HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Regular_04/13/2006MINUTES
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
REGULAR VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING
TEQUESTA RECREATION CENTER
THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 2006
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL - The meeting was called to order by
Mayor Jim Humpage at 7:03 P.M. A roll call was taken by Village Clerk Gwen
Carlisle. Present were: Mayor Jim Humpage, Vice Mayor Pat Watkins, Council
Member Geraldine A. Genco, and Council Member Tom Paterno. Also in
attendance were: Village Manager Michael R. Couzzo, Jr., Village Attorney
Scott Hawkins, Attorney Karen Roselli, Village Clerk Gwen Carlisle, and
Department Heads.
II. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Genco mentioned it was an honor this evening for her to have
the ability to give the invocation. She indicated this past week has been rather
hectic for the Village of Tequesta, because the Village code has been attacked.
She explained it is an honor to serve the Village, and they serve it in a non-
political manner. She mentioned she fully respects anyone's right to wish for
peace in this world, and to wish that our governments got along better with the
people. She commented what has happened has taken away from their purpose of
being here this evening. She commented she hoped everyone would conduct
themselves in a very peaceful, and professional manner, and that they thank the
lord, whoever it might be, and they are grateful for being here.
Mayor Humpage led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
III. COUNCIL OATHS OF OFFICE
Village Manager Couzzo performed the Oaths of Office to:
Seat 1 -Geraldine A. Genco
Seat 3 -Jim Humpage
Mayor Humpage explained he was aware that Mr. Basil E. Dalack does not
choose to take the Oath of Office for Seat 5. Mr. Dalack mentioned he has
something that could work this out, if Council would let him read it. He indicated
he would provide everyone with a copy. Attorney Hawkins pointed out that Mr.
Dalack has to take the Oath now, or that he could comment at the appropriate time
for citizens. Mr. Dalack noted it was not a comment, he was submitting an oath he
could take, and it is in accordance with the principles set forth in the order of the
Court yesterday. He mentioned if Council would take a look at it, they might be
able to work something out. Mayor Humpage asked Mr. Dalack if the oath that he
wanted to repeat was the identical oath that is in the Village Charter.
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 2
Mr. Dalack stated it was not. Mayor Humpage indicated then he could not take it.
Mr. Dalack asked if they would listen to reason, and asked if Council wanted to
try and work this out~eacefully. Mayor Humpage stressed they continue to have
these things at the 12 hour. Mr. Dalack stated he is proposing peace, and if they
want to talk peace, let's do it, if they do not, it is their right. Mayor Humpage
pointed out he is going to stay with oath as it appears in the Charter. Mr. Dalack
stated they could chose peace, or they could choose to carry this on. Consensus of
Council agreed they would choose the Village Charter. Attorney Hawkins stated
this is over, and that Mr. Dalack was only entitled to take one oath. He stated the
people of Tequesta adopted the Oath, and it was not the Mayor's option.
IV. REMARKS OF INCOMING COUNCIL MEMBERS
Seat 1-Geraldine A. Genco
Council Member Genco commented as she stated in the invocation that the events
of this past week has been overshadowed; She mentioned she is very proud to be
serving the Village for another 2-year term. She believed not only herself, but that
her follow Council Members have worked well as a team, and that they have
come up with a lot of projects and items that have benefited the Village, the
infrastructure, the administration, and is looking forward to doing more of the
same for the next two years. Mayor Humpage thanked Council Member Genco.
Seat 3 -Jim Humpage
Mayor Humpage commented he appreciates the Council he works with, and that
he intends to abide by the Charter of the Village. He pointed out the most
important people he must consider is the people before him, and it is his job to do
the best that he can for their quality of life, and that is why he is here. He stated to
those folks that were not her; he would stay to them Jim Humpage is in their
court. He thanked everyone.
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved to approve the agenda, as amended; seconded
by Council Member Paterno.
Council Member Paterno removed Consent Agenda Items 14 and 15, and asked
that Regular Agenda Item 29, regarding Town Hall Meetings be deleted entirely
from the agenda this evening. Council Member Genco asked why Council
Member Paterno wanted to delete Item 29. Vice Mayor Watkins felt Council did
not need to discuss the item this evening. Mayor Humpage agreed, and felt it
should be put on a lighter agenda. Consensus of Council agreed to delete Item 29.
Vice Mayor Watkins removed Item 6 from the Consent Agenda.
2
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 3
Motion passed 4-0.
VI. VILLAGE COUNCIL REORGANIZATION
Election of Officers for the following year:
a. Mayor
Vice Mayor Watkins nominated Jim Humpage for Mayor. She commented she
sincerely feels the Mayor position is one that should be supported unless there is a
reason not to. She stated he has done an outstanding job. She noted this year the
Village has had a lot of difficult issues. She stated with him out there, the
residents respond to him very well, and he devotes 150% to the job, and she is
proud to nominate him. Mayor Humpage thanked Vice Mayor Watkins.
Mayor Humpage asked if there were any other nominations; their being none a
motion was made.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved to close the nominations, and elect Jim
Humpage as Mayor for the following year; seconded by Council Member Paterno;
motion passed 4-0.
b. Vice Mayor
Mayor Humpage commented it is his intent, and he has always said he is a two-
term person, and at the end of this term he will probably fade away. He
commented he would still be present all the time. He suggested Council needs to
consider having someone groomed up to the position. He commented he has
struggled with his decision, and does not know where the Vice Mayor would like
to go in the future, since she is a new grandmother. Vice Mayor Watkins stated
she is fine with any job on Council. Mayor Humpage felt perhaps Council should
give Council Member Paterno the nomination for Vice Mayor. He nominated
Council Member Paterno for Vice Mayor. Council Member Genco commented
she was glad Council was taking a junior member, and making them a Vice
Mayor, and then hopefully they will be groomed for the Mayor. She hoped that
was something Council would consider for the future. Mayor Humpage agreed
that was a great idea.
Mayor Humpage asked if there were any other nominations. Their being none a
motion was made.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved to close the nomination, and elect Tom
Paterno as Vice Mayor for the following year; seconded by Mayor Humpage; motion
passed 4-0.
3
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 4
•
VII. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
1. Proclamation declaring the week of April 24-28, 2006 as "Victims Rights
Week" in the Village of Tequesta.
Mayor Humpage declared the week of April 24-28, 2006 as "Victims
Rights Week" in the Village of Tequesta.
2. Proclamation declaring the week of April 9-15, 2006 as "Public Safety
Telecommunications Week" in the Village of Tequesta.
Mayor Humpage commented the Police Department Communications
Officers were present to accept the Proclamation. He asked them to come
forward to the podium.
Mayor Humpage read for the record the Proclamation in its entirety. He
thanked the Communication Officers for all their hard work, especially
during the hurricanes, and presented them with a plaque.
3. Proclamation declaring the Month of April 2006 as "Water Conservation
Month" in the Village of Tequesta.
•
Mayor Humpage declared the month of April 2006 as "Water
Conservation Month" in the Village of Tequesta.
VIII. STANDING REPORTS
VILLAGE ATTORNEY -None
VILLAGE MANAGER -None
IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
4. Tequesta Drive Bridge -Discussion and possible action regarding posting
speed limit/weight limits on Tequesta Drive Bridge.
Mayor Humpage commented he was glad to see the bridge now open. He
explained what Council has before them is a discussion item of what
Council would like to see occur on the bridge. He pointed out Council has
been provided with a report from the State which reflects the strength of
the bridge, as far as the State is concerned. He explained it gives them
recommendations toward the weight and speed limits.
•
Council Member Watkins stated she would like to see the speed limit back
to 30 mph. She mentioned as to the weight, Council's primary concern has
been getting the school buses and fire equipment across the bridge.
4
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 5
She stated she would like to hear Council's comments, and understands
• the concerns about the through truck traffic in the Village. She questioned
whether Council would want to allow the school buses and the fire trucks
at their weight, and keep it at 5 tons, or would Council want to do
something other with the tonnage as the permanent to allow others. She
felt that would be hard for the police to enforce, and would just assume
find a good tonnage to allow, and leave it at that. Council Member Genco
mentioned she was a little concerned, but stated she would like to allow
the fire rescue, and the school buses, if possible. She indicated the reason
she was still concerned was because the Village needed to do other repairs
on the bridge, and the other side of the bridge also needed quite a bit of
work. She pointed out they were told the bridge it is not in the best of
shape, and that the heavier weight limits would cause it to degrade
quicker. She explained she was very concerned about putting the tonnage
up to whatever the maximum is. She mentioned she was not sure if the
legal staff has had a chance to review this, and allow the Village to give an
exemption to school buses and fire rescue equipment, and keep the
tonnage down for all other vehicle traffic. She pointed out if the Village
ends up allowing the heavier weight, then it would give out faster, and it
may give out quicker then what Council would like.
Council Member Genco stated she would like to see the Village do a five-
year plan. towards developing plans for a new bridge. She felt that would
• give the Village the opportunity to save the money towards that purpose.
She stated she wanted to make sure the bridge lasts at least the five years.
Vice Mayor Paterno stated he would concur with Council Member
Watkins in reference to the speed. He commented in reference to the
weight he sort of goes along with Council Member Genco. He commented
in his understanding from different engineers, and different people, if the
Village puts more weight on the bridge it is going to deteriorate quicker.
He mentioned he was hoping that maybe the Village could fix Section 2
and 4, and some other things, and then he found out there is also problems
with the seawall that needed to be addressed at some point. He noted in
order to fix the bridge it would have to come out, because they can not put
the pilings down, because the bridge is in the way to put new ones in. He
commented in order to get as much longevity out of it, in order to save the
funds to build the bridge; he stated he would like to make a motion.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Paterno moved to approve the return of the speed limit to 30
mph, and keep the tonnage at S tons, and make an exception for the school buses, and
emergency vehicles only. Mayor Humpage stated one thing with this Council is that they
have tried to pay as they go, then to take from the Village reserves. Council Member
Genco questioned whether Council could make the exception for one group of people on
the tonnage, or if they would be faced with someone suing the Village. Attorney Hawkins
• stated if the engineers support it, and noted he could not guarantee that the Village would
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 6
not be sued. Council Member Genco pointed out it is reasonable to do that because the
• Village owns the bridge, and because they have a purpose. Attorney Hawkins commented
it is a valid question. He noted if the Village has engineering support that justifies the
proposal, then he felt the Village could do it, and keep it with the Village's police powers.
Attorney Hawkins stated there is no guarantee there would not be a claim. Council
Member Genco felt it was a viable reason, and that it is supported. Council Member
Genco seconded the motion.
Mayor Humpage pointed out all the members on Council have always
tried to pay as they go. He indicated he happened to walk into Village Hall
when Staff was having a meeting with the Department of Transportation
(DOT) people and the Village does have some repairs that need to be
done. He stated instead of taking the money from Reserves, if the Village
is frugal with their budgets for the next 5 years, Council could budget
funds and do the repairs. He pointed out the more stress this bridge is put
under the quicker it will fail. He felt the Village needed to be guarded, so
they would not have to expend another $350,000, and have it occur or be
inconvenienced by another failure in the bridge. He indicated although
there is a motion on the floor for 5 tons, some of the residents were
concerned when they pull their boats and try to get them out. He suggested
leaving the speed at 30mph, but taking the tonnage to 10 tons. He
explained that would allow the basic travel for every citizen to move some
of the personal items, but prevent concrete trucks, garbage trucks, and
• moving vans, etc. He stated he was ok with 5 tons, but felt 10 tons would
give the citizens more leeway.
Council Member Watkins stated she would appreciate it, because if
Council was going to vote to leave it at 5 tons, she would have to vote no.
She stated the only reason she would vote no was because she has a
neighbor who is a handyman and he can not bring his truck over the
bridge. She explained it is not a big truck, nor double axle, but he can not
even do his business reasonably with his truck. She pointed out she is
trying to accommodate someone who lives on the other side to be able to
reasonably do their daily lives. She felt if the tonnage went to 10 tons she
did not believe that it would seriously compromise the bridge any worst
than it is. She hoped everyone realized they are on a 5-year plan to build a
new bridge. She wanted Council to try and accommodate the best they
could. Attorney Hawkins mentioned he could see everyone was struggling
to make the best decision based on the data that was provided, and the
burden on the citizens. He suggested that whatever they ultimately vote
on, Council should put a caveat that administratively it will be assessed
within 3 months to determine whether the warranted travel, that Council
would be permitting in the motion, appeared to be causing a problem. He
stated they can then assess it in 3 months, or whatever time the Manager
deems to be appropriate. He urged 3 months, and they could reevaluate
• then.
6
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 7
Council Member Genco asked if there was any way the Village could put
• some kind of device on the bridge to know what the weight was, because a
10 ton vehicle is a lot harder to distinguish from a 15 ton. She pointed out
the vehicles would typically look very similar. She commented also the
police officers are going to have to make judgment calls, and it would be
very difficult for them to know what the weight of the vehicle is. She felt
keeping it at 5 tons was very easy, because it was going to basically be
vehicle traffic. She stated if they go with 10 tons, except the school buses
and emergency vehicles, the Village needed to have a mechanism to
enforce it.
Vice Mayor Paterno commented in reference to that there is new
technology available today as far as cameras. He mentioned there is a
local company that has the technology that can actually run the license
plate, and within 5 seconds to be able to tell if there was a warrant on the
person that owned the vehicle, and at the same time be able to check the
tonnage of the truck by the plate. He explained it is new technology, and
the company would be willing to do a temporary study, if Council wanted
them to, where they would install the equipment for the Village to use as a
trial for $3,000. He pointed out with $1,500 of it being refundable to the
Village if they brought the system and applied towards the purchase, and
then the Village would own it.
• Council Member Genco questioned how the Village was going to enforce
it. Mayor Humpage stated that was the problem. Vice Mayor Paterno
stated the Police Department would send warnings to those people.
Council Member Genco noted Staff could also check to see if they needed
an occupational license. Vice Mayor Paterno stated the Village could do
many things with the system. He explained that is the only option, without
having to have someone sitting there. Council Member Watkins
questioned whether it would be so difficult to enforce at 10 tons instead of
5 tons. She asked if there would be a good place to put a tonnage amount.
Village Manager Couzzo stated all the vehicles have a gross vehicle
weight. The officer would have to pull the vehicle over, which they have
done, and check the gross vehicle weight to see if it exceeded the posted
vehicle weight. He stated the predicament is more having somebody there
when the vehicle goes over the Bridge. He pointed out the police
department did it one morning, and within 1 %2 hours had 12 trucks pulled
over. He mentioned his concern was after they left, what happened. Mayor
Humpage felt Council was all on the same page that they wanted the
bridge to last 5 or 6 more years, so the Village could fund the complete
repair of it. He stated Council was ok with the 30 mph. He commented in
talking to the DOT people, the biggest problem that this bridge faces is the
vibration caused by the larger vehicles.
•
7
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 8
Mayor Humpage indicated he would have difficulty supporting 5 tons, and
• would like to see it at 10 tons, because it lets the citizens move their
personal belongings (their boats and recreational vehicles) across the
bridge. He commented it would definitely inhibit any moving van, any
concrete truck, or any major truck that could cause damage. Council
Member Paterno suggested looking at the big picture and the traffic
control of the area. He felt 5 tons actually helped the Village by putting
some of the burden on Martin County, who has had their residents use
Tequesta roads as a through street. He felt it redistributed the traffic
probably more equitably, and some of his neighbors have said they have
noticed fewer commercial through trucks coming through their neighbor.
He pointed out this was an opportunity to possibly handle both items at the
same time, with the 5 ton limit, and it would be easy to enforce, because it
was basically passenger vehicles, and Village residents. He mentioned he
had not heard any complaints about anyone having to use Island Way.
Council Member Genco asked what if the Village had it for local traffic
only. She mentioned the Village could post it and enforce local traffic
only, no through traffic, which would get rid on a lot of the commercial
vehicles, and no vehicles over 10 tons. She commented that way it would
be easy to distinguish by having that kind of posting. Mayor Humpage
commented he was fine with that. Vice Mayor Paterno asked how the
Village was going to distinguish through traffic or enforce it. He suggested
• it might be harder to enforce it, than differencing between 5 tons and 10
tons. Council Member Genco stated through traffic would be easily
identified by a commercial vehicle. Mayor Humpage commented the
police can not be everywhere, but a police officer who sees a Rooms to Go
truck on the other side of the bridge going into Turtle Creek, that is
through traffic. He felt it was an enforcement issue, and they can not take
the police and have them only do traffic for the rest of the three months.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked if the Chief had an opinion on which way
would be easier to enforce the 5 ton versus the 10 ton limits. Police Chief
Steve Allison commented the Village all ready has an ordinance for
through trucks, which is 5000 pounds. He asked if the ordinance would
need to be amended based on the Council action this evening in order to
enforce this. Attorney Hawkins stated they would need to amend the
ordinance. Council Member Genco commented the issue was not so much
the ordinance, but through traffic. She asked if it would be a problem for
the police officers to identify the difference between commercial vehicles
and residents. Chief Allison noted the way the ordinance was written now,
with through traffic the vehicle has to be followed just about out of town
before the police could make the stop. Council Member Genco agreed that
could be a problem for the police. Vice Mayor Paterno stated it is very
difficult to enforce, and it is a problem with the through trucks.
•
8
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 9
Chief Allison commented the system Vice Mayor Paterno was proposing
• would give the police pictures of the vehicle, and they would have dates
and times to send the warnings to the violators, which would help in
establishing patterns, so they could put these officers out there when these
violations were taking place. Mayor Humpage asked whether that could
occur at 10 tons as well as 5 tons. Chief Allison agreed. Council Member
Genco agreed she liked the idea of the camera surveillance, but felt it did
not have enough teeth. She commented in a one-hour period, the Village
could end up with 100- 30 ton trucks going over the bridge in which case
they will have done damage to the bridge. She stated rather than taking the
chance of doing damage, they should stay with the lighter tonnage. She
felt she would rather have a couple of residents inconvenienced a little,
than a lot of people being inconvenienced.
Council Member Watkins commented she was just trying to help out the
residents who live on the other side of the bridge and work with their
vehicles. She asked if it would be possible for them to come register with
the police department. She noted she has a neighbor that was at 6 tons,
rather than 5 tons, and that it cripples him from coming across the bridge.
She commented she was trying to accommodate the residents, be
conservative, but allow them to live as well. Council Member Genco
commented what about if they have a VOT sticker. Council Member
Watkins pointed out everyone has a sticker; her neighbor is a resident and
• would have a VOT sticker. Vice Mayor Paterno explained they are not
allowed to have commercial vehicles, or large trucks in the Country Club
anyway. Council Member Watkins mentioned her neighbor has been
stopped and told he can not go over the bridge, because he is over the 5
tons. She suggested registering the vehicles with the Police Department.
Council Member Genco commented if the residents have a sticker, maybe
the Village could do it like that, and leave the bridge at 5 tons. Vice Mayor
Paterno suggested a compromise by making it 5 tons, but with an
exception that a resident of Tequesta would have a special thing that they
could put on their window allowing them to go over the bridge, as long as
they are between 5-10 tons. He explained a special permit, something like
that if they are a resident of the Village of Tequesta, and nobody else, no
unincorporated areas. He commented those Village residents are also
paying the bill to go over the bridge. He felt this was a compromise and
Council could do it that way. Council Member Genco agreed they have to
have a special sticker. Vice Mayor Paterno stated if they get pulled over
and do not have a sticker, give them a ticket. Mayor Humpage asked if
Council could do that. Attorney Hawkins stated he believed they could, in
keeping with their police powers.
9
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 10
Mayor Humpage agreed, and stated that would get the Village residents
• off the hook, and get them to where they need to be. He felt Council
needed to amend the original motion.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Paterno moved to amend his motion that the Village raise the
speed limit back to 30 mph, and keep the S tons, except for residents of the Village of
Tequesta, that they will be required to have a permit for 5-10 tons, and including the
other exceptions that have been put in, emergency vehicles and the school buses, and for
the residents it would beano fee sticker, non transferable. Council Member Genco
commented the permit has to match the license tag. Attorney Hawkins asked if there
would be any situation where an emergency type of vehicle that is not of Tequesta, would
have to transverse the bridge. Council Member Watkins stated the County would have to.
Council Member Genco pointed out the Council is not limiting it to just Tequesta
emergency vehicles. Mayor Humpage agreed the County has to service unincorporated
pockets. Vice Mayor Paterno pointed out the same for Martin County emergency vehicles
also; seconded by Council Member Genco; motion passed 4-0.
X. CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under Consent Agenda are considered 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.
Vice Mayor Paterno removed Items 14 and 15.
Council Member Watkins removed Item 6.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve the Consent Agenda, as
amended; seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno; motion passed 4-0.
Therefore the following items were approved on the Consent Agenda:
5. Village Council Regulaz Meeting Minutes February 16, 2006.
7. Village Council Special Emergency Meeting Minutes January 2'7, 2006.
8. Village Council Special Emergency Meeting Minutes February 2, 2006.
9. Village Council Special Emergency Meeting Minutes February 7, 2006.
10. Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes January 25, 2006.
11. Village Council Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes, February 16, 2006 with
Martin County Commissioners, Town of Jupiter Town Council, and
Facilitated by Palm Beach County Commissioner Kazen Mazcus.
10
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 11
12. RESOLUTION 65-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving a Proposal
from Chaz Equipment Co., Inc, for the installation of Street Lighting
Conduit in an amount not to exceed the existing budgeted amount of
$98,470 (Account #303-390-663.661)
13. a) RESOLUTION 68-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of
the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving a
Contract through J.C. White Furniture, of Riviera Beach, Florida, for
Furniture for the new Village Hall per Florida State Contracts #425-001-
01-1, #425-001-06-1, #420-420-02-01, #GS-28F-2100D in the total
amount of $127,613.07, Having a FY 2005/2006 Capital Projects Fund
allocation of $144,000.00, account #303-331-664.603 and authorizing the
Village Manager to execute the applicable contract on behalf of the
Village.
b) RESOLUTION 74-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of
the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving a
contract to Westwood Appliance Center, Jupiter, Florida, for Kitchen
appliances for the new Village Hall in the total amount of $6,461.00,
Having a FY 2005/2006 Capital Projects Fund allocation of $144,000.00,
account #303-331-664.603 and authorizing the Village Manager to
execute the applicable contract on behalf of the Village.
16. Budget Adjustments for the month of Apri12006.
17. Council approval for membership with the Northern Palm Beaches
Cultural Alliance in the amount of $100.00.
18. Council approval of the Council Executive Session -Union (Collective
Bargaining), April 27, 2006, 6:00 P.M., and Council Workshop, Apri127,
2006, 7:00 P.M. -Boat Related Matters in the Tequesta Recreation
Center, 399 Seabrook Road, Tequesta.
19. Council consideration to declare Surplus Property on unserviceable items.
19.1 Council approval for a letter from the Village of Tequesta in support of the
designation of Trapper Nelson Interpretive Site, located on the
Loxahatchee River as a National Historical Place.
END OF CONSENT AGENDA
11
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 12
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. Village Council Regulaz Meeting Minutes March 9, 2006.
Council Member Watkins asked for a correction on Page 6, Paragraph 2,
Line 4, Delete "people", and Insert "pupil". Consensus of Council agreed.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve the Minutes of March 9, 2006
Regular Meeting, with one correction; seconded by Council Member Genco; motion
passed 4-0.
14. a) RESOLUTION 70-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of
the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving adding
the financing of Phase II of the Police Department 800MHZ
Communications Replacement System to the Master Lease/Purchase
Program that the Village has entered into with the Florida League of
Cities, in the amount of $136,788.89 at an annual interest rate of 4.38% or
94% of the 5-Yeaz treasury to be financed over five (5) years as described
in the attached proposal from the Florida League of Cities (Exhibit A), and
authorizing the Village Manager to execute the applicable contract on
behalf of the Village.
Vice Mayor Paterno indicated he removed this item for information
purposes for the residents. He mentioned the Village police department
was switching from the VHF radio system to 800 MHz system, which
would allow the Village to have better communications for emergency
personnel. He felt this was a movement in the right direction, and he
would like to see in the future the fire department move into the same
system so that they coordinate their services. He mentioned currently they
are on two different systems, and have to go through dispatch in order to
do the call. He indicated he would like to see fire on the same system.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Paterno moved to approve Resolution 70-05/06; seconded by
Council Member Watkins.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 70-05/06.
Motion passed 4-0.
b) RESOLUTION 71-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of
the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving a
proposal from Caz-Comm, Inc., of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, for
Phase II of the replacement of the Police Department Communications
System per the Florida Department of Transportation bid award D022844
in the amount of $136,788.89, interest and principal payments budgeted in
12
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 13
~ the 2005/2006 General Fund #001 budget and authorizing the Village
• Manager to execute the applicable contract on behalf of the Village.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve Resolution 71-05/06;
seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 71-OS/06.
Motion passed 4-0.
1 S. RESOLUTION 73-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving the purchase
of an 88 KW Diesel Generator from Hertz Equipment Rental, of
Jacksonville, Florida, in the amount of $33,602.00; this is part of the
Village's Hurricane Preparedness Program; Cost to be funded by the
existing Hurricane Wilma Reserve Contingency account in the General
Fund #001 account #001-990-599.902 and in the Water Utility Fund #401
account # 401-990-599.902.
Vice Mayor Paterno commented Item 1 S has to do with a generator for the
Public Utilities, and for the Wells. He mentioned if the Village has a
power outage this would provide power to run the deep wells. He pointed
out Staff has suggested taking SO% funding from Utilities, and SO% from
Public Works. He felt it would be in the best interest to take all the funds
out of Utilities, since it is mainly a utility item. He suggested taking
$33,602.00 out of account # 401.
Mayor Humpage questioned whether this generator would be used to run
the Public Works building. Mr. Russell White, Public Services Manager
indicated this generator would run the public services garage and also run
a well. Mayor Humpage asked if that would come out of the enterprise
fund. Council Member Genco stated the money coming out of Public
Works was part of the money the Village had set aside for the hurricanes.
Vice Mayor Paterno agreed, but stated that was out of the hurricane
money to fix the items they found that needed fixed. He stated this item is
new equipment, and it really is not related to hurricane damages. He felt it
might not be appropriate to take from that fund. Village Manager Couzzo
indicated the monies would come out of the general fund reserve. Council
Member Genco pointed out the Village received monies to reimburse the
Village for Hurricane Wilma, and that has already passed. She stated this
is money the Village akeady has that was set aside from Hurricane Wilma,
that is sitting in the General Fund to be used for hurricane related
contingencies. Vice Mayor Paterno felt Council had appropriated money
from the General fund for this. He commented the Village was not
reimbursed the total amount they thought, so what actually happened is the
Village appropriated more money then they got from FEMA.
13
'r.
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 14
Council Member Genco stated she understood that FEMA may not have
reimbursed the Village 100%, which they were not supposed to, but the
monies that Council put aside in the budget were attached to the Hurricane
Wilma Reserve Contingency account. Vice Mayor Paterno agreed.
Council Member Genco commented if Council is taking it out of the
General Fund, they are taking out of the general-purpose account. She
noted Council has already set aside money towards generators and
emergency preparations that was identified by the Hurricane Wilma fund.
Mr. White agreed it could be taken from the hurricane fund. Council
Member Genco stated it should not be coming out of the General Fund; it
should come from the disaster contingency account. Vice Mayor Paterno
agreed, but felt it should come out of the public utilities, because the use
was mainly going to be public utilities, and it should not come out of the
General Fund. Council Member Genco noted she would rather do it this
way, than to do two transfers from the General Fund to this account. Vice
Mayor Paterno clarified he would like to see all the money taken from the
Utility account. Council Member Genco commented it is not budgeted out
of Utilities; it is budgeted out of the account that this was designed for.
She stated this is an emergency generator. Vice Mayor Paterno noted he
sees this as equipment for the future; and they could also take that money
and put it back into the general fund. Council Member Genco mentioned if
they do not spend the money somewhere else it would go back into the
General fund. Vice Mayor Paterno suggested putting the $16,000 (50 %)
back into the general fund. Council Member Genco indicated she would
rather have the money that is set up for emergency equipment come out of
the emergency fund. She felt that was the purpose of having a budget and
following it.
Mayor Humpage indicated he would not have a problem with it since the
Village was going to spend the money one way or another. He agreed to
leave it as is, so that the Village could track it better. He felt it was a
housekeeping matter. Vice Mayor Paterno noted he would rather see it
come out of the Utility fund. He commented he always thought of the
contingency fund more as if the Village had a hurricane the money was
there, and they would be able to take care of it, whether it was debris,
telephones poles, or the bridge that gets knocked down. He noted he did
not necessarily see that money as equipment for the future. Consensus of
Council agreed to leave the Resolution as proposed.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve Resolution 73-05/06;
seconded by Council Member Genco; motion passed 4-0.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 73-05/06.
END OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
14
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
' Page 15
XI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS
Mayor Humpage commented Village Manager Couzzo wanted to discuss
extending the work hours for drilling the new well. He mentioned the Village had
extended the work hours for drilling the Village Hall well, and it seemed to work
out with the neighboring Blair House residents. Village Manager Couzzo
requested to extend the hours of work operation from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm. He
felt this drilling should not inconvenience anyone in noise, and it would provide
for a much smoother drilling operation. Consensus of Council agreed to extend
the work hours for the well drilling.
- Mr. John Goodland resident of Beach Road and President of the Beach
Road Association gave a brief overview of the Association. He mentioned
the Association represents the common welfare and general interests of 22
condominiums on Jupiter Island, comprised of over 600 units. He
explained recently they engaged on a landscaping plan for Beach Road
from U.S. One to east of the drawbridge. He indicated they assessed the
homeowners for the landscape improvements. He commented additionally
they obtained a substantial grant from Commissioner Karen Marcus'
discretionary funds, and the Village of Tequesta appropriated additional
funds for the landscaping project. He thanked Council, the Village
Manager, and wanted to recognize the Assistant Manager Bob Garlo and
his staff for all their help and assistance. He indicated as a result of these
efforts and funds, they have received a lot of favorable comments from
their members. He noted when the Village completed the work, it was
much more than they expected. He thanked Mr. Tom Hayworth of Rood
Landscaping for developing and implementing the plan. He noted the
project is about 2/3 completed. He thanked Council for all the help and
assistance.
Mayor Humpage noted he received a card from Ms. Karen Schweitzer
resident of Tequesta Drive, regarding the "Special exception use for the
property located at 565 No. Dover Road. He explained the applicant has
withdrawn their application. He read the following cards of residents that had
left the meeting: 1) Mr. Russell von Frank, resident of Dover Road; and 2)
Mr. Howard Morton.
Ms. Joann Huffinan resident of Willow Road, noted there was a constant
pile of trash and yard waste, and felt the owner waits until the sanitation
people come through, and then puts another pile out there. She noted the
sanitation people came through this morning, and there is akeady another
pile out there. She stated the homeowner commented there was no grass
there, and she agreed no wonder there was no grass there. She pointed out
they put carpet out there when they refurbish the apartments, and kitchen
cabinets, and appliances. She commented she has called the police and
called the Mayor, but nobody can seem to do anything about it.
15
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 16
Mayor Humpage indicated he would pass her comment along to the Community
Development Director and she can give it to her code enforcement officer. Ms.
Huffman stated she has already contacted Community Development, and they
could not do anything for her. Council Member Genco asked whether they were
required to have a dumpster. Ms. Huffman pointed out they have a dumpster in
the back, but noted they do not use it. Mayor Humpage stated they would see if
they can get a better handle on it, and if not she is to come back to Council.
- Mr. Royce Hood, resident of Evergreen Ave thanked the Council
Members for their leadership, ethics, and moral judgment, and for
allowing the residents to speak here this evening. He indicated he came to
the meeting this evening to challenge Mr. Dalack directly. He commented
as elected members of Council they representative the voices of the
citizens of Tequesta. He felt Tequesta is one of the finest municipalities in
the State of Florida, and as a traveler he is proud to say this is one of the
finest place in the world, and where he intends on living his life. He
commented Council as a voice of the people; serve at the pleasure of the
voters. He felt their job, as he understands it, is to represent the needs of
the community, and to build confidence among their constituents. He
stated Mr. Dalack's reckless judgment has embarrassed him, and feels it
' has tarnished the image of the Village. He stated he has no confidence in
Mr. Dalack's leadership. He felt the people of Tequesta could sign an
• initiative, which can then be presented to Council. He commented he has
not done his homework on this, but at this time would like to create a
petition/initiative, avote of no confidence in Mr. Dalack's judgment and
leadership. He commented he feels this would solve problems, as the
voice of Tequesta would have spoken. He felt this could bring the Village
to a Special Election.
Mr. Tom Tardonia, resident of Hickory Hill Road mentioned he had
preferred to speak directly to Mr. Dalack, but he has left the meeting. He
thanked Council for their outstanding job. He commented Tequesta,
without a doubt, is the best place in Palm Beach County to live, and that
he born and raised here. He commented while his views are different than
Mr. Dalack's; he does have the right to his opinions. He is elected to
Council to conduct the business of the Village of Tequesta only. He felt
Mr. Dalack's proposed Resolution to withdraw the troops from Iraq, and
impeach the President was entirely out of line, and embarrassing to the
Village. He commented he wished Mr. Dalack would stick to the Village
business at hand. He commented the oath of office is done to preserve the
integrity of the position. He felt Mr. Dalack should not be on Council if he
signed the papers for office without reading the papers. He stated he
would not want someone on Council that could not remember taking the
oath several years prior. He thanked Council.
16
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
' Page 17
• - Mr. Joseph Marzilanio resident of Tequesta Drive commended Council for
the good job on the bridge. He mentioned with the bridge being closed he
and everyone else on that side of the bridge had it as a real burden. He
indicated earlier in the meeting the bridge was discussed regarding the
speed, and tonnage, but nothing was mentioned about the water traffic
under the bridge. He noted he lives immediately adjacent to the bridge,
and his boat dock is close to the bridge, and he is constantly down at the
dock, or in his boat, and from experience he can say that boats go under
the bridge wide-open speed. He commented they ski through there
constantly, and one skier last week hit the concrete support and scrapped
his arm. He felt with what he was getting at the footing of the bridge and
bulkheads, they were seriously being eroded and affected. He mentioned
also there is a manatee sign that they must be at idle speed on both sides of
the bridge. He felt it has not been enforced, and was very bad for the
bridge, and luckily no one has been hurt. He suggested the Village put a
no wake buoy, and rules to enforce it.
Mayor Humpage commented the Village does have a marine boat, and as
other situations the police department can not be every place at the same
time. He mentioned they would look into it, and give to code enforcement
and the Chief. He stated he could come back to Council, if needed.
•
XII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCIL
COUNCIL MEMBER WATKINS
Council Workshop -Boat Related Matters -She mentioned in the past
several months there were many people interested in the Boat issue, and
she wanted to be sure to let everyone know that Council had scheduled a
Workshop on Apri127, 2006, at 7:00 P.M. She noted the Village Clerk has
assured her it would be published in the paper. She commented anyone
interested in the issue could certainly attend.
Incoming Council Member Dalack -She mentioned over the past week
she had not given much comment to the newspapers regarding the
situation, but in light of this evening she felt that she would read into the
record for the public a letter she wrote after last months Council Meeting.
He indicated she sent this to the Village Manager, and it was distributed to
Council. (Copy on file in the Clerk's Office).
VICE MAYOR PATERNO
Incoming Council Member Dalack - He commented a reporter asked him
the other day, and he stated he supports the government of the United
States, the Village Charter, the Florida Constitution, and the U.S.
Constitution.
17
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 18
He stated without our form of government, they would be no United
• States, nor would it be the greatest place on earth to live.
COUNCIL MEMBER GENCO
- Old Train Station -She indicated she would like to clarify something she
read in the newspaper. She mentioned about four years ago the Village
started talking about the old train station, and the potential of moving it.
She explained back in January she spoke with Ms. Louise Murtaugh,
President of the JTJB Chamber of Commerce about the building, and Ms.
Murtaugh became quite excited about the opportunity of restoring a
historic building, and was enthusiastic enough to consider trying to raise
funds to help accomplish that; and that the building might serve a public
purpose. Ms. Genco stated she was all in favor of this, and wanted Council
to consider the idea. Since the Village has looked into the costs of moving
the building, and maybe in the next six months or so the Village may have
the opportunity to discuss it more, and wanted the Council aware of what
she had been talking about. Mayor Humpage agreed, and commented he
would like to see something happen with the building, because if
something was not done, they were going to knock it down. He stated this
item would come back, and maybe they could get some help by hooking
' up with the Historical Society, Chamber of Commerce, Town of Jupiter,
and individuals that may be interested in helping. He felt it would be great
to preserve that portion of history.
MAYOR HUMPAGE
Incoming Council Member Dalack - He noted the Press that the Village
has been getting. He asked that the Press at this point in time would cease
and desist. He commented it is Council's, and his job to follow the rules
that are dictated by the Village Charter. He commented he feels badly that
this has occurred for the Village, and sad for the citizens. He stressed he
hopes this comes to a quick and speedy end, so that they can move on with
the business of the Village of Tequesta, and maintaining the quality of life
that the citizens expect.
XIII. DEVELOPMENT MATTERS
20. ORDINANCE 605 -FIRST READING - An Ordinance of the Village
Council of the Village of Tequesta, Florida, Amending the Village Code
of Ordinances, Chapter 78, Article I, Section 78-4, entitled "Definitions";
Amending Chapter 78, Article VI, Division 2, Section 78-143, entitled
"Schedule of Site Requirements"; Amending Chapter 78, Article VI,
Division 2, Section 78-177, entitled "C-2
District"; Amending Chapter 78, Article VI
Developments"; Amending Chapter 78, Artic
Community Commercial
I, "Planned Commercial
le VIII, Section 78-251,
18
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 19
. entitled "Purpose and Intent"; Amending Section 78-252, entitled
"Applicability of Land Development Regulations to Planned Commercial
Developments"; Amending Section 78-253, entitled "Conflicts with Other
Regulations"; Amending Section 78-254, entitled "Special Defimitions";
Amending Section 78-255, entitled "General Requirements and Special
Regulations"; Section 78-256, entitled "Property Development
Regulations"; Amending Section 78-257, entitled "Design Criteria";
Amending Chapter 78, Article IX, Section 78-282, entitled "Structures
that may be Exempt from Height Limitations"; Creating new Code Section
78-303 to be entitled "Visibility Triangles"; Providing for Severability;
Providing for Codification; Providing for Repeal of Laws in Conflict; and
Providing for an Effective Date.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve First Reading of Ordinance
605; seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno. (Vote at end of discussion)
Mayor Humpage commented Council has tried to look at the code, and
listen to the citizens of what they would like to occur in the commercial
district. He noted every Council Member has given a great deal of time
and thought to this matter. Attorney Hawkins mentioned this is a
preliminary review, first reading, and that this document can be modified.
He noted there are a few typographical changes that need to be corrected,
but it basically represents the product of Staff, looking at questions that
Council raised back in the fall of 2005, at which time, azoning-in-
progress was declared by Council, relative to the C-2 district. He
commented Ms. Catherine Harding, Director of Community Development,
Attorney Karen Roselli, he and Village Manager Michael Couzzo have
worked on formulating revisions to the Ordinance, with a view toward
trying to address Council's concerns. He stated specifically in context to
the Planned Commercial Development (PCD).
Council Member Genco asked if this was a public hearing, and official
first reading. Attorney Hawkins stated yes. Attorney Roselli mentioned the
document was in legislative format. She indicated she was planning on
reviewing the entire document, in case Council may have questions. She
noted the new text was underlined, and some things have been moved
around. She reviewed the proposed Ordinance: Page 3, "Definitions", 1)
the definition of basement was clarified to make it clear the basement was
not counting in calculating overall building height, unless it exceeded
natural grade; 2) the definition of "Height" was added, which includes
four different points on the roof that the measurement of height would go
up to; 3) the defmition of "Highest adjacent grade" was expanded to
address issues where the finished grade was not necessarily level, so there
would be an average taken of the elevation of the ground at each face of
the building to determine height; 4) the definition of "Story" was revised;
and 5) the definition of "Turret" was added.
19
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 20
' Mayor Humpage pointed out on Page 3, under the definition of
i "Basement" it says "that portion of any basement which exceeds natural
grade shall be used in calculating the overall building height"; he
commented on Page 13, "Parking Garages" 3`d sentence, "subterranean
parking garages and/or storage areas which are below natural grade shall
not be counted". He asked why are they not like basements. Attorney
Roselli stated they are, anything that is below grade is not counted. Village
Manager Couzzo stated he felt it was a "above and below grade" issue.
Mayor Humpage clarified if the parking garage comes above grade it gets
counted. Attorney Roselli stated yes, that is where it starts to get counted
just the portion that is above grade.
Attorney Roselli mentioned the "Schedule of Site Requirements" table
was already in the code, but needed to be consistent with the code. She
indicated she added a box for the PCD special exception uses. She noted
the regulations are summarized in the table. She explained the C-2
regulations were the only ones contained in the table, and there was
conflict with the building height that was in the table, and what was
actually in the code. She stated that now has been changed, and it is up to
Council to decide what they would like, but for discussion purposes, the
maximum building height in the C-2 is 4 stories/50 feet, and in the PCD it
is also 4 stories/50 feet, but up to 5 stories/70 feet at the Council's
discretion. She pointed out in the PCD the minimum living area
requirement is 1,200 square feet per dwelling unit.
Council Member Genco commented the 20% under the Minimum
landscaped open space should be 25%. Attorney Roselli agreed, but noted
in the PCD regulations currently there is an 80%/20% mix, so that is why
it states 20%. Council Member Genco stated on Pages 6 and 11, it is
showing 25%. She felt it was Council's intent to make it 25%. Attorney
Roselli pointed out on Page 17, "Area limitations", the existing code says
the platted open space is 20% of gross land area. She stated that is why she
used the 20%, and did not know if this 20% was the same as the
"Minimum landscaped Open Space" in the table. Council Member Genco
stated that should be 75%/25%. Attorney Hawkins clarified was it
Council's desire for 75%/25%. Mayor Humpage noted it was 20% and
Council wanted to bring it up. Consensus of Council agreed to 25%.
Vice Mayor Paterno questioned whether as they add stories, should
Council require for every story more of a setback. He explained as the
building gets larger, and it is close to the street, it creates a tunnel effect,
and questioned whether they should go back 5 feet per floor. Attorney
Roselli pointed out in the table, which is consistent with C-2, 4 and 5 story
buildings require an additional 5 feet for each story above 50 feet. Vice
Mayor Paterno noted he does not want to see a new building going up
right against the street.
20
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 21
Council Member Genco felt Council was doing that with this code, and
that Council still has discretion on the aesthetics and footprint of the
building. She indicated they could still ask the applicant to move the
building back or tweak it more. She felt this was a rule of thumb; that the
applicant can do more than this, but they can not do less. Vice Mayor
Paterno agreed, but suggested maybe Council should require it at the 3ta
floor level, so Council could start moving the front setbacks of the
building back more.
Council Member Genco noted there is also a required easement in the
front of the property, then a setback, then an additional 5 feet for the 4~'
and Sa' story. She noted a typical road easement is usually 12-15 feet,
sometimes more, so probably it is at least 40 feet from the curb, then 5 feet
back for the 4`~ floor, and additional 5 feet for 5~` story. She explained that
could be 50 feet from the curb. Council Member Watkins felt that was a
lot, when considering the size of the properties that aze left in the Village.
Council Member Genco mentioned the only one that got the exception on
that rule was Mr.Van Brock's building, because it was pre-approved.
Mayor Humpage suggested the Sa' story and the front yard setback could
be deleted, because it being 5 stories would have to come back to Council
anyway. Council Member Genco explained this is guideline; the applicant
could not do anything less. She felt it was important to have that in the
code, for the next Councils after them.
• ointed out 1 200 s uaze feet er residential
Council Member Watkins p q p
dwelling unit was lazge. She explained they have 2 bedroom units in Little
Club that were 900 square feet. She felt 1,200 squaze feet, as a minimum
was quite lazge. She stated she personally thinks it should be at the most
1,000 square feet. Attorney Roselli noted she had no problem changing
the squaze footage. Mayor Humpage indicated Council might want to
consider that with Workforce housing. Council Member Genco felt the
Village was not going to have much workforce housing because of the tax
rates. Council Member Watkins suggested making the squaze footage
1,000 instead of 1,200. Consensus of Council agreed to 1,000 square feet
per residential dwelling unit for the "Minimum living azea requirements"
in the PCD. Council Member Genco noted if it was anywhere else in the
code, it should be made consistent throughout. Attorney Roselli agreed.
Council Member Watkins explained the current code for the PCD height is
5 stories/70 feet, and 6 stories/84 feet with Council discretion. She stated
she spoke with Ms. Hazding, and in keeping consistent and uniform, she
wanted Council to consider the big picture, and the potential of having
different heights in different azeas. She stated she knows Council agreed
by consensus to do the 4 and 5 stories. She pointed out the maximum
height in the C-2 is only 4 stories. Council Member Genco felt having 4
• stories lends interest in changes in elevations, and to her that's what makes
21
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 22
communities look interesting. She explained when everything is so
homogeneous it becomes very boring. Ms. Harding noted in the Planned
Mixed Use Developments the Village currently allows 6 stories/84 feet, as
an option, and the standard is 5 stories/70 feet; and in the Planned
Residential Development (PRD) it is 6 stories/84 feet as an option with a
special exception, and 5 stories/70 feet as the standard. She mentioned
what the ordinance is doing for the Planned Commercial Development
(PCD) is reducing it to 4 stories/50 feet as a standard, and 5 stories/70 feet
as an option. She stated the Village will have three separate types of
zoning in the Planned Developments, and two of them will have the option
of 6 stories/84 feet, and the PCD will only have the option of 5 stories/70
feet. She mentioned her concern was that if Council believes they were
limiting the height across the board, they have two other elements to
explore, before they get to that point.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked for clarified of what Ms. Harding was saying.
He asked if it would be in Council's best interest to address the others and
lower them by one story. Ms. Harding stated if Council wanted consistent
5 story maximum in the Village that would be the case. She stated she
wanted Council aware there is a difference. Council Member Genco
asked if Ms. Harding could tell Council which areas were adjacent, and
where their approximate locations were without a zoning map. Ms.
Harding stated she would need a zoning map. Council Member Watkins
• noted she was just questioning if there was a need to change it. Attorney
Roselli mentioned the PCD is not primarily a residential district, where the
mixed-use and the Planned Residential districts contemplate at least 50%
residential. She stated this is back to a Traditional Planned Commercial
Development, which is predominately commercial. She mentioned at one
time Council talked about changing the PCD to stand for Planned
Combined Use Development, but after speaking with Ms. Harding that is
already available in the Mixed Use development. Attorney Roselli felt it
was better to stick with the Planned Commercial Development (PCD) and
treat it as planned commercial; and if Council wanted the height to go up
they may have the same situation as an Atlantis project, possibly where it
is predominately residential, and they do not have that commercial
component. She commented something like that project should be in a
mixed use or planned residential community. She noted if Council goes up
with the height are they going to be able to fill it with commercial, or have
this residential issue coming back.
Council Member Watkins noted Council agreed to the 1St floor was to be
commercial, so the remaining 4 or 5 stories could be residential. Attorney
Roselli stated the 1St floor must be commercial, and the rest of it can be
whatever Council desires. Council Member Watkins pointed out it is
different in the other two, and she does not want to back track and do this
again. She felt it needed to be discussed at this time.
22
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 23
She commented she was not sure if Council needed to limit the PCD to 4
and 5 stories, since the others were 5 and 6 stories. Vice Mayor Paterno
pointed out the commercial comes down along U.S. One, and the only one
left in the Mixed Use that is build-able at this time is probably the
Zuccarelli property. He felt everything else was basically built out
residential, and that would be the only property that could go to 6 stories.
Council Member Genco commented except for redevelopment. Mayor
Humpage agreed that is where the Village could get caught. Vice Mayor
Paterno agreed, and stated everything north of Tequesta is residential now.
He felt the only mixed use left was the Zuccarelli, and the strip mall along
Bridge Road. Council Member Watkins pointed out where the old Publix
is that is C-2. She noted if you look down the road at the potential of what
is left in commercial, and what is possible to be redeveloped; she stated
she was not so sure it does serve their purpose, just a well, to limit them at
that point at 5, and not grant the exception to 6 stories, and have 5 and 6
stories going on, then 4 and 6 stories going on potentially. Council
Member Genco agreed.
Vice Mayor Paterno agreed he had no problem reducing the other one too.
Council Member Watkins stated she wanted to leave the PCD at 5 and 6
stories. Vice Mayor Paterno commented he thought Council agreed and
comprised to make at 4 and 5 stories. Council Member Watkins
commented she wanted Council to look at the potential of what the other
• zoning districts could be. Vice Mayor Paterno noted he would like to see
the rest of the height come down to be the same. He stated he likes it
lower, and he does not want to get the density to the point it is going to be
people everywhere. He commented they love this place, and a lot of
people do, and he was just trying to keep it as close as what it is currently.
Attorney Roselli added as part of this ordinance the height in the C-2 has
been reduced. She mentioned the height might be higher right now, but the
way the ordinance has been drafted is the C-2 maximum height would be
4 stories/50 feet. She indicated the other districts that would be higher
would be the PRD and the Mixed-Use. She noted whatever Council
decided she recommended that they be compatible, because one is a
special exception use, so the C-2 is housing the PCD. She felt they should
be consistent, and that is why the ordinance reduces the C-2 down so that
it is consistent with the PCD. Attorney Roselli reviewed Page 5, C-2
Commercial District, and noted the information on Page 6, Building height
setbacks, lot size, open space, etc is all included in the table on Page 4.
Vice Mayor Paterno questioned Page 6, Item 3, regarding the language "
the maximum lot width shall not exceed 75 feet (75'). He asked if the
language should read the "minimum" instead of "maximum". Attorney
Roselli stated yes, it should read "minimum". Vice Mayor Paterno
• indicated other sections would need to be corrected with that same
23
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 24
language. Attorney Roselli indicated she would make sure all corrections
• were made to the document.
Attorney Roselli reviewed Page 7, Planned Commercial Development,
Section 78-251, Purpose and Intent. She mentioned the purpose and intent
has been rewritten for the PCD, because of Council's prior discussions
about what they intended this district to be. She noted the original
paragraph was inadequate, and vague. She noted Pages 7, and 8 were
language that she created to address Council's comments of what they
would want the PCD to be. She commented it included types commercial
uses that would be appropriate for a PCD, and types of blending issues,
architectural issues, and the idea there should be a pedestrian flow through
the development. She mentioned some of those concepts were
incorporated later on in the guidelines for the PCD. Vice Mayor Paterno
asked what fee simple meant. Attorney Hawkins stated fee simple is a
legal doctrine that describes the nature of the title held by the owner. Fee
Simple is where someone owns the title outright, not burdened by the
interest of another. Attorney Roselli noted on Page 8, under the purpose
and intent where it says, "The proposed commercial uses for the PCD
must be identified at the time of conceptual plan review..." that it should
be changed to "special exception request review" instead of "conceptual
plan review" so that at the time the applicant comes before Council
requesting the special exception they have identified what types of
• commercial uses were going to be in the PCD. She clarified that before the
applicant gets to site plan approval, when they are asking Council to let
them have a PCD in the C-2, they need to know what kind of commercial
uses they are going to put in there, so Council knows.
Council Member Watkins clarified if a developer knowing they are going
to have commercial components, at the point of special exception approval
or conceptual review approval would they really know the number of
employees. Attorney Roselli stated that language is already in the code,
and was not revised. She felt they did not have to be committed, and held
to that number, but they needed to have a general idea. She pointed out the
type of uses is going to be limited to what is allowed in the C-2. Council
Member Watkins explained when the Village asks for the estimated
amount of employees, hopefully it would not be expected to identify the
number down to one or two. She felt that would be extremely difficult.
Attorney Roselli noted she wanted to point out which stage of the process
they would be identifying this information would be at the time they come
before Council for special exception approval.
Attorney Roselli explained Page 10, under Section 78-255, General
requirements and special regulations for the PCD was now in the table.
She noted she would change the living area down to 1,000 square feet, and
make sure everything else is consistent throughout the ordinance.
24
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 25
She mentioned on Page 11, (e) Building height Council still needed to
determine what that will be. She read the following language from item
(e); "However, as part of the site plan approval process, a petitioner may
request an increase in building height in accordance with the provisions of
this paragraph". She commented criteria have been added in items 1-9,
and it could be changed or modified. Vice Mayor Paterno pointed out
under (c) the lot width should be changed to "minimum" as noted earlier
in the meeting. Attorney Roselli mentioned on the first line of (c) it should
say "not less than" instead of "no less than". She commented the criteria
were in there to help in the exercise of Council's discretion. She noted
from a legal standpoint the Village needs to have some kind of standards
or guidelines to govern the discretion to avoid a legal challenge.
Attorney Roselli noted Page 13 deals with Parking Garages. She
mentioned Council addressed this under "Basements" and how they are
counted. Vice Mayor Paterno asked if the ordinance addressed the sale of
parking places. He mentioned that is a big thing in Miami where they sale
their parking place to other people, because they are assigned. He
explained he has a friend that has bought 5 of them in his condo, and he
has made a lot of money doing it. Council Member Watkins noted in
Lighthouse Cove they purchase the garages, and they are separate from the
units. Attorney Roselli indicated that was not addressed in the proposed
ordinance. Vice Mayor Paterno commented everyone needs a parking
• place, so when they sell them, such as in South Beach, some do not have
cars, they take the money. Council Member Watkins felt the parking spot
needed to be deeded to the unit. Attorney Roselli mentioned she handled
closings where they buy a unit, that comes with a garage, and then they
sell the unit, and keep the garage for space. Vice Mayor Paterno agreed,
and knows someone who did it 5 times. Council Member Genco asked if
Council wanted to do one deeded parking space per unit minimum, and
have it like a unity of title. Attorney Roselli stated some might have
additional parking spaces. Vice Mayor Paterno felt it needed to be
addressed, because it may not be a problem now, but could be in the
future. Attorney Hawkins pointed out there are minimum development
standards on required parking, but did not think that the unit has to be
deeded or attached to the garage, or vice versa. Attorney Roselli indicated
she would add language to the ordinance.
Attorney Roselli reviewed Page 13, noting Building use is where the first
story of the PCD shall be limited to permissible commercial uses, and
shall be pedestrian oriented. She pointed out it the language "Live/works
lofts are not permitted in the PCD. She commented that would be up to
Council to decide if they wanted that language in the ordinance. Council
Member Watkins pointed out there appeared to be a numbering issue on
Page 15, item (7), 3 & 4. Attorney Roselli agreed.
•
25
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 26
• She mentioned item (9) on Page 15 was added, which is like a catch all, if
an applicant did not fit into one of the specific uses, that this expanded the
uses for other similar low-intensity commercial uses.
Attorney Hawkins commented he had a question about the phrase "Private
club", and what exactly that meant. Council Member Genco felt that was
written to address Mr. Zuccarelli's private club. Attorney Roselli
mentioned it is existing language in the current code, for example an Elks
Club. Council Member Watkins noted the club did not have to be open to
general membership. Attorney Hawkins felt that item was a little unusual.
Vice Mayor Paterno indicated he would have no problem with deleting
that from the ordinance. He mentioned a few Council Meetings ago a
gentleman came, and he was concerned as to what was going in for the
private club. Attorney Roselli mentioned anyone else would become non-
conforming if there was a private club in existence and this was deleted.
Vice Mayor Paterno suggested deleting item (7) Private club, and if it
comes in under item (9) Council could make an adjustment if needed, if it
was something the Village would not mind having. Consensus of Council
agreed to delete item 7. (7) Private club.
Attorney Roselli reviewed Page 17, item 11 Area limitations. She
suggested deleting item 11, because Council had agreed to the 25% open
space as mentioned earlier in the meeting. Consensus of Council agreed
• to delete item 11, in its entirety. She reviewed item 12, Architectural
theme, noting this was new language being added. She noted on Page 19,
Section 78-256 was renamed "PCD design standards: waivers". She
explained Council may waive regulations for PCD, except for building
height permit requirements, density requirements, requirements associated
with concurrency management, and requirements for the preservation of
environmentally sensitive lands". She stated the waiver for building
height is treated separately in another section. She explained the "Waiver
procedure" as provided on Pages 19-21. She touched on Page 22, Outdoor
storage, which prohibits the outdoor storage of boats, trucks, recreational
vehicles, and other similar items in a PCD, and outdoor storage facilities
as well. She pointed out on Page 22, Access, noting there was discussion
at a previous meeting on vehicular access. She stated at the top of Page 23
language was added, "No commercial facility shall maintain frontage,
direct view, or physical access on or from any local or neighborhood
roads. A thoroughfare plan indicating the primary, secondary, arterial,
tertiary, and main street roadways throughout the PCD shall be provided at
the time the site plan application is submitted to the Village". She
mentioned a new section, Section 78-303, Visibility triangles, has been
added on Page 26.
•
26
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 27
Vice Mayor Paterno asked that language on Page 24, item (2) a. "Minor
S streets within the PCD shall not connect with minor streets in adjacent
developments in such a way so as to encourage through traffic". He
suggested deleting the portion of the sentence "in such a way so as to
encourage through traffic". Vice Mayor Paterno commented so that
Council did not have to worry about through traffic.
Council Member Genco stated she would hate to have what happened in
Tequesta Oaks with the way the traffic pattern was done, and felt that
could happen again if they where not careful. Vice Mayor Paterno
explained he was thinking of other developments and access between
neighborhoods, such Atlantis and Casa Del Sol, if they could access these
sites from County Line Road and could be used to cut through the
developments. He indicated he would not want to see that. Council
Member Genco commented she would like to see every development have
two means of getting in and out, unless it was a very small development.
Vice Mayor Paterno explained they could have two entries in the front, or
one on each side of the building. Council Member Genco pointed out
especially when talking about planned commercial, it is just easier for the
commercial to flow into the commercial, then trying to get it back out to
U.S. One. She was thinking is what the ordinance is trying to accomplish.
Vice Mayor Paterno felt this could potentially bombard someone, and they
not even realize it. He felt once the road was in, they could not go back
and pull it out. Council Member Genco noted that is what the word
encourage does; so that Council could interpret it the way they wanted; or
if it may turn out to be something that they felt would be a problem. She
liked the way it was written so if they felt it worked better for the
facilities, they could still approve it. Attorney Hawkins commented
Council could always say to the developer seeking approval, "nice
concept, but do not like your traffic pattern". Attorney Roselli suggested
it would be easier to leave the language in, because Council would see
people requesting a waiver, and then they would have to deal with the
waiver. She suggested doing it on a case-by-case basis, with the idea they
do not want to do it. Consensus of Council agreed to leave the entire
sentence in the ordinance.
Mayor Humpage noted on Page 26, Section 78-282. Structures exempt
from height limitations; he felt some developers could get very creative
with turrets and parapet walls. He commented he would hate to just
exempt them. Attorney Roselli clarified it came up at one of the meetings
the idea of limiting the architectural features to a certain height, so that an
applicant can not have a 30 foot spine, or something like that. Vice Mayor
Paterno suggested if there was a way the Village could say these are
exempt from the overall height limitations, but these individual things can
not exceed a certain height.
s
27
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 28
Mayor Humpage suggested adding language "At the approval of Council".
He noted that way Council could take a look at each one on its merit.
Council Member Genco stated that is where the word "may" comes in, it
means Council has the discretion. She commented she kind of liked the
way Atlantis had their rooftop. Mayor Humpage agreed, but noted he
would not want a developer to put a 25-foot spire. Council Member Genco
indicated she would like to see applicants be able to do something
creative. Council Member Watkins stated it would be on a case-by-case
basis, and if Council did not like it, and felt it was too high, they would
ask them to bring it down. Mayor Humpage stated he would like to see
something in there that allows Council the authority to look at it, rather
then to say they are non-exempt. Attorney Roselli suggested changing the
heading. Council Member Genco suggested "Structures that may be
exempt from height limitations". Consensus of Council agreed to insert
the language "that may be" in the heading.
Council Member Genco asked if someone for the next Council Meeting
could prepare a map that identifies the other areas so they could look at the
zoning heights. She stated she would like to know visually if this was all
going to work together, and that she could be comfortable with the height
limitations. Attorney Hawkins noted they would bring something color
coded and larger for Council at the next meeting. He complimented
Attorney Roselli for pulling this all together, and that she did a nice job.
S asked for ublic comment• their bein none the ublic
Mayor Humpage p g P
hearing was closed. Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of
Ordinance 605. (A motion was made at the beginning of the
discussion).
Motion passed 4-0.
21. DELETED FROM AGENDA BY STAFF
a z~
> >
•1. f ~` 1 ~D L i2 L. D .a 1' '71 A
~vmzx--vr- nsr- r-aizc~ vir-v°cuoxr-rcvucr, tetisiiir~~.-r.-r-fte£es,
22. Council consideration for review of a Preliminary Plat for The Preserve of
Tequesta, formerly known as The Crossings. .
Mr. Christopher Saia, Legal Counsel for the applicant mentioned in May
2005 the developer was before Council for site plan approval, and were
now back for preliminary plat approval. Mr. Catherine Harding,
Community Development Director noted Staff had reviewed the
preliminary plat application, along with the Development Review
28
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 29
Committee (DRC). She indicated they asked for one change fora 10 foot
' dedicated water utility easement, and the applicant complied with their
request and gave them a 12 foot dedicated easement for the water lines.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked if the easement was on the north side of the
property. Ms. Harding confirmed it was on the north side of the property.
Council Member Watkins questioned whether the site plan design had
remained the same. Mr. Saia reviewed the site plan, noting the building in
the back would look like townhouses, but legally they would be
condominiums. He mentioned there was no change in the site plan.
Council Member Watkins noted rumor was that the developer had sold the
front portion. She commented she was just trying to make sure their plan
was the same plan they brought to Council previously. Mr. Saia stated the
site plan was 100% consistent with what was approved.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked why the developer had to plat a street as a
Tract, such as Tract J. Mr. Saia explained the entire parcel had to be
divided up into different tracts, and parcels, so they do not have a void. He
mentioned Tract J is there so that it can be identified by the Condominium
Associations to maintain it. He mentioned the Master Association would
maintain Tract K, and the Condominium Associations would maintain the
other Tract. Vice Mayor Paterno clarified by the individual ones. Mr. Saia
agreed. Vice Mayor Paterno mentioned by doing that they would have a
' different associations by buildings. He asked if they could end up with a
different ambience, rather than all being under one Master Association.
Mr. Saia explained there would be two individual condo associations, one
on the north side and one for the large 3 story building on the south side,
and a master association that controls the landscaping around the
perimeter, and the roadways inside. He mentioned the master association
would take care of the perimeter so everything someone would see from
outside would be consistent.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked if Council would have concerns in reference to
the north side being potentially a little different than the rest, or was it
their idea to have it all the same. Council Member Genco felt the reason
they separated into two was because the townhouses would have different
maintenance considerations than the other buildings would have, and
would want to be able to assess those units differently than the other units.
She asked if each parcel was one townhome. Mr. Saia stated each one of
the parcels have 5 or 6units, consistent with the other buildings. Council
Member Genco commented it was like a monopoly game. Vice Mayor
Paterno asked if there would be consistency in the future on the painting
throughout the project. He noted for example if they change the roof on
one, would it still be consistent with the others. Mr. Saia stated the Master
Association would give consistency in what people see along the
roadways.
29
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 30
He noted there would not be 100% consistency in the townhouse and the
3-story building, because they are very different buildings. Council
Member Genco commented all the elements that are commonly used by
everybody that lives there were alphabetical, such as Tracts A, J, L, and K.
She asked if the parcels would be the homeowner's association's
responsibility, and the roads maintained by the Master Association. Mr.
Saia explained the roads in the southern portion of the plan would be
maintained by the southern condominium association; and the roads in the
northern portion would be maintained by the northern condominium
association. He indicated Tract K and Tract L would be maintained by a
common Master Association, as well as an easement not shown on the
plan around the perimeter along the fencing.
Vice Mayor Paterno questioned Tract J going on to Village Boulevard. He
asked if there could be a problem allowing the northern people to cut
through. He mentioned the way it was set up, and with Publix in the back,
people would be entering Tract J. He asked if that would create a problem
for the residents. Mr. Saia commented it looks like a roadway, but with the
parking spaces, he felt it would not feel like a roadway, and that people are
not going to want to go through it. He felt they would want to come
through the main entrance on Old Dixie Highway, because it is much
wider. Council Member Genco suggested she would like to see all the
roadways part of the Master Association. She felt it would be a lot more
' functional, especially since people in Parcel 14 would be coming through
and out Tract J to go to Village Boulevard. She felt there would be
infighting among the people of who is going to maintain it. Mr. Saia noted
it was drafted this way so that people would not be cutting through. He
pointed out the large roundabout that is a combination Tract L and Tract
K. Council Member Genco commented she sees the roundabout, but
where it comes out on Old Dixie Highway it is showing it at 47.62 and the
other shows at 50.1. She pointed out those are very close dimensions when
they exit. Mr. Saia noted the Department of Transportation (DOT) governs
the dimension width, and guidelines for entering and exiting.
Mr. Gerald Valent, Developer and Vice President, Cornerstone Group
Development felt the issue was they were trying to divide roadways versus
a parking lot with drive aisles. He explained in the 3-story area is not a
roadway, because there are parking spaces, and the idea was to park in
front of their units, so they are going to be responsible for their roadways
coming in. He noted the main roadway is a common roadway coming up
to where the second roadway is going through. He commented he
understands what Council was saying, but felt when there is parking
spaces the area it is more drive aisles than a road. He commented it was
very difficult to dedicate a drive aisle as a roadway.
•
30
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 31
Council Member Genco pointed out Parcel 6, and Tract J, that Parcel 6 is
. where the pazking is going to be for the large building where the Crossings
was, and Tract J is going to be where the roadway egress and access is
going to be. She noted she has lived in homeowner's associations and felt
the people from the townhomes aze going to use that to get to Publix. Mr.
Valent agreed there would be some, but not everyone is going to do that.
He commented until the Village gets to a point where the traffic is
unmanageable on Old Dixie Highway, which it is not currently and does
not appear it is going to be in the future; he felt more people would come
out to Old Dixie. Council Member Genco noted if the Village gets a traffic
light it would be at Old Dixie Highway and Village Boulevazd, which
means everyone else would be using the Tract J exit to avoid the traffic
light. Mr. Valent asked when was a traffic light going to be installed.
Council Member Genco noted the Village was looking at it, and
potentially that was where it was going to go. Vice Mayor Paterno
commented what Council was worried about the residents are going to
start skirting through there. He asked if there was a way so the traffic
would not want to go that way.
Council Member Genco suggested Tracts J, L, and K should all be part of
the Master Association. She felt that would eliminate infighting within the
development. Mr. Saia asked if Council would like Tract J to be part of the
Master Association. He commented they could do that. Mr. Valent agreed.
Council Member Genco noted that way when they start using it as a road,
people will not be screaming about the maintenance. Vice Mayor Paterno
suggested in their planning they want to look at a way so that people do
not want to cut through the azea. He suggested maybe where Tract L and
K is in the front, maybe put a circle, so that those people would not come
shooting down in front of the building on Tract J, and maybe something in
the back such as roundabout. Mr. Saia noted there is a roundabout, but not
on the plan Council had before them. Mr. Valent noted that would be
drafted in the Association documents, but the plat would stay as it exists.
Consensus of Council agreed.
Council Member Watkins commented she noticed they were advertising,
and asked if they had a timeframe for when the units would be mazketable.
She mentioned she keeps getting calls about it. Mr. Valent noted that is
out of his hands, and with another department. He commented all the
brochures have been printed, and initially they were waiting to get to this
stage. Vice Mayor Paterno asked what the asking price was. Mr. Valent
said the townhouses were in the mid $500,000. He felt the units would go
fast, because they have received many calls. Council Member Watkins
asked how they came up with the name "The Preserve". She noted she
does not see it as a preserve of any kind. Mr. Valent commented they had
developed very nice townhomes in North Miami, and they called it The
• Preserve, and it was very populaz.
31
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 32
He noted this was not a preserve, just a name. He noted most of the names
• they came up with were already taken in the Palm Beach County area, so
it was a process of elimination to find a name that was not already been
used. Council Member Watkins commented people were asking because
they thought it was because they were going to preserve the existing
building. Mr. Valent noted there is a scrub jay preserve at the north end of
the property they are still working on. Mr. Valent noted regarding the
consistency, the buildings will be the same color scheme, and the roof
schemes also. He stated they want a unity there, and that it all would look
pretty much the same. Council Member Watkins commented she felt it
was going to be awell-received project.
MOTION: Council Member Genco moved to approve accepting the preliminary plat
application, with the following changes: 1) Roadway Tracts J K and L to belong to the
Master Association, and 2) the change from a 10 foot to a 12 foot water utility easement;
seconded by Council Member Watkins; motion passed 4-D.
XIV. NEW BUSINESS
23. a) ORDINANCE 604- FIRST READING - An Ordinance of the Village
Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Deleting
Section 14-151 Valuation Data Table, in Chapter 14, Article VI, Permit
Fees of the Village of Tequesta Code of Ordinances; Providing for
Severability; Providing for repeal of Ordinances in conflict; Providing for
an effective date.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve First Reading of Ordinance
604; seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno. (Vote at end of discussion)
Ms. Catherine Harding, Director of Community Development mentioned
the department requests the deletion of Section 14-151, Valuation Data
Table, under Article VI, Permits Fees, because it is no longer relevant in
computing of permit fees. She explained this valuation data table was
used, and the fees were currently calculated by the cost of construction.
She noted the valuation table gives them the cost of construction average
throughout the United States. She noted there are modifiers for Palm
Beach County, but that is what the Community Development Department
charges for a permit. She commented what the department is doing in the
proposed ordinance is that they are going to use square footage for the
basis for the fee, instead of the cost of construction. Council Member
Genco asked if they were going to use the actual cost of construction. Ms.
Harding explained right now the Village was using the cost of
construction, but they were switching to a schedule that they would be
basing it on the square footage. She noted for example if you have a 2,000
square foot it is so much per square foot. Council Member Genco asked if
that works out more realistically, or less realistically.
32
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 33
• Ms. Hazding noted the current fees the Village was using is from 1975,
and have never been updated. She stressed they aze grossly out of date.
She stated she does not feel what they are bringing it is equal to what they
need to spend on the community to give it the services that it requires.
Council Member Genco questioned whatever they were going to use as a
reference, instead of the actual cost, was it going to be generally higher
than costs, less than costs, or averages of cost. Ms. Hazding explained
there aze two ways of doing the fees, and basically the Village was using
the square footage. She noted most of the communities she had worked
with use the squaze footage. She commented it is just a matter of choice.
Council Member Genco pointed out someone could build a super luxury
home that is $1,000 a squaze foot versus the regular residential home,
which could come in at $175.00 a square foot. She asked where is the
fairness. Ms. Hazding stated the fairness is the volume of the house they
aze building, it is going to cost a lot more, not per square foot, but there is
many more square foot involved, and it is an equitable system because
everybody is chazged the same amount per square foot, but if they are
building a 2,000 squaze foot house it is much less than a 4,000 or 5,000
squaze foot house, so it goes up inclemently. The people with more money
building larger homes aze paying more for their permits, based on the fact
that it is larger squaze footage.
• Council Member Genco pointed out if they aze building something that is
costing a $1,000 squaze foot they aze being charged at the rate as someone
building a home $175.00. She felt that was not fair. Ms. Hazding stated it
may not seem fair, but she has never seen anyone put actual cost of
construction on their application. She noted the department would then
have to investigate the actual cost. She stated what they want to do is
encourage the community to build better, higher quality homes, spend
more money on the home and the details, to give a better quality
community. She noted she would not want to discourage that by making it
so they just build a cracker jack box that it would be less money and they
would be working toward that goal. She stated this way the square footage
is fair, and if they want to build a beautiful home they would not be
punished for it. They would be able to build what they want, the quality
they want, and it would be the same cost per squaze foot as someone who
can not afford a more luxurious home. She noted it would not deter
anyone from building a better home, or using better quality.
Council Member Genco asked who would be doing the appraisal as to the
market value of the home for the tax base. Ms. Hazding stated the Palm
Beach County Tax Appraiser, and it would not involve the Department of
Community Development at all. Council Member Genco stated she just
wanted to be certain that the Village would not be caught in something
• that was not consistent.
33
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 34
• Ms. Harding noted following this item is the proposed fee schedule. She
felt the way it is currently done is a complicated way of charging fees, and
they have eliminated that and simplified with the new proposed fee
schedule. She stated they have created flat fees where there were none
before, so now if someone gets a pool it is a fixed amount, and not based
on the cost of the pool. She felt the quality of construction is not an
element in the fees.
Council Member Watkins noted she definitely liked the fact that they are
not going to encourage to build a poorer quality. Vice Mayor Paterno
stated it was fine for him, and understands both sides of the issue, and felt
this proposed fee was simple. He noted he understands it happens that
when someone goes in to get a permit it is costing $10,000, and as soon as
they get the permit they upgrade all the stuff, and then they are up to
$30,000 because they do not want to pay the other $20,000. He noted if
the Village makes it by square footage it is simple, people come in when
they feel they are getting an honest shake, and it just works.
Council Member Genco pointed out Council has to pay $50.00 for
political signs. Ms. Harding stated it would be for as many as they would
want. She felt it was a way of monitoring the signs, but once they get the
permit they could put as many signs as they want. Mayor Humpage
explained his permit fees the minimum permit fee, is the same now as
• when he went into business. Vice Mayor Paterno noted he saw the 1975
date on the permit fees. He felt at the same time everyone is building new
homes, and the people that live here at this point are actually subsidizing
the new construction and costs. Mayor Humpage felt this would work
along with the other municipalities and counties, because it will bring the
Village in line with them. He felt this would not be any great surprise to
people in the building industry.
Public Comment -None
Council Member Genco asked if they were going to renumber things, or
leave it the way it is in the codebook, and note that this section was
deleted. Ms. Harding stated yes. (A motion was made at the beginning
of the discussion)
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Ordinance 604.
Motion passed 4-0.
34
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 35
' b) RESOLUTION 67-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Revising Appendix C,
in Chapter 14, Article VI, Permit Fees, Section 14-152, Building Permits;
Whereas Appendix C, Permit Fees is herby officially adopted by this
Resolution.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve Resolution 67-05/06;
seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 67-05/06.
Motion passed 4-0.
24. RESOLUTION 69-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Approving a Lease
Agreement between the Village of Tequesta and Palm Beach County,
Florida, for Lease of Real Property located at 465 Seabrook Road,
Tequesta, Florida, for the purpose and operation of a Fire Station by Palm
Beach County Fire Rescue Department, and authorizing the Village
Manager to execute the applicable contract on behalf of the Village.
Fire Chief James Weinand commented what Council has before them is a
lease that was requested by Palm Beach County. He commented this lease
' extension was for Seabrook Road Station 11, and the current lease is
scheduled to expire in June 30, 2006. He noted this is fora 2-two yeaz
extension. Mayor Humpage stated initially PBC wanted more time on the
lease. Chief Weinand explained initially they wanted a 3-year lease
extension, and they negotiated back down to a 2-yeaz extension. He
pointed out the Village provided the language in the document that ties
into the Mutual Aid Agreement. He stated the penalties are not great if
they violate it, but PBC did agree to add the language. Mayor Humpage
asked he was ok with the agreement. Chief Weinand stated this is a wide
range of things, and depending on how you look at this, you can look at
this in all different angles, whether is it good for the Village, or bad for the
Village; whether it hurts with annexation, whether it does not. He stated
those are all things that are over his head. He noted as far as protection for
the residents, yes he felt it was a good thing to have this station renewed.
He commented as long as they work with the Mutual Aid, and they back
up the Village, it is like 3 additional people on duty that the Village is not
paying for.
Vice Mayor Paterno suggested after talking with Chief Weinand and the
Village Manager that he felt Council may want to address getting
reimbursed from the County. He commented using last years numbers
Station 11 had approximately 411 runs, 33 runs on the average per month.
' He noted in the month of January the Village did, the difference between
35
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 36
what they gave us, and what we gave him, the Village did 33% of their
runs. He pointed out it was something for Council to think about, because
the Village is doing more runs than they used to. Mayor Humpage
questioned whether they were medical runs. Chief Weinand commented
they were medical and fire. Mayor Humpage asked how many were
medical. Chief Weinand stated the Village gets money for the transports
for the medical runs He stated he could not give the data at this time. Vice
Mayor Paterno noted if it was a transport. He commented it was $369-
$400 per transport, but at the same time the Village was paying a lot of
money, and maybe they should reimburse us, because basically the Village
is supplying them 30% of their runs in the unincorporated area north of the
River.
Council Member Genco noted when the Village originally approved the
Mutual Aid Agreement Council was told that was not the case. She asked
what has changed. Chief Weinand commented nothing had changed, it
works exactly the way the Mutual Aid Agreement was approved. Council
Member Genco noted Council discussed the potential of it being
unbalanced where the Village of Tequesta would be covering more, and
when they discussed it they were told it would not be the case. She
questioned what has changed in the mix that has caused this to happen.
Chief Weinand stated he would have to look back at every run to give
them a good analysis, because he does not have that in front of him this
• evening. He explained if Council looks at the year there were a lot of
things that went into the Mutual Aid this year, such as the bridge closing
on State Road 707 where the Village covered their area, and they covered
our area. Also Tequesta Drive Bridge went out, and other different things.
Council Member Genco pointed out then the numbers that Vice Mayor
Paterno was referring to reflects all of these extraneous events that
happened that the Village did not anticipate. Vice Mayor Paterno stated he
was referring to the Chief's monthly reports. He explained this year the
Village got 8 runs from Palm Beach County, and the Village gave them
23. He noted Martin County the Village got 0, and the Village gave them
7. He felt if they combined all that the Village got and all that the Village
was given, the Village gave 30 and got 8, there is a difference of 22, and
in that month the Village did 110 runs. He commented they are looking at
a 20% of Mutual Aid going the other way. Council Member Genco
pointed out these numbers were for January 2006. Vice Mayor Paterno
noted it was good that they were there to help, but at the same time the
Village needed to be reimbursed. He went on to explain as of January
2006 the Village was doing 33% of their runs. Council Member Genco
noted in return Palm Beach County was only doing 12% of the Village's
runs. Chief Weinand agreed, and mentioned on his aspect of looking at the
protection of the Village how could anyone put a price tag on bringing in a
• unit when there is not a unit.
36
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 37
He stated the service is there and is available. He commented these are
things over and above what works on the street. Council Member Genco
noted Vice Mayor Paterno bangs up a good point, the Village is wearing
our equipment, and stressing the Staff more, and there is no compensation
for that. She noted Council was under an understanding when they signed
the Mutual Aid Agreement that it was going to be an easy deal.
Vice Mayor Paterno felt what has happened is the Village has gone to the
County's radio system, so they dispatch us, and our staff does such a great
job, and are available in 4 or 5 minutes. He mentioned Station 11 people
also are sent to Jupiter, because they send them for training, and maybe
they do not have them available at times. He felt if the Village was going
to agree to this in the lease, he suggested maybe this is the time to
approach Commissioner Marcus, and the County Chief to say the Village
needs to be reimbursed somehow, or maybe collect the percentage (3 `/2
mills) they are getting for fire for the residents portion. He felt the Village
should be collecting some of that revenue to help subsidize the service
Fire is providing them.
Council Member Watkins questioned how does this affect our Mutual Aid
Agreement. She indicated if the Village is part of a Mutual Aid
Agreement, and say we want to participate, but we want to charge them;
she felt that skewed everything. Vice Mayor Paterno noted before the
agreement they charged the Village. Chief Weinand pointed out
everything could be reversed next month, that the Village draw in more
services than we give out. He commented there has been a trend, and Vice
Mayor Paterno was correct that the Village gives more mutual aid out then
we have receive. He pointed out ever since this began in 1993, the Village
has always given Martin County 3 times the mutual aid out then they have
brought in. He felt it was a good part of doing business, and to have their
resources to draw upon if needed.
Council Member Genco asked if it would be a burden on Staff for Council
to ask that they give a recap on a three-month basis of what is going on,
such as the number of runs. She stated if Council sees a trend over the next
6-12 months then they need to address the financial aspects of it with the
County. Vice Mayor Paterno felt it was a great opportunity now to talk
about it with the lease. He commented the Village is not going to kick
them out at this point. Council Member Genco felt the lease was not the
way to do this, because they have come a long way, and would not want to
hold the lease over their head. She felt they have treated the Village
upfront on things, and if they could demonstrate to them that it is costing
the Village more than it should to provide services to their residents; she
felt they would do something. She stated if they do not, the Village would
have anyone year of the lease, and Council does not do it again. Mayor
• Humpage agreed, and stated that would be the way to go.
37
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 38
Vice Mayor Paterno indicated he did not want to see the runs keep
growing, and all of sudden our guys are doing all the runs. Council
Member Genco noted the Village needs to have more than a couple of
months of data to show that this was not an aberrant occurrence; she
suggested at lease 6-12 months of data. Council Member Watkins
mentioned if and when the Village does that they should copy the County
or whoever needs to be notified that the Village is watching this now, and
this is what is happening, and let them know Council is going to take the
posture that the Village needs to be compensated at some point. She
agreed the Village needed to look at it for more than a quarter, and felt
maybe a year. She commented Chief Weinand would now know to track it
and provide it to the County, and Martin County, so that they have a heads
up we are watching this. Council Member Genco commented let them
know Council has asked the Chief to provide them with it every three
months regarding the status of the Mutual Aid.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked whether to let the Chief and the Village
Manager try an address and work with Commissioner Marcus, just like
they did with the code enforcement issue. Council Member Genco noted
the Village needed to get some facts first. Mayor Humpage agreed.
Council Member Genco noted the Village would be monitoring this, so
maybe in 6 months they can reevaluate it. Council Member Watkins
pointed out right away they would know, seeing this come from the Chief,
what direction Council is heading toward. She felt they needed the data to
prove the point. Chief Weinand indicated they can get the data, and it is
available for the past year also. He noted it might be a little skewed with
the circumstances, with the bridges, etc. He explained working with the
County is a lot safer for the staff, they enjoy it, the moral is higher with
them, and they are getting valuable experience. He commented this gives
them a chance to get into Jupiter, and into some of the fires, the Village
does not have here. Vice Mayor Paterno noted he agreed, but just wanted
to be reimbursed.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve Resolution 69-05/06 for the
Lease Agreement with Palm Beach County for Fire Station I1; seconded by Vice Mayor
Paterno.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 69-05/06.
Motion passed 4-0.
25. RESOLUTION 72-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Establishing a Revised
Fee Schedule for Fire Inspections preformed by the Fire Rescue
Department, in accordance with Section 34-63 of the Village of Tequesta,
Palm Beach County, Florida Code of Ordinances.
s
38
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 39
Chief Weinand commented what Council has before them is a
recommendation to increase the Fire permit fees. He noted their building
permit fees have not been increased since 1993. He felt it was a modest
increase, and if they had increased 3% per year it comes up to more than
what they are asking for now. He mentioned they were also changing the
fee structure to fall in line with what Community Development is doing,
setting a flat square footage instead of valuation. He felt it was important
to follow suit with what they do, so it does not give confusion to the
developers.
Chief Weinand pointed out whether the costs of construction were
$1,000.00 or $175.00 per square feet it is still the same amount of
inspections. He commented Staff was also asking that the Village impose
some additional fees that they have looked at over the years, and have
been tracking: 1) add a $50.00 fee for Fire disaster operational plans. He
noted a lot of nursing homes aze required to have these plans annually
reviewed, and they are time consuming; 2) locked or blocked exits there
would be an immediate fine of $75.00; 3) a chazge of $85.00 for Staff
consultations. He noted developers will send in architects and they will
spend all morning, and they do not get any fee for that work. He
commented he would like to get something back for their time; and 4)
asking that multi-family units pay $2.50 per unit for an inspection fee. He
noted when they go out to the highrises and do an eleven story building,
they could be out there % day and they are not currently charging for
them. He noted there is no enticement for them to comply, because there is
no fees or penalties, so they keep going back for re-inspections. He
indicated they are trying to eliminate that with the new fee.
Council Member Genco clarified when he says $2.50 per unit does he
mean the building. Chief Weinand stated $2.50 per unit in the building. He
commented if it has 20 units it would be more versus a building with 10
units. Council Member Watkins felt it should be more than that. Council
Member Genco suggested make it closer to what it would be for a
residential residence, probably $25.00 or $50.00. Chief Weinand noted
there is a flat minimum permit fee of $50.00. Council Member Genco
suggested $50.00 per unit. Chief Weinand commented that would get very
expensive for some of the units. He noted if you look at all the different
units, for instance, Tequesta Gazdens those units do not take a lot of time,
compazed to the highrises that have fire pumps, sprinklers, etc.
Chief Weinand noted if they start with this fee schedule it would give
them a good basis, then they could track the time and then come back and
adjust it next year. Vice Mayor Paterno suggested why not do it by floors,
and extra fee every floor. He felt that way it would accomplish what the
Chief was staying with the higher buildings.
39
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 40
Council Member Genco suggested they should get at least $5.00 for
walking in the door. She felt they needed more than $2.50 per unit. Chief
Weinand stated this is a fee that has never been imposed on the Village.
Council Member Genco commented she was sure they were talking at
least 5-10 minutes per unit, suggested doubling what the Chief is
proposing.
Mayor Humpage noted he could see where they needed the re-inspection
fee, because there is no incentive to get it done. Chief Weinand agreed,
and noted that is what happens. He noted if Council looks at the residential
units for 1 and 2 story units it is $2.50 per unit, for 3 and 4 story it is $5.00
per unit, for 5 stories and over it is $7.50 per unit. He commented it is
tiered already. Council Member Genco suggested doubling the numbers.
She felt it was very reasonable rate, noting they are professionals, and they
are going in and rendering a service. Vice Mayor Paterno pointed out
doubling them would also increase the $7.50 per unit to $15.00 per unit.
Mayor Humpage asked if the only time they are getting into 5 stories was
over on the beach. Chief Weinand agreed. Mayor Humpage noted if they
keep everything at $5.00 then everyone would be the same. Chief
Weinand noted the reason they went to $5.00 per unit on the buildings
over 5 stories, was because they have sprinklers, and have sandpipe
systems. He noted there is a lot more to inspect in a higher building versus
a building under 4 floors. Mayor Humpage asked if there was a sandpipe
inspection fee also. Chief Weinand commented that is for when someone
is putting a new one in a building. Consensus of Council agreed to $5.00
per unit across the boazd.
Attorney Hawkins noted if Council was going to move to approve the fee
schedule they would need to do it with the modifications. Vice Mayor
Paterno asked what the re-inspection fee was. Chief Weinand stated
$35.00. Vice Mayor Paterno questioned whether that was no matter how
many units have a problem. Chief Weinand noted that is correct, and when
they go in to do an inspection on a condominium it would be for the entire
condominium. Vice Mayor Paterno suggested anytime they have to go
back for re-inspection, the more times they go back, it should double. He
commented if they have to go a 3`~ time it should cost $70.00, and if they
have to go back a 4~` time it should cost $140.00. Chief Weinand stated it
would help with compliance. Vice Mayor Paterno commented at $35.00
they say come back next week. Chief Weinand noted when Kmart was in
town, they had inspection fees that run over $300.00, because they had to
go back 10 and 11 times to get compliance. He noted it is really hazd to
get compliance with some of these, and anything like this would help. He
pointed out the initial inspection fee covers the first inspection, and one re-
inspection. He noted if they come back for another inspection that is when
the $35.00 comes in.
40
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 41
Vice Mayor Paterno noted each subsequent inspection would be doubled.
Chief Weinand clarified each re-inspection after the 1St one would
continually double up. Mayor Humpage agreed the first inspection and
one re-inspection, then it is $35.00, and after that it doubles until they
come into compliance: $35.00, then the 4th $70.00, and the 5th $140.00,
etc. Council Member Watkins commented it would double with each
subsequent inspection. Consensus of Council agreed.
Chief Weinand noted the locked and blocked exit is a new fee, but true to
his belief. He would not want to be in a building where someone could not
get out because the door was locked or blocked.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Paterno moved to approve Resolution 72-OS/06, with the
proposed amendments to the fee schedule; seconded by Council Member Watkins.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 7205/06.
Motion passed 4-0.
Mayor Humpage mentioned Council was going to take a short breal~ Mayor Humpage
recessed the meeting at 10: 00 pm, and reconvened the meeting at 10:11 pm.
26. RESOLUTION 66-05/06 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the
Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Increasing the
2005/2006 Community Development budgeted expenditures, for
Departments #150- Planning; #180 -Building, Zoning and Licensing; and
# 181 Code Compliance by $119,750 (see attached Exhibit A); Increasing
Budgeted Revenues by $79,100, and Appropriating additional Unreserved
Fund Balance of $40,650 to fund the Reorganization of Community
Development and Authorizing the Village Manager to proceed on behalf
of the Village.
Ms. Catherine Harding, Director of Community Develoopment reported
she had reorganized the Community Development Department and wanted
to bring all services in-house, which would reduce the amount of time for
the current consultants and also provide more availability of the inspectors
to the public. Ms. Hazding advised that currently there was an outside
consultant for planning and an outside consultant doing inspections. If
there were an in-house inspector, there would be more control and more
time could be spent out in the community to see what was going on, while
right now the inspectors had to fly through in order to do their job. The
net expense of the two current consultants was the same as hiring someone
with benefits. Ms. Harding advised that the budget was wholly inadequate
when she had taken over, and every time she did something she had to
switch things around in the budget to get something paid.
Z
41
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 42
She had assessed the needs and realigned the budget with proper amounts
~ in the right line items so that when she needed to draw on it, the money
was there.
Council Member Genco asked Community Development Director Hazding
to explain what positions currently existed and those proposed. Ms.
Harding advised that currently Ms. Marilou Kuper was the Secretary and
did some licensing, but was coming around to doing more of Ms.
Hazding's letters. Letters were sent for approvals of conditional
certificates of occupancy, and to corm agreements with developers, and
Ms. Kuper was doing very well. Maureen McGuinniss was issuing
licensing to builders, to home occupations, to businesses, and also did all
the permits, with Ms. Kuper's help. There was also afull-time code
enforcement official and he was getting very good results. Director
Harding reported Hy-Byrd did all the building inspections, and when she
had met the inspector he had reported he was not serving the community
in good conscience because he had to rush through to take care of the
Village in addition to his other clients. Director Hazding noted that
usually alast-minute inspection could not be accommodated, and she
would like someone who was in-house who could go whenever someone
needed an inspection. For the requested planner, Ms. Harding explained
she did not want to bring in a high-end planner, but someone who could
answer all the code questions and work with the communities and attend
meetings with the county, etc., and mainly handle day-to-day zoning in the
office. Ms. Harding indicated she would like to be able to spend more
time out in the community so that residents would identify with the
Community Development Department, and would want to work with and
support the department.
Council member Genco commented when she came to work at the Village
there had been about ?5 employees-now there were over 111 and part-
time personnel, while the population had not increased that much, and
building was pretty much completed, except for reconstruction. Council
member Genco asked if there was a way of doing this with part-time help.
Community Development Director Harding indicated she did not think so,
and advised that although lots were built out there was redevelopment all
over the Village-buildings were being tom down and new ones
constructed, and proper staff was needed to handle that, because most of
what was coming in now was high-end construction. For the same cost as
the current planning consultant, there could be afull-time employee, and
what was being paid now to Hy-Byrd for flighty inspections was much
more than the cost of a full-time inspector who would do the job the
Village needed. Council member Genco commented that an inspector and
a planner would be a lot of staff. Mayor Humpage clarified with Ms.
Harding that she had stated that for the current out-of-pocket cost she
could add both these employees full-time, including their benefits.
42
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 43
Council member Genco advised she was seeing the market slowing down,
and if the Village got into a slowdown and had a lot of staff, they could
not just let people go because things slowed down. In Council member
Genco's opinion, an employee that cost $50,000 this yeaz would cost
another $17,000 to $20,000 in three more years. Mayor Humpage asked if
the same logic wouldn't also apply to a subcontractor whose rates went
up. Council member Genco responded that the planning consultant was
getting half of what he got three years ago-Mr. Horniman had been
getting $100,000 when she came, then it was cut to $70,000, then $60,000,
and now was $55,000. Council member Genco noted the Village had
already had a planner and that did not work.
Community Development Director Harding advised she had cut the
outside services and she had taken on that responsibility herself, and it was
an overload. Council member Genco responded she was not questioning
that Ms. Hazding needed help, but she did not know why two more people
were needed in a Village that had not increased in population and was
9$% built out, and every time afull-time employee was hired there were
insurance costs, vehicle costs, office costs, and pension costs. Council
member Genco commented she did not expect future tax revenue to be as
much as in the past few years, and when it stabilized, the Village would be
at a point where revenues would not take care of operating expenses-and
she was really getting nervous about that. Director Harding commented
part of the reason she had done this in conjunction with the fee increase
was the fee increase would cover these expenses, and under State Law a
building department was supposed to pay for itself but not make a profit
year after year.
Council member Genco advised that Community Development used to be
an enterprise fund but that had been changed in order to roll the extra
money into the General Fund. Director Hazding commented the fees were
supposed to cover the cost of n~nning the office. Council member Genco
asked what would happen when there was no longer any building, to
which Director Harding responded there would be repairs and
reconstruction of large buildings. Council Member Genco commented
that the Council's vision was not to have that happen, and Vice Mayor
Paterno would not let that happen. Council member Genco stated she was
very concerned about adding two new full-time employees, but at the
same time was cognizant that Director Harding probably did need help
right now with two new construction projects starting. Vice Mayor
Paterno commented he had had the same concerns expressed by Council
member Genco, being conscious of the money and needing to be fiugal.
Vice Mayor Paterno noted since Ms. Harding had been with the Village he
had seen major accomplishment; therefore, he was willing to give her the
benefit of the doubt, and he believed by having personnel in-house she
would be able to do a far more efficient job and a better job.
43
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 44
He believed the department was working as it should, and he had a lot of
confidence in Ms. Hazding. Council Member Watkins shared the concerns
expressed, except she did not agree that the employee count would be up
to 113, and indicated the council had also wanted to reduce the amount of
outside contractors. Council Member Watkins stated she believed it
would be more efficient to have in-house personnel, and to be able to
manage employees on a day-to-day basis was a much more efficient way
of doing anything. Council Member Watkins agreed that the housing
mazket had already slowed, but also, because people could not afford to
move up in the county, they would be building additions or rebuilding on
their own property. Council Member Watkins noted this community had
decent size lots and people were really in a bind with the property tax
situation if they wanted to move within the county, so she believed there
would be more people making improvements to their current property.
Council member Watkins commented she liked the idea of having in-
house people so that the work could be structured to be most efficient, and
this would not be at a higher cost than using the current consultants.
Council member Genco stated she disagreed with Council member
Watkins' opinion on the employee count, and stated it was well over 111.
Vice Mayor Paterno asked for the employee count. Assistant Village
Manager Gazlo responded an analysis had been done, which showed 78
full-time employees, 12 part-time, and also a category of seasonal
employees for Parks & Recreation for which he did not have the number.
Council member Genco commented the Council had gone through these
numbers many times and there were 111 or more employees, whether or
not they were seasonal, and when she started with the Village there had
been a total of only 78, so no matter how one looked at it the Village had
gone from 78 to 111+ employees, which was significant. Council member
Genco commented she was not azguing over the fact people needed help,
but you had to look at it not just as an immediate need but as alonger-term
need, and if someone was hired she did not want to find in a few months
that they were not needed on a full-time basis. She indicated once
someone was taken in, they would not be let go, and she would not expect
that to be done. Council member Genco commented the Village had had a
planner and that didn't work out. Council member Watkins reminded
Council member Genco that had been a particulaz situation, and she did
not think Ms. Hazding would ask for a planner if she did not think she
needed one. Council member Genco commented planning had to do with
comprehensive planning and community planning, and asked how much
more planning Tequesta had to do. Mayor Humpage commented if the
Village was spending that much money with a planner now, they must be
doing something. Council member Genco responded that there had been a
lot of comprehensive planning and now Attorney Roselli was doing a lot
of the work that Mr. Newell had been doing, and she had been helping
with re-writing the code.
44
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 45
Vice Mayor Paterno expressed his opinion the Village was not getting its
money's worth with some of the people being used currently, and he
thought it could be done more efficiently. Vice Mayor Paterno expressed
his opinion that the planner would also be doing other things, to which
Ms. Harding responded that was right, it was not going to be a high-end
planner, but would be a planning assistant to fill the needs in the office.
Director Harding commented the department was not providing any
services, and the public wanted those services and called every day. The
code issues were now being fulfilled with the proper code enforcement,
but the problem was there were not even the right services for the building
inspections-when people asked questions someone should be able to go
out in the field and answer those questions, and that could not be done. If
she had to wait until the next day when the inspector came in to see if he
had time to fit someone in, we were not doing what we should be doing,
and the thrust of this was to provide the kind of services to the community
that they expected and what was required under the codes-not just
padding up with more personnel, because if that were the case she would
not even want them because she would be responsible for them.
Council member Genco indicated she did not think this would be padding
up, but she really questioned adding two full-time employees, and noted
the Last person who held this job before Ms. Harding when doing budget
projections had had a very different opinion of what was needed. Ms.
Hazding responded the person before her didn't do the job. Vice Mayor
Paterno noted there had been a problem of not having any final
inspections; he had looked into this and believed this to be true, and she
was trying to correct problems. Council member Genco asked why the
Council had not been made awaze of that. Vice Mayor Paterno
commented no one knew. Mayor Humpage commented he had exposure
to Ms. Hazding where a lot of the rest of the Council did not, because he
dealt with that department a lot, and the feedback he had akeady received
from people like Mr. Van Brock was amazing-they thought the Village
had done a 360 degree turn--and he understood Council member Genco
was anxious about spending. Council member Genco commented it was
also that the Village was building a new building that was to accommodate
so many people and now there would be more, so the building would be
crowded and therefore the building was already obsolete. Mayor
Humpage disagreed that the building was obsolete. Village Manage
Couzzo advised the building was designed to accommodate the personnel
being requested, and Ms. Harding was asking to change from outside
contracting to in-house personnel so that the level of service could be
improved.
45
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 46
Village Manager Couzzo noted it was unknown how the mazket would
affect the Village in 5 yeazs-no one knew, but he believed this was a
good plan because it would enhance the level of service to the Village, and
by amending the rate structure the differential was $40,000 in the first
yeaz. The Village Manager advised that if this were approved and it was
not working next year, staff would be coming to the Council to say it was
not working, and then changes would be made. Mr. Newell had had an
entirely different approach and when Ms. Harding was hired he had told
her he wanted her to analyze the department and he would try to give her
the latitude to provide excellence in that department. He did not
necessarily think a comparison should be made with the approach Mr.
Newell had had, and Ms. Harding was now Community Development
Department Director. Council Member Genco stated she respected Ms.
Hazding--she was very professional, but this would increase staff by 40%.
Village Manager Couzzo noted with such a small staff it was a big
percentage, but commented Vice Mayor Paterno had said it quite well, and
the Village gave key people the opportunity when they were brought in to
develop the department and expand the level of service, and then
measured them accordingly.
Mayor Humpage commented department heads were expected to do the
best job they could and he respected Ms. Hazding's opinion, and also there
was a financial tradeoff. He realized there might be some risks down the
road, but in his opinion Ms. Harding should be given the green light to go
forward. Vice Mayor Paterno noted there were other sources of money,
such as Palm Beach County, and all sources of revenue needed to be
pursued. Council member Genco commented she was hoping that money
would be on boazd before this was approached. Village Manager Couzzo
commented this went back to comments made tonight by the Council and
members of the audience that Tequesta was the best community in the
State of Florida, and advised that in order for that perception to continue,
the Village must continually re-examine how to raise the bar. The Village
Manager commented he had told both Assistant Manager Gazlo and the
Police Department earlier that he planned to send them a letter tomorrow
regarding their exceptional job in providing security tonight, and you
would not even know there had been a potential problem and a very
difficult situation, and that opportunity should be provided to the other
departments. When Finance Department Director Forsythe came there
had been no one in the Finance Department, and now there were eight
people counting customer service, and there was a different level of
service and no one was questioning what Ms. Forsythe did in Finance.
Council Member Genco responded to the Village Manager that she had a
lot of concerns-the Village was building a building she believed would
be obsolete in two to five years at the rate the Village was going; and she
was concerned about budget projections, and about the market. Council
46
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13!06
Page 47
member Genco commented Code Enforcement had just become full-time,
and the Village was hoping Palm Beach County would help with that.
Council member Genco stated she saw no big projection for the Village
that would require a planner, but she did feel an inspector was needed.
Village Manager Couzzo commented he did not think there was an
argument on the inspector, but that there were questions on the planner;
however, if Ms. Harding felt she needed a planner it would have to be seen
if that was justified. Council member Genco asked what the planner
would be used for, to which Ms. Harding responded when she came in
each morning there were approximately ten phone messages for her to
respond to, to answer zoning questions, so she had to stop her work to
make sure those people got an answer because their next call would be to
the Manager or Council. Council member Genco suggested getting a
zoning technician. Director Harding responded that was her plan-maybe
the word "planner" was confusing-this was a low level planner type and
she could not have somebody with no planning experience or they would
be useless, but this person would grow with the department if the
department grew, and if not, it was not ahigh-end person and would be
something the department could work with.
Vice Mayor Paterno commented what was really wanted was a zoning
technician with the credentials of a beginning planner. Council member
Genco noted there was a difference in the market, and planners did not
usually have as much longevity in the job. Vice Mayor Paterno
commented he was just trying to figure out something to make everyone
happy, to which Council member Genco responded she did not think she
was going to be happy, so not to worry about her.
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to approve Resolution 66-OS/06;
seconded by Vice Mayor Paterno.
Attorney Hawkins read for the record the title of Resolution 66-05/06.
Motion carried 3-1 with Council member Genco opposed.
27. Discussion of Compensation and Classification Study for Village
Employees
Mayor Humpage recommended this be delayed to the May meeting.
MOTION: Council Member Genco moved to table the Discussion of Compensation
and Classification Study for Village Employees to the May Village Council meeting;
seconded by Council Member Watkins; motion passed 4-0 vote.
t3
47
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 48
Village Manager Couzzo suggested even though they were taking no
action on this item this evening, that the Council hear comments from Mr.
Dave Evertson, who was conducting the study, since he had traveled from
Arizona. Mr. Evertson commented interpretation of data was most
important, and although the Council had expressed differences of opinions
on a lot of different things tonight, it had been interesting to see how they
came together, and he was very impressed. Mr. Evertson asked the
Council members to think about what a position was worth-if you were a
department head with employees what it was worth to the organization,
what it was worth compared to the market, etc. There were so many
different perspectives on what a position was worth-whether you were
government or non-government, whether you were an applicant looking at
a salary range, or the worth to an existing employee within a position. The
second question was, What do you value? There was quantity, quality,
experience, knowledge, longevity. What he had been asked to do was to
determine whether or not the current job classifications internally were
equitable, whether the ranges were appropriate internally, if there were
inappropriateness to make recommendations for adjustments, and then to
compaze those to similaz communities with a variety of criteria that they
used to determine comparable positions within comparable communities
with comparable types of services. Mr. Evertson noted it was interesting
that Tequesta offered services more like those of Palm Beach County
communities and less like those in Martin County, but if looking at size or
budget as a factor, Tequesta was more like smaller communities in Martin
County. So there were variables and depending on what one valued, it
could mean one thing to one person and something else to another person;
therefore, when he looked at the data, he questioned should he have used
this city and not another, or one position or another, and it was not an
exact science but was intended to was to provide as clear an illustration as
possible of patterns, disparities, or irregularities within the paying
classification system.
Mr. Evertson explained the process that had been used was to have each
employee complete a survey listing what their position required in terms
of knowledge, skills, ability, experience--not what they had, but what the
position required. This provided a tool to create a hierazchy to compaze all
the positions in the organization and weigh them in terms of how they
ranked with one another, creating a "what is this position worth". They
tried to come up with the market value of a position and also what the
value of a position was internally-what it meant to the Village. Mr.
Evertson referred to his report, and explained that the positions of
communications supervisor, detective investigator and police
administrative secretary scored identical, based on compensable factors,
and the grade was very close, but there was a difference in what the
market was paying for those positions, which made it difficult to come up
with a proposed grade. Looking at the uniquely different positions of
48
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 49
Police Lieutenant, Police Department Executive Secretary, and Finance
Department Accounting Clerk it had appeared the positions were very
close in terms of knowledge, skills, and abilities but the current grades
didn't match at all, so then the survey average was referred to in order to
see what was correct. All the survey did was help identify if there were
irregularities in the relationships between positions. The questions to
consider were, what is the position worth on the market and what is the
position worth within the organization, and he had tried to come up with a
way to help identify if there were some positions that needed to be
reclassified. Salary data was also provided that showed where they were
in relation to the midpoint, the minimum and the maximum. There were
eight positions above the maximum, but those positions might be properly
classified; the ones that were below the minimum might also be properly
classified, and he recommended focusing on those first to see if they were
properly classified and if there were other factors that should be
considered.
Mr. Evertson advised that sometimes there was an employee who had
been with the Village 13 years and another only two years who was
making more, and those inequities needed to be addressed. Mr. Evertson
recommended that once a baseline had been established, to go back and
evaluate employees from the perspective of if one was going to hire that
employee today if the salary that employee was making would be
appropriate--if the conclusion was that they would be hired at a different
rate, then that was the answer. If the organization in the past had awarded
longevity, then it might not be appropriate to penalize along-time
employee because they happened to be outside that range. Mr. Evertson
explained there were unique positions, one of which was that of City
Manager, and many larger cities did not even have a range for the position
of City Manager, but looked at the individual's value. Mr. Evertson noted
there had been no discussion about duties, and it would be up to Village
management to determine if a person was doing proportionally more
work, and if so, they should be proportionately compensated for that. If
they were wearing multiple hats for what were two separately classified
positions, in most other comparable communities, then the differential pay
should be considered, and it might be entirely appropriate for them to be
outside the maximum range. There were no absolutes, but this was
intended to provide information, and hopefully raise questions, and several
employees had come back to him with questions.
Mr. Evertson commented the Village benefits were very comparable to the
smaller communities, and he had been impressed that the Village had been
able to provide health insurance premiums without an increase when the
national average was an increase of 15% to 20% annually. Information
had been provided in the benefits section of his report regarding what
other communities were doing and might provide ideas for things the
49
Minutes -Village Council Regulaz Meeting 04/13/06
Page 50
Village would like to try. Mr. Evertson stated, from what he had seen, the
Village valued quality, and the question often asked of him was whether
employees were paid too much, and his response was he had not known
too many public employees who were paid too much Mr. Evertson
expressed hope that the information provided would help, empower the
Council to ask questions and make decisions, and recommended
discussing and analyzing the information, and at the end of the day to give
guidance to the Village Manager.
Village Manager Couzzo announced that Mr. Evertson would be here on
April 22 and Council members could schedule time with him by
coordinating through Mr. Couzzo's office. He would also be available
later, and there was no urgency to adopting or implementing the results of
this study--it would be done when the Council was comfortable with the
information.
28. Council appointment of the Voting Delegate/Representatives for the
Florida League of Cities 80th Annual Conference, August 10-12, 2006,
Jacksonville, Florida.
Mayor Humpage commented he had missed the first day last year but he
had attended the second day and enjoyed it. Council member Genco
reported the first day had been just a lot of people campaigning, but that
had been predetermined. August 10 and 12 were the dates this yeaz, one
of which was normally a Council meeting. Mayor Humpage announced
he would not be able to attend next month, and Council member Genco
would not be able to be present, so it would be necessary to change the
date of the May meeting. Village Manager Couzzo advised that the
Village Clerk would call everyone to set up the date for the May meeting.
Consensus of Council was to have Mayor Humpage attend the Florida
League of Cities 80th Annual Conference, Augustl0-12, 2006 in
Jacksonville, Florida as the voting delegate/representative from the
Village.
XV. ANY OTHER MATTERS
Council Member Watkins reported she had been severely misquoted in a
newspaper article, and clarified that what she had said to the reporter was not that
she couldn't support it, but that she was going to have to have a little more
information. Council member Watkins advised that her problem was she was
getting calls from people from Jupiter asking why Tequesta wanted this as a
landmark when it was a Jupiter depot. The second thought to the reporter was she
did not know if the building could physically be moved without being ruined in
the process. Council Member Watkins indicated she wanted the Council to know
she did not say she could never support it, but that she needed more
information-and she did want the Council to know she was getting calls from
50
Minutes -Village Council Regular Meeting 04/13/06
Page 51
Jupiter residents saying why was Tequesta wanting to do this when it is a Jupiter
depot. It was noted that the depot was in Tequesta now.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Council Member Watkins moved to adjourn the meeting; Council Member
Genco seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. Therefore, the
meeting was adjourned at 11: OS p. m..
Gwen Carlisle
Village Clerk
51
Oath of Office
I, Geraldine A. Genco, do hereby solemnly swear that I will support, protect and
defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of
Florida against all enemies, domestic or foreign, and that I will bear true faith,
loyalty and allegiance to the same and that I am entitled to hold office under the
Constitution and that I will faithfully perform all the duties of the office of
Council Member Seat 1 on which I am about to enter so help me God.
r, -,
A. Gehco, Council Member
`4- 1 ~ b.6
Date
ATTEST:
f 5 j'
ti-..~?~ v~ ~'~:.-ice ~L..~,~..
~:`-c_-
,
Gwen E. Carlisle, CMC
Village Clerk
```,,~h{i IFf~~'''i
~~~~~ ~~ .P ~.
/ ~ v •G 'i .
fl ~,
Date ~ ;~NCORpGr,AT~
~N
~~~gFOF ~`O~```~~:
_~'u~~unu~~~~`
Oath of Office
I, Jim HumpaPe, do hereby solemnly swear that I will support, protect and defend
the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida
against all enemies, domestic or foreign, and that I will bear true faith, loyalty and
allegiance to the same and that I am entitled to hold office under the Constitution
and that I will faithfully perform all the duties of the office of Council Member
Seat 3 on which I am about to enter so help me God.
U
~~ ~ ~~ ~
Ji umpage, Council mb Date
ATTEST:
,,
Gwen E. Carlisle, CMC
Village Clerk
`~~~~~tmlN~~i
~~ E O F TF~~~~i
Date ~~~ ~ , .... , , QG ~~~
v • pPP OR~~F` ~-~ y
. ~ ~ ~ r 7
:,
_>~ SEAL :y=
~INC~JRPORATED:
~Nj;• vG ~! • Q':
i~~'9~,~~y f 4 `~9~? ~`Q``~~
''' ~ ~~ ~ o l l 11111 O `~~O
~'
~~