Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-06-03 - City Commission Reconvened Regular Meeting MinutesCITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 3, 1980 (Reconvened from 5/28/80 and 5/29/80) CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Falck called the reconvened meeting to order on Tuesday, June 3, 1980, at 9:30 A.M. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter Falck Vice -Mayor Helen Massaro Councilman Irving M. Disraelly Councilman Irving Zemel Councilwoman Marjorie Kelch ALSO PRESENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City Planner, Evan Cross City Attorney, Arthur M. Birken Assistant City Clerk, Carol Evans Clerk/Steno, Mimi Reiter 36. Tamarac Jewish Center - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan d) Emergency Ordinance - Tem2. Ord. #768 -- Discussion and possible action for the elimination of parking requirements. First and Second Readings. AGENDIZED BY CONSENT e) Agreement on Parking - AGENDIZED BY CONSENT SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Approved, d) Approved on lst & 2nd Readings, and e) Approved (d) and e) AGENDIZED BY CONSENT ORDINANCE NO.O- Ln.-4. _PASSED. d) C/M Disraelly MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT, Temp. Ord. #768, an Emergency Ordinance eliminating parking spaces for the Jewish Center, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. C/M Disraelly indicated that discussion was held for the elimina- tion of certain parking spaces, by an emergency ordinance. He also stated that additional land was being purchased to permit extra parking. e) C/M Disraelly MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT, the Agreement concerning additional parking, and V M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. C/M Disraelly inquired of Jack Weiner, the President of the Tamarac Jewish Center, as to the Agreement indicating the intention of a purchase of land for additional parking. Also, he said, this faci- lity will be paved, under the City`s ordinances. Sol Schulman said that he was in the process of negotiating with the owner of the property, and felt this situation will be realized very shortly. Mr. Schulman indicated that he was the Chairman of the Building Committee for the Jewish Center. V/M Massaro MOVED for approval of the Agreement, and that proper persons be authorized to execute this, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. d) Mr. Birken indicated there will be two readings of the Ordinance, with the second reading being a Public Hearing. Temp. Ord. #768 was read by the City Attorney. He inquired of the Jewish Center representatives whether the Ordinance was reviewed by them, and the findings of fact statements were correct. Mx. Weiner indicated that the statements were correct. -1- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ C/M Disraelly MOVED for the adoption of Temp. Ord. #768, an Emergency Ordinance eliminating certain parking requirements, on first reading, and C/M Zemel SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. The City Attorney read Temp. Ord. #768, on second reading. Mayor Falck opened the discussion to the public, and closed it because there were no comments received. V/M Massaro inquired whether the retention and $130.00 per acre fees were paid, to which Mr. Darby indicated they were paid, and the Vice -Mayor suggested that the motion include that all appro- priate fees have been paid. C/M Zemel MOVED that Temp. Ord. #768, be approved on second and final reading, which Emergency Ordinance would eliminate certain parking requirements for the proposed building addition, and, also indicating that all appropriate fees have been paid. C/M Disraelly SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. a) C/M Disraelly indicated that the Site Plan was reviewed previously, and MOVED that the plan, as presented, and revised 4/24/80, be approved, and V/M Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. V/M Massaro said there was a recommendation that a sprinkler system was to be installed in the school building, and was not certain whether the site plan included this. Mr. Weiner advised that it was for the children, and that such bids were included to the General Contractor. 58. Lease of Tamarac Elementary School for 1980 Summer Youth Pro ram - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT (See page 17) C/M Zemel MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT, an Agreement with Tamarac Elementary School for the use of their facilities for the Summer Youth Program, and V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 59. Solicitation of Architectural Quotes - Addition to the City Hall Buildin Authorization for the City Manager to solicit quotes. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ( See page 17 ) AGENDIZED BY CONSENT C/M Zemel MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT authorization for the City Manager, under the Competitive Negotiation Act, to solicit Architectural Quotes for possible plans for construction of the addition to the City Hall building. C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 60. Architectural Plans for Communit Center - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT See page 17) V/M Massaro MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT the hiring of an Architect for plans to construct the Community Center, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. Qrm 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ L VOTE: C/W Kelch - Aye C/M Zemel - Aye C/M Disraelly - Aye, and then changed to NAY V/M Massaro -- Aye Mayor Falck - Aye C/M Disraelly then changed his vote, to NAY, because he felt that input should be given prior to discussion, and said this should be considered at a Pre -Agenda Meeting, and not during a regular meeting. 61.. Temp. Reso. #1683 - Construction of Commercial Boulevard & Rock Island Road near Burkhard Plaza. Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AGENDIZED BY CONSENT - See page 12) V/M Massaro MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT, a resolution pertaining to the construction of Commercial Boulevard and Rock Island Road, as it refers to Burkhard Plaza, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL 21. Tamarac Park Facilities Fees - Temp. Reso. #1447 - Discussion and possible action to establish fees for use of park facilities. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Motion to reconsider Died for lack of a Second. C/M Zemel MOVED to reconsider Temp. Reso. #1447, a resolution estab- lishing certain fees for use of recreation facilities at the Tamarac Park. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. V/M Massaro felt that C/M Zemel did not have particular information, which was pertinent, and was also illegible. Mayor Falck said this item would be agendized at the next regular meeting. Mr. Birken distributed Exhibit D for Concord Village II -- Water and Sewer Developers Agreement, which input he just received from the City Engineer. He felt that Council could determine the action, but will have the backup information, which could be tabled,to permit review by Council. The Councilmembers felt that items or backup information should not be submitted prior to consideration of a particular subject, especially since the May 28th agenda has been reconvened twice, and has become extremely lengthy. V/M Massaro said everything was being assembled into one Developers Agree- ment, and the variables being encountered, were massive. She felt that it was a monumental task to put this into one ordinance, and was the reason for submission of thoughts of staff, in an attempt to coordinate and cover every avenue. The Vice -Mayor said that patience at this time, was quite important, in order to avoid mistakes. C/M Disraelly concurred with the Vice -Mayor, as to the amount of work in- volved, and felt that until everything has been properly reviewed and es- tablished, it could not be passed. The City Attorney said that the items relating to Concord I,and,also Concord II, could be tabled. 48. Concord Villa e I - Discussion and possible action to approve an ad- dendum to the water and sewer developers agreement. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled until ready. V/M Massaro MOVED that Concord Village I be tabled until problems are corrected, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. -3- 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ V/M Massaro said the problem related to the developers water and sewer agreement, which was created between the developer and the parent company; and dial not involve the City. Mr. Birken indicated that he would submit a memorandum to Council on this area. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 49. Concord Village II -.Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan b) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement c) Agreement on Park and Recreation Dedications SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to 6/11/80 meeting. 14r. Birken indicated that his distribution to Council related to this item, and Council did not have the opportunity to review Exhibit D. This, he said, involved a provision which the City Engineer was to prepare, and entailed the extra work to be per- formed for Concord I or II, to increase the total dynamic head; Also, for reimbursement, as other projects are put into the system for use of lift station 18. V/M Massaro clarified that lift station 18 involves a very serious problem, and has been operating 24 hours a day. She stated that it has eased -up because of the corrective work that was done on infiltration, but was still in a serious condition. She added that although it is under Concord Village II, they are agreeing to do it before further permits are issued to Concord I, because of the condition of the lift station and pumping station. The Vice -Mayor said this station services the Lagos De Campo area. C/M Disraelly MOVED to table this item to the 6/11/80 meeting, and C/M Zemel SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. C/M Disraelly recommended that scrap paper be packaged for pickup on Wed- nesday, June 18th, at all the residential areas of the City. PUBLIC HEARING 45. y _ u ns - Temp. Ord. #764A - Discussion and possible Re__.,._—,_,_.,_� g atio p to amend Ordinance No. 0--80-35 by modifying the pro- vision pertaining to contribution charges and guaranteed revenue. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted on 2nd Reading, ORDINANCE NO.O- PASSED. as amended. The City Attorney read Temp. Ord. #764A. He said this agreement was revised 5/21/80, and approved on first reading. He also noted that two proposed amendments were distributed to Council, by memo, which addressed minor verbiage items. The title, he said,pg.l,line ll,should indicate amending "Section 58", instead of Section 50. Mayor Falck opened the discussion to the public, and closed it because there were no comments received. Mx. Birken discussed the amendments which were included in his memo of 6/2/80; a proposal that the ordinance be modified to add a new paragraph 7, which would be page 5, line 14. This language was included for large projects, without a minimum number being indicated, but was intended to take a project, essentially more than 300 units, and allow phasing -in with no reserved water and sewer connections. At the end of two years, he said, the project would have paid for the same number of units as,a 300 units project, with benefits being allowed for units to be reserved over many years, and gradually paid over a period of time. An example, he said, would be included in the ordinance,for clarity purposes, by taking an 800 unit project, and spelling out the amount of units to be paid for in --full, and the units to be paid for through interest charges, over the six -year period. The rationale, he said, -4- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ behind the amendment is that it is only realistic to expect a certain number of units to be built and sold each year. Most projects, he indicated, would not have 800 units actually constructed over a two-- year period. This proposed amendment, he said, was attempting to be realistic, as to what could or could not be developed, which would include time frames for large projects. C/M Disraelly inquired whether someone who was building 100 units, could pay for 150 in full, and reserve the other 50, and start paying the interest charges. Mr. Birken said that it would not be economically prudent for someone building a project of that size, to avail themselves of this option. C/M Disraelly further suggested changes on line 4 of paragraph 3, by keeping everything in denominations of 50,100 and 150, it would permit multiples of 150 throughout. He felt that 25 units could then be picked -up six months earlier. Indication, he said, is made to 75 and 175, and line 4, paragraph 3 should be 100, and the 175 should be 150; with reserve ERC's become 450, and would involve one set of numbers. V/M Massaro felt there was no problem with this by keeping, 50, 125 and 175, because the 150 was going into another year. C/M Disraelly again stated that in the next to the last paragraph, the 125 would be changed to 150, and the 425 to 450, which would permit the use of one component figure; of 150 in 50 units throughout, instead of 75 and 175. He felt that it was easier for mathematical computation by the Finance Department. V/M Massaro said that either method would not cause a problem, and it Tape was established with the developers in mind, in order for them to move Side forward, which was involved with changes by the banks for construction #2 loans. She further added that the agreement had to be compatible for the developers, as well as the City. C/W Kelch felt it was presently in acceptable form, and did not want confusion or delays, because of changes in figures. C/M Disraelly indicated that memos and ordinances are not being dis- tributed for adequate perusal, prior to discussions and consideration by Council, to which Mr. Birken stated that Council received this in- formation before the 5/28/80 meeting. C/M Disraelly said the discussion related to changing numbers on the proposed Amendment #1; also, stating that the City Attorney noted a misspelling in paragraph 5, of the word "paragraph"; also, the letters in paragraphs b), c) and e), should be changed to 2), 3) and 5). Mayor Falck felt that Item #3 should be considered, as suggested by C/M Disraelly, to change 75 to 100, and 175 to be changed to 150; which would still permit the total of 300. The other change, he said, would be from 125 to 150, in the second paragraph from the bottom, by making a total of 450, as compared to 425 ERC's at the present time, in the proposed Amendment #1. C/M Disraelly MOVED that in paragraph 3, where 75 ERC's is referenced, that it be changed to 100; and the next line, where it indicates 175, that it be changed to 150; and, the next to the last paragraph, the 125 becomes 150, and the 425 would be 450. MAYOR FALCK INDICATED THAT THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mayor Falck stated that Item #5 did not require a motion, but should be noted as follows; correction of misspelling for the word "paragraph", and changes in paragraphs b), c) and e) to 2), 3) and 5), as suggested by the City Attorney, to be incorporated in the Agreement. He further stated that Proposed Amendment #1, remains as corrected, which are located on page 5, line 14. Mr. Birken said that Proposed Amendment #2 pertains to Guaranteed Revenues, and extends the period of time for large projects, which ties into Amendment #1. Mayor Falck indicated that Amendment #2 will remain, with a change r'lfl 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ to page 6, line 30, instead of page 5, line 29. Mayor Falck discussed Modifications, as per the 6/2/80 communication from the City Attorney. C/M Disraelly said that page 2, line 11 1/2 indicates that the devel- oper may be required, and would request that a colon be placed in this point, and delete the comma, after the word to. "That the developer may be required: 1) to construct or 2) to modify". The following modification were recommended by the City Attorney; 1. On page 4, line 17, after the word "per" insert the words "number of" and make ERC plural. 2. On page 4, line 27, add at the end of the line, after the word "due", "no later than". 3. One page 6, line 26, remove the word "the first", and sub- stitute the word "each". 4. On page 6, line 27, after the word "Agreement", add the fol- lowing: "for the units for which the building permit was issued". 5. On page 6, line 31, remove the word "must", and substitute the word "shall". Mr. Birken recommended minor typographical errors, on page 7, line 11, the word "precedent" has an extra "n"; and on page 7, line 30, the last word is "guaranteed", with a "d" at the end. V/M Massaro noted that on page 3, Section 6, "no refund will exceed developers actual cost for off -site or over -sized facilities", and felt that the following language should be added; "and in no case shall it exceed the percentage of the developers responsibility for his volumetric load capacity". She inquired as to other projects coming in, when density will affect additional work to be accomplished, to which Mr. Birken said that more work would be the responsibility of the developer. Mr. Birken indicated that if Concord Village I does work, that would benefit Concord Village II and III, hypothetically; and Concord Village II comes in to develop, and requires work which benefit other projects, then a payment would be made to Concord I, for their portion of volu- metric capacity, and would be doing the work. Also, when Concord III comes in, they would be required to make payments back to I and II. Lon Rubin, President of HLR, Inc., disagreed philosophically that work to be done to the sewer system is evaluated at the time the developer comes in, and is then charged -off to the developer, with the Developer's Agreement. He felt the City was aware of the total impact on the sys- tem, the number of units not built in the area served by those facili- ties, plus the maximum zoning which is permissible. He also noted that developers generally develop to a lesser density than their maximum, and do not always use all available units. V/M Massaro said the Engineer was working against time, and unexpected items will be covered, as far as the City is concerned, but Mr.Keating has not had the opportunity to thoroughly research everything that was submitted. She felt it would take weeks to make a determination, but the City would require protection for unexpected occurrences. V/M Massaro suggested that 7) be added, as to its legality; "any controversary between the developer and subsequent users, shall not impose any liability upon the City or require the City's participation in such controversary". Mr. Birken felt that language could not be put into the ordinance, in order to take the City out of litigation, to which the Vice -Mayor said she would not recommend such inclusion. V/M Massaro felt that at the end of paragraph 7, line 30 1/2, the fol- lowing language should be added; "the City may enter into contracts with developers upon such terms and conditions which the City Council deems to be in the best interest of the City". Mr. Birken felt there was adequate flexibility in Section 58 of the Q:� 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ W of the Ordinance -� Developer Agreements Required:, and read that por- tion, which related to the Vice -Mayor's recommendation. He felt the language was redundant, because it was already covered in this provi- sion. Mr. Birken said that Section 50 references Developer's Agreement, and the .language pertaining to this was covered, and said that Section 58 does relate to Developer's Agreement, and covers the additional work. The City Attorney said if Council does want to add something, it could be incorporated into Section 58 of the ordinance, on page 7. His recom- mendation was for additional verbiage on line 32, after the words Developer Agreements, "and other matters which the Council determines to be in the best interests of the City". He felt this would not be ultimately helpful, and might possibly be stricken at some time in the future. Lon Rubin was opposed to the Large Users Agreement, because it sets a double standard for policy, and does not help the developer or the City. He felt the addition of the language was unnecessary, and requested deletion of the entire paragraph, because it was over -complicating. Mr. Birken suggested to leave Section 58, as --is, because he was legally doubtful whether it would be effective in Court. V/M Massaro said that she was aware that tracts would be combined, rather than submitting each tract separately; also, the combination would be for several reasons, and was attempting to preserve latitude. for the City. Tape Sanford Rissman said that he was building 870 units on Woodmont - Side Tract 70, with the recreation center being 4 1/2 acres, with three #3 satellites and one large recreation center, which cost would be ap- proximately $1,000,000.00. He felt that the Agreement and Ordinance was fair, and would avoid future problems. Gene Toll felt the Developer's Agreement was very complicated, be- cause he was presenting a large complex, and was over 300 units. He said the Agreement did not offer him any assistance, and would prefer to sign the 136 unit Agreement, than the one being discussed at this time. Mr. Toll also felt that the break of 300 units on a large tract was a mistake, and would divide it into phases. V/M Massaro said that due to interest rates dropping, real estate sales will be rising. Julian Bryan, represented three out of four developers, and said that the problem is with Stipulation #3, and the language involved with phase development. He said it was discussed many times with the City Planner, the City Engineer and the Vice -Mayor, and felt that the lan- guage was very general and vague, and has tried to interpret it. Mr. Bryan felt that everyone was concerned about a large project, such as Mr. Rissman's, for approximately 800 units, would be subject to change at a later date, if only 250 connections were sought, and then 250 additional ones, once those sales were completed. He said that the language in Stipulation #3 would not assure overall site plan ap- proval being meaningful. Mr. Rubin indicated that he has experience in large condominium develop- ments, and was presently building a 543 unit project at this time, and was aware of requirements for recreational facilities, the financing and marketing requirements. He could not see the need for.Amendment #7, and the creation of a distinction between a 302 unit probject, and 303 units, or wherever the break -off occurs. C/M Disraelly said there is a developer coming into the City with several thousand units, and inquired of the City Attorney, whether it could be handled under the multiplicity of units, in paragraph 7. Mr. Birken said the project could be structured in such a manner to bring it under that paragraph, but felt it would be unlikely. V/M Massaro said that F & R Corp. or Lennar will be phasing their projects, and could utilize this, because some of the tracts will be combined, to which Mr. Bryan said the plan would be on a tract -by - tract and site-plan--by-site-plan basis. He felt the larger tracts -7- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ will be cut in half. Mr. Birken said that projects were handled by separate stipulation in Land Section 4, 5 and 6, which was approved by the Circuit Court, and felt there was tremendous limitations as to what the City could do. He said that Council has the ability to have a document prepared, which could be taken to the Circuit Court; and, if it is illegal, then the Judge will not sign it. The amendment, he said, could be considered, if only the one large project was involved, which option has not been explored in depth. Mr. Rubin indicated that the various developers determined there was no need for Stipulation #7, and felt at this time, it was a matter of principle, and requested reconsideration by Council of this issue. C/M Disraelly indicated additional verbiage to be added on page 4, . line 24, following "shall be required to pay interest to the City in the amount of $4.19 per month, (adding) per number of ERC's". C/M Disraelly said there were a number of changes. recommended in the memorandum of June 2nd, 1980; also, a few corrections were suggested in the verbiage. It has also been indicated, he said, that on the .Large User item, staging could occur upon the presentation of,the site plan, which does not presently require the use of Proposed Amendments #1 and #2. He then MOVED that Proposed Amendments #1 and #2 not be included in the Ordinance, and C/M Zemel SECONDED. C/W Kelch confirmed the fact that should it be necessary, that an amendment could be added, in order to clarify a problem, to which Mr. Birken concurred. V/M Massaro said that it is definitely understood, if these amendments are taken out, then large projects have to conform, without special consideration, or separate agreements. She said that it is clearly understood that the developer's and Council's interpretation of the stipulation, may differ. Mr. Birken said that whatever is approved, and permits are pulled, would require payment. He further added that if the amendment is taken out, that the City has the option of exploring with any developers in Sections 4, 5 and 6, the possibility of a separate agreement, which will be approved by the Court. And, if this is not effective, then it can come back to Council for their consideration of other amendments. Julian Bryan concurred with Mr. Birken, and indicated that Mr. Rissman stated that the amendment should not be added at this time. V/M Massaro said if the Ordinance is adopted, and it is agreed that separate agreements can be made, as the various projects come in, then it would not involve any problems. She further stated that large pro- jects could be handled by stipulation or ordinance at a later date. C/M Disraelly RESTATED HIS MOTION, to deny Proposed Amendments #1 and #2, and to adopt Temp. Ord. #764A, as amended by the memorandum of 6/2/80, and this day. C/M Zemel repeated his SECOND to the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. LEGAL AFFAIRS 24. Emergep2z Ordinance - Temp. Ord. #764 - Discussion and possible action to enact an emergency ordinance amending Ordinance No.80-35 - Compre- hensive Utility Regulations - to modify the provisions pertaining to payment of contribution charges and guaranteed revenues. Second Reading. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: DENIED The City Attorney advised that Temp. Ord. #764 was previously read, by title, and the Public. Hearing was held. C/M Disraelly MOVED that Temp. Ord. #764 be denied on Second Reading, and C/M Zemel SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. --8- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ 46. Water and Sewer Plan Review Fees - Temp. Reso. #1627 - Discussion and possible action to adopt these fees. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted RESOLUTION NO.R- FO-IV,5 PASSED. V/M Massaro said this item involved the review fees for the Consulting Engineers. The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1627, and V/M Massaro MOVED for its adoption, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. C/W Kelch advised that on page 2, Section 1, the revised resolution should indicate "shall be $500.00 for any project containing ten or more ERC's", instead of twenty-five. V/M Massaro AMENDED HER MOTION to indicate adoption of Temp. Reso. #1627, as revised 5/19/80, which C/M Disraelly, concurred, as the SECOND. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. MEETING WAS RECESSED TO 1:30 P.M., FOR LUNCH. MAYOR FALCK INDICATED THAT IT WAS NECESSARY THAT HE LEAVE AT 4:00 P.M., AND ITEMS NOT CONCLUDED, WOULD BE HELD FOR THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT COUNCILMAN PEARL WAS IN ATTENDANCE, AND WAS FROM THE CITY OF SUNRISE. Tape Side . . . . . . . . . . . . . #4 MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER, ROLL CALL TAKEN, AND V/M MASSARO WAS TEMPORARILY ABSENT. 47. Woodview Tract 38 - Discussion and possible action to approve a water and sewer developers agreement. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled Mr. Cross said that lie was requested to obtain this information, and on October 24, 1979 the site plan approval was extended, with conditions; and then, on January 25, the model sales and temporary sign waiver was approved. C/M Disraelly MOVED to table the item, and C/M Zemel SECONDED. VOTE: C/W Kelch - Absent C/M Zemel - Aye C/M Disraelly - Aye V/M Massaro - Absent Mayor Falck - Aye 50. Southgate Gardens - East - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan b) Landscape Plan c) Vacation of Drainage Easement - Tem . Reso. #1582 d) Grant of Utility Easement - Temp. Reso. #1583 e) Grant of Canal Maintenance Easement Temp. Reso. #1584 f) Agreement to Construct N.W. 71st Avenue g) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement h) Recreation Agreement - AGENDIZED BY CONSENT SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:a)Approved with conditions, b) Approved, c), d) & e) Approved, subject to acquisition of title to property by Mr. Toll. within 1 year, f)Approved with conditions, C:) Approved, and h)AGENDIZED BY CONSENT, and, Approved.' RESOLUTION NO.R- QOf/f�(o PASSED. RESOLUTION NO.R- YO./.V�E PASSED. RESOLUTION NO.R- gp -/rl% PASSED. Mr. Birken advised that Mr. Toll submitted three checks this day, a check in the amount of $1,1495.00 for drainage, which involves the $130.00 per acre; $3,090.00 for Recreation fees; and $1,454.25 relating to the Developers Agreement,,- one month interest payments. He further stated that Mr. Toll does not own the property, and felt 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ VOTE: VOTE: VOTE: VOTE: VOTE: this should be considered by Council, as to the resolutions pertaining to vacation and acceptance of easements, which would be subject to acquisition of title to the property by Mr. Toll. He additionally stated that Item f) involved an agreement which relates to construc- tion of the road, which Mr. Toll has agreed to install. The document, he said, was executed, but there was a suggestion made by the City Engineer, that additionally, a median cut be included in the construc- tion on Southgate Boulevard, and an appropriate turn -lane for south - bound traffic, exiting from Southgate Boulevard. Mr. Birken said that Mr. Toll indicated this be included in the work to be performed.Also,the City Attorney stated that the motion should include those items being added to the agreement, and being re -executed after the addition has been made. Mr. Toll felt that easements should not be released on properties he does not own, which should be subject to acquisition of title. Mr. Birken advised that Leadership Housing presently owns the property, and were not willing to sign anything at this time. a) C/M Disraelly discussed the water retention on the landscape plan, which was not identical, in shape, to the site plan, and felt there was a considerable variance. Ile further noted that some of the trees would have to be adjusted, to which Mr. Toll said the land- scape plan was made prior to the preparation of the final site plan. C/M Disraelly also indicated that parking for a one (1) bedroom should show 1.5 spaces, which was computed correctly, but an incor- rect figure was inserted. V/M Massaro MOVED to adopt the site plan, as submitted, and subject to his acquiring title within one year; also, reducing the number of handicapped spaces; with a correction on the site plan, showing the required parking for one (1) bedroom, to be 1.5 spaces, and was a scrivener's error. C/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. ALL VOTED AYE. b) C/M Disraelly said the ordinance notes "no Ficus Trees within 100 feet of the right-of-way", because of damage from roots.lt was indicated by C/M Disraelly that Ficus Benjamina and Australian Pines were not approved, but other than that, any amount can be put in, as long as the minimum requirements were met. V/M Massaro said that he cannot exceed more than 25% of the palm trees, and 75% of other type trees, and once met, than any amount, including palms, could be installed. C/M Disraelly MOVED to adopt the Landscape Plan, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. c) The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1582, and recommended that it be subject to Mr. Toll's acquiring title to the property. V/M Massaro MOVED for the approval of the vacation of the drainage easement, Temp. Reso. #1582, subject to Mr. Toll obtaining title to this property within one year, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. d) The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1583, and V/M Massaro MOVED for approval of acceptance of the Utility Easement, subject to Mr. Toll obtaining title to this property within one year, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. e) The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1584, and V/M Massaro MOVED for acceptance of the Canal Maintenance Easement for South- gate Gardens East, subject to Mr. Toll obtaining title to this property within one year, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. -10- 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ I VOTE: v[•100xa VOTE: VOTE: f) Mr. Birken said this would be subject to a modification as it currently exists, to provide that Toll Development Corp. will construct a median cut on Southgate Boulevard, and appropriate turn -Lanes for south -bound traffic exiting Southgate Boulevard. VIM Massaro felt that the median cut and stacking lane be construc- ted, which would be inserted as part of the agreement. She then MOVED to accept the agreement, authorizing the appropriate persons to execute this agreement. Mr. Toll confirmed the fact that the same terms would be considered, but adding the median cut, for collecting one-half from the other people, when they develop. C/M Disraelly said when a median cut is put in Southgate Boulevard, the north half of the property is FP & L easement, and would not be developed. VIM Massaro said if there is benefit to another development, then one-half will be collected. C/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. ALL VOTED AYE. C/M Disraelly said that based on the memorandum, it is suggested that inclusion be made part of the site plan. a) VIM Massaro MOVED to RESCIND ACTION taken on the site plan, and- C/M Disraelly SECONDED, because it should include recreation areas being rezoned to S-1. ALL VOTED AYE. h) Recreattion Agreement -- AGENDIZED BY CONSENT VIM Massaro MOVED that the Recreation Agreement, regarding South- gate Gardens East project, be AGENDIZED BY CONSENT, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. VIM Massaro said this project was platted previously, during the period of time the land was in the County. She said that it was realized the City has an obligation to collect fees required by the City Ordinances, and Mr. Toll established a method of paying these fees, in the amount of $21,000.00. She said he would like to make payment at $154.50 per unit, which included 20 units in the first building, totaling $3,090.00. She additionally stated that when permits are taken, the same rate will be paid until the entire sum of $21,000.00 has been paid. It was also noted that such payment will be for no longer than 12 months from the first building permit. Mr. Birken indicated that the first check has been submitted, and was legally correct, because it related to platted property. VIM Massaro MOVED for approval of the Recreation Agreement fees, also, noting that the first fee has been paid, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. VIM Massaro moved for approval of the Agreement, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. ALL VOTED AYE. g) Water & Sewer Developers Agreement - Mr. Birken said there was a check received in the amount of $1,454.25, and covered 136 units and 2 1/2 for rec. complex, which is based on meter size. He indicated that it was a standard agree- ment, with a check, which was submitted by Mr. Toll this morning. VIM Massaro MOVED for the adoption of the Developers Agreement, -11- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ ___ as it relates to Toll Developme-nt_ Co.ru.or-ation. ,-_ gou.thc e•-GadP_a,9-- --- East project, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. a) Site Plan -(Previous Action Rescinded) C/M Disraelly inquired whether a revised site plan was necessary to show the median cut on the west, to which the Vice -Mayor stated that it would be included in the motion, with Engineering Plans to be submitted. Mr. Toll indicated they have agreed to do the engineering for the street, and was interested in amending the agreement, to include the median cut, with the same terms. V/M Massaro said this agreement will be modified to include the refund of monies within the five-year period, as stated in the other agreements, if other people benefit by such use of the median. C/M Disraelly MOVED that the agreement will be modified, and the site plan will be approved, 1) subject to acquiring ownership of the property; 2) to create a median cut in Southgate Boule- vard into 71st Avenue, with stacking lane; 3) subject to the agree- ment currently listed as Item #50f), as far as the responsibility for building the road, with a proviso, that if someone builds to the west, and has the use of that turning lane, and 71st Avenue, for the length of that property, that they will be subject to pay- ment toward Toll Development, within a period of five -years; 4) furnish the necessary engineering plans, to be approved by the City Engineer; 5) rezoning of recreation parcels to S-1; and 6) the cor- rection ofthescrivener's error as far as the parking plan; 7) the rezoning must be initiated before a building permit is issued. V/M Massaro SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 61. Temp. Reso. #1683 - Pertaining to Construction of Commercial Boulevard and Rock Island Road by Burkhard Plaza SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Adopted, as amended. RESOLUTION NO.R_ PASSED. See page 3) ___.. The City Attorney read Temp. Reso. #1683. V/M Massaro said this item was discussed during the City Council reports, which memo was distributed this morning. She MOVED to approve Temp. Reso. #1683, and be hand delivered to Mr. Gerren's Tape office, in order to expedite this, because the work is being held up Side for receipt of this legislation. She felt if a safety problem was #5 evident, the City would take necessary steps to correct this.. Mr. Birken felt that Mr. Mercer, the County Traffic Engineer,should provide something in writing, that this is a reasonable and prudent method of traffic engineering, to have the median end at that particu- lar point, and would not create a dangerous condition. He said that a situation should not exist where bad traffic engineering is ac- quiesced to by the City. He reiterated his request that the Traffic Engineer submit something in writing, that this is a reasonable approach to the problem. Mr. Birken felt that an addition should be made to page 2, line 2, after the word goal, " would appear to be, to have the median", rather than would be. V/M Massaro CHANGED HER MOTION, and MOVED that Temp. Reso. #1683, pertaining to construction of Commercial Boulevard and Rock Island Road, at the Burkhard Plaza, be approved as amended, and be hand - delivered this day to Mr. Gerren's office. C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE_ -12- 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ r 51. Tamarac Gardens - Discussion and possible action on: a) b) c) d) Site Plan Plat - Temp. Reso. #1595 Water and Sewer Developers Landscape Plan -- AGENDIZED Agreement BY CONSENT SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a), b), c) Approved with RESOLUTION NO.R- d 41 /,4,e�P PASSED. conditions, and d) AGENDIZED BY CONSENT, and Approved, with conditions. Julian Bryan, who represented F & R Builders, and said the Landscape Plan was inadvertently omitted. d) C/M Disraelly MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT Landscape Plan, under Tamarac Gardens, and V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: C/W Kelch - Absent from dais C/M Zemel - Aye C/M Disraelly- Aye V/M Massaro - Aye Mayor Falck - Aye Mr. Bryan indicated that K, L and M, were the three tracts directly west of the existing Lime Bay development, on the west side of Westwood Boulevard -- West; also, on the south side of McNab Road; and on the north side of Westwood Community 2, along with the existing canal. He further added that the west property line will be an extension of Nob Hill Road or 100th Avenue, in the very near future. Mr. Bryan said it is zoned R-4A, which would normally allow 15 dwelling units per acre, but was shown as medium density 10 in the adoption of the City's Land Use Plan and the Broward County Land Use Plan. Therefore, he said, they have voluntarily restricted this to 10 units per acre development; which are two-story condominium living units, in clusters of 20 to 32 units per building, and were walk-up to the upper level. He said this data was indicated on the site plan. a) Site Plan - Mr. Bryan reviewed the three tracts of K, L and M, running from east to west, with provision for the required parking, based on 1.5 spaces for a one -bedroom apartment; 1 3/4 spaces for a two --bedroom, and 10% additional spaces for guest parking. Also, the configuration throughout the development permits an interior circulator street, which is dedicated to the public but would serve this particular development and the residents living within the tract. He stated an existing median opening was located, which was planned previously, and installed when McNab Road was originally four-laned. This, he said, will be utilized for ingress -egress to tracts L and M. Mr. Bryan advised that tract K also has an existing median crossing for 95th Terrace, which goes into Westwood Community 4, and will be utilized with a new left -turn lane. Mr. Bryan said that the recreation facilities are shown on tract K, and a larger one, of approximately 1 1/2 acres, on L and M, which will include tennis court, cabana, pool and shuffleboard. The other rec area will primarily consist of barbecue area and passive open space. He additionally stated that on -site retention has been handled by taking the existing property line, where the canal is generally excavated within five to eight feet of the line; and agreed to excavate it within the property, which would widen the existing body of water. He also stated that by the plat and site plan, they would dedicate the additional area to the public, for reten- tion. This, he said, would create retention around the tract, with a graded slope in conformance with Ordinance 78-48, with something similar being done on tract K, to a lesser degree, but would be contiguous. In response to the Vice -Mayor's question of the width where the -13- 6/3/80 Recon. 5/29/80 mr/ stacking lanes are cut,..t was stated by Mr. Bryan that the green area varies, but was approximately eight (8) feet, for ingress and egress. He said that if it has to be curbed in its entirety, then it would be included in the City's ordinance. Mr. Bryan advised of a substantive change to the site plan, which revision was changing the sidewalk width on Westwood Boulevard, from four (4) feet to five (5) feet, and adding another portion of side- walk on the culdesac. He indicated that the east -west leg, that terminates in a culdesac, will also be dedicated to the public. C/W Kelch inquired as to indemnification of the owners, because they are now under the Home Insurance Plan, to which Mr. Bryan said it was discussed with Lennar, and there were a number of options available, which included bonds and other forms of guarantee. it was, he said, discussed with him by Mr. Birken, for consideration of the site plan, because his client was not a HOW builder. Mr. Birken said he would be troubled if a project was approved, and it was obvious that there would not be compliance with the City's ordinance, without the posting of $1,500.00. But, he said, on the other,hand, if Lennar agrees to comply with the ordinance, whether it is in Court or otherwise, and is modified, then it would apply, and he would be satisfied. Mr. Bryan said that the City Attorney advised that this would not be a requirement of site plan approval, but may be discussed, and they should be aware of it, prior to pulling a building permit, noting they are not a HOW builder. He said that F & R Builders and Lennar, would perhaps like to impose an alternative in the form of bonds, which they were aware should be determined prior to the pulling of permits. Mr. Bryan felt this should be put on record, as to compliance with the ordinance. V/M Massaro said there were several areas with canals, and excavation would be required. She also noted there were guardrails, and after excavation, the seawalls and guardrails would require extension to the full width of the excavation, or be installed. Mr. Bryan concurred with the various areas requiring seawall and guardrail extensions, as noted on the site plan, and said that such responsibility was clearly stated in Ordinance 78-48, which would be reflected on the Engineering plans. C/M Disraelly discussed the dumpsters, and the proposed location which is noted on the site plan, to which Mr. Bryan said this will be noted per the applicable ordinance, with the concrete slab and enclosures, with the required opening, relating to Ordinance 79-67. He further advised there was a dumpster adjacent to every building. V/M Massaro referred to a lift station which the Planning Commission requested to be moved, and would recommend landscaping in the area. Mr. Bryan said that the City Engineer's office requested the location along McNab Road, but the Planning Commission requested to place it in the recreation area, and then screened, as long as access was available. V/M Massaro said the recreation parcels have to be rezoned, and the Developers Agreement has to be re -executed, to which Mr. Bryan con- curred, indicating it would be submitted by Friday. Mr. Bryan said they would agree to curb the median on McNab Road, in front of the property. V/M Massaro MOVED for the approval of the site plan, subject to the following conditions being met: 1) That wherever excavation takes place, and a seawall exists, the seawall will be extended to the full width of the excavation, according to the City's ordinance, and the guardrail either be extended or installed, where necessary, in each case of excava- tion where it is adjacent to a road. aAIC 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ J 2) That the recreation parcels be rezoned to S-1. 3) That the median be curbed all. -around the full length of the property at McNab Road. Tape 4) Nob Hill Road to have two (2) lanes installed, with half of the Side median on the east side. #6 5) Dumpsters to be created to proper size, in accordance with the present ordinance. 6) Development review requirements have been satisfied. 7) Two streets must be named and approved by the Planning Department, in order to avoid duplication. 8) Developer required by City's ordinances, to comply with HOW agree- ment, unless an agreement is entered into, which would be acceptable to Council, prior to requesting a permit. It was noted by the Vice --Mayor, that checks were received for the fol- lowing; $15,000.00 for the recreation fees, $500.00 fee for the engineer, for water and sewer plan review, $3,484.78 interest for 269 unit connec- tions, and $2,814.00 for drainage fees at $130.00 per acre, which in- volves 26.806 acres. *SEE EDITOR'S NOTE C/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. d) Landscape Plan C/M Disraelly inquired whether Westwood Boulevard - West would have a hedge running the length of the recreation area, or a separation would be installed from the sidewalk. Mr. Bryan said that no specific arrangement has been made, but dis- cussion was held to provide it at the end of the parking area, but felt that berms or clustering of trees would best serve the area along the perimeter. He stated that additional planning was required within the recreation parcel, and would resubmit a landscaped plan for the facilities, as amended,.. -to the Community Development Depart- ment; which would include rearranging the size and number of trees. C/M Disraelly further requested that McNab Road be bermed, and the hedge be protected in the rec area around Westwood Boulevard - West. Also, he said, the apartments would have trees in the area. He then MOVED for the approval of the Landscape Plan, and V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement Mr. Birken advised that an executed copy was just received, relating to the Water and Sewer Developers Agreement, with a check which is in compliance with the ordinance enacted this morning. He felt the Developers Agreement should be approved subject to re -execution of the latest form. V/M Massaro MOVED that the Developers Agreement for Tracts K, L and M of Tamarac Gardens, be approved subject to it being re -executed, and the proper persons be authorized to sign this agreement, in the newest form. C/M Disraelly SECONDED the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. b) Plat - Temp. Reso. #1595 C/M Disraelly read Temp. Reso. #1595. V/M Massaro said the plat would be subject to naming of the streets, which is to be discussed with the Community Development Department, prior to transmittal to the County, to avoid duplication. She then MOVED for approval of Temp. Reso. #1595, the plat for Tamarac Gardens, with the streets names being approved, and C/M Disraelly SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. *EDITOR'S NOTE: Item #51 -- $2,814.00 is interest for 269 units; and $3,484.78 are the drainage fees. -15- 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ 55. Tract 70 - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan - Woodmont b) Plat - AGENDIZED BY CONSENT SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) Approved with conditions; RESOLUTION NO.R-fp-Ln���? d PASSED. and b) Approved - AGENDIZED BY _CONSENT (See page 17) a) Tom Schnars representing Tract 70,said that the Planning Commission submitted their approval, with recommendations, which requirements were performed. Mr. Keating indicated that Rafael Pena checked the area of 75th Street, and he determined that the sewer line which was extended across the road, going into LaForet, was repaired, but the backfill on the south side of the road was not properly performed, and subsided. V/M Massaro said the cut only goes from the center of the road south to Tract 70, and not to LaForet. Mr. Keating said that after the last severe storm, it was noted that the drainage involved a large problem in front of the project on 75th Street. He said there were three items which would require compliance by the property owner; 1) swales being redressed to con- form with the City's standards, and insure a smooth run --off flow to the catch basins, located on the east and west sides of the project, 2) also the cleaning of the swales, and 3) and the existing outfall line be shown, which is adjacent to the west -side of the property, and be cleaned. He further added that the swales should be redressed, in the front of their project, and clean the outfalls to the two catch basins, on both sides. Mr. Keating stated they were not aware of existing culverts, but then found culverts and catch basins, which may not be functioning properly, because of construction debris. V/M Massaro said that $95.00 per unit was required for recreation, and requested copies of a letter relating to this, by Mr.Cross, for the City Council to be aware of transactions. She also inquired about curbed medians on 75th Street, to which Steve Epple said they would comply with the curbing for the length of the property. Mr.Epple requested a street --cut, in order to install a sprinkler system into the median, for landscaping and irrigating. V/M Massaro said the street -cut can be made, but felt that a depres- sion in front of it has to be corrected, and required a commitment for such handling. She felt the area was not properly compacted. She then MOVED for approval of the site plan, and also noted that the development review requirements have been met; also, the applicant has agreed to curb the median for the full length of his property; check the fees; and redress swales for the full length of the property on 75th Street, and clean the east and west outfalls. C/W Kelch SECONDED -the motion. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. b) V/M Massaro MOVED to AGENDIZE BY CONSENT, plat approval, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: C/W Kelch - Aye C/M Z eme 1 -- Nay C/M Disraelly - Aye V/M Massaro - Aye Mayor Falck - Aye 56. Park and Recreation Site Acquisition -- Tem. Ord. #742 SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Tabled to 6/11/80 (See Minutes 28/80) V/M Massaro MOVED to table this item to the 6/11/80 meeting, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. a9� 6/3/80 Recon.5/29/80 mr/ VOTE: C/W Kelch - Aye C/M Zemel - Nay C/M Disraelly- Aye V/M Massaro - Aye Mayor Falck Aye 58. Lease of Tamarac Elementary School for 1980 Summer Youth Program - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Approved, with execution by the proper authorities, (See page 2) C/M Zemel MOVED for approval of the lease agreement between Tamarac Elementary School and the City of Tamarac, for the 1980 Summer Youth Program. C/M Disraelly sai6 this was similar to the 1979 lease, and would SECOND the motion, for approval, to be signed by the proper authorities. Mayor Falck indicated that the only requirement was for necessary liability insurance, which has been accomplished. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 59. Solicitation of Architectural Quotes - Addition to the City Hall Buildi Authorization for the City Manager to solicit quotes. ;YNOPSIS OF ACTION: City Manager authorized to contact architects for proposals, in compliance With City law, after discussion with the City Attorney. C/M Zemel said the City Manager requested permission to solicit quotes .from architects, under the Competitive Negotiation Act. He then MOVED that the City Manager be authorized to contact architects for the pur- pose of submitting proposals, in accordance with the City's laws, after discussion with the City Attorney, and V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 60. Architectural Plans for Community Center - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Item withdrawn, with a bequest for a Workshop Session to be held. 'Tape ,;i.de 7 ,. V/M Massaro MOVED to withdraw the item, and a Workshop Session be held, which would be scheduled by Mayor Falck, and C/W Kelch SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE. 55. Tract 70 - Woodmont - b) Plat (See page 16) b) VOTE: Plat -- Temp. Reso. #1684 (Recalled) Mayor Falck read Temp. Reso. #1684, and V/M Massaro MOVED for its approval,with C/W Kelch SECONDING. ALL VOTED AYE. MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 4:00 P.M. ATTEST: ASS T. CITY CLERK This public document was promulgated at a cost of $-26� /� , or��,�' per copy, to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the City Council of the City of .,Tamarac . APPROVED BY -17- CITY COON IL, W 1D 6/3/80 Recon.5 29 80 mr/