02-03-1998 CC Meeting AgendaCity of Aventura
Cit~ Council
Arthur L Snyder, Mayor
Jay IL Beskin, Vice Mayor
Arthur Bcrgcr
Ken Cohen
Harry Holzberg
Jeffrey M. Perlow
Patricia Rogers-Libert
City Manager
Eric M. Soroka
City Clerk
Teresa M. Smith
City Attorne),
Weiss Serota& ltelfman
AGENDA
Council Meeting
February 3, 1998 - 6:00 P.M.
Columbia Aventura Medical Arts Building
21110 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 101
Aventura, Florida 33180
CALL TO ORDER~ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ZONING HEARINGS - SPECIALLY SET BY COUNCIL FOR 6 P.M.
QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARINGS - Please be advised that the following items on the
Council's agenda are quasi-judicial in nature. If you wish to object or comment upon these items,
please indicate the item number you would like to address when the announcement regarding the
quasi-judicial item is made. You must be sworn before addressing the Council, and if you wish to
address the Council, you may be subject to cross-examination. If you refuse to submit to cross-
examination, the Council will not consider what you have said in its final deliberations.
DISCLOSURE OF ANY EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 96-09
A. COSCAN WATERWAYS, INC. - Request for Deferral
B. AVENTURA'S FINEST HAND CAR WASH - Request for Extension
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Council Meeting January 20, 1998
$. AGENDA: Request for Deletions/Emergency Additions
February 3, 1998 Council Meeting
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None
7. CONSENTAGENDA
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR DUAL DESIGNATION OF
NORTHEAST 37TM AVENUE AS NORTHEAST 37TM AVENUE AND
YACHT CLUB DRIVE WITHIN THE CITY OF AVENTURA;
REQUESTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TO APPROVE AND
IMPLEMENT SUCH DUAL DESIGNATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE
AIMS OF THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(Provides for dual designation of NE 372 Avenue as Yacht Club DrivefNE 372
Avenue in order to malmaln postal service)
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: - ORDINANCES - FIRST READING
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING A NEW
CHAPTER ENTITLED "SATELLITE DISHES", PROVIDING FOR THE
REGULATION OF THE INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, AND USE
OF SATELLITE DISHES DESIGNED FOR OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION
OF TELEVISION BROADCAST SIGNALS, MULTICHANNEL,
MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION SERVICE, DIRECT BROADCAST
SATELLITES, MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION SERVICE,
INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION FIXED SERVICE, AND LOCAL
MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION SERVICE; DELEGATING REVIEW
AUTHORITY AND APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF SUCH
DISHES TO THE CITY MANAGER; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING A NEW
CHAPTER, ENTITLED "WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TOWERS AND ANTENNAS"; PROVIDING PURPOSE; PROVIDING
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS; PROVIDING
PERMITTED USES ON PUBLIC PROPERTY; PROVIDING PERMITTED
USES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY; PROVIDING SPECIAL EXCEPTION
USE; PROVIDING EQUIPMENT STORAGE; PROVIDING REMOVAL
OF ABANDONED ANTENNAS AND TOWERS; PROVIDING
NONCONFORMING USES; PROVIDING PROTECTION FOR
2
February 3, 1998 Council Meeting
RESIDENTS; PROVIDING PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ORDINANCES - SECOND READING:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING A RESIDENCY POLICY FOR
UTILIZATION OF AVENTURA FOUNDERS PARKS TO PROVIDE
PRIORITY TO CITY RESIDENTS; ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE
FOR GUESTS AND NON RESIDENTS; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA,
ADOPTING SECTION 1 OF CHAPTER 26, "ELECTIONS" PROVIDING
THAT THE CITY CLERK SHALL CANVASS ELECTION RETURNS
WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE DADE COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF
ELECTION; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE
CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
10. OTHER BUSINESS:
NAMING OF NEW HIGH SCHOOL (Councilmember Cohen)
REPORTS
12. PUBLIC COMMENTS
13. ADJOURNMENT
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS/EVENTS:
COUNCIL MEETING February 17, 1998
COUNCIL WORKSHOP February 20, 1998
2:30 p.m.*
*Government Center 2999 NE 191~t Street Suite 500
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Eric M. Soroka, Ci~
January 27, 1998-
Coscan Sign Variance
er
February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item ~/~
The subject matter was deferred from the December 16, 1997 meeting to February 3,
1998. The applicant has requested a further deferral of this matter (see attached
letter).
Therefore, it will be rescheduled to another Council Meeting when the matter is ready to
be heard.
EMS/aca
Attachment
CC0474-98
CITY OF AVENTURA
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Jaye M. Epstein, C~.mmun ~velopment Director
January 23, 1998
Coscan Sign Variance
At the City Council meeting of December 16, 1997, the applicant requested deferral of
their petition for a sign variance to the February 3, 1998 meeting. As per the attached
correspondence, it now appears that they will not be in a position to present this item to
the Council at that time.
C: Teresa M. Smith, City Clerk
DELLA PORTA WARD & ASSOCIATES
Planning & Zoning Consultants
January 16, 1998
Ms. Brenda Kelley, Planner
Community Development Dept.
2999 N.E. 191 Streel - Suite # 500
Aventura, Florida 33180
RE: Coscan Signage
Dear Mrs. Kelley:
This correspondence is provided as a follow up lo our meeting regarding the signs for
Coscan As you know the on site signs were deferred to the February 3rd agenda. It was
our hope to consolidate the offsite signs into one application. It does not appear we will
be able to ac?,ieve that at this time. We have removed some signs, and are having plans
prepared to reflect the location of the balance oftbe signs which are to remain. In
addition copies of the zoning approvals for the two entry signs at Biscayne Boulevard and
the one at 34th Avenue have also been requested from Dade County. These are old files
and are in their warehouse and have not yet been received. As soon as this documentation
is received and the plans are completed, this will be provided to you~ At that point we
would be prepaid to proceed forward with the offsite signage as well.
The main concern in my writing is to advise you that in fact we arc moving forward in
accordance with the meeting we had prior to the first of the year. We are attempting to
reconcile all signs and to verify the approval of some of the existing signs. If in fact this
information is not complete in time to consolidate both of these imo one application, then
I believe we want to proceed with the on site signs. We would then finalize our
submission and come ba~k to a second public hearing for the offsite signage Regardless
we are attempting lo reconcile all of these issues as expeditiously as possible.
St,tying Sottth Fk~rida since 1974
Suile 214 · 2525 S.W. 3rd Avenue. Miami. Florida 33129 * (305) 859-8774 * FAX [305~ 859-8121
Mrs. Brenda Kelley
January 16, 1998
Page 2
[flhere are any questions, please do not hesitate to caJl. I appreciate your assistance in
this matter as always.
Sincerely yours,
DELLA PORTA, WARD & ASSOCIATES
Philip J. Ward
CC: JetTy. Proctor
Bud Hall
PJW/_~m
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council /"~ ~
Eric M. Soroka, City~a r
January 27, 1998 ~.x
Aventura's Finest Hand Wash - Request
for Extension
February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item
Reference is made to the attached letter dated January 23, 1998 regarding Aventura's
Finest Hand Car Wash. The applicant is requesting an extension to a condition placed
on the development appraisals granted by the City Council on August 5, 1997.
Specifically, the request is to extend the time frame for the DERM required
improvements to be completed to August 31, 1998.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
EMS/aca
Attachment
cc0473-98
~iICHAEL J. SNYDER,
~0803 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
SUITE 200
AVENTURA, FLORIDA 33180
January 23, 1998
TELEPHONE (305) 937 4445
TELEF~X (305) 937-0102
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION AND
HAND DELIVERY
Eric M. Soroka, City Manager
City of Aventura
City Manager's Office
2999 N.E. 191st Street
Aventura, FL 33180
Re:
Aventura's Finest Hand Car Wash
Property at 2890 N.E. 187th Street
Aventura, Florida 33180
Dear Mr. Soroka:
As you are probably aware, the undersigned represents
Aventura's Finest Hand Car Wash and Guillermo Freile, as President.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 97-48, my client was to complete
the DERM improvements within 180 days from the adoption of the
Resolution on August 5, 1997. Please be advised that we received
our final approval on January 16, 1998 and I have enclosed a copy
for your review.
Additionally, my client met with Mr. Jaye Epstein on Tuesday,
January 20, 1998, with the DERM plans and approval letters
submitted. Since the construction of the improvements will take
anywhere from four to six weeks, we will need to request an
extension from the City Council as to the requirement that all
items be completed within 180 days from the date of the above
Resolution.
As you are probably aware, this is the height of the season
and the busiest time of the year for my client. Further, we are
told by our contractor that we will have to be completely closed
for a period of one to two weeks during the construction and
thereafter, we can work on different sections of the site without
interfering with the construction of the improvements.
Therefore, we are hereby requesting an extension to complete
our construction until August 31, 1998. We would like to start the
work on July 1, 1998. The months of July and August are the
slowest times of the year in my client's business period. We are
also requesting that we be put on the first scheduled agenda.
Please schedule us for Tuesday, February 3rd, if possible.
C: \WPDOCS \ Z ONING\FP.E ILE \ SOROKA - LTR
JAN 2 6 1998
OFF~C~ OF THE
CiTY MANAGER
Eric M. Soroka, City Manager
C~ty of Aventura
January 22, 1998
Page 2
Should you have
contact this office.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL J.
MJS:tlh
Enclosures
CC:
SNYDER, ESQ.
Mr. Guillermo Freile
Mr. Jaye Epstein
any questions, please
Thank you.
do not
hesitate to
C: \WPDOCS \ ZONING\FRE ILE \$OROKA, LTR
LAW OFFICES
MICHAEL J. SNYDER, P.A.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
METRO~AD~
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PLAN REVIEW SECTION
111 N.W. 1ST STREET
SUITE 1010
APPROVED BY THE MIAMI, FLORIDA 33128-1923
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (305) 375-3330
JOHN W, RENFROW, P.E., DIRECTOR
Date: January 16, 1998
For the Director: Adriana H. Gongaleg
NO CONSTRUCTION SHALL TAKE PLACE ON CONTAMINATED GROUND.
INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES SECTION ONLY
Project Name:
AVENTURA'S HAND CAR WASH
Address(Approx.): 2890 NE 187 ST AVENTURA, FL. 33180
Approval granted for the CAR WASH AREA as per plans submitted
to this depart~nent at the above address with the following conditions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
S)
Property must be connected to the sanitary sewer system at all times.
The floor drain must be connected to a minimum 750 gL oil~water separator.
A samplingpoint, 90° Tee-Type, ~nust be installed in the effluentpipe of the
oil~water separator and be easily accessible to DERM personnel as per plans
submitted.
The oil~water separator must be properly maintained to meet Dade County
Discharge Stcndards.
The car wash impervious area ( 83' x 209, must be contained on all sides
by a minimum four(4) inch high reinforced concrete berm.
The roof of the car wash must provided a miubnum of two feet overhang
beyond the 4" contabunent berms.
For City of Aventura
W/S - NO COI
Folio # 28 - 2203 - 000 - 0020
Car wash in area of HI-Lift Marina Inc.( Already permitted facility)
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF AVENTURA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Eric M. Soroka, Ci~
Jaye M. Epstein, Com
'Development Director
January 22,1998
Update: Aventura's Finest Hand Car Wash
You have requested that I provide an update on the status of the aforementioned
subject. On August 5, 1997, the City Council approved, with conditions, a use variance
and two (2) non-use variances for Aventura's Finest Hand Car Wash (formerly known
as Tommy's). As with all such approvals, the Community Development Department
monitors compliance with Council imposed conditions.
I have attached the pertinent sheet from our latest Monitoring Report. The applicant is
in compliance with conditions 1,2, 3 and 6. The applicant did not literally comply with
condition 4, in that the landscaping was not completely installed within the Council's
specified time frame. However, the landscaping has been installed and approved by
the City's Landscape Architect.
The most troubling situation exists relative to condition 5. This condition reads that
DERM "required improvements shall be completed by the Applicants within 180 days of
the date of this Resolution." Following several verbal reminders of this impending
deadline, the applicant came in this week to discuss this matter with me. I informed him
that he needed to return to the City Council for any request to have the time limit
extended. I also advised that he should make every effort to be in front of the Council
prior to his current approval expiring. He informed me that he would be in touch with
his attorney, who would file a letter with your office for consideration by the City Council
at their February 3, 1998 meeting. I told him that the letter needed to be received by
your office by Friday of this week.
If you require any additional information, please let me know.
OPEN
..... i"
97-48 Use Variance to permit 1. This variance shall expire when the property to the immediate Existing
AVENTURA'S FINEST an outside car wash; non- east is no longer utilized as a marina or changes from marina marina as of
HAND CAR WASH use variance of setback use. 11/7/97
2890 NE 187 Street requirements; and non-
8/5/97 use variance of parking 2. The owner of the subject car wash business shall obtain a valid Lease
requirements written lease, for a five (5) year term, from Applicant Big-E, the submitted by
owner of the marina, which lease shall be delivered to and filed 9/4/97
with the City within 30 days from the date of this Resolution.
3. The variance approval is personal to the Applicant Finest and Complies as
shall expire upon termination or expiration of the lease of 11/7/97
described above or upon abandonment of the car wash
business or sale or transfer of the car wash business or the sale
or transfer of the Finest corporation, or the assets of such
Applicant Finest from Finest or by the principal of such
Applicant, Guillermo Freile.
4. Landscaping shall be installed by Applicants within 90 days of Landscaping
this Resolution. i ~ 3 ~/~/~ ~,~ ~ not installed
/~/' o, "~ 6.) ¢-~/¢ asof11/7/97
5. Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM)
required improvements shall be completed by Applicants within To be
180 days of the date of this Resolution. determined
6. Maximum duration of variances shall be for a total of five (5) Variances null
years and 30 days from date of this Resolution. & void on
9~5~02
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 1998 6:00 P.M.
Columbia Aventura Medical Arts Building
21110 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 101
Aventura, Florida
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder. Present were Councilmembers Arthur Berger, Ken Cohen,
Harry Holzberg, Jeffrey M. Perlow, Patricia Rogers-Libert, Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin,
Mayor Snyder, City Manager Eric M. Soroka, City Clerk Teresa M Smith, and City
Attorneys Stephen Jay Helfman and Richard Jay Weiss. As a quorum was
determined to be present, the meeting commenced.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Robert Diamond led the pledge of allegiance.
3. ZONING HEARINGS - SPECIALLY SET BY COUNCIL FOR 6 P.M.
Ex-parte communications by Council, if any, were disclosed and filed with the City
Clerk in accordance with Ordinance 96-09. All witnesses giving testimony in this
hearing were sworn in by the City Clerk.
A. Mr. Helfman read the following resolution by title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A REZONING
FROM RU-3, FOUR UNIT APARTMENT HOUSE DISTRICT TO BU-2,
SPECIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT; GRANTING APPROVAL OF A
SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A HOTEL IN THE BU-2, SPECIAL
BUSINESS DISTRICT; DENYING A NON-USE VARIANCE REQUIRING
A FIVE (5) FOOT HIGH DECORATIVE WALL WHERE NO WALL IS
PROPOSED; APPROVING A RELEASE OF A PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 4-ZAB-167-77; APPROVING A
RELEASE OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 5-ZAB-
425-95; APPROVING A MODIFICATION OF A PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. Z-181-95 WHICH GRANTED A NON-
USE VARIANCE OF SIGN REGULATIONS TO PERMIT SlX (6) WALL
SIGNS WHERE TWO (2) WALL SIGNS ARE PERMI'I-rED AND WHICH
CONDITIONED APPROVAL UPON A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN FOR THAT
CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
BETWEEN NE 191 STREET AND NE 193 STREET; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. The following individuals addressed
Council: Jaye Epstein, Community Development Director; George Berlin, 1940 NE
191 Drive, North Miami Beach; and Bill Rosenberg, Landscape Architect. There
being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. A motion to approve
rezoning from RU-3, Four Unit Apartment House District to BU-2, Special Business
District and a special exception to allow a hotel in the BU-2, Special Business
District, subject to site plan approval as submitted was offered by Councilmember
Rogers-Libert, seconded by Councilmember Holzberg, and unanimously passed. A
motion to delete items 5 and 6 on page 2 of the Resolution was offered by
Councilmember Rogers-Libert, seconded by Councilmember Berger and
unanimously passed. A motion to deny a non-use variance requiring a five (5) foot
high decorative wall where no wall is proposed was offered by Councilmember
Rogers-Libert, seconded by Counciimember Holzberg and passed 6-1, with Vice
Mayor Beskin voting no. Thus, Resolution No. 98-09 was adopted.
Mayor Snyder presented Beautification Advisory Board members with Certificates of
Appointment for 1998. Those present included: Robert Diamond, Janice Albin,
Patty Robinson and Fanny Fraynd-$inger. Rubin Steiner, Henry Diamond and
Stuart Schulman were not present.
Mayor Snyder then presented Certificates of Appreciation to Bernice Diamond and
Marian Kane (not in attendance) for citizenship above and beyond the call of duty.
B. Mr. Helfman read the following resolution by title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA APPROVING A SIGN VARIANCE FOR
RAINFOREST CAFE, INC., LOCATED AT 19501 BISCAYNE
BOULEVARD, TO PERMIT A SECOND EXTERIOR WALL SIGN
WHERE ONLY ONE WALL SIGN IS PERMITTED; APPROVING A SIGN
VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE SECOND EXTERIOR WALL SIGN TO
HAVE A LARGER SIGN AREA THAN WHAT IS PERMITTED;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. The following individuals addressed
Council: Mr. Epstein; and Phil Ward, Consultant. There being no further speakers,
the public hearing was closed. A motion for approval was offered by
Councilmember Cohen, seconded by Councilmember Rogers-Libert and failed, 0-7.
2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA APPROVING THE AVENTURA LAKES - PHASE
I FINAL PLAT, SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 51S, RANGE 42E OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR
RECORDATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. The following individuals addressed
Council: Mr. Epstein; Jeffrey Bercow, Esq., 200 S. Biscayne Blvd; and David
Ettman, Consultant for the applicant. There being no further speakers, the public
hearing was closed. A motion for approval was offered by Vice Mayor Beskin,
seconded by Councilmember Cohen, unanimously passed and Resolution No. 98-
10 was adopted.
D. Mr. Helfman read the following resolution by title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE SOFFER REDLICH
REPLAT, SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP $2S, RANGE 42E OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR
RECORDATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. The following individual addressed
Council: Mr. Epstein. There being no further speakers, the public hearing was
closed. A motion for approval was offered by Councilmember Perlow, seconded by
Councilmember Rogers-Libert, unanimously passed and Resolution No. 98-11 was
adopted.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion to approve the minutes of the January 6,
1998 Council Meeting and the January 12, 1998 Workshop Meeting was offered by
Councilmember Rogers-Libert and seconded by Councilmember Perlow.
Councilmember Berger requested that item 7 in the January 12, 1998 Workshop
Meeting minutes be amended to provide that the program is a match-up of
volunteers/businesses. The motion for approval passed unanimously.
5. AGENDA: REQUESTS FOR DELETIONS/EMERGENCY ADDITIONS: None
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None.
7. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Berger requested removal of item 7-B from
the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Holzberg requested removal of item 7-D from
the Consent Agenda. Vice Mayor Beskin requested removal of item 7-E from the
Consent Agenda. Councilmember Rogers-Libert and Vice Mayor Beskin disclosed
conflicts of interest relative to item 7-A and did not vote on this matter. A motion for
approval was offered by Councilmember Cohen, seconded by Councilmember
3
Holzberg and unanimously passed by roll call vote, thus the following action was
taken:
A=
F=
Resolution No. 98-12 was adopted as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTING SERVICES WITH BERMELLO, AJAMIL, & PARTNERS,
INC. TO PERFORM MUNICIPAL PUBLIC TRANSIT STUDY AS SET
FORTH IN ISQ 97-12-2-2 IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,000; AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO CARRY
OUT THE AIMS OF THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Weiss read the following ordinance by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA; AMENDING
THE CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 18 "BUSINESS
REGULATIONS, LICENSES AND PERMITS" AT SECTION 18-42 "TAX
SCHEDULE," TO REVISE THE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX RATE
FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF "ASTROLOGER, PSYCHIC,
FORTUNETELLER"; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Resolution No. 98-13 was adopted as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF AN
INTERIM SERVICE FEE REPORT BY TISCHLER & ASSOCIATES,
INC.; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DO ALL THINGS
NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE AIMS OF THIS RESOLUTION;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Weiss read the following ordinance by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA, ADOPTING
SECTION I OF CHAPTER 26, "ELECTIONS" PROVIDING THAT THE
CITY CLERK SHALL CANVASS ELECTION RETURNS WITH THE
ASSISTANCE OF THE DADE COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTION;
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
4
The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda and addressed
separately:
B. Mr. Weiss read the following ordinance by title:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING A RESIDENCY POLICY FOR
UTILIZATION OF AVENTURA FOUNDERS PARK TO PROVIDE
PRIORITY TO CITY RESIDENTS; ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE
FOR GUESTS AND NON RESIDENTS; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
The following individuals addressed Council: Walter Erickson, NE 34th Court; Robert
Jordan, Commodore Plaza; and June Stevens, NE Del Vista Court. A motion for
approval was offered by Vice Mayor Beskin, seconded by Councilmember Holzberg
and unanimously passed by roll call vote. Mr. Weiss advised that modifications
would be made to the ordinance prior to second reading to include Council's
concerns expressed.
Ms. Rogers-Libert left the meeting at the conclusion of this item (7:30 p.m.)
D. Mr. Weiss read the following motion:
MOTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF UP TO $79,000
FOR EMERGENCY CALL BOXES, RADIO EQUIPMENT, FIVE LAPTOP
COMPUTERS AND DRUG AND CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS
FROM THE POLICE FORFEITURE FUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
CITY MANAGER'S MEMORANDUM DATED JANUARY 15, 1998.
A motion for approval was offered by Councilmember Holzberg, seconded by
Councilmember Cohen and passed 6-0, with Councilmember Rogers-Libert absent.
E. Mr. Weiss read the following resolution by title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT FOR THE BILLING OF
STORMWATER CHARGES BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF
AVENTURA AND METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY WATER AND
SEWER DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DO
ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE AIMS OF THIS
RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
5
A motion for approval was offered by Vice Mayor Beskin and seconded by
Councilmember Berger. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0, with Councilmember
Rogers-Libert absent, and Resolution No. 98-14 was adopted.
8. OTHER BUSINESS:
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RELATING TO BILLBOARDS
(Councilmember Cohen)
Councilmember Cohen proposed that the City set aside funds in the preparation of
next year's Capital Improvements Program to buy out the remaining billboards in the
City. No action was taken on this proposal.
9. REPORTS: Subcommittee reports as follows:
School site: Councilmember Berger advised that a report would be forthcoming from
the School Board to the City Manager,
Entrance signs: Councilmember Berger advised of preliminary discussions with
Beautification Advisory Board - to be reviewed fudher at their next meeting.
Access to Hallandale Beach Blvd. via 34th Street: Councilmember Perlow reported
that the City Manager of Hallandale had been contacted to query their interest. No
word yet received.
10.PUBLIC COMMENTS: The following individuals addressed Council: Harry Crook,
Commodore Plaza (post office); Ginger Grossman 20100 W. Country Club Drive
(landscaping); Ms. Stevens (landscaping); Sydell Schwartz, Waterview
(landscaping).
12. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business to come before Council at this
time, after motion made, seconded and unanimously passed, the meeting adjourned
at 8:30 p.m.
Teresa M. Smith, CMC, City Clerk
Approved by Council on
Anyone wishing to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at a
meeting or hearing will need s record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings if made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based.
6
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
City Council_~
Resolution Providing for the Dual Designation of N,E. 37th Avenue
February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item ;~' ~/~
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution providing for the
dual designation of N.E. 37th Avenue as Yacht Club Drive and N.E. 37th Avenue.
BACKGROUND
Reference is made to the attached letter dated January 23, 1998 from Howard S.
Vogel, of Berman Wolfe & Rennert. In order to maintain postal service for residents of
the North Tower at the Point who utilize the Yacht Club Drive designation, the postal
service has requested that N.E. 37th Avenue be dually designated as both N.E. 37th
Avenue and Yacht Club Drive.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
EMS/aca
Attachment
CC0478-98
JAH. ~3. 1998 4: 44PM BWR HO, 585 P. ~. 4
How^ J.
BERMANWOLFE
Janua~23,1998
(466-8919)
Mr, Eric Soroka, City Manager
City of Aventura
2999 N.E. 191 Street, Suite 500
Aventura, FL 33180
RE: Yacht Club Drive
Dear Mr. Soroka:
As Stan Price explained to you, we are in urgent need of a resolution from the City
of Aventura designating "Yacht Club Drive" as an aitemate name for Northeast 37tn
Avenue.
Yacht Club Drive is the name which has been designated for many years to the road
in The Waterways development which runs easterly from Northeast 34~ Avenue to The
Point development and then southerly to The Golden Point development. Attached is a
sketch which reflects the north-south portion of Yacht Club Drive.
In order to eliminate confusion, several years ago the County previously changed
the sign at the intersection of Northeast 34t~ Avenue and 207~ Street to include a reference
tO Yacht Club Drive.
There is now an urgent need to obtain a resolution setting forth this alternate
designation so that residents of "North Tower at The Point", which is located alo~o
Northeast 34"~ Avenue, continue to receive their mail. Closings began in the North Tower
building in early August and it now has several hundred residents, Many of these residents
refer to this street, and receive mail which also refers to this street, as "Yacht Club Ddve".
The Postal Service is now requiring a governmental designation of this alternate address
in order to continue its delivery of mail to residents in the NoAh Tower project. I have
NatiomBank Tower at International Place · 100 Southeast Secorui Street · Suite 3500 · Miami · Florida 33131-2130
Office (305) 577.4177. Fax (305) 373-6036
JAhl. 23. 1998 4 ~ 44P£'1 BWR r~O. ~ P. ~ 4
Mr. Edc Soroka, Ci~ Manager
January 23,~998
Page 2
discussed this matter with Mrs, Berthina Robinson of the Postal Service, who indicated that
she cannot continue to deliver mail using the Yacht Club Ddve designation unless such a
resolution is furnished.
Please arrange for a resolution, designating Yacht Club Drive as an alternate name
for Northeast 37~ Avenue, to be included on the agenda for the next City Commission
meeting, which I understand is scheduled for this Tuesday. We would greatly appreciate
your handling this matter on an emergency basis in order to avoid any further confusion
or delays in these residents receiving their mail,
Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance.
Ve/~/~ly yours,
HJV/th
Enclosure
cc: Ms. Berthina Robinson (via fax)
Stanley Price, Esq, (via fax)
David Wolpin, Esq. (via fax)
Mr. Robert Ackerman (via fax)
B RMANWoL
NadonsBank Tower ak Int~mationa! Place · 100 5ou~ ~fl S;~; · Sui~ ]}~ · Mia~ · ~o~ 33131-2130
Tei~n;: ~05) 577-~177 * F~m~l~ (305) 373-~36
J~,r~. £3. :].996~m 4; 45P1.~ ~NI~m~ J ~0.58,~P. 4, I
LIFESTYLE CENTER
"THE I~INT WAI~RWAY~
"NORTH TOWER
AT THE POINT..
A CONDOMINIUM
(O.R.B. 177¢5-145g)
FUTUR~
CON DOUIN[U~
· ATLANllC II
AT THE POrNT,
CONDOMINIUM'
17545-1a2}
12T1S0 N.~.3~%h AV~
FUTURE
CONDOMINIUM
LOCATION ,SKETCH
TRACT 'A","THE POINT AT THE WATERWAYS"
(P. EI. 145-25, D.C.R.) SEC.35-51-42,
DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
LEITER, PEREZ ~ ASSOCIATES,
LAND OEVELOPMET~ CONSUL TANI~
~r 3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR DUAL
DESIGNATION OF NORTHEAST 37TM AVENUE AS
NORTHEAST 37TM AVENUE AND YACHT CLUB DRIVE
WITHIN THE CITY OF AVENTURA; REQUESTING MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY TO APPROVE AND IMPLEMENT SUCH
DUAL DESIGNATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO CARRY
OUT THE AIMS OF THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Aventura has been advised by representatives of
residents of "North Tower At The Point," which is located at 21205 Yacht Club Drive,
that the United States Post Office is experiencing difficulties delivering mail to such
location, in the absence of an alternate or dual designation including the name of
"Yacht Club Drive" for Northeast 37th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to respond to such concerns in an
appropriate manner.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The dual designation of Northeast 37th Avenue as "Northeast 37th
Avenue/Yacht Club Drive," is hereby approved by the City Council, and that the
appropriate officers and agencies of Miami-Dade County, Florida, are hereby
requested to approve and implement such dual designation and to provide appropriate
street identification signs.
Resolution No. 98-__
Page 2
Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to do all things necessary
to carry out the aims of this Resolution.
Section 3. This Resolution shall
adoption.
The Resolution
Councilmember
follows:
foregoing
become effective immediately upon its
was offered by Councilmember
, who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey Perlow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February, 1998.
ATTEST:
ARTHURI. SNYDER, MAYOR
TERESA M. SMITH, CMC
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council _~'~
Ordinance Regulating Satellite Dishes
Ist Reading February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item
2nd Reading February 17, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance establishing
regulations for the installation, maintenance and use of satellite dishes in the City.
BACKGROUND
Based on recent rules issued by the Federal Communications Commission, our
telecommunications legal advisor, Leibowitz and Associates, Inc., has prepared the
attached Ordinance (see attached letter). Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996, prohibits any local law or regulation that impairs the installation, maintenance
or use of satellite dishes that is one meter or less in diameter in a residential area or
two meters or less in a commercial or industrial area. The Ordinance provides
regulatory authority in the establishment of regulations for the installation, maintenance
and use of satellite dishes in the City. The Ordinance is necessary to protect the
activities of the City and comply with new Federal regulations.
The key provisions of the Ordinance are as follows:
· Requires a permit and compliance with applicable safety and construction
codes.
· Requires written notice to the City within 48 hours of antenna installation.
· Restricts the placement of antennas in front yards.
· Requires screening or protective barriers around the satellite if feasible.
· Requires that a satellite be ground mounted or located on the side of
structures as close to the ground as possible.
· Requires the satellite dish to be painted to blend with the surrounding
environment.
· Establishes requirements for rooftop installations.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
EMS/aca
Attachment
cc0467-98
JOSEPH A. BELISLE
JANE M. FAOAN
ILA L, FELD
EDWARD S. HAMMERMAN~'
LEIIBOWITZ ~c 2~-SSOCIATES, P.A.
SUITE 1450
SUNTRUST INTERNATIONAL CENTER
ONE SOUTHEAST THIRD AVENUE
MtAMI~ FLORIDA 33131-1715
TELEPHONE (305) 530-1322
TELECOPIER (305) 530-9417
· mall Broadiaw@aol.¢om
January 5, 1998
Eric M. Soroka
City of Aventura
Government Center
2999 N.E. 191 Street
Suite 500
Aventura, FL 33180
City of Aventura, Florida
Satellite Ordinance
Dear Terry:
As requested, attached please find a draft Satellite Dish regulatory ordinance for the City of
Aventura, Florida.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 granted the Federal Communications Commission
("Commission") authority to promulgate regulations to prohibit restrictions that impair a viewer's
ability to receive video programming services through devices designed for over-the-air reception
of television broadcast signals, multicharmel/multipoint distribution service, and direct broadcast
satellite services. The 1996 Act's direction to the Commission to prohibit restrictions that impair
reception of over-the-air video programming services promotes the primary objective of the
Communications Act to, "make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States
·.. a rapid, efficient, nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service with
adequate facilities at reasonable charges."
In August 1996, the Commission issued a final rule. The rule has several key components
which include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Telecommunications reception equipment covered by the rule:
Direct broadcast satellite (DBS) antennas one meter or less in diameter
(except in Alaska, where no size limitation is imposed because larger
antennas are required for reception);
Multipoint distribution service (MDS) antennas of one meter or less in
diameter;
· Television broadcast antennas regardless of size.
2. Types of property upon which antennas may be installed:
· Individually owned property;
Exclusive use areas, where an owner has a direct or indirect but not exclusive,
ownership interest in property and exclusive use or control over that property.
3. Restrictions permitted:
Restrictions based on safety - restrictions based on safety if necessary to
accomplish a clearly defined safety objective that is either stated in the text,
preamble or legislative history of the restriction, or described as applying to
that restriction in a document that is regularly available to antenna users, and
that are applied to the extent practicable in a non-discriminatory manner to
other appurtenances, devices or fixtures that are comparable in size, weight
and appearance to these antennas and to which local regulation would
normally apply;
Restrictions intended to preserve a historic district - restrictions intended to
preserve a historic district if the historic district is listed or ehgible for listing
in the National Register of Historic places, as set forth in the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, so long as the restrictions
impose no greater hardship on antennas covered by this role then are imposed
on the installation, maintenance or use of other modem appurtenances,
devices, or fixtures that are comparable in size, weight and appearance to
these antennas.
4. Any restriction based on safety or intended to preserve a historic district may
be no more burdensome to affected antenna users than is necessary to achieve the objective
described above.
Therefore, pursuant to the role, the City of Aventura, Florida may promulgate regulations
including the following:
1. Regulations that do not (a) prevent or unreasonable delay installation, maintenance
or use of the antenna; (b) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance, or use of
antennas; or (c) preclude an acceptable quality signal. In addition, the local authority may
promulgate restrictions that require compliance with building and safety codes.
The Commission role preempts State and local laws that conflict with the rule. However,
state and local laws that do not conflict with the rule will remain enforceable. To date, the
Commission has preempted five (5) locally promulgated rules. In considering these cases, the
2
LEI]BOWITZ ~ ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Commission has issued decisions with respect to implementing the rule including, but not limited
to those issues listed below.
· City house owners associations fall within the definition of a homeowners
association and, therefore, fall within the rule that preempts restrictive covenants that
impair viewer's ability to receive over-the-air programming through antennas.
A requirement to obtain a five dollar ($5.00) permit prior to installation, and the
requirement to obtain City approval prior to antenna placement, was held to conflict
with the prohibition against restrictions that unreasonably delay or prevent antenna
installation, maintenance, or use that are not required by safety or historic
preservation considerations.
A setback regulation that was vague impermissibly delayed or prevented antenna
installation, maintenance and use, thereby violating the rule.
An outhght ban against the installation of externally mounted antennas that is not
justified on either safety or historic preservation grounds is prohibited.
The burden is on the local authority to prove that reception will not be impaired by
requiring internal antenna installation.
The recommended draft ordinance, while complying with current Federal law, reserves to
the City substantial regulatory authority. The key provisions of the draft ordinance include, but are
not limited to: (1) a requirement to obtain approval by the Building and Zoning director which is
contingent upon the antenna user obtaining permits, if necessary, registering with the proper City
authority and following applicable safety and construction codes; (2) a requirement to provide
written notice to the City within forty eight (48) hours of antenna installation; (3) a requirement that
the City act upon a permit request within twenty (20) days; (4) a restriction on placement of
antennas in front yards; (5) a requirement to screen in or place protective barriers around the satellite,
if feasible; (6) administrative fees of $10.00; (7) a requirement that a satellite be ground mounted
or located on the side of structures as close to the ground as possible (i.e. with
painting/camouflaging); (8) a requirement that a satellite be painted to blend with the surrounding
environment; (9) a requirement that a temporary or movable antenna be removed within six (6)
months after a permit is issued absent special circumstances; and (10) certain requirements for roof
top installation.
Note that the proposed draft does not incorporate any provisions for special zoning districts.
If necessary, the City may consider filing a request for waiver of the rules with the FCC for such
districts.
The draft Satellite Ordinance attached hereto is consistent with the FCC's current rules but
adopts certain reqnimments including, but not limited to, the $10 permit fee which could be subject
to challenge.
3
LlglBO'~ITZ ~ ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SUiTE 14~0, ONE SOUTHEAST THIRD AVENUE, MIAMI, fLORIDA 33131-171~ · TELEPHONE (305) 530-13~2
The Commission is expected to issue rules and decisions that further clarify and implement
satellite rules in the near future. Thus, as case law develops, and as the Commission promulgates
new Federal rules, the Satellite Ordinance may require future amendments or modifications.
Please review the first draft of the Satellite Ordinance and contact me at your earliest
convenience with your comments so that we may move forward with this matter.
Sincerely,
Ila L. Feld
ILF/vl
CC~
David Wolpin, Esq.
Weiss, Serota & Helfrnan, P.A.
C:\225kAvenmta\Satellite OrdinaneekLe~ers\Soroka 122497
4
ORDINANCE NO. 98-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY
ADDING A NEW CHAPTER ENTITLED "SATELLITE
DISHES", PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF THE
INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, AND USE OF
SATELLITE DISHES DESIGNED FOR OVER-THE-AIR
RECEPTION OF TELEVISION BROADCAST SIGNALS,
MULTICHANNEL, MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION SERVICE,
DIRECT BROADCAST SATELLITES, MULTIPOINT
DISTRIBUTION SERVICE, INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION
FIXED SERVICE, AND LOCAL MULTIPOINT
DISTRIBUTION SERVICE; DELEGATING REVIEW
AUTHORITY AND APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION
OF SUCH DISHES TO THE CITY MANAGER; PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Congress enacted Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act to
prohibit restrictions that impair an antenna user's ability to receive over-the-air video
programming services; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") rules
require the City to re-examine its laws regulating Over the Air Reception Devices; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance 96-27 of the City of Aventura, the City
Council has been designated as the local planning agency for the City pursuant to
Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the regulations set forth in this
Ordinance and has determined that such regulations are consistent with the applicable
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of Miami-Dade County as made applicable to the
City; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent and purpose of the City to encourage and facilitate
competition and consumer choice by ensuring antenna users' ability to receive over-
the-air signals; and
WHEREAS, Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act 1996 prohibits any local
law or regulation that impairs the installation, maintenance, or use of: (1) an antenna
that is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite services that is one meter or less
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 2
in diameter; or (2) an antenna that is designed to receive video programming services
via multipoint distribution services, including multichannel multipoint distribution
services, instructional television fixed services, and local multipoint distribution
services, and that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement; (3) an
antenna that is designed to receive television broadcast signals; or (4) an antenna that
is two meters or less in diameter and is located or proposed to be located in any area
where commercial or industrial uses are generally permitted by non-federal land use
regulation zoning; and
WHEREAS, Commission Rule 25.104(a), which applies to satellite earth station
antennas prohibits any regulation that (1) materially limits transmission or reception by
satellite earth station antennas or (2) imposes more than minimal costs on users of
such antennas, where the City cannot demonstrate that such regulation is reasonable;
and
WHEREAS, Commission Rule 25.104(b), which applies to small satellite earth
station antennas, clarifies that a regulation or restriction impairs installation,
maintenance or use of an antenna if it: 1) unreasonably delays or prevents installation,
maintenance or use, 2) unreasonably increases the cost of installation, maintenance or
use, or 3) precludes reception of an acceptable quality signal. However, Section 257
provides that any restriction otherwise prohibited is permitted if: 1) it is necessary to
accomplish a clearly defined safety objective and is applied in a non-discriminatory
manner to other appurtenances, devices, or fixtures that are comparable in size,
weight, and appearance to these antennas and to which local regulation would
normally apply; or 2) it is necessary to preserve an historic district or district eligible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places as set forth in the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §470(a) and imposes no greater
restrictions on antennas covered by this rule than are imposed on the installation,
maintenance or use of other modern appurtenances, devices or fixtures that are
comparable in size, weight, and appearance to these antennas; and 3) it is no more
burdensome to affected antenna users than is necessary to achieve the objectives
stated herein; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City to promote the health, safety and welfare
of its citizens and visitors; and
WHEREAS, the City, located in the Southeast region of Florida, is within an area
of the United States that is subject to a relatively greater risk from hurricanes than other
areas of the country and therefore has a legitimate interest in reducing the possibility of
human and property damage from windblown satellite dish antennas; and
WHEREAS, it is also a reasonable governmental responsibility for the City to
assure aesthetic compatibility.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA THAT:
Section 1. Title: This Ordinance shall be entitled "Satellite Dish Ordinance"
and shall be an amendment to the City's Code of Ordinances.
Sec. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the
following terms and phrases shall apply:
A. "Antenna" means any device used for the receipt of video
programming services, including TVBS, MDS, DBS, ITFS and LMDS, and
MMDS. A reception antenna that has limited transmission capability
designed for the viewer to select or use video programming is a reception
antenna provided that it meets the Federal Communications Commission
standards for radio frequency emissions. A mast, cabling, or other
accessory necessary for the proper installation, maintenance, and use of
a reception antenna shall be considered part of the antenna. An
"antenna" within the meaning of this Ordinance expressly excludes any
device that comes within the definition of the term "Antenna" in the City
Code.
B. "Antenna User" means the person or entity that has a
direct or indirect ownership interest in, and exclusive control over, the
property upon which the antenna is located.
C. "Applicant" means any person submitting an application
within the meaning of this Ordinance.
D. "Application" means any proposal, submission or request
to install a satellite dish. An application includes an applicant's initial
proposal, submission or request, any and all subsequent amendments or
supplements of the proposal, relevant correspondence, and all written
and oral representations, and/or material made or provided to the City.
E. "Commission" or "FCC" shall mean the Federal
Communications Commission or any successor governmental entity
thereto.
F "Communications Act" means the Communications Act of
1934, 47 US.C. §151 et seq., as the Act has and may hereinafter be
amended.
G. "Large Satellite Dish" means any satellite earth station
antenna that is not defined as a "Small Satellite Dish".
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 4
H. "Mast" means a structure to which an antenna is attached
that raises the antenna height.
I. "National Historic Preservation Act" means the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C., §§470 et. seq., as the Act
has and may hereafter be amended.
J. "Permit" means the authorization expressly granted by the
City to an Antenna User to install an Antenna on the property wherein the
User has a direct or indirect ownership interest. The term does not
include any other authorization, including, but not limited to, a franchise,
license, or permit that may be covered by other laws, ordinances or
regulations of Federal, State, or any local government entity including
other laws or regulations of the City.
K. "Small Satellite Dish" means any receive-only satellite
earth station antenna that is two meters or less in diameter and located or
proposed to be located in any area where commercial or industrial uses
are generally permitted by non-federal land-use regulation, or a satellite
earth station antenna that is one meter or less in diameter in any area
regardless of land use or zoning category.
L. "Temporary" or "Moveable Dish" means an antenna
which is not anchored in the ground which is not affixed to a permanent
structure.
M. "City" means the City of Aventura, Florida.
N. "VSAT" means a commercial satellite service that may use
satellite antennae less that one meter in diameter but that is not used to
provide over-the-air- video programming.
Sec. 2. ~ Intent. It is the purpose and intent of
this Ordinance to establish rules and regulations consistent with Federal
policy with respect to the installation, placement, maintenance and use of
satellite dishes designed for over-the-air reception of television broadcast
signals that (a) ensures that consumers have access to a broad range of
video programming services; (b) fosters full and fair competition among
different types of video programming services; (c) satisfy the City's
legitimate governmental interests in protecting lives and property and
promoting the public's safety, health and including, but not limited to (i)
reducing the likelihood that satellite dishes will become windblown
hurricane hazards and (ii) reducing crime and the opportunity for crime;
and (c) ensure compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 5
law, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the South Florida
Building Code.
Sec. 3. Small Satellite Dish ReRulation.
A. Small satellite dish antennas are subject to the following
requirements:
1. The satellite antenna installation shall require the
approval of the City Manager or his designee.
2. The approval of the City Manager or his designee is
contingent upon the compliance by the satellite antenna with the
regulations of the City.
3. Where the construction, connection or installation of
an antenna requires a permit under the South Florida Building Code (the
"Code"), a permit shall be obtained.
4. To avoid any possibility of delay with respect to the
deployment of an antenna, any person who wishes to install or have
installed an antenna may do so without the advance filing of an
application, the advance payment of the application fee and the filing and
obtaining in advance of a permit, as such are required in this Section;
provided, however, that the installer or the person for whom the antenna
is installed must provide written notice to the City within forty-eight (48)
hours after any such installation (exclusive of weekends and legal
holidays) reporting the facts of such installation (i.e., the address of the
installation, identity of the person responsible for the antenna at the
installation site and location of the antenna as installed). Failure to
provide such notice is a violation of this Section.
5. As soon as staff resources permit, the City will
inspect the installation to determine if it complies with the requirements of
this Section and the Code (if such Code is also applicable). Neither the
approval of the City Manager or his designee nor a permit under the
South Florida Building Code will be unreasonably withheld to delay
antenna deployment.
6. If an antenna is deployed in advance, but does not
comply with this Section, the Code or both in any respect, the City shall
not be responsible for any costs incurred in connection with any
alteration, modification, redeployment or reinstallation of an antenna in
order for it to achieve full compliance.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 6
7. Alternatively, the person who wishes to install an
antenna may file the application, pay the fee and obtain the permit, if one
is required, in advance of the installation.
8. If a satellite plan is in compliance with federal and
local rules, approval of the City Manager or his designee and a permit
under the Code will be issued within twenty (20) days of application,
absent exceptional circumstances.
9. Such permitting is no more burdensome than is
necessary to ensure public health and safety.
10. Review and approval shall be required on an annual
renewal basis and at such time the applicant shall be required to submit
photos of the antenna taken from the street and adjacent properties. This
is necessary to assure continued compliance and to keep the City
appraised of the status of satellite communications within the City.
B. The City Manager or his designee shall review all
installations and applications for small satellite antenna approvals for
such installations within twenty (20) days of receipt of applications, absent
exceptional circumstances, to determine that the installation meets the
following permit conditions:
1. The installation or modification of a satellite earth
station shall be in accordance with all applicable construction and safety
code and procedures and shall meet the requirements of the South
Florida Building Code.
2. No antenna shall be permitted in a front yard or on
the front part of any roof which runs parallel with the front property line,
except in the instance of corner lots where only one side will be
designated the front property line (the "front" shall be the same as the
street address of the property as assigned by the United States Post
Office).
3. Every reasonable effort must be made to locate the
antenna in a manner where it is effectively screened by a fence, near a
structure or near another protective barrier which will decrease the
likelihood of a broken or dislodged antenna becoming a windblown
hurricane hazard.
4. The City shall charge a ten dollar ($10.00)
administration fee for review of each application and installation. Such fee
shall be remitted with the application.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 7
5. No antenna installation shall ultimately be authorized
by the City Manager or his designee unless the fee has been paid and the
installation has been approved in writing and evidence of the issuance of
a permit is produced where required.
6. The antenna shall be ground-mounted or located on
the side of a structure as close to the ground as is reasonably possible.
7. Ground-mounted satellite earth stations shall conform
to the minimum setback requirements as are required for the principal
building on the building site pursuant to the South Florida Building Code
and any applicable City Zoning Code.
8. Ground-mounted satellite earth stations shall conform
to the minimum setback requirements from the waterway as required for
the principal building location on the property pursuant to the South
Florida Building Code and any applicable City Zoning Code.
9. Ground-mounted satellite earth stations shall conform
to minimum setback requirements from power lines which shall be, at
minimum, no less than eight (8) feet from any power line over 250 volts.
10. Except as provided in subparagraph D below, no
antenna shall be placed upon a roof area that is supported by trusses.
11. Each antenna and antenna installation shall be
required to be painted in a fashion so that it blends into the background
against which it is mounted.
12. Special Requirements for temporary or moveable
antennas. The provisions of this subsection (B) shall apply to "temporary
or moveable" dish or dish antennas. All temporary or moveable dish
antennas must be removed within six (6) months after a permit has been
issued absent the receipt of approval as provided by this subsection.
C. VSAT, is not within the purview of this ordinance because it
is not used to provide over-the-air video programming.
D. If, as a result of compliance with this Ordinance's
requirements as set forth above, reception is impaired, the cost to comply
is or would be unreasonable, or the installation may be unreasonably
delayed, the City Manager may approve plans which deviate from the
requirements of this Ordinance as follows (in order of the most acceptable
deviation to least):
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 8
1. The following list enumerates the hierarchy of
deviations. The City Manager must deviate from requirement No. 1
before deviating from requirement No. 2, must deviate from requirements
Nos. 1 and 2 before deviating from requirement No. 3, must deviate from
requirements Nos. 1, 2 and 3 before deviating from requirement No. 4,
and must deviate from requirements Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 before deviating
from requirement No. 5.
2. The antenna shall not be located in a historic district
listed or eligible to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places, as
set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
3. The antenna shall be ground-mounted or located on
the side of a structure as close to the ground as is reasonably possible.
4. An antenna shall not be placed on a roof area which
is supported by trusses;
5. No antenna shall be permitted in a front yard area or
on the front part of any roof which runs parallel with the front property line,
except in the instance of corner lots where only one side will be
designated the front property line. The "front" shall be the same as the
street address of the property as assigned by the United States Post
Office.
6. Any deviation from the requirements of this
Ordinance must be justified, taking into consideration the location and
surrounding structures, fences, landscaping and other features.
E. 1. Rooftop installation of satellite dish or dish antennas
will only be permitted where (a) a City Building Official/Truss
Manufacturer approves the method of attachment proposed by the
applicant before the installation; (b) the antenna is anchored to the roof in
conformance with the requirements of the South Florida Building Code;
and (c) a professional engineer certifies as safe any infrastructure
improvements made to fortify the truss system or the truss system as
designed to which the antenna will be installed. Such certification must be
obtained, absent exceptional circumstances, within twenty (20) days of
installation.
2. The installation of any antenna structure mounted on
the roof of a building shall not be erected nearer to the lot line than the
total height of the antenna structure above the roof, nor shall such
Ordinance No. 98-._
Page 9
structure be erected near electric power lines or encroach upon any street
or other public space.
3. Antenna users must obtain a special permit as
described in Section F herein, in cases in which the antennas extend
more than twelve (12) feet above the roof line in order to receive signals.
F. Mast Installation.
1. Mast height may be no longer than absolutely
necessary to receive acceptable quality signals.
2. Masts that extend 12 feet or less beyond the roof line
may be installed subject to the regular notification process. Masts that
extend more than 12 feet above the roof line must be approved before
installation due to safety concerns posed by wind loads and the risk of
falling antennas and masts. Any application for a mast that extends more
than 12 feet above the roof-line must include a detailed description of the
structure and anchorage of the antenna and the mast, as well as an
explanation of the necessity for a mast higher than 12 feet. If this
installation will pose a safety hazard to City residents and visitors then the
City may prohibit such installation. The notice of rejection shall specify
these safety risks.
contractor.
Masts must be installed by a licensed and insured
4. Masts must be painted the appropriate color to match
their surroundings.
5. Masts installed on a roof shall not be installed nearer
to the lot line than the total height of the masts and antenna structure
(combined height) above the roof. The purpose of this regulation is to
protect persons and property that would be damaged if the mast were to
fall during a storm or from other causes.
6. Masts shall not be installed nearer to electric power
lines than the total height of the mast and antenna structure above the
roof. The purpose of this regulation is to avoid damage to electric power
lines if the mast should fall in a storm.
7. Masts shall not encroach upon another owner's lot or
common property.
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 10
8. Masts installed on the ground must sustain a
minimum of 120 mph winds, or such speeds as otherwise provided in the
applicable Building and Zoning Codes.
G. Applicability. The regulations in this Ordinance shall be
applied in a nondiscriminatory manner to other appurtenances, devices
and fixtures that are comparable in size, weight and appearance to the
subject antennas and to which local regulations would normally apply.
Sec. 4. Lar,qe Satellite Dish Re.qulation. The provisions of
Section 3 shall apply to Large Satellite Dish Antennas. To the extent that
any provision of Section 3 (1) materially limits transmission or reception
by satellite earth station antennas, or (2) imposes more than minimal
costs on users of such antennas and to the extent that the City cannot
demonstrate that such regulation is reasonable, that provision shall not
apply.
Sec. 5. Existin,q Antennas. All existing Antenna Users must
apply for all necessary permits and licenses within thirty (30) days of the
passage and adoption of the Ordinance.
Sec. 6. Violation of Ordinance.
A. Violation of specified conditions and safeguards, when
made part of the terms under which the antenna is approved, or the
various provisions of this section, shall be deemed grounds for revocation
of permit and punishable as a violation of the Zoning Code.
B. A maximum fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per
violation may be imposed for any violation of this Section.
Sec. 7. Contact.
A. Both the Local Zoning Authority and the Antenna User shall
provide one another with the name and address of the contact designated
to receive notices, filings, reports, records, amendments, and other types
of correspondence or information that rebate to administration and/or
enforcement of this Ordinance.
B. All notices affecting the legal rights of the parties and all
other filings, reports, records, documents and other types of
correspondence shall be in writing, and shall be deemed served when
delivered by hand or personal service, certified mail return receipt
requested, registered mail, or express delivery by the designated contact.
If such notice is not timely served, then parties shall follow State rules to
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 11
determine the consequence of the non-timely service of notice, and the
rights and remedies of the affected parties.
Section 2. Repeal. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances (including
Miami-Dade County Code Section 33-63.1) inconsistent or in conflict herewith are
hereby repealed in so far as there is conflict or inconsistency.
Section 3. Severability. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause,
phrase or other part of this Ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction
to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance as a whole or
any portion thereof, other than the part so declared to be invalid.
Section 4. Inclusion in the Code. It is the intention of the City Council, and it
is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and made a part of
the City of Aventura Code; that the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or
relettered to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance" shall be changed to
"Section" or other appropriate word.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective
immediately after adoption on second reading.
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember , who
moved its adoption on first reading. This motion was seconded by Councilmember
, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry HoIzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Perlow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember ,
who moved its adoption on second reading. This motion was seconded by
Councilmember , and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Perlow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 12
PASSED AND ADOPTED on first reading this 3'd day of February, 1998.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this 17th day of February, 1998.
ATTEST:
Arthur I. Snyder, Mayor
Teresa M. Smith, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
City Attorney
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council t~
Eric M. Soroka, Ci r
January 21, 1998
Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Towers and
Antennas Ordinance
Reading February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item ~.~_~
Reading February 17, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance, which
establishes regulations for wireless telecommunications towers, and antennas. This
Ordinance is necessary to protect the aesthetics of the community and required to
comply with the tower siting provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
BACKGROUND
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was an attempt at the deregulation of the
telecommunications industry and provides for increased competition. It also provides
for the Federal regulation of wireless telecommunications. Attached is an overview of
the wireless communications topic prepared by our telecommunications legal counsel,
Leibowitz & Associates. The Act allows local governments to regulate the siting,
modification and removal of the telecommunications towers in their jurisdiction. The
telecommunications industry has filed numerous challenges opposing the local
governments' ability to regulate telecommunications towers. The Act provides that the
regulation of the towers by local government shall not unreasonably discriminate among
providers of functionally equivalent services and shall not prohibit or have the effect of
prohibiting the provision of personal wireless service.
In order to protect the City's ability to regulate tower sitings and comply with the
Telecommunications Act, our legal telecommunications counsel, Leibowitz &
Associates, P.A. has prepared the attached Ordinance for adoption by the City Council.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
EMS/aca
Attachment
CC0470-98
Tower Siting
Legal Considerations for Local Government
1. Local zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among
wireless telecommunications providers that compete hgainst one another.
2. Local zoning requirements may not prohibit or have the effect of
prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service.
3. A local government must act within a reasonable period of time on
requests for permission to place or construct wireless telecommunications
facilities. · ·
4. Any city or county council or zoning board decision denying a ret 'est for
permission to dnstall ,r construct wireless telecommunications facilitie must
be in writing and mast be based on evidence in a written record befor~ the
council or board.
5. If a wireless telecommunications facility meets technical emissions
standards set by the FCC, it is presumed safe. A local government may not
deny a request to construct a facility on grounds that its radiofrequency
emissions would be harmful to the environment or the health of residents if
those emissions meet FCC standards.
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS
By its passage of The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act)~,
Congress set in motion a tidal wave of change in the telecommunications
industry. Competition and de- regulation have become the catch words not
only of the industry itself but of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), the Federal agency charged with the oversight and implementation of
the 1996 Act. Gone are the cross-ownership restrictions that prohibited cable
and telephone companies from entering each others' businesses as well as
the exclusive control the dominant telephone carriers in your jurisdiction had
to provide basic local exchange service over or its own network. The
auctioning by the Federal government of licenses for spectrum or for specific
authority for designated airwave use has also created a major influx of cellular
and personal communications service (PCS) providers clamoring to provide
wireless telecommunications to an ever increasingly mobile U.S. population.
Accordingly, local governments used to dealing with a single telephone
provider and perhaps one or two cable operators can realistically expect to
have to handle ever increasing demands for access to and use of the public
rights of way and/or public property for telecommunications purposes from a
variety of potential providers.
- A growing trend in the telephone industry, for example, is the increasing
demand for personal wireless services provided by cellular telephone,
personal communications services (PCS), other mobile radio services and
any other FCC licensed wireless common carrier. Such wireless telephone
services use poles to transmit signals in lieu of traditional wires and cables.
To implement a wireless system, providers must install monopoles, lattice
towers, stealth structures (structures designed to look like trees, church
steeples, etc.) and storage equipment facilities to send and receive radio
signals from one point to another through space.
Because of the different technologies involved in each service, different
types of antennas and transmission facilities may be also required for each
~The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Pub. L. No. 104-104) was enacted on Februa~, 8,
1996, as an amendment to the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq. )
of the wireless providers involved. The number of pole sitings requested in
a particular jurisdiction therefore may depend on the type of carrier, the
frequency the provider uses in its system, as well as the terrain and density
of population within a specific geographic area or "cell." Cellular antennas,
for example, are currently being placed approximately six to twelve miles
apart. Digital pager systems, however operate on a lower frequency than
cellular and therefore can send and receive communication signals at greater
distances, resulting in the need for fewer towers. Personal Communications
Services (PCS) providers, on the other hand, operate at a higher frequency
which means that towers must be placed even closer together (between one
and six miles apart) since the sending and receiving signals are weaker and
cannot travel as far in space as compared to the signals of cellular or digital
pager systems.
Currently, there are over 22,000 towers in the United States, providing
wireless telephone service to approximately 2.2 million customers. It is
projected by the industry that consumer demand for additional wireless
service as well as the advent of high definition TV required under the 1996
Act will only serve to bolster the demand for additional towers into the next
century. Local governments, as a result, will be faced with an increasing
number of applications from providers seeking to provide such services to
local communities. This present and growing demand will, in turn, necessitate
the need for local governments to continually reevaluate the provisions of its
land development or zones codes relating to the regulation of towers,
antennas and satellite dishes to ensure ongoing compliance with the
competitively neutral goals of the 1996 Act.
Section 253(c) of the 1996 Act specifically preserves the authority of
State and local governments to manage public rights-of-way and to require
that local governments receive fair and reasonable compensation for rights-
of-way use on a competitive, neutral, and nondiscriminatory basis from both
new entrants as well as incumbents. ~ also allows local governments to
regulate the siting, modification and removal of such towers within their
jurisdictionS. During the Senate floor debate on Section 253(c), Senator
Feinstein offered examples of the types of restrictions that Congress intended
to permit under section 253(c) including State and local legal requirements
that:
Requiring a company to place its facilities underground, rather than
overhead, consistent with the requirements imposed on other utility
companies
Regulating the time or location of excavation to preserve effective traffic
flow, prevent hazardous road conditions, or minimize notice impacts
Requiring a company to pay fees to recover an appropriate share of the
increased street repair and paving costs that result from repeated
excavation
Requiring a company to indemnify the City against any claims of injury
arising from the company's excavation.
A critical issue then for local governments in reexamining its local
regulations and ordinances is the need to balance the interests of the
community while ensudng that any modifications or new regulations adopted
do not have the effect of creating a barrier to entry for alternative providers
and, as a result, to competition. This authority, however, is not without
present challenge. After the passage of the 1996 Act, a number of local
jurisdictions elected to enact moratoriums on the processing of tower
applications so as to allow those jurisdictions time to evaluate what
modifications, if any, were necessary to comply with the 1996 Act.
Telecommunication providers subsequently challenged many of these local
laws across the country, asserting that they constituted birders to competition
in violation of the 1996 Act. In the matter of Sprint Spectrum v. City of
Medina, 924 F. Supp 1036 (1996), the Court did, however, hold that the City
of Medina's six-month moratorium on issuing permits for additional wireless
communications did not violate Section 704 of the 1996 Act. Recognizing the
short duration of the moratorium and that the City had intentions of acting on
all wireless tower siting applications, the Court upheld the City's right to issue
a moratorium to reorganize the tower siting provisions in its local ordinance.
It is important to note that this case was decided shortly after the enactment
of the 1996 Act and that subsequent court decisions have placed the viability
of such moratorium into question.2
:See Sprint Speclxum L.P.V. Jefferson Cotmty, 968 F. Supp. 1457 CN.D. Ala. 1997)
(Court found that the County Commission's third moratorium issued approximately fifteen
It must also be noted that the FCC is presently considering a Petition
for Declaratory Ruling filed by the Cellular Telecommunications Industry
Association (CTIA) asking the Commission to preempt moratoria regulation
imposed by state and local governments on siting of telecommunications
facilities. As part of their filing, the CTIA also sent a letter to the FCC listing
the names of the local governments that had zoning regulations the CTIA felt
were burdensome on wireless providers and represented a barder to access.
The FCC, in response, issued a letter to all the local governments mentioned
in the CTIA letter enunciating to the parties the requirements of the 1996 Act
and suggesting compliance methods for the parties to follow. It has also
issued a Public Notice requesting additional comments on the preemption of
local moratoria of unlimited or unspecified duration. FCC action on this matter
is currently pending.
Other jurisdictions who have gone ahead and enacted ordinances and
laws to control and manage the numerous siting applications filed by wireless
telecommunications services providers to their respective local zoning
authorities have also found themselves subject to challenge in the courts. In
appealing local government decisions to deny a tower application, the
providers have consistently raised the issue of whether the government's
actions were consistent with the procedural and competitive requirements of
the 1996 Act. Local governments, therefore, must be careful not to enact
regulations which have the effect of favoring one carrier over another or which
create undue administrative or financial burdens. The decision to allow only
one tower within each quadrant of the city could, for example, effectively favor
pager providers over PCS providers, thus creating a barrier to competition in
violation of the 1996 Act.
Section 704 of the 1996 Act requires that a local government's decision
on a tower siting be made within a reasonable period of time based on
months after the passage of the 1996 Act violated the Act); Sprint Spectrum L.P.V. Town of
Farmington, F. Supp. (D. Conn. 1997), 1997WL631104(D. Conn.). (Nine month
moratorium issued after plaintiff's tower application received was in violation of 47 U.S.C.
332(c) (7)(B) 11 and (B)(i)(I); Sprint Spectrum L.P.v. Town of West Seneca, 1997 WL 24253
(N.Y. Sup.) (Town's inaction on tower application violated the provisions of the 1996 Act
requiring action on applications within a reasonable time).
evidence in a written record. In WesteI-Milwaukee Co. v. Walworth County=
566 N.W. 2d 107 (1996), the Court found that the 1996 Act does not require
any change in the factfinding procedures that local zoning authorities followed
pdor to the Act, for purposes of zoning requests for personal wireless service
facilities, besides specifying that decisions should be made timely and based
on the written record. For purposes of compliance, therefore, it seems
advisable that local governments should attempt to make decisions on tower
siting within the same time frame as non-telecommunications facilities. To
ensure the decision is based on the written record, localities should consider
taking the following steps:
Creating a standard application process, cleady outlining all
requirements.;
Transcribing all hearings on the application and including in the written
record staff's review and recommendations regarding the application.;
Producing a written decision based on documented records, testimony,
statistics and repods. (Denial based on hearsay or undocumented
health fears concerning Radio frequency emissions is prohibited under
the 1996 Act).
Not charging telecommunications companies excessive fees for
erecting a tower. (This may constitute a "discriminatory" or "excessive"
barrier to entry precluded by Section 253 of the 1996 Act).
The importance of a written record documenting the basis for local
government action, specifically in the area of tower sitings can not be
underestimated. In Western PCS II Corp. v. Extraterritorial Zoning Authority
of the City. and County. of Santa Fa: 957 F.Supp 1230 (1997), for example, a
PCS company filed a petition for review of a Santa Fe zoning decision to deny
the company's request to mount wireless antenna to a water tank owned by
the county. The district court reviewing ',he matter found that the County had
failed to follow the Telecommunications Act's requirement of issuing a written
decision to deny. It further held that the City's denial was not supported by
substantial evidence. The Court cited the fact that the only basis given by the
council chairman for denial was that he did not hear "from a single resident
of this subdivision who wants the service" and he therefore concluded that the
residents of the neighboring subdivisions were of the opinion to oppose the
facility. Other courts have followed a similar trend in this area. 3
As demonstrated by the analysis provided above, the ability of local
governments to manage the public rights of way both now and in the future
will be a source of ongoing challenge by the telecommunications providers
who wish to utilize them . Buffeted by the often conflicting demand of
business versus the public interests, it is important for a local government
and its attorneys to keep apprised of the ongoing developments in this
continually evolving area of law.
3Id.
NATIONAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNCATIONS SITING
POLICY
47 U.S.C. SECTION 332 (c) (7) "Preservation Of Local
Zoning Authority"
GENERAL AUTHORITY Except as provided in this paragraph, nothing
in this Act shall limit or affect the authority of a State or local government
or instrumentality thereof over decisions regarding the placement,
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities.
LIMITATION - The regulation of the placement, construction, and
modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local
government or instrumentality thereof
a) Shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of
functionally equivalent services; and
b) Shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the
provision of personal wireless service
A STATE OR LOCAL government or instrumentality thereof shall act on
any request for authorization place, contract, or modify personal wireless
service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is
duly filled with such government or instrumentality, taking into account
the nature and scope of such request.
ANY DECISION by a State or local government or instrumentality thereof
to deny a request to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service
facilities shall be in wiring and supported by substantial evidence
contained in a written record.
NO STATE OR LOCAL government or instrumentality thereof may
regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal
wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of
radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with
the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions.
ANY PERSON adversely affected by any final action or failure to act by
a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is
inconsistent with this subparagraph may, within 30 days after such action
or failure to act, commence an action in any court of competent
jurisdiction. The court shall hear and decide such action on an expedited
basis. Any person adversely affected by an act or any failure to act by
a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is
inconsistent with above may petition the Commission for relief.
DEFINITONS - For purpose of this paragraph..
a) PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICES means commercial mobile
services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless
exchange access services;
a) PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITIES means facilities for
the provision of personal wireless services; and
a) UNLICENSED WIRELESS SERVICE means the offering of
telecommunications services using duty authorized devices which do
not require individual licenses, but does not mean the provision of
direct-to-home satellite services.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 §253 Removal of
Barriers to Entry
1. IN GENERAL - No State or local statute or regulation, or other
State or local legal requirements, may prohibit or have the effect of
prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or
intrastate telecommunication service.
2. STATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY - Nothing in this section shall
affect the ability of a State to impose, on a competitively neutral
basis and consistent with section 254, requirements necessary to
preserve and advance universal service, protect the public safety
and welfare, ensure the continued quality of telecommunications
services, and safeguard the dghts of consumers.
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY - Nothing in
this section affects the authority of a State or local government to
manage the public rights-of-way or to require fair and reasonable
compensation from telecommunications providers, on a
competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, for use of
public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis, if the
compensation required is publicly disclosed by such government.
(This is the most critical issue facing the local government, the
creation of entry and use of public dghts of way on a neutral
nondiscriminatory basis, yet still protecting the local governments
public dghts of way.)
PREEMPTION - If after notice and an opportunity for public
comment, the Commission determined that a State or local
government has permitted or imposed any statute, regulation, or
legal requirement that violates subsection (a) or (b), the
Commission shall preempt the enforcement of such statute,
regulation, or legal requirements to the extent necessary to
correct such violation or inconsistency.
COMMERCIAL MOBILE SERVICE PROVIDERS - Nothing in this
section shall affect the application of section 332(c)(3) to
commercial mobile service providers.
RURAL MARKETS - It shall not be a violation of this section for a
State to require a telecommunications carder that seeks to
provide telephone exchange service or exchange access in a
service area served by a rural telephone company to meet the
requirements in section 214(e)(1)for designation as an eligible
telecommunications carrier for that area before being permitted
to provide such service. This subsection shall not apply-
a. To a service area served by a rural telephone company
that has obtained an exemption, suspension, or
modification of section 251(c)(4) that effectively prevents a
competitor from meeting the requirements of section
214(e)(I); and
b. To a provider of commercial mobile sergices.
Tower Siti~,g
Critical Issues for Local Government
Clustering vs. Separation
Co-location vs. Individual Facilities
Public Property vs. Private Property
Existing Structures vs. New Structures
Administrative Procedures
Revenue Requirements
Protections
· Engineering/Codes
· Inspections
· Signage
· Bonding/Insurance
Enforcement
PCS TOWER & ANTENNA TYPES
GUYED TOWER
LATTICE TOV~E R
MONO POLE
MONO POLE W/UNICELL
SIMULATED PINE TREE
LIGHT STANDARD
STEALTH ANTENNAE BASE OF PINE TREE STEALTH ANTENNA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY
ADDING A NEW CHAPTER, ENTITLED "WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AND ANTENNAS";
PROVIDING PURPOSE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
PROVIDING APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS;
PROVIDING PERMITTED USES ON PUBLIC PROPERTY;
PROVIDING PERMITTED USES ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY; PROVIDING SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE;
PROVIDING EQUIPMENT STORAGE; PROVIDING
REMOVAL OF ABANDONED ANTENNAS AND TOWERS;
PROVIDING NONCONFORMING USES; PROVIDING
PROTECTION FOR RESIDENTS; PROVIDING
PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States adopted the Telecommunications
Act of 1996, providing federal regulation of wireless telecommunications, a technology
of wireless voice, video and data communications systems rapidly became available,
requiring land use facilities that impact planning and zoning concerns in the City of
Aventura ("City") and throughout the United States; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that it is in the public interest to permit the siting of
wireless telecommunications towers and antennas within its municipal boundaries, and
WHEREAS, the City has received and expects to receive additional requests
from telecommunications service providers to site wireless telecommunications towers
and antennas within the municipal boundaries and is authorized by federal, state and
local law to regulate the siting of such telecommunications towers and antennas; and
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 2
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City to provide reasonable accommodation to,
and to promote and encourage fair and reasonable competition among
telecommunications service providers or providers of functionally equivalent services
on a neutral and non-discriminatory basis; and
WHEREAS, the purpose and intent of this Ordinance is to establish appropriate
locations in priority order of use, and, further, to develop the requirements and
standards to permit the siting of wireless telecommunications towers and antennas
within the municipal boundaries, with due consideration to the City's master plan,
zoning map, existing land uses and environmentally sensitive areas, including
hurricane preparedness areas, and
WHEREAS, through these regulated standards, it is the intent of the City to
protect and promote the health, safety and general welfare of its citizens and residents,
the traveling public and others in such manner that will minimize both the number of
telecommunications towers and antennas and the adverse visual impact and other
potential damage by these facilities by encouraging co-location and shared use of new
and pre-existing telecommunications facilities, through incentives, careful design,
engineering siting, landscape screening and innovative camouflaging techniques; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance 96-27 of the City of Aventura, the City
Council has been designated as the local planning agency for the City pursuant to
Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the regulations set forth in this
Ordinance and has determined that such regulations are consistent with the applicable
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 3
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of Miami-Dade County as made applicable to the
City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA THAT:
Section 1. Title. This Ordinance shall be entitled "WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AND ANTENNAS Ordinance," and shall be an
amendment to the City's Code of Ordinances.
Section 2. Purpose. The regulations and requirements establish general
guidelines for the siting of wireless telecommunications towers and antennas and are
intended to accomplish the following purposes:
(a) protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the residents of
the City;
(b) minimize residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of towers
and antennas;
(c) encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and to locate them, to the
extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal;
(d) minimize the total number of towers throughout the community by strongly
encouraging the co-location of antennas on new and pre-existing tower sites as a
primary option rather than construction of additional single-use telecommunications
towers;
(e) encourage users of telecommunications towers and antennas to configure them in a
way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the telecommunications towers and
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 4
antennas through careful design, siting, landscape screening, and innovative
camouflaging techniques;
(f) minimize potential damage to property from telecommunications towers and
telecommunications facilities by requiring such structures be soundly designed,
constructed, modified and maintained; and
(g) enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such
services to the community through an efficient and timely application process. In
furtherance of these goals, the City shall at all times give due consideration to the
City's master plan, comprehensive plan, zoning map, existing land uses, and
environmentally sensitive areas, including hurricane preparedness areas, in
approving sites for the location of telecommunications towers and antennas.
Section 3. Definitions. As used in this Ordinance, the following terms shall
have the meanings set forth below, and shall control over any other definitions
contained in the City's Code of Ordinances:
A. "Accessory Use" means a secondary use including a use that is related
to, incidental to, subordinate to and subservient to the main use of the property on
which an antenna and/or telecommunications tower is sited.
B. "Alternative Tower Structure" means a design mounting structure that
camouflages or conceals the presence of an antenna or telecommunications tower.
For example, man made trees, clock towers, bell steeples, light poles, utility poles and
similar alternative designs. An antenna mounted on a utility pole shall be subject to all
requirements as stated in this Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 5
C. "Antenna" means a transmitting and/or receiving device mounted on a
telecommunications tower, building or structure and used in telecommunications
[personal wireless] services that radiates or captures electromagnetic waves, digital
signals, analog signals, radio frequencies, wireless communications signals and other
communications signals including directional antennas such as panel and microwave
dish antennas, and omni-directional antennas such as whips, but excluding radar
antennas, amateur radio antennas and satellite earth stations.
D. "Backhaul Network" means the lines that connect a provider's
telecommunications towers/cell sites to one or more cellular telephone switching
offices, and/or long distance providers, or the public switched telephone network.
E. "Broadcasting Facility" means any telecommunications tower built
primarily for the purpose of broadcasting AM, FM or television signals.
F. "Essential Service" means those services provided by the City and other
governmental entities that directly relate to the health and safety of its residents,
including fire, police and rescue.
G. "Extraordinary Conditions" means subsequent to a hurricane, flood, or
other
natural hazard or subsequent to a defective finding on a previous inspection.
H. "FAA" means the Federal Aviation Administration.
I. "Fair Market Value" means the price at which a willing seller, or
telecommunications tower owner, and willing buyer, or service provider seeking to rent
space on owner's telecommunications tower, will trade.
J. "FCC" means the Federal Communications Commission.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 6
K. "Guyed Tower" means a telecommunications tower that is supported, in
whole or in part, by guy wires and ground anchors.
L, "Height" when referring to a telecommunications tower or other related
structure, means the vertical distance measured from the finished grade of the parcel to
the highest point on the telecommunications tower or other related structure, including
the base pad and any antenna.
M. "Microwave Dish Antenna" means a dish-like antenna used to link
telecommunications [personal wireless service] sites together by wireless transmission
and/or receipt of voice or data.
N. "Monopole Tower" means a telecommunications tower consisting of a
single pole or spire self-supported on a permanent foundation, constructed without guy
wires, ground anchors, or other supports.
O. "Lattice Tower" means a telecommunications tower that is constructed
to be self-supporting by lattice type supports and without the use of guy wires or other
supports.
P. "Pre-Existing Towers and Pre-Existing Antennas" means any
telecommunications tower or antenna for which a building permit or special use permit
has been properly issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, including
permitted telecommunications towers or antennas that have not yet been constructed
so long as such approval is current and not expired.
Q. "State of the Art" means existing technology where the level of facilities,
technical performance, capacity, equipment, components and service are equal to that
Ordinance No. 98-___
Page 7
developed and demonstrated to be more technologically advanced than generally
available for comparable service areas in South Florida.
R. "Stealth Facility" means any telecommunications facility which is
designed to blend into the surrounding environment. Examples of such facilities would
include, but not be limited to, architecturally screened roof mounted antennae, building-
mounted antennae painted to match the existing structure, antennae integrated into
architectural elements, and telecommunications towers designed to look like light
poles, power poles, or trees.
S. "Telecommunications Facility" means a facility that is used to provide
one or more telecommunications services, including, without limitation, radio
transmitting telecommunications towers, other supporting structures, and associated
facilities used to transmit telecommunications signals. An open video system is not a
telecommunications facility to the extent that it provides only video services; a cable
system is not a telecommunications facility to the extent that it provides only cable
service.
T. "Telecommunications Services" means the offering of
telecommunication (or the transmission, between or among points, specified by the
user of information of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the
information as sent and received), for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of
users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities
used. Personal wireless communication services shall not be considered as essential
services, public utilities or private utilities.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 8
U. "Telecommunications Tower" means any structure, and support
thereto, designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more
antennas intended for transmitting or receiving personal wireless services, telephone,
radio and similar communication purposes, including lattice, monopole and guyed
telecommunications towers. The term includes radio and television transmission
telecommunications towers, microwave telecommunications towers, common-carrier
telecommunications towers, cellular telephone telecommunications towers, alternative
telecommunications tower structures, among others.
V. "Whip Antenna" means a cylindrical antenna that transmits signals in
360 degrees.
Section 4. Applicability.
A. New Telecommunications Towers and Antennas. All new
telecommunications towers or antennas in the City shall be subject to these
regulations, except as provided in Sections 4(B) through (C), inclusive.
B. Broadcasting Facilities/Amateur Radio Station Operators/Receive Only
Antennas. This Ordinance shall not govern any telecommunications tower, or the
installation of any antenna, that is for the use of a broadcasting facility or is owned and
operated by a federally-licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively
for receive only antennas.
C. Preexisting Telecommunications Towers or Antennas. Pre-existing
telecommunications towers and pre-existing antennas shall not be required to meet the
requirements of this Ordinance, other than the requirements of Sections 5(J), 5(K) and
5(T).
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 9
Section ,5. General Requirements/Minimum Standards.
Applicants regulated by this Ordinance may request a pre-application
conference with the City. Such request shall be submitted with a non-refundable fee of
Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) to reimburse the City for the cost and fees incurred by
the conference. Every new telecommunications tower and antenna shall be subject to
the following minimum standards:
A. Lease Required. Any construction, installation or placement of a
telecommunications facility on any property owned, leased or otherwise controlled by
the City shall require a Lease Agreement executed by the City and the owner of the
facility.
The City may require, as a condition of entering into a Lease Agreement with a
telecommunications service provider, the dedication of space on the facility for public
health and safety purposes, as well as property improvement on the leased space. Any
dedications and improvements shall be negotiated prior to execution of the lease.
B. Principal or Accessory Use. Antennas and towers may be
considered either principal or accessory uses. A different existing use of an existing
structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or
telecommunications tower on such lot.
C. Lot Size. For purposes of determining whether the installation of a
telecommunications tower or antenna complies with the City zoning provisions,
including, but not limited to, setback requirements, lot coverage requirements, and
other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even though the
antenna or telecommunications tower may be located on leased parcels within such lot.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 10
D. Inventory of Existin,q Sites.
1. Each applicant shall review the City's inventory of existing
telecommunications towers, antennas, and approved sites. All requests for sites shall
include specific information about the proposed location, height, and design of the
proposed telecommunications tower. No new telecommunications tower shall be
permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the City
that no existing telecommunications tower, structure or state of the art technology that
does not require the use of new telecommunications towers or new structures can
accommodate, or be modified to accommodate, the applicant's proposed antenna.
Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing telecommunications tower,
structure or state of the art technology is suitable shall consist of any of the following:
a. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent
efforts for permission to install or collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities
on City owned telecommunications towers or usable antenna support located within a
one-half (1/2) mile radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site.
b. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent
efforts to install or collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on towers or
useable antenna support structures owned by other persons located within a one-half
(1/2) mile radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site.
c. An affidavit demonstrating that existing towers or structures
located within the geographic search area as determined by a radio frequency engineer
do not have the capacity to provide reasonable technical service consistent with the
applicant's technical system, including but not limited to, applicable FCC requirements.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 11
d. Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to
meet applicable FCC requirements.
e. Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural
strength to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment.
f. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause
electromagnetic/radio frequency interference with the antenna on the existing towers or
structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference
with the applicant's proposed antenna.
g. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the
owner in order to share an existing telecommunications tower or structure or to adapt
an existing telecommunications tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs
exceeding new telecommunications tower development are presumed to be
unreasonable.
h. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting
factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable.
i. The applicant demonstrates that state of the art technology
used in the wireless telecommunications business and within the scope of applicant's
FCC license, is unsuitable. Costs of state of the art technology that exceed new
telecommunications tower or antenna development shall not by itself be presumed to
render the technology unsuitable.
2. The City may share such information with other applicants applying for a
permitted use on private property and special exception use under this Ordinance or
other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the jurisdiction of the City
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 12
provided, however, that the City is not, by sharing such information, in any way
representing or warranting that such information is accurate or that such sites are
available or suitable.
E. En,qineerin,q Report.
1. All applicants for new telecommunications towers and pre-existing
telecommunications towers which are modified or reconstructed to accommodate
additional antennas shall submit a written report certified by a professional engineer
licensed to practice in the State of Florida. The report shall include:
a) The applicable standards of site plan review, drawn to scale,
including without limitation, a legal description of the parent tract and leased parcel, if
applicable, on-site and adjacent land uses, Master Plan classification of the site, a
visual impact analysis and photo digitalization of the telecommunications tower and all
attachments including associated buildings and equipment containers at the property
line, as well as at a distance of 250 feet and 500 feet from all properties within that
range, or at other points agreed upon in a pre-application conference.
b) If applicable, a narrative of why the proposed
telecommunications tower cannot comply with the requirements as stated in this
Section.
c)
d)
Type of telecommunications tower and specifics of design.
Current wind-loading capacity and a projection of wind-
loading capacity using different types of antennas as contemplated by the applicant.
No telecommunications tower shall be permitted to exceed its wind loading capacity as
provided for by the South Florida Building Code.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 13
e) A statement that the proposed telecommunications tower,
including reception and transmission functions, will not interfere with the visual and
customary transmission or reception of radio, television or similar services as well as
other wireless services enjoyed by adjacent residential and ~qon-residential properties.
f) A statement of compliance with all applicable Building
Codes, associated regulations and safety standards as provided in Section 5(M)
herein. For all towers attached to existing structures, the statement shall include
certification that the structure can support the load superimposed from the
telecommunications tower. Except where provided in Section 7(B), all towers shall
have the capacity to permit multiple users; at a minimum, monopole towers shall be
able to accommodate two (2) users and, at a minimum, self-support/lattice or guyed
towers shall be able to accommodate three (3) users.
g) Any additional information deemed by the City to be
necessary to assess compliance with this Ordinance.
F. Co-Location. Pursuant to the intent of this Ordinance, co-location of
telecommunication antennas by more than one provider on existing
telecommunications towers shall take precedence over the construction of new
telecommunication towers. Accordingly, in addition to submitting the information
required in subsection D of this section, each application shall include a written report
certified by a professional engineer licensed to practice in the State of Florida, stating:
1) the geographical service area requirements; 2) mechanical or electrical
incompatibility; 3) any restrictions or limitations of the Federal Communications
Commission that would preclude the shared use of the telecommunications tower; and
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 14
4) any additional information required by the City. If the City does not accept the full
evaluation as provided as accurate, or if the City disagrees with any part of the
evaluation, the time in which an application is processed pursuant to this Ordinance
shall be tolled pending further evaluation.
G. Co-Location Incentive. Pursuant to the intent of this Ordinance, the City
shall provide the following incentive to service providers:
1. The review of all applications submitted by providers seeking to co-
locate on a pre-existing telecommunications tower or to rent space on a proposed new
telecommunications tower, shall be completed by the City no more than thirty (30) days
following the filing of a completed application as provided in this Ordinance.
H. Aesthetics. Towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements:
1. Towers shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, subject to
any applicable standards of the FAA, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce visual
obtrusiveness.
2. At a telecommunications tower site, the design of the buildings and
related associated ancillary structures shall, to the extent possible, use materials,
colors, textures, screening, and landscaping that will blend them into the natural setting
and surrounding buildings to minimize the visual impact.
3. All telecommunications tower sites must comply with any
landscaping requirements of the City Code and all other applicable aesthetic and safety
requirements of the City, and the City may require landscaping in excess of those
requirements in order to enhance compatibility with adjacent residential and non-
residential land uses. All landscaping shall be properly maintained to ensure good
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 15
health and viability at the owners expense. Telecommunications tower facilities shall
be landscaped with a buffer of plant materials that effectively screens the view of the
telecommunications tower compound consisting of the telecommunications tower and
antennas, backhaul network and any structure or equipment cabinet, from property
used for residences. The standard buffer shall consist of a landscaped strip at least
five (5) feet wide outside the perimeter of the compound. In locations where the visual
impact of the telecommunications tower would be minimal, the landscaping requirement
may be reduced or waived by the City Manager or his designee. Existing mature tree
growth and natural land forms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent
possible. In some cases, as determined by the City Manager or his designee, such as
towers sited on large, wooded lots, natural growth around the property perimeter may
be sufficient buffer.
4. If an antenna is installed on a structure other than a
telecommunications tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical
equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the
color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as
visually unobtrusive as possible.
I. Lighting. No signals, artificial lights, or illumination shall be permitted on
any antenna or telecommunications tower unless required by the FAA or other
applicable authority. If lighting is required, the lighting alternatives and design chosen
must cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views.
J. Setbacks. Towers must be set back a minimum distance of 110% of the
height of the telecommunications tower from the property line.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 16
K. Separation. Any telecommunications tower shall be separated from any
other telecommunications tower by a distance of no less than one (1) mile as measured
by a straight line between the bases of the towers.
L. Hei,qht. Telecommunications towers shall not be constructed at any
heights in excess of those provided belo~
(1) for a single user, up to ninety (90) feet in height;
(2) for two users, up to one hundred twenty (120) feet in height;
(3) for three or more users, up to one hundred fifty (150) feet in height;
(4) for the purpose of determining compliance with all requirements of
this section, measurement of telecommunications tower height shall include the
telecommunications tower structure itself, the base pad, and any other
telecommunications facilities attached thereto which extend more than twenty (20) feet
over the top of the telecommunications tower structure itself. Telecommunications
tower height shall be measured from grade.
M. Local, State or Federal Requirements. The construction, operation and
repair of telecommunications facilities are subject to the regulatory supervision of the
City, and shall be performed in compliance with all laws, ordinances and practices
affecting such system including, but not limited to, zoning codes, building codes, and
safety codes, and as provided in Section 5 (J) and (K). The construction, operation
and repair shall be performed in a manner consistent with applicable industry
standards, including the Electronic Industries Association. All telecommunication
towers and antennas must meet or exceed current standards and regulations of the
FAA, the FCC, including emissions standards, and any other agency of the local, state
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 17
or federal government with the authority to regulate towers and antennas prior to
issuance of a building permit by the City. If such applicable standards and regulations
require retroactive application, then the owners of the telecommunications towers and
antennas governed by this Ordinance shall bring such towers and antennas into
compliance with such revised standards and regulations within six (6) months of the
effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a different compliance
schedule is mandated by the controlling state or federal agency. Failure to bring
towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations shall
constitute grounds for the removal of the telecommunications tower or antenna at the
Building Codes; Safety Standards.
1. To ensure the structural integrity of telecommunications towers
installed, the owner shall construct and maintain the telecommunications tower in
compliance with the South Florida Building Code, and all other applicable codes and
standards, as amended from time to time. A statement shall be submitted to the City by
a professional engineer certifying compliance with this subsection upon completion of
construction and/or subsequent modification. Where a preexisting structure, including
light and power poles, is requested as a stealth facility, the facility, and all modifications
thereof, shall comply with all requirements as provided in this Ordinance. Following the
issuance of a building permit, the City shall require the owner to provide a professional
analysis of a soil sample from the base of the telecommunications tower site to assure
integrity of the foundation.
owner's expense.
N.
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 18
2. The City reserves the right to conduct periodic inspection of
telecommunications towers to ensure structural and electrical integrity. If, upon
inspection, the City concludes that a telecommunications tower fails to comply with
such codes and standards and constitutes a danger to persons or property, then upon
notice being provided to the owner of the telecommunications tower, the owner shall
have no more than thirty (30) days to bring such telecommunications tower into
compliance with such standards. Failure to bring such telecommunications tower into
compliance within thirty (30) days shall constitute grounds for the removal of the
telecommunications tower or antenna at the owner's expense.
O. Warnin,q Signs. Notwithstanding any contrary provisions of the City's
Code, the following shall be utilized in connection with any telecommunications tower
or antenna site, as applicable.
1. If high voltage is necessary for the operation of the
telecommunications tower or any accessory structures, "HIGH VOLTAGE--DANGER"
warning signs shall be permanently attached to the fence or wall surrounding the
structure and spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart.
2. "NO TRESPASSING" warning signs shall be permanently attached
to the fence or wall and spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart.
3. The height of the lettering of the warning signs shall be at least
twelve (12) inches in height. The warning signs shall be installed at least five (5) feet
above the finished grade.
4. The warning signs may be attached to free standing poles if the
content of the signs may be obstructed by landscaping.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 19
P. Security Fencing. Telecommunications towers and the accessory
building(s) and/or equipment associated therewith shall be enclosed by security fencing
not less than six feet in height and shall also be equipped with an appropriate anti-
climbing device; provided however, that the City may waive such requirements.
Q. Measurement. For purposes of measurement, telecommunications tower
setbacks and separation distances shall be calculated and applied to facilities located
in the City irrespective of municipal and county jurisdictional boundaries.
R. Not Essential Services. Telecommunications towers and antennas shall
be regulated and permitted pursuant to this Ordinance and shall not be regulated or
permitted as essential services, public utilities, or private utilities.
S. Franchises/Licenses. Owners and/or operators of towers or antennas
shall certify that all franchises/licenses required by law for the construction and/or
operation of a wireless communication system in the City have been obtained and shall
file a copy of all required franchises/licenses with the City.
T. Public Notice. For purposes of this Chapter and notwithstanding any
other requirements with regard to public notice in the City's Code, any request for a
special exception use on private property shall require a public hearing that shall be
advertised at least seven (7) days before the public hearing in a newspaper of general
circulation and readership in the municipality. A courtesy notice shall also be mailed to
all affected property owners within 300 feet of the subject property prior to the public
hearing. The property shall also be posted with a sign in accordance with the City's
zoning provisions. If approved, the owner of any telecommunications tower approved
for shared use shall provide notice of the location of the telecommunications tower and
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 20
the tower's load capacity to all other providers regulated by this Ordinance. All costs
related to the public notice shall be paid by the applicant.
U. Signs. No signs, including commercial advertising, logo, political signs,
flyers, flags, or banners, whether or not posted temporarily, shall be allowed on any
part of an antenna or telecommunications tower.
V. Buildin.qs and Support Equipment. Buildings and support equipment
associated with antennas or towers shall comply with the requirements of Section 9
below.
W. Inspections; Reports; Fees.
1. Telecommunications tower owners shall submit a report to the City
certifying structural and electrical integrity every two years. The report shall be
accompanied by a non-refundable fee of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) to reimburse
the City for the cost of review.
2. The City may conduct periodic inspection of telecommunications
towers, at the owner's expense, to ensure structural and electrical integrity and
compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. The owner of the
telecommunications tower may be required by the City to have more frequent
inspections should there be an emergency, extraordinary conditions or other reason to
believe that the structural and electrical integrity of the telecommunications tower is
jeopardized. There shall be a maximum of one inspection per year unless emergency
or extraordinary conditions warrant.
Section 6. Permitted Uses on Public Property.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 21
A. General. The uses listed in this Section apply specifically to all wireless
telecommunications antennas and towers located on property owned, leased, or
otherwise controlled as specified in Section 5(A) by the City, provided a lease
agreement pursuant to Section 5(A) has been approved by the City. The City reserves
the right to modify or waive the requirements for use on public property, but shall not be
required to provide access to City property. A determination whether to grant or deny a
waiver request shall be made in accordance with standards to be adopted by
administrative regulation of the City
B. Uses. All applicants for use in this Section shall first submit a letter of
intent and all other information as stated in Section 5 herein to the City Manager's
office, which shall be reviewed within thirty (30) days from the submission of a
completed application. The City Manager is authorized to execute lease agreements
and waive requirements as provided in Section 5 on behalf of the City. The uses
permitted under this Section are as follows:
1. Rooftop Mounted Telecommunications Towers and Antennas.
a. The height, including support structures, shall not extend
more than thirty (30) feet above the average height of the roof line;
b. Screening shall be required to minimize the visual impact
upon adjacent properties;
C.
No more than one (1) telecommunications tower shall be
located on a single lot or single building site;
d. Rooftop telecommunications towers shall not adversely
affect adjacent properties.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 22
2. Telecommunications towers and/or antennas constructed pursuant
to this Section shall be exempt from the minimum distances from residential zoning
districts as provided in Section 8 below.
3. No lease granted under this Section shall convey any exclusive
right, privilege, permit or franchise to occupy or use the public lands of the city for
delivery of telecommunications services or any other purpose.
4. No lease granted under this Section shall convey any right, title or
interest in the public lands other than a leasehold interest, but shall be deemed only to
allow the use of the public lands for the limited purposes and term stated in the lease.
No lease shall be construed as a conveyance of a title interest in the property.
Section 7. Permitted Uses on Private Property.
A. General. The uses listed in this Section apply to all wireless
telecommunications antennas and telecommunications towers located on private
property. The following provisions shall govern the issuance of approval by the City
pursuant to this Section:
1. Each applicant shall apply to the City for a permit providing the
information as set forth in Sections 5 and 8 of this Ordinance, and a nonrefundable fee
of Fifteen Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00) to reimburse the City for the costs of reviewing
the application.
2. The City shall review the application and determine if the proposed
use complies with applicable Sections of this Ordinance.
3. The City shall respond to each such application within the time
dictated by the nature and scope of the individual request, subject to the generally
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 23
applicable time frames and pursuant to the intent of Section 704 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, but in no event more than thirty (30) days for
administrative zoning decisions. Building permit applications shall be processed within
a reasonable period of time.
4. In connection with any such approval, the City may, to encourage
the use of monopoles towers, allow the reconstruction of an existing
telecommunications tower to monopole construction. The reconstruction shall, at all
times, comply with the standards and requirements of this Ordinance.
5. If an application pursuant to this Section is denied, the applicant
shall file an application for a special exception use permit pursuant to Section 8.
B. Uses. The following uses may be approved by the City Manager or his
designee after conducting an administrative review:
1. Antennas on Pre-Existing Structures.
a. Any antenna which is not attached to a pre-existing
telecommunications tower may be approved by the City as an accessory use to any
commercial, industrial, professional, institutional, or multi-family structure of eight or
more dwelling units, provided:
i. The antenna does not extend more than thirty (30)
feet above the highest point of the structure;
ii. The antenna complies with all applicable FCC and
FAA regulations and all applicable building codes; and
iii. To minimize adverse visual impacts, antennas shall
be selected based upon the following priority; (1) any stealthed antenna; (2) panel; (3)
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 24
whip; and (4) dish. The applicant shall demonstrate, in a manner acceptable to the
City, why each choice cannot be used for a particular application if that choice is not
the top priority.
2. Antennas on Pre-Existing Telecommunications Towers.
a) An antenna which is attached to a pre-existing
telecommunications tower may be approved by the City provided such co-location is
accomplished in a manner consistent with the following:
i. A telecommunications tower which is modified or
reconstructed to accommodate the co-location of an additional antenna shall be of the
same telecommunications tower type as the existing telecommunications tower, unless
the City allows reconstruction as a monopole pursuant to this Section.
ii. Height
(a) An existing telecommunications tower may be
modified or rebuilt to a taller height, to accommodate the co-location of an additional
antenna(s), only if the modification or reconstruction is in full compliance with this
Ordinance. This provision shall include utility and powerpoles.
(b) The additional height referred to in subsection
(ii)(a) above shall not require an additional distance separation as set forth in Section
8. The tower's premodification height shall be used to calculate such distance
separations.
iii. Onsite location
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 25
(a) A telecommunications tower which is being
rebuilt to accommodate the co-location of an additional antenna may be moved onsite
within fifty (50) feet of its existing location.
(b) After the telecommunications tower is rebuilt to
accommodate co-location, only one telecommunications tower may remain on the site.
(c) A relocated onsite telecommunications tower
shall continue to be measured from the original telecommunications tower location for
purposes of calculating separation distances between towers pursuant to Sections 5(K)
and 8(C)(2). The relocation of a telecommunications tower shall in no way be deemed
to cause a violation of Sections 5(K) and 8(C)(2).
iv. Microwave dish antennas located less than sixty-five
(65) feet above the ground may not exceed six (6) feet in diameter. Microwave dish
antennas located sixty-five (65) feet and higher above the ground may not exceed eight
(8) feet in diameter. Ground-mounted dish antennas must be located or screened so
as not to be visible from abutting public streets.
3. Alternative Telecommunications Tower Structure. Locating an alternative
telecommunications tower structure in an IU-1, IU-2 and BU-2 zoning district that is in
conformity with the goals set forth in Section 2 of this Ordinance.
4. Cable Microcell Network. Installing a cable microcell network through the
use of multiple Iow-powered transmitters/receivers attached to existing wireline
systems, such as conventional cable or telephone wires, or similar technology that
does not require the use of towers.
Section 8. Special Exception Use.
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 26
A. General. The provisions listed in this Section apply only where an
application for the construction of a telecommunications tower or the placement of an
antenna in a zoning district does not meet the criteria for approval as provided in
Sections 5, 6 or 7 of this Ordinance. An applicant for a special exception use permit
shall submit information described in Section 5 and the City's Code of Ordinances and
any other reasonable information the City may require. The following provisions shall
govern the issuance for Special Exception Use permits:
1. Compliance with the procedures and requirements of Special
Exception Uses as stated in the City's Code of Ordinances, including the zoning
provisions, and as required in this Section.
2. In granting a permit, the City may impose conditions to the extent
the City concludes such conditions are necessary to minimize any adverse effect of the
proposed telecommunications tower or antenna on adjoining properties or to satisfy the
special exception criteria.
3. Any information of an engineering nature that the applicant
submits, whether civil, mechanical, or electrical, shall be certified by a licensed
professional engineer.
4. A non-refundable fee of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) to
reimburse the City for the costs of reviewing the application, in addition to all other
applicable fees required by the City.
B. Setbacks. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of the City's zoning
regulations, the following setback requirements shall apply to all telecommunications
towers for which a permit under this Section is required:
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 27
1. Towers must be set back a minimum distance of 110% of the
height of the telecommunications tower from the property line.
2. The base of any guys and accessory buildings must satisfy the
minimum zoning district setback requirements with reference to special exception use,
but not to include reference to rights-of-way controlled by the City.
C. Separation. The following separation requirements shall apply to all
telecommunications towers and antennas for which a special exception use permit is
required:
1.
Separation from off-site uses/designated areas.
a. telecommunications tower separation shall be measured
from the base of the telecommunications tower to the lot line of the off-site uses and/or
designated areas as specified in Table 1, except as otherwise provided in Table 1.
b. Separation requirements for towers shall comply with the
minimum standards established in Table 1.
2. The separation distance from other towers described in the
inventory of existing sites submitted pursuant to Section 5(D) shall be shown on an
updated site plan or map. The applicant shall also identify the type of construction of
the existing telecommunications tower(s) and the owner/operator of the existing
telecommunications tower(s), if known.
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 28
Table 1:
Off-site Use/Designated Area Separation Distance
Single-family or duplex residential unitsI 500 feet or 300% height of
lelecommunications tower whichever is
reater
~acant single-family or duplex residentially 500 feet or 300% height of
,.oned land [elecommunications tower~ whichever is
reater
--xisting multi-family residential units 100 feet or 100% height of
'eater than duplex units :elecommunications tower whichever is
teeter
Non-residentially zoned lands or non- ~lone; only setbacks apply
residential uses
~lncludes modular homes and mobile homes used for living purposes.
2Separation measured from base of telecommunications tower to closest building
setback line.
towers shall be
Separation distances between telecommunications towers.
(a) Separation distances between telecommunications
applicable for and measured between the proposed
telecommunications tower and pre-existing towers. The separation distances shall be
measured by drawing or following a straight line between the base of the pre-existing
telecommunications tower and the proposed base, pursuant to a site plan, of the
proposed telecommunications tower. The separation distance shall be a minimum of
one (1) mile, regardless of type of towers.
D. Factors Considered in Granting Special Exception Permits for Towers. In
addition to any standards for consideration of permit applications pursuant to the City's
Code of Ordinances, including the zoning regulations, the City shall consider the
following factors in determining whether to issue a permit:
Ordinance No. 98-
Page 29
a. Availability of suitable existing telecommunications towers,
other structures, or state of the art technologies not requiring the use of towers or
structures, as discussed in Section 8(B)(2) of this Ordinance.
b. Height of the proposed telecommunications tower;
c. The setback and separation distances between the
proposed telecommunications tower and the nearest residential units or residentially
zoned properties.
d. Proximity of the telecommunications tower to residential
structures and residential district boundaries;
e. Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties;
f. Surrounding topography;
g. Surrounding tree coverage and foliage;
h. Design of the telecommunications tower, with particular
reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual
obtrusiveness;
i. Proposed ingress and egress.
Section 9. Buildin,qs or Other Equipment Facilities.
The following standards shall apply:
A. Antennas Mounted on Structures or Rooftops. The equipment
cabinet or structure used in association with antennas shall comply with all of the
following:
1.
square feet of gross floor area or be more than 80 inches in height.
The cabinet or structure shall not contain more than 300
In addition, for
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 30
buildings and structures which are less than four (4) stories in height, the related
unmanned equipment structure, if over 100 square feet of gross floor area or 3 feet in
height, shall be located on the ground and shall not be located on the roof of the
structure unless the building or structure is completely screened from sight pursuant to
the requirements of Section 5(H).
2. If the equipment structure is located on the roof of a
building, the area of the equipment structure and other equipment and structures shall
not occupy more than five (5) percent of the roof area.
3. Equipment buildings or cabinets shall comply with all
applicable zoning and building c/odes, including minimum setback requirements, as
provided in Section 8.
4. Mobile or immobile equipment not used in direct support of a
telecommunications tower facility shall not be stored or parked on the site of the
telecommunication tower, unless repairs to the telecommunications tower are being
made.
all times.
B.
5. All buildings and equipment cabinets shall be unoccupied at
Antennas Not Located on Telecommunications Tower; Mounted on Utility
Poles or Light Poles. The equipment cabinet or structure used in association with
antennas shall be located in accordance with the following:
1. In residential districts, the equipment cabinet or structure may be
located:
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 31
a. In a side yard setback provided the cabinet or structure is no
greater than 3 feet in height or 16 square feet of gross floor area and the
cabinet/structure is located a minimum of 5 feet from all lot lines. The cabinet/structure
shall be screened by an evergreen hedge with an ultimate height of at least 42-48
inches and a planted height of at least 36 inches.
b. In a rear yard setback, provided the cabinet or structure is
no greater than 5 feet in height or 16 square feet in gross floor area. The
cabinet/structure shall be screened by an evergreen hedge with an ultimate height of
72 inches and a planted height of at least 36 inches.
2. In commercial or industrial districts the equipment cabinet or
structure shall be no greater than 5 feet in height or 25 square feet in gross floor area.
The structure or cabinet shall be screened by an evergreen hedge with an ultimate
height of 72 inches and a planted height of at least 36 inches. In all other instances,
structures or cabinets shall be screened from view of all residential properties which
abut or are directly across the street from the structure or cabinet by a solid masonry
fence 6 feet in height or an evergreen hedge with an ultimate height of six (6) feet and
a planted height of at least 36 inches.
C. Antennas Located on Towers. The related unmanned equipment
structure shall not contain more than 1500 square feet of gross floor area or be more
than 8 feet in height, and shall be located in accordance with the minimum yard
requirements of the zoning district in which located.
Section 10. Removal of Abandoned Antennas and Towers. Any antenna
or telecommunications tower that is not operated for a continuous period of twelve (12)
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 32
months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such antenna or
telecommunications tower shall remove the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of
notice from the City notifying the owner of such abandonment. Failure to remove an
abandoned antenna or telecommunications tower within the ninety (90) days shall be
grounds for the City to remove the telecommunications tower or antenna at the owner's
expense. If there are two or more users of a single telecommunications tower, then this
provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the telecommunications
tower.
Section
Nonconforminq Uses.
A. Not Expansion of Nonconforming Use. Telecommunications towers that
are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of
this Ordinance shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use
or structure.
B. Preexisting Telecommunications Towers. Lawful pre-existing
telecommunications towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently
exist. Routine maintenance (including replacement with a new telecommunications
tower of like construction and height) shall be permitted on such preexisting towers.
New construction other than routine maintenance on a preexisting telecommunications
tower shall comply with the requirements of this Ordinance.
C. Rebuildin.q Damaged or Destroyed Nonconformin,q Towers or Antennas.
Notwithstanding Section 10, bona fide nonconforming telecommunications towers or
antennas that are damaged or destroyed may be rebuilt without having to first obtain
administrative approval or a permit and without having to meet the separation
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 33
requirements specified in Sections 8(B) and 8(C). The type, height, and location of the
telecommunications tower onsite shall be of the same type and intensity as the original
facility approval. Building permits to rebuild the facility shall comply with the then
applicable building codes and shall be obtained within 180 days from the date the
facility is damaged or destroyed. If no permit is obtained or if the permit expires, the
telecommunications tower or antenna shall be deemed abandoned as specified in
Section 10.
Section '12.
A.
Protection of the City and Residents.
Indemnification.
1. The City shall not enter into any lease agreement until and unless
the City obtains an adequate indemnity from such provider. The indemnity must at
least:
a. Release the City from and against any and all liability and
responsibility in or arising out of the construction, operation or repair of the
telecommunications facility. Each telecommunications facility operator must further
agree not to sue or seek any money or damages from the City in connection with the
above mentioned matters;
b. Indemnify and hold harmless the City, its Council, elected
and appointed officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all
claims, demands, or causes of action of whatsoever kind or nature, and the resulting
losses, costs, expenses, reasonable attorneys' fees, liabilities, damages, orders,
judgments, or decrees, sustained by the City or any third party arising out of, or by
Ordinance No. 98-._
Page 34
reason of, or resulting from or of each telecommunications facility operator, or its
agents, employees, or servants negligent acts, errors, or omissions.
c. Provide that the covenants and representations relating to
the indemnification provision shall survive the term of any agreement and continue in
full force and effect as to the party's responsibility to indemnify.
B. Insurance.
1. The City may not enter into any lease agreement until and unless
the City obtains assurance that such operator (and those acting on its behalf) have
adequate insurance. At a minimum, the following requirements must be satisfied:
a. A telecommunications facility operator shall not commence
construction or operation of the facility without obtaining all insurance required under
this section and approval of such insurance by the City Manager, nor shall a
telecommunications facility operator allow any contractor or subcontractor to
commence work on its contract or sub-contract until all similar such insurance required
of the same has been obtained and approved. The required insurance must be
obtained and maintained for the entire period the telecommunications facility is in
existence. If the operator, its contractors or subcontractors do not have the required
insurance, the City may order such entities to stop operations until the insurance is
obtained and approved.
b.
Certificates of insurance, reflecting evidence of the required
insurance, shall be filed with the City Manager. For entities that are entering the
market, the certificates shall be filed prior to the commencement of construction and
once a year thereafter, and as provided below in the event of a lapse in coverage.
Ordinance No. 98-___
Page 35
c. These certificates shall contain a provision that coverages
afforded under these policies will not be canceled until at least thirty days (30) prior
written notice has been given to the City. Policies shall be issued by companies
authorized to do business under the laws of the State of Florida.
d. In the event that the insurance certificate provided indicates
that the insurance shall terminate or lapse during the period of the lease agreement
with the City, then in that event, the telecommunications facility operator shall furnish,
at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the date of such insurance, a renewed
certificate of insurance as proof that equal and like coverage for the balance of the
period has been obtained.
C. Comprehensive General Liability.
1. A telecommunications facility operator and its contractors or
subcontractors engaged in work on the operator's behalf, shall maintain minimum
insurance to cover liability bodily injury (including death) and property damage.
Exposures to be covered are: premises, operations, and those certain contracts
relating to the construction, installation or maintenance of the telecommunications
facility. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis and shall be included, as
applicable, in the lease agreement between the City and the telecommunications
facility operator.
Section '13. Security Fund. Every telecommunications service provider
whether on public or private property shall establish a cash security fund, or provide
the City with an irrevocable letter of credit in the same amount, to secure the payment
of removing an antenna or telecommunications tower that has been determined to be
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 36
abandoned, in the event the owner is not in compliance with Section 10. The amount
to be provided for each telecommunications tower shall be Twenty Five Thousand
Dollars ($25,000); the amount for each antenna array shall be Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000).
In the alternative, at the City's discretion, an operator may, in lieu of a cash
security fund or letter of credit, file and maintain with the City a bond with an acceptable
surety in the amount of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). The operator and the
surety shall be jointly and severally liable under the terms of the bond. In the
alternative, at the City's discretion, an operator may, in lieu of the cash security fund,
letter of credit or bond, file with the City a corporate guarantee in a form acceptable to
the City to be used as a security fund.
Section 14. Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation who knowingly
breaches any provision of this Ordinance shall upon receipt of written notice from the
City be given a time schedule to cure the violation. Failure to commence to cure within
thirty (30) days and to complete cure, to the City's satisfaction, within sixty (60) days, or
such longer time as the City may specify, shall result in revocation of any permit or
license and the City shall seek any remedy or damages to the full extent of the law.
This shall not preclude other penalties allowed by law.
Section 15. Severabilit¥. The various parts, sections and clauses of this
Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. If any part, sentence, paragraph,
section or clause is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the remainder of the Ordinance shall not be affected thereby. In the event
of a subsequent change in applicable law, so the provision which had been held invalid
Ordinance No. 98-__
Page 37
is no longer invalid the provision shall thereupon return to full force and effect without
fudher action by the City and shall thereafter be binding under this Ordinance.
Section 16. Inclusion in the Code. It is the intention of the City Council, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and made a par[ of the
Code of Aventura, Florida; that the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or
relettered to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance" shall be changed to
"Section" or other appropriate word.
Section 17. Provisions of This Section to Control. Notwithstanding any
contrary provisions of the City's Code of Ordinances, including the City's zoning
regulations, the provisions of this new Ordinance shall control.
Section 18. Repealer. Any ordinances or parts thereof in conflict with the
provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 19. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately
upon passage on second reading.
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember ,
who moved its adoption on first reading. This motion was seconded by Councilmember
, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Perlow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
Ordinance No. 98-~
Page 38
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember , who
moved its adoption on second reading. This motion was seconded by Councilmember
, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Pedow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
PASSED AND ADOPTED on first reading this 3rd day of February, 1998
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this 17m day of February, 1998.
ATTEST
ARTHURI. SNYDER, MAYOR
TERESA M. SMITH, CMC
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
CITY A'I-FORNEY
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
_~,*
Eric M. Soroka, Citty//~l.~ ;r
January 29, 1998
Ordinance Establishing
Residents for Utilization of Aventura Founders Park
R isidency Policy to Provide Priority to City
Reading February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the enclosed amendment to the subject
Ordinance on second reading in order to address the guest pass regulations.
BACKGROUND
At the January 20, 1998 meeting, the Council was concerned that the subject
Ordinance did not provide for an adequate definition of a family member of a resident in
order to implement the guest pass requirements.
The City Attorney has recommended the following language be used to define family
members:
The term "family members" as used herein means any of the following relations:
father, mother, spouse, children, brother, sister, grandparents or in-laws of such
enumerated relations; residency and family status shall be determined by driver's
license, other formal identification or other reliable means authorized by the City
Manager.
However, since the meeting, Councilmember Jeffrey Perlow, discussed a concept with
me that would simplify the process. When a resident is issued their pass for the park,
they automatically receive guest passes. I concur with this simplified approach and
would recommend that initially ten (10) guest passes be issued to each resident. The
procedure should be adopted administratively so that it can be revised, if it is
necessary, without amending an Ordinance.
Based on the foregoing, the attached Ordinance removes the language regarding the
guest pass and provides that the City Manager shall establish administration
procedures to implement the regulations regarding the use of the various types of
passes.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
EMS/aca
Attachment
CC0477-98
CITY OF AVENTURA 10 2 1
AND PROCEDURES MANUAL
Date January 29,
Issued: 1998
CHAPTER: PARKS AND RECREATION APPROVED:
City Manaqer
SUBJECT: GUEST USAGE POLICY FOR AVENTURA FOUNDERS PARK
PURPOSE
To provide procedures to avail the guests of Aventura residents temporary usage of Aventura
Founders Park.
POLICY & PROCEDURES
The following procedures are to be followed to ensure guest usage of City Parks.
1. All guests using the Aventura Founders Park shall be required to obtain and utilize
a guest pass or be accompanied by a resident at all times.
2. Resident households shall be issued ten (10) daily guest passes when registering
for a residency card.
3. Replacement guest passes shall be issued by the City Manager or his designee
based upon administrative review to monitor usage and prevent misuse.
4. Guests shall be permitted to use Aventura Founders Park, amenities, and facilities
on a space available basis.
5. Non accompanied guests or guests who do not have a City issued pass shall be
classified as Non-Residents and shall be subject to all non resident fees.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING A
RESIDENCY POLICY FOR UTILIZATION OF AVENTURA
FOUNDERS PARKS TO PROVIDE PRIORITY TO CITY
RESIDENTS; ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR
GUESTS AND NON RESIDENTS; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Council to insure that City residents are
provided priority in the use and enjoyment of Aventura Founders Park; and
WHEREAS, this Council finds it to be in the best interests of the residents of the
City of Aventura to establish a fee schedule for use of Aventura Founders Park by
guests and non-residents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The following residency policy for use of Aventura Founders Park
is hereby established:
A. All guests using the park shall be required to obtain and utilize a guest
pass and or be accompanied by a resident at all times. G'.'o=t~ pc~$~ sh=!l b~
Ad
Ordinance No.
Page 2
A. The City Mana,qer shall establish administrative procedures to implement
re,qulations re,qardin.q the use of the various types of passes.
B. Non-residents shall be permitted to use the park, amenities and facilities
on a space-available basis.
The usage fees for non-residents is as follows:
City.
Section 2.
Daily Pass:
Monthly Pass:
Annual Pass:
Adults $5.00
Children (17 and under) $3.00
Adults $100.00
Children (17 and under) $ 60.00
Adults $1,000.00
Children (17 and under) $ 500.00
Non-resident fees shall not apply to all permitted activities for the purpose
of City-sponsored and approved special events, leagues and activities.
Non-resident fees shall be in addition to any user fees established by the
Usage fees for guests and non-residents may be amended from
time to time by the City Council after public hearing.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be
severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for any
reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining sections, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance but they shall
Ordinance No.
Page 3
remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand
notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 4. Inclusion In the Code. It is the intention of the City Council, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and made a part of the
City of Aventura Code; that the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered
to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance" shall be changed to "Section"
or other appropriate word.
.Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately after adoption
on second reading.
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Vice Mayor Beskin, who moved its
adoption on first reading. This motion was seconded by Councilmember Holzberg, and
upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger yes
Councilmember Ken Cohen yes
Councilmember Harry Holzberg yes
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Pedow yes
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert yes
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin yes
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder yes
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember ,
who moved its adoption on second reading. This motion was seconded by
Councilmember , and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Pedow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
Ordinance No.
Page 4 --"
PASSED AND ADOPTED on first reading this 20th day of January, 1998.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this 3rd day of February, 1998.
ATTEST:
Arthur I. Snyder, Mayor
Teresa M. Smith, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
City Attorney
CITY OF AVENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
BY:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Eric M. Soroka,
Teresa M. Smith, CMC, ~it
January 16, 1998
Canvassing Board
1= Reading January 20, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 7-G
2nd Reading February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item ¢/-/J'
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council enact the attached Ordinance establishing a
Canvassing Board and procedures for the canvassing of election returns and
certificates of election.
Backqround
The primary responsibilities of the Canvassing Board are to canvass absentee ballots
and certify election results. Based upon discussions with the Dade County Supervisor
of Elections and the practice of other municipalities in Dade County, it is recommended
that the City Clerk serve as the City's Canvassing Board, with the assistance of the
County Supervisor of Elections.
This Ordinance would establish that Board and provide that a certification of election
results shall be presented to the City Council at the first meeting of the City Council
following the election and the results shall be adopted by Resolution.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
tms
attachment
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA,
ADOPTING SECTION 1 OF CHAPTER 26, "ELECTIONS,"
PROVIDING THAT THE CITY CLERK SHALL CANVASS
ELECTION RETURNS WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE
DADE COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS;
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 8.03 of the City Charter incorporates all code provisions,
ordinances and resolutions contained in the Code of Metropolitan Dade County (the
"County Code"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council wants to repeal any conflicting provisions of the
County Code pertaining to canvassing of elections and establish its own procedure for
the canvassing of election returns and certificates of election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The Code of the City of Aventura, Florida is hereby amended by
adding a new section to Chapter 26, "Elections" which shall read as follows:
Sec 1. Canvassin.q of Election Returns; Certificates of Election.
All municipal elections shall be canvassed by the City Clerk with the
assistance of the Dade County Supervisor of Elections. The City Clerk
shall present a certification of election results to the City Council at the
first meeting of the City Council following the election, which shall be
adopted by Resolution. Canvassing of election returns shall be conducted
under the applicable provisions of the Florida Statutes.
Ordinance No.
Page 2
Section 2. Repeal of Conflictin,q Provisions. Any conflicting provisions,
ordinances or resolutions of the County Code, as made applicable to the City by
Section 8.03 of the City Charter, are hereby repealed in their entirety.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be
severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for any
reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining sections, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance but they shall
remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand
notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 4. Inclusion In the Code. It is the intention of the City Council, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and made a part of the
City of Aventura Code; that the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or reletterad
to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance" shall be changed to "Section"
or other appropriate word.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately after adoption
on second reading.
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember Cohen, who moved its
adoption on first reading. This motion was seconded by Councilmember Holzberg, and
upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger yes
Councilmember Ken Cohen yes
Councilmember Harry Holzberg yes
Ordinance No.
Page 3
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Perlow yes
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert yes
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin yes
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder yes
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Councilmember
who moved its adoption on second reading. This motion was seconded by
Councilmember
, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Councilmember Arthur Berger
Councilmember Ken Cohen
Councilmember Harry Holzberg
Councilmember Jeffrey M. Perlow
Councilmember Patricia Rogers-Libert
Vice Mayor Jay R. Beskin
Mayor Arthur I. Snyder
PASSED AND ADOPTED on first reading this 20th day of January, 1998.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this 3rd day of February, 1998.
ATTEST:
Arthur I. Snyder, Mayor
Teresa M. Smith, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
City Attorney
/tms
CITY OF A VENTURA
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eric M. Soroka, City Manager
FROM: Ken Cohen, Councilmember ~
DATE: January 29, 1998
SUBJECT: Naming of New High School
February 3, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda Item ~
Please place on the agenda for possible action by the City Council consideration of a
recommendation to the School Board that the new high school be named the "Dr.
Michael Krop High School."
KC/tms
FROM Lauren Morris 305 932 09B9 01-29-9B Oi:00PM TO 4BBBgi9 ~98 P.2/2
I,AUREN & CARY MORRIS
Jmmary 29, 1998
The l-Itmonilfle Kenneth Cx~hcn
Councilman, Ci~y of Avcutura
2999 NE 191,~ Street, Smtc 500
Aventura, FL 33180
As per our recent discussion, we are wxi6ng to you a,~ act/xne members of our corranuni~y, deeply
involved in our public school system. As y(.m Im(.r% Cavy w.,~.s ~Fe;uzhet of the Year' at Virbdnia A.
Botme Highland Oaks Elementary :md is thc fi>under of thc new Botanic',d Learning Center tlmt we
· tcn. amiag [tx honor of Sen. Gwen Margolis. I chair the Attendance Bo~mdaries Co~rwnittee for
VABHOE/NMB Feeder Pattern, am an active member of the I}'I'A and the r~tucamm Excellence
Committee 6or mxr wrmderfiil school.
C~ry and I h~ve had the distinct pleasure of knowing and xvtlrking with one of our most valued
resources in m;r public schrml system, Dr. MicJanel Kmp Dr. K~x)p has represenbed us fi>r the past
18 yea~s. I.Ic has bccn instrumcnv~al m providing our younh,~tcrs with the tools alld programs
necessm'y to achieve the highest educational standards possible using innovariw testing mchniqucs,
reading ~e',~diness proggwns, and advocacy tff implementing Into. met Te*Omology in every school.
Dr. Keop has always had d~e vision etd provided us wifl~ the leadership necessary to mnve our
children h]to the 21'~ cea~mry. It was this vision that helped and inspnx~d the D:mle C<mn~y School
Bo~d to build a nmchneeded high school in Noctheast Dude to handle the tremendous
overcrowding sima6on we currendy ace.
This new state-of-the-art high school will be ready to open dais fall, yet it still does not bcax a
namt. Therefi>re, Cary 5md I respectfully request daat you ~md yxmr collcabmcs on the Aventura City
Council m-~,kc a resolution m name this sdxool "Dr. Midxael Ktop High School" to hono~ a man
who has devoted d~e majority of his professional career as the voice l'~r our children's educational
needs. You may direct your lette~ m Mr. Craig Sturgeon, Reb4tm II Superintendent, Dude County
I~ublic Schools at 151.% NrW 167 St., Suite 300, Mian~i, FL 33169. We truly appreciate your
consideration of this special and well-deserved request.
Sincerely,
I .am'eh & Cary Mo~xisIJ
Very Interested l)~enm
2135 NE 198 TERRACE ° UMSA~ FL * 33179-3133
PHON~: (305) 935-5~336 ° FAX: (305) 932-0989
CITY OF AVENTURA
Ordinance 96-09
Disclosure of Verbal Contact
Agenda Item: Item No. ¢ ~ ~ of ~,-
1994 agenda of /~'/i,~,~,~q- ~. ,~z~ --~
body
Date of Verbal Communication: :;/¢ ~
Identity of Person or E, qtity Making Communication:
Subject and Substance of Communication:
Filed this _? day of
Respectfully,
Council or Board Member
?[~unication:
~ :.,19~'
CLerk / Secretary
Receiving
MIAMI DALLY BUSINESS REVIEW
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Dada County, Florida.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the underSigned authority personally appeared
Octelma V. Ferbeyre, who on oath says that she Is the
Supervisor, Legal Notices of the Miami Daily Business
Review f/kJa Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday
and Legal Holidays) newspapar, published at Miami in Dede
County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement,
being a Legal Advertisement of Notice in the matter of
CITY OF AVENTURA
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENCY
POLICY FOR UTILIZATION OF
AVENTURA FOUNDERS PARK, ETC.
in the ...................... X~I~.~ ....................................... Court,
was published in said newspaper in the i~ues ~
Jan 22, 1998
Affiant further says that the said Miami Daity Business
Review is a newspaper published at Miami In said Dade
County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published In said Dade County, Florida,
each day (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) and
has been entered as second class mail matter at the post
office in Miami in said Sade County, Florida, for a period of
one year next preceding the first publication of the attached
copy ofadverdsement; and affiant further says that she has
neither paid r promised any per ' or corporation
any disco , rebate, commiss r the purpose
~~..._of sec n.g this advertise n in the said
Swo subscdbad this
(~A~) ! ,~I~V" ~/ OFFIC~ALNOTAR¥SEAL
I O~'t'~- (' JANE'ir LLERENA
Octelma V. Ferbey~l~oe[~Lt~ l~wn ~ NUMBER
I[ ~-~' I CC566004
I%~ ~ ~, co,.~.~ EXPIRES
I ~'OF;~. r JUNE 23~2000
cl'r~ OF AVENTURA
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES
NOTICE IS HEREBYe~elIVEN that on Tuesday, the 3rd day ct
February, 1998, at a m eting of the City Council of the City ct
Aventura, to be held at 6:q0 p.m. in the Council Meeting Rcom at the
Columbia Aventura Hospital and M~:lical Center 21110 Biscayne
Boulevard, Suite 101, Ave~ptura, Florida, the City CoUncil will consider
the adooiton of the following] )rdinance on second reading, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF+HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA. FLORII~A, ESTABLISHING A RESIDENCY
_.pguo~' ~0_R UTIM:~ATION OF AVENTURA FOUNDERS
PARK TO PROVIDE PRIORITY TO CITY RESIDENTS:
ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR GUESTS AND
NON RESIDENTS. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA. FLORIDA.
ADOPTING SECTION 1 OF CHAPTER 26, 'ELECTIONS'
PROVIDING THAT THE CITY CLERK SHALL CANVASS
ELECTION RETURNS WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE
DADE COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTION; PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS: PROVID-
NG FOR SEVERABILIT¥. INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND
A.N EFFECTIVE DATE.
The proDoseQ Ordinances may be respected by the pubhc at the Of-
tice of the City Clerk. 2999 N E. 191st Street. Suite 500, Aventura,
Florida. Interested parties may appoa~ at the Public Hearing and be
heard with respect to the proposed Ordinances. Any person w~shlng to
address the City Council on any *tern at this Public Hearing is asked to
register with the City Clerk prior to that item being heard.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. alt
persons who are disabled and who need soec~al accommodahons to
pad~c~pate in th~s prooeeding because of that disability should contact
the Office of the City Clerk. 466-8901 not later than two business days
onor to SUCh oroceedings.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council
with respect to any matter considered at a meehng or hea~ng, that
person will need a record of the proceedings and. for such purpose,
may need to ensure that a verbatim recorQ of the proceedtngs is
made. which record tncludes the testimony and evidence upon which
ti~e appeal is to be based.
Dated January 22. 1998.
Teresa M. Smith, CMC. City Clerk
1/22 98-4-012248M
PUBLISHED DAI. L~Y.,,~ ,TheMiami Herald PublishingCompany
MIAMI-DADE-F~u~v~,,
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE
Before the undersigned authority personally
appeared:
JANEY ANDERSON
who on oath says that he/she is"
CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS
of The Miami Herald, a daily newspaper published at
Miami in Dade County, Florida; that the attached
copy of advertisement was published in said
newspaper in the issues of:
Affiant further says that the said The Miami Herald
is a newspaper published at Miami, in the said Dade
County, Florida and that the said newspaper has
heretofore been continuously published in said Dade
County, Florida each day and has been entered as
second class mail matter at the post office in Miami,
in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one
year next preceding the first publication of the
attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further
says that he has neither paid nor promised any
person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate,
commission or refund for the purpose of securing
this advertisement for publication in the said
newspapers(s).
My Commission /
Expires: October 17, 2001
Virginia J. Gallon
,1998
One Herald Plaza, Miami, Florida 33132-1693 (305) 350-2111
CITY OF AVENTURA
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS
AND ANTENNAS
The City of Aventura proposes to adopt the following
Ordinance on first reading:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES BY
ADDING A NEW CHAPTER ENTITLED "WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AND ANTENNAS";
PURPOSE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
PROVIDING APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS;
PROVIDING PERMITTED USES ON PUBLIC PROPERTY;
PROVIDING PERMITTED USE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY;
PROVIDING SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES; PROVIDING
EQUIPMENT STORAGE; PROVIDING REMOVAL OF
ABANDONED ANTENNAS AND TOWERS; PROVIDING
NONCONFORMING USES; PROVIDING PROTECTION
FOR RESIDENTS; PROVIDING PENALTIES; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
A Public Hearing on the Ordinance will be held on Tuesday,
February 3, 1998, at 6 p.m. at the Columbia Aventura
Medical Center, located at 21110 Biscayne Boulevard,
Suite 101, Aventura, Florida. The proposed Ordinance may
be inspected by the public at the Office of the City Clerk,
2999 N.E. 191st Street, Suite 500, Aventura, Florida.
Interested parties may appear at the Public Hearing and be
heard with respect to the proposed Ordinance. Any person
wishing to address the City Council on any item at this
Public Hearing is asked to register with the City Clerk prior
to that item being heard.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990, all persons who are disabled and who need special
accommodations to participate in this proceeding because
of that disability should contact the Office of the City Clerk,
466-8901, not later than two business days prior to such
)roceedings.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the
City Council with respect to any matter considered at a
meeting or hearing, that person will need a record of the
)roceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure
that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is to be based.
Dated this 23rd day of January, 1998
Teresa M. Smith, CrvlC
Citv Clerk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE
Before the undersigned authority personally
appeared:
JANEY ANDERSON
who on oath says that he/she is"
CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS
of The Miami Herald, a daily newspaper published at
Miami in Dada County, Florida; that the attached
copy &advertisement was published in said
newspaper in the issues of.'
Affiant further says that the said The Miami Herald
is a newspaper published at Miami, in the said Dada
County, Florida and that the said newspaper has
heretofore been continuously published in said Dada
County, Florida each day and has been entered as
second class mail matter at the post office in Miami,
in said Dada County, Florida, for a period of one
year next preceding the first publication of the
attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further
says that he has neither paid nor promised any
person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate,
commission or refund for the purpose of securing
this advertisement for publication in the said
newspapers(s).
~g~wom t~and ~bs~ribea ~et~o~ ~ th~ /
My Commission
Expires: Octobar 17, 2001
One Herald Plaza, Miami, Florida 33132-1693 (305) 350-2111
CITY OF AVENTURA
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
OF ORDINANCE
REGULATING SATELLITE DISHES
The City of Aventura proposes to adopt the
following Ordinance on first reading:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA,
FLORIDA AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER
ENTITLED "SATELLITE DISHES", PROVIDING
FOR THE REGULATION OF THE INSTALLATION,
MAINTENANCE, AND USE OF SATELLITE
DISHES DESIGNED FOR OVER-THE-AIR
RECEPTION OF TELEVISION BROADCAST
SIGNALS, MULTICHANNEL, MULTIPOINT
DISTRIBUTION SERVICE, DIRECT BROADCAST
SATELLITES, MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION
SERVICE, INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION FIXED
SERVICE, AND LOCAL MULTIPOINT
DISTRIBUTION SERVICE; DELEGATING REVIEW
AUTHORITY AND APPROVAL OF THE
INSTALLATION OF SUCH DISHES TO THE CITY
MANAGER; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN
THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
A Public Hearing on the Ordinance will be held
on Tuesday, February 3, 1998, at 6 p.m. at the
Columbia Aventura Medical Center, located at
21110 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 101, Aventura,
Florida. The proposed Ordinance may be
inspected by the public at the Office of the City
Clerk, 2999 N.E. 191st Street, Suite 500, Aventura,
Florida. Interested parties may appear at the~
Public Hearing and be heard with respect to the
proposed Ordinance. Any person wishing to
address the City Council on any item at this Public
Hearing is asked to register with the City Clerk prior
to that item being heard.
In accordance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, all persons who are
disabled and who need special accommodations to
participate in this proceeding because of that
disability should contact the Office of the City Clerk,
466-8901, not later than two business days prior to
such proceedings.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made
by the City CoUncil with respect to any matter
considered at a meeting or hearing, that person will
need a record of the proceedings and, for such
purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based.
Dated this 22nd day of January, 1998
Teresa M. Smith, CMC
City Clerk