Loading...
12-21-59 297 DECEMBER 21ST, 1959, A Regular Meeting o.f the City Council was held in the Council Cb. ambers at l:0O P.M., with Mayo.r George Talbot Jr., in the Chair, Cl~y Manager ~V, E. Lawson Jr,, C~ty Attorn.ey Harry ~. Newett and Com- missioners J. LeRoy Croft, Charles H. Harb~son, Fred B. McNeece and GeOrge V. Warren being pre,ont. An opening prayer was delivered by Me. G. Ben Hammett~ The Co.u~.cil, by general consent, approved the Minutes for the Co~uncil Meeting of December 14th, 1959. City Manager Lawson submitted BIDS received for INSURANCE COVER- AGES covering the needs for the City of I)elray Beach during the iod Jan.uary.lst, 1960 thru December 31st, 1960, TABULAT. ION of wh~oh, in detail, is attached hereto and forms a part hereof. (see Page 302-A) On motion of Commissioner Harbison and seconded by Commissioner Croft, the Council unanimously approved the placing of Insurance Coverage, in each Type of req~red coverage, to the lowest bidder for the individual coverages, as ~commended by the City Manager. The City Manager then submitted the following BIDS reoeived for construction of three tennis. CoUrts: MODERN TENNIS COURTS CONST. CO., Pompano Beach, Fla., $ 8,950.00 '(Start' 10 Days- Complete in. 4~) working Days) F. C. FEISE~ COMPANY~ ~Vest Palm Beach,' F1a., "6,§80,00 (Start 10. Days -'Complete in'SO working Days) . V~M. C. V/ESTERVELT & SONS, East Rutherford, N.J. 9,085.00 ~(Start in 10 Days - Complete in~60 Cai,Days) Commissioner Harbison inquired if the Engineering Department had determined if all bidders were qualified to provide and construct the desired Courts, and was advised that terms and specifications as con- tained~ in ihe proposal and' agreement forms assured construction`'of the type of'Courts.desired? Director of Recreation Tom Gray further advised the Commis'sione'r~ that supervision would also insure proper construction of the. courts.- On motion of Commissioner Harbison and seconded by Commissioner Croft, the 'Council unanimous.ly agr.eed' on acceptance of the low bid f.or construction of ~three (S) ~tenn~s courts, as recommended ~by the C~tYManager..~ ~ ' · ~ . ' On motion of..Commissioner V~arren and seeonded by C~mmissioner M.cNeec~, the Counclt unanimously approved the referral, to the Plan- ning/Zoning Board for Public Hea~ng on,_.a request for the Re-Zoning of Lots'.7'& 8, in Block 76. fromt~ S.to C 2, · ~ . · City Manage.r Lawson then re~uded the Council. that Resolution No. 1211,'assess~ng. costs for abatement ~of' nuisances~and Passed and Adopted. on' December?th, providedl.for a "Public"Hearing" thereon to be held at this me. etx~g on the 21st: The Manager read the following two letters of Obsection to such assessments as made.against~ their respective properties:. .... .~ . .~ ~ "In.'reference to your letter with the bills for clearing off our lots, i~'d like. to .say'that I.am a builder and have.ha~ plenty of ex~ peri'once'in th~J hne', .C°ns~d?ring the wa~ .the lots' were'~left all uneven' and~ dug ~, .I thxnk it-~s ye.fy unfair .to~ take advantage of pro- perry-owners. · I'~ ~n favor of keeping your c~ty. cleam, but-I 298 DECEMBER 21st, 1959. thinkyou could present a much more reasonable bill." Lots 57, 88, 11, 12, 35 & 36, /S/ PAUL D. SAHLER DelrayManor S/D. "I wish to issue a complaint concerning the bill for $21.92which was levie~ against m~ lots for clearing the-grass and shrubs. The property anvolved was Lot 12 and North 28 ft of Lot 13, an Block 109. When I received the notice this July I went to the city clerk's office to discuss the matter. I alsotalked several times with the fire chief as there was some question about one of the trees. In my con- versation with you I mentioned that I was letting the contract to have the work done as soon as I could contact someone. I explained that lived in Miami so would not be able to k~ep a close check on when the work was done. I was assured that th? city would.not take any steps toward having the work done without farst contacting me. When I cam~ up and found the lot had been cleared and the trees were being moved (within ten days time) between my trips up here I ~ssumed that Mr. Mcyu~.ra~ was doing the work as contracted. In his b~ll to me he did not ~ndacate otherwise, and it was not until I received the letter from the city stating that this amount had been levie~ against the proper~y that I knew that the city had done the clearing. Sance I had been in rather constant check with both the city clerk's office and the fire department I do not feel that I should have to pay again for work for which I had already contracted and been billed. I would certainly appreciate it if you would gave this com- plaint careful consideration. Thank you." /s/ ARY LOVE rOSTER The Council received no further complaints nor objections t~ the nuisance abatement assessments as set forth in said Resolution No. 1211, and acting as a Board of Equalization approved such assessments with the.exception of t~e properties of MaryLove Foster and Paul D. Sahler, ~n regard to whlch the City Nanagerwas requested, to investi- gate the cause, if any exist, for complaints as outlined in the above shown letters from the persons mentioned herein, reporting bis find- ings and recommendation to the Council at the next meeting. The City Manager then advised the Council that Resolution No. 12lB, "Declaring certain lands in the City to constitute a nuisance", Passed and Adopted on December 7th, provided for a Public Hearing to be held thereon at this meeting of December 21st for the purpose of al~ewinE property owners to show cause, if any they can, why said nuisance should not be abated. Mr. Brenner, on behalf of Mrs. Ada C. Thomas who is the owner of Lot 4, Block 5, Rio Del Rey Shores listed in said Resolution No. 1212, protested being required to clear said Lot 4 at this time inasmuch as Mrs. Thomas intends to construct a home thereon earl~ in the coming year, and further cited the apparent dumping of debras on the rear of this lot_by men working on a construction going up on an adjoining lot and the City Manager was requested ~o ~nvestigate the circumstances concerning this lot and the allegataons 9f Mr. Brenner, reporting his findings to the Council at the next meet~ng, Att'y. Rhea Whitle~ infommed the Council that Mrs. Jearmette H. Resor, owner of Lot 2, an SEASPRAY ESTATES, had protezted against be- ing required to further clear said Lot 2 which had been thoroughly an~ completely cleared by Boone's Nuts?fy a year ago, which, due to the removal of trees, resulted in considerable expense. It was ack- nowledged, however, by Att'y. ~itley,.that grass and weeds at the rear o2 Mrs. Resor's lot was in the ne~ghborhogd of being 24" high, and the.CityManaEer mentioned that th? violataon indicated i~ ss. id Resolutaon No. 12~2 referred to the height of grass and/e~ weeds only. The City Manager was als? requested to check the possibilaty of work- men, in the ~_mmediate neaghborhood, dumping debris om said Lot 2, Seaspray Estates. 299 DECEMBER 21st, 19~9. The Council,~ag~eed on the process of Resolution No. 1212, as set forth therein by virtue of EXCEPTING therefrom only the two (2) items referred to in the final two paragraphs on the preceding page hereof City Manager Lawson then read - ORDINANCE N0~ AN ORDINANCE A~IENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE CODE OF O~DINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA; RELATING TO COIN OPERATED DEVICES; FURTHER DEFINING THE TERM "COIN OPERATED MA- ~CHINE?; PROHIBITING THE POSSESSION AND PLAY- ~ING'0FSUCH¥~CHINES AND PRESCRIBING PENALTY .FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; AUTHORIZING SURRENDER OF ANY LICENSE AND PRO-RATA REFUND. Replying to inquiry frgm Commissioner Harbison, the City At-. torney advised that the Ordinance was drafted after the provisions for such prohibited operation of coin operated machines as contained in the Statutes of the State of Florida, but does not prohibit the operation of min~ature shuffle board or bowl games where skill enters intQ its operation. 0n motion of Commissioner M~Nee~e and seconded by Commissioner Harbison, the Council unanimously approved Placing Ordinance No. $41 on FIRST READING. City Manager Lawson submitted the foll0winE 'Report' from the Planning Board Chairman Paul S. Knowles, which Mr. K~owles read and commented further on the progress made by him and the City Nanager in further preliminary work concerning a proposed R/V~ for ~est At- lantic Avenue from Swinton Avenue to the Turnpike. Mr. Knowles also submitted to the Council a sketch plan of a proposed route, as re- designed, following complications in the original proposed route for such R/W. 0n motion of Commissioner Warren and seconded by Commissioner Croft, the Council unanimously approved the results, to date, of the preliminary work of Chairman Paul S. Knowles and City Nanager W. Lawson Jr., relative to a proposed Route forWest Atlantic R/Wand authorized their continuation of this work and particularly obtain- ing an official survey of their propoSed re-designed R/V4 by Elliott Gross & Associates, following which further consultations with Mr. Winston Carleton of the State Road Department should be arranged to provide for tentative approval or disapproval by Mr. Carleton of the re-designed proposed West Atlantic R/W. The City Nanager then read the following letter, dated Dec~ 20: "TO THE CITY COUNCIL: At its regular meeting~on Dec. lSth, 1~$~, the Planning and Zoning Board re-elected Mm. Paul S. Knowles CHAIRNAN of the Board for the Year 1~60." /S/ PAUL S. KNOi~{LES Ch'm'n. The Council, on motion of Commissioner McNeece and seconded by Commissioner Harbison, unanimouslyapproved Payment of BILLS, as mitred by the Cft~.Nanager, sub,eot to the approval of the Finance Committee: General Fund $ 8,214.09 Water Fund - 0per. ~und 1,886.88 Cemetery Perpetual Care Fund -0- Payroll Accounts 16,082.88 3oo DECEMBER 21st, 1959. City Manager Lawson submitted a BILL from City Attorney Harry T. Newett, in the amount of $150.00, for services rendered in connection with - Circuit Court At law Case No. l?,lS1-D, entitled Henmy Gordon, et al., Plaintiffs, v. City of Delray ~each, Defendant, and read the following letter which accompanie~ the Bill: · "I enclose herewith bill for $180.00 for services rendered in the above cause. This suit was filed in 1957 and required considerable research and several court hearings. By order of the Court dated December l?th, I obtained a dismis- sal of the same, and the matter is terminated. Therefore, I feel the enclosed bill is in order, and if further itemization is desired as to services rendered, I will furnish same." /S/ HARRY T. NEW'aTT On motion of Commissioner McNeece and seconded by Commissioner ~Varren, the Council unanimously approved payment of said bill, in thm amount of $150.00, to Att'y. Harry T. Newett. The City Manager then submitted a Bill receive~ from Howard Le~ Cromer, Inc., in the amount of $7.$00.00, covering Furnishing and Installing water main and appurtenances on South West 10th Street as pe~ contract dated the 21st of October, 195~ $7,500.00 Said Bill was approved for payme~ by Director of Public Works, Mark Fleming, having been appro]ed as to Materials and Workmanship by the Supt. ofWater Department Paul E. Nicolls. Commissioner Croft moved that said Bill of Howard Lee Cromer, Inc., in the amount of $?,500.00, be paid. Motion was secomded by Commissioner McNeece. On Call of Roll - Commissioners Croft, McN~ece andWarren, together withMayor Talbot, voted in favor thereof, Com- missioner Harbison being opposed. Motion carried. Commissioner McNeece moved for acceptance of the "Final Plat" of GOLF PARK, a subdivision in Sec. 19-46-48, as submitted by Golf Park, Inc., Roy L. Calamia, Pres., SUBJECT to completion of all requirement~ as set forth in Subdivision Ordinance No. G-285. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Harbison and unanimously passed. Commissioner Warren requested that the matter of Smith & Gilles- pie's bill, dated October 22, 1959, in the amount of $9,176,00, which item was tabled, at the regular meeting of December 14th, for further study, be brought up for consideration, and requested the City Mana- get to review certain portions of a letter from Smith & Gillespie, dated December 1st, 1959, and addressed to the City Attorney. Following the City l~.nager's review of said letter dated Decem~ 1st, 1959, which appears in detail in the official m~.nutes of Council Meeting held on December lath, 19~9, Commissioner V~arren moved that the 'Request for Payment' received Srom Smith & Gillespie, dated Oc- tober 22nd, 1959, in the amount of $9,178.00, for alleged profession- al services rendered concerning Sanitary Sewerage Improvements for D$1ray Beach, Florida, be denied, due to the determination of the Cmty Attorney that s?h services, as set forth therein, had not b~en contracted for. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Croft and upon Call of Roll - Commissioners ~arren, Croft and Harbi$on, together with Mayor Talbot, voted'in favor thereof, Commissioner McNeece being opposed. Motion carried. 3Ol DECEMBER 21st, 19~9. Mm. John C. ~itchell, part owner and developer of Rio Del Rey Shores S/D, arriving late at the Council meeting, protested the re- quiring.of certain lots in said S/D to be cleared, as provided in Resolution No. 1212, and further stated that one of the lots shown therein did not belong to him. The Council requested the City Manager to investigate the facts concerning the alleged nuisance on Lots 1 & 2, Block 2; Lots 1 & 2, Block $; and Lot $ in Block 4, all of Rio Del Rey Shores, as well as the comment of Mr. Mitchell relative to one of the specified lots not being owned by him, and submit his findings, resulting from a complete investigation, at the next meeting. MEETING ADJOURNED: on Motion of Commissioner V~arren and seconded by 2:40 P.M. Commissioner Croft. 302 DECEMBER 21st, 1959.