HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Council 032692t/
CITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP MEETING
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
MARCH 26, 1992
The Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Martino at 7:35
P.M., in the Assembly Room of the Municipal Complex, 10500 North
Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
ROLL CALL The Assistant Deputy City Clerk called the roll, and present were
Mayor Martino, Councilwoman Monroe, Councilman Kiselewski, and
Councilman Aldred. Vice Mayor Russo was not in attendance.
LANDSCAPE
CODE Mayor Martino stated the first item of business is the
Landscaping and Vegetation Protection Ordinance, and he recalled
that the Council had been given two draft Landscape Codes. Staff
had asked that Council choose which draft was preferred in the
new land regulations. The Mayor asked Mark Hendrickson, City
Forester, to give a brief history of the matter.
Mr. Hendrickson stated that the comparison analysis given to
Council shows the biggest changes in the present Landscape Code
language. Council had asked that a Landscape Ordinance Review
Committee be formed, and they met on March 22, 1989, to begin
working on the draft. Mr. Hendrickson then introduced some
Committee members who where present to answer questions -- Mr.
Jeff Blakely of Blakely & Associates, Mr. Peter Bodycomb of
Cotleur Hearing, and Mr. Steve Mathison of Mathison & Goldenberg.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 2
Mayor Martino stated that the Committee's draft was a radical
departure from the old Code which was a more standard approach
to typical landscaping seen throughout Palm Beach County, or
where a community is paying attention to that area of its quality
of life. The newer draft did some new things in that it gave
more flexibility, basically that of a point system. Three
projects were looked at to see what they would look like under
the new system.
Councilwoman Monroe said she wanted to hear comments from those
who served on the Committee as to why they thought this was a
good draft and perhaps come up with some additions which would
improve it.
The Committee members stated that Janet Olson should be given
special recognition for the work she had done on the draft. Mr.
Blakely stated that he likes this draft because a tremendous
amount of time had been spent looking at codes throughout the
country as far away as California and Oregon,that had diverse
approaches to landscape design and environmental sensitivity.
The best of these were analyzed to come up with what is believed
to be a novel approach which allowed for a point system for
current existing landscaping materials to come up with something
that is very flexible in determining what is right for each
specific site. Regarding visibility of signs, he commented this
takes into account tree pruning methods.
Mr. Mathison stated that they had worked a very long time to come
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 3
up with this Code and added that there are some items in the
consultant's proposed Code which could add some important
elements to what has already been done, such as vehicular access
and how that is addressed, plant quality and installation of
plants and how those are controlled, and enforcement. He also
stated that before the Code is adopted a discussion as to non -
conformities of existing conditions needs to take place.
Councilman Kiselewski had some comments concerning the three
projects which had been looked at -- Gardens Square, the Admiralty
Building and Pier One Imports. He mentioned that the only
project that passed was Pier One Imports, and it was the only
one on which he would have not accepted the landscaping. He
asked if the "structure" of the document had been reformulated
to do something about this.
Councilwoman Monroe felt that it was not just a landscape issue
but also an architectural issue as well.
Councilman Kiselewski then stated that he would have difficulty
trying to add anything more at Gardens Square since it is almost
impossible to see the buildings now, and it doesn't pass. He
said that, secondly, he has trouble trying to add to the
simplicity of the Admiralty corner since this is a nice looking
corner. To say those two projects would not meet our current
Code and that Pier One Imports does, then he could not accept
this proposal.
Councilwoman Monroe mentioned that Gardens Square was a PUD and
that when a code is adopted, that is what everything is judged
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 4
by and that some leeway could be given depending on the type of
landscaping that was installed, thereby letting them come in with
less points.
Councilman Kiselewski said that he had a problem with the point
system which depended on the type of shrubbery or tree used.
Mark Hendrickson answered that both drafts try to persuade
Council to go towards preferred species rather than exotic plants
which has been the case in the past. The point system directs
people toward planting the proper plants rather than exotic
plants. Mr. Shah's draft stated 50 per cent preferred species
and the Committee's stated 75 per cent. The Comprehensive Plan
stated that in coastal areas 90 per cent preferred species should
1 be planted. He stated he still felt the draft they have would
allow a business such as Pier One to come in again, because they
have the correct number of points per open space, as long as the
unsightly elements of the property are screened. He further
stated that landscape architecture tries to point you in the
direction of what you want to see.
Councilman Kiselewski stated that he has a problem with the fact
that businesses will be able to trade off points if particular
species of plants are used.
Staff responded that the Admiralty Building failed the point
system because it didn't have proper set backs not because it
didn't have enough trees, and that they were trying to create
more open space with this Code.
Mr. Blakely stated that at Costco there would not have been as
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 5
many problems in some instances had a landscape architect been
used, that a professional would have caught certain problems.
Councilman Kiselewski stated his concern that professional
landscape architects would have a certain amount of job security.
Mr. Blakely responded that under the present plan we have the
professional involved only when it's a PUD. This plan would also
eliminate the individual homeowners.
Mr. Kiselewski asked that if there was any other city in the
County which would require a professional landscape architect
to do the work.
Mr. Blakely responded that, on the contrary, they had made it
easier for the non - professional to do a plan on those areas they
felt needed a professional.
Councilwoman Monroe stated landscaping is ongoing, growing,
changing - -that each plant will grow and change and, therefore,
you need to know its characteristics and requirements. Training
is needed to know the requirements of these things to be sure
that the best job has been done.
Mr. Blakely referred to page 27, 153.40 Enforcement, E, which
states that all landscape plans except individual single family
and duplex properties shall bear the seal of a Landscape
Architect licensed to practice in the State of Florida or be
prepared by another licensed professional. He stated if this
needs to be changed it can be done at this time.
Mr. Hendrickson continued by saying this is new language and has
not been in Design Plan /Research's plan in the past and that with
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 6
the present language he was speaking about PUD versus site plan,
and this is not in the landscape code. He explained that it's
when you speak about PUD's that you speak about professionals
doing the work.
Councilman Kiselewski responded he would rather see that a
landscape architect be required with a PUD and not require it
for other areas.
Councilwoman Monroe stated that maybe the Pier One problem could
be solved by changing the whole front- -that a certain minimum
will have to be there while still offering the point
flexibilities.
Mr. Hendrickson stated that regarding Pier One, where the
Landscape Code mentions screening displays, this was meant to
be outdoor displays. Screening of that area was not required
and, therefore, they did not screen it.
Councilman Kiselewski said he would rather think in terms of not
telling people where they have to plant trees, but make
provisions that would prohibit naked buildings.
Councilwoman Monroe said there was something mentioned concerning
foundation plantings which would not totally do it.
Mr. Hendrickson asked if the Pier One site was objectionable
because of the interior being visible from the outside.
Councilman Kiselewski responded that the philosophy of the City
is to provide adequate screening for the people who drive by to
soften and hide the commercial aspects that occur in various
areas.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3126192
PAGE 7
Councilwoman Monroe stated she felt that part of the problem
was architectural and was not sure how to deal with that.
Councilman Kiselewski said he did not have a problem with a solid
wall. To have that much grass come right up to a wall whether
it's glass or not doesn't fit what they have been trying to
accomplish in trying to soften the commercial.
At this point, there was some discussion concerning the Admiralty
and its appearance as compared to Pier One.
A discussion followed concerning what "softening" meant with
Councilman Kiselewski stating that a business should not
necessarily be visible from the main thoroughfare but from an
interior street. He mentioned that the Mall is a good example
w of softening.
Staff inquired if it was the structure itself or if it was the
product itself as it is with Pier One. Did Council want the
structure softened and less visible or did they want the interior
itself to be less visible; or should the building itself be
scaled down.
Mayor Martino made the comment that one of the things not liked
is a form of strip commercial and for all intents and purposes
is outlawed in Palm Beach Gardens. Protection is needed from
this type of development, and Mayor Martino asked if staff could
come up with some language to cover this. Mayor Martino noted
that whatever Council decides he wanted to make sure that the
code is "user friendly" and isn't so cumbersome that future
members of the Council cannot understand what is going on. He
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/32
PAGE 8
stated that he didn't have any problems going either way, whether
they want to stay with the traditional type or try for some
imagination or flexibility. He also stated concern that this
be used in conjunction with the other tools available throughout
the new land use regulations so that they take into consideration
a lot of what Councilman Kiselewski is talking about. He
continued with saying that these land development regulations
need to be compatible with other codes such as the Sign Code.
Mayor Martino said he would like to make sure there is some kind
of communication between these regulations.
Mr. Hendrickson said he believed they had attempted to do that
and went on to explain that landscape architects look at not just
attractive landscaping plans but look at the Sign Ordinance and
plan so there is no competition between landscaping and signage.
He further explained that landscaping can sometimes cause
problems for the police if it is put in the wrong place, because
of lighting, etc.
Mayor Martino asked if the points that Councilman Kiselewski
wanted clarified or built into the ordinance would be a problem.
The response was that it would not be a problem as long as there
is a clear intent.
Mayor Martino stated that he had a minor difference with what
Councilman Kiselewski had stated, that he was a little concerned
with having a non - professional because of some of the site plans
that have been seen in the past.
`- Councilman Kiselewski stated that he didn't like to see a
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 9
landscape architect required for a project as small as a triplex.
Mayor Martino then stated that he felt the Costco project looked
amateurish because a professional was not involved.
Councilman Kiselewski asked if the Committee had looked at the
approach of having the professional designer use his flexibility
in this new point system to develop his plan. In other words,
if you have someone who doesn't know what he is doing, he has
to follow the standards. However, if a professional does it,
he can use the other part of the ordinance to follow.
Mayor Martino asked for some direction at this point, and he said
it seemed that they are leaning toward going with the Committee's
document, and asked if there was a consensus of the City Council.
Councilwoman Monroe said yes if certain amendments were made.
Mayor Martino said they have some things they want to see
included, and they need to begin doing that. For the moment,
the Council is satisfied to proceed with the Committee's draft.
Councilwoman said the Committee may want to take a look at the
other drafts to see if there is anything they want to use from
them. She asked if this addresses the use of f icus, the backf low
preventer, and maintenance of the swales.
Mayor Martino said he had one other question concerning who is
responsible for being sure that all this happens.
Mr. Hendrickson stated that the landscape architect of record
is responsible for signing off that all plans and specifications
were adhered to.
Councilman Kiselewski asked that they think about the way a
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 10
building code is written, for example. A building code is
written so that if you don't know what to do it will tell you
what to use and how. If a professional is involved, a
professional can say he signed off, and it will work to meet a
certain criteria. He stated he would still like to see this in
the code. He went on to say that a building code gives you a
minimum standard that you follow, and that if you have a
professional involved you can take that and do whatever you want
as long as that professional signs off.
Mayor Martino stated that in the selection of the plant species
he thought that is where the professional really augments what
is already in there.
Councilman Aldred said he noticed in the document that there
are three trees which are not allowed in the City- -the Melaleuca,
Australian Pine, and Brazilian Pepper. He noticed that the ficus
hedge is permitted but that some people are leaning toward
eliminating the ficus altogether as an acceptable tree because
of their water consumption, and he asked if this was true.
Mr. Hendrickson responded that the County has a long list of
species which they would prefer not be propagated. It's not so
much an elimination of the species that are already in place.
Councilman Kiselewski asked if there was anything the City could
learn from the County's list.
The consultant responded that the County's list would preclude
a strangler fig or a banyan tree.
Councilman Aldred asked if on the point system, which he prefers
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 11
since it offers more flexibility, is there any way to integrate
xeriscape type mentality to grant more points towards plants that
meet the xeriscape requirements and less to those that use more
water such as the ficus.
Mr. Hendrickson stated the point system gives more points for
preferred species than non - preferred species. The ficus is not
on the preferred list.
Councilman Aldred asked if they could encourage two points if
it is from the preferred list and only one if it is not.
Mr. Hendrickson stated that all new landscaping would have to
be irrigated, that every xeriscape concept has irrigation. The
rule of thumb is that the irrigation system is designed so that
it is only supplying water when it has to, that there is a probe
in the ground to detect moisture. He stated that the irrigation
system could be cut off to a point after the plants are
established.
A short discussion followed concerning certain aspects of
xeriscaping.
Mayor Martino stated the City has a Water Conservation Ordinance
which was effective January 1, and he thinks there needs to be
a tie -in with this. He also mentioned that landscape architects
need to be aware that watering is no longer allowed between the
hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5 :00 p.m.
Staff asked when they should come back to present the revised
version and said they were proceeding with the Committee's
ordinance.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 12
Mayor Martino stated that they would do the Concurrency first
and as they get into the balance of the Land Development
Regulations they would start to look at the rest.
Councilwoman Monroe stated that they might want to compare it
with the next project as a working comparison.
Mayor Martino made a statement concerning Prosperity Center,
saying not to forget they made some concessions and promises to
the neighborhood and also made a promise to themselves that what
they had on the other side of the street they would like to
duplicate on this side of the street.
CONCURRENCY
STEM Mayor Martino stated the last time they met on this subject they
W went through the entire packet and made language changes.
Mr. L. Lindahl stated they made the requested changes. He stated
that concurrency management could be quite complex if that is
the desire and direction of the Council. They approached it from
the standpoint of using a number of other sources of information
that had already been approved by other governmental bodies and
were working successfully in meeting the statutory requirements
of DCA in dealing with performance standards and levels of
service. He also stated that at the same time they recognized
that there will be a need to develop a process in the City to
implement the concurrency management system; that they recognize
there are various users of the system within the City; and there
is the need for the City from structural, legal, and sufficiency
standpoints to meet certain basic requirements in the Concurrency
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 13
Management System. This is to safeguard the fact that adequate
public facilities are in place to meet your performance standards
and levels of service. They structured this document using that
kind of criteria in balancing it to make it as workable, as
straightforward and as non - complex for the user and also for
implementing it in the City from a staff standpoint. Mr. Lindahl
went on to say that even with that level of effort it will still
require major effort on the part of reorganizing some processes
and procedures within the City. Mr. Lindahl again stated that
they did try to approach it from a balanced standpoint. They
made the changes; the ones that were added were highlighted in
yellow on the text that was made available to Council. He went
on to explain that the deletions were not shown on the documents,
but that in the future they would have a method of showing what
was deleted.
Mayor Martino stated that it was not necessary to go through the
whole text again since this had been done before.
Councilman Kiselewski asked how this could be modified as time
goes on. He also inquired if this has to be filed with DCA.
Staff said it was reviewed only by DCA if a grant had been
received from them, and in this case there had been no grant.
Councilman Kiselewski then asked if all they were going to do
with the document would be to independently put it in the land
regulations and /or adopt it by separate ordinance.
Mr. Lindahl stated they had always talked about putting them with
`-' the LDR's so there would be a full and complete manual of LDR's
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 14
and it would include concurrency, again following the practice
that was discussed last time when they were developing consistent
definitions throughout all the LDR's, and concurrency would carry
that consistency into its definitions and have references back
to the LDR's.
In response to an inquiry from Council regarding timing, it was
stated that all could be adopted separately.
Mayor Martino stated that the idea was to get it on the books
as soon as possible.
Mr. Lindahl said it does not have to be sent to DCA, that it is
a part of composite LDR's that do not have to all be adopted
under one ordinance. It was thought to move this forward because
in terms of timing relative to the adoption of the Comp Plan
being overdue, this needed to get on the books as soon as
possible. He also made the comment that it does reflect the fact
that there are outside suppliers of services that are the subject
of concurrency -- traffic and solid waste. Those two items and
major roads, collector and arterial, inside the City Limits of
Palm Beach Gardens are governed by the County and the Countywide
Traffic Performance Standards and countywide by the Solid Waste
Authority (now the County Commission).
It was noted that the Authority is still formed by the
Legislature of the State of Florida and is not part of the County
Commission.
Mr. Lindahl stated that the County Commission sits as the
Authority. What we do in management of our concurrency Standards
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 15
is to integrate it with Palm Beach County in terms of those two
outside suppliers of services. Mr. Lindahl noted we also have
a third outside supplier of service, but we have a direct linkage
with Seacoast Utility with water and wastewater, but the City
is a member of the Board. In fact, it carries more weight than
any other governmental entity on that Board.
Councilman Kiselewski suggested that the appropriate thing to
do would be to put this into a draft ordinance for a first
reading and a workshop.
Mayor Martino said that the consultant did a marvelous job, but
said there were some things he was not sure of. Concurrency is
new to a lot of people and he didn't want a document that had
the same problems Palm Beach County had with theirs. The Mayor
had a legal question concerning procedure with an ordinance or
legislative act, re: when an exemption is allowed to expire or
has an automatic termination. He stated that if a legislative
act creates something a legislative act should take it away, and
that from the standpoint of protecting the City legally he wanted
to know if this was appropriate.
Attorney Brant said that it was a matter of policy. In other
words, Council can determine if it has automatic termination.
Councilman Kiselewski stated this was discussed last time, and
they tried to make it so clear that if somebody did not act it
was terminated.
Mr. Lindahl stated that the original draft would require an act
of the City Council even in the absence of a request for an
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 16
extension by the applicant. It was decided in the workshop that
if the applicant does not request an extension, and that is the
only condition, then it would automatically clear the books in
that capacity and then can be restored to all the services that
it would affect. Mr. Lindahl also stated that it was made clear
in the annual report that if development orders do expire both
the consumption of capacity and the re- establishment capacity
would be kept track of.
Mayor Martino asked if the City is libel if there is not a
subsequent act to take it away.
Attorney Brant responded that a privilege is being given. If
the privilege is not exercised, it is lost. He stated that all
the ground rules are laid out in sufficient form where they are
put on notice, that it is a right given, which must be exercised
within a certain time period otherwise the right terminates, if
that is the desire of the Council. He gave an example that the
City could include a "tickler" that the City shall prior to
termination notify the parties that they have 60 days to comply.
In this instance the burden falls back to the City which is not
foolproof, and felt that in his opinion this is where the City
could become libel.
Mayor Martino asked if there was a problem if the City does not
set up criteria to measure expirations.
Attorney Brant stated no, that the Council makes a policy saying
there is a certain period of time to do this.
Councilman Kiselewski compared the situation to having a driver's
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 17
license which expires in three years, that it is the
responsibility of the driver to renew the license or lose it.
Attorney Brant stated that the parties would not be entitled to
a hearing of any kind. He said that you first determine if the
period of time is reasonable, that this is the foundation.
Attorney Brant stated that there has to be a subpolicy, that the
objective of the exercise is there are other people who may not
have this privilege.
Mayor Martino asked if there was anything in the document for
creating an exemption for projects that are in the system now.
He wanted to know if the City is forever vesting anything when
an exemption is created.
Staff responded there was one exception that was forever and that
is a recorded plat.
Mayor Martino mentioned that the County had a two -year period
to exercise the exemption which is now up.
Mr. Lindahl responded they now have an ordinance for an extension
of that, but this is not what we have. He said the City's is
different in that those lots which would qualify for an exemption
have an exemption forever. They are in the system as committed
but as yet unused or unbuilt units. The reason they incorporated
that as a simplification is there are no ghost subdivisions
proliferating the City of Palm Beach Gardens like those in
unincorporated Palm Beach County. Mr. Lindahl stated that Palm
Beach County has a whole set of problems that the City of Palm
Beach Gardens does not have, and there was no reason to get into
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
that complexity.
PAGE 18
Councilman Kiselewski asked for a status report on Ballen Isles
and was told by Mr. Lindahl that this is a project with a
development order in which there are time schedules. If the time
schedules are not met, then they have to come before the City
Council to address the items that are in this ordinance that
demonstrates their efforts to move forward and why they were
unable to achieve those dates plus supplemental information.
Councilman Kiselewski inquired what would happen if the Council
at that point and time decided not to grant that extension; and
questioned if the Council would have the right to have Ballen
Isles restored to the way it was before?
Mr. Lindahl said that the City Council could say that the balance
of the PUD is no longer valid. The consumption of that capacity
is then put back.
Councilman Kiselewski asked if the City had the right to call
in any bonding that it has.
Mayor Martino stated he didn't believe this is a concurrency
question and that it goes beyond this ordinance.
Staff responded that if there is no renewal, then when that
person comes to renew their vacant area, it would have to meet
the same criteria as any new project.
Mayor Martino asked at what point would they be allowed to make
a decision on what to do with traffic capacity and does it have
to be done by a legislative act.
Mr. Lindahl responded that any portion of the project that has
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 19
received approvals, is under some form of surety, and has moved
into that level of development would be vested, would be
"uncompleted approved ". He further stated any portion of the
land that is not into final development plans and not subject
to surety is out there waiting for the next level of development
and could be curtailed if they defaulted on meeting time
obligations of the Development Board. if it were Council's
decision to call it quits on the PUD, then that capacity of
traffic would be restored.
Mayor Martino asked if they are exempting rezonings, and the
response was yes since there is not sufficient information to
establish concurrency. Mr. Lindahl stated that an examination
of adequate public facilities is always looked at.
Councilwoman Monroe said they should be able to get a concurrency
reservation. She questioned the fact that the developers will
have to go to different agencies for their permits and the time
involved to do this and wondered if they could come to the City.
She also wondered if it would not be better to say in this
ordinance that all permitting would be funneled through the City
rather than their working with the other agencies independently
and then let our staff send it downtown. This would be when
the "clock starts running ".
Mr. Lindahl responded that he would prefer not to put this in
the ordinance since it is a procedural aspect. He also stated
a concurrency certification for traffic performance must be
-- obtained from the County, and this is in the ordinance since it
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 20
is required. He stated the way the ordinance is written when
the City gets into staff meetings with the County there will be
a number of options on how to specifically implement the
procedure where the City and County are communicating with each
other. He stated that it is not necessary to be that specific
in the ordinance concerning procedural aspects and how they will
be undertaken.
Councilwoman questioned what was meant by the word "evidence"
on pages 18 and 19 of the report.
Mr. Lindahl stated that evidence would be an order to issue a
concurrency certificate, that there would have to be a sign -
off from the County.
There was considerable discussion between Councilmembers Monroe
and Kiselewski and Mr. Lindahl concerning the possibility of
staff administering the entire concurrency application.
Mayor Martino said why not leave it as it is, and once it is
adopted ask the Planning and Zoning Department to provide Council
with the administrative procedures they intend to work under and
then refine those.
Councilwoman Monroe questioned some of the language (the words
"conform" and "evidence "), and Mr. Lindahl said he would check
further for possible substitutions.
Councilwoman Monroe said to say simply that the trips to serve
that project have been reserved by Palm Beach County, and then
Palm Beach County will determine how much time they will reserve.
Mayor Martino then said he would like to place the draft on first
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
reading.
PAGE 21
Mr. Lindahl recommended that it be placed on first reading and
suggested that Mr. Walton and he select a couple of consultants
that regularly deal with the City from a planning and engineering
standpoint and let them review the document.
Mayor Martino said they should put it on the table and ask for
comments, particularly from the home builders and to also send
a copy to any of the service providers that the City deals with
and have them review it. He stated this would indicate that the
City is interested in intergovernmental cooperation and wants
the service providers to be as comfortable with our system as
possible.
Mr. Lindahl stated they would take handle this and select a
planning and engineering consultant.
Councilman Kiselewski suggested that it be sent to some of the
developers who have projects similar to Ballen Isles.
Mr. Lindahl said the document is written to recognize the
necessity to keep track of adequate public facilities; and if
someone simply is not moving at all, then there is capacity on
the books that is being taken away from someone else, and then
there is the ability to free up that capacity.
Councilman Kiselewski asked if the Foundation had any input in
the document, and Mr. Lindahl stated his office had not been
contacted by any landowners or their agents. Mayor Martino
stated that putting it on first reading undoubtedly will bring
out some people.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92
PAGE 22
Mr. Lindahl stated that the biggest issue will be meeting time
schedules in the development orders. He stated he knew the land
owners would take the position that if they have a development
order they would prefer to have the whole development order
vested and not be subject to the concurrency management
regardless of whether or not they meet their time schedule. He
stated this will involve a policy decision.
Mayor Martino asked if they could now get the document in
ordinance form so it can be put on first reading and allow Mr.
Lindahl sufficient time to interface with the people that might
be necessary, and then look at an appropriate date.
Mayor Martino said that at first reading and public hearing
the document will just be put on the table. Mr. Lindahl will
be given some time to complete his work, and then have a
workshop -type public hearing, and then the formal public hearing.
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 23
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
9:30
APPROVAL
AA-
Mayo:
Vice
P.m.
r Martino
Mayor Russo
Jade Holloman
Administrative Secretary
Councilman Aldred
Councilwoman Monroe
l
C4 ounci
an Kiselewski