10-18-11 Regular MeetingCity of Delray Beach Regular Commission Meeting RULES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Tuesday, October 18, 2011 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. Delray Beach City Hall 1.
PUBLIC COMMENT: The public is encouraged to offer comments with the order of presentation being as follows: City Staff, public comments, Commission discussion and official action. City
Commission meetings are business meetings and the right to limit discussion rests with the Commission. Generally, remarks by an individual will be limited to three minutes or less. The
Mayor or presiding officer has discretion to adjust the amount of time allocated. A. Public Hearings: Any citizen is entitled to speak on items under this section. B. Comments and Inquiries
on Non-Agenda Items from the Public: Any citizen is entitled to be heard concerning any matter within the scope of jurisdiction of the Commission under this section. The Commission may
withhold comment or direct the City Manager to take action on requests or comments. C. Regular Agenda and First Reading Items: Public input on agendaed items, other than those that are
specifically set for a formal public hearing, shall be allowed when agreed by consensus of the City Commission. 2. SIGN IN SHEET: Prior to the start of the Commission Meeting, individuals
wishing to address public hearing or non-agendaed items should sign in on the sheet located on the right side of the dais. If you are not able to do so prior to the start of the meeting,
you may still address the Commission on an appropriate item. The primary purpose of the sign-in sheet is to assist staff with record keeping. Therefore, when you come up to the podium
to speak, please complete the sign-in sheet if you have not already done so. 3. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION: At the appropriate time, please step up to the podium and state your name and
address for the record. All comments must be addressed to the Commission as a body and not to individuals. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous
while addressing the Commission shall be barred by the presiding officer from speaking further, unless permission to continue or again address the Commission is granted by a majority
vote of the Commission members present. APPELLATE PROCEDURES Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter
considered at this meeting, such person will need
to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City neither provides nor prepares such record. 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach,
Florida Phone: (561) 243-7000 Fax: (561) 243-3774 The City will furnish auxiliary aids and services to afford an individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in and enjoy
the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Contact Doug Smith at 243-7010, 24 hours prior to the event in order for the City to accommondate your request.
Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. INVOCATION 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG A. NONE 4. AGENDA
APPROVAL 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. September 13, 2011 -Workshop Meeting B. October 4, 2011 – Regular Meeting 6. PROCLAMATIONS: A. NONE 7. PRESENTATIONS: A. USA Netball Association,
Inc. Tournament -Carole Hokrein(ADDENDUM) 8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval A. REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL/1001 LEWIS COVE: Approve a request to defer the installation
of sidewalk along Lewis Cove for property located at 1001 Lewis Cove. B. REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL/975 BANYAN DRIVE: Approve a request to defer the installation of a sidewalk along
Banyan Drive for property
located at 975 Banyan Drive. C. FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL/LITTLE WOOD ESTATES: Approve the final subdivision plat for Little Wood Estates, located at the south end of N.W. 1st
Avenue, between Woods Lane and Trinity Lutheran Church. D. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Palm Beach County to extend
the deadline to October 21, 2012 for completing improvements comprising the Auburn Avenue project. E. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY DROWNING PREVENTION COALITION (DPC): Approve
an Interlocal Agreement with Palm Beach County for payment of swimming lesson fees not to exceed $50.00 per class for the Learn to Swim Program at Pompey Park and the Delray Swim and
Tennis Center through the Drowning Prevention Coalition of Palm Beach County. F. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP) to the lowest responsive bidder for 316 N.W. 6th Avenue to Raymond Graeve & Sons Construction,
Inc. in the amount of $28,090.46. Funding is available from 118-1963-554-49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation) and 118-1936-554-49.19 (Neighborhood
Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation). G. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract to the selected contractor for
Neighborhood Stabilization Program, All Phase Roofing & Construction, in the amount of $39,018.00 for 212 N.W. 14th Avenue. Funding is available from 118-1935-554-62.12 (Neighborhood
Services: Capital Outlay/Acquisition Rehabilitation). H. CHANGE FUNDING SOURCE FROM DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI) TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)/HOUSING REHABILITATION
CONTRACT AWARD: Approval to change the funding source from Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI) to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the Housing Rehabilitation contract award
for 354 N.W. 6th Avenue; and approval to exceed the maximum housing rehabilitation cost, established at $37,000.00 for an individual property under the Department’s approved Policies
and Procedures to accommodate the total bid award of $37,875.95. Funding is available from 118-1963-554-49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation). I.
GRANT APPLICATION: WALMART -HOLIDAY TOY PROGRAM: Provide authorization for submission of a grant application to Walmart in the amount of $5,000 to support a Holiday Toy program for disadvantaged
youth in collaboration with local Law Enforcement Officers. J. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HOLIDAY PAGEANT PARADE: Approve a special event request to endorse the Annual Holiday Pageant Parade
co-sponsored by the
Parks and Recreation Department and the Chamber of Commerce to be held on December 10, 2011 beginning at approximately 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., grant a temporary use permit per LDR Section
2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of Atlantic Avenue from A-1-A to NW 5th Avenue for the parade route and set up from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., and approve staff support for
traffic control, security, EMS assistance, barricading, trash removal, clean up, and event signage. K. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HOWARD ALAN 23RD ANNUAL DELRAY BEACH FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS:
Approve a special event request for the 23rd Annual Delray Beach Festival of the Arts sponsored by Howard Alan Events, Ltd. to be held on January 21-22, 2012 from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m., granting a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for use of City rights-of-way on Atlantic Avenue from the east side of N.E. 6th Avenue to Bronson, and the Gladiola lot
(S.E. 6th Avenue) for vendor parking; authorize staff support for security and traffic control, barricade assistance, EMS assistance, fire inspection services, and permit an event sign
to be erected on Atlantic Avenue just east of I-95 fourteen (14) days prior to the event with the sponsor paying all overtime costs. L. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS:
Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period October 3, 2011 through October 14, 2011. M. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Bid award to LV Superior
Landscaping, Inc. in the estimated annual amount of $33,049.36 for landscape maintenance of Stormwater Retention Areas. Funding is available from 448-5416-538.34-90 (Stormwater Utility
Fund: Other Operating/Other Contractual Services). 2. Bid awards to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. in the amount of $19,696.94 for Landscape Maintenance of Lake Ida Road Medians, South
Federal Highway and Congress Avenue. Funding is available from 119-4144-572-46.40 (Beautification Trust Fund: Repair & Maintenance Services/Beautification Maintenance). 3. Contract award
to Intercounty Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $237,142.00 for construction of a water main upgrade on S.W. 10th Avenue from S.W. 2nd Street to West Atlantic Avenue. Funding is available
from 442-5178-536-68.76 (Water & Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/S.W. 10th Avenue Water Main). 4. Contract award to Line-Tec, Inc. in the amount of $70,681.00 for
relocating water services as part of the Osceola Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-65.85 (Water & Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Other Improvements;
Osceola Park). 5. Purchase award to Airgas in the amount of $107,000.00 for delivery of Liquid Carbon Dioxide (CO2) to be ordered “as needed”. Funding is available from 441-5122-536-52.21
(Water and Sewer Fund: Operating Supplies/Chemicals).
6. Purchase award to Otto Waste Systems, as a sole source provider, in the amount of $50,000.00 for purchase of hot stamped garbage carts, lids and wheels to be ordered “as needed”.
Funding is available from 433-3711-534-49.35 (Sanitation Fund: Other Current Charges/Cart Renewal & Replacement). 7. Purchase award to Dumont Company, Inc. in the amount of $51,200.00
for the purchase and delivery of Sodium Hypochlorite on an “as needed” basis to remote booster station locations. Funding is available from 441-5123-536-52.21 (Water and Sewer Fund:
Operating Supplies/Chemicals). 8. Purchase award to CDW-Government in the amount of $346,873.44 and to Emergency Vehicle Supply (EVS) in the amount of $23,460 for the purchase and installation
of sixty-eight (68) In-Car video systems in police vehicles. Funding is available from 334-2111-521-64.90 (General Construction Fund: Machinery/Equipment/Other Machinery/Equipment) and
115-2112-521-64.90 (Special Projects Fund: Machinery/Equipment/Other Machinery/Equipment). 9. REGULAR AGENDA: A. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/THE ELECTRIC EXPERIENCE: Consider a conditional
use request to allow the sale of Segways and Segway tours along designated routes for The Electric Experience located at 1047 East Atlantic Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) B. WAIVER
REQUESTS/BOUERI MIXED-USE BUILDING: Consider approval of six (6) waiver requests to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.13(F)(3) and Section 4.4.13(F)(4), “Principle Uses
and Structures Permitted”, regarding the required building frontage and front setback along S.E. 1st Avenue and along S.E. 1st Street; Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.18
(B)(14)(iv)(2), “Windows and Doors”, to reduce the required 75% transparency surface to 49% in the building elevation along S.E. 1st Avenue and to 43% along S.E. 1st Street; Land Development
Regulations (LDR) Section 5.3.1(D)(3), “Corner Clip”, to reduce the required corner clip at the intersection of S.E. 1st Street and S.E. 1st Avenue from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”;
Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 6.1.3 (b), “Additional Paving”, to reduce the required 8’ wide sidewalk along S.E. 1st Avenue and S.E. 1st Street to 5’ for Boueri Mixed-use
Building, located at 104 S.E. 1st Street.(Quasi-Judicial Hearing) C. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD’S DECISION/CLASS III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION: Consider an appeal
of the Historic Preservation Board’s denial of the Class III site plan modification request for 85 S.E. 6th Avenue.(Quasi-Judicial Hearing) 1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION
BOARD’S DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST: Consider a waiver request to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)(2), “Parking”, for six required parking spaces for 85 S.E. 6th
Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
D. REQUEST TO CHALLENGE THE FUNDING MECHANISM PERTAINING TO PALM BEACH COUNTY’S INSPECTOR GENERAL PROGRAM: Request authorization to allow the City Attorney to join Delray Beach with
other municipalities in a lawsuit challenging the funding mechanism pertaining to Palm Beach County’s Inspector General Program. E. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/TWILIGHT BICYCLE RACE AND WELLNESS
FESTIVAL: Consider approval and endorsement of a new event, Delray Beach Twilight Bicycle Race and Wellness Festival, sponsored by RAC Event Productions/Swaggerolls to be held on March
9, 2012 from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., and March 10, 2012 from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.; grant a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for closure and use of Atlantic Avenue from
Swinton to Railroad Way, Railroad Way from Atlantic to NE 1st Street, NE 1st Street from Railroad Way to Swinton and NE 1st Avenue from Old School Square grounds to Atlantic from approximately
4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 10, 2012 for the bike races; and authorize staff support for traffic control and security, EMS assistance, trash removal and cleanup, trash
boxes and event signage; contingent upon receipt of a non-refundable deposit in the amount of $2,000.00, copies of signed rental agreements with Old School Square and the City for use
of Old School Square Park, receipt of a signed and notarized Hold Harmless Agreement and receipt of a Certificate of Event Liability and Alcohol Liability Insurance by the dates outlined
in the staff report. F. BID AWARD/RANDOLPH AND DEWDNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.: Consider approval of a bid award to Randolph and Dewdney Construction, Inc., in the amount of $456,710.00 for
renovations to the Pompey Park Concession Stand. Funding is available from 334-4127-572-62.10 (General Construction Fund/Pompey Park Concession Stand).(ADDENDUM) 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 36-11 (SECOND READING/SECOND PUBLIC HEARING): Consider a privately initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.9. (B), “Principle Uses
and Structures Permitted”, and Section 4.4.13 (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, to clarify that bicycles with an electric helper motor are the only motorized equipment
permitted in the “rental of sporting goods and equipment” use category. B. ORDINANCE NO. 39-11: Consider an amendment to the Code of Ordinance Section 72.02, “Definitions,” to conform
to the State Statute definition of a bicycle and to place further limitations on motorized bicycles. C. RESOLUTION NO. 43-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/2216 N.E. 3RD AVENUE: Consider
approval of Resolution No. 46-11, a contract for sale and purchase, authorizing the City to transfer Neighborhood Stabilization Program property located at 2216 N.E. 3rd Avenue to the
Delray Beach Community Land Trust for the amount of $10.00. D. RESOLUTION NO. 44-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/310 SOUTHRIDGE ROAD: Consider approval of Resolution No. 44-11, a contract
for
sale and purchase, authorizing the City to transfer Neighborhood Stabilization Program property located at 310 Southridge Road to the Delray Beach Community Land Trust for the amount
of $10.00. E. RESOLUTION NO. 45-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/518 S.W. 9TH COURT: Consider approval of Resolution No. 45-11, a contract for sale and purchase, authorizing the City
to transfer Neighborhood Stabilization Program property located at 518 S.W. 9th Court to the Delray Beach Housing Group, Inc. for the amount of $10.00. F. RESOLUTION NO. 46-11/CONTRACT
FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/1505 S.W. 3RD COURT: Consider approval of Resolution No. 46-11, a contract for sale and purchase, authorizing the City to transfer Neighborhood Stabilization Program
property located at 1505 S.W. 3rd Court to the Delray Beach Housing Group, Inc. for the amount of $10.00. 11. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS FROM THE PUBLICIMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING
PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. City Manager's response to prior public comments and inquiries. B. From the Public. 12. FIRST READINGS: A. ORDINANCE NO. 37-11: Consider a city initiated amendment
to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.5.3, “Flood Damage Control Districts”, Subsection (D) “Construction Standards”, to modify the section while maintaining compliance
with State Statutes. If passed, a public hearing will be held on November 1, 2011. B. ORDINANCE NO. 38-11: Consider an annexation (via the provisions of the executed Agreement for Water
Service and Consent to Annexation) with initial City zoning of CF (Community Facilities) for Lago Vista, located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and the LWDD E-3 Canal. If
passed, a public hearing will be held on November 1, 2011. 13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: A. City Manager B. City Attorney C. City Commission
WORKSHOP MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 A Workshop Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie in the First Floor
Conference Room at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, September 13, 2011. Roll call showed: Present -Commissioner Thomas F. Carney, Jr. Commissioner Jay Alperin Commissioner Adam Frankel
Commissioner Angeleta E. Gray Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie Absent -None Also present were -David T. Harden, City Manager Brian Shutt, City Attorney Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk Mayor Nelson
S. McDuffie called the workshop meeting to order and announced that it had been called for the purpose of considering the following Items. WORKSHOP MEETING AGENDA 1. Grant Request for
the FY 2011/2012 Budget from the Delray Beach Centennial Committee Mr. Robert Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, stated he is a part of the Centennial Committee and introduced Ms. Laura
Simon. The Miscellaneous Grants Review Committee met last week to review this grant request and the recommendation is for Commission to consider this and place funding for this grant
in the amount of $6,300 in next year’s budget. Mrs. Gray asked if this is Delray’s Centennial why is it not a big deal. She asked if communities know about this. Mayor McDuffie asked
if press releases regarding the Centennial had been sent out yet. Ms. Simon reiterated what has been done so far; and discussed events that will take place in January 2012. It was the
consensus of the Commission to place this in next year’s budget. 2. Delray Beach Marketing Cooperative Presentation Ms. Sarah Martin presented a summary of the Delray Marketing Cooperative
(DMC) strategic planning session via PowerPoint. Dr. Alperin stated he was very pleased. Mr. Carney asked how the response of businesses in the West regarding the expanded effort is.
2 September 13, 2011 Ms. Martin stated they are working on Morikami, the Duncan Center and the Boys Market, etc. She stated they are working with the Sports Commission on some things
as well. Dr. Alperin asked if the Sister Cities Committee is aware of this. Mrs. Gray discussed delegates regarding the Net Ball Tournament that will come in December. She asked if there
will be events to bring traffic to businesses west of I-95 and Linton as well. Mr. Frankel stated this is a great year for the DMC. He stated there is some confusion with the name change
for “Jazz on The Avenue” to “On The Ave”. He asked that the DMC make sure no one else is using the new name. Mayor McDuffie stated the DMC has done a great job and he thanked them for
their efforts. He stated we should be ambassadors regarding the Centennial. 3. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) FY 2011-2012 Work Plan and Budget Mr. Jeff Costello, Assistant Director
of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) introduced Mr. Peter Arts, Board Chair and Ms. Lori Hayward, Finance Director. He conducted a PowerPoint presentation of the Fiscal Year 2010/2011
CRA work plan and the preliminary work plan for FY 2011/2012. Ms. Colonna described the accomplishments of the CRA for FY 2010-2011 to date and progress on upcoming projects. Ms. Hayward
explained the FY 2012 budget. Mr. Frankel stated the CRA has done a great job. He mentioned the $300,000 regarding bus shelters. He feels that maybe the CRA should look at trolleys.
He mentioned he has also learned from the newspaper that we have a new Economic Development Director and feels that the city should have been informed since they participated in the
process. Mrs. Gray asked about the $2 million regarding incentives specifically for the library site. She asked if there is anything in the CRA budget for affordable housing and asked
about the property on SW 8th Avenue (Carver Square). She asked about renters. David T. Harden, City Manager, discussed the environmental studies that were done for Carver Square. Mrs.
Gray commended the CRA and its staff. Mr. Carney stated this was great presentation and stated the CRA does great work. Dr. Alperin mentioned the revenue that is being carried forward.
He asked if it is committed to certain projects. Mayor McDuffie spoke regarding the shuttles. He stated Abbey Delray did not even know that they existed and asked staff to send them
some information. He stated he was disappointed to read the newspaper and learn that the new Economic Development Director was leaving Wilford, Connecticut to come to Delray Beach. He
stated the City was supposed to be involved. He thanked the CRA for the presentation.
3 September 13, 2011 4. Discussion of the Rear/Side Door Garbage Collection Survey Mrs. Lula Butler presented this item and stated based on the survey results, residents wish to change
to curbside garbage collection. She discussed the upfront costs for the change of containers. Mrs. Butler asked for Commission direction. Dr. Alperin asked if staff checked with residents
of the Sherwood Development as they did with residents on the beach. He stated he does not believe his neighborhood knows what is going on. Mr. Carney discussed the survey participation.
Dr. Alperin asked were the neighborhoods notified regarding the results. Mrs. Butler stated they have not been notified yet. Staff is asking for Commission direction on this tonight.
Mrs. Gray stated she is in favor of staff’s recommendation starting with Sherwood and to offer three (3) service categories. She mentioned costs on water bills regarding vacant properties.
Mr. Frankel asked about the startup cost of $60,000. Dr. Alperin asked if people were being back billed for what the city failed to bill persons for previously. He asked that Commission
take a look at this. Mayor McDuffie stated he supports staff’s findings. Dr. Alperin stated he too supports staff’s findings. 5. Proposed Parks and Recreation Fee Changes Mrs. Linda
Karch, Parks and Recreation Director, presented this item. She reviewed fee changes based on the August 30, 2011 Commission Workshop Meeting. She stated this is mostly increasing non-resident
fees. She stated staff would like to hold off on the fees regarding the SW 5th Avenue Plaza and will re-visit this issue next year. Mrs. Karch mentioned the boating fees and stated that
staff will still pursue raising those fees. Staff feels that we should maintain a non-resident sports provider fee. Lastly, she commented that the Marina Rate will increase from $16
to $18 per foot. Mr. Frankel stated he is in support of the fee changes; especially the non-resident fees. Mrs. Gray stated she is in favor of the fees as proposed. Mr. Carney stated
staff had done a great job regarding the fees and he is glad to see the change regarding the SW 5th Avenue Plaza fee. Dr. Alperin asked for clarification of the resident versus non-resident
provider fees. Mrs. Karch stated there is no charge for residents and there is a $10 charge for non-residents. Dr. Alperin asked who is going to verify residency. The City Manager stated
we can audit the addresses. Mrs. Gray asked if staff can take a look at rentals of our fields. Mr. Harden stated the fee schedule will be placed on the agenda next week. Mayor McDuffie
adjourned the Workshop Meeting at 7:35 p.m.
4 September 13, 2011 ________________________________ City Clerk ATTEST: MAYOR The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the information provided herein
is the Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of the City Commission held on Tuesday, September 13, 2011, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Commission on October
18, 2011. ________________________________ City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they are not the official Minutes
of the City Commission. They will become the official Minutes only after review and approval, which may involve amendments, additions or deletions to the Minutes as set forth above.
10/04/11 OCTOBER 4, 2011 A Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie in the Commission Chambers at
City Hall at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, October 4, 2011. 1. Roll call showed: Present -Commissioner Tom Carney Commissioner Jay Alperin Commissioner Adam Frankel Commissioner Angeleta E. Gray
Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie Absent -None Also present were -David T. Harden, City Manager Brian Shutt, City Attorney Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk 2. The opening prayer was delivered by
Reverend Ron Arflin, Director of Pastoral Services with Abbey Delray South. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was given. 4. AGENDA APPROVAL. Mr.
Frankel moved to add Item 9.G., Ratification of Collective Bargaining Agreement/PBA Police Lieutenants and Item 9.H., Ratification of Collective Bargaining Agreement/PBA Police Officers
and Sergeants to the Agenda, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney
– Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mr. Frankel requested that Item 8.J., Amendment No. 1 to the Interlocal Agreement/Town of Gulf Stream, of the Consent Agenda be moved to
the Regular Agenda as Item 9.A.A. Mr. Carney moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray
– Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
2 10/04/11 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mrs. Gray moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 20, 2011, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
follows: Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 6. PROCLAMATIONS: 6.A. Recognizing and
Commending Bishop Leonard Nathan Quince, Jr. Mayor McDuffie read and presented a proclamation hereby extending heartfelt thanks and appreciation to Bishop Leonard Nathan Quince, Jr.
and call upon all present to acknowledge and applaud his longtime outstanding and exemplary dedication, multitudinous contributions and accomplishments to the City of Delray Beach, its
residents and his community. Bishop Quince, Jr. came forward to accept the proclamation. 6.B. Florida City Government Month – October 2011 Mayor McDuffie read and presented a proclamation
hereby proclaiming the month of October as Florida City Government Month. Janet Meeks, Education Coordinator, came forward to accept the proclamation and gave a few brief comments. 7.
PRESENTATIONS: 7.A. RESOLUTION NO. 47-11: Approve Resolution No. 47-11 recognizing and commending Benjamin Leonard for over 30 years of dedicated service to the City of Delray Beach.
The caption of Resolution No. 47-11 is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, RECOGNIZING AND COMMENDING BENJAMIN LEONARD FOR THIRTY YEARS
OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. (The official copy of Resolution No. 47-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) Mayor McDuffie read and presented Resolution No.
47-11 and plaque to Benjamin Leonard for thirty years of dedicated service to the City of Delray Beach. Benjamin Leonard, Recreation Supervisor, came forward to accept the resolution.
3 10/04/11 Mrs. Gray moved to approve Resolution No. 47-11, seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin
– Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Abbey Murrell, Acting Site Supervisor III/Pompey Park, on behalf of the City of Delray Beach Parks and
Recreation, Pompey Park staff and Delray Rocks Cheerleaders, congratulated and thanked Mr. Leonard for the service he has given the City for the past 30 years. Linda Karch, Director
of Parks and Recreation, stated on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Department, she extended her gratitude to Mr. Leonard for his dedicated service to the City of Delray Beach for
the last 30 years. 7.B. 2012 All-America City Award – Campaign for Reading Readiness Ms. Janet Meeks, Education Coordinator, along with Dr. Debra Kaiser, member of the Education Board,
presented the 2012 All-America City Campaign for Reading Readiness Award and asked for Commission direction to proceed forward with it. Mrs. Meeks stated one of the goals of the Education
Board presented to the Commission in June 2011 was to focus on the 0-8 child for school readiness because this is what the City heard from the community and principals. She stated shortly
after that the City Manager sent her an email from the National Civic League that they were putting a national call out for action for communities to address third grade reading proficiency.
Mrs. Meeks stated the National Civic League is partnering with the All-America City people and United Way to mobilize communities to address three issues in their communities: (1) school
readiness, (2) chronic absenteeism, and (3) summer learning loss. Mrs. Meeks stated the first step would be to submit a Letter of Intent and the National Civic League provides help to
write the application which would be due in March 2012 and the ten cities who win would be announced at their national conference in June and if Delray is selected as a city they would
actually be provided with funding and resources to implement the best plan within your community. Mrs. Meeks displayed a short video from the National League of Cities. Dr. Debra Kaiser,
member of the Education Board, stated they formed a cross functional team and have about 15 people across the community and public and private sector; and have begun to look at the data
to see how Delray Beach compares to the numbers in the video. Dr. Kaiser stated the school age poverty has increased 25% in the last five years so we have gone from 47% of our kids in
poverty to 59%; Village Academy and Pine Grove are 95%. Dr. Kaiser stated although they have doubled their reading level in the last ten years only 58% in third grade read on grade level.
She stated based on the National Civic League data we can project a loss of 221 high school graduates because of the combination of poverty and learning. She stated 5% of the students
or 121 students in that group miss 10% of school days a month or more each year. Dr. Kaiser stated Delray Beach has approximately 2,000 students in kindergarten through third grade level
and 75% of those kids have some kind of summer experience
4 10/04/11 such as summer camp or summer care program but only 25% of those students have a defined academic curriculum. Dr. Kaiser stated they are optimistic about the future because
of the partnership that the City has demonstrated with the schools and local agencies. She stated the increase in poverty level over the last five years would have caused a major decline
if they did not have the City’s support like the Eagles Nest and Criminal Justice Programs at Atlantic High School, Carver’s Morning Program, Plumosa School of the Arts, Village Academy’s
Beacon Program and the Achievement Center for Children and Families. Dr. Kaiser stated they look forward to working with their Campaign for Grade Level Reading Committee to develop a
plan that will build on a strong Delray Beach foundation and help each child to read on grade level within the next five years and look for the City’s continued support. Mr. Frankel
moved to approve the Letter of Intent for the Campaign for Reading Readiness, seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin –
Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 7.C. Economic Development Director – Vincent Nolan Ms. Diane Colonna, Executive
Director of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), introduced the new Economic Development Director Vincent Nolan who is from New Milford, Connecticut where he did economic development
for approximately 12 years and ran various programs and is certified as an Economic Developer through the International Economic Development Council. Ms. Colonna stated Mr. Nolan was
also a City Council person for the City of Danbury, Connecticut and was an Assistant to a State Senator from Connecticut. Ms. Colonna stated the CRA is pleased to have him onboard and
he will be working in the CRA District and throughout the City. Vincent “Vin” Nolan stated this is a great opportunity for himself in his career development as an Economic Developer
and he looks forward to working with the Commission and his colleagues at the CRA. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval. 8.A. RESOLUTION NO. 50-11: Approve Resolution
No. 50-11 to abandon an alleyway within Block 11, running from S.E. 7th Street some 303 feet toward S.E. 6th Street, between S.E. 5th Avenue and S.E. 6th Avenue. The caption of Resolution
No. 50-11 is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, VACATING AND ABANDONING AN ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY, AS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A”,
BUT RESERVING AND RETAINING TO THE CITY A WATER/SEWER EASEMENT OVER THE ENTIRE
5 10/04/11 AREA THEREOF AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN. (The official copy of Resolution No. 50-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) 8.B. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/INTERCOUNTY
ENGINEERING, INC.: Approve Change Order No. 1 (C.O. No. 1) with Intercounty Engineering, Inc. for an extension to the contract of seven (7) days for the Osceola Park Water Main Phase
2 Project and the amount of $18,321.82 to be paid out of the Contract's Utility Allowance for additional scope requirements. 8.C. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/SPEARHEAD DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.:
Approve Change Order No. 1 with Spearhead Development Group, Inc. in the amount of $24,118.80 for additional scope needed for driveway reconstruction to meet ADA requirements; and for
a contract time extension of thirty (30) days for the Community Improvement Sidewalks Project. Funding is available from 118-1965-554-63.11 (Neighborhood Services: Improvements-Other/Bikepaths/Sidewa
lks). 8.D. CONTRACT AWARD/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS, INC.: Approve a contract award to Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. in the amount $1,156,896.00 for the construction of the Auburn
Avenue Improvement Project. Funding is available from 334-3162-541-68.65 (General Construction Fund: Other Improvement/Auburn Avenue Improvements) and 442-5178-536-68.50 (Water & Sewer
Renewal & Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/WM -S.W. 12th & 13th Avenue). 8.D.1. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS, INC.: Approve Change Order No. 1 with Foster Marine
Contractors, Inc. to update certain documents as required for federally funded projects in the contract. 8.E. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 07-05.2/AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.: Approve
Service Authorization No. 07-05.2 to AECOM Technical Services, Inc. in the amount of $20,260.00 for the construction phase of Worthing Park. Funding is available from 117-4133-572-68.19
(Recreation Impact Fee FD: Other Improvement/Worthing Park Improvement). 8.F. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS, INC./S.W. 12TH AVENUE/S.W. 14TH AVENUE/AUBURN AVENUE: Approve
Change Order No. 1 with Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $16,907.80 for relocation of an additional twenty-eight (28) sewer cleanouts with funding available from 442-5178-536-68.04
(Water & Sewer & Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/S.W. 12th Avenue-Auburn-14th Avenue), and approve $1,400 for removal of two (2) inlets to be paid out of the contract's Unforeseen
Conditions Allowance.
6 10/04/11 8.G. REJECTION OF ALL BIDS/PAVEMENT ASSESSMENT PROJECT: Approve a recommendation to reject all bids received for the City's Pavement Assessment Project and authorize staff
to rebid the project with a modified scope. 8.H. RESOLUTION NO. 51-11: Approve Resolution No. 51-11 assessing costs for abatement action required to remove nuisances on twelve (12) properties
throughout the City of Delray Beach. The caption of Resolution No. 51-11 is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER
100 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS FOR ABATING NUISANCES UPON CERTAIN LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AND PROVIDING THAT A NOTICE
OF LIEN SHALL ACCOMPANY THE NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT; SETTING OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLUTION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR
UNPAID ASSESSMENTS. (The official copy of Resolution No. 51-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) 8.I. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation
contract through the State Housing Initiative Program (SHIP) to the lowest responsive bidder for 336 S.W. 11th Avenue to Built Solid Construction, LLC in the amount of $32,637.64. Funding
is available from 118-1924-554-49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation). 8.J. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA AS ITEM 9.A.A. 8.K. SPECIAL
EVENT REQUEST/14TH ANNUAL BED RACE: Approve a special event request for the 14th Annual Bed Race, sponsored by the Delray Beach Marketing Cooperative proposed to be held on October 28,
2011 from 5:30 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., granting a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6.(F) for the use and closure of N.E. 2nd Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.E. 1st Street from
2:00 p.m. to
7 10/04/11 9:00 p.m.; authorize staff support for traffic control and security, EMS assistance, trash removal and clean up, barricading, use and set up of half of the small stage, and
preparation and installation of event signage; contingent up receipt of a Certificate of Liquor Liability Insurance and a copy of the Temporary Liquor License as stated in the staff
report. 8.L. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HALLOWEEN PARADE: Approve a special event request for the Annual Halloween Parade sponsored by the Noontime Kiwanis Club to be held on October 29,
2011 from 1:30 p.m. until approximately 2:30 p.m., including temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for the rolling closure of Atlantic Avenue from N.E. 2nd Avenue to Veterans
Park, and staff support for traffic control and security; contingent upon receipt of the Certificate of Liability Insurance and a signed and notarized Hold Harmless Agreement by October
24, 2011. 8.M. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/25TH ANNUAL TURKEY TROT: Approve a special event request to allow the 25th Annual Turkey Trot to be held on Saturday, November 19, 2011 from 7:00
a.m. until approximately 9:00 a.m., including a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of A-1-A from Casuarina to George Bush Boulevard from 5:00 a.m.
to approximately 10:00 a.m., and authorize staff support for traffic control, barricading, clean up, use of half of small stage, event signage and waiver of parking meter fees for Sandoway,
Ingraham, and Anchor Parking Lots and along Atlantic Avenue from Venetian to A-1-A from 6:00 a.m. until approximately 10:00 a.m. 8.N. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS:
Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period September 19, 2011 through September 30, 2011. 8.O. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Bid award to multiple
vendors in the annual estimated amount of $210,000.00 for the purchase of Chemicals and Fertilizers through the Co-Op annual contract on an “as needed basis” for FY 2011/2012. Funding
is available from 001-4511-539-52.21 (General Fund: Operating Supplies/Chemicals), 001-4511-539-52.26 (General Fund: Operating Supplies/Gardening Supplies), 119-4144-572-52.21 (Beautification
Trust Fund: Operating Supplies/Chemicals), 445-4714-572-52.26 (D B Municipal Golf Course: Operating Supplies/Gardening Supplies), 446-4714-572-52.26 (Lakeview Golf Course: Operating
Supplies/Gardening Supplies). 2. Bid award to West Construction, Inc. in the amount of $197,156.00 for modifications to Worthing Park. Funding is available from 117-4133-572-68.19 (Recreation
Impact Fee FD: Other Improvement/Worthing Park Improvement).
8 10/04/11 3. Contract award to Baker’s Transport Services (BTS) in an amount not to exceed $300,000.00 for hauling and disposal of liquid lime slurry from the Water Treatment Plant.
Funding is available from 441-5122-536-34-90 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Contractual Services). 4. Contract award to Line-Tec, Inc. in the amount of $98,638.00 for installing water
meters and connecting customers on the Barrier Island to the Reclaimed Water System. Funding is available from 441-5161-536-49.23 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Current Charges/OB/Reclaim
Water Distribution System). 5. Contract award to Line-Tec, Inc. in the amount of $205,000.00 for three projects: Water Service Relocations, Water Meter Replacements-Contract Services
and Fire Hydrant Flow Testing. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-49.33 (Water and Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Other Current Charges/OB/Water Service Relocation), 442-5178-536-52.34
(Water and Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Operating Supplies/Water Meter Replacement Contract Service) and 441-5123-536-34.90 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Contractual Services). 6.
Contract award to Rosso Paving and Drainage, Inc. in the amount of $92,699.00 for construction of drainage improvements on Palm Trail. Funding is available from 448-5461-538-68.69 (Storm
Water Utility Fund: Other Improvement/Palm Trail Drainage). 7. Purchase award to Sensus USA, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $500,000.00 for small water meters. Funding is available
from 442-5178-536-61.81 (Water & Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Land/Water Meter Replacement Program). Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Mr.
Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to
0 vote. 9. REGULAR AGENDA: 9.A.A. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/TOWN OF GULF STREAM: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Interlocal Agreement with the Town of Gulf Stream to
provide for an increase in the fee paid to the City based upon the Town's annexation of additional property. The City Attorney stated this is the Interlocal Agreement between the City
of Delray Beach and the Town of Gulf Stream and the terms of the agreement were discussed at the August 2, 2011 Commission Meeting and at that time direction was given that once Gulf
Stream approved it staff would bring it back to the Commission.
9 10/04/11 Mr. Frankel explained that he removed this item because in his opinion the City of Delray Beach did not get as much as they deserved and therefore he is not in favor of going
forward. Mr. Carney stated he spent a lot of time analyzing the contract and the issues surrounding the contract. He stated although he appreciates the view that some have expressed
that the standard for applying what pricing should be used would be dwelling units, the point of fact is that the contract provided that the standard was population. Mr. Carney stated
this is a situation where applying the standard gives the City of Delray Beach the biggest benefit in the balance because 40% of the population of Gulf Stream is gone in the summer and
all of these people are paying for fire services, etc. for things they are not using. Mr. Carney commented about the issue regarding the 38 units that were to be constructed at the old
Sea Horse Club and stated they are not constructed. Mr. Carney stated he measured this on the amount of current usage and also looked at the amount of actual usage as it relates to the
people in Gulf Stream who are calling on the services of Delray Fire-Rescue and 78% of them were for emergency services not for fire and a fair percentage of them resulted in transportation
being given by the City of Delray Beach to hospitals in the area and the City for the most part was reimbursed for this service. Dr. Alperin stated he is comfortable with the formula.
Mayor McDuffie stated he spent a lot of time on that as well including speaking to the Mayor and Town Administrator. Mayor McDuffie stated he has other meetings with Mayors across Palm
Beach County and he is very aware that the formula that is used essentially takes the cost and adds 25% to it so the City makes a profit on the contract. However, there are at least
six barrier island municipalities right now that are not happy with the contracts that they have and they have banned together to release an RFP to privatize all their fire service on
the barrier island in those six communities. Mayor McDuffie stated he is comfortable with the formula and supports it as well. Mrs. Gray moved to approve Item 9.A.A. (formerly 8.J.),
seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – No; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed
with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.A. WAIVER REQUEST/DECK 84: Consider a waiver request to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(a)(2), “Front Setbacks”, to reduce the required
front setback from five feet (5’) to eight inches (8”), to allow for the installation of a support column and knee wall associated with new sliding glass doors in the same location as
existing windows for Deck 84 located at 840 East Atlantic Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) Mayor McDuffie read the City of Delray Beach procedures for a Quasi-Judicial Hearing into the
record for this item and all subsequent Quasi-Judicial Hearings.
10 10/04/11 Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications.
Mr. Frankel stated he has been to Deck 84 numerous times but has not had one communication about the subject matter. Mrs. Gray stated she had no ex parte communications to disclose.
Mayor McDuffie stated he too has attended many functions at Deck 84 and spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner today. Mr. Carney stated he spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner today and he did
not speak about this issue and noted he has been to Deck 84. Dr. Alperin stated he has been to Deck 84 and spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning,
entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2011-143 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this is a recommendation of approval for a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(a)2
to reduce the front setback from five feet (5’) to 8 inches to allow the installation of a support column and knee wall associated with new sliding glass doors in the same location as
the existing windows. He stated Deck 84 is on the south side of Atlantic Avenue on the Intracoastal Waterway. Mr. Dorling stated at its meeting of September 21, 2011, the Historic Preservation
Board (HPB) approved with conditions a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and Class I Site Plan Modification for elevation changes on the front and rear facades of Deck 84. The HPB
considered this waiver request concurrently with the COA and Site Plan requests and recommended approval with a vote of 7 to 0. Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner and Lynne, P.A.,
10 S.E. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, representing the applicant, stated they are not encroaching any further than the existing encroachment; those fixed windows are sliding windows.
Mr. Weiner stated they have complete unanimity by the Historic Preservation Board and this meets the requirements for substantial competent evidence. Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone
from the public would like to speak in favor or in opposition of the waiver request, to please come forward at this time. There being no one from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding the waiver request, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Gray asked what the purpose of the sliding glass door is. The applicant stated this is to make the location
more attractive and more inviting. Mrs. Gray stated this is going to be beautiful there. Dr. Alperin stated there is no room for tables outside and asked if they will allow air in for
the circulation.
11 10/04/11 Mayor McDuffie asked if the knee wall is going to come down. The applicant stated the knee wall is going to stay and the mulch is going to come out and it will be covered
with the same travertine that is on the outside and on the floor of the building. The City Attorney briefly reviewed the Board Order with the Commission who made findings according to
their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an official part of the minutes). Mr. Frankel moved to adopt the Board Order as presented, seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call
the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.B. CONSIDERATION
OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD’S DECISION/CLASS III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION: Consider an appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s denial of the Class III site plan modification
request for 85 S.E. 6th Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) 9.B.1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD’S DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST: Consider a waiver request to Land Development
Regulations (LDR) Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)(2), “Parking”, for six required parking spaces for 85 S.E. 6th Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) Mayor McDuffie stated anyone wishing to speak
on Item 9.B., 9.B.1., 9.C., and 9.C.1. and who has not been sworn in to please stand and be sworn in by the City Clerk. Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who
wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mr. Frankel stated he received a call from Michael Weiner who is
the Attorney for the applicant about this agenda item. Mrs. Gray stated she has no ex parte communications to disclose. Mayor McDuffie stated he received a call from Attorney Michael
Weiner as well. Mr. Carney stated he spoke to Mr. Lynne briefly a couple of days ago and Mr. Weiner today. Dr. Alperin stated he spoke to Mr. Weiner today. Paul Dorling, AICP, Director
of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2011-061 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this is a consideration of an appeal of a Historic Preservation
Board (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The Board made a motion to approve a Class III Site Plan Modification which failed on a 0 to 5 vote. Mr. Dorling stated at its meeting of
August 16, 1995, the Historic Preservation Board approved a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for some improvements that were for two of the
12 10/04/11 three buildings. In 1995, there was a conversion of the Blank House from a single-family residence to a retail use and also a conversion of a two-car garage to an office
building and a nine space parking lot. He stated the conversions occurred but none of the parking improvements associated with that conversion was constructed and subsequently the office
was never legally established. Between 1995 and 2004 as the illegal status of the office use continued to surface, the applicant submitted Site Plan Applications and was approved for
the conversion of use with associated parking improvements. Mr. Dorling stated each of those applications was allowed to expire and none of the required improvements were ever constructed
associated with that office conversion. Mr. Dorling stated August 3, 2004, the applicant was granted the ability to pay for two in-lieu parking spaces and included the installation of
the balance of required spaces on-site in a configuration off the City’s parking lot. He stated in 2004 there was a proposal to put in a tea garden and eliminate the parking. The 2004
approval allowed inlieu of two spaces and four spaces in either configuration off the parking lot and that approval was granted; however, the parking improvements were never constructed.
At its meeting of August 21, 2011, the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) reviewed another attempt after 16 years to address the office conversion. This request was to waive all required
(6 spaces) associated with the Class III Site Plan Modification for the office space. This request was not supported and the appeal of both the denial of the waiver and this Class III
Plan Modification are now before the City Commission. Mr. Dorling stated this is a request to completely waive the requirement. At its meeting March 10, 2011, the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) recommended denial of the waiver to the required parking; at its meeting of March 14, 2011, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request and the
Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the required spaces. Direction was given to the applicant to work out an alternative approach with staff
and return to the DDA for further review; at its meeting of June 28, 2011, the Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) also recommended denial of the request to waive all six (6) parking
spaces and suggested that the applicant work with staff and possibly provide three spaces on-site and provide three (3) spaces onsite and provide the other through an in-lieu agreement.
Mr. Dorling reiterated that the applicant does not want to provide the parking nor does he want to pay for the parking. Staff believes that they should be responsible for that parking
in one configuration or another and recommends that this appeal not be upheld and that the original recommendation by HPB stands. Mr. Dorling stated if the Commission should decide otherwise,
staff would like the four (4) conditions on page two to be applied. Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner and Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, briefly discussed
a request associated with a Class III Site Plan Modification to the property located at 85 S.E. 6th Avenue known as the Blank House. Mr. Weiner stated the Blank House is designated on
the Local Historic Register built in 1903 updated through the 40’s and 50’s and it was converted to restaurant use in 1995. The restaurant is a little over 2,000 square feet and the
office is 1,000 square feet.
13 10/04/11 Various site plans have been proposed for this site but because of conditions that were added the applicant has been reluctant to commence construction. With respect to the
current request, the City is recommending that there be six (6) parking spaces added. Mr. Weiner stated they would have to add about 700 square feet of pavement for a 1,000 square foot
office. Mr. Weiner stated these requirements and other requirements in the staff report cannot be imposed because LDR Section 4.5.1 of the LDRs stating that parking relief be granted
by the HPB if the following conditions are met: (1) that adequate parking proposed for the use and that the parking be achieved by alternate means and (2) that those alternative means
be found to be in keeping with the provisions of the Delray Beach Historic Design Guidelines. He stated the elements for relief are met and in 2008 the City placed this ordinance in
the LDRs in order to accommodate this kind of situation. Mr. Weiner stated in a report signed by Ron Hoggard and Paul Dorling in support of that ordinance it stated that the language
was added to regulate parking by presenting additional options. Mr. Weiner displayed a photo of the property taken March 11, 2011, and the parking lot immediately adjacent is utilized
at only 40%. He stated this is substantial competent evidence there are alternate means for parking. Mr. Weiner stated the Planning and Zoning Department has informed him that they would
not consider the request unless they submitted a Class III site plan modification. Mr. Weiner stated they have done this under protest and reserve all rights and noted that a Class III
application is not required for a waiver to LDR Section 4.5.1. He stated the office use is grandfathered in and previously established and not illegal. Mr. Weiner stated this was approved,
tax receipts were issued, and there was a Code Enforcement matter that was resolved ending up in confirmation of the completion of the work and approval of this use. Mayor McDuffie stated
if anyone from the public would like to speak in favor or in opposition of the appeal, to please come forward at this time. There being no one from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding the appeal, the public hearing was closed. There was no cross-examination. The following individuals gave a brief rebuttal: Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning
and Zoning, stated there was a tax receipt issued for this property but that does not give land use authority. There was a Code violation issued for installation of replacement doors
for a garage. Mr. Dorling stated that was closed out and they did pay a fine and that did not resolve the outstanding issue for many years about the parking and they came in two years
later to talk about the parking and to seek alternatives. He stated that is when the City Commission talked about alternatives with providing the in-lieu and the options for parking
off-site. Mr. Dorling stated the ordinance that Mr. Weiner talks about providing a waiver and alternative means was not envisioned to waiving all the requirements and having the public
provide the parking but it was to provide additional options in these situations where paving of the site is inappropriate you can provide in-lieu fees or an off-site parking agreement.
14 10/04/11 Mr. Weiner briefly discussed the letter from staff and made reference to the building permits which stated “enclosed garage for additional office use” (March 17, 2000). He
stated the doors went up without approval but it was done for the purpose of being an office. Mr. Weiner stated the City passed 4.5.1 that states to give relief to historic sites and
the Parking Management Advisory Board report says if it is 1,000 square feet and it is close to a parking lot their recommendation is no parking spaces. He stated the issue of this office
space was closed. Mr. Frankel stated he is troubled that staff has been discussing this building and feels 1995 is a long time for this place to be in operation if it is not compliant
with what they are supposed to be. Mr. Frankel stated he finds the case Joe Redner v. the City of Tampa very persuasive. Mr. Frankel made reference to page 3 of the documents submitted
by Mr. Weiner in his argument and stated these are powerful documents and noted the 2003 letter that states this is in compliance. With regard to the parking issue, there is a parking
lot on Federal Highway and other than at night it is pretty empty during the day. Bert Handlesman, owner of the property, stated he has never seen more than one person in there. Mr.
Frankel asked what kind of business operates out of the business space. The owner stated it is clerical work. Mr. Frankel stated the Parking Management Advisory Board recommended putting
in three spaces and asked if there is any room for compromise. Mr. Weiner stated they have offered one space. The City Manager stated staff has worked with the applicant and has been
very patient with the applicant for 16 years and feels we have provided a good compromise in allowing the parking spaces to be located off the driveway in the public parking lot so there
is minimal disruption to the site and no disruption to the historic appearance of the site. Mrs. Gray asked about the parking process and asked why the City did not go after them and
make them do this. Mr. Dorling stated it was five separate occasions and as these site plans expired and it was brought to their attention that they needed to do something they came
in and got site plan approval again. There is a two year time period for which the site plan is validated and during those two years those improvements are expected to be installed.
Mr. Dorling stated the record shows that there have been five attempts or renewals of site plans with parking scenarios that have never been implemented. Mrs. Gray stated there should
be some sort of compromise by the applicant and supports staff’s recommendation. Mr. Carney stated he would like to see Mr. Weiner come up with some parking and feels one in-lieu space
is not enough. Dr. Alperin stated he is in shock that it has been 16 years and this is still here. He feels there needs to be a Workshop to discuss why something like this was allowed
to continue. Dr. Alperin briefly discussed the ordinances and stated three boards recommended denial of this application.
15 10/04/11 Mr. Carney inquired about Mr. Weiner’s “51% argument”. Mr. Weiner stated there are 76 spaces in the parking lot called Gladiola and the parking report states that it is not
utilized at more than 51%; 50% of 76 spaces is approximately 38 spaces next to 1,000 square feet. Mr. Carney stated he is troubled with giving away six (6) spaces. Mayor McDuffie stated
he thought he saw some compelling evidence and it troubles him that he now has to sit on the dais as Mayor who was not on the Commission when all this started and make a decision about
something that is 16 years old. Dr. Alperin stated the Commission has to make a decision based on the ordinance now. The City Manager stated another alternative is to table this ordinance
and allow staff put together a thorough history of this whole parking issue over the entire 16 year period. Mr. Weiner stated the owner has spent hundreds of dollars to keep the house
presentable and urged the Commission to vote on this tonight. Jane Rankin, One East Broward Boulevard Ste. #1600, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 (Attorney representing the applicant), stated
she handled the transaction in July 2000 and at that time the building was in a condition that was very dangerous. Ms. Rankin stated Mr. Handelsman has spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars in renovating that building inside and out and taking care of the outside of the other properties on the site. She stated to asphalt more of that lot would be discouraging when
looking at the historic value of the property and the aesthetic picture that it presents as you enter into the city. She stated the reason for the parking waiver is because they believe
they have a solid basis for all the land use and zoning compliance issues. Ms. Rankin stated they too do not understand why this has gone on as long as it has when the matter was disposed
of in 2003. The City Attorney stated the applicant has certain rights and asked if they would like the Commission to vote on it. Brief discussion by the Commission followed. Mayor McDuffie
asked staff to be very thorough in what they do and bring back to the Commission a complete picture of what happened, why things were approved and if the applicant did not meet the requirements
at the time why permits were issued. Mr. Frankel moved to table Item 9.B., seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney –
Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
16 10/04/11 Mr. Frankel moved to table Item 9.B.1., seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs.
Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. At this point, the time being 7:51 p.m. the Commission moved to the duly advertised Public Hearings portion of
the Agenda. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 36-11 (FIRST READING/FIRST PUBLIC HEARING): Consider a privately initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section
4.4.9. (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, and Section 4.4.13 (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, to clarify that bicycles with an electric helper motor are the
only motorized equipment permitted in the “rental of sporting goods and equipment” use category. If passed, a second public hearing will be held on October 18, 2011. The caption of Ordinance
No. 36-11 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY AMENDING SECTION
4.4.9 “GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) DISTRICT”, SUBSECTION 4.4.9(B), “PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED”; AND SECTION 4.4.13, "CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT", SUBSECTION 4.4.13(B),
"PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED"; TO CLARIFY THAT BICYCLES WITH AN ELECTRICHELPER MOTOR ARE THE ONLY MOTORIZED EQUIPMENT PERMITTED IN THE “RENTAL OF SPORTING GOODS AND EQUIPMENT”
USE CATEGORY WITHIN THE GC AND CBD ZONING DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 36-11 is on file
in the City Clerk’s office.) The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of
Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
17 10/04/11 Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this is a privately-initiated text amendment to LDR Section 4.4.9(B)(4)(a) General Commercial – Principal Uses
and Section 4.4.13(B)(3)(a) Central Business District – Principal Uses. Mr. Dorling stated this will clarify that bicycles with an electric-helper motor are the only motorized equipment
permitted in the rental of sporting goods equipment use category. This is in association with the establishment of The Electric Experience at 1047 East Atlantic Avenue and this business
wants to rent bicycles that have electric-helper motors to the general public at this site. The current rental of sporting goods and equipment category is limited to non-motorized goods
and equipment. Mr. Dorling stated this will provide clarification that in the CBD and GC zoning districts this will be expanded with respect to motorized bicycles only. The applicant
has also submitted a conditional use application for Segway tours as well as a city code amendment to the Code of Ordinances definition to bicycles to include the electric-helper motor
which is consistent with Florida Statute definition for bicycles. At its meeting of September 8, 2011, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) recommended approval; at its meeting of
September 12, 2011, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) recommended approval; and at its meeting of September 13, 2011, the West Atlantic Redevelopment Coalition (WARC) recommended
approval. Staff recommends approval. David Schmidt, Attorney representing applicant, stated they do not disagree with anything staff has represented and is present for any questions
the Commission may have. Mr. Carney asked if this relates to mopeds. Mr. Schmidt stated this ordinance does not relate to mopeds and disagrees with Mr. Dorling’s reading of the current
ordinance and stated he does not believe it prohibits rental of motorized vehicles. The current definition of bicycle includes mopeds so by updating to the later item to adopt the current
statutory definition of bicycles. One Statute also has separate definition for mopeds. Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished
to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 36-11, the public hearing was closed. Albert Richwagen, 48 year Delray native and bike shop owner, stated this business that has initiated
this change of use has been doing illegal business for over a year. Mr. Richwagen stated they have not complied with any City laws, they have illegal signage and are doing Segway tours
without a license. Mr. Richwagen stated if they want to operate a business as such they should go under the current guidelines which are be in the automotive area or be where the motorcycle
shops are in the allowed use or as he did buy a pre-existing automotive use so that they can do what they want to do.
18 10/04/11 Dr. Alperin stated he does not consider a Segway a bicycle but it has two wheels and is an electric driven machine. Mr. Dorling stated this amendment does not apply to Segways.
Dr. Alperin stated an electric car is a totally different thing than a gas car as far as maintenance, etc. and what kind of shop requirements there are to maintain this needs to be looked
at as well when considering this. Mayor McDuffie concurs with comments expressed by Dr. Alperin. For the record, Mr. Frankel stated he understands all the different groups that looked
at it did approve it. Mr. Frankel stated Al Jacquet of the Planning and Zoning Board had stated he does not know if this is consistent with the vision of the city. Mr. Frankel stated
this is something he struggled with when the Commission discussed the Segways and whether or not we want to turn this into another Key West. Mr. Frankel concurs with the Mayor’s recommendation
to pass this ordinance tonight to get it to second reading but he would also like the additional information that was brought up. Mr. Carney stated some good issues were raised about
how the Segways will be maintained. Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 36-11 on First Reading/First Public Hearing, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted
as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 10.B. ORDINANCE NO. 32-11: An ordinance
amending Chapter 51, "Garbage and Trash", of the City Code of Ordinances by amending Section 51.70, “Regular Charges Levied”, to provide for increased residential and commercial collection
service rates for FY 2012. The caption of Ordinance No. 32-11 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 51, "GARBAGE AND
TRASH", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 51.70, "REGULAR CHARGES LEVIED", TO PROVIDE FOR INCREASED RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL COLLECTION SERVICE
RATES FOR FY 2012; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 32-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.)
19 10/04/11 The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the
Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Lisa Hartman, Utility Billing Manager, stated this for a rate increase in the ordinance. Mrs. Hartman stated the rate increase is a result
of the requirements in the City’s Waste Management Contract and stated the City has to adjust rates for the CPI and the diesel fuel price adjustment. Dr. Alperin asked if these rates
are non-negotiable according to the contract. Mrs. Hartman stated this is non-negotiable. The City Manager stated the commercial rates are affected by the Solid Waste Authority increase
in tipping fees in addition to the Waste Management collection charges. Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished to address the
Commission, the public hearing was closed. Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 32-11 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
follows: Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 10.C. ORDINANCE NO. 34-11: Approve an increase
of the parking meter fees from $1.25 to $1.50 per hour in all metered parking spaces, an increase to the cost of the annual beach parking permit from $80.00 to $90.00 per year, and creation
of a new permit classification of Senior Beach Parking Permit at a cost of $95.00 per year. The caption of Ordinance No. 34-11 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 71, “PARKING REGULATIONS” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING SECTION 71.058, "COST OF PARKING OR STANDING VEHICLES IN CERTAIN METERED
SPACES", TO PROVIDE FOR A PER HOUR METER FEE TO BE CHARGED AND LISTING THE PARKING LOTS AFFECTED; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 71.060, “PARKING METER PERMITS”, TO ESTABLISH A SENIOR BEACH
PERMIT PROGRAM AND COSTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
20 10/04/11 (The official copy of Ordinance No. 34-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been
legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated the
City has proposed a slight increase to the annual beach permit from $80.00 per year to $90.00 per year. Mr. Aronson stated the City has also proposed a new classification for senior
citizens for an additional $5.00 they will be able to use the spaces on A-1-A south of Miramar and north of Atlantic Avenue in the parallel parking spaces and excludes the angled parking
spaces which are immediately adjacent to the business district on A-1-A. Mr. Aronson stated the City also proposed a .25 per hour increase on the meter fees from $1.25 to $1.50 per hour.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. Andy Katz, speaking on behalf of the Beach Property Owners Association, stated Delray Beach is a very popular destination and compared
to other cities Delray Beach offers more amenities such as showers, bathrooms, food, lounges, fountains, etc., have the convenience of parallel parking on A-1-A, patrolled beaches, have
the unique proximity to downtown, and are relatively cheap compared to other cities. Mr. Katz stated he does not feel it is unreasonable for the meter fees to increase from $1.25 to
$1.50 per hour and from the beach area perspective they would like to see some of the additional money collected be used to fund the Beach Area Master Plan. He stated with regard to
enforcement very early in the morning they do not have the beach crowds. Mr. Katz suggested that there be enforcement along Atlantic Avenue at 9:30/10:00 a.m. but not along A-1-A. He
stated when the beach crowd arrives especially on the weekends and during season there are illegal parking issues on Venetian, Casuarina and Gleason and stated they would like to see
some of the enforcement they can save before 9:30 or 10:00 a.m. be used to take care of the illegal parking issues in other areas of the beach. Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard
#207, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated she too believes that $1.50 is very reasonable when comparing to competing towns. She suggested increasing the time limit from 2 hours to 3 or 4
hours. Ms. Morrison suggested that the meters to be able to take parking cards and credit cards and make them easily available for people to buy. There being no one else from the public
who wished to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 34-11, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Frankel inquired if the senior permit is going to be for a one year period not
the six months as initially discussed. Mr. Aronson stated it was suggested it be an off season and it was determined that it would not be an overburden so the senior
21 10/04/11 permit is going to be year-round. Mrs. Gray asked how someone would be able to identify the senior permits. Mr. Aronson stated staff has taken the last 100 because the permits
are numbered and these will be dedicated to the Senior Program and staff will be placing a small distinguishing mark on those permits to identify it as a senior permit. Mr. Aronson clarified
that the parallel parking on A-1-A is 4 hours and Atlantic Avenue is 2 hours in the business district and stated the Smartcard can be purchased in the Utility Billing Department for
$5.00 and can be recharged at any of the multi-space parking meters on the beach. Mr. Frankel moved to adopt Ordinance No. 34-11 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon
roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 10.D.
ORDINANCE NO. 35-11: Approve an ordinance amending Chapter 92, "Boats and Boating", by amending Section 92.15, "Docking License for Excursion Boat Operations", Subsection (E), "Short-Term
Agreement", to modify the permit fee; and by amending subsection (G), "Use of Docks at Veterans Park", to increase the mooring time for excursion boats at Veterans Park. The caption
of Ordinance No. 35-11 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 92, "BOATS AND BOATING", BY AMENDING SECTION 92.15, "DOCKING
LICENSE FOR EXCURSION BOAT OPERATIONS", SUBSECTION (E) “SHORT-TERM AGREEMENT”, TO MODIFY THE PERMIT FEE; AND BY AMENDING SUBSECTION (G) “USE OF DOCKS AT VETERANS PARK”, TO INCREASE THE
MOORING TIME; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE; A SAVING CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 35-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) The City Attorney
read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida. Linda Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated this ordinance is to modify the permit fee and to increase the mooring time for excursion boats at Veterans
22 10/04/11 Park. Staff recommends increasing the fee from $250.00 to $300.00 and the operating hours from 9:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 p.m. In addition, Mrs. Karch stated
staff recommends allowing the boats to dock for no longer than 60 consecutive minutes (increased from 30 minutes). Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 35-11 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Dr. Alperin.
Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.E. RESOLUTION NO. 48-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/133 S.W. 12TH AVENUE: Consider approval of Resolution No. 48-11, which incorporates a Contract for Sale and Purchase between
the City and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for a vacant lot located at 133 S.W. 12th Avenue in the amount of $10.00. The caption of Resolution No. 48-11 is as follows: A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING
AND ACCEPTING THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE FROM THE DELRAY BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, SELLER, TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 48-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of
Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The City Attorney stated Resolution No. 48-11 adopts the Contract for Sale and Purchase between the City of Delray Beach
and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for the vacant property at 133 S.W. 12th Avenue. This property will be used to better utilize the Neighborhood Resource Center. Mayor McDuffie
declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed.
23 10/04/11 Mr. Frankel moved to approve Resolution No. 48-11, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel
– Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 10.E.1. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA): Consider approval of an Interlocal
Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to transfer property to the City and pay some design and construction costs of a new structure to be located at 133 S.W. 12th
Avenue to expand the Neighborhood Resource Center; contingent upon approval of Resolution 48-11 and the Contract for Sale and Purchase. The City Attorney stated this is a request for
approval of an Interlocal Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for property located at 133 S.W. 12th Avenue where the CRA will contribute a maximum amount of $67,815.00
to the City to assist in the cost of the design and construction of a structure to accommodate expansion of the Neighborhood Resource Center. Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Interlocal
Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes;
Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. At this point, the time being 8:18 p.m., the Commission moved to Item 11.A., City Manager’s response to
prior public comments and inquiries. 11.A. City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries. The City Manager stated Dr. Kirson had complained about the fact that Workshop
Meetings were not being broadcast or available on archives and in response to Mr. Carney’s suggestion, the City Manager stated the Workshop Meetings will be recorded and placed in the
archives so they are accessible over the internet beginning with the October 11, 2011 Workshop Meeting. At this point, the Commission moved to Item 11.B., Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda
Items from the Public. 11.B. From the Public. None. At this point, the time being 9:19 p.m., the Commission moved back to Item 9.C. of the Regular Agenda.
24 10/04/11 9.C. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/EGLISE DE DIEU PRIMITIVE DE LA NOUVELLE JERUSALEM, INC.: Consider approval of a conditional use request to allow conversion of an existing 3,335
sq. ft. duplex residential structure at 614 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive to a church for Eglise De Dieu Primitive De La Nouvelle Jerusalem, Inc., with an associated off-site parking
lot located on the west side of N.W. 6th Avenue, approximately 165 feet south of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those
individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mr. Frankel stated he spoke with Attorney Michael
Weiner about this issue earlier today. Mrs. Gray stated he spoke to staff about this issue a couple of months ago and two of the Pastors. Mayor McDuffie stated he spoke to Attorney Michael
Weiner who acknowledged to him that it was on the agenda and he would be speaking on it. Mr. Carney stated he too spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner and spoke to Mr. Dorling last week
briefly as an agenda item but did not get into any details. Dr. Alperin stated he spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner this morning. Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning,
entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2011-129 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated one item relates to a conditional use approval to establish a church and then a
second one relates to a waiver to distance for an off-site parking lot. The church building which was an existing duplex is proposed and an offsite parking lot is proposed in the vicinity
where these are currently vacant. He stated there is a maximum requirement of 300 square foot between an off-site parking lot and the use. Mr. Dorling stated this is a conditional use
to convert a 3,335 square foot duplex structure to a church at 614 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. The church has a congregation of about 50-80 members and it currently rents a church
building for weekly services at 414 S.W. 3rd Street. The church would have three main services on Friday evening between 8:00 a.m. – 10:30 p.m. and on Sundays from 8:00 a.m. – 11:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Creole classes will be offered for those parishioners who cannot read the Creole Bible. This training service will be offered two days a week for two hours
a day and the church functions common with places of religious assembly such as church bazaars, fundraisers, and various activities around the holidays. Mr. Dorling stated this facility
is in the R-1-A zoning district and is allowed as a conditional use because each site is unique and in some cases it is appropriate and in some cases it is not. He stated this site has
some challenges as it relates to compatibility and those concerns have been identified in the staff report and for that and other reasons it is not a use that should be allowed to go
into this building. He stated LDR Section 3.1.1(D) requires compliance with LDRs and the parking lot does not meet the maximum spacing and it also does not meet consistency requirements
of 3.1.1(C) with Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff feels this is incompatible with the adjacent properties because there will be noise issues as it relates to
this. Mr. Dorling stated there is also a
25 10/04/11 discussion in the staff report as it relates to fulfilling remaining land use needs. There is twelve (12) churches within a one mile radius with many of them the same congregation.
Staff feels although this is minor it still does not meet that Future Land Use objective. He stated required findings under LDR Section 2.4.5(E) also go to compatibility. Mr. Dorling
stated it requires that you establish a conditional use and it will not have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within it is located nor will it
hinder development or redevelopment of the nearby properties. At its meeting of July 18, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the conditional use request and recommended denial
of the conditional use and the waiver. At its meeting of July 14, 2011, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and the Planning and Zoning Board had concerns with the potential negative
impacts on abutting residential properties as well as traffic impact with respect to stacking and parking along the adjacent rights-of-way. Staff recommends denial. Michael Weiner, Attorney
with Weiner and Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (representing the applicant), stated about 4:45 p.m. the neighboring property owner in the church reached an agreement
on an easement and it eliminates the requirement for the waiver and allows the people to walk internally very few feet from the church to the parking lot. Mr. Weiner briefly spoke on
the conditional use because the waiver is no longer necessary and thus will be withdrawn. Mr. Weiner stated the church already owns the structure and they were advised about the City’s
zoning code that states you can have a church use in a residential area. He stated Chapter 3 has four sub-elements: (1) Future Land Use Map designation, (2) a concurrency, (3) a consistency,
and (4) a compliance with the LDRs. Mr. Weiner stated that includes compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and there is a second requirement that has two sub-categories LDR Section 2.4.5
and first is that the use will not be significantly detrimental and the second is it will not hinder development or redevelopment. He stated staff tries to add more about the noise and
other Code Enforcement issues in the area. Mr. Weiner stated they are an R-1-A zoning and LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 dwelling units per acre) land use designation and are allowed
to be a conditional use. Mr. Weiner stated the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs indicate that there is no restriction for limiting policy on churches, other houses of worship, or the free
exercise of religion. He stated the staff report states that there are already 12 churches within a one mile radius of the site. Mr. Weiner stated one more church is not a significant
change to this neighborhood. He stated the staff report makes reference to noise and traffic but there is no reason to believe that noise and traffic actually occurs. Mr. Weiner briefly
spoke about the setback requirements and reviewed the site plans. He stated effective September 22, 2000, they signed into Federal Law the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons
Act (RLUIPA) and there is also the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the general rule is “that no government shall impose or implement the land use regulation in a manner
that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise on a person including a religious assembly unless the government can demonstrate that the imposition of the burden on that
person is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest.” Mr. Weiner stated before he represented the applicant they purchased this land and they made significant strides to try
to improve the
26 10/04/11 position of the church and what it is they want to do in the neighborhood and area. Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone else from public would like to speak in favor or in opposition
of the conditional use request, to please come forward at this time. Reginald Cox, 715 N.W. 2nd Street (a/k/a Drive) Delray Beach, representing Paradise Heights Neighborhood Association,
stated three terms that were heard earlier this evening were (1) common sense, (2) powerful impact, and (3) use of the Advisory Boards that the Commission depends on and put into place.
Mr. Cox read a brief statement into the record from the Paradise Heights Neighborhood Homeowners’ Association. He stated the Paradise Heights HOA would like to see the property remain
the residential designation. Pastor Harry, one of the Pastors of the church, briefly discussed the architects of the church. Barbara Shuler, resident of Delray Beach, supports the conditional
use request and stated she has spoken to several people who live in the Paradise Heights neighborhood and asked how many people were present at the meeting, who held the meeting, and
how did they inform the neighbors. Mrs. Shuler stated she is close to the neighbors who live to the west and when they heard about the church they asked her to look into the situation.
Mrs. Shuler stated she met with several members of the church and they agreed to allow the church to exist next to their home. She stated the church needed an easement at the back of
the church property which would allow the people to park in that lot behind the church and walk right into the church. Mrs. Shuler urged the Commission to approve the conditional use
request and stated many of people who attend the church live in that neighborhood. Greg Deneus, 126 N.W. 6th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (resides next to the parking lot in Paradise
Heights), stated he is not aware of what Mr. Cox is speaking about. Mr. Deneus stated this building used to be an assisted living for mental health and they demolished it. He stated
he would rather live among 50 churches than live next to a bar or a sober house. There being no one else from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding the conditional
use request, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Dorling stated the setback issue is critical as it relates to this use as being compatible. He stated this unit was built within ten feet
in an R-1-A zoning district which does allow it as a conditional use but there are structures within this zoning district which are more compatible for this type of use. Mr. Dorling
stated required findings need to be made under Section 2.4.5(E) and they are not met and noted that this will have a detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood because
of noise issues with late night worshiping this close to adjacent residential structures. Mr. Dorling stated with regard to the Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan particularly
Future Land Use Element that states properties shall be developed or redeveloped complimentary to
27 10/04/11 adjacent land uses. He stated this structure for a commercial use is not going to be complimentary to adjacent residential uses. Mr. Dorling stated the findings are made
in the staff report and recommends denial of the request. Mr. Weiner stated there is nothing in the ordinances of what percentage of a block should be devoted to churches. He stated
drainage will be better because they are increasing the open space. Mr. Weiner stated Section 2.4.7(B) has to do with waivers and they no longer need the waiver. He stated they are going
to have on-site parking as a result of the easement. Mr. Weiner stated in 2005 the City Commission approved a church three times this size. He stated an extra ten feet in setback is
not going to make a difference with respect to sound. Mr. Weiner stated there may be some site plan things they can do that will minimize the possible impact that has been suggested
by the Planning and Zoning Department. Dr. Alperin stated the issue is whether this meets the requirements of Section 2.4.5 and noted that when he served on the Commission previously
he felt the City was setting a precedent and that we were going to end up with churches every 500 feet. He stated there are now multiple churches on the same lots and feels this does
has an impact on the neighborhood and he cannot support it for that reason. Mr. Carney made reference to Mr. Weiner’s comments and reiterated that this is a conditional use and we do
have some mechanisms at our disposal to mitigate certain issues that have been raised such as noise; the parking issue can be addressed and he is confident that the church members are
going to be parking on the off-site parking lot and noted it is a Code Enforcement issue if they do not park there. Mr. Carney stated he will support this providing that conditions can
be put in place that would mitigate some of the concerns. He suggested that the hours be addressed regarding the start time. Mr. Carney stated he supports this provided some of these
other conditions can be addressed in the final approval. Mrs. Gray stated she lives and attends one of the churches in this community. However, she expressed concern about the neighbors
and spoke to some people who are not in support of it because they live right next door within that block. Mrs. Gray stated with regard to the parking lot on the back side there is no
guarantee that people are going to just stay on that property. She stated she has a business and a parking lot and people walk through her parking lot to get to the CRA parking lot.
Mrs. Gray stated this is a very tight spot and does not think a church needs to be in-between two residences. She stated they are going to have rehearsals and it will be used more than
the three services and expressed concern with the church being in this spot. Brief discussion between Mrs. Gray and Mr. Weiner continued regarding the easement. Mr. Frankel stated he
agrees with the CRA, Planning and Zoning, and staff to deny the conditional use request.
28 10/04/11 Mayor McDuffie stated when he was in his 20’s he signed a loan to build a church in a residential neighborhood and one of the things that was part of the building of the
structure was the sound proofing of the structure. He stated it is possible to mitigate the sound. Mayor McDuffie stated the times are not bothersome to him because most everything is
done by the time anyone would be going to bed. Mayor McDuffie stated he has no issues with the parking and the easement eliminates one of the problems with it. He stated if people are
not allowed to park in the swales then then the City needs to take action and solve the problem. Mayor McDuffie supports the church in this location. Mr. Carney asked if someone bought
this now could they put 10 residential units there. Mr. Dorling stated they could not because it is R-1-A and allows a duplex and single family only. Mr. Carney moved to table this to
the next meeting. Motion to table failed due to a lack of a second. Mr. Carney moved to table to give the applicant and staff an opportunity to work out some of the concerns if possible
that was raised tonight, Mayor McDuffie passed the gavel to the Vice Mayor and seconded that motion. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – No; Mrs. Gray – No;
Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – No. Said motion was DENIED with a 3 to 2 vote, Commissioner Carney and Mayor McDuffie dissenting. The City Attorney briefly reviewed
the Board Order with the Commission who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an official part of the minutes). Dr. Alperin moved to adopt the
Board Order (denying the conditional use), seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – No; Mr. Carney
– No; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion to adopt the Board Order denying the conditional use request was approved with a 3 to 2 vote, Mayor McDuffie and Commissioner Carney dissenting.
9.C.1. WAIVER REQUEST/EGLISE DE DIEU PRIMITIVE DE LA NOUVELLE JERUSALEM, INC.: Consider a waiver request to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.9.E.5 (a) (1), “Off Site Parking”,
to increase the maximum acceptable pedestrian path distance to three hundred twenty-two feet (322’) for an off-site parking lot for Eglise De Dieu Primitive De La Nouvelle Jerusalem
Church located at 614 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) This item has been withdrawn by the applicant.
29 10/04/11 9.D. GARAGE PARKING SPACE LICENSE AGREEMENT/GLOBAL PARKING SOLUTIONS: Consider approval of a parking license agreement with Global Parking Solutions for the utilization of
40 parking spaces in the Federspiel Garage seven (7) days per week between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. at a rate of $40.00 per space, per month. Scott Aronson, Parking Management
Specialist, stated Global Parking Solutions is a parking company that provides valet services. The valet queue for Prime Steakhouse located at 110 East Atlantic Avenue is one of the
exceptions to the Valet Parking License Agreement in that the City leases parking spaces in the Federspiel Garage and the reason for that is the 110 East Atlantic Avenue building owned
a 50 car parking lot that was on the property that Worthing Place now sits. He stated those 50 spaces were eliminated from the valets use who used them all those years for that valet
queue. At its meeting of September 12, 2011, the City Commission entered into a Parking License Agreement with Boca Parking Systems, Inc. (BPS) for use of 40 parking spaces in the Federspiel
Garage and this was approved. The South Florida Parking Systems who formerly ran the valet is no longer operating that valet for Prime Steakhouse and Global is looking for approval to
assume that lease for the 40 spaces. Mr. Aronson stated it is $40.00 per month per space for a total of $1,600.00 per month. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Carney stated he would like
to see a little a better price being charged for the valet queues and feels the City can get more than $40.00 per month. Mr. Frankel concurred with comments expressed by Mr. Carney.
Mrs. Gray concurred with comments expressed by Mr. Carney as well. Dr. Alperin asked how many parking spaces are there in the Federspiel Garage. Mr. Aronson stated there are a total
of 202; 55 full time, 40 part-time spaces and the rest of the spaces are public spaces and remain available. Dr. Alperin inquired about the rates. Mr. Aronson stated the modifications
to the Valet Parking License Agreement cap the fee at $10.00 per car and we allow an overtime fee if customers stay more than 4 hours they can charge an extra $5.00 and for that they
have to have a time clock and time punch the tickets in and out. In his opinion, Mayor McDuffie stated it is problematic to change this tonight but he feels the next time staff reviews
fees this fee needs to be raised. Dr. Alperin asked how long this contract is for. The City Manager stated it expires March 31, 2012 but they automatically renew. Mr. Frankel suggested
that the City Commission either at a Workshop or another meeting review the valet operators and determine if the price is appropriate. Mr. Carney stated he does not like automatic renew
language and feels that each contract has to be individually reviewed.
30 10/04/11 Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Parking License Agreement contingent that it expires on March 31, 2012, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows:
Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.E. APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Appoint
one (1) alternate member to the Board of Adjustment to serve an unexpired term ending August 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the recommendation/appointment will be made by
Commissioner Alperin (Seat #2). Dr. Alperin moved to appoint Kenneth Nordt as an alternate member to the Board of Adjustment to serve an unexpired term ending August 31, 2013, seconded
by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes. Said motion passed with a
5 to 0 vote. 9.F. APPOINTMENTS TO THE DELRAY BEACH HOUSING AUTHORITY: Appoint one (1) regular member to serve an unexpired term ending July 14, 2014 and one (1) regular member to serve
a four (4) year term ending October 27, 2015 to the Delray Beach Housing Authority. Based on the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Gray (Seat #4) and Mayor
McDuffie (Seat #5). Mrs. Gray moved to appoint Marcia Beam as a regular member to the Delray Beach Housing Authority to serve an unexpired term ending July 14, 2014, seconded by Mr.
Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to
0 vote. Mayor McDuffie stated he wished to appoint Christel Silver as a regular member to the Delray Beach Housing Authority to serve a four (4) year term ending October 27, 2015. Mr.
Frankel so moved, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes.
Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.G. RATIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT/PBA POLICE LIEUTENANTS: Consider ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with
the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Lieutenants. (ADDENDUM) Bruce Koeser, Human Resources Director, stated the City has come to an agreement with the Police Benevolent Association
(PBA) and has labor agreements for lieutenants. Mr. Koeser stated this reduces the work week from 42 hours to 40 hours a week; a cut of the VEBA which is the retiree health trust from
3.3% to whatever the active current retiree is and noted the City is just paying just active current retirees. He stated instead of the City paying the three (3%) in pension contributions
that will now go
31 10/04/11 to those employees; two unpaid holidays; future pension benefits for those hired after October 1, 2012 will be negotiated as possibly a second tier of pension benefits. Mr.
Koeser stated this mirrors the agreement with Fire (IAFF) that they did last year and noted that this is a three year agreement and includes merits for this fiscal year, a pay freeze
next fiscal year and a re-opener for the third year (effective October 1, 2011-September 30, 2014). Mr. Carney moved to approve the Ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement
with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Lieutenants, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray
– Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.H. RATIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT/PBA POLICE OFFICERS AND SERGEANTS: Consider
ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Officers and Sergeants. (ADDENDUM) Bruce Koeser, Human Resources Director, stated
this item is to consider ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA) for Police Officers and Sergeants and mirrors the Fire (IAFF)
contract. Mr. Koeser stated with Police Officers and Sergeants the City is a year behind in their Collective Bargaining Agreement and will actually be effective October 1, 2010-September
30, 2013. Mr. Koeser stated the first year was a freeze, the second year will be step movement, and the third year will be a reopener. He stated this reduces the work week from 42 hours
to 40 hours; two unpaid holidays. Mr. Koeser stated this will be a cost savings of approximately $1 million this year. The City Manager stated another important aspect that only affects
Police Officers and Sergeants is that we are allowed to negotiate our new pension benefits for officers hired after October 1, 2012. Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Ratification of
the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Officers and Sergeants, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows:
Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. At this point, Mayor McDuffie thanked City staff,
the union representatives from the Police Department and all the men and women in the Police Department because he understands it has been tough on both sides. At this point, the time
being 9:54 p.m., the Commission moved to Item 12, First Readings.
32 10/04/11 12. FIRST READINGS: 12.A. ORDINANCE NO. 39-11: Consider an amendment to the Code of Ordinance Section 72.02, “Definitions,” to conform to the State Statute definition of
a bicycle and to place further limitations on motorized bicycles. If passed, a public hearing will be held on October 18, 2011. The caption of Ordinance No. 39-11 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 72, “BICYCLES”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 72.02,
“DEFINITION”, TO CONFORM WITH STATE STATUTE DEFINITION OF BICYCLE AND TO PLACE FURTHER LIMITATIONS ON MOTORIZED BICYCLES; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 39-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of
Planning and Zoning, stated this ordinance modifies the City’s definition to be consistent with the State of Florida definition for bicycles. Dr. Alperin moved to approve Ordinance No.
39-11 on FIRST Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel
– Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. 13.A. City Manager The City Manager stated Mr. Carney mentioned that someone raised the
issue that they had written to Utility Billing Department to receive their bill by email and they were receiving them by email but also received a duplicate in the mail. The City Manager
stated the City’s present software does not allow the City to issue statements by email. He stated if someone arranges for it we will manually scan it and email it to them but the system
is still generating the print out. The City Manager stated this is one of the things that will change when the City receives its new software.
33 10/04/11 Secondly, the City Manager stated with regard to the Palm Beach County League of Cities Valentin Rodriguez, Commissioner from Lake Clarke Shores, was reappointed to the Criminal
Justice Commission to represent the League and Joann Brinkman from Lake Park was reappointed to the Land Development Regulation Advisory Board. Lastly, the City Manager stated there
was a case in Broward County imposing term limits on County Commissioners and that was upheld at the trial court, overturned at the appeals court, and was currently on appeal to the
Supreme Court so it is not resolved. There will be a meeting on November 2, 2011 between the County Commission, the League of Cities, and the School Board to discuss issues of mutual
interest. The Florida League of Cities Legislative Action Day this year will be on January 25, 2012. 13.B. City Attorney The City Attorney had no comments or inquiries on non-agenda
items. 13.C. City Commission 13.C.1. Dr. Alperin Dr. Alperin stated he attended the Education Board Meeting and was impressed with their enthusiasm. Secondly, Dr. Alperin stated he will
be on vacation the first week of November. 13.C.2. Mr. Carney Mr. Carney stated he supported the ordinance with the raising of the parking rates and did not support it the first time
around because he wanted to make a point about enforcement. Mr. Carney stated at the last meeting Mr. Katz and Ms. Morrison Pearce spoke for this point regarding the enforcement issue.
Mr. Carney stated typically at 9:30 am during the week these are Delray residents that are going to places and he does not feel they should have to pay for parking. Mr. Carney suggested
that this be extended to A-1-A. Secondly, Mr. Carney stated he raised the issue with the City Manager related to a sign which has appeared on A-1-A at the end of Atlantic Avenue regarding
Boston’s Hotel and reportedly it is part of the program with the Department of Transportation where these signs are supposed to be at interstates. Mr. Carney stated this is three miles
east of that interchange and all it is doing now is promoting one business over others. Mr. Carney stated he has asked the City to find out why that sign was placed there and for its
speedy removal because it is not in concert with the Beach Area Master
34 10/04/11 Plan which is trying to eliminate signage except for signs for Public Information or disaster. 13.C.3. Mrs. Gray Mrs. Gray announced that Saturday, October 15, 2011, Delray
Beach is having its first Net Ball Tournament and invited everyone to attend. 13.C.4. Mr. Frankel Mr. Frankel stated the Election date for the republican candidates has been moved up
and suggested that the Commission discuss whether it would be appropriate to move up the City’s Municipal Election as a cost savings if the City wanted to hold it at the same time. The
City Clerk stated because the City’s Charter specifically says it is the second Tuesday in March of every year the only way the City would be able to move it is if they agree to move
it to January 31st. However, the City Clerk stated the viable reason to move it would be whether or not the Supervisor or Elections would be able to have the equipment and everything
in place by that time. The City Manager stated City’s Charter would have to be amended in order to move the Election unless there is a special circumstance. Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated
he spoke with Maria Herrera last week and she brought up the subject about the ordinances that the City Attorney’s office and many people worked so hard on with regard to the sober houses
and the unrelated people. Mr. Frankel stated Ms. Herrera stated that City officials have not levied any fines or found any violations since July 2009. The City Manager stated he has
asked Code Enforcement to research this because there was a lot of activity initially when the ordinances were passed and some of the problem places went away. The City Manager stated
there has also been activity in the Planning and Zoning Department with people coming in wanting to start a sober house but have been told they cannot do it here but have to go elsewhere.
The City Manager stated it is definitely having an impact but he will find out more about the complaints the City has received and what has been done with it. Lastly, Mr. Frankel stated
last week was the Jewish New Year. 13.C.5. Mayor McDuffie Mayor McDuffie stated he sat in the rain in Ohio and did not see the sun for five days. There being no further business, Mayor
McDuffie declared the meeting adjourned at 10:09 p.m.
35 10/04/11 ________________________________________________ City Clerk ATTEST: ____________________________________ M A Y O R The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting held on October 4, 2011, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by
the City Commission on ________________________. ________________________________________________________ City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the Minutes you have received are not completed
as indicated above, this means they are not the official Minutes of the City Commission. They will become the official Minutes only after review and approval which may involve some amendments,
additions or deletions as set forth above.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011 Regular Meeting; Item 9.A.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011 Regular Meeting; Item 9.A.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 18, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 7.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 USA NETBALL
ASSOCIATION, INC. TOURNAMENT PRESENTATION ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION USA Netball Association, Inc. Tournament presentation byCarole Hokrein
Netball moving forward … Official Member of the International Federation of Netball Associations and the Americas Federation of Netball Associations and the only Governing Body for
the sport of Netball in the USA. USANA is run by volunteers and its players and officials fundraise in order to represent the United States at international events. USANA’s coaches,
umpires, tutors and trainers are all volunteers and take no remuneration or stipends. USANA runs training courses for umpires and coaches annually. The Executive Board strives to raise
funds and is constantly reaching out to potential sponsors, grant making institutions and governmental departments. Addendum to the Agenda; Item 7.A.
NETBALL The most popular women’s team sport in the world! Let’s see why…
NETBALL – A global, vibrant, game for all
NETBALL -A Brief History… James Naismith invented basketball in 1891 and inadvertently aided in the invention of netball. Naismith sent a copy of his basketball rules to a sports teacher
in New Orleans, Clara Baer. Baer interpreted Naismith's drawings of the court and players as meaning that players could not leave certain areas. Taken across the Atlantic to a women’s
physical education college, Netball was first played in England in 1895. This form of basketball was taken from Britain to the countries then forming part of its empire where the game
transformed into a fast passing, no dribbling game, restricted playing area ultimate team game called… Netball!
Who’s Playing NETBALL? Worldwide, over 20 million registered players participate in netball—women, children and men. There are twice that number of recreational players. Many schools
throughout the world have Netball as a central core sport in their physical education curriculum. For many women and girls around the world it is empowering, a chance to be active and
the opportunity to play a team sport. In the USA, Netball is gaining momentum--the USA has been ranked as high as 9th in the World and narrowly missed out on qualifying for this year’s
World Championships by 0.6 of a goal.
NETBALL Basics of Play The game is based on passing , throwing, intercepting and scoring of goals. There are seven players in a team and they each have their own area of play. This
means team-work and strong passing skills are very important. Two players are allowed to try and score goals— a goal is worth one point. There is a ring through which the ball must
pass. There is no dribbling and no running with the ball. The ball, which is the size of a soccer ball, must be caught and thrown within 3 seconds. Contact that interferes with
play is not permitted. Defenders must defend 3 feet away from the player with the ball.
NETBALL Court A Netball Court is always the same size and shape measuring 100 feet x 50 feet. Any firm surface can be used. The court is divided into 3 major parts known as “thirds”.
There are two goal thirds and these contain the goal circle from where goals are scored. The object of the game is to score more goals than your opponents. The other third is known as
the center third which contains the center circle. The game is always started or restarted after a goal from the center circle.
Netball Positions GS Goal Shooter One of only two players who can score/shoot goals and may play in only the attacking third of the court. GA Goal Attack The Goal Attack scores and
shoots goals and also runs two thirds of the court. WA Wing Attack To feed the circle players giving them shooting opportunities. C The Center connects the defense end with the attack
end and runs all three thirds of the court but may not go in either circle. WD Wing Defense The opponent is the Wing Attack and the WD is a mobile defender who plays in two thirds
of the court, but not the circle. GD Goal Defense The opponent is the GA and the GD has the responsibility for defending the shooting circle and rebounding missed shots as well as
clearing the ball out of defense. GK Goal Keeper Tries to prevent the Goal Shooter from receiving the ball and shooting. The last line of defense.
Positions on Court C GS WD WA WD WA C GD GA GD GA GS GK GK
NETBALL What’s needed to play? A size 5 Netball (juniors may play with a size 4). Note – a soccer ball can be used at first. Bibs/Pinnies-2 sets with different colors for practice;
Velcro “Patches” for match uniforms. 7 Players Per Team although 12 on the bench. 2 Goalposts Court with Markings – Outdoor or indoor, although indoor is preferable and is the
only permitted surface for international matches.
Set up Netball in your Community! Maybe your players will be members of the Flying Eagles – the USA National Team – here is the u.21 team playing in the 2009 World Youth Championships
in the Cook Islands. NETBALLNOW
England School Team 1940s. NETBALLTHEN
Netball – Around the World Asia: Singapore v India Europe: Scotland v Wales Oceania: Gold medalists New Zealand Silver Ferns
The Modern Game – All 5 continents Africa: Malawi versus Botswana Australia – World Champions 2011
“The Americas” -USA v Jamaica – the ring is 10 feet tall! USA flying high against Canada
Where is Netball going in the USA? Increasing the number of players by Contacting Parks & Rec Departments Following up on contacts made at TEAMS national conference Participation
in the 2012 Junior Olympics by invitation of the AAU Participation in the YMCA National Convention in 2012 Participation in the National Association of Sports Commissions Convention
2012
FLORIDA TAKES THE LEAD But what is coming up in Florida … Meeting of “The Americas” Region – representatives from 15 countries will be attending: USA, Canada, Bermuda, Barbados,
Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Argentina, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & The Grenadines, Antigua & Barbuda, Grenada, Dominica, Guyana, Cayman Islands, St. Kitts/Nevis. December 1-4 Visiting
team from The Bahamas – October 22 First Annual Jingle Bells Netball Tournament, Pompey Park – December 4 Florida Classic – November 19-20 USA NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS June 23-24,
2012 Atlantic High School, Delray Beach
NETBALL…The most popular women’s team sport in the world.. Coming back to its roots. The United States of America Netball Association, (USANA) is the governing body of netball in the
USA and has the goal of promoting and expanding netball is to help children and women learn a new sport leading to lifetime participation. Men and boys are also finding this is a fun
sport to play. USANA provides a unique outlet for women athletes within the USA and is committed to building America to a world-class netball authority. It strives to accomplish this
through development of players, coaches and officials at all levels. For more information about the game of NETBALL, or to help start a new team in your community please contact: development@usanetba
ll.com
Netball in Delray! Pompey Park started its program just 8 weeks ago. Delray Thunder – the girls picked the name – played their first tournament on Saturday against girls twice their
size and in some cases twice their age. They had all the teams and crowd on their feet when showing no fear, they took their shots from the edge, and certainly demonstrated the art of
the bounce pass! They played against teams from Jamaica, Texas, Miami and Ft. Lauderdale.
Great Cultural Exchanges Teams visit from around the world – here are a few -New Zealand’s Silver Ferns training in Palm Beach USA u.21 team in Fort Lauderdale
TO The Caribbean FROM The Pacific Ocean ACROSS THE SEAS
Crossing CulturesFrom ASIA To Africa and Friends from USA
Transition: Tradition to Athlete
The Underdogs who nearly caused an upset with some of their support team Final match of the World Championships – USA v Scotland (ranked 7th)
Contacts President: president@usanetball.com Secretary: secretary@usanetball.com Treasurer: treasurer@usanetball.com Mailing Address United States of America Netball Association, Inc
Bowling Green Station PO Box 1105 New York, NY 10274-1105 The USA Netball Association (USANA), Inc is the governing body of netball in the USA. USANA was founded in New York in 1992
by netball enthusiasts, who came together & volunteered their time for the love of the game. USANA continues to be run by volunteers. USANA is dedicated to promoting and expanding the
sport of netball across the USA through education, training and the implementation of netball in schools, colleges and recreational facilities. The goal of promoting and expanding netball
is to help children and women learn a new sport leading to lifetime participation. It is USANA’s aim to encourage increased participation in netball and to continue to develop and foster
interest in the sport at all ages and levels. USANA provides a unique outlet for women athletes within the USA and is committed to building America in a world-class netball authority.
It strives to accomplish this through development of players, coaches and umpires at all levels. United States of America Netball Association, Inc Introducing Netball Netball Across
the USA USANA currently has affiliates and contacts in several states across the USA; Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii,
Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Portland, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia.
If you would like the contact information for a netball affiliate in your area or you would like to become a netball affiliate please contact us. www.usanetball.com Lets Play Netball!
Netball is one of the most popular women’s sport in the world, with over 20 million players from school to adult leagues. Although popular with w o m e n netball has seen an increase
in male players within the past ten years. Netball is a fast, skillful team game based on running, jumping, throwing & catching. It is played by two teams, and each team consists of
seven players -two shooters, two defense & three center court players. Each player has a playing position determined by the areas on the court where they may move. The playing positions
are shown by identification letters worn above the waist, on both front and back of the player. Those positions are GS, GA, WA, C, WD, GD & GK. The main aim of the game is to score as
many goals as possible from within an area called the Goal Circle, which is a semicircle centered on the goal line & measuring 16 feet in radius. Only GS & GA from each team may score
goals. Goals are scored through a hoop resembling a basketball hoop but without the backboard. Each goal scores one point. The netball moves up & down the court by catching & throwing
it to other team members. Dribbling & moving with the ball is not allowed. What is Netball? Netball -Basic Rules Players cannot dribble but they may bounce the ball once to gain possession.
No running with the ball, players may not re ground the foot which first touches the court (landing foot). Players must pass the ball to someone else within three seconds of catching
it. No contact. Players may not take the ball out of another player’s hands, push, push off, or shove other players. No defending within 3 feet of the player with the ball. This is measured
from the landing foot. Players can only shoot within the shooting circle, a 16-foot radius semicircle at each end of the court, and these players are GS or GA. Each goal scores one point.
The ball must be touched in each third as it travels down the court. Netball Playing Positions Each position has a main role to play: GS (Goal Shooter) -to score goals & work in & around
the goal circle with the GA GA (Goal Attack) -to feed & work with GS & to score goals WA (Wing Attack) -to feed the goal circle players giving them shoot ing opportunities C (Center)
-to take the center pass & to control game flow between attack & defense WD (Wing Defense) -to look for interceptions & to prevent the WA from feeding the goal circle players GD (Goal
Defense) -to win the ball & reduce the effectiveness of the GA GK (Goal Keeper) -to work with the GD to prevent the GS from scoring goals The Netball Court Each playing position has
a specific court area. Netball court dimensions: Length (Side Line) -100 feet Width (Goal Line) -50 feet Goal Circle -16 foot radius Center Circle -3 foot diameter Goal Posts -10 feet
high Goal Ring -15 inch diameter
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Tracie M. Lutchmansingh, P.E., Assistant City Engineer Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden,
City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL /1001 LEWIS COVE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The
item before Commission is consideration of a sidewalk deferral along Lewis Cove for property located at 1001 Lewis Cove. BACKGROUND The applicant submitted a building permit application
to construct a new single family residence. Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along Lewis Cove. The sidewalk deferral was supported at the September 1, 2011 DSMG meeting.
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Tracie M. Lutchmansingh, P.E., Assistant City Engineer Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden,
City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.B. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL /975 BANYAN DRIVE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The
item before Commission is consideration of a sidewalk deferral along Banyan Drive for property located at 975 Banyan Drive. BACKGROUND The applicant submitted a building permit application
to construct a new single family residence. Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along Banyan Drive. The sidewalk deferral was supported at the October 6, 2011 DSMG meeting.
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.C. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL/LITTLE WOOD ESTATES ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission
is the certification of the final plat for an 1.08 acre residential development containing three (3) single-family lots being platted as Little Wood Estates. The subject property is
located at the south end of NW 1st Avenue, between Woods Lane and Trinity Lutheran Church. BACKGROUND The 1.08 acre property is a replat of a portion of Lot 12, in Section 8, Township
46 South, Range 43 East, of the Map showing subdivisions of portions of Townships 45 and 46 South, Range 43 East, Plat Book 1, Page 4, of the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The property is undeveloped. The replat of the property will allow for development of three (3) single-family homes. The property will be divided into 3 lots, Tract “A”, which is being
dedicated as a private street (Little Wood Lane), and Tract “B”, which is a 50 feet wide right-of-way being dedicated for extension of NW 1st Avenue. Water and sewer service will be
provided within both roadways. Drainage and utilities (electric, phone, cable, and gas) will be provided within easements. A five foot landscape buffer surrounds the perimeter of the
property. The City Commission approved the replat for this project on June 20, 2006, but the plat was never recorded. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(E)(5), if the final plat is not recorded
within eighteen (18) months, the approval expires. Therefore, this Plat has been resubmitted for approval. Although minor modifications have been made, the re-submittal is essentially
the same as the previously approved Plat. Plat Analysis: City staff has reviewed the plat and determined that all technical comments have been satisfied. Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1,
prior to approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information in the
application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the Board to approve or deny the development application. As shown in the attached Planning and Zoning Board staff
report, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map Consistency, Concurrency, Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and Compliance with the Land Development
Regulations. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the Plat at its meeting of August 15, 2011, and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. Courtesy Notices: Courtesy
notices were provided to the following groups and neighborhood associations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen’s Coalition • Lake Ida Property Owners To date, no letters
of objection to or support for the Plat have been received. Any future letters of support or objection will be presented at the City Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION Move approval
for the Little Wood Estates Plat, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report and finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(J) (Major Subdivisions), Section 3.2.3 (Standards for Site Plan and/or Plat Actions) and Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings) of the
Land Development Regulations.
Little Wood Estates
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Timothy Tack, Project Manager ESD/CRA Richard C. Hasko, Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE:
October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.D. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Request for Commission
approval/authorization for Mayor to execute Agreement Amendment #1 between Palm Beach County and the City of Delray Beach for the Auburn Avenue project (#2010-040) to extended the deadline
for completion. BACKGROUND Palm Beach County has entered into a contract with the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, in connection with the State’s 2005 Disaster Recovery
Initiative Program – Supplemental Appropriation, which the State is implementing for grant funds provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development under its Community Development
Block Grant Program. Delray Beach was allocated funds under this contract to implement specified activities under the 2005 Disaster Recovery Initiative Program. The improvements associated
with this project are in coordination with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and are part of the Southwest Area Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The attached map provides the
location for this project. Improvements include; roadway resurfacing and reconstruction, sidewalks, landscaping, design build irrigation, drainage improvements, on street parking (where
space is available), bus shelters (if required), new water mains and sanitary sewer infrastructure. The purpose of this amendment is to extend the deadline for the agreement from October
22, 2011 to October 21, 2012. FUNDING SOURCE This agreement will allow for reimbursement to the City of up to $1,000,000 for the improvements associated with the project. Grant funding
is provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development under its Community Development Block Grant Program. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Agreement Amendment
#1 between Palm Beach County and the City of Delray Beach.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Linda R. Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM
8.E. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY/DROWNING PREVENTION COALITION (DPC) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Request approval to renew the Interlocal
Agreement with Palm Beach County Drowning Prevention Coalition ("DPC") for payment of swimming lesson classes to individuals who present vouchers issued by the DPC Learn to Swim Program.
BACKGROUND The County through its Drowning Prevention Coalition's Learn to Swim Program, distributes vouchers to the public which may be redeemed for swimming lessons at Pompey Park
Pool and Delray Swim and Tennis Pool. The County reimburses the City up to $50.00 per voucher. This is the sixth year the City of Delray Beach has entered into an agreement with Palm
Beach County to provide swimming lessons. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Agreement with Drowning Prevention Coalition's Learn to Swim Program for payment
of swimming lesson fees not to exceed $50.00 per voucher.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.F. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD/316 N.W. 6TH AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation
grant(s) to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $28,090.46. Funding for the projects is through the CDBG and RCMP Housing Rehabilitation and grant. BACKGROUND
Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant(s) to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder for the following projects: n 316 NW 6th Avenue/Raymond Graeve & Sons
Cons, Inc./$27,216=Total Rehab cost: $28,090.46 Grant awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency.
Total rehab cost also includes lead inspection, lead abatement, lead clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, and recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost may be incurred
for lead clearance test(s). The contingency may be used for change orders and all unused funds will remain with the CDBG and RCMP Housing Rehabilitation program. Inspection of work is
done by the Department of Community Improvement’s Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services Divisions. Contracts are executed between the building contractor and the property owner.
The City remains the agent and this office monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require
both contractor and homeowner’s signatures. Grant recipients have met all eligibility requirements as specified in the approved Policies and Procedures. The rehabilitation activities
will bring the homes to minimum code requirements by repairing the roof, electric and plumbing systems and correcting other incipient code violations. Detailed work write-ups and individual
case files are available for review in the Neighborhood Services Division Office. The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible for ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts
are awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, as a result of a formal bid process. Therefore, an in-house policy was created to limit awards to the lowest responsive bidder as it relates
to the Division’s professional in-house estimate. This serves to disqualify unreasonably low bids and therefore, protect
against the resulting change order requests. Mr. Bowers is a City employee that has applied for assistance through the City’s Housing Rehabilitation Programs. Mr. Bowers has been qualified
for eligibility through the same process applicable to all applicants and will receive the same benefits available to all eligible applicants under the City program. A letter was received
from HUD dated September approving the Wavier of Employee Conflict of Interest for Mr. Bowers. The Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics issued an opinion on a similar matter dated
July 25, 2011 which allowed employee participation in the County NSP program as outlined in the attached letter. The City also placed an advertisement of Notice of Employee Participation
in the August 6, 2011, Palm Beach Post. FUNDING SOURCE Community Development Block Grant 118-1963-554-49.19 $ 23,522.96 Residential Construction Mitigation Program 118-1936-554-49.19
$ 4,567.50 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant award(s) to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $28,090.46.
BID/QUOTE #: 13-2011NS APPLICANT: PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE OF BID LETTERS: April 26, 2011 DATE OF BID OPENING: May 23, 2011 GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND Abisset Corporation All
Phase Roofing $ 2 9,670.00 Yes All-Site Construction, Inc. ARZ Builders, Inc. $ 2 8,270.00 Built Solid Construction, LLC $ 2 6,615.00 Yes Citywide Construction Services, Inc. CJ Contracting,
LLC $ 3 1,276.00 Yes Cordoba Construction Co. Jemstone Construction Group, Inc. JIJ Construction Corp. KM Construction Inc. MacDonald Construction Company of Palm Beach Raymond Graeve
& Sons Construction, Inc. $ 2 5,920.00 Yes South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $ 2 7,105.00 Yes Sunband Builders Construction Inc. In-House Estimate: $ 2 4,996.55 RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR:
Raymond Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT : $ 25,920.00 5% Contingency $ 1,296.00 $ 27,216.00 Lead Inspection N/A Lead Clearance N/A Termite Inspection N/A Termite
Treatment 855.36 Recording Fees 19.10 GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 28,090.46 FUNDING SOURCE: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account # 118-1963-554-49.19 $23,522.96 118-1936-554-49.19
$4,567.50 COMMENTS: Staff recommends awarding one (1) Housing Rehabilitation project to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET Richard Bowers 316 NW 6th Avenue Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP)
BID /QUOTE NUMBER: 13-2011NS OWNER: ADDRESS: 316 NW 6th Avenue BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE: April 26, 2011 BID OPENING DATE: May 23, 2011 Richard Bowers In-HouseAbisset Corporation All Phase
Roofing All-Site Construction, Inc. ARZ Builders, Inc. Built Solid Construction, LLC CJ Contracting, LLC. Raymond Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. South Florida Construction Services,
Inc. Sun Band Builders 1 Replace Soffit and Fascia $ 92.30 $ 170.00 $ 250.00 $ 150.00 $ 288.00 $ 175.00 $ 155.00 2 House Numbers $ 50.00 $ 40.00 $ 50.00 $ 85.00 $ 22.00 $ 30.00 $ 90.00
3 Hurricane Shutters $ 2,450.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 3,850.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 2,940.00 4 Install Exterior Door $ 1,450.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,750.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 1,050.00
$ 1,320.00 5 Paint House Complete $ 1,925.25 $ 2,120.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 1,860.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 2,210.00 6 Remove Replace Decorative Trim $ 475.00 $ 400.00 $ 750.00 $ 465.00 $
388.00 $ 350.00 $ 215.00 7 Repair All Windows $ 770.00 $ 910.00 $ 850.00 $ 940.00 $ 650.00 $ 575.00 $ 450.00 8 Repair Post Trim $ 85.00 $ 210.00 $ 300.00 $ 475.00 $ 400.00 $ 220.00 $
90.00 9 Install Base Trim $ 135.00 $ 780.00 $ 350.00 $ 785.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 575.00 $ 120.00 10 Install Cabinets and Counter Top $ 6,600.00 $ 5,850.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 4,375.00 $ 3,900.00
$ 5,100.00 $ 7,400.00 11 Install Carpet $ 1,376.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,875.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,925.00 $ 2,850.00 12 Install Ceramic Floor Tile $ 1,417.50 $ 3,500.00 $ 1,100.00 $
1,600.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 1,580.00 13 Install Interior Door $ 400.00 $ 325.00 $ 900.00 $ 295.00 $ 250.00 $ 300.00 $ 430.00 14 Paint Interior Complete $ 1,912.50 $ 2,300.00 $ 2,200.00
$ 1,875.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 2,375.00 $ 1,975.00 15 Repair Drywall $ 736.00 $ 300.00 $ 400.00 $ 665.00 $ 700.00 $ 325.00 $ 300.00 16 Install Vanity w/Sink $ 1,050.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,060.00
$ 1,275.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,025.00 $ 1,430.00 17 Install Water Heater $ 675.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 695.00 $ 800.00 $ 675.00 $ 545.00 18 Repair Toilet $ 190.00 $ 400.00 $ 250.00 $ 200.00
$ 400.00 $ 225.00 $ 420.00 19 Install Exterior Light Fixture $ 230.00 $ 200.00 $ 175.00 $ 175.00 $ 210.00 $ 200.00 $ 85.00 20 Repair Ele. Service $ 1,350.00 $ 1,430.00 $ 750.00 $ 1,600.00
$ 1,100.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,130.00 21 Repair Kitchen Overhead Lighting $ 475.00 $ 615.00 $ 450.00 $ 785.00 $ 700.00 $ 395.00 $ 280.00 22 Replace Exhaust Fan $ 322.00 $ 585.00 $ 260.00
$ 550.00 $ 800.00 $ 240.00 $ 290.00 23 Smoke Detectors $ 600.00 $ 975.00 $ 650.00 $ 650.00 $ 800.00 $ 725.00 $ 690.00 24 Install Rangehood $ 230.00 $ 390.00 $ 900.00 $ 465.00 $ 368.00
$ 135.00 $ 110.00 TOTAL $ 24,996.55 $ -$ 29,670.00 $ -$ 28,270.00 $ 26,615.00 $ 31,276.00 $ 25,920.00 $ 27,105.00 $ -
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.G. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD/212 NW 14TH AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval is requested for one (1) NSP Housing Rehabilitation
project to be awarded to the selected general contractor for acquired NSP properties for the total amount of $39,018. BACKGROUND On February 21, 2010, the City publicized a Request for
Qualification (RFQ 08-2010NS) to obtain qualified firms and/or individuals to execute miscellaneous services, including: General Contractor Service Providers for NSP properties, contingent
on the same being approved by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and were subsequently approved by Commission. In October 2010, Commission approved additional general contractors
to work on NSP properties. Project awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost may
include lead inspection, lead abatement, lead clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, and recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost may be incurred for lead clearance
test(s). The contingency may be used for change orders and all unused funds will remain with the NSP Housing Rehabilitation program. Inspection of work is done by Gil Valdes, Inc. (approved
through RFP 11-2010NS at the June 15, 2010 Commission meeting), the Department of Community Improvement’s Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services Divisions. Contracts are executed
between the building contractor and the City. A contractual agreement is signed by Gil Valdes, Inc. and the contractor with each award. The City remains the agent and this office and
housing inspector monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require both contractor and
City representative’s signature ensuring all City approved Policies and Procedures have been adhered to. The rehabilitation activities will bring the homes to minimum code requirements
by repairing the roof, electric and plumbing systems and correcting other incipient code violations prior to resale. Detailed work write-ups and individual case files are available for
review in the Neighborhood Services Division Office. The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible for ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts are awarded on a rotating
basis to the approved contractors, as a result of a formal bid process.
This housing rehabilitation project for 212 NW 14th Avenue is recommended for award to All Phase Roofing & Construction for $39,018. FUNDING SOURCE Neighborhood Stabilization Program
118-1935-554-62.12 RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending the approval for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation project to be awarded to selected general contractor per RFQ 08-2010NS and RFQ
08-2010NS(A) for the total amount of $39,018.
BID #: 02-2012NS PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE OF BID LETTERS: September 14, 2011 DATE OF BID OPENING: October 6, 2011 GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND All Phase Roofing & Construction,
Inc $ 3 7,160.00 Y All Site Construction C J Contracting, LLC $ 3 7,924.00 Y Florida Community Development Services, Inc. Haywood Construction $ 3 8,960.00 Y J M W Construction Corp.
SW Marlow General Contractors In-House Estimate: 3 5,790.30 RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: All Phase Roofing & Construction BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT : $37,160.00 Contingency: 5% 1,858.00 $39,018.00
FUNDING SOURCE: DCA-Neighborhood Stabilization Program Account # 118-1935-554-62.12 COMMENTS: Staff recommends lowest responsible bidder. Revised 12/7/10 FFM CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD
SERVICES DIVISION HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET 212 NW 14th Avenue
Neighborhood Services Division Bid Estimate Summary Bid Number: 02-2012NS OWNER: ADDRESS: BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE: BID OPENING DATE: In-House All Phase Roofing & Construction C J Contracting
LLC Haywood Construction 1 Install Flat Deck Roof -Shed $ 500.10 $ 1 ,000.00 $ 400.00 $ 1,400.00 $ -$ -2 Install New Roof $ 5,501.60 $ 4 ,150.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ -$ -3 Replace
Soffit & Fascia $ 599.95 $ 830.00 $ 230.00 $ 800.00 $ -$ -4 House Numbers $ 75.00 $ 34.00 $ 2 0.00 $ 30.00 $ -$ -5 Install Exterior Door $ 1,100.00 $ 1 ,200.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 1,200.00
$ -$ -6 Install Impact Windows $ 6,000.00 $ 5 ,660.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 5,800.00 $ -$ -7 Paint House Complete $ 2,000.00 $ 2 ,185.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 2,500.00 $ -$ -8 Install Landscape $ 2,268.60
$ 1 ,020.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ -$ -9 Irrigation System $ 1,500.00 $ 1 ,880.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 2,000.00 $ -$ -10 Install Carpet $ 1,101.00 $ 1 ,765.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 700.00 $ -$ -11 Install
Interior Door $ 1,100.00 $ 1 ,300.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,600.00 $ -$ -12 Install Medicine Cabinet $ 150.00 $ 140.00 $ 80.00 $ 150.00 $ -$ -13 Install Wood Baseboard $ 552.00 $ 975.00 $ 1,200.00
$ 500.00 $ -$ -14 Paint Room Complete $ 2,002.00 $ 2 ,290.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ -$ -15 Repair Base and Wall Cabinets $ 900.00 $ 580.00 $ 750.00 $ 175.00 $ -$ -16 Repair Drywall/Apply
Knockdown $ 2,025.00 $ 1 ,490.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 1,900.00 $ -$ -17 Install Tub/Shower $ 2,000.00 $ 2 ,200.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 2,400.00 $ -$ -RECOInstall Vanity w/Sink $ 525.00 $ 1 ,015.00 $
800.00 $ 1,400.00 $ -$ -19 Repair Drin Lines $ 600.05 $ 500.00 $ 600.00 $ 800.00 $ -$ -20 Reuse Kitchen Sink $ 250.00 $ 450.00 $ 100.00 $ 275.00 $ -$ -21 Carbon Monoxide/Smoke Detectors
w/Arc Fault $ 600.00 $ 570.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 850.00 $ -$ -22 Install Exterior Light Fixture $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 100.00 $ 4 0.00 $ -$ -23 Install Interior Light Fixture $ 125.00 $ 130.00
$ 100.00 $ 4 0.00 $ -$ -24 Repair Electrical Service $ 700.00 $ 1 ,070.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,400.00 25 Upgrade Electric to 150 Amp Service $ 1,065.00 $ 2 ,340.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,400.00 26
Appliances $ 1,800.00 $ 1 ,400.00 $ 1,894.00 $ 1,700.00 27 Repair A/C Unit $ 250.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,400.00 28 Replace Ceramic Tile Floor $ 300.00 $ 286.00 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 29
30 0 $ -$ -$ -$ -TOTAL $ 35,790.30 $ 3 7,160.00 $ -$ 37,924.00 $ -$ 38,960.00 $ -$ -# $ -212 NW 14th Avenue City of Delray Beach October 6, 2011 September 14, 2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.H. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CHANGE FUNDING SOURCE FROM DRI TO CDBG/HOUSING REHABILITATION CONTRACT AWARD ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission approval to change the funding
source on the Housing Rehabilitation Grant awarded at the regular meeting of September 6, 2011 for property located at 354 NW 6th Avenue from Disaster Relief Initiative (DRI) to Community
Block Grant (CDBG). Staff is also recommending aproval to exceed the maximum housing rehabilitation cost, established at $37,000 for an individual property under the Department's approved
Policies and Procedures, for this property to accommodate the total bid award at $37,875.95. BACKGROUND Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded exceeding
the maximum allowed to the lowest responsive bidder for the following project: n 354 NW 6th Avenue/South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $36,670.00 = Total Rehab Cost: $37,875.95
City Commission approved the rehabilitation award for 354 NW 6thAvenue on September 6, 2011 for $37,875.95. The actual costs for termite inspection, lead-based paint testing and additional
recording fees added to the project cost create the need to exceed the maximum project cost. The cost breakdown is: Housing Rehabilitation $35,670.00 Contingency 1,000.00 Lead Inspection
325.00 Lead Clearance 85.00 Termite Treatment 706.75 Recording Fees 89.20 FUNDING SOURCE
Community Development Block Grant 118-1963-554-49.19 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the change of funding source from DRI to CDBG and approval to exceed the maximum housing
rehabilitation cost of $37,000, accommodating the $37,875.95 bid award.
BID/QUOTE #: 13-2011NS APPLICANT: PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE OF BID LETTERS: April 27, 2011 DATE OF BID OPENING: May 23, 2011 GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND Abisset Corporation All
Phase Roofing All-Site Construction, Inc. ARZ Builders, Inc. Benchmark Custom Building of Palm Beach Built Solid Construction, LLC $ 40,975.00 Yes Citywide Construction Services, Inc.
CJ Contracting, LLC $ 40,403.00 Yes Cordoba Construction Co. Jemstone Construction Group, Inc. JIJ Construction Corp. KM Construction Inc. MacDonald Construction Company of Plam Beach
Ray Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. $ 42,410.00 Yes South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $ 35,670.00 Yes Sunband Builders Construction Inc. In-House Estimate: $ 34,814.11 RECOMMENDED
CONTRACTOR: South Florida Construction Services, Inc. BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT : $ 35,670.00 Contingency $ 1,000.00 $ 36,670.00 Lead Inspection 325.00 Lead Clearance 85.00 Termite Inspection
Termite Treatment 706.75 Recording Fees 89.20 GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 37,875.95 FUNDING SOURCE: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account # COMMENTS: Recommend awarding project
to the lowest responsive bidder. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET Daisy Manning 354 NW 6th Avenue 118-1963-554-49.19
BID /QUOTE NUMBER: 13-2011NS OWNER: Daisy Manning ADDRESS: 354 NW 6th Avenue BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE: April 27, 2011 BID OPENING DATE: May 23, 2011 In-HouseAbisset Corporation All Phase
Roofing All-Site Construction, Inc. ARZ Builders, Inc. Benchmark Custom Building of Palm Beach Built Solid Construction, LLC CJ Contracting, LLC. Citywide Construction Services, Inc.
Cordoba Construction Company, Inc. Jemstone Construction Group, Inc. JIJ Construction Corp. KM Construction Inc. MacDonald Construction Co of Palm Beach Ray Graeve & Sons Construction,
Inc. South Florida Construction Services, Inc. Sun Band Builders 1 Globial Encasement $ 3,281.25 $ 2,300.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 5,800.00 2 Remove All Window Sills $ 3,150.00 $ 1,495.00
$ 900.00 $ 1,975.00 $ 1,680.00 3 Remove Exterior door $ 1,300.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 4 Remove Fascia $ 420.00 $ 1,475.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,575.00 $ 345.00 5 Install 4ply
Built up Roof $ 567.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,475.00 $ 1,500.00 6 Replace Soffit and Fascia $ 193.83 $ 1,100.00 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 65.00 7 House numbers $ 50.00 $ 85.00 $ 22.00 $
30.00 $ 75.00 8 Hurricane Shutters $ 3,990.00 $ 4,150.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 4,675.00 $ 3,980.00 9 Install Exterior Door $ 2,175.00 $ 2,025.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,800.00 10 Installl New
Windows $ 6,175.00 $ 6,650.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 6,100.00 $ 4,750.00 11 Paint House Complete $ 1,721.83 $ 2,400.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 2,650.00 $ 2,475.00 12 Repair Porch Structure $ 883.20 $ 3,800.00
$ 350.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 780.00 13 Install Ceramic Tile Fixture Set $ 325.00 $ 325.00 $ 700.00 $ 170.00 $ 150.00 14 Repair Drywall $ 920.00 $ 975.00 $ 800.00 $ 475.00 $ 400.00 15 Install
Hi-Rise toilet $ 900.00 $ 495.00 $ 400.00 $ 725.00 $ 650.00 16 Install New Tub/Shower $ 1,800.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 2,140.00 17 Install Water Heater $ 515.00 $ 675.00
$ 800.00 $ 600.00 $ 775.00 18 Remove Tub and Install Shower $ 2,100.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 2,900.00 $ 2,440.00 19 Install 150 Amp Service $ 1,350.00 $ 1,325.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 2,100.00
$ 1,850.00 20 Install Exterior Light Fixture $ 345.00 $ 275.00 $ 208.00 $ 285.00 $ 195.00 21 Install Interior Light Fixture $ 260.00 $ 350.00 $ 325.00 $ 300.00 $ 420.00 22 Repair ELE.
Service $ 1,350.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 1,150.00 23 Replace Exhaust Fan $ 322.00 $ 575.00 $ 599.00 $ 250.00 $ 600.00 24 Smoke Detector $ 720.00 $ 600.00 $ 899.00 $ 675.00
$ 900.00 TOTAL $ 34,814.11 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 40,975.00 $ 40,403.00 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 42,410.00 $ 35,670.00 $ -
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Sharon L'Herrou, Administrative Officer Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12,
2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.I. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 GRANT APPLICATION/WALMART/HOLIDAY TOY PROGRAM ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The Police Department seeks approval
for the submission of a grant application to Walmart in the amount of $5,000. The award will support a Holiday Toy program for disadvantaged youth in collaboration with local Law Enforcement
Officers. BACKGROUND Historically, the Police Department has sponsored a Holiday Toy drive to help ensure that all the children of our community have a healthy and happy holiday season.
This grant would fund a program where identified youth would "Shop with a Cop" and pick out their holiday toys with an officer. Adding this component would improve the process by which
the level of need is identified. It also enriches the relationships between Law Enforcement and the community. FUNDING SOURCE There is no match requirement. RECOMMENDATION The Police
Department recommends approval.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.J.
-REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HOLIDAY PAGEANT PARADE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to endorse the Delray Beach Holiday Pageant
Parade co-sponsored by Parks and Recreation Department and Chamber of Commerce to be held on December 10, 2011 beginning at approximately 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., to grant a temporary
use permit per LDR’s Section 2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of Atlantic Avenue from A-1-A to NW 5th Avenue for the parade route and set up from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Commission is also requested to approve staff support for traffic control, security, EMS assistance, barricading, trash removal, clean up and event signage. BACKGROUND Attached is a
Special Event permit received from Danielle Beardsley requesting approval of this event with a copy of the event site plan, budget and economic prosperity calculator. The parade will
end on NW 5th Avenue again this year. Since the event is co-sponsored by the Parks and Recreation Department, there will be no charges per City policy for City costs and a Hold Harmless
Agreement or Certificate of Insurance is not required. The estimated costs for the event which includes overtime, barricade rental, signage and trash boxes are approximately $13,555.
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the event, the temporary use permit and staff support as requested.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.K.
-REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/23RD ANNUAL DOWNTOWN DELRAY FESTIVAL OF ARTS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to endorse the
23rd Annual Downtown Delray Festival of the Arts sponsored by Howard Alan Events, Ltd. to be held January 21-22, 2012, from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., to grant a temporary use permit per
LDR’s section 2.4.6(F) for use of City rights-of-way on Atlantic Avenue from the east side of NE/SE 6th Avenue to Bronson and the Gladiola lot (SE 6th Avenue) for vendor parking, to
authorize staff support for security and traffic control, barricade assistance, EMS assistance, fire inspection services, and to permit an event sign to be erected on Atlantic Avenue
just east of I-95 fourteen (14) days prior to the event. BACKGROUND Attached are an event permit application, site plan, budget, Economic Prosperity Calculator, Certificate of Insurance
and Hold Harmless Agreement for this event. Howard Alan Events, Ltd. will be conducting the 23rd Annual Downtown Delray Festival of the Arts on January 21st and 22nd from 10:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Alan is requesting closure of Atlantic Avenue, from just east of NE/SE 6th Avenue east to Bronson. He is also requesting barricading assistance and security and traffic
control assistance from the Police Department. Mr. Alan has indicated that he will rent barricades and City staff will install them. He is also requesting use of the Gladiola lot (SE
6th Avenue) for vendor parking. Because of the size of this event, EMS and Inspector services will be required. The estimated overtime cost for City services is $10,654. Per Event Policies
and Procedures, Mr. Alan will pay 100% for overtime costs, as well as provide for trash removal, clean up, port-a-lets and signage, which he will pay for. Signage can be installed fourteen
(14) days prior to the event and must be less than 20 square feet. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends endorsement of the event, granting of the temporary use permit for the street closure
and parking lot use as recommended by staff, providing staff assistance for traffic control and security, barricading, EMS assistance, fire inspection services, and allowing the event
sign to be installed fourteen (14) days prior to the event, with all City costs to be paid by the vendor. Approval is to include use of the Gladiola lot (NE 6th Avenue) for vendor parking,
with City staff installing rented barricades.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Jasmin Allen, Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October 13, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA
ITEM 8.L. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of the City Commission is review
of appealable actions which were taken by various Boards during the period of October 3, 2011 through October 14, 2011. BACKGROUND This is the method of informing the City Commission
of the land use actions, taken by designated Boards, which may be appealed to the City Commission. After this meeting, the appeal period shall expire (unless the 10 day appeal period
has not occurred). Section 2.4.7(E), Appeals, of the LDRs applies. In summary, it provides that the City Commission hears appeals of actions taken by an approving Board. It also provides
that the City Commission may file an appeal. To do so: · The item must be raised by a Commission member. · By motion, an action must be taken to place the item on the next meeting of
the Commission as an appealed item. REVIEW BY OTHERS Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting of October 12, 2011 A. Approved (5 to 0, Scott Porten and Nick Sadowsky absent), a
request for a color change to recover existing awning structures for Blue Gallery, located at the southeast corner of East Atlantic Avenue and SE 6th Avenue (600 East Atlantic Avenue).
B. Approved with conditions (4 to 1, Roger DeCapito dissenting), a request to reconsider the landscape plan associated with a Class II site plan modification which includes removal of
existing landscaping and installation of three tree grates along SE 2nd Avenue, to accommodate a sidewalk café for the Sushi Restaurant, located at the southeast corner of East Atlantic
Avenue and SE 2nd Avenue (32 SE 2nd Avenue).
C. Approved (5 to 0), a Class I site plan modification request associated with architectural elevation changes to the storefront for PGA Tour Superstore (former Ross, The Linen Store
and Rose Vine Winery), located at the southwest corner of Linton Boulevard and SW 10th Avenue (1100 Linton Boulevard). D. Approved (4 to 1, Rustem Kupi dissenting) , a Class I site plan
modification associated with the replacement of awnings for Delray Commercial Center, located at the northeast corner of Congress Avenue and SW 10th Street (975 South Congress Avenue).
E. Approved with conditions (3 to 2, Roger DeCapito and Rustem Kupi dissenting), a Class I site plan modification associated with architectural elevation changes involving the installation
of an awning for Spoon Fed, located on the northwest corner of East Atlantic Avenue and the FEC Railway (217 East Atlantic Avenue). F. Approved with conditions (5 to 0), a Class II site
plan modification request associated with extensive modifications to the existing landscape plan and photometric plan including the introduction of 35’ high light poles in a portion
of the site for Palm Tran South County Satellite Facility, located at the northwest corner of Congress Avenue and NW 1st Street (100 North Congress Avenue). G. Approved with conditions
(4 to 0, Shane Ames left the meeting), a Class III site plan modification associated with the conversion of a portion of the existing 7,041 sq. ft. club house at the Village at Delray
development for the Milagro Center child care facility. The day care will occupy a 4,114 sq. ft. area while the clubhouse will now occupy 2,927 sq. ft. The Milagro Center is located
on the east side of Auburn Avenue, south of SW 6th Street (675 Auburn Avenue). H. Approved with conditions (4 to 0), a Class III site plan modification, landscape plan and architectural
elevation plan associated with the interior conversion of two existing automotive service bays to retail use for the expansion of the existing convenience store for Gasland, located
at the southwest corner of NE 4th Street and NE 5th Avenue (398 NE 5th Avenue). RECOMMENDATION By motion, receive and file this report. Attachment: Location Map
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David Boyd, Finance Director Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Manager THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA
ITEM 8.M.1 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 BID AWARD/LV SUPERIOR LANDSCAPING, INC./STORM RETENTION AREAS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to approve
bid award to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. for landscape maintenance of Stormwater Retention Areas, Bid #2011-30 for the estimated annual total $33,049.36, this is a savings of $4,798
compared to the previous annual contract for this service. BACKGROUND Bid #2011-05 for landscape maintenance of stormwater retention areas was awarded to Vila and Sons Landscaping Corp.
on April 5, 2011. On August 5, 2011 Vila and Sons Landscaping Corp. informed the City that they would no longer be in operation. Bid #2011-30 was opened on September 14, 2011. Eleven
(11) contractors submitted bids all in accordance with City purchasing policies and procedures. This is a one (1) year contract with two (2) one year renewals. LV Superior Landscaping,
Inc. was the apparent low responsive bidder. The department reviewed references and equipment to ensure that they were able to fulfill the contract obligations. FUNDING SOURCE Funding
from account code 448-5416-538-34.90, Stormwater Utility Fund/Other Contractual Services. RECOMMENDATION Department and Purchasing staff recommend award to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc.
for the landscape maintenance of the Stormwater Retention Areas for an estimated annual total of $33,049.36.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BID # 2011-30 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE STORMWATER RETENTION AREAS ANNUAL CONTRACT Bid Opening: September 14, 2011 VENDOR ==> I. MOWING, TRIMMING, EDGING RETENTION AREAS:
Total Per Month $ 1,335.45 mo. $ 1,320.00 mo. $ 1,320.00 mo. $ 1,222.66 mo. $ 1,665.80 mo. $ 1,485.00 mo. Total Per Year $ 16,025.40 yr. $ 15,840.00 yr. $ 15,840.00 yr. $ 14,671.92 yr.
$ 19,989.60 yr. $ 17,820.00 yr. II. FERTILIZING (ADD ON ALTERNATE): Total Per Month $ 184.33 mo. $ 200.00 mo. $ 180.00 mo. $ 150.00 mo. $ 216.00 mo. $ 275.00 mo. Total Per Year $ 2,211.96
yr. $ 2,400.00 yr. $ 2,160.00 yr. $ 1,800.00 yr. $ 2,592.00 yr. $ 3,300.00 yr. Total Items I & II -Per Month $ 1,519.78 mo. $ 1,520.00 mo. $ 1,500.00 mo. $ 1,372.66 mo. $ 1,881.80 mo.
$ 1,760.00 mo. Total Items I & II -Per Year $ 18,237.36 yr. $ 18,240.00 yr. $ 18,000.00 yr. $ 16,471.92 yr. $ 22,581.60 yr. $ 21,120.00 yr. ADDITIONAL RETENTION POND AREAS Area #1 Lindell
Blvd. and South Dixie Hyw. $ 3,288.00 yr. $ 3,920.00 yr. $ 3,932.00 yr. $ 4 ,414.00 yr. $ 3 ,910.40 yr. $ 4,760.00 yr. A -NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area $ 3,958.00 yr. $ 3,780.00 yr. $
4,792.00 yr. $ 5 ,838.00 yr. $ 4 ,338.70 yr. $ 5 ,980.00 yr. B -NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area $ 3,604.00 yr. $ 4,260.00 yr. $ 4,330.00 yr. $ 5 ,690.00 yr. $ 4 ,104.94 yr. $ 5,500.00 yr.
C-NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area $ 3,962.00 yr. $ 3,880.00 yr. $ 4,090.00 yr. $ 5 ,684.00 yr. $ 4 ,281.40 yr. $ 5 ,570.00 yr. Addional Area Total $ 14,812.00 yr. $ 15,840.00 yr. $ 1 7,144.00
yr. $ 2 1,626.00 yr. $ 1 6,635.44 yr. $ 2 1,810.00 yr. ANNUAL TOTAL $ 3 3,049.36 $ 34,080.00 $ 3 5,144.00 $ 38,097.92 $ 39,217.04 $ 4 2,930.00 III. PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
1 Sod Replacement (sq. ft. price) $ 0 .48 sf $2.00 sf $0.65 sf $0.50 sf $0.75 sf $0.65 sf 2 Plant & Tree Installation (labor per hour per man) $ 21.75 hr $75.00 hr $30.00 hr $18.00 hr
$19.50 hr $28.00 hr 3 Fertilizing (labor per hour per man) $ 21.75 hr $25.00 hr $30.00 hr $18.00 hr $19.50 hr $28.00 hr 4 Additional Pest Control -Gallon $ 6 9.60 gal $250.00 gal $100.00
gal $85.00 gal $87.00 gal $125.00 gal (price per 50 gal. application of insecticide) 5 Additional Pest Control -Pound $ 6 9.60 lb $250.00 lb $75.00 lb $85.00 lb $87.00 lb $100.00 lb
(price per 50 lb. application of insecticide) 6 Fire Ant Control (labor per hour per man) $ 21.75 hr $25.00 hr $30.00 hr $25.00 hr $91.00 hr $28.00 hr ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUESTED ♦LIST
OF EQUIPMENT ATTACHED ( Yes /No ) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ♦LIST OF CURRENT ACCOUNTS ( Yes /No) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ♦# OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES 24 4 40 4 17 80 ♦# OF YEARS AS A LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR 16 25 6 6 17 23 ♦DELRAY BEACH OCCUPATION LICENSE # PBC200710104 No No 11042828 1100027568 1200041099 ♦STATE APPLICATORS LICENSE # JE104922 018FL00012039 No Contractor
P97000094813 JE104922 ♦LIST/ATTACHED OF FERT//CHEM TO BE USED ( Yes /No ) Yes Yes Yes Yes Hand Pulled Yes ♦REFERENCES SUBMITTED ( Yes /No ) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Property Svrs. Alpha
Scape Lawn Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping & Landscaping Landscaping LV Superior Tare World Class Gator Complete Page 1 of 2
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BID # 2011-30 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE STORMWATER RETENTION AREAS ANNUAL CONTRACT Bid Opening: September 14, 2011 VENDOR ==> I. MOWING, TRIMMING, EDGING RETENTION AREAS:
Total Per Month Total Per Year II. FERTILIZING (ADD ON ALTERNATE): Total Per Month Total Per Year Total Items I & II -Per Month Total Items I & II -Per Year ADDITIONAL RETENTION POND
AREAS Area #1 Lindell Blvd. and South Dixie Hyw. A -NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area B -NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area C-NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area Addional Area Total ANNUAL TOTAL III.
PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED) 1 Sod Replacement (sq. ft. price) 2 Plant & Tree Installation (labor per hour per man) 3 Fertilizing (labor per hour per man) 4 Additional Pest
Control -Gallon (price per 50 gal. application of insecticide) 5 Additional Pest Control -Pound (price per 50 lb. application of insecticide) 6 Fire Ant Control (labor per hour per man)
ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUESTED ♦LIST OF EQUIPMENT ATTACHED ( Yes /No ) ♦LIST OF CURRENT ACCOUNTS ( Yes /No) ♦# OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES ♦# OF YEARS AS A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR ♦DELRAY
BEACH OCCUPATION LICENSE # ♦STATE APPLICATORS LICENSE # ♦LIST/ATTACHED OF FERT//CHEM TO BE USED ( Yes /No ) ♦REFERENCES SUBMITTED ( Yes /No ) $ 100.00 mo. $ 1,986.00 mo. $ 1,490.00 mo.
$ 1,595.00 mo. $ 2,900.00 mo. $ 1,200.00 yr. $ 23,832.00 yr. $ 17,880.00 yr. $ 19,140.00 yr. $ 34,800.00 yr. $ 30.00 mo. $ 220.00 mo. $ 210.00 mo. $ 1,595.00 mo. $ 400.00 mo. $ 360.00
yr. $ 2,640.00 yr. $ 2,520.00 yr. $ 19,140.00 yr. $ 4,800.00 yr. $ 130.00 mo. $ 2,206.00 mo. $ 1,700.00 mo. $ 3,190.00 mo. $ 3,300.00 mo. $ 1,560.00 yr. $ 26,472.00 yr. $ 20,400.00 yr.
$ 38,280.00 yr. $ 39,600.00 yr. (Vendor Error) $ 10,640.00 yr. $ 5,686.00 yr. $ 6 ,050.00 yr. $ 5 ,090.00 yr. $ 6 ,645.00 yr. $ 1 0,640.00 yr. $ 6 ,560.00 yr. $ 8,760.00 yr. $ 6 ,210.00
yr. $ 9 ,125.00 yr. $ 10,640.00 yr. $ 4,694.00 yr. $ 7 ,900.00 yr. $ 5 ,400.00 yr. $ 7 ,905.00 yr. $ 1 0,640.00 yr. $ 4 ,576.00 yr. $ 8,040.00 yr. $ 5 ,760.00 yr. $ 8 ,135.00 yr. $ 42,560.00
yr. $ 21,516.00 yr. $ 3 0,750.00 yr. $ 2 2,460.00 yr. $ 3 1,810.00 yr. $ 44,120.00 $ 47,988.00 $ 5 1,150.00 $ 60,740.00 $ 71,410.00 $95.00 sf $3.00 sf $0.75 sf $0.75 sf $0.80 sf $15.00
hr $30.00 hr $25.00 hr $28.75 hr $25.00 hr $15.00 hr $30.00 hr $25.00 hr $28.75 hr $25.00 hr $100.00 gal $4.00 gal $100.00 gal $80.00 gal $100.00 gal $100.00 lb $4.00 lb $100.00 lb $80.00
lb $100.00 lb $15.00 hr $30.00 hr $25.00 hr $28.75 hr $25.00 hr No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 6 30 29 12 4 6 6 29 23 1100048960 1000045361 PBCBT201015499 1100046780 No JE12958
CM20937 No JE136670 LC181256 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Wesley Lawn Wizard USA Tree Huggers Palm Beach Landscaping Landscaping Property Works Landscaping Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Linda R. Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM
8.M.2 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 BID AWARDS/LV SUPERIOR LANDSCAPING, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before Commission to consider awarding two (2) bids
to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. in the amount of $19,696.94 for Landscape Maintenance of Lake Ida Road Medians, South Federal Highway and Congress Avenue. BACKGROUND Staff recommends
awarding two (2) bids in the amount of $19,696.94 to the second lowest contractor, LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. for the following: Bid# 2011-28: In the amount of $6,665.05 for Landscape
Maintenance of Lake Ida Road Medians-between Swinton & I-95. Bid # 2011-29: In the amount of $13,031.89 for Area A-South Federal Highway and Area B-Congress Avenue. LV Superior Landscaping,
Inc. has met all the requirements as a City of Delray Beach contractor for the areas listed Bid# 2011-28 and Bid# 2011-29. The lowest bidder, Wesley Landscaping failed to present staff
with complete bid packages, and their bids are considered to be non-responsive. On Bid #2011-28 they did not provide a list of current maintenance equipment, and they did not provide
an indication that they had a pesticide license. On Bid #2011-29 they did not provide an equipment list. FUNDING SOURCE Funding is available from Beautification Fund Account # 119-4144-572-46.40
(Beautification Maintenance). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding contract Bid# 2011-28 and Bid# 2011-29 to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc.
BID OPENING: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 @11:00 A.M. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE LAKE IDA ROAD MEDIANS (Between Swinton I95) BID #2011-28 Annual Contract World Class 1st Nationa
Landscaping ITEM Annual Property # DESCRIPTION Quantity Management 1 Weed Control 24 $50.47 $62.68 $77.58 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 $80.00 $50.00 $180.00 $75.00 $80.00 $100.00 2 Pruning a.
Shrubs 12 $90.00 $131.92 $151.80 $148.00 $160.00 $175.00 $158.00 $200.00 $200.00 $125.00 $200.00 $185.00 b. Trees & Palms 12 $50.00 $58.88 $70.15 $65.00 $75.00 $75.00 $28.00 $20.00 $75.00
$150.00 $25.00 $100.00 3 Litter Control 260 $4.00 $5.37 $7.25 $6.00 $4.50 $8.00 $10.00 $5.00 $3.00 $18.50 $20.00 $55.00 4 Chemical Applications a. Shrub Insecticide Program (As needed,
see rates for additional work) b. Fire Ant Control (As needed, see rates for additional work) c. Disease Control (As needed, see rates for additional work) e. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3
$124.00 $200.07 $226.80 $100.00 $100.00 $130.00 $45.00 $70.00 $75.00 $175.00 $180.00 $200.00 f. Shade Tree Fertilization 2 $65.00 $65.57 $71.50 $100.00 $70.00 $75.00 $90.00 $125.00 $100.00
$175.00 $200.00 $250.00 g. Shrub Fertilization 3 $60.00 $71.56 $196.80 $100.00 $70.00 $220.00 $110.00 $300.00 $175.00 $225.00 $200.00 $205.00 5 Mulch 3 $145.00 $176.30 $325.00 $300.00
$500.00 $400.00 $1,200.00 $1,500.00 $700.00 $700.00 $800.00 $250.00 TOTAL BID PRICE ( ACTUAL ) ERROR ON SHEET==>BID BY VENDOR PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED) 6.a. Plant & Tree
Installation $19.00 $24.03 $17.50 $25.00 $30.00 $30.00 $50.00 $30.00 $28.00 $28.75 $30.00 $30.00 (labor per hour/per man) 6.b. Fertilizing $18.00 $24.03 $20.00 $25.00 $30.00 $30.00 $25.00
$30.00 $28.00 $28.75 $25.00 $40.00 (labor per hour/per man) 6.c. Additional Pest Control $18.00 $17.80 $45.00 $165.00 $135.00 $100.00 $250.00 $200.00 $125.00 $150.00 $125.00 $100.00
(price per 50 gallon application of insecticide) 6.c. Additional Pest Control $18.00 $17.80 $45.00 $165.00 $135.00 $45.00 $125.00 $150.00 $100.00 $100.00 $125.00 $100.00 (price per 50
gallon application of insecticide) 6.d. Fire Ant Control $19.00 $24.03 $31.00 $25.00 $35.00 $30.00 $25.00 $30.00 $28.00 $28.75 $25.00 $30.00 (labor per hour/per man) Florida Certified
Pesticide Application License NO YES NO YES NO NO NO YES YES YES YES YES List of Current Maintenance Equipment Listed N0 YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES References Listed
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES City of Delray Occupational License NO NO YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES YES Acknowledged Addendum's 1 & 2 YES YES YES YES YES YES
YES YES YES YES YES NO Federal Tax I.D # 61-1568920 20-4941314 65-0887772 20-2092400 90-0733801 37-1507102 26-4277822 26-0580247 35-2210720 87-0720106 03-0518060 27-1080466 $1,800.00
$1,500.00 $1,800.00 $4,810.00 $525.00 $350.00 $675.00 $2,100.00 $13,560.00 Palm Beach Landscape Maintenance Inc. $2,400.00 $2,220.00 Huggers & Property Services Tree Complete of South
FL $4,320.00 $22,585.00 Property Works Outsourcing Property Maint. Services $1,920.00 $2,400.00 $300.00 $1,200.00 $14,300.00 $600.00 $500.00 $615.00 $750.00 $9,640.00 $10,997.00 $150.00
$336.00 $2,600.00 $240.00 $1,300.00 $210.00 $600.00 $2,400.00 $13,760.00 $250.00 $900.00 $4,500.00 $11,000.00 $5,200.00 $540.00 $400.00 $1,200.00 $2,400.00 Nursery $180.00 $6,664.33
$7,266.32 $9,720.00 $11,275.00 $300.00 $900.00 $7,496.00 $590.40 $975.00 $1,896.00 Wizard USA $1,861.92 $2,160.00 $1,920.00 $131.14 $214.68 $8,799.12 $143.00 $1,680.00 $1,920.00 Contractors
$1,920.00 Tare Landcaping, Inc. Landscaping $8,060.00 Superior Alpha $200.00 $390.00 $2,100.00 $2,080.00 $1,776.00 $780.00 $680.40 $1,821.60 $841.80 $1,885.00 $900.00 $1,170.00 $300.00
$140.00 Wesley Scape LV Gator Lawn Landscaping Landscaping $1,211.28 $1,080.00 $600.00 $1,040.00 $706.56 $1,396.20 $600.21 $1,504.32 $1,583.04 $372.00 $130.00 $180.00 $435.00 $11,450.00
$2,400.00 $900.00 $780.00 $225.00 $5,048.28 $528.90 $6,665.05 $900.00 $210.00 $525.00 $1,500.00 $2,100.00 $660.00 $1,200.00 $3,600.00 $330.00 $200.00 $135.00 $1,560.00 $300.00
BID OPENING DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE Tabulation Bid No 2011-29 LV Complete Area (a) South Federal Highway
Wesley Superior Property of South Tare Lawn Wizard World Class (Between Linton Blvd. & C-15 Canal) Landscaping Landscaping, Inc. Florida Landscaping USA Inc. Landscape Item # Description
Qty Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 1 Weed Control 24 $20.00 $480.00 $34.71 $833.04 $50.00
$1,200.00 $35.00 $840.00 $40.000 $960.00 $38.00 $912.00 2 Mowing 44 $10.00 $440.00 $10.71 $471.24 $10.00 $440.00 $9.00 $396.00 $12.000 $528.00 $10.50 $462.00 3 Pruning a. Shrubs 12 $100.00
$1,200.00 $121.49 $1,457.88 $100.00 $1,200.00 $120.00 $1,440.00 $135.000 $1,620.00 $135.00 $1,620.00 b. Trees & Palms 12 $17.00 $204.00 $17.36 $208.32 $25.00 $300.00 $15.00 $180.00 $20.000
$240.00 $20.00 $240.00 c. Accent Trees 6 $20.00 $120.00 $27.77 $166.62 $35.00 $210.00 $35.00 $210.00 $30.000 $180.00 $32.00 $192.00 4 Litter Control (5 time a week) 260 $2.00 $520.00
$3.47 $902.20 $3.00 $780.00 $2.99 $777.40 $3.000 $780.00 $3.50 $910.00 5 Chemical Applications a. Shrub Insecticide Program As Needed (See rates for additional work) b. Fire Ant Control
As Needed (See rates for additional work) c. Disease Control As Needed (See rates for additional work) d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00 $180.00 $34.71 $104.13 $40.00 $120.00 $35.00 $105.00
$40.000 $120.00 $36.00 $108.00 e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 $60.00 $180.00 $69.42 $208.26 $75.00 $225.00 $75.00 $225.00 $80.000 $240.00 $72.00 $216.00 6 Mulch 3 $520.00 $1,560.00 $225.62 $676.86
$300.00 $900.00 $295.00 $885.00 $300.000 $900.00 $275.00 $825.00 Denotes calculation error by vendor $5,015.60 AREA (A) TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6) $4,884.00 $5,028.55 $5,375.00
$5,058.40 $5,568.00 $5,485.00 Area (b) Congress Avenue (Between Lake Ida & South to C-15 Canal) Item # Description Qty Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension
Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 1 Weed Control 24 $20.00 $480.00 $69.42 $1,666.08 $100.00 $2,400.00 $80.00 $1,920.00 $80.000 $1,920.00 $70.00 $1,680.00
2 Mowing 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 Pruning a. Shrubs 12 $100.00 $1,200.00 $121.49 $1,457.88 $150.00 $1,800.00 $139.00 $1,668.00 $135.000
$1,620.00 $135.00 $1,620.00 b. Trees & Palms 12 $17.00 $204.00 $52.07 $624.84 $50.00 $600.00 $49.00 $588.00 $60.000 $720.00 $60.00 $720.00 c. Accent Trees 6 $20.00 $120.00 $52.07 $312.42
$50.00 $300.00 $60.00 $360.00 $50.000 $300.00 $60.00 $360.00 4 Litter Control (5 time a week) 260 $2.00 $520.00 $5.55 $1,443.00 $3.00 $780.00 $4.99 $1,297.40 $5.000 $1,300.00 $7.00 $1,820.00
5 Chemical Applications a. Shrub Insecticide Program As Needed (See rates for additional work) b. Fire Ant Control As Needed (See rates for additional work) c. Disease Control As Needed
(See rates for additional work) d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00 $180.00 $69.42 $208.26 $75.00 $225.00 $80.00 $240.00 $80.000 $240.00 $70.00 $210.00 e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 $60.00 $180.00
$69.42 $208.26 $75.00 $225.00 $180.00 $540.00 $75.000 $225.00 $70.00 $210.00 f. Shade Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00 $180.00 $104.13 $312.39 $100.00 $300.00 $80.00 $240.00 $90.000 $270.00
$105.00 $315.00 6 Mulch 3 $520.00 $1,560.00 $590.07 $1,770.21 $600.00 $1,800.00 $680.00 $2,040.00 $700.000 $2,100.00 $650.00 $1,950.00 AREA (B) TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6) $4,624.00
$8,003.34 $8,430.00 $8,893.40 $8,695.00 $8,885.00 Denotes calculation error by vendor $8,004.13 $13,019.72 GRAND TOTAL BID PRICE AREA'S (A) AND (B) $9,508.00 $13,031.89 $13,805.00 $13,951.80
$14,263.00 $14,370.00 1
BID OPENING DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE Tabulation Bid No 2011-29 LV Complete Wesley Superior Property of
South Tare Lawn Wizard World Class Landscaping Landscaping, Inc. Florida Landscaping USA Inc. Landscape PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED) A. Sod Replacement $14.00 $0.28 $0.65
$2.00 $0.75 $65.00 per square feet B. Plant & Tree Installation $18.00 $22.25 $28 $50 $25 $30 Labor per hour/per man C. Fertilizing $18.00 $22.25 $28 $25 $25 $30 Labor per hour/per man
D. Additional Pest Control Price per 50 gallon application-insecticide $18.00 $44.50 $125 $250 $100 $100 Price per 50 pound application-insecticide $18.00 $44.50 $100 $180 $100 $45 E.
Fire Ant Control $19.00 $22.25 $28 $25 $25 $30 Labor per hour/per man F. Hurricane Debris Removal $18.00 $22.25 $28 $50 $35 $30 Labor per hour/per man Valid Florida Certified Pesticide
Applicator's License? YES YES NO YES YES NO Valid Certified Arborist (ISA) Certification NO NO NO YES yes NO Federal I.D. # 61-1568920 20-4941314 35-2210720 264277822 20-2092400 37-1507102
Equipment List Submitted? NO YES YES YES YES YES Drug Free Workplace Certification Signed? NO YES YES YES YES YES References? YES YES YES YES YES YES 2
BID OPENING DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE Tabulation Bid No 2011-29 Area (a) South Federal Highway (Between
Linton Blvd. & C-15 Canal) Item # Description Qty 1 Weed Control 24 2 Mowing 44 3 Pruning a. Shrubs 12 b. Trees & Palms 12 c. Accent Trees 6 4 Litter Control (5 time a week) 260 5 Chemical
Applications a. Shrub Insecticide Program b. Fire Ant Control c. Disease Control d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3 e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 6 Mulch 3 Denotes calculation error by vendor AREA (A)
TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6) Area (b) Congress Avenue (Between Lake Ida & South to C-15 Canal) Item # Description Qty 1 Weed Control 24 2 Mowing 0 3 Pruning a. Shrubs 12 b. Trees
& Palms 12 c. Accent Trees 6 4 Litter Control (5 time a week) 260 5 Chemical Applications a. Shrub Insecticide Program b. Fire Ant Control c. Disease Control d. Palm Tree Fertilizer
3 e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 f. Shade Tree Fertilizer 3 6 Mulch 3 AREA (B) TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6) Denotes calculation error by vendor GRAND TOTAL BID PRICE AREA'S (A) AND (B) 1st
National Alpha Tree Huggers Outsourcing Property Scape Landscaping & Gator Maint. Services Contractors Property Works Nursery, LLC Landscaping Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension
Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension $45.00 $1,080.00 $35.00 $840.00 $50.00 $1,200.00 $40.00 $960.00 $41.00 $984.00 $10.00 $440.00 $15.00 $660.00 $15.00 $660.00
$9.50 $418.00 $14.00 $616.00 $125.00 $1,500.00 $130.00 $1,560.00 $136.00 $1,632.00 $150.00 $1,800.00 $141.50 $1,698.00 $15.00 $180.00 $20.00 $240.00 $22.50 $270.00 $20.00 $240.00 $25.80
$309.60 $30.00 $180.00 $30.00 $180.00 $35.50 $213.00 $30.00 $180.00 $35.40 $212.40 $5.00 $1,300.00 $4.00 $1,040.00 $5.00 $1,300.00 $5.00 $1,300.00 $8.00 $2,080.00 As Needed (See rates
for additional work) As Needed (See rates for additional work) As Needed (See rates for additional work) $40.00 $120.00 $45.00 $135.00 $50.00 $150.00 $40.00 $120.00 $41.00 $123.00 $80.00
$240.00 $75.00 $225.00 $68.00 $204.00 $25.00 $75.00 $81.00 $243.00 $300.00 $900.00 $400.00 $1,200.00 $325.00 $975.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 $275.00 $825.00 $7,268.00 $5,940.00 $6,080.00 $6,604.00
$6,593.00 $7,091.00 Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension $60.00 $1,440.00 $65.00 $1,560.00 $78.00 $1,872.00 $50.00
$1,200.00 $81.00 $1,944.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $1,800.00 $176.00 $2,112.00 $160.00 $1,920.00 $175.00 $2,100.00 $138.00 $1,656.00 $60.00
$720.00 $70.00 $840.00 $70.00 $840.00 $60.00 $720.00 $61.00 $732.00 $60.00 $360.00 $65.00 $390.00 $70.00 $420.00 $50.00 $300.00 $61.00 $366.00 $5.00 $1,300.00 $4.00 $1,040.00 $5.00 $1,300.00
$5.00 $1,300.00 $8.00 $2,080.00 As Needed (See rates for additional work) As Needed (See rates for additional work) As Needed (See rates for additional work) $80.00 $240.00 $66.50 $199.50
$75.00 $225.00 $75.00 $225.00 $81.00 $243.00 $80.00 $240.00 $66.50 $199.50 $75.00 $225.00 $95.00 $285.00 $81.00 $243.00 $100.00 $300.00 $87.50 $262.50 $150.00 $450.00 $85.00 $255.00
$121.00 $363.00 $700.00 $2,100.00 $790.00 $2,370.00 $700.00 $2,100.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $691.50 $2,074.50 $8,500.00 $8,973.50 $9,352.00 $9,385.00 $9,701.50 $16,953.00 $14,440.00 $15,053.50
$15,956.00 $15,978.00 $16,792.50 3
BID OPENING DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE Tabulation Bid No 2011-29 PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
A. Sod Replacement per square feet B. Plant & Tree Installation Labor per hour/per man C. Fertilizing Labor per hour/per man D. Additional Pest Control Price per 50 gallon application-insecticide
Price per 50 pound application-insecticide E. Fire Ant Control Labor per hour/per man F. Hurricane Debris Removal Labor per hour/per man Valid Florida Certified Pesticide Applicator's
License? Valid Certified Arborist (ISA) Certification Federal I.D. # Equipment List Submitted? Drug Free Workplace Certification Signed? References? 1st National Alpha Tree Huggers Outsourcing
Property Scape Landscaping & Gator Maint. Services Contractors Property Works Nursery, LLC Landscaping $0.85 $55.00 $3.00 $2.00 $0.48 $25 $30 $23 $30 $28 $20 $30 $25 $30 $28 $100 $65
$125 $4 $52 $100 $70 $100 $4 $52 $25 $35 $25 $35 $31 $35 $28 $25 $40 $21 YES NO YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO 03-0518060 90-0733801 87-0720106 26-0580247 65-088772 YES NO YES YES YES
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES 4
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Randal L. Krejcarek, P.E., LEED AP, GISP, City Engineer Richard C. Hasko, PE, Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden,
City Manager DATE: October 5, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.3 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CONTRACT AWARD/INTERCOUNTY ENGINEERING, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This
item is before the Commission for approval/authorization for Mayor to execute a construction contract with Intercounty Engineering, Inc. for construction of a water main upgrade on SW
10th Ave from SW 2nd St to W Atlantic Ave. Cost of this contract is $237,142.00. Project #2011-047. BACKGROUND This project is to upgrade an existing 2” water main on SW 10th Ave from
SW 2nd St to W Atlantic Ave., including the micro-surfacing of SW 10th Ave. This upgrade is part of the City-Wide Water Main Upgrade Master Plan. The bid tabulation and a location map
are attached. FUNDING SOURCE 442-5178-536-68.76 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval.
BID TABULATION SW 10th Ave Water Main Upgrade Project # 2011-047 Printed : 10/10/2011 ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE INTERCOUNTY FOSTER MARINE JOHNSONDAVIS CARIBE CENTERLINE
SUN UP 1 Site Mobilization $ 14,000.00 11,292.00 8,000.00 12,200.00 18,100.00 12,750.00 15,000.00 2 Maintenance of Traffic $ 10,000.00 2,588.00 4,500.00 4,400.00 3,100.00 3,500.00 3,800.00
3 NPDES/Erosion Control $ 400.00 489.00 250.00 1,000.00 1,870.00 1,350.00 1,500.00 4 Clearing and Grubbing, Demolition and Disposal $ 3,000.00 1,419.00 9,000.00 6,000.00 2,415.00 4,000.00
4,800.00 5 6" Thick Concrete Driveway Repair $ 8,000.00 7,200.00 10,000.00 8,000.00 17,440.00 11,000.00 9,000.00 6 Asphalt Driveway Repair $ 9,000.00 6,800.00 8,000.00 7,000.00 7,480.00
6,800.00 4,000.00 7 5' wide, 6" thick Conc. Sidewalk Construction $ 2,700.00 1,350.00 2,025.00 3,600.00 3,825.00 5,400.00 2,227.50 8 Pavement Marking and Signage $ 1,900.00 2,243.00
2,000.00 2,000.00 873.80 3,450.00 2,500.00 9 Sodding (Bahia) $ 1,787.50 1,925.00 2,337.50 2,750.00 3,025.00 1,650.00 1,650.00 10 6" PVC Watermain $ 4,200.00 2,940.00 3,720.00 2,700.00
2,544.00 2,100.00 1,710.00 11 8" PVC Watermain $ 84,960.00 50,740.00 74,340.00 66,080.00 55,578.00 77,290.00 42,480.00 12 6" Gate Valves $ 4,000.00 4,032.00 3,800.00 4,800.00 3,496.40
3,800.00 6,000.00 13 8" Gate Valves $ 6,000.00 4,712.00 5,600.00 6,000.00 4,694.80 5,000.00 7,400.00 14 8" Flange (Plug) $ 125.00 289.00 150.00 300.00 216.50 1,700.00 350.00 15 6" x
6" Tapping Sleeve and Valve $ 3,000.00 4,091.00 2,800.00 5,200.00 3,788.60 3,650.00 3,800.00 16 8" x 6" reducer $ 600.00 268.00 180.00 400.00 300.00 330.00 450.00 17 Fire Hydrant Assembly
& 6" Gate Valve $ 6,750.00 8,754.00 9,600.00 13,500.00 9,240.00 11,400.00 11,400.00 18 Watermain Testing Appurtenances/Sample Points $ 900.00 1,040.00 800.00 1,500.00 890.00 800.00 1,600.00
19 Water Services -Single $ 20,000.00 12,820.00 18,000.00 17,000.00 19,400.00 13,000.00 30,000.00 20 Water Services -Double $ 15,600.00 12,857.00 18,525.00 12,480.00 19,266.00 12,675.00
27,300.00 21 Sewer Lateral Reconstruction and Relocation $ 6,300.00 25,382.00 7,000.00 11,200.00 16,800.00 18,200.00 14,000.00 22 New 6" PVC Sewer Service Construction $ 3,000.00 4,314.00
3,600.00 2,100.00 3,200.00 9,000.00 3,600.00 23 Remove Existing 2" Watermain $ 12,425.00 10,650.00 8,875.00 7,100.00 6,567.50 3,550.00 8,875.00 24 Remove Existing 8" Watermain & Valve
$ 400.00 480.00 260.00 240.00 732.00 640.00 600.00 25 Reconnect Existing Water Services $ 4,050.00 4,698.00 4,050.00 13,500.00 9,774.00 14,850.00 27,000.00 26 Micro-Surfacing $ 35,875.00
38,500.00 35,000.00 33,250.00 41,650.00 34,125.00 34,930.00 27 Crack Sealant $ 5,100.00 5,800.00 5,700.00 5,600.00 7,200.00 4,800.00 8,000.00 28 Miscellaneous Fittings $ 144.00 159.00
180.00 216.00 2,170.08 450.00 3,600.00 29 Allowances -Video Recordings $ 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 30 Allowances -Utility $ 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00
5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 31 Allowances -Irrigation $ 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 32 Indemnification $ 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 TOTAL
EVALUATED BASE BID BID ITEMS 1 through 32 (in numbers) $ 273,526.50 $ 237,142.00 $ 257,602.50 $ 259,426.00 $ 274,946.68 $ 276,570.00 $ 286,882.50 TOTAL EVALUATED BASE BID BID ITEMS 1
through 32 (in words)
SW 10th Ave S 0 e Water Main Upgrade N 4/25/2011 Delray Beach GIS
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Timothy Tack, Project Manager ESD/CRA Richard C. Hasko, P.E. Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE: October 6, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.4 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CONTRACT AWARD/LINE-TEC INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Requesting Commission approval of
a contract with Line-Tec, Inc. for relocating water services as part of the Osceola Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan; Project #2010-082. Total cost of this contract is $70,681.00 BACKGROUND
In December 2004 City Commission approved the Osceola Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. For purposes of this plan the neighborhood is bordered by SE 5th Avenue (Federal Highway southbound)
on the east; Swinton Avenue on the west; SE 2nd Street on the north; and SE 10th Street on the south. The purpose of this Redevelopment Plan was to fulfill the requirements of the Comprehensive
Plan and provide the framework for the revitalization of the entire neighborhood. The City and representatives from the neighborhood met numerous times to discuss implementation of the
redevelopment plan recommendations. It was agreed that assessable elements of the plan would not be implemented at this time, and that the non-assessable underground infrastructure would
be constructed. On June 07, 2011, City Commission awarded a construction contract to Intercounty Engineering, Inc. for the installation of 5,340 linear feet of 8 inch Ductile Iron water
main, connection of water services located in the front of the property, and installation of fire hydrants as part of the Osceola Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The scope of this Line-Tec
contract consists of relocating 80 existing water services located in the rear of the properties and connecting them to the new water services that were installed as part of the construction
contract awarded to Intercounty Engineering, Inc. The estimate by Line-Tec, Inc. is based on the current competitively bid contract with the City of Boynton Beach for “Supply and Installation
of Water Service Connections and Restoration”, Bid #033-2821-10/JA. Upon award, Line-Tec, Inc. will execute the "Standard Form of Agreement between the City and Contractor." FUNDING
SOURCE Funding will be available from account # 442-5178-536-65.85, upon budget transfer. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval.
Estimate Date 9/28/2011 Estimate # 3481 Name /Address City of Delray Beach 434 South Swinton Ave Delray Beach, Fl 33444 Terms P.O. No. Net 30 Project Osleola Park Transfers Signature
_____________________________________ Total 241 NW 18th Avenue | Delray Beach, Fl 33444 | Ph: 561.374.9494 | Fax: 561.737.3827 | www.linetecinc.com Item Description Cost Qty Total This
estimate is for the transfer of the water services from the rear of the property to the new meter boxes located in the front. Work will include the removal of the old meter box, transfer
of the existing water meter, noting the removed reading. Reconnection of the water service at an appropriate location nearest the existing house service connection. Reconnection of any
irrigation systems on the house that uses potable water. All new services will be schedule 40 PVC of either 1" or 1-1/4" diameter pipe. Reports will be generated to note the location
of the meter, length of the line and date completed. This estimate is based on are annual contact with The City of Boynton Beach Bid #033-2821-10/JA Expires June 1, 2012 and the City
of Delray will only be billed for item/Qty installed. 001 House connection 300.00 80 24,000.00 1" Schedule 40 PVC water pipe and sod restoration over trench, furnish and install 002
5.00 7,621 38,105.00 021 Furnish and Install 1-1/4" SCH 40 PVC Water Service Pipe 7.00 1,118 7,826.00 024 Reconnect existing sprinkler connection at the house 75.00 10 750.00 $70,681.00
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David A. Boyd, Finance Director Richard Hasko, Environmental Services Director Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Manager THROUGH: David Harden,
City Manager DATE: October 10, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.5 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 PURCHASE AWARD/AIRGAS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The City Commission is requested
to approve a blanket purchase in the amount of $107,000 for the purchase and delivery of liquid carbon dioxide (CO2) as needed from Airgas at $0.0975 lb./$195.00 ton per proposal dated
08/29/2011. Pricing firm for one (1) year with a two (2) year renewal option. BACKGROUND For 2010/11 fiscal year the City Commission approved the purchase of liquid carbon dioxide from
Praxair, Inc. via the City of West Palm Beach bid Agreement at $194.74 per ton as needed. On June 8, 2011 Praxair notified the City that they will only be able to provide 50% of the
current required supply and Commission approved Airgas for delivery of CO2. Prior to the award to Airgas, staff had also contacted Air Liquide America who was unable to supplement our
supply at that time and their price was higher as well. As of September 2011 the City has not received any update from Praxair and the Water Treatment staff would like to continue with
Airgas for purchase of this product. Carbon dioxide is essential to the water treatment process. The water from the wells has a pH in the mid-7 range. Lime is added to raise the pH to
10.2 which is the point where calcium precipitates out for the softening process. After the lime softening process, carbon dioxide is added to bring the pH back to a mid-7 range for
the finished water product. If we were to reduce the carbon dioxide dosage, the finished water would have a higher pH. After extensive Lead and Copper testing, we have found that we
get the best results with a pH of 7.5 in the distribution system. It is best to continue using the current amount of carbon dioxide for this reason. FUNDING SOURCE Funding is available
from 441-5122-536-52.21 (Water and Sewer Fund: Operating Supplies/Chemicals).
RECOMMENDATION The Water Treatment Plant recommends a blanket purchase order in the amount of $107,000. to Airgas for purchase and delivery of Liquid Carbon Dioxide (CO2) to be ordered
“as needed” per proposal dated 08/29/2011. Pricing firm for one (1) year with a two (2) year renewal option.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David Boyd, Finance Director Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Director THROUGH: David Harden,
City Manager DATE: October 10, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.6 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 PURCHASE AWARD/OTTO WASTE SYSTEMS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The City Commission
is requested to approve a blanket purchase order in the amount of $50,000.00 for purchase of hot stamped garbage carts, lids and wheels to be ordered “as needed” from Otto Waste Systems
as a sole source provider. The blanket purchase will cover a period of 10.18.2011 through 09.30.2012. BACKGROUND Otto Environmental System was approved by City Commission as a sole source
vendor for the purchase of the hot stamped garbage carts that are provided to the citizens of Delray Beach. Otto Industries, Inc. is the original vendor for the purchase of these carts
since their initial "roll-out" in 1996. The sizes of garbage carts required by the City are 95 gallon “Classic” @$53.00 each; 65 gallon “Classic” @$46.75 each and 35 gallon “Evolution”
@$37.00 including attached lids and wheels per quote dated 10/10/2011. The carts has a forest green body, black lid, rubber tires and hot stamped with the City Logo and serial numbers.
Garbage carts are order and shipped in full truckload quantities for cost savings and in various sizes as needed and freight is included in the pricing from Charlotte, NC to Delray Beach,
FL. FUNDING SOURCE Funding is available from 433-3711-534-49.35 (Sanitation Fund: Other Current Charges/Cart Renewal & Replacement). RECOMMENDATION The Commun ity Improvement Department
recommends a blanket purchase order in the amount of $50,000.00 for the purchase of garbage carts with lids and wheels from Otto Waste Systems as a sole source vendor to be ordered “as
needed”.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Victor Majtenyi; Deputy Director of Public Utilities Richard C. Hasko; Director of Environmental Services Department THROUGH: David
Harden; City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.7 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 PURCHASE AWARD/THE DUMONT COMPANY, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Request City Commission approve a blanket purchase order in the amount of $51,200 to The Dumont Company, Inc. The award is for Fiscal Year 2011/2012 for the purchase and delivery of
Sodium Hypochlorite on an “as needed” basis to remote booster station locations. BACKGROUND Sodium hypochlorite is used as a disinfectant/antimicrobial agent. Currently the City purchases
this product from Sentry Industries in bulk tanker loads for other locations. Remote locations in Gulfstream, Owens Baker, and other booster station sites are limited to small quantities
between 500 gallons and 1,000 gallons and cannot accommodate a tanker size truck of 12,000 gallons due to truck inaccessibility. Minimum delivery for this product is 1,000 gallon for
most vendors, which is considered a small order (or mini-bulk) for delivery. Two vendors can accommodate deliveries in smaller size quantities, from 250 and 1,000 gallons; Poolsure of
South Florida at $1.35 per gallon (quote dated October 3, 2011) and Dumont at $1.25 per gallon (quote dated October 5, 2011). The estimated usage for this year is 40,000 gallons with
an award requested at $51,200; the amount approved in the division’s operating budget for FY 11/12. FUNDING SOURCE Funding will from account 441-5123-536.52-21, Water Distribution/Operating
Supplies-Chemicals. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends a blanket purchase order for the purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite “as needed” from The Dumont Company, Inc. at a unit cost of $1.25
per gallon, for an estimated annual cost of $51,200.00.
The Dumont Company, Inc. – 381 S. Central Ave., Oviedo, FL 32765 800-330-1369 FAX: 800-524-9315 1 October 5, 2011 City of Delray Beach 434 S. Swinton Ave. Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Mr. Solomon: Mr. Solomon, In regards to the sodium hypochlorite used at the re-pump and booster stations. Dumont offers Odyssey’s Ultra Chlor product which is known for its high
strength and clarity. Dumont offers the 12.5% Ultra Chlor in mini-bulk from 250 to 1000 gallon deliveries. The product is produced from the purest ingredients and has virtually no metal
contaminants or suspended solids. In most cases, iron, nickel, copper, and other heavy metal ions that catalyze bleach decomposition are below detectable levels. The Ultra Chlor is manufactured
according to American Water Works Association B300-04 Standard for Hypochlorites at 12.5 trade percent available chlorine. There are other hypochlorite concentrations listed in the B-300
standard, but 12.5 percent delivers the best economy and performance for the Florida market. Sodium hypochlorite degrades with age. Certain formula variables and conditions during storage
and manufacturing determine the stability of a hypochlorite product. The Odyssey process maximizes shelf life for all of the variables under our control. As illustrated in the Table
below, Florida storage temperatures are simply not compatible with the higher B-300 hypochlorite concentrations. The issue is not simply one of lost product and higher usage. Of greater
concern are the sodium chlorate and oxygen produced in the decomposition reaction. 12.5% has a thirty-day shelf life under a variety of storage conditions and generates little or no
oxygen and/or chlorate. The Ultra Chlor is ANSI /NSF Standard 60 certified and meets all repacking certifications to maintain the certification.
The Dumont Company, Inc. – 381 S. Central Ave., Oviedo, FL 32765 800-330-1369 FAX: 800-524-9315 2 Dumont provides services that are second to none in the water and wastewater treatment
industry. Dumont provides each system with an account manager, warehouse manager, operations manager and a delivery driver. This team works to ensure that all deliveries are scheduled
and made on time. This team will set up a delivery process based on a route, call-in basis or call-you basis (this is where a route scheduler calls you to confirm which locations need
product). Dumont also provides a 24 hour 7 day service in case of an emergency situation. We understand that you currently have your own tanks and containments at each location at this
time, if ever in the future one of the tanks fail Dumont provides tanks and containments at no charge to its customers. (See attachment for ANSI/NSF Standard 60) We can provide the 12.5
% Sodium Hypochlorite at $1.25 per gallon. Upon acceptance of the sodium hypochlorite offer, Dumont can offer pallets of the 100# HTH used by the lift station crew for $130.00 per 100#
pails. Each pallet has 16 100# pails which Dumont would delivery to your warehouse, making the total per pallet $2080.00. Another option is for Dumont to deliver a four (4) minimum per
order for $140 per pail (or $560.00 for four) from Dumont’s Hollywood warehouse as needed with a five to seven day delivery schedule. We look forward to working with you in the near
future, if you have any questions please contact me. Best Regards Kenny Williams Technical Development Manager The Dumont Co., Inc. 381 S. Central Ave., Oviedo, FL 32765 Tel: 800-330-1369
Cell: 352-303-5773 Fax: 800-524-9315 KennyW@dumontchemicals.com
October City of D 434 Sout Delray B To Who Please b the same 9/30/201 Any ques Sincerely Bill Gome 3, 2011 elray Beach th Swinton each, FL 33 m It May Co be advised th e for the upc
2. stions, pleas y, ez D Off 3444 oncern: hat the Price coming year se contact ou Divisions of G Division of G 4800 NW Ft Laude ffice 954 651 e per Gallon at $1.35. T ur office. Gomez
Chem Gomez Chemi W 15th Ave Un erdale, FL 333 6415 Fax 954 for Chlorine his price rem micals Inc. icals Inc. nit 1C 309 4 651 6435 e for the City mains in effe of Delray B ect from 10/1each
remain 1/2011 to ns
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Sharon L'Herrou, Administrative Officer Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 13,
2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M.8 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 PURCHASE AWARD/CDW-G/EMERGENCY VEHICLE SUPPLY (EVS) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The Police Department requests
approval to purchase and install 68 In-Car video systems in police vehicles. The cameras will be purchased on a Federal GSA contract from CDW-G at a price of $5,101.08 each for a total
purchase price of $346,873.44. The installation will be completed by EVS at a cost of $345 each for a total amount of $23,460. BACKGROUND This equipment will be used daily during routine
traffic enforcement and community patrols. It has the ability to secure solid evidence for criminal prosecution, real time recording of events, and enhanced officer safety. It also reduces
the likelihood of civil liability claims. Currently the Department only has ten (10) such cameras deployed. Over the past couple of years, the purchase of additional cameras has been
deferred due to funding limitations. Purchase of the 68 requested here will allow the Department to fully equip all of the take home Patrol vehicles as well as those vehicles used in
high-risk situations. Incar video cameras have become an industry standard, and without them, our Department is falling behind. The cost of the cameras with CDW-G is under a GSA contract
(#GS-35F-0143R). EVS is the vendor of choice for the installation; they been selected as the Department’s vendor for work on police vehicles. This selection was made based on a variety
of factors including: quality of work, price, and speed/efficiency of service. Prior to this shift, multiple vendors worked on the vehicles. Due to the volume and complexity of equipment,
a variety of issues arose, including blame shifting between vendors. Consolidating the work with one vendor eliminated that problem, reduced equipment costs, and reduced staffing costs
required to transport each vehicle to multiple locations, as well as reducing down time for vehicles. FUNDING SOURCE Funding in the amount of $156,000 has been approved in this year’s
CIP (#334-2111-521-64.90, project
# 12-046). The remainder of the funding, $214,333.44, will come from the Department’s Federal Forfeiture account (#115-2112-521-64.90). RECOMMENDATION The Police Department recommends
approval.
SALES QUOTATION Please remit payment toCDW Government : 230 North Milwaukee Ave. C D W G o ve r n m e n t Vernon Hills, IL 60061 75 R e m it ta n c e D r iv e General Phone: 847-371-5000
Fax: 847-419-6200 S ui te 15 1 5 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312-705-8218 C h ic a g o, I L 6 0 6 75 -1 51 5 Page 1 ZBL7914 5 5 1 6 4 3 2 1 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 1 MARLO DAHL C I T Y O F D
E L R A Y B E A C H 100 NW 1ST AVE 1 0 0 N W 1 S T A V E MANGT INFO SYSTEMS M A N G T I N F O S Y S T E M S CITY OF DELRAY BEACH M A R L O D A H L DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2612 D E L R
A Y B E A C H , F L 3 3 4 4 4 -2 6 9 8 Contact: MARLO DAHL 561-243-7865 5612437865 Q T Y 6 0 Q U O T E MIKE ZORICA 866-339-3535 U P S G r o u n d R e q u e s t T e r m s 8 5 8 0 1 2
6 2 1 5 5 9 C 4 60 1 7 8 6 7 2 6 P A N A S O N I C A R B I T R A T O R K I T M K 2 . 0 4 4 2 9 . 0 0 2 6 5 7 4 0 . 0 0 Mfg#: PNB-ARBTR-KIT-360 Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R
60 1 4 0 8 7 4 8 P A N A R B I T R A T O R R E A R S E A T I R C A M E R A 1 1 7 . 0 8 7 0 2 4 . 8 0 Mfg#: PNB-CN258IR-P Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 60 1 4 6 6
3 9 0 P A N A S O N I C A R B I T R A T O R G -F O R C E S E N S O R 2 2 8 . 0 0 1 3 6 8 0 . 0 0 Mfg#: PNB-TGS-3DP Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 60 2 0 0 9 2 1 9
P A N A S O N I C 1 Y R A R B I T R A T O R 3 6 0 S W M N T 2 8 9 . 0 0 1 7 3 4 0 . 0 0 Mfg#: PAW-CF-SVCARB2AMA1Y Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 60 1 6 0 3 4 5 6 L
I N D A R B I T R A T O R D E T E C T O R C A B L E 3 8 . 0 0 2 2 8 0 . 0 0 Mfg#: LND-CBLMS-F00200 Contract: MARKET ------------SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS -----------Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE
(SLED) GS-35F-0143R SUBTOTAL 3 0 6 0 6 4 . 8 0 FREIGHT . 0 0 SALES TAX . 0 0 US Currency 306,064.80 QUOTE NO.
Page 2 ______________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________Total_|_______________________306,064.80
___________FMV_Lease_Option_|___________________8,805.48/Month ______________________Total_|_______________________306,064.80 ___________$BO_Lease_Option_|___________________9,561.46/Month
Monthly payment based on 36 month lease. Other terms and options are available. Contact you Account Manager for details. Payment quoted subject to change. ** =========================================
================== Why finance? * Lower Upfront Costs. Get the products you need without impacting cash flow. Preserve your working capital and existing credit line. * Flexible Payment
Terms. 100% financing with no money down, payment deferrals and payment schedules that match your company's business cycles. * Predictable, Low Monthly Payments. Pay over time. Lease
payments are fixed and can be tailored to your budget levels or revenue streams. * Technology Refresh. Keep current technology with minimal financial impact or risk. Add-on or upgrade
during the lease term. And choose to return or purchase the equipment at end of lease. * Bundle Costs. You can combine hardware, software, and services into a single transaction! Which
means you can pay for your software licenses over time. We know your challenges and understand the need for flexibility. General Terms and Conditions: **This quote is not legally binding
and is for discussion purposes only. The rates are estimate only and are based on a collection of industry data from numerous sources. All rates and financial quotes are subject to final
review, approval, and documentation by our leasing partners. Payments above exclude all applicable taxes. Financing is subject to credit approval and review of final equipment and services
configuration. Fair Market Value leases are structured with the assumption that the equipment has a residual value at the end of the lease term.
SALES QUOTATION Please remit payment toCDW Government : 230 North Milwaukee Ave. C D W G o ve r n m e n t Vernon Hills, IL 60061 75 R e m it ta n c e D r iv e General Phone: 847-371-5000
Fax: 847-419-6200 S ui te 15 1 5 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312-705-8218 C h ic a g o, I L 6 0 6 75 -1 51 5 Page 1 ZBL8067 5 5 1 6 4 3 2 1 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 1 MARLO DAHL C I T Y O F D
E L R A Y B E A C H 100 NW 1ST AVE 1 0 0 N W 1 S T A V E MANGT INFO SYSTEMS M A N G T I N F O S Y S T E M S CITY OF DELRAY BEACH M A R L O D A H L DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2612 D E L R
A Y B E A C H , F L 3 3 4 4 4 -2 6 9 8 Contact: MARLO DAHL 561-243-7865 5612437865 Q T Y 8 Q U O T E MIKE ZORICA 866-339-3535 F E D E X G r o u n d R e q u e s t T e r m s 8 5 8 0 1
2 6 2 1 5 5 9 C 4 8 1 7 8 6 7 2 6 P A N A S O N I C A R B I T R A T O R K I T M K 2 . 0 4 4 2 9 . 0 0 3 5 4 3 2 . 0 0 Mfg#: PNB-ARBTR-KIT-360 Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R
8 1 4 0 8 7 4 8 P A N A R B I T R A T O R R E A R S E A T I R C A M E R A 1 1 7 . 0 8 9 3 6 . 6 4 Mfg#: PNB-CN258IR-P Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 8 1 4 6 6 3 9
0 P A N A S O N I C A R B I T R A T O R G -F O R C E S E N S O R 2 2 8 . 0 0 1 8 2 4 . 0 0 Mfg#: PNB-TGS-3DP Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 8 2 0 0 9 2 1 9 P A N A
S O N I C 1 Y R A R B I T R A T O R 3 6 0 S W M N T 2 8 9 . 0 0 2 3 1 2 . 0 0 Mfg#: PAW-CF-SVCARB2AMA1Y Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED) GS-35F-0143R 8 1 6 0 3 4 5 6 L I N D A R
B I T R A T O R D E T E C T O R C A B L E 3 8 . 0 0 3 0 4 . 0 0 Mfg#: LND-CBLMS-F00200 Contract: MARKET ------------SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS -----------Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R SUBTOTAL 4 0 8 0 8 . 6 4 FREIGHT . 0 0 SALES TAX . 0 0 US Currency 40,808.64 QUOTE NO.
Page 2 ______________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________Total_|________________________40,808.64
___________FMV_Lease_Option_|___________________1,199.77/Month ______________________Total_|________________________40,808.64 ___________$BO_Lease_Option_|___________________1,307.10/Month
Monthly payment based on 36 month lease. Other terms and options are available. Contact you Account Manager for details. Payment quoted subject to change. ** =========================================
================== Why finance? * Lower Upfront Costs. Get the products you need without impacting cash flow. Preserve your working capital and existing credit line. * Flexible Payment
Terms. 100% financing with no money down, payment deferrals and payment schedules that match your company's business cycles. * Predictable, Low Monthly Payments. Pay over time. Lease
payments are fixed and can be tailored to your budget levels or revenue streams. * Technology Refresh. Keep current technology with minimal financial impact or risk. Add-on or upgrade
during the lease term. And choose to return or purchase the equipment at end of lease. * Bundle Costs. You can combine hardware, software, and services into a single transaction! Which
means you can pay for your software licenses over time. We know your challenges and understand the need for flexibility. General Terms and Conditions: **This quote is not legally binding
and is for discussion purposes only. The rates are estimate only and are based on a collection of industry data from numerous sources. All rates and financial quotes are subject to final
review, approval, and documentation by our leasing partners. Payments above exclude all applicable taxes. Financing is subject to credit approval and review of final equipment and services
configuration. Fair Market Value leases are structured with the assumption that the equipment has a residual value at the end of the lease term.
Quotation 4661 JOHNSON ROAD -SUITE 1 Tel. 954-428-5201 * Fax 954-428-5202 COCONUT CREEK, FL 33073 Good Thru 12/30/11 Quote Number: 12901 Quote Date: Oct 12, 2011 PO Number Quoted to:
DELRAY BEACH PD 300 W. ATLANTIC AVE DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 Customer ID Payment Terms Page: DELRAY BEACH PD Net 30 Days 1 Quantity Item Description Unit Price Extension INSTALLATION INCLUDES
LIGHT, SIREN, BRAKE INTERFACES. DVR TO BE LOCATED IN THE GLOVE BOX. CUSTOM DOWNLOAD SOCKET PLACED IN THE TRUNK. 8.00 INSTALLATION_ PANASONIC ARBITRATOR 345.00 2,760.00 CUSTOM INSTALLATION
AT EVS COCONUT CREEK, FL FACILITY Total 2,760.00 Sales Tax Subtotal 2,760.00
Quotation 4661 JOHNSON ROAD -SUITE 1 Tel. 954-428-5201 * Fax 954-428-5202 COCONUT CREEK, FL 33073 Good Thru 12/30/11 Quote Number: 12900 Quote Date: Oct 12, 2011 PO Number Quoted to:
DELRAY BEACH PD 300 W. ATLANTIC AVE DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 Customer ID Payment Terms Page: DELRAY BEACH PD Net 30 Days 1 Quantity Item Description Unit Price Extension INSTALLATION INCLUDES
LIGHT, SIREN, BRAKE INTERFACES. DVR TO BE LOCATED IN THE GLOVE BOX. CUSTOM DOWNLOAD SOCKET PLACED IN THE TRUNK. 60.00 INSTALLATION_ PANASONIC ARBITRATOR 345.00 20,700.00 CUSTOM INSTALLATION
AT EVS COCONUT CREEK, FL FACILITY (MULTI-UNIT DISCOUNT) Total 20,700.00 Sales Tax Subtotal 20,700.00
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Scott Pape, AICP, FCP, Senior Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/THE ELECTRIC EXPERIENCE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of the City Commission
is consideration of a conditional use request to establish a Segway tour and sales facility known as The Electric Experience. BACKGROUND The applicant has submitted tour route maps that
indicate the tours will be operated solely on the barrier island and extend primarily south of Atlantic Avenue. The hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday.
The required training of customers is proposed within the parking area on the north side of the plaza. Further, the floor plan indicates that the repair of these devices will occur within
the interior of the tenant space. At its meeting of September 19, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the conditional use request for The Electric Experience and recommended
approval (6-1, Spodak opposed) to the City Commission. However, the Planning and Zoning Board did express concerns with homeowner privacy with respect to the tour segments through neighborhoods
particularly along East Road and Vista Del Mar Drive. Further, as Segways are not allowed on Atlantic Avenue there was concern over short segments that were proposed along Atlantic Avenue
even though the applicant indicated the devices are walked in those areas of Atlantic Avenue. The Board was also concerned that the businesses that utilize the parking area along the
north side of the site be notified of the proposed use and that training is proposed within this parking lot. The applicant has provided notice to the affected business regarding the
proposed use and training within the parking area (see attached letter and list of property owners). In response to the Planning and Zoning Board’s concerns, the applicant has submitted
a revised tour route map that has eliminated the East Road and Vista Del Mar Drive segments and added a note that indicates that the devices will be walked within Atlantic Avenue. Since
the applicant has notified the affected business owners and revised the tour route map, the two conditions of approval recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board dealing with these
items have been deleted. Additional background and an analysis of the Conditional Use request are found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board staff report.
REVIEW BY OTHERS Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA): At its meeting of September 8, 2011, the CRA reviewed the conditional use request and recommended approval Downtown Development
Authority: At its meeting of September 12, 2011, the DDA reviewed the conditional use request and recommended approval. RECOMMENDATION Move a recommendation of approval of the conditional
use request to allow a Segway Tours and Segway Sales for The Electric Experience, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request,
and approval thereof, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(E)(5) and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the
following conditions: 1. That a note be added to the plans that indicate that the parking area will be accessible at all times for the use it was intended (i.e. vehicle parking). 2.
That the business is limited to no more than nine tours each day. 3. That the tour guides are prohibited from amplifying voice or music while operating tours. 4. That tours will be conducted
in compliance with Chapter 132.10(c) of the City Code of Ordinances. 5. That the Segways be walked across Atlantic Avenue.
1 IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SEGWAY
TOUR AND SALES FACILITY KNOWN AS THE ELECTRIC EXPERIENCE 1. This conditional use request has come before the City Commission on October 18, 2011. The conditional use request is to establish
a Segway tour and sales facility known as The Electric Experience which will be located at 1047 East Atlantic Avenue. 2. The City staff, applicant, and other persons have presented documentary
evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the conditional use request of The Electric Experience. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required
findings are made in Sections I and II below. I. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A. FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The use or structures must be allowed in the zone district and the zoning district must be
consistent with the land use designation. Are the requirements of the Future Land Use Map met? Yes ________ No_________ B. Concurrency: Facilities which are provided by, or through,
the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within
the Comprehensive Plan. Are the concurrency requirements met with respect to water, sewer, drainage, streets and traffic, parks, open space, solid waste and schools? Yes ________ No_________
C. Consistency: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3 and required findings in LDR Section 2.4.5(E) (5) for the Conditional Use request shall be the basis upon
which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency.
2 Are the consistency requirements met such that the proposed project is complementary to and compatible with adjacent land uses and the beneficial aspects of the project outweigh the
negative impact of identified points of conflict? Yes ________ No_________ II. LDR REQUIREMENTS A. Section 2.4.5(E)(5) requires certain findings: The conditional use will not: 1. Have
a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located; 2. Hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. Will Section 2.4.5(E)(5)
be met? Yes _________ No_________ B. LDR Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2) – Segway Tours and Segway Sales: Per LDR Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2), the following are the special regulations that apply
to Segway tour and sales businesses: § The applicant for Conditional Use will designate routes for the tours and shall be limited to only routes that are approved. § No more than nine
(9) tours shall be conducted each day. § All servicing of Segways shall be indoors and not utilize more than twenty (20%) of the floor area of the premises. § No Segway sales or tour
businesses shall be located within three hundred (300) feet of any other Segway sales or tour business, as measured from property line to property line in a straight line. § Tour guides
shall not amplify voice or music while operating tours. § Pre tour instructions shall not be conducted on public streets, sidewalks, or between the building and the adjacent street.
§ Segway tours shall operate in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 132 of the City of Delray Beach Code of Ordinances. Are the requirements of Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2) met? Yes
_______ No_________
3 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the conditional use application was submitted. 4. The City Commission finds
there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff
reports and testimony of witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves ___ denies ___ the conditional use application subject
to the conditions attached hereto in Exhibit “A” and hereby adopts this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote of _____ in favor and ____ opposed. ________________________________
Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Chevelle Nubin City Clerk
EXHIBIT “A” Conditions Related to The Electric Experience 1. That a note be added to the plans that indicate that the parking area will be accessible at all times for the use it was
intended (i.e. vehicle parking). 2. That the business is limited to no more than nine tours each day. 3. That the tour guides are prohibited from amplifying voice or music while operating
tours. 4. That tours will be conducted in compliance with Chapter 132.10(c) of the City Code of Ordinances. 5. That the Segways be walked across Atlantic Avenue.
1045 East Atlantic Avenue Adams Paul CPA, Suite 300 Anella & Company, Suite 214 Aspen Grove Design, Suite 212 Coastal Commercial Group LLC, Suite 311 Elder Issues Kailan, LLC, Suite
214 Native Sun Communications Inc., Suite 208 Pepe's Hideaway Pristine Properties International, Suite 305 Reyes Fine Art & Antique Ross, Carter & Shackford, Suite 300 Schroeder Craig
B DDS, Suite 304 Superoffice, Suite 209 Travers Hartnett, Suite 203 United Sports Academies Inc Zimmerman & Boueri, Inc. 1049 East Atlantic Avenue Petite Connection 1051 East Atlantic
Avenue Virginia Courtenay Interiors, Inc. 1053 East Atlantic Avenue Kientzy & Co.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Estelio Breto, Senior Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October 3, 2011 SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM 9.B. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 WAIVER REQUESTS/BOUERI MIXED-USE BUILDING ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Consideration of a total of six waivers: two waiver
request to Land Development Regulation (LDR) Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) regarding the required building frontage and front setback along SE 1st Avenue and along SE 1st Street; one
waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), to reduce the required 75% transparency surface to 49% for the building elevation along SE 1st Avenue and to 43% for the building
elevation along the SE 1st Street l; one waiver request to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3) to reduce the required corner clip at the intersection of SE 1st Street and SE 1st Avenue from 20’
by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”; and two waiver requests to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce the required 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street to 5’ all in association with
the Boueri Mixed Use development. BACKGROUND The following waivers are requested in association with the Boueri Mixed Use development: Waiver #1: Along SE 1st Avenue: For a height from
finished grade to 25’: A Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) [Design Development Standards]: -To allow an increase in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or
less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’; and -To allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2’ to 5’; and Along SE 1st Avenue: For a
height from 25’ to 48’
-To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’. Waiver #2: Along SE 1st Street: For a height from finished grade to 25’: A Waiver request
to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) [Design Development Standards]: -To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1’ to 44’; -To
allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3’ to 5’. Along SE 1st Street: For a height from 25’ to 48’ -To allow a decrease in the required
building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 86’ to 31’. Waiver #3: A waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2) to reduce the 75% minimum transparency or glass surface area
on the ground floor architectural elevation along SE 1st Avenue from the required 75% to 49% and along SE 1st Street from the required 75% to 43%. Waiver #4: A waiver request to LDR
Section 5.3.1(D)(3) to reduce the required 20’ by 20’ corner clip triangle at the intersection of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street from the required 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11” Waiver
#5: A waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce the required 8’ wide side walk along SE 1st Avenue from 8' to 5’. Waiver #6: A waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce
the required width of the sidewalk in the Central Business District along SE 1stAvenue from 8' to 5’. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body
must make a finding that granting the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall
not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for
another applicant or owner.
Waiver #1 and Waiver #2 – Required Building Frontage and Setback: The applicant has provided the following justification with regard to these two waiver requests: “The architect is fully
aware and respects the section of the LDR's requirements for frontage. The architect has strived to meet as close as possible the intent of the code with reference to SE 1 Street. The
layout of the site makes additional frontage unfeasible. The architect has designed a decorate wall to enhance the frontage while also providing screening from the parking. On the SE
1st Avenue elevation the architect is within a few percent point of meeting all requirements and has received support for waivers from the P&Z Department. Consequently, a positive finding
with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5), Waiver Findings, can be made. Therefore, for the reasons enumerated above, we respectfully request that this waivers be approved”. Waiver #1
and #2 are minor adjustments to building setback requirements. The intent of the code is to provide a building that has architectural relief both at the street level as well as upper
floors, and this development meets that intent. The waivers will not adversely affect neighboring properties or diminish the provision of public facilities. The waivers would also be
supported under similar circumstances and therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.5 (B)(5).
Waiver #3 -Minimum Transparency: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and
mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. All storefronts or glass areas abutting the street shall be transparent. The building ground floor
transparency along SE 1st Avenue is 49% while 75% is required. Also, the building ground floor transparency elevation along SE 1st Street is only 43% while 75% is required. The proposed
north and west elevations for the Boueri mixed use building do not meet the LDR requirement, and thus, the applicant has requested a waiver. In support of the waiver request the applicant
has provided the following statement: “Prior approval for a similar condition has been given to Chase Bank: 1010 North Federal Highway, Delray Beach, FL. The percentage of glass surface
area requested is more consistent with the massing and proportion of the design of the building(s). Tall ceiling height has been provided on the ground floor areas; this feature is also
another key element for the survivability of the retail components of the project. Based on this ceiling height, the resulting glass surface area required is excessively disproportionate
to the overall building frontage. In any event, the glass surface/transparency provided is more than sufficient to meet the intent of the LDRs, which is to maintain a pedestrian friendly
retail/office environment. This project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) for this waiver request. By granting this waiver, a superior product will be achieved.
The waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area, significantly diminish the provision of public facilities, create an unsafe situation and/or result in the grant of a special
privilege. The intent of this requirement is to assure that the street facades remain customer friendly and encourage pedestrian traffic and the current facades meet the intent of this
requirement. Granting the requested waiver will not have an adverse effect on the neighboring area, diminish the provision of public facilities, or create an unsafe situation. This waiver
would also be supported under similar circumstances and therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Consequently, a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5)
can be made.
Waiver #4 – Required Corner Clip: Corner Clip: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3), a right-of-way dedication will be required at all intersections in the Central Business District (CBD).
This right-of-way dedication will consist of an area of property located at the corner formed by the intersection of two or more public rights-of-way with two sides of the triangular
area being 20 feet in length along the abutting public right-of-way lines. The ground floor structure of the proposed building encroaches into the required corner clip at the intersection
of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. Thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required corner clip from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”. In support of the waiver the
applicant has provided the following statement: “The property owner will provide a 12'-11" by 12'-11" dedication corner clip along S.E. 1st avenue and S.E. 1st street. We are also providing
the 20'x 20' site triangle at this corner location. The property owner is providing over 7% of his site in dedications and easements. A 20' x 20' corner clip would increase that over
8% and make the project unfeasible. Thus we ask for a reduced corner clip. Consequently, a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) Waiver Findings can be made. Therefore,
for the reasons enumerated above, we respectfully request that this waiver be approved”. The applicant has been required to dedicate 5’ along SE 1st Avenue, plus two (2’) feet r-o-w
dedication along the east alley r-o-w. To provide a triangle dedication of 20’ by 20’ corner clip will require the dedication of almost 8% of his land to the City. It is noted that a
triangle dedication of a 20’ by 20’ corner clip will relocate the existing property line, and thus, compliance with the CBD design guidelines will futher reduce the footprint of the
building making the building economically unfeasible. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the corner clip triangle side to 12’-11” by 12’-11”. Granting the requested waiver will
not have an adverse effect on the neighboring area, diminish the provision of public facilities, or create and unsafe situation. This waiver would also be supported under similar circumstances
and therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Consequently, a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made. Waiver #5 and Waiver #6 – Provision
of Sidewalks: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), an 8’ sidewalk shall be provided in the Central Business District. The applicant is requesting a waiver to allow for a reduction from
8'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along SE 1st Street and along SE 1st Avenue. In support of the SE 1 st Street waiver request the applicant has provided the following statement: “There are
already new city sidewalks recently installed at 4' wide along S.E. 1st street. The owner will provide an easement to increase the sidewalk wide from 4' to 5' along SE 1st Street. Increasing
the sidewalk to the proposed 8' wide would prevent the site to layout efficiently. Thus, we ask you to support the sidewalk reduction”. In support of the SE 1 st Avenue waiver request
the applicant has provided the following statement: “The property owner will provide a new 5' concrete sidewalk along S.E. 1st Avenue. Increasing the sidewalk to the proposed 8' wide
would prevent the site to layout efficiently. Thus we ask you to support the sidewalk reduction”. The Central Business District design guide lines require that all buildings be placed
in close proximity to rights of way to encourage pedestrian flows and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample sidewalks.
The adjacent land use intensity, pattern of development, and anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1stStreet or SE 1st Avenue. Main thoroughfares
in the CBD (Central Business District) such as Atlantic Avenue, Pineapple Grove Way and the Federal Highway pairs may require an 8’ wide sidewalk due to the intensity of development
and anticipated volume of pedestrian traffic. Granting the requested waivers will not have an adverse effect on the neighboring area, diminish the provision of public facilities, or
create and unsafe situation. This waiver would also be supported under similar circumstances and therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Consequently, a positive
finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) reviewed the waiver requests at their meeting of September
14, 2011 in conjunction with review of the proposed Boueri Mixed Use Building. After a brief discussion, the Board moved a recommendation of approval of all waivers on a unanimous vote
of 6-0. A detailed description and analysis of the proposal is contained within the attached SPRAB staff report September 14, 2011. RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waiver #1: Along
SE 1st Avenue for a height from finished grade to 25’: Move approval of the waiver requests to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow: -An increase in the required building frontage
setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’; and -A decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2’ to 5’ Along SE 1st Avenue for
a height from 25’ to 48’: -A decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’; and Waiver #2: Along SE 1st Street for a height from finished grade
to 25’ Move approval of Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow: -A decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86’ to 44’;
and -A decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3’ to 5’. Along SE 1st Street for a height from 25’ to 48’ -A decrease in the required building
frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 86’ to 31’; and Waiver #3:
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), to reduce the building ground floor elevation transparency along SE 1st Avenue from the required 75% to 49%
and along SE 1st Street from the required 75% to 43%; and Waiver #4: Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3), to reduce the required corner clip triangle at the
intersection of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”; and Waiver #5: Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to allow the reduction
from 8' to 5’ wide for the required sidewalk along SE 1st Street; and Waiver #6: Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to allow the reduction from 8'-0" to 5’-0”
wide for the required sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the requests are consistent with LDR Section
2.4.7(B) (5).
1 IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR BOUERI MIXED USE BUILDING
1. These waiver requests came before the City Commission on October 18, 2011. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining
to the six (6) waiver requests in association with the Boueri Mixed Use Development Proposal. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in
accordance with Subsection I. I. WAIVERS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a)
Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not
result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. A. Waiver #1 to LDR
Section 4.4.13(F)(3) and (4), along SE 1st Avenue: For a height from finished grade to 25’: § To allow an increase in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum
of 64.8’ to 67’; § To allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2’ to 5’; and For a height from 25’ to 48’: § To allow a decrease
in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’. Should the waiver to the building frontage and front setback along SE 1st Avenue be granted? Yes _______ No
_______
2 B. Waiver #2: to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4), along SE 1st Street: For a height from finished grade to 25’: § To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at
10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1’ to 44’; § To allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3’ to 5’; and For a height from 25’ to 48’:
§ To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 86.1’ to 31’ Should the waiver to the building frontage and front setback along SE 1st Street be granted?
Yes _______ No _______ C. Waiver #3: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all nonresidential
and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. All storefronts or glass areas abutting the street shall be transparent, non-solar or non-mirrored,
and have a light transmission reduction of no more than twenty percent (20%). The building ground floor transparency along SE 1st Avenue is 49% while 75% is required. Also, the building
ground floor transparency elevation along SE 1st Street is only 43% while 75% is required. The proposed north and west elevations for the Boueri mixed use building do not meet the LDR
requirement, and thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to this LDR requirement. Should the waiver to 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2) to the minimum transparency glass surface area be granted?
Yes _______ No _______ D. Waiver #4: Corner Clip: Pursuant to LDR Section5.3.1(D)(3), a right-ofway dedication will be required at all intersections in the Central Business District
(CBD). This right-of-way dedication will consist of an area of property located at the corner formed by the intersection of two or more public rights-of-way with two sides of the triangular
area being 20 feet in length along the abutting public rightof-way lines. Further, a dedication of 10 feet shall be required along both sides at the intersection of an alley and right-of-way.
These areas are to be measured from their point of intersection, and the third side being a line connecting the ends of the other two lines. This right-of-way dedication will be referred
to as a “corner clip” and is provided to ensure adequate right-of-way for the safe movement of pedestrians in the CBD. It appears that the ground floor structure of the building encroaches
into the required corner clip at the intersection of SE
3 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. Thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required corner clip from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”. Should the waiver to reduce the corner
clip required by Section 5.3.1(D)(3) be granted? Yes _______ No _______ E. Waiver #5: Provision of Sidewalks: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), an 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the
Central Business District. The applicant is requesting a waiver to allow for a reduction from 8' to 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Street. Should the waiver to reduce the sidewalk along
SE 1st Street be granted? Yes _______ No _______ F. Waiver #6: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the Central Business District. The applicant is requesting
a waiver to allow for a reduction from 8' to 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue. Should the waiver to reduce the sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue be granted? Yes _______ No _______ 3.
The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the original development application was submitted and finds that its determinations
set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record
submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5.
Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves ___ denies ___ the waiver requests.
4 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote of _____ in favor and ____ opposed. ________________________________
ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor ________________________________ Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October
13, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.C. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE HPB'S DECISION/85 S.E. 6TH AVENUE/CLASS III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of the City Commission is consideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s
motion to approve the Class III Site Plan Modification at 85 SE 6th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon findings that the request was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
did not meet the criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.
BACKGROUND At its meeting of August 16, 1995, the HPB approved a COA for two (2) of the three (3) on-site buildings including the conversion of the Blank House from single-family residence
to retail use (Building A), the conversion of a garage to office use and addition of a second story residential apartment (Building B), and the construction of a nine-space, pea-rock
parking area off of SE 1st Street. The third building (Building C) was, and remains, a multi-family residence. The single family residence (Building A) was subsequently converted to
retail use and the garage was converted to office use. Building permits were not obtained for the conversion of the garage nor was the parking area required for this conversion ever
installed. As a result, the office use was never legally established. In October of 1995, the retail use (Building A) was legally converted to restaurant use and the second floor to
a storage area. Between 1995 and 2004 as the illegal status of the office use continued to surface, Site Plan Applications were submitted and approved for the conversion of use with
associated parking improvements. Each application was allowed to expire and none of the required improvements were ever constructed. The latest approval of August 3, 2004 permitted the
applicant to pay for two (2) parking spaces and included installation of the balance of required spaces on site (a total of four new spaces just south of the City’s public parking lot
and retention of three existing spaces off the alley on the east side of the property). As with previous approvals, no improvements were constructed, no
payments of in-lieu of parking fees were made, and the approvals expired. At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed yet another attempt after 16 years to address the office conversion.
This request was to waive all required parking (6 spaces) associated with the Class III Site Plan Modification for the office space. This request was not supported and the appeal of
both the denial of the waiver (separate Commission item) and this Class III Site Plan Modification are now before the City Commission. If the Class III Site Plan Modification is approved
by City Commission, the approval should include the following conditions: 1. That a traffic statement be provided; 2. That a current floor plan be submitted; 3. That compliance with
handicap accessibility within the office space be indicated; and, 4. That a decorative bicycle rack be provided on-site. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) considered
the subject request at its March 10, 2011 meeting, where they recommended denial of the waiver to the required parking. The Board also requested that the item return for further review
when “a solution is worked out.” The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011 meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline”
the request to waive all six (6) of the required spaces. Direction was given to the applicant to work out an alternative approach with Staff, and return to the DDA for further review.
The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) considered the subject request at its June 28, 2011 meeting, where a recommendation to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested
that the applicant work with Staff and accommodate three (3) spaces on site and provide the balance either through an off-site parking agreement, or via the in-lieu of parking fee. RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Preservation Board’s action of denial.
IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 1. This appeal of the denial of the Historic Preservation
Board’s August 21, 2011 decision denying the Certificate of Appropriateness, Class III Site Plan Modification, and wavier of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6th Avenue has come before
the City Commission on October 18, 2011. 2. The Appellee and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the Historic Preservation Board’s
August 21, 2011 decision denying the Certificate of Appropriateness, Class III Site Plan Modification, and wavier of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6th Avenue. All of the evidence
is part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection I. I. LDR REQUIREMENTS A. Certificate of Appropriateness 1. Findings: Pursuant to Section
2.4.6(H)(5), prior to approval, a finding must be made that any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective
A-4 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan (attached as Exhibit “A”) and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines
(attached as Exhibit “B”) and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (attached as Exhibit “C”). Is the Certificate of Appropriateness consistent with Historic Preservation
as detailed in the Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Regulations, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation? Yes ______ No ______ B. Class III Site Plan
Modification 1. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(c), a Class III site plan modification is a modification to a site plan which represents either a change in intensity of use, or which
affects the spatial relationship among improvements on the land,
2 requires partial review of Performance Standards found in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.2.3, and the required findings of Section 2.4.5(G)(5). 2. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), modifications
to Site Plans and Development Plans, the approving body must make a finding that the proposed changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made concurrent
with approval of a class III modification. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13, CBD Zoning Regulations (B)(2), Principal Uses and Structures Permitted, Business, Professional and Medical
Uses including but not limited to interior decorating, medical and dental clinics, medical and dental laboratories, photographic studios, printing and publishing, business, medical and
professional offices. Are these requirements met by the conversion of a garage to office use? Yes _______ No _______ 3. The City Commission has applied the LDR requirements in existence
at the time the original site plan was submitted. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts
the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire
record before it, the City Commission approves ___ denies ____ the appeal and hereby adopts this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote of _____ in favor and ____ opposed. ATTEST:
________________________________ Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor ________________________________ Chevelle Nubin City Clerk
EXHIBIT “A” Objective A-4 The redevelopment of land and buildings shall provide for the preservation of historic resources. The objective shall be met through continued adherence to
the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and the following policies: Policy A-4.1 Prior to approval or recommending approval of any land use or development application for property
located within a historic district or designated as a historic site, the Historic Preservation Board must make a finding that the requested action is consistent with the provisions of
Section 4.5.1 of the Land Development Regulations relating to historic sites and districts and the “Delray Beach Design Guidelines”. Policy A-4.2 In order to protect the City’s historic
resources, the Land Development Regulations shall include provisions for designation of historically significant buildings, structures, archaeological sites, or districts. The City shall
conduct periodic neighborhood surveys to identify and evaluate potential historic resources.
4.5 -4 "B" ARTICLE 4.5 ARTICLE 4.5 OVERLAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS The Districts described in this Article do not establish uses or categorize uses. These Districts, however,
do regulate allowable uses in a manner to mitigate adverse impacts of such uses upon the natural or man-made environment; or regulate development so as to mitigate potential dangers
to the use of such developed land, or to otherwise implement policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Overlay and environmental management districts need not be shown on the
Official Zoning Map. Section 4.5.1 Historic Preservation Sites and Districts: (A) General: In recognition of findings as set forth in the original enactment of Ordinance 13-87, passed
March 10, 1987, this Section is created in order to provide for the identification, preservation, protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and the use of districts, archeological sites,
buildings, structures, improvements, and appurtenances that are reminders of past eras, events, and persons important in local, state, and national history; that provide significant
examples of architectural styles of the past; that are unique and irreplaceable assets to the City and its neighborhoods; or that provide this and future generations with examples of
the physical surroundings in which past generations lived; and other purposes. (B) Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts: (1) To qualify as a historic site, historic
district, historic structure, or historic interior, individual properties, structures, sites, or buildings, or groups of properties, structures, sites, or buildings must have significant
character, interest, or value as part of the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. To qualify as a historic site, historic district,
or historic structure, the property or properties must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) or (3) below; to qualify as a historic interior the interior must
fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) and meet the criteria set forth in divisions (3)(b) and (3)(d). [Arnd• Ord. 38-07 215108] (2) A building, structure, site,
interior, or district will be deemed to have historical or cultural significance if it meets one or more of the following criteria: (a) Is associated in a significant way with the life
or activities of a major person important in city, state, or national history (for example, the homestead of a local founding family); (b) Is the site of a historic event with significant
effect upon the city,
4.5 -5 state, or nation; (c) Is associated in a significant way with a major historic event, whether cultural, economic, social, military, or political;
4.5 -6 SECTION 4.5.1 (B) (2) (d) (d) Exemplifies the historical, political, cultural, economic, or social trends of the community in history; or, (e) is associated in a significant way
with a past or continuing institution which has contributed substantially to the life of the city. (3) A building, structure, site, or district is deemed to have architectural or aesthetic
significance if it fulfills one or more of the following criteria; except that to qualify as a historic interior, the interior must meet the criteria contained within divisions (3)(b)
and (3)(d): (a) Portrays the environment in an era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural styles; (b) Embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural
style, period, or method of construction; (c) Is a historic or outstanding work of a prominent architect, designer, landscape architect, or builder; or (d) Contains elements of design,
detail, material, or craftsmanship of outstanding quality or which represented, in its time, a significant innovation or adaptation to the South Florida environment. (4) A building,
structure, site, interior, or district will be deemed to have historic significance if, in addition to or in the place of the previously mentioned criteria, the building, structure,
site, or zone meets historic development standards as defined by and listed in the regulations of and criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, as prepared by the United
States Department of the interior under the Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. A copy of these standards for the National Register is made part of this section as if fully
set forth herein. (C) Designation Procedures: (1) Buildings, structures, archaeological sites, or districts which meet the criteria for historic sites or districts set forth in Section
4.5.1(8) may be designated as historic sites or districts, and may be listed on the Local Register of Historic Places. (2) Nominations for historical site or district designation shall
be made to the Historic Preservation Board on an application form developed and approved by the Board. (a) Nominations for historic site status may be initiated by: (1) The Historic
Preservation Board; (2) The City Commission; or
4.5 -7 SECTION 4.5.1 (C) (2) (a) (3) (3) The property owner. (b) Nominations for historic district status may be initiated by: (1) The Historic Preservation Board; or (2) The City Commission.
(3) The Board shall conduct a preliminary evaluation of the information provided on each nomination application to determine if it generally conforms with historic status criteria. The
Board shall then prepare a designation report which shall contain the following: [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (a) Proposed legal boundaries of the historic building, archaeological site,
structure, or district; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (b) any proposed conditional zoning regulations designed to replace or complement existing zoning regulations with regard to, but not
limited to use, floor area, density, height, setbacks, parking, and minimum lot size; [Mid. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (c) Analysis of the historic significance and character of the nominated
property; and [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (d) analysis of optional historic interiors for those buildings and structures with interior features of exceptional architectural, aesthetic,
artistic, or historic significance. [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (4) Upon completion and formal review of the report, the Board shall set a public hearing on each proposed designation.
Notice of said hearing shall be made to the owner of affected property at least ten days prior to the hearing by regular mail. Additional notice shall be given in the same manner as
provided for a rezoning action [see Section 2.4.2(B)(1)(b)] and by notice published in the newspaper at least ten days prior to the hearing, provided, however, posting pursuant to 2.4.2(B)(1)(b)
is not required. [Amd. Ord. 78-04 1118/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] DELETED (5) AND RENUMBERED [Amd. Ord. 24-05 4/19/05] (5) After conducting the public hearing, if the Historic Preservation
Board finds that the nomination fulfills the proper designation criteria and all procedures have been followed correctly, it shall vote on the designation. A majority of the entire Board,
present and voting, must act in the affirmative to transmit the nomination and the Board's findings to the City Commission. The City Commission shall consider the recommendation through
its standard ordinance adoption procedures, except that at least three affirmative votes of the City Commission is necessary to make a designation. In the event that a directly affected
property owner objects to the historic designation, the Commission approval shall require a super majority vote of four votes. [Amd. Ord. 24-05 4/19/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91]
SECTION 4.5.1 (C) (6) 4.5 -8 (6) After conducting the public hearing, if the Historic Preservation Board does not find that the request fills the criteria, no further action will be
required and the request will be deemed denied. However, an appeal may be filed and processed pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E). (Arad. Ord. 24-05 4/19/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3126191] (7)
The Board will issue an official "certificate of historic significance" to the owner of properties listed individually on the local historic register or judged as contributing to the
character of a historic district listed on the local historic register. The Director acting as City Preservation Officer, or his appointee, is authorized to issue and place official
signs denoting the geographic boundaries of each historic district listed in the local historic register. [Amd. Ord. 24-05 4/19105]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91] (D) Review and Approval
Procedures: Once property is placed within a Historic District or designated as a Historic Site no development order shall be issued without first obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness
(C.O.A.) pursuant to Section 2.4.6(J) from the Historic Preservation Board. Obtaining a C.O.A. is required in addition to any other process which is required for the development application.
(E) Development Standards: AU development regardless of use within individually designated historic properties and/or properties located within historic districts, whether contributing
or noncontributing, residential or nonresidential, shall comply .with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, these regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines, and the. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] (1) Exterior Architectural Features. For the purpose of this Section, exterior
architectural features shall include, but not be limited to the following: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (a) The architectural style, scale, general design, and general arrangement of the
structure's exterior; (b) The type and texture of building material; and (c) The type and style of all roofs, windows, doors, and signs. (2) Major and Minor development: For purposes
of this section, major and minor development standards shall be applied as noted in the following table: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (2) 4,9 -5 ci$ .,77."-t3:',43:1-.-,,, -.6:1, , Ps. _ tg tiNtiij§ . : -n Aaiun , .,? . •. 4..,. Mr7VrW r•.=:.7: raDig0i. ----• ,n-, ----•:a -,--., , ,,, • . 150119.,
1C9girtif OAVNY-• ' .N11.--.•`_•! ,..13:‘Ls rid64ifitai?) f: .;Gf.ziiirKrff ..,..... -.-t w .ti . . . . -,----.-,,I,;•,..s t,K.: . .11 -61345),47t. Aw err,. , *10: oft-04.-ver 2 CBD
& CF Multi-Famil Minor Minor Mi.-Jr.:7 Minor 11:715-,T Non-Residential M i n ( : -Minor i: Minor Minry R-I -A, R-I -AA, RD, OSSHAD, RL, & RM, Single Family/Duplex :t' a' Minor -1 7)
Minor --ti4 ----Multi-Family ',.,.. .f. '6. Minor 4:Jor Minor e.-iZ4iirr:fili:ribr-Non-Residentiat Minor i•tAi63101. Minor ,-,tkW'' -Notes: 1. All development on individually designated
properties in all zoning districts is Minor 2. All development on properties in the OSSHAD district which are subject to CBD regulations pursuant to Section 4.4.24(B) (12) is Minor.
(a) For the purposes of this section, "residential" includes single family, duplexes and multifamily in all historic districts and all development, regardless of use, in the Residential
Office (RO) zoning district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5108] (b) Major development shall be considered: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 1. New construction in all historic districts except CBD and
CF zoned properties and properties zoned OSSHAD subject to CBD design guidelines; or , [Amd. Ord, 38-07 2/51081 2. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of in excess of twenty-five
percent (25%) of the existing floor area of the building, and all appurtenances, except for properties zoned CBD or CF and properties zoned OSSHAD subject to CBD design guidelines. For
purposes of this section, all limitations and regulations shall be reviewed in a cumulative manner from the date of passage of this ordinance in 2008; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] 3.
The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of any part of the front façade of an existing contributing residential or non-residential structure and all appurtenances, except for
properties zoned CBD or CF and properties zoned OSSHAD subject to CBD design guidelines. For purposes of this section, all limitations and regulations shall be reviewed in a cumulative
manner from the date of passage of this ordinance in 2008. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (c) Minor development shall be considered: [Amd, Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 1. All new construction in all
historic districts on property zoned CBD and CF as well as all properties in the OSSHAD zoned district subject to the CBD design guidelines; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (2) (c) 2. 4.5 -10 2. All modifications to existing contributing and noncontributing structures in all historic districts on property zoned CBD and CF as well as all
properties in the OSSHAD zoning district subject to the CBD Design Guidelines; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] 3. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of any part of the front
façade of an existing noncontributing residential or nonresidential structures and all appurtenances; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 4. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration
of less than twentyfive percent (25%) of the existing floor area of the building and all appurtenances. For purposes of this section, all limitations and regulations shall be reviewed
in a cumulative manner from the date of passage of this ordinance in 2008. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 5. Any changes to Individually Historically Designated properties, whether already
on site or newly designated, to help facilitate the move of a historic structure into a historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108] (3) Bui l d i ng s , St r uc t ur e s , Ap p u r t
e n an c e s and P a r k i ng . Buildings, structures, appurtenances and parking shall only be moved, reconstructed, altered, or maintained, in accordance with this chapter, in a manner
that will preserve the historical and architectural character of the building, structure, site, or district: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] DELETED (a) AND RELE7TERED [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(a) Appurtenances: Appurtenances include, but are not limited to, stone walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, sidewalks, signs, and accessory structures. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
1. Fences and Walls: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] a. Chain-link fences shall be clad in a green or black vinyl and shall only be used in rear yards, or where they are not visible from the
street. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] Swimming pool fences shall be designed in a manner that integrates the layout with the lot and structures without exhibiting a utilitarian or stand-alone
appearance. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] c. Fences and walls over four feet (4') shall not be allowed in front or side street setbacks. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5. 1 (E) (3) (a) 1. d. 4.5 -11 d. All other provisions in Section 4.6.5 shall ap ply. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 2. Garages and Carports: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5108] a. The following
compatibility standards shall apply for major development, where applicable: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] i. Garages and carports are encouraged to be oriented and entered from the side
or rear and out of view from the public right of way. However, if this is not possible, the orientation of garages and carports shall be consistent with the majority of such structures
within the district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] ii. Garage doors should be designed to be compatible with the architectural style of the principal structure and include individual openings
for vehicles rather than two car expanses of doors. Metal two car garage doors are discouraged. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (b) Parking: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 1. Where feasible, alternative
methods of meeting minimum parking standards contained in Sections 4.6.9(C)(8) and/or 4.6.9(E), as applicable, shall be explored to avoid excessive use of historic properties and/or
properties located in historic districts for parking. Parking lots shall strive to contribute to the historic nature of the properties/districts in which they are located by use of creative
design and landscape elements to buffer parking areas from historic structures. At a minimum, the following options shall be considered: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] a. Locate parking adjacent
to the building or in the rear. [Amd. Ord. 38-07. 2/5/08] b. Screen parking that can be viewed from the public right-of-way with fencing, landscaping, or a combination of the two pursuant
to Section 4.6.5. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] c, Utilize existing alleys to provide vehicular access to sites. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] d. Construct new curb cuts and street side driveways
only in areas where they are appropriate or existed historically. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (3) (b) 1. 4.5 -12 e. Use appropriate materials for driveways, such as concrete poured in ribbons. [Amd. Ord, 38-07 2/5/08] f. Avoid wide driveways and circular drives.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 2. Waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation
that adequate parking for a proposed use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (4) Alterations. In considering proposals for alterations to the exterior of historic buildings and structures and in applying development
and preservation standards, the documented, original design of the building may be considered, among other factors. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] (5) Standards and Guidel ines . A historic
site, building, structure, improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall only be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in
accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time. [Amd. Ord. 3807
2/5108] (6) Relocation. Relocation of historic buildings and structures to other sites shall not take place unless it is shown that their preservation on their existing or original sites
is not consistent with the purposes of this Section or would cause undue economic hardship to the property owner. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (7) Demolition. Demolition of historic or archaeological
sites, or buildings, structures, improvements, and appurtenances within historic districts shall be regulated by the Historic Preservation Board in the manner described in Section 4.5.1(F).
Demolition of any structure, whether contributing or non-contributing, shall not occur until a building permit has been issued for the HPB approved redevelopment. All structures approved
for demolition and awaiting issuance of a building permit for the redevelopment shall be maintained in a manner similar to that in which it existed at time of application unless the
Chief Building Official determines that an unsafe building condition exists in accordance with Section 4.5.1(n). [As d. Ord, 38-07 2/5/08]; [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1/15/08] DELETED (7) AND
RENUMBERED [Amd. Ord. 3B-07 2/5/08]
4.5 -9 SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (8) Visual Compatibility Standards. New construction and all improvements to both contributing and noncontributing buildings, structures and appurtenances
thereto within a designated historic district or on an individually designated property shall be visually compatible. In addition to the Zoning District Regulations, the Historic Preservation
Board shall apply the visual compatibility standards provided for in this Section with regard to height, width, mass, scale, facade, openings, rhythm, material, color, texture, roof
shape, direction, lot coverage, and square footage, and other criteria set forth elsewhere in Section 4.5.1. Visual compatibility for minor and major development as referenced in Section
4.5.1(E)(2) shall be determined by utilizing criteria contained in (a)-(m) below. Visual compatibility for all development on individually designated properties outside the district
shall be determined by comparison to other structures within the site. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible
in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. For major development, visual compatibility with
respect to the height of residential structures, as defined by 4.5.1(E)(2)(a), shall also be determined through application of the following: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 Building Height
Plane (BHP): The building height plane technique sets back the overall height of a building from the front property fine. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 a. The building height plane line is
extended at an inclined angle from the intersection of the front yard property line and the average grade of the adjacent street along the lot frontage. The inclined angle shall be established
at a two to one (2:1) ratio. See illustration below. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE AT 2C1 RATIO b. A structure relocated to a historic district or to an individually
designated historic site shall be exempt from this requirement. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 NO BUILD ZONE r-• of ai REAR SETBACK
4.5 -6 SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (a) 2. 2. First Floor Maximum Height: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] a. Single-story or first floor limits shall be established by: [Arnd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] Height
from finished floor elevation to top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed fourteen feet (14'). [Amd. Ord, 38-07 215108] ii. Mean Roof Height shall not exceed eighteen feet (18'). [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] iii. Any portion exceeding the dimensions described in i. and ii above shall be considered multi-story structures. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] iv. See illustration. below:
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] v. Sections i. and ii., above may be waived by the Historic Preservation Board when appropriate, based on the architectural style of the building. [Amd. Ord.
38-07 2/5/08] 3. Upper Story Height: tAmd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] a. Height from finished floor elevation to finished floor elevation or top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed twelve
feet (12'). [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108] (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the
width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (c) (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified
by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings
shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure
shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108] (e) Rhythm :of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship
between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Protections: The relationship of
entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic
buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials,
texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the
subject historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape
of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic
buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (j) (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall
be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. To determine whether the scale of a building
is appropriate, the following shall apply for major development only: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 1. For buildings wider than sixty percent (60%) of the lot width, a portion of the front
facade must be setback a minimum of seven (7) additional feet from the front setback line: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 a. Lots sixty-five (65) feet or less in width are exempt from this
requirement. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081 To calculate how much of the building width must comply with this provision, multiply the lot width by 40% and subtract the required minimum side
setbacks (example: 100' lot width x 40% = 40' -15' side yard setbacks = 25'). [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] c. Any part or parts of the front facade may be used to meet this requirement.
[Amd. Ord, 38-07 2/51081 d. See illustration below: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/083 75' LOT 75' LOT
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) 0) 2. 2. For buildings deeper than fifty percent (50%) of the lot depth, a portion of each side facade, which is greater than one story high, must be setback a
minimum of five (5) additional feet from the side setback line: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] a. To calculate how much of the building depth must comply with this provision, multiply the
lot depth by fifty percent (50%) and subtract the required minimum front and rear setbacks (example: 120' lot depth x 50% = 60' -25' front yard setback -10' rear setback = 25'). [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] b. Any part or parts of the side facades may be used to meet this requirement. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] c. See illustration below: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] d. If the
entire building is set back an additional five (5) feet from the side, no offsets are required on that side. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 3. Porches may be placed in the offset portion of
the front or side facades, provided they are completely open except for supporting columns and/or railings. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard
to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
4.4 -14 (1) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of
another style. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (m) Additions to Individually Designated Properties and to Contributing Structures in all Historic Districts. Visual compatibility shall be accomplished
as follows: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108] 1. Additions shall be located to the rear or least public side of a building and be as inconspicuous as possible. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 2. Additions
or accessory structures shall not be located in front of the established front wall plane of a historic building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 3. Characteristic features of the original
building shall not be destroyed or obscured. [Arad. Ord. 38-07 215/08] 4. Additions shall be designed and constructed so that the basic form and character of the historic building will
remain intact if the addition is ever removed. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 5. Additions shall not introduce a new architectural style, mimic too closely the style of the existing building
nor replicate the original design, but shall be coherent in design with the existing building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] 6. Additions shall be secondary and subordinate to the main mass
of the historic building and shall not overwhelm the original building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (9) Visual Compatibility incentives. In order to provide design flexibility for residential
structures, as defined by LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2)(a), that otherwise satisfy the Visual Compatibility Standards outlined in Section 4.5.1(E)(8), incentives for development shall include
the following: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08] (a) Open Air Spaces: The ratio of the Building Height Plane (BHP) can increase from two to one (2:1) to two to one and a half (2:1.5) for open
air spaces limited to; first or second floor front porches (separation must be provided between floors), first or second floor side porches (separation must be provided between floors),
balconies, and overlooks with open railings (see illustration below); and [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
4.5-5 SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (9) (a) 15.L.Aat: t5;-.); (b) Front Elevation: Up to twenty five percent (25%) of the front elevation(s) can extend above the Building Height Plane (BHP) to a
maximum height of thirty five feet (35'), provided twenty five percent (25%) or more of the front elevation(s) remains one (1) story as defined by LDR Section 4.5.1 (E)(8)(a)(2). The
total width of extension shall not exceed eighteen feet (18') along the front elevation(s). See illustration below. [Mid. Ord. 38-07 215108] FRDNT VI EW S S SIDE CAN'.35,!?!.tOVE _ •1:11k:F
375-. MAX.----NOT EXC ED:. 35.! ___ M131$1 aE LIN,DEA. OF t M.D:R 4 ' F ' 0 3# FA:CAD:E(S ) MUST REMAIN I STORY
SECTION 4.5.1 (r) (F) Restrictions on Demolitions: No structure within a Historic District or on a Historic Site shall be demolished without first receiving a Certificate of Appropriateness
pursuant to Section 2.4.6(H). The Historic Preservation Board shall be guided by the following in considering such a request. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1/15108] (1) The Historic Preservation
Board upon a request for demolition by a property owner, shall consider the following guidelines in evaluating applications for a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of designated
historic sites, historic interiors, or buildings, structures, or appurtenances within designated historic districts; (a) Whether the structure is of such interest or quality that it
would reasonably fulfill criteria for designation for listing on the national register. (b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmanship, or material that it could be reproduced
only with great difficulty or economically nonviable expense. (c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the designated historic district within the
city. (d) Whether retaining the structure would promote the general welfare of the city by providing an opportunity to study local history, architecture, and design, or by developing
an understanding of the importance and value of a particular culture and heritage. (e) Whether there are approved plans for immediate reuse of the property if the proposed demolition
is carried out, and what effect those plans will have on the surrounding area. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 11151081 (2) No decision of the Board shall result in undue economic hardship for the
property owner. The Board shall have authority to determine the existence of such hardship in accordance with the definition of undue economic hardship found in Subsection (H). (3) The
Board's refusal to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness requested by a property owner for the purpose of demolition will be supported by a written statement describing the public interest
that the Board seeks to preserve.
4.5 -7 SECTION 4.5.1 (F) (4) (4) The Board may grant a certificate of appropriateness as requested by a property owner, for demolition which may provide for a delayed effective date.
The effective date of the certificate will be determined by the Board based on the relative significance of the structure and the probable time required to arrange a possible alternative
to demolition. The Board may delay the demolition of designated historic sites and contributing buildings within historic districts for up to six months while demolition of non-contributing
buildings within the historic district may be delayed for up to three months. (5) During the demolition delay period, the Board may take such steps as it deems necessary to preserve
the structure concerned. Such steps may include, but are not limited to, consultation with community groups, public agencies, and interested citizens, recommendations for acquisition
of property by public or private bodies, or agencies, and exploration of the possibility of moving one or more structures or other features. (6) The Board may, with the consent of the
property owner, request that the owner, at the owner's expense, salvage and preserve specified classes of building materials, architectural details and ornaments, fixtures, and the like
for reuse in the restoration of the other historic properties. The Board may, with the consent of the property owner, request that the Delray Beach Historical Society, or the owner,
at the owner's expense, record the architectural details for archival purposes prior to demolition. The recording may include, but shall not be limited to photographs, documents, and
scaled architectural drawings to include elevations and floor plans. Two (2) copies of such recordings shall be submitted to the City's Planning and Zoning Department. One (1) to be
kept on file and the other to be archived with the Delray Beach Historical Society. At the Board's option, and with the property owner's consent, the Board or the Delray Beach Historical
Society may salvage and preserve building materials, architectural details, and ornaments, textures, and the like at their expense, respectively. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1115108] (7) The owner
shall provide the following information on his/her application for any contributing structure in a historic district or individually designated historic structure: [Amid. Ord. 55-07
1115/081 (a) A certified report from a registered architect or engineer which provides documentation explaining that the building is structurally unsound and is damaged beyond the ability
to repair it at a reasonable cost. The report must include photographs to substantiate the damage. [Amd. Ord, 55-07 1115/08/(b) A certified report from an engineer, architect, general
contractor, or other qualified professional which documents the projected cost of repairing the structure and returning it to a safe and habitable condition. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1/15/081
SECTION 4.5.1 (F) (7) (c) 4.5 -18 (c) An appraisal of the property in its current condition, its value as vacant land and its potential value as a preserved and restored historic property.
[Amd. Ord. 55-07 1115108] (d) Documentation that reasonable efforts have been made to find a suitable alternate location for the structure within the City of Delray Beach to which the
contributing/individually designated historic structure could be safely relocated. Valid. Ord. 55-07 1/15/08] (G) Unsafe Buildings: in the event the Chief Building Official determines
that any structure within a designated historic site or designated historic district is unsafe pursuant to the applicable Code of Ordinances, the Chief Building Official will immediately
notify the Board of his findings. Where appropriate and in accordance with applicable ordinances, the Chief Building Official will attempt to have the structure repaired rather than
demolished, and will take into consideration any comments and recommendations by the Board. However, the provisions contained within division (A) of this section shall not apply to the
Chief Building Official's declaration that a building is unsafe, nor will the Chief Building Official be precluded from taking whatever steps, as may be required by applicable ordinances
to protect the public health and safety of the community. The Board may also endeavor to negotiate with the owner and interested parties, provided such actions do no interfere with procedures
in the applicable ordinances. (H) Undue Economic Hardship: In any instance where there is a claim of undue economic hardship, the property owner may submit, within a reasonable period
of time, prior to a meeting with the Board, the following documentation: (1) For All Property: (a) The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase, and the party from whom purchased;
(b) The assessed value of the land and improvements thereon, according to the two most recent assessments; (c) Real estate taxes for the previous two years; (d) Annual debt service or
mortgage payments, if any, for the previous two years; (e) All appraisals, if any, obtained within the previous two years by the owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, financing,
or ownership of the property; (f) Any listing of the property for sale or rent, price asked, and offers received, if any; and
SECTION 4.5.1 (H) (1) (g) 4.5 -8 (g) Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the property, including but not limited to possible fair market rents for the property
if it were rented or leased in its current condition. (2) For Income Property (Actual or Potential): (a) The annual gross income from the property for the previous two years, if any;
(b) The annual cash flow, if any, for the previous two years; and (c) The status of leases, rentals, or sales for the previous two years. (3) An applicant may submit and the Board may
require that an applicant furnish additional information relevant to the Board's determination of any alleged undue economic hardship. The Board may also require, in appropriate circumstances,
that information be furnished under oath. (4) In the event that any of the required information is not reasonably available to the property owner and cannot be obtained by the property
owner, the property owner shall file statement of the information which cannot be obtained and the reasons why such information cannot be reasonably obtained. Where such unobtainable
information concerns required financial information, the property owner will submit a statement describing estimates which will be as accurate as are feasible. (I) Historic Preservation
Board to Act on Site Plans, Landscape Plans, and Architectural. Elevations: Pursuant to the powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the Historic Preservation Board shall act on all development
applications, within a Historic District or on a Historic Site, subject to processing under Sections 2.4.5(F),(G),(H), and (I) which otherwise would be acted upon by the Site Plan Review
and Appearance Board or the Planning and Zoning Board. (J) Historic Preservation Board to Act on Variance Requests: Pursuant to the powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the Historic Preservation
Board shall act on all variance requests, within a Historic District or on a Historic Site, which otherwise would be acted upon by the Board of Adjustments. In acting on such variance
requests the Board may be guided by the following as an alternative to the criteria normally used by the Board of Adjustments. [And. Ord. 12-93 219193] (1) That a variance is necessary
to maintain the historic character of property through demonstrating that: (a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare.
SECTION 4.5.1 (J) (1) (b) 4.5 -20 (b) Special conditions and circumstances exist, because of the historic setting, location, nature, or character of the land, structure, appurtenance,
sign, or building involved, which are not applicable to other lands, structures, appurtenances, signs, or buildings in the same zoning district, which have not been designated as historic
sites or a historic district nor listed on the Local Register of Historic Places. (c) Literal interpretation of the provisions of existing ordinances would alter the historic character
of the historic district, or historic site to such an extent that it would not be feasible to preserve the historic character, of the historic district or historic site. (d) The variance
requested is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character of a historic site or of a historic district. [Arad. Ord, 12-93 2/9/93] (2) Or, as an alternative to subsection
(i)(1), that a variance is necessary to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse of a structure within a Historic District or upon a Historic Site through demonstrating that: (a) A
variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. (b) The variance would not significantly diminish the historic character of the Historic District or Site.
(c) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to effect the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site. [Amd. Ord. 12-93 219193] (3) The Board shall otherwise follow
all procedures and impose conditions as required of the Board of Adjustments. [Arad. Ord. 12-93 219/93] (K) Designation of Historic Sites: The following Historic Sites are hereby affirmed
or established: (1) THE SCOTT HOUSE, 19 Andrews Avenue, located on the North 50 feet of the West 110 feet of the South 100 feet, less the West 10 feet of the Beach Lot 15, Subdivision
of the Fractional East Half of Section 16, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. (Original designation by Ordinance 17-90, May 22, 1990).
SECTION 4.5A (K) (2) (2) FONTAINE FOX HOUSE, 610 N. Ocean Boulevard, located on the South Half of Lot 4 lying West of State Road MA, (less the West 435.5 feet thereof, less the West
25 feet thereof for road Right-of-way), that part of the South 10 feet of Lot 3 and the North Half of Lot 4 lying West of State Road AlA (less the West 25 feet thereof for road Right-of-way),
and Lot 3 (less the South 10 feet thereof, less the West 25 feet thereof for road Right-of-way) (less Right-of-way of State Road AlA, missing from original description) of Block E, Revised
Plat of Blocks D and E, Palm Beach Shore Acres, Defray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida as Recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 38, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. And
that part of the South 10 feet of Lot 3 lying East of the Right-of-way of State Road AlA. (3) SITE OF SCHOOL NO. 4 DELRAY COLORED, located on Block 28, Lot 2, N.W. 5th Avenue. (Original
designation by Ordinance 16-89) (4) GREATER MOUNT OLIVE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, 40 N.W. 4th Avenue, located on Lot 7, Block 28, Delray Beach. (Original designation by Ordinance 17-89)
(5) ST. PAUL AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 119 N.W. 5th Avenue, located on Lot 5, Block 27, Delray Beach (Original designation by Ordinance 18-89) (6) THE FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS
OF DELRAY BEACH LODGE 275, 85 N.W. 5th Avenue, located on Lot 1, Block 28, Delray Beach (Originally designation by Ordinance 19-89) (7) ST. MATTHEW EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 404 S,W. 3rd Street,
located on Lot 1, Block 32, Delray Beach (Original designation by Ordinance 20-89) (8) THE KOCH HOUSE, 777 North Ocean Boulevard. Palm Beach Shore Acres, Lot 21, Block D, Delray Beach,
Palm Beach County [Amd. Ord. 29-94 617/94 (9) SUNDY FEED STORE, located on the South 85 feet of the North 153 feet of Lot 1, Block 84, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County. (10) HISTORIC
DEPOT SQUARE, located on a parcel of land lying in Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, City of Defray Beach (Original designation by Ordinance 119-88) (11) THE COLONY HOTEL
AND THE COLONY HOTEL NORTH ANNEX, located on the South 12 feet of Lot 18, Alley South of Lot 18, East 25 feet of Lot 21 and Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, inclusive, Block 108. And Lots 5,
6 and 7, Less 5 foot Road RAW, Block 108, Town of Delray, with the designation pertaining to the buildings only and not the grounds. ['kind. Ord. 22-91 3/26/91]
4.5 -22 SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (12) (12) MILTON-MYERS POST NO. 65, THE AMERICAN LEGION OF THE UNITED STATES, 263 N.E. 5th Avenue, located on Lots 5, 14 and 15, Block 106, Delray Beach, formerly
Town of Linton, Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 68-94 10/18194]. (13) SOLOMON D. SPADY HOUSE, 170 N.W. 5th Avenue, located on Lots 5, 6 and the north 26.25 feet of Lot 7, Block
19, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton, Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 8-95 2/7195] (14) THE SUSAN WILLIAMS HOUSE, located at 154 N.W. 51h Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; more
particularly described as follows: south 12 feet of Lot 7 and Lot 8, Melvin S. Burd Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 73, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida
(154 N.W. 5th Avenue). [Amd. Ord. 29-02 7/16/02]; [Amd. Ord. 9-95 2/7/95] (15) THE BLANK HOUSE, 85 S.E. 6th Avenue, located on Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 117, Delray Beach, formerly
Town of Linton, Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 26-95 616195] (16) THE MONTEREY HOUSE, 20 North Swinton Avenue, located on Lot 12, Block 60, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton,
Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 27-95 6/6/95] (17) THE HISTORIC BUNGALOW, 24 North Swinton Avenue, located south 50 feet of Lot 11, Block 60, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton,
Palm Beach County, Florida, [Amd. Ord. 28-95 616195] (18) THE SANDOWAY HOUSE, 142 South Ocean Boulevard. Beach Lots Delray, the South 73 feet of the North 100 feet of Lot 24, less the
West 355 feet, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 25, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 57-96 12/3/96] (19) THE TRINITY EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH CHAPEL,
located on a portion of the Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church property at 400 North Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; more particularly described as the East 1/2 of Lot 12, Section
8-46-43, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. The chapel is the only building in the church complex receiving an historic designation. The church complex is located at the northwest
corner of Lake Ida Road and Swinton Avenue. [Amd. Ord. 26-97 7/1/97) (20) THE TURNER HOUSE, located at 145 N.E. 6th Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; more particularly described as the
South 27.6 feet of Lot 5, less the West 5 feet SR RNV, Lots 6 & 7, less the West 5 feet SR R/W, of Block 115, as recorded in Plat Book 1 at Page 3 of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 46-97 11/18/97
SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (21) 4.5 -23 (21) THE PRICE HOUSE, located at 1109 Sea Spray Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; more particularly described as Lot 11, Sea Spray Estates, as recorded in
Plat Book 21 at Page 15 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida_ [Amd. Ord. 12-98 3/3/981 (22) THE FELLOWSHIP HALL OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF DELRAY BEACH, located
at 36 Bronson Street, Defray Beach, Florida; more particularly described as Lots 16, 17, 18 and 19, Block 3, Ocean Park Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 15 of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 46-99 11116199] (23) THE ATLANTIC AVENUE BRIDGE (State Structure #930864), located at East Atlantic Avenue and the Intracoastal Waterway
in the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 18-00 8/15/00] (24) THE GEORGE BUSH BOULEVARD BRIDGE, formerly known as the N.E. 8th Street Bridge, (State Structure
#930026), located at George Bush Boulevard and the Intracoastal Waterway in the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. [Arnd. Ord. 19-00 8/15/001 (25) THE WATER HOUSE, located
at 916 and 918 Northeast 5th Street, Delray Beach, Florida; more particularly described as the West 84.82 feet of Lot 37, Las Palmas, Delray Beach, Florida, according to the Plat thereof
recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in Plat Book 10 at Page 68. [Amd. Ord. 15-01 2/20/01] (26) THE O'NEAL HOUSE, located at
910 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lots 1, 2, 3, 28 and 29, Block 10, Dell Park, Defray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, according
to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 8 at Page 56 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 27-02 7116/02] (27) THE AMELUNG HOUSE, located at 102 NE 12th
Street, Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lot 9, Block 6, Dell Park, according to the Plat recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 56, recorded in the Public Records
of Palm Beach County, Florida; said land situate, lying and being in Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 25-03 8/19/03] (28) THE DEWITT ESTATE, located at 1110 North Swinton Avenue,
Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as the East 365.69 feet of Lot 8 (less the West 40.00 feet of the South 20.00 feet of said East 365.69 feet of Lot 8) Subdivision of
South half of East half of Lot 8, Section 8, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 16, Page 80, of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 71-04 1/4105]
SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (29) 4.5 -24 (29) THE HARTMAN HOUSE, located at 302 N.E. 7th Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lots 13 and 14, Block 113, Highland
Park according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 79, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 26-05 5131051 (30) THE SEWELL C. BIGGS
HOUSE, located at 212 Seabreeze Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lot 21 and the West 35 feet of Lot 22, Defray Beach Esplanade, according to the
plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 18, Page 39, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Arad. Ord. 5005 7/19105] (L) Designation of Historic Districts: The following Historic
Districts are hereby affirmed or established: (1) NASSAU STREET which consists of Lots 2-19 of Nassau Park, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 67 of Palm Beach County, Florida; Lots 1-12
of Wheatley Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 98 of Palm Beach County, Florida; and Block E, Lot 4 and Block F, Lot 1 of John B. Reid's Village as recorded in Plat Book
21, page 95 of Palm Beach County, Florida. (Original designation by Ordinance 97-87 adopted on January 12, 1988) [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (2) MARINA which consists of Block 125, excluding
the south 350' of the north 488.6' of the west 100' of Block 125, along with that part of Block 133 lying west of the Intracoastal Waterway, together with the east half of Block 118,
along with all of Block 126, together with that portion of Block 134 lying west of the Intracoastal Waterway, along with east half of Block 119, together with all of Block 127, along
with the east half of Block 120, and all of Block 128, all within the Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County Records (Original designation by Ordinance
156-88 adopted on December 20, 1988) [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08] (3) DEL-IDA PARK which consists of Blocks 1 through 13, inclusive, along with Tracts A, B, and C DEL-1DA PARK, according
to the Plat thereof on file in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida recorded in Plat Book 9 at Page 62 (Original designation by Ordinance
9-88 adopted on March 22, 1988) (4) OLD SCHOOL SQUARE which consists of the south one-half of Block 57 and Blocks 58-62, Blocks 65-70, the west half of Blocks 74 and 75, and Lots 1-6
of Block 76, Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County Records. (Original designation by Ordinance 1-88 adopted on February 9, 1988).
4.5 -25 SECTION 4.5.1 (L) (5) (5) WEST SETTLERS is bounded on the north by Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (N.W. 2nd Street). The eastern boundary is as follows: the alley running
north and south in Block 43; N.W. 3rd Avenue between N.W. 1st Street and the eastwest alley of Block 36. The southern boundary is N.W. 1st Street between N.W. 3rd Avenue and the alley
in Block 43; the east-west alley in Block 36 and Block 28 and the south property line of Lot 13, Block 20. The western boundary is the north-south alley and the eastern one-half (1/2)
of the block south of the alley of Block 19; the northsouth alley in the north half of Block 20. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]; [Amd. Ord. 6-97 2/18/97] (M) Tax Exemption for Historic Properties:
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (1) The City Commission hereby creates a tax exemption for the restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of qualifying historic properties designated in Section
4.5.1(K) & L, as amended. Qualifying properties shall be exempt from that portion of ad valorem taxation levied by the City of Delray Beach on 100% of, the increase in assessed value
resulting from any renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the qualifying property made on or after the effective date of this ordinance. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96
11119/96] (2) The above exemption does not apply to: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) Taxes levied for payment of bonds; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (b) Taxes authorized by a vote of the
electors pursuant to Section 9(b) or Section 12, Article 7 of the Florida Constitution; or [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (c) Personal property. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (3) Duration of
Tax Exemption: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (a) The exemption period shall be for ten (10) years, beginning January 1st following the year in which final approval is given by the City
Commission and the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser has been instructed to provide such exemption. However, the City Commission shall have the discretion to set a lesser term. [Amd.
Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (b) The term of the exemption shall be specified in the resolution approving the exemption and shall continue regardless of any changes
in the authority of the City to grant such exemption or change in ownership of the property. To retain an exemption, the historic character of the property and the improvements which
qualified the property for an exemption must be maintained in their historic state over the period for which the exemption was granted. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
4.5 -26 SECTION 4.5i (M) (4) (4) Effective Date of Exemption: The effective date of the tax exemption shall be January 1 of the year following the year in which a historic preservation
exemption covenant is recorded and a copy of the Final Application and resolution of the City Commission, as approved, have been transmitted to the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser.
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (5) Qualifying Properties and improvements: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (a) The following real property in the City is qualifying property for the purposes
of this ordinance if at the time the exemption is approved by the City Commission, the property: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (i) is individually listed in the National Register of Historic
Places pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended; or, [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (ii) is a contributing property to a National Register-listed district;
or, [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (iii) is designated as a historic property, or as a contributing property to a historic district, under the terms of the City's historic preservation ordinance;
and, [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (iv) has been certified by the Historic Preservation Board as satisfying (a) (i), (ii), or (iii). [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (b) For an improvement to
a historic property to qualify the property for an exemption, the improvement must: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (i) be consistent with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for Rehabilitation, as amended; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (ii) be determined an improvement by the Historic Preservation Board as established in rules adopted by the Department of State,
Division of Historical Resources, FAG 1A-38, as amended which defines a real property improvement as changes in the condition of real property brought about by the expenditure of labor
and money for the restoration, renovation, or rehabilitation of such property. improvements shall include, but are not limited to: modifications, repairs, or additions to the principal
contributing building and its associated accessory structures (i.e, a garage, cabana, guest cottage, storage/utility structures, swimming pools), whether existing or new, as long as
the new construction is compatible with the historic character of the building and site in terms of size, scale, massing, design, and materials, and preserves the historic
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (5) (b) ( 4.5 -27 relationship between a building or buildings, landscape features, and open space. The exemption does not apply to improvements made to non-contributing
principal buildings or their noncontributing accessory structures. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96 (iii) be consistent with Section 4.5.1(E), "Development Standards",
of the City's Land Development Regulations; and [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119196] (iv) include, as part of the overall project, visible improvements to the exterior of the structure. [Amd.
Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (6) Evaluation of Property Used for Government or Nonprofit Purposes: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (a) For purposes of the exemption under Section 196.1998, Florida
Statutes, a property is being used for government or nonprofit purposes if the sole occupant of at least 65 percent of the useable space is an agency of the federal, state or a local
government unit or a nonprofit organization certified by the Department of State under Section 617.0301, Florida Statutes. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119196] (b) For
purposes of the exemption under Section 196.1998, Florida Statutes, a property is considered regularly and frequently open to the public if public access to the property is provided
not less than 12 days a year on an equitably spaced basis, and at other times by appointment. Nothing herein shall prohibit the owner from charging a reasonable nondiscriminatory admission
fee, comparable to fees charged at similar facilities in the area. [Arad. Ord. 50-96 11119196] (7) Application for Exemption: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (a) Any property owner, or the
authorized agent of the owner, that desires an ad valorem tax exemption for the improvement of a historic property must file a Tax Exemption Application with the Planning and Zoning
Department. The application shall be made on the two-part Historic Preservation Property Tax Exemption Application, approved by the State of Florida, Division of Historical Resources.
Part 1 of the application, the Construction Application, shall be submitted before, during, or after qualifying improvements are initiated and Part 2, the Final Application/Request for
Review of Completed Work, shall be submitted upon completion of the qualifying improvements. The Final Application shall contain the Historic Preservation Exemption
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (7) (a) 4.5 -28 Covenant, as provided for herein. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (8) Part 1, Construction Application: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
[Amd, Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) A Construction Application shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning Department before, during, or after the qualifying project is constructed. The Construction
Application shall also contain information concerning the estimated cost of the qualifying improvement and be accompanied by a copy of the most recent tax bill from the Palm Beach County
Property Appraiser for the property. Upon receipt of the Construction Application, the Historic Preservation Planner shall review the application and determine whether the application
is complete and whether the property satisfies the requirements of Section 4.5.1(M)(5) and is therefore eligible for review by the Historic Preservation Board. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
(9) Review of Const ruct ion Appl i cat ion by the Histor i c Preservat ion Board: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (a) The Historic Preservation Board shall review
the Construction Application within 60 days of the Historic Preservation Planner's determination of eligibility. The exterior portion of the work shall be reviewed in accordance with
the Certificate of Appropriateness review process simultaneously with the Part 1, Construction Application. If site plan approval or a variance is required for the project, the respective
applications shall be presented to the Historic Preservation Board in conjunction with the Certificate of Appropriateness review process. If Part I of the Construction Application is
submitted after the project has been completed, the application must be submitted within 18 months from the date of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (i) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as proposed is a qualifying improvement and is in compliance with the review standards contained
in Section 4.5.1(E), the Construction Application and, if applicable, the Certificate of Appropriateness shall be approved by the Historic Preservation Board. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
[Arnd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (ii) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as proposed is not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance with the review standards
contained in Section 4.5.1(E), corrective measures shall be prescribed by the Board. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (10) 4.5 -29 (10) Part 2, Final Applicat ion/Request for Review of Completed Work: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) if the Historic Preservation
Board determines that the work is a qualifying improvement and is in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the Board shall approve the Final Application/Request
for Review of Completed Work and the Historic Preservation Planner shall issue a written order to the applicant. The Historic Preservation Planner will inspect the completed work to
verify such compliance. The review of the Historic Preservation Board shall be completed within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the completed Final Application/Request for Review
of Completed Work as verified by the Historic Preservation Planner. [Amid, Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (b) The Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work
shall be accompanied by documentation of the total expenditures of the qualifying improvements. Appropriate documentation may include, but is not limited to, paid contractor's bills,
NA Forms 702-704, canceled checks, copies of invoices, and an approved building permit application listing the cost of work to be performed. Upon the receipt of a Final Application/Request
for Review of Completed Work and all required supporting documentations, the Historic Preservation Board shall conduct a review at a regularly scheduled public meeting to determine whether
or not the completed improvements are in compliance with the work described in the Construction Application, approved amendments, if any, and Section 4.5.1(E). After the above mentioned
review, the Historic Preservation Board shall recommend that the City Commission grant or deny the exemption. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord, 50-96 11/19/96] (c) If the Historic
Preservation Board determines that the work as completed is either not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the applicant
shall be advised that the Final Application has been denied. The Historic Preservation Planner shall provide a written summary of the reasons for the determination to the applicant.
[Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (11) Appeal to the Historic Preservation Board's Decision: [Amd. Ord. 1003 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) Any action taken
by the Historic Preservation Board is appealable to the City Commission pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E), "Appeals'. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (12) -30 (12) Approval by the City Commission: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119196] (a) Upon approval of a Final Application/Request for Review of
Completed Work by the Historic Preservation Board, the Final Application shall be placed by resolution on the agenda of the City Commission for approval. The resolution of the City Commission
approving the Final Application shall provide the name of the owner of the property, the property address and legal description, a recorded restrictive covenant as provided in Section
4.5.1(M)(13) in the official records of Palm Beach County as a condition of receiving the exemption, and the effective dates of the exemption, including the expiration date. [Amd. Ord.
10-03 5/20103]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (13) His tor i c Preservat ion Exempt ion Covenant : [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (a) To qualify for an exemption,
the applicant must sign and return the Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant with the Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work. The covenant as established by the Department
of State, Division of Historical Resources, shall be in a form approved by the City of Delray Beach City Attorney's Office and applicable for the term for which the exemption is granted
and shall require the character of the property and qualifying improvements to be maintained during the period that the exemption is granted_ [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Arnd. Ord. 50-96
11119196] (b) On or before the effective date of the exemption, the owner of the property shall have the covenant recorded in the official records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and
shall cause a certified copy of the recorded covenant to be delivered to the City's Historic Preservation Planner. Such covenant shall be binding on the current property owner, transferees,
and their heirs, assigns and successors. A violation of the covenant shall result in the property owner being subject to the payment of the differences between the total amount of the
taxes which would have been due in March of each of the previous years in which the covenant or agreement was in effect had the property not received the exemption and the total amount
of taxes actually paid in those years, plus interest on the difference calculated as provided in Sec. 212_12(3), Florida Statutes. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120103]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(14) Completion of Work: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
4.5 -31 SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (14) (a) (a) An applicant must complete all work within two (2) years following the date of approval of a Part 1 Construction Application by the Historic Preservation
Board. A Construction Application shall be automatically revoked if the property owner has not submitted a Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work within two (2) years
following the date of approval of the Construction Application. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196] (b) The City Commission, upon the recommendation of the Historic
Preservation Board, may extend the time for completion of a substantial improvement in accordance with the procedures of the City's Building Code. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (15) Notice
of Approval to the Property Appraiser: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) Upon the receipt of a certified copy of the recorded restrictive covenant by the Historic
Preservation Planner, the Planner shall transmit a copy of the approved Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work, the exemption covenant and the resolution of the City
Commission approving the Final Application and authorizing the tax exemption to the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser. [Amd. Ord, 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (b) The
resolution approving an historic tax exemption must be filed with the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser on or before January 1st of the year in which an exemption is requested. Therefore,
the Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work must be submitted no later than November 1st of the year the work was completed in order to process the application for both
the Historic Preservation Board and City Commission approvals. If the Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work is not submitted by November 1st of the year the work was
completed, the abatement will not take effect until the following year of the date of submittal. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96] (16) Revocation Proceedings: [Amd.
Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (a) The Historic Preservation Board may initiate proceedings to revoke the ad valorem tax exemption provided herein, in the event the
applicant, or subsequent owner or successors in interest to the property, fails to maintain the property according to the terms, conditions and standards of the Historic Preservation
Exemption Covenant. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
4.5 -32 SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (16) (b) (b) The Historic Preservation Planner shall provide notice to the current owner of record of the property and the Historic Preservation Board shall
hold a revocation hearing in the same manner as in Section 4.5.1(M)(10), and make a recommendation to the City Commission. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Arad. Ord. 50-96 11119196] (c)
The City Commission shall review the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board and make a determination as to whether the tax exemption shall be revoked. Should the City Commission
determine that the tax exemption shall be revoked, a written resolution revoking the exemption and notice of penalties as provided in Paragraph 8 of the covenant shall be provided to
the owner, the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser, and filed in the official records of Palm Beach County. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96] (d) Upon receipt of the resolution revoking the
tax exemption, the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser shall discontinue the tax exemption on the property as of January 1st of the year following receipt of the notice of revocation.
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/961 Section 4.5.2 Noise Control: Any land use established within the City of Delray Beach must comply with the requirements of Chapter 99, Noise Control, of the
Code of Ordinances. Section 4.5.3 Flood Damage Control Districts: (A) Purpose and Intent: It is the purpose of this Overlay Zone District to promote the public health, safety, and general
welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to: (1) Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety,
and property due to water or erosion or in flood heights or velocities; (2) Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve these uses, be protected against
flood damage at the time of initial construction; (3) Control the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers which are involved in the accommodation
of flood waters; (4) Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase erosion or flood damage; and, (5) Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers
which will unnaturally divert flood waters or which may increase flood hazards to other lands.
4.5 -32 EXHIBIT "C" The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary of the interior's Standards for Rehabilitation are ten basic principles created to help
preserve the distinctive character of a historic building and its site, while allowing for reasonable change to meet new needs. The Standards (36 CFR Part 67) apply to historic buildings
of all periods, styles, types, materials, and sizes. They apply to both the exterior and the interior of historic buildings. The Standards also encompass related landscape features and
the building's site and environment as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires
minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic
materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes
that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change
over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or
examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration
requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of
missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials
shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project
shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall
not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and
architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10.New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a
manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Planning and Zoning Director THROUGH: City Manager DATE: October 13,
2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.C.1 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is consideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s motion to approve the
waiver of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon a failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2. BACKGROUND At its meeting of
October 4, 2011, the City Commission considered the subject appeal and tabled the item so that additional background information and clarification could be provided by Staff regarding
the outstanding violations of the illegal conversion of the garage to office use, and the Code Enforcement Board case which was resolved in 2003. The summary of the longstanding history
of outstanding permits, the code case, and multiple site plan applications submitted for HPB review is below. In researching our files, a Class V site plan was submitted in 1995 for
the conversion of the principal structure (Blank House) to retail use; conversion of the garage to office use, construction of a 9 space pea rock parking area at the SW corner of the
site; and additional site improvements. The request was approved by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) on August 16, 1995 (valid through February 1997), and it was noted that this
approval was for a conversion that already occurred without permits, and without the provision of required parking. No site improvements were installed and the site plan approval expired
in February 1997. On March 17, 2000, a building permit application was submitted to convert the garage space to office and to construct associated site improvements (parking lot, etc.).
As the original site plan approval had expired (February, 1997), a new site plan approval was required. On December 12, 2000 a Class III site plan modification was submitted for conversion
of garage to two offices (already established), installation of outdoor dining and exterior staircase for the Blank House, and construction of 8 asphalt parking spaces at the SW corner
of lot, and 1 handicap space at the North side of the lot. A building permit was submitted on December 19, 2001 (01-77442) for the conversion from garage to office and related site improvements.
This permit request did not include the garage door
replacement with French doors done in 1995. On January 18, 2001, a code violation was issued (CEB-01-77906) for conducting work without a permit (changing of the garage doors to French
doors). As the applicant was seeking site plan approval (per December 12, 2000 submittal) for the use conversion, the citation was likely limited to the physical work which had been
accomplished without a permit. The Class III site plan modification request submitted on December 12, 2000 was approved at the HPB meeting of May 2, 2001. This site plan was not certified
(conditions of approval had not been addressed) and the permit was not issued. The improvements were not constructed and the Class III approval (May, 2001) expired on November 2, 2002.
As no action was taken by the applicant to get a permit for the conversion of the doors, a lien was levied on April 18, 2002. A new Class III site plan modification and COA (2003-052
SPM) were submitted on November 22, 2002, which included the conversion of the garage into offices and associated site improvements (including parking). This was approved subject to
conditions on March 19, 2003. The Class III site plan modification was certified on June 3, 2003, and building permits were issued on August 6, 2003 (01-77442). As the French doors were
now included in the improvements on the permit, the citation issued by the Code Enforcement Division (work constructed without a permit) was satisfied and a letter was sent to the applicant
on August 15, 2003. The lien amount was considered by Code Enforcement on October 14, 2003 and reduced. This reduced lien was paid on November 13, 2003 and the lien was closed. On December
5, 2003, a COA and Class II Site Plan Modification (COA 2004-076-SPI-CL2) was submitted. The request included an English Rose Garden and fountain in place of the parking lot and a request
to replace the 9 spaces with 6 in-lieu parking spaces. A reduction to 6 spaces from 9 was requested as the apartment conversion originally part of the 1995 approval was never implemented.
A revision to building permit number 01-77442 was filed on December 29, 2003 to “change parking lot to English Rose Garden and walk path”. The permit was put on hold pending Class II
site plan approval (submitted on December 5, 2003) which was scheduled for HPB consideration on January 7, 2004. The item was tabled by HPB at this meeting due to concerns over the elimination
of the parking spaces. The HPB approved the Class II modification at its meeting of March 4, 2004 and recommended approval of the purchase of 6 in-lieu of parking spaces. The request
for 6 in-lieu of parking spaces was reviewed by the City Commission at 4 separate meetings with a final approval granted for the purchase of 2 in-lieu parking with 4 additional new spaces
for a total of 7 spaces to be provided on site. The Class II site plan modification expired in August of 2005, as revised plans were never submitted for certification, and the in-lieu
fees were never paid. As a result, the revision to permit 01-77442, submitted on December 29, 2003, was never issued, and the permit file was closed out on July 24, 2008 due to no activity.
At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed yet another attempt after 16 years to address the office conversion. This request was to waive all required parking (6 spaces) for the
office space conversion. This request was not supported and the appeal of that denial is now before the City Commission. WAIVER: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2., waivers may
be granted by the Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation that adequate parking for a proposed
use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
As required above, confirmation that adequate parking can be achieved by alternate means has not been presented. Past site plan submittals have been approved which adequately provided
the required amount of parking and were found to be appropriate and compatible to the historic property. Further, in 2004, additional options were approved to provide for a portion of
the parking on-site and a portion via inlieu. None of these options were followed up on or completed. Waiving the required parking spaces altogether will have the potential to adversely
affect the neighboring area in that the required parking for this private project will utilize public parking spaces, thereby reducing the number of public spaces available for other
users. In addition to the above, it should be considered that while relief may be granted to the amount of required parking spaces, the intent of this “benefit” afforded to historic
properties is not to excuse the provision of all parking but to provide alternatives. Otherwise, one could conclude that all parking on historic properties converted to office use is
not necessary. It is noted that the parking requirement currently being applied is significantly less than the current code requirement. To understand the intensity of the uses on the
site, and what their parking requirement would be if the site were required to comply with today’s parking requirement, the following is noted. The required parking for each individual
use would be: office-4, restaurant-13, multi-family residence-7, for a total of 24 spaces. The mixed-use parking calculation would require that twenty (20) spaces be provided, plus the
two (2) spaces eliminated from the garage conversion to office. Utilizing the old code requirements requires that only nine (9) parking spaces be provided (3 existing and 6 for the garage
conversion). The current request is to legally establish the aforenoted change of use, and to completely waive the required six (6) parking spaces. The subject request is not supported
by Staff nor has it received support from other reviewing Boards. If Commission finds that the most appropriate manner in which to maintain the historic integrity of the site is to not
physically provide any parking spaces, then Staff recommends that the property owner be required to make payment of all required spaces (6) via the inlieu of parking process. This alternative
would be the fair approach given that other historic properties converted to commercial use have been obligated to account for their required parking through the available and appropriate
options, including the in-lieu program. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) considered the subject request at its March 10, 2011 meeting, where they recommended
denial of the waiver to the required parking. The Board also requested that the item return for further review when “a solution is worked out.” The Downtown Development Authority (DDA)
considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011 meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the required spaces. Direction
was given to the applicant to work out an alternative approach with Staff, and return to the DDA for further review. The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) considered the subject
request at its June 28, 2011 meeting, where a recommendation to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested that the applicant work with Staff and accommodate three (3) spaces
on site and provide the balance either through an off-site parking agreement, or via the in-lieu of parking fee. RECOMMENDATION Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Preservation
Board’s action of denial.
1 IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUEST FOR 85 SE 6TH AVENUE 1. This waiver
request came before the City Commission on October 18, 2011. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver
request to reduce the required parking for 85 SE 6th Avenue from six (6) spaces to zero (0) spaces. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made
in accordance with Subsection I. I. WAIVERS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does
not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. A. Pursuant to LDR
Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2, waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation
that adequate parking for a proposed use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines. As provided for in the referenced Section above, the applicant has requested a waiver to the provision of the six (6) required parking spaces. The following is an
excerpt from the attached waiver justification statement provided with the request: “Adequate parking…can be…achieved by alternate means which are consistent with the provisions and
intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines…Thus, the owner is seeking to maintain the historic integrity of the site by allowing the property to exist with 3
spaces on the Property.
2 …the disruption of existing open spaces to provide otherwise underutilized parking would undermine the intent of Ordinance 38-07 and Future Land Use Policy A-4.2, which mandates that
redevelopment shall provide for the preservation of existing resources.” Does the waiver to Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2 to allow a reduction in parking from six (6) spaces to zero (0) spaces
meet all of the requirements of 2.4.7(B)(5)? Yes _______ No _______ 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the original
development application was submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample
and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony
of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves ___ denies ___ the waiver request to LDR Section
4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2. 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote of _____ in favor and ____ opposed. __________________
______________ ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor ________________________________ Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE: September 30, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.B.1 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2011 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HPB'S DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The
action requested of the City Commission is consideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s (HPB) rejection of the waiver request on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s motion
to approve the waiver of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon a failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2. BACKGROUND On
August 16, 1995, the HPB approved a COA for two (2) of the three (3) on-site buildings including the conversion of the Blank House from single-family residence to retail use (Building
A), the conversion of a garage to office use and addition of a second story residential apartment (Building B), and the construction of a nine-space, pea-rock parking area off of SE
1st Street. The third building (Building C) was, and remains, a multi-family residence. The single family residence (Building A) was subsequently converted to retail use and the garage
was converted to office use. Building permits were not obtained for the conversion of the garage nor was the parking area required for this conversion ever installed. As a result, the
office use was never legally established. In October of 1995, the retail use (Building A) was legally converted to restaurant use and the second floor to a storage area. Between 1995
and 2004 as the illegal status of the office use continued to surface, Site Plan Applications were submitted and approved for the conversion of use with associated parking improvements.
Each application was allowed to expire and none of the required improvements were ever constructed. The latest approval of August 3, 2004 permitted the applicant to pay for two (2) parking
spaces and included the installation of the balance of required spaces on site (a total of four new spaces just south of the City’s public parking lot and retention of three existing
spaces off the alley on the east side of property). As with previous approvals, no improvements were constructed, no payments of in-lieu of parking fees were made, and the approvals
expired. Coversheet Page 1 of 3 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntranet/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4984&MeetingID=331 10/14/2011
At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed yet another attempt, after 16 years, to address the office conversion. This request was to waive all required parking (6 spaces) for
the office space conversion. This request was denied and the appeal of that denial is now before the City Commission. WAIVER: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2., waivers may be
granted by the Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation that adequate parking for a proposed
use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Confirmation that
adequate parking can be achieved has not been presented. Past site plan submittals have been approved which adequately provided the required amount of parking and were found to be appropriate
and compatible to the historic property. Further, in 2004, additional options were approved to provide for a portion of the parking on-site and a portion via in-lieu. None of these options
were followed up on or completed. Waiving the required parking spaces altogether will have the potential to adversely affect the neighboring area in that the required parking for this
private project will utilize public parking spaces, thereby reducing the number of public spaces available for other users. In addition to the above, it should be considered that while
relief may be granted to the amount of required parking spaces, the intent of this “benefit” afforded to historic properties is not to excuse the provision of all parking but to provide
alternatives. Otherwise, one could conclude that parking on historic properties converted to office use is not necessary. It is noted that the parking requirement currently being applied
is significantly less than the current code requirement. To understand the intensity of the uses on the site, and what their parking requirement would be if the site were required to
comply with today’s parking requirement, the following is noted. The required parking for each individual use would be: office-4, restaurant-13, multi-family residence-7, for a total
of 24 spaces. The mixed-use parking calculation would require that twenty (20) spaces be provided, plus the two (2) spaces eliminated from the garage conversion to office. Utilizing
the old code requirements requires that only nine (9) parking spaces be provided (3 existing and 6 for the garage conversion). The current request is to legally establish the aforenoted
change of use, and to completely waive the required six (6) parking spaces. The subject request is not supported by Staff nor has it received support from other reviewing Boards. If
Commission finds that the most appropriate manner in which to maintain the historic integrity of the site is to not physically provide any parking spaces, then Staff recommends that
the property owner be required to make payment of all required spaces (6) via the inlieu of parking process. This alternative would be the fair approach given that other historic properties
converted to commercial use have been obligated to account for their required parking through the available and appropriate options, including the in-lieu program. REVIEW BY OTHERS The
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) considered the subject request at its March 10, 2011 meeting, where they recommended denial of the waiver to the required parking. The Board also
requested that the item return for further review when “a solution is worked out.” The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011 Coversheet
Page 2 of 3 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntranet/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4984&MeetingID=331 10/14/2011
meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the required spaces. Direction was given to the applicant to work out an alternative
approach with Staff, and return to the DDA for further review. The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) considered the subject request at its June 28, 2011 meeting, where a recommendation
to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested that the applicant work with Staff and accommodate three (3) spaces on site and provide the balance either through an off-site parking
agreement, or via the in-lieu of parking fee. RECOMMENDATION Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Preservation Board’s action of denial. Coversheet Page 3 of 3 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntran
et/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4984&MeetingID=331 10/14/2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Terrill Pyburn, Assistant City Attorney THROUGH: Brian Shutt, City Attorney DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.D. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 REQUEST TO CHALLENGE THE FUNDING MECHANISM PERTAINING TO PALM BEACH COUNTY'S INSPECTOR GENERAL PROGRAM ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This is a request
for authorization to allow the City Attorney to join Delray Beach with other municipalities in a lawsuit challenging the funding mechanism pertaining to Palm Beach County’s Inspector
General Program. BACKGROUND 1. The Municipalities are bringing this lawsuit solely to contest the funding mechanism for the Inspector General Program, not to overturn the Program. 2.
The current funding mechanism, which makes the Municipalities share in the cost of the Inspector General Program, is an unlawful tax and goes against past precedent for countywide programs.
3. For the funding mechanism to be lawful, the County must pay for the Inspector General Program in its entirety. RECOMMENDATION The City Attorney’s office recommends City Commission
discretion.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.E.
-REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/DELRAY BEACH TWILIGHT BICYCLE RACE AND WELLNESS FESTIVAL ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Commission is requested to approve
a Special Event Permit request for the Delray Beach Twilight Bicycle Race and Wellness Festival proposed to be held on March 9, 2012 from 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 p.m. and March 10, 2012 from
8:00 a.m. -11:00 p.m., produced by RAC Event Productions /Swaggerolls. Commission is also requested to grant a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for the use and closure of
Atlantic Avenue from Swinton to Railroad Way, Railroad Way from Atlantic to NE 1st Street, NE 1st Street from Railroad Way to Swinton and NE 1st Avenue from Old School Square grounds
to Atlantic from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 10, 2012 for the bike races. The event producer is also requesting staff assistance for traffic control and
security, EMS assistance, trash removal and cleanup, trash boxes and event signage. BACKGROUND Attached are a letter, special event permit, site plans, budget, economic prosperity calculator,
proposed event schedules and additional information received from Chelsea Midlarsky. The event consists of a Wellness Festival, which will be held on the grounds of Old School Square,
as well as men’s and women’s professional races to be held on Saturday evening; race route is per the attached site maps. The festival will include a food court, beer garden, health
and wellness vendors and entertainment. Staff has been meeting with the event producers and the Downtown Development Authority staff over the last couple of months to work out details
and concerns. The event producer will be responsible for overall event management, as well as barricading streets for the races. Estimated City costs for this event are as follows: $14,700
for overtime, $250 for event signage, $350 for trash boxes and $2,000 for the Old School Square Park rental for a total of $17,300. Per Event Policies and Procedures, the event producer
is responsible for payment of 100% of all of these costs. Ms. Midlarsky will be present to answer any questions you may have.
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special event permit, temporary use permit and City staff assistance including signage and trash boxes as requested with the following
conditions: 1. Receipt of a non-refundable deposit in the amount of $2,000 by February 7, 2012. 2. Receipt of a Certificate of Event Liability and Alcohol Liability Insurance by February
19, 2012. 3. Receipt of a signed and notarized Hold Harmless Agreement by February 19, 2012. 4. Copies of signed rental agreements with Old School Square and the City for use of Old
School Square Park by February 25, 2012.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Bob Diaz, Construction Manager Richard C. Hasko, Environmental Services Director THROUGH: David T. Harden DATE: October 17, 2011 SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM 9.F. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 BID AWARD/RANDOLPH AND DEWDNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before the Commission to consider
approval of a bid award to Randolph and Dewdney Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $456,710.00 for renovations to the Pompey Park Concession Stand. BACKGROUND The Pompey Park
concession stand building, originally constructed in 1974, has had only one substantial enhancement with the addition of a second floor press box in 1991. The building is currently in
need of extensive renovations as a result of experiencing years of weathering and use by the public. Interior spaces of the building like the restrooms are small, inadequately lit and
poorly ventilated. In the opinion of staff, the structure has not exhausted it useful life so refurbishing the building is recommended. As a result, funds were programmed into the Capital
Improvements program for fiscal year 2011. Bids for this project were opened on Thursday, May 12, 2011; six bids were received. The apparent low bidder was Randolph and Dewdney Construction
with a bid amount of $456,710.00. Construction time for this proposal has been reduced to 120 days. The agenda item for award of this bid was tabled at the July 12, 2011 Special/Workshop
meeting with some Commissioners expressing reluctance to spend the total cost of the project. Since then staff has explored less expensive alternatives for the rehabilitation project
including revisiting a phased approach involving only the first floor rehabilitation and replacement of the deteriorated staircase to the existing second floor press box. Staff presented
the Phase I proposal to Commission at the August 30, 2011 Workshop Meeting. During discussion of the Phase I alternative, it was noted that the windows in the existing press box were
Plexiglas, and had weathered and fogged to a degree that significantly hindered visibility of the ball fields. Commission expressed a consensus that the window replacement should also
be included in the Phase 1 scope. After further discussion, Commission directed staff to place the item on the September 6,
2011 agenda for action at which time Commission could choose to construct the entire project as bid and award the contract to Randolph & Dewdney Construction as the lowest responsive
bidder for the amount of $456,710.00; or build only the first phase improvements limited to first floor rehabilitation scope and replacement of the stairway to the second floor. The
estimated construction cost for that scope is $233,000.00. The replacement of the weathered windows in the press box would add to Phase I costs estimated as follows: Replace with impact
resistant windows $ 15,000 or replace with new Plexiglas $ 6,000. On advice of the City Attorney, should Commission opt to approve the Phase I scope only, the project will need to be
rebid. On September 6, 2011 Commission voted 2/2 (no action); as a result the City pursued the option to secure additional funding for the project from the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA). The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) subsequently approved the request for funding on October 13th, 2011 for the amount of $200,000.00 (see attached email); this will allow
the City to conduct all of the proposed renovations in lieu of phasing the project. Randolph and Dewdney Construction, Inc. has agreed to honor the bid amounts submitted on May 12, 2011
(see attached letter). FUNDING SOURCE Funding is available from 334-4127-572-62.10 (General Construction Fund/Pompey Park Concession Stand). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval
of a bid award to Randolph and Dewdney Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $456,710.00 for the renovations to the Pompey Park Concession Stand.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 ORDINANCE
NO. 36-11 (SECOND READING/SECOND PUBLIC HEARING) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This ordinance is before Commission for second reading and public hearing to consider a privately initiated amendment
to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.9. (B), “Principle Uses and Structures Permitted”, and Section 4.4.13 (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, to clarify
that bicycles with an electic helper motor are the only motorized equipment permitted in the “rental of sporting goods and equipment” use category. BACKGROUND At first reading on October
4, 2011, the Commission passed Ordinance No. 36-11. At first reading, the Commission discussed a need for additional information regarding maintenance of bicycles equipped with an electric
helper motor. The Electric Experience provides a 218.50 square foot indoor service area within the tenant space for the repair of the Segways, and this seems to be the areas that will
be used for maintenance/repair of the electric helper bicycles (see attached floor plan). RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 36-11 on second and final reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 36-11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY AMENDING SECTION
4.4.9 “GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) DISTRICT”, SUBSECTION 4.4.9(B), “PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED”; AND SECTION 4.4.13, "CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT", SUBSECTION 4.4.13(B),
"PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED"; TO CLARIFY THAT BICYCLES WITH AN ELECTRIC-HELPER MOTOR ARE THE ONLY MOTORIZED EQUIPMENT PERMITTED IN THE “RENTAL OF SPORTING GOODS AND EQUIPMENT”
USE CATEGORY WITHIN THE GC AND CBD ZONING DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning
and Zoning Board reviewed the proposed text amendment at a public hearing held on September 19, 2011 and voted 6 to 1 to recommend that the changes be approved; and WHEREAS, pursuant
to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the change is consistent with and furthers the goals, objectives
and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the findings in the Planning and Zoning Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the City
Commission of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. That Section 4.4.9, "General Commercial (GC) District", Subsection 4.4.9(B),
"Principal Uses and Structures Permitted," of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be amended to read as follows: (B) Principal
Uses and Structures Permitted: The following are allowed within the GC District as
2 ORD. NO. 36-11 permitted uses, except as modified in the Four Corners Overlay District by Section 4.4.9(G)(3)(a). (1) General retail uses and/or facilities, including, but not limited
to: (a) Antiques, arts and crafts, automotive parts, baked goods, books, carpet and floor covering, cheeses, beer, wine, liquor, confectioneries, cosmetics, meats, draperies and slipcovers,
pharmacies, electrical fixtures and supplies, fabrics, fish, flowers and plants, fruits and vegetables, food, garden supplies, gifts, glassware, hardware and paints, home furnishings,
ice cream, lawn care equipment, leather goods, luggage, medical and surgical equipment, music and musical instruments, nautical supplies, office furniture equipment and supplies, pets
and pet supplies, photographic equipment and supplies, sewing supplies, sporting goods, toys, wearing apparel and accessories, appliances, bicycles, business machines, jewelry. (2) Business,
Professional, and Medical uses including, but not limited to: (a) Interior decorating, medical and dental clinics, medical and dental laboratories, photographic studios, printing and
publishing, business offices, professional offices, and medical offices. (3) Contractor's Offices, including but not limited to: (a) Air conditioning, general contractor, electrical,
painting, and plumbing; however, any outside storage of materials is prohibited. (4) Services and Facilities including, but not limited to: (a) Auctions, barber and beauty shops and
salons, caterers, dry cleaning limited to on-site processing for customer pickup only, dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations, financing e.g. banks and similar institutions including
drivethrough facilities, laundromats limited to self-service facilities, pet grooming, restaurants including drive-in and drive-through, tailoring, tobacconist, vocational schools limited
to arts and crafts, business, beauty, dancing, driving, gymnastics, photography, modeling, and karate-judo, small item repair, and rental of sporting goods and equipment (such as but
not limited to bicycles, skates, boogie boards). With the exception of bicycles with an electric-helper motor as defined in section 72.02, Delray Beach Code of Ordinances, all rented
sporting goods must be non-motorized. (b) Abused spouse residence with forty (40) or fewer residents, galleries, broadcast studios, butcher shops, cocktail lounges, exercise facilities
e.g.
3 ORD. NO. 36-11 gyms and clubs, indoor shooting ranges, museums, libraries, newsstands, commercial or public parking lots and parking garages, theaters excluding drive-ins. (5) Dwelling
units and residential licensed service provider facilities in the same structure as commercial uses provided that: commercial uses must be provided on the ground floor; commercial uses
on the ground floor must occupy no less than 25% of the total structure excluding square footage devoted to vehicular use; residential uses are not located on the ground level; residential
uses and non-residential uses are physically separated and have separate accessways; and the residential density does not exceed 12 units per acre, except the Four Corners District which
may have a free standing residential building as part of a multi-building unified master plan or the residential component may be a part of a single mixed use building. The density of
the Four Corners Master Plan shall not exceed 30 dwelling units per acre and is subject to the provisions under Section 4.4.9 (G)(3)(d)(4). (6) Astrologists, clairvoyants, fortune tellers,
palmists, phrenologists, psychic readers, spiritualists, numerologists and mental healers, subject to the locational restrictions of Section 4.4.9(H)(3). (7) Group Home, Type 1, pursuant
to restrictions set forth in Section 4.3.3(I). Section 3 . That Section 4.4.13, "Central Business (CBD) District", Subsection 4.4.13(B), "Principal Uses and Structures Permitted," of
the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be amended to read as follows: (B) Principal Uses and Structures Permitted: The following
types of use are allowed within the CBD District as a permitted use: (1) General retail uses and/or facilities, including, but not limited to: (a) Antiques, arts and crafts, automotive
parts, baked goods, books, carpet and floor covering, cheeses, beer, wine, liquor, confectioneries, cosmetics, meats, draperies and slipcovers, pharmacies, electrical fixtures and supplies,
fabrics, fish, flowers and plants, fruits and vegetables, food, garden supplies, gifts, glassware, hardware and paints, home furnishings, ice cream, lawn care equipment, leather goods,
luggage, medical and surgical equipment, music and musical instruments, nautical supplies, office furniture equipment and supplies, pets and pet supplies, photographic equipment and
supplies, sewing supplies, sporting goods, toys, wearing apparel and accessories, appliances, bicycles, business machines, jewelry. (2) Business, Professional and Medical uses pursuant
to restrictions set forth in Section
4 ORD. NO. 36-11 4.4.13(H)(1) including, but not limited to: (a) Interior decorating, medical and dental clinics, medical and dental laboratories, photographic studios, printing and
publishing, business, medical and professional offices. (3) Services and facilities including, but not limited to: (a) Auctions, barber and beauty shops and salons, caterers, dry cleaning
limited to on-site processing for customer pickup only, dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations, laundromats limited to self-service facilities, pet grooming, restaurants excluding
drive-in and drive-through, outdoor cafes, tailoring, tobacconist, vocational schools limited to arts and crafts, business, beauty, dancing, driving, gymnastics, photography, modeling,
and karate-judo, small item repair, and rental of sporting goods and equipment (such as but not limited to bicycles, skates, boogie boards). With the exception of bicycles with an electric-helper
motor as defined in section 72.02, Delray Beach Code of Ordinances, all rented sporting goods must be non-motorized. (b) Galleries, broadcast studios, butcher shops, cocktail lounges,
exercise facilities e.g. gyms and clubs, museums, libraries, newsstands, commercial or public parking lots and parking garages. (c) Public open space plazas (4) Multi-family dwelling
units, including residential licensed service provider facilities, but excluding duplexes, up to a maximum density of thirty (30) units per acre except for the West Atlantic Neighborhood
or Beach District, where the maximum density is twelve (12) dwelling units per acre. (5) Hotels, motels, and residential-type inns except in the West Atlantic Neighborhood. (6) Assisted
Living Facilities, Nursing Homes, and Continuing Care Facilities, up to a maximum density of thirty (30) units per acre except for the West Atlantic Neighborhood or Beach District, where
the maximum density is twelve (12) dwelling units per acre. (7) Bed and Breakfast Inns, except in the West Atlantic Neighborhood, subject to the provisions of Section 4.3.3(Y). Section
4. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than
5 ORD. NO. 36-11 the part declared to be invalid. Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 6. That this
ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the ___ day of ___________________
______, 2011. ____________________________________ ATTEST MAYOR ____________________________________ City Clerk First Reading_________________________ Second Reading_______________________
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Scott Pape, AICP, FCP, Senior Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: September 28,
2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2011 ORDINANCE NO. 36-11/(FIRST READING/FIRST PUBLIC HEARING) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of
the City Commission is consideration of a privately initiated text amendment to LDR (Land Development Regulation) Section 4.4.9(B)(4)(a)[General Commercial – Principal Uses] and Section
4.4.13(B)(3)(a)[Central Business District – Principal Uses] to clarify that bicycles witn an electric-helper motor are the only motorized equipment permitted in the “Rental of Sporting
Goods Equipment” use category. BACKGROUND The proposed text amendment is related to the establishment of The Electric Experience at 1047 East Atlantic Avenue. This business wants to
rent bicycles that have electric-helper motors to the general public at this site. The current rental of sporting goods and equipment category is limited to nonmotorized goods and equipment.
As the rental of motorized sporting goods is not currently allowed in the CBD or GC zoning districts, the applicant has submitted this privately-initiated LDR text amendment. It is noted
that the applicant has also submitted a conditional use application for Segway sales and tours at this site and a request that the City modify the Code of Ordinances definition of “bicycle”
to include the electric-helper motor versions of bicycles. REVIEW BY OTHERS The proposed text amendment was reviewed by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) at its meeting of September
8, 2011 which recommended approval. The DDA (Downtown Development Authority) considered the proposed text amendment at its meeting of September 12, 2011 and recommended approval. At
its meeting of September 13, 2011, the WARC (West Atlantic Redevelopment Coalition) considered the proposed text amendment and recommended approval and expressed concerns with the use
of these devices on the public sidewalk. Planning and Zoning Board: Coversheet Page 1 of 2 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntranet/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4978&MeetingID=331 10/11/2011
The Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed LDR text amendment at its meeting of September 19, 2011 and recommended approval (6 to 1 vote, Mr. Jacquet dissenting). Mr. Jacquet
indicated that the rental of motorized bicycles is not consistent with the vision of the City. RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve the text amendment to clarify that “bicycles with an
electric-helper motor” are the only motorized equipment permitted in the “rental of sporting goods and equipment” use category in the GC [LDR Section 4.4.9(B)(4)(a)] and CBD [4.4.13(B)(3)(a)]
zoning districts, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the Staff Report and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria
set forth in LDR Section 2.4.5(M)(5). Coversheet Page 2 of 2 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntranet/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4978&MeetingID=331 10/11/2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October 11, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.B. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 ORDINANCE
NO. 39-11 ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This ordinance is before Commission for second reading to consider an amendment to the Code of Ordinance Section 72.02, “Definitions,” to conform to
the State Statute definition of a bicycle and to place further limitations on motorized bicycles. BACKGROUND At the first reading on October 4, 2011, the Commission passed Ordinance
No. 39-11. RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 39-11 on second and final reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 39-11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 72, “BICYCLES”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 72.02, “DEFINITION”, TO CONFORM WITH STATE STATUTE DEFINITION OF BICYCLE AND TO PLACE FURTHER LIMITATIONS ON MOTORIZED BICYCLES; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, desires to update its Code of Ordinances to conform with the definition
of “bicycle” as set forth in Florida Statutes Section 316.003(2); and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, desires to place further limitations on motorized
bicycles. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Chapter 72, "Bicycles", Subsection 72.02, “Definition”,
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: For the purpose of this Chapter the following definition shall apply
unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning: Bicycle. Every vehicle propelled solely by human power, or any moped propelled by a pedal-activated helper motor
with a manufacturer's certified maximum rating of one and one-half brake horsepower, upon which any person may ride, having two (2) tandem wheels, and including any device generally
recognized as a bicycle though equipped with two (2) front or two (2) rear wheels. The term does not include such a vehicle with a seat height of no more than twenty-five (25) inches
from the ground when the seat is adjusted to its highest position, or to a scooter or similar device. Bicycle. Every vehicle propelled solely by human power, and every motorized bicycle
propelled by a combination of human power and an electric helper motor with an average power of no more than 750 watts (1 horsepower) and which is capable of propelling the vehicle at
a speed of not more than 20 miles per hour on level ground upon which any person may ride, having two tandem wheels, and including any device generally recognized as a bicycle though
equipped with two front or two rear wheels. The term does not include such a vehicle with a seat height of no more than 25 inches from the ground when the seat is adjusted to its highest
position or a scooter, moped, or similar device. No person under the age of 16 may operate or ride upon a motorized bicycle.
2 ORD. NO. 39-11 Section 2. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction
to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 3. That all ordinances
or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed. Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective upon its passage on second and final reading. PASSED
AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the _____ day of ____________________, 2011. ____________________________________ M A Y O R ATTEST: _____________________________
City Clerk First Reading__________________ Second Reading________________
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Scott Pape, AICP, FCP, Senior Planner Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: September 28, 2011 SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM 12.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2011 ORDINANCE NO. 39-11 ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Consideration of a City initiated text amendment to the City Code of Ordinances
Section 72.02 to modify the City’s bicycle definition to conform with the State Statute’s bicycle definition. BACKGROUND The proposed definition change is one of several changes being
processed in connection with the establishment of The Electric Experience at 1047 East Atlantic Avenue. This business wants to rent bicycles, including those with electric-helper motors,
to the general public. The current rental of sporting goods and equipment category (which includes bicycles) in the Land Development Regulations is limited to non-motorized goods and
equipment. However, the current State of Florida definition of bicycles includes bicycles with electric helper motors. The proposed modification would make the City’s definition of bicycles
consistent with the State’s definition. In addition, LDR amendments being initiated by the applicant for The Electric Experience will clarify that bicycles with an electric helper motor
are the only motorized equipment permitted in the “Rental of Sporting Goods Equipment” use category. RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve the amendment to Code of Ordinance Section 72.02
(Bicycle Definition). Coversheet Page 1 of 1 http://itwebapp/AgendaIntranet/Bluesheet.aspx?ItemID=4976&MeetingID=331 10/11/2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.C. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 RESOLUTION NO. 43-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/2216 N.E. 3RD AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Staff requests City Commission approval to sell/transfer
one (1) NSP property to the Delray Beach Community Land Trust (DBCLT) for the benefit and resale of the unit to a household with an income less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%)
of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. BACKGROUND The City and the DBCLT entered into an agreement dated July 16, 2010, which was amended and restated on September 21, 2010
for resale of bank owned/REO units within the NSP1 Target Area for the purpose of reselling the units to income eligible households. The agreement provides for the disposition, through
sale, donation, or otherwise, of residential units acquired with NSP funds or reasonable costs of temporarily managing such properties. All properties for rental under this activity
will be transferred for the purpose of affordable housing to benefit Low, Moderate and Middle Income (LMMI) households. The DBCLT will make property available for resale to a household
with an income less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. Individuals or households who wish to purchase NSP property must apply directly
to the DBCLT. This item is for the sale/transfer of the following NSP property: 2216 N.E. 3rd Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Commission approval
to sell/transfer of 2216 N.E. 3rd Avenue to the DBCLT for the benefit and resale of the unit to a household with an income less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of the Area Median
Income (AMI) as determined by HUD.
RESOLUTION NO. 43-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO TRANSFER REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED
HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTING THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to transfer property located at 2216 NE 3rd Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Buyer hereinafter named desires to buy the property hereinafter described from
the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to transfer said property to be used for affordable housing purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, as Seller,
hereby agrees to transfer to Delray Beach Community Land Trust, as Buyer, for the purchase price of Ten Dollars and 00/100 cents ($10.00), said property being described as follows: Seacrest
Park Lot 2, Block 7, according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 24154, Page 1309, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Section 2. That the terms and
conditions contained in the contract for sale and purchase and addenda thereto between the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the Buyer as hereinabove named are incorporated herein as
Exhibit “A”. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the _____ day of ______________, 2011. __________________________________ ATTEST: M A Y O R ________________________________ City
Clerk
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.D. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 RESOLUTION NO. 44-11/310 SOUTHRIDGE ROAD ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Staff requests City Commission approval to sell/transfer one (1) NSP property to
the Delray Beach Community Land Trust (DBCLT) for the benefit and resale of the unit to a household with an income less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI)
as determined by HUD. BACKGROUND The NSP funding is for the purpose of purchasing foreclosed or abandoned homes for rehabilitation, resale, or redevelopment in order to stabilize neighborhoods
and stem the decline of home values. NSP Funds are to benefit Low, Moderate and Middle Income Households (LMMI). LMMI households are defined as those with incomes less than one-hundred
twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. The City and the DBCLT entered into an Agreement dated July 16, 2010, which was amended and restated on September
21, 2010 for resale of bank owned/REO units within the NSP1 Target Area for the purpose of reselling the units to income eligible households. The agreement provides for the disposition,
through sale, donation, or otherwise, of residential units acquired with NSP funds or reasonable costs of temporarily managing such properties. The DBCLT will make property available
for resale to a household with an income less than onehundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. Individuals or households who wish to purchase NSP
property must apply directly to the DBCLT. This item is for the sale/transfer of the following NSP property: 310 Southridge Road, Delray Beach, FL 33444. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends
City Commission approval to sell/transfer of 310 Southridge Road to the DBCLT for the benefit and resale of the unit to a household with an income less than one-hundred twenty percent
(120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD.
RESOLUTION NO. 44-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO TRANSFER REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED
HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTING THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to transfer property located at 310 Southbridge Road; and WHEREAS, the Buyer hereinafter named desires to buy the property hereinafter described
from the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to transfer said property to be used for affordable housing purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, as Seller,
hereby agrees to transfer to Delray Beach Community Land Trust, as Buyer, for the purchase price of Ten Dollars and 00/100 cents ($10.00), said property being described as follows: Lot
14, Block 4, Plat 1 of 2 Southbridge, according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Page 38, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Section 2. That
the terms and conditions contained in the contract for sale and purchase and addenda thereto between the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the Buyer as hereinabove named are incorporated
herein as Exhibit “A”. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the _____ day of ______________, 2011. __________________________________ ATTEST: M A Y O R ________________________________
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.E. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 RESOLUTION NO. 45-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/518 S.W. 9TH COURT ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Staff requests City Commission approval to donate
property acquired under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) located at 518 SW 9th Court, to the Delray Housing Group (DHG), the non-profit arm of the Delray Beach Housing Authority,
for the benefit and rental to a household at or below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. BACKGROUND NSP Funds are to benefit Low, Moderate and Middle Income Households
(LMMI). LMMI households are defined as those with incomes less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. The City and DHG entered into
an Agreement dated July 16, 2010 which was amended and restated on September 21, 2010 for the disposition of bank owned/REO units within the NSP1 Target Area for the purpose of leasing
the units to income eligible households. The NSP agreement provides that all properties for rental under this activity will be donated to DHG. DHG will make units available for rent
to households at or below 50% AMI. Individuals or households who wish to occupy NSP Rental Units must apply directly to the DHG. The Neighborhood Services Administration staff will monitor
the project on an annual basis to ensure continued affordability, ownership and maintenance of the property for 20 years pursuant to HUD regulations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends
approval by City Commission to donate the property located at 518 SW 9th Court, acquired under the NSP program, to DHG for the benefit and rental of the unit to a household at or below
50% of AMI.
RESOLUTION NO. 45-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO TRANSFER REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED
HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTING THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to transfer property located at 518 SW 9th Court; and WHEREAS, the Buyer hereinafter named desires to buy the property hereinafter described from
the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to transfer said property to be used for affordable housing purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, as Seller,
hereby agrees to transfer to Delray Housing Group, Inc, as Buyer, for the purchase price of Ten Dollars and 00/100 cents ($10.00), said property being described as follows: Delray Manor
Add to Delray Lot 38 and W 25 FT of Lot 39, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 23974, at Page 679 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Section 2.
That the terms and conditions contained in the contract for sale and purchase and addenda thereto between the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the Buyer as hereinabove named are incorporated
herein as Exhibit “A”. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the _____ day of ______________, 2011. __________________________________ ATTEST: M A Y O R ________________________________
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.F. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 RESOLUTION NO. 46-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/1505 S.W. 3RD COURT ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Staff requests City Commission approval to donate
property acquired under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) located at 1505 SW 3rd Court, to the Delray Housing Group (DHG), the non-profit arm of the Delray Beach Housing Authority,
for the benefit of and rental to a household at or below 50% Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. BACKGROUND NSP Funds are to benefit Low, Moderate and Middle Income Households
(LMMI). LMMI households are defined as those with incomes less than one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD. The City and DHG entered into
an Agreement dated July 16, 2010 which was amended and restated on September 21, 2010 for the disposition of bank owned/REO units within the NSP1 Target Area for the purpose of leasing
the units to income eligible households. The NSP agreement provides that all properties for rental under this activity will be donated to DHG. DHG will make units available for rent
to households at or below 50% of AMI. Individuals or households who wish to occupy NSP Rental Units must apply directly to the DHG. The Neighborhood Services Administration staff will
monitor the project on an annual basis to ensure continued affordability, ownership and maintenance of the property for 20 years pursuant to HUD regulations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends
approval by City Commission to donate the property located at 1505 SW 3rd Court, acquired under the NSP program, to DHG for the benefit and rental of the unit to a household at or below
50% of AMI.
RESOLUTION NO. 46-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO TRANSFER REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED
HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTING THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to transfer property located at 1505 SW 3rd Court; and WHEREAS, the Buyer hereinafter named desires to buy the property hereinafter described from
the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to transfer said property to be used for affordable housing purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, as Seller,
hereby agrees to transfer to Delray Housing Group, Inc, as Buyer, for the purchase price of Ten Dollars and 00/100 cents ($10.00), said property being described as follows: CARVER PARK
LT 23 BLK 2, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 24081, at Page 1165 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Section 2. That the terms and conditions
contained in the contract for sale and purchase and addenda thereto between the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the Buyer as hereinabove named are incorporated herein as Exhibit “A”.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the _____ day of ______________, 2011. __________________________________ ATTEST: M A Y O R ________________________________ City Clerk
Prepared by: RETURN: Terrill C. Pyburn, Esq. City Attorney’s Office 200 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 QUIT-CLAIM DEED THIS QUIT-CLAIM DEED, executed this ______ day of _____________,
2011 by the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, and having its principal place of business at 100 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, First Party, to: DELRAY HOUSING GROUP, INC, and having its
principal place of business at 600 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 310B, Delray Beach, FL 33444, Second Party: (Whenever used herein the term “First Party” and “Second Party” include singular
and plural, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporation, whenever the context so admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, That the
said First Party, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid by the said Second Party, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release
and quit-claim unto the said Second Party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said First Party has in and to the following described lot, piece or parcel
of land, situate, lying and being in the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida, to-wit: See Exhibit “A” TO HAVE and to HOLD the same together with all and singular the appurtenances
thereunto belonging or anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, equity and claim whatsoever of the said First party, either in law or equity, to the only
proper use, benefit and behoof of the said Second Party forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the said First Party has caused these presents to be executed in its name, and its corporate seal
to be hereunto affixed by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, the day and year first above written. WITNESS: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ________________________ By:_____________________
_______ ________ ________________________ Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor (Please Print or Type Name) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before
me this _____ day of ___________, 2011, by ___________________________________________ (name of person acknowledging), who is personally known to me or who has produced _________________________
as identification. ____________________________________ Signature of Notary Public -State of Florida
EXHIBIT “A” CARVER PARK LT 23 BLK 2, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 24081, at Page 1165 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: MARK MCDONNELL, AICP, ASST. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND ZONING PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND ZONING THROUGH: CITY MANAGER DATE:
September 27, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 12.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 ORDINANCE NO. 37-11 ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval of a city-initiated amendment to the
Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that will amend provisions in the Flood Damage Control Districts. BACKGROUND On January 11, 2011, Ordinance No. 02-11 was adopted by City Commission
to amend the Flood Damage Control Districts regulations. The major component of the previously adopted ordinance (which is the subject of this text amendment) was to require that the
“lowest floor elevation be raised twelve inches (12”) above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for all new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard areas for
residential and commercial structures, mechanical equipment, utility areas, or any enclosed area including basements and attached garages, or that it must otherwise be provided with
flood proofing per FEMA standards.” This recently adopted language has created significant obstacles and has presented unintended consequences to construction activities. It has further
been learned that while once thought to be mandates from the State that required our Land Development Regulations to be updated, we now know that the previously adopted amendments were
optional. Accordingly, this text amendment will remove only the language that has been problematic. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the item at their September
19, 2011 meeting and a unanimous recommendation of approval was made. RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve Ordinance No. 37-11 on first reading for a city-initiated amendment to the Land
Development Regulations, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report and finding that the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria
set forth in Section 2.4.5(M) of the Land Development Regulations.
ORDINANCE NO. 37-11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY AMENDING SECTION
4.5.3, “FLOOD DAMAGE CONTROL DISTRICTS”, SUBSECTION (D) “CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS”, TO MODIFY THE SECTION WHILE MAINTAINING COMPLIANCE WITH STATE STATUTES; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the National Flood Insurance Program Act (NFIP) was adopted by Congress in 1968; and WHEREAS, the NFIP enables property owners
in participating communities to purchase insurance protection from the government against losses from flooding; and WHEREAS, Florida Statutes Section 553.73(5) allows counties and municipalities
to adopt by ordinance an administrative or technical amendment to the Florida Building Code relating to flood resistance in order to implement the NFIP or incentives; and WHEREAS, consistent
with 44 C.F.R. §60.6, an administrative amendment may assign the duty to enforce all or portions of flood-related code provisions to the appropriate agencies of the local government
and adopt procedures for variances and exceptions from flood-related code provisions other than provisions for structures seaward of the coastal construction control line; and WHEREAS,
the City of Delray Beach desires to modify Section 4.5.3 while maintaining compliance with NFIP, Federal Emergency Management Act, and the Community Rating System; and, WHEREAS, pursuant
to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the proposed text amendment at a public hearing held on September 19, 2011 and voted 7 to 0 to recommend that the changes
be approved; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the change is consistent
with and furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the findings in the Planning and Zoning
Staff Report; and
2 ORD. NO. 37-11 WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. That Article 4.5, “Overlay and Environmental Management
Districts”, Section 4.5.3, “Flood Damage Control Districts”, Subsection (D) “Construction Standards” of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Construction Standards: (1) General: In all areas of special flood hazard, the following provisions apply: (a)
The lowest floor elevation for all new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard areas for residential and commercial structures, mechanical equipment, utility
areas, or any enclosed area including basements and attached garages must be raised 12” above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE), or must be provided with flood proofing per FEMA standards.
(a) (b) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent floatation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. (b) (c) All new construction and substantial
improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. (c) (d) All new construction or substantial improvements shall be constructed by methods
and practices that minimize flood damage. (d) (e) All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system.
(e) (f) New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood
waters.
3 ORD. NO. 37-11 (f) (g) On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. (g) (h) Any alteration, repair, reconstruction,
or improvements to a structure on which the start of construction was begun after May 8, 1978, shall meet the requirements of new construction as contained in this chapter. (h) (i) Manufactured
homes shall be anchored to prevent floatation, collapse, or lateral movement. Method of anchoring may include, but is not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors.
This standard shall be in addition to and consistent with applicable requirements for resisting wind forces. (i) (j) All mechanical, electrical and plumbing equipment must be located
at or above the BFE. This includes all heaters, air conditioners, compressors, fans, hot water heaters, laundry facilities, plumbing fixtures, etc. (j) (k) Where enclosed space occurs
below the BFE, openings are required to allow for automatic entry and exit of flood waters. FEMA requires a minimum of two (2) openings having a total new area not less than one (1)
square inch per one (1) square foot of enclosed area. All openings shall be one (1) foot above adjacent grade. (k) (l) Louvers, screens, or other opening covers shall not block or impede
the automatic flow of floodwaters into and out of the enclosed areas. (l) (m) Openings meeting the requirement of (k) (j) and (l) (k) above may be installed in doors. Doors by themselves
do not meet the flood venting requirements. (2) Mapped Areas: In all areas of special flood hazard where base flood elevation data has been provided on FEMA Maps, the following provisions
apply: (a) Residential Construction: New construction or substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, (as defined in Appendix “A” to these LDRs),
including basement, elevated to or above base flood elevation. (b) Nonresidential Construction: New construction or substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential
4 ORD. NO. 37-11 structure shall either have the lowest floor, (as defined in Appendix “A” to these LDRs), including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation or, together
with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of
water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy. (3) Subdivisions: All subdivision proposals shall
(a) Be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; (b) Have public utilities such as water, gas, sewer, and electrical systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage;
(c) Have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood hazards; (d) Provide base flood elevations in all cases where a plat involves five acres of land or fifty dwelling units.
Section 3. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 4. That all ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on second and final reading.
The Clerk shall provide a copy of the adopted ordinance to the Florida Building Commission within thirty (30) days of passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular
session on second and final reading on this the _____ day of ___________________, 20___. ____________________________________ ATTEST M A Y O R _______________________________ City Clerk
5 ORD. NO. 37-11 First Reading__________________ Second Reading________________
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 AGENDA NO: VI. C. AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF A CITY-INITIATED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
(LDR), BY AMENDING SECTION 4.5.3, FLOOD DAMAGE CONTROL DISTRICTS, SUBSECTION D CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is to make a recommendation to
the City Commission regarding a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that amends provisions in the Flood Damage Control Districts. Pursuant to Section
1.1.6, an amendment to the text of the Land Development Regulations may not be made until a recommendation is obtained from the Planning and Zoning Board. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Amendments
to Section 4.5.3, Flood Damage Control Districts, were recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board on December 20, 2010 and subsequently approved by City Commission by Ordinance 02-11
on January 18, 2011. The purpose was to bring the regulations into compliance with State requirements. The amendment generally dealt with mechanical, electrical and plumbing equipment;
required openings for enclosed spaces to allow for flow of floodwaters; and included mention of louvers, screens, door openings and required dimensions. However, the major component
of the previously adopted ordinance (which is the subject of this text amendment) was to require that the “lowest floor elevation be raised twelve inches (12”) above the Base Flood Elevation
(BFE) for all new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard areas for residential and commercial structures, mechanical equipment, utility areas, or any enclosed
area including basements and attached garages, or that it must otherwise be provided with flood proofing per FEMA standards.” This recently adopted language has created significant obstacles
and has presented unintended consequences to construction activities. It has further been learned that while once thought to be mandates from the State that required our Land Developments
to be updated, we now know that the previously adopted amendments were optional. Accordingly, this text amendment will remove only the language that has been problematic. Following are
the negative effects that have been discovered while implementing the requirement to raise the lowest floor elevation twelve inches (12”) above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for all
new construction and substantial improvements in the special flood hazard areas for residential and commercial structures, mechanical equipment, utility areas, or any enclosed area including
basements and attached garages: § Storm water cannot be accommodated on-site, due to large allowable building envelopes and minimal area remaining to accommodate runoff;
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting, September 19, 2011 LDR Amendment – Flood Damage Control Districts 2 § Steeper slopes resulting from increased elevation requirements creates erosion
conditions; § Negative impacts have occurred to properties adjacent to construction sites; § To maintain storm water runoff on-site can require very costly infiltration improvements;
§ Negative impacts have occurred to our public rights-of-way (ponding, erosion); and § Construction associated with a higher floor elevation than is actually required, results with increased
costs for fill material, foundation and site stabilization efforts. This amendment will remove the requirement to raise the lowest floor 12” above the Base Flood Elevation, while retaining
the other components of the code that have value and are beneficial. Compliance with State requirements will be maintained with adoption of this amendment. REQUIRED FINDINGS Comprehensive
Plan Conformance LDR Section 2.4.5(M)(5) (Findings) requires that the City Commission make a finding that the text amendment is consistent with and furthers the Goals, Objectives and/or
Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The following were identified as relevant to this amendment: FLUE Objective A-1 Property shall be developed or redeveloped, in a manner so that the
future use, intensity and density are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; encourage affordable goods and services; are complementary
to and compatible with adjacent land uses; and fulfill remaining land use needs. This objective is supported as new regulations will ensure that development and redevelopment is appropriate
in terms of topographic and other physical considerations, by requiring minimum elevations for specified features along with openings to allow for the flow of floodwaters. FLUE Objective
A-5 The City shall maintain its Land Development Regulations, which shall be regularly reviewed and updated, to provide timely, equitable and streamlined processes including, but not
limited to, building permit processes for residential developments and to accommodate mixed-use developments, and other innovative development practices. FLUE Policy A-5.2 The City shall
continue to enforce its Flood Damage Protection Ordinance. Both Objective A-5 and Policy A-5.2 are supported by the proposed regulations. The objective requires that the LDRs be regularly
reviewed and regularly updated, and the policy requires the city to enforce its Flood Damage Protection Ordinance. REVIEW BY OTHERS Courtesy Notices Courtesy notices were provided to
the following civic associations: § Neighborhood Advisory Council § Delray Citizen’s Coalition
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting, September 19, 2011 LDR Amendment – Flood Damage Control Districts 3 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move a recommendation of approval
to the City Commission of the amendment to Land Development Regulations, Section 4.5.3, Flood Damage Control Districts, Subsection (D) Construction Standards, by adopting the findings
of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the text amendment and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in
LDR Section 2.4.5(M) C. Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commission of the amendment to Land Development Regulations, Section 4.5.3, Flood Damage Control Districts, Subsection
(D) Construction Standards, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the text amendment and approval thereof is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in LDR Section 2.4.5(M) (motion to be made in the affirmative). RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend approval of the amendment to
Land Development Regulations, Section 4.5.3, Flood Damage Control Districts, Subsection (D) Construction Standards, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report,
and finding that the text amendment and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in LDR Section 2.4.5(M). Attachment: § Draft Ordinance
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Estelio Breto, Senior Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: October
5, 2011 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 12.B. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011 ORDINANCE NO. 38-11 ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission is that of approval
of a City-initiated Annexation (via the provisions of an executed Water Service Agreement) of the “Lago Vista” property and initial zoning of CF for a 6.12 acre site located on the south
side of Linton Boulevard west of Delray Medical Center (Delray Hospital) and east of Canal E-3 (5430 Linton Boulevard). BACKGROUND The property under consideration contains a 44,514
square feet nursing home with 120 units (as reported in the PBC Property Appraisers web-site), which was built in 1984. Its annexation is pursuant to a modified water service agreement
executed on March 18, 1999. The agreement for a larger parcel of 56.501 acres stated that the overall development will be annexed in phases with the shopping center to be annexed by
March 31, 2001 (completed), Delray Medical Center during the year 2005 (completed), Fair Oaks property by 2008 (completed), and the Lago Vista property by 2011 (this property). Along
with the annexation, the City is rezoning the property from County RM (Multi-Family Residential Medium Density) to City CF (Community Facilities). The property is located within the
City’s designated annexation area known as Annexation Area “B”, as noted in Future Land Use Element Policy B-3.5 of the Comprehensive Plan. The associated Future Land Use Amendment will
be considered with the second reading of this annexation and rezoning ordinance. A full analysis of the proposed annexation, rezoning, and Land Use Amendment is provided in the attached
July 18, 2011, Planning and Zoning Board staff report. REVIEW BY OTHERS The subject property is not in a geographical area requiring review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency)
or the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). The Planning and Zoning Board held its public hearing regarding the annexation, rezoning and FLUM amendment on July 18, 2011 and unanimously
(5-0) recommended approval. Palm Beach County Notice:
On June 17, 2011, Palm Beach County Administrator and Palm Beach County Planning Division were notified of the City’s intent to annex this property. The County has responded that it
has no objections to the proposed annexation. Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARC) Notice: On June 23, 2011 a notice of the Future Land Use Amendment was also provided
to the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARC) which distributes the information to adjacent municipalities. To date, no objections have been received. Lake Worth Drainage
District: On June 23, 2011, Lake Worth Drainage District was notified of the City’s intent to annex this property. Lake Worth Drainage District has submitted a letter stating that they
do not have any objections to the proposed annexation. Courtesy Notices: Special courtesy notices were provided to the following homeowners and civic associations: · Neighborhood Advisory
Council · Delray Citizens Coalition · Hammock Reserve HOA · Del-Aire HOA · Shadywoods HOA Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to the affected property owners as well
as property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. We have received no letters of objection or support. RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve on first reading, Ordinance No.
38-11, annexing and applying an initial zoning of CF for the Lago Vista property, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(C)(4) of the Land Development Regulations, and complies with Florida Statutes Chapter 171.
ORDINANCE NO. 38-11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
LINTON BOULEVARD AND LWDD E-3 CANAL, AS THE SAME IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY TO
INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES (CF); PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING
CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, NME PROPERTIES CORP is the fee simple owner of a 6.12 acre parcel of land located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and LWDD E-3 Canal;
and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement for Water and Sewer Service and Consent to Annexation and Stormwater Management Assessment executed on March 18,1999 the City of Delray Beach intends
to annex the subject property into the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is contiguous to the corporate limits of
the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach has heretofore been authorized to annex lands in accordance with Section 171.044 of the Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is presently under the jurisdiction of Palm Beach County, Florida, having a County Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Institutional
with an underlying High Residential 8 units per acre (INST/8); and WHEREAS, the City’s FLUM designation of Community Facilities (CF), as initially contained on the City’s Future Land
Use Map adopted in November, 1989, and as subsequently amended, is deemed to be advisory only until an official Future Land Use Map Amendment is processed; and WHEREAS, the designation
of a zoning classification is part of this proceeding, and the provisions of Land Development Regulations Chapter Two have been followed in establishing the proposed zoning designation;
and
2 Ord No. 38-11 WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(6), the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of July 18, 2011, and
voted 5 to 0 to recommend that the annexation be approved with an initial zoning of Community Facilities (CF) District, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida
Statutes 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the changes are consistent with and furthers the objectives and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the findings in the Planning and Zoning Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the City Commission
of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, hereby
annexes to said City the following described land located in Palm Beach County, Florida, which lies contiguous to said City to-wit: A parcel of land situate in Section 26, Township 46
South, Range 42 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Section 26; thence along the North line of
said Section 26, North 89° 56’ 07” West, a distance of 1967.73 feet to a point on the South right-of-way line of Linton Boulevard as described in Official Record Book 7818 Page 139,
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, said point being a point of curvature of a curve concave to the South having a radius of 7581.44 feet; thence along said South right-of-way
line and westerly along the arc of said curve, through a central angle of 01° 46’ 47”, a distance of 235.48 feet to a non-tangent line and the Point of Beginning; thence South 00° 03’
53” West, a distance of 712.34 feet to a point on the South line of the North 715.99 feet of said Section 26; thence along said South line North 89° 56’ 07” West, a distance of 375.71
feet to a point on the East line of the West 56.10 feet of the northwest quarter of said Section 26; thence along the East line North 00° 31’ 11” West, a distance of 691.76 feet to a
point on the said South right-of-way line of Linton Boulevard; thence along said South right-of-way line North 86° 18’ 21” East, a distance of 121.45 feet to a point of curvature of
a curve concave to the South having a radius of 7581.44 feet; thence easterly along the arc of said curve, through a central angle of 01° 58’ 45”, a distance of 261.90 feet to the Point
of Beginning.
3 Ord No. 38-11 Section 3. That the boundaries of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, are hereby redefined to include therein the above-described tract of land, and said land is hereby
declared to be within the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Section 4. That the land hereinabove described shall immediately become subject to all of the franchises,
privileges, immunities, debts, obligations, liabilities, ordinances and laws to which lands in the City of Delray Beach are now or may be subjected, including the Stormwater Management
assessment, levied by the City pursuant to its ordinances and as required by Florida Statutes Chapter 197, and persons residing thereon shall be deemed citizens of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida. Section 5. That this annexation of the subject property, including adjacent roads, alleys, or the like, if any, shall not be deemed acceptance by the City of any maintenance
responsibility for such roads, alleys, or the like, unless otherwise specifically initiated by the City pursuant to current requirements and conditions. Section 6. That Chapter Two of
the Land Development Regulations has been followed in the establishment of a zoning classification in this ordinance and the tract of land hereinabove described is hereby declared to
be in the Community Facilities (CF) Zoning District as defined by existing ordinances of the City of Delray Beach. Section 7. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith
be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 8. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any -paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a court
of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section
9. That this ordinance shall become effective as follows: As to annexation, immediately upon passage on second and final reading; as to zoning, upon the effective date of Ordinance No.
25-11, under which official Future Land Use Map designation of CF (Community Facilities) is affixed to the subject parcel herein described.
4 Ord No. 38-11 PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the _____ day of ___________________, 20___. ____________________________________ ATTEST M A
Y O R _______________________________ City Clerk First Reading__________________ Second Reading________________
5
10/04/11
AREA THEREOF AS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 50-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
8.B. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/INTERCOUNTY ENGINEERING, INC.:
Approve Change Order No. 1 (C.O. No. 1) with Intercounty Engineering, Inc . for an
extension to the contract of seven (7) days for the Osceola Park Water Main Phase 2
Project and the amount of $18,321.82 to be paid out of the Contract's Utility Allowance
for additional scope requirements.
8.C. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/SPEARHEAD DEVELOPMENT GROUP,
INC.: Approve Change Order No. 1 with Spearhead Development Group, I nc. in the
amount of $24,118.80 for additional scope needed for driveway reconstruction to mee t
ADA requirements; and for a contract time extension of thirty (30) days for the
Community Improvement Sidewalks Project. Funding is available from 118-1965-554-
63.11 (Neighborhood Services: Improvements-Other/Bikepaths/Sidewalks).
8.D. CONTRACT AWARD/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS, INC.:
Approve a contract award to Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. in the amount $1,156,896.00
for the construction of the Auburn Avenue Improvement Project. Funding is available
from 334-3162-541-68.65 (General Construction Fund: Other Improvement/Auburn
Avenue Improvements) and 442-5178-536-68.50 (Water & Sewer Renewal &
Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/WM - S.W. 12th & 13th Avenue).
8.D.1. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS,
INC.: Approve Change Order No. 1 with Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. t o update
certain documents as required for federally funded projects in the contract.
8.E. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 07-05.2/AECOM TECHNICAL
SERVICES, INC.: Approve Service Authorization No. 07-05.2 to AECOM Technical
Services, Inc. in the amount of $20,260.00 for the construction phase of Worthing Park.
Funding is available from 117-4133-572-68.19 (Recreation Impact Fee FD: Other
Improvement/Worthing Park Improvement).
8.F. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1/FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS,
INC./S.W. 12TH AVENUE/S.W. 14TH AVENUE/AUBURN AVENUE: Approve
Change Order No. 1 with Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. in the am ount of $16,907.80
for relocation of an additional twenty-eight (28) sewer cleanouts with funding available
from 442-5178-536-68.04 (Water & Sewer & Replacement Fund: Improvements
Other/S.W. 12th Avenue-Auburn-14th Avenue), and approve $1,400 for removal of two
(2) inlets to be paid out of the contract's Unforeseen Conditions Allowance.
6
10/04/11
8.G. REJECTION OF ALL BIDS/PAVEMENT ASSESSMENT
PROJECT: Approve a recommendation to reject all bids received for the Cit y's
Pavement Assessment Project and authorize staff to rebid the p roject with a modified
scope.
8.H. RESOLUTION NO. 51-11 : Approve Resolution No. 51-11 assessing
costs for abatement action required to remove nuisances on twelve (12) properties
throughout the City of Delray Beach.
The caption of Resolution No. 51-11 is as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT
TO CHAPTER 100 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING
COSTS FOR ABATING NUISANCES UPON CERTAIN
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH AND PROVIDING THAT A NOTICE OF LIEN
SHALL ACCOMPANY THE NOTICE OF
ASSESSMENT; SETTING OUT ACTUAL COSTS
INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH
ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND
INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLUTION, AND
DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 51-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
8.I. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT
AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the State H ousing
Initiative Program (SHIP) to the lowest responsive bidder for 336 S.W. 11th Avenue to
Built Solid Construction, LLC in the amount of $32,637.64. Funding is available f rom
118-1924-554-49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing
Rehabilitation).
8.J. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA
AS ITEM 9.A.A.
8.K. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/14 TH ANNUAL BED RACE: Approve a
special event request for the 14th Annual Bed Race, sponsored by the Delray Beach
Marketing Cooperative proposed to be held on October 28, 2011 from 5:30 p.m. until
8:00 p.m., granting a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6.(F) for the use and
closure of N.E. 2nd Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.E. 1st Street from 2:00 p.m. to
7
10/04/11
9:00 p.m.; authorize staff support for traffic control and security , EMS assistance, trash
removal and clean up, barricading, use and set up of half of the small stage, and
preparation and installation of event signage; contingent up recei pt of a Certificate of
Liquor Liability Insurance and a copy of the Temporary Liquor Li cense as stated in the
staff report.
8.L. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HALLOWEEN PARADE: Approve a
special event request for the Annual Halloween Parade sponsored by the Noontime
Kiwanis Club to be held on October 29, 2011 from 1:30 p.m. until approxim ately 2:30
p.m., including temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for the rolling closure of
Atlantic Avenue from N.E. 2nd Avenue to Veterans Park, and staff suppor t for traffic
control and security; contingent upon receipt of the Certificate of Liability Insurance and
a signed and notarized Hold Harmless Agreement by October 24, 2011.
8.M. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/25 TH ANNUAL TURKEY TROT:
Approve a special event request to allow the 25th Annual Turkey Trot to be held on
Saturday, November 19, 2011 from 7:00 a.m. until approximately 9:00 a.m., including a
temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of A-1-A from
Casuarina to George Bush Boulevard from 5:00 a.m. to approximately 10:00 a.m., and
authorize staff support for traffic control, barricading, clean up, use of half of small stage,
event signage and waiver of parking meter fees for Sandoway, Ingra ham, and Anchor
Parking Lots and along Atlantic Avenue from Venetian to A-1-A from 6:00 a.m. until
approximately 10:00 a.m.
8.N. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boa rds for
the period September 19, 2011 through September 30, 2011.
8.O. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS:
1. Bid award to multiple vendors in the annual estimated amount of
$210,000.00 for the purchase of Chemicals and Fertilizers through
the Co-Op annual contract on an “as needed basis” for FY
2011/2012. Funding is available from 001-4511-539-52.21
(General Fund: Operating Supplies/Chemicals), 001-4511-539-
52.26 (General Fund: Operating Supplies/Gardening Supplies),
119-4144-572-52.21 (Beautification Trust Fund: Operating
Supplies/Chemicals), 445-4714-572-52.26 (D B Municipal Golf
Course: Operating Supplies/Gardening Supplies), 446-4714-572-
52.26 (Lakeview Golf Course: Operating Supplies/Gardening
Supplies).
2. Bid award to West Construction, Inc. in the amount
of $197,156.00 for modifications to Worthing Park. Funding is
available from 117-4133-572-68.19 (Recreation Impact Fee FD:
Other Improvement/Worthing Park Improvement).
8
10/04/11
3. Contract award to Baker’s Transport Services (BTS) in an amount
not to exceed $300,000.00 for hauling and disposal of liquid lime
slurry from the Water Treatment Plant. Funding is available from
441-5122-536-34-90 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Contractual
Services).
4. Contract award to Line-Tec, Inc. in the amount of $98,638.00 for
installing water meters and connecting customers on the Barrier
Island to the Reclaimed Water System. Funding is available f rom
441-5161-536-49.23 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Current
Charges/OB/Reclaim Water Distribution System).
5. Contract award to Line-Tec, Inc. in the amount of $205,000.00 for
three projects: Water Service Relocations, Water Meter
Replacements-Contract Services and Fire Hydrant Flow Testing.
Funding is available from 442-5178-536-49.33 (Water and Sewer
Renewal & Replacement Fund: Other Current Charges/OB/ Water
Service Relocation), 442-5178-536-52.34 (Water and Sewer
Renewal & Replacement Fund: Operating Supplies/Water Mete r
Replacement Contract Service) and 441-5123-536-34.90 (Water
and Sewer Fund: Other Contractual Services).
6. Contract award to Rosso Paving and Drainage, Inc. in the amount
of $92,699.00 for construction of drainage improvements on Palm
Trail. Funding is available from 448-5461-538-68.69 (Storm Water
Utility Fund: Other Improvement/Palm Trail Drainage).
7. Purchase award to Sensus USA, Inc. in an amount not to exceed
$500,000.00 for small water meters. Funding is available from
442-5178-536-61.81 (Water & Sewer Renewal & Replacement
Fund: Land/Water Meter Replacement Program).
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded
by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr.
Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. C arney – Yes. Said
motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9. REGULAR AGENDA:
9.A.A. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT/TOWN OF GULF STREAM: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the
Interlocal Agreement with the Town of Gulf Stream to provide for an increase in the fee
paid to the City based upon the Town's annexation of additional property.
The City Attorney stated this is the Interlocal Agreement between the City
of Delray Beach and the Town of Gulf Stream and the terms of the agreement were
discussed at the August 2, 2011 Commission Meeting and at that time direction was
given that once Gulf Stream approved it staff would bring it back to the Commi ssion.
9
10/04/11
Mr. Frankel explained that he removed this item because in his opinion the
City of Delray Beach did not get as much as they deserved and the refore he is not in
favor of going forward.
Mr. Carney stated he spent a lot of time analyzing the contrac t and the
issues surrounding the contract. He stated although he appreciates the view that some
have expressed that the standard for applying what pricing s hould be used would be
dwelling units, the point of fact is that the contract provided tha t the standard was
population. Mr. Carney stated this is a situation where applyi ng the standard gives the
City of Delray Beach the biggest benefit in the balance be cause 40% of the population of
Gulf Stream is gone in the summer and all of these people ar e paying for fire services,
etc. for things they are not using. Mr. Carney commented about t he issue regarding the
38 units that were to be constructed at the old Sea Horse Club and stated they are not
constructed. Mr. Carney stated he measured this on the amount of curre nt usage and also
looked at the amount of actual usage as it relates to the people in Gulf Stream who are
calling on the services of Delray Fire-Rescue and 78% of them w ere for emergency
services not for fire and a fair percentage of them resulted i n transportation being given
by the City of Delray Beach to hospitals in the area and th e City for the most part was
reimbursed for this service.
Dr. Alperin stated he is comfortable with the formula.
Mayor McDuffie stated he spent a lot of time on that as wel l including
speaking to the Mayor and Town Administrator. Mayor McDuffie sta ted he has other
meetings with Mayors across Palm Beach County and he is very aw are that the formula
that is used essentially takes the cost and adds 25% to it so the City makes a profit on the
contract. However, there are at least six barrier island m unicipalities right now that are
not happy with the contracts that they have and they have banned toget her to release an
RFP to privatize all their fire service on the barrier isl and in those six communities.
Mayor McDuffie stated he is comfortable with the formula and supports it a s well.
Mrs. Gray moved to approve Item 9.A.A. (formerly 8.J.), seconded by
Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr . Frankel – No; Mrs.
Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alp erin – Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.A. WAIVER REQUEST/DECK 84: Consider a waiver request to Land
Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(a)(2), “Front Setbacks”, to reduce
the required front setback from five feet (5’) to eight inches (8”), to allow for the
installation of a support column and knee wall associated with new s liding glass doors in
the same location as existing windows for Deck 84 located at 840 Ea st Atlantic Avenue.
(Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
Mayor McDuffie read the City of Delray Beach procedures f or a Quasi-
Judicial Hearing into the record for this item and all subsequent Quasi-Judici al Hearings.
10
10/04/11
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex par te
communications. Mr. Frankel stated he has been to Deck 84 numerous tim es but has not
had one communication about the subject matter. Mrs. Gray stated s he had no ex parte
communications to disclose. Mayor McDuffie stated he too has atte nded many functions
at Deck 84 and spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner today. Mr. Carney stated he spoke to
Attorney Michael Weiner today and he did not speak about this issue a nd noted he has
been to Deck 84. Dr. Alperin stated he has been to Deck 84 and spoke t o Attorney
Michael Weiner.
Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and
Zoning Department project file #2011-143 into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated this is a recommendation of approval for a waiver to
LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(a)2 to reduce the front setback from five feet (5’) t o 8 inches to
allow the installation of a support column and knee wall associated with new sliding glass
doors in the same location as the existing windows. He stated Dec k 84 is on the south
side of Atlantic Avenue on the Intracoastal Waterway.
Mr. Dorling stated at its meeting of September 21, 2011, the Hist oric
Preservation Board (HPB) approved with conditions a Certificate of Appropriateness
(COA) and Class I Site Plan Modification for elevation changes on the front and rear
facades of Deck 84. The HPB considered this waiver request concurr ently with the COA
and Site Plan requests and recommended approval with a vote of 7 to 0.
Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner and Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1 st
Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, representing the applicant, stated they are not
encroaching any further than the existing encroachment; those fix ed windows are sliding
windows. Mr. Weiner stated they have complete unanimity by the H istoric Preservation
Board and this meets the requirements for substantial competent evidence.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in
favor or in opposition of the waiver request, to please come forwa rd at this time. There
being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission re garding the
waiver request, the public hearing was closed.
Mrs. Gray asked what the purpose of the sliding glass door is. T he
applicant stated this is to make the location more attractive and more inviting. Mrs. Gray
stated this is going to be beautiful there.
Dr. Alperin stated there is no room for tables outside and asked if they will
allow air in for the circulation.
11
10/04/11
Mayor McDuffie asked if the knee wall is going to come down. The
applicant stated the knee wall is going to stay and the mulch is going to come out and it
will be covered with the same travertine that is on the outside a nd on the floor of the
building.
The City Attorney briefly reviewed the Board Order with the C ommission
who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an
official part of the minutes).
Mr. Frankel moved to adopt the Board Order as presented, seconded by
Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr s. Gray – Yes; Mayor
McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Fra nkel – Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.B. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION
BOARD’S DECISION/CLASS III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION: Consider an
appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s denial of the Clas s III site plan modification
request for 85 S.E. 6 th Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
9.B.1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION
BOARD’S DECISION/ WAIVER REQUEST: Consider a waiver request to Land
Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)(2), “Parking ”, for six required
parking spaces for 85 S.E. 6 th Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
Mayor McDuffie stated anyone wishing to speak on Item 9.B., 9.B.1.,
9.C., and 9.C.1. and who has not been sworn in to please stand and be sworn in by t he
City Clerk.
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex par te
communications. Mr. Frankel stated he received a call from Michae l Weiner who is the
Attorney for the applicant about this agenda item. Mrs. Gray stated she has no ex parte
communications to disclose. Mayor McDuffie stated he received a call from Attorney
Michael Weiner as well. Mr. Carney stated he spoke to Mr. Ly nne briefly a couple of
days ago and Mr. Weiner today. Dr. Alperin stated he spoke to Mr. Weiner today.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning Department project file #2011-061 into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated this is a consideration of an appeal of a Hist oric
Preservation Board (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The Board made a motion
to approve a Class III Site Plan Modification which failed on a 0 to 5 vote. Mr. Dorling
stated at its meeting of August 16, 1995, the Historic Preservation Board approved a
Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for some improvements that were for two of the
12
10/04/11
three buildings. In 1995, there was a conversion of the Blank House from a single-family
residence to a retail use and also a conversion of a two-car ga rage to an office building
and a nine space parking lot. He stated the conversions occurred but none of the parking
improvements associated with that conversion was constructed and sub sequently the
office was never legally established. Between 1995 and 2004 as the illegal status of the
office use continued to surface, the applicant submitted Site Pla n Applications and was
approved for the conversion of use with associated parking improveme nts. Mr. Dorling
stated each of those applications was allowed to expire and none o f the required
improvements were ever constructed associated with that office conversi on.
Mr. Dorling stated August 3, 2004, the applicant was granted the abi lity to
pay for two in-lieu parking spaces and included the installation of the balance of required
spaces on-site in a configuration off the City’s parking lot. He stated in 2004 there was a
proposal to put in a tea garden and eliminate the parking. The 2004 approval allowed in-
lieu of two spaces and four spaces in either configuration off the parking lot and that
approval was granted; however, the parking improvements were never construct ed.
At its meeting of August 21, 2011, the Historic Preservation Board (HPB)
reviewed another attempt after 16 years to address the office c onversion. This request
was to waive all required (6 spaces) associated with the Clas s III Site Plan Modification
for the office space. This request was not supported and the ap peal of both the denial of
the waiver and this Class III Plan Modification are now before the City Com mission. Mr.
Dorling stated this is a request to completely waive the requirement.
At its meeting March 10, 2011, the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) recommended denial of the waiver to the required parking; a t its meeting of
March 14, 2011, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject
request and the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all
six (6) of the required spaces. Direction was given to the applic ant to work out an
alternative approach with staff and return to the DDA for furth er review; at its meeting of
June 28, 2011, the Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) also recommended
denial of the request to waive all six (6) parking spaces and sugg ested that the applicant
work with staff and possibly provide three spaces on-site and provi de three (3) spaces on-
site and provide the other through an in-lieu agreement. Mr. Dorl ing reiterated that the
applicant does not want to provide the parking nor does he want to pay f or the parking.
Staff believes that they should be responsible for that parkin g in one configuration or
another and recommends that this appeal not be upheld and that the or iginal
recommendation by HPB stands. Mr. Dorling stated if the Commissi on should decide
otherwise, staff would like the four (4) conditions on page two to be applied.
Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner and Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1 st
Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, briefly discussed a request associated with a Class III
Site Plan Modification to the property located at 85 S.E. 6 th Avenue known as the Blank
House. Mr. Weiner stated the Blank House is designated on the Local Historic Register
built in 1903 updated through the 40’s and 50’s and it was converted to res taurant use in
1995. The restaurant is a little over 2,000 square feet and the office is 1,000 square feet.
13
10/04/11
Various site plans have been proposed for this site but becaus e of conditions that were
added the applicant has been reluctant to commence construction. With respect to the
current request, the City is recommending that there be six (6) parking spaces added. Mr.
Weiner stated they would have to add about 700 square feet of pavement for a 1,000
square foot office. Mr. Weiner stated these requirements and othe r requirements in the
staff report cannot be imposed because LDR Section 4.5.1 of the LDR s stating that
parking relief be granted by the HPB if the following conditions are met: (1) that
adequate parking proposed for the use and that the parking be achi eved by alternate
means and (2) that those alternative means be found to be in keepi ng with the provisions
of the Delray Beach Historic Design Guidelines. He stated the el ements for relief are met
and in 2008 the City placed this ordinance in the LDRs in order to accommodate this kind
of situation. Mr. Weiner stated in a report signed by Ron Hoggard and Paul Dorling in
support of that ordinance it stated that the language was added t o regulate parking by
presenting additional options. Mr. Weiner displayed a photo of the property taken March
11, 2011, and the parking lot immediately adjacent is utilized at only 40%. He stated this
is substantial competent evidence there are alternate means for parking. Mr. Weiner
stated the Planning and Zoning Department has informed him that the y would not
consider the request unless they submitted a Class III site p lan modification. Mr. Weiner
stated they have done this under protest and reserve all rights a nd noted that a Class III
application is not required for a waiver to LDR Section 4.5.1. He sta ted the office use is
grandfathered in and previously established and not illegal. Mr. Weiner stated this was
approved, tax receipts were issued, and there was a Code Enforceme nt matter that was
resolved ending up in confirmation of the completion of the work and appr oval of this
use.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in
favor or in opposition of the appeal, to please come forward at this time. There being no
one from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding the appeal, the
public hearing was closed.
There was no cross-examination.
The following individuals gave a brief rebuttal:
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated there wa s a
tax receipt issued for this property but that does not give la nd use authority. There was a
Code violation issued for installation of replacement doors for a gar age. Mr. Dorling
stated that was closed out and they did pay a fine and that did not r esolve the outstanding
issue for many years about the parking and they came in two y ears later to talk about the
parking and to seek alternatives. He stated that is when the Cit y Commission talked
about alternatives with providing the in-lieu and the options for pa rking off-site. Mr.
Dorling stated the ordinance that Mr. Weiner talks about providing a waiver and
alternative means was not envisioned to waiving all the requireme nts and having the
public provide the parking but it was to provide additional options in these situations
where paving of the site is inappropriate you can provide in-lie u fees or an off-site
parking agreement.
14
10/04/11
Mr. Weiner briefly discussed the letter from staff and made reference to
the building permits which stated “enclosed garage for additional office use” (March 17,
2000). He stated the doors went up without approval but it was done for the purpose of
being an office. Mr. Weiner stated the City passed 4.5.1 that s tates to give relief to
historic sites and the Parking Management Advisory Board report sa ys if it is 1,000
square feet and it is close to a parking lot their recommendation is no parking spaces. He
stated the issue of this office space was closed.
Mr. Frankel stated he is troubled that staff has been discus sing this
building and feels 1995 is a long time for this place to be in ope ration if it is not
compliant with what they are supposed to be. Mr. Frankel state d he finds the case Joe
Redner v. the City of Tampa very persuasive. Mr. Frankel made reference to page 3 of
the documents submitted by Mr. Weiner in his argument and stated these are powerful
documents and noted the 2003 letter that states this is in compliance. With regard to the
parking issue, there is a parking lot on Federal Highway and other than at night it is p retty
empty during the day.
Bert Handlesman, owner of the property, stated he has never seen more
than one person in there. Mr. Frankel asked what kind of business ope rates out of the
business space. The owner stated it is clerical work. Mr. Fr ankel stated the Parking
Management Advisory Board recommended putting in three spaces and as ked if there is
any room for compromise. Mr. Weiner stated they have offered one space.
The City Manager stated staff has worked with the applica nt and has been
very patient with the applicant for 16 years and feels we have provided a good
compromise in allowing the parking spaces to be located off the driveway in the public
parking lot so there is minimal disruption to the site and no disru ption to the historic
appearance of the site.
Mrs. Gray asked about the parking process and asked why the C ity did not
go after them and make them do this. Mr. Dorling stated it was f ive separate occasions
and as these site plans expired and it was brought to their at tention that they needed to do
something they came in and got site plan approval again. There is a two year time period
for which the site plan is validated and during those two years thos e improvements are
expected to be installed. Mr. Dorling stated the record shows tha t there have been five
attempts or renewals of site plans with parking scenarios tha t have never been
implemented. Mrs. Gray stated there should be some sort of compr omise by the
applicant and supports staff’s recommendation.
Mr. Carney stated he would like to see Mr. Weiner come up wit h some
parking and feels one in-lieu space is not enough.
Dr. Alperin stated he is in shock that it has been 16 years and t his is still
here. He feels there needs to be a Workshop to discuss why s omething like this was
allowed to continue. Dr. Alperin briefly discussed the ordinances a nd stated three boards
recommended denial of this application.
15
10/04/11
Mr. Carney inquired about Mr. Weiner’s “51% argument”. Mr. Weiner
stated there are 76 spaces in the parking lot called Gladiola and the parking report states
that it is not utilized at more than 51%; 50% of 76 spaces is approx imately 38 spaces next
to 1,000 square feet. Mr. Carney stated he is troubled with giving away six (6) sp aces.
Mayor McDuffie stated he thought he saw some compelling evidence and
it troubles him that he now has to sit on the dais as Mayor who w as not on the
Commission when all this started and make a decision about something that is 16 years
old.
Dr. Alperin stated the Commission has to make a decision based on the
ordinance now.
The City Manager stated another alternative is to table thi s ordinance and
allow staff put together a thorough history of this whole parking issue over the entire 16
year period.
Mr. Weiner stated the owner has spent hundreds of dollars to keep the
house presentable and urged the Commission to vote on this tonight.
Jane Rankin, One East Broward Boulevard Ste. #1600, Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33301 (Attorney representing the applicant), stated she handled the
transaction in July 2000 and at that time the building was in a condit ion that was very
dangerous. Ms. Rankin stated Mr. Handelsman has spent hundreds of thousa nds of
dollars in renovating that building inside and out and taking care of the outside of the
other properties on the site. She stated to asphalt more of tha t lot would be discouraging
when looking at the historic value of the property and the aesthe tic picture that it presents
as you enter into the city. She stated the reason for the parki ng waiver is because they
believe they have a solid basis for all the land use and zoning comp liance issues. Ms.
Rankin stated they too do not understand why this has gone on as long as it has when the
matter was disposed of in 2003.
The City Attorney stated the applicant has certain rights and asked if they
would like the Commission to vote on it.
Brief discussion by the Commission followed. Mayor McDuffie a sked
staff to be very thorough in what they do and bring back to the Comm ission a complete
picture of what happened, why things were approved and if the appli cant did not meet the
requirements at the time why permits were issued.
Mr. Frankel moved to table Item 9.B., seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon
roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Ye s; Mr. Carney – Yes;
Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 t o 0
vote.
16
10/04/11
Mr. Frankel moved to table Item 9.B.1., seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon
roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; D r. Alperin – Yes; Mr.
Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes. Sa id motion passed with a 5 to
0 vote.
At this point, the time being 7:51 p.m. the Commission moved to the dul y
advertised Public Hearings portion of the Agenda.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 36-11 (FIRST READING/FIRST PUBLIC
HEARING): Consider a privately initiated amendment to the Land Development
Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.9. (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, and
Section 4.4.13 (B), “Principal Uses and Structures Permitted”, to cl arify that bicycles
with an electric helper motor are the only motorized equipment permitted in t he “rental of
sporting goods and equipment” use category . If passed, a second public hearing will be
held on October 18, 2011.
The caption of Ordinance No. 36-11 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY
AMENDING SECTION 4.4.9 “GENERAL
COMMERCIAL (GC) DISTRICT”, SUBSECTION
4.4.9(B), “PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES
PERMITTED”; AND SECTION 4.4.13, "CENTRAL
BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT", SUBSECTION 4.4.13(B),
"PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED";
TO CLARIFY THAT BICYCLES WITH AN ELECTRIC-
HELPER MOTOR ARE THE ONLY MOTORIZED
EQUIPMENT PERMITTED IN THE “RENTAL OF
SPORTING GOODS AND EQUIPMENT” USE
CATEGORY WITHIN THE GC AND CBD ZONING
DISTRICTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 36-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
17
10/04/11
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this i s a
privately-initiated text amendment to LDR Section 4.4.9(B)(4)(a) General Commercial –
Principal Uses and Section 4.4.13(B)(3)(a) Central Business Distri ct – Principal Uses.
Mr. Dorling stated this will clarify that bicycles with an electric-helper motor are the only
motorized equipment permitted in the rental of sporting goods equipm ent use category.
This is in association with the establishment of The Electric Experience at 1047 East
Atlantic Avenue and this business wants to rent bicycles that ha ve electric-helper motors
to the general public at this site. The current rental of sp orting goods and equipment
category is limited to non-motorized goods and equipment. Mr. Dorling s tated this will
provide clarification that in the CBD and GC zoning districts thi s will be expanded with
respect to motorized bicycles only. The applicant has also sub mitted a conditional use
application for Segway tours as well as a city code amendment to the Code of Ordinances
definition to bicycles to include the electric-helper motor whic h is consistent with Florida
Statute definition for bicycles.
At its meeting of September 8, 2011, the Community Redevelopme nt
Agency (CRA) recommended approval; at its meeting of Septembe r 12, 2011, the
Downtown Development Authority (DDA) recommended approval; and at it s meeting of
September 13, 2011, the West Atlantic Redevelopment Coalition (WARC ) recommended
approval. Staff recommends approval.
David Schmidt, Attorney representing applicant, stated they do not
disagree with anything staff has represented and is present f or any questions the
Commission may have.
Mr. Carney asked if this relates to mopeds. Mr. Schmidt sta ted this
ordinance does not relate to mopeds and disagrees with Mr. Dorling’s reading of the
current ordinance and stated he does not believe it prohibits rental of motorized vehicles.
The current definition of bicycle includes mopeds so by updating to the later item to
adopt the current statutory definition of bicycles. One Statut e also has separate definition
for mopeds.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Or dinance No. 36-11,
the public hearing was closed.
Albert Richwagen, 48 year Delray native and bike shop owner, stated
this business that has initiated this change of use has been doing i llegal business for over
a year. Mr. Richwagen stated they have not complied with any City laws, they have
illegal signage and are doing Segway tours without a license. Mr. Richwagen stated if
they want to operate a business as such they should go under the cur rent guidelines which
are be in the automotive area or be where the motorcycle shops are in the allowed use or
as he did buy a pre-existing automotive use so that they can do what they want to do.
18
10/04/11
Dr. Alperin stated he does not consider a Segway a bicycle but it has two
wheels and is an electric driven machine. Mr. Dorling stated this amendment does not
apply to Segways. Dr. Alperin stated an electric car is a totally different thing than a gas
car as far as maintenance, etc. and what kind of shop requirements there are to maintain
this needs to be looked at as well when considering this.
Mayor McDuffie concurs with comments expressed by Dr. Alperin.
For the record, Mr. Frankel stated he understands all the differe nt groups
that looked at it did approve it. Mr. Frankel stated Al Jacquet of t he Planning and Zoning
Board had stated he does not know if this is consistent with the visi on of the city. Mr.
Frankel stated this is something he struggled with when the Commi ssion discussed the
Segways and whether or not we want to turn this into another Key West. Mr. Frankel
concurs with the Mayor’s recommendation to pass this ordinance tonight to get it to
second reading but he would also like the additional information that was brought up.
Mr. Carney stated some good issues were raised about how the Se gways
will be maintained.
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 36-11 on First Reading/First
Public Hearing, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Comm ission voted as
follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Y es; Mayor McDuffie –
Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.B. ORDINANCE NO. 32-11: An ordinance amending Chapter 51,
"Garbage and Trash", of the City Code of Ordinances by amending Section 51.70,
“Regular Charges Levied”, to provide for increased residential a nd commercial collection
service rates for FY 2012.
The caption of Ordinance No. 32-11 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 51, "GARBAGE AND
TRASH", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING
SECTION 51.70, "REGULAR CHARGES LEVIED",
TO PROVIDE FOR INCREASED RESIDENTIAL
AND COMMERCIAL COLLECTION SERVICE
RATES FOR FY 2012; PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 32-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
19
10/04/11
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Lisa Hartman, Utility Billing Manager, stated this for a rate increase in the
ordinance. Mrs. Hartman stated the rate increase is a result of the requirements in the
City’s Waste Management Contract and stated the City has to adjust rates for the CPI and
the diesel fuel price adjustment.
Dr. Alperin asked if these rates are non-negotiable according to the
contract. Mrs. Hartman stated this is non-negotiable.
The City Manager stated the commercial rates are affecte d by the Solid
Waste Authority increase in tipping fees in addition to the Was te Management collection
charges.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was clos ed.
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 32-11 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr.
Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. C arney – Yes; Dr. Alperin
– Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.C. ORDINANCE NO. 34-11: Approve an increase of the parking meter
fees from $1.25 to $1.50 per hour in all metered parking spaces, an increas e to the cost of
the annual beach parking permit from $80.00 to $90.00 per year, and creation of a new
permit classification of Senior Beach Parking Permit at a cost of $95.00 per y ear.
The caption of Ordinance No. 34-11 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 71, “PARKING
REGULATIONS” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
BY AMENDING SECTION 71.058, "COST OF
PARKING OR STANDING VEHICLES IN CERTAIN
METERED SPACES", TO PROVIDE FOR A PER
HOUR METER FEE TO BE CHARGED AND LISTING
THE PARKING LOTS AFFECTED; AND BY
AMENDING SECTION 71.060, “PARKING METER
PERMITS”, TO ESTABLISH A SENIOR BEACH
PERMIT PROGRAM AND COSTS; PROVIDING A
SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
20
10/04/11
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 34-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated the City has
proposed a slight increase to the annual beach permit from $80.00 pe r year to $90.00 per
year. Mr. Aronson stated the City has also proposed a new class ification for senior
citizens for an additional $5.00 they will be able to use the spac es on A-1-A south of
Miramar and north of Atlantic Avenue in the parallel parking sp aces and excludes the
angled parking spaces which are immediately adjacent to the b usiness district on A-1-A.
Mr. Aronson stated the City also proposed a .25 per hour increas e on the meter fees from
$1.25 to $1.50 per hour.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open.
Andy Katz, speaking on behalf of the Beach Property Owners
Association, stated Delray Beach is a very popular destination and compare d to other
cities Delray Beach offers more amenities such as showers , bathrooms, food, lounges,
fountains, etc., have the convenience of parallel parking on A-1-A, patrolled beaches,
have the unique proximity to downtown, and are relatively cheap compa red to other
cities. Mr. Katz stated he does not feel it is unreasonable f or the meter fees to increase
from $1.25 to $1.50 per hour and from the beach area perspective they woul d like to see
some of the additional money collected be used to fund the Beach Area Master Plan. He
stated with regard to enforcement very early in the morning they do not have the beach
crowds. Mr. Katz suggested that there be enforcement along At lantic Avenue at
9:30/10:00 a.m. but not along A-1-A. He stated when the beach crowd arrive s especially
on the weekends and during season there are illegal parking issues on Venetian,
Casuarina and Gleason and stated they would like to see some of the enforcement they
can save before 9:30 or 10:00 a.m. be used to take care of the illega l parking issues in
other areas of the beach.
Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL
33483, stated she too believes that $1.50 is very reasonable when comparin g to
competing towns. She suggested increasing the time limit from 2 hours to 3 or 4 hours.
Ms. Morrison suggested that the meters to be able to take parking cards and credit cards
and make them easily available for people to buy.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding Ordinance No. 34-11, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Frankel inquired if the senior permit is going to be for a one year
period not the six months as initially discussed. Mr. Aronson stated it was suggested it be
an off season and it was determined that it would not be an overburden so the senior
21
10/04/11
permit is going to be year-round.
Mrs. Gray asked how someone would be able to identify the senior
permits. Mr. Aronson stated staff has taken the last 100 because the permits are
numbered and these will be dedicated to the Senior Program and s taff will be placing a
small distinguishing mark on those permits to identify it as a senior permi t.
Mr. Aronson clarified that the parallel parking on A-1-A is 4 hours and
Atlantic Avenue is 2 hours in the business district and stated the S martcard can be
purchased in the Utility Billing Department for $5.00 and can be r echarged at any of the
multi-space parking meters on the beach.
Mr. Frankel moved to adopt Ordinance No. 34-11 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs.
Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel –
Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.D. ORDINANCE NO. 35-11: Approve an ordinance amending Chapter 92,
"Boats and Boating", by amending Section 92.15, "Docking License for Exc ursion Boat
Operations", Subsection (E), "Short-Term Agreement", to modify t he permit fee; and by
amending subsection (G), "Use of Docks at Veterans Park", to inc rease the mooring time
for excursion boats at Veterans Park.
The caption of Ordinance No. 35-11 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING
CHAPTER 92, "BOATS AND BOATING", BY
AMENDING SECTION 92.15, "DOCKING LICENSE FOR
EXCURSION BOAT OPERATIONS", SUBSECTION (E)
“SHORT-TERM AGREEMENT”, TO MODIFY THE
PERMIT FEE; AND BY AMENDING SUBSECTION (G)
“USE OF DOCKS AT VETERANS PARK”, TO INCREASE
THE MOORING TIME; PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE; A SAVING CLAUSE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 35-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Linda Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated this ordinanc e is to
modify the permit fee and to increase the mooring time for excur sion boats at Veterans
22
10/04/11
Park. Staff recommends increasing the fee from $250.00 to $300.00 and the o perating
hours from 9:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 p.m. In addition, Mrs. Karch
stated staff recommends allowing the boats to dock for no longer t han 60 consecutive
minutes (increased from 30 minutes).
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was clos ed.
Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 35-11 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commission vote d as follows:
Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs.
Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.E. RESOLUTION NO. 48-11/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND
PURCHASE/133 S.W. 12 TH AVENUE: Consider approval of Resolution No. 48-
11, which incorporates a Contract for Sale and Purchase between the City and the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for a vacant lot located at 133 S.W. 12 th
Avenue in the amount of $10.00.
The caption of Resolution No. 48-11 is as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, HEREBY
INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTING THE
CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE
FROM THE DELRAY BEACH COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, SELLER, TO THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 48-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in com pliance
with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Be ach, Florida.
The City Attorney stated Resolution No. 48-11 adopts the Contract for
Sale and Purchase between the City of Delray Beach and the Com munity Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) for the vacant property at 133 S.W. 12 th Avenue. This property will be
used to better utilize the Neighborhood Resource Center.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was clos ed.
23
10/04/11
Mr. Frankel moved to approve Resolution No. 48-11, seconded by Mrs.
Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carne y – Yes; Dr. Alperin –
Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Y es. Said motion passed
with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.E.1. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA): Consider approval of an Interlocal Agreement with the Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to transfer property to the City and pay some design and
construction costs of a new structure to be located at 133 S.W. 12th Avenue to expand the
Neighborhood Resource Center; contingent upon approval of Resolution 48-11 and the
Contract for Sale and Purchase.
The City Attorney stated this is a request for approval of an Interlocal
Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for property located at
133 S.W. 12 th Avenue where the CRA will contribute a maximum amount of $67,815.00
to the City to assist in the cost of the design and construction of a structure to
accommodate expansion of the Neighborhood Resource Center.
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Interlocal Agreement with the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), seconded by Mr. Frankel. U pon roll call the
Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Y es; Mrs. Gray – Yes;
Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
At this point, the time being 8:18 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
11.A., City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries.
11.A. City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries.
The City Manager stated Dr. Kirson had complained about the fact that
Workshop Meetings were not being broadcast or available on ar chives and in response to
Mr. Carney’s suggestion, the City Manager stated the Workshop Meet ings will be
recorded and placed in the archives so they are accessible over the internet beginning
with the October 11, 2011 Workshop Meeting.
At this point, the Commission moved to Item 11.B., Comments and
Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the Public.
11.B. From the Public.
None.
At this point, the time being 9:19 p.m., the Commission moved back to
Item 9.C. of the Regular Agenda.
24
10/04/11
9.C. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/EGLISE DE DIEU PRIMITIVE
DE LA NOUVELLE JERUSALEM, INC.: Consider approval of a conditional use
request to allow conversion of an existing 3,335 sq. ft. duplex residenti al structure at 614
Martin Luther King Jr. Drive to a church for Eglise De Dieu Pri mitive De La Nouvelle
Jerusalem, Inc., with an associated off-site parking lot located on the west side of N.W.
6 th Avenue, approximately 165 feet south of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive . (Quasi-
Judicial Hearing)
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex par te
communications. Mr. Frankel stated he spoke with Attorney Michael Weiner about this
issue earlier today. Mrs. Gray stated he spoke to staff about this issue a couple of months
ago and two of the Pastors. Mayor McDuffie stated he spoke to Attorney Michael
Weiner who acknowledged to him that it was on the agenda and he would be speaking on
it. Mr. Carney stated he too spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner and spoke to Mr. Dorling
last week briefly as an agenda item but did not get into any de tails. Dr. Alperin stated he
spoke to Attorney Michael Weiner this morning.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning Department project file #2011-129 into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated one item relates to a conditional use approva l to
establish a church and then a second one relates to a waiver to dis tance for an off-site
parking lot. The church building which was an existing duplex is p roposed and an off-
site parking lot is proposed in the vicinity where these are currently vacant. He stated
there is a maximum requirement of 300 square foot between an off-s ite parking lot and
the use. Mr. Dorling stated this is a conditional use to convert a 3,335 square foot duplex
structure to a church at 614 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. The chur ch has a
congregation of about 50-80 members and it currently rents a church b uilding for weekly
services at 414 S.W. 3 rd Street. The church would have three main services on Friday
evening between 8:00 a.m. – 10:30 p.m. and on Sundays from 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Creole classes will be offered for those par ishioners who cannot
read the Creole Bible. This training service will be offere d two days a week for two
hours a day and the church functions common with places of religious ass embly such as
church bazaars, fundraisers, and various activities around the holidays. Mr. Dorling
stated this facility is in the R-1-A zoning district and is al lowed as a conditional use
because each site is unique and in some cases it is appropriat e and in some cases it is not.
He stated this site has some challenges as it relates to c ompatibility and those concerns
have been identified in the staff report and for that and other reasons it is not a use that
should be allowed to go into this building. He stated LDR Section 3.1.1(D) requires
compliance with LDRs and the parking lot does not meet the maximum spacing and it
also does not meet consistency requirements of 3.1.1(C) with Objective s and Policies of
the Comprehensive Plan. Staff feels this is incompatible wit h the adjacent properties
because there will be noise issues as it relates to this. Mr. Dorling stated there is also a
25
10/04/11
discussion in the staff report as it relates to fulfilling re maining land use needs. There is
twelve (12) churches within a one mile radius with many of them the same congregation.
Staff feels although this is minor it still does not meet that Future Land Use objective. He
stated required findings under LDR Section 2.4.5(E) also go to compatibi lity. Mr.
Dorling stated it requires that you establish a conditional use and it will not have a
significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the ne ighborhood within it is located
nor will it hinder development or redevelopment of the nearby properties.
At its meeting of July 18, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board
considered the conditional use request and recommended denial of the condit ional use
and the waiver. At its meeting of July 14, 2011, the Community Redevelo pment Agency
(CRA) and the Planning and Zoning Board had concerns with the potential negative
impacts on abutting residential properties as well as traf fic impact with respect to
stacking and parking along the adjacent rights-of-way. Staff recomm ends denial.
Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner and Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1 st
Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (representing the applicant), stated about 4:45 p.m.
the neighboring property owner in the church reached an agreement on an easement and
it eliminates the requirement for the waiver and allows the peo ple to walk internally very
few feet from the church to the parking lot. Mr. Weiner brief ly spoke on the conditional
use because the waiver is no longer necessary and thus will be withdrawn. Mr. Weiner
stated the church already owns the structure and they were advi sed about the City’s
zoning code that states you can have a church use in a residential a rea. He stated Chapter
3 has four sub-elements: (1) Future Land Use Map designation, (2) a concurrency, (3) a
consistency, and (4) a compliance with the LDRs. Mr. Weiner stat ed that includes
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and there is a second requir ement that has two
sub-categories LDR Section 2.4.5 and first is that the use will not be significantly
detrimental and the second is it will not hinder development or re development. He stated
staff tries to add more about the noise and other Code Enforcement issues in the area.
Mr. Weiner stated they are an R-1-A zoning and LD (Low Density R esidential 0-5
dwelling units per acre) land use designation and are allowed to be a condi tional use. Mr.
Weiner stated the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs indicate that ther e is no restriction for
limiting policy on churches, other houses of worship, or the free ex ercise of religion. He
stated the staff report states that there are already 12 churches within a one mile radius of
the site. Mr. Weiner stated one more church is not a significant change to this
neighborhood. He stated the staff report makes reference to noi se and traffic but there is
no reason to believe that noise and traffic actually occurs. Mr . Weiner briefly spoke
about the setback requirements and reviewed the site plans. He stated effective
September 22, 2000, they signed into Federal Law the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and there is also the Fl orida Religious Freedom
Restoration Act and the general rule is “that no government shall impose or implement
the land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial b urden on the religious
exercise on a person including a religious assembly unless the government can
demonstrate that the imposition of the burden on that person is in furt herance of a
compelling governmental interest.” Mr. Weiner stated before he represented the
applicant they purchased this land and they made significant stri des to try to improve the
26
10/04/11
position of the church and what it is they want to do in the neighborhood and area.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone else from public would li ke to speak in
favor or in opposition of the conditional use request, to please come forward at this time.
Reginald Cox, 715 N.W. 2 nd Street (a/k/a Drive) Delray Beach,
representing Paradise Heights Neighborhood Association, stated three terms that were
heard earlier this evening were (1) common sense, (2) powerful imp act, and (3) use of the
Advisory Boards that the Commission depends on and put into place. Mr. Cox read a
brief statement into the record from the Paradise Heights Ne ighborhood Homeowners’
Association. He stated the Paradise Heights HOA would like to s ee the property remain
the residential designation.
Pastor Harry, one of the Pastors of the church, briefly discussed the
architects of the church.
Barbara Shuler, resident of Delray Beach, supports the conditional use
request and stated she has spoken to several people who live in the Paradise Heights
neighborhood and asked how many people were present at the meet ing, who held the
meeting, and how did they inform the neighbors. Mrs. Shuler stated s he is close to the
neighbors who live to the west and when they heard about the church the y asked her to
look into the situation. Mrs. Shuler stated she met with several me mbers of the church
and they agreed to allow the church to exist next to their home. S he stated the church
needed an easement at the back of the church property which would a llow the people to
park in that lot behind the church and walk right into the church. Mrs. Shuler urged the
Commission to approve the conditional use request and stated many of people who attend
the church live in that neighborhood.
Greg Deneus, 126 N.W. 6 th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (resides
next to the parking lot in Paradise Heights), stated he is not aware of what Mr. Cox is
speaking about. Mr. Deneus stated this building used to be an as sisted living for mental
health and they demolished it. He stated he would rather live among 50 churches than
live next to a bar or a sober house.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding the conditional use request, the public hearing was c losed.
Mr. Dorling stated the setback issue is critical as it re lates to this use as
being compatible. He stated this unit was built within ten fe et in an R-1-A zoning district
which does allow it as a conditional use but there are structures within this zoning district
which are more compatible for this type of use. Mr. Dorling s tated required findings
need to be made under Section 2.4.5(E) and they are not met and noted that this will have
a detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood bec ause of noise issues with
late night worshiping this close to adjacent residential str uctures. Mr. Dorling stated with
regard to the Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan p articularly Future Land
Use Element that states properties shall be developed or redeveloped complimentary to
27
10/04/11
adjacent land uses. He stated this structure for a commercial use is not going to be
complimentary to adjacent residential uses. Mr. Dorling state d the findings are made in
the staff report and recommends denial of the request.
Mr. Weiner stated there is nothing in the ordinances of what per centage of
a block should be devoted to churches. He stated drainage will be be tter because they are
increasing the open space. Mr. Weiner stated Section 2.4.7(B) has to do with waivers
and they no longer need the waiver. He stated they are going to have on-site parking as a
result of the easement. Mr. Weiner stated in 2005 the City Commi ssion approved a
church three times this size. He stated an extra ten feet i n setback is not going to make a
difference with respect to sound. Mr. Weiner stated there may be some site plan things
they can do that will minimize the possible impact that has b een suggested by the
Planning and Zoning Department.
Dr. Alperin stated the issue is whether this meets the requir ements of
Section 2.4.5 and noted that when he served on the Commission previously he f elt the
City was setting a precedent and that we were going to end up with churches every 500
feet. He stated there are now multiple churches on the same lot s and feels this does has
an impact on the neighborhood and he cannot support it for that reason.
Mr. Carney made reference to Mr. Weiner’s comments and reite rated that
this is a conditional use and we do have some mechanisms at our disposa l to mitigate
certain issues that have been raised such as noise; the parking issue can be addressed and
he is confident that the church members are going to be parking on the off-sit e parking lot
and noted it is a Code Enforcement issue if they do not park there. Mr. Carney stated he
will support this providing that conditions can be put in place tha t would mitigate some
of the concerns. He suggested that the hours be addressed regarding t he start time. Mr.
Carney stated he supports this provided some of these other conditions can be addressed
in the final approval.
Mrs. Gray stated she lives and attends one of the churches in this
community. However, she expressed concern about the neighbors and sp oke to some
people who are not in support of it because they live right next door within that block.
Mrs. Gray stated with regard to the parking lot on the back si de there is no guarantee that
people are going to just stay on that property. She stated s he has a business and a parking
lot and people walk through her parking lot to get to the CRA par king lot. Mrs. Gray
stated this is a very tight spot and does not think a church needs t o be in-between two
residences. She stated they are going to have rehearsals and i t will be used more than the
three services and expressed concern with the church being in this spot.
Brief discussion between Mrs. Gray and Mr. Weiner continued regar ding
the easement.
Mr. Frankel stated he agrees with the CRA, Planning and Zoning, a nd
staff to deny the conditional use request.
28
10/04/11
Mayor McDuffie stated when he was in his 20’s he signed a loan t o build
a church in a residential neighborhood and one of the things that was p art of the building
of the structure was the sound proofing of the structure. He st ated it is possible to
mitigate the sound. Mayor McDuffie stated the times are not bot hersome to him because
most everything is done by the time anyone would be going to bed. Mayor McDuffie
stated he has no issues with the parking and the easement elimi nates one of the problems
with it. He stated if people are not allowed to park in the s wales then then the City needs
to take action and solve the problem. Mayor McDuffie supports the church in this
location.
Mr. Carney asked if someone bought this now could they put 10
residential units there. Mr. Dorling stated they could not because it is R -1-A and allows a
duplex and single family only.
Mr. Carney moved to table this to the next meeting. Motion to ta ble failed
due to a lack of a second.
Mr. Carney moved to table to give the applicant and staff an op portunity
to work out some of the concerns if possible that was raised tonight , Mayor McDuffie
passed the gavel to the Vice Mayor and seconded that motion. Upo n roll call the
Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – No; Mrs. Gray – No; Ma yor McDuffie –
Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – No. Said motion was DENIED with a 3 to 2 vote,
Commissioner Carney and Mayor McDuffie dissenting.
The City Attorney briefly reviewed the Board Order with the C ommission
who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an
official part of the minutes).
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt the Board Order (denying the conditiona l
use), seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr.
Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – No; Mr. Ca rney – No; Dr. Alperin –
Yes. Said motion to adopt the Board Order denying the conditional use request was
approved with a 3 to 2 vote, Mayor McDuffie and Commissioner Carney dissenting.
9.C.1. WAIVER REQUEST/EGLISE DE DIEU PRIMITIVE DE LA
NOUVELLE JERUSALEM, INC.: Consider a waiver request to Land Development
Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.9.E.5 (a) (1), “Off Site Parking”, to inc rease the
maximum acceptable pedestrian path distance to three hundred twe nty-two feet (322’) for
an off-site parking lot for Eglise De Dieu Primitive De La Nouvelle Jerusalem Church
located at 614 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
This item has been withdrawn by the applicant.
29
10/04/11
9.D. GARAGE PARKING SPACE LICENSE AGREEMENT/GLOBAL
PARKING SOLUTIONS: Consider approval of a parking license agreement with
Global Parking Solutions for the utilization of 40 parking spaces in t he Federspiel Garage
seven (7) days per week between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. at a rate of $40.00
per space, per month.
Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated Global Parki ng
Solutions is a parking company that provides valet services. The valet queue for Prime
Steakhouse located at 110 East Atlantic Avenue is one of the excepti ons to the Valet
Parking License Agreement in that the City leases parking s paces in the Federspiel
Garage and the reason for that is the 110 East Atlantic Avenue buildi ng owned a 50 car
parking lot that was on the property that Worthing Place now sit s. He stated those 50
spaces were eliminated from the valets use who used them all t hose years for that valet
queue. At its meeting of September 12, 2011, the City Commission ente red into a
Parking License Agreement with Boca Parking Systems, Inc. (BPS) for use of 40 parking
spaces in the Federspiel Garage and this was approved. The S outh Florida Parking
Systems who formerly ran the valet is no longer operating that valet for Prime
Steakhouse and Global is looking for approval to assume that lease f or the 40 spaces.
Mr. Aronson stated it is $40.00 per month per space for a total of $1,600.00 per month.
Staff recommends approval.
Mr. Carney stated he would like to see a little a better price being charged
for the valet queues and feels the City can get more than $40.00 per month.
Mr. Frankel concurred with comments expressed by Mr. Carney.
Mrs. Gray concurred with comments expressed by Mr. Carney as well.
Dr. Alperin asked how many parking spaces are there in the Fe derspiel
Garage. Mr. Aronson stated there are a total of 202; 55 full time, 40 part-time spaces and
the rest of the spaces are public spaces and remain availa ble. Dr. Alperin inquired about
the rates. Mr. Aronson stated the modifications to the Valet Parki ng License Agreement
cap the fee at $10.00 per car and we allow an overtime fee if c ustomers stay more than 4
hours they can charge an extra $5.00 and for that they have to have a t ime clock and time
punch the tickets in and out.
In his opinion, Mayor McDuffie stated it is problematic to c hange this
tonight but he feels the next time staff reviews fees this fee needs to be raised.
Dr. Alperin asked how long this contract is for. The City Mana ger stated
it expires March 31, 2012 but they automatically renew.
Mr. Frankel suggested that the City Commission either at a W orkshop or
another meeting review the valet operators and determine if the price is appropriate.
Mr. Carney stated he does not like automatic renew language a nd feels
that each contract has to be individually reviewed.
30
10/04/11
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Parking License Agreement conti ngent
that it expires on March 31, 2012, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the
Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes ; Mayor McDuffie –
Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.E. APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Appoint one
(1) alternate member to the Board of Adjustment to serve an unexp ired term ending
August 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the recommendation/appoint ment will
be made by Commissioner Alperin (Seat #2).
Dr. Alperin moved to appoint Kenneth Nordt as an alternate member to
the Board of Adjustment to serve an unexpired term ending Aug ust 31, 2013, seconded
by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: M rs. Gray – Yes; Mayor
McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Fra nkel – Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.F. APPOINTMENTS TO THE DELRAY BEACH HOUSING
AUTHORITY: Appoint one (1) regular member to serve an unexpired term ending J uly
14, 2014 and one (1) regular member to serve a four (4) year term endi ng October 27,
2015 to the Delray Beach Housing Authority. Based on the rotation system , the
appointments will be made by Commissioner Gray (Seat #4) and Ma yor McDuffie (Seat
#5).
Mrs. Gray moved to appoint Marcia Beam as a regular memb er to the
Delray Beach Housing Authority to serve an unexpired term ending Jul y 14, 2014,
seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as foll ows: Mayor
McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Fr ankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray –
Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
Mayor McDuffie stated he wished to appoint Christel Silver a s a regular
member to the Delray Beach Housing Authority to serve a four (4) year term ending
October 27, 2015. Mr. Frankel so moved, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon r oll call the
Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Ye s; Mr. Frankel – Yes;
Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.G. RATIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT/ PBA POLICE LIEUTENANTS: Consider ratification of the
Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Ass ociation (PBA)/Police
Lieutenants. (ADDENDUM)
Bruce Koeser, Human Resources Director, stated the City has come to an
agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA) and has labor agreements for
lieutenants. Mr. Koeser stated this reduces the work week from 42 hour s to 40 hours a
week; a cut of the VEBA which is the retiree health trust fr om 3.3% to whatever the
active current retiree is and noted the City is just paying j ust active current retirees. He
stated instead of the City paying the three (3%) in pension cont ributions that will now go
31
10/04/11
to those employees; two unpaid holidays; future pension benefits for those hired after
October 1, 2012 will be negotiated as possibly a second tier of p ension benefits. Mr.
Koeser stated this mirrors the agreement with Fire (IAFF) that they did last year and
noted that this is a three year agreement and includes merits f or this fiscal year, a pay
freeze next fiscal year and a re-opener for the third year (effective October 1, 2011-
September 30, 2014).
Mr. Carney moved to approve the Ratification of the Collective
Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Lieutenants,
seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as fol lows: Dr. Alperin
– Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffi e – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes.
Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.H. RATIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT/PBA POLICE OFFICERS AND SERGEANTS: Consider
ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Poli ce Benevolent
Association (PBA)/Police Officers and Sergeants. (ADDENDUM)
Bruce Koeser, Human Resources Director, stated this item is to consider
ratification of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Poli ce Benevolent
Association (PBA) for Police Officers and Sergeants and mirrors the Fire (IAFF)
contract. Mr. Koeser stated with Police Officers and Sergea nts the City is a year behind
in their Collective Bargaining Agreement and will actually be effective October 1, 2010-
September 30, 2013. Mr. Koeser stated the first year was a fre eze, the second year will
be step movement, and the third year will be a reopener. He s tated this reduces the work
week from 42 hours to 40 hours; two unpaid holidays. Mr. Koeser stated t his will be a
cost savings of approximately $1 million this year.
The City Manager stated another important aspect that only affects Police
Officers and Sergeants is that we are allowed to negotiate our new pension benefits for
officers hired after October 1, 2012.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Ratification of the Collective
Bargaining Agreement with the Police Benevolent Association (PBA)/Police Officers
and Sergeants, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commissi on voted as
follows: Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney –
Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
At this point, Mayor McDuffie thanked City staff, the union
representatives from the Police Department and all the men and women in the Police
Department because he understands it has been tough on both sides.
At this point, the time being 9:54 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
12, First Readings.
32
10/04/11
12. FIRST READINGS:
12.A. ORDINANCE NO. 39-11: Consider an amendment to the Code of
Ordinance Section 72.02, “Definitions,” to conform to the State Statute definition of a
bicycle and to place further limitations on motorized bicycle s. If passed, a public hearing
will be held on October 18, 2011.
The caption of Ordinance No. 39-11 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 72, “BICYCLES”, OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 72.02,
“DEFINITION”, TO CONFORM WITH STATE
STATUTE DEFINITION OF BICYCLE AND TO PLACE
FURTHER LIMITATIONS ON MOTORIZED
BICYCLES; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 39-11 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this
ordinance modifies the City’s definition to be consistent with the S tate of Florida
definition for bicycles.
Dr. Alperin moved to approve Ordinance No. 39-11 on FIRST Reading,
seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follow s: Mrs. Gray –
Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes.
Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.
13.A. City Manager
The City Manager stated Mr. Carney mentioned that someone raise d the
issue that they had written to Utility Billing Department to r eceive their bill by email and
they were receiving them by email but also received a dupli cate in the mail. The City
Manager stated the City’s present software does not allow the City to issue statements by
email. He stated if someone arranges for it we will manuall y scan it and email it to them
but the system is still generating the print out. The City M anager stated this is one of the
things that will change when the City receives its new software.
33
10/04/11
Secondly, the City Manager stated with regard to the Palm Beac h County
League of Cities Valentin Rodriguez, Commissioner from Lake Cla rke Shores, was
reappointed to the Criminal Justice Commission to represent the L eague and Joann
Brinkman from Lake Park was reappointed to the Land Development R egulation
Advisory Board.
Lastly, the City Manager stated there was a case in Browa rd County
imposing term limits on County Commissioners and that was upheld at the trial court,
overturned at the appeals court, and was currently on appeal to the Su preme Court so it is
not resolved. There will be a meeting on November 2, 2011 between the County
Commission, the League of Cities, and the School Board to discuss i ssues of mutual
interest. The Florida League of Cities Legislative Action Day this year will be on
January 25, 2012.
13.B. City Attorney
The City Attorney had no comments or inquiries on non-agenda items.
13.C. City Commission
13.C.1. Dr. Alperin
Dr. Alperin stated he attended the Education Board Meeting and was
impressed with their enthusiasm.
Secondly, Dr. Alperin stated he will be on vacation the first we ek of
November.
13.C.2. Mr. Carney
Mr. Carney stated he supported the ordinance with the raising of t he
parking rates and did not support it the first time around because he wanted to make a
point about enforcement. Mr. Carney stated at the last meeti ng Mr. Katz and Ms.
Morrison Pearce spoke for this point regarding the enforcement i ssue. Mr. Carney stated
typically at 9:30 am during the week these are Delray resi dents that are going to places
and he does not feel they should have to pay for parking. Mr. Carney s uggested that this
be extended to A-1-A.
Secondly, Mr. Carney stated he raised the issue with the City M anager
related to a sign which has appeared on A-1-A at the end of At lantic Avenue regarding
Boston’s Hotel and reportedly it is part of the program with the Department of
Transportation where these signs are supposed to be at intersta tes. Mr. Carney stated this
is three miles east of that interchange and all it is doing now is promoting one business
over others. Mr. Carney stated he has asked the City to find out why that sign was placed
there and for its speedy removal because it is not in concert with the Beach Area Master
34
10/04/11
Plan which is trying to eliminate signage except for signs for Public Information or
disaster.
13.C.3. Mrs. Gray
Mrs. Gray announced that Saturday, October 15, 2011, Delray Beach i s
having its first Net Ball Tournament and invited everyone to attend.
13.C.4. Mr. Frankel
Mr. Frankel stated the Election date for the republican candi dates has been
moved up and suggested that the Commission discuss whether it would be appropriate to
move up the City’s Municipal Election as a cost savings if t he City wanted to hold it at
the same time. The City Clerk stated because the City’s C harter specifically says it is the
second Tuesday in March of every year the only way the City woul d be able to move it is
if they agree to move it to January 31 st . However, the City Clerk stated the viable reason
to move it would be whether or not the Supervisor or Elections would be able to have the
equipment and everything in place by that time. The City Manage r stated City’s Charter
would have to be amended in order to move the Election unless there is a special
circumstance.
Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated he spoke with Maria Herrera last week and
she brought up the subject about the ordinances that the City Attor ney’s office and many
people worked so hard on with regard to the sober houses and the unrelated people. Mr.
Frankel stated Ms. Herrera stated that City officials have not levied any fines or found
any violations since July 2009. The City Manager stated he has as ked Code Enforcement
to research this because there was a lot of activity initia lly when the ordinances were
passed and some of the problem places went away. The City Manager stated there has
also been activity in the Planning and Zoning Department with peo ple coming in wanting
to start a sober house but have been told they cannot do it here b ut have to go elsewhere.
The City Manager stated it is definitely having an impact but he will find out more about
the complaints the City has received and what has been done with it.
Lastly, Mr. Frankel stated last week was the Jewish New Year.
13.C.5. Mayor McDuffie
Mayor McDuffie stated he sat in the rain in Ohio and did not see the sun
for five days.
There being no further business, Mayor McDuffie declared the m eeting
adjourned at 10:09 p.m.
35
10/04/11
________________________________________________
City Clerk
ATTEST:
____________________________________
M A Y O R
The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the
information provided herein is the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeti ng held
on October 4, 2011, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City
Commission on ________________________.
________________________________________________________
City Clerk
NOTE TO READER:
If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they
are not the official Minutes of the City Commission. They wil l become the official
Minutes only after review and approval which may involve some amendme nts, additions
or deletions as set forth above.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011 Regular Meeting; Item 9.A.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011 Regular Meeting; Item 9.A.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
City Commission Meeting on October 4, 2011; Item 9.C.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 18, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 7.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
USA NETBALL ASSOCIATION, INC. TOURNAMENT PRESENTATION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
USA Netball Association, Inc. Tournament presentati on byCarole Hokrein
Netball moving forward …
x Official Member of the International Federation of
Netball Associations and the Americas Federation
of Netball Associations and the only Governing
Body for the sport of Netball in the USA.
x USANA is run by volunteers and its players and
officials fundraise in order to represent the United
States at international events.
x USANA’s coaches, umpires, tutors and trainers are
all volunteers and take no remuneration or
stipends. USANA runs training courses for umpires
and coaches annually.
x The Executive Board strives to raise funds and is
constantly reaching out to potential sponsors, grant
making institutions and governmental
departments.
Addendum to the Agenda; Item 7.A.
NETBALL
The most popular
women’s team sport in
the world!
Let’s see why…
NETBALL –A global, vibrant, game
for all
NETBALL -A Brief History…
James Naismith invented basketball in 1891 and
inadvertently aided in the invention of netball.
Naismith sent a copy of his basketball rules to a
sports teacher in New Orleans, Clara Baer. Baer
interpreted Naismith's drawings of the court and
players as meaning that players could not leave
certain areas. Taken across the Atlantic to a women’s
physical education college, Netball was first played in
England in 1895. This form of basketball was taken
from Britain to the countries then forming part of it s
empire where the game transformed into a fast
passing, no dribbling game, restricted playing area
ultimate team game called… Netball!
Who’s Playing NETBALL?
Worldwide, over 20 million registered players
participate in netball—women, children and men.
There are twice that number of recreational players.
Many schools throughout the world have Netball as a
central core sport in their physical education
curriculum. For many women and girls around the
world it is empowering, a chance to be active and the
opportunity to play a team sport.
In the USA, Netball is gaining momentum--
the USA has been ranked as high as 9th in the World
and narrowly missed out on qualifying for this year’s
World Championships by 0.6 of a goal.
NETBALL
Basics of Play
y The game is based on passing , throwing, intercepting an d
scoring of goals.
y There are seven players in a team and they each have t heir own
area of play. This means team-work and strong passing ski lls are
very important.
y Two players are allowed to try and score goals—a goal i s worth
one point. There is a ring through which the ball mu st pass.
y There is no dribbling and no running with the ball.
y The ball, which is the size of a soccer ball, must be caugh t and
thrown within 3 seconds.
y Contact that interferes with play is not permitted.
y Defenders must defend 3 feet away from the player wit h the ball.
NETBALL
Court
A Netball Court is always the same size and
shape measuring 100 feet x 50 feet. Any firm
surface can be used. The court is divided
into 3 major parts known as “thirds”. There
are two goal thirds and these contain the
goal circle from where goals are scored. The
object of the game is to score more goals
than your opponents. The other third is
known as the center third which contains the
center circle. The game is always started or
restarted after a goal from the center
circle.
Netball Positions
y GSGoal Shooter
One of only two players who can score/shoot goals and may play
in only the attacking third of the court.
y GAGoal Attack
The Goal Attack scores and shoots go als and also runs two thirds of
the court.
y WA Wing Attack
To feed the circle players giving them shooting opportu nities.
y C The Center connects the defense end with the attack end and runs
all three thirds of the court but may not go in eithe r circle.
y WDWing Defense
The opponent is the Wing Attack and the WD is a mobil e defender
who plays in two thirds of the court, but not the circle .
y GDGoal Defense
The opponent is the GA and the GD has the responsibilit y for
defending the shooting circle and rebounding missed shots as well
as clearing the ball out of defense.
y GK Goal Keeper
Tries to prevent the Goal Shooter from receiving the ball and shooting .
The last line of defense.
Positions on Court
GS C
WD
WA
WD
WA
C
GD
GA
GD
GA
GS
GK
GK
NETBALL
What’s needed to play?
y A size 5 Netball (juniors may play with a size 4).
Note –a soccer ball can be used at first.
y Bibs/Pinnies-2 sets with different colors for
practice; Velcro “Patches” for match uniforms.
y 7 Players Per Team although 12 on the bench.
y 2 Goalposts
y Court with Markings –Outdoor or indoor,
although indoor is preferable and is the only
permitted surface for international matches.
Set up Netball in your Community! Maybe your player s
will be members of the Flying Eagles –the USA
National Team –here is the u.21 team playing in the
2009 World Youth Championships in the Cook Islands.
N
E
T
B
A
L
L
N
O
W
England School Team 1940s.
N
E
T
B
A
L
L
T
H
E
N
Netball –Around the World
Asia: Singapore v India
Europe: Scotland v Wales
Oceania: Gold
medalists
New Zealand
Silver Ferns
The Modern Game –All 5 continents
Africa: Malawi versus
Botswana
Australia –World Champions 2011
“The Americas” -USA v Jamaica –the ring is
10 feet tall! USA flying high against Canada
Where is Netball going in the USA?
Increasing the number of players by
y Contacting Parks & Rec Departments
y Following up on contacts made at TEAMS
national conference
y Participation in the 2012 Junior Olympics
by invitation of the AAU
y Participation in the YMCA National
Convention in 2012
y Participation in the National Association of
Sports Commissions Convention 2012
FLORIDA TAKES THE LEAD
y But what is coming up in Florida …
y Meeting of “The Americas” Region –representatives
from 15 countries will be attending: USA, Canada,
Bermuda, Barbados, Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago,
Argentina, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & The Grenadines,
Antigua & Barbuda, Grenada, Dominica, Guyana,
Cayman Islands, St. Kitts/Nevis. December 1-4
y Visiting team from The Bahamas –October 22
y First Annual Jingle Bells Netball Tournament, Pompey
Park –December 4
y Florida Classic –November 19-20
y USA NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS June 23-24,
2012 Atlantic High School, Delray Beach
NETBALL…The most popular women’s team
sport in the world.. Coming back to its roots.
The United States of America Netball
Association, (USANA)is the governing body of netball
in the USA and has the goal of promoting and expandi ng
netball is to help children and women learn a new spor t
leading to lifetime participation. Men and boys are a lso
finding this is a fun sport to play. USANA provides a
unique outlet for women athletes within the USA and is
committed to building America to a world-class netball
authority. It strives to accomplish this through
development of players, coaches and officials at all leve ls.
For more information about the game of NETBALL, or to
help start a new team in your community please contact:
development@usanetball.com
Netball in Delray!
Pompey Park started its program just 8 weeks
ago. Delray Thunder –the girls picked the
name –played their first tournament on
Saturday against girls twice their size and in
some cases twice their age. They had all the
teams and crowd on their feet when showing
no fear, they took their shots from the edge,
and certainly demonstrated the art of the
bounce pass! They played against teams
from Jamaica, Texas, Miami and Ft.
Lauderdale.
Great Cultural Exchanges
Teams visit from around the world –here
are a few -
New Zealand’s Silver Ferns
training in Palm Beach
USA u.21 team in Fort Lauderdale
TO
The Caribbean
FROM
The Pacific
Ocean
ACROSS THE
SEAS
Crossing Cultures
From ASIA
To Africa and
Friends from
USA
Transition: Tradition to Athlete
The Underdogs who nearly caused an upset with some
of their support team
Final match of the World
Championships –USA v
Scotland (ranked 7 th )
Contacts
President: president@usanetball.com
Secretary: secretary@usanetball.com
Treasurer: treasurer@usanetball.com
Mailing Address
United States of America Netball Association, Inc
Bowling Green Station
PO Box 1105
New York, NY 10274-1105
The USA Netball Association (USANA), Inc
is the governing body of netball in the
USA. USANA was founded in New York in
1992 by netball enthusiasts, who came
together & volunteered their time for the
love of the game. USANA continues to be
run by volunteers.
USANA is dedicated to promoting and
expanding the sport of netball across the
USA through education, training and the
implementation of netball in schools,
colleges and recreational facilities.
The goal of promoting and expanding
netball is to help children and women
learn a new sport leading to lifetime
participation.
It is USANA’s aim to encourage increased
participation in netball and to continue to
develop and foster interest in the sport at
all ages and levels.
USANA provides a unique outlet for
women athletes within the USA and is
committed to building America in a
world-class netball authority. It strives to
accomplish this through development of
players, coaches and umpires at all
levels.
United States of America
Netball Association, Inc Introducing
Netball
Netball Across the USA
USANA currently has affiliates and contacts in seve ral
states across the USA; Alaska, Arizona, California,
Connecticut, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florid a,
Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland,
Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, North
Carolina, Pennsylvania, Portland, Tennessee, Texas,
Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington and West Virgin ia.
If you would like the contact information for a net ball
affiliate in your area or you would like to become a
netball affiliate please contact us.
www.usanetball.com
Lets Play Netball!
Netball is one of the most
popular women’s sport
in the world, with over 20
million players from
school to adult leagues.
Although popular with
women
netball has seen an
increase in male players
within the past ten years.
Netball is a fast, skillful team game
based on running, jumping, throwing &
catching. It is played by two teams, and
each team consists of seven players -
two shooters, two defense & three
center court players. Each player has a
playing position determined by the
areas on the court where they may
move. The playing positions are shown
by identification letters worn above the
waist, on both front and back of the
player. Those positions are GS, GA,
WA, C, WD, GD & GK.
The main aim of the game is to score as
many goals as possible from within an
area called the Goal Circle, which is a
semicircle centered on the goal line &
measuring 16 feet in radius. Only GS &
GA from each team may score goals.
Goals are scored through a hoop
resembling a basketball hoop but
without the backboard. Each goal
scores one point.
The netball moves up & down the court
by catching & throwing it to other team
members. Dribbling & moving with the
ball is not allowed.
What is Netball? Netball - Basic Rules
Players cannot dribble but they may
bounce the ball once to gain possession.
No running with the ball , players may not
re ground the foot which first touches the
court (landing foot).
Players must pass the ball to someone
else within three seconds of catching it.
No contact. Players may not take the ball
out of another player’s hands, push, push
off, or shove other players.
No defending within 3 feet of the player
with the ball. This is measured from the
landing foot.
Players can only shoot within the
shooting circle , a 16-foot radius
semicircle at each end of the court, and
these players are GS or GA. Each goal
scores one point.
The ball must be touched in each third
as it travels down the court.
Netball Playing Positions
Each position has a main role to play:
GS (Goal Shooter) - to score goals & work
in & around the goal circle with the GA
GA (Goal Attack) - to feed & work with GS
& to score goals
WA (Wing Attack) - to feed the goal circle
players giving them shooting
opportunities
C (Center) - to take the center pass & to
control game flow between attack &
defense
WD (Wing Defense) - to look for
interceptions & to prevent the WA from
feeding the goal circle players
GD (Goal Defense) - to win the ball &
reduce the effectiveness of the GA
GK (Goal Keeper) - to work with the GD
to prevent the GS from scoring goals
The Netball Court
Each playing position has a specific court
area.
Netball court dimensions:
Length (Side Line) - 100 feet
Width (Goal Line) - 50 feet
Goal Circle - 16 foot radius
Center Circle - 3 foot diameter
Goal Posts - 10 feet high
Goal Ring - 15 inch diameter
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Tracie M. Lutchmansingh, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Dire ctor
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL / 1001 LEWIS COVE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before Commission is consideration of a si dewalk deferral along Lewis Cove for property
located at 1001 Lewis Cove.
BACKGROUND
The applicant submitted a building permit applicati on to construct a new single family residence.
Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along Lewis Cove. The sidewalk deferral was
supported at the September 1, 2011 DSMG meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Tracie M. Lutchmansingh, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Dire ctor
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRAL / 975 BANYAN DRIVE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before Commission is consideration of a si dewalk deferral along Banyan Drive for property
located at 975 Banyan Drive.
BACKGROUND
The applicant submitted a building permit applicati on to construct a new single family residence.
Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along Banyan Drive. The sidewalk deferral was
supported at the October 6, 2011 DSMG meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 11, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL/LITTLE WOOD ESTATES
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before the City Commission is the certific ation of the final plat for an 1.08 acre residentia l
development containing three (3) single-family lots being platted as Little Wood Estates. T he subject
property is located at the south end of NW 1st Aven ue, between Woods Lane and Trinity Lutheran
Church.
BACKGROUND
The 1.08 acre property is a replat of a portion of Lot 12, in Section 8, Township 46 South, Range 43
East, of the Map showing subdivisions of portions o f Townships 45 and 46 South, Range 43 East, Plat
Book 1, Page 4, of the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The property is undeveloped.
The replat of the property will allow for developme nt of three (3) single-family homes. The property
will be divided into 3 lots, Tract “A”, which is being dedicated as a private street (Littl e Wood Lane),
and Tract “B”, which is a 50 feet wide right-of-way being dedicated for extension of NW 1st Avenue.
Water and sewer service will be provided within bot h roadways. Drainage and utilities (electric, phone ,
cable, and gas) will be provided within easements. A five foot landscape buffer surrounds the perimete r
of the property.
The City Commission approved the replat for this pr oject on June 20, 2006, but the plat was never
recorded. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(E)(5), if t he final plat is not recorded within eighteen (18)
months, the approval expires. Therefore, this Plat has been resubmitted for approval. Although minor
modifications have been made, the re-submittal is e ssentially the same as the previously approved Plat .
Plat Analysis:
City staff has reviewed the plat and determined tha t all technical comments have been satisfied.
Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1, prior to approval of development applications, certain findings must be
made in a form which is part of the official record . This may be achieved through information in the
application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the Board to approve or deny the
development application. As shown in the attached P lanning and Zoning Board staff report, positive
findings can be made with respect to Future Land Us e Map Consistency, Concurrency, Consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan, and Compliance with th e Land Development Regulations.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the Plat at its meeting of August 15, 2011, and recommended
approval by a vote of 6 to 0.
Courtesy Notices:
Courtesy notices were provided to the following gro ups and neighborhood associations:
• Neighborhood Advisory Council
• Delray Citizen’s Coalition
• Lake Ida Property Owners
To date, no letters of objection to or support for the Plat have been received. Any future letters of
support or objection will be presented at the City Commission meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval for the Little Wood Estates Plat , by adopting the findings of fact and law containe d in
the staff report and finding that the request and a pproval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensiv e
Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(J) (Major Subdivisions), Section 3.2.3 (Standar ds
for Site Plan and/or Plat Actions) and Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings) of the Land Development
Regulations.
Little Wood Estates
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Timothy Tack, Project Manager ESD/CRA
Richard C. Hasko, Environmental Services Director
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 11, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Request for Commission approval/authorization for M ayor to execute Agreement Amendment #1
between Palm Beach County and the City of Delray Be ach for the Auburn Avenue project (#2010-040)
to extended the deadline for completion.
BACKGROUND
Palm Beach County has entered into a contract with the State of Florida, Department of Community
Affairs, in connection with the State’s 2005 Disast er Recovery Initiative Program – Supplemental
Appropriation, which the State is implementing for grant funds provided by the US Department of
Housing and Urban Development under its Community D evelopment Block Grant Program. Delray
Beach was allocated funds under this contract to im plement specified activities under the 2005 Disaste r
Recovery Initiative Program.
The improvements associated with this project are i n coordination with the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) and are part of the Southwest Area Nei ghborhood Redevelopment Plan. The attached
map provides the location for this project. Improv ements include; roadway resurfacing and
reconstruction, sidewalks, landscaping, design buil d irrigation, drainage improvements, on street
parking (where space is available), bus shelters (i f required), new water mains and sanitary sewer
infrastructure.
The purpose of this amendment is to extend the dead line for the agreement from October 22, 2011 to
October 21, 2012.
FUNDING SOURCE
This agreement will allow for reimbursement to the City of up to $1,000,000 for the improvements
associated with the project. Grant funding is provi ded by the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development under its Community Development Block G rant Program.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Agreement Amendmen t #1 between Palm Beach County and the City
of Delray Beach.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Linda R. Karch, Director of Parks and Recreati on
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/PALM BEACH COUNTY/DROWNING PREVENTION
COALITION (DPC)
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Request approval to renew the Interlocal Agreement with Palm Beach County Drowning Prevention
Coalition ("DPC") for payment of swimming lesson cl asses to individuals who present vouchers issued
by the DPC Learn to Swim Program.
BACKGROUND
The County through its Drowning Prevention Coalitio n's Learn to Swim Program, distributes vouchers
to the public which may be redeemed for swimming le ssons at Pompey Park Pool and Delray Swim and
Tennis Pool. The County reimburses the City up to $50.00 per voucher. This is the sixth year the Cit y
of Delray Beach has entered into an agreement with Palm Beach County to provide swimming lessons.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Agreeme nt with Drowning Prevention Coalition's Learn to
Swim Program for payment of swimming lesson fees no t to exceed $50.00 per voucher.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD/316 N.W. 6TH AVENU E
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilit ation grant(s) to be awarded to the lowest
responsive bidder in the amount of $28,090.46. Fund ing for the projects is through the CDBG and
RCMP Housing Rehabilitation and grant.
BACKGROUND
Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilit ation grant(s) to be awarded to the lowest
responsive bidder for the following projects:
316 NW 6 th Avenue/Raymond Graeve & Sons Cons, Inc./$27,216=To tal Rehab cost: $28,090.46
Grant awards are based on the actual cost of the re habilitation, as determined by the low responsive
bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost also includes lead inspection, lead abatement, lead
clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, a nd recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost m ay
be incurred for lead clearance test(s). The conting ency may be used for change orders and all unused
funds will remain with the CDBG and RCMP Housing Re habilitation program. Inspection of work is
done by the Department of Community Improvement’s Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services
Divisions. Contracts are executed between the build ing contractor and the property owner. The City
remains the agent and this office monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance
according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require both contractor and
homeowner’s signatures. Grant recipients have met all eligibi lity requirements as specified in the
approved Policies and Procedures. The rehabilitatio n activities will bring the homes to minimum code
requirements by repairing the roof, electric and pl umbing systems and correcting other incipient code
violations. Detailed work write-ups and individual case files are available for rev iew in the
Neighborhood Services Division Office.
The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible f or ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contrac ts
are awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, as a r esult of a formal bid process. Therefore, an in-house
policy was created to limit awards to the lowest re sponsive bidder as it relates to the Division’s
professional in-house estimate. This serves to disqualify unreasona bly low bids and therefore, protect
against the resulting change order requests.
Mr. Bowers is a City employee that has applied for assistance through the City’s Housing Rehabilitation
Programs. Mr. Bowers has been qualified for eligibi lity through the same process applicable to all
applicants and will receive the same benefits avail able to all eligible applicants under the City
program. A letter was received from HUD dated Septe mber approving the Wavier of Employee Conflict
of Interest for Mr. Bowers. The Palm Beach County C ommission on Ethics issued an opinion on a
similar matter dated July 25, 2011 which allowed em ployee participation in the County NSP program as
outlined in the attached letter. The City also plac ed an advertisement of Notice of Employee
Participation in the August 6, 2011, Palm Beach Pos t.
FUNDING SOURCE
Community Development Block Grant 118 -1963 -554 -49.19 $ 23,522.96
Residential Construction Mitigation Program 118 -1936 -554 -49.19 $ 4,567.50
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends awarding one (1) Housing Rehabilit ation grant award(s) to be awarded to the lowest
responsive bidder in the amount of $28,090.46.
BID/QUOTE #: 13-2011NS
APPLICANT:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
DATE OF BID LETTERS: April 26, 2011
DATE OF BID OPENING: May 23, 2011
GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND
Abisset Corporation
All Phase Roofing 29,670.00 $ Yes
All-Site Construction, Inc.
ARZ Builders, Inc.28,270.00 $
Built Solid Construction, LLC 26,615.00 $ Yes
Citywide Construction Services, Inc.
CJ Contracting, LLC 31,276.00 $ Yes
Cordoba Construction Co.
Jemstone Construction Group, Inc.
JIJ Construction Corp.
KM Construction Inc.
MacDonald Construction Company of Palm Beach
Raymond Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc.25,920.00 $ Yes
South Florida Construction Services, Inc.27,105.00 $ Yes
Sunband Builders Construction Inc.
In-House Estimate:24,996.55 $
RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: Raymond Graeve & Sons Constru ction, Inc.
BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT :25,920.00 $
5% Contingency 1,296.00 $
27,216.00 $
Lead Inspection N/A
Lead Clearance N/A
Termite Inspection N/A
Termite Treatment 855.36
Recording Fees 19.10
GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 28,090.46
FUNDING SOURCE:Community Development Block Grant (CDB G)
Account #118-1963-554-49.19$23,522.96
118-1936-554-49.19$4,567.50
COMMENTS:Staff recommends awarding one (1) Housing Reha bilitation project to be awarded to
the lowest responsive bidder.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
BID INFORMATION SHEET
Richard Bowers
316 NW 6th Avenue
Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP)
BID /QUOTE NUMBER:13-2011NS
OWNER:
ADDRESS: 316 NW 6th Avenue
BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE:April 26, 2011
BID OPENING DATE:May 23, 2011
Richard Bowers
In-
H
o
u
s
e
Abi
s
s
e
t
Cor
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
All
P
h
a
s
e
R
o
o
f
i
n
g
All-
S
i
t
e
Con
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
I
n
c
.
AR
Z
B
u
i
l
d
e
r
s
,
Inc
.
Bui
l
t
S
o
l
i
d
Con
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
LLC
CJ
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
n
g
,
LLC
.
Ray
m
o
n
d
G
r
a
e
v
e
& Son
s
Con
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
I
n
c
.
Sou
t
h
F
l
o
r
i
d
a
Con
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Ser
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
Sun
B
a
n
d
Bui
l
d
e
r
s
1 Replace Soffit and Fascia 92.30 $ 170.00 $ 250.00 $ 150.00 $ 288.00 $ 175.00 $ 155.00 $
2 House Numbers 50.00 $ 40.00 $ 50.00 $ 85.00 $ 22.00 $ 30.00 $ 90.00 $
3 Hurricane Shutters 2,450.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 3,850.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 2,940.00 $
4 Install Exterior Door 1,450.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,750.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 1,050.00 $ 1,320.00 $
5 Paint House Complete 1,925.25 $ 2,120.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 1,860.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 2,210.00 $
6 Remove Replace Decorative Trim 475.00 $ 400.00 $ 750.00 $ 465.00 $ 388.00 $ 350.00 $ 215.00 $
7 Repair All Windows 770.00 $ 910.00 $ 850.00 $ 940.00 $ 650.00 $ 575.00 $ 450.00 $
8 Repair Post Trim 85.00 $ 210.00 $ 300.00 $ 475.00 $ 400.00 $ 220.00 $ 90.00 $
9 Install Base Trim 135.00 $ 780.00 $ 350.00 $ 785.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 575.00 $ 120.00 $
10 Install Cabinets and Counter Top 6,600.00 $ 5,850.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 4,375.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 5,100.00 $ 7,400.00 $
11 Install Carpet 1,376.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,875.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,925.00 $ 2,850.00 $
12 Install Ceramic Floor Tile 1,417.50 $ 3,500.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 1,580.00 $
13 Install Interior Door 400.00 $ 325.00 $ 900.00 $ 295.00 $ 250.00 $ 300.00 $ 430.00 $
14 Paint Interior Complete 1,912.50 $ 2,300.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 1,875.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 2,375.00 $ 1,975.00 $
15 Repair Drywall 736.00 $ 300.00 $ 400.00 $ 665.00 $ 700.00 $ 325.00 $ 300.00 $
16 Install Vanity w/Sink 1,050.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,060.00 $ 1,275.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,025.00 $ 1,430.00 $
17 Install Water Heater 675.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 695.00 $ 800.00 $ 675.00 $ 545.00 $
18 Repair Toilet 190.00 $ 400.00 $ 250.00 $ 200.00 $ 400.00 $ 225.00 $ 420.00 $
19 Install Exterior Light Fixture 230.00 $ 200.00 $ 175.00 $ 175.00 $ 210.00 $ 200.00 $ 85.00 $
20 Repair Ele. Service 1,350.00 $ 1,430.00 $ 750.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,130.00 $
21 Repair Kitchen Overhead Lighting 475.00 $ 615.00 $ 450.00 $ 785.00 $ 700.00 $ 395.00 $ 280.00 $
22 Replace Exhaust Fan 322.00 $ 585.00 $ 260.00 $ 550.00 $ 800.00 $ 240.00 $ 290.00 $
23 Smoke Detectors 600.00 $ 975.00 $ 650.00 $ 650.00 $ 800.00 $ 725.00 $ 690.00 $
24 Install Rangehood 230.00 $ 390.00 $ 900.00 $ 465.00 $ 368.00 $ 135.00 $ 110.00 $
TOTAL 24,996.55 $ -$ 29,670.00 $ -$ 28,270.00 $ 26,615.00 $ 31,276.00 $ 25,920.00 $ 27,105.00 $ -$
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.G. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/CONTRACT AWARD/212 NW 14TH AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Approval is requested for one (1) NSP Housing Rehab ilitation project to be awarded to the selected
general contractor for acquired NSP properties for the total amount of $39,018.
BACKGROUND
On February 21, 2010, the City publicized a Request for Qualification (RFQ 08-2010NS) to obtain
qualified firms and/or individuals to execute misce llaneous services, including: General Contractor
Service Providers for NSP properties, contingent on the same being approved by the Florida
Department of Community Affairs, and were subsequen tly approved by Commission. In October 2010,
Commission approved additional general contractors to work on NSP properties.
Project awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive
bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost may include lead inspection, lead abatement, lead
clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, a nd recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost m ay
be incurred for lead clearance test(s). The conting ency may be used for change orders and all unused
funds will remain with the NSP Housing Rehabilitati on program. Inspection of work is done by Gil
Valdes, Inc. (approved through RFP 11-2010NS at the June 15, 2010 Commission meeting), the
Department of Community Improvement’s Building Insp ection and Neighborhood Services
Divisions. Contracts are executed between the build ing contractor and the City. A contractual
agreement is signed by Gil Valdes, Inc. and the con tractor with each award.
The City remains the agent and this office and hous ing inspector monitors all work performed by the
contractor, ensuring compliance according to specif ications and program guidelines. Pay request forms
require both contractor and City representative’s s ignature ensuring all City approved Policies and
Procedures have been adhered to. The rehabilitation activities will bring the homes to minimum code
requirements by repairing the roof, electric and pl umbing systems and correcting other incipient code
violations prior to resale. Detailed work write-ups and individual case files are available for review in
the Neighborhood Services Division Office. The Neig hborhood Services Division is responsible for
ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts are awarded on a rotating basis to the approved
contractors, as a result of a formal bid process.
This housing rehabilitation project for 212 NW 14th Avenue is recommended for award to All Phase
Roofing & Construction for $39,018.
FUNDING SOURCE
Neighborhood Stabilization Program 118-1935-554-62.12
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending the approval for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation project to be a warded to selected
general contractor per RFQ 08-2010NS and RFQ 08-2010NS(A) for the total amount of
$39,018.
BID #: 02-2012NS
PROJECT ADDRESS:
DATE OF BID LETTERS: September 14, 2011
DATE OF BID OPENING: October 6, 2011
GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND
All Phase Roofing & Construction, Inc 37,160.00 $ Y
All Site Construction
C J Contracting, LLC 37,924.00 $ Y
Florida Community Development Services, Inc.
Haywood Construction 38,960.00 $ Y
J M W Construction Corp.
SW Marlow General Contractors
In-House Estimate:35,790.30
RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: All Phase Roofing & Construction
BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT :$37,160.00
Contingency:5%1,858.00
$39,018.00
FUNDING SOURCE:DCA-Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Account #118-1935-554-62.12
COMMENTS:Staff recommends lowest responsible bidder.
Revised 12/7/10 FFM
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
BID INFORMATION SHEET
212 NW 14th Avenue
Neighborhood Services Division
Bid Estimate Summary
Bid Number:02-2012NS
OWNER:
ADDRESS:
BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE:
BID OPENING DATE:
In-House All Phase Roofing &
Construction
C J Contracting
LLC
Haywood
Construction
1 Install Flat Deck Roof - Shed 500.10 $ 1,000.00 $ 400.00 $ 1,400.00 $ -$ -$
2 Install New Roof 5,501.60 $ 4,150.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ -$ -$
3 Replace Soffit & Fascia 599.95 $ 830.00 $ 230.00 $ 800.00 $ -$ -$
4 House Numbers 75.00 $ 34.00 $ 20.00 $ 30.00 $ -$ -$
5 Install Exterior Door 1,100.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 1,200.00 $ -$ -$
6 Install Impact Windows 6,000.00 $ 5,660.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 5,800.00 $ -$ -$
7 Paint House Complete 2,000.00 $ 2,185.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 2,500.00 $ -$ -$
8 Install Landscape 2,268.60 $ 1,020.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ -$ -$
9 Irrigation System 1,500.00 $ 1,880.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 2,000.00 $ -$ -$
10 Install Carpet 1,101.00 $ 1,765.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 700.00 $ -$ -$
11 Install Interior Door 1,100.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,600.00 $ -$ -$
12 Install Medicine Cabinet 150.00 $ 140.00 $ 80.00 $ 150.00 $ -$ -$
13 Install Wood Baseboard 552.00 $ 975.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 500.00 $ -$ -$
14 Paint Room Complete 2,002.00 $ 2,290.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ -$ -$
15 Repair Base and Wall Cabinets 900.00 $ 580.00 $ 750.00 $ 175.00 $ -$ -$
16 Repair Drywall/Apply Knockdown 2,025.00 $ 1,490.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 1,900.00 $ -$ -$
17 Install Tub/Shower 2,000.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 2,400.00 $ -$ -$
RECO Install Vanity w/Sink 525.00 $ 1,015.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,400.00 $ -$ -$
19 Repair Drin Lines 600.05 $ 500.00 $ 600.00 $ 800.00 $ -$ -$
20 Reuse Kitchen Sink 250.00 $ 450.00 $ 100.00 $ 275.00 $ -$ -$
21 Carbon Monoxide/Smoke Detectors w/Arc Fault 600.00 $ 570.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 850.00 $ -$ -$
22 Install Exterior Light Fixture 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 100.00 $ 40.00 $ -$ -$
23 Install Interior Light Fixture 125.00 $ 130.00 $ 100.00 $ 40.00 $ -$ -$
24 Repair Electrical Service 700.00 $ 1,070.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,400.00 $
25 Upgrade Electric to 150 Amp Service 1,065.00 $ 2,340.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,400.00 $
26 Appliances 1,800.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 1,894.00 $ 1,700.00 $
27 Repair A/C Unit 250.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,400.00 $
28 Replace Ceramic Tile Floor 300.00 $ 286.00 $ 200.00 $ 300.00 $
29
30 0 -$ -$ -$ -$
TOTAL 35,790.30 $ 37,160.00 $ -$ 37,924.00 $ -$ 38,960.00 $ -$ -$ #-$
212 NW 14th Avenue
City of Delray Beach
October 6, 2011
September 14, 2011
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.H. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CHANGE FUNDING SOURCE FROM DRI TO CDBG/HOUSING REHABILITATION
CONTRACT AWARD
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission approval to change the funding sour ce on the Housing Rehabilitation Grant awarded
at the regular meeting of September 6, 2011 for pro perty located at 354 NW 6th Avenue from Disaster
Relief Initiative (DRI) to Community Block Grant (C DBG). Staff is also recommending aproval to
exceed the maximum housing rehabilitation cost, est ablished at $37,000 for an individual property
under the Department's approved Policies and Proced ures, for this property to accommodate the total
bid award at $37,875.95.
BACKGROUND
Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilit ation grant to be awarded exceeding the maximum
allowed to the lowest responsive bidder for the fol lowing project:
354 NW 6 th Avenue/South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $36,670.00 = Total Rehab Cost:
$37,875.95
City Commission approved the rehabilitation award f or 354 NW 6 th Avenue on September 6, 2011 for
$37,875.95. The actual costs for termite inspectio n, lead-based paint testing and additional recording
fees added to the project cost create the need to e xceed the maximum project cost. The cost breakdown
is:
Housing Rehabilitation $35,670.00
Contingency 1,000.00
Lead Inspection 325.00
Lead Clearance 85.00
Termite Treatment 706.75
Recording Fees 89.20
FUNDING SOURCE
Community Development Block Grant 118-1963-554-49.1 9
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the change of funding source from DRI to CDBG and approval to exceed
the maximum housing rehabilitation cost of $37,000, accommodating the $37,875.95 bid award.
BID/QUOTE #: 13-2011NS
APPLICANT:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
DATE OF BID LETTERS: April 27, 2011
DATE OF BID OPENING: May 23, 2011
GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND
Abisset Corporation
All Phase Roofing
All-Site Construction, Inc.
ARZ Builders, Inc.
Benchmark Custom Building of Palm Beach
Built Solid Construction, LLC 40,975.00 $ Yes
Citywide Construction Services, Inc.
CJ Contracting, LLC 40,403.00 $ Yes
Cordoba Construction Co.
Jemstone Construction Group, Inc.
JIJ Construction Corp.
KM Construction Inc.
MacDonald Construction Company of Plam Beach
Ray Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc.42,410.00 $ Yes
South Florida Construction Services, Inc.35,670.00 $ Yes
Sunband Builders Construction Inc.
In-House Estimate:34,814.11 $
RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: South Florida Construction Servic es, Inc.
BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT :35,670.00 $
Contingency 1,000.00 $
36,670.00 $
Lead Inspection 325.00
Lead Clearance 85.00
Termite Inspection
Termite Treatment 706.75
Recording Fees 89.20
GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 37,875.95
FUNDING SOURCE:Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Account #
COMMENTS:Recommend awarding project to the lowest responsive bidder.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DIVISION
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
BID INFORMATION SHEET
Daisy Manning
354 NW 6th Avenue
118-1963-554-49.19
BID /QUOTE NUMBER:13-2011NS
OWNER: Daisy Manning
ADDRESS: 354 NW 6th Avenue
BID ADVERTISEMENT DATE:April 27, 2011
BID OPENING DATE:May 23, 2011
In-
H
o
u
s
e
A bi sse
t
C orp
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
A ll P
has
e
R oof
i
n
g
A ll -S
ite
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
I
n
c
.
A R Z B
u
i
l
der
s
,
Inc
.
B enc
h
m
a
r
k
C ust
o
m
B
u
i
l
di ng
of P
a
l
m B
eac
h
B ui l t S
oli d
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
LLC
C J C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
n
g
,
LLC
.
C i tyw
i de
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
S erv
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
C ord
o
b
a
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
C om
p
a
n
y
,
I
n
c
.
Jem
s
t
o
n
e
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Gro
u
p
,
I
n
c
.
JIJ
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
C orp
.
K M C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Inc
.
Mac
D
ona
l
d
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
C
o
of P
a
l
m B
eac
h
R ay
G
r
a
e
v
e
&
S ons
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
I
n
c
.
S
o
u
t
h
F
l
orid
a
C ons
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
S erv
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
S un
B
a
n
d
B ui l der
s
1 Globial Encasement 3,281.25 $ 2,300.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 5,800.00 $
2 Remove All Window Sills 3,150.00 $ 1,495.00 $ 900.00 $ 1,975.00 $ 1,680.00 $
3 Remove Exterior door 1,300.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 $
4 Remove Fascia 420.00 $ 1,475.00 $ 600.00 $ 1,575.00 $ 345.00 $
5 Install 4ply Built up Roof 567.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,475.00 $ 1,500.00 $
6 Replace Soffit and Fascia 193.83 $ 1,100.00 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 65.00 $
7 House numbers 50.00 $ 85.00 $ 22.00 $ 30.00 $ 75.00 $
8 Hurricane Shutters 3,990.00 $ 4,150.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 4,675.00 $ 3,980.00 $
9 Install Exterior Door 2,175.00 $ 2,025.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,800.00 $
10 Installl New Windows 6,175.00 $ 6,650.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 6,100.00 $ 4,750.00 $
11 Paint House Complete 1,721.83 $ 2,400.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 2,650.00 $ 2,475.00 $
12 Repair Porch Structure 883.20 $ 3,800.00 $ 350.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 780.00 $
13 Install Ceramic Tile Fixture Set 325.00 $ 325.00 $ 700.00 $ 170.00 $ 150.00 $
14 Repair Drywall 920.00 $ 975.00 $ 800.00 $ 475.00 $ 400.00 $
15 Install Hi- Rise toilet 900.00 $ 495.00 $ 400.00 $ 725.00 $ 650.00 $
16 Install New Tub/Shower 1,800.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 2,140.00 $
17 Install Water Heater 515.00 $ 675.00 $ 800.00 $ 600.00 $ 775.00 $
18 Remove Tub and Install Shower 2,100.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 2,900.00 $ 2,440.00 $
19 Install 150 Amp Service 1,350.00 $ 1,325.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 1,850.00 $
20 Install Exterior Light Fixture 345.00 $ 275.00 $ 208.00 $ 285.00 $ 195.00 $
21 Install Interior Light Fixture 260.00 $ 350.00 $ 325.00 $ 300.00 $ 420.00 $
22 Repair ELE. Service 1,350.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,950.00 $ 1,150.00 $
23 Replace Exhaust Fan 322.00 $ 575.00 $ 599.00 $ 250.00 $ 600.00 $
24 Smoke Detector 720.00 $ 600.00 $ 899.00 $ 675.00 $ 900.00 $
TOTAL 34,814.11 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 40,975.00 $ 40,403.00 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 42,410.00 $ 35,670.00 $ -$
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Sharon L'Herrou, Administrative Officer
Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.I. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
GRANT APPLICATION/WALMART/HOLIDAY TOY PROGRAM
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The Police Department seeks approval for the submis sion of a grant application to Walmart in the
amount of $5,000. The award will support a Holiday Toy program for disadvantaged youth in
collaboration with local Law Enforcement Officers.
BACKGROUND
Historically, the Police Department has sponsored a Holiday Toy drive to help ensure that all the
children of our community have a healthy and happy holiday season. This grant would fund a program
where identified youth would "Shop with a Cop" and pick out their holiday toys with an officer. Adding
this component would improve the process by which t he level of need is identified. It also enriches th e
relationships between Law Enforcement and the commu nity.
FUNDING SOURCE
There is no match requirement.
RECOMMENDATION
The Police Department recommends approval.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 11, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.J. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/HOLIDAY PAGEANT PARADE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission is requested to endorse the Delray Beach Holiday Pageant Parade co-sponsored by
Parks and Recreation Department and Chamber of Comm erce to be held on December 10, 2011
beginning at approximately 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., to grant a temporary use permit per LDR’s Section
2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of Atlantic Avenue from A-1-A to NW 5 th Avenue for the parade route
and set up from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m . Commission is also requested to approve staff
support for traffic control, security, EMS assistan ce, barricading, trash removal, clean up and event
signage.
BACKGROUND
Attached is a Special Event permit received from Da nielle Beardsley requesting approval of this event
with a copy of the event site plan, budget and econ omic prosperity calculator. The parade will end on
NW 5 th Avenue again this year. Since the event is co-sponsored by the Parks and Recreation
Department, there will be no charges per City polic y for City costs and a Hold Harmless Agreement or
Certificate of Insurance is not required. The estim ated costs for the event which includes overtime,
barricade rental, signage and trash boxes are appro ximately $13,555.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the event, the tempora ry use permit and staff support as requested.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 11, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.K. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/ 23RD ANNUAL DOWNTOWN DELRAY FESTIVAL OF ARTS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission is requested to endorse the 23 rd Annual Downtown Delray Festival of the Arts
sponsored by Howard Alan Events, Ltd. to be held Ja nuary 21-22, 2012, from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
to grant a temporary use permit per LDR’s section 2 .4.6(F) for use of City rights-of-way on Atlantic
Avenue from the east side of NE/SE 6 th Avenue to Bronson and the Gladiola lot (SE 6 th Avenue) for
vendor parking, to authorize staff support for secu rity and traffic control, barricade assistance, EMS
assistance, fire inspection services, and to permit an event sign to be erected on Atlantic Avenue jus t
east of I-95 fourteen (14) days prior to the event.
BACKGROUND
Attached are an event permit application, site plan , budget, Economic Prosperity Calculator, Certifica te
of Insurance and Hold Harmless Agreement for this e vent. Howard Alan Events, Ltd. will be
conducting the 23 rd Annual Downtown Delray Festival of the Arts on Jan uary 21 st and 22 nd from 10:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Alan is requesting closure of Atlantic Avenue, from just east of NE/SE 6 th
Avenue east to Bronson. He is also requesting barri cading assistance and security and traffic control
assistance from the Police Department. Mr. Alan has indicated that he will rent barricades and City st aff
will install them. He is also requesting use of the Gladiola lot (SE 6 th Avenue) for vendor
parking. Because of the size of this event, EMS and Inspector services will be required. The estimated
overtime cost for City services is $10,654. Per Ev ent Policies and Procedures, Mr. Alan will pay 100%
for overtime costs, as well as provide for trash re moval, clean up, port-a-lets and signage, which he will
pay for. Signage can be installed fourteen (14) day s prior to the event and must be less than 20 squar e
feet.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends endorsement of the event, granting of the temporary use permit for the street closure
and parking lot use as recommended by staff, provid ing staff assistance for traffic control and securi ty,
barricading, EMS assistance, fire inspection servic es, and allowing the event sign to be installed
fourteen (14) days prior to the event, with all Cit y costs to be paid by the vendor. Approval is to in clude
use of the Gladiola lot (NE 6 th Avenue) for vendor parking, with City staff instal ling rented barricades.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Jasmin Allen, Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 13, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.L. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is revi ew of appealable actions which were taken by
various Boards during the period of October 3, 2011 through October 14, 2011.
BACKGROUND
This is the method of informing the City Commission of the land use actions, taken by designated
Boards, which may be appealed to the City Commissio n. After this meeting, the appeal period shall
expire (unless the 10 day appeal period has not occ urred). Section 2.4.7(E), Appeals, of the LDRs
applies. In summary, it provides that the City Comm ission hears appeals of actions taken by an
approving Board. It also provides that the City Com mission may file an appeal. To do so:
· The item must be raised by a Commission member.
· By motion, an action must be taken to place the ite m on the next meeting of the Commission as an
appealed item.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting of Oc tober 12, 2011
A. Approved (5 to 0, Scott Porten and Nick Sadowsky ab sent), a request for a color change to
recover existing awning structures for Blue Gallery , located at the southeast corner of East
Atlantic Avenue and SE 6 th Avenue (600 East Atlantic Avenue).
B. Approved with conditions (4 to 1, Roger DeCapito di ssenting), a request to reconsider the
landscape plan associated with a Class II site plan modification which includes removal of
existing landscaping and installation of three tree grates along SE 2 nd Avenue, to accommodate
a sidewalk café for the Sushi Restaurant , located at the southeast corner of East Atlantic
Avenue and SE 2 nd Avenue (32 SE 2 nd Avenue).
C. Approved (5 to 0), a Class I site plan modification request associated with architectural
elevation changes to the storefront for PGA Tour Superstore (former Ross, The Linen Store
and Rose Vine Winery), located at the southwest cor ner of Linton Boulevard and SW 10 th
Avenue (1100 Linton Boulevard).
D. Approved (4 to 1, Rustem Kupi dissenting) , a Class I site plan modification associated with the
replacement of awnings for Delray Commercial Center , located at the northeast corner of
Congress Avenue and SW 10 th Street (975 South Congress Avenue).
E. Approved with conditions (3 to 2, Roger DeCapito an d Rustem Kupi dissenting), a Class I site
plan modification associated with architectural ele vation changes involving the installation of an
awning for Spoon Fed , located on the northwest corner of East Atlantic Avenue and the FEC
Railway (217 East Atlantic Avenue).
F. Approved with conditions (5 to 0), a Class II site plan modification request associated with
extensive modifications to the existing landscape p lan and photometric plan including the
introduction of 35’ high light poles in a portion o f the site for Palm Tran South County
Satellite Facility , located at the northwest corner of Congress Avenu e and NW 1 st Street (100
North Congress Avenue).
G. Approved with conditions (4 to 0, Shane Ames left t he meeting), a Class III site plan
modification associated with the conversion of a po rtion of the existing 7,041 sq. ft. club house
at the Village at Delray development for the Milagro Center child care facility. The day care
will occupy a 4,114 sq. ft. area while the clubhous e will now occupy 2,927 sq. ft. The Milagro
Center is located on the east side of Auburn Avenue , south of SW 6 th Street (675 Auburn
Avenue).
H. Approved with conditions (4 to 0), a Class III site plan modification, landscape plan and
architectural elevation plan associated with the in terior conversion of two existing automotive
service bays to retail use for the expansion of the existing convenience store for Gasland , located
at the southwest corner of NE 4 th Street and NE 5 th Avenue (398 NE 5 th Avenue).
RECOMMENDATION
By motion, receive and file this report.
Attachment: Location Map
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David Boyd, Finance Director
Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Manager
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
BID AWARD/LV SUPERIOR LANDSCAPING, INC./STORM RETENTION ARE AS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission is requested to approve bid award t o LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. for landscape
maintenance of Stormwater Retention Areas, Bid #201 1-30 for the estimated annual total $33,049.36,
this is a savings of $4,798 compared to the previou s annual contract for this service.
BACKGROUND
Bid #2011-05 for landscape maintenance of stormwater retentio n areas was awarded to Vila and Sons
Landscaping Corp. on April 5, 2011. On August 5, 20 11 Vila and Sons Landscaping Corp. informed the
City that they would no longer be in operation.
Bid #2011-30 was opened on September 14, 2011. Eleven (11) co ntractors submitted bids all in
accordance with City purchasing policies and proced ures. This is a one (1) year contract with two (2)
one year renewals.
LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. was the apparent low responsive bidder. The department reviewed
references and equipment to ensure that they were a ble to fulfill the contract obligations.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding from account code 448-5416-538-34.90, Storm water Utility Fund/Other Contractual Services.
RECOMMENDATION
Department and Purchasing staff recommend award to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. for the landscape
maintenance of the Stormwater Retention Areas for a n estimated annual total of $33,049.36.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
BID # 2011-30
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE STORMWATER RETENTION AREAS
ANNUAL CONTRACT
Bid Opening: September 14, 2011
VENDOR ==>
I.MOWING, TRIMMING, EDGING RETENTION AREAS:
Total Per Month 1,335.45 $ mo.1,320.00 $ mo.1,320.00 $ mo.1,222.66 $ mo.1,665.80 $ mo.1,485.00 $ mo.
Total Per Year 16,025.40 $ yr.15,840.00 $ yr.15,840.00 $ yr.14,671.92 $ yr.19,989.60 $ yr.17,820.00 $ yr.
II.FERTILIZING (ADD ON ALTERNATE):
Total Per Month 184.33 $ mo.200.00 $ mo.180.00 $ mo.150.00 $ mo.216.00 $ mo.275.00 $ mo.
Total Per Year 2,211.96 $ yr.2,400.00 $ yr.2,160.00 $ yr.1,800.00 $ yr.2,592.00 $ yr.3,300.00 $ yr.
Total Items I & II - Per Month 1,519.78 $ mo.1,520.00 $ mo.1,500.00 $ mo.1,372.66 $ mo.1,881.80 $ mo.1,760.00 $ mo.
Total Items I & II - Per Year 18,237.36 $ yr.18,240.00 $ yr.18,000.00 $ yr.16,471.92 $ yr.22,581.60 $ yr.21,120.00 $ yr.
ADDITIONAL RETENTION POND AREAS
Area #1 Lindell Blvd. and South Dixie Hyw.3,288.00 $ yr.3,920.00 $ yr.3,932.00 $ yr.4,414.00 $ yr.3,910.40 $ yr.4,760.00 $ yr.
A - NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area 3,958.00 $ yr.3,780.00 $ yr.4,792.00 $ yr.5,838.00 $ yr.4,338.70 $ yr.5,980.00 $ yr.
B - NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area 3,604.00 $ yr.4,260.00 $ yr.4,330.00 $ yr.5,690.00 $ yr.4,104.94 $ yr.5,500.00 $ yr.
C- NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area 3,962.00 $ yr.3,880.00 $ yr.4,090.00 $ yr.5,684.00 $ yr.4,281.40 $ yr.5,570.00 $ yr.
Addional Area Total14,812.00 $ yr.15,840.00 $ yr.17,144.00 $ yr.21,626.00 $ yr.16,635.44 $ yr.21,810.00 $ yr.
ANNUAL TOTAL33,049.36 $ 34,080.00 $ 35,144.00 $ 38,097.92 $ 39,217.04 $ 42,930.00 $
III.PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
1Sod Replacement (sq. ft. price)0.48 $ sf$2.00sf$0.65sf$0.50sf$0.75sf$0.65sf
2Plant & Tree Installation (labor per hour per man)21.75 $ hr$75.00hr$30.00hr$18.00hr$19.50hr$28.00hr
3Fertilizing (labor per hour per man)21.75 $ hr$25.00hr$30.00hr$18.00hr$19.50hr$28.00hr
4Additional Pest Control - Gallon 69.60 $ gal$250.00gal$100.00gal$85.00gal$87.00gal$125.00gal
(price per 50 gal. application of insecticide)
5Additional Pest Control - Pound 69.60 $ lb$250.00lb$75.00lb$85.00lb$87.00lb$100.00lb
(price per 50 lb. application of insecticide)
6Fire Ant Control (labor per hour per man)21.75 $ hr$25.00hr$30.00hr$25.00hr$91.00hr$28.00hr
ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUESTED
♦LIST OF EQUIPMENT ATTACHED ( Yes / No )YesYesYesYesYesYes
♦LIST OF CURRENT ACCOUNTS ( Yes / No)YesYesYesYesYesYes
♦# OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES 2444041780
♦# OF YEARS AS A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR1625661723
♦DELRAY BEACH OCCUPATION LICENSE # PBC200710104NoNo1104282811000275681200041099
♦STATE APPLICATORS LICENSE #JE104922018FL00012039NoContractorP97000094813JE104922
♦LIST/ATTACHED OF FERT//CHEM TO BE USED ( Yes / No )YesYesYesYesHand PulledYes
♦REFERENCES SUBMITTED ( Yes / No )YesYesYesYesYesYes
Property Svrs.
Alpha Scape Lawn
& Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping
LV SuperiorTareWorld Class GatorComplete
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
BID # 2011-30
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE STORMWATER RETENTION AREAS
ANNUAL CONTRACT
Bid Opening: September 14, 2011
VENDOR ==>
I.MOWING, TRIMMING, EDGING RETENTION AREAS:
Total Per Month
Total Per Year
II.FERTILIZING (ADD ON ALTERNATE):
Total Per Month
Total Per Year
Total Items I & II - Per Month
Total Items I & II - Per Year
ADDITIONAL RETENTION POND AREAS
Area #1 Lindell Blvd. and South Dixie Hyw.
A - NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area
B - NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area
C- NE 3rd Avenue-Retention Area
Addional Area Total
ANNUAL TOTAL
III.PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
1Sod Replacement (sq. ft. price)
2Plant & Tree Installation (labor per hour per man)
3Fertilizing (labor per hour per man)
4Additional Pest Control - Gallon
(price per 50 gal. application of insecticide)
5Additional Pest Control - Pound
(price per 50 lb. application of insecticide)
6Fire Ant Control (labor per hour per man)
ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUESTED
♦LIST OF EQUIPMENT ATTACHED ( Yes / No )
♦LIST OF CURRENT ACCOUNTS ( Yes / No)
♦# OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
♦# OF YEARS AS A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR
♦DELRAY BEACH OCCUPATION LICENSE #
♦STATE APPLICATORS LICENSE #
♦LIST/ATTACHED OF FERT//CHEM TO BE USED ( Yes / No )
♦REFERENCES SUBMITTED ( Yes / No )
100.00 $ mo.1,986.00 $ mo.1,490.00 $ mo.1,595.00 $ mo.2,900.00 $ mo.
1,200.00 $ yr.23,832.00 $ yr.17,880.00 $ yr.19,140.00 $ yr.34,800.00 $ yr.
30.00 $ mo.220.00 $ mo.210.00 $ mo.1,595.00 $ mo.400.00 $ mo.
360.00 $ yr.2,640.00 $ yr.2,520.00 $ yr.19,140.00 $ yr.4,800.00 $ yr.
130.00 $ mo.2,206.00 $ mo.1,700.00 $ mo.3,190.00 $ mo.3,300.00 $ mo.
1,560.00 $ yr.26,472.00 $ yr.20,400.00 $ yr.38,280.00 $ yr.39,600.00 $ yr.
(Vendor Error)
10,640.00 $ yr.5,686.00 $ yr.6,050.00 $ yr.5,090.00 $ yr.6,645.00 $ yr.
10,640.00 $ yr.6,560.00 $ yr.8,760.00 $ yr.6,210.00 $ yr.9,125.00 $ yr.
10,640.00 $ yr.4,694.00 $ yr.7,900.00 $ yr.5,400.00 $ yr.7,905.00 $ yr.
10,640.00 $ yr.4,576.00 $ yr.8,040.00 $ yr.5,760.00 $ yr.8,135.00 $ yr.
42,560.00 $ yr.21,516.00 $ yr.30,750.00 $ yr.22,460.00 $ yr.31,810.00 $ yr.
44,120.00 $ 47,988.00 $ 51,150.00 $ 60,740.00 $ 71,410.00 $
$95.00sf$3.00sf$0.75sf$0.75sf$0.80sf
$15.00hr$30.00hr$25.00hr$28.75hr$25.00hr
$15.00hr$30.00hr$25.00hr$28.75hr$25.00hr
$100.00gal$4.00gal$100.00gal$80.00gal$100.00gal
$100.00lb$4.00lb$100.00lb$80.00lb$100.00lb
$15.00hr$30.00hr$25.00hr$28.75hr$25.00hr
NoYesYesYesYes
YesYesYesYesYes
46302912
4662923
11000489601000045361PBCBT2010154991100046780No
JE12958CM20937NoJE136670LC181256
PartialYesYesYesYes
YesYesYesYesYes
Wesley Lawn Wizard
USA
Tree Huggers Palm Beach
Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping Property Works
Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Linda R. Karch, Director of Parks and Recreati on
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.2 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
BID AWARDS/LV SUPERIOR LANDSCAPING, INC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before Commission to consider awarding two (2) bids to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. in
the amount of $19,696.94 for Landscape Maintenance of Lake Ida Road Medians, South Federal
Highway and Congress Avenue.
BACKGROUND
Staff recommends awarding two (2) bids in the amoun t of $19,696.94 to the second lowest contractor,
LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. for the following:
Bid# 2011 -28: In the amount of $6,665.05 for Landscape Mainten ance of Lake Ida Road
Medians-between Swinton & I-95.
Bid # 2011 -29: In the amount of $13,031.89 for Area A- South Federal Highway and Area
B-Congress Avenue.
LV Superior Landscaping, Inc. has met all the requi rements as a City of Delray Beach contractor for th e
areas listed Bid# 2011-28 and Bid# 2011-29.
The lowest bidder, Wesley Landscaping failed to pre sent staff with complete bid packages, and their
bids are considered to be non-responsive. On Bid #2 011-28 they did not provide a list of current
maintenance equipment, and they did not provide an indication that they had a pesticide license. On
Bid #2011-29 they did not provide an equipment lis t.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding is available from Beautification Fund Accou nt # 119-4144-572-46.40 (Beautification
Maintenance).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends awarding contract Bid# 2011-28 and Bid# 2011-29 to LV Superior Landscaping, Inc.
BID OPENING: SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 @ 11:00 A.M.CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
LAKE IDA ROAD MEDIANS
(Between Swinton I95)
BID #2011-28 Annual Contract
World Clas s 1st Nationa
Landscaping
ITEM Annual Property
#DESCRIPTIONQuantity Management
1Weed Control24 $50.47$62.68$77.58$70.00$80.00$90.00$80.00$50.00$18 0.00$75.00$80.00$100.00
2Pruning
a.Shrubs12 $90.00$131.92$151.80$148.00$160.00$175.00$158.00$20 0.00$200.00$125.00$200.00$185.00
b.Trees & Palms12 $50.00$58.88$70.15$65.00$75.00$75.00$28.00$20.00$75 .00$150.00$25.00$100.00
3Litter Control260 $4.00$5.37$7.25$6.00$4.50$8.00$10.00$5.00$3.00$18.5 0$20.00$55.00
4Chemical Applications
a.Shrub Insecticide Program(As needed, see rates for additional work)
b.Fire Ant Control(As needed, see rates for additional work)
c.Disease Control(As needed, see rates for additional work)
e.Palm Tree Fertilizer3 $124.00$200.07$226.80$100.00$100.00$130.00$45.00$70 .00$75.00$175.00$180.00$200.00
f.Shade Tree Fertilization2 $65.00$65.57$71.50$100.00$70.00$75.00$90.00$125.00$100.00$175.00$200.00$250.00
g.Shrub Fertilization3 $60.00$71.56$196.80$100.00$70.00$220.00$110.00$300.00$175.00$225.00$200.00$205.00
5Mulch3 $145.00$176.30$325.00$300.00$500.00$400.00$1,200.00 $1,500.00$700.00$700.00$800.00$250.00
TOTAL BID PRICE ( ACTUAL )
ERROR ON SHEET==>BID BY VENDOR
PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
6.a.Plant & Tree Installation $19.00$24.03$17.50$25.00$30.00$30.00$50.00$30.00$28 .00$28.75$30.00$30.00
(labor per hour/per man)
6.b.Fertilizing $18.00$24.03$20.00$25.00$30.00$30.00$25.00$30.00$28 .00$28.75$25.00$40.00
(labor per hour/per man)
6.c.Additional Pest Control $18.00$17.80$45.00$165.00$135.00$100.00$250.00$200.00$125.00$150.00$125.00$100.00
(price per 50 gallon application
of insecticide)
6.c.Additional Pest Control $18.00$17.80$45.00$165.00$135.00$45.00$125.00$150.0 0$100.00$100.00$125.00$100.00
(price per 50 gallon application
of insecticide)
6.d.Fire Ant Control $19.00$24.03$31.00$25.00$35.00$30.00$25.00$30.00$28 .00$28.75$25.00$30.00
(labor per hour/per man)
Florida Certified Pesticide Application License NOYESNOYESNONONOYESYESYESYESYES
List of Current Maintenance Equipment Listed N0YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES
References Listed YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES
City of Delray Occupational License NONOYESYESYESNONOYESYESYESYESYES
Acknowledged Addendum's 1 & 2 YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESNO
Federal Tax I.D #61-156892020-494131465-088777220-209240090-073380137-1507 10226-427782226-058024735-221072087-072010603-051806027-1 080466
$1,800.00
$1,500.00
$1,800.00
$4,810.00
$525.00
$350.00
$675.00
$2,100.00
$13,560.00
Palm Beach
Landscape
Maintenance Inc.
$2,400.00
$2,220.00
Huggers &Pro p ert y Service s
TreeComplete
of South FL
$4,320.00
$22,585.00
Property
Works
Outsourcing
Property Maint.
Services
$1,920.00
$2,400.00
$300.00$1,200.00
$14,300.00
$600.00
$500.00
$615.00
$750.00
$10,997.00 $9,640.00
$150.00
$336.00
$2,600.00
$240.00
$1,300.00
$210.00
$600.00
$2,400.00
$13,760.00
$250.00
$900.00
$4,500.00
$11,000.00
$5,200.00
$540.00
$400.00
$1,200.00
$2,400.00
Nursery
$180.00
$6,664.33$7,266.32 $9,720.00 $11,275.00
$300.00
$900.00
$7,496.00
$590.40
$975.00
$1,896.00
Wizard USA
$1,861.92 $1,920.00 $2,160.00
$131.14
$214.68
$8,799.12
$143.00
$1,920.00 $1,680.00
Contractors
$1,920.00
Tare
Landscaping Landcaping, Inc.
$8,060.00
Superior
Alpha
$200.00
$390.00
$2,100.00
$2,080.00
$1,776.00
$780.00
$680.40
$1,821.60
$841.80
$1,885.00
$900.00
$1,170.00
$300.00
$140.00
Wesley Scape
LV
GatorLawn
LandscapingLandscaping
$1,211.28
$1,080.00
$600.00
$1,040.00
$706.56
$1,396.20
$600.21
$1,504.32
$1,583.04
$372.00
$130.00
$180.00
$435.00
$11,450.00
$2,400.00
$900.00
$780.00
$225.00
$5,048.28
$528.90
$6,665.05
$900.00
$210.00 $525.00
$2,100.00 $1,500.00
$660.00
$1,200.00$3,600.00
$330.00
$200.00
$135.00
$1,560.00
$300.00
BID OPENING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE
Tabulation Bid No 2011-29
L V Complete
Area (a) South Federal Highway WesleySuperiorProperty of SouthTare Lawn WizardWorld Class
(Between Linton Blvd. & C-15 Canal)LandscapingLandscaping, Inc.FloridaLandscapingUSA In c.Landscape
Item #DescriptionQty Unit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensio nUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtension
1Weed Control 24 $20.00$480.00$34.71$833.04$50.00$1,200.00$35.00$840 .00$40.000$960.00$38.00$912.00
2Mowing 44 $10.00$440.00$10.71$471.24$10.00$440.00$9.00$396.00 $12.000$528.00$10.50$462.00
3Pruning
a. Shrubs 12 $100.00$1,200.00$121.49$1,457.88$100.00$1,200.00$12 0.00$1,440.00$135.000$1,620.00$135.00$1,620.00
b. Trees & Palms 12 $17.00$204.00$17.36$208.32$25.00$300.00$15.00$180.0 0$20.000$240.00$20.00$240.00
c. Accent Trees 6 $20.00$120.00$27.77$166.62$35.00$210.00$35.00$210.0 0$30.000$180.00$32.00$192.00
4 Litter Control (5 time a week)260 $2.00$520.00$3.47$902.20$3.00$780.00$2.99$777.40$3.000$780.00$3.50$910.00
5Chemical Applications
a. Shrub Insecticide Program As Needed (See rates for additional work)
b. Fire Ant Control As Needed (See rates for additional work)
c. Disease Control As Needed (See rates for additional work)
d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00$180.00$34.71$104.13$40.00$120.00$35.00$105.0 0$40.000$120.00$36.00$108.00
e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 $60.00$180.00$69.42$208.26$75.00$225.00$75.00$225.0 0$80.000$240.00$72.00$216.00
6Mulch 3 $520.00$1,560.00$225.62$676.86$300.00$900.00$295.00 $885.00$300.000$900.00$275.00$825.00
Denotes calculation error by vendo r $5,015.6 0
AREA (A)TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6)$4,884.00$5,028.55$5,375 .00$5,058.40$5,568.00$5,485.00
Area (b) Congress Avenu e
(Between Lake Ida & South to C-15 Canal)
Item #DescriptionQty Unit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensio nUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtension
1Weed Control 24 $20.00$480.00$69.42$1,666.08$100.00$2,400.00$80.00$1,920.00$80.000$1,920.00$70.00$1,680.00
2Mowing 0 $0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.000$0.00 $0.00$0.00
3Pruning
a. Shrubs 12 $100.00$1,200.00$121.49$1,457.88$150.00$1,800.00$13 9.00$1,668.00$135.000$1,620.00$135.00$1,620.00
b. Trees & Palms 12 $17.00$204.00$52.07$624.84$50.00$600.00$49.00$588.0 0$60.000$720.00$60.00$720.00
c. Accent Trees 6 $20.00$120.00$52.07$312.42$50.00$300.00$60.00$360.0 0$50.000$300.00$60.00$360.00
4 Litter Control (5 time a week)260 $2.00$520.00$5.55$1,443.00$3.00$780.00$4.99$1,297.4 0$5.000$1,300.00$7.00$1,820.00
5Chemical Applications
a. Shrub Insecticide Program As Needed (See rates for additional work)
b. Fire Ant Control As Needed (See rates for additional work)
c. Disease Control As Needed (See rates for additional work)
d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00$180.00$69.42$208.26$75.00$225.00$80.00$240.0 0$80.000$240.00$70.00$210.00
e. Shrub Fertilizer 3 $60.00$180.00$69.42$208.26$75.00$225.00$180.00$540.00$75.000$225.00$70.00$210.00
f. Shade Tree Fertilizer 3 $60.00$180.00$104.13$312.39$100.00$300.00$80.00$240 .00$90.000$270.00$105.00$315.00
6Mulch 3$520.00$1,560.00$590.07$1,770.21$600.00$1,800.00$6 80.00$2,040.00$700.000$2,100.00$650.00$1,950.00
AREA (B)TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6)$4,624.00$8,003.34$8,430 .00$8,893.40$8,695.00$8,885.00
Denotes calculation error by vendor $8,004.13
$13,019.72
GRAND TOTAL BID PRICE AREA'S (A) AND (B)$9,508.00$13,031.8 9$13,805.00$13,951.80$14,263.00$14,370.00
1
BID OPENING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE
Tabulation Bid No 2011-29
LV Complete
WesleySuperiorProperty of SouthTare Lawn WizardWorld Class
LandscapingLandscaping, Inc.FloridaLandscapingUSA In c.Landscape
PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
A.Sod Replacement $14.00$0.28$0.65$2.00$0.75$65.00
per square feet
B.Plant & Tree Installation $18.00$22.25$28$50$25 $30
Labor per hour/per man
C.Fertilizing $18.00$22.25$28$25$25 $30
Labor per hour/per man
D.Additional Pest Control
Price per 50 gallon application-insecticide $18.00$44.50$125$250$100 $100
Price per 50 pound application-insecticide $18.00$44.50$100$180$100 $45
E.Fire Ant Control $19.00$22.25$28$25$25 $30
Labor per hour/per man
F.Hurricane Debris Removal $18.00$22.25$28$50$35 $30
Labor per hour/per man
Valid Florida Certified Pesticide Applicator's License?YES YESNOYESYESNO
Valid Certified Arborist (ISA) CertificationNONONOYESyesNO
Federal I.D. #61-156892020-494131435-221072026427782220-209240037-1507 102
Equipment List Submitted?NOYESYESYESYESYES
Drug Free Workplace Certification Signed?NOYESYESYESYESYES
References?YESYESYESYESYESYES
2
BID OPENING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE
Tabulation Bid No 2011-29
Area (a) South Federal Highway
(Between Linton Blvd. & C-15 Canal)
Item #DescriptionQty
1Weed Control 24
2Mowing 44
3Pruning
a. Shrubs 12
b. Trees & Palms 12
c. Accent Trees 6
4 Litter Control (5 time a week)260
5Chemical Applications
a. Shrub Insecticide Program
b. Fire Ant Control
c. Disease Control
d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3
e. Shrub Fertilizer 3
6Mulch 3
Denotes calculation error by vendo r
AREA (A)TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6)
Area (b) Congress Avenu e
(Between Lake Ida & South to C-15 Canal)
Item #DescriptionQty
1Weed Control 24
2Mowing 0
3Pruning
a. Shrubs 12
b. Trees & Palms 12
c. Accent Trees 6
4 Litter Control (5 time a week)260
5Chemical Applications
a. Shrub Insecticide Program
b. Fire Ant Control
c. Disease Control
d. Palm Tree Fertilizer 3
e. Shrub Fertilizer 3
f. Shade Tree Fertilizer 3
6Mulch 3
AREA (B)TOTAL BID PRICE (Items 1 thru 6)
Denotes calculation error by vendor
GRAND TOTAL BID PRICE AREA'S (A) AND (B)
1st National A lpha Tree Huggers
Outsourcing PropertyScape Landscaping &Gator
Maint. ServicesContractorsProperty WorksNursery, LLCLandsc aping
Unit PriceExtension Unit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensio n
$45.00$1,080.00 $35.00$840.00$50.00$1,200.00$40.00$960.00$41.00$984 .00
$10.00$440.00 $15.00$660.00$15.00$660.00$9.50$418.00$14.00$616.00
$125.00$1,500.00 $130.00$1,560.00$136.00$1,632.00$150.00$1,800.00$14 1.50$1,698.00
$15.00$180.00 $20.00$240.00$22.50$270.00$20.00$240.00$25.80$309.6 0
$30.00$180.00 $30.00$180.00$35.50$213.00$30.00$180.00$35.40$212.4 0
$5.00$1,300.00 $4.00$1,040.00$5.00$1,300.00$5.00$1,300.00$8.00$2,0 80.00
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
$40.00$120.00$45.00$135.00$50.00$150.00$40.00$120.0 0$41.00$123.00
$80.00$240.00$75.00$225.00$68.00$204.00$25.00$75.00 $81.00$243.00
$300.00$900.00$400.00$1,200.00$325.00$975.00$500.00 $1,500.00$275.00$825.00
$7,268.0 0
$5,940.00$6,080.00$6,604.00$6,593.00$7,091.00
Unit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensionUnit PriceExtensio nUnit PriceExtension
$60.00$1,440.00$65.00$1,560.00$78.00$1,872.00$50.00 $1,200.00$81.00$1,944.00
$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00
$150.00$1,800.00$176.00$2,112.00$160.00$1,920.00$17 5.00$2,100.00$138.00$1,656.00
$60.00$720.00$70.00$840.00$70.00$840.00$60.00$720.0 0$61.00$732.00
$60.00$360.00$65.00$390.00$70.00$420.00$50.00$300.0 0$61.00$366.00
$5.00$1,300.00$4.00$1,040.00$5.00$1,300.00$5.00$1,3 00.00$8.00$2,080.00
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
As Needed (See rates for additional work)
$80.00$240.00$66.50$199.50$75.00$225.00$75.00$225.0 0$81.00$243.00
$80.00$240.00$66.50$199.50$75.00$225.00$95.00$285.0 0$81.00$243.00
$100.00$300.00$87.50$262.50$150.00$450.00$85.00$255 .00$121.00$363.00
$700.00$2,100.00$790.00$2,370.00$700.00$2,100.00$1,000.00$3,000.00$691.50$2,074.50
$8,500.00$8,973.50$9,352.00$9,385.00$9,701.50
$16,953.00
$14,440.00$15,053.50$15,956.00$15,978.00$16,792.50
3
BID OPENING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONGRESS AVENUE
Tabulation Bid No 2011-29
PRICING FOR ADDITIONAL WORK (IF NEEDED)
A.Sod Replacement
per square feet
B.Plant & Tree Installation
Labor per hour/per man
C.Fertilizing
Labor per hour/per man
D.Additional Pest Control
Price per 50 gallon application-insecticide
Price per 50 pound application-insecticide
E.Fire Ant Control
Labor per hour/per man
F.Hurricane Debris Removal
Labor per hour/per man
Valid Florida Certified Pesticide Applicator's License?
Valid Certified Arborist (ISA) Certification
Federal I.D. #
Equipment List Submitted?
Drug Free Workplace Certification Signed?
References?
1st National Alpha Tree Huggers
Outsourcing Property Scape Landscaping &Gator
Maint. Services ContractorsProperty WorksNursery, LLCLandscaping
$0.85$55.00$3.00$2.00$0.48
$25$30$23$30$28
$20$30$25$30$28
$100$65$125$4$52
$100$70$100$4$52
$25$35$25$35$31
$35$28$25$40$21
YES NOYESYESYES
NO NOYESYESNO
03-0518060 90-073380187-072010626-058024765-088772
YES NOYESYESYES
YES YESYESYESYES
YES YESYESYESYES
4
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Randal L. Krejcarek, P.E., LEED AP, GISP, City Engineer
Richard C. Hasko, PE, Environmental Services Direct or
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 5, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.3 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CONTRACT AWARD/INTERCOUNTY ENGINEERING, INC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the Commission for approval/aut horization for Mayor to execute a construction
contract with Intercounty Engineering, Inc. for con struction of a water main upgrade on SW 10th Ave
from SW 2nd St to W Atlantic Ave. Cost of this cont ract is $237,142.00. Project #2011-047.
BACKGROUND
This project is to upgrade an existing 2” water main on SW 10th Ave from SW 2nd St to W Atlan tic
Ave., including the micro-surfacing of SW 10th Ave. This upgrade is part of the City-Wide Water
Main Upgrade Master Plan.
The bid tabulation and a location map are attached.
FUNDING SOURCE
442-5178-536-68.76
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval.
BID TABULATION
SW 10th Ave Water Main Upgrade
Project # 2011-047
Printed : 10/10/2011
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION ENGINEER'S
ESTIMATE INTERCOUNTY FOSTER
MARINE
JOHNSON-
DAVIS CARIBE CENTERLINE SUN UP
1 Site Mobilization 14,000.00 $ 11,292.008,000.0012,200.0018,100.0 012,750.0015,000.00
2 Maintenance of Traffic 10,000.00 $ 2,588.004,500.004,400.003,100.003,500.003,800.00
3 NPDES/Erosion Control 400.00 $ 489.00250.001,000.001,870.001 ,350.001,500.00
4 Clearing and Grubbing, Demolition and Disposal 3,000.00 $ 1,419.009,000.006,000.002,415.00 4,000.004,800.00
5 6" Thick Concrete Driveway Repair 8,000.00 $ 7,200.0010,000.008,000.0017,440.0011,000.009,000.00
6 Asphalt Driveway Repair 9,000.00 $ 6,800.008,000.007,000.007,480.00 6,800.004,000.00
7 5' wide, 6" thick Conc. Sidewalk Construction 2,700.00 $ 1,350.002,025.003,600.003,825.00 5,400.002,227.50
8 Pavement Marking and Signage 1,900.00 $ 2,243.002,000.002,000.00873.803,450.002,500.00
9 Sodding (Bahia)1,787.50 $ 1,925.002,337.502,750.003,025.00 1,650.001,650.00
10 6" PVC Watermain 4,200.00 $ 2,940.003,720.002,700.002,544.00 2,100.001,710.00
11 8" PVC Watermain 84,960.00 $ 50,740.0074,340.0066,080.0055,578.0077,290.0042,480.00
12 6" Gate Valves 4,000.00 $ 4,032.003,800.004,800.003,496.40 3,800.006,000.00
13 8" Gate Valves 6,000.00 $ 4,712.005,600.00 6,000.00 4,694.805,000.007,400.00
14 8" Flange (Plug)125.00 $ 289.00150.00300.00216.501,700 .00350.00
15 6" x 6" Tapping Sleeve and Valve 3,000.00 $ 4,091.002,800.005,200.003,788.60 3,650.003,800.00
16 8" x 6" reducer 600.00 $ 268.00180.00400.00300.00330.0 0450.00
17 Fire Hydrant Assembly & 6" Gate Valve 6,750.00 $ 8,754.009,600.0013,500.009,240.0 011,400.0011,400.00
18 Watermain Testing Appurtenances/Sample Points 900.00 $ 1,040.00800.001,500.00890.008 00.001,600.00
19 Water Services - Single 20,000.00 $ 12,820.0018,000.0017,000.0019,400.0013,000.0030,000.00
20 Water Services - Double 15,600.00 $ 12,857.0018,525.0012,480.0019,266.0012,675.0027,300.00
21 Sewer Lateral Reconstruction and Relocation 6,300.00 $ 25,382.007,000.0011,200.0016,800 .0018,200.0014,000.00
22 New 6" PVC Sewer Service Construction 3,000.00 $ 4,314.003,600.002,100.003,200.00 9,000.003,600.00
23 Remove Existing 2" Watermain 12,425.00 $ 10,650.008,875.007,100.006,567.503 ,550.008,875.00
24 Remove Existing 8" Watermain & Valve 400.00 $ 480.00260.00240.00732.00640.0 0600.00
25 Reconnect Existing Water Services 4,050.00 $ 4,698.004,050.0013,500.009,774.0 014,850.0027,000.00
26 Micro-Surfacing 35,875.00 $ 38,500.0035,000.0033,250.0041,650.0034,125.0034,930.00
27 Crack Sealant 5,100.00 $ 5,800.005,700.005,600.007,200.00 4,800.008,000.00
28 Miscellaneous Fittings 144.00 $ 159.00180.00216.00 2,170.08 450.003,600.00
29 Allowances -Video Recordings 300.00 $ 300.00300.00300.00300.00300.0 0300.00
30 Allowances - Utility 5,000.00 $ 5,000.005,000.005,000.005,000.00 5,000.005,000.00
31 Allowances - Irrigation 4,000.00 $ 4,000.004,000.004,000.004,000.00 4,000.004,000.00
32 Indemnification 10.00 $ 10.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010 .00
TOTAL EVALUATED BASE BID
BID ITEMS 1 through 32 (in numbers)273,526.50 $ 237,142.00 $ 257,602.50 $ 259,426.00 $ 274,946.68 $ 276,570.00 $ 286,882.50 $
TOTAL EVALUATED BASE BID
BID ITEMS 1 through 32 (in words)
S W 1 0 th A v e W ate r M a in Upg r ade S0 ea t eaU p ga d e
N
4/25/2011Delray Beach GIS
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Timothy Tack, Project Manager ESD/CRA
Richard C. Hasko, P.E. Environmental Services Direc tor
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 6, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.4 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CONTRACT AWARD/LINE -TEC INC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Requesting Commission approval of a contract with L ine-Tec, Inc. for relocating water services as part
of the Osceola Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan; Pro ject #2010-082. Total cost of this contract is
$70,681.00
BACKGROUND
In December 2004 City Commission approved the Osceo la Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. For
purposes of this plan the neighborhood is bordered by SE 5th Avenue (Federal Highway southbound)
on the east; Swinton Avenue on the west; SE 2nd Str eet on the north; and SE 10th Street on the south.
The purpose of this Redevelopment Plan was to fulfi ll the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and
provide the framework for the revitalization of the entire neighborhood. The City and representatives
from the neighborhood met numerous times to discuss implementation of the redevelopment plan
recommendations. It was agreed that assessable elem ents of the plan would not be implemented at this
time, and that the non-assessable underground infra structure would be constructed.
On June 07, 2011, City Commission awarded a constru ction contract to Intercounty Engineering, Inc.
for the installation of 5,340 linear feet of 8 inch Ductile Iron water main, connection of water servi ces
located in the front of the property, and installat ion of fire hydrants as part of the Osceola Neighbo rhood
Redevelopment Plan.
The scope of this Line-Tec contract consists of relocating 80 existing wat er services located in the rear
of the properties and connecting them to the new wa ter services that were installed as part of the
construction contract awarded to Intercounty Engine ering, Inc. The estimate by Line-Tec, Inc. is based
on the current competitively bid contract with the City of Boynton Beach for “Supply and Installation of
Water Service Connections and Restoration”, Bid #03 3-2821-10/JA. Upon award, Line-Tec, Inc. will
execute the "Standard Form of Agreement between the City and Contractor."
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding will be available from account # 442-5178-5 36-65.85, upon budget transfer.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval.
Estimate
Date
9/28/2011
Estimate #
3481
Name / Address
City of Delray Beach
434 South Swinton Ave
Delray Beach, Fl 33444 P.O. No.Terms
Net 30
Project
Osleola Park Transfers
Signature _____________________________________
Total
241 NW 18th Avenue | Delray Beach, Fl 33444 | Ph: 561.374.9494 | Fax: 561.737.3827 | www.linetecinc.com
Description Qty Cost Total Item
This estimate is for the transfer of the water services from the rear
of the property to the new meter boxes located in the front. Work
will include the removal of the old meter box, transfer of the
existing water meter, noting the removed reading. Reconnection
of the water service at an appropriate location nearest the existing
house service connection. Reconnection of any irrigation systems
on the house that uses potable water. All new services will be
schedule 40 PVC of either 1" or 1-1/4" diameter pipe. Reports will
be generated to note the location of the meter, length of the line
and date completed.
This estimate is based on are annual contact with The City of
Boyn ton Beach Bid #033-2821-10/JA Expires June 1, 2012 and the
City of Delray will only be billed for item/Qty installed.
House connection 80 300.00 24,000.00 001
1" Schedule 40 PVC water pipe and sod restoration over trench,
furnish and install
7,621 5.00 38,105.00 002
Furnish and Install 1-1/4" SCH 40 PVC Water Service Pipe 1,118 7.00 7,826.00 021
Reconnect existing sprinkler connection at the house 10 75.00 750.00 024
$70,681.00
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David A. Boyd, Finance Director
Richard Hasko, Environmental Services Director
Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Manager
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 10, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.5 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
PURCHASE AWARD/AIRGAS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The City Commission is requested to approve a blank et purchase in the amount of $107,000 for the
purchase and delivery of liquid carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) as needed from Airgas at $0.0975 lb./$195.00 ton
per proposal dated 08/29/2011. Pricing firm for on e (1) year with a two (2) year renewal option.
BACKGROUND
For 2010/11 fiscal year the City Commission approve d the purchase of liquid carbon dioxide from
Praxair, Inc. via the City of West Palm Beach bid A greement at $194.74 per ton as needed.
On June 8, 2011 Praxair notified the City that they will only be able to provide 50% of the current
required supply and Commission approved Airgas for delivery of CO 2. Prior to the award to Airgas,
staff had also contacted Air Liquide America who wa s unable to supplement our supply at that time and
their price was higher as well . As of September 2011 the City has not received an y update from Praxair
and the Water Treatment staff would like to continu e with Airgas for purchase of this product.
Carbon dioxide is essential to the water treatment process. The water from the wells has a pH in the
mid-7 range. Lime is added to raise the pH to 10.2 whi ch is the point where calcium precipitates out for
the softening process. After the lime softening pr ocess, carbon dioxide is added to bring the pH back to
a mid-7 range for the finished water product.
If we were to reduce the carbon dioxide dosage, the finished water would have a higher pH. After
extensive Lead and Copper testing, we have found th at we get the best results with a pH of 7.5 in the
distribution system. It is best to continue using the current amount of carbon dioxide for this reaso n.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding is available from 441-5122-536-52.21 (Water and Sewer Fund: Operating
Supplies/Chemicals).
RECOMMENDATION
The Water Treatment Plant recommends a blanket purc hase order in the amount of $107,000. to Airgas
for purchase and delivery of Liquid Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ) to be ordered “as needed” per proposal dated
08/29/2011. Pricing firm for one (1) year with a t wo (2) year renewal option.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David Boyd, Finance Director
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement
Patsy Nadal, Purchasing Director
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 10, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.6 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
PURCHASE AWARD/OTTO WASTE SYSTEMS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The City Commission is requested to approve a blank et purchase order in the amount of $50,000.00
for purchase of hot stamped garbage carts, lids and wheels to be ordered “as needed” from Otto Waste
Systems as a sole source provider. The blanket purc hase will cover a period of 10.18.2011 through
09.30.2012.
BACKGROUND
Otto Environmental System was approved by City Comm ission as a sole source vendor for the purchase
of the hot stamped garbage carts that are provided to the citizens of Delray Beach. Otto Industries, I nc.
is the original vendor for the purchase of these ca rts since their initial "roll-out" in 1996.
The sizes of garbage carts required by the City are 95 gallon “Classic” @ $53.00 each; 65 gallon
“Classic” @ $46.75 each and 35 gallon “Evolution” @ $37.00 including attached lids and wheels per
quote dated 10/10/2011. The carts has a forest green body, black lid, rubbe r tires and hot stamped with
the City Logo and serial numbers.
Garbage carts are order and shipped in full trucklo ad quantities for cost savings and in various sizes as
needed and freight is included in the pricing from Charlotte, NC to Delray Beach, FL.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding is available from 433-3711-534-49.35 (Sanitation Fund: Other Current Charges/Cart Renewal
& Replacement).
RECOMMENDATION
The Commun ity Improvement Department recommends a blanket purchase order in the amount of
$50,000.00 for the purchase of garbage carts with l ids and wheels from Otto Waste Systems as a sole
source vendor to be ordered “as needed”.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Victor Majtenyi; Deputy Director of Public Uti lities
Richard C. Hasko; Director of Environmental Service s Department
THROUGH:David Harden; City Manager
DATE:October 11, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.7 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
PURCHASE AWARD/ THE DUMONT COMPANY, INC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Request City Commission approve a blanket purchase order in the amount of $51,200 to The Dumont
Company, Inc. The award is for Fiscal Year 2011/201 2 for the purchase and delivery of Sodium
Hypochlorite on an “as needed” basis to remote boos ter station locations.
BACKGROUND
Sodium hypochlorite is used as a disinfectant/antim icrobial agent. Currently the City purchases this
product from Sentry Industries in bulk tanker loads for other locations. Remote locations in Gulfstre am,
Owens Baker, and other booster station sites are li mited to small quantities between 500 gallons and
1,000 gallons and cannot accommodate a tanker size truck of 12,000 gallons due to truck
inaccessibility.
Minimum delivery for this product is 1,000 gallon f or most vendors, which is considered a small order
(or mini-bulk) for delivery. Two vendors can accommodate de liveries in smaller size quantities, from
250 and 1,000 gallons; Poolsure of South Florida at $1.35 per gallon (quote dated October 3, 2011) and
Dumont at $1.25 per gallon (quote dated October 5, 2011).
The estimated usage for this year is 40,000 gallons with an award requested at $51,200; the amount
approved in the division’s operating budget for FY 11/12.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding will from account 441-5123-536.52-21, Water Distribution/ Operating Supplies-Chemicals.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends a blanket purchase order for the p urchase of Sodium Hypochlorite “as needed” from
The Dumont Company, Inc. at a unit cost of $1.25 pe r gallon, for an estimated annual cost of
$51,200.00.
The Dumont Company, Inc. – 381 S. Central Ave., Ovi edo, FL 32765
800-330-1369 FAX: 800-524-9315
1
October 5, 2011
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Ave.
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Mr. Solomon:
Mr. Solomon,
In regards to the sodium hypochlorite used at the re-pump and booster stations. Dum ont
offers Odyssey’s Ultra Chlor product which is known for its high strength and cl arity.
Dumont offers the 12.5% Ultra Chlor in mini-bulk from 250 to 1000 gallon deliveries.
The product is produced from the purest ingredients and has virtually no metal
contaminants or suspended solids. In most cases, iron, nickel, copper, and other heavy
metal ions that catalyze bleach decomposition are below detectable le vels.
The Ultra Chlor is manufactured according to American Water Works Associa tion B300-
04 Standard for Hypochlorites at 12.5 trade percent available chlorine. There ar e other
hypochlorite concentrations listed in the B-300 standard, but 12.5 percent delivers the
best economy and performance for the Florida market. Sodium hypochlorite degra des
with age. Certain formula variables and conditions during storage and manufacturi ng
determine the stability of a hypochlorite product. The Odyssey proc ess maximizes shelf
life for all of the variables under our control. As illustrated in the Table bel ow, Florida
storage temperatures are simply not compatible with the higher B-300 hy pochlorite
concentrations. The issue is not simply one of lost product and higher usage. Of great er
concern are the sodium chlorate and oxygen produced in the decomposition reaction.
12.5% has a thirty-day shelf life under a variety of storage conditions and genera tes little
or no oxygen and/or chlorate. The Ultra Chlor is ANSI / NSF Standard 60 certified and
meets all repacking certifications to maintain the certification.
The Dumont Company, Inc. – 381 S. Central Ave., Ovi edo, FL 32765
800-330-1369 FAX: 800-524-9315
2
Dumont provides services that are second to none in the water and wastewater tre atment
industry. Dumont provides each system with an account manager, warehouse manager ,
operations manager and a delivery driver. This team works to ensure that all del iveries
are scheduled and made on time. This team will set up a delivery process ba sed on a
route, call-in basis or call-you basis (this is where a route scheduler calls you to confirm
which locations need product). Dumont also provides a 24 hour 7 day service in case of
an emergency situation. We understand that you currently have your own tanks and
containments at each location at this time, if ever in the future one of the tanks fai l
Dumont provides tanks and containments at no charge to its customers. (See attachme nt
for ANSI/NSF Standard 60)
We can provide the 12.5 % Sodium Hypochlorite at $1.25 per gallon.
Upon acceptance of the sodium hypochlorite offer, Dumont can offer pallets of the 100#
HTH used by the lift station crew for $130.00 per 100# pails. Each pallet has 16 100#
pails which Dumont would delivery to your warehouse, making the total per palle t
$2080.00. Another option is for Dumont to deliver a four (4) minimum per order for $140
per pail (or $560.00 for four) from Dumont’s Hollywood warehouse as needed with a
five to seven day delivery schedule.
We look forward to working with you in the near future, if you have any questions pleas e
contact me.
Best Regards
Kenny Williams
Technical Development Manager
The Dumont Co., Inc.
381 S. Central Ave., Oviedo, FL 32765
Tel: 800-330-1369
Cell: 352-303-5773
Fax: 800-524-9315
KennyW@dumontchemicals.com
October
City of D
434 Sou t
Delray B
To Who
Please b
the sam e
9/30/201
A ny que s
Sincerel y
Bill Gom e
3, 2011
elray Beach
t h Swinton
each, FL 3 3
m It May C o
b e advised t h
e for the up c
2.
s tions, plea s
y ,
e z
D
O ff
3 444
o ncern:
h at the Pric e
c oming year
s e contact o u
D ivisions of G
Division of G
4800 N W
Ft Laud e
ff ice 954
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Sharon L'Herrou, Administrative Officer
Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 13, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.M.8 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
PURCHASE AWARD/CDW -G/EMERGENCY VEHICLE SUPPLY (EVS)
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The Police Department requests approval to purchase and install 68 In-Car video systems in police
vehicles. The cameras will be purchased on a Federa l GSA contract from CDW-G at a price of
$5,101.08 each for a total purchase price of $346,8 73.44. The installation will be completed by EVS at a
cost of $345 each for a total amount of $23,460.
BACKGROUND
This equipment will be used daily during routine tr affic enforcement and community patrols. It has the
ability to secure solid evidence for criminal prose cution, real time recording of events, and enhanced
officer safety. It also reduces the likelihood of c ivil liability claims. Currently the Department onl y has
ten (10) such cameras deployed. Over the past coupl e of years, the purchase of additional cameras has
been deferred due to funding limitations. Purchase of the 68 requested here will allow the Department to
fully equip all of the take home Patrol vehicles as well as those vehicles used in high-risk situation s. In-
car video cameras have become an industry standard, and without them, our Department is falling
behind.
The cost of the cameras with CDW- G is under a GSA contract (#GS-35F-0143R).
EVS is the vendor of choice for the installation; t hey been selected as the Department’s vendor for work
on police vehicles. This selection was made based o n a variety of factors including: quality of work,
price, and speed/efficiency of service. Prior to th is shift, multiple vendors worked on the vehicles. Due
to the volume and complexity of equipment, a variet y of issues arose, including blame shifting between
vendors. Consolidating the work with one vendor eli minated that problem, reduced equipment costs,
and reduced staffing costs required to transport ea ch vehicle to multiple locations, as well as reduci ng
down time for vehicles.
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding in the amount of $156,000 has been approved in this year’s CIP (#334-2111-521-64.90, project
# 12-046). The remainder of the funding, $214,333.4 4, will come from the Department’s Federal
Forfeiture account (#115-2112-521-64.90).
RECOMMENDATION
The Police Department recommends approval.
SALES QUOTATION
Please remit payment to: CDW Government
CDW Government 230 North Milwaukee Ave.
75 Remittance Drive Vernon Hills, IL 60061
Suite 1515 General Phone: 847-371-5000 Fax: 847-419-6200
Chicago, IL 60675-1515 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312-705-8218
Page 1
5516432 10/12/2011 ZBL7914
MARLO DAHL CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
100 NW 1ST AVE 100 NW 1ST AVE
MANGT INFO SYSTEMS MANGT INFO SYSTEMS
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH MARLO DAHL
DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2612 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2698
Contact: MARLO DAHL 561-243-7865
5612437865 QTY 60 QUOTE
858012621559C4 Request Terms MIKE ZORICA 866-339-3535 UPS Ground
PANASONIC ARBITRATOR KIT MK2.0 1786726 60 265740.00 4429.00
Mfg#: PNB-ARBTR-KIT-360
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PAN ARBITRATOR REAR SEAT IR CAMERA 1408748 60 7024.80 117.08
Mfg#: PNB-CN258IR-P
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PANASONIC ARBITRATOR G-FORCE SENSOR 1466390 60 13680.00 228.00
Mfg#: PNB-TGS-3DP
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PANASONIC 1YR ARBITRATOR 360 SW MNT 2009219 60 17340.00 289.00
Mfg#: PAW-CF-SVCARB2AMA1Y
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
LIND ARBITRATOR DETECTOR CABLE 1603456 60 2280.00 38.00
Mfg#: LND-CBLMS-F00200
Contract: MARKET
------------ SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS -----------
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
SUBTOTAL 306064.80
FREIGHT .00
SALES TAX .00
US Currency
306,064.80
QUOTENO.
Page 2
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________ ______________________Total_|_______________________306,064.80
______________________________________________________________ ___________FMV_Lease_Option_|___________________8,8 05.48/Month
______________________________________________________________ ______________________Total_|_______________________306,064.80
______________________________________________________________ ___________$BO_Lease_Option_|___________________9,5 61.46/Month
Monthly payment based on 36 month lease. Other term s and options
are available. Contact you Account Manager for deta ils. Payment
quoted subject to change. **
===========================================================
Why finance?
* Lower Upfront Costs. Get the products you need wi thout
impacting cash flow. Preserve your working capital and
existing credit line.
* Flexible Payment Terms. 100% financing with no mo ney down,
payment deferrals and payment schedules that match your
company's business cycles.
* Predictable, Low Monthly Payments. Pay over time. Lease
payments are fixed and can be tailored to your budg et levels
or revenue streams.
* Technology Refresh. Keep current technology with minimal
financial impact or risk. Add-on or upgrade during the lease
term. And choose to return or purchase the equipmen t at end
of lease.
* Bundle Costs. You can combine hardware, software, and
services into a single transaction! Which means you can
pay for your software licenses over time. We know y our
challenges and understand the need for flexibility.
General Terms and Conditions:
**This quote is not legally binding and is for disc ussion
purposes only. The rates are estimate only and are based on a
collection of industry data from numerous sources. All rates
and financial quotes are subject to final review, a pproval, and
documentation by our leasing partners. Payments abo ve exclude
all applicable taxes. Financing is subject to credi t approval
and review of final equipment and services configur ation. Fair
Market Value leases are structured with the assumpt ion that
the equipment has a residual value at the end of th e lease term.
SALES QUOTATION
Please remit payment to: CDW Government
CDW Government 230 North Milwaukee Ave.
75 Remittance Drive Vernon Hills, IL 60061
Suite 1515 General Phone: 847-371-5000 Fax: 847-419-6200
Chicago, IL 60675-1515 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312-705-8218
Page 1
5516432 10/12/2011 ZBL8067
MARLO DAHL CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
100 NW 1ST AVE 100 NW 1ST AVE
MANGT INFO SYSTEMS MANGT INFO SYSTEMS
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH MARLO DAHL
DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2612 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444-2698
Contact: MARLO DAHL 561-243-7865
5612437865 QTY 8 QUOTE
858012621559C4 Request Terms MIKE ZORICA 866-339-3535 FEDEX Ground
PANASONIC ARBITRATOR KIT MK2.0 1786726 8 35432.00 4429.00
Mfg#: PNB-ARBTR-KIT-360
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PAN ARBITRATOR REAR SEAT IR CAMERA 1408748 8 936.64 117.08
Mfg#: PNB-CN258IR-P
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PANASONIC ARBITRATOR G-FORCE SENSOR 1466390 8 1824.00 228.00
Mfg#: PNB-TGS-3DP
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
PANASONIC 1YR ARBITRATOR 360 SW MNT 2009219 8 2312.00 289.00
Mfg#: PAW-CF-SVCARB2AMA1Y
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
LIND ARBITRATOR DETECTOR CABLE 1603456 8 304.00 38.00
Mfg#: LND-CBLMS-F00200
Contract: MARKET
------------ SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS -----------
Contract: SYNNEX GSA SCHEDULE (SLED)
GS-35F-0143R
SUBTOTAL 40808.64
FREIGHT .00
SALES TAX .00
US Currency
40,808.64
QUOTENO.
Page 2
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________ ______________________Total_|________________________40,808.64
______________________________________________________________ ___________FMV_Lease_Option_|___________________1,1 99.77/Month
______________________________________________________________ ______________________Total_|________________________40,808.64
______________________________________________________________ ___________$BO_Lease_Option_|___________________1,3 07.10/Month
Monthly payment based on 36 month lease. Other term s and options
are available. Contact you Account Manager for deta ils. Payment
quoted subject to change. **
===========================================================
Why finance?
* Lower Upfront Costs. Get the products you need wi thout
impacting cash flow. Preserve your working capital and
existing credit line.
* Flexible Payment Terms. 100% financing with no mo ney down,
payment deferrals and payment schedules that match your
company's business cycles.
* Predictable, Low Monthly Payments. Pay over time. Lease
payments are fixed and can be tailored to your budg et levels
or revenue streams.
* Technology Refresh. Keep current technology with minimal
financial impact or risk. Add-on or upgrade during the lease
term. And choose to return or purchase the equipmen t at end
of lease.
* Bundle Costs. You can combine hardware, software, and
services into a single transaction! Which means you can
pay for your software licenses over time. We know y our
challenges and understand the need for flexibility.
General Terms and Conditions:
**This quote is not legally binding and is for disc ussion
purposes only. The rates are estimate only and are based on a
collection of industry data from numerous sources. All rates
and financial quotes are subject to final review, a pproval, and
documentation by our leasing partners. Payments abo ve exclude
all applicable taxes. Financing is subject to credi t approval
and review of final equipment and services configur ation. Fair
Market Value leases are structured with the assumpt ion that
the equipment has a residual value at the end of th e lease term.
Qu otation
4661 JOHNSON ROAD - SU ITE 1
Tel. 954-428-5201 * Fax 954-428-5202
COCO NU T C RE EK, FL 33073
Go od Thru
12 /30/1 1
Quote Num ber:12901
Quote Da te :Oc t 12 , 2 011
PO Numbe r
Quoted to:DELRA Y BEACH PD
30 0 W.ATLANTIC AVE
DELRA Y BEACH , FL 33 44 4
Custom er ID Payme nt Te rms
Page:
DELRA Y BEACH PD Ne t 30 Day s
1
Quantity Item Description Un it P ric e Extensio n
INST ALLATION INCLUDES LIGHT,
SIREN, BRAKE INT ERFACES . D VR
TO BE LOCA TE D IN TH E G LOV E
BOX.CU ST OM DOWNLOA D
SOC KET PLACED IN TH E T RUNK.
8.00 INST ALLATION _PANASO NIC ARBITRATOR 34 5.0 0 2,760 .00
CU ST OM INSTALLA TI ON AT E VS
CO CON UT C REEK, FL FACI LITY
To tal 2,760 .00
Sales Ta x
Subto tal 2,760 .00
Qu otation
4661 JOHNSON ROAD - SU ITE 1
Tel. 954-428-5201 * Fax 954-428-5202
COCO NU T C RE EK, FL 33073
Go od Thru
12 /30/1 1
Quote Num ber:12900
Quote Da te :Oc t 12 , 2 011
PO Numbe r
Quoted to:DELRA Y BEACH PD
30 0 W.ATLANTIC AVE
DELRA Y BEACH , FL 33 44 4
Custom er ID Payme nt Te rms
Page:
DELRA Y BEACH PD Ne t 30 Day s
1
Quantity Item Description Un it P ric e Extensio n
INST ALLATION INCLUDES LIGHT,
SIREN, BRAKE INT ERFACES . D VR
TO BE LOCA TE D IN TH E G LOV E
BOX.CU ST OM DOWNLOA D
SOC KET PLACED IN TH E T RUNK.
60 .00 INST ALLATION _PANASO NIC ARBITRATOR 34 5.0 0 20 ,700.0 0
CU ST OM INSTALLA TI ON AT E VS
CO CON UT C REEK, FL FACI LITY
(MULTI-UNIT DISCO UN T)
To tal 20 ,700.0 0
Sales Ta x
Subto tal 20 ,700.0 0
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Scott Pape, AICP, FCP, Senior Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/THE ELECTRIC EXPERIENCE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is cons ideration of a conditional use request to establish a
Segway tour and sales facility known as The Electri c Experience.
BACKGROUND
The applicant has submitted tour route maps that in dicate the tours will be operated solely on the bar rier
island and extend primarily south of Atlantic Avenu e. The hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. Monday through Sunday. The required training o f customers is proposed within the parking area
on the north side of the plaza. Further, the floor plan indicates that the repair of these devices wil l occur
within the interior of the tenant space.
At its meeting of September 19, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the conditional use
request for The Electric Experience and recommended approval (6-1, Spodak opposed) to the City
Commission. However, the Planning and Zoning Board did express concerns with homeowner privacy
with respect to the tour segments through neighborh oods particularly along East Road and Vista Del
Mar Drive. Further, as Segways are not allowed on Atlantic Avenue there was concern over short
segments that were proposed along Atlantic Avenue e ven though the applicant indicated the devices are
walked in those areas of Atlantic Avenue. The Board was also concerned that the businesses that utiliz e
the parking area along the north side of the site b e notified of the proposed use and that training is
proposed within this parking lot. The applicant has provided notice to the affected business regarding
the proposed use and training within the parking ar ea (see attached letter and list of property owners ). In
response to the Planning and Zoning Board’s concerns, the applicant has submitted a revised t our route
map that has eliminated the East Road and Vista Del Mar Drive segments and added a note that
indicates that the devices will be walked within At lantic Avenue. Since the applicant has notified the
affected business owners and revised the tour route map, the two conditions of approval recommended
by the Planning and Zoning Board dealing with these items have been deleted.
Additional background and an analysis of the Condit ional Use request are found in the attached
Planning and Zoning Board staff report.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA):
At its meeting of September 8, 2011, the CRA review ed the conditional use request and recommended
approval
Downtown Development Authority:
At its meeting of September 12, 2011, the DDA revie wed the conditional use request and recommended
approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Move a recommendation of approval of the conditiona l use request to allow a Segway Tours and
Segway Sales for The Electric Experience , by adopting the findings of fact and law containe d in the
staff report, and finding that the request, and app roval thereof, is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5 (E)(5) and Chapter 3 of the Land Development
Regulations, subject to the following conditions:
1. That a note be added to the plans that indicate tha t the parking area will be accessible at all times
for the use it was intended (i.e. vehicle parking).
2. That the business is limited to no more tha n nine tours each day.
3. That the tour guides are prohibited from am plifying voice or music while operating tours.
4. That tours will be conducted in compliance with Cha pter 132.10(c) of the City Code of
Ordinances.
5. That the Segways be walked across Atlantic Avenue.
1
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SEGWAY TOUR
AND SALES FACILITY KNOWN AS THE ELECTRIC EXPERIENCE
1. This conditional use request has come before the Ci ty Commission on
October 18, 2011. The conditional use request is to est ablish a Segway tour and sales
facility known as The Electric Experience which will be lo cated at 1047 East Atlantic
Avenue.
2. The City staff, applicant, and other persons have presented documentary
evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertainin g to the conditional use
request of The Electric Experience. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this
case. Required findings are made in Sections I and II below.
I. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
A. FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The use or structures must be allowed in the
zone district and the zoning district must be consistent w ith the land use designation.
Are the requirements of the Future Land Use Map met ?
Yes ________ No_________
B. Concurrency : Facilities which are provided by, or through, the C ity shall
be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established
within the Comprehensive Plan.
Are the concurrency requirements met with respect t o water, sewer,
drainage, streets and traffic, parks, open space, s olid waste and schools?
Yes ________ No_________
C. Consistency : Compliance with performance standards set forth in
Chapter 3 and required findings in LDR Section 2.4.5(E) (5) for the Conditional Use
request shall be the basis upon which a finding of overa ll consistency is to be made.
Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comp rehensive Plan may be used in
making a finding of overall consistency.
2
Are the consistency requirements met such that the proposed project is
complementary to and compatible with adjacent land uses and the
beneficial aspects of the project outweigh the nega tive impact of identified
points of conflict?
Yes ________ No_________
II. LDR REQUIREMENTS
A. Section 2.4.5(E)(5) requires certain findings : The conditional use will
not:
1. Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the st ability of the
neighborhood within which it will be located;
2. Hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties.
Will Section 2.4.5(E)(5) be met?
Yes _________ No_________
B. LDR Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2) – Segway Tours and Segwa y Sales:
Per LDR Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2), the following are th e special regulations that apply to
Segway tour and sales businesses:
The applicant for Conditional Use will designate rout es for the tours and shall
be limited to only routes that are approved.
No more than nine (9) tours shall be conducted each da y.
All servicing of Segways shall be indoors and not utili ze more than twenty
(20%) of the floor area of the premises.
No Segway sales or tour businesses shall be located within three hundred
(300) feet of any other Segway sales or tour business, a s measured from
property line to property line in a straight line.
Tour guides shall not amplify voice or music while oper ating tours.
Pre tour instructions shall not be conducted on public str eets, sidewalks, or
between the building and the adjacent street.
Segway tours shall operate in compliance with the requ irements of Chapter
132 of the City of Delray Beach Code of Ordinances.
Are the requirements of Section 4.3.3(ZZZZ)(2) me t?
Yes _______ No_________
3
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive P lan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the conditional use application was submitted.
4. The City Commission finds there is ample and compete nt substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff r eports and testimony of witnesses
supporting these findings.
5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Co mmission approves ___
denies ___ the conditional use application subject to th e conditions attached hereto in
Exhibit “A” and hereby adopts this Order this 18 th day of October, 2011, by a vote of
_____ in favor and ____ opposed.
________________________________
Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Chevelle Nubin
City Clerk
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions Related to The Electric Experience
1. That a note be added to the plans that indicate that the parking a rea will be accessible at all
times for the use it was intended (i.e. vehicle parking).
2. That the business is limited to no more than nine tours each day.
3. That the tour guides are prohibited from amplifying voice or music while ope rating tours.
4. That tours will be conducted in compliance with Chapter 132.10(c) of t he City Code of
Ordinances.
5. That the Segways be walked across Atlantic Avenue.
1045 East Atlantic Avenue
Adams Paul CPA, Suite 300
Anella & Company, Suite 214
Aspen Grove Design, Suite 212
Coastal Commercial Group LLC, Suite 311
Elder Issues
Kailan, LLC, Suite 214
Native Sun Communications Inc., Suite 208
Pepe's Hideaway
Pristine Properties International, Suite 305
Reyes Fine Art & Antique
Ross, Carter & Shackford, Suite 300
Schroeder Craig B DDS, Suite 304
Superoffice, Suite 209
Travers Hartnett, Suite 203
United Sports Academies Inc
Zimmerman & Boueri, Inc.
1049 East Atlantic Avenue
Petite Connection
1051 East Atlantic Avenue
Virginia Courtenay Interiors, Inc.
1053 East Atlantic Avenue
Kientzy & Co.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Estelio Breto, Senior Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 3, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
WAIVER REQUESTS/BOUERI MIXED -USE BUILDING
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Consideration of a total of six waivers: two waiver request to Land Development Regulation (LDR)
Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) regarding the require d building frontage and front setback along SE 1st
Avenue and along SE 1st Street; one waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), to reduce the
required 75% transparency surface to 49% for the bu ilding elevation along SE 1st Avenue and to 43%
for the building elevation along the SE 1st Street l; one waiver request to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3) to
reduce the required corner clip at the intersection of SE 1st Street and SE 1st Avenue from 20’ by 20’ to
12’-11” by 12’-11”; and two waiver requests to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce the required 8’ wide
sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street to 5 ’ all in association with the Boueri Mixed Use
development.
BACKGROUND
The following waivers are requested in association with the Boueri Mixed Use development:
Waiver #1:
Along SE 1 st Avenue: For a height from finished grade to 25 ’:
A Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) [Design Development Standards]:
- To allow an increase in the required building fr ontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of
64.8’ to 67’; and
- To allow a decrease in the remaining length of t he building frontage setback at 15’ or more from
7.2’ to 5’; and
Along SE 1 st Avenue: For a height from 25 ’ to 48 ’
- To allow a decrease in the required building fro ntage setback at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’.
Waiver #2:
Along SE 1 st Street: For a height from finished grade to 25 ’:
A Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) [Design Development Standards]:
- To allow a decrease in the required building fro ntage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of
86.1’ to 44’;
- To allow a decrease in the remaining length of t he building frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3’ to
5’.
Along SE 1 st Street: For a height from 25 ’ to 48 ’
- To allow a decrease in the required building fro ntage setback at 15’ minimum from 86’ to 31’.
Waiver #3:
A waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2) to reduce the 75% minimum transparency or
glass surface area on the ground floor architectura l elevation along SE 1 st Avenue from the required
75% to 49% and along SE 1 st Street from the required 75% to 43%.
Waiver #4:
A waiver request to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3) to redu ce the required 20’ by 20’ corner clip triangle at
the intersection of SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street from the required 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”
Waiver #5:
A waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce the required 8’ wide side walk along SE 1 st Avenue
from 8' to 5’.
Waiver #6:
A waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to reduce the required width of the sidewalk in the Central
Business District along SE 1 st Avenue from 8' to 5’.
Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to grant ing a waiver, the approving body must make a
finding that granting the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area ;
(b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities;
(c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and
(d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under
similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner.
Waiver #1 and Waiver #2 – Required Building Frontage and Setback:
The applicant has provided the following justificat ion with regard to these two waiver requests:
“The architect is fully aware and respects the sect ion of the LDR's requirements for
frontage. The architect has strived to meet as clos e as possible the intent of the code
with reference to SE 1 Street. The layout of the si te makes additional frontage
unfeasible. The architect has designed a decorate w all to enhance the frontage while
also providing screening from the parking. On the S E 1 st Avenue elevation the
architect is within a few percent point of meeting all requirements and has received
support for waivers from the P&Z Department. Conseq uently, a positive finding with
respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5), Waiver Findings , can be made. Therefore, for the
reasons enumerated above, we respectfully request t hat this waivers be approved”.
Waiver #1 and #2 are minor adjustments to building setback requirements. The intent of the code is to
provide a building that has architectural relief bo th at the street level as well as upper floors, and this
development meets that intent. The waivers will not adversely affect neighboring properties or diminis h
the provision of public facilities. The waivers wou ld also be supported under similar circumstances an d
therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Thus, positive findings can be made wit h
respect to LDR Section 2.4.5 (B)(5).
Waiver #3 - Minimum Transparency:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the
ground floor wall area of all non-residential and m ixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the
wall area for that elevation. All storefronts or gl ass areas abutting the street shall be transparent. The
building ground floor transparency along SE 1 st Avenue is 49% while 75% is required. Also, the
building ground floor transparency elevation along SE 1 st Street is only 43% while 75% is required. The
proposed north and west elevations for the Boueri m ixed use building do not meet the LDR requirement,
and thus, the applicant has requested a waiver. In support of the waiver request the applicant has
provided the following statement:
“Prior approval for a similar condition has been gi ven to Chase Bank: 1010 North
Federal Highway, Delray Beach, FL. The percentage o f glass surface area requested
is more consistent with the massing and proportion of the design of the building(s).
Tall ceiling height has been provided on the ground floor areas; this feature is also
another key element for the survivability of the re tail components of the project. Based
on this ceiling height, the resulting glass surface area required is excessively
disproportionate to the overall building frontage. In any event, the glass
surface/transparency provided is more than sufficie nt to meet the intent of the LDRs,
which is to maintain a pedestrian friendly retail/o ffice environment. This project meets
or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) for this waiver request. By
granting this waiver, a superior product will be ac hieved. The waiver will not
adversely affect the neighboring area, significantl y diminish the provision of public
facilities, create an unsafe situation and/or resul t in the grant of a special privilege.
The intent of this requirement is to assure that th e street facades remain customer friendly and encou rage
pedestrian traffic and the current facades meet the intent of this requirement. Granting the requested
waiver will not have an adverse effect on the neigh boring area, diminish the provision of public
facilities, or create an unsafe situation. This wai ver would also be supported under similar circumsta nces
and therefore will not result in the grant of a spe cial privilege. Consequently, a positive finding wi th
respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made.
Waiver #4 – Required Corner Clip:
Corner Clip: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3), a right-of-way dedication will be required at all
intersections in the Central Business District (CBD ). This right-of-way dedication will consist of an area
of property located at the corner formed by the int ersection of two or more public rights-of-way with
two sides of the triangular area being 20 feet in l ength along the abutting public right-of-way lines. The
ground floor structure of the proposed building enc roaches into the required corner clip at the
intersection of SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street. Thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the
required corner clip from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”. In support of the waiver the applicant has
provided the following statement:
“The property owner will provide a 12'-11" by 12'-1 1" dedication corner clip along
S.E. 1 st avenue and S.E. 1 st street. We are also providing the 20'x 20' site tr iangle at
this corner location. The property owner is providi ng over 7% of his site in
dedications and easements. A 20' x 20' corner clip would increase that over 8% and
make the project unfeasible. Thus we ask for a redu ced corner clip. Consequently, a
positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) Waiver Findings can be made.
Therefore, for the reasons enumerated above, we res pectfully request that this waiver
be approved”.
The applicant has been required to dedicate 5’ alon g SE 1 st Avenue, plus two (2’) feet r-o-w dedication
along the east alley r-o-w. To provide a triangle d edication of 20’ by 20’ corner clip will require the
dedication of almost 8% of his land to the City. It is noted that a triangle dedication of a 20’ by 20 ’
corner clip will relocate the existing property lin e, and thus, compliance with the CBD design guideli nes
will futher reduce the footprint of the building ma king the building economically unfeasible. The
applicant is requesting a reduction of the corner c lip triangle side to 12’-11” by 12’-11”. Granting the
requested waiver will not have an adverse effect on the neighboring area, diminish the provision of
public facilities, or create and unsafe situation. This waiver would also be supported under similar
circumstances and therefore will not result in the grant of a special privilege. Consequently, a posit ive
finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made.
Waiver #5 and Waiver #6 – Provision of Sidewalks:
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), an 8’ sidewalk shall be provided in the Central Business District. The
applicant is requesting a waiver to allow for a red uction from 8'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along SE 1 st
Street and along SE 1 st Avenue. In support of the SE 1 st Street waiver request the applicant has
provided the following statement:
“There are already new city sidewalks recently inst alled at 4' wide along S.E. 1 st
street. The owner will provide an easement to incre ase the sidewalk wide from 4' to 5'
along SE 1 st Street. Increasing the sidewalk to the proposed 8' wide would prevent the
site to layout efficiently. Thus, we ask you to sup port the sidewalk reduction”.
In support of the SE 1 st Avenue waiver request the applicant has provided t he following statement:
“The property owner will provide a new 5' concrete sidewalk along S.E. 1st Avenue.
Increasing the sidewalk to the proposed 8' wide wou ld prevent the site to layout
efficiently. Thus we ask you to support the sidewa lk reduction”.
The Central Business District design guide lines re quire that all buildings be placed in close proximi ty to
rights of way to encourage pedestrian flows and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample sidewalks.
The adjacent land use intensity, pattern of develop ment, and anticipated pedestrian traffic does not
warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Street or SE 1 st Avenue. Main thoroughfares in the CBD
(Central Business District) such as Atlantic Avenue , Pineapple Grove Way and the Federal Highway
pairs may require an 8’ wide sidewalk due to the intensity of development a nd anticipated volume of
pedestrian traffic. Granting the requested waivers will not have an adverse effect on the neighboring
area, diminish the provision of public facilities, or create and unsafe situation. This waiver would a lso
be supported under similar circumstances and theref ore will not result in the grant of a special privi lege.
Consequently, a positive finding with respect to LD R Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) r eviewed the waiver requests at their meeting of
September 14, 2011 in conjunction with review of th e proposed Boueri Mixed Use Building. After a
brief discussion, the Board moved a recommendation of approval of all waivers on a unanimous vote of
6-0. A detailed description and analysis of the propo sal is contained within the attached SPRAB staff
report September 14, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION
By Separate Motions:
Waiver #1:
Along SE 1 st Avenue for a height from finished grade to 25 ’:
Move approval of the waiver requests to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow:
- An increase in the required building frontage set back at 10’ or less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’;
and
- A decrease in the remaining length of the buildin g frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2’ to 5’
Along SE 1 st Avenue for a height from 25 ’ to 48 ’:
- A decrease in the required building frontage setb ack at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’; and
Waiver #2:
Along SE 1 st Street for a height from finished grade to 25 ’
Move approval of Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow:
- A decrease in the required building frontage setb ack at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86’ to 44’; an d
- A decrease in the remaining length of the buildin g frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3’ to 5’.
Along SE 1st Street for a height from 25 ’ to 48 ’
- A decrease in the required building frontage setb ack at 15’ minimum from 86’ to 31’; and
Waiver #3:
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), to reduce the building
ground floor elevation transparency along SE 1 st Avenue from the required 75% to 49% and along SE
1 st Street from the required 75% to 43%; and
Waiver #4:
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(3), to reduce the required corner clip
triangle at the intersection of SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”;
and
Waiver #5:
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to allow the reduction from 8' to 5’ wide
for the required sidewalk along SE 1 st Street; and
Waiver #6:
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to allow the reduction from 8'-0" to 5’-0 ”
wide for the required sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue,
by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the requests are
consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5).
1
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
WAIVER REQUESTS FOR BOUERI MIXED USE BUILDING
1. These waiver requests came before the City Commission on October 18,
2011.
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the six (6) waiver requests in association
with the Boueri Mixed Use Development Proposal. All of the evidence is a part of the
record in this case. Required findings are made in accord ance with Subsection I.
I. WAIVERS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to grantin g a waiver, the
approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area;
(b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of p ublic facilities;
(c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and,
(d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same
waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on ot her
property for another applicant or owner.
A. Waiver #1 to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(3) and (4), along SE 1 st Avenue:
For a height from finished grade to 25’:
To allow an increase in the required building frontag e setback at 10’ or
less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’;
To allow a decrease in the remaining length of the bu ilding frontage
setback at 15’ or more from 7.2’ to 5’; and
For a height from 25’ to 48’:
To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’
minimum from 50.4’ to 31’.
Should the waiver to the building frontage and fron t setback along SE 1 st
Avenue be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
2
B. Waiver #2: to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4), along SE 1 st Street:
For a height from finished grade to 25’:
To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or
less from a minimum of 86.1’ to 44’;
To allow a decrease in the remaining length of the bu ilding frontage at
15’ or more from 12.3’ to 5’; and
For a height from 25’ to 48’:
To allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’
minimum from 86.1’ to 31’
Should the waiver to the building frontage and fron t setback along SE 1 st
Street be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
C. Waiver #3: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum
transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wa ll area of all non-
residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area
for that elevation. All storefronts or glass areas abutt ing the street shall be
transparent, non-solar or non-mirrored, and have a li ght transmission reduction
of no more than twenty percent (20%). The building g round floor transparency
along SE 1 st Avenue is 49% while 75% is required. Also, the buildi ng ground
floor transparency elevation along SE 1 st Street is only 43% while 75% is
required. The proposed north and west elevations for t he Boueri mixed use
building do not meet the LDR requirement, and thus, the applicant has requested
a waiver to this LDR requirement.
Should the waiver to 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2) to the mi nimum transparency glass
surface area be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
D. Waiver #4: Corner Clip: Pursuant to LDR Section5.3.1(D)(3), a r ight-of-
way dedication will be required at all intersections in the Central Business District
(CBD). This right-of-way dedication will consist of an a rea of property located at
the corner formed by the intersection of two or more p ublic rights-of-way with two
sides of the triangular area being 20 feet in length along the abutting public right-
of-way lines. Further, a dedication of 10 feet shall b e required along both sides at
the intersection of an alley and right-of-way. These a reas are to be measured
from their point of intersection, and the third side b eing a line connecting the
ends of the other two lines. This right-of-way dedicati on will be referred to as a
“corner clip” and is provided to ensure adequate right-of-way for the safe
movement of pedestrians in the CBD. It appears that th e ground floor structure
of the building encroaches into the required corner clip at the intersection of SE
3
1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street. Thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to
reduce the required corner clip from 20’ by 20’ to 12’-11” by 12’-11”.
Should the waiver to reduce the corner clip require d by Section 5.3.1(D)(3)
be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
E. Waiver #5: Provision of Sidewalks: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B),
an 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the Central Business District. The applicant
is requesting a waiver to allow for a reduction from 8 ' to 5’ wide sidewalk along
SE 1 st Street.
Should the waiver to reduce the sidewalk along SE 1 st Street be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
F. Waiver #6: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), 8’ sidewalk shall be
provided on the Central Business District. The applicant is requesting a waiver to
allow for a reduction from 8' to 5’ wide sidewalk alon g SE 1 st Avenue.
Should the waiver to reduce the sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue be granted?
Yes _______ No _______
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive P lan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the original dev elopment application was
submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The City Commission finds there is ample and compete nt substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff r eports, testimony of experts and other
competent witnesses supporting these findings.
5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Co mmission approves ___
denies ___ the waiver requests.
4
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City C ommission hereby adopts
this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote o f _____ in favor and ____
opposed.
________________________________
ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
________________________________
Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 13, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE HPB'S DECISION/85 S.E. 6TH AV ENUE/CLASS
III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is cons ideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation
Board’s (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s motion to approve the Class III Site Plan
Modification at 85 SE 6th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon findings that the request was
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and did no t meet the criteria set forth in the Land
Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary
of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of August 16, 1995, the HPB approved a COA for two (2) of the three (3) on-site
buildings including the conversion of the Blank Hou se from single-family residence to retail use
(Building A), the conversion of a garage to office use and addition of a second story residential
apartment (Building B), and the construction of a n ine-space, pea-rock parking area off of SE 1st Street.
The third building (Building C) was, and remains, a multi-family residence. The single family residence
(Building A) was subsequently converted to retail u se and the garage was converted to office use.
Building permits were not obtained for the conversi on of the garage nor was the parking area required
for this conversion ever installed. As a result, th e office use was never legally established.
In October of 1995, the retail use (Building A) was legally converted to restaurant use and the second
floor to a storage area.
Between 1995 and 2004 as the illegal status of the office use continued to surface, Site Plan
Applications were submitted and approved for the co nversion of use with associated parking
improvements. Each application was allowed to expir e and none of the required improvements were
ever constructed. The latest approval of August 3, 2004 permitted the applicant to pay for two (2)
parking spaces and included installation of the bal ance of required spaces on site (a total of four ne w
spaces just south of the City’s public parking lot and retention of three existin g spaces off the alley on
the east side of the property). As with previous ap provals, no improvements were constructed, no
payments of in-lieu of parking fees were made, and the approvals expired.
At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed ye t another attempt after 16 years to address the
office conversion. This request was to waive all re quired parking (6 spaces) associated with the Class III
Site Plan Modification for the office space. This r equest was not supported and the appeal of both the
denial of the waiver (separate Commission item) and this Class III Site Plan Modification are now
before the City Commission.
If the Class III Site Plan Modification is approved by City Commission, the approval should include th e
following conditions:
1. That a traffic statement be provided;
2. That a current floor plan be submitted;
3. That compliance with handicap accessibility with in the office space be indicated; and,
4. That a decorative bicycle rack be provided on-si te.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) considered the subject request at its March 10, 2011
meeting, where they recommended denial of the waive r to the required parking. The Board also
requested that the item return for further review w hen “a solution is worked out.”
The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011
meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the
required spaces. Direction was given to the applica nt to work out an alternative approach with Staff, and
return to the DDA for further review.
The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) consid ered the subject request at its June 28, 2011
meeting, where a recommendation to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested that the
applicant work with Staff and accommodate three (3) spaces on site and provide the balance either
through an off-site parking agreement, or via the i n-lieu of parking fee.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Pre servation Board’s action of denial.
fA W OFFICf.S WEINER & LYNNE MICHAEL S. WEINER JEFFREY C. LYNNE PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 10 SE 1" AVEN UE SUITE C DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 TELEPHONE (561) 265 2666 FACSIMILE (561)
272 6831 MYVEINER@ZONELAW.COM LA UIUEA. THOMPSON, P.A. w\VW.ZONELAW.COM OFCOU. 'SEL October 17, 20 II EIVED Ms. Chevelle Nubin Via Hand Deliverv City Clerk OCT 1 7 2011 City of Delray
Beach 100 NW I SI Avenue CITY CLERK Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: The Blank House; 85 SE 6th Avenue Our File No.: HANB006 On behalf of our client, we are respectfully requesting that
the Appeal of the Historic Preservation Board 's Decision associated with the Class III Site Plan Modification and Waiver for the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue be postponed from
the October 18, 20 II meeting. If a postponement fee is required, please contact the undersigned and it shall be paid. My client will not be in town on that date and his availability
and attendance at the hearing is of critical importance. If YOll should have any questions, please contact me. Thank you very much for y ur assistance in this matter. enclosure cc: Mr.
Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning Brian Shutt, Esquire, City Attorney Jane Rankin, Esquire 0:\IIANI3006\Lett~r to Chevelle Nlibin re pOSlpOnelTlCnt.Oct 17 2011.docx Information
Pertaining to Item 9.C. and Item 9.C.1.; October 18, 2011 Regular Commission Meeting
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
1. This appeal of the denial of the Historic Preservat ion Board’s August 21,
2011 decision denying the Certificate of Appropriatene ss, Class III Site Plan
Modification, and wavier of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6 th Avenue has come
before the City Commission on October 18, 2011.
2. The Appellee and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the Hist oric Preservation Board’s August
21, 2011 decision denying the Certificate of Appropria teness, Class III Site Plan
Modification, and wavier of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6 th Avenue. All of the
evidence is part of the record in this case. Required f indings are made in accordance
with Subsection I.
I. LDR REQUIREMENTS
A. Certificate of Appropriateness
1. Findings : Pursuant to Section 2.4.6(H)(5), prior to approva l, a
finding must be made that any Certificate of Appropri ateness which is to be approved is
consistent with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan (attached as Exhi bit “A”) and specifically with
provisions of Section 4.5.1, the Delray Beach Historic Pr eservation Design Guidelines
(attached as Exhibit “B”) and the Secretary of the Int erior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
(attached as Exhibit “C”).
Is the Certificate of Appropriateness consistent wi th Historic Preservation
as detailed in the Comprehensive Plan, the Land Dev elopment Regulations,
and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for r ehabilitation?
Yes ______ No ______
B. Class III Site Plan Modification
1. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(c), a Class III site plan
modification is a modification to a site plan which rep resents either a change in intensity
of use, or which affects the spatial relationship among improvements on the land,
2
requires partial review of Performance Standards found in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.2.3, and
the required findings of Section 2.4.5(G)(5).
2. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), modificatio ns to Site Plans
and Development Plans, the approving body must make a finding that the proposed
changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made
concurrent with approval of a class III modification.
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13, CBD Zoning Regulatio ns (B)(2),
Principal Uses and Structures Permitted, Business, Professional and Medical Uses
including but not limited to interior decorating, me dical and dental clinics, medical and
dental laboratories, photographic studios, printing and publishing, business, medical
and professional offices.
Are these requirements met by the conversion of a g arage to office use?
Yes _______ No _______
3. The City Commission has applied the LDR requiremen ts in existence at
the time the original site plan was submitted.
4. The City Commission finds there is ample and compete nt substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff r eports, testimony of experts and other
competent witnesses supporting these findings.
5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Co mmission approves ___
denies ____ the appeal and hereby adopts this Order th is 18th day of October, 2011, by
a vote of _____ in favor and ____ opposed.
ATTEST: ________________________________
Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
________________________________
Chevelle Nubin
City Clerk
EXHIBIT “A”
Objective A-4
The redevelopment of land and buildings shall provide for the preservation of historic
resources. The objective shall be met through continued a dherence to the City’s Historic
Preservation Ordinance and the following policies:
Policy A-4.1 Prior to approval or recommending approval of any land use or
development application for property located within a historic district or designated as a
historic site, the Historic Preservation Board must make a finding that the requested
action is consistent with the provisions of Section 4.5.1 of the Land Development
Regulations relating to historic sites and districts and th e “Delray Beach Design
Guidelines”.
Policy A-4.2 In order to protect the City’s historic resources, the L and Development
Regulations shall include provisions for designation of h istorically significant buildings,
structures, archaeological sites, or districts. The City shal l conduct periodic
neighborhood surveys to identify and evaluate potent ial historic resources.
4.5 - 4
"B" ARTICLE 4.5
ARTICLE 4.5 OVERLAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
The Districts described in this Article do not esta blish uses or categorize uses. These
Districts, however, do regulate allowable uses in a manner to mitigate adverse
impacts of such uses upon the natural or man-made e nvironment; or regulate
development so as to mitigate potential dangers to the use of such developed land,
or to otherwise implement policies and objectives o f the Comprehensive Plan.
Overlay and environmental management districts need not be shown on the Official
Zoning Map.
Section 4.5.1 Historic Preservation Sites and Districts:
(A) General: In recognition of findings as set forth in the ori ginal enactment of
Ordinance 13-87, passed March 10, 1987, this Sectio n is created in order to provide for
the identification, preservation, protection, enhan cement, perpetuation, and the use of
districts, archeological sites, buildings, structur es, improvements, and appurtenances
that are reminders of past eras, events, and person s important in local, state, and
national history; that provide significant examples of architectural styles of the past; that
are unique and irreplaceable assets to the City and its neighborhoods; or that provide
this and future generations with examples of the ph ysical surroundings in which past
generations lived; and other purposes.
(B) Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Distr icts:
(1) To qualify as a historic site, historic district, h istoric structure, or historic
interior, individual properties, structures, sites, or buildings, or groups of properties,
structures, sites, or buildings must have significa nt character, interest, or value as
part of the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and ar chitectural heritage of the city, state,
or nation. To qualify as a historic site, historic district, or historic structure, the property or
properties must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) or (3) below; to
qualify as a historic interior the interior must fu lfill one or more of the criteria set forth in
division (2) and meet the criteria set forth in div isions (3)(b) and (3)(d). [Arnd• Ord. 38-
07 215108]
(2) A building, structure, site, interior, or district will be deemed to have
historical or cultural significance if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
(a) Is associated in a significant way with the life or activities of a major
person important in city, state, or national histor y (for example, the
homestead of a local founding family);
(b) Is the site of a historic event with significant ef fect upon the city,
4.5 - 5
state, or nation;
(c) Is associated in a significant way with a major his toric event, whether
cultural, economic, social, military, or political;
4.5 - 6
SECTION 4.5.1 (B) (2) (d)
(d) Exemplifies the historical, political, cultural, ec onomic, or social trends
of the community in history; or,
(e) is associated in a significant way with a past or c ontinuing institution
which has contributed substantially to the life of the city.
(3) A building, structure, site, or district is dee med to have architectural or
aesthetic significance if it fulfills one or more o f the following criteria; except that to
qualify as a historic interior, the interior must m eet the criteria contained within divisions
(3)(b) and (3)(d):
(a) Portrays the environment in an era of history chara cterized by one or
more distinctive architectural styles;
(b) Embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style,
period, or method of construction;
(c) Is a historic or outstanding work of a prominent ar chitect, designer,
landscape architect, or builder; or
(d) Contains elements of design, detail, material, or c raftsmanship of
outstanding quality or which represented, in its ti me, a significant
innovation or adaptation to the South Florida envir onment.
(4) A building, structure, site, interior, or distr ict will be deemed to have historic
significance if, in addition to or in the place of the previously mentioned criteria, the
building, structure, site, or zone meets historic d evelopment standards as defined by
and listed in the regulations of and criteria for t he National Register of Historic Places,
as prepared by the United States Department of the interior under the Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. A copy of the se standards for the National
Register is made part of this section as if fully s et forth herein.
(C) Designation Procedures:
(1) Buildings, structures, archaeological sites, or dis tricts which meet the
criteria for historic sites or districts set forth in Section 4.5.1(8) may be designated as
historic sites or districts, and may be listed on t he Local Register of Historic Places.
(2) Nominations for historical site or district designa tion shall be made to the
Historic Preservation Board on an application form developed and approved by the
Board.
(a) Nominations for historic site status may be ini tiated by:
(1) The Historic Preservation Board;
(2) The City Commission; or
4.5 - 7
SECTION 4.5.1 (C) (2) (a) (3)
(3) The property owner.
(b) Nominations for historic district status may be initiated by:
(1) The Historic Preservation Board; or
(2) The City Commission.
(3) The Board shall conduct a preliminary evaluation of the
information provided on each nomination application to determine if it generally
conforms with historic status criteria. The Board s hall then prepare a designation report
which shall contain the following: [Amd. Ord. 30 -91 3/26/91]
(a) Proposed legal boundaries of the historic building, archaeological site,
structure, or district; [Amd. Ord. 30 -91 3/26/91]
(b) any proposed conditional zoning regulations designe d to replace or
complement existing zoning regulations with regard to, but not limited
to use, floor area, density, height, setbacks, park ing, and minimum lot
size; [Mid. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91]
(c) Analysis of the historic significance and character of the nominated
property; and [Amd. Ord. 30 -91 3/26/91]
(d) analysis of optional historic interiors for those b uildings and structures
with interior features of exceptional architectural , aesthetic, artistic, or
historic significance. [Amd. Ord. 30 -91 3/26/91]
(4) Upon completion and formal review of the report, th e Board shall set a
public hearing on each proposed designation. Notice of said hearing shall be made to
the owner of affected property at least ten days pr ior to the hearing by regular mail.
Additional notice shall be given in the same manner as provided for a rezoning action
[see Section 2.4.2(B)(1)(b)] and by notice publishe d in the newspaper at least ten days
prior to the hearing, provided, however, posting pu rsuant to 2.4.2(B)(1)(b) is not
required. [Amd. Ord. 78-04 1118/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91 ]
DELETED (5) AND RENUMBERED [Amd. Ord. 24 -05 4/19/05]
(5) After conducting the public hearing, if the Histori c Preservation Board finds
that the nomination fulfills the proper designation criteria and all procedures have been
followed correctly, it shall vote on the designatio n. A majority of the entire Board,
present and voting, must act in the affirmative to transmit the nomination and the
Board's findings to the City Commission. The City C ommission shall consider the
recommendation through its standard ordinance adopt ion procedures, except that at
least three affirmative votes of the City Commissio n is necessary to make a
designation. In the event that a directly affected property owner objects to the historic
designation, the Commission approval shall require a super majority vote of four votes.
[Amd. Ord. 24-05 4/19/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91 ]
SECTION 4.5.1 (C) (6)
4.5 -8
(6) After conducting the public hearing, if the Histori c Preservation Board does
not find that the request fills the criteria, no fu rther action will be required and the
request will be deemed denied. However, an appeal m ay be filed and processed
pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E). (Arad. Ord. 24-05 4/1 9/05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3126191]
(7) The Board will issue an official "certificate of hi storic significance" to the
owner of properties listed individually on the loca l historic register or judged as
contributing to the character of a historic distric t listed on the local historic register. The
Director acting as City Preservation Officer, or hi s appointee, is authorized to issue and
place official signs denoting the geographic bounda ries of each historic district listed in
the local historic register. [Amd. Ord. 24-05 4/191 05]; [Amd. Ord. 30-91 3/26/91]
(D) Review and Approval Procedures: Once property is placed within a Historic
District or designated as a Historic Site no develo pment order shall be issued without
first obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness (C .O.A.) pursuant to Section 2.4.6(J)
from the Historic Preservation Board. Obtaining a C .O.A. is required in addition to any
other process which is required for the development application.
(E) Development Standards: AU development regardless of use within individual ly
designated historic properties and/or properties lo cated within historic districts, whether
contributing or noncontributing, residential or non residential, shall comply .with the
goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensiv e Plan, these regulations, the Delray
Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the . Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
(1) Exterior Architectural Features. For the purpose of this Section, exterior
architectural features shall include, but not be li mited to the following: [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
(a) The architectural style, scale, general design, and general arrangement
of the structure's exterior;
(b) The type and texture of building material; and
(c) The type and style of all roofs, windows, doors, an d signs.
(2) Major and Minor development: For purposes of this section, major and
minor development standards shall be applied as not ed in the following table: [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (2)
4,9 - 5
ci$ .,77 ."-t3:',43:1 -.-,,,
-.6:1 , , Ps. _ tg t iNtiij§
.:- n Aaiun
, .,?
. •. 4 ..,.
Mr 7 VrW r•.=:.7 :
raDig0i .----•
,n-,---- •:a
-,--., ,
,,,
• ..... 150119 ., 19 Cgi r tif OAVNY -
• ' .N11.--.•`_•! ,..13:‘Ls rid64ifitai?) f: .;Gf.ziiirKrff
..,..... - .- tw .... .ti
-,-- --.-
,,I,;•,..s
t ,K.: . .11 -61345),47t. Aw err,. , *10: oft -04.- ver 2
CBD & CF Multi-Famil Minor Minor Mi.-Jr.:7 Minor 11:715 -,T
Non-Residential Min(: -Minor i: Minor Minry
R-I -A, R-I -AA,
RD, OSSHAD,
RL, & RM,
Single Family/Duplex :t' a' Minor - 1 7) Minor --ti 4 ----
Multi-Family ',.,.. .f. '6. Minor 4 :Jo r Minor e.-iZ4iirr:fili:ribr -
Non-Residentiat Minor i•tAi63101. Minor ' - ,-,tkW'
Notes:
1. All development on individually designated properti es in all zoning districts is Minor
2. All development on properties in the OSSHAD distric t which are subject to CBD regulations pursuant to Section
4.4.24(B) (12) is Minor.
(a) For the purposes of this section, "residential" includes single family,
duplexes and multifamily in all historic districts and all development,
regardless of use, in the Residential Office (RO) z oning district. [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5108]
(b) Major development shall be considered: [Amd. Or d. 38-07 2/5/08]
1. New construction in all historic districts except C BD and CF zoned
properties and properties zoned OSSHAD subject to C BD design
guidelines; or , [Amd. Ord, 38-07 2/51081
2. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of in excess of
twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing floor are a of the building,
and all appurtenances, except for properties zoned CBD or CF and
properties zoned OSSHAD subject to CBD design guide lines. For
purposes of this section, all limitations and regul ations shall be
reviewed in a cumulative manner from the date of pa ssage of this
ordinance in 2008; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
3. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of any part of the
front façade of an existing contributing residentia l or non-residential
structure and all appurtenances, except for propert ies zoned CBD
or CF and properties zoned OSSHAD subject to CBD de sign
guidelines. For purposes of this section, all limit ations and
regulations shall be reviewed in a cumulative manne r from the date
of passage of this ordinance in 2008. [Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/08]
(c) Minor development shall be considered: [Amd, Ord. 3 8-07 2/5/08]
1. All new construction in all historic districts o n property zoned CBD
and CF as well as all properties in the OSSHAD zone d district
subject to the CBD design guidelines; or, [Amd. Ord . 38-07
2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (2) (c) 2.
4.5 - 10
2. All modifications to existing contributing and nonc ontributing
structures in all historic districts on property zo ned CBD and CF as
well as all properties in the OSSHAD zoning distric t subject to the
CBD Design Guidelines; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
3. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of any part of the
front façade of an existing noncontributing residen tial or non-
residential structures and all appurtenances; or, [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
4. The construction, reconstruction, or alteration of less than twenty-
five percent (25%) of the existing floor area of th e building and all
appurtenances. For purposes of this section, all li mitations and
regulations shall be reviewed in a cumulative manne r from the date
of passage of this ordinance in 2008. [Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/08]
5. Any changes to Individually Historically Designated properties,
whether already on site or newly designated, to hel p facilitate the
move of a historic structure into a historic distri ct. [Amd. Ord. 38-07
215108]
(3) Buildings, Structures, Appurtenances and Parking. Buildings,
structures, appurtenances and parking shall only be moved, reconstructed, altered, or
maintained, in accordance with this chapter, in a m anner that will preserve the historical
and architectural character of the building, struct ure, site, or district: [Amd. Ord. 38-07
215/08]
DELETED (a) AND RELE7TERED [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(a) Appurtenances: Appurtenances include, but are not limited to, sto ne
walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, sidew alks, signs, and
accessory structures. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
1. Fences and Walls: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
a. Chain-link fences shall be clad in a green or bl ack vinyl and
shall only be used in rear yards, or where they are not visible
from the street. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
Swimming pool fences shall be designed in a manner that
integrates the layout with the lot and structures w ithout
exhibiting a utilitarian or stand-alone appearance. [Amd. Ord.
38-07 2/5/08]
c. Fences and walls over four feet (4') shall not b e allowed in front
or side street setbacks. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5. 1 (E) (3) (a) 1. d.
4.5 - 11
d. All other provisions in Section 4.6.5 shall ap p ly. [Amd. Ord. 38-
07 2/5/08]
2. Garages and Carports: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5108]
a. The following compatibility standards shall appl y for major
development, where applicable: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5 /08]
i. Garages and carports are encouraged to be oriented and
entered from the side or rear and out of view from the
public right of way. However, if this is not possib le, the
orientation of garages and carports shall be consis tent with
the majority of such structures within the district . [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
ii. Garage doors should be designed to be compatible wi th
the architectural style of the principal structure and include
individual openings for vehicles rather than two ca r
expanses of doors. Metal two car garage doors are
discouraged. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(b) Parking: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
1. Where feasible, alternative methods of meeting m inimum parking
standards contained in Sections 4.6.9(C)(8) and/or 4.6.9(E), as
applicable, shall be explored to avoid excessive us e of historic
properties and/or properties located in historic di stricts for parking.
Parking lots shall strive to contribute to the hist oric nature of the
properties/districts in which they are located by u se of creative
design and landscape elements to buffer parking are as from
historic structures. At a minimum, the following op tions shall be
considered: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
a. Locate parking adjacent to the building or in the r ear. [Amd.
Ord. 38-07. 2/5/08]
b. Screen parking that can be viewed from the public r ight-of-way
with fencing, landscaping, or a combination of the two pursuant
to Section 4.6.5. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
c, Utilize existing alleys to provide vehicular acc ess to sites.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
d. Construct new curb cuts and street side driveway s only in
areas where they are appropriate or existed histori cally. [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (3) (b) 1.
4.5 - 12
e. Use appropriate materials for driveways, such as co ncrete
poured in ribbons. [Amd. Ord, 38-07 2/5/08]
f. Avoid wide driveways and circular drives. [Amd. Ord . 38-07
2/5/08]
2. Waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservat ion Board for
relief from the number of parking spaces required i n Section 4.6.9
upon presentation of confirmation that adequate par king for a
proposed use may be achieved by alternate means whi ch are
found to be in keeping with the provisions and inte nt of the Delray
Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. [Amd . Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
(4) Alterations. In considering proposals for alterations to the ex terior of
historic buildings and structures and in applying d evelopment and preservation
standards, the documented, original design of the b uilding may be considered, among
other factors. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
(5) Standards and Guidelines. A historic site, building, structure,
improvement, or appurtenance within a historic dist rict shall only be altered, restored,
preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or othe rwise changed in accordance with
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabi litation, and the Delray Beach
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time. [Amd. Ord. 3807
2/5108]
(6) Relocation. Relocation of historic buildings and structures to other sites
shall not take place unless it is shown that their preservation on their existing or original
sites is not consistent with the purposes of this S ection or would cause undue economic
hardship to the property owner. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(7) Demolition. Demolition of historic or archaeological sites, or buildings,
structures, improvements, and appurtenances within historic districts shall be regulated
by the Historic Preservation Board in the manner de scribed in Section 4.5.1(F).
Demolition of any structure, whether contributing o r non-contributing, shall not occur
until a building permit has been issued for the HPB approved redevelopment. All
structures approved for demolition and awaiting iss uance of a building permit for the
redevelopment shall be maintained in a manner simil ar to that in which it existed at time
of application unless the Chief Building Official d etermines that an unsafe building
condition exists in accordance with Section 4.5.1(n). [As d. Ord, 38-07 2/5/08]; [Amd.
Ord. 55-07 1/15/08]
DELETED (7) AND RENUMBERED [Amd. Ord. 3B -07 2/5/08]
4.5 -9
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8)
(8) Visual Compatibility Standards. New construction and all improvements
to both contributing and noncontributing buildings, structures and appurtenances
thereto within a designated historic district or on an individually designated property
shall be visually compatible. In addition to the Zo ning District Regulations, the Historic
Preservation Board shall apply the visual compatibi lity standards provided for in this
Section with regard to height, width, mass, scale, facade, openings, rhythm, material,
color, texture, roof shape, direction, lot coverage , and square footage, and other criteria
set forth elsewhere in Section 4.5.1. Visual compat ibility for minor and major
development as referenced in Section 4.5.1(E)(2) sh all be determined by utilizing
criteria contained in (a)-(m) below. Visual compati bility for all development on
individually designated properties outside the dist rict shall be determined by
comparison to other structures within the site. [Am d. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081
(a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be
visually compatible in comparison or relation to th e height of existing
structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor
development. For major development, visual compatib ility with respect
to the height of residential structures, as defined by 4.5.1(E)(2)(a), shall
also be determined through application of the follo wing: [Amd. Ord. 38-
07 2/5/081
Building Height Plane (BHP): The building height plane technique
sets back the overall height of a building from the front property
fine. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081
a. The building height plane line is extended at an in clined angle
from the intersection of the front yard property li ne and the
average grade of the adjacent street along the lot frontage.
The inclined angle shall be established at a two to one (2:1)
ratio. See illustration below. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5 /08]
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
AT 2C1 RATIO
b. A structure relocated to a historic district or to an individually
designated historic site shall be exempt from this requirement.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/081
NO BUILD
ZONE
r -•
of
ai
REAR
SETBACK
4.5 - 6
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (a) 2.
2. First Floor Maximum Height: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5 /08]
a. Single-story or first floor limits shall be esta blished by: [Arnd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
Height from finished floor elevation to top of beam (tie or
bond) shall not exceed fourteen feet (14'). [Amd. O rd, 38-
07 215108]
ii. Mean Roof Height shall not exceed eighteen feet (18').
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
iii. Any portion exceeding the dimensions described in i . and ii
above shall be considered multi-story structures. [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
iv. See illustration. below: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
v. Sections i. and ii., above may be waived by the His toric
Preservation Board when appropriate, based on the
architectural style of the building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
3. Upper Story Height: tAmd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
a. Height from finished floor elevation to finished floor elevation or
top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed twelve f eet (12').
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108]
(b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or
structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship
to the width of the building and to the height of t he front elevation of
other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (c)
(c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any
building within a historic district shall be visual ly compatible with the
openings exemplified by prevailing historic archite ctural styles of similar
buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows
and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be
visually compatible within the subject historic dis trict. [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
(d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a
building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic
buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all
development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. [Amd.
Ord. 38-07 215108]
(e) Rhythm :of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to
open space between them and adjoining buildings sha ll be visually
compatible with the relationship between existing h istoric buildings or
structures within the subject historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Protections: The relationship of
entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be
visually compatible with existing architectural sty les of entrances and
porch projections on existing historic buildings an d structures within the
subject historic district for all development, [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of
materials, texture, and color of the facade of a bu ilding and/or
hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the p redominant
materials used in the historic buildings and struct ures within the subject
historic district. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a bui lding
or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing
historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The
roof shape shall be consistent with the architectur al style of the
building. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or
building facades, shall form cohesive walls of encl osure along a street
to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildi ngs or structures within
the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually
related. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) (j)
(j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in
relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, ba lconies, porches,
and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass
of historic buildings and structures within a histo ric district for all
development. To determine whether the scale of a bu ilding is
appropriate, the following shall apply for major de velopment only:
[Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/08]
1. For buildings wider than sixty percent (60%) of the lot width, a
portion of the front facade must be setback a minimu m of seven (7)
additional feet from the front setback line: [Amd. Ord. 38 -07
2/5/081
a. Lots sixty -five (65) feet or less in width are exempt from thi s
requirement. [Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/081
To calculate how much of the building width must co mply with
this provision, multiply the lot width by 40% and s ubtract the
required minimum side setbacks (example: 100' lot w idth x
40% = 40' - 15' side yard setbacks = 25'). [Amd. Ord. 38 -07
215/08]
c. Any part or parts of the front facade may be used to mee t this
requirement. [Amd. Ord, 38 -07 2/51081
d. See illustration below: [Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/083
75' LOT 75' LOT
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (8) 0) 2.
2. For buildings deeper than fifty percent (50%) of the lot depth, a
portion of each side facade, which is greater than one story high,
must be setback a minimum of five (5) additional fe et from the side
setback line: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
a. To calculate how much of the building depth must co mply with
this provision, multiply the lot depth by fifty per cent (50%) and
subtract the required minimum front and rear setbac ks
(example: 120' lot depth x 50% = 60' - 25' front ya rd setback -
10' rear setback = 25'). [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
b. Any part or parts of the side facades may be used t o meet this
requirement. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
c. See illustration below: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
d. If the entire building is set back an additional fi ve (5) feet from
the side, no offsets are required on that side. [Am d. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
3. Porches may be placed in the offset portion of t he front or side
facades, provided they are completely open except f or supporting
columns and/or railings. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be
visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a
historic district for all development with regard t o its directional
character, whether vertical or horizontal. [Amd. Or d. 38-07 2/5/08]
4.4 - 14
(1) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of
only one (1) architectural style per structure or p roperty and not
introduce elements definitive of another style. [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
(m) Additions to Individually Designated Properties and to
Contributing Structures in all Historic Districts. Visual compatibility
shall be accomplished as follows: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215108]
1. Additions shall be located to the rear or least pub lic side of a
building and be as inconspicuous as possible. [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
2. Additions or accessory structures shall not be loca ted in front of the
established front wall plane of a historic building . [Amd. Ord. 38-07
2/5/08]
3. Characteristic features of the original building sh all not be
destroyed or obscured. [Arad. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
4. Additions shall be designed and constructed so that the basic form
and character of the historic building will remain intact if the addition is
ever removed. [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
5. Additions shall not introduce a new architectural s tyle, mimic too
closely the style of the existing building nor repl icate the original design,
but shall be coherent in design with the existing b uilding. [Amd. Ord.
38-07 2/5/08]
6. Additions shall be secondary and subordinate to the main mass of
the historic building and shall not overwhelm the o riginal building.
[Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(9) Visual Compatibility incentives. In order to provide design flexibility for
residential structures, as defined by LDR Section 4 .5.1(E)(2)(a), that otherwise satisfy
the Visual Compatibility Standards outlined in Sect ion 4.5.1(E)(8), incentives for
development shall include the following: [Amd. Ord. 38-07 215/08]
(a) Open Air Spaces: The ratio of the Building Height Plane (BHP) can
increase from two to one (2:1) to two to one and a half (2:1.5 ) for open air
spaces limited to; first or second floor front porc hes (separation must be
provided between floors), first or second floor sid e porches (separation
must be provided between floors), balconies, and ov erlooks with open
railings (see illustration below); and [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
4.5-5
SECTION 4.5.1 (E) (9) (a)
1 5 .L.Aat: t5;-.);
(b) Front Elevation: Up to twenty five percent (25%) of the front
elevation(s) can extend above the Building Height P lane (BHP) to a
maximum height of thirty five feet (35'), provided twenty five percent (25%)
or more of the front elevation(s) remains one (1) s tory as defined by LDR
Section 4.5.1 (E)(8)(a)(2). The total width of exte nsion shall not exceed
eighteen feet (18') along the front elevation(s). S ee illustration below.
[Mid. Ord. 38-07 215108]
FRDNT VI EW
S S
SIDE
CAN'.35,!?!.tOVE _
•1:11k:F
375 -. MAX.----
NOT EXC ED:. 35 .!
___ M131$1 aE LIN,DEA .
OFt M.D:R 4'F'03#
FA:CAD:E (S ) MUST REMAIN
I STORY
SECTION 4.5.1 (r)
(F) Restrictions on Demolitions: No structure within a Historic District or on a
Historic Site shall be demolished without first rec eiving a Certificate of Appropriateness
pursuant to Section 2.4.6(H). The Historic Preserva tion Board shall be guided by the
following in considering such a request. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1/15108]
(1) The Historic Preservation Board upon a request for demolition by a
property owner, shall consider the following guidel ines in evaluating applications for a
certificate of appropriateness for demolition of de signated historic sites, historic
interiors, or buildings, structures, or appurtenanc es within designated historic districts;
(a) Whether the structure is of such interest or qualit y that it would
reasonably fulfill criteria for designation for lis ting on the national
register.
(b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmans hip, or material that
it could be reproduced only with great difficulty o r economically
nonviable expense.
(c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind
in the designated historic district within the city .
(d) Whether retaining the structure would promote the g eneral welfare of
the city by providing an opportunity to study local history, architecture,
and design, or by developing an understanding of th e importance and
value of a particular culture and heritage.
(e) Whether there are approved plans for immediate reus e of the property
if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect those plans
will have on the surrounding area. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 11151081
(2) No decision of the Board shall result in undue economic hardship for the
property owner. The Board shall have authority to d etermine the existence of such
hardship in accordance with the definition of undue economic hardship found in
Subsection (H).
(3) The Board's refusal to grant a Certificate of A ppropriateness requested by
a property owner for the purpose of demolition will be supported by a written statement
describing the public interest that the Board seeks to preserve.
4.5 - 7
SECTION 4.5.1 (F) (4)
(4) The Board may grant a certificate of appropriatenes s as requested by a
property owner, for demolition which may provide fo r a delayed effective date. The
effective date of the certificate will be determine d by the Board based on the relative
significance of the structure and the probable time required to arrange a possible
alternative to demolition. The Board may delay the demolition of designated historic
sites and contributing buildings within historic di stricts for up to six months while
demolition of non-contributing buildings within the historic district may be delayed for up
to three months.
(5) During the demolition delay period, the Board may t ake such steps as it
deems necessary to preserve the structure concerned . Such steps may include, but
are not limited to, consultation with community gro ups, public agencies, and interested
citizens, recommendations for acquisition of proper ty by public or private bodies, or
agencies, and exploration of the possibility of mov ing one or more structures or other
features.
(6) The Board may, with the consent of the property own er, request that the
owner, at the owner's expense, salvage and preserve specified classes of building
materials, architectural details and ornaments, fix tures, and the like for reuse in the
restoration of the other historic properties. The B oard may, with the consent of the
property owner, request that the Delray Beach Histo rical Society, or the owner, at the
owner's expense, record the architectural details f or archival purposes prior to
demolition. The recording may include, but shall no t be limited to photographs,
documents, and scaled architectural drawings to inc lude elevations and floor plans.
Two (2) copies of such recordings shall be submitte d to the City's Planning and Zoning
Department. One (1) to be kept on file and the othe r to be archived with the Delray
Beach Historical Society. At the Board's option, an d with the property owner's consent,
the Board or the Delray Beach Historical Society ma y salvage and preserve building
materials, architectural details, and ornaments, te xtures, and the like at their expense,
respectively. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1115108]
(7) The owner shall provide the following information o n his/her application for
any contributing structure in a historic district o r individually designated historic
structure: [Amid. Ord. 55-07 1115/081
(a) A certified report from a registered architect or e ngineer which provides
documentation explaining that the building is struc turally unsound and
is damaged beyond the ability to repair it at a rea sonable cost. The
report must include photographs to substantiate the damage. [Amd.
Ord, 55-07 1115/08/
(b) A certified report from an engineer, architect, gen eral contractor, or
other qualified professional which documents the pr ojected cost of
repairing the structure and returning it to a safe and habitable condition.
[Amd. Ord. 55-07 1/15/081
SECTION 4.5.1 (F) (7 ) (c)
4.5 - 18
(c) An appraisal of the property in its current conditi on, its value as vacant
land and its potential value as a preserved and res tored historic
property. [Amd. Ord. 55-07 1115108]
(d) Documentation that reasonable efforts have been mad e to find a
suitable alternate location for the structure withi n the City of Delray
Beach to which the contributing/ individually desig nated historic
structure could be safely relocated. Valid. Ord. 55 -07 1/15/08]
(G) Unsafe Buildings: in the event the Chief Building Official determine s that any
structure within a designated historic site or desi gnated historic district is unsafe
pursuant to the applicable Code of Ordinances, the Chief Building Official will
immediately notify the Board of his findings. Where appropriate and in accordance with
applicable ordinances, the Chief Building Official will attempt to have the structure
repaired rather than demolished, and will take into consideration any comments and
recommendations by the Board. However, the provisio ns contained within division (A)
of this section shall not apply to the Chief Buildi ng Official's declaration that a building is
unsafe, nor will the Chief Building Official be pre cluded from taking whatever steps, as
may be required by applicable ordinances to protect the public health and safety of the
community. The Board may also endeavor to negotiate with the owner and interested
parties, provided such actions do no interfere with procedures in the applicable
ordinances.
(H) Undue Economic Hardship: In any instance where there is a claim of undue
economic hardship, the property owner may submit, w ithin a reasonable period of time,
prior to a meeting with the Board, the following do cumentation:
(1) For All Property:
(a) The amount paid for the property, the date of purch ase, and the party
from whom purchased;
(b) The assessed value of the land and improvements the reon, according
to the two most recent assessments;
(c) Real estate taxes for the previous two years;
(d) Annual debt service or mortgage payments, if any, f or the previous two
years;
(e) All appraisals, if any, obtained within the previou s two years by the
owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, financing, or
ownership of the property;
(f) Any listing of the property for sale or rent, price asked, and offers
received, if any; and
SECTION 4.5.1 (H) (1) (g)
4.5 - 8
(g) Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the
property, including but not limited to possible fai r market rents for the
property if it were rented or leased in its current condition.
(2) For Income Property (Actual or Potential):
(a) The annual gross income from the property for the p revious two years,
if any;
(b) The annual cash flow, if any, for the previous two years; and
(c) The status of leases, rentals, or sales for the pre vious two years.
(3) An applicant may submit and the Board may requi re that an applicant
furnish additional information relevant to the Boar d's determination of any alleged
undue economic hardship. The Board may also require , in appropriate circumstances,
that information be furnished under oath.
(4) In the event that any of the required informati on is not reasonably available
to the property owner and cannot be obtained by the property owner, the property
owner shall file statement of the information which cannot be obtained and the reasons
why such information cannot be reasonably obtained. Where such unobtainable
information concerns required financial information , the property owner will submit a
statement describing estimates which will be as acc urate as are feasible.
(I) Historic Preservation Board to Act on Site Plans, L andscape Plans, and
Architectural. Elevations: Pursuant to the powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the
Historic Preservation Board shall act on all develo pment applications, within a Historic
District or on a Historic Site, subject to processi ng under Sections 2.4.5(F),(G),(H), and
(I) which otherwise would be acted upon by the Site Plan Review and Appearance
Board or the Planning and Zoning Board.
(J) Historic Preservation Board to Act on Variance Requ ests: Pursuant to the
powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the Historic Pr eservation Board shall act on all
variance requests, within a Historic District or on a Historic Site, which otherwise would
be acted upon by the Board of Adjustments. In actin g on such variance requests the
Board may be guided by the following as an alternat ive to the criteria normally used by
the Board of Adjustments. [And. Ord. 12-93 219193]
(1) That a variance is necessary to maintain the hi storic character of property
through demonstrating that:
(a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or
welfare.
SECTION 4.5 .1 (J) (1) (b)
4.5 - 20
(b) Special conditions and circumstances exist, because of the historic
setting, location, nature, or character of the land , structure,
appurtenance, sign, or building involved, which are not applicable to
other lands, structures, appurtenances, signs, or b uildings in the same
zoning district, which have not been designated as historic sites or a
historic district nor listed on the Local Register of Historic Places.
(c) Literal interpretation of the provisions of existin g ordinances would alter
the historic character of the historic district, or historic site to such an
extent that it would not be feasible to preserve th e historic character, of
the historic district or historic site.
(d) The variance requested is the minimum necessary to preserve the
historic character of a historic site or of a histo ric district. [Arad. Ord,
12-93 2/9/93]
(2) Or, as an alternative to subsection (i)(1), tha t a variance is necessary to
accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse of a stru cture within a Historic District or
upon a Historic Site through demonstrating that:
(a) A variance would not be contrary to the public inte rest, safety, or
welfare.
(b) The variance would not significantly diminish the h istoric character of
the Historic District or Site.
(c) That the variance requested is the minimum necessar y to effect the
adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site. [A md. Ord. 12-93
219193]
(3) The Board shall otherwise follow all procedures and impose conditions as
required of the Board of Adjustments. [Arad. Ord. 1 2-93 219/93]
(K) Designation of Historic Sites: The following Historic Sites are hereby affirmed
or established:
(1) THE SCOTT HOUSE, 19 Andrews Avenue, located on the North 50 feet of
the West 110 feet of the South 100 feet, less the W est 10 feet of the Beach Lot 15,
Subdivision of the Fractional East Half of Section 16, Township 46 South, Range 43
East, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. (Or iginal designation by Ordinance
17-90, May 22, 1990).
SECTION 4.5A (K) (2)
(2) FONTAINE FOX HOUSE, 610 N. Ocean Boulevard, located on the South
Half of Lot 4 lying West of State Road MA, (less th e West 435.5 feet thereof, less the
West 25 feet thereof for road Right-of-way), that p art of the South 10 feet of Lot 3 and
the North Half of Lot 4 lying West of State Road Al A (less the West 25 feet thereof for
road Right-of-way), and Lot 3 (less the South 10 fe et thereof, less the West 25 feet
thereof for road Right-of-way) (less Right-of-way o f State Road AlA, missing from
original description) of Block E, Revised Plat of B locks D and E, Palm Beach Shore
Acres, Defray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida as Recorded in Plat Book 7, Page
38, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Flo rida. And that part of the South 10
feet of Lot 3 lying East of the Right-of-way of Sta te Road AlA.
(3) SITE OF SCHOOL NO. 4 DELRAY COLORED, located on Block 28, Lot 2,
N.W. 5th Avenue. (Original designation by Ordinance 16 -89)
(4) GREATER MOUNT OLIVE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, 40 N.W.
4th Avenue, located on Lot 7, Block 28, Delray Beac h. (Original designation by
Ordinance 17-89)
(5) ST. PAUL AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 119 N.W. 5th
Avenue, located on Lot 5, Block 27, Delray Beach (O riginal designation by Ordinance
18-89)
(6) THE FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF DELRAY BEACH LODGE
275, 85 N.W. 5th Avenue, located on Lot 1, Block 28, Del ray Beach (Originally
designation by Ordinance 19-89)
(7) ST. MATTHEW EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 404 S,W. 3rd Street, located on
Lot 1, Block 32, Delray Beach (Original designation by Ordinance 20-89)
(8) THE KOCH HOUSE, 777 North Ocean Boulevard. Palm Beach Shore
Acres, Lot 21, Block D, Delray Beach, Palm Beach Co unty [Amd. Ord. 29 -94 617/94
(9) SUNDY FEED STORE, located on the South 85 feet of the North 153 feet
of Lot 1, Block 84, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County .
(10) HISTORIC DEPOT SQUARE, located on a parcel of land lying in Section
18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, City of Defra y Beach (Original designation by
Ordinance 119-88)
(11) THE COLONY HOTEL AND THE COLONY HOTEL NORTH ANNEX,
located on the South 12 feet of Lot 18, Alley South of Lot 18, East 25 feet of Lot 21 and
Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, inclusive, Block 108. And L ots 5, 6 and 7, Less 5 foot Road
RAW, Block 108, Town of Delray, with the designatio n pertaining to the buildings only
and not the grounds. ['kind. Ord. 22-91 3/26/91]
4.5 - 22
SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (12)
(12) MILTON-MYERS POST NO. 65, THE AMERICAN LEGION OF TH E
UNITED STATES, 263 N.E. 5th Avenue, located on Lots 5, 14 and 15, Block 106,
Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton, Palm Beach C ounty, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 68-94
10/18194].
(13) SOLOMON D. SPADY HOUSE, 170 N.W. 5th Avenue, locate d on Lots 5, 6
and the north 26.25 feet of Lot 7, Block 19, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton,
Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 8-95 2/7195]
(14) THE SUSAN WILLIAMS HOUSE, located at 154 N.W. 5 1h Avenue, Delray
Beach, Florida; more particularly described as foll ows: south 12 feet of Lot 7 and Lot 8,
Melvin S. Burd Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Boo k 11, Page 73, of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida (154 N.W. 5 th Avenue). [Amd. Ord. 29-02
7/16/02]; [Amd. Ord. 9-95 2/7/95]
(15) THE BLANK HOUSE, 85 S.E. 6th Avenue, located on Lot s 12, 13, and 14,
Block 117, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton, P alm Beach County, Florida. [Amd.
Ord. 26-95 616195]
(16) THE MONTEREY HOUSE, 20 North Swinton Avenue, locate d on Lot 12,
Block 60, Delray Beach, formerly Town of Linton, Pa lm Beach County, Florida. [Amd.
Ord. 27-95 6/6/95]
(17) THE HISTORIC BUNGALOW, 24 North Swinton Avenue, loc ated south 50
feet of Lot 11, Block 60, Delray Beach, formerly To wn of Linton, Palm Beach County,
Florida, [Amd. Ord. 28-95 616195]
(18) THE SANDOWAY HOUSE, 142 South Ocean Boulevard. Beac h Lots
Delray, the South 73 feet of the North 100 feet of Lot 24, less the West 355 feet, as
recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 25, of the Public Rec ords of Palm Beach County,
Florida. [Amd. Ord. 57-96 12/3/96]
(19) THE TRINITY EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH CHAPEL, loc ated on
a portion of the Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Churc h property at 400 North Swinton
Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; more particularly de scribed as the East 1 /2 of Lot 12,
Section 8-46-43, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, F lorida. The chapel is the only
building in the church complex receiving an histori c designation. The church complex is
located at the northwest corner of Lake Ida Road an d Swinton Avenue. [Amd. Ord. 26-
97 7/1/97)
(20) THE TURNER HOUSE, located at 145 N.E. 6th Avenue, D elray Beach,
Florida; more particularly described as the South 2 7.6 feet of Lot 5, less the West 5 feet
SR RNV, Lots 6 & 7, less the West 5 feet SR R/W, of Block 115, as recorded in Plat
Book 1 at Page 3 of the Public Records of Palm Beac h County, Florida. [Amd. Ord.
46-97 11/18/97
SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (21)
4.5 - 23
(21) THE PRICE HOUSE, located at 1109 Sea Spray Avenue, Delray Beach,
Florida; more particularly described as Lot 11, Sea Spray Estates, as recorded in Plat
Book 21 at Page 15 of the Public Records of Palm Be ach County, Florida_ [Amd. Ord.
12-98 3/3/981
(22) THE FELLOWSHIP HALL OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURC H OF
DELRAY BEACH, located at 36 Bronson Street, Defray Beach, Florida ; more
particularly described as Lots 16, 17, 18 and 19, B lock 3, Ocean Park Subdivision, as
recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 15 of the Public Re cords of Palm Beach County,
Florida. [Amd. Ord. 46-99 11116199]
(23) THE ATLANTIC AVENUE BRIDGE (State Structure #930864 ), located at
East Atlantic Avenue and the Intracoastal Waterway i n the City of Delray Beach, Palm
Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 18-00 8/15/00]
(24) THE GEORGE BUSH BOULEVARD BRIDGE, formerly known as the
N.E. 8 th Street Bridge, (State Structure #930026), located at George Bush Boulevard
and the Intracoastal Waterway in the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County,
Florida. [Arnd. Ord. 19-00 8/15/001
(25) THE WATER HOUSE, located at 916 and 918 Northeast 5 th Street, Delray
Beach, Florida; more particularly described as the West 84.82 feet of Lot 37, Las
Palmas, Delray Beach, Florida, according to the Pla t thereof recorded in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beac h County, Florida, in Plat Book 10 at
Page 68. [Amd. Ord. 15-01 2/20/01]
(26) THE O'NEAL HOUSE, located at 910 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Delray Beach,
Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lo ts 1, 2, 3, 28 and 29, Block 10, Dell
Park, Defray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, acc ording to the Plat thereof,
recorded in Plat Book 8 at Page 56 of the Public Re cords of Palm Beach County,
Florida. [Amd. Ord. 27-02 7116/02]
(27) THE AMELUNG HOUSE, located at 102 NE 12 th Street, Delray Beach,
Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lo t 9, Block 6, Dell Park, according to
the Plat recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 56, recorded in the Public Records of Palm
Beach County, Florida; said land situate, lying and being in Palm Beach County,
Florida. [Amd. Ord. 25-03 8/19/03]
(28) THE DEWITT ESTATE, located at 1110 North Swinton Avenue, Delra y
Beach, Florida, more particularly described as the East 365.69 feet of Lot 8 (less the
West 40.00 feet of the South 20.00 feet of said East 365.69 feet of Lot 8) Subdivision of
South half of East half of Lot 8, Section 8, Townsh ip 46 South, Range 43 East,
according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 16, Page 80, of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 71-04 1/4105]
SECTION 4.5.1 (K) (29)
4.5 - 24
(29) THE HARTMAN HOUSE, located at 302 N.E. 7 th Avenue, Delray Beach,
Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lo ts 13 and 14, Block 113, Highland
Park according to the map or plat thereof as record ed in Plat Book 2, Page 79, of the
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Amd. Ord. 26-05 5131051
(30) THE SEWELL C. BIGGS HOUSE, located at 212 Seabreeze Avenue,
Delray Beach, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Lot 21 and the West 35
feet of Lot 22, Defray Beach Esplanade, according t o the plat thereof, as recorded in
Plat Book 18, Page 39, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. [Arad. Ord. 5005
7/19105]
(L) Designation of Historic Districts: The following Historic Districts are hereby
affirmed or established:
(1) NASSAU STREET which consists of Lots 2-19 of Nassau Park, as
recorded in Plat Book 16, page 67 of Palm Beach Cou nty, Florida; Lots 1-12 of
Wheatley Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 98 of Palm Beach County,
Florida; and Block E, Lot 4 and Block F, Lot 1 of J ohn B. Reid's Village as recorded in
Plat Book 21, page 95 of Palm Beach County, Florida . (Original designation by
Ordinance 97-87 adopted on January 12, 1988) [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(2) MARINA which consists of Block 125, excluding the south 350' o f the north
488.6' of the west 100' of Block 125, along with th at part of Block 133 lying west of the
Intracoastal Waterway, together with the east half of Block 118, along with all of Block
126, together with that portion of Block 134 lying west of the Intracoastal Waterway,
along with east half of Block 119, together with al l of Block 127, along with the east half
of Block 120, and all of Block 128, all within the Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat
Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County Records (Original designation by Ordinance 156-
88 adopted on December 20, 1988) [Amd. Ord. 38-07 2/5/08]
(3) DEL-IDA PARK which consists of Blocks 1 through 13, inclusive, along wit h
Tracts A, B, and C DEL-1DA PARK, according to the P lat thereof on file in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beac h County, Florida recorded in Plat
Book 9 at Page 62 (Original designation by Ordinanc e 9-88 adopted on March 22,
1988)
(4) OLD SCHOOL SQUARE which consists of the south one-half of Block 57
and Blocks 58-62, Blocks 65-70, the west half of Bl ocks 74 and 75, and Lots 1-6 of
Block 76, Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County
Records. (Original designation by Ordinance 1-88 ad opted on February 9, 1988).
4.5 - 25
SECTION 4.5.1 (L) (5)
(5) WEST SETTLERS is bounded on the north by Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard (N.W. 2nd Street). The eastern boundary i s as follows: the alley running
north and south in Block 43; N.W. 3rd Avenue betwee n N.W. 1st Street and the east-
west alley of Block 36. The southern boundary is N.W. 1st Street between N.W. 3rd
Avenue and the alley in Block 43; the east-west alle y in Block 36 and Block 28 and the
south property line of Lot 13, Block 20. The wester n boundary is the north-south alley
and the eastern one-half (1/2) of the block south o f the alley of Block 19; the north-
south alley in the north half of Block 20. [Amd. Ord. 38 -07 2/5/08]; [Amd. Ord. 6 -97
2/18/97]
(M) Tax Exemption for Historic Properties: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(1) The City Commission hereby creates a tax exempt ion for the restoration,
renovation or rehabilitation of qualifying historic properties designated in Section
4.5.1(K) & L, as amended. Qualifying properties shall be exempt from that portion of ad
valorem taxation levied by the City of Delray Beach on 100% of, the increase in
assessed value resulting from any renovation, resto ration or rehabilitation of the
qualifying property made on or after the effective date of this ordinance. [Amd. Ord.
10 -03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50 -96 11119/96]
(2) The above exemption does not apply to: [Amd. Ord. 50 -96 11/19/96]
(a) Taxes levied for payment of bonds; [Amd. Ord. 50 -96 11/19196]
(b) Taxes authorized by a vote of the electors pursuant to Se ction 9(b) or
Section 12, Article 7 of the Florida Constitution; or [Amd. Ord. 50 -96
11/19/96]
(c) Personal property. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(3) Duration of Tax Exemption: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
(a) The exemption period shall be for ten (10) years, b eginning January 1st
following the year in which final approval is given by the City
Commission and the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser has been
instructed to provide such exemption. However, the City Commission
shall have the discretion to set a lesser term. [Amd. Ord. 10 -03
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50 -96 11119/96]
(b) The term of the exemption shall be specified in the r esolution approving
the exemption and shall continue regardless of any changes in the
authority of the City to grant such exemption or chang e in ownership of
the property. To retain an exemption, the historic character of the
property and the improvements which qualified the p roperty for an
exemption must be maintained in their historic state over the period for
which the exemption was granted. [Amd. Ord. 50 -96 11/19196]
4.5 - 26
SECTION 4.5i (M) (4)
(4) Effective Date of Exemption: The effective date of the tax exemption
shall be January 1 of the year following the year i n which a historic preservation
exemption covenant is recorded and a copy of the Fi nal Application and resolution of
the City Commission, as approved, have been transmi tted to the Palm Beach County
Property Appraiser. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(5) Qualifying Properties and improvements: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
(a) The following real property in the City is qual ifying property for the
purposes of this ordinance if at the time the exemp tion is approved by
the City Commission, the property: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(i) is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places
pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended; or, [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(ii) is a contributing property to a National Register-l isted district; or,
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(iii) is designated as a historic property, or as a contr ibuting
property to a historic district, under the terms of the City's historic
preservation ordinance; and, [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(iv) has been certified by the Historic Preservation Boa rd as
satisfying (a) (i), (ii), or (iii). [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(b) For an improvement to a historic property to qu alify the property for an
exemption, the improvement must: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(i) be consistent with the United States Secretary of t he Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation, as amended; [Amd. Ord. 50-96
11/19/96]
(ii) be determined an improvement by the Historic Preser vation Board
as established in rules adopted by the Department o f State,
Division of Historical Resources, FAG 1A-38, as amen ded which
defines a real property improvement as changes in t he condition of
real property brought about by the expenditure of l abor and money
for the restoration, renovation, or rehabilitation of such property.
improvements shall include, but are not limited to: modifications,
repairs, or additions to the principal contributing building and its
associated accessory structures (i.e, a garage, cab ana, guest
cottage, storage/utility structures, swimming pools ), whether
existing or new, as long as the new construction is compatible with
the historic character of the building and site in terms of size, scale,
massing, design, and materials, and preserves the h istoric
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (5 ) (b) (
4.5 - 27
relationship between a building or buildings, lands cape features,
and open space. The exemption does not apply to imp rovements
made to non-contributing principal buildings or the ir non-
contributing accessory structures. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96
(iii) be consistent with Section 4.5.1(E), "Development S tandards", of
the City's Land Development Regulations; and [Amd. Ord. 50-96
11119196]
(iv) include, as part of the overall project, visible im provements to the
exterior of the structure. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/9 6]
(6) Evaluation of Property Used for Government or Nonpr ofit Purposes:
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
(a) For purposes of the exemption under Section 196.199 8, Florida
Statutes, a property is being used for government o r nonprofit purposes
if the sole occupant of at least 65 percent of the useable space is an
agency of the federal, state or a local government unit or a nonprofit
organization certified by the Department of State u nder Section
617.0301, Florida Statutes. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/0 3]; [Amd. Ord.
50-96 11119196]
(b) For purposes of the exemption under Section 196.199 8, Florida
Statutes, a property is considered regularly and frequently open to the
public if public access to the property is provided not less than 12 days
a year on an equitably spaced basis, and at other t imes by
appointment. Nothing herein shall prohibit the owne r from charging a
reasonable nondiscriminatory admission fee, compara ble to fees
charged at similar facilities in the area. [Arad. O rd. 50-96 11119196]
(7) Application for Exemption: [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(a) Any property owner, or the authorized agent of the owner, that desires
an ad valorem tax exemption for the improvement of a historic property
must file a Tax Exemption Application with the Plan ning and Zoning
Department. The application shall be made on the tw o-part Historic
Preservation Property Tax Exemption Application, ap proved by the
State of Florida, Division of Historical Resources. Part 1 of the
application, the Construction Application, shall be submitted before,
during, or after qualifying improvements are initia ted and Part 2, the
Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Wo rk, shall be
submitted upon completion of the qualifying improve ments. The Final
Application shall contain the Historic Preservation Exemption
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (7) (a)
4.5 - 28
Covenant, as provided for herein. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd.
Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(8) Part 1, Construction Application: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd,
Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(a) A Construction Application shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning
Department before, during, or after the qualifying project is constructed.
The Construction Application shall also contain inf ormation concerning
the estimated cost of the qualifying improvement an d be accompanied
by a copy of the most recent tax bill from the Palm Beach County
Property Appraiser for the property. Upon receipt o f the Construction
Application, the Historic Preservation Planner shal l review the
application and determine whether the application i s complete and
whether the property satisfies the requirements of Section 4.5.1(M)(5)
and is therefore eligible for review by the Histori c Preservation Board.
[Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
(9) Review of Construction Application by the Historic Preservation
Board: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/191 96]
(a) The Historic Preservation Board shall review th e Construction
Application within 60 days of the Historic Preserva tion Planner's
determination of eligibility. The exterior portion of the work shall be
reviewed in accordance with the Certificate of Appr opriateness review
process simultaneously with the Part 1, Constructio n Application. If site
plan approval or a variance is required for the pro ject, the respective
applications shall be presented to the Historic Pre servation Board in
conjunction with the Certificate of Appropriateness review process. If
Part I of the Construction Application is submitted after the project has
been completed, the application must be submitted w ithin 18 months
from the date of issuance of a Certificate of Occup ancy. [Amd. Ord.
10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(i) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as
proposed is a qualifying improvement and is in comp liance with the
review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the Construction
Application and, if applicable, the Certificate of Appropriateness
shall be approved by the Historic Preservation Boar d. [Amd. Ord.
10-03 5/20/03]; [Arnd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(ii) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as
proposed is not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance
with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), corrective
measures shall be prescribed by the Board. [Amd. Or d. 10-03
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (10)
4.5 - 29
(10) Part 2, Final Application/Request for Review of Com pleted Work:
[Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/9 6]
(a) if the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work is a
qualifying improvement and is in compliance with th e review standards
contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the Board shall appr ove the Final
Application/Request for Review of Completed Work an d the Historic
Preservation Planner shall issue a written order to the applicant. The
Historic Preservation Planner will inspect the comp leted work to verify
such compliance. The review of the Historic Preserv ation Board shall
be completed within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the completed
Final Application/Request for Review of Completed W ork as verified by
the Historic Preservation Planner. [Amid, Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd.
Ord. 50 -96 11/19/96]
(b) The Final Application/Request for Review of Complet ed Work shall be
accompanied by documentation of the total expenditu res of the
qualifying improvements. Appropriate documentation may include, but
is not limited to, paid contractor's bills, NA Form s 702-704, canceled
checks, copies of invoices, and an approved buildin g permit application
listing the cost of work to be performed. Upon the receipt of a Final
Application/Request for Review of Completed Work an d all required
supporting documentations, the Historic Preservatio n Board shall
conduct a review at a regularly scheduled public me eting to determine
whether or not the completed improvements are in co mpliance with the
work described in the Construction Application, app roved amendments,
if any, and Section 4.5.1(E). After the above menti oned review, the
Historic Preservation Board shall recommend that th e City Commission
grant or deny the exemption. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord,
50-96 11/19/96]
(c) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as
completed is either not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance
with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the applicant
shall be advised that the Final Application has bee n denied. The
Historic Preservation Planner shall provide a writt en summary of the
reasons for the determination to the applicant. [Amd. Ord. 10 -03
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(11) Appeal to the Historic Preservation Board's Decision: [Amd. Ord. 1003
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(a) Any action taken by the Historic Preservation B oard is appealable to
the City Commission pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E), "Appeals'. [Amd.
Ord. 10 -03 5120/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (12)
- 30
(12) Approval by the City Commission: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Amd.
Ord. 50-96 11119196]
(a) Upon approval of a Final Application/Request fo r Review of Completed
Work by the Historic Preservation Board, the Final Application shall be
placed by resolution on the agenda of the City Comm ission for
approval. The resolution of the City Commission app roving the Final
Application shall provide the name of the owner of the property, the
property address and legal description, a recorded restrictive covenant
as provided in Section 4.5.1(M)(13) in the official records of Palm
Beach County as a condition of receiving the exempt ion, and the
effective dates of the exemption, including the exp iration date. [Amd.
Ord. 10-03 5/20103]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(13) Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant: [Amd. Ord. 10-03
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
(a) To qualify for an exemption, the applicant must sig n and return the
Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant with the F inal
Application/Request for Review of Completed Work. T he covenant as
established by the Department of State, Division of Historical
Resources, shall be in a form approved by the City o f Delray Beach
City Attorney's Office and applicable for the term for which the
exemption is granted and shall require the characte r of the property
and qualifying improvements to be maintained during the period that
the exemption is granted_ [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Arnd. Ord. 50-
96 11119196]
(b) On or before the effective date of the exemption, t he owner of the
property shall have the covenant recorded in the of ficial records of
Palm Beach County, Florida, and shall cause a certi fied copy of the
recorded covenant to be delivered to the City's His toric Preservation
Planner. Such covenant shall be binding on the curr ent property
owner, transferees, and their heirs, assigns and su ccessors. A
violation of the covenant shall result in the prope rty owner being subject
to the payment of the differences between the total amount of the taxes
which would have been due in March of each of the p revious years in
which the covenant or agreement was in effect had t he property not
received the exemption and the total amount of taxe s actually paid in
those years, plus interest on the difference calcul ated as provided in
Sec. 212_12(3), Florida Statutes. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120103]; [Amd.
Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(14) Completion of Work: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5120/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96
11/19/96]
4.5 - 31
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (14) (a)
(a) An applicant must complete all work within two (2) years following the
date of approval of a Part 1 Construction Applicati on by the Historic
Preservation Board. A Construction Application shal l be automatically
revoked if the property owner has not submitted a F inal
Application/Request for Review of Completed Work wi thin two (2) years
following the date of approval of the Construction Application. [Amd.
Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19196]
(b) The City Commission, upon the recommendation of the Historic
Preservation Board, may extend the time for complet ion of a
substantial improvement in accordance with the proc edures of the
City's Building Code. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(15) Notice of Approval to the Property Appraiser: [Amd. Ord. 10-03
5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(a) Upon the receipt of a certified copy of the recorde d restrictive covenant
by the Historic Preservation Planner, the Planner s hall transmit a copy
of the approved Final Application/Request for Revie w of Completed
Work, the exemption covenant and the resolution of the City
Commission approving the Final Application and auth orizing the tax
exemption to the Palm Beach County Property Apprais er. [Amd. Ord,
10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(b) The resolution approving an historic tax exemption must be filed with
the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser on or befo re January 1st of
the year in which an exemption is requested. Theref ore, the Final
Application/Request for Review of Completed Work mu st be submitted
no later than November 1 st of the year the work was completed in order
to process the application for both the Historic Pr eservation Board and
City Commission approvals. If the Final Application /Request for
Review of Completed Work is not submitted by Novemb er 1 st of the
year the work was completed, the abatement will not take effect until
the following year of the date of submittal. [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03];
[Amd. Ord. 50-96 11119/96]
(16) Revocation Proceedings: [Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Amd. Ord. 50-
96 11/19/96]
(a) The Historic Preservation Board may initiate pr oceedings to revoke the
ad valorem tax exemption provided herein, in the ev ent the applicant,
or subsequent owner or successors in interest to th e property, fails to
maintain the property according to the terms, condi tions and standards
of the Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant. [A md. Ord. 50-96
11/19196]
4.5 - 32
SECTION 4.5.1 (M) (16) (b)
(b) The Historic Preservation Planner shall provide not ice to the current
owner of record of the property and the Historic Pr eservation Board
shall hold a revocation hearing in the same manner as in Section
4.5.1(M)(10), and make a recommendation to the City Commission.
[Amd. Ord. 10-03 5/20/03]; [Arad. Ord. 50-96 111191 96]
(c) The City Commission shall review the recommendation of the Historic
Preservation Board and make a determination as to w hether the tax
exemption shall be revoked. Should the City Commiss ion determine
that the tax exemption shall be revoked, a written resolution revoking
the exemption and notice of penalties as provided i n Paragraph 8 of the
covenant shall be provided to the owner, the Palm B each County
Property Appraiser, and filed in the official recor ds of Palm Beach
County. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/96]
(d) Upon receipt of the resolution revoking the tax exe mption, the Palm
Beach County Property Appraiser shall discontinue t he tax exemption
on the property as of January 1st of the year follo wing receipt of the
notice of revocation. [Amd. Ord. 50-96 11/19/961
Section 4.5.2 Noise Control: Any land use established within the City of Delray
Beach must comply with the requirements of Chapter 99, Noise Control, of the Code of
Ordinances.
Section 4.5.3 Flood Damage Control Districts:
(A) Purpose and Intent: It is the purpose of this Overlay Zone District to promote
the public health, safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses
due to flood conditions in specific areas by provis ions designed to:
(1) Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to he alth, safety, and
property due to water or erosion or in flood height s or velocities;
(2) Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including f acilities which serve these
uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction;
(3) Control the alteration of natural flood plains, str eam channels, and natural
protective barriers which are involved in the accom modation of flood waters;
(4) Control filling, grading, dredging, and other devel opment which may
increase erosion or flood damage; and,
(5) Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barri ers which will unnaturally
divert flood waters or which may increase flood haz ards to other lands.
4.5 - 32
EXHIBIT "C"
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation
The Secretary of the interior's Standards for Rehabi litation are ten basic principles
created to help preserve the distinctive character of a historic building and its site, while
allowing for reasonable change to meet new needs. T he Standards (36 CFR Part 67)
apply to historic buildings of all periods, styles, types, materials, and sizes. They apply
to both the exterior and the interior of historic b uildings. The Standards also encompass
related landscape features and the building's site and environment as well as attached,
adjacent, or related new construction.
1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose o r be placed in a new use
that requires minimal change to the defining charac teristics of the building and its site
and environment.
2. The historic character of a property shall be retai ned and preserved. The
removal of historic materials or alteration of feat ures and spaces that characterize a
property shall be avoided.
3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical rec ord of its time, place,
and use. Changes that create a false sense of histo rical development, such as
adding conjectural features or architectural elemen ts from other buildings, shall not
be undertaken.
4. Most properties change over time; those changes tha t have acquired historic
significance in their own right shall be retained a nd preserved.
5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction te chniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired ra ther than replaced. Where
the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new
feature shall match the old in design, color, textu re, and other visual qualities and,
where possible, materials. Replacement of missing fe atures shall be substantiated
by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasti ng, that cause damage
to historic materials shall not be used. The surfac e cleaning of structures, if
appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. Significant archeological resources affected by a p roject shall be
protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures
shall be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not
destroy historic materials that characterize the pr operty. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and
architectural features to protect the historic inte grity of the property and its
environment.
10.New additions and adjacent or related new constr uction shall be undertaken in
such a manner that if removed in the future, the es sential form and integrity of the
historic property and its environment would be unim paired.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Planning and Zoning Director
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:October 13, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.C.1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S
DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is cons ideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation
Board’s (HPB) decision made on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s motion to approve the waiver of
required parking spaces at 85 SE 6th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon a failure to make positive
findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2.
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of October 4, 2011, the City Commiss ion considered the subject appeal and tabled the
item so that additional background information and clarification could be provided by Staff regarding
the outstanding violations of the illegal conversio n of the garage to office use, and the Code
Enforcement Board case which was resolved in 2003. The summary of the longstanding history of
outstanding permits, the code case, and multiple si te plan applications submitted for HPB review is
below.
In researching our files, a Class V site plan was s ubmitted in 1995 for the conversion of the principa l
structure (Blank House) to retail use; conversion o f the garage to office use, construction of a 9 spa ce
pea rock parking area at the SW corner of the site; and additional site improvements. The request was
approved by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) o n August 16, 1995 (valid through February 1997),
and it was noted that this approval was for a conve rsion that already occurred without permits, and
without the provision of required parking. No site improvements were installed and the site plan
approval expired in February 1997. On March 17, 200 0, a building permit application was submitted to
convert the garage space to office and to construct associated site improvements (parking lot, etc.). As
the original site plan approval had expired (Februa ry, 1997), a new site plan approval was required. O n
December 12, 2000 a Class III site plan modificatio n was submitted for conversion of garage to two
offices (already established), installation of outd oor dining and exterior staircase for the Blank Hou se,
and construction of 8 asphalt parking spaces at the SW corner of lot, and 1 handicap space at the Nort h
side of the lot. A building permit was submitted on December 19, 2001 (01-77442) for the conversion
from garage to office and related site improvements . This permit request did not include the garage do or
replacement with French doors done in 1995.
On January 18, 2001, a code violation was issued (C EB-01-77906) for conducting work without a
permit (changing of the garage doors to French door s). As the applicant was seeking site plan approval
(per December 12, 2000 submittal) for the use conve rsion, the citation was likely limited to the physi cal
work which had been accomplished without a permit. The Class III site plan modification request
submitted on December 12, 2000 was approved at the HPB meeting of May 2, 2001. This site plan was
not certified (conditions of approval had not been addressed) and the permit was not issued. The
improvements were not constructed and the Class III approval (May, 2001) expired on November 2,
2002. As no action was taken by the applicant to ge t a permit for the conversion of the doors, a lien was
levied on April 18, 2002.
A new Class III site plan modification and COA (200 3-052 SPM) were submitted on November 22,
2002, which included the conversion of the garage i nto offices and associated site improvements
(including parking). This was approved subject to c onditions on March 19, 2003. The Class III site pla n
modification was certified on June 3, 2003, and bui lding permits were issued on August 6, 2003 (01-
77442).
As the French doors were now included in the improv ements on the permit, the citation issued by the
Code Enforcement Division (work constructed without a permit) was satisfied and a letter was sent to
the applicant on August 15, 2003. The lien amount w as considered by Code Enforcement on October
14, 2003 and reduced. This reduced lien was paid on November 13, 2003 and the lien was closed.
On December 5, 2003, a COA and Class II Site Plan M odification (COA 2004-076-SPI-CL2) was
submitted. The request included an English Rose Gar den and fountain in place of the parking lot and a
request to replace the 9 spaces with 6 in-lieu parking spaces. A reduction to 6 spaces from 9 was
requested as the apartment conversion originally pa rt of the 1995 approval was never implemented.
A revision to building permit number 01-77442 was f iled on December 29, 2003 to “change parking lot
to English Rose Garden and walk path”. The permit was put on hold pending Class II site pl an approval
(submitted on December 5, 2003) which was scheduled for HPB consideration on January 7, 2004. The
item was tabled by HPB at this meeting due to conce rns over the elimination of the parking spaces. The
HPB approved the Class II modification at its meeti ng of March 4, 2004 and recommended approval of
the purchase of 6 in-lieu of parking spaces.
The request for 6 in-lieu of parking spaces was reviewed by the City Com mission at 4 separate meetings
with a final approval granted for the purchase of 2 in-lieu parking with 4 additional new spaces for a
total of 7 spaces to be provided on site. The Class II site plan modification expired in August of 200 5, as
revised plans were never submitted for certificatio n, and the in-lieu fees were never paid. As a result,
the revision to permit 01-77442, submitted on December 29, 2003, was never is sued, and the permit file
was closed out on July 24, 2008 due to no activity.
At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed ye t another attempt after 16 years to address the
office conversion. This request was to waive all re quired parking (6 spaces) for the office space
conversion. This request was not supported and the appeal of that denial is now before the City
Commission.
WAIVER:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2., waivers m ay be granted by the Historic Preservation Board
for relief from the number of parking spaces requir ed in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmati on
that adequate parking for a proposed use may be ach ieved by alternate means which are found to be in
keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delra y Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
As required above, confirmation that adequate parki ng can be achieved by alternate means has not been
presented. Past site plan submittals have been appr oved which adequately provided the required amount
of parking and were found to be appropriate and com patible to the historic property. Further, in 2004,
additional options were approved to provide for a p ortion of the parking on-site and a portion via in-
lieu. None of these options were followed up on or completed.
Waiving the required parking spaces altogether will have the potential to adversely affect the
neighboring area in that the required parking for t his private project will utilize public parking spa ces,
thereby reducing the number of public spaces availa ble for other users.
In addition to the above, it should be considered t hat while relief may be granted to the amount of
required parking spaces, the intent of this “benefi t” afforded to historic properties is not to excuse th e
provision of all parking but to provide alternative s. Otherwise, one could conclude that all parking o n
historic properties converted to office use is not necessary.
It is noted that the parking requirement currently being applied is significantly less than the curren t code
requirement. To understand the intensity of the use s on the site, and what their parking requirement
would be if the site were required to comply with t oday’s parking requirement, the following is noted.
The required parking for each individual use would be: office-4, restaurant-13, multi-family residence -
7, for a total of 24 spaces. The mixed-use parking calculation would require that twenty (20) spaces be
provided, plus the two (2) spaces eliminated from t he garage conversion to office. Utilizing the old c ode
requirements requires that only nine (9) parking sp aces be provided (3 existing and 6 for the garage
conversion).
The current request is to legally establish the afo renoted change of use, and to completely waive the
required six (6) parking spaces. The subject reques t is not supported by Staff nor has it received sup port
from other reviewing Boards. If Commission finds th at the most appropriate manner in which to
maintain the historic integrity of the site is to n ot physically provide any parking spaces, then Staf f
recommends that the property owner be required to m ake payment of all required spaces (6) via the in-
lieu of parking process. This alternative would be the fair approach given that other historic propert ies
converted to commercial use have been obligated to account for their required parking through the
available and appropriate options, including the in -lieu program.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) considered the subject request at its March 10, 2011
meeting, where they recommended denial of the waive r to the required parking. The Board also
requested that the item return for further review w hen “a solution is worked out.”
The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011
meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the
required spaces. Direction was given to the applica nt to work out an alternative approach with Staff, and
return to the DDA for further review.
The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) consid ered the subject request at its June 28, 2011
meeting, where a recommendation to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested that the
applicant work with Staff and accommodate three (3) spaces on site and provide the balance either
through an off-site parking agreement, or via the i n-lieu of parking fee.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Pre servation Board’s action of denial.
1
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
WAIVER REQUEST FOR 85 SE 6 TH AVENUE
1. This waiver request came before the City Commission on October 18,
2011.
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the wai ver request to reduce the
required parking for 85 SE 6 th Avenue from six (6) spaces to zero (0) spaces. All of th e
evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance
with Subsection I.
I. WAIVERS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to grantin g a waiver, the
approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area;
(b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of p ublic facilities;
(c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and,
(d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same
waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on ot her
property for another applicant or owner.
A. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2, waivers m ay be granted by the
Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in
Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation that a dequate parking for a proposed
use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the
provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preser vation Design Guidelines.
As provided for in the referenced Section above, the applicant has requested a
waiver to the provision of the six (6) required parkin g spaces. The following is an
excerpt from the attached waiver justification statement provided with the request:
“Adequate parking…can be…achieved by alternate means whi ch are consistent
with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Hist oric Preservation Design
Guidelines…Thus, the owner is seeking to maintain the hist oric integrity of the site by
allowing the property to exist with 3 spaces on the Pro perty.
2
…the disruption of existing open spaces to provide other wise underutilized
parking would undermine the intent of Ordinance 38-07 and Future Land Use Policy A-
4.2, which mandates that redevelopment shall provide f or the preservation of existing
resources.”
Does the waiver to Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2 to allow a reduction in parking
from six (6) spaces to zero (0) spaces meet all of t he requirements of
2.4.7(B)(5)?
Yes _______ No _______
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive P lan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the original dev elopment application was
submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The City Commission finds there is ample and compete nt substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff r eports, testimony of experts and other
competent witnesses supporting these findings.
5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Co mmission approves ___
denies ___ the waiver request to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City C ommission hereby adopts
this Order this 18th day of October, 2011, by a vote o f _____ in favor and ____
opposed.
________________________________
ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
________________________________
Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:September 30, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.B.1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETI NG OF OCTOBER 4, 2011
CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL/HPB'S DECISION/WAIVER REQUEST
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is consideration of an appeal of the Historic Preservation
Board’s (HPB) rejection of the waiver request on August 21, 2011. The HPB’s motion to approve the
waiver of required parking spaces at 85 SE 6 th Avenue failed on a 0-5 vote, based upon a failure to
make positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2.
BACKGROUND
On August 16, 1995, the HPB approved a COA for two (2) of the three (3) on-site buildings including
the conversion of the Blank House from single-family residence to retail use (Building A), the
conversion of a garage to office use and addition of a second story residential apartment (Building B),
and the construction of a nine-space, pea-rock parking area off of SE 1st Street. The third building
(Building C) was, and remains, a multi-family residence. The single family residence (Building A) was
subsequently converted to retail use and the garage was converted to office use. Building permits were
not obtained for the conversion of the garage nor was the parking area required for this conversion ever
installed. As a result, the office use was never legally established.
In October of 1995, the retail use (B uilding A) was legally converted to restaurant use and the second
floor to a storage area.
Between 1995 and 2004 as the illegal status of the office use continued to surface, Site Plan
Applications were submitted and approved for the conversion of use with associated parking
improvements. Each application was allowed to e xpire and none of the required improvements were
ever constructed. The latest approval of August 3, 2004 permitted the applicant to pay for two (2)
parking spaces and included the installation of the balance of required spaces on site (a t otal of four new
spaces just south of the City’s public parking lot and retention of three existing spac es off the alley on
the east side of property). As with previous approva ls, no improvements were constructed, no payments
of in-lieu of parking f ees were made, and the approvals expired.
Page 1of 3 Coversheet
10/14/2011 htt p ://itweba pp /A g endaIntranet/Bluesheet.as p x?ItemID=4984&Meetin g ID=331
At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed yet another attempt, after 16 years, to address the
office conversion. This request was to waive all required parking (6 spaces) for the office space
conversion. This request was denied and the appeal of that denial is now before the City Commission.
WAIVER:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2., waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation Board
for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation
that adequate parking for a proposed use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in
keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
Confirmation that adequate parking can be achieved has not been presented. Past site plan submit tals
have been approved which adequately provided the required amount of parking and were found to be
appropriate and compatible to the historic property. Further, in 2004, additional options were approved
to provide for a portion of the parking on-site and a portion via in-lieu. None of these options were
followed up on or completed.
Waiving the required parking spaces altogether will have the potential to adversely affect the
neighboring area in that the required parking for th is private project will utilize public parking spaces,
thereby reducing the number of public spa ces available for other users.
In addition to the above, it should be considered that while relief may be granted to the amount o f
required parking spaces, the intent of this “benefit” a fforded to historic properties is not to excuse the
provision of all parking but to provide alternatives. Otherwise, one could conclude that parking on
historic properties converted to office use is not necessary.
It is noted that the parking requirement currently being applied is significantly less than the c urrent code
requirement. To understand the intensity of the uses on the site, and what their parking requirement
would be if the site were require d to comply with today’s parking requirement, the following is noted.
The required parking for each individual use would be: office-4, restaurant-13, multi-family residence-
7, for a total of 24 spaces. The mixed-use parking calculation would require that twenty (20) space s be
provided, plus the two (2) spaces eliminated from the garage conversion to office. Utilizing t he old code
requirements requires that only nine (9) parking spaces be provided (3 existing and 6 for the garage
conversion).
The current request is to legally establish the aforenoted change of use, and to completely w aive the
required six (6) parking spaces. The subject request is not supported by Staff nor has it received support
from other reviewing Boards. If Commission finds that the most appropriate manner in which to
maintain the historic integrity of the site is to not physically provide any parking spaces , then Staf f
recommends that the property owner be required to ma ke payment of all required spaces (6) via the in-
lieu of parking process. This alternative would be th e fair approach given that other historic properties
converted to commercial use have been obligated to account for their required parking through the
available and appropriate options , including the in-lieu program.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) consid ered the subject request at its March 10, 2011
meeting, where they recommended denial of the wa iver to the required parking. The Board also
requested that the item return for further revi ew when “a solution is worked out.”
The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) considered the subject request at its March 14, 2011
Page 2of 3 Coversheet
10/14/2011 htt p ://itweba pp /A g endaIntranet/Bluesheet.as p x?ItemID=4984&Meetin g ID=331
meeting, where the Board unanimously recommended to “decline” the request to waive all six (6) of the
required spaces. Direction was given to the applicant to work out an alternative approach with Staff, a nd
return to the DDA for further review.
The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) c onsidered the subject request at its June 28, 2011
meeting, where a recommendation to deny the request as presented. The Board suggested that the
applicant work with Staff and ac commodate three (3) spaces on site and provide the balance either
through an off-site parking agreement, or via the in-lieu of parking fee.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Historic Preservation Board’s action of denial.
Page 3of 3 Coversheet
10/14/2011 htt p ://itweba pp /A g endaIntranet/Bluesheet.as p x?ItemID=4984&Meetin g ID=331
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Terrill Pyburn, Assistant City Attorney
THROUGH:Brian Shutt, City Attorney
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
REQUEST TO CHALLENGE THE FUNDING MECHANISM PERTAINING TO PALM BE ACH
COUNTY'S INSPECTOR GENERAL PROGRAM
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This is a request for authorization to allow the Ci ty Attorney to join Delray Beach with other
municipalities in a lawsuit challenging the funding mechanism pertaining to Palm Beach County’s
Inspector General Program.
BACKGROUND
1. The Municipalities are bringing this lawsuit solely to contest the funding mechanism for the
Inspector General Program, not to overturn the Prog ram.
2. The current funding mechanism, whi ch makes the Municipalities share in the cost of th e
Inspector General Program, is an unlawful tax and g oes against past precedent for countywide
programs.
3. For the funding mechanism to be l awful, the County must pay for the Inspector Genera l
Program in its entirety.
RECOMMENDATION
The City Attorney’s office recommends City Commissi on discretion.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:October 12, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/DELRAY BEACH TWILIGHT BICYCLE RACE A ND
WELLNESS FESTIVAL
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Commission is requested to approve a Special Event Permit request for the Delray Beach Twilight
Bicycle Race and Wellness Festival proposed to be h eld on March 9, 2012 from 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 p.m.
and March 10, 2012 from 8:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m., produced by RAC Event Productions /
Swaggerolls. Commission is also requested to grant a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F)
for the use and closure of Atlantic Avenue from Swi nton to Railroad Way, Railroad Way from Atlantic
to NE 1 st Street, NE 1 st Street from Railroad Way to Swinton and NE 1 st Avenue from Old School
Square grounds to Atlantic from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 10, 2012
for the bike races. The event producer is also requ esting staff assistance for traffic control and sec urity,
EMS assistance, trash removal and cleanup, trash bo xes and event signage.
BACKGROUND
Attached are a letter, special event permit, site p lans, budget, economic prosperity calculator, propo sed
event schedules and additional information received from Chelsea Midlarsky.
The event consists of a Wellness Festival, which wi ll be held on the grounds of Old School Square, as
well as men’s and women’s professional races to be held on Saturday evening ; race route is per the
attached site maps.
The festival will include a food court, beer garden , health and wellness vendors and entertainment. St aff
has been meeting with the event producers and the D owntown Development Authority staff over the
last couple of months to work out details and conce rns. The event producer will be responsible for
overall event management, as well as barricading st reets for the races.
Estimated City costs for this event are as follows: $14,700 for overtime, $250 for event signage, $350
for trash boxes and $2,000 for the Old School Squar e Park rental for a total of $17,300. Per Event
Policies and Procedures, the event producer is resp onsible for payment of 100% of all of these
costs. Ms. Midlarsky will be present to answer any questions you may have.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the special event perm it, temporary use permit and City staff assistance
including signage and trash boxes as requested with the following conditions:
1.Receipt of a non-refundable deposit in the amount of $2,000 by February 7, 2012.
2.Receipt of a Certificate of Event Liability and A lcohol Liability Insurance by February 19, 2012.
3.Receipt of a signed and notarized Hold Harmless A greement by February 19, 2012.
4.Copies of signed rental agreements with Old School Square and the City for use of Old School
Square Park by February 25, 2012.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Bob Diaz, Construction Manager
Richard C. Hasko, Environmental Services Director
THROUGH:David T. Harden
DATE:October 17, 2011
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2011
BID AWARD/RANDOLPH AND DEWDNEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the Commission to consider appr oval of a bid award to Randolph and Dewdney
Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $456,710 .00 for renovations to the Pompey Park Concession
Stand.
BACKGROUND
The Pompey Park concession stand building, original ly constructed in 1974, has had only one
substantial enhancement with the addition of a seco nd floor press box in 1991. The building is current ly
in need of extensive renovations as a result of exp eriencing years of weathering and use by the public .
Interior spaces of the building like the restrooms are small, inadequately lit and poorly ventilated. In the
opinion of staff, the structure has not exhausted i t useful life so refurbishing the building is
recommended. As a result, funds were programmed int o the Capital Improvements program for fiscal
year 2011.
Bids for this project were opened on Thursday, May 12, 2011; six bids were received. The apparent low
bidder was Randolph and Dewdney Construction with a bid amount of $456,710.00. Construction time
for this proposal has been reduced to 120 days.
The agenda item for award of this bid was tabled at the July 12, 2011 Special/Workshop meeting with
some Commissioners expressing reluctance to spend t he total cost of the project. Since then staff has
explored less expensive alternatives for the rehabi litation project including revisiting a phased appr oach
involving only the first floor rehabilitation and r eplacement of the deteriorated staircase to the exi sting
second floor press box.
Staff presented the Phase I proposal to Commission at the August 30, 2011 Workshop Meeting. During
discussion of the Phase I alternative, it was noted that the windows in the existing press box were
Plexiglas, and had weathered and fogged to a degree that significantly hindered visibility of the ball
fields. Commission expressed a consensus that the w indow replacement should also be included in the
Phase 1 scope. After further discussion, Commission directed staff to place the item on the September 6,
2011 agenda for action at which time Commission cou ld choose to construct the entire project as bid
and award the contract to Randolph & Dewdney Constr uction as the lowest responsive bidder for the
amount of $456,710.00; or build only the first phas e improvements limited to first floor rehabilitatio n
scope and replacement of the stairway to the second floor. The estimated construction cost for that
scope is $233,000.00. The replacement of the weathe red windows in the press box would add to Phase I
costs estimated as follows:
Replace with impact resistant windows $ 15,000 or r eplace with new Plexiglas $ 6,000.
On advice of the City Attorney, should Commission o pt to approve the Phase I scope only, the project
will need to be rebid. On September 6, 2011 Commiss ion voted 2/2 (no action); as a result the City
pursued the option to secure additional funding for the project from the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA). The Community Redevelopment Agency (C RA) subsequently approved the request for
funding on October 13th, 2011 for the amount of $20 0,000.00 (see attached email); this will allow the
City to conduct all of the proposed renovations in lieu of phasing the project. Randolph and Dewdney
Construction, Inc. has agreed to honor the bid amo unts submitted on May 12, 2011 (see attached letter ).
FUNDING SOURCE
Funding is available from 334-4127-572-62.10 (General Construction Fund/ Pompey Park Conce ssion
Stand).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a bid award to Randolph and Dewdney Construction, Inc., in the total
amount of $456,710.00 for the renovations to the Pompey Park Concession Stand.