10-16-56SpMtg OCTOBEr{ 16th, 1956.
A Special Heeting of the City Commission of the City of
Delray Beach, was held in the Commission Chamber's at 4:00 P.}l.,
with }layor ~tike Yargates in the Chair, City }lanager 14. E. Lawson Jr.,
City Attorney John H. Adams and the following Commissioners, .
Catherine E. Strong, 14. J. Onow, ~'.mory J. Ba.'row and tioward ~Lee Cromer,
a full Commission being pres4nt.
Mayor Yargates read the following two letters of Resignation;
October 16th, 1956.
tionorable Hayor & City touncil
City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Fellow Commissioners:
It seems that the general opinion of the people, with whom
have talked, that the present City Comacil has had to deal with more
iv~portant and unpleasant problems than any previous Council.
I have at all times tried to vote and act in the best intel'est
of the City, as I have been a citizen for many years and intend to
stay here.
I have been told by different interests that I ttAVE and ILhVE
NOT represented the majority of the people.
In as much as tt~ere is such a difference of opinion, I hereby
offer my resignation as a member of thi. s Council effective January 1,-
1957, with the understanding that I will offer my services for my
unexpired term.
Yours very truly,
/S/ ttu14AitD LEE
In the interest of the best City government for l)elray Beach,
I am resigning from my term as city commissioner, as of l)ecember 31st.-
1956. I will file and run for my own unexpired term of one year.
1956 has proven to be a year of many important decisions~
Some of your city leaders have emotionally upset the tempo and
tranquility of our city. It is only honest and fair to have the voters
of l)elray Beach express their opinion on the record of an elected
official before his term expires.
I strongly urge Commissioner lioward Cromer and Vice Hayor
Catherine E. Strong to ask for the opinion of the voters by resigning;
filing and running for the unexpired term.
/S/ }like Yargates
Both Hayor Yargates and Co~aissioner Crnmer stated they have at
times doubted if they represented the majorit~ of the people due to
the constant criticism of their actions an~ felt that an election
would provide definite evidence as to the peoples choice.
Commissioner Strong, upon being asked reg;~.rding her intentions,
stated that i..'~ view of having been elected by approximately 80~ of the
qualified $0ters she saw no reason for taki~g similar action and fully
intended serving the term for which she was elected.
0CTOBE~t 16th,1956
Commissioner Strong then moved for acceptance of the resignatio~s,
as tendered, with reluctance and that the City Clerk provide for the
unexpired one year terms on the Ballot at the £orthcoming election.
Motion was seconded by Cosmi. ssi.~:~e¢ Snow and unanimously carried.
Mayor Yargates then stated that the specific purpose for which
this meeting was called was For discussion concerning the Andrews
Avenue Improvement Project and invited }ir. Bert Boldt, of Inter-
county Construction Corp., who was awa~'ded the contract for Paving
of Andrews Avenue, and Mr. Elliott Gross, Engineer, who prepared
the original plans~ to sit at the Commission Table.
City Manager W. E. "awson Jr., then briefed the Commission on
the events concernin~ the improvement pr~'~ject from the time the
original plans were drawn, prior to soliciting Bids, ~up to the time
when work was stopped at the request of Commissioner now due to the
Commissioner having observed that Shell frock was being used instead of
Lime Sock as called for in the written specifications incorporated
in the Contract.
Commissioner Strong asked Commissioner 5now, in view of his wide
knowled~;e of road construction, his eom,~ent on the caf'rent situation
of Andrews Avenue and possible solution to the problem confronting the
City Due to the amount of Shell i(oek already based, to which
Conm~issioner Onow replied t;at in his opinion Shell ~ock would not h~ld
up in that type of ~and area and had specifically advised, prior to
considering any e~ntract being let, against the Use of any Shell ttock.
The City Hanager then read the following letter of recoam,endation
from E. billiott Gross & Associates, creators of the original Plans;
October llth, 1956
Mr. John Il. Adams,
City Attorney
Nowlin & Adams
12 S.E. 5th Ave.
Delray Beach, Florida.
City Ho,ad Contract, re Andrews Avenue -
Boldt
Dear Mr. Adams:
In view of the complication that has arisen in cor~nection with
the above referenced contract with Bert Boldt Paving, be advised that
I have inspected the job and under the circumstances, recommend
settlement on the following basis:
That Mr. Boldt place 7" of shell rock on top of his stabilization
material, compress the same with an eight ton roller, then lay an
additional 3" of lime rock, the quality of which is set out in the
basic contract, compress same with t/~e above referenced eight t~n
roller and proceed to complete the job in accordance with the contract.
Under'these circumstances, the City would be receiving a
10" road rather than an 8" road though p=rt of the road is shell
rock and I feel that the quality of the road, mhen installed, will be
equal to the quality of said road had the same been installed according
to the specifications. The increase in road depth by 2" would there-
fore res~}{t in a grade change, requiring the drains and manholes
to be brought up one bricks' width. This is a minor expense and I
recommend that the City~ under' the circumstances, defray the expense
of same.
It is understood that I will give the road my personal
engineering supervision in line with our recent discussions with city
officials, reasonable compensation being paid to me by the City for
such supervision service.
Very truly yours,
E. ELLIOTT G~tOSS & ASSOCI~ITLS
By /S/ E. hiLI.,iI~TT GitOSS
OCTOBE~ 16tt~, 1956
Hr. Bert Boldt then requested permission, which was granted,
to read a letter he had prepared for distribution to the Commission
~lembe rs:
October 8th, 1956.
Hayo r Ya rga tes
Commission~,r Barrow
Commissioner Cromer
Con~,issioner ~now
~ommissioner Strong
The following document stat, s my position in the current Andrews Ave.
disagreement.
In prepa, ing my original bid I found that the plans and specifi-
cations conflicted, and were to vague for me to bid intelligently.
}ty superintendent and I went to Elliott ~ross' office to point this
out and get clarification. B. L. Cutes told us he had nothing to do
with it and advised we check with the City iia]l. We went directly
to City Hall and were told by C. R. Chevalier that he had nothing to
do with it, and the whole matter was in Elliott Gross' hands.
We went back to Elliott Gross' office and relayed Chevalier's words
to ~r. Cares. )lr. Cutes then told us that his office would supply
tLe lines and grades, and supplied us with the dimensions we were in
doubt ab,)ut.
lihen :the question of Lime rock or Shell rock arose, he told us
about his personal dislike of Shell rock but ended by saying: "but
yo~ know and I know that since the plan calls for Shell you'll build
it out of Shell". I assured him that was just what 1 would do,
because I don't share his dislike of Shell. lie thanked him and left.
}ly I'irst actual use of Shell rock was made on august 2$th, at
~hich time I rocked in the first 180' from Atlantic Avenue north,
which was thoroughly examined by }Ir. Chevalier and approved. The
city paid for this Shell rock in my ~ugust estimate.
On ~londay morning, October 1st, we bagan the concentrated rock
haul which would have put in all the rock by Wednesday noon.
~lr. Chevalier came to the job ab,)ut 8:30 }londay morning, lie was
present while the 5th, 6th and 7th truck was being dumped, iiis only
comment was that he was glad to see the job starting to move again.
I told him I was too. a,~d that we h;~d really hit it lucky because in a
telephoue conversation with Coy Jones on Sunday evening, Coy tnld
he h;':~d just moved irto about 20,000 yards of the best Shell he
L. ad eve~~ seen. )lr. Chevalier agreed that the material looked good.
Tuesday, (October 2nd) at about noon, }Ir. Elli0tt Gross intro-
duced hims¢,lf to my foreman. He complimented us (m the progress we
had made. tie exan}ined some of the She1] in his hands and told the
foreman he had never seen any Shell that looked th;{t good before.
I{e further stated that it seemed to contain as much lime as Li,.e rock.
It was about 2:30 (Tuesday) when Hr. Chevalier shut the job down
saying (~00 truck loads too late) that the job had to be done with
Li n.e' rock~
By about 4 P.H. I had the mess cleaned up that had been caused ~)y
the disrupted haul. lihen I was ready to reach }Ir. Chevalier his
only explanation was that Hr. Snow had ordered the job stopped, and
t~mt now he, too, thought the job should have been done with Lime rock
instead of Shell rock.
lihen I quoted '~&r. Cutes as our authority for using Ohell rock
Hr. Chevalier phones ldm to c~nfirm it. Hr. Cutes de~:i, ed ever
authorizing the use of ~hell rock. ! went to Hr. Cates office
Wednesday morning for an explanation and at t/~at t~ne he remembered
the conversation I quoted in Paragraph 2.
0CTOBEil 16th, 1956
ttowever~ he attached some peculiar significance to the fact that
the conversation took place before the job was bid. tie denies th;~t
he was in charge of the job then or now, or that he has ever been
and hence had no authority to sanction the use of Shell rock.
The use of Lime rock throughout this entire project would, only
have addel ~62.40 to the complete material bill.
It was certainly not this amount of money which prompted my
use of Shell rock, but the fact that Lime rock had become inconsis-
tent and of questionable quality, even before the advent of the
turnpike s.
The above facts, set forth in their chronological order, are
all statements that I would be x~i I ling to testify to under oath of
if I w~s not the first party there are others who can offer
sub s tantia ti on.
A general discussion followed during which the City }lanager
explained that the City Engineer, }ir. Chevalier, was in the area
of the Andrews Avenue project on the morning referred to in }lt. Boldt's
letter for the purpose of Drainage inspection.
The Commission agreed that the written specifications incorpora-
ted in the Contract were specific and clearly understandable and
could not be vague in any sense of the word and "~/ritten Specifica-
tions" are known by all to govern when ever same differs from original
plans. It was further disclosed there had been no direct supervision,
as is often times the case, the contract let~ accepted and clearly
understood, having been executed in a manner that its contents
could not be misunderst,~od by any one familiar ~{ith such documents.
Commissioner Snow expressed an opinion that possibly, at
least 6" of Lime rock on top of the present Shell rock might work
o~t to a satisfactory condition, however, the Commissioner further
stated, being in accord with Commissioners Barrow and Cromer, that
procedure of installation concerning the paving ~hould have been
strictly in accordance with the "Contract" awarded for the job and
not deviated from in any manner as a result of assumption or inter-
pretation of verbal remarks or conversation, none of which to any
degree constitute or reflect authorization to alter the written
specifications of the Contract covering the job.
Mr. Jack Carver, of Carver inc., and Ylr. Lee ~sborn, of
ttardrives, Inc.~ who were in attendance at the meeting, both agreed
that the bids which they originally submitted in connection with th;s
project and which were some~,hat higher than the bid of the low-
'~.idder to whom contract was awarded, had based their bids on Lime
l~ock as called for in the specifications.
~r. Chevalier, commenting on the letter read by ~r. Boldt,
stated that he thought Elliott Gross i Associates were the Engineers
on the paving project, and filrti~er that he was in that vicinity
for the purpose of consultation ~ith }ir. Harvel concerning the
drainage project and that while in the neighborhood of Seabreeze
Avenue and Thomas Street met Bert Boldt. }Ir. Chevalier further
advised that he had been unaware that Shell rock was being hauled
for base installation.
Commissioner Barrow moved that Bert Boldt should complete the
paving of Andrews ~venue in accordance with the terms and specifica-
tions of the Contract and under the direct supervision and inspection
by F. 11iott Gross who be employed for the purpose of full time
engineer and responsible for furrd, shing complete inspection to insure
the fulfillment of the. Contract and expressed wishes of the
Commission, and further to report back to the Commission the number
of days he recommend be ~xtended to }lt. Boldt for a final contract
completion date, all of which is at NO additio~al expense to the
City of Delray Beach with the one exception of expense incurred by
employment of ~lr. ~lliott Gross for the purpose herein indicated.
OCTOt½h~( 16th, 1956
Motion was seconded by Commissioner ~romer and upon Call of
Roll, Mayor Yargates and Commissioners Barrow, Cromer and Snow
Favored said motion, Commissioner Strong being disposed feeling
that due to such differences as e~ist between the original plans
and the specifications as incorporated in the Contract considera-
tion should be made in effeeting solution to the problem at band.
Att'y Neil MacMillan, On behalf of the local Car males and
~tentals firms, stated his desire to petition the Cot~.mission
concerning no more granting dC similar activities within the City
o£ Oelray Beach until a Certificate of need and/or necessity be recog-
nized, and was advised by the City Manager that provision h~s been
m~-,de on the Agenda for the next regular meeting, namely 7:30 P.kt.,
Monday, October 22nd, for consideration of this item.
Meeting adjourned.
/S/ l~, D, Worth~n~
City Clerk -