03-28-13 Organizational MeetingCITY COMMISSION DELRAY aEaCK
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING - THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2013 1d1'1`a
6:00 P.M. DELRAY BEACH CITY HALL
s)
1 {j31�
2001
The City will furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an
equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Contact
the City Manager at 243 -7010, 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate
your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers.
Call to Order /Commission Roll Call
2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
3. Comments from outgoing Mayor
4. Oath of Office administered to Newly- Elected City Commission Members:
Mayor Cary D. Glickstein
Commissioner Shelly E. Petrolia
Commissioner Adam Frankel
5. Roll Call Newly Sworn-in Commission
6. Selection of Vice -Mayor (for the term March 29, 2013 through March 27, 2014)
7. Selection of Deputy Vice -Mayor (for the term March 29, 2013 through March 27, 2014)
8. Review and Acceptance of regularly scheduled City Commission Meeting dates for the period
April 2013 through March 2014
9. Establish a date for the 2014 Goal Setting Session
10. Review and Adoption of Rules of Procedure —Delray Beach City Commission (Local Rules)
11. Review and Adoption of Procedures for Quasi Judicial Hearings
12. Review of City Commission Liaison Appointments to various Advisory Boards and outside
agencies
13. Commission Comments
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.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:
DATE: March 19, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.3 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
COMMENTS FROM OUTGOING MAYOR
MEMORANDUM
'A z
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:
DATE: March 19, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.7 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
SELECTION OF DEPUTY VICE -MAYOR (FOR THE TERM MARCH 29, 2013
THROUGH MARCH 27, 2014)
MEMORANDUM
'A z
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
THROUGH: Douglas E. Smith, Interim City Manager
DATE: March 19, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.8 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
REVIEW OF ACCEPTANCE OF REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COMMISSION
MEETING DATES FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 2013 THROUGH MARCH 2014
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before the Commission for review and discussion regarding the meeting dates for the period
April 2013 through March 2014.
BACKGROUND
Below is the list of the regularly scheduled City Commission meeting dates for the period April 2013
through March 2014:
City Commission Meetings:
April 02, 2013- Regular Meeting
April 09, 2013 - Workshop
April 16, 2013 - Regular Meeting
May 07, 2013 - Regular Meeting
May 14,2013-Workshop
May 21, 2013 - Regular Meeting
June 04, 2013 - Regular Meeting
June 11, 2013 - Workshop
June 18, 2013 - Regular Meeting
July 02, 2013 - Regular Meeting
July 09, 2013 - Workshop
July 13, 2013 - Regular Meeting
August 06, 2013- Regular Meeting
August 13, 2013 - Workshop
August 20, 2013 - Regular Meeting
September 03, 2013 - Regular Meeting
September 10, 2013 - Workshop
September 17, 2013 - Regular Meeting
October 01, 2013 - Regular Meeting
October 08, 2013 - Workshop
October 15, 2013 - Regular Meeting
November 05, 2013 - Regular Meeting
November 12, 2013 - Workshop
November 19, 2013 - Regular Meeting
December 03, 2013 - Regular Meeting
December 10, 2013 - Regular Meeting
January 07, 2014 - Regular Meeting
January 14, 2014 - Workshop
January 21, 2014 - Regular Meeting
February 04, 2014 - Regular Meeting
February 11, 2014 - Workshop
February 18, 2014 - Regular Meeting
March 04, 2014 - Regular Meeting
March 11, 2014 - MUNICIPAL ELECTION
March 13, 2014 - Special Meeting(Thursday)
March 18, 2014 - Regular Meeting
March 27, 2014 - Annual Organizational Meeting (Thursday)
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend Commission review and acceptance of the City Commission meeting dates for the period
April 2013 through March 2014.
Year 2013 Calendar — United States
Calendar for year 2013 (United States)
4:111:0 18:4) 26:0
January
Su
Mo
Tu We Th
Fr Sa
1
1 2 3
4 5
6
7
8 9 10
11 12
13
14
15 16 17
18 19
20
21
22 23 24
25 26
27
28
29 30 31
29 30
4:111:0 18:4) 26:0
34 10:0 18:4) 25:0
July
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
8:0 154D 22:0 29:4
October
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
4:0 114D 18:0 26:4
February
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28
34 10:0 17:4) 250
April
Su
Mo
Tu We Th
Fr Sa
1
2 3 4
5 6
7
8
9 10 11
12 13
14
15
16 17 18
19 20
21
22
23 24 25
26 27
28
29
30
29 30
34 10:0 18:4) 25:0
July
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
8:0 154D 22:0 29:4
October
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
4:0 114D 18:0 26:4
February
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28
34 10:0 17:4) 250
24 9:0 184D 25:0 31:
August
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
6:0 14:4) 20:0 28:4
November
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
3:0 10:4) 170 25:4
May
Su
Mo
Tu We Th Fr Sa
Fr Sa
1
2 3 4
5
6
7 8
9 10 11
12
13
14 15
16 17 18
19
20
21 22
23 24 25
26
27
28 29
30 31
24 9:0 184D 25:0 31:
August
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
6:0 14:4) 20:0 28:4
November
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
3:0 10:4) 170 25:4
44 11:0 19:C 27:0
June
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
8:0 164D 23:0 30:
September
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
5:012:D 19:0 264
December
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
2:0 9:4) 17:0 254
Page 1 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2013 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
March
Su
Mo
Tu We Th
Fr Sa
1 2
3
4
5 6 7
8 9
10
11
12 13 14
15 16
17
18
19 20 21
22 23
24
25
26 27 28
29 30
31
44 11:0 19:C 27:0
June
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
8:0 164D 23:0 30:
September
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
5:012:D 19:0 264
December
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
2:0 9:4) 17:0 254
Page 1 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2013 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
Year 2013 Calendar — United States
Calendar generated on www.timeanddate.com /calendar
Page 2 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /Print.html ?year= 2013 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
Holidays and Observances:
Jan 1
New Year's Day
Sep 5 Rosh Hashana
Jan 21
Martin Luther King Day
Sep 14 Yom Kippur
Feb 14
Valentine's Day
Sep 25 Last day of Sukkot
Feb 18
Presidents' Day
Oct 14 Columbus Day (Most regions)
Mar 26
First day of Passover
Oct 31 Halloween
Mar 31
Easter Sunday
Nov 11 Veterans Day
Apr 2
Last day of Passover
Nov 28 First Day of Hanukkah
May 12
Mother's Day
Nov 28 Thanksgiving Day
May 27
Memorial Day
Dec 5 Last day of Hanukkah
Jun 16
Father's Day
Dec 24 Christmas Eve
Jul 4
Independence Day
Dec 25 Christmas Day
Sep 2
Labor Day
Dec 31 New Year's Eve
Calendar generated on www.timeanddate.com /calendar
Page 2 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /Print.html ?year= 2013 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
Year 2014 Calendar — United States
Calendar for year 2014 (United States)
January
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
I 1:0 7:C 15:0 244 30:0
April
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30
7:C 15:0 22:0 29:0
5:C 12:0 18:4 26:0
July
Su
Mo
Su
Mo
Tu We
Th
Fr Sa
2 3 4
5
1 2
3
4 5
6
7
8 9
10
11 12
13
14
15 16
17
18 19
20
21
22 23
24
25 26
27
28
29 30
31
5:C 12:0 18:4 26:0
1:C 8:0 154 23:0 30:0
February
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
I 6:4) 14:0 224
May
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
6:014:021:028:0
October
Su
Mo
Tu We
Th Fr Sa
Fr Sa
1
2 3 4
5
6
7 8
9 10 11
12
13
14 15
16 17 18
19
20
21 22
23 24 25
26
27
28 29
30 31
1:C 8:0 154 23:0 30:0
February
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
I 6:4) 14:0 224
May
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
6:014:021:028:0
I 3:4) 10:0 17:125:0
November
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
6:014:422:0 29:4)
March
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
1:08:4) 16:023430:0
June
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
5:4) 13:0 194 27:0
September
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
I 2:C 8:0 154 24:0
December
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
6:0 103 21:0 28:C
Page 1 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2014 &country = l &cols =3 &hot = 16409 &... 3/19/2013
August
Su
Mo
Tu We Th
Fr Sa
1 2
3
4
5 6 7
8 9
10
11
12 13 14
15 16
17
18
19 20 21
22 23
24
25
26 27 28
29 30
31
I 3:4) 10:0 17:125:0
November
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
6:014:422:0 29:4)
March
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
1:08:4) 16:023430:0
June
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
5:4) 13:0 194 27:0
September
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
I 2:C 8:0 154 24:0
December
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
6:0 103 21:0 28:C
Page 1 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2014 &country = l &cols =3 &hot = 16409 &... 3/19/2013
Year 2014 Calendar — United States
Calendar generated on www.timeanddate.com /calendar
Page 2 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2014 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
Holidays and Observances:
Jan 1
New Year's Day
Sep 25 Rosh Hashana
Jan 20
Martin Luther King Day
Oct 4 Yom Kippur
Feb 14
Valentine's Day
Oct 13 Columbus Day (Most regions)
Feb 17
Presidents' Day
Oct 15 Last day of Sukkot
Apr 15
First day of Passover
Oct 31 Halloween
Apr 20
Easter Sunday
Nov 11 Veterans Day
Apr 22
Last day of Passover
Nov 27 Thanksgiving Day
May 11
Mother's Day
Dec 17 First Day of Hanukkah
May 26
Memorial Day
Dec 24 Christmas Eve
Jun 15
Father's Day
Dec 24 Last day of Hanukkah
Jul 4
Independence Day
Dec 25 Christmas Day
Sep 1
Labor Day
Dec 31 New Year's Eve
Calendar generated on www.timeanddate.com /calendar
Page 2 of 2
http: / /timeanddate.com/ calendar /print.html ?year= 2014 &country =l &cols =3 &hot= 16409 &... 3/19/2013
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
THROUGH: Douglas E. Smith, Interim City Manager
DATE: March 19, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.9 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
ESTABLISH A DATE FOR THE 2014 GOAL SETTING SESSION
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
This item is before Commission regarding discussion of a 2014 Commission Goal Setting Session date.
BACKGROUND
For your information below is the currently scheduled date for the 2013 Commission Goal Setting
Session with Lyle Sumek:
CF.CCl(lN P A TF. TlMF.
City Commission Monday, April 15, 2013 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
This date is in accordance with the Commission's direction from the March 29, 2012 Organizational
Meeting to set the 2013 Goal Setting Session for the first or second week of the April 2013.
At the April 3, 2012 Regular Meeting it was the consensus of the Commission to expand he invitation
list for a proposed Citizen's Summit (see attached minutes).
Department Heads are scheduled to meet with Mr. Sumek on Monday, April 1, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
Commission direction is requested regarding setting a date for the 2014 Goal Setting Session.
RECOMMENDATION
Commission discretion regarding scheduling a date for Commission Goal Setting for 2014
APRIL 3, 2012
A Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, was called to order by Mayor Nelson S. MCDuffie in the Commission Chambers
at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, April 3, 2012.
1. Roll call showed:
Present- Commissioner Thomas F. Carney, Jr.
Commissioner Alson Jacquet
Commissioner Adam Frankel
Commissioner Angeleta E. Gray
Mayor Nelson S. McDuffie
Absent - None
Also present were - David T. Harden, City Manager
Brian Shutt, City Attorney
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
2. The opening prayer was delivered by Reverend Nancy Norman with Unity
of Delray Beach.
3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was
given.
4.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
Mr. Frankel requested that Item &E., Service Authorization No. 07-
17.2/Mathews Consulting, Inc. /Reclaimed Water Expansion -- Area 12A of the
Consent Agenda be moved to the Regular Agenda as Item 9.A.A.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs.
Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel —
Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes. Said motion passed
with a 5 to 0 vote.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mrs. Gray moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
March 20, 2012, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney —
Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
04/03/12
6. PROCLAMATIONS:
S.A. None
6.A. Paralyzed Veterans Association (PVA) Awareness Month — April 2012
Mayor MCDuffie read and presented a proclamation hereby proclaiming
April 2012 as PVA Awareness Month in the City of Delray Beach. Charles Brown came
forward to accept the proclamation and gave a few brief comments.
6.B. Earth Month — April 2012
Mayor McDuffie read and presented a proclamation to Richard Reade,
Lori Nolan and Jennifer Buce hereby proclaiming the month of April as Earth Month in
Delray Beach. Richard Reade, Sustainability Officer, gave a few brief comments.
7. PRESENTATIONS:
A. None
8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval.
8.A. RIGHT -OF -WAY DEEDIWAYSIDE HOUSE: Accept the dedication
of 2' of alley right -of -way for Wayside House, located at 328 -378 N.E. 6th Avenue.
S.B. QUEST FOR A SIDEWALK DEFERRAL . AND SIDEWALK
EASEMENT AGREEMENT /720 NORTH OCEAN BOULEVARD: Approve a
sidewalk easement and sidewalk deferral agreement for the property located at 720 North
Ocean Boulevard along the north side of Crestwood Drive to allow future construction of
a sidewalk, for a proposed new single family residence within the North Beach Overlay
District.
8.C. CONTRACT CLOSEOUT CHANGE ORDER NO.
3XINAL IINTERCOUNTY ENGINEERING INC. /OSCEOLA PARK WATER
MAIN PHASE 2 PROJECT: Approve Contract Closeout (C.O. No. 3/Final) in the
amount of a $221,470.60 decrease and final payment in the amount of $11,900.44 to
Intercounty Engineering, Inc., for completion of the Osceola Park Water Main Phase 2
Project. Funding is available from 442 -5178 -536 -65.85 (W & S Renewal & Replacement
Fund: Other Improvements /Osceola Park).
S.D. CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 1FOSTER MARINE CONTRACTORS
INC.: Approve Change Order No. 2 to Foster Marine Contractors, Inc. in the amount of
$20,991.00 for additional concrete sidewalk and driveway removal and replacement; and
for a contract time extension of six (6) days for Auburn Avenue Improvements.
Funding to be paid out of the contract's Unforeseen Conditions Allowance.
2
04/03/12
8.E. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA
AS ITEM 9.A.A.
S.F. REJECTION OF ALL BIDS/DELRAY BEACH HEIGHTS SWALE
PROJECT: Approve a recommendation to reject all bids received for the Delray Beach
Heights Swale Project and authorize staff to rebid the project with a modified scope.
8.G. AMENDMENT NO. I TO THE LICENSE AGREEMENT/PREP
AND SPORTS, INC.: Approve Amendment No. I to the License Agreement with Prep
and Sports, Inc. to extend the term for an additional two (2) years for their use of a
portion of the Soccer Complex.
S.H. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD:
Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Neighborhood Services
Division and Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP) to the lowest
responsive bidder, Cordoba Construction Co., for 318 S.E. 5th Street in the amount of
$31,065.20. Funding is available from 118- 1924 - 554 -49.19 (Neighborhood Services:
Other Current Charges /Housing Rehabilitation) and 118 -1936 - 554 -49.19 (Neighborhood
Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation).
8.1. RESOLUTION NO. 20-12: Approve establishing a revised investment
policy which will set forth investment objectives and parameters for the management of
public funds (excluding pension funds, trust funds and funds related to debt issuance) of
the City.
The caption of Resolution No. 20 -12 is as follows:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
ESTABLISHING THE INVESTMENT POLICY FOR
SURPLUS FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 218.415, FLORIDA
STATUTES, AN ACT RELATING TO THE
INVESTMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS; ESTABLISHING
THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY MANAGER
AND THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY;
PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE
AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT THE INVESTMENT
POLICY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 20 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
office.)
S.J. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /14th ANNUAL CINCO DE MAYO
FIESTA: Approve a special event request to allow the 14th Annual Cinco De Mayo
Fiesta to be held Saturday, May 5, 2012, from 2:00 p.m. — 10:00 p.m., on the grounds of
Old School Square and in Old School Square Park, to authorize staff support for traffic
3
04/03/12
control and security, trash removal, EMS assistance, Fire inspection, signage preparation
and installation, and to approve use of the Old School Square parking garage for vendors
and staff and use of a City generator; contingent on the receipt of a certificate of liability
insurance and liquor liability insurance fourteen (14) days prior to the event.
8.K. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards
for the period March 19, 2012 through March 30, 2012.
8.L. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS:
1. Bid award to multiple vendors at an estimated cost of $126,000.00
for the purchase of medical /drug supplies for the City of Delray
Beach Fire and Ocean Rescue and Highland Beach. Funding is
available from various Fire - Rescue and Ocean Rescue budget
accounts).
Mr. Frankel moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded
by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gay — Yes; Mayor
McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9. REGULAR AGENDA:
9.A.A. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 07- 17.2 /MATHEWS
CONSULTING INC./RECLAIMED WATER EXPANSION — AREA 12A: Approve
Service Authorization No. 07 -17.2 to Mathews Consulting, Inc. in the amount of
$33,146.00 for additional professional engineering services in the design of Area 12A
Reclaimed Water System. Funding is available from 441 -5161- 536 -68.73 (Water and
Sewer Fund: Improvements Other /Reclaim Water, Area 12A).
Mr. Frankel stated the reason he had this item pulled is because the
Commission received an email from former Mayor and now former City Commissioner
Jay Alperin regarding Mathews Consulting, Inc. and he wrote "this section under Atlantic
was supposed to be planned in the 90's when we rebuilt it "....Mr. Frankel stated he felt
that a different engineering firm should re- evaluate the project. He wrote "notice soft dig
and proposal not radar because they just did it 13 years ago ". "Shouldn't there already be
records of exactly what is there and why are multiple smaller pipes better and/or more
economical ?"
Randal Krejcarek, City Engineer, stated Dr. Alperin's first question had to
do with the crossing of Atlantic Avenue and what he is referring is a pipe that was
actually put in with a project done in the 1990's and that pipe is being utilized from the
north side of Atlantic Avenue to the south side of Atlantic Avenue. Mr. Krejearek stated
once they start the design process it also goes to the different utilities and ask them what
they have and verify where their utilities are. He stated when you get that information
4
04/03/12
back then staff looks at all they can make this all fit within the sidewalk area with all the
other utilities that are underneath there. He stated staff realized at that point they were
not going to make this fit within the sidewalk area with all the other utilities that are
underneath there and that is why the City is going to move that part up into the roadway.
He stated with regards to the other part with redesigning on Venetian Drive from the 8
inch to the 4 inch the original Master Plan had an 8 inch coming down Venetian Drive
and when staff starts the project they tell the consultant to follow the Master Plan and
then come back. He stated staff has steps along the way where they actually meet with
the consultant at 30 %, 60 %, and 90% where they are constantly reviewing what they are
doing to see if that is exactly what they want to do. Mr. Krejcarek stated in 2000 with the
Road Bond Program when the City redid Venetian Drive they put in a mat in because that
is a very mucky road and subsurface. Staff also realized they did not need the trunk lane
coming down Gleason Street and an 8 inch down Venetian Drive. Mr. Krejcarek stated
in order to save some construction money staff told the consultant to go back and go 4
inches versus 8 inches on Venetian Drive and instead of having a line on Venetian Drive
from Atlantic Avenue south to Casuarina Road staff with tap a trunk line on Gleason
Street and head east on the east /west streets and go north/south as far as they have to
catch those meters to divide and it is going to be a lot less pipe actually doing it this
process.
Mr. Carney stated last October/November the Commission approved 6 or
7 companies to do this and this is the third time he has seen Mathews Consulting, Inc.
and has not seen any others. Mr. Carney stated he would lime to see the business being
spread among the different companies.
Mr. Krejcarek stated the City hired Mathews Consulting, Inc. last year to
do the design of Area 12A and staff broke this into two projects because it was a fairly
large project and because of other priorities that came up they took some of that money
away and split it into two projects. He stated this item is an amendment to that original
service authorization from last year. Mr. Krejcarek stated staff will be coming the next
meeting this month or the first meeting in May with the other contracts with some of the
other consultants that staff has been trying to work with trying to get service
authorizations underway. Mr. Carney stated the City encourages companies to give us
RFP's to respond and if they do not get any work the City at some point may lose
competitive pricing. Mr. Krejcarek stated staff has lined up the projects with the
consultants that have the best expertise for those projects that are coming up.
Mrs. Gray asked if it was necessary to have the soft digs considering we
now have the radar now. Mr. Krejcarek stated staff went through a process where they
had the new technology demonstrated for them and in the presentation that the consultant
provided they indicated that the radar technology is not a replacement to soft digs; it is in
addition to soft digs. Mr. Krejcarek stated the radar is not 100% adequate on vertical
depth but it does not give you the pipe size or the pipe material.
5
04/03/12
Mr. Jacquet asked if the email that Commissioner Frankel is referring to
was sent to the entire Commission. Mr. Frankel stated it does not appear that the email
was sent to Commissioner Jacquet and believes this was not intentional. Mr. Jacquet
stated since he did not receive the email that Mr. Frankel is referring to he has no
comments.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve Item 9.A.A. (formerly Item 8.E.),
seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor
McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray —
Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.A. APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD
ACTION: DELRAY INN, INC.: Consider an appeal of the Site Plan Review and
Appearance Board's decision regarding the Class III site plan modification request and
landscape plan for Delray Inn, Inc., located at 297 N.E. 6t` Avenue. (Quasi - Judicial
Hearing)
Mayor McDuffie read the City of Delray Beach Quasi - Judicial Hearing
rules into the record for this item and all subsequent Quasi - Judicial items.
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex pane
communications. Mr. Frankel stated he spoke to Marissa Baggs with Channel 5 News,
Attorney Jeffrey Lynne, Attorney Jason Dollard, noted he is from the same town as one
of the principals who may be buying the Delray Inn, Dr. Scanlan, and attended the
Downtown Development Authority (DDA) where this was discussed at length. Mrs.
Gray stated she spoke with Attorney Jeffrey Lynne and Attorney Michael Weiner.
Mayor McDuffie stated he spoke with Attorney Michael Weiner and has also received
the same letters that the Commission has received on the dais and several emails which
he will submit to the City Clerk to add to the record. Mr. Carney stated he spoke with
Attorney Jeffrey Lynne and had several comments from people in the neighborhood and
had numerous emails all of which are on his public email site to his email address here,
and he did attend the SPRAB meeting that is now under consideration. Mr. Jacquet
stated
The City Attorney stated staff has received three letters for people
requesting parry status that is Benita Goldstein, Joanne Varga and Jason Dollard. The
City Attorney stated it is his opinion that the Commission should grant them party status.
The City Attorney suggested that the Commission make a motion in order to grant Benita
Goldstein, Joanne Varga and Jason Dollard party status in this matter. Mr. Carney asked
what the basis is as to why the determination of party status. The City Attorney stated
one of the criteria is that they be within 500 feet which all three are and the other criteria
is that they have alleged certain facts that make their circumstances different from the
public at large and it is his opinion that they have alleged those facts in those letters they
6
04/03/12
submitted. Mr. Jacquet asked if that mean that anyone with 500 feet that can articulate
some issues with this that no one else outside that 500 radius could qualify for parry
status. The City Attorney stated in order to attain party status they first have to be within
500 feet of the property that is coming forward and then if they are within 500 feet in
accordance with the quasi-judicial rules and obtaining party status they have to articulate
certain things that in his opinion different from the public at large and he believes they
have done that. The City Attorney stated then he needs to make a recommendation to the
Commission but it is up to the Commission to vote on whether or not they want to grant
them parry status.
Mr. Carney moved to grant Benita Goldstein, Joanne Varga and Jason
Dollard parry status, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
follows: Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes;
Mayor MCDuffze — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning Department project file 42011 -051 into the record.
Jeffrey Lynne, Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A., 10 S.E. 1St Avenue,
Delray Beach, FL 33444, representing the applicant, stated they are before the
Commission tonight on appeal from the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board
(SPRAB) decision to deny the site plan and landscape plan of February 22, 2012. Mr.
Lynne reiterated the rules of a Quasi - Judicial Hearing. Mr. Lynne stated they are here for
a single question: "Did the applicant meet the technical objective criteria for site plans as
adopted by the City`" The use of the property was approved August 2010 and therefore is
not at issue. Mr. Lynne stated this hearing under the Land Development Regulations is
"De novel" which means it is a new hearing. He stated throughout the SPRAB hearing
there was a motion to approve the site plan with conditions that was denied because of
the use of the property and for no other reason. Mr. Lynne stated there was a motion to
approve the landscaping which they denied because the site plan was denied. However,
Mr. Lynne stated when they discussed the architectural elevations it went through the
land development regulation criteria for architectural elevations they approved the
architectural elevations after reviewing the LDRs with conditions 5 to 1. Therefore, Mr.
Lynne stated that is not before the Commission this evening as that has already been
determined and reiterated that they are here this evening to discuss the site plan and the
landscape plan. Mr. Lynne stated his client has met the objective criteria adopted in the
LDRs. Mr. Lynne stated the Delray Inn, Inc. is located at 297 N.E. 6h Avenue and is
currently used as a motel. He stated it is on a Federal Highway; a commercially zoned
district and that district also allows medical uses, dental uses, medical labs, inns, motels,
and a broad range of commercial uses within the city that are permitted as of right. Mr.
Lynne stated with minor modifications to the site the operator of Delray Inn, Inc. could
go in tomorrow and start operating a detox facility. He briefly reviewed the existing
elevations and stated there is currently back out parking onto Federal Highway; currently
a non -gated courtyard where the doors are open to the public; currently uncontrolled
access to those doors as well as to a back patio area and there is visibility obstructions to
the front allowing people to wonder through the property unsecured. Mr. Lynne stated
7
04/03/12
the new architectural elevations approved by SPRAB brought in a modern design with
new privacy walls closing the courtyard off; a new sloped beam metal roof; new windows
and French doors; removal of the back out parking, new landscaping in the front, and
leaving the paved parking off to the side. He stated there is also a new five foot sidewalk
that will also be connected to the back via pavers. Mr. Lynne reviewed the rear existing
east elevation also with unpaved parking and open patio access for people to wonder off
the streets and cut through the courtyard through the back. Mr. Lynne also reviewed the
new east elevation which will have paved parking, residential look and feel, 24 -hour
supervised care, accent lighting where there is no lighting at all, and closed circuit
security cameras so that the property and the investment that is desired to be made can be
maintained. Mr. Lynne stated they have met every standard in the staff report that is
required and the staff report says so. Mr. Lynne stated they have met the landscape plan
standard with conditions; the criteria for the elevations the Board found met and therefore
approved the architectural elevations; and the staff report says they have met
compatibility and therefore as a matter of law the Commission must approve the site plan
and the landscape plan. However, Mr. Lynne stated SPRAB voted against the site plan
and landscape plan because of the use and the intended people to be treated at this
property are viewed as subhuman, less than, second class citizens, and accusations are
made that they are criminals, druggies and not welcomed in our society like lepers. He
stated SPRAB proposed certain conditions: (1) that the entrance be relocated off 6th
Avenue onto 3rd Street, (2) asked for reduced parking to increase the landscaping, (3)
asked that the wall in the front be raised to 5' 6" and that they gates be removed. Mr.
Lynne stated this was their initial application except that the Police Department through
CPTED (Community Policing Through Environmental Design) wanted a lower wall so
they had to meet the police requirements. Mr. Lynne stated they agreed to these
conditions notwithstanding ultimately the Board voted against them. He stated they also
proposed that there be landscaping along 6th Avenue with trees. Mr. Lynne stated based
upon that request they have gone back and changed the elevations to this: (1) removed
the front gates, (2) increased the privacy wall to be solid 5' 6" as requested by SPRAB,
(3) added more landscaping and trees, and (4) relocated the primary entrance off to the
northern side. Mr. Lynne stated with regard to compatibility and enhancement of the
CBD, these are the surrounding properties: Richwagen's Bicycle Shop, cabinetry store,
auto - repair shop, MacLaren's Sign Shop, an inn next door that is currently for sale, and a
vacant coffee restaurant shop and they are asking to build this and put millions of dollars
into the community for use that is permitted. Mr. Lynne stated he also received letters
from the Benita Goldstein, Joanne Varga and Attorney Jason Dollard. He stated the
Hartman House located at 302 N.E. 7th Avenue and they expressed concern over security.
Mr. Lynne explained how the east elevation will be revised with removal of the doors,
have a complete wall, parking on the side, closed circuit security, and 24 -hour care. In
addition, Mr. Lynne stated all the exits from the motel rooms exit to the outside including
the east, the use is entirely interior to the property, removed the back out parking onto
Federal Highway to avoid any accidents. Mr. Lynne stated with regard to fence
surrounding the property, this is not a penitentiary it is a therapeutic use. He stated there
are existing fences to the rear of the property next to the alleyway then why do they need
to fence it again. Mr. Lynne stated with regard to the back out parking along 3rd Street (a
side street) and noted the Hartman House has back out parking along an alleyway.
E
04/03/12
Lastly, Mr. Lynne stated the acquisition that this would increase traffic, besides the fact
that the County has stated that there will be no traffic impact from the use, there is no
through traffic on N.E. 3`d Street; there is an obstruction and you cannot drive through 3`d
Street. Mr. Lynne stated there is a sign in front of the Hartman House that says "No
Through Street Dead End ". Mr. Lynne stated there is also a question about a substantial
depreciation of property values and entered into the record multiple studies that have
prepared about substance abuse treatment facilities which state "there is no evidence of
any depreciation of property values when a substance abuse treatment facility is placed in
a single family residential neighborhood" and noted that this is a commercially zoned
neighborhood. Mr. Lynne displayed Mr. Dollard's property (295 N.E. 5d' Avenue
highlighted in red) and the Delray Inn is off to the right and stated there are commercial
properties between the two and displayed the view from Mr. Dollard's window. Mr.
Lynne stated Mr. Dollard's total market value has increased since 2009 and his taxable
value has increased since 2009. Mr. Lynne stated there will be very little if no evidence
of any depreciation of values let alone substantial depreciation of property values. Mr.
Lynne stated the issue of compatibility deals with the structure and the design not the use.
Mayor McDuffie echoed one sentiment that Mr. Lynne had and stated we
had a disabled veteran here tonight and the Federal Government affords the same
protection to people with substance abuse problems that they do to disabled veterans.
►f the first Bed and
stated in
2011 they took a neglected historic home and made a substantial investment and
converted it into the first Bed and Breakfast in Delray Beach. Mrs. Goldstein stated
neighbors stopped by regularly to thank them for creating what was an eyesore and
turning it into something that everybody wanted to see. She stated this historic home
provided there and the entire town as it gave a new found status enjoyed by picturesque
towns throughout the United States which is to have a bed and breakfast.
Jordan Goldstein, 302 N.E. 7"' Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
the parking that the Delray Inn has is 22 feet the street is 18 feet and across the street is
only 17 feet so what could happen is two cars could be backing out with only 18 feet
which should be regulatory at 24 feet this is a possibility. Mr. Goldstein stated people
who come down the alleyway from 4"' Street they come down and make a right because
they want to avoid the lihts on Federal Highway to go south. He stated they direct all
their guests to come up 6 Avenue and make a right on 3`d Street because their parking is
a little up the alleyway. Mr. Goldstein stated all their guests are coming through 3`d
Street and they are not coming to the front of their Bed and Breakfast on the other side;
they are all coming up 6th Avenue because they cannot get to the parking lot from the
other side of 3`d Street.
Mrs. Goldstein stated there is also the issue of the small size of the kitchen
and how it can adequately feed the 18 patients who will be there. She stated in speaking
with one similar business they were informed about the importance of nutrition when
people are undergoing such an arduous process and that there should be three main meals
9
04/03/12
provided at specific meal times giving them some stability in their life and schedule. She
stated at this other place they have a chef onsite and food available 2417. Mrs. Goldstein
stated they were told at the SPRAB hearing by the applicant that they do not provide
Thanksgiving style dinner. She stated it is more appropriate that people are able to sit
down together as families have done for years and years. Mrs. Goldstein stated it seems
contrary to providing stability when the meals are done haphazardly; then there is the
issue of compatibility in evaluating how this business fits into the surrounding businesses
as well as residences. She stated our community does not see how this business will
create a good environment for the families and children who have populated the area
surrounding Delray Inn, Inc. even with paint and shrubs. Mrs. Goldstein stated. Planning
and Zoning cited it now as blending in which they feel imposes an additional threat to the
neighborhood where children are unaware of what is happening behind this facade. Mrs.
Goldstein expressed concern over who owns Delray Inn, Inc. and since non - residential
license services provider facilities are not allowed within the CBD (Central Business
District) according to the City Attorney's office the business will be allowed to proceed
only if owned and operated by the original applicant Delray Inn, Inc. She stated it cannot
be transferred to new owners and inquired about the ownership particularly since the new
parties involved have an LLC entitled 297 N. Federal (N.E. 6' Avenue), LLC which is
the address of the Delray Inn, Inc. Mrs. Goldstein referenced a March 10, 2012 article in
the Sun - Sentinel Maria Herrera interviewing Harold Jonas maintains that he is selling the
Delray Inn. Furthermore, Mrs. Goldstein stated she spoke with Chris Mullen at Flagler
Bank which at one time was foreclosing on this property and informed her that Delray
Inn has been sold and was supposed to close at the end of the month (March) but has
been delayed because of the zoning issue. Mrs. Goldstein stated they have no objection
to a business treating people for addictions they actually are in agreement with City's
new codes recognizing that this type commercial business should be located in the
medical arts district close to a hospital and other supportive services for their patients
rather than in the heart of town surrounded by residences on three sides and 5.4 miles
from the nearest hospital. Mrs. Goldstein urged the Commission to think of the families
they represent who have chosen to make this place their home and for many their
business.
The City Attorney stated there is a set time for rebuttal and that is what the
rules provide so you cannot reserve time at the end of the meeting. Mr. Lynne asked that
he be given the opportunity to have closing remarks considering the number of people
who are going to make many statements. The City Attorney stated it is up the
Commission if they want to increase the time allowed for closing remarks. Mr. Lynne
stated he is not asking for the increase in time but is requesting for the balance of the time
that he has remaining. The City Attorney stated the rules provide City staff, applicant,
and parties have two minutes for rebuttal and Mr. Lynne requests the five minutes that he
had reserved to include that for rebuttal and pointed out that procedurally that is not
something that the rules allow for. However, the City Attorney stated if the Commission
wants to do that, they can agree to allow that to take place.
At this point, Mr. Lynne completed his presentation.
10
04/03/12
At this point, Mr. Lynne cross- examined Mrs. Goldstein.
Jason P. Dollard, Es_g._ 295 N.E. 5th Avenue #31, Delray Beach, FL
33483, stated his family moved to Boca Raton in 1989 and they came here on vacations
and would always come through Delray Beach. Mr. Dollard stated in 1999 he moved
down here for graduate school and have lived in Delray since that time with the exception
of a couple months after school. He stated he is actively involved in the Chamber and
over the last couple of years he has seen a change and it is not a good change. Mr.
Dollard stated it is where we have different types of people that are hanging out in this
town who are not good for this town. He stated it is the type of things that are being
allowed to have a business in this town that are creating dangers for people to live in this
town. Mr. Dollard stated we have a detox facility that is being put directly into a
residential community and noted that his home is directly across the street. The
Goldstein's property and their business are directly behind this particular facility and
there are many residences behind this facility. He stated he travels through that area a lot
and sees many children playing on a daily basis, he sees families walking the streets at
night, and sees people in his townhouse development there are many families and kids
that play outside on a daily basis. Mr. Dollard stated he personally has experience with
these types of facilities through two of his uncles. He stated the type of people that go in
these facilities are doctors, lawyers, politicians, etc. and when they go in there the first
time or even the second time it does not work sometimes. Mr. Dollard stated and they
get out of these facilities and they will do whatever they have to do to get their fix and
drugs and that is a danger to the people that live around this particular facility and in this
case in a residential community. Mr. Dollard asked how is putting a detox facility so
close to downtown where there are restaurants, bars, and temptations galore for these
type of people who are going to this facility and how does that help them and how does
that allow them to get back into a community. Mr. Dollard expressed several concerns;
non -legal concerns and legal concerns. He stated the non -legal concerns are safety
issues. Mr. Dollard stated he was not at the SPRAB meeting but did have a copy of the
tape and it was stated by the applicant "will not be on lockdown." He stated these are
people that are coming in for detox meaning they have a drug, alcohol or some other
substance abuse issue. Mr. Dollard stated if they are allowed to leave this facility as they
come and go how that is safe for the people around the community. He stated he will not
be able to sell his house for the property value. Mr. Dollard stated if he starts a family
one day he would want to stay here but the way this is going and the way we are allowing
particular facilities to be in areas where it is not safe for the community is not a place
where he would want to raise his family and it is not a place that he may eventually keep
his business. Mr. Dollard expressed concern over the legal concerns: (1) who are the
owners of this particular facility, (2) the application for the reasonable accommodation
and the forthcomingness of the applicant for reasonable accommodation, (3) the LDR
that is currently in place concerning the CBD (Central Business District) and whether this
fits within the purpose. He stated at the SPRAB hearing in February the architect gave
testimony and it has been presented to the Commission by not only the City but also by
Mr. Lynne that this is going to be "a restoration and a no footprint and a renovation."
Mr. Dollard stated what was actually said at the SPRAB meeting by the architect was
"We are taking it to the slab; this will be a brand new building." Mr. Dollard stated this
11
04/03/12
is not a renovation of the building that is currently there but is a brand new building and it
should be regulated under the new LDR regulations which do not allow this particular
type of facility to be here. Mr. Dollard made reference to LDR Section 4.4.13. Mr.
Dollard stated he has seen this first hand and people steal from their own family in order
to get their fix and if people think they will not steal and /or attack a normal citizen
walking around an area they are mistaken. Mr. Dollard stated in a recent letter by the
City addressed to Mr. Lynne from Mr. Dorling the City itself is questioning the
placement of this facility. Mr. Dollard stated at the end of the letter dated January 23,
2012, Mr. Dorling states "Based on the information given by the applicant (which is not
Delray Inn, Inc. which he will admit later on in other documents did show that it was
Delray Inn, Inc.) in its letter dated January 18, 2012, the proposed use of Detoxification
as regulated by Section 397.311 18(a) 4 is prohibited in the City's Central Business
District." Mr. Dollard stated Mr. Dorling clearly states that "this reasonable
accommodation, which is limited to the approvals set forth in the City's August 25, 2010
approval from the City, still remains valid today; however, it applies to Delray Inn, Inc.
only and is not transferrable." Mr. Dollard stated in August 2010 the applicant was
granted a conditional accommodation which needed to go through the approval of the rest
of the boards. As they are here today, Mr. Dollard stated they were disapproved by
SPRAB, denied by the DDA, and his understanding was denied by the CRA. Mr.
Dollard stated in a City letter dated May 3, 2011 from Mike Vinci he states "The request
for reasonable accommodation did not include the establishment of a detoxification
facility." He goes on to state "An application for this conversion of use was never submitted.
On January 4, 2011, a modified application which included the operation of an 18 bed
detoxification facility at this location was submitted. Given the ongoing status of this application
a determination was made that this use (18 unit detoxification facility) could proceed even though
an ordinance that was under consideration at that time would not permit this use in this location."
Mr. Dollard stated this means that not only were they not forthcoming in the beginning for their
application for reasonable accommodation that when they applied the Commission and the City
was already under advisement about doing the medical district. He stated this application process
should have started all over again and it should have been frozen until such time as the
Commission had voted on the medical district being implemented. Therefore, Mr. Dollard stated
it would have never been allowed and we would not be here tonight. Mr. Dollard stated Mr.
Jonas is currently listed as the Delray Inn, Inc. and documents that he pulled off for the Florida
Corporation yesterday is listed as the only officer and director of this particular facility. Mr.
Dollard stated this reasonable accommodation is non - transferrable meaning whoever takes over
has to buy all of Delray Inc. its assets and everything included with it in order to have it be
transferred. He stated the proposed people who are going to run this facility are Mr. Scanlan and
his team. Mr. Dollard stated why is it they have a corporation stated as 297 North Federal
Highway unless they are actually moving in to take over this whole thing. He stated they cannot
just buy the property and take over the reasonable accommodation; it has to be a complete sale of
the entire Delray Inn, Inc. as a whole in order for it to transfer. Mr. Dollard stated there is clearly
evidence that is before the Commission that is more than just personal reasons and noted there are
clear violations and legal reasons why this should not be allowed.
At this point, Mr. Lynne cross - examined Mr. Dollard.
12
04/03/12
Joanne Varga, 296 N.E. 6th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
she is a little apprehensive in speaking this evening because after the last meeting she
spoke at when SPRAB turned down the Delray Inn detoxification site plan the new owner
physically came after her. Mrs. Varga stated fearing for her life she filed a police report.
She stated after the incident she was afraid to leave her home especially alone. Mrs.
Varga stated this convinced her even more that this proposed business is not compatible
with the community. Mrs. Varga stated the people that are being treated here are in the
first stages in detoxification the most dangerous state and can leave the facility if they so
desire. She stated the detoxification facility is adjacent to residents on its three sides;
Palm Trail residents within so many feet towards east and hundreds of children,
apartment rentals to its west more residential homes 26 feet from the detoxification
center. Mrs. Varga stated behind her is the San Sebastian townhomes with over 50
children and families that utilize the sidewalks, alleys, and the streets skateboarding,
bicycling, etc. as if this were their backyard including her son. Mrs. Varga stated she
does not oppose the treatment of addiction but her opposition is to the location of the
business touching our residential communities and not being harmonious to the
businesses in the neighborhood. Mrs. Varga entered petitions into the record.
examination.
At this point, Mr. Lynne cross - examined Mrs. Varga.
Mr. Dorling, Mrs. Goldstein, or Mr. Dollard did not have any cross-
There was no cross - examination between Mr. Dorling and Mr. Lynne
The following individuals gave a brief rebuttal:
Dr._ Scanlan, Board Certified Psychiatrist and Addiction Medicine
Doctor, resident of Delray Beach living about one mile away from the
propose
facility with his wife, 6 year old and 4 year old, stated he has been doing detox for
many years and has treated thousands of patients. Dr. Scanlan stated he has done
inpatient, outpatient, an in a hospital and has written papers. He stated this is going to be
a facility with 24 -hour nursing care, an EMT, medical team and 24 -hour nursing. Dr.
Scanlan people have to sign in and if they want to leave they would have to sign out and
he would have their possessions and they would have to meet with him before that. He
stated he has an outpatient detox right now and it is a safe procedure. Dr. Scanlan stated
one block away ftom this office is the Wayside Rehab and three blocks away at 160 S.E.
6th Avenue is the Palm Partners Recovery Center which is an inpatient detox and rehab.
Mrs. Goldstein stated she believes Dr. Scanlan has very good intentions to
help people. She stated the Delray Medical Arts area is available and is away from the
temptations in downtown Delray and is away from the unsuspecting tourists who come
around and do not know what is going on and most importantly for the patients it
provides them with immediate medical relief if they need it right by the hospital.
13
04/03/12
Mr. Dollard stated he believes Dr. Scanlan has good intentions but feels
there are multiple questions that have not been answered such as why here and if he is
trying to give the highest level of care why not near a hospital where most detox centers
are placed. Mr. Dollard stated this accommodation cannot be transferred and the
question has still not been answered of who actually owns Delray Inn, Inc. which is the
holder of this accommodation. He stated if this cannot be transferred then this detox
center does not belong here.
Mrs. Varga had no closing arguments.
Mayor MCDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in
favor or in opposition of the appeal, to please come forward at this time.
Richwagen, Delray native of 48 1
„ y
RichwaMen Bike and Sport est. in 1961 29$ N.E. 6 i" Avenue , Delray Beach , FL
33444, stated his business is directly across from the proposed detox center. Mr.
Richwagen read a brief statement into the record and stated LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14) —
Criteria for Board Action: "The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with
good taste, good design, and general contributes to the imagine of the City as a place of
beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality." Mr.
Richwagen stated with property owners from all four sides and a signed petition from
numerous home and business owners within a stone throw of this property they are
begging the Commission to stop this project. The City Redevelopment Agency (CRA),
the Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and the Site Plan Review and
Appearance Board (SPRAB) have all voted "no" prior to this meeting. Mr. Richwagen
urged the Commission to vote "no ".
Dr. Larissa Scanlan stated her husband is a Board Certified
psychiatrist and also a specialist_ Board Certified in addiction medicine, stated she is
a dermatologist that works in the community and lives about ,.._., ,
g � y t a mile away with their two
children and urged the City to approve this. Dr. Scanlan stated her husband wants to
work there because it is only a mile from where they live and because they are citizens of
Delray. She stated if this does not go through there is a possibility that this will become a
very expensive lawsuit and she does not want to see her city dollars going to fight
something that ultimately may end up happening anyways. Dr. Scanlan stated her
husband is highly trained in what he does and helps lots of people and has worked
everywhere including prisons. She stated he knows what a dangerous person looks like
and who to treat and who not to treat. Dr. Scanlan stated in terms of coming and going
there is no data on crime where these facilities are. She stated it does not mean it is going
to increase crime; if people can come and go that means they are there by choice and will
not go there in the first place if they do not want help and is the beauty of being able to
select who goes into the facility. Dr. Scanlan stated they want high paying jobs to attract
people that are going to be good citizens here and this is going to employ at least 25
people (i.e. doctors, nurses, pharmacists, medical technicians) in in our community.
14
04/03/12
Claire Frontera, 811 N.E. 5th Street, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
she does work in the substance field and mental health and walks into detox facilities all
the time. Ms. Frontera stated to go to rehab is a want; you could be pushed in by family
members or pushed in by DCF and it is not always the case that they do want to get clean.
She stated they could go to detox but they do not want to be there because if they do not
want to get clean they will not get clean. Ms. Frontera stated at that point they will walk
out the facility and it is technically a lock down facility but you can walk out anytime.
She stated the reason it is lock down because they do not want anyone walking off the
street. Ms. Frontera stated if you are dealing with substance abuse you are also dealing
with mental health such as the bipolar the psychotropic drugs or if a client needs to be
baker acted the Delray Beach Police Department have to be called and a lot of people do
get baker acted. Ms. Frontera stated a detox facility is out -of- pocket and no insurance
and noted this is going to be a 24/7 facility. She inquired as to where are the patients
going to be treated for their aftercare and where are they going to make their
recommendations for them to go. Ms. Frontera stated there are numerous detox facilities
in the area and asked why we need another one. She stated she deals with addict's day in
and day out and if you ask an addict if they have ever been arrested a lot of them tell you
yes for theft or possession of a controlled substance. Ms. Frontera stated a patient or
individual may turn up on the premises with a gun and asked what their lockdown
procedure is and if there is a fire where would they go. She stated if there is a gun or
knife on the premises then 911 will be called. Ms. Frontera inquired about the
prescriptions and asked if there is an on -site pharmacist or are they going to have a
pharmacist who they recommend them to.
Kristine De Hoseth, Executive Director of Florida Coalition for
Preservation, speakinLF on her landlord's behalf Brian Phifler who has subsidized
her rental for the last rive __years who own Mark Plaza located at 235 N.E. 6th
Avenue, read a brief statement into the record and noted that Mr. Brian Phifler opposes
the site plan for the old Delray Inn.
Dawn "Dr." Jonas, stated she has lived in Delray Beach and Boca
Raton for 35 years, stated this is the town that she used and abused alcohol and other
drugs. Dr. Jonas stated this May she will be clean and sober for 26 years due to the love
and support of the Delray Beach recovering community. She stated she has raised four
children here two of which own their own homes in Delray Beach. Dr. Jonas stated in
1995 they opened the Recovery Zone and set about to provide a drug and alcohol living
environment that is supported and community based. She stated when the recovery
housing industry started to boom in 2002 a group of operators got together and farmed a
South County Recovery Residents Association. She stated they worked together to have
high quality community based services.
James Arnas 605 N.E. 2" Street Delray Beach FL 33444 two blocks
south of the Proposed Delray Inn Detox Center), distributed photos to the Commission
taken yesterday from the south and north end of the alleyway from 2"d Avenue north to
the access road for what is proposed for the Delray Inn. Mr. Arnas stated that the photos
show his street looking north at N.E. 2"d Street (his house in on the corner) during the day
15
04/03/12
where his 8 year old daughter and wife live and also showed a photo of what it looks like
at night. He stated the second photo from the Delray Inn looking south is how it looks
like during the daytime versus how it looks like at night. Mr. Arnas stated the alleyway
is already being used as a second Federal Highway in -lieu of the stop lights and stop
signs and is already dangerous. He stated he has a camera installed in his house due to
the theft of hoses, roses, bushes, orchids from his house. Mr. Arnas expressed concern
that there have been comments expressed that this facility is just like a psychiatrist office
or a dentist office and stated they do not have those in their neighborhood that are
housing people 2417. He stated due to a recent car accident he cannot sit for very long
and had to step outside where he met the developer who is buying the Delray Inn. Mr.
Arnas asked who is the real owner and stated if it is someone new shouldn't it not be
resubmitted as a day one and not what was based on months or years ago.
Bob GanIzer, President of the Florida Coalition for Preservation
stated he lives about 62 feet from the proposed location. Mr. Ganger stated the purpose
of this meeting is the site plan review and the Board has determined that it should not be
approved. He stated per LDR Section 4.6.18(B) states "The plan or the proposed
structure is in conformity with for good taste, good design, and in general contributes to
the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad
vistas, and high quality. Mr. Ganger stated is this development likely to impede or
improve progress in the long term plan of beautifying and calming Federal Highway as it
goes from Atlantic Avenue to George Bush Boulevard.
Ruth Hartman Berge, 302 N.E. 71h Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483,
stated she is here for the historic Hartman House and it was sold by her family in 1973
and over 40 years the house fell into disrepair and when the Goldstein's purchased it they
worked diligently with the town to create a place of beauty and peace. Ms. Berge stated
working with the City of Delray Beach the Goldstein's successfully opened the Historic
Hartman House as the first Bed and Breakfast in Delray. She stated the reputation of the
peaceful tropical oasis at the Historic Hartman House is already national. Ms. Berge
stated the comments on travel sites on the internet show that guests find the Historic
Hartman House a wonderful place to stay in Delray Beach. Ms. Berge stated the
Goldstein's have devoted time and money to restore and renovate this home and the
opening of the proposed detox facility this close would seriously impact the attraction of
a stay at the bed and breakfast. She stated the Historic Hartman House attracts upscale
visitors who shop in local businesses and eat in the local restaurants for which Delray
Beach is known. Ms. Berge stated the Historic Preservation Board, the Delray Beach
Historical Society, and others devoted preserving the history of Delray Beach have
worked hard with the Goldstein's to see that the Historic Hartman House was restored
and renovated correctly. She stated with the Sundy House, the Spady Museum, Cason
Cottage, and Old School Square the Historic Hartman House is becoming a destination.
Ms. Berge stated by permitting this facility to open so close to this house Delray Beach
would be sending a message to those who wish to preserve and protect historical sites in
this area. Ms. Berge stated Delray Beach is already known throughout the country as the
drug rehab capital of the world and there are only six cities in the State of Florida with
more facilities. Ms. Berge strongly believes Delray Beach does not need this facility so
16
04/03/12
close to these homes but it needs to be in the medical district.
Lindsey Pratt lives in San Sebastian with her husband and two
children, stated she personally has experience with family members with addiction and
one is dead from addiction. Mrs. Pratt stated the doctor's wife who is also a doctor
herself stated that these are irrational fears which is condescending and is not correct.
She stated that most of the people, who are sitting here today, with the exception of the
people who own the facility and are buying the facility, are against this. She stated
everyone is here today because we live in a democracy and the people clearly are here
standing up to say we do not want this here. Mrs. Pratt stated Mr. Dollard has presented
enough evidence to indicate that based on the stocks and the law it should not be here.
Mrs. Pratt stated drug addicts will do anything they need to get high and they will steal,
rob, and corrupt the area to get money to do drags. Mrs. Pratt stated she would like to
know how many times Dr. Scanlan's patients are successful in rehab because from her
understanding it does not work the first time or even the second time; sometimes it will
work the third time. She stated going through withdrawals is a very painful and
dangerous experience and many people die from going through withdrawal alone even
under medical facilities. Mrs. Pratt stated they need to be next to a hospital because
many people die in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.
Cary Glickstein, 1118 Waterway Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33483, stated
at a previous Commission meeting he made some comments to this Commission which
were overly harsh and out of order and apologized publicly for those comments. Mr.
Glickstein stated there has to be a compatibility standard met and noted that LDR Section
2.4.5(F)(6) has not been met. He stated the Planning Director's staff report to the
SPRAB that states "with respect to the uses compatibility is a concern; however, as the
use is allowed to be established via the reasonable accommodation that is minimized.
Mr. Glickstein stated the Planning Director's logic was correct in that the use is not
compatible but saying that the use is minimized via a reasonable accommodation is a
mutually exclusive concept. Mr. Glickstein stated he does not feel people will pay the
same price for property next to a detox center that they would for some other use. Mr.
Glickstein stated with regard to the Mayors comments he understands the concept that the
city has been crawling and begging for businesses in this town and feels Delray Beach is
better served looking for the right businesses. Mr. Glickstein stated he does not feel in
this town that we need to crawl and beg for anything and we should be supporting the
right businesses and property owners that have paid their dues with vested interest in this
town that contribute towards its wellbeing not to ones that contribute to is denigration.
Harold Jonas, owner of record and it is his sub "S" corporation and is
registered through Sunbiz, stated he has the August 25, 2010 letter from Mr. Dorling's
office that grants the reasonable accommodation. Mr. Jonas stated this was not done
behind anyone's back and it was done all in open public records. He stated the intent is
to convert the motel which is now housing transient residents throughout the city into a
medical facility. Mr. Jonas stated he is a licensed psychotherapist and has a Ph.D. in
addiction studies and stated he is one of those experts and one of those people. He stated
he got into recovery having coming to Delray Beach in 1987 and is one of those success
17
04/03/12
stories. Mr. Jonas stated he works professionally as an interventionist and gets people to
go to detox. Mr. Jonas stated he has worked in detox, worked in businesses in Delray
Beach, operates businesses here and has stood before the Commission in the past
speaking out against the medical arts district as discriminatory to this business of
addiction treatment. He has been a strong advocate of people in recovery he helped put
Delray Beach on the map with the Koffeeokee Coffee House and was there for the New
York Times to interview them to say recovery works and the Federal Government
supports that through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA). Mr. Jonas reiterated that he owns the property and wants to convert it to
improve and enhance Delray Beach.
Rick Edick, 615 North Ocean Boulevard, Delray _Beach, FL 33483,
stated after finishing and MBA at Warden he worked for a global consulting firm and one
of the things he specialized in was market analysis and feasibility studies primarily on
commercial properties. Mr. Edick stated six months ago Fran Marincola, owner of Cafe
Luna Rosa, referred a couple to him who own the Creperie Restaurant on Federal
Highway and Atlantic Avenue and they are outgrowing their space. He stated they came
to him and asked what he thought about a property that they were looking at which was
the Koffeeokee Coffee House. Mr. Edick stated they were going to invest their life
savings in this and the numbers did not work and from a market analysis standpoint they
informed him that there was a rehab facility going in. Mr. Edick stated his opinion was
that this would not be something that would really necessarily fit with the type of market
that they are trying to appeal to. Mr_ Edick stated he felt that they were too far from
Atlantic Avenue but also because he did not realize it was an in- patient facility. Mr.
Edick stated people corning in will hire consultant professionals who do market analysis
and feasibility and would almost guarantee that there would be some adverse impact of
having that detox facility right next door or maybe down the street. He stated it will be a
compatibility issue if not now it will be in the future.
buildin,g at 25 N.E. 6`° (Federal Highway), expressed concern over Federal Highway
because see owns property on Federal Highway and stated what is happening in Boynton
Beach is quite nice. Ms. Bierstock stated she sees what is happening in Delray and it is a
scourge; not a scourge because of anything that is going but because of all the businesses
that we have lost. She stated Delray Beach have two gateways to the beach off of Federal
Highway; George Bush Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue. Ms. Bierstock stated she has
lived here for 31 years and her home is historic and was built in 1928.
Vicky „ , Del ay „Beach, FL 33483, stated she
�c _ 0 Palm Trail D r,,,,
wrote an email to the Commission and thanked them for responded. Ms. Lichtman stated
she loves her home and neighborhood and when she purchased it felt safe and
welcoming. She stated the City was having problems driving from 1 -95 down Atlantic
Avenue but these problems were fixed because previous Commissions did something
about it. Ms. Lichtman stated this city is changing right now before our eyes and our
residents feel disappointed and helpless about what is happening. She stated the people
that live in Delray chose to live here for the charm and the safety and feels the
18
04/03/12
atmosphere has changed in the city and they do not want to go out as often. Ms.
Lichtman stated the neighborhoods have people walking our streets that do not live here
for more than days and weeks. She stated if someone chooses to live before detox is
complete they most likely will be looking for ways to buy new drugs and feels they will
come to people in their neighborhood for the money or the goods that they need to buy.
She asked the Commission to not let the Delray Inn become part of what is destroying
our beloved city and urged the city to fight this.
Gerber, Secretary of the San Sebastian 1
Beach,_FL_33483, stated she moved here in 2009 from Coral Springs because she read
the Plan and saw what the plan was for the downtown Delray community and loved the
idea. Ms. Gerber stated if the Scanlan's would like to live closer there are dozens of
residents in the community who will be putting their homes up for sale because they
would not feel comfortable with this.
Dr. Victor Kirson, D.D.S., 2050 Alta Meadows Lane #2110, Delray
Beach, FL 33444 President of the Board of Directors of Tierra Verde at Delray
Beach and Member of the Alliance), thanked everyone that spoke tonight especially the
individuals that spoke on the fact that this is a SPRAB appeal. Dr. Kirson asked the
Commission to speak solely on the SPRAB appeal. He recommended that the
Commission say very little or nothing, vote "no ", and take the lawsuit and fade it out in
court.
.Zack Barrette 1201 Seas pray Avenue Delray Beach FL 33483 stated
he has looked more about bizarre location of substance abuse facilities in his four months
in this town then he had hoped to; however, Mr. Barrette stated he still loves Delray
Beach a great deal. Mr. Barrette gave an analogy of smoking on airplanes and stated
when you look at a site plan you like to think that we are saying can the smoke get out
and is this something that we do not want in the neighborhood and is this something that
really physical barriers or new walls, trees, grass or back out parking can change and he
does not see it and this does not make any sense at all. He stated if people want to smoke
these cigarettes there are places they can go and there is a place near the hospitals where
you can do this. Mr. Barrette stated he does not see any reason other than money this
makes sense to do in this particular location and he does not see anything physical they
can with a site plan that stops this particular smoke from billowing out. Mr. Barrette
stated this is not something we can resolve with trees and walls but a bigger issue of
preserving the character of the neighborhood.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding the appeal, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Frankel asked if the appellee has the burden in this hearing. The City
Attorney stated he would not term it as a burden and the Commission bases their decision
on substantial competent evidence. Mr. Frankel stated about 98% of what was said he
cannot consider it because he would consider it inapplicable to this hearing. He stated
19
04/03/12
before himself and the rest of the Commission they have a Board Order so any comments
about "not in my backyard argument" he cannot consider nor will he; "we don't want
rehabbers on our street" he will not consider that. Mr. Frankel stated several people
offered substantial evidence which he considers truthful knowing what the area involves
have put on the record and have testified under oath there is an art school, Richwagen's
Bike Shop, auto center, San Sebastian townhomes, hairdresser, artist, the historic
Hartman Bed and Breakfast and there is another historic home. Mr. Frankel stated before
him he has a Board Order and part of the Board Order reads as follows: Subsection 2
Comprehensive Plan A Future Land Use Element Objective A -1 "Properties shall be
developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate
and complies in terms of soil, typographic, and other applicable physical considerations,
in complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs." Mr.
Frankel stated he does not believe the applicant has provided competent substantial
evidence that meets this burden so because of this he will be voting no on the appeal.
Mrs. Gray stated this use is not compatible and believes it will create a
negative impact to the business owners. Mrs. Gray stated she is a business owner and
owns property in the City of Delray Beach and expressed concern with this not
compatible she will not support the appeal.
Mr. Carney stated he does not believe this Board ever abrogates its
authority to determine whether or not an application itself has been processed correctly
and if in fact the timing of the initial application did not include the disclosure that it was
going to be 16 or 18 beds and that came after the ordinance then that is a material change
and should have required that application to be restarted and that would have been after
the ordinance. Mr. Carney stated the ordinance pre -empts any suggestion of
grandfathering because he does not believe this is grandfathered because he thinks the
initial application fail to disclose what he considers to be material information.
Mr. Dorling stated staff had that discussion with the City Attorney when
the request was originally made and it was the concurrency wall that in fact that they had
a vested interest to the reasonable accommodation. Mr. Carney stated he believes that is
material information that was omitted and is prepared to let a court make that decision as
to whether or not that should have been a new application at that time. Mr. Carney stated
Section 397.401 of the Florida Statutes particularly 397.403 even if all the assets in
Delray were in fact purchased the licensing procedure would require a new license to be
issued because the new owners would have to qualify under the Statute. He stated he is
troubled by the entire application process. Mr. Carney stated under the experienced
owner of Delray In-Patient Detox Center will be a 16 bed state -of -the -art detox center
focused on helping the addict and alcoholic find a real solution to their problem. He
stated everything about this is that a new company is coming in and they are taking
advantage of an existing grant that was given and believes the change of control is
substance here and the competent evidence that was put forth by Commissioner Frankel
he agrees with completely and for that reason he concurs with his colleagues and not
support the appeal.
20
04/03/12
Mr. Jacquet thanked everyone from the public for attending this evening.
Mr. Jacquet stated the applicant is correct that this is an appeal of SPRAB's decision and
the applicant is correct that we do address this "De novo" which means the Commission
reconsiders the information presented. Mr. Jacquet stated with regard to the issues with
the application that was made and whether there was any misinformation or not and who
owns it etc. can be reconsidered because this is a new hearing. However, Mr. Jacquet
stated the test for this is simple when appealing SPRAB; do you meet all the
requirements as set forth in the City's LDRs and Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Jacquet stated
the Commission cannot reasonably withhold approval once they have already adopted a
legislative procedure for how they are supposed to hear this and the Commission cannot
deny it only because neighbors are against it. Mr. Jacquet stated there was a fourth DCA
that was provided to the City where Judge Farmer made a good point "Power of the
government to regulate land use within its border is among the very reason for the
existence of local government. I also believe that land ownership is at the core of our
constitutional freedoms thus the power of government must be exercised with healthy
regard for that right." Mr. Jacquet stated the test is whether there is competent substantial
evidence to support the Commission's decision and believes there is competent
substantial evidence to support SPRAB's decision. Mr. Jacquet stated he believes that
Future Land Use Element Objective A -1 of the Comprehensive Plan is not met and there
are other issues that are not met as far as compatible with adjacent properties and the
overall fabric of that area.
Mayor McDuffie thanked everyone for attending this evening. He stated
Quasi - Judicial Hearings do not allow the Commission to take into consideration the
number of people for or against an item but there are some things the Commission can
consider such as the City's ordinances and the adherence to those ordinances in our Land
Development Regulations. Mayor McDuffie stated he would like to address a comment
that was made about his equating a paralyzed veteran who was here earlier tonight to
receive accommodations from the City was the same as someone in substance abuse.
Mayor McDuffie stated what he actually said was they are treated the same by the
Federal Government. He stated they both fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and they are both due our respect. Mayor McDuffie stated his father was a
Marine, he is a Vietnam vet, and his son just got out of the Navy serving in the Persian
Gulf so he has a great regard for Veterans and wanted to make sure that what he said was
very clear. Mayor McDuffie stated they are both protected the same by the Federal
Government; they did not win that protection the same way. Mayor McDuffie stated the
Commission is not allowed to take into consideration 99% of what was said tonight;
however, there is a caveat that allows the Commission to say whether something is
compatible with its neighbors and future uses and the plans that people talked about on
Federal Highway. Mayor McDuffie stated the Commission just got out of a long -range
planning session all day long yesterday where they planned for this city 1 year out, 5
years out and 10 years out, and 15 years out and emphasized that they are looking
forward to the future and the betterment of this community in the future. He stated the
Commission has the opportunity to make a decision that will be part of that future and the
City is fortunately supported by Future Land Use Element Objective A -1. Mayor
McDuffie stated he believes we can put these places where they are surrounded by places
21
04/03/12
like them and not our residences and our bed and breakfasts. He stated he will not
support the appeal.
The City Attorney briefly reviewed the Board Order with the Commission
who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an
official part of the minutes).
Mr. Carney moved to adopt the Board Order as presented (denying the
appeal), seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr.
Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney
— Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
At this point, the time being 8:50 p.m., the Commission took a short break.
At this point, the time being 8:57 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
10, Public Hearings.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 05 -12: Consider a privately- initiated Future Land
Use Map change from Transitional (TRN) to General Commercial (GC), rezoning from
POC (Planned Office Center) to PC (Planned Commercial), and a Text Amendment of
the Comprehensive Plan modifying the description of the GC (General Commercial)
Future Land Use designation to limit the maximum FAR to 0.46 for a 9.95 acre property
located on the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and
1845 South Federal Highway) known as Delray Place. (Quasi- Judicial Hearing) THIS
ITEM IS A CONTINUATION FROM THE MARCH 20 2012 PUBLIC HEARING-
IT IS NOT OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
The caption of Ordinance No. 05 -12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ADOPTING A SMALL -SCALE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF THE "COMMUNITY PLANNING
ACT ", FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 163.3187,
INCLUDING A SMALL -SCALE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP AMENDMENT FROM TRN (TRANSITIONAL)
TO GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) FOR LAND
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL
HIGHWAY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
HEREIN, AND AN ASSOCIATED TEXT
AMENDMENT MODIFYING THE DESCRIPTION OF
22
04/03/12
T14E GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION PERTAINING TO SAID LAND;
AND REZONING AND PLACING SAID LAND
PRESENTLY ZONED POC (PLANNED OFFICE
CENTER) TO PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL)
DISTRICT; AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012 "; PROVIDING A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 05 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
The City Attorney stated this was continued from the last meeting as a
public hearing item and that public hearing was closed. The City Attorney stated the
Planning Director is going to be speaking and he is still under oath from the prior
meeting.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning project file 42012 -058 and #2012 -059.
Mr. Dorling stated this was postponed from the public hearing of March
20, 2012 at which time there was as suggestion that the applicant consider the SAD
zoning. The applicant has submitted a letter dated March 29, 2012 and they are asking
that they be given a period of six months which would give them adequate time to
prepare and submit documents that are required for the SAD zoning piece. Mr. Dorling
stated the applicant has asked that since SAD is consistent with all land uses that the land
use portion of their current application is no longer necessary and that it be withdrawn.
The City Attorney recommends that if the Commission votes to continue
this that in the motion to continue that it be for a time period not to exceed six months
and prior to this item coming before the Commission again that it will have to be re-
noticed and re- advertised and that the applicant would pick up the expense for Ordinance
No. 05 -12 unless they withdraw it completely.
Mr. Carney asked if the applicant comes in under the SAD availability
isn't this a brand new application anyway. The City Attorney stated it is his
understanding that it is. Mr. Carney asked what the rationale is for trying to keep this
application still alive even in a suspended form. Mr. Dorling stated in his discussions
with the applicant is that they would like to show that they are having a continuing
process rather than a complete withdrawal and a new application. He stated that goes to
their negotiations with tenants and if they show that they are in fact proceeding with a
23
04/03/12
continuing application that is better than starting anew. Mr. Dorling stated at the final
stage the current ordinance could be eliminated and replaced with a new ordinance
should it be necessary.
Mrs. Gray thanked the applicant for meeting with the residents from
Tropic Bay and asked staff if he has heard anything about how the residents feel about
this extended application. Mr. Dorling stated the previous meetings the City has had
would appear to give them an opportunity to way in to the degree that they have not to
date.
Mr. Frankel stated because this is a quasi-judicial hearing does he need to
disclose any communications that have been made since the last hearing. Mr. Frankel
stated he received an email from Mr. Carasello requesting to talk about this issue and he
responded back to him and copied the Commission and Ms. Freeman that he would not
have any more discussions because based on what his communications were with the
City Attorney that because the presentation of evidence was closed he was not going to
hear more. For the record, Mr. Frankel stated this is former Mayor Alperin's idea and
believes this is a great idea because it is the hottest corner in the city that needs to be
updated. Therefore, Mr. Frankel stated the ability to attract a first class tenant would help
based on the postponement he is all for it in this SAD zoning but feels the Dr. Alperin
deserve credit.
Mr. Jacquet disclosed that he received a letter from Mr. Carasello which
he forwarded to the City Clerk and he met with Mr. Carasello and Mr. Covelli on the site
and numerous times have driven around the site and have walked some portions of the
site to take a look. Mr. Jacquet stated he met with Ms. Kelli Freeman a while back and
briefly discussed this issue as well. Mr. Jacquet stated with the applicant proceeding in
this manner does it require and asked if they have to get a consensus from the community
or the Commission as to what is allowed. Mr. Dorling stated what the SAD does is
physically ties the site plan to the zoning action and it does not require that they work
with anybody.
Mr. Carney disclosed he too received an email from Mr. Carasello and
spoke with Ke1Ii Freeman and forwarded this email to the City Clerk.
Mayor McDuffie stated he received a voicemail and email from Mr.
Carasello as well but did not respond.
Mrs. Gray disclosed that she too received the same email and spoke to
staff. Mrs. Gray stated she received a telephone call from Bill Branning to meet with the
applicant but she did not.
Mayor McDuffie echoed comments expressed by Commissioner Frankel
and stated this is the most important corner that needs something done to it. Mayor
McDuffie stated he supports a 6 month extension with pursuit of the SAD zoning.
24
04/03/12
Mr. Jacquet moved to continue for a period not to exceed of six (6)
months and when this matter comes back if it is not withdrawn that the applicant must
pay for the re- notice and re- advertising of this item, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll
call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor
McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0
vote.
10.B. ORDINANCE NO. 09 -12: Consider a city - initiated amendment to Land
Development Regulations (LDR) Appendix "A ", "Definitions ", to expand the definition
of "Restaurant (Bona Fide) ", to clarify required operations and components for restaurant
uses.
The caption of Ordinance No. 09 -12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY
AMENDING APPENDIX "A ", "DEFINITIONS ", TO
EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF "RESTAURANT
(BONA FIDE)" TO CLARIFY REQUIRED
OPERATIONS AND COMPONENTS FOR
RESTAURANT USES, PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 09 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this ads three
specific sections to the existing definition of restaurant that says all tables, chairs, and
counter areas are to remain available for full course meals during all hours of operation
and tables and seatings cannot be cleared away to accommodate other activities such as
dance floors or other occupancy areas. Mr. Dorling stated this is to really address an
issue where restaurants more of a stand -alone bar in the evenings and in the cases when
they do that either because they become a stand -alone bar and the City has a distance
requirement for stand -alone bars, or they fail to satisfy requirements that are currently in
place for operation of restaurant and that language is being proposed. He stated some
additional language that facilities that qualify for a stand -alone bar facility serving food
category per Florida Statute would not qualify as a bona fide restaurant. Mr. Dorling
stated the Statutes say that if you provide more than 10% of the revenue from food then
you cannot have that category so that says you are providing 90% liquor at a minimum.
25
04/03/12
He stated in a situation like that you cannot meet the definition of a restaurant. Mr.
Dorling stated the language is strengthened that service of full course meals be available
at all times that alcoholic beverages are being served. He stated there is some concern
that in later parts of the evening that facilities that are truly restaurants may in fact not
have full course meals at the end of the evening and there was some discussion about
some time associated with that. Mr. Dorling stated right now under the current restaurant
regulation that has been in place for two years or more "A bona fide restaurant must,
during all hours of operation, continually offer food service consisting of full service
meals." Furthermore, Mr. Dorling stated the language states "A bona fide restaurant
must have full kitchen facilities, which are located in a completely enclosed room, under
roof of the main structure, or in an interior court and food preparation staff capable of
preparing and serving full course meals during all hours of operation." Mr. Dorling
stated while staff is adding 46 that is really clarification of the existing ordinance. Mr.
Dorling recommends approval at this time and stated this is to address an issue where
people he believes are taken advantage of it and turning it into a stand -alone bar after
certain hours of the evening.
At its meeting of February 27, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board
reviewed the item and recommended approval with a 4 to 0 vote. At its meeting of
March 7, 2012, the Pineapple Grove Main Street Committee reviewed the item and the
thought there should be some additional language that would allow restaurants to move a
certain amount of tables to provide a small area for entertainment venues but not to the
degree that is being taken advantage of now.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open.
„ ,
Jeffrey Lynne, Weiner, Lynne &Thom p Thompson, P.A., 10 S.E. 1St Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444, speaking on behalf of Union (8 East Atlantic Avenue) located
next to Tryst Bull Bar Deluxe), stated because of the location of Union it does not lend
itself to a full -time restaurant type of situation. Mr. Lynne stated they have a kitchen that
remains open until closing and exceptionally good food. He stated their concern is that
the ordinance as drafted would make them a legal non - conforming use or an illegal use.
Mr. Lynne stated they are concerned about their significant investment at that location.
Dr. Victor Kirson, D.D.S., 2050 Alta Meadows Lane ##2110, Delray
Beach, FL_ 33444 (President of the Board of Directors of Tierra Verde at Delray
Beach and Member, of the Alliance), stated at first he thought this was an invasion of
government into a private business but then after speaking to people he found that this is
not what the majority of residents of Delray Beach want. Dr. Kirson stated if all the
standing bars would keep tabs of how drunk somebody is it would not be a problem but
they do not and the problem spills out into the street. Dr. Kirson supports the Planning
and Zoning Board's recommendation to follow the rules or shut down.
Butch Johnson, Tryst and 32 East, stated he is unclear as to what the
ordinance is and asked if there is a certain amount of food that needs to be sold versus
liquor. Mr. Johnson stated if he leaves the kitchen open therefore he can serve liquor and
26
04103/1.2
noted that he has a 4COP license at Tryst. He stated he would like to be in compliance.
Mr. Dorling stated in negotiations with Union there is SRX license which
requires 55% food sales to 45% alcohol. He stated they are one of the few that has an
SRX license; most if not all of them in downtown have a 4COP which allows them to
have full liquor but does not put a cap on the percentages of food to liquor. Mr. Dorling
stated the City's regulations say that you need to meet the definition of restaurant which
means you have a kitchen and that you offer full course meals all the time they are open
under the current regulations (i.e. 20 %, 30 %, or 40 %). He stated this is to address the
people that do this on a regular basis.
Mr. Jacquet asked for clarification regarding the 4COP license. Mr.
Dorling stated there is no percentage requirement with regard to food versus alcohol. Mr.
Jacquet inquired about the SRX licenses. Mr. Dorling stated the SRX licenses are 55 %-
45%. Mr. Jacquet asked if the City has any requirements in our definitions for restaurant
on what percentage of food versus alcohol these owners should be looking at. Mr.
Dorling stated the City does not. Mr. Jacquet asked if the City's definition for restaurant
specify that the kitchen must be in -house or does it just say you have to offer food within
those hours. Mr. Dorling stated the current definition states that "A bona fide must have
a full kitchen facility and food preparation staff capable of preparing and serving full
course meals during all hours of operation."
Mr. Carney stated it does not actually state that the food has to be prepared
on -site; you can staff taken out of the kitchen and bring food in from elsewhere and serve
it. Mr. Dorling stated it is mute to that.
Mr. Johnson asked what type of menu he has to have available and how
many people does he need to have in his kitchen. Mr. Johnson stated they are a restaurant
and 90% of their opening hours and on Fridays and Saturdays between 11:00 p.m. -1:30
a.m. that the crowd goes from the dinner crowd to a lively social crowd people drinking
cocktails. However, Mr. Johnson stated they do not move tables and chairs.
There being no one else from the public who wished to address the
Commission regarding Ordinance No. 09 -12, the public hearing was closed.
Mrs. Gray asked if there would have to be a full staff and asked if a
restaurant owner would have to have a different menu or a full menu. Mr. Dorling stated
there is a difference between the language that is being proposed now which is limited to
you cannot move your tables around and you cannot have a stand -alone facility and be
called a bar and what is on the books now. Mr. Dorling stated the City's current
ordinance states that you have to have full kitchen facilities and food prep staff.
Mr. Frankel stated he learned since this the Commission last discussed this
is that every day Monday - Friday he eats lunch at nightclubs. Mr. Frankel stated he does
not feel we should micro -manage what has been named the number one street in Florida.
He stated there is nothing about lunch requirements, percentage of food to liquor sales,
27
04/03/12
food being prepared on -site, and there is nothing about being open 6 -7 days a week. Mr.
Frankel stated Tramonti's indicated that this would cost them $5,000 a month. If this
ordinance is passed as written, Mr. Frankel stated 32 East is not going to have a
substandard staff. Mr. Frankel stated he understands there needs to be regulations and
things need to be done to target one or two people on Atlantic Avenue but if this is passed
it has much larger unintended consequences. Mr. Frankel stated he does not support this.
Mr. Carney concurred with comments Commissioner Frankel and he does
not want to micro - manage the restaurants in requiring them to do all these things.
However, he does want to address the issue but thinks it can be done in a better way.
Mr. Jacquet stated he agrees that there is an issue that we are trying to fix
and feels that we are over regulating these businesses. Mr. Jacquet suggested that staff
go back and relook at the definition of restaurants and address some of these questions.
He stated he asked if the kitchen has to be in -house and do they actually have to produce
the food within that physical structure or can they bring it in and noted this is unclear.
Mr. Jacquet suggested that staff just tighten up the ordinance and be specific by stating
that the restaurants have to have a kitchen within the facility and that food must be
prepared within the facility. Mr. Jacquet stated he cannot support this because in his
opinion it will hurt businesses and feels it is unclear.
Mayor McDuffie stated he supports the idea and understands what staff is
trying to do. However, Mayor McDuffie stated the City is trying to take over something
that should be a law enforcement or Code Enforcement problem by over regulating our
operators who are doing a great job now. Mayor McDuffie stated there are people
present this evening on another issue because we have unscrupulous operators in town in
that kind of business and it is very passionate. He stated we have some noise problems
and some restaurants that are not really acting as restaurants. Mayor McDuffie stated if
the City makes the restaurants keep everything operational so they can serve a full dinner
at 1:58 a.m. before the doors close at 2:00 a.m. then there will be a lot of staff around for
quite a while which costs the restaurant owners money.
Mr. Dorling stated he feels that the Commission has a concern with not the
new language but with the existing language in the ordinance. He stated it is not the new
language that is making the restaurants non - compliant; they are in non - compliance now.
Mr. Darling stated the issues with percentages become problematic in that we would have
to audit individual restaurants and there are ways that this sort of thing can be
manipulated. He stated when there was an SRX license the City would call in the State
and they would perform an audit as part of their enforcement. Staff can revisit some of
the definitions and address the current regulations as well.
Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 09 -12 on Second and FINAL
Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows:
Mrs. Gray — No; Mayor McDuffie -- No; Mr. Carney — No; Mr. Jacquet — No; Mr.
Frankel — No. Said motion was DENIED with a 5 to 0 vote.
28
04/03/12
10.C. ORDINANCE NO. 10 -12: Consider a city - initiated amendment to the
Land Development Regulations (LDR) Appendix "A ", "Definitions ", to provide a
definition of "Delicatessen ", Section 4.6.9, "Off- Street Parking Regulations ", and Article
6.3, "Use and Work in the Public Right of Way ", Subsection 6.3.3, "Sidewalk Cafe", to
provide a definition, clarify required parking, and to clarify the characteristics of a
Delicatessen.
The caption of Ordinance No. 10 -12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY
AMENDING APPENDIX "A ", "DEFINITIONS" BY
ENACTING A NEW DEFINITION OF
"DELICATESSEN"; BY AMENDING 4.6.9, "OFF -
STREET PARKING REGULATIONS ", SUBSECTION
(C)(3)(D), "RESTAURANTS "; AND SECTION 6.3.3(F),
"REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE USE, DESIGN,
AND MAINTENANCE OF A SIDEWALK CAFE ", TO
CLARIFY PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND
SIDEWALK CAFE COMPONENTS FOR
DELICATESSENS AND SIMILAR USES; PROVIDING
A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 10 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
office.)
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was
held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida
and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this
ordinance clarifies parking requirements for Deli's and similar uses and how the sidewalk
cafe components can be utilized for those uses and also provides a new definition for
delicatessen. Mr. Dorling stated there is additional clarification that sidewalk cafes can
be established by modifying the current reference to public space in front of a public
open space plaza adjacent to a business. He stated currently ice cream shops, sandwich
shops; delicatessen's where no indoor seating is allowed is considered a take -out facility
and is subject to general parking requirements. Mr. Dorling stated it also provides that
sidewalk cafes that are allowed for take -out facilities would be limited to consumption of
take -out food only and that waiter and waitress service to tables is only allowed for
restaurants or for facilities which have been assessed restaurant parking requirements.
29
04/03/12
At its meeting of March 7, 2012, the Pineapple Grove Main Street
Committee reviewed the item and recommended approval; at its meeting of February 27,
2012, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the item and recommended approval with
a 4 to 0 vote.
Mayor McDuffie declared the public hearing open. There being no one
from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 10 -12,
the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Jacquet asked if Big Al's counts as a delicatessen. Mr. Dorling stated
they would be a kin to a delicatessen/sandwich shop and they do not have any inside
seating so their sidewalk cafe would be subject to take -out product only.
Mr. Carney stated he supports the ordinance.
Mrs. Gray stated she supports the ordinance.
Mr. Frankel stated he cannot support the definition of a delicatessen
because he feels this is where he can get matzo ball soup and a corned beef sandwich.
However, Mr. Frankel stated he can support the language of a sandwich shop.
The City Manager asked if it is necessary to have the definition of a deli.
Mr. Dorling stated staff could eliminate the definition and somebody comes in and says
they are a deli what is the parking requirement and the City does not define deli and then
there is confusion. Mr. Dorling stated if we say sandwich shops and anything similar to it
not including a deli and not include a definition. Mr. Carney stated the English definition
of deli is a take -out food. Mr. Dorling stated staff can eliminate the definition of deli.
After brief discussion, Mr. Dorling suggested to eliminate the definition of
deli (Section 2).
Mr. Carney moved to adopt Ordinance No. 10 -12 on Second and FINAL
Reading deleting Section 2 definition of Delicatessen (Deli), seconded by Mr. Frankel.
Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney —
Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes. Said motion passed with a
5 to 0 vote.
At this point, the time being 9:55 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
11, Comments and Inquiries on Non - Agenda Items from the City Manager and the
Public.
ILA. City Manazer's response to prior public comments and inquiries.
inquiries.
The City Manager had no response to prior public comments and
30
04/03/12
11.8. From the Public.
11.11.1. Greg Weiss 340 S.W. 61h Avenue Delray Beach FL 33444 speaking
on behalf of the Milagro Center, stated he is a Board member and Chair of Government
Affairs Committee. Mr. Weiss stated the Milagro Center currently serves 45 elementary
school aged children after school while providing arts education while teaching values
such as respect, responsibility, cooperation, and tolerance. He stated the Milagro Center
also provides tutoring and academic support to the most at risk children living at or below
the poverty line here in Delray Beach. Additionally, the Milagro Center is now serving
20 teens providing cultural arts, living values and academic support and the teens are also
offered life skills training, SAT Prep and job training. Mr. Weiss stated as of this date the
City has not signed off on their new home at the Villages of Delray and this has created a
situation where they cannot facilitate their Health Department permit. He stated they
have new tenants that are scheduled to move into the old facility and the new tenants are
a child care facility in approximately sixty (60) days. Mr. Weiss stated they do not wish
to break the lease agreement because these new tenants provide a critical service to the
surrounding community. He stated by not having the City sign off may put their program
as a whole at risk including the summer camp for the children. Mr. Weiss stated he had a
pleasant and positive conversation with the City Manager regarding their situation. He
thanked the City Commission for allowing him to give an update on this unnerving
situation from their perspective as a charity in Delray Beach trying to do some good
work. Mr. Weiss stated he hopes we can all resolve this in a timely manner and save
these vital programs.
11.13.2. Dr. Victor Kirson,_ D.D.S., 2050 Alta Meadows Lane 42110, Delray
Beach, FL 33444 (President of the Board of Directors of Tierra Verde at Delray
Beach and Member of the Alliance }, stated when he was campaigning he did a survey
to see what each section of Delray Beach was most concerned about. Dr. Kirson stated
the beach was concerned about taxes and the rest of the city was concerned about taxes.
He stated there is also the problem with the transient housing and taxes go against each
other. Dr. Kirson asked how much are the residents willing to spend to defend the city
against transient housing and what kind of millage increase are they willing to go to. He
stated it is up to the Commission to decide how much do we spend and what are the
chances we are willing to take to win a case.
11.13.3. David Charles Faustin, 10175 Canino Del Dios, Delray Beach, FL
33446, stated he stands before the Commission in defense of liberty, the rules of law, and
the United States Constitution and continued his remarks from the March 6, 2012 City
Commission meeting.
At this point, the time being 10:04 p.m., the Commission moved back to
Item 9.13. of the Regular Agenda.
31
04/03/12
9.B. CONDITIONAL USE REOUEST/DELRAY GAS STATION:
Consider approval of a conditional use request for Delray Gas Station (formerly known
as Valero Gas Station) to allow the re- establishment of the gasoline station with attendant
food sales, at 14111 South Military Trail. (Quasi - Judicial Hearing)
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte
communications. The Commission had no ex parte communications to disclose.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning project file #2012 -079 into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated this is a conditional use request to re- establish a gas
station and food sales at 14111 S. Military Trail. The subject property contains a vacant
Valero Gas Station, which was established in 1983 and vacated in 2009. He stated this
has been purchased by the bank and they are marketing the property for a new gas
station. Mr. Dorling stated since the conditional use has lapped for more than six months
it requires to be re- established through this process and the new owner is proceeding with
that requirement. Staff recommends approval at this time subject to the applicant corning
in with a site plan being submitted and processed later.
At its meeting of March 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board
recommended approval subject to conditions with a 7 to 0 vote.
Michael Sanchez /Johnston Group, representing Iberia Bank, stated
Iberia Bank acquired this property through an action by the FDIC and they would like to
position the property to market it to potential gas station and so that they can renovate the
property.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in
favor or in opposition of the conditional use request, to please come forward at this time.
There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public
hearing was closed.
The City Attorney briefly reviewed the Board Order with the Commission
who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an
official part of the minutes).
Mr. Frankel move to adopt the Board Order as presented, seconded by
Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr.
7acquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes. Said
motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
32
04/03/12
9.C. WAIVER REQUESTS /SW DELRAY ONE, LLC.: Consider approval'
of four (4) waiver requests to Land Development Regulations (LDR) to allow 9 ft. floor
to ceiling height for the rooftop pavilion where 10 ft. is required pursuant to LDR Section
4.4.13(F)(1)(b), to allow 8'11" and 13'0" ft. stacking distances where a 50 ft. stacking
distance is required for parking lots with 51 or more spaces pursuant to LDR Section
4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), to allow 50% frontage at a maximum setback of 10 ft. along SE I"
Avenue where 70 %T90% is required pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(1) , to
allow 11.59% frontage at a minimum setback of 15 ft. for heights above 25' along SE 1st
Avenue where 70% is required, and to allow 76% of the ground level floor area for floor
levels above 25' where a 70% maximum is allowed pursuant to LDR Section
4.4.13(F)(4)(c)(2) for the proposed Saxena White Corporate Office located at 111 S.E. lst
Avenue. (Quasi - Judicial Hearing)
Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to
give testimony on this item.
Mayor McDuffie asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte
communications. The Commission had no ex parte communications to disclose.
Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the
Planning and Zoning Department project file #2012 -035 into the record.
Mr. Dorling stated this is the Saxena White Office Building and the
Commission saw waivers for the sidewalk at their previous meeting. He stated there are
four (4) additional waivers that are requested at this time as part of that site planning
process. One of those waivers is to allow a 9 foot ceiling to height for a rooftop pavilion
where ten feet is required and allow a 8 foot 11 inch and 13 foot stacking distance
requirements for the parking lot where a 50 feet stacking distance is required and some
modifications to the frontage requirements in the CBD design guidelines. Mr. Dorling
stated there is a 50% frontage at a maximum 10 foot setback where 70 % -90% is required;
and a 70% requirement of ground floor to upper floors where 76% is proposed. Mr.
Dorling stated the required findings are made in LDR Section 2.4.5(B)(5) and the
analysis of each of these is in the staff report. Mr. Dorling stated staff has a concern
relating to the first waiver which is a reduction from 9 foot to ten foot; from 10 foot to 9
foot there is a minimum height for all floors and this can be accomplished. He stated
staff is not sure why it is not proposed in this case but staff is suggesting that it would be
a grant of special privilege and therefore is not supporting that portion of the waiver;
however, staff supports the balance of the waivers.
Mr. Dorling stated the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB)
considered these waivers as part of their review and recommended approval with a 6 to 0
vote on all of the waivers; however, that first waiver they suggested that it only be
approved only in the event the required height could not be achieved. Staff believes this
height can be achieved with a 48 foot height limit and 45 foot current limit of that
building. Staff recommends approval of three of the waivers with the exception of
waiver #1 which staff recommends denial as did SPRAB.
33
04/03/12
Richard Jones, Richard Jones Architecture, 10 S.E. 1" Avenue A,
Delray Beach, FL 33444, stated they are very excited about this project coming to
downtown as well as their clients Sazena White. Mr. Jones stated they are bringing
several attorneys and other well paid individuals that are going to be relocating their
businesses from Boca Raton. He stated they feel that they have provided justification for
all the waivers. Mr. Jones stated the 9 foot versus the 10 foot at the top he feels they
could get it to work at ten feet. He stated they would like to have the waiver approved in
case they need that foot and feels they can accommodate the four- stories within the 48
feet. Mr. Jones stated SPRAB thought it was 44 feet but it is actually 48 feet. Mr. Jones
urged the Commission to approve all the waivers.
Mayor McDuffie stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in
favor or in opposition of the waiver requests, to please come forward at this time. There
being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing
was closed.
Mr. Jacquet stated that Mr. Jones stated that it is possible that he could
meet that ten foot requirement but he is not sure yet but in case he is unable to meet it that
is why he is wanting this waiver. Mr. Jones stated the original concept design and the
other drawings that had occupied they planned for certain ceiling heights on each floor
and when they got to the top they found they could only accommodate a 9 foot ceiling.
Mr. Jones stated the top floor is just a pavilion and it includes a bathroom for a rooftop
terrace and some storage. He stated if they add a foot in that rooftop pavilion which
would seldom be used they would have to take it out of ceiling heights on the lower three
floors. Mr. Jones stated these are leasable floors and are at a ceiling height minimum for
Class A office space. Mr. Jacquet asked staff about the extra foot.
Mr. Dorling stated staff was basing that assumption on the dimensions that
were previously provided which showed 45 feet. He stated if in fact it is 48 feet then
staffs position would be different.
Mr. Jacquet asked if it is in fact 48 feet. Mr. Jones stated it is 48 feet.
Mr. Jacquet moved to adopt the Board Order as presented, seconded by
Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet --- Yes; Mr.
Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes. Said
motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.D. RESOLUTION NO. 21- 12/DELRAY BEACH ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT FUND: Consider approval of Resolution No. 21 -12 which
recognizes the importance of economic opportunities within city boundaries, establishes
the Delray Beach Economic Development Fund to provide matching funds for various
State economic development incentives and provide an effective date.
The caption of Resolution No. 21 -12 is as follows:
34
04/03/12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA RECOGNIZING
THE IMPORTANCE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES
WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARIES; APPROVING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DELRAY BEACH
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Resolution No. 21 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
office.)
Vin Nolan, Economic Development Director /Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA), stated this is a request for the Commission to act on creating the Delray
Beach Economic Development Fund in accordance with discussion that they held at the
March 15, 2012 Workshop. Mr. Nolan stated the CRA described to the Commission the
baseline that they feel is necessary to get on track to fulfill their broader city -wide
economic initiatives in particular the Congress Corridor. He stated this is a resolution
that establishes that fund and designates a specific amount that they would anticipate be
allocated towards that fund.
Mr. Frankel stated because the work is % CRA and '/4 City is the CRA
putting up $3 million and will there be some overlap.
The City Manager stated he does not envision much of this happening
within the CRA district but he pointed out that each individual match be approved by the
City Commission and if we happen to get a business that wants to go in the CRA district
then the City would ask them to put up some of the money to make this local match. Mr.
Nolan stated
Mrs. Gray stated she is glad to see the progress that we have made in the
short period of time and asked if we need more staff. She stated everyone is on board
with this but the Commission really wants to see some work being done and some results.
Mr. Nolan stated at the present time over the past six months since he has been here most
of his work with the CRA is tactical and the work he has been doing on the City side is
strategic and long -term. Mrs. Gray asked if the grant dollars that we would be matching
are they job specific. Mr. Nolan stated the largest proportion of them are that is the QTI
Program that the State does for special targeted industries and those are $3,000.00 per job
created in those categories. Mr. Nolan stated they have already initiated some work
towards reaching out to the State Legislative Delegation to look towards next year's
legislative session and the creation of an enterprise zone which will double those State
dollars that will come back to them. Mrs. Gray asked if the $1 million that Mr. Nolan is
requesting is sufficient. Mr. Nolan stated they have to say that there is a dollar amount
out there that they are prepared to commit to show their seriousness for the business
community and their upstream stakeholders at the County and the State level. He stated
if they see a lot of activity and it is going in the direction that they want and they want to
come back later and suggest a new number they will do that at the appropriate point in
35
04/03/12
time.
The City Manager stated the local match is 20% so $1 million would
generate another $4 -5 million.
Mr. Jacquet stated if we do not match this 20% that the City is putting in
then we lose the other 80 %. Mr. Nolan stated this is our seed core and they are basically
planting for the future. Mr. Nolan stated the jobs that will come as a result and the tax
based growth that will come as a result of the nominal expenditure against the 80% that
will come back that is passing us at the present time will yield both the tax base growth
and the job creation which also throws off additional revenue to the city. He stated this is
future investment dollars.
Mayor McDuffic stated he has had the privilege to be involved in many of
these site selection trips in Boca and this is something that has been needed for quite
some time. He stated this is a great step and looks forward to the enterprise zone
becoming a reality.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve Resolution No. 21 -12, seconded by Mrs.
Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray —
Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion passed
with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.E. REQUEST DIRECTION ON THE CONVERSION OF S.E.
TgrSTRF,ET: Provide direction on the implementation schedule for the conversion of
S.E. Is' Street to two -way traffic from S.E. 1st Avenue to S.E. 6th Avenue.
Randal Krejcarek, City Engineer, stated this item is for the conversion of
S.E. Is' Street and it starts at South Swinton Avenue and goes east to northbound Federal
Highway and is converted from one -way to two -way. Mr. Krejcarek stated staff has been
working with the County on converting the signals and the three intersections that are
signalized are Swinton, southbound Federal Highway and northbound Federal Highway.
He stated South Swinton intersection does not have a right -of -way and existing signals
are on FPL poles and FPL does not allow signals on their poles anymore. Therefore, Mr.
Krejcarek stated the City is going to have to obtain right-of-way or easements in order to
put in the new poles and mast arms. The redevelopment on the northeast corner is
currently going through a review process and staff has asked for a corner clip on that area
to accommodate a mast arm. He stated he had conversations with the County about
putting one pole in and just diagonal across and hang all the signals on that. Mr.
Krejcarek stated the next one is South Federal Highway and the existing roadway is built
out almost to the maximum right-of-way and the existing poles are not structurally sound
enough to handle the additional heads that have to be placed up there. He stated two
additional poles would have to be placed on the west approach on S.E. I st Street. Mr.
Krejcarek stated two additional poles would have to be placed on the west approach on
S.E. 1st Street to hang new signal heads on there; staff would have to talk to both property
owners and obtain easements to put those new poles in. He stated the temporary at S.E.
36
04/03/12
5th Avenue would be with wood poles not with mast arms because when they come
through with the Federal Highway project which starts later this summer, that intersection
is going to get completely redone with mast arms. Mr. Krejcarek stated S.E. 1St Street at
northbound Federal Highway is a much easier intersection to handle. He stated the other
issue is both southbound and northbound Federal Highway even for the temporary the
City has to go to FDOT for a permit and there has been preliminary indications from
FDOT that even though we are so far along with the design of the Federal Highway
Beautification Project they still have not required the City to bring those intersections up
to ADA compliant which means that the City will have to do some physical at two if not
four of the corners of both intersections in addition to the work that the County is going
to do. He stated the City does not know the cost of that work until staff receives the
comments back from the State. Mr. Krejacarek stated the cost is approximately
$67,000.00 depending on the requirements from the State and with regard to the
timeframe and the minimum would be ten months and the longest could be as much as
two years and the reason is because of the fact that the City would have to get easements
for the intersection at southbound Federal and southeast 1St. Mr. Krejcarek suggested
looking at running at S.E. 1St Street from S.E. 1 Sc Avenue going west to S.E. 6th Avenue
to a two -way until staff can resolve the issues at the intersection of Swinton Avenue. He
reiterated that the anticipated start date is late this summer and the anticipated completion
date of the Federal Highway Beautification Project is October 2013. He stated even if the
City started with the temporary conversion this may not be completed with that by the
City gets under construction with the Federal Highway project. Staff recommends not
moving forward at this time and letting it naturally evolve with the Federal Highway
proj ect.
The City Manager stated there have been five (5) accidents along S.E. 1St
Street in the last ten months involving people turning into oncoming traffic.
Mr. Frankel stated he recognizes the fact that a lot of cars go the wrong
way. However, he stated if we are patient we can save $65,000.00 in taxpayer dollars
then he is in favor of staff's recommendation.
Mrs. Gray supports staff s recommendation.
Mr. Carney supports staff's recommendation.
Mr. Jacquet stated that is a dangerous one -way and he would like to see
this go forward as soon as possible. Mr. Jacquet stated he supports staff s
recommendation.
Mayor McDuffie stated it is foolish to make these changes and then go do
everything again. He agrees that we do not have to spend $65,000.00 and asked if the
City's Federal funding remained intact. Mr. Krejearek stated at the last meeting the
Commission approved the LAP (Local Agency Program) and that is what the Federal
funding is tied to.
37
04/03/12
Mr. Frankel moved to approve staffs recommendation and wait the
additional 18 months and not spend the estimated $65,000.00, seconded by Mrs. Gray.
Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor MCDuffie —
Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes. Said motion passed with
a 5 to 0 vote.
9.F. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF REGULARLY SCHEDULED
CITY COMMISSION MEETING DATES: Review and discuss an alternate date for
the January 1, 2013 Regular Meeting and provide direction on whether to schedule the
January 29, 2013 Annual Citizen's Roundtable.
The City Manager stated in setting the meeting dates it was overlooked
that the first Tuesday in January falls on January 1, 2013 so that date needs to be changed
and the calendar had on it a potential Annual Citizen's Roundtable date of January 29,
2013.
It was the consensus of the Commission to hold the first regular meeting
on January 3, 2013,
Mr. Frankel asked if there is an estimate of how many staff hours are
designated to the presentations. The City Manager stated he would guess between 60 -80
hours and it is highly paid people as well. Mr. Frankel stated what the Commission had
last week with Lyle Sumek with citizen's and expand it to different homeowners'
associations Mr. Frankel stated that kind of time being taken away from pressing
business for a very minimal attendance he feels there is better use of time.
The City Manager suggested that department heads be done during the day
and the Citizen's Summit that evening on April 1, 2013. The City Manager stated they
could expand the invitation list and let each Commission invite 12 -15 people to ensure
that we end up with at least 50 people there.
Mayor McDuffie stated there is a much better participation in the Citizen's
Summit than the Annual Citizen's Roundtable.
Mrs. Gray stated she is in favor of the Citizen's Summit as long as the
City makes sure to add more residents and not just the non - profits or organizational
institutions.
Mr. Jacquet stated he loves the Annual Citizen's Roundtable and feels it is
an opportunity for the residents to be involved in what it is that we are doing and it is
very symbolic of open government. However, Mr. Jacquet stated he agrees that the
Citizen's Summit and would like to merge the Citizen's Summit and the Annual Citizen's
Roundtable to still allow the public to be involved and also mare it more productive. He
concurred with comments expressed by the City Manager to invite more than 10 people
and include some residents who live here.
38
04/03/12
Mayor McDuffie stated the issue with the Annual Citizen's Roundtable is
dramatically diminishing participation.
The City Manager stated staff will work on this.
9.G. REVISED VALET PARKING LICENSE AGREEMENTS: Consider
approval modifications contained in the proposed Valet Parking License Agreements.
Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated at the March 15,
2012 Workshop meeting staff discussed changes to the Valet Agreement that were
proposed from direction of the December 6, 2011 City Commission meeting. Mr.
Aronson stated at that meeting it was determined that the restaurant owners and
stakeholders made some valid arguments to the validity and the success of the program
that the City was administering at the time as opposed to the options that were provided
in lieu of that program. Mr. Aronson stated those have been incorporated into the new
agreement; all signage must include "Open to the Public "; the agreement terms were
recommended to be extended (3 -5 years) and the City selected a three -year term. He
stated staff has also proposed 3% annual increases and noted fees have remained
unchanged for several years and staff recommends a 5% on the initial agreement and then
those 3% increases to come in the subsequent renewal years. Also, Mr. Aronson stated
addressing the uniforms that they be displayed permanently with the valet on the rear or
the front of shirt. Mr. Aronson stated there was a disparity between east of the
Intracoastal fees per space per month $125 and west of the Intracoastal is $100. He
stated there was a comment that those fees should be equal. Mr. Aronson stated then the
discussions from the Commission turned to keeping increases moderate so that we do not
end up with a situation where they have increased parking valet fees in order to make a
successful project. He stated he did not incorporate the $25 increase to the queues west
of the Intracoastal and asked for clarification on this.
Mr. Aronson stated the Parking Management Advisory Board reviewed
these modifications in between those two times there were a couple of ideas that were
thought of that were not available at the Commission Workshop: (A) valet services must
be provided throughout the year to assure service is consistently available to customers of
area. He stated in the past restaurateurs have opted not to provide the service; they pay
the fee so that they can maintain the queue but they do not put the valets out and three
spaces usually went back into the parking pool. Staff feels that being that it is now a
service for neighboring businesses including validation programs to be available that they
be required to provide that service 12 months out of the year; (B) queues should be
staffed by a minimum of two (2) employees, with one stationed at the valet queue at all
times, to assure the smooth flow of traffic in the queue and to prevent illegal parking in
the queue which may result in a citation being issued and/or vehicle being towed, and (C)
parking lot(s) required for the storage of vehicles must be in the name of the licensee to
assure continued compliance with the agreement if a change in valet operators is needed.
Mr. Aronson stated the Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB)
reviewed these recommendations as well. The Board did not recommend approval of the
39
04/03/12
following recommendations: (1) valet company name and/or logo on the front of shirt,
(2) the proposed 5% increase failed to pass in a 3 -3 vote (Marincola and Gergen rescued
themselves from this financial aspect of the Board's action), and (3) did not agree with
the 2- person minimum staffing level.
Mrs. Gray stated with regard to the valet queues west of the Intracoastal
should be the same price as east Atlantic Avenue ($125). Mr. Aronson stated the
difference between the two is that the valets east of the Intracoastal work in the daytime
from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. He stated there is no difference in those fees but east of
the Intracoastal is metered area so there was some difference in price to make up for that
difference in revenue that the City was not seeing from metering at that valet queue
between 1 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
The City Manager stated the valet parking queues west of the Intracoastal
start after 5:00 p.m. and the ones east of the Intracoastal have an additional six hours of
service.
Mr. Carney commented about the recommendations that the PMAB did
not recommend. Mr. Aronson staff recommends that the shirts be light in color because
the valets are working in the right-of-way at night and the Board agreed with that as well.
Mr. Carney stated he supports the recommendation.
Mr. Jacquet stated he read the license agreement and thought it was pretty
well written. Mr. Jacquet stated the only question he has is 416 the penalties for
violations /termination and asked if there is any specific time period and is it four within
the term of the agreement. Mr. Aronson stated it is within the licensing year so it is from
its date of origin to its expiration.
The City Attorney stated we need to clarify this to make it on an annual
basis.
Mr. Frankel stated he attended the PMAB meeting on March 27, 2012 and
agrees with staff and wants to keep the valet fees within that $5 -$10 range.
The City Attorney stated pursuant to our local rules the Commission will
need to make a motion to extend the meeting otherwise it will end now.
Mr. Carney moved to approve the revised Valet Parking License
Agreement, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows:
Mayor McDuffie --Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs.
Gray --- Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve to extend the City Commission meeting
beyond 11:00 p.m., seconded by Mr. Jacquet. Upon roll call the Commission voted as
follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie
Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
M
04/03/12
9.H. OFFER OF SETTLEMENT IN VINCENT GRAY v. CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH AND RALPH PHILLIPS: Consider an Offer of Settlement in the
total amount of $175,000.00 in Gray v. City of Delray Beach and Ralph Phillips. Staff
recommends denial.
The City Attorney stated the plaintiff's attorney has offered to settle this
case for $175,000.00 and staff recommends denial.
Mr. Frankel moved to deny the Offer of Settlement in Vincent Gray v.
City of Delray Beach and Ralph Phillips, seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the
Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes;
Mayor MCDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.1. APPOINTMENT TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD:
Appoint one (1) regular member to the Public Art Advisory Board to serve an unexpired
term ending July 31, 2013. Based upon the rotation system, the appointment will be made
by Commissioner Jacquet (Seat #2).
Mr. Jacquet stated he would like to defer his appointment to the next
regular meeting of April 17, 2012,
99.I. APPOINTMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY
COUNCIL: Appoint one (1) regular member from Zone 2 to the Neighborhood
Advisory Council to serve an unexpired term ending July 31, 2014. Based on the rotation
system, the appointment will be made by Commissioner Gray (Seat 44).
Mrs. Gray moved to appoint Colson Zulmar (Zone 2) to the Neighborhood
Advisory Council as a regular member to serve an unexpired term ending July 31, 2014,
seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel
— Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney -- Yes; Mr. Jacquet Yes.
Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
9.K. APPOINTMENT TO THE CHARTER REVISION COMMITTEE:
Appoint the Chairperson to the Charter Revision Committee. The appointment will be
made by Mayor McDuffie (Seat #5).
Mayor McDuffie stated he would like to appoint Jay Alperin as the
Chairperson to the Charter Revision Committee. Mr. Carney so moved, seconded by Mr.
Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor
McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney --- Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes. Said motion
passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
At this point, the time being 11:02 p.m., the Commission moved to Item
12, First Readings.
41
04/03/12
12. FIRST READINGS:
12.A. ORDINANCE NO. 14 -12: Consider a Future Land Use Map amendment
(small - scale) from CMR (Commerce) to TRN (Transitional), rezoning from LI (Light
Industrial) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and text amendment to the General
Commercial Land Use Description for 10th & 101h Center, Iocated at the southeast corner
of S.W. 100' Street and S.W. 10t11 Avenue. If passed, a public hearing will be held on
April 17, 2012.
office.)
The caption of Ordinance No. 14 -12 is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
ADOPTING A SMALL -SCALE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF THE "COMMUNITY PLANNING
ACT ", FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 163.3187,
INCLUDING A SMALL -SCALE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP AMENDMENT FROM CMR (COMMERCE) TO
TRN (TRANSITIONAL) FOR LAND LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SW 10TH STREET
AND SW 10TH AVENUE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND AN ASSOCIATED TEXT
AMENDMENT MODIFYING THE DESCRIPTION OF
THE TRN (TRANSITIONAL) FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION PERTAINING TO SAID LAND; AND
REZONING AND PLACING SAID LAND PRESENTLY
ZONED LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO NC
(NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT;
AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012 "; PROVIDING A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(The official copy of Ordinance No. 14 -12 is on file in the City Clerk's
The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance.
Ron Hoggard, Principal Planner, stated the property is located as the
southeast corner of S.W. 10th Street and S.W. 10`h Avenue. The property is currently
undeveloped. Mr. Hoggard stated the property is 1 1/2 acres and is located within the
Wallace Drive industrial area and is subject to the Wallace Drive Redevelopment Plan
adopted by the City Commission in 2004. He stated that Plan recommended a Future
Land Use Map and rezoning for the property to Commerce (CMR) and from single
family R -1 -A zoning to Light Industrial (LI) zoning. Mr. Hoggard stated the requested
42
04/03/12
Future Land Use Map amendment from CMR (Commerce) to TRN (Transitional) and
rezoning from Light Industrial (LI) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) is to allow
development of a neighborhood commercial center at this location. Mr. Hoggard stated
the Wallace Drive Plan in 2004 which make additional industrial development
impractical; and that there has been an increase in residential development in the
immediate area specifically in the Villages of Delray area to the north that has resulted in
increased demand for neighborhood retail and services uses. Staff does agree that there
has been a change in industrial along with commercial and everything else because of the
economic downturn staff does not agree that the current economic conditions represent a
necessity to change its long -range Future Land Use provisions for the city. The City only
has 374 acres of land within the Industrial Land Use categories of IND (Industrial) and
CMR (Commerce) which represents 3.7% of the City's developable area. Staff also
reduced the amount of industrial land uses in 2006 when they created the MROC District
along the Congress Avenue Corridor. Staff's position is also supported by the Palm
Beach County Light Industrial Land Use Study "Whitepaper" and "Land Use Toolkit"
which recommends retention of industrial property in Palm Beach County. He stated in
terms of increase demand from the additional residential development in the area there
has been additional development north of 10'h and 445 additional residential multifamily
units have been approved and some of the units built within the area north of S.W. 10t'
Street, this area was zoned for multiple family development prior to adoption of the
Wallace Drive Redevelopment Plan in 2004. In terms of long -range planning, staff does
not feel it represents a change in circumstances. Mr. Hoggard stated the convenience
needs of the residents are being met by two convenient stores; the ABC mini mart and
another convenient store at the Sherwood Park plaza which is at the Valero Gas Station
on S.W. le Street and Congress Avenue. He stated the applicant's intent is to put a
dollar type store in this area. At one time, Mr. Hoggard stated that center had a Dollar
General Store but it has since been closed. Mr. Hoggard stated there is also major
shopping available on Linton Boulevard including Linton Square Plaza, Linton Center,
and The Plaza at Delray. He stated downtown Delray Beach is 1.7 miles away with a
wide variety of shopping. Staff feels that the changed conditions are not sufficient to
warrant approval of the proposed modification or the change in zoning and recommends
that the reduction is in direct conflict with Future Land Use Element A -1.3 which states
that such reductions should be discouraged. Mr. Hoggard stated since the proposed
FLUM Amendment and rezoning are not consistent with the recommendations in the
adopted Wallace Drive Plan they are also seeking an amendment to that Plan which
would come to the Commission at second reading of this ordinance.
At its meeting of March 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board had a
public hearing for the amendment and rezoning and the land use redevelopment plan
amendment. Staff provided their analysis and the applicant presented their justification.
Several members of the public spoke (some in favor and some against) and the Board
recommended approval with a 7 to 0 vote. Although the Board did recommend approval,
staff still recommends that the City deny the ordinance and retain the commerce
designation at this location.
43
04/03/12
Mrs. Gray stated this piece of property has been vacant for a very long
time and north of that is residential homes from that point to Linton Boulevard. Mr.
Hoggard stated the area to the north is residential but the area to the south is an industrial
area; Light Industrial (LI). Mr. Hoggard stated prior to the Wallace Drive Plan this was
zoned single family residential. Mr. Hoggard stated the County had a plan done in 2007
that was their "Whitepaper" and "Land Use Toolkit" and they looked at the entire County
for industrial development and felt that we needed to preserve light industrial
development in the County as a whole and that the municipalities need to adopt
regulations to do that and recommended some amendments to their Comp Plans. Mr.
Hoggard stated the City has that policy in our plan that states "conversion from the
commerce designation will be discouraged."
The City Manager stated this is a classic case of spot zoning.
Mr. Carney asked how light industrial is defined and what are the types of
industries would be allowed. Mr. Hoggard stated it allows a range of uses such as a
research and development, wholesaling, storage and distribution, manufacturing and
assembly, office and repair and limited retail if the item is constructed on the premises.
With regard to comments expressed by the City Commission, Mr. Jacquet
asked if he is referring to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Mr. Jacquet asked if the NC
is owned by one person and everything else is different owners. Mr. Hoggard stated this
is correct. The City Manager stated the same owner owns some other parts of that block.
Mr. Hoggard stated he has the parcels on the south end but not connecting.
Mayor McDuffie stated he does not feel that the little store across the
street does the job for the residential that is around there. He commented about the
redevelopment plan for Carver Estates. Mr. Hoggard stated he has a hard time believing
that somebody is going to do major shopping 1/2 miles away and feels it is going to be
mostly convenient store type items.
The City Attorney recommended that the Commission pass this ordinance
on first reading so that the Commission can get to the quasi-judicial hearing on second
reading.
Mr. Frankel moved to approve Ordinance No. 14 -12 on FIRST Reading,
seconded by Mr. Carney. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor
McDuffie — Yes; Mr. Carney — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray —
Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote.
13. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON- AGENDA ITEMS.
B.A. City Manager
The City Manager stated that he distributes a two page summary financial
report and the narrative section of the Police Department's report. He stated if staff is
44
04/03/12
giving the Commission too much then they can cut some things off or if there are other
departments the Commission would like to see reports from he can forward those to
them.
B.B. City Attorney
The City Attorney had no comments or inquiries on non - agenda items.
13.C. City Commission
B.C.1. Mr. Jacquet
Mr. Jacquet stated it is an honor and pleasure to serve this great city on
this Commission. He stated he was impressed from the meeting yesterday and likes the
way the Commission works together because he sees they have the same commitment
and passion for the city that he feels the people and he have.
13.C.2. Mr. Carney
Mr. Carney had no comments or inquiries on non - agenda items.
13.C.3. Mrs. Gray
Mrs. Gray wished everyone a Happy Easter and stated she will be
traveling to California to see her 1 year old granddaughter and asked everyone to pray for
her safe travel.
13.C.4. Mr. Frankel
Mr. Frankel wished everyone a Happy Passover.
Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated he went to the new restaurant 75 Main on
Atlantic Avenue. He stated the restaurant is beautiful; however, on the walls there are
several photos of naked females on the walls. Mr. Frankel stated he was informed by
Code Enforcement that they have on order a big statue of David. Mr. Frankel stated he
believes some people of the public may take offense to this.
13.C.5. Mayor McDufBe
Mayor McDuff e thanked everyone for attending the meeting.
There being no further business, Mayor McDuffie declared the meeting
adjourned at 11:23 p.m.
45
04/03/12
City Clerk
ATTEST:
4)�� Qt�-
MAYOR
The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the
information provided herein is the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting held
on April 3, 2012, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City
Commission on May 1, 2012.
City Clerk
NOTE TO READER:
If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they
are not the official Minutes of the City Commission. They will become the official
Minutes only after review and approval which may involve some amendments, additions
or deletions as set forth above.
46
04/03/12
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
1. This is are appeal of the February 22, 20112 decision by the Site Plan
Review and Appearance Board ( "SPRAB ") denying Class III Site Plan and Landscape
Plan associated with Delray Inn, Inc which came before the City Commission at its
meeting on April 3, 2012.
2. The Appellants, Appellee and City staff presented documentary evidence
and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the appeal of the denial of a Class
III Site Plan and Landscape Plan associated with Delray inn, Inc. Required findings are
made in accordance with Subsections I, 11, and Ill.
A. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(4)(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.
Has this requirement been met?
Yes f No
MINNIAw
.A. Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or
redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and
complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is
complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs,
Has this requirement been met?
Yes No J
City Commission Meeting on April 3, 2012; Item 9.A.
r ..
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16, "Landscape Regulations ", a landscape plan
shall improve the appearance of setback and yard areas in conjunction with the
development of commercial, industrial, and residential properties, including off - street
vehicular parking and open -lot sales and service areas in the City and protect and
preserve the appearance, character and value of the surrounding neighborhoods and
thereby promote the general welfare by providing minimum standards for the installation
and maintenance of landscaping.
Are the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.16 met?
Yes No V/
4. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the original site plan was submitted..
. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other
competent witnesses supporting these findings.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves
denies V the appeal, subject to the following conditions set forth in Exhibit "A' and
The City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 3rd day of April, 2012, . by a
vote of 5 in favor and 6 opposed.
ATTE�T:
Nelson S. McDU65,Wayor
evelle Nubia
City Clerk r�
CityLommission Meeting on April 3, 2012; Item 9.A.
SITE PLAN CONDITIONS
1. That three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted addressing all conditions
of approval and technical items contained in the staff report;
2. That the 2' r-o-w dedication along the east alley shall be executed by right -of -way
deed between the City of Delray Beach and the land owner, and must be
recorded at the Palm Beach County Clerk's office prior to site plan certification;
3. That all parking lots and parking spaces., shall be improved with a paved surface
meeting Engineering Department standards;
4. That the applicant will be responsible for the improvement of the alley along its
property line;
5. All equipment along the east side of the storage building (including the facilities
mounted on the building) shall be relocated;
6.. The storage building shall be improved to be architecturally consistent with the
balance of the site (standing seam roof, color scheme, and faux windows) at a
minimum;
7. haver black sidewalks shall be provided around the perimeter of the building as
noted on the architectural rendering. In addition paver block connections should
be provided to the sidewalk along NE 6th Avenue (southern connection at a
minimum);
8. Nate removal of existing curb cuts along NE 8th Avenue and replacement with
curbing;
9. That adequate back -up paving width be provided for parking. along NE 3rd Street;
19. That the wall height on the front be increased to a height of five and one -half
feet (5 % ft..) above the finished floor lime;
11. That the dumpster be relocated or repositioned in such a manner that is
agreeable with staff.
NOTE: These are the conditions according to the transcription made by Rebecca
Truxell, Secretary to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, blot have not yet
been approved in written form within the Minutes for that meeting.
City Commission Meeting on April 3, 2012; Item 9.A.
y
1. That three (3) copies of the revised landscape plan are submitted. addressing all technical
items contained in the staff report.
City Commission Meeting on April 3, 2012; Item 9.A.
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH; FLORIDA
ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO REESTABLISH A GAS STATION
USE WTH. FOOD SALES AT 14111 SOUTH MILITARY TRAIL
1. This conditional use request has :come before the City Commission on
.April 3, 2012. . The conditional use request is to reestablish a gas station use with food
sales at 14111 South Military Trail.
2. The City staff, applicant, and other persons have presented documentary
evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the conditional use
request of Valero Gas Station. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case.
Required findings are.made in Sections l and 11 below..
1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
A. 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 subject property has a Future Land Use Map designation of GC (General
Commercial), and a zoning designation of GC (General Commercial). The GC zoning is
consistent with the General Commercial FLUM designation. The primary use is that of
a "gasoline station ", which is listed as a Conditional Use in the GC district per LDR
Section 4.4.9(0.)(8).
Are the requirements of the Future Land Use Map met?
Yes V", No
B. Concurrency: Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall
be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate. of
Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established
within the Comprehensive Plan.
Are the concurrency requirements met with respect to water, sewer,
drainage, streets and traffic, parks, open space, solid waste and
schools?
Yes No
1
City Commission Meeting on April 3, 2012 Item 9.8.
C. Consistency: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter
3 and required findings in LDR Section 2.4.5(E) (5) for the. Conditional Use request shall
be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be.made. Other objectives.
and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding
of overall consistency.
Are the consistency requirements met such that the proposed
project is complementary to and compatible with adjacent land uses
and the beneficial aspects of the project outweigh the negative
impact of identified points of conflict?
Yes V No
D. Future Land Use Element Objective. A -1: Property shall be developed or
redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and
complies in terms of soil; topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; is
complimentary to adjacent. land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs.
The property will reestablish its primary use as a gas station with. food sales.
This will reinstate a use which has occupied the site for almost thirty years. The
approval m6ll be conditioned on rehabilitation of this property, including but:nat limited to,
landscape., signage, and driveway improvements. to assure compliance with City LDR
requirements.
Are the requirements of the Future Land Use Element Objective A -1
met?
Yes ✓ No
I.I. LDR REQUIREMENTS
A, Section _2. .5(E)(5) requires certain findings: The conditional use will
not:
1. Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the
neighborhood within which it will be located;
2. Hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties.
Will Section 2.4.5(E)(5) be met?
Yes No
2
City Commission Meeting on April 3, 2012 Item 9.B.
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR
requirements in existence at the time the conditional use application was submitted.
4. The. City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adapts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff reports and testimony of witnesses
supporting these findings.
5. used on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves V�
denies the conditional use application subject to the conditions provided in Exhibit
"A„ attached hereto and hereby adopts this Order this 3rd day of April; 2012, by a vote
of 5 in favor and 0 opposed.
Nelson S. McDu i ayor
4TTEST ° =
is u
.� :.,
Chevelle �Nu'bin
City Clerk
3
Conditions s to the
Request for Conditional Use for Valero Gas Statior
. That a site development plan be processed which shall include significant
landscape improvements including those noted in the attached landscape
technical comments (Appendix B) signa:ge in compliance with LDR Section 4.6.7,
and driveway modifibations as noted in the staff report,
Planning and Zoning Board - Staff Report of March 19, 2012
Conditional Use — Gasoline Station aka Valero)
Page 7
1) A landscape plan was not submitted. This plan shall be incorporated into the submittal.
The landscape plan shall show all existing vegetation and incorporate the below required
items (see no. 2). The landscape plan should be signed and sealed by a Registered
Landscape Architect (RLA).
2) A site visit was performed on February 17, 2012 and the following observations were noted:
a) The hedge facing Military Trail is in very poor condition and requires replacement with a
new hedge that is a minimum of 2' in overall height.
b) The south perimeter landscape buffer is missing a hedge and canopy trees. install a 2'
hedge within this buffer, adjacent to the existing vehicular use area. Canopy trees that
are 12' in height shall be installed at 30' on center. Use FPL approved species due to
the overhead lines.
c) The west perimeter landscape buffer, adjacent to the parking lot, requires 12' tall canopy
trees spaced at 30' on center.
d) All landscape islands shall contain at least one (1) 12' canopy tree. There are at least
three islands where canopy trees are missing
2912,
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
�► • I El
• ;� >« .
1. These waiver requests carne before the City Commission on April 3,
2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and
testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for Saxena White
Corporate Offices. -All. of the evidence is a part of the regard in this case. Required
findings are made in accordance with Subsection 1,
1. WAIVERS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the
approving body shall `make a finding that the granting of the waiver:
(a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area;
(b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities;
(c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and,
(d) does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that. the same
waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other
property for another applicant or owner.
A. Waiver fo Minimum Floor Height
Pursuant to Section 4.4.13 (F)(1)(b), a minimum of ten feet (19) distance
is required from the finished floor to the finished ceiling. The applicant
has proposed a floor to ceiling height of nine feet (9') for the roof deck
level above the third floor.
Should the waiver to reduce the minimum floor height from 10` to 'tae
granted?
Yes v' No
City Commission Meeting on Aril 3, 2012; Item 9.C.
B. Waiver to Stackin Distance Requirements
Pursuant. to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), a stacking distance of fifty .feet
(50') is required for parking lots of fifty -one (51) or more spaces. The
applicant has provided 8'11Y2" stacking along SE 15t Avenue and 13' -0
stacking along the adjacent alley to the east. Along both rights -of -way, 50'
of stacking is required for the proposed eighty -two (82) space parking lot,
The applicant has requested. that a waiver be granted to this requirement.
Should the waiver to reduce the stacking distance be granted?
Yes -%,/ No
C. Waiver to Ground Level Setback and Frontage Requirements
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(c)(1), a minimum. of 70% and a
maximum 90% of the building frontage shall be set back no .greater than
term feet (10') from the property line for buildings up to twenty-five (25') in
height. The remaining length of the building shall be setback a minimum
of fifteen feet (15'). The applicant has requested a waiver to allow the
renew structure to exceed the ten foot (10') maximum setback from the
property Tine along S.E. 1t Avenue for fifty percent (50 %) of the frontage.
Should the waiver to increase the maximum ground level setback and
frontage requirements be granted?
Yes V, No
D. Waiver to Upper Level Floor Area and Frontage Requirements
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13 (F)(4)(c)(2), the minimum floor area for
each floor contained within the portion of the structure that is 25' to 48' in
height shall not exceed seventy percent (70 %) of the floor area contained
within the allowable ground level footprint. The 3`d level and roof level fall
within this height range. Seventy -six percent (76 %) is proposed, whereas
seventy percent (70 %p) is the maximum. There is also a minimum setback
requirement of fifteen feet (15') for seventy percent (70 %) of the building
frontage between 25' and 48'. The applicant has requested a waiver to
these setback and floor area requirements.
Should the waiver to increase the upper level floor area and frontage
requirements be granted?
Yes V_/ No
2
City Commission Meeting on Aril 3, 2012; Item 9.C.
3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LIDR
requirements in existence at the time the original development application was
submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
&. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial
evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adepts the facts contained
in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other
competent witnesses supporting these findings.
Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves V
denies the waiver requests.
6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adapts
this Order this 3rd day of April, 2612, by a vote of 5 in favor and D opposed.
ATTEST: ��_ Nelson S. McDu e ayor
hevelle iubin-, ity Clerk
I
3
City Commission Meeting on Aril 3, 2012; Item 9.C.
MEMORANDUM
'A Z
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
DATE: March 22, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.10 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF RULES OF PROCEDURE — DELRAY BEACH CITY
COMMISSION (LOCAL RULES)
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Attached for your review are the Rules of Procedure for the City Commission for consideration at the
Organizational Meeting on March 28, 2013.
BACKGROUND
These rules were adopted by City Commission on March 5, 2013.
The action requested is formal adoption of the Rules of Procedure (Local Rules) for the ensuing year,
with any modifications the Commission may deem necessary or appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval and adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the City Commission.
EITY OF DELRAY BEREH
DELRAY BEACH
CITY CLERK 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE • DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 5611243 -7000
All-America City
I I
199-3 RULES OF PROCEDURE - DELRAY BEACH CITY COMMISSION
2001
L GENERAL PARLIAMENTARY RULES.
The general parliamentary procedure to be followed by the City Commission of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, except as otherwise modified by the City Commission or as modified
or amended herein, shall be in accordance with the rules of parliamentary procedures
entitled "Robert's Rules of Order ", being the reprint of the 1907 edition.
II. LOCAL RULES.
A. The following Local Rules of Procedure shall be applicable to the organization and
conduct of business, as well as preparation and publication of agendas, of the City
Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. To the extent these Local Rules shall
modify or conflict with the standard "Robert's Rules of Order" as adopted above, these
Local Rules shall prevail to the extent of their conflict or inconsistency with "Robert's
Rules of Order ". In addition to these local rules, rules for quasi judicial proceedings
shall apply to proceedings which require quasi judicial hearings.
L Regular meetings of the City Commission shall be held on the first and third
Tuesdays of each month, with the exception of the month of December and any
Delray Beach municipal election dates, at 6:00 p.m., in City Hall. During the month
of December only, the regular City Commission meetings shall occur on the first and
second Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. There shall be no regular City
Commission meeting on the date of a Delray Beach municipal election. A meeting
that would otherwise have been scheduled for such date shall be held on the
Thursday immediately following the election at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.
2. Workshop meetings of the City Commission shall be held on the second Tuesday of
each month at 6:00 p.m. in City Hall, except that there shall be no workshops in the
month of December.
3. All regular City Commission meetings shall be held in the City Commission
Chambers at City Hall, unless otherwise designated by the City Commission. All
workshop City Commission meetings will be held in either the First Floor
Conference Room or the Commission Chambers at City Hall, as determined by the
City Manager.
SERVICE • PERFORMANCE • INTEGRITY • RESPONSIBLE • INNOVATIVE - TEAMWORK
All meetings of the City Commission shall end by 11:00 p.m. unless extended
beyond 11:00 p.m. by a majority vote of the City Commission. Thereafter, the
meeting shall end upon the conclusion of each hour (12:00, 1:00, etc.), unless
extended by a majority vote of the City Commission for each hour. Any unfinished
business shall be considered at a time and place set by the City Corm - nission.
4. There may also be special workshop meetings at such other times as so designated in
advance by the City Commission for the purposes of holding joint meetings with
City boards, etc., to include receiving annual reports and presentations from the
City's boards, committees, agencies and authorities, or for such other purposes as
may be deemed necessary or desirable by the City Commission.
5. Special meetings shall be called at the request of the Mayor in accordance with the
provisions of the City Charter and the Code of Ordinances.
6. To the extent compatible with the conduct of business, all workshop meetings shall
be held on an informal basis. The applicability of the City's general rules shall not be
strictly applied. Public comments after presentations will be limited to three (3)
minutes at the Mayor's discretion or by consensus of the City Commission.
Presentations made at workshop meetings shall be limited to fifteen (15) minutes,
unless the Commission, by consensus, agrees to extend the time.
7. Although appropriate members of the City Attorney's Office and City
Administration may place items on either the workshop or the regular agendas, all
regular agendas shall be subject to review in advance by the Mayor prior to their
publication, except that a majority of the members of the City Commission may
request that the City Manager's office place or remove an item on such regular
agendas, and that all such regular agendas shall be further subject to the approval of
the City Commission preceding the conduct of business at each such meeting.
If the Commission or any of its members wish to place or remove an item on an
agenda, or if any member of the Commission has a question or concern about an
item, any such request or inquiry shall be directed to the City Manager's office for
disposition as opposed to any Commission member contacting any City officer or
employee who is subject to the direction and supervision of the City Manager.
S. With regard to the agenda for regular City Commission meetings, the following shall
apply:
a. To the extent possible, the City Administration shall group all matters by subject
area, and shall place as many as possible on the consent portion of the agenda.
b. The agenda format shall be generally as follows: A call to order, invocation,
pledge of allegiance, formal approval of minutes, proclamations and
presentations, if any, public comments and inquiries from the floor, formal
approval of the agenda, the consent agenda, the regular agenda, public hearings,
first readings of ordinances, followed by items not specifically on the published
agenda from the City Manager, the City Attorney, and members of the City
Commission. The public comment and inquiry portion shall not extend beyond
7:00 p.m. and in the event there are persons who have not been able to voice
their comments prior to 7:00, the public comment portion shall resume after the
public hearing segment of the agenda. The public hearing segment of the agenda
shall be duly advertised for and shall commence at 7:00 p.m. or as soon
thereafter as possible.
c. Any items received during the public comment portion of the regular agenda
may, at the discretion of the Commission, be discussed by the City Commission
at the time of such presentation, may be directed by the Commission to the City
Manager for action or resolution, or may be added to a subsequent workshop
agenda if a member of the City Commission so specifically requests.
d. (1) Votes taken on ordinances, resolutions and motions shall be by roll call and
shall be recorded by the City Clerk. The roll call shall be on a rotating basis and
according to the numbered Commission seats, i.e.:
Motion A — Order of rotation: Seat 1, Seat 2, Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 5
Motion B — Order of rotation: Seat 2, Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 5, Seat 1
Motion C — Order of rotation: Seat 31 Seat 4, Seat 5, Seat 1, Seat 2, etc.
(2) There shall be no votes taken on any non - published /non - agendaed items,
except upon the declaration of an emergency. The declaration of emergency
shall only be determined upon the affirmative vote of no less than four (4)
members, or a unanimous vote if only three (3) City Commission members
are present and voting on such motion. These rules are not intended to and
shall not supersede the procedures and requirements of the City Charter,
Code of Ordinances or State Statute with regard to emergency matters for
consideration by the City Commission.
e. All public comment on agendaed or non- agendaed items shall be limited to not
more than three (3) minutes, in total, per person, subject to an extension of such
time upon the formal approval by a majority vote of the City Commission
members present and voting on such request for extension of time. Public
comment on quasi- judicial items and items that have been set for a formal public
hearing shall only be allowed when those. items are specifically heard by the
Commission.
f. The Mayor shall have the authority to limit immaterial, unnecessary or redundant
presentations or requests.
III. CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE, COMMISSION AND AGENDA
APPOINTMENTS.
A. All appointments to city boards, commissions and committees whose members are not
subject to appointment by other entities, and in accordance with any applicable
restrictions by State Statute, shall be made in accordance with the following procedures:
I. All vacancies subject to appointment to such city boards, commissions and
committees shall be made on a nomination basis by each of the members of the City
Commission. This nomination shall be construed to be a Motion to Appoint, which
must be seconded by another member of the City Commission then present and
voting, and then adopted by an affirmative vote of no less than three (3) votes. A
Commissioner may defer an appointment to the next regular meeting. If a
Commissioner is not ready to make an appointment at the next regular meeting then
the nomination shall rotate to the next appropriate Commissioner.
If a Commissioner makes a nomination /motion and this motion either fails for lack
of a second or does not receive a sufficient number of affirmative votes, then that
Commissioner shall have one additional opportunity to make a secondary
nomination. for this vacancy at this same ineeting or the next successive regular
meeting. If that appointment should also fail for lack of a second to the nomination
or by not receiving sufficient affirmative votes, then the nomination shall rotate to
the next appropriate Commissioner.
2. The rotation system shall be by numbered Commission seat and insofar as possible,
each Commission seat shall be assigned an equal number of initial appointments
from the date of adoption of these rules, i.e.:
Board A — Order of Rotation: Seat 1, Seat 2, Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 5
Board B Order of Rotation: Seat 2, Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 5, Seat I
Board C — Order of Rotation: Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 5, Seat 1, Seat 2
3. A separate rotation list shall be established by the City Clerk's office for each such
City board, commission or committee, and the City Clerk's office shall maintain
records of the rotation list, the status of same, and the nominations made by each
Commissioner. In the instance where a vacancy is available at a City Commission
meeting where the Commissioner who is next on the rotation is absent, then the City
Commission shall postpone this appointment to the next regular meeting. Should
this Commissioner not be present at the subsequent meeting, then the nomination
ability shall pass to the next Commissioner on the rotation system present at that
meeting.
4. In the event that an individual, duly nominated and appointed to a board,
commission or committee by a Commissioner at a City Commission meeting, is
unable to accept or declines the appointment, for whatever reason, then the
Commissioner who appointed the individual unable to serve shall have the
opportunity to nominate a replacement appointee to fill the vacancy before the
nomination ability passes to the next Commissioner on the rotation system.
Such replacement appointment shall be made no later than the second regular
meeting subsequent to the meeting at which the declined appointment was made. If
the replacement appointment is not made within this time frame, then the
nomination ability shall pass to the next Commissioner on the rotation system.
5. Appointments for vacancies occurring on a board wherein the particular member
has, for whatever reason, not fulfilled their entire term of membership on that
particular board, commission or committee, shall be to complete the unexpired term
only.
6. The City Commission retains the right to waive these requirements by the affirmative
vote of no less than four (4) members of the City Commission under circumstances
that would be in the best interest of the City (or a unanimous vote if only three
members of the City Commission are present and voting on such motion).
7. These rules, when adopted, shall supersede any other general rules or local rules
which are inconsistent herewith, to the extent of such inconsistency.
IV. CITY MANAGER /CITY ATTORNEY ANNUAL REVIEW.
The City Commission shall annually, in the month of May, conduct a performance
evaluation and salary review of the City Manager and City Attorney.
Approved and adopted by the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, at the Regular
Meeting held on March 5, 2013.
ATTEST:
Chevelle D. Nubin, MMC
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
THROUGH: Douglas E. Smith, Interim City Manager
DATE: March 22, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.11- ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF PROCEDURES FOR QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Attached for your review are the Procedures for Quasi- Judicial Hearings for the City Commission as
they are proposed for consideration at the Organizational Meeting on March 28, 2013.
BACKGROUND
These procedures were adopted by City Commission on July 5, 2012.
The action requested is formal adoption of the Procedures for Quasi- Judicial Hearings for the ensuing
year, with any modifications the Commission may deem necessary or appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval and adoption of the Procedures for Quasi- Judicial Hearings.
EITY OF DELRAY BEREH
DELRAYBEACH CITY CLERK
V1�. s . ?kVF�i..1E o
All- America
f City
1 I
City of Delray Beach Procedures for Quasi - Judicial Hearings
1993
2001
1. Definitions;
A. Applicant - the owner of record or his or her authorized agent
B. Citizen Participants - those members of the general public, other than
the City, the Applicant, or other Party to the proceeding, who attend a
quasi- judicial public hearing for the purpose of being heard on a particular
application.
C. Ex Parte - communications, oral or written, between members serving on
the board or commission and the public, other than those made on the
record at the hearing,
D. Party - the owner of property located within 500 feet of the property that is
the subject of the application and who meets the additional requirements
set forth in Section 3.13 below.
E. Quasi- Judicial Proceedings — proceedings where existing policies and
regulations are applied to a specific property. Examples are site specific
rezonings, conditional use approvals, site plan approvals, waivers and
variances, plat approvals, certificates of appropriateness, historic
designations, but not land use amendments or amendments to the
comprehensive plan and not generally, amendments to the Land
Development Regulations.
F. Relevant Evidence — evidence that either strengthens or weakens the
application by supporting or disapproving factual assertions related to the
application.
2. General Procedures for City Commission Consent Items.
A. Consent Agenda Items. Applications before the City Commission for plat
approval, variances, or waivers may be placed on the consent agenda, if
the Applicant signs a statement that the Applicant concurs with the Staff
recommendation.
B. Removal from Consent Agenda. The Applicant, the Mayor, any
Commissioner, or any member of the public may request that an
SERVICE - PERFORMANCE - INTEGRITY - RESPONSIBLE - INNOVATIVE ' TEAMWORK
application for approval of a plat, waiver, or variance be removed from the
City Commission consent agenda. If removed, the application will be
placed on the next regular City Commission meeting for a quasi-judicial
hearing, or if the Applicant consents, the hearing may take place at the
meeting the application was removed from the consent agenda.
3. General Processing for Hearings.
A. File/Inspection.
(1) Establishing the File. The Planning and Zoning Department shall
establish a project file. All written communications shall be sent to
the Planning and Zoning Department. The project file will be
maintained in the Planning and Zoning Department.
(2) Contents of the File. The project file will contain all written
communications that are sent to the Planning and Zoning
Department prior to the hearing. The project file will include, but not
be limited to, all Staff reports, pertinent sections of the Land
Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. The file will
contain curricula vitae, drawings, documents and all other pertinent
documents.
(3) Index. The Planning and Zoning Department staff will provide the
City Clerk or Board clerk with an index to the project file at the
Hearing.
(4) Supplementation of the File. The City Clerk or Board clerk will
supplement the project file with all documents submitted at the
hearing.
(5) File for Inspection. The project file will be made available upon
request for public inspection.
(6) File Placed into the Record. The Planning and Zoning Staff
member making the presentation shall place the project file into the
record at the hearing.
B. Party Status
(1) Party Status - Written Requests; Timeframe. In order to obtain
status as a Party, the owner of property located within 500 feet of
the subject property must make a written request, meeting the
requirements of 3B(2) below, which is received by the Planning and
Zoning Department three or more business days prior to the
hearing.
(2) Contents of Request. The written request shall outline the effect
of the application on the owner's property. To obtain Party status,
the owner must describe the effect of the application on owner's
property that is different from the effect on the public as a whole.
The City Attorney's Office will advise as to whether sufficient facts
2
have been alleged to achieve Party status and shall notify the
person requesting Party status of the City Attorney's opinion as to
the adequacy of the request. Ultimate decisions as to Party status
shall be made by the City Commission or the Board. The decision
to confer Party status at the hearing before the City Commission or
a Board shall not be seen as a waiver of the City's right to contest
the standing of any Party in court.
C. Time Limits
(1) Staff Time Limits. The City Staff shall have up to 20 minutes
(including the presentation of witnesses and expert witnesses) to
present the City's case.
(2) Applicant Time Limits. The Applicant shall have up to 20 minutes
(including the presentation of witnesses and expert witnesses) to
present the Applicant's case.
(3) Party Time Limits. A Party may have up to 20 minutes (including
the presentation of witnesses and expert witnesses).
(4) Citizen Participants in General. Citizen participants not
represented by a representative speaker shall have three (3)
minutes to speak.
(5) Participants with a Representative. Speakers representing a
group of six (6) or more interested citizens in attendance at the
meeting shall have six (6) minutes to speak, as long as those being
represented identify themselves and yield their time to the
representative at the meeting.
(6) Representing an Organization. Speakers representing an
organization that is comprised of interested citizens shall have six
(6) minutes to speak.
(7) Extension of Time by the Commission or Board. The
Commission or the Board may, at their discretion, extend the time
for presentations.
4. Conduct of the Hearing.
A. Swearing in of Witnesses. All Witnesses, Parties, the Applicant, Citizen
Participants and their representatives and City Staff who plan to speak at
the hearing shall collectively be sworn at the beginning of the hearing by
the City Clerk, the City Clerk's designee, of the Board clerk, or the Board
Chairperson, Vice- Chair, or Second Vice- Chair.
B. Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications. The Commission or Board
shall disclose any ex parte communications and disclose whether any
member physically inspected the property. To the extent possible, the
Commissioner or Board member shall identify with whom the
communication took place, summarize the substance of the
communication, and the date of the site visit, if any. The Commissioners
or Board members shall give the City Clerk, his or her designee, or Board
clerk, any written ex parte communications they have received that are not
already included in the project file.
C. Presentation of the Case.
1. The City Staff shall present its case.
2. The Applicant shall present its case.
3. Parties may present their case.
4. Citizen participants or their representatives may speak for or
against the application.
5. The opportunity to cross - examination will occur after the
presentation of a witness, and the manner and the conduct of
cross - examination shall be as provided in these rules.
6. The City Staff, the Applicant, and Parties may have two minutes
each for rebuttal.
7. The Commission or Board may ask questions at any time during
the proceeding.
8. The Commission or Board will commence deliberations and render
a decision.
D. Basis of Decision. All decisions shall be based on the evidence
presented at the hearing on the case, which shall include the agenda
materials, minutes, the entire project file, testimony presented, and other
evidence presented. Strict rules of evidence shall not apply, but evidence
must be relevant to the issues before the Commission or the Board.
5. Cross - examination.
A. Persons to be Cross - Examined. The City Staff, the Applicant, Parties,
their respective witnesses and Citizen Participants are subject to cross -
examination as set forth herein.
B. Cross - Examination Guidelines.
1. Citizen Participants are subject to cross - examination by the Mayor
or Board Chair only. In the event of an absence of the Mayor or
Board Chair, the term Mayor or Board Chair shall be deemed to
include the person authorized to run the meeting in their absence.
If the Staff, the Applicant, or Parties desire to have the Mayor or
Board Chair cross examine a Citizen Participant, they shall,
whenever possible, present written cross- examination questions to
the Mayor or Board Chair prior to the commencement of the cross -
examination. The Mayor or Board Chair shall first ask the cross-
4
examination questions submitted by Staff, then the Applicant, and
finally the Parties based on who submitted a request and became a
Party first. The Staff, Applicant, and any Parties' cross - examination
through the Mayor or Board Chair is limited to two (2) minutes per
Citizen Participant.
2. Only the City Staff, the Applicant, or a Party may cross - examine
non- Citizen Participant witnesses.
3. Cross - examination by City Staff, the Applicant, or a Party shall be
limited to two (2) minutes per witness each.
4. The Commission or Board is not limited to two (2) minutes and may
ask questions of anyone who testifies at any time during the
proceedings.
C. Relevancy. All relevant evidence shall be accepted.
D. Scope. The scope of the cross - examination shall be limited to the facts
alleged by the person testifying in relation to the application.
E. Good Faith Questions. The cross- examination shall not be designed to
merely harass, intimidate, or embarrass the person testifying.
F. Power to Halt Cross Examination. The Mayor or Board Chair shall
determine whether the question and evidence is relevant and the proper
scope of cross- examination. In the absence of the Mayor or Board Chair,
the term Mayor or Board Chair shall be deemed to include the person
authorized to run the meeting in their absence. The Mayor or Board Chair
may defer to the City Attorney (or Assistant City Attorney) to determine the
relevancy of the question and the evidence and the proper scope of the
cross - examination. The person conducting the cross- examination may be
stopped from pursuing a line of questioning, if the questioning is on an
issue that is not relevant, the scope of proper cross examination is
exceeded, or the cross- examination is conducted in a manner that is
designed to harass, intimidate, or embarrass the person being cross -
examined. If a person conducting the cross- examination continues to
pursue improper lines of questioning, the Mayor or Board Chair may halt
the cross- examination.
6. Applicability.
These rules only apply to proceedings and hearings that are quasi - judicial in
nature. These rules are applicable to the City Commission and any Board that
does not have specific rules for the conduct of quasi-judicial proceedings.
Approved and adopted by the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, at
the Regular Meeting held on July 5, 2012.
ATTEST:
Chevelle D. Nubin, MMC
City Clerk
Ref151Agenda 20121Quasi- Judicial Rules
MEMORANDUM
'A z
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk
THROUGH: Douglas E. Smith, Interim City Manager
DATE: March 22, 2013
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM OM.12 - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2013
REVIEW OF CITY COMMISSION LIAISON APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS
ADVISORY BOARDS AND OUTSIDE AGENCIES
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before the Commission is a review of City Commission liaison assignments to various
Advisory Boards and outside agencies for any changes, deletions or additions that the Commission may
direct.
BACKGROUND
A list of City Commission liaison assignments from 2012 is attached (including updated information
where applicable).
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend Commission make any desired changes, deletions or additions to the liaison assignments.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
THRU: Douglas E. Smith, Interim City Manager
FROM: Chevelle D. Nubin, MMC, City Clerk
SUBJECT: CITY COMMISSION LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS
DATE: March 28, 2013
Below is the list of City Commission Liaison assignments as amended at the January 15, 2013 Regular
Commission Meeting plus some additional changes to League of Cities appointments and other revisions.
BOARD I LIAISON
Community Redevelopment Agency
2nd & 4`h Thursdays at 5:30 p.m.
Commission Chambers
Community Land Trust
3rd Thursday at 6:00 p.m.
Old School Square Library
Delray Beach Public Library
3' Wednesday at 5:30 p.m.
2nd Floor Conference Room, Library
Delray Beach Public Schools
Mayor Carney
Primary Member
Commissioner Jacquet
Alternate Member
Commissioner Morrison
Commissioner Jacquet
City Commissioners adopt a Delray Beach Public School and serve as a liaison to that School's
Advisory Committee. The Schools are:
Banyan Creek Elementary School
Spady Elementary School
Plumosa Elementary School
Commissioner Frankel
Commissioner Morrison
Commissioner Jacquet
Pine Grove Elementary School Commissioner Gray
Page 2
Orchard View Elementary School
Village Academy
Carver Middle School
Atlantic High School
Downtown Development Authority
2nd Monday at 12:00 Noon
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Mayor Carney
Commissioner Morrison
Commissioner Jacquet
Commissioner Jacquet
Commissioner Frankel
Primary Member
Commissioner Morrison
Alternate
Delrav Beach Marketing Cooperative Board of Directors
Commissioner Morrison
4d' Thursday at 8:30 a.m. Primary Member
Chamber of Commerce Commissioner Gray
Alternate Member
Drug Task Force Commissioner Morrison
3rd Friday at 8:30 a.m. Primary Member
Commissioner Jacquet
Alternate
Education Board Commissioner Jacquet
1s' Monday at 5:30 p.m. Primary Member
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall Commissioner Morrison
Alternate Member
General Employees Retirement
Committee
Meets once every quarter
Historic Preservation Board Commissioner Frankel
1s' and 3rd Wednesdays at 6:00 p.m.
Commission Chambers
Parking Management Advisory Board Mayor Carney
4' Tuesday at 5:30 p.m.
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Police & Fire Board of Trustees Commissioner Frankel
3' Wednesday of designated months Douglas E. Smith
at 1:00 p.m. in Training Room at Fire HQ Interim City Manager
C:AProgram Files \neevio.com \docConverterPro \temp \NVDC \EA03EC05 -4BA9- 4927 -B823-
0373E502E9 CC \PDFConvert.17241.1. CITY _COMNIISSION_ LIAISON _ ASSIGNMENTS_ 2013 - 2014[1]. doc
Page 3
Public Art Advisory Board Commissioner Frankel
4d' Monday at 6:00 p.m.
Delray Beach Community Center
50 N.W. I" Avenue
Sister Cities Committee Commissioner Morrison
I" Thursday at 4:45 p.m.
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
OTHER CITY ADVISORY BOARDS:
Board of Adjustment
1st and 3rd Thursday as needed at 5:30 p.m.
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
Civil Service Board
Meets as needed
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
Code Enforcement Board
2nd Tuesday at 1:30 p.m.
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
Delray Beach Housing Authority
3rd Thursday at 8:45 a.m.
Environmental Services Department
434 South Swinton Avenue
Financial Review Board
2nd and 4d' Wednesday at 8:15 a.m.
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Green Implementation Advancement Board
4d' Thursday of each month at 9:00 a.m.
Environmental Services Department
434 South Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach
Kids and Cons
1s' Wednesday at 6:00 p.m.
Police Department
300 West Atlantic Avenue, Delray Beach
Neighborhood Advisory Council
3rd Monday at 5:30 p.m.
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Nuisance Abatement Board
1s' and 3rd Monday as needed at 3:30 p.m.
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
C:AProgram Files \neevio.com \docConverterPro \temp \NVDC \EA03EC05 -4BA9- 4927 -B823-
0373E502E9 CC \PDFConvert.17241.1. CITY _COMNIISSION_ LIAISON _ ASSIGNMENTS_ 2013 - 2014[1]. doc
Planning & Zoning Board
3rd Monday at 6:00 p.m.
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
Police Advisory Board
Meets quarterly on the 2nd Monday of the month at 5:30 p.m.
First Floor Conference Room, City Hall
Public Employees Relations Commission
Meets as needed
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
Site Plan Review and Appearance Board
2nd and 4d' Wednesday at 6:00 p.m.
City Commission Chambers, City Hall
OUTSIDE AGENCY APPOINTMENTS
Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc.
Governmental Center
301 North Olive Avenue
West Palm Beach 33402
Contact: Richard Radcliffe, Exec. Director
(561) 355 -4484
Page 4
Commissioner Gray
Board of Directors
Co -Chair Education Committee
The Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc. was chartered in 1969 as a non - profit corporation.
The purpose of the Palm Beach County League of Cities is to promote and advance the collective
interest of the municipalities of Palm Beach County; to study municipal issues and seek desired
results through cooperative efforts; to respect the principles of Home Rule; and to encourage and
enhance the quality of life of citizens of Palm Beach County.
The General Membership meets once per month (normally the 4d' Wednesday) at 11:30 a.m. at
different host cities around the county. The Board of Directors meets once per month (normally
the 4`'' Wednesday) at 10:00 a.m., at various locations in Palm Beach County.
Florida League of Cities, Inc.
301 S. Bronough Street, Suite 300 (32301)
Post Office Box 1757
Tallahassee, Florida 32302 -1757
Contact: Scott Dudley, Sr. Legislative Advocate
(850) 222 -9684
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Of Palm Beach County
160 Australian Avenue, Suite 201
P. O. Box 21229
West Palm Beach 33416
Contact: (561) 684 -4170
Mayor Carney
Primary Member
Commissioner Jacquet
Alternate Member
C:AProgram Files \neevio.com \docConverterPro \temp \NVDC \EA03EC05 -4BA9- 4927 -B823-
0373E502E9 CC \PDFConvert.17241.1. CITY _COMNIISSION_ LIAISON _ ASSIGNMENTS_ 2013 - 2014[1]. doc
Page S
or Paul Dorling (City staff)
(561) 243 -7040
The Metropolitan Planning Organization of Palm Beach County was created pursuant to Chapter
339.175 of the Florida Statutes. Their objectives are to encourage and promote the safe and
efficient management, operation and development of surface transportation systems that will serve
the mobility needs of people and freight within, and through, urbanized areas of Palm Beach County
while minimizing transportation related fuel consumption and air pollution. The MPO is charged
with the development of short -range (5 year) and long -range (20 year) transportation plans and
programs.
MPO Board (elected officials) meets on the 3' Thursday of the month at 9:00 a.m., 12ffi floor
Conference room at the Governmental Center, 301 North Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida.
Technical Advisory Committee JAC, staff subcommittee) meets on the 1s` Wednesday of the
month at 9:00 a.m. at 2300 North Jog Road in the 4`h floor Conference Room, #4E -12, West Palm
Beach.
Liaison to State Representatives
Bobby Powell, District 88 Commissioner Jacquet
Bill Hager, District 89 Commissioner Frankel
Liaison to State Senators
Maria Lorts Sachs, District 34 Commissioner Morrison
Commissioner Gray
Commissioner Frankel
Liaison to United States Representatives
Lois Frankel, District 22 Commissioner Frankel
Commissioner Morrison
Commissioner Gray
Intergovernmental Coordination Issues Commissioner Frankel
Forum
Primary Member
Lantana Council Chambers
500 Greynolds Circle
Lantana, 33405
Contact: Ana Yeskey
Commissioner Gray
9835 -16 Lake Worth Road, Suite 223
Alternate Member
Lake Worth 33467
Paul Dorling
(561) 434 -2575
City Staff Member
The Intergovernmental Coordination Issues Forum reviews and makes recommendations on issues
of multi-jurisdictional significance, such as school concurrency, county wide fire rescue services, and
countywide library services. The intent is to have municipalities work together on issues of
countywide concern or impact and to assist in the resolution of any disputes which may arise
between local governments. The Issues Forum meets on a quarterly basis. Meeting dates are to be
determined.
C:AProgram Files \neevio.com \docConverterPro \temp \NVDC \EA03EC05 -4BA9- 4927 -B823-
0373E502E9 CC \PDFConvert.17241.1. CITY _COMNIISSION_ LIAISON _ ASSIGNMENTS_ 2013 - 2014[1]. doc
Page 6
The Executive Committee meeting at 9:30 a.m., Issues Forum at 10:30 a.m. and IPARC at 2:30 p.m.
in the Lantana Council Chambers.
C:AProgram Files \neevio.com \docConverterPro \temp \NVDC \EA03EC05 -4BA9- 4927 -B823-
0373E502E9 CC \PDFConvert.17241.1. CITY _COMNIISSION_ LIAISON _ ASSIGNMENTS_ 2013 - 2014[1]. doc