
there at this time; and V/M Massaro said as far as she knows,
there is nothing there now, and she feels this is unfair to
the other people since the vision is blocked from Unit 16E
and it would be impossible for the people in 16D to build anything.
She said she does not see the justice in this..
Mr. Ray Munitz, resident, asked whether the people in Units 16D
and 16E have objected to this room addition; and V/M Massaro
said those people are not aware of this, and she feels if
something like this is intended, there should be a sign posted
there as well as a public hearing held.
^38- 12/1/83
/rb
C/M Stelzer asked whether the Condominium Association has
approved this addition; and V/M Massaro said the Condominium
Association approved it but the people in the other units
do not know about it.
Mr. Mike Wood, general contractor for Spyglass, said that all
parties concerned agreed that this addition is acceptable
and he has gone through a lot of trouble and expense to
accomplish all that had to be done.
V/M Massaro asked whether Mr. Wood -hasa letter from the people
in 16D stating they do not object to this room addition; and
Mr. Wood said he has a verbal agreement.
C/M Krantz said this may come up in the future, and there should
be something in writing to avoid problems.
Mayor Falck said it would be appropriate to obtain letters from
the people who live in the nearby units, at which time Council
can act upon the request for the room addition. 1n that way, both
the contractor and the City would be protected.
C/M Krantz said letters are needed from the people in Units 16D
and 16E as they are the only parties who are affected by this.
C/M Stelzer asked whether the existing slab is screened; and
Mr. Wood stated that there is a garden wall there now which
obscures the vision. The garden wall is five feet high and is
thirteen feet six inches from the other people's property.
C/M Stelzer asked how high the room to be added would be; and
Mr. Wood said it would be eight feet high. C/M,Stelzer
commented that the obstruction would be the same if the room
is added as it is at the present time, as the addition would be only
slightly higher.
V/M Massaro said the situation is different when a full wall and
roof are added, than it is when only a garden wall exists.
C/M Kravitz MOVED to table Temp. Reso. #2930 to possibly Tuesday's
meeting or a future meeting thereafter.
Mayor Falck stated that if the letters are brought in by Tuesday,
action can be taken at that time.
The MOTION was SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
34. Recreation Fund - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized by
Consent on Page 2. City Attorney
to research whether a referendum is
required for the. City to spend funds
contributed and earmarked for recreational
facilities and not taken from the general
budget.
C/M Stelzer stated that for many years, the City Council, the
Charter Board and some members of the public were of the opinion
that if the City wished to spend money for recreational facilities
which cost more than 2-1/2% ofthe Recreation Fund budget, a
referendum would be required.
-39- 12/1/83
/rb
C/M Stelzer said he would like to pose some hypothetical
questions at this time and perhaps Council can come up
with a different answer. He said for example, if the
City were to spend $100,000.00 and obtains a Federal grant
of a million dollars to build a City Hall, a referendum
would not be required.
City Attorney Henning said it is his understanding
that if the City makes a commitment for less than 2-1/2%
of the budget to match funds from a grant, a referendum
is not required.
The City Manager said an example of this would be Fire House #1 on
Pine Island Road, for which the City did receive Federal
money and the City's contribution toward that construction
fell well under 2-1/2% of the current budget. The Federal
money paid for the balance and there was no referendum.
C/M Stelzer said another example would be that
if the City received a Federal grant of one million dollars
and the City makes no contribution toward building a City
Hall, a referendum would not be required.
C/M Stelzer said an additional example would be the improvements
that are required for Land Section 7. If all the developers would
make contributions and present the City with five million dollars
in cash, to be spent for improvements to Land -Section 7 as the
City sees fit, and the City makes no contribution of its own, a
referendum would not be required.
Tape C/M Stelzer said he would lake to ask a question with regard to
7 recreational facilities. For example, if a developer does not
provide recreational facilities for a development and instead
makes a contribution to the City to a special Recreation Fund,
to be used only for the construction of those facilities and the
City spends no budgeted monies toward that construction, why
should this last example differ from the situation in connection
with Land Section 7;"and why should a referendum be required?
Mayor Falck said back a number of years
discussed the possibility of building a
Community Center, there were some grant
time, Judge Birken was the Tamarac City
was discussed with him, he was not sure
spend those grant funds without going tc
said he thinks somewhere along the line,
by the City Attorney to that effect.
ago when Council first
new City Hall and a new
possibilities. At that
Attorney, and when this
whether the City could
referendum. The Mayor
a ruling was put out
Mayor Falck said at that time he used several examples which were
similar to.those mentioned by C/M Stelzer although they related
specifically to building. The Mayor said he was of the opinion
at that time that there was a very real question as to whether
or not the City had the authority to spend that money without a
referendum.
Mayor Falck said he would refer Council to the present legislation
regarding annexation. Due to the laws relating to annexation,
the City lost Kelly's Island off Commercial Boulevard and Prospect
Road. In addition, when the City approached Woodlands at the
north side of Commercial Boulevard on annexation, there was a lot
of difficulty and the City could not accomplish it without a
lot of hassle and without spending a lot. of money.
C/M Stelzer stated he would now ask whether a referendum is
required if the City spends no money of its own. He said ,
that the Charter states, "No capital facility or improvement
or contract requisitionfor construction of such facility or
improvement involving a cost in excess of 2-1/2% of the current
budget......"
-40- 1.2 /1 /R -�
City Attorney Henning stated that this is mentioned in Section 7.13
of the City Charter; and he distributed copies of that
Section to Council.
C/M Stelzer said in the example he has given regarding recreational
facilities, the City would not be spending any money that comes
out of the budget.. In the case of Land Section 7, the City would
obtain monies from the developers for the improvements and
would not have to go to referendum. Therefore,
he would ask why the City has to go to referendum to spend monies
obtained from developers for recreational facilities:
Mr. Ray Munitz, resident, said this is basically a question of whether
a referendum is required for the City to spend funds that are
earmarked and accumulated for a specific purpose, such as those
given as examples by C/M Stelzer.
C/M Stelzer said he would add that those earmarked funds do
not come from the general budget in the examples he has provided,
and there are no direct costs to the City taxpayers.
City Attorney Henning said there is a question as to whether this
2-1/2% figure, or 1-1/2% as the Charter amendment proposes, is a
barometer as to the cost of any project; or is a question of whether
it is a cost to the City. He said the charter states, "cost"
and does not say, "a cost to the City" or "a cost to the City's
general revenue account". Mr. Henning said the County Charter is
a little more specific and perhaps some other City Charters are;
but the Tamarac City Charter states only, "improvements involving
a cost in excess of...." and the Charter goes further and says,
"no capital facility or improvement- shall be approved without a
referendum if the cost is....".
Mr. Henning said those questions were presented to him just
yesterday and he does not have the answers to them as yet.
V/M Massaro said that Council would want to move forward on this
and she would suggest that the City Attorney research the matter,
so the City will not become involved in a law suit.
23.' Home Construction Warrant Bond -- Temp. Reso. #2937 - Discussion
and possible action to release a bond posted as a warranty
against defects for a home located at 8701 Banyan Court.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. R-83--,�5/4, �PASSED
bond release.
City Attorney Jon Henning read the Resolution by title.
V/M Massaro said this bond was posted on October 1, 1980 and she
would MOVE this bond be released. SECONDED by C/M Krantz.
V/M Massaro mentioned that this was a $1,500.00 cash bond.
C/M Stelzer said that Sam Stevens wrote a letter stating that
he has no objection to releasing this bond.
VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE
24. Drainage Improvements in the City - Discussion and possible
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: City Manager advised
a report will be available next week
for Council action, from Public Works
Director and City Engineer, on drainage
improvement needs and resurfacing needs.
City Manager Laura Stuurmans said
Public Works Director and the City
road resurfacing needs as well as
The product of their efforts will
and consideration and action will
December 14, 1983.
that she had requested the
Engineer to collectively review
drainage improvement needs.
be available to Council next week
be placed on the agenda for
-41-
12/1/83
/rb
Mayor Falck said he has received complaints from residents
in his own section as well as a few other sections that
there are people who are putting their grass and trimmings
down the surface drains. When those drains are cluttered
there are drainage problems when there are heavy rains.
He said he is wondering whether the City Manager can suggest
something other than a release to the various sections indicating
that this should not be done. The Mayor said this came up
once before in connection with pouring gasoline, chemicals
and paints down the drains which adversely affected the fish
in the lakes and canals.
City Manager Stuurmans said she had requested that the PIC
send out a release to the Association Presidents or Maintenance
Chairmen, as she feels this would be the best approach to the
problem.
Mayor Falck stated that Council had a discussion about a month
or two ago concerning the need for alertness on the part of the
residents regarding lift stations and he feels this should be
done occasionally to avoid problems.
C/M Krantz asked whether Council will receive a priority list;
and the City Manager said it will be distributed to Council shortly.
THE MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 4:30 P.M.TO TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1983
AT APPROXIMATELY 3:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
CITY OF TAMARAC
Ap�j,, �Y iVEI1if�G ur �
City Clerk
This public document was promulgated at a cost of $ 475.93 or $13.20
per copy to inform the general public and public officers and
employees about recent opinions and considerations by the
Council of the City of Tamarac.
--42- 12/l/83
/rb