Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-02-20 - City Commission Special Meeting Minutes (2)I[] MAIL REPLY TO: P.O. BOX 25010 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320 5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321 TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900 February 19, 1985 NOTICE OF RESCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING/SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA The City Council of the City of Tamarac, Florida, will hold a Public Hearing at a Special Meeting on Wednesday, February 20, 1985 at 9:00 A.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 5811 NW 88 Avenue, Tamarac, Florida. This meeting was rescheduled from Tuesday, February 19, 1985, due to lack of quorum of City Council members. The purpose of this Public Hearing is to discuss and receive comment on the Future Wastewater Facilities Planning, includ- ing the Effluent and Sludge Disposal System Alternatives. Discussion will involve the impact on individual user charges. A discussion will also be held regarding the Broward County 201 Facilities Plan Update. The public is encouraged to attend. Carol E. Barbuto Assistant City Clerk Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BAS►S OF HANDICAPPED STATUS CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA Tape 1 ROLL_ CALL: PUBLIC HEARING/SPFC.T.AL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WASTEWATER FACILITIES (Rescheduled from 2/19/85) PRESENT: February 20, 1985 ABSENT_ AND EZCDSED: ALSO PRraT : SYNOPSTS OF ACTION: Public Hearing was held. APPROVED Temo.__Reso. #3518 with an amendment to the Broward County 201 Facilities Plan Update for Wastewater and Sludge Disposal Systems. Vice Mayor Sydney M. Stein Councilman Jack Stelzer Councilman Raymond J. Munitz Councilman Allan C. Bernstein Mayor Philip B. Kravitz Elly F. Johnson, City Manager Jon. M. Henning, City Attorney William Greenwood, Utilities Director/ City Engineer Carol E. Barbuto, Assistant City Clerk Patricia Marcurio, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. R-85-59 PASSED. The following is a Verbatim Transcript as requested by William Greenwood, Utilities Director/City Engineer. V/M Stein: This is a Rescheduled Public Hearing/Special Meeting of the City Council of Tamarac, Florida, February 20th at 9:00 A.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 5811 NW 88 Ave., Tamarac, Flor- ida. The Clerk please call the Roll for this Special Meeting. Carol E. Barbuto: C/M Bernstein Here C/M Muni.tz (Out of Room) C/M Stelzer Here V/M Stein Here Mayor Kravitz Absent V/M Stein: The purpose of this Public Hearing is to discuss and receive comment on the Future Wastewater Facilities Planning, including the Effluent and Sludge Disposal System Alternatives. Discussion will involve the impact on individual user charges. A discussion also will be held regarding the Broward County 201 Fac- ility Plan Update. Are we going to have a presentation? Mr. Henning: Yes, T am sure we will have a presentation. I would like to just comment to everybody present that we will be making verbatim minutes today to go along with our Grant application. . 01 V/M Stein: The City Attorney has asked me why we do not want to stop anybody who has something to say to say it, please remember these are verbatim minutes which we have to take and are costly and we are going to have to submit them as part of our Grant. So, if you have to say something, say it precisely and to the point. I would appre- ciate that, otherwise, this thing will just ramble on and on. Than you. All right. Mr. Greenwood, you are on. Bill Greenwood: Bill Greenwood, Utilities Director. This morning, one of the requirements of two pending Grants is a Public Hearing. The two projects that will be discussed this morning by the City's Consultant, CH2M Hill, is the proposed deep injection well alterna- tive. Secondly, the Sludge Dewatering and Composting project. The deep injection well. is still on the planning portion of the Grant's funding list, the sludge dewateri.ng and composting project has been 1 2/20/85 /pm upgraded to the fundable list. This morning we have representatives from CH2M Hill to give a presentation to Council on these two pro- jects and Dr. Gerry Faess will be starting off the presentation. Thank you. Dr. Gerry Foess: We are here to discuss the Broward County Facili- ties Plan. It is a big, thick document that really outlines a Master Plan for wastewater disposal throughout the County area. What we are talking specifically about is an amendment to that plan that pertains to the City of Tamarac. It is a thinner documenrt and it pertains specifically to the wastewater sludge disposal method and to the wastewater effluent disposal method. Those two particu- lar aspects of wastewater treatment, both of which serve our criti- cal needs in the City of Tamarac. Is f would like to run through about a 10 or 15,minute presentation, after which we would then be open for questions from the Council or from the public or any comments. T,et me begin with an overview of the facilities that are proposed in the Facility Plan Amendment. They consist of a new 24-inch pipeline that will convey treated wastewater from the existing treatment plant, near University Dr., approximately 2-1/2 miles out to the Section 7 site near where the existing sod farm operation is for sludge disposal. Also being constructed out at Section 7 will be the deep injection well that the treated wastewater will be pumped into. There will be approximately a 10--acre holding pond for temporary emergency efflu- ent disposal for those rare times when the deep well needs to be taken out of service. And, then, the other part of the project is construction of a new compost facility at Land Section 7. Let's look first at effluent disposal. There were 3 alternatives that were considered in the facility plant amendment. The first is spray irrigation. This is the method that is currently used by the City and it involves discharging treated wastewater into golf course lakes from which it is now pumped out and irrigated on golf courses. The problem with that system is the regulation in Broward County that requires the golf course lake or the holding pond to be lined and that lining requirement makes that a very expensive alternative. The City applied for a variance to that lining requirement which was denied by Broward County and that necessitated looking at additional alternatives. A report was then prepared by Montgomery Engineers and they evaluated these 3 alternatives and presented life -cycle costs. Second and third alternatives were deep well injection and connection to the County treatment plant. The life -cycle cost analysis showed that the deep well injection alternative was the least cost alternative and that is the recommended plan for effluent disposal.. ,lust briefly, this is a diagram showing the construction of a deep injection well. Tt is a well that goes down approximately 3,000 feet into a lower salt water aquifer called the "boulder zone". The treated wastewater is pumped into that aquifer, which, in essence, is an extension of the ocean itself. (C/M Munitz entered the meeting at this point, 9:10 A.M.) The well is protected by half inch steel casing and several inches of concrete to protect any leakage that might come out and contaminate the drinking water. Tn addition to that protection, there are a. couple of monitoring wells that are installed as part of the deep injection well to continuously monitor the chemistry of the aquifers above to be able to detect any leakage that might occur over time. When a deep well system is installed, it is necessary to consider temporary emergency disposal. measures that can be relied upon in the rare instance that the deep well needs to be taken out of service. Typically, that would only occur for one day in every three to five years for routine inspection, but, nevertheless, this alternative disposal measure needs to be implemented along with the deep well. Three alternatives were considered for emergency disposal. A hold- 2 2/20/85 /pm ing pond concept where the wastewater would be temporarily pumped into a lined holding pond. Second method would be a continuation. of the existing method of surface discharge but with some temporary added treatment to upgrade the level of treatment. And, that would consist of phosphorus removal and also some aeration of the receiv- ing lake. The third method considered was interconnection with the Sunrise system. In evaluating these alternatives, the holding pond concept was the only one that could be implemented without a variance from Broward County so that was selected as the implementable alternative. However, the temporary upgraded treatment and discharge of surface waters was somewhat less expensive and so, the City is currently pursuing a variance that would allow that method of emergency dis- posal to be used. A ruling on that variance is expected at the end of this month and, should that be favorable, it would be our re- commendation to abandon the holding pond concept and to switch to the temporary upgraded treatment. That would eliminate the need for the large holding ponds at Land Section 7. (See Attachment 1). Let us move over to sludge disposal alternatives. There are three sludge disposal alternatives presented in the facility plan amendment and a fourth alternative is currently undergoing some further evaluation. The first alternative that was investigated is the current method of sludge disposal, which is spreading of liquid sludge on the land in a sod farm operation. The problem with this method is that it requires a lot of land. Currently about 35 acres is avail -able for sludge spreading. We estimate that upwards of 1.80 acres is required and, with the cost of land being what it is in this area, the sod farm method of disposal is not cost effective. The second method is to dewater the sludge into a cake -like consistency and then compost it. The third method is dewatering the sludge and trucking to the County regional treatment plant. The problem with that alternative is that the County itself is having sludge disposal problems. They have a landfill which has been closed down by the City of Pompano Beach and the County is now looking for temporary sludge disposal methods and they are also planning to do a composting study evaluation.. So, amongst those three alternatives, based on cost and other con- siderations, dewatering and composting was the recommended alterna- tive. Recently there has been some interest in trucking sludge to orange groves in Palm Beach County. The problem with that alterna- tive is that the haul. distance is upwards of 40 to 50 miles or more. However, that option, has some possibilities and, as T mentioned, is undergoing further evaluation.. This is a small chart which you may not be able to see but it depicts schematically the component, of the dewatering and composting system. The liquid sludge comes in at one end and undergoes dewatering in a filter press that squeezes out the water and transforms the sludge into a. cake like consistency. Tt is then mixed with a bulking agent, wood chips or something of that sort, and then undergoes composting, a screening operation to screen out the bulking agent, curing of the compost resulting in a finished compost material which can be used by the City for landscaping and other purposes. The location of that composting facility, as Z mentioned, is proposed at Land Section 7, except for the dewatering step which would be located at the existing treatment plant. This chart summarizes the costs of the effluent disposal and the sludge dewatering and composting systems. The effluent disposal system is 5.2 million, the dewatering and composting system is estimated at about 2-1/2 million for a total of 7.76 million dollars. The annual debt service for that amount, based on 10% interest over 20 years, is 1.1.9 million dollars per year. The increased 0 and M, Operation and Maintenance, costs of those two systems is estimated at about $281,000 per year, resulting in total annual costs, and these are hypothetical costs based on these assumptions, of 1. ... it looks Like an addition error there. V/M Stein: Yes, somebody made a mistake. Dr. Foess: 1.473 million dollars per year. Breaking that down into more understandable costs, this would result in a monthly cost per 3 2/20/85 /pm Li person based on a projected 1994 population, of $1.74. The cost per 1,000 gallons treated of $.63. C/M Munitz: The correction of the addition, would not that increase the "per person" figure? Dr. Foess: I believe the correct figures are in the facility plan amendment, this was done subsequently and I think this is just a typographical. error. That would not affect these numbers below. C/M Munitz: Thank you. Dr. Foess: That is a brief presentation. I will once again summar- ize the proposed facilities. They would consist of the sludge dewateri.ng system at the treatment plant, the pipeline to convey Is treated wastewater to Land Section 7, the deep well and composting facility constructed at Land Section 7. There is also some consideration being given to locating the deep well at the treatment plant, but that again is prohibited by a Broward County regulation and a variance would be required to do that. With that I will stop and ask if there are any questions or comments. C/M Bernstein: Ah. V/M Stein: Wait a minute. C/M Bernstein: I'm sorry. V/M Stein: This is a. Public, Hearing and I guess I will let the public speak first, Allan. C/M Bernstein: That's all right. V/M Stein: Yes, Melanie? Melanie Reynolds: I have two questions. One is why is the County against... V/M Stein: Melanie, will you please identify yourself, we told you, this is for the record. Melanie Reynolds: Melanie Reynolds. Why is the County against our going with Sunrise under the emergency disposal? Dr. Foess: I do not know that the County is against it. It re- quires approval of the County. Melanie Reynolds: But you said they would not give the approval on that. V/M Stein: I did not say that. C/M Munitz: He said it would require a variance. Melanie Reynolds: Well, he ... it was inferred. C/M Stelzer: He does not infer anything. Melanie Reynolds: I inferred it. Because you said why the other two points ... you gave the reasons for them but you left out the Sunrise; therefore, I anticipated that you meant the County was against it. It Dr. Foess: No. To my knowledge the County...I do not know if they are for it or against it. All I know is that it does require their approval.. Melanie Reynolds: In the dewatering, you say that it is done at the existing plant. Where does that water go? Is it treated further or what? Dr. Foess: The water is squeezed out of the sludge, that water then would be recycled back through the treatment process. Melanie Reynolds: O.K. Thank you. 4 2/20/85 /pm \� V/m Stein: John Lachmann. John Lachmann: John Lachmann, resident. The holding ponds that you propose for the deep well injection system, is that going to take care of just one day's capacity of the plant or two days capacity of the plant or what? Dr. Foess: They are sized to handle three days of flow from the treatment plant. John Lachmann: So, roughly, how many gal -Ions are we talking about? Dr. Foess: I guess it would be roughly... John Lachmann: I'm talking projecting to 1990. Dr. Foess: Yes, that would be roughly 18 million gallons of capa- city. John Lachmann: Total, for three days? Dr. Foess: Yes. John Lachmann: And the lining of the pond... is it going to be a plastic lining or a concrete lining of the pond? Dr. Foess: Plastic. John Lachmann: And what is the nature of the plastic? Dr. Foess: We are ... that lining is currently being designed right at this moment and I do not know that we have actually selected the final lining as yet. John Lachmann: Would it be a fiberglass, polyester type of system? Dr. Foess: I do not believe so. It would be a poly -vinyl chloride type of lining, P.V.C. John Lachmann: In other words, it would be a semi -rigid P.V.C.? Dr. .Foess: It would not be rigid, no. It would be flexible. John Lachmann: What thickness of the film? Dr. Foess: As I ment.ioned...I am not familiar with that. V/M Stein: John, why are we doing this? John Lachmann: Because it is very important. V/M Stein: No, it is not important. I'm sorry. What has that got to do with this? Well ... first of all...it has to be approved by the County. We can not put anything in that is not approved. John Lachmann: Also then, I understand... all right then, disregard the question. Going back to holding ponds. Tt is my understanding that in the case of a drought period, the Water Management District insists on spray irrigation in lieu of the present deep well injec- tion. In other words, if this is going to be the scenario and the background for this thing, why are we considering deep well rather than spray pond ... spray irrigation. I mean... eventually, as I understand the picture, the Broward County, in the case of a drought period, will require holding ponds to be able to go t.:o spray irriga- tion and, in that case, instead of having ponds capable of having 3 it days effluent from the treatment plant, you are going to require more than 3 days effluent treatment plant which will require more holding ponds. Dr. Foess: T am not sure exactly what your question is. I can say that the South Florida Management District does promote water conservation and likes to see those types of systems wherever. pos- sible. They, in. fact, need to approve the deep well concept. We have already appeared before the technical advisory committee which 5 2/20/85 /pm consists of representatives of the Florida Department of Environ- mental Regulation as well as the South Florida Water Management District. I believe their approval. is forthcoming. They are satis- fied, I believe, that an evaluation of alternatives has been conducted and that the deep injection well system is the least costly. John Lachmann: It might be the least costly but you are depleting a valuable water resource by going to deep well injection rather than spray irrigation. V/M Stein: I would like to interject. I thought I had asked Bill Greenwood...I think our residents ought to hear this. Could you please give me the cost of spray irrigation as opposed to the deep f well? I think if we put that on the record maybe we will straighten out some questions here. C/M Munitz: That would include the lining of all the existing ponds? V/M Stein: Yes. That would include all of the lining of the exist- ing ponds. Mr. Henning: While we are looking for that figure, I think what we are having here is an example of the conflict that you have between various agencies. We have certainly the water conservation interest of one agency and yet the Grant is predicated on us finding the most cost-effective method of treating or disposing of the wastewater. What the City has been struggling with right along is what cost would be grant eligible. You have heard us talk about that at previous meetings. John Lachmann: And you are talking about what percentage of the grant of the total gross figure? Mr. Henning: If any. If any. Because it may not be grant eligible at all. John Lachmann: Yeah, O.K. Thank you. Mr. Henning: So, before you leave... V/M Stein: The numbers are important, Mr. Lachmann, I would like to hear this so we can get straight once and for all. Dr. Foess: The alternatives were compared on a total present -worth basis. The spray irrigation numbers range... there were three alter- natives selected and they range from 22 million to approximately 32 million dollars total present -worth basis. The deep injection well alternatives range from 19.6 million to 19.3 million. City Manager Johnson: The estimated construction costs at the Present time though... you have that somewhere. Dr. Foess: The construction costs for the spray irrigation system, just considering those alone, ranged from 7.5 million to 15 million. The construction costs for the deep well alternatives range from 4 million to 5.2 million. V/M Stein: The reason I asked them to do this, John, we have heard a lot of talk about this thing. I think everybody in this City would like to see spray irrigation but the fact remains that, number one, it is not coat effective to make us even eligible for a grant. If we do that we knock ourselves out immediately. Secondly, it is twice the cost of the deep well as you just heard. From 7.8 or 8 something to 4 million and an overall cost of 20 as opposed to almost 30 million. John Lachmann: Yeah, I recognize all that, Vice Mayor Stein, but looking ahead... and as I said before ... water is one of our most valuable resources. And if you are going to deplete this valuable water resource in the future what are you going to do for water 1.5, 20, 30 years ahead? I am talking about the future. I will not be here but other people will be here and will require potable drinking water. This is the system that I feel...the spray irrigation, 6 2/20/85 j /pm regardless of the cost, you are shortchanging yourselves by not looking at the retention of the valuable water resources that we have in the State of Florida. Eventually, you might not have any water in the State of Florida. Thank you. V/M Stein: Anybody else from the public? Anybody else from the public? Jaast chance... anybody else? C.K., Council. Allan? C/M Bernstein: I had one or two questions here. That wastewater treatment plant there, will that be secondary or tertiary treatment? Dr. Foess: Secondary treatment. C/M Bernstein: Secondary treatment. Now, will there continue to be an odor problem from that treatment plant. City Manager Johnson.: Tt is not an odor problem, Mr. Councilman. C/M Bernstein: Will, there be an odor problem, let me put it that way. Dr. Foess: We did not address that question as part of our work. T understand that there is odor control system there but...and in the future there can be an odor study. C/M Bernstein: Going back to the area over at the left where you have the composting system. Will there be an odor problem in that area? Dr. Foess: Composting systems can generate odors. The system that we are proposing will have an odor control system as part of the design. C/M Bernstein: How about from the holding pond? Dr. Foess: The holding pond should not produce odors because the wastewater has already been treated... it should contain dissolved oxygen ... there should not be an odor problem from the holding pond. C/M Bernstein: I also would Like to add that I am in full sympathy with the questions and the intent behind them raised by John Lachmann. We, all of us, would have been happier if we could have gone to spray irrigation. Unfortunately, some of the governing agencies do not see eye to eye and the cost to the consumer would have been completely unreasonable had we held out for spray irriga- tion. We had no choice except to go the route we did. That is all I have to say. V/M Stein: Ray ... nothi.ng? Jack? C/M Stelzer: Yes, I have a question. T thought we were contemplat- ing moving the entire wastewater treatment plant over to Land Sec- tion 7. V/M Stein: Jack, that has nothing to do with them. C/M Stelzer: Well, T am asking if this wastewater treatment is moved over, the one over near University would not be used then, would it? V/M Stein: No. You mean if we moved the whole system? C/M Stelzer: Yes. V/M Stein: No, of course not. City Manager Johnson: Everything is going to be...Mr. Chairman, might T comment? if you move the plant tomorrow, everything we are talking about here today is still going to have to be done to comply. Whatever we are putting in will work with the new idea. I will have a report on the 27th on relocating the plant for you. This would still have to be done if you moved the plant. V/M Stein: That's all, Jack? 7 2/20/85 /pm C/M Stelzer: That's all. I have. V/M Stein: I have one interesting question that has been occurring to me. One of the alternatives of being allowed to hold the efflu- ent is by retreatment, in other words, further treatment as a secondary. Have you investigated the cost if we did that as a primary situation? In other words, if Broward County allows us to have unlined ponds if the water is further treated, and they do... what extra cost would there be? we have the ponds, we have the ability to do it, what extra cost would there be if we had spray irrigation but have a plant which could further treat this. $I Dr. Foess: My understanding is that they would allow this temporary upgraded treatment only on a. temporary basis. V/M Stein: Oh, O.K. Pr. Foess: If it were a permanent situation we would have to go to something more in the way of treatment and that would be more expen- sive. V/M Stein: O.K. Are there any further questions from staff or anybody here? is there any action that we have to take now? Mr. Henning: We have a Resolution on the subject. Let me ask our Engineer if what the Council is adopting today is, in fact, this January 18, 1985 draft of the 201 amendment. Is this the document that we are talking about? Dr. Foess: Yes. Mr. Henning: O.K. Council, there is a Resolution that has been passed out to you earlier today, or earlier in this meeting and the title of this Temp. -Re -so, _#3518 is, "A Resolution adopting the amendment to the Broward County 201 Facilities Plan Update for Wastewater and Sludge Disposal Systems for the City of Tamarac; and providing an effective date." In order to more specifically identify the plan that we are considering today and that is the subject of your approval, I would like to revise Section 1. It sounds a little longer and, Carol, I will have the language for you; however, I think when you hear it it is merely a better identification of the document involved. Section 1 would read, "That the amendment to the Broward County 201 Facilities Plan Update for Wastewater and Sludge Disposal.. Systems for Tamarac Utilities West Wastewater Treatment Plant, prepared by CH2M Hill, Engineers, dated January 18, 1985, has been the subject of a Public Hearing and the recommendations therein are hereby adopted by the Tamarac City Council." Then Section 2 will read, "That this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage." And, with those amendments, I would recommend the approval of Te_mp._ Reso. #_3518. V/M Stein: Is there a MOTION to ADOPT? C/M Bernstein: I so MOVE. V/M Stein: SECOND? C/M Stelzer: I will SECOND. V/M Stein: SECOND. C/M Munitz: I have a question, Mr. Chairman. V/M Stein: All right. C/M Munitz: What does a "yes" vote mean and what does a "no" vote mean found on the bottom Line? V/M Stein: A "yes" vote means that we are adopting this plan... 8 2/20/85 /pm C/M Muni.tz: The recommendation of CH2M Hill? And, if we turn it down, where are we? V/M Stein: Then we have to go get a new plan. City Manager Johnson: We have lost a Grant. C/M Bernstein: We have lost a Grant. City Manager Johnson: We do not have the Grant, let me, if I might.. V/M Stein: well, let us say this. I do not want to go on record saying that we lost the Grant because we get misinterpretations. If we turn it down we lose any chance of getting the Grant. Is that right, Mr. City Manager? 46 City Manager Johnson: Yes, sir. Mr. Henning: And from here, with a "yes" vote you are endorsing this plan. It goes on to the County for final approval, is that correct? City Manager Johnson: You also have another problem you ought to be well aware of. We are in a mandate by July of 1986, to have a disposal_ system in place operating. V/M Stein: Any other questions? Call the question. Carol Barbuto: C/M Bernstein Aye C/M Muni.tz Aye C/M Stelzer Aye V/M Stein Aye Mr. Henning: Mr. Vice Mayor.... V/M Stein: That is as amended, right? Mr. Henning: Yes. We had the assistance of a visual aid on these charts that were presented by the engineers today and, just for the sake of this record, I would like to know if anybody were to refer to these minutes, where will. these documents be kept. will.. we keep them in the Clerk's office, will they be in your office, where will these charts be? Dr. Foess: They can be kept at our office and if anyone would like a copy of any of these, we can provide them in an 8-1/2 x 11 format. Mr. Henning: I think if we could get a set of reductions for our record, it would be very helpful. otherwise, the original documents will be at the office of CH2M bill. That's for the record. C/M Munitz: There should be a complete copy in our file. V/M Stein: Any further discussion? With that, I will declare this Special Meeting/Public Hearing closed. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 A.M. i HEREBY CERTIFY that I attended tb.i.s meeting, that I_ have reviewed this transcript and that the transcript accurately represents the discussions and actions taken during this meeting, although these minutes have not been formally adopted and approved by the City Council. at their regular meeting. e Carol_ F. Barbuto Assistant City Clerk 9 2/20/85 /pm V/M Stein: Any further discussion? With that, I will declare this Special Meeting/Public Hearing closed. It The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 A.M. MA.YCR� ATTEST: ASSISTANT CITY CLERK This public document was promulgated at a cost of $76.40 or $2.12 per copy to inform the general public and public officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the Council of the City of Tamarac. CITY OF TAMAR C APPROVED AT MEETING OF .z City Clerk 1D 2/20/85 /pm page I of 8 W i 0 1� 0 04 W Q a H z J a J 0 a W-1 ATTACHMENT #1 MINUTES OF 2/20/85 PUBLIC HEARING SPECI,z,,L MEETING page 2 of 8 cl W N 0 an 0 oc a z a W U fr O! LL UNIVESITY DRIVE 88th AVENUE I N °o z_ W U) cc W J 1 pare 3 of 8 l� 9 page 4 of S z 0 am z 0� (' mi mi LLI it z 0 w M) z r► to il? W F !- _ z Zz I& a to o t� a19 w c r - 1 W W W AL AL IL o z �:U �a W LL CZ � F � 0 0 0 0 0 o a Lu e o .oa 4D e o 10 a ,r sv a ari �i U33:1) 1� G page 5 of 8 page 6 of 8 0• • Page 7 of 8 U) 0 4a4q- V J E w a0 U) E Elm* (>A%�= H E � C4 �CD one c cc UJ m � W 0 N i" cc c c 0 U L 8 Ln M r r J a 0 c0 0= cc a :;�,8 U)a oCL T' 00 2u ,.)age 8 of c� z z w W U' z u 0 _. S t I