Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Regular_07/27/1989• I. The Tequesta Village Council held a regularly scheduled Village Council Meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, July 27, 1989. The meeting was called to order at 9:00 A.M. by Mayor Capretta. A roll call was taken by the Recording Secretary. Councilmembers present were: William E. Burckart; Earl L. Collings and Vice-Mayor Edward C. Howell. Village Officials present were: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager; John C. Randolph, Esquire, Village Attorney; Department Heads and Bill C. Kascavelis, Finance Director. VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 27, 1989 • II. Mayor Capretta gave the Invocation and led those in attendance to the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (407) 575-6200 FAX: (407) 575-6203 Councilmember Collings moved to approve the Agenda as submitted, and the motion was seconded by Councilmember Burckart. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Mayor Capretta - for Vice Mayor Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND REPORTS A) Board of Adjustment Meeting - June 19, 1989. B) Community Appearance Board Workshop Meeting - June 28, 1989. Councilmember Burckart asked how close the Community Appearance Board was in creating the Landscape Code which is in process of being written. Village Manager Bradford speculated it would probably be ready by next Council Meeting on August 10, 1989. ~ ~~ h Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 2 ------------------------------- Councilmember Collings asked Mr. Bradford if he had any comments on the ratio of Palm Trees in parking lots, regarding the CAB's recommendation of 505. Mr. Bradford explained it was "up to" 50$. C) Code Enforcement Board Public Information Meeting - July 3, 1989. D) Village Council Special Meeting - July 6, 1989. E) Tequesta Downtown Development Task Force Meeting - July 7, 1989. F) Village Council Workshop Meeting - July 11, 1989. G) Village Council Meeting - July 13, 1989. H) Village Manager's Report - July 10-21, 1989. Councilmember Collings asked Village Manager Bradford where the report was on water consumption. Mr. Bradford answered this was in the June Report. Councilmember Collings also asked if there had been any change in consumption since the new rates have been introduced. Water Department Manager Tom Hall answered affirmatively; however, at this time it cannot be ascertained what has caused that change (which in some cases has been a 20~ decrease), whether accredited to restrictions, or weather, or precisely the reason. Mayor Capretta mentioned he had asked Tom Hall to prepare chart on water consumption, by month, for 1987, 1988 and year to date and to project out from that, based on data received from Gee & Jensen, to ascertain what the monthly estimated consumption would be for the rest of this year and into 1990. Councilmember Collings moved to approve the above- referenced Meeting Minutes as submitted. Councilmember Burckart seconded. The vote was: Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 3 ------------------------------- William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. • V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Frances Vaughn, citizen representing Harkin Terrace on County Line Road spoke regarding the installation of water lines. Ms. Vaughn stated she had two gaping holes on the side of County Line Road for which she could not get a wet tap until the connection charge issue as settled. Ms. Vaughn's desire was to proceed with the wet tap, get the holes buried, with the understanding that the rates may vary within the next few weeks, accepting the fact there would be a change. Mayor Capretta stated he felt the issue would be resolved today, and if it was not, Council could foresee no problem in granting a special exception, as long as it was understood the rate would change. Vic Perrone, Vic's Hardware and representative of Tequesta Business Association stated the Association had two recommendations for the Code Enforcement Board: 1) Muriel Manning, The Poodle Puff; and 2) Bill Frank, Frank's Associates, Century 21. Mr. Bradford suggested to Mr. Perrone that he stop in the Village Administrative Office to ask for two application forms for these recommended individuals. Mr. Bradford further explained if Mr. Frank was chosen for the CEB, he may have to relinquish his present position on the Community Appearance Board. VI. APPOINTMENTS A) Consideration of Re-Appointment of Janet Gettig to a New Three-Year Term as a Regular Member of he Community Appearance Board, with New Term to Run from August 1, 1989 through July 31, 1992. I• Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 4 ------------------------------- Mr. Bradford explained he had spoken with Mrs. Gettig who accepted nomination to the re- appointment. Councilmember Collings moved to accept the re-appointment of Mrs. Gettig to the new three- year term. Councilmember Burckart seconded. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. • VII. DEVELOPMENT MATTERS A) Consideration of Site Plan Review (Associated Communications) for Telecommunications Satellite Dish at Walgreens, 151 U.S. Highway One North. Ralph Murcato, representative for Associated Communications, presented the proposal for a satellite dish for Walgreen's computer for their intercom network, to transmit data to and from other Walgreens throughout the United States. Councilmember Collings asked if this proposal was consistent with previous requests for satellite dishes - Mr. Ladd responded that it was. Vice- Mayor Howell asked if this dish would be used only for that specific information or if it could be used for other things. Scott Ladd answered that a different type dish would be needed for different reception, and this one would be used only for computer reception and transmittal. Mr. Bradford asked Mr. Ladd if he was satisfied that this dish was not visible from the highway. Mr. Ladd responded that the Line of Site Drawing indicates that it will not be seen. Councilmember Collings moved to approve the satellite dish as proposed. Vice-Mayor Howell seconded. The vote was: • • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 5 ------------------------------- William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) Ordinance No. 387 - Second Reading - Increasing the Capital Improvement Charge for Each New Connection to the Water System to $1,500. Attorney Randolph gave the second reading of the above- referenced Ordinance. Councilmember Burckart wrote a letter to Council stating he felt 51500 was excessive and that 51150 was more reasonable; also, he did not like the way the Jupiter Island charge was being handled and felt it should be a 'per property' basis, stating the present charge would not be sufficient to reimburse the Village if indeed there are fewer properties developed on the Island than the Village projects. Attempting to simplify this Ordinance, Attorney Randolph suggested no change has been made in the charge to Jupiter Island in this Ordinance. This was recently done with the proviso that this matter would be looked at from time-to-time to see whether or not there should be an increase and to see whether or not the correct formula was being used. Therefore, this issue is something separate and apart from Ordinance 387, and it's something that could be addressed at a Workshop or another Council meeting, or have the Engineer look at another way of assessing that charge. The primary purpose of this Ordinance is simply to change the Capital Improvement Charge, not to change what is happening over on Jupiter Island. Councilmember Collings asked if the second paragraph of Section 1.(f) could be amended to read "as developed"; Attorney Randolph responded affirmatively. Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 6 ------------------------------- Attorney Randolph continued that the issue of the $1500 was actually the primary issue, this being the one that had engineering input to substantiate the $1500 cost. Attorney Randolph reminded Council of the range given to them by Tom Hall who felt the $1500 range was a good mid-range; it could have been higher than submitted, but it was felt that $1500 was supportable. Councilmember Collings agreed. Mr. Burckart continued that he did not feel the estimated 1600 new ERC's was an accurate figure. Mr. Staudinger, Gee & Jensen, stated that anytime you take a snapshot picture of what you think development is going to be over the next ten years, will not be an accurate estimate. There will be a lot of factors that will come into play over the next few years. He stated you can't just set the charge and leave it that way - you have to revisit it. Village Manager Bradford stated it should be reviewed a minimum of once a year. Mayor Capretta stated he had a tendency to agree with Councilmember Burckart that the charge should be per property and asked what it would take to get that into the Ordinance. Mr. Bradford replied he was not sure that was possible, that it would probably have to start with maximum allowed density. However, Mr.Bradford suggested historical allowed density might be able to be used, if it was quantifiable. Mayor Capretta asked if building single-family homes on lots where several units were anticipated, could be prevented. Mr. Staudinger explained the way the charge is set up now, is based on ERCs, determined by the size of the water meter, and depending on what water meter the builder requests, that's the number of ERCs assigned; however, a minimum meter size could be set. Councilmember Collings felt minimum meter size was most impractical. Mayor Capretta stated one can never make the maximum assumption on the number of units, and one can never assume the acreage will all be used; therefore, a charge is installed that may be more than it could be, but is in the middle of the road, and though too much may be collected in one ~ • • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 7 ------------------------------- instance, and not enough in another, but overall the costs would be recovered. In the past, costs have not been recovered. Councilmember Collings stated the Engineering firm probably did the same type analysis, but perhaps more finite, and their recommendation of the range they gave was from the very minimum previously suggested to a substantially higher level. It was decided on a logical basis that, rather than go to the very minimum, and certainly not to the maximum, to take what was equitable with those capital connection charges of other Villages, and $1500 seemed to be eminently logical. Upon conclusion of all discussion, Councilmember Collings moved to accept the Ordinance as submitted. Vice-Mayor Howell seconded the motion. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for • Earl L. Collings _ for Joseph N. Capretta for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. Village Manager Bradford reminded Mayor Capretta that back in late June when the Village proceeded in this direction, by motion of Council, a moratorium was implemented, and suggested that perhaps for proper procedure the moratorium should now be undone. Attorney Randolph added that in this undoing, it should be made clear that this new Ordinance shall apply to anyone who applies, or who has applied, who has not yet received a water connection. Vice-Mayor Howell moved to rescind the moratorium. Councilmember Collings seconded the motion. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 8 B) Ordinance No. 388 - Second Reading - Increasing Permit Fees to One and One-Half Percent of the Value of Construction. Attorney Randolph read the Ordinance by title. Councilmember Burckart asked Scott Ladd if general contractors are paying 1.5$ and subcontractors are paying a fee under $6,000, isn't that in essence 3~? Mr. Ladd responded that some agencies are already at 2~ for general contractors, but that subcontractors pay 1.5$, but only on their portion of the contract and it averages out. Mr. Bradford asked Mr. Ladd if when the general contractor permit fee amount is set, do you count the HVAC system as part of that amount? Mr. Ladd answered affirmatively. Mr. Bradford continued: Then the HVAC subcontractor comes in and pays another fee on top of that? Mr. Scott answered the subcontractor would pay $55.00, the cost of processing the permit. Mr. Ladd stated he prefers charging the subcontractors because it give him better control over the subcontractors. Mayor Capretta explained the past practice has been to charge general contractors 1~, plus charging the subcontractors, so in actuality the increase is only .5$, and it puts the Village about in line with Palm Beach County. Our methodology is just different, which gives us better control. Councilmember Collings moved to accept the second reading of Ordinance No. 388. Vice-Mayor Howell seconded the motion. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. C) Resolution No. 10-88/89 - Amending the Study Area of the Tequesta Downtown Development Task Force to Include the Vacant Coast Guard Lands as May be Deemed Necessary. • • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 9 ------------------------------- Village Manager Bradford stated the Task Force suggested this because of the aspect of the government putting the land on the surplus list and the large potential of uses for the land, one of which could be a library. Councilmember Collings asked what the timeframe was for relinquishment of the land. Mr. Bradford answered it could be 12-24 months. He stated he had spoken with people in charge of this project and found it has been decided the relinquishment will be a 25 acre, L-shaped parcel that runs parallel to U.S. #1 and then east-west parallel to CR- 707. Councilmember Collings questioned whether this and should be included in the soon-to-come Charette being planned. Mr. Bradford pointed out the last sentence of Section 3 of the proposed Resolution which states, "inclusion of the vacant Coast Guard lands lying northward of CR-707 may be included within the . planning process to develop the recommended Master Plan as deemed appropriate by the Task Force." These planners may say it's of-the-wall, and don't bother. Mr. Collings suggested suppose they don't say that; he stated if he were a Charette Planner he would want to take the biggest possible environment to plan in. Mr. Bradford stated he felt it would not be included because the present possibility of acquiring the land is still vague. Councilmember Collings moved to table the Resolution until after November, and assign it to the Public Works Committee which has purview over parks and recreation. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. C) Consideration of Offer of Settlement regarding FEC vs. Palm Beach County and Village of Tequesta. • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 10 ------------------------------- • Attorney Randolph explained Tequesta has been involved in a lawsuit over a bill for repairs to the railroad right-of-way which occurred several years ago. The original amount of the bill was $26,200. The County and the Village were sued by FEC to collect the bill, the dispute really being between the two parties; the County saying the Village owed it and the Village saying the County owed it. Attorney Randolph convinced the County to pay half of the original amount of the bill as long as the Village would pay the interest on the bill. The total amount of the bill now, with interest, is $38,776.99. With the County agreeing to pay half of the original amount of the bill, Tequesta's share would be $25,676.65. The way this would take place is, the County would go ahead and pay the entire bill, and the Village would reimburse the County for the Village's share. Councilmember Collings moved to settle along the suggested terms of the Village Attorney. Councilmember Burckart seconded. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. IX. NEW BUSINESS A) Review and Comments Relative to Proposed Ordinance Allowing Additional Building Height in the Village Prior to Advertisement of Same. Village Manager Bradford stated the advertising costs for this issue were so great that everyone should be certain they're on the same track before advertising for the first hearing. Mayor Capretta was concerned that a general amendment of an Ordinance was being requested for the whole C- 2 district as opposed to one spot approval. Attorney Randolph stated it would have to be done that way; otherwise, it would be spot zoning. It would n U • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 11 ------------------------------- only be through PCD that you could have an 8-story building, not through special exception. Councilmember Collings asked if it were spot zoning if the amendment were to say "on Highway One". Attorney Randolph explained the zoning would have to be changed, an overlay zone would be necessary. Or this particular area could right now go under Planned Development to go as high as four stories. Mayor Capretta was reluctant to support any C-2 overall zoning change. Mr. Collings suggested if increasing stories in the C-2 district was not going to be supported by Council, it would severely limit the planners at the Charette and felt strongly that allowance should be made right now for the Route #1 area in order to give proper liberty to the Charette. Attorney Randolph explained you would have to draw a zone; there would have to be something to . show on the zoning map where you would allow a five- story building, and asked what kind of depth is necessary. Mr. Ladd stated traditionally County uses a 250 foot depth. David Sullivan, representative of the proposed Radisson Hotel, stated 250 feet was not enough allowance for the hotel. Councilmember Burckart stated he could support five stories in the C-2 zoning and drop the eight story PCD. Councilmember Collings concurred. Mr. Bradford stated if all Councilmembers agreed with five stories, the footage needed to be determined, and asked Scott Ladd to reiterate to Council what was reviewed in the last staff meeting. Mr. Ladd responded he had reviewed with architects regarding the newer luxury styled buildings compared to the current type of building you might get under the 10-foot per story general limit, that does not give enough flexibility to give a quality, luxury office or hotel, or whatever - 13 1/2 feet per floor would work out very well for what a developer might want to do. Councilmember Collings substantially preferred a community where a modest height would be allowed and with requirements for landscaping and parking, as opposed to • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 12 ------------------------------- total ground coverage with 2 or 3 stories. He felt that would be a far more upscale environment than with ground level density. Village Manager Bradford asked Attorney Randolph if an 8-story office building was built outside the Village, and the Village allows 8 stories as a PCD, does that mean the 8 story outside the Village is able to annex into the Village - would there be any constraint in that regard? Attorney Randolph answered they would probably come in under the general zoning category they were adjacent to - they would probably be an 8-story non-conforming building in a zoning category that allows 5 stories. Mayor Capretta stated he wished to table the issue, not to advertise it yet, and to entertain it again in 60 days, and by that time, hopefully, recommendations from the Task Force and the Charette will be in, and • Council would be able to take a look at the overall plan. Attorney Randolph agreed the 8-story issue would probably be controversial and bog this proposed ordinance down; however, the purpose of the PCD was to allow for someone who wanted a mix to have some sort of advantage in height. With this change there would be a situation in the PCD where someone can only go 4 stories, yet in a regular zone, 5 stories. He suggested Council at least look at making the change from 4 to 6 within the PCD, or even giving an additional story in the PCD. Building Official, Scott Ladd, stated there is no setback requirements in C-1, C-2 nor C-3 zones, and builders can build right up to the property line. It was his recommendation that a setback requirement be incorporated in this Ordinance. Councilmember Collings agreed that should be included in the Ordinance. Mayor Capretta mentioned the 8-story issue should also be include. Mr. Bradford suggested density should be included as well. Mayor Capretta suggested the Ordinance be re-worked including the above, and by the time the re-write, the advertising, and the first and second hearings took place, the Downtown Task Force • • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 13 ------------------------------- would probably have completed their planning. David Sullivan asked how long he could expect that to take since they would like to have the Radisson up by next year. Mayor Capretta asked Council if they had any problem supporting the five stories. Attorney Randolph suggested he could have an Ordinance for the next meeting which allows for five stories, has a setback requirement, and a lot coverage requirement in the C-2 area and suggested with proper approval the Ordinance could be passed in perhaps 45 days. David Sullivan was satisfied. Council was in full agreement on the rewrite of the Ordinance with the above-referenced inclusions. B) Ordinance - First Reading - Implementing a Surcharge on Water Services to Residents of Unincorporated Palm Beach County. Attorney Randolph read the Ordinance by title. "AN • ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 18-5 OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO PROVIDE FOR AN EIGHT PERCENT SURCHARGE ON WATER SERVICES TO RESIDENTS OF UNINCORPORATED PALM BEACH COUNTY AND MARTIN COUNTY; PROVIDING THE BASIS FOR THE SURCHARGE; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Mr. Collings explained that this in effect means, if passed, that Martin County and Palm Beach County residents whom the Village serves will be charged the same price that is charged Village residents. Mr. Bradford stated Florida Statute 372 allows for up to a 25$ surcharge to customers of unincorporated areas, without justification; between 25-50$ surcharge with justification; therefore, this complies with that Statute, provides for fairness in rate structure, and helps recoup the special costs associated with providing and delivering water services to residents outside the confines of the Village of Tequesta. Mr. Collings added it is in no way penal, and it is equitable. Vice-Mayor Howell moved to approve the Ordinance. Councilmember Collings seconded the motion. The vote was: r~ U • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 14 ------------------------------- William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. C) Review of Village Council Priorities List and Plan to Prioritize Same. Mr. Bradford suggest to Council that if they had already assigned numbers, all they needed to do was hand them back to him so that he could compile the information and bring it back to the next agenda. D) Adoption of the Proposed Millage Rate (6.3140) Necessary to Provide the Ad Valorem Taxes Required to Balance the Tentative Fiscal Year 1990 General Fund Budget. . Village Manager Bradford reiterated that in Budget Hearings in June and July, 1989, they started with a proposed millage rate of 7.3 mills; at the instruction of the Finance and Administration Committee, administration was instructed to reduce the millage rate and were able to do so to 6 mills. At the last General Fund Budget Workshop there was a discussion relative to the Public Safety Consultant Study that's taking place at this time and that there was a strong likelihood if the Public Safety is found to be feasible, extra manpower should be provided to allow existing staff to be trained, and therefore that cost came to approximately $93,000. In order to generate that amount of money, an additional .3140 mills had to be provided in order to balance the budget. Therefore, the proposed millage rate is 6.3140 mills necessary to provide the ad valorem taxes required to balance the fiscal 1990 General Fund Budget, making our tax rate increase 9.8~ on the Tequesta portion of the resident's tax bill. Mayor Capretta asked if the rate could be lowered later on if it is found the Public Safety program was not adopted. Mr. Bradford stated there would be • Village Council Meeting Minutes July 2 7 , 1989 Page 15 -------------------------------- opportunity to lower that rate in September, but if this rate today is adopted, it can not be exceeded. Mr. Bradford reminded Council they could not reduce the tax rate after October 1. Councilmember Collings moved to adopt the new millage rate. Councilmember Burckart seconded the motion. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. E) Adoption of the Computed Roll-Back Millage Rate (5.2388) to be Provided to the Property Appraiser in Accordance with F.S. 200.065. Councilmember Collings asked what impact this would have on the taxpayers. Village Manager Bradford explained it would have no impact on the taxpayers; it is just a way of showing to the taxpayer that if the city had the same amount of expenditures next year as this year, it could, in theory, adopt a millage rate of 5.2388 mills. Councilmember Collings moved to adopt the computed roll-back millage rate. Councilmember Burckart seconded. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. F) Adoption of the Date, Time and Place of the First and Final Budget Hearing to Consider the Proposed Millage Rate and Tentative Budgets. Village Manager Bradford explained the first and final public hearings cannot conflict with Palm Beach County School Board nor the Palm Beach County Commission. Therefore, the recommendations are: Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 16 -------------------------------- 1) First P.M. at Florida; Public Hearing Village Hall, - September 14, 1989, 5:30 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, 2) Final P.M. at Florida. Public Hearing Village Hall, - September 28, 1989, 5:30 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Councilmember Burckart moved to approve the above meeting dates and times for First Public Hearing and Final Public Hearing. Councilmember Collings seconded. The vote was: William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Edward C. Howell - for the motion therefore passed and was adopted. X. ANY OTHER MATTERS. Councilmember Burckart asked where we were going with the Charette. Councilmember Collings reminded Council he had initially suggested that the thinking of the Task Force might generate a thought-starter for developers, the Villagers, and planners, if they were given a few thousand dollars to make some preliminary sketches of what might happen. Subsequent action of the Task Force and the Village Planner brought up the logic of using a Charette and develop a substantially more comprehensive plan of what might be done. The cost would be about $25,000. Initially Mr. Collings was against that because the Village did not have control of all three properties in question. Subsequently, an increased interest has been developed by the old Winn-Dixie area, plus outside interests have come in, to the point to where now the Task Force is very enthusiastic about having the Charette and will request Council to come up with the $25,000. Mr. Collings has now moved from being very much against that expenditure to where it could be acceptable, depending on what comes out of the meeting on the 10th. On one hand he feels there is no financial control; on the other he can see that Village Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 1989 Page 17 ------------------------------- now there is some apparently significant interest from outside parties on doing something downtown; it may serve a useful purpose, and most certainly it will serve a publicity base to an even broader audience. Village Manager Bradford explained the difference between providing a few thousand dollars to draw up a conceptual plan of what may or could happen, and the $25,000, is that there will be a final product, with recommended development codes, architectural codes, road layouts, landscaping design patterns, etc. It will be a product the Task Force can give to Council that can, in fact, be adopted and provided for within the Village Zoning Code. Councilmember Collings stated he had been assured that three of the four existing landowners would be at the Charette; the three being: St. Jude's Catholic Church; owner of the old Publix mall; and the Dorner group. ~~ L.J Mayor Capretta felt this was almost a dramatic advertising technique to create a market for developers. Mr. Collings stated the peripheral benefit will be the viewpoint of citizens when they finally see the plan that Tequesta is finally doing something about those properties and it will generate momentum and enthusiasm. Mayor Capretta and Vice-Mayor Howell stated they could support this idea. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no other matters before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 A.M. Respectfully submitted, 2~z~i Fran Bitters /fgb DATE APPROVED: August 10, 1989 Recordir~ ~~ec]r~tary. ;,•'° r ~„ .. y ~ ~ ~ f ,,x „ e ~^° ~~ / ATTEST: ..~ r Bill C. Kascavelis Finance Director/ Village Clerk