Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 04D_4/11/20021ASSOCIATES MEMORANDUM TO: Village Council Members a, d Village Manager FROM: Jack Horniman, JLH Associ DATE: January 20, 2002 RE: Re -Zoning (Referred to as the Glendinning Property) The Spear Group, through their agent Gentile, Holloway, O'Mahoney and Associates, Inc., are requesting a R-1 Single Family Dwelling District zoning on a 0-34 acre parcel of land generally described as lying north of Riverside Drive; and lying west and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel that was recently annexed into the Village and which will be part of an overall proposed development project, if approved. The R-1 zoning request is consistent with the Residential Low Density land use designation requested for this property. The R- I zoning is consistent with its adjacent properties situated in the Village which are also zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District, and with its adjacent properties that lie in the unincorporated County that are currently zoned RS Single Family. This re -zoning will require a change to the Village Zoning Map to reflect the new municipal boundaries and zoning designation for this parcel. It is recommended that the Village Council approved this proposed re -zoning application. a ORDINANCE NO. 571 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 355, AS AMENDED, THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE, AT SECTION V, ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO APPLY A ZONING DESIGNATION TO A PORTION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL, REFERRED TO AS THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.34 ACRES, TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: INCORPORATION OF RECITALS The Village Council does hereby amend Ordinance No. 355, as amended, the official zoning ordinance of the Village, at Section V, Establishment of Districts and Official Zoning Map, by amending the zoning map to apply a zoning designation to a portion of real property located north of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel, referred to as the "Rood Property" containing approximately 0.34 acres to R- 1 single family dwelling district. SECTION 2: The Village Council hereby directs Village staff to reflect an R-1 Single Family Dwelling District to the property herein described on the official Village Zoning Map. 3 SECTION 3: Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or applications, and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared severable. SECTION 4: Repeal of Ordinances in Conflict. All other ordinances of the Village of Tequesta, Florida, or parts thereof which conflict with this or any part of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 5: Codification. This Ordinance shall be codified and made a part of the official Code of Ordinances of the Village of Tequesta. a W SECTION 6: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and approval, as provided by law. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was offered by Councilmember who moved its adoption. The Ordinance was seconded by Councilmember and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows MAYOR GERALDINE A. GENCO AYE NAY VICE -MAYOR JOSEPH N. CAPRETTA AYE NAY COUNCIL,MEMBER BASIL E. DALACK AYE NAY COUNCLLMEMBER RUSSELL J. VON FRANK AYE NAY COUNCILMEMBER EDWARD D. RESNIK AYE NAY The Mayor thereupon declared the Ordinance duly passed and adopted this day of , A.D., 2002 ATTEST: Village Clerk Mary Wolcott Mayor Geraldine A. Genco No Text March 11, 2002 Mr. R. Edward Glendinning 1907 Commerce Lane, Suite 10 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Dcar Mr. Glendinnin& At their Regular Village Council Meeting of April 11, 2002, 7:00 p.m. at 299 Seabrook Road, Tequesta, the Village Council will hold public hearings regarding the following two Ordinances that concern your property on Riverside Drive, Tequesta, Florida (for rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment): ORDINANCE NO, 569 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNT', FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT, AS AMENDED, ADOPTING A SMALL SCALE DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE AREA DESIGNATED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT, APPLYING A RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO A PORTION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, NEST OF AND ADJACENT TO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL REFERRED TO AS THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.34 ACRES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ORDINANCE NO. 571 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDnANCE NO. 355, AS AMENDED, THE OFFICIAL, ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE, AT SECTION V, ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND OFFICIAL ZONING DIAL', BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO APPLY A ZON ING DES IGNAT' ON TO A PORTION Of' REAL PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF RIVERSIDE DRIN-E, WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL, REFERRED TO AS 'THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.34 ACRES, TO R-I SINGLE FAMILY DWELLUNC DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SE'�,ERABIIJTY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVMING FOR CODIFIC,!kTION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADNTISED: "I'll' any person decide.s to appeal any decision made by this Council with resp�;ct to any fnaater considered at this tneeting or hearl he/she will need a record of the prouedinp, a,-,,d tbat, for sucl-i purpos-, hellshe- nnay need to ensure that a verbatim i-ecord of tho Pfcceeclung-, is made-, r,,:rord includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you have any que-,Aionregarding thi::: -mafter, p I ease d,,' no,( hes" t a i a to conta -A rn, at 577-5-6244 Sincerely, ij Mary Wolco.0 Village Clerk Village of Tequesta ASSOCIATES MEMORANDUM TO: Village Council Members and Village Manager FROM: Jack Horniman, JLH Associd DATE: January 20, 2002 _ RE: Re -Zoning (Referred to as the Glendinning Property) The Spear Group, through their agent Gentile, Holloway, O'Mahoney and Associates, Inc., are requesting a R-1 Single Family Dwelling District zoning on a 0-34 acre parcel of land generally described as lying north of Riverside Drive; and lying west and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel that was recently annexed into the Village and which will be part of an overall proposed development project, if approved. The R-1 zoning request is consistent with the Residential Low Density land use designation requested for this property. The R-1 zoning is consistent with its adjacent properties situated in the Village which are also zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District, and with its adjacent properties that lie in the unincorporated County that are currently zoned RS Single Family. This re -zoning will require a change to the Village Zoning Map to reflect the new municipal boundaries and zoning designation for this parcel. It is recommended that the Village Council approved this proposed re -zoning application. ORDINANCE NO. 571 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 355, AS AMENDED, THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE, AT SECTION V, ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO APPLY A ZONING DESIGNATION TO A PORTION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL, REFERRED TO AS THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.34 ACRES, TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: INCORPORATION OF RECITALS The Village Council does hereby amend Ordinance No. 355, as amended, the official zoning ordinance of the Village, at Section V, Establishment of Districts and Official Zoning Map, by amending the zoning map to apply a zoning designation to a portion of real property located north of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel, referred to as the "Rood Property" containing approximately 0.34 acres to R- 1 single family dwelling district. SECTION 2: The Village Council hereby directs Village staff to reflect an R-1 Single Family Dwelling District to the property herein described on the official Village Zoning Map. SECTION 3: Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or applications, and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared severable. SECTION 4: Repeal of Ordinances in Conflict. All other ordinances of the Village of Tequesta, Florida, or parts thereof which conflict with this or any part of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 5: Codification. This Ordinance shall be codified and made a part of the official Code of Ordinances of the Village of Tequesta. i SECTION 6: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and approval, as provided by law. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was offered by Councilmember who moved its adoption. The Ordinance was seconded by Councilmember and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows MAYOR GERALDINE A. GENCO AYE NAY VICE -MAYOR JOSEPH N. CAPRETTA AYE NAY COUNCILMEMBER BASIL E. DALACK AYE NAY COUNCILMEMBER RUSSELL J. VON FRANK AYE NAY COUNCILMEMBER EDWARD D. RESNIK AYE NAY The Mayor thereupon declared the Ordinance duly passed and adopted this day of , A.D., 2002 Mayor Geraldine A. Genco ATTEST: Village Clerk Mary Wolcott No Text t, March 1 1. 2002 Mr. R. Edward Glendinning 1907 Commerce Lane, Suite: 101 Jupiter, Florida 3 i 458 Dear TkIrr. Gleniinning: At their Regular Village Council Meeting of April 11, 2002, 7:00 p.m. at 299 Seabrook Road, Tequesta, the Village Council will hold public hearings regarding the following two Ordinances that concern your property on Riverside Drive, Tequesta, Florida (for rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment): ORDINANCE NO. 569 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE Of' TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNT', FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (IF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT, AS AMENDED, ADOPTING A SMALL SCALE DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE AREA DESIGNATED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT, APPLYING A RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY LAND USE CLASSIFICATION TO A PORTION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL REFERRED TO AS THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.34 ACRES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY° PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ORDINANCE NO. 571 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLOJUMA, AMENDING ORDNANCE NO. 355, AS AMENDED, THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE, AT SECTION V, ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND OFFICIAL ZONING -'IAP, BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO APPLY A ZONING DES4GNATIONTO A PORTION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, WEST OF AND ADJACEN'TTO A 15.23 ACRE PARCEL, REFERRED TO AS THE ROOD PROPERTY, CONTAINING APPROXINTIan TELY 0.34 ACRES, TO R-1 SINGLE FAMRX DWELLINC DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SE'ERABILM; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROWDING FOR CODIFICATION, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED: "It" any person decides to appeal any decision made by this Courcil vvitb respr,,ct to any inafter considored at this meeting or h ' 'i, i, - ear , I - " -rle I g he, will need a record of tb--. proceed ngs, a.-d that, fbir such purpos-, he Is' irmy need to ensure that a verbatim record oftho pfcceedings. is made, which rt.con,l includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be bared," If you h ter, please dl.., not hesiitat-, t",j contal-11 nj,at., 1- ave ally que-56 tv, regxding thiat .I m 57-5-6244. Mary WolcoO Village Clerk Village of Tequesta A 1�. 9 I g i j ji( x a / V L a i tiA ,1 i L.- ^ 1 i ti 51€f 11,A4www.loc-gov-law.org CHAIR: Susan H. Churuti 315 Court Street Clearwater, FL 33756-5165 (727) 464-3354 schuruti @co.pinellas.fl.us CHAIR -ELECT. Thomas Pelham 909 E. Park Ave. Tallahassee, FL 32301-2646 (850)222-5984 tgpelham@aol.com SECRETARY11 Fi EASURER: Kenneth W. Buchman P.O. Box 5 Plant City, FL 33564 (813)650-4242 kbuchman@plantcitygov.com IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR: Sandy MacLennan 225 Water Street, Ste. 2100 Jacksonville, FL 32202-5154 (904)366-2462 amaclennan@ssd.com BOARD LIAISON: Louis Kwall, Clearwater (727)441-4947 EXECUTIVE COUNCIL: Terms Expiring 2002, District 3 Craig H. Colter Miami (305)375-5151 District 5 Kaye Collie Orlando (407) 836-5695 Terms Expiring 2003: District 4 Eugene Steinfeld Margate (954)972-8830 Terms Expiring 2004: District 1 Cari L. Roth Tallahassee (850) 488_0410 District 2 Mary Helen Campbell Tampa (813)272-5670 Terms Expiring 2002 At -Large Members: Emeline C. Acton Tampa (813) 272-5670 Professor James J. Brown St. Petersburg (727) 562-7855 Liz Hernandez Coral Gables (305)460-5218 Lawrence A. Levy Miami Beach (305)673-7470 Susan L. Trevarthen Ft. Lauderdale (954)763-4242 Maureen S. Sikora Bradenton (941)745-3750 Ex-O#icio Members: All Past Chairs SECTION ADMI NISTRATOR: Carol Kirkland The Florida Bar cki rkland @ flabar. org March 20, 2002 Geraldine A. Genco, Mayor P.O. Box 3273 Tequesta, FL 334690273 Re: Proclamation and Pledge of Civility in the Month of May Dear Mayor Genco: Please join with other cities and counties in the State of Florida to proclaim May as Civility Month. Like last year, we have expanded our program to include Florida's district school boards. We hope that the pledge of civility will uplift the tone and conduct in your meetings. Civility uplifts our common life, and invites citizens to participate in their government. The art of civility requires constant application everyday. The attorneys of the City, County and Local Government Law Section of The Florida Bar ask you to renew the pledge of public conduct. A sample proclamation is enclosed for your use. We urge all citizens to exercise civility toward each other throughout the year. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Susan H. Churuti Chair Enclosure SHC:ck THE FLORIDA BAR/650 APALACHEE PARKWAY/TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2300/ (850) 561-5631/FAX: (850)561-5825 'ifIng of Zrqursfa Xforiba 1jrOrlamafian Whereas, the open exchange of public disclosure is essential to the democratic system of government and Whereas, as a cornerstone of democracy Americans have observed certain rules of behavior generally known as civility; Whereas, civility, derived from the Latin words "civitas" meaning city and "civis" meaning citizen, is behavior worthy of citizens living in a community or in common with others; and Whereas, displays of anger, rudeness, ridicule, impatience, and a lack of respect and personal attacks detract from the open exchange of ideas, prevent fair discussion of the issues, and can discourage individuals from participation in government; and Whereas, civility can assist in reaching consensus on diverse issues and allow for mutually respectful ongoing relationships; and Whereas, civility can uplift our daily life and make it more pleasant to live in an organized society; and Whereas, the city, County and Local Government Law Section of The Florida Bar urges the adoption of a pledge of civility by all citizens in the State of Florida. Now, therefore, be it resolved, by the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta that the month of May is proclaimed as Civility Month, and calls upon all citizens to exercise civility toward each other. Passed and adopted the eleventh day of April, 2002. rAffrsf: ,Attgnr 33tllttge clerk a VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3213 • 250 Tequesta Drive, Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (561) 575-6200 Fax: (561 ) 575-6203 MINUTES REGULAR VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA MARCH 14, 2002, 7:00 PM 399 SEABROOK ROAD TEQUESTA, FLORIDA 33469 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village Council of the Village of Tequesta held a Regular Village Council meeting on March 14, 2002. Mayor Genco called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., and Village Clerk Wolcott called the roll. MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmember Russell J. von Frank, Mayor Geraldine A. Genco, Vice Mayor Joseph N. Capretta, and Councilmember Basil E. Dalack. ABSENT: Councilmember Sharon D. Walker. ALSO PRESENT: Village Manager Michael R. Couzzo, Jr., Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Village Clerk Mary Wolcott, and Department Heads. H. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Capretta gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. M. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Dalack asked to move agenda item XIII A to right after the reorganization, just before "Unfinished Business." Mayor Genco stated she wouldn't mind moving it after "Unfinished Business," and Councilmember Dalack agreed. Councilmember von Frank asked to add an item, 15, to request a closed session regarding the Village of Tequesta and Siegel. Mayor Genco asked to strike XIV E from the agenda, and added the U.S. Baseball Association Resolution as the last item. She noted she received a letter from the Community Blood Center stating supplies were low. She stated she would like to add under "Any Other Matters" the subject of annexation and a workshop. Recycled Paper MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to accept the agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember Dalack; motion carried 4-0. IV. OATH OF OFFICE TO INCOMING COUNCILMEMBERS Village Manager Couzzo swore in new Councilmembers Genco, Capretta and Resnik en mass. V. REMARKS OF INCOMING COUNCILMEMBERS A. Seat 1—Geraldine A. Genco Councilmember Genco gave her thanks, and stated she was very proud of having the opportunity of serving the Village again. She is hoping that no election was an indication that everyone had a lot of faith in what she has done in the last years, and will do her best to continue the same. B. Seat 3--Joseph N. Capretta Councilmember Capretta thanked the audience for the opportunity to serve. He still enjoys it and likes representing the people, and likes the idea of being able to talk to them and understand what makes Tequesta a better place to live, and then trying to achieve that objective. We have achieved a lot the last 14 years he has been serving on the Council: water plant, post office, new public safety building, new city hall. C. Seat 5—Edward D. Resnik Councilmember Resnik stated he was pleased and privileged to serve the Village and its residents as a member of the Council. He declared his candidacy early so he could learn the requirements of running. I had a campaign pledge he was going to publish, but still will adhere to while in office: to be fair, to be honest, to be always faithful representing you, and I am dedicated to preserving and improving the quality of life, the security, the beauty and the residential nature of our Village, and to assure Tequesta remains a great place to live. I look forward to a challenging and rewarding experience, working with the Mayor, fellow Councilmembers, and the Village Manager, to represent your interest while participating in deliberations like this, and decisions that are fiscally responsible, productive, progressive, and will keep Tequesta a great place. VI. VILLAGE COUNCIL REORGANIZATION A. Election of Council Officers for the following year Councilmember Genco passed the gavel to Village Manager Couzzo. Mayor 2 MOTION: Councilmember von Frank nominated Councilmember Geraldine Genco. She accepted the nomination. Motion was seconded by Councilmember Dalack. Motion carried 4-0. 2. Vice -Mayor MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to nominate Councilmember Capretta. He accepted the nomination. Councilmember Resnik seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Consideration and approval of Village Manager's Employment Contract. Mayor Geraldine A. Genco MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to accept, second by Councilmember Dalack. Motion carried 5-0. B. Discussion and consideration of a donation to the Lighthouse Center for the Arts. —Village Manager Michael R Couzzo, Jr. Mayor Genco stated it was suggested at the last meeting we should make a $10,000 donation to them, and in view of everything they have done to help our cultural diversity within the Village, and bringing in a lot of interest from the outside, I strongly support making this donation. Councilmember Resnik wanted to confirm that the $9,000 from the budget account, and you are using $1,000 from the contingency account to do this. Mayor Genco responded that was correct. Councilmember Dalack stated he could not vote because of an apparent conflict of interest —his wife is on the faculty and receives a stipend. Mayor Genco stated it would be helpful if she read the Resolution we were giving them first. Resolution No. 30-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, publicly commending Lighthouse Center for the Arts for their contribution to the cultural diversity of artistic endeavor in the community, providing an effective date. Mayor Geraldine A. Genco Mayor Genco read Resolution No. 30-01/02 in its entirety. MOTION: Councilmember Dalack moved to approve Resolution No. 30-01 %02, seconded by Councilmember von Frank. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to approve the $10, 000 donation, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 4-0. Councilmember Dalack did not vote because of a conflict of interest. Mayor Genco presented a Resolution plaque to Margaret Inserra of Lighthouse Center for the Arts. Meeting broke at 7:25 p.m., and resumed at 7:40 p.m. VIH. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS A. See under "Unfinished Business." B. Status Report and Presentation on Construction of Public Safety Facility — Police Chief Stephen J. Allison Police Chief Allison deferred to Fire Chief Wienand. He stated that the project his about halfway through its first stage. They have been doing daily supervision and looking at everything they can do to save money. He showed large aerial photos of the construction that were shot on February 20, 2002. He remarked that next week on March 18ffi they should be able to set trusses. Yacht Club Point, 1 Yacht Club (Tract D), Tequesta, Florida —Jim Burg applicant. —Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell 1. Replat of Yacht Club Point. 1. Swearing in of witnesses Village Clerk Wolcott swore the witnesses in en mass. 2. Disclosure of ex parte communications Councilmember Resnik stated he had been by the property and also talked to Brian O'Brien. Councilmember Dalack stated he, on Tuesday night, had listened to comments of the public and representatives of the landowners, plus he spoke to Brian O'Brien and Mr. Aumack and had their input, and went over some of the drawings. Councilmember von Frank mentioned that he was here on Tuesday and had to recuse himself because of advice of counsel. 2 nl Mayor Genco stated she had exparte communication with Mr. Burg, Mr. O'Brien and the attorney. Essentially everything was in the sense of fact finding. Councilmember von Frank stated he spoke to Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Ryan. Village Attorney Randolph remarked they should not have any preconceived notions, and they must make their decision based upon the testimony you hear at this hearing this evening. 3. Testimony of witnesses and cross-examination, if any a. Testimony by applicant Attorney Joseph Grosso of Madden and Grosso stated this application has been discussed for a couple of months, and this is a proposal to replat. The first thing is the application, and given the nature of this type of application, he is entitled to the approval. If he meets the code he is entitled to the approval notwithstanding personal preferences. He meets the requirements. b. Staff comments Community Development Director Newell mentioned this parcel was originally divided into three lots through subdivision regulations, and the roadway was granted a variance to remain at a 20 foot right-of-way. In its current state, a four lot subdivision would allow a four lot configuration, and meets the minimum zoning requirements, only if the roadway remains in that state. Should a widening of the roadway occur and/or a cul-de- sac is required, then the replat would not meet the minimal requirements. C. Village Council comments Councilmember Resnik asked what decision was made in August. Village Attorney Randolph stated it was a first step in a process, and not binding. Mayor Genco remarked under Article IV Section 2 in the subdivision rules, this should conform to a plan by the neighborhood. There were safety factors that were noted, I think a cul de sac. The sidewalk issue has now changed. Is there anything else we have similar to this in the Village? Community Development Director Newell stated this particular arrangement is the only arrangement in Rl-A. Mayor Genco asked going through the RI -A District, what is the conformity? If I were to drive around Golfview, are all the houses 20 feet apart? Community Development Director Newell stated in the older residences you are bound to have some nonconformity. Some are greater than 10 to the side, some are less than 10. Vice Mayor Capretta stated he would like to pursue the statement made by Mr. Grosso when he said that fundamentally if his client meets the code, the Village is obligated to approve it. Does this meet the codes? Community Development Director Newell responded if the Council chooses to approve the roadway as it is, then it �F meets the codes. Vice Mayor Capretta stated the road only services the three lots we approved, and doesn't serve the fourth lot. As you look at lot four, there is the possibility that it could be served at that roadway. Community Development Director Newell stated there is enough frontage on the fourth lot to be serviced by that roadway. Councilmember Dalack requested to pursue Mr. Capretta's question about entitlement. Village Attorney Randolph stated if he meets all the criteria of your code, he is entitled to a subdivision. You need to make a determination whether or not the applicant meets the criteria of the subdivision code. Any question you might have with regard to the size of the building is not really dependent on this. 0 Mayor Genco questioned that based on the plan, if the Council approves, the Council is willing to allow the variances. Villaize Attorney Randolph stated yes if there are variances needed. Councilmember Dalack stated the road is really a driveway, apparently it is going to be widened. The adequacy of that would seem to fall into this. A 20 ft wide road. Mayor Genco questioned if they want to give the variances the previous replat enjoyed. Village Attorney Randolph stated in order to approve this they have to find a variance from the cul de sac provision. d. Comments by the public Steve Gordon, Yacht Club Place stated he was neither for nor against this, but he is interested. He is concerned that the Council -Developer relationship is not looking at the Council -New Resident relationship. He is bringing new residents into the neighborhood. Donna Meyers, 23 River Drive, read a letter into the record (attached). Brian O'Brien, 15 Yacht Club Place, stated they are concerned with the safety of the neighborhood. This has been confusing, multiple applications have been submitted, and we are at the preliminary hearing point. People are being quoted in the paper as stating it meets the codes —it requires a huge variance in the road, it needs to be designed to promote the public safety, health and welfare. The matter goes past three minutes. A 20 ft right of way was not considered. My kids are out there in the street playing. Julie O'Brien, 15 Yacht Club Place, quoted an article about safety issues with people and trucks backing up. She was concerned about her children playing in the street, and the service trucks and more traffic going in and out of the development. 7 N14 Ellen Aumack, 15 Yacht Club Place, wanted to see where the new house was being built on the property, and was it on a lot with a four lot plan, or one of the three lots originally approved. Robert Aumack, 15 Yacht Club Place, addressed the issue of the code minimum requirement if 12,000 square feet, and asked if the cul de sac was put in would it meet the minimum requirement with four lots. Lonnie Martosha, 252 Golfview Drive, asked the Council to consider going back to three lots. He asked them to conform it to a proper situation with a cul de sac, or cancel it and go back to the original plat. Jim Ryan, 20 Yacht Club Place, asked the Council to consider that the house is the scheme of the neighborhood. A house on the road has over 30,000 sq. ft. and he has approximately 21,000 sq. ft. of lot coverage, Mr. O'Brien has close to 21,000 sq. ft, and someone else has 23,000 sq. feet. The lots on the water side are what I bought into this neighborhood for. Tom Tardonia, 4 Hickory Hill Road, was concerned that the issues being brought up were only opinion, especially the safety issues. The safety concern is not as bad as they are talking about. This is not about code, but about public opinion on how the decision is made. This gentleman is doing all he possibly can to accommodate the code. Mayor Genco questioned the construction on the lot. Village Attorney Randolph stated there was a request for a lot split and the Village denied the request. An application was made for a building permit to build a home which met the requirements of the code, and they chose to site it to leave a big side yard, suggesting an opportunity to come before you to get it split into a subdivision. There was enough room left to build another house if the Council decides to divide it. Mayor Genco stated someone brought up some type of notice of violations. Community Development Director Newell stated Mr. Burg proceeded with the building pad, and his crew put in 8 footer trenches. They started installing the form boards without a permit, but we addressed that issue, brought it to a halt, and Mr. Burg complied and got the proper permitting. Mayor Genco asked about the issue of the trucks as far as trash pickup. Community Development Director Newell stated a letter was submitted from Nichols Sanitation, and they expressed an opinion that it would not be a problem for them. If the trash containers are being brought to the cul de sac, they can move in the radius of the cul de sac and backing up wouldn't be required. Mayor Genco stated if the people put the trash in front of their houses, I'm sure they'll be backing out. Mayor Genco stated according to the code the minimum lot size width is 100 ft, and I see the back isn't 100 ft. Community Development Director Newell stated the code only addresses the front, not the back. e. Final comments by applicant Attorney Grosso stated there have been complaints brought up to me. There was supposed to be a workshop, and we heard public comments. Some folks chose not to make comments because it is my understanding they feared we would have time to consider those and address those comments now. There is a lot of talk about safety issues and clearly the developer does not want to create an unsafe situation, but no real talk about specific safety problems except for what is in the backing up. I contend, just because there is a cul de sac doesn't mean that trucks delivering, people visiting friends, are going to leave someone's house and decide to drive to the end of the cul de sac and turn around. The same turn around that takes place all around that road is going to take place in here. Comments about the character of the neighborhood —where do we choose to decide what properties we are going to look at to determine the character of the neighborhood. This proposed subdivision meets the minimum requirements of your code in our opinion. There is allegations of changes in surveys, clearly that is meant to impress the Council there is something shaky going on. I OJ don't think it is accurate that people got restraining orders. We believe this meets the code, the road has been approved, it has been dedicated. All we are doing is changing the configuration of the lots on the road. If there are safety concerns we'll provide access to the fourth lot as on the cul de sac. We would ask that this be approved. 4. Executive Session a. Discussion Councilmember Resnik stated he has some objectives to bring out. I have listened to everybody, I have walked out on the road. I don't know why the past Council didn't provide some means of turnaround. I know the code says 100 ft radius, 50 ft diameter, but it also indicates the Council can adjust their decisions to best suit the particular neighborhood. I was told that if any adjustment is made to the road, then it digs into the builder's property. Some kind of turnaround should be at the end of that street. I believe most auto traffic coming out of the homes will come out driving out of their driveways not backing down the street. In fact UPS people driving in will pull into driveways and not back out. The garbage people should be directed to back in and drive out. There should be some basis for a turnaround down there that the builder can accommodate. It would be beneficial to the safety aspect of this thing. As far as legal, if the code is met for the property, it is my understanding that you can have that approve, but if the roundabout at the end takes away from your property, then you won't meet the code, so it has to be part of your property in order to maintain the lot size. Village Attorney Randolph stated he would not have buildable lots if they were to put the cul de sac in. They could not use their own property for the cul de sac because we require that be dedicated to the public. They would not be able to modify this subdivision so as to modify the subdivision. Councilmember Resnik stated the decision was not to do anything regarding the road previously. Jim Bury stated in Tequesta Oaks there is a similar situation, a dead end street, and it has a turnaround 10 ft wide by 15 ft long. I could provide that for you. This 10 dock has to be relocated and the dock will no longer be there. Mr. Burg pointed out the location where he could place the turnaround and a barrier to prevent going into the water. Councilmember Von Frank asked if that was a cul- de-sac, to which Village Attorney Randolph responded no, that Mr. Burg was offering that in lieu of a cul-de-sac. Mayor Genco stated it was literally a front end in and then you back out. Councilmember Dalack commented he did not understand and it was not within the Country Club Community and was not consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. Vice Mayor Capretta commented he understood these lots were the most controversial there had ever been in the Village; that he had been through many of them and he always checked to see if they complied with the code. Vice Mayor Capretta commented that when the Council met at other times to discuss setting up the codes and ordinances as to how they wanted homes built, that was the time to change them, and they could not be changed retroactively. Vice Mayor Capretta stated he went over this project with staff and Mr. Newell step by step, and knowing that the Council had previously approved the three plots —as long as the Council approved that road the way it is and as long as they said lot 4 which was the one nearest the cul-de-sac was to be open on that side the road would only be used for three. Some people liked to call it a driveway, but it happened to be a driveway six inches wider than Yacht Club Place, and it had been widened by the Village to 20' to make it the same as Yacht Club Place. Vice Mayor Capretta stated therefore he always went by the code; he had helped develop the code; he had been on the Council for years and it had been changed many times. The Vice Mayor commented that people used lot line homes and these lots were 12,000 — 14,000 foot lots —much bigger than most homes in the Country Club community. Bigger than half of them, and these would not be cheap million dollar homes —they would be expensive. This would upgrade property values in the neighborhood, and anyone wanting to buy one of these homes would need more than a million dollars to buy one. Vice Mayor Capretta commented one gentleman who spoke had experience in this area, and if you went along River Drive and looked at what was happening, on every large lot people were buying 11 the homes, tearing them down, and building two homes F because the lots were so large--20,000 to 40,000 feet —so they could be split and still be larger than any lot in the neighborhood. Vice Mayor Capretta commented that what should be looked at was the percentage of the lot that the house took and the amount of open space. Vice Mayor Capretta advised that the Village's code was very specific regarding this and it said the maximum lot coverage the house could have was 37% in R-1-A and the minimum lot open area had to be at least 30%. Vice Mayor Capretta stated these did not even come close to that and when somebody bought a lot to build a house he had to protect property values and make sure the neighborhood was maintained the way it was, and when somebody wanted to build 4 houses in the Perry Como estate that we going to be a million to 2-1/2 million dollars in value, they would be beautiful mansions. In letters he had received someone was worried about monster mansions and that they were too expensive, and the owner should build cheaper homes. Vice Mayor Capretta commented you could not have it both ways, and as he saw it he could not oppose building 4 million dollar plus homes on 12,000-15,000 square feet with a road just as wide as Yacht Club Place it because it met the code . Vice Mayor Capretta commented in his opinion the only question ever was the road, but since it was already approved long ago for the three lots he saw no reason to change it, particularly since he thought the fourth lot would face the cul-de-sac and would not even use the road. Councilmember Von Frank stated his background was insurance, that he had to go back to Mr. Schwartz's letter of March 6, and had to go with public safety and dead end streets —he was always worried that it could create a serious problem regarding life and property loss. Councilmember Dalack commented he had been impressed with Mrs. O'Brien and her presentation and citation of a publication dealing with automobile impact, and that had been very significant to him. Councilmember Dalack commented he believed the only means of dealing with that would be what Councilmember Von Frank referred to in the letter of 3/6/02 from Kimley-Horn, and that situation could not be alleviated, as the Village Attorney had stated. Councilmember Dalack commented the place was not physically capable of having a cul-de-sac. 12 So this Council would have to waive the requirement for a cul-de-sac in order to obviate the problems created by the absence of a cul-de-sac. Councilmember Dalack stated it could not be alleviated —the safety hazard was there, and he would not feel comfortable in waiving that requirement. Councilmember Dalack commented on the conformity of this project to the rest of the neighborhood. Councilmember Dalack stated he could not disagree more with Vice Mayor Capretta, and in his view the monster mansions would diminish the property values of the surrounding properties; that Yacht Club Place which he rode his tricycle every day was not 20' wide and he believed it to be 60' like all the other streets he saw in the neighborhood, and therefore the driveway did not conform with the rest of Yacht Club Place, but that was just the beginning. From Jim Ryan's house down to the existing cul-de-sac at the beginning of the Perry Como property there were Mr. Ryan's house and then three more houses which was 400' of homes on Yacht Club Place facing the water, and the developer wanted to put in four homes and if anybody went down Yacht Club Place and saw the expansive area between the homes and then went inside the old Perry Como house, those things were jammed together. Councilmember Dalack commented to him this proposal was absolutely inconsistent with the plan of the rest of the neighborhood, and that was another reason he thought this proposition should not be waived. Councilmember Dalack stated first, safety, then the non -conformity of this development with the rest of the neighborhood. Mayor Genco commented when the plan originally came before the Council she had looked at what was presented — the three lots —and she thought it was a superb plan. She looked at the roadway, amount of green space, amount of impervious space, and whether or not it was part of the record she did think about the turnaround and the cul-de- sac, and based on the existing proposed green space versus building she had been comfortable with granting a variance without having a cul-de-sac. The Mayor stated that had this plan been presented to her at that time, she would have changed her mind. Mayor Genco stated she would not have been in favor of this 4-lot subdivision the way it was being presented for the reason that it did not have a cul-de- sac, that she had now learned about the safety issues about which she was somewhat concerned with the trash pickup, and she found that the Council had to look at the spirit of 13 the code and consider what people would like to see besides just appreciating real estate values. Mayor Genco stated she found that the four -subdivision plat before the Council did not meet the spirit of the code. The Mayor stated she was looking at this as if it were coming before her for the first time and would not approve this and was looking for a motion based on findings of fact. A 5-minute break was declared and the Council was advised they could speak to no one during the break. The Council reconvened at 10:00 p.m. Attorney Grosso asked for additional consideration for Mr. Burg's proposal regarding the turnaround to possibly work out something that would alleviate the safety and insurance concerns, and to that extent requested the Village Council table a decision to allow the applicant time to explore and present that proposal. Village Attorney Randolph advised that it was the prerogative of the Village Council if they wished to allow the applicant an opportunity to redraw the plan to attempt to alleviate their concerns. Councilmember Von Frank asked, when you turn around, what was on the other side of that line. Mr. Burg indicated a guard rail would be added along the water. Village Attorney Randolph commented it was his understanding the applicant could not re -draw the plan to provide a cul-de-sac as provided in the code. The applicant responded no, that he could not provide a 80' or 100' round cul-de-sac, but under the definition of cul-de-sac was also turn -around, which had been allowed other places in the Village, serving more houses. Councilmember Dalack commented Attorney Randolph's question led to a further question, if there was a definition of cul-de-sac in the code and read aloud the definition: Cul-de-sacs permanently designed shall not exceed 400' in length and be provided at closed -end. Cul-de-sac with a turn around having an outside roadway diameter of at least 80' and a property line diameter of at least 100'. Councilmember Dalack asked if the applicant could supply that; applicant responded, no. Councilmember Dalack stated there would be no point to tabling this because the applicant could not comply with the cul-de-sac provision. The applicant commented he might be able to comply. Mayor Genco stated it was understood the applicant could not provide a cul-de-sac and that answered the question. 14 b. Finding of fact based on competent, substantial evidence, and motion to approve/decry. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta made a motion to allow the applicant a reasonable period of time to come back with a proposal to provide a turn around to alleviate the safety conditions that some of the people were concerned about. Vice Mayor Capretta stated like Councilmember Von Frank and several people in the audience who made persuasive presentations about safety, which he assumed the applicant could do before the next meeting and the applicant responded affirmatively. Councilmember Resnik seconded the motion. During discussion, Mayor Genco asked if this did come back and did get tabled as a result of this motion, if the whole process would start over from the beginning. Attorney Randolph advised it would continue to be a quasi-judicial hearing and the public would have an opportunity to speak in regard to the modifications. Mayor Genco asked if then the entire process that had been gone through tonight would be done again, to which Attorney Randolph responded, yes, the opportunity had to be provided; however, the likelihood of going through all the same comments again was not expected, however, the opportunity had to be given. Councilmember Dalack stated he believed a delay would be pointless because the developer had just said he could not comply with the definition of cul-de-sac; therefore, it was undisputed that the proposed project did not comply with Section 310 of the code. Councilmember Dalack stated the compliance was not for a turnaround, it was for a cul-de-sac, so it was pointless to delay. Vice Mayor Capretta commented it was not pointless, that the Council could approve it if they liked the turn around. 15 Councilmember Resnik reiterated that the Council had the authority to adjust the end of that road to meet the unique requirements of that particular situation if they did not put in a full cul-de-sac. Mayor Genco agreed that the Council had that discretion. Vice Mayor Capretta —for Councilmember Resnik —for Councilmember Von Frank — against Councilmember Dalack — against Mayor Genco -- against Motion failed. MOTION: Councilmember Dalack made a motion to deny the request based on the following findings of fact: No. I it is undisputed that the proposal violates the provision of Section 310 that dead end streets are prohibited. It also violates Section 3.1 of article 4, and he thought the letter of 3'6/02 page 78(g) supports that proposition, and further he would find that the proposed use was not consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. Councilmember Von Frank seconded the motion. During discussion, Councilmember Resnik stated it was his understanding if the Village Council denied the motion the plat would revert back to the 3-lot decision with a dead- end road, so there was no safety added into this —all that would do would be to delete a house --and that decision was irrevocable, and if the issue was a dead-end street, that was what it would be. Councilmember Dalack accepted that and he was glad Councilmember Resnik had said this and he would move to reconsider the earlier motion that there may be a means of alleviating the safety factor if the developer was given a chance to submit a proposal. Councilmember Dalack moved to reconsider the vote on the motion to table. Vice Mayor Capretta commented he thought that was a good proposition, and stated he had been shocked at Councilmember Von Frank's vote since he had brought up all the insurance actuary and then when the man offered him a chance to eliminate the safety problems and the turnaround problem, he voted against it; therefore, Mayor 16 Capretta had come to the conclusion that Councilmember Von Frank was not serious or was being facetious. Attorney Randolph advised on a motion to reconsider it was made by someone on the prevailing side and anyone could second the motion. Motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta. Attorney Randolph commented that the Village Manager had indicated to him that Councilmember Dalack had made a motion to deny that was seconded that had not been withdrawn. Councilmember Dalack stated he withdrew his motion to deny and now made a motion to reconsider the tabling, which was seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta. Mayor Genco stated there was now a motion to reconsider the developer coming back to the Council with another proposition which it was believed would entail a turnaround. Mayor Genco stated she would repeat herself that she felt this was tantamount to blackmail, because had this development of four homes come before her when she voted on it originally she would not have approved it without a cul-de-sac. The subdivision code required a cul- de-sac, and the Council was now having to settle for something that was less than the subdivision code required. Mayor Genco stated she knew sometimes they had to compromise and now they were being forced into a situation of compromise because the developer did not take the time to really think through what he wanted to do with his property and all of a sudden in her opinion saw an opportunity of greater gain and chose to disregard the Village's codes and requirements. We now have to look at a compromise. Village Attorney Randolph stated he is making a motion to reconsider to defer, after that is voted on, if the motion to reconsider passes, then there can be a motion to defer. Motion to reconsider: Motion carried 4-1 with Councilmember von Frank dissenting. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to table this vote until the next Council meeting to allow Mr. Burg to come back with his 17 proposal for a turnaround to avoid the safety problem. Seconded by Councilmember Resnik. Vice Mayor Capretta aye Councilmember Resnik aye Councilmember Dalack aye Councilmember von Frank aye Mayor Genco aye Motion carried 5-0. IX. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under Consent Agenda are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Village Council Member .so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. A. Village Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February 14, 2002.—Village Clerk Mary Wolcott B. Board of Adjustment meeting Minutes of October 15, 2001.—Village Clerk May Wolcott C. General Employees' Pension Trust Fund Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes of January 24, 2002.—Village Clerk Mary Wolcott D. Public Safety Officers' Pension Trust Fund Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes of January 14, 2002.—Village Clerk Mary Wolcott E. Designate Mosquito Control items-15 five -gallon containers scourge insecticide and 9 containers of Bactimos Briquets mosquito larvae —as surplus. Public Works Director Gary Preston F. Resolution No. 31-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, approving a building inspection services agreement between Hy -Byrd Inc. Inspection Services of Lantana, Florida and the Village of Tequesta providing, on a regular basis, for construction inspections (building, electrical, mechanical & plumbing) for the Village of Tequesta for a term not to exceed thirty six (36) months, in the amount of $46,800.00 per twelve month contract period and providing for back-up plan review and building official services on an as needed basis for a term not to exceed thirty six (36) months, in an amount not to exceed $65.00 per hour; with said funds being appropriated from the Community Development Special Revenue Fund having a Code Compliance/Inspections Division, and authorizing the 18 Village Manager to execute the same on behalf of the Village. — Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell G. Resolution No. 32-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, awarding a proposal from Information Management Services, Ormand Beach, Florida, for one Building Permits Manager Software program in the amount of $5,725.00. having a FY 2002 Community Development Special Revenue Fund Capital Outlay with a remaining balance of $8,500.00 and authorizing the Village Manager to execute the applicable proposal on behalf of the Village. —Community Development Director Jeffrey C Newell MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to approve the Consent Agenda, seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. X. ADJOURN TO LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING See Local Planning Agency Agenda MOTION: Councilmember Dalack moved to adjourn to Local Planning Agency Meeting, seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. Meeting was adjourned at 10: 42 p.m. XI. RECONVENE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Meeting was reconvened at 10: 54 p.m. XH. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Dorothy Campbell, 4 Tradewind Circle, offered a present to the Council. She said we are officially the last to use the Votomatic voting machines, and we were also the first to use them. She presented the Council with an original votomatic machine with a butterfly ballot, a ballot box with shads in it, and an autographed picture of Theresa LePore and Carol Roberts. XIII. DEVELOPMENT MATTERS A. See above. B. Tequesta Fashion Mall, 150 U.S. Highway One, Tequesta, Florida —Gary Van Brock, applicant. —Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell Special Exception Hearing for retail use exceeding 3,500 square feet of gross retail per tenant area in Mixed Use District. 19 2. Site Plan Review. 1. Swearing in of witnesses Villase Clerk Wolcott swore in witnesses en mass. 2. Disclosure of ex parte communications Mayor Genco, Councilmember Dalack, and Councilmember von Frank disclosed ex-parte communication with Mr. Van Brock. 3. Testimony of witnesses and cross-examination, if any a, Testimony by applicant None. b. Staff comments Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell stated that Mr. Van Brock is in the Mixed Use Zoning District and is proposing an addition to an existing tenant's space. He stated the seven criteria have been met, and its proposed use is a valid use, and the public health, safety and welfare is protected. The use conforms to all staff review and they support the approval of the special exception. C. Village Council comments None. d Comments by the public None. e. Final comments by applicant Mr. Van Brock stated Puritan Cleaners occupies this space, with the extra space it is less than 3900 square feet. 4. Executive Session a. Discussion None. b. Finding of fact based on competent, substantial evidence, and motion to approveldeny. 20 MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve the special exception, seconded by Councilmember Dalack; motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve the site plan, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 5-0. C. Fire Training Tower, 901 Old Dixie Highway, Tequesta, Florida —Village of Tequesta, applicant. —Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell 1. Special Exception Hearing to allow a Public Safety training area, a three story tower within the C-2 Community Commercial District. 1. Swearing in of witnesses Village Clerk Wolcott swore in en mass all witnesses for the remaining quasi-judicial hearings. 2. Disclosure of ex parte communications Councilmember Resnik stated he spoke to the Fire Chief. 3. Testimony of witnesses and cross-examination, if any a. Testimony by applicant See below. b. Staff comments Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell stated this is in a C-2 Commercial District, so we are looking only to approve a special exception use for this tower. C. Village Council comments None. d. Comments by the public Cyrese Colbert asked if the public would be notified within a certain radius. Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell responded that they would. 21 e. Final comments by applicant None. f. Executive Session a. Discussion None. b. Finding of fact based on competent, substantial evidence, and motion to approve,%deny. MOTION: Councilmember Dalack moved to approve the special exception, seconded by Y ice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. D. Willow Glen Subdivision, north of Riverside Drive and adjacent to Tequesta Pines Subdivision, Tequesta, Florida —The Spear Group, applicant. --Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newell l . Site Plan Review. 1. Swearing in of witnesses See above. 2. Disclosure of ex parte communications None. 3. Testimony of witnesses and cross-examination, if any a. Testimony by applicant George Gentile, representing the Spear Group, stated they have met with the residents of Tequesta Pines, and provided the Council a letter of agreement from them. Liz Schauer, Tequesta Pines Homeowners Association President stated they have agreed with the plan that Mr. Gentile had faxed to Mr. Brienza, the one you have now. The one thing that upsets the residents has nothing to do with the development per se, but no one was ever notified that they were coming in. George Gentile stated he spoke to Mark Sinkhorn from the Department of Engineering with the County. They have concerns with drainage problems on Riverside Drive, and some offers were 22 made by the developers. The issues outlined in the letter to Mr. Newell have been fully addressed. b. Staff comments None. C. Village Council comments None. r. Comments by the public None. e. Final comments by applicant None. 4. Executive Session a. Discussion None. b. Finding of fact based on competent, substantial evidence, and motion to approve; deny. MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to approve the site plan subject to final approval of the subdivision, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 5-0. E. Tequesta Cay Subdivision, Village Boulevard, Tequesta, Florida —George Gentile applicant. --Community Development Director Jeffrey C. Newelli Consultant Jack Horniman, JLH Associates 1. Revised Sketch Plan Review 1. Swearing in of witnesses See above. 2. Disclosure of ex parte communications None. 3. Testimony of witnesses and cross-examination, if'any 23 a. Testimony by applicant George Gentile stated they added more parking spaces since the last time, and a little more green space. They still meet all of the Village's requirements for units there. b. Staff comments None. C. Village Council comments Mayor Genco remarked they did a good job revising. Vice Mayor Capretta stated when you look at density, if you look at units per acre at Tequesta Oaks, it is only 12.7. The Council was concerned, and we tried to force the developer to buy a strip of land to make up the difference. When you are looking at the criteria, you have to look at open space as well as units per acre. I had Mr. Newell look at that. d. Comments by the public None. e. Final comments by applicant None. 4. Executive Session a. Discussion None. b. Finding of fact based on competent, substantial evidence, and motion to approve ,deny. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve the sketch plan, seconded by Councilmember von Frank; motion carried 5-0. XIV. NEW BUSINESS A_ Ordinance No. 568—First Reading —An Ordinance of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, amending the Comprehensive Plan of the Village of Tequesta, Florida in accordance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land 24 Development Regulation Act, as amended, adopting a small scale development amendment to the Future Land Use Map in the area designated on the attached exhibit, applying a Residential Low Density Land Use classification to a portion of real property located on the north side of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel referred to as the Rood Property, containing approximately 0.29 acres; providing for severability; providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict; providing for codification; providing an effective date. — Consultant Jack Horniman, JLH Associates Mayor Genco read Ordinance No. 568 by caption only. MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to approve Ordinance No. 568, seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. B. Ordinance No. 569—First Reading —An Ordinance of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, amending the Comprehensive Plan of the Village of Tequesta, Florida in accordance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, as amended, adopting a small scale development amendment to the Future Land Use Map in the area designated on the attached exhibit, applying a Residential Low Density Land Use classification to a portion of real property located on the north side of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel referred to as the Rood Property, containing approximately 0.34 acres; providing for severability; providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict; providing for codification; providing an effective date. — Consultant Jack Horniman, JLH Associates Village Attorney Randolph read Ordinance No. 569 by caption only. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve Ordinance No. 569, seconded by Councilmember von Frank; motion carried 5-0. C. Ordinance No. 570—First Reading —An Ordinance of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Amending Ordinance No. 355, as amended, the Official Zoning Ordinance of the Village, at Section V, Establishment of Districts and Official Zoning Map, by amending the Zoning Map to apply a zoning designation to a portion of real property located north of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel, referred to as the Rood Property, containing approximately 0.29 acres, to R-1 Single Family Dwelling District; providing for severability; providing for repeal of ordinances in conflict; providing for codification; providing an effective date. —Consultant Jack Horniman, JLH Associates 25 Vice Mayor Capretta read Ordinance No. 570 by caption only. MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to approve Ordinance No. 570, seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. D. Ordinance No. 571—First Reading --An Ordinance of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, amending Ordinance No. 355, as amended, the Official Zoning Ordinance of the Village, at Section V, Establishment of Districts and Official Zoning Map, by amending the Zoning Map to apply a zoning designation to a portion of real property located north of Riverside Drive, west of and adjacent to a 15.23 acre parcel, referred to as the Rood Property, containing approximately 0.34 acres, to R-1 Single Family Dwelling District; providing for severability; providing for repeal of ordinances in conflict; providing for codification; providing an effective date. —Consultant Jack Horniman, JLH Associates Village Attorney Randolph read Ordinance No. 571 by caption only. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve Ordinance No. 571, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 5-0. F. Resolution No. 35-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, accepting the fee proposal from Song + Associates, Inc. of West Palm Beach, Florida, for the conceptual schematic design of the Village Center to be located at the Old Village Hall/New Public Safety Building site at 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida; in the amount of $10,000 plus expenses and hourly rates for topographic data, site survey, zoning and deed restrictions, and other such data, having a Fiscal Year 01/02 budget allocation of $150,000 in Account No. 303 331 662.632 Architectural and Engineering — Building; and authorizing the Village Manager to execute the proposal on behalf of the Village. —William D. Reese, P.E., Reese, Macon and Associates, Inc. Village Attorney Randolph read Resolution 35-01/02 by caption only. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve Resolution 35-01, 02, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 5-0. G. Resolution No. 36-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, approving the Village's sponsorship of the First Annual Tequesta Fest to be held April 13 and 14, 2002, 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. in Constitution Park, and thereby waiving the Village's fees for services rendered to Tequesta Fest. Mayor Geraldine A. Genco 26 Mayor Genco read Resolution No. 36-01/02 by caption only. She also mentioned she would like to transfer the remaining funds in the election account, since we did not have an election. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to approve Resolution No. 36-01102 and to transfer funds remaining in the election account. Seconded by Councilmember Resnik. Motion carried 5-0. XV. ANY OTHER MATTERS Mayor Genco stated that in the Village Manager's Report there was a package on annexation, and she would like that on the next agenda. Also there are two meetings scheduled for Saturday, One on Traffic and on the Zucarelli matter, and I would like to postpone until further notice. Village Attorney Randoloh stated you can postpone it to a time certain. MOTION: Councilmember Dalack motioned to postpone the closed door session until March 21, 2002 at S: 00 p.m. to be held at the Village Offices at 250 Tequesta Drive. Mayor Genco stated all Councilmembers will be present, Mr. Randolph, Mr. Couzzo, and a Court Reporter. Seconded by Councilmember von Frank. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Councilmember von Frank moved to cancel the Traffic Workshop, seconded by Councilmember Resnik; motion carried 5-0. Mayor Genco requested the Council pass a U.S. Baseball Association Resolution that was sent to them during the week. Consensus agreed Councilmember von Frank requested to hear information on the Siegel matter. Councilmember Resnik stated that an item under New Business, item E, there would be no requirement for any money out of this year's budget. The requirement to put four thousand dollars in the bottom line price, based on providing an advanced payment was not proposed in the basic memo from staff. The proposed payment plan goes into the FY 02/03 Budget, the contract provides a basis for getting a fairly good deal on a fire truck, the opportunity to piggyback on a multi -engine sale will probably be lost, and we'll be faced with another year, and I don't think it is in the best interest to cancel —we should consider that. 27 Village Attornev Randolph staTed before discussing that item you should have a motion to reconsider. MOTION: Councilmember Resnik moved reconsider Resolution No. 33-01 /02, seconded by Vice Mayor Capretta; motion carried 5-0. E. Resolution No. 33-01/02—A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, approving the purchase of one (1) Sutphen Custom Rescue Pumper, in the amount of $305,860.20, from Sutphen Corporation of Amlin, Ohio, and the purchase of equipment necessary to place the pumper in service at a cost of $93,000. The pumper will be financed with a ten (10) year lease, with the first year's payment being made in the FY 02/03 budget year, upon recommendation of the Finance Department after approval by the Village Council, and authorizing the Village Manager to execute the applicable contracts on behalf of the Village. Fire Chief James Weinand Mayor Genco stated the second letter does require a down payment. Councilmember Resnik replied the contract doesn't say that, it is just letting us know that you can save four thousand dollars. They would determine the best objective in next year's budget. Fire Chief Weinand stated you can put this off until the budget process. It was brought forward because of the price and because it was the direction of the Council in 1994. Vice Mayor Capretta stated it is saving us about $20,000. Fire Chief Weinand stated Finance said it was not worth it to put the money down now, but wait. Village Attorney Randolph read Resolution No. 33-01/02 by caption only. MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta motion to approve Resolution No. 33-01;`02, seconded by Councilmember Resnik. Motion carried 5-0. XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Vice Mayor Capretta moved to adjourn, seconded by Councilmember Resnik. Motion carried 5-0. Respectfully submitted: 28