HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Miscellaneous_06/06/1996_Public Safety Committee c
� `��• VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
; ,
, Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive
�' Tequesta, F7orida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200
� ` Fa�c: (407) 575-6203
�- a
; o
B 4
f ��N coUM�
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6,1996
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The Tequesta Public Safety Committee held a regularly
scheduled meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive,
Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, June 6, 1996. The meeting
was called to order at 4:30 P.M. by Chairman Joseph
Capretta. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the
Recording Secretary. In attendance were: Chairman Joseph
Capretta, and Committeemembers Carl C. Hansen and Elizabeth
A. Schauer. Village Staff present were: Village Manager
Thomas G. Bradford, Village Attorney John C. Randolph,
Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Committeemember Schauer made a motion to approve the Agenda
as submitted. Committeemember Hansen seconded the motion.
The vote on the motion was:
Joseph N. Capretta - for
Carl C. Hansen - for
Elizabeth Schauer - for
The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda
was approved as submitted.
IZr�vcf�°d P���u��
PUBLIC SAFETY CONIlyiITTEE
ME�TING MINUTES
JE3NE 6, 1996
PAGE 2
-----------------------
III. GONIl�1tJNICATTONS FROM C�TIZENS
Toan Little, 486 Dover R�ad, expressed concern that hurricane
season was approaching and that tree trimminqs left by the
roadside could become projectiles during a storm. Mr.
Little suqgested the possibility of a Hurricane Ordinance be
considered, �nd that people not be allowed to pile up trash
right before a storm since it took Nichols Sanitation a few
days to pick up. Village Manager Bradford explained that
when a clamshell truck was required that pick up could be
delayed appraximately three days.
�V. DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 370 MAPLE AVENtJE
Chairman Capretta explained that the owner of the property
at 370 Maple had provided no upkeep for several years, that
fines of over $65,000 had accumu].ated, and subsequently that
the Court had awarded the property to the Village. A
decision was necessary reqarding what would be done with the
praperty. Options available were: demolition, renovation,
or sale with conditions for renavation. Village Manager
Bradford expressed concern that demalition of the house in
order to sell the lot so that a new ho�ne could be built
might result in a market price for the new house which would
exceed that of the neighborhood, A proposal for demolitian
had been received by the Vil.lage for $8,700. VilZage
Manager Bradford explained that the property appraiser had
establishe� the value of the land at $30,000, and that a new
house in that neighbarhood would cost between $85,000-
$115,00�. Neil Vander Waal, who was present in the
audien.ce, commented that a financial institution might not
be willing to loan on a property which would be overpriced
for the area. Mr. Vander Waal explained that he was present
at the meeting in order to inform the Committee that he had
someone i.nterested in buying the property "as is". Another
man present in the audience who lived across the street from
the property stated that he was also interested in
purchasing the property "as is". Village Manager Bradford
commen�ed that he had had 15 - 20 inquiries and had told
each that if the Village Coun�ii picked the option of sale
with conditions for ren.ovation that they would all be given
an equal chance at the property. Village Manager Bradford
PUBLIC SA�'ETY C�t�A+tITTEE
I�ETING MINUTES
JLJNE 6, 1996
PAGE 3
T----------------------
suggested that if an auction were held that a minimum bid be
set at $12, 000. Chairinan Capretta suggested that a real
estate appraisal. be obtained. Village Manager Bradford
explained that the foundation and walls were the only parts
of the house that would be salvageable. Commit�teemember
Scha�aer questioned whether the Viilage was mowing the
property since the grass was over 12" high, to which the
Village Manager responded he would contact Public Works.
Chairman Capretta expressed his opinion in favor of holding
an auction and selling the property with conditions for
renovation so that the property would not remain an eyesore.
Committeemember Hansen questianed whether bids should be in
the form of bid offers to be submitted in two we�ks, to
which the Village Manager responded he could pl.ace an
advertisement and then send bid invitatians to all who had
inquired about the property. Discussion ensued regarding
appropriate time frames which should be established for
completion of certain items, such as a certain number of
days to have the roof completed. Mr. Vander Waal comnlented
that six months would be sufficient time to compiete the
whole renovation. Village Manager Bradfard explained that
there would be a general time frame to accomplish Village
Council approval of the highest bid, after which the
contract would be executed and the times for the conditions
would begin. In response to Committeemember Schauer's
question whether the highest bidder would know ahead of
Village Council approval that he would get the job so that
he could begin to put things in order, Village Attorney
Randolph explained that the high bidder would not be
informed until the Village Council had approved the bid.
Councilmember Michael Meder, who was present in the
audience, comm.ented that the time frames for conditions
would run from the closing and not from the award date.
Tom Little, 486 Dover Road, expressed his opinion that the
minimum bid should be at least $�0,000 to recovez funds
which the Village had spent on this matter. Mr. Little also
questioned whether the foundation height would have to be
raised to meet the current Building Code requirements, and
expressed concern that the 'time frames would not be
sufficient if such a problem must be worked out with the
Village. Mr. Little suggested that hol�.ing an auction would
increase the flow af dollars to the community over a sealed
PUBLIC 5AFETY COMMITTEE
ME�TING MINUTES
JL7NE 6, 1996
PAGE 4
bid process, and recommended that the Village find out the
cost o� an auctioneer. Discussion ensued regarding whether
the slab would have to be raised to meet current Code for a
renovation project rather than for new construction. Mr.
Little commented that he believed if a certain percentage of
renovation were made then the n.ew height requirement must be
met. Committeemember Hansen commented that he would expect
the bidders to be professional people who would ascertain.
the conditions with which they must comply, and if
conditions were unreasonable they wouid tak� exception to
the bid. Chairman C�pretta recommended that Building
Official Ladd look at th2 key questions, such as the level
of the foundation, since it had been his impression that as
long as an exterior wall was left from the origin,al
structure that the new fl.00r height requirement did not
apply. Committeemember Schauer commented that the
consulting engineer's report had been very descriptive
regarding what needed to be done for renovation.
� Village Attorney Randolph advised that the decision whether
to have an auction or sealed bids should be made after
selection of an option for demolition, renovation, or sale
with conditions for renovation. It was stated that staff
would research the options and choose the best alternative.
Committeemember Schauer made a motion to sell the property
at 370 Maple Avenue with conditions for renovatian (Option
#3). Comm�titteemember Hansen seconded the motion. The vote
on the motion was:
Joseph N. Capretta - for
Carl C. Hansen - for
Elizabeth Schauer - for
The motion was therefore p$ssed and adogted.
V. ZONING ORDINANCE AMEATDMENT FOR SPECIFIC MEDICAL HA,RDSHIP
Village Manager Bradford explained that Tom Little, 486
Dover Road, had previously requested a waiver for parking
his motor home which had been denied. Subsequently, on
October 12, 1995, Mr. Little had approached the Village
PUBLIC SAFETY CONIlrlITTEE
MEETING MINUTES •
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 5
-----------------------
Council seeking help relative to the hardship facing him
regarding access to his motor home for his wife who he had
explained had a medical hardship. Village Manager Bradford
stated that a copy of that portion of the Village Council
meeting minutes had been provided for the Committeeit�.embers
to review, and explained that the Village Council had voted
3-2 in favor of having staff look at the existing portion of
the Tequesta Zoning Ordinance to see what could be done.
Subsequently, Village Attorney Randolph had prepared a draft
ordinance for review and consideration, which would provide
an amendment for medical hardship waiver under certain
conditions enumerated within the ordinance.
Committeemem.ber Schauer stated that she had re�riewed the
draft ordinance and that her position was the same, i.e.,
that she would prefer not to approve the ordinance and to
leave the Code as is.
Committeemember Hansen commented that he did not think af a
mator home or recrea�ional vehicle as the type of
transgortation normally used to transport handicapped
people, and considered an average car which had no steps
better suited. Mr. Hansen commented that ADA guidelines
mentioned wide doors for access and a lot of other things
which did nat appl�r to motor homes.
Chairman Capretta commented that this matter had been
discussed several times.
Tom Little, 486 Dover Raad, commented on the last paragraph
in Village Manager Bradford's memo to the Public Safety
Committee members, which stated, "Just as a point of
information, at your recent Village Council Meetings, Mr.
Little has been indicating that Attarney General �pinions
indicate that it is illegal for municipalities to adopt
regulations for handicapped parking. The Village Attorney
advises me that this is not the case." Mr. Little stated
everyone was familiar with 84-1 which he had read at
practically every meeting. Mr. Little read aloud from a
dacument which he stated was dated 6/4/96 at 13.52.51,
Office of the Attorney General of the State of Florida, from
Tom Baxter Law Library: The Sheriff's Office of each of
severa.I counties of this State sha13 enfarce al� of the
PUBLIC SAFETY CONIl�IITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 6
-----------------------
traffic laws of the State on a11 the streets and h.ighways
thereof and e�sewhere througho�t the Count�r wherevex the
public has t�e right to travel by motor vehicles. Faotnote
number 3r See E.G. AGD 84-1 (Municipalities are not
au�horized by 1aw to enact an ordinance regUlating park.ing
for phys�cally disabled persons on pri vate property) In AGO
83 and 84 the provisions of 316 Florida Statutes are
enforceable on pri vate property only when the public has the
right to trave.t by motor vehicle thereon.
Village Attorney Randolph commented those were correct
statements, but they were not relevant to what was being
done; and that �here was a Statute which related �o
physically handicapped parking which could be enforced on
public property and it did not allow someone to go onto
property such as the shopping center next door and require
them to have physically handicapped spaces, and did not
allow the Chief of Police to go onto a property owner's
property without the permission of the property owner to go
on to enforce the Statute. Village Attorney Randolph stated
he did not see how that related to what was being done here
in regard to trying to craft out a provision for it, and
stated that he believed that in this ordinance an attempt
was made to craft out a provision for physically handicapped
parking. The Village Attorney commented that it seemed that
the argument being used was saying that could not be done,
and if so, the ordinance would have to be left the way i�
was. Village Attorney Randolph commented that what was
attempted by this ordinance was to try to accommodate
private people for the need of a physically handicapped
person.
Chairman Capretta commented that Mr. Little's arguments and
the reading of the code led him to the conclusion that the
Village had no business passing such an ordinance, and might
not have the right to do it. Village Attorney Randolph
stated that was where the argument would lead if the
argument was correct, but the argument was not correct as it
related to these properties. In response to Chairman
Capretta's question of what this ordinance would do if
passed, Village Manager Bradford expiained that it would
provide for specific medical hardship for the parking of
vehicles referenced in certain sections of the Code as being
PUBLIC SAFETY COIrIlrIITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 7
illegal on private property. Village Attorney Randalph
stated that currently there was no Code provision for
medical hardship, and that the hardship Mr. Little would
have to show was the same as anyone would have to show for
granting of a variance--that there was something unique
about his particular property which should allow him to park
a motor vehicle of this size when no one else in the Village
had the right to do that. The question was raised whether
in addition to that the Village should have a provision in
the Code which would allow someone to obtain a variance from
the Code for a medical hardship, which was why this
ordinance was drafted. Attorney Randolph stated that he was
not sure whether, under the provisions of this ordinance if
it should be passed, Mr. Little would be successful in
getting an exemption for parkinq his motor home; because the
Ordinance read that in order to be granted a variance for
medical hardship it must be proved that (a� the parking of
the vehicle could not reasonably meet the terms of the
Ordinance without the granting of a waiver. Attorney
Randolph stated that there had been a question of whether or
not Mr. Little's vehicle could legally be parked on the
property. Attorney Randolph commented that the Ordinance
also required that (b} the vehicle for which the waiver was
sought was necessitated for the use of the transportation of
a physically handicapped person living on the premises and
that another vehicle not regulated under the terms of the
Ordinance was insufficient for transportation of said
physicaliy handicapped person. And (c) that the vehicle for
which the waiver was sought shall be specifically equipped
for the transportation of a physically handicapped person;
and td) that a notarized letter attesting to the truth of
the information contained therein be provided from a medical
doctor verifyin.g that the person on the premises �or whom
the waiver is requested is physically handicapped and is in
need of the vehicle for which th.e waiver is requested for
transportation purposes. Attorney Randolph stated this was
a reasonable Ordinance; however, he was not sure it was
going to get Mr. Little what he was looking for.
Mr . Little cofnmented that, number one, that was the only
vehicle he had since in Octaber his car had floated away
. during the high waters. Mr. Little stated, number 2, how
many handicapped vehicles do you find in the community that
PUBLIC SAFETY CObIl�lITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 8
have facilities for restrooms, and stated that his wife when
she says, "Tom, bathroom", she didn't mean ten minutes from
now or twenty minutes from now, she means now. Mr. Little
stated he found a landing area immediately, that we had ali
had the goosey gallop trots or G.I.`s or whatever you wish
to call them, diarrhea, and he had had several experiences
over the last four years, and when she says "restroom", he
landed right now with that motor home. Mr. Little stated, "I
need it. I`ve got to have it for that purposes only. I've
got to be there. I've got �o have it instantaneously,
practically. And again, going back to Footnote 3, it's so
specific, whenever the public has the right to travel by
motor vehicle. They don't have the right to travel. �ou
cannot legislate, and basically, it's not the vehicle, the
person is who you are legislating. That's the handicapged
person. T can take that blue tag that I have right now in
my motor home, if I had a vehicle with restroom facilities
in it I would take that tag and go anywher� with her, but
I've got to have the restroom. You're not going to find it
' in the vans coming from Jupiter Hospital, or any of the
ambulance squads that I know af. Here aqain, we are right
back to square one. Ladies and Gentlemen, I asked for your
help last time very, very nicely, and so forth. I am still
asking for help. And I don't think this Ordinance is going
to do it because basically, you can't legislate a disabled
person's vehicle on private property, according to Florida
State Statutes 316."
Committeem�mber Hansen suggested that recommendation be made
to the Vill.age Council not to pass the proposed Ordinance.
Villaqe Manager Bradford commented that another applicant
was on the Village Council meeting agenda for next week who
was seeking a medical hardship for a motor home, and
expressed his personal opinion t_hat wai�ers should not be
allowed. Mr. Little suggested tha� there should be give and
take rather than a dictatorial position, and commented that
in almost every chapter in the Village Codes there were
provisions for waivers, variances, and hardship. Mr. Little
stated that the only section of the Code which mentioned
hardship was the section he had been discussing. Chairman
Capretta questioned where Mr. Little had been parking his
motor homes on his property for the last several years. Mr.
Little responded that it was the same approximate location,
PUBLIC SAFET3� COIyIl�IITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 9
-----------------------
however, since Mr. Vorpagel had erected a fence alongside
the property, that fence had preven.ted Mr. Little from
backing the motor home deeper into that side of his lot;
however, Mr. Little stated he did n.ot bel.ieve that was the
problem based upon the opinion he had obtained from the
Attorney General's office which said that a municipality
could not l.egislate a disabled person's vehicle on private
property--that it was not a thoroughfare. In response to
Chairman Capretta's question whether the police had tried to
stop Mr. Little from parking appro�imately where he had
parked since 1972, Mr. Little responded that the only
episode had been with Code Enforcement Officer Davis who
verbally informed Mr. Little he was not in compliance with
the Code, and that was when Mr. Little had requested a
waiver because of hardship, which was denied. During
en5uing discussion, Chairman Capretta questioned why Mr.
Little kept bringing this matter up since he had never been
cited. Mr. Little explained that he wanted to be in good
standing. Chairman Capretta expressed the opinion that the
PoliCe and the �Tillage had been compassionate by having left
Mr. Little alone, and explained that the Village had not
found a way to write an ordinance that was applicable to all
the people in the Village and also to solve Mr. Lit�le's
particular problem. Chairman Capretta commented that his
advice to Mr. Little was to continue what he was doing, and
to see what happened in the next case which would be cominq
up. Councilmember Meder questioned whether Mr. Little was
saying that the Florida Statute sai.d that it was illegal for
a municipality to regulate motor vehicles, to which Mr.
Little responded that it stated regulation was illegal for
physically disabled persons on private property. Mr. Little
exp].ained that he used a piece of plywood for a ramp to push
his wife's wheel�hair into the motor home.
Chairman Capretta questioned whether this Committee should
act on this matter or send it to tl�e full Villaqe Council,
to which the Village Attorney responded that the full
Village Council had requested the Public Safety Committee's
recommendation, tY�eretore, it had to go back to the Village
Council.
Committ�:emember Hansen made a motion to bring the proposed
zoning ordinance amendment for speaifie medical hardshig
PUBLIC SAFETY COI�tITTEE
MEETING MTNUTES
JtJNE 6, 1996
PAGE 10
before the full Village Council with the recom�nendation from
the Public Safety Committee that it not be approved.
Com�nitteemember Schauer seconded the motion. The vote on the
motian was:
Joseph N. Capretta - for
Car1 C. Hansen - for
Elizabeth Schauer - for
The motion was therefore passed and adopted.
Village Manager Bradford requested and received
clarification from Chairman Capretta that the decision of
the Committee would be made to the Village Councii in the
report of the Commit�ee's meeting rather than placed on the
agenda of the Village Council meeting. Mr. Little
questioned where he stood. Village Manager Bradford stated
that Mr. Little was in violation of the Code. Mr. Little
� stated, go back to the original variance he had �equested
referring to that section of the Code and grant the variance
based upon the haxdship that was in the Code. Viilage
l�Ianager Bradford explained that staff had reviewed Mr.
Little's property and had found that he could park his motor
home legally under the Cod.e if he parked it on the east side
of his property, and he believed that the issue came down to
the fact that Mr. Little did not want to make the changes
necessary to come into compliance with the Code, and
questioned Mr. Little whether he did or did not want to make
the necessary changes. Mr. Little responded that he did
not, that on April 18 his wife had fallen and broken her 1eq
and had fin.ally came home from the hospital and nursing care
center, and now had to use a walker. Mr. Little again stated
he did not see how the Village could legislate this matter
since according to Florida Statutes munieipalities are not
authorized by law to enact an ordinance regulating parking
for physically disabl.ed persons on private p�operty.
Chairman Capretta pointed out that Mr. Littl.e could park his
motor home legally on his lot even though it wa� not the
most convenient spot, and cauld pull over into the driveway
to pick up his wife when she needed to go somewhere.
Committeemember Hansen explained there were many Village
residents who had spent $500 to $1,DOQ to put up a fence or
provide screening for their recreational vehicles in order
PUBLIC SAFETY CONIlrlITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 11
to be in. cornpliance with Village Code, and that Mr. Little
couJ.d also be in compliance. Mr. Hansen stated that as far
as he could see, Mr. Little had a choice to come into
compiiance and had chosen not to comply. Mr. Little
responded �hat was correct. Mr. Little stated he would not
give up. Mr. Little provided Village �lttorney Randolph the
number of the most recent AGO to which he had referred.
VI. DISCUSSIOtQ OF NAMAC REPRESENTATIVE
Village Manager Bradford reported that the Village was a
member of both the NAMAC Palice and Fire organizations,
who5e councils had voted to merge into one council. A�.so,
former Vice Mayor Burckart needed to be replaced as the
Village representative for the NAMAC Police organi.zation,
and Mayor Mackail was currently the representative for the
N�1MAC Fire Rescue organ�.zation.
Committeemember 5chauer made a motion to make Mayor Ron
Mackail the Village Representative for both the NAMAC Police
organization and the NAMAC Fire Resaue organization, with
Councilmember Car� C. Hansen as alternate VilZage
Representative. Comanitteemember Hansen seconded the motian.
The vote on the motion was:
Joseph N. Capretta - for
Carl C. Hansen - for
Elizabeth Schauer - for
The motion was therefore passed and adopted.
YII. ANY QTHER MATTERS
Chairman Capretta reported that the people in Waterway
Village on the west side of - the intercoastal were concerned
that the Vill.age was planning to cut dowrz the trees which
blocked the wind from their homas. Village Manager Bradford
explained that the Village was not involved and that Palm
Beach County would be handl.ing such a matter since they
managed that land for the State. Village Manager Bradford
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 6, 1996
PAGE 12
-----------------------
explained that the trees were Australian Pines which were
an invasive species and should be cut.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 5:26 P.M.
,�
� .e�' Respectfully submitted,
:;��3 ��� ` �� �a-�-�-,� i
- ''' � :f �1 ?�i�,i /
Betty Laur
Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
J ann Mangani lo
Village Clerk
DATE APPROVED:
as 5�