Loading...
06-04-1990 - Regular ~ """'" J, .' ~ CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER REGULAR MEETING JUNE 4, 1990 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Mitchum called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Mayor David Mitchum Councilman Dan Hatfield Councilmember Gigi Bennington Councilman Russell Gold Councilman Thomas Fish City Attorney Jose. Alvarez City Manager Elly Johnson City Clerk Susan Wadsworth Chief Lawrence Schumaker Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present INVOCATION. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Reverend Ken Zimmerman, Edgewater Methodist Church, delivered the invocation. There was a pledge of allegiance to the Flag. PRESENTATION OF JUNE BEAUTIFICATION AWARD TO MR. EDWARD JANUS. 3103 NEEDLE PALM DRIVE - Mayor Mitchum presented the Beautification plaque to Mr. Janus and expressed his appreciation for his part in beautifying our City. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of May 21. 1990 - Councilman Hatfield moved they accept the minutes of May 21st. Councilman Fish seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mayor Mitchum advised there's a 3-minute limit unless Council rules otherwise. John Siburn, Connecticut Avenue, asked about the Rotary Park equipment and why it was named Rotary Park and if Rotary put money into it. He noted they paid $150,000 for the 1 and and Jack Ascher 1 got a grant for $50,000 and th i s is taxpayers' money. Mr. Johnson explained Rotary has put money into it and they're doing a lot of the labor. Mr. Siburn asked if they'll have basketball and baseba 11 there. Mr. Johnson rep 1 i ed they I 11 have basketba 11 . Mr. S i burn suggested they fence between the park and Park Avenue because children may run into the street and Park Avenue is a very busy thoroughfare. Mr. Johnson said they'll look at it when they finish the park. Frank Roe, 2732 Juniper Drive, stated he was misquoted in the News Journal regarding his statements made about the gravity system being selected. He explained what his statements had been regarding the engineer's changing to low gravity system in mid stream. He referred to prior statements made about not having to build a new plant but increasing the output would take them into the 90.s. He said they're getting wrong information from the engineering firm. He said one engineer quoted $55.40 for water and sewer for Florida Shores for 20 years but it will be about $80 a month. He stated he knows they.ll get sewers in Florida Shores but until the City can prove he's polluting the Indian River, he'll keep his septic tank. CONSENT AGENDA Parks & Recreation Director's recomendation to accept bids for Rotary Park playground equipment in amount of $ 17.414.74: Chief of Police request for line item transfer to cover cost of Comunication Improvements: Citizen Code Enforce- ment Board request for addition of Voting Requirements to Bylaws: Public Works Assistant Director's request to gO out for bids on sale of Chipspreader: City Historian's request to hold Founder's Day Nov. 17. 1990 in honor of Dr. Hawks' and Public Works Director's re uest to waive bid rocedure and urchase used 1984 Boom Truck for 10 000.00 Mayor Mitchum asked if they want to remove any items. Councilman Fish asked to remove the last item on the boom truck. Councilmember Bennington asked to remove the Rotary Park equipment and sale of the chipspreader. Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to close the consent agenda. Councilman Hatfield so moved. Councilmember Bennington seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. .. ...., -, -. CONSENT AGENDA (Continued) Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to approve the consent agenda. Councilman Gold so moved. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Parks & Recreation Director's recomendation to accept bids for Rotarv Park playground equipment in amount of $ 17,414.74 - Councilmember Bennington asked Jack Corder to update them on the status of the park. Mr. Johnson replied they recently asked for an extension because of delays in getting materials and Rotary has been working extra hours. He added the basketball court is now being used, they got an extension of three months on the grant, they painted the rest rooms, and are starting to put in tables, and they're waiting for this equipment to finish up the area. He stated by September they should be pretty well through. Councilmember Bennington asked if Rotary is doing all the work. Mr. Johnson replied yes, they've provided all the labor. Councilmember Bennington moved to accept the recommendation. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Pub 11 c Works Ass i stant Director's request to go out for bids on sa 1 e of Chipspreader - Councilmember Bennington asked if this is the chip spreader from the three pieces of equipment from the County. Mr. Johnson replied it's from an equipment company, not the County, and it's the only piece of equipment they can get rid of and any money secured wi 11 be put into an aspha It spreader. Councilmember Bennington asked if the paving spreader could spread asphalt. Mr. Johnson replied this will spread fine rock and gravel and it1s equipment where you can dump hot asphalt and put it down. Councilmember Bennington asked if this is just to go for bids. Mr. Johnson replied it will come back to Council and if they don't have a reasonable price or an offer on equipment, they'll recommend they not approve it. Councilmember Bennington moved they accept the recommendation. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Public Works Director's request to waive bid procedure and purchase used 1984 Boom Truck for $10,000.00 - Councilman Fish asked if this would come out of the stormwater account that's paid $3.00 a month. Mr. Johnson replied they have a budget set up for equipment for trees and rights of way and ditch cleaning and they don't have equipment to do that and the power company bought a heavier piece of equipment and made this available to us at this price. Councilman Fish questioned if it would be used mainly for stormwater. Mr. Johnson replied yes, and it will be charged to that department, and if they use if for another depart- ment, they'll charge them. Councilmember Bennington questioned where it is in the budget. Mr. Johnson showed her the location. Councilmember Bennington pointed out there's $84,000 for equipment, but not specifically what they'll buy with it. She asked if they can legally take it from the stormwater fees people are paying. City Attorney Alvarez replied he didn't have the ordinance in front of him but he can answer after reviewing the ordinance. Councilmember Bennington stated Carl Overstreet's memo and Mr. Johnson1s recommendation say it will be used for other things and she wants to be sure it1s legal and would like to table it. Mayor Mitchum stated if this truck would be primarily used for stormwater with other departments using it in some instances, he wouldn't have a problem with paying for it from this account. Councilmember Bennington pointed out different departments use different equipment and it1s charged back. Mr. Johnson agreed if it's billed, it would be billed against that account. He suggested Council table it to the next meeting to get clarification of the memo along with the City Attorney's reply regarding the ordinance. Mayor Mitchum suggested a motion to TABLE. Councilmember Bennington so moved. Councilman Gold seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. NEW BUSINESS There was no New Business on this agenda. ORDINANCES, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND RESOLUTIONS First Reading None. Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to go from regular meeting to public hearing. Councilmember Bennington so moved. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. 2 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 '-' ...., ORDINANCES. PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Second Read;na:(Publ;c Hear;nal Attorney Glenn Storchls appeal of dec;s;on of May 9. 1990. dec;s;on of Land Development & Reaulatory Aaency to deny request for subd;v;s;on on S. R;vers;de Dr;ve (Kane property) Attorney Glenn Storch, law firm of Storch & Hansen, 1625 Clyde Morris Boulevard, represented Lois Kane, appealing the denial of the LDRA. Mr. Storch stated they're looking at two lots, the existing 80 ft. lot on the front of Riverside Drive and the back lot which has a 20 ft. wide access. He stated the 20 ft. wide parcel was purchased based on the suggestion of a City official. He said they don't want to set precedent for other lots in this area. Counc ilman Go 1 d sa i d he I d asked Mr. Storch about an 80 ft. lot that I s non- conforming and they add 20 ft. for a driveway, and if they share a driveway, that's only a 10 ft. driveway and would be only a 90 ft. wide lot. Mr. Storch clarified itls an 80 ft. lot with a driveway that exists on the 80 ft. and then they purchased the 20 ft. lot and it could provide access to that back lot and it wouldn't be shared, but they would share ownership. Councilman Gold asked if the current driveway is on the 80 ft. Mr. Storch replied yes. He then drew a rough sketch of how it was located. He pointed out if theyld purchased the 20 ft. lot in a different name and transferred the back lot to that name, there would be no questions and they'd have a conforming back lot and a pre-existing lot with a house on it. GeorQe Ew;na, 2923 Royal Palm, asked the depth of the lot from Riverside Drive to the river. Mr. Storch replied about 525 feet. Mr. Ewing stated Council's taking a chance if they approve this because if you start giving permission to non-conforming lots they're creating a lot of problems and a lot of people may want variances. John S;burn, Connecticut Avenue, stated the Building Code requires anything on the East side must be 100 ft. in width and John Wilbur bought property there and was told it wasn't buildable and he came before Council and got a special exception. He stated there's also a height restriction on the East side of Riverside Drive and they had a house built that exceeded what was allowed. Ravmond Bradshaw, 2115 S. Riverside Drive, stated he lives about 5 lots south and he objects to and is expressing concern with doubling the density on that lot. He said they've heard from owners of other lots nearby that they'll apply for other variances. He said he understands that since itls under the same ownership, with the 20 ft. purchased by the same owner, it became one lot. He said Council doesn't have the option of determining whether the front or back lot is non-conforming. He added if they give a special exception they'll make the conforming lot a non-conforming lot, and held question spot zoning if it were allowed. He said he purchased his property with a view of the river and hates to see this compromised for economic advantage. Dom Fazzone, 302 Paradise Lane, presented a petition with 63 signatures and also 3 individual letters requesting the application of this minor subdivision in R- IA be denied for the reasons that the City says you cannot build on the land in question. He stated they own a lot 80 ft. wide and 525 ft. to the river and they purchased another lot 20 ft. wide also going to the river and came to the City and subdivided it to have two homes on the lot. He stated itls not legal according to the zoning. He read excerpts of an April 6, 1990, letter from Mark Karet, part of which was ~It is important to note that neither of the lots,...,conform to the R-1A district regulations.1I He stated the land is beautiful from City Hall to a section called Kane Apartments because they1ve adhered to the zoning ordinances which are pretty strict and the property must be 100 ft. wide and 120 ft. in depth. He stated many petitioners have said if this application is approved by Council, they'll start action because they feel they have the same right as anyone else to subdivide their lot to build two res i dences. He po i nted out next to the app 1 i cant I s property there I s another property where there was a building and it was a 100 ft. lot to the river and they asked if they could maintain the residence in front and build one in back and were told they could build one, but must take down the other. He requested time to respond if anything more is to be said. Mr. Storch stated they're not seeking rezoning or a variance or special exception, but a minor subdivision, and if they meet the criteria with square footage and the lot size, then they1re entitled to a subdivision. He stated they need to look at a ministerial act and there are special circumstances that exist 3 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 ... ....." ORDINANCES. PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Second Reading:(Public Hearing) Attorney Glenn Storch's appeal of decision of May 9. 1990. decision of Land Development & Regulatory Agency to deny request for subdivision on S. Riverside Drive (Kane property) with this instance. He said they have a landowner who owns an 80 ft. by 525 ft. lot and she went to the City to ask what she had to do to subdivide this lot and she was told if she bought 20 ft. she1d have sufficient size and she confirmed that and sent a letter from her lawyer and the City said they can subdivide it. He added she went out and bought the lot and had a conforming lot that existed with the house on it and she only bought the 20 ft. for the purpose of subdividing and did it based solely on the advice of the City. He pointed out this is known as equitable estoppel. He read excerpts of previous cases and decisions rendered. He pointed out this will create a situation where it will not set a precedent and he feels they meet all the requirements of the subdivision ordinance. He asked the City to honor its representation. Mayor Mitchum requested a clarification. Mr. Storch stated his client purchased the strip and was told sheld be able to subdivide and it was made orally and confirmed in writing to Judson Woods from the Planning Department. Mayor Mitchum stated the front is still non-conforming. Mr. Storch explained they have a tenancy in common on the 20 ft. strip. Councilmember Bennington asked if Lois Kane purchased this based on someone from the City saying she could subdivide. Mr. Storch replied yes. Councilmember Bennington asked if it1s creating a financial hardship. Mr. Storch replied yes. Councilmember Bennington asked if other property owners have offered to buy this. Mr. Storch replied no, but a member of LDRA suggested the City reimburse the Kanes for any expenditures. Mayor Mitchum questioned the letter from Lynne Plaskett regarding two buildable lots. Mr. Storch replied the question is how they make the back lot buildable and they don't care about the front lot, and the eas i est is to go wi th a mi nor subd i vis ion. He added you can I t create a buildable lot without subdividing from the front parcel. Dom Fazzone, 302 Paradise Lane, stated the attorney says it allowable but there's nothing in the Code that says it's allowable and R-1A has to have 100 by 120 ft. and the minor subdivision sates the two lots that are made should face the road and those two lots don't face the road. He added the one that's 80 ft. faces it with the house on it and it's non conforming now and was grandfathered in and the other lot they bought a 20 ft. strip and then wanted to divide the non- conforming and sell the back property and keep the house in the front and use the 20 ft. as an access or a road. He stated regarding equitable estoppel, there's equality under the law which is found under the 14th amendment regarding equal protection of law and if this is granted, they'll be discriminating against all the property owners of the City. He again read excerpts of the letter and pointed out the 20 ft. lot was bought October, 1986, and the first letter they have is one written by Mrs. Plaskett to Judson Woods dated March 18, 1987, six months after the purchase of the property. He reviewed the dates of the other documents, concluding with the application being denied 7-0 by LDRA March, 1990. He stated that before 1987 they spent considerable sums of money without any proof from the City that it would be approved by the City. He pointed out the plan they have was prepared in October, 1986, which was sent by Mrs. Plaskett to the attorney. He said in 1987 they put the property on the market for sale. He asked when the City was first approached because the first document is March, 1987, and the lot was purchased October, 1986. He asked if they submitted a written request to the Planning Department for a subdivision and if they produced the written information requested by Mrs. Plaskett to Judson Woods. He asked if the Kane1s property in 1987 met all the other City regulations and zoning codes that had to be adhered to. Mayor Mitchum asked if there1s a house on the front. Mr. Storch replied yes. Mayor Mitchum apologized because he didn't know that and was under the impression it was a non-conforming lot. Mr. Storch explained there1s an existing house with an existing driveway. He added the lot which was for sale, based on previous representations, was when the letter came from Judson Woods to get confirmation of that understanding, and they had a contract and then found the City wouldn1t allow it and the contract fell through. Mayor Mitchum suggested a motion to go from public hearing to regular meeting to take action on this and then they'll go back to public hearing for the ordinances. Councilman Hatfield so moved. Councilman Fish seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. 4 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 .... .",." ORDINANCES. PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Second Readinq:(Public Hearinq) Attornev Glenn Storch's appeal of decision of Mav 9. 1990. decision of Land Develo ment & Re ulator A enc to den re uest for subdivision on S. Riverside Drive Kane ro ert ) Mayor Mitchum asked the City Attorney if the front is non- conforming, does the 20 ft. that was purchased make the back lot conforming and can it be subdivided. City Attorney Alvarez replied arguments from both sides were raised before LDRA and if this matter goes to court, he'll be utilizing it. He said there are legal theories of equitable estoppel and compliance of a minor subdivision. He added they have opinions from Planning and Zoning and previous letters from City officials, and the ultimate question will have to be answered by a judge. He said he can give them how the principle applies but he can't tell them with certainty what the outcome will be if it goes to court because there are close arguments from both sides. He pointed out equitable estoppel has three tests and one is, on reliance of an act or omission of a governmental unit an individual changed his or her position for his or her detriment, and if not for the statements made to Lois Kane she would not have gone ahead and been involved in the purchase and these proceedings. He cautioned them that cases go both ways and it depends on how reasonable was the reliance of the individual, and do you take the word of someone if a lot is buildable, but from a Planning and Zoning official it carries a lot more weight. He pointed out the court cases look at how much of a detriment the applicant suffered, and in some cases they see they've purchased the property and hired engineers and designers, and the courts will say it's too late now to say you can't build, so you're not able to stop it. He said this will come before a tribunal if an equitable estoppel should be evoked here. He added the minor subdivision provisions of the Code have been complied with. He drew on the chalk board diagrams of the locations of the two lots, pointing out the dimensions of each. He pointed out the minor subdivision requires it abut a public right of way and that it meet a certain area. He said there's a house on the 80 ft. with a driveway and they're getting 100 ft. with the 20 ft. added and making it a buildable lot. Councilman Hatfield asked if the 100 ft. in the back has to abut the road. City Attorney Alvarez replied the lots or parcels fronting an existing public street can be interpreted for the entire lot. Mr. Mark Karet, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated the subdivision ordinance states each lot shall abut a public street for a distance of at least 20 ft. and no zoning regulations allow 20 ft. so they're contemplating odd shaped lots. He said it's not a violation of the subdivision ordinance. Councilman Hatfield asked if they'd sold the home and 80 ft. which was the original parcel, the front lot and the 20 ft. added to the back lot, it would be in conformance. Mr. Karet replied yes, and the problem is the zoning ordinance regarding lot widths of non-conforming lots. Mayor Mitchum asked if the non-conforming lot as it now exists is 80 ft. by 525 ft. Mr. Karet agreed. Mayor Mitchum asked if it's one parcel on the tax record and subdivided to sell and adding 20 ft. would create another legal description. Mr. Karet agreed. Mayor Mitchum stated it's about 80 ft. by 525 ft. and 20 ft. by 525 ft. Mr. Karet agreed. Mayor Mitchum stated they're talking about whether the lot on the back is buildable and it's not a lot now. Mr. Karet agreed, adding to make it buildable, they had to subdivide. Councilman Hatfield asked if it's lot 90. Mr. Karet explained it's lot 90 and 91. Councilman Hatfield asked if the line on the survey is their proposal. Mr. Karet replied that's where they want to subdivide. Councilmember Benn i ngton stated there are arguments on both sides from both legal counsels but they have an LDRA board and rely on their expertise in the zoning areas along with the Planning Department to advise and make recommend- ations and LDRA unanimously voted against it. She moved they sustain the LDRA boardls actions based on their recommendation and reasons. Councilman Gold seconded the motion. Mayor Mitchum stated he's not against people being allowed to use their property but it's one lot now and not two regardless of the depths and it doesn't change anything with the 20 ft. Councilman Hatfield stated that because of equitable estoppel, helll probably vote against it. Motion CARRIED 4-1. Councilman Hatfield voted NO. Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to go from regular meeting to public hearing. Councilman Fish so moved. Councilman Gold seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. 5 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 -- """ ORDINANCES. PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Second Readinq:(Public Hearinq) Ord. 90-0-20 amendinq qaraqe sales by deletinq flea markets and providinq sales to be held at residentially zoned property - Mayor Mitchum read the Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-20 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 12, ARTICLE II, "GARAGE SALES", SECTION 12-41 (A) BY CHANGING THE DEFINITION OF GARAGE SALES BY DELETING FLEA MARKET AND PROVIDING FOR SALES TO BE HELD AT A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He requested audience comments. James Morqan, South Ridgewood Avenue, stated held come into City Hall to purchase a permit for a yard sale at the corner of Hotel and U.S. 1 in his driveway off U.S. 1 and was told to hold off because it might be changed and he may not be able to have it because of this ordinance. Mrs. Wadsworth stated it's residential zoned property only and she'd asked him to hold off until tonight because it's not residentially zoned property. Mr. Johnson explained it's a trailer park. Mayor Mitchum noted it's not in there now and the ordinance isn't passed yet and he asked for it today. Mrs. Wadsworth stated it's for this week- end. Councilmember Bennington, Mayor Mitchum, and Council Fish agreed he should be given the permit. Ord. 90-0-21 amendinq Chapter 16. Taxation. by deletinq cable TV as a taxable item - Mayor Mitchum read the Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-21 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 16, TAXATION, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, BY DELETING CABLE TELEVISION AS A TAXABLE ITEM; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE,AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He asked for audience comments and there were none. Ord. 90-0-22 amendinq Sec. 11-20. reducinq excise tax on insurance companies from 1% to .85% - Mayor Mitchum read the Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-22 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE II, MISCELLANEOUS TAXES AND REGULATIONS, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, BY DECREASING THE EXCISE TAX ON THE GROSS AMOUNT OF PREMIUMS ON MUNICIPALITIES POLICE RETIREMENT FUNDS FROM ONE (1%) PERCENT TO .85 PERCENT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He requested audience comments and there were none. Ord. 90-0-23 amendinq budqet ordinance - Mayor Mitchum read this Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-23 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-0-25, THE FINAL BUDGET ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1989, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1990, BY AMENDING CERTAIN REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ITEMS OF THE GENERAL FUND AND CERTAIN REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ITEMS OF THE REFUSE COLLECTION FUNDi SHOWING A MORE DETAILED BREAKDOWN BY "EXHIBIT A"; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSEi PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION OF THIS ORDINANCE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He requested audience comments and there were none. Ord. 90-0-24 amendinq Charter. Chapter 27532 of Florida Special Acts of 1951. as amended. to clarify City's power to issue bonds under General State Law in lieu of specific provisions of its Charter - Mayor Mitchum read this Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-24 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, BEING CHAPTER 27532, LAWS OF FLORIDA, SPECIAL ACTS OF 1951, AS AMENDED, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE CITY.S POWER TO ISSUE BONDS UNDER GENERAL STATE LAW IN LIEU OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF ITS CHARTER; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He requested audience comments and there were none. Ord. 90-0-25 adoptinq floodplain manaqement requlations to comply with National Flood Insurance Proqram - Mayor Mitchum read the Ordinance. ORD. 90-0-25 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 9.5, ARTICLE II, "FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION II OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING DIVISION I. Generally, SECTION 9.5-25, "DEFINITIONS", 9.5-27, "BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING THE AREAS OF SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD II , BY AMENDING DIVISION 2, ADMINISTRATION, SECTION 9.5-37, "DESIGNATION OF CITY ENGINEER", SECTION 9.5-38, "PERMIT PROCEDURES II , SECTION 9.5-39, "DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND CITY ENGINEER", SECTION 9.5- 40, "VARIANCE PROCEDURES II , BY AMENDING DIVISION 3, STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, SECTION 9.5-44, "GENERAL STANDARDS", 9.5-45 "SPECIFIC STANDARDS", 9.5-46, 6 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 '-" ...", ORDINANCES. PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND RESOLUTIONS (Continued) Second Readinq:(Public Hearinq) Ord. 90-0-25 (Continued) IISTANDARDS FOR STREAMS WITHOUT ESTABLISHED BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS AND/OR FLOODWAYSII, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. He requested audience comments and there were none. Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to go from public hearing back to the regular meeting. Councilman Hatfield so moved. Councilmember Bennington seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Ord. 90-0-20 - Councilman Gold moved for approval of Ordinance 90-0-20. Council- member Bennington seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. There was discussion regarding the permit for Mr. Morgan's yard sale. City Attorney Alvarez agreed if an administrative direction had been made prior to the ordinance, it would be sufficient. Mayor Mitchum advised Mr. Morgan to come in the next day to pick it up. Ord. 90-0-21 - Councilman Fish moved to accept 90-0-21. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Ord. 90-0-22 - Councilman Gold moved for approval. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Ord. 90-0-23 - Councilman Hatfield moved they adopt Ordinance 90-0-23. Council- member Bennington seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Ord. 90-0-24 - Councilmember Bennington moved they adopt 90-0-24. Councilman Gold seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. Ord. 90-0-25 - Councilmember Bennington moved they adopt 90-0-25. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Consider chanqinq aqenda closinq date - Mr. Johnson stated Councilman Fish asked this be placed on the agenda for discussion and it presently is Wednesday preceding the Monday night meeting. He added there have been some exceptions because of information coming from bond attorneys, but staff can do whatever Council directs. Councilman Fish said they get the packets on Thursday or Friday and don1t have enough time to go over it when it1s voluminous and if they want to talk to someone it's hard to contact people over the week end. He added held like it a couple of days sooner and would like Council's input. Mr. Johnson suggested Tuesday deadline and get it Wednesday or have it remain at Wednesday and deliver it to Council's homes, which a lot of cities do, for Thursday. Councilman Hatfield suggested a Monday deadline to give them a full week and get them Tuesday evening or Wednesday at the latest. Councilmember Bennington agreed it's sometimes difficult if you have questions of people and she'd like a Monday cut off and have it be Wednesday to give them Thursday, Friday, and Monday besides the week-end. Mr. Johnson asked if they'd make adjustments for holidays. Councilman Fish agreed they would. There was more discussion about time needed for copying. Mr. Johnson stated if they want to go with Monday, they could have Tuesday to put it together and distribute it Wednesday. Mayor Mitchum requested the City Attorney to bring a resolution to have it for Monday night and to allow for a holiday on Monday to extend it to Tuesday. Councilmember Bennington said they don't have to deliver it if they're going to have it that early. Council members agreed. Councilmember Bennington stated she'd originally thought this ordinance would be simple to enact but discovered there are complications and the idea was to limit solicitation hours and have control over it as she'd had calls from people about people knocking on their doors after dark. She added the original 7 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 '-' ...." UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Continued) Ord. 90-0-17 (Continued) ordinance doesn't address all the sections of the Codes that address soliciting and there's no provision if someone was caught violating the ordinance and she feels penalties should be included in it, such as going before Citizen Code Enforcement Board or if it's a criminal offense. She asked Council's ideas and if they want to proceed with it or drop it. Mayor Mitchum agreed the sample she'd provided could make a good ordinance and he suggested it go back to the City Attorney and he'll bring back one for discussion they can make changes on and then they can finalize it and have first reading later. No Council member objected to his suggestion. COUNCIL/OFFICERS REPORTS City Attorney - Mr. Alvarez stated there are two minor items with the purchase of the School Board property, one is the title search showed the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State have an interest in all phosphate minerals and metals in the subject project and he's asked the School Board to petition the State for a release of that interest. He explained in the past they've closed even though there were mineral rights involved and it's a situation of using it for a park. He said the second item is a minor encroachment on the corner of the property and they're looking into that to see if it's worthwhile to go through whatever's necessary to have it removed or leave it alone. Mayor Mitchum asked what the encroachment is. Mr. Johnson replied it's a corner on the east side of the ditch and we wouldn't be involved there and it's a swimming pool behind a row of apartments. City Attorney Alvarez showed on a plat where it's located. Counci lmember Bennington expressed concern there might be an eagle's nest on the property and asked if it's been verified there was no endangered species. Mr. Johnson replied held walked through and there's a track cut through the property and didn't find any eagles nests but they'll check it again to make sure none have moved onto the property. He noted they can relocate tortoises and others, but not eagles. City Manaaer - Mr. Johnson had no report at this time. City Council Councilmember Bennington asked the status of Turgot Avenue. Mr. Johnson replied they sent the app 1 i cat i on to the State and to St. John I s and will send an amendment and the permit is being processed for the retention on Turgot. Councilmember Bennington asked about bike paths. Mr. Johnson replied they1re waiting for the report and they saw the preliminary drawing. Councilmember Bennington stated that Ron Ferland said there's no reason they couldn't have it for this meeting and he just needed spec's. She moved they have the engineers get it to them for the next meeting. Mr. Johnson requested to have one more meeting as the engineer will be on board next week and they can look at with Carl Overstreet and see if they're happy with it. He added they could have a workshop if Council wishes. He stated held promised it will be done by November 1st when school starts and it will be. Councilmember Bennington said they've asked for plans and she'd like Council to see what she saw. Mr. Johnson explained those were very preliminary and it won't be a permanent bike path. Councilmember Bennington disagreed, saying it wasn't that preliminary and it just needed specls. Mr. Johnson apologized that the engineer said they'd be at this meeting, but the engineer's on vacation. Councilmember Bennington said Council deserves to see the plans and have the same courtesy she had. She added they haven't decided to go out for bids or do it in house and she didn't know it's locked in. She asked Council's opinion since it's been since February. Mayor Mitchum agreed with both comments, saying he understands the delay and suggested they give him time to get the engineer on staff but make it his first priority and it looks like they haven't done anything on the bike paths. Councilmember Bennington suggested they could have a special meeting after he comes on board. Councilman Hatfield suggested they get a status report from the City Manager at the next meeting and if they feel they can make a presentation at that time, that would be fine, and if not, a date when they can. He added he wants to give the engineer ample time to check it out and doesn't want to make a mistake his first week because they're rushing him. Mayor Mitchum suggested it be the first meeting in July. Councilman Hatfield agreed. Mr. Johnson agreed if they get it earlier, they'll bring it to Council. Councilman Fish stated he understands both positions but would like a progress report even if it's a rough drawing. 8 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 ....." ~ COUNCIL/OFFICERS REPORTS (Continued) City Council (Continued) Mr. Johnson explained he didn't keep a copy of the drawing and it's a 5 foot wide asphalt strip along the south side of 30th Street which won't be straight because of utility poles and other problems and when it crosses canals the bulkheads will have to be extended, there will be hand rails, and when it gets close to the pavement there will be 3 foot high posts with reflector tape to keep traffic off the path. He said they're going to talk to the railroad about the tracks. He added they didn't make plans to go on Roberts Road, east of the railroad, which he understands will be done by the County. He added there will be a swale on the south side. He said there are questions about rights of way and eventually 30th will be 24 foot wide because it's a main arterial street. He added they wa 1 ked it and video taped it and wi 11 have a report at the next meeting. Councilmember Bennington stated they're in the preliminary stages of budget and asked at what point Council will see it. Mr. Johnson replied the budget is put together after requests are in and before any meetings are held he'll do some cutting before giving it to Council and they'll then make modifications or changes. Councilmember Bennington stated Council needs to decide what the goals for the next year will be and they haven't done it since Mr. Johnson came on board. Mr. Johnson pointed out they adopted a Comprehensive Plan with a capital improvements element that sets a program, and Council has talked with him about additional help for Code Enforcement and given directions about certain other areas. He added a personnel administrator is needed because of being involved in arbitration and legal discussions. He suggested they put the draft prelim- inary budget together and Council can see what they want to change and what direction they want to go. Councilmember Bennington agreed that was what she was suggesting. Councilmember Bennington asked the status of the recycling program. Mr. Johnson replied they received the containers a few days ago and will put out a flyer with the containers. Councilmember Bennington asked if it has to be implemented by July. Mr. Johnson replied 1993 is when it has to be 37% reduction in what goes to the landfill. He added when they get the kinks out after they get the subdivisions worked in, they'll expand to other areas. Councilmember Bennington asked if the City is immune to general regulations they place on the public with zoning requirements, etc. City Attorney Alvarez replied no. Councilmember Bennington asked if they have to meet the requirement. City Attorney Alvarez replied yes. Councilmember Bennington asked about the addition to Public Works because she understood if there's an addition to a site plan, it has to be brought up to Code for stormwater and others. Mr. Johnson replied Tom Owens asked about some of the buildings they built and they were built by the proper people and stormwater wasn't a problem and they do meet the requirements and it was inspected and properly done. Councilmember Bennington stated when they added to City Hall they should have paved the parking lot according to the Code. Mr. Johnson repl ied it is paved with rock, but the windows don't meet Fire Codes, but they'll correct the problem. Mayor Mitchum asked if it was built by a contractor. Mr. Johnson replied no. Councilmember Bennington stated it was done in house. Mr. Johnson stated certain sized buildings don't require a general contractor and they'll have an engineer on board who will seal all plans. Mayor Mitchum stated any commercial building in this City should have a permit pulled by a licensed general contractor. Councilmember Bennington pointed out they changed it to any commercial building. Councilmember Bennington stated the Charter Review Committee is having a public hearing tomorrow night at 7 p.m. at the Library and they1re getting more public input as Council directed. Councilman Gold stated VCOG is going to have a resolution regarding the 1 cent sales tax and they'd like Council to accept or reject it or remain neutral. He said it can be at the 18th meeting and they can talk to citizens and he needs a response before the next VCOG meeting on the 26th. He said the County wants 53% and the City would get 47%, but if the schools come in on this, they'll probably cut down on the cities amount. Mr. Johnson said that's the revised formula, originally it was less than that. Councilman Gold stated the schools have passed legislation but he doesn1t know if it's signed by the Governor. He added one County School Board has to hold a referendum on it. 9 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990 '-' ....., ,. ". ~ '.~ QUESTIONS FROM PRESS Ms. Linda Creesy, News Observer, stated that if Councilmember Bennington has any questions about recycling, the Observer did an extensive update on it recently. CITIZEN COMMENTS Georae Ewina, 2923 Royal Palm, suggested if Council closes the agenda on Monday and gives it to Council Wednesday, it could be in the paper Thursday because it's a big publication. Mr. Johnson agreed held talk with them. Mr. Ewing stated Thursday would be the day because they give free papers on Thursday. Frank Roe, 2732 Juniper Drive, asked about corrections to the sound system. Mr. Johnson stated therels nothing wrong with the speakers but it's hard to adjust a mike with everyone's voice being different. He added they had the roof put on about 10 days ago and are in the process of putting a drop ceiling in. Mayor Mitchum stated the sound system is in the budget and they make mikes that can control different voice volumes and they should stick with the program. Mr. Roe stated they have a recycling system in California using baskets. He suggested they could have big barrels for people to use in and then private companies would pick it up. He added it seems when cities start it, it costs them money and they end up only collecting newspapers. He suggested they have deposits on cans. Mr. Johnson explained the legislature won't pass a deposit law in Florida and they now have more newspapers than they know what to do with and prices are going down. He pointed out welre not doing it to save money but to save the landfill, and we have to collect it and dispose of it, but not to the landfill, and we have to recycle waste material. Mr. Roe asked if they have to pick up aluminum cans and plastic bottles. Mayor Mitchum called the time limit. Mr. Roe asked they pass a law to restrict putting that in their garbage. James Moraan asked when the water contamination at Menard-May Park will be done as it's been closed about 1-1/2 years now. Mr. Johnson replied the Health Department sampling of water closed it and it will stay closed until they release it. He added they're doing water tests all along the river. ADJOURN Mayor Mitchum suggested a motion to adjourn. Councilman Fish so moved. Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lura Sue Koser ATTE'ff:.l~ j. CITY CLERK Approved this 18th day of June , 199~. iJt'~~ M YOR 10 Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 4, 1990