Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 12 23 City Council Regular Minutes '\- e - . REGULAR SESSION CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WIN'IER SPRINGS DECEMBER 23, 1980 80-81-8 The Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Troy Piland. The invocation was given by City Manager Richard Rozansky. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Attorney Wallace Stalnaker. Roll Call: Councilmen: Mayor Troy Piland, present Ieputy lYhyor J olm Torcaso, absent (ill) Ci ty Manager Richard Rozansky City Attorney Wallace Stalnaker Jim Hartman, present Wilfred Arnold, present Martin Trencher, present Maureen Boyd, present Approval of J'lIinutes of December 9, and Iecember 15, 1980: lVbtion was made by Councilman Arnold to approve the minutes of Iecember 9, and Iecember 15, 1980. Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; lIDtion carried. Public Input: Mr. J olm Bennett, 928 Wedgewood Dr. N. reported he had not received an answer to his question as to who is responsible for maintaining the city's right-of-ways. City Attorney Stalnaker stated the city is responsible for maintaining the right- of-ways to prevent accidents and to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens, but as far as day-to-day maintenance, the city is not responsible. Mr. Bennett is particularly interested in finding out who is responsible for the lIDle crickets which are on the right-of-ways. The City Attorney will look into this. There was discussion on Ordinance No. 229 and 230. Consent Agenda: A. Resolution No. 336, Division of Lot 1, Blk. 1, N. Orlando Ranches Sec. 5. B. Resolution No. 337, Division of Lot 2, Blk. 1, North Orlando Ranches Sec. 5. C. Resolution No. 338, Division of Lot 3, Blk. 1, North Orlando Ranches Sec. 5. D. Resolution No. 339, Division 'of Lot 4, Blk. 1, North Orlando Ranches Sec. 5. E. Resolution No. 340, to sanction second homesite on Lot 1, Tusc. Unit 5. Councilman Hartman moved to approve the above consent agenda (Resolution Numbers 336 through 340). Seconded by Councilman Arnold. Mayor Piland stated Mr. Hartman will file a Conflict of Interest. Vote on the lIDtion: Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; motion carried. Public Hearing (contin.) for Ordinance No. 227, authorizing the renewal of refuse contract between the City and H & W Refuse Service, etc.: lYhyor Piland recessed the Council Meeting and convened the public hearing to hear comment on Ordinance No. 227. City lYhnager Rozansky reported he has taken Council's recorrmendations from their December 9, 1980 meeting and has in- corporated them into the draft. Mr. Rozansky has presented Council a letter in reference to the specifications/H & W Contract dated Dec. 23, 1980. He recommends these changes/additions be made to the Contract/Specifications. There was discussion on the rates. Councilman Hartman questioned whether there was a need for the bond to be for a period of 6 months. Mr. Jolm Bennett questioned the proposed pickup rate and whether it is a requirement to replace the lids on the garbage can. He commented that he would rather not have the men replace the lids on the cans and hold down the cost if possible. The City -..- . e e . Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 80-81-8. Page 2. M9.nager reported that the proper place for the lids is on the ground next to the cans. J.Vlr>s. Ellen Weiss, 1203 Winter Springs Blvd., asked about the status of her previous question regarding whether or not H & W has an exclusive franchise in the city and if so, what is Dumpall doing still operating in the city? She also asked if the cost for additional containers over 6 is still in the contract. Ci ty Manager Rozansky reported that the stipulation involving containers over 6 was taken out. He also stated that the reason Dumpall is in the city is that H & W decided not to exercise their right to remove them from the city since their contract was so close to being up for renewal, however if the contract is renewed they do intend to exercise their right. J.Vlr>. Bennett said he could see no reason why the Highlands should be given a lower rate simply because of the density of the dllITpsters than other people who are not going to generate 6 containers. Discussion followed concerning an increase for corrrnercial (from $25 to $32) for twice a week pickup of a 2 cu. yd. container. J.Vlr>. Bennett stated that he feels every living unit in the city should pay the same price. Mayor Piland recormnended this be taken into con- sideration. The City Manager reviewed the rnaj or changes in the contract. J.Vlr>. Bennett suggested if the garbage pickup is going to be restricted to 7 :00 a.m. that Council provide an ordinance precluding transportation of trucks to residential areas bearing construction materials for that same period of time. IVayor Piland closed the Public Hearing and reconvened the Council Meeting. Councilman Hartman moved to approve the contract as amended (that the bond be for 3 months instead of 6 months and that the cormnercial condominium rates remain the same). Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; motion carried. Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 228, conveying certain land designated as park area in Sec. 9, N. Orlando Ranches Blk. 7, etc. IVayor Piland recessed the Council Meeting and convened the public hearing for the purpose of hearing input on proposed Ord. No. 228. Attorney Stalnaker read Ordinance No. 228 by title only. The City Planner pointed out the area. IVayor Piland closed the public hearing and reconvened the Council Meeting. Councilman Arnold moved to adopt Ordinance No. 228. Seconded by Councilman Boyd. Vote on the motion: Councilman Torcaso, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; motion carried. Request of Winter Springs Dev. Corp. for approval of final engineering for Country Club Village Unit 3: City Manager Rozansky reported the Planning and Zoning Board recormnended approval of the above request on Dec. 17, 1980, subc:fect to the proviso of the Engineer's letter of December 8, 1980 and the Staff recormnends approval subject to the Staff Review and the City Engineer's recorrmendations. Mr. Art Barr was present to speak for the request. Discussion followed concerning the necessity of a fence around the retention pond. The City Planner stated the retention pond is not remote. It is at the intersection of two streets and is within 100' of a lot which under the current law requires the ditch be fenced for security reasons. The City Engineer reported that the pond is designed to retain 5 feet of water - minimum depth of 6 feet. He stated that the pond is near highways and is open to the public and therefore felt a fence should be recormnended. Attorney Stalnaker stated the pond would be referred to as an attractive nuisance. Councilman Trencher questioned whether the retention pond would be a liability on the part of the homeowners or the owners of the retention pond if a child were to drown in the pond. The City Attorney reported there was a chance of liability if this happened. Councilman Trencher recormnended a 6' fence be installed. Bill Jacobs, 404 S. Edgemon stated that if the city is going to require one pond to be fenced, then they should require all of the e e . Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 80-81-8. Page 3. retention ponds be fenced. He said there are two on Edgemon that are not fenced. M:l.yor Piland asked Attorney Stalnaker if the code requires a fence. Attorney Stalnaker said the way the subdivision ordinance reads it requires that the builder place a 4' chain link fence whenever a building permit is issued for a lot which borders on a drainage ditch. Mayor Piland remarked that maybe Attorney Stalnaker could find out why some fences were taken down around similar areas and why in some cases fences were not required at all. Councilman Boyd moved to recommend approval of the final engineering of Country Club Village Unit 3 subj ect to the City Engineer's letter of December 8, 1980 and the Staff Review of December 11, 1980. Councilman Arnold questioned if her motion included the requirement of a fence. She stated that it did. Seconded by Councilman Hartman. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Councilman Arnold, no; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, no; M:l.yor Piland, no; motion failed. Councilman Arnold moved to approve the request of Winter Springs Dev. Corp. for approval of the final engineering for Country Club Village Unit 3 subj ect to the City Planner's letter of Dec. 11, 1980 and the City Engineer's letter of Dec. 8, 1980 with the exception that at this time a fence around the retention area is not required. Seconded by Councilman Hartman. Vote on the motion: Councilman Trencher, no; Councilman Boyd, no; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Mayor Piland, aye; motion carried. Approval of final engineering of Tuscawilla Shopping Village, Phase 1 Sub-Phase A - Kross Professional Office. The City Manager reported the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the above request on December 17, 1980, subject to the City Engineer's letter of Dec. 17, 1980. The City Planner remarked that there is one outstanding item - an access easement to the city (north of the information center and west of the 7-Eleven. We have received this easement now and the condition is removed from the recommendation. Councilman Arnold moved to approve the final engineering of Tuscawilla Shopping Village, Phase 1 Sub-Phase A - Kross Professional Office subject to the City Engineer's Letter of December 17,1980 as approved by the Planning and Zoning Board. Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; motion carried. Approval to record Plat of Oak Forest Unit 2. City Manager Rozansky reported the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the above request. Councilman Arnold moved to approve the request for approval to record plat of Oak Forest Unit 2. Seconded by Councilman Boyd. Vote on the ootion: Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; motion carried. Approval to record plat of Woodstrearn Phase 1. City Manager Rozansky stated the Staff recommended approval of the above request. Councilman Hartman moved to approve the recordation of the plat of Woodstrearn Phase 1. Seconded by Councilman Arnold. Vote on the motion: Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; ootion carried. Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 Page 4. 80-81-8. Charter Revision Corrmission Appointments: e The following appointments were made: Seat I - Jon Zabel - Alfred Davis Seat II - John Bennett - Gary Massey Seat III - Frank Kruppenbacher - Joel Weiss Seat IV - Carrie Weaver - Bill Jacobs Seat V - Ben Kaplan _ Richard DeFazio (Reported by Councilman Boyd per Councilman Torcaso). Mayor's Office - Frank Tibbitts - Leanne Grove - Jim Conger e Mayor Piland will get with the City Manager and call an organizational meeting of the Charter Revision Commission. He would like our charter made available to the members and some of the surrounding cities charters as well as a model charter from the Florida League of Cities. The meeting should be held after the information is disbursed. First Reading of Ordinance No. 229, prohibiting the exposure of private parts, etc. Attorney Stalnaker read Ordinance No. 229 in its entirety. Mayor Piland asked Attorney Stalnaker if this ordinance is something that we can enforce. Attorney Stalnaker replied that it was not. He stated that the ordinance could be amended prior to the public hearing to reflect what is going on right now and that when conformed, it could be enforced if adopted. Ordinance No. 230 is orientated more towards the zoning. Councilman Trencher asked if both Ordinance No. 229 and 230 were adopted if this would tie the mot so tight that it would prevent this type of activity in the city. Attorney Stalnaker stated that he thought it would (assuming Ord. No. 229 is amended). First Reading of Ordinance No. 230, restricting the location of adult entertain- ment establishments, etc. Attorney Stalnaker read Ordinance No. 230 in its entirety. Councilman Trencher moved to extend the original resolution on the moratorium concerning the subj ect for no sooner than 120 days from the original date of expiration and including the adoption of the ordinance as previously discussed, that is we must adopt the ordinance first before the moratorium expires. Seconded by Councilman Boyd. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, 8:;je; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; motion carried. . City Manager - Richard Rozansky The City Manager reported a bid opening was held on December 3, 1980 to redo the roof on Fire Station #1. The bids were turned over to Cox Partnership and they recommend Green Bros. bid be accepted for $18,888.00 and an auxiliary bid of $1,761. 00. After receiving their recommendation the packet was turned over to the City Engineer. The City Engineer has reviewed it and approval is hereby recommended for acceptance of Green Bros. bid for $18,888.00 and the auxiliary Reg. Session~ City Council~ Dec. 23, 1980 Page 5. 80~81-8. e bid of $1,761.00. The total job should be around $20,737.00 (according to wood condition, etc.) however the leaks need to be fixed. Councilman Arnold moved to award the bid on fire station no. 1 to Green Bros. Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher ~ aye; Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; motion carried. City Manager Rozansky reported we are going out on insurance bids to our depts. on public official bonds, etc. that we bid out each year. He has asked the department heads to have any changes back to him no later than January 9 ~ 1981~ to be followed by bidding. The City Manager reported the bid opening will probably be scheduled for the first part of February. The City Manager reported the Planning and Zoning Board is about to undertake our 5 year review of our comprehensive development plan. They have money in their line code and they requested that we update this map to show the new streets and the new subdivisions in considering the transportation element and other uses. The cost is estimated at $200 - $300 to update this map. e Mr. Rozansky also reported he talked to the County Commissioner's Office (Roger Neiswender) today. He reported that he and Councilman Torcaso attended a meeting last week about our 100 ~ 000 gallons. It was very favorable. The three provisos that Wally took out they put back in. He feels we can live with this. Nikki Clayton has sent the agreement to Wally and he has just received it. They will get back to Council. Mayor Piland stated the county wanted to give us the capacity but retain the voting rights while we pay the debt service. We disagreed with them there - we were willing to give up the voting rights if they paid the debt service and gave us the capacity. This was a major item that was resolved. lYhyor Piland requested copies of the amended agreement be made available to council. Mayor Piland requested this be placed on the next agenda. City Manager Rozansky reported on D.O.T. He said one street they are in favor of for installing traffic light signals is Timberline - which is in Casselberry. The other one is on SR 434 and Edgemon. They want the city to pay for it. The cost would be about $25,000 for 1 - 4 way signal plus maintenance. Councilman Trencher questioned the traffic light opposite the supermarket. The City Manager corrmented D.O.T. will not approve a traffic light for that location, nor will they change the stripes on the road. The City Planner stated that she has talked to D.O.T. and they said at this time~ it does not warrant any change in traffic control (even painting a crosswalk on the street) but they will review it again next year at our request as the shopping center expands and the traffic increases. Mayor Piland corrmented that it is not just a matter of coming up with the money for a light, but that D.O.T. must be in agreement with the placing of the light. Councilman Trencher questioned the procedure to challenge D.O.T.'s decision. The City Manager reported on 2 and 2A. The two resolutions accepting 2 and 2A will be coming up, and the one getting ready to make the final assessment. The final cost to date of the project is $440~232.98. It will cost the homeowner $14.68 a foot. Mr. Rozansky stated the City Engineer has finished his design for the rejuvena- tion of fire station 2. A presentation will be made at the next meeting. . Councilman Boyd questioned the status of Mr. Mansfield's letter. The City Manager reported he is working with Mr. Mansfield to resolve the problems. Mayor Piland recommended the City Manager make an inquiry to Fannie Mae in regards to the fence as to whether it adequately meets their requirements and that it might get the attention of the property owners once you make the inquiry. e e . Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 Page 6. 80-81-8. Councilman Arnold questioned the status of Southern States. Attorney Stalnaker reported the PSC has interpleaded and filed an answer. He is now attempting to see if the court will remove that from the lawsuit. It is still his contention that they do not belong in there because it is not a regulatory matter. We are ready to proceed with a hearing. Basically Southern States is willing to give us money that was earned prior to 1975, (around $400). Councilman Arnold questioned the time frame on rezoning. The City Planner commented this was turned over to the City Attorney. It was recommended this be put on the next agenda and that copies of the corresponding material be distributed. Councilman Arnold questioned the status of equal opportunity. The City Mmager stated he has appointed Jacqueline Koch as the Affirmative Action Officer and we are currently working on an Affirmative Action Plan with the CETA Office. We were trying to run it in conjunction with the plan in the county with their grant. As soon as a draft is available one will be forwarded to council. Mayor Piland stated that in regards to how long a zoning matter can be put into limbo by withdrawing it from the agenda and also on rezoning matters where a developer comes in and requests rezoning and are turned down, the waiting period is 6 months but at six months if they are turned down every six months for 10 years - we discussed maybe if they are turned down one time the next waiting period should be extended up to some maximum, for instance a year. He requested the City Manager provide the council with adequate briefing for the first meeting in January so that action can be taken. Councilman Arnold questioned the status of the flood plan. The City Planner reported there are two appeals to the boundaries under review at this time and until these are settled the government cannot provide us with a final map for the city. It is not until that time when we get the final determination of the elevations, that we can proceed with an ordinance. From the time they settle that we have six months to adopt an ordinance. Councilman Arnold asked about the extensions given to Mr. Schachter and Mr. Spears. The City Planner reported Mr. Schachter's development (Oak Grove) has an approved site plan for that property and he has been advised that his other exception has expired. He got the one 6-months extension and he was advised that there was no further extension allowable and that he would have to come back to reapply for a special exception. Mr. Spears has a building permit already - but has not taken any action on building at this time. Council Seat I - Jim Hartman Wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Council Seat II - Wilfred Arnold Seconded the motion. Council Seat III - M:lrtin Trencher So moved. Council Seat IV - Maureen Boyd Wished everyone a Merry Christmas, a Happy Hanukah or Happy Holidays, whichever may fit. Council Seat V - John Torcaso Absent. . e . , Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 80-81-8. Page 7. Mayor's Office: Wander Lake Agreements: Mayor Piland stated that the City Engineer recommended two identical agreements. The President of Boulder Construction spoke for the above request. Mr. Herman Stokes, 520 Tradewinds presented a petition to Mayor Piland opposing Horizon. Mr. Paul McCray, 260 Tradewinds, spoke on the present danger of Wander Lake and on the problem of the fish dying. Councilman Boyd questioned the length of time Mr. Surrrnerfield could have the job completed. He stated it would take 6 months to get it in shape and take care of the fish problem and that the job could be completed wi thin a year. The City Engineer stated that the performance to date has been and is unacceptable and that Mr. Artzner agrees with that. He also agrees with the fact that a dragline is a necessary piece of equipment. He has advised Mr. Cooper that he can obtain the equipment needed to do the job. Boulder has the equipment now. After viewing some of Boulder's work, he feels they appear to be capable of handling this job. The City Engineer recommends the city employ a more capable contractor. Mayor Piland stated he did not want the length of the contract depending on how fast the dirt was sold. Mr. Artzner commented that one of the maj or problems at Wander Lake is that there is no stockpile area for fill material. Councilman Boyd questioned whether Mr. Artzner had any plans of selling his company if he received the contract. Mr. Artzner stated that he had at one time thought of selling his company, but at this time had no such plans. Mr. Perkins, a landowner around the lake spoke against Horizon. Mr. Paul McCray spoke on his property depreciating in value due to the lake behind his house. Mr. Kenneth Burch will be leasing equipment to Mr. Summerfield. It was agreed that the contract (in paragraph LF.) should have the 2 plus 2 years taken out and that the second sentence should read: perform all work in two years from date of this contract. Both Mr. Artzner and Mr. Surrmerfield were in agreement wi th these terms. Mr. Cooper stated that all the other changes recorrmended by council had been included. Councilman Arnold moved that the agreement drawn up without the name be approved, with the amendment of the second sentence in paragraph I. F . Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Boyd, aye; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, aye; motion carried. Councilman Trencher moved that we set aside the action that the council made last JVbnday and consider both parties for consideration for the contract as adopted. JVbtion failed due to lack of a second. Councilman Arnold moved to reaffirm council's action at the previous meeting to award the contract to Horizon. Seconded by Councilman Boyd. Vote on the motion: Councilman Hartman, no; Councilman Arnold, aye; Councilman Trencher, no; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Boyd, no; motion failed. Councilman Boyd moved to go out on bid. Seconded by Councilman Trencher. The time factor for going out on bid was discussed. Mrs. Carrie Weaver, 240 N. 3rd St., questioned why it was so difficult for council to make a decision, and also expressed the need to speed up this process. Councilman Trencher withdrew his second. Councilman Boyd stated that the reason she made the motion to go out for bid was to give other people the same opportunity as these two companies. Councilman Hartman moved to approve the contract with Boulder Construction. Seconded by Councilman Trencher. Vote on the motion: Councilman Arnold, no; Councilman Trencher, aye; Councilman Boyd, no; Councilman Torcaso, absent; Councilman Hartman, aye; Mayor Piland, aye; ITDtion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. ., . Reg. Session, City Council, Dec. 23, 1980 Page 8. 80-81-8. . aPe~ec(Jj~;}, o-;an Braddock, Recording Secretary Approved: - . " !;, 1./'" I'.) v j,- I ( FORM 4 MEMORA DUM OF VOTING CONFLICT AGENCY is unit of: DSTATE il'COUNTY RST NAME - MIDDLE NA ~lV1 WA-\!D MAILING ADDRESS ZIP COUNTY MEMORANDUM OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN A VOTING SITUATION [Required by Florida Statutes ~112.3143 (1979) ] If you have voted in your official capacity upon any measure in which you had a personal, private, or professional interest which inures to your special private gain or the special private gain of any principal by whom you are retained, please disclose the nature of your interest below. 1. Description of the matter ~pon which you voted in your~f!i<:)al cap'acity: ~J ~ ~ ~ A;/-/;.~ ~~~rrop((L~~ ~e-r I /l/~ cY2f~ ~S- /-0 -r ;)- L- 07 ~ /-.01 'I I \ ( l .....l , I . I , t ,- l, 'l , I , I ' I \ 2. Description of the personal, private, or professional interest you have in the above matter which inures to your special private gain or the special private gain of any principal by whom you are retained: ::;::- a-. ~ ~ ~ tI ~ ~ :f ~ P--M-€ of -=c.b ~ 3. Person or principal to whom the special gain described above will inure: a~ Yourself bj2t Principal by whom you are retained: ---r- ~ ,L) ~ ~ (NAME) DATE ON WHICH FORM 4 WAS FILED WITH THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR RECORDING MINUTES OF THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE OCCURRED: /~ ~L/-ro FILING INSTRUCTIONS This memorandum must be filed within fifteen (15) days following the meeting during which the voting conflict occurred with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who shall incorporate the memorandum in the meeting minutes. This form need not be filed merely to indicate the absence of a voting conflict. Florida law permits but does not require you to abstain from voting when a conflict of interest arises; if you vote, however, the conflict must be disclosed pursuant to the requirements described above. NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317 (1979), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY,REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. CE FORM 4 - REV. 12-79