Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
10-20-98 Regular
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 - 6:00 P.M./PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. COMMISSION CHAMBERS 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 Randolph at 243-7127 (voice) or 243-7199 (TDD), 24 hours prior to the event in order for the City to accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. RULES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 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: When extraordinary circumstances or reasons exist and at the discretion of the Commission, citizens may speak on any official agenda item under these sections. 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. AGENDA 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation. 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 4. Agenda Approval. 5. Approval of Minutes: Regular Meeting of October 6, 1998 6. Proclamations: A. OF NOTE: Head Start Awareness Month October 1998 National Epilepsy Awareness Month - November 1998 7. Presentations: None 8. Consent Agenda: City Manager recommends approval. A. AGREEMENT FOR LOBBYING SERVICE/KATHLEEN E. DALEY: Approve an agreement for consultant/lobbying services between the City and Kathleen E. Daley for the period October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999, with funding in the amount of $48,000 from 001-1111-511-34.90 (City Commission - Other Contractual Services). B. AMENDMENT #001 TO CHILDREN'S SUBSTANCE ABUSE GRANT CONTRACT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES: Approve Amendment ~001 to the contract between the City and the Department of Children & Families which increases the funding allocation by $60,000 ($27,583 to $87,583) for expansion of the Excel Focus Five Program ($20,000) and implementation of Mad Dad's newest initiative, Adult Prevention ($40,000). C. REMOVED D. FUNDING SUBSIDY UNDER THE DELRAY BEACH RENAISSANCE PROGRAM: Approve a funding subsidy in the amount of $20,000.00 for an income eligible applicant under the Delray Beach Renaissance Program, with funding from 118-1924-554-83.01 (SHIP). Regular Commission Meeting October 20, 1998 E. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION #69/O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'BRIEN (SEACREST/ DEL-IDA AREA IMPROVEMENTS PHASE I): Approve a service authorization in the amount of $19,472.00 with O'Brien, Suiter & O'Brien, Inc. for surveying services associated with the Seacrest Area Improvements Phase I project, with funding from 442-5178-536- 61.78 (Water & Sewer R&R/Water Distribution Improvements). F. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION #3/SLATTERY & ROOT ARCHITECTS (CHEMICAL STORAGE BUILDING): Approve Service Authorization #3 in the amount of $13,600.00 with Slattery & Root for design of the chemical storage building at the Water Treatment Plan, with funding from 441-5161-536-63.73 (W&S New Capital Outlay - Chemical Storage Building). G. PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION/PAN & TILT SEWER TV CAMERA: Approve and authorize the purchase of a Pan & Tilt Sewer Television Camera from Aries Industries at a total price of $14,100.00 using the purchase order from an existing Broward County contract, with funding from 442-5178-536-64.90 (W&S Renewal & Replacement - Other Machinery & Equipment). H. AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PERC DECISION: Approve the City's participation in an amicus brief regarding PERC decision that subcontracting by a public employer is an inherent management right. I. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period October 5th thru October 16, 1998. J. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Contract award at an estimated annual cost of $52,509.60 to G&K Services, via City of Vero Beach bid, for the rental of City employee uniforms, with funding from various departmental operating budgets. 2. Purchase award in the amount of $27,955.25 to Dionex Corporation, sole source provider, via SNAPS (State Negotiated Agreement Price Schedule) for DX-100 Ion Chromatography Analytical Testing Equipment to be used by the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory, with funding from 441-5161-536-63.75 (Water & Sewer Capital Outlay). 3. Purchase award in the amount of $91,360.00 to Linc Quantum Analytics, Inc. for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph/ Mass Spectrophotometer (GC/MS) for use by the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory, with funding from 442-5178- 536-64.90 (W&S Renewal & Replacement/Other Machinery & Equipment). 4. Renewal of annual maintenance contract with U.S. Filter, sole source provider, for wet scrubbers located at various Regular Commission Meeting October 20, 1998 sewage lift stations in the total amount of $25,200.00, with funding from 441-5144-536-52.21 (Water & Sewer Lift Station Maintenance/Chemicals). 9. Regular Agenda: A. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/EDUCATIONAL FACILITY FOR DELRAY BEACH INTERNATIONAL TENNIS RESORT ACADEMY: Consider a request for conditional use approval to establish an educational facility (i.e. language classes) associated with the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy at Delray Racquet Club, located east of Lindell Boulevard, south of Egret Circle. QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING B. APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD ACTION: Consider an appeal of SPRAB's action to approve a Class III Site Plan Modification in conjunction with the restaurant addition at the Delray Beach Marriott, located at the northwest corner of East Atlantic Avenue and A1A. QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING C. REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME FRAME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL/CROSSROADS CLUB: Consider a request to extend the time frame for compliance with conditions of approval associated with the Crossroads Club. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of N.E. 2nd Street and N.E. 4th Avenue, within the Central Business District. D. REQUEST FOR WAIVER (USE OF LOTS OF RECORD): Consider a request to waive LDR Section 4.1.4(C) to allow a nonconforming lot of record located on N.E. 7th Street in the Del-Ida Park Historic District, which was under the same ownership as an adjacent lot, to be sold as a separate buildable lot. QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING E. REQUEST FOR WAIVER (RECONFIGURATION OF NONCONFORMING LOTS IN OSCEOLA PARK): Consider approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.3.1(D) to allow the reconfiguration of existing nonconforming lots to create new nonconforming lots for Lots 6-10, Block 2, Osceola Park, located on the east side of S.E. 4th Avenue between S.E. 4th and 5th Streets. QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING F. TEMPORARY PARKING LOT/MILAGRO CENTER: Consider a request to establish a temporary parking lot within the Central Business District at the southwest corner of S.E. 1st Street and S.E. 3rd Avenue associated with the Milagro Center vocational school. G. LETTER OF SUPPORT/CRAAPPLICATION TO INNER CITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE GRANTS PROGRAM: Consider a request from the Community Redevelopment Agency for a letter in support of its application for funding for the Center for Economic Development incubator facility through the Inner City Redevelopment Assistance Grants Program. -4- Regular Commission Meeting October 20, 1998 H. BID AWARD FOR SOUTHEAST INTERCEPTOR SLIPLINING PROJECT: Consider approval of a bid award in the amount of $367,710.00 to Westra Construction Corporation as the lowest responsive bidder (second low bid) for the Southeast Interceptor Sliplining Project, with funding from '442-5178-536-63.93 (W&S Renewal & Replacement/Southeast Interceptor). I. RESOLUTION NO. 64-98: Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the filing of eminent domain proceedings as required by a final judgment in that case styled Stanley G. Tare, Trustee vs. City of Delray Beach and the Lake Worth Drainage District, as clarified and amended. J. APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY I: Consider approval of the appointment for the Assistant City Attorney I position as recommended by the City Attorney. 10. Public Hearings: A. ORDINANCE NO. 44-98: An ordinance amending Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations by enacting definitions of "antique" and "secondhand material" B. ORDINANCE NO. 45-98: An ordinance amending Chapter 102, "Streets and Sidewalks", Subheading "Moveable Fixtures Within the Right-of-Way", of the City Code to clarify provisions and their applicability to modular newsracks, and providing for certain other changes. C. ORDINANCE NO. 24-98 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1): An ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1, which includes: (1) Future Land Use Map amendment from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre), in part, and from MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre), in part, in conjunction with the implementation of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan. The subject property is generally located between Seacrest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and between George Bush Boulevard and Atlantic High School. (2) Future Land Use Map amendment from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre), in part, and from LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) to TRN (Transitional), in part, related to the realignment of a roadway within the Citation Club/Hammock Reserve developments located on the east side of Military Trail, south of Linton Boulevard. (3) Amendment to the text of the Housing Element relating to the adoption of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan. -5- Regular Commission Meeting October 20, 1998 (4) Amendment to the text of the Conservation Element regarding the preparation of a program to preserve or mitigate the development of Hurricane Pines, an environmental site on the south side of SoE. 10th Street between Dixie and Federal Highways. D. ORDINANCE NO. 41-98 (SECOND READING/SECOND PUBLIC HEARING): An ordinance rezoning certain parcels of land in conjunction with the implementation of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan. E. ORDINANCE NO. 42-98: An ordinance rezoning from RM-10 (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density with a density suffix of 10 units per acre) to PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 units/acre) in part, and from PRD-5 to RM-10 with a density suffix of 10 units per acre related to the realignment of a roadway within the Citation Club/Hammock Reserve developments. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING F. ORDINANCE NO. 39-98: An ordinance rezoning a residential lot within Lambert Trailer Court (aka Floranda Trailer Park) from R-iA (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home) District. The subject property is located at 311 S.E. 12th Road which is on the north side of 12th Road approximately 450 feet west of southbound Federal Highway. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING G. ORDINANCE NO. 40-98: An ordinance annexing a parcel of land located approximately 280 feet south of West Atlantic Avenue between Military Trail and Markland Lane; providing for a small scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CHO/8 (Commercial High Office/Residential 8 units per acre), in part, and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 units/acre), in part, to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 units/acre); and establishing initial zoning of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 units/acre) for Palm Gardens at Delray, a proposed assisted living facility. QUASI-JUDICIAL ~RARING 1. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY: Consider a request for conditional use approval to establish an Assisted Living Facility and Adult Day Care containing 344 beds for Palm Gardens at Delray. The subject property is located approximately 280 feet south of West Atlantic Avenue between Military Trail and Markland Lane. 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. -6- Regular Commission Meeting October 20, 1998 12. First Readings: Ao ORDINANCE NO. 43-98: An ordinance amending LDR Section 4.3.4 by repealing Section 4.3.4(E), "Frontage", and enacting a new Section 4.3.4(E), "Front and Frontage", to provide clarifying language; amending Appendix "A" (Definitions) by repealing the current definition of 'frontage' and enacting a new definition of 'frontage', and by enacting a new definition of 'lot front' If passed, a public hearing will be scheduled for November 3, 1998. 13. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items. A. City Manager B. City Attorney C. City Commission -7- MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden, City Manager FROM: Alison MacGregor Harry, City Cler~ ~UBJECT: Aqenda Correction (10/20/98) DATE: October 19, 1998 There is an error on Item 8.B., Amendment #001 to Children's Substance Abuse Grant Contract with Florida Department of Children & Families, as follows: Approve Amendment #001 to the contract between the City and the Department of Children & Families which increases the funding allocation by $60,000 ($27,583 to $87,583) for expansion of the Excel Focus Five Program ($20,000) and implementation of Mad Dad's newest initiative, Adult Prevention (~6~ $40,000). You may want to note this at the meeting for those who have already received their agendas. By copy of this memorandum, I will notify the Mayor and City Commissioners. Thank'you. AMH/m Attachment cc: Mayor and City Commissioners Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement WHEREAS, the Association for the Education of Young Children and other local organizations, in conjunction with the National Association for the Education of Young Children, are having a celebration in Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, by calling attention to the need for quality child care for young children within our community whose parents must work outside the home, these groups hope to improve the quality and availability of such services; and WHEREAS, the quality of services is primarily determined by the individual teachers and caregivers who perform this valuable work; and WHEREAS, the work of early childhood professionals is not fully understood and is under-appreciated; and WHEREAS, quality child care services can help provide the basis for a good beginning for children's sound growth and development. NOW, THEREFORE, I, JAY ALPERIN, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby proclaim October, 1998, as HEAD START AWARENESS MONTH and urge all citizens to recognize the valuable contributions of early childhood teachers and caregivers and to actively support making more and better child care available within our community. 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 20th day of October, 1998. MAYOR JAY ALPERIN SEAL PHONE I~_ ~v~OBILE AREA CdlD-E NUMBER TIME TO CALL TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL CAME:~O SEE y~'D RUSR wANTS TO SEE YOU ~ sPECiAU A~N~IDN MESSAGE Headstart & Children Services ~e~a~emt of 610 S "W. lSth Avenue Community Services Delray Beach,. Florida 33444 Dlvislo~ of ~ Child~nSe~l~es October 2, 1998 ~10 Dot.fa (~61) ~55-4720 ht[p:/Iwww;co.palm-beach.~.us C~y Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Boa=d of Delray City Co~ssio~e~s & Staff ~oa~c~a~ The staff 'of Delray Mead~ta~t request ~ha honor of your commi~i~nem presence on October 27, 1998 at 10:0.0 ..O'clock A. M. to our B~ Aa~omson, Chairman Head~tar~ Awa~eness program. Maude~rd~e. Vice'Chair Please come amd be our 'guest. We wold like ~o [lave one of ~re~z~arcus your staff:· to'honor us with a .copy of the City's P~oclamation and do the presentation. Carol A. Roberts You ara al~o ~mv~ted to speak in behalf of ou= Headstart MaFy McCarcy Piease come c.eleb~ with us,' your pre~emee is our honor. Rem L. Coun~ Admlnlst~r Robert ~i~man, -Staff of Delray's Headmtart WHEREAS, the Association for the Education of Young Children and other local organizations, in conjunction with the National Association for the Education of Young Children, are having a celebration in Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, by calling attention to the need for quality child care for young children within our community whose parents must work outside the home, these groups hope to improve the quality and availability of such services; and WHEREAS, the quality of services is primarily determined by the individual teachers and caregivers who perform this valuable work; and WHEREAS, the work of early childhood professionals is not fully understood and is under-appreciated; and WHEREAS, quality child care services can help provide the basis for a good beginning for children's sound growth and development. NOW, THEREFORE, I, JAY ALPERIN, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Plorida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby proclaim 0 o~vo~gme~. I ~ ~ c~/o HEAD START AWARENESS CC%O ~ and urge all citizens to recognize the valuable contributions of early childhood teachers and caregivers and to actively support making more and better child care available within our community. 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 20th day of October, 1998. MAYOR JAY ALPERIN SEAL WHEREAS, Epilepsy, also known as Seizure Disorder, has afflicted mankind since the dawn of our species and has ~ .. been recognized since the earliest medical writings; and WHEREAS, as long ago as 400 B.C., Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine, repudiated ancient beliefs that Epilepsy was a visitation from the gods and sacred or that it was a curse from the gods that people afflicted with this disorder held prophetic powers. Hippocrates believed that Epilepsy was a brain disorder; and WHEREAS, a seizure is a sudden, brief attack of altered consciousness, motor activity or sensory phenomena; a sign that certain brain cells (neurons) are discharging an excessive amount of electrical impulses; and WHEREAS, Epilepsy can be caused by injury to the brain, lack of oxygen at birth, brain tumor, infection and brain hemorrhage; but in sixty percent of the cases, the cause is unknown; and WHEREAS, more than two million Americans are afflicted with some type of Epilepsy and of this number, 150,000 are Florida residents; and WHEREAS, with the administration of anticonvulsant drugs, two-thirds of those afflicted with Epilepsy are drug controlled so that workers with Epilepsy make reliable and conscientious workers who often rate better in job performance, attendance, safety and job stability than non-handicapped workers; and WHEREAS, studies carried out in the United States over the past thirty years have indicated that of all disabilities, Epilepsy poses the greatest barrier to employment with unemployment rates estimated to fall between twenty and twenty-five percent; and WHEREAS, Epilepsy should not be a barrier to success. In addition to the normal requirements for success, a person who has Epilepsy needs a supportive environment and employers who are willing to give them an opportunity to become productive citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, I, JAY ALPERIN, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby declare the month of November, 1998, as NATIONAL EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH in Delray Beach, Florida, and urge all of its citizens to become aware of this disorder and encourage those afflicted to take their rightful place in society and become productive citizens. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Delra¥ Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 20th day of October, 1998. MAYOR JAY ALPERIN COMMITTEE FOR EPILEPSY AWARENESS 6670 ROYAL PALM BLVD BLDG. K APT. 302 MARGATE, FLORIDA 33063-2189 .]em/Pizza, Chairman Bill Naulty, Secretary (954) 984--8319 (561) 798-2798 October, 1998 The month of November is "NATIONAL EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH". The Committee for Epilepsy Awareness would greatly appreciate your assistance in helping bring about an awareness of this disorder. Due to lack of correct information and an ~undance of misinformation, people afflicted with Epilepsy have been discriminated against in all walks of life. It is our goal to remove the ancient myths, superstitions and prejudices associated with this disorder and edtw, ate people as to what Epilepsy is and what Epilepsy is not. Enclosed, please find a copy of our resolution. If your municipality participates in our awareness campaign, please send a copy of the resolution or proclamation to: Jerry Pizza - Chairman Committee for Epilepsy Awareness 6670 Royal Palm Blvd. Bldg. lC Apt. 302 Margate, Florida 33063-2189 Thank you in advance for your interest in and concern for people afflicted with Epilepsy. Sincerely, Chairman COMMI-i-FEE FOR EPILEPSY AWARENESS 3erry Pizza - Chairman William C. Nauity - Secretar~ (954) 984-8319 (561) 798-2798 RESOLUTION DECLARING NOVEMBER, 1998 AS NATIONAL EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH WHEREAS, Epilepsy, also known as Seizure Disorder, has afflicted mankind since the dawn of our species and has been recognized since the earliest medical writings, and WI-IEREAS, as long as 400 B.C., Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine, repudiated ancient beliefs that Epilepsy was a visitation from the gods and sacred or that it was a curse from the gods that people afflicted with this disorder held prophetic powers. Hippocrates believed that Epilepsy was a brain disorder, and WHEREAS, a seizure is a sudden, brief attack of altered consciousness, motor activity or sensory phenomena~ It is a sign that certain brain cells (neurons) are discharging an excessive amount of electrical impulses, and WHEREAS, Epilepsy can be caused by injury to the brain, lack of oxygen at birth, brain tumor, infection and brain hemorrhage. In sixty percent of the cases, the cause is unknown, and WHEREAS, Epilepsy can affect anyone, at any age and at any time, and WI-IF.~, more than two million Americans are afflicted with some type of Epilepsy. Of this number, 150,000 are Florida residents, and WHEREAS, with the administration of anticonvulsant drugs, two thirds (66.66%) of those afflicted with Epilepsy are drug controlled, and WHEREAS, lack of education about this disorder has contributed to age old myths, superstitious and prejudices, and WHEREAS, the stigma associated with this disorder is sometimes worse than the disorder itself, and WHEREAS, people who have Epilepsy make reliable and conscientious workers in job performance, productivity, safety, cooperation and attendance, and WHEREAS, studies carried out in the UNITED STATES over the past thirty years have indicated that of all disabilities, Epilepsy poses the greatest barrier to employmem with unemployment rates estimated to fall between twenty and twenty-five percent. WHEREAS, Epilepsy should not be a barrier to success. In addition to the normal requirements for success, a person who has Epilepsy needs a supportive environment and employers who are willing to give them an oppommity to become productive citizens. Be it resolved, that the governing body of: does hereby declare the month of November as National Epilepsy Awareness Month. Be it further resolved, that a copy of the Resolution or Proclamation be sent to the Committee for Epilepsy Awareness, 6670 Royal Palm Blvck, Bldg .lC, Apt. 302, Margate, Florida 33063-2189 [lTV OF DELRIIV BEfl[H N.W. I AVENUE · DELRAY FLORIDA 33444 ° 243-7000 1 00 st BEACH, (561) AII-AmericaCity 1993 TO: David T. Harden City Manager FROM: ~obe~ A. Barcinski ~' Assistant City Manager DATE: October 13, 1998 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - CITY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 APPROVAL - LOBBYING SERVICES AGREEMENT ACTION City Commission is requested to approve the proposed agreement for lobbying services with Kathleen E. Daley and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $48,000 for fiscal year 1999. Funding would be available in City Commission budget account 001-1111-511- 34.90. BACKGROUND We have received a proposed agreement for FY 1999 for lobbying services from Kathleen E. Daley and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $48,000. The term of the agreement is from 10/01/98 through 09/30/99. The fee proposed is the same as it has been the last three (3) years. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed agreement for lobbying services with Kathleen E. Daley and Associates, Inc. for $48,000. Funding would come from City Commission FY 98-99 budget account 001-1111-511-34.90. RAB/tas File:u:sweeney/agenda Doc:kdaley.doc THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS Kathleen E. Daley & Associates, Inc. GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS AGREEMENT FOR LOBBYING SERVICES As Governmental Affairs ConsUltant/Lobbyist for the City of Delray Beach, I, Kathleen Daley, an equal partner of Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc., a public relations/political consulting/governmental affairs firm, will continue to represent the interest of the City before the Governor and Cabinet, State agencies, and the Florida Legislature, which representation would include attendance at all necessary House and Senate committee meetings during each calendar year, necessary delegation meetings, as well as the regular session and any relevant special sessions of the Florida Legislature, and continue to monitor all legislation affecting municipalities on behalf of the City of Delray Beach. As Governmental Affairs Consultant/Lobbyist for the City of Delray Beach, and managing partner of the account, working in conjunction with the Delray Beach City Council, the Delray Beach City manager, and other such staff persons within the City Administration as they are related to my duties on behalf of the City. I will make myself available to the above-mentioned persons and offices on both regular and "as needed" bases for the meetings and discussions related to my duties on behalf of the City. It is submitted that my services would be initially contracted for a period of one (1) year from October 1, 1998 to October 1, 1999, to be reviewed for renewal by the Commission at the end of OneCapitolPlace.108EastJeffersonStreet, SuiteC- ~llah~see, FL32301 (~222-0000- ~x:(850)222-0095 said period. Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. is willing to undertake the foregoing representation on the following basis: 1. Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. will be paid a retainer in the total amount of $48,000.00 for the contracted period due in twelve (12) equal monthly installments payable by the 30th of each month beginning in October of 1998. 2. Any additional "special project" work which may be requested at any time by the City Commission or the Office of the City Manager, and which falls outside of my realm of duty as Governmental Affairs Consultant/Lobbyist for the City, will be contracted for separately and on a special project bases. 3. Either the City of Delray Beach or Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc., may terminate this agreement at any time, pursuant to the following: (i)If terminated by the City Delray Beach at any time during the contracted period, for other than good cause, Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. will retain the total amount of $48,000.00. (ii)If terminated by the City of Delray Beach at ~any time during the contracted period, for good cause, Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. will retain a pro- rated to-date portion of the total amount of $48,000.00. Good cause shall include but not be limited to the arrest of any of the principals of Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. and/or conduct by any of the principals of Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. which may subject the City of Delray or Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. to negative publicity which would hamper the effectiveness of Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. in fulfilling their obligations under this agreement. (iii)If terminated by Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. at any time during the ,contracted period, Kathleen Daley & Associates, Inc. will retain a pro-rated to- date portion of the total amount of $48,000.00. 4. This Agreement shall be executed as an original and three counterparts. WITNESSES: K~THLEEN DALEI_ & ASSOCIATES, INC. By ~THLEEN E. D~Y" ~ Dat~ ' ATTEST: CI~ OF DE~Y B~CH, ~ORIDA By: City Clerk Mayor Date Approved as to Form: City Attorney MEMORANDUM DATE: October 15, 1998 TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement ~.~ RE: Amendment to Contract/Children's Substance Abuse Grant ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION: Approval of Amendment #001 to the Fiscal Year 1998/99 contract between the City of Delray Beach and the Florida Department of Children & Families, approved by the City Commission on July 7,1998. BACKGROUND: The City receives and administers block grant funds from the State Department of Children and Families for programs developed and carried out by MAD DADS of Delray Beach. The City is the designated fiscal agent ensuring compliance to terms and conditions established within the contract. The initial contract was approved by the City Commission at the regular meeting of July 7th, allocating funding in the amount of $27,583. These dollars were allocated for the continued implementation of the Excel Focus Five Program housed at Pine Grove Elementary School. The amended contract increases the annual funding allocation to $87,583, providing for the tracking of students from Pine Grove Elementary into Carver and Omni Middle Schools ($20,000). The balance ($40,000) is allocated for MAD DADS's newest initiative, Adult Prevention. This program is proposed to provide one full-time and one part-time staff persons to organize, conduct coalition building and leadership development to the Osceola Park and Pine Grove neighborhoods and the Fall Ridge development. It targets neighborhoods housing a high concentration of Haitian and Hispanic residents with a goal to reduce the amount of open-air drug sales and violent behavior occurring among these residents. The program will work in partnership with the City's Code Enforcement Division, our Neighborhood Organization Program and the Community Policing Division. The Community Development Coordinator has the primary responsibility for monitoring and administering funds under the HRS contract. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending City Commission approval of the amended contract, increasing the funding allocation from $27,583 to $87,583, between the City and the State of Florida, Department of Children and Families for fiscal year 98/99. Date: October 16, 1998 Agenda Item No. ~. ~. AGENDA REQUEST Agenda request to be placed on: X Regular __ Special __ Workshop __ Consent When: October 20, 1998 Description of Agenda Item: Amendment to Contract / Children's Substance Abuse Grant Ordinance/Resolution Required: Yes / No Draft Attached: Yes / No Recommendation: Approval ~:Pty. a~ ~:mnte .yHe~:v 72 gwn~e~c2 :m~~~ Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding Available: Yes / No Funding Alternatives: .(if applicable) Account # & Description: Account Balance: City Manager Review' _.~X~- Approved for ~genda: ~/No Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Action: Approved / Disapproved 5/98 AMENDMENT # 001 THIS AMENDMENT, entered into between the State of Florida, Department of Children and Families, hereinafter re~rred to as the "department" and THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH , he~ina~erre~rredto asthe"p~vided',amendscont~ct# IH380. 1. Standard Contract, Section II, A is hereby amended to read: A. Contract Amount To pay for contracted services according to the conditions of Attachment I in the amount not to exceed $87,583.00 subject to the availability of funds. The State of Florida's performance and obligation to pay under this contract is contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature. The costs of services paid under any other contract or from any other source are not eligible for reimbursement under this contract. 1 Attachment I is hereby revised and attached hereto. 2 Attachment I, Exhibit A is hereby revised and attached hereto. 3 Attachment I, Exhibit B is hereby revised and attached hereto. 4 Attachment I, Exhibit C is hereby revised and attached hereto. 5 Attachment I, Exhibit D is.hereby revised and attached hereto. 6 Attachment I, Exhibit G is hereby revised and attached hereto. __ This amendment shall begin on 10/01/z~98, orthe date on which the amendment has been signed by both parties, whichever is later. All provisions in the contract and any attachments thereto in conflict with this amendment shall be and are hereby changed to conform with this amendment. All provisions not in conflict with this amendment are still in effect and are to be performed at the level specified in the contract. This amendment and all its attachments are hereby made a part of the contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this 30 page amendment to be executed by their officials thereunto duly authorized. PROVIDER: The City of Delra¥ Beach STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND SIGNED BY: FAMILIES NAME: Jay A1Derin SIGNED BY: TITLE: Mayor NAME: EDWARD C. HORTON DATE: TITLE: DISTRICT 9 ADMINISTRATOR FEDERAL ElD #: VF596000308 (or SEN) DATE: JF 12/96 1 07/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: IH380 Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services (ADM) ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT A. Services To Be Provided The provider will ensure the provision of Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services as specified in Exhibit A 1. Definition of Terms a. Contract Terms (1) Day means calendar day. (2) Year means fiscal year which begins July 1 and ends June 30. (3) Local match is described in Chapter 394.76, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and Chapter 65E-14.005, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) which is to be interpreted to mean that expenditures for alcohol services requires local match and drug abuse services do not require local match. (4) Major remodeling is defined as any construction to property that materially affects its value. (5) Major medical equipment is defined as fixtures and other tangible personal property of a nonconsumable and nonexpendable nature, the value of which is $500 or more and the normal expected life of which is one year or more. (6) Prorated share is defined as the total number of unpaid units or funds divided by the number of months remaining between the time the prorated share is calculated and the end date of the contract. (7) Contract period is defined as the time period between the contract's effective date and end date. (8) The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Integrated Data System (IDS) is a manual that contains the policies and procedures for reporting client demographic and treatment information to the department for persons receiving substance abuse and mental health services. (9) State Integrated Substance Abuse Reports (SISAR) is a manual that contains the policies and procedures for reporting federally required client demographic and treatment information to the department for persons receiving substance abuse services. (10) Units of services are defined as the unit of measure for billing the department for services. There are eight different units of measure; the definition of each can be found in Chapter 3 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. (11 ) Verifiable service is the documentation of a service event that is in compliance with the documentation requirements contained in Appendix A, Cost Center Definitions and Models, of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. (12) Client fees means compensation received by the provider for services rendered to clients from any source of funds, including city, county, state, federal and private sources which means first and third party payers. HC02 2 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) b. Program/Service Specific Terms (1) Services and cost centers are synonymous terms. Each service is defined in Appendix A, Cost Center Service Definitions and Models, of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. (2) Community-based is defined as any service provided outside a state mental health facility and general hospital licensed under Chapter 395, F.S. (3) Client as defined herein means any individual receiving services in any alcohol, drug abuse, or mental health facility, program, or service whose cost of care is paid, in part or in whole, by the department, Medicaid, and local match. Recipients and persons receiving services are used synonymously with client. (4) State custody refers to the care of clients being made the responsibility of a state agency by court order by Chapters 393,394, 397, 916, and 985.223 F.S. (5) Performande standards are quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used by the department to objectively measure a provider's performance. A detailed description of each of the performance standards contained in this contract can be found in Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual. 2. General Description a. General Statement These are community based services provided by local progran~s as authorized in Chapter 394.74, F.S. b. Authority (1) The provider agrees to comply with Chapters 394, 395 and 397, F.S., Chapters 65E-4, 65E-5, 65E-10, 65E-14, 65E-15, and 65D-16, F.A.C., the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition, the State Integrated Substance Abuse Reporting Manual, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Integrated Data System Manual, and the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual, as appropriate. All of the above referenced documents are hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here. (2) The provider agrees to comply with the ADAMHA Reorganization Act, P.L. 102-321, Section 201 Part B of Title XIX of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300x et seq.) as amended July 10, 1992 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 96 which are hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here. (3) The provider agrees to comply with the requirements of Public Law 103-227 which is incorporated herein by reference, with the same force and effect as if given in full text and will not allow tobacco smoking in any portion of any indoor facility used for the provision of services for children under the age of 18, if those services are funded by Federal programs either directly or through state or local governments. The law does not apply to children's services provided in private residences; portions of facilities used for inpatient drug or alcohol treatment; service providers whose sole source of applicable Federal funds is Medicare or Medicaid. HC02 3 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) Failure to comply with the provisions of the law may result in the imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and]or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. (4) The provider agrees to comply, within 30 days of notification from the department, with all other applicable state standards, Florida Statutes and Administrative Codes established by the department or made k.nown in writing to the provider that are not included herein. (5) The provider, if appropriate, agrees to comply with the federal and Florida pharmaceutical rules, regulations, and statutory requirements as specified in Chapter 465, F.S. which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here. (6) Pursuant to section 20.19(19), F.S., the provider agrees to maintain data on the perforn~ance standards specified in Exhibit D and section D, Special Provisions, for the types of services provided under this contract and shall submit such data to the department upon request. (7) The provider agrees to participate in the Title XIX Florida Medicaid Program as defined in the Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Programs, Rule 59G-4.050, F.A.C. which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here., and Targeted Case Management and will: (a) Pursue and submit vouchers on all Medicaid eligible clients for Medicaid eligible services. (b) Identify and report Medicaid earnings separate from all other fees. Medicaid earnings cannot be used as local match. (c) Ensure that Medicaid payments are accounted for in accordance with applicable federal regulations. (d) Comply with Chapter 5 of the Guide to Perfonr~ance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition, to ensure that no funds from this contract are used to pay for costs paid for by Medicaid. (8) If Exhibit B indicates that this contract includes federal funds authorized under the ADAMHA Block Grant Program, which includes the Community Mental Health Services Block Grant and the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant, the provider agrees to: (a) Ensure that block grant funds are not used to fund inpatient services. Inpatient services are defined as ser¥ices delivered in a licensed hospital. (b) Ensure that block grant funds are not used to make cash payments to intended recipients of health services. (c) Ensure that block grant funds are accounted for in a manner that pemaits separate reporting. (d) Ensure that block grant funds are not used to satisfy any requirement for the expenditure of non-federal funds as a condition of the receipt of federal funds. (e) Ensure that block grant funds are not used for the purpose of purchasing or improving land, to purchase, construct or permanently improve (other than minor remodeling) any building or other facility, or to purchase major medical equipment. HC02 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) (f) Ensure that block grant funds are not used to provide financial assistance to any entity other than a public or nonprofit private entity. (g) Ensure that block grant funds are not used to pay the salary of an individual, through a grant or other extra mural mechanism, at a rate in excess of $125,000 per year. (h) Ensure that block grant funds are not expended to carry out any program of distributing sterile needles for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug or distributing bleach for the purpose of cleansing needles for such hypodermic injection. (i) Ensure that block grant funds are not expended to carry out any testing for the etiologic agent for acquired immune deficiency syndrome unless such testing is accompanied by appropriate pretest counseling and post-test counseling. (j) Ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, each person who requests and is in need of treatment for intravenous drug abuse is admitted to appropriate treatment within 14 days of the request or is provided interim services within 48 hours and admitted to treatment within 120 days. (k) Ensure that program income derived from services funded in whole or in part is accounted for in accordance with 45 CFR Part 74.24. (9) If Exhibit B indicates funding from the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant, the provider agrees to also ensure, as appropriate, the following: (a) That funds expended for prevention are directed at individuals not identified to be in need of treatment using one or more of the six strategies defined in Interim Final Rule 45 CFR Part 96.125; and that alcohol and other drug expenditures, in terms of the units and unit costs given in Exhibit A, are not less than the amounts indicated in Exhibit B. (b) That funds expended for services to women are in accordance with Interim Final Rule, 45 CFR Part 96, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here, and ensure compliance with the specification given in Chapter 10 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. which contains details regarding additional federal compliance requirements; and that, in terms of the units and unit costs given in Exhibit A, expenditures for alcohol services to women and other drug services to women are not less than the amounts indicated in Exhibit B. (c) That the provider will provide outreach services in accordance with Interim Final Rule, 45 CFR Part 96, and that these services will be based on the following mode]: indigenous which is one of the three models approved by the National Institute of Drug Abuse. The provider agrees to obtain written approval from the department for the method used, to secure written approval from the department before making anv changes and ensure compliance with the specifications given in Chapter 10 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition which contains additional federal requirements. HC02 7/0 l/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) (d) That early intervention services for the HIV projects are in accordance with Inter/m Final Rule, 45 CFR Part 96, and are in compliance with the specifications given in Chapter 10, Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition which contains additional federal reqmrements. (10) The provider agrees to use the Florida Supplement to the American Society of Addiction Medicine Patient Placement Criteria for the Treatment of Substance-Related Disorders Second Edition (ASAM PPC-2) for assessing clients receiving substance abuse treatment services. (11) If Exhibit B indicates funding from Temporary Assistance To Needy Family Grant, the provider agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal rules and regulations as soon as they are made known to the provider and shall be incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here. c. Scope of Service The provider's service catchment area will include the following counties: Palm Beach County The provider's catchment area will not include the following locations within the catchment area: N/A To insure that state supported services are available continuously throughout the contract period, unless otherwise specified, services are to be provided evenly throughout the entire contract period. d. Major Program Goals The provider agrees to impact the following list of contributing factors as appropriate: For mental health services they are: Family/Natural Support, Community Support, Crisis and Emotional Impairment, Completion of/Adherence to Treatment Regimens, Safe/Stable Home Environment, Court-ordered Dispos!tions, Poverty, Life-skills Training, and Job Skill Training. For substance abuse they are: Safe/Stable Home Environment, Family/Natural Support, Lack of Ka~owledge, Early Identification and Intervention, Healthy Alternatives, Low Birth Weight, Diet/Nutrition, Substance Abuse, Developmental Disability, Unprotected Sex and Multiple Sex Panners, Risk-taking Behavior, Alcohol Use, Motor Vehicle Crashes and Domestic Violence. HC02 6 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) 3. Clients to be Served a. The provider agrees to provide services funded by this contract to the target populations that are checked below: UI Adult Mental Health - Serious and Persistent Mental Illness UI Adult Mental Health - Crisis Adult Mental Health - Forensic Involvement Adult Mental Health - Other Children's Mental Health - Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Children's Mental Health - Emotionally Disturbed Children's Mental Health - At Risk of Emotional Disturbance Parents Putting Children at Risk of Substance Abuse Persons with Substance Abuse in Criminal Justice System Intravenous Drug Users Dually Diagnosed Persons with Substance Abuse Other Persons with Substance Abuse Adult Substance Abuse Prevention Children Using Substances Under State Supervision Children Using Substances Not Under State Supervision Children At Risk for Substance Abuse Problems b. Client Eligibility (1) The provider agrees that all persons meeting the target population descriptions are eligible for services based on the availability of funds. (2) The provider agrees that crisis stabilization units and substance abuse detoxification and addiction receiving facilities must be provided to all persons meeting the criteria for admission. (3) The provider agrees that funds provided in this contract will not be used to serve persons not meeting the target population(s) specified above. c. Client Determination The provider agrees to enroll all persons served using the department's enrollment process as given in the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual. A detailed description of each target population and sub-population is also given in this manual. The department will validate the provider's determinations to ensure accuracy. d. Service Eligibility The provider agrees to determine services a person should receive in accordance with Chapter 65E-15, F.A.C. for mental health services and the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant for substance abuse services. In the event neither of the above is appropriate, the provider should use the Florida Supplement to the American Society of Addiction Medicine Patient Placement Criteria for the Treatment of Substance-Related Disorders Second Edition (ASAM PPC-2). HC02 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) e. Contract Limits Services provided under this contract are limited by the availability of funds. B. Mmmer of Service Provision 1. Service Tasks a. The department will purchase units of services from the provider by program and in the amounts as specified in Exhibit A. Services must be provided in compliance with all applicable licensing rules and other service standards as approved by the department or included in Exhibit G. b. The provider agrees to provide additional services with local match up to the amount specified in Exhibit B. c. In accordance with the District-wide initiative to support the treatment processes of the Child Abuse and Neglect Pilot Project, prioritization needs to be given to Pilot Project identified children and adults who are referred for services. Each provider will be required to formulate procedures for the recognition and timely response of pilot project family members. Providers will be required to develop procedures to ensure prioritization of pilot project family members by August 1 st, 1998. This process should betin by providers as soon as possible, and developed procedures should be sent to.the AlUM Program Office refelcting provider compliance by August 1 st, 1998. These efforts will ensure that clients with prioritized need will receive maximum benefit from the quality services we already have in place. 2. Staffing Requirements a. Staffproductivity standards are given in Chapter 4 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. b. The department reserves the right to be notified of staffing changes of persons in the following positions: Program Director and above. The Special Provision section of this contract may contain additional specifications regarding departmental notification of personnel changes. 3. Service Location and Equipment a. The dates, times and location of services will be as specified in the approved district plan or departmentally approved agency operating plan as appropriate. HC02 7/01/98 ADM Sen, ices Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) b. The provider agrees to notify in writing the contract manager within 7 days of any changes in dates, times and locations of services that will materially affect compliance with the district plan or departmentally approved agency operating plan as appropriate. c. The provider agrees to provide all appropriate equipment necessary for the effective delivery of the services purchased. 4. Deliverables a. The provider agrees to deliver the service units as specified in Exhibit A of the contract b. The provider agrees to deliver additional services that are eligible as local match. The unit cost of the additional services multiplied by the number of additional service units will be equal to or ~eater than the required amount given in Exhibit B. c. The provider agrees to serve the number of persons indicated in Exhibit D of the contract. d. The provider agrees to meet the outcome standards as given in Exhibit D of the contract 5. Performance Specifications a. The provider agrees to the performance standards specified in Exhibit D of the contract. A detailed description of each standard is given in the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual. b. The department will conduct an evaluation of the performance of the provider in achieving the standards specified in Exhibit D of the contract within 90 days after the contract's end date. The methodology for conducting this evaluation is given in the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual. c. By execution of this contract the provider hereby acknowledges and agrees that its performance under the contract must meet the standards set forth in paragraph B.5.a., above, and will be bound by the conditions set forth below. If the provider fails to meet these standards, the department, at its exclusive option, may allow up to six months for the provider to achieve compliance with the standards. If the department affords the provider an opportunity to achieve compliance, and the provider fails to achieve compliance within the specified time frame, the department will terminate the contract in the absence of any extenuating or mitigating circumstances. The determination of the extenuating or mitigating circumstances is the exclusive detem~ination of the department. HC02 9 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) C. Method of Payment 1. This is a fixed price (unit cost) contract. 2. The department agrees to purchase units of services from the provider at the rates and in the amount specified in Exhibit A provided the units are delivered in compliance with all other terms of this contract. 3. Client Fees a. In accordance with proviso language in the 1998 Appropriations Act, all client fees collected for services paid for, in whole or in part, by this contract will be used in accordance with the Cost Centers Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report, a required report that is specified in Exhibit C. The provider may allocate client fees except 1st and 3rd party payments in two steps. The first step requires that, to the extent possible, client fees are allocated to the cost center where they are generated. First and 3rd party client fees will be accounted for in total only. If, after the first step, there is a positive difference between the client fees generated within a cost center and the estimated expenditures within that respective cost center, the provider may reallocate this excess: (1) To expand current services beyond which the department is paying for; (2) To reduce deficits and achieve the financial requirements standards referenced in Section 9-4 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition; (3) To start new services, and; (4) To provide for fixed capital projects. For cost centers funded by this contract, the provider further agrees that as part of the contract negotiations, any reallocation of client fees except for 1st and 3rd party fees from cost centers where the client fees are generated must be disclosed prior to the contract's effective date. A narrative will accompany the Cost Centers Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report which will specify the amounts reallocated, both by cost center and type of client fee. b. If it is not possible to determine the cost center where a client fee is generated such as local government funding, the provider may use an allocation methodology. c. The provider agrees to amend and resubmit to the department the Cost Centers Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report within 30 days of when the provider becomes aware that any funding or revenues in cost centers funded in whole or in part by this contract will exceed the amounts given by 5 percent or $10,000, whichever is greater. HC02 10 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) d. For cost centers funded in whole or in part by this contract, if the actual amount ofclient fees, except for first and third party fees as given in the audit report exceeds the amounts in the Cost Centers Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report by 5 percent or $10,000, whichever is greater, the amount in excess will be treated as non-reimbursable. If such excess is expended in the delivery of additional services to the target populations specified in this contract, the liability will be waived. e. Client fees do not include revenues generated from: Bequests, one-time financial settlements with public or private payers, funds generated in the delivery of services to non-state supported clients, donations that are restricted for use by a specific donor, substance abuse and mental health services, programs, or activities that are not related to a state supported substance abuse or mental health sen, ices, programs, or activities, and activities that are not related to substance abuse or mental health services, programs, or activities. 4. The amount of departmental financial participation shall not exceed $ 87,583.00 as detailed on Exhibit A, subject to the availability of funds. 5. The provider agrees to provide local match up to the amount specified in Exhibit B. 6. Payment System a. The provider a~ees to request payment for services delivered on a monthly basis through submission of a properly completed invoice, Exhibit E, within 30 days following the end of each month in which services were delivered. b. The department may advance funds for one month(s) of this contract, based on documented and anticipated cash needs of the provider and provided that the advancement of funds is approved by the Office of the Comptroller. Exceptions may be made for federal grants that terminate within the first three months of the contract. c. In accordance with s.216.181(15), F.S. and federal regulations, the provider agrees that unused advance funds will be temporarily invested by the provider in an insured interest bearing account. Interest earned on these deposits will be returned to the department on a monthly basis. d. After the initial advance period, the provider agrees to request payment based on actual numbers of service units delivered up to the prorated amount, begim~ing with the first month that was advanced. e. Invoices for the initial month's advances will not require supporting documentation. The comptroller reserves the right to request supporting documentation on particular invoices at any time after actual units have been delivered. 11 HC02 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) f. The provider's final invoice, which is due 45 days after the contract's end date, must reconcile actual units during the contract period with the amount paid by the department. o Except for the final invoice, the provider agrees that the amount of the state's monthly payment will be equal to the number of verifiable services provided to eligible clients times the rates given in Exhibit A. Except as provided for in paragraph h. below, the total numbers of monthly service units paid under this contract can not exceed the monthly prorated number of units as specified in Exhibit A. h. The department may, if funds are available, release more than the monthly prorated share of the contract amount when the provider submits a request justifying the release of additional funds and that-request is approved by the department. i. The departmer~t may reduce a request for advance or withhold payment, if a provider is determined by the department to be out of compliance with the terms of this contract. j. The department will reduce a request for advance or withhold payment, if the provider fails to submit full client enrollment, demographic, services, or performance information, as required for the department's Integrated Data System, the State Integrated Substance Abuse Reports (SISAR), and the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual, 45 days after the due date given in Exhibit C. k. The department's decision to reduce or withhold funds shall be in writing and submitted to the provider. The written notice will specify the manner and extent to which the provider has failed to comply with the terms of the contract. When compliance is achieved, withheld funds will be reinstated to the provider. 1. If a provider closes or suspends services funded by this contract, the provider agrees to notify the department, in writing, two weeks prior to such closing or suspension of services. If the provider fails to notify the department, the provider agrees not to request payment for services provided in prior months, if the actual number of services in the month for which payment is being requested, is less than 25 percent of the prorated anmunt of services by cost center as given in Exhibit A. D. Special Provisions 1. Fee Schedule The provider agrees to develop a fee schedule and fee collection policy, based on income and family size, which does not create barriers to persons in need of publicly supported services. The fee schedule and fee collection policy for publicly supported sen'ices shall be submitted to and approved by the department. HC02 12 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) 2. Grievance Procedures The provider agrees to establish grievance procedures which applicants for mad recipients of services may use to present grievances to the governing authority of the agency about services being provided under this contract. Additionally, the provider agrees to establish fair hearing procedures that ensure all persons will be advised of their right to a fair hearing to appeal a denial or exclusion from services and the failure of staff to take into account the individual's choice of service. 3. Clinical Records The provider agrees that, as defined by section 394.4615, F.S., clinical records are exempt from public records disclosure to protect client confidentiality. 4. Required Reports The provider agrees to submit to the department financial and programmatic reports specified in Exhibit C by the dates specified. 5. Block Grant Funding Agreement Program Reports Upon request, the provider agrees to submit to the department information regarding the amount and number of services paid for by either the Community Mental Health Ser¥ices Block Grant and the Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Block Grant. The amount of funding and services are specified in Exhibit B of this contract. Also, the provider will ensure that the amount of funding and services that is reported and paid for reconciles with their (1) audit report, (2) client information system, and (3) departmental invoices. 6. Special Audit Reporting Requirements a. The provider agrees that its audit report will include the standard schedules, as appropriate, that are given in Appendix J of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition, and Exhibit F. b. The provider agrees to include in their audit report an additional schedule of actual funding and revenue that is in the same format of the Cost Center Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report. The independent auditor will provide a negative assurance that nothing in the audit came to the attention of the independent auditor that would cause a material misstatement in this schedule. Client fees do not include revenues generated from: Bequests, one-time financial settlements with public or private payers, funds generated in the delivery of services to non-state supported clients, donations that are restricted for use by a specific donor, substance abuse and mental health services, programs, or activities that are not related to a state supported substance abuse or mental health services, programs, or activities, and activities that are not related to substance abuse or mental health services, programs, or activities. HC02 13 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) c. If the provider has an ADM contract with more than one district, the provider agrees that Schedule of State Earnings as given in Appendix J of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition, will be completed for each district separately. d. The provider agrees that an audit report will not be acceptable to the department, if it is missing these required schedules or if the schedules are in a different format. 7. Family Planning Information The provider agrees to advise appropriate recipients that family planning services are available on a sliding fee scale at the local county public health unit (CPHU). 8. Recipient Identification Number For persons and services being reported to the department through the ADM Integrated Data System and SISAR, the provider agrees to use the recipient's social security number. 9. Work and Gain Economic Self-sufficiency (WAGES) The provider agrees to notify the department of all entry level employment opportunities associated with this contract which require a high school education or less. The department will contact the WAGES Coordinator in the Department of Labor and Employment Security regional office and request that WAGES participants be referred to the provider. In the event that the provider employs a person who was referred by the WAGES office, the provider will notify the department. 10. Psychotropic Medication a. The provider agrees that clients discharged from state mental health treatment facilities will be maintained on the medication that was prescribed for them by the facility at discharge for at least 90 days unless there is some extenuating medical reason for changing the client's prescription or the client requests the change. Maintaining includes perfon'ning required lab tests, providing the medication, and providing appropriate physician oversight. b. If Exhibit B of this contract includes funds from the Indigent Drug Program (IDP), the provider agrees to assist the department in designing an expedited, one-time study, such as for the month of September, to identify key IDP characteristics, utilization levels, cost factors and accessibility barriers. The provider further agrees to participate in the study and provide the department with reliable data from the selected sample. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the need for a legislative budget request. HC02 14 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) 11. Informed Consent for Follow-up Survey The provider agrees that individuals, who are receiving substance abuse services paid for, in whole or in part, by this contract, shall be informed of procedures to gather follow-up information on clients after treatment. Clients shall be asked to consent, voluntarily, to being contacted for this information. They shall be asked to sign a consent form which allows for follow-up contact during a period of from six (6) to 18 months following discharge. The form should meet the stipulations of 42 C.F.R. (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 2.31 and be filed in the clients medical record. A copy will be given to the department, if requested. The form must also indicate non-consent. 12. Payments from MCO and HMO Organizations Unless waived in the Special Provisions of this contract, section D, the provider agrees that subcapitated rates from either a managed care organization (MCO) or a health maintenance organization (HMO) will be considered to be "third party contractual fees" as defined in Chapter 5 of the Guide to Performance Contracting for Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, 4th Edition. Units of services which are covered by the subcapitated contract and provided to persons covered by these subcapitated contracts must be subtracted at the state rate of the cost center in which the service was delivered. 13. Minimum Computer Hardware/Software Requirements The provider agrees to have access to the following computer hardware and software: a. Processor: 486 (Pentium preferred) b. R.A.M.: 16 megabytes (32 megabytes_preferred) c. Hard Drive: .5 gigabyte d. Operating System: Windows 95 or Window NT (not 3.X) 14. Data Submission Requirements a. The provider agrees to submit IDS, SISAR, Enrollment, and Performance data electronically and in a manner that meets departmental standards with one exception. Mental health service providers may elect to submit performance data on department-approved scannable forms as specified in the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Measures Manual. b. The department prefers that the provider use the revised electronic version of SISAR as of July 1, 1998. The provider may, however, use the prior year SIS.ad*, electronic version through September 30, 1998 to allow for reprogramming. As of October 1, 1998, the provider agrees to use either the department's revised SISAR software or to submit the data on an ASCII file which meets departmental standards and has been edited by the department's checker program. 15. Calculating Local klatch for Alcohol Services The amount of local match required by section 394.76(3)(b) for alcohol serx,ices is equal to the percent of clients with a primary or secondary alcohol abuse problem from the latest 12 month SISAR. HC02 15 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) 16. Additional Local Match !f Exhibit B indicates that this contract contains additional local match, the department agrees that this additional amount is not to be factored in when determining the amount of local match required for compliance. 17. Additional Performance Measures a. If the district and provider have agreed on an Agency Operating Plan, the provider agrees to the district specific performance measures included in the Agency Operating Plan, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set out here b. The provider agrees to the following district specific performance measures: See Exhibit D. 18. Subcontracting with Minority Businesses The provider agrees to develop agency goals for doing business with minority owned/operated vendors, should any part of Children and Families contracted dollars be sub-contracted out. Minority status is defined as: provider is at least 51% owned or controlled (i.e., composition of governing board if non-profit) by: 1. Black, Hispanic, Asian or Native Americans. 2. American Women 3. Combination of#1 and #2 (use only if#1 does not equal at least 51%) Pr/or to executing any sub-contracts, the provider agrees to demonstrate to the department (Contract Manager) the following: · How the provider attempted to recruit and select minority vendors · How many responses were received by the provider · Why a minority vendor was/was not selected 19. Medicaid Earnings The per day rate, as specified in Exhibit A of this contract, must be reduced by Medicaid earnings, other State funding and other applicable first, second, and third party fees, with the exception that funds provided by Medicaid to the provider for Specialized Therapeutic Foster Care ( as published in the current Medicaid Manual), which are in excess of the rate published in Exhibit A, will not be returned to the Department as the scope of services provided under this Medicaid category exceed those provided in normal CCRT placements funded by PRTS/Medicaid funding at the rate in this contract ( i.e., a requirement for two home visits per week). Medicaid earnings must be reported for billing purposes using the cash method of accounting. The provider assumes no responsibility for any Medicaid eligibility determination. HC02 16 7/01/98 ADM Services Contract No: ATTACHMENT I - PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (Cont.) 20. Security Data Integrity - CF Operating Procedure No. 50-6 As referenced in Florida Administration Code 44-4.080, and Chapter 815, Florida Statutes, "Florida Computer Crimes Act", all employees and contract provider employees with access to data through computer related media must read and sign the security agreement for (CF 114) as identified in Exhibit H. Fulfillment of security responsibilities shall be mandatory and violations may be cause for civil penalties, or criminal penalties under Chapters 119, 812, 817, 839, or 877, Florida Statutes, or similar laws. The provider will ensure that Exhibit H is signed by all required personnel, and a copy retained in their file. The signed original must be sent to the contract manager, for retention in the contract file. A copy of the CF Operating Procedure No. 50-6 is available upon request. HC02 17 07;01/98 ADM Services EXHIBIT A Page I of 2 STATE FUNDING BY COST CENTER AND PROGRAM Agency Name The Cirv of Delra¥ Beach Contract: 1H350 Date: 10101/9g Revision# 01 Adult Adult Children's Child/Adol COST CENTERS Mental Health Subsiance Abuse Mental Health Substance Abuse 1. Assessment State Rate $ $ S Contact Hours Purchased 2. Case Management $ $ $ $ Stale Rate Direct Svs Hfs Purchased 3. Crisis Stabilization State Rate Bed Days Purchased 4. Crisis Support/Emergency State Rate $ $ $ Staff Hours Purchased 5. Day Care State Rate $ $ Days Purchased 6. Day-Night $ $ $ $ State Rate Days Purchased 7. Dropqn/Self-Help Centers $ State Rate Facility Days Purchased I~. In-home and On-site 5; $ $ $ State Rate $ $ $ S Direct Svs Hrs Purchased 9. Inpatient $ $ Sta~e Rate $ Days Purchased l 0. Intensive Case Management $ $ $ $ State Rate S $ S $ Direct Svs Hrs Purchased l I. Intervention State Rate $ $ $ $ Direct Svs Hrs Purchased 12. Medical Services 5; $ $ $ State Rate S S $ S Contact Hours Purchased 13. Methadone Maintenance State Rate $ $ Dosages Purchased 14. Outpatient a. Individual $ $ S $ Individual State Rate S $ S $ Contact Hours Purchased b. Group Group State Rate $ Contac! Hours Purchased 15. Outpatient De,ox S~ate Kate $ S Days Purchased 07/01/98 ADM Services EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 2 STATE FUNDING .BY COST CENTER AND PROGRAM Agency Name The Citv ofDelray Be~ch Contract: 111380 Date: 10/01/98 Revision# 01 Adult Adult Children's Child/Adol COST CENTERS Mental Health Substance Abuse Mental Health Substance Abuse I 2 3 4 16. Outreach $ $ $ State Rate $ $ S $ Non-Direct Svs Hfs Purchased 17. Prevention $ $ 40.000 $ $ 47.583 State Rate $ $ 22.41 $ $ 22.41 Non-Direct Svs Hrs Purchased 1,785J 2, 123 18. Prev/Interv - Day $ $ S*.me Rate $ $ Days Purchased 19. Residential Level I $ $ $ $ State Rate $ $ $ Days Purchased 20. Residential Level 2 $ $ S $ State Rate $ $ S Days Purchased 21. Residential Level 3 $ $ $ $ State Rate Days Purchased 22. Residential Level 4 $ State Rate $ Days Purchased 23. Respite Services $ State Rate $ Contact Hours Purchased 24. Sheltered Employment State Rate Days Purchased 25. Substance Abuse Detox $ State Rate $ S Bed Days Purchased 26. Supported Employment a. Individual $ State Rate S Direct Svs Hrs Purchased b. Enclave Model $ $ 5; $ State Rate $ $ $ 5; Direct Svs Hrs Purchased 27. Supported Housing/Living $ State Rate $ $ S S Direct Svs Hrs Purchased 28. TASC State Rate Direct Svs Hrs Purchased Total State Funds 5; 0 $ 40,000 $ 0 5; 47,583 19 7/1/98 ADM Services EXHIBIT B FUNDING DETAIL Agency Name The City of Delrav Beach Contract # IH380 Date: 10/01/t)8 Revision # 01 MENTAL HEALTH ADULT COMM. MENTAL HEALTH OCA AMOUNT CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH OCA AMOUNT 3aker Act Services(100611 ) Children's Mental Health Services(100435) General Revenue GR000 $ General Revenue GR000 ADAMH Trust Fund * 19000 $ 2ommunity Mental Health Services(100610) Grants and Dontations Trust Fund General Revenue GR000 $ Grant ADAMH Trust Fund * 19000 5 Federal Grants Trust Fund Federal Grants Trust Fund Title IV-B WO000 Homeless Grant GX001 $ Grant Community Mental Health Services - CCMS(100610) Children's Baker Act(104257) General Revenue GR000 $ General Revenue GR000 ADAMH Trust Fund * 19000 Indigent Drugs (IDP) Purchased Residential Treatment Services(102780) General Revenue GR000 $ General Revenue GR000 Line of Credit Purchase of Therapeutic Services(100800) Special Project $ General Revenue GR000 TOTAL ADULT COMM. MH TOTAL CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADULT SUBSTANCE ABUSE (100618) OCA AMOUNT CHILD/ADOL SUBSTANCE ABUSE(100420) OCA AMOUNT General Revenue GR000 $ General Revenue GR000 General Revenue/ADMTF/G&D 'IT** 2700G $ General Revenue./ADMTF/G&D TF/CASA TF** 2700G 5 Prevention Services *** 27PRV S40,000 .Prevention Services *** 27PRV $47,583 Serv/ces to Women *** 27WOM S Intravenous Drug Usage *** 27HIV $ Federal Grant Trust Fund SSI Disenrollee Services *** 27887 5 Grant SSI Disenrollee Services *** 27888 S Federal Grants Trust Fund TOTAL CHILD/ADOL SUB. ABUSE 547,583 AIDS/CDC Grant 9M000 $ TOTAL ADULT SUB. ABUSE $40,000 MATCH CALCULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONTRACT FUNDS NOT REQUIRING MATCH SO TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRING MATCH 587.583 S LOCAL MATCH REQUIRED $29.194 S ADDITIONAL LOCAL MATCH S TOTAL FUNDS NOT REQ MATCH $0 GRAND TOTAL LOCAL MATCH $29.194 Community Mental Health Block Grant *Expenditures must be Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant eligible. *** Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant - Funding Agreement.- RESTRICTIONS APPLY 20 07/01/98 ADM Services EXHIBIT C REQUIRED REPORTS Agency Name:city o~' Delrav Beach Contract No. IH380 Date 09/29/98 Revision No. 131 [ I Due Date [ # of Copies., [ Send to: [ Reports Required For All Providers Response to Monitoring Reports 15 days after I Contract Manager receipt Agency Service Capacity Budget Report FY 1999 Final 8/1/99 2 Contract Manager FY 2000 Draft 3/15/99 1 Contract Manager Cost Center Expense Budget Report FY 1999 Final 8/1/99 2 Contract Manager FY 2000 Draft 3/15/99 1 Contract Manager Cost Center Funding Sources and Revenue Budget Report FY 1999 Final 8/1/99 2 Contract Manager FY 2000 Draft 3/15/99 I Contract Manager FY 2000 Local Match Plan 3/15/99 I Contract Manager Monthly Data Specified for the Integrated Data System N/A Electronic Mental Health Program Submission Office or FMHI as appropriate Mental Health Performance Data (PB2) and client enrollment N/A Electronic District Nine ADM Submission Progra.,m Office State Integrated Substance Abuse Reports (SISAR) 15 days after Electronic District Nine ADM month Submission Program Office Reports Required for Substance Abuse Providers Prevention Records 15 days after I District Nine ADM quarter Program Office Alpha/Beta Pre and Post Reports N/A HIV Counseling and Testing N/A HIV Outreach Annual Report N/A Prevention Services Report 8/1/99 I Contract Manager Monthly Report for CDC Grant N/A Other Reports Children's Mental Health Priority Svs List N/A Cost Center Personnel Detail Report 3/15/99 1 Contract Manager Quarterly Local Match Report 15 days after 1 Contract Manager end of month indigent Drug Report NIA Contram Manage: Quarterly Service Provision Report 15 days after 1 end of month 21 07/01/98 ADM Services Exhibit D Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Performance Measures Agency Name:City of Delray Beach Contract #:IH380 Date: 09/29/9[3 Revision #:001 Minimum I. Target Populations Numbers to Be Served A. Adult Mental Health 1. Serious and Persistent Mental Illness 2. Crisis 3. Forensic Involvement B. Children's Mental Health 1. Seriously Emotionally Disturbed 2. Emotionally Disturbed 3. At Risk of Emotional Disturbance C. Adult Substance Abuse 1. Parents Putting Children at Risk 2. Involved in Criminal Justice System 3. Intravenous Drug Users 4. Dually Diagnosed 5. Other D. Children's Substance Abuse 1. Under State Supervision and Abusing Substances 2. Not Under State Supervision and Abusing Substances 3. Children At-risk of Substance Abuse 24 II. Outcome Standards For Each Target Population A.1. Adult Mental Health - Serious and Persistent Mental Illness N/A 1. Average post admission annual number of days spent in the community by persons served will be at least 2. Average post admission GAF score for persons served will be at__ 3. Average post admission consumer satisfaction score (BHRS) for persons served will be at least __ 4. Average post admission annual number of days worked for pay for persons served will be at least __ 5. Average post admission monthly income for persons served will be at least __ A.2. Adult Mental Health - Crisis N/A 1. Average post admission GAF score for persons served will be at least__ 2. Average post admission consumer satisfaction score (BHRS) for persons served will be at least __ 22 07,'01/98 ADM Services Exhibit D (cont'd) Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Performance Measures Agency Name: Contract #: Date: / / Revision #:__ A.3. Adult Mental Health - Forensic Involvement N/A 1. Average post admission GAF score for persons served will be at least__ 2. Average post admission consumer satisfaction score (BHRS) for persons served will be at least__ 3. Percent of persons who violate their Chapter 916, F.S., conditional release and re recommitted shall be no more than percent. 4. Average post admission annual number of days spent in the community by persons, who are on conditional release (Chapter 916, F.S.) and served, will be at least __ B.1. Children's Mental ttealth - Seriously Emotionally Disturbed N/A 1. The average post admission score on the Children's Global Assessment Scale for children served will be at least 2. Children served will spend an average of at least ~ days in the community per year. 3. Children served will attend an average of at least ~ percent of available school days per year. 4. No more than __ percent of children served will be committed or recommitted to the Department of Juvenile Justice. 5. At least __ percent of families of children served will be satisfied with services as reported on the Family Center Behavioral Scale (an average item score of four or above indicates satisfaction). B.2. Children's Mental Health - Emotionally Disturbed N/A 1. The average post admission score on the Children's Global Assessment Scale for children served will be at least 2. Children served will spend an average of at least __ days in the community per year. 3. Children served will attend an average of at least __ percent of available school days per year. 4. No more than , percent of children served will be committed or recommit-ted to the Department of Juvenile Justice. 5. At least ~ percent of families of children served will be satisfied with services as reported on the Family Center Behavioral Scale (an average item score of four or above indicates satisfaction). B.3. Children's Mental Health - At Risk of Emotional Disturbance N/A 1. At least__ percent of families of children served will be satisfied with services as reported on the Family Center Behavioral Scale (an average item score of four or above indicates satisfaction). C. Adult Substance Abuse N/A Average post admission consumer satisfaction score (BHRS) for all adult substance abuse clients served will be at least 23 07/01/98 ADM Services Exhibit D (cont'd) Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Performance Measures Agency Name: Contract #: Date: / / Revision #: C.1. Adult Substance Abuse - Parents Putting Children at Risk N/A 1. At least __ percent of persons discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drag use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least __ persons served will complete treatment. 3. At least __ percent of persons discharged from treatment will be employed upon discharge. 4. At least __ percent of women pregnant during treatment will give birth to substance free newborns. C.2. Adult Substance Abuse - Adults Involved in the Criminal Justice System N/A 1. At least __ percent of persons discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drag use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least __ persons served will complete treatment. 3. At least , percent of persons discharged from treatment will be employed upon discharge. C.3. Adult Substance Abuse- Intravenous Drug Users (not including Methadone) N/A 1. At least__ percent of persons discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drug use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least persons served will complete treatment. 3. At least __ percent of persons discharged from treatment will be employed upon discharge. C.4. Adult Substance Abuse - Dually Diagnosed N/A 1. At least__ percent of persons discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drag use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least __ persons served will complete treatment. 3. At least __ percent of persons discharged from treatment will be employed upon discharge. C.5. Adult Substance Abuse - Other N/A 1. At least__ percent of persons discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drug use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least__ persons served will complete treatment. 3. At least percent of persons discharged from treatment will be employed upon discharge. D. Children's Substance Abuse N/A 1. At least percent of families of children served will be satisfied with services as reported on the Family Center Behavioral Scale (an average item score of four or above indicates satisfaction). D.I. Children's Substance Abuse - Under the Supervision of the State N/A 1. At least. percent of children discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drug use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least _ children ser~,ed will complete treatment. 24 07/01/98 ADM Services Exhibit D (cont'd) Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Performance Measures Agency Name: Contract #: Date: / / Revision #: D.2. Children's Substance Abuse - Not Under the Supervision of the State N/A 1. At least__ percent of children discharged will successfully complete treatment with no alcohol and other drug use during the month prior to discharge. 2. At least __ children served will complete treatment. D.3. Children's Substance Abuse - Children at Risk of Substance Abuse 1. At least n/a percent of students in targeted prevention programs will achieve a minimum of six months improvement in reading each semester, or will progress to within grade level. 2. At least n/a percent of students in targeted prevention programs will achieve a minimum of six months improvement in math each semester, or will progress to within grade level. 3. At least 95 percent of children receiving targeted prevention services will not be admitted to substance abuse services during the 12 months after completion of prevention services. 4. At least 95 percent of children will perceive substance use to be harmful at the time of discharge when compared to admission. District Specific: Excel Focus Five: 80 percent will successfully complete prevention program. 60 percent of program will include parenting skills program. The Excel Focus Five will provide a minimum of five community based activities to include key community organizations and stakeholders. The Neighborhood Stabilization Program: Will develop three new Neighborhood Associations in the southwest section of Delray Beach. Each association will conduct monthly meetings with 15 members. Minutes of monthly meetings will be recorded in the prevention format and submitted to the ADM Contract Office per Exhibit C. Drop-In Center: Will maintain a Prevention Log to be submitted to the ADM Program Office per Exhibit C. 25 Exhibit G SERVICE DEgCRIP%qON ACrENCY:~¢~ADDAD$ of Grrater I)eb~_Y PROGRAM; MH. ,.CMH . ASA~CSA COST CENIER:_Prevea~¢io~ _ 1. Service I~flnltion: Prevention ~:rvice are those involving strategies that preclude, foresiall, or impede th~ dcwelopmont of sub~anees abuse mad mentxl he~h problems srui include increasing public ~wareness through haformation and community based eommuni~ tmsed process programs. 2. B,-18De~ptio,, of Serviee~ Provided: This program pro~4~s community orgnnizing, conlition ~ilding nnd le.~lemhip development for residents living in Pine Gro~, Osc~oln, ~1 Fall Ridge Neighborhoods. The go~l .o£this pro,'nm is ~ re, ce +,~ m'noum of open air drug r~le% nnd violem behavior existing in thc thr~ eommunitie~ This progrnm Is nvniltble to thr~e neighbo~oo~, ~wo of which ~ pr~:lomin~tly Creole s~ ~cl one Hisp~mic community. ~ n~ighborhood~ D'pic.~lly fe.~xtr¢ ~ba_,,.doned horace, ~ lcr~ nnd tml~v~l stre~s. TI~ r~ighborixx>d ~itttion meetings will be held momhly ~ hour~ eonveniem for resider~ ~h az evenin~; or weeke~Iz. M. ont~y ~-c-et/bike l~trol~ u~ill nluo be develop to provide n vi~le presetme. r,,lutiomkip~ ~ help make theue neighborhood ~tfe. This program will n.t~ a ~ull year ~nd is design to heI~ rcsident~ Imm how to eliminnle blight nnd other conditions tim rrmk~ it ~ £0r drug related ~ivitie$ to ~i~. This community drop-in center is n c~mmuni~ ~ progrnm, d~veloped ~r re~i&n~s living in the Community D~velopmem Block Gram target nre~ of the city ofDelr~y ]3en~l~. The progrmm will provide ~ d~-op-in 0enter lin.i~on, will work wi~ Delnty Bea~l~ poli~ ~o fil~ reports nnd m~e reque~ for poli~ irmm'v~mion on re$idm'ns bel'mt~. Th= go~tl oftl~ progrmn i~ ~o drug use ~ violence. The pro~w~n i~ ~vtiltbie to tl~ community r~idem, living in the C.D.B.G ttrge~ tre~ nnd ~ get ~o m~l fi.om ~¢ eentea' by tl~ir o~,'n m. The e_m-rter will be open Monday thru Fridny from 5:00 PM until ~:0~ PM_ The ~:nter will be nv~ihtbl¢ for n~ighN:n'bood ~oei~tion meeting~, drug prevention trair~g m'Z ~o r~uesI ~tsis'mnces'~le reports ~bom drug-rel~t~ ~-tivkies in I. he Tm'g~ N~ighborhood A~r,o¢i~tion me~ing, stre~Jbike pn~.rol~., ~n~ vigils will be h~ld during cverfing nncl we~k-end hours. 26 5:00 i'M to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday 3. Tart. el Poo~lation: Residents living in the Community Development Block Crram target area which ii oor~id~ to be a economically dira~tvantaged, minorky community. Kesidems living in thc C.D.B. O tarse~ m-ca. ~ t~ p~~ ~i~rh~s elimi~te ~g-~at~ ~ti~. ~. ASd~ & T~hone ~um~r ~ ~eh ~m: C~ of~y 1~ ~ I" A~ 1~1 SW 12~ Av~ (561) 243-7203 (561) 27~755 ~ ~n: M~ B~I~ ~ ~n: C~ ~di~ 301 SW (561) 6. Em~en~n~~ N~: E~~ ~ot~ ~ ~li~ wh~ ~d~ ~ id~ifi~. 7. ~m~g ~: Potion: Full ~me ~g ~on ~r~ator S~io: 1:~5 Edu~io~~S~lls: ~gh Po~fion: P~-fimc ~in C~ Li~n g~io: 1:50 ~u~fio~en~S~lls: ~lls ~ ~ ~d v~bal, ~fl ~le ~o ~te ~]1 with neigh~ ~d ~. 8. ~nn~Aeh~ent ~ ~: N/A 9. ~~ chang~ N/A 27 SERVI CE D .SCRiPTION AGENCY: City of Delray Beach P OGKaM: ASA %/ CSA V" cos 1. S¢ndc¢ Deflation by Cost Center ~ Per ~M Guidelines: 2. Dascfiption of Sewices Prodded: a. List ~ccific ~ks, i.¢. co~s~g, c~¢ m~ag:m~t, day ~¢a~nt, ~. h. Li~ ~ l~i~ of~c ~ i.~., pro~afic, m~i~, g~p~c, crc. c. Sp¢ci~ ~¢s ~¢ s¢~ic¢ is av~lable ~d ho~ of operation d. How o~¢n ~ cli~ts · ~. - '. lf~sid¢ntlal, auach ~ d~ly. schedule a. Prevention s~iccs provid~ to fi~ ~de, ct-risk ~l~¢n l~v~g wi~ ~~ Dcv¢lopm¢nt Block ~t t~gct ~ of ~¢ CJ~ of Dekay C~l~n ~¢ m~oduc~d ~d given oppo~fies ~o hut¢ff~¢c, dev¢lop ~o~h social ~d emot]o~ stfills ~d ~¢ ~i~ to ~w ¢~¢¢m ~om ~iquen~ss. obs~ o~m b¢hzx~or ~d to appr¢¢[at~ co~monMfies ~d d[ff~r~nc~¢. allow¢ for h~6~-on ~ md ~afis, ro]~ play ~d x4sual ~nd P¢ffo~g Ci%,-¢smb~shed CDBG t~g¢~ c. Sen,ices provided z~er schoo] gore 2:00-5:00 pm, Monday t~-ougb f~d~y all hzlf day t~acher pt~n~ days. z. Dascfib¢ uh~ v-vpula~on b. Provide c~:¢~a for ¢li~biliw c. Descffb¢ d~sch~g¢ cfi~c~a ~nd ~'hat cons~;u~es sea, ice comp}etlon d. D~scfib~ ~u)' special tzr~at pOpU]2l~OD a. Ch~)~-¢n living witch ~e CDBG :arcct ~ ~d amcnd~n~ Pine _~m_m¢, School. Approximately 9~% of~h¢ smdant5 lh'~ v.,i',~n fi~ deFm¢fl ~'aa ~d ~ sons'dared a 28 b. Children arc recommended for p~rtic~pafion by the(r teachers. These children show no psycbologica] problems bu~ ~c workins below their level of potential and expectation. c. As r~ak~d by Section 10E-16.00~(260 ~d(30), th~ ~rot:ction of p~icip~u disch~ procedures shall be in accord~c~ ~'i~ th: attach~ ch~ck info,at,on fo~. Slots are available to s=~e stud,nts who live within ~ D~vc]opm~nt Block Or~t target ara~ ~ound~d on thc w~st by 1-95, thc =~t by F~d:ml Highway, the nomh by L~ Ida Road and the south by L~nton B]vd). Sendc~ complc[ion is =st~bl~shcd by thc smd:hr bc~g promoted inlo ~h: ~d= ]=v~] (middle school). ~ CDBG t~g~t area houses lh~ higher conc=n~ation of low ~d mod~rat~ households, mo~ of which m~t the S~d~ Title ~ eligibii{5' Addr:ss ~d Talaphon~ Number of Each 400 SW lOth S~reec 101Barwl~k Rd 5775 Jo~ Road belray Beach, FI ~3444 Delay BeaCh, FL 33445 Boca Raton, ~L 33496 561/243-1554 5~1/279-1710 561/989-2800 Pro.am Dkector, s Name mud Location: Mr. Charles PddIcy 301 S~; 14~ Ave Delray Beach, FI.334~4 56i/276-6755 6. Describe How Emerged)des are. Responded to or How I.Jnexpe~t¢d Needs for Sen'ice ar¢ Delivcr¢d: Thc attached procedures shall bc adh¢rcd to in case ofinju,-%, ~o pz~i¢ipams or other' ~n)er~¢:~c:,'/non-cm~rgensy situations arise. ~nes¢ procedures ar~ :.n complimc¢ with Section Sta/~n~ Lcv:ls: 2. Speci ff,,.. .... n un': p¢rfom-, thc work. b. \¥"ha! ii; thc elis::: c. Wha,, are the..~_¢,~.~', .... ., r¢:~ui;'cments rc,.'ardi:: a c¢.tifi¢,~tion,- o licensln$ or m'c, fcssionz] C:,:pCi'i CF.,C C ? 29 b. Client to staffrafion is I~ children to' l mdult c. Policies and Procedures are attached. S. Explain Any Changes, Achievements or Modification for FY97/9~: Th~ projected changes to our pro~ ~ ~ follows: z. To provid~ activities ~d homework ~is~ from ~:00- 5:00 for 6th ~aflers who have pa~cipated in our pro~ or who haw b~ r~oomendM by teach~rs. b. To find ad~tional funding ~nd ~mf~g to ~ompli~h ~s ~k. c. To ~quir~ add~tion~ ~ac: to hous~ s~l~:n ~om o~r schools. d. To set up.a wcck long b~ c~p far middk ~d ~E~chool s~d~nts. e, To continue ~tiqueU~ ~d ch~ pro~s for middle ~d high . school ~mden~. 9. Ezpl~n Proposed Chases, I~y, For FY 91/99 ~d ~ationa~e: a. To confinu~ to exI~nd s~c~s to 6~ ~ad~ at C~r Middl~ and O~i to ~ack education~ pro~ess and to provid~ support ~d homework ~sist- ~c~ to Cm,~r Smd~. 3O Memorandum TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Charles Bender, Community Development Coordinator THRU: Lula Butler, Community Improvement Directorf/~,,~ DATE: October 13, 1998 SUBJECT: Delray Beach Renaissance Program Subsidy Request ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION City Commission authorization and approval to issue subsidy to one eligible applicant under the Delray Beach Renaissance Program. BACKGROUND The Delray Beach Renaissance Program Memorandum of Understanding was approved by the City Commission on January 23, 1996. In partnership with the Delray Beach Community Development Corporation, the TED Center, the Community Redevelopment Agency, the Community Financing Consortium, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta and the Delray Beach Housing Authority, we are committed to providing homeownership opportunities to 80 homebuyers through new construction and acquisition/rehab beginning October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1997. An agreement to extend the program for one additional year has been approved by all partners and the City Commission. Each potential homebuyer is required to attend a homebuyers seminar sponsored by the Community Financing Consortium, Inc., the Renaissance Programs parmer and first mortgage lender. The seminar includes training and information on financial planning, credit and borrowing, budgeting, fair housing issues, mortgage and closing costs and a comprehensive glossary of real estate terms. The Grant is secured by a Promissory Note/Second Mortgage approved by the City Attorney and requires the applicant to maintain ownership/residence for a specified period accounting to the amount of the Grant. Grant amounts less than $15,000 per unit are forgiven at a rate of 20% per year for a period of 5 years and Grant amounts equal to or greater than $15,000 but less than $40,000 per unit are forgiven at a rate of 10% per year for 10 years. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending City Commission approval to fund subsidy for the one eligible applicant of the following property: Lot 35, Plumosa Park, Sec A / $20,000.00 s :\commun~renprg\comagend.doc AGENDA REQUEST Request to be placed on: Date: October 13, 1998 __ Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda xxxx Consent Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of item: Authorization and approval to issue subsidy to one eligible applicant under the Delray Beach Renaissance Program totaling $ 20,000.00 ORDINANCE / RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of subsidy award. Funds are to be awarded from the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP). SHIP Total $ 20,000.00 Account # 118-1924-554-83.01 ~:~;~ffnrnte~e;~vilwgna~e~i:mmendation~'(if app icable):'''' j ~ Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding Available: ~O Funding Alternatives..``=`' (if applicable) Account No. & Description: Account Balance: 2S [-.~ Z; Ct)O ' City Manager Review: Approved for Agenda:~O Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Disapproved s:\commun- 1 \cd~renprgrn\comagend.doc DELRAY BEACH RENAISSANCE PROGRAM SUBSIDY REQUEST BREAKDOWN NEW CONSTRUCTION NO CENSUS TRACT 65 NAME Cheryl Mumford PROPERTY ADDRESS 1419 SE 2nd Ave., Delray Beach LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 35, Plumosa Park SEC A, Plat Bk 23, Pg 68 % OF AREA MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 58 # IN HOUSEHOLD 2 COST OF EXISTING UNIT $ 80,000 COST OF REHABILITATION $ 9,930.00 PROJECT/SUBSIDY BREAKDOWN FIRST MORTGAGE $ 68,500.00 Community Finance Consortium RATE 6.5 % LTV 76.17 % SECOND MORTGAGE $. City of Delray, HOME $ 20,000.00 City of Delray, SHIP $ CRA of Delra¥ $ Housing Authori _ty THIRD MORTGAGE $. Federal Home Loan Bank GRANT $ HTF "A" APPLICANT FUNDS Pre-paids $ 360.00 Escrowed $1,000.00 Paid at closing $ 4,847.00 TOTAL TRANSACTION $ 94,707.00 s:\communXrenprg\suberqst\subrest.doc MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~ITY M_haN'AGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 SERVICE AUTHORIZATION ~69/O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'BRIEN (SEACREST/DEL-IDAAREA IMPROVEMENTS PHASE I) DATE: OCTOBER 14, 1998 This is before the Commission to approve a service authorization in the amount of $19,472.00 with O'Brien, Suiter & O'Brien for surveying services associated with Phase I of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park area improvements. The streets to be surveyed are outlined in the attached memorandum from Environmental Services. The boundaries are shown on the accompanying map. Funding will be from 442-5178-536-61.78 (Water & Sewer R&R/Water Distribution Improvements). Recommend approval of Service Authorization #69 with O'Brien, Suiter & O'Brien, Inc. ref:agmemoll Agenda Item No. 2. ~ . AGENDA REOUEST Date: Oct. 12,1998 Request to be placed on: X Regular Agenda Special Agenda __ Workshop Agenda When: Oct. 20, 1998 Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Execution of service authorization number 69 to O'Brien, Suiter, & O'Brien, Inc. in the amount of $19,472.00 for the Seacrest/Del Ida Area Improvements Project Phase I, Project 99-006. The funding for this project will be provided from the following: Funding Source Account Number Amount Water & Sewer R/R 442-5178-536-61.78 $19,472.00 ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO Recommendation: Staff recommends execution of the service authorization number 69 to O'Brien, Suiter, & O'Brien, Inc. in the amount of $19,472.00 for the Seacrest/Del Ida Area Improvements Project Phase I, Project 99-006. ~(~~. ~~ Department head signature: , JO'l~O Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds ): Funding available: (Y'E~/NO Funding alternat ive~B- (if applicable) ~ .. ~ .~_ Account No. Des; iption City Manager Review: ~pproved for a~enda: ~0 Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Disapproved DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden, City Manager FROM: Barron Caronite, Assistant City Engineer-'~~ DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJECT: Seacrest/Del Ida Area Improvements Phase I Project No. 99-006 Please find enclosed the agenda request for Commission to execute the service authorization number 69 in the amount of $19,472.1)0 to O'Brien, Suiter & O'Brien, Inc. to survey the area encompassing the SeacrestJDel Ida Area Improvements Phase I project. I have enclosed a map illustrating the streets to be surveyed. The streets to be surveyed include the following: :~ ~t :: i i i i :~: :: :~r°~: :~ :~ i :: i :::i i i ~ :: i :~ i i i :~ i ~ ~ i i i i P6~i°n °f T°tal 1 NE 5th St. Swinton Ave. NE 3rd Ave. $3000.00 2 Dixie Blvd. NE 2nd Ave. NE 3rd Ave. $2772.00 3 NE 7th St. Swinton Ave. NE 2nd Ave. $1500.00 4 NE 9th St. Swinton Ave. NE 3rd Ave. $4000.00 5 NE 10th St. Swinton Ave. NE 3rd Ave. $4000.00 6 NE 12th St. Swinton Ave. NE 3rd Ave. $4200.00 Funding Soume Account Number Amount Water & Sewer PJR 442-5178-536-61.78 $19,472.00 If acceptable, please place this item on the October 20, 1998 Commission meeting for Commission approval. Attachment cc: P, andal Krejcarek, P.E. City Engineer Richard Hasko, P.E., Director of Env. Svcs. Joseph Safford, Finance Director File: 98-006 (A) AGENMEMO.doc N.E. 11TH ST. BUSH BOULEVARD GEORGE N.E. 7TH N.E. 7TH ST. N.W. 6TH ST. N.E. 6TH ST. 0 N.E. iTH TERR. N.E. 6TH N.E. 5TH CT. N.E. 5TH ST. LAKE IDA RD N.E. 4.TH ST, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPAETMENT O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'BRIEN, INC. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH CONSULTING SERVICES AUTHORIZATION DATE: SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. ~ FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CITY P.O. NO. CITY EXPENSE CODE PROJECT NO.: (CITY) (O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'BRIEN, INC.) TITLE: SEACREST AREA SURVEY This Service Authorization, when executed, shall be incorporated in and shall become an integral part of the Contract, dated Hay, 1991, between the City of Delray Beach and O'Brien, guitar & O'Brien, Inc. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Prepare bound&fy and topographic survey of the following: N.E. 5th Street from Swinton Avenue to N.E. 3rd Avenue Dixie Blvd. from N.E. 2nd Avenue to N.E. 3rd Avenue N.E. 7th Street from Swinton Avenue to N.E. 2nd Avenue N.E. 9th Street from Swinton Avenue to N.E. 3rd Avenue N.E. 10th Street from Swinton Avenue to N.E. 3rd Avenue N.E. 12th Street from Swinton Avenue to N.E. 3rd Avenue II. SCOPE oF sERVICE~ The survey would included the following: 1. Platted rights-of-w&y (including bearing and distances for centerlines), lot numbers, block numbers, and dedicated easements. 2. All improvements, physical objects, driveways, and significant landscape (i.e. trees, shrubs) within the right-of-way. 3. All underground utilities. Inverts on sanitary and storm sewers will be indicated, as well as, locations of water valves and meters. Coordination with the Sunshine State Call One Center for location of other underground utilities will be surveyor's responsibility. P age 1 4. All topographic surveys shall have stationing established from south to north and west to east where applicable. 5. Elevations will be indicated every 100 feet, at a minimum, to indicate centerline grades, edge of pavement grades, and shoulder grades. Intermediate grades will be indicated at all grade breaks, driveways, and sidewalks. Two grades (one at the right-of-way line and one 15 feet back) will be indicated on the driveways to indicate direction of grade. 6. The survey will include topography of the complete intersection at the terminal end of each street. 7. Surveys shall be submitted on floppy disk, one vellum copy, and one signed and sealed print, with a copy of field notes. III. BUDGET ESTIHAT~ OF S~RVIC~S Compensation for services described herein shall be in lump sum of $19,472, IV. COMPLETION DATE This work for this Service Authorization will be completed within forty-five (45) days of the date of this Service Authorization. Page 2 This service authorization is approved contingen~ upon the City's acceptance of and satisfaction with the completion of the services rendered in the previous phase or as encompassed by the previous service authorization. If the City in its sole discretion is unsatisfied with the services provided in the previous phase or service authorization, the City may terminate the contract without incurring any further liability. The CONSULTANT may not commence work on any service authorization without a further notice to proceed. Approved by: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'.BR!!EN, INC. Date Date October Jay Alperin Paul D. Englevr Mayor Secretary/Treasurer City Clerk ~WZ%~ess Sufficiency and Form STATE OF FLORIDA City Attorney COUNTY OF PALM BEACH The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1st day of October, 1998, by. Paul D. Encjle, Secretary/ Treasurer, of O'Brien, Suiter O'Brien, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of the corporation. He is personal ly known to me and did take an oath. Paul D. Engle Sect e~b~/r y/Tr easur er Notary Public ~' ~ ~t~r ~ 2~ P~e 3 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~CITY MgAIAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 SERVICE AUTHORIZATION #3/SLATTERY & ROOT ARCHITECTS (CHEMICAL STORAGE BUILDING) DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 This is before the Commission to approve Service Authorization #3 in the amount of $13,600.00 with Slattery & Root Architects for design of the chemical storage building to be constructed on recently acquired property located east of the water treatment plant. The new building will provide a permanent facility for the storage of polymer chemicals used at the water treatment plant, allowing staff to discontinue use of the garage facilities. This project was included in the Capital Improvement Plan for FY 1998; however, delays were encountered during the land acquisition process. Funding will be from 441-5161-536-63.73 (W&S New Capital Outlay - Chemical Storage Building). Recommend approval of Service Authorization #3 with Slattery & Root Architects. ref:agmemol0 AGENDA REQUEST Agenda Item No. ~.~- Date: October 13, 1998 Request to be placed on: X Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff requests Commission award of Service Authorization No. 3 to Slattery and Root Architects in the amount of $13,600.00 for desiqn of the chemical storage buildinq at the water treatment plant. This project was included in the C.I.P. for fiscal year 1997/1998, however delays were encountered as a result of property acquisition. Funding is available from new Capital Account #441-5161-536-63.73, Chemical Storage Building. ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO Recommendation: Staff recommends award of service Authorization No. 3 to Slatter¥ and Root Architects in the amount of $13,600.00. Department head signature: ~~~. ~ Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds ): Funding available: E~/NO Funding alternatives (if applicable)j. Account No. & Des~cription4~, ~-SI~{-~ ~.-~3']~ Account Balance ~, ~k~, ~-~ Dr~ r)xg~ ~ /~///.~///~/~ ~ -F~ - City Manager Review:~ ' ~ .... Approved for agenda: ~NO Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Di s approved \ \ESSRV001 \DEPARTMENTS \EngAdmin\ Projects \ 97 \ 97 -003 \OFFICIAL\AG102098. DOC City Of Delray Beach. Department of Environmental Services MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden City Manager FROM: C. Danvers Beatty, P.E. ~ Deputy Director of Public ~ilities SUBJECT: CHEMICAL STORAGE BUILDING PROJECT NUMBER 97-003 DATE: October 13, 1998 Attached is an Agenda Request and Service Authorization No. 3 to Slattery and Root Architects for design of the proposed chemical storage building to be located on the recently acquired property east of the water treatment plant. The proposed chemical storage building will allow the water treatment plant to relocate the existing storage of polymer chemicals to a permanent location and discontinue the use of the garage facilities. Slattery and Root is one of our continuing contract consultants for architectural services. This project was outlined in the Capital Improvement Plan for FY 1997/1998 however delays have been encountered as a result of land acquisition. The total amount of Service Authorization No. 3 is $13,600.00 and funding is available from New Capital Account # 441-5161-536.63-73. Please place this item on the October 20, 1998 Agenda for consideration by City Commission. CDB/cdb cc: Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Director of Environmental Services file: S :\EngAdminXProj ects\97\97-003\OFFICIAL\agenmemo.doc SLATTERY & ROOT ARCHITECTS EXHIBIT A CONSULTING SERVICE AUTHORIZATION DATE: SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 3 CITY P.O. No. CITY EXPENSE CODE TITLE: Chemical Storage Building and Associated Site Improvements Project No. This Service Authorization, when executed, shall be incorporated in and shall become an integral part of the Contract, dated February, 1996. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed construction of an approximately 1,200 S.F. chemical storage building and associated parking and site improvements. The project is located on Lots 8 & 9 (along with the abandonment of a portion of S.W. 2nd Avenue. The proposed project will become a part of the City of Delray's existing Municipal/Water Treatment Complex. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES: PHASE I: Conceptual design of the site plan, building floor plans, and building elevations. 1098 N.W. Boca Raton Blvd. · Boca Raton, FL 33432 ° (561) 392-3720 · FAX (561) 392-1399 · Palm Beach Gardens Office (561) 775-1334 Lic # AA C001011 PHASE I1: Preparation of a complete package for submission to the City of Delray for SPRAB approval to include the following: detailed architectural site plan, floor plans, rendered colored building elevations and landscape design and specifications. Provide coordination and representation at all private meetings and public hearings with city staff and review boards to obtain final SPRAB approval. PHASE II1: · Prepare a complete set of architectural construction documents. · Structural engineering. · Mechanical, electrical, plumbing engineering (including site lighting). · Final landscape design and specifications (including irrigation design). · Provide coordination and communications with general contractor bidding on this project, and assist city with selection and negotiation. PHASE IV: Perform on-site observations, shop drawing review, contractor coordination, review applications for payment, etc., as required during construction. III. FEES: PHASE I: Based on the above scope of services for Phase I, the fixed fee for our professional services will be Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00). PHASE I1: Based on the above scope of services for Phase II, the fixed fee for our professional services will be Two Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($2,850.00). PHASE II1: Based on the above scope of services for Phase III, the fixed fee for our professional services will be Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($7,750.00). PHASE IV: Based on the above scope of services for Phase IV, the fixed fee for our professional services will be performed on an hourly basis as required. If the scope of the project or the services are changed materially, the amount of compensation will be adjusted accordingly. All work will be billed monthly and in proportion to services performed. All blueprint reproduction will be billed at $2.00 per sheet. All specialty printing (sepias, mylars, etc.) will be billed at 1.2 times our cost. Computer plots will be provided for $15.00 per plot. The total for all printing will not exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). V. PROJECT SCHEDULE: PHASE I: Project Phase I shall be completed within twenty one (21) days upon written authorization to proceed by the City of Delray Beach. This service authorization is approved contingent upon the City's acceptance of and satisfaction with the completion of the services rendered in the previous phase or as encompassed by the previous service authorization. If the City in its sole discretion is unsatisfied with the services provided in the previous phase or service authorization, the City may terminate the contract without incurring any further liability. The CONSULTANT may not commence contract without a further notice to proceed. Approved by: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: CONSULTANT.~ Date Date:~~~~,~ By:By: --"'""'" Jay Alperin, Mayor ~~~e~)- / Attest: Attest: Before ME, the forgoing instrument, this day of ,199 ,was acknowledged by. on behalf of the Corporation and said person executed the same free and voluntarily for the purpose there-in expressed. Witness my hand and seal in the County and State aforesaid this day of ,1998. Notary Public State of Florida My Commission Expires: a:c:~contracts~lelray7 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION/PAN & TILT SEWER TV CAMERA DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 This is before the Commission to approve and authorize the purchase of a Pan & Tilt Sewer Television Camera from Aries Industries at a cost of $14,100.00. The purchase will be made using the purchase order from an existing Broward County contract. The camera will benefit our utilities surveillance crew by improving the ability to view into service laterals from the main lines. It will also improve the accuracy of pipe evaluations. This purchase is included in the FY 1999 Capital Improvement Plan and will be funded from 442-5178-536-64.90 (W&S Renewal & Replacement/Other Machinery & Equipment). Recommend approval of the purchase of a Pan & Tilt Sewer TV Camera from Aries Industries using the purchase order from an existing Broward County contract. ref:agmemo9 Agenda Item No. ~. ~- o Date: October 13, 1998 Request to be placed on: X Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff requests Commission approve purchase of a Pan & Tilt Video Camera from Aries Industries, Inc. off the Broward County Service Contract in the amount of $14,100.00. This purchase was included in the C.I.P. for fiscal year 1998/1999 and funding is available from R&R account #442-5178-536-64.90, Other Machinery & Equipment. ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO Recommendation: Staff recommends award of purchase from Aries Industries, Inc. off the Broward County Service Contract in the amount of $14,100.00. Department head signature: ~~ ~ I~-~-~ Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): ~ Funding available: NO Funding alternative's--' (if applicabl~) Account No. & De~crip~ign~W~ -~6'/ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ - ~ %J~ ?~F/' /~C~ /~?1~9. Account Balance...~./~. Y?I ~ 0.~' ~ _/D~./~/~ -/2~-() / / Y ' ~ ~/) / '/ ~' - City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: ~NO Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Disapproved \ \ESSRV001 \ DEPARTMENTS \EngAdmin\ Projects \ 97 \ 97-003 \OFFICIAL lAG102098. DOC City Of Delray Beach. Department of Environmental Services MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden City Manager FROM: C. Danvers Beatty, P.E. i/-~~li~ Deputy Director of Public Ut SUBJECT: PAN & TILT VIDEO CAMERA DATE: October 13, 1998 Attached is an Agenda Request and supporting documentation for purchase of a Pan & Tilt Video Camera utilizing an existing Broward County Contract. The camera will enhance the operation of our television surveillance crew by providing the ability to view into service laterals from the main lines and enhance the accuracy of our pipe evaluations. This purchase is included in the FY 1998/1999 Capital Improvement Plan. The total amount of this purchase is $14,100.00 and funding is available from R&R Account # 442-5178-536.64-90 Other Machinery & Equipment. Please place this item on the October 20, 1998 Agenda for consideration by City Commission. CDB/cdb cc: Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Director of Environmental Services 10/09/98 10:35 F,S~ 414 246 7099 &I~IES INDUSTRIES ~001 FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 9, 199B TO: Scott Solomon COMPANY: City of Delray Beach - FL FAX #: 561-243-7060 FROM: James P, Lenahan President/CEO # of Pages: ~ (~n~.di~; =.,,e, .~..t: Phone #: 800 234-7205 Phone #: 414 246-3900 FAX #: 4'14-246-7099 This fax will authorize the City of Delray Beach to utilize the Purchase Order from Broward County for a Pan & Tilt Color Camera from Aries at the price of $14:100.00. If we can be of further assistance, please call Stu c~r myself. Thank you. h :~,~elett ~m~fl-delm.fax OONFIDENTIALITY NOTE; The inform:'tlen in this fa(;aimil~ ia intended ~or the named ~'e~ilglent(',) only. It may contain pllvilogad and ;enfidentlel I~farrnatlett, Do nat did:lose the -.~nlanta la anyone, PLEAIE DELIVER TO REGIPIENT, Thank yeu. Aries Industries Incorporated N65 W221S41 Main Street St~sex, Wisconsin 53089 10/09./98 10:36 F,%~ %14 246 7099 tkRIES IMDUSTRIES ~002 PIPELINE VIDEO INSPECTION, QUOTATION TEST AND SEALING SYSTEMS Page_ 1 _ of l city of Delr&y Beach TO: FROM: Aries Industries, Inc. Water and Sewer Department N63 W22641 Main Street 434 South Swinton Avenue Sussex, WI 53089 Delray Beach, FL 33444 (414) 246-3900 800-234-7205 Scott Solcm~c3n (561) 243-7312 FAX 414-246-7099 ATTN: PHONE: (561) 243-7060 p~RE~~Y JOB/SUBJECT: Ccm~t s FAX, CATE EXPIRES TERMS F,O,B. DELIVERY PR 10/09/98 12/09/98 Net-30 Destination 2-4 Weeks J. Lenahan/S . Gossett ITEM QTY. U/~ PART NO, DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE ITEM PRICE 1 1 ea 4.04.22 Aries Pan am/ T~lt Camera with $14,100.00 360° Head Rotation, Auto Hc~s Feature and Individual Light Bulb Mcc%~lee. an~ Spare Parts. { , ARIES INDUSTRIES, INC. Terrors and Conditions of Sale on the reverse side of this form or on arts=hod cheat are an integral part of this qUOtation. 03.'.~3,'98 18:~.~ FAX 4][4 ~48 ?099 .ARIES INDUSTRIES OF CO SSIO BROWARD COUNt, FLORIDA MA~L PROPER INVOICE AND COPY OF PU~H~E ORDER TO ~ SHOW THIS NUMBER ON ALL INVOICES ~ ~ ~ 3~1~ '~IPTO; -- OES W~REHOUSE ATTN PHDNE: 831-0804 2555 W, COP~NS ~0~0 n 3~i~/o~l o PCIMP~N~ N~3 a22~:41 M~ZN STREET F,O~. ., DELIVERY DUE DATE ~ TER~ aUO'rAT~ON 001 88337002(;000 ~ER 'HONITORIN~ E~U'~PME:N'T CLOSEO C~'ECUIT 'FU ONLY UP~RAO~ COUNTY'S EX~STIN8 ~URRENT NA];NL'~NE TU SYSTE~ TO' A PAN &'q'ZLT CAMERA TV ZNSPECTION FOR .~ZD~ VIEW CAPASI'klTIES..-360 DEGRE~ ROTA'I'I[)N, INCLUDES ARIES PAN i .~LT CRMERA. CONTRO.L BOX SPARE .PAR$~ .AND IN/ER%CONNECT CABLE, "CON~ACT P~UI, W, ORO'PPPS~R JR UNliT "D" ~V~4-357-6078 .. O1, F'UND~ 46; A~CY,: ~26 OR[~: 1310 OB J: 64~0 ACT: 5360 '~.*~.~ TUTAL ORDER $~4,~00,00 U~7<)~8 D9'70i8 QUOTATION REQUEST ~ BID/COh~RACT ~ - IMPORTANT: NO C.O.D.'S O~ COLLECT SHIPMENTS w~['BE ACCEP~D. VENDOR Mu~ INCLU~ MSDS SHEETS ~ DEUVERY WHERE AgPMCABLE. (SEE INV~A~ON FOR BIO ~ORM OR Q~TATION REQUEST FOR DETAILS) ~ FEDERAL T~ EXEMPTION NO, ~-6~0531 -- ~UTHORIZE~NA~E ' PROPER INVOICE-SEE ~EVE~SB SlOE ~Ru ~. ~o3.a m~, ~3) VENDOR COPY Video Inspection, Te$I and Seal Systems PAN AND TILT LOW LIGHT SENSITIVE COLOR RADiAL VIEWING CAMERA SYSTEM The ARIES PAN AND -RLT RADIAL VIEW!NG COLOR CAMEP, A is designed inspect sewer line w~Tls, lateral connections and large uncierground ducts and chembers.T.qe camera will Pan and Tilt in 6" relined pipes and larger. It is available with an auto centering o~3tior', The highly articulateci viewing module containing the Iow l',gr~t sensitive camera and focused directional lighthead sets a new peflormance stan- dard for pan and tilt radial viewing cameras. ARIES PAN AND TILT CAM- ERA provides over 90% spherical viewing a*. distances o~ 1 inch to 240 inCheS from the camera's operating position. The 300 degree pan anci tiit viewing angle permits 60 degree reverse angle viewing providing uncistorted full view inspection up lateral lines with the camera moving in the downstream dlrection, The 360 de§rea red(- al rotation provides complete undistorted wall viewing perpendicular to direction of camera travel, The camera can be mounted in either a standard camera skid or tractor. The camera connects to industry standard 5-pin multi-conductor waterblGcked connectlo¢ aP, d Is compatible with most multi- conductor sewer TV systems. FAX 414 2~8 ?099 .(~STRIES ~009 Aries Pan and Tilt Camera is the 'most reliable, rugged camera of its type because of these features: - Inspects 6" lines and larger. - Rotate only or full "Home" features for oDerator convenience. - Lightbulbs are individually sealed in removable light modules. - Light modules twist open in ~he ~ddle and bulbs ~e replaced without removing cover ~lass or breaking c~ra wate~ight integrity. - Lighthead heat is dissipated through ligh~head retainer. - A directional Largm Line Quad Lighthaad (4 bulb) mo~ts 4ireutly on c~era head (optional - Selec~ horizontal ?an or vertlc~ tilt as base c~era direction to best meet your ~nsp~ction requirements, - Auxilia~ligh~ing and ligh=hsa4 power box is avail~le for line~ - C~era r~tat~s 360 degrees ~untinuously wi~h internal'slip rang. - Strong ~wo-part side a~s contain "0" ring se~ls ~or wa=ertigh~ integrity. - Rear dirt seal protects rotating "0" ring seal giving added reliability. - ~ie~ Pan and Tilt C~era~ can be retrofit to Buchen,~dues or Tele~peotor systems. FAX 414 246 7099 ARIES ISDUSTR]E$ [~008 (4.04,~ 3723/99 Page 4 Aries Camera Storage and Transport&rich Ca~e A d~g~ ree~s=ant came is p~ovided for the camera and lighthead wh~le it is in storage or during transport, including shipping on co~%~ercial carriers. The interior of the ca~e contains a foam saddle and a lid installed yoke ~o firmly hold the camera and protect it fr~m damage. The case is equipped with metal closing latches. S_~ar~ Par~s Kit: ~. Descriptioq Aries ~art 8 O'Ring Viton (-016 V75) 13-0162-00 4 o'Ring Viton (-014 V75) 13-0163-00 1 0'Ring Vitcn (-217 V75) 13-0177-00 1 Holder, Light ~rotective Glass 21-0153-00 4 Screw, 10-32 x 3/4 Sc~ SS Cap 10-740~-500 1 Silicone, 736 3 Oz. Tube 13-0015-100 4 Window, Pryex Lighthead 16-0072-100 4 O'Ring ~018 16-0073-100 10 Bulb for Pan & Tilt ~1-~513-100 1 ~ilicone, 1 Oz. 94-0206-000 Aries Psn and T£1~ C~era is ~Aa most reliable, rugged camera of - Lightbulbs are individually sealed in removable light modules. - Light modulem twist open in thm middle and bulbs are replaced without removing cover glass or breaking camera watertight integrity. - Li~hthead heat is dissipated thru ligh=head re~ainer. - Cover glass is flush with lighthead retaining eliminated build-up o~ dirt particles. - Internal window glass is not removed when chang%ng lighthead bulbs, thus protecting ca,era watertight integrity. - Auxiliary lighting =nd lighthead power box is available ~or lines up to 144" diameter. - Camera rotates ]60 degrees continuously with in~ernal slap ring. - Strong two-part side arms contain "0" ring seals watertight integrity. - Rear ~lrt seal protects rotatin~ "0" ring seal givin~ added reliability. 05/2~/95 16:29 FA~ 414 24~ 7099 ARIES I~DUSTRZES 0007 3i23/98 L~qhthead Position: Directional with viewing head Powerl 28 watts, 4 bulb, independent directional reflectors, field replaceable. Optional Hi-Performance or Triplex lightheads with auxiliary power box for large line pan and tilt operations. 9peratin~ Conditions Line Sizes: 6" to 128" diameter Tempera:ute: -10 Degrees to +50 Degrees Celsius Moisturez Up to 100% R.H. Arie~ Pan_and ~ilt Camera - 360 Degree Rotation Plus 300 Degree Pan and Tilt Feature - Remote Controlled The design of the camera head allows it to view 360 dsgrees around the entire barrel of the pipe. The pan and ~ilt feature permits u~ to 70 degrees of rear viewing, thus permitting examination o~ a lateral while moving the camera either up or down stream. The lighthead moves with the camera and provides complete illumination in the viewing direction on surfaces up to 5 feet away from the camera head. The camera has focus and iris remotely oontrolle~ from the viewing station. Aries ~an ~d T~lt Camera - Contro11~ T~e 240 degree pan and tilt angle and 360 degree rotational motion are remotely controlled from the operator's ~tation. The controller is equipped with a Joystick to pan, tilt and rotate the view providing complete, undistorted pipe barrel and lateral connection viewing. Th~ con%roller is eguipped wi=h remote ~ocus and remote iris controls. The controller is designed for quick hook-up to the ~ower control unit when the Pan and Tilt Ca,era is being used. It is compa=t and easily stored while not in use. Aries Fan and Tilt Camer.a - High Intensity Directional Liqhting system A high intensity lighting system is ~urnished to provide the proper illumination to inspect down the pipe, along the pipe crown, invert, ~i~ewalls and laterals while usin~ the camera. The lighting system uses four (4) individually replaceable iightbuib modules which are easily field replaced. The bulb sockets accept multiple wattage bulbs ranging ~rom 3 watts to 10 watts per bulb. The bulbs are independent from the reflectors, and the lightbulb module~ can be rebulbed in the ~ield. Th~ lighting system is designed ~or inept=ting connections, pipe walls and joints at pipe distance~ up ~O 5'. Aries..~olid State Color Camera. Con~rol circuitr~ The color camera is equipped with the necessary =ircuitr~ to allow for the remote adjustment of the optical focus and iris from the power control unit at the viewing eta=ion. The camera is calibrated with both color bench ~est and picture analysis equipment at the ~actory. ~123I~ P&ge ~ provided with no sacrifice of iow frequency response. There is no visible streaking of the low frequency test bars when viewing a stan4ard ~IA Test Chart, The camera is equipped with a remote irks ~o control the illu~ination range for an acceptable picture between 3 and 10,000 Lux. Geometrical distortion O~ the i~age does not exceed 1%. Aries Pan an~ Tile C~_m-ra - Solid_State Color - Multi-Conductor - TechnicaI ~pecifications 1. 360 Degree camera head rotation 2. 300+ Degree pan and tilt viewing angle 3. Low light 3 Lux color chip camera 4. Large pipe wall and connection inspections up to 20' in diameter 5. Re~ote controlled focus and iris 6. Automatic white balance 7. Connects to standard 5-pin multi-conductor systems 8. High resistance to vibration or mechanical shock for long li~e 9. Preciee image geometry, no image burn-in 10. Excellent color rendition 11. Image pick-up device (CCD) has a lower random noise feature in comparison with other devices 12. Fits standard 3" camera skid yoke or Tractor Camera Carriage for inspection o~ 6" and larger lines Technical Specifications ~echa~ica~ Data Rota~ion~ 3~0 Degrees Axial Pan and Tilt~ 249 Degrees Centerline to Centerline Viewing Angle: 300 Degrees Pan and Tilt Spherical Viewing Capabilities: In excess of 90% Enclosure: Waterproof, sewer submergence Length~ 1%" Body Diamete=~ 2.375" Head Diameter: 4.5" including ~ighthea~ Vibration~ 7G (ll Hz to 200 Hz) Shook: 70G oD~ical Dat~ Lens: 6mm, ~[.4, C-mount Focus~ 1/2" to infinity, remote controlled Iris: Remote controlled, full range Distortion: None El~c~rp~i¢ Data Sensor: 1/2" Colo= CCD Sensitivity: 3 LUX Picture Elemen~s~ 768 (H) x 494 (V), 379,392 Total ~i~els Resolutlon: 460 (H) TV Lines Image Scanning: 525 line~ a% 60 Hz (NTSC), 2:1 inte=laced FAX 414 ~/~3/~e Aries Color Pan and Tilt L~wLiqh~ Sewer Te~evis.lon ~amera. ~60~ Rad£al. 30Or.Pan and ~l~ V~ewlnq FielA. Multi-Conductor_ Otv. pes~riution 1 Aries Pan and Tilt Radial View Color Sawer TV Camera, 360 Degree Radial x 300 Degree Pan and Tilt Viewing Field, Multi-Conductor, Remote Adjustable Optical Focus, Remote Light Compensating Iris, Automatic White Balance Circuitry, NTSC Color, Low Light, 3 Lux Camera 1 Camera Pan and Tilt Angle and Rotational Viewing Joystick Controller for 360 Degree Side View, 240 Degree Pan and Tilt Angle with Remote Focus and Iris Control 1 Directional Camera Light System for 8" to 30" Pipes and Ducts 1 Skid Yoke Adapter 1 Camera Storage and Transpor~ Case 1 Spare Parts Kit ~or Camera Light System 1 Test Cable, B-Pin to 12-Pin PCU Connector Aries Pan and ~ilt Ca,era - Solid S~&te Color - Multi-Conduct~ The pan and tilt view camera is s~ecifiua!ly designe~ to provide a close-up view of sewer pipe walls and lateral entrances through the use of a iow light sensitive camera, movable uamera head and directional lighting. The unit is color and designed for operation through up to 2,008' of multi-conductor cable in sanitary and storm sewers. Chassis construction is 100% solid state circuitry~esigned to withstand shocks and vibration normally sustained while being pulled through a pipe. The image pick-up device i~ a low light sensitive, 3 Lux solid state camera incorporating the latest high resolution clos~ circuit television technology. Operating climatic ranges of the camera are -10 degrees C to +50 degrees C, and up to 100% relative humidity. The camera p:ovides 360 degrees o£ radial rotation viewing with chip rotation to view all sewer wall surfaces an~ lateral connections. The rotating camera and lighthead configure=ion provides 240 degrees o~ pan and tilt angle measuring centerline to centerline. With the 70 degree lens viewing angle, this yield~ a total pan and tilt viewing area in excess of 300 degrees. This configuration provides a 70 degree reverse angle (rear) viewing capability for incoming lateral inspection when camera is moving downstream away from iateral connections. The camera design provides over 90 percent spherlcal viewing of the pipe or chamber being inspected. Aries Pan and Tilt View Camera - Solid Spate Color - ~equirements MultlnConduutor The =amera provides 460 lines of horizontal resolution and 400 lines o~ vertical resolution. The image pick-up device contains in exce~s of 379,000 picture elements (pixels). This high resolution image sensor provides significantly higher picture clarity. It will not burn even when p~inted at direct sunlight. Scanning is 525 lines, 60 fields, 30 ~rames, interlaces l:1 - NTSC color standard. The cmmera ~evelops a true color and transmits a sharp image picture on video ben,widths only. Full color video bandwidths are lIT'IF DF DELRrI¥ BErlI:H CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ~oo ~,~, ^~,.,~. ~,.~^~ ~,.^~,, ~,.o~,~^ TELEPHONE 561/243-7090 · FACSIMILE 561/278-4755 Writer's Direct Line: 561/243-7091 DELRAY BEACH Ali. America City MEMORANDUM 1993 TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney SUBJECT: PERC Decision - Call for Amicus Briefs Attached is a letter from the City's labor counsel requesting that we participate in an amicus brief regarding public employer's inherent right to subcontract. Please place this request for participation in the amicus brief on the October 20, 1998 City Commission agenda for consideration. Attachment cc: Alison MacGregor Harty, City Clerk amicus, sar CARSON & ADKINS TO: C&A Public Sector Labor Clients FROM: Leonard A. Carson ~ DATE: October 9, 1998 RE: ATU v. Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority_ PERC recently held that subcontracting by a public employer is an inherent management right. The union has appealed this decision to the First District Court of Appeal. We are advised that many unions and labor organizations intend to file an amicus brief in support of the ATU position that the PERC decision is erroneous. It would be helpful ifa number of amicus briefs were filed in support of the employer's position and in support of the PERC decision. The PERC decision is a major victory for employers in Florida, and it is important that the decision be upheld by the courts. We are contacting our public sector labor clients to determine whether they are interested in funding an amicus brief that would be filed by our firm on behalf of those clients. We would share the cost among all clients who express an interest, and all those clients (who wish) will be identified as amici in support of the brief. Since the brief must be filed by October 22, please let me know ASAP if you are interested in supporting this effort. Thank you for your attention. CARSON & ADKINS Lawyers MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~ITY M_g~AGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~- REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 Attached is the Report of Appealable Land Use Items for the period October 5th through October 16, 1998. It informs the Commission of the various land use actions taken by the designated boards which may be appealed by the City Commission. Recommend review of the appealable actions for the period stated. Receive and file the report as appropriate. ref:apagmemo FROM: JASMIN ALLEN, PLANNER '.,~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1'998 *CONSENT AGENDA* REPORT OF APPEALABLE LAND USE ITEMS OCTOBER 5, '1998 THRU OCTOBER 16, '1998 The action requested of the City Commission is that of review of appealable actions which were made by various Boards during the period of October 5, 1998 through October 16, 1998. This is the method of informing the City Commission of the land use actions, taken by designated Boards, which may be appealed by the City Commission. After this meeting, the appeal period shall expire (unless the 10 day minimum has not occurred). Section 2.4.7(E) 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: 1. The item must be raised by a Commission member. 2. By motion, an action must be taken to place the item on the next meeting of the Commission as an appealed item. A. Approved (6 to 0), a request for elevation change associated with the addition of awnings at Caf~ Ciao Toto, located at 522 East Atlantic Avenue. B. Approved (6 to 0), a request for elevation change to allow the addition of non- stealth antennas to the Spanish River Resort, located the northeast corner of East Atlantic Avenue and Seabreeze Avenue. C. Approved (6 to 0), the landscape plan associated with the redevelopment and expansion of the Delray's Lost Drive-In (aka Delray swap Shop), located on the east side of North Federal Highway, approximately 500 feet north of Allen Avenue. Concurrently, the Board approved waivers reducing the total number of required interior shade trees from 137 to 122 and to allow the use of sod instead of groundcovers in some of Phase One planting areas with the condition that if Phase Two is not constructed, the landscaping must be installed consistent with the improvement schedule for the rear parking lot. City Commission Documentation Appealable Items Meeting of October 20, 1998 Page 2 1. Approved (5 to 0, Ames and Diggins absent), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness, site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevation plan associated with the construction of two mixed use structures comprised of each 2,600 sq. ft. of office on the first floor and 2 one-bedroom apartments on the second floor for Lloyd Hasner Office Building, located on the south side of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, between NW 1st Avenue and Swinton Avenue. Concurrently, the Board approved the following waivers: Reduced the required 5' wide landscape strips between the off-street parking area and the north/south alley to 3 ~ ' and 4 ~'. Reduced the required right-of-way width for NW 1st Avenue from 60' to 40'. 2. Approved (4 to 0, Turner stepped down), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the relocation of a contributing single family residence from 116 South Swinton Avenue to 275 North Swinton Avenue. 3. Approved (5 to 0), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness associated with fa(;ade changes for Henry Dean Office Building (251 Dixie Boulevard),located west of NE 3rd Avenue between George Bush Boulevard and Dixie Boulevard. 4. Approved (5 to 0), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness associated with the construction of a deck/porch for a contributing single family residence located at 1104 Nassau Street. No other appealable items were considered by the Board. The following item which was considered by the Board will be forwarded to the City Commission for action. · Recommended on a 5 to 0 vote that the City Commission grant a waiver to LDR Section 4.1.4 for a parcel located on NE 7th Street (Mannweiler Residence) in order to allow a non conforming lot of record which is under the same ownership as an adjacent lot to be sold as a separate buildable lot. No Regular Meeting of the Board was held during this period. By motion, receive and file this report. Attachment: Location Map LOCATION MAP FOR G,,LrSTREA. BL*. CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 L-30 CANAL LAKE IDA ROAD N,W. 2ND ATLANTIC S.W, 2ND LOWSON BOULEVARD LINTON BOULEVARD ! L-58 CANAL C-15 CANAL C,T~ L,M,TS ........... S.P.R.A.B.: H.P.B.: A. - CAFE CIAO TOTO 1. - LLOYD HASNER OFFICE BUILDING B. - SPANISH RIVER RESORT 2. - 116 S. SWlNTON AVENUE I 1 M~LE / C. - DELRAY'S LOST DRIVE-IN 5. - 251 DIXIE BOULEVARD I J 4. - 1104 NASSAU STREET SCALE N CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FL PLANNING &: ZONING DEPARTMENT -- D/G/i'A/. BASE' M-AP SYSTEM -- MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~TY Mh!XlAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 This is before the City Commission to approve the award of the following bids and contracts: 1. Contract award at an estimated annual cost of $52,509.60 to G&K Services, via City of Vero Beach bid, for the rental of City employee uniforms, with funding from various departmental operating budgets. 2. Purchase award in the amount of $27,955.25 to Dionex Corporation, sole source provider, via SNAPS (State Negotiated Agreement Price Schedule) for DX-100 Ion Chromatography Analytical Testing Equipment to be used by the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory, with funding from 441-5161-536-63.75 (Water & Sewer Capital Outlay). 3. Purchase award in the amount of $91,360.00 to Linc Quantum Analytics, Inc. for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrophotometer (GC/MS) for use by the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory, with funding from 442-5178-536-64.90 (W&S Renewal & Replacement/Other Machinery & Equipment). 4. Renewal of annual maintenance contract with U.S. Filter, sole source provider, for wet scrubbers located at various sewage lift stations in the total amount of $25,200.00, with funding from 441-5144-536-52.21 (Water & Sewer Lift Station Maintenance/Chemicals). Recommend approval of the bid and contract awards listed above. ref:agmemo8 Agenda Item No.: ~O-I AGENDA REQUEST Date: October 12) 1998 Request to be placed on: xw Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October ~O~ ]gQ~ Description of agenda item (who, what, where, how much): Contract award to G&K Services Inc. for the rental of uniforms at an estimated annual cost of $52.509.60 via the C~ty of Vero Beach Bid ~97-4]. Funding from various departments operating budget. ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO Recommendation: Determination of Consistency w t~omprehensiLe~P'laL: ~ City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding available: ~ NO Funding alternatives: (if applicable Account No. & Description: Ac count Balance: N, l o-._~,-'~.~,...~.% City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: Hold Unt±l: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Action: Approved/Disapproved MEMORANDUM TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Jacklyn Rooney, Purchasing Supervisor THROUGH: Joseph~ff(~nance Director DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CTIY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 - CONTRACT AWARD- UNIFORM RENTAL VIA CITY OF VERO BEACH BID #97-41 Item Before Commission: City Commission is requested to approve the contract award to G & K Services for the rental of uniforms at an estimated annual cost of $52,509.60, via the City of Vero Beach Bid #97-41. Background: The City of Delray Beach is cun'ently utilizing a Palm Beach County Co-op Bid. The City of Boca Raton is the lead entity for this Co-op Bid. The City of Boca Raton has informed the Co- op that they will no longer be bidding this service as a Co-operative Bid when this contract expires. A survey was sent to all using departments of this uniform rental contract with Aramark Uniform Rental which was requested of Purchasing from Aramark Uniform Rental. A tabulation of this survey is attached for your review. The original surveys received are on file in the Purchasing Office. A large majority of these employees surveyed are not satisfied with the uniform rental service being provided by Aramark Uniform Service. The quality of their service and uniforms for the past year has been poor. In addition, Purchasing has had to contact the vendor (almost weekly) to relay complaints of uniforms missing, repairs not completed, soiled uniforms, and problems with invoicing. (Copies of facsimiles on file in Purchasing.) The City of Boca Raton sent out a bid package for uniform rental, and G&K Services was low bid, but they did not award contract due to changes in bid requirements (possible changing to polo shirts for employees). The City of Vero Beach has a contract with G&K Services which was awarded in April of 1998. I have contacted Mr. Don P. Wixon, Contract Administrator, City of Vero Beach, in reference to quality of service being provided by G&K Services. He stated, "Rough start-up, but they have come around 100%. Outstanding service, fantastic now, highly recommend them". The School District of Beach County School is also piggy-backing this contract. See attached Purchase Order to G& K Services from Palm Beach County School Board dated August 21, 1998. G & K Services has agreed to extend to the City of Delray Beach the same terms, prices, and conditions of the City of Vero Beach Bid #97-41. See attached memos dated August 17, 1998, and September 09, 1998 to City of Delray Beach from G&K Services. Unit pricing is $.25 per employee, per week, higher for industrial uniforms and $.50 cheaper per employee, per week, for supervisory uniforms than our current contract with Aramark Uniform. Based on surveys received from employees, and unit pricing from G&K Services, Purchasing recommends the City of Delray Beach piggy-back the City of Vero Beach Bid #97-41 which was awarded to G&K Services at an estimated annual cost of $52,509.60 (see attached City of Delray Beach uniform requirements for each department). Recommendation: Award to G&K Services for the rental of uniforms via the City of Vero Beach Bid #97-41, at an estimated annual cost of $52,509.60. Funding from various department's operating budgets. Attachments: Survey of Aramark Service and Tabulation Letter from G&K Services Tabulation of Bids Received Purchase Order From School District of Palm Beach County MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Hasko, Director of Environmental Services Don Haley, Manager Water Treatment Plant Mike Offie, Manager Water/Sewer Network Bob Bullard, Supt. of Maintenance Public Utilities Joe Weldon, Director of Parks and Recreation Hoyt Owens, Deputy Director of Public Works Ray Eubank, Parks Superintendent Joe Dragon, Asst. Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Schooler, Utility Customer Service Manager FROM: Jacklyn Rooney, Purchasing Superviso~/ THROUGH: Joseph Sa<~~ctor of Finance DATE: August 18, 1998 SUBJECT: Uniform Rental Contract Co-op Bid # 91-059 The uniform rental contract with Aramark Uniform Service has been extended to December 31, 1998, by City of Boca Raton, which is the lead agency for this Co-op Bid. This contract cannot be renewed for another term. Purchasing guidelines require that we re-bid this contract, or piggy-back another contract. Please fill out the attached survey sheet received from Aramark Uniform Services and return by August 28, 1998. Your comments will help Purchasing in making an evaluation of the service being supplied by Aramark Uniform Services to determine which process to proceed with for a new contract. If you have any questions, you may contact me at ext. 7163. Attachment cc: Milena L. Walinski, cGFo Assistant Finance Director Leon Slydell, Storekeeper II Merle Hess, Storekeeper I Patty Goodson, Storekeeper I · o ~ m < m c ~0 m z z z Z 0 0 0 z z z z z z z z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~__ > > > > ~ > > ~ ~ z ~ z ~ ~ > .. ~ .... ~..~ ~ ~ ~..~ .. ~ 0 0 g~ o o > > ~c mm z z 0 -- =~o o o o o o o o ...... m ..m ...... m SERVICE REVIEW WEARER SATISFACTION SURVEY FOR ARAMARK COMMENTS / REMARKS CONSTRUCTION: 1. Pants not sent with office clothes. 2. My uniforms are returned with odd stains, pants and shirts not pressed, and shirts are frayed and worn thin. 3. I never have the dght amount of uniforms. PARKS: 1. Need more pants and shirts (3 shirts). 2. I have no "SHIRT". 3. I need more uniforms 4. Some uniforms come back the same even when you put repairs on them and not getting all back (3 shirts missing). 5. No?? You turn them in and get nothing back?? 6. Pants should be 32 long 33 wide. Missing 3 shirts, medium sleeve, 32 long. Name Frank, not Willie. 7. Mixing uniforms and shirts. 8. Missing I shirt and 1 pair of pants. 9. I am missing 2 complete uniforms. 10. Missing 2 long sleeve shirts. 11. Pants, 36 waist and 30 long and shirt 12. Sizing should be redone and wearouts replaced in a timely manner. 13. In the past year, there have been four delivery persons. 14. In the past year, there have been four delivery persons. 15. I don't have enough uniforms. PUBLIC UTILITIES: 1. None at this time. Overall Division uniforms are in satisfactory condition. PUBLIC WORKS: 1. Need to replace uniforms when they are worn out or have tear that looks bad. 2. Shirts are soiled when returned and pants are to tight. _ 3. Since day one, I received shirts with holes, buttons missing or broken, and needing to be ironed. 4. Last 3 weeks, I had to wash my own clothes. One week, 1 pant and 3 shirts, next week, no shirt and 9 pants. I would be better off doing my own clothes. 5. Change company! 6. I expect service will continue. Page 2 UTILITY BILLING: 1. This is poor service. 2. The service is bad. 3. Hopeless company. I also get other peoples clothing. 4. Poor service overall, showed improvement last couple months. 5. Not a good job. 6. Your quality of work has been very good the last two months. WATER/SEWER NETWORK: 1. Change service. 2. Get a new company. 3. Get someone else. No good. 4. Need better service. 5. When uniforms are turned in to be cleaned, 4 out of 5 times you don't get all of your uniforms back. 6. I clean my uniforms. 7. Need to find a company who wants and needs our business. It is very apparent that this company does not have our best interests at heart! 8. After many confrontations, finally everything is taken care of. 9. Get rid of them. WATER TREATMENT PLANT: 1. This is a response for all 16 users of the Water Treatment Plant. Page 3 G&K Services® 3050 S.W. 42nd Street Fort Lauderdale, FL 33312 954/327-9400 Fax 954/327-9154 City of Dekay Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Atm.: Ms Jackie Rooney August 17,1998 Dear Ms Rooney: Thank you for selecting G&K Services as your uniform supplier. I want to follow up with you on a few clarifications regarding our existing agreement with The City of Vero Beach. On page 17,section 3, G&K does provide neW uniforms at the beginning of the contract. All uniforms put into service afterwards are prewashed, B stock uniforms. On page 18,section 5 and 7, cotton shirts and coveralls are only available in long sleeves. On page 21,section 9, the 100% cotton garments are not specified to be pressed. If you prefer these items be pressed, G&K will do so for an additional charge of $.25 per garment per week. Jackie, please note that lab coats, smocks, counter coats, and coveralls are accessory items and all are priced the same. The Vero bid includes pricing for these garments under "Coveralls". Also, short pants are priced the same as industrial pants. Thanks again for choosing G&K Services. Sincerely, ~au~ T. Scott.Smith Sales Manager General Manager DEDICATED TO UNIFORM EXCELLENCE® ~&K ~ervi~es® 407/833-0123 Fax 4071833-8501 ~00 N.W. 1 st Avenue S~:~mber 09, 1998 ~ plonse find e cx~py of th0 ~ schedule for lost m clnnas~ 8mmonts for the CityofVe~oBoaoh~~ 1, 15198. This l~sorv~ nsverifica~ti~thntthis sc}~lule will nlso q:~ly to tl~ City of Delrny Benc~ bnsed on the pil~y-bnck of the Veto Bench Bid No. 97-41-UNIF .ORM SERVICES ANNUAL 8UPPLY CONTRACT. Nnturnlly, the dntes for the ~ ~ will be ~ nnnivetsm7 dnte of the initinl delivery not the April dnte spe~ed for Veto Beach. I am also enolming n schedule of prooedm~ G&K Services must follow to process your new order. It shnH tnke qtxaxinmtely ton weeks fi'om the time we receive the pm'chase order to the time we make the first delivory. ~ ? IfI onn be of furthor ~ plense feel flee to Oontnot me anytime at 1-800-78~ c~ CInSsfine nt 561-458-7171. Jnokie, once nl~nin I would like to thnnk you fo~ selecting G&K ~s your uniform provider. Sales Manager DEDICATED TO UNIFORM F_JfCE.,.r~NCE® 1306 Allendale Road West Palm Beach, FL 33405 407/833-O123 Fax 407/833-8501 Week 1: Cxmla~eae~depammmandurdfogmooordinatorfor~eseleciionofgamaent~styi~ oolors,~~. We~~~~mo~. ~~ W~ 3: F~~m~~. M~~~o~~~~~ W~ 4: ~p~~~~~~~. W~lO: ~~~~~~. ' -,- .. DEDICATED TO UmFOP.~ EXCErrmVC~ April 27, 1998 To: Don W'dson City of Vero Beach From: T. Scott Smith G & K Services, Inc. Re: Damage/Replacement Charges on Uniforms Don, In regards to the damage/replacement charges that we discussed, the only time these charges would apply is in the event someone loses a garment or returns a garment to G & K in a damaged condition. As long as a garment is returned to G & K with normal wear and tear, no damage/replacement charges apply. This is in the event where an employee of the City of Veto Beach resigns or is terminated, or if G & K should ever discontinue doing business with the City of Veto Beach. Also, with our consistent appearance program, all garments on your account will be upgraded on an as needed basis to always keep your employees in a quality uniform. I hope this explains our process a little better. Thanks for your call. Sincerely, ~ T. Scott Smith Textile Leasing Systems l~y 1, 1998 Attn: Don W'm~n City of Veto Beach Following is a proposed depreciation schedule for any lost or damaged garments for the City of Vero Beach: Garment Replacement COSt It,~m 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year Crhrou~mh April 1999) (Through April 2000) (Through April 2001) Industrial Shirt $10.00 $ 8.50 $ 6.50 Industrial Pant $12.00 $10.50 $ 8.00 1007,~ Cotton Shirt $16.00 $14.50 $12.00 100% Cotton Pant $18.00 $16.50 $14.00 Executive Shirt $14.00 $12.50 $10.00 Executive Pant $16.00 $14.50 $12.00 Indura Shirt $19.00 $17.50 $15.00 Indura Pant $ 20.00 $18.50 $16.00 High Visiblity Shirt $13.00 $11.50 $ 9.00 High Visibilty Pant $15.00 $13.50 $11.00 Additionally, we will be replacing garments, as needed, through normal wear and tear during the term of the agreement. I hope this is satisfactory to everyone concerned. If so, I will make sure we apply this schedule immediately. Sincerely, T.-Scott Smith Sales Manager DEDICATED To UNIFORM CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ESTIMATED UNIFORM QUANTITIES Estimated Number Depmment Location of Service Of Employees Utility Billing 100 N.W. First Avenue Industrial Uniform - 11 Supervisory- 1 Environmental Svcs. 434 S. Swinton Avenue Industrial uniform - 6 Construction Div. Supervisory 4 Public Works Building Maint. 434 S. Swinton Avenue Industrial uniform - 4 Supervisor- 1 Public Works Fleet Maint. 434 S. Swinton Avenue Industrial uniform - 8 Supervisory - 2 Shorts - 8 Coveralls - 2 Public Works Traffic Div. 434 S. Swinton Avenue Industrial Uniform - 4 Supervisory- 1 Public Works Streets Div. 434 S. Swinton Avenue Industrial Uniform - 10 Supervisory- 1 Water Treatment Plant - Compliance 200 S.W. 6th Street Industrial Uniform - 2 Supervisory - 5 Lab Coats - 5 Water Plant 200 S.W. 6th Street Industrial Uniform - 11 Supervisor- 8 Water/Sewer 434 S. Swinton Industrial Uniform - 10 Supervisory- 1 Environmental Svcs. Utility Maint. Div. 434 S. Swinton Industrial Uniforms - 23 Supervisory - 2 Shorts - 20 Parks And Recreation Parks Maint. Division 320 S.W. 4th Avenue Industrial Uniforms - 55 Supervisor- 1 Parks And Recreation Community Center 50 N.W. First Avenue Supervisory - 1 Parks And Recreation Pomey Park 1101 N.W. 2 Street Industrial Uniforms - 1 Parks And Recreation 802 N.E. 1 Street Veterans Park Industrial Uniforms - 1 Unit Price Total per item: Industrial Unfiroms - 146 ~ 4.50 wk. $34,164.00 (146 x $4.50 wk per employee = $657.00 x 52 wks = $34,164) Supervisory - 43 ~ 5.50 wk (43 x $5.50 wk = $236.50 x 52 wks = $12,298) $12,298.00 Lab Coats - 5 and Coveralls - 2 ~ .90 wk (7 x $.90 wk = $6.30 x 52 wks = $327.60 $ 327.60 Parks & Recreation: Part Time Employees - Polo Shirts Afterschool Program 30 Community Center 1 Veterans Park 3 Pompey Park 3 Athletic 3 Total 40 ~ $2.75 wk. (40 x $2.75 wk = $110.00 x 52 wk = $5,720) $ 5,720.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL USAGE FOR CITY OF DELRAY $52,509.60 Agenda Item No. : ~ AGENDA REQUEST Date: October 12, 1998 Request to be placed on: Consent xX ~eg~-l~ Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of agenda item ~(who, what, where, how much): Purchase award to Dionex Corporation for DX-100 I0N Chromatography Analytical testin~ equipment for the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory via SNAPS Agreement #493856 as a sole source purchase for a total amount of $27,955.25. ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO Recommendation: Award to Dionex Corporation for the purchase of a DX-i00 ION Chromatography Analytical testin~ equipment via SNAPS Agreement #493856 as a sole source purchase for a total amount of $27~955.25. Funding from account #441-5161-536-63.75. Department Head Signature: ,~ Determination of Consistency with om~/rehensive Plan~~' ' \ City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items' involving expenditure Funding available :~ NO Funding alternatives: (if applicable) Account No. '& Description: Account Balance: ~ 2-~~ ~-'~ City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: NO Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Ac t ion: Approved/Di sapProved MEMORANDUM TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Jacklyn~Purchasing Supervisor ~ THROUGH: Joseph Sa~inance Director DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CTIY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 - PURCHASE AWARD DX-100 ION CHROMATOGRAPHY ANALYTICAL TESTING EQUIPMENT VIA SNAPS AGREEMENT Item Before Commission: City Commission is requested to approve the award for the purchase of an Ion Chromatography (IC) Analytical Testing Equipment for the Water Treatment Laboratory to Dionex Corporation via the SNAPS (State Negotiated Agreement Price Schedule) at a total price of $27,955.25. Background: The Water Treatment Plant Laboratory is in need of an automated anion analysis to perform Ion Chromatography analysis as recommended during a HRS annual licensing inspection. This new Ion Chromatography analysis is an EPA approved method as it saves time for wet chemistry analyses, and is computerized and would not require the the analyst to sit and continuously monitor the analysis. This automated anion analysis testing equipment is available fi:om the SNAPS Agreement #493856 awarded to Dionex Corporation on March 30, 1998, as a sole source purchase award. See attached SNAPS price agreement dated March 18, 1998. Dionex Corporation agrees to extend to the City of Delray Beach this SNAPS Agreement price per Quotation # 58844/R dated September 03, 1998. The Manager of Environmental Compliance of the Delray Beach Water Treatment Plant recommends award to Dionex Corporation per attached memo dated September 03, 1998. The purchase of this new equipment would result in an estimated annual saving of $9,325 for the laboratory. This new analysis equipment is comparable to City of Boca Raton Quote #30929 which was awarded by the City of Boca Raton as a sole source award in November of 1996. Recommendation: Staff recommends the awarded to Dionex Corporation for the purchase of an Ion Chromatography (lC) Testing Equipment for the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory as a sole source procurement via SNAPS Agreement #493856 for a total cost of $27,955.25. Funding fi.om account code 441-5161-536-63.75. Attachments: Memo From Manager of Enviromental Compliance Quotation #58844/R fi.om Dionex SNAPS Agreement #493856 Dated March 18, 1998 lemorandum pl of 2. Dionex Capital Request: DATE: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 03, 1998 TO: Ms. Jackie Rooney, Senior Buyer FROM: n'Detenga n"Gurumo, Manager of Environmental Compliance RE: Justification for D~-IO0 ION CHROMA TOGR~tPHY We are herewith submitting Dionex 120 Quote No: 58844 for approval by the City Commission as sole source; e.g. requesting you to assist us in purchasing Ion Chromatography (IC) to our laboratory that is already approved for '98-'99 fiscal year. This quote has a SNAPS (State Negotiated Agreement Price Schedule) and is comparable to Boca Quote No: _30929_which was sole source bid by the City of Boca Raton dated on 11/18 '96. History: During a HRS annual licensing inspection held on Nov. 14th, 1995. Mr. Gus Ruser ((now deceased), then inspector for HRS) recommended that our laboratory convert over to automated anion analysis that is now an EPA approved method # 300.0, because it would save tremendous time for wet chemistry analyses. It not only gives _7 analytes (namely: Fluoride, Chloride, Nitrite, Bromide, Nitrate, Phosphate, Sulfate) every 15 min. per sample. For an additional $5,400 for an autosampler the laboratory could then run continuously overnight when high demand is needed (using the 66 sample capacity autosampler). This bid does not include the autosampler, but is something that can be added to the instrument at a latter date. We presently perform nitrate analysis that involves three days for production wells, this could be reduced to less than one day and provide seven times the analyte information. IC is more sensitive (0.010 mg/L range for IC as opposed 0.100 mg/L range for wet chemistry (extensive preparation & titrations)) and accurate than wet chemical methods and easier to use. The Dionex system is computerized and would not require that the analyst sits and continuously monitors the analysis in the manner that current wet chemistry technique demand. The resultant data is stored on the PC's hard drive for easy retrieval. This technique requires only one inexpensive chemical reagent as opposed to the multiple chemicals and standards we currently use. This will result in reduced consumable costs. Also, some of these chemicals generate toxic waste (ex. AgNO3) which must be properly disposed, and IC generates no toxic wastes. P2 of 2. Dionex Capital Request: To Ms. Jackie Rooney, From: n'Detenga n'Gummo. The instrument would be used daily for routine analysis, complaint samples, and be a cost savings to our laboratory in that we would not need to waste analyst time that could be spent on other projects. It is estimated that a cost savine o[ not less than $9,325 per Fear may be easily realized by adding Ion Chromatography to our laboratory. This amount is based on calculations that reflect the reduction of chemical usage by 1/3, and time paid for baby sitting the analysis via titration (Cd-reduction colum packing and preparation, PO4 digestion) separate glassware provisions, salary saved by diverting analyst time to more specialized productive projects. This Dionex DX120 is the state of the art for ion-chromatography for rapid water & waste water analysis of 7 analytes and would begin to prepare us to enter the laboratory competitiveness of the 21 st Century. 2 09/03/98 11:57 '~'7707635680 DION'EX CORP. ~002 l~inncx Corporaiio,~ ~0 432 BlO0 TO: Oetunua Oummo City of Delray Beach DATE: 3-Se~98 200 SW 6th Street DaJray Bea~, FL 334~2698 QUOTATION NO.: 58~ (561) 24~7318 F~: (~1) 243-7316 ~ ARE PL~SED TO SUBMIT ~E FOLLOWING QUOTATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS SHO~; ITEM O~ PIN DESCRIPTION .... UNIT PRICE ~EN~ED 1 I 050200 DX-120 Auto Single Column, 115V 12,555.00 12,555.00 2 ~ 050218 DX-120 Conductivity Cell w~eatet 1,395.00 1,395_00 3 1 ~124 IonPac AS14 Anal~i~l Column, 4-mm 674.~5 674.25' 4 1 046134 IonPac AG14 Guatd Column, 4-mm 204.60 204.60 5 1 053946 Suppre~or, ASRS-UL~ 4mm 850.00 850.00 6 I 037157 ~Anion ~anda~, 100 mL (10x Con~ntrate) 98.00 98.00 7 1 037162 Ca~onate Concentrate, 0.SM 50~mL 75.00 75.00 8 1 037163 Bi~onate Concentrate, 0.SM 50~mL 75.00 75.00 9 1 0508D3 DX120 Sy~em & Appli~Uon Inmaliation 1,900.00 1,900.00 10 I 960708 Line Co~, 3COND, Nodh Amed~ 11 1 049116 PeakNet Control ~nd~ 95 Wo~ation 7,2~_00 7.254.00 To~i S25,080.85 12 I 29060 1 year Extcnd~ 5e~ice Agreement refle~ a 2o~ discount incen~ve Warra0W: 90 days pads and labor_ If installat[on {s purchased the ~rranty ~ll be ~ended to one year CONSU~LES: 90 da~ pads and labor Prices reflect discounts as extcnd~ from ~e SN~S ~reement SNAPS Numar 493~6; valid through March 29, 1999 The a~ve items are sole s~mo itm offer~ ~ ~gh Oi~ex C~tion " RESPEGTFU~Y SURMISED: DIONEX CO~O~Ti~N R~lonai Sales ESTi~TEO DELIVERY FROM RECEIPT OF ORDER Within 30~0 Da~ 1820 Water Pla~, 8te. 250 FOB POINT Sunn~ie, California ~}an~, ~ 30339 TERMS Net 30 Days (/Y0) 432~100 09/03/98 11: 57 'j~7707635680 DIONEX CORP. ~ 00:3 S.NAPS State Negotiated Agreement Price Schedule -- ' To be completed ~ the D~ion of P~ng F~e~ Empl~er Iden~n Numar 94-264-7429 ' SPURS or S.S. N~r Tele~o~ Numar (~0) 432-81 00 -To[~Fr~ Nu~er ~ to ~ Sew~ '~k box(~) whi~ app.. If ~ d~ ~ s~ pm~d~ No Y~ Agenda Item No.: ~ AGENDA REQUEST Date: October 12, 1998 Request to be placed on: Consent XX Re~b&r Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of agenda item (who, what, where, how much): Purchase award to Linc Quantum Analytics. Inc. for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer (GC/MS) instrument for the Water Treatment Plant for a total Cost of $91.360. ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO Recommendation: Award to Linc Quantum Analytics, Inc. for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer (GC/MS) instrument for the Water Treatment Plant for a total cost of $91.360. Funding from account code Department Head Signature: ~ ~~' *'~'~J4 Determination of Consistency with Co~prehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding available:~ NO ~--~ Funding alternatives: {if applicable) Account No. & Description: Account Balance: ~10~ ~.o~ City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: ~/ NO Hold Until: . Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Action: Approved/Disapproved MEMORANDUM TO: David Harden, City Manager FROM: Jacklyn Rooney, Purchasing Supervisor ~ THROUGH: Joseph Sa~~-"~ce Director DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CTIY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 - PURCHASE AWARD GAS CHROMATOGRAPH / MASS SPECTROPHOTOMER (GC/MS) INSTRUMENT Item Before Commission: City Commission is requested to approve the award for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer (GC/MS) Insmnnent for the Water Treatment Laboratory to Linc Quantum Analytics, Inc., for a total cost of $91,360. Background: The Water Treatment Plant Laboratory is in need of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer to perform EPA 524.2 and 624 to upgrade the existing nine (9) year old GC System. The new system required provides a quadmpole technology that gives excellent sensitivity and resolution for the volatile compounds for sixty (60) organic analysis that the laboratory performs monthly to ensure safe drinking water. Bids were received from four (4) vendors as follows (copies attached): Vendor Name: Total Price: Linc Quantum Analytics, Inc. 91,360.00 Perkin - Elmer 92,206.00 Tekmar-Dohrmann 93,315.68 Hewlett Packard 97,199.04 The Compliance Manager of the Water Treatment Plant recommends award to Linc Quantmm at a total cost of $91,360, which includes one year free labor part warranty, free installation, and two (2) day on-site training. Recommendation: Staff recommends the awarded to Linc Quantmm for the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer (GC / MS) for the Water Treatment Plant Laboratory at a total cost of $91,360. Funding from account code 442-5178-536-64.90. Attachments: Memo From Manager of Environmental Compliance Quotes Received October 07, 1998 To: Ms. Jackie Rooney, Senior Buyer From: n'Detenga n'Gurumo, Compliance Manager SUBJECT: GCMS / Purchase Of the four bids provided for the Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrophotometer (GC / MS), we recommend that the approval be granted to the lowest bider, who is Linc Quantum for $91,360. Linc Quantum has agreed to provide free installation, one year free labor plus part warranty. They also agree to provide two days of on-site training. The laboratory will be responsible for providing the proper table on wheels, to place the complete system in the location that has been previously prepared for this instrument during our last laboratory expansion. Gas and exhaust vents are already in place. When we get the bid approval we can modify the electrical requirements to meet the instrument needs. Ri~,hard~ Hasko, PE Director of Environental Services n'Deteng~ n'Gurumo, Compliance Manager Fenli Yang, Senior Chemist Memo Thursday, September 03, 1998 To: Ms. Jackie Rooney, Senior Buyer From: n'Detenga n'Gurumo, Compliance Manager SUBJECT: GCMS / Purchase The Compliance Division anticipates the purchase of a Gas Chromatograph / Mass Spectrometer ( GC/MS ) for the fiscal year 1998-1999. We have completed the initial preparation needed in the decision to upgrade our existing 9 yr. old GC system. The laboratory choice is a Hewlett Packard GC/MS only because this instrument provides with a quadrupole technology that gives excellent sensitivity and resolution and is not duplicated by other vendors. The competition uses ion trap technology in their Mass Spectrometers which is not the direction for our laboratory. On the other hand, their costs are almost same. We have carefully researched the possibilities, and we are submitting these specifications as what is needed by our laboratory. 1. The system should perform EPA 524.2 and 624, and can get high sensitivity with Iow method detection limits (0.5ppb). 2. Quadrupole GC/MS system is more reliable and maintenance free than ion trap GC/MS system and is the choice for our laboratory. 3. One full year free maintenance warranty on all parts and labor. 4. Diffusion pump required instead of turbo pump, due to much less maintenance required. 5. Data collection system must be able to interface with excel our quality control program. 6. Mass Detector must include 2 filaments; this allows the user to continue being productive if one filament bums out. 7. Data System operating software is fully operable in and compatible with Microsoft NT 4.0 Operating System. 8. Split/Splitless capillary GC inlet provides backpressure control in the split mode to allow for the independent adjustment of split flow and septum purge flow without affecting the column flow rate. The following list is persons to contact: 1. Jeff Downing Hewlett Packard - 3166 5550 W. Idlewild Ave., suite 150 Tampa, FL 33634 Ph. 813-889-4479 Fax 813-264-2966 2. Jerry Dasson / Pam Anderson Linc Quantum Analytics 363 Vintage Park Drive Foster City, CA 94404 Ph. 800-992-4199 Fax 650-312-0313 3. Pete Vega Tekmar-Dohrmann 7143 East Kemper Road P.O. Box 429576 Cincinnatti, Ohio 45242-9576 Ph. 800-543-4461 Fax; 513-247-7050 Sincerely, n'Detenga n'Gurumo, (-~ Compliance Manager and Fenli Yang, Senior Chemist Sep.-03- 98 12:21P LINC Quantum Analytics, inc. Quote Number. 8E12785 363 'V'a3tage Park Dr~e, Fo~ C.~ C~ g~34 CHY OF DEL REY BEACH Phone: 800-992-4199 Fax: ~50-312-0313 Quote Date: 7/9/98 Quotation of Plan: Direct Sale 1 I Hewlett-Packard 5973 Diffusion Pump El System; G1725A Includes 5973 MS Detecter with Diffusion Pump; $51,460 $51,460 Vec~. Pentium PC; Windows NT; 17' Color Monitor;, LaserJet 5 Printer;, G1701BA MS ChemStation Software Induding Enviroquant; installation. 2 I Hewlett-Packard 59864B Ion Gauge Controller for 5973 $1,315 $1,315 3 1 Hewlett-Packan:16890 Plus for 5973 MSD; opt G1942A with option 201 (MSD interface) and ppflon~112. $13,100 $13,100 (sptif~splitless inlet) 4 I Tekmar 3000 Purge & Trap Concentrator with Hand-held Controller and imedace cable to 6890 $11.072 $11,072 5 I Tekmar 2016 - 16-position Autosampler - 3/4" mounts Glassware kit sold separately $9,950 $9.950 6 I Tekmar 3/4" Disposable Glassware Kit S58o 7 1 Hewlett-Packard NIST Ubrary; G1033A 74K spectra $2.800 $2,600 Total: $90,277 $90,277 2 days HP MSD onsite training is Included. System Installation is included. LINC Quantum Analytics, Inc.s =7ss ' 363 Vintage Park Drive, F-oster City CA 94404 .. ~ cn'Y OF DEL REY BEACH Phone: 800-g92-4199 Fax: 650-312.0313 QuoteDate: 7/9/98 Quotation pM 4 of 4 Shipping: North American surface 7-9 day, Insured Shipping Charge: "$11003.00: Warranty: Manufacturers wan'anty applies Availabilit~. To be advised Installation Included. Availability is subject to prior sale, This is a self service agreement and all service required, beyond the stated warranty, is the responsibility of the customer. Columns and gases not provided. Please submit a signed copy of this quotation along with your purchase order to: LINC Quantum Analytics 363 Vintage Park Drive Foster City, CA 94404 FAX: 650-312-0313 MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden, City Manager FROM: Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Director of Environmental Services SUBJECT: GAS CHROMATOGRAH/MASS SPECTROPHOTOMETER (GC/MS) BID EVALUATION DATE: October 14, 1998 For purposes of clarification of statements appearing in the proposal submitted by Perkin Elmer for replacement of the subject lab instrument, the following observations are offered: * With regard to Perkin Elmer's claim of not having received detailed specifications, it appears obvious that this is not the case since the specifications are cited in the submittal cover letter. * The diffusion pump/turbo pump issue is moot insofar as the bid documents explicitly specified that the instrument be provided with a diffusion pump and not a turbo pump regardless of the vendor's preference or suggestion. To clarify, the turbo pump may be considered an upgrade to the instrument in terms of its superior capabilities, hence the additional cost. Staff considered this option in preparation of the specifications and decided that the applications for which we use the instrument do not warrant the additional cost of the turbo pump component. The level of performance and reliability provided by the proven diffusion pump technology satisfies our needs. As regards the divergent opinions of the maintenance requirement for the turbo pump, I am suspicious of any claim containing the phrase "...maintenance free...". In any event, the bidder had the same specification as his competitors and opted to submit a non-conforming quote. This alone is sufficient cause to consider the Perkin Elmer submittal nonresponsive. In closing, Purchasing has verified that the delivery time of 127 weeks was a typographical error. The vendor has resubmitted materials indicating a 30 day delivery time. RCH: jem c: Jackie Rooney, Purchasing Supervisor n'Detenga n'Gurumo, Environmental Compliance Manager ;=ERKIN ELMER Chromatography Division Customer Support Center 761 Main Avenue Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 October 5, 1998 Ms. Jackie Rooney Purchasing Department City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1 st Ave. Delray Beach, FL 33444 Re: GC/MS purchase Dear Ms. Rooney, I would like to submit an addendum to the quotation I provided last week. As part of our bid proposal, Perkin Elmer is willing to include an on-site training course for the personnel at the Water Treatment Plant laboratory in exchange for the trade-in of the old Perkin Elmer Model 8500 GC that is being replaced. This training course, which is in addition to the familiarization session provided during installation, is valued at $4,000.00 and will be a minimum of two full days. The total of our bid $92,206.00 (Quotation #QA78718) remains the same. Also, ! would like to offer an additional item as an option to our bid ...... Thru-Put Systems, Inc.'s Target software. This software is designed to be compatible with TurboMass software, and provides the ability for the TurboMass to generate EPA/CLP reports. In Thru-Put's words, it's "designed with walkaway automation for compound identification, quantitation, final concentration calculations, QA checks, and reporting." The price is $6,050.00 which includes a 4- day training course at their facility in Orlando, or $7,050.00 which includes a 3-day training course at the City of Delray Beach's Water Treatment Plant's lab. Thank you. Please call me at 272-8909 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, --Jim Wagner Sr. Sales Account Manager - Chromatography Division c.c. n'Detenga n'Gurumo, Fengli Wang Phone (888) PE CHROM Fax (203) 761-2626 F~F~KIN Chromatography Division Customer Support Center 761 Main Avenue Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 September 29, 1998 Ms. Jackie Rooney Purchasing Department City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1 st Ave. Delray Beach, FL 33444 Re: GC/MS purchase Please find enclosed our bid for a gas chromatograph / mass spectrometer (GC/MS) system for the City's Water Treatment Laboratory. Because we never received an invitation to bid, or detailed bid specifications to follow, I am bidding a system with capabilities which not only meet the mentioned performance criteria for EPA methods 524.2 and 624, but also includes a powerful component that I believe has been omitted by our competition ..... a turbomolecular pump. The sole source statement #4, "Diffusion pump required instead of turbo pump, due to much less maintenance required'' leads me to realize that the City lab has been misinformed as to the difference between the two pump types, because just the opposite is true. The fact is that a turbomolecular pump is oil-free, lubrication-free, and in fact, maintenance-free. Additionally, it achieves vacuum by pumping down at 250 L/second vs a diffusion pump's 80 L/second, and is therefore far more powerful and robust. PE offers a diffusion pump (for $5,000 less), but I have never quoted it in any of my accounts because I believe in the importance of performance, up-time, and longevity. Regarding the rest of our offer, I am submitting two separate quotes, one with and one without the Tekmar purge & trap concentrator & autosampler. The two quotes are identical in all other respects. It is my understanding that Tekmar is also submitting a bid, so I want the City to have the option of saving money by purchasing the GC/MS from PE, and the concentrator directly from Tekmar. Because of the expense of maintaining several service offices in Florida, we must charge more for the Tekmar components than Tekmar. Please note that after Tekmar's new instrument warranty expires, PE will be pleased to offer a service maintenance contract to cover both the TurboMass and the Tekmar items. Phone (888) PE CHROM Fax (203) 761-2626 This bid offer represents a huge & aggressive effort (discount) on my part to keep the City's business, both because of the rapport I enjoy with the lab's personnel, and because it is my property taxes that are helping to pay for this system. The fact that I live in walking distance of the lab can only add to the excellent technical support that Perkin Elmer offers anyway. Thank you for this opportunity to submit an offer. Please call me at 272-8909 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, ~ .~Wa~ner~~--~ Sr. Sales Account Manager - Chromatography Division c.c. n'Detenga n'Gummo, Fengli Wang Q U 0 TA TI 0 N ;=E;gKIN ELMER Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 Phone: 1888) PE CHROM Fax: (203) 761~2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW 1ST AVENUE Page No: 1 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FAX (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wagner Your Ref: JW91 Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTAL Price Price 1 1 N6119100 AUTOSYSTEM XL GC 120V 50/60HZ 12600.00 12600.00 AutoSystem XL Gas Chromatograph for 120 Volts, 50/60 HZ operation. *** N611000B BASIC ASSY-XL W/PPC BUT W/O AUTO SAMP AutoSystem XL Gas Chromatograph with Programmed Pneumatic Control (PPC) but RE¢ IyED without integral liquid autosampler. Features include: SEP 3.0 19~ RC ASI G, DEPI. - Four-level, three-ramp temperature programming to 450 C (oven maximum software controlled). -Five method setup, generation, storage and copy. - Up to two simultaneous analog outputs for integrator or recorder, switchable to either detector. -Digital electronic pressure readouts with capillary injectors. -Up to six solenoid valves for split vent and gas sampling valve control. - Up to 32 programmable timed events. - External computer communications allows full instrument control plus two simultaneous channels of raw data. - Dual-channel background correction. -Battery RAM storage of five methods, instrument configuration, and Q U 0 TA TI 0 N F EaKIN ELMEa Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 Phone: (888) PE CHROM Fax: (203) 761-2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW lST AVENUE Page No: 2 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FAX (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wagner Your Ref: JW91 Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTAL Price Price automation programs. Stopwatch function with flow calculation. - Control of up to 12 PPC modules. *** N61110C0 CAPILLARY INJECTOR W/PPC Channel A - Single capillary-column injector with programmable pneumatic control (PPC) and 1/16" male column fittings. *** N6113010 INTEGRAL LINK OPTION - AUTOSYSTEM GC Integral LINK for AutoSystem XL. Provides digital-to-digital connection between the AutoSystem XL and a Turbochrom Chromatography Workstation. Requires AutoSystem IPM for Turbochrom or Turbo GC Lite Software Accessory. 2 1 S5010025 SER CBL PC(DB9) TO 600/941A 7FT 36.00 36.00 3 1 E6419000 TURBOMASS 120V 55935.00 55935.00 TURBOMASS MASS SPECTROMETER for 120V, 50/60 Hz. Includes TurboMass mass spectrometer quadrupole analyzer with prefilter, mass range of 2-1200 daltons, variable scan rate up to 6000 da/sec, direct capillary interface settable from 50 to 350 degrees centigrade, photo- Q U 0 TA TI 0 N iaEigKIN ELME Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 Phone: (888) PE CHROM Fax: 1203J 761-2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW 1ST AVENUE Page No: 3 DELP~AY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FA3( (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wagner Your Ref: JW91 Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTAL Price Price multiplier detector, mass spectrometer operating software and shipping kit. *** E6411001 EI ONLY Electron Ionization (EI) mode. For operation of the TurboMass mass spec- trometer in electron ionization mode. *** E6412001 HIGH VACD73M GAUGE High Vacuum gauge. Optional for both diffusion and turbomolecular pump configurations. *** E6412040 TURBO PUMP + LOW VACUUM GAUGE 250 L/sec turbomolecular pump with a 3.0 m3hr-1 backing pump and low vacuum gauge. *** E6413001 U.S. COUNTRY KIT United States Country Kit. Includes Windows NT 4.0 operating system, key- board and North American power cords (0999-1420). *** E6413010 15 INCH MONITOR *** E6413200 300 M}{Z PENTIUM II COMPUTER 300 Mhz Pentium II Pro Computer with 64 megabyte RAM, 2 gigabyte hard drive, Q U 0 TA TI 0 N ;=ERKIN ELMER Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 No~valk, CT 06859-0270 Phone: (888) PE CHROM Fax: (203) 761-2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW 1ST AVENUE Page No: 4 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FAX (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wa~ner Your Ref: JW91 Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTAL Price Price CD-ROM and tape backup. Includes inter- face card and operating software for mass spectrometer. 4 1 E6420001 NIST MASS SPECTRAL LIBRARY 1900.00 1900.00 5 1 N0200415 MASS SPEC INSTALLATION W/GC 2950.00 2950.00 6 1 N6600360 LSC 3000 LIQUID SAMPLE CONCENTRATOR l15V 12980.00 12980.00 LSC-3000 Pur~e and Trap Concentrator with 60" heated nickel transfer line. Includes hand held controller, installation kit and interface cable. Standard features include Moisture Control System (MCS), Trap Pressure Control (TPC) and Flow Tuned Tubing (FTT) . Microprocessor controlled, 16 method storge with LC display. Also includes 5 mL frit spar~er sampler, Tenax/Silica Gel/Charcoal trap, spare fuses and instruction manual. For l15V operation. 7 1 N6603041 ALS 2016 FOR LSC 3000 l15V 11580.00 11580.00 8 1 N6120049 LSC2000/3000 TO AUTOS¥S INT. KIT 225.00 225.00 LSC 2000/3000 TO AUOTSYSTEM INTERFACE KIT. Includes "dummy" injector and unions to connect LSC 2000/3000 heated Q U 0 TA TI 0 N ' ;=ERKIN ELMER Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 Norwalk, CT 068590270 . Phone: (888J PE CHROM Fax: (203) 761-2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW 1ST AVENUE Page No: 5 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FAX (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wagner Your Ref: .JWgl Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTAL Price Price transfer line to Autosystem GC. Required for use when the heated transfer line IS NOT connected directly to a capillary column or through a packed injector. 9 1 N0207641 INSTALL LSC3000 STANDALONE 800.00 800.00 10 1 N0207254 INSTALL. ALS2016 STANDALONE 800.00 800.00 11 OPTIONAL: 1 N0200417 TURBOMASS GC/MS OPERATOR (4) 2500.00 FOB: SHIPPING POINT 99806.00 SALES DISCOLrNT 7600.00- TOTAL: 92206.00 QUOTATION VALIDITY: NOVEMBER 29, 1998 , TERMS g_,NrD CONDITIONS OF SALE ENCLOSED. Q U 0 TA TI 0 N ' ;=ERKIN ELMER Chromatography Division 761 Main Avenue Mail Station 270 Norwalk, CT 06859-0270 . Phone: (888) PE CHROM Fax: (203) 761-2789 To: MRS. JACKIE ROONEY Quotation No: QA78718 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 100 NW 1ST AVENI/E Page No: 6 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 (561) 243-7163 Issue Date: 9/29/98 FAX (561) 243-7166 Destination:U S A From: James Wagner Your Ref: JW91 Phone# (888) 732-4766 Itm QTY Part-No Description Unit TOTA~ Price Price TERMS SUBJECT TO CREDIT APPROVAL. . THIS AMOUNT DOES NOT INCLUDE TAX OR FREIGHT CHARGES. THESE WILL BE INCLUDED ON THE INVOICE IF APPLICABLE. PRICE INCLUDES ONE-YEAR WARRAi~I~f (PARTS, LABOR AND TRAVEL). APPLICATION CODE: EN PRICE INCLUDES COMPLETE INCLUDES COMPLETE INSTALLATION AND ON-SITE USER FAMILIARIZATION. . A FOUR-DAY TRAINING COURSE AT APE TECHNICAL CENTER HAS BEEN LISTED AS OPTIONAL. ESTIMATED DELIVERY: 127 WEEKS, ARO PAYABLE ON RECEIPT James Wagner PACKARD Quotation City of Delray Beach 6915 08/19/1998 9 Weeks 1 OF 6 200 SW 6th St Delray Beach FL 33444-3558 ~::f/~?~/~.~::/::::~:?.~~ ~:~:~::~?/::~:~::/~?~::::?~:~:~:~:~?~.~:~.?/~:?~:/~:~:~:~f~?:/~:::.~::~::~:/://:::~:~.~:~?~?.~?.~:.::: Jeff Downing 813-889-4479 10/18/1998 G1725A 1.000 EA $ 51,460.00 $ 2,058.40- $ 4g,401.60 HP 5973 MSD/DS-Diffusion El Bundle Includes: MSD, C hemSta§on (NT), Software (B.00.01), & printer (LJ4000). For use with 6890 GC. Recommend ion gauge c~nttoller 59884B. With the following configuralion: Ship-to Country reference: USA Printer :Included I rastallation Familiarization Item Total $ 49,401.60 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. G1033A 1.000 EA $2,800.00 $112.00- $2,688.00 NISTg8 MS library Bundle includes: 130K speclra, 107K+ struclures (HP & NIST formats) and NIST MS Search and DeconvolutJon Programs. Requires 120MB. CD ROM. With the following configura~o~: Ship-to Country reference: LISA Item Total $ 2,888.00 Special discount of 4.00 % is al~lied. PACKARD Quotation City of Delray Beach 6915 08/19/1998 9 Weeks 2 OF 6 2OO SW 61h St Delray Beach FL 33444-3558 :::~i ~:~:/::~:/~?:?~?/~:?~?/:~.:~:~:~:~:~i:`~?:~:.~i?~:~:?~:?.~:.?.~: ~: :.:ii::?:?/:i~'~:~;.~:~:~: Jeff Downing 813-889-4479 10/18/1998 59864B 1.000 EA $1,315.00 $ 52.60- $1,262.40 Ion Gauge Controller For use with HP5973 MSD and HP5972A MSD. With the following con§guratJon: Ship-to Country reference: USA Item Total $1,262.40 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. H1170A-O02 1.000 EA $ 4,300.00 $172.00- $ 4,128.00 2 Days Application Optimiza~on Services Item Total $ 4,128.00 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. 19245-61000 1.00O EA $106.D0 $ 4.24- $101.78 Sptit/Spli~ess Adap~e~ ~t Item Total Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. 19991V-402 1.000 EA $ 375.00 $15.00- $ 360.00 HP-624 25m, 0.20mm, 1.12um Capillary column d~veloped f~r analy~s of volatile priodt~ pollutants Item Total $ 380.00 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied PAI~KARD Quotation City of Delray Beach I 6915 08/19/1998 9 Weeks 3 OF 6 200 SW 6th St I Jeff Downing 813-889-4479 10/18/1998 GlgOOA 1.000 EA $12,000.00 $480.00- $11,520.00 Purge and Trap Concentrator includes 5 mi frit sparger, installation kit, Tenax/S~lica Gef/Charcoal trap. Requires Handhetd Contrciler or G1909A sg/aNvam [or both) and Interface Cable. With the following configuration: Ship-to Country reference: USA Handhold Controller for Purge and Trap. $ 900.00 $ 36.00- $ 864.00 Intmface cable for HP6890/Purge & Trap $125.00 $ 5.00- $120.00 Installation $ 690.00 $ 27.60- $ 662.40 Familiarization $ 460.00 $18.40- $ 441 .$0 Item Total $13,808.00 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. GlgO4A 1.000 EA $11,330.00 $ 453.20- $10,878.80 Autoaampler for the Purge and Trap. 16-sample capacity, 3~4" sparger mount. Glassware kits which include upper/lower purge lines, nuts~lerrules and needles, must be purchased separately. With the following configuration: Ship-to Country reference: USA Installation $1,495.00 $ 5g.80- $1,435.20 Item Total $12,312.00 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. Quotation City of Delray Beach 200 SW 6th St 6915 08/19/1998 9 Weeks 4 OF 6 Delray Beach FL 33~'1,'!-3558 ~ ~:~:.?~?~:~::~.?::~:?:~::~:~`:?:~.~.::`:~:~::~/~.:~?.~?.~:~:~:~:~:~:`~:~?~?:?~:::.?~::~:~:~:~:~i~?~:~?~.~?i Jeff Downing 813-889-4479 10/18/1998 GIGO4-60550 1.000 EA $ 690.00 $ 27.b"0- $ 662.40 Disposable tube kit for P&T Autosampler Six, eh 150mm tubes with soil needtes, nuts/f~rrules, and purge lines. item Total $ 662.40 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. 5162-0775 1,000 EA $ 40.00 $1.60- $ 38.40 Trap, VOCARB 3000 Item Total $ 38.40 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. G1942A 1.000 EA $13,163.00 $ 526.52- $12,636.48 6890 Plus GC for 5973 MSD Includes 100 psi sll3/t/splilte~ inlet and interface fo 5973MSD With the following cor~guralion: Ship-to Country reference: USA I nstallafion Familiarization Item Total $12,636.48 Special discount of 4.00 % is applied. Gross Amount : $101,249.00 To~al Discount : $ 4,049.98 Net Amount : $ 97,1 Sales Tax : $ 5,584.25 Net + Sales Tax : $162,763.29 r~ HIEW/ETT~ PACKARD Quotation Cityof DelrayBeach I6915 08/19/19989Wee 5OF~I 200 SW 6th St Delray Beach FL 33444-3558 { Jeff Downing 813-889-4479 10/18/1998 I HOW TO PLACE ORDER: For fast service, call 1-800-227-9770 any weekday between 8 am and 5 pm. The following information is required: · Quotation Number: 6915 · Your company's purchase order number so we may reference it on your order. · Your VISA, Mastercard cx American Express card and expiratio~ date for credit card orders. You can also Fax your purchase order to us: 302-833-8954. or submit Purchase Order to: Hewlett-Packard Company Analyl~cal Processing Cente~ 2850 Centarville Road M/S~37 Wilmington. DE 19808-1610 TERMS AND CONDITIONS: This offer is subject to HP's Standard Terms and Conditions for Sales and San~cas, E16 Revision 980501. · Pricing: All prices are for U.S.A. end use only and are inclusive of US Sales Tax (if applicable) for pianning puqx~e. US Sales Tax is subject to change at the ~me of order. ' Deliven/Charges: Prices include prepaid standard HP delivery; FOB De~ination. 'Payrnent Terms: Net 30 days from invoice date, subject to credit approval. PACKARD Fengli; Our GC/MS SYSTEM FOR VOLATILES as quoted to you is consistent with all other quotes we have done for EPA 824.2 Volatiles. It consists of the 6890 GC with splitJsplitless injector, It/lSD, Pentium, LaserJet 4000, 17" monitor, modem, EnviroQuant Target compound software, NIST Library, ion gauge, 2 days on-site training, Purge and trap with 16 position autosampler and disposable 314" disposable tube kit, VoCarb 3000 trap, VOA column, all necessary installation and plumbing. A separate quote is being provided with only the GC/MS portion (you would have to add the Tekmar purge and trap and autosampler). I provide this separation so that you may decide which components add up to the best value for your lab. Many times Tekmar and HP have teamed up to provide the total volatiles solution, with a spotless track record. Please note that we may not need to have both days training (since you are already very familiar with our EnviroQuant stw and GCIMS and Purge and trap.) You will need to add more on-site training if you are dealing with unfamiliar software and hardware platforms from other vendors to equal that which is already known to you.) Also, there is no equal to EnviroQuant s/w. It is our Filth generation and is robust beyond compare when trying to meet EPA methods and their associated QC. I look forward to discussing those features with you to further clarify the qualities of our offer. This system will provide many years of stable operation, backed by a company that will be Supportive to the high standard you seek. I am eager to work with you on this implementation, Fengli and stand ready to answer your questions. Regards, Jeff Downing B8~21x98 16:15 TEKPiqR-~ -~ ~ 245 7316 DOHR N C~i, ~ 4~78 Price ~.~.L~. ~. ~ns oz~ Vuotmion ~TO: F~ Ya~ ~: 661-2~3-731 C~y of Oe~W ~h F~: 681-243-7316 E~el ~ Lab USA ~/~1/98 1G:I~ TEKMAR-DOHRMANN ~ 4~ ~45 7516 ~.98~3 P~/8~5 ti,=,.,.,, ~ ..~2,,z~ Price 'roi (0oo) ~s.44e'~ · F ~ (~'~ s) F.£.I.N. :1-00,2002 -(].INS o~.208-le24 QUOq'F.D TO: FenOil Yang PhMm: 661.243-7318 City of Delrly Beech FIx: 661-243.7316 DMray Beach. FL S~I~O'TAL [ $93.116.68 TJa(: 0.00'd, ] ESTIMATED FREIGHTIi-- $200.00 TOTAL. AMOUNT ! So$,$1eLGe 7Ns qoo~ d ~ ~ ~3gV~ THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS1 08×~1~D8 16:16 TEKM~R-I)OHRM~NN a 41~9 ~43 7516 NO.~ PI~3z~3 TEKMAR COMPANY DOMESTIC TERM~ AND CONDITIONS OF ~ ~Tu: M~~~~.~t~m~~~~~.~~,~.~.~~, ~ ~8 NO ~ FOR ~ ~T~. ~R ~ ~ ~, ~U~Q ~E~ ~ MERC~IL~ ~0 F~ESS FOR A IN ~1~ ~ ~ ~IN 8TA~O ~E PR~E ~ ~ ~, ~F~ ~ ~Y ~ ~ ~A~D ~ ~. ~ O~ER ~E9 A~ G~N~ INCLU~, B~ ~T L~D ~. ~E$~ ~D ~0 ~$ ~ ~RC~K~ AND F~E$$ F~ A PAR~U~R 12 L~ ~ ~: ~LLER ~kk NOT BE ~LE F~ ~S ~D BY ~Y ~ PE~~. ~E 6~E ~D ~U~ R~EDY F~ B~CH ~US~ OF A~, ~ SE~ L~ ~ED ~E PR~E ~ BUYER ~ ~E ~C~ ~S ~F~TURED ~Y ~LLER GMNG R~SE TO THE ~USE OF ~. B~ER ~REE6 ~T IN ~ E~ S~ ~LLER'$ ~ ~D TO t~U~ ~C~ OR C~SEQ~L ~O~ CONSEQ~NT~ ~ ~ I~, ~ ~ ~ L~D TO. LO~ ~ ~A~D ~. L~ ~ ~ ~S ~ ~. COST ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LO~ ~ OTHER ~R~ O~ ;QUI~, ~ NO ~NT S~ ~L~R ~ L~E F~ ~R~ ~ AN~ ~D PAR~ C~S C~RED BY HEREU~. 7143 Em~ K~ Ro~ Ci~Bti. OH 46249 U.S.A. Agenda Item No.: AGENDA REQUEST Date: October 14, 1998 Request to be placed on: Consent xx R~-r Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of agenda item {who, what, where, how much): Contract renewal for annual maintenance contract for wet scrubbers located at various sewage lift stations to U.S. Filter for a total annual cost of $25~200. ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO Recommendation: Contract renewal with U.S. Filter for maintenance for wet scrubbers for a total annual cost of $25.200. Funding from account code #441-5144-536-52.2~_ - Lift Station Chemicals Department Head Signature: Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required~°n a~ items~involving expenditure of funds): Funding available: Funding alternatives: ~q(-~l~q-~-~'~~~-~ (if applicable) Account No. & Description: Account Balance: City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Action: Approved/Disapproved MEMORANDUM TO: David Harden, City Manager .~/ Jacklyn Rooney, Purchasing Supervisor FROM: THROUGH: Joseph Sa~~ce Director DATE: October 14, 1998 SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CTIY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1998 CONTRACT RENEWAL SCRUBBER SERVICE MAINTENANCE Item Before Commission: The City Commission is requested to renew the annual maintenance contract with U.S. Filter for wet scrubbers located at various lift stations for a total contract amount of $25,200. Background: U.S. Filter is the current vendor for the annual maintenance contract for wet scrubbers units located at sewage Lift Stations #1, 4, 11, and 80. The current contract for the rate of $650 per unit per month expired on September 30, 1998. The proposed renewal contract includes a cost increase of $50 per unit to cover the increased cost of chemicals provided under the contract for a revised unit price of $700 per month. See attached proposal from U.S. Filter dated June 03, 1998. This scrubber equipment was supplied and installed by Davis Water & Waste as part of the Master Booster Pump Station project, therefore it is beneficial to the City to renew this maintenance contract on a sole source basis. The Deputy Director of Public Utilities recommends the one year renewal with U.S. Filter for a total annual contract cost of $25,200. This is based on $700 per unit per month for lift station #1, 4, and 11. Lift station #80 was removed from the contract this year. See attached memo from Deputy Director of Public Utilities dated October 12, 1998. Recommendation: Staff recommends the one year renewal for the maintenance contract for wet scrubbers located at sewage lift stations for a total amount of $25,200. Funding from account code #441-5144-536- 52.21~, Lift Stations Chemicals. Attachments: Memo From U.S.Filter Memo From Deputy Director of Public Utilities SEP 21_ 'BB 04:44PM U S FILTER'-DAVIS PROCESS 2~50 TALLEVAST ROAD TELEPHONE ~41-3~5-2~71 5ARA$OTA, FL 34243 FACSIMILE ~41-351-475~ ..SUgjECT .... ... ME$ SAG E IT~TRAN$~ON ~ONTAIN$CON CID ENT~, INFORMAT~ [NT[NDED rOq dS[ONCY ~T~EA~E NA~ED R~IPlENT_ R~D- ~ TELEDHOH ~ ~OLL~,AHD R~U~N T~EOR~I~AL ~ ~ETO U~AT TH EA~EAD 0R~V~ U~ ~ALSEqV~ .SEP Zl '98 04:44PM U S FILTER DAVIS PROCESS p.z/~ U.S. FILTEr~/'OAV~ 2~50 TALLEVAST ROAD P_ O_ ~OX 20 SARASOTA, FL 34243 T/kLLEVAST. FL 3,~270 TFLEPHON~. 94,1-.3.55-2971 FACSIMILE ~41-351-4756 June 3, 1998 Fax (561) 243-7060 Richard C. Hasko Deputy Director/Public Utilities City of Dclray Beach 434 S. Swinton Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Re: Scrubber Service Contract Quote Budget Year 98-99 Dear Mr. Hasko: Due to an increase in chomical and labor cost pleaso be advised that thc scrubber located at L.S. 1, 4, I I and 80 will be increased fi:om $650.00 per month to $700.00 per month per unit. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call me at 800-345-3982 or on my mobile at 561-735-1361. Sincerely, U.S. FILTER/DAVIS PROCESS U.S-HLTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP, INC. avcrrite Sales Representative F:~roup~ales\j tXdclrysr~ City Of Delray Beach. Department of Environmental Services MEMORANDUM TO: Jackie Rooney, Senior Buyer FROM: Dan Beatty, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Utilit~ DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJECT: Scrubber Service Contract Renewal Attached is a letter from U.S. Filter/Davis Process for renewal of our annual maintenance cbntract for wet scrubbers located at Lift stations 1,4 and 11. This proposal is for a one-year renewal period (October 1,1998 - September 30, 1999) at the adjusted rate of $700.00 per month, per unit for a total contract amount of $25,200.00. Funding is from Account ~441-5144- 536-52.21), Lift Station Chemicals. TO: DAVID T. HARDEN CITY MANAGERDoMiNGUEZ, ~ THRU: DIANE DIRECTOR ~ ~~NING AND ZONING v ~ t, FROM: J~IET MEEKS, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 1998 CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ESTABLISH AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY FOR DELRAY BEACH INTENATIONAL TENNIS RESORT ACADEMY WHICH IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF JAEGER DRIVE BETWEEN DOTTERAL ROAD AND EGRET CIRCLE The conditional use request is to establish an Educational Facility (i.e. language classes) associated with the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy. The existing racquetball courts within the clubhouse facility are to be converted to classrooms and support offices. No exterior modifications or site upgrades are being proposed at this time. The educational classes will be limited to those students enrolled in the tennis academy. Additional background and an analysis of the request are found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report. At its meeting of September 28, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing in conjunction with review of the request. Several residents from the surrounding neighborhood spoke on this item and stated that they supported the tennis academy, but noted concerns regarding the language school and wanted to insure that the school was an ancillary use to the tennis academy and limited to children ages 2-18. After reviewing the staff report and discussing the proposal, the Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the Conditional Use request to establish a private school associated with the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards), Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility) and Section 4.3.3(HH) (Educational Facilities Criteria) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. That the language school be limited to children ages 2-18; 2. That the language school be an accessory use to the tennis academy; 3. That the academy continue to maintain the 24 tennis courts, and 4. That the classrooms be limited to the interior space of the clubhouse facility with square footage as shown on the plan. By motion, approve the Conditional Use request to establish an Educational Facility for The Delray Beach International Tennis Resort subject to the findings and conditions as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board. Attachments: P& Z Staff Report and Documentation of September 28, 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: September 28, 1998 (Continued from July 20, 1998) AGENDA ITEM: IV.A. ITEM: Conditional Use Request to Allow the Establishment of a "Tennis School Known as Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy at Delray Racquet Club, Located East of Lindell Boulevard, South of Egret Circle. GENERAL DATA: Owner/Applicant ............. Delray Beach International Tennis Resort, Ltd. Agent .............................. Doak S. Campbell, III Esq. Location .......................... East of Lindell Boulevard, South of Egret Circle. Property Size .................. 3.24 Acres Future Land Use Map ..... MD (Medium Density 5-12 du/ac) Current Zoning ...............RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density) Adjacent Zoning .... North: SAD (Special Activities District) & RM East: RM South: RM West: RM Existing Land Use ..........Clubhouse, Tennis Club & Academy Proposed Land Use ........ Educational facility providing instructional classes in the English language to students enrolled in the tennis academy. Water Service ................. n/a. Sewer Service ................n/a. IV.A. The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the City Commission on a request for Conditional Use approval to establish an Educational Facility (private school) for the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(E). The 3.24 acre property is located on the west side of Jaeger Drive between Dotteral Road and Egret Circle within a subdivision known as the Delray Racquet Club. At its meeting of August 14, 1978, the City Commission approved a Conditional Use and site plan request for Lake Ray Tennis Club for the construction of 325 units in six 5- story buildings and a tennis club with 15 tennis courts. The clubhouse and associated recreational facilities were severed from the condominium owners interest and have been owned and operated over the years by several different entities and utilized for tennis academies. The condominium owners have access to the recreational facilities through memberships. Lake Ray Tennis Club is now referred to as the Delray Racquet Club. The parcel was zoned RM-15 (Multiple Family 15 units per acre) until it was rezoned to RM (Multiple Family-Medium Density 6-12 units per acre) with the Citywide Rezoning associated with the approval of the Land Development Regulations in 1990. In 1997, the clubhouse and recreational facilities were sold to the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy, Ltd., which in conjunction with the clubhouse operation is a tennis academy. The academy provides tennis lessons and assists students in improving their knowledge and skills of the game. Since many of the students are foreign nationals with limited ability to speak English, the tennis academy wishes to provide its students language courses. The establishment of private schools are allowed as a Conditional Use in the RM zone district subject to certain criteria. The conditional use request is to establish a private school within the existing 2 story Delray Racquet Club clubhouse facility. This is to be accomplished by converting the indoor racketball courts and locker rooms to 12 classrooms and support offices. No exterior modifications or site upgrades are being proposed at this time. The educational classes will be limited to those students enrolled in the academy. Planning and Zoning Boa, .~taff Report Conditional Use Approval - Delray Beach International Tennis Academy Private School Page 2 REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3): Pursuant to 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, 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 four areas. FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The use or structures must be allowed in the zone district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation). The subject property has a Future Land Use Map designation of Medium Density Residential and a zoning designation of RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density 6-12 units/acre). The zoning district is consistent with the Medium Density Residential Future Land Use Map designation and "educational facilities" are listed as a Conditional Use in the RM district [LDR Section 4.4.6 (D)(4)]. CONCURRENCY: Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. The conversion of interior space from a recreational use to classrooms will have little or no impact on water and sewer demands. The request does not create a need for additional Parks and Recreation facilities, but may create a slight increase in demand on existing racketball facilities as two courts are being eliminated. As the classrooms will function as an accessory use to the existing tennis academy, there will be no change in trip generations that would impact traffic level of service standards. As no exterior modifications are being proposed, drainage is not affected. Level of service as it relates to solid waste is discussed below. Solid Waste: The proposal calls for the conversion of a clubhouse that contains recreational uses to classrooms. Pursuant to the Solid Waste Authority guidelines Clubhouses and Recreational buildings generate 11.8 pounds of solid waste per square foot per year while schools generate 10.2 pounds of solid waste per square foot per year. Therefore, a reduction in 10.43 tons of solid waste per year will be realized by this development proposal. Planning and Zoning Boa. 5taft Report Conditional Use Approval - Delray Beach International Tennis Academy Private School Page 3 CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3 and required findings in Section 2.4.5(E)(5) for the Conditional Use request shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and no applicable policies were found. SECTION 2.4.5(E) REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Conditional Use) Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the City Commission must make findings that establishing the conditional use will not: A. Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located; B. Nor that it will hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. The Delray Racquet Club is bordered on the north by the Laver's SAD, a multiple family development; to the west by Town and County, a multiple family development; to the south by Tropic Palms, a single family development; and west by the Waterford Apartments. Compatibility with the adjacent residences is not a major concern. The establishment of a private school on the site will be an accessory use to the existing tennis academy. The school does not necessitate any exterior building modifications or upgrades to the site (parking or landscaping), and no additional traffic will be generated by the proposal, as the school is an accessory use to the academy. The establishment of a private school at this location should not have a detrimental effect upon the stability of the adjacent neighborhoods, nor should it hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.6(D)(4) within the RM zone district, educational facilities are allowed as a conditional use subject to the restrictions set forth in LDR Section 4.3.3(HH). LDR Section 4.3.3(HH) Educational Facilities: For the purpose of this section, educational facilities shall be of a limited nature serving children ages 2-18. Examples of such programs may include those which meet special education needs, or programs that are directed toward Planning and Zoning Boa. 5taft Report Conditional Use Approval - Delray Beach International Tennis Academy Private School Page 4 providing intensive instruction to a limited number of students; but does not include vocational or training schools which may be located in various commercial or Community Facilities districts. The proposed private school fits the description above as it will serve children within the age limits described above and provides intensive instructions (English language) for the foreign students attending the academy. (1) Lot Area: The minimum lot area shall be 7,$00 square feet. The subject property involves approximately 3.24 acres which exceeds the minimum square footage of 7,500 square feet (.172 acre). (2) Floor Area: Facilities shall contain a minimum floor area of 35 square feet per child exclusive of space devoted to bathrooms, halls, kitchen, offices, and storage. The floor area devoted to classrooms, media room, library, and study represents approximately 4,000 square feet which could accommodate up to 114 students. However, the academy enrollment is approximately 60 students. Therefore, more than 35 square feet per child will be provided with this development proposal. (3) Loading area: A pickup and drop-off area for children shall be provided in a convenient area adjacent to the building and shall provide clear ingress and egress to the building. A pickup and drop-off area exists in front of the clubhouse which meets the above requirement. (4) Outdoor Area: There shall be a minimum area of 75 square feet of outdoor play area per student. The play area shall be located on the same lot as the principal use and shall not be located in the front yard setback. The play area shall be surrounded by a six foot fence. The proposal is associated with an existing recreational facility containing a swimming pool and 15 tennis courts situated on approximately 3.24 acres. Therefore, more than 75 square feet of outdoor play area per student will be provided. The recreational facilities are located on the same lot as the principal use. The balance of this criteria is not applicable (i.e. that the play area shall not be located in the front yard setback and surrounded by a 6' fence), given the unique character of the school being associated with a tennis academy. Planning and Zoning Boa~. ~taff Report Conditional Use Approval - Delray Beach International Tennis Academy Private School Page 5 (5) Other Regulations: All Educational Facilities shall comply with the American Disability Act, Standard Building Code, Fire Codes, and any other regulations as may be required. This item will be addressed at the time of building permit submittal and HRS permits. The development proposal is not located within a geographical area requiring review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) or the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property. Letters of objection or support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations which have requested notice of developments in their areas: · Town and Country · Waterford Apartments · Lavers The proposed conditional use seeks to establish a private school at the Delray Racquet Club for the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy. The private school will provide intensive language courses for the foreign students attending the academy. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed use with surrounding properties and LDR Section 4.3.3(HH) Educational Facilities criteria. Planning and Zoning Bo~, _;taft Report Conditional Use Approval- Delray Beach International Tennis Academy Private School Page 6 A. Continue with direction and concurrence. B. Recommend approval of the request for Conditional Use approval for Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy, based upon positive findings with respect to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility), Section 4.3.3(HH) (Educational Facilities criteria) and Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to conditions. C. Recommend denial of the Conditional Use approval for Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility) and Section 4.3.3(HH) (Educational Facilities Criteria). Recommend approval of the request for Conditional Use to establish a private school associated with the Delray Beach International Tennis Resort Academy based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards), Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility) and Section 4.3.3(HH) (Educational Facilities Criteria) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: · Location Map · Sketch Plan '~--. : ~ -~'~. . G : '.,..~' ' =' -:-': .:' . . ~ ~.','"'--- -: = _ . / DODGE WLLAGE RITY LINTON WALL,,CE CO~DO ~ OUmRIDGE ~ ~ ~ O~C~ ~m. LIN TON BOULEVARD LINTON INTERNATIONAL PLAZA ROSS COS TCO LA~R'S DELRA Y INDUSTRIAL PARK LAKE~EW A PA R TMEN TS SOLID WASTE TRANSFER TARGET STATION MILLER FIELD MILLER DELRA Y PARK OSPREY DRIVE TOWN & COUNTRY ESTATE CONDOS ROAD BUCKY DENT'S MALLARD DRIVE HERON DRIVE CURLEW ROAD KIA LAKE DELRA Y CURLEW ROAD APAR TMEN TS DELRA Y TOYOTA MORSE SA TURN MOBILE HOMES N DELRAY BEACH INTERNATIONAL CI~OFOE~A~EAO~.~L TENNIS RESORT ACADEMY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- D/G/I'AL [~45E MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: LM264 DIANE DOMINGUEZ, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING w,,, ~ /A.,, z,,~....., THRU: FROM: ,JEFFREY A. COSTELLO, PRINCIPAL PLANNE SUB,JECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 APPEAL OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SITE PLAN MODIFICATION FOR DELRAY BEACH MARRIOTT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ATLANTIC AVENUE AND OCEAN BOULEVARD. The action requested of the City Commission is that of reversal of the site plan modification approval granted by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for the construction of a new restaurant at the Delray Beach Marriott. The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Atlantic Avenue and Ocean Boulevard. SPRAB action was taken on September 16, 1998. The action was appealed on September 28, 1998 by the owner of properties along Atlantic Avenue generally located between Venetian Drive and Seabreeze Avenue (copy attached). The focus of the appeal relates to the parking requirement which was applied to the restaurant addition. The development proposal incorporates the following: conversion of the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites (246 units total); elimination of the 1,560 sq.ft, tiki hut and swimming pool at the southeast corner of the site to accommodate the construction of a one-story 4,900 sq.ft, restaurant with 1,100 sq.ft. outdoor dining area (6,000 sq.ft, total); conversion of the one tennis court on the second level adjacent to Andrews Avenue to accommodate a 39-space parking lot; and, elimination of 4 parking spaces on the north side of the proposed parking lot to accommodate a valet drop-off area and loading area for the restaurant. A detailed description and analysis of the request is found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report. At its meeting of September 16, 1998, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board held a quasi-judicial hearing in conjunction with review of the request. City staff and the applicant offered testimony which supported the development proposal. The testimony stated the following: that the proposal complies with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; that parking requirements and traffic concurrency have been met. There was testimony objecting to the request by an attorney, representing the property owner, and his representatives/witnesses of the property owner. The objections mainly related to the concern with staff's interpretation of the Land Development Regulations as they relate to the parking requirements for hotels and restaurants in the CBD (Central Business District) zone district. The attorney stated that the parking requirements were improperly applied, that there was insufficient public notice, and objected to the Board not permitting him to cross examine staff and the applicant's attorney. While LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(7)(e) (Parking Regulations) states that restaurants associated with hotels must provide 10 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft., Section 4.4.13(G) states that the supplemental regulations of the CBD shall apply in addition to Article 4.6, which includes the parking requirements for hotels. As the CBD City Commission Documentation Meeting of October 20, 1998 Appeal of SPRAB's Action re: Site Plan Modification for Delray Beach Marriott Page 2 regulations state that restaurants shall provide 6 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft., the CBD parking calculation was applied. The Board was supportive of the development proposal and felt that the project would be an asset to City. After discussing the proposal, the Board voted 6-0 to approve the Class III Site Plan Modification based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5(G)(5) subject to the following conditions: 1. That revised plans be submitted addressing the Site Plan Technical Items of the Staff Report; 2. That site lighting fixture locations and details be indicated on the plans, and a photometric plan submitted; and, 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any of the proposed improvements, the plat must be recorded. Based upon staff's analysis calculating the 3,800 sq. ft. restaurant addition at 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. (22.8 spaces), the 4 proposed suites at O. 7 spaces per unit (2.8 spaces), and replacement of the 4 parking spaces, a total of 30 parking spaces are required and 40 are proposed. If the parking for the restaurant addition is calculated at 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. (38 spaces), a total 45 spaces must be provided. This would result in a deficiency of 5 spaces, which could be addressed by either reducing the square footage, paying an in-lieu fee, or providing compact parking spaces to gain the 5 spaces. By motion, uphold the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board's decision and deny the appeal of the Class III Site Plan Modification Approval for Delray Beach Marriott. Attachments: Appeal Letter P & Z Staff Report and Documentation of September 16, 1998 BRUCE F. SILVER, P.A.. T[LEPHON[: (~61) 488-3344 ~R~C~ ~. ~[~R TELECOPIE~: (56~) 488-5899 ~'ICO~ S. PxccI~-I~'~'I September 28, 1998 Allison Harty, City Clerk City of Dekay Beach 100 N.W. l't Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 RE: Delray Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existing Hotel L~tter of Appeal Dear Honorable Clerk: This Letter of Appeal is submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E), Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, on behalf of my clients, Delray Historic, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Delray Ocean Partners, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, and as general partner of Delray Historic, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership; Sunspot, Inc., a Florida corporation; and Atlantic Center, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Atlantic Center, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. In compliance with Section 2.4.7(E)(2) thereof, the following information is hereby provided with regard to this appeal: Action Appealed: Action of the City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, taken on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, which granted the application submitted by Robert Currie, Architect, on behalf of the property owner, to modify the approved site plan for the Delray Beach Marriot in order to allow construction of a 4,900 square foot restaurant with an additional 1,100 square feet of outdoor dining (6,000 square feet total), and conversion of the existing penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites. Basis of Appeal: a. The City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, erroneously and/or improperly applied Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(a), Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, which provides, '~the parking requirement for restaurants is established at six (6) spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area," and, therefore, miscalculated the required number of parking spaces which the Allison Harry, City Clerk September 28, 1998 Page Two applicant must provide in order to operate the proposed uses pursuant to the proposed modified site plan. More specifically, it is respectfully submitted that the controlling provision of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach is Section 4.6.9(C)(7)(e) which provides, "Hotels and Motels: Shall provide 0.7 ora space for each guest room plus 10 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft, of floor area devoted to ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants, lounges, and shops." b. The City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, refused to permit the appellants to question Jerome Sanzone, Chief Building Official, who testified regarding the interpretation and application of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach thereby denying the appellants a fair and adequate opportunity to be heard and thus due process of law. c. The applicant received a variance from the City of Delray Beach Board of Adjustment on Thursday, June 28, 1990, to reduce the parking requirement from 390 to 340 spaces on-site in. order to allow for the expansion which is now operated by the Delray Beach Marriott. The variance should not have been interpreted to have been granted in perpetuity so as to permit the same applicant to expand beyond the plans to which it was originally attached. More specifically, it is hereby respectfully submitted that when the aforementioned variance was originally granted to the applicant, the "Downtown" area was more akin to a "Ghost Town" than a thriving "All-American City." Today, however, the economic profile of"Downtown" Delray Beach is exciting with new development attracted and proposed. Due to the fact that parking requirements were relaxed in the past, in order to attract business and development into this redevelopment area, there is now a parking problem, the existence of which has been acknowledged by many City Officials. Accordingly, the applicant should be required to adhere to the strict letter of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach in order to expand the use on the subject property beyond that for which it was granted a variance in 1990. d. The action appealed from will adversely impact the approved uses on the real property owned by the appellants thereby diminishing the value of these substantial real estate holdings and may, additionally, endanger the safety of the public. e. The City of Delray Beach failed to provide sufficient and adequate notice of the intended action of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board which deprived the appellants of an adequate opportunity to prepare opposition to the subject application. Relief Sought: Review and reversal of the decision of the City of Delray Beach, Site Plan and Appearance GLADES ROAD, SUITE E:OI · BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33434 . (561) 488-3344 . FAX (561) 488-5ta199 Allison Harry, City Clerl~ September 28, 1998 Page Three Board, taken on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, which granted the application submitted by Robert Currie, Architect, on behalf of the property owner, to modify the approved site plan for the Delray Beach Marriot in order to allow construction of a 4,900 square foot restaurant with 1,100 square feet of outdoor dining (6,000 square feet total), and conversion of the existing penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites. Appellant(s): 1. Delray Historic, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Delray Ocean Partners, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, and as general partner of Delray Historic, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. 2. Sunspot, Inc., a Florida corporation; and 3. Atlantic Center, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Atlantic Center, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. Appellants' Interest in Matter: The appellants, tax payers, are owners of several parcels of real property located within the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach, including the "downtown" area, east of the intracoastal waterway, known as the Central Business District (CBD) Zone District. Appellants, affected property owners, are, respectfully, concerned that applicant's proposed site plan modification will adversely impact the approved uses on their properties thereby diminishing the value of their substantial real estate holdings and, moreover, endangering the safety of the public. Please fred our firm check enclosed herewith and made payable to the City of Delray Beach in the amount of Two Hundred ($200.00) and No/100 Dollars for processing. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Additionally, I hereby certify that a tree and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished by U.S. Mail delivery to Alan J. Cildin, Esquire, BOOSE CASEY CIKL1N, et al., Attorney(s) for the Applicant, 515 North Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 28th day of September, 1998. Respectfully submitted, BRUCE F. SILVER, P.A. Bruce F. Silver BFS/ip Enclosures pc: Client(s) BRUCE F. SILVER, P.~k. 6100 GLADES ROAD, SUITE 2 I0 - BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33434 · (56i) 488-3344 . FAX (561) 486-5899 SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: September 16, 1998 AGENDA ITEM: ~V.A. ITEM: Class III Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations associated with the construction of a new restaurant for the Delray Beach Marriott, located on the northwest corner of N. Ocean Boulevard (A-l-A) and E. Atlantic Avenue. GENERAL DATA: Owners/Applicant .......................... Ocean Properties, Ltd. Agent ....................................... Robert Currie, Architect Robert G. Currie Partnership Location ......................................... Northwest corner of Ocean Blvd. (A-l-A) and E. Atlantic Avenue Property Size ................................. 4.64 Acres Future Land Use Map .................... Commercial Core Current Zoning .............................. CBD (Central Business District) Adjacent Zoning ................... North: CF (Community Facilities) & OS (Open Space) East: OS South: CBD (Central Business District) West: CBD & RM (Medium Density Residential) Existing Land Use ......................... Hotel, hotel parking lot, beach parking lot, and attendant · facilities Proposed Land Use ....................... Conversion of the existing penthouse restaurant to 4 suites, elimination of the ground floor patio/snack bar/swimming pool area at the southeast corner of the site to accommodate a new one-story 6,000 sq. ft. restaurant with associated parking and landscaping. Water Service ................................ Existing on site. Sewer Service ............................... Existing on site. f--i i I I I I 1 I II II t H--/ IV.A. The action before the Board is that of approval of the following aspects of a Class Ill Site Plan Modification for the Delray Beach Marriott, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(b): [] site plan; [] landscape plan; [] architectural elevations; and The subject property is located at the northwest corner of East Atlantic Avenue and North Ocean Boulevard (A-l-A), within the CBD (Central Business District) zone district, and contains approximately 4.64 acres. The subject property has a lengthy and complicated land use history. The most recent history involving the project is provided below. At its meeting of April 16, 1997, SPRAB considered two design layouts for the hotel expansion to accommodate a 5-story addition with 106 rooms (246 total). One site plan combined the beach parking lot with the proposed hotel parking area adjacent to the north property line, and the second plan maintained the previously approved separation of the two parking areas. The site plan combining the parking areas was approved, while the associated landscaping and elevations were continued. At its meeting of June 25, 1997 SPRAB approved the architectural elevations for the project. The revised landscape plan was approved by SPRAB on July 9, 1997. On December 17, 1997, SPRAB approved a site plan modification request, which included minor modifications to the approved plans for expansion of the hotel. These items included redesign of the main entry from an elliptical to a circular drive; redesign of the proposed pool area; relocation of garage entry along Andrews Avenue; elimination of one tennis court; and other floor plan changes. The modification resulted in an 85 sq. ft. increase in total building area. The most significant differences between the approved and proposed site plan modifications were the changes to the north side of the guest tower. A site plan modification request has been submitted to convert the penthouse restaurant to suites/rooms, and construct a restaurant addition. The proposal is now before the Board for action. The development proposal incorporates the following: Conversion of the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites (246 units total); SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real) - Class III Site Plan Modification Page 2 [] Elimination of the 1,560 sq.ft, tiki hut and swimming pool at the southeast corner of the site to accommodate the construction of a one-story 4,900 sq.ft, restaurant with 1,100 sq.ft, outdoor dining area (6,000 sq.ft, total); [] Conversion of the one tennis court on the second level adjacent to Andrews Avenue to accommodate a 39-space parking lot; [] Elimination of 4 parking spaces on the north side of the proposed parking lot to accommodate a valet drop-off area and loading area for the restaurant; [] Installation of a canopy between the restaurant and the existing canopy/porte cochere on the south side of the hotel (over the proposed valet drop-off area); [] Installation of a covered compactor and service courtyard along the west side of the restaurant; [] Installation of a trellis over a sidewalk along the west and north sides of the restaurant; and, [] Installation of associated landscaping and refuse storage areas. COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on site and development applications/requests. LDR Section 4.4.13 CBD (Central Business District) Regulations: Parking Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(7)(e), hotels and motels are required to provide .7 of a space for each guest room plus 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area devoted to ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants, lounges, and shops. However, pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(d), within this portion of the CBD zone district, restaurants require 6 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft, of floor area. On June 28, 1990 the Board of Adjustment approved a variance request to reduce the parking requirement by 50 spaces. The approved plans indicate that 340 spaces are required (based upon the variance) and 340 spaces have been provided. Thus, there are no excess parking spaces on the site. The proposal is to construct a 6,000 sq.ft., conversion of the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites; elimination of 4 parking spaces to accommodate a loading area and valet drop-off area; and conversion of the tennis court to accommodate 39 parking spaces, which will result in a total of 369 spaces. With credit for the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant, 23 parking spaces are required for the 3,800 sq.ft, of additional restaurant floor area. The 4 proposed penthouse suites require 3 spaces and the 4 spaces eliminated to accommodate the valet and loading SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real) - Class III Site Plan Modification Page 3 areas must be replaced. Thus, 30 additional parking spaces are required and 39 additional spaces are proposed, which exceeds the code requirement. Open Space Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(2) (Open Space), within the CBD zone district east of the Intracoastal Waterway, there shall be no minimum open space requirement. Nothwithstanding the provisions of the is section, the body acting upon a development application within the CBD may require that open areas, including but not limited to courtyards, plazas, and landscaped setbacks, be provided in order to add interest and provide relief from the building mass. Adjacent to Atlantic Avenue and Ocean Boulevard (south and east sides of the restaurant), landscape areas have been indicated which will provide relief from the building mass as well as interest to the project. LDR Section 4.3.4(K)(Development Matrix): Building Setbacks Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), within this portion of the CBD zone district, a 10' front and side street setback is required. The proposed restaurant is setback 32' from Atlantic Avenue and 24' from Ocean Boulevard. It is noted that the proposed awning along the south and east sides of the restaurant extends into the side street setback (Ocean Boulevard). However, pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(4)(n) (Structures Allowed in Setbacks), canopies, marquees, and covered walkways may extend within the front and side street setback areas in commercial zone districts. Based upon the above the building setback requirements have been met. Building Height Pursuant to Section 4.3.4(K), within the CBD zone district, a maximum building height of 48' is allowed. The restaurant has a height of 24' and to the top of the tower 45', thus compliance with this requirement has been met. LDR Section 4.6.9 (Supplemental Regulations): Site Lighting Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.8, site lighting must be provided within the proposed parking area. The plans do not indicate the location and types of light fixtures for both the parking area or adjacent to the restaurant. Site lighting fixture locations and details must be indicated on the plans, and a photometric plan must be provided, which is attached as a condition of approval. SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real) - Class III Site Plan Modification Page 4 Site Plan Technical Items: The following are items that do not require specific action of the Board, however, the items must be addressed with the submittal of revised plans. 1. The handicap accessible space that is being eliminated to accommodate the loading area must be relocated elsewhere on the site. 2. A demolition plan for the elimination of the penthouse restaurant and a floor plan for the 4 proposed penthouse suites must be provided. A Certificate of Occupancy cannot be issued for the proposed restaurant until the existing restaurant is demolished. 3. A parks impact fee of $500 will be assessed to each of the 4 proposed suites for a total of $2,000. This fee must be paid at the time of building permit submittal for the suites. 4. An engineering plan must be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit which indicates how the drainage will be accommodated. 5. The site data for the proposed modification must be incorporated into the existing site data for the overall development. The square footage of each of the 4 proposed suites must be indicated. The majority of the proposed landscaping will be installed along the south and east sides of the proposed restaurant. At the no~heast, southeast and southwest corners of the restaurant groupings of Coconut Palms will be installed with underplantings consisting of Pi~osporum, Indian Ha~horne, Native Allamanda and Pentas. Also, at the nodheast, no~hwest and southwest corners groupings of Chinese Fan Palms will be installed with Rusty Fig trees at the southeast corner be~een the entrance walkway. Along the east and south sides of the outdoor dining area Silver Buttonwood trees and Crinum Lilies are proposed with underplantings consisting of Pi~osporum and Indian Ha~horne. The landscaping will complement the existing landscaping along Atlantic Avenue as well as the architecture of the building. The proposed restaurant will be of the Mediterranean Revival architectural style which is the architectural style of the hotel. The building will be constructed of c.b.s with a decorative parapet to screen the rooftop mechanical equipment and ac units. The building will contain three towers, one at the no~heast, southeast and southwest corners of the building. The tower at the southeast corner is larger that the other ~o as it represents the main entrance to the restaurant. The east and south sides of the building as well as the towers will be provided with barrel tile roofs to match the hotel. Columns that contain a stone finish/appearance will suppoA the restaurant canopy. The proposed awning and entrance canopy on the noah side of the building will be green and white striped. SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real) - Class III Site Plan Modification Page 5 Platting: At its meeting of February 17, 1998, the City Commission approved the final plat for the property (Seacrest Hotel Property - Plat No.2), however the plat has not been recorded. The plat was to be recorded prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the hotel expansion. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any of the proposed improvements, the plat must be recorded and is attached as a condition of approval. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(c)(Class III Site Plan Modification), a modification to a site plan which represents either a change in intensity of use, or which affects the spatial relationship among improvements on the land, requires partial review of Performance Standards found in LDR Sections 3.1.1 and 3.3.3, as well as required findings of LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5). LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5) (Findings) Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), a finding that the proposed changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made concurrent with approval of a Class III modification. With the site plan modification approval of April 16, 1997 and December 17, 1997, positive findings were made with respect to Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Compliance with the Land Development Regulations and applicable Concurrency items as they relate to this site plan modification are discussed below. The development proposal involves the conversion of the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant to 4 hotel suites, the construction of a 6,000 sq.ft. Restaurant and conversion of the tennis court to accommodate parking. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), this minor modification does not significantly impact the previous findings. However, the applicable Concurrency items as they relate to this development proposal are discussed below. Section 3.1.1 (B) - Concurrency Pursuant to 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. SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real) - Class Ill Site Plan Modification Page 6 The proposed improvements will not have an impact on water and sewer demands. Drainage will not be significantly affected as the proposed location of the restaurant is primarily impervious area. However, it is noted that an engineering plan must be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit which indicates how the drainage will be accommodated. Concurrency findings as they relate to Traffic, Parks and Recreation Facilities, and Solid Waste are discussed below. Traffic: The subject property is located within the TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD (Central Business District), OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and the West Atlantic Avenue Business Corridor. The TCEA exempts the above-described areas from complying with the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. The construction of a 6,000 sq.ft. addition, will generate 35 additional trips onto the surrounding roadway network. The traffic generated will not have an adverse impact on this level of service standard. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The 4 additional suites will not have a significant impact with respect to level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities. However, pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, whenever a development is proposed upon land which is not designated for park purposes in the Comprehensive Plan, an in-lieu fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit will be collected prior to issuance of building permits for each unit. Thus, an in-lieu fee of $2,000.00 will be required of this development. Solid Waste: Based upon the Solid Waste Authority's Trash Generation Rates, trash generated each year by additional 6,000 sq.ft, of floor area will be 4.7 Ibs./sq.ft./yr., or 14.1 tons per year. The trash generated by this development can be accommodated by existing facilities. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Section 3.1.1 (D) - Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Modification Analysis section of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided the conditions of approval are addressed. I I NOTE: At the time the proposal was presented to the following Board's, the proposal did not include the installation of 39 additional parking spaces on the site. SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real)- Class III Site Plan Modification Page 7 Community Redevelopment Agency At its meeting of August 27, 1998, the CRA Board reviewed and recommended approval of the development proposal. The Board supported the provision of additional parking on site to accommodate all or part of the demand. The Board felt the remaining spaces could be accommodated with in-lieu fees. Downtown Development Authority At its meeting of August 17, 1998, the DDA reviewed the development proposal. The Board recommended approval of the project however they had concerns with parking situation in the beach area. They felt the required parking should be provided on the site, not through an in-lieu fee payment. Parking Management Advisory Board At its meeting of August 24, 1998, the PMAB reviewed the request and recommended approval provided the required parking is accommodated on site. The Board would not support an in-lieu fee payment for 31 spaces. Courtesy Notices: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's and civic organizations. Ron Price- Delray Ocean Villas Dr. Harris Shumacker- Delray Summit [] Frank McKinney- Oceanfront Property Owners Fred Devitt- Oceanfront Property Owners Joan Baccari - Beach Properties Owners Association [] Manor House Condominium Association Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Board's meeting. The modification before the Board involves redesign of the installation of a 6,000 sq.ff. restaurant, and conversion of the 2,200 sq.ft, penthouse restaurant to accommodate 4 suites. The development proposal will be consistent with LDR Section 3.1.1 and Section 2.4.5(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan provided the conditions of approval are addressed. SPRAB Staff Report Delray Beach Marriott (fka Holiday Inn Camino Real)- Class III Site Plan Modification Page 8 A. Continue with direction. B. Approve the Class III Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan and Building Elevations for Delray Beach Marriott, based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards), LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to conditions. C. Deny the Class III Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations for Delray Beach Marriott with the basis stated. A. Site Plan Modification Approve the Class III Site Plan Modification for the Delray Beach Marriott based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5(G)(5) subject to the following conditions: 1. That revised plans be submitted addressing the Site Plan technical Items of the Staff Report; 2. That site lighting fixture locations and details be indicated on the plans, and a photometric plan submitted; 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any of the proposed improvements, the plat must be recorded. B. Landscape Plan Approve the Landscape Plan for the Delray Beach Marriott based upon positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16. C, Architectural Elevations Approve the Architectural Elevations for the Delray Beach Marriott, based upon positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18. Attachments: r~ Site and Landscape Plans, and Elevations ] ~flN~V ~ f l.:.t.h ~ ~~ d ~ CITY CLERK ~oo N,w. 1st AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444' 407/243-7000 1993 Bruce F. Silver, P.A. Suite 201 6100 Glades Road Boca Raton, FL 33434 Re: Appeal of Site Plan Review and ADpearance Board Action re Delray Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existinq Hotel Dear Mr. Silver: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of appeal and filing fee with respect to the action taken by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on September 16, 1998, concerning the referenced project. Pursuant to Section 2.4.7 of the Land Development Regulations, the appeal was received in a timely manner by the City Clerk's office on September 28, 1998. Please be advised that the matter will be scheduled as a quasi-judicial proceeding before the City Commission at the regular meeting to be held on Tuesday, October 20, 1998. The meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. and will be held in the Commission Chambers at City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida. You may wish to check with my office prior to the October 20th meeting to determine the item's standing on the agenda. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk AM~/m Attachment: Fee receipt cc: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney Diane Dominguez, Director of Planning and Zoning THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS f~rinted o~ ~tecycC~,~ LAW OFFICES BRu¢~ F. $i~.v~R, P. 3~. 6100 GLADES ROAD BOCA RATON, fLORida 33434 September 28, 1998 Allison Harty, City Clerk City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 RE: Delray Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existing Hotel £etter of Appeal Dear Honorable Clerk: This Letter of Appeal is submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.7(E), Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, on behalf of my clients, Delray Historic, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Delray Ocean Partners, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, and as general partner of Delray Historic, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership; Sunspot, Inc., a Florida corporation; and Atlantic Center, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Atlantic Center, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. In compliance with Section 2.4.7(E)(2) thereof, the following information is hereby provided with regard to this appeal: Action Appealed: Action of the City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, taken on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, which granted the application submitted by Robert Currie, Architect, on behalf of the property owner, to modify the approved site plan for the Delray Beach Marriot in order to allow construction of a 4,900 square foot restaurant with an additional 1,100 square feet of outdoor dining (6,000 square feet total), and conversion of the existing penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites. Basis of Appeal: a. The City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, erroneously and/or improperly applied Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(a), Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, which provides, "the parking requirement for restaurants is established at six (6) spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area," and, therefore, miscalculated the required number of parking spaces which the Allison Harry, City Clerk September 28, 1998 Page Two applicant must provide in order to operate the proposed uses pursuant to the proposed modified site plan. More specifically, it is respectfully submitted that the controlling provision of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach is Section 4.6.9(C)(7)(e) which provides, "Hotels and Motels: Shall provide 0.7 of a space for each guest room plus 10 spaces per 1,000 sq.fi, of floor area devoted to ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants, lounges, and shops." b. The City of Delray Beach, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, refused to permit the appellants to question Jerome Sanzone, Chief Building Official, who testified regarding the interpretation and application of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach thereby denying the appellants a fair and adequate oppommity to be heard and thus due process of law. c. The applicant received a variance from the City of Delray Beach Board of Adjustment on Thursday, June 28, 1990, to reduce the parking requirement from 390 to 340 spaces on-site in order to allow for the expansion which is now operated by the Delray Beach Marriott. The variance should not have been interpreted to have been granted in perpetuity so as to permit the same applicant to expand beyond the plans to which it was originally attached. More specifically, it is hereby respectfully submitted that when the aforementioned variance was originally granted to the applicant, the "Downtown" area was more akin to a "Ghost Town" than a thriving "All-American City." Today, however, the economic profile of"Downtown" Delray Beach is exciting with new development attracted and proposed. Due to the fact that parking requirements were relaxed in the past, in order to attract business and development into this redevelopment area, there is now a parking problem, the existence of which has been acknowledged by many City Officials. Accordingly, the applicant should be required to adhere to the strict letter of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach in order to expand the use on the subject property beyond that for which it was granted a variance in 1990. d. The action appealed from will adversely impact the approved uses on the real property owned by the appellants thereby diminishing the value of these substantial real estate holdings and may, additionally, endanger the safety of the public. e. The City of Delmy Beach failed to provide sufficient and adequate notice of the intended action of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board which deprived the appellants of an adequate oppommity to prepare opposition to the subject application. Relief Sought: Review and reversal of the decision of the City of Delray Beach, Site Plan and Appearance ]~RIJC]~ 17. $II.¥]~R, P.~J~. 8100 GLADES ROAD, SUITE ~OI · BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33434 · (56i) 488-3344 · FAX (561) 488-5899 Allison Harty, City Clerk September 28, 1998 Page Three Board, taken on Wednesday, September 16, 1998, which granted the application submitted by Robert Currie, Architect, on behalf of the property owner, to modify the approved site plan for the Delray Beach Marriot in order to allow construction of a 4,900 square foot restaurant with 1,100 square feet of outdoor dining (6,000 square feet total), and conversion of the existing penthouse restaurant to 4 penthouse suites. Appellant(s}: 1. Delray Historic, Inc., a Florida corporatiOn, as general parmer of Delray Ocean Partners, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, and as general partner of Delray Historic, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. 2. Sunspot, Inc., a Florida corporation; and 3. Atlantic Center, Inc., a Florida corporation, as general partner of Atlantic Center, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership. Appellants' Interest in Matter: The appellants, tax payers, are owners of several parcels of real property located within the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach, including the "downtown" area, east of the intracoastal waterway, known as the Central Business District (CBD) Zone District. Appellants, affected property owners, are, respectfully, concerned that applicant's proposed site plan modification will adversely impact the approved uses on their properties thereby diminishing the value of their substantial real estate holdings and, moreover, endangering the safety of the public. Please find our firm check enclosed herewith and made payable to the City of Delray Beach in the amount of Two Hundred ($200.00) and No/100 Dollars for processing. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Additionally, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished by U.S. Mail delivery to Alan J. Ciklin, Esquire, BOOSE CASEY CIKLIN, et al., Attorney(s) for the Applicant, 515 North Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 28th day of September, 1998. Respectfully submitted, BRUCE F. SILVER, P.A. Bruce F. Silver BFS/ip Enclosures pc: Client(s) B~u¢'~, F. SZT.X"~:~, P.A.. e I00 GLADES ROAD. SUITE a(O · BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33434 · (561) 488-3344 - FAX (561) 488-51q99 10/14/98 WED 09:44 FAX 561 243 3774 CITY CLERK ~001 *** TX REPORT *** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 2961 CONNECTION TEL 94885899 CONNECTION ID ST. TIME 10/14 09:42 USAGE T ~ PGS. SENT RESULT DELRAYBEACH . '' ' .'"' l q93 Bruce F. Silver, P.A. Suite 201 6100 Glades Road Boca Rato~, FL 33434 Re: Appeal of Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Action re Delray Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existinq Hotel Dear Mr. Silver: This is concerning your re,est to postpone the above referenced appeal action. The item is currently scheduled for consideration at the October 20th City Commission meeting. We can postpone the matter until the following regular meeting which will be held on Tuesday, Nove~er 3, 1998. If you want to have the appeal removed from the 10/20/9S agenda and reschedu!ed for Nove~er 3rd, please advise in writing by Noon on Wednesday, October 14~ 1998. Thank you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, I:ITY OF DELRI:IY BERI:H DELRAY BEACH ~ CITY CLERK ~00 N.W. is, AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444. 407/243-7000 1993 Bruce F. Silver, P.A. Suite 201 6100 Glades Road Boca Raton, FL 33434 Re: Appeal of Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Action re Delra¥ Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existinq Hotel Dear Mr. Silver: This is concerning your request to postpone the above referenced appeal action. The item is currently scheduled for consideration at the October 20th City Commission meeting. We can postpone the matter until the following regular meeting which will be held on Tuesday, November 3, 1998. If you want to have the appeal removed from the 10/20/98 agenda and rescheduled for November 3rd, please advise in writing by Noon on Wednesday, October 14, 1998. Thank you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, _ Alison MacGregor/Harty City Clerk AMH/m cc: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney Diane Dominguez, Director of Planning and Zoning THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS DELRAY BEACH CITY OF DELRAY BEACH 100 N.W. 1'~ Ave 1993 Delray Beach FL 33444 Tel (56t)243-7050 - Fax (561)243-3774 TO: ~g[r. &ruce Si£ver FAX NUMBER 488-334a FROM: NAME OF SENDER ~ifza 9~tadden DIRECT PHONE LINE (561)243-'/059 FAX NUMBER (561)243-3774 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet) [] Urgent [] For Review [] Please Comment [] Please Reply [] Please Recycle COMMENTS: qLe: ~ppea[- ®dray $eaCh Marriott Class III Site &[an ~odification to accommodate restaurant addition Dear Mr. Silver: Please note that the above subject is scheduled to be heard on our next Regular Commission Meeting of October 20, 1998. Should you wish to postpone this item to a later meeting, please let us know by faxing a request to 243-3774. Sincerely yours, S\city clerk\fax 98\nilzas fax FOFI~ FAX AREf~ ~ MOBIl ~ ARE/¥ CODE DELRAY BEACH CITY CLERK ,oo ,.w. ,s, ^vE,uE · DE R^ ,E^OH. FLOR,D^ 33444. 407 3- 000 qF ~ ~~ ~IL 1993 Bruce F. Silver, P.A. Suite 201 6100 Glades Road Boca Raton, FL 33434 Re: Appeal of Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Action re Delra¥ Beach Marriott Class III Site Plan Modification to accommodate Restaurant Addition for an Existinq Hotel Dear Mr. Silver: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of appeal and filing fee with respect to the action taken by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on September 16, 1998, concerning the referenced project. Pursuant to Section 2.4.7 of the Land Development Regulations, the appeal was received in a timely manner by the City Clerk's office on September 28, 1998. Please be advised that the matter will be scheduled as a quasi-judicial proceeding before the City Commission at the regular meeting to be held on Tuesday, October 20, 1998. The meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. and will be held in the Commission Chambers at City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida. You may wish to check with my office prior to the October 20th meeting to determine the item's standing on the agenda. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk AMH/m Attachment: Fee receipt cc: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney Diane Dominguez, Director of Planning and Zoning THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS ~rintecl o~ F~ecycled Pa,oor PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT CASH RECEIPT ACCOUNT # TYPE OF ACTIONS FEE ~ ZONING APPROVAL 001-0000-341-21.00 Voluntary Annexations/Rezonings/ Plan Amendments/ADA-DR[ Reviews 001-0000-341-23.00 PLAT APPROVAL Minor/Major Subdivisions 001-0000-341-24.00 SITE PLAN APPROVAL New Applications/Master Plans/ Class L II, III & IV Modificaffons/ Sketch Plans/Extension Requests 001-0000-341-25.00 CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL New Applicatfons/Modification With Board Review/ Extension Requests 001-0000-341-26.00 ABANDONMENT APPROVAL Rights-Of-Way/Easements 001-0000-341-30.00 OVER THE COUNTER INCIDENTALS Non taxable Items such as File Copies/Copies of Approved Blueprints 001-0000-341-30.01 Taxable Items such as Maps/Neighborhood Plans/ Redevelopment Plans/LDRs/Comp Plan/HPB Guidelines/Other Published Materials 001-0000-208-0700 SALES TAX 6% MISCELLANEOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS 001-0000-341-31.00 COAs/~P~ Variances/Historic Designation Requests/Water Service Agreements/LDR Text Changes/Waivers & Internal Adjustments/Appeals/Re-Advertising//Similairty of Use Requests/Zoning Verification Letters TOTAL $ ~00 .~ Name of Applicant . ~.~.<%., .... %~, :, ~L.~~ '~; ~ · 's of F~e C~e~ ApProved Blue--ts Received BYDate ~/"~~" ~[[r ~'~ ~2/ :~ C~py: ~r~tor: ~VI~ Ye~ow-P~ ~t P~m~mer October 19, 1998 ~ FAX: 5_61/243-3774 Diane Dormnguez, Director of Zoning Delray Beach City Hall 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Response to Appeal of SPKAB Decision/Delray Beach Marriott Restaurant Dear Diane: Please find enclosed our response to the appeal of the SPRAB approval. I have also requested that the Clerk's office provide each of the Commissioners with a copy; however, I would also ask that you do the same to make sure they receive the response prior to tomorrow night's hearing. Since I have not seen a formal request for a postponement, I am assmmng the appellemt is moving ahead tomorrow night. Sincerely, PUC/ag 13180 Encl. Susan Ruby, Esquire w/end. (561/275-4755) October 19, 199g VIA FAX: 561/2 78~_-4755 Alison Hardy, City Clerk Mayor 3ay Alperm City Commissioners City of Delray Beach 200 N. W. First Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Response to Appeal of Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) Approval of the Restaurant at the Delray Beach Marriott Granted September 16, 1998 Dear Madam Clerk, Mayor and City Commissioners: I represem the owner of thc property known as the D¢lray Beach Marriott which was subject to SPRAB review on September 16, 1998. At that time, SPRAB unanimously approved the request of the Delray Beach Marriott as presented by Robert Cuttle, Architect. The approval is for a 4,900 foot restaurant with an additional 1,100 square feet of outdoor dining. The restaurant is located at the intersection of A-1-A and East Atlantic Avenue and is free-standing A.opellant's Basis for .4.v~eal The Appellant offered no substantial competent evidence at the SPRAB hearing. An officer of the Appellant's corporation and his employees spoke and indicated that there was a parking problem on East Atlantic. The Appellant does not own adjacent property. The issue is, however, whether this SPRAB application meets the criteria in the City's Land Development Regulations. Does the_AvvJicant meet the ~arkin~reouirements? The property is located iii the Central Business District (CBD). The only identified issue is the owner's compliance with the applicable parking requirements. Section 4.,1.13(G)(1 )(d) Parking, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A", states that in the CBD the parking requirements are as follows: The parking requirement for restaurants is established m six {6) spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. P, OI;l:'i;E EASE"," Fai~::S61-~iCO-03~!~i Oc± 19 '9~i~ 16:51 Alison Hardy, City Clerk Mayor Jay Alpcrin City Commissioners October 19, 1998 Page Two According to fl~e staffreport, tiffs new restaurant reauires thirty-one 131 ) oarking spaces and thir[¥-nin¢ (39) spaces are grovided, exceeding the requirement by eight (lq) spaces. 35~'ect. if any_do~s the vadmace t>reviously granted tim D¢lrav Beach Marriott have on this r¢cmest? The Appellant states that the City Board of Adjustment granted a variance for fifty (50) spaces in 1990 and that the variance should not longer be considered. Mr. Sanzone, Chief Building Official, testified that variances mn with the land and that they do not expire, and that this variance is valid. The Appellant offered no evidence to the contrary, and for that matter still doesn't. Tom McMurrain, representing the property owner, indicated his personal involvement with the hotel for approximately sixteen (16) years mid testified that there has always bee~ sufficient parking at the hotel. Subsequent to the hearhig, Mr, Currie's office prepared a parking analysis for the hotel and restaurant, a copy of which is attached as Exlfibit "B". It shows that when using the City's present parking standm-ds and disregarding the variance (as the Appellant suggests), t. he ~arking requirements_are still met. The attached parking aa~alysis has been confirmed as being correct by City staff. What evidence was offered to substantiate the,~P1KAB approval? In addition to Mr. McMuman's sworn testhnony, Mr, Currie also testified that the parking requirements of this restaurant i.n the CBD were met and that the Delray Beach Marriott was one of the few users in the CBD that met its parking requirements; in other words, it was not a part of the parking problem but a part oft, he solution. Mr. Sargone and Mr. Costello both testified that the correct parking requirements were applied to the SPRAB request and that they were the requirements consistently applied to all CBD properties. Pursuant to the Land Development Regulations, Mr. Sanzone is responsible for Code interpretations. D_o_es the Appellant_have standing to apgeal? According to the Appeal's section of the Land Development Regulations, in order to appeal a matter it must be made by "the aggrieved party". Ihe Appellant is not an "aggrieved party". They own no adjacent property and will suffer no greater impact than the public generally because of the SPRAB approval. The fact that they own a business on Atlantic does not confer standing and there is no allegation ofa ~ on Appeilant's non-adjacent properties. To allow any property owner on Atlantic Avenue~ even though not adjacent, to appeal a decision ora City Board opens up the appellate process to literally hundreds of property owners with little or no merit to their appeals. It also pemfits appeals for reasons of competition rather than filling to meet the Standards of review. Alison Hardy, City Clerk Mayor Jay Alperin City Commissioners October 19, 1998 Page Three Conclusion The Appellant offered no evidence at the SPRAB hearing ~md refers to none in his appeal. The City Land Development Regulations require that in granting an appeal you must make a finding that the required findings of SPRAB were incorrect. The Appellant does not even suggest that SPKAB's required findings were not met. Since SPKAB's findings were based on the CBD Code requirements as cotffirmed by Mr. Sanzone, Mr. Costello and Mr, Currie (all considered experts) and not disputed except by the Appellant's lawyer (not an expert), the Appellmlt's appeal is baseless and should be demed Sincerely, Al n .~C. iklin AJC/ag 13180 Encls. ccs: Thomas T, McMurrain (305/296-0135) Robet~ G. Currie (561/243-8184) Brace F. Silver, Esquire ~CEE;E CR.':.:EY Fa:,.: :=F,l-f:-'n-n~,'.::l CIr.:~ 19 '9~!~ 16:52 F', iF_,,, 10 - - ........ Section 4.4_13 (Fl (2) (2) _O_~.en Spac_~: A minimum of 10% non-vehicular open space si]all be provided; however, within the area encompassed by the boundaries of the original Downtown Development Authority as described in Section 8.2.2(B), and within the sec[ion of the CBD zonin9 district located east of the Intracoastal Waterway, there shall be no minimum open space requirement_ Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the body ac[in9 upon a development application within the CBD may require that open areas, including but not limited to courtyards, plazas, and landscaped setbacks, be provided in order to add interest and provide relief from the building mass. [Amd. Ord. 24-95 5116195] (Gl ~upplemental Di.s~t.d~t ReguJationA: In addition to the supplemental district regulations as set fodh in Article 4_6, except as modified below, the following shall also apply. (1) Parking: (a) Within that portion of the CBD bounded b~,_:~wJ~ton Avenue on the west, N.E. 1st Street on the north, the Intracoast~l at~ on t~e ~ast ~nd S.E. lst~treet on t-~-'~'south. parkincJ"r~ol"rements shall apply to new floor area only. Changes in use (both residential and non-residential) shall not be required to provide on-site parking. The parking required for the creation of new non-residential floor area ~.-. shall beat the rate of one space for each 300 square feet, or fraction thereof, of floor area in addition to the replacement of any previously required parking which may be eliminated. · Within ali other geographic areas of the CBD Zone District, the provisions of Section 4.6.9(C) shall apply, as further modified within this Subsection ((3)(1)_ [Amd, Ord, 63-93 111~3193] (b) After January 1~, 199~4, when the parking requirements of Section 4.6.9(C) are applied to either new development or a change in use, said parking requirements {hall be reduced ~y one parking s~Dace. This reduction may only occur once. [Amd. Ord_63-93 11123193] (c) If it'. is impossible or inappropriate to provided required parking on-site or off- site, pursuant to Subsection 4.6.9(E)(4), the in-lieu fee option provided in Section 4.6.9(1::)(3) ma~-b~ ap'plied. [A~ Ord. 63-93 11123193] / ~ ~ ¢ (d) The parking requirement for restaurants is established at si_x (6) 'spaces per T. uuu square teet o]' floor ~-rea. [Amd. C~ra EXHIBIT ~H.:.,E, Fa.?,Fl-fOrl-rlxg'l 0c± 19 "-P 1~:-,:53 P. 06.'10 BOOSE -"' .... . ......... ; -~ - becl~on 4.4.13 (G) (2) (2) ,,~etb~ck~; Within the area encompassed by the boundaries of the ODA as originally established in Section 8.2.2(B), there shall be no required front, side (interior), side (.street), or rear building setbacks except for the situation where there is no dedicated access to the rear of a building, a ten foot (10') side setback shall be provided. (H) _S_.pe cia I Regulations: (1) The sale of second hand material, other than verifiable antiques, shall not be allowed within businesses which have an entry from and/or windows along East Atlantic Avenue. [Amd. Ord. 58-90 12111190] (2) The picking-up, dropping-off, or otherwise transporting workers, assigned through an employment agency, from an assembly point in the CBD to the work site is prohibited. DELETED SUBPARAGRAPHS 4.4.13(H) (3), AND 4.4,13(H) (4) IN THEIR ENIRETY. [Amd. Ord. $3-95 6120195] 4439 Central Business (CBID) District: Per Section 4.4.13 (G) (1) (a) Parking: Within that potion of the CB1D bounded by Swin~on Avenue on the west, Iq. E. 1st Str~,et on the norbh, She In~racoastal Wat, erway on the east anti S. E. 1st Street on the south, parking refluir~ments shall apply to new floor area only. Change~ in use (both residential and non- residential) small not be reRuired ko provide on-site parking. The parking required for the creation of new non- residential floor area shall be at the rate of one space for each 300 square feet, or fraction thereof, of floor area in addition to the replacement of any previously required parking which may be eliminated. Within all other geographic areas of the CBO Zone District, the provisions of Section 4.6.9 (C) shall apply, as fu~her modified within this Sub~ection (G) (1). Page No. 1 EXHIBIT Per Section 4.4.13 (G) (1) (d) Parking- The parking re~tuiremet~t for restaurants is established at six (6) spaces per 1,00© square feet of floor area.*' Per Section 4.6.9 (C) (7) (e) Hotels and Motels: Shall provide 0.7 of a space for each guest room plus 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft, of floor area devoted to ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants, lounges, and shops. (**Please note this parking requirement supersedee the 10 per 1,000 ~q. ft. for reetaurant, s/Iounges requirement in Section above.) Page No. 2 BOO:';;E ER:'i;EY Fa:., :$61-g217~-0~S1 Oc"l: 1'3 '9S 16:54 I:'. 03.' 10 Parking required using above matrix: Hotel Rooms, 254 ¢) .7 per room --.. 177.8 spaces Retail, 2,439 sf ¢) 10 per 1,00© = 24.4 spaces Restaurant/Lounge, 7,441 sf ~ 6 per 1,000 44.6 spaces Meeting Rooms, 13,220 sf ¢ 10 per 1,000 ~3..~c..e~ Total Required 379.0 spaces Reduction of 1 space, per - 1.~,~ Section 4.4.13 (G) (1) (a): After January 1, 1994, when the parking requirements are applied to either new development or a change in use, said parking requirements shall be reduced by one parking epace. This reduction may only occur once. New Total Required in 1998 378 spaces Parking Provided '~ 379 spaces Page No. 3 THE ONLY NEW RESTAURANT RECENTLY BUILT: OLD CALYPSO [BANANA BOAT) Parking required' 4 per 1,000 square feet Based on Shopping Center definition (Waterway East) Section 4.6.9 (C) (3) (e). All other restaurants were either in existing buildings which were grandfathered in, or west of the Intracoastal which carries a less requirement of 3 per 1,000 sf, (Refer back to Section 4.4.13 (G) (1) (a) Parktng. Page No. 4- JEFFREY W. BUCKHOLZ, P.E. Chie~ Tr~e Engineer Education, ~IVERSI~ OF TeLEx, Toledo, Ohio: Bachelor of ~ien~ in Civil Engin~erln~, Magna Cum Laurie, 1976 ~IVE~SITY OF CALIFO~IA, B~el,y, Czlifomia: Ma~ter of ~ienee in Civil En~ne~ri~ ~nspo~ation Maj.. 1977 ~IVERSITY OF TeLEx, Tole~ Ohio: Ma~r of Businos~ Adminl~tlv~ MAS~CHUSETTS ~TITUTE OF TEC~OL~Y, ~mbrid$~, Ma~chusett~: Postgraduate ~tudies in Tr~po~atlon, ] 984-1985 Professional Slalus *' o ~e~iste~d Civil En~egr in Florida. Georgia, California, Ohio, Michigan and o Certified Unlimited Elecrrlcal Contract~ in Florida. o Level Ii I~SA - ~ified Tra~c Signa] Technician o Level Ii 1MSA - Ce~ified Signs · Mark~ S~iali~ o Author - ]~SA Levels ! ~d ]~ Tm~c Signal Training Manual o Author - Tra~c Si~l l~ctl~ Manual o Cou~ Ce~ified Expc~ Witness in Tra~c Engineering Experience o JW BUCKHOLZ T~FFIC ENG~EER~G, Co~ulting Engineers o SIMS-EISMAN-RUS~, Consulting Engineers, Jacksonville, Florida o VANASSE, H~GEN, 9RUSTLIN, C~suhing Engineers, Breton, Mns~ehusetts o VOLLMER AssocIATES, Consultins Engineer, Boston, M~chusefls o SAN DIEGO CO~TY DEPARTMENT OF T~NS~RTATION, San Diego, California Areas of Special Expertise o Timing of C~rdinat~ Si~nl Systems o T~fr~ Signal Troub~h~ting o Closed.~p Signal System Desi~ o Tra~c S[~aI Con~tion and lns~ct[on o Trani~ntion Planning Jeffrey W. Buckhol2, P.E. Page I Mr. Buckholz is thc president and chief' tr~f'fic engineer ~or JW Buckholz Trafflc Engineering Inc. Mr. Buc~olz holds a M~te~ desree iff C~il Engineering wi~ e T~fl~atf~ Major ~om the Ufliversf~ of Caligula at Berkeley n~ a Masters of Busing~ A~ini~tion degree from ~ Univer~i~ of Toledo. He i~ a ~isteted Civil Engineer ~n FIo~ds, Ge~gi~ Massachu~lts, Ohio, Michigan ~d ~i~ia nnd Is a state-ce~i~ed Unlimited ElectricnI C~ctor in Florida. Mc Buckholz Is n ~ni~ level ~c eng~eer wi~ 20 yen~ of wid~-rnn~ing ex~ri~nce in the ~ns~n~ion pm~ession. ex~enee includes ~sp~tion planning nnd ~c Impact nnnlys~, highly es~ci~ annl~is, adv~ced si~al design, tra~c si~nnl construction, and ~c signal timlna. ~e is f~llinr ~th th~ latest ~a~c englneerin~ tec~iques nnd ~ns~mtlon ~nre. ~c B~lz is' capable o~ handlin~ nil phases of a t~n~tion ~ject, ~om data call.ion ~d co~ep~i planning ~u~ tra~c im~t analys~ and d~tailed m~dway, inte~ction, ~d si~nl d~stgn. He is a c~ ce~i~d expe~ wimess ~n ~ ~ld o~n~c engineering n~ (s al~ ~ifled ~ t Level I[ Signs ~d M~ings S~ci~ilst ~d · ~vel II T~c Signal Technician. In additJ~, ho has nutho~d throe ~inin~ manuals on ~c signal ~st~ti~, repair, end i~cti~ For the Intem~fonal Munici~l Sisal A~intion. ~me projee~ ~r which Mr. Buc~olz has ~efl th~ pri~ipai investi~tor include: o The design of n 36-signal clo~d I~p s~stem f~ St. Jo~s Cou~y, Florid~ A ~tailed ~t of plans ~d afl extensive set o~s~cial provisions were dcvel~d ~r this ~ate-o~-th~n~ ~f~c con~ol system which utilizes ~r o~fc ~ble fm msste~Yo-I~sl c~munic~l~s. Since n Argo ~ion o~the s~mm is within hist~ic St. Augustine, a number of im~nt 8e~tie 8~d 8rcheologicel isles hud m ~ u~res~d within the ~s and s~cifle~t~ons. o Pm~retlon of n long-range ~n~ntion plaflnlng study m nnnl~e the e~ctoflh~ LuVIII~r~ deveio~ent ~ject, I mn~ new dove.meat coverln~ ~e western ~o~ of ~wntown Jnc~vitle. ~e Jac~ville Area T~ansp~ati~ System (JUATS) files were u~ated m reflect ia~ u~ and net~rk chafes ns~hted with the new deve~pment. Netwo~ changes Included ~ee~y Mmp clmures, ~d clmums, rand realJgnmefl~ and chnnges in the num~ of travel I~s, Complete a~a simulations were executed us~g ~e OS~ vetsi~ of FSUTMS nad daily t~c volume m~pifl~ were plotted. AM end PM ~ak hour ~a~c flows we~ derived f~ the daily flows usln8 ~k hour ~fo~ati~ o~a~ed from downtown ~a~ c~n~. The ~ ~r capacity situation at critical links a~ Interactions wes established, deficient nreu were identified, n~ netwo~m~ificatio~ we~ rec~mended. o Pmvjd~ l~ct~n So.ices for the Installation of~erhead Change~le Mes~ge Si~s a~ Radar Detection Along 1.~9~ in Ft. Lauder~le, Florin (~8o~n8), ~ved as resM~t en~neeron this CMS ~stem, pmvidin8 services ~t ~cluded: Facto~ A~eptn~e Testing, ~em t~tin8, fl~r~ptic ins~tion, ~wet ~ice ins~ctlon, and conduit and wiring lnsp~tion. The system has 23 ~il-mntrix over~ ~ a~ cantilever mounted signs with fiber-optic flip disk technology. o A trans~t~n planning n~ aclu manngementst~dy for SR 21 (Blnnd~g aoule~rd) in Clay County. This study developed ~t~e ~a~e volume, ~dentifl~ I~itions whe~ m~ian cl~u~s or m~ification~ were neede~ and t~e re~mmen~d la~ e~flgu~tion at each slanallzed intemctlon. Nume~us me~in~ were held ~ ~at the ~ults o~ the study could ~ p~nted ~ the Florida ~panment of T~ns~tion, ~1 officials, a~ ~e general public. o ~e~red sign~g plans f~ 16 State Roads in ~e ~lando a~a. ~e w~k includ~ the invento~ of exiuin~ the convert,on of nil the nume~cal sians ~om English m Metric, ~d ~e m~ificati~ of all ~e ~tanda~ n~- numerical ~i~s to m~t FHWA st~datds. Design impr~men~ were m~e with res~ct to such items as legeS, clear.ne, longi~diaal placem~k re~ectivi~, and letter~ize. The design w~ lnclu~d ~oximately signs and resulted in a 4~-~t ~t or de,ailed signing plans, inclu~d ~ extensive set of 8ui~ sign wo~he~. BUCKHOLZ TRAFFIC Jeffrey W. Buckholz, P.E. Page 2 The design cfa 14-signal closed loop system for SR 21 in Clay County, Florida. A detailed set of plans and special provisions were developed for this system which utilizes fiber optic cable for master-to-local communications. A complete set of signing and pavement marking plans for the SR 21 corridor were also developed and lane closure calculations were completed. Factory Acceptance Testing of Econolite Controllers in accordance with the requirements of the State of Vermont Agency of Transportation. Over a period otr three years, t'actory acceptance testing of Econolite controllers was conducted at Econolite's east coast assembly facility in Jacksonville, Florida. The controller, conflict monitor, and cabinet were put through an extensive set of' operational tests and various electrical measurements were made to ensure proper cabinet construction. A check was also made of all timings, Including coordinated timings, to ensure compliance with the plans and specifications. A transportation planning study for the US ! conidor in St. Johns County, Florida. Public participation Is a key elementoFthL~projeet with three formal public presentationsbeingprovided. SlJdepresentationswltb accoml~mying pta-recorded scripts were used, along with extensive sets of aerial photographs. Press releases and public notices were prepared and mailing lists ct' adjacent property owners and local officials were developed, A retiming project for ] 8 signals on Roosevelt Blvd. (US 17) in Jacksonville, Florida. Coordinated traffic flow was achieved along this busy conidor which carries both downtown commuter traffic and traffic generated by Jacksonville Naval Air Station, the largest employment location in Northeast Florida. Many of'the signals along the corridor have railroad preemption and it was necessary to accommodate the railroad preemption la developing the revised timing plans. The presence of a number of continuous thru lanes along the corridor also required special consideration. Served es resident engineer in charge of construction for: a 37-signal fiber optic closed-loop system in St. Johns County, Florida; 32 signals on SR 5 (Main Street) in Jacksonville, Florkla; and a 73 signal expansion m the UTCS signal system in l~roward County (Ft. Lauderdale), Florida. Aisc provided on-site construction inspection servtces for new tra~c signals in Duval and Nassau County, Florida. Monitored construction quality, adherence to plans and specifications, and workzone safety. T~e design oF a 22-signal closed loop system along Lea Turner Road in Jacksonville, Florida. A detailed set plans and an extensive set of model 170 technical special provisions were developed for this traffic control system which will utilize fiber-optic master-to-localcommunications. Prior to initiating the design, a detailed system timing report was prepared for FDOT review which contained information on existing signal operation and identified needed signal improvements. Preparation of' a long-range transportation planning study to support of' the improvement of Monument Road in Jacksonville, Florida. Jacksonville Urban Area Transportation System (JUATS) files were updated to reflect land use and network changes for the various alternatives under study. Area simulations were executed and diversion studies were carried out usin~ FSUTMS. Using b~e results from the computer planning models, cordonline counts, existing turning movement counts, and our knowledge of the area, we were able to identify the best roadway configuration and intersection geometries for the future Monument Road Corridor. The design of an overhead lane use control system for Birmingham Avenue in Jacksonville, Florida. Birmingham Avenue is a major east.west roadway located inside the Jacksonville Naval Air Station. A complete set ctr final plans and detailed technical special provisions were prepared for this job in accordance with US Navy Specifications. This project involves the construction of 7 overhead lane use ganges and a supporting communications and control network with central monitoring and manual override. Since the direction ct' the entire roadway must be reversed to handle commuter traffic, it was also necessary to design a complete system ol~ electricallypowered single message and dual message fiber optic blank-out signs (one way, no right mm, no lea turn, etc.) BUCKHOLZ TRAFFIC Jeffrey W. Buekholz, P,E. Page 3 A retiming project for 37 traffic signals on Ssa Jose Boulevard (SR 13) in Duval County. Coordinated traffic flow was echievedalong this heavi[y-trevelledcommuter route through the field implementalion of'a serles or'new timing plans. The corridor was divided into logical subsections with separate timing plans tailered to each subsection. Trailblazer and guide sign design for the Sewgrass Expressway in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. This signing project involved an extensive sign inventory from which a conceptual signing plan for th~s 36 mile facility wes develol~,-d. Once the Conceptual destine was approved, a final plans paclotge wu prepared. A traffic study and feasibility nnnlysi$ for the installation of reversible lane signals on Birmingham Avenue, This stud),, vtbtch wes conducted for Jacksonville Naval Air Station, examined & number ol'reversible lane design options before recommending a system of overhead lane use control signals and dual mes~$e bleak-out signs. A traffic signal retiming project for 40 signals on Blending Boulevard (SR 21) In Clay and Dural counties. Coordinated tra~c flow was achieved along this heavily-traveiledcommuter route through the field implememation of new AM-peek, Phi-peak, Off-peak and "shoulder-period" timing plans. Both Itard-wire and time-based interconnectlon was used to provide the needed coordination and a special phasing scheme was developed for the compressed diamond interchange in the middle of the corridor. A retlming project for 2:~ signets on University Boulevard {SR 109) in Dural County. Coordinated traffic flow was achieved alonll this heavily-travelled circumferential arterial through the field implementation of a complete set of new timing plans. A traffic study for the extension of $0th Street in Jacksonville, Florida. 50th Street is a primary access route for semi-trailer traffic destined for Industrial and prat-related facilities in North Jacksonville. This study identified future trnffic volumes, suggested a suitable cross section and pavement design for the extension, and recommended appropriate traffic control devices. A truck access study for the ITT. Rayonier Mill in Fernandina Beach, Florida. Seven alternative access routes wer~ evaluatedand a preferred route chosen. Both short term and long term recommendedimprovements were identified. These ~ncluded signal equipment and timing modifications, si~n[ng and striping enhancements, and geometric improvements. A traffic impact study for the St. Augustine Outlet Center in St. Johns County, 'Florida. This 220,000 st' factor)' outlet mall, which will be located near the interchange of 1-95 and State Route 16, will have a substantial impact on the sur~oonding road system. Needed roadway, signalization, and interchange improvements were identified. Subsequent to the traffic study, a traffic impact fee analysis was completed. A traffic impact sit, dy for the Baptist Outpatient Center in downtown Jacksonville, Florida. This 135,000 st'medical facility will serve ns a regional center for acute eye care and cancer treatment. A circulation platl was developed that would provide suitable access for a difficult site location. Completion of' the study required coordination with the Florida Department of Transportation, the City of Jacksonville Traffic Engineering Department, the City of Jacksonville Planning Department, and the Jacksonville Tr~sportation Authority. Preparation of' a revised highway master plan for downtown Chaltenooge, Tennessee. In order to open.up the banks of the Tennessee River For cultural development, it became necessary to close a major hlghwa), running along the river. A revised highway master plan was developed to accommodate both the diverted traffic from the highway to be closed and the generated tra~c from the new cultural center. BUCKHOLZ TRAFFIC Jeffrey W. Budtholz, P.E. Page o Preparation of ~ long-ran&e trausportation platming study to analyze the traffic elTeets o['~he proposed Regency By- Pass and to identity the required mainline, interchange, and intersection Inne configurations. The Jacksonville Urban Area Transportation System (JUATS) model was updated to reflect network changes and diversion studies were canled out using the multi-period/multi-path transit module of FSUTMS. o A tra~c engineering analysis and functional roadway design for Boston's Third Harbor Tunnel/Seaport Access Road. This included all phases of transportation modelling (trip generation through traffic assignment) as well u highway capacity analysla. o The design cfa proposed new isles:baRge and ~ennlnal roadways for Logan International Airport. This included ~ design of exclusive commercial vehicle lanes to be used by taxis and buses, the redesign of complex traffic weaving sections, and the design of a simplified signing system for the airport. Due to the many modes o~'traval to and bom Boston's Logan Aiq)ort, it was neccs,~u7 to develop a special computer model for traffic forecasting. o Development of a transportatinn master plan and proposed roadway system t~or the City of Westland, Michigan. The area involved included a large shopping mall, single Family and multiple family residential areas, and s~p commercial development. New roadways and intersection improvement~ were recommended. o Design of' an access system and internal roadway system for Ohio's newest state park. A linear re~ression model was developed for t'orecasting attendance and associated ~ra~c. Internal park roadways, activity parking areas, and the camper check-in area were all designed to be visually pleasing and to minimize disruption to the environment. o Parking study for Boston's World Trade Center and Fish P~er. An analysis of future parking demand versus available supply was prepared by 5-year intervals. A structured parking facility was recommended to handle expectedparking demand increases due to future office expansion. o Participated in the development of Traffic impact Fee procedures and monitoring systems for Rockland, Massachusetts and Amelia Island, Florida An equitable procedure foe assessing both immediate and furore developments was prepared. This procedure was based on past legs! precedents and current transportation theory with regard to impact tees. o Served as project manager on eight minor highway design projects located in District !! or the Florida Department of Transportation. These projects included road widenings, brid~ approaches, and intersection widenings. Responsibilities included: paflicipation in plan preparation, coordination of pro, ecl submittals, plan review to ensure adherence to safety criteria, and overall review of plans, specifications, and bid items. o Designed maintenance of traffic plans for the temporary closing of' three railroad crossings in St. Johns County Florida. These plans included detour signing with all signs and barricades in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Tra~c Control Devices. .- o Signing, striping, geometric design and signal design for many intersections in Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and Massachusetts. Work included: signal wan'ant analysis, the use of microcomputer programs such a SOAP, TRANSYT, and PASSER to set signal timings, accident analysis, and capacity analysis based on the 1985 and 1994 tllghwny Capacity Manual. o Preparation of numerous TratT~e Impact studies and Environmental Impact Reports for project developments throughout New England and Florida. These developments hxeluded of flee parks, regional shopping centers, medical facilities, resorts, and housing developments, BUCKHOLZ TRAFFIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD 8 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH 9 10 September 16, 1998 11 16 :1.8 2O COPY 2& 25 561/338-0955 ESQUIR~ DEPOSITIIO~ SERVICES 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 3 BRUCE SILVER, ESQUIRE 4 ALAN CIKLIN, ESQUIRE 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 3 1 PRO CE ED I NG S 3 MR. SITTLER: Everyone who is about to testify or 4 would like to speak to this issue, would you please 5 rise so we can have an affirmation testament. 6 THE CLERK: By the authority vested in me as a 7 Notary of the State of Florida, do you swear or affirm 8 that the testimony you are about to give is the truth 9 the whole truth and nothing but the truth? 10 MR. COSTELLO: First of all, the property, Delray 11 Beach Marriott is located at the northwest corner of 12 Ocean Boulevard and east Atlantic Avenue. There is an 13 extensive land use history on this particular item. 14 First of all, I would like to enter into the record the 15 project file for the Delray Beach Marriott regarding 16 this development proposal. 17 The proposal is to convert the 2200 square foot 18 restaurant to four suites. Conversion of a tennis 19 court to accommodate 39 parking spaces, elimination of 20 the existing Tiki hut and pool to accommodate a 6000 21 square foot restaurant addition at the southeast corner 22 of the site along with other improvements, including 23 the elimination of four parking spaces at this location 24 to accommodate a valet drop off area and the 25 installation of canopies and so forth. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 18 1 city downtown both east and west of intracoastal. My 2 client is going to testify here today that he is 3 concerned about the value of his property and he is 4 concerned about this project being approved today and 5 not having enough parking. 6 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Silver, I don't mean to be rude, 7 but the question I have is how soon do you expect to 8 bring forward these other witnesses and therefore come 9 to some conclusion of your opposing argument? 10 MR. SILVER: Right now. 11 MR. SITTLER: Please do so. 12 MR. SILVER: Thank you, sir. Can I call Mr. Carl 13 Desantis. 14 MR. CIKLIN: I don't know whether Mr. Silver is 15 testifying or not. I don't guess he is an engineer or 16 he is making some sort of argument. If he is not 17 testifying, then I don't have any interest in asking 18 him any questions because he is not providing any 19 evidence. If he thinks this stuff that he said is 20 testimony, then I would like to cross examine him. And 21 the question is, is it appropriate to do it now or 22 after -- one witness at a time? 23 MR. SITTLER: Let's do it after he has finished 24 his complete opposition statement. We will do so 25 before we get to the -- I see a number of others in the 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 19 1 audience. Please go ahead, Mr. Silver. 2 MR. SILVER: Before I call the next witness, I 3 just simply would like to know whether or not Mr. 4 Ciklin was testifying when he spoke and whether or not 5 Mr. Ciklin is going to submit himself for cross 6 examine? 7 MR. SITTLER: You two are lawyers. I am not. I 8 cannot answer that question. I will not answer the 9 question. What we're going to do now, we're going to 10 continue. Your witness can come forward. 11 BY MR. SILVER; 12 Q Please state your name? 13 A Carl Desantis, D-e-s-a-n-t-i-s. 14 Q Do you have something that you would like to say 15 to the board? 16 A I would refer to read it. I am currently the 17 president and managing partner of the Delray Ocean Partners 18 Limited. I am the president and managing partner, if you 19 would, of Sun Spot, the president and general partner of 20 Atlantic Center Incorporated, and the president and general 21 partner of Delray Historic Limited. You may not know them 22 by name, but the Great Western Bank building you are 23 familiar with. I am turning that into a gallery right now. 24 I am also the president and managing director of the Linton 25 Southeast, you know, where NationsBank is on the southeast 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 20 1 corner of Federal Highway, that nine acres. Myself and some 2 partners control about thirty plus acres here in Delray of 3 which I am very proud to be a part of Delray, may I add 4 that. I sincerely mean that and I appreciate what you are 5 attempting to do. 6 I have made, like I said, substantial investment 7 in the Delray area. When I read about the applicant's 8 proposal in the newspaper, I made a decision we need to have 9 our investment protected so we hired Mr. Silver to look into 10 the matter with more detail. I want you to know, however, 11 that I instructed Mr. Silver initially not to disclose my 12 identity. Frankly, I thought that it would bring some 13 reprisals. I am new to the area. I live in Gulf Stream. I 14 didn't know if it would or would not. I now see that 15 obviously you have got a very fine board. I am not 16 concerned with that. I am just letting you know my 17 concerns. 18 I also felt though that I am in favor of the 19 project as it stands, but I fairly believe that it's much to 20 large a restaurant for the parking that's avail itself to 21 it. There is nothing wrong with growth. My fear is it's 22 just too large a place and right now it's just -- I have 23 people here with me that are some of the tenants that I have 24 in the landlord with and they are having a difficult time on 25 every day basis just trying to hold on to the parking. As a 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 21 1 matter of fact they police it on a Saturday and we have a 2 very difficult time, people going to the beach, and we are 3 very close by. We're roughly about a 150 yards from the 4 Marriott on the other side of the street. 5 I understand that the applicant received a 6 variance of some 50 spaces in June in order to build the 7 expansion that we see there today. More specifically it's 8 my understanding the land development regulations of the 9 city of Delray required the applicant to provide 390 spaces. 10 I am not going to redo that. I think we already said that. 11 I receive complaints from tenants and reports by 12 property managers frequently. The problem is obviously 13 there is not enough on site public parking to accommodate 14 the needs of the area. I am trying desperately to help work 15 with the city on that. As a matter of fact, I have talked 16 to the city and have been talking about bring a trolley from 17 Swinton to A1A to bring people back and forth to all 18 businesses and I would pay for that. I have no problem 19 doing that. 20 I also have some property across from the Chamber 21 of Commerce that we are calling the Sun Spot which I offered 22 to the city and the Chamber of Commerce to use for craft 23 shows, whatever the want to use in the interim because it's 24 it's up for sale until something is done with it. I am 25 looking out wherever I can to try and assist the city. I 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 22 1 think this has gone overboard. I feel that this is a real 2 constriction and it's not in the public interest to have 3 something that large so close and where are we going to park 4 the people. 5 The plaza that you may be somewhat familiar with 6 there is a restaurant currently there called Ernie's. You 7 have got Smith Barney there. There is about 15 shops in 8 that particular section, if you would, east. Unfortunately 9 it's constantly laden with people parking there and going 10 somewhere else. I think it's just going to add to it, we're 11 going to need security. We know that Calypso opened across 12 the street just west of us on the backside. My fears are 13 that growth is fine, but I think we have overdone it in this 14 case and I don't think that proper parking has avail itself 15 and I could go on. But I hope that the downtown area 16 continues to grow. Like I said, I have a great interest to 17 see Delray be everything it can be. 18 By the way, may I add, if I could go on beyond 19 those three minutes. Any time you have jazz on the avenue, 20 any event that you have had, I have given up the property 21 both behind Great Western of which I own and acquired and 22 have let them use that property for parking. I also let 23 them use the property which is across from Chamber of 24 Commerce on a regular basis any time there is events. I am 25 letting you know that it's a two-way street. I am letting 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 23 1 you know that I am for Delray. But I think this is a major 2 impediment on what's going to occur at the beach area. 3 MR. SITTLER: Thank you, Mr. Desantis for your 4 remarks. 5 MR. SILVER: James Knight, Calco Development, Inc. 6 He is the property manager. 7 MR. KNIGHT: My name is Jim Knight. My office is 8 1801 South Federal Highway, southeast corner of Linton 9 and US1. I manage all these properties and enjoy it 10 very much. Unfornately, we have run into a number of 11 situations where people are parking, going to the 12 beach, taking up parking spaces at that particular 13 project. 14 MR. SITTLER: Which project are you talking about? 15 MR. KNIGHT: Ten East Atlantic Avenue. Where 16 Ernie's is. I doubt anybody in this entire room here 17 as acted as parking security guard before. I have done 18 it, I have been there. I have seen it. We continue to 19 have problems. I am not an expert at traffic, but I 20 would like to make a couple of comments. 21 One of things it says in here is traffic in the 22 report that is 6000 restaurant that has 150 seats will 23 only bring 35 new trips to the roadway network system. 24 If they are only selling 70 meals, assume two people 25 come every car, I don't think economics is working for 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 24 1 them. I question that. I am not a traffic expert. I 2 would have liked to have had the time to get a traffic 3 expert in to discuss that. 4 I also would like to briefly mention, I attended 5 the downtown development authority meeting today at the 6 the Chamber of Commerce at which time one of the 7 members of Planning and Zoning board handed out an in 8 lieu fee parking study. This was prepared by the 9 planning department. And one of things that I kind of 10 underline, it goes in and talks about the fact $6000 11 per space isn't going to cut it. It's going to take 12 $14,000 to build the parking space. But at the very 13 end it says, I would like to read one sentence of this. 14 We must decide at what point we no longer need the 15 reduced parking requirements as a redevelopment 16 incentive. 17 I think the city is striving very well. I am very 18 fortunate. I make a living as a result of of what's 19 happened on Atlantic Avenue. I think it's important 20 that we take the time and carefully look at this to 21 make sure we are applying the right requirements, not 22 to create a larger problem. I do not believe a piece 23 of property exist that is perfect for a parking 24 structure east of the intracoastal waterway today. 25 MR. SITTLER: Thank you very much. Mr. Silver? 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 3O 1 specific comments made? 2 MR. CIKLIN: Yes, sir. 3 MR. SITTLER: No objections. Please do so. 4 MR. CIKLIN: He has already been sworn. 5 BY MR. CIKLIN: 6 Q Mr. McMurray, you're vice president of Ocean 7 Properties? 8 A I am. 9 Q You are familiar with the hotel formerly 10 Camino/Del Marriott? 11 A I am. 12 Q How long has your association been with that 13 hotel? 14 A For about sixteen years. 15 Q During that time period, would you describe for 16 the Board the parking situation at the hotel from sixteen 17 years ago to the present and describe what if any problems 18 there have ever been parking customers of the hotel, guests, 19 restaurant people or anybody else? 20 A We have always have over abundance of parking at 21 the hotel. Even during our function periods for those 22 periods of years we have always had a garage downstairs to 23 the point -- people made comments it seems like a football 24 field, as far as the parking lot. That's been discussed. 25 And other times we went before the board and we have always 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 4 1 The restaurant will include 4900 square foot 2 building with 1100 square feet of outdoor dining. 3 With regard to compliance with the regulations, 4 there are two code requirements that we refer to in the 5 staff report. One is that hotels and motels are 6 required to provide point seven space for each guest 7 room plus ten space for a 1000 square feet devoted to 8 ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants and lounges. 9 However, within the central business district, central 10 business district allows the restaurant to provide six 11 spaces per 1000 square feet and that's throughout the 12 central business district whether it stands alone or 13 included with another development. 14 In 1990 the Board of Adjustment granted a variance 15 to reduce the parking requirement by 50 spaces. Prior 16 to this submittal there is a site plan approved 17 indicated 390 spaces were required and 340 provided, 18 therefore they provided the required spaces. 19 With this proposal there is a credit for 2200 20 square feet of penthouse, restaurant. And actually the 21 additional restaurant area is 3800 square feet, which 22 requires 23 parking spaces. The four penthouses each 23 requires three spaces and the four spaces that are 24 being eliminated must be replaced elsewhere on site. 25 And the proposal does require 30 spaces and 39 are 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 5 1 proposed within the tennis area here. 2 With regard to building setbacks, the building 3 itself meets the setbacks, 10 feet from the ocean and 4 10 feet from Atlantic. The canopies can encroach 5 within the setbacks within commercial zone districts 6 and their yawning and canopy, outdoor dining encroaches 7 into the setback along Ocean Boulevard. 8 There is comment regard site lighting. They must 9 provide and indicate the lighting adjacent to the 10 restaurant itself. We do need a photometrics plan. 11 There are concerns, of course, the beach is right 12 across the street and sea turtles are a concern. 13 With regard to the landscape plan, there is a 14 variety of landscape material provided primarily along 15 the east and south sides of the building. The 16 landscape plan meets code and the proposed landscape 17 will be an enhancement and will be consistent with 18 what's on Atlantic Avenue just recently installed. 19 As far as the architectural elevations, there well 20 be mediterranean style which is consistent with the 21 hotel. Another item relates to the plat. The city 22 commissioner approved the plat in February. That plat 23 has not been recorded and they need to record that 24 plat. Condition of approval is that prior to issuance 25 of a building permit of any of the proposed 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 6 1 improvements that the plat be recorded. It's just a 2 matter, just getting it done. I think the plat has 3 been signed and everything. It just needs to be taken 4 care of. 5 As far as concurrency, positive findings can be 6 made with respect to concurrency. This property is 7 within the TCEA It's a traffic concurrency exception 8 area, therefore it's exempt from the concurrency or 9 traffic performance standard ordinance Palm Beach 10 county. But we do calculate the number of trips that 11 are created. We do get a traffic statement. We factor 12 that in, we keep a calculation on each of the projects 13 coming into TCEA, how many trips they generate. We 14 forward that to the county. 15 Reviewed by others. The boards that review this 16 will be the, CBEA, parking management advisory board 17 and personal notices were submitted to homeowners and 18 civic organization. 19 Just note that when these boards reviewed this 20 plan, the proposal did not include the additional 21 parking. And their comments primarily related to they 22 need to provide parking. 23 So staff recommends approval of the development 24 subject to conditions outlined in the staff report. 25 MR. SITTLER: Are there any other members of the 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 7 1 city staff that need to present this? 2 MR. COSTELLO: No. Jerry Zanzone is here as an 3 expert witness. 4 MR. SITTLER: If required. 5 MR. COSTELLO: If required. 6 MR. SITTLER: All right, item number four. The 7 applicant and or her representative will make a 8 presentation. Please identify yourself? 9 MR. CIKLIN: My name is Alan Ciklin. I am a 10 lawyer in West Palm Beach representing Ocean 11 Properties, the owner. Bob Curry is the architect and 12 he is here and he is going to tell you about the 13 details of the plan and answer any questions. Tom 14 McMurray is vice-president of Ocean Properties and will 15 also be able to answer any questions that you have from 16 him. 17 As Mr. Costello said this is site plan 18 modification. The hotel and the restaurant are 19 permitted uses in CBD zoning district. The plan as he 20 indicated is to relocate the main hotel restaurant from 21 the hotel structure. Many of you have probably been 22 there in the past. It was up on the top floor to this 23 particular location. 24 The prior restaurant was 2200 square feet. This 25 is going to be 4900 square feet and another 1100 square 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 14 1 into the record what the stated purpose and intent of 2 this chapter is. It says right here in your land 3 development regulations at Sub Ao The purpose of the 4 section is ensure that adequate off street parking is 5 provided to meet the needs of users and structures and 6 usage of land. All parking area shall be designed and 7 situated so as to ensure their usefulness to protect 8 public safety and where appropriate to mitigate 9 potential adverse impacts and adjacent uses. It is the 10 responsibility of the developer of property to provide 11 and maintain adequate off street parking. 12 More specifically this chapter speaks to hotels 13 and motels in addition to restaurants. At Section 14 4.6.9, Sub 7E, the code says for hotels and motels they 15 shall provide 0.7 and 7/10 of the space for each guest 16 rooms plus ten spaces for 1000 square feet of floor 17 area devoted to ballrooms, meeting rooms, restaurants, 18 lounges and shops. The staff report that was submitted 19 to this board says that the applicant need only provide 20 six spaces for 1000 square feet. 21 Again, the code clearly says ten spaces. Now, 22 with respect to restaurants, this section of the code 23 distinquishes between hotels that have restaurant space 24 and free-standing restaurant. This section of the code 25 and Section 4.6.9, C3D, says that restaurants inclusive 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 15 1 of drive-ins, drive through, snack shops, night club, 2 lounges, shall provide twelve spaces for 1000 square 3 feet of floor area up to 6000 square feet which is the 4 applicant's request, and then 15 spaces for 1000 square 5 feet of floor area over the initial 6000 square feet. 6 In recent years the comission, the city 7 commission, the elected commission has gone ahead and 8 enacted special regulations for the downtown area for 9 what has been called the Central Business District, the 10 CBD district. Stated purpose of intent of creating 11 this special district without reading each word 12 verbatim is to stimulate ecomomic growth in the 13 downtown area. However, when we come down to the 14 special regulation that relates to restaurant where 15 they say in the CBD area restaurants must provide six 16 spaces for 1000 square feet of floor area. We see that 17 the commission in its wisdom has not said anything 18 about hotels. 19 The staff for some reason, I don't know what that 20 reason is, has decided to go ahead and interpret the 21 code to include restaurants that are in hotels when the 22 code doesn't say that it should be applied that way. 23 Now, according to the staff report, the applicant 24 proposes to have 369 parking spaces on this site. That 25 would be on the third page where it says parking, 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 16 1 bottom of the second paragraph. Now, it has been said 2 that this project has a history, a man use history and 3 my research indicates that that is true. What I have 4 is done I have made copy of some materials that I would 5 like to distribute to you folks, if I may. 6 MS. SHUTT: Move to accept this into evidence. 7 MR. SILVER: What I have given you is an agenda 8 from June 28, 1990 that was an agenda of the Zoning 9 Board of Adjustment. On the second page is an 10 application for an appeal for a variance that was 11 submitted to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. It's the 12 matter that was heard that evening. And on the third 13 page is the board of adjustment action. You can see 14 that on June 28, 1990 the Zoning Board of Adjustment of 15 this city granted a variance to this very same 16 applicant, in order for this applicant to construct the 17 expansion that we can see out there today. 18 The code required 390 parking spaces. The 19 applicant came before the Zoning Board of Adjustment 20 and says we have a none self-imposed unnecessary 21 hardship, we need a variance for 50 spaces. Yes, the 22 code says we need 390 spaces, but we need relief. We 23 can provide 340 spaces. And the Zoning Board of 24 Adjustment granted a variance. What we have out there 25 today is the expansion of the 340 spaces. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 17 1 The code, however, at that time required again 390 2 spaces. The applicant now wants to come before this 3 board and expand beyond the parameters of the 4 footprints for which it got that original variance in 5 1990, eight years later. The City of Delray Beach is a 6 different place today. It's more populated, there is 7 more business going on here. Business has been 8 attracted to the downtown area. And now they want to 9 put up a 6000 square foot restaurant in addition to 10 what they have already got which they needed 390 spaces 11 for and they only wanted to provide 369 spaces, which 12 is 21 less than what they should have for what they 13 have already. 14 I have here additionally unofficial minutes and 15 excerpts of unofficial minutes from the DBA. I would 16 like to -- I am advised by the DBA that they were 17 approved today, but I would also like to put these into 18 the record if I may. 19 MS. SHUTT: Move to accept. 20 MR. SILVER: I put them into the record to support 21 our position that there is a parking problem downtown. 22 Everybody knows it. It's been discussed. What 23 everybody seems to agree on is that there is a problem. 24 There is not enough parking spaces. Now, I have a 25 client who has made a substantial investment in this 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 18 1 city downtown both east and west of intracoastal. My 2 client is going to testify here today that he is 3 concerned about the value of his property and he is 4 concerned about this project being approved today and 5 not having enough parking. 6 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Silver, I don't mean to be rude, 7 but the question I have is how soon do you expect to 8 bring forward these other witnesses and therefore come 9 to some conclusion of your opposing argument? 10 MR. SILVER: Right now. 11 MR. SITTLER: Please do so. 12 MR. SILVER: Thank you, sir. Can I call Mr. Carl 13 Desantis. 14 MR. CIKLIN: I don't know whether Mr. Silver is 15 testifying or not. I don't guess he is an engineer or 16 he is making some sort of argument. If he is not 17 testifying, then I don't have any interest in asking 18 him any questions because he is not providing any 19 evidence. If he thinks this stuff that he said is 20 testimony, then I would like to cross examine him. And 21 the question is, is it appropriate to do it now or 22 after -- one witness at a time? 23 MR. SITTLER: Let's do it after he has finished 24 his complete opposition statement. We will do so 25 before we get to the -- I see a number of others in the 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 19 1 audience. Please go ahead, Mr. Silver. 2 MR. SILVER: Before I call the next witness, I 3 just simply would like to know whether or not Mr. 4 Ciklin was testifying when he spoke and whether or not 5 Mr. Ciklin is going to submit himself for cross 6 examine? 7 MR. SITTLER: You two are lawyers. I am not. I 8 cannot answer that question. I will not answer the 9 question. What we're going to do now, we're going to 10 continue. Your witness can come forward. 11 BY MR. SILVER; 12 Q Please state your name? 13 A Carl Desantis, D-e-s-a-n-t-i-s. 14 Q Do you have something that you would like to say 15 to the board? 16 A I would refer to read it. I am currently the 17 president and managing partner of the Delray Ocean Partners 18 Limited. I am the president and managing partner, if you 19 would, of Sun Spot, the president and general partner of 20 Atlantic Center Incorporated, and the president and general 21 partner of Delray Historic Limited. You may not know them 22 by name, but the Great Western Bank building you are 23 familiar with. I am turning that into a gallery right now. 24 I am also the president and managing director of the Linton 25 Southeast, you know, where NationsBank is on the southeast 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 2O 1 corner of Federal Highway, that nine acres. Myself and some 2 partners control about thirty plus acres here in Delray of 3 which I am very proud to be a part of Delray, may I add 4 that. I sincerely mean that and I appreciate what you are 5 attempting to do. 6 I have made, like I said, substantial investment 7 in the Delray area. When I read about the applicant's 8 proposal in the newspaper, I made a decision we need to have 9 our investment protected so we hired Mr. Silver to look into 10 the matter with more detail. I want you to know, however, 11 that I instructed Mr. Silver initially not to disclose my 12 identity. Frankly, I thought that it would bring some 13 reprisals. I am new to the area. I live in Gulf Stream. I 14 didn't know if it would or would not. I now see that 15 obviously you have got a very fine board. I am not 16 concerned with that. I am just letting you know my 17 concerns. 18 I also felt though that I am in favor of the 19 project as it stands, but I fairly believe that it's much to 20 large a restaurant for the parking that's avail itself to 21 it. There is nothing wrong with growth. My fear is it's 22 just too large a place and right now it's just -- I have 23 people here with me that are some of the tenants that I have 24 in the landlord with and they are having a difficult time on 25 every day basis just trying to hold on to the parking. As a 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 21 1 matter of fact they police it on a Saturday and we have a 2 very difficult time, people going to the beach, and we are 3 very close by. We're roughly about a 150 yards from the 4 Marriott on the other side of the street. 5 I understand that the applicant received a 6 variance of some 50 spaces in June in order to build the 7 expansion that we see there today. More specifically it's 8 my understanding the land development regulations of the 9 city of Delray required the applicant to provide 390 spaces. 10 I am not going to redo that. I think we already said that. 11 I receive complaints from tenants and reports by 12 property managers frequently. The problem is obviously 13 there is not enough on site public parking to accommodate 14 the needs of the area. I am trying desperately to help work 15 with the city on that. As a matter of fact, I have talked 16 to the city and have been talking about bring a trolley from 17 Swinton to A1A to bring people back and forth to all 18 businesses and I would pay for that. I have no problem 19 doing that. 20 I also have some property across from the Chamber 21 of Commerce that we are calling the Sun Spot which I offered 22 to the city and the Chamber of Commerce to use for craft 23 shows, whatever the want to use in the interim because it's 24 it's up for sale until something is done with it. I am 25 looking out wherever I can to try and assist the city. I 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 22 1 think this has gone overboard. I feel that this is a real 2 constriction and it's not in the public interest to have 3 something that large so close and where are we going to park 4 the people. 5 The plaza that you may be somewhat familiar with 6 there is a restaurant currently there called Ernie's. You 7 have got Smith Barney there. There is about 15 shops in 8 that particular section, if you would, east. Unfortunately 9 it's constantly laden with people parking there and going 10 somewhere else. I think it's just going to add to it, we're 11 going to need security. We know that Calypso opened across 12 the street just west of us on the backside. My fears are 13 that growth is fine, but I think we have overdone it in this 14 case and I don't think that proper parking has avail itself 15 and I could go on. But I hope that the downtown area 16 continues to grow. Like I said, I have a great interest to 17 see Delray be everything it can be. 18 By the way, may I add, if I could go on beyond 19 those three minutes. Any time you have jazz on the avenue, 20 any event that you have had, I have given up the property 21 both behind Great Western of which I own and acquired and 22 have let them use that property for parking. I also let 23 them use the property which is across from Chamber of 24 Commerce on a regular basis any time there is events. I am 25 letting you know that it's a two-way street. I am letting 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 23 1 you know that I am for Delray. But I think this is a major 2 impediment on what's going to occur at the beach area. 3 MR. SITTLER: Thank you, Mr. Desantis for your 4 remarks. 5 MR. SILVER: James Knight, Calco Development, Inc. 6 He is the property manager. 7 MR. KNIGHT: My name is Jim Knight. My office is 8 1801 South Federal Highway, southeast corner of Linton 9 and US1. I manage all these properties and enjoy it 10 very much. Unfornately, we have run into a number of 11 situations where people are parking, going to the 12 beach, taking up parking spaces at that particular 13 project. 14 MR. SITTLER: Which project are you talking about? 15 MR. KNIGHT: Ten East Atlantic Avenue. Where 16 Ernie's is. I doubt anybody in this entire room here 17 as acted as parking security guard before. I have done 18 it, I have been there. I have seen it. We continue to 19 have problems. I am not an expert at traffic, but I 20 would like to make a couple of comments. 21 One of things it says in here is traffic in the 22 report that is 6000 restaurant that has 150 seats will 23 only bring 35 new trips to the roadway network system. 24 If they are only selling 70 meals, assume two people 25 come every car, I don't think economics is working for 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 24 1 them. I question that. I am not a traffic expert. I 2 would have liked to have had the time to get a traffic 3 expert in to discuss that. 4 I also would like to briefly mention, I attended 5 the downtown development authority meeting today at the 6 the Chamber of Commerce at which time one of the 7 members of Planning and Zoning board handed out an in 8 lieu fee parking study. This was prepared by the 9 planning department. And one of things that I kind of 10 underline, it goes in and talks about the fact $6000 11 per space isn't going to cut it. It's going to take 12 $14,000 to build the parking space. But at the very 13 end it says, I would like to read one sentence of this. 14 We must decide at what point we no longer need the 15 reduced parking requirements as a redevelopment 16 incentive. 17 I think the city is striving very well. I am very 18 fortunate. I make a living as a result of of what's 19 happened on Atlantic Avenue. I think it's important 20 that we take the time and carefully look at this to 21 make sure we are applying the right requirements, not 22 to create a larger problem. I do not believe a piece 23 of property exist that is perfect for a parking 24 structure east of the intracoastal waterway today. 25 MR. SITTLER: Thank you very much. Mr. Silver? 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 25 1 MR. SILVER: Next witness is Jim Steinhauser. 2 MR. STEINHAUSER: Jim Steinhauser. I work with 3 MR. Carl Desantis. On more than five or six occasions 4 I have been in that parking lot at Ernie's. I have had 5 to redirect people walking away from their car with 6 beach gear on and tell them that this the patrons of 7 that shopping center. That's basically all I need to 8 say. 9 BY MR. SILVER: 10 Q Mr. Steinhauser, are you a parking security guard? 11 A No, I am not. 12 Q What do you do? 13 A I work for Mr. Desantis. 14 Q You're stationed at the store? 15 A No, I am not stationed there, no. 16 Q You just happened to be there. 17 A I am there for reasons for Mr. Desantis' outlook. 18 MR. SITTLER: We understand your dilemma. You are 19 not a traffic cop or a security guard. You are just 20 trying to make things right. We understand that. 21 Thank you, Mr. Steinhauser. 22 MR. SILVER: Next witness would be Ed Bradley. 23 MR. BRADLEY: I am Ed Bradley. I have the Avenue 24 Barber shop. I am across the street from Ernie's. 25 It's also -- I have been working, people come in 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 26 1 parking, to to the beach. I have to stop, go out and 2 tell them it's not their parking lot. It's for 3 patrons. This is how it goes. All the time, you know, 4 in the evenings they park, go across, go to the 5 restaurant. 6 MR. SITTLER: Which place do they park in? 7 MR. BRADLEY: At 1145 East Atlantic Avenue. I 8 have parking in front, around the side. They just pull 9 in in the back or the side, park their cars, take their 10 beach chairs out start going to the beach. 11 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Silver, are you ready to 12 finalize this or should I? 13 MR. SILVER: Yes, I am. There is one other item I 14 would like to put into the record. That's the draft of 15 the the city of Delray in lieu parking fees analysis 16 and recommendations that's been prepared by the 17 planning and zoning department. I do not have enough 18 copies to go around. 19 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Costello, do we have copies of 20 that available for the board? 21 MR. COSTELLO: Yes. 22 MR. SILVER: I submit that the record will show 23 and does show that this is an attempt by the applicant 24 to get an approval before the parking required in the 25 city change. Parking requirements are about to change. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 27 1 They are not even coming forward today meeting code 2 requirements, my reading of code granted. We know that 3 legal battles have been fought because one person says 4 sexual relations isn't intercourse -- you understand 5 what I am trying to say. 6 The bottom line is semantics. Legal battles are 7 fought over semantics. I say you read the code 8 plainly. A plain reading is restaurants, not hotels 9 that have restaurants. Askewed reading of the code is 10 what I think has been presented. There is not enough 11 required parking spaces and we ask that you deny the 12 application as submitted. Thank you. 13 MR. SITTLER: Thank you, Mr. silver. Ladies and 14 gentlemen, we are still in the those oppose mode. I do 15 want to tell you we have spent 26 minutes with Mr. 16 Silver and his witnesses and you're now invited, if you 17 would like to speak in opposition. I want to make sure 18 there is no other member of the public who needs to 19 speak in opposition. Now, we have this -- 20 MR. COSTELLO: I would like to ask a question, if 21 all your witnesses that testified were sworn. Is that 22 correct? 23 MR. STEINHAUSER: I did not stand up, sir. I I 24 will do it now if you need to. 25 MR. SITTLER: Let the record show Mr. Steinhauser 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 28 1 suggested he was not sworn in. 2 MR. SILVER: I will swear him in, if you would 3 like. 4 MR. SITTLER: Do it now. Stand up, Mr. 5 Steinhauser, would you, please, and be sworn in by Mr. 6 Silver. And Bradley also. 7 MR. SILVER: Do you solemnly swear that the 8 testimony that you presented to the Board today was the 9 truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. 10 MR. SITTLER: Now, I want to ask a question here. 11 Seven is applicant or representative have the 12 opportunity to cross examine staff and experts. 13 However, there is no specific section that speaks to 14 Mr. Ciklin's request to make some comments of some 15 type, whether the cross examine or otherwise, for Mr. 16 Silver. 17 MR. COSTELLO: Because our procedures do not 18 include that, I would not recommend that you allow the 19 cross examination. However, if Mr. Ciklin wants to 20 respond to some of the comments that were made, he may 21 do so. Again, if it goes to the city commission and 22 gets appealed, they can discuss with the city attorney 23 if they would allow cross examination of one another. 24 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Ciklin, would you care to make 25 any comments? 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 29 1 MR. CIKLIN: I just want to ask a question. I 2 think number seven says you can cross examine expert 3 witnesses. 4 MR. COSTELLO: Experts retained to represent the 5 city. And the same with us, we can cross examine you 6 if we choose. 7 MR. CIKLIN: That's a little unusual that if he is 8 trying and I use the word very loosely to present some 9 sort of testimony, that I shouldn't be able to ask them 10 questions. 11 MR. COSTELLO: I would suggest that at this point 12 if you want to respond to the comments, then do so. 13 MR. CIKLIN: Just let me go over their testimony 14 just briefly and I promise -- 15 MR. SITTLER: You are going to get a closing 16 statement, you know. 17 MR. CIKLIN: You want me to do it now? 18 MR. SITTLER: Why don't we hold that closing 19 statement till closing. 20 MR. CIKLIN: I would like to bring Mr. McMurray 21 up, however, who is a representative owner familiar 22 with the history of the hotel and just have him answer 23 a couple of questions. 24 MR. SITTLER: Any objections from the Board? 25 MR. BRANNING: Would that be in response to 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 30 1 specific comments made? 2 MR. CIKLIN: Yes, sir. 3 MR. SITTLER: No objections. Please do so. 4 MR. CIKLIN: He has already been sworn. 5 BY MR. CIKLIN: 6 Q Mr. McMurray, you're vice president of Ocean 7 Properties? 8 A I am. 9 Q You are familiar with the hotel formerly 10 Camino/Del Marriott? 11 A I am. 12 Q How long has your association been with that 13 hotel? 14 A For about sixteen years. 15 Q During that time period, would you describe for 16 the Board the parking situation at the hotel from sixteen 17 years ago to the present and describe what if any problems 18 there have ever been parking customers of the hotel, guests, 19 restaurant people or anybody else? 20 A We have always have over abundance of parking at 21 the hotel. Even during our function periods for those 22 periods of years we have always had a garage downstairs to 23 the point -- people made comments it seems like a football 24 field, as far as the parking lot. That's been discussed. 25 And other times we went before the board and we have always 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 31 1 had the same outlook. During the approval of the Marrriott 2 too, our discussions that we had go along the same lines. 3 We feel very comfortable. We wouldn't have built a hotel 4 and spend the money we did with the conditions and space if 5 we didn't feel like it was appropriate for our needs. 6 Q During your are negotiations with Marrriott were 7 they in fact - was that one of their criterias as well to 8 have adequate parking? 9 A Absolutely. Marriott is very strict with their 10 requirements. They look at our site plan, they look at the 11 hotel. 12 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Ciklin, are you satisfied at 13 this time that you have been able to complete your 14 presentation? 15 MR. CIKLIN: Yes, sir. I just want to have a 16 brief closing when you're ready for me. 17 MR. SITTLER: Now, item seven. The applicant 18 and/or his representative shall have the opportunity, 19 the applicant, to cross examine staff and experts 20 retained by the city. 21 MR. CIKLIN: I just want to confirm with Mr. 22 Costello and I know he said it, but just one more time 23 in case I missed it. Jeff, the staff review indicates 24 that we meet all the requirements of the code? 25 MR. COSTELLO: Yes. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 32 1 MR. CIKLIN: And you're satisfied that we meet the 2 parking requirements for both the restaurant and the 3 additional hotel rooms? 4 MR. COSTELLO: Yes. 5 MR. CIKLIN: There is no requirements that you're 6 aware of or anybody else on the staff that you're aware 7 of that we don't meet? 8 MR. COSTELLO: That's correct. 9 MR. SITTLER: That completes item seven. Eight is 10 deleted. We skip to nine. Staff shall have the 11 opportunity to cross examine or ask questions of the 12 applicant, its designee and experts retained to 13 represent the applicant. 14 MR. COSTELLO: I do not choose to cross examine 15 the applicant, however I do want to state that Jerry 16 Zanzone, our chief building official is present as an 17 expert witness. He has the authority in the 18 interpretations of Section 4.6.9. 19 Jerry, is it true that your interpretation is that 20 the parking requirements for this particular restaurant 21 would, for the restaurant would go with the 4.4.13 code 22 section regarding restaurants in the CBD at six per 23 thousand or that it would go with the hotel 24 requirements at ten spaces per thousand? 25 MR. ZANZONE: I am the chief building inspector 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 33 1 for the city of Delray. And my determination based on 2 the documents that I have to enforce under the LDR, 3 that in CBD that this meets all the criteria based on 4 the LDR that I am required to enforce and interpret. 5 MR. SITTLER: Any further cross examination? That 6 took care of eight and nine. 7 Now, number ten. Members of the Board, please 8 feel free to ask any questions you might have of staff, 9 the applicant or of any witness. Who would like to 10 start? Mr. Branning. 11 MR. BRANNING: This is a question to Mr. Zanzone. 12 Is it your opinion then that if the requirements, the 13 minimum requirements of Section 4.6.9, which is the off 14 street parking regulations, the minimum requirements 15 are met, that then no additional requirements would be 16 set forth by the city or could be set forth provided 17 the applicant complies with minimum requirements? 18 MR. ZANZONE: By the regulations that we are 19 governed by today, yes, because of the CBD. 20 MR. COSTELLO: Why he says that is that the 21 Central Business District, it says in addition to 4.6.9 22 these regulations apply, which is the CBD at six spaces 23 per thousand. It's more flexible. 24 MR. SITTLER: Does any other board member have a 25 question for Mr. Zanzone? 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 34 1 MR. SMITH: I just wanted to touch one thing that 2 Jeff said. You just used the word flexible. I just 3 want you to clarify what that means. 4 MR. COSTELLO: The Central Business District, if 5 you look at the purpose and intent, it is to encourage 6 revitalization of the downtown area. And it was noted - 7 the six spaces per thousand, actually whenever -- I am 8 trying to think of the exact date -- anyway, the six 9 spaces per thousand allows flexibility. Any other area 10 of the city a restaurant requires 12 spaces per 1000 11 square feet up to 6000. Over that it's 15 spaces per 12 1000 square feet. 13 So any other area of the city, minus the CBD, the 14 West Atlantic Avenue Redevelopment area, if you run a 15 restuarant you're providing more than ten spaces per 16 thousand, you're going at twelve per thousand. Over 17 6000, 15 spaces per 1000. So therein lies the 18 flexibility. A lot of that has related to the public 19 parking and so forth within the Central Business 20 District. 21 And yes there is a concern east of the 22 intracoastal, however if any applicant wants to come in 23 and they are going to provide the required parking on 24 their site, while there is a parking, may be a parking 25 concern, we would not deny it, if they met the 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 35 1 required. It's not a moritorium on development east of 2 the intracoastal until the in lieu fees options are 3 raised. 4 Now, last night at the City Commission meeting 5 there was an item on the agenda relating a development 6 called Villas Delray. Villas Delray, it's a mixed use 7 project. They were providing six spaces on the site. 8 They requirement was like 19. The commission approved 9 that project. At that time the mayor stated, we're 10 going to see other proposals like this. At one point 11 we he did recommend that prior to last night's meeting, 12 that they were to entertain a moritorium and the 13 commission said no. 14 You know, basically what I hear from the public is 15 that we hve parking concern, let's stop everything 16 until this is addressed. If that was the case, the 17 Waterways restaurant wouldn't be almost getting ready 18 for CO. 19 MR. SITTLER: Thank you, Mr. Costello. 20 MR. ZANZONE: This no different than what I have 21 done with every restaurant that has come in on a CBD. 22 We have been very consistent in our interpretation in 23 this area of parking. 24 MR. SITTLER: Arnold, are you satisfied with those 25 answers? 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 36 1 MR. SMITH: This is not an appropriate time to be 2 using the word flexible in our parking dilemma that we 3 have because I am affected by that as well. But, yes, 4 I am okay. 5 MR. SITTLER: Ms. Fowler, your thinking on this 6 matter or question for the applicant or for staff? 7 MS. FOWLER: Not to this particular item. But I 8 will have comments later regarding my opinion on the 9 parking code. They need to revise them, perhaps. 10 MR. SITTLER: Franciso? 11 MR. PEREZ: No comments on this item, no. 12 MR. SITTLER: Ms. Shutt? 13 MS. SHUTT: I just want to make sure, the purpose 14 of the CBD district is to encourage more pedestrian 15 oriented use. Is that why there is a lesser parking. 16 MR. COSTELLO: You did read the purpose and intent 17 of the CBD, right? The purpose and intent of the 18 Central Business District is to establish an order to 19 to preserve and protect the cultural and historic 20 aspects of downtown Delray Beach and simultaneously 21 provide stimulation and enhancement of the vitality and 22 economic growth of the special area. 23 That's basically about it. With regard to the 24 Central Business District, the codes that are existing, 25 those date back to the 1970s. You talk about in lieu 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 37 1 fees. The DBA was created I believe in '71 or '72 and 2 they started talking about in lieu fees and less 3 stringent parking requirements in the Central Business 4 District in 1973. The city has focused on the downtown 5 to encourage. We have seen the shopping centers take 6 over and kill the downtown. To encourage people to do 7 if develope in downtown they came up with more flexible 8 codes. 9 And if you do research the history of the parking 10 requirements, sometimes they are made them more 11 restrictive and then the next year they would change 12 code and make them less restrictive. 13 What we are experiencing now is a successful city. 14 And while the term flexible may have not sat well with 15 Arnold, you know, there are other aspects of the zoning 16 code that may need to be researched will be with 17 looking at in lieu fee. And of them may be that the 18 conversion of an existing floor area. If you would 19 look at all the restaurants that do exist in downtown 20 Delray Beach, if you have existing floor area on 21 Atlantic Avenue between northeast 1st Street and 22 southeast 1st Street you aren't required to provide any 23 parking. So that there in lies, maybe part of the 24 problem in that district, in that the conversion is two 25 restaurants have never been kept in check. There has 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 38 1 been conversions on east Atlantic Avenue east of the 2 intracoastal where the park requirements, if you do 3 convert east of the intracoastal you have to provide 4 for the conversion one space for 6000 square feet. 5 That just started coming on line. 6 MS. SHUTT: But they are not asking for any in in 7 lieu or anything like that. They meet the parking 8 requirements as it is interpreted by Jerry. 9 MR. COSTELLO: Right. 10 MR. SITTLER: Are there any other board questions 11 for the applicant or staff? 12 MR. SMITH: Jeff, I just wanted to ask you this 13 appeal for a variance that reduced the parking 14 requirements in 1990 from 390 to 340. Is that -- could 15 you just explain. 16 MR. ZANZONE: The variance that was granted is 17 from the Board of Adjustment. Board of Adjustment 18 variances take into consideration the configuration of 19 land and it goes in perpetuity. So as far as the board 20 was concerned when they went ahead and allowd this, 21 they felt that due to the type of business, the 22 configuration of the land and the all of the factors 23 involved with the type of hotel facility it was, that 24 the reduced parking was in conformance with what was 25 necessary for the facility. That goes with the land in 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 39 1 perpetuity. So, as far as anyone is concern, that is 2 what the requirement are once the board made their 3 determination. 4 MR. SITTLER: This is the actual record that they 5 passed out, right. 6 MR. ZANZONE: Yes. 7 MR. SMITH: Can you explain to me what you mean by 8 the fact that this type of facility met the 9 requirement. When I hear the word hotel/convention 10 center it kind of makes you think something different 11 as well. The opposite way. 12 MR. ZANZONE: The difference is that many people 13 don't drive there own vehicle there. It's not the same 14 as a motel where you know people are going to drive a 15 car. So, that's some of the rational that was used. 16 MR. SMITH: Meaning that they would go by -- 17 MR. ZANZONE: By plane and have a shuttle aspect. 18 The board did deliberate quite heavily when they did 19 grant this. So, as far as anyone is concerned once the 20 granting of a variance, that's in perpituity, that 21 means that that is in conformance and that's the reason 22 they had to go before this board. 23 MR. SHUTT: When they granted the variance there 24 were all accessory uses that were on there that aren't 25 there now and they considered all those uses as well. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 40 1 MR. ZANZONE: Yes. For the expansion and the new 2 convention center and all the amenities that are with 3 the hotel now, including the restaurant which was on 4 the top floor. 5 MS. SHUTT: They never debated anything about 6 limiting the conditions, are having it revisited from 7 the Board of Adjustment if something else changes? 8 MR. ZANZONE: The Board of Adjustment usually does 9 not set limitations or conditions mainly because their 10 concern is if the performance of what they are granting 11 because it goes in perpetuity with the land. 12 MS. SHUTT: What I was just trying to get at if 13 they base their approval on a certain assumption and 14 that's a totally different thing, and if they were 15 concerned about it, they would have had authority to 16 condition? 17 MR. ZANZONE: Correct. But there was no concern 18 so there was no conditions. 19 MR. SMITH: But now because there is a request for 20 additional 6000 square foot of restaurant space, does 21 that muddy that condition in any way or does it 22 question any of the conditions to lower? 23 MR. ZANZONE: It would not be concern of that 24 board because once the board makes a determination it's 25 binding. And the restaurant that they had upstairs, 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 41 1 you know, it's a difference that you're dealing with. 2 MR. SITTLER: I want to remind the board that now 3 is the time to ask any questions of the applicant with 4 respect to the site plan, modification or the landscape 5 plan or the architectural elevation. Now, is a good 6 time. Anything you want to ask we have Mr. Curry here 7 and we can go through this now. 8 MR. SMITH: Bob, are re going to be okay with the 9 turtles and the lighting for that and so forth. I 10 happen to be building a restaurant up in another county 11 right now, and I really don't understand how the 12 clientele, whether they will be able to tell what they 13 are eating when the turtle people are complete with us 14 up there. 15 MR. CURRY: We haven't done that analysis for the 16 restaurant itself. I have done it before and you keep 17 the lighting. 18 As far as the parking lot lot itself, there are 19 existing lights there for the tennis courts. They have 20 already been approved which do not spill over. We're 21 going to tone it down. But we will, of course, comply 22 with cOde and meet the proper criteria. 23 MR. BRANNING: I appreciate the adjacent property 24 owners comments and concerns about this. My view is 25 that the approval granted in 1990, the variance 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 42 1 granted, as I understand it, runs with the property and 2 what's before us tonight is the site plan approval for 3 the restaurant for which the parking requirements have 4 been met. I don't know that it's our position to go 5 back and address a variance that was granted in 1990 6 and impose conditions on this site plan that is before 7 us tonight because of that. 8 If the restaurant complies with today's codes, I 9 think it would be unfair of me to vote against that, if 10 it meets today's requirements, just as I think it would 11 be unfair if one of adjacent property owners were to 12 come before us tonight and have a similar situation. I 13 think that it would be unfair to impose conditions 14 because of a, really a city wide problem concern with 15 parking, not so much for the site. 16 Having said that, I wanted to clear it up before I 17 move to a couple of other items. 18 On the landscaping, Mr. Curry, is this designed to 19 be user friendly to the pedestrian or there seems to be 20 a hedge of landscape between the dining areas and the 21 sidewalk along A1A. Is there a control, there would a 22 control access, or it would be more user friendly to 23 the public? 24 MR. CURRY: First of all, we are not putting any 25 dining out on the sidewalks. We're putting it on our 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 43 1 own property? 2 MR. BRANNING: The dining that is on the patio. 3 MR. CURRY: The corner is opened up with the same 4 brick pattern and material as the street-scape already 5 has, which will allow you to come in the corner and 6 circulate pass the restaurant internally on the site. 7 Is that what you're talking about? 8 MR. BRANNING: The controlled entry way. 9 MR. CURRY: It is controlled entry in terms of 10 getting into the restaurant, yes. But, no, there is 11 free access outside. 12 MR. BRANNING: I saw the staff report that there 13 were -- it referenced stone face columms. What is the 14 finish of the columns along the outside? Will those be 15 stucco columns or will those be the precast? 16 MR. CURRY: Stucco columns. We are going to match 17 materials, colors, details that's on the hotel 18 involved. The base is a stone base, but the columns 19 are primarily stucco. 20 MR. BRANNING: Is there any landscaping in the 21 converted parking area? 22 MR. CURRY: No. 23 MR. BRANNING: Is there any curbing? 24 MR. CURRY: There is curbing. It's up in the air. 25 You don't see it. You can't see the parking lot. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 44 1 MR. PEREZ: Is there a level change between the 2 sidewalk and covered walkway? What is that level 3 change? 4 MR. CURRY: There is a small change as you get up 5 to the bottom of the stairs. And then you have got a 6 level change into the building. I think it's about 7 another 18 inches above. You're about two feet higher. 8 MR. PEREZ: In the building. 9 MR. CURRY: In the building. In the restaurant. 10 MR. PEREZ: How about in the outside dining area? 11 MR. CURRY: Outside dining is down. It's probably 12 about six inches, you know, more or less higher. 13 MR. SITTLER: Any further questions. 14 MR. PEREZ: No. 15 MR. SMITH: You know, this kind of goes along with 16 what Bill says. I think that the project looks great 17 and I think functionally for that corner it a great 18 place to have such a facility and so forth. But, I am 19 in a real bad situation here. MY wife went to church 20 on Mother's Day and she goes to a church that's in that 21 area. She could not part in church parking lot for 22 Mother's Day. And I am not going to say where all the 23 people were. They were either on the beach sunning 24 themselves or they were over having Mother's Day brunch 25 somewhere in the local. I am not going to blame the 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 45 1 Marriott for that and I am going to blame anybody else 2 in the area. 3 But it's almost become unfair for us to as a board 4 to sit here and know that there are evils out there, 5 but then on the other hand, you have complied. And you 6 have. It would almost be like should we go back and 7 look at every merchant on the avenue and say you're 8 guilty and you are not because you do have parking and 9 you are grandfathered in. You just can't take this 10 that far. But something has to be done. And this is 11 definitely, in my opinion going to have a severe 12 negative impact on the city of Delray Beach's parking 13 problem? It's definitely going to have an impact on 14 the church that my family goes to every Sunday. The 15 church is in a bad situation because they say, we have 16 got these signs that say, no parking, we will tow you 17 away. But then is that a church like thing to do. No, 18 it's not. 19 So it just continues and it's a problem. But it 20 is affecting things. And I really have a problem, Jeff 21 because this is going to be continuing problem putting 22 us in this situation where you comply and I have to go 23 with staff's recommendations because they are right all 24 the way. And I put all my faith in Jeff and what his 25 office does, you know, on a daily basis. They do all 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 46 1 the work for us to make sure that what we are doing is 2 correct. 3 But I just wanted to make it clear how my feelings 4 were about this. Great project, looks good, beautiful 5 really is s plus for Delray Beach. But the negative 6 definitely is the parking. You read this report, you 7 know, and look at all the names that you recognize in 8 here. Look at all the comments that they make. None 9 of those feelings are the same. We have to do 10 something about this. This has come up before. We 11 have got to do something about it. 12 I think as far as any comments go about 13 landscaping and the elevation and all that, it's 14 typically good. 15 MR. SITTLER: We have got a good handle on Mr. 16 Smith is coming from. And now it would be a good time 17 Ms. Fowler you have some comments you were going to 18 make? 19 MS. FOWLER: I totally agree with Arnold. I think 20 these park requirement codes are dinosaurs. The 21 situation isn't the same as it was back in 1990 when 22 the city really did need to bring business in. It's 23 successful economically and I just think it's time for 24 a change. We have a serious problem. 25 MR. SITTLER: It appears to me that we have 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 47 1 members of the board who have deeply held concerns 2 about the parking situation. However, where we are 3 today is where we are with our land development 4 regulations and our duties to do what we think is 5 appropriate for the city. And where we have come in 6 that -- unless someone else wants to make a comment. 7 MR. BRANNING: One point of clarification. The 8 staff report stated the yawning will be green and 9 white. They are black and white. 10 MR. CURRY: The yawning that we submitted is 11 consistent, that is what they are going to do 12 throughout the rest of the building. 13 MR. SITTLER: Where we are, we are finished with 14 number ten. What I have in front of me is that three 15 other things are going to happen; the applicant is 16 going to make his closing argument. Mr. Ciklin is 17 going to show up here in a moment, staff is going any 18 closing argument, then the board is going to discuss 19 without further, without further testimony from the 20 public or anyone else what we think should be done. 21 And once we have done that, we are going to vote. 22 MR. SILVER: If I may. I would like to, just for 23 the record, ask you, Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would 24 like to have permission to ask a question out of order 25 of one of witnesses that has testified. If I am 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 48 1 denied, so be it. For the record, I need to ask. 2 MR. SITTLER: I don't mean to be rude. But I 3 believe we have comported, if you will, with your 4 desire and your client's desire to have a adequate 5 gathering of your opinions. I think we have done that 6 fairly. And I would ask that you please not ask any 7 more questions. 8 MR. SILVER: Fair enough. My objection is noted. 9 MR. SITTLER: Now, the applicant, Mr. Ciklin, your 10 closing argument. 11 MR. CIKLIN: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, 12 it's become evident to me and I guess I knew beforehand 13 from reading the papers that downtown has a parking 14 problem. Mr. McMurray, because I have been, and I 15 think many of you have to the old Camino, now the 16 Marriott. I haven't been to new Marriott. I have been 17 to the old Camino. But I can tell you from my 18 experience and just testimony, that there has always 19 been plenty of parking down below. It's always been 20 very easy to find a space close to the elevator. 21 That sort of validates we think the fact that the 22 variance answer work. Mrs. Shutt had a question about 23 what went on with all that. We offered -- Mr. Zanzone 24 has got a great memory. We offered extensive testimony 25 at that time and did a lot of study by Kimberly Horn 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 49 1 indicating that because this was a hotel some of what 2 he says is absolutely true. So many people would come 3 by van, so many people would use taxis. People would 4 come together when they were in groups. 5 We also had an extensive and continue to have an 6 extensive valet parking program. And you know with 7 valet parking you can fit more people into a facility 8 than you could if they were parking themselves. And, 9 in fact, we thought it would and it's worked very well 10 because we have plenty of spaces. 11 NOW, we have come in with a new proposal to 12 relocate the restaurant. The good news is as Mr. Smith 13 said it that it's part of what you're trying to 14 accomplish, that's rejuvenation of downtown Delray 15 Beach. It's the corner we think. And you're going to 16 have a brand new restaurant there at this corner, which 17 I think is terrific. I am West Palm and when do that 18 kind of stuff everybody gets excited. I am sure you 19 get equally as excited here. 20 And now we're not -- we're taking the restaurant, 21 taking the four penthouse suites, we're meeting those 22 requirements and exceeding them by eight or nine, 23 depending on whether Mr. Curry counted correctly. So 24 now we're going to be in a better position than we 25 were. These three or four or five or six gentlemen 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 5O 1 testified that there is a problem at Ernie's. The 2 barber shop guy problem. The people that frequent 3 Ernie's, a problem, problem. There is, I guess. I 4 believe what they say. But nobody said that the hotel 5 guests from the Marriott are parking on the street. 6 Because they are not. 7 When you go to a hotel, when I go to a hotel I 8 don't park on the street. I park at the hotel and so 9 do these folks too. There is a problem. We don't 10 think we are a part of it. 11 I think their testimony is very sincere. I don't 12 want to belittle them at all. But they are talking 13 about the problem in Delray generally, not as it 14 relates to our application. Mr. Costello has told you 15 twice that we meet the requirements. That's all we can 16 do so. Thank you. 17 MR. SITTLER: That concludes the closing argument 18 of the applicant. Mr. Costello, would you like to make 19 a closing argument? 20 MR. COSTELLO: No. 21 MR. SITTLER: That concludes item 12. Number 22 thirteen. No further testimony shall be taken and the 23 board shall begin its deliberations. 24 MS. SHUTT: I would like to go ahead by moving it 25 Class 111, Site Plan Modification the Delray Beach 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 51 1 Marriott of LDR policy to the plan and Section 2.4.5.G5 2 the following conditions one through three as in the 3 staff report. 4 MR. SITTLER: There is a motion on the floor. Is 5 there a second. 6 MR. BRANNING: Second. 7 MR. SITTLER: There is a motion and a second. Is 8 there any discussion by the board on the motion? 9 MS. SHUTT: I would like to see how everybody's 10 opinions are. That's why I want to get it to 11 discussion. Personally for me there is never going to 12 be any true correspondence between the traffic that's 13 going to be generated and the actual use and parking 14 demand of the facility. Secondly, I would like to 15 question Jeff, is this something that will be required 16 for notices like a typical public hearing would? 17 MR. COSTELLO: No, it is not. 18 MR. SHUTT: You may want to get your expert for 19 the appeal to the city commission, if that's the way 20 you would like to do it. The code does not require 21 notices with respect to the -- 22 MR. SILVER: So long as the record notes my 23 objection. I appreciate your finding. 24 MS. SHUTT: In a way I feel, the parking, I 25 question that new fee as well. But that's not under 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 52 1 discussion. There is a problem with the city, but I am 2 not sure this site needs to held responsible. They are 3 adding square footage, 3800. They are meeting that 4 right now. Mr. Zanzone has said that the parking, 5 there is no condition, whatever they have made -- the 6 decision they made back in '90 is held binding. They 7 didn't feel there was a need for conditions. They 8 didn't feel there was a need for limitation to the 9 expansion or any revisits to the site. We don't have 10 authority to question that. Jeff can correct me. 11 So basically the site as I understand it is only 12 responsible for the additional impact above what is 13 currently approved. I have listened to everyone. I am 14 sure if I have really heard that there is -- like Mr. 15 Ciklin said, has anyone that's been parking in the 16 other lots were connected to he Marriott usees, the 17 restaurant uses or any of the other accessory uses. 18 So as far as my decision is concerned, I can only 19 base on the fact that there has been an interpretation. 20 Whether that's right or wrong, that a different remedy. 21 They meet the parking requirements for what they are 22 expanding. They are vested for what they have the 23 variance. I can't find anything that would cause me to 24 deny this. And it's a problem for the city. I think 25 the problem that needs to be resolved, needs to be 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 53 1 resolved with the city and the city staff. We're 2 looking at the parking ordinance, if that's the case. 3 MR. SITTLER: That's not within our purview. 4 MS. FOWLER: My comments were just going to be 5 that we don't have the authority to change the parking 6 codes, so we just have to treat this, the elevations 7 and the landscape plan and the site plan based that 8 it's within the requirement, meets the requirements. 9 MR. PEREZ: I also want to voice the appreciation 10 for the concern that everybody has for the parking 11 problem. We all have that concern. It is a problem. 12 Again I just want to reemphasize unfortunately that's 13 not the issue at hand in here. We have a restaurant 14 seems to be complying with the requirements. All the 15 neighbors that came in and complained about the 16 parking, they were complaining about people going to 17 the beach with their beach chairs, not people going to 18 the Marriott. 19 I think what happens from the people that stay at 20 the hotel, they more likely to park the cars at the 21 hotel and then visit the other businesses around the 22 area. So everybody benefits from the success of the 23 hotel. I have experienced that because I have had 24 friends come to the hotel and enjoy the city, going to 25 eat at other places in the area and buying in the shops 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 54 1 of the area. Just a note on that issue. 2 MR. SITTLER: Mr. Smith, any further comments or 3 the motion? 4 MR. SMITH: No. I strongly agree with everything 5 our board has commented about. It's a city problem. 6 And this board, like everyone else said, does not have 7 the authority to deny this project based upon the job 8 that the staff has done. It would be something that 9 you need to go the commission with. That's the way I 10 feel. 11 MR. BRANNING: It's been said. 12 MR. SITTLER: We can not do this or disapprove, 13 for example, only if we can cite a basis for our 14 decision. Otherwise, we need to rely on our own 15 knowledge of the land development regulation. We need 16 to rely on the staff, Mr. Costello and his people. We 17 need to rely on Mr. Zanzone, our chief building 18 official. 19 Having said that, since we can -- personally can 20 see no basis for denying this, now we will call for the 21 vote. 22 Mr. Costello, please call roll on the motion. All 23 those in favor say Aye by the roll. Call the roll. 24 MS. FOWLER: Aye. 25 MR. PEREZ: Aye. 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 55 1 MS. SHUTT: Aye. 2 MR. SMITH: Aye. 3 MR. BRANNING: Aye. 4 MR. SITTLER: Aye. The motion for the sites plan 5 modification is approved unanimously. We will now 6 entertain a motion on the landscape plan. 7 MS. SHUTT: Move to approve the landscaping plan 8 for Delray Beach Marriott based upon positive findings 9 with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16. 10 MR. BRANNING: Second. 11 MR. SITTLER: There is a motion and a second. Is 12 there any further discussion or any discussions by 13 members of the board on the landscape plan. Hearing 14 none, will you please call the roll on the motion, Mr. 15 Costello. 16 MS. FOWLER: Aye. 17 MR. PEREZ: Aye. 18 MS. SHUTT: Yes. 19 MR. SMITH: Yes. 20 MR. BRANNING: Yes. 21 MR. SITTLER: Aye. Motion carries unanimously for 22 the landscape. I need a motion for the architectural 23 elevation. 24 MR. BRANNING: Move to approve the architectural 25 elevations for the Delray Beach Marriot based upon 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 56 1 positive findings with respect to LDR of Section 4.618 2 subject to the condition that the yawning be cream and 3 black in accordance with sample submitted by the 4 applicant. That the yawning be cream color. 5 MS. FOWLER: Second. 6 MR. SITTLER: There is a motion and a second. Is 7 there any discussion by the board on the architectural 8 elevation. Hearing none. Mr. Costello, will you 9 please call the roll on the motion. 10 MS FOWLER: Yes. 11 MR PEREZ: Yes. 12 MS SHUTT: Yes. 13 MR SMITH: Yes. 14 MR BRANNING: Yes. 15 Mr Sittler: Yes. The motion carries unanimously 16 on the architectural elevation. This concludes this 17 Quasi-Judicial Hearing. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES 57 1 CE RT I F I CATE 2 3 The State of Florida, ) 4 County of Palm Beach. ) 5 6 I, CYNTHIA RILEY, Shorthand Reporter, do hereby 7 certify that I was authorized to and did report the above 8 hearin9 at the time and place herein stated, and that it is 9 a true and correct transcription of my stenotype notes taken 10 durin9 said hearing. 11 The fore~oin~ certification of this transcript 12 does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means 13 unless under the direct control and/or direction of the 14 certifyin~ reporter. 15 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand 16 this : day of 1998. 17 18 CmTRZI A RILEY, July 10, 000. My Commission E~ 23 24 25 561/338-0955 ESQUIRE DEPOSITIION SERVICES TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER ~.~,~ ~.~ '- THRU: DIANE DOMINGUEZ, DIRECTOR OF PLAN .~~~ FROM: JEFFREY A. COSTELLO, PRINCIPAL PLAN~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE TIME FRAME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ASSOCIATED WITH THE CROSSROADS CLUB, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF N.E. 2r~u STREET AND N.E. 4'" AVENUE. The action requested of the City Commission is that ofapproval of a request to extend the time frame for compliance with conditions of approval associated with the Crossroads Club. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of N.E. 2nd Street and N.E. 4th Avenue, within the CBD zone district. The Crossroads Club meeting facility received Conditional Use approval in January of 1996. The property was severely deficient in terms of required parking. One of the conditions of approval was that within one year of occupying the site the parking issues would be resolved, either through the execution of agreements for off-site parking or limitations on meeting times and attendance so as not to exceed the existing parking capacity. Crossroads occupied the premises on July 22, 1996. Shortly afterwards they converted the four space parking lot on the north side to an outdoor seating area, further exacerbating the parking shortage. In August of 1997 the City Commission granted a 6-month time extension for compliance with the conditions of approval. In February of 1998 another extension was granted which extended the term of compliance another 9 months, to October 22, 1998. A complete chronology of actions related to the conditional use approval is attached. The Club is continuing to discuss parking alternatives with adjacent property owners, however, as of this date they have not resolved their parking deficiency. Attached is a letter from the F.E.C Railroad regarding the Club's request to purchase the property on the north side of N.E. 2"d Street. There has not been any progress to utilize the Cary property to the south, as a Phase II environmental analysis of the site must be conducted. Crossroads is requesting another 9 month time extension (until July 22, 1999) to comply with the conditions of the conditional use approval. Given the lack of progress made and the slow response by the FEC to the Crossroads inquiries, it seems doubtful that the situation will be resolved within 9 months. If the is recommended that if an extension is granted, it be for a minimum one year period. If a time extension is not acceptable, the Commission may want to consider reducing the parking requirement for this specific use to coincide with the 18-parking spaces existing on the site. It would be difficult to justify such a reduction from 88 to 18 spaces, however, since it is obvious that the parking demand greatly exceeds the on-site supply. City Commission Documentation Meeting of October 20, 1998 Crossroads Club - Time Extension Page 2 A. Continue with direction. B. Approve the request to extend the time frame for compliance with the following conditions of approval associated with the Crossroads Club for a specified period. 1. The maximum occupancy between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday - Friday, be limited to that which can be accommodated by the 18 on-site parking spaces, or 72 people; 2. That either formal off-site parking and lease agreements must be finalized; an alternative parking plan must be provided which includes letters from adjacent property owners consenting to permit Crossroads Club to utilize their properties for parking; or, the meeting schedules and capacity must be revised and reduced to not exceed the number of on-site parking spaces; and, 3. That if the Crossroads Club is not in compliance with the conditions of approval by (specify date), that the matter be brought back to the City Commission for review. C. Deny the request to extend the time frame for compliance with conditions of approval associated with the Crossroads Club, and require that the occupancy of the building (daytime and evening) be reduced so as not to exceed the capacity of the on-site parking area. Commission discretion. Attachments: · Letter from FEC Railway Company · Chronology · Location Map OCT. ?.1~8 ~:02PM FEC ID & RE ST AU~FL MO~O?l P.1 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY 1 Malaga Street Post Office Box 1048 St Augustine, FL 32085-I048 Telephone (904) 826-11169 or Toll free (800) 342-1131, ext. 12269 l~ax: (904) 826-2322 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL To: Mr. George Allerton The Crossroads Club, Inc. Fax: (561) 278-8004 From: M.O. Bagley, Director (EVA/ct) Industrial Development & Real Estate Date: October 7, 1998 Time: 11:10 a.m. File: 31%2 Re: Railway Prope~'y - Deh'ay Beach Pages: __2.__, including this cover page Special Instructions/Notes: This is follow-up to my letter dated $0auary 5, 1998, regarding your organization's interest in Railway's propc, rty at 1~ 2nd Strvet, Delray Beth, Florida. While thc Railway is not yet in a position to offer formal proposal, we do acknowledge your communication and correspondence with this office during the past year, We appreciate your urgency concerning this matter and. will keep you advised of our handling. RECENEO CROSSROADS CLUB CHRONOLOGY January 9, 1996--City Commission granted conditional use approval for the Crossroads Club meeting facility. The building was significantly deficient in terms of the parking requirement for the use (88 spaces required, 23 provided on site). The applicants indicated that they were working with adjacent property owners to purchase or lease property for additional parking, but they wanted to proceed with the improvement and occupancy of the building. The Commission agreed to allow them to move forward, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum occupancy be limited to 350 people; 2. That between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, activities and meetings/groups be limited to a maximum of 92 people in order to not exceed the capacity of the 23 on-site parking spaces; and, 3. That within one year of occupying the building, either formal off-site parking and lease agreements must be finalized; an alternative parking plan must be provided; or, the meeting schedules and capacity must be revised and reduced so as not to exceed the number of on-site parking spaces. July 22, 1996--Crossroads occupied the building. Shortly afterwards, they blocked off one of the parking areas with bollards in order to provide an outdoor seating and smoking area for meeting participants. The improvements were made without approval of the City, and resulted in the elimination of 4 required parking spaces, including the handicapped accessible space, further exacerbating the parking shortage. October 14, 1996--Crossroads Club issued a violation notice by the Code Enforcement Division (Case No. 96-33121 ) for making the changes without first obtaining approval. February 7, 1997--Crossroads submitted an application for a conditional use modification to have the outdoor seating area formally approved. March 17, 1997-- Planning and Zoning Board considered the request to allow the outside seating area to remain. The Board was very concerned with the elimination of the parking, but noted that the greatest demand for the facility seemed to be in the evenings, when other parking was available (i.e., by agreement with the FIo-Gas Company located across N.E. 2nd Street, and along N.E. 4th Avenue). The Board agreed to approve the modification and allow the tables to remain for the duration of the time frame by which they had to comply with the requirement for providing additional off-site parking (July 22, 1997). They also reduced the maximum number of meeting participants that could be accommodated during the weekdays. The conditions of approval for the modification were as follows. 1. The maximum occupancy between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday - Friday, be limited to that which can be accommodated by the 18 on-site parking spaces, or 72 people; 2. That within one year of occupying the building (July 22, 1997) either formal off-site parking and lease agreements must be finalized; an alternative parking plan must be provided which includes letters from adjacent property owners consenting to permit Crossroads Club to utilize their properties for parking; or, the meeting schedules and capacity must be revised and reduced to not exceed the number of on-site parking spaces; and, 3. That if the Crossroads Club is not in compliance with the previous conditional use approval requirements by July 22, 1997, that the matter be presented to the City Commission. August 5, 1997--City Commission approved a 6 month time extension (to February 1998) to comply with the conditions of approval (without the requirement that the parking area on the north side of the building be reinstated). An additional condition of approval was added that a formal, legally acceptable agreement be executed between Crossroads and the property owners to the south (Douglas and Virginia Cary) for the use of their property as off-site parking. Subsequent to the granting of the time extension, the Code Enforcement Case was closed. February 17, 1998--City Commission approved a request to extend the time frame for compliance with the following conditions of approval associated with the Crossroads Club for an additional 9 months(to October 22, 1998): 1. The maximum occupancy between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday - Friday, be limited to that which can be accommodated by the 18 on-site parking spaces, or 72 people; 2. That either formal off-site parking and lease agreements must be finalized; an alternative parking plan must be provided which includes letters from adjacent property owners consenting to permit Crossroads Club to utilize their properties for parking; or, the meeting schedules and capacity must be revised and reduced to not exceed the number of on-site parking spaces; and, 3. That if the Crossroads Club is not in compliance with the conditions of approval by October 22, 1998, that the matter be presented to the City Commission. At that time, the Club submitted a signed agreement with Douglas and Virginia Cary which stated that th the club may utilize their property on N.E. 4 Avenue for parking. The letter (and the unpaved condition of the property) did not meet the requirements as stipulated in the LDRs for an off-site parking agreement. October 1998--Crossroads requests a third time extension. N.E. ~TH ST, N.E. 2ND ST. ATLANTIC ' ~ PLAZA OLD SQUARE' , [ ~ ,, ATLANTIC AVENUE [ ~ CROSSROADS CKUB PLANNING DEPARTMENT C~ OF DELRAY BEACh, FL TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CiTY MANAGER ~,/~ ~'~ ~.. "~,~~ THRU: DIANE DOMINGUEZ, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING~ F R O M: P A TC AY CE, HiST OR lC PRESERV AT I ON P LA NNE R~-~~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 APPROVAL OF A WAIVER TO LDR SECTION 4.1.4(C), USE OF LOTS OF RECORD FOR LOT 10, BLOCK 1, DEL-IDA PARK SUBDIVISION, DEL-IDA PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT I The action requested of the City Commission is approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.1.4(C) which states that in residential zoning districts other than R-l-A, if two (2) or more adjoining lots (or combination of lots and portions of lots) of record are under the same ownership at the time of passage or amendment of this ordinance, and if the total frontage and the total area is equal to or greater than that which is required by the zoning district regulations, said property shall not be developed except in accordance with the minimum frontage and lot area requirements of the district. [Amd. Ord. 78~94 10/18/94] Paul Lamson and Bonnie Bowen, the owners of the subject property have initiated the request for the waiver. Mr. Lamson and Ms. Bowen owned 3 adjoining lots of record, Lots 8, 9 and 10 in Block 1 of the Del-Ida Park subdivision located in the Del-Ida Park Historic District, in the R1-AA zoning district. The owners recently sold Lots 8 and 9 which contain a single family residence and a detached garage; Lot 10 (the subject lot) is vacant. At the time of sale of their residence they were unaware that the adjoining lot to the east, Lot 10, was not a buildable Lot of Record; they have put the lot up for sale and now have a buyer for the property. The lot is 50' wide and 120' deep for a total of 6,000 square feet. The development standards for lots in the R-l-AA zoning district require a minimum width of 75', a minimum depth of 100', and 9,500 s.f. minimum lot size. The vacant lot exceeds the depth requirements but is 25' less than the required width, and 3,500 s.f. less than the minimum lot size. It is not possible to split the three lots into two conforming lots without moving the existing house and garage or demolishing both structures. As a Lot of Record, Lot 10 would be a buildable lot were it not for the above cited code section pursuant to adjoining lots under the same ownership. The owners are requesting the waiver so that Lot 10 may be sold as a buildable lot. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the granting 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; or, (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. City Commission Documentation Request for a Waiver from LDR Section 4.1.4(C) Page 2 The Del-Ida Park Historic District was platted largely with 50' wide lots. Of the 258 original lots only 13 would meet current development standards. There are 152 structures in the subdivision, 42 of these are constructed on 50' lots and an additional 12 are on lots with less than 75' of frontage. The City's Design Guidelines state on the subject of spacing for new construction, "that the rhythm of buildings within a block should be constant. At the turn of the century, people left rural areas to live closer together in the inner city. Fifty and seventy five foot lots were meant to create harmony and security. Zoning regulations should be modified in older platted areas to distinguish the new construction, and create the proper perspective.' Granting the waiver would not adversely affect the neighboring area in that it would allow a development pattern that is consistent with that of the district. Nor would the waiver diminish the provision of public facilities or create an unsafe situation. A similar waiver was granted by the City Commission in April of this year for the lot across the street from the subject property (Lot 22, Block 2), which also has only 50' of frontage. Therefore, the waiver request meets the required findings of Section 2.4.7(B)(5). At a pre-application review on September 16, 1998 the Historic Preservation Board considered the proposal for the house which will be constructed on Lot 10, if the waiver to Section 4.1.4(C) is granted. The proposed 2- story single family residence with detached garage is appropriate to the Del-Ida Park Historic District and meets all of the criteria set forth in the Design Guidelines for new construction. The Historic Preservation Board formally reviewed the waiver request at its meeting of March 18, 1998 and voted to recommend to the City Commission that the waiver be approved, based upon consistency with the historic development pattern of Del-Ida Park and the appropriateness of the new construction proposed for the site. By motion, approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.1.4(C), based upon positive findings to Section 2.4.7(B), in that the waiver will allow for development which is consistent with the Design Guidelines for Historic Districts, especially as it pertains to the rhythm of buildings in the Del-Ida Park District. Attachments: · Letter of Request · Survey of Lot 10 · LDR Section 4.1.4 (C) · Location map File/s/reports/manweiler waiver SECTION 4.1.3 (I) (I) Where any street, alley, or waterway is officially abandoned or vacated, the regulations applicable to each parcel of abutting property shall apply to that portion of such street, alley, or waterway added thereto by virtue of such abandonment or vacation. Section 4.1.4 Use of Lots of Record: Any lot, or parcel, which qualifies as a lot of record as set forth in these Regulations, but which does not comply with respect to minimum lot area and minimum lot dimensions specified for the zoning district in which it is located, may nevertheless be used (for purposes as allowed in that zoning district), as long as it complies with all other requirements of that zoning district, subject to the following limitations: [Amd. Ord. 78-94 10/'18/94] (A) Duplex and multiple family structures may not be constructed on a lot which has an area less than that provided for as the minimum lot area within the zoning district. [Amd. Ord. 78-94 10118194] (B) A residential structure shall not be constructed on any lot, within a residential zoning district, which has frontage of less than fifty feet (50'). However, this provision shall not prevent construction of a residential structure on a Single Family Lot (or Parcel) of Record which conforms with all other aspects of minimum lot size requirements but which has no frontage. Further, such a Lot of Record with no suitable access may achieve private access for a single family residence and similar uses by means of a nonpublic (private) access easement. [Amd. Ord. 78-94 10/18/94] (C) In residential zoning districts other than R-l-A, if two (2) or more adjoining lots (or combination of lots and portions of lots) of record are under the same ownership at the time of passage or amendment of this ordinance, and if the total frontage and the total area is equal to or greater than that which is required by the zoning district regulations, said property shall not be developed except in accordance with the.. minimum frontage and lot area requirements of the district. Ownership shall be determined by the property tax rolls on file in the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's Office as of the effective date of this ordinance. [Amd. Ord. 78-94 10/18/94] 4104 ,I N.E. 9TH ' ST , ' N.E. 7TH--ST. · LAKE TERR. gN.W. 6TH ST. , i ~EVERLY DR'. _. -- · N.E. 5TH ST. N.E. 4TH ST. ..w. ~ ~T. ~ ~~ ~~ ~1~ 'J J JJ J ~'~ N ~ DEL-IDA PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT o,J, o~ ~,~,~,~,~. ~ BLOCK 1 , LOT ~ 0 PLANNING ~ ZONING DEPARTMENT MAP REF: L~2B1 TO: DAVID T. HARDEN/~ ~ CITY MANAGER \~\ ~ \[\ THRU: DIANE DOM INGU E~I~E~TO~~~-~ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONIN~ ~ SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 WAIVER TO LDR SECTION 4.3.1(D), TO ALLOW THE RECONFIGURATION OF EXISTING NONCONFORMING LOTS TO CREATE NEW NONCONFORMING LOTS, FOR LOTS 6-10, BLOCK 2, OSCEOLA PARK (EAST SIDE OF SE 4TM AVENUE BETWEEN SE 4TM AND SE STM STREETS On September 21, 1998, the City received a request from the CRA to create 5 non- conforming lots within the Osceola Park subdivision. The CRA is in the process of negotiating the sale of the property to a private developer who wishes to develop the five lots into five single-family homes with two-car garages accessed from the rear alley. The CRA purchased the five lots this year with a goal to improve and stabilize the Osceola Park community. The property is currently platted as lots 6-10, Block 2, Osceola Park. It consists of one 51.1 feet wide corner lot, three 51.1 feet wide interior lots and one 72.1 feet wide corner lot. All lots are 132.5 feet deep and back up to an unimproved alley. The request is to reduce the three interior lots to 50 feet wide and shift the lot lines approximately ten feet in order to evenly distribute the corner lots. The proposal does not create any additional non-conforming lots since all five lots are already nonconforming with respect to width. On September 24, 1998, pursuant to authority granted in LDR Section 5.1.4(F), the Development Services Management Group (DSMG) directed that the project be exempted from the requirement to re-plat. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.1(D), lots shall meet the minimum requirements established unless the City Commission declares at the time of approval of an associated development application that it is necessary and appropriate to create such a nonconformity. City Commission Documentation CRA lots on SE 4th Avenue Page 2 The site is currently vacant, and is located within Redevelopment Area #5. The existing zoning is R-1-A (Single Family Residential). The property consists of five platted lots fronting on NE 4th Avenue, none of which conform to the zoning district standards. The corner lot at NE 4th Avenue and NE 4th Street is only 51.1 feet wide. Within the R- 1-A zoning district, the required side street setback is 15 feet and the side interior setback is 7.5 feet. When this total of 22.5 feet is subtracted from the 51.1 feet lot width, only 28.6 feet is left upon which to fit the building. Development of the type of product proposed by the developer is difficult within this limited area. The proposal is to shift the lot lines to create three 50 feet wide interior lots, one 62 corner lot and one 62.82' wide corner lot. This will allow the developer to place a larger unit on the corner and still meet the side street setback requirements. Although another option would be to seek a variance for reduction of the side street setback, this would put the building closer to NE 4th Street and is not preferred. As previously noted, the Commission may approve the creation of a nonconforming lot based upon a finding that it is necessary and appropriate to do so. The City Commission may also impose mitigating conditions at the time such a plat is approved. Staff notes that the proposal does not result in a significant change in the existing lot dimensions on the block. By shifting the lot lines, one corner lot becomes slightly more conforming and one becomes slightly less conforming. The reduction in size of the three interior lots is minimal. The resulting lots remain consistent in size with other lots on NE 4th Avenue and in the subdivision in general. The CRA feels that the development of these lots for single family housing in the $115,000 to $135,000 range will give the area a boost. By shifting the lot lines, the architectural options for the narrow corner lot are improved, while retaining an appropriate side street setback. Given and the minimal impacts and continued compatibility with adjacent lots, the required finding can be justified. Planning and Zoning Board review of the proposal is not required.. A. Continue with direction. B. Approve the Waiver to LDR Section 4.3.1(D), based on positive findings that it is necessary and appropriate to reconfigure existing nonconforming lots 6-10, Block 2, Osceola Park to create new nonconforming lots, in that the resulting lots will remain consistent in size with other lots on NE 4th Avenue and in the subdivision in general. City Commission Documentation CRA lots on SE 4th Avenue Page 3 C. Deny the Waiver to LDR Section 4.3.1(D), based upon a determination that four lots will become more non-conforming, and that it has not been demonstrated that it is necessary and appropriate to accommodate the request. Approve the Waiver to LDR Section 4.3.1(D), based on positive findings that it is necessary and appropriate to reconfigure existing nonconforming lots 6-10, Block 2, Osceola Park to create new nonconforming lots, in that the resulting lots will remain consistent in size with other lots on NE 4th Avenue and in the subdivision in general. Attachments: Location Map · Applicant's letter · Letter from the Director of Planning and Zoning · Reduced Composite Drawing of Lots · Schematic site plan, floor plans and building elevations S.W. 2ND ST. S.E. 2ND ST. S.W. SRO ST. S,E. 3RD ST. DELRA Y >- S.E. 5TH ST ..... BEACH <r, WOMEN'S APT F- S.E. 6TH ST. ~ BA RR TON .~.W. 6TH ST. < CONDOS CHURCHILL CONDO s.w. 7TH ST. 7TH I-- CURRIE BANt COMMONS gz ~. ~ ,n BUILDh S.E. 8TH ST. O S,W. 8TH ST. S.E. 8TH ST. BARNETT I-- ~,W. 8TH CT. DRIVE-THRU Z 5TH AVE. _ GRILL S.W. 9TH ST. · 9TH ST. C.R.A. OWNED LOTS CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FL -- W/THIN OSCEOLA PARK - PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- D/C/I'AL BASE MAP $~JTEM -- MAP REF: LM299 Community Redevelopment Agency Delray Beach MEMO TO: Diane Dominguez FROM: Chris Brown ~/~ 5~._.__~.__.~. DATE: September 21, 1998 RE: Five Lots on SE 4th Avenue Owned by the CRA Diane: We respectfully request that the City grant a waiver to create a non-conforming lot as described in the attached drawing based upon the action being necessary and appropriate. The CRA purchased the five lots in 1998 and issued a Request for Proposal this year to sell the property. Mr. Jack Frysinger was ranked to negotiate a contract, which we are in the process of completing. Mr. Frysinger wishes to develop the five lots into five single-family homes but has requested that the lot lines shift approximately ten feet in order to evenly distribute the comer lots. The comer lots will change from 51 and 72 feet in width, Lots 1 and 5, to 62 and 62 feet in width. The interior lots remain relatively unchanged in width. The request is making one lot less conforming and the other more conforming. The project has a unique and important feature which Mr. Frysinger is proposing. He intends to provide two-car garages with each house, accessed from the alley. The CRA's goal is to improve and stabilize the Oceola Park community, and we feel new housing in the $115,000 to $135,000 range would give the area a boost. Attached you will find schematic site plans, floor plans and elevations of the project. Thank you for your consideration. /d attach. cc: CRA Board of Commissioners Jack Frysinger 24 N. Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (561) 276-8640/Fax (561) 276-8558 DELRAY BEACH 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE · DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 · (561) 243-7000 AII-AmericaCity 993 October 1, 1998 Christopher Brown Executive Director, CRA 24 North Swinton Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 RE: Waiver of Platting Requirement; Lots 6-10, Block 2, Osceola Park Dear Chris, Your request for an exemption to the platting requirement associated with the reconfiguration of the above referenced lots was considered at the Development Services Management Group (DSMG) meeting of September 24, 1998. Pursuant to the authority granted in LDR Section 5.1.4(F), DSMG directed that the project be exempted from the requirement to re-plat. The request for a waiver of minimum lot requirements will be considered by the City Commission at the meeting of October 20, 1998. If you have any questions regarding that action, please contact Ron Hoggard. S(i~,cerely, ("'",., . · e 'g , P ,J Director of Planning and Zoning "------" C: Ron Hoggard, Senior Planner ~ S.E. 4TH STREET 1,7,2.50' BLOCK 2 ACC~ TO ~ PAL~ ~A~ C~TY. FL~A. LOT 8 ~ ~ v ~ o ~BLOCK2 .~- [~,~ ~,o, · 132.50' LOT ~. LESS r~ ~tH a. aA r~Er. ~K Z OSCE~A LOT 7 / c~rY. BLOCK 2 *~'~ ~L OCK 2 ~T~ V~RT~AL OA~ ~2~, S~CE: O~AD UT[ITY ~ _ · ~ _ 5.E. flTH STREET _r~) MAP OF COMPOSITE D~ WING ~o ~ors ~ s~o. [ O'BRIEN, SUITER & O'BRIEN, IN( 13 _j 0 tu 0 , COVERED PA'I30 1,490 a.f. ~r- RCXET FENCE 2 CAR GARAGE KITCHEN D~I~I~ BED, FOYER : MODEL 'B' '" ' 1,410 ~.f. RCK£T 2 CAR ~RA~ × MODEL 'C'~ ..- P~C1(£1 r[NCE TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER · ..u: /,~/ /// / .~ //// ..~ FROM: JEFFREY A. COSTELLO, PRINCIPAL PLAN~iE~~¢~~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY PARKING LOT WITHIN THE CBD AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF S.E. 1=' STREET AND S.E. 3Ku AVENUE. The subject property is Block 86, Town of Delray, and contains 2.42 acres. The site currently contains a 40-space asphalt parking area on the north end of the block. The City previously leased the lot from the FEC Railroad for public parking as well as the east 5' for a public sidewalk. In October 1997, the lease between the City and the FEC was terminated as the property was being prepared to be sold, which has occurred. The proposal is to install a 192-space temporary parking lot (162 gravel spaces, 30 asphalt spaces) which would be utilized primarily by the Milagro Center (vocational school), located at the southeast corner of S.E. 2® Avenue and S.E. 1st Street, however the parking lot may also be used by the general public. The 4 spaces at the northeast corner of the site are to be utilized for golf cart parking for security personnel. A portable umbrella will be utilized by security personnel for collection of parking fees. The proposal includes the installation of site lighting and perimeter landscaping. The additional parking may be necessary to accommodate the parking demand for occasional productions. Technical comments have been transmitted to the applicant which may result in the reduction of 5 spaces. LDR Section 2.4.6(H) (Temporary Use Permits, Temporary Parking Lot) Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H), establishment of a temporary parking lot is subject to approval by the City Commission. LDR Section 2.4.6(H)(3)(d)(1) states that a temporary parking lot may be permitted within the portion of the Central Business District (CBD) which is bounded by Swinton Avenue on the west, the Intracoastal Waterway on the east, and N.E. 2"d Street on the north, and S.E. 2nd Street on the south. The subJect property is located on the south side of S.E. 1st Street within the designated area described above. Access to the parking lot will be from S.E. 3rd Avenue. The temporary parking lot spaces shall not be used to fulfill minimum off-street parking requirements for new development or redevelopment, however they may be used to supplement required parking. The required parking for the Milagro Center has been provided on the building site. Thus, the temporary spaces are not needed to fulfill the parking requirements for this development. LDR Section 2.4.6(H)(4) states that the temporary parking lot site plan shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Parking Management Advisory Board prior to submission to the City Commission for consideration. City Commission Documentation Meeting of October 20, 1998 Milagro Center - Temporary Parking Lot Page 2 ' At its meeting of September 29, 1998, the Parking Management Advisory Board reviewed and recommended approval of the temporary parking lot. Permits for temporary parking lots shall be issued for a one-year period. Permits may be renewed annually to a maximum of three (3) years upon review and positive recommendation by the Parking Management Advisory Board. The temporary parking lot shall be monitored for compliance with the approved plan. Should the City Manager find that the operation of a lot is not in compliance or if the lot has an adverse effect on surrounding properties, and the applicant is unable or unwilling to rectify the problem the permit may be reviewed by the City Commission for revocation. The applicant has stated that the temporary parking lot is being provided to help support the parking demand of the Milagro Center, which is a vocational school with occasional productions, as there is minimal public parking in close proximity to the center. While the time limit has not been specified, the temporary parking lot permit is only issued for a one year period up to a maximum of 3 years. The parking lot will not be permanent and cannot exist for more than 3 years, provided yearly permit renewals are granted by the City Commission. Community Redevelopment Agency At its meeting of October 8, 1998, the CRA reviewed and recommended approval of the site plan modification request. Parking Management Adviso~ Board On September 29, 1998, the PMAB reviewed and recommended of approval of the request for the temporary parking lot. Downtown Development Authority The City Commission's action will be reported to the DDA at its meeting of October 21, 1998. Approve the request to establish a temporary parking lot for the Milagro Center for one year, subject to the provisions of LDR Section 2.4.6(H). Attachment: Site Plan glTY OF I)ELAAY BEAgH DELR^Y 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE · DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA :33444 · 407/24:3-7000 lilk/In~ica C~ 1993 October 20, 1998 Mr. Burt Von Hoff Executive Office of the Governor Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development The Capitol - Suite 2001 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001 Re: Inner City Redevelopment Assistance Grants Proqram Dear Mr. Von Hoff: On behalf of the Delray Beach City Commission, please let me express to you our support for the Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Agency's application for funding for the Center for Economic Development. Since 1986, the Community Redevelopment Agency has successfully participated in activities which have resulted in an increased tax base, greater housing opportunities for our citizens and jobs for our community. The construction of a 16,167 square foot business incubator to be located in the heart of our redevelopment district is an important component of the Economic Development Strategy for our community. We look forward to the opportunity to further improve our community and increase the probabilities for small business success. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to finance this facility and meet our economic development objectives. Sincerely, Jay~'Alperin THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS Pr,"~',eO ~q ~'ecycteJ Paper Community Redevelopment Agency Delray Beach MEMORANDUM DATE: October 13, 1998 TO: David T. Harden, City Manager City of Delray Beach FROM: Shelley Treadwell, Economic Development Manager Delray Beach CRA RE: Inner City Redevelopment Assistance Grants Program Request for letter of Support and Consideration on the October 20"~ City Commission Agenda The Delray Beach CRA will be submitting an application on October 30"~, 1998 for funding under the new "Inner City Redevelopment Assistance Grants Program" offered by the Florida Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development, part of the Governor's Office. The funding request will be for $245,000 for assisting in the construction of the proposed "Center for Economic Developmenf' incubator facility to be located on SW 9th Avenue (subject to EDA approval). This 16,167 square foot facility, owned by the CRA will house the CRA and will rent space to TED Center (@ 77%). The CRA will be submitting several applications for funding to reduce the proposed debt on the facility, to avoid operating a facility that is undercapitalized and debt ridden. As you remember, the EDA has already approved an $800,000 grant award to the CRA/TED for this project, which has a proposed construction start date of September 1999. I am hereby requesting that the City of Delray Beach provide the CRA with a letter of support for this project and this application. I have attached a sample copy for your review. I would hope that you might consider this request at your October 20th City Commission meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions. ?.~. 24 N. Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (561) 276-8640 / Fax (561) 276-8558 October 20, 1998 Mr. Burt Von Hoff Executive Office of the Govemor Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development The Capitol; Suite 2001 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001 RE: Inner City Redevelopment Assistance Grants Program Dear Mr. Von Hoff: On behalf of the City of Delray Beach Commission, please let me express to you our support for the CPA's application for funding for the Center for Economic Development. Since 1986, the CPA has successfully participated in activities which have resulted in an increased tax base, greater housing opportunities for our citizens and jobs for our community. The construction of a 16,167 square foot business incubator to be located in the heart of our redevelopment district is an important component of the Economic Development Strategy for our community. We look forward to the opportunity to further improve our community and increase the probabilities for small business success. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to finance this facility and meet our economic development objectives. Sincerely, Jay Alperin Mayor Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Agency FaGsimile Transmission Form FROM~ NUMBER OF PAGE~: ~ RE: I0 399d ~3 H3~38 19~33G B§§Bgi~I9§ I§:gI B66I/EI/OI MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~ITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~H - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 BID AWARD FOR SOUTHEAST INTERCEPTOR SLIPLINING PROJECT DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 This is before the Commission to make a determination that the low bid received for the referenced project is non-responsive and award the bid to the second low bidder, Westra Construction Corporation as the lowest qualified bidder in the amount of $367,710.00. The Southeast Interceptor project generally consists of sliplining some 2,500 linear feet of 36-inch gravity sewer main with a 30-inch PVC carrier pipe on S.E. 10th Street and on S.E. 4th Avenue from S.E. 10th Street to just north of S.E. 7th Street. Bids were received for this project on September 30, 1998. The apparent low bid was from Intercounty Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $343,510.00. However, based on personal interviews and a review of Intercounty Engineering's qualifications, staff has determined the company does not have any experience with this type of project. The southeast interceptor project is specialized in nature and warrants award to a contractor with verifiable sliplining experience. Westra Construction has successfully completed over 50 sliplining projects in the south Florida area within the past 5 years. Funding for the project will be from 442-5178-536-63.93 (Water & Sewer Renewal & Replacement/Southeast Interceptor). Recommend approval of the bid award in the amount of $367.710.00 to Westra Construction Corporation as the lowest qualified bidder for the Southeast Interceptor Sliplining Project. ref:agmemo20 AGENDA REQUEST Agenda Item No. ~ Date: October 13, 1998 Request to be placed on: X Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda When: October 20, 1998 Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff requests Commission award a construction contract to Westra Construction Corporation as the lowest qualified bidder for the Southeast Interceptor Slip-lining Project (PN 97-05) in the total amount of $367,710.00. The project generally consists of the slip-lining of 2,500 L.F. of 36" gravity sewer main with a 30" P.V.C. carrier pipe on S.E. 10d~ Street and on S.E. 4d' Avenue from S.E. 10u' Street to just north of S.E. 7u' Street. Funding is from R&R Account #442-5178-536-63.93, Southeast Interceptor. ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO Recommendation: Staff recommends award of contract to Westra Construction Corporation in the amount of $367,710.00. Department head signature: Q~?~~ ~ [O~]~J'~ Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable): Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding available: ~'~NO Funding alternatives~-' (if applicable) Account No. & De~cription~g/gW~--J~ ~3.~ ~'~ ~O~/6~~ Account BalanceJ~/~/J~,~5-~ ~F~~ ~ d~,~ ~ ~ : ~_~/ /~1~ ti ' ' ; fA ~ - - / City Manager Review: ~//~1~,~'~ Approved for agenda: E~/NO ~ Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Disapproved S: \EngAdmin\Proj ects \97 \97-005\OFFICIAL\AG102098. DOC City Of Delray Beach. Department of Environtnental Se.ices MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden City Manager FROM: C. Danvers Beatty, P.E.'~-~'~~ Deputy Director of Publi~r,~~ SUBJECT: SOUTHEAST INTERCEPTOR SLIPLINING PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER 97-05 DATE: October 13, 1998 Attached is an Agenda Request, location map and tabulation of Bids received for the subject project on September 30, 1998. The firm of Intercounty Engineering, Inc. is the apparent low bidder with a total proposal of $343,510.00. A review of the qualificatiOns as well as our personal interview of Intercounty Engineering, Inc. for a slip-lining project indicates that they do not have any experience with this type of project. Intercounty is primarily an underground contractor, specializing in open cut type pipe installation and replacement. This particular project is more specialized in nature and warrants award to a contractor with qualified slip-lining experience. The second low bidder is Westra Construction Corporation with a total proposal of $367,710.00. A review of their references as well as a personal interview revealed that Westra Construction Corp. has successfully completed over 50 slip-lining projects in the south Florida area within the past 5 years. Based on their proposal and satisfactory report from their references, we are recommending award of the project to the second lowest bidder, Westra Construction Corporation in the total amount of $367,710.00. Funding will be from R&R Account #442-5178-536-63.93, Southeast Interceptor which has $390,000.00 budgeted for this project. Please place this item on the October 20, 1998 Agenda for consideration by City Commission. CDB/cdb cc: Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Director of Environmental Services file: S:\EngAdminXProj ects\97\97-005\OFFICIAL\agenmemo.doc 1:~ 16 98 FRI 14:42 FAX 407 278 4755 DEL B('H CTY ATTY -*--~ CITY ILiLL ~o2 V CE & DO Y, James W. Vance Telephone (561) 684-55~ Willi~ P. Doney oceober 16, lS98 F~le (561) 684-0833 B. Douglas MacGibbon , City Attorney CiTy of DelSey Beach 200 N.w. First Avenu~ Delray Beach, FL 33444 Dear Susan: i As you may ~ecall, the Final Judgment entered by. the ~ri&l cour~ required th9 City and L~k~ wo~,th Drainage District to file an independent :~eminen[ domain proceedings to acquire ~he proper~y iht=rests a':'~le~e~ly "taken" 'from the landowner, Stanley G. Tare, Trustee. A~ you may also recall, on August 19, 1997, the City Commiseion ~opted Resolution No.. 63-97 authorizing the filin~ of 5ne eminent ~omain p=oceedings_ In the meantime, on February 19, 1998, ~h~ trial court entered an order of C~rification, a copy of which i~ enclosed for your reference. ~his Order clarif~e~ that the gove~mental entities did not "tmke" ~he lan4s in questiom but rather "took" th~ access to the land_ A~cordin~ly, the defen~nts are fin~ciall~ responzible for ~y di~ inuti~n in the value of the pr~er=y due ~ =he property's l~)ss of access. Because of the languag~ in the Order of Clarification, I believe that it is '~advisable for the .City Commi~si~n =o ~opt a new Resolution ~'lthorizin~ eminent d~main ~roc~edings to~ac~ire the access right,s only. Enclosed is a propoe~ Re~lution for congideratio~ by the City Co~ission. I underst~4 that yo~ ~ill be ~le to h~ve the mat=er co~idere~ at the meeting Bch~duled on October 20, ~998. Please fe~l ~ free to contact mc if you have any ~estions or comments co~er~in~ this matter. WPD/ko RESOLUTION NO. 64-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS AS REQUIRED BY A FINAL JUDGMENT IN THAT CASE STYLED STANLEY G. TATE, TRUSTEE VS. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA AND THE LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT, AS CLARIFIED AND AMENDED; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, in 1993, Stanley G. Tare, Trustee, instituted a lawsuit against the City of Delray Beach and the Lake Worth Drainage District in which Mr. Tare contended that certain governmental actions resulting in the alleged closing of Davis Road denied Mr. Tare of legal access to his property and resulted in a taking of the lands in question; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach strongly disagrees with the allegations set forth in Mr. Tate's Complaint; and WHEREAS, on or about October 17, 1996, the trial court in the above-referenced lawsuit entered Final Judgment against both the City of Delray Beach and the Lake Worth Drainage District finding that the governmental entities had "taken" certain property and/or property rights allegedly owned by Mr. Tare; and WHEREAS, the Final Judgment in the above-referenced lawsuit ordered the City of Delray Beach and the Lake Worth Drainage District to institute eminent domain proceedings to acquire the' property interests allegedly taken by the governmental entities; and WHEREAS, the trial court clarified the Final Judgment of October 17, 1996, by that Order of Clarification dated February 19, 1998, and by that Order on Plaintiff's Response to and Request for Clarification of Order of Clarification of February 19, 1998; and WHEREAS, in compliance with the Court's Final Judgment, as clarified and amended, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach is authorizing the filing of the condemnation proceeding without prejudice to pursue its appellate rights in the future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE. CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above recitals are hereby ratified and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. The City Commission of the City of Delray Beach hereby authorizes the acquisition of that certain property or property rights as shown on attached Exhibit "A" and as set forth in that Final Judgment dated October 17, 1996 in the case styled "Stanley G. Tate, Trustee vs. City of Delray Beach and Lake Worth Drainaqe District", being Case No. 93-5198 AI, as clarified and amended by the above-referenced Orders. This authorization is without prejudice to any and all appellate rights of the City of Delray Beach in the above-referenced litigation. Section 3. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 4. Should any section or provision of this Resolution or any portion thereof be declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the remainder of this Resolution. Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage. PASSED AND ~OPTED in regular session on this the 20th day of October, 1998. AfO R ATTEST: ~City Cl~k ~ - 2 - Res. No. 64-98 EXHIBIT "A" Property or Estate to be acquired: A taking of vehicular access to the following described property: Tate Trustee (20 Acres) The South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the East Half (E-l/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE-l/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW-1/4) of Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida The South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the West Half (W-l/2) of the Southwest Quarter (SW-1/4) of the Northeast Quarter (NE-l/4) lying west of Lake Worth Drainage District Canal E-4. LESS the North 100.0 feet of that part of the South Half (S-1/2) of the Northwest Quarter (NW-1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW-1/4) of the Northeast Quarter (NE-l/4) of Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, lying West of the Westerly right-of-way line of Davis Road, together with the North 100.0 feet of the South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the East Half (E-l/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE-l/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW-1/4) of said Section 18, less the West 40.0 feet thereof, all lying in Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. LESS the East 40 feet thereof conveyed to the City of Delray Beach, Florida; for Public Highway purposes with rights of reverter, and Less the South 70 feet thereof previously conveyed to the Lake Worth Drainage District. ALSO LESS: The West 30.0 feet of the South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the East Half (E-l/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE-i/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW-1/4) of Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, less the South 70.0 feet thereof. ALSO LESS: The South 100 feet of the North 200 feet of the South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the East Half (E-l/2) of the Southeast Quarter (SE-l/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW-1/4) of said Section 18, less the West 30 feet thereof; together with the South 100 feet of the North 200 feet of that part of the South Three Quarters (S-3/4) of the West Half (W-l/2) of the Southwest Quarter (SW-1/4) of the Northeast Quarter (NE-l/4) of said Section 18, lying West of Lake Worth Drainage District's Canal E-4. All of said properties being in Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida. - 3 - (Exhibit "A" to Res. No. 64-98) £1TY JIF I]ELR#Y Bffi£H CiTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TELEPHONE 561/243-7_Q~0 · FACSIMILE 561/278-4755 Writer's D~rect Line: 561/243-7~1 OEtrav BEACH ~MO~~ 111.1~ DATE: October 13, 1998 1993 FROM: ~san A. Ruby, Ci~ A~omey SUBJECT: Appoin~em of Assistant Ci~ AUomey I The City Cha~er provides ~at ~e City Co~ission approve appoM~ems of aaorneys representing ~e City. At this t~e, I reco~end the appoin~em of Jay Jmbeck for the position of Assistam City Aaomey I. Mr. Jmbeck was admiaed to the Florida Bar in 1998. He has worked as a Judicial Stuff Aaorney for ~e Fou~ Judicial Ckcuit Cou~ of Florida in Jacksonville, Florida since Janua~, 1998 where he conducted research ~d dra~ed legal documems covering a myriad of legal issues for the Circuit Cou~ judges. Mr. Jmbeck graduated from University of Florida College of Law with honors in December of 1997. ~ile at law school, he was a member ~d seMor galleys editor of ~e Florida ~ Revi~, and received a book award for his legal research and writing. In addition, while attending law school, Mr. Jmbeck served as a law clerk for ~e Depmem of Enviromenml Protection. If approved by the City Commission, Mr. Jambeck's starting salary will be $37,000 per year with merit increases occurring on October 1 in conjunction with the start of each fiscal year. Mr. Jambeck will begin work for the City on October 27, 1998. Vacation and sick days will be the same as for all non-represented City employees. Mr. Jambeck would receive the automobile allowance received by Assistant City Attorneys, and will be eligible to participate in the ICMA Retirement Plan beginning on the first anniversary of his date of hire with the City. Mr. Jambeck has accepted the offer outlined above, contingent on approval by the City Commission and confirmation of medical and background information. I am pleased to recommend Mr. Jambeck to you for appointment. By copy to David Harden, City Manager, our office requests that the appointment of be placed on the regular City Commission agenda for October 20, 1998. cc: David Harden, City Manager Alison Harry, City Clerk Jay lambeck C~. ~. MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER ~ 1 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #/~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 44-98 (DEFINITION OF "ANTIQUE" AND "SECONDHAND MATERIAL") DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1998 This is second reading and a public hearing for Ordinance No. 40-98 which amends Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations by enacting definitions of "antique" and "secondhand material". This amendment is largely corrective in nature in that it is being processed to provide clarification for the enforcement of existing regulations. There are several areas of the City in which "the sale of secondhand material, other than verifiable antiques" is prohibited. These include businesses and properties fronting along East Atlantic Avenue, West Atlantic Avenue (within the Redevelopment Area), and most recently along N.E. 2nd Avenue (Pineapple Grove Way). However, the LDRs do not provide a definition that clearly specifies the difference between antiques and secondhand merchandise. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that clarification. The CRA Board discussed the amendment at their meeting of September 24, 1998. The Board felt that it might be better to define "antique shop" and establish a minimum percentage of merchandise within such shops that must be antiques. This approach would require amendments to the regulations for each of the zoning districts in which the sale of secondhand material is restricted and would be a little more complicated to undertake. The Planning and Zoning Board considered the text amendment at a public hearing on September 28, 1998. There was no public testimony and the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. At first reading on October 6th, the City Commission passed the ordinance by unanimous vote. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 44-98 on second and final reading. ref: agmemol 4 ~~ '3~ ~ ORDINANCE NO. 44-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING APPENDIX "A" (DEFINITIONS) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY ENACTING DEFINITIONS OF 'ANTIQUE' AND 'SECONDHAND MATERIAL'; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the proposed text amendment at a public hearing on September 28, 1998, and voted unanimously to recommend that it be approved; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4) (c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the change is consistent with and furthers the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting the following definitions: ANTIQUE: An object havinq special value or siqnificance because of its aqe, made in a former period of at least 40 years aqo. Such objects may include but are not limited to furniture, tableware, art, handicrafts, artifacts, linens, ruqs, jewelry, curios, and vintaqe clothinq and accessories. SECONDHAND MATERIkL: Objects and clothinq of the modern period that have been previously used or worn. Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 3. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective i~ediately upon its passage on second and final reading. PASSED ~ ~OPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October , 1998. ATTEST: ~ citY- C~rk First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading October 20, 1998 - 2 - Ord. No. 44-98 ~ r ~N N NG ZONI I NG Di ME ORANDUM STAFF~ REPORT MEETING OF: SEPTEMBER 28, 1998 AGENDA ITEM: IV. I. AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX "A" (DEFINITIONS) OF THE LDRS, ADDING A DEFINITION OF "ANTIQUE" AND "SECONDHAND MATERIAL". The item before the board is an amendment to the Land Development Regulations section on Definitions (Appendix A), adding definitions of "antique" and "secondhand material". Pursuant to Section 1.1.6(A), the Planning and Zoning Board must hold a public hearing and make a recommendation on any amendment to the LDRs. There are several areas of the City in which "the sale of secondhand material, other than verifiable antiques", is prohibited. These include businesses and properties fronting along East Atlantic Avenue, West Atlantic Avenue (within the Redevelopment Area), and most recently, along N.E. 2nd Avenue (Pineapple Grove Way). However, the LDRs do not provide a definition that clearly specifies the difference between antiques and secondhand merchandise. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that clarification. The proposed amendment adds the following definitions to Appendix "A": ANTIQUE: An object having special value or significance because of its age, made in a former period of at least 40 years ago. Such objects may include but are not limited to furniture, tableware, art, handicrafts, artifacts, linens, rugs, jewelry, curios, and vintage clothing and accessories. SECONDHAND MATERIAL: Objects and clothing of the modem period that have been previously used or worn. As part of the background research for this item staff consulted dictionaries as well as local art and antique dealers. Webster's Dictionary defines an antique as "a work of art or handicraft more than 100 years old." However, businesses P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report LDR Amendment RE: Definition of Antique/Secondhand Materials Page 2 dealing in antiques, curios, and collectibles often deal in merchandise that, while not 100 years old, possesses a certain value because it is no longer being produced, or because it represents a past era. For example, 50's-style furnishings and objects have become quite popular in recent years, often selling for many times their original value. The purpose of the limitations on secondhand sales in the above described geographical areas is to restrict shops that are dealing in clothing and other items whose prices have been significantly discounted because they are used. It is felt that these types of stores are not consistent with the desired character of the downtown area. However, shops dealing in furnishings or artifacts that represent former periods could well add to the artistic ambience. The proposed definition of antique places a minimum age of 40 years on merchandise being sold. While less restrictive than the dictionary definition, it will allow stores to sell period furnishings and items made through the 1950%. The definitions will provide the necessary clarification to facilitate enforcement of the restrictions on secondhand sales. REQUIRED FINDINGS LDR Section 2.4.5(M)(5), Amendment to the Land Development Regulations, Findings: In addition to the provisions of Section 1.1.6(A), the City Commission must make a finding that the text amendment is consistent with and furthers the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This amendment is largely corrective in nature, in that it is being processed to provide clarification for the enforcement of existing regulations. The existing regulations on secondhand sales are consistent with Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan regarding appropriate uses for specific areas of the City [Reference Future Land Use Element Policies C-1.5 regarding the West Atlantic Redevelopment Area; C-4.1 pertaining to CBD zoning district regulations; and C-4.4 regarding the revitalization of the Pineapple Grove Main Street area]. This amendment will help to further those policies and therefore meets the required finding. By motion, recommend to the City Commission approval of the proposed amendment to Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations, adding definitions for "Antique" and "Secondhand Material" as described in this report, based upon a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Policies C-1.5; C--4.1; and C-4.4. MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER~ ] SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM/Cd- REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 45-98 (MOVEABLE FIXTURES/NEWSRACKS) DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1998 This is second reading and a public hearing for Ordinance No. 45-98 which amends Chapter 102, "Streets and Sidewalks", "Moveable Fixtures Within the Right-of-Way", of the City Code primarily to clarify provisions and their applicability to modular newsracks. The most notable changes are as follows: (1) A prohibition on charges by controlling entities in excess of actual costs for the use and maintenance of modular newsracks. (2) Clarifies the definitions of newsracks and modular newsracks, adding the term "modular newsracks" to various sections to clarify the applicability of the City's ordinance provisions to modular newsracks. (3) Expressly provides that the City can be a controlling entity to ensure uniformity and compatibility of style of modular newsracks, and provides that the City may order removal of modular newsracks to accomplish this goal. (4) Amends the abandonment section to shorten the period before which abandonment can be declared and provides standards for abandonment of modular newsracks. (5) Amends the enforcement and appeals sections to provide immediate appeals in cases of abandonment to Circuit Court. Amends the provisions regarding stays to eliminate the stay if it involves removal of an abandoned newsrack or modular newsrack, if the stay would adversely affect distribution of newspapers, periodicals or advertising circulars by others. (6) Provides that all modular newsracks must be placed on concrete pads and that no modular newsrack may obstruct other modular newsracks on the same pad or extend beyond the concrete pad. At first reading on October 6th, the City Commission passed the ordinance by unanimous vote. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 45-98 on second and final reading. ref: agmemol8 ~~ ~-C ORDINANCE NO. 45-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING TITLE 9, "GENERAL REGULATIONS", CHAPTER 102, "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS", BY AMENDING SUBHEADING, "MOVABLE FIXTURES WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.40, "PURPOSE AND SCOPE", TO INCLUDE MODULAR NEWSRACKS; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.41, "DEFINITIONS", TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITIONS OF NEWSRACKS AND MODULAR NEWSRACKS; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.42, "CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE REQUIRED", TO CLARIFY THAT MODULAR NEWSRACKS ARE INCLUDED; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.43, "STANDARDS FOR NEWSRACK MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION", TO PROVIDE FOR A RETITLING OF THE SECTION, AND CLARIFYING THAT THE CITY MAY ACT AS A CONTROLLING ENTITY OF MODULAR NEWSRACKS, PROVIDING THAT RENT AND MAINTENANCE COSTS ABOVE ACTUAL COSTS ARE PROHIBITED, PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS FOR THE PLACEMENT, APPEARANCE, AND MAINTENANCE OF MODULAR NEWSRACKS; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.44, "PROHIBITED LOCATIONS", TO PROVIDE FOR CONCRETE PADS FOR MODULAR NEWSRACKS ON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY AND CITY PROPERTY AND PROVIDING FOR RELETTERING; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.45, "INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION", TO INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS FOR MODULAR NEWSRACKS; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.46, "ABANDONMENT", TO INCLUDE A STANDARD FOR ABANDONMENT OF MODULAR NEWSRACKS, AND SHORTENING THE TIME FOR A DETERMINATION OF ABANDONMENT; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.47, "ENFORCEMENT", TO INCLUDE MODULAR NEWSRACKS; BY AMENDING SECTION 102.48, "APPEALS", TO CLARIFY THE APPEAL PROCESS, PROVIDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE APPEAL TO CIRCUIT COURT IN CASES OF ABANDONMENT OF NEWSRACKS AND MODULAR NEWSRACKS, PROVIDING EXCEPTIONS TO A STAY OF THE REMOVAL OF MODULAR NEWSRACKS AND NEWSRACKS IN CERTAIN INSTANCES AND WHERE ABANDONMENT ADVERSELY AFFECTS DISTRIBUTION, PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF STORAGE COSTS IF APPELLANT PREVAILS ON APPEAL; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, substantial growth in the number of newspaper operators and Newsracks in the City produced a significant increase in the number of Newsracks installed in public rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, the uncontrolled placement of Newsracks in public rights-of-way presents an inconvenience and danger to the safety and welfare of persons using such rights-of-way, including pedestrians, persons entering and leaving vehicles and buildings, and persons performing essential utility, traffic control and emergency services; and WHEREAS, the installation and placement of Newsracks in public rights-of-way has resulted in concerns by the public and City officials with regard to the safety, convenience and aesthetics thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted Ordinance 27-96 on August 6, 1996 and found that there is a need to regulate and establish procedures regarding installation, placement maintenance and insuring of Newsracks within the City; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of Ordinance 27-96, the City Commission finds that such regulations and procedures governing Newsracks need to be more clearly defined with respect to modular newsracks which are installed on the City's right-of-way in order to promote the health, safety, aesthetics and welfare of the citizens of Delray Beach; and WHEREAS, the City Commission recognizes the need for the entity which installs a modular newsrack to collect a fee to offset the actual cost of the modular newsrack and to maintain the modular newsrack. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA: Section 1. That Title 9, "General Regulations", Chapter 102, "Streets and Sidewalks", Subheading "Movable Fixtures Within the Right-of-Way", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: MOVABLE FIXTURES WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY 2 ORD NO. 45-98 Section 102,40 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. The purpose of the following is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the regulation of placement, type, appearance, servicing, and insuring of newsracks and vaodular newsracks on public rights-of-way so as to: (A) Provide for pedestrian and driving safety and convenience. (B) Restrict unreasonable interference with the flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic including ingress into or egress from any residence or place of business, or from the street to the sidewalk by persons exiting or entering parked or standing vehicles. (C) Provide for public and property safety during hurricane conditions. (D) Provide reasonable access for the sue and maintenance of poles, posts, traffic signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes and access to locations used for public transportation purposes. (E) Relocate and/or replace newsracks and modular newsracks which result in a visual blight and/or excessive space allocation on the public rights-of-way or which unreasonably detract from the aesthetics of store window displays, adjacent landscaping and other improvements, as well as to have abandoned newsracks and modular newsracks removed. (F) Maintain and protect the values of surrounding properties and prevent damage to grass right-of-way areas. (G) Reduce unnecessary exposure of the public to personal injury or property damage. (H) Treat all newspapers equally regardless of their size, content, circulation, or frequency of publication. (I) Maintain and preserve freedom of the press. (J) Cooperate to the maximum with newspaper distributors. Section 102.41 DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this subsection, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. "ADVERTISING CIRCULAR." Any publication that contains only advertising and no news reports. "AUXILIARY LANE." A turn lane or on-street parking area. 3 ORD NO. 45-98 "~." That portion of a right-of-way improved, designed, or ordinarily used for bicycle traffic. "CONTROLLING ENTITY." The person or entity responsible for placing and maintaining a movable fixture, the owner of the movable fixture, or the publisher of the newspaper vended within a newsrack. The City may be a controlling entity of modular newsracks if it purchases, leases, or lease purchases and maintains or subcontracts out the maintenance of modular newsracks. "DOWNTOWN AREA." The rectangular area bounded generally by the western right- of-way of S.W./N.W. 4th Avenue on the west, the northern right-of-way of N.W./N.E. 2nd Street on the north, the Intracoastal Waterway on the east, and the southern right-of-way of S.W./S.E. 1st Street on the south. In addition, on the east side of the Intracoastal Waterway, Lowry Street on the north, Miramar Street on the south, and the western right-of-way of Ocean Boulevard on the east. Also including N.E. 2nd Avenue from Atlantic Avenue north to N.E. 4th Street. "INTERSECTING SIDE STREET." Any roadway or driveway on which traffic is required to stop prior to entering the intersection. "MODULAR NEWSRACK." A connected grouping of four to nine ~ ~ modules placed on a pedestal or platform which is installed as a single unit and ~ used for the display, sale, or distribution of newspapers or other news periodicals or advertising circulars. "MOVABLE FIXTURE." Any newsrack, modular newsrack, bench, or other non- attached fixture. "~IF.,_~SRA.C2K." Any stand alone self-service non coin-operated or coin-operated box, container, storage unit, or other dispenser installed, used, or maintained for the display, sale, or distribution of a particular newspapers, ~ news periodicals, or advertising circulars. "pAVED SURFACES." Any hard maintained surface used or built for the purpose of transporting vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians, including parking areas. Surfaces shall include, but not be limited to, asphalt, concrete, paver block, tree grates and/or rocks. "PUBLIC AGENCY." The City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, the State of Florida, its subdivisions, departments or authorized agents. "RIGHT-OF-WAY." All that area dedicated to public use or otherwise owned by a public agency for public street purposes and shall include, but not be limited to, roadways, swales, bike paths, and sidewalks. 4 ORD NO. 45-98 "]l~./~O_xlfl~[~." That portion of a right-of-way improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular traffic. "~ID.F,2t~I~." Any surface within a right-of-way provided for the exclusive or primary use of pedestrians. Section 102.42 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE REQUIRED. The ~"~'~:~ .... -~:~*~:*-"*-'" controllin~ entity of any newspaper or, written periodical, or ally_tllB, i~circular distributed from any newsrack or rrlodular newsrack location within a City public right-of-way within the City_ shall notify the Code Enforcement Administrator or his/her designee, in writing, of the location or change of location of any such newsrack or modular newsrack by filing a certificate of compliance in accordance with the provisions of this section no later than fourteen (14) days after the placement or relocation of the newsrack or modular newsrack. (A) Reviewing an0 Enforcement ATlthori.ty: The authority responsible for reviewing the certificates of compliance to verify compliance with the ordinance provisions and enforcing the terms of this ordinance shall be the Code Enforcement Administrator or his/her designee. (B) Certification: The controlling entity shall file with the Code Enforcement Administrator a written certificate of compliance which shall contain the following information: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the controlling entity, who is the owner and/or principal responsible for the newsrack(s) or modular newsrack(s). (2) The name, address and telephone number of a responsible person whom the City may notify or contact at any time concerning the controlling entity's newsrack(s) or modular newsrack(s), including notifications for enforcement purposes. (3) The proposed location of the newsrack(s) or modular newsrack(s). (4) Names of newspapers or periodicals to be contained in each newsrack or modular newsrack. (5) A certification that the newsrack(s) or modular newsrack(s) is (are) installed in conformance with the provisions of this ordinance in their entirety. (6) Executed indemnification agreement and insurance certificate in compliance with Section 102.45. 5 ORD NO. 45-98 More than one newsrack or modular newsrack location may be included on a certificate of compliance. (C) Denial of Certificate of Compliance: If a certificate of compliance for newsrack or modular newsrack location is incorrect, or the neWsrack or modular newsrack is not located, maintained, or installed in conformity with the certification or this section, the certificate of compliance shall be deemed denied, and an order to correct the violation shall be issued pursuant to Section 102.47. Section 102.43 STANDARDS FOR NEWSRACK AND MODULAR NEWSRACKS INCLUDING MAINTENANCE, P~D INSTALLATION. AND LOCATIONS. Any newsrack or modular newsrack which in whole or in part rests upon, in or over any public property or right-of-way located within the City_ shall comply with the following standards: (A) A newsrack shall not exceed 4 feet, 6 inches in height including the pedestal, if any, 40 inches ~ in width, or 24 inches in depth. M~'.'-!ar newo°rac~: ma;,' excee~ ~e size (B) A modular newsrack shall not exceed 4 feet. 6 inches in height (including the pedestal, if any) and 24 inches in depth. A modular newsrack's width shall not exceed the width of the concrete pad. (C) Modular newsrack modules shall be arranged so as to provide an overall square or rectangular shape to the entire modular newsrack. x--J~,~-~mxrr~ Newsracks and modular newsracks shall carry no advertising except for the name of the publication being distributed, and a cardholder kept in a neat and untorn condition describing the publication being distributed. x---,~.,~tr'xrv:~ Coin-operated newsracks and coin-onerated_ modular newsracks shall be equipped with a coin return mechanism to permit a person wishing to purchase a newspaper or periodical to secure an immediate refund in the event the newsrack is inoperable. At all times, the coin return mechanism shall be maintained in good working order. (D)(F) ~ Each controlling entity shall permanently affix to its modular newsracks and newsracks a label which states a 24 hour operable telephone number of a working telephone service which the customer may call to report a malfunction, or to secure a refund in the event of a malfunction of the coin return mechanism. The label shall feature clearly on its face, the name and address of the d~.str~.b'ater controlling entity_ to give the notices provided for in this chapter. 6 ORD NO. 45-98 fm~ Modular Newsracks ~. (1) In the following locations, individual newsracks are prohibited. Modular newsracks may only be placed on concrete pads which will be constructed by the City in the following areas: (a) Within the Downtown Area. 1. East Atlantic Avenue east of ~e FEC Railroad tracks adjacent to the parking lot on ~e west side of S.E. 3rd Avenue. 2. On the east side of the building located at the southwest corner of southbound Federal Highway and Atlantic Avenue. 3. The Mu~cipal Te~is Cemer, in close proximity to the clubhouse building. 4. In front of CiW Hall on N.W. 1st Avenue. 5. At the Gleason Bath House at Atlantic Avenue and South Ocean Boulevard. 6. Adjacent to ~e building located at 40 South Ocean Boulevard. (b) Wi~in the No~ Federal Highway Redevelopment Area. (c) Within ~e West Atlantic Avenue Redevelopment Area. (d) A modular newsrack may be placed on the west side of South Ocean Boulevard approx~ately 1 ,~ feet south of Linton Boulevard. ~~:, ..... :,~ ~:~,:~ ~:.. ~.~: ...... The color of ~e modular newsracks shall have gloss black bases, and forest green sides and doors. A color sample is available in the Co--unity Improvement Depa~ent n ..... ~"~ ........... u ~ .... ~ *~ ~-rcx;~/~ The controlling entity shall maintain each movable Rxmre in a neat and clean condition, and in good repair at all t~es. Each movable ~xmre shall be mainlined so that: 7 ORD NO. 45-98 (1) It is free of graffiti. (2) It is reasonably free of dirt and grease. (3) It is reasonably free of chipped, faded, peeling and cracked paint in the visible painted areas thereof. (4) It is reasonably free of rust and corrosion in the visible metal areas thereon. (5) The clear plastic or glass parts thereon, if any, through which the publications are viewed are unbroken and reasonably free of cracks, dents, blemishes, and discoloration. (6) The paper or cardboard parts or inserts thereof are reasonably free of tears, and are not peeling or tearing. (7) The structural parts are not broken or unduly misshapen. (8) The surrounding area upon which the newsrack or modular newsrack is placed will also be maintained in a neat and orderly condition. ,-~,~,t~xrT~ The use of a bench for advertising purposes is strictly prohibited. (t-I~LD Any newsrack or modular newsrack being installed, placed or maintained on a public right-of-way, street or sidewalk or other public property shall be installed in a safe and secure manner so as to prevent the newsracks or the modular newsrack from being stolen or becoming a hazard in severe weather. At any time, the total weight of the newsrack or modular ~ and any weighting device shall not be less than one hundred twenty-five (125) pounds. A modular newsrack must be secured to a concrete pad. (t-)tK) In the event of the issuance of a hurricane warning by any entity with jurisdiction to issue such a warning, the newsrack shall be secured to the ground or placed in such a manner so that the newsrack is parallel to the ground. (L) The controlling entity of a modular newsrack or newsrack shall not recover or collect, from entities placing for distribution publications in a newsrack, or modular newsrack payments in excess of the actual cost of the newsrack or modular newsrack, and the actual reasonable costs for maintenance. The cost of the modular newsrack may be prorated in proportion to the size of the individual module in a modular newsrack. The cost of a modular newsrack or newsrack may be paid over a 36 month period, or less. in equal monthly installments. The annual maintenance costs may be also paid in equal monthly installments. In no event, however, shall a controlling entity, collect payments over the actual costs referred to 8 ORD NO. 45-98 above, once recaptured. The controlling entity_ shall file a document with the Code Enforcement Administrator illustrating the monthly cost computations. flVl) The City. may order the removal of modular newsracks from public rights-of-way and City property in order to serve as a controlling entity of modular newsracks to ensure uniformity and compatibility of style. (NJ Modular newsracks shall not be placed on the concrete pad in a manner to obstruct other nlodular newsracks on the same concrete pad nor may they extend beyond the concrete pad. (O) Movable Fixtures shall be installed and maintained by the controlling entity or their agent or designee in conformity, with existing City_ ordinances. Any movable fixture found to be in violation of the City ordinances is subject to the enforcement provision of Section 102.47 and subject to abandonment where indicated by Section 102.46. Section 102.44 PROHIBITED LOCATIONS. (A) Landscaped Areas: Movable fixtures shall not be placed or installed or erected on any landscaped area within an improved public right-of-way or public property. Thc landscaped areas include, but are not limited to, those areas in which the following ground cover material is placed: (1) Decorative plants, or (2) Native plants maintained to match the surrounding flora. (]~) Concrete Pads: Modular newsracks may not be placed in any public right-of-way or on any City property unless installed on a concrete pad and securely affixegl thereto, x~tmrc'~,.~., Public Utilities: Movable fixtures shall not be placed, installed or erected to obstruct the use of any public utility pole or structure. These areas are designated as follows: (1) Drainage structures. Movable fixtures shall not be physically attached, chained or bolted to any drainage structure, inlet pipe or other physical object meant to carry water for drainage purposes. (2) Utility poles. Movable fixtures shall not be physically attached, chained or bolted to a utility pole. (3) Fire hydrants. Movable fixtures shall not be located within 15 feet of a fire hydrant. 9 ORD NO. 45-98 (C)/.DDTraffic Control Devices: Movable fixtures shall not be physically attached, chained, bolted or erected to obstruct the function of traffic signals, traffic signs or pavement markings. These areas shall be designated as follows: (1) Traffic signals. (a) Movable fixtures shall not be physically attached, bolted or chained to a traffic signal pole. (b) Movable fixtures shall not be placed in such a manner which obstructs the free pedestrian flow to and from a pedestrian traffic signal push button. In order to allow for the free pedestrian flow, and handicap access, to and from pedestrian traffic signal push buttons, movable fixtures shall be placed at least 36 inches away from such pedestrian traffic signal push buttons. (2) Traffic Signs. Movable fixtures shall not be physically attached, bolted or chained to a traffic sign or post used for the support of a traffic sign or signs. rr~(v~,...,~.,~ paved Surfaces: No movable fixture shall be placed, installed or erected directly on a paved surface which is intended primarily for the use of motor vehicles. ,~,..-..rx:xru~ Sidewalks: Movable fixtures placed or maintained on a sidewalk shall leave a clear area for traffic of not less than 40 inches. x-r~xxrc"~,.,.~., Bike Paths: Movable fixtures which are placed or maintained on a bike path shall leave a clear area for traffic of not less than 8 feet. r t"-x lI4 ~ ,...,,.., ~e, aLT. AZllr~ Movable fixtures shall not be installed, placed or erected within clear zones as defined in this section. Clear zones are defined as follows: (1) The area measured within four feet of the face of a six inch high vertically faced curb. Where the four foot minimum is impractical, the minimum may be reduced to 2 1/2 feet. (2) In all other locations, the movable fixture shall be located no less than ten (10) feet away from the edge of the pavement. If there is not ten (10) feet available, the movable fixture shall be located as far away from the edge of the pavement as possible. ,-.,IIl ~ Movable fixtures shall not be placed, attached, installed or erected within the sight areas defined in this section. For purposes of this section, sight areas extend vertically from a point commencing 3 feet above the pavement elevation, and encompass the triangular area of property located at a corner formed by the intersection of two or more public 10 ORD NO. 45-98 rights-of-way, with two sides of the triangular area extending twenty-five (25) feet from their point of intersection along the edge of pavement, and the third side being a line connecting the ends of the other two lines. (See Figure 1). All obstructions to the required sight distance shall be removed within the area shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 Typical Intersection (not to scale) (4)03 Other Areas: Movable fixtures shall not be placed, installed or erected in any of tile areas defined in this section. (1) Tile area within 50 feet of any railroad track. (2) On any City property unless the location has been specifically designated by the City Manager or any authorized representative. (a) The City Manager or the duly authorized City representative shall designate locations at City facilities for the placement of movable fixtures. (b) Tile City shall prepare a map for each City facility illustrating the designated locations for tile placement of movable fixtures. The location maps shall be available for inspection at the office of the City Clerk. (3) The area within tile medians of a divided roadway. 11 ORD NO. 45-98 (4) Newsracks or modular newsracks may not be placed within a one hundred fifty foot (150') radius of another newsrack containing the same newspaper, news periodical, or advertising circular except where separated by a street corner. Where warranted by the quantity of newspaper sales, the Code Enforcement Administrator may allow a double newsrack not more than forty (40) inches wide otherwise complying with the requirements of Section 102.43. (5) Newsrack and modular newsrack locations may be agreed upon by mutual consent of the City, publishers and distributors. (4) L6~ x::v,..~ m ...... *' Movable fixtures shall not be placed on any roadway, bike path or swale area in front of, to the rear of, or to the side of a single family residence within the City. Section 102.45 INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFCATION. (A) Insurance. Every ~,,1~1;~1~ .... ,4;t,~.~:l.~,,~-~ controlline entity other than a governmental entity or agency who places or maintains a newsrack or modular newsrack on a public right-of-way or public property shall provide to the Code Enforcement Administrator a current certificate of insurance, naming the City as an additional insured on October 1st of each year. Such insurance shall be comprehensive general liability or commercial general liability coverage on a form no more restrictive than the latest edition of the Comprehensive General Liability Policy or Commercial General Liability filed by the Insurance Services Office. Minimum limits of total coverage shall be $300,000.00 per occurrence combined single limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. Reasonable evidence of equivalent self- insurance coverage may be substituted by the applicant for the above certificate of insurance, subject to the approval of the City's Risk Manager. Insurance under this section shall run continuously with the presence of the applicant's newsrack(s) or modular newsrack(s) in the City's right-of-way, and any termination or lapse of such insurance shall be a violation of this section, subject to the appropriate remedy by the Code Enforcement Division under Chapter 37 of the City's Code of Ordinances and the enforcement provisions of this chapter. (B) Indemnification. Every ~f'~'11~'~1;~ .... ~;o*-;~11*fi~ controlline entity other than a governmental entity, or agency who places or maintains a newsrack or modular newsrack on a public right-of-way, public sidewalk, street or swale in the City shall execute and deliver a written agreement under which it agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any loss, liability or damage sustained by any person as a result of the installation, use and/or maintenance of a modular newsrack or newsrack within the City. This shall not be construed to affect in any way the City's rights, privileges and immunities as set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 12 ORD NO. 45-98 Section 102.46 ABANDONMENT. (A) In the event a newsrack remains empty for a period of thirty (30) continuous days for a monthly publication and fourteen (14) continuous days for all other publications, it shall be deemed abandoned and may ~'~ ~mp~ for fou,een (14) continuous days. it shall be deemed abandoned and posted as such. x~,.~_,~nxrc~ If the controlling entity is not identified on ~e movable fixture, it will be comidered abandoned and posted as such. '~x~n~ If ~e newsrack is placed at a City facility in a location not previously approved a newsrack is placed in a location where individual newsracks are prohibited, it will be comidered abandoned and posted as such. (E) If ~e controlling enti~ of a newsrack or modular newsrack is in violation of Section 102.43(L). it shall be considered abandoned and posted as such. Section 102.47 ENFORCEMENT. (A) Correction of Violation. Upon determination by a Code Enforcement Officer that a movable fixture has been installed, used or maintained in violation of this chapter, an order to correct the violation shall be issued to the controlling entity. If ~e a newsrack or modular newsrack is considered abandoned, it will be posted and an order will not be issued. (B) The order to correct the violation shall specifically describe the violation and may suggest actions necessary to correct the condition or violation. Such order shall be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the controlling entity. (C) Failure to properly correct the violation within fifteen (15) days of the receipt of the order shall result in the offending movable fixture being removed by the City. Any movable fixture removed by the City thereunder shall be stored at the controlling entity's expense for a period of thirty (30) days. The movable fixture shall be released upon a proper showing of ownership and payment of removal, administrative and storage charges. The administrative charge is $55.00 and the storage charge is $2.00 per day, up to a maximum of thirty (30) days. In the event the movable fixture is not claimed within the thirty (30) day period, the movable fixture may be sold at public auction and the proceeds applied first to removal, administrative and storage charges, and the remainder, if any, then paid into the General Fund of the City. 13 ORD NO. 45-98 (D) If the movable fixture is posted as abandoned and not removed within seven (7) days from the date of posting, or the City is not contracted by the controlling entity within seven (7) days from receipt of an order to correct the violation, the City may remove the movable fixture immediately. The City shall store the movable fixture for thirty (30) days and if not claimed within that time, the City may dispose of the movable fixture in any manner it deems appropriate. If the movable fixture is claimed, the entity claiming the movable fixture shall pay for all removal, administrative and storage charges prior to release of the fixture. If the charges are not paid within fifteen (15) days of claim being made, the City may dispose of the movable fixture. (E) At least ten (10) days prior to the public auction, the City Clerk shall publish a description of the movable fixture, the location from where it was removed, and notice of the auction in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. Any publication may include multiple listings of movable fixtures. The City shall also provide the controlling entity identified on the movable fixture, or if otherwise known, with written notification of the auction by certified mail, return receipt requested. Provided, however, that the City Manager, or his designee, may dispose of the movable fixture in any manner he sees fit, including negotiating the release of the movable fixture to the controlling entity for less than full payment of all storage charges if the City Manager, or his designee, is of the opinion that such disposal will be more advantageous to the City than auctioning off the movable fixture. Section 102.48 APPEALS. (A) Any per-son-~ controlling entity aggrieved by any order, finding or determination taken under the provisions of this ordinance other than abandonment of a newsrack or modular newsrack. (hereinafter an appellant) may file an appeal with the Code Enforcement Board for the City of Delray Beach. The appellant must effect their appeal within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the order mailed to the appellant pursuant to this ordinance. In order to effect the appeal, the appellant must deliver their letter of appeal, briefly stating the basis of their appeal, to the Clerk of the Code Enforcement Board. A hearing before the Code Enforcement Board shall be scheduled on the appeal no later than thirty (30) days following the receipt of the letter of appeal, unless the parties mutually agree to an extension thereof. The appellant shall be given at least 14 ORD NO. 45-98 seven (7) days written notice of the time and place of the hearing. The Board shall give the appellant and any other interested party a reasonable opportunity to be heard in order to show cause why the fixture is not violating this ordinance. At the conclusion of the hearing the Board shall make a final and conclusive determination. The determination shall be reduced to writing and signed by the Board and filed in the Office of the City Clerk within fifteen (15) days of the hearing and a copy shall be sent to the appellant. The decision of the Board shall be effective when rendered. The decision of the Board may be appealed as provided for by law. (B) Where the newsrack or modular newsrack is considered abandoned, the controlling entity, may take an immediate appeal to Circuit Court as provided by law, (C) During the pendency of an appeal, the removal of the movable fixture shall be stayed pending final disposition of the appeal, except if abandonment of the newsrack or modular newsrack occurs in violation of sections 102.46(A). (B). (D~. (E) and 102.43(L). and adversely effects the distribution of newspapers, news periodicals or advertising circulars from that location. (D) The City shall reimburse the controlling entity, any storage charges in the event the decision on appeal is rendered in favor of the controlling entity_. ~. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other that the part declared to be invalid. ~. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which conflict herewith be and the same is hereby repealed. Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October , 1998. ATTEST: ~ ~ City Clerk ~ ' First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading. October 20, 1998 15 ORD NO. 45-98 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~ITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM/C~C- REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 24-98 (ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1) DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1998 This is second reading and a public hearing for Ordinance No. 24-98 which adopts Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1, including: (1) Changes related to the adoption of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan, including text amendments and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments; (2) Changes related to the preparation of a program to preserve or mitigate the development of Hurricane Pines, an environmental site along S.E. 10th Street; and (3) Corrective FLUM amendments related to the road alignment in the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. The Planning and Zoning Board considered Amendment 98-1 at a public hearing on June 15, 1998, at which there was considerable discussion concerning the FLUM amendments associated with the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan, as well as the related downzonings and their effect of creating non-conforming uses. The Board recommended denial of the Seacrest FLUM amendments and related rezonings on a 5 to 2 vote (Archer and Schwartz dissenting), and ultimately voted 7-0 to recommend that Amendment 98-1 be transmitted without the Seacrest/Del-Ida FLUM amendments. On first reading of the ordinance and the transmittal hearing on July 21, 1998, the City Commission voted 4 to 0 (Mr. Schmidt abstaining) to accept the staff recommendation and transmit Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 in its entirety to the State for review. The Department of Community Affairs conducted a preliminary review and subsequently determined there was no need for Amendment 98-1 to be formally reviewed for consistency with F.S. Chapter 163 or Rule 9-J5 of the Florida Administrative Code. Two comments were made by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council with respect to proposed changes to Conservation Element Policy B-1.2 (Hurricane Pines). These are addressed in the attached staff report. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 24-98 on second and final reading. ref:agmemo7 TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER THRU: D OF PLANNING AND ZONING FROM: ~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, '1998 ** PUBLIC HEARING ** ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-'1 The action requested of the City Commission is that of adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1. The City Commission initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 on May 5, 1998. The proposed amendment contains: · Changes related to the adoption of the Seacrest/Lake Ida Neighborhood Plan, including text amendments and Future Land Use Map amendments. · Changes related to the preparation of a program to preserve, or mitigate the development of, Hurricane Pines (environmental site along S.E. 10th Street). · Corrective Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments related to the road alignment in the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. The FLUM amendments consist of two parcels, each containing 0.36 acres, one of which will be changed from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential), and the other from LD to TRN. On July 7, 1998 at a public hearing Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 was transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council for review. This meeting was also the first reading of the adoption Ordinance (No. 24 -98). The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) reviewed the amendment at their August 21, 1998 meeting and forwarded their comments to DCA. While the TCRPC did not recommended DCA conduct a formal review they had two comments with respect to proposed changes to Conservation Element Policy B-1.2 (Hurricane Pines). One comment emphasizes the value of small parcels in protecting endangered City Commission Documentation Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 Page 2 and threatened species (especially plants), and as an education and research venue. The other comment questions the desirability of allowing money which is donated to mitigate the effects of destroying native habitat to be utilized to manage existing conservation lands, rather than purchase similar habitat. However, the policy as proposed includes options to donation similar habitat, or donate funds to purchase similar habitat in the City of Delray. These are the preferred options and would be pursued if available. However, in absence of available land the policy provides the option of contributing to the maintenance of existing areas as a mitigation alternative. As there were no requests for formal review from either the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council or any affected person DCA has determined the proposed plan amendment does not need to be formally reviewed for consistency with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, nor Rule 9-J5, of the Florida Administrative Code. ^ letter affirming the waiver of formal review was received on August 26, 1998 (copy attached). The amendment is now ready for adoption by the City Commission. By motion, approve adoption Ordinance 24-98 on second reading. Attachments: DCA Response · Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Response · Ordinance 24-98, including Exhibit "A" consisting of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 S :\adv\com p\971 CC3 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS "Helping Floridians create safe, vibrant, sustainable communities" LAWTON CHILES JAMES F. MURLEY Governor Secretary ECEIVED August 26, 1998 AUG 2 8 1998 .,.,,.,,,,.,,,~,a~ .,-..,,, Alperin, Mayor City of Delray Beach 1 O0 Northwest l't Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Mayor Alperin: The Department has conducted a preliminary review of the City's proposed comprehensive plan amendment received on July 29, 1998, DCA Reference No. 98-1. The Department has determined that the proposed plan amendment need not be formally reviewed for consistency with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. In addition, the Department has not received any recommendation for review from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council or any affected person regarding the proposed amendment. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not be reviewed and the Objections, Recommendations and Comments report will be waived. The local government may proceed to immediately adopt the amendment. Also, pursuant to Section 163.3189(2)(a), F.S., the Department recommends that the County include the following language in the adoption ordinance regarding the effective date of the adopted amendment. "The effective date of this plan amendment shall be: The date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs finding the amendment to be in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; or the date a final order is issued by the Administration Commission finding the amendment to be in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S." 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100 Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.0781/Suncom 291.0781 Internet address: http://www.$tate.fl.u$/comaff/dca.html I:LORIDA IC['YS G~N SWAMP SOUTH FLORIDA R[-COV'ERY OFFICE Nea of Critica~ State C~ncem Field Ottlce Nea of Critical State Concern Field Office P.O. ~ox 4022 2796 Ove-~a~ Highway, Suite 212 155 E~ Surnrne*lin 8riO0 N.W. 361h St~ee( ~4arath0~, FI0dda 33050-2227 8~ow, Florida 338304~1 Miami, Flofi& 33159-4022 Honorable Jay Alperin August 26, 1998 Page Two Further, the Department's notice of intent to find a plan amendment in compliance shall be deemed to be a final order if no timely petition challenging the amendment is filed. Any affected person may file a petition with the agency within 21 days alter the publication of the notice pursuant to Section 163.3184(9), F.S. This letter should be made available for public inspection, laeyou have any question, please contact Courtney Harris, Planning Evaluation Specialist, overseeing the review of the amendment, at (850) 487-4545. Sincerely, Charles Gauthier, AICP Growth Management Administrator Bureau of Local Planning CG/ch cc: Mr. Paul Dorling, Acting Director, Planning and Zoning Department Mr. Michael Busha, AICP, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council COCEI: pianniq9 August 21, 1998 Mr. Paul Dorling Acting Director of Planning and Zoning City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. First Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Subject: City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan Draft Amendments - DCA Reference No. 98-1 Dear Mr. Dorling: Pursuant to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, the Council reviewed the above- referenced comprehensive plan amendments at its meeting on August 21, 1998. A review report was approved by the Council for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs as required by Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. A copy of the approved report is attached for consideration by your governing body prior to adoption of the amendments. Council will consider your response to any objections or comments contained in this report as an important factor in making a consistency recommendation on the adopted : ~i amendments. · [<~ Please send one copy of all materials related to these amendments directly to our office once -~. they are adopted by your governing body, pursuant to Chapter 9J-11, Florida Administrative ~.~ Code. ! t~ If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Terry L. Hess, AICP Planning Director TLH:wh Attachment RECEIVED ~:- AUG ? 5 1998 L 3~: c~s: o~c.mr ,~.o=:=. ~,,;i~= ,~:..~ PLANNING & ZONING RECEIVED TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANPqING COUNCIL AUG ? 5 1998 -- PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 5D From: Staff Date: August 21, 1998 Council Meeting Subject: Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review Draft Amendments to City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 98-1 Introduction The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statures, requires that the Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if ~. requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, or an affected · ~ person or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local government requests DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then the Council must provide DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt. Backm'ound The City of Delray Beach has transmitted proposed amendments to the City Comprehensive Plan. The City has not requested that the amendments be formally reviewed. Council's responsibility is to review the amendments and to notify the DCA if a formal ORC Report should be prepared. Evaluation The proposed amendments include: 1) text and Future ]2nd Use Map (FLUM) amendments to implement the Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Plan, 2) text amendments to promote the preservation or mitigation of development of an environmental site know as Hurricane Pines, and 3) corrective FLUM amendments related to the road ali~mament in the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. Future Land Use Map Amendments 1. Policy A-5.5 in the City's Housing Element called for the development of neighborhood plans to address deteriorating conditions in several areas of the CID'. Among the issues the plans are to address is the appropriateness of existing FLUM and zoning classifications. Plans are to be prepared for four neighborhoods, which were prioritized. The Seacrest/Del Ida Plan was to be fa'st. The Neighborhood Plan has now been completed and adopted. One of the objectives stated in the Plan is the elimination of problems associated with small lot duplex and multi-family development. In order to prevent future development of this nature, the FLUM is to be amended to redesignate 35 lots (total of 9.1 acres) from Medium Density to Low Density Residential and 7 lots (total of 3.2 acres) from Transitional to Low Density Residential (see attached maps). 2. Corrective amendments are to be made to two small parcels of land (total 0.7 acres) as a result of the final road alignment of Orchard Lane in the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. One parcel will be redesi~maated fi'om Transitional to Low Density Residential and the other from Low Density Residential to Transitional (see attached map). Text Amendments 1. Policy A-5,5 of the Housing Element has been amended to delete reference to the Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Plan, which has been completed and adopted. " 2. Policy B-1.2 of the Conservation Element has been amended to reflect the City's efforts to preserve the Hurricane Pines eeosite. This three-acre pine scrub site was identified in the 1988 "Inventory of Nature Ecosystems in Palm Beach County .... ". It was ranked as a second priority for acquisition and is not presently under consideration for purchase through the County program. The City debated the disposition of the site during its EAR process btrt came to no ultimate decision regarding the future of the site. The site is privately owned and subject to development. The City has elected to revise its existing policy regarding this site to be more specific. The previous policy made reference to preservation through sensitive site planning or mitigating its development through mitigating banking. The proposed revision indicates that any proposed development for the site will require a detailed environmental assessment. If preservation is not feasible, the development order will require the developer to enter into a mitigation agreement with the City which will require the developer to devote land with a similar habitat to be preserved or funds to allow the purchase of similar habitat or the management of existing conservation lands. Extra jurisdictional Impacts These amendments were processed by the Palm Beach County Intergovernmental Plan Amendment Review Committee on May 15, 1998. According to the Clearinghouse Coordinator, no objections have been received regarding the amendments. Effects on Significant Regional Resources or Facilities Analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they would not have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. Objections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments A.Objections 1. None B. Comments 1. The City is commended for its past and current efforts to preserve the Hurricane Pines site, located along SE' 10th Street between U.S. 1 and Dixie Highway. According to the background materials provided with the proposed amendment, there was a good deal of sentiment during the EAR process to delete the site from the list of those to be afforded special protection because the site would yield limited environmental benefits and may be impossible to sustain as a viable · y':, ecosystem. The Strategic Regional Policy Plan points out, however, that the protection of small parcels of natural communities in urban areas can be very important to protecting endangered and threatened species, especially plants. Significant populations of endangered and threatened species have been discovered on very small sites in the Region. Such sites may be of greater importance in the future as additional habitat is lost. Biological diversity is very important. Such sites can also be valuable for local educational and research purposes. 2. The proposed changes to Policy B-1.2 relating to the Hurricane Pines site are desirable with one exception. The policy would allow the City to permit development on this site without preservation if the developer donates funds to be used for the management of existing conservation lands. Money which is donated to mitigate the effects of destroying native habitat should be used for purchasing other habitat. While the management of such lands is an important component of preservation, other sources should be utilized to fund management. Recommendation Based on the lack of identified extrajurisdictional impacts and impacts to significant regional resources or facilities, Council does not recommend that an ORC Report be prepared. Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs Attachmems ORDINANCE NO. 24-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE "LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT", FLORIDA STATUTES SECTIONS 163.3161 THROUGH 163.3243, INCLUSIVE; ALL AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ENTITLED "COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1" AND INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach exercised the authority granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections 163.3161 through 163.3243, known as the "Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and WHEREAS, via Ordinance No. 82-89, the City Commission adopted the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan - Delray Beach, Florida"; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, did prepare an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1"; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, following due public notice, held a public hearing on June 15, 1998, in accordance with the requirements of the "Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and WHEREAS, after the above referenced public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, recommended to the City Commission that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 be transmitted; and WHEREAS, proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 was submitted to and reviewed by the City Commission; and WHEREAS, following due public notice, the first of two required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 was held by the City Commission on July 7, 1998, at which time it was authorized to be transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs for required review; and WHEREAS, a report of Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) has been received from the State Department of Community Affairs and said report has been reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency; and WHEREAS, following due public notice, the second of two required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 was held on October 20, 1998, in accordance with statutory requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, hereby declares its intent to exercise the authority granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections 163.3161 through 163.3243, inclusive, known as the "Local Government Planning and Land Development Regulation Act" Section 2. That in implementation of its declared intent as set forth in Section 1 of this ordinance, there is hereby adopted the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1", which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3. That the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan - Delray Beach, Florida" is hereby amended pursuant to the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1" Section 4. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 6. That this ordinance shall become effective upon the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs finding the amendment to be in compliance in accordance with Chapter 163.3184, F.S0; or the date a final order is issued by the Administration Commission finding the amendment to be in compliance in accordance with Chapter 163.3184, F.S. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October~ /~/, 1~98. First Reading July 7, 1998 Second Reading October 20, 1998 - 2 - Ord. No. 24-98 TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ~".<.?.:.ii?.!i~"::¢~:,.~;<'.:..i~"...".i!i~!!.'.'.~i~ii!!!~:.¢~.~.~??.~.~...~.~¢.~.~...~.~...~.~.`.`.~...~¢~..~.`~..i..T?~.?.~:..~....:~..~.......¢¢~.~...`..~.~.`...~i.`.~..~:~`..~.`~;?~.::.~.~!~..:~...~~..?`~.`.`.~...~.?~..~?...~..~7~¢,.~!~?i`.;`iii~```~:?.~.~i~!.:¢?.!~!!i~.:~;!!.:~!~!~ii!~i Page ':- FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 2 AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Citation Club/Hammock Reserve 2 HOUSING ELEMENT Policy A-5.5 (Neighborhood Plans) 4 CONSERVATION ELEMENT Needs and Recommendations Policy B-1.2 (Hurricane Pines) SUPPORT DOCUMENTS Appendix i Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Plan 2 Seacrest/Del Ida FLUM Amendments 3 Citation Club/Hammock Reserve FLUM Amendments 4 Hurricane Pines CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ,FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT.~ AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP Amendments on 35 parcels of land (totaling 9.05 acres) from Medium Density Residential (5-12 du/ac) to Low Density Residential (0-5 du/ac). Amendments on 7 parcels of land (totaling 3.23 acres) from Transitional to Low Density Residential. All of these amendments are in conjunction with the Seacrest/Lake Ida Neighborhood Plan.. See Support Documents #1 (SeacrestJDel Ida Neighborhood Plan).and 2 (Seacrest/Del Ida FLUM Amendments) for a complete discussion of this item. ' - Corrective amendments on 2 parcels of iand totaling 0.72 acres. One parcel will be amended from Transitional to Low Density Residential; the other parcel will be amended from Low Density Residential to Transitional. Both amendments are related to the final road alignment in the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments, and will clean up the designations within the individual developments. See Support Document #3 (Citation Club/Hammock Reserve FLUM Amendments)'~or a complete discussion of this item. HOUSING ELEMENT 1) Location: Pg. HO-30, Policy A-5.5 (Neighborhood Plans) Policy A-5.5 These areas shall be provided assistance through the development of a "neighborhood plan" which is directed toward the arresting of deterioration through physical improvements such as street lighting, street trees, landscaping, street repair, drainage improvements, sidewalks, parks and parking areas, installation or upgrading of water and sewer facilities, all of which may be provided through funding and/or assessment districts. The plans shall also address the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications, traffic circulation patterns, abatement of inappropriate uses, and targeting of code enforcement programs. The plans shall be prepared by the Planning and Zoning Department, with assistance from the Community Improvement Department, and the Community Redevelopment Agency if located within the CRA district. At least one neighborhood plan shall be prepared each fiscal year. The priority for these plans is as follows: Page 2 r3 Seacrest/Del Ida Allen/Eastview/Lake Avenues (to be addressed in the N. Federal Plan) Osceola Park Delray Shores ...... Change: REVISION Policy A-5.5 These areas shall be provided assistance through the development of a "neighborhood plan" which is directed toward the arresting of deterioration through physical improvements such as street lighting, street trees, landscaping, street repair, drainage improvements, sidewalks, parks and parking areas, installation or upgrading of water and sewer facilities, all of which may be provided through funding and/or assessment districts. The plans shall also address the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications, traffic circulation patterns, abatement of inappropriate uses, and targeting of code enforcement programs. The plans shall be prepared by the Planning and Zoning Department, with assistance from the Community Improvement Department, .and ~the Community Redeve. lopment Agency if located within the CRA district. At least one 'neighborhood plan shall be prepared each fiscal year. The priority for these plans is as follows! ' r3 Allen/Eastview/Lake Avenues (to be addressed in the N. Federal Plan) -- Osceola Park Q Delray Shores Comment: The Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Plan, called for in this policy, has been completed and adopted. See Support Document #1 (Seacrest/Del Ida Neighborhood Plan) for a summary of the adopted work. Page 3 CONSERVATION ELEMENT 1) Location: Pg. CO-8, Needs and Recommendations NEEDS AND RECOMMENDATiONS Summarizing from the above, the foli6wing needs and recommendations are identified in the Conservation Element: Continuation of the beach erosion control program. · Promotion of water quality and weed control improvements in Lake Ida and associated drainage canals. · Continued pursuit of water conservation programs. · Promotion of water conservation through public education. · Development and/or implementation of programs for the preservation of Delray Oaks, the Donnelley Tract, and FIND parcels 645 and 650. · Establishment of an interpretive trail at the Leon Weekes Environmental Preserve. · Development of a program to preserve a portion of the Hurricane Pines parcel or mitigate its development through a form of mitigation banking. - _ Change: REVISION NEEDS AND REGOIVIMENDA TIONS Summarizing from the above, the following needs and recommendations are identified in the Conservation Element: · Continuation of the beach erosion control program. · Promotion of water quality and weed control improvements in Lake Ida and associated drainage canals. · Continued pursuit of water conservation programs. · Promotion of water conservation through public education. Page 4 · Development and/or implementation of programs for the preservation of Delray Oaks, the Donnelley Tract, and FIND parcels 645 and 650. · Establishment of an interpretive trail at the Leon Weekes Environmental Preserve. Comment: The program addressing the future of Hurricane Pines has been completed. See Support Document ¢4 (Hurricane Pines) for a complete discussion of this item. Policy B-1.2 The City shall develop a program, in FY 97/98, to preserve the Hurricane Pines parcel along S.E. 10th Street to the extent feasible through sensitive site planning, or mitigate its development through a form of mitigation banking. Change: REVISION ~- ~;~i.~+~ ~. dc':~pm~nt +~ .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;+;'~+;-~ ~;~- Any development Dro~osal fgr the Hg~icane Pines site along S.E. loth Street shall be accompanied by a complete, indeDendent assessment of the environmentally sensitive po~io~8 of the site. The assessment shall define the exact area of environmentally sensffive flgr~, ~nd address the ~otential for Drese~ation of the area. If ff is dete~ined by the C~ thst Drese~ation i8 not feasible, a condition of the develoDment order ~Jll be for the ~eveloper to ~nt~r into a mitigation agreement with the C~ wher6by the developer will donate land with a similar habitat to be orese~ed, or funds to be used for the purchas~ of similar habitat within the Ci~ or the management of ~xi~ting conse~ation lands. Th~ amount of the donation will be. based on the apDraised value of Hu~cane Pin~s. and will eaual the value of the environmentally sensitive are~ which will be lost throggh develoDment. Comment: The program addressing the future of Hurricane Pines has been completed. See Support Document #4 (Hurricane Pines) for a complete discussion of this item. S:~aclv~,omp\98-1 Page 5 SUPPORT DOCUMENT # 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1 SEACREST/DEL IDA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) geacres / Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan ¢it~ crf IPetraw Beach IPe!ra~j Beach Com_~..unituj Redevelopment Agenc~j EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF THE PLAN The "?lan Z,:pIc~,~tation" section outiines the ,--ne "Residential Neighborhood Categor:-ZaQon Map," s~ateg).' for the revitaIizaQon of the neighborhood, contained in the Housing Eiernent of the Cit',"s including the actions that the Cit,' will take ~e facilitate Comprehevsive Pian. delineates neighborhoods ~roughout the Ci~' according to the prevaiimg condi~on of pcb'ate properS'. The maL'~ objective of EXISTING CONDITIONS ~'~e categor~ma~on ~ to iden~;,' t~ne leve! of need ~m Development Pattern each neighborhood, which in turn will dete.-mme the The nei§hborhood area contains a mix of residen~al, s=ateg'i~ to be taken in meeting that need. The commercial, office, and commun.in' facili~' la.nd uses. 5eacrest/De]-Ida Park Neighborhood ~ currently ~ne area also contains many undeveioped parcel. The categorized as follows: pz~ncipal land uses are detached singl~faznily residences and duplexes, Six hundred eighteen single- Revitalization - Evid¢zce o£ decline ir: :ondia'on family parcels take up 64.19% of the land area and 105 q.'.'s~:~zres and yard~; increase i~: crhnc: prop.~ny duplex parcels tale up 9.55%. Other major land uses vaJz~es staomza~z~. or declining, in the area include 45 undeveloped parcels ($.11~ %) and 1 public school ('Plu.mosa Elementary School~ with ..'i-ne Comprehensive Plan calls for areas with this 4.5%. categorization to have a g-rearer ?riori~' in terms of t~rgeting of code enforcement and law e_nYorcement - There are severa2 resid&ntia] subdh'isions with/n the operations; and to have a ~reater priofitT.' in the neighborhood area. containing a mix of single-family, scheduling of capital improvements (infras='ucmre) duplex and mu.lt,-family structures. Overall, the which will assist in arc,ting visual si~m,s of neighborhood contains 6-~2 single-family residential detm'ioration. It also calls for the creation of a units, 21 apartments/g-uest houses associated with Neighborhood Plan. single fa.mil)', 240 duplex uni~ and 94 multi-family units for a total of 997 residenff~.l units. ..--ne overa/i purpose of tlnis Neighborhood Plan is to -. capitalize on the streno~hs of ~e area and vrovirle methods to deal ~'ith the weaknesses. The ?lan inappropriate mix o£small-parcel duplex and multiple provides the ~amework for the re~d~7~tion of the famiiv development ~-ith single famih' residences. A "Seacrest/DeI-Jda Park Neighborhood," bordered by major concern o£ neighborhood residents is the m_ F.E.C. Railroad on the east; $~,-inton Avenue on the contmuatio;~ and pot-'_ntial expansion o~ this west; .NE 4u~ Street on the south and the ci~, limits to ' development pattern. Over 75% of the residen~al units ~ne north. The vlan is organized into three sections, the in the areas where this deveiovment pattern occurs are · 'Ln=oduc~-Jon'', "=_xJsiing Conditions" aa~d "Plan rentals. Unfortunateiy, the combination of apathetic knpl~__mentation", landlords and un.motivated tenants has resulted in many deteriorating duvlex and mulS-famih' ..--ne "Introduction:' Wes a bri~ backg-ro,~nd anr~ properties. Lark of building maintenance (painling, hisro.~' o£ the azea. ~t abe . ~_s,.~v_ the vu~-ooseofthe ~indow and door repair, etc.'), inade~uare and ?1am and Wes a bri~d su.mzna.m' of the pianning overgro~-n la~n~szapin§, crowding and overpazking .'~rocess that heived shaped the contenr-, o.~ the Plan. are the major probiezns. Combined, these ?robiems have a blightin$ L'zfiuence on adiacent single iaznih' ;-ne "Ezisting Conditions" section des~..-'ribes the homes. '~ result .-~ a ma,nv of these homes have neighborhood in terms of the factors that reflect the converted to rentals-the probl~, escalate and the ouah~' of life in *,.he area. It contat,~.s a description o:' bLisht spreads. the e×~ting land uses, zordng, and .;u~are Land Use ~.,..' ~-'~ desig'na~ons ~at a??lv.. .-t~nah'ses of Back-out parking onto adjacent roadways ~ the ~'pica! develovment va~erns, occu'oan~m' star',-s, vrove:'n' Darkin~ a_-ran_~e_ment ','aJues. i.nf-ras~acture, code endorzement aa;lis and the neighborhood, ir; most cases, the number of s~aces z.-~-n.e =robiem.sareaisoLnzluded. are n:~ximized w~tln tlne entire roadway flung-ge covered ~. as~)',a~t w,~thout the benefit o£ landszaved · $.i..=.CR'EEL,DEL-ID.~. PARK .','EIGHBORHOOD PL4N EX.s. CU'7,;~? .~',.I.~ixL.%I:Y breaks be.h~'een spaces. .'i-hiS de~rades he appearance Highway and +dne ne~ghb,~:hovd, Tiv..sc. area., are of ~e azea, affec~ d:ama~e and encourages speeding, x'~ualix' unat~ac~x'e, and generate noise within thc. neighborhood. O~ ~e ~08 duplex pazce~ wi~m ~e neighborhood. 93 (85%) are non-coMorm~. Two parce~ are ]ocated m Tr~c Issues ~e R-l-AA d~ict, wh~ do~ not pe~it duplex~. Traffic proble~ wi~m ~e neighborhood include Of ~e rem~g parcel, 65 (6~%) are non-co~ormm~ sp~d~g on NE lnd and 5wmton Avenues as well ~d~n respect to lot s~e (i.e. ]ess fnan S,000 sq. f{:), 4 on local residen~a] s~S, ]ack of observance at stop parce~ (4%) do not meet talcum lot wid~ si~, ~nd non-residenha] ~rough ~affic to Federal re~emen~ (i.e. less ~ 60 ft. wide) ~d ~ parce~ Highway on NE l~": S~eet. N~ 14" Smeet and NE ~._, ,~) are non-colognE wiah respect tv um~ s=e (i.e. S=~t Co~iderahon must be pven to el~hna~ns ]~s ~ %000 sq. ff.) exc~sive f~rough-=~fic on residenha] s=ee*J m neighborhood w~ch are headed for ~e commercial .~ mulh-f~v development ~J~ ~e neighborhood comdor. w~ fo~d to ~ non-co~o~g ~J~ r~pect to d~i~'. Wi~ ~e RL zone (~6 du/a~e), ~ mulE- PLAN IMPLEMENTATION f~v b~gs have de~iE~ ~,~n 19 ~d 27 du/'a~e. Wi~ ~e ~ zone (6-12 du/a~e), 1 m~d- ~e ~p]~enm~o~ pro~a~ ~d wor~ e]emenu of ~v b~g h~ a de~im- of 20 du/a~e ~d four ~ ~1~ =e ~ed at a~evmg ~r~ major objec~v~: o~ers have a de~i~' of 40 du,/a~e. Two b~s ~d~ ~e n~hborhood are ]ocated m a m El~mit=~on ~ ~]~ ~ob~s ~ssosmtcg u,ffh st~m~f ~o~ zo~g ~ w~ do~ not pe~t ~e ~e. Bo~ of dupZe:' and mul~':family ~elopment. Prohibiffm: ~e b~gs ~e located ~ ~e D~-ida P~k n~, dup~' m~d mulff~famfly ~oeZopment n~h sub~v~ion, ~d~ ~e R~R~idenffal,/Office zo~g' ~gc Bush Bou~o~d. ~ct. ~ Redurffon o~ t~ nega~ve impacts asso:i:ted with through and non-resi~aI vehi~Zar ~affic on lo:at Hidoric S~uc~res resi~ s~ec~s. There ~e 105 b~gs ~ ~e nmghborhood over 50 ye~s old. Geo~ap~c~y, 45 (~.9%,) ~e located ~ Im~,ement qf t~ physical ~earance qf t~t ~d~ ~e DeMda P~-k ~to~c D~ct ~e n~ghb~hood ti~ough enimnzed polict_ac~vi~i, co~ - r~m~g 60 b~gs ~e located ou~ide ~e ~to~c ~f~:~e~zt :~;d ~ ~out prote~ve re~o~ m place to vr~e~,e ~e~ ~to~c v~ue. Of ~e 60 b~gs, 55 ~LB~ Amendments ~nd Rezo~ings ~ .....o ~ ~e located ~d~, ~e D~ Park sub~v~ion. It ~ ~e ~tent oi ~ pl~ ~at ~ new residen~ Code Enforcement developm~t or redevelopment, not located ~d~ Del-Ida P~k ~to~c D~ct be smgled~y ~e ioca~on of ea~ prop~, ~d~ ~e n~ghborhood de~ed ho~mg. ~ ~d zo~g desi~a~ov~ w~ e~ed ~d~ r~pect to ~e n~ o~ m~d~t ~ ~ ~ded where nec~s~' to suppo~ ~ go~. c~ g~eramd. G~er~y, ~e n~r of m~d~t c~ Wi~ ~e DeMda P~A RO ~d RL zo~g w~ com~t~t ~ ~e~ o~ ~e neighborhood ~d~ low d~i~' mffi~-~v ~d/'or d~plex development ph~)' smgled~y r~id~n~al development: ~ con~ue to ~ p~ed ~der ~e con=o] of where,, ~e n~ber o~ mcid~t c~ w~ si~c~dy ~toric Pr~e~'a~on Board. ~gher m ~e~ where duplex ~ m~-f~v 6eveiopmen¢ ~ prevalent. Most v~-ce~ ~d~ ~e neighborhood area w~ re~. ~ ~nt ~bL2~ ~d zo~g 6esi~a~on. However, Adjacent Nuisances ~plem~m~on ~ ~e neighborhood pian w~ rea~e The neighborhood' ~ adjac~t to a n~b~ o~ ~bb~ amen~ent ~d/or r~o~g o~ some p~ceb m proposes ~d ~o~m~on fa~ ~at ~ffe~ ~e ~e area. ~e proposed Fu~re L~d Use M~v smb~' o~ ~e neighborhood. D~ec~v to ~e e~t o~ Zo~g Map ~or ~e Neighborhood Area are ~e neighborhood ~ ~ e~g co~erci~ co=i~or ~ ~es mziu~mg automo~ve s~es ~d rep~, z~e proposed ~_L~ amendmen~ ~d rezo~s res~ur~n~ ~d s~v co~ercia] development, z~e mziude: develovment &on~ on Federal :~ighway, which ~u~ ~e rear of b~m~s ~nd se:,'ice are~ ~azmg Dixie n Amendment of FLL'M desi~a~on from "Medium Street, NE ]6'r S~eet. NE 22 .... Street, gi~:ic Densi~, Residential" to "Low Den$iN' Residential" Boulevard (be,~veen NE 2"a Avenue and NE 3 and rezoning from RM to R-I-A of 34 parcels Avenue) and NE 3'~ Avenue (be~veen George located on the east side of NE x'~: * '~ -- , .~x ,nue, north of Bush Boulevard and NE "~"~ Street). Install round- N'E 14th S~eet. Smgle-fami!y zonmg (R-1-.~K) abouts and divided roadways on selected streets. exists west of this area and si>: parcels to be Consideration may also be Wen to installing a rezoned are currently developed as single family temporaD, street closure at the NE 14'~ Street homes.; - ~. railroad crossing until these traffic calming devices are mstaIled. -, Amendment of FLUM desig'nation from __. Reduce the highway feel on local residen~al streets ~ransil2ona, to "Low DensJ~' R~i~dential" of a by removing addi~onal pavement used for parcels and rezonmg from RL to R-1-A_~ of 2 street parking on ail stogie family homes and parcels located on .NE ~ Street. The moo parcels to multi-famih' s~-acmres where possible. be rezoned are the ordy properties in the area -, Evaluate the possibiJi~' of chang-ing the caution cua'rentty zoned RL. They are surrounded on three signal to traffic light at Swinton Avenue and sides by single-family homes zoned R-fA&.; and George Bush Boulevard. = There is a need for stricter enforcement of speed = Rmzoning from RL to R-1-A of 1~ parcels located limits on N'E 2~ Avenue (Seacrest Boulevard) and east of .NrE 2"~ Avenue (Seacrest Boulevard), Swinton Avenue as well as on local residential bet-ween George Bush Boulevard and .NE 1Bth streets. Street. The area contains a mix of single-family = Ban through truck traffic north of NE_ 4th Street on homes, duplexes and multi-family s,'-uct-m'es. The Swinton and N-E 2-a Avenue (Seacrest Boulevard). ~.-eas to the north and west are zoned Rd-AA. Within this area, these are residential streets. This 5ingleFami]y. ~'pe of traffic should be using North Federal I-Lighway, Con~s Avenue, or 1-95. Land Development Regulations a Remove comF~c~fi_ng lanc~Lscaping at the interseddons where vis~b~t-y is a problem ?rocess~ of LDR ~ex~ a.mo- ,.,td.mertts made necessa_~,; by the Neig]hbo~hoort ?lan ~Sfl] be L~tiated = ~equJze ]a~m ma~ena~ce compa.~es to ~ar]< in m~rte~nt~ly follow, t§ tSe adoption of t_he pla_~..As d.dvewavs where possible ~o avoid bloc 'id.rig tra.~c. dJscussed in the "£:'z's~noo Cc~z~fi,~c~" ~eci:ioz~, there are -~ Zr~tnil £mproved s~g-na§e to rou~e people around a considerable nu.mber of non-coz~oz-m~g zes~dential the neiDhborlhood to Federal sti~.zctures ~thJ_n the nei§ihborSood. AddfitionaZty, = Convert ~al<e Court back to t~,o-wav ~ra~c flow. ma_nv au?]exes and multi-faznj.lv bu~ld.mgs will become non-confoz-min§ with respe~ to ~se as a resa]~ Streetscape of the recoz3'Lmended rezorfings. ]t is a Eoal o£ ~ ?]a_n ]t is recom_mende~ that stree~cape Lmwovements be ~at residen~fia.l propeyfies in the neigSborSood be made to ~e neighborhood w~ch includes addfitional u~aded and ~mproved. A~'ticie 1.3 o£ the LDR's, street liE'nts, street trees, repafiz of damaged s~dewalJ<s, NONCO.N~FOrdvZ~G U5~. LOT_~ A_N-D the adc~o~ o£ new s~dewa.Ucs, removal of ~egal on- 5"~U~. places li3~ts on expend~t'u-~es for repaJ.r street paz']d_~§, and the reconstruction of d.ra~ase and ma.tnte~ance of non-conformfiz~§ uses and swales. '/'ne ]-~omeo~-ne:s .Associations sSould be s~"ac~u.res. Zn order to prevent tu.~-ther decay, a_n revolved L~ the location end des~g'n o£ n/1 new fac'JfiJties. ~.m~,'td.ment to the LDR's ~5.1~ be ~,-d~ated to ~ease or ~undJ~§ for the projec~ would be s~h~ed ~v the C~', efi. bz~ate the CUZTent ex-~endfi~e ]Zmfi~ w~thj_~ the CRA. a~d t. he prope,"~.' o~-ners. ]tis reco]z~nended that z~e~Sbo:5ood., the nmgS~or'noo~ create a Wopert-}.' ~nprovement 8Jsl:r~,-'t wSjzh, in ~m.m, wou.l~ be the legal enti,",' lraffic w~ the C~? would create a partners?Lip. The '/'ne follo,~in§ ~easu.res are reco~menc~ed to he]? £oz'mation o£ a woperty Lmwovement distz~ct would a.Uev~ate the ~rob]ems associated w~ excessive We the owners a collective voice in Lmprovm$ theL- t. hzough e. nd non-residential vehJ~--~l~ ~n.~/-Jc in the neighborSood. ~ne clJs~dct would contribute a nei$hborhood: o~ the moneys needed to ;pa}' for the Lmerovemen~. ', L-,.stall =affic calming measures (svee,d humps) on ~ pia~-, also recommends o,x ,lopm_m of a selected s=eets. At a rrd~"v-=num, sveed humvs to provide additional exterior ligh~ng on private shouia be i.,,.sraIie~d or, .N-E '.3th S~'eet, .NE_ !4th propert?'. Under ~ program, the Ci=' and C'7',_~. woul,d share the cost with ind.~vidua] orover~' o~,mers · Sr_4CF~E,.CT/'Dzy.-IDA PAF, K >,"ZIGHBOF, ZZOOD ?L.4.\ £Z£CL'-F;V£ Ynese lights would impro\'e securiw m ',.he be prepared to ?urchase any propernes m dnis area snor~-t~rn~,. neighborhood by fiI!mg m ~e dark spots be~veen ~at become ~vailable m tlne ' · o s=eet Firs~ Steps Public Parking Lots immed~ateh' io]]owm~ ~e a~op~on of 6qis plan, ~ p~rt o~ ~e over~ s~ee~c~e pro~m for ~e processm~ of ~e Comprehe~h'e Pian amendment, neiDhborhood, it ~ recommended d~at ~e CRA acquire Forte L~nd Use M~p amendmenu~, Land one or more ]o~c on each block w~nm ~he hiDher Development Re~la~o~ text amendmen~ de~iw durlex 'muld-J~v ~r~=~ These io~ w~ be rezo~cs reouL-ed to im~iement ~e plan w~X bem~ use~ for ~qe co~ucaon of off-s~eet p~;km~ ]o~ for ;ne C~'s Commu~w ~ .... ~_]o ....... Plan wm · e r~iden~. T~ w~ help ~eviate many of ~e need to be revved to include ~e projes~ and proble~ ~sodnted wi~ ~e ]~rDe number of ~nck-out pro~ included m ~e Neighborhood p~ spac~ on ~e s~eet ~d ~rovide oppor~es to m~ ad~ona] i~dscn~m~ ~d drY.De. M~rs of ~e ~omeo~ers A~socia~ons who h~ve p~r~p~ted m ~qe deve]opment of ~ P]~ should Del-ldo Park Residenfial/O~qce Dis~icf be~ to ~eet wi~ o~er neighborhood residen~ to ~ order to ~nc~te ~usm~s 6eve]o~m~t m ~e RO ~ss ~e provsior~ o~ ~e ?i~ ~d ga~er ~ict, it ~ recommended 6~t ~e CP~ co~ider for ~e 5?ed~ Assessment D~ict. ncq~i~on of one or more ~rce~ to ~rov~6e p~. It ~ reco~ended ff~n~ ~D ~or ~ Since ~e c~pi~] ~provemen~ included m ~e p~ be Fovided by ~e ~ ~d/or Ciw. ~e are not vet included m ~e 5-Ye~ C~pi~] p~ spaces woui~ ~en be sold to adjacent' pro~ for eider ~e Ciw or ~e C~N, ~ese prope~ who ~h to redeveios ~e~- prope~es or Hi~oric Di~ic~ Expansion ~p]em~on of ~e capi~ ~rovemen~ It ~ ~e reco~enda~on of ~ ~1~ ~at n ~toric m ~e Pi~ ~ ~st req~e ~e prep~ra~on of s~evs. ~ work element sho~d be sche6~ed ev~on~on of ~e b~q~s m ~ ~e~ be conducted, soon ~ ~ossible. l~=ne~ ~e su~,evs ~e~ompleted, ~e ~ ~e r~ o~ ~e s~dv ~cate ~nt it ~ w~ted, en~ee~n$, desi~ ~d de.ed cost-es~at~ o~ no~ al George D~sh ~o~ev~r~ to include ~e DeX ~comes ~v~able. P~-k sub~v~ion. O~er new pro~ con.ed m ~e ~ ~ FZ.~. Railroad Buffer onfi Linear Park deveio~ed'~d ~iemented ~ oppo~m~es ~e ~d ~e apve~ce, of ~e adiacent, r~oad _~ht-of-wav= . ~dm~ becomes av~able. ~d D~ie ~ghway h~ a seno~ ~pa~ on ~e neighborhood. ~ne ~ ~ ~e a po~on of ~e mx Fundin9 Sources m~ement generated by new develovment ~d ~e Ciw ~d ~ ~ vrovide whatever suv~o~ r_a.x.lovm_n, of~eNo~Feder~Z~ghway :o~dor av~abie to ~smt m ~e ~=]em~on of ~.av. b~ers along ~qe ra~-oa~. Neighborhood Pi~,. r~n~ for some ~vrovemen~ may ~e avafiabie from ~e CiW or ' = . ~'ough Zqe CP~&'s ~x m~ement =.n_~ ~;at_-~x by new vessib~w oi ~ea~n~ a ~ne~- v~-~ aion~ ~e r~oad development ~d redevelopment m ~e neighborhood =a:~ adjacent to N~ 3'~ Avenue. ~ p~ wo~d ~d m ~e N. De~er~ ~ghway comdor. O~er vro~i~e oppo~es for p~sh, e re~ea~or, m ~e ~ea ~provem~ m~v be ~ced m p~t ~ough ~e ~d ~eate a b~ffer ' o ,~ v.~.~u~er~-oad ~ud +' ~smgle- esmb~b~t of one or more special ~sessment i~)' neighborhood ro ~e west. ~ne pm-k wo~d a~o d~c~ ~eated v~su~t to ~e neighborhood enable ~e Ciw to vrovide a6~i~or,~ sto~water · ~e CP~& ~ expend ~n~ on beha~ of ~e reten~on m ~e area. Cov~c~on of ~e ~ark could be ~n~nzed m 9~-t by m. ~ari~ ~nd re.eaton ~oazt neighborhood m order to create ~e reau~ed Sveaa] Assessment ~ees ~6 =x increment ..... ~ S~ ~-'=~ ~v . _a-x _:o. m_n. _. ~ne area mhd along ina ~<ori~ Federa] ...... ~'~,'a~' .o...,~..~ --~x.. SUPPORT DOCUMENT # 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1 SEACREST/DEL IDA NEIGHBORHOOD FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE' June 15. 1998 AGENDA ITEMS: IV.A. 1. Future Land Use Ma.2 Amendments from, TRN ('Tra2siti~na!} to LD (Low DensitY Residential, 0-5 units/acre) tr. pa'~-anr.; from, MD (Medium Density Residential, 5-12 units;acre) to LD" ' t~-:)~ Density Resi0ential, 0-5 units/acre) in Imnlementatior, Generally Located Screen Seacrest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and Be~een Gearge Bush Boulevard and Atlantic High 1.a.Assdciated Rezonincs from RL (Multisle Family Resiaen~ia',-Low Density) to R-I-~ (Single Family Residential) in (Multiple Family Residential-Medium Densi~) to R-i-A (Singie Family Residential) in paA, and from RL (Multiple Family Residential-Low Densi~) to R-i-A (Single Family Residential) in Conjunction with the implementation of the Seacres;'De;-Ida Park Neighbo~ood Plan, Generally Located Baleen Seacrest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and~.~..n~' ~= Georoe_ Bus~ Boulevard and Atlantic High Scnoot. GENE L DATA: Owner .............................................. Various Apph,an~Apphcan .................... Ci~ of Delray Beach, David Harden, Ci~ Manager Location ........................................... Baleen Seaorest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and Baleen George Bush Boulevard and~t,~nd.'- High School. Prop~ S ze ................................. 38.3~ Acres F.L.U.M. Designation ....................... Transitional & Medium ~9~si~, (5-;2 units/acre) Proposed F.L.U.M. Designation ...... Low Densi~ (0-5 units,'acre! Cu~ent Z~ninc ..... RL (Multi,ia Family Resid'entlai-Low Densi~) & RM fMulti~le Famiiv Residential-Medium Densi~,) Pr~ssed Zoning ............................. R-~-~ (Single Family Residential) & R-~-A (Sinaie Family Residenbal) Adja:en: ~ ' S=uth: CF, R-!-.~ & RO West: R-I-.~.. CF, ~xistin: Land Us= ........................... Seasres¢Dei-id~ Neig~bs~nood Pr;;=se2 Land Us ........ Future Land Use Sewer Serwce ................................. Wa;e: Se-dice ................................. I "='~'~: ~' ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is that of making a recommendation on proposed Future Land Use (FLUM) Amendments and Rezonings associated with the adopted Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan. The Future land Use Map Amendmen~t~ involve the following areas (See attached'Map. Legal descriptions for each area are contained in Appendix A): E3 Area A: Future Land Use Map Amendment from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre)---7 parcels (by ownership), located east of Seacrest Boulevard, north of NE 22nd Street. Area A contains a total of 3.23 acres. r~ Area B: Future land Use Map Amendment from MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre)to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre)-35 parcels (by ownership), located north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue), between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC Railroad. Area B contains a total of 9.05 acres. The proposed rezonings involve the following areas (See attached Map. Legal descriptions for each area are contained in Appendix A): I~ Area C: Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-l-AA (Single Family Residential)---2 parcels (by ownership) on NE 22 Street, east of Seacrest Boulevard. Area C contains a total of 1.13 acres. This area is contained within "Area A" above. Q Area D: Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-1- -A (Single Family Residential)--14 parcels (by ownership) north of Plumosa Elementary School, between NE 3~ Avenue and the FEC Railroad. Area D contains a total of 3.1 acres. This area is contained within "Area B" above. E3 Area E: Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-l- A (Single Family Residential)-20 parcels (by ownership) north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue), between NE 3~ Avenue and the FEC Railroad. Area E contains a total of 5.5 acres. This area is contained within "Area B" above. Q Area F: Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential)-134 parcels (by ownership) east'of Seacrest Boulevard between George Bush Boulevard and NE 14th Street. Area F contains a total of 26.08 acres. This area does not require a FLUM amendment. Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E) of the Land Development Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Board shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to FLUM Amendments or Rezoning of any property within the City. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the SeacrestfDelAda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 2 I · I The "Residential Neighborhood Categorization Map," contained in the Housing Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, delineates neighborhoods throughout the City according to the prevailing condition of private property. The main objective of the categorization is to identify the level o.f_need in each neighborhood. Specific strategies and programs and the degree to which these programs are implemented will depend upon this level of need. The Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood is currently categorized as follows: Revitalization - Evidence of decline in condition of structures and yards; increase in crime; property values stagnant or declining. Policy 5.5 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires the preparation of a Neighborhood Plan for areas within this category. The Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan has been completed and was adopted by the City Commission at its meeting of March 3, 1998. The Neighborhood Plan included many recommendations aimed at the elimination of the problems associated with small lot duplex and multiple family development within the neighborhood. One recommendation was that all new residential development or redevelopment within the neighborhood, except in the Del-ida Park Historic District, be limited to single-family detached housing. Although most of the neighborhood is zoned for single family development, duplex and multiple family units are currently allowed in several areas. The proposed ~:LUM Amendments and Rezonings for these areas will implement the recommendations identified in the Neighborhood Plan. Other programs aimed at improving the physical appearance and secudty of the neighborhood are also included in the Plan. Capital improvements will be funded through a partnership of the City, the CRA and the property owners. It is anticipated that traffic calming, streetscape and other improvements to the public spaces within the neighborhood will encourage additional private investment in the area. A strong sense of community spirit and neighborhood pdde is already emerging as is evidenced by the high level of public participation in the neighborhood planning process. I ' '" FUT. URE LAND .USE'MA'P AMENDMENT ANALYSIS. :. ~ '1 REQUIRED FINDINGS: Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7: Amendments to the Future Land Use Map must be based upon the following findings: '~ Demonstrated Need - That there is a need for the requested land use. The need must be based upon circumstances such as shifts in demographic trends, changes in the availability of land, changes in the existing character ,Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 3 and FLUM designations of the surrounding area, fulfillment of a comprehensive plan objective or policy, or similar circumstances. The need must be supported by data and analysis. The policy shall not apply to requests for the FLUM designations of Conservation or Recreation and Open Space. The proposed FLUM amendments and associated rezonings will fulfill Housing Element Policy A-5.5, stated as follows:. Housing Element Policy A-5.5 These areas shaft be provided assistance through the development of a Uneighborhood plan~ which is directed toward the arresting of deterioration through physical improvements such as street lighting, street trees, landscaping, street repair, drainage improvements, sidewalks, parks and parking areas, installation or upgrading water and sewer facilities, all of which may be provided through funding and/or assessment districts. The plans shall also address the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications, traffic circulation paffems, abatement of inappropriate uses, and targeting of code enforcement programs. The plans shall be prepared by the Planning and Zoning Department, with assistance from the Community Improvement Department, and the Community Redevelopment Agency if located within the CRA district. At least one neighborhood plan shall be prepared each fiscal year. The priority of these plans is as follows: · Seacrest/Del-lda · Allen/Eastview/Lake Avenues (to be addressed in the North Federal Plan) · Osceola Park · De/ray Shores The adopted SeacresfJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan addressed all the issues included in this policy including the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications. The FLUM amendments and concurrent rezonings being considered at this time are proposed to fulfill the provisions of the plan. Thus, this policy is furthered by the proposed amendments.and a positive finding can be made. 121 Consistency - The requested designation is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. As stated above, the proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. ~ Concurrency - Development at the highest intensity possible under the requested designation can meet the adopted concurrency standards. The proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings will eliminate the potential for additional multiple family and duplex development on the subject properties. This decreases the overall potential density as well as the potential demand for services and facilities. Thus, positive findings can be made at this time with regard to concurrency for all services and facilities. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 4 Q Compatibility -- The requested designation will be compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. The subject properties are located in a primarily single family neighborhood with 66% of all residential units and 85% of all residential parcels developed as detached single family homes. A description of each of the areas to be changed is as follows: · Area A - TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) The subject area is surrounded on the east and south by single family homes, on the north by Atlantic High School and on the west by neighborhood commercial. This area is a part of the residential neighborhood and is developing accordingly. Of the 7 ownership parcels, four contain single family homes (1 also contains a beauty salon), two are undeveloped and one is an access tract. The two undeveloped parcels are surrounded on three sides by single family homes and are zoned R-l-AA (Single Family). When these two parcels are developed pursuant to the existing zoning, the area will consists entirely of single family homes. The proposed FLUM designation of LD is contiguous to the LD designation to the south and is compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. · Area B - MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) The subject area is located between NE 3r~ Avenue and the FEC Railroad, between NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue) and Atlantic High School. The area to the west consists of an elementary school and single family homes zonec~-R-1- AA. Six of the ownership parcels in the subject area also contain single family homes. The Neighborhood Plan's direction for this area is the gradual reintroduction of single family uses consistent with the properties to the west. The proposed FLUM designation of LD is contiguous to the LD designation to the west and is compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. D Compliance - Development under the requested designation will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. All future development within the requested designations will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. A detailed discussion of Compliance with the Land Development Regulations is included in the "Zoning Analysis" section of this report. LDR {(~hapter 3) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to approval of Land Use 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 Planning'and Zoning Staff Report ~=LUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 5 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map: The use or 'structures must be allowed in the zone district and the zoning district must be consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation. The FLUM designations and zoning classifications for the subject properties are being amended pursuant to the adopted Neighborhood Plan for the area. The proposed FLUM amendments will assign a Future Land Use Map designation of Low Density and the proposed rezonings to R-l-AA and R-1-A (Single Family) are consistent with this FLUM designation. Although many of the existing land uses will be made non- conforming, the direction of the Plan is to phase out these uses and promote infill with uses which are consistent with the new FLUM designation. Thus, positive findings can be made regarding consistency of the FLUM designations and zonings. Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were discussed above. As previously stated, a detailed discussion of Compliance with the Land Development Regulations is included in the "Zoning Analysis" section of this report. REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map, Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were previously discussed under the "Future Land Use Map Amendment Ana/ysis" section of this report. Compliance with the Land Development Regulations with respect to Standards for Rezoning Actions and Rezoning Findings are discussed below. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) for the Rezonings shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made, Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. P~anning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the SeacrestJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 6 Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoninq Actions): Standards A, B and C are not applicable with respect to the rezoning requests. The applicable performance standard of Section 3.3.2 is as follows: (D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an '-|ncompatibility may occur, that suffi(~ient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. Compatibility of land uses within the Seacrest Del-Ida Neighborhood was a primary concern in preparation of the neighborhood plan. The subject properties are located in a primarily single family neighborhood with 66% of all residential units and 85% of all residential parcels developed as detached single family homes. Additionally, 45% of the subject properties contain detached single family residences. A description of each of the areas to be rezoned is as follows: Area C - Rezoninq of 2 parcels from RL fo R-'I-AA. These two parcels, located on NE 22 Street, are the only properties in the area zoned RL. They are surrounded, on three sides by owner-occupied (93%) detached single family homes zoned R-l-AA and by a Iow intensity commercial business (Dance Conservatory) on the west side zoned NC (Neighborhood Commercial). The residential density of the surrounding area is 5.0 du/acre with an average lot size of 8,712 sq. feet. Both of the subject parcels currently contain single family homes and one of the parcels also contains a hair salon business. The existing density on these two large parcels is only 1.76 units per acre. - Areas D and E - Rezoninq of 34 parcels from RM to R-I-A. These parcels are located .between NE 3r~ Avenue and the FEC Railroad, north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue). Single-family zoning (R-l-AA) exists west of this area and 6 parcels to be rezoned are currently developed as single family homes. The area also contains 20 duplexes and 4 multi-family structures which will become non-conforming uses. The Plan's direction for this area is the gradual reintroduction of single family uses consistent with the properties to the west. Area F - Rezoninq of ~34 parcels from RL to R-1-A. These parcels are located east of NE 2nd Avenue (Seacrest Boulevard), between George Bush Boulevard and NE 14th Street. Single Family zoning (R-l-AA) exists north and west of the area and RO (Residential Office) zoning consisting primarily of medical offices is located immediately to the south. The area contains a mix of single-family homes, duplexes and multi-family structures, with a total of 68 detached single family homes, 69 duplexes (138 units) and 31 multi- family units. The duplex and multi-family units will become non-conforming uses. The Plan calls for this area to be stabilized through eventual phasing out of Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page ? duplex and multi-family structures and their replacement with single family homes. Given the above, these rezonings will help to promote compatibility throughout the entire Seacrest/Del-lda Park neighborhood. Section 2.4.5(D){5) (Rezoninq Findi'n-~s): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it ~s more ar~_~ror~riate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The appropriate reasons for the proposed rezonings are ~b' and 'c':, based on the following: The Comprehensive Plan identified the neighborhood as needing "revitalization" and directed the City to take measures to prevent further decline and to help-the neighborhood toward a classification of "stabilization" or "stable." This is to be achieved through the implementation of a "neighborhood plan". The City Commission adopted the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan at its meeting of March 3, 1998. With the adoption of the plan, a vision was established for the future development of the area. The proposed rezonings are required to ~mplement the provisions and vision of the adopted plan. In order to implement the adopted neighborhood plan, FLUM designations for the area are being amended as directed in the plan. The proposed zoning districts are of.similar intensity to the new FLUM designations and will be more appropriate than the existing zonings, based on the direction of the community and the adopted plan. The appropriateness of the zonings in the area was a fundamental concern during the review of the neighborhood plan. The adoption of the plan establishes the City's finding that the proposed zonings are more appropriate than the existing. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on a land development application/request. Blanning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 8 No development proposals have been received for the subject properties. Any proposed development will be subject to the provisions of the new zoning districts. Therefore, a positive finding can be made with respect to future compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Since the proposed rezonings will'-Affect the land developments regulations "and applicable development standards for the subject properties, it is also appropriate to discuss the impact of the rezonings on existing development. a. RL to R-l-AA. The existing single family homes on the two parcels to be rezoned will remain conforming uses in the proposed zoning district. Although the minimum lot size for single family development will increase from 7,500 sq. ft. to 9,500 sq. ft., and the minimum lot dimensions will increase, both parcels exceed the new standards and will also remain conforming lots. Although one parcel also has a business located on site, the use is non-conforming and will remain so with the proposed rezoning. b. RM to R-1-A. This area contains a private school, a daycare center, 6 single family homes, 4 multiple family structures,.20 duplexes, and 2 vacant lots. The school and daycare center are permitted as conditional uses and the development standards for them will remain unchanged. The development standards for the single family homes will also remain unchanged. All of the duplex and multiple family structures will become non-conforming uses. It is important to note however that 16 of the 20 duplexes are currently non-conforming with respect to unit size and all four multiple family structures are non-conforming with respect to density. Although the maximum density in the RM district is 12 du/acre, these four buildings each have a density'of 40 du/acre. c. RL to R-'I-A. This area contains a mix of single-family homes, duplexes and multi-family structures. The development standards for_the single family homes will remain unchanged. The 4 multiple family structures and 59 duplex parcels will become non-conforming uses. All of the multi-family development within the area is currently non-conforming with respect to density. Within the RL zone (3-6 du/acre), these multi- family buildings have densities between 19 and 27 du/acre. Of the 59 duplex parcels within the area, 56 (95%) are non-conforming with respect, to one or more of the following standards: lot size (i.e. less than 8,000 sq. ft.), lot width (i.e. less than 60 ft. wide) or unit size (i.e. less than 1,000 sq. ft.). The multiple family structures which become non-conforming uses as a result of the proposed rezonings will be allowed to continue even if ownership changes as long as the use does not cease for 180 days. If such a use is destroyed by a disaster, it is allowed to be rebuilt to the same density if the permit is applied for within one year and the structure is completed within three years. Overall, the development of duplex and multi-family units on small lots within the neighborhood has created the appearance of over-crowding on many streets. This is best evidenced by the excessive number of parked cars in these areas. Most of these · Planning and Zoning Staff Report, FLUM Amendments and Rezonin.es Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 9 uses are deficient with respect to number of parking spaces and/or parking lot design. Where adequate spaces do not exist in off-street parking lots or immediately in front of these uses, parking, has spilled onto front yards and into the swales of adjacent single- family development. Back-out parking onto adjacent roadways is the typical parking arrangement for duplex development within the neighborhood. In most cases, the number of spaces are maximized with. the entire roadway frontage covered in asphalt without the benefit of landscaped'-breaks between spaces. This degrades ..the appearance of the area, affects drainage and encourages speeding. Although the proposed rezonings will not eliminate all of these problems, they will prevent additional units for being constructed or the conversion of single family homes to duplexes. Additionally, most of the affected structures are at least 30 years old. Age, obsolescence and poor maintenance have taken their toll on many of the duplex and multiple family structures in the area. As these buildings approach the end of their useful life, they will have to be replaced with single-family homes. I 'ii~i::~::~!;!!~"-".!ii' i ~ ' -' !!~!~ i? ;:..:. :~ .;._ ii. ii!:. REVIEW BY OTHERS ~' ,.~'ii · :~:i~iii?::/iii!?i~ii!':.ii~-~!::~ i:~: The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the HPB (Historic Preservation Board). Community Redevelopment Agency: At its meeting of May 22, 1998, the Community Redevelopment Agency reviewed the proposal and recommended approval for the FLUM Amendments and Rezonings. Ad|acent Municipalities: - Notice of the proposed amendments has been provided to the City of Boynton Beach and the Town of Gulf Stream. A response has not been received. Courtesy Notices: Special courtesy notices were provided to the following homeowners and civic associations: ~ Seacrest Homeowners Association C} Del-Ida Park Homeowners Association I~ Lake Ida Homeowners Association Q PROD (Progressive Residents of Delray) Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to the owners of all properties subject to the FLUM and zoning changes as well as to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject properties. Letters of support and objection, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the SeacrestJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 10 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The proposed FLUM Amendments and Rezonings are recommended in the adopted Seacrest~Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan, which was adopted to meet the provisions of Housing Element Policy A-5.5 of th~. Comprehensive Plan. Positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), LDR Section 2.4,5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore the proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings can be recommended for approval based on the findings outlined in this report. A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend to the City Commission approval of FLUM Amendments to the subject parcels, based on positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and, Recommend to the City Commission approval of the rezonings of the subject parcels, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), LDR SSction 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Recommend.denial of the FLUM Amendments and. Rezonings based on a failure to make positive findings and that the FLUM amendments and rezonings fail to fulfill one of the basis for which a FLUM Amendment or rezoning should be granted. . . COMMEND D *CT.ON ". 1. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the proposed FLUM Amendments from: Q TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre), for the parcels within "Area A" identified in Appendix A; and, MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) for the parcels within "Area B" identified in Appendix A; Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with ti~e SeacrestYDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 11 based on positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A -1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and, 2. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the following rezoning requests: Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-l-AA (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area C" identified in Appendix A; Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-1- -A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area D" identified in Appendix A; r~ Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-l- A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area E" identified in Appendix A; and, Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area F" identified in Appendix A; based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: !~! Proposed Future Land Use Map Amendments ~ Proposed Rezonings B Appendix A Report prepared by: Ron Hoo~ard. Senior Planner Planning and Zoning Staff Re;:)ort FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Det-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June _15, 1998 Page 12 APPENDIX A 1 FLUM AREA A: THEE316.gF-i'OFN¼OFS½OFNE¼OFSW¼OFSW¼;THEE195FTOFW 350FTOFN½OFS½OFNE¼OF. SW¼OFSW¼/LESSN30FT/;THEN30FT OF E 310 FT OF W 350 FT OF S ½ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW %; AND, THE E ½ OF S ¼ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW %, OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E. FLUM AREA B: THE PART OF LOT 38 LYING EAST OF NE 3RD AVENUE AND WEST OF FEC RY, SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E - REFER TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 4, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOTS 102 TO 115, INCLUSIVE AND THE PART OF LOT 116 LYING NORTH OF LAKE AVENUE, PLUMOSA PARK SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOTS 1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 11 OF SEACREST PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 24, PAGE 33, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING - AREA C: THE E ¼ OF S ¼ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E. REZONING AREA D: LOTS 1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 11 OF SEACREST PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 24, PAGE 33, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING AREA E: THE PART OF LOT 38 LYING EAST OF NE 3RD AVENUE AND WEST OF FEC RY/ LESS NLY 141.56 F-T, SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E - REFER TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 4, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, Planning and Zoning Staff Re:~ort FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 15 LOTS 102 TO 115, INCLUSIVE, AND THE PART OF LOT 116 LYING NORTH OF LAKE AVENUE, PLUMOSA PARK SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING AREA F: ALL OF BLOCKS 1,4, 5, 8, 9, AND LOTS 4-12 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 12, DELL PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8, PAGE 56, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOT 12, PLUMOSA PARK, SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. / N .. ~ SEACRESTfDEL-IDA NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT DOCUMENT # 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1 ! CITATION CLUB/HAMMOCK RESERVE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: June ;; AGENDA ITEMS: IV.A.2. & Future Land Use Map Amenaments from T.=,N (Trans~tiona!) to LD (Low Dens;tv Residential. 0-5 units/acre), and LD to TRN. an~ AssD:iated Rezonin~s from, RM-~0 (Medium Densi~, Residential- 10 units per acre) to PRD-5 (Planned Res~aent;al DeveloLment 5 units 2~ acre',' -=' - . ~_,a~_~ Citation Club & Hammock Rese~,e Developments. LoLate= an the Eas~ S~de of Mii~;a~' Trail, Sout~ of Linto~ Boulevard. ~'~' ~' i GENE~L DATA: Owner .............................................. Beztek and DiVDs~ F.L.U.M. D~s~gnat~ons ..................... TRN (Transitional) & LD (Low Densi~ 0-5 unim/acre) d _onmg ................................. RM-10 (Medium Densi~ S2uth: PRD-5 West: PRD-5 ~-i Exisdn; LaLd Use ........................... Ro~= ri=~t-Df-v,'av for Orchard Lane ~,~ =i, ant Open Spa=e ProLmse: Land Use. Correztive Future Land Use Mare .AmenOmen:s ant Rezonin~s t:. the aii=nmen: ~f ,Or:nar: Lane. Sewer Semite ................................. n/a. ' Water-= ,'-~ ~ '~' ~ ¢ ~' ' ~ ....................................nia. ~ I ~ ~'F ' - f',/-.* 2 & IVA 2, The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the City Commission on corrective Future Land Use Map amendments and rezonings on 2 parcels of land totaling 0.72 acres, associated with the Citation Club and Hammock-.Reserve developments. The request involves a FLUM amendment for the Hammock Reserve parcel from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential) and rezoning from RM-10 (Medium Density Residential- 10 du/ac) to PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 du/ac). The FLUM amendment for the Citation Club parcel is from LD to TRN, and the associated rezoning is from PRD-5 to RM-10. The subject parcels are located along Orchard Lane, approximately 600 feet east of Military Trail. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency (Planning and Zoning Board) shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to all amendments to the City's Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map amendments and rezonings involve two parcels of land each containing 0.36 acres which are located within approved developments known as Citation Club (zoned RM-10 with an underlying FLUM designation of Transitional)-and Hammock Reserve (zoned PRD-5 with an underlying FLUM designation of Low Density Residential). The corrective amendments and rezonings are a result of the final alignment of a private road (Orchard Lane) which connects Military Trail with Linton Boulevard. The alignment of the road split the corners, of each development leaving triangular parcels on both sides of the road which were owned by opposite developments. When Hammock Reserve platted their property it was identified that the developers had land swapped the parcels. The 0.36 acre portion associated with the Citation Club is incorporated into an open space area, and the 0.36 acre portion associated with Hammock Reserve is a portion of the main roadway (Orchard Lane). This F~ure Land Use Map Amendment is being processed pursuant to the twice a year statutory limits for consideration of plan amendments (F.S. 163.3187). P & Z Board Staff Report, Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 2 Land Use Analysis: Pursuant to Land Development Regulation Section 3.1.1(A) (Future Land Use Map), all land uses and resulting structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and, said zoning must be consistent with the land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. In conjunction with the Future Land Use Map amendments, rezonings to PRD-5 and RM-10 are being sought. The FLUM amendments and rezonings are being processed concurrently to eliminate existing inconsistencies between the FLUM and zoning designations as they relate to their respective developments (Citation Club and Hammock Reserve). The areas which are being changed contain open space and a roadway. These land areas are part of larger developments in which the land uses and resulting structures are consistent with the proposed FLUM and zoning designations. REQUIRED FINDINGS: Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7; Amendments to the Future Land Use Map must be based upon the following findings: Demonstrated Need - That there is a need for the requested land use. The need must be based upon circumstances such as shifts in demographic trends, changes in the availability of land, changes in the existing character and FLUM designations of the surrounding area, fulfillment of a comprehensive plan objective or policy, or similar circumstances. The need must be supported by data and analysis. This policy shall not appl~, to requests for the FLUM designations of Conservation or Recreation and Open Space. The current FLUM and zoning designations of the respective properties are currently inconsistent with the intensity of use of the overall developments. This is a corrective amendment which applies Future Land Use Map designations which will reflect the current use and intensity of the properties. Consistency -The requested designation is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as it applies Future Land Use Map designations which reflect the current intensity of use. Concurrency - Development at the highest intensity possible under the requested designation can meet the adopted concurrency standards. The subject properties are portions of developed projects. The parcels have been swapped by the two developments. The two projects are currently developed at their highest intensity, based upon their existing zoning designations. Citation Club P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 3 is zoned RM-10 and contains an apartment complex with a density of 10 units per acre, and the portion of the Hammock Reserve under consideration is zoned PRD-5 and is developed at 5 units per acre. At the time of Annexation of both properties, positive findings were made with respect to Concurrency. The proposal replaces one land use designation with the other and visa-versa. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to concurrency. r3 Compatibility - The requested designation will be compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. The proposed FLUM and zoning designations will be consistent and compatible with their respective developments. Required findings of Compatibility were made with each development approval and no intensification of the development is proposed. ~ Compliance - Development under the requested designation will comply with the provisions and requirement of the Land Development Regulations. The existing developments comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. No intensifi.cation of the development is proposed. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which i~-part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map, Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were previously discussed under the Future Land Use Map Analysis section of this report. Compliance with respect to Compliance with the Land Development Regulations (Standards for Rezoning Actions, Rezoning Findings) are discussed below. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings) shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a finding of overall consistency. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 4 Comprehensive Plan Policies: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was previously discussed under the Future Land Use Map Amendment Analysis section of this report. Section 3.3.2 !Standards for Rezohin_a Actions): Standards A, B and C are' not applicable with respect to this rezoning request, as the rezonings are corrective in nature. The applicable performance standard of Section 3.3.2 is as follows: D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The requests for rezoning and their associated FLUM amendments will eliminate existing incompatibilities. These changes will result in FLUM and zoning designations of these two 0.36 acre parcels which reflect their existing use and intensity. Section 2.4.$(D){S) f_Rezonincj Findings): Pursuant to Section 2.4.$(D)(5), in addition to the provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: __ a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in;circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The proposed zoning designations are more appropriate based upon the current development pattern which resulted from the alignment of Orchard Lane. The changes are corrective in nature and will apply zoning designations consistent with the balance of their respective developments. The subject property is not within a geographical area requiring review by the Community Redevelopment Agency, Downtown Development Authority or the Historic Preservation Board. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 5 Courtesy Notices: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following civic and homeowners associations: r3 Citation Club - - [] Hammock Reserve ~ BeI-Aire Q Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) !:::1 Del-Abe Country Club ~ Shadywoods [] Foxe Chase Public Notice; Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. A letter of objection has been received from DeI-Aire Country Club (copy attached). Additional letters of objection and support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The existing Transitional and Low Density Residential Future Land Use Map designations as well as the RM-10 and PRD-5 zoning designations are inconsistent with the respective developments. The changes will result in FLUM and zoning .designations which correspond with the balance of their respective developments, thus eliminating the current discrepancies. Positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan, and Sections-3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Deveiop~nent Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Recommend to the City Commission denial of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon a failure to make positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Section 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, that the FLUM amendments and rezonings fail to fulfill one of the basis for which a FLUM amendment or rezoning should be granted. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 6 I ..i ........ :.. !!i.i.!i :....:~:i:..:.i.ii.i..i.i.i.i:.i :.i.il :S ThiiF~F:ii!R: E.!C O: M ME~ND:~!~:T:!!iiO N: :: :i:~'. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Pian (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: ,-i Letter of objection from DeI-Aire Country Club '~ Future Land Use Map Q Zoning Map Counrr~ Club Property Owner's Association, Inc. 4645 'White Cedar Lane Delray Beach, FL 33445 499-9090 June 9. 1998 .kir. Paul Doriing Acting Director of Planrfing Planning and Zoning Depm"tmenr CiD' of Delray Beach. 100 Northwest First Avenue Del-ay Beach. FL 33444 R.E: Proposed Future Land Use Map A_mendmem and Re-Zoning File #98-154 Dear 1~-. Doffing: Thank vou for sending your June 4. 1998 lener with reference to the above captioned, h appears that 'the area A. the Hammock Reser,,e. change viii only be a benefit so 'the CID'. As for the proposed increase in densiD' for area B, the Citation Club. such a change bill certainly no~ ~ of an>' benefit so The C~n.'. Therefore, we request that the area B proposal b~ re. iec~ed. Sincereiy. , Dan/el Cayne, President ProperD.' Owners' Associazion DC/m-rn TRN S~.'T~ ~DuNTY MD CF-H ' sour~ COUNTY ' MrNTA~ HEALTH ," ~oc SUPPORT DOCUMENT # 4 PLAN AMENDMENT 98-1 HURRICANE PINES Introduction Hurricane Pines is approximately three acres of pine scrub located on the south side of S.E. 10th Street between Federal and Dixie Highways. The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a natural area which the City should undertake efforts to protect (Conservation Objective B-l). Specifically, a program shall be developed to preserve the site to the extent feasible through sensitive site planning, or mitigate its development (Policy B-1.2). The Hurricane Pines parcel is privately owned, and subject to development. This report summarizes the history of the identification of Hurricane Pines, and assesses the potential of the site for successful preservation in a development scenario, Inventory of Native Ecosystems In 1988, a report was completed for Palm Beach County, "Inventory of Native Ecosystems in Palm Beach County, Phase III Report, Location and Evaluation of Sites for Possible Preservation as Wilderness Island Park Preserves". One of the sites identified in this report was Hurricane Pines, listed as five acres ~f Flodda Scrub and evaluated as "good representation of native Flodda ecosystems". The report provided a priority ranking for potential public acquisition with sites ranked by clusters of associated ecosystems. Hurricane Pines was ranked, along with five similar sites, as a second priodty for acquisition in the southern portion of the:County. 1989 Comprehensive Plan In developing the Comprehensive Plan in 1989, the City based its listing of native ecosystems on the above noted report, and included the following direction: Objective B-1 The City shall undertake efforts, through the following policies, to protect the following natural reservations and environmentally sensitive areas: (b3, b4)(c9) · Pine Scrub area east of Tropic Palms Subdivision; · Delray Oaks hammock area in the Alfieri Pugliese Park of Commerce; · Pine Scrub community along S.W. 10th Street east of the Gulfstream Motor Lodge; · The following Florida Inland Nav!gational District holdings: · parcel off McCleary Street · parcel southeast of the 8th Street Bridge · parcel by Knowles Park; · the public area along 1-95, west of Tropic Palms subdivision; · portions of the "17 acre parcel" with the specific areas to be considered for preservation to be determined during the development review process. Policy B-1.2 The Low Oak Hammock area of the Alfiefi Pugliese Park of Commerce and the Pine Scrub along S.W. 10th should be preserved in part through sensitive site planning. Since 1989, there have been no substantive amendments to this policy direction. The policy language today is: Objective B-1 The City shall undertake efforts, through the following policies, to protect tl~e following natural reservations and environmentally sensitive areas: (b3, b4)(c9) · Leon Weekes Environmental Preserve; · Delray Oaks hammock area in the Alfieri Pugliese Park of Commerce; · Hurricane Pines scrub community along S.W. 10th Street west of U.S. #1 (S.E. 5th Avenue); · The following Flodda Inland Navigational District holdings: · parcel off McCleary Street · parcel southeast of the 8th Street Bridge · parcel by Knowles Park; Policy Bol.2 The Delray Oaks area of the Alfieri Pugliese Park of Commerce shall be preserved through sensitive development under "planned development" concepts, exaction (public sites dedication provisions of the Land Development Regulations), or acquisition (including the County Environmentally Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program). The City shall participate with the County in seeking State funding for the acquisition of the Delray Oaks site and its development as a preservation area. Hurricane Pines along S.W. 10th Street should be preserved in part through sensitive site planning. County. Acauisition Pro,qram In 1990, Palm Beach County established its Environmentally Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program. A total of 38 sites were identified for possible acquisition, including Hurricane Pines and Delray Oaks. These sites were then prioritized and fourteen sites were identified as highest priority for acquisition. The high priority list included Delray Oaks, which has been purchased, but did not include Hurricane Pines. Hurricane Pines is not presently considered for acquisition through the County program. Field Investiqation In 1992, in work associated with the development of the Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan, the Hurricane Pines site was reassessed by the author of the Inventory of Native Ecosystems (attachment). The site was found to consist of approximately three acres of Sand Pine Scrub. The assessment stated that, without management, this small site would continue to undergo succession, from pinelands to oak-palmetto woodlands. With management, the succession would -- be slowed, but succession would continue. Management of such a small site would be difficult due both its size and proximity to homes. The author concluded that it would be worth the difficulty and expense for the public to acquire and manage the site. Evaluation and Appraisal Report The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the Comprehensive Plan was completed by the City in 1996. In developing the EAR for the Conservation Element, staff and a citizen task team debated the disposition of Hurricane Pines. It was acknowledged that preservation of the site would yield limited environmental benefits and may be impossible to sustain as a viable ecosystem. The possible courses of action discussed included: 1) public acquisition of the site; 2) deletion of Hurricane Pines from the list of sites to be afforded special protection in the Comprehensive Plan; 3) no change to the existing language in the Comprehensive Plan. Opinions among staff and citizens were evenly split between acquisition and deletion, resulting in the recommendation for no change. (- ASSeSSmenT ( [, The Hurricane Pine Scrub is located west of Federal Highway, on the south side of SE 10th Street. At one time, the Pine Scrub covered approximately 5 acres. However, a portion of the site was cleared along S.E. 10th Street for the construction of a r residential unit (in the early 1960's), which has since been demolished. Approximately 1. 3 acres of the Pine Scrub remains. . - The Hurricane Pine Scrub is considered a Florida Scrub, which has a desert-like eco- system dominated by sand pines and several species of Oak. This eco-system has been identified on the Land Use Map as a conservation parcel subject to Conservation Element Policy B-1.2 wherein it states Hurricane Pines along S.W. lOth Street should be preserved in part through sensitive site planning. Under the needs and recommendations of the Conservation Element, it states the following: The Hurricane Pines (five acres of Florida Scrub) site and the Delray Oaks (24 acres, Low Oak Hammock) are in private ownership and are ,s~bject to development. Portions of these sites can be preserved through acquisition, (including '-. the County Environmentally Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program), exb-actfon (pubfic site dedication provisions of the subdivision regulations), or through sensitive development under 'planned Developmer}t" concepts. ~'" An inventory was conducted by Palm Beach County to locate, identify, evaluate and (' [ · rank examples of each of Palm Beach County's native landscapes - the Ecosystems [REF: Inventory of Native Ecosystems in Palm Beach County. Phase III Reoort~. Based the findings of that Inventory, it was noted that Palm Beach County's native eco- r upon systems are now even more endangered than its endangered species. Endan.~ered L meaning unlikely to survive without human intervention. ! There are so few sites where native ecosystems survive in Palm Beach County that if such eco-systems are to continue, all should be acquire.d, or at least protected. The Hurricane Pine Scrub is listed as a Iow priority on Palm Beach County's land acquisition list due to its relatively small size. Since the Hurricane Pine Scrub is located in the middle of an area to be developed, the question arose as to whether or not this ecosystem was still viable and worth saving, or if a portion of it could be cleared and developed. To answer that question, Daniel Austin PH.D. of Florida Atlantic University, Department of Biological Sciences was contacted to assess the current conditions of the site. To summarize, Dr. Austin walked the site and noted that a number of native animals and endangered plants are surviving in the eco-system. His recommendation is that the Hurricane Pine Scrub be acquired, managed and used as a passive recreation and educational site. If the Pine Scrub is not managed it will continue to under go succession and eventually change from pinelands to an oak-palmetto woodlands. Thus. the endangered species would no longer survive. For additionalinformation see attached letter from Dr. Austin. ~ FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY I:~.O. I~OX BOCA I~ATON. ~LO~IOA COU ~E OF ,SCIENCE DEPA~E~ OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES ' - Phone: (~ ~7-~20 F~ (40~-~749 19 Nov. 1992 1~ ~ ~t Argue Ci~ of ~ B~ ~y B~c~ ~ 33~ ~ D~ ~ M~: As ~ o= ~ion on Ee phone r~nfly, I ~m suppl~ my id~ ~d [mpr~sions a=e p~l of ~d = ~e ~mer o f S ~ I0~ S~t ~d US I ~ ~y ~c~ -. No o~ ~o~ ~e lon$-~ ~ab~W of s~ ~cu of ~five v~emfion such m ~ p=~l of S~d ~e S~b. ~wm ~t we do ~ow of ~ veg~fio~ ~out ~agement it ~ ~n~ue to ~go su~on ~d evenly ch~e ~om a.p~e~ to ~ ~-~m~o w~~. ~ p~ss ~ slow ~d ~1), ~es d~des. ~ m~em~ ~e p~e~d may be ~~ for ~ ~d~ ~fio& Evenm~y, it is · ou~ ~e s~ gene ~h of ~e s~i~ ~ ~ ~m~ ~ de~d~ ~ ~. ~ ~ borne out by shom-~ ob~o~ ~d o~ ~ow1~ge but h~ not b~ ~e subj~t of lon~-m~ ~v~fi~o~. ~e ~en~ de~fion of ~e ~ve~ d~des, ~aps even hun~e~ of y~s. ~ my op~o~ thi~ s~ e~ple of native Eod~ S~d ~e S~b vegetation wo~d ~ well wo~ ~e e~ W ob~ m~e, ~d u~ ~ a p~ive ~fioW~u~fion site. Not oEy world it ~o~de ~ ~ple of "pre~ev~opmen:" mfive v~fion for ~ple ~le B~g ~ ~e s~~g ~ wo~d be ~zd to have th~ ~ ~a~. Mor~ver, ~ere p~U on ~e si~ ~em ~ ~ pwble~ ~ ~g~g such a sm~ ~ but ~e ~efiu ou~eigh ~e ~sU op~om To be m~ag~ pro,fly, S~b should be b~ on ~te~ of 20-70 y~s. ~ will be a ~It ~k wi~ ho~ ~ close m ~ey =e to ~s si~. ~tem~ ~ement t~h~ques may be ~u~ed in ~s ~s~. If I may be of ~er ~ir~ with ~is or o~er p~Is of l~d, pl~ f~l ~ to ~I on me. S~ely, Daniel F. Austin, PI~.D. Professor independent assessment, funded by the developer, is recommended to determine the area of the environmentally sensitive land. Recommended Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan The Hurricane Pines site should continue to be addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, in a manner that will assure_preservation of the environmentally sensitive portions of the site, or mitigation of their loss through development. The City's position and program concerning the site should be expressed in a revision of policy B-1.2 as follows: Policy B-1.2 Any development proposal for the Hurricane Pines site along S.E. 10th Street shall be accompanied by a complete, independent assessment of the environmentally sensitive portions of the site. The assessment shall define the exact area of environmentally sensitive flora, and address the potential for preservation of the area. If it is determined by the City that preservation is not feasible, a condition of the development order will be for the developer to enter into a mitigation agreement with the City whereby the developer will donate land with a similar habitat to be preserved, or funds to be used for the purchase of similar habitat in the City or the management of existing conservation lands. The amount of the donation will be based on the appraised value of Hurricane Pines, and will equal the value of the environmentally sensitive area which will be lost through development. S:~adv\pinesl EAR-Based Comprehensive Plan Amendment In 1997, the City adopted a major Comprehensive Plan amendment based on the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. As part of that amendment, the subject of the Hurricane Pines site was addressed in the Analysis section of the text as follows: Existin~q Use and the Potential for Conservation or Protection Hurricane Pines (currently 3 acres) continues in private ownership and is subject to development. While portions of the site could be preserved through acquisition, or through development order conditions, its continued viability is questionable due to its small size. Acquisition through the Palm Beach County Environmentally Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program is not presently considered, and is unlikely in the future. Development order conditions would result in less than one acre being preserved. A possible alternative to preservation of the site is a form of mitigation banking, whereby a developer augments a similar habitat by purchasing land or funding management activities. Hurricane Pines is addressed in the ~oals, Objectives and Policies section as follows: Ob|ective B-1 The City shall undertake efforts, through the following policies, to protect natural reservations and environmentally sensitive areas. - policy B-1.2 The City shall develop a program, in FY 97/98, to preserve the Hurricane Pines parcel along S.E. 10th Street to the extent feasible through sensitive site planning, or mitigate its development through a form of mitigation banking. CONCLUSION Hurricane Pines is privately owned and subject to development. Under City requirements, any development proposal will include a detailed environmental survey and a plan to preserve the pine scrub ecosystem. Since the viability of the pine scrub is questionable, an alternative to preservation should be investigated. One reasonable alternative is a form of mitigation agreement. A developer would donate funds to be used in the purchase of land with a similar habitat or management of existing conservation lands, such as Leon Weekes Environmental Preserve. The amount of the donation would be based on the appraised value of the environmentally sensitive land. Another alternative would be for the developer to donate a parcel of land with similar habitat. An MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #/~ D- REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 41-98 (SEACREST/DEL-IDA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD REZONINGS) DATE: OCTOBER 14, 1998 This is second reading and a public hearing for Ordinance No. 41-98 which rezones certain parcels of land within the Seacrest/ Del-Ida Park neighborhood from multiple family residential zoning to single family zoning designations. The rezonings, together with the Future Lane Use Map amendments for this area contained in Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1, are proposed in order to implement the recommendations set forth in the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan which was adopted by the City Commission on March 3, 1998. A review of the Planning and Zoning Board's consideration and recommendation is contained in the attached staff report, along with the staff recommendation for approval which differs from that of the P&Z Board. At first reading on October 6, 1998, the City Commission passed the ordinance by a vote of 4 to 0, with Mr. Schmidt abstaining. The associated FLUM amendments are a part of Ordinance No. 24-98 adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 considered earlier on the agenda. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 41-98 on second and final reading. ref:agmemol2 FORM 8B MEM_0.RANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS '~--- ~/~] I~"~l &.~i %&MI I IR,I %%M1(~,~0(..~ ~:)MIIH)I I ~ &MI:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! /~~NAME O~ ~ARD. MAll i%(i -Xl)IIHI ~ I '1 lie ~)~K[). C'OUN('II.. ('OMMI~ION. ! liAIEO) IHICH~OII'(~('I KK~D ~ MY~ITION I~: WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for u~e by ~n.~ person serving at the ¢ounL~. city, or other local level of go~ernmen! on an appointed or elected board. council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a ¥oting conflict of imerest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law ,,'hen faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding electi~'e county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure ~hieh inures to his special pri,.'ate gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a governmem agency) by whom he is retained. [n either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; an# WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the'officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: · You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of thc meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. · A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest: CF FORM #B - I.~i PAC~ IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. You should complete the form and file it ~vithin I$ days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for.recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF LOC:AL OFFICER'S INTEREST (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my' special pri~ate gain; or ~ inured to the special gain of ~ D'~ /~' '~' ~"~t ~ , by ~hom I am retained. (bi The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Date i Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §!!2.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $$,000. CE FORM 1~8- I~! P~,GE 2 ORDINANCE NO. 41-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM RL (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - LOW DENSITY) TO R-I-AA (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT, FROM RM (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY) TO R-1-A (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT, AND FROM RL (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - LOW DENSITY) TO R-1-A (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT; ALL AS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THE SEACREST/DEL-IDA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN PURSUANT TO THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; SAID LAND BEING GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN SEACREST BOULEVARD AND DIXIE HIGHWAY AND BETWEEN GEORGE BUSH BOULEVARD AND ATLANTIC HIGH SCHOOL; AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1994"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan was adopted by the City Commission on March 3, 1998; and WHEREAS, one recommendation contained in the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan is that all new residential development or redevelopment within the neighborhood, except in the Del-Ida Park Historic District, be limited to single family detached housing; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of June 15, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning Agency, considered the proposed rezonings at a public hearing and voted 5 to 2 to recommend denial; and WHEREAS, the City Commission, acting in its legislative capacity, desires to initiate the rezonings as set forth herein for numerous lots and blocks under various ownerships within the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan area, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be amended to reflect the revised zoning classifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of R-i-AA (Single Family Residential) District from RL (Multiple Family Residential - Low Density) District for the following described property: The East 1/2 of South 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 of Southwest 1/4 of Southwest 1/4 of Section 4, Township 46 South, Range 43 East. The subject property is identified as Area C on the map attached hereto and made a part hereof; containing 1.13 acres, more or less. Section 2. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of R-1-A (Single Family Residential) District from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) District for the following described property: Lots 1 to 15, inclusive, Block 11 of Seacrest Park, a subdivision in Palm Beach County, Florida, as per Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 33, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is identified as Area D on the map attached hereto and made a part hereof; containing 3.1 acres, more or less. Section 3. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of R-1-A (Single Family Residential) District from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) District for the following described property: The part of Lot 38 lying east of N.E. 3rd Avenue and west of FEC RY, LESS Northerly 141.56 feet, subdivision of Section 9, Township 46 South, Range 43 East; refer to Plat Book 1, Page 4, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; and Lots 102 to 115, inclusive, and the part of Lot 116 lying north of Lake Avenue, Plumosa Park Section A, a subdivision in Palm Beach County, Florida, as per Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 68, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. - 2 - Ord. No. 41-98 The subject property is identified as Area E on the map attached hereto and made a part hereof; containing 5.5 acres, more or less. Section 4. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of R-1-A (Single Family Residential) District from RL (Multiple Family Residential - Low Density) District for the following described property: All of Blocks 1, 4, 5, 8, 9 and Lots 4-12, inclusive, Block 12, Dell Park, a subdivision in Palm Beach County, Florida, as per Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 56, of the Publ±c Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; and Lot 12, Plumosa Park Section A, a subdivision in Palm Beach County, Florida, as per Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 68, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is identified as Area F on the map attached hereto and made a part hereof; containing 26.08 acres, more or less. Section 5. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4 hereof. Section 6. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 7. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 8. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon the effective date of Ordinance No. 24-98 which adopts Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1, under which an official land use designation of LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) is affixed to the subject parcels hereinabove described in furtherance of the Seacrest/Del-Ida Park Neighborhood Plan. - 3 - Ord. No. 41-98 PASSED ~ ~OPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October .~ 1998. ATTEST: ~ity C~rk ! First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading October 20~ 1998 - 4 - Ord. No. 41-98 N SEACREST/DEL-IDA NEIGHBORHOOD ~ - PROPOSED REZONiNOS - ,O':T~ 0r DEL,~A~ DEAS-,-"~ (~) "'ROM: RL TO: R-i-A,~ (~ :";~OM: Ri',/ TO: ~,.AN~IN$ & ZONft';3 DE=Am, TM:'_N- O "'ROM: Ri',/ 'TO: R-'-A O ""ROM: R_ TO: R-'-,c -- DI$1TXL Bx$~ ~Xc Z~$FE, v __ CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION DEPARTMENT OF P~NNING ANb~ZONING FROM: RONALD HOGGAR~ SENIOR P~NNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 1998 SEACREST/DEL-IDA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD REZONINGS BAC KG RO UN D The Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan was adopted by the City Commission on March 3, 1998. The Neighborhood Plan included many recommendations aimed at the elimination of the problems associated with small lot duplex and multiple family development within the neighborhood. One recommendation was that all new residential development or redevelopment within the neighborhood, except in the Del- Ida Park Historic District, be limited to single-family detached housing. Although most of the neighborhood is zoned for single family development, duplex and multiple family units are currently allowed in several areas. The proposed rezonings for these areas will implement the recommendations identified in the Neighborhood Plan. II ^.D The Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on the proposed amendments at its meeting of June 15, 1998. Two property owners with duplexes in the area inquired if the duplexes would be allowed to remain. They were told that the duplexes could continue as non-conforming uses as long as they did not cease for 180 days. Two neighborhood residents, including the president of the Seacrest Homeowners Association spoke in favor of the FLUM amendments and rezonings. There was extensive discussion by the P & Z Board regarding the effect of the downzoning on the neighborhood by the creation of non-conforming uses. One consideration centered on the ability to rebuild the non-conforming structures should they be destroyed pursuant to LDR Section 1.3.8, Reconstruction Necessitated by An Act of God. The concern was that if the destruction were deemed not be an "Act of God", the duplexes and multifamily structures could not be rebuilt, thereby creating a hardship for the property owners. Two Board members also felt that creating non- conforming uses would create a disincentive to improve the properties. City Commission Documentation SeacrestJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Rezonings Page 2 The Board recommended denial of the FLUM Amendments and rezonings by a vote of 5to 2. Staff Comments These rezonings are an important part of the adopted neighborhood plan for the area and are necessary to bring stability to the neighborhood. The goal of the Neighborhood Plan is to gradually replace the duplex and multi-family uses in this area with detached single-family homes, consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. In order to encourage new single-family development and redevelopment in the neighborhood, investors must have confidence in the area as a single family neighborhood. To accomplish this, we must take the first step to insure that no additional duplexes or multi-family structures are constructed in the neighborhood. In response to the issues regarding the creation of non-conforming uses, it must be remembered that all of the multi-family structures and most of the duplexes are already non-conforming with respect to density, lot size, lot area or unit size. As such, these structures are already subject to the provisions of LDR Article 1.3, Nonconforming Uses~ Lots and Structures. If one of these structures were destroyed by something other than an "Act of God", it could not be re-constructed now. Therefore, for most of the structures to be rezoned, this is a non-issue. It should also be noted that the proposed amendment and rezoning relating to the area on NE 22nd Street, are consistent with the existing single family uses and do not create non-conforming uses. II,, .... ,~ ,, RECOMMENDED ACTION , , I By motion, approve on first reading the ordinance for the rezonings from RL (Multiple Family Residential- Low Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) and R-l-AA (Single Family Residential) and the rezonings from RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential), based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that the recommended action differs from that of the Planning and Zoning Board. Attachments: · P&Z Staff Report · Letter from property owner PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: June 15, 1998 AGENDA ITEMS: IV.A. 1. Future Land Use Map Amendments from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential, 0-5 units/acre) in part, and from MD (Medium Density Residential, 5-12 units/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential, 0-5 units/acre)in part, in Conjunction with the Implementation of the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan, Generally Located Between Seacrest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and Between George Bush Boulevard and Atlantic High 1.a. Associated Rezonings from RL (Multiple Family Residential-Low Density) to R-l-AA (Single Family Residential)in part, from RM (Multiple Family Residential-Medium Density)to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) in part, and from RL (Multiple Family Residential-Low Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) in Conjunction with the Implementation of the SeacrestJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan, Generally Located Between Seasrest Boulevard and Dixie Highway and Between George Bush Boulevard and Atlantic High School. Owner .............................................. Variou Aoolicant/ApplJcant ........................ City of Delray Beach, ,. Location ........................................... Between Seacrest Boulevard and Bush Boulevard and Atlantic High School. Properb' Size F.L.U.M D~s~gnat~on ....................... Transitional & Medium Density (5-12 units/acre) Proposed F.L.U.M Designation ...... Low Density (0-5 units/acre) Current Zoning ................................. RL (Multiple Family Residential-Low Residential-Medium Density) Prop=sad Zoning ............................. R-l-AA (Single Family Residential) & R-1-A (Single Family Residential) Adjacent Zoning ..................... North: CF (Community Facilities) & R-l-AA East: CF, R-l-AA, SAD (Special Activities District), GC (General Commercial) , ~ (Neighborhood Commercial) Existi,n~ Land Us ............................ SeacrestJDel-lda Neighborhood Proposed Land Use ......................... Future Land Use Amendments and Rezonings related with the implementation of the Seacrest/Del- Ida Park Neighborhood Plan. Sewer Service ................................. n/a. Water Se~ice .................................. n/a. IV.A.1. & IV.A.1. L ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD J The action before the Board is that of making a recommendation on proposed Future Land Use (FLUM) Amendments and P,ezonings associated with the adopted Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan. The Future land Use Map Amendments involve the following areas (See attached Map. Legal descriptions for each area are contained in Appendix A): i~l Area A: Future Land Use Map Amendment from TP,N (Transitional) to LD (Low Density P,esidential 0-5 du/acre/-7 parcels (by ownership), located east of Seacrest Boulevard, north of NE 22nd Street. Area A contains a total of 3.23 acres. E] Area B: Future land Use Map Amendment from MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre)-35 parcels (by ownership), located north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue), between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC P,ailroad. Area B contains a total of 9.05 acres. The proposed rezonings involve the following areas (See attached Map. Legal descriptions for each area are contained in Appendix A): ~ Area C: P,ezoning from P,L (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-l-AA (Single Family P,esidential)-2 parcels (by ownership) on NE 22 Street, east of Seacrest Boulevard. Area C contains a total of 1.13 acres. This area is contained within "Area A" above. rn Area D: P,ezoning from P,M (Multiple Family P,esidential - Medium Density) to P,-1- -A (Single Family Residential)-14 parcels (by ownership) north of Plumosa Elementary School, between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC P,ailroad. Area D contains a total of 3.1 acres. This area is contained within "Area B" above. E] Area E: P,ezoning from P,M (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to P,-1- A (Single Family Residential)-20 parcels (by ownership) north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue), between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC Railroad. Area E contains a total of 5.5 acres. This area is contained within "Area B" above. ~ Area F: P, ezoning from P,L (Multiple Family - Low Density) to P,-1-A (Single Family P,esidential)-134 parcels (by ownership) east of Seacrest Boulevard between George Bush Boulevard and NE 14th Street. Area F contains a total of 26.08 acres. This area does not require a FLUM amendment. Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E) of the Land Development P,egulations, the Planning and Zoning Board shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to FLUM Amendments or P,ezoning of any property within the City. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 2 BACKGROUND I The "Residential Neighborhood Categorization Map," contained in the Housing Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, delineates neighborhoods throughout the City according to the prevailing condition of private property. The main objective of the categorization is to identify the level of need in each neighborhood. Specific strategies and programs and the degree to which these programs are implemented will depend upon this level of need. The Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood is currently categorized as follows: Revitalization - Evidence of decline in condition of structures and yards; increase in crime; property values stagnant or declining. Policy 5.5 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires the preparation of a Neighborhood Plan for areas within this category. The Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan has been completed and was adopted by the City Commission at its meeting of March 3, 1998. The Neighborhood Plan included many recommendations aimed at the elimination of the problems associated with small lot duplex and multiple family development within the neighborhood. One recommendation was that all new residential development or redevelopment within the neighborhood, except in the Del-Ida Park Historic District, be limited to single-family detached housing. Although most of the neighborhood is zoned for single family development, duplex and multiple family units are currently allowed in several areas. The proposed FLUM Amendments and Rezonings for these areas will implement the recommendations identified in the Neighborhood Plan. Other programs aimed at improving the physical appearance and security of the neighborhood are also included in the Plan. Capital improvements will be funded through a partnership of the City, the CRA and the property owners. It is anticipated that traffic calming, streetscape and other improvements to the public spaces within the neighborhood will encourage additional private investment in the area. A strong sense of community spirit and neighborhood pride is already emerging as is evidenced by the high level of public participation in the neighborhood planning process. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT ANALYSIS J REQUIRED FINDINGS: Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7: Amendments to the Future Land Use Map must be based upon the following findings: F~ Demonstrated Need -- That there is a need for the requested land use. The need must be based upon circumstances such as shifts in demographic trends, changes in the availability of land, changes in the existing character Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 3 and FLUM designations of the surrounding area, fulfillment of a comprehensive plan objective or policy, or similar circumstances. The need must be supported by data and analysis. The policy shall not apply to requests for the FLUM designations of Conservation or Recreation and Open Space. The proposed FLUM amendments and associated rezonings will fulfill Housing Element Policy A-5.5, stated as follows:. Housing Element Policy A-5.5 These areas shall be provided assistance through the development of a "neighborhood plan" which is directed toward the arresting of deterioration through physical improvements such as street lighting, street trees, landscaping, street repair, drainage improvements, sidewalks, parks and parking areas, installation or upgrading water and sewer facilities, all of which may be provided through funding and/or assessment districts. The plans shall also address the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications, traffic circulation patterns, abatement of inappropriate uses, and targeting of code enforcement programs. The plans shall be prepared by the Planning and Zoning Department, with assistance from the Community Improvement Department, and the Community Redevelopment Agency if located within the CRA district. At least one neighborhood plan shall be prepared each fiscal year. The priority of these plans is as follows: · Seacrest/Del-lda · Allen/Eastview/Lake Avenues (to be addressed in the North Federal Plan) · Osceola Park · Delray Shores The adopted SeacrestJDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan addressed all the issues included in this policy including the appropriateness of existing land use and zoning classifications. The FLUM amendments and concurrent rezonings being considered at this time are proposed to fulfill the provisions of the plan. Thus, this policy is furthered by the proposed amendments and a positive finding can be made. ~ Consistency -- The requested designation is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. As stated above, the proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. r3 Concurrency -- Development at the highest intensity possible under the requested designation can meet the adopted concurrency standards. The proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings will eliminate the potential for additional multiple family and duplex development on the subject properties. This decreases the overall potential density as well as the potential demand for services and facilities. Thus, positive findings can be made at this time with regard to concurrency for all services and facilities. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 4 Fa Compatibility -- The requested designation will be compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. The subject properties are located in a primarily single family neighborhood with 66% of all residential units and 85% of all residential parcels developed as detached single family homes. A description of each of the areas to be changed is as follows: · Area A - TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) The subject area is surrounded on the east and south by single family homes, on the north by Atlantic High School and on the west by neighborhood commercial. This area is a part of the residential neighborhood and is developing accordingly. Of the 7 ownership parcels, four contain single family homes (1 also contains a beauty salon), two are undeveloped and one is an access tract. The two undeveloped parcels are surrounded on three sides by single family homes and are zoned R-l-AA (Single Family). When these two parcels are developed pursuant to the existing zoning, the area will consists entirely of single family homes. The proposed FLUM designation of LD is contiguous to the LD designation to the south and is compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. · Area B - MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) The subject area is located between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC Railroad, between NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue) and Atlantic High School. The area to the west consists of an elementary school and single family homes zoned-R-l- AA. Six of the ownership parcels in the subject area also contain single family homes. The Neighborhood Plan's direction for this area is the gradual reintroduction of single family uses consistent with the properties to the west. The proposed FLUM designation of LD is contiguous to the LD designation to the west and is compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. Fa Compliance -- Development under the requested designation will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. All future development within the requested designations will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. A detailed discussion of Compliance with the Land Development Regulations is included in the "Zoning Analysis" section of this report. LDR (Chapter 3) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to approval of Land Use 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, wriffen Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 5 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map: The use or structures must be allowed in the zone district and the zoning district must be consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation. The FLUM designations and zoning classifications for the subject properties are being amended pursuant to the adopted Neighborhood Plan for the area. The proposed FLUM amendments will assign a Future Land Use Map designation of Low Density and the proposed rezonings to R-l-AA and R-1-A (Single Family) are consistent with this FLUM designation. Although many of the existing land uses will be made non- conforming, the direction of the Plan is to phase out these uses and promote infill with uses which are consistent with the new FLUM designation. Thus, positive findings can be made regarding consistency of the FLUM designations and zonings. Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were discussed above. As previously stated, a detailed discussion of Compliance with the Land Development Regulations is included in the "Zoning Analysis" section of this report. · ZONING ANALYSIS : REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map, Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were previously discussed under the "Future Land Use Map Amendment Analysis" section of this report. Compliance with the Land Development Regulations with respect to Standards for Rezoning Actions and Rezoning Findings are discussed below. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) for the Rezonings shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 6 Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): Standards A, B and 6 are not applicable with respect to the rezoning requests. The applicable performance standard of Section 3.3.2 is as follows: (D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. Compatibility of land uses within the Seacrest Del-Ida Neighborhood was a primary concern in preparation of the neighborhood plan. The subject properties are located in a primarily single family neighborhood with 66% of all residential units and 85% of all residential parcels developed as detached single family homes. Additionally, 45% of the subject properties contain detached single family residences. A description of each of the areas to be rezoned is as follows: Area C - Rezoninq of 2 parcels from RL to R-l-AA. These two parcels, located on NE 22 Street, are the only properties in the area zoned RL. They are surrounded on three sides by owner-occupied (93%) detached single family homes zoned R-l-AA and by a Iow intensity commercial business (Dance Conservatory) on the west side zoned NC (Neighborhood Commercial). The residential density of the surrounding area is 5.0 du/acre with an average lot size of 8,712 sq. feet. Both of the subject parcels currently contain single family homes and one of the parcels also contains a hair salon business. The existing density on these two large parcels is only 1.76 units per acre. _ r3 Areas D and E - Rezoninq of 34 parcels from RM to R-1-A. These parcels are located between NE 3rd Avenue and the FEC Railroad, north of NE 14th Street (Lake Avenue). Single-family zoning (R-l-AA) exists west of this area and 6 parcels to be rezoned are currently developed as single family homes. The area also contains 20 duplexes and 4 multi-family structures which will become non-conforming uses. The Plan's direction for this area is the gradual reintroduction of single family uses consistent with the properties to the west. Area F - Rezoninq of ~ 34 parcels from RL to R-f-A. These parcels are located east of NE 2"d Avenue (Seacrest Boulevard), between George Bush Boulevard and NE 14th Street. Single Family zoning (R-l-AA) exists north and west of the area and RO (Residential Office) zoning consisting primarily of medical offices is located immediately to the south. The area contains a mix of single-family homes, duplexes and multi-family structures, with a total of 68 detached single family homes, 69 duplexes (138 units) and 31 multi- family units. The duplex and multi-family units will become non-conforming uses. The Plan calls for this area to be stabilized through eventual phasing out of Plannin~ and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 7 duplex and multi-family structures and their replacement with single family homes. Given the above, these rezonings will help to promote compatibility throughout the entire SeacrestJDel-lda Park neighborhood. Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The appropriate reasons for the proposed rezonings are "b" and "c":, based on the following: The Comprehensive Plan identified the neighborhood as needing "revitalization" and directed the City to take measures to prevent further decline and to help-the neighborhood toward a classification of "stabilization" or "stable." This is to be achieved through the implementation of a "neighborhood plan". The City Commission adopted the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan at its meeting of March 3, 1998. With the adoption of the plan, a vision was established for the future development of the area. The proposed rezonings are required to implement the provisions and vision of the adopted plan. in order to implement the adopted neighborhood plan, FLUM designations for the area are being amended as directed in the plan. The proposed zoning districts are of similar intensity to the new FLUM designations and will be more appropriate than the existing zonings, based on the direction of the community and the adopted plan. The appropriateness of the zonings in the area was a fundamental concern during the review of the neighborhood plan. The adoption of the plan establishes the City's finding that the proposed zonings are more appropriate than the existing. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on a land development application/request. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 8 No development proposals have been received for the subject properties. Any proposed development will be subject to the provisions of the new zoning districts. Therefore, a positive finding can be made with respect to future compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Since the proposed rezonings will affect the land developments regulations and applicable development standards for the subject properties, it is also appropriate to discuss the impact of the rezonings on existing development. a. RL to R-I-AA. The existing single family homes on the two parcels to be rezoned will remain conforming uses in the proposed zoning district. Although the minimum lot size for single family development will increase from 7,500 sq. ft. to 9,500 sq. ft., and the minimum lot dimensions will increase, both parcels exceed the new standards and will also remain conforming lots. Although one parcel also has a business located on site, the use is non-conforming and will remain so with the proposed rezoning. b. RM to R-I-A. This area contains a private school, a daycare center, 6 single family homes, 4 multiple family structures, 20 duplexes, and 2 vacant lots. The school and daycare center are permitted as conditional uses and the development standards for them will remain unchanged. The development standards for the single family homes will also remain unchanged. All of the duplex and multiple family structures will become non-conforming uses. It is important to note however that 16 of the 20 duplexes are currently non-conforming with respect to unit size and all four multiple family structures are non-conforming with respect to density. Although the maximum density in the RM district is 12 du/acre, these four buildings each have a density ef 40 du/acre. c. RL to R-I-A. This area contains a mix of single-family homes, duplexes and multi-family structures. The development standards for the single family homes will remain unchanged. The 4 multiple family structures and 59 duplex parcels will become non-conforming uses. All of the multi-family development within the area is currently non-conforming with respect to density. Within the RL zone (3-6 du/acre), these multi- family buildings have densities between 19 and 27 du/acre. Of the 59 duplex parcels within the area, 56 (95%) are non-conforming with respect to one or more of the following standards: lot size (i.e. less than 8,000 sq. ft.), lot width (i.e. less than 60 ft. wide) or unit size (i.e. less than 1,000 sq. ft.). The multiple family structures which become non-conforming uses as a result of the proposed rezonings will be allowed to continue even if ownership changes as long as the use does not cease for 180 days. If such a use is destroyed by a disaster, it is allowed to be rebuilt to the same density if the permit is applied for within one year and the structure is completed within three years. Overall, the development of duplex and multi-family units on small lots within the neighborhood has created the appearance of over-crowding on many streets. This is best evidenced by the excessive number of parked cars in these areas. Most of these Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 9 uses are deficient with respect to number of parking spaces and/or parking lot design. Where adequate spaces do not exist in off-street parking lots or immediately in front of these uses, parking has spilled onto front yards and into the swales of adjacent single- family development. Back-out parking onto adjacent roadways is the typical parking arrangement for duplex development within the neighborhood. In most cases, the number of spaces are maximized with the entire roadway frontage covered in asphalt without the benefit of landscaped breaks between spaces. This degrades the appearance of the area, affects drainage and encourages speeding. Although the proposed rezonings will not eliminate all of these problems, they will prevent additional units for being constructed or the conversion of single family homes to duplexes. Additionally, most of the affected structures are at least 30 years old. Age, obsolescence and poor maintenance have taken their toll on many of the duplex and multiple family structures in the area. As these buildings approach the end of their useful life, they will have to be replaced with single-family homes. REVIEW BY OTHERS - . The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority)or the HPB (Historic Preservation Board). Community Redevelopment Aqency: At its meeting of May 22, 1998, the Community Redevelopment Agency reviewed the proposal and recommended approval for the FLUM Amendments and Rezonings. Adjacent Municipalities: - Notice of the proposed amendments has been provided to the City of Boynton Beach and the Town of Gulf Stream. A response has not been received. Courtesy Notices: Special courtesy notices were provided to the following homeowners and civic associations: 121 Seacrest Homeowners Association r3 Del-Ida Park Homeowners Association ~ Lake Ida Homeowners Association rn PROD (Progressive Residents of Delray) Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to the owners of all properties subject to the FLUM and zoning changes as well as to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject properties. Letters of support and objection, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-tda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 10 ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The proposed FLUM Amendments and Rezonings are recommended in the adopted Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan, which was adopted to meet the provisions of Housing Element Policy A-5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan. Positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore the proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings can be recommended for approval based on the findings outlined in this report. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend to the City Commission approval of FLUM Amendments to the subject parcels, based on positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and, Recommend to the City Commission approval of the rezonings of the subject parcels, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Recommend denial of the FLUM Amendments and Rezonings based on a failure to make positive findings and that the FLUM amendments and rezonings fail to fulfill one of the basis for which a FLUM Amendment or rezoning should be granted. RECOMMENDED ACTION : 1. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the proposed FLUM Amendments from: I;::l TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre), for the parcels within "Area A" identified in Appendix A; and, MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/acre) to LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) for the parcels within "Area B" identified in Appendix A; Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the SeacrestYDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 11 based on positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A -1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and, 2. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the following rezoning requests: r-i Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-l-AA (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area C" identified in Appendix A; Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-l- -A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area D" identified in Appendix A; Fi Rezoning from RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to R-l- A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area E" identified in Appendix A; and, Rezoning from RL (Multiple Family - Low Density) to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) for the parcels in "Area F" identified in Appendix A; based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: Fi Proposed Future Land Use Map Amendments Fi Proposed Rezonings Q Appendix A Report prepared by: Ron Hogqard, Senior Planner Planning and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the Seacrest/Del-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 12 I APPENDIX ^ I FLUM AREA A: THEE316.gFTOFN½OFS½OFNE¼OFSW¼OFSW%;THEE195FTOFW 350 FT OF N ½ OF S ½ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW ¼ / LESS N 30 FT/; THE N 30 FT OF E 310 FT OF W 350 FT OF S ½ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW ¼; AND, THE E ½ OF S ¼ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW ¼, OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E. FLUM AREA B: THE PART OF LOT 38 LYING EAST OF NE 3RD AVENUE AND WEST OF FEC RY, SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E - REFER TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 4, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOTS 102 TO 115, INCLUSIVE AND THE PART OF LOT 116 LYING NORTH OF LAKE AVENUE, PLUMOSA PARK SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOTS 1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 11 OF SEACREST PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 24, PAGE 33, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING - AREA C: THE E ½ OF S ¼ OF NE ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SW ¼ OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E. REZONING AREA D: LOTS 1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 11 OF SEACREST PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 24, PAGE 33, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING AREA E: THE PART OF LOT 38 LYING EAST OF NE 3RD AVENUE AND WEST OF FEC RY/ LESS NLY 141.56 FT, SUBDIVISION OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46S, RANGE 43E - REFER TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 4, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, Plannin~ and Zoning Staff Report FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Associated with the SeacresVDel-lda Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting of June 15, 1998 Page 13 LOTS 102 TO 115, INCLUSIVE, AND THE PART OF LOT 116 LYING NORTH OF LAKE AVENUE, PLUMOSA PARK SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. REZONING AREA F: ALL OF BLOCKS 1,4, 5, 8, 9, AND LOTS 4-12 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 12, DELL PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8, PAGE 56, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND, LOT 12, PLUMOSA PARK, SECTION A, A SUBDIVISION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AS PER PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 68, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. N --~o,~:SEACREST/DEL-IDA:~,,s,:,o,,A: ::: ~o~, ~,,s--, NEIGHBORHOOD ~ - PROPOSED -~'-' ~ b'EE - r..~U.,E LAND MAP AIvIENDMENTS -- ~I~IFAL ~S[ MA~ S~SF~M -- MAc REt: L~253 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM /~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 42-98 (CORRECTIVE REZONINGS FOR PROPERTIES IN THE CITATION CLUB AND HAMMOCK RESERVE) DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1998 This is second reading and a quasi-judicial public hearing for Ordinance No. 42-98 which rezones two parcels of land totaling 0.72 acres, associated with the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. This is a corrective action to rezone the Hammock Reserve parcel from RM-10 (Medium Density Residential - 10 units per acre) to PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 units per acre), and to rezone the Citation Club parcel from PRD-5 to RM-10. The rezonings are being processed in conjunction with the associated Future Land Use Map amendments contained in Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1. The corrective amendments and rezonings are a result of the final alignment of a private road (Orchard Lane) which connects Military Trail with Linton Boulevard. The alignment of the road split the corners of each development leaving triangular parcels on both sides of the road which were owned by opposite developments. The Planning and Zoning Board considered both the FLUM amendment and rezoning requests at a public hearing on June 15, 1998. There was no public testimony and the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Future Land Use Map amendments and the rezonings based upon positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D) (5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. At first reading on October 6, 1998, the City Commission passed the ordinance by unanimous vote. The FLUM amendments are a part of Ordinance No. 24-98 adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1 considered earlier on the agenda. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 42-98 on second and final reading, based upon the findings and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board. ref: agmemol6 ~~ ~-O ORDINANCE NO. 42-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING TWO PARCELS OF LAND, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM RM-10 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY WITH A DENSITY SUFFIX OF 10 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO PRD-5 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 5 UNITS PER ACRE), AND FROM PRD-5 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 5 UNITS PER ACRE) TO RM-10 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY WITH A DENSITY SUFFIX OF 10 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), RESPECTIVELY, ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITATION CLUB AND HAMMOCK RESERVE DEVELOPMENTS; SAID PARCELS OF LAND BEING LOCATED ALONG ORCHARD LANE, APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET EAST OF MILITARY TP~AIL; AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1994"; PROVIDING A GENEP~AL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the properties hereinafter described are shown on the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, as being zoned RM-10 (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density with a density suffix of 10 dwelling units per acre) and PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 units per acre), respectively; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of June 15, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning Agency, considered this item at a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend that the properties hereinafter described be rezoned, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be amended to reflect the revised zoning classifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 units/acre) for the following described parcel of land: AREA A (Ha,,u,~ck Reserve) A parcel of land lying within the Plat of Citation Club as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 181 thru 187, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and lying in Section 25, Township 46 South, Range 42 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of said Section 25; also being a southwesterly corner of the Plat of Citation Club as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 181-187, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence North 01 degrees 23'47" West, along the West line of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of said Section 25, also being a boundary line of said plat of Citation Club, a distance of 184.88 feet; thence South 38 degrees 31'21" East, a distance of 63.95 feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave to the Northeast; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve having a central angle of 28 degrees 14'29" and a radius of 440.53 feet, a distance of 217.14 feet to a point on the south line of said Citation Club; thence South 88 degrees 47'15" West, along said South line a distance of 206.23 feet to the Point of Beginning afore described. Containing 0.36 acre, more or less. Section 2. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of RM-10 (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density with a density suffix of 10 dwelling units per acre) for the following described parcel of land: AREA B (Citation Club) A parcel of land lying within the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section 25, Township 46 South, Range 42 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: - 2 - Ord. No. 42-98 Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (aw 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of said Section 25, also being a Southwesterly corner of the Plat of Citation Club as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 181-187, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence North 01 degrees 23'47" West, along the West line of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (aw 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of said Section 25, also being a boundary line of said Plat of Citation Club, a distance of 184.88 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel to be herein described; thence continue North 01 degrees 23'47" West, a distance of 151.48 feet; thence South 88 degrees 46'29" West, along a boundary line of said Plat of Citation Club, a distance of 223.04 feet; thence South 38 degrees 31'21" East, a distance of 78.62 feet; thence North 88 degrees 46'29" East, a distance of 108.11 feet; thence South 38 degrees 31'21" East, a distance of 111.81 feet to the Point of Beginning afore described. Containing 0.36 acre, more or less. Section 3. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Sections 1 and 2 hereof. Section 4. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 5. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 6. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon the effective date of Ordinance No. 24-98 which adopts Comprehensive Plan Amendment 98-1, under which official land use designations of LD (Low Density Residential 0-5 du/acre) for Area A and TRN (Transitional) for Area B are affixed. - 3 - Ord. No. 42-98 PASSED ~ ~OPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of Octobe______~r , 1998. ATTEST: ' Cit~ C~rk First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading October 20, 1998 - 4 - Ord. No. 42-98 LIN TON BOULEVARD C A N A L L-36 1 C A N A L ~o L-36 Sou t h Tru$t ' BLOSS~ DR ' MENTAL HEALTH --~ SOUTH COUNTY PROF'. N CITATION CLUB &: HAMMOCK RESERVE - PROPOSED REZONINGS - CITY 0~' D-'LRAY ErEAT.~., FL IDLANNING ~ZONING DEPAR'rM~NT Q FROM: RM-10 TO: mRD-5 (~ FROM: PRD-5 TO: RM-10 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: June 15, 1998 AGENDA ITEMS: IV.A.2. & IV.A.2.a Future Land Use Ivlap Amendments from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential, 0-5 units/acre), and LD to TRN, and Associated Rezonings from RM-10 (Medium Density Residential- 10 units per acre) to PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 units per acre), Related to the Alignment of Orchard Lane within the Citation Club & Hammock Reserve Developments, Located on the East Side of Military Trail, South of Linton Boulevard. L I N 710 N = 0 U L F:Vi. A~R D I GENERAL DATA: Owner .............................................. Beztek and DiVosta Applican~Applicant .......................... Ci~ of Delray Beach, David Harden, Ci~ Manager Location ........................................... The subject parcels are located along Orchard Lane, approximately 600 feet east of Militaw Trail. Prope~ Siz .................................... 0.72 Acres (~o 0,36 acre parcels) F.LU.M. Designations ..................... TRN (Transitional) & LD (Low Densi~ 0-5 units/acre) Proposed F.LU.M. Designation ...... LD & TRN Current Zoning ................................. RM-10 (Medium DensiW Residential- 10 units/acre) & PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development- 5 units/acre) Proposed Zoning ............................. PRD-5 & RM-10 Adjacent Zoning ..................... NoA~: RM-10 East: RM-10 South: PRD-5 .x,st~n~ Land Us ............................ Road right-of-way for Orchard Lane and Open Space Proposed Land Use ......................... Corrective Future Land Use Map L Amendments and Rezonings re~ated to the aii?ment of Orchard Lane. ~'" Sewer S~ ................................... nla. / Water So.ice. nla. ~ r~ ~ / The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the City Commission on corrective Future Land Use Map amendments and rezonings on 2 parcels of land totaling 0.72 acres, associated with the Citation Club and Hammock Reserve developments. The request involves a FLUM amendment for the Hammock Reserve parcel from TRN (Transitional) to LD (Low Density Residential) and rezoning from RM-10 (Medium Density Residential- 10 du/ac) to PRD-5 (Planned Residential Development - 5 du/ac). The FLUM amendment for the Citation Club parcel is from LD to TRN, and the associated rezoning is from PRD-5 to RM-10. The subject parcels are located along Orchard Lane, approximately 600 feet east of Military Trail. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency (Planning and Zoning Board) shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to all amendments to the City's Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map amendments and rezonings involve two parcels of land each containing 0.36 acres which are located within approved developments known as Citation Club (zoned RM-10 with an underlying FLUM designation of Transitional)- and Hammock Reserve (zoned PRD-5 with an underlying FLUM designation of Low Density Residential). The corrective amendments and rezonings are a result of the final alignment of a private road (Orchard Lane) which connects Military Trail with Linton Boulevard. The alignment of the road split the corners of each development leaving triangular parcels on both sides of the road which were owned by opposite developments. VVhen Hammock Reserve platted their property it was identified that the developers had land swapped the parcels. The 0.36 acre portion associated with the Citation Club is incorporated into an open space area, and the 0.36 acre portion associated with Hammock Reserve is a portion of the main roadway (Orchard Lane). This Future Land Use Map Amendment is being processed pursuant to the twice a year statutory limits for consideration of plan amendments (F.S. 163.3187). P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 2 Land Use Analysis: Pursuant to Land Development Regulation Section 3.1.1(A) (Future Land Use Map), all land uses and resulting structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and, said zoning must be consistent with the land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. In conjunction with the Future Land Use Map amendments, rezonings to PRD-5 and RM-10 are being sought. The FLUM amendments and rezonings are being processed concurrently to eliminate existing inconsistencies between the FLUM and zoning designations as they relate to their respective developments (Citation Club and Hammock Reserve). The areas which are being changed contain open space and a roadway. These land areas are part of larger developments in which the land uses and resulting structures are consistent with the proposed FLUM and zoning designations. _REQUIRED FINDINGS: Future Land Use Element Policy A-1,7: Amendments to the Future Land Use Map must be based upon the following findings: Q Demonstrated Need -- That there is a need for the requested land use. The need must be based upon circumstances such as shifts in demographic trends, changes in the availability of land, changes in the existing character and FLUM designations of the surrounding area, fulfillment of a comprehensive plan objective or policy, or similar circumstances. The need must be supported by data and analysis. This policy shall not apply to requests for the FLUM designations of Conservation or Recreation and Open Space. The current FLUM and zoning designations of the respective properties are currently inconsistent with the intensity of use of the overall developments. This is a corrective amendment which applies Future Land Use Map designations which will reflect the current use and intensity of the properties. E;I Consistency -- The requested designation is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as it applies Future Land Use Map designations which reflect the current intensity of use. Q Concurrency -- Development at the highest intensity possible under the requested designation can meet the adopted concurrency standards. The subject properties are portions of developed projects. The parcels have been swapped by the two developments. The two projects are currently developed at their highest intensity, based upon their existing zoning designations. Citation Club P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 3 is zoned RM-10 and contains an apartment complex with a density of 10 units per acre, and the portion of the Hammock Reserve under consideration is zoned PRD-5 and is developed at 5 units per acre. At the time of Annexation of both properties, positive findings were made with respect to Concurrency. The proposal replaces one land use designation with the other and visa-versa. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to concurrency. I~ Compatibility -- The requested designation will be compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. The proposed FLUM and zoning designations will be consistent and compatible with their respective developments. Required findings of Compatibility were made with each development approval and no intensification of the development is proposed. ~1 Compliance -- Development under the requested designation will comply with the provisions and requirement of the Land Development Regulations. The existing developments comply with the provisions and requirements of the Land Development Regulations. No intensification of the development is proposed. Iil i..i i .' .iiil !....',ii...ii.ii.. i. ........ii ',. ',. ',. ?,. ',.', i.',.',.i',', ',i i i i iii ', REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to 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, 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 Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehensive Plan Consistency and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Future Land Use Map, Concurrency and Comprehensive Plan Consistency were previously discussed under the Future Land Use Map Analysis section of this report. Compliance with respect to Compliance with the Land Development Regulations (Standards for Rezoning Actions, Rezoning Findings) are discussed below. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings) shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a finding of overall consistency. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 4 Comprehensive Plan Policies: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was previously discussed under the Future Land Use Map Amendment Analysis section of this report. .Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezonin_o Actions): Standards A, B and C are not applicable with respect to this rezoning request, as the rezonings are corrective in nature. The applicable performance standard of Section 3.3.2 is as follows: D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The requests for rezoning and their associated FLUM amendments will eliminate existing incompatibilities. These changes will result in FLUM and zoning designations of these two 0.36 acre parcels which reflect their existing use and intensity. Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezonin_a Findina_s): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D)(5), in addition to the provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular tp the site and/or neighborhood. The proposed zoning designations are more appropriate based upon the current development pattern which resulted from the alignment of Orchard Lane. The changes are corrective in nature and will apply zoning designations consistent with the balance of their respective developments. The subject property is not within a geographical area requiring review by the Community Redevelopment Agency, Downtown Development Authority or the Historic Preservation Board. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 5 CourtesY Noti.c, es: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following civic and homeowners associations: Q Citation Club [3 Hammock Reserve [3 BeI-Aire [3 Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) r3 Del-Aire Country Club [3 Shadywoods [3 Foxe Chase Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. A letter of objection has been received from DeI-Aire Country Club (copy attached). Additional letters of objection and support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The existing Transitional and Low Density Residential Future Land Use Map designations as well as the RM-10 and PRD-5 zoning designations are inconsistent with the respective developments. The changes will result in FLUM and zoning designations which correspond with the balance of their respective developments, thus eliminating the current discrepancies. Positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan, and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend to the City Commission approval of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Recommend to the City Commission denial of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon a failure to make positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Section 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, that the FLUM amendments and rezonings fail to fulfill one of the basis for which a FLUM amendment or rezoning should be granted. P & Z Board Staff Report Citation Club and Hammock Reserve - FLUM Amendments and Rezonings Page 6 Recommend to the City Commission approval of the Future Land Use Map amendments from TRN to LD and LD to TRN, and the rezonings from RM-10 to PRD-5 and PRD-5 to RM-10 based upon positive findings with Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), and Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: r--t Letter of objection from DeI-Aire Country Club [] Future Land Use Map [] Zoning Map Country Club Property Owner's Association, Inc. 4645 White Cedar Lane Delray Beach, FL 33445 499-9090 June 9. 1998 Mr. Paul Dorling Acting Director of Planning Planning and Zoning Department City of Delray Beach, 100 Northwest First Avenue Delray Beach. FL 33444 RE: Proposed Future Land Use Map Arnendmem and Re-Zoning File #98-154 Dear lx&. Doffing: Thank you for sending your June 4, 1998 lener with reference to the above captioned. It appears that the area A. the Hammock Reserve. change will only be a benefit to the CID,. .As for the proposed increase in densiD' for area B, the Citation Club, such a change will certainly not be of any benefit to the CiLv. Therefore, we request that the area B proposal b~ rejected. Sincerely, Daniel Ca>me, President Propertb.' O~xmers' .~sociation DC/m-m p, ECENED DEL RAY LIN TON OULEVA~D CANAL L-36 ~ South Trust ~ ~ALM ~OCARA Y ...... ~,.~ .... ~ .......... I.... T~N ............. ~ I MENTAL HEAL TH I =~,~ O <I-- X~~ ' ;'l~ ~ ~J ~ X X%~ ~ .'~ B / ~ ~ ~~/',,~ I L ~~ ~~ ~ ~ [ ///~ xxX , , , ,, ~ '/ LUgS ~S~O DRr~ / - D N CITATION CLUB &:: HAMMOCK RESERVE - PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE ldAP AMENDMENTS - PLANNINg, & 'ZONIN,~ DEi3ARTM"NT G FROM: TRN TO: LD {~ FROM: LD TO: TRN J --- DI~_,ITA! ~z._.~£ M4P $,~T=~M --- MkC R[F: LM249 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER ~ "I SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #/C~- REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 39-98 (REZONING OF A LOT WITHIN LAMBERT TRAILER COURT) DATE: OCTOBER 14, 1998 This is second reading and a quasi-judicial public hearing for Ordinance No. 39-98 which rezones a residential lot within Lambert Trailer Court (aka Floranda Trailer Park) from R-1-A (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home) District. The subject property is located at 311 S.E. 12th Road which is on the north side of 12th Road approximately 450 feet west of southbound Federal Highway. The subject property was included in Redevelopment Area #4. The Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan, which includes this area, was adopted on March 6, 1996. Pursuant to the recommendations in the Redevelopment Plan, rezonings were enacted on September 17, 1996, with the adoption of Ordinance No. 40-96. Although the subject property contained a mobile home at the time, it was mistakenly included in the rezoning of adjacent lots to the west which contain single family homes, and was given an R-1-A zoning designation. Adjacent mobile homes to the south and east retained the MH (Mobile Home) designation. This error in the zoning designation was not discovered until the owner recently requested information related to replacing the existing mobile home. The Planning and Zoning Board considered this item at a public hearing on September 28, 1998. There was no public testimony and the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. At first reading on October 6th, the City Commission passed the ordinance by unanimous vote. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 39-98 on second and final reading, based upon the findings and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board. ref:agmemol3 ORDINANCE NO. 39-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED R-1-A (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT IN THE MH (MOBILE HOME) DISTRICT; SAID LAND BEING THE WEST 40 FEET OF THE EAST 120 FEET OF LOT 6, PLAT OF LAMBERT TRAILER COURT, LOCATED AT 311 SOUTHEAST 12TH ROAD, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1994"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, as being zoned R-1-A (Single Family Residential) District; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 28, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning Agency, considered this item at a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend that the property hereinafter described be rezoned, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, 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 Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby amended to reflect a zoning classification of MH (Mobile Home) District for the following described property: The West 40 feet of the East 120 feet of Lot 6, according to the Plat of Lambert Trailer Court, recorded in Plat Book 22, Page 41, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is located at 311 S.E. 12th Road (approximately 450 feet west of U.S. Highway #1) within the Floranda Trailer Park; containing 0.11 acre, more or less. Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Section 1 hereof. Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 4. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ~OPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October , 1998. ATTEST: ~City Cl~rk t First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading October 20, 1998 - 2 - Ord. No. 39-98 GC ~ 9TH ST. S.W. 1 DELRA Y CONDOS S SITE- o~R~s RM ~,~o~ ,v~.. ~_ POC ~u MH CENTRAL AVE. ~ ~ T~A/LE~ [ S.[. 12TH PARK HARBOUR ~ S/DE DOMAIN£ 0 C DELRA Y HARBOURS THE ED GE PLAZA BANYAN TREE A T L IN TON VlL L A GE DELRA Y WOODS __[. TREE LANE RM HARBOURS EDGE OLD HARBOUR PLAZA LIN TON BOULEVARD N - REZONING - W. 40' OF E. 120' OF LOT 6, LAMBERT TRAILER COURT CITY Or DELRA¥ BEACH, FL PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT FROM: R-1-A (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO: MH (MOBILE HOME) ---- OI~:ITA/. ~45~* ~ $~'~)'~'M ---- MAP REF: LM273 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: September 28, 1998 AGENDA ITEM: ITEM' Rezoning from R-1-A (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home) for a Residential Lot within Lambert Trailer Court (a.k.a. Floranda Trailer Park), Located on the North Side of S.E. 12th Road, Approximately 450 Ft. West of Federal Highway (U.S. 1). GENERAL DATA: Owner ..................................... B. & Josefa Santiago ~ r,;-'~- Applicant ................................. City of Delray Beach, s.E. 10TH David Harden, City Manager,~---~ i I , Location .......... 311 S.E. 12m Road, ~AvE.~ I DELRAY ........................ ~ PLACE , CONDOS Approximately 450 ft. west of --~ Federal Highway (U.S. 1) ~SITE- EXECU,, OOARTERS Property Size.. 0.11 Acre t._l.__j .m Land Use Map Designation .... Transitional ~: ~ ~ , Existing Zoning ....................... R-1-A (Single Family~ -~ I i!li !~ Residential) ~ ~ ~-LORAND, CEN ,"~,~. TRAILER S.£. ~2T. RD. Proposed Zoning .................... MH (Mobile Home)~--L PAR~ Adjacent Zoning ............ North: RM (Medium Density Residential) East: MH South: MH DO*'A,NE West: R-1-A T~ DELRA? Existing Land Use. Residential Mobile Home P~AZA ................. AT Proposed Land Use ................ Corrective rezoning ~ELRA~ BANYAN TREE Water Service ......................... N/A. VILLAGE Sewer Service ......................... N/A. SA~*N llREE LANE t HARBOURS EDGE OLD HARBOUR PLAZA N L I N T 0 N BOULEVARD / IV.C. II ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD II The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the City Commission on a rezoning request from R-1-A (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home) for the property located at 311 SE 12th Road within the Floranda Trailer Park. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to rezoning of any property within the City. The subject property is described as the West 40 Ft. of the East 120 Ft. of Lot 6, Lambert Trailer Court. The Lambert Trailer Court is now known as the Floranda Trailer Park. There is an existing mobile home on the property. It is bordered by mobile homes to the east and south, a single family home to the west and an undeveloped parcel to the north. The Comprehensive Plan requires that a redevelopment plan be completed for all designated redevelopment areas within the city. The subject property was included in Redevelopment Area ~zt. The "Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan", which includes this area, was adopted on March 6, 1996. As part of the planning process, all properties within the redevelopment area were analyzed with respect to their current use and appropriate zoning designation. Pursuant to the recommendations in the Plan, rezonings were enacted on September 17, 1996 by Ordinance #40-96. Although the subject property contained a mobile home at the time, it was mistakenly included in the rezoning of adjacent lots to the west which contain single family homes, and was given an R-I-A zoning designation. Adjacent mobile homes to the south and east retained the MH (Mobile Home) designation. This error in the zoning designation was not discovered until the owner recently requested information related to replacing the existing mobile home. The proposal under consideration at this time is to rezone the property back to its former MH (Mobile Home) designation. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to 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, 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 four areas. P & Z Board Staff Report Rezoning from R-I-A to MH for Santiago Property Page 2 Future Land Use Map: The use or structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation. The current Future Land Use designation for the subject property is Transitional. The requested zoning change is from Single Family Residential (R-l-A) to Mobile Home (MH). The proposed zoning designation of MH is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map. Concurrency: Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing mobile home on the property. The proposed rezoning will not increase the potential density or the demand for services and facilities. Thus, positive findings can be made at this time with regard to concurrency for all services and facilities. Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with required findings in Section 2.4.$(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings) shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a finding of overall consistency. Section 3.3.2 (Standards for RezoninR Actions): Standards A, B and C are not applicable with respect to the rezoning request. The applicable performance standard of this section is as follows: (D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The subject property is located within an existing mobile home park and contains an existing mobile home. With the exception of a few single family homes to the west of the subject property, the mobile home park is made up exclusively of mobile homes. The vacant property to the north is zoned RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density). Under these conditions, compatibility with surrounding land uses is not an issue. Section 2.4.5(D)~5) (Rezonin.q Findin_~s): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D)(1) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Section 3,1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: P & Z Board Staff Report Rezoning from Rol-A to MH for Santiago Property Page 3 a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more apl~rooriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The property was rezoned in 1996 pursuant to the "Proposed Zoning Map" contained in the Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan. However, language within the Plan indicates that there was an error on the map. The Redevelopment Plan states: The Floranda trailer park will remain in the MH district. MH zoning is inappropriate, however, for the single family structures and lots along 12th Road. Those parcels will be rezoned to R-1-A (Single Family Residential) to reflect current conditions. Although the subject property contained a mobile home at the time, it was mistakenly included in the rezoning of adjacent lots to the west which contain single family homes, and was given an R-1-A zoning designation. Adjacent mobile homes to the south and east retained the MH (Mobile Home) designation. The intent of the Redevelopment Plan was to make the zoning more compatible with existing uses. It did not seek to eliminate existing mobile homes as a permitted use in the area. Additionally, the plan did not indicate that there was anything unique about the subject property that would warrant its rezoning to single family. Therefore a positive finding can be made with respect to this section pursuant to reason "a"-- "that the zoning was changed in error." Compliance With Land Development Re.qulations: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on a land development application/request. The owner of the subject property recently requested information from the City on the potential of replacing the old existing mobile home with a new mobile home or constructing a single family home on the lot. Under the current R-1-A zoning designation, the existing mobile home is a nonconforming use and can not be replaced. Additionally, a single family home can not be constructed on the lot since it is only 40 feet wide and does not meet the minimum lot dimensions in the R-1-A district. Therefore, it is not possible to establish a conforming use on the lot. P & Z Board Staff Report Rezoning from R-1-A to MH for Santiago Property Page 4 It was not the intent of the Redevelopment Plan to place this burden on the property owner. Rezoning the property back to its original MH (Mobile Home) designation will make the existing use and the lot conforming with respect to the Land Development Regulations. Then, under the MH zoning, the deteriorated mobile home may be replaced. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives and policies were noted. Future Land Use Element Policy C-1.6 - The following pertains to the redevelopment of the Silver Terrace Area: This area involves the old Silver Terrace Subdivision which contains some mixed use but is primarily single family. It also involves the adjacent land use of the Floranda Mobile Home Park which is a well maintained land use but which may, in the future, be inappropriate for its location along Federal Highway adjacent to a regional shopping center. The Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on March 5, 1996. The plan establishes Future Land Use Designations, zonings, and special development standards for the redevelopment area. Future Developments in the area must be in accordance with the provisions of the redevelopment plan. As stated earlier, the subject property was rezoned pursuant to an error on the proposed zoning map contained in the Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan. The current proposal to rezone the subject back to its original MH (Mobile Home) designation is consistent with the applicable text contained in the Redevelopment Plan, which describes the proposed zoning for the Floranda Mobile Home Park. The rezoning is not in a geographic area requiring review by either the HPB (Historic Preservation Board), DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: Courtesy Notices have been provided to the following homeowner's and civic associations: · June Carr- Silver Terrace Homeowners Association Derek Hemandez- Osceola Park · Patricia Kelly- Delray Harbor Club · Paul Gerblick- Harbourside · Cornelius Wagnre- Domain Delray P & Z Board Staff Report Rezoning from R-1-A to MH for Santiago Property Page 5 Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. Letters of objection and support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS The rezoning from R-1-A (Single family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home) is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Also, positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(D)(5) "Rezoning Findings", that the is more appropriate given the circumstances particular to the site. A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend rezoning the Santiago Property at 311 SE 12th Road from R-1-A (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home), based on positive findings with respect to Section 2.4.5(D)(1) "Rezoning Findings", Section 3.1.1, and the performance standards of Section 3.3.2. C. Recommend denial of a rezoning, based on a failure to make positive findings. Recommend approval of the rezoning request for the Santiago Property at 311 SE 12t" Road from R-I-A (Single Family Residential) to MH (Mobile Home), based upon positive findings with respect to Section 3.1.1 "Required Findings", Section 3.3.2 "Standards for Rezoning Actions", and Section 2.4.5(D)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: · Location/Zoning Map Report prepared by: Ron Hoq.qard, Senior Planner MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 40-98 {ANNEXATION, SMALL SCALE FL UMAMENDMENT AND INITIAL ZONING FOR PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY) DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1998 This is second reading and a quasi-judicial public hearing for Ordinance No. 40-98 which annexes a vacant 8.68 acre parcel of land, provides for a small scale Future Land Use Map amendment to affix a City land use designation of MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 dwelling units/acre), and establishes initial zoning of RM-8 (Multiple Family Residential - 8 dwelling units/acre). The subject property is located approximately 280 feet south of West Atlantic Avenue between Military Trail and Markland Lane. The property currently has a County Future Land Use Map designation of CHO/8 (Commercial High Office/Residential 8 dwelling units/acre), in part, and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 dwelling units/acre). The proposal includes voluntary annexation of the property with a City FLUM designation of MD and initial zoning of RM-8. The proposed use of the property is that of an assisted living facility and adult day care. The Planning and Zoning Board considered the request at a public hearing on September 28, 1998. Several residents of the adjacent neighborhoods spoke in favor of the proposed use. After discussion, the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval, based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) and Section 2.4.5(D) (5) of the Land Development Regulations, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. At first reading on October 6th, the City Commission passed the ordinance by unanimous vote. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 40-98 on second and final reading, based upon the findings and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board. ref:agmemol5 ORDINANCE NO. 40-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED BETWEEN MILITARY TRAIL AND MARKLAND LANE, APPROXIMATELY 280 FEET SOUTH OF WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AFFIXING AN OFFICIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MD (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5-12 UNITS/ACRE) FOR SAID LAND TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AS CONTAINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; ELECTING TO PROCEED UNDER THE SINGLE HEARING ADOPTION PROCESS FOR SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF TO RM-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - 8 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE); PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, William F. Koch, Jr. and Mary Lou F. Koch, his wife, are the fee-simple owners of a 8.68 acre parcel of land located approximately 280 feet south of West Atlantic Avenue, between Military Trail and Markland Lane; and WHEREAS, Mark Fassy, Glanzrock Corporation, as duly authorized agent for the fee-simple owners hereinabove named, has requested by voluntary petition to have the subject property annexed into the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach has heretofore been authorized to annex lands in accordance with Section 171.044 of the Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is presently under the jurisdiction of Palm Beach County, Florida, having a County Future Land Use Map designation of CHO/8 (Commercial High Office/Residential 8 units/acre), in part, and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 units/acre), in part; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for the subject property in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 units/acre); and WHEREAS, the City's FLUM designations as initially contained on the City's Future Land Use Map adopted in November, 1989, and as subsequently amended, are deemed to be advisory only until an official Land Use Amendment is processed; and WHEREAS, the designation of a zoning classification is part of this proceeding, and the provisions of Land Development Regulations Chapter Two have been followed in establishing the proposed zoning designation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(6), the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of September 28, 1998, and voted unanimously to recommend that the requests be approved with an initial zoning of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 dwelling units/acre), based upon positive findings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, hereby annexes to said City the following described land located in Palm Beach County, Florida, which lies contiguous to said City to-wit: A portion of the West One-Half (W 1/2) of the West One-Half (W 1/2) of the Southeast One Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southeast One Quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 14, Township 46 South, Range 42 East and described as follows: COMMENCE at the Northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of said Section; thence South 00 degrees 20'37" East, along the West line of the aforesaid Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4), a distance of 251.73 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence North 89 degrees 14'31" East, a distance of 334.49 feet; thence South 00 degrees 21'24" East, to a point on the South line of said Section 14, a distance of 1130.46 feet; thence South 89 degrees 12'59" West along said South line of Section 14 to a point on the West line of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4), a distance of 334.76 feet; thence North 00 degrees 20'37" West, a distance of 1130.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. - 2 - Ord. No. 40-98 The subject property is located approximately 280 feet south of West Atlantic Avenue, between Military Trail and Markland Lane; containing 8.68 acres, more or less. Section 2. That the boundaries of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, are hereby redefined to include therein the above-described tract of land and said land is hereby declared to be within the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Section 3. That the land hereinabove described shall immediately become subject to all of the franchises, privileges, immunities, debts, obligations, liabilities, ordinances and laws to which lands in the City of Delray Beach are now or may be subjected, including the Stormwater Management Assessment levied by the City pursuant to its ordinances and as required by Florida Statutes Chapter 197, and persons residing thereon shall be deemed citizens of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Section 4. That this annexation of the subject property, including adjacent roads, alleys, or the like, if any, shall not be deemed acceptance by the City of any maintenance responsibility for such roads, alleys, or the like, unless otherwise specifically initiated by the City pursuant to current requirements and conditions. Section 5. That the Future Land Use Map designation of the subject property is hereby officially affixed as MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 units/acre). Section 6. That the City of Delray Beach elects to make this small scale amendment by having only an adoption hearing, pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 163.3187(1) (c) (4). Section 7. That Chapter Two of the Land Development Regulations has been followed in the establishment of a zoning classification in this ordinance and the tract of land hereinabove described is hereby declared to be in Zoning District RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 dwelling units/acre) as defined by existing ordinances of the City of Delray Beach. Section 8. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 9. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. - 3 - Ord. No. 40-98 Section 10. That this ordinance shall become effective as follows: As to annexation, immediately upon passage on second and final reading; as to land use and zoning, thirty-one (31) days after adoption, unless the amendment is challenged pursuant to Section 163.3187(3), F.S. If challenged, the effective date of the land use plan amendment and zoning shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs, or the Administration Commission, finding the amendment in compliance with Section 163.3184, F.S. 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 resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2740 Centerview Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 20th day of October , 1998. ATTEST: ~ity Cl~rk - First Reading October 6, 1998 Second Reading October 20, 1998 - 4 - Ord. No. 40-98 -- SQUARE ,~ <~. PLAZA Z EXECUTIVE CARNIVAL OF ~' SQUARE FLEA DELRA Y ~ MA RKE T I [I ) ~~C£ WASHINGTON FIRST ~ MUTUAL UNION WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE SUNTRUST )~ P;NES ( DELRA Y WE S T ~ WE S T PLA ZA _ PLA ZA J ~ ' , , ~ ~ J~FFERSO~ Rp WASHINOTON ROAD BOULEVARD N PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY ~ FUTURE ~ND USE MAP AMENDMENT CITY Or DELRAY BEACH, FL FROM: COUN~ OHO/8 (COMMERCIAL HIGH OFFICE/8 UNITS PER ACRE) ~ COUN~ MR-5 (MEDIUM D[N51~ RESIDENTIAL-5 UN[TS PER ACRE) ~LANNING ~ ZONING DEPARTMENT TO: CI~ MD (MEDIUM DENSI~ RESIDENTIAL 5-12 UNITS PER ACRE.) -- DIGI~ ~C MAP E~TEM -- ~P REF: LM278 DELRA Y S©UARE PLAZA PC WA SHIN S TON MUTUAL EST ATLANTIC N UE $OU TH TRUS TB ANK I ~ POC P,N~ ~L~A~ WE 5 T WES T PLAZA PLAZA --GC ESTATES DErv[ N PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY ~ ANNEXATION WITH INITIAL ZONING OF RM-8 cra, or DEL~A¥.,~^C~. r~ (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL-8 UNITS/AC.) t~LANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGIT, a,I. ,~45E MAP .CY~T£,IUI -- MAP REF: LM278 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: September 28, 1995 AGENDA ITEM: IV.E. ITEM: Future Land Use Map Amendment from County CHO/8 (Commercial High Office/ Residential 8 Units/acre) and MR-5 (Medium Residential-5 units/acre) to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 units/acre), and Associated Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential-8 units/acre) for Palm Gardens at Delray, a Proposed Assisted Living Facility And Adult Day Care, Located Approximately 280 ft. South of West Atlantic Avenue, Between Military Trail and Markland Lane. GENERAl_ DATA: Owner ........................................ W.F. Koch, Jr. & Mary L. Koch Glanzrock Corp., Agent/Applicant Mark Fassy Location ...................................... Approximately 280 ft. south of West Atlantic Avenue, between South Military Trail and Markland Lane Property Size .............................. 8.68 Acres ~----~ C..-~ ~-~-~ ~ Existing County Future Land Use CHO/8 (Commercial High Map Designation ........................ Office/Residential 8 units/acre) and wEs~ A'~AN~IC .~.V~iNuE MR-5 (Medium Residential-5 ~. l~~~fl 7:~[ t-il esou~t~USrl ~ANK I f;,/ I /I units/acre) Proposed City Future Land Use MD (Medium Density Residential Map Designation .......... ............... 5-12 units/acre) Existing County Zoning ............... CliO (Commercial High Office) & AR (Agricultural Residential) Proposed City Zoning ................. RM-8 (Medium Density Residential-8 ,. units/acre) Adjacent Zoning ................ North: City POC (Planned Office Center) East: City PC (Planned Commercial) and County AR (Agricultural Residential) South: County RS West: County AR ill Proposed Land Use .................... Future Land Use Map Amendment to , MD and Annexation with initial zoning of RM-8 to obtain City services foriii I I I ] l l Ii IJ, l~rl i~I I~ll E ..... the construction of an assisted living facility and Alzheimers/Dementia .,o,,o. .o.o .... care facility with associated parking and landscaping. - i i Water Service ............................. Available via connection to an existing 6" water main at the I I Ill southwest corner of the shopping ...., property line of the shopping center ITEM BEFORE:THE BOARD ' The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation on a Voluntary Annexation (pursuant to Florida Statute 171.044), and a Small-Scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CHO-8 (Commercial High Office - 8 du/ac) and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 du/ac) to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac) with initial zoning of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac). LDR Sections 2.4.5 (A), (C) and (D) provide rules and procedures for the processing of this petition. The 8.64 acre property is located 280' south of West Atlantic Avenue, approximately 1,000' west of Military Trail. BA CK:GRO:U N D/:PRO!:J;EC~TiDE SCRI P~iO:N: : The subject property is an 8.64 acre vacant parcel located in unincorporated Palm Beach County, and within the City's Planning Area. It has a County Future Land Use Map designation of CHO-8 (Commercial High Office - 8 du/ac) and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 du/ac) and County zoning of AR (Agricultural Residential) and CHO (Commercial High Intensity Office). The proposal is to annex the property into the City, change the Future Land Use Map designation to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac), and apply an initial zoning designation of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac). The proposed use of the property is that of an assisted living facility (ALF) and Adult Day Care. The ALF and Adult Day Care uses require Conditional Use approval, which is addressed in a separate report. :FUTU:R~E LAN D U:SEiiMAP AMENDMENT~:ANAL'¥SIS Current Land Use Designations: The current County Land Use Map designation for the property is County CHO-8 (Commercial High Office - 8 du/ac) and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 du/ac. The current City "advisory" Future Land Use designation for this property is TRN (Transitional). Requested Land Use Designation: The requested Future Land Use Map change is to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac). Florida Statutes 163.3187 -Small Scale Land Use Map Amendments: This Future Land Use Map Amendment is being processed as a Small-Scale Development pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. This statute states that any local government comprehensive land use amendments directly related to proposed small scale development activities may be approved without regard to statutory limits on the frequency of consideration of amendments (twice a year), subject to the following conditions: ~ The amendment does not exceed 10 acres of land; Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 2 The cumulative effect of the amendments processed under this section shall not exceed 120 acres within designated redevelopment and traffic concurrency exception areas, or 60 acres annually in areas lying outside the designated areas; and, The proposed amendment does not involve the same property, or the same owner's property within 200 feet of property, granted a change within a period of 12 months. [] That if the proposed amendment involves a residential land use, the residential land use has a density of 10 units or less per acre. [] The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. [] The property that is the subject of a proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern. The FLUM amendment involves an 8.64 acre area, thus the total area is less than the 10 acre maximum. This amendment along with other small-scale amendments processed this year, outside the designated areas, will not exceed 60 acres. This property has not previously been considered for a land use amendment nor has the same property owner's properties been granted a land use change within 200 feet, within the last year. The proposed amendment to Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac (MD) is being processed concurrently with a request for annexation and initial zoning of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac) to accommodate an assisted living facility, which is allowed as a conditional use. While the amendment involves a residential land use that could potentially exceed 10 units per acre, the proposed zoning limits the density to 8 du/ac. The MD land use designation allows zoning districts, which include single family -- Iow and medium density, and multiple family developments. The amendment does not involve a text change to the Comprehensive Plan, and deals with a site specific small scale amendment activity. The property is not located within a designated redevelopment or traffic concurrency exception area, nor is it within an area of critical concern. Land Use Analysis: Pursuant to Land Development Regulations Section 3.1.1(A) (Future Land Use Map), all land uses and resulting structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and, said zoning must be consistent with the land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac Future Land Use Map designation is consistent with the proposed RM-8 zoning designation. The proposed use (assisted living facility) is allowed as a conditional use within the RM-8 zoning district. Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 3 Consistency between the City and County Land Use Designations: The City's MD land use designation is consistent with the County's CHO-8 and MR-5 Land Use designations in that Medium Density Residential uses are allowed under each Land Use category. The current "advisory" Transitional designation allows multiple family development as well as office and limited commercial development. The current City' FLUM designations as initially contained on the City's Future Land Use Map adopted in November, 1989, (and as formally amended subsequently) are deemed to be advisory until an official Future Land Use Map Amendment is processed. Adjacent Land Use Map Designations, Zoning Designations & Land Uses: North: Property north of the subject property has a City land use designation of GC (General Commercial) and is zoned PC (Planned Commercial). The property is developed with a bank (Sun Bank). South: Property o the south, across the L-34 Canal, has a County land use designation of MR-5 (Medium Residential 5 du/ac) and a County zoning designation of RS (Single Family). The existing land use is a single family development (Country Club Acres). West: The abutting properties to the west have a Palm Beach County land use designation of MR-5 (with an advisory City land use designation of Transitional) and a City land use designation of GC (General Commercial). The properties are zoned County AR (Agricultural Residential) and City POC (Planned Office Center). The existing land uses are single family residences (Breezy Acres Subdivision) and Sun Trust Bank. East: The abutting properties to the east have a Palm Beach county land use designation of MR-8 (with an advisory City land use designation of Transitional) and City land use designation of GC (General Commercial). The properties are zoned County AR (Agricultural Residential) and City PC (Planned Commercial). The existing land uses are a single family subdivision and a commercial development (Points West Plaza). Allowable Land Uses: Under the proposed Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac land use designation, residential zoning districts, which accommodate single family and multiple family units (R-I-A through R-l-AAA, RL, PRD, and RM), are allowed. The applicant has requested an initial zoning designation of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac). This zoning designation is consistent with the proposed land use designation. Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 4 REQUIRED FINDINGS: Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7: Amendments to the Future Land Use Map must be based upon the following findings: I~1 Demonstrated Need -- That there is a need for the requested land use. The need must be based upon circumstances such as shifts in demographic trends, changes in the availability of land, changes in the existing character and FLUM designations of the surrounding area, fulfillment of a comprehensive plan objective or policy, or similar circumstances. The need must be supported by data and analysis. This policy shall not apply to requests for the FLUM designations of Conservation or Recreation and Open Space. The proposal involves annexation of property, which requires changing the FLUM designation from County to City. The current County FLUM designation is CHO-8 (Commercial High Office - 8 du/ac) and MR-5 (Medium Residential- 5 du/ac) and the current City "advisory" designation is Transitional, which allows residential (single and multiple family, offices, and limited retail). The proposed City FLUM designation of MD is consistent with the current County CHO-8 and MR-5 designations. The County designation of CHO-8 allows offices or a residential development up to 8 du/ac. While the proposed FLUM and zoning designations are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the proposed use of the property (assisted living facility and adult day care) is inconsistent with certain policies of the Housing Element. These policies and mitigating factors related to this particular property are discussed within the Conditional Use report for the ALF. Future Land Use Element Objective A-l: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complementary to adjacent uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The subject property is heavily wooded with Slash Pines. The only viable plant community (i.e. understory growth) is located along the south property line with an undulating depth of 20'-35'. LWDD is requesting that the southern 20' of the property be dedicated as additional canal right-of-way. The balance of the property contains scattered Slash Pines that should be saved to the greatest extent possible. Mitigation to reinstate the viable plant community (which will be lost with the LWDD dedication) somewhere else on site will be required and can further be addressed with the site plan request. The property can be developed in a manner that will be complementary to the adjacent residential area with some changes to the proposed sketch plan. However, the use as an assisted living facility does not fulfill a remaining land use need identified within the City's Comprehensive Plan. With review of a specific development proposal this policy will be revisited. Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 5 [] Consistency -- The requested designation is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the most recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. As previously stated, the proposed ALF is inconsistent with policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan regarding adult oriented communities. However, LDR Section 3.1.1(C)(Consistency) states that a finding of overall consistency can be made even though the action will be in conflict with some performance standards within Article 3.3 of the Land Development Regulations, provided the approving body specifically finds that the beneficial aspects of the proposed project outweighs the negative impacts of the identified points of conflict. In order to establish the use of an assisted living facility, Conditional Use approval is required and Consistency is discussed further within that report. E3 Concurrency -- Development at the highest intensity possible under the requested designation can meet the adopted concurrency standards. As discussed later in this report, the property can be developed at the highest intensity allowed under the MD land use designation and meet adopted concurrency standards. The proposal is to annex the property with an initial zoning designation of RM-8, which will be limited to a maximum of 8 units per acre. [] Compatibility -- The requested designation will be compatible with the existing and future land uses of the surrounding area. Compatibility with the commercial development to the north is not a concern. Compatibility with abutting residential properties is a concern based on the overall size and massing of the proposed building. There are landscape regulations in place that can help to mitigate any potential adverse impacts, however, the size and scale of the development needs to be addressed further with the Conditional Use and site plan analyses. [] Compliance -- Development under the requested designation will comply with the provisions and requirement of the Land Development Regulations. Compliance with the Land Development Regulations will be further addressed with review of a conditional use and site plan approval request. There should be no problems complying with the Land Development Regulations. I A'N~NEXATI:ON: ANALYSISi~,i ~ : I Florida Statutes Governing Voluntar7 Annexations: Pursuant to Florida Statute 171.044 "the owner or owners of real properties in an unincorporated area of the County, which is contiguous to a municipality and reasonably compact may petition the governing body of said municipality that said property be annexed to the municipality". Pursuant to F.S. 171.044 (5) "land shall not be annexed through voluntary annexation when such annexation results in the creation of enclaves". Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 6 Pursuant to F.S. 171.031(13), an "enclave" is (1) any unincorporated improved or developed area that is enclosed within and bounded on all sides by a single municipality; or, (2) any unincorporated improved or developed area that is enclosed within and bounded by a single municipality and a natural or manmade obstacle that allows the passage of vehicular traffic to that unincorporated area only through the municipality. I;I The property is contiguous with the City along the north and a portion of the east and west property lines. The property does have unincorporated areas to the south and east. However, the subject property, as well as the property to the east is considered to be two distinct enclosures under the definition of enclosure FS. 171.131 (31)(2). Each of these properties either abuts property within the municipalities and has manmade obstacles (platted properties or canals) which allow access only through the municipality. The annexation of this property will eliminate one exiting enclave in its entirety. ~ Land Development Regulations Governing Annexations: Pursuant to the Land Development Regulations Section 2.4.5 (C)(1) "the owner of land may seek the annexation of contiguous property, under his ownership" pursuant to Florida Statutes. The property owner has voluntarily petitioned for this annexation. CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Designated Annexation Area: The territory to be annexed is located within designated annexation area "D" ( as identified in FLUE Policy B3.5) on the west side of Military Trail south of Atlantic Avenue. Annexation of the territory is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy B-3.5, which calls for annexation of eligible properties through voluntary annexations as the opportunities arise. CONCURRENCY: Provision of Services: When annexation of property occurs, services are to be provided in a manner which is consistent with services provided to other similar properties already in the City (Future Land Use Element Policy B-3.1). The following is a discussion of required services and the manner in which they will be provided. Police: This property is currently serviced by the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, located at 345 South Congress, which serves the South County area. The property lies within Sheriff patrol zone 7. Zone 7 is bordered by Jog Road on the west, the Delray Beach City Limits on the east, Atlantic Avenue on the north, and Clint Moore Road to the south. One officer is assigned to a particular zone during a shift (three shifts per day). Additional response can be mustered from "Cover Cars" which roam throughout zones randomly, depending on their availability in South County during that time. Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 7 The City of Delray Beach's Police Department has 14 cars per shift patrolling a 15 square mile area; and, as a consequence, significantly improved response time should be realized. Annexation will not require additional manpower, as the police currently pass the property while patrolling areas of the City to the north of the property. Fire and Emergency Services: The annexation of this property will not require additional manpower. The municipal area is served by Fire Station No. 4 (Barwick & Lake Ida Roads). With annexation, the property will receive an improvement in response time from the current 5.5 minutes of the County's Fire Department (Fire Station #42/Hagen Ranch Road near the Turnpike) to approximately 2.5 minutes for the City's Fire Department (Fire Station ~4 at Barwick and Lake Ida Roads). Water: Municipal water service is available via connection to an existing 12" water main located along Atlantic Avenue and from a main extension from an existing 8" main located behind the Firestone building to the east. Along the new mains, fire hydrants must be installed with a maximum spacing of 300 feet for the proposed assisted living facility as well as a fire sprinkler system within the building. If 3-story multi-family structures are constructed, a fire hydrant spacing of 300 feet will be required, and 400 feet for multi-family structures up to 2-stories. Also, looping of the main internal to the site for system integrity will be required. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Sewer: Sewer service is available north of the site via an existing 8" sewer main. With future development, the installation of sewer main extensions to the west and south property lines may be required. The applicant's engineer will need to determine if the existing system can handle the demands of this development or if the installation of a lift station will be required. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build- out. Streets: This property has access to Atlantic Avenue, which is under the jurisdiction of Palm Beach County. The jurisdictional responsibility and the associated maintenance responsibility will not change upon annexation. A traffic study was submitted comparing the development potential under the county and proposed city land use and zoning designations upon the maximum number of residential units allowed under the proposed RM-8 zoning, which would be 69 units generating 484 average daily trips. The annexation will not result in any increase development potential. A detailed traffic study was submitted for the ALF conditional use request. The proposed assisted living facility will generate a total of 679 average daily trips. Atlantic Avenue is operating at Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 8 LOS "D", which can accommodate the vehicular trips generated by the proposed development. Parks and Open Space: The annexation of the property to accommodate an assisted living facility will not create an additional impact on park and recreational facilities. The stated intended use of the property is as an assisted living facility, which typically do not impact the park system. However, even if the property were developed to accommodate permanent residential units, these units would not have a significant impact with respect to level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities. The impacts of the potential residents have already been factored into the park demands calculated on build-out projections. Further, the City currently provides approximately 8 acres per 1,000 residents of recreation space, which far exceeds the desired standard of 3 acres per 1,000 residents established in the Comprehensive Plan. If the parcel is ultimately developed as homes or apartments, a parks and recreation impact fee of $500 per unit will be assessed at the time of building permit. Solid Waste: As there is no change in actual land use at this time, there will be no impact on solid waste disposal. The service provider will change, as described later in this report. Financial Impacts: Effect Upon Annexed Property: For the 1998 tax year the subject property had an assessed value of $388,475. With the change from County to City jurisdiction, the following taxes and rates will be affected: Ad Valorem Taxes Millage With Annexation Fire/Rescue MSTU 2.5764 Deleted (County) Library .4997 Deleted (County) City Of Delray Beach 6.9100 Added (City) City of Delray Beach Debt .7900 Added (City) 4.6239 Difference* * Total tax millage in the County is 19.8597 mills while in the City the total millage rate is 24.4836 mills. The current yearly ad valorem taxes are $ 7,714.99. With annexation the yearly ad valorem taxes will be $ 3,768.67; a tax difference of $1,796.28. In addition to property taxes, the following Non Ad Valorem fiscal impositions apply: Delray Beach Storm Water Utility - This assessment is based upon the percentage of impervious area of the buildings, parking areas, etc. If the property is developed as a multiple family complex or is subdivided for residential purposes, an assessment of $54.00 per unit would be applied. For non-residential units the fee is calculated using Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 9 the following formula (# sq.ft, of impervious area/2,502) X $54. A 25% discount from the assessment is available as the site is within the Lake Worth Drainage District and an additional 25% discount may be available if drainage is retained on site. As the property is currently vacant, this assessment is not immediately imposed. With future development, the storm water utility tax will be assessed. Solid Waste Authority - The Military Trail annexation areas are serviced by Sunburst (pursuant to new contract awarded on May 13, 1998), and the City's contract is currently through BFI (Browning-Ferris Industries). Pursuant to Florida Statute 171.062 (4)(a) "if a party has an exclusive franchise which is in effect for at least six months prior to the initiation of an annexation, the franchisee may continue to provide such services to the annexed area for five years or the remainder of the franchise term whichever is shorter". As the annexation was to occur before the six month, the waste service provider will change with annexation to BFI. Occupational License Fees - The proposed assisted living facility will require an occupational license. This license will be in addition to the current County license fee required for an assisted living facility of approximately $30 per year. The City license fee for the facility is $125. If the property is developed for owner-occupied residential purposes, an occupational license will not be required. Resulting Impacts to Property Owner: FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: AD VALOREM TAXES +$1,796.28 (Change from 97/98 County of 19.8597 to City 97/98 rate 24.836 mills.(4.7239) NON AD VALOREM Stormwater Assessment $ .00 Solid Waste Collection $ .00 WATER & SEWER UTILITY FEES $ .00 OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE FEES $125.00 ANNUAL FINANCIAL IMPACT: +$1,921.28 Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 10 SERVICE CONSIDERATIONS: FIRE RESPONSE + Faster response time from (estimated time) 5.5 minutes (County) to 2.5 minutes (City) EMS + Faster response time from (estimated time) 5.5 minutes (County) to 2.5 minutes (City) POLICE + Better response based upon more officers in field. CODE ENFORCEMENT + Pro-active vs reactive opportunity to work with property owners Fiscal Impacts to the City: At the 1998/99 City operating millage rate of 6.91 mills and debt rate of 0.79 mills, the vacant property will generate approximately $2,991.26 in new ad valorem taxes per year. With future development, additional revenues will be realized through increased assessment value, building permit fees, the annual collection of the stormwater assessment fee as well as utility taxes (9.5% electric, 7% telephone) and franchise fees on electric, telephone, and cable. I The proposed City zoning designation is RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac) while the current County zoning designation is AR (Agricultural Residential) and CHO (Commercial High Intensity Office). The surrounding zoning designations are County AR and City POC (Planned Office Center) to the west; County AR and City PC (Planned Commercial) to the east; City POC to the north; and County AR to the south. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to 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, 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 four areas: Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 11 FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The use or structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation. The proposed RM-8 zoning designation is consistent with the proposed Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac land use designation. The proposed assisted living facility is allowed as a conditional use within the RM zone district. Based upon the above, a positive finding can be made with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map. CONCURRENCY: Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal involves the annexation of existing vacant land. There will be no changes in the manner that water, sewer, drainage, and streets/traffic will be provided. Fire, EMS, solid waste and police will shift to a different provider; however, all of these services will be equal to or better than existing services (see annexation analysis for details). COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: The subject property is currently vacant. Any future development will be required to comply with all Land Development Regulations. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), along with the required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. Comprehensive Plan Policies: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was previously discussed under the Future Land Use Map Amendment analysis section of this report. Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): Standard B and C are not applicable with respect to this rezoning request. The applicable performance standards of Section 3.3.2 are as follows: A) That a rezoning to other than CF within a stable residential area shall be denied. The subject property and the residential properties to the east and west are not designated on the Neighborhood Categorization Map. However, the property to the south (County Club Acres) is noted as Stabilization. The rezoning request involves the application of an initial zoning designation in conjunction with the Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 12 annexation request. The proposed RM-8 zoning designation will be consistent with the proposed MD Future Land Use Map designation and is appropriate given the adjacent City zoning districts. D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The initial RM-8 zoning designation will accommodate the proposed assisted living facility as a conditional use. Compatibility with the adjacent residential development will relate to the ultimate density of future development. The development potential of the property under the County's CHO-8 and MR-5 land use designation is 54 residential units, which is similar to the maximum allowed under the proposed RM-8 zoning district of 69 units (it is noted that beds within ALF are not considered individual units). The City's RM zoning district has a range of 6-12 units per acre, with the maximum density determined at the time of site plan approval, based upon compatibility with surrounding properties, or application of a density suffix through the rezoning process. It is appropriate to apply the density suffix of 8 units per acre given the following: a) that the subject property is bordered to the north, northeast and northwest by existing commercial developments; b) that the County's underlying land use of MR-8 to the east is equivalent to the proposed zoning of RM-8; and c) that the County's underlying land use of MR-5 to the west is of a similar density to the proposed RM-8 zoning designation and that sufficient regulations exist to mitigate any negative impacts. Regulations which help mitigate impacts include a minimum 15' (side interior) and 25' front and rear building setback. Further, if the property is developed as an assisted living facility, trees must be planted every 25' within the landscape strips abutting the single family residences to the east, west and south. Compatibility of a specific development proposal with the adjacent developments will be appropriately addressed with the review of the Conditional use and site and development plan requests. Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D)(5), in addition to the provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the following: a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 13 c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The applicant is applying for annexation of this property into the City and the annexation requires that an appropriate zoning designation also be applied. The RM-8 zone designation is being sought as it is consistent with the existing County AR and CHO zoning designations and the proposed City Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac Future Land Use Map designation. Items "b" and "c" are the basis for which the rezoning should be granted. The property is in the unincorporated area of Palm Beach County, however, it is within the City of Delray Beach reserve annexation area. With annexation (change of circumstance) a City zoning designation must be applied. The requested zoning is of similar intensity as that allowed under the proposed City Medium Density FLUM designation. The RM-8 zoning is more appropriate for the property and is of similar intensity as allowed under the County's zoning designations to the south, east, and west. REVIEW BY: OT:HE:RS , The subject property is not in a geographical area requiring review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the HPB (Historic Preservation Board). Lake Worth Drainage District: Lake Worth Drainage District reviewed the annexation application and requested a dedication of 20' along the south property line of the subject property for the L-34 Canal. The applicant has voluntarily agreed to this provision. Palm Beach County Notice: On September 17, 1998 the Palm Beach County Planning Division was notified of the City's intent to annex this property. To date, a response has not been received. IPARC Notice: Notice of the Future Land Use Map Amendment was also provided to the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARC) which distributes the information to adjacent municipalities. To date, a response has not been received. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices were sent to the following homeowner's and civic associations: I~ Country Club Acres r~ Greensward Village Condominium Association (within The Hamlet development) Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 14 [2 Hamlet Residents Association [2 Highpoint West E! PROD (Progressive Residents of Delray) [2 Presidents Council Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to all property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property. Letters of objection or support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Accommodating the annexation of this property is consistent with the City's program for annexation of territory within its Planning and Service Area. The requested Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac Future Land Use Map designation is less intense than development that is allowed under the current City advisory designation of Transitional. The application of an initial zoning designation of RM-8 is consistent with the proposed FLUM designation. While the FLUM and Zoning designations will be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the proposed use as an assisted living facility, is inconsistent with Housing Element Policy B-2.2 and Future Land Use Element Objective A-1. However, a finding of overall consistency with the Comprehensive Plan can be made provided the approving body specifically finds that the beneficial aspects of the proposed project outweigh the negative impacts of the identified points of conflict. The annexation will provide the property with better Police, Fire, EMS and Code Enforcement services. The property will experience an increase in ad valorem taxes. Upon development of the property for residential purposes, stormwater assessment fees will be imposed. The City will receive additional revenue from property taxes, in addition to stormwater assessment fees, utility taxes, franchise fees, and licensing fees upon development. The total immediate revenue increase is approximately $2,991 a year. With development of the property, infrastructure improvements, which include water and sewer main extensions from Atlantic Avenue, will be required. If the annexation is approved, Conditional Use approval is being sought and is discussed under a separate report. A site and development plan submittal will also follow. Compatibility of a specific development proposal with the adjacent developments will be addressed with the review of the Conditional Use request and again with a site and development plan request. Planning and Zoning Board Staff report Palm Gardens at Delray - Annexation with Initial Zoning of RM-8 and Small-Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment Page 15 ' '' A L.T E R NATIVE' A CTI:QNS' A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend approval of the Annexation, Small-Scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CHO-8 and MR-5 to City Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac and initial zoning designation of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac) based upon positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2, and 2.4.5(D)(5), and the following: 1. That the property is contiguous, reasonably compact and does not create an enclave; and, 2. That services will be provided to the property in a manner similar to other similar properties within the City. C. Recommend denial of the Annexation, Small-Scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CHO-8 and MR-5 to City Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac and initial zoning designation of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac), based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), that the proposed use is inconsistent with Housing Element Policy B- 2.2. [,*~: ~:/ii::~: : : ~.. S'iT:AFF~RECOMMENDA~TlioN` ~' ' Recommend approval of this Annexation, Small-Scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CHO-8 and MR-5 to City Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac and initial zoning designation of RM-8 (Medium Density Residential - 8 du/ac) based upon positive findings with respect to Future Land Use Element Policy A-1.7 of the Comprehensive Plan (FLUM Amendment Findings), LDR Sections 3.1.1, 3.3.2, and 2.4.5(D)(5), and the following: 1. That the property is contiguous, reasonably compact and does not create an enclave; and, 2. That services will be provided to the property in a manner similar to other similar properties within the City. Attachments: · Future Land Use Map · Zoning Map This Report prepared by: Janet Meeks, Senior Planner TO: DAVID T. HARDEN CITY MANAGER ~ ~'~0~/~ ~ THRU: DIANE DOMINGUEZ, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONINg'"-' FROM: MEEKS~.S ~NIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ESTABLISH AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AND ADULT DAY CARE FOR PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY WHICH IS LOCATED 280' SOUTH OF WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 1,000' WEST OF MILITARY TRAIL A Conditional Use request is sought to establish an Assisted Living Facility (ALF) and Adult Day Care for a project to be known as Palm Gardens at Delray. The 3-phased development proposal includes the construction of a 176,800 square foot ALF consisting of 264 units/288 beds and a 32,656 square foot ALF for patients who are memory impaired (i.e. Alzheimer's), consisting of 52 units/56 beds and adult day care with a capacity of 20 patients. Additional background and an analysis of the request are found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report. At its meeting of September 28, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing in conjunction with review of the request. The applicant presented a revised sketch plan (referred to as Concept A) addressing many of the concerns raised in the staff report. Members of the public spoke and were largely in favor of the request. The Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Conditional Use request to establish an ALF and Adult Day Care for Palm Gardens be approved, based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) and Section 2.4.5(E)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to the following revised conditions of approval: 1. That the ALF be limited to 316 units/344 beds, and the adult day care to 20 patients. 2. That the vehicular circulation be as depicted on Concept A as presented by the applicant. 3. That the buildings be designed as shown on Concept A. 4. That a decorative fence or wall be provided along the east, west and south property lines where it abuts the single family subdivisions. 5. That the site plan reflect the 20' right-of-way dedication for the LWDD. 6. That the site plan indicates where the mitigation areas are to be located. 7. That a 20' buffer be provided on the east, south, and west property lines. By motion, approve the Conditional Use request to establish an ALF and Adult Day Care for Palm Gardens based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards), Section 2.4.5(E)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board. Attachments: P& Z Staff Report and Documentation of September 28, 1998 PLANh,NG AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELR Y BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: September 28, 1998 AGENDA ITEM: iV.F. ITEM: Conditional Use Request to Establish an Assisted Living Facility And Adult Day Care, Containing 344 beds for Palm Gardens at Delray, Located Approximately 280 ft. South of West Atlantic Avenue, Between Military Trail and Markland Lane. Owner ........................................ W.F. Koch, Jr. & Mary L. Koch i K_MART Agent/Applicant ...................... Glanzrock Corp., - - Mark Fassy Location ...................................... Approximately 280 ft. south of West Atlantic Avenue, between ,~o,.,3~ _ South Military Trail and MARK~LACE¢" Markland Lane CAR~,VAL Or fLEA DELRA Y Property Size .............................. 8.68 Acres Existing County Future Land Use CHO/8 (Commercial High --1~.----~ ~'g~ ~ Map Designation ........................ Office/Residential 8 units/acre) [/I IIk It I and MR-5 (Medium Residential- _ ........... ~_S.T_ ........... _*LL.A_N;r_~c_ ............. .A_.V[_..N.U.[.._ ,,.,,"~_ 5 units/acre)~,,~,,,,u,,l;¥;~;-~'T'-a~~~ I?~l ~ ............................ Proposed City Future Land Use MD (Medium Density~! ~,, ~ /~, ~,~~s L-L_ Map Designation ......................... Residential i -_=~ 5-12 units/acre)~ ._~~ ~ Existing County Zoning ............... CHO (Commercial High Office) ~ ~ _~, & AR (Agricultural Residential) :~ = -- Proposed City Zoning ................. RM-8 (Medium Density ~~~:::::=::= :::::::::~. Residential-8 units/acre) ~BI~IB ~ Adjacent Zoning ................ North: City POC (Planned Office Center) East: City PC (Planned Commercial) : ~ :~r;,' and County AR (Agricultural " ~ ~ ~ Residential)/~/ ~'~ '~ ~"~ _ South: CountyRS I ~ I IIIIlilli?~lll',,lll' :, West: County AR I Ii ~" Existing Land Use ...................... Vacant I,~! Ii o Proposed Land Use .................... Condition Use Request to allow -*~"~" -- the construction of a 344 bed, ' [~i!~ i ...... assisted living facility with I <,, 'lT'f"f"'""% associated parking and .,~. ,o,~ landscaping. Water Service ............................. Available via connection to an existing 6" water main at the ~,~ southwest corner of the 111111111111 41P IIIIII--I shopping center to the east. Sewer Service ............................. Available via connection to an ~,l I ,u,~f t I existing 8" sewer main along the Ii- west property line of the I shopping center to the east ...... The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the City Commission on a request for Conditional Use approval to establish an Assisted Living Facility and Adult Day Care for Palm Gardens at Delray, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(E). The 8.64 acre property is located 280' south of West Atlantic Avenue, approximately 1,000' west of Military Trail. The subject property is currently vacant and located in unincorporated Palm Beach County. The applicant is seeking voluntary annexation, FLUM amendment and initial zoning which are discussed in a separate report. A Conditional Use request is also being sought to establish an Assisted Living Facility (ALF) and Adult Day Care for a project to be known as Palm Gardens at Delray. Access to the site is provided from Atlantic Avenue via an access easement that runs along the west side of the SunTrust Bank and along the north side of the subject property. The property contains heavy vegetation throughout the site consisting of Slash Pines and exotic materials such as Australian Pines and Florida Holly. The development proposal consists of the following: PHASES I and 3: · Construction of a 176,800 square foot Assisted Living Facility consisting of two three-story wings (264 units/288 beds) that are connected by a one story structure. The one story structure contains common area uses such as a dining area, kitchen, administration offices outdoor courtyards, verandas, etc.; · Installation of 87 parking spaces; Installation of a half acre pond; Note: As proposed, the phase line splits through the center of the one story building. PHASE 2: Construction of a one-story 32,656 square foot Assisted Living Facility for patients who are memory impaired (i.e. Alzheimer's). This building consists of 52 units/56 beds, dining room, kitchen, administration offices, and an 820 sq.ft, room that is to accommodate an Adult Day Care with a capacity of 20 patients; · Installation of 33 parking spaces and refuse area. .Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report Conditional Use Appro,. Palm Gardens at Delray . .' ' Page 2 The order of completion of the phases is not specified, but will be determined based on market demand. Also, no information has been given on the phasing of infrastructure (i.e. road, water and sewer) with the construction of the project. The applicant has submitted the following narrative describing the operation: "Palm Gardens at De/ray is an assisted living facility which services special needs residents such as Alzheimer's and dementia care. The facility is planned to be developed in stages. The facility will be staffed on a 24-hour basis. The number of employees will vary according to stages of completion of each phase, however stage one will have 38 employees in a 24-hour period. The proposed facility will be strictly an "Adult Living Facility" and provide the types of personal services as defined for an ALF within the City's Land Development Regulations - Appendix A. Services to be provided will include supervision of self- administered medication, assistance with or supervision of daily activities such as eating, personal hygiene, walking, etc. The facility will provide meals prepared in a common kitchen and served in congregate dining areas. Other services offered are organized activities, educational and exercise classes, hair salon/barbershop, a store for personal sundry items, etc. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3): Pursuant to 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, 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 four areas. FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The use or structures must be allowed in the zone district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation. The current County land use map designation is County CHO-8 (Commercial High Intensity- 8 du/ac) and MR-5 (Medium Residential - 5 du/ac). The current City "advisory" designation is TRN (Transitional). The requested Future Land Use Map change is to City MD (Medium Density Residential 5-12 du/ac). The current County zoning is CHO (Commercial High Intensity Office) and AR (Agricultural Residential). The requested zoning is to City RM-8. The proposed RM-8 zoning designation is consistent with the proposed MD Future Land Use Map designation, and "Assisted Living Facilities" and "Adult Day Care" are allowed as a conditional uses in the RM zone district [LDR Section 4.4.6 (D)(1) and (3)]. 'Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report Conditional Use Appro~ Palm Gardens at Delray . .' Page 3 CONCURRENCY: Facilities which are provided by or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Concurrency as it relates to Water and Sewer, Streets and Traffic, Parks and Open Space were discussed in the Annexation report. Concurrency as it relates to Drainage, and Solid Waste is discussed below. Drainage: Paving and drainage plans are not required for the conditional use analysis. Drainage can be accommodated via an exfiltration system and/or sheet flow into sodded swale areas with outfall to the proposed pond. Thus, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. If the conditional use request is approved, a paving and drainage plan must be provided with the submittal of the site plan. Solid Waste: The proposed development will generate 617 tons (209,456 sq.ft, x 5.9 pounds per square foot per year = 1,235,790 + 2,000 = 617 tons) of solid waste per year. As a multiple family development and its associated solid waste generation was anticipated by the City and County Comprehensive Plans, LOS for solid waste disposal will not be affected by the proposed development. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3 and required findings in Section 2.4.5(E)(5) for the Conditional Use request shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. Housin~l 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 3 and 4 bedroom units and activity areas for children ranging from toddlers to teens. 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 proposed ^LF is inconsistent with this policy, as the nature of the use will be restricted to adult residents. However, a single-family development is unlikely given the adjacent commercial uses and the infedor access through the commercial uses to the north. Further, if the site were developed as a multiple family development the infedor access through an ingress/egress easement would be a concern given the higher traffic generation rates, and the area to the west of the site is already experiencing a saturation of multifamily developments. Based on the above, while Planning and Zoning Bo~-,J Staff Report , . ~. Conditional Use Appro~ Palm Gardens at Delray -' Page 4 the use as an ALF is inconsistent with this policy, it appears that it may be the most appropriate use for this particular property. Future Land Use Element Objective A-l: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complementary to adjacent uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The subject property is heavily wooded with Slash Pines and exotic materials. The only viable plant community (i.e. understory growth) is located along the south property line within an undulating band containing a depth of 20'-35'. LWDD is requesting that the southern 20' of the property be dedicated as additional right-of- way. The balance of the property contains scattered Slash Pines that should be saved to the greatest extent possible. Mitigation to reinstate a viable plant community somewhere else on site will be required and can further be addressed with the site plan request. The property can be developed in a manner that will be complementary to the adjacent residential area with some changes to the proposed sketch plan. While the use as an assisted living facility and adult day care does not fulfill a remaining land use need as identified within the City's Comprehensive Plan, for reasons stated above under the Housing Element Policy it is an appropriate use for the property. SECTION 2.4.5(E) REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Conditional Use) Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(E)($) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the City Commission must make findings that establishing the conditional use will not: A. Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located; B. Nor that it will hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. The subject property is bordered on the north by City GC (General Commercial) zoning; to the south across the L-34 Canal by County RS (Single Family) zoning; to the west by County AR (Agricultural Residential) zoning and City PC (Planned Commercial) zoning; and east by County AR (Agricultural Residential) zoning and City PC (Planned Commercial) zoning. The existing land uses are to the north an office building - Sun Bank; to the south by a single family development (Country Club Acres); to the west by single family residences (Breezy Acres Subdivision) and Sun Trust Bank; and to the east by a single family subdivision and Points West Plaza. There are no concerns with the bank buildings located to the north and northwest of the site. Compatibility with the adjacent residential subdivisions is a concern. The sketch 'Planning and Zoning Bo--d Staff Report Conditional Use Appro~ Palm Gardens at Delray ·" Page 5 plan indicates that the proposed ALF building will be approximately 660' long consisting a one-story building that connects to a three story wing on the north and south sides. A building separation of 30' is proposed between the ALF and the one story Alzheimer's facility. The adjacent residential subdivisions contain three-quarter acre lots with one and two story single family dwellings, and some of the lots are vacant. The design of the facility attempts to mitigate impacts on the adjacent single family subdivisions by splitting the three story wings with a one story section, and by locating the one story building at the south end of the property (adjacent to Country Club Acres). However, the massing and scale of the ALF is too intense given the proposed length of the building and the 35' high residential wings. To be more sensitive to the adjacent residential developments, some redesigning of the site is necessary. The lake and open space area situated at the north end of the site (where it abuts the commercial developments) could be relocated further to the south and situated adjacent to the single-family subdivisions. On-site circulation could be redesigned to eliminate some of the unnecessary loop road that traverses the entire site along the perimeter. If the loop road were provided between the two structures, approximately 900' of loop road (south end of the site) could be eliminated; the structures would be separated by a larger distance than 30' which would help visually; and the residents of the memory impaired facility would have a view of landscaping rather than a service road. It is also recommended that the height of the three story wings be reduced to two stories. There are landscape regulations in place to help mitigate potential adverse impacts when a commercial type of development directly abuts residentially zoned property or properties in residential use. These regulations include the installation of a masonry wall or hedge with the height of 4 %' at the time of planting and installation of trees 25' on center to form a solid tree line. While these regulations would apply along the east, west and south property lines, they are not sufficient to buffer the overall massing of a building that is two football fields long. It is recommended that a 6' high concrete wall be installed around the property instead of the hedge. While the proposed use (ALF and adult day care) may not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area, the proposed massing and scale of the development is a concern and may hinder development of the adjacent single family subdivisions that contain vacant lots. Therefore, unless the site is redesigned, a positive finding to this standard cannot be made. COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: In conjunction with the Conditional Use request a sketch plan was submitted which staff has reviewed. If the Conditional Use is approved, a full site plan submittal complying with LDR Section 2.4.3 will be required. Based upon staff's review of the sketch plan and site inspections, the following "Items of Concern" have been identified. The attached technical comments, which include the items · Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report Conditional Use Approw =alrn Gardens at Delray -' ,' Page 6 below, have been transmitted to the applicant and will need to be addressed with revised plans, LDR Section 4.3.3 (C) Assisted Living Facility Common Area: A minimum of 10% of the total floor area of an ALF shall be devoted to a common area wherein a variety of recreational or therapeutic activities may occur. This floor area shall be calculated exclusive of halls, corridors, stairs, elevator shafts, and garages. The applicant must provide additional information regarding the percentage of common areas; however, it appears that this regulation has been met. Intensity - Post 1987 Structures: ALF(s) which are to be established in buildings constructed on, or after, January 1, 1987 shall be permitted to house residents as follows: · Residential Zone Districts - 900 square feet of lot area per bedroom. Based on the site containing 8.64 acres, a total of 418 beds could be provided and 344 beds are proposed. Facilities Requirements: An ALF located in any zone district shall provide outdoOr amenities, landscaping, design features, and yard space to serve the residents. Such features shall be reviewed and approved concurrent with the Conditional Use approval. The sketch plan indicates that 45.07% open space and 6.99% of lake area will be provided with this development proposal. Outdoor amenities include courtyard areas, verandas, pool and gazebo that overlook the lake. It appears that adequate landscaping will be provided once the preserve areas are identified and mitigation measures taken. LDR Section 4.3.3 (E) Adult Day Care Floor Area: Facilities shall contain a minimum floor area of 35 square feet per adult, exclusive of space devoted to bathrooms, halls, kitchen, offices, and storage. Additional information will be required to determine if this requirement has been met. Planning and Zoning Bo>--~ Staff Report Conditional Use Appro¥ Palm Gardens at Delray . .~ Page 7 Loading Area: A pickup and drop-off area for the adults shall be provided in a convenient area adjacent to the building and shall provide clear ingress and egress to the building. This requirement has been addressed. LDR Chapter 4.6 Supplementary District Regulations: Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9 (C)(7)(b), parking for ALF's shall be calculated at the rate of one space for each four beds. Pursuant to Section 4.6.9(C)(7)(h), Adult day care shall provide 1 parking space per 300 square feet. Based on the proposed number of beds (344) and 820 square feet of Adult Day Care, a total of 91 spaces are required and 120 spaces are proposed. A reduction in parking spaces should be considered. Further, the parallel parking spaces should be eliminated, as they are the hardest to maneuver into particularly for this type of development. Special District Boundary: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.4(A), Special District Boundary: where the rear or side of commercially zoned property directly abuts residentially zoned property without any division or separation between them, such as a street, an alley, railroad, waterway, parking, or other public open space, the commercially zoned property shall provide a 10' building setback from the line located adjacent to the residentially zoned property. In addition, either a solid finished masonry wall six feet in height, or a continuous hedge at least 4 %' in height at the time of installation, shall be located inside and adjacent to the portion of the boundary line of the commercially zoned property which directly abuts the residentially zoned property. If a wall is used, it shall have only those openings as required by other city codes to meet hurricane or severe storm construction standards. No walkways or other pedestrian ways shall be located through the wall or hedge. This requirement would apply along the east, west and south property lines. The building setbacks exceed this requirement. As mentioned earlier in this report, a concrete masonry wall instead of a hedge should be provided to enhance compatibility with adjacent residences. Landscaping: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(e), where any commercial areas abut a residential zoning district or properties in residential use, in addition to the requirements established for district boundary line separators (above ~.requirement), one tree shall be planted every 25' to form a solid tree line. The above requirement applies along the south, east and west property lines. .. .planning and Zoning B(,--~ Staff Report Conditional Use Appro~ Palm Gardens at Delray Page 8 Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(D)(2), Preservation and promotion of Existing Plant Communities: All existing native plant communities on sites proposed for development shall be preserved where possible through their incorporation into the required open space. Existing plant communities that are specified to remain shall be preserved to the greatest extent possible with trees, understory, and ground covers left intact and undisturbed, except for the eradication of prohibited plant species. Portion of Native Communities to Remain: When natural plant communities occur on a parcel of land which is to be developed, at least 25% of the required open space must be in the form of preserved natural plant communities. The applicant submitted a biological survey indicating that a viable plant community exists along the south property line with a depth of 20'-35'. LWDD is requiring the south 20' of the site to be dedicated as fight-of-way, which will eliminate most of the viable native plan community. Therefore, mitigation will be required elsewhere on site. The mitigation areas must be indicated on the site plan and can be accomplished by saving an area(s) of existing slash pines and reinstating the under growth. This item could effect the overall layout of the sketch plan. Otherlssues Platting: Based on the fact that water and sewer main extensions will be required of this development proposal, the subject property must be platted pursuant to Chapter 5. Solid Waste: A 10' x 10' dumpster enclosure is proposed at the southeast comer of the site. The proposed enclosure is inadequate to accommodate the solid waste demands of this type of development (617 tons of solid waste per year). A trash compactor should be considered along with an area for recyclable materials and medical hazardous waste materials. The development proposal is not located within a geographical area requiring review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) or the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). · . .~Planning and Zoning Bo- '~ Staff Report Conditional Use Approv, 'Palm Gardens at Delray .. Page 9 Site Plan Review and Appearance Board: If Conditional Use approval is granted, a revised site plan must be submitted accommodating the concerns raised through the conditional use petition. Final action on the site plan will rest with the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property. Letters of objection or support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: I;3 Country Club Acres El Greensward Village Condominium Association (within The Hamlet development) El Hamlet Residents Association El Highpoint West El PROD (Progressive Residents of Delray) El Presidents Council The proposed conditional use is to establish a 316-unit/344 bed Assisted Living Facility and Adult Day Care (20 clients) for Palm Gardens at Delray. The use is not consistent with Housing Element Policy B-2.2 that discourages adult odented communities. However, alternative uses of the site as office, multiple family, or single family development would be less desirable (or less feasible) given the particular characteristics of this property as previously described in this report. The proposed layout of the site and the massing and scale of the ALF (660' long) is not compatible with the adjacent residential subdivisions. It is recommended that the sketch plan be redesigned to take into consideration the concerns noted herein including the reduction of the three story sections of the building to two stodes, relocating the lake further to the south, reconfiguring the loop road and parking layout, identification of the mitigation areas, and LWDD dedication of 20'. Given the magnitude of the changes to the sketch plan and that a reduction in number of beds will most likely be realized with the redesign of the site, staff is recommending that the Board continue the item with direction. ~Planning and Zoning Bo- ~ Staff Report Conditional Use Appro,~ Palm Gardens at Delray .-' Page 10 II A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend approval of the request for Conditional Use approval for Palm Gardens at Delray, based upon positive findings with respect to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility) and Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. That the ALF be limited to 316 units/344 beds, and the adult day care to 20 patients. 2. That the vehicular circulation be redesigned as discussed herein. 3. That the overall massing and scale of the building be reduced. 4. That a wall be provided along the east, west and south property lines where it abuts the single-family subdivisions. 5. That the site plan reflect the 20' right-of-way dedication for the LWDD. 6. That the site plan indicates where the mitigation areas are to be located. 7. That the lake be relocated to the southern portion of the site, preferably between the two structures to provide additional building separation. C. Recommend denial of the Conditional Use approval for Palm Gardens at Delray based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Compatibility). Continue with direction to the applicant to re-design the site to be more compatible with adjacent Iow density residential developments. Attachments: · Location Map · Sketch Plan SOUARE PLAZA ~Z EXECUTIVE CARNIVAL OF SQUARE' FLEA DELRA Y MA RKE T MUTUAL UNION WEST A T L A N T I C ~ ¢. A V E N U E SUN TRUST SOUI'HI'RUST BANK BANK PINES DELRA Y WEST WEST PLAZA PLAZA JEF?ERSON RD. LINCOLN RD. ESTATES DRIVE ADAMS ROAD WASHINGTON ROAD MADISON ROAD LAKE BOULEVARD PALM GARDENS AT DELRAY CITY 0¢ D£LRAY BEACH, FL PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGIt'.Al. ~Sg M,~P S)~£&I -- MAP R£F: LM278 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: ~CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM/~ - REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. 43-98 (DEFINITION OF FRONTAGE AND LOT FRONT) DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1998 This is first reading for Ordinance No. 43-98 which amends LDR Section 4.3.4 by repealing Section 4.3.4(E), "Frontage", and enacting a new Section 4.3.4(E), "Front and Frontage", to provide clarifying language. It also amends Appendix "A" (Definitions) by repealing the current definition of 'frontage' and enacting a new definition of 'frontage', and by enacting a new definition of 'lot front' The Planning and Zoning Board considered a similar text amendment at a public hearing on September 28, 1998, and voted unanimously to recommend that it be approved. Originally scheduled for first reading on October 6th, staff requested a postponement to further refine the proposed amendment and the Commission delayed consideration to the October 20th meeting. Some minor changes and clarifications have since been made although they do not affect the determinations previously made by the Planning and Zoning Board. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 43-98 on first reading. If passed, a public hearing will be scheduled for November 3, 1998. ref:agmemol9 ORDINANCE NO. 43-98 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 4.3.4 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY REPEALING SECTION 4.3.4(E), "FRONTAGE", AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 4.3.4(E), "FRONT AND FRONTAGE", TO PROVIDE CLARIFYING LANGUAGE; AMENDING APPENDIX "A" (DEFINITIONS) BY REPEALING THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF 'FRONTAGE' AND ENACTING A NEW DEFINITION OF 'FRONTAGE', AND BY ENACTING A NEW DEFINITION OF LOT 'FRONT'; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the amendment at a public hearing on September 28, 1998, and voted unanimously to recommend that it be approved; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the change is consistent with and furthers the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, minor changes and clarifications not affecting the aforesaid determinations were made at the time of the original first reading of this ordinance; and, WHEREAS, a second first reading is now scheduled on the ordinance as changed and a second reading and public hearing will be scheduled as required by law. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Chapter Four, "Zoning Regulations", Article 4.3, "District Regulations, General Provisions", Section 4.3.4, "Base District Development Standards", Subsection 4.3.4(E), "Frontage", of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby repealed and a new Subsection 4.3.4(E) is hereby enacted to read as follows:: (E) Front and Frontage: (1) Each lot is required to have frontage. (2) On curving streets and cul-de-sacs the frontage may be reduced by 40% provided the centerline radius of the street is 100 feet or less. (3) The front of a lot is the side with frontage on a street. For comer lots, the side having the least street frontage shall be the front for setback purposes. Where a comer lot or through lot has frontage on an arterial or collector street, the front shall be the side with frontage on the arterial or collector. For lots with frontage on both an arterial and a collector, the front shall be the arterial frontage. (4) Notwithstanding the previous description, if a limited access easement or limited access right-of-way runs the length of the frontage on a street, then the front of the lot shall be on a frontage without such access restrictions. Section 2. That Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by repealing the current definition of "Frontage" in its entirety, and enacting a new definition of"Frontage" to read as follows:: lot boundary adjoining a street. Section 3. That Appendix "A" (Definitions) of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a definition of "Lot Front", to read as follows: Lot Front: The front of a lot is the side with frontage on a street. For corner lots, the side having the least street frontage shall be the front for setback purposes. Where a corner lot or through lot has frontage on an arterial or collector street, the front shall be the side with frontage on the arterial or collector. For lots with frontage on both an arterial and a collector, the front shall be the arterial frontage. Notwithstanding the previous description, if a limited access easement or limited access right-of-way runs the length of the frontage on a street, then the front of the lot shall be on a frontage without such access restrictions. Section 4. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 6. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on second and final reading. 2 ORD NO. 43-98 PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the __ day of ,1998. MAYOR ATTEST: City Clerk First Reading Second Reading frontage.oral 10/16/98 3 ORD NO. 43-98