The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1982-07-16 - City Commission Reconvened Regular Meeting Minutes5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE 0 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900 July 15, 1982 NOTICE RECONVENED COUNCIL MEETING There will be a reconvened City Council meeting on Friday, July 16, 1982, at 9:00 A.M., in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 5811 N.W. 88 Avenue, Tamarac, Florida 33321. The items remaining from the Council Agenda of July 14, 1982, to be con- sidered are as follows: 6. Bid Award - Caporella Park - Temp. Reso. #2242 - Discussion and possible action to award a bid for facilities at Caporella Park. 8. Cypress Creek Commons - Discussion and possible action to com- pensate the Consulting City Planner for services rendered in connection with seeking a grant. 12. F.Y. 1980/81 Audit - Discussion and possible action, and report by Councilman Kravitz, liaison to Auditors (tabled from 6/9/82). 13. Independent Auditor - Discussion and possible action to approve the services of an auditor for F.Y. 1981/82 financial records (tabled from 5/26/82). PUBLIC HEARINGS - 10:00 A.M. 21. F & R Builders, Inc. - Rezoning Petition #10-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #991 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands on the.east side— of Nob Hill Road, approximately 800-feet south of N.W. 77 Street, from R-4 to B-5, to permit sales facilities and a model area and to permit future conversion to professional offices. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. 22. F & R Builders, Inc. - Rezoning Petition #16-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #992 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands south of and adjacent to Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall on N.W. 77 Street, from B-1 to S-1. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. 23. F & R Builders, Inc. - Rezoning Petition #17-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #993 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands on the south side of N.J. 77 Street, east of and adjacent to Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall, from R-4 to S-1. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. 25. Zoning Regulations - Temp._Ord. #982 - Discussion and possible action to amend Chapter 28 of the Code pertaining to height, plot size, density, floor area, length of structures and setbacks of residential building or structures in all zoning districts by providing a composite table of setback lines and miscellaneous zoning district requirements. First Reading. Reconvened Council Meeting - 7/16/82 Page 2 27. Park and Recreation Land Dedication - Temp. Ord. #990 - Discussion and possible action to amend Section 20-42 of the Code to provide for alternative methods of cash payment in lieu of land dedica- tion. First Reading. 29. Tamarac Plaza (southwest corner of Brookwood Boulevard and McNab Road) - Temp. Reso. #2268 - Discussion and possible action on rescission of parking waiver (tabled from 6/23/82). 30. WoodlandsGuntry Club - Revised Site Plan -� Temp .RReso. #2249 - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for parking lot revisions. 33. Southgate Gardens, Inc. (7300 Southgate Boulevard) - Discussion and possible action on: a) Revised site plan for 6-foot high wood shadowbox fence along the south property line - Temp. Reso. #2261. b) Acceptance of utility easement for drainage purposes - Temp. Reso. #2251. c) Acceptance of utility easement for water purposes - Temp. Reso. #2252. d) Acceptance of utility easement for sewer purposes - Temp. Reso: #2253. 43. Woodmont Tract 60 - Bond Release - Temp. Reso. #2255 Discussion and possible action on release of a warranty bond posted for public improvements. 45. Northwood II - Revised Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2262 - Discussion and possible action on: - a) Reflect project phasing b) Addition of adjacent sidewalks c) Modifications to the Water and Sewer Developers Agreement 46. Kings Point Professional Plaza - Discussion and possible action on: a Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2264. c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. 47.. Drainage Improvements in the City - Discussion and possible action. REPORTS 48. City Council 49. City Manager 50. City Attorney 51. AGENDI7ED BY CONSENT - Business Uses - Temp. Ord. #967 - Considera- tion and general discussion concerning amendment of Section 28-171 of the Code pertaining to amusement centers in B-2 and B-3 zoning districts. First Reading. Council may consider such other business as may come before it. The public is invited to attend. Carol A. Evans Assistant City Clerk Pursuant to Chapter 80-105 of Florida Law, Senate Bill No. 368; 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 the proceedings and for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record inc!ude6 the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. MAIL REPLY TO: P.O. BOX 25010 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320 5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE v TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900 July 15, 1982 NOTICE RECONVENED COUNCIL MEETING The following two items will be considered to be agendized by majority consent on Friday, July 16, 1982 at 9:00 A.M. in Council. Chambers of City Hall, 5811 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, 33321. ITEM #20 - Clarification of action concerning GRG Fitness Centers, Inc. Petition 15-Z-82 - Temp. Reso. 2248 - request for figure salon in a B-2 zoning district at Mr -Nab Plaza North, 7160 University Drive. ITEM # - Chef Onecio Perera Restaurant, 6455 W. Commercial Blvd. Discussion and Possible Action to amend Resolution No. R-81-161 granting a special exception for on premises consumption of alcoholic beverages by permitting the transfer of this license. Temp. Reso #2370. Council may consider such other business as may come before them. �1 /J MariWWn Bert o City Clerk /lc CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA RECONVENED CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 16, 1982 TAPE CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Falck called the meeting to order at 9:00 A.M. #1 Friday, July 16, 1982, in the Council Chambers ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter W. Falck Vice Mayor Helen Massaro Councilman Irving M. Disraelly Councilman Philip B. Kravitz Councilman David E. Krantz ALSO PRESENT: City Manager, Laura Z. Stuurmans City Attorney, Jon M. Henning Assistant City Clerk, Carol A. Evans Secretary, Norma R. Rayman 12. FISCAL YEAR 1980/1981 AUDIT -- Discussion and possible action, and report by C/M Kravitz, liaison to Auditors. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ACCEPTED report as submitted. C/M Kravitz stated that the City had received a report from the City Auditors, Alexander Grant & Co. for the period ending September 30th, 1981. The City had also received the regular report, which was in connection with the audit, dated Play 5th, 1982, with suggestions to the City in order to keep better internal control. C/M Kravitz said he felt this report was very important to the City, since it came from professional people and they could help the City to keep better records, more up to date records and of course, the City wants to keep abreast of all these things. In connection with that, the item that caused the main concern, and the Mayor too was concerned, with Building Permits. C/M Kravitz pointed out that as liaison to finance, he looked into the matter. He had asked the building department clerk to make a test check of a full month of invoices in connection with building permits. In order to do that, as he was not familiar with the exact structure of the building permit rates, he had gone through the mathematical figures with the clerk and saw how she had arrived at the figures. He then went through them and although he did find some minor errors, they were not very significant. C/M Kravitz said his next step was to ask the auditors, and they were very cooperative, to send their work papers on what they found wrong in their test audit on the building permits. There were six permits involved, two of which were just a matter of the rates being listed in two different areas with two different rates. He said he believed those were being corrected now. He added that the auditors did not feel that it was of such great importance that ,it was of material factor, but it was listed in this particular report. C/M Kravitz continued that in going forward with the report, other things developed and he said he felt that the auditors were lax in not going deep enough into these items. Some problems should have been brought to the attention of Council or the City Manager, and they have never been mentioned. C/M Kravitz said that as to the action on the report, he did not see anything that he would recommend at this time, except to Accept the report as submitted and then they would discuss Item #13 and at that time he would like to go further into this. C/M Kravitz MOVED that they ACCEPT the Auditor's Supplemental Report, and the Report for the .Fiscal Period. C/M Krantz SECONDED. R141160M ALL VOTED AYE -l- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro said she wished to add something to Item #12 before they went into the discussion on Item #13. She said that this was a matter on which she felt very strongly. In connection with the services of Alexander Grant & Co., she said she thought that Council was familiar with the problems that the City was having daily with just about each and every account that the City has. She added that concerning the developers agreements, every time Council tries to get anything approved, they find that they have to go back and check to see where they stand as far as the finances are concerned, whether commitments have been met. She added that she felt that the City Auditors have a strong responsibi- lity in not having monitored anything regarding those monies. V/M Massaro said that from the very beginning when.the City had acquired the Utility and when the City had to go into these various agreements, because of some that existed, and some new ones that had to be met, if someone did not monitor them, there would have been tremendous losses, and she did not know if there have been because staff is still researching all accounts. She said that she had dealt long enough with auditors and accountants to know that when something new comes up, the auditors discuss it and decide that certain procedures are needed, and they advise as to what procedures should be set up. She said that the City's auditors have never done this and she had!.told Mr. Emmer that she thought that they had a strong responsibility there and she did not think that they had done their job. 13. INDEPENDENT AUDITOR - Discussion and possible action to approve the services of an auditor for F.Y. 1931/82 financial records. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED awaiting Memo from C/M Kravitz by July 31, 1982 at which time a special meeting will. be called. C/M Kravitz stated that the Council had interviewed seven accounting firms including Alexander Grant & Co. and all of these firms in his opinion, would be capable of handling the City's audit. He said they were all of national importance and they all have been doing municipal work and he believed that some of them are more familiar with what the City requires, and therefore should be given more cognizance than the other accounting firms. He said that at this point, he is not exactly the happiest with the information that he got from Alexander Grant & Co.'s audit, as to what he would like to get or what he would find desirable. C/M Kravitz made a MOTION to TABLE in selecting an auditor for the next Council Meeting which would be July 28, 1982. He added that Council would have time to reconsider and choose an auditor of their choice. V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: C/M Disraelly said that he voted going on for many months, and he accomplish. He did not know what would have two weeks from today. C/M Krantz - NAY C/M Kravitz - AYE C/M Disraelly - NAY V/M Massaro - AYE Mayor Falck -- NAY NAY specifically because this has been did not know what two more weeks would other evidence or indications they C/M Kravitz answered that he was working on certain things that would affect the report. He said he had promised Council a written report and he would have the report ready shortly so Council could decide for themselves. He added that he was not making any recommendations or saying who he thought the auditor should be, but leaving it open and giving Council all the facts. --2- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Krantz said the reason for his NAY vote was that he would not be present at the next City Council meeting and he thought they should have is full complement of Councilmen there, this way it would only be four members and that might pose some problems. Mayor Falck suggested that the information from C/M Kravitz should be submitted to Council before C/M Krantz leaves. He added that the report should be distributed so that C/M Krantz will have an opportunity to indicate his ideas on the subject. C/M Kravitz said they would have that by Wednesday, July 21 at the latest. Mayor Falck said when the report was ready and it warranted a special meeting, he would call a special meeting. C/M Kravitz MOVE to TABLE this item for a. special meeting to be called pending distribution of report no later than July 21, 1982. V/M Massaro SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 6. BID AWARD - CAPORELLA PARK - Temp. Reso. #2242 - Discussion and possible action to award a bid for facilities at Caporella Park. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED for a meeting not later than 7/28/82. Jon Henning read the resolution by title only. The City Manager said that Council had received from staff a break -down of the items that were requested in the bid package, the various contractors and the proposal by staff breaking the bid to two separate vendors and also providing a portion of the work that they felt could be done by Public Works. The City Manager added that since they have prepared this, they have considered again the possibility of some additional work being performed by the Public Works Dept. Since they are still reviewing that now, and they have sufficient time under the bid commitment by these vendors, she asked that the item be Tabled to the meeting July 28, 1982. V/M Massaro MOVED that this item be TABLED to the meeting July 28, 1982. She felt that they had some very valid points there. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE C/M Disraelly added that although Council had moved to table to the meeting of the 28th, if there was a special meeting would this item be ready before because of the time element involved. V/M Massaro amended her MOTION to TABLE for a meeting not later than July 28, 1982. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 8. CYPRESS CREEK COMMONS - Discussion and possible action to compensate the Consulting City Planner for services rendered in connection with seeking a grant. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED payment of $143.00, other monies to be paid if and when grant is awarded. C/M Disraelly said he brought this up at the last meeting because it was his understanding that payment to Mr. Rubin had been dis- cussed, that at the end of the time period he would be paid out of the grant, based on the figures given to Council in the pre- paration of this entire project. -3- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly continued that then the question arose about making the model and the engineering work that was involved with that, the sketches and so forth. Fie said he thought that they had come up with a figure of $700.00 that would be given to the City Planner for that project, if the project did not go through. C/M Disraelly said at least the City Planner would have been recompensed for out of pocket expenses and time involved in the preparation of the design that he had created for presentation to Council, the slide presentation and the fact that it was presented.to the South Florida Water Management District. He said that there could be a long time element involved in getting that grant and meanwhile the City Planner has had considerable out of pocket expenses in the preparation of the model. He added that it seemed to him that to be fair and equitable, that cost of $700.00 should not be held in abeyance since it is out of pocket money for him. He continued that this way if the grant was awarded in October, November or December and the City got the monies piece meal, he would not have to wait until then to get his out of pocket monies. C/M Disraelly stated that the City Planner had done the work and has made an excellent presentation, both to Council and to the South Florida Water Management District and he has had these out of pocket expenses. C/M Disraelly MOVED that the City pay the City Planner $700.00 and if the City gets the grant, it will have been reimbursed. C/M Kravitz added that he was a little confused on this issue. He said he was working from memory only and to the best of his knowledge, he remembered this coming before Council, a statement was made that in the event that the grant was not given to the City or that the City would not use the grant, there would be no fees involved. He said that if there are monies due, he would like to see them paid but he thought it would be advisable to know whether Council had said there would be no expenses involved in the event that the grant was not given. V/M Massaro said that she had discussed this with the City Planner briefly and he did acknowledge that he would not get paid until the grant was awarded. V/M Massaro said the City Planner had said there was some discussion between him and C/M Disraelly about the additional costs for the model. She said she could understand that there could be additional cost if there was a fee established for the first part, and she did not believe that there ever really was a fee established for the first part. She continued that she had not questioned it because it was rather indefinite as to how much time it would take and that could be established later. V/M Massaro continued that the City Planner showed her the out of pocket expenses, and it was in the neighborhood of $100.00 and change. The City Planner informed her that it was $143.00. She said that she felt that the out of pocket expenses were not really something that he should bear the burden of and the rest should go as was agreed upon and it had been agreed by Council that he should get the out of pocket money, $143.00, but as far as the labor was concerned, she did not think he should be paid immediately as he gets his regular salary. She said it was extra work and he realized he would not get paid for that immediately and hopefully he will be properly compensated for it. Mayor'Falck asked for a second to C/M Disraelly's Motion. The MOTION died for the lack of a second. V/M Massaro P40VED that the out of pocket expenses incurred by Mr. Rubin in the amount $143.00 for the model, be paid and the other money for whatever labor he has done be paid at the time of the grant, if the City gets the grant, as was originally agreed to. C/M Krantz SECONDED. -4- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly added that the travel time to the South Florida Water Management District of Palm Beach was not put in for pay- ment and he thought that this was a cost and it might have a serious affect on anyone wanting to do work for the City. He said that it was something to be paid for out of pocket expenses, but there was also something to be said for the travel that was done, for the work that was done, for the hours that were put into it, which were on free time, not compensated for by the City and this was not taken into consideration. Fie added that Council did have to consider that it is more than pocket expenses, because there was no reason that that model had to be made and there was no reason for the slide presentation having to be made. C/M Disraelly said, he was sure the record would reflect that at a prior meeting, Council had indicated that they thought the figure that was originally proposed was too low and should have been raised in order to be sure that City was adequately covered for various expenses. He said he thought it unfair not to consider the hours and time and travel that was also put into this. V/M Massaro added that the hours and time will be all be considered by Mr. Rubin when he submits his bill, if and when they get the grant. She added that that was the agreement and she did not think Council has a right to do any different. VOTE: C/M Krantz - AYE C/M Kravitz - AYE C/M Disraelly - NAY V/M Massaro - AYE Mayor Falck - AYE Richard Rubin thanked the Council for the payment of the invoices. 20. GRG FITNESS CENTERS, INC. - Temp..Reso. #2248 - Granting a Special -Exception - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Item reconsidered and TABLED to meeting of 7/28/82. Jon Henning stated that he was concerned with this because there were certain details which Council may wish to consider and probably did consider brieflv in their discussion as to the overall plan that was presented to the City Council. He added that he thought it was clear in the plan that it is for one sex, either male or female,at this health fitness place and also there were. hours mentioned, closing hour of 9:00 P.M and that was not addressed in the motion. He said he did not know if Council wished to impose an hour of closing• There was also a question of transferability which is usually addressed, and there was no mention particularly made as to whether the exception will be transferable either from this location or to a subsequent owner. Jon Henning said he felt that legally it would be appropriate since Council was meeting today, to readdress this issue to clarify the granting of the special exception, if that is of continued interest or desire, and possibly to invite the petition- er back again to address these issues or others that Council may wish to discuss with him. V/M Massaro MOVED that this item be agendized for reconsideration. C/M Kravitz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE -5- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro said that in all fairness to C/M Disraelly who made the motion, that in listening to the tape she heard very distinctly he was intending to further clarify that motion, but the second was very fast, and it seemed like it was just dropped there. She said that she checked some of the statements that were made, she did not think that anyone meant to deceive, but nevertheless, she has not been able to substantiate some of these statements. She said she thought that further clarification is certainlyneeded here and she MOVED that this item be TABLED to the next regular meeting 40- that everything can be checked out and determined properly. Mayor Falck questioned whether V/M Massaro meant statements made by the Council. She answered that she had meant statements made by the Applicant. She said there were contradictory statements made and statements that she has not been able to check out. She added that did not mean that these people's intentions were not good, it is just that she has not been able to have these things checked out, and Council needs the time to get all the proper answers so i_hat t1iey can make t:leir own judgment as to what to do in this matter. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AXE Richard Rubin said that during a Site Review this morning, he found discrepancies between the concept plan on file on this project and the way the existing space is laid out. He added that he had requested the architect.to clarify which way it will finally be built, the way it is laid out and built now, or the way it is on the concept plan, and to submit new drawings to Council. C/M Disraelly added that on a Special Exception, the Concept Plan is required and the ultimate plan must follow the Concept Plan. C/M Krantz added that what Mr. Rubin was saying substantiated the Motion. V/M Massaro said she had not gone into all the details as she did not feel that was necessary, but certainly they do have to submit a new concept plan to Council. Ronald Kall, architect, said that at the Planning and Zoning meeting, he had specifically asked_ Mr. Rubin. what .-his definition of the-. concept: ,plan was, and -he said it was detailed for him -at that time, that the Concept plan should include all the elements interior to the structure that they planned on putting in there. He added that the particular arrangement was of no consequence as long as they had supplied documentation that they were not going to put in a juice bar, they were not going to put in swimming pool or the elements they were going to put in there. Ronald Kall added that since that meeting with Planning and Zoning they are still rearranging the interior areas of the structure, but basically or essentially,the elements that Council has seen on the concept plan are the elements they are supplying, an excercise room, a sauna, a steam bath, lockers,etc. He added that if he needed to supply Council with another concept plan to further detail that element, he was not sure whether the term concept plan was what they meant. Mayor Falck suggested that he work that out with Mr. Rubin. --6- 7/16/82 /nrr 53. CHEF ONECIO PERERA RESTAURANT - Temp. Reso. #2370 - Granting. a Special Exception for Alcoholic Beverages. Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: AgLandized by Consent (See Page lg) Jon Henning asked that this be agendized by consent as he was awaiting a resolution on this item and it should be brought before Council shortly. C/17 Krantz MOVED to Agendize Item #53. V/1•4 Massaro SECONDED. 45. NORTHWOOD II - Revised Site Plan - Temp._ Reso. #2262 - Discussion and possible action on: a) Reflect project phasing b) Addition of adjacent sidewalks c) Modifications to the Water and Sewer Developers Agreement SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) and b) APPROVED with stipulation that all fees due be paid by 7/19/82. c) APPROVED subject to all payments including guaranteed revenues will be effective this date. RESO. NO. R-82--_1fZ PASSED. Julian Bryan, representing Northwood II, stated that this item had been brought back before Council for two reasons. One was a written request from Mr. Foy of the City Engineering Depart- ment, that Northwood II add some adjacent off -site sidewalk on Southgate Boulevard, which has been completed, and on 100th Avenue, which has been committed to and bonded in an off --site road agreement with the County. He added that the two sidewalks are on the site plan and it is a five foot concrete sidewalk. Mr. Bryan said they felt it necessary to add an additional change to the phasing plan in hopes that Council will consider an amendment to the Water and Sewer Developers Agreement. This agreement would encompass only Phase I, which will be 57 1/2 E.R.C.s. He added that this was an area on the Phasing Plan that he has delineated and it is Phase I..,and the southern 55 units of residential development,and 2 1/2 E.R.C.s required for'the clubhouse, which has already been completed. Mr. Bryan added that all site improvements were in on this tract. They were the underground water, sewer, paving, drainage, grading throughout the entire tract as were the improvements subject to an agreement 1 1/2 yrs. ago,.when they installed augmentation drainage Mr. Bryan continued that what they were seeking now was an approval of a revised site plan that would add those two sidewalks, would amend the phasing lines to bring it into conformance with what actually has been constructed on the property and the requirements of the City's new phasing regulations under Ordinance 81-53 and seek additionally an amendment to the water and sewer agreement. He added that they had met with the City Attorney and with the Vice Mayor and he believed they were significantly in agreement on all of the terms of the water and sewer agreement. V/M Massaro said that this agreement dated back to the original agreement or a provision has to be made in it because of the guaranteed revenues. She checked the agreement and could not see where that had been done. She saw that most everything had been taken care of, but the guaranteed revenues on those units have got to be according to the original agreement. Jon. Henning asked if Mr. Bryan.would explain to Council his understanding of Paragraph 4 on Page 3, where they have amended the language to read, "developer agrees to pay all the units recited in Paragraph K, no later than 60 days from the execution of this agreement." -7- 7/16/82 /nrr Mr. Bryan said he had spoken with Mr. Kommer after the meeting with the Vice Mayor and City Attorney and he had agreed to pay the guaranteed revenues on the occupied units beginning immediately with the execution of this agreement. There were 19 of the 57 1/2 units that were occupied and they would be paying their own water and sewer assessments. He added that this was in conflict with what he had stated in their proposal, which was that those guaranteed revenues would begin in nine months. He said they were trying to project it reasonably and in anticipation of this year's sales season, if there is such a thing. He added that they recognized the problem that Council might have with that as it relates to the City's bonding requirements. Mr. Bryan agreed that that paragraph could be changed and Mr. Henning can certainly do that and those would commence with the approval by Council or with the passage of the Resolution. The City Attorney questioned if that would be Phase I only and Mr. Bryan said that was correct. V/M Massaro said she wished to clarify this, what Mr. Bryan was saying was that it would be triggered if and when the Council approved it. If they approved it today, that would trigger it. V/M Massaro suggested that something be done about getting the agreements signed properly, because some of the paragraphs state that certain things occur from the date of the signed agreement. Mr. Bryan informed V/M Massaro that there were some agreements signed by the developer and then it was quite a bit of time before it came before Council or was signed. He added that this was also because of changes in the agreement or they were in Mr. Birken's office. 'Mr. Bryan said there would be some question then of what the anniversary date would be by virtue of that. V/M Massaro added that what she wanted was when Council approved it. She wanted absolutely no question that it should be date of approval and not the date of the signing and then there would be no problems. Jon Henning suggested that the contract recite that it be effective retroactively to the point of the Resolution being passed. He said he thought that was the intention of Council. C/M Disraelly added that all future agreements say, "on passage of the Resolution". C/M Disraelly pointed out that Mr. Bryan had not filled in the amount on Page 3. Mr. Bryan said he did not fill that in because in the standard agreement, that is the total amount of ERCs in the Phase times the connection charge. In this case some of the connections have already been prepaid, 47 of the 57 1/2 units have been prepaid, therefore, he guessed that the number that would go in there would be 10 1/2 times whatever the City receives per unit. C/M Disraelly asked if they had a reserve for the entire project? Mr. Bryan said they would not by execution of this agreement. Under the Phasing concept they would not, they would have to come back to Council with a subsequent date. C/M Disraelly pointed out that originally when it was brought before Council as one site plan, they had not reserved any capacity then. Mr. Bryan said they had executed an agreement that was for the entire 171 units and it did contemplate reserving units. They were paying interest and have been paying interest for two years, on the basis of taking down 171 units. He added that regrettably the market has not allowed that to occur. He said they had been paying interest all this time, but by virtue of this agreement, they would not be paying on the remaining units, interest or guaranteed revenues, because they would not be entitled -8� 7/16/82 /nrr to those units until or unless they came in with .a separate agreement for that particular phase, which would have to be Phase II. C/M Disraelly said that if Council declared a moratorium, then they could not go beyond the 47 units or 57 1/2 units. Mr. Bryan said that was precisely correct and they recognized that fact. V/M Massaro said she wanted him to understand that if any interest has been prepaid on units that are now being eliminated, there is no credit. Mr. Bryan said he did understand that. She also pointed outthat the amount for water and sewer was incorrect as it says $900.00 and it is supposed to be $1,000.00. Mr. Bryan said he understood that. Mr. Bryan apologized for the error as it was an original agreement which was subsequently amended to read $1,000.00 a unit of which a portion is paid to them. ,Ion Henning explained that there was only one agreement so far in this matter, and that is the agreement which Council has before them. It was delayed in transmitting to Council in the packet because of the discussions that were had with the Vice Playor and also his concern that he not put his approval on it until these matters are resolved. He said he was hoping to resolve these matters this morning, and he finally had copies given to Council. V/M Massaro added that in the agreement, the interest amount of $10.50 a month has to be changed also as that was based on the $900.00 figure. It becomes $11.67. Mr. Bryan said that those would be computed on 10 1/2 units,the difference between those that have been paid for and the balance remaining. V/M Massaro said that another thing that has to be verified and that was monies that are due the City have already been paid. V/M Massaro added that for this approval to be valid, Mr. Bryan had to come in Monday and pay all the interest charges. Mayor Falck stated that they just have to do whatever was required in order to get the approval. C/M Disraelly asked if the hydrant on the Site Plan for Phase I in front of Building 114, will be installed. Mr. Bryan informed him that that had already been installed. V/M Massaro MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2262, which reflects the Revised Site Plan for Northwood II. C/M Disraelly SECONDED. V/M Massaro said the modification she would like to make to the MOTION was whatever fees are due must be into the City on Monday. She added that Mr. Henning will see that the corrections are made on the Water and Sewer Agreement. C/M Disraelly added that the payment of all fees recognized as being effective this date, including guaranteed revenues. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE V/M Massaro MOVED the APPROVAL of the Water and Sewer Developers Agreement under Temp. Reso. #2262, the Revised Northwood II Site Plan, subject to the corrections that have been discussed at this meeting. C/M Krantz SECONDED. \U0JPVDV ALL VOTED AYE --9- 7/16/82 /nrr 30. WOODLANDS COUNTRY CLUB - REVISED SITE PLAN -- Temp. Reso. #2249 - Discussion and possible action on a revised site plan for parking lot revisions. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED Tem Reso. #2249 RESO. NO. R--82-Z2:�p —PASSED. Mr. Alan Bernstein, Chairman of the House Committee, Woodlands Country Club, said that the addition was a fairly simple one, adding approxi- mately 50 feet to an existing parking lot in the direction of the Country Club. He continued, pointing to the site plan, that the area is outlined heavily and the notes that he has circled, are the notes that are new. The Plan is the Plan that was originally submitted at the time the Country Club was expanded approximately 3 years ago. He added that that plan has now been modified to show the additional parking in that area. He continued that these changes have been made to accommodate the great number of cars that are there in season. He said that they had had too many minor accidents and this change was primarily for safety. It had been reviewed by Planning and it was reviewed by the City Engineer. C/M Disraelly pointed out that the plan showed parking in the driveway. He questioned whether they used this for only overflow parking. Mr. Bernstein said that was correct, there were various other overflow parking shown on the plan in different areas that they do not use ordinarily, but when it gets jammed up, they have to use every available space. C/M Disraelly said he brought it up because the City Ordinance does require handicapped spaces, Mr. Bernstein said that would not affect this as this was valet parking, 100% valet parking. Jon Henning read the resolution by title only. C/P1 Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2249. C/11 Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 21. F & R BUILDERS, INC. - REZONING PETITION #10-Z-82 - Temp. Ord. #991 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands on the east side of Nob Hill Road, approximately 800 feet south of NW 77th Street, from R-4 to B-5, to permit sales facilities and a model area and to permit future conversion to professional offices. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) ACCEPTED Affidavits b) ADOPTED Temp, Ord. #991 on first reading, as amended. C/M Disraelly said that Council had a letter from the City Clerk indicating that ads had been run, and he MOVED the ACCEPTANCE of the Affidavit of Publication, Posting and Mailing. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE Richard Rubin said that the application was for a parcel of 2.04 acres that is being rezoned in accordance with Stipulation #13, which has been reviewed by the Broward -10- 7/16/82 /nrr Planning Council and they have been informed that Council has also initiated the change of the Land Use Plan to reflect that this parcel will be commercial in use as the B-5 is a commercial business district. Therefore, this will be in conformance with the Amended Land Use Plan. He added that the Planning Commission voted in favor of the proposed rezoning. Mayor Falck opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Sawyer and Mr. Martin were representing Kingdom Hall Jehovah Witness on 77th Street. Mr. Sawyer said they were not protesting any of the. changes from R-4 to B-5. He said that when they had purchased the land from Leadership, Bob Schultz, there were supposed to be apartments and townhouses, which they had agreed to, and across on 77th Street, next to the waterway was a 7 acre park and on the left hand side going west on 77th Street, was another 3 acre park. He continued that since then, they found that Woodmont Country Club is putting in Soccer Fields and tennis courts across the road from Kingdom Hall. Mr. Sawyer said that they would then be surrounded by recreational and business. Mr. Sawyer said he felt when they had purchased the 2 acres, two years ago, that they would more or less not have these kinds of things taking place. When they had built the building, Council had requested that they put a lake in the back, which they did and the lake is 14 feet deep. He added that the Council had requested that they put hedges all around the 2 acres, which they did. He said that if there were recreational areas in the back and he would request that the developers put up a fence. Mr. Sawyer sited an incident in Miami where a youngster had climbed a 5 foot fence and drowned in the pool. They had sued the owners for several hundred thousand dollars. He would not like to see that happen here. He continued that there would probably be more noise with recreat- ional facilities in back of them which would not affect them too much, but he said he would like to be protected against law suits. Mr. Sawyer suggested that the contractor put up a five foot fence. Mr. Rubin said he wished to respond to Mr. Sawyer, as he knew he has worked hard with the City in the past. He pointed out on the plan, that to the west, there would be a wall constructed by that developer. He added that to the south side the owner plans to construct a theatre, but it will not be active recreation. There will not be children playing in that area. He added that the rezoning that they were hearing now was for the parcel that is over 500 feet away from Kingdom Hall, facing Nob Hill Road. Mr. Rubin said Mr. Sawyer was actually concerned with the next item. Mr. Rubin suggested that Kingdom Hall get together with the developers to see what the overall plans are. Mr. Holland stated that there would not be any children there. He added that this would be a retirement community. It is their intention to construct a wall on the south property line. The roadway will be on the east property line. Mayor Falck closed the Public Hearing. V/M Massaro asked Mr. Henning if all they were acting on now, irrespective of the wordage, was the rezoning to B-5, and not approving anything more than that right now. Mr. Henning said if Council would notice Ord. #991, which action takes place, is ordained by the Council in Section 1, to rezone from R-4 to B-5. V/M Massaro said that this goes on to say, "and a -model area and to allow for future conversion to professional offices". -11- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro said that they were incorporating a lot into that title. She said she thought all that should be in the title, should be rezoning of certain real property from R-4 to B--5. Mr. Henning said that if Council wished to restrict the title, that could be done. He added that the trouble with titles is usually that they are not expansive enough. There is rarely a complaint that the title is too explanatory. He added that the meat of the ordinance, what is ordained by it, is simply stated in Section 1, which states it is hereby rezoned from R--4 to B-5. He said if Council felt more comfortable at this time striking certain phrases, he saw no problem with that. C/M Disraelly MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Ord. #991, Petition 10-Z-82, striking from the title the words "in order to permit sales facilities and a model area and allow for future conversion to professional offices". C/12 Disraelly read the ordinance by title only. V/M Massaro SECONDED and added the words "as amended" to the MOTION. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 22. F & R BUILDERS, INC. - REZONING PETITION #16-Z-82 - Temp. #992 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands south ^of and - adjacent to Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall on N.W. 77th Street, from B-1 to S-1. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting, and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) ACCEPTED Affidavits b) ADOPTED Temp. Ord. #992 on First Reading. C/M Disraelly MOVED the ACCEPTANCE of the Affidavit of Publication, Posting and Mailing as he had the information from the City Clerk. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE Jon Henning read the ordinance by title only. Mayor Falck stated that this was the item that Mr. Sawyer had been referring to. Mr. Rubin said that this was a parcel that was being rezoned from Commercial to Open space for the purpose of a theatre which should be better land use for the church than the commercial use. It has also been noted in Stipulation #13, that the City Council voted to amend the Land Use Plan to reflect this parcel as open space which is consistent with Broward County Planning Council's requirements. The Planning Commission heard this item on June 28, and voted unanimously in favor of the rezoning. Mayor Falck opened the Public Hearing. No one wished to be heard and Mayor Falck closed the Public Hearing. V/M Massaro MOVED the ADOPTION of Tem . Ord. #992 on First Reading. C/M Disraelly SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 23. F & R BUILDERS, INC. - REZONING PETITION #17--Z-82 - Temp. Ord. 4993 - Discussion and possible action to rezone lands on the south side of N.W. 77th Street, east of and adjacent to Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall, from R-4 to S--l. First Reading. a) Acceptance of Affidavit of Publication, Affidavit of Posting, and Affidavit of Mailing. b) Consideration of Application. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) ACCEPTED Affidavits b) ADOPTED Temp. Ord. #993 on First Reading. -12- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly MOVED the ACCEPTANCE of the Affidavit of Publication, Posting and Mailing as .he has the information from the City Clerk. C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE Jon Henning read the Ordinance by title only. Mayor Fal.ck opened the Public Hearing. No one wished to be heard and he closed the Public Hearing. C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Ord. #993, Rezoning _Ord. #9 Petition #17-Z-82 on First Reading.C/M SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 46. KINGS POINT PROFESSIONAL PLAZA - Discussion and possible action on: a) Site Plan - Temp. Reso. #2264 c) Water and Sewer Developers Agreement SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) and c ) TABLED to a meeting not later than July 28, 1982. V/M Massaro said she had certain concerns on this item, one of which was the manner in which the CIAC payments are to be made to the City. The City should have a letter from the Marmon Group stating that they had received the monies. She added that if they did not have this letter, the City should be collecting the full amount. V/M Massaro stated that the City has no right to take a partial payment without having the full amount on hand, unless they have gotten a letter say- ing that Marmon has been paid. Futhermore, she said that she had strong objection to doing anything with this project until they resolve the fee question on the site beautification. V/M Massaro indicated that Mr. Holland had said he would like to pay this under protest and then resolve the issue. She said she did not feel this was the way Council should handle this and they were under Court Order and have certain requirements that have to be met. It was difficult enough to work with these requirements without getting involved any further. She said that if Mr. Holland feels that there is a question about it, they should resolve the question before the Council takes action. Certainly they should be able to resolve it in time for the next regular meeting. Mr. Holland said that he had with him a check in the amount of $1145.00. V/11 Massaro informed him that was not enough as the fee was $1,000.00 per unit, and part of that was due to the Marmon Group. Mr. Holland pointed out that they had already signed an agreement and it is not $1,000.00 per unit, but an amount less than that, adding that the City had already received monies from them. V/M Massaro said that all this was given to Council late and they have been in meetings since then, and to check all these things out has been impossible. They did check out the $130.00 fee that was found in the Stipulation that their particular tract was covered. She added that not all tracts were covered, but that particular tract was. She said that all the work involved checking each individual tract, each individual stipulation and getting it a day before the Council meeting was very difficult. She added that the $1,145.00 would be the City's portion, providing the other monies were paid. She said she did not know if they were paid until Marmon sends the form they usually send on all the projects stating they did receive monies or that monies were still due on this particular project. Mr. Holland questioned what that had to do with him as he was giving the City a check for the amount that was due them. V/M Massaro informed him that the City was responsible for the full amount. -13- 7/16/82 Mx. Holland stated that this was the first time this had come up and this was their third site plan. V/M Massaro said what had come up was that Marmon had indicated that they had not received monies on certain projects, and she was not saying that it was his, but the responsibility falls on the City's lap. Mr. Holland said that they had a contractual obligation to pay them, and they have made all the payments. V/M Massaro added that there was a contractual obligation on the City's part too. She added that the City was not allowed to release anything until they had a letter from Marmon stating that all payments had been made; it was the City's obligation to make sure that all payments had been made, otherwise they are respons- ible for the payments. She suggested that Mr. Holland could pay the City and they would pay Marmon. V/M Massaro said that had already come up and Marmon had said the City had released ERCs to people and they -were not paid. She added that in the City's agreement with them, when they close all this, the City is responsible because the City is not to give out anything until they have a letter from Marmon. Mr. Holland questioned if this would be something that would come up on all future site plans. V/M Massaro said that it would be. Mr. Holland reiterated that they had paid their fees. V/M Massaro said she had to have it in writing from Marmon. Mr. Holland said he would get the letter to Council. He said it was very important to him to get the site plan approved before Council went on vacation. V/M Massaro said she was willing to Move with the Plat, which she felt was more important to them because they could not do anything with the site plan until the Plat is approved downtown. C/M Disraelly pointed out that the Plat had been approved at the previous meeting. V/M Massaro said that the two weeks would not matter to them. Mr. Holland said two weeks would not matter, but because of the vacations, it might run into two weeks and a month and that would matter. V/M Massaro said that she intended to resolve these issues and do whatever needs to be done. V/M Massaro said the City Attorney had.suggested that the City collect the full amount. She said if this was going to delay Mr. Holland he could pay and the City in turn would pay Marmon. She added that she was not trying to throw road blocks. Mr. Holland said that there were problems with the Developers Agreemeht that he would like to straighten out. V/M Massaro informed him that Council had not gotten that until 2 minutes ago. She added that they still had not straightened out the Beautification Fees. She said that this was only one of a mass of projects and whatever was done now, they will have to live with. V/M Massaro said she was talking about total required beautification. She said she felt if they wanted to put in more than was required, she was not looking for extra fees, she was interested in the amount that was required. -14.- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly asked Mr. Henning to clarify for him, if they are required to have 100 trees and they put in 200 trees, they can present a cost in 2 phases, one that is required and one we do not care about. Jon Henning said the specific provisions that fees would be assessed, or could be assessed for only required beautifi- cation is specified in the Court Order. Jon Henning added that Council was in agreement as to those lands covered by the Court Order. He said he was not offering any interpre- tations of any other ordinances at this time. Mr. Rubin added that he would like to clear up one item on the water and sewer developers agreement. He understood from talking with the City Engineer that F & R Builders are revising the engineering drawings on this project, Kings Point, which will perhaps require the rewriting of the water and sewer developers agreement, so that the City is aware of what their ultimate needs are, on that site. Mr. Holland stated that the drawings were submitted first thing this morning. Mr. Rubin pointed out that this was something that could be answered clearly at the next meeting; unfortunately, they did not have the information on hand right now. V/M Massaro MOVED that this item be. TABLED to not later than the next regular meeting. C/M Disraelly SECONDED. Mayor Falck mentioned that when things were ready to go, they would agendize them and get them out of the way. C/M Disraelly said that was why he had asked to change the motion to say not later than so that it could come in on a special meeting. Mr. Holland stated that they had not heard what his thoughts were as far as landscape fees were concerned. The City Attorney said he thought they were in agreement on .the fees. Mr. Holland said he felt that the only fees for landscaping that they should pay were the grassing in the public right-of-way, pursuant to Chapter 24. On March 17th of this year, he had addressed a letter to the City Attorney requesting his interpretation of this and he forwarded it to the then City Attorney on March 23rd and subsequent to that time, he has received no answer. He said he then followed it up with another letter to Mr. Keating requesting his review and he has not heard anything as yet. V/M Massaro suggested that the way to handle this was to have a meeting as soon as possible, the early part of the week, and start discussion on this, with Mr. Henning and Mr. Holland and herself, and at that time, a memo can go out as to the interpre- tation as she sees it, and if Mr. Henning agrees or disagrees, he will express himself and Mr. Holland will have the opportunity to meet with any member of Council that he chooses so that there is no delay and so that Council can move forward with this. She said she did not think that they could resolve this at this meeting. Mr. Holland reiterated that his understanding on the landscaping fees, was that the only landscaping items that would be included, would be items that occur within the public right-of-way. He added that for any private on -site landscaping, the fees would be paid at the time of building permitting, to the building dept. -15- 7/16/82 /nrr Therefore, he said, they have included in their engineering cost estimate, the projected cost of the landscaping within the public right-of-way. He added that they had no question about that whatsoever, it has been included and any discuss- ions prior to the approval of this site plan have no place before the Council, since the fees will be paid at the building.permit time. V/M Massaro said there was a statement on one of the documents that says that they would be paying to the Building Department the on -site beautification fees under protest. She said this would have to be cleared up before she had anything to do with approving anything further. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 53. CHEF ONECIO PERERA RESTAURANT - Temp. Reso. #2370 - Discussion and possible action on Special Exception for transfer of license for alcoholic beverages. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: RESO. NO. R-82-Iff PASSED. APPROVED Temp. Reso. #2370 with conditions Jon Henning informed Council that he had amended a prior Resolution. He pointed out that the prior Resolution, at the time, was a non -transferable Special Exception for the consump- tion of alcoholic beverages, granted to the Chef Onecio Perera Restaurant. He added that Council had the power or jurisdiction to grant either a non -transferable special exception or trans- ferable under certain conditions, or transferable. He said if Council desires to amend that transferable or non -transferable provision of the prior resolution, he presented to them Temp. Reso. #2370, which amends Section 2 of Resolution No. 81-161, to make that transferable. He added that Section 2 would read, "conditions of approval, 1. hours no later than 2:00 A.M. Local Time and 2. License is transferable". V/M Massaro questioned if a regular fee had been paid as though they were asking for a Special Exception. Mr. Rubin informed her that if they received a fee, they would have to go through the Public Hearing process. V/M Massaro said that maybe that was something that was necessary. Jon Henning said that Council had asked for a method that was legally feasible if Council wished to go forward with this at this meeting. What he was suggesting to them is that consider- ing.. the fact that the public hearings were held several months ago, that 4 of the 5 members of Council unanimously approved this resolution, are present today, that if Council desired, they could amend their prior resolution being cognizant of the action that was taken and being aware that there was a hearing at that time, and they had approved it at that time, if they amend this prior resolution it will be conditionally transferable to this particular applicant. Jon Henning said he wished to make one correction on Temp. Reso. #2370 that Line 23, the word "not'should be stricken before the word "transferable", and on Line 25, the word "not" is erroneous- ly stricken out. In other words, the word "not" was stricken in the wrong place. Jon Henning pointed out that this will not be transferable after the action taken today. -16- 7/16/82 /nrr Mayor Falck said that the Public Hearing on this item related to whether or not they could have a license, it was not whether or not it was for a particular individual. Jon Henning said he was assuming that it had been advertised, the neighbors from adjoin- ing properties were available to voice their objections. He said he did not know whether or not there had been objections as he was not present, but regardless of whether there were any, and apparently there were none at the time, this was barely a year ago. He said at that time it was expected that the special exception would have lasted more than 12 months, but apparently business did not prosper. He added that this is a legal vehicle for Council consideration, additional conditions can be made. V/M Massaro said that if they were going to open on July 28th, they need the license and she knew it was a beautiful place and she knew they were going to run a good establishment. V/M Massaro said they could not afford to run the place unless it was a good place. She said that things had to be right for it to last longer than the last one, but these things do cost money and Council could not process these things without them being paid for. She asked whether Council had a right to charge a fee. Jeff Cohen said that they did have an occupational license fee that they will have to pay and also if there is a way that Council can structure a fee from them, without the process of having to go through the public hearing, he will have no problem consenting to that fee. V/M Massaro said she meant the normal regular fee that the City would get for something like this. She added that if it were a public hearing there would be additional fees, because the applicant has to pay for those. She said she was not speaking of that, because the City will not have to do that. V/M Massaro questioned Mr. Henning., asking if the City had a right to ask another fee. Mr. Henning answered that if the Council felt that this was a continuation of the prior hearing and Council wishes Mr. Cohen to contribute to the same fees that were paid in 1981, except for the portions of publication, he did not think there was a problem as he was apparently willing to pay that. C/M Disraelly pointed out that Council had had this problem with other restaurants in the past. C/M Disraelly questioned the Assistant City Clerk, asking her if this was advertised today, could it be advertised for the 28th. The Assistant City Clerk answered that it would have to go before the Planning Commission first. Mayor Falck added that if they went through regular steps with this, they would be talking about September or October. C/M Disraelly reiterated that this had happened previously. V/M Massaro pointed out that this was a liquor license, this was not a beer and wine license. Jon Henning questioned if Mr. Cohen had received a transfer from the state of the liquor license. Mr. Cohen informed him that he was in the process of that now. He had another liquor license for his other restaurant in Broward County, therefore, there would be no problem, it would take about four days. Jon Henning stated that it should be placed in the record that the gentlemen is Jeffrey M. Cohen and it should be stated that he would like a license to go to ALLDAD Enterprises, Inc. Mr. Cohen is the president and sole stock owner. V/M Massaro added that if she were to act on this, she would want in the conditions, hours no later than 2:00 A.M. local time, and the license is not further transferable. The third provision would be any applicable fees. -17- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2370, Section 2 to read, "conditions of approval, 1. hours no later than 2:00 A.M. local time, 2. license is transferable from Chef Onecio to ALLDAD Enterprises, Inc. upon payment of applicable fees and is not further transferable to other persons or locations without approval of City Council." C/M Krantz SECONDED. VOTE: ALL VOTED AYE 33. SOUTHGATE GARDENS, INC. (7300 SOUTHGATE BOULEVARD) -Discussion and possible action on: a) Revised Site Plan for 6-foot high wood shadowbox fence along the south property line - Temp. Reso. #2261 b) Acceptance of utility easement for drainage purposes - Temp. Reso. #2251 c) Acceptance of utility easement for water purposes - Temp. Reso. #2252 d) Acceptance of utility easement for sewer purposes - Temp. Reso. #2253 SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: a) through d) TABLED to no later than 7/28/82 meeting. Jon Henning read Temp._Reso. #2261 by title only. V/M Massaro stated that on this item, the City Engineer has various problems with the easements and not only with the description of the easements, but with the fact that there are plantings which preclude the City from maintaining certain lines properly and there are things that cannot be resolved here this morning, and she asked that this item and the applicant asks that this item be TABLED to the next regular meeting so that these things can be straightened out and she so MOVED. She added that the MOTION be changed to not later than the next regular meeting. She suggested that they get together with the City Engineer and get these things resolved as quickly as possible. C/M Krantz asked if this was the a) item only. V/M Massaro said it was a) through d). Steve McCann, with the law firm of Rubin, Barnett, McCloskey and Schuster and represents Southgate Gardens, Inc., said he would request that item a) be acted on as the problems were with b), c), and d). V/M Massaro respectfully asked the Mayor that all items be handled at the same time at the next regular meeting. Mayor Falck said it would seem to him that the whole thing should be taken at the same time. C/M Kravitz SECONDED. C/M Disraelly questioned why the a) item could not be taken at this time. Mr. McCann said they had requested a permit for that fence on April 20th and they have had no reports that there were any problems. He had spoken with Mr. Bob Woelke, at the suggest- ion of Richard Rubin, in respect with certain construction on the easements, but that is really a separate matter and totally separate from the fence. Mayor Falck said it behooves one time. Mr. McCann pointed easements. 061185M them to handle the whole thing at out that the fence was not on the ALL VOTED AYE MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 11:00 A.M. FOR 30 MINUTES FOR BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING. 7/16/82 /nrr MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 11:05 A.M. AND ALL MEMBERS V&RE PRESENT. 27. PARK AND RECREATION LAND DEDICATION - Temp. Ord. #9_90 - Discussion and possible action to amend Section 20-42 of the Code to provide for alternative methods of cash payment in lieu of land dedication. First Reading. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ADOPTED Tema Ord. #990. First Reading as amended. Jon Henning read the ordinance by title only. V/P4 Massaro MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Ord. #990 on First Reading. C/M Disraelly questioned the $75,000.00. The average figure they come up with per unit is roughly $500.00, and he wondered whether under those circumstances $50,000.00 would not be a better figure to use than $75,000.00. He said he thought if they did some computing the maximum number of units based on the zoing, it does come out to about $500.00 per unit, which would mean 100 units. He added that if they used the $75,000.00 figure, that would be 150 units before this could apply. V/M Massaro said that he only thought was that the figure should be something of significance because for recreation facilities and she did not think it was going to be hard for them to come up with. She would not mind dropping it some, but she would like to see them make more than a $25,000.00 payment necessary. She added that it would be 50% of that $75,000.00 figure. She explained that it was only if it was over $75,.000.00, otherwise they only pay 50% of it. Jon Henning added that $75,000.00 addresses the total fees due, and this ordinance would allow 50% of that payment. C/M Disraelly asked then if it would be a minimum project of 150 units. V/M Massaro said she did not know what that was, but it was a minimum amount of over $75,000.00 before they can avail themselves of this ordinance, of paying one half. She added that at that rate, they would be paying $38,000.00. C/M Disraelly added that it would apply to only a project of 150 units or more. He said that basically under 150 units this ordinance would not be applicable, especially in R-3U, R-3 and R-4A. They had gone through the computations based on the number of units that are available. V/M Massaro stated that up to $75,000.00, if they are going to have a project and it is going to be a viable project, they should be able to pay that. She said if it was over $75,000.00, she could understand that they may be running into problems and the City is giving them consideration, but then they only pay half of that amount. She added that most likely those that are running $100,000.00 or more, are the ones that would be looking for assistance. She said those were the only ones so far that had asked for assistance. C/M Disraelly said he had done the computations based on whoever might come in and that was why he was using the figure of 100 units rather than 150 units. V/M Massaro said the reason she did not want to figure on whoever might come in because there are too many people who are able to Pay the full amount and once you give them an out, they will not paY- --19- 7/16/82 /nrr Jon Henning said before a motion was made on this, he wished to point out that on the second page of this ordinance in the second condition, the Council had some discussion and it was now reflected in the condition as to what bank should hold the letter of credit. He added that as it was stated was "a Bank in Florida". They had discussed possibly "Broward County or other bank approved by the City Council". He said that if they wish this included, they could do so. Council expressed a desire to do so. Mr. Henning said he had a house- keeping amendment which he will submit to Council later, for the second reading with no subsequent changes, there were some numbering problems there, but he did not want to confuse the issue at this point. C/M Disraelly said if they go with the $50,000.00 figure or some figure in between, the City will still get the interest for the other half. V/M Massaro said that the City was not a bank and did not concern itself so much with the interest as with the cash, because the City needs money for the recreational programs. Mayor Falck asked if the Council could not approve it on first reading, and then get it resolved. C/M Disraelly said that all he wanted by the second reading was that Council give consider- ation to some figure less than $75,000.00, and he will submit a memo of a figure that he has come up with. C/M Krantz SECONDED the MOTION. "as amended". VOTE: V/M Massaro added to the Motion ALL VOTED AYE 29. TAMARAC PLAZA - (Southwest corner of Brookwood Boulevard and McNab Road) - Temp. Reso. #2268 - Discussion and possible action on rescission of parking waiver. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: TABLED to a meeting not later than 7/28/82 V/M Massaro raised a question as to whether the people have been notified that this was on the agenda for today. The Assistant City Clerk informed her that they were indeed notified. C/M Disraelly MOVED that the prior Resolution which guaranteed completion within 90 days of April 28th, be extended to not later than the meeting of July 28th for action and consideration, so that Council can clarify what has happened there. He added that there was a memorandum from the Chief Building Official dated July 13th, that things are still on order and that the require- ments of the prior resolution have not been satisfied and rather than get into the complications of that, this will give them two more weeks in which to comply with our Resolution, Temp. #2247, which said that the City was to have a cash bond of $5,000.00 and the hedge was to be put in and the handicapped parking spaces be provided and he did not think that any of that had been done. V/M Massaro stated that 90 days from April 28th would automatic- ally bring them to July 28th, so they were alright. C/M Disraelly noted that it had been tabled to this meeting from June 23rd. His concern was they were supposed to put up a bond and they had not. V/M Massaro SECONDED the MOTION. VOTE ALL VOTED AYE C/M Disraelly asked that Mr. Fatizzi be is brought up next. V/M Massaro asked formal letter sent to them by the City here whenever this item if they should not have a Attorney. -20- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro pointed out that Mr. Fatizzi was just an agent, not the owner, and she felt that they should send a letter to the owner, so that he knows that the City means business. C/M Disraelly added that actually what the Resolution said was not carried out by the department that was involved. V/M Massaro said again that she thought a letter should go to the owner from the City Attorney. Mr. Henning said that he would notice the owner of this property. 43. WOODMONT TRACT 60 - BOND RELEASE - Tem Reso. #2255 - Discussion and possible action on release of a warranty bond posted for public improvements. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: APPROVED Tem . Reso. RESOLUTION NO. R-821Zf!7_PASSED #2255 SYNOPSIS TABLED to be called for first ,Ion Henning read the resolution by title only. V/M Massaro MOVED the ADOPTION of Temp. Reso. #2255 releasing Public Improvement Bond for Woodmont Tract 60. C/M Disraelly SECONDED the MOTION. VOTE: C/M Kravitz left the meeting. ALL VOTED AYE 25. ZONING REGULATIONS - Tem . Ord. #982 - Discussion and possible action to amend Chapter 28 of the Code pertaining to height, plot size, density, floor area, length of structures and setbacks of residential building or structures in all zoning districts by providing a composite table of setback lines and miscellaneous zoning district requirements. First Reading. OF ACTION: a meeting to by the Mayor reading. Jon Henning read the ordinance by title only. C/M Disraelly said that he had sponsored and introduced this ordinance. Council had discussed it earlier and now he would like to turn it over to the City Planner for Council's edification. Richard Rubin wished to discuss the ordinance as of 5/19/82. Mr. Rubin said that prior to Mr. Henning coming aboard, the staff advertised this ordinance for hearing before the Planning Commission and they heard it and are still reviewing it and they have it now in final form, which they will be reviewing at the meeting Wednesday. He added that Mr. Henning had assisted them by reviewing the legalese, to make sure that it was proper and that is what he was showing Council today. Jon Henning said he could give them a copy of this ordinance now but if they felt it was confusing he would not. Mr. Rubin added that they did not have an attorney to review the legalese and that was what they had needed assistance in doing. V/M Massaro questioned if it had gone to the Planning Commission. Mr. Rubin said they had had a public hearing and they had assigned Mr. Schoenfeld to review with him and finalize it. They had done that and they would be reviewing the final draft next Wednesday. V/M Massaro questioned then why could it not come before them at the meeting of the 28th. Mr. Rubin said it would, but they would like the first reading today. The City Mananger added if they did not have the first reading today, it would have to have the second reading in September instead of July 28th. -21-- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro questioned if there was some real money in this. C/M Disraelly said there was as they had been working on this; unfortunately, there had been a delay and they were hoping that it would be presented to Council last month but there were other extenuating circumstances. He added that there were some people vitally concerned because of some setbacks that are being adjusted in this, that are of minor consequence, to bring it into conformity with all other districts, where that one district was eliminated in a setback requirements. He added that the changes had been brought before Council previously on a large proposed table of setbacks which were penciled or inked in, so that Council would know how every- thing was being made to conform to one set of standard setbacks for the entire city. He added that previously they had some zoning districts that had a street yard setback of 15 feet and an almost identical area or zoning district would have 20 feet. He continued that there was a variance of distances between buildings in some instances and a discrepancy between one zoning district with 2 floors, and they have tried to bring these all into conformity by having them in a table so reading the entire code book to put it together was not necessary. Members of Council were supplied with all these changes a few months ago, prior to Mr. Birken's leaving the City. C/M Disraelly said that there had been one delay after another and he was hoping he could explain the changes today to Council so they would have a complete understanding. The minor changes that Mr. Henning was considering would be presented at the second hearing, so that they would not have to wait until after the summer to complete it. V/M Massaro asked if the City had a legal right to act on this when Planning Commission had not. She added that if they did in fact have the right to act on it at first reading without the Planning Commission, she was not opposed to acting on it. C/M Disraelly said again that the Planning Commission did have their Public Hearing on June 2nd. V/M Massaro added that they had tabled it, they have not taken action. C/M Disraelly added that Mr. Rubin had informed Council that their action was to review it with a one man committee. Mayor Falck said that he understood what C/M Disraelly wanted and he also understood V/M Massaro's concern, but if Council expected other people to conform, and if they were not going to conform, it seemed to him they were not really abiding by their own regulations. Mayor Falck added that if this was an emergency type thing, Council has a procedure for handling emergencies and that would be to have two readings on the same day. He said the point was that if it had not been acted on by the Planning Commission, what was it doing in fron of Council in the first place. He said he did not think that it belonged there. Mayor Falck said that if it is still essential that Council take action on this, then they would handle it as an emergency item on July 28th. V/M Massaro suggested that they ask the Planning Commission to have a Special Meeting to take action and move forward. Jon Henning said it appeared that they were in need of a Resolution from the Planning Commission first. He continued that the most prudent path that Council could take would be to have a first reading today, if they wished to address it briefly and then if it is confirmed that they need action from the Planning Commission first, they could have the first reading again. He added that nothing would be lost by having a first reading today and then having a second first reading, and then a second reading. He said that he doubted that this could be resolved by having a first reading today, but there could be nothing lost but a few minutes. -22- 7/16/82 /nrr Jon Henning continued that it had been advertised for today so they could have the first reading today, but he was pretty con- fident that when they investigate the statute they will find that they will have to have final action by the Planning Comm- ission before they act further. He added that if time was of the essence, he saw nothing lost by having the first reading and briefly addressing it. C/M Disraelly added that this would have to be advertised for a Public Hearing for the July 28th meeting and if they did not pass it on first reading today, they could not get the ad in the paper on time. V/M Massaro questioned what kind of projects were being held up by this ordinance. Mr. Rubin said that people were coming in for additions or enclosures. V/M Massaro did not see the urgency in this as they were very small items. C/M Disraelly added that it served two purposes, number one it clarifies all the setbacks, some of which are in contradiction of the zoning. He added that number two, this thing has been hanging fire for over a year and Council has not gotten a judgment on it and it is unfortunate that the summer vacation is interfering with it again. The City Manager said that the City Clerk has pointed out that whatever Council's decision is with respect to this item, the same would be applicable to Item #27 Park and Recreation Land Dedication Ordinance, which is also going to be subject to Planning Commission review this coming Wednesday. She suggested to the City Attorney that he might look into the treatment of Liberty and Padulla, because she thought in that instance Council might have acted prior to a recommendation of Planning Commission. They had won that case in court. Mayor Falck asked if they wish to go to court on this. Mr. Alper said they should place their ad now for the July 28th meeting, and then the Planning Commission will have determined one way or another, then Council could act. V/M Massaro said she did not think there was anything that could stop this from going to the paper. The Assistant City Clerk informed them that it had been advertised for Public Hearing for the Planning Commission, but not for Council. She added that Council has a Public Hearing on second reading. The Assistant City Clerk said they would have to act on it today in order for her to place the ad for second reading for the meeting of July 28th. V/M Massaro questioned if only they could tell her to put the ad in, or if the Planner or City Attorney could not advise her to place the ad. C/M Disraelly explained that where V/M Massaro lived, she could put in a patio and where he lived he could not. They lived the same distance from a golf course or recreation hall. He added that this was one of the things he was trying to clarify, because in one zoning area it is restricted to 20 feet from the golf course and in another, they are restricted to 8 feet from the golf course. He added that it should be equitable for all and that was just one of the items the ordinance addressed. He added that one of the others, were that the street setbacks vary from district to district. C/M Disraelly pointed out that in the memorandum that was given to Council, he made note that in R-3U for example, currently the street yard is 15 feet, but it should be 20 feet, the same as RM-5 and R-1B. He added that they were trying to get away from the 15 foot street yard, as a 20 foot automobile would be off the drive. V/M Massaro said she agreed with C/M Disraelly but what they were talking about now were the legal ramifications. -23- 7/16/82 /nrr Jon Henning referred to the City Code, Section 28-25, and a provision for approval by the Planning Commission, Paragraph E, "Action of the Planning Commission", where there is a 40 day period in which the Planning Commission is to act and if that period expires without their action, Paragraph E addresses advertisement of a hearing before Council, states that the City Clerk shall advertise the same at Public Hearing before the Council. He added that the City Clerk does not have to wait if the 40 day period has expired. He added that what he was saying was that it is not required for the Council to direct the advertisement, since the 40 days has expired. Richard Rubin added that on July 12th, the 40 days had expired, so they do have authorization to advertise it as Council has asked. He said he was sure that Council still wanted to receive the comments and input of the Planning Commission. V/M Massaro said that if this was an emergency, Council could have two readings, as long as it was advertised for a Public Hearing. She added that the fact that a car could not fit in front of a home was basis enough for an emergency. Jon Henning said they could have a first reading at a special meeting and then the second reading at the regular meeting on July 28th. V/M Massaro suggested that the City Attorney take this up with the City Clerk to take care of this properly so that they could act on it. C/M Disraelly MOVED that this item be TABLED for first reading to a meeting to be called by the Mayor. SECONDED by C/M Krantz. VOTE: C/M Kravitz - Absent C/M Krantz - Aye C/M Disraelly - Aye V/M Massaro - Aye Mayor Falck - Aye 51. AGENDIZED BY CONSENT - BUSINESS USES - Temp. Ord. #967 - Consideration and general discussion concerning amendment of Section 28-171 of the Code pertaining to amusement centers in B-2 and B-3 zoning districts. First Reading. SYNOPSIS OF ACTI01: Discussion only. The City Manager pointed out to Council that this was also an amendment to Chapter 28 and they would need Planning Commission input. Mr. Rubin said that this item was on for discussion so that Council could direct them to begin the advertising process. Mr. Henning explained that what .was before them was the text of the ordinance, of what will be changed and all the other charts and pages have nothing to do with this. He added that if they looked at the code in Chapter 28, these amendments have come as paragraphs inside a chart. He pointed out in his code book, that these amendments as it was originally proposed would be an interruption of the chart and would go on for a couple of pages. He said that therefore in final form he proposed to make an editorial change to list the exact text that they have and place it in a more convenient place under special exception where it can be read without interrupting the chart. C/M Disraelly added that ultimately it would be a separate heading, a separate ordinance and will be placed under special exception. -24- 7/16/82 /nrr Mr. Henning.added that the chart would not lose its continuity as it would be a separate section in the same ordinance. He said it would be on a different page. V/M Massaro asked C/M Disraelly about the amusement centers; she knew he had discussed with Horn and Hardart concerning what they were going to have in their center and did he by any chance discuss what is in here? C/M Disraelly said this hasbeen under discussion for a number of months. He continued that at one point in time, he had a conference with Richard Rubin and David McKenzie who is the Attorney for the amusement center industry of Broward County or perhaps the whole state, and a lobbyist for them. C/M Disraelly said that Mr. McKenzie was very concerned with the ordinance that had been written in Plantation which was an awfully tough ordinance. He added that Mr. McKenzie had advised Mr. Birken that he would not take this one to court where he had taken the ordinance in Plantation to court, as he felt the industry could live with what was being proposed. C/M Disraelly continued that based on the concept that has been given to Council by Horn and Hardart and by Chucky Cheese. Based on the size of the amusement area that they were consider- ing they talked about restricting it to 40 games and that was based on the square .footage that was originally involved, about 44 feet per game. That was the figure that Cooper City had computed and that was roughly what Chucky Cheese was using. He and Alan Ruf visited two of these places in Plantation and they came up with their numbers and substituted them here based on the figures. C/M Disraelly added that he thought the city ordinance said forty four square feet per machine which was roughly the figure they had come up with and this figured out to some 40 odd games that were involved. He said he spoke with Horn and Hardart and they said they would like to have more games than that. He said that when they had come before Council, they had indicated that they wanted 50 games, plus skee ball. C/M Disraelly continued that when he spoke with Jon Henning in reviewing this, perhaps they could change the square footage to a minor degree, maybe to 40 feet, but the City still has to make sure that they don't jamb them in one on top of the other. V/M Massaro said she intended to go down to Kendall to see how the Horn and Hardart operation worked and how the square footage worked out. C/M Disraelly suggested that she stop at the Old Sweden House on 441, just south of Broward and that was where Chucky Cheese was located. V/M Massaro said she knew there was one in Davie too, but she thought she would like to see Horn and Hardart. C/M Disraelly added that at one time they spoke of putting 100 games in and he had told them if they did that, they would have no room for anything else. He added that now they were consider- ing 50 games and the skee ball games, and he thought that they could live with what numbers the City comes up with that are viable. -25- 7/16/82 /nrr C/M Disraelly stated that in the Plantation Ordinance, they had gotten into the morality of whether games should be permitted and he did not think that Tamarac should become moralists. V/M Massaro agreed with that. C/M Disraelly said they did write into the ordinance, that an amusement center shall have no more than 40 games, however, amusement centers having and serving food may substitute an additional games in place of a table. He added that this was for games where two people play opposite each other, and sit at a table and do not stand up at a game. C/M Disraelly said they were trying to make provisions and this would be 10 more tables, so they are now up to 50 games, based on this ordinance as it is currently written. He added that they do speak of coin operated devices but they did not specifically address skee ball or rides. He said he thought they have those little merry-go-rounds in there. He said perhaps they could add into the ordinance that rides could be permitted in addition, based on the definition which is used which is mechanical or coin operated amusement games or rides. He said maybe the word rides could be striken, but it was put in originally because it is part of the electronics. He said he did not know whether rides should be eliminated or not. C/M Disraelly said the word "free standing" was not included and he thought it should be. He added that he had meant free stand- ing operation because they address an amusement center in a shop- ping center, not less than 6 acres and in an enclosed shopping mall, not less than 50,000 square feet and they say not more than one amusement center in each shopping center of the city. Jon Henning added free standing building. C/M Krantz asked if this ordinance will permit the installation of a business devoted exclusively to these video games? C/M Disraelly said that it would. C/M Krantz said therefore it did not have to be part of a restaurant or bowling alley. Jon Henning said that the City was only regulating those places that have four machines or more, anyone can have up to three machines, virtually any place, any zoning. He added that there were a few ways of approaching video games, and they were not necessarily addressing whether or not the City was going to protect people from themselves, whether or not these machines are harmful to themselves, but the City is trying to address possibly the nuisance factor of protecting the citizens, the public from each other. He said there was a noise factor involved, there is crowd control involved and these are the zoning issues that the City is trying to address in this ordinance. Jon Henning continued that they have provided for those places that have four or more machines, all of the machines will be in one room, they do not want them scattered around a restaurant or around a shopping center or whatever. He pointed out there was the amusement center per se that would just have the video games and those should be contained in just one area and there are numerous requirements for crowd control and supervision in this ordinance. In addition to that, those businesses which wish to have two types of operations, restaurant and video games, a store and video games, those that have a restaurant facility can have the table top games, up to ten additional games, and they can be used as tables when games are not being played or they may be used as games when the tables are not used, or simultaneously. Mr. Henning said they had tried to keep everything in one room, and they have addressed hours, and distance from schools and from residences and this is the thrust of this ordinance. -26- 7/16/82 /nrr V/M Massaro made a comment on the title. She pointed out that it excludes, by removing such indoor and exterior amusement centers as a permitted use in B-1 Districts, and Horn and Hard - art is in a B-1 district and certainly that is an appropriate place for it. Jon Henning said if you look at the chart it has excluded it from B-1. V/M Massaro suggested that it be put back in there by Special Exception. Jon Henning said that the code reads now "amusement centers indoors special exception, B--1, B-2, B-3, amusement center exterior, special exception just B-2 and B-3". V/M Massaro said they had to address that too, because she did not know whether you would call it an amusement center if they just have some things outside, even McDonalds has amusement things out there for the children. C/M Disraelly said these were not coin operated and the definition of a game is coin operated. Jon Henning said it would not cover slides and swings and things like that, it would cover coin operated. Mayor Falck questioned what kind of time frame they had in mind. C/M Disraelly said they just had to have it ready for Horn and Hardart. Jon Henning said it would go to the Planning Commission first. He added that it was on for discussion and if Council has any observations, Council should make them and address them to the Planning Commission and would hope the Planning Commission would start taking action very soon and this would be ready when Council returns from vacation. V/M Massaro said that Mr. Henning had heard the comments and he might make those changes and pass it down to the Planning Commission. She said that Horn and Hardart were very eager to get moving and there will be a great loss of time anyway because of the various waivers and Special exceptions, which take advertising. She said that Horn and Hardart knew that this was going to run them into September or October, but certainly she thought it should get going as quickly as possible. Mr. Carl Alper, member of the Planning Commission, said that he had been making some corrections in the ordinance as they went along. He said he thought it might expedite things if he presented it to Council. On the question of nuisance, he would suggest ther be added on page 2 line 27 the following language, "that a license when issued, shall be effective for one year and may be reissued only in accordance with the regulations of the City in effect at the time of renewal." He added that these games engender a good deal of problems, the police chief of this City is aware of these problems and is not very happy with the electronic games, but of course, he will abide by the will of this Council. He added that they ought to be renewed after one year only on conditions which Council proposes. V/M Massaro said that nobody is going to invest a million dollars under those conditions. Mr. Alper said that was a way of protect- ing the community. C/M Disraelly said they would not come into the City if they told them that they would license them every year. Mr. Alper continued that on Page 4, line 25, it says, "from the City Council", he thought they should insert, "from the Planning Commission and from the City Council". They had indicated that they wanted the Planning Commission to concern itself with Special Exceptions. C/M Disraelly asked Mr. Henning to strike B--2 and B-3 because it is now going to be just "B". Mr. Rubin suggested that they rezone from B-1 to B-2 for Horn and Hardart. V/M Massaro said they would not spot zone there. She added they would not give everyone on that strip B-2 and if they did not, it was spot zoning. -27- 7/16/82 /nrr Mr. Alper said that he had spoken with the principal of Taravella High School, who is very much concerned about Electronic Games. He added that Horn and Hardart had said they would not permit persons under the age of 18 to come into the restaurant unless accompanied by an adult, he would put on Page 5, line 23, that after the words 2:00 A.M., "and no person under the age of 18 shall be permitted to operate these games during regular school hours". The Principal had indicated that the children were cutting classes to play these electronic games. Mayor Falck said that Tamarac cannot supervise these child- ren. C/M Disraelly said they could go to Tamarac Lanes right now and any four year old cannot be stopped from playing the games. Mayor Falck said they should not debate these things, but just let Mr. Alper cover the things he would like changed. Mr. Alper suggested that permit may be suspended at any time by the police chief if he has reason to believe that the permit was secured by fraud or misrepresentation or that the permittee is operating in violation of this ordinance. Mayor Falck said he already had the right to do that. C/M Disraelly said the ordinance states that the applicant has to conform to the requirements of the Chief Of Police. Mayor Falck said that all of them had thoughts and ideas and he thought C/M Disraelly and V/M Massaro are exactly right, they are not trying to moralize on this type of thing and he is not concerned as the Chief of Police is about the moral effect that this is going to have on some- body's brain. He recalled that when he was younger, they said those kind of things about Bowling Alleys and look what bowling alleys do now. 47. DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY - Discussion and possible action. SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: V/M Massaro said Section 7 is not yet completed and engineering will not start another section until it is complete. V/M Massaro said our engineering department is overloaded and they have not been able to get Section 7 completed, and she told them not to start another one until Section 7 is done. V/M Massaro added that engineering had said they would not. She said that they are working on Section 7 and the area that C/M Disraelly brought up before. 48. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS C/M KRANTZ -- No Report C/M DISRAELLY -- said concerning the Florida Power & Light case, the City of Coral Springs is becoming an intervener so that they will be presenting their arguments and their Council will be hiring attorneys to speak to FP &L on that particular case, the rate increase. He added that based on the fact that they have a large street lighting bill, Coral Springs is taking this as the basis for being an intervener. He continued that the only that if they looked at the the trees are down to the He said that the buildings they find out what action cleaned up. He added that people about animals. other thing he wished to mention was 6000 complex again, it is getting bad, ground and it is getting more ratty. look deplorable, and he would suggest can be taken to a least get that place they were getting complaints from WX15 7/16/82 /nrr 49. CITY MANAGER -- No Report 50. CITY ATTORNEY Jon Henning reported that there was a tentative agreement with relation to the KAVENEY CASE to settle the case for $40,000.00 and the City would bear 1/3 of the cost. He added that it would probably be a few weeks before it is taken care of, but a settlement has been reached. 48. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS _Mayor Falck said he would like to suggest that City Manager and City Attorney and himself get together some time before the next meeting as he has not been happy with this session. He said maybe he was getting crotchety. V/M Massaro said she felt the same way. He added that next Wednesday would be their last meeting before recess and when they finished Wednesday, that would be it, there would be no quorum. Therefore, whatever was on that agenda, had to be settled and completed on Wednesday. MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 12:10 P.M. MAYOR ATTEST: AS ISTANT ITY CLERK This public document was promulgated at a cost of � 70?-O Z., or . SJr' 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. MIRZL APPROVED Y Cffy COUNCIL ON g~� 7/16/82 /nrr