03-06-12 Regular MeetingCity of Delray Beach Regular Commission Meeting RULES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Tuesday, March 6, 2012 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, FL 33444 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. February 21, 2012 – Regular Meeting 6. PROCLAMATIONS: A. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Awareness Month – March 2012 B. Fix A Leak
Week – March 12-18, 2012 C. National Kids to Parks Day – May 19, 2012 7. PRESENTATIONS: A. NONE 8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval A. FINAL BOUNDARY PLAT APPROVAL/JOYA:
Approve the Joya Plat located at the southeast corner of S.E. 1st Avenue and S.E. 1st Street. B. REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRALS/1041 SEASPRAY AVENUE: Approve requests to defer the installation
of a sidewalk along Beach Drive and Seaspray Avenue for a proposed two-story single family residence at 1041 Seaspray Avenue within the
North Beach Overlay District. C. RESOLUTION NO. 12-12: ABANDONMENT OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT: SAXENA WHITE CORPORATE OFFICES: Approve Resolution No. 12-12 to abandon a 10’ wide drainage easement
for Saxena White Corporate Office located at 111 S.E. 1st Avenue. D. AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (JPA)/FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT): Approve Amendment
No. 2 to the Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the proposed landscaping along Atlantic Ave (SR 806) from I-95 to N.W./S.W.
12th Avenueto extend the deadline to June 30, 2013. E. RESOLUTION NO. 14-12: Approve Resolution No. 14-12 assessing costs for abatement action required to remove nuisances on thirty
(30) properties throughout the City of Delray Beach. F. GRANT AWARD/HOME DEPOT FOUNDATION: Accept a grant award from Home Depot Foundation in the amount of $5,000 in support of the Curb
Appeal by the Block program. G. AGREEMENT/EAGLE 1 RESOURCES, LLC.: Approve an agreement with Eagle 1 Resource, LLC in the amount of $18,750.00 to review existing lease agreements with
Florida East Coast Railroad to see if any lease agreement expenses can be eliminated. Funding is available from 448-5461-538-31.90 (Storm Water Utility Fund: Other Operating/Other Contractual
Service) and 442-5178-536-31.90 (W & S Renewal and Replacement Fund: Professional Services/Other Professional Services). H. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept
the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period February 21, 2012 through March 2, 2012. 9. REGULAR AGENDA: A. APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE
BOARD ACTION: TMOBILE: Consider an appeal of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board’s decision to deny the request by T-Mobile to amend the blanket sign program for the Fountains
Plaza located at 14451 S. Military Trail. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) B. WAIVER REQUEST/SW DELRAY ONE, LLC.: Consider a waiver request with SW Delray One, LLC. to reduce the required sidewalk
width from 8’ to 5’ along S.E. 1st Avenue for Saxena White Corporate Offices located at 111 S.E. 1stAvenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) C. WAIVER REQUESTS/WAYSIDE HOUSE: Consider approval
of two (2) waiver requests to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), “Height”, to permit a building addition to be constructed less than the minimum height requirement
of 25’; and Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(b) (1), “Lower Levels”, to permit a building addition to exceed the lower level setback
requirements for building on N.E. 6th Avenue, within the Central Business District (CBD) for Wayside House located at 328-378 N.E. 6th Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) D. WAIVER REQUEST/1041
SEASPRAY AVENUE: Consider a waiver request to reduce the required sight visibility triangle from 10’ to 4’6” for a clear line of sight between 3’ and 6’ height in the area along both
sides of the driveway on 1041 Seaspray Avenue for a proposed new two-story single family residence within the North Beach Overlay District. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) E. VALET PARKING
QUEUE EXPANSION/PRIME STEAKHOUSE: Consider approval of a request from Prime Steakhouse, located at 110 E. Atlantic Avenue, to expand their valet parking queue from 2 to 6 spaces. F.
RESOLUTION NO. 13-12/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA): Consider approval of Resolution No. 13-12 authorizing the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to issue Tax Increment Redevelopment
Bonds not to exceed $4,000,000.00 to fund certain projects. G. REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST/ROBERT GOLDSTEIN: Consider a request to reimburse Robert Goldstein the amount of $13,161.85 for Plan
Review fees paid upon the submission of a permit application for a new single family home on July 19, 2005. H. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/FOOD TRUCK JAM: Consider approval of a special event
request for the Food Truck Jam to be produced by Ruth Rales Jewish Family Services proposed to be held on May 6, 2012 from noon to 4:00 p.m. on the Old School Square Park grounds; and
to authorize staff support for security and traffic control, trash removal and site cleanup, and fire inspection services; contingent upon meeting the conditions listed in the staff
report. I. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/DELRAY ROCKS: Consider approval of a special event request for Delray Rocks, a music festival, to be produced by Josh Davis to be held on September 22,
2012 from noon to 11:00 p.m. at Old School Square and in Old School Square Park; and to authorize staff support for security and traffic control, EMS services, fire inspection, site
cleanup and trash removal, event signage, use of the small city stage and trash boxes; contingent upon meeting the conditions listed in the staff report. J. APPOINTMENT TO THE PUBLIC
ART ADVISORY BOARD: Appoint one (1) regular member to the Public Art Advisory Board to serve an unexpired term ending July 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the appointment will
be made by Commissioner Carney (Seat #1). 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. RESOLUTION NO. 09-12/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/421 S.W. 5th AVENUE: Consider approval of Resolution No. 09-12,
which incorporates a Contract for Sale and Purchase between the City and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to provide that the City agrees to accept the property is in “As Is”
condition and to restrict use of the property to public uses, including but not limited to drainage
retention, for the benefit of the general public located at 421 S.W. 5th Avenue in the amount of $10.00. 1. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA): Consider approving
an Interlocal Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) providing that the City agrees to accept the property is in “As Is” condition and restrict the use of the property
to public uses, including but not limited to drainage retention, for the benefit of the general public located at 421 S.W. 5th Avenue; contingent upon approval of Resolution 09-12 and
the Contract for Sale and Purchase. B. RESOLUTION NO. 11-12/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/530 N.W. 47th AVENUE: Consider approval of Resolution No. 11-12, a contract for sale and purchase,
authorizing the City to sell the Neighborhood Stabilization Program property located at 530 N.W. 47th Avenue to Jean Louigene Nelan for the purchase price of $45,000.00. 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. 05-12: Consider a privately-initiated Future Land Use Map change from Transitional (TRN) to General Commercial (GC), rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center)
to PC (Planned Commercial), and a Text Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan modifying the description of the GC (General Commercial) Future Land Use designation to identify a maximum
FAR of 0.46 for a 9.95 acre property located on the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) known as Delray Place. If passed, a
public hearing will be held on March 20, 2012. B. ORDINANCE NO. 12-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 8.5.1, “Establishment of
Public Arts Program”, Subsection (B), “Appropriation of Capital Improvement Project (CIP Funds)”, setting forth the right to use funds as appropriated in the City’s budget. If passed,
a public hearing will be held on March 20, 2012. 13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: A. City Manager B. City Attorney C. City Commission
02/21/12 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 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, February 21, 2012. 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/Abbey Delray South. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was given. 4. AGENDA APPROVAL. Mayor
McDuffie stated Item 9.C. Reimbursement Request/Robert Goldstein, has been removed by the applicant and Item 9.D., Amendment No. 5 to the Franchise Agreement/Waste Management has been
removed by staff. Also, Mayor McDuffie requested that Item 8.C., Service Authorization No. 12-01/Mathews Consulting, Inc./Congress Avenue Force Main Replacement be removed from the Consent
Agenda and moved to the Regular Agenda as Item 9.A.A. Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Agenda as amended, 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 was passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dr. Alperin moved to approve the
Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of January 31, 2012, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
2 02/21/12 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. Dr. Alperin moved to approve
the Minutes of the February 6, 2012 Workshop Meeting, 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. Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 7, 2012, 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.
6. PROCLAMATIONS: 6.A. None 7. PRESENTATIONS: 7.A. Recognizing and commending Douglas Smith, Milena Walinski and Richard Reade for participating in the Palm Beach County League of Cities,
Inc. Economic Sustainability Speaker Series Mayor McDuffie recognized and commended Douglas Smith, Milena Walinski and Richard Reade for participating in the Palm Beach County League
of Cities, Inc. Economic Sustainability Speaker Series and presented them with certificates. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval. 8.A. RATIFICATION OF SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL BOARD ACTION: Approve and ratify the action of the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Board at their Quarterly Meeting of January
19, 2012. 8.B. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT/302 N.E. 7TH AVENUE: Approve a Hold Harmless Agreement with Hartman House B & B, LLC. for encroachment of a sign into the right-of-way at 302 N.E.
7th Avenue. 8.C. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA AS ITEM 9.A.A. 8.D. REIMBURSEMENT TO FLORIDA EAST COAST (FEC) RAILROAD: Approve reimbursement in the amount of $55,765.40
to Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad for the reconstruction of the East Atlantic Avenue railroad crossing. Funding is available from 334-3162-541-46.90 (General Construction Fund: Repair
& Maintenance Services/Other Repair/Maintenance Costs).
3 02/21/12 8.E. APPROVAL OF POLL WORKERS FOR THE FIRST NONPARTISAN ELECTION: Approve the poll workers for the First Nonpartisan Election to be held on March 13, 2012. 8.F. REVIEW OF
APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period February 6, 2012 through February 17, 2012. 8.G. AWARD
OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Contract award to MWI Pumps in the amount of $16,987.17 to rebuild storm water pump at the Seasage Drive Pump Station. Funding is available from 448-5416-538-46.90
(Storm Water Utility Fund: Repair & Maintenance Svc/Other Repair/Maintenance Cost). 2. Purchase award to Broward Motor Sports in the amount of $21,336.00 for three (3) ATVs for Ocean
Rescue. Funding is available from 501-3312-591-64.20 (Garage Fund: Machinery/Equipment/Automotive). 3. Purchase award to HD Supply Waterworks in the amount of $15,225.69 for various
piping materials to be installed by the City's in-house construction crew for N.W. 16th Street water main project. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-68.61 (Water/Sewer Renewal &
Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/N.W. 16th Street Water Main). 4. Purchase award to Intercounty Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $74,640.98 for emergency force main repair at Lowson
Boulevard and Congress Avenue intersection. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-46.24 (W & S Renewal & Replacement Fund: Repair & Maintenance Service/Repair Sewer Mains). 5. Purchase
award to Otto Waste Systems in the amount of $58,150.00 to purchase additional garage containers in various sizes for Barrier Island residents who will have curb-side service starting
April 1, 2012. Funding is available from 433-3711-534-49.90 (Sanitation Fund: Other Current Charges). Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Frankel.
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.
4 02/21/12 9. REGULAR AGENDA: 9.A.A. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 12-01/MATHEWS CONSULTING, INC./CONGRESS AVENUE FORCE MAIN REPLACEMENT: Approve Service Authorization No. 12-01 to Mathews
Consulting, Inc. in the amount of $106,291.00 for professional engineering services in the design of the Congress Avenue Force Main Replacement project. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-68.89
(W & S Renewal & Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/Congress Avenue Force Main Replacement). Dr. Alperin stated he wants to ensure that the Commission is keeping track of what is happening
with the change orders, 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.A. APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION/OFF THE AVE: Consider the appeal of an administrative interpretation by the City Manager
that a sidewalk café cannot be established in a public space which is not a sidewalk for Off the Ave located on SE 6th Avenue, south of Starbucks Coffee. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) Mayor
McDuffie read the City of Delray Beach Quasi-Judicial Hearing rules into the record for this item and all subsequent Quasi-Judicial items. 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 had discussions with Adam
Neblack at “Off the Ave” about his sidewalk café and walking in this evening he asked Mr. Jeffrey Lynne if the court reporter was here for this item. Mrs. Gray stated she has had conversation
with staff. Mayor McDuffie, Mr. Carney, and Dr. Alperin stated they had no ex parte communications to disclose. Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, stated the application
was submitted to use a portion of the City’s alley south of the building that the business occupies. She stated LDR Section 3.3(F)(2) allows the establishment of a sidewalk café in front
of a business or along the side street adjacent to the business. Mrs. Butler stated the proposal submitted would encompass approximately 440 square feet of space within the alleyway
in which the applicant has proposed to remove the existing rock, mulch, and landscaping improvements done by the city and replaced with pavers. The site plan also shows an aluminum fence
to encompass this area. Staff recommends that the appeal be denied based on the fact that the alleyway is not consistent with being a side street or sidewalk. The site plan is very crowded
with an existing sewer line, a concrete FPL pole with supporting guy wire, three existing mature sabal palms, several bushes and very mature lirope as ground cover. Staff also believes
that the placement of the tables and
5 02/21/12 chairs with all the existing obstructions would not be conducive to a very safe environment. Staff recommends denial of the appeal because it is inconsistent with how we approve
sidewalk cafés. At this point, Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in Mr. Lynne’s clients as they just arrived to the meeting. Jeffrey Lynne, Attorney with Weiner & Lynne, P.A., 10
S.E. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, asked that the entire City’s file on this matter be accepted into the record for purposes of this hearing. Mr. Lynne stated Off the Ave Food
and Spirits is located on South Federal Highway and the question is whether a sidewalk café is allowed to be located at the place requested. The proposed sidewalk café is the landscaped
area adjacent to the restaurant in an adjacent public space. Mr. Lynne displayed architectural renderings of the existing and the proposal is to fence off that area to make it safe so
that people can have an outdoor dining experience. Mr. Lynne referenced an email from the City Manager to Mr. Brewer that “A sidewalk café cannot be established in a public space which
is not a sidewalk.” Mr. Lynne stated the issue on appeal this evening is whether a sidewalk café can be established in a public space which is not a currently paved sidewalk. Mr. Lynne
stated the question is does the plain language of the LDRs restrict sidewalk cafés to just sidewalks. Mr. Lynne referenced the language in the LDRs regarding where sidewalk cafes can
go and it states that (1) A sidewalk café can be located in front of a business, (2) along a side street adjacent to a business, (3) in a public space adjacent to a business, and (4)
in front of an adjacent business. Scott McClure, part owner of “Off the Ave”, 19-23 S.E. 5th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated he has owned the building since 2005 and has been
maintaining that property next door since that time. Mr. McClure stated there are tree stumps there because trees were cut down after the trees destroyed his roof in Hurricane Wilma.
He stated since 2007 he has been picking up hypodermic needles. Mr. McClure stated the City came out and fenced some of the areas to make it safer. He stated he wants to improve the
area because it has been such an eyesore. Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to address the Commission regarding the appeal, to please come forward at this time.
There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Butler stated when staff modified the sidewalk café ordinance they did put
the language in talking about sidewalk cafés could be located adjacent to public space and that was done in conjunction with Worthing Park. She stated there was some restriction placed
on the site plan prior to Worthing Park being designed. Mrs. Butler stated it was never intended that we would use alleyways as a component of sidewalk cafés.
6 02/21/12 The City Manager stated we are not just talking about an alleyway we are also talking about a landscape node that is part of the City’s parking lot. Mr. Lynne stated they
are not using any part of the parking lot but it is simply that landscape node area. He stated before the code was changed landscape nodes were specifically allowed area and the area
was expanded to clarify public spaces. Mr. Lynne stated with regard to Worthing Place and other areas City staff is proposing a further amendment to sidewalk café areas to clarify public
space. Mr. Lynne stated the law says you look at the plain language and it says public space. He stated if it is not clear you look at the legislative intent. Mr. Lynne stated the record
is clear that the intent was to expand the area where sidewalk cafés can go. Mr. Lynne urged the Commission to approve the appeal. Dr. Alperin asked if there is any other place in the
City where a landscape node has been converted to a sidewalk café. Mrs. Butler stated there are places along East Atlantic Avenue where sidewalk cafés are allowed to be adjacent to areas
that have landscape nodes. Mrs. Butler stated she is not aware of any. George Brewer, 204 N.W. 9th Street, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (Architect), stated the French restaurant that is on
1st Street across from Spot Coffee the landscape strip has been converted into sidewalk café. Mr. Brewer stated there was landscaping there and they went around it and the other landscaping
that was not in such great shape was taken out and they did pave it. Dr. Alperin asked if a City owned parking lot considered public space. Mrs. Butler stated the City owned parking
lot is a public facility but the landscape node is the requirement as part of the landscaping that exists with that parking lot so if you remove it then this creates a different situation.
Mrs. Gray inquired about the safety issue with the City parking lot and it appears from slide that there are car tire marks along the curb. Mrs. Butler stated it is a fairly tight movement
because there is businesses that park along the back side of the buildings. She displayed the alleyway and stated there is back out parking along the backside of the buildings so people
are backing out and there are parking spaces and dumpsters. Mrs. Butler stated she was at the site today and she was coming around and another car was coming from another angle and she
had to almost get up on the curb to get around. She stated it is a very tight movement and people do not circulate correctly. Mrs. Gray asked about the existing sewer line. Mrs. Butler
stated the things that are sticking up will be somewhat of an issue and commented about an email from Mr. Hasko who is responsible for this area saying that it is not a problem. Mrs.
Butler stated maybe there is a way that Mr. Hasko can cap that for them but is not sure. Mrs. Butler expressed concern over drainage as well. Mr. Lynne stated this is way off topic and
these are issues that had a sidewalk café application been accepted by the City and comments had come back they would be able to work with them. Mr. Lynne made reference to staff’s email
and the
7 02/21/12 City Manager’s response. Mr. Lynne stated they are not here regarding the site plan but is here on the legal determination of whether a sidewalk café has to be on a sidewalk
or not. Mr. Frankel made reference to the photo and asked where the sidewalk is. Mr. Lynne stated a lot of sidewalk cafés are located on private property set back from the property such
as for instance Burgerfi is set back on private property and at the Seagate Hotel those are sidewalk cafés that are up on the property but they are not on a sidewalk. Mr. Carney stated
he is not prepared to make a legal decision; however, he does believe we have landscape ordinances in this city to create landscaping and so that we do not always have concrete, tables,
or fences. Mr. Carney supports staff’s interpretation. Dr. Alperin made reference to page 4 of Ordinance No. 37-10 Section (2) paragraph indicates that any travel lanes that there is
room for a sidewalk café. He stated you have to have at least a two (2) feet vehicular travel lane and does not see this as a potential use for this property. Dr. Alperin stated he does
not see this as a potential use for this property and does not think it can be interpreted as a public space that could be used for a sidewalk café. Mayor McDuffie stated Mr. Lynne made
a point and concurs with Mr. Carney that the Commission is being asked to rule on a legal issue for which none of them are prepared to rule on. Mayor McDuffie recommended that this go
back to the City Attorney and our side of the case be presented to the Commission and then they can rule on it. The City Attorney stated staff made an interpretation that the sidewalk
café ordinance does not apply in this particular case therefore you cannot put a sidewalk café there and that is the issue in front of the City Commission. 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 appeal), 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. 9.B. WAIVER REQUEST/THE DELRAY BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY: Consider a request to waive Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section
4.6.7(F)(3)(f), “Special Event Non-Roadway Banner Signing”, to allow the Delray Beach Public Library to erect two (2) Centennial Banners (6’ x 21’) on the south elevation of the building,
facing Atlantic Avenue for a period of six (6) months; the beginning date may be selected by the Library. (Quasi-Judicial Hearing)
8 02/21/12 Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mr. Frankel, Mrs. Gray, and Mayor McDuffie stated they had no ex parte communications to disclose.
Mr. Carney stated he spoke with Alan Kornblau, Director of the Delray Beach Library today. Dr. Alperin stated he had no ex parte communications to disclose. Lula Butler, Director of
Community Improvement, stated this is a request from the Delray Beach Library to erect two (2) Centennial Banners (6’ x 21’) on the south elevation of the building, facing Atlantic Avenue.
The library is celebrating 100 years of service (1913-2013) and seeking approval to erect these banners for one (1) year beginning April 2012. Mrs. Butler stated per LDR Section 4.6.7
which governs the use of banners allows banners for grand openings, special events, non-roadway and special event roadway banners. Banners associated with City facilities and properties
are submitted to the City Manager for approval. Banners for special events on non-roadway are limited to 20 square feet in size. The Library is seeking approval to erect two (2) banners
that are 126 square feet each that will flank the entrance from Atlantic Avenue, announcing their Centennial celebration. Staff recommends approval of the waiver request to allow the
two (2) banners to be erected; however, that these be limited to a period of six (6) months as opposed to one year. Mrs. Butler stated staff would opt that the library could establish
the beginning date to erect the banners. 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, the public hearing was closed. Dr. Alperin stated he supports this; however, he feels when it comes
to organizations such as Old School Square, Spady Museum or any publicly owned museum or building that has exhibits for the public and it is for public interest he feels the City should
be allowing banners all the time. Dr. Alperin suggested that the Commission approve this for one (1) year. Mr. Carney concurred with comments expressed by Dr. Alperin and that the banners
are kept in pristine condition. Mr. Frankel stated he has no objection to the one (1) year proposed by Dr. Alperin. Mayor McDuffie stated he supports one (1) year and that the banners
be kept in pristine condition. Mr. Carney stated he would like staff to maintain to ensure that they keep the banners in the proper condition in the event that staff determines that
it is readdressed then he would expect the library to comply.
9 02/21/12 Mr. Carney moved to adopt the Board Order as presented, 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.C. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE APPLICANT. 9.D. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED BY STAFF. 9.E. ADDITIONAL
SCOPE/RANDOLPH & DEWDNEY CONSTRUCTION INC./POMPEY PARK CONCESSION STAND: Consider approval of additional scope for the Pompey Park Concession Stand project in the amount of $2,614.50
for Randolph & Dewdney Construction, Inc. for relocation and extension of existing low voltage conduit, and modification of all flat roof areas; and approval for the amount to be paid
from the Contract's Contingency Allowance. Richard Hasko, Director of Environmental Services, stated this item is a request for approval of a small additional scope to the Pompey Park
Concession building in the amount of $2,614.50. Mr. Hasko stated approximately $2,200 has to do with some insulation modifications to the roof. He stated when the Commission approved
the scope addition to replace the entire second floor press box because of the water damage that had occurred to the support beams that it was determined that was because the water was
ponding in the flat roof and seeping into the beams. Mr. Hasko stated this modification will give the roof a slight pitch away from the new construction of the press box so that will
not occur in the future with the new construction. He stated the remaining $441.00 has to do with some modifications to some minor low voltage conduit. Mr. Hasko stated this is proposed
to be coming from the contract contingency so there is no additional funding for the contract. Mr. Carney stated the whole point of doing this contract was to create an amount and he
does not understand why this type of obvious thing which had to be moved was not picked up in the original bid. Mr. Hasko stated the original bid did not anticipate complete reconstruction
of the second story press box. Mr. Carney stated he felt that the Commission had a lot of discussion about redoing the second story press box. Mr. Hasko stated there was discussion about
expanding the press box but not about completely reconstructing the entire box. He stated staff got into that as they started to do the demolition on some of the siding and realized
that the support beams suffered from the water damage. Mr. Carney asked what will happen after the contingency fund runs out. Mr. Hasko stated if there are additional problems that staff
runs into and we have completed the contingency staff will have to find other ways to get around the problem. Mr. Carney stated he feels the contractor has to find other ways. Mr. Carney
stated there is $8,000.00 and suggested that they spend it wisely because he is unhappy with the way this whole thing has manifested itself in particular if there are going be change
orders will bring it over what we originally agreed to. Mrs. Gray stated it is not uncommon to have change orders and inquired how far along with regard to percentage is this project.
She supports this.
10 02/21/12 Mr. Frankel stated he has a problem with all of it. He stated the original budget was $230,000.00 and the amount approved by the Commission although it was shared with the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was $456,000.00. Mr. Frankel stated with the change orders it is well double the original budget and believes there will be another change order
forthcoming before the project is completed. He stated while improvements needed to be made it gets to a point where it is a little excessive. Mr. Frankel stated as he had previously
voted he is not in favor of spending any more money on this project. The City Manager stated the changes that have been made have not increased the amount that the Commission approved
for the project. Dr. Alperin stated it is still within the contingency and it makes no sense to him not to support what we need to do. Prior to the vote, Mayor McDuffie stated he is
not fond of change orders either. However, he understands that things appear when they are demolished that are not apparent to the eye when the project is started. Mayor McDuffie stated
he will support the additional scope. Dr. Alperin moved to approve the additional scope for the Pompey Park Concession Stand project in the amount of $2,614.50, seconded by Mrs. Gray.
Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – No; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. At
this point, the time being 7:07 p.m., the Commission moved to the duly advertised Public Hearings portion of the Agenda. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 03-12 (SECOND READING/SECOND
PUBLIC HEARING): Consider a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR), amending Section 4.3.3, “Specific Requirements for Specific Uses”, by amending Subsection
4.3.3 (ZZZ), “Transient Residential Use”, in order to clarify prohibitions, exemptions/exceptions, waivers, and penalties for same; amending Appendix “A”, “Definitions”, in order to
amend the definition of “Transient Residential Use". The caption of Ordinance No. 03-12 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING
SECTION 4.3.3, “SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC USES”, BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 4.3.3(ZZZ), “TRANSIENT RESIDENTIAL USE”, IN ORDER TO CLARIFY
11 02/21/12 PROHIBITIONS, EXEMPTIONS/EXCEPTIONS, WAIVERS, AND PENALTIES FOR SAME; AMENDING APPENDIX “A”, “DEFINITIONS”, IN ORDER TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF “TRANSIENT RESIDENTIAL USE”;
PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 03-12 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. Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this is a city-initiated amendment
that will amend the prohibitions, exemptions, exceptions, waivers and penalty section for transient residential uses and will also amend the definition of transient residential uses.
Mr. Dorling stated currently the transient residential use definition includes those dwelling units that are in both single family and multi-family zoning districts which have a turnover
rate of more than six times a year. He stated this definition is being modified to include dwelling units that turnover in occupancy more than three times a year in single family and
PRD districts. Mr. Dorling stated further being modified to clarify that this turnover rate refers to the entire dwelling unit or any part thereof. The transient residential uses that
may exist by virtue of this definition change will be allowed to continue for 12 months after the effective date of this ordinance. At its meeting of December 19, 2011, the Planning
and Zoning Board recommended approval subject to conditions with a 7 to 0 vote. There were three conditions that the Board suggested and one of those was changing the references in the
“whereas” clauses to reference the 2010 census; the second was to clarify that the ordinance applies to dwelling units and any part thereof and they also recommended lowering the allowed
turnover rate from three times to two times a year. Mr. Dorling stated the first two of those conditions are incorporated in the ordinance that is before the Commission. At its meeting
of February 7, 2012, the City Commission considered this ordinance on first reading and recommended approval. Mr. Dorling entered into the record a document that the Commission had received
this evening in support of this ordinance which summarizes related planning issues regarding transient uses which was prepared by the City’s planning expert Maria L. York. Mr. Dorling
stated this document in summary discusses goals, objectives and policies in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use and Housing elements which emphasize the City’s longstanding
commitment to neighborhood stability and references
12 02/21/12 how high turnover rates can change the character of a neighborhood and undermine this neighborhood stability. Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. William Shelley,
1012 Langer Way, Delray Beach, FL 33483, expressed concern with this rehabilitation of alcoholics and drug addicts coming into Delray and being treated. Mr. Shelley stated he has first-hand
experience and knowledge how an alcoholic treatment center operates. Mr. Shelley stated he is a former alcoholic who has spent 28 years in AA and was married to a psychotic woman who
was hospitalized four months after their marriage. Her initial treatment was in a mental institution and upon a release she attended AA meetings with an alcoholic friend and her next
hospitalization was an alcoholic treatment center at a hospital. Mr. Shelley stated recovery treatment centers do not always treat only alcoholics and drug related patients and are not
capable or licensed to treat psychiatric patients who are psychotic. Mr. Shelley stated in order to protect the community the psychiatric patients should be in a locked unit separate
from the treatment center. Louise Kornfeld, 719 North Ocean Boulevard, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated in the last 26 years since she has lived here she has watched Delray Beach evolve
into a city we were all proud of. Ms. Kornfeld asked when the new City officials fell asleep and stopped caring about the residents who pay their taxes and helped make this city grow.
She asked if they were sleeping when we went from the “village-by-thesea” to the drug rehabilitation capital of the southeast as was reported on the loud speaker of the trains that deliver
info to their passengers as they pass through our city. Laney Lewis, 1098 Hibiscus Lane, Delray Beach, FL ( President of the Lake Ida Homeowners’ Association), supports the City on passing
this ordinance to try and get a handle on these boarding houses in the single family neighborhoods. Ms. Lewis stated we need to keep our single family neighborhoods safe and keep the
quality of life in our neighborhoods. She stated she has lived in her home for 34 years and this is the single largest investment that she has and she does not want her property values
going down any more than they already have. Ms. Lewis stated she has change; some for the good and some for the bad and these boarding houses are bad. She stated boarding houses do not
belong in single family neighborhoods such as theirs. She urged the Commission to let the residents know what they can do to help them do this and thanked them for all their hard work
in keeping Delray Beach the great place to live. McCall Credle-Rosenthal, President of La Hacienda Neighborhood, stated she has a tenant in a residential area who rents annually to.
She stated the ordinance is acceptable; however, she urged the City Commission to consider a moratorium so that the City would have the time to get ourselves organized to be able to
make sure that the existing transient housing businesses are in compliance and any proposed new facilities will be in compliance with a system that will be established or set up. She
stated there are transient housing facilities that have not paid their landlord permits and there are liens against these properties, some transient houses have more than
13 02/21/12 the allowed amount of tenants and they are living in substandard conditions and most are not managed properly. Ms. Credle-Rosenthal stated we need to come together an set
up a system to be able to collect data and a tracking system and suggested that a volunteer or homeowners association task force to get information, submit it by neighborhoods to identify
the transient houses that are not in compliance and try to get a perspective has to how many of these houses are actually here in Delray Beach. John Barneby, 801 Palm Trail, Delray Beach,
FL 33483, speaking on behalf of the homeowners’ association which is also a member of the Florida Coalition for Preservation and the Beach Property Owners’ Association, stated he is
new resident of Delray Beach and is very upset with the increasing number of transient housing in the city and feels they have no place in residential neighborhoods. Mr. Barneby urged
the Commission to enact this ordinance along with other ordinances in their entirety and to provide the resources so they may be enforced without delay. He stated they want Delray Beach
to have quality neighborhoods where people want to live and not live in fear of transient housing. William Gladstone, 326 Palm Trail, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (was Florida’s longest sitting
Circuit Judge who works with children), supports this ordinance and he moved to Delray Beach from South Dade in 1995 and Delray became an All American community on two occasions and
hopes that it stays that way. Mr. Gladstone stated with all the good news that Delray Beach has had two northern newspapers have written serious criticisms of Delray Beach including
the New York Times in recent times. Mr. Gladstone stated he lives in a quiet residential neighborhood and tours go by his home every day to show people the lovely single family residence
that is so near to downtown. Mr. Gladstone stated He stated transitional residential living is incompatible with single family residential area. Mr. Gladstone suggested reducing it and
not having so much coming and going and the like would be a help to the community. He stated he would like Joe Collard, 1004 Brooks Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, concurs with the previous
comments and protecting the beach as a park is important aspect. Mr. Collard expressed concern that what the City is proposing is not really going to get the desired effect. Mr. Collard
made a reference to an article in the Coastal Star where it stated an executive from the Caron House said that they are not renting property and they are not going to abide by any turnover
rules that they are basically housing people who are being treated in another facility and those people are not in fact renters and are not subject to any of these turnover or rental
rules. Secondly, Mr. Collard stated this exemption for ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) was granted without giving an address. He asked if there is a procedure or verification to
follow-up to make sure that this exemption is being covered. Mr. Collard expressed concern over the legality and validity of it. Nancy Wibbelsman, 2613 North Ocean Boulevard #N-4, Delray
Beach, FL 33483, stated when she was 7 her grandparents moved to Delray Beach and her parents followed. Ms. Wibbelsman stated she loves this area and grew up thinking
14 02/21/12 that it was one of the sweetest, safest and adorable places. She stated the concern is not about any one particular group of people and she would be just as unhappy if she
heard one house on her block was accepting bowling leagues and the one next door was accepting nuns. Ms. Wibbelsman stated you do not want people in your residential are who are not
vested in the neighborhood and when a person buys a home they buy it with a certain understanding that the neighborhood has a feeling and part of the reason people make this investment
is because of the feeling that the neighborhood has and the support the neighbors lend each other. She stated if the people are flowing through in large groups and they do not have the
same interest in community they are not looking out for each other. Ms. Wibbelsman stated it diminishes the neighborhood in which we live. She stated years ago Delray Beach was voted
the “Best Small Town in the United States” and urged the Commission to strive to preserve it. Ms. Wibblesman stated she applauds the initial passing of this ordinance and urged the Commission
to follow-up with limiting the number of beds in any house for unrelated people. Pat Archer, 380 Sherwood Forest Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33445 (Chair of the Delray Beach Drug Task Force),
stated any business for profit or not-forprofit that operates in a manner that systematically rotates residences is not a business that needs to be in a single family community. Mrs.
Archer stated this is a business that is disruptive to the neighborhood in every way and whether they are not-for-profit or for profit it is a business not a long-term living arrangement.
She urged the Commission to support these ordinances. Kristine De Haseth, Florida Coalition for Preservation, stated two weeks ago she made public comments mainly in support of the ordinance
and applauds the Commission for unanimously approving the first reading and moving to the second reading. Ms. De Haseth stated she has received many calls, inquiries, concerns, and comments
from residents and homeowners in Manalapan, Ocean Ridge, Briny Breezes and Gulf Stream as she has from Delray. She stated this is not just a Delray issue. Ms. De Haseth urged the Commission
to preserve the single family residential neighborhoods. Gary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated the most prestigious organizations and institutions in this
country have all reached the same conclusion that tenancy restrictions in residential areas stabilize neighborhoods through enhanced property values and common vested interests. Mr.
Glickstein stated as a homeowner and builder he believes people buy homes thinking will be owner occupants sharing a common goal of living in a stable, safe and quiet neighborhood. He
stated transient housing of any type is by definition an investment and the goals of owner/occupants and transient occupants are in large measure mutually exclusive. Mr. Glickstein stated
he has owned rental homes in Delray for many years and would like to see even more tenancy restrictions than what are proposed tonight. He stated the majority of people buying into the
neighborhoods do so to live here not so with transients that is here for a night, week or a month with no vested interest in the neighborhoods or properties they temporarily occupy.
Mr. Glickstein stated the Commission was elected to preserve the quality of life for the majority of people that live here and support this community year end and year out. He stated
passing the proposed ordinance is a solid
15 02/21/12 first step and next he hopes the Commission will focus on enforcement and more significant consequences for violators. Bessie Vane, 50 East Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483,
stated she understands through a reliable source a member of a certain foundation was asking for a financial contribution for their foundation and asked if they would like to live next
to a transient house the answer was “no”. Laura Finn, 411 Andrews Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (resident of Delray Beach for 34 years), stated she loves her neighborhood and her neighbors
and is very much opposed to transient housing in all the single family neighborhoods. She urged the Commission to support this ordinance. Anita Casey, 1003 Beach Drive, Delray Beach,
FL 33483, stated she walks her dogs early in the morning and is tired of bumping into every addict everywhere she goes. Ms. Casey stated recently an addict was about to through himself
in traffic and she called the Police and saved his life. She stated yesterday she had three appointments in downtown Delray and three panhandlers asked her for money. Ms. Casey stated
she has friends from Europe invest in Delray Beach and is now ashamed that she told them to invest here. She urged the Commission to do something about this. Yan Hansen, (3 year resident
of Delray Beach), stated he moved to Delray Beach from Fort Lauderdale because of the small town community this was and is. Mr. Hansen stated staff has done a pretty good job striking
a compromise in preserving the rights of both and urged the Commission to move forward with this. Tom Sand, 1216 Crestwood Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated as the Commission considers
the impact of transient housing on the town and its people he feels it is very important to think about the real lives of people who could not be here and who would be impacted by this
and gave a few examples. Mr. Sand stated we all respect the rights of people who need to be in transient homes to get assisted but urged the Commission to be mindful of the rights and
expectations and the impact of people who live in those residences and who assumed that they would be that way for a long time in the future. Barry Degner, 919 Hyacinth Drive, Delray
Beach, FL 33483 (Vice President of the Tropic Isle Civic Association), stated he and his wife moved to Delray Beach after being snowbirds in the area for many years and specifically
chose Delray Beach because of its ambience. Mr. Degner stated when he walks around the area he knows everybody and if does not know them by name they are familiar faces which is very
reassuring. He stated at his age he is worried about his safety and his wife’s safety and he likes the fact that it is a small town and unless the Commission can stop this influx we
are going to lose what we all treasure and moved here for.
16 02/21/12 Jack Barrette, 1201 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (lived here for 62 days), thanked the Caron Foundation for what they are doing for the City and cannot imagine
a better way to galvanize us all on this issue than someone who comes to Seaspray Avenue buys a home in the middle of it through an anonymous attorney and tries to use ADA and Hippa
law to hide the address and then tries to flout our zoning regulations to change the single family neighborhood for the worse. He stated no one supports that. Mr. Barrette stated we
need to use the reasonable accommodation to help people with real disabilities to get the housing they need where they need it in appropriately zoned neighborhoods not to help corporations
to cynically use his neighborhood to make a lot of money ($30,000-$50,000) a month on people who are going to live in very nice houses and then go to Boca for rehab. Mr. Barrette stated
everyone supports the Commission if they fight the transient housing issue, pass the ordinance and enforce it no matter what. Bob Ganger, President of the Florida Coalition for Preservation,
stated at the last meeting the Commission asked them to come help. Mr. Ganger stated they have galvanized every credible civic association, homeowners association, and everyone who lives
in a single family home in this entire area including outside of Delray over to the lake. Mr. Ganger urged the Commission to pass Ordinance No. 3-12, 4-12, 8-12 and then ask for their
help. Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL 33483, thanked Judge Gladstone for coming tonight but if he could of spoken longer he would of spoken to the fact
that children and families need nurturing and stable environments and neighborhoods where they know people across the street, etc. She thanked Mr. Frankel for his answers of clarification.
Ms. Morrison stated these ordinances are a very good start and urged the Commission to be vigilant and protect our neighborhoods. Mary Renaud, 1017 Bucida Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483
(speaking as a realtor who has worked in Delray for the last 13 years), stated she has done countless contracts who want to rent their people who want to live here temporarily. Mrs.
Renaud stated the only rentals she has handled in the last 13 years is seasonal and yearly. She stated if they want to rent for a few days there are several hotels to choose from. Mrs.
Renaud stated restricting turnovers to no more than 3 times per year is a very liberal amount. She stated she is aware of some homeowners in the beach are who rent their house on a weekly
and nightly basis. Mrs. Renaud thanked the Commission and the City Attorney for taking this matter seriously, hopes this law applies to everyone, and urged them to let them know what
the association can do to help Code Enforcement. Warren Roy, 329 Andrews Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (speaking as a member of the BPOA), reiterated their strong support of the new
proposed rules and call for the enforcement of these rules for the protection of the cohesiveness, integrity and safety of the single family neighborhoods. Mr. Roy stated the issue is
called transient housing and we are talking about preserving single family home neighborhoods. He stated a home is defined as where you live permanently; a house is
17 02/21/12 defined a building for human habitation. Mr. Roy stated urged the Commission to respect that. Richard Sasso, 1042 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated at the last
meeting he raised concern over enforcement of the new ordinance and how are we going to change the penalty for somebody who abuses the ordinance. Mr. Sasso reiterated that the penalty
is only $500 for somebody to go beyond the ordinance restriction. He asked if he has to write a letter to ask that it now be reheard to create a three strike rule that if someone abuses
the new ordinance that beyond the third time that we can do something beyond just a $500 fine. Mr. Sasso expressed concern that this caring company Caron who knows that 95-100% of the
community that they are trying to now infiltrate with these homes are against them and asked if they are that caring why don’t they step back and relook at this. Bob Stern, 410 N.E.
8th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated the Commission has done a great job in drafting this ordinance and this is only one step. He stated relying solely on the turnover rate may
not be the best strategy for the town. Mr. Stern stated this is a commercial business and several of these operators including the Caron Foundation filed for tax exempt status with the
IRS and do that they have to make the case that they are exclusively in the business of rehabilitation or education. He stated in that case an argument can be made that whatever they
do whether it is housing clients or providing meals is an interval part of that business but it is a commercial business. Mr. Stern suggested that the City ask if it is a commercial
business and if so it does not even belong in a residential area even before you get to apply a test of turnover. He stated another example of a test would be is this residential housing
versus institutional (referring to a hospital, nursing home or jail). Mr. Stern suggested that the City ask if the occupants of this facility have the rights that are normally associated
with residential living. Mr. Stern stated if they do not have these rights, the City can make a case that then it is really an institutional living situation not a residential living
situation. He stated if it is that kind of institutional setting then it should be in a proper zone. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding
Ordinance No. 03-12, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Frankel thanked everyone coming out and stated he appreciates the emails and communications. He stated City staff and the City
Attorney’s office have worked very diligently on this issue. Mr. Frankel stated you need to comply and it is very delicate to deal with the Fair Housing Act, Americans with Disabilities
Act, and the Equal Protection and Procedural Due Process Clauses of the United States and Florida Constitutions. Mr. Frankel stated his decision tonight is not based on a single entity
that is proposing to do business in a single family neighborhood. He stated in 2009 he proposed to limit occupancy turnover to no more than 3 times per year but could not gather support
of that. Mr. Frankel stated the ordinances we are dealing with particularly Ordinance No. 3-12 is applicable to all single family home neighborhoods and all forms of transient rentals
(condos, boarding homes) or any short-term rentals. Mr. Frankel stated basing his decision on Federal Court decisions and based on Marie York’s
18 02/21/12 memorandum he fully supports Ordinance No. 3-12. Mrs. Gray thanked everyone for attending the meeting and thanked staff for the great job they have done. Mr. Carney stated
Commissioner Frankel stated his views succinctly. Dr. Alperin stated the public stated his views succinctly. Mayor McDuffie thanked everyone for attending and for being professional.
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 03-12 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. 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.B. ORDINANCE NO. 04-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development
Regulations (LDR), by amending Section 2.4.7(G), “Requests for Accommodation”; Subsections (1), “Purpose”, and (8), “Request Form for Reasonable Accommodation”, in order to remove obsolete
references, in order to update same; enacting a new Subsection 2.4.7(G)(9), “Expiration of Approvals” to provide an expiration date for untimely implementation of approvals. The caption
of Ordinance No. 04-12 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION 2.4.7(G),
“REQUESTS FOR ACCOMMODATION”; SUBSECTIONS (1), “PURPOSE”, AND (8), “REQUEST FORM FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION”, IN ORDER TO REMOVE OBSOLETE REFERENCES, IN ORDER TO UPDATE SAME; ENACTING
A NEW SUBSECTION 2.4.7(G)(9), “ EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS” TO PROVIDE AN EXPIRATION DATE FOR UNTIMELY IMPLEMENTATION OF APPROVALS ; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 04-12 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.)
19 02/21/12 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. Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this amendment provides clarification with respect to the current information
requested on the request form for reasonable accommodation. Mr. Dorling stated it identifies additional information that will be provided with any reasonable accommodation request that
we believe is necessary to appropriately consider reasonable accommodation requests. At its meeting of January 23, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board considered this item and the Board
recommended approval with a 7 to 0 vote; at its meeting of February 7, 2012, the City Commission considered this on first reading and recommended approval at that time. Mayor McDuffie
declared the public hearing open. Jack Barrette, 1201 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, reiterated that the reasonable accommodation requests have been a source of some concern
to the community and this willingness to put some transparency into the process to request information from people who might otherwise not provide it is welcome. Cary Glickstein, 1118
Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated the reasonable accommodation has been abused and thinks that in the confusion of the co-mingled Federal Law (i.e. ADA, FHA) Planning has
not had clear direction and perhaps at the City Attorney’s level there is not clear understanding of what we really can do. Mr. Glickstein stated the residents would like the City to
take a much more aggressive stance in granting these reasonable accommodations and if somebody disagrees with their position then they will support the Commission. He stated when this
came before Planning and Zoning residents were told that on not one occasion had an application for reasonable accommodation ever been denied in this city. Mr. Glickstein urged the Commission
that in passing this tonight that it not stop here that counsel the City has hired advises everybody so that there is a clear understanding as to what is the most aggressive position
we can take towards these applicants. Bob Ganger, President of the Florida Coalition for Preservation, stated a lot of public acts affecting a neighborhood receive a courtesy notice
when something is about to happen so that the people who could be affected are aware. Mr. Ganger stated as the Commission considers the next step and the step after that he would like
to get to a point where we have courtesy notices where people are aware that something is about to happen in their neighborhood. Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray
Beach, FL 33483, stated when this was discussed in SPRAB or Planning and Zoning that we were going to put some remedies for misrepresentation or repeated violations. Ms. Morrison stated
a $500 penalty to some of these organizations is not a lot of money and suggested
20 02/21/12 that a stronger remedy be imposed or maybe losing their reasonable accommodation status if they are repeat offenders. There being no one else from the public who wished to
address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 04-12, the public hearing was closed. Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 04-12 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Carney.
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.C. ORDINANCE NO. 08-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment Chapter 117, “Landlord Permits”, of the Code of Ordinances, by amending Section 117.01, “Permit Required”, to clarify when
a permit is required; amending Section 117.03, “Approval of Application”, to provide additional requirements; amending Section 117.04, “Denial or Revocation of Permit Application; Appeals”,
to clarify grounds for revocation; and amending Section 117.06, “Tenant/Occupant Eviction”, to ensure notice and due process rights are followed or alternate housing is provided. The
caption of Ordinance No. 08-12 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 117, “LANDLORD PERMITS”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 117.01, “PERMIT REQUIRED”, TO CLARIFY WHEN A PERMIT IS REQUIRED; AMENDING SECTION 117.03, “APPROVAL OF APPLICATION”, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING SECTION 117.04, “DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF PERMIT APPLICATION; APPEALS”, TO CLARIFY GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION; AND AMENDING SECTION 117.06, “TENANT/OCCUPANT EVICTION”,
TO ENSURE NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS RIGHTS ARE FOLLOWED OR ALTERNATE HOUSING IS PROVIDED; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy
of Ordinance No. 08-12 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.
21 02/21/12 Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, summarized some of the changes that are occurring under Chapter 117 and it clarifies that permit applicants will be required
to submit to the City documentation of their lease agreements and they have thirty (30) days to report any changes to the existing leases that they provide upon initial permit. Mrs.
Butler stated leased residential units will be required to have parking stickers for each of their tenants and those will be limited to four (4) per unit. She stated if additional parking
stickers are needed the reasons why must be documented. Mrs. Butler stated all applicants are required to follow Chapter 83 governing evictions. She stated if someone states that their
property is not otherwise required to follow that then they must present the City with an alternative situation on how they will handle temporary dwelling units for these people in case
they need to evict them. Mrs. Butler stated this also clarifies the reasons for a landlord permit under which they might revoke. She stated this ordinance was before the City Commission
on first reading on February 7, 2012 and was passed. Staff recommends approval on second reading. Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. Matthew Ledger, representing the Realtors
Association of the Palm Beaches (RAPB) and its 8,000 members, stated as it stands now you can renew your landlord permit online and under the new ordinance you will no longer have that
option. Mr. Ledger stated you will have to show up in person to renew so that you can present a copy of your lease and he feels this creates a burden. Mr. Ledger expressed concern over
the City having to know the details of the lease and stated if the landlord is registered in the landlord program the City will have the contact information if there are any problems.
In addition, Mr. Ledger stated requiring residential parking stickers for leased residential units seem a bit far reach for local government. He stated this additional regulation is
borderline a violation of private property rights to homeowners. Mr. Ledger urged the Commission to not move forward with this ordinance and invite the Realtors Association of the Palm
Beaches to the table so that we together can come up with practical solutions. McCall Credle-Rosenthal, 817 Lake Avenue North, Delray Beach, FL (President of La Hacienda Neighborhood
and also an owner of a home and cottage that she rents out), supports this ordinance and would like to see even more constraints. She stated Code Enforcement does not people working
at night and they cannot go into these residences and find out that people are not in compliance. Ms. Credle-Rosenthal suggested that if people were working at night we could look into
this a little more to find out who is actually living by these landlord permits. She stated there are more people staying in units then are paying for them. Mary Renaud, 1017 Bucida
Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated she has no problem with this ordinance and coming to City Hall and bringing a contract prevents fraud. Mrs. Renaud stated her husband came up with
the idea for parking stickers and supports it.
22 02/21/12 Cary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (member of the Realtors Association of the Palm Beaches), stated he fully supports the changes and is hopeful
this ordinance is linked with the reasonable accommodation form so that whoever is applying for a reasonable accommodation is deemed a landlord and thus needs a permit. Christina Morrison,
2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL 33483, reiterated her concerns regarding the need for remedies in the ordinance. There being no one else who wished to address the Commission
regarding Ordinance No. 08-12, the public hearing was closed. Prior to the vote, Mrs. Gray asked if the City Manager will be responding to Mr. Ledger in writing. The City Manager stated
he will receive a response. Mrs. Gray stated she has received several telephone calls concerning the application. She stated while she is in support of this ordinance she would like
to make sure that they heard the realtors’ side and that staff will be responding to it. Mr. Frankel moved to adopt Ordinance No. 08-12 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Carney.
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.D. ORDINANCE NO. 06-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.16, “Landscape Regulations”, to provide an updated landscape code.
The caption of Ordinance No. 06-12 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.6.16, “LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS”, TO PROVIDE AN UPDATED LANDSCAPE CODE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official
copy of Ordinance No. 06-12 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.
23 02/21/12 Peter Anuar, Senior Landscape Planner, stated revisions to the landscape code and at the meeting of February 7, 2012, the City Commission voted to approve with a 5 to 0 vote.
Mr. Anuar stated some of the items that were up for discussion were expansion of landscape islands from five (5) feet to nine (9) feet with the limits of the Central Business District;
removal of compacted rock within the landscape islands and its effect on the integrity of the curbing and asphalt. He stated the items are already requested through the landscape permit
process but now they are going to be codified a landscape code. At this point, Mayor McDuffie stepped away from the dais. Vice Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open. Christina
Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated with the size of these trees she would like to make sure that there is some consideration given to the water that
is going to be required to keep these trees alive. She stated she wants to make sure that we have sustainable type of landscaping that can withstand droughts. At this point, Mayor McDuffie
returned to the dais. There being no one else from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed. Dr. Alperin asked if there were any changes made in
the ordinance that will create less resistant trees or plantings for drought. Mr. Anuar stated in revising the landscape code staff created a more sustainable environment for trees to
survive, increasing the landscape islands and taking out all that bad compacted rock with suitable planting soil. Mayor McDuffie asked if what is being put in is termed as xeriscaping.
Mr. Anuar stated this is xeriscaping. Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 06-12 on Second and 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. At this point, the time being 8:24 p.m., the Commission
moved to Item 11, Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the City Manager and the Public. 11.A. City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries. The City Manager
stated at the previous meeting Mr. Goodman complained about different types of criminal activity in his neighborhood. The City
24 02/21/12 Manager stated this location has been addressed before and continues to be an area that is frequented often by the Community Patrol officers. He stated Mr. Goodman has contacted
the Police Department previously to express his concerns and each instance has been met with aggressive patrols, surveillance, high visibility patrols, search warrants, etc. The City
Manager stated the problem dissipates when those involved are arrested but unfortunately those arrested are released again and tend to reside in the same area. He stated staff’s plan
of action will include some of the same tactics as before but we will try to identify the owners of the properties that these people are moving back to and make them aware of criminal
activity that is occurring in their locations. The City Manager stated a supervisor in the Police Department will be meeting with Mr. Goodman in the near future to explain the plan of
action as it pertains to his concerns. 11.B. From the Public. None. At this point, the time being 8:26 p.m., the Commission moved back to Item 9.F. 9.F. RESOLUTION NO. 10-12/MID YEAR
BUDGET AMENDMENT: Consider approval of Resolution No. 10-12 amending Resolution No. 42-11 adopted September 20, 2011, which made appropriations of sums of money for all necessary expenditures
of the City of Delray Beach for the FY 2011/2012, by setting forth the anticipated revenues and expenditures for the operating funds of the City for FY 2011/2012. The caption of Resolution
No. 10-12 is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 42-11 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 WHICH MADE APPROPRIATIONS
OF SUMS OF MONEY FOR ALL NECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2011/2012, BY SETTING FORTH THE ANTICIPATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE
OPERATING FUNDS OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2011/2012; REPEALING ALL RESOLUTIONS INCONSISTENT HEREWITH. (The official copy of Resolution No. 10-12 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
25 02/21/12 The City Manager stated at the last Workshop meeting regarding the $3.2 million fire service fee not being adopted the Commission directed that we take no more than $1.4
from undesignated fund balance, cuts in capital projects and other reductions in order to handle that cost. The budget amendment uses $1 from fund balance and does rebalance the budget
without the $3.2 in additional revenue. The City Manager stated we are also adding a cost to address what we see staff needs for enforcement of the ordinances adopted this evening. The
City Manager stated Mrs. Butler requested a parttime Code Enforcement Officer that the City has already hired and she would like to hire another full-time Code Enforcement Officer that
would work nights and weekends and a clerical person to handle primarily the landlord permit applications. In addition, the City Attorney’s office has been struggling with the workload
and as of June 1, 2012, the City is unfreezing the third attorney’s position. The City Manager stated we absorbed those additional costs and still used the $1 from fund balance to rebalance
the budget. This is the mid-year budget review which staff would normally do in April but staff felt it was appropriate given the magnitude the change to go ahead and do that now plus
that enable us to take a hard look at all the revenues and although staff knew that we were getting additional building permit fees in but we did not know how everything else might project
out. The City Manager stated there is additional revenue and we are able to rebalance at that level. Mr. Carney stated the pavilion on the beach is the only item where the community
has actually raised money towards its repair. He stated this could get to a situation in its continuing state of disrepair where it may have to be closed. Mr. Carney stated at that time
the City Commission said to the BPOA who was spearheading the effort that the City was not going to be able to afford it; however, if the BPOA was willing to raise money towards then
the City could probably meet them halfway. The BPOA has since raised money and some developers have agreed to construct the project for cost and the BPOA is also raising additional monies.
Mr. Carney asked that the Commission consider re-establishing this particular project because it is so different from all the others on the list. Mr. Carney asked that this be deleted
from the mid-year budget amendment and that we utilize the ample reserves that we currently have and it will keep us well below the $1.4 in reserves. Dr. Alperin stated if this were
approved how soon the construction would start. The City Manager stated we are approximately 4-6 months away from construction and noted there are no construction drawings yet. Mr. Carney
reiterated that the pavilion is continually dilapidated condition and in some areas of it are unsafe. He stated this is something that was promised to be done and the BPOA has raised
money for this. Mr. Frankel thanked the City Manager and everyone who worked very diligently on the budget. Mr. Frankel stated he feels priority is getting the City Attorney’s office
the help they need. Mr. Frankel stated he also places a priority on Mrs. Butler’s request and applauds the decision to hire someone to work nights and weekends. He stated he is out a
lot during nights and weekends and there are blatant violations. Mr.
26 02/21/12 Frankel suggested that in the future the City may even need more Code Enforcement Officers based on the passage of the ordinances tonight. Mr. Frankel stated a local builder
is constructing the pavilion at cost and it is important that this project be completed by next season. Mrs. Gray stated this is very similar to the Pompey Park project. She supports
moving forward with this project because it is not safe. Dr. Alperin stated staff has done a phenomenal job. Mayor McDuffie stated the choices with the pavilion are either to raise it
or rebuild it. Mr. Carney moved to approve Resolution No. 10-12 to add back in $105,000.00 from reserves for the beach pavilion, 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. 9.G. PARKING STUDY CHARETTE RESULTS
Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated in accordance with City Commission direction, two public Charettes were held on January 30th and 31st. He stated the attendance was
less than expected but still significant. Mr. Aronson stated if a fee based program were to be initiated that careful consideration is given to help commerce instead of hinder commerce
and that the program would be flexible to change as it is monitored as the shortcomings that get noted be corrected and that any equipment also be flexible with respect to changing rates
and doing things without any great expense or be done in short order once recognized. Mr. Aronson stated staff has talked a great deal about validation programs and other programs that
would assist residents in using parking as a marketing tool. Staff feels a fee based program is the most efficient way to monitor parking in the downtown. Mrs. Gray asked if we are now
using the top floor of the Old School Square Garage for valet parking. Mr. Aronson stated the City has not started that program yet. Mrs. Gray inquired about the employee parking. Mr.
Aronson stated with regard to the one-hour free parking the first hour is free but you have to pay for the second hour when you park. Mrs. Gray stated she has been talking to some of
the merchants on Atlantic Avenue and if we have the valet parking in the garage would it be okay to have two of the floors of the garage designated for employee parking and then have
the owners to participate in paying for some of that parking. Mr. Aronson stated this could be a possibility. However, Mr. Aronson stated staff has an idea of how many employees in total
are employed in the downtown but does not have that broken down in shift and exact area. In his opinion, Mr. Aronson stated he does not believe we will be able to accommodate all the
employees in season in that first three blocks on Atlantic Avenue.
27 02/21/12 Mayor McDuffie asked if there is potential of an Interlocal agreement to use the County Courthouse parking. Mr. Aronson stated this is going to be proposed. Mayor McDuffie
stated we have made some strides. Mayor McDuffie stated he had an opportunity to speak to some of the stakeholders’ downtown and anytime there is talk about fees and meters they are
afraid that they are going to lose business. Mayor McDuffie stated a young man from Kimley-Horn spoke at the first Charette and he was so knowledgeable about how parking fees and parking
meters can actually bring business to the downtown rather than forcing it away from the downtown. Mayor McDuffie suggested that staff get that message across to the merchants with some
of his backup materials it would go a long way toward calming some of the fears about parking meters downtown. Mr. Carney stated he understands the merchants fear and they can be addressed
with a lot of what staff is trying to bring forth now. He stated he is very happy that the Charette took place and is glad we are getting ready to do this. Mr. Frankel stated he attended
the morning Charette, the parking study presentation, and the Workshop meeting. He stated after hearing the presentations he is very happy with his vote not to spend $92,000.00 on a
parking study because he feels it was a waste of money. Mr. Frankel stated at the time he stated that they were going to put meters everywhere. He stated some other communities that
have put meters in their business have gone down a lot. Mr. Frankel expressed concern over the amount of car traffic even during off-season during the day and at night. Mr. Frankel stated
that this citywide meter parking will have an effect on the downtown. Mr. Carney stated the five minute spots are great and suggested that if we are going to do parking meters that there
be more of those on the Avenue to try and compensate for those who want to run into a store for five minutes to pick up a postcard, etc. Mayor McDuffie stated we have to look toward
additional revenue sources for this community in the future and this is one of them. Dr. Alperin stated it was a waste of money to do the study in the first place but it was done. Therefore,
Dr. Alperin stated he supports the study. Mr. Aronson stated one of the programs that were initially suggested when these discussions started were how you count someone’s parking with
meters. Mr. Aronson stated you cannot but if you give them a card or token that gives them free parking the next time they come to the town that is the type of incentives you build into
the program. Mayor McDuffie suggested that we could institute automated parking in the City of Delray Beach by making some changes in here in information technologies. He stated make
a call on your cell phone and put the number of the meter in.
28 02/21/12 It was the consensus of the Commission to find out how many employees will have to park per shift, obtain additional information from Kimley-Horn and come up with a program
to bring back to the Commission. 9.H. APPOINTMENT TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD: Appoint one (1) regular member to the Public Art Advisory Board to serve an unexpired term ending
July 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the appointment will be made by Mayor McDuffie. (Seat #5). Mayor McDuffie stated he would like to defer his appointment to March 6, 2012.
12. FIRST READINGS: A. None At this point, the time being 9:07 p.m., the Commission moved to Item 13, Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items. 13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA
ITEMS. 13.A. City Manager With regard to Commissioner Gray’s concern about noise complaints in the downtown area, the City Manager stated staff met with several business owners late
last summer at the library and discussed noise problems. The City Manager stated some businesses have been ticketed and staff will be scheduling another meeting with the Police Department
and business owners and residents to work on these issues. Secondly, the City Manager stated the County is in the process of revising their vehicle for hire and Captain Mitchell is the
League’s appointment to that Board and has brought back to us some concerns that staff is trying to address through the league. The City Manager stated the Committee the County has working
on it is an 8 member committee and is dominated by the industry. The City Manager stated staff had a transportation committee meeting today with the league and it is all focused on protecting
the industry not on protecting the consumer. The City Manager stated in Palm Beach County taxis do not have to display their rates on the door. Also, he stated they are proposing to
expand the definition and there is not even an exception for City owned vehicles. He stated the City would have to go pay a $5,000.00 fee to get registered as a company; it would apply
to things like the shuttle that runs between the Seagate and the Seagate Beach Club. The City Manager stated all the shuttles that hotels operate would all come under this County control.
He stated it is a county-wide ordinance that cities can opt out of and there are 4 or 5 cities that have their own taxing regulation ordinance. The City Manager stated Captain Mitchell
and the Committee wanted to institute a requirement that the taxis had to accept credit cards and the County Commission refused to accept that so far. The City Manager stated the problem
is you get someone that has
29 02/21/12 no cash and is intoxicated and wants to get a ride home and they have to go to an ATM machine to get money to pay the cab. He stated staff will continue working on this.
Secondly, the City Manager stated staff outlined four (4) possible scenarios for changing the governance of the South Central Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Board (SCRWTDB). He stated
he met with Lori Osborn from Boynton Beach to discuss and they will meet with Dennis Coates to get his input. The City Manager stated you could go to a system where the Board would only
meet once a year to adopt the budgeted rates; everything has to go through the Commissions anyway. He stated as other things come up just send it through the Commissions without having
a joint meeting unless you had a big capital project or something where you are talking about issuing debt, etc. The City Manager stated another option might be to have the Board comprised
of staff members instead of the elected officials and reiterated that the actions that the Board takes would go back to the Commissions for approval. Lastly, the City Manager stated
he was cleaning out files this past week and came across his 2002 tax bill. He stated with discounts his 2002 tax bill was $2,208.11; his 2011 tax bill with discounts is $2,416.92. The
City Manager stated the City in 2002 was $661.97; in 2011 it is $639.84. He stated what went up is the required local millage for schools; the school state tax went up from $517.00 to
$647.00. The City Manager stated the South Waste Authority went up from $104.00 to $174.00; the City’s stormwater increased from $54.00 to $63.96. The City Manager stated he did not
realize that his City taxes are actually lower today than they were nine (9) years ago and it is because of homestead exemption and other things that have been instituted. He stated
no one tax bill is typical but he is sure there are a lot of homeowners in a similar favorable situation. 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 commented about the difficulty over getting the SCRWTDB meeting together. Secondly, Dr. Alperin stated the Commission received
a letter from Dennis Coates that he is leaving the position. The City Manager suggested letting Delray Beach run the SCRWTDB. The City Manager stated if you read the Interlocal Agreement
that set this up it says the Board may hire a Director and it also talks about Delray Beach running the Plant because it is in our City limits. He stated under the existing Interlocal
Agreement Delray Beach could run it and would have a Plant Superintendent that would come under Environmental Services.
30 02/21/12 13.C.2. Mr. Carney Mr. Carney stated there were lots of comments made this evening in the public hearings related to the three ordinances that were discussed related to the
transient housing and landlord permits. He stated there were some very good ideas as they related to remedies and penalties need to be addressed. Mr. Carney stated sometimes it is cheaper
to pay the fine than it is to go forward. Mr. Carney stated if we do in fact have a number of landlord permits that are in violation and we do liens we are not really trying to enforce
it or collect it. He stated he would like to make sure that we always try to maximize the leverage that we have and to ensure that we use the ability to lien and penalize to ensure adequate
compliance with the rules and regulations that we may be doing. Secondly, Mr. Carney stated this past Sunday he attended the 2nd Annual “Art in the Alley” and it was a great event. He
stated Mr. and Mrs. Jacquet also attended and it was pleasure to meet them. Mr. Carney stated the issue of the parking enforcement hours needs to be addressed especially parking enforcement
during the mid-week. Lastly, Mr. Carney stated at one of the candidates’ forums a comment was made about the Commission’s review of the City Manager and the City Attorney. Mr. Carney
stated typically the reviews would occur during a time when there was going to be a salary increase. Mr. Carney stated the last four years he was at the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) and the salary increase was never on the table yet the Executive Director always got reviewed and when he was on the Delray Beach Housing Authority they always got reviewed on
an annual basis. Mr. Carney stated this is a great way for the Commission to let the City Manager’s office and the City Attorney’s office know what they think and vice versa. Mr. Carney
suggested that this be done in May versus September since May is a less busy month and suggested that the Commission have a policy on an annual basis to review. He stated this is good
for everyone to be able to have that dialogue to find out what everyone’s expectation levels are. Mr. Carney stated there is a general feeling in the public that there is none of these
formalized review processes going on and recommends that this begin in May. 13.C.3. Mrs. Gray Mrs. Gray stated she attended St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church Annual Tea this past Sunday
where they honored U.S. Congressman Alcee Hastings, the Parks and Recreation Afterschool Program, and others. She stated this event was well attended. 13.C.4. Mr. Frankel Mr. Frankel
commented about the Candidate Forums and stated he has not received notification of any of the Forums that have been held so far.
31 02/21/12 Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated he was at his weekly tennis game last night at the tennis center and it was great to see all the buildings and facades that are up for the tennis
tournament that starts Friday, February 24, 2012. Mr. Frankel stated he is looking forward to the ten days of tennis. For the record, Mr. Frankel stated the #4 ranked player in the country,
Andy Murray, has been using the tennis facilities for the last week or so. Mr. Frankel stated this is a compliment to the City’s facilities that one of the greatest tennis players in
the world has come to Delray Beach. 13.C.5. Mayor McDuffie Mayor McDuffie stated he just got back from Japan on a Sister Cities trip and had an incredible trip. He stated he took approximately
450 pictures and met with the Mayor and the Commission in Miyazu and met with the Chamber of Commerce in Miyazu. Mayor McDuffie stated they had two half day sessions with the Mayor and
the Commission talking about issues in their community versus issues in our community and sharing information about their problems and our problems. He stated the temperature seldom
got above 35 degrees for the entire time they were there. Mayor McDuffie stated they discussed alternative energy and commercial fishing. He stated they have a marine high school that
has its own 130 foot research vessel and a marine research laboratory. Mayor McDuffie stated he met with the Mayor of Kyoto and got invited to meet a university professor at a Buddhist
university whose sister works here at Morikami Park. Mayor McDuffie stated he also met with the Vice Governor of the Prefecture of Kyoto. He stated his wife and Mike Malone’s wife being
school teachers got to tour several schools and the men went commercial fishing and met them in the middle of the day and toured the Marine High School and Miyazu High School as well.
Mayor McDuffie stated the hallways in the schools were freezing and they have cut their heat off in every place that they can cut it off in Miyazu. He stated they have two alternate
energy things going on: one with waves and Miyazu has a bamboo burning power generation plant and also get other gases off that as a by-product. Mayor McDuffie stated an hour into his
first meeting one of the Chamber members came in and handed them some pamphlets from Miyazu and then handed them a plastic wand. He stated you take the brochure from Miyazu, turn the
power on, stick the point of the wand on a photograph and it starts telling you everything about the photo (i.e. a photo of a restaurant) and noted he will bring this to the next Commission
meeting. Mayor McDuffie stated in addition to agreeing on student exchange between our two cities they have now agreed upon an artist exchange. Secondly, Mayor McDuffie thanked the City
Manager and City staff regarding the budget and the ordinances. There being no further business, Mayor McDuffie declared the meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
32 02/21/12 ________________________________________________ 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 February 21, 2012, 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 February 21, 2012; Item 9.A.
retention, for the benefit of the general public lo cated at 421 S.W. 5th Avenue in the
amount of $10.00.
1.INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(CRA): Consider approving an Interlocal Agreement with the Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) providing that the City agrees to accept the
property is in “As Is ” condition and restrict the use of the property to p ublic uses,
including but not limited to drainage retention, fo r the benefit of the general
public located at 421 S.W. 5th Avenue; contingent u pon approval of Resolution
09 -12 and the Contract for Sale and Purchase.
B.RESOLUTION NO. 11 -12/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/530 N.W. 47 th
AVENUE: Consider approval of Resolution No. 11 -12, a contract for sale and
purchase, authorizing the City to sell the Neighbor hood Stabilization Program
property located at 530 N.W. 47 th Avenue to Jean Louigene Nelan for the purchase
price of $45,000.00.
11. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC-
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A.City Manager's response to prior public comments and inquiries.
B.From the Public.
12. FIRST READINGS:
A.ORDINANCE NO. 05 -12: Consider a privately -initiated Future Land Use Map
change from Transitional (TRN) to General Commercia l (GC), rezoning from POC
(Planned Office Center) to PC (Planned Commercial), and a Text Amendment of the
Comprehensive Plan modifying the description of the GC (General Commercial)
Future Land Use designation to identify a maximum F AR of 0.46 for a 9.95 acre
property located on the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway
(1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) known as Delr ay Place . If passed, a public
hearing will be held on March 20, 2012.
B.ORDINANCE NO. 12 -12: Consider a city -initiated amendment to the Land
Development Regulations (LDR) Section 8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts
Program ”, Subsection (B), “Appropriation of Capital Improvement Project (CIP
Funds)”, setting forth the right to use funds as appropriate d in the City ’s budget. If
passed, a public hearing will be held on March 20, 2012.
13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
A.City Manager
B.City Attorney
C.City Commission
02/21/12
FEBRUARY 21, 2012
A Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Del ray Beach,
Florida, was called to order by Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie in the C ommission Chambers
at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 21, 2012.
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, Dir ector of
Pastoral Services/Abbey Delray South.
3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of A merica was
given.
4. AGENDA APPROVAL.
Mayor McDuffie stated Item 9.C. Reimbursement Request/Robert
Goldstein , has been removed by the applicant and Item 9.D., Amendment No. 5 to the
Franchise Agreement/Waste Management has been removed by staff.
Also, Mayor McDuffie requested that Item 8.C., Service Authorization
No. 12-01/Mathews Consulting, Inc./Congress Avenue Force Main Repl acement be
removed from the Consent Agenda and moved to the Regular Agenda as Item 9.A.A.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs.
Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Dr. Alpe rin – Yes; Mr. Frankel –
Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Y es. Said motion was
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of
January 31, 2012, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commissi on voted as
2
02/21/12
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.
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Minutes of the February 6, 2012
Workshop Meeting, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commi ssion 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.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
February 7, 2012, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll call the Commiss ion voted as
follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alper in – Yes; Mr. Frankel –
Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
6. PROCLAMATIONS:
6.A. None
7. PRESENTATIONS:
7.A. Recognizing and commending Douglas Smith, Milena Walinski and
Richard Reade for participating in the Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc.
Economic Sustainability Speaker Series
Mayor McDuffie recognized and commended Douglas Smith, Milena
Walinski and Richard Reade for participating in the Palm Beach County League of
Cities, Inc. Economic Sustainability Speaker Series and presented them w ith certificates.
8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval.
8.A. RATIFICATION OF SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL BOARD ACTION: Approve and
ratify the action of the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment a nd Disposal Board
at their Quarterly Meeting of January 19, 2012.
8.B. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT/302 N.E. 7 TH AVENUE:
Approve a Hold Harmless Agreement with Hartman House B & B, LL C. for
encroachment of a sign into the right-of-way at 302 N.E. 7th Avenue.
8.C. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA
AS ITEM 9.A.A.
8.D. REIMBURSEMENT TO FLORIDA EAST COAST (FEC)
RAILROAD: Approve reimbursement in the amount of $55,765.40 to Florida East
Coast (FEC) Railroad for the reconstruction of the East Atlanti c Avenue railroad
crossing. Funding is available from 334-3162-541-46.90 (General Construct ion Fund:
Repair & Maintenance Services/Other Repair/Maintenance Costs).
3
02/21/12
8.E. APPROVAL OF POLL WORKERS FOR THE FIRST
NONPARTISAN ELECTION: Approve the poll workers for the First Nonpartisan
Election to be held on March 13, 2012.
8.F. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boa rds for
the period February 6, 2012 through February 17, 2012.
8.G. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS:
1. Contract award to MWI Pumps in the amount of $16,987.17 to
rebuild storm water pump at the Seasage Drive Pump Station.
Funding is available from 448-5416-538-46.90 (Storm Water
Utility Fund: Repair & Maintenance Svc/Other
Repair/Maintenance Cost).
2. Purchase award to Broward Motor Sports in the amount of
$21,336.00 for three (3) ATVs for Ocean Rescue. Funding is
available from 501-3312-591-64.20 (Garage Fund:
Machinery/Equipment/Automotive).
3. Purchase award to HD Supply Waterworks in the amount of
$15,225.69 for various piping materials to be installed by the City's
in-house construction crew for N.W. 16th Street water main
project. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-68.61
(Water/Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund: Improvements
Other/N.W. 16th Street Water Main).
4. Purchase award to Intercounty Engineering, Inc. in the amount of
$74,640.98 for emergency force main repair at Lowson Boulevard
and Congress Avenue intersection. Funding is available from 442-
5178-536-46.24 (W & S Renewal & Replacement Fund: Repair &
Maintenance Service/Repair Sewer Mains).
5. Purchase award to Otto Waste Systems in the amount of
$58,150.00 to purchase additional garage containers in various
sizes for Barrier Island residents who will have curb-side ser vice
starting April 1, 2012. Funding is available from 433-3711-534-
49.90 (Sanitation Fund: Other Current Charges).
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded
by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr.
Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor Mc Duffie – Yes. Said
motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
4
02/21/12
9. REGULAR AGENDA:
9.A.A. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 12-01/MATHEWS
CONSULTING, INC./CONGRESS AVENUE FORCE MAIN REPLACEME NT:
Approve Service Authorization No. 12-01 to Mathews Consulting, Inc. in the am ount of
$106,291.00 for professional engineering services in the design of the Con gress Avenue
Force Main Replacement project. Funding is available from 442-5178 -536-68.89 (W & S
Renewal & Replacement Fund: Improvements Other/Congress Avenue F orce Main
Replacement).
Dr. Alperin stated he wants to ensure that the Commission is keeping track
of what is happening with the change orders, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll ca ll 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.
9.A. APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION/OFF
THE AVE: Consider the appeal of an administrative interpretation by the C ity Manager
that a sidewalk café cannot be established in a public spac e which is not a sidewalk for
Off the Ave located on SE 6 th Avenue, south of Starbucks Coffee. (Quasi-Judicial
Hearing)
Mayor McDuffie read the City of Delray Beach Quasi-Judici al Hearing
rules into the record for this item and all subsequent Quasi-Judicial items.
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 had discussions with Adam Neblack at “Off
the Ave” about his sidewalk café and walking in this evening he aske d Mr. Jeffrey Lynne
if the court reporter was here for this item. Mrs. Gray sta ted she has had conversation
with staff. Mayor McDuffie, Mr. Carney, and Dr. Alperin state d they had no ex parte
communications to disclose.
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, stated the applic ation
was submitted to use a portion of the City’s alley south of the building that the business
occupies. She stated LDR Section 3.3(F)(2) allows the establ ishment of a sidewalk café
in front of a business or along the side street adjacent to the b usiness. Mrs. Butler stated
the proposal submitted would encompass approximately 440 square f eet of space within
the alleyway in which the applicant has proposed to remove the existing rock, mulch, and
landscaping improvements done by the city and replaced with pa vers. The site plan also
shows an aluminum fence to encompass this area. Staff recommends that the appeal be
denied based on the fact that the alleyway is not consistent with being a side street or
sidewalk. The site plan is very crowded with an existing sewe r line, a concrete FPL pole
with supporting guy wire, three existing mature sabal palms , several bushes and very
mature lirope as ground cover. Staff also believes that the pl acement of the tables and
5
02/21/12
chairs with all the existing obstructions would not be conducive to a very safe
environment. Staff recommends denial of the appeal because it is inconsistent with how
we approve sidewalk cafés.
At this point, Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in Mr. Lynne’s clients
as they just arrived to the meeting.
Jeffrey Lynne, Attorney with Weiner & Lynne, P.A., 10 S.E. 1 st
Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444, asked that the entire City’s file on this matter be
accepted into the record for purposes of this hearing. Mr. Lynne stated Off the Ave Food
and Spirits is located on South Federal Highway and the question is w hether a sidewalk
café is allowed to be located at the place requested. The pr oposed sidewalk café is the
landscaped area adjacent to the restaurant in an adjacent pub lic space. Mr. Lynne
displayed architectural renderings of the existing and the prop osal is to fence off that area
to make it safe so that people can have an outdoor dining experie nce. Mr. Lynne
referenced an email from the City Manager to Mr. Brewer tha t “A sidewalk café cannot
be established in a public space which is not a sidewalk.” Mr. Lynne stated the issue on
appeal this evening is whether a sidewalk café can be esta blished in a public space which
is not a currently paved sidewalk. Mr. Lynne stated the question i s does the plain
language of the LDRs restrict sidewalk cafés to just side walks. Mr. Lynne referenced the
language in the LDRs regarding where sidewalk cafes can go and it states that (1) A
sidewalk café can be located in front of a business, (2) along a s ide street adjacent to a
business, (3) in a public space adjacent to a business, and (4) in front of an adjacent
business.
Scott McClure, part owner of “Off the Ave”, 19-23 S.E. 5 th Avenue,
Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated he has owned the building since 2005 and has been
maintaining that property next door since that time. Mr. McClur e stated there are tree
stumps there because trees were cut down after the trees des troyed his roof in Hurricane
Wilma. He stated since 2007 he has been picking up hypodermic needles. Mr. McClure
stated the City came out and fenced some of the areas to make i t safer. He stated he
wants to improve the area because it has been such an eyesore.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to address
the Commission regarding the appeal, to please come forward at t his time. There being
no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the publi c hearing was
closed.
Mrs. Butler stated when staff modified the sidewalk café ordi nance they
did put the language in talking about sidewalk cafés could be located adjacent to public
space and that was done in conjunction with Worthing Park. She state d there was some
restriction placed on the site plan prior to Worthing Park be ing designed. Mrs. Butler
stated it was never intended that we would use alleyways as a component of sidewalk
cafés.
6
02/21/12
The City Manager stated we are not just talking about an all eyway we are
also talking about a landscape node that is part of the City’s parking lot.
Mr. Lynne stated they are not using any part of the parking lot but it is
simply that landscape node area. He stated before the code w as changed landscape nodes
were specifically allowed area and the area was expanded to clarify public spaces. Mr.
Lynne stated with regard to Worthing Place and other areas City staff is proposing a
further amendment to sidewalk café areas to clarify public s pace. Mr. Lynne stated the
law says you look at the plain language and it says public s pace. He stated if it is not
clear you look at the legislative intent. Mr. Lynne stated the record is clear that the intent
was to expand the area where sidewalk cafés can go. Mr. Lynne urged the Commission
to approve the appeal.
Dr. Alperin asked if there is any other place in the City where a landscape
node has been converted to a sidewalk café. Mrs. Butler stated there are places along
East Atlantic Avenue where sidewalk cafés are allowed to be adjacent to areas that have
landscape nodes. Mrs. Butler stated she is not aware of any.
George Brewer, 204 N.W. 9 th Street, Delray Beach, FL 33444
(Architect), stated the French restaurant that is on 1 st Street across from Spot Coffee the
landscape strip has been converted into sidewalk café. Mr. Brewe r stated there was
landscaping there and they went around it and the other landscaping that was not in such
great shape was taken out and they did pave it.
Dr. Alperin asked if a City owned parking lot considered publi c space.
Mrs. Butler stated the City owned parking lot is a public fa cility but the landscape node is
the requirement as part of the landscaping that exists with t hat parking lot so if you
remove it then this creates a different situation.
Mrs. Gray inquired about the safety issue with the City parki ng lot and it
appears from slide that there are car tire marks along the c urb. Mrs. Butler stated it is a
fairly tight movement because there is businesses that park along the back side of the
buildings. She displayed the alleyway and stated there is back out parking along the
backside of the buildings so people are backing out and there are parking spaces and
dumpsters. Mrs. Butler stated she was at the site today and sh e was coming around and
another car was coming from another angle and she had to almost ge t up on the curb to
get around. She stated it is a very tight movement and people do not circulate correctly.
Mrs. Gray asked about the existing sewer line. Mrs. Butler st ated the things that are
sticking up will be somewhat of an issue and commented about an em ail from Mr. Hasko
who is responsible for this area saying that it is not a pro blem. Mrs. Butler stated maybe
there is a way that Mr. Hasko can cap that for them but is not sure. Mrs. But ler expressed
concern over drainage as well.
Mr. Lynne stated this is way off topic and these are issues that had a
sidewalk café application been accepted by the City and comment s had come back they
would be able to work with them. Mr. Lynne made reference to sta ff’s email and the
7
02/21/12
City Manager’s response. Mr. Lynne stated they are not here regarding the site plan but
is here on the legal determination of whether a sidewalk café has to be on a sidewalk or
not.
Mr. Frankel made reference to the photo and asked where the sidewa lk is.
Mr. Lynne stated a lot of sidewalk cafés are located on private property set back from the
property such as for instance Burgerfi is set back on private property and at the Seagate
Hotel those are sidewalk cafés that are up on the property but they ar e not on a sidewalk.
Mr. Carney stated he is not prepared to make a legal decision; however, he
does believe we have landscape ordinances in this city to creat e landscaping and so that
we do not always have concrete, tables, or fences. Mr. Carney s upports staff’s
interpretation.
Dr. Alperin made reference to page 4 of Ordinance No. 37-10 Secti on (2)
paragraph indicates that any travel lanes that there is room for a sidewalk café. He stated
you have to have at least a two (2) feet vehicular travel lane a nd does not see this as a
potential use for this property. Dr. Alperin stated he does not see this as a potential use
for this property and does not think it can be interpreted as a public space that could be
used for a sidewalk café.
Mayor McDuffie stated Mr. Lynne made a point and concurs with Mr.
Carney that the Commission is being asked to rule on a legal issue for which none of
them are prepared to rule on. Mayor McDuffie recommended that this go back to the
City Attorney and our side of the case be presented to the Commi ssion and then they can
rule on it.
The City Attorney stated staff made an interpretation that t he sidewalk
café ordinance does not apply in this particular case therefore you cannot put a sidewalk
café there and that is the issue in front of the City Commission.
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 appeal),
seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follow s: 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.B. WAIVER REQUEST/THE DELRAY BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY:
Consider a request to waive Land Development Regulations (LDR) Se ction
4.6.7(F)(3)(f), “Special Event Non-Roadway Banner Signing”, to allow the Delray Beach
Public Library to erect two (2) Centennial Banners (6’ x 21’) on the south ele vation of the
building, facing Atlantic Avenue for a period of six (6) months; the beginning date may
be selected by the Library. (Quasi- Judicial Hearing)
8
02/21/12
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex par te
communications. Mr. Frankel, Mrs. Gray, and Mayor McDuffie stated they had no ex
parte communications to disclose. Mr. Carney stated he spoke wit h Alan Kornblau,
Director of the Delray Beach Library today. Dr. Alperin st ated he had no ex parte
communications to disclose.
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, stated this is a request
from the Delray Beach Library to erect two (2) Centennial Banners (6’ x 21’) on the
south elevation of the building, facing Atlantic Avenue. The library is celebrating 100
years of service (1913-2013) and seeking approval to erect these banners for one (1) year
beginning April 2012. Mrs. Butler stated per LDR Section 4.6.7 which governs the use
of banners allows banners for grand openings, special events, non-roa dway and special
event roadway banners. Banners associated with City facilitie s and properties are
submitted to the City Manager for approval. Banners for spec ial events on non-roadway
are limited to 20 square feet in size. The Library is seekin g approval to erect two (2)
banners that are 126 square feet each that will flank the entranc e from Atlantic Avenue,
announcing their Centennial celebration. Staff recommends approval of the waiver
request to allow the two (2) banners to be erected; however, that these be limited to a
period of six (6) months as opposed to one year. Mrs. Butler state d staff would opt that
the library could establish the beginning date to erect the banners.
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, t he public hearing
was closed.
Dr. Alperin stated he supports this; however, he feels when it comes to
organizations such as Old School Square, Spady Museum or any publicly owned museum
or building that has exhibits for the public and it is for publ ic interest he feels the City
should be allowing banners all the time. Dr. Alperin suggested tha t the Commission
approve this for one (1) year.
Mr. Carney concurred with comments expressed by Dr. Alperin and that
the banners are kept in pristine condition.
Mr. Frankel stated he has no objection to the one (1) year pro posed by Dr.
Alperin.
Mayor McDuffie stated he supports one (1) year and that the ba nners be
kept in pristine condition.
Mr. Carney stated he would like staff to maintain to ensure that they keep
the banners in the proper condition in the event that staff determi nes that it is re-
addressed then he would expect the library to comply.
9
02/21/12
Mr. Carney moved to adopt the Board Order as presented, 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. Fra nkel – Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.C. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE APPLICANT.
9.D. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED BY STAFF.
9.E. ADDITIONAL SCOPE/RANDOLPH & DEWDNEY
CONSTRUCTION INC./POMPEY PARK CONCESSION STAND: Consider
approval of additional scope for the Pompey Park Concession Stand pro ject in the
amount of $2,614.50 for Randolph & Dewdney Construction, Inc. for relocation and
extension of existing low voltage conduit, and modification of all flat roof areas; and
approval for the amount to be paid from the Contract's Contingency Allowance.
Richard Hasko, Director of Environmental Services, stated this ite m is a
request for approval of a small additional scope to the Pompey P ark Concession building
in the amount of $2,614.50. Mr. Hasko stated approximately $2,200 has to do with s ome
insulation modifications to the roof. He stated when the Commission ap proved the scope
addition to replace the entire second floor press box because of the wate r damage that had
occurred to the support beams that it was determined that was because the water was
ponding in the flat roof and seeping into the beams. Mr. Hasko state d this modification
will give the roof a slight pitch away from the new constructi on of the press box so that
will not occur in the future with the new construction. He stated the remaining $441.00
has to do with some modifications to some minor low voltage conduit. Mr . Hasko stated
this is proposed to be coming from the contract contingency so ther e is no additional
funding for the contract.
Mr. Carney stated the whole point of doing this contract was to cr eate an
amount and he does not understand why this type of obvious thing which had to be
moved was not picked up in the original bid. Mr. Hasko stated the or iginal bid did not
anticipate complete reconstruction of the second story press box . Mr. Carney stated he
felt that the Commission had a lot of discussion about redoing the secon d story press box.
Mr. Hasko stated there was discussion about expanding the press box but not about
completely reconstructing the entire box. He stated staff g ot into that as they started to
do the demolition on some of the siding and realized that the support beams suffered
from the water damage. Mr. Carney asked what will happen aft er the contingency fund
runs out. Mr. Hasko stated if there are additional problems that staff runs into and we
have completed the contingency staff will have to find other ways to get around the
problem. Mr. Carney stated he feels the contractor has to fi nd other ways. Mr. Carney
stated there is $8,000.00 and suggested that they spend it wisely be cause he is unhappy
with the way this whole thing has manifested itself in particul ar if there are going be
change orders will bring it over what we originally agreed to.
Mrs. Gray stated it is not uncommon to have change orders and inquir ed
how far along with regard to percentage is this project. She supports this .
10
02/21/12
Mr. Frankel stated he has a problem with all of it. He st ated the original
budget was $230,000.00 and the amount approved by the Commission although it wa s
shared with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was $456,000.00. Mr.
Frankel stated with the change orders it is well double the ori ginal budget and believes
there will be another change order forthcoming before the project is completed. He
stated while improvements needed to be made it gets to a point w here it is a little
excessive. Mr. Frankel stated as he had previously voted he is not in favor of spending
any more money on this project.
The City Manager stated the changes that have been made have not
increased the amount that the Commission approved for the project.
Dr. Alperin stated it is still within the contingency and it makes no sense
to him not to support what we need to do.
Prior to the vote, Mayor McDuffie stated he is not fond of change orders
either. However, he understands that things appear when they are demolished that a re not
apparent to the eye when the project is started. Mayor Mc Duffie stated he will support
the additional scope.
Dr. Alperin moved to approve the additional scope for the Pompey Pa rk
Concession Stand project in the amount of $2,614.50, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll
call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; M r. Carney – Yes; Dr.
Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – No; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said motion p assed with a 4 to 1
vote.
At this point, the time being 7:07 p.m., the Commission moved to the du ly
advertised Public Hearings portion of the Agenda.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 03-12 (SECOND READING/SECOND PUBLIC
HEARING): Consider a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Reg ulations
(LDR), amending Section 4.3.3, “Specific Requirements for Specific Uses”, by amending
Subsection 4.3.3 (ZZZ), “Transient Residential Use”, in order to c larify prohibitions,
exemptions/exceptions, waivers, and penalties for same; amendin g Appendix “A”,
“Definitions”, in order to amend the definition of “Transient Residential Use".
The caption of Ordinance No. 03-12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING SECTION 4.3.3, “SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC USES”, BY
AMENDING SUBSECTION 4.3.3(ZZZ), “TRANSIENT
RESIDENTIAL USE”, IN ORDER TO CLARIFY
11
02/21/12
PROHIBITIONS, EXEMPTIONS/ EXCEPTIONS,
WAIVERS, AND PENALTIES FOR SAME;
AMENDING APPENDIX “A”, “DEFINITIONS”, IN
ORDER TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF
“TRANSIENT RESIDENTIAL USE”; PROVIDING A
SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 03-12 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.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning Department project file into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated this is a city-initiated amendment that w ill amend the
prohibitions, exemptions, exceptions, waivers and penalty section f or transient residential
uses and will also amend the definition of transient residential us es. Mr. Dorling stated
currently the transient residential use definition includes those dwe lling units that are in
both single family and multi-family zoning districts which have a turnover rate of more
than six times a year. He stated this definition is being modified to include dwelling units
that turnover in occupancy more than three times a year in sing le family and PRD
districts. Mr. Dorling stated further being modified to clarif y that this turnover rate refers
to the entire dwelling unit or any part thereof. The transient residential uses that may
exist by virtue of this definition change will be allowed to conti nue for 12 months after
the effective date of this ordinance.
At its meeting of December 19, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Board
recommended approval subject to conditions with a 7 to 0 vote. There we re three
conditions that the Board suggested and one of those was changing the re ferences in the
“whereas” clauses to reference the 2010 census; the second was t o clarify that the
ordinance applies to dwelling units and any part thereof and they al so recommended
lowering the allowed turnover rate from three times to two times a year. Mr. Dorling
stated the first two of those conditions are incorporated in the ordinance that is before the
Commission. At its meeting of February 7, 2012, the City Commissi on considered this
ordinance on first reading and recommended approval.
Mr. Dorling entered into the record a document that the Commission had
received this evening in support of this ordinance which summarize s related planning
issues regarding transient uses which was prepared by the C ity’s planning expert Maria
L. York. Mr. Dorling stated this document in summary discusses goals, objec tives and
policies in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use and Housi ng elements which
emphasize the City’s longstanding commitment to neighborhood stabi lity and references
12
02/21/12
how high turnover rates can change the character of a neighborhood and unde rmine this
neighborhood stability.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open.
William Shelley, 1012 Langer Way, Delray Beach, FL 33483,
expressed concern with this rehabilitation of alcoholics and drug addi cts coming into
Delray and being treated. Mr. Shelley stated he has first -hand experience and knowledge
how an alcoholic treatment center operates. Mr. Shelley stat ed he is a former alcoholic
who has spent 28 years in AA and was married to a psychotic woma n who was
hospitalized four months after their marriage. Her initial tre atment was in a mental
institution and upon a release she attended AA meetings with an a lcoholic friend and her
next hospitalization was an alcoholic treatment center at a hos pital. Mr. Shelley stated
recovery treatment centers do not always treat only alcoholics and drug related patients
and are not capable or licensed to treat psychiatric patients who are psychotic. Mr.
Shelley stated in order to protect the community the psychiatri c patients should be in a
locked unit separate from the treatment center.
Louise Kornfeld, 719 North Ocean Boulevard, Delray Beach, FL
33483, stated in the last 26 years since she has lived here she has wa tched Delray Beach
evolve into a city we were all proud of. Ms. Kornfeld asked whe n the new City officials
fell asleep and stopped caring about the residents who pay their taxes and helped make
this city grow. She asked if they were sleeping when we we nt from the “village-by-the-
sea” to the drug rehabilitation capital of the southeast as w as reported on the loud speaker
of the trains that deliver info to their passengers as they pass through our ci ty.
Laney Lewis, 1098 Hibiscus Lane, Delray Beach, FL ( President of the
Lake Ida Homeowners’ Association), supports the City on passing this ordinance to try
and get a handle on these boarding houses in the single family neigh borhoods. Ms.
Lewis stated we need to keep our single family neighborhoods sa fe and keep the quality
of life in our neighborhoods. She stated she has lived in her home for 34 years and this is
the single largest investment that she has and she does not want he r property values going
down any more than they already have. Ms. Lewis stated she ha s change; some for the
good and some for the bad and these boarding houses are bad. She stated boarding
houses do not belong in single family neighborhoods such as theirs. She urged the
Commission to let the residents know what they can do to help them do this and thanked
them for all their hard work in keeping Delray Beach the great place to live .
McCall Credle-Rosenthal, President of La Hacienda Neighborhood ,
stated she has a tenant in a residential area who rents annual ly to. She stated the
ordinance is acceptable; however, she urged the City Commission to c onsider a
moratorium so that the City would have the time to get ourselves org anized to be able to
make sure that the existing transient housing businesses are in c ompliance and any
proposed new facilities will be in compliance with a syste m that will be established or set
up. She stated there are transient housing facilities that ha ve not paid their landlord
permits and there are liens against these properties, some transient houses have more than
13
02/21/12
the allowed amount of tenants and they are living in substandard conditi ons and most are
not managed properly. Ms. Credle-Rosenthal stated we need to come together an set up a
system to be able to collect data and a tracking system and suggested that a volunteer or
homeowners association task force to get information, submit it by neighborhoods to
identify the transient houses that are not in compliance and try to get a perspective has to
how many of these houses are actually here in Delray Beach.
John Barneby, 801 Palm Trail, Delray Beach, FL 33483, speaking on
behalf of the homeowners’ association which is also a member of the Florida
Coalition for Preservation and the Beach Property Owners’ Assoc iation , stated he is
new resident of Delray Beach and is very upset with the incre asing number of transient
housing in the city and feels they have no place in residential ne ighborhoods. Mr.
Barneby urged the Commission to enact this ordinance along wit h other ordinances in
their entirety and to provide the resources so they may be enf orced without delay. He
stated they want Delray Beach to have quality neighborhoods wher e people want to live
and not live in fear of transient housing.
William Gladstone, 326 Palm Trail, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (was
Florida’s longest sitting Circuit Judge who works with child ren), supports this
ordinance and he moved to Delray Beach from South Dade in 1995 and Delray became
an All American community on two occasions and hopes that it stays that way. Mr.
Gladstone stated with all the good news that Delray Beach has had two northern
newspapers have written serious criticisms of Delray Beach including the New York
Times in recent times. Mr. Gladstone stated he lives in a quie t residential neighborhood
and tours go by his home every day to show people the lovely sing le family residence
that is so near to downtown. Mr. Gladstone stated He stated transit ional residential living
is incompatible with single family residential area. Mr. G ladstone suggested reducing it
and not having so much coming and going and the like would be a help to the
community. He stated he would like
Joe Collard, 1004 Brooks Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, concurs with
the previous comments and protecting the beach as a park is im portant aspect. Mr.
Collard expressed concern that what the City is proposing is not really going to get the
desired effect. Mr. Collard made a reference to an articl e in the Coastal Star where it
stated an executive from the Caron House said that they are not re nting property and they
are not going to abide by any turnover rules that they are bas ically housing people who
are being treated in another facility and those people are not in fact renters and are not
subject to any of these turnover or rental rules. Secondly, Mr. Col lard stated this
exemption for ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) was granted without giving an
address. He asked if there is a procedure or verification to foll ow-up to make sure that
this exemption is being covered. Mr. Collard expressed concern over the legality and
validity of it.
Nancy Wibbelsman, 2613 North Ocean Boulevard #N-4, Delray
Beach, FL 33483, stated when she was 7 her grandparents moved to Delray Beach and
her parents followed. Ms. Wibbelsman stated she loves this area and grew up thinking
14
02/21/12
that it was one of the sweetest, safest and adorable places . She stated the concern is not
about any one particular group of people and she would be just a s unhappy if she heard
one house on her block was accepting bowling leagues and the one nex t door was
accepting nuns. Ms. Wibbelsman stated you do not want people in your residential are
who are not vested in the neighborhood and when a person buys a home th ey buy it with
a certain understanding that the neighborhood has a feeling and part of the reason people
make this investment is because of the feeling that the neigh borhood has and the support
the neighbors lend each other. She stated if the people are flowing through in large
groups and they do not have the same interest in community they ar e not looking out for
each other. Ms. Wibbelsman stated it diminishes the neighborhood in which we live.
She stated years ago Delray Beach was voted the “Best Smal l Town in the United States”
and urged the Commission to strive to preserve it. Ms. Wibblesma n stated she applauds
the initial passing of this ordinance and urged the Commission to fol low-up with limiting
the number of beds in any house for unrelated people.
Pat Archer, 380 Sherwood Forest Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33445
(Chair of the Delray Beach Drug Task Force), stated any business for profit or not-for-
profit that operates in a manner that systematically rotat es residences is not a business
that needs to be in a single family community. Mrs. Archer sta ted this is a business that
is disruptive to the neighborhood in every way and whether they are not-for-profit or for
profit it is a business not a long-term living arrangement. S he urged the Commission to
support these ordinances.
Kristine De Haseth, Florida Coalition for Preservation, stated two
weeks ago she made public comments mainly in support of the or dinance and applauds
the Commission for unanimously approving the first reading and moving t o the second
reading. Ms. De Haseth stated she has received many calls, i nquiries, concerns, and
comments from residents and homeowners in Manalapan, Ocean Ridge, Briny Breezes
and Gulf Stream as she has from Delray. She stated this is not just a Delray issue. Ms.
De Haseth urged the Commission to preserve the single family residential neighborhoods.
Gary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483,
stated the most prestigious organizations and institutions in this country have all reached
the same conclusion that tenancy restrictions in residential area s stabilize neighborhoods
through enhanced property values and common vested interests. Mr. Gli ckstein stated as
a homeowner and builder he believes people buy homes thinking will be owner
occupants sharing a common goal of living in a stable, safe and quiet neighborhood. He
stated transient housing of any type is by definition an investment and the goals of
owner/occupants and transient occupants are in large measure mut ually exclusive. Mr.
Glickstein stated he has owned rental homes in Delray for many years and would like to
see even more tenancy restrictions than what are proposed tonight . He stated the
majority of people buying into the neighborhoods do so to live here not so with transients
that is here for a night, week or a month with no vested interest i n the neighborhoods or
properties they temporarily occupy. Mr. Glickstein stated the Commission was elected to
preserve the quality of life for the majority of people that live here and support this
community year end and year out. He stated passing the proposed ordinance is a solid
15
02/21/12
first step and next he hopes the Commission will focus on enforcem ent and more
significant consequences for violators.
Bessie Vane, 50 East Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated she
understands through a reliable source a member of a certain foundat ion was asking for a
financial contribution for their foundation and asked if they would like to live next to a
transient house the answer was “no”.
Laura Finn, 411 Andrews Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (resident
of Delray Beach for 34 years), stated she loves her neighborhood and her neighbors and
is very much opposed to transient housing in all the single family neighborhoods. She
urged the Commission to support this ordinance.
Anita Casey, 1003 Beach Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated she
walks her dogs early in the morning and is tired of bumping into e very addict everywhere
she goes. Ms. Casey stated recently an addict was about to thr ough himself in traffic and
she called the Police and saved his life. She stated yester day she had three appointments
in downtown Delray and three panhandlers asked her for money. Ms. Cas ey stated she
has friends from Europe invest in Delray Beach and is now ashamed that she told them to
invest here. She urged the Commission to do something about this.
Yan Hansen, (3 year resident of Delray Beach), stated he moved to
Delray Beach from Fort Lauderdale because of the small tow n community this was and
is. Mr. Hansen stated staff has done a pretty good job striking a compromise in
preserving the rights of both and urged the Commission to move forward with this.
Tom Sand, 1216 Crestwood Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated as
the Commission considers the impact of transient housing on the town an d its people he
feels it is very important to think about the real lives of pe ople who could not be here and
who would be impacted by this and gave a few examples. Mr. Sand s tated we all respect
the rights of people who need to be in transient homes to get assisted but urged the
Commission to be mindful of the rights and expectations and the impa ct of people who
live in those residences and who assumed that they would be that way for a long time in
the future.
Barry Degner, 919 Hyacinth Drive, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (Vice
President of the Tropic Isle Civic Association), stated he and his wife moved to Delray
Beach after being snowbirds in the area for many years and specifically chose Delray
Beach because of its ambience. Mr. Degner stated when he wal ks around the area he
knows everybody and if does not know them by name they are familiar faces which is
very reassuring. He stated at his age he is worried about his safety and his wife’s safety
and he likes the fact that it is a small town and unless the Commission can sto p this influx
we are going to lose what we all treasure and moved here for.
16
02/21/12
Jack Barrette, 1201 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (lived
here for 62 days), thanked the Caron Foundation for what they are doing for the City and
cannot imagine a better way to galvanize us all on this issue than someone who comes to
Seaspray Avenue buys a home in the middle of it through an anonymous attorney and
tries to use ADA and Hippa law to hide the address and then trie s to flout our zoning
regulations to change the single family neighborhood for the worse. He stated no one
supports that. Mr. Barrette stated we need to use the reasonabl e accommodation to help
people with real disabilities to get the housing they need w here they need it in
appropriately zoned neighborhoods not to help corporations to cynica lly use his
neighborhood to make a lot of money ($30,000-$50,000) a month on people who are
going to live in very nice houses and then go to Boca for rehab. M r. Barrette stated
everyone supports the Commission if they fight the transient housing i ssue, pass the
ordinance and enforce it no matter what.
Bob Ganger, President of the Florida Coalition for Preservation,
stated at the last meeting the Commission asked them to come hel p. Mr. Ganger stated
they have galvanized every credible civic association, homeowners as sociation, and
everyone who lives in a single family home in this entire area i ncluding outside of Delray
over to the lake. Mr. Ganger urged the Commission to pass Ordinance No. 3-12, 4-12, 8-
12 and then ask for their help.
Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL
33483, thanked Judge Gladstone for coming tonight but if he could of spoken longer he
would of spoken to the fact that children and families need nurturing and stable
environments and neighborhoods where they know people across the str eet, etc. She
thanked Mr. Frankel for his answers of clarification. Ms. Morris on stated these
ordinances are a very good start and urged the Commission to be vig ilant and protect our
neighborhoods.
Mary Renaud, 1017 Bucida Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (speaking
as a realtor who has worked in Delray for the last 13 years), stated she has done
countless contracts who want to rent their people who want to live here temporarily.
Mrs. Renaud stated the only rentals she has handled in the last 13 ye ars is seasonal and
yearly. She stated if they want to rent for a few days there are several hotels to choose
from. Mrs. Renaud stated restricting turnovers to no more than 3 ti mes per year is a very
liberal amount. She stated she is aware of some homeowners in the beach are who rent
their house on a weekly and nightly basis. Mrs. Renaud thanked the C ommission and the
City Attorney for taking this matter seriously, hopes this law applies to everyone, and
urged them to let them know what the association can do to help Code Enforcement.
Warren Roy, 329 Andrews Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483
(speaking as a member of the BPOA), reiterated their strong support of the new
proposed rules and call for the enforcement of these rules for the protection of the
cohesiveness, integrity and safety of the single family neigh borhoods. Mr. Roy stated the
issue is called transient housing and we are talking about prese rving single family home
neighborhoods. He stated a home is defined as where you live perma nently; a house is
17
02/21/12
defined a building for human habitation. Mr. Roy stated urged the Commi ssion to
respect that.
Richard Sasso, 1042 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
at the last meeting he raised concern over enforcement of the new ordinance and how are
we going to change the penalty for somebody who abuses the ordinanc e. Mr. Sasso
reiterated that the penalty is only $500 for somebody to go be yond the ordinance
restriction. He asked if he has to write a letter to ask tha t it now be reheard to create a
three strike rule that if someone abuses the new ordinance that b eyond the third time that
we can do something beyond just a $500 fine. Mr. Sasso expressed co ncern that this
caring company Caron who knows that 95-100% of the community that the y are trying to
now infiltrate with these homes are against them and asked if they are that caring why
don’t they step back and relook at this.
Bob Stern, 410 N.E. 8 th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated the
Commission has done a great job in drafting this ordinance and this is only one step. He
stated relying solely on the turnover rate may not be the best strategy for the town. Mr.
Stern stated this is a commercial business and several of the se operators including the
Caron Foundation filed for tax exempt status with the IRS and do t hat they have to make
the case that they are exclusively in the business of rehabilitation or education. He stated
in that case an argument can be made that whatever they do whe ther it is housing clients
or providing meals is an interval part of that business but it is a commercial business.
Mr. Stern suggested that the City ask if it is a commercial business and if so it does not
even belong in a residential area even before you get to apply a te st of turnover. He
stated another example of a test would be is this residential housing versus institutional
(referring to a hospital, nursing home or jail). Mr. Stern s uggested that the City ask if the
occupants of this facility have the rights that are normally a ssociated with residential
living. Mr. Stern stated if they do not have these rights, the City can make a case that
then it is really an institutional living situation not a residentia l living situation. He stated
if it is that kind of institutional setting then it should be in a proper zone.
There being no one from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding Ordinance No. 03-12, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Frankel thanked everyone coming out and stated he appreciates the
emails and communications. He stated City staff and the City A ttorney’s office have
worked very diligently on this issue. Mr. Frankel stated you need t o comply and it is
very delicate to deal with the Fair Housing Act, Americans w ith Disabilities Act, and the
Equal Protection and Procedural Due Process Clauses of the United St ates and Florida
Constitutions. Mr. Frankel stated his decision tonight is not based on a single entity that
is proposing to do business in a single family neighborhood. He stated in 2009 he
proposed to limit occupancy turnover to no more than 3 times per ye ar but could not
gather support of that. Mr. Frankel stated the ordinances we a re dealing with particularly
Ordinance No. 3-12 is applicable to all single family home neighb orhoods and all forms
of transient rentals (condos, boarding homes) or any short-term r entals. Mr. Frankel
stated basing his decision on Federal Court decisions and based on Mar ie York’s
18
02/21/12
memorandum he fully supports Ordinance No. 3-12.
Mrs. Gray thanked everyone for attending the meeting and thanked staff
for the great job they have done.
Mr. Carney stated Commissioner Frankel stated his views succinctly.
Dr. Alperin stated the public stated his views succinctly.
Mayor McDuffie thanked everyone for attending and for being
professional.
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 03-12 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. 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.B. ORDINANCE NO. 04-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment to the
Land Development Regulations (LDR), by amending Section 2.4.7(G), “Requests for
Accommodation”; Subsections (1), “Purpose”, and (8), “Request Form for Reasonable
Accommodation”, in order to remove obsolete references, in order t o update same;
enacting a new Subsection 2.4.7(G)(9), “Expiration of Approvals” t o provide an
expiration date for untimely implementation of approvals.
The caption of Ordinance No. 04-12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION 2.4.7(G),
“REQUESTS FOR ACCOMMODATION”;
SUBSECTIONS (1), “PURPOSE”, AND (8), “REQUEST
FORM FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION”, IN
ORDER TO REMOVE OBSOLETE REFERENCES, IN
ORDER TO UPDATE SAME; ENACTING A NEW
SUBSECTION 2.4.7(G)(9), “ EXPIRATION OF
APPROVALS” TO PROVIDE AN EXPIRATION DATE
FOR UNTIMELY IMPLEMENTATION OF
APPROVALS ; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 04-12 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
19
02/21/12
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.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this
amendment provides clarification with respect to the current infor mation requested on the
request form for reasonable accommodation. Mr. Dorling stated it identifies additional
information that will be provided with any reasonable accommodation request that we
believe is necessary to appropriately consider reasonable accommodati on requests.
At its meeting of January 23, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board
considered this item and the Board recommended approval with a 7 to 0 vote; at its
meeting of February 7, 2012, the City Commission considered this on firs t reading and
recommended approval at that time.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open.
Jack Barrette, 1201 Seaspray Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483,
reiterated that the reasonable accommodation requests have been a source of some
concern to the community and this willingness to put some transpare ncy into the process
to request information from people who might otherwise not provide it is welcom e.
Cary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
the reasonable accommodation has been abused and thinks that in the conf usion of the
co-mingled Federal Law (i.e. ADA, FHA) Planning has not had cle ar direction and
perhaps at the City Attorney’s level there is not clear unders tanding of what we really can
do. Mr. Glickstein stated the residents would like the City to ta ke a much more
aggressive stance in granting these reasonable accommodations and i f somebody
disagrees with their position then they will support the Commiss ion. He stated when this
came before Planning and Zoning residents were told that on not one o ccasion had an
application for reasonable accommodation ever been denied in this cit y. Mr. Glickstein
urged the Commission that in passing this tonight that it not stop her e that counsel the
City has hired advises everybody so that there is a clear under standing as to what is the
most aggressive position we can take towards these applicants.
Bob Ganger, President of the Florida Coalition for Preservation,
stated a lot of public acts affecting a neighborhood receive a courtesy notice when
something is about to happen so that the people who could be affecte d are aware. Mr.
Ganger stated as the Commission considers the next step and the step after that he would
like to get to a point where we have courtesy notices where peop le are aware that
something is about to happen in their neighborhood.
Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL
33483, stated when this was discussed in SPRAB or Planning and Zoning t hat we were
going to put some remedies for misrepresentation or repeated vi olations. Ms. Morrison
stated a $500 penalty to some of these organizations is not a lot of money and suggested
20
02/21/12
that a stronger remedy be imposed or maybe losing their reas onable accommodation
status if they are repeat offenders.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding Ordinance No. 04-12, the public hearing was closed.
Dr. Alperin moved to adopt Ordinance No. 04-12 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission vot ed as follows: Dr.
Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes; Mayor Mc Duffie – Yes; Mr. Carney
– Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
10.C. ORDINANCE NO. 08-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment Chapter
117, “Landlord Permits”, of the Code of Ordinances, by amending Sect ion 117.01,
“Permit Required”, to clarify when a permit is required; amendi ng Section 117.03,
“Approval of Application”, to provide additional requirements; amending Sect ion 117.04,
“Denial or Revocation of Permit Application; Appeals”, to clarify grounds for revocation;
and amending Section 117.06, “Tenant/Occupant Eviction”, to ensure notice a nd due
process rights are followed or alternate housing is provided.
The caption of Ordinance No. 08-12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 117, “LANDLORD PERMITS”,
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 117.01,
“PERMIT REQUIRED”, TO CLARIFY WHEN A
PERMIT IS REQUIRED; AMENDING SECTION 117.03,
“APPROVAL OF APPLICATION”, TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING
SECTION 117.04, “DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF
PERMIT APPLICATION; APPEALS”, TO CLARIFY
GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION; AND AMENDING
SECTION 117.06, “TENANT/OCCUPANT EVICTION”,
TO ENSURE NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS RIGHTS
ARE FOLLOWED OR ALTERNATE HOUSING IS
PROVIDED; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 08-12 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.
21
02/21/12
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, summarized some of
the changes that are occurring under Chapter 117 and it clarifi es that permit applicants
will be required to submit to the City documentation of their lea se agreements and they
have thirty (30) days to report any changes to the existing l eases that they provide upon
initial permit. Mrs. Butler stated leased residential units will be required to have parking
stickers for each of their tenants and those will be limited t o four (4) per unit. She stated
if additional parking stickers are needed the reasons why must be documented. Mrs.
Butler stated all applicants are required to follow Chapter 83 governing evictions. She
stated if someone states that their property is not otherwise required to follow that then
they must present the City with an alternative situation on how they will handle
temporary dwelling units for these people in case they need to evict them. Mrs. Butler
stated this also clarifies the reasons for a landlord permit under which they might revoke.
She stated this ordinance was before the City Commission on fir st reading on February 7,
2012 and was passed. Staff recommends approval on second reading.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open.
Matthew Ledger, representing the Realtors Association of the Palm
Beaches (RAPB) and its 8,000 members, stated as it stands now you can renew your
landlord permit online and under the new ordinance you will no longer have tha t option.
Mr. Ledger stated you will have to show up in person to renew s o that you can present a
copy of your lease and he feels this creates a burden. Mr. Ledger expressed concern over
the City having to know the details of the lease and stated if the landlord is registered in
the landlord program the City will have the contact information if there are any problems.
In addition, Mr. Ledger stated requiring residential parking st ickers for leased residential
units seem a bit far reach for local government. He stated thi s additional regulation is
borderline a violation of private property rights to homeowners. M r. Ledger urged the
Commission to not move forward with this ordinance and invite the Realtor s Association
of the Palm Beaches to the table so that we together can come up with prac tical solutions.
McCall Credle-Rosenthal, 817 Lake Avenue North, Delray Beach, FL
(President of La Hacienda Neighborhood and also an owner of a h ome and cottage
that she rents out), supports this ordinance and would like to see even more constraints.
She stated Code Enforcement does not people working at night and they cannot go into
these residences and find out that people are not in compliance. M s. Credle-Rosenthal
suggested that if people were working at night we could look into this a little more to find
out who is actually living by these landlord permits. She state d there are more people
staying in units then are paying for them.
Mary Renaud, 1017 Bucida Road, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated she
has no problem with this ordinance and coming to City Hall and bringi ng a contract
prevents fraud. Mrs. Renaud stated her husband came up with the ide a for parking
stickers and supports it.
22
02/21/12
Cary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483
(member of the Realtors Association of the Palm Beaches), stated he fully supports the
changes and is hopeful this ordinance is linked with the reasonable accommodation form
so that whoever is applying for a reasonable accommodation is deem ed a landlord and
thus needs a permit.
Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL
33483, reiterated her concerns regarding the need for remedies in the ordinance.
There being no one else who wished to address the Commission regar ding
Ordinance No. 08-12, the public hearing was closed.
Prior to the vote, Mrs. Gray asked if the City Manager will b e responding
to Mr. Ledger in writing. The City Manager stated he will r eceive a response. Mrs. Gray
stated she has received several telephone calls concerning the application. She stated
while she is in support of this ordinance she would like to make sure that they heard the
realtors’ side and that staff will be responding to it.
Mr. Frankel moved to adopt Ordinance No. 08-12 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mr. Carney. 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.D. ORDINANCE NO. 06-12: Consider a city-initiated amendment to the
Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.16, “Landscape Regulations ”, to
provide an updated landscape code.
The caption of Ordinance No. 06-12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
BY AMENDING SECTION 4.6.16, “LANDSCAPE
REGULATIONS”, TO PROVIDE AN UPDATED
LANDSCAPE CODE; PROVIDING A SAVING
CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 06-12 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.
23
02/21/12
Peter Anuar, Senior Landscape Planner, stated revisions to the
landscape code and at the meeting of February 7, 2012, the City Commi ssion voted to
approve with a 5 to 0 vote. Mr. Anuar stated some of the items that were up for
discussion were expansion of landscape islands from five (5) feet to nine (9) feet with the
limits of the Central Business District; removal of compacte d rock within the landscape
islands and its effect on the integrity of the curbing and asphal t. He stated the items are
already requested through the landscape permit process but now t hey are going to be
codified a landscape code.
At this point, Mayor McDuffie stepped away from the dais.
Vice Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open.
Christina Morrison, 2809 Florida Boulevard #207, Delray Beach, FL
33483, stated with the size of these trees she would like to make sur e that there is some
consideration given to the water that is going to be required to ke ep these trees alive. She
stated she wants to make sure that we have sustainable type of landscaping that can
withstand droughts.
At this point, Mayor McDuffie returned to the dais.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission, the public hearing was closed.
Dr. Alperin asked if there were any changes made in the ordi nance that
will create less resistant trees or plantings for drought. Mr. Anuar stated in revising the
landscape code staff created a more sustainable environment for t rees to survive,
increasing the landscape islands and taking out all that bad compac ted rock with suitable
planting soil.
Mayor McDuffie asked if what is being put in is termed as xeriscaping.
Mr. Anuar stated this is xeriscaping.
Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 06-12 on Second and Reading,
seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as f ollows: Mrs. Gray –
Yes; Mayor McDuffie – Yes; Mr. Carney – Yes; Dr. Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes.
Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
At this point, the time being 8:24 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
11, Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the City Manager and the
Public .
11.A. City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries.
The City Manager stated at the previous meeting Mr. Goodman
complained about different types of criminal activity in his nei ghborhood. The City
24
02/21/12
Manager stated this location has been addressed before and conti nues to be an area that is
frequented often by the Community Patrol officers. He stated Mr . Goodman has
contacted the Police Department previously to express his concer ns and each instance has
been met with aggressive patrols, surveillance, high visibilit y patrols, search warrants,
etc. The City Manager stated the problem dissipates when those involved are a rrested but
unfortunately those arrested are released again and tend to reside in the same area. He
stated staff’s plan of action will include some of the same ta ctics as before but we will try
to identify the owners of the properties that these people ar e moving back to and make
them aware of criminal activity that is occurring in their l ocations. The City Manager
stated a supervisor in the Police Department will be meet ing with Mr. Goodman in the
near future to explain the plan of action as it pertains to his concerns.
11.B. From the Public.
None.
At this point, the time being 8:26 p.m., the Commission moved back to
Item 9.F.
9.F. RESOLUTION NO. 10-12/MID YEAR BUDGET
AMENDMENT: Consider approval of Resolution No. 10-12 amending Resolution No.
42-11 adopted September 20, 2011, which made appropriations of sums of money for all
necessary expenditures of the City of Delray Beach for the FY 2011/2012, by setting
forth the anticipated revenues and expenditures for the operating f unds of the City for FY
2011/2012.
The caption of Resolution No. 10-12 is as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 42-11 ADOPTED
SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 WHICH MADE
APPROPRIATIONS OF SUMS OF MONEY FOR ALL
NECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 2011/2012, BY SETTING FORTH THE
ANTICIPATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
FOR THE OPERATING FUNDS OF THE CITY FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR 2011/2012; REPEALING ALL
RESOLUTIONS INCONSISTENT HEREWITH.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 10-12 is on file in the City Clerk’s
office.)
25
02/21/12
The City Manager stated at the last Workshop meeting reg arding the $3.2
million fire service fee not being adopted the Commission dire cted that we take no more
than $1.4 from undesignated fund balance, cuts in capital projects a nd other reductions in
order to handle that cost. The budget amendment uses $1 from fund bala nce and does
rebalance the budget without the $3.2 in additional revenue. The Cit y Manager stated we
are also adding a cost to address what we see staff needs for en forcement of the
ordinances adopted this evening. The City Manager stated Mrs . Butler requested a part-
time Code Enforcement Officer that the City has already hire d and she would like to hire
another full-time Code Enforcement Officer that would work nights and weekends and a
clerical person to handle primarily the landlord permit appli cations. In addition, the City
Attorney’s office has been struggling with the workload and as of J une 1, 2012, the City
is unfreezing the third attorney’s position. The City Manager s tated we absorbed those
additional costs and still used the $1 from fund balance to rebalance the budget. This is
the mid-year budget review which staff would normally do in Ap ril but staff felt it was
appropriate given the magnitude the change to go ahead and do that now plus that enable
us to take a hard look at all the revenues and although staff knew that we were getting
additional building permit fees in but we did not know how everything else might project
out. The City Manager stated there is additional revenue and we a re able to rebalance at
that level.
Mr. Carney stated the pavilion on the beach is the only item wher e the
community has actually raised money towards its repair. He stated this could get to a
situation in its continuing state of disrepair where it may have to be closed. Mr. Carney
stated at that time the City Commission said to the BPOA who was spearheading the
effort that the City was not going to be able to afford it; how ever, if the BPOA was
willing to raise money towards then the City could probably meet them halfway. The
BPOA has since raised money and some developers have agreed t o construct the project
for cost and the BPOA is also raising additional monies. Mr. Car ney asked that the
Commission consider re-establishing this particular project b ecause it is so different from
all the others on the list. Mr. Carney asked that this be delete d from the mid-year budget
amendment and that we utilize the ample reserves that we curre ntly have and it will keep
us well below the $1.4 in reserves.
Dr. Alperin stated if this were approved how soon the construction would
start. The City Manager stated we are approximately 4-6 months away from construction
and noted there are no construction drawings yet.
Mr. Carney reiterated that the pavilion is continually dilapida ted condition
and in some areas of it are unsafe. He stated this is something that was promised to be
done and the BPOA has raised money for this.
Mr. Frankel thanked the City Manager and everyone who worked very
diligently on the budget. Mr. Frankel stated he feels priority is getting the City
Attorney’s office the help they need. Mr. Frankel stated he als o places a priority on Mrs.
Butler’s request and applauds the decision to hire someone to work nights and weekends.
He stated he is out a lot during nights and weekends and there are blatant violations. Mr.
26
02/21/12
Frankel suggested that in the future the City may even need more Code Enforcement
Officers based on the passage of the ordinances tonight. Mr. Fra nkel stated a local
builder is constructing the pavilion at cost and it is important that this project be
completed by next season.
Mrs. Gray stated this is very similar to the Pompey Par k project. She
supports moving forward with this project because it is not safe.
Dr. Alperin stated staff has done a phenomenal job.
Mayor McDuffie stated the choices with the pavilion are eithe r to raise it
or rebuild it.
Mr. Carney moved to approve Resolution No. 10-12 to add back in
$105,000.00 from reserves for the beach pavilion, seconded by Dr. Alperin. Upon roll
call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie – Yes; M r. Carney – Yes; Dr.
Alperin – Yes; Mr. Frankel – Yes; Mrs. Gray – Yes. Said moti on passed with a 5 to 0
vote.
9.G. PARKING STUDY CHARETTE RESULTS
Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated in accordance with
City Commission direction, two public Charettes were held on Ja nuary 30 th and 31 st . He
stated the attendance was less than expected but still signif icant. Mr. Aronson stated if a
fee based program were to be initiated that careful consider ation is given to help
commerce instead of hinder commerce and that the program would be flexible to change
as it is monitored as the shortcomings that get noted be correcte d and that any equipment
also be flexible with respect to changing rates and doing things wi thout any great expense
or be done in short order once recognized. Mr. Aronson stated staff has talked a great
deal about validation programs and other programs that would assist r esidents in using
parking as a marketing tool. Staff feels a fee based progra m is the most efficient way to
monitor parking in the downtown.
Mrs. Gray asked if we are now using the top floor of the Old School
Square Garage for valet parking. Mr. Aronson stated the City has not started that
program yet. Mrs. Gray inquired about the employee parking. Mr . Aronson stated with
regard to the one-hour free parking the first hour is free but you have to pay for the
second hour when you park. Mrs. Gray stated she has been talking to some of the
merchants on Atlantic Avenue and if we have the valet parking in the garage would it be
okay to have two of the floors of the garage designated for employee parking and then
have the owners to participate in paying for some of that parki ng. Mr. Aronson stated
this could be a possibility. However, Mr. Aronson stated staff has an idea of how many
employees in total are employed in the downtown but does not have tha t broken down in
shift and exact area. In his opinion, Mr. Aronson stated he does not be lieve we will be
able to accommodate all the employees in season in that firs t three blocks on Atlantic
Avenue.
27
02/21/12
Mayor McDuffie asked if there is potential of an Interlocal agreement to
use the County Courthouse parking. Mr. Aronson stated this is going to be proposed.
Mayor McDuffie stated we have made some strides. Mayor Mc Duffie stated he had an
opportunity to speak to some of the stakeholders’ downtown and anytime there is talk
about fees and meters they are afraid that they are going to lose business. Mayor
McDuffie stated a young man from Kimley-Horn spoke at the firs t Charette and he was
so knowledgeable about how parking fees and parking meters can actua lly bring business
to the downtown rather than forcing it away from the downtown. Mayor M cDuffie
suggested that staff get that message across to the merchants w ith some of his backup
materials it would go a long way toward calming some of the fear s about parking meters
downtown.
Mr. Carney stated he understands the merchants fear and they c an be
addressed with a lot of what staff is trying to bring forth now. He stated he is very happy
that the Charette took place and is glad we are getting ready to do this.
Mr. Frankel stated he attended the morning Charette, the parking study
presentation, and the Workshop meeting. He stated after hearing the presentations he is
very happy with his vote not to spend $92,000.00 on a parking study because he feels it
was a waste of money. Mr. Frankel stated at the time he stat ed that they were going to
put meters everywhere. He stated some other communities tha t have put meters in their
business have gone down a lot. Mr. Frankel expressed concern over the amount of car
traffic even during off-season during the day and at night. Mr. Fra nkel stated that this
citywide meter parking will have an effect on the downtown.
Mr. Carney stated the five minute spots are great and suggest ed that if we
are going to do parking meters that there be more of those on the A venue to try and
compensate for those who want to run into a store for five minutes to pick up a postcard,
etc.
Mayor McDuffie stated we have to look toward additional revenue sources
for this community in the future and this is one of them.
Dr. Alperin stated it was a waste of money to do the study in the first plac e
but it was done. Therefore, Dr. Alperin stated he supports the study.
Mr. Aronson stated one of the programs that were initially sugges ted when
these discussions started were how you count someone’s parking with m eters. Mr.
Aronson stated you cannot but if you give them a card or token that gi ves them free
parking the next time they come to the town that is the type of incentives you build into
the program.
Mayor McDuffie suggested that we could institute automated p arking in
the City of Delray Beach by making some changes in here in i nformation technologies.
He stated make a call on your cell phone and put the number of the meter in.
28
02/21/12
It was the consensus of the Commission to find out how many emplo yees
will have to park per shift, obtain additional information from Ki mley-Horn and come up
with a program to bring back to the Commission.
9.H. APPOINTMENT TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD:
Appoint one (1) regular member to the Public Art Advisory Board to serve an unexpired
term ending July 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the appointment will be made
by Mayor McDuffie. (Seat #5).
Mayor McDuffie stated he would like to defer his appointment to M arch
6, 2012.
12. FIRST READINGS:
A. None
At this point, the time being 9:07 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
13, Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items.
13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.
13.A. City Manager
With regard to Commissioner Gray’s concern about noise complaints in
the downtown area, the City Manager stated staff met with sever al business owners late
last summer at the library and discussed noise problems. The City Manager stated some
businesses have been ticketed and staff will be scheduling anothe r meeting with the
Police Department and business owners and residents to work on these issues.
Secondly, the City Manager stated the County is in the process of revising
their vehicle for hire and Captain Mitchell is the League’s a ppointment to that Board and
has brought back to us some concerns that staff is trying to addre ss through the league.
The City Manager stated the Committee the County has working on i t is an 8 member
committee and is dominated by the industry. The City Manager st ated staff had a
transportation committee meeting today with the league and it is all focused on protecting
the industry not on protecting the consumer. The City Manager stated in Palm Beach
County taxis do not have to display their rates on the door. Also, he s tated they are
proposing to expand the definition and there is not even an exception f or City owned
vehicles. He stated the City would have to go pay a $5,000.00 fee to ge t registered as a
company; it would apply to things like the shuttle that runs betwe en the Seagate and the
Seagate Beach Club. The City Manager stated all the shuttl es that hotels operate would
all come under this County control. He stated it is a county-wide o rdinance that cities
can opt out of and there are 4 or 5 cities that have their own tax ing regulation ordinance.
The City Manager stated Captain Mitchell and the Committee wanted to institute a
requirement that the taxis had to accept credit cards and the C ounty Commission refused
to accept that so far. The City Manager stated the proble m is you get someone that has
29
02/21/12
no cash and is intoxicated and wants to get a ride home and they have to go to an ATM
machine to get money to pay the cab. He stated staff will continue working on thi s.
Secondly, the City Manager stated staff outlined four (4) possib le
scenarios for changing the governance of the South Central Wastewa ter Treatment and
Disposal Board (SCRWTDB). He stated he met with Lori Osbo rn from Boynton Beach
to discuss and they will meet with Dennis Coates to get his inp ut. The City Manager
stated you could go to a system where the Board would only meet once a year to adopt
the budgeted rates; everything has to go through the Commissions an yway. He stated as
other things come up just send it through the Commissions without having a joint
meeting unless you had a big capital project or something where you are talking about
issuing debt, etc. The City Manager stated another option might be to have the Board
comprised of staff members instead of the elected official s and reiterated that the actions
that the Board takes would go back to the Commissions for approval.
Lastly, the City Manager stated he was cleaning out files this past week
and came across his 2002 tax bill. He stated with discounts his 2002 tax bill was
$2,208.11; his 2011 tax bill with discounts is $2,416.92. The City Manager stat ed the
City in 2002 was $661.97; in 2011 it is $639.84. He stated what went up is the required
local millage for schools; the school state tax went up from $517.00 to $647.00. The City
Manager stated the South Waste Authority went up from $104.00 to $174.00; the City’s
stormwater increased from $54.00 to $63.96. The City Manager stated he did not realize
that his City taxes are actually lower today than they were nine (9) years ago and it is
because of homestead exemption and other things that have been inst ituted. He stated no
one tax bill is typical but he is sure there are a lot of hom eowners in a similar favorable
situation.
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 commented about the difficulty over getting the SC RWTDB
meeting together.
Secondly, Dr. Alperin stated the Commission received a letter from
Dennis Coates that he is leaving the position. The City Manager suggested letting Delray
Beach run the SCRWTDB. The City Manager stated if you rea d the Interlocal
Agreement that set this up it says the Board may hire a Dir ector and it also talks about
Delray Beach running the Plant because it is in our City limit s. He stated under the
existing Interlocal Agreement Delray Beach could run it and woul d have a Plant
Superintendent that would come under Environmental Services.
30
02/21/12
13.C.2. Mr. Carney
Mr. Carney stated there were lots of comments made this eve ning in the
public hearings related to the three ordinances that were dis cussed related to the transient
housing and landlord permits. He stated there were some very good idea s as they related
to remedies and penalties need to be addressed. Mr. Carney sta ted sometimes it is
cheaper to pay the fine than it is to go forward. Mr. Carney st ated if we do in fact have a
number of landlord permits that are in violation and we do liens we are not really trying
to enforce it or collect it. He stated he would like to make sure that we always try to
maximize the leverage that we have and to ensure that we use t he ability to lien and
penalize to ensure adequate compliance with the rules and regula tions that we may be
doing.
Secondly, Mr. Carney stated this past Sunday he attended the 2 nd Annual
“Art in the Alley” and it was a great event. He stated Mr . and Mrs. Jacquet also attended
and it was pleasure to meet them.
Mr. Carney stated the issue of the parking enforcement hours ne eds to be
addressed especially parking enforcement during the mid-week.
Lastly, Mr. Carney stated at one of the candidates’ forums a comment was
made about the Commission’s review of the City Manager and the C ity Attorney. Mr.
Carney stated typically the reviews would occur during a time when there was going to
be a salary increase. Mr. Carney stated the last four yea rs he was at the Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and the salary increase was neve r on the table yet the
Executive Director always got reviewed and when he was on the De lray Beach Housing
Authority they always got reviewed on an annual basis. Mr. Carney stated this is a great
way for the Commission to let the City Manager’s office and t he City Attorney’s office
know what they think and vice versa. Mr. Carney suggested that this b e done in May
versus September since May is a less busy month and suggested that the Commission
have a policy on an annual basis to review. He stated this is good for everyone to be able
to have that dialogue to find out what everyone’s expectation levels are. Mr. Carney
stated there is a general feeling in the public that there is none of these formalized review
processes going on and recommends that this begin in May.
13.C.3. Mrs. Gray
Mrs. Gray stated she attended St. Matthew’s Episcopal Churc h Annual
Tea this past Sunday where they honored U.S. Congressman Alcee Ha stings, the Parks
and Recreation Afterschool Program, and others. She stated this event was well attended.
13.C.4. Mr. Frankel
Mr. Frankel commented about the Candidate Forums and stated he has not
received notification of any of the Forums that have been held so far.
31
02/21/12
Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated he was at his weekly tennis game last night
at the tennis center and it was great to see all the buildings and facades that are up for the
tennis tournament that starts Friday, February 24, 2012. Mr. Frankel stated he is looking
forward to the ten days of tennis. For the record, Mr. Frankel stat ed the #4 ranked player
in the country, Andy Murray, has been using the tennis facilities for the last week or so.
Mr. Frankel stated this is a compliment to the City’s facil ities that one of the greatest
tennis players in the world has come to Delray Beach.
13.C.5. Mayor McDuffie
Mayor McDuffie stated he just got back from Japan on a Sist er Cities trip
and had an incredible trip. He stated he took approximately 450 pi ctures and met with
the Mayor and the Commission in Miyazu and met with the Chamber of Commerce in
Miyazu. Mayor McDuffie stated they had two half day sessions with the Mayor and the
Commission talking about issues in their community versus issues in our community and
sharing information about their problems and our problems. He stated the temperature
seldom got above 35 degrees for the entire time they were there . Mayor McDuffie stated
they discussed alternative energy and commercial fishing. He s tated they have a marine
high school that has its own 130 foot research vessel and a marine re search laboratory.
Mayor McDuffie stated he met with the Mayor of Kyoto and got invited to meet a
university professor at a Buddhist university whose sister works he re at Morikami Park.
Mayor McDuffie stated he also met with the Vice Governor of t he Prefecture of Kyoto.
He stated his wife and Mike Malone’s wife being school teachers got to tour several
schools and the men went commercial fishing and met them in the middle of the day and
toured the Marine High School and Miyazu High School as well. Mayor McDuffie sta ted
the hallways in the schools were freezing and they have cut t heir heat off in every place
that they can cut it off in Miyazu. He stated they have two alt ernate energy things going
on: one with waves and Miyazu has a bamboo burning power generation p lant and also
get other gases off that as a by-product.
Mayor McDuffie stated an hour into his first meeting one of the Chamber
members came in and handed them some pamphlets from Miyazu and the n handed them
a plastic wand. He stated you take the brochure from Miyazu, turn the power on, stick
the point of the wand on a photograph and it starts telling you every thing about the photo
(i.e. a photo of a restaurant) and noted he will bring this to t he next Commission meeting.
Mayor McDuffie stated in addition to agreeing on student exchange between our two
cities they have now agreed upon an artist exchange.
Secondly, Mayor McDuffie thanked the City Manager and City s taff
regarding the budget and the ordinances.
There being no further business, Mayor McDuffie declared the m eeting
adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
32
02/21/12
________________________________________________
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 February 21, 2012, 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.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
21
,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
A
.
City Commission Meeting on February 21, 2012; Item 9.A.
City Commission Meeting on February 21, 2012; Item 9.B.
City Commission Meeting on February 21, 2012; Item 9.B.
City Commission Meeting on February 21, 2012; Item 9.B.
City Commission Meeting on February 21, 2012; Item 9.B.
WHEREAS, in 1985, the City of Delray Beach established the Community Redevelopment Area through a Findings of Necessity that identified a slum and blighted area, as defined under Chapter
163, Part III of the Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach established the Community Redevelopment Agency in 1985 to carry out the Community Redevelopment purposes
of Chapter 163, Part III of the Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the boundaries of the Community Redevelopment Area were amended and expanded in 1986 and again in 1987 to encompass the
areas that make up the current CRA District; and WHEREAS, the CRA is governed by a seven-member volunteer Board of Commissioners, whose members are appointed by the City Commission;
and WHEREAS, the mission of the Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Agency is to foster and directly assist in the redevelopment of the Community Redevelopment Area in order to eliminate
blight, create a sustainable downtown and encourage economic growth, thus improving the attractiveness and quality of life of the CRA District and the City of Delray Beach as a whole;
and WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA works in partnership with the City to implement various areawide and neighborhood redevelopment plans, including the Delray Beach Community Redevelopment
Plan, the Downtown Master Plan, and the Southwest Area Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA works to enhance the tax base within the CRA District by funding
infrastructure and streetscape improvement projects, offering incentive programs to promote economic growth, creating affordable housing opportunities, and supporting cultural arts institutions;
and WHEREAS, the CRA seeks to inform Delray Beach residents, property owners, businesses, and community organizations of the role of redevelopment projects and economic development initiatives
in the revitalization of the Delray Beach economy; and WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA has planned a series of presentations, activities and events throughout the month of March to interact
with community stakeholders and to facilitate dialogue about the redevelopment process within the CRA District. NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. McDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby proclaim the month of March, 2012 as: CRA Awareness MONTH in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and call upon each citizen to take
part in many or all of the presentations, activities and events that have been scheduled throughout the month. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official
Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6th day of March, 2012. __________________________ NELSON S. McDUFFIE MAYOR
WHEREAS, the amount of water leaked from U.S. homes is estimated to be more than one trillion gallons per year. These leaks account for an average of 11,000 gallons of water per home
wasted, with 10 percent of homes having leaks that waste 90 gallons or more per day; and WHEREAS, common types of leaks found in the home include leaking toilet flappers, dripping faucets
and other leaking valves. In most cases, fixture replacement parts don’t require a major investment and can be installed by do-it-yourselfers. Fixing easily corrected household water
leaks can save homeowners 10 percent or more on their utility costs; and WHEREAS, approximately four percent of the nation’s electricity consumption is used moving or treating water
and wastewater. Considerable amounts of energy also go to heat water for bathing, shaving, cooking, and cleaning our homes, dishes, and clothes. One of the best ways to save energy across
the country and in our own homes is to use water more efficiently; and WHEREAS, WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to protect the
future of our nation’s water supply by promoting and enhancing the market for water-efficient products and services. March 12-18, 2012 marks the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
WaterSense program's "Fix a Leak Week," a time to remind Americans to check their household fixtures and irrigation systems for leaks; and WHEREAS, the Delray Beach Water Department’s
Water Conservation Program is designed to reduce demands on Delray Beach's water supply by increasing the efficiency of water use within its service area and has been a WaterSense promotional
partner since November 10, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach has submitted its application to be designated as a Certified Green Local Government by the Florida Green Building
Coalition, acknowledging its exceptional environmental stewardship and commitment to making real, tangible improvements that will protect our natural environment for future generations
through a number of mediums, such as energy, water, air quality, health issues, land use, and waste. NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. McDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
on behalf of the City Commission do hereby proclaim the week of March 12-18, 2012 as: Fix A Leak Week in the City of Delray Beach, Florida and urge all citizens and business to help
eliminate wasteful water use by repairing leaks and becoming more aware of the need to use water efficiently. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official
Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6th day of March, 2012. ___________________________ NELSON S. McDUFFIE MAYOR
11/10/2009
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Linda Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager DATE: February 29, 2012 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 6.C.
-REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY PROCLAMATION ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This proclamation is to encourage children nationwide to take part in a grassroots
movement to celebrate America's parks through play on Saturday, May 19, 2012 as they participate in National Park Trust's second annual National Kids to Parks Day. BACKGROUND Families
are invited to join the City of Delray Beach in a "Day of Play" at Pompey Park on May 19th, from 10:00am to 1:00pm. The event is free, and water and snacks will be provided. There will
be scheduled activities throughout the event. The tennis courts, basketball courts, playground and pool will also be available for open play (free admission from 10am -1pm).
WHEREAS, May 19, 2012 is the second National Kids to Parks Day organized and launched by the National Park Trust; and WHEREAS, National Kids to Parks Day empowers kids and encourages
families to get outdoors and visit America’s parks; and WHEREAS, it is important to introduce a new generation to our nation’s parks because of the decline in park attendance over the
decades; and WHEREAS, we should encourage children to lead a more active lifestyle to combat the issues of childhood obesity and other childhood diseases; and WHEREAS, National Kids
to Parks Day is open to all children and adults across the country to encourage a large and diverse group of participants; and WHEREAS, National Kids to Parks Day will broaden children’s
appreciation for nature and the outdoors; and WHEREAS, the National Kids to Parks Day event will be held on Saturday, May 19, 2011 at Pompey Park, 1101 NW 2nd Street, from 10am – 1pm;
and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department at Pompey Park will be offering children’s activities, games, sporting events and food from 10am – 1pm and encourages families to come
out and enjoy a day in the park with their children. NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. MCDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, do hereby proclaim May 19, 2012 as: NATIONAL KIDS
TO PARKS DAY in Delray Beach and urge residents of Delray Beach to make time on May 19, 2012 to take the children in their lives to a neighborhood park. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6th day of March, 2012. _______________________________ NELSON S. McDUFFIE M A Y O R
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
21
,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
21
,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
21
,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
21
,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
WHEREAS, in 1985, the City of Delray Beach established the C ommunity Redevelopment Area
through a Findings of Necessity that identified a slum and blighted area, as defined under Chapter 163, Part
III of the Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach established the Community Redeve lopment Agency in 1985
to carry out the Community Redevelopment purposes of Chapter 163, Part III of the Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the boundaries of the Community Redevelopment Area w ere amended and expanded
in 1986 and again in 1987 to encompass the areas that make up th e current CRA District; and
WHEREAS, the CRA is governed by a seven-member volunteer Boa rd of Commissioners, whose
members are appointed by the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, the mission of the Delray Beach Community Redevelop ment Agency is to foster and
directly assist in the redevelopment of the Community Redevelopment Area in order to eliminate blight,
create a sustainable downtown and encourage economic growth, thus improving the attractiveness and
quality of life of the CRA District and the City of Delray Beac h as a whole; and
WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA works in partnership with the City to implement various
areawide and neighborhood redevelopment plans, includi ng the Delray Beach Community Redevelopment
Plan, the Downtown Master Plan, and the Southwest Area Neigh borhood Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA works to enhance the tax base within the CRA District by
funding infrastructure and streetscape improvement pr ojects, offering incentive programs to promote
economic growth, creating affordable housing opportunitie s, and supporting cultural arts institutions; and
WHEREAS, the CRA seeks to inform Delray Beach residents, prop erty owners, businesses, and
community organizations of the role of redevelopment projects and economic development initiatives in th e
revitalization of the Delray Beach economy; and
WHEREAS, the Delray Beach CRA has planned a series of present ations, activities and events
throughout the month of March to interact with comm unity stakeholders and to facilitate dialogue about
the redevelopment process within the CRA District.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. McDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby proclaim t he month of March, 2012 as:
CRA Awareness MONTH
in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and call upon e ach citizen to take part in many or all of the
presentations, activities and events that have been schedule d throughout the month.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Se al of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6 th day of March, 2012.
__________________________
NELSON S. McDUFFIE
MAYOR
WHEREAS , the amount of water leaked from U.S. homes is estima ted to be more than one
trillion gallons per year. These leaks account for an average of 11,000 gallons of water per home
wasted, with 10 percent of homes having leaks that waste 90 g allons or more per day; and
WHEREAS , common types of leaks found in the home include le aking toilet flappers,
dripping faucets and other leaking valves. In most ca ses, fixture replacement parts don’t require a
major investment and can be installed by do-it-yoursel fers. Fixing easily corrected household water
leaks can save homeowners 10 percent or more on their utility costs; and
WHEREAS , approximately four percent of the nation’s electr icity consumption is used
moving or treating water and wastewater. Considerable amounts of energy also go to heat water for
bathing, shaving, cooking, and cleaning our homes, dishes, a nd clothes. One of the best ways to save
energy across the country and in our own homes is to use water m ore efficiently; and
WHEREAS , WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by t he U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to protect the future of our nati on’s water supply by promoting and enhancing
the market for water-efficient products and services. March 12-18, 2012 marks the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's WaterSense progra m's "Fix a Leak Week," a time to remind
Americans to check their household fixtures and irrigation sy stems for leaks; and
WHEREAS , the Delray Beach Water Department’s Water Conserv ation Program is
designed to reduce demands on Delray Beach's water supp ly by increasing the efficiency of water
use within its service area and has been a WaterSen se promotional partner since November 10,
2009; and
WHEREAS , the City of Delray Beach has submitted its applica tion to be designated as a
Certified Green Local Government by the Florida Green Building Coalition, acknowledging its
exceptional environmental stewardship and commitment to making real, tangible improvements that
will protect our natural environment for future gen erations through a number of mediums, such as
energy, water, air quality, health issues, land use, and wa ste.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. McDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, on behalf of the City Commission do hereby proclaim th e week of March 12-18, 2012 as:
Fix A Leak Week Fix A Leak Week Fix A Leak Week Fix A Leak Week
in the City of Delray Beach, Florida and urge all cit izens and business to help eliminate wasteful
water use by repairing leaks and becoming more aware of the nee d to use water efficiently.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6 th day of March, 2012.
___________________________
NELSON S. McDUFFIE
MAYOR
11/10/2009
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Linda Karch, Director of Parks and Recreation
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 6.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY PROCLAMATION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This proclamation is to encourage children nationwi de to take part in a grassroots movement to
celebrate America's parks through play on Saturday, May 19, 2012 as they participate in N ational Park
Trust's second annual National Kids to Parks Day.
BACKGROUND
Families are invited to join the City of Delray Bea ch in a "Day of Play" at Pompey Park on May 19th,
from 10:00am to 1:00pm. The event is free, and wate r and snacks will be provided. There will be
scheduled activities throughout the event. The ten nis courts, basketball courts, playground and pool
will also be available for open play (free admissio n from 10am - 1pm).
WHEREAS, May 19, 2012 is the second National Kids to Parks Da y organized and launched by the
National Park Trust; and
WHEREAS, National Kids to Parks Day empowers kids and encourag es families to get outdoors
and visit America’s parks; and
WHEREAS, it is important to introduce a new generation to ou r nation’s parks because of the
decline in park attendance over the decades; and
WHEREAS, we should encourage children to lead a more active li festyle to combat the issues of
childhood obesity and other childhood diseases; and
WHEREAS, National Kids to Parks Day is open to all children a nd adults across the country to
encourage a large and diverse group of participants; and
WHEREAS, National Kids to Parks Day will broaden children’s ap preciation for nature and the
outdoors; and
WHEREAS, the National Kids to Parks Day event will be held on Saturday, May 19, 2011 at
Pompey Park, 1101 NW 2 nd Street, from 10am – 1pm; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department at Pompey Park will be offering children’s
activities, games, sporting events and food from 10am – 1pm and encourages families to come out and enjoy
a day in the park with their children.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, NELSON S. MCDUFFIE, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
do hereby proclaim May 19, 2012 as:
NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY NATIONAL KIDS TO PARKS DAY
in Delray Beach and urge residents of Delray Beach to make time on May 19, 2012 to take the children in
their lives to a neighborhood park.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the Cit y of
Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 6 th day of March, 2012.
_______________________________
NELSON S. McDUFFIE
M A Y O R
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: February 28, 2012
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 FINAL BOUNDARY PLAT APPROVAL/JOYA ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission is approval of the
Joya Plat (Boueri Mixed Use Building). BACKGROUND The Boueri Mixed-Use Building is a proposed retail/office/residential development located at the southeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and
SE 1st Street, within the Central Core area of the Central Business District (CBD). A Class V Site Plan for the project was approved by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on September
14, 2011. This plat is a re-plat of Lot 1, Block 78, Town of Linton, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida and lying in Section 16, Township
46 South, Range 43 East, City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. Plat Analysis: The replat of the subject property will allow for development of the approved Boueri mixed-use
project. The property will be divided into 1 development lot, and two road/alley right-of-way dedication tracts, “A and “B”. The plat also contains a 1’ sidewalk easement along SE 1st
Street and a 8’ x 10’ water main easement at the southwest corner of the property. The utility providers have indicated that no easements are required for electric, phone, cable TV or
gas service. 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 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 Site Plan Review and Appearance 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 Plat was processed as a Minor Subdivision, therefore, it is forwarded directly to the City Commission for final action. No other Board review or action is required.
RECOMMENDATION Move approval for the Joya 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(K) (Minor Subdivisions), of the Land Development Regulations.
O:\Drawings\GENERAL CADD\Gxd\11-30.gxd --02/23/2012 --12:20 PM --Scale 1 : 120.0000
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Plat was processed as a Minor Subdivision, ther efore, it is forwarded directly to the City
Commission for final action. No other Board review or action is required.
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval for the Joya Plat, by adopting the fi ndings of fact and law contained in the staff repor t
and finding that the request and approval thereof i s consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets
the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(K) (Minor S ubdivisions), of the Land Development Regulations.
O
:\D
r
a
w
i n
g
s
\G
E
N
E
R
A
L
C
A
D
D
\G
x
d
\1
1
-
3
0
.g
x
d
-- 0
2
/2
3
/2
0
1
2
-- 1
2
:2
0
P
M
-
-
S
c
a
l e
1
: 1
2
0
.0
0
0
0
SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT---MEETING DATE: September 14, 2011 ITEM: Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V, Site Plan, Landscape Plan and
Architectural Elevations associated with the construction of a 3-story mixed use building with 900 sq. ft. retail space and 1,486 sq. ft. of office space on the first floor; 938 sq.
ft. of office space on the second floor and a 3,239 sq. ft. three bedroom residential unit on the second and third floors. The property is located at SE 104 1st Street. GENERAL DATA:
Agent……………………….. Richard Jones, Architects Inc. Applicant………..………….. Joya International, LLC Location............................. Southeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street
Property Size...................... 0.235 Acres Future Land Use Map......... Commercial Core (CC) Current Zoning................... Central Business District (CBD) Adjacent Zoning......
North: Central Business District (CBD) South: Central Business District (CBD) East: Central Business District (CBD) West: Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD) Existing Land
Use.............. Vacant Land Proposed Land Use…........ Mixed Use Building Water Service.................... Via Service Lateral Connection to an Existing 8” Water Main Located within
the SE 1st Avenue Right-of-Way Sewer Service.................... Via Service Lateral Connection to an Existing 8” Sanitary Sewer Main Located within the Adjacent Alley to the East
ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the approval of the following aspects of a Class V site plan request for the Boueri Building, pursuant to Land Development Regulations
(LDR) Section 2.4.5(F): Site Plan; Landscape Plan; Architectural Elevations; and Waiver Requests. BACKGROUND The subject property consists of Lot 1, Block 78, Town of Linton
Plat and is approximately 0.235 acres. The property is located on the southeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and southeast 1st Street, within the Central Core area of the Central Business
District (CBD). The property is zoned CBD (Central Business District) and is currently vacant. A Class V site plan application has been submitted associated with the construction of
a 3-story mixed use building located at the southeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street, which is the action now before the Board. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal
consists of the following: Construction of a three (3) three-story mixed use building containing 875 sq. ft. retail space and 1,486 sq. ft. of office space on the first floor; 938
sq. ft. of office space on the second floor, and a 3,239 sq. ft. three bedroom residential loft unit on the second and third floor; Construction of a twelve (12) space parking lot
at the rear of the building with access off the east alley r-o-w; Construction of a 5 foot wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street; and Installation of associated landscaping.
The Class V site plan application also includes the following waiver requests: Waiver #1: Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) [Design Development Standards]: Along SE
1st Avenue: For a height from finished grade to 25’ The required building frontage setback along SE 1st Avenue `at 10’ or less needs to be between a minimum of 50.4’ (70% of the lot
frontage 72’x0.70=50.4’) and a maximum of 64.8’ (90% of the lot frontage 72’x0.90=64.8’). The applicant is proposing 67’ building frontage setback at 10’ or less. Thus, the waiver request
is to allow an increase in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’ The remaining length of the building frontage along SE 1st Avenue setback
at 15’ or more needs to be between a minimum of 7.2’ (7.2’+64.8’=72’) and a maximum of 21.6’ (21.6’+50.4’=72’). The applicant has proposed a remaining building frontage of 5’. Thus,
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 2 the waiver request is to
allow 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’ The required building frontage
along SE 1st Avenue setback at 15’ minimum needs to be a minimum of 50.4’ (70% min. of the lot frontage 72’x0.70=50.4’). The applicant is proposing 31’ building frontage setback at 15’
minimum. Thus, the waiver request is to allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’. Waiver #2: Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)
(3) and (4): Along SE 1st Street: For a height from finished grade to 25’ The required building frontage along SE 1st Street setback at 10’ or less needs to be between a minimum of
86.1’ (70% of the lot frontage 123’x0.70=86.1’) and a maximum of 110.7’ (90% of the lot frontage 123’x0.90=110.7’). The applicant is proposing 44’ building frontage setback at 10’ or
less. Thus, the waiver request is to allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1’ to 44’. The remaining length of the building
frontage along SE 1st Street setback at 15’ or more needs to be between a minimum of 12.3’ (12.3’+110.7’=123’) and a maximum of 36.9’ (36.9’+86.1’=123’). The applicant has proposed a
remaining building frontage of 5’. Thus, the waiver request is 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’ The required building frontage along SE 1st Street setback at 15’ minimum needs to be a minimum of 86.1’ (70% min. of the lot frontage 123’x0.70=86.1’).
The applicant is proposing 31’ building frontage setback at 15’ minimum. Thus, the waiver request is to allow a decrease in the required building frontage setback at 15’ minimum from
86.1’ to 31’. 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 non-residential and mixed-use
buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. The building ground floor transparency along SE 1st Avenue is 52% while 75% is required. Also, the building ground
floor transparency elevation along SE 1st Street is only 43% while 75% is required. Waiver #4: 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 (aka corner clip) will consist of an area of property located at the corner formed by the intersection
of two or
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 3 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 applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the corner clip triangle from
20’ to 11’. Waiver #5: 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'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along S. E 1st Street. 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'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along S. E 1st Avenue. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified
in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. LDR Section 4.3.4(K) -Development
Standards Matrix: The following table indicates that the development proposal either meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Sections 4.3.4(K): Required: Provided: Building Setbacks
(min.): Front (West) See Discussion Below Side Street (North) “ Rear (East) 0’ 68’ Side Interior (South) 0’ 0’ Building Height: 48’ 41’-3” Open Space: 10% 18.1% Floor Area (min.): One
Bedroom 600 sq. ft. N/A Two Bedroom 900 sq. ft. N/A Three Bedroom 1,200 sq. ft. 3,239 sq. ft. Four Bedroom 1,500 sq. ft. N/A
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 4 LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3)
and (4) -Building Frontage and Front Setbacks: Boueri Mixed Use Building Road and Lot Frontage Building Height Percentage of Building Frontage (min & max) Required Setback Required Lot
Frontage at Setback Proposed Lot Frontage Compliance with LDRs Yes No SE 1st Avenue Lot Frontage=72’ (77’-5’=72’) Finished Grade to 25’ 70% min 90% max 10’ max 50.4’ min 64.8 max 67
67”/72’=93% * Remaining Length 15’ min 7.2’ min 5’ 72’-67’=5’ * From 25’ to 48’ 70% min 15’ min 50.4’ min 31’ 31’/72’=43% * 48’ and above 90% min N/A N/A N/A SE 1st Street Lot Frontage=123’
(135’-10’-2’=123’) Finished Grade to 25’ 70% min 90% max 10’ max 86.1’ min 110.7’ max 44’ 44’/123’=36% * Remaining Length 15’ min 12.3’ min 5’ * From 25’ to 48’ 70% min 15’ min 86.1’
min 31’ * 48’ and above 90% min N/A N/A N/A The table above indicates that the proposed development does not meet the requirements of the LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) with regard
to Building Frontage and Front Setbacks for a height from finished grade to 25’ feet, and for a height from 25’ feet to 48’ feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting waivers to these
LDR requirements. Waivers Analysis: 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. 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’.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 5 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’ 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 P&Z. 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”. The Central Business District
requires all buildings to be placed in close proximity to rights of way, to encourage pedestrian access and to foster a uniform streetscape along major thoroughfares. While the code
encourages a maximum setback of 10’, the ultimate design and placement of the mixed use building appears to have been based on two principles. First, parking lot location towards the
rear of the building to provide access from the east alley r-o-w; and second, to conceive a geometrically well-proportioned building in close proximity to SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street
r-o-w. It appears to be important for the applicant, to recognize the need to pull the building mass closer to the street, and create an attractive pedestrian area at the corner, with
a tower feature and public use area that accomplishes the intent of the code provisions. The site is constrained by the fact that it is bounded by three public right-of-ways which include
SE 1st Avenue, SE 1st Street, and the east alley r-o-w. The site frontage along SE 1st Avenue is approximately 77’ wide while the depth of the site along SE 1st Street is 123’ or almost
twice the width of the site. This site configuration presents limitations to accommodate the required building frontage along the narrow width of the site on SE 1st Avenue. Likewise
the need to locate the parking lot towards the rear of the site and the ingress/egress driveway on the east alley r-o-w, makes it difficult to meet the required building frontages while
achieving a well proportion, visually attractive, and economically feasible solution along SE 1st Street. The parking lot location and un-usually long configuration of the site resulted
in a well-conceived and geometrically well proportion building that has in turn impacted the required building frontages along SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. The applicant has attempted
to meet the intent of the code via provisions of a decorative wall along SE 1st Street creating the sense of an urbanized downtown development which is the intent of the CBD District
Design Guidelines. Under these circumstances the waivers can be supported. The waivers will not adversely affect neighboring
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 6 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: 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,
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 52% 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. In support of the waiver the applicant has provided the following statement:
“Prior approval for a similar condition has been given to Chase Bank: 1010 South 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. A 75% minimum transparency
or glass surface area is required along the north and west elevations of the building. The functions and use of the building in the ground floor level include a retail shoe boutique
and a structural engineering consultant professional office. The proposed tall ceiling height on the ground floor appears to be a key element in the success of the retail component of
the building. Complying with the 75% transparency area required by the LDR on both elevations will result in a building with out of proportion architectural elevations. The percentage
of glass surface area proposed is more consistent with the massing and proportion of the design of the building. The main purpose of the LDR requirement is to maintain a pedestrian friendly
retail/office environment which is being achieved by the level of transparency proposed by the applicant. The building ground floor transparency along SE 1st Avenue is 52% while the
building ground floor transparency along SE 1st Street is 43%. The Central Business District design guide lines require that all buildings be placed in close proximity to rights of way,
to encourage pedestrian access and to foster a uniform streetscape. The proposed level of transparency does meet this requirement, and thus, the requested waiver should be supported.
Prior approval for a similar waiver request has been granted to Chase Bank located at 1010 north Federal Highway.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 7 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. Off-Street Parking:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (8) (a), the minimum parking requirement for mixed-use buildings in the CBD shall be determined by the peak parking demand period. The peak demand period
for the Bouri project is the period from Midnight to 6:00 A.M. during weekdays. The following shared parking table reflects the uses associated with the development proposal and depicts
the resulting parking requirement within the timeframe: Shared Parking Calculations Table Use for multiple use projects which include residential in CBD, GC and PC zoning districts Use
Required Residential 2 100% 2 60% 1.2 90% 1.8 80% 1.6 90% 1.8 Office 8 5% 0.4 100% 8 10% 0.8 10% 0.8 5% 0.4 Commercial/Retail 3 5% 0.15 70% 2.1 90% 2.7 100% 3 70% 2.1 Reserved Parking
1 100% 1 100% 1 100% 1 100% 1 100% 1 TOTALS 14 4 12 6 6 5 Midnight to 6 AM 9 AM to 4 PM 6 PM to Midnight 9 AM to 4 PM 6 PM to Midnight Night Day Evening Day Evening Weekday Weekend Based
upon the above methodology, the total number of parking spaces required is 12. The project provides 12 parking spaces onsite. It is noted that the conversion of any commercial floor
area to restaurant will require the processing of a site plan modification which must address any additional parking demand. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. Handicapped Accessible
Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (1) (b), special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code
for Building Construction. Accessibility for residential structures is covered by the Federal Fair Housing Act. Pursuant to this Act, two percent (2%) of the parking spaces serving the
development must be handicap accessible and accessible visitor spaces should be provided at a rate in accordance with the local code. Based upon the 12 parking spaces provided, the development
needs to provide a minimum of one (1) handicap accessible parking space and
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 8 one (1) handicap accessible
parking spaces have been provided. Therefore, this LDR requirement has been met. On Street Parking: Although not counted toward meeting the parking requirements for the project, two
(2) parallel on-street parking spaces are being provided along SE 1st Avenue. The survey of the property depicts along S.E. 1st Street right-of-way four (4) existing parallel parking
spaces located on the south side of S.E. 1st Street. Although available to the general public, these spaces should help meet the shorter term parking requirements of residents and guests
of the project. LDR Article 4.6 -Supplemental District Regulations: Refuse Enclosure: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.6(C) (1), dumpsters, recycling containers and similar service areas
must be enclosed on three sides with vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless such areas are not visible from any adjacent public right-of-way. The development proposal includes
a trash room located at the rear of building with out swinging doors accessible from the rear parking area. A letter from the Waste Authority has been provided indicating that the trash
area will be of sufficient size to serve the mixed use building. The trash room area must depict the recycling bins on the site plan, and thus, this is attached as a condition of approval.
Lighting: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.8, the photometric plan submitted partially complies with the LDR requirements. The applicant needs to provide wall mounted light fixtures details
and light pole/fixture details. It is therefore attached as a condition of approval that details or cut-sheets of the proposed wall mounted light fixtures are provided. In addition,
a minimum of 1.0 FC illumination level must be provided along the north, and west property line. SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street are intended to be CBD pedestrian sidewalk areas, and
thus, need to be illuminated for safety reasons. Bicycle Parking: LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (1) (c) and Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that a bicycle
parking facility be provided. Particular emphasis is to be placed on developments within the TCEA. Two bike racks have been provided, one located along SE 1st Avenue r-o-w in close proximity
to the office and retail bays, and the other along SE 1st Street adjacent to the parking lot area. Thus, this LDR Requirement has been met. Bus Shelter: Pursuant to Transportation Element
A-1.3 of the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant shall provide a bus shelter contribution ($5,000) for the site prior to site plan certification, and thus, this is attached as a condition
of approval. The applicant shall contact Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, to process the required Bus Shelter contribution.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 9 Sight Visibility Triangles:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.14(B)(1), (2), and (3), when an access way intersects a public right-of-way or when the subject property abuts the intersection of two or more public right-ofway,
triangular areas shall provide unobstructed cross-visibility. Sight visibility triangles are required at the intersection of: a) the parking lot driveway and the east alley r-o-w; b)
the east alley r-o-w and SE 1st Street; and c) the intersection of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. All visibility triangles have been properly depicted on the site plan and landscape
plan. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. OTHER ITEMS: Dedication of Rights-of-Way: SE 1st Avenue: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1 and the Transportation Element of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan, the ultimate right-of-way width for SE 1st Avenue is 60’ and only 40’ of right-of-way currently exists. For existing streets, the City Engineer, upon a favorable recommendation
from the Development Management Services Group (DSMG), may grant reductions in right-of-way width. The City Engineer and DSMG have reviewed the request for a reduction in right-of-way
width and have determined that a reduction in right-of-way width to 50’ would be sufficient for this section of SE 1st Avenue. Based upon the above, a dedication of five feet (5’) of
right-of-way is required and has been depicted on the proposed development plans. It is attached as a condition of approval that the dedication of five feet (5’) of right-of-way for
SE 1st Avenue is made as part of the associated plat for the development. SE 1st Street: Table T-1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires that the ultimate
right-of-way width for SE 1st Street is 55’ and currently 50’ exists. However, at the Development Services Management Group (DSMG) meeting of February 27, 2003, a reduction in the required
right-of-way widths for this street was approved to the existing width of 50’ for Beluga Restaurant, which was consistent with approvals given during development review for adjacent
properties. Thus, no dedication will be required along 1st Street for the Boeuri Mixed use development. Alley: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D) (2), the required width of an alley is
20’. Further, pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D) (3), additional right-of-way width may be required to promote public safety and welfare; to provide for storm water management; to provide
adequate area for street trees; and to ensure adequate access, circulation and parking in high intensity use areas. Such a determination shall be advanced by a recommendation from the
City Engineer. The authority for requiring such additional right-of-way shall rest with the body having the approval authority of the associated development application. The existing
alley right-of-way width is 16’ with a paved width of approximately 14’. The development proposal will provide access to the parking spaces and garbage pick-up off the alley. The City
Engineer and DSMG have determined that the width of the alley should be expanded to a width of 20’, which is consistent with the widths provided with recent redevelopment proposals (i.e.
Miraflores Residential development to be located to the south of the proposed development, Bamboo North and South – aka as The Mark -, and the Atlantic Shore residential development).
Therefore, a dedication of two feet (2’) from the subject property is required from this development and has been depicted on the site plan. It is attached as a condition of approval
that the dedication of two feet (2’) of right-of-way for the east alley is made as part of the associated plat for the development. It is noted that additional pavement east of the eastern
right-of-way line will be required with this development and this has been attached as a condition of approval.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 10 Waiver #4: Corner Clip:
Pursuant to LDR Section5.3.1(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. 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 rightof-way dedication will be referred to as a “corner clip” and is provided
to ensure adequate rightof-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 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. Thus, the applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required corner clip from 20’ to 12’-11”. Waivers Analysis: 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: (e) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (f)
Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (g) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (h) 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. 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.
The applicant will also be required to widen the existing 4’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st street which will be considered as an easement to diminish the subsequent impact on the existing
north property line. The applicant will also be required to provide a five (5’) wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue. To provide also a triangle dedication of a 20’ by 20’ corner clip will
mean that the applicant would have dedicated almost 8% of his land to the City. In addition, 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 reduce the footprint of the building making the building economically unfeasible. The applicant is requesting to reduce the required
corner clip triangle side from 20’ to 12’-11”. The Central Business District design guide lines require that all buildings be placed in close proximity to rights of way, to encourage
pedestrian access and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample space at r-o-w corner intersections for pedestrian traffic. The proposed corner clip
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 11 reduction from 20’ to 12’-11”
does meet this requirement, and thus, the requested waiver should be supported. 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. An additional 10’ by 10’ corner clip dedication is required at the intersection of the east alley
r-o-w and SE 1st Street. It is attached as a condition of approval that the dedication of the proposed 12’-11” by 12’-11” corner clip, and the 10’ by 10’ corner clip dedication required
at the intersection of the east alley r-o-w and SE 1st Street shall both be made as part of the associated plat for the development. 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'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along SE 1st Street.
Waivers Analysis: Waiver #5: In support of this waiver request the applicant has provided the following statement: “There are already new city sidewalks recently installed at 4' wide
along and S.E. 1st street. The owner will provide an easement to increase the sidewalk wide from 4' to 5'. 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 access and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. However, a 4’ wide sidewalk already exists along SE 1st
Street and the applicant will be required to widen this sidewalk up to 5’ to provide a uniform sidewalk system in the area, and thus this attached as a condition of approval. The adjacent
land use intensity, pattern of development, as well as street section, and anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Street. 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. Thus, the requested waiver should be supported. 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.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 12 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'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk
along SE 1st Avenue. In support of this waiver request the applicant has provided the following statement: “The property owner will provide a new 5' wide 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 access and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample sidewalks
for pedestrian traffic. The applicant will be required to provide a 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue so that a uniform sidewalk system in the area can be put in place, and thus this
is attached as a condition of approval. The adjacent land use intensity, pattern of development, as well as street section, and anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’
wide sidewalk along 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 pedestrian traffic. Thus, the requested waiver should be supported. 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. Street Improvement Obligations: Pursuant
to LDR Section 6.1.2(A) (2) (a), when a street or alley is located on a boundary of a project, the project is responsible for providing one-half of the current costs (in cash funds)
of such improvements along its property line. When access to the project is provided from a local street and/or alley, then the project must provide appropriate traffic lanes meeting
requirements of Section 5.3.1(C) in order to provide continuous paved access from the nearest paved street or alley to the subject property in addition to the improvements on its side
of the center line of the right-of-way. The alley (16 feet right-of-way), which abuts the east property line for the subject property, is only partially improved at present. The alley
must be improved to its maximum width including the 2’ that will be dedicated. Therefore, based upon the above, the project is responsible for payment of the full costs of improvement
of the alley, which is attached as a condition of approval. Undergrounding of Utilities: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities serving the development shall be located underground
throughout the development. A note to this effect has been placed on the site plan.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 13 Plat: As the development
proposal includes the dedication of right-of-way for SE 1st Avenue, the adjacent east alley r-o-w, and required corner clips, a plat must be processed and recorded prior to issuance
of a building permit and is attached as a condition of approval. Site and Engineering Plan Technical Items: While revised plans may have accommodated most of staff’s concerns it is important
to emphasize that the City Engineer has not yet undertaken a final review of the project, and thus, the following items may have already been addressed by the applicant. If the items
have not been addressed by the applicant then they remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal: Site and engineering plan technical items have
been included in Appendix “C”. LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City’s Senior Landscape Planner. The plan provides for perimeter and parking
area landscaping to address landscaping needs for the ground level of the proposed mixed use building. A variety of large plants, shrubs, and groundcover materials are employed to enhance
the proposed development. This landscape material include three 10’-high clear trunk Royal Palm trees, two 12’-high Silver Buttonwood, two Cabbage Palm trees, two Montgomery trees, two
Bougainville trees, two Lady Palm, and one Bird of Paradise. The proposed under planting include 21 Foxtail Fern, 16 Bromeliads, 35 Jamaican Caper, Dwarf Fire Bush, and Wart Fern. Based
on the above, the Landscape Plan submitted complies with LDR Section 4.6.16Based on the above, the Landscape Plan submitted complies with LDR Section 4.6.16. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS
ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.6.18(E) -Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered, by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB), in the review of plans for
building permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved: 1. The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and
in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 2. The proposed structure, or project, is
in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. 3.
The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set
forth for the Board from time to time. The Boueri Mixed Use Building is will contain an 875 sq. ft. retail space on the first floor, a two story 1,486 sq. ft. office between the first
and the second floor, and a 3,239 sq. ft. 2-story loft apartment within the second and third floor. The site will contain 12 parking spaces, 2 bike racks, a trash room, a handicapped
accessible pedestrian path, and pedestrian arcades along the north and west facades. All HVAC equipment will be screened on the roof top and the site parking will be screened by an attractive
decorative wall with metal railing.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 14 The architectural design
concept utilized in the design of the proposed building is the typical Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND), where the building has frontage on major streets and parking is shielded
to the rear. The outdoor plaza and tower entry feature on the corner will be an attractive focal point for traffic traveling east and west on SE 1st street. The Eclectic style of architecture
is the borrowing of various architectural styles to create a functional and cohesive look through color, texture, physical volumes and/or shapes. The style of Architecture of the proposed
building is an eclectic combination of the Caribbean and Old Florida Vernacular style of architecture. The building will have a Standing Seam metal roof, smooth stucco walls, decorative
brackets and lighting, decorative railing and expansive outdoor terraces that will offer city views. Based upon the above the proposed architectural elevations will be consistent with
the criteria of LDR Section 4.6.18(E). REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the 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 on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes.
Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following areas: LDR Section 3.1.1(A) -Future
Land Use Map: The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Commercial Core (CC) and a zoning designation of CBD, which are consistent with one another. Pursuant
to LDR Sections 4.4.13(B) (1) and (2), general retail uses and offices are allowed as a principle use. Further, Pursuant to LDR 4.4.13(C)(5), a single family residence, either separate
or within a structure housing a nonresidential use is allowed as accessory use within the CBD district, provided that the residence is occupied by the owner, proprietor, or employee
of a business enterprise conducted on the property. The applicant has indicated that the proposed attached residential unit will be occupied by his mother. It is noted that the leasing
arrangements of the attached residential unit are in perpetuity. Thus, all future tenants are required to be the owner, proprietor, or employee of a business enterprise conducted on
the property. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to FLUM consistency. LDR Section 3.1.1(B) -Concurrency: As described in Appendix “A”, a positive finding of concurrency
can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, solid waste, and schools. LDR Section 3.1.1(C) -Consistency (Standards
for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix “B”, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. LDR Section 3.1.1(D) -Compliance
with the Land Development Regulations:
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 15 As described under the
Site Plan Analysis section of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDR can be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive
Plan Policies: The following Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan will impact the proposed project, and thus, the analysis below is being provided: Future Land Use Element
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. The property is currently
vacant. There are no special physical or environmental characteristics of the land that would be negatively impacted by the proposed mixed use development. The redevelopment will be
complimentary with the surrounding commercial and residential developments and will also provide a customer base for the businesses on a year-round basis, which will provide economic
stability for the downtown area. In terms of fulfilling remaining land use needs, the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: “One of the most important objectives
of the City’s overall housing policy is the establishment of housing in the downtown area. In the years since adoption of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan the downtown has changed from a
somewhat sleepy, seasonally oriented shopping district to a vibrant year-round retail, service, and entertainment area with an active nightlife. A critical missing element is a significant
housing development. The City recognizes the importance of providing housing in close proximity to shopping, employment, and transportation, and the need to have a residential base to
support the businesses in the downtown area”. Pursuant to LDR 4.4.13(C)(5), a single family residence, either separate or within a structure housing a nonresidential use is allowed as
accessory use within the CBD district, provided that the residence is occupied by the owner, proprietor, or employee of a business enterprise conducted on the property. The applicant
has indicated that the proposed attached residential unit will be occupied by his mother. It is noted that the leasing arrangements of the attached residential unit will be in perpetuity.
Thus the residence shall be occupied by the owner, proprietor, or employee of a business enterprise conducted on the property. The proposed development will help to fulfill this stated
land use need by providing one (1) additional 3,239 sq. ft. 2-story loft apartment within the downtown area, and is therefore consistent with this policy. Future Land Use Element Objective
C-3: The Central Business District (CBD) and surrounding neighborhoods, including A-1-A, Seacrest and Swinton Avenue represents the essence of what is Delray Beach i.e. a "village by
the sea". The continued revitalization of the CBD is essential to achieving the overall theme of the City's Comprehensive Plan by managing growth and preserving the charm. The following
policies and activities shall be pursued in the achievement of this objective. Policy C-3.1: The CBD zoning district regulations shall facilitate and encourage rehabilitation and revitalization
and shall, at a minimum, address the following: Deletion of inappropriate uses;
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 16 Incentives for locating
retail on the ground floor with office and residential use on upper floors; Accommodating parking needs through innovative actions; Incentives for dinner theaters, playhouses, and
other family oriented activities; Allowing and facilitating outdoor cafes; Incentives for mixed use development and rehabilitation; Elimination of side yard setback requirements;
and Allow structural overhang encroachments into required yard areas. The development proposal is associated with the construction of one (1) multiple-family residential dwelling unit
within the downtown area. The residents of this attached single family unit will be able to walk to shops, restaurants, cultural venues and parks. They will interact on a regular basis
with the storekeepers and employees, and their neighbors. They will get to know the downtown much more intimately than the majority of Delray residents. The Boueri mixed use building
proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.1 as it will facilitate the continued rehabilitation and revitalization of the CBD zoning district. Transportation Element
Policy A-1.3: The City endorses the continued operations of the Palm Tran Transit System and its operations in Delray Beach, and through policies of this Element related to the TCEA,
will coordinate with Palm Tran to improve the system. Given the potential impacts the proposed development will have on the surrounding road network and the location of a Palm Tran bus
stop at the southeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street (immediately to the north), it is appropriate that the development contribute toward the provision of a bus shelter at
this location. Thus, it is attached as a condition of approval that a contribution of $5,500 (approximately half the cost of a shelter) is paid prior to certification of the site plan
for the development. Subject to this condition of approval being addressed, the development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A-1.3. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2:
Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. The development proposal
has accommodated a two bicycle parking facilities (i.e. bike racks) on site. The provision of a bicycle parking facility has been made for guests along the sidewalk adjacent to the parking
area entrance from SE 1st Street and also adjacent to the retail bay and office area along SE 1st Avenue. Based upon the above, the development will comply with Transportation Element
Policy D-2.2. Open Space and Recreation Element Policy A-3.1: Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddlers to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments
as part of design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill
projects having fewer than 25 units. The City may require a monetary contribution in-lieu of the provision of on-site facilities where appropriate. This policy may be waived for projects
in the downtown because the City recognizes that households located in the downtown are likely to have fewer children than those located in suburban settings. Further, land in the downtown
is at a premium and it can be cost prohibitive to provide recreational features such as tennis courts, volleyball courts, etc. and there are other cultural and recreational opportunities
located in the downtown that are not readily available to residents of suburban apartment complexes. However, the applicant is proposing only one
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 17 residential unit. Thus,
the proposed development does not provide recreational facilities to its residents, such as a swimming pool and an exercise facility. The Open Space and Recreation Element of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan indicates in its’ conclusion that “The City will have sufficient recreation facilities at build-out to meet the adopted standards”. A park impact fee is collected
to offset any impacts that the project may have on the City’s recreational facilities. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit will be collected
prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of $500 will be required of this development for parks and recreation purposes. Some of the recreational, cultural and
open space opportunities located in proximity to the First Boueri mixed use development include: Veteran’s Park, which includes a large playground and recreational area; the Municipal
Beach, the City’s Tennis Center, and the Old School Square Cultural Center. As playground areas are located close by and other facilities that can be utilized by children, such as the
pool, the intent of this policy will be met. Based on the above, it is appropriate to waive this requirement to provide these services entirely on site. Housing Element Objective B-2:
Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City’s demographic
profile, and meet the housing needs identified in this Element. Policies, which will implement this objective, include: Housing Element Policy B-2.2: The development of new adult oriented
communities within the City is discouraged. New housing developments shall be designed to accommodate households having a range of ages, especially families with children, and shall
be required to provide three (3) and four (4) bedroom units and activity areas for children ranging from toddlers to teens. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential
development located in the downtown area and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. This project will not be restricted to occupancy by adults only. However, it is acknowledged
that downtown dwellings are not typically occupied by households with children. This building will primarily accommodate young and middle-age professionals. It is located in a very small
site and will contain a very small building. The development will provide only one residential unit with three-bedroom which will be occupied by the mother of the owner of the building.
The office space will be occupied by the owner and the retail bay will be occupied by the wife of the owner of the building. It will be an all-family occupancy. Based on the above, it
is appropriate to waive this requirement entirely for this project. Housing Objective A-11: To assist residents of the City in maintaining and enhancing their neighborhood environment,
the City shall take steps to ensure that modifications in and around the neighborhood do not lead to its decline, such as those described in the following policies. Housing Policy A-11.3
In evaluating proposals for new development or redevelopment, the City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as
noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential
areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. As noted previously, the
residents of this development will aid in the economic stability of the downtown area. However, the introduction of an additional residential unit, the retail, and office area will also
likely improve the safety of the area by introducing more nighttime activity and more “eyes” to observe what is happening in the area, which should be a deterrent to criminal
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 18 activity. While the development
proposal will result in additional 12 AM and 11 PM peak hour trips onto the surrounding roadway network, the number of daily trips generated will not negatively impact the area. Based
upon the above, the development proposal will be consistent with Housing Policy A-11.3. LDR Section 2.4.5(F) (5) -Compatibility (Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding
that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial
depreciation of property values. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Zoning: Use: North Central Business District
(CBD) Vacant South Central Business District (CBD) Vacant East Central Business District (CBD) Manufacturing Food Processing Building West Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD)
Single-Family Dwellings The development proposal will significantly enhance the aesthetics of the subject property under a single development. Further, the neighborhood and the downtown
as a whole will benefit by the inclusion of a new residential dwelling unit, retail, and office space. REVIEW BY OTHERS Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA): At its meeting of August
11, 2011, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) reviewed the development proposal and recommended approval of the Class V site plan. Downtown Development Authority (DDA): At its meeting
of August 8, 2011, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) reviewed the development proposal and recommended approval of the Class V site plan. Courtesy Notices: Courtesy notices have
been sent to the following homeowner’s and/or civic associations: Neighborhood Advisory Council Delray Citizen’s Coalition, Chamber of Commerce Letters of objection or support,
if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The development proposal associated with the construction of a 3-story
building that contains an 875 sq., ft., retail space on the first floor, a two story 1,486 sq. ft. office on the first and the second floor, and a 3.239 sq. ft. 2-story loft apartment
on the second and third floor. The site will contain 12 parking spaces, 2 bike racks, a trash room, a handicapped accessible pedestrian
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 19 path, and pedestrian arcades
along the north and west facades. The development proposal also includes six (6) waiver requests which are described later on the Staff Recommendation section of this report. Positive
findings can be made with regard to this waiver requests. The provision of an additional residential dwelling unit within the downtown area will further the long term revitalization
and stabilization of the CBD. The proposed use will be consistent with the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter Three of the LDR, provided the attached conditions
of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of the waiver request, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for
the Boueri Mixed Use Building, 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
criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F), 2.4.7(B) (5), and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to conditions. C. Move denial of the waiver request, Class V site plan,
landscape plan and architectural elevations for the Boueri Mixed Use Building, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F), 2.4.7(B) (5), and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
By Separate Motions: Waiver #1: Move approval of the waiver requests to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow: Along SE 1st Avenue for a height from finished grade to 25’: An
increase in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 64.8’ to 67’; 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’. by adopting the findings of
fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5). Waiver #2: Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to
allow: Along SE 1st Street for a height from finished grade to 25’ A decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1’ to 44’.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 20 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 86.1’ to 31’. by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5). 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 52% and along SE 1st
Street from the required 75% to 43%, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5).
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’
to 11’, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5). Waiver #5: 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 Street, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained
in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5). 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 request is consistent
with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5). Class V Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for the Boueri Mixed Use Building, 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 criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F) and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations,
subject to the following conditions: 1. That three (3) sets of copies of the revised plans are submitted addressing all technical items and conditions of approvals as indicated in the
staff report and the listed conditions; 2. That one single copy of the site plan is submitted so that it can be sent to the files of the Planning Department of Palm Beach County;
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 21 3. That details or cut-sheets
of the proposed wall mounted light fixtures are provided; 4. That a dedication of five feet (5’) of right-of-way for SE 1st Avenue is made as part of the associated plat for the development;
5. That a dedication of two feet (2’) of right-of-way for the adjacent alley is made as part of the associated plat for the development; 6. That the dedication of the proposed 12’-11”
by 12’-11” corner clip at the intersection of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street, and the 10’ by 10’ corner clip required at the intersection of the east alley r-o-w and SE 1st Street shall
both be made as part of the associated plat for the development; 7. That the project is responsible for payment of the full costs of improvement of the alley to its maximum width including
the 2’ that will be dedicated. This will include additional pavement east of the eastern right-of-way line of the alley; 8. That a plat is processed and recorded prior to issuance of
a building permit; 9. That a contribution of $5,500 (approximately half the cost of a bus shelter) is paid prior to certification of the site plan and that the applicant contact Scott
Aronson, Parking Management Specialist to process the bus shelter contribution; 10. That the trash room area must depict the recycling and roll out trash bins on the site plan; 11. That
concurrency verification from the Palm Beach County School District is provided prior to site plan certification; 12. That a total fee of $500 must be provided for this development for
parks and recreation purposes and that the fee shall be collected prior to issuance of a building permit. 13. That the photometric plan be revised and a 1.0 FC minimum illumination level
must be provided along the north, and west property line. SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street are intended to be CBD pedestrian sidewalk areas, and thus, need to be illuminated for safety
reasons; and 14. That the applicant will be required to provide a 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street so that a uniform sidewalk system in the area can be put in place.
Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for the Boueri Mixed Use Building, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
meets criteria set forth in Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following condition: 1. That three (3) sets of copies of the land scape plan are submitted.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011 The Boueri Mixed Use Building -Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations Page 22 Architectural Elevations:
Move approval of the architectural elevations for the Boueri Mixed Use Building, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
meets criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations. Staff Report Prepared by: Estelio Breto, Senior Planner Attachments: Appendix “A” Appendix “B”
Appendix “C” Site Plan Landscape Plan Architectural Elevations
APPENDIX “A” CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1(B), Concurrency, as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, must be met and
a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require
the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: Water service is proposed via a service lateral connection to the existing eight inch (8”) water
main located within the SE 1st Avenue right-of-way. Sewer service is proposed via a service lateral connection to the existing eight inch (8”) sanitary sewer main located within the
adjacent alley to the east. Fire protection is proposed to be provided via an existing fire hydrant located at the northeast corner of SE 1st Avenue and SE 1st Street. Pursuant to the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City’s Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based
upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to this level of service standard. Streets and Traffic: The subject property is located within the City’s Transportation Concurrency
Exception Area (TCEA), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC and OSSHAD. The TCEA exempts the above-described areas from complying with the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards
Ordinance. Therefore, a traffic study is not required for concurrency purposes; however a traffic statement is necessary to keep a record of trips approved in the TCEA and for calculation
of traffic impact fees. A traffic statement has been submitted indicating the generation of 12 AM peak hour trips and 11 new PM peak hour trips. Parks and Open Space: The Open Space
and Recreation Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan indicates in its’ conclusion that “The City will have sufficient recreation facilities at build-out to meet the adopted standards”.
A park impact fee is collected to offset any impacts that the project may have on the City’s recreational facilities. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 per
dwelling unit will be collected prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of $500 will be required of this development for parks and recreation purposes. Solid
Waste: The proposed residential unit will generate 0.52 tons of solid waste per year (1 unit x 0.52 tons = 0.52 tons). The retail component of the building will generate a total of 2.05
tons of solid waste per year (875 sq. ft. x4.7 /2,000 = 2.05). The office component will generate a total of 2.74 tons of solid waste per year (1,486 sq. ft. x 3.7 /2,000 = 2.74). Thus
resulting total of solid waste generated will be equate to 5.31 tons of solid waste per year. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its facilities have sufficient capacity to
handle all development proposals until the year 2031, thus a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainage: Preliminary drainage plans indicate
that drainage will be accommodated via exfiltration trench. There are no problems anticipated in accommodating on-site drainage. Based upon the above, positive findings with respect
to this level of service standard can be made. Schools: The Palm Beach County School District must approve the development proposal for compliance with the adopted Level of Service for
School Concurrency. Verification from the Palm Beach County School District is pending and a written finding of approval from the School District is attached as a condition of approval.
APPENDIX “B” STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility
as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent X – This standard will be met once the attached conditions of approval pertaining
to the photometric plan have been addressed. B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent
with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described
in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City
shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will
be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant
land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable X Meets intent
of standard Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other
applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent G. Redevelopment
and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City’s demographic profile,
and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent
H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns
shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result
in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be
approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without
such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children
from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified
for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent
APPENDIX “C” ENGINEERING TECHNICAL COMMENTS 1. Provide copy of certified boundary and topographic survey meeting requirements of LDR Section 2.4.3 (A), (B) and (D). Provide existing
grades at least 10-feet outside all subject property lines for all adjacent properties. Provide existing grades over site. Provide survey drawn on 24” x 36” sheets. 2. Provide Engineering
Plans with existing and proposed spot elevations showing changes of elevations of not more than 2-feet, throughout the site and at a minimum distance of 10-feet into all adjacent properties
per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20) and (D) (2). Provide sufficient elevations to establish historical storm water flow onto and through property. 3. Provide existing elevations on existing
roadway including edge of pavement and center line. 4. Clearly indicate limits of right-of-way for all adjacent streets. 5. Indicate right-of-way dedications on all plans in accordance
with LDR Section 5.3.1. A 2-foot dedication is required for the alley and a 5-foot dedication is required for S.E. 1st Avenue. 6. Provide a 20’ x 20’ corner clip right-of-way dedication
at the intersection of S.E. 1st Street and S.E. 1st Avenue. This is a requirement in the Central Business District (CBD) per LDR Section 5.3.1 (D) (3). 7. Indicate sight distances at
all ingress/egress points and all intersections. 8. Clearly dimension driveway width on Engineering Plans. 9. Provide 8-foot wide sidewalks along S.E. 1st Avenue and S.E. 1st Street.
Sidewalks utilized by the public in the Central Business District are required to be a minimum of 8-feet wide per LDR Section 6.1.3 (B). However, a waiver may be requested through the
Planning and Zoning Department to provide a minimum sidewalk of 5-feet. 10. Provide certification letter in accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 (B) (2) for proposed building not meeting
finish floor elevation requirements. If finished floor elevation is less than 18-inches above centerline of adjacent road, but above the 100-year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum
elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above
the flooding level. Letter must state drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed finished floor elevation is above the 100-year flooding level. 11. Provide signed and
sealed drainage calculations indicating the proposed system’s ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District
regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7) and indicate how storm water will be retained on site. Sites with parking lots are required to retain a 5 year 1 hour storm (3.2”) in addition
to meeting the water quality criteria (1” or 2.5 x % impervious). 12. Indicate location of existing water service on Civil Plans per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (8) and 2.4.3 (D) (3) including
type and size of existing lines. Provide notes that state the disposition of all existing facilities including service lines and meters. 13. Show nearest existing fire hydrants and add
any necessary hydrants per Fire Department requirements and in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.10 (2). 14. Provide signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated
flows into existing or proposed lift station and force main. Written approval from the Deputy Director of
Public Utilities stating that the City’s system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows is required. 15. If project is adjacent to or within 3 blocks of a Palm Trans Bus Route,
installation of, or contribution for a bus shelter and easement may be required; contact Parking Management Specialist, Scott Aronson at (561) 243-7196. 16. Final Engineering comments
will also be generated after next submittal of Engineering Plans and during the Building Permit review process.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: CANDI N. JEFFERSON, SENIOR PLANNER PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING THROUGH: CITY MANAGER DATE: February 28, 2012
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.B. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRALS/1041 SEASPRAY AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission
is the approval of two (2) sidewalk deferrals along Beach Drive and Seaspray Avenue for the property located at 1041 Seaspray Avenue within the North Beach Overlay District. BACKGROUND
The subject property is 0.3202 acres and is an undeveloped single family lot which is a vacant landscaped area previously associated with the single family residence to the west (1010
Seaspray Avenue). Itlies within the North Beach Overlay District and is located on the north side of Seaspray Avenue, south of Beach Drive. The property is zoned Single Family Residential
(R-1-AAA) and the applicant proposes to construct a new 7,582 sq. ft. two-story single family residence with four (4) bedrooms, a loft, two (2) offices, an art studio, great room, cabana
bath and a three (3) car garage. The owner wishes to defer construction of a five foot (5’) sidewalk adjacent to the rights-of-way along Seaspray Avenue and Beach Drive. No other sidewalks
exist on either side of the road. At its meeting of February 9, 2012, the DSMG supported both of the sidewalk deferrals. Pursuant to the agreement, the owner will construct the sidewalks
along Seaspray Avenue and Beach Drive at its sole cost and expense at a later date, after being requested to do so by the City. The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and
has been approved as to form. RECOMMENDATION Move approval of the agreement to defer the construction of sidewalks along Seaspray Avenue and Beach Drive for the property located at 1041
Seaspray Avenue.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 2
the waiver request is to allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building
frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2 ’ to 5 ’.
Along SE 1 st Avenue: For a height from 25’ to 48’
The required building frontage along S E 1 st Avenue setback at 1 5 ’ minimum needs to
be a minimum of 50.4’ (70% min. of the lot frontage 72’x0.70=50.4’). The applicant is
proposing 3 1 ’ building frontage setback at 15 ’ minimum . Thus, the wai ver request is to
allow a de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 5 0.4’ to
3 1 ’.
Waiver #2 :
Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4):
A long SE 1 st Street: For a height from finished grade to 25’
The required bui lding frontage along S E 1 st Street setback at 10’ or less needs to be
between a minimum of 86.1 ’ (70% of the lot frontage 123 ’x0.70=86.1 ’) and a maximum
of 110.7’ (90% of the lot frontage 123 ’x0.90=110.7’). The applicant is proposing 44 ’
building frontage setback at 10’ or less. Thus, the waiver request is to allow a de crease
in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1 ’ to 44 ’.
The remaining length of the building frontage along SE 1 st Street setback at 15’ or
more need s to be between a minimum of 12 .3 ’ (12 .3 ’+110.7 ’=123 ’) and a maximum of
36.9 ’ (36.9 ’+86.1 ’=123 ’). The applicant has proposed a remaining building frontage of
5 ’. Thus, the waiver request is to allow a decrease in the remaining length of the
building fronta ge at 15’ or more from 12.3 ’ to 5 ’.
A long SE 1 st Street: For a height from 25’ to 48 ’
The required building frontage along S E 1 st Street setback at 1 5 ’ minimum needs to
be a minimum of 86.1 ’ (70% min. of the lot frontage 123 ’x0.70=86.1’). The applicant i s
proposing 3 1 ’ building frontage setback at 15 ’ minimum . Thus, the waiver request is to
allow a de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 86.1 ’ to
3 1 ’.
Waiver #3 :
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18 (B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum t ransparency 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. The building ground floor transparency along SE 1 st
Avenue is 52 % while 75% is re quired. Also, the building ground floor transparency elevation
along SE 1 st Street is only 43 % while 75% is required.
Waiver #4 :
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 (aka corner
clip) will consist of an area of property located at the corner formed by the intersection of two or
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 3
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 applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the corner clip
triangle from 20’ to 11’.
Waiver #5 :
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the Central Business
District. The applicant is re questing a waiver to allow for a reduction from 8'-0 " to 5’-0” wide
sidewalk along S. E 1 st Street.
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'-0 " to 5’-0” wide
sidewalk along S. E 1 st Avenue .
SITE PLAN ANALYSIS
COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS:
Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the
body taking final action on the site and development application/request.
LDR Section 4.3.4(K) - Development Standards Matrix:
The following table indicates that the development proposal either meets or exceed s t he
requirements of LDR Section s 4.3.4(K):
Require d : Provid ed :
Building Setbacks (min.): Front (West) See Discussion Below
Side Street (North ) “
Rear (East ) 0’ 68 ’
Side Interior (South) 0’ 0’
Building Height: 48’ 4 1 ’-3 ”
Open Space: 10% 1 8.1 %
Floor Are a (min.): One Bedroom 600 sq. ft. N/A
Two Bedroom 900 sq. ft. N/A
Three Bedroom 1,200 sq. ft. 3,239 sq. ft.
Four Bedroom 1,500 sq. ft. N/A
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 4
LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) - Building Frontage and Front Setbacks:
Boueri Mixed Us e Building
Road and Lot
Frontage
Building
Height
Percentage
of Building
Frontage
(min & max)
Required
Setback
Required
Lot
Frontage at
Setback
Proposed
Lot
Frontage
Compliance
with LDRs
Yes No
SE 1 st Avenue
Lot Frontage=72’
(77’-5’=72’)
Finished
Grade to
25’
70% min
90% max 10’ max 50.4’ min
64.8 max
6 7
67”/72’=93% *
Remaining
Length 15’ min 7.2’ min 5’
72’-67’=5’ *
From 25’
to 48’ 70% min 15’ min 50.4’ min 3 1 ’
3 1 ’/72’=4 3 % *
48’ and
above 90% min N/A N/A N/A
SE 1 st Street Lot
Frontage =123’
(135’-10’-2’=123’)
Finished
Grade to
25’
70% min
90% max 10’ max 86.1’ min
110.7’ max
4 4 ’
4 4 ’/123’=3 6 % *
Remaining
Length 15’ min 12.3’ min 5 ’ *
From 25’
to 48’ 70% min 15’ min 86.1’ min 3 1 ’ *
48’ and
above 90% min N/A N/A N/A
The table above indicates that the proposed development does not meet the requirements of
the LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) with regard to Build ing Frontage and Front Setbacks for a
height from finished grade to 25’ feet, and for a height from 25’ feet to 48’ f eet. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting waiver s to th ese LDR requirement s .
Waivers Analysis :
Pu rsuant 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 adverse ly 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 circum stances on other property for another applicant or owner.
Waiver #1: to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4), a long SE 1 st Avenue:
Fo r a height from finished grade to 25’:
T o allow an increase in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a
minimum of 64.8’ to 67’;
T o allow a decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage setback at 15’ or
more from 7.2’ to 5’; and
Fo r a height from 25’ to 48 ’:
T o allow a de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 50.4’
to 31’.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 5
Waiver #2 : to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4), a long SE 1 st Street:
Fo r a height from finished grade to 25’:
T o allow a de crease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a
minimum of 86.1 ’ to 44’;
To allow a decrease in t he remaining length of the building frontage at 15’ or more from
12.3 ’ to 5 ’; and
Fo r a height from 25’ to 48 ’:
T o allow a de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 86.1 ’
to 31’
The applicant has provided the following justifi cation with regard to the se two waiver request s :
“The architect is fully aware an d respects the section of the LD R's
requirements for fronta g e. The architect has strived to meet as close as
possible the intent of the code with reference to SE 1 Street. Th e 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 1 st Avenue elevation the architect is with in a few percent
point of mee ting all requirements and has received support for waivers from
P&Z. 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 waiv er s be approved ”.
The Central Business District requires all buildings to be placed in cl ose proximity to rights of
way, to encourage pedestrian access and to foster a uniform streetscape along major
thoroughfares. While the code encourages a maximum setb ack of 10’, the ultimate design and
placement of the mixed use building appears to ha ve been based on two principles. First,
parking lot location towards the rear of the building to provide access from the east alley r -o -w;
and second, to conceive a geomet rically well -proportioned building in cl ose proximity to SE 1 st
Avenue and SE 1 st Street r -o -w . It appears to be important for the applicant, to recogniz e the
need to pull the building mass closer to the street, and create a n attractive pedestrian area at
the corner , with a tower feature and public use area that accomplishes the intent of the code
provisions.
The site is constrained by the fact that it is bounded by three public right -of -ways which include
SE 1 st Avenue, SE 1 st Street, and the east alley r -o -w . The site frontage along SE 1 st Avenue is
approximately 7 7 ’ wide while the depth of the site along SE 1 st Street is 123’ or almost twice the
width of the site. Th is site configuration presents limitations to accommodate the required
building frontage along the narrow width of the site on SE 1 st Avenue. Likewise the need to
locate the parking lot towards the rear of the site and the ingress/egress driveway on the east
alley r -o -w , makes it difficult to meet the required building frontage s while achievi ng a well
proportion, visually attractive , and economically feasible solution along SE 1 st Street . The
parking lot location and un -usually long configuration of the site resulted in a well -conceived and
geometrically well proportion building that has in tu rn impacted the required building frontages
along SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street . The applicant has attempted to meet the intent of the
code via provisions of a decorative wall along S E 1 st Street creat ing the sense of an urbanized
downtown development wh ich is the in tent of the CBD District Design Guidelines. Under these
circumstances the waivers can be supported. Th e waivers will not adversely affect neighboring
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 6
properties or diminish the provision of public facilities. The waiver s would also be supporte d
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 :
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.1 8 (B)(14)(iv)(2), t he minimum transpar ency 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, 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 1 st Avenue is 52%
while 75% is required. Also, the building ground floor transparency elevation along SE 1 st Street
is only 43% while 75% is required. T h e proposed north and west elevation s for the Boueri mixed
use building do not meet the LDR requirement, and thus, the applicant has requested a w aiver
to this LDR requirement. In support of the waiver the applicant has pro vided the following
statement:
“Prior approval for a similar condition has been given to Chase Bank: 1010
South Federal Highway , Delray Beach, FL. The percentage of glass surface
area requested is more consistent with the massing and proportion of the
des ign 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. T his project meets o r exceeds the
requirements of LD R 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.
A 75% minimum transparency or glass surface area is required along the north and west
elevation s of the building . The functions and use of the building in the ground floor le vel include
a retail shoe boutique and a structural engineering consultant professional office . The proposed
tall ceiling height on the ground floor appears to be a key element in the success of the retail
component of the building. Comp lying with the 75% transparency area required by the LDR on
both elevations will result in a building with o ut of proportion architectural elevations . The
percentage of glass surface area propos ed is more consistent with the massing and proportion
of the d esign of the building.
The main purpose of the LDR requirement is to maintain a pedestrian friendly retail/office
environment which is being achieved by the level of transparency proposed by the applicant.
The building ground floor transparency along SE 1 st Avenue is 52% while the building ground
floor transparency along SE 1 st Street is 43%. The Central Business District design guide lines
require that all buildings be placed in close proximity to rights of way, to encourage pedestrian
access and to fost er a uniform streetscape . The proposed level of transparency does meet this
requirement, and thus, the requested waiver should be supported. Prior approval for a similar
waiver request has been granted to Chase Bank located at 1010 north Federal Highway .
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 7
G ranting 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 resul t in the grant of a special
privilege. Consequently, a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made.
Off -Street Parking:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (8) (a), the minimum parking requirement for mixed -use
buildings in the CBD shall be determined by the peak parking demand period. The peak
demand period for the Bouri project is the period from Midnight to 6:00 A.M. during weekdays.
The following shared parking table reflects the uses associated with the development proposal
an d depicts the resulting parking requirement within the timeframe:
Shared Parking Calculations Table
Use for multiple use projects which include residential in CBD, GC and PC zoning districts
Use Required
Residential 2 100%2 60%1.2 90%1.8 80%1.6 90%1.8
Office 8 5%0.4 100%8 10%0.8 10%0.8 5%0.4
Commercial/Retail 3 5%0.15 70%2.1 90%2.7 100%3 70%2.1
Reserved Parking 1 100%1 100%1 100%1 100%1 100%1
TOTALS 14 4 12 6 6 5
Midnight to 6 AM 9 AM to 4 PM 6 PM to Midnight 9 AM to 4 PM 6 PM to Midnight
Day Evening Evening Day Night
Weekend Weekday
Based upon the above methodology, the total number of parking spaces required is 12. The
project provides 12 parking spaces onsite. It i s noted that the conversion of any commercial
floor area to restaurant will require the processing of a site plan modification which must
address any additional parking demand. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met.
Handicapped Accessible Parking:
Pu rsuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (1) (b), special parking spaces designed for use by the
handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for
Building Construction . Accessibility for residential structures is covered by the Federal Fair
Housing Act. Pursuant to this A ct, two percent (2%) of the parking spaces serving t he
development must be handicap accessible and accessible visitor spaces should be provided at
a rate in accordance with the local code. Based upon the 12 parking spaces provided , the
development needs to provide a minimum of one (1 ) handicap accessible parking space and
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 8
one (1 ) handicap accessible parking spaces h ave been provided. Therefore, this LDR
requirement has been met.
On Street Parking:
Although not counted toward meeting the parking requirements for the project, two (2) parallel
on -street parking spaces are being provided along SE 1 st Avenue. The survey of the property
depicts along S.E. 1 st Street right -of -way four (4 ) existing parallel parking spaces located on the
south side of S.E. 1 st Street. Although available to the general public, these spaces should help
meet the shorter term parking requirements of residents and guests of the project.
LDR Article 4.6 - Supplemental District Regulation s:
Refuse Enclosure :
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.6(C) (1), dumpster s , recycling containers and similar service areas
must be enclosed on three sides with vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless such
areas are not visible from any adjacent publi c right -of -way. The development proposal includes
a trash room located at the rear of building with out swinging door s accessible from the rear
parking area . A letter from the Waste Authority has been provided indicating that the trash area
will be of suf ficient size to serve the mixed use building. The trash room area must depict the
recycling bins on the site plan, and thus, this is attached as a condition of approval.
Lighting:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.8, the photometric plan submitted partially c omplies with the LDR
requirements. T he applicant needs to provide wall mounted light fixtures details and light
pole/fixture details. It is therefore attached as a condition of approval that details or cut -sheets
of the proposed wall mounted light fixture s are provided . In addition, a minimum of 1.0 FC
illumination level must be provided along the north, and west property line. SE 1 st Avenue and
SE 1 st Street are intended to be CBD pedestrian sidewalk areas, and thus, need to be
illuminated for safe ty rea sons.
Bicycle Parking:
LDR Section 4.6.9(C) (1) (c) and Transportation Element Policy D -2.2 of the Comprehensive
Plan recommend that a bicycle parking facility be provided. Particular emphasis is to be placed
on development s within the TCEA . Two bike rac ks have been provided, one located along SE
1 st Avenue r -o -w in close proximity to the office and retail bays, and the other along SE 1 st Street
adjacent to the parking lot area. Thus, this LDR Requirement has been met.
Bus Shelter :
P ursuant to Transport ation Element A -1.3 of the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant shall
provid e a bus shelter contribution ($5 ,0 00) for the site prior to site plan certification, and thus,
this is attached as a condition of approval. The applicant shall contact Scott Aronson, Parking
Management Specialist , to process the required Bu s Shelter contribution.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 9
Sight Visibility Triangles:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.14(B)(1), (2), and (3), when an access way intersects a public
right -of -way or when the subject property abuts the intersection of two or more public right -of -
way, triangular areas shall provide unobstructed cross -visibility. S ight v isibility t riangle s are
required at the intersection of: a) the parking lot d riveway and the east a lley r -o -w; b) the east
alley r -o -w a nd SE 1 st Street; and c) the intersection of SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street. All
visibility triangles have been properly depicted on the site plan and landscape plan. T hus, this
LDR requirement has been met.
OTHER ITEMS :
Dedication of Rights -of -Way :
SE 1 st Avenue: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1 and the Transportation Element of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, the ultimate right -of -way width for SE 1 st Avenue is 60’ and only 40’ of
right -of -way currently exists. For existing streets, the City Engineer, up on a favorable
recommendation from the Development Management Services Group (DSMG), may grant
reductions in right -of -way width. The City Engineer and DSMG have reviewed the request for a
reduction in right -of -way width and have determined that a reductio n in right -of -way width to 50’
would be sufficient for this section of SE 1 st Avenue. Based upon the above, a dedication of five
feet (5’) of right -of -way is required and has been depicted on the proposed development plans.
It is attached as a condition o f approval that the dedication of five feet (5’) of right -of -way for SE
1 st Avenue is made as part of the associated plat for the development.
SE 1 st Street: Table T -1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires that
the ultimate rig ht -of -way width for SE 1st Street is 55’ and currently 50’ exists. However, at the
Development Services Management Group (DSMG) meeting of February 27, 2003, a reduction
in the required right -of -way widths for this street was approved to the existing widt h of 50’ for
Beluga Restaurant, which was consistent with approvals given during development review for
adjacent properties. Thus, no dedication will be required along 1 st Street for the Bo e uri Mixed
use development.
Alley: Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D ) (2), the required width of an alley is 20’. Further,
pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D) (3), additional right -of -way width may be required to promote
public safety and welfare; to provide for storm water management; to provide adequate area for
street tree s; and to ensure adequate access, circulation and parking in high intensity use areas.
Such a determination shall be advanced by a recommendation from the City Engineer. The
authority for requiring such additional right -of -way shall rest with the body ha ving the approval
authority of the associated development application. The existing alley right -of -way width is 16’
with a paved width of approximately 14’. The development proposal will provide access to the
parking spaces and garbage pick -up off the al ley. The City Engineer and DSMG have
determined that the width of the alley should be expanded to a width of 20’, which is consistent
with the widths provided with recent redevelopment proposals (i.e. Miraflores Residential
development to be located to th e south of the proposed development, Bamboo North and South
– aka as The Mark -, and the Atlantic Shore residential development). Therefore, a dedication
of two feet (2’) from the subject property is required from this development and has been
depicted on the site plan . It is attached as a condition of approval that the dedication of two feet
(2 ’) of right -of -way for the east alley is made as part of the associated plat for the development.
It is noted that additional pavement east of the eastern right -of -way line will be required with this
development and this has been attached as a condition of approval .
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 10
Waiver #4:
Corner Clip: Pursuant to LDR Section5.3.1(D)(3), a right -of -way dedication will be required at
all intersections in the Central Business Dis trict (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. 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 int o 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’ to 12’-11”.
Waivers Analysis :
Pu rsuant 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:
(e) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area;
(f) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities;
(g) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and
(h) Does not r esult 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.
In support of the waiver the applicant has provided the following statement:
“The property ow ner will provide a 12'-11" by 12'-11" dedication corner clip
along S.E. 1 st avenue and S.E. 1 st 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 easemen ts. 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 L D R 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 1 st Avenue, plus two (2’) feet r -o -w
dedication along the east alley r -o -w. The applicant will also be required to widen the existing 4’
wide sidewalk along SE 1 st street which will be considered as an easement to diminish the
subsequent impact on the existing north property line. The applicant will also be required to
provide a five (5’) wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue. To pr ovide also a triangle dedication of a
20’ by 20’ corner clip will mean that the applicant would have dedicated almost 8% of his land to
the City . In addition, 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 reduce the footprint of
th e building making the building economically unfeasible. The applicant is requesting to reduce
the required corner clip triangle side from 20’ to 12 ’-11”.
The Central Business D istrict design guide lines require that all buildings be placed in close
proximity to rights of way, to encourage pedestrian access and to foster a uniform streetscape
with ample space at r -o -w corner intersections for pedestrian traffic . The proposed corn er clip
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 11
reduction from 20’ to 12’-11” does meet this requirement, and thus, the requested waiver should
be supported. Granting the requested waiver will not have an adverse effect on the neighboring
area, diminish the provision of public facilities, or cre ate 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. An additiona l 10’ by 10’ corner clip dedication is required at the intersection of the
east alley r -o -w and SE 1 st Street. It is attached as a condition of approval that the dedication of
the proposed 12’-11” by 12’-11” corner clip, and the 10’ by 10’ corner clip dedi cation required at
the intersection of the east alley r -o -w and SE 1 st Street shall both be made as part of the
associated plat for the development.
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'-0 " to 5’-0” wide
sidewalk along SE 1 st Street.
Waivers Analysis:
Waiver #5 :
In support of this waiver request the applicant has provided the following statement:
“There are already new city sidewalks recently instal led at 4' wide along and
S.E. 1 st street. The owner will provide an easement to increase the sidewalk
wide from 4' to 5'. 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 access and to foster a uniform
st reetscape with ample sidewalks for pedestrian traffic . However, a 4’ wide sidewalk already
exists along SE 1 st Street and the applicant will be required to widen this sidewalk up to 5’ to
provide a uniform sidewalk system in the area , and thus this attache d as a condition of
approval .
The adjacent land use intensity, pattern of development, as well as street section , and
anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Street . Main
thoroughfares in the CBD (Central Busine ss 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. Th us, the requested waiver should be
supported. Granti ng 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.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 12
Waiver #6 :
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), 8’ sidewalk shall be provided on the Central Business
District. The applicant is reque sting a waiver to allow for a reduction from 8'-0 " to 5’-0” wide
sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue . In support of this waiver request the applicant has provided the
following statement:
“The property owner will provide a new 5' wide 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 access and to foster a uniform
streetscape with ample sidewalks for pedestrian traffic . The applicant will be required to provide
a 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue so that a uniform sidewal k system in the area can be
put in place , and thus this is attached as a condition of approval .
The adjacent land use intensity, pattern of development, as well as street section , and
anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk a long 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 and anticipated pedestrian traffic . Th us, the requested waiver should be
supported. 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.
Street Improvement Obligations:
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.2(A) (2) (a), when a street or alley is located on a boundary of a
project, the project is responsible for providing one -half of the current costs (in cash funds) of
such improvements along its property line. When access to the project is provided from a local
street and/or alley, then the project must provide appropriate traffic lanes meeting requirements
of Section 5.3.1(C) in order to provide continuous paved access from the nearest paved street
or alley to the subject property in addition to the improvements on its side of the center line of
the right -of -way. The alley (16 feet right -of -way), which abuts the east property line for the
subject property, is only partially improved at present. The alley must be improved to its
maximum width including the 2’ that will be dedi cated. Therefore, based upon the above, the
project is responsible for payment of the full costs of improvement of the alley, which is attached
as a condition of approval .
Undergrounding of Utilities:
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities ser ving the development shall be located
underground throughout the development. A note to this effect has been placed on the site
plan .
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 13
Plat:
As the development proposal includes the dedication of right -of -way for SE 1 st Avenue, the
adjacent east alle y r -o -w , and required corner clips, a plat must be processed and recorded
prior to issuance of a building permit and is attached as a condition of approval.
Site and Engineering Plan Technical Items: While revised plan s may ha ve accommodated
most of staff ’s concerns it is important to emphasize that the City Engineer has not yet
undertaken a final review of the project , and thus, the following items may have already
been addressed by the applicant. If the items have not been addressed by the applicant
then they remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to building permit
submittal:
Site and engineering plan technical items have been included in Appendix “C”.
LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS
A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the Ci ty ’s Senior Landscape Planner .
The plan provides for perimeter and parking area landscaping to address landscaping needs for
the ground level of the proposed mixed use building . A variety of large plants, shrubs, and
groundcover materials are employed to e nhance the proposed development. This landscape
material include three 10’-high clear trunk Royal Palm trees, two 12’-high Silver Buttonwood,
two Cabbage Palm trees, two Montgomery trees, two Bougainville trees, two Lady Palm, and
one Bird of Paradise. The proposed under planting include 21 Foxtail Fern, 16 Bromeliads, 35
Jamaican Caper, Dwarf Fire Bush, and Wart Fern. Based on the above, the Landscape Plan
submitted complies with LDR Section 4.6.16 Based on the above, the Landscape Plan submitted
c omplies w ith LDR Section 4.6.16.
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS ANALYSIS
LDR Section 4.6.18(E ) - Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered,
by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB), in the review of plans for building
permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved:
1. The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and
in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness,
harmony , taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality.
2. The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality
such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to
materially depreciate in appearan ce and value.
3. The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in
the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria
which may be set forth for the Board from time to time.
The Boueri Mixed U se Building is will contain an 875 sq . ft . retail space on the first floor , a two
story 1 ,486 sq. ft. office between the first and the second floor , and a 3,239 sq. ft. 2 -story loft
apartment within the second and third floor . The site will contain 12 pa rking spaces, 2 bike
rack s , a trash room, a handicapped accessible pedestrian path , and pedestrian arcades alo ng
the north and west facades. All HVAC equipment will be screened on the roof top and the site
parking will be screened by a n attractive decorati ve wall with metal railing.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 14
The architectural design concept utilized in the design of the proposed building is the typical
Traditional Neighborhood D esign (TND ), where the building has frontage on major streets and
parking is shielded to the rear. The o utdoor plaza and tower entry feature on the corner will be
a n attractive focal point for traffic traveling east and west on SE 1 st street.
T he Eclectic style of architecture is the b orrowing of various architectural styles to creat e a
functional and cohe s ive look through color, texture, physical volumes and/or shape s . The style
of Architecture of the proposed building is a n eclectic combination of the Caribbean and Old
Florida Vernacular style of architecture . The building will have a Standing Seam metal roof,
smooth stucco walls, decorative brackets and lighting, decorative railing and expansive outdoor
terraces that will offer city views. Based upon the above the proposed architectural elevations
will be consistent with the criteria of LDR Section 4.6.18(E).
REQUIRED FINDINGS
Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the 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 on the application, written materials
submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the
body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These
findings relate to the following areas:
LDR Section 3.1.1(A) - Future Land Use Map:
The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Commercial Core (CC)
and a zoning designation of CBD, which are consistent with one another. Pursuant to LDR
Section s 4.4.13 (B) (1) and (2), general r etail uses and offices are allowed as a principle use.
Further, Pursuant to LDR 4.4.13(C)(5), a single family residence, either separate or within a
structure housing a nonresidential use is allowed as accessory use within the CBD district ,
provided that the residence is occupied by the owner, proprietor, or employee of a business
enterprise conducted on the property . The applicant has indicated that the proposed attached
residential unit will be occupied by his mother. It is noted that the leasing arrange ments of the
attached residential unit are in perpetuity. Thus , all future tenants are required to be the owner,
proprietor, or employee of a business enterprise conducted on the property . T hus , positive
findings can be made with respect to FLUM consistenc y.
LDR Section 3.1.1(B) - Concurrency:
As described in Appendix “A ”, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to
water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, solid waste ,
and schools .
LDR Section 3.1.1(C) - Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions):
As described in Appendix “B ”, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to
Standards for Site Plan Actions.
LDR Section 3.1.1(D) - Compliance w ith the Land Development Regulat ions:
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 15
As described under the Site Plan Analysis section of this report, a positive finding of comp liance
with the LDR can be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are
addressed.
Comprehensive Plan Policies:
T he following Objectives and Poli cies of the Comprehensive Plan will impact the proposed
project, and thus, the analysis below is being provided :
Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or redeveloped, in a
manner so that the future use, int ensity 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.
The property is currently vacant . There are no special physical or environmental characteristics
of the land that would be negatively impacted by the proposed mixed use development. The
re development will be complimentary with the surrounding commercial and residential
developments and will also provide a customer base for the businesses on a year -round basis,
which will provide economic stability for the downtown area.
In terms of fulfilling remaining land use needs, the Housing Element of the Comprehensiv e Plan
states the follow ing :
“One of the most important objectives of the City’s overall housing policy is the
establishment of housing in the downtown area. In the years since adoption of the 1989
Comprehensive Plan the downtown has changed from a somew hat sleepy, seasonally
oriented shopping district to a vibrant year -round retail, service, and entertainment area
with an active nightlife. A critical missing element is a significant housing development.
The City recognizes the importance of providing h ousing in close proximity to shopping,
employment, and transportation, and the need to have a residential base to support the
businesses in the downtown area”.
Pursuant to LDR 4.4.13(C)(5), a single family residence, either separate or within a structure
housing a nonresidential use is allowed as accessory use within the CBD district , provided that
the residence is occupied by the owner, proprietor, or employee of a business enterprise
conducted on the property . The applicant has indicated that the propose d attached residential
unit will be occupied by his mother. It is noted that the leasing arrangements of the attached
residential unit will be in perpetuity. Thus the residence shall be occupied by the owner,
proprietor, or employee of a business enterpris e conducted on the property . The proposed
development will help to fulfill this stated land use need by providing one (1) additional 3,239 sq.
ft. 2 -story loft apartment within the downtown area, and is therefore consistent with this policy.
Future Land Use Element Objective C -3 : The Central Business District (CBD) and
surrounding neighborhoods, including A -1 -A, Seacrest and Swinton Avenue represents the
essence of what is Delray Beach i.e. a "village by the sea". The continued revitalization of the
CBD i s essential to achieving the overall theme of the City's Comprehensive Plan by managing
growth and preserving the charm. The following policies and activities shall be pursued in the
achievement of this objective.
Policy C -3 .1: The CBD zoning district reg ulations shall facilitate and encourage rehabilitation
and revitalization and shall, at a minimum, address the following:
Deletion of inappropriate uses;
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 16
Incentives for locating retail on the ground floor with office and residential use on
upper floors;
A ccommodating parking needs through innovative actions;
Incentives for dinner theaters, playhouses, and other family oriented activities;
Allowing and facilitating outdoor cafes;
Incentives for mixed use development and rehabilitation;
Elimination of side y ard setback requirements; and
Allow structural overhang encroachments into required yard areas.
The development proposal is associated with the construction of one (1) multiple -family
residential dwelling u nit within the downtown area. The residents of th is attached single family
unit will be able to walk to shops, restaurants, cultural venu es and parks. They will interact on a
regular basis with the storekeepers and e mployees, and their neighbors. They will get to know
the downtown much more intimately th an the majority of Delray residents. The Boueri mixed use
building proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy C -4.1 as it will facilitate the
continued rehabilitation and revitalization of the CBD zoning district.
Transportation Element Po licy A -1.3: The City endorses the continued operations of the Palm
Tran Transit System and its operations in Delray Beach, and through policies of this Element
related to the TCEA, will coordinate with Palm Tran to improve the system.
Given the potential impacts the proposed development will have on the surrounding road
network and the location of a Palm Tran bus stop at the southeast corner of SE 1 st Avenue and
SE 1 st Street (immediately to the north), it is appropriate that the development contribute tow ard
the provision of a bus shelter at this location. Thus, it is attached as a condition of approval that
a contribution of $5 ,500 (approximately half the cost of a shelter) is paid prior to certification of
the site plan for the development. Subject to this condition of approval being addressed, the
development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A -1.3.
Transportation Element Policy D -2.2: Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all
new development and redevelopment. Particular e mphasis is to be placed on development
within the TCEA Area.
The development proposal has accommodate d a two bicycle parking facilit ies (i.e. bike rack s )
on site. T he provision of a bicycle parking facilit y ha s be en made for guests along the sidewalk
adj acent to the parking area entrance from SE 1 st Street and also adjacent to the retail bay and
office area along SE 1 st Avenue . Based upon the above , the development will comply with
Transportation Element Policy D -2.2.
Open Space and Recreation Element P olicy A -3.1: Tot lots and recreational areas, serving
children from toddlers to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of
design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived
or modified for res idential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects
having fewer than 25 units. The City may require a monetary contribution in -lieu of the provision
of on -site facilities where appropriate.
This policy may be waived for projects i n the downtown because the City recognizes that
households located in the downtown are likely to have fewer children than those located in
suburban settings. Further, land in the downtown is at a premium and it can be cost prohibitive
to provide recreatio nal features such as tennis courts, volleyball courts, etc. and there are other
cultural and recreational opportunities located in the downtown that are not readily available to
residents of suburban apartment complexes. However, the applicant is proposin g only one
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 17
residential unit. Thus, the proposed development does not provide recreational facilities to its
residents, such as a swimming pool and an exercise facility. The Open Space and Recreation
Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan indicates in it s’ conclusion that “The City will have
sufficient recreation facilities at build -out to meet the adopted standards”. A park impact fee is
collected to offset any impacts that the project may have on the City’s recreational facilities.
Pursuant to LDR Sec tion 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit will be collected
prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of $500 will be required of this
development for parks and recreation purposes.
Some of the recreational, cultu ral and open space opportunities located in proximity to the First
B oueri mixed use development include: Veteran’s Park, which includes a large playground and
recreational area; the Municipal Beach, the City’s Tennis Center, and the Old School Square
Cultu ral Center. As playground areas are located close by and other facilities that can be
utilized by children, such as the pool, the intent of this policy will be met. Based on the above, it
is appropriate to waive this requirement to provide these services entirely on site.
Housing Element Objective B -2: Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result
in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse
makeup of the City’s demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in this
Element. Policies, which will implement this objective, include:
Housing Element Policy B -2.2: The development of new adult oriented communities within the
City is discouraged. New housing developments shall be desi gned to accommodate
households having a range of ages, especially families with children, and shall be required to
provide three (3) and four (4) bedroom units and activity areas for children ranging from toddlers
to teens. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential development located in
the downtown area and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units.
This project will not be restricted to occupancy by adults only. However, it is acknowledged that
downtown dwellings are not typicall y occupied by households with children. This building will
primarily accommodate young and middle -age professionals. It is located in a very small site
and will contain a very small building. The development will provide only one residential unit with
thr ee -bedroom which will be occupied by the mother of the owner of the building . The office
space will be occupied by the owner and the retail bay will be occupied by the wife of the owner
of the building. It will be an all -family occupancy. Based on the abov e, it is appropriate to waive
this requirement entirely for this project .
Housing Objective A -1 1 : To assist residents of the City in maintaining and enhancing their
neighborhood environment, the City shall take steps to ensure that modifications in and a round
the neighborhood do not lead to its decline, such as those described in the following policies.
Housing Policy A -1 1 .3 In evaluating proposals for new development or redevelopment, the
City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby
neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall
be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of
residential areas. If it is deter mined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of
any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied.
As noted previously, the residents of this development will aid in the economic stability of the
downtown area. Howev er, the introduction of an additional residential unit, the retail, and office
area will also likely improve the safety of the area by introducing more nighttime activity and
more “eyes” to observe what is happening in the area, which should be a deterrent to criminal
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 18
activity. While the development proposal will result in additional 12 AM and 11 PM peak hour
trips onto the surrounding roadway network, the number of daily trips generated will not
negatively impact the area. Based upon the above, the devel opment proposal will be consistent
with Housing Policy A -1 1 .3.
LDR Section 2.4.5(F) (5) - Compatibility (Site Plan Findings): The approving body must
make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be
compatible and harmoni ous with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole,
so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values.
The following table identifies the zoning designations a nd uses that are adjacent to the subject
property:
Zoning: Use:
North Central Business District (CBD) Vacant
South Central Business District (CBD) Vacant
East Central Business District (CBD ) Manufacturing Food Processing Building
West Old School Square Historic Arts District
(OSSHAD)
Single -Family Dwellings
The d evelopment proposal will significantly enhance the aesthetics of the subject property under
a single development. Further, the neighborhood and the downtown as a whole will benefit by
the inclusion of a new residential dwelling unit , retail, and office sp ace .
REVIEW BY OTHERS
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA):
At its meeting of August 11 , 2011 , the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA ) reviewed the
development pr oposal and recommended approval of the Class V site plan.
Downtown Development Authority (DDA):
At its meeting of August 8 , 20 11 , the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) reviewed the
development proposal and recommended approval of the Class V site plan .
Courtesy Notice s :
Courtesy notices have been sent to the following home owner’s and /or civic associations:
Neighborhood Advisory Council
Delray Citizen’s Coalition,
Chamber of Commerce
L etters of objection or support, if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance
Board (SPRAB) meeting.
ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION
The dev elopment proposal associated with the construction of a 3 -story building that contains
an 875 sq., ft., retail space on the first floor , a two story 1 ,486 sq. ft. office on the first and the
second floor , and a 3.239 sq. ft. 2 -story loft apartment on the second and third floor . The site
will contain 12 parking spaces, 2 bike rack s , a trash room, a handicapped accessible pedestrian
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 19
path , and pedestrian arcades alo ng the north and west facades. The development proposal
also includes six (6) waiver request s which are described later on the Staff Recommendation
section of this report. Positive findings can be made with regard to this waiver request s .
The provision of an addit ional residential dwelling unit within the downtown area will further the
long term revitalization and stabilization of the CBD. The proposed use will be consistent with
the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter Three of the LDR , provided
the attached conditions of approval are addressed .
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
A. Con tinue with direction.
B. Move approval of the waiver request, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural
elevations for the Boueri Mixed Use Building , by adopting the findings of fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the reque st is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F), 2.4.7(B) (5), and
Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to conditions.
C. Move denial of the waiver request, Class V site plan, landscape plan an d architectural
elevations for the Boueri Mixed Use Building , by adopting the findings of fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F), 2.4.7(B) (5),
and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
By Separate Motions:
Waiver #1:
Move approval of the waiver requests to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow :
Along SE 1 st Avenue for a height from fin ished grade to 25’:
A n increase in the required building f rontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 64.8’
to 6 7’;
A decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage setback at 15’ or more from 7.2 ’
to 5’
Along SE 1 st Avenue f or a height fro m 25’ to 48’:
A de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 50.4’ to 31’.
by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5).
Waiver #2 :
Waiver request to LDR Section 4.4.13(F) (3) and (4) to allow :
Along SE 1st Street f or a height from finished grade to 25’
A decrease in the required building frontage setback at 10’ or less from a minimum of 86.1’ to
44’.
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 20
A decrease in the remaining length of the building frontage at 15’ or more from 12.3 ’ to
5’.
Along SE 1st Street f or a height from 25’ to 48’
A de crease in the required building frontage setback at 1 5 ’ minimum from 86.1 ’ to 31’.
by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5).
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 A venue from the required 75% to 52%
and along SE 1 st Street from the required 75% to 43%, by adopting the findings of fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)
(5).
Waiver #4 :
Move app roval 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’ to 11’, by adopting
the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is
consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5).
Waiver #5 :
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 Street , by adopting the findings o f fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)
(5).
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 require d sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue , by adopting the findings of fact and
law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section
2.4.7(B) (5).
Class V Site Plan:
Move approval of the Class V site plan for the Boueri Mix ed Use Building , 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 criteria set forth in Section s 2.4.5(F ) and Chapter 3 of
the Land Development Regulati ons , subject to the following conditions:
1. That three (3) sets of copies of the revised plans are submitted addressing all
technical items and c onditions of a pprovals a s indicated in the staff report and the
listed conditions;
2. That one single copy of the site plan is submitted so that it can be sent to the files of
the Planning Department of Palm Beach County;
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 21
3. T hat details or cut -sheets of the proposed wall mounted light fixtures are provided ;
4. That a dedication of five feet (5’) of right -of -way for SE 1 st Avenue is made as part of
the associated plat for the development;
5. That a dedication of two feet (2’) of right -of -way for the adjacent alley is made as part
of the associated plat for the development;
6. T hat the dedication of the proposed 12’-11” by 12’-11” corner clip at the intersection of
SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street , and the 10’ by 10’ corner clip required at the
intersection of the east alley r -o -w and SE 1 st Street shall both be made as part of the
associated plat for the development ;
7. Th at the project is responsible for payment of the full costs of improvement of the alley to
its maximum width includin g the 2’ that will be dedicated. This will include additional
pavement east of the eastern right -of -way line of the alley;
8. That a plat is process ed and recorded prior to issuance of a building permit ;
9. That a contribution of $5 ,500 (approximately half the cost of a bus shelter) is paid
prior to certification of the site plan and that the applicant contact Scott Aronson,
Parking Management Specialis t to process the bus shelter contribution ;
10. That the trash room area must depict the recycling and roll out trash bins on the site
plan ;
11. That concurrency v erification from the Palm Beach County School District is provided
prior to site plan certification;
12. That a total fee of $500 must be provided for this development for parks and
recreation purposes and that the fee shall be collected prior to issuance of a building
permit.
13. That the photometric plan be revised and a 1.0 FC minimum illumination level mus t
be provided along the north, and west property line. SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street
are intended to be CBD pedestrian sidewalk areas, and thus, need to be illuminated
for safety reasons; and
14. T hat t he applicant will be required to provide a 5’ wide side walk along SE 1 st Avenue
and SE 1 st Street so that a uniform sidewalk system in the area can be put in place.
Landscape Plan:
Move approval of the landscape plan for the Boueri Mixed Use Building , by adopting the
findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets criteria
set forth in Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations , subject to the following
condition:
1. That three (3) sets of copies of the land scape plan are submitted .
Staff Report for the SPRAB Meeting of September 14, 2011
The Boueri Mixed Use Building - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevat ions
Page 22
Architectural Elevati ons:
Move approval of the architectural elevations for the Boueri Mixed Use Building , by adopting
the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets
criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Developmen t Regulations .
Staff Report Prepared by: Estelio Breto , Senior Planner
Attachments:
Appendix “A ”
Appendix “B ”
Appendix “C”
Site Plan
Landscape Plan
Architectural Elevations
APPENDIX “A”
CONCURRENCY FINDINGS
Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1(B), Concurr ency , as defined pursuant to Objective B -2 of the Land
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan , must be met and a determination made that the public
facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability
of the Ci ty to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the
following areas:
Water and Sewer: Water service is proposed via a service lateral connection to the existing eight inch (8”)
water main located within the SE 1 st Avenue right -of -way. Sewer service is proposed via a service lateral
connection to the existing eight inch (8”) sanitary sewer main located within the adjacent alley to the east.
Fire protection is proposed to be provided via an existing fire hydrant loc ated at the northeast corner of
SE 1 st Avenue and SE 1 st Street .
Pursuant to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City’s Water Treatment
Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at buil d -out. Based upon
the above, positive findings can be made with respect to this level of service standard.
Streets and Traffic: The subject property is located within the City’s Transportation Concurrency
Exception Area (TCEA), which encompass es the CBD, CBD -RC and OSSHAD. The TCEA exempts the
above -described areas from complying with the Palm Beach County Traffic Pe rformance Standards
Ordinance. Therefore, a traffic study is not required for concurrency purposes; however a traffic statement
is necessary to keep a record of trips approved in the TCEA and for calculation of traffic impact fees . A
traffic statement has been submitted indicating the generation of 12 AM peak hour trips and 11 new PM
peak hour trips.
Parks and Open Space: The Open Space and R ecreation Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan
indicates in its’ conclusion that “The City will have sufficient recreation facilities at build -out to meet the
adopted standards”. A park impact fee is collected to offset any impacts that the project ma y have on the
City’s recreational facilities. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling
unit will be collected prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of $5 00 will be
required of this development f or parks and recreation purposes.
Solid Waste: The proposed residential unit will generate 0.5 2 tons of solid waste per year (1 unit x 0.52
tons = 0.52 tons). The retail component of the building will generate a total of 2.05 tons of solid waste per
year (875 sq. ft. x4.7 /2,000 = 2.05). The office component will generate a total of 2.74 tons of solid waste
per year (1,486 sq. ft. x 3.7 /2,000 = 2.74). T hus resulting total of solid waste generated will be equate to
5.31 tons of solid waste per year. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its facilities have sufficient
capacity to handle all development proposals until the year 2031, thus a positive finding with respect to
this level of service standard can be made.
Drainage: Preliminary drainage pl ans indicate that drainage will be accommodated via exfiltration trench.
There are no problems anticipated in accommodating on -site drainage. Based upon the above, positive
findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made.
Schools: Th e Palm Beach County School District must approve the development proposal for compliance
with the adopted Level of Service for School Concurrency. Verification from the Palm Beach County
School District is pending and a written finding of approval from th e School District is attached as a
condition of approval.
APPENDIX “B”
STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS
A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create
unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it perta ins to traffic circulation.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard
Does not meet intent X – This standard will be met once the attached conditions of approval
pertaining to the photometric plan have been addressed.
B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes
pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under
Objectives D -1 and D -2 of the Transportation Element.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet inte nt
C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B -1 of the Open
Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed.
Not applicable X
Meets intent of standard
Does not meet intent
D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification
may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification
will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be
permi tted.
Not applicable X
Meets intent of standard
Does not meet intent
E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a
manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations.
No t applicable X
Meets intent of standard
Does not meet intent
F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity
are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations;
comp lementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs .
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet intent
G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of
housing types which s hall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City’s
demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall
be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B -2 of the Housing
Element.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet intent
H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby
neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns
sha ll be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and
stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a
degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified ac cordingly or denied.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet intent
I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a
new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high
accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet intent
J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all
new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range
of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in
the downtown area, and for infill projects havin g fewer than 25 units.
Not applicable
Meets intent of standard X
Does not meet intent
APPENDIX “C”
ENGINEERING TECHNICAL COMMENTS
1. Provide copy of certified boundary and topographic survey meeting requirements of LDR Section
2.4.3 (A), (B) and (D). Provide existing grades at least 10 -feet outside all subject property lines
for all adjacent properties. Provide existing grades over site. Provide survey drawn on 24” x 36”
sheets.
2. Provide Engineering Plans with existing and proposed spot elevations sh owing changes of
elevations of not more than 2 -feet, throughout the site and at a minimum distance of 10 -feet into
all adjacent properties per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20) and (D) (2). Provide sufficient elevations to
establish historical storm water flow on to and through property.
3. Provide existing elevations on existing roadway including edge of pavement and center line.
4. Clearly indicate limits of right -of -way for all adjacent streets.
5. Indicate right -of -way dedications on all plans in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.1. A 2 -foot
dedication is required for the alley and a 5 -foot dedication is required for S.E. 1st Avenue.
6. Provide a 20’ x 20’ corner clip right -of -way dedication at the intersection of S.E. 1 st Street and
S.E. 1 st Avenue. This is a requiremen t in the Central Business District (CBD) per LDR Section
5.3.1 (D) (3).
7. Indicate sight distances at all ingress/egress points and all intersections.
8. Clearly dimension driveway width on Engineering Plans.
9. Provide 8 -foot wide sidewalks along S.E. 1 st Avenue and S.E. 1 st Street. Sidewalks utilized by the
public in the Central Business District are required to be a minimum of 8 -feet wide per LDR
Section 6.1.3 (B). However, a waiver may be requested through the Planning and Zoning
Department to provide a minimum sidewalk of 5 -feet.
10. Provide certification letter in accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 (B) (2) for proposed building not
meeting finish floor elevation requirements. If finished floor elevation is less than 18 -inches above
centerline of adjacent ro ad, but above the 100 -year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum
elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the
drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above the
flooding level. Letter must state drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed
finished floor elevation is above the 100 -year flooding level.
11. Provide signed and sealed drainage calculations indicating the proposed system’s ability to meet
s torm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water
Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7) and indicate how storm water will
be retained on site. Sites with parking lots are required to retain a 5 year 1 hour storm (3.2”) in
addition to meeting the water quality criteria (1” or 2.5 x % impervious).
12. Indicate location of existing water service on Civil Plans per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (8) and 2.4.3
(D) (3) including type and size of existing lines. Provide notes that state the disposition of all
existing facilities including service lines and meters.
13. Show nearest existing fire hydrants and add any necessary hydrants per Fire Department
requirements and in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.10 (2).
14. Pro vide signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated flows into
existing or proposed lift station and force main. Written approval from the Deputy Director of
Public Utilities stating that the City’s system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows is
required.
15. If project is adjacent to or within 3 blocks of a Palm Trans Bus Route, installation of, or
contribution for a bus shelter and easement may be required; contact Parking Management
Specialist, Scott Aronson at (561) 24 3 -7196.
16. Final Engineering comments will also be generated after next submittal of Engineering Plans and
during the Building Permit review process.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:CANDI N. JEFFERSON, SENIOR PLANNER
PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
THROUGH:CITY MANAGER
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
REQUEST FOR SIDEWALK DEFERRALS/1041 SEASPRAY AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before the City Commission is the approval of two (2) sidewalk deferrals along Beach Drive
and Seaspray Avenue for the property located at 104 1 Seaspray Avenue within the North Beach
Overlay District.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is 0.3202 acres and is an undeveloped single family lot which is a vacant
landscaped area previously associated with the sing le family residence to the west (1010 Seaspray
Avenue). It lies within the North Beach Overlay District and is located on the north side of Seaspray
Avenue, south of Beach Drive. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (R-1-AAA) and the
applicant proposes to construct a new 7,582 sq. ft. two-story single family residence with four (4)
bedrooms, a loft, two (2) offices, an art studio, g reat room, cabana bath and a three (3) car garage.
The owner wishes to defer construction of a five fo ot (5’) sidewalk adjacent to the rights-of-way along
Seaspray Avenue and Beach Drive. No other sidewalks exist on either side of the road. At its meeting o f
February 9, 2012, the DSMG supported both of the si dewalk deferrals. Pursuant to the agreement, the
owner will construct the sidewalks along Seaspray A venue and Beach Drive at its sole cost and expense
at a later date, after being requested to do so by the City.
The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorne y and has been approved as to form.
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval of the agreement to defer the constru ction of sidewalks along Seaspray Avenue and
Beach Drive for the property located at 1041 Seaspr ay Avenue.
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: February 28, 2012
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.C. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 RESOLUTION NO. 12-12: ABANDONMENT OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT/SAXENA WHITE CORPORATE OFFICES ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The
request involves abandoning a 10’ wide drainage easement, which was dedicated by the “Miraflores at Delray” plat, recorded in Plat Book 108, Pages 184 through 185 of the Public Records
of Palm Beach County, Florida on November 13, 2006. BACKGROUND On February 15, 2005, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board approved a Class V Site Plan for the Miraflores Townhouse
development and the property was subsequently platted to accommodate the development. The subject drainage easement, which was needed for the townhouse development, was dedicated with
the plat. The Miraflores project was never constructed and a new development proposal on the property has since been submitted for the corporate offices of the Saxena White law firm.
A Class V site plan for the new development was approved by the Site plan Review and Appearance Board on February 22, 2012. Since, the subject easement conflicts with the new building
layout on the property and is no longer needed for the purpose for which it was intended, the applicant has requested that it be abandoned. REVIEW BY OTHERS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(5),
a finding must be made prior to the City Commission granting an abandonment that the abandonment will not be detrimental to the provision of utility services to adjacent properties or
the general area. The abandonment of the easement will not be detrimental to the provision of utility services since the easement is no longer needed with the new project design for
the property. The City Engineer has reviewed the request and has no objection to the abandonment. Since the easement was dedicated only for drainage purposes, Florida Power & Light,
Comcast Cable, Florida Public Utilities Company and AT&T do not have an interest in this request and therefore are not required to comment. Pursuant to the above, a positive finding
pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(5) can be made.
RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve Resolution No. 12-12 to abandon a 10’ wide drainage easement, dedicated by the “Miraflores at Delray” plat, recorded in Plat Book 108, Pages 184 through
185 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section
2.4.6(N)(5), Abandonment of Public Easements, of the Land Development Regulations.
RESOLUTION NO. 12-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, VACATING AND ABANDONING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT DEDICATED BY THE “MIRAFLORES AT DELRAY” PLAT,
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 108, PAGES 184 THROUGH 185 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A". WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, received an application for abandonment of a drainage easement dedicated via the Plat of “Miraflores at Delray”, as recorded in Plat Book 108, Pages 184 through 185 of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and as more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the application for abandonment of said easement was processed pursuant to Section
2.4.6(N), "Abandonment of Public Easements", of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(3)(c), the application
was forwarded to the City Commission with the recommendation that the abandonment be approved, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(5), finds that the abandonment will not result in detriment for the provision of utility services to adjacent properties or the general area;
that its interest in the described property is no longer needed for the public good; and deems it to be in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach to vacate and abandon said easement,
as more particularly described in Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals
are hereby incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. That pursuant to Chapter 177 and Chapter 166 of the Florida Statutes, it is hereby determined to vacate and abandon all right
and interest it holds to the following real property, more particularly described as follows:
2 RES. NO. 12-12 See Exhibit "A" PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the __ day of__________ , 2012. ________________________________ M A Y O R ATTEST: ___________________________
City Clerk
4 RES. NO. 12-12
RECOMMENDATION
By motion, approve Resolution No. 12-12 to abandon a 10’ wide drainage easement, dedicated by the
“Miraflores at Delray” plat, recorded in Plat Book 108, Pages 184 through 185 of the Public Records of
Palm Beach County, Florida, and finding that the re quest and approval thereof is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section 2.4.6(N)(5), Abandonment of Public
Easements, of the Land Development Regulations.
RESOLUTION NO. 12-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, VACATING AND
ABANDONING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT DEDICATED
BY THE “MIRAFLORES AT DELRAY” PLAT,
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 108, PAGES 184 THROUGH
185 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND AS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A".
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, Florida, received an appl ication for
abandonment of a drainage easement dedicated via th e Plat of “Miraflores at Delray”, as
recorded in Plat Book 108, Pages 184 through 185 of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, and as more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, the application for abandonment of said easement wa s processed
pursuant to Section 2.4.6(N), "Abandonment of Publi c Easements ", of the Land Development
Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; a nd
WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(3)(c), the applica tion was forwarded to
the City Commission with the recommendation that th e abandonment be approved, based
upon positive findings; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Fl orida, pursuant to
LDR Section 2.4.6(N)(5), finds that the abandonment will not result in detriment for the
provision of utility services to adjacent propertie s or the general area; that its interest in the
described property is no longer needed for the publ ic good; and deems it to be in the best
interest of the City of Delray Beach to vacate and abandon said easement, as more
particularly described in Exhibit "A".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSI ON OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 . That the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporat ed herein by this
reference.
Section 2 . That pursuant to Chapter 177 and Chapter 166 of t he Florida Statutes, it is
hereby determined to vacate and abandon all right a nd interest it holds to the following real
property, more particularly described as follows:
2 RES. NO. 12-12
See Exhibit "A"
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the __ day of__________ , 2012.
________________________________
M A Y O R
ATTEST:
___________________________
City Clerk
4 RES. NO. 12-12
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:February 22, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT/FDOT
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the Commission for approval and authorization for the Mayor to execute amendment
number 2 to the Joint Participation Agreements (JPA ) with Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT). This agreement is for the proposed landscap ing along Atlantic Ave (SR 806) from I-95 to
NW/SW 12 th Avenue.
BACKGROUND
The City of Delray Beach was awarded a Keep Palm Be ach Beautiful grant, in FY 2008-2009 in the
amount of $199,760.00 for landscaping along W Atlan tic Ave from I-95 to SW/NW 12th Avenue. On
April 20, 2010, City Commission approved execution of the JPA. Amendment #1 extended the funding
deadline to June 30, 2012, which was approved by Ci ty Commission on September 6, 2011. The City of
Delray Beach received the Florida Department of Tra nsportation permit to proceed with the work on
December 29, 2011.
The deadline for the funding expires June 30, 2012 and this amendment #2 will extend the deadline to
June 30, 2013. Due to permitting issues, the extens ion will be required to complete the project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:March 2, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 14 -12
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This is a resolution assessing costs for abatement action required to remove nuisances on 30 propertie s
throughout the City.
BACKGROUND
The resolution sets forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanisim to attach liens agains t
the properties if the assessments remain unpaid.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 14-12.
RESOLUTION NO. 14-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 100 OF T HE
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 A ND
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 LE VY
TO BE A LIEN UPON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID
ASSESSMENTS.
WHEREAS, the City Manager or his designated representative ha s, pursuant to
Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, declared the exi stence of a nuisance upon certain lots or
parcels of land, described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for violation of the
provisions of Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 100.21 and 100.22 of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the City Manager or his de signated representative has inspected said
land(s) and has determined that a nuisance existed in ac cordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish t he respective owner(s) of the land(s)
described in the attached list with written notice of public nuisance pursuant to Sections 100.21 and
100.22 of the Code of Ordinances describing the nature of the nuisance(s) and sent notice that
within seven (7) days from the date of said notice (fo rty-two (42) days in the case of violation of
Section 100.04 pertaining to seawalls) they must ab ate said nuisance, or file a written request for a
hearing to review the decision that a nuisance exist ed within five (5) days from the date of delivery
of said notice, failing which the City of Delray Bea ch would proceed to correct this condition by
abating such nuisance, and that the cost thereof wou ld be levied as an assessment against said
property; and,
WHEREAS, the property owner(s) named in the list attached her eto and made a part
hereof did fail and neglect to abate the nuisance(s) existing up on their respective lands or to properly
request a hearing pursuant to Section 100.21 and 100 .22 within the time limits prescribed in said
notice and Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, or i f the property owner(s) did request and
receive a hearing, said property owner(s) failed and/or neglect ed to abate such nuisance(s) within the
time designated at the hearing wherein a decision was rendered adverse to the property owner(s);
and,
2
Res. No. 14-12
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, through the City Administ ration or such
agents or contractors hired by the City Administratio n was therefore required to and did enter upon
the land(s) described in the list attached and made a pa rt hereof and incurred costs in abating the
subject nuisance(s) existing thereon as described in the noti ce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has, pursuant to Chapter
100 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray B each, submitted to the City Commission a
report of the costs incurred in abating said nuisance (s) as aforesaid, said report indicating the costs
per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, p ursuant to Chapter
100 of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the c ost of said nuisance(s) against said property
owner(s),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISS ION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That assessments in the individual amounts as shown by the report of the
City Manager of the City of Delray Beach, involving the City's cost of abating the aforesaid
nuisances upon the lots or parcels of land described i n said report, a copy of which is attached
hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied agai nst the parcel(s) of land described in said report
and in the amount(s) indicated thereon. Said assessmen ts so levied shall, if not paid within thirty
(30) days after mailing of the notice described in Sec . 3, become a lien upon the respective lots and
parcel(s) of land described in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien for
general city taxes and shall be collectible in the s ame manner as mortgages and foreclosures are
under state law.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and bin ding obligations upon
the property against which said assessments are levied.
Section 3 . That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach i s hereby directed to
immediately mail by first class mail to the owner(s) of the property, as such ownership appears upon
the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s) th at the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach at the March 6, 2012 meeting has levied an assessment against said proper ty for the cost of
abatement of said nuisance by the City, and that said a ssessment is due and payable within thirty (30)
days after the mailing date of said notice of assessme nt, after which a lien shall be placed on said
property, and interest will accrue at the rate of 8% per annum, plus reasonable attorney's fees and
other costs of collecting said sums. A Notice of Li en shall be mailed, along with the Notice of
Assessment and this resolution.
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirt y (30) days from the date
of adoption and the assessment(s) contained herein sha ll become due and payable thirty (30) days
after the mailing date of the notice of said assessme nt(s), after which a lien shall be placed on said
3
Res. No. 14-12
property(s), and interest shall accrue at the rate o f eight (8) percent per annum plus, if collection
proceedings are necessary, the costs of such proceedings incl uding a reasonable attorney's fee.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been recei ved by the City Clerk
within thirty (30) days after the mailing date of t he notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby
directed to record a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach County,
Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certified copy of this resolution a lien shall
become effective on the subject property which shal l secure the cost of abatement, interest at the
rate of 8%, and collection costs including a reasonable attor ney's fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this 6 th day of March, 2012.
________________________________________
M A Y O R
ATTEST:
____________________________________
City Clerk
This instrument was prepared by:
Brian Shutt, City Attorney
200 N.W. 1 st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
7 SW 9TH STREET
BELLVIEW COURT LOT 1
PCN 12 43 46 20 15 000 0010
CASE NO. 11 00019154
Laurent Gillot
4214 NW 1st Place
Deerfield Beach, FL 33442 87.85 $ Invoice No. 37425
55.00 $ Admin Fee
142.85 $
FLORIDA BLVD
TROPIC ISLE 3RD SECTION
LOTS 411 & 412 PB07448 PG 0625
PCN 12 43 46 28 03 000 4110
CASE NO. 11 00018792
Katharine D. Martens
589 Deerfield Drive
Melbourne, FL 32940 137.50 $ Invoice No. 37426
55.00 $ Admin Fee
192.50 $
322 SW 5TH AVENUE
TOWN OF DELRAY N 50 FT OF S 356.4 FT OF
E 135 FT OF BLOCK 24
PCN 12 43 46 16 01 024 0040
CASE NO. 11 00019150
Maurice and Patricia Lord
8454 NW 14th Street
Coral Springs, FL 33071 142.50 $ Invoice No. 37427
55.00 $ Admin Fee
197.50 $
1314 SW 22ND AVENUE
DELRAY BEACH HIGHLANDS SEC 3
LOT 8 BLOCK 8
PCN 12 43 46 19 04 008 0080
CASE NO. 11 00019310
Jorge L. Vidaure
1314 SW 22nd Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33445 103.40 $ Invoice No. 37429
55.00 $ Admin Fee
158.40 $
2414 SUNDY AVENUE
SOUTHRIDGE LOT 8 BLOCK 7
PCN 12 43 46 20 13 007 0080
CASE NO. 11 00018852
Donielle S. Morgenstern
324 Maryland Avenue NE
Washington, DC 20002 97.80 $ Invoice No. 37432
55.00 $ Admin Fee
152.80 $
122 SW 10TH AVENUE
ATLANTIC GARDENS DELRAY
PCN 12 43 46 17 23 009 0180
CASE NO. 11 00019472
Kimelia Monteith
218 Newlake Drive
Boynton Beach, FL 33426 157.80 $ Inv. No. 37434
55.00 $ Admin Fee
212.80 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
RES NO. 14-12.xls
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
810 SW 5TH AVENUE
ROSEMONT VILLAS UNIT B LOT 10
PCN 12 43 46 20 33 000 0100
CASE NO. 11 00018321
Felicia Dickson
1319 NW 3rd Street
Delray Beach, FL 33444 87.80 $ Invoice No. 37435
55.00 $ Admin Fee
142.80 $
619 HERON DRIVE
TROPIC PALMS PL 1 LOT 126
PCN 12 43 46 29 02 000 1260
CASE NO. 11 00017986
Charles A. Malortigue
3149 Waterside Circle
Boynton Beach, FL 33435 60.00 $ Invoice No. 37436
55.00 $ Admin Fee
115.00 $
4892 LINCOLN ROAD
COUNTRY CLUB ACRES 2ND ADD LOT 112
PCN 12 42 46 13 03 000 1120
CASE NO. 11 00018922
Mary M. Phillips
113 Russell Street
Cumberland City, TN 37050 121.55 $ Inv. No. 37437
55.00 $ Admin Fee
176.55 $
1101 SW 7TH AVENUE
RIDGEWOOD HEIGHTS DELRAY LOT 1 BLOCK D
PCN 12 43 46 20 20 004 0010
CASE NO. 11 00018610
Kenan Telli
5200 Flagler Drive Apt. 501
West Palm Beach, FL 33407 155.80 $ Invoice No. 37439
55.00 $ Admin Fee
210.80 $
702 SE 4TH AVENUE
OSCEOLA PARK LOT 1 BLOCK 8
PCN 12 43 46 21 01 008 0010
CASE NO. 11 00019544
Edwina Jolly
702 SE 4th Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33483 110.00 $ Invoice No. 37440
55.00 $ Admin Fee
165.00 $
520 SW 9TH STREET
E 40 FT OF LOT 86 W 20 FT OF LOT 87
PCN 12 43 46 20 12 000 0861
CASE NO. 11 00018320
Stacey and Cassandra Sanders
520 SW 9th Street
Delray Beach, FL 33444 91.70 $ Invoice No. 37441
55.00 $ Admin Fee
146.70 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
2RES NO. 14-12.xls
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
39 NW 14TH AVENUE
ODMANNS SUB LOT 26 BLOCK 1
PCN 12 43 46 17 28 001 0260
CASE NO. 11 00013548
Ethel M. A. Est Williams
39 NW 14th Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444 105.00 $ Invoice No. 37444
55.00 $ Admin Fee
160.00 $
551 NW 46TH AVENUE
N 40 FT OF LOT 10 BLOCK 1
PCN 12 42 46 12 07 001 0101
CASE NO. 11 00020664
Sol Pal John Bejarano
551 NW 46th Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33445 $121.75Invoice No. 37445
$55.00Admin Fee
176.75 $
203 NW 5TH AVENUE
PJB LLC PLAT LOT 2
PCN 12 43 46 17 63 000 0020
CASE NO. 11 00018803
Teresa Machado
203 NW 5th Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444 121.75 $ Invoice No. 37446
55.00 $ Admin Fee
176.75 $
316 SW 4TH AVENUE
TOWN OF DELRAY LOTS 4 AND 24 BLOCK 32
PCN 12 43 46 16 01 032 0040
CASE NO. 11 00017876
Felix and Eugene Bethel
Valencia S. Spells
Agatha E. Stubbs
Christopher E. Stubbs
Glenroy Stubbs
Harry E. Stubbs
Rochelle D. Williams
Beverly S. Wilson
P.O. Box 361
Carteret, NJ 07008 111.80 $ Invoice No. 37450
55.00 $ Admin Fee
166.80 $
120 SW 3RD AVENUE
TOWN OF DELRAY
S 23.5 FT OF LOT 11 AND LOT 12 OF N 1/2 OF
BLOCK 38
PCN 12 43 46 16 01 038 0112
CASE NO. 11 00019009
Corine Meadows
120 SW 3rd Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444 121.75 $ Invoice No. 37451
55.00 $ Admin Fee
176.75 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
3RES NO. 14-12.xls
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
222 SE 5TH STREET
OSCEOLA PARK LOT 11 BLOCK 6
PCN 12 43 46 21 01 006 0110
CASE NO. 11 00018047
Jean L. Denisier
222 SE 5th Street
Delray Beach, FL 33483 103.75 $ Invoice No. 37452
55.00 $ Admin Fee
158.75 $
38 NW 10TH AVENUE
WHIDDENS SUB E 1/2 OF LOT 6 /LESS E 10 FT/
BLOCK 1
PCN NO. 12 43 46 17 16 001 0061
CASE NO. 11 00017113
Alexandre Blanc
5585 Boynton Rise Lane
Boynton Beach, FL 33437 97.65 $ Inovice No. 37453
55.00 $ Admin Fee
152.65 $
809 NW 2ND STREET
TOURIST NOOK DELRAY
W 1/2 OF LOTS 17 AND 18 BLOCK B
PCN 12 43 46 17 25 002 0172
CASE NO. 11 00018648
ZMAX Investors LLC
R/A Galina Tschernaya
300 Bayview Drive #705
Miami, FL 33160 165.35 $ Invoice No. 37454
55.00 $ Admin Fee
220.35 $
14960 WHATLEY RD
COUNTRY CLUB ACRES 1ST ADD
LOT 34 (LESS S 1/2) & S 37.5 FT OF LOT 35
PCN 12 42 46 13 02 000 0341
CASE NO. 11-19990
Grayhawk Development Corp
% Lawrence B. Hawkins, Reg Agt.
4570 Lake Worth Road #B-1
Lake Worth, FL 33463 167.60 $ Invoice No. 37474
55.00 $ Admin Fee
222.60 $
20 NW 13TH AVENUE
ODMANNS SUB LOT 12 BLOCK 1
PCN 12 43 46 17 28 000 0120
CASE NO. 11-18651
Marih Hayes Est
% Willie Goodman Jr.
687 Pennington Avenue
Trenton, NJ 08618 131.50 $ Invoice No. 37475
55.00 $ Admin Fee
186.50 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
4RES NO. 14-12.xls
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
14950 WHATLEY RD
COUNTRY CLUB ACRES 1ST ADD
LOT 35 (LESS S 37.5 FT) & LOT 36
PCN 12 42 46 13 02 000 0351
CASE NO. 11-19998
Grayhawk Development Corp
% Lawrence B. Hawkins, Reg Agt.
4570 Lake Worth Road #B-1
Lake Worth, FL 33463 167.60 $ Invoice No. 37476
55.00 $ Admin Fee
222.60 $
308 NW 2ND STREET
TOWN OF DELRAY W 85.6 FT OF LOT 9 AND
W 85.6 FT OF N 54 FT OF LOT 10 BLOCK 35
PCN 12 43 46 16 01 035 0092
CASE NO. 11-20599
Matt Gerchow
2131 Hollywood Boulevard #201
Hollywood, FL 33020 135.00 $ Invoice No. 37477
55.00 $ Admin Fee
190.00 $
41 SW 7TH AVENUE
TOWN OF DELRAY S 55 FT OF N 540 FT OF W
135
FT OF BLOCK 13
PCN 12 43 46 16 01 013 0070
CASE NO. 11 20443
James Gross
3646 Blue Dawn Drive
North Las Vegas, NV 89032 163.40 $ Invoice No. 37480
55.00 $ Admin Fee
218.40 $
355 N. CONGRESS AVENUE
L L PARK OF COMMERCE REPL PAR B
PCN 12 43 46 18 43 002 0000
CASE NO. 11 20632
Bently CKS, Inc.
% Sam Caliendo, Reg Agent
900 Glades Road #200
Boca Raton, FL 33431 177.30 $ Invoice No. 37481
55.00 $ Admin Fee
232.30 $
107 NW 10TH AVENUE
WEST SIDE HEIGHTS DELRAY
LOT 11 BLOCK A
PCN 12 43 46 17 26 001 0110
CASE NO. 11 21403
Jani E. Wagner
252 NE 15th Street
Delray Beach, FL 33444 165.80 $ Invoice No. 37483
55.00 $ Admin Fee
220.80 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
5RES NO. 14-12.xls
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONOWNER
582 NW 51ST AVENUE
PINE TRAIL SEC 4 LOT 10 (LESS NLY 41.28 FT)
BLOCK 10
PCN 12 42 46 12 12 010 0102
CASE NO. 11 20435
Marie E. Mondesir and Camy Cean
528 NW 51st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33445 140.45 $ Invoice No. 37484
55.00 $ Admin Fee
195.45 $
3118 LOWSON BOULEVARD
SHERWOOD PARK W 100 FT OF LOT 3
BLOCK 3
PCN 12 42 46 24 01 003 0032
CASE NO. 11 19814
Joseph E. Wiseley Est
3118 Lowson Boulevard
Delray Beach, FL 33445 215.25 $ Invoice No. 37487
55.00 $ Admin Fee
270.25 $
106 AND 108 NW 10TH AVENUE
17-46-43, E 135 FT (LESS N 150 FT, S 50 FT &
E 25 FT RD R/W) & W 15 FT OF E 150 FT
PCN 12 43 46 17 42 006 0240
CASE NO. 11 20607
Maggie Rolle
106 NW 10th Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444 146.80 $ Invoice No. 37479
55.00 $ Admin Fee
201.80 $
ASSESSMENT
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 –LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS,
VEGETATION, AND MATTER CONSTITUTESHAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE
6RES NO. 14-12.xls
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
GRANT AWARD/HOME DEPOT FOUNDATION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Request for approval to accept a $5,000 grant awarded by The Home Depot Foundation i n support of the
City’s “Curb Appeal by the Block” program scheduled for March 24, 2012.
BACKGROUND
The City of Delray Beach is committed to neighborho od revitalization and continues to promote this
effort through various programs and projects. Commu nity involvement plays a vital role in the success
of these programs. In addition to resident particip ation, the City relies on the support of local
organizations to partner with, in the form of grant awards, to maintain a sustainable environment to l ive,
work and play.
“Curb Appeal by the Block” is a program that focuses on the improvement of the condition of existing
housing through painting, minor repairs and landsca pe work. The City’s Neighborhood Services
Division, Community Improvement Department, will ho st its 2nd “Curb Appeal by the Block” event on
Saturday, March 24, 2012, at 7:00 am.
During “Curb Appeal by the Block”, six (6) homes, located on SW 11th Avenue, have been designated
for painting and landscape work. The City is seekin g approximately 200 volunteers to participate in th is
community project by assisting with the home improv ements. All supplies for the event will be
provided by the City and volunteers will receive a t-shirt, breakfast and lunch. Community service hours
will be awarded.
The Neighborhood Services Division was successful i n receiving a $5,000 grant from The Home Depot
Foundation. In addition to the funding, The Home De pot Foundation will provide volunteer support the
day of the event with a showing of no less than 75 Home Depot employees.
The City Attorney’s office has reviewed the Home Depot Foundation Agr eement and has determined
that we do not normally agree to indemnify other or ganizations, however since the grant award amount
is a one-time award and the liability is minimal, he is rec ommending we move forward to execute the
agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval for accepting the $5,000 grant awarded by The Home Depot Foundation.
Community Affairs Grant Agreement
Grant Number: 14791
Grantee: City of Delray Beach
Project Title: 2012 Curb Appeal by the Block
Grant Amount: $5,000
Date: 2/17/2012
1. In support of charitable purposes, and as detailed in your project description o f the original grant application
for the above reference project (Project).
Payments received by the Grantee from The Home Depot Foundation (THDF) may be expended only for the
purposes outlined in the approved scope of work, subject to any special conditi ons itemized below. No other
uses are authorized without the express, written consent of The Home Depot Foundation.
2. The agreement shall be effective 3/24/2012 and will be completed no later than 5/24/2012 .
3. Grantee agrees that none of the funds covered by this Agreement shall be used to participate in, or intervene
in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office. If the project
involves any lobbying activities, as defined by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code), the Grantee
represents that 1) this grant is not earmarked for any lobbying activities and 2) the amount of this grant,
together with any other grants by THDF for the same project for the same year, does not exceed the amount
budgeted (if any) for the year of the grant, by the Grantee for non -lobbying activities.
4. If the Grantee is currently tax exempt under Code Section 501 (c)(3) , then in the event Grantee loses its tax
exempt status, this Agreement will be considered null and void and all u nexpended funds will be immediately
returned to THDF.
5. The Grantee agrees to immediately notify The Home Depot Foundation, in writing, if: 1) Grantee's federal tax
status is revoked or altered; 2) Grantee has reasonable grounds to believe its tax exempt st atus may be
revoked or altered; or 3) has reason to believe that the grant monies cannot be or continue to be expended
for the specified purposes. If grant funds cannot be expended for the originally awarded purpose, unspent
portion must be returned to TH DF.
6. The Grantee shall indemnify and hold the Home Depot Foundation, its directors, officers, employees,
consultants, representatives and agents harmless from and against all third party claims, liabilities, suits,
demands, losses, judgments, fines, pena lties, interest, expenses and costs (including, without limitation
reasonable accounting and attorney's fees and disbursements) which result from any breach of the terms of
this Agreement, or from any negligent acts or omissions of the Grantee, its directo rs, officers, employees,
consultants, representatives and agents relating to or in any way connected with, activities pursuant to this
Agreement.
7. The Grantee will cooperate with The Home Depot Foundation in supplying any information or complying with
any procedures which might be required by any governmental agency in order for THDF to establish the fact
that it has observed all requirements of the law with respect to this grant.
8. THDF may monitor and conduct formal evaluations of operations under this gra nt, which may include a visit
from THDF personnel to observe your projects and programs and to review financial and other records and
materials connected with activities supported by this grant. The Grantee agrees to keep accurate and
complete books and r ecords of receipts and expenditures using grant funds for at least four (4) years after the
completion of use of the grant funds and will make these books and records available to THDF for inspection
as reasonably required from the time of the Grantee's ac ceptance.
9. A Final Report is required within 30 days of the end of the grant terms. Grantee agrees to submit the final
report using THDF's online format accessible at https://www.grantrequest.com/SID_248.
10. Funding for this grant will be paid in one disbur sement, upon execution of this agreement.
It is anticipated that the grant will be paid in accordance with the disbursement schedule noted in this section.
However, in the case of a multi -year grant or other grant payable in installments, the payment o f each
installment shall be additionally subject to a determination by THDF, in its sole and absolute discretion, that i)
Grantee has provided the deliverables requested by THDF in a timely manner; ii) payments received from
THDF have been used solely for the purposes for which they were authorized; iii) additional payments shall be
used solely for the purposes for which they are authorized; iv) Grantee has otherwise strictly complied with
the terms and conditions of this Agreement; v) there have been no ma terial changes in the Grantee's
operations, staffing or funding which would adversely affect the objectives for which the Grant was
authorized; and vi) the context in which the Project is to be executed has not been changed so substantially
that the object ives for which the funds were authorized cannot be adequately realized.
11. Grantee agrees to use its best efforts to comply with all applicable requirements of the USA Patriot Act and
Executive Order 13224, and all subsequently enacted legislation, executi ve orders, or regulations, designed to
prevent any Grant funds from being used in support of terrorism or a terrorist organization.
12. The Grantee acknowledges that none of the activities financed by the grant violates U.S. laws that prohibit
corrupt payment s to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or keeping business and that The Home
Depot Foundation has not authorized any activity that would constitute such payments. The Grantee will use
reasonable efforts to ensure that grant funds are not used to make corrupt payments to foreign officials for
the purpose of obtaining or keeping business.
13. All press releases, manuscripts, papers, exhibits or interviews prepared for scientific meetings, the public or
private press, magazines, periodicals, radio , television or other means of communication dealing with the
activities or achievement of the work of the grant shall acknowledge The Home Depot Foundation's support .
All such material shall be submitted to The Home Depot Foundation for written approv al prior to use.
14. Either party may terminate this grant upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other.
15. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of THDF and the Grantee with respect to the subject
matter, and supersedes all prior agreements a nd understandings, whether oral or written. This Agreement
may not be amended or modified except in writing and signed by THDF. This Agreement shall be deemed to
be made under, and in all respects, interpreted under and governed by the laws of the State of Georgia.
The undersigned duly authorized official of the Grantee agrees to these terms and conditions:
For the Home Depot Foundation:
____________________________________________ ______________________
Tyrene Hodge , Manager - Community Affairs Date
For the Grantee:
____________________________________________ ______________________
Grantee's Executive Director Date
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:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 8.G. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
AGREEMENT/EAGLE 1 RESOURCES, LLC
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the Commission for approval/aut horization for Mayor to execute an agreement with
Eagle 1 Resources, LLC. This agreement covers the review of existing lease agreements with Florida
East Coast Railroad to see if any lease agreement e xpenses can be eliminated. The cost of this
agreement is $18,750.00. Project #12-073.
BACKGROUND
Eagle 1 Resources, LLC is a firm that works with ut ilities in reviewing existing agreements with
railroad companies. The review includes land owner ship and government regulations affecting the
crossings. The goal is to eliminate the annual leas e agreement fee paid to the railroad. There are
approximately 25 existing utility crossing along th e Florida East Coast Railroad (FEC) corridor throug h
the City of Delray Beach. The City paid FEC $18,54 9.68 in lease agreement fees in 2011. These fees
increase 5% annually. Staff believes that after all pertinent information is reviewed some, if not all of
these crossing fees can be eliminated. Attached are the following: agreement from Eagle 1 Resources
LLC, scope of work, quote and last year’s FEC invoi ce.
FUNDING SOURCE
448-5461-538.31-90 & 442-5178536.31-90 (after trans fer)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval.
Page: 1 of 2
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
This consulting agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into effecti ve as of _____________,
2012, by and between Eagle 1 Resources, LLC (“Consultant”) and __________________
(“Client”), collectively referred to as the “Parties,” and/or individually referred to as
“Party.”
RECITALS
Whereas, the Client and Consultant wish to set forth the terms of their contractual
relationship in writing, therefore, in consideration of the mutual prom ises set forth
hereunder, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Client a nd Consultant agree
as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Scope of Work . Consultant will provide the following services to the Client:
See Attached Scope of Work
2. Consultant’s Compensation .
See Attached Scope of Work.
3. Term. This Agreement will remain in place until canceled in writing b y the
Consultants or the Client upon 30 days written notice. Cancellation of the Agreement by
either party does not invalidate the Consultant’s right to compensation.
4. Non-Exclusive. This is a non-exclusive agreement and Consultant is free to
provide services to other persons or firms at any time during th e term of this agreement
provided that such services are not directly and substantially adve rse to the interests of
Client.
5. [Intentionally deleted]
6. Non-disclosure. Subject to Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes pertaining t o
public disclosure by governmental bodies, the Parties agree t hat, except as directed by
either Party in writing or with the prior written permissi on of either Party, the Parties
shall not at any time, whether during or after the time peri od set forth in this Agreement,
use or disclose to any person any Confidential Information, or perm it any person to use,
examine or make copies of any documents, files, data or other info rmation sources which
contain or are derived from Confidential Information, whether prepar ed by Consultant or
otherwise coming into either Party’s possession or control. For pur poses of this
Paragraph, the term “Confidential Information” shall mean any do cuments, files, data or
other information which is marked or labeled “Confidential” by either part y.
Page: 2 of 2
7. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is held unenforceable for any reason,
the remaining portion of this Agreement shall remain in full forc e and effect, and shall be
carried out in a manner consistent with the intentions of the parties hereto.
8. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action between the parti es
concerning the enforcement or interpretations of the Agreement, the default ing party shall
reimburse the non-defaulting party for all of its costs, fees, and reasonable attorney fees
incurred.
9. Governing Law; Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in
accordance with the internal laws (except those pertaining to choice of law) of the State
of Florida applicable to contracts made and performed there. T he parties agree that the
State Courts sitting in Palm Beach County, Florida, shall be the exclusive venue for any
legal action arising under the terms of this contract, or to enforc e the terms thereof, or to
obtain remedies for breach thereof. The parties do hereby su bmit to the personal
jurisdiction of said Court and do hereby waive any and all objections to jurisdiction of
and venue in said Court.
10. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual consent
of the parties hereto, with any such amendment to be invalid unless in writing, s igned by
Client and Consultants.
11. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
parties, and there are no representations, warranties or commitm ents, except as set forth
herein. The Client acknowledges that it has had adequate opportunit y to review this
contract with legal counsel.
12. Warranty of Signature. The persons signing below warrant that they have the
legal capacity and authority to bind the Parties to this Agre ement and by doing so have
duly executed this Agreement.
Consultant:
Eagle 1 Resources, LLC
______________________________
By: David L. Thomas, Managing Member
Date: ___________________________
Client: __________________________
By: _____________________________
Name: __________________________
Its: _____________________________
Date: ___________________________
Eagle 1 Resources, LLC 2155 Herndon Street A uburn, AL 36830 office: 334.887.0328
info@eagle1resources.com
www.eagle1resources.com Subsurface Utility Consultant | Strategic Planning & M anagement
Railroad Crossing Investigation
Scope of Work and Compensation
If you need assistance in investigating your existi ng railroad crossing lease agreements
and would like to seek reimbursement, our team can help you. Our office can team
with you to research and develop a clear path forwa rd to address your concerns.
Our goal is to eliminate your annual lease agreement e xpense.
Client Requirements:
o Client secures all railroad invoices to be research ed
o Client secures all railroad agreements, if availabl e, for the locations to be
investigated
o Client develops location map of crossings / encroac hments
Eagle 1 Resources Requirements:
o E1R secures mapping information
o E1R works with all agencies required to research lan d ownership and
government regulations affecting area to be investi gated
o E1R provides all maps, pictures, and data logs to c lient
o E1R will research historical railroad(s) maps for l etter preparation to railroad
o E1R will review historical railroad(s) charter reco rds for specific railroad line to
evaluate ownership issue.
o E1R will draft payment termination letter(s) to rai lroad(s) and submit after
client approval / payment.
o E1R will advise client of specific project concerns / questions during project
work.
Investment by Client:
$ 750.00 Each location investigated (4 Location Minimum)
Effective 06/01/2011
Page 1 of 1
Quote 1
P. O. Number (Valid for 60 days)
Vendor Number
2155 Herndon Street
Auburn, AL. 36830
Phone 334.887.0328
DATE: February 20, 2012
Bill To:
City of City of City of City of Delray Beach Florida Delray Beach Florida Delray Beach Florida Delray Beach Florida
100 Northwest First Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
F or:
Railroad Investigation
Project Review and Recommendations
Work Order # Project Work
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY R ATE AMOUNT
DESCRIPTION:
Investigation and research of the property
owners for Railroad Right of Way located in
service area of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Investigate project and develop potential course
of action for client. Prepare Report and deliver
recommendation letter(s) to client.
Client Specified Locations 25 $750.00 $18,750.00
TOTAL $18,750.00
Make all checks payable to: Eagle 1 Resources
Total due upon receipt. Overdue accounts (over 30 d ays) subject to a 50% service charge.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS!
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Jasmin Allen, Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: City Manager DATE: February 29, 2012 SUBJECT: AGENDA
ITEM 8.H. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 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 February 21, 2012 through March 2, 2012. 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 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting of February 27, 2012 No appealable items were considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. The
following items which were considered by the Board will be forwarded to the City Commission for action: A. Recommended denial (5 to 0, Craig Spodak and Connor Lynch absent), of a privately-sponsored
Future Land Use Map amendment from Transitional (TRN) to General Commercial (GC), rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to PC (Planned Commercial) and Text Amendment of the Comprehensive
Plan modifying the description of the General Commercial (GC) Future Land Use designation to identify a maximum FAR of 0.46 for Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Linton
Boulevard and South Federal Highway.
B. Recommended approval (4 to 0, Al Jacquet left the meeting), of a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) by amending Appendix “A” Definitions, to expand
the definition of “Restaurant”. C. Recommended approval (4 to 0), of a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR), by amending Appendix “A” Definitions, to provide
a definition of “Delicatessen”, Section 4.6.9 “Off-Street Parking Regulations”, and Article 6.3 “Use and Work in the Public Right of Way”, Subsection 6.3.3, “Sidewalk Café”, to provide
a definition, clarify required parking, and to clarify the characteristics of a Delicatessen. D. Continued (4 to 0), a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR),
by amending Article 7.9, “Docks, Dolphins, Finger Piers, and Boat Lifts”, by amending Section 7.9.5, “Standards for Approval”; to clarify current language regarding docks. E. Recommended
denial (3 to 1), of a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) by amending Section 8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts Program”, Subsection (B), “Appropriation
of Capital Improvement Project (CIP Funds)”, setting forth the City’s right to use appropriated funds. OTHER ITEMS: F. Received public comments pertaining to Citywide infrastructure
improvements for future consideration. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting of February 22, 2012 1. Approved (6 to 0, Nick Sadowsky absent), an amendment to the master sign
program to allow the installation of new flat wall and free standing signs for the newly constructed building at Delray Lincoln Mercury, located on the west side of South Federal Highway,
south of Linton Boulevard (2102 South Federal Highway). 2. Approved (5 to 0, Rustem Kupi stepped down), an amendment to the master sign program to allow the replacement of the “golf”
and “tennis” signs with the “PGA Tour Superstore logo” signs for the PGA Tour Superstore, located at the southwest corner of Linton Boulevard and SW 10th Avenue within the Delray Crossing
Center. 3. Tabled (6 to 0), a request for a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.7(E)(7) for additional signage for Office Depot, located at the southeast corner of South Federal Highway and SE
10th Street (1110 South Federal Highway). 4. Denied (4 to 2), a Class III site plan modification and landscape plan associated with the conversion of a 9-bedroom motel to a 7-bedroom,
18-bed Non-residential Licensed Service Provider facility for Delray Detox Center, located at the southeast corner of NE 6th Avenue and NE 3rd Street (297 NE 6th Avenue). Concurrently,
the Board approved with conditions the architectural elevation plan on a 5 to 1 vote. 5. Approved (6 to 0), a Class II site plan modification and landscape plan associated with the construction
of additional parking spaces at the clubhouse facility for Hanover Square (aka Windy Creek), located on the north side of West Atlantic Avenue, west of Highpoint Boulevard (226 NW 41
Avenue).
6. Approved (6 to 0), a Class II site plan modification and landscape/hardscape plan associated with the demolition of the existing vacant guard house and modification to the entry drive
for Congress Park, located on the west side of Congress Avenue, south of West Atlantic Avenue (225 Congress Avenue). 7. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class III site plan modification
and architectural elevation plans associated with the conversion of a commercial tenant space to restaurant for The Grove Restaurant, located at the southeast corner of Pineapple Grove
Way (NE 2nd Avenue) and NE 2nd Street (187 NE 2nd Avenue). 8. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class III site plan modification, landscape plan and architectural elevation plan associated
with the construction of a 1,853 sq. ft. addition which will accommodate four new bedrooms (8 beds) and conversion of existing floor area to accommodate an additional 3 beds for the
Wayside House, located on the west side of NE 6th Avenue, south of NE 4th Street (328-378 NE 6th Avenue). Concurrently, the Board recommended that the City Commission approve the following
waivers: a) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), which requires a minimum building height of 25’, by permitting an addition to an existing building at a height of 14’10”. b) A waiver
to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1., which requires 70% -90% of a building fronting along NE 6th Avenue to be set back 10’ from the property line, by permitting an addition to an existing
building with a setback 25’ from the front property line. 9. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevation plan associated with the
construction of a new 23,943 net sq. ft. three-story office building for Saxena White Corporate Offices, located on the east side of SE 1st Avenue, south of SE 1st Street. Concurrently,
the Board recommended that the City Commission approve the following waivers: a) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(b), to reduce the minimum floor height from the required 10’ 0”
from finished floor to finished ceiling, to the proposed 9’ 0” for the rooftop pavilion. b) A waiver to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), to reduce the minimum sidewalk width requirement within
the CBD from eight feet (8’) to five feet (5’) along SE 1st Avenue. c) A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), to reduce the minimum stacking distance requirement from 50’ for parking
lots with 51 or more spaces to 8’ 11½” along SE 1st Avenue and 13’ 0” along the alleyway. d) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(1), to reduce the required ground floor setback and
frontage from 70%-90% at a maximum of ten feet (10’) to 50% along SE 1st Avenue. e) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(2), to reduce the upper level floor area and frontage from
70% at a minimum setback of 15’ to 28% on the floor levels from 25’ to 48’ in height. RECOMMENDATION By motion, receive and file this report. Attachment: Location Map
B. Recommended approval (4 to 0, Al Jacquet lef t the meeting), of a City-initiated amendment to the
Land Development Regulations (LDR) by amending Appe ndix “A” Definitions, to expand the
definition of “Restaurant”.
C. Recommended approval (4 to 0), of a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development
Regulations (LDR), by amending Appendix “A” Definit ions, to provide a definition of “Delicatessen”,
Section 4.6.9 “Off-Street Parking Regulations”, and Article 6.3 “Use and Work in the Public Right of
Way”, Subsection 6.3.3, “Sidewalk Café”, to provide a definition, clarify required parking, and to
clarify the characteristics of a Delicatessen.
D. Continued (4 to 0), a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulat ions (LDR), by
amending Article 7.9, “Docks, Dolphins, Finger Pier s, and Boat Lifts”, by amending Section 7.9.5,
“Standards for Approval”; to clarify current langua ge regarding docks.
E. Recommended denial (3 to 1), of a City-initiated amendment to the Land Development
Regulations (LDR) by amending Section 8.5.1, “Estab lishment of Public Arts Program”, Subsection
(B), “Appropriation of Capital Improvement Project (CIP Funds)”, setting forth the City’s right to use
appropriated funds.
OTHER ITEMS:
F. Received public comments pertaining to Citywide inf rastructure improvements for future
consideration.
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting of Fe bruary 22, 2012
1. Approved (6 to 0, Nick Sadowsky absent), an amendme nt to the master sign program to allow the
installation of new flat wall and free standing sig ns for the newly constructed building at Delray
Lincoln Mercury, located on the west side of South Federal Highway, south of Linton Boulevard
(2102 South Federal Highway).
2. Approved (5 to 0, Rustem Kupi stepped down), an ame ndment to the master sign program to
allow the replacement of the “golf” and “tennis” si gns with the “PGA Tour Superstore logo” signs for
the PGA Tour Superstore , located at the southwest corner of Linton Bouleva rd and SW 10 th Avenue
within the Delray Crossing Center.
3. Tabled (6 to 0), a request for a waiver to LDR Sect ion 4.6.7(E)(7) for additional signage for
Office Depot, located at the southeast corner of South Federal H ighway and SE 10 th Street (1110 South
Federal Highway).
4. Denied (4 to 2), a Class III site plan modification and landscape plan associated with the
conversion of a 9-bedroom motel to a 7-bedroom, 18-bed Non-residential Licensed Service Provider
facility for Delray Detox Center, located at the southeast corner of NE 6 th Avenue and NE 3 rd Street
(297 NE 6 th Avenue). Concurrently, the Board approved with con ditions the architectural elevation plan
on a 5 to 1 vote.
5. Approved (6 to 0), a Class II site plan modificatio n and landscape plan associated with the
construction of additional parking spaces at the cl ubhouse facility for Hanover Square (aka Windy
Creek), located on the north side of West Atlantic Avenue, west of Highpoint Boulevard (226 NW 41
Avenue).
6. Approved (6 to 0), a Class II site plan modificatio n and landscape/hardscape plan associated with
the demolition of the existing vacant guard house a nd modification to the entry drive for Congress
Park, located on the west side of Congress Avenue, south of West Atlantic Avenue (225 Congress
Avenue).
7. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class III site plan modification and architectural elevation
plans associated with the conversion of a commercia l tenant space to restaurant for The Grove
Restaurant, located at the southeast corner of Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2 nd Avenue) and NE 2 nd
Street (187 NE 2 nd Avenue).
8. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class III site plan modification, landscape plan and
architectural elevation plan associated with the co nstruction of a 1,853 sq. ft. addition which will
accommodate four new bedrooms (8 beds) and conversi on of existing floor area to accommodate an
additional 3 beds for the Wayside House , located on the west side of NE 6 th Avenue, south of NE 4 th
Street (328-378 NE 6 th Avenue). Concurrently, the Board recommended that the City Commission
approve the following waivers:
a) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), wh ich requires a minimum building height of 25’, by
permitting an addition to an existing building at a height of 14’10”.
b) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1., which requires 70% - 90% of a building fronting
along NE 6 th Avenue to be set back 10’ from the property line, by permitting an addition t o an existing
building with a setback 25’ from the front property line.
9. Approved with conditions (6 to 0), a Class V site p lan, landscape plan and architectural elevation
plan associated with the construction of a new 23,9 43 net sq. ft. three-story office building for Saxena
White Corporate Offices , located on the east side of SE 1 st Avenue, south of SE 1 st Street.
Concurrently, the Board recommended that the City C ommission approve the following waivers:
a) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(b), to reduce the minimum floor height from the required
10’ 0” from finished floor to finished ceiling, to the proposed 9’ 0” for the rooftop pavilion.
b) A waiver to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), to reduce the min imum sidewalk width requirement within the
CBD from eight feet (8’) to five feet (5’) along SE 1 st Avenue.
c) A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), to reduc e the minimum stacking distance requirement
from 50’ for parking lots with 51 or more spaces to 8’ 11½” along SE 1 st Avenue and 13’ 0” along the
alleyway.
d) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(1), to redu ce the required ground floor setback and
frontage from 70%-90% at a maximum of ten feet (10’) to 50% along SE 1 st Avenue.
e) A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(2), to redu ce the upper level floor area and frontage
from 70% at a minimum setback of 15’ to 28% on the floor levels from 25’ to 48’ in height.
RECOMMENDATION
By motion, receive and file this report.
Attachment: Location Map
CITY COMMISSION MEETING --- _CITYLIMITS _ „_,_ „_ N
_ APPEALABLE ITEMS ONE MILE _!
LOCATION MAP PLANNING AND ZONING
MARCH 6, 2012 GRAPHIC SCALE DEPARTMENT
SPRAB:
1. DELRAY LINCOLN MERCURY 4. DELRAY DETOX CENTER 7. THE GROVE RESTAURANT
2. PGA TOUR SUPERSTORE 5. HANOVER SQUARE 8. WAYSIDE HOUSE
3. OFFICE DEPOT 6. CONGRESS PARK 9. SAXENA WHITE CORPORATE OFFICES
-- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- -- DLS -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \File— Cab \CC— DOC \3 -6 -12
MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: David Harden, City Manager DATE: February 28, 2012 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.A. -REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012 APPEAL OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD'S DECISION: TMOBILE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission consideration of an Appeal of the decision
by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) to deny the request by T-Mobile to amend the blanket sign program established September 14, 2005 for the Fountains Plaza, located
at 14451 S. Military Trail, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR’S) Section 2.4.7(E). BACKGROUND At their regular meeting on January 25, 2012, SPRAB considered a request from
T-Mobile to amend the blanket sign program approved for the shopping center to allow the use of their corporate color, “PMS Rhodamine Red” and font. SPRAB voted 5 to 0 approving the
change to the corporate font but required the business to comply with the blanket sign color of blue vinyl #3630-36 by a separate vote. The applicant for T-Mobile is appealing this decision,
seeking to allow the use of T-Mobile’s corporate color of PMS Rhodamine Red on the building. A copy of the minutes and building elevation identifying the sign and location are attached
for your reference. Section 2.4.7(E) of the Land Development Regulations allows the City Commission to grant waivers to this Section of the code governing signs after making a finding
of fact based on one of the following: § -Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area § -Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities § -Shall not create an
unsafe situation; and -Does not result in the granting of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant
or owner
It is staff's position that granting this appeal would be the granting of a special privilege that would not be granted under similar circumstances on other property. RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending City Commission support SPRAB’s decision to maintain the Master Sign Program, pursuant to LDR 4.6.7(F)(b), and not allow the red lettering for this sign.
IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ON THE APPEAL OF THE SPRAB 1/25/12 DECISION TO
RESTRICT THE USE OF T-MOBILE’S CORPORATE COLOR ON THEIR SIGN 1. This is an appeal of the January 25, 2012 decision by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (“SPRAB”) approving T-Mobile’s
request to change to their corporate font, but requiring the business to comply with the blanket sign color of blue vinyl #3630-36, instead of the requested “PMS Rhodamine Red” corporate
color. This appeal came before the City Commission at its meeting on March 6, 2012. 2. The Appellants, Appellee and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City
Commission pertaining to the appeal of the approval of a request from T-Mobile to amend the blanket sign program approved for the Fountains Plaza located at 14451 S. Military Trail,
with restrictions requiring T-Mobile to comply with the blanket sign color of blue vinyl #3630-36 in accordance with the Blanket Sign Program, pursuant to LDR 4.6.7(F)(2)(a). I. LDR
REQUIREMENTS FOR BLANKET SIGN PROGRAM: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2)(a), “Blanket Sign Program. Are the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2)(a) met? Yes ______ No ______ 3.
The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and 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.
2 The City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 6th day of March, 2012, by a vote of ______ in favor and ______ opposed. ATTEST: ________________________________ Nelson S. McDuffie,
Mayor ____________________________ Chevelle Nubin City Clerk
Meeting Date: January 25, 2012 Agenda Item: SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD Agent: Art Sign Company Project Name: “T-Mobile” Project Location: The Fountains 14451 S. Military Trail
ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before SPRAB is consideration to amend the Master Sign Program established September 14, 2005, for The Fountains commercial plaza. BACKGROUND On September
14, 2005 SPRAB approved a Master Sign package for the plaza. The flat wall signs are to be channel letters, illuminated or not, mounted on raceways painted to match the color of the
building and Helvetica font. The face & trim cap to be the color 3M blue vinyl #3630-36, internally illuminated with white neon. Logos placed in front of the copy may display corporate
colors, with staff approval & the owner’s consent (box sign allowed for the logo). For single line of copy the maximum letter height will be 31”, including the logo letter box. The applicant
is proposing that the T-Mobile sign be changed to its corporate Magenta color and font. The sign height 2’, sign length 12’ 1 3/8”, total square footage = 24”; the sign is illuminated
with white LED lights and meets the other criteria as outlined in the master sign program. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Deny the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile
based on a failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2). 2. Approve the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile based on positive findings pursuant
to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2). 3. Approve the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile based on positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) with direction
for any changes desired by the board. RECOMMENDATION Board’s Discretion
Transcription of Minutes on “T-Mobile”; SPRAB meeting of January 25, 2012 (DRAFT – not yet approved by the Board) Ms. Jennifer Buce from the Community Improvement Department advised
the Board that the applicant, “T-Mobile” is requesting an amendment to the Master Sign Program for The Fountains Shopping Center located at 14451 South Military Trail. They are requesting
to use their corporate color of magenta and their corporate font for their signage. Ms. Buce said their proposal meets the other sign criteria and it is only these two items that require
the Board’s approval. She concluded by stating that staff is recommending Board discretion. Applicant’s Presentation Ms. Denise Williams of Art Sign Company, agent for T-Mobile then
addressed the Board. She stated that T-Mobile is requesting to use their corporate logo with their font and color. She stated that there are other businesses within the shopping center
that have their company’s corporate logo for their signage. Public Comments There were none. Board Discussion Ms. Alice Finst stated that she had gone to visit the site and pointed out
that the proposed TMobile sign would be located higher than the sign for the adjacent cleaners. She said there were other signs in the shopping center that were in the blue dictated
by the Master Sign Program and she thought the T-Mobile sign should meet this same criteria. Ms. Buce stated that the reason blue was the approved color for the sign program was because
Washington Mutual Bank had originally been the anchor tenant and their corporate logo color was blue and that the other tenants, including the cleaners, had used the 3M color blue vinyl
number 3630-36. She said that the only other tenant currently using their corporate logo was the Chase Bank which replaced the Washington Mutual bank but noted that Chase’s corporate
logo color was also a blue. Ms. Finst commented that, as the proposed T-Mobile sign would be located higher than that of the cleaners, if it was not blue it would really stand out. Mr.
DeCapito said that he did not have a problem with corporate identity or the sign’s placement. Mr. Kupi said he did not have an issue with the placement but thought it should be blue
since that was what everyone else was required to use. Ms. Williams said that they really wanted to use the pink/magenta color as that was the color they are identified with, even in
their commercials. There was a discussion on the color of the sign and the Board asked Ms. Williams if she had an actual color sample and she said she did not but stated it was not red,
it was more like a hot pink. Mr. Sadowsky said the Board obviously had a problem with the proposed color and asked Ms. Williams if T-Mobile would accept using blue for the sign. She
said that, if that was what the Board approved, they would have to use it as they needed the signage but that they really wanted the magenta color. She said they would really like to
use the corporate font. MOTION/FINDINGS It was moved by Mr. Kupi for approval of the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile at The Fountains based on positive
findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2). Mr. Sadowsky seconded for discussion and said that it appeared the Board was going to vote to deny the proposed signage and asked if the
Board should add a condition that the sign could be approved with the proposed font, but in the Master Sign Program blue color. After some discussion, Mr. Kupi then amended his motion
for approval of the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile at The Fountains based on positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) for the font style
only of the sign. Mr. Sadowsky amended his second. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote (Ms. Dawson and Mr. Porten absent.) Mr. DeCapito moved for approval of the request for an amendment
to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile at The Fountains based on positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) to replace the blue color of the Master Sign Program for The Fountains
with the proposed magenta color. Mr. Sadowsky seconded the motion and there was a 2 to 3 vote for approval (Ms. Dawson and Mr. Porten absent, Ms. Finst, Mr. Kupi and Mr. Sadowsky dissented).
________________________ Rebecca Truxell, Secretary to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board.
It is staff's position that granting this appeal wo uld be the granting of a special privilege that wou ld not
be granted under similar circumstances on other pro perty.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending City Commission support SPRAB ’s decision to maintain the Master Sign
Program, pursuant to LDR 4.6.7(F)(b), and not allow the red lettering for this sign.
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ON THE APPEAL OF THE SPRAB 1/25/12 DECISION TO REST RICT
THE USE OF T-MOBILE’S CORPORATE COLOR ON THEIR SIGN
1. This is an appeal of the January 25, 2012 decision b y the Site Plan
Review and Appearance Board (“SPRAB”) approving T-Mo bile’s request to change to
their corporate font, but requiring the business to comp ly with the blanket sign color of
blue vinyl #3630-36, instead of the requested “PMS R hodamine Red” corporate color.
This appeal came before the City Commission at its mee ting on March 6, 2012.
2. The Appellants, Appellee and City staff presented documentary evidence
and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the appeal of the approval of a
request from T-Mobile to amend the blanket sign progra m approved for the Fountains
Plaza located at 14451 S. Military Trail, with restri ctions requiring T-Mobile to comply
with the blanket sign color of blue vinyl #3630-36 in accordance with the Blanket Sign
Program, pursuant to LDR 4.6.7(F)(2)(a).
I. LDR REQUIREMENTS FOR BLANKET SIGN PROGRAM:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2)(a), “Blanket Sign Program.
Are the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2)(a) met?
Yes ______ No ______
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive P lan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the original sit e 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.
2
The City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 6th da y of March, 2012, by a
vote of ______ in favor and ______ opposed.
ATTEST: ________________________________
Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
____________________________
Chevelle Nubin
City Clerk
Meeting Date: January 25, 2012
Agenda Item:
SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD
Agent: Art Sign Company
Project Name: “T-Mobile”
Project Location: The Fountains
14451 S. Military Trail
ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD
The item before SPRAB is consideration to amend the Master Sign Program established
September 14, 2005, for The Fountains commercial pl aza.
BACKGROUND
On September 14, 2005 SPRAB approved a Master Sign package for the plaza. The flat
wall signs are to be channel letters, illuminated o r not, mounted on raceways painted to
match the color of the building and Helvetica font. The face & trim cap to be the color 3M
blue vinyl #3630-36, internally illuminated with wh ite neon. Logos placed in front of the
copy may display corporate colors, with staff appro val & the owner’s consent (box sign
allowed for the logo). For single line of copy the maximum letter height will be 31”,
including the logo letter box.
The applicant is proposing that the T-Mobile sign b e changed to its corporate Magenta
color and font. The sign height 2’, sign length 12’ 1 3/8”, total square footage = 24”; the
sign is illuminated with white LED lights and meets the other criteria as outlined in the
master sign program.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Deny the request for an amendment to the Master Sig n Program for T-Mobile based
on a failure to make positive findings to LDR Secti on 4.6.7(F)(2).
2. Approve the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile
based on positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2).
3. Approve the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile
based on positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) with direction for
any changes desired by the board.
RECOMMENDATION
Board’s Discretion
Transcription of Minutes on “T-Mobile”; SPRAB meeti ng of January 25, 2012
(DRAFT – not yet approved by the Board)
Ms. Jennifer Buce from the Community Improvement De partment advised the Board that the
applicant, “T-Mobile” is requesting an amendment to the Master Sign Program for The
Fountains Shopping Center located at 14451 South Mi litary Trail. They are requesting to use
their corporate color of magenta and their corporat e font for their signage. Ms. Buce said their
proposal meets the other sign criteria and it is on ly these two items that require the Board’s
approval. She concluded by stating that staff is r ecommending Board discretion.
Applicant’s Presentation
Ms. Denise Williams of Art Sign Company, agent for T-Mobile then addressed the Board. She
stated that T-Mobile is requesting to use their cor porate logo with their font and color. She
stated that there are other businesses within the s hopping center that have their company’s
corporate logo for their signage.
Public Comments
There were none.
Board Discussion
Ms. Alice Finst stated that she had gone to visit t he site and pointed out that the proposed T-
Mobile sign would be located higher than the sign f or the adjacent cleaners. She said there
were other signs in the shopping center that were i n the blue dictated by the Master Sign
Program and she thought the T-Mobile sign should me et this same criteria. Ms. Buce stated
that the reason blue was the approved color for the sign program was because Washington
Mutual Bank had originally been the anchor tenant a nd their corporate logo color was blue and
that the other tenants, including the cleaners, had used the 3M color blue vinyl number 3630-
36. She said that the only other tenant currently using their corporate logo was the Chase Bank
which replaced the Washington Mutual bank but noted that Chase’s corporate logo color was
also a blue. Ms. Finst commented that, as the prop osed T-Mobile sign would be located higher
than that of the cleaners, if it was not blue it wo uld really stand out.
Mr. DeCapito said that he did not have a problem wi th corporate identity or the sign’s
placement. Mr. Kupi said he did not have an issue with the placement but thought it should be
blue since that was what everyone else was required to use. Ms. Williams said that they really
wanted to use the pink/magenta color as that was th e color they are identified with, even in
their commercials. There was a discussion on the c olor of the sign and the Board asked Ms.
Williams if she had an actual color sample and she said she did not but stated it was not red, it
was more like a hot pink. Mr. Sadowsky said the Bo ard obviously had a problem with the
proposed color and asked Ms. Williams if T-Mobile w ould accept using blue for the sign. She
said that, if that was what the Board approved, the y would have to use it as they needed the
signage but that they really wanted the magenta col or. She said they would really like to use
the corporate font.
MOTION/FINDINGS
It was moved by Mr. Kupi for approval of the reques t for an amendment to the Master Sign
Program for T-Mobile at The Fountains based on posi tive findings pursuant to LDR Section
4.6.7(F)(2). Mr. Sadowsky seconded for discussion and said that it appeared the Board was
going to vote to deny the proposed signage and aske d if the Board should add a condition that
the sign could be approved with the proposed font, but in the Master Sign Program blue color.
After some discussion, Mr. Kupi then amended his mo tion for approval of the request for an
amendment to the Master Sign Program for T-Mobile a t The Fountains based on positive
findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) for th e font style only of the sign. Mr. Sadowsky
amended his second. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote (Ms. Dawson and Mr. Porten
absent.)
Mr. DeCapito moved for approval of the request for an amendment to the Master Sign Program
for T-Mobile at The Fountains based on positive fin dings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.7(F)(2) to
replace the blue color of the Master Sign Program f or The Fountains with the proposed
magenta color. Mr. Sadowsky seconded the motion an d there was a 2 to 3 vote for approval
(Ms. Dawson and Mr. Porten absent, Ms. Finst, Mr. K upi and Mr. Sadowsky dissented).
________________________
Rebecca Truxell,
Secretary to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Bo ard.
LAKE DRIVE
WEST
N
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
-- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM --
J
Q
F-
!Y
Q
H
J
N. W.
aE
0
A T L A N T I C
M BRADY
Iw( Q
a
o I
o'
BARRETT
FRANCES I
Of
w
ELLWOOD
0 F ---- 77
FRANWOOD
A V E N U EI
SUBJECT T -MOBIL E
PROPERTY
14451 SOUTH MILITARY TRAIL
LOCATION MAP
MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \File— Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1318 —T— Mobile
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:CANDI N. JEFFERSON, SENIOR PLANNER
PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
THROUGH:CITY MANAGER
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
WAIVER REQUEST/SW DELRAY ONE, LLC.
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Consideration of a waiver request to reduce the 8’ sidewalk to a 5’ foot sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue
in association with the approved site plan for the Saxena White Corporate Offices.
BACKGROUND
The subject property consists of Lots 2-6, Block 78, Town of Linton Plat and is approximate ly 1.12
acres. The property is located on the east side of SE 1 st Avenue, approximately 76.5’ south of SE 1 st
Street. The parcel has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Central Core (CC) and is zoned
Central Business District (CBD). The site is curren tly vacant.
At its meeting of February 21, 2012, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) approved
the Class V Site Plan, Architectural Elevations and Landscape Plan associated with the Saxena White
Corporate Offices consisting of a proposed three-story commercial building with a rooftop pavilion,
green roof garden area and a main lobby that opens to all three floors. The Board also approved the
sidewalk width reduction from 8’ to 5’. Staff’s recommendation of approval included a requirement that
the sidewalk be brick pavers. In addition, the DSMG , DDA and CRA recommend the brick paver
surface be provided. The reduction from 8’ to 5’ wa s supported by each group only if the reduced
surface was brick pavers. However, the SPRAB’s approval removed this condition of approval. In
accordance with recommendations from DSMG, CRA and DDA, a sidewalk width reduction from 8’ to
5’ should be conditioned on the provision that the red uced surface be brick pavers. It is noted that a f ive
foot brick paver sidewalk is provided south of the proposed Saxena White Corporate Offices along the
east side of SE 1 st Avenue, built in association with the new developm ent known as The Mark
Downtown.
Waiver Request – Provision of Sidewalks:
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 8'0” to 5’0” has been requested.
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.
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'-0" to 5’-0” wide sidewalk along SE
1 st Street and along SE 1 st Avenue. In support of this waiver request the appl icant has provided the
following statement:
“The property owner will provide a new 5’ wide conc rete sidewalk along SE 1 st 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”.
A four foot (4’) wide sidewalk already exists along SE 1 st Avenue and the applicant is to replace this
sidewalk with brick pavers at a minimum width of 5’ to provide a uniform sidewalk system in the area.
The Central Business District design guidelines req uire that all buildings be placed in close proximit y to
rights of way, to encourage pedestrian flows and ac cess and to foster a uniform streetscape with ample
sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. However, the adja cent land use intensity, pattern of development, an d
anticipated pedestrian traffic does not warrant an 8’ wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue.
Granting the requested waiver in width will not hav e an adverse effect on the neighboring area, dimini sh
the provision of public facilities, or create an un safe 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 LD R Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made, if the 5 ’
sidewalk is constructed of brick pavers instead of concrete.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
At its meeting of December 12, 2011, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) reviewed the
development proposal and recommended approval. At i ts meeting of December 15, 2011, the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) reviewed the d evelopment proposal and recommended
approval. At its meeting of February 9, 2012, the Development Services Management Group (DSMG)
reviewed the development proposal and recommended a pproval. All three (3) groups supported staff’s
recommendation for installation of decorative brick pavers and the reduction in width from 8’ to 5’. The
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) revie wed the sidewalk width waiver request at their
meeting of February 21, 2012 in conjunction with re view of the proposed Saxena White Corporate
Office development proposal and recommended approva l of the request to reduce the required sidewalk
width from 8’ to 5’ on a unanimous vote of 6-0. However, SPRAB did not support the installation of
decorative brick pavers and instead opted for a fiv e foot (5’) concrete sidewalk. A detailed description
and analysis of the proposal is contained within th e attached SPRAB staff report of February 21, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval of the waiver request to LDR Section 6.1.3(B) to allow a reduction from an 8' to a 5 ’
wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Avenue, by adopting the findings of fact and law c ontained in the staff
report, and finding that the request is consistent with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), provided that the 5 ’
sidewalk is constructed of brick pavers.
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 SAXENA WHITE CORPORATE OFFICES
1. This waiver request came before the City Commission on March 6, 2012.
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the wai ver request for Saxena White
Corporate Offices. All of the evidence is a part of th e 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. Waiver to LDR Section 6.1.3(B)
Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B), an 8’ sidewalk shall b e provided on the
Central Business District. The applicant is requesting a w aiver to allow for
a reduction from 8’ to 5’ wide sidewalk along SE 1 st Street and along SE
1 st Avenue. Staff supports the waiver subject to the condit ion that the
sidewalk be brick pavers instead of cement.
Should the waiver to reduce the sidewalk width from 8 feet to 5 feet be
granted subject to the condition stated above?
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
2
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.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City C ommission hereby adopts
this Order this 6th day of March, 2012, 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, Senior Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
WAIVER REQUESTS/WAYSIDE HOUSE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The action requested of the City Commission is appr oval of two waiver requests for the Wayside
House, a Residential Licensed Service Provider, loc ated at 328-378 NE 6 th Avenue. The first waiver is
to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a) to permit a building addition to be constructed less than the minimum
height requirement of 25’ within the CBD. The second waiver is to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1., to
permit a building addition to exceed the lower leve l setback requirements for building on NE 6 th
Avenue, within the CBD.
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of February 22, 2012, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) approved
with conditions a Class III Site Plan Modification for the Wayside House, located at 328-378 NE 6th
Avenue. The modification was for a 1,853 square foo t building addition and expansion of 11 additional
beds (8 within the addition, and 3 within the exist ing building), for a total of 34 beds.
WAIVER ANALYSIS
Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to grant ing a waiver, the approving body shall make a
finding that the granting of the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighbori ng area;
(b) Shall not significantly diminish the pro vision of public facilities;
(c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; an d
(d) Does not result in the grant of a specia l privilege in that the same waiver would be grante d
under similar circumstances on other property for a nother applicant or owner.
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), Developmen t Standards, Height : Overall height of buildings
shall be a minimum of twenty–five feet (25’). The p roposed addition measures approximately 14’10” to
the mean roof height, which is consistent with exis ting roof heights on the site.
In consideration of the criteria above, the waiver request can be supported in that the lower height w ill
not adversely affect the neighboring area as the si te already consists of multiple one-story structures of
the same scale and height. If compliance was propos ed, the addition meeting the minimum height would
adversely impact the streetscape in that area. The granting of this waiver will not result in a specia l
privilege in that it has been supported in other ca ses where an addition is proposed to an existing
building and considered to be more appropriate to m aintain the lower height, rather than arbitrarily
increase it due to the current development requirem ents. Based on the above, positive findings can be
made to reduce the minimum height requirement to 14 ’10”, whereas 25’ is required.
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(b)1., Develop ment Standards, Front Setbacks, Lower Levels : In
addition to Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(a) above, for buil dings fronting on A-1-A, Atlantic Avenue in the West
Atlantic Neighborhood and Beach Districts, and on N E and SE 5th and NE and SE 6th Avenues, from
the ground floor to thirty-seven feet (37’) height, a minimum of seventy percent (70%) and a ma ximum
of ninety percent (90%) of the building frontage sh all be set back no greater than ten feet (10’) from the
property line. The remaining length of the building shall be setback a minimum of fifteen feet (15’)
from the property line. The subject property fronts along NE 6th Avenue and, therefore, is required to
meet this requirement. However, the proposed addit ion measures approximately 25’ from the front
property line.
In consideration of the criteria above, the waiver request can be supported in that permitting the add ition
to be setback 25’ from the front property line, as opposed to the required 10’, would not adversely affect
the neighboring area as existing scale of the devel opment would be maintained while further providing
the desired privacy of the facility. In addition, t he 25’ setback further assures that an unsafe situation
would not be created for the residents on the prope rty by allowing preservation of the additional buff er
between them and the adjacent right-of-way. The granting of this waiver would not result i n a special
privilege as the request is consistent with existin g setback conditions on the site and should be
considered for other similar circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION
Waiver: Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), CBD, Development S tandards, Height:
Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), which requires a minimum building height
of 25’, by permitting an addition to an existing bu ilding at a height of 14’10”, based upon positive
findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5).
Waiver: Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1., CBD, Development Standards, Front Setbacks, Lower Levels:
Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1, which requires 70%-90% of a building
fronting on NE 6th Avenue to be set back 10’ from the property line, by permitting an addition t o an
existing building be set back 25’ from the front property line, based upon positive f indings with respect
to 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 WAYSIDE HOUSE
1. This waiver request came before the City Commission on March 6, 2012.
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the wai ver requests for Wayside House.
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 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 to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a):
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(1)(a), overall heig ht of buildings shall
be a minimum of twenty-five feet (25’).
Should the waiver to reduce the minimum building he ight from 25 feet to 14
feet 10 inches be granted?
Yes ______ No _______
B. Waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1 :
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(b)1, for buildin gs fronting on A-1-A,
Atlantic Avenue in the West Atlantic Neighborhood and Beach Districts,
and on NE and SE 5 th and NE and SE 6 th Avenues, ground floor to thirty-
seven feet (37’) shall be a minimum of seventy percent (70%) and a
maximum of ninety percent (90%) of the building fron tage shall be set
back no greater than ten feet (10’) from the property line. The remaining
2
length of the building shall be set back a minimum of f ifteen feet (15’) from
the property line.
Should the waiver to increase the setback from 10 f eet by 15 feet (from 10
feet to 25 feet) for 70-90% of building frontage an d by 10 feet (from 15 feet
to 25 feet) for the remainder of the building front age 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.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City C ommission hereby adopts
this Order this 6th day of March, 2012, by a vote of ____ in favor and ____ opposed.
________________________________
ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
________________________________
Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:CANDI N. JEFFERSON, SENIOR PLANNER
PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
THROUGH:CITY MANAGER
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
WAIVER REQUEST/1041 SEASPRAY AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Consideration of a waiver to reduce the required si ght visibility triangle from 10’ to 4’6” along both
sides of the driveway on 1041 Seaspray Avenue assoc iated with a new single family residence within
the North Beach Overlay District.
BACKGROUND
Waiver Requests LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) Findings:
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 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 other property for another applicant or owner.
The applicant is requesting relief from the requirement for a clear line of sight between t hree feet (3')
and six feet (6’) height within the ten foot (10’) sight visibility triangle. There is a six foot (6’) high
motorized aluminum gate with concrete columns propo sed within the required 10’ sight visibility
triangle reducing the sight visibility triangle to 4'6" versus 10'. A call box with an access control panel
system will operate the gates and is also located w ithin the sight visibility triangle on the west sid e of
the driveway. These visual obstructions prevent a c lear line of sight within a portion of the required
sight triangle. A detail of the proposed fencing i s attached.
The purpose and intent of these triangles is to pro vide sufficient view corridors for safe interaction of
vehicles and pedestrians at intersections. However, since the property line is 10’7” from the driveway
intersection with the roadway of Seaspray Avenue, a nd there are no future expansions of roadway width
anticipated, there is adequate visibility for vehic les entering and exiting the site. There is justifi cation to
grant the waiver as the purpose and intent as writt en in the LDR’s is fulfilled. The reduction of the 10 ’
sight visibility triangle at the intersection of th e driveway and the property line for 1041 Seaspray
Avenue will not negatively affect traffic flow, nor present a danger to vehicu lar traffic or pedestrians.
Granting the requested waiver will not have an adve rse effect on the neighboring area, diminish the
provision of public facilities, or create and unsaf e situation. This waiver would also be supported un der
similar circumstances and therefore will not result in the granting of a special privilege. Consequent ly, a
positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made.
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval of the request to waive LDR Section 4 .6.14(B)(1) to reduce the requirement for a ten
foot (10’) sight visibility triangle at the interse ction of the driveway and the property line from 10 ’ to
4’6”for 1041 Seaspray Avenue, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report,
and finding that the request is 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 REQUEST FOR 1041 SEASPRAY AVENUE
1. This waiver request came before the City Commission on March 6, 2012.
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the wai ver request for 1041 Seaspray
Avenue. All of the evidence is a part of the record i n 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. Waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(B)(1):
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.14(B)(1), there is a requi rement for a ten foot
(10’) sight visibility triangle at the intersection of the driveway and the
property line.
Should the waiver to reduce the sight visibility fr om 10 feet to 4 feet, 6
inches 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.
2
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.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City C ommission hereby adopts
this Order this 6th day of March, 2012, by a vote of ____ in favor and ____ opposed.
________________________________
ATTEST: Nelson S. McDuffie, Mayor
________________________________
Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist
Richard C. Hasko, PE, Director of Environmental Ser vices
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
VALET PARKING QUEUE EXPANSION/PRIME STEAKHOUSE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before the City Commission is that of appr oving a request from Prime Steakhouse for the
expansion of its valet parking queue from two (2) t o six (6) spaces.
BACKGROUND
Prime Steakhouse, located at 110 East Atlantic Aven ue, currently holds a Valet Parking License
Agreement for the valet queue on the west side of S E 2nd Avenue, just south of Atlantic Avenue.
Queued vehicles are parked in the Federspiel Garage on SE 1st Avenue. While only one 1-block
separates the two, the existing traffic grid requir es valets to drive 5-blocks to the garage, unable to
access SE 1st Ave using eastbound SE 1st Street. Wh ile the return trip would be optimal utilizing SE 1 st
Street, the valet queue on the west side of the roa d requires the valet to return vehicles to patrons via
Atlantic Avenue. In an effort to reduce driving dis tance and improve service, the restaurant is reques ting
expansion of the queue by adding two spaces, on the east side of SE 2nd Avenue, in front of the former
VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) building, for return ing vehicles to customers. It is noted that Staff i s
working with the developer of the VFW in the reconf iguration of the right-of-way on the east side of the
road. In addition to the aforementioned, approval o f the request reduces traffic on eastbound Atlantic
Avenue during its peak utilization. Staff introduce d a similar idea several years ago, finding the
separation of incoming and outgoing vehicles stream lines operations. A shortcoming of the trial was
restricting the spaces to customer pick-up only, necessary to avoid lengthy distance to par k vehicles.
Customers accessing the queue from the north got be lligerent and/or attempted u-turns, when asked to
use the correct side. This request, however, provid es attendants with clear sight of both east and wes t
sides of the road, and can efficiently park and ret urn vehicles from either direction (see diagrams).
Furthermore, given the queue's close proximity to A tlantic Avenue, the western two-space queue is, at
times, insufficient to accommodate incoming vehicle s given the high volume of traffic at this western
fringe of the Downtown Core Area. Gridlock in this portion of Atlantic Avenue would paralyze traffic
movements in the area. Consequently, the request in cludes further expansion of the west side to four (4)
spaces, assimilating the two (2) spaces south of th e existing queue. Until recently the queue primaril y
served restaurants occupying the 110 East Atlantic Avenue building, with few others. Recent
occupation of the Worthing Place restaurants has re sulted in a significant increase in parking demand,
and demand is expected to increase further with the completion of the VFW's 3,151 square foot
conversion of use to Restaurant Racks.
The CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) at its mee ting of February 23, 2012, raised a concern
over the growing number of public spaces dedicated to the valet parking program. Assuming the valet
program provides an additional 500 spaces through t he various private lot leases, and calculating a 1.75
turnover ratio, a total of 875 vehicles are accommo dated through the use of (including this request) 54
on-street spaces, resulting in a 16 vehicle, per sp ace, turnover ratio. Normal turnover for on-street
parking spaces, utilized by the general public in b usy downtown areas, averages approximately three (3 )
cars per space during peak times.
Staff is confident approval of the request will pr ovide better service to patrons and reduce several
negative impacts, including but not limited to, a reduction of eastbound traffic on Atlantic Avenue
between 1st and 2nd Avenues, reduced travel distanc e, reducing emissions, mitigating allegations of
speeding through the neighborhood, etc. Staff note s that, if approved, all spaces will be used for drop
off and/or pick up, contingent on vehicular approac h.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Parking Management Advisory Board, at its meeti ng of January 31, 2012, unanimously
recommended approval of the applicant's request.
At the Downtown Development Authority meeting of Fe bruary 13, 2012, the item failed to receive
a second on a motion to approve the request, and th erefore was not approved.
Consensus of the CRA, at its meeting of February 23 , 2012, was denial of the applicant's request in a 2-
3 vote, (Lewis, Arts and Branning dissenting).
RECOMMENDATION
Move approval of the request from Prime Steakhouse, for the expansion of its valet parking queue from
two to six spaces, as described in the preceding st aff report.
Diagram A Route
Red arrows=
Drop Off
Route
Green
arrows=
Drop Off
Parking
Garage
Valet Stand
(Drop Off &
Return)
Diagram B
Parking Queues for Request
Existing
Valet Queue
2 -spaces
Requested
spots
Valet Stand /
Key box
Diagram C
Valet Stand
(Drop Off &
Return)
Requested
spots
Existing
Valet
Queues
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -12/COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Approve Resolution No. 13-12 authorizing the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)to issue Tax
Increment Redevelopment Bonds not to exceed $4,000,000.00 to fund certain projects.
BACKGROUND
At its February 23, 2012 meeting the CRA approved R esolution No. 2012-03, authorizing issuance of
$4,000,000.00 in tax increment redevelopment bonds by the Delray Beach CRA. The funds will be
expended on capital projects, freeing up Tax Increm ent Financing (TIF) dollars needed to provided a
$2.7 million loan for the Housing Authority's elder ly housing project (Village Square) as well as a $1.5
million loan to Prime Developers and Investors towa rd the construction of a moderately priced hotel on
West Atlantic Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution No. 13-12.
RESOLUTION NO. 13-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
DELRAY BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(THE "AGENCY") TO ISSUE TAX INCREMENT
REDEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS, IN ONE OR
MORE SERIES (THE "BONDS"), IN THE AGGREGATE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED FOUR
MILLION DOLLARS ($4,000,000) TO BE OUTSTANDING
FROM TIME TO TIME PURSUANT TO A REVOLVING
LINE OF CREDIT UPON TERMS HEREINAFTER
DESCRIBED; AUTHORIZING THE PROPER OFFICIALS OF
THE CITY TO DO ALL OTHER THINGS NECESSARY TO
ASSIST THE AGENCY IN THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 46-85 (as amended and supplemented ) enacted by the City
Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida (the "City Commission") as the governing body of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida (the "City"), the Delray Be ach Community Redevelopment Agency was
created; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission has been requested pursuant to t he terms of Resolution
No. 2012-03 adopted by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Delray Beach Community
Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") on February 23, 2012 (the "Agency Requesting Resolution") to
authorize the issuance of the Agency's Tax Incremen t Redevelopment Revenue Bonds, in one or
more series (the "Bonds") pursuant to Section 163.3 85, Florida Statutes, in the aggregate principal
amount of not to exceed Four Million Dollars ($4,00 0,000) to be outstanding from time to time pursuant
to a revolving line of credit, said Bonds to be sol d at private sale to City National Bank of Florida (the
"Bond Purchaser") upon terms and conditions determi ned appropriate and acceptable to the Agency and
consistent with the Bond Purchaser's commitment to purchase the Bonds (the "Commitment"); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it appropriate and in the public's interest to authorize and
approve the issuance and sale to the Bond Purchaser of the Agency's Bonds for the purpose of funding t he
development and implementation of certain redevelop ment projects provided for in the Agency's
Community Redevelopment Plan, as the same exists fr om time to time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSI ON OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: All of the above recitals are true and correct.
Section 2: The terms and provisions of the Commitment of the B ond Purchaser are hereby
approved and accepted.
2
Res No. 13-12
Section 3: That pursuant to Section 163.385, Florida Statutes, the Agency is hereby authorized to
issue and sell, on a negotiated basis to the Bond P urchaser, pursuant to the terms and provisions of t he
Commitment of the Bond Purchaser and resolutions of the Agency reflecting the terms of such
Commitment and other provisions deemed appropriate by the Agency and the Bond Purchaser, the
Agency's Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000) to be
outstanding from time to time pursuant to a revolvi ng line of credit agreement provided by the Bond
Purchaser.
Section 4: The Agency is hereby authorized to execute in its c orporate capacity, in its discretion,
such documentation as it deems necessary and approp riate to complete the issuance and sale of said Bon ds.
Section 5: The Mayor, the City Manager, the Finance Director, the Treasurer and any other
proper official of the City, be and each of them is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deli ver any and
all documents and instruments and to do and cause t o be done any and all acts and things necessary or
proper for carrying out the transactions contemplat ed by this Resolution.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]
Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the 6 th day of March, 2012.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
By: ______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.G. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST/ROBERT GOLDSTEIN
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Consideration of the request from Mr. Robert Goldst ein to reimburse to him Plan Review fees paid
upon the submission of a permit application for a n ew single family home on July 19, 2005 in the
amount of $13,161.85.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Goldstein’s initial request for reimbursement was made in Apr il 2007 and my response to his
request was by letter on May 2, 2007. In August 201 1, Mr. Goldstein again called to follow-up on his
reimbursement request stating that in these difficu lt economic times every penny counts. His positio n
is that since he did not build the home, the City d id nothing to earn the plan review fee made on his
initial submission.
According to my research, we received the permit ap plication on July 7, 2005. The plans were routed to
the Planning & Zoning department the same day, beca use the property was immediately identified as
being in the Beach Overlay District. Planning Depar tment staff disapproved the application since it di d
not have the required Overlay District application. Staff communicated this information to the project
Architect on July 28, 2005. In addition, we actuall y reviewed the map used in 2005, verifying that it
clearly identified the property as being within the district. The plans submitted were routed to and
reviewed by Public Utilities, Engineering and build ing staff for structural, mechanical, electric and
plumbing. Permit applications automatically expire when no action is taken within six months of
submission. Thus, the permit application expired De cember 2005. Mr. Goldstein’s request for
reimbursement was made seventeen (17) months after our last contact with his agent (July 28, 2005).
I have attached my letter to Mr. Goldstein dated Ma y 2, 2007 and correspondence received from him
dated August 28, 2011. The property has changed own ers twice since his initial ownership in 2004.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the request from Mr. Rob ert Goldstein for reimbursement of plan review
fees associated with a permit application for a new single family home in July, 2005 because the plan
review was done and the request for reimbursement w as not submitted in a timely manner.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Mananger
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.H. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST / FOOD TRUCK JAM
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission is requested to approve a Special E vent Permit for a Food Truck Jam produced by the
Ruth Rales Jewish Family Services proposed to be he ld on May 6, 2012 from noon to 4:00 p.m., on the
Old School Square Park grounds. Commission is also requested to approve staff support for the traffic
control and security, fire inspection services, tra sh removal and cleanup.
BACKGROUND
Attached are a letter, special event permit, budget , site plan and economic calculator for this event
received from Jill Waldman on behalf of the Ruth Ra les Jewish Family Services. This is a first time
event which falls within the small scale event cate gory.
The event will be a family friendly event to acknow ledge their supporters and volunteers and to recrui t
new volunteers.
The total estimated overtime costs are $2,185 and t rash boxes $90 for a total of $2,275. Per the Speci al
Event Policies and Procedures, the event producer w ill pay 100% of all City costs of $2,275 including
park rental.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends consideration of approval of the S pecial Event Permit and staff support as requested
with the following conditions:
1. Receipt of a rental agreement with Old School Squar e Park by April 6, 2012.
2. Receipt of a Certificate of General Liability and Alcohol Liability Insurance by April 23, 2012.
3. Require the site to be fenced or at least the beer garden.
4. Receipt of a copy of the Temporary Liquor Lice nse by May 1, 2012.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
THROUGH:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.I. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/DELRAY ROCKS CONCERT
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
City Commission is requested to approve a Special E vent Permit request received from Josh Davis for a
proposed music festival to be held on the grounds a t Old School Square and in the Old School Square
Park on September 22, 2012 from noon to 11:00 p.m. Commission is also requested to approve staff
support for traffic control and security, EMS assis tance and fire inspection, site cleanup, trash remo val,
trash boxes, event signage and small stage use.
BACKGROUND
Attached are a Special Event Permit application, si te plan, budget and economic calculator received
from Mr. Josh Davis, the event producer for this pr oposed event. This is a first time event that fall s
within the major event category. It will be the se cond major event in September, which is the limit f or
major events in a month.
The event is a proposed music festival, utilizing t hree (3) stages and will include food, beverage and
merchandise vendors per the attached site plan.
Estimated overtime costs for this event are $15,465 , stage rental $530, trash boxes $245, signage $250
and park rental $1,000 for a total of $17,490. Per the Special Event Policies and Procedures, the even t
producer is required to pay 100% of all City costs.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Commission consideration of approv al of the Special Event Permit and staff
assistance as requested with the following conditio ns:
1. Receipt of a rental agreement with Old School Square by August 22, 2012.
2. Receipt of a rental agreement with Old School Square Park by August 22, 2012.
3. Receipt of a Certificate of General Liability and Alcohol Liability Insurance and a signed Hold
Harmless Agreement by September 1, 2012.
4. Require the site to be fenced.
5. Require an on-site dumpster and grease disposa l barrels.
6. Receipt of a non-refundable deposit of $4,000 by September 1, 2012.
7. Receipt of a copy of the Temporary Liquor Lice nse by September 14, 2012.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 27, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 9.J. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
APPOINTMENT TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the City Commission for an appo intment to the Public Art Advisory Board.
BACKGROUND
Ms. Ora Sorensen, regular member on the Public Art Advisory Board, submitted her resignation
effective immediately. An appointment is needed fo r one regular member to serve an unexpired term
ending July 31, 2013.
On February 1, 2005, the Delray Beach City Commissi on adopted Ordinance No. 77-04 establishing the
Public Art Advisory Board for the purpose of advisi ng and making recommendations to the City
Commission with respect to public art policy and re lated issues including, but not limited to, the
selection, construction and placement of public art in/on City right-of-way and City owned property.
The Public Art Advisory Board shall consist of seve n (7) members. Three (3) seats on the Board must
be filled with either an artist, architect, landsca pe architect or engineer. Laypersons of knowledge,
experience and judgment who have an interest in pub lic art shall make up the balance of the Board.
The following individuals have submitted applicatio ns and would like to be considered for
appointment:
(See Exhibit A attached)
A check for code violations and/or municipal liens was conducted. None were found. Voter registration
verification was completed and all are registered.
Based on the rotation system, the appointment will be made by Commissioner Carney (Seat #1) for one
(1) regular member to serve an unexpired term endin g July 31, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend appointment of one (1) regular member to serve on the Public Art Advisory Board for an
unexpired term ending July 31, 2013.
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD
01/12
TERM EXPIRES REGULAR MEMBERS OCCUPATION
07/31/13
Unexp Appt
Vacant
07/31/12
Appt 07/15/08
Reappt 07/20/10
Dana Donaty, Chair
Artist
07/31/13
Appt 08/02/11
Jonathan Jonas
Project Manager
07/31/12
Appt 07/20/10
Sandi Franciosa
Administrative
Asst/Retired
07/31/12
Appt 07/15/08
Reappt 07/20/10
Michiko Kurisu
Artist/Photographer
07/31/12
Appt 07/15/08
Reappt 07/20/10
Richard McGloin, Vice Chair
Electrical Engineer
07/31/13
Appt 07/21/09
Reappt 07/05/11
Mary Minieka
Administration
Contact: Alberta Gaum X7136
S/City Clerk/Board 11/Public Art Advisory Board
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD
EXHIBIT A
Applicants interested in serving as lay persons:
Applicant Occupation
Daniel Bellante Business Owner
Alexia Rouquette Real Estate/Marketing/Public Relations
Kera Trowbridge Interviewer-Panelist
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:R. Brian Shutt, City Attorney
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 10.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 09 -12/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/421 S.W. 5TH AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Staff requests approval of Resolution No. 09-12 and the Purchase and Sale Agreement for 421 SW 5 th
Avenue.
BACKGROUND
In 2001 the staff had the City-Wide Storm Water Master plan updated. One of the i ssues identified in
the Master Plan was to address the drainage at the intersection of SW 4 th Av and SW 4 th St. This
intersection collects water and there is no positiv e drainage provided. Staff reviewed options for
addressing this drainage issue and decided on a pla n that would require a retention area somewhere in
the block on the southwest corner of SW 4 th Ave and 4 th St. One parcel became available shortly after
the Master Plan was completed and the City purchase d that parcel. It is identified on the attached ma p.
Several attempts to purchase additional parcels wer e unsuccessful. While the parcel being considered
under this item (421 SW 5th Ave.) is on the west si de of the alley, a design can be developed to obtai n
the required retention volume with a pond on both s ides of the alley when sufficient land is purchased .
Resolution No. 09-12 adopts and includes the Contract for Sale and Pu rchase between the City and the
CRA for the property located at 421 SW 5 th Avenue. The cost of the purchase is ten dollars
($10.00). The property is conveyed in “As Is” condition and the City agrees to restrict the use o f the
property to public uses, including but not limited to drainage retention, for the benefit of the gener al
public. The restriction on use is outlined in the interlocal agreement with the CRA that is a sub-item to
this agenda item. This transaction has been adverti sed and is ready for approval by the City
Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 09-12.
RESOLUTION NO. 09-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ACQUIR E
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 DELRA Y
BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, SELLER, TO
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to acquire certain property located at 421
S.W. 5 th Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to purchase said property
for the municipal purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSIO N OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 . That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida , as Buyer, hereby agrees
to purchase the property described herein from the Seller, for the purchase price of Ten Dollars ($10.00),
said property being described as follows:
Lot 11, Sundy & Tenbrook Addition to Delray, Florid a according to the Plat
thereof on file in the Office of the Clerk of the C ircuit Court in and for Palm
Beach County, Florida recorded in Plat Book 12, Pag e 32, said lands situate,
lying and being in Palm Beach County.
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 S eller as hereinabove named are
incorporated herein as Exhibit “A”.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the _____ day of ______________, 2012.
_____________________________________
ATTEST: M A Y O R
___________________________________
City Clerk
O w n e d b y C i t y
S W
5 T
H
A V
E
S W 4 T H A V E
S W 4 T H S T
N
C i t y O f D e l r a y B e a c h E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e r v i c e s D e p a r t m e n t E n g i n e e r i n g /G I S C i t y O w n e d L o t s
L o t 5 L o t 1 2
L o t 1 1
L o t 1 1 t o b e c o n v e y e d t o t h e C i t y o f D e l r a y B e a c h
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:R. Brian Shutt, City Attorney
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 10.A1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/421 S.W. 5TH AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Staff requests approval of the Interlocal Agreement between the City and CRA regarding the property
located at 421 SW 5 th Avenue.
BACKGROUND
The Interlocal Agreement provides that the City wil l accept the property is in “As Is” condition and
agrees to restrict use of the property to public us es, including but not limited to drainage retention , for
the benefit of the general public. This transaction has been advertised and is ready for approval by t he
City Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Agreeme nt.
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement
THROUGH:David Harden, City Manager
DATE:February 28, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 10.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -12/CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE/530 N.W. 47TH AVENUE
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Staff requests City Commission approval to sell Nei ghborhood Stabilization Program property located
at 530 NW 47th Avenue to Jean Louigene Nelan for th e purchase price of forty-five thousand dollars
($45,000).
BACKGROUND
The City of Delray Beach has received $1,905,005 under the Neighborhood Stabilization Pro gram
(NSP) award through the Florida Department of Commu nity Affairs by the U. S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and $400,000 fr om the Delray Beach Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) as a result of the Housi ng and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R.
3221). The NSP funding is for the purpose of purcha sing foreclosed or abandoned homes for
rehabilitation, resale, or redevelopment in order t o 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 t han one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area
Median Income (AMI) as determined by HUD.
The property at 530 NW 47th Avenue was appraised fo r $60,000 on June 13, 2010. The total rehab cost
for the property was $35,000. The property was rea ppraised on February 4, 2012 for $45,000. The City
desires to sell the subject property to Jean Louige ne Nelan for the purchase price of Forty-Five
Thousand dollars ($45,000), said property being des cribed as follows:
A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5, PINE TRAIL SECTION TWO , ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF,
AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGE 153 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BE GINNING AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE RUN N. 63 DEGREES 03' 03" W. 113.36 FEET ALONG THE NORTH
LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE RUN S. 26 DEGREES 13' 46 " W. 43.54 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT 6 TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 15 DEG REES 35' 54" W. 10.80 FEET ALONG SAID
WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 70 DEGREES 12' 46" E. 114.08 FEET TO A POINT OF
INTEREST WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST; THE NCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY 40.00
FEET ALONG ARC OF SAID CURVE HAVING FOR ITS ELEMENT S A RADIUS OF 320 FEET AND A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7 DEGREES 09' 43" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Commission approval to sell N SP property located at 530 NW 47th Avenue to
Jean Louigene Nelan for the purchase price of forty -five thousand dollars ($45,000).
RESOLUTION NO. 11-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO SELL
REAL PROPERTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS
DESCRIBED HEREIN, HEREBY INCORPORATING AND ACCEPTIN G
THE CONTRACT STATING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR
THE SALE AND PURCHASE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE CIT Y
OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, Florida, wishes to sell p roperty located at 530 NW 47 TH
AVENUE; and
WHEREAS, the Buyer hereinafter named desires to buy the prope rty hereinafter described from the
City of Delray Beach, Florida; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Delray B each, Florida, to sell said property to be
used for single family homeownership.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSI ON OF THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 . That the City Commission of the City of Delray Be ach, Florida, as Seller, hereby agrees to
sell to Jean Louigene Nelan, as Buyer, for the purc hase price of the lesser of Forty-Five Thousand Dol lars
($45,000.00) or bank appraised value, said property being de scribed as follows:
A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5, PINE TRAIL SECTION TWO, ACC ORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGE 153 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULA RLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SA ID LOT 6; THENCE
RUN N. 63 DEGREES 03' 03" W. 113.36 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6;
THENCE RUN S. 26 DEGREES 13' 46" W. 43.54 FEET ALONG THE WESTER LY LINE OF
SAID LOT 6 TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 15 DEGREES 35' 54" W. 10.80 FEET ALONG
SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 70 DEGREE S 12' 46" E. 114.08 FEET
TO A POINT OF INTEREST WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST; THENCE
RUN NORTHEASTERLY 40.00 FEET ALONG ARC OF SAID CURVE HAV ING FOR ITS
ELEMENTS A RADIUS OF 320 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7 DEGREES 09' 43" TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
2
Res No. 11-12
Section 2 . That the terms and conditions contained in the contr act 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 ______________, 2012.
__________________________________
ATTEST: M A Y O R
________________________________
City Clerk
CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE
PARTIES: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH , a Florida municipal corporation, ("Seller"), of
100 N.W. 1 st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444 and Jean Louigene Nelan ,
("Buyer"), of 492 NW 52 nd Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33445, hereby agree that t he
Seller shall sell and Buyer shall buy the following described Real Property and
Personal Property (collectively “Property”) upon the f ollowing terms and conditions,
which INCLUDE the Standards for Real Estate Transactions (“Standard(s)”), attached
hereto and riders and any addenda to this Contract for Sale and Purchase (“Contract”):
I. DESCRIPTION :
(a) Legal Description: A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5, PINE TRAIL SECTION TWO ,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGE 153 OF
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, M ORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CO RNER OF SAID LOT 6;
THENCE RUN N. 63 DEGREES 03' 03" W. 113.36 FEET ALO NG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
LOT 6; THENCE RUN S. 26 DEGREES 13' 46" W. 43.54 FE ET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE
OF SAID LOT 6 TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 15 DEGREES 35' 54" W. 10.80 FEET ALONG
SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 70 DEG REES 12' 46" E. 114.08 FEET
TO A POINT OF INTEREST WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST; THENCE RUN
NORTHEASTERLY 40.00 FEET ALONG ARC OF SAID CURVE HA VING FOR ITS ELEMENTS
A RADIUS OF 320 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7 DEGRE ES 09' 43" TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
PCN: 12-42-46-12-08-005-0061
(b) Address: 530 NW 47 th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33445
II. PURCHASE PRICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . US$45,000.00
III. TIME FOR ACCEPTANCE; EFFECTIVE DATE: If this offer is not executed by
and delivered to all parties OR FACT OF EXECUTION com municated in writing
between the parties on or before March 30, 2012, the deposit(s) will, at Buyer's option,
be returned to Buyer and the offer withdrawn. The date of this Contract ("Effective
Date") will be the date when the last one of the Buyer and the Seller has signed this
offer.
IV. TITLE EVIDENCE : At least 7 days before closing date, Buyer shall obtain a title
insurance commitment.
V. CLOSING DATE : This transaction shall be closed and the deed and othe r
closing papers delivered on or before seven (45) days fr om the date of the execution of
this agreement, unless extended by other provisions of t his Contract.
VI. RESTRICTIONS; EASEMENTS; LIMITATIONS: Buyer shall take title by Quit
Claim Deed subject to: zoning, restrictions, prohibition s and other requirements
imposed by governmental authority; restrictions and mat ters appearing on the plat or
otherwise common to the subdivision; public utility easem ents of record (easements are
to be located contiguous to Real Property lines and not more than 10 feet in width as to
the rear or front lines and 7 ½ feet in width as to t he side lines, unless otherwise
2
specified herein); taxes for year of closing and subsequen t years; assumed mortgages
and purchase money mortgages, if any; provided, that t here exists at closing no
violation of the foregoing and none of them prevent s the use of Real Property for
residential purpose.
VII. OCCUPANCY: Seller warrants that there are no parties in occupancy other
than Seller , but if Property is intended to be rented or occupied beyond closing, the fact
and terms thereof shall be stated herein, and the tena nt(s) or occupants disclosed
pursuant to Standard D. Seller agrees to deliver occupancy of Property at time of
closing unless otherwise stated herein. If occupancy is to b e delivered before closing,
Buyer assumes all risk of loss to Property from date of occupancy, shall be responsible
and liable for maintenance from that date, and shall be deemed to have accepted
Property in their existing condition as of time of taki ng occupancy unless otherwise
stated herein or in a separate writing.
VIII. TYPEWRITTEN OR HANDWRITTEN PROVISIONS: Typewritten or handwritten
provisions shall control all printed provisions of Contra ct in conflict with them.
IX. ASSIGNABILITY: Buyer may not assign Contract.
X. DISCLOSURES:
(a) Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that, when accumulated in
a building in sufficient quantities, may present health risks to persons who
are exposed to it over time. Levels of radon that ex ceed federal and state
guidelines have been found in buildings in Florida. Additional information
regarding Radon or Radon testing may be obtained fro m your County
Public health unit.
(b) Buyer may have determined the energy efficiency rating of the residential
building, if any is located on the Real Property.
XI. SPECIAL CLAUSES; ADDENA: If additional terms are to be provided, they will
be provided in the attached addenda. If there is an addenda, check here
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA Jean Louigene Nelan
By:_________________________ ______ By:_______________________ _____
Mayor: Nelson S.McDuffie Date Print Name:________________ Date
ATTEST: ATTEST:
___________________________ _______________________________
City Clerk Approved as to Form:
City Attorney
3
ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE
SELLER: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
BUYER: Jean Louigene Nelan
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 530 NW 47 th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33445
XI. SPECIAL CLAUSES; ADDENDA (Continued):
A. FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN REAL PROPERTY TAX ACT ("FIRPT A"):
The parties shall comply with the provisions of Internal Revenue Code Section 1445
and applicable Treasury Regulations issued thereunder. I f the Seller is a U.S. person
for Internal Revenue Code Section 1445 purposes, then on demand of the Buyer and
prior to closing the Seller shall provide the Buyer wi th a certificate of non-foreign status
in the manner provided in Treasury Regulations Section 1.1445-2. If the Seller provides
the Buyer with such certificate, and if the Buyer is oth erwise permitted to rely on such
certificate under those Regulations, the Buyer shall not withhold under Internal
Revenue Code Section 1445.
If the Seller is a 'foreign person' as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, the
Buyer generally is required to withhold 10% of the g ross sales price from the Seller at
closing and to pay the withheld amount over to the In ternal Revenue Service (IRS)
unless an applicable exemption from withholding or a l imitation on the amount to be
withheld is available. To the extent that the cash to be paid over to the Seller at closing
is insufficient to cover the Buyer's withholding obligat ion, the Seller shall provide to the
Buyer at closing cash equal to such excess for purposes of maki ng such withholding
payment. If the Seller's federal income tax on the ga in is less than the applicable
withholding amount, the Seller may make advance appli cation to the IRS for reduced
withholding and, if granted, the Buyer shall withhol d only the authorized reduced
amount. If such ruling has not been received by closing, the parties at closing shall
enter into an escrow agreement reasonably satisfactory to the Buyer and Seller pending
receipt of the ruling, provided that at closing the Se ller shall have the obligation to
provide to the escrow agent from the closing proceeds (or from the Seller's other
resources if necessary) cash equal to the maximum required withholding, with any
excess withholding being refundable to the Seller upon receipt of a favorable ruling
from the IRS.
Buyer and Seller understand that the IRS requires th e Buyer and the Seller to
have a U.S. federal taxpayer identification number a nd to supply that number on the
foregoing forms. A foreign individual may acquire an International Taxpayer
Identification Number for this purpose. Since it may ta ke several weeks to receive the
number after application and the IRS will not process t hese forms without the actual
number, a party lacking a TIN is advised to apply immed iately.
4
B. The Buyer shall have thirty (30) calendar days with in which to conduct any
and all feasibility studies and determinations rela tive to the suitability for the acquisition of
the subject property by the Buyer and the Buyer res erves the express right to terminate
this Contract at any time during said period for an y reason or no reason, in Buyer’s sole
discretion, whereupon Buyer shall receive a full re fund of all deposit monies paid
hereunder. Buyer shall be granted reasonable acces s to the premises to conduct such
feasibility studies and determinations, including e nvironmental assays, core drilling,
surveys, soil sampling and other such testing.
C. This Contract is expressly contingent and conditioned upon the approval
of the same by the City Commission of the City of Delr ay Beach.
SELLERS’ INITIALS: BUYER’S INITIALS:
5
STANDARDS FOR REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS
A. Evidence of Title : A title insurance commitment issued by a Florida licensed title
insurer agreeing to issue to Buyer, upon recording of the deed to Buyer, an owner's policy of title
insurance in the amount of the purchase price, insu ring Buyer's title to real property, subject only t o liens,
encumbrances, exceptions or qualification set forth in this agreement and those which shall be dischar ged
by Seller at or before closing. Seller shall conve y a marketable title subject only to liens, encumbr ances,
exceptions or qualifications set forth in this agre ement and those which shall be discharged by Seller at or
before closing. Marketable title shall be determin ed according to applicable title standards adopted by
authority of The Florida Bar and in accordance with law. If title is found defective, Buyer shall not ify Seller
in writing specifying defect(s). If the defect(s) render title unmarketable, Seller will have one hun dred
twenty (120) days from receipt of notice within whi ch to remove the defect(s), failing which Buyer sha ll
have the option of either accepting the title as it then is or demanding a refund of deposit(s) paid w hich
shall immediately be returned to Buyer; thereupon B uyer and Seller shall release one another of all fu rther
obligations under the agreement. Seller will, if t itle is found unmarketable, use diligent effort to correct
defect(s) in title within the time provided therefo r, including the bringing of necessary suits.
B. Survey : Buyer, at Buyer's expense, within time allowed t o deliver evidence of title and
to examine same, may have real property surveyed an d certified by a registered Florida surveyor. If
survey shows encroachment on real property or that improvements located on real property encroach on
setback lines, easements, lands of others, or viola te any restrictions, agreement covenants or applica ble
governmental regulation, the same shall constitute a title defect.
C. Ingress and Egress : Seller warrants and represents that there is ing ress and
egress to the real property sufficient for the inte nded use as described herein, title to which is in
accordance with Standard A.
D. Leases : If applicable, Seller shall, not less than fifte en (15) days before closing,
furnish to Buyer copies of all written leases and e stoppel letters from each tenant specifying the nat ure
and duration of the tenant's occupancy, rental rate s, advanced rent and security deposits paid by tena nt.
If Seller is unable to obtain such letter from each tenant, the same information shall be furnished by Seller
to Buyer within that time period in the form of a S eller's affidavit, and Buyer may thereafter contact tenants
to confirm such information. Seller shall, at clos ing, deliver and assign all original leases to Buye r.
E. Liens : Seller shall furnish to Buyer at time of closing an affidavit attesting to the
absence, unless otherwise provided for herein, of a ny financing statements, claims of lien or potentia l
lienors known to Seller and further attesting that there have been no improvements or repairs to prope rty
for ninety (90) days immediately preceding date of closing. If property has been improved, or repaire d
within that time, Seller shall deliver releases or waivers of mechanics' liens executed by all general
contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and materia lmen in addition to Seller's lien affidavit setting forth the
names of all such general contractors, subcontracto rs, suppliers and materialmen and further affirming
that all charges for improvements or repairs which could serve as a basis for a mechanic's line or a c laim
for damages have been paid or will be paid at closi ng.
F. Place of Closing : Closing shall be held in the county where real p roperty is
located, at the office of the attorney or other clo sing agent designated by Buyer.
G. Time : Time is of the essence of this agreement. Time periods herein of less
than six (6) days shall in the computation exclude Saturdays, Sundays and state or national legal holi days,
and any time period provided for herein which shall end on Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday shall ext end
to 5:00 p.m. of the next business day.
H. Documents for Closing : Seller shall furnish deed, bill of sale, mechani c's lien
affidavit, assignments of leases, tenant and mortga gee estoppel letters, and corrective instruments.
6
Buyer shall furnish closing statement, mortgage, mo rtgage note, security agreement, and financial
statements.
I. Expenses : Documentary stamps on the warranty deed and reco rding corrective
instruments and the warranty deed shall be paid by Buyer.
J. Prorations; credits : Taxes, assessments, rent, interest, insurance an d other
expenses and revenue of property shall be prorated through day before closing. Buyer shall have the
option to taking over any existing policies of insu rance, if assumable, in which event premiums shall be
prorated. Cash at closing shall be increased or de creased as may be required by prorations. Proratio ns
will be made through day prior to occupancy if occu pancy occurs before closing. Advance rent and
security deposits will be credited to Buyer and esc row deposits held by mortgagee will be credited to
Seller. Taxes shall be prorated based on the curre nt year's tax with due allowance made for maximum
allowable discount, homestead and other exemptions. If closing occurs at a date when the current year 's
milage is not fixed, and current year's assessments is available, taxes will be prorated based upon su ch
assessment and the prior year's milage. If current year's assessment is not available, then taxes wil l be
prorated on the prior year's tax. If there are com pleted improvements on real property by January 1st of
year of closing which improvements were not in exis tence on January 1st of the prior year then taxes s hall
be prorated based upon the prior year's milage and at an equitable assessment to be agreed upon
between the parties, failing which, request will be made to the County Property Appraiser for an infor mal
assessment taking into consideration available exem ptions. Any tax proration based on an estimate may ,
at request of either Buyer or Seller, be subsequent ly readjusted upon receipt of tax bill on condition that a
statement to that effect is in the closing statemen t.
K. Special Assessment Liens : Certified, confirmed and ratified special
assessment liens as of date of closing (and not as of Effective Date) are to be paid by Seller. Pendi ng
liens as of date of closing shall be assumed by Buy er. If the improvement has been substantially
completed as of Effective Date, such pending lien s hall be considered as certified, confirmed or ratif ied
and Seller shall, at closing, be charged an amount equal to the last estimate of assessment for the
improvement by the public body.
L. Risk of Loss : If the property is damaged by fire or other casu alty before closing
and cost of restoration does not exceed the purchas e price of the property so damaged, cost of
restoration shall be an obligation of the Seller an d closing shall proceed pursuant to the term so the
agreement with restoration costs escrowed at closin g. If the cost of the restoration exceeds three pe rcent
(3%) of the assessed valuation of the improvements so damaged, Buyer shall have the option of either
taking property as is, together with either the thr ee percent (3%) or any insurance proceeds payable b y
virtue of such loss or damage, or of canceling the agreement and receiving return of deposit(s).
M. Escrow : Any escrow agent ("Agent") receiving funds or eq uivalent is authorized
and agrees by acceptance of them to deposit them pr omptly, hold same in escrow and, subject to
clearance, disburse them in accordance with terms a nd conditions of agreement. Failure of clearance o f
funds shall not excuse Buyer's performance. If in doubt as to Agent's duties or liabilities under the
provisions of agreement, Agent may, at Agent's opti on, continue to hold the subject matter of the escr ow
until the parties mutually agree to its disbursemen t, or until a judgment of a court of competent juri sdiction
shall determine the rights of the parties or Agent may deposit with the clerk of the circuit court hav ing
jurisdiction of the dispute. Upon notifying all pa rties concerned of such action, all liability on th e part of
Agent shall fully terminate, except to the extent o f accounting for any items previously delivered out of
escrow. If a licensed real estate broker, Agent wi ll comply with provisions of Chapter 475, F.S. (198 7), as
amended. Any suit between Buyer and Seller where A gent is made a party because of acting as Agent
hereunder, or in any suit wherein Agent interpleads the subject matter of the escrow, Agent shall reco ver
reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred with the fees and costs to be charged and assessed as
court costs in favor of the prevailing party. Part ies agree that Agent shall not be liable to any par ty or
person for misdelivery to Buyer or Seller of items subject to this escrow, unless such misdelivery is due to
willful breach of contract or gross negligence of A gent.
7
N. Failure of Performance : If Buyer fails to perform this Contract within t he time
specified Seller shall be relieved of all obligatio ns under Contract. If, for any reason other than f ailure of
Seller to make Seller's title marketable after dili gent effort, Seller fails, neglects or refuses to p erform this
Contract, the Buyer may seek specific performance o r elect to receive the return of Buyer's deposit(s)
without thereby waiving any action for damages resu lting from Seller's breach.
O. Agreement Not Recordable; Persons Bound; Notice : Neither this agreement
nor any notice of it shall be recorded in any publi c records. This agreement shall bind and inure to the
benefit of the parties and their successors in inte rest. Whenever the context permits, singular shall
include plural and one gender shall include all. N otice given by or to the attorney for any party sha ll be as
effective as if given by or to that party.
P. Conveyance : Seller shall convey the property by way of Quit Claim Deed subject
to an easement for any utilities that may exist and lie on the property.
Q. Other Agreements : No prior or present agreements or representation s shall be
binding upon Buyer or Seller unless included in thi s Contract. No modification or change in this Cont ract
shall be valid or binding upon the parties unless i n writing and executed by the party or parties inte nded to
be bound by it.
R. Warranties : Seller warrants that there are no facts known to Seller materially
affecting the value of the real property which are not readily observable by Buyer or which have not b een
disclosed to Buyer.
NOTICE OF INTENT TO SELL REAL PROPERTY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Delray Beach, F lorida, announces its
intention to sell the following real property described as:
A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5, PINE TRAIL SECTION TWO, A CCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGE 153 O F THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORT HEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE RUN N. 63 DEGREES 03' 03" W. 113.36 F EET
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE RUN S. 26 DEGREES 13' 46"
W. 43.54 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 TO A POINT;
THENCE RUN S. 15 DEGREES 35' 54" W. 10.80 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY
LINE TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 70 DEGREES 12' 46" E. 114.08 FEE T TO A
POINT OF INTEREST WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH EAST;
THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY 40.00 FEET ALONG ARC OF SAID CU RVE
HAVING FOR ITS ELEMENTS A RADIUS OF 320 FEET AND A CEN TRAL
ANGLE OF 7 DEGREES 09' 43" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Resolution 11-12 of the City Commission authorizing the sale of real p roperty incorporating the
terms and conditions thereof, will be considered at a public heari ng to be held at 7:00 p.m. on
March 6, 2012 at City Hall, Commission Chambers, 100 N.W. 1 st Avenue, Delray Beach,
Florida.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
Chevelle Nubin
City Clerk
Publish: Palm Beach Post
February 25, 2012
March 3, 2012
Page 1 of 3
SECOND ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE
Buyer: Jean Louigene Nelan
Seller: City of Delray Beach
Property: A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 5, PINE TRAIL SECTION TWO , ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGE 153 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICU LARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SA ID LOT 6; THENCE
RUN N. 63 DEGREES 03' 03" W. 113.36 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6;
THENCE RUN S. 26 DEGREES 13' 46" W. 43.54 FEET ALON G THE WESTERLY LINE OF
SAID LOT 6 TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 15 DEGREES 35' 54" W. 10.80 FEET ALONG
SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT; THENCE RUN S. 70 DEG REES 12' 46" E. 114.08
FEET TO A POINT OF INTEREST WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST;
THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY 40.00 FEET ALONG ARC OF SA ID CURVE HAVING
FOR ITS ELEMENTS A RADIUS OF 320 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7 DEGREES
09' 43" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
The Parties further agrees as follows:
1. Disclosures:
A. Mold: Mold is naturally occurring and may cause health risks or dam age to
Property. If Buyer is concerned or desires additional inform ation regarding mold,
Buyer should contact an appropriate professional.
B. Lead Warning Statement: Every purchaser of any interest in r esidential real
property on which a residential dwelling was built prior to 1978 i s notified that
such property may present exposure to lead from lead-b ased paint that may place
young children at risk of developing lead poisoning. Lead poisoni ng in young
children may produce permanent neurological damage, includi ng learning
disabilities, reduced intelligence quotient, behavio ral problems, and impaired
memory. Lead poisoning also poses a particular risk to pregna nt women. The
Seller of any interest in residential real property is r equired to provide the Buyer
with any information on lead-based paint hazards from risk a ssessments or
inspections in the Seller's possession and notify the Buyer of any known lead-
based paint hazards. A risk assessment or inspection for possib le lead based paint
hazards is recommended prior to purchase.
Seller’s Disclosure (initial)
(a) Presence of lead-based paint and/or lead based paint hazar ds (check one
below):
_____ Known lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards are
present in the housing (explain) ______________________
________________________________________________
_____ Seller has no knowledge of lead-based paint and/or lead based
paint hazards in the housing.
Page 2 of 3
(b) Records and report available to the Seller (check below):
_____ Seller has provided the purchaser with all available records and
reports pertaining to lead-based paint and/or lead-paint hazards in the housi ng
(list documents) ________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
__X __ Seller has no reports to records pertaining to lead -based paint and/or
lead paint hazards in the housing.
Purchaser’s Acknowledgement (initial):
(c) _____ Purchaser has received copies of all informatio n listed above.
(d) _____ Purchaser has received the pamphlet Protect Your F amily from Lead
in Your Home
(e) _____ Purchaser has (check one below):
____ Received a 10-day opportunity (or mutually agreed u pon
period) to conduct a risk assessment or inspection fo r the
presence of lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint ha zards;
or
____ Waived the opportunity to conduct a risk assessment or
inspection for the presence of lead-based paint and/or lead-
based paint hazards.
Agent’s Acknowledgement (initial):
(f) _____ Agent has informed Seller of the Seller’s obliga tions under 42
U.S.C. 4852 (d) and is aware of his/her responsibility to ensure compliance.
Certification of Accuracy
The following parties have reviewed the information above and certify, to the best of their
knowledge, that the information they have provided is true and correct.
C. PROPERTY TAX DISCLOSURE SUMMARY: BUYER SHOULD NOT R ELY ON THE
SELLER'S CURRENT PROPERTY TAXES AS THE AMOUNT OF PR OPERTY TAXES
THAT THE BUYER MAY BE OBLIGATED TO PAY IN THE YEAR SUBSEQUENT TO
PURCHASE. A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP OR PROPERTY IMPROVE MENTS
TRIGGERS THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY THAT COULD RESULT IN
HIGHER PROPERTY TAXES. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CON CERNING
VALUATION, CONTACT THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE FOR
INFORMATION.
2. With respect to Standard (A), if title is found defective, Se ller may, but shall have no
obligation, to render title marketable. In the event Seller does not render title marketable
within thirty (30) days after the date of Buyer's noti ce to Seller advising the Seller of the
defects in title, Buyer shall have the option of either cancell ing this Contract and receiving a
refund of the deposits paid, or to accept title as is and close.
3. Seller has agreed to convey the Property to Buyer under the assumption that t here are no
Page 3 of 3
liens, encumbrances, mortgages, assessments or other evidences of debt (hereinafter
collectively referred to as "liens and encumbrances ") which must be paid by Seller at
closing. In the event Buyer determines that there are liens and encumbrances, Seller shall have
the option of paying off the liens and encumbrances at closing, failing which, Buyer may pay
the liens or encumbrances, Buyer may cancel this Con tract and receive a refund of its deposit,
or Buyer may accept title as is subject to the liens and encumbr ances and close.
4. With respect to Standard (L), if the Property is damaged by fir e or other casualty before
closing, Seller may elect to restore the Property, failing which, Buyer shall accept the
physical condition of the Property as is or Buyer may cance l this Contract and receive a
refund of its deposit.
5. Standard (N) is hereby deleted and the following is stated in its plac e: "If Buyer fails to
perform the Contract within the time specified, Seller may cancel this Contract and be
relieved of all obligations under the Contract or Seller may seek specific performance. If
Seller fails to perform this Contract within the ti me specified, Buyer may elect to cancel this
Contract and receive a return of Buyer's deposit, or Buyer may seek speci fic performance.
6. With respect to Paragraph (V) of the Contract, the transaction shal l be closed and the deed and
other closing documents delivered on or before seve n (7) days after Buyer has determined
the Property condition is satisfactory to Buyer pursuant to Paragraph (XI)(B) of the Contract.
7. Buyer accepts the Property AS IS in its present physi cal condition, subject to any violations of
governmental, building, environmental and safety co des, restrictions or requirements and shall
be responsible for any and all repairs and improveme nts required. Seller makes no
representation or warranty relating to the physical condition of or title to the Property.
8. Standard (R) of the Contract is hereby deleted.
9. The terms and conditions of this Second Addendum co ntrol over any conflicting terms and
conditions contained in the Contract or any the other Addendum to the Contr act.
Jean Louigene Nelan, Buyer
BY: _____________________________
Date: ____________________________
City of Delray Beach, Seller
BY: _____________________________
Date: ____________________________
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:Estelio Breto, Senior Planner
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning
THROUGH:City Manager
DATE:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 12.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
ORDINANCE NO. 05 -12
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Consideration of a privately sponsored Future Land Use Map change from Transitional (TRN) to
General Commercial (GC), rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to PC (Planned Commercial),
and Text Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan modify ing the description of the GC (General
Commercial) Future Land Use designation to identify a maximum FAR of 0.46 for a 9.95 acre property
located on the southeast comer of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South
Federal Highway).
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located at the southeast co rner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway and is
approximately 9.95 acres in size. The property is k nown as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility and
it is currently occupied by three office buildings: two multiple-story office buildings (one located to the
north of the property and the other to the south), and a one-story multiple tenant office building located
to the east side of the property along Linton Boule vard. The property was originally annexed into the
City of Delray Beach from unincorporated Palm Beach County in the late 1970's. The property was
assigned the Future Land Use Map designation of Tra nsitional (TRN) and a zoning of SAD (Special
Activities District) and it was developed with thre e office buildings and associated parking
simultaneously with the annexation. In 1991, the Ci ty of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development
Regulations and the property was assigned the new z oning designation of POC (Planned Office Center)
and retained the Future Land Use Map Designation of TRN (Transitional).
The requested Future Land Use Map designation from Transitional (TRN) to General Commercial (GC)
and rezoning from Planned Office Center (POC) to Pl anned Commercial (PC), for the subject property
is to allow greater development flexibility on the property including the future potential of a Multip le
Building Commercial Development. The proposal also includes a privately-initiated amendment to the
Text of the Comprehensive Plan modifying the descri ption of the GC (General Commercial) Future
Land Use designation to limit the maximum intensiti es (FAR’s) for Delray Place. The maximum
intensity will be reduced from a FAR (Floor Area Ra tio) of 3.0 to 0.46 to assure any resulting
development will meet traffic concurrency.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
At its meeting of February 27, 2012, the Planning a nd Zoning Board held a public hearing associated
with the GC Future Land Use Map amendment, PC rezon ing request, and Text Amendment of the
Comprehensive Plan modifying the description of the GC (General Commercial) Future Land Use
designation to identify a maximum FAR of 0.46 for t he subject property.
The Board had concerns which centered more around i ssues relating to site plan approval and not the
broader issues relating to whether the proposed Lan d Use and Zoning designations are
appropriate. These concerns included the width of t he buffer that separates the subject property from the
residential development to the south and east. The public expressed concerns over how the rezoning
proposal fits into the South Federal Highway Redeve lopment plan which is underway. The public also
had concerns regarding the increase in traffic and noise with a new development, the potential
diminishment of property values, compatibility with existing developments in the neighborhood, etc.
After an intense discussion, the Board recommended denial of the proposed FLUM, Rezoning and Text
Amendment on a 5-0 vote.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve on first reading Ordinance 05-12 for a Futu re Land Use Map amendment from TRN
(Transitional) to GC (General Commercial), Rezoning from POC (Planned Commercial) to PC (Planned
Commercial) and the Text Amendment of the Comprehen sive Plan modifying the description of the GC
(General Commercial) Future Land Use Map designatio n to reduce the maximum FAR to 0.46 for
Delray Place, 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 does meet the criteria set
forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), 2.4.5(D)(5)
(Rezoning Findings).
ORDINANCE NO. 05-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA ADOPTING A SMALL-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ,
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE “COMMUNITY PLANNI NG ACT”,
FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 163.3187, INCLUDING A SMAL L-SCALE FUTURE
LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM TRN (TRANSITIONAL) TO G C (GENERAL
COMMERCIAL) FOR LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNE R OF
LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, AS MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND AN ASSOCIATED TE XT
AMENDMENT MODIFYING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE GC (GENE RAL
COMMERCIAL) FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION PERTAINING TO SAID
LAND; AND REZONING AND PLACING SAID LAND PRESENTLY ZONED POC
(PLANNED OFFICE CENTER) TO PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT;
AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, JANU ARY 2012";
PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUS E, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach exercised the authority gr anted pursuant to the
provisions of Florida Statutes Sections 163.3161 through 163.3248, inclusive, known as the
"Community Planning Act"; and
WHEREAS, via Ordinance No. 82-89, the City Commission adopted the document entitled
"Comprehensive Plan - Delray Beach, Florida"; and
WHEREAS, Delray Place LLC, is the fee simple owner of a 9.95 acre of land located at the
southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway; and
WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described has an e xisting Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional); and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property requested to change the Future Land Use Map
designation from TRN (Transitional) to GC (General Commercial); and
WHEREAS, Delray Place LLC, has requested an amendment to the de scription of the
General Commercial designation within the Future Land Use Element pertaining to said property
located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway; and
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the Zoning District Map of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated January 2012, as being zoned POC (Planned Office Center)
District; and
2 ORD NO. 05-12
WHEREAS, at its meeting of February 27, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Boa rd for the City
of Delray Beach, as Local Planning Agency, considered this item a t a public hearing and voted 5 to 0
to recommend that the request be denied, based upon a failure to make positive findi ngs; 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 chang es are not consistent with and do
not further the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adop ts 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; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida be amended to reflect the revised zoning classification.
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 Future Land Use Map designation of the subject proper ty is hereby
officially affixed as GC (General Commercial).
Section 3 . That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida , hereby declares
its intent to exercise the authority granted pursuant to the provis ions of Florida Statutes Sections
163.3161 through 163.3248, inclusive, known as the "Community Planning Act."
Section 4 . That the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby amended, by amending the de scription of the General
Commercial Land Use designation to read as follows:
General Commercial: This designation is applied to land which is, or should be, developed for
general commercial purposes e.g. retail, office, services. Lig ht industrial type uses such as
fabrication and assembly are permissible under this designati on when located in the special overlay
district between Federal Highway and Dixie Highway, north of N.E . 14th Street to the north City
limit. A maximum Floor Area Ratio of 3.0 is permitted for nonresi dential uses, except as indicated
within the following overlay districts:
3 ORD NO. 05-12
• Four Corners Overlay District - For mixed-use development withi n this overlay district, the
nonresidential component is limited to an FAR of 2.0
• Silver Terrace Courtyards Overlay District - Nonresidential development is limited to an
FAR of 0.75
• Lintco Development Overlay District - Nonresidential developme nt is limited to an FAR of
0.36.
• Waterford Overlay District - Nonresidential development is limited to a n FAR of 1.32.
• Delray Place Overlay District - Nonresidential development is limi ted to an FAR of 0.46.
Residential uses may comprise up to 15% of the total floor area of the General Commercial Land
Use designation. Residential uses are permitted either in conjunc tion with a commercial use, or as a
stand alone use subject to Conditional Use approval. Residential densi ty is limited to a maximum
of 12 dwelling units per acre, except in Redevelopment Area #6 (L indell/Federal Highway) where
residential densities may be allowed up to a maximum of 16 units per acre subject to Conditional
Use approval and the criteria outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for that area and within the Silver
Terrace Courtyards Overlay District where residential densit ies may be allowed up to a maximum of
22 units per acre subject to Conditional Use approval. Areas with t he General Commercial
designation, located within a workforce housing overlay district, may a lso exceed 12 units per acre
up to a maximum of 30 units per acre within the Four Corners Overl ay District and 18 units per acre
within the infill workforce housing area, by obtaining density bonuses through the provision of
workforce housing units.
Section 5 . That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, F lorida, be and the
same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of P C (Planned Commercial) District for
the following described property:
Parcel A
All of Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, according to the Pla t thereof, as recorded in Plat
Book 42, Page 61, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. (Less a nd Except
therefrom that parcel of land described as Parcel 103 in that Or der of Taking on Palm Beach
County Petition filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court under Case N0. CL99-229AN and
recorded March 30, 1999 in Official Records Book 11016, Page 226, being more par ticularly
described as follows:
A parcel of land lying in Section 28, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Pa lm Beach
County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows:
That portion of the Plat of Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, according to the Plat thereof,
4 ORD NO. 05-12
as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, of the Public Records of Palm B each County, Florida,
being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Plat; thence North 89° 47’ 57” East, along the
Northerly boundary line of said Plat, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence South 57° 26’ 45” West,
a distance of 42.24 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary line of sa id Plat and on the arc of
a circular curve to the right, where the radial line bears South 65° 17’ 42” East; thence
Northeasterly along said Westerly boundary line and the arc of sa id curve, having a radius of
1850.08 feet and a central angle of 00° 47’ 27”, a distance of 25.00 feet to t he point of
beginning).
Together with
Parcel B
All of Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility II, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in
Plat Book 42, Page 62, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Section 6 . That the Planning and Zoning Director of the said City shall, upon the effective
date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the City of Delray B each, Florida, to conform with
the provisions of Section 5 hereof.
Section 7. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same ar e
hereby repealed.
Section 8. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion ther eof, any
paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent j urisdiction 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: thirt y-one (31) days after
adoption, unless the Comprehensive Plan amendment is timely challeng ed. If timely challenged, the
effective date of this Ordinance shall be the date a final order is issued by the State Land Planning or
the Administration Commission, finding the adopted amendment to be in c ompliance. No
development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued
or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a
resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which res olution shall be sent to the state land
planning agency.
5 ORD NO. 05-12
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final readi ng on this the _____
day of ___________________, 2012.
____________________________________
ATTEST M A Y O R
_______________________________
City Clerk
First Reading__________________
Second Reading________________
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:February 29, 2012
SUBJECT:AGENDA ITEM 12.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2012
ORDINANCE NO. 12 -12
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Approval of a city-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulat ions (LDRs) Public Arts
Program clarifying the City’s right to use funds as appropriated in the City’s budget.
BACKGROUND
The City Commission established a Public Arts Progr am on February 1, 2005 by enacting Ordinance
No. 77-04. The purpose was to use part of the Capital Impr ovement Project dollars to incorporate art in
certain public projects. Current Land Development R egulations allow for the City to appropriate 1.5%
of the total eligible construction costs to be used for various components of the public art program. In
the recent budget revisions, Public Art Program mon ies, along with other Capital Improvement Project
dollars, were considered for reallocation. This LDR amendment would clarify that the public art
program funds can be utilized for not only public a rt programs, but for other purposes as otherwise
appropriated in the City Budget.
REVIEW BY OTHERS
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the item at their February 27, 2012 meeting. Several
members of the public spoke in opposition to the am endment. After considerable Board discussion, a
recommendation of denial on a 3-1 vote was made. (M ark Krall dissenting).
RECOMMENDATION
By motion, approve Ordinance No. 12-12 on first rea ding for a city-initiated amendment to Section
8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts Program”, Subs ection (B), “Appropriation of Capital Improvement
Project (CIP Funds)” of the Land Development Regulations, by adopting th e 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. 12-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULAT IONS OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTIO N 8.5.1,
“ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAM”, SUBSECTION (B),
“APPROPRIATION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP FUNDS)”,
SETTING FORTH THE CITY’S RIGHT TO USE APPROPRIATED FUNDS;
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 review ed the
proposed text amendment at a public hearing held on February 27, 2012 and voted 3 to 1 to
recommend that the changes not be approved; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning B oard,
sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the chang e is not consistent with and does
not further the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adop ts 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 8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts Program”, Subs ection (B),
“Appropriation of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Funds”, of the Land Development
Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby amended to read as
follows:
(B) Appropriation of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Funds:
(1) The City will appropriate 1.5% of the total eligible construction costs to be used for
artist design services and for the selection, acquisition and display of artworks, and for the administration of
the public art program or as otherwise appropriated in the C ity budget . Eligible appropriations include
appropriations for capital improvement projects, including elig ible bond projects, eligible grant-funded
2 ORD. NO.12-12
projects, other eligible capital projects funded from other s ources, but excluding appropriations for
underground infrastructure improvements, which include, but are not limite d to water mains, sewer main,
storm drainage, wastewater or any other underground utility. The involve ment of public art in a capital
improvement project is optional for capital projects of le ss than two hundred thousand dollars
($200,000.00); however, 1.5% of the cost of the projects will be retained fo r public art and these funds will
be pooled for other art projects or as otherwise appropriated in the City budget . If the funding source
specifically restricts the use of the monies, then that portion of the funding shall not be included for the
basis for the art fee.
(2) Notwithstanding the foregoing, funds appropriated for one capit al improvement
project, but not deemed necessary or appropriate by the City Commission in whole or in part for that
project, may be expended on other public art projects approved by the City Commission, subject to bond
restrictions, legal or grant restrictions. The monies appropria ted under this ordinance may be used for artist
design services, for the development of design concepts and models, for the selection, acquisition,
purchase, commissioning, placement, installation, exhibition, maintenanc e, and display of artworks.
Artworks may be temporary or permanent, may be integral to t he architecture or may be incorporated into
the capital improvement project.
Section 2 . That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion there of,
any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent juris diction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whol e 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 immediately upon it s passage on
second and final reading and this amendment shall apply to funds that have already been col lected.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final readi ng on this the _____
day of ___________________, 2012.
__________________________
ATTEST M A Y O R
___________________________
City Clerk
First Reading__________________
Second Reading________________
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2012
AGENDA NO: V. E.
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF A CITY-INITIATED AME NDMENT TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDR), BY AMENDING SECTION 8.5.1,
“ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAM”, SUBSECTION
(B), “APPROPRIATION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(CIP FUNDS)”, SETTING FORTH THE CITY’S RIGHT TO USE
APPROPRIATED FUNDS.
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 Regulat ions (LDRs) that will set forth the City’s right
to use appropriated funds.
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 t he Planning and Zoning Board.
BACKGROUND
The City Commission established a Public Arts Program on February 1, 2005 by enacting
Ordinance No. 77-04. The purpose was to use part of th e Capital Improvement Project dollars to
incorporate art in certain public projects. Current La nd Development Regulations allow for the City
to appropriate 1.5% of the total eligible construction costs to be used for various components of the
public art program. In the recent budget revisions, Pu blic Art Program monies, along with other
Capital Improvement Project dollars, have been reallo cated. This LDR amendment would clarify
that the public art program funds can be utilized for not only public art programs, but for other
purposes as otherwise appropriated in the City Budget.
REQUIRED FINDINGS
Comprehensive Plan Conformance
LDR Section 2.4.5(M)(5) (Findings) requires that the C ity Commission make a finding that the text
amendment is consistent with and furthers the Goals, Obj ectives and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. While there were no specific section s of the Comprehensive Plan to support
the proposed amendment, it is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
I · City of Delray Beach Memo To: City Commission From: David T. Harden, City Manager cc: Date: 3/6/2012 Re: Mid-year Budget Amendment Some residents have raised questions about how
the budget was rebalanced with the Mid-year Budget Adjustment, and why the amended budget is actually more than the budget adopted in September, even though we cut out $3,200,000 in
projected revenue from the Fire Service Fee. We did cut $3,200,000, and then added back the following revenues which were included in the Mid-year Amendment. Prior year's surplus $1,000,000
Prior year's encumbrances 135,614 2004 G.O. Bond (1) 371,000 JAG Grant (2) 53,503 Homeland Security Grant (2) 177,915 CRA Shuttle Grant (2) 50,000 DOT Shuttle Grant (2) 300,000 Transfer
from Special Projects (Art) 123,130 Building permits (3) 958,550 Prol.2ertv Taxes {3} 3851270 Total $3,554,882 (1) These are funds ·Ieft over from the taxable portion ofthis bond issue
used to build the ,retail space in the OSS parking garage. We had to issue more than we thought we needed to be sure we did not make the whole issue taxable. We now feel comfortable
that we will not need any more ofthis money. The $371,000 was used to payoff that much of the money we had borrowed, so there ,is an offsetting expenditure. (2) All grant revenue has
an offsetting expenditure.
(3) The City's financial situation is not static. When the Commission initially voted not to proceed with the Fire Service Fee we only had financial reports for October and November,
so we had no basis for projecting additional revenue. By the time the Mid-year Budget Amendment was presented to the Commission we had four months of reports, through January. At that
point we felt comfortable in projecting sUbstantial increases in property tax collections and building pennit fees. Property taxes are projected at the beginning of the year based on
the assumption that we will collect 95% of what is levied. Usually we collect somewhat more than that, but there have also been years when we have collected less. Based on what has been
collected through January we felt comfortable in projecting an increase of $385,270 in revenue from current property taxes. With regard to building permits, again by February we had
four months of collections in our coffers. We also had a much better idea of what major building projects were on the drawing boards and were likely to pull permits during the balance
of this fiscal year. Thus we were fortunate enough to be able to increase our projected building pennit fee revenue for the year by $958,550 . • Page 2
(3) The City's financial situation is not static. When the Commission initially voted not to
proceed with the Fire Service Fee we only had financial reports for October and November ,
so we had no basis for projecting additional revenue. By the time the Mid-year Budget
Amendment was presented to the Commission we had four months of reports, through
January. At that point we felt comfortable in projecting sUbstantial increases in property
tax collections and building pennit fees. Property taxes are projected at the beginning of
the year based on the assumption that we will collect 95% of what is levied. Usually we
collect somewhat more than that, but there have also been years when we have collected
less. Based on what has been collected through January we felt comfortable in projecting
an increase of $385,270 in revenue from current property taxes. With regard to building
permits, again by February we had four months of collections in our coffers. We also had a
much better idea of what major building projects were on the drawing boards and were
likely to pull permits during the balance of this fiscal year. Thus we were fortunate enough
to be able to increase our projected building pennit fee revenue for the year by $958,550 .
• Page 2
REVIEW BY OTHERS
Courtesy Notices
Courtesy notices were provided to the following homeo wner and civic associations:
Neighborhood Advisory Council
Alliance of Delray
Letters of objection and support, if any, will be pro vided at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION
This amendment will allow additional flexibility of Capital Improvement Program monies which are
currently allocated primarily for public art program f unctions.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
A. Continue with direction.
B. Move a recommendation of approval to the City Com mission of the amendment to Land
Development Regulations, Section 8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts Program ”,
Subsection (B), “Appropriation of Capital Improveme nt Project (CIP Funds)”, Setting
Forth the City’s Right To Use Appropriated Funds, by adopting the findings of fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the t ext amendment and approval thereof is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the cri teria set forth in LDR Section
2.4.5(M)
C. Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commi ssion of the amendment to Land
Development Regulations, Section 8.5.1, “Establishment of Public Arts Program ”,
Subsection (B), “Appropriation of Capital Improveme nt Project (CIP Funds)”, Setting
Forth the City’s Right To Use Appropriated Funds, by adopting the findings of fact and law
contained in the staff report, and finding that the t ext amendment and approval thereof is
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not me et 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 Developm ent Regulations, Section 8.5.1,
“Establishment of Public Arts Program”, Subsection (B), “Appropriation of Capital
Improvement Project (CIP Funds)”, Setting Forth the City’s Right To Use Appropriated
Funds, 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:
Proposed Ordinance
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
A
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
A
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
D
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
D
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
B
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
C
.
Ci
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
on
Ma
r
c
h
6,
20
1
2
;
It
e
m
9.
C
.