11-15-94 Regular
I
DElRA ~ BEACH
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ~
All-America City
NOVEMBER 15.1994 - 6:00 P.M./PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. '11'1'
COMMISSION CHAMBERS ,
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 activi-
ty conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Randolph at 243-7127
(voice), or 243-7199 (TDD), 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.
RULES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: The public is encouraged to offer comments with the
order of presentation being as follows: City Staff, public comments,
Commission discussion and official action. City Commission meetings are
business meetings and the right to limit discussion rests with the
Commission. Generally, remarks by an individual will be limited to three
minutes or less, (10 minutes for group presentations). The Mayor or
presiding officer has discretion to adjust the amount of time allocated.
A. Public Hearings: Any citizen is entitled to speak on items
under this section.
B. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the Public: Any
ci tizen is entitled to be heard concerning any matter wi thin the
scope of jurisdiction of the Commission under this section. The
Commission may withhold comment or direct the City Manager to take
action on requests or comments.
C. Regular Agenda and First Reading Items: When extraordinary
circumstances or reasons exist and at the discretion of the
Commission, citizens may speak on any official agenda item under
these sections.
2. SIGN IN SHEET: Prior to the start of the Commission Meet ing,
individuals wishing to address public hearing or non-agendaed items
should sign in on the sheet located on the right side of the dais. If
you are not able to do so prior to the start of the meeting, you may
still address the Commission on an appropriate item. The primary purpose
of the sign-in sheet is to assist staff with record keeping. Therefore,
when you come up to the podium to speak, please complete the sign- in
sheet if you have not already done so.
3. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION: At the appropriate time, please step up
to the podium and state your name and address for the record. All
comments must be addressed to the Commission as a body and not to
individuals. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who
becomes boisterous while addressing the Commission shall be barred by ~he
)residing officer from speaking further to the Commission unless
Jermission to continue or again address the Commission is granted by
majority vote of the Commis$ion member present.
.
. ,
APPELLATE PROCEDURES
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by
the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at this meeting
or hearing, such persons will need a record of these proceedings, and for
this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of
the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is to be based. The City will neither provide nor
prepare such record.
AGENDA
1. Roll Call.
2. Invocation.
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
4. Agenda Approval. l.)oT'E. A-DOti\OU,fY1 : ~()O ff.P. ;.. q .::t:. .
Action: Motion to Approve. ern - 'RE.move... ~.o.3.
- e~0~SE.- 10.8. wI /o.c, .
.15. Approval of Minutes: CA - ~dd. +~em"(),*,o(l alAU..S e. -to 8'. (!. .
Regular Meeting of November 1, 1994
Special Meeting of November 8, 1994
.16. Proclamations:
A. National Bible Week - November 20 to 27, 1994
./7. Presentations:
A. Resolution No. 92-94: A resolution recognizing and commending
Ruth J. Swanson for over 13 years of dedicated service to the
City of Delray Beach.
8. Consent Agenda: City Manager recommends approval.
.IA. FINAL PLAT/OWENS COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION: Approve the final
plat for Owens Commercial Subdivision, a proposed three lot
subdivision, subject to conditions. The subject property is
located on the north side of West Atlantic Avenue, between N.W.
18th Avenue and the CSX Railroad.
JB. PROPOSED SCHOOL BOUNDARY CHANGES: Approve the proposed school
boundary changes reviewed on November 8, 1994, and forward same
as a recommendation to the School Board and their multi-racial
citizens committee.
jC. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF BOCA/
DELRAY: Approve agreement between the City and Habitat for
Humani ty of Boca Raton/Delray to build ten (10 ) homes on lots
provided by the City for low-income families by September 30,
1996. As ~mtn~ by Addi09 hem In l1"r1on C I W-6 E.-.
-2-
D./ SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT/SALAH A. SAWAYA: Approve a
Completion of Subdivision Improvements Agreement between the
City and Salah A. Sawaya, for proposed improvements which
include the extension of a sanitary sewer line to service a
single family residence at 615 North Ocean Boulevard.
vE. ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT DEED: Accept an easement deed to allow
for City maintenance of an existing pipe which currently qrains
N. W. 13th Street and outfalls into Lake Ida, involving the
Mellor property at 1300 N.W. 13th Street.
/F. PAYMENT FOR RELOCATION OF CITY HALL TRANSFORMERS: Approve
payment in the amount of $15,905.00 to Florida Power and Light
Company for the relocation of transformers from inside the
existing vault at the rear of City Hall to the exterior of the
building on a concrete pad adjacent to the new generator
enclosure; with funding from Buildings - Renewal and
Replacement (Account No. 334-6112-519-62.10).
vG. CHANGE ORDER NO. 6/MOLLOY BROTHERS, INC.: Approve Change Order
No. 6 with Molloy Brothers, Inc. for an extension of time to
delay the start of construction on Swinton Circle until January
9, 1995.
~. CHANGE ORDER NO. l/FIVE STAR CONSTRUCTION, INC: Approve Change
Order No. 1 to the contract with Five Star Construction, Inc.
for an extension of City Hall generator enclosure project
completion date by twelve (12) days (from December 10 to
December 22, 1994).
II. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 6A/GEE & JENSON: Approve Service
Authorization No. 6A in the amount of $12,000.00 to Gee &
Jenson for consulting services necessary to obtain a Florida
Department of Transportation variance for design of the East
Atlantic Avenue Beautification project.
jJ. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 9/GEE & JENSON:
Approve Amendment No. 1 to Service Authorization No. 9 in the
amount of $12,790.00 to Gee and Jenson for additional design
cost due to the increase in scope of the Pompey Park Pool &
Bathhouse project; with funding from General Construction Fund
- Pompey Park Pool (Account No. 334-4170-572-63.45).
~. SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 14/CH2M HILL: Approve Service
Authorization No. 14 in the amount of $31,972 to CH2M Hill for
preparation of a feasibility study for the proposed Aquifer
Storage and Recovery project, with funding from Water and Sewer
- Aquifer Storage & Recovery (Account No. 441-5181-536-69.18)
through budget transfer.
vL. RESOLUTION NO. 88-94: Approve a resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to remove nuisances on 21 properties
located within the City.
-3-
yM. RESOLUTION NO. 89-94: Approve a resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to remove five inoperable/abandoned
vehicles throughout the City.
vN. RESOLUTION NO. 90-94: Approve a resolution assessing costs for
abatement action to be performed on an abandoned septic tank
located at 18-24 N.W. 6th Avenue.
";0. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS:
1. Bid Award - to Lamar's Uniforms and Harrison Uniforms for
Fire Department uniforms, at an estimated annual cost of
$24,746.20, with funding from Ambulance and Rescue Service
- Uniforms (Account No. 001-2315-526-52.22), Fire Safety -
Uniforms (Account No. 001-2317-522-52.22), and Administra-
tion - Uniforms (Account No. 001-2311-522-52.22).
2. Bid Award - to Hector Turf for Toro Groundsmaster mowers
via State Contract, in the amount of $23,190, with funding
from City Garage - Automotive (Account No. 501-3312-519-
64.20).
3. Lease/purchase of photocopier (Kodak Model 2085A) for City
tJ Clerk's Office - from Eastman Kodak Company, via GSA
/.)erf\CO Contract, at a monthly cost of $1,864.12 for 48 months,
'f\ with lease financing through Barnett Bank. Funding is
available from Debt Service - Lease/Purchase (Account No.
001-7111-519-71.50) .
4. Contract award - to Florida Design Contractors, Inc. for
the Morikami Park Raw Water Main, in the amount of
$434,090, with funding from 1993 Water and Sewer Bond
(Account No. 440-5179-536-63.61).
5. Bid Award - to Tri-Gas for the Miller Air Pac Welder
Generator/Compressor, in the amount of $17,275, with
/ funding from Garage - Vehicle Replacement (Account No.
501-3312-591-64.20) .
if.P. (Bt..( ADO~Own)
9. Regular Agenda:
IA. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Consider
accepting the actions and decisions made by the Site Plan
Review and Appearance Board during the period October 31
through November II, 1994.
../ B. STORMWATER MASTER PLAN SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS:
Consider the first 5 years of the proposed Stormwater Master
Plan Schedule of Capital Improvements, and authorize staff to
proceed with the FY 1994/95 project list.
vlc. BID AWARD/HARDRIVES OF DELRAY, INC.: Consider bid award in the
amount of $1,467,078.00 to Hardrives of Delray, Inc. for S.W.
10th Street Phase II and S. W. 10th Avenue project, including
Change Order No. 1 to provide for the maintenance of two-way
traffic under the- 1-95 overpass from S. W. 17th Avenue to the
-4-
'.
west end of the project at all times throughout the duration of
the project. Funding is available from Decade of Excellence
Phase II in the amount of $760,341.75 (Account No. 228-3162-
541-61.90) i S.W. lOth Street Renewal and Replacement in the
amount of $72,790.00 (Account No. 442-5178-536-61.90) i
Stormwater Utility Fund in the amount of $366,945.00 (Account
No. 448-5411-538-62.42) i and S.W. lOth Avenue Road Construction
in the amount of $267,001.25 (Account No. 334-3162-541-61.89).
yn. CHANGE ORDER NO. 2/FLORIDA DESIGN CONTRACTORS. INC.: Consider
Change Order No. 2 for a 30 day extension to the contract with
Florida Design Contractors, Inc. for Golf Course production
wells #35 and #36.
vf. RESOLUTION NO. 91-94: Consider a resolution expressing strong
opposition to the State of Florida Department of
Transportation's proposal to expand U. S. Highway No. 1 from
four to six lanes in certain areas of Palm Beach County without.
coordinating with the local governments of the affected
municipalities.
/F. MUNICIPAL CEMETERY EXPANSION: Consider expansion of the
Municipal Cemetery and the reestablishment of the Perpetual
Care Fund for future maintenance of the cemetery.
JG. EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORT SERVICES: Direction concerning
proposals from the Delray Beach Fire Department and Bethesda
Ambulance Service concerning emergency medical transportation.
H. APPOINTMENT TO THE DELRAY BEACH HOUSING AUTHORITY: Appoint a
resident member to the Delray Beach Housing Authority to a
four-year term ending July 14, 1998.
:r.. (a4 ftOOEt)oum)
10. Public Hearings:
~A. ORDINANCE NO. 84-94: An ordinance amending Chapter 71,
"Parking Regulations", by repealing Ordinance No. 70-94 and
former Section 71.060 of the City Code, and enacting a new
Section 71.060, "Parking Meter Permits", to establish that all
persons may obtain a parking permit for Anchor, Sandoway and
the Holiday Inn North parking lots, to limit the Ingraham
Avenue lot to City residents, establishing a fee for parking
permits, and to provide for the transfer of parking permits and
the issuance of substitute stickers.
vB. ORDINANCE NO. 87-94: An ordinance rezoning a parcel of land
0>/1 located on the east side of Military Trail south of Linton
~~~ Boulevard (Taheri Property) from POC (Planned Office Center) in
~V \ part, and A (Agricultural), in part, to RM (Medium Density
'fv Residential) .
~. ORDINANCE NO. 90-94: An ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 94-1.
/D. ORDINANCE NO. 89-94: An ordinance annexing Lot 19, Delray
Beach Estates, establishing initial zoning of GC (General
-5-
.,
Commercial) District, and providing for a small scale land use
plan amendment to affix an official City land use designation
of General Commercial. The subj ect property is located at
2706 North Federal Highway and contains 1.09 acres.
E. ORDINANCE NO. 86-94: An ordinance rezoning CRA-owned property
located on the south side of West Atlantic Avenue between S.W.
1st and 2nd Avenues (Kwik Stop and Discount Auto Parts) , from
CF (Community Facilities) District to GC (General Commercial)
District.
F. ORDINANCE NO. 85-94: An ordinance rezoning the St. Paul A.M.E.
Church property located on the east and west sides of N.W. 5th
Avenue, between N.W. 1st and 2nd Streets, from GC (General
Commercial) District to CF (Community Facilities) District.
11. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the Public-
Immediately following Public Hearings.
A. City Manager's response to prior public comments and inquiries.
B. From the Public.
12. First Readings:
JA. I ORDINANCE NO. 88-94: Corrective Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendment from Low Density Residential to Transitional and
corrective rezoning from RM (Medium Density Residential) to RO
(Residential Office) District for a 0.34 acre parcel of land
located at 800 North Andrews Avenue (known as the Moore
property; f/k/a Tison Realty) . If passed, public hearing on
December 6, 1994.
JB . / ORDINANCE ,
NO. 93-94: Corrective Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendment from Medium Density Residential to Transitional and
corrective rezoning from RM (Medium Density Residential) to RO
(Residential Office) District for a 0.40 acre parcel of land
located at 1201 George Bush Boulevard (Chapin Law Offices) . If
passed, public hearing on December 6, 1994.
C) ORDINANCE NO. 61-94: An ordinance annexing and establishing
initial zoning of RL (Low Density Residential - 3 to 6 units
per acre) for an 11.63 acre undeveloped portion of Rockland
. Park Subdivision. The subject property is located on the west
side of Military Trail, approximately 2,800 feet north of
Atlantic Avenue. If passed, public hearing on December 6,
1994.
D. ADINANCE NO. 94-94: An ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 94-2. If passed, public hearing on December 6, 1994.
Associated Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments:
1. Rockland Park Subdivision, from County LR-3 (Low Density
Residential - 3 units per acre) to City Medium Density (5
to 12 units per acre)
-6-
2. Lee Property, from County MR-5 (Medium Density Residential
- 5 units per acre) to City Low Density (0 to 5 units per
acre)
3. Silver Terrace Redevelopment Area: A text change to
redirect the scope of the Silver Terrace Redevelopment
Plan
4. S.W. 10th Street Area from Transitional to Commerce.
E. ORDINANCE NO. 91-94: An ordinance repealing Chapter 112,
"Alarm Systems", of the City Code in its entirety, and enacting
a new Chapter 112, "Alarm Systems" , to provide for the
regulation of alarm systems. If passed, public hearing on
December 6, 1994.
F. ORDINANCE NO. 92-94: An ordinance amending Section 53.130,
"User Charges; Wholesale Sewer Rates; Calculation of Sewer
Surcharge" to provide for corrections in the connection fee
which was inadvertently amended by passage of Ordinance No.
22-94. If passed, public hearing on December 6, 1994.
13. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items.
A. Commission
B. City Attorney
C. City Manager
-7-
'.
. .
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 15, 1994 - 6:00 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
q --- llrn~
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE:
S.P. SETTLEMENT/CITY OF DELRAY BEACH v. DECAPITO: Approve
settlement in the amount of $16,500 plus attorney's fees, for
the City v. Decapito, an eminent domain action regarding the
acquisition of right of way for S.W. 10th Avenue.
.
THE REGULAR AGENDA IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE:
9. I. SETTLEMENT/GLORIA HILTON v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: Consider
settlement in the amount of $39,500, which includes all costs
and attorney's fees, for Gloria Hilton v. City of Delray
Beach.
:
[ITY DF DELAAY BEA[H
DELRA Y BEACH
~'A~~ 100 ^'. 1~! .-4.\/!:."J0E. O:::~;::;:;\'y' 8~:"-=;.-4 r'_C';1:DA 33444 ,0" =, ~
AI~America n PROCLAMA TION
'1111.
1993
WHEREAS, the Bible is the foundational document of the
Judeo-Christian principles upon which our nation was conceived;
and,
WHEREAS, the Bible has been a constant source of moral
and spiritual guidance for Americans throughout our history;
and,
WHEREAS, the Bible has profoundly influenced our
nation's art, literature, music, laws and sense of charity; and,
WHEREAS, in this time of financial distress, with its
attendant plights of joblessness and homelessness, many
Americans turn directly to the Bible for comfort and guidance
for themselves and their families; and,
WHEREAS, it becomes necessary to educate all
Americans, but especially our youth, to the values that
distinguish a humane and caring society; and,
WHEREAS, for fifty-four years women and men of all
faiths have banded together in the Laymen's National Bible
Association to sponsor National Bible Week as a time to remind
their fellow Americans of the Bible's unique place in American
life; and,
WHEREAS, this annual emphasis has helped to strengthen
spiritual understanding throughout America by encouraging
personal reading and study of the Bible.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, THOMAS E. LYNCH, Mayor of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida, on behalf of the City Commission do
hereby proclaim November 20 to 27, 1994 as
NATIONAL BIBLE WEEK
in Delray Beach, Florida, and urge all my fellow citizens to
participate in the observance of National Bible Week by reading
the Bible and discovering for themselves its values for personal
and community life.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
caused the Official Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
to be affixed this 15th day of November, 1994.
MAYOR
THOMAS E. LYNCH
SEAL
~.A
Tuc ~::C"DT AI 'I\I~VC: M .\"cac::
RESOLUTION NO. 92-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, RECOGNIZING AND COMMENDING
RUTH J. SWANSON FOR OVER THIRTEEN YEARS OF
DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH.
WHEREAS, Ruth J. Swanson was hired by the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, January 12, 1981; and,
WHEREAS, Ruth J. Swanson will reach a milestone in her
career on November 30, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, this milestone is achieving over thirteen years
of full-time public service with the City of Delray Beach, Florida;
and,
WHEREAS, Ruth J. Swanson has consistently performed any
and all duties required of her in an exceptionally mature
professional manner, exhibiting initiative, competence and loyalty;
and,
WHEREAS, Ruth J. Swandon will retire from employment with
the City of Delray Beach effective November 30, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, the services and knowledge provided by this
dedicated employee will be missed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, hereby congratulates and expresses its
sincere thanks and appreciation to Ruth J. Swanson for over thirteen
years of dedicated, faithful, public service with the City of Delray
Beach, and further wishes her the best of health and happiness in
her retirement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this 15th day
of November, 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
'i.A'
'.
.
. . "
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER 811
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 8A - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
FINAL PLAT/OWENS COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve the final plat for Owens
Commercial Subdivision located on the north side of West Atlantic
Avenue, between N.W. 18th Avenue and the CSX Railroad. The plat
proposes to subdivide a 1.46 acre industrial site into three fee
simple lots.
The Owens Commercial Subdivision will maintain parking and
drainage for the three new lots through the execution of a cross
parking and drainage agreement. While the site may not be able
to fully meet all requirements, there is potential to gain site
upgrades in the form of landscaping and screening of outside
storage. The setback non-conformity is existing and is not being
enlarged.
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed this item on October 17,
1994, and voted unanimously to recommend approval, subject to
conditions.
Recommend approval of the final plat for Owens Commercial Sub-
division subject to the following conditions:
1. That a landscape and screening plan be submitted, along with
a cross parking and drainage agreement prior to releasing
the plat for recording.
2 . That the plat and cross parking and drainage agreement shall
not be released for recording until the parking areas to be
shared are cleared of all storage.
~on~
.
01{
~
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
THRU: ~~\f
DIRECTOR_~\ PLANNIN & ZONING
FROM: ~~~
. STEVEN E. . LOR
PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
OWENS COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT
**CONSENT AGENDA**
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval of the Owens Commercial Subdivision final plat, a
proposed 3 lot subdivision. The project is located on the
north side of Atlantic Avenue, immediately west of the
C.S.X. Railroad.
This plat is being processed pursuant to LDR Code Section
2.4.5(J), Major Subdivisions.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
Between June and July 1974, building permits were issued for the
construction of warehouse type buildings at the subject
property. From 1974 forward, the site has operated as an
industrial complex for such uses as Delray Beach Farm Supply,
Miller Moving and Storage, Excellence Auto, Econo Paint, etc.
The site continues to function in the above capacity.
In August, 1994, a proposed subdivision of the subject property
was submitted to the City. The plat proposes to subdivide the
industrial site, which consists of 3 warehouse buildings and
associated parking, into 3 fee simple lots. The subdivision
would then allow the 3 buildings to be sold separately.
The plat has been properly prepared and is ready for City
Commission consideration.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its
meeting of October 17, 1994. By a vote of 7-0 the Board
transmitted a recommendation of approval, subject to the
following conditions:
.
City Commission Documentation
Owens Commercial Subdivision
Page 2
1. That the plat be revised to show an existing 15' road
easement and changes to the dedication statement, and
that a landscape and screening plan be submitted prior
to scheduling the plat for City Commission action; and
2. That the plat and cross parking and drainage agreement
shall not be released for recordation until the
parking areas to be shared are cleared of all storage.
A revised plat has been submitted for the Owens Commercial
Subdivision. However the landscape and screening plan are still
outstanding. In addition, after a recent site visit, it was
discovered that the parking areas to be shared have not been
cleared of the aforementioned storage. The applicant has
stated that he is currently working toward compliance, however
these issues will again be made as conditions of approval.
R E COM MEN D E D ACT ION:
By motion, approve the final plat for the Owens Commercial
Subdivision, subject to the following conditions:
1. That a landscape and screening plan be submitted,
along with a cross parking and drainage agreement
prior to releasing the plat for recordation.
2. That the plat and cross parking and drainage agreement
shall not be released for recordation until the parking
areas to be shared are cleared of all storage.
Attachment:
* Reduced Plat & Location Map
'I'OWENSCC.DOC
.
" .....
.: ~ ~ ,,~/" (IS ;~r'~ '~"'~"~"P ...,:':,,)
~ ~ ~ I'w? 'i1f,;i'/)~ '.';/#/1"#'1..-'(7;7 (J,VY)' 7';.-(7"..,
~ ~ \i. 1[' '//Y~J ./.? 1Vt?/.:i-t:1___ ~
~"'~
- - - - , ! ~ - -f I
~""'" ----
:O~,t j~I"''' 'clj.P Pl-:.?}) \~. J \i 'S'~'''.rN~.:nf!,)~~'47i~;/;;'~~;I. - - - - - -. - -
_L.LY~":'''~ _ i\; J.ff.i!Ls;;>r; ,En,;,/ I!J ~
(/'>( ')0' .-t) ~ , .::JoT, \ r'IS,;$";';'~ 00 -O~ -~"i,.::i-='7r -------(
? ~ t::.'~ ..."i"v.l'- _ ~Pl? J,n.,..,J' ! LPO h .
::Yd' ,,/(>~ gJ':?) >/I ~~, - ~ - _;.'~J'_"'...:""'~'S:..2 ~ Il~
.~ ~tQ.: ~ ~ ~ --, --- - ~- - -
_ - :xJ':/.!'~$ I \.~~ - I
1.." -,,,-;-
, " , ,
. I ... ~ I
) ... .. ~
l I ~ ~
___ I ~: ~ ~
' , ___......:__ _L-..
. .... - ,.
"'l 00;/ :"t",,:- I ~
~ ! j-C I
>l I 1'-'
~ ,~
~ I I::
~ I . :-:
~ I ~ I
"\:l :: I
1ll;S (j "I ~ _
~~... ~
, ~ ~~! ' I
" ~ .~ \t l-.. 't. t ~ '~
~ '" ~ I (:. '" oJ.:...;.,
o...:~ > ~ ~ ""
i; , I '-' I '.
'" ~ ::: I :--" ~
r-,,~ .. - ~
<' ~\ - ~ ~
I.'" " ~ .to - ." '.
" ^"'l 01) ~: ~
H < :.' ~ ="
~ I: ~ "I I ~ - I
~' '" -'
~ ~ ~'I) ~, 1= I ~
~ ( Vi"'" I .!..- ~
~ ~""!~: ~,~ 17"-
< "', _, <J- ! ~ '>
"\ '" ,-, " I ~ ' ,
" <i ~ ,~ 1= I :;'
. . .... .~
::; ~ ~ I "" ,>-' ""7 ;. ,
~ ~.. I " ~ :=~ I ~
" 'or) "', ' ...-- .... '<
I _ _ _ - J - -,.... t~ I - ~~ !(-"
",,^ .'" --. .
~ l\t ~~ \) . ~ I'
,,' .... I I - " "
"4 \) 7",<7C,OC.6PY,lg"r6 ~ C\J ....... ;7 ~ ~
~ ~ I- _ _ _ _ _ -1'" ~ 'l:: ' r:: 'i-. ~
~ I I" ~ 1 -, '\ I' "
~ II) tv - '"'--
"! I '" ~ ;-" 1;, I
~ !"-:, " :r=~
I \ ! " ' !...-' I
'-'"'\..:,~\ I <::s ,i-~
- " '" IC~
~ ~ ::::~ I
:'l: "-
~ i I ~ :: ~ I
~ 'l\ I '" . '-~ I
, ~ ~ k. t x;,-:~
~I '" It) E ~
.... <::. ' '< '> \j';;'
\::" ~ <::. ;-;- ~
~ I ~"' =~ I
~ t ~ -~
I '" -'
"' 'I - I
lIj " ~ \Tl .... :- :<
~ ...( ! c~.-~
..... ~..: llc't,j c::: -:'(
~ ~ ~! "'" \JJ;;:: N :.- .... I
;.: 'I .. ~ '" '" "
'" ,~. ~ . 11"'.... ~ ~
~.. " ~ : ~ ;:t ~ ~ 'T- ~ I
" " , " I l' ,,--,,
,,' 7C :>
~ ",-:1 --'----- -To w; I
'("l , I~ -,' '- I
~ \: ,--
:\ ~ I .? ...~r :;t~~.v .lgt-6 ~' - ~
;;: ~ : - - -- - - ,-' . ' '"-' I
\., I I, IiI
~..... i '"" I
"" .,
I:: S'; ~1, I
" ,", :0<1 ~
~ ~" '"
4, ~ ~ ::: p I
~ ~I ~ I
\~, ~
~~ i- I
~'~.... =:
'. 'I'j..... ~ of I' I
'.i ~ :it.. ...... ':--
~ .~~ ~~ ~,t
~ { -:z: " ' .... I' I
~ , .~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t~I~~ ? ti I
t,~,~%' .. h
.. A":~:~.! ~~~i"~ ,,-. ~F I
~~:~,.... ~~r~': ~~ rI.: I
" ~ ~ ! 2~. : _ - ~ ~- _ ~ - - ----r
, '-I ~ ~ - - -J ~- -=__J.~--.J
,i ~~'fG?' '- ~ -- -IO'G.IJ.~~ 000; 1- c::ccs-'
. .--..------~_.:: ~~~. > ~..Q{,.79. ~. I ~ .
;c)'-."~~ 1 ,-.,"~";:,o;-' ..., __J~~'" i- _~,-_c
~ ~~;.::, =--=>', ~~~~ ~ ~'~\ -"--!~ -~-:;~~-:-
y\jf.sl' A-r LAt~~, C AVrcNo.J.~ ~", ,,' - ';,-
. . { (
.
iE
LsJ 10 0
~ <l:
0
::J 5
z <i
0::
LsJ 3i
Z
>
<i.
N. W. 1S1 51. DON FRANCISCO'S WAY
Vl @
If)
LsJ
cr:
'-'
z
0
-t. U
~~ C,
~ ~~ .;?
o ~~ ~~
~.jJ
~
i?t?
c,~<() ~~
O~~~
G 0(1.
N
- OWEN'S COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION
Pl.ANNlNC l>EPAImlEHT
OT1 Of OEl.RA Y BEAal, Fl
-- OIe/rAL ~E I/AP SY'STEU --
.
. () 1<8'J'V1
[IT' DF DELIA' IEA[H
DElRAY BEACH
f lOll; 1 n "
be.d 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243-7000
flifi! MEMORANDUM
19<)3
TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM: f!l;Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # g 8 CITY COMMISSION MEETING 11/15/94
APPROVAL PROPOSED SCHOOL BOUNDARY CHANGES
DATE: November 9, 1994
ACTION
City Commission is requested to approve proposed school
boundary changes as recommended by the Education Board and to
forward the proposal to the School Board and their multiracial
citizens committee for approval.
BACKGROUND
City Commission reviewed this item at their 11/8/94 workshop.
The Education Board is requesting approval of this item as
proposed. The proposal would then be forwarded to the School
Board and their multiracial citizens committee for review and
approval. The Education Board will serve as the lobbyist for
this proposal and work to gain grass roots community support.
The written proposal as presented 11/8/94 is attached.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approve the proposed school boundary changes and forward same
as a recommendation to the School Board and their multiracial
citizens committee.
RAB:kwg
~on~
@ Printed on Recycled Paper THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
'.
. ~
Revised 11/8/94
OUTLINE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH EDUCATION BOARD
PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
REASONS TO CONSIDER BOUNDARY CHANGES
- Existing conditions, i.e. , too many attendance zones,
irregular boundaries, long busing distances
- Provide input to School Board as they address OCR mandates
- Recommendations contained in Visions 2005 and Sharing for
Excellence in Schools 1994
BOUNDARY REVIEW GOALS
- Reduce total number of student attendance zones
- Reduce busing distances
- Attempt to maintain neighborhood integrity/even out
boundaries
Reduce student population / number of portables
- Try to attain OCR mandated student population %'s, i. e. ,
6% to 40% Black
EXISTING DATA
PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHANGES
Existing vs.Proposed
PROPOSED MIDDLE SCHOOL CHANGES
Existing vs. Proposed
PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL CHANGES
- Existing vs. Proposed
Pagr: 1
'.
EXISTING DATA
FY '94-'95 DELRA Y BEACH PUBLIC SCHOOLS
# Outside
Design Current Assigned
Capacity Enrollment SACs %B % Other Portables
Banyan Creek 702 1434 223 30% 70% 26
Pine Grove 600 896 76% 24% 30
Plumosa 588 553 48% 52% 3
S.D. Spady 559 623 247 38% 62% 6
Carver Middle 1275 1229 38% 62% 0
Atlantic High 1920 2092 115 26% 74% 24
New Elem. (Aug. 95) 950 0
EXISTING PROPOSAL
16 Elementary School Zones 8 Elementary School Zones
5 Middle School Zones 2 Middle School Zones
6 High School Zones 2 High School Zones
Census Data (Est.) SAC Data
Within City Limits: # Students %B # Students %B
Elementary Schools 3074 52% 3072 68%
Middle Schools 2000 54% 1390 67%
High School 1777 54% 1577 64%
Trend - Non Black Population Attending Other School, i.e., Private
Page 2
.
.
Revised
11/8/94
IMPACT PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS - PLAN A (SPECIAL PROGRAM PINE GROVE)
Existing Proposed
Design
Capacity Enrollment %B % Other Enrollment %8 % Other
Banyan Creek 702 1434 30% 70% 989 34.30% 65.70%
Pine Grove 600 896 76% 24% TBD 40% 60% (1)
Plumosa 588 553 48% 52% 525 30% 70%
S.D. Spady 587 623 38% 62% TBD 40% 60% (2)
S-2 950 0 0 0 880 40% 60%
Del Prado 712 1178 6% 94% 1111 1% 99% (3)
Verde 815 766 9% 91% 778 2% 98% (4)
Forest Park 601 630 31% 69% 508 15% 85%
Sandpiper Shores 676 1511 2% 98% 1502 2% 98% (5)
Hagan Ranch Road 730 686 11% 89% 987 10% 90%
Calusa 690 1050 19% 81% 800 15% 85%
J.C. Mitchell 677 1098 19% 81% 1046 28% 72%
Addison Mizner 626 896 17% 83% 976 22% 78%
IMPACT PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
Existing Proposed
Design
Capacity Enrollment %B % Other Enrollment %B % Other
Carver 1275 1229 38% 62% TBD 40% 60% (6)
Omni 1168 1304 28% 72% 1230 36% 63%
Logger's Run 1153 1894 3% 97% 1884 2% 98% (7)
Boca Middle 1081 1552 19% 81% 1524 8% 92%
Congress 1354 1432 34% 66% 1661 30% 70%
IMPACT PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
HIGH SCHOOLS
Existing Proposed
Design
Capacity Enrollment %B % Other Enrollment %B % Other
Atlantic 1920 2092 26% 74% 1645 28% 72%
Spanish River 2488 2515 12% 88% 2335 28% 72%
Boca High 1980 1775 16% 84% 1870 6% 94%
Olympic Heights 2212 1804 15% 85% 1914 1% 99% (8)
Notes - see attached narrative
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Page 3
.
Revised 11/8/94
NARRATIVE
PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Consolldated trom 11 schools to 8
Banyan Creek
- Move Boynton SACs 262A & B to Hagan Ranch
- Move Delray SACs 289, 291, 292, 407 to Plumosa, SACs
290A, 290B, 294B to Spady
- Put in SACs 278, 284 from Spady
- Pine Grove
- Leave in neighborhood SACs 299A, 300A, 300B 301 and add
performing arts program as recommended by the pine Grove
Student Advisory Council to assist in achieving racial
balance.
(1 ) - After new additions design capacity estimated to be
750-800. As proposed enrollment from assigned SACs
estimate is 517, with a predominately black population.
40/60 racial balance to be achieved through special
program.
Plumosa
- Take out SAC 299B to S-2, SAC 300D to Calusa
- Add in SACs 288, 274B, 261B, 270B from Spady, 289, 291,
292, 407 from Banyan Creek
S.D. Spady
- Leave in neighborhood SACs only putting in SACs 294B,
290A and 290B from Banyan Creek, 294C from J.C.
Mitchell and moving other SACs to Plumosa, Banyan Creek,
S-2 and Boca SACs (7 students) to Pine Grove.
- Maintain Montessori Program to achieve racial balance.
(2 ) - As proposed enrollment from assigned SACs is estimated
at 525, with a predominately black population. 40/60
racial balance to be achieved through Montessori
Program.
8-2
- New school Blood's Grove property.
- Make up zone from former Spady SACs west of Military,
Pine Grove SACs, 299B from Plumosa, 299C from Calusa and
Boca SACs 307A and 307B from Calusa and 309 from J.C.
Mitchell
Page 4
.
.
Narrative
Proposed Boundary changes
(Cont. )
(3 ) Del Prado
- Recommendations reassign Delray minority students, SAC
300C to Calusa to reduce busing distances and to reduce
the number of non Delray Beach schools attended by
minority students from Delray Beach.
(4 ) Verde
- Recommendations reassign Delray minority students SAC
299G to Addison Mizner to reduce busing distances and to
reduce the number of non Delray Beach schools attended
by minority students from Delray Beach.
(5) Sandpiper Shores
- Only 9 Delray Beach students attending from SAC 299H.
Proposed change does not affect current racial balance
and eliminates long busing distance. Also reduces the
number of non Delray Beach schools attended by minority
students from Delray Beach.
Page 5
.
'00 ,
NARRATIVE
PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
- Consolidate from 4 middle schools to 2; Carver and Omni.
Take out Boynton SACs 246B, 252, 253A, 259, 260, 260B,
261A, 261B, 262A, 262B move to Congress from Carver, put
in Boca Middle School SACs 290A, 290B, 294A, 294C, 244B
to Carver. Move SACs 300D and 299G from Boca Middle to
Omni and 299H from Logger's Run to Omni. Recommend
Pre-IB special program to be established.
(6) - As proposed enrollment from assigned SACs is estimated
to be 1086 with a predominately black population. 40/60
racial balance to be achieved through special
Pre-IB/Gifted program.
(7) Logger's Run
- Only 10 Delray Beach students attending from SAC 299-1.
Proposed change has minimal effect on current racial
balance and eliminates long busing distances. Also
reduces the number of non Delray Beach schools attended
by minority students from Delray Beach.
(8) Recommendations reassign Delray Beach minority students to
Spanish River to reduce busing distances and the number
of non Delray Beach schools.
HIGH SCHOOLS
-'"--------------
- Consolidate from 4 high schools to 2. All SACs north to
Atlantic Avenue to Atlantic. All SACs south of Atlantic
Avenue to Spanish River. Delray SACs 299A, 299B, 299C,
299E, 299F, 299H, 300A from Olympic Heights to Spanish
River, SACs 290A, 290B, 294A, 294B, 294C from Spanish
River to Atlantic. SACs 332, 332A, 332B, 333A, 333B
from Spanish River to Boca and 410D to Olympic Heights;
SACs 304, 305, 309, 310, 310A, 315, 315A, 316, 375, 408,
409 from Boca High to Spanish River i and Boynton SACs
252, 253, 253A, 253B, 254, 255, 256 from Atlantic to
Boynton, all SACs north of Boynton Beach Boulevard.
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
-._-_..~-
- School Board adopt structured reassignment program for
students electing not to enroll in magnet/special
programs. Assignments to be made to schools with lower
actual to capacity enrollment.
- Give Delray Beach students first priority for enrollment
in magnet/special programs.
Page 6
.
I
oK
?r1
M E M 0 RAN DUM
November 3, 1994
To: DAVID HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
From: DOROTHY ELLINGTON, CD COORDINATOR ht;
Thru: LULA BUTLER, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DIRECTOR ~
Subject: CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF BOCA/DELRAY
ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION
Approval of a new agreement between the City of Delray Beach and
Habitat for Humanity of Boca/Delray to build 10 homes on lots
provided by the City for low-income families by September 30,
1996.
BACKGROUND
In November, 1991, the Commission approved an agreement with
Habitat for Humanity in accordance with Comprehensive Plan
policies relating to affordable housing. The original agreement
provided for the City to donate a total of 5 lots over a period
of 2 years which ended September 30, 1993. Having fulfilled the
terms of the original agreement, the City has been asked to renew
the agreement in order to continue the work of this nonprofit
agency. Habitat for Humanity has built 5 housing units and is
nearing completion of the sixth unit since 1991.
With the execution of the approved agreement, the Community
Improvement Department would be authorized to proceed with the
immediate conveyance of one lot and purchase 9 additional lots
over a 2 year period.
RECOMMENDATION
We recommend City Commission approval of the proposed agreement
between the City and Habitat for Humanity of Boca/Delray to
provide home ownership opportunities for low-income residents.
~ on (!~ JWv~
~ Cf) .M- ~ ~~
~e
.
AGREEMENT
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
AND
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF BOCA-DELRAY
This is an Agreement between: City of Delray Beach, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, its successors and assigns,
hereinafter referred to as "City" , through its City Commission,
and
Habitat For Humanity, a non-profit corporation of the mutual
terms and conditions, promises, covenants and payments hereinafter set
forth, City and Subgrantee agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS AND IDENTIFICATIONS
1.1 Assurances: means those assurances made by the Subgrantee to the
City as specifically set forth in this Agreement.
1.2 City of Delray Beach Community Development Block Grant Program:
means the Community Development Program applied for by the City
of Delray Beach and awarded by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development as authorized pursuant to Title I,
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383,
as amended.
1.3 CDBG Funds: means the Community Development Block Grant Funds;
The monies given to the Subgrantee pursuant to the terms of this
Agreement.
1.4 Grantee: means City of Delray Beach, Florida.
1.5 H.U.D. : means the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
1.6 Project(s): means the project or projects set forth in Article
III hereof, and Exhibit "A" entitled Scope of Services and
timetable.
1.7 Rules and Regulations of H.U.D.: means 24 CFR 570, "Community
Development Block Grant Regulations"; OMB Circular A-122, and OMB
Circular A-110.
1.8 Subgrantee: means Habitat for Humanity of Boca-Delray.
.
ARTICLE II
PREAMBLE
This Agreement between the City and Habitat For Humanity of Boca-
Delray on the following mutual considerations:
Under the Rules and Regulations of H. U.D., the City 1.S
administrator of the CDBG program and the City is mandated to
comply with various statutes, rules and regulations of the United
States and the Rules and Regulations of H.U.D., as to the
allocation and expenditure of funds.
ARTICLE III
PROJECT
The Subgrantee hereby agrees to provide and implement the
following eligible Project:
Horne Ownership
Opportunities for Lower Income Families
The project is more specifically described and set forth in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
ARTICLE IV
ASSURANCES
The Subgrantee hereby agrees to comply with:
4.1 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Public Law 88-352: 42
U.S.C. S. 2000 d et seq.) : and
4.2 Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-284; 42
U.S.C. S. 3601 et se'J.) ;
4.3 CFR 24, S.570.608 lead-based paint notification inspection,
testing and abatement procedures.
4.4 The requirements and standards of OMB Circular NO. A-87, OMB
Circular A-128 and with the relevant Sections of 24 CFR Part 85.
4.5 Any other rules, regulations or requirements as H.U.D. may
reasonably impose, in addition to the aforementioned assurances.
.
ARTICLE V
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1 Subgrantee hereby gives the City, H.U.D., and the Comptroller
general, through any authorized representative, access to and the
right to examine all records, books, papers or documents relating
to the Project.
5.2 Subgrantee hereby agrees to maintain books, records and documents
in accordance with accounting procedures and practices which
sufficiently and properly reflect all expenditures of funds
provided by the City under this Agreement.
5.3 Subgrantee hereby agrees that if it has caused any funds to be
expended in violation of this Agreement, it shall be responsible
to refund such monies in full to the City.
ARTICLE VI
TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall commence on the day the City executes
the Agreement and shall terminate on September 30, 1996.
ARTICLE VII
TERMINATION
In accordance with 24 CFR 85.43, suspension or termination of
this Agreement may occur if the Subgrantee materially fails to comply
with any term of the grant, and that the grant may be terminated for
convenience in accordance with 24 CFR 85.44.
ARTICLE VIII
LEGAL PROVISIONS DEEMED INCLUDED
Each and every provision of any law and clause required by law to
be inserted in this Agreement shall be deemed to be inserted
herein, and this Agreement shall be read and enforced as though
it were included herein and if, through mistake or otherwise, any
such provision is not inserted or is not correctly inserted, then
upon application of either party this Agreement shall forthwith
be amended to make such insertion.
'.
.
In Witness Whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement at
Delray Beach, Florida this day of , 1994.
Habitat For Humanity City of Delray Beach, Florida
of Boca-Delray
Thomas E. Lynch
Mayor
Witness:
.
Habitat For Humanity
of Boca-Delray
Subgrantee (CDBG Program)
EXHIBIT A
The City will convey at no cost a parcel of land situated in Palm
Beach County, south 50 ft. of N350 ft. of W135 ft. of Block 33,
Town of Delray, for the purpose of providing a home to an
eligible, low-income family.
The City will purchase and convey at no cost nine (9 ) additional
lots during the term specified within this Agreement ( thru
September 30, 1996) to Habitat for Humanity Boca-Delray for the
purpose of providing homes to eligible, low-income families.
The City will provide site improvements at a cost not to exceed
fifteen hundred dollars ($1,500) for each lot deeded to Habitat
under the terms of this Agreement.
Habitat For Humanity of Boca-Delray will select a low lncome
family, preferably a Delray Beach resident, construct a dwelling
unit In accordance with all City codes and convey the real
property and improvements to the family selected at a cost to be
determined by Habitat for Humanity of Boca-Delray.
The family will qualify as an eligible, low-income household as
defined by the City of Delray Beach Community Development Block
Grant Program.
In the event that the property and improvements are not developed
and conveyed to an eligible family within twenty-four (24) months
from the transfer of the deed, the land will revert back to the
City of Delray Beach.
Habitat.CC
11/94
,
.
,
. Agenda Item No.1
,.
. AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 11/9/94
Request to be placed on:'
x . Reqular Aqenda Special Aqenda Workshop Agenda
When: 11/15/94
Uescription of agenda item (who, what, where, how much) I
Agreement wlth Habitat for Humanity
ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO
Recommendation: Approval
Department Head SiqnaturG' I~~~::-c.:: "" "-, :
Determination of Consistency with Comprebensive Plan.
,
City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable):
,
Budget Director Review (required on all ite.s involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available. YES/ NO
Fundinq alternatives: (if applicable)
Account No. & Description:
Account Balance:
City Hanaqer Review: @/ NOPJ1v)
Approved for agenda:
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received: .
Action: Approved/Disapproved
"
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~D - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT/SALAH A. SAWAYA
DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve a Completion of
Subdivision Improvements Agreement between the City of Delray Beach
and developer Salah A. Sawaya for extension of a sanitary sewer
line to service a single family residence at 615 North Ocean
Boulevard. The agreement has been reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.
Recommend approval of the Completion of Subdivision Improvements
Agreement with Salah A. Sawaya for improvements to the Wilson
residence at 614 North Ocean Boulevard.
~ ern ~
ref:agmemo4
.
Agenda Item No.:
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: November 7. 1994
Request to be placed on:
~ Regular Agenda
_____ Special Agenda
_____ Workshop Agenda When: November 15. 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Approval of an aoreement to
complete subdivision improvements between the Citv of Delrav Beach and Salah A.
Sawava. Developer of the proposed improvements which include the extension of a
sanitarv sewer line to service a sinole family residence at 615 N. Ocean Blvd.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES~DRAFT ATTACHED YES~
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed aoreement
Department Head Signature: #d~~ . ~ /~~~
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds):
Funding available: YES/NO
Funding alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description
Account Balance
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: ~/NO zr~~l
Hold Until: .
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
/agenda.kt
,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN
CITY MANAGER ~
FROM: WILLIAM H. GREENWOOD ~
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DATE: NOVEMBER 7, 1994
SUBJECT: AGREEMENT TO COMPLETE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AND SALAH A. SAWAYA, DEVELOPER
OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Attached is an Agenda Request for approval of Agreement to
complete subdivison improvements between the City of Delray and
Salah A. Sawaya, Developer of the proposed improvements which
include the extension of a sanitary sewer line to service a
single family resident at 615 N. Ocean Blvd.
WHG:KT
Attachment
WG:DB:kt
File: Proj. No. 93-68
DBSAWAYA.KT
.
ENGINEERING
OCT 2 6 1994
[IT' DF DELHA' BEA[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 200 NW 1st AVENUE' DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
FACSIMILE 407/278-4755 Wr~t.r'. D~r.ct L~n.
DELRAY BEACH (407) 243-7090
F LOR IDA
~
AI~America City
" III! MEMORANDUM
Date: October 21, 1994
1993
To: Dan Beatty, Assistant City Engineer ~
From: David N. Tolces, Assistant City Attorne
Subject: 615 N. Ocean Boulevard
Subdivision Improvements Agreement
Salah A. Sawaya
I reviewed the attached agreement, and approve it as to
legal sufficiency and form. Please place the agreement on
the next available City Commission agenda for the
Commission's approval.
Please call if you have any questions.
DNT:smk
Attachment
sawaya.dnt
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
"
SA! 94156.820
COMPLETION OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS
THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of
, 19 - between the CITY OF DEL RAY BEACH
(hereinafter the City) and _ Salah A. Sawlya
(hereinafter the sUbdivider), for the purpose of assuring the
City that the subdivider will complete the improvements in the
Sanit Sewer Extension Plan - Wilson Residence
approved iW&llc:rl\ary aRQ fiR.l plat of 615 fotlrth CkJean Blvd.
and that the subdivider provide the guarantee, all as required
by the City of Oelray Beach Subdivision Ordinance.
WIT N E SSE T H
1. The subdivider agrees to establish a cash account with the
City of Oelray Beach in the amount of $ 445.83
.
The funds in the above account are
$ for the and
all improvements approved
preliminary nal plat of all improveme called for on
.
to be completed at the required by the City of
Delray Beach. of the preliminary and
final plat are to of
not more than 1) year from the date e agreement. In
the satisfactory progress toward is not
the judgment ot. the City Engineer
orized to complete the required improvements using the fu
".'. .,'. . ..~. ....' . . . ,
'c i T ~y- - 0 F- -0 E L-R A Y - -aTE A C H - - - -r-E L -: -4-0 7 ~-2-4 3 ~-7-2 2 i - - - - - - - - - - - - - s~ ~ - - 02-, -94 - - - - i 3 -:-; i - N-o- ~ 00-; - P -. -0:5 - - - - - -
'.
,= I T-"i - i:1 ~- -DE L -R- ~ "~ . B-~ ~;= ~- - - - -T-~ ~ -: ~-o 7 ~ -2-d 3 ~ 7-;; ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -- s ~ ~- - ~; -:9 ~ - - - - ~ 3 -: -d ~ - ~-o- ~ ;~-3 - ~ -. -I; i, -
herein to pay for materials, labor and
with said the
subdivider is the completion
of the proportionate
amounts of this of are completed
in specifications a8 approved by t
h) $ 445.83 tor the guarantee required of the
subdivider pursuant to the City's subdiv1sion ordinance. The
subdivider is required to defray all expenses incurred by the
City as a result of defect in materials and/or workmanship
relating to the required subdivision improvements 4S set forth
Sewer Extension Plan - Wilson Residence
on the preliminary and final plat ~ 615 liJrth Ocean Blvd. .
This obligation continue. to a period of one (1) year after the
City's acceptanoe of the completed subdivision improvements.
3. Any interest earned on the above cash account shall be the
property of Salah A. SaE:ya unles8 the interest i.
necessary to meeting the obligations of the subdivider in
either 1 (a) or (b) above.
4. Followin9 the city's acceptance of a completed subdivision
improvements the ei ty will disburse any excess amount then
remaining from that portion of the above account allocated to
completion of subdivision improvements, to the subdivider. In
2
.
the event of a defioiency the subdivider shall on thirty (30)
days written notice from the City pay the City the full, amount
of any such deficiency.
After the expiration of one (1) year from the date of
final acceptance by the City, the City shall disburse any
excess funds remaining in that portion of the above account
allocated to the guarantee within thirty (30) days of written
notice from the City, pay to the City the amount of deficiency.
5. The subdivider agrees that in the event there was 4
deficiency in regard to either the completion ot. the
improvements or the guarantee, which continues after the thirty
(30) day written notice from the City, the City shall be
entitled to a lien on the subdivider's property for any
defioiency balance then remaining. The property to which this
lien shall apply is legally described 88 set forth on Exhibit A
attached to the amount of the deficiency, all attorney's fees
and costs which may be incurred by the City 1n the collection of
said SWll.
In addition, the. City shall have any and all remedies
pray ided at law or 1n equity. In any action other than the
foreclosure of the above referred to lien the City shall also
be entitled to all costs and attorney's fee. incurred in the
collection of said sum.
3
I
-------------------------------------------------~-------------------------------------------------------
.
.----. --" -----------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY OF DELRRY BERCH TEL:407-243-7221 Sep 02,94 13:42 No.003 P.OS
6. The cash account established under this Agreement shall be
established 1n the name of the City alone and only the City
will have the right to withdraw funds from the account until
such time as the account is formally released by the City
pursuant to a written instrument to that effect. The cash
shall be delivered to and held in custody of the City Finance
Director.
7. If the subdivider abandons the final plat approval and
submi ts an affidavit to the Cl ty Finance Director indicating
such abandonment and certifying that the final plat will not be
recorded, the subdivider may obtain the release of all funds
then remaining, which are being held by the City pursuant to
this agreement.
WIi~~ . SUBDIVIDE~
By : . ~
It:- . ,. c..,;.-{ ~ _ te 7'"t,(,A. ~t~
(Name printed 4~d)'D r;. Salah A. Sawaya.
161 'f~ ~...;fA - , ~'(,Clr (Name printed or typed)
( Addres8 ) ,,- 777 E. Atlantic Ave.. 1312
~ Beadl. FL 33444
(Ad res.)
4
'0
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
By:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to legal sufficiency
aDr~:ON~
~~ City Attorney
STATE OF ~
COUNTY OF PAIM BF.AOI
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
this /7-1{.... day of Cc.C(J~"~\ , !t'i4by
Salah A. Sawaya (name of person acknowledged),
who is personally known to me or has produced l/~'-V e::
(type of identification) as
- .,
identification and who d1~:::fdi~~ake an oath.
itMrx ~ -
Signature of Person T
AC nt
....N.. DOLORES
If.iflY.~~ WHrTMAN SHEREMETA
~': : ~ CCMIBSION , CC 241447
d,
Title or Rank
Serial Number, if any
5
!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. -
.
EXHIBIT we A ..
COMPLETION OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT~
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 1, Ocean Apple Estates, according to the Plat thereof,
recorded in Plat Book 65, Page 100 of the Public Records
of Palm Beach County, Florida.
SAl 94156.820
'.
.
.' .. 01{
tn\
[IT' DF DELIA' BEA[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 200 NW 1st AVENUE . DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
FACSIMILE 407/278-4755 Wr~t_r'. D~r_ct L~n_
DELRAY BEACH (407) 243-7090
f LOR I D A
Ibr:e:d
AII.America City
, ~ II I! MEMORANDUM
Date: November 10, 1994
1993
To: City Commission
From: David N. Tolces, Assistant City Attorn~
Subject: Acceptance of Easement Deed
Joseph and Barbara Mellor
The attached Easement Deed will allow the City to maintain
an existing pipe which currently drains N.W. 13th Street and
outfalls into Lake Ida. The easement covers the South 12'
of the parcel. Acceptance of this easement is recommended.
Please call if you have any questions.
DNT: smk
Attachment
cc: David Harden, City Manager
Sharon Morgan, City Clerk's Office
Dan Beatty, Acting City Engineer
mellor. dn t
~ C5IJ ~
11//6/9'1
@ P,inted on Recycled Pape, YE
"
.
Prepared by: RETURN:
David N. Tolces, Esq.
City Attorney's Office
200 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
EASEMENT DEED
THIS INDENTURE, made this t' day of ~N~, 19 ~l\. between Joseph and
-'
Barbara Kellor, whose address is 1300 N.W. 13th Street, party of the first part, and the
CIT1 OF DELRA1 BEACH, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444, municipal
corporation in Palm Beach County, State of Florida, party of the second part:
WITNESSETH: That the parties of the first part, for and in consideration of the
sum of Ten (SIO.OO) Dollars and other good and valuable considerations to it in hand
paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby grant, bargain, sell and release unto the party of the second part, its
successors and assigns, a right of way and perpetual easement for the purpose of:
maintenance of drainage facilities within the following described property located in
Palm Beach County, Florida, to-wit:
DESCRIPTION
The subdivision of section 8, TWP 46S, Range 43E, the South 12' of W 1/4 of Lot 15
(less the 5 1/2 and N 200 feet)
Concomitant and coextensive with this right is the further right in the party of
the second part, its successors and assigns, of ingress and egress over and on that
portion of land described above, to effect the purposes of the easement, as expressed
hereinafter.
That this easement shall be subject only to those easements, restrictions, and
reservations, and reservations of record. That the parties of the first Pitrt agree to
provide for the release of any and all mortgages or liens encumbering this easement.
The party of the first part also agree to erect no additional building or effect any
other additional kind of construction or improvements upon the above-described property.
It is understood that upon completion of such installation, all lands disturbed
thereby as a result of such installation or spoilage deposited thereon, will be restored
to its original condition or better without expense to the property owner.
Party of the first part does hereby fully warrant the title to said land and will
defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever claimed by, through
or under it, that it has good right and lawful authority to grant the above-described
easement and that the same is unencumbered. Where the context of this Easement Deed
allows or permits, the same shall include the successors or assigns of the parties.
,
-
-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Easement Deed set their hands and
day and year first above written.
WITNPi2 /leV
{~~~ :Be/(lT('
(name pr~nted or type wr~tten) JuA~4V1,(- flWlb
WIT~ 9~
/C~v:..,J iS~ C otte.
(name printed or type written)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this !Z-day o~--//77tk
192:.L... by,:\;;"",p'"' ~~("\)(\<'/\ N,,(\~,"'" who is personally known to melo,: his _ produced
(type of identification) as identification and ~fii)___did ('did not)
take an oath. -
O~C'~,;"" T-
Print, Type or Stamp Na e of N ary Public
~1.011IA J. MONTGOMEllV
j\ Nol."Y PublIC. S~1O rJ Flori:!;l
.Z:L'.lyeorm.. Expires l~u..,. 26. 1996
,,' '. No. CC 415940
Bonded Thru lI!llirtll Ndlt'II).,.n",
MELDEED.MRM
'.
-.
",Y I r
t\~ .
~, --..,
l ~. \/"' .
- ,
tl\o J:t'1
~ ... t
-I ..,~ I
~~ I
!
t
!
~ I
i
- .
.1
1
-
CD !
"
LAKE
14S
-
-
.
...
.
. . -
~ ... N
"'.. :
...
i
-
(a,)
-
-
..,.
-
U\
.. ...... i\
-
,
-
-...J
-
CD
-
CoD ~
-
. ,
I
1
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER !lJ<1.
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # gp - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
RELOCATION OF CITY HALL TRANSFORMERS/FLORIDA POWER AND
LIGHT
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve payment in the amount of
$15,905.00 to Florida Power and Light to relocate transformers
from inside the existing vault behind City Hall to a new
exterior, pad-mounted system adjacent to the new generator
enclosure. The vault currently being used is undersized and at
capacity, and FPL is concerned with their ability to access the
vault. They also feel that ventilation has been compromised by
the enclosure.
In addition to correcting these problems, the new transformer
will give us the capacity for addditional electrical load at City
Hall and the Community Center. It will also be possible to
separately meter City Hall and the Community Center to better
manage energy usage. These two buildings are now both served by
the same meter.
Recommend approval of payment in the amount of $15,905.00 to
Florida Power and Light Company to relocate the transformers,
with funding from Buildings - Renewal and Replacement (Account
No. 334-6112-519-62.10) .
~ on ~
.
Agenda Item No.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: November 8, 1994
Request to be placed on:
__X__ Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: November 15, 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff request
the City Commission approve payment to Florida Power and Liqht
Company $15,905.00 for the relocation of the existinq interior
located transformers from the rear of the City Hall Facility, to a
new exterior pad mounted transformer adiacent to the new qenerator
enclosure. Fundinq is available in the Buildinq Renewal and
Replacement Account Number 334-6112-519-62.10.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: NOT REQUIRED
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of payment in the amount
of $15,905.00 to Florida Power and Liqht for transformer relocation
behind City Hall. ~<< g~_~L~
Department head Signature:~ It/~r
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
Ci ty Attorney Review/Recommendation (i f applicable) :
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds): ~
Funding available: YES NO
Funding alternative (if apPlicablil
Account No. & Des1f41/?:;on,m -bIIZ-Glq.t1z-IO (3f1JIJJ/M65 -((&N8'\h e~!ftfJfJf}Jr
Account Balance .
I
City Manager Review: @/NO t~ '1
Approved for agenda:
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
\esd\9472\fplreq
.
.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Harden
City Manage~~
From: Jose Aguila
Asst. Constr ion Manager
Date: November 9, 1994
Subject: City Hall Transformer Relocation
Project No. 94-72
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
During the construction of the Generator Enclosure behind the City
Hall Facility, Florida Power and Light approached the City with a
request that the existing transformers be relocated from inside the
existing vault, to the exterior of the building on a new concrete
pad.
FPL had several concerns with the existing condition, including the
fact that based on current design criteria, the vault is undersized
and at capacity. They are concerned with their ability to access
the vault, now that we have enclosed the generator, and they feel
that the ventilation has been compromised by the enclosure.
By relocating the transformers to an exterior pad mounted system,
FPL's concern for proper ventilation and access are solved, plus
now additional capacity to the system will be possible in the event
of future demand; such as the provision of a cost saving chiller
system for both City Hall and the Community Center. Also, separate
metering could be provided, for budgeting purposes, in lieu of the
current single meter used for both buildings.
I requested cost estimates from the contractor and FPL to determine
which way to proceed, and it resulted in being more cost effective
to relocate the transformer for a FPL cost of $15,905.00.
I will be contacting the contractor for the Tennis Center - Phase
III project to get his crews, if the price is right, to do the
necessary trenching and conduit installation. Staff estimates this
cost to be in the $4,000.00 range. I hope to have this work
completed by early December.
Funding is available in the Building Renewal and Replacement
Account No. 334-6112-519-62.10.
ee: William Greenwood
Joe Safford
File 94-72 (A)
\esd\9472\areqlllS
.
.
. : 1;l~I;h' ~ :,;-,'~.' ..... .i~i~'.~ ;.:I~l!~:;n:',: \,j Lc~: ~ .;:!~;, l)~~i:-llY ECo~,I, i"L JJ4:;"j-:!.hb
F=PL
November 7, 1994
Jose Aguila
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1 Ave.
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: City Hall Transformer Relocation
Dear Mr. Aguila:
Enclosed is a miscellaneous bill for $15,905.00. This represents the cost to the City to
relocate the transformer which serves the City Hall. This cost is based on the agreement
that the City will trench and backfill and install all FPL provided conduits according to FPL
specifications at the City's expense.
Upon receipt of the City's payment of the $15,905.00 and the installation of the conduits
by the City, FPL will proceed with this relocation project.
If you require any additional information, please call me at (407) 265-3104.
Sincerely,
*~
A. G. Russillo, Jr.
Major Account Manager
an FPL Group company
.
-
RETURN TO: FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
14159 STATE ROAD #7
DELRAY BEACH, FL 33446
ATTN DONNA CRAIG
CUSTOMER 10---) 2431.7
INVOICE NO----> 093297
CITY OF DELRAV BEACH
ATTN: RALPH HAYDEN INVOICE DATE--> 11/03/94
100 NW 1 AVENUE
DELRAV BEACH FL 33444 PAST DUE AFTER 12/03/94
Ar..;OUNT DUE--> 15~905.00
PLEASE DETACH AND MAIL THIS PORTION WITH YOUR PAVr..;ENT
-.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLORIDA PO~ER & LIGHT COMPANY INVOICE
CUSTOMER 10---> 24317
CITY OF DELRAV BEACH INVOICE NO----) 093297
100 NW 1 AVENUE INVOICE DATE--> 11/03/94
DELRAV BEACH FL 33444 PAST DUE AFTER 12/03/94
AMOUNT DUE--> 15~905.00
CURRENT CHARGES AND CREDITS
COST FOR RELOCATION INSTALLATION OF UG
SERVICE FOR CITY HALL
___ __ __ _ ____ DES CuR ItTJO N__ REFEJ~E_NCE NBR AMOUNT
CUST CONTRIB - WO (NEW CNST) 454-4 -6595 V 15~905.00
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $15~905.00
i=-OR INQUIRI~S_CALL: DONNA CRAIG_ fH 407-495-7608
- .
l"\
, -
,
.
1-69.0.0 TYPICAL CONNECTIONS
3~ RADIAL DEAD FRONT PADMOUNT TX
7620/13200Y OR 13200/22B60Y VOLT
~,.-@
FRONT viEW SIDE VIEW
I TEll OUANTITY DESCRIPTION II!S NO.
USE CL IP PROV IDEO BY 7ERMINAL LUG, NUMBER, SIZE
MANUFACTURER OR 1-5/8' I I V AR I OUS
SO. WASHER 161-53600-6 & ME lAL AS REOU IRED
2 SERV I CE CABLES VARIOUS
I I S. V 163-S8700-7
3 3 ! ELBOW lERlAlNATOR 2SKV 163- 50200-1
: '<0) --..,.........,... IAS REQuiRED I COPP[RwELO GROUND ROD & CONNECT I ON I 130-61600-8 OR
'~1"" "!;: ~;(';'~:d.~' J.; A
\:~fr~.~~;::~~;. I LS REO. PER S7ANDARDS G-2 J 30-61700-4
5 I CONNECTOR COMPRESSION, K[ ARNEY 120-11100-1
. ... '... ~,4-"p~ C- .. 10 <6 BURND \ J 20- \ 3200-8
.. , I
HOLD DOWN DET A I L To V~L.T 6 I 3 ':ONNEC10R COM.RESSION. KE~RNEY I 120-11200-1 III:
.. TO '4 BURNDy 120-13300-4
7 2 ;RANSF ORMER lANK GROUND 120- 33800- S
I 6' -0' CONNEC10R
8 I ?LQ, TRANSFORMER, 3 I, UI'1l6 IUP TO 500 KVA'I
r CuS10MER PRovIDES P~D FOR ISO 'VI AND A80VE 162-24700-8
SE UH 16. I. I I
9 12 F i. WIRE .4C, BAR 112- 30900-0
10 I' PRESSURE REL I [F VAL VE 410-80200-1
0 II '" SECONDARY NEUTRAL BUS BAR 121-30100-8
:r. 12 3 BUSHING INSERT IS,v 163-86100-1
25KV 163-86400-1
13 2 F 7. 'Ii; RE '6C. B~RE 112-30800-3
. NORlAALLI FUilNISHED ~,;H TRANSFORlAER
.. FOR USE WITH MORE iHAN FOUil NEUTRAL CONNECTORS.
PAD
NOTES,
\. PRiMARy CABLE SHOULD HAVE A SL IGH1 'BOW" IN FINAL
ASSEMBLED POSI T ION.
2. ALLO\'j SuFF ICIENT LENGTH OF NEUTHL TO PERlAlT FREE UOVEt.I[NT
TO ELBOWS.
3. lAHE CERTAIN OF CABLE LOCATION BHORE INSTALLING GROUND
SECONDARY RODS 10 AVOID DRIVING THE GROUND ROD THROUGH ANY EXISTING CABLES.
SUPPORT ~. SEAL ALL CONDUITS WITH DUCT SEAL.
NO BUS BAR !.
EXTENS IONS r
ALLOWED ON
16 HOLE SPANS
SUPERSEDES 1-69 LAST REVISED 1-4-88
IGENERRL REVlSlONl
STANDARDS
OH & UG DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
750 KVA IALL TYPESl
OR J G. JI.
n'il DRAWN \C. T;;'i tl\c.r-
~OO SECONOARY CONNECTIONS OETAIL NO SCALE
J 10, C. ,1'~ 10, p, ,Afrf DATE .I~N :: Q 1992
REVISION CHELf'[D
-,
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~G - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CHANGE ORDER NO. 6/MOLLOY BROTHERS, INC.
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve Change Order No. 6 with
Molloy Brothers, Inc. , to delay the start of construction on
Swinton Circle until January 9, 1995. This request is made so
that construction does not cause disruptions during the Thanks-
giving, Hanukkah and Christmas holidays.
The scope of the work on Swinton Circle is extensive, and
includes a new gravity sewer system, a new eight-inch water main,
and complete road reconstruction. Under this Change Order, final
completion date for the construction would be extended until
March 9, 1995, 60 days after the start of construction.
Recommend approval to delay the start of construction on the
Swinton Circle project until January 9, 1995.
~cm~
.
.
Agenda Item No.:
~ REUJESr
Date: November 10, 1994
Request to be placed on:
_X_Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: November 15, 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): staff requests city
carmi.ssion to approve Olange Order #6 to Molloy Brothers, Inc. for the street
Reconstruction and utility Inprovements (Northwest, Northeast) (Project 92-06).
Olange Order #6 is for an extension of time associated with delayirg the swinton
circle construction until January 9, 1995 so that construction does not cause
disruptions durirg the 'lhanksgi ving and Olristmas Holidays.
'!he Olange Order provides for exterrli.ng the final completion date for SWinton Cr
until March 9, 1995 or sixty days after start of construction. Scope of work on
SWinton Cr is quite extensive and includes a new gravity sewer system, a new 8"
water main and complete road reconstruction. All other work in this contract on
various streets in the Northwest area will be completed final by the current
adjusted Contract date of December 14, 1994.
ORDINANCE/RFSOllJI'ION RmUIRED: YESI@ DRAFT ATI'ACliED YES@
Recon1nlen:)ation: staff Recolrnnerrls approval of Olange Order #6.
Department Head ~ 0 ~~
Signature: ~4 ~""'l~ -' II/fairy
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
city Attorney Review/Recon1nlen:)ation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of furrls):
F'Urning available: YES/NO
F'Urning alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description
Account Balance
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: (!f)/NO 8/1
Hold Until: I
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenja:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
/agen065.doc
.
.
Memorandum
To: David T. Harden, City Manager
From: william H. Greenwood, Director of Environmental~l,7t27
Services
Date: November 10, 1994
Re: Change Order No. 6 - Reconstruction and utility
Improvements (Northwest/Northeast) - Project 92-06
Extension of time for Swinton Circle
Attached is an agenda request for Change Order #6 to Molloy
Brothers, Inc., on the above referenced Project. The Change
Order is for an extension of time for delaying the start of
construction on Swinton Circle until January 9, 1995.
This request is made so that the construction does not cause
disruptions during the Thanksgiving and Christmas Holidays. The
scope of work on Swinton Circle is quite extensive and includes a
new gravity sewer system, a new 8" water main and complete road
reconstruction.
The Change Order provides for extending the final completion for
Swinton Circle until March 9, 1995 or sixty days after the start
of construction. All other work in this Contract on various
streets in the Northwest area will be completed final by the
current adjusted final completion date of December 14, 1994.
File: Memo to City Manager
92-060
A:memo9206
.
I - ~
~ ~ GULF S
3:
........ w
N. W. 25TH CT. :>
BONNIEVlEW RD. Z
Itti::q~~"~1ljj9U1:U~":~"f:':""m~~:'~" ~ '.'r,"""', ~
E ~ h...df;j~~lIi;jmr:"~~U!'r...,". ....M,jP..8""":"".. 5EACREST LA.. g
...... ". ".." ".... l'?~'
~ DECAF
'<:lOo' N. W. 25TH ST.
COCONUT ROAD
~ @
N.W. 24TH CT. <(
>
lJJ
AVOCADO ROAD ....1
.dOb. ::>
o
~N ~
- - N.W. 24TH ST.
~ TANGERINE lRAIL
(j)
~
Z f-
--\ en
o w
Z a:::
. u
w <( t-= t-=
> W u u
< ~ en ~ ~
I ~ ~~~ ~~
:z ~ ~ ~ ~~ .
o C ~ =
z ~ ~
N ,., ~ ~
PINE RIDGE RD. N. Eo 22ND
~<~~:'::~~,~'~:~:'.:~~~ ;~~..~ :~~~::: -~~-;~ Y,~.~x~:~~:.~?;' "); ~
~ \oJ v-v- ~ ::~
z ~ ~.
~ 11 )
< SWINTON CIR. SEAC~E~T . ~ :~: N.E. 21ST
~. . .' ... - .. . ' '~ ~ ". . - " ,'.. .. ,. , -.
.... ~ E. ....:.. .,'.'~',"~'.'~'.'..' .>~:'\. ~ ~. ,", '.,.~".,...,.,.,X<y.,"r:,.""'''''''';.
~ ~~l:f-=-(""'~' .', . ,. ,".
3: ( ':.:,~ :..-- ,,'
Z \j :: < ~r;~
,: >;. c;-c.
:~. CIRCLE ::. a::..... N E. 20ST
) ~ ~ ) ~{"~",,~,,,';'-';:"'~:'.'-:~ ~~.' .
SWINTON ClR. ~ <;
N.~ ,.,,, or. m ~~
N.E. 19TH ST.
18TH 5T N.W. laTH ST
:,' ~ N.E. 18TH ST.
;'"
".
~,
:~?,
;': N. W. 17TH ST. N.E. 17TH ST. ~
. ,
J.
17TH ST. .~~
~, N. E. 17TH ST.
y'
,,'
;;: N.E. 16TH CT.
~, ~
~:( ,
.. >
16TH ST. S" ~
.~, ~
.
" .
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
CHANGE ORDER TO ORIGINAL CONTRACT
CHANGE NO. 6 ~NO. 92-06 DATE:
~ TITLE: Street Reconstruction and utility Improvements (Northwest, Northeast)
'10 OONTRACIDR: Molloy Brothers, Inc.
YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED '10 MAKE '!HE FOLLCMING CHANGES IN '!HE PIANS AND SPEX:IFICATIONS FOR
'lHIS ~ AND '10 PERFURM '!HE l'K>RK AC'CX)RDINGLY, ~ '10 ALL <X>NTRAcr STIPUIATIONS AND
OOVENANTS .
JUSTIFICATION:
Delay start of SWinton Cr construction until January 9, 1995 so as not to conflict with
'Ihanksgi virg and Olristmats Holidays.
SUMMARY OF <X>NTRAcr AMJUNI'
ORIGINAL <X>NTRAcr AMJUNI' $1,025,935.00
cosr OF CDNSTRUCl'ION CHANGES PRE.VIOUSLY ORDERED $ 224,312.25
ADJUSTED <X>NTRAcr AMJUNI' PRIOR '10 'lHIS OIANGE ORDER $1,250,247.25
cosr OF CDNSTRUCl'ION CHANGES 'lHIS ORDER $ 0.00
ADJUSTED <X>NTRACl' AMJUNI' INCliJDING 'lHIS CHANGE ORDER $1,250,247.25
PER CENT INCRE'ASE 'lHIS CHANGE ORDER 0 %
'IUI'AL PER CENT INCRE'ASE '10 DATE 21.9%-
<X>NTRAcr c:x::MPLEI'ION DATE FOR SCDPE OF l'K>RK ON SWINION CIRCLE IS ADJUSTED PER 'lHIS CHANGE
ORDER UNl'IL MARai 9, 1995. ALL 0l'HER SCDPE OF l'K>RK INCliJDED IN '!HE <X>NTRAcr IS '10 BE
<XM'LEI'ED FINAL BY '!HE aJRRENI' ADJUSTED CONTRAcr crMPLEl'ION DATE OF DEX::EMBER 14, 1994.
CERl'IFIED STATEMENl': I hereby certify that the supportirg cost data included is, in my
considered opinion, accurate
for Molloy Brothers, Inc.
'10 BE FILLED our BY DEPARIMENl' INITIATING OIANGE ORDER
F\mding Source n/a
DEr.RAY BEACH, F1.DRIDA by its City CoImnission
REXXI-1MEND : By:
william H. Greenwood, Director 'Ihomas E. Lynch, Mayor
of Enviromnental Services
A'lTFSl' :
APPROVED: By:
City Attorney City Clerk
'.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER t>7t1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # <3H - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CHANGE ORDER NO. l/FIVE STAR CONSTRUCTION, INC.
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve Change Order No. 1 to
the contract with Five Star Construction, Inc. for a twelve day
extension to the contract completion date for the City Hall
generator enclosure project (from December 10 to December 22,
1994) .
Recommend approval of twelve day extension to the contract with
Five Star Construction, Inc.
~61) ~
.
.
Agenda Item No.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: November 9, 1994
Request to be placed on:
X Regular Agenda
-- -- Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: November 15, 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff request
City Commission approve Change order number one for an extension of
time to the contract with Five Star Construction of twelve (12)
days. The contractor has had several project delays beyond his
control, including FPL equipment conflicts, additional fire
department requirements and rain delays. There is no additional
cost to the contract for this request.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: NOT REQUIRED
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Change Order number
one for an extension of twelve days to contract time until December
22, 1994 to Five Star Construction, on the generator enclosure
project.
Department head signature: At/$.f1-.,~_~ I/(Ih/t?</
Determination of Consistency wi th Comprehensi ve Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable) :
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available: YES/NO
Funding alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description
Account Balance
City Manager Review: &
Approved for agenda:E NO IfJv1
Hold Until: l/' f
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
\esd\9472\colreq
,
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Harden
City Manager
From: Jose AgUila~
Asst. Const ction Manager
Date: November 9, 1994
Subject: City Hall Generator Enclosure
Project No. 94-72
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Attached is a request for City Commission approval of change order
number one to Five Star Construction for an extension of contract
time of twelve (12) days.
The contractor was delayed due to conditions beyond his control,
including conflicts with Florida Power & Light equipment, Fire
Department construction requirements for additional work and rain
delays.
The original contract completion date is December 10, 1994. This
request will change the completion date to December 22, 1994.
Staff has reviewed this request and find the request reasonable and
as such recommends approval.
cc: William Greenwood
File 94-72 (A)
esd\9472\colreq
'.
.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
CHANGE ORDER TO ORIGINAL CONTRACT
CHANGE NO. ONE PROJECT NO. 94-72 DATE: November 9, 1994
PROJECT TITLE: City Hall Generator Enclosure
TO CONTRACTOR: Five Star Construction, Inc.
YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN THE PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT AND TO PERFORM THE WORK
ACCORDINGLY, SUBJECT TO ALL CONTRACT STIPULATIONS AND COVENANTS.
JUSTIFICATION: Provide the contractor with twelve (12) additional
days for contract completion due to various project delays beyond
his control.
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT AMOUNT
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT 26,303.40
COST OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGES PREVIOUSLY ORDERED 0.00
ADJUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER 26,303.40
COST OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGES THIS ORDER 0.00
ADJUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT INCLUDING THIS CHANGE ORDER 26,303.40
PER CENT INCREASE THIS CHANGE ORDER o %
TOTAL PER CENT INCREASE TO DATE o %
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT TIME ALLOWED BY THIS CHANGE 12 CALENDAR DAYS TO 12/22/94
date
CERTIFIED STATEMENT: I hereby certify that the supporting cost
data included is, in my considered opinion,
accurate; that the prices quoted are fair
and reasonable and in proper ratio to the
cost of the original work contracted for
under benefit competitive bidding.
CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE (ARCHITECT)
(seal)
TO BE BILLED OUT BY DEPARTMENT INITIATING CHANGE ORDER
DEPARTMENT FUNDS BUDGETED CODE CERTIFIED BY
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
RECOMMEND: ,#;f21..fU- - --d~~r By its City Commission
By:
ENGINEER/DIRECTOR MAYOR
ATTEST:
APPROVED: By:
City Attorney City Clerk
\esd\9472\co1req
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER IJ111
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 8:f.- - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 6A/GEE & JENSON
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to consider Service Authorization
No. 6A in the amount of $12,000 to Gee & Jenson for consulting
services necessary to obtain a DOT variance for design of the
East Atlantic Avenue Beautification project.
The original design by Gee & Jenson was in conflict with certain
design guidelines as established by the Florida Department of
Transportation Roadway and Traffic Design Standards. By working
with the DOT, City staff, and the East Atlantic Avenue Beautifi-
cation Task Team, Gee & Jenson were able to get the variances
needed to move the project forward.
Recommend approval of Service Authorization No. 6A with Gee &
Jenson, with funding from the Decade of Excellence, East Atlantic
Avenue Beautification (Account No. 228-4141-572-61.73) .
~ em (!~
.
.
Agenda Item No.:
AGENDA REOUEST
Date: November 7. 1994
Request to be placed on:
~ Regular Agenda
_____ Special Agenda
_____ Workshop Agenda When: November 15. 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Service Authorization Number
6A. in the amount of S 12.000.00. to Gee & Jenson for Consultina Enaineerina
Services required to obtain a variance from Florida Department of Transportation
for the proposed improvements to East Atlantic Avenue from the Intracoastal
Waterwav to S.R. AlA. The fundina source is 228-4141-572-61.73
Pro;ect No. 93968
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Service Authorization Number 6A in
the amount of 12 000.00 to Gee & Jen on
Department Head Signature: ~ llr)O-t
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds):
Funding available: @/NO
Funding alternative. (if applicable) ~
Accnunt Hn. & De'crifiO~.tfJ!,-'if- ~r}7 r cJ ftllWhLIk- -7n!r.4J.d>! W.
Account Balance JJ rgj 9h II 9
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: @/NO !7Jt1
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
/agenda.kt
"
.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Harden
City Manager
From: Jose Aguila ~
Asst. Construction Manager
Date: November 8, 1994
Subject: Service Authorization No. 6A
East Atlantic Avenue Beautification
Project No. 93-68
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Attached is an agenda request for approval of Service Authorization
number 6A in the amount of $12,000.00 to Gee & Jenson for
consulting services required to obtain a variance from the Florida
Department of Transportation on the referenced project.
As you may remember, the original design by Gee & Jenson was in
conflict with certain design guidelines as established by the FDOT
Roadway and Traffic Design Standards. Following a meeting with
DOT, attended by City staff, and a subsequent review of our options
with the East Atlantic Avenue Beautification Task Team, it was the
consensus that a variance should be sought. It is important to
note that without the variance, only minimal planting would be
allowed due to the existing developed condition and the project
would have been pointless.
The consultants made several attempts with the Fort Lauderdale
office of DOT before they were able to go to Tallahassee for
review, thus necessitating three different schemes and numerous
letters and reports. Following these efforts, Gee and Jenson was
able to get the variances needed to move the project forward.
Attached for your review is a project chronology on this project
which may be helpful.
Gee & Jenson have provided correspondence and other supporting
documentation which verify their work required to obtain the
variance from the Department of Transportation. Staff recommends
approval of Service Authorization number 6A.
Funding is available in the Decade of Excelence, East Atlantic
Avenue Beautififation account No. 228-4141-572-61.73.
cc: William Greenwood
Dan Beatty
File 96-68 (D)
\esd\9368\agmmlllS
.
.
EAST ATLANTIC AVENUE BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
9/20/93 Kick off meeting with East Atlantic Avenue Beautification
Task Team and City staff.
9/22/93 City request Service Authorization from Gee & Jenson to
provide design and construction document services.
10/12/93 City Commission approves Service Authorization #5, for
preliminary design services.
10/11/93 First meeting between Task Team members and consultants
to review project scope.
10/18/93 Second meeting between Task Team members and consultants.
Preliminary drawings and cost estimates are reviewed.
10/26/93 Consultant makes presentation to the City Commission of
preliminary design. Commission approves, in concept, and
approves Service Authorization #6 to Gee & Jonson to
proceed with design development and construction
documents.
11/93 City is informed of the ISTEA Grant, which will cover a
large portion of the project as designed. The major draw
back is the delay of available funding for at least one
year.
12/1/93 City staff met with FDOT to review ISTEA Grant
requirements and procedure to receive funding.
12/2/93 City staff and consultants met with FDOT in Fort
Lauderdale to review plans. FDOT determines that plans
are in conflict with Design Index 546 and 17358.
Consultant is to redesign or seek a variance in
Tallahassee.
12/9/93 Staff attends DSMG meeting to update City Manager on
status of the ISTEA Grant and the FDOT variance procedure
and its effect on the design and schedule.
12/16/93 Staff holds a meeting with the Task Team members to
provide an update of events since the meeting of October
18, 1993, and it is the consensus of the Team to
recommend to the City Commission that the project should
be delayed for' one year in order that we can take
advantage of the ISTEA Grant and apply for the necessary
variances to FDOT.
"
.
1/3/94 Lula Butler provides memo to City manager advising of
Task Team recommendation to delay project one year and
have consultants proceed with the necessary variance.
1/11/94 City Commission agrees to delay the project for one year
in order to allow for the necessary variances, and to
take advantage of the ISTEA Grant.
esd\9368\chronlgy
.
GEE&JENSON ID:407-686-7446 NOV 10'94 9:38 No.002 P.02
CONSULTING SERVICES AUTHORIZATION
Date: SeD!lmber 15 1994
Sel'\flce Authorization No. 6A for Consulting Sel'\flcea
City P.O. No. City Expense Code 228-4141-572-81.73
Title: East Atlantic AVllnuo - FOOT Variance - Prqi.ct Np ~.aa
Thill sltfYlce AutIKIrIIMlon. when C1XlICu18d, thall bllnoo~ In .nd IIh.11 beGOfIIII .n I"WI,.I pilI'!. of 'he Comr.ot d..d .J.nuary 11, 1nt.
i. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The "8!Vlce. Include preparation 01 plans and supporting documentation and submittal of same to FOOT
District 4 \0 obtain a design v,rietlon from FOOT Standard Index No. a46 for State Roed eoe (East Atlantic
Avenue) botween A1A and the Intracoastal.
II. SCOPE OF SE;RVICES:
1. Preparation of Design Variation Plana. Engineer will prepare separate pl.n views of the propo8od
beautification plans (landscaping) for E.s' Atlantic Avenue betweon tho Intracoastal Waterway and
A 1 A detailing tile proPOlled troo locations and pel'Ci8ntag., of view blockage8 for all troo. foceted
within the sight triangles of Standard Index No. 546.
2. Meet with FOOT District 4 ataff to present results of plan. Prepare and submit design variation form
and lupportlng documentation to FOOT Diatrlct 4 to obtain approval of proposed landscaping pl.n for
East Atlantic Avenuo.
3. Miscellaneous Services
Provide other additional S8l'\flcea as mutually agreed upon by both parti...
Item. Fuml.h,d by Owner
at No Expen.. to the Conaulunt
ASSist Consultant by fumlshlng, at no cost to the Consultant, slllilvanabl" pertinent Information, _II permit application
and gcvemmentallnspecUon fe,,; and any other data relative to performance of the above .al'\flcea for the project. It
i, .greed and understood thm the accuracy and veracity of Mid Information and datil mllY be relied upon by Consultant
without Independent verifialtion of the 5sme.
City shall doaignate a contact person for purposes of project coordination.
Time of Performance
The Engineer will proceed to prepare application material and submit documentation to FOOT In an expeditlou, manner
with tne goal of obtaining a Design Varlllltlon Approval from FDOT District 4, by September, 1994. Services will begin
immediately.
Fees to be Paid
pasie Services:
For item 111nd 2 above, oomprislng tho totell aoope of 88fVice8 for S~rvice AuthorIzation No. SA, the El'IginHf will be p.id
an hourly rate fee not to exceed $12,000.00.
.,
GEE&JENSON ID:407-686-7446 NOV 10'94 9:39 No.002 P.03
IV.
This service authorization Is approved contingent upon the City's acceptance of and satisfaction with the completion of
the 6ervices ",ndored in the previous phase or as encompassed by the previous s.rvice authora.tion. It tho City in it's
sole discretIon Is unsatisfied with the "Nlces provided in the previous phase or service authorization, the City may
terminate the contract without Incurring any further liability. The CONSUL TAN'T may not commonco work on Bny service
lIuthorizatlon approved by tne City to be included a$ part of the contract without a further notice to proceed.
Approved by:
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: CONSULTANT: Gee & Jenson E-A-P. Inc.
Date Date 11/10~
Thomas E. I.ynch By:
Russell C. Oevick, Senior Vice President
Mayor
(Seal)
Witness
Witn.'1
Attest:
Attest:
Approved IS to Leg,.1 Sufficiency and Form
STATE OF Florida
COUNTY OF Palm Beach
The foregoing instrument wall acknowledged before me thia ,Dth day of November, 19Ji!. by ~u..ell C. Devlck.
P.E.. Sr. Vice President of Gee & Jonson Englneers.Archltects-Planners, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of the
corporation. Ho I, porsonally known to me and did not take an oath.
Signature of Person Tllking Acknowledgment
Name of Acttnowledger Typed, Printed or Stamped
cm:\IYWIlMl1,1'OO'
.
.
~~JG I NEFR I "I r,
n OCT 2 7 1994 GEE & JENSON
Engineers-Architects-Planners, Inc.
One Harvard Circle
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
Telephone (407) 683-3301
Fax (407) 686-7446
October 26, 1994
Dan Beatty, Assistant City Engineer
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: East Atlantic Avenue (SR 806) Beautification
FDOT Index 546 Design Variation
Service Authorization 6A
Dear Dan,
This letter is sent to clarify and enumerate on the services provided to the City of
Delray Beach by Gee & Jenson under proposed service authorization No. 6A.
Attached are copies of the submittals prepared by Gee & Jenson and submitted to
FDOT, District 4 offices. Because this design variation on Index 546 and Index
17358 was the first of it's kind in District 4, they were unsure of what criteria
would be acceptable to their Tallahassee staff. As a result we prepared a complete
submittal package (Labelled "A") dated January 1993, listing the detailed
justification for each variation to Index 546 at each cross street. Submitted with
this 8 page letter were 4 plan sheets outlining sight distances and blockages and 5
plan sheets outlining actual landscaping improvements proposed.
Submittal "B", dated May 26, 1994 included a new plan depicting only 4 locations
out of 16 sight line triangles affected because of existing sight line conflicts. FDOT
staff in Tallahassee rejected this argument because they didn't care what the
"actual existing sight line" conditions were.
In response to the rejection of the May submittal, District 4 staff requested we
prepare new plans and documentation (submittal "C") indicating the percent of
each sight line triangle blocked by new landscape plantings along the centerline of
East Atlantic Avenue. Supporting plans were submitted with this request, also.
After a conference call with FDOT District 4 staff and the Tallahassee staff of
FDOT, Gee & Jenson was directed to further modify this submittal to reflect a
design speed of 35 mph (posted 25 mph speed limit) and to calculate blockage
lengths projected to the travel lanes on East Atlantic Avenue instead of the
centerline of the roadway.
-
.
.. .
.
n
Mr. Dan Beatty
East Atlantic Avenue
October 26, 1994 - Page 2
Gee & Jenson then submitted package "D" complete with variation memo and new
plans reflecting FDOT's latest requests. This variation package was approved in
September of 1 994 by District 4.
In summary, because this was the first design variation approved by FDOT, Gee &
Jenson was requested to make numerous submittals, attend meetings and prepare
plans resulting in the scope and fees reflected in Service Authorization No. 6A.
Future submittals can be accomplished much more economically now that criteria
has been established by FDOT. Please call if you need additional material on this
effort or if you have any further questions.
W. Richard Staudinger, P.E.
WRS/ln
93040.22/99
cc: Ralph Hayden, P.E.
Jose' Aguila
Mitch Thomas
EAAINDEX.WPD
.
.
. ..~... _... - _. ___._._ _,,__,. ~_".' _~_'_"_'......._ ~'_~___'__"__'________""'__""'_'___~"~'___._'__"_""'''_.__._'-...__-....""'--_.... M",_ ..,,-_,
n GEE & JENSON
Englneers-Architects-Planners. Inc.
One Harvard Circle
West Palm Beach. FL 33409
Telephone (407) 683-3301
Fax (407) 686-7446
January 3, 1994
.
Mr. Alan Rothmann
Florida Department of Transportation
District 4
Permits/Traffic Operations
3400 Commercial Blvd.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309
Re: East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806)
City of Delray Beach
Variance Request
Dear Mr. Rothmann:
Please find enclosed six (6) sets of blueline prints for the proposed beautification of
East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) between the Intracoastal Waterway and State Road
A 1A in downtown Delray Beach. The City is proposing major drainage, landscaping
and curbing improvements for this portion of East Atlantic Avenue as a continuation of
the improvements previously constructed on East Atlantic Avenue between Swinton
and the Intracoastal Waterway. The entire length of East Atlantic Avenue between
Swinton Avenue and S.R. A1A is the highly urbanized core of downtown Delray
Beach's retail shopping district. The plans enclosed consist of nine (9) sheets
detailing the location of proposed curbed landscaping areas (nodes), new drainage
inlets, curb profiles. and typical sections.
This project was discussed in concept with the Variance Committee of the Florida
Department of Transportation (FOOT) on December 2, 1993. At that time the City was
instructed to meet the requirements of FOOT Index 17358 for parking and FOOT Index
546 and AASHTO requirements for all landscaping proposed in the node areas or to
request variances with appropriate justification. The other option discussed but not
considered acceptable to the City was the deletion of this portion of East Atlantic
Avenue from the State Highway system thereby alleviating FOOT permitting
procedures.
A review of existing conditions for this 1600 ft. stretch of roadway in downtown Delray
~each has sh,own that it is impossible to meet FOOT Index 546 or AASHTO
..
.
. ~ ~ ._.~__... _c.,_,____......_.,_ _.. 0" ~ ....~.~.- ...,--~.~--,~-----_.- - ._'-~""--". _..-.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 2
requirements for intersection sight distances for the seven cross roads intersecting
S.R. 806 or for the S.R. 806/S.R. A 1A Intersection. All intersections are 3-way 'T'
intersections, none are four way intersections. Three of the eight intersections are
presently signalized. Four of the other five cross streets only have right-of-way widths
of between 18.75 ft. and 36 ft.
Also, meeting the requirements of FOOT Index 17358 would significantly impact
existing parking along East Atlantic Avenue, causing a customer parking hardship for
customers of existing retail merchants along the street. Several existing buildings and
structures would have to be removed to meet all of the sight distance requirements.
Therefore, as sight distances cannot be obtained some sort of reasonable
compromise on practical sight line distances must be considered. This will require the
granting of variances at every intersection along S.R. 806.
In an attempt to move ahead with this project under the approach of obtaining the
best practical sight distances, considering existing conditions, the four plan sheets
enclosed outline the proposed sightline and distances based on a control point at the
edge of public right-of-way at each intersection. This criteria is most appropriate for
this urbanized portion of S.R. 806 which has a posted speed limit of 25 mph and three
signalized intersections within 1600 If. This control point is appropriate because the
existing improvements on private property in this area include many buildings, hedges,
planters, retaining walls, trees and other physical barriers at or very near the edge of
existing right-of-way lines. These are all obstacles to meeting FOOT Index 17358,
FOOT Index 546 and AASHTO Guidelines for sight distances and for on-street parking.
The following is a detailed listing of the variances requested by the intersection as
numbered on the enclosed plans:
1. Intersection of Venetian Drive and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
10+00. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Southwest and Southeast corners of the
intersection.
For the Southwest corner, no modification or improvements within S.R. 806 are
planned, therefore no variance is required for new improvements. However, as
.
.
--_.- _._,,__, _ . __._,_._.. _.__."~,__._.._,_,,_~.M _."___~ . ._.._.u'_T__~_""'_.._ .. ..... - .'" -..... "-'--'-- .-.-". -, - + . .. ...., .._,~.....,__._... .__U____.'._.......o_.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 3
is the case at all 8 intersections, just maintaining existing conditions will require
a variance from FOOT criteria for site distances.
For the Southeast corner, all of the proposed node (proposed landscaped area)
falls within the sight line East of Venetian Drive as shown on the enclosed plans.
The first parallel parking space East of the node falls partially within the sight
line. It is an existing parking space and requires a variance. Landscaping
within the node at Station 10 + 40 (right) falls within the sight line and requires a
variance.
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because this is a signalized intersection. Sight distances to the East of
Venetian relate to the safety of through traffic and left turn traffic onto Atlantic
Avenue Westbound. A conflict between these movements cannot occur (left
turns and on-coming traffic) due to the signalization at this intersection. Within
the sight distance to the West there are no proposed modifications of existing
conditions. The sight lines shown reflect the practical limit of FOOT control over
improvements affecting sight lines at this intersection.
2. Intersection of Seabreeze and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station 11 +90.
The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is the corner
of private property at the Northwest and Northeast corners of the intersection.
This is not a signalized intersection.
For the Northwest corner no parking spaces fall within the sight line shown.
However, the node does and landscaping proposed inside the sight line shown
should meet FOOT Index 546 to allow left turns from Seabreeze onto
Eastbound S. R. 806. A variance is required for the improvements shown.
For the Northeast corner the first parking space falls partially within the sight
line shown. It is an existing parking space and requires a variance.
Landscaping within the node falls within the sight line almost completely and
should meet Index 546 to allow the existing sight line for right turns from
Seabreeze onto Westbound S.R. 806 to be preserved.
.
.
.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 4
3. Intersection of Gleason Street and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
13 + 58. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Southwest and Southeast corners of. the
intersection. This is a signalized intersection.
For the Southwest corner no parking spaces and only a portion of the
landscaping node fall within the sight line shown. Landscaping within the sight
line area should meet Index 546. A variance is required for the proposed
parking (same as existing) and for the landscaping node.
For the Southeast corner no parking is proposed and the landscaping node is
not within the sight line as shown. A variance is required for the proposed
landscaping node.
i The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
.
because this is a signalized intersection. Sight distances to the East relate to
left turns onto Atlantic Avenue, which cannot occur with on-coming traffic due to
the traffic signal. The sight distance to the West is not a factor if right turns on
red from Gleason are prohibited. The sight lines shown reflect the practical
limits of FOOT control over improvements affecting sight lines at this
intersection.
4. Intersection of Palm Avenue and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
14+58. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Southwest and Southeast corners of the
intersection. This is not a signalized intersection. It is, however, located only
100 ft. East of the signalized intersection of Gleason Street (#3) and East
Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806). Of particular note is the fact that the Palm Avenue
right-of-way is only 20 ft. wide.
For the Southwest corner no parking is proposed. The proposed landscaping
node is not located within the sight lines shown. A variance is required for
these improvements as well as for existing conditions.
,
.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 5
For the Southeast corner, no parking spaces nor any portions of the proposed
landscaping node are within the sight lines shown on the plan. The
improvements as well as existing conditions require a variance from present
FOOT requirements outlined by Indexes 546 & 17358.
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because existing conditions, including the location of buildings and other
physical improvements on private property up to the existing right-of way lines
on Palm Avenue preclude the use of sight lines meeting FOOT criteria without
condemning and removing structures from private property. The sight lines
shown reflect the practical limit of FOOT control over improvements affecting
sight lines at this intersection.
5. Intersection of Bronson Avenue and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
! 16+58. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Southwest and Southeast corners of the
intersection. This is not a signalized intersection. Of particular note is the fact
that the Bronson Avenue right-of-way is only 20 ft. wide.
For the Southwest corner no parking nor any portion of the proposed
landscaping node is within the sight lines shown on the plan. A variance is
required for these improvements as well as the existing site conditions.
For the Southeast corner no parking or any portion of the proposed
landscaping node is within the sight lines shown. A variance is required for
these improvements and for existing conditions, as well.
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because existing conditions, including buildings and other structures adjacent to
the Bronson Avenue right-of way preclude the use of sight lines meeting FOOT
criteria unless private property and associated structures are condemned. The
sight lines shown reflect the limit of FOOT control at this intersection.
6. Intersection of Andrews Avenue and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
17+04. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Northwest and Northeast corners of the
intersection. This is not a signalized intersection. The right-of-way width of
Andrews Avenue is only 36 ft.
.
.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 6
For the Northwest corner no parking and only a small fraction of the proposed
landscaping node is within the sight lines shown. A variance is required for
existing conditions as well as for the proposed improvements.
For the Northeast corner no parking is within the sight lines shown. The
proposed landscaping node is within the sight line and all of that portion within
the sight line should meet FDOT Index 546. A variance is required for existing
conditions as well as the proposed improvements.
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because existing conditions, on private property, already have a significant
impact on sight lines at the intersection, precluding the use of sight lines
requested by FDOT without removing existing facilities on private property. The
sight lines shown are the best that can be obtained at this intersection, and
should govern the location of improvements instead of the standard FDOT
criteria for sight lines and parking at intersections.
7. Intersection of Salina Avenue and East Atlantic Avenue (S.R. 806) at Station
18+57. The sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is
the corner of private property at the Southwest and Southeast corner of the
intersection. This is not a signalized intersection. Of particular note is the fact
that the Salina Avenue right-of-way is only 18.75 ft wide.
For the Southwest corner, no parking spaces nor any portion of the proposed
landscaping node fall within the sight lines. A variance is required for these
improvements and would be required for existing conditions, as well.
For the Southeast corner, no parking spaces or any portion of the proposed
landscaping node fall within the sight lines. A variance is required for these
improvements and would be required for existing conditions, as well.
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because existing conditions, including the location of physical improvements on
private property up to and adjacent to the existing right-of-way lines on Salina
Avenue preclude the use of sight lines meeting FDOT criteria without
condemning and removing structures on private property. The sight lines
shown reflect the limit of FOOT control over improvements affecting sight lines
..
.
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 7
within FDOT and public right-of-way at this intersection.
8. Intersection of Atlantic Avenue (S. R. 806) and S. R. A 1 A at Station 21 + 50. The
sight lines shown are based on the edge of right-of-way which is the corner ot
private property at the Northwest and Southwest corners ot the intersection.
This is a signalized intersection.
For the Southwest corner, no parking spaces are within the sight lines. A
portion of the proposed landscaping node is within the sight line. A variance is
required for the proposed landscaping node as well as existing conditions.
For the Northwest corner, no parking spaces are within the sight lines shown
on the plan. A portion of the proposed landscaping node is within the sight
line. A variance is required for the improvements, as well as for existing
!l! conditions.
'.t,
The configuration proposed should be approved with the necessary variances
because this is a signalized intersection. The sight line for the Southwest
corner of the intersection is for left turns from Eastbound Atlantic to Northbound
A 1 A, a movement which cannot occur with through traffic on A 1 A, because of
the traffic signal. The Northwest corner sight line is not a factor if right turns on
red from Atlantic to Southbound A 1 A are prohibited.
The City of Delray Beach requests reconsideration of the variances to FDOT criteria in
order to implement the East Atlantic Avenue Beautification plan as indicated on the
enclosed plans and as enumerated in this letter.
As detailed at each of the eight intersections existing conditions make the application
of FOOT Indexes 546 and 17358 physically impossible without incurring significant
costs to condemn and remove structures outside of the existing right-ot-way. The
sight lines shown on the enclosed plans reflect the practical limits of FOOT's control
over existing and potential obstructions affecting the sight lines at each of the eight
three-way intersections. Another consideration in granting the variances requested is
that all eight of the intersections have no side street through traffic movement because
they are all a 'T' configuration.
.
,
,
n
Mr. Allan Rothmann
. East Atlantic Avenue Variance Request
December 29, 1993 - Page 8
We are requesting consideration of this matter at the February Variance Committee
meeting at District 4 Headquarters. Your concurrence with this schedule would be
appreciated.
Ie //>
rd Staudinger, P.E.
WRS/ln
93040.22
cc: ~tt Nein
Jose' Aguila w/encl.
Ralph Heyden
'.
.
"
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tf1<1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # F::f - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 9 AMENDMENT/GEE & JENSON
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve Amendment No. 1 to
Service Authorization No. 9 in the amount of $12,790 to Gee and
Jenson for increase in the scope of the Pompey Park pool project.
At the October 18, 1994, Commission meeting the pool was
increased to provide a 12 foot diving well and two diving boards.
Recommend approval of Service Authorization No. 9 to Gee & Jenson
in the amount of $12,790. Funding is available from the General
Construction - Pompey Park Pool (Account No. 334-4170-572-63.45) .
~ 01) ~
.
.
Agenda Item No.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: November 10, 1994
Request to be placed on:
__X__ Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: November 15, 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff request
City Commission approve Amendment Number 1 to Service Authorization
Number 9 to the contract with Gee and Jenson in the amount of
$12,790.00. This request is to compensate the consultants for the
increase in scope following the October 18, 1994 Commission meeting
where the Pompey Park pool was increased to provide a 12 foot
diving well and two diving boards. Funding is available in the
General Construction Fund Porn e Park Pool Account No. 334-4170-
572-63.45., ~ ~ 5~'1)05
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: NOT REQUIRED
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Amendment Number 1,
to Service Authorization number 9 to Gee & Jenson in the amount of
$12,790.00.
Department head signature :Qt1 #d. X- .. ~ If(ta/~ 'I
Determination of Consistency wi th Comprehensive Plan:
Ci ty Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable) :
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds): ~~
Funding available: ~/NO ,W
Funding al ternati ves '. -C-i ap lic Ie
Account No. &De:~tiontJ!/fJ'IJ~~?ft- ~iW; ~a
Account Balance J <11 I/O
/1 I
City Manager Review: ~
Approved for agenda: ~~/NO ~
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
\esd\9356\agrqll15
,
.
'.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Harden
City Manager
From: Jose Aquila ~
Asst. Const · ion Manager
Date: November 9, 1994
Subject: Pompey Park Pool & Bathhouse
Amended Service Authorization
Project No. 93-56
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Following the City Commission meeting of October 18, 1994, the
consultant was requested to amend their service authorization, as
necessary, to cover any additional design cost due to the increase
in scope, primarily the addition of the diving well and boards to
the Pompey Park Pool Project.
Attached is Amendment number 1 to Service Authorization No. 9 for
additional services for City Commission approval.
The original contract amount for the project was $61,300.00 and the
amount added by this amendment is $12,790.00. The new revised
contract price will be $74,090.00.
Funding is available in the General Construction Fund, Pompey Park
Pool Account No. 334-4170-572-63.45. Staff recommends approval.
cc: William Greenwood
Joe Weldon
File 93-56 (0)
\esd\9356\agrql115
.
.
'.
CONSULTING SERVICES AUTHORIZATION
O.e: November 9.1994
Service Authorization No. Amendment Number 1 to OQ for Consulting SeNiCIIs
City P.O. No. 527106 City expense Code 334-417~72-83.45
Title: POMPEY PARK POOL & BATHIojOUSE PROJECT #Q~
Thi. hlYi~ AuthCMlutlon, when UKuttd, .....11 be I~d In and .hall become .n InWgnt paI't of the 0111111181 COl1tl'Ht ci.~ JanUIIIy
11, 1"3, and Service AuthoriDtlon 1M, d.ted Merch 31, 1994.
I. PROJECT OeSCRIPTION
THE ACOITIONAL. SERVICES CONSIST OF AOOING A 12 FOOT CEEP OIVING WELL TO THE PRoposeo
POOL.
SERVICES TO INCLUDE DESIGN OF A NEW 12 FT DEEP 1.280 SF:t DIVING WELL AND TWO O~E
ME.TER DIVING BOARDS. TO BE ADDED TO THE PROPOSED POOL FOR A TOTAL. POOL AREA OF 337~
SQUARE FEET.
II. scope OF SERVICES:
1. Preliminary Design Phase:
a. Consult with the City to determine the general scope extent .nd character of the project.
b. Prepare preliminary documents consisting of one sehematic site plan, floor pl.n and exterior
elevations to determine project concept.
2. Final Design Phase:
a. Based on the approved Preliminary Oesign Documents the Consultant shall prepare. for approval by
the Owner, Construction Documem consisting of Drawings and Specifications setting forth In detail
the requirements for the construction of the project.
b. The Consullent shall as.iet the Owner In connedion with the Owner's responsibility for flllng required
permit documents for approval by governmental authorities having juriadidion over the projed.
e. The Consultant shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to Preliminary Cost Estimates indicated
by the changes in requirements or general market condit/one.
3. Bidding & Negotiation. Phase:
a. The Consultant shall uslst the Owner in pr.p.....ion of the mlce...ry bidding information. bidding
fonna, the Conditions of the Contract, and the Form of Agreement between the Owner and the
Contractor. Owner will bear the cost of bid advertisement, printing and publication.
b. The Consultant, following the Owner's approval of the Con.ttruction Documents and the latest Estimate
of Probable Construction Cost. shall a..lat the Owner In Obtaining bids or negotiated proposal, and
assist in awarding the preparing contracts for construction. Attendance at a pre-bid conference Is
included.
'.
4. Construction Phase:
8. Th. Con.ultDnt shall review and proce.. Contnllctar's submittals such a. shop drawings, product data
and 8ample.. for the limited purpose of checking for confonnence with Infonnation given and the
d.slgn concept expressed in tho Contract Documents.
b. Tho Consultant shall villt the lite an average of up to 4 hours per wtlek for a 32 week construction
period. Thl. indu.d" field vlslta by struotural, mec;h.ni~1 and electrical engin..,. and Substantial
and Final Inspection.
On the basis of on-site observationa, the Conlulblnt shall keep Ihe Owner infonned of the progress
of the work.
C. The Consultllnt .hall select and submit materlaltl..mple8lcolors for the Own"', approval.
d. The Consultant shall provide in-offtee project management including phase calls, faxel. project
correspondence, the lIquivalent of up to 3 hou,. per week for 32 weeks.
e. 8-* on the Consultanh ob$eNations and evaluation. of the Contractor'a Application for Payment.
the Consulwnt will review and proc... the .mounts due the Contrador (monthly) for the owner'.
approval.
f. The Consultant shall receive and forward to the OWner. for the owner's review and records. written
worrentles and ...Iated documents required by the Contract Documents :and .s.embled by the
Contractor, and ~halllS&ue a final Certi1i~ for Payment upon compliance with the requirements of
the Contract Documents.
g. Record drawing r8,!iew bas.d on certified Contractor supplied documents.
ltema furnished by OWner
at No Exp.n.. to the Conaultant
Assist Conaultllnt by furnishing, at no cost to the Consultant, 811 ,II.llable pertinent information, geotechnical services.
topoglllphlc sketch of .ite _rea (180 X 180). all permit application and governmental inspection fees: and other data
relative to perform_nee of the abov. ..""ice. for the project. It i. .g...~ and unde~ that tM accuracy and veraelty
0' laid informlltion and data may be relied upon by Consultant without independent verification of the same.
City shall designate a contact peraon for purpoa.. of project coordination.
III. BUDGET:
For Items 1 through 4 of the Scope of Services, the Consultant shall be paid a lump ~um fee of Twelve
Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety and n0/1oo Dollars ($12,790.00).
IV. COMPLETION DATe:
Itema 1 through 4 of the Scope of Services will be c::ompleted 88 follows:
Item 1 and 2 - 90 calendar days
Item 3 - 60 calendar days
Item .. . 280 calendar da~ .
(oxcept for delaye beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant).
.
. .
This service authorization 18 approved contingent upon the City's acceptance of end s.tlafactlon with the c:ompletion of
the eeNlees rendered in the prevlou8 phtl.e or .. encompa8Hd by the previous service authorization. If the City in it's
sole discretion Ie unsatisfied with the services provided In the previous phase or service authorization. the City may
terminate the contract without in~rring any further liability. The CONSULTANT may not commence work on any service
authori::ration .pproved by the City to be included as part of the contract without a further notice to proceed.
Approved by:
CITY OF OELRAY BEACH: CONSULTANT: Gee & Jenson E-A-P, Inc.
Date
..
Thomas E. Lynch
Mayor
~l~:" ~~~&f
WITNESS
Attest: ~, ~
WITNESS
Attest: (2. -. , tAL--
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency and Form -:'-i:-O\kfr;vt..(j
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
The aforegoing in.trument wes acknowledged before me this Aday of November. 19,K by Russell C. Oft/ck P.E..
Senior Vice President of Gee & Jenson Englneers-Architects.Planner., Inc., a Florida corporation. on behalf of the
corporation. He is personelly known to me and did not take en oa .
Name of Acknowledger Typed. Printed or Stamped
em:\JqW\Il\dh, porn
CD I.ON NOEL
. IN ~..D' =#81_
. ElCNII:.. ,.
....., -...., IlIlIIo ~...
'.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tJ'>11
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~K - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 14/CH2M HILL
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to authorize Service Authorization
No. 14 in the amount of $31,972 to CH2M Hill for preparation of a
feasibility study for construction of the proposed Aquifer
Storage and Recovery projects. This aquifer storage and recovery
project is proposed in lieu of above ground storage tanks in the
City's water storage and supply system.
The total fee for performance of the study is $31,972.00, with
funding from Water and Sewer - Aquifer Storage & Recovery
(Account No. 441-5181-536-69.18) through budget transfer from
Water and Sewer - Project Reserve (Account No. 441-5181-536-
99.01) .
Recommend approval of Service Authorization No. 14 to CH2M Hill
for the Aquifer Storage and Recovery feasibility study.
~ on ~
.
.
Aqenda Item No.
AGENDA REOUEST
Date: 11/09/94
Request to be placed on:
XX Reqular Aqenda
special Aqenda
Workshop Aqenda When: 11/15/94
Description of item (who, what, where, how much) : Staff requests
Commission approval of service authorization #14 to CH2M Hill in the
amount of $31,972.00 for preparation of a feasibility study for
construction of Aquifer Storage and Recovery wells in lieu of above
ground storage tanks in the City'S water storage and supply system.
Funding is proposed from Water & Sewer connection fees, account
#441-5181-536-69.18, Aquifer Storage & Recovery with a budget transfer
from 441-5181-536-99.01, project reserves.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: JJJ/NO DRAFT ATTACHED JJJ/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of service authorization No.
14 to CH2M Hill.
DEPARTMENT HEAD SIGNATURE: tJ!.~€?(;>*"-'cS_~ IIfroj9C! ~
Determination of consistency with comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budqet Director Review (required on all items involvinq expenditure of
funds): ~
Fundinq available ES NO
Fundinq alternati '~f ~1~1rble) .
Account No. & Desor,iPJ.-ion~~/tg'~ - ~~' r~-e- ..r'teutl~
Account Balance-;-"""" \~l, q . i
City Hanaqer Review:
Approved for aqenda: ~NOt'1(
Hold Until:
Aqenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Aqenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
,
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: David T. Harden rJy~
City Manager
FROM: Richard C. Hasko,
P.E.
Deputy Director of Public utilities
SUBJECT: CH2M HILL SERVICE AUTHORIZATION No. 14
AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY WELL
FEASIBILITY STUDY; PN: 93-055
DATE: November 9, 1994
Attached is an agenda request and a copy of proposed service
authorization No. 14 for CH2M Hill in the subject regard.
The feasibility study will be performed in six steps as
follows:
1. Review existing information to include research of
existing data regarding local and regional geology as well
as available facilities at various alternative ASR sites.
2. Conduct field inspection of alternative sites for
information gathering regarding available space, available
utilities, neighborhood composition and drainage
constraints.
3. Identification of facilities requirements for ASR
design, construction and operation.
4. Identify constraints regarding construction,
operation, permitting and neighborhood impacts of ASR at
various sites.
5. Identify alternatives and conduct feasibility
analysis including development of magnitude of costs for
alternative installations.
6. Prepare feasibility report formalizing
presentation of materials and staffing conclusions and
recommendations.
Time for completion of the feasibility study is
approximately 90 days.
.
.
The total fee for performance of the study is $31,972.00 and
will be funded from connection fees, account
#441-5181-536-69.18, Aquifer storage & Recovery with a
budget transfer from 441-5181-536-99.81, project reserves.
RCH: jem
c: William H. Greenwood, Director of ESD
victor Majtenyi, CM Tech.
f: 93-055 D
.
'. .
.. ' '
, " ..- . ~'"'' ,~_.:. . ~ .~ . -' ~ " .. ..~
. '
. .
, '.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -1L
DATE: . November 4. 1994
PAGE -1- OF 9
Service Authorization No. 14 to the Agreement to Furnish
Professional Services Dated July 11, 1990, Between
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and
CH2M IfiLL Southeast, Inc.
City P.O. No.: City Expense Code:
City P.N.:
Title: Feasibility Study for Utilizing Aquifer Storage and Recovery in the City's
Water Distribution System.
Category of Work:, Professional Engineering Services
General:
This SERVICE AUTHORIZATION, when executed, will modify the professional
services agreement referenced above and will become an integral pan of that
AGREEMENT as if written there in full. Changes in the indicated Scope of Services
will be subject to renegotiation and implemented through an Amendment to this
agreement. This SERVICE AUTHORIZATION is for preparation of a feasibility study
to exaMine the possibilities of using aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) in the City's
water distribution system.
Introduction
The 'CitY of'Delray Beach has ~mbar.kcd on a plan to consider aquifer storage and
recovery (ASR) in lieu of traditional above ground storage to provide potable water for
peak demand periods including fire protection. ASR is the underground storage of
treated drinking water that is injected into a suitable aquifer and recovered from the same
well or wells, genetally requiring no treatment other than disinfection. By utilizing ASR,
the City can store more water than through conventional above-ground storage tanks and
can be constructed on a much smaller site. Therefore, there appears to be potential for
utilizing ASR within the City's water system.
Alternative'sites for ASR have been preliminarily considered by the City, and include:
,
DFB100140BF.WPS
,
.
.
-... . . . __. -, '" -..
. .,
.
CH2M Hll..L
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -XL
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE ~ OF 9
. Crosswinds Residential Area
. City's Municipal Golf Course
. City's North Reservoir and Pump Station
. Property at N.E. 3rd Avenue and 20th Street
These areas have been identified based on their location within the City's water
distribution system and their proximity to existing facilities.
The 'first step in developing ASR within the City water system is to conduct a feasibility
study. The study will examine each of the proposed locations (along with others
identified by the City) with respect to:
. Underlying geology and hydrogeology
. Water quality changes
. Access to both raw and treated water pipelines
. Flow and pressure requirements
. Onsite treatment and equalization requirements
. Power and instrumentation and control requirements
. Ability to permit and construct the required facilities
Conclusions and recommendations will be made based on the feasibility analyses
conducted, and if feasible, will include a conceptual design and flow schematic of the
recommended alternative site(s).
The objective of the feasibility study is to examine ASR as an alternative or supplement
to traditional above-ground storage wi~ the CITY's water distribution system.
This Service Authorization covers the preparation of a feasibility study to consider the
use of ASR within the City's water system. Additional services such as design,
permitting and construction inspection will be authorized under a separate service
authorization. --
DFBlOOl40EF.WPS
.
.
, ,
.
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -1A-
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE -L- OF 9
I. Services to be Provided by the Consultant
A. Description of Work Tasks
CONSULTANT will provide specific services to the CITY in accordance with the
following task descriptions.
Task 1-:- Review Existing Information
CONSULTANT will research existing data on the local and regional geology and
hydrogeology, and based on the information provide a recommendation for an appropriate
storage and rerovery zone. The data search will include information on existing ASR
facilities in south Florida.
CONSULTANT will review information provided by the CITY on the CITY's water
supply, treatment and distribution system. Information will include reports and as-built
drawings prepared by both the CONSULTANT and others, and will be provided in a
hard copy format.
CONSULT ANT will review current regulations ,pertaining to water use, well
construction, drinking water quality and disinfection requirements, and other related
permitting requirements. Also, CONSULTANT will meet with appropriate regulatory
agencies to discuss the permitting requirements and clarify rule interpretations.
Task ,2 - Conduct Field Inspection of Alternative Sites
-
CONSULT ANT will spend up to one half day at each site to exaniine the area and gather
and document site-specific information regarding available space, available utilities, adja-
cent properties and neighborhoods, p,otential drainage limitations, and other site specific
information necessary to complete the feasibility analysis. Following the site visits,
CONSULTANT will review available as-bunt drawings provided by the CITY on existing
utilities at each of the sites.
Based on the information gath:ered during the site visit and from the as-built information
provided by the CITY, 'CONSULTANT will'prepare generalized not-to-sca1e maps of
each site illustrating the locations of pertinent features of the site, including known
underground utilities. A meeting will be held with the City to discuss each of the site
DFBlOOl40EF.WPS
.
.
..
. '
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION --1L
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE -L OF 9
plans. Also, the meeting will focus on the results of the meetings with regulatory
agencies.
Task 3 - Identify Facilities Requirements
After the permitting and site constraints have been identified, CONSULTANT will
examine the facility requirements at each of the sites to construct an ASR facility. These
requirements will include:
. Well construction
. ASR well and monitor well spacing
. Drilling and final pad
. Mechanical (pump, piping, valves, etc.)
. Treatment and retention (disinfection, turbidity, etc.)
. Electrical and Instrumentation and Control (motors, meters, sequencing,
actuators, etc.)
. Monitoring (ASR and monitor wells)
CONSULTANT will develop a preliminary list-of facility requirements and a conceptual
plan view of the proposed facilities at each of the sites.
-
Task 4- Identify Constraints I
Based on the results of the previous tasks, CONSULTANT will identify potential
constraints in constructing and opermUtg the ASR facilities at the selected sites. These
constraints will, be categori:red as follows:
. Subsurface (Hydrogeologic characteristics of the targeted ASR zones)
. Environmental (Impacts from the construction and/or operation of the
proposed facilities)
. Regulatory (permitting and regulatory perception)
DFBl00l40BF.WPS
.
.
, ,
o.
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -1L
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE ~ OF 9
. Physical (Space limitations, available utilities)
. City's Water System (pipeline pressures and transmission capability, water
treatment, and available retention capacity)
. Public Relations (Neighborhood reaction)
~ONSULTANT will compile the list of constraints for each site in the form of a table
and will be discussed with respect to potential options for surmounting them.
Task 5 -Identify Alternatives and Conduct Feasibility Analysis
Based on constraints identified, CONSULTANT will identify alternatives for constructing
an ASR facility at each site. As part of the alternatives analysis, CONSULTANT will
develop order of magnitude costs for each alternative. Each construction alternative will
be compared with a -no action- alternative at each site. No action represents the City's
currently proposed improvements as identified in the Water Distribution System Master
Plan.
CONSULTANT will screen the alternatives with respect to the identified constraints and
desired objectives and develop a objective system for ranking, the alternatives. The feasi-
bility of each of the alternatives will based on the ranking developed and applied.
Task 6- Prepare Feasibility Report
CONSULTANT will compile data gathered and evaluated under previous tasks, and
! based on the results, develop conclusions regarding the most feasible alternative at each
site. CONSULTANT will present recommendations for each site, which will include a
conceptua1layout and schematic of the recommended alternatives. CONSULTANT will
also refine the previous order-of-magn!tude costs estimates for the selected alternatives
, ,~
and develop a schedule for implementing them.
Six copies of a draft'report will be submitted by the CONSULTANT to the CITY for
review and comment~ A meeting will be held with the CITY to reconcile the comments,
and following the meeting, ten final copies of the report will be delivered by the
CONSULTANT to the CITY.
DFB1OOl40EF.WPS
.
.
, , "...'
I ",
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION ~
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE --L- OF 9
C. Assumptions !
!
,
,
The work described herein is based upon the assumptions listed below. If conditions
differ from those assumed in a manner that will affect schedule or scope of work, the
CONSULTANT will advise the CITY in writing of the magnitude of the required adjust-
ments. Changes in completion schedule or compensation to the CONSULTANT will be
negotiated with the CITY.
. 'the alternatives analysis will be based on the sites listed in this Service
Authorization. If other sites are identified by the City at a later time
during the preparation of this report, an addendum to this Service
Authorization will be negotiated with the CITY.
. The CITY will conduct all modeling of its water distribution system for
each alternative identified by the CONSULTANT. Other water distribu-
tion modeling runs required to complete this study will also be completed
by the CITY.
. ASR is site-specific, and its success is contingent upon, among other
things, the identification of a suitable aquifer for storage and recovery of
the treated water. Therefore, conclusions associated with this report will
identify the risks associated with each alternative, and a recommendation
will be made with the CITY's clear understanding of the inherent risks
involved.
. Presentation of the results to the CITY Commission will be conducted by
the CITY's Environmental Services Department and will not require fonnal
presentation by CONSULTANT.
During the progress of the project the CITY will provide the following:
-
. Access to the sites
. CITY personnel familiar with the sites
. Information on the location of utilities at the sites and as-built drawings
. Copy of Distribution System Master Plan and other pertinent documents
. Copies of output files from the CITY's modeling of its distribution system
DFBl00140EF.WPS
.
.
. .
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -1L
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE -2- OF 9
D. Deliverables
The appropriate number of major deliverables, as outlined in the contract between the
CITY and the CONSULTANT dated July 11, 1990, will be submitted by the
CONSULTANT to the CITY.
II. Compensation to the Consultant
Compensation for professional consulting engineering services as described herein is
estimated as follows:
Task No. Labor Expenses Total
Task I-Review Existing Information $ 4,185 $ 534 $ 4,719
Task 2 -Conduct Field Inspection 4,331 576 4,907
Task 3 - Identify Facilities Requirements 5,004 610 5,614
Task 4-Identify Constraints 3,551 454 4,004
Task 5 - Identify Alternatives and Conduct 5,021 669 5,690
Feasibility Analysis
Task 6- Prepare Feasibility Report 6,161 878 7,038
Totals $28,253 $3,721 $31,971-- gJl!
I -
Compensation for services will be in accordance with Article VII.A.2 of the
AGREBMBNT. Exhibit A attached presents a breakdown of the labor and expense
charges per the:Agreement.
-
m. Project Schedule
The CONSULTANT agrees to perform the services described herein within the following
estimated time periods unless otherwise extended in writing by the CITY ~ Time as stated
herein refers to weeks from the date of execution of the SERVICE AlITHORIZATION.
DFB1OOl40EF.WPS '
.
.
. -
.
CH2M Hll.L
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION JL
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE ~ OF 9
Time of Completion.
Task No. (Weeks)
Task 1- Review Existing Information 3
Task 2 -Conduct Field Inspection 1
Task 3 - Identify Facilities Requirements 1
Task 4 -Identify Constraints 1
Task 5 - Identify Alternatives and Conduct Feasibility 2
Analysis
Task 6-Prepare Feasibility Report 3
· Time of completion in weeks is based upon the CONSULTANT receiving a written
fully executed SERVICE AUTHORIZATION.
Task 1 will begin upon the CONSULTANT's receipt of a written fully executed
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION. Completion time is contingent upon timely review by
the CITY of identified deliverables.
-
,
;
DFBlOOI40BF.WPS
.
.
."
. .
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION -H-
DATE: November 4. 1994
PAGE --2- OF 9
This service authorization is approved contingent upon the City's acceptance of and
satisfaction with the completion of the services rendered in the previous phase or as
encompassed by the previous service authorization. If the City in its sole discretion is
unsatisfied with the services provided in the previous phase or service authorization, the
City may terminate the contract without incurring any further liability. The
CONSULTANT may not commence work on any service authorization approved by the
City to be included as part of the contract without a further notice to proceed.
Approved by:
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH: CH2M IllLL, INC. (Corporate Seal)
Date: .
Thomas B. Lynch
Mayor wi~h~
Attest: STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF BROW ARD
The foregoing instrument was
Approved as to Legal acknowledged before me this _ day of
, _ by John F. Curtiss
Sufficiency and Form Vice President, Manager South Florida.
-- Operations, CH2M HilL, Inc., a Florida
corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
He is personally known to me and (did!
did not) take an oath.
Bobbie Willcox
Notary Public
State of Florida
(Seal)
DFBl00l40BF.WPS
,
.
I -
. ~
,
"
(<') \0 \0 0 \0 \0 V 00 =
~~ <;;;> M (<') - \0 <;;;> 0 - (<') - - 11"\ - 0 0 ('f'\ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0\ 0\ 0 ,- M
- - 11"\ .., .., -' .., .., .., .., V 0\ .., "M r--
~S N "<t. - "1.. 11"\ r-- ~
00 -' .., - .., c<1 -
... 0 M .., .., .., (<')
~E-4 .., ..,
0 0 0
.., .., ..,
ClO
0 0 0
.., .., ..,
-=
u r--
ti
~
f \0 00 "<t M 00 M M \0 - 00 0 0 0 00 00
M (<') - - \0 0 11"\ r-- 11"\
'il - ('f'\ ('f'\ - r-- (<')
~ ..0 00 0
\C .., &;
.... ..,
0
~ ~
t:i IQ 00 V "<t 00 ......-'" - 0 0 00 $ 0
:l M M S It'l "<t ~ 0
t.l Q M - 0\
;3 == vi \0 IQ
WI .., vi
... ... .., ..,
oS Q c5
iZ
~ ~~ "<t 00 M 0 00 - 00 0 IQ "<t 8
:l ~ ; - M It'l t- ~ t-
.... It'l - It'l
en _E-4 c<1 ~
~ ~ "<t .., ~
e -
= ~ l
&I '"
<! 1';1;1 "<t 00 IQ 00 00 00 00 8 0 0 0 0 0 "<t
- M It'l M It'l 0\
M M - -
vi IQ \0
t= b ~ .., vi
.., ..,
s ;..
~ ~ M "<t 0 M 00 , 00 - t- It'l 0 It'l \0 ~
M ('f'\ - ('f'\ - M IQ r--
1';1;1 Ill: ('tl M M r--
~ It'l
'tl N .., ~
Cl
~
~
f - "<t IQ M 00 It'l ~ 11"\ 8 8 "<t 0\
- ('tl 00 M
0 - M - (<') -
.... ~ 11"\ r--
en .... .., ~
...
~
'S
< 8 8 00 "<t 11"\ It'l IQ 0\ r-- M ! 00 V 11"\
... 0\ 00 r-- \0 11"\ IQ 11"\ 11"\ ('tl ('tl ('tl
Cl t.l ... - - .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., .., ..,
~ c.:l .., ..,
... - Q
oS ~==
:l U
~
U ~ -
'tl
t.l ;3 a
.... ~ -a
I ~ '"
, " .5 ~ = u If
0 ] ti ;
.... ;3 u
~ ;3 '" .~ .~ u
= -a u ... , "0 ~
'" ~ -a 0 'j;
~ Cl 0 U '" '" '"
0 u ] I:; = 'f u D e ) ::s =
U ... .9 B I ~ ~ ',3. ...c
if ... 0 u ~ '" t::l .... ~ ~ g ~
0 '8 u '" ~ ~
~ '" ~ -a -a !a ! -~ '"
i .... '8 u = ::s t5 g u '0 ~ j
~ u en '" &: c::l = en !a '0 !a " ~ u i1 g
i U ~ ii" 1';1;1 .s '-'
~ 'i:; ~ .9 .9 !a ] 6 ~ !a 'f ... ~ f
'0 '0 .g ~' U c::l
~ '" ... '" '" '0 ~ = = e '" &I @
= !a .i '" '" ] ] u 0 ii "0
U '" U ~ ~ ] ~ :.( ~ ~~~ i 0 '::3 = en ::s .... = c::l
:2 a .g '::3 '" 0 "0 .~ g u en
~ &: &: u a ~ t! u '::I 1a ~ ~ f 0 ~
l ~ J: 8 u ~ -a ::s =1 '8 u U 1a D E-4 U
~ 0.. ~ "0 '0 u en en '.4 = ~ i ~ ::s .~ ! ~ ~ .... ~ ><
... u ...g.,", &I "0 ~ ~ = Cl 19 11
... ... ... .i u lS ~ ] ... ] u .8iJ ~ t.l ~ ~
u 0 0 0 .g "0 0 U .~ S u 9 Ui !!
U "8 "8 '8 ,~ '8 u '8 u S "0 '" '" j 'U El ~ e
:> u &: t.l U &: J: u u ~ ::s I~ ~ U 3 8 ~ & I~ Ir~ ~ ~ ~ ~
en en en ...,j en U 0 ...:l '" . Ill: ~
" ' ",.. - , . .. ", -l ~.:
;
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # <11- - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 88-94
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve a resolution assessing
costs for abatement action required to remove nuisances on 21
properties located within the City. The resolution sets forth
the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach
liens on these properties in the event the assessments remain
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 88-94 assessing costs for
abating nuisances on 21 properties located within the City.
~ an ~
.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 100 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
FOR ABATING NUISANCES UPON CERTAIN LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AND PROVIDING THAT A NOTICE OF
LIEN SHALL ACCOMPANY THE NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT; SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ABATEMENT OF
NUISANCES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE
DATE AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE
RECORDING OF THIS RESOLUTION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO
BE A LIEN UPON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESS-
MENTS.
WHEREAS, the City Manager or his designated representative has,
pursuant to Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, declared the exis-
tence of a nuisance upon certain lots or parcels of land, described in
the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for violation of the
provisions of Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances; and, I
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 100.20, 100.21 and 100.22 of the I
Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, the City Manager or his I
designated representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined I
that a nuisance existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish the respective I
owner (s) of the land (s) described in the attached list with written
notice of public nuisance pursuant to Sections 100.20, 100.21 and 100.22
of the Code of Ordinances describing the nature of the nuisance(s) and
sent notice that within ten (10) days from the date of said notice
forty-two (42) days in the case of violation of Section 100.04 pertain-
ing to seawalls) they must abate said nuisance, or file a written
request for a hearing to review the decision that a nuisance existed
within ten (10) days from the date of said notice, failing which the
City of Delray Beach would proceed to correct this condition by abating
such nuisance, and that the cost thereof would be levied as an assess-
ment against said property; and,
WHEREAS, the property owner(s) named in the list attached
hereto and -made a part hereof did fail and neglect to abate the
nuisance(s) existing upon their respective lands or to properly request
a hearing pursuant to Section 100.21 and 100.22 within the time limits
prescribed in said notice and Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances, or
if the property owner(s) did request and receive a hearing, said prop-
erty owner(s) failed and/or neglected to abate such nuisance(s) within
i
!
.
! the time designated at the hearing wherein a decision was rendered
adverse to the property owner(s); and,
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, through the City Administra-
tion or such agents or contractors hired by the City Administration was
therefore required to and did enter upon the land(s) described in the
list attached and made a part hereof and incurred costs in abating the
subject nuisance(s) existing thereon as described in the notice; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs incurred
in abating said nuisance (s) as aforesaid, said report indicating the
costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
: pursuant to Chapter 100 of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said nuisance(s) against said property owner(s),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE I
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: I
Section 1. That assessments in the individual amounts as shown
by the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach, involving
the City's cost of abating the aforesaid nuisances upon the lots or
parcels of land described in said report, a copy of which is attached
hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the parcel(s)
of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indicated thereon.
Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within thirty (30) days
after mailing of the notice described in Sec. 3, become a lien upon the
respective lots and parcel(s) of land described in said report, of the
same nature and to the same extent as the lien for general city taxes
and shall be collectible in the same manner as mortgages and fore-
closures are under state law. i
I
,
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by first class mail to the owner(s)
of the property, as such ownership appears upon the records of the
County Tax Assessor, notice(s) that the City Commission of the City of
Delray Beach on the has levied an
assessment against said property for the cost of abatement of said
nuisance by the City, and that said assessment is due and payable within
thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said notice of assessment,
after which a lien shall be placed on said property, and interest will
- 2 - Res. No. 88-94
,
accrue at the rate of 8% per annum, plus reasonable attorney's fees and I
other costs of collecting said sums. A Notice of Lien shall be mailed,
along with the Notice of Assessment and this resolution. I
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty I
I
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained I
I
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30 ) days after the mailing I
I
date of the notice of said assessment(s), after which a lien shall be I
I
,
placed on said property (s) , and interest shall accrue at the rate of I
eight (8) percent per annum plus, if collection proceedings are
necessary, the costs of such proceedings including a reasonable
attorney's fee.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been
received by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing
da t e 0 f the notice of assessment, the Ci ty Clerk is hereby directed to
record a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm
Beach County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the
certified copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 8%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
of , 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
.
- 3 - Res. No. 88-94
,
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION OWNER ASSESSMENT
LOT 22, BLOCK 32, TOWN J. W. & MARGARET YOUNG $ 37.50
OF DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 6, 317 SW 5TH AVENUE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 97, PUBLIC RECORDS DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL
(SW 4TH AVENUE)
LOT 9 (LESS 1-95 R/W) , VICTOR & NELLIE NOCERA $ 30.00
WILLIAMS SUB., PLAT 626 WEST DRIVE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
BOOK 24, PAGE 180, PUBLIC DELRAY BEACH, FL
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH 33445-8714
COUNTY, FL
(SW 15TH AVENUE)
LOT 19, BLOCK 2, ATLANTIC J. D. & EARLINE MONROE $ 37.50
PARK GARDENS, DELRAY, 32 EARLE STREET 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PLAT BOOK 14, PAGE 56, HARTFORD, CT. 01620-1714
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FL
(39 SW 13TH AVENUE)
LOT 29, BLOCK 1, ROBERT ASSANTES & $ 45.00
SOUTHRIDGE, PLAT BOOK FRED WENISCH 70.00 (ADM. COST)
12, PAGE 38, PUBLIC 1228 SW 4TH COURT
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH BOCA RATON, FL 33432-7131
COUNTY, FL
(321 STERLING AVENUE)
S60' OF E200' OF LOT 15, ABRAHAM OLIVA & $ 55.00
ESQUIRE SUB., PLAT BOOK D. FERNANDEZ & R. RODRIGUEZ 70.00 (ADM. COST)
23, PAGE 43, PUBLIC 402 SE 3RD AVENUE
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH DELRAY BEACH, FL 334834414
COUNTY, FL
(1028 SW 9TH AVENUE)
LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKE IDA ROBERT L. & BERTHA M. $ 75.00
SHORES, PLAT BOOK 25, 246 NE 17TH STREET 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 54, PUBLIC RECORDS DELRAY BEACH, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33444-4140
(LAKE SHORE DRIVE)
S31.25' OF E200' OF LOT ROBERTO RODRIQUEZ & $ 75.00
14 & N31.25' OF E200' OF DENIS FERNANDEZ 70.00 (ADM. COST)
LOT 15, ESQUIRE SUB., 402 SE 3RD AVENUE
PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 43, DELRAY BEACH, FL
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM 33483-4414
BEACH COUNTY, FL
(1026 SW 9TH AVENUE)
-4-
RES. NO. 88-94
.
S47' OF LOT 10 & N3' OF THEILIA J. SMITH $ 65.00
LOT 11, OF N 1/2 OF 108 SW 3RD AVENUE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
BLOCK 38, TOWN OF DELRAY, DELRAY BEACH, FL
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM 33444-3650
COUNTY, FL
(108 SW 3RD AVENUE)
N60' OF E200' OF LOT 14, DENIZ FERNANDEZ & $ 45.00
ESQUIRE SUB., PLAT BOOK ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ 70.00 (ADM. COST)
23, PAGE 43, PUBLIC & A. T. OLIVA
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH 401 SE 4RD AVENUE
COUNTY, FL DELRAY BEACH, FL
(1024 SW 9TH AVENUE) 33484-4414
LOTS 8 & 9 (LESS RD R/W) , DOLORES A. LIDDY, TRUSTEE $ 57.50
BLOCK 2, SOPHIA FREY % ARNOLD KURZINGER 70.00 (ADM. COST)
ADDITION, PLAT BOOK 23, 4426 GLENEAGLES DRIVE
PAGE 14, PUBLIC RECORDS BOYNTON BEACH, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33436-4805
(911 NORTH FEDERAL HWY)
CORNICHE ALL OF PLAT, CRAFT DEVELOPMENT II, INC. $ 67.25
PLAT BOOK 53, PAGE 28, 18559 LONG LAKE DRIVE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BOCA RATON, FL
COUNTY, FL 33496-1936
(SE 6TH AVENUE)
S40' OF N256' OF E135' DELORES RIGGINS $ 45.00
OF BLOCK 31, TOWN OF A/K/A DELORES QUINCE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 1, 6395 SEMINOLE CIRCLE
PAGE 3, PUBLIC RECORDS LANTANA, FL
OF PALM COUNTY, FL 33462-2295
(220 SW 4TH AVENUE)
LOT 3, BLOCK 47, TOWN ROBERT G. & PATRICIA ALLEN $ 45.00
OF DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 12, 206 SW 3ND AVENUE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 81, PUBLIC RECORDS DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL
(206 SW 2ND AVENUE)
LOT 20 (LESS Nl. 6' OF V. C. & A. P. NOCERA TRUST $ 45.00
W26'), BLOCK 87, LINN'S 626 WEST DRIVE 70.00 (ADM. COST)
ADDITION TO DELRAY, DELRAY BEACH, FL
PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 133, 33445-8714
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FL
(232 SE 3RD AVENUE)
.
N58' OF S312.12' OF IVERSON LASTER $ 45.00
E135', BLOCK 10, TOWN P. O. BOX 1225 70.00 (ADM. COST)
OF DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 1, BOYNTON BEACH, FL
PAGE 3, PUBLIC RECORDS 33425-1225
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL
(NW 6TH AVENUE)
-5 - RES. NO. 88-94
.
LOT 10, DELRAY BEACH FDIC RECV'R FOR BANK OF $ 72.50
ESTATES, PLAT BOOK 21, SOUTH PALM BEACHES 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 13, PUBLIC RECORDS P.O. BOX 56307/CLAIMS DEPT.
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL ATLANTA, GA 30343
(2440 N. FEDERAL HWY)
LOT 4, CLINTON & MORGAN WADE DEVELOPMENT $ 50.00
SUB., PLAT BOOK 59, 7575 DR. PHILLIPS BLVD. 70.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 138, PUBLIC RECORDS # 320
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL ORLANDO, FL 32819-7221
(244 NW 5TH AVENUE)
LOTS 32 & 33, BLOCK 32, ROGER JOHNSON $ 45.00
TOWN OF DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 5628 BLUEBERRY COURT 70.00 (ADM. COST)
6, PAGE 97, PUBLIC RECORDS FT. LAUDERDALE, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33313-3004
(SW 5TH AVENUE)
LOT 13, BLOCK 39, RESUB. SHIRLEY T. WILLIAMS & $ 50.00
OF S 1/2 OF BLOCK 38 & O.B. THOMAS 70.00 (ADM. COST)
N 1/2 OF BLOCK 39, 816 SW 3RD COURT
DELRAY BEACH, PLAT BOOK DELRAY BEACH, FL
11, PAGE 34, PUBLIC 33444-4435
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH
COUNRTY, FL
(222 SW 3RD AVENUE)
LOTS 13 TO 19, INC. , BUYING SELLING & RENOVATING $145.63
LINCOLN ATLANTIC PARK PROPERTIES, INC. 70.00 (ADM. COST)
GARDENS, PLAT BOOK 23, 450 NE 10TH STREET
PAGE 226, PUBLIC RECORDS BOCA RATON, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33432-2938
(102 SW 13TH AVENUE)
LOT 6, BLOCK 3, ROSEMONT WADE DEVELOPMENT $ 45.00
PARK, DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 7575 DR. PHILLIPS BLVD. 70.00 (ADM. COST)
13, PAGE 60, PUBLIC # 320
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH ORLANDO, FL 32819-7221
COUNTY, FL
(623 SW 6TH AVENUE)
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 100.01 LAND TO BE KEPT FREE OF DEBRIS, VEGETATION,
. MATTER CONSTITUTING HAZARDS; DECLARED NUISANCE.
- 6- RES. NO. 88-94
'.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER f)J0
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~N - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 89-94
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve a resolution assessing
costs for abatement action required to remove five inoperable/
abandoned vehicles throughout the City. The resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to
attach liens on these properties in the event the assessments
remain unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 89-94 assessing costs to
remove junked vehicles on five properties located within the
City.
~ on ~
.
.
J
I
I RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 90 OF THE CODE OF
I ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
FOR ABATING NUISANCES BY REMOVING JUNKED AND/OR ABANDONED
VEHICLES WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING OUT
I ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING SAID COSTS; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST ON ASSESS-
MENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLUTION,
AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE
MAILING OF NOTICE OF LIEN.
WHEREAS, the City Manager or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances, removed junked
and/or abandoned vehicles owned by persons described in the list
attached hereto and made a part hereof, for violation of the provisions
of Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the City Manager or his designated represent-
ative has determined that a nuisance existed in accordance with the
standards set forth in Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances, and did
furnish the respective owner (s) of the land (s) described in the
attached list with written notice of public nuisance pursuant to
Sections 90.02 and 90.03 of the Code of Ordinances; and,
I
WHEREAS, the property owner (s) named in the list attached ;
hereto and made a part hereof did fail and neglect to remove said :
junked and/or abandoned vehicles, and thus failed to abate the nuis- .
ance{s) or to properly request a hearing pursuant to Chapter 90 within
the time limits prescribed in Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances, or
if the property owner (s) did request and receive a hearing, said
property owner(s) failed and/or neglected to abate such nuisance(s) as
required by Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, through the City Adminis-
! tration or such agents or contractors hired by the City Administration
I was therefo~e required to and did remove said junked and/or abandoned
I vehicles owned by persons described in the list attached and made a
part hereof and incurred costs in abating the subject nuisance{s); and,
WHEREAS, the Ci ty 'Manager of the Ci ty of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
.
Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs incurred
in abating said nuisance(s) as aforesaid; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray beach, I
pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said nuisance(s) against said property owner(s),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS
Section 1. That assessments in the individual amounts as
shown by the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach,
involving the City's cost of abating the aforesaid nuisances a copy of
which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied
against the parcel(s) of land described in said report and in the
amount(s} indicated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not
paid within thirty (30 ) days after mailing of the notice described in
Section 3, become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel(s} of land
described in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as
the lien for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same
manner and with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to
sale and foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessment shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments
are levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is !
hereby directed to immediately mail by first class mail to the owner(s) i
of the property, as such ownership appears upon the records of the !
I County Tax Assessor, notice(s) that the City Commission of the City of
I
Delray Beach on the has levied an
assessment against said property for the cost of abatement of said
nuisance by the City, and that said assessment is due and payable
within thirty (30 ) days after the mailing date of said notice of
assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said property, and
interest will accrue at the rate of 8% per annum, plus reasonable
attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums.
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30 ) days f~om the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein and shall become due and payable thirty (30 ) days after the
mailing date of the notice of said assessment(s), after which a lien
shall be placed on said prqperty(s), and interest shall accrue at the
rate of eight (8) percent per annum plus, if collection proceedings are
necessary, the costs of such proceedings including a reasonable
attorney's fee.
-.
-2- Res. No. 89-94
I
.
I
Section 5. That in the event that payment has been !
not I
received by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to I
i
record a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of I
I Palm Beach County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of I
, the certified copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on I
the subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest
i at the rate of 8%, and collection costs including a reasonable
i attorney's fee.
i Section 6. That at the time the City Clerk sends the
certified copy of this resolution for recording, a notice of lien, in
the form of prescribed in Section 90.06 of the Code of Ordinances,
shall be mailed to the property owner.
.1 PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the
I
! day of , 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
I City Clerk
'.
!
I
i
I
I
I '.
-3- Res. No. 89-94
, . .
COST OF ABATING NUISANCES UNDER CHAPTER 100
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION OWNER ASSESSMENT
LOTS 19 & 20, BLOCK 10, WILLIAM N. LITERSKY $ 19.45
OSCEOLA PARK, PLAT BOOK 5 KENMORE LANE 15.00 (ADM. COST)
3, PAGE 2, PUBLIC RECORDS BOYNTON BEACH, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33435-7355
(904 S.E. 3RD AVENUE)
N30' OF LOT 1, CLARKE CHRISTOPHER B. HOGAN $ 19.45
RUNGE ADDITION, PLAT 955-A N.E. 8TH AVENUE 15.00 (ADM. COST)
BOOK 25, PAGE 217, DELRAY BEACH, FL
PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM 33483-5726
BEACH COUNTY, FL
(955 A N.E. 8TH AVENUE)
LOTS 38 & 39, HALLER & DANIEL & EILEEN KLIMKIEWICZ $ 19.45
GROOTMANS SUB., PLAT 9232 LAKE SERENA DRIVE 15.00 (ADM. COST)
BOOK 5, PAGE 4, PUBLIC BOCA RATON, FL
RECORDS OF PALM BEACH 3349-6501
COUNTY, FL
(425 N.E. 7TH AVENUE)
LOT 15 & S25' OF LOT 16, ELAND & CLORAINE A. MUSTIVA $ 19.45
BLOCK 6, SILVER TERRACE, & VIGUEL GOURDET 15.00 (ADM. COST)
DELRAY, PLAT BOOK 11, 1045 MIAMI BLVD.
PAGE 61, PUBLIC RECORDS DELRAY BEACH, FL
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL 33484-3452
(1045 MIAMI BLVD.)
LOT 9, BLOCK 1, BELAIR CELESTINA POITIER & $ 19.45
HEIGHTS, PLAT BOOK 20, CAROLYN SMITH, ET AL 15.00 (ADM. COST)
PAGE 45, PUBLIC RECORDS 31 S.W. 10TH AVENUE
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL DELRAY BEACH, FL
(23 & 25 S.W. 10TH AVE.) 33444-1519
VIOLATION IS: SECTION 90.03 - STORING, PARKING OR LEAVING WRECKED OR
INOPERABLE MOTOR VEHICLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY; EXCEPTIONS.
-.
..
-4- RES. NO. 89-94
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 8N - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 90-94
DATE: NOVEMBER II, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve a resolution assessing
costs for abatement action to be performed on an abandoned septic
tank located at 18-24 N.W. 6th Avenue. The resolution sets forth
the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $440.00
remains unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 90-94 assessing costs for
abating a nuisance on property located at 18-24 N.W. 6th Avenue.
~~on ~
.
.
_ _ .-.--"..--- ,- ----. . - ----- --- ._.. - - -..-- ----
-_._-----~._------- - -~.
RESOLUTION NO. 90 - 94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 7.8, "UNSAFE
BUILDINGS" , OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS FOR ABATEMENT
ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON LAND (S) LOCATED
WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING OUT ACTUAL COSTS
INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH ABATEMENT AND
LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
THE MAILING OF NOTICE.
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Article 7.8 of the Land Development Regulations,
declared the existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or
parcels of land, described in the list attached hereto and made a part
hereof, for violation of the building codes and building requirements
adopted by Article 7.8 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code
of Ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 7.8 of the Land Development
Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his
designated representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined
that an unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set
forth in Article 7.8 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and
did furnish the respective owner(s) of the I and ( s) described in the
attached list with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report
of conditions and notice to vacate as the Building Official determined
that the building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to
life and public welfare pursuant to Article 7.8 of the Land Development
Regulations, describing the nature of the violations and sent notices
that the building was to be vacated and that the building was to be
repaired or demolished; work must be begun within sixty (60 ) days and
all work must be completed wi thin such time as the Building Official
determines, said notice also advised that all appeals must be filed
within thirty (30 ) days from the date of service of the notice and
i failure to "file an appeal or to make the repairs required that the !
Building Official would have the authority to have the building demol- I
I
I ished from the date of the said notice; and, I
WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained within Article
7.8 have been complied with; and,
.
.
------ ,---- .. ,---- m________u_.__ I
WHEREAS, neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appeals
or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
Chief Building Official; therefore pursuant to Article 7.8 of the Land
Development Regulations the Building Official caused the abatement
action to be done; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 7.8.11 of the Land Development Regulations of the
City of Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the
costs incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report
indicating the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Article 7.8 of the Land Development Regulations desires to
assess the cost of said condition against said property owner(s) .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcel(s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days afte'r mailing of the notice described in Section 7.8.11
become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel(s) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner (s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the Ci:'ty Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an
assessment against said property for the cost of abatement action
regarding an unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of said notice of asses,sment, after which a lien shall be placed on
said property, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6%)
per annum, plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting
I said sums.
,
I .
, .
- 2 - Res. No. 90-94
I
I
,
,
.
~- -- - -- --- -- -- .- - -'.
- -.-..' ._----- ----_. .. -, I
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30 ) days after the mailing
date of the notice of said assessment(s), after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s) , and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6% ) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30 ) days after the mailing date
of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
of , 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-.
1
-.
- 3 - Res. No. 90-94 !
I
.
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
Date
TO: Ethel M. Pitman estate
ADDRESS:c/o H.S. Fitzgerald. 1341 6th St.. West Palm Beach. FI 33401
PROPERTY: 18-24 NW 6th Avenue. Delray Beach. Fl. 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Town of Delray. N100' of E130' of S~ of Block 12. Plat Book
1. Page 3 of the official records of Palm Beach County. Fl.
You. as the record owner of. or holder of an interest in. the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of $440.00 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach. Florid.. dated
. 1993. has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given not,ice on 10-18-94
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiatp.d on an emergency basis by the City.
x You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board ot Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
.'
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the above-described property on 11-2-94
at a cost of $440.00 which includes a ten percent (10%) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days. that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County. Florida against
the above-described property.
."
'.
"
,
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Build~ng Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
City Clerk
.
.
,~
.
. .
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER m.
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # g.O- - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to approve the award of the
following bids and contracts:
1. Bid Award - to Lamar's Uniforms and Harrison Uniforms for
Fire Department uniforms, at an estimated annual cost of
$24,746.20, with funding from Ambulance and Rescue Service -
Uniforms (Account No. 001-2315-526-52.22) , Fire Safety -
Uniforms (Account No. 001-2317-522-52.22) , and Administra-
tion - Uniforms (Account No. 001-2311-522-52.22) .
2. Bid Award - to Hector Turf for Toro Groundsmaster mowers via
State Contract, in the amount of $23,190, with funding from
City Garage - Automotive (Account No. 501-3312-519- 64.20).
3. Lease/Pur hase of copier for City Clerk's office - Approve
~ purcha of a Kodak Copier Model 2085A via GSA contract, at
~~~ a mo hly cost of $1,864.12, with financing through Barnett
Ba Funding is available from the Debt Service - Lease/
rchase (Account No. 001-7111-519-71.50) .
4. Contract award - to Florida Design Contractors, Inc. for the
Morikami Park Raw Water Main, in the amount of $434,090,
with funding from 1993 Water and Sewer Bond (Account No.
440-5179-536-63.61) .
5. Bid Award - to Tri-Gas for the Miller Air Pac Welder
Generator/Compressor, in the amount of $17,275, with funding
from Garage - Vehicle Replacement (Account No. 501-3312-591-
64.20) .
~(M)~
un~
.
.
"-
Agenda Item No. g.O./.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: September 21, 1994
Request to be placed on:
X Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda
When: September 27, 1994
Descriptlon of agenda ltem (who, what, where, how much): tire Department
Uniforms - Multiple Award to Martin Lamar's Uniforms and Harrison niforms at
estimated annual cost of $24,746.20 per Bid #94-64
Martin Lamar - $3.477.50
HRrri~on - $71,'1'17.70
ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: Y2S/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO
Recommendation: Award to Martin Lamar's Uniforms and Harrison Uniforms
at estimated annual cost of $24,746.200
Department Head Signature:
Determination of Consistency
.
City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable) :
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds) :
Funding available, ~ NO
Funding alternative . (if applicable)
Account No. & Descr~tion: See A~vc:t
Account Balance: ~ ODD
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: S/ NO ' rlC)
Hold Until: 1t11~/91
Agenda Coordinator Review:
.
Received:
Action: Approved/Disapproved
,
.
M E M I] R. A N D U M
TO: ['avId T. Hard~anagec
THR.OL}GH: JO;::i:jeprl M. Saf I , 1"')'rectoi of Finan,:;e
FROM: Jacklyn Rocney, Senior Buyer c;ji!..
I
DATE: ~::;ep tembe r '21, 19q4
SUBJECT: DOCUMEtHATION . CITY COMMISSIm~ ME ET It4G -
SEPTERMBER r').., 1994 - 8ID AWARD - BID ~94-64
L I,.
EJ.B...L~P.EP0RIMEl'lT UNIfORMS - ANNUAL CON..JRACT
1,'i:~_rrr.~s;XQL~ u_ (:t t yC omfTlj~_?,i.Q[":.
The Cit.y Commission IS reque:3 ted to rnake multiple aw-3. r c~.:.3, f c.r- Fire
Depa,'tment lJ n i f C) r-' rH S to Harrison Uni fe, rms and Mar U, n , Lama~ lJ n i f c. f- rr~ '3 - ~ a. i,
",. .'~. I
e'=" t ima ted .3 n nu .3.1 cost of $'24,746.20.
Q_?_~J~~gr_g~~_l1:j..;__
c..:. -J were re;::.=~ i \/'3cj CJn August ,--..c.. 19'j4, f ;'0(;) fCfU r ~4) \'/E -!~''::'=l r s all In
L'LV '.J -.J ....
;3.CCO r'da.n.:=~e with ~,i t Y ~_... ......-..1... -.........: ~___ ~\ r-OCE"ju res ( 8i.j ~94-- 64. [J()C'J rfle n t.3, tic> '~I cr',
i-}U 1 L.! la~l. I I'd
file In the :~'U I c ~'1,3.'3 i ng 07'fiu:,.) " ta~:~u la ticln ()T bids lS at tac:i-!E-.j + ,.-. .- "yO =i U r-
h j '_i 1
r'81....Jew.
The F i r'e [;ei:~"3. r- trflEn t ,Lj .3.3 j-e v' i evie.j t ,~- t~_l i c1:3 , and r(~c~c~mrtte nGS rnu 1 t- i f:-' l-~~ -::~ :rJ '':l r" .j '2 ~
i :c
pei 3. t tache.::; rnSfftD a r'!(} })ighl ightec; U,b -::hEet.
\,/.e n-:k'.L;' E_s,t ifft2,t;,~g Ano'.JTi t.:..
h,a r r i 3CII'~ Uni fo~'ms $ 21,557.20
Martin's Lamar Uni fonns 3,477.50
TDTA:_~ "", 2 -1 , 746 . 20
~>
e~_c::_ C:' ri},lT.E?_iJ.::t~_t i C:' ': :
S ta f + f~ e C (J ,T) fT. e n.j:= 3;",/," r,j to \i2i-,do ,. S ;3. 3 S t C1 U: d abc \(e , at 3,;-; 63 t i j-;"!r3 te<=t .:f.ililua 1
C:CIS t cf $24 ~ 74(,. 2C, FtJndirtg f I e'lft tt-!e dep,3.rtment's FY 94/95 t)UCl;}E t
8.t t.9i;::t\fil~l'lt ::'u:
Tabulation c' [) : ,--1__
_I i u.lU>
i1emo F f'C;fn !' 1 rOE Ge}:;-.3. r tflt,~.n t
cc t1 i ~~ e ~.aJ i gete r ~:;on
~.O.I
,-
.
AlOJST 05, 1994 CITY OF OElRAY BEPCH
TAaJAL TICJol OF BIDS
8lO . 94-64
FIRE OEPARTME}oIT LtlIFa:<MS - PI'lHUAL COHRACT
Martin's Lamar Harrison Gold Nugget dba Suncoast Textile
ITEM QTY. OESCRIPTI CJol Uniforms Uniforms Argo Uniform Co. Systems
1. 425 SHffiT SLEEVE 16.95 / 26.80 / No Bid 19.50 /
SHIRT 7203.75 11390.00 # 8287.50
2. 50 LCtIG SLEEVE 20.85 / 23.65 / 21. 50 /
SHIRT 1042.50 1182.50 No Bid 1075.00
ALTERNATE 11. 30 / 27 .65 / 21. 50 /
n 60 LCJolG SLEEVE 678.00 1659.00 No Bid 1290.00
SHIRT
3. 75 ME}oI , S DRESS 14.50 / 26.45 / 19.50 / 21. 00 /
TROJSER 1087.50 1983.75 1462.50 1575.00
4. 12 looOME}oI . S ffiESS 14.50 / 26.45 / 20.95 / 21. 00 /
TROJSER 174.00 317.40 251. 40 252.00
5. 325 ME}oI'S 15.35 / 22.94 / 16.00 /
TROJSER 4988.75 7455.50 No Bid 5200.00
6. 45 looOME}oI . S 15.35 / 22.94 / 16.00 /
No Bid
TROJSER 690.75 1032.30 720.00
7. 130 TWILL 26.75 / 49.85 / 32.50 / 49.50 /
JlA'PSUIT 3477.50 6480.50 4225.00 6435.00
8. 13Q BELTS 7.25 / 13 . 00 / 7.50 / 8.80 /
942.50 1690.00 975.00 1144.00
BRAHD/CHTALO:i Martin's Flying Cross, Horace Small #909 Tauras Uniform
HLffiER Uniform Catalog Fechheimer, SWS #L4500-1 Red Kap
#611 Peerless, Fashion Walls #1216 Eagle Uniform
(trousers - do Seal, Looper Duty Man
not have a watch
pocket, ~~gular
r;CD f'\nlu
#1 & 2 - 1-2 days A/R --
DELIVERY 14-21 calendar Stock 14 days
days after #3,4,5,6 1-2 days A/a
receipt of order 117 - 45 days
fl8 - 1-5 days
CO't1E}o1TS/ variations to Alternate Bids Variances:
EXCEPTIctlS specifications: Submitted - #3-4 No Watch
Shirt - stitched- (Next page of Pocket
in Military crease tabsheet) #7 - Top right
Available in two front pocket has
"Body Fits" velcro closure not
Long Sleeve Shirt; flap, also sewn in
Two outside pleat- sleeves, not rag-
ed breast pockets, Ian. NOTE: increas
... ... ..--
.
.
Al...GJST 05. 1994 CITV Of DElRAV BEPCH
TAEU\L TICfi OF BIDS
BID . 94~
fIRE OEPARTMEHT LttIFCR1S - IlNHUAl ~TRPCT
ALTERNATE BID AL TERNA TE ITEMS
Harrison Harrison
ITEM QTY. OESCRIPTICfi Uniform Uniform
L 425 SHffiT SLEEVE 24.85
SHIRT, 1a) 19.65
#
2. 50 l..l:liG SLEEVE 21 85 20.85 *
SHIRT 2a) 25.60
ALTERNATE
~ 60 l..l:liG ~EEVE
SHIRT
3. 75 HEH . S OOESS 26.45 3a-Fechheimer
TI<OJSER 1134200 Trousers
3a) 31.25 Men - $32.50
4. 12 \o01EH . S OOESS 26.45 4a Fechheimer
TI<OJSER 1134250 Pants
4a) 31.25 Ladies $32.50
5. 325 t1EH'S
TI<OJSER 21. 94
6. 45 looCI1EH ' S
TI<OJSER 21. 94
7. 130 TWILL
Jl-"PSUIT 49.85
8. 130 BELTS
- 11.20
~/CATALffi
HLM3ER
i
DELIVERY
CXH1EHTS/ The following * Price for long
E.)Q',:EPTI CfolS pricing is offeree sleeve shirt if
for total award of alternate 111 (a)
all items ex- is used for short
elusive of 117. sleeve shirt
'.
[IT' DF DELIA' BEA[H
FIRE DEPARTMENT SERVING DELRAY BEACH . GULF STREAM . HIGHLAND BEACH
DELRA Y BEACH
F lOR I D A
.....
A1~America Ci,
'~lIt
1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
FROM: M.B. WIGDERSON, ASSISTANT CHIEF
DATE: OCTOBER 28, 1994
SUBJECT: AWARD OF UNIFORM BID
This is in response to your questions concerning the award of uniform bid for the
Fire Department. The Fire Department reviewed all the samples submitted by the bidders
and found the following:
The trousers submitted by Martins Lamar do not meet our specifications as listed
below:
1. The company can only provide regular rise sizes. We require
regular, short and long rises.
2. The waistband does not contain Sungtex or an equivalent. This
material holds the shirts in place which provides safety to our
personnel during emergency situations and also provides a
professional appearance.
3. The trousers do not contain a watch pocket as specified.
4. The labeling of this gannent is not provided on the outside of the
trouser which assists with the receiving process.
The trousers submitted by Gold Nugget dba Argo Uniform Company do not meet
our specifications as listed below:
1. The trousers do not contain a watch pocket as specified.
2. Waistband measurement is larger than specified,
3. This company can only provide regular rise sizes. We require regular,
short and long rises.
FIRE DEPARTMENT HEADOUARTERS · 501 WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE · DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
407/243.7400 · SUNCOM 928.7400 · FAX 407/243.7461
Printed on Recyled Paper
'.
.
David T. Harden, City Manager
October 28, 1994
Page -2-
The trousers submitted by Suncoast Textile do not meet our specifications as
listed below:
1. The waistband does not contain Sungtex or an equivalent. This
material holds the shirts in place which provides safety to our
personnel during emergency situations and also provides a
professional appearance.
2. The belt loops are not 3/4" wide and are not sewn into the bottom of
the waistband. Without the loops sewn into the waistband the loops
have a tendency to separate and tear.
The Fire Department had specified a belt that had the quality of a Looper belt or
equivalent. The belts submitted by Martins Lamar and Gold Nugget are the same quality
of belt that we are currently using and these belts are pealing and the buckles became
discolored after a few months of wear. Suncoast Textile Systems did not submit a belt
for us to review the quality. The belt submitted by Harrision Uniforms has been w\:af
tested and to this date we have not experienced any pealing Of discolored bucklt:s
Therefore, we are requesting that the belt be awarded to Harrision Uniforms,
If you have any further questions, please contact me,
~~~
Assistant Chief
MBW/tw
'.
.
.
.
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H
FIRE DEPARTMENT c:; t fl V III (; IJ II Vi.~', h Lf'. 11 . GUL r Sl flEAM . H I G H L Ar~ 0 BE A C H
DElRA Y BEACH
f to. I 0 "
bad
All-America c;
"111. I
1993 MEMORANDUM
TO: JOSEPH SAFFORD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: M.B. WIGDERSON, ASSISTANT CHIEF
DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
SUBJECT: UNIFORM BID
The Fire Department has reviewed the tab sheet for the annual uniform
contract bid #94-64. We are requesting that the Commission approve splitting the
bid and awarding Harrision Uniforms alternate items 1 through 6 and alternate
item 8 and award Martin's Lamar Uniforms item 7.
This request is due to the following:
.
. Harrision Uniforms IS the only vendor who met our shirt
specification. Martin's Lamar Uniform and Suncoast Textile System
submitted shirts that did not meet our specification and Gold Nugget
dba Argo Uniform Company replied with a no bid.
. / The Harrision Uniform pant is far superior in quality to the other
vendors that submitted samples. The Department feels that if we
use a lower quality of pant the frequency of replacement will
increase, ultimately increasing the quantity and cost of the garment.
Also, if the award of pants and shirts is split, the shirt cost would
increase the overall cost by $2.21 a shirt. Our Department is
currently using this garment and is satisfied with the quality.
iiHI D[Yi\FlltMtn ! IF,[ 'fl,H 1 t-H~ . . 1 \:!i~,l ATU\IITIC AVF:,.!L · DEU~I\y BEACH. FLORIDA 33444
i', ,>U 7<1c:n .~UIJCOM 9?8 ("WO. Fr,!. -107!243-74Eil
.
.
.
Joseph Safford, Finance Director
September 12, 1994
Page -2-
. Martin's Lamar Uniforms is the low bid on the jumpsuit portion of
our bid and the Fire Department is recommending award to them.
. The two vendors listed above have previously supwied our
Department with the above items and we have been satisfied with the
quality of the garments and the service provided by both vendors.
I wish to thank the Purchasing Department for their assistance with this bid
and if you have any questions concerning our request, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
AJ/~jc~~
M.B. Wigderson
Assistant Chief
MBW/tw
.
.
.
-
. .
~
Agenda Item No.: q.O.~
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 11/3/94
Request to be placed on:
x Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda
When: Novpmher 15.1994
Description of agenda item (who, what, where, how much):
RQplaCQm~Rt L~yTn MoYer~ ~O~ P~rk~ M~intpn~nrp from Hector TVrf
for ~oro Groundsmaster Mowers at total cost of $23,190.00 Vla
Flnrinrl Strltp r.nn~r~~~ #515-630-94-1.
'Rllnl}ptpn frnm" ~Ol-3312-591-64.20
ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO
Recommendation: iu~chase the mowers from Hector Turf at a total
cost of 2 ,190.00.
Department Head Signature: .
Determination of Consistency with ,
City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable):
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available, ~ NO
Funding alternative : (if#&liCable)
Account No. & DescriPt10n: SC{-2i::5/z.-, SiC;. (p4-u; C I ~E- /tPt7l)Y/t10T7~
Account Balance: r;~, b7
/
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: (!!j/ NO f7~1
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
.
Received:
Action: Approved/Disapproved
.
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
THROUGH: JOSEPH S~INANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: JANICE SLAZY(, BUYER~
DATE: NOVEMBER 3, 1994
SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CITY COMMISSION MEETING-
NOVEMBER 15, 1994 - LAWN MOWER REPLACEMENT
FOR PARKS MAINTENANCE
Item Before City Commission
The City Commission is requested to make award to Hector
Turf for the replacement of two (2) Lawn Mowers with Toro
Groundsmaster mowers for the Parks Maintenance Department.
At a total cost of $23,190.00 via Florida State Contract
#515-630-94-1.
Ba.ckqround:
These mowers will replace two 1990 John Deere mowers which
are in poor condition.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Hector Turf for the purchase of the mowers
at a total cost of $23,190.00.
Attachments:
Memo from Asst. City Manager
Memo from vendor: Hector Turf
State Contract Pricing
<g.O.~
.
[IT' DF DELIA' BEA[H
DElRAY BEACH
f \ 0 R I I) A
~ 100 N,W. 1st AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444. 407[243-7000
;Iifr MEMORANDUM
1993 TO: Janice Slazyk, Buyer
FROM: ~Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: LAWN MOWER REPLACEMENT - PARKS MAINTENANCE
DATE: October 31, 1994
I have reviewed Mr. Weldon's request ~\9 ~rcha~ two Toro
Groundsmaster mowers, model 30788, wi ~ ~8r ~nd deluxe
seat, $iO,8es.Qg each. I concur with this request.
if 1/) Sq S; . w
These mowers will replace two 1990 John Deere mowers, tag
numbers 17850 and 17851. These mowers are in poor condi t ion.
The average life of mowers is estimated to be five years. The
mowers are available on State Contract #515-630-94-1, Commodity
Number 515-630-560-0783. Per Linda Turnage, funds in the
amount of $25,000 were allocated in the Fleet Maintenance
Capital Replacement budget account #501-3312-591-64.20.
Please process for the 11/15 City Commission meeting.
RAB:kwg
cc: Joe Weldon
Richard Sandell
-
I o-CtA...G Co~
f15 23) ICfD. ()Q
tS>.. ' THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
~ Prmted on Recycled Paper
,.
.
J.\:J-'::'\:J-J.:",'::l"l '1<)1; 1 \Qr-'I 'I r-t'<'UI'1 Ht.'_ I Uk: I UHf- TO 14072437165 p.m
.
, -- .
1301 NW THIRD STREET I DEERFIElO BEACH, Fl33442
TEL.: (305) 429-3200. FAX; (305) 36Q-7657
October 20, 1994 Via FAX: 407-243-7166
Ms. .Tan Slazyk
Purchasing Department
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33445
Dear Jan:
We are pleased to offer the following quotation for your consideration:
Model 30788 Toro Groundsmaster UNIT PRICE
30716 with mulching deck $10,695.00
#3716 & Deluxe Seat + 900.00
$11.595.00 e~C'n .. , -
The above is on State Contract 515-630-94-1; Commodity Number 515~630-560-
0783.
If we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
HECTOR TURF
~~~
Vice President, Turf Products
RJB/gn
.
.
l"Ij
t-'
0
(f) 1-0 1"1
< - - ,..."
~ - ()) OJ - Q,
- I')) \Q - PJ
-3:U1 ~ 00 0 0 O(f)~~CI-O(f)I-O~ CIl ()) -3:::I;I-O>(f)t1~(f)3:U1
n -0.... ~I-O ~ 1-0 I-OHO)>>ZO~" Z 1-'- ->-<>(~>-<;;j~ "'~~\ en
0 _~U1 Z~~~(f)~~~2~Nt1~~~~~Q 0 .... -Ztl~~ Ht1~ U1 ("t
:3 -tI:l1 CXHHCHOH H~~ 0 - H ::l -H~n ~< "tl~1 PJ
:3 _~O'I "tltI:lOO(f)O~O~O ~"tl)>>~~OZ -e t'"1p~tI1~I~C\ ("t
OJ^-- w )>>tlJZZI-OZ~Z ZO )>>t1 ~. tlJ "tl ^- C~ H ~I-O- w (1)
:JI- 0 n~ tI1 ~ H "tlZQtI:l~~ ' (f) 1_~t'"1~~ZVl~~ 0
o.l-~1 ~ ~~Z)>> ~Z)>> 0 tlH tl n 1-- H ~G1>< O~ I ()
v _)>>U1 Ctl (f)tl Glt12' C, z)>>~~ X - ntI1 (f)~I-O>U1 0
tU-~C\ ~~t:lt10t1 t:lCt1~ ~C~S~tl 11--...1 ~~~~(f)tlJ2C\ ='
I1-Zo ~ 1-C\3: ~~~~~ 0 ("t
()) --- I ~<~"tlZ"tl ~Z"tl ~ZC ~ D - I ~ 0 ~ ~.. I 1"1
<_ 0 -tlJOO 0 OHO n3:~)>> ::: _H ~~tI:l tHt1 0 PJ
-tU-...1 (f) ~~(f)~ ~~~ ~- )>>VlC Vl -ZtI:l t'"1~~t1tU-...1 ()
-Ocx> ~ -...1W~ ~:r:~ 0 -n:ogl-O HH- ~cx> ("t
_~U\ ~ ~e)>>~ C\ ~NOO~tl~)>>H 11 -X ~nt~ w
-~ )>> 0 ~ 0 =-...1~tI:lHtI1~n ()) - tlz)>>o ~ '"d
-~ ~ C~ Ll I )>> <Xl' tltI:l:o ()) -nt:rJ~@zo. H~ 1"1
- ~ :on C H ~ <Xl - VlO< 1-0 :J :~~t1)>>~~~8~ ,..."
-~ )>> :t (I) z trl- ~- ()
-0 Z ~H ~ n t1 ~ )>>~ O~ (f) - (f)ttlO tI1Z0 ,..."
-~ ~ ~z > x >-< ~ w . ()) -3:~Ot'"1t'"1~~Q~ :J
-> 0< ~Gl ttl Vl ~Vltrl~nO t-' -~HZtrl @ - > La
-~ ~ tQ ~ tI1ZHC, ()) :H~H"tl~ trll-t1~
--<: ~ tl tI:l 3:Q~~ 0 ()
- tI:l tI:! )>> ~~H:r:~H rt -3:- ZH~CZ~ 0
-Iyj ~ ~ H t'"1Z trl~ 1-'- -C t1t'"1 VlQO"tl ='
-t-t H t-t Gl- - ~tI1~~ 0 -3:VlC~ tI:!HZt'"1 ("t
-> o trl~ tl- I ~ :J -- HVl ~ ~~> 1"1
-~ t1 w - n tI:! - N~~@O ~ PJ
-I o t:l-<:)>>~ I-' -~tt1 Iyj- n I ()
:2 -...1 ~tt1nt:l 0 -> H~tI:l ~r; ("t
NO tI:lt'"1t'"1- Z '\. -@-...1>t-t~ttl~ Z
Z _H ~<Xl ~HtI1 ~ N - ....t'"1trl tI:l H #:
()) -t1j N* {/HIr * * -. ~- tI1 ~ -~ I I ~Vl~ Ht1j Ul
X -tI:l ~ ~I-' .... N ~ 0< t-tt:l '\. - H~ ~~~Z~ t-'
rt - ><;- 0-...1 U1 0 ~ ~~tI1:o \0 -nZ><ZtI1VlOGl , Ul
-~ tI1.... 00 0 0 ~ ~tI1~QH ~ -8n~~trl Vl- ~ I
~ :~ >0 . - I Otl- < - ::I;tI1 ~O~ ~ 0'>
OJ ~ 0':0 0 0 0 U\ - \0 ~ tI1 .... -t-t . ~H~>t1j W
\Q -tt:I (f)- .'00 00 -...1 3: H 0 -tI1g HZ ~OtI:l 0
()) _. o I <Xl ~ ::CnO .. -t1 ~GlgH~- I
II - o I H 0 0 ~ w - X- n~ \.0
z - Z ~ -...1 - > )>> ~
tI1 - H Vl .. - H ~ I
X - Z ~ tI1 I-' - Z t1 f-'
6'J ~ - t"'1 I .... - Vl
- tU > > -
~ - t-t n 3: -
"U - > trl N -
'1 - n )>> -
(l) - tI1 0 C -
~ < - Iyj z -
- 0 -
d I'd - I1j -...1 -
OJ - ~ -
\Q - -...1 = -
~ ())3:- ~ ~-
no- = , -
tUl1- * 1-
~(l):~ ,-
.... -
< 1-- 0 -
~ 1-- - -
'" C\ ' -
v - Oi
~ - \0 -
~ III --G U1 -
0 - {{\ -
IN ;>:; - 0 -
- c - a 0 -
- 'tl - ~ -
-iJ n - <Xl - .
I'd ~ ~ U\ -
0 I1j -
w -
-
- -
.
.
-
Agenda Item No. g-.tJ..f
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 11/07/94
Request to be placed on:
XX Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: 11/15/94
Description of item (who, what, where, how much) : Staff requests
Commission award a construction contract for the extension of
approximately 3,600' of 24" raw water main and 650' of 4" water main per
agreement with JEM Orchids along Jog/Carter Rd. between Linton Blvd. and
the proposed entrance to Morikami Park to Florida Design Contractors,
Inc. , the lowest responsible bidder in the total contract amount of
$434,090.00. Florida Design Contractors, Inc. is currently constructing
the City's Golf Course Wellfield expansion and has been performing
satisfactorily. Funding for this project is from the 1993 Water & Sewer
Bond, account #440-5179-536-63.61.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: J~_/NO DRAFT ATTACHED J~_/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends award of contract to Florida Design,
Inc.
DEPARTMENT HEAD SIGNATURE: ~4dJ?- -,.~_jJ If lIck, rf ~
, .
Determination of consistency with comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of
funds): ~
Funding available E VNO
Funding al t:ernati v , (if ak>>lim;,.l~ ' ~ ); (It j
Account: 110. & DeSCr~tion '!/1f-Sj,1'J'':1''Jb- ,~# IA 5 ' )) W
Account Balance II' ..J;..,7 · )/1 /
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: @/NO Cf11
Hold until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: David T. Harden
City Manager _ ~~
FROM: Richard C. Hasko, P.E.~
Deputy Director of Public utilities
SUBJECT: MORIKAMI WELLFIELD RAW WATER MAIN
PROJECT NUMBER: 94-001
DATE: November 9, 1994
Attached is an agenda request and bid tab for the subj ect
project showing the lowest responsible bidder to be Florida
Design Contractors, Inc. with a total evaluated bid of
$434,090.00. This contract consists of the extension of
approximately 3,600' of 24" raw water main and 650' of 4"
water main per agreement with JEM Orchids along Jog/Carter
Rd. between Linton Blvd. and the proposed entrance to
Morikami Park and the City's proposed wellfield.
The funding source for this proj ect is the 1993 Water &
Sewer Revenue Bond, account #440-5179-536-63.61.
Florida Design Contractors, Inc. is currently constructing
Golf Course Wells 35 and 36 and associated raw water main.
On the basis of their performance to date on that project,
staff is recommending award of the Morikami wellfield raw
water main to Florida Design Contractors, Inc. in the bid
amount of $434,090.00.
RCH: jem
c: William H. Greenwood, Director of Env. Svcs.
victor Majtenyi, C. M. Tech.
Jackie Rooney, Purchasing Agent
f: 94-001 (D)
&,. ().~
'.
.
. .,..., ;;:;...., w~
Q
( . ~...<.'r
. '-J' Q~ - 04 \ ~
@- EHV SVS/AD~1IN.
Engineers
- Planners 94 OCT 13 AM 10: 58
~ Economists EECEiVED
- Scientists
October 10, 1994
FLW30787.M2
Ms. Iackie Rooney
Purchasing Department
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Subject: Morikami Park Wellfield Water Transmission Main - Reconunendation of Award
Dear Ms. Rooney:
We have reviewed the bids received for the above-referenced project on October 4, 1994. Complete and
valid bids were received from the contractors listed on the attached Bid Tabulation:
The low-bidder, at a base-bid amount ofS434,090, was Florida Design Contractors, Inc. We have reviewed
the bid and bid attaclunents and :find that the bid is complete, balanced, and appropriate for the proposed the
work. The bid contains no inconsistencies.
We reconunend that the City award this contract to the low-bidder, Florida Design Contractors, Inc. This
contractor has appropriate experience in this type of work and received positive recommendations based on
previous work with the City.
When the contract award has been authorized by the City Conunission, we will prepare six copies of the
conformed contract documents for execution.
Please contact me if you have any questions or if you require any additional information.
Sincerely,
.
Walter Schwarz, P.E.
Project Engineer
DFB 1 00 14027 .DOC
Enclosure
c: William';H:.;GreenwO&JlEnViionm:entaUS~ees
Richard C. Hasko/Public Utilities
Southeast Florida Office " Hl/lboro Executive Center North, 800 Fairway Drive, 305 426-4008
Suite 350, Deerfleld Beach, FL 33441-1831 Fax No. 305 698-6010
., ..
.
$
~
z~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g
~~u ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g
U',~z ~ ~ ~ M - N ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ - - ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 - M N M ~
-["""'" - - W)
a:z
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ 8 ~ 8 8 8 ~ $ 8 ~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ - ~ ~ N ~ M ~ ~ ~
~ ovi ci.,; . ~ .c 00 ~ .,; N N .c .,; r-: 00 r-: 0\ N l'-
~ <'\N '<t 0 <'\"" NM <'\ l'-
E:a: - - on
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .,;.,; .,; ~ r-: .c ~ .,; M r-: ~ .c r-: ci ci ci - ~
~ v ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ N - ~ .
~ - on
U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
8 8 8 8 8 8 888 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 888 8 g
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Z ~o~~";"; N";"; ~ .c ...: . ..; ::: ~ N .c 00 ~ - ;::
~u ~ N N ~ 0 - N - ~ ~
:;: '"'~ N - on
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~
~ ::c!:: N"; .,; ~ r-: . N ci . .c N . 00 r-: o\.c . N ...f
~ u~ '<t M >D - l'- - ~ l'- - N N '<t ~
Z ~ on
-< tol ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~z 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g
a:o ou ,....',....,.........
~~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S
~-< ~t; '.,; r-: ci ...: ~ .c NOM ci N .,; ..; 0\ N - C
~..:I ~Z '<t M ~ - >D '<t l'- - N N M ~
~~ -0 - II) ~
..:I~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
tol-<
5~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..:I; O. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~
tol r.(u .. ...... .......
~ ZZ M ~ "" "" >D l'- M >D - ~ "" '<t '<t ~ MM.
, ~~ . N ~ V V ~ - N N - M ~
::.:: .... - tn
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-< >~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 8 8 ~
~ :3c,} 0\ vl ~ ri :- ~. ~ '" :- vi ~ 00 6- .. ~.. ~ V\ : : ~
a: ..:10 N M M M 00 M M - M on
o ~a: - ...
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-< 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g
eZ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 g ~ ~ ~ 2
a:9z t-:. (5. "1. "1. >0. ~ --: N. (5. t"i. q ~ ~ "". '<to O. '<t .... ~ c
o~o M ~ - l'- >D l'- N M MOM '<t 0 "" '<t - .
,tolU M N M M - l'- M N M ~
G: ~ - ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
. a: ~
a: 0 .,
8 ~ ~ ~ b ~
fa S = 8 ~ .8. ~5 .g ~ ~
1t r.::: r.::: .~ ., - .s: . .;:; 5 5 ~
b .>4.>4 'S c: ....sa, .. ~..:I
~ .8:::;.~ ~ ~ ' .~ ~ ~ 'c ~ .g :g '" .8 .8 -<
i=l .~< ealal~';: ~ 0 9'jil ~ ~ ~ Ildlld ~ b
- ].'g-8lldo<:lrn~_ ~-lii~iii.c'~ ~ .,.8'-E--
o g ~ ~ ~ 8 ! ! ~ ~ ~ & & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !
~u 8 'i R- ~~~~~d'c~ ~> E:a
"'.~li'5'5"O:;I].""" b filS.; te
e is fj! ~ ~ ~ a ~ .s e: e: e: e: e: .~ 8 ~ .~ ~ ij
al ~ ~ E-- E-- ~ rn -< ~ c c c c c ~ U M . ~ rn
~ ,^ 0 - M M '<t ~ >D l'- "" ~ 0
Z ~ N ~ · ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - - - ~ ~ - N
!
j
'.
.
.
Agenda Item No.: ~.O.S.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 11/11/94
Request to be placed on:'
X Regular Agenda (Consent)SpeC ial Agenda Workshop Agenda
When: 11/15/94
Description of agenda item (who, what, where, how much): Bid Award-
Tri-Gas. The apparent low bidder for Miller Air Pac - Welder Generator/Compressor
in the amount of $17.275.00
FlInding available in the Garage Fuel "Vehicle Replacement" Account
#501-3312-531-64.20
ORDINANCE/ RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO Draft Attached: YES/NO
Recommendation: Recommend approval. This item will be installed on the
Environmental Maintenance Truck when delivered by our crews.
pepartment Head Signature:
Determination of Consistency
City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable):
Budget Director Review (required on all iteas involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available: ~NO (if applicable)
Funding alternatives~
, Account No. & DescrWtion: 7/~1 3317~ s'""9/ b'f.:Jo \ rt'{:Jf0 Account Balance: .6g~ ~GTjlJE
\ I II "
C~ty Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: @/ NO ~
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Action: Approved/Disapproved
.
.
-
MEMORANDUM
TO: David T. Harden City Manager
THROUGH: Joseph sa~snce Direc~
FROM: Jacklyn Rooney, Senior Buyer
DATE: November 11, 1994
SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CITY COMMISSION MEETING -
NOVEMBER 15, 1994 - BID AWARD - BID 9502
DIESEL ENGINE DRIVEN MULTIPROCESS WELDING GENERATOR
Item Before Commission:
The City Commission is requested to award a contract to low responsive
bidder Tri-Gas, in the amount of $17,275.00.
Background:
The Facility Maintenance Department has a need of a welding generator.
Funding from the Garage Fund "Vehicle Replacement" account
#501-3312-531-64.20.
Bids were received on November 10, 1994 from five (5) vendors all in
accordance with City purchasing procedures. (Bid #95-02. Documentation on
file in the Purchasing Office.) A tabulation of bids is attached for your
review.
The Fleet/Facilities Supt. has reviewed the bids and recommends award to
the low responsive bidder, Tri- Gas, per attached memo.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends award to low responsive bidder, Tri-Gas at a cost of
$17,275.00. Funding as outlined above.
Attachments:
Memo From Mr. Barcinski, Asst. City Manager
Tabulation of Bids
cc Richard Corwin
Richard Sandell
;.().5
.
.
-
. .
I
CITY OF OElRAY BBlCH
TABUlATI(JoI OF BIDS
DIESEL ENGINE DRIVEN MULTIPROCESS
WELDING GENERATOR
HOVEl'ElER 10, 1994 BID ~S-O:2
Tri-Gas George W. Air Liquid Anchor Edwards
DESCRIPTI(JoI Fowler Co. America Corp. Research Corp Electric Corp
TOTAL BID PRICE TO
FURNISH & DELIVER $19,975.24
(JoIE HILLER AIR PAC $17,275.00 $17,483.22 $20,157.49 $28,420.00
DIESEL ENGINE DRIVEN
MULTI PROCESS WELDING
GENERATCf<
~/MDEL Miller Elect- Miller per Miller Airpak
As Specifica- ric #903 044 attached 903-044
tions read Air Pak Specifications r
DELIVERY 10 calendar 42 calendar 45 calendar 14 calendar 60 calendar
TIME days after days after days after days after days after
receipt of receipt of receipt of receipt of receipt of
order order order order order
~TY Two Year By Two Year See attached As Per
Manufacturer Warranty manufacturer 1 year
C01'tEHTS / Deviations: Deviations: Acknowledged Deviations: Deviations:
EXCEPTI(JoIS Items /121 and Items /121 and Addendum /11 Items 32, 35, #4 -(n/a)
22 22 36,37, & 38
Acknowledged Acknowledged
Addendum /f 1 Addendum /f 1
,
I I
I
I
! I
I
I
!
!
i
1
1
!
I
I
I I
,
I I
I
!
..
.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING -V-- .,~.~t~f- 6:00 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
TL_ -l...~rll.
'l'._Dml _ .ALLlL.-, II II J...,~1!IHII~lJt~f' ~~
Approve
settlement in the amount of $16,500 plus attorne s fees, for
the City v. Decapito, an eminent domain action regarding the
acquisition of right of way for S.W. 10th Avenue.
.
THE REGULAR AGENDA IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE:
9. I. SETTLEMENT/GLORIA HILTON v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: Consider
settlement in the amount of $39,500, which includes all costs
and attorney's fees, for Gloria Hilton v. City of Delray
Beach.
:
'.
. 111.5'9-l rrE 16:23 FAX -lUT 2T~ 4755 U~L o~n ~1~ ~~1. --... - l: l ~ \. n~""\..) .L _ ',-1
--,
[I" IF DELIA' HEAEM .
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 100 NW 1$1 AVENUE' DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
fAC$I~lILE 40i/278.~ 755 W=~t.~'. O~~.Qt L~n.
DELRAV BE,J,CJ-l (407) 243-7090
..
, , II I! MEMORANDUM
Date: November 15, 1994
19',H
To: City Commission
From: David N. Tolces, Assistant City Attorne~
Subject: City v. Decap1to - Settlement
The City has received an ,offer to settle this eminent domain
matter for $16,500.00 plus $2,500.00 in attorney's fees.
The property owner also requests that the City install a
curb cut along his east property boundary. The attorney's
fees will total approximately $4,500.00 which includes
$2,092.97 from the initial action which was dismissed in May
of this year and $2,500.00 for this action.
Our office recommend!! settlement of this matter, as
additional costs and fees would have to be paid if the case
proceeded further. Please call if you have any questions.
ON'!' : smk
cc: David Harden, City Manager
Sh.aron Morgan
dec4pi:".d.n~
-
@ Prffll~tj on J1tacyc/ed Psper ?It
'.
11 " 1.5 " 9 -l TCE 1d: 2Lf.-\X .,\Oi 2H ..Ii 5 5 J);:,L d~..L1. ,.H .1.TTY --- Pl"RUBSl\G @UOI,
- --
~
~
J.:
,,~1
I . ~
; \
o~"^J1nOa 3\:(10 I --..----.'-..--...j"---..... '-".' ....-......-.. . \
: 3nNl^Y SN33nO , I
I I
~
u_,.._--.,-- I r-------'-.-.-.--
. "1'
I'., . >~I
~1rl'" .....
. "I
.", l.'
-4 :~.~:. ';'~:',:
.. 1'" 1~'1
'> \> t
:" ,. "
I"..... "j
'~~ r:i
"~ .':
,); ~.
,~" ,~:
I:' 1:-!
I L~,> 1"'"
~~l~i :f
.. :-~...' k'.>:
., "1 .............
'~"~ ~~.. ~ .
, "
,.,' t'l ~
i~':~ ,:~:! ~
,- ~.. \
;' \:'
I:'. " I
i ;'1 ~
, ,~
, ,"l
....... .- .-~r:. I ~
L ''0
I,
,--,-_..-----1,', ,"
IlIlI'. .l 511:1'0. " ,
I> ..'>1
"'>>~'.I.' 1111.3 .
.-., ---._---- "I
I . .. '" ..
i~h,:
i ~ i, 1.....1
> 'I'
, -<~' ,,'
, , "!,'I
.- .... ... .--- --- ..-.. ,--
I', I
~-..' ,
:J: I,
I I>"
! l-
e :. .
; - F:;~; 'j
I
',.~. '.
...." '.
, f\~ > I
, . (", ,
~ ", .' f
','
",
vi I
I
I
...
I
......'--...:..
--..--. _..- . -
.. ,-
"
< I ' ---- -.... '. ...
.
I
'~
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGERP1i'1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 'fA - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
Attached is the Report of Appealable Land Use Items for the
period October 31 through November 11, 1994. It informs the
Commission of the various land use actions taken by the
designated boards which may be appealed by the City Commission.
Recommend review of appealable actions for the period stated;
receive and file the report as appropriate.
~ ~~
-5 .-' 0
.
Of(
t1ft1
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
~~~~ ~
THRU: DIA DOMINGUEZ, DIR CTOR )
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND )ZONING
FROM: 2ff:Z#~~
JE PERKINS, PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
REPORT OF APPEALABLE LAND USE ITEMS
OCTOBER 31, 1994 THRU NOVEMBER 11, 1994
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is review of
appealable actions which were made by various Boards during
the period of October 31, 1994, through November 11, 1994.
BACKGROUND:
This is the method of informing the City Commission of land use
actions, taken by designated Boards, which may be appealed by
the City Commission. After this meeting, the appeal period
shall expire (unless the 10 day minimum has not occurred).
Section 2.4.7(E) of the LDRs applies. In summary, it provides
that the City Commission hears appeals of actions taken by an
approving Board. It also provides that the City Commission may
file an appeal. To do so:
1. The item must be raised by a City Commission member.
2. By motion, an action must be taken to place the item
on the next meeting of the Commission as an appealed
item.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD:
The Planning and Zoning Board did not meet during this period.
SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING OF NOVEMBER 2,
1994
A. Approved (7 to 0), with conditions, a Minor Site Plan
Modification and Building Elevations for the addition
.
.
City Commission Documentation
Appealable Items - Meeting of November 15, 1994
Page 2
of a body shop expansion and write-up canopy at Delray
Toyota, located at the northwest corner of Federal
Highway and Fladdell's Way.
B. Approved (7 to 0), a change to building elevations for
Veteran's Park (removal of proposed gazebo), located
on the north side of Atlantic Avenue and the west side
of the Intracoastal Waterway.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD:
The Historic Preservation Board did not consider any appealable
items during this period.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, receive and file this report.
Attachment: Location Map
.
.
.
LOCATION MAP FOR
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
I'cJ~ CI
w ~
~ ~
~ ~
-I _ Z Iii
~ I e w
z ft
,...---.---.- ! ~
i I
i c.
LAKE lOA ROAD
i
- ~
I u
I I !
k- "W2ST
J L.___..r---.,
i i I
. .' ,
! L________ .-, r---.J
! i -
! - ~ SW2ST
r'-r- ~ ATLANTIC AVENUE ~I
___J I
I !
I ~
,..___..i .1
i 'Ot
ICl
i Ii ~ ~
i
i
i
LaWSON BOUlEVARD
._-"-~ SoW. I om STREET
8 I
i
u
LINTON BOUlEVARD ~
---. Z
i i
I
I
i i
i I
I L.1.i I
~ ,~
i1 g i
'" :i i
~ - IL_="~_
L-"I CAMAL C-15 CANAL
CItY LIMns _. .w ._ S.P .RA8. :
A. - DELRAY TOYOTA
B. - VETERAN'S PARK
f WILE I
I
SCALE
N
-
CItY OF DEl.RAY BEACH. FL
PlNtNlNC DEPARnlENT
-- OIGITAL S4.5F IMP SYSTEM --
'.
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGERtJ/11
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # Cf6 - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
STORMWATER MASTER PLAN SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to consider the first five years of
the proposed Stormwater Master Plan Schedule of Capital Improve-
ments, and authorize staff to proceed with the FY 1994/95 project
list.
A third item requested was that the City Manager be authorized to
re-prioritize the five-year project list, within available fund-
ing. I do not believe it would be appropriate for me to change
the scheduled projects without approval from the Commission.
Also mentioned is the possibility of a bond issue to finance an
expedited schedule for stormwater improvements. This concept
needs to be discussed at greater length and will be scheduled for
the January, 1995 workshop meeting.
Recommend approval of the projects listed in the first five years
as identified on Attachment 1, and authorize staff to proceed
with the FY 1994/95 project list.
~Q&
$-0
.
Agenda Item No.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 11/9/94
Request to be placed on:
XX Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: 11/15/94
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): staff request
Commission to approve the first five (5) years of the proposed Stormwater
Master Plan Schedule of Capital Improvements; authorize staff to proceed
with the FY 1994/95 project list; and, authorize the City Manager to
re-prioritize the five-year project list, within available funding.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: tES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED tES/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.
DEPARTMENT HEAD SIGNATURE: ~d'Ji1 o~ ~",,"",,(J 11/1'/91
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable):
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of
funds) :
Funding available YES/NO
Funding alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description
Account Balance
City Manager Review:
Approved for agenda: ~/NO ~
Hold Until: VI r
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM: William H. Greenwood, Environmental Services Director ~~
SUBJECT: STORMWATER MASTER PLAN
DATE: November 11, 1994
Attached is an agenda request with regard to the Stormwater
Utility Capital Improvement Program. Staff has prepared an
expanded schedule which prioritizes projects based upon the
available funding and the recommendations contained in the
"Stormwater Master Plan", prepared by Mock, Roos and Associates,
I nc . ; "Preliminary Design Report, Barrier Island Stormwater
Management", prepared by Hazen and Sawyer, Environmental Engineers
and Scientist; and, from staff discussions, relative to localize
drainage problems, held at various Development Services Management
Group meetings.
Based upon the current "pay as you go" financing philosophy, and
as illustrated in the attached table, it will take approximately
20 years to complete all of the projects currently recommended in
the Master Plan.
Items to be considered include:
0 Operating expenses are ramped upward from $448,000 in FY
94/95 to $506,000 in FY 99/00; and, are projected to
increase 2.5% per year thereafter.
0 No inflation factor is included in project costs.
Current estimates are based upon 1994 Construction Cost
Index.
0 Actual bid costs are reflected for the Basin Drive and
Bay Street pump stations. The costs shown for the
remaining pump stations are best guess estimates.
0 We should be able to correct the drainage deficiencies
identified in Area 45 (Beach) of the Stormwater Master
Plan during the first five year planning period, based
upon the availability of $1 million per year.
0 We have decreased the project costs listed in the
Stormwater Master Plan as identified in the attached
table (Attachment 2).
,.
.
Based on the foregoing, I am requesting that Commission approve:
1) the projects listed in the first five years, as
identified on the attached spread sheet (Attachment 1) ,
so that it may be incorporated into the FY 1994/95
budget;
2) authorize staff to proceed with the FY 1994/95 project
list; and,
3) authorize the City Manager to re-prioritize the
five-year project list, within available funding, as
additional refinements are made to the program.
Additionally, direction is requested regarding the "pay as you go"
financing philosophy. Based upon current revenue projections, the
City could float a $10-12 million bond issue; which would allow
construction of the first 10 to 12 years projects in a two to
three year period. This would complete the projects with the
highest priority ranking; after which the remaining projects could
be reevaluated as to financing options.
WHG:cl
cc: Joseph Safford, Finance Director
-2-
.
.
~ ~llil~I,. I
~ .. ~ ~ l<l ~I 5l
~ ~. :~:~:
--
~ ~~~~~ ~ 8
!t~~gl I g ..'
!!III- I ~ ~
tl -:;;.;
! i ~ ~ ! ,.1!.l.. :1 ~
... - . . . '.~ "i::f -
o fi: ~_ l'l ~I ..J{' 5l
.;.~.:
II> !;! !;! !ll"'.""" ... !;!
!e .- lIS. ~, CiS..,.", ~ I,.', ~-
.. c:> l'l ~ 't5i ' " 5l
>- Oi 'i). II) .:~ :;::...:.:;~
:::~:: KI::
!5l!;!!;!~;!Q R !;!
~ - liS ~ co :.:. :: .;... ~
o~~~~11 g
~1~~_~_llJ .1 I
t&l~l<l~1 .1 5l
..... !;! 2 !;! "1"'" '51 2
Ii! i lIS ~ 115 .'. ".. 11 ~
'!O~g~Nf,iW: g
"'. 13 .,'~ ..J.t
~;~~: ;~~~i
!~~~ml - ~ ~
. _ . _ '..,',~,' ,J{." . ~
.C:>QO>"~ 'R.. Q Sl
110 _ '" _ ,..~ ..~ III '"
~ II)~ ~ ~
"'-" ~ ~
!m!;!2~. R 2 ~
. N. <<S~ 4!5. ~ }~4 ::JI: ~. us
.~~l<l~1 . 5l ~
~ ~ ~
!.. I ~_ ~. ~_I, .,1,.,', I ~ rl
.g~l<l~. . 5l ~
~ ~ ~ ~ i
c ~~~~!81!l1 ~ tl
..... . . . - Ji "'iii' - -g
~ ~~~l<l~. I 5l i
~ ~:;;_!~_~~ .~ ~_ I ~ ~
~ ~I~u;_l'l~~! 5l ~ ~ i
:) !Q~~~!QI ~ ~ t\'l "~
~ = OOQ~,.,,'.,.,..,.,.. .,.,~,~,... 0 0 ~8~
u; '" '4 .'.~' ,,~,. II> '" >- E '0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;; ~ ~ ~ ~ <:> ~~ ~ i i f
~ aS~~fl I g ~ I g g~~ i~!
~ ........,..,n .!! u ~
O !~!;!2~tl"~". 8~S5l=~22!;! ~ I~o
"&I)c:s~m::> .:"":: ,....~M&t)o(J)25 CiS 0 - ~
~ .~Ori""';.~ 'I'" ri~~Q~NriO~ N tlj~
,^ ..... '" '" ."...,'.,', ' '" '" II> '" '" Vi on ..
VI ("II ,..., ::~:: . B g U
1t,...,..,.,.'I..:,..."....,. i........'~;;,'.,..,i ~:~ ~ ~ Hi
I ...... c:> II:: ~ .. .. .,
~ ~ B S8 J~~
.. ,-0> ..... ~~lI) a.~~
,..",,'.. ". I' ~ ~ - ~ ~ &l ~ Q. ~.. '5i ..J
I,'.,.,.. ..,.,.,'.." '.",",. , l:? ~ '" ;:r; 0. ::l ~ ..J.l..! '" M .!! '3 c:
E .'~ '.,..",. ,', ~ ~ E' ~ e ~ g ~ ~ s III ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~
LL ,.,""',....., I,.,.., .", ' & e Sl! ! Q. 'Iii E ~ ~ g Sl ~ -; ~ 3 'E3
~1_:: -:.: ~ j'Z' C .g.% .~~~:!&-e. !&l~[
r 'I"".. 5 ~ Q.! i 5- ~ ~ oj N ~ ,~t 1i :> 0 ,~ ~ :: 'B
'.'.'. ,"'" - UltJ , ,_ ~I!......
II 1.1: ',' .... ',., "", ~ ~' ~ ~ I! I ~ -f "? g-;}! .!! .!! 15 I! ~ .[ 0( C III UJ ..J
.. ai",., ," ~.ll!CC", :> lilli)' 00."-
0( e: ...,\it'. ",' .'.'.'."" .. 2 1;;':> Ul Q. i5 .. 1;; 0 ... .. :::.. ~ C-
o:: {".':: :':.:: "..... < 0:: _ Ii C):c .. a. ~ 0 i ! ~ oG
~ 15 j i ','.",.,.,' ',".. "" ,..,'.,' .;::......, 1> ;g f I" .till) ~. ~ i Ill! ~~' ~ lI) ~ ..J~ ~ ~ e: ~ ~
i1:!jw,0_1!! ...iiw::E 0 -; 'Ii
>- 1 )~i . ":""."1"'0 ~f '" Ie: en ~~1!-!:
l< .... ,'.' '. " ' .., -2 > - .. - J./ t! '" ~ -
~_cu ::;;:: :::::: ..... ;::_UJ....ts: =~i;'- liiW 3:~
Q.lIlc~,I.. ..1, Q.~zlllzl-3::I:~..Jm.!lmI-Ullllmz~IIlUJ
_ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.
... ! ~, ~"
'" fA ~"
"- ..,..
..... '"
.....
"-
..... ~
..... ! "..
I
! . ~
'.... ~
! ~ .~
gg
.....-
! ~
~
~ ~
~
,
~ ~ e ~ :i
..
Iri ~ ~ .2l
~ J
.5
! ~ ~ .!
s
8" .~ j
"
c
c
! ~ ,g
11
i 0.
\ E
&.
! ~ ~.. ~ Vi
g ~ Iri J
lD
l-
S
! ~ ~ ,~ N
~ g ~
- CD ~
U
~" e ~ ~
! j
~ ~ ~ ~
'"
~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
<
l=i Fi ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ s
~
! ~ ~" ~" ~- ~" ~ !It
:; c
~ ~ i ~ ~ Ill" ~ ~
, ~ ~
! ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ,6 i-
i :: ~
~ :l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' !l "=
UJ .. ::J
q :l ~
! ~ o ~ ~
~ ..
~ l! 'il
':i .!!! .. ~
'" i ~
I~ in in ii) liD l!. ..
'il _ ~
I";:' ;;:;. ;;;;. .... I;:;' -g ~ ..
i ~ I .!
f .! ~
i o .Q
I ~ ~ -g 1
LL ~ i .. ~ ~ ~
I J i s u .. E ()
.!!!
I i J i ~ I lr ;;; 0. ~ E
E l?!. OIl 3: i .~
5 Q. E ::J i .!
f::!. ::J Q. 'i l S ' ~ E
ll. Q. Q. ~ f::!. ~ ~ 1 .... ~ l ~
t2. !i ~ ~ f::!. .. ::J f::!. i r c c c c c c c c c c
J! iii c Q. ~ I J!l .!!! J!l J!l J!l J!l J!l J!l J!l J!l ~ i .s
~ J! i ~ 0. } ~ V> e! t ~ ~ ~ !:!. ll. Q. ll. Q. ll. Q. ll. Q. ll. D..
~ 0. 0. 0 .. c I i . ~ I ~ ~ I ~ .!! u; iii
U) t f ~ ~ .... 8, ~
0. 0. f Q. ~ 0:: .. 8l t OIl ~ .5 j I ,. :( ~ ;n
5 ~ I!! D.. 0:: ~ ~ I .! l! l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..
'! ! ll. C j ::0 ~ie€
ll. ll. C D.. ~ ~ () ~ D.. D.. 'j!
D.. 0 ~ ! ~ ! UJ '0 lD ~ D.. 3: 3: ~ 3: ~ 3: ~ 3: ~ 3:
~ 0 ~ < 0 LL ~ iii lr 0 ~ iii
i f c i ... :::. 0( ~ iii ~ V> U) (I) U) (I) U) <I) <I) (I) U)
I t '5 U) c ~ ~ ,!!! CD !l ~ ~ ~ 'It '" CD ~ f:l ~ CD ~ ~
I I 0 j i ~ ~ I 'if .2l c 'il I lD N
" 'if z:
i ~ ~ II l!. 3: c 3: ::J :5 S 3: ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~
.. UJ ;;; .. ~ !!!
<II :I: U) U) U) Z lr U) lD :i :J U) U) 0( 0( 0( 0( 0( 0( 0( <I: 0(
N ~ ~ 'It 1Q lEl t::; l!il ~ ~ ;;; N ~ ~ III l5! ... l5! ~ ~ . 'i;/ 1;'1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lil ~ N
N '" .., '" '"
.
'.
.
.
.. '.' ,.,.... .' ,...-.......-......
.. ,. ," ",',"
""','t ,,',',',,'
'>,...,..>8"orl1l<..,
",',"" ,. - , . ",. " , -. .
." , ,. -- ..
'..,.', .'Wat er<
,'...,.< Ma st.er>
. .. .
'plan Cost'
13. Lake Ida $2,590,300 $ 700,000 A significant
Area No. of number of streets
Lake Shore have been ,~.
-. Drive resurfaced and
drainage
improvements made
with DOE Road
Reconstruction
14. Lake Ida $2,952,500 $1,000,000 Drainage in this
Area So. of area was enhanced
Lake Shore by construction
Drive of the Boy Scout
Hut Drainage.
Beverly Drive
improvement is
already planned.
16. N. W. $4,967,800 $ -175,000. This area has had
Drainage significant -. . ------_. ..--
Area improvements.
This revised cost
will connect
remote drainage
basins.
Goldstein
Property already
planned.
18. S. W. 10th $4,204,400 $2,500,000 A large portion .
Street Adj. ,'. of the trunk line
to 1-95 .. is proposed with
S. W. 10th street
and a drainage
" ditch exist along
I-95 which can be
substituted for
96" outfall pipe.
22. Dotteral $ 207,000 $ -0- Road to be
Road West resurfaced with ...-"
of swale drainage.
Hungerford
Canal
23. Dotteral $ 333,400 $ 333,400 No change. This
Road E. of work is needed.
Lindell
Blvd.
2
-A1c-ML-'
! '
.
<:>storm."',,,:
, , .. ......."... - ....,.
>)Wa tEn:)
,'. .<Mast;er>i
PIa n Cost<
24. N. E. of $ 496,100 $ 250,000 A number of these
Lindell roads have been
Blvd. No. resurfaced. Some
of Boblink swale grading and
Road minor drainage
pipes are needed.
Approx. 50% of
original cost.
28. No. of N. $3,551,000 $3,000,000 Most of this area
E. 4th st. needs drainage
West of N. improvements.
E. 3rd Some work has
Avenue been installed at
,. Del Ida circle
"
and at N. E. 14th
Street.
40. S. W. 10th $4,162,000 $2,500,000 A significant
street from amount of
s. W. 7th construction work
street to has been
Dixie Hwy. constructed on S.
W. 10th Street
and So. Swinton
" Avenue south of
s. W. 10th
Street.
43. Federal Hwy $3,065,600 $3,065,600 No change. This
South of work is needed.
Ave 'AI
,~-
.
'.
7 J I 1uno:) '1UJ'Daf[ 'UL7'Dc! II ) , .
1"."'3 'f1CmDl:I .~ WlYd )S}'\
81-or-rt-tt 'lI'l 'III '1pna[[ lin.qaa 10 fin:) AWl31~ 0ZlS
~.~.~
Oo-LtI.-1I 'OlV'd SP.L'DPU'D1S a:J~n.Las 10 7<Ma7 JNI ~S31VI'Xf2SV ~ SO~ ~ )(O..J
HII 'I. .. j '3lW
'STN
i '~~A.US 10 ,'B'1 II a '~~U'S I' 1"&11 II fl UJU'S 10 l'A'T D
I U)U'S 10 ,'Ba1 II :1 '~'U'S I' 1'&17 II , '~'U'S I. 1'''7 fIJ
pua6a1
.
,
Le gend
~ Lnll 01 S,nic. A II L,vd 01 Servic, C II L.v,1 01 Service g
."':,::~ir'
D Levd 01 S,nic, B II Level 01 Service D II Lev,1 01 S.rvice ,
N.T.S,
. MOCK~ ROOS & ASSOCIATES~ INC. Level of Service Standards DAlE, F.~ II, 11M
~ 0 SlRVEYCRS 0 Pl.AIIN::RS City of Delray Beach P."" N1, 11-117.00
5720 ca<PCRAIE WAY OR, N1, 4I-~3-20-"
w:sr PALM~. ~ Palm Beach Count , F L E"Ii~lt I
, ("107) 113
.
~ I~ c>> ..~... m IrA ~8 ~ffi 0 ..~... <>> .'~ <>(0) ~ ..~, I\).lI
~ '.~,. ~ "~,,, lr .'~..., ~ ..~... g' ..~[--.... g' rl~< Q 'if". :iE .~~~."'. ~ '~' ~ lr ~ '::::@.:' "I~':' IIi:f:t lD ~ ~ ~ .
l.C "<:' a:~'r < 'lil" tJl ,0 '< ^,.. tJl t",::r Ill, CD"'Q' ... <: 'Ii!> -, :.:.:.:.:.:. ., ':': III Cl) :l 0
ro'"" tJl Ii;>: CD !:l.: - .~ ", rJl ~'.,:i' e ~ '~, g:,fj' ~ 3 0('/ ~ :,:,:,;:::,: .: ':.: "'::1'"
~.: _ &" ~ "Cl) ',' 0 ," - " , ~.",z, ',::;",::r ' .[, _ :.:.:.:':':. .:m:.: 0 81 -<
l/O ,tt Cl) "'. ':!/l;" :l,: ,,~'.. O?> 3: m' lll:r' rJl I iil ::;:0 rJl :::::::::::: ;;... ::11'" 11 - I lB
~ ..~.. i ..~'.., ~[ ~ ..~." ~>~} ~. '~.. ~ ~~'.. ~ ilL ~.:.~' ..~.'. !l :.:!.::!:!:!~: !:I:!: Ii ~ ~ i ,
~ ~ ~ 8 "".. 0 .~..... Cl)iiL iil ." "0 "'O:."'tl ct.'::l ;! c: ~,- 3:;' CD ~:!:.)> ::::,:,:::,: :'a;':' ::~':':i' 3 )> Cl)
~ -!:::l -= !l .'~..""O2 0 .'~:. 5' !:iZ: rJls c: ,",1. Cl) ill ::;; is 01ll1O 5} 5: ::;;.,: '.1):': .'~} l.C Cl) tJl le
r m C/I 0> )>0 iilo 1lI'1!/ iii ;;0.. 3 '~'. ~ ,i:i. !4..... iil-' c,.l5, Cl) ~t... :,!!f;,:, m Ill:<
~ 1lI CD iil .tjj..,.8a 5'~, l.C ";::..,:.... 'm-',."O r; m ' ;; !!!, 5' ~, CD /0>""'. g:; :;it,,: .l:5 III Cl)
Q. tJl 1lI _..' ,'. c:~. 1lI::l '1'8.. ,'. C/I111> .Q III iil llI"O <0 .';',' ~}: ::/11::::: 'li' 11) 3 /II
~ ! ~ ~ l i ~ ! i lt~,.;..., ~i ~ :~.,,~' ,~~..,.. ~ ~,~ I'.: ~.:; ;I:I ,;11::: I !
-. 1lI r <0 -- w, 'fl ,~" -. ., '."0 '7"'"'tl ,,1+: -. " ,: 'fl ,..., 'Ii. I';j;" '::;11.. '1' . :.: II
!1!. 0 ~ c.l <0, ,0)' - ..,r" 0 'v tJl --~' c: :;;:." ::l ,,: _ ':L' ..... ' :::: ::!!!i:::,
~..... r JiJ.-: .....,;.:-: (.a,) .(.i,).. - ....-,.:... ::-~:- - .... _I :Cl" (0.. -...;:::
o - CD - ,"., .., ~ '~. 0....." 3 .", <0 .., ~ ... ., g")" IIr.
c: -. W ::~" ". I _. . :>::: - .' ._." . '" -..", '1:::: :.:. ":I:'"
;. ~ ~ ~ "WI ',.,' '.. g' "h.: ~b ','El]! ~c,.l 1111'.16 ~S Sm ';". ..::: :......:.
~ c5' "0 ", . ~ii!' :r:. '1O!~"!>> ~ .;1."'" .;:.. ,:3,:,:
; i ~ .. ,. , ". [ ..~... S ~'-= i':::.;"':: .:1.::: .1. ..
o ::l lil ,', " " :I: ,lil'", ", , ............ ::ill:::
~ ~ ~ '," ,,' ~c. II .. ,. .. ' . " IUI :::J:::j::::
[ CD::l ,",',' . b? E . ....;. [<I :.:.:.:.:.: ...........
1I1~,".N~ I!I~! ,i,~!I~~i i-it j! ii ~ ! ~ !l ~
:;l ?i tJl ~ ,<>> ~ g: I' <>> " aI '.'.... " . C1I .,.,.,.,.,., Sit !ill ~ I\) 0 N ;z <
~ ~ ~ ~i ~ .' ,. ~ ',' ~ ,', . ~>< ~ rrrl' ;Im ~ ~ ~ i s <
~ ~ ~ ..'...' "".:,9 ",' ' .', :::,:,:,:,:: ........... ......,.: C1t)>
CD tJl 0 >> "'> II > ' ...... ....... .-. - "" ~
l.C 0 ...........' ". . ' ' :.:.:.:.:.:. ;".....::: ;:':"':} - 'TI m
o "TI'C2,', 'I. ' ...... '2" .Q. ~ C1I 00('
i ~ -< '~. [<I 1< . ,'. · ~ \\\ ~ ::~,: lB ~ 0 a;.,. "'7'1
- CD <0 - " ..... , ", - .:.:.:.:.:.: :!f - - - of ~
i" ~ ~.. ".'..... d< .:'.:..8 :j:j:j:j:j:j .~.. :.~.:: 8 ~ ~ 0 ,~.'. ~
... 1<1 i'l ...... ......
I ~ ..il! ........ I!!!!! ,"; ~!; ~ ~ ~ 1-; I. ~
a< I>, <<I " , ..........'..'..'. .:.:.:.:.:.: ...... :..~: .-"l'( C
-. ...... '....'... < " }}( '1" :,~::: ~ C1I 00(
::l '"" " ~ :.:.:.:.:.:. .:"":.: <>> I\) - CD ...:c Z
Q. .."., ,,' _ ,.;.:.;>. ,,....:.:;, ;,.Ql,::: J'.l .0 .0 :-l ~ .
l5..'. ,'.' , < 8 ............ ..~.... ..~... C1I 8 ~ - ,... 0
CD ' " '. : '....'.' ((( :: . :;,:. .:: C1I 0 <I>
tJl ' ...... , .. . .. .~ I\) OCl-c..
...... ." . . v.
...... .. .. . ..
i I.."'." ',',"." ....' .~ ::,:;:::;:,: :.;::: I~ill.i ~ ~ -~ '~...
f-' ;a. 1>>1 II ." s< ",::::"", .g.. '!'Ii" <>> s< S!! 0 ,...
g' 1>1 I,. Iii '.i ~ tmr' .~.. ii5 <0 0 0 ~ e.
! 1-1......., ,", I"" '\ I.. C1I j:j:";:? :::':, :F::. !l! ~:=~.
CD o~ .~. ~~~oo
1lI '.... II ~ :::::::::':: :~::: ~::: ~ ~ "S!! N co
~ . ..' ".. ,".', 0 :j:::::::::: :.~::: .:m::::s: 0 0 rgg..
~ "".'" r", , , ' :::::::::::' :,:i:i!i;,:; ::...::: ~ ..,r
3 I> ........... .~.. . tI. C1I C1I '< .
~ I> , ", .~ :::!:!:::!:. :01',,:, ~.:..::: i -~ .0 ~ ~...
CD ~ 8- &_s<S!!.~~
:"' II {,::f: ::.,;,::: ~ 0 0 u. c"\
::::::,:,:,: :,:i:i!i;,:; ::...::: ~ .,.."
......~.. .~. gj C1I 00(
','", ....'... ,.. ~ :.i::II.I':1 (1:--::: .......:.: ~ ~8 _0 ~ i
.>., I>, "i",A """ 0 ............ '.' .'. C1I S!! -. '7
. ...... .. .. 0 C5__
. ..............
I:.i:i I 2
.:':':< :::::::::::: :~:::::::~:~ :~~:~ -~ ,,:
II".""",..... .." ':::::'::::: '1' .!!,. ~ ~ 00(
.. , " ' ~ :.:.:.:.:.:. ~ 0 w<o 0'
.... .......
..' . .. ............
" ' '...... - ............ .0.. .'. .... ..... . _ _ ""
, ..' ,,':.. 8 ,;,;,;;;,;;, ;,.~.:;;, I" ~ 8 ~ ~ """"
',',',',',',' ',', ..... ............ ..,... 0,'
"'" = . ...... ..
..:" '" t-0" }}} ..::.::)j . . .. Cot
i> '.' '. .'.,.">> ....i...... .......'.,.. ::li;li;;: - '~...
~ 0C11- R '2'~I\)~<OC~
'. 0 :.:.:.:.:.:. .ut. ~ co 0 0 C1I
\i ~ :,:::,:,:::, '!:':!f Ol - . ~ ~'..
'.'.'.' / II 'i E.' :: Pi =: ~ : ~ :
"" ~ ...... .~.. I -...j ~ ' <0
, =~ ... --
> .'...... _ .;.{{; .~Ii.:.>, ''W'''.W..O .- :;;;: ,
\< .,,' ..' " . " ,,'. ~ t/t .:ixljij O>~ 8 ~O> ~ Q
,",.. 1><1 ...... ,40" C1I eft,.
. . ....... .
. . ....... .. .
.. ......
lilli' \\. II!' 1"1' ,':':':':':':
, "< ' '~lli'l :::::::::::: :::::::::::: ::...::: - "i1"
.. . < .' rimr :.:~.:.:.:.:. .~.. C1I ~ 00(
,,' . ~ .:.:.:.:.:.: .... :."".:. ~ ~ 0 ~ 0
, . , ' ,,' ,,',,,., -8 I::::i::: "1";" ':m><o -8 -~ 8l S!!
, ' '...'... ,", ,.... , :.:.:.:.:.:. ~ co ,,:,:i,.
.. . . . ...... .
...... .
.:.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.:.:.:.: .'
.., .'...'.'.' i<;<I:\ I.' I' , .., "'\...,' ffl ;:':;:;:':;' ";';;;;';;' ,;:_::::::,,: - "'TIE
. '. .... ...... ............ ............ . .
II'llill ..+m. ~ I' I t ~ I ~ i
II .......' ........., , >. :;:,:,:,:;:, :,:::,:,:,,: ...... 'TI
.. ...... ...... ......
< '0 - - .._-~ ,-
.... ' .;. tIS :I"'~<>> ~ :
" .,...,...' C1I :;:,:,:,:,:, :: . ,:: - I\) - <0 .....
.'.".. ,,' ,,' ", ",' ", _0 :t:::} :-l .0 .0 _~ is'''
"" <8- ~ ~-'s<S!!~.
> ".'.... ' ............ '~"'r.<if'':;: ~ 0 c>> ,,' ',',' f-'
.'"",;". II ,> : i tl~ i; ~ j -~I ~
, 8 ............ .1:.. s< S!! oT
I\) ttt ::~;:: ~ ~ 0 ~ i<
.
,II II Iii ".'... ii ....~. 8
qo 1'.111,'111> ,'10 Lti
0'\ '.', ......', . <N 8
::i ..,.W ri
.-l ,..'.. 1><
::i~11 II 1>1 " ." , ~
nll;;I; IIII J!lL ..... 1;1 1/ r~1
I >' ,'f--t- ,'::;:;:
.,1, '.'..... ..',.'..' ....... ,", ".,..,.~
/ ...'..,... > .. "le,.
%0' "1'" '~~
. .... . .
....... .... .
..... . . . .
..... .. ... .
..... . .
..1"':111 I' I": '.i"11 '.'...'" 8_ .~
,,<, g g
<, . '" 0' ,,'I
"" " ~0
"I'" '." " " ." '" I 11111 > /1 8 '
- U"'" ........, , ..,..
.~ , '" "..,. "'../ ,.."',' ....... .....'. ~'"
,.', " . II E<
II . "II. . [0] ..... .. . Il IHtlm fliII ~
;;~: .. 1..1 ii ;...... ;;1 .... I:;:!; ~,II;.....II ~; :1/11 1
o ",... ..' >11/), ,C') I/) Idl 1ii
< ,',' II' , '" ,'" C') N " cu
....... : - ~ ~ >
7". ..' " ",..... ..'.. '..'... .5
mI....' '. [>I"d '.'... !<' SO! ~
S! " I/I/i ,'...' ", 0 0 -
, .. ",> ........... />> 8-g- ~
..m .,.'.' , ,...> "d>< ,.... N ~
'I ,.., 1;;;1 >>i!< =i
,~ "= 0 -
.0 I .'..'... '"
..'~ , '" ".'../ g ~
.IIII , '" , 'i ", ,'....,', <>> ::J
'II II ,,1 ,.'.. ~
1"'-'1;11<<1 , I'. 1<<1 i>< 8 '. .~" 8 . ,."', ~
.,ill 1 , ..... . , ' ". ,,'.' _de _". .,., III
1ft . '/< " < g ",Ie" I/) ',' E
. .' "'1 ,........... ,,'. '..... ~r 10 ' ~
"1" ... 1'1>' ...~.. !< . , ,'.' ~
e ,. . .> ,'.. ...'.. "'CS.. oi' ,g N
'1ft <<I .,' " I',.. ' ..1." .it; ci lil
" :'. ' N I/) I::
'. . ,~ CO ..'....' I::
",', ",..'..'.'... 0
"':'. 1'.".:.. ......... ~
· .... .. ' ""<i .'.'.". l
..1" "....' ,," / 8 ~ '8 .,.. ........ .
. - /<~~ . i/ cu
" ,,' _0 1/),
, " ' ,,',( , C') CO '" >
.,' It'.... ,.,',(" ~ I/) < <(
ill . ,'.> .....,.i.. ~
G '. ...,p. .."', ' . , ," .,,:.,1 ..."... .. '.' :,,1 LI ~
N " ' , =~ ~ 0, SA Kd
.'1. ',p 8 .'~.' '" " '.' 8 8: 8: ,~8,' ......'..'.' I:'l ',"'I " , ',., ",. <(I::
, Ql '= -' ,~.' - ~'.- ,... . ..,', ..'..'..,...,
...;,. ~" R ~m." i" :g '8 !;:j:g g " .....'.. "".s
. ., ,N: N _: N ..,.,.'. ..,..'. "==
. ., ~ m j 0
. . . ~
8_ ..,~ 8. '.~ 8. 1<>1> ......' Iii II ~ c
'.,. ,..', ~ .,'~, ~ 1;Q ~ II> //> 1<1 .. ..,. . ~ ~
ii', ..l'ii. .../.d /, ...., I'll cu
>> ".'..',....>>i " ....,..,'.. ~ ~ ~
. ' .',., ,,'. I 8 ~/"g ~ . ",..>>1 ci ~ ~
, '.. .. ..... ' . -::;- - ',..'. ,..... ........ ~ 0 cu
, 0 ~ !f), !;!,,', .'....'. . ::J .l::
o ~,~ N '.... ....' .... ~ '" ::J
1111 " ..... .'.."... II g/> · ,.'.,.,.".. ' ~ i {
o ~ ~ ~
: .' c::i =l!0)
..'.~/ ~ i~~
~ ~ cu ~
;: it) I 'i)t>1 ".:0 ..(D1 '.'.. ,> al :g. '*
'..;;; I :::':J'.f <i'l II, ......1 :1.i.~111 ,1 ~.. ..,., -g ~ ~
.,..',., ,I .' ' , '.'....... .;:l;, > . . .,'. .2 ~ 1!
. ',' ." ',". -;;- =>> ' I ~ ~ ,g ~
~ ....;::; i - -.f:
..... :". cu .'...... I:: .... I:: al s
<>> "..... ' '.,' al<> g e > .2 ~ a..
...... ' : u.. ~,i ~ 10 I:: ~
1 ...'.. Ed !: ., ..... ~ , .s ~> .,.'I;, ~>d< 1ii ~ 0
__ ~' ' kZ E '. " ~ l[ l[. I:: ~....... n:: = '..,. , >> ~ E E
~ '" .....l[ l[ .. E' E.s <>> tJl '" I'll" ,..". E 0 ::J
... ~ ,d!; ~ E.::J::J .1:: ,'" :::: ~ ~.' ~ ..'.'..... .."..' a lil .5
." , ~ '::J N" ::J~. Q. ~ , I:: ,~ ~ 0 )"_ .,..,.' .......<. ~ E
, ,::J", 0..:" ...... a.. , N N rJl' ~ 0 a.. _ .- - 0) I:: ::J
".:;" ~ N .l!!.. ,'.,', !:::!. .."", ';; -; " ~ i N -: -m ".~, ~F I::C: I:: I:: I::C I::C I:: ~ ~ <(
'.'';" ......" <;;' m ."'. .!! m en 'i!! .'....'.', ~ m';;:~ ~ 5 8 .'~. ~ .,~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~, ~ ,g ~ ~
, ~, I'll 'Cb ..1!t ~.!l!. m"''' ~ 0 'Cb' I:: ...... - 0 0 j;; ......',....'....0:;- ',:-: ' " I:: cu .-
men.. ..21 cu .'..~~,. E ."~ Q. E .. ".' " Ol I'll m' et' = ..,'.~ ~ '..'.~ ~ ~ ~ ....~. ~~ ~ I'll 1ii ]1
A ~ l! Ol ..,'p; ::Js ~E E ::J .e 0::j!...J '51 Q, & '.~, -.5 cu .. 'li(, 1ii 1;; 1ii 1;; 1ii 1;; 1ii 'li( 1ii ;:: .\1! x
E E'- !5 o..:!!! ::l o..:,e 0::;- .c: ~ I'll E I'll ,. '2. .E I'll ",Iii I'll I'll I'll I'll l'll.flJ I'll Iii I'll <( "" w
& ::J5 'i!!' 'i:1;., ~e ~ ~. cue 05 ~o -&. ~ .~ u.. S! ~ 1! ~. ~ ~. ~ ~. ~ ", ~ ~ ..~ ~ ~ ~ €
".,.;a;. ~'= oiL !l ."l!!' .!l! ~ .~ 'j! ~Cb ~ ,~, _ti 0 :0- iD!l! ~ 3: 3: 3: 3: 3: ~ ~ 3:3: 3:
'" >, 0 ..~ 1::" 1: ~,I\J I:: " OR ;::..~ c( '>, mo:: _ Z .c. ..-Z. m m m (I) rJl (I) rJl(l) m(h (I)
:,0( ..." ::J .,0', ~ ...J 0 ! CII;f (I) 01: .c.:!!! m II) tJl of; .c: ..,.~;k ' : ....;:;'::
,,:0 Ill"",. 0 ,......, :1:: ~ Ol"m.c... '" .c: ",0) is ,I:: ~= ::J i5 .." C') ~ lO, co N C') ::!. co 0 C')
~ EcD 0 fi CII' 2' ~ - ~ ~ ~ D ~ - 0) ~ II) ~ 0 TI ~ - ~ ~ N ~ N 5 ~
'I ....:Itt -. ]"1' - . ;. t! ,..tJlm, - ,5 ..... ,C; ~ ,C ~ '5 ... -g lil ,L~'", ~ jill, I'll illl I'll ..Ill' I'll ,m I'll m I'll
~ .c. -, , ,Ill " ",'u'u "'Ill .- - - 0) cu cu cu cu' cu cD cu cu. 0)
," .- :-:::I{ 0 .... :- ::::.. .~': C'U. Q) ::::,0;. W - lU co:= ~ .... .... -= ......... ..... ~ .... ~ ....
<( ~ ~ ~ m ~ m ~ m m m m.. z .0::, m II) ~ ~ ~ m m ~ <( <( <( ~ <(<( <( <( <(
R ~ . .~.' ~ ...~.. ~ .~.. ~ >~ g >~ ~ >~ ~i~ ~ ...[;i. ~>~ ~;r ~ >~ ~ >~ ~ :..~. ~ ....~. Ifi ....;0 ~
'.
'.
.
,
,
Legend
II Ln,1 01 S.nice ~ II L,vel _/ S,nic, C II L.v.1 01 Service g
D L".I 0/ S'f'Vic, B II Level 01 S,rvice D II Leuel 0/ S.rvic. ,
N,T.S.
. MXK~ ROOS & ASSOCIATES~ INC Level of Service Standards DAlE, F.~ 11, ..~
EN>lJIEERS 0 SlRVEYCRS . fll.N\IIfRS City of Delray Beach P."" N1, 11-117.00
5720 ca<PCRATE WAY OR,N) 41-43-20-11
\oEST' PAU1~. ~ Palm Beach Count , F L E"'I~II I
1
M E M 0 R AND U M
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER fJJt1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM i 9(!., - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
BID AWARD/HARDRIVES OF DELRAY. INC,
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to consider a bid award in the amount of
$1,467,078.00 to Hardrives of Delray, Inc. for the S,W. 10th Street
Phase II and S. W. 10th Avenue project. The work consists of widening
S.W. 10th Street to four lanes from S.W. 8th Avenue west to the CSX
Railroad, including installation of drainage and a drainage trunkline,
It also involves the construction of S.W. 10th Avenue from The Groves
north to S.W. 10th Street, including drainage and retention area s .
Hardrives is the only responsible, responsive bidder on this project.
Also included is Change Order No. 1 which provides for traffic
maintenance on S.W. 10th Street throughout the duration of the
project. It includes retaining two-way traffic under the I-95
overpass from S.W. 17th Avenue to the west end of the project. This
will allow traffic access to S.W. 10th Street from Congress Avenue at
all times during construction. The amount of the change order as
negotiated by staff is $0.00.
Funding for this project is available as follows:
D.O.E./SW 10th St. Paving & Drainage
Account No, 228-3162-541-61.90 $ 760,341. 75
SW 10th St. R&R - Water & Sewer
Account No. 442-5178-536-61.90 72,790.00
Stormwater - Drainage Trunkline
Account No. 448-5411-538-62.42 366,945.00
SW 10th Avenue Paving & Drainage
Account No. 334-3162-541-61.89 267.001.25
$1.467.078.00
I wanted to be sure the Commission was aware that this project, as
designed, has 14 feet wide outside lanes instead of the normal 12. A
white stripe will be placed two feet in from the edge of pavement,
creating a two foot "paved shoulder" . Specifications also call for
six inch wide striping instead of four inches. In my opinion, these
changes are unnecessary. However, the paved shoulder does give a
safer area for bicycles and taking it out would only save about
$7,500.
Recommend approval of bid award to Hardrives of Delray, Inc. in the
amount of $1,467,078.00 and Change Order No. 1 for traffic
maintenance, and advise staff if any design changes should be made.
~ 6-0
,
.
Agenda Item No.:
AGENDA REOUEST
Request to be placed on: Date: November 3, 1994
_____ Regular Agenda
_____ Special Agenda
--X-- Workshop Agenda When: November 8. 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Pro;ect No. 94-084. S.W. 10th
Street - Phase II & S.W. 10th Avenue. consists of widenino S.W. 10th Street from
8th Avenue to the CSX Railroad to four lanes, includino installation of drainaoe
and a drainaoe trunkline. Also. included is the construction of S.W. 10th
Avenue from the Groves tb S. W. 10th Street. includino drainaoe and retention
areas. Included in this aoenda is a request for approval of Chanoe Order #1 for
additional traffic maintenance on S.W. 10th Street. The scope of this
additional work includes maintainino two-way traffic under the 1-95 overpass at
all times throuohout the duration of the pro;ect. The base bid allows for
temporary road closures and detours for the entire pro;ect. This work was
included as part of a S114.000.00 alternate to the base bid for maintainino
two-way traffic throuohout the pro;ect The amount of Chanoe Order #1 as
neootiated bv staff is SO.OO. The only responsible. responsive bidder on this
pro;ect was Hardrives of Delrav. Inc. with a bid in the amount of Sl,467.078.00.
Fundino sources for this pro;ect are as follows:
Items Fundino Source Account No. Amount
S.W. 10th St. Decade of Excellence 228-3162- $760,341.75 '
pavino and Drainaoe Phase II 541-61. 90
Water & Sewer S. W. 10th Street R & R 442-5178- $ 72,790.00 /
536-61. 90
Drainage Trunkline Storm Water Utilities 448-5411- $366,945.00
538-62.42
S.W. 10th Ave. S. W. 10th Avenue 334-3162- $267,001. 25 /
pavino & Drainaoe Road Construction 541-61. 89
Total $1,467,078.00
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends award of Pro;ect No. 94-084. S. W. 10th Street
- Phase II and S.W. 10th Avenue, to Hardrives of Delrav. Inc. for their bid in
the amount of 1 467 078.00 and al 0 Chan e Order 1 for 0.00.
Department Head Signature:
Determination of Consistency
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds):
Funding available: YES/NO
Funding alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description
Account Balance
City Manager Review: ~ ~ ~;d{8
Approved for agenda: Y S NO
Hold Until: < ';(f..~ -~~
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda: ~
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
FiLe: AG484021.MRM
.
.
.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: David T. Harden
city Manager ~
FROM: William H. Greenwood
Director of Environmental Services
DATE: November 3, 1994
SUBJECT: S.W. 10th Street - Phase II & s.w. 10th Avenue
project No. 94-84
Attached is an agenda request and bid tabulation for the
regular commission meeting on November 8, 1994, requesting
award of the construction contract for the referenced
project to Hardrives of Delray, Inc. Hardrives was the only
responsive bidder for this project with a base bid amount of
$1,490,668.00;and an add amount of $114,000.00 for Bid
Alternate #1 for increasing traffic maintenance
requirements. The Engineer's estimate for the base bid is
$1,493,000.00 and $120,000.00 for alternate #1. The
attached Bid Tabulation provides a detailed breakdown for
the above totals.
Approximately ten (10) potential bidding contractors
purchased plans from the City, but only the one bid was
received. Staff telephoned each of these bidders to poll
them on the reason they were not responsive in submitting a
bid. Two common answers were that there was not enough time
due to other bid commitments that week for Palm Beach
County, etc. ; and for some of the smaller firms the $1.5
million dollar project amount exceeded their bonding lines,
which prevented them from bidding.
The Base Bid scope consists of reconstructing S. w. 10th
Street from the CSX Railroad to S. w. 8th Avenue, and
constructing s.w. 10th Avenue from the Groves to S. w. 10th
Street. The project includes drainage improvements and the
installation of a drainage trunkline along s.w. 10th Street.
Traffic maintenance provisions in the Base Bid allow road
closures with local traffic and periodic detours as approved
by the City Engineer.
Alternate #1 increased the scope of traffic maintenance as
specified in the Base Bid. It requires that two-way traffic
be maintained at all times for the entire length of the
project for the duration of the construction period. It
would require additional barricades and temporary asphalt
pavement to comply with this scope.
Upon review of the Base Bid by CDB Engineering it was
identified that items 48 - 52 costs were a lot higher than
,
.
the Engineer's estimate. Items 48, 51 & 52 represent work
required to replace an existing double sanitary service.
This existing service has minimum slope and must be serviced
periodically by CDB Public utilities when blockages occur.
The blockages occur very infrequently. Based on the actual
bid costs for this work it is not cost effective to replace
at this time.
Item 49 represents the replacement of an 18" cast iron
sanitary main to the wet well of Lift station #25. Based on
TV information the inside of the pipe has deteriorated. The
cost of this item is excessive and is not cost effective to
replace under this Contract. The work could be completed by
City crews simultaneously with the remainder of the work
under this Contract.
Based on the above Staff recommends that the city commission
approve the Contract award to Hardr i ves in the amount of
$1,467,078.00. This amount represents the $1,490,668.00
base bid amount less $23,590.00 which represents individual
bid items 48 - 52 referenced above as unbalanced with the
Engineer's estimate.
Staff is recommending that Alternate #1 not be accepted. In
lieu of this and also included in this agenda request staff
is recommending approval of Change Order #1 for a limited
increased traffic maintenance scope for S. W. 10th Street.
It includes maintaining two-way traffic as proposed in
Alternate #1 only under the 1-95 overpass from SW 17th Ave
to the west end of the Project. This will allow traffic
access to SW 10th st from Congress Ave at all times
throughout the duration of construction. The amount of
Change Order #1 as negotiated by staff is $0.00.
All of the above has been reviewed and approved by Susan
Ruby.
The following is a breakdown of the funding sources for the
Project:
Item Funding Source Amount
SW 10th st Paving 228-3162-541-61.90 $ 760,341. 75
and Drainage DOE - Phase II
Water and Sewer 442-5178-536-61.90 $ 72,790.00
SW 10th st R & R
Drainage Trunkline 448-5411-538-62.42 $ 366,945.00
Storm Water utilities
SW 10th Ave Paving 334-3162-541-61.89 $ 267,001. 25
and Drainage SW 10th Ave Rd Const
-------------
$1,467,078.00
WG:HW:mm
File: project No. 94-84 (A)
WG484027.MRM
.
.
5W 10th 5t and 5W 10th Ave BID-TAB Project No. 94-84
l!!IIII:I:II:II_~III!I:II!'I:"'I!I..:,II..",II:i.I'".:II'I~::II'II"I~:II'II:.:III:,I.I.:I:':II:illllllll'"II'llllll"'rJlillll.III!11 :i::I:IIIIIIII'=llIIJII:II:lilll. ,1'111111111.1'1:11
...................................................................
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::;:::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
.................................. ........ ..... . ............. ............................................. ...................
1 Maintenance of traffic LS 1 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $41,280.00 $41,280.00
2 Clearing and grubbing LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $18,500.00 $18,500.00
3 Pavement removal LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $71,684.00 $71,684.00
4 1 Yo" Type S-lII asphah SY 22405 $14,00 $313,670.00 $12.50 $280,062.50
5 Asphalt driveway replacement SY 555 $12.00 $6,660.00 $16.00 $8,880.00
6 Type "F" curb & gutter LF 425 $8.00 $3,400.00 $6.40 $2,720.00
7 Type "D" curb LF 350 $12.00 $4,200.00 $7.50 $2,625.00
8 Concrete gravity wall LF 260 $100.00 $26,000.00 $159.00 $41,340.00
9 Concrete barrier wall LF 550 $50.00 $27,500.00 $69.00 $37,950,00
10 Concrete sidewalk SF 14765 $2.50 $36,912.50 $1.60 $23,624.00
11 Concrete inlet apron EA 20 $250.00 $5,000.00 $212.00 $4,240.00
12 Concrete flume SY 155 $26.00 $4,030.00 $19.00 $2,945.00
13 Pavement striping LS 1 $21,000.00 $21,000.00 $17,650.00 $17,650.00
14 Valve box adjust. EA 30 $150.00 $4,500.00 $365.00 $10,950.00
15 Adjust manhole top EA 15 $300.00 $4,500.00 $780,00 $11,700.00
16 6" Stabilized shoulder SY 5080 $2.50 $12,700.00 $1.60 $8,128.00
17 Grade swales LS 1 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $3,400.00 $3,400.00
18 Sod SY 12815 $2.50 $32,037,50 $2.15 $27,552.25
:",:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:':\t.o.1lAV'A_e.:'$W':loUf$.'tOllljf':':::':::::::':':':,:::::,:::,:,:::::,:::':::::::::,:,:,:, ft:t:t::::t:t::t:t~nll'fmijQfr"r'::::rr::rr:::r t::tttt:::~:t~::t]~j$.':: ~lf$t,.::r,.,).r",:",:t:,,::::,
................................................................... ...... . .... . '. .. .'. .... ....... ..' ................................................................
:::.:::.:.:.:.:.:::.:.:::::.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.;.:;;;;.;:;;:.:.:.::: :.... :.... . :. :: :'.:. .':' .:...:.:.... :....: :....:.. ......;.:.;:;;:;;:;.;;::;;;;::;;;.:.;.:;;.:.:;;:;::;;.:.:;:::.;.:.:.:: '" ..... ..............
19 Replace headwall EA 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $3,500.00 $7,000.00
20 Type 'C' Inlet wI USF 6212 (0'-8' cut) EA 5 $1,200.00 $6,000.00 $1,655.00 $8,275.00
21 Type 'C' Inlet wI USF 6212 (8'-12' cut) EA 8 $1,800.00 $14,400.00 $3,142.00 $25,136.00
22 Type 'C' Inlet wI USF 5130-6168 EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $3,275.00 $3,275.00
23 Type 'E' Inlet wI USF 6290 EA 4 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,000.00 $20,000.00
24 5' Drainage manhole EA 3 $1,700.00 $5,100.00 $5,560.00 $16,680.00
25 6' Drainage manhole EA 5 $3,500.00 $17,500.00 $6,380.00 $31,900.00
26 8' Drainage manhole EA 3 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $13,315.00 $39,945.00
27 6' Conflict Manhole EA 1 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $14,800.00 $14,800.00
28 15" RCP (0'-8' cut) LF 165 $25.00 $4,125.00 $34.00 $5,610.00
29 15" RCP (8'-12' cut) LF 420 $28,50 $11.970.00 $52.00 $21,840.00
30 18" RCP LF 525 $32.00 $16,800.00 $36.00 $18,900.00
31 24" RCP LF 115 $38.00 $4,370.00 $48.00 $5,520.00
32 30" RCP (6'-8' cut) LF 110 $42.00 $4,620.00 $52.00 $5,720.00
33 30" RCP (10'-12' cut) LF 80 $45.00 $3,600.00 $55.00 $4,400.00
34 36" RCP LF 775 $60.00 $46,500.00 $64.00 $49,600.00
35 42" RCP LF 930 $75.00 $69,750.00 $75.00 $69,750.00
36 48" RCP LF 605 $85.00 $51,425.00 $87.00 $52,635.00
37 Clean & flush exist. drainage LS 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
38 Core exist. drainage structure EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,640.00 $2,640.00
39 Connect to exist. drainage EA 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,640.00 $2,640.00
40 Remove existing CMP LF 315 $24.00 $7,560.00 $39.00 $12,285.00
41 Remove exist. type 'J' structure EA 1 $900.00 $900.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
:m:::::::}/:::::::::::::::::::::::tt::::::::it.b.1itiUJ1ti..l(OE:~m:~lQijf~Wtm:m:/:t::ttIt:m:::'I:::f. //:\::I:::t:I\:m:..Qfh~'j);ijl't:tttt::::::::::::mt::t :::::::::::::::::::f:::rItt$4.tn$l;~itf::f'\mt::}'......r
42 6" DIP - WM LF 155 $25.00 $3,875.00 $21.00 $3,255.00
43 6" Gate valve EA 4 $450.00 $1,800.00 $415.00 $1,660.00
44 6" X 6" Tapping sleeve EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $1,565.00 $4,695.00
45 Relocate exist. fife hydrant EA 5 $1,500.00 $7,500.00 $1,800.00 $9,000.00
46 Fire hydrant assembly EA 5 $1,800.00 $9,000.00 $2,125.00 $10,625.00
47 Water service repair LF 350 $10.00 $3,500.00 $30.00 $10,500.00
48 Plug exist. sewer invert EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 $365.00 $365.00
49 18" PVC - san. (10'-12' cut) LF 20 $39.50 $790.00 $745.00 $14,900.00
50 Sanitary service LF 195 $10.00 $1,950.00 $27.00 $5,265.00
51 Sanitary c1eanout EA 3 $300.00 $900.00 $550.00 $1,650.00
52 Cut-in 15" sanitary wye EA 1 $495.00 $495.00 $6,675.00 $6,675.00
53 Rebuild bench and flow channel EA 1 $450.00 $450.00 $990.00 $990.00
54 Replace sanitary MH frame & cover EA 2 $750.00 $1,500.00 $850.00 $1,700.00
55 Rehab sanitary manhole EA 6 $3,500.00 $21,000.00 $2,100.00 $12,600.00
.:,:..:..'?::::?:....'.......:..?T:OTA'll\\f\ :: 'R'ittSitW', ':.sW)ti d:f . .EE1t',...."~.........................r ...:..:,.:..:,,:,,:t???:........~~9."'260']iO............................r???::: :,:.:",:.'.:,:.'...'....'?,',........:,~3'880iM??:....':,:,:....??........'
Page 1
.
SW 10th St and SW 10th Ave BID~TAB Project No, 94-84
i.~11111\111_~flf1:[II':I':'II'II'If1llil'I:..:II:111111![II.II::I':'I:\I::I'~.II.I:::IIIII.~I!:I:III:'lfJi.I':11':11: !.I'.~lllltll:..II':1111 :'1111.111111.'.1.
.. .......... ............ ....... ..... ..
56 Utility allowance LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000,00
57 Video allowance LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
58 Indemnification LS 1 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
:titll:i:::[:::[:::::t!t:::::1tf:\t.ilNi_WBm::.::tb.b.f$.i!....t.'Jt::::::t:i:imm:tt::i::mi:::.: \::::i::t:::f))m::::t:::$..~IU4.oo:::::t:)::[:\:::t:::[::tt:i: \i::::::l::[:::\\\[:f[::jj1;bJIDijjm\i\:::::::::t:::::::::\ti
TOTAL SW 10TH STREET $1,070,000.00 $1,147,671.75
59 Maintenance of traffic LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
60 Building demolition LS 1 $17,000.00 $17,000.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00
61 Clearing and grubbing LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $23,550.00 $23,550.00
62 Pavement removal LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
63 1 W' Type S-1lI asphalt SY n05 $14.00 $100,870.00 $12.50 $90,062.50
64 Asphalt driveway replacement SY 205 $12.00 $2,460.00 $16.00 $3,280.00
65 Type "F" curb & gutter LF 605 $8,00 $4,840.00 $6.40 $3,872.00
66 Type "D" curb LF 260 $12.00 $3,120.00 $7,50 $1,950.00
67 Concrete sidewalk SF 6860 $2.50 $17,150.00 $1.60 $10,976.00
68 Concrete inlet apron EA 10 $250.00 $2,500.00 $212.00 $2,120.00
69 Concrete flume SY 15 $26.00 $390.00 $19.00 $285.00
70 Bollards EA 5 $88.00 $440.00 $300.00 $1,500.00
71 Pavement striping LS 1 $7,650.00 $7,650.00 $6,700.00 $6,700.00
n Valve box adjust. EA 5 $150.00 $750.00 $330.00 $1,650.00
73 Adjust manhole top EA 1 $300.00 $300.00 $465.00 $465.00
74 6" Stabilized shoulder SY 2585 $2.50 $6,462.50 $1.60 $4,136.00
75 Grade swales LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $4,600.00 $4,600.00
76 Sod SY 17365 $2.50 $43,412.50 $2,15 $37,334.75
,t~t~.~~.~~.t",t???~:~~?~~?~~~,t .,::' ::.. ':,':\' ./':y .... 'G.:". . {tiid,'~~;j\~'" ._:.:...........~...:.?t....,.....???f:.... .'..'..'..'::.:"./'''''i?:..'.':.!:Uij'::: i;i5iiiO:t~ft~t~~~:~:':':~'.f~....." ?:,::?:........~~.~.t:::tt~'!1D)i)1n;1S............~t~t".:..~ftf,'
77 Retention area excavation CY 8300 $8.00 $66,400.00 $3.65 $30,295.00
78 Type 'C' Inlet wi VSF 6212 EA 7 $1,200.00 $8,400.00 $1,650.00 $11,550.00
79 Type 'E' Inlet wi VSF 6290 EA 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 $2,215.00 $4,430.00
80 Type 'E' Inlet wi VSF 5130-6168 EA 2 $3,500.00 $7,000.00 $2,520.00 $5,040.00
81 5' Drainage manhole EA 1 $1,700.00 $1,700.00 $2,750.00 $2,750.00
82 4: 1 V-type endwall EA 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,800.00 $2,800.00
83 6:1 V.type endwall EA 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,050.00 $5,050.00
84 15" RCP LF 470 $25.00 $11,750.00 $34.00 $15,980.00
85 18" RCP LF 510 $32.00 $16,320.00 $36.00 $18,360.00
86 24" RCP LF 780 $35.00 $27,300.00 $42,00 $32,760.00
87 30" RCP LF 45 $43.00 $1,935.00 $52,00 $2,340.00
88 Connect to exist. drainage EA 1 $850.00 $850.00 $660.00 $660.00
,}~.~t~.t{,"",{,?H:f:~:t~!t()l1Alintt(tNAG.:'$W.,.UUllh'nNt:O!f{:"{:t?i(:,:\,(tt,\ :,:{~~~~~~~~~,t,.::,:~",~~t.t$l$$::(iS$mjf\,:,:::{,}?:ttt:t .,?,,~,~,?}}?'t{""$tlt'(}Ui' '.
TOTAL SW 10TH AVENUE I $423,000,00 I $342,996.25
:::t::::::::~::::tt:~{::m}:::::::::f:::::t::t::t::ttXQtwe.:..i$JUUi.fM#j:t~f::::~::ff('ff::t:{(:::~t:':.:~::::t'f::f Ittf:tt:t}t$tj?j;m);ij~OO't:m::::fmmt:fm::::' f:t:f::~ttmmt:[:$l~ij,Q;~ijit.ijj::{t:::::t::\):t{:'
ALT Additional traffic maintenance L.S. 1 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $114,000,00 $114,000.00
trfffftf:t~:t~fffmt'f:~~t~:::::t:Jffttb.ltAlaUj..il#iffmtt:f:t::::::~:ttt::t::~:.::fftft:::~:tt:i ff'tt~ttfff$njl'io.oojMfJJ:ttmmttt: :ttt:::f:::t:mmJS:i;~'ij;nmijjijij:r:::))tmrrrr
Items to be deleted from sianed contract with Hardrives of Delra ,Inc,
48 Plug exist. sewer invert EA 1 $500.00 $500.00 $365.00 $365.00
49 18" PVC - san. (10'-12' cut) LF 20 $39.50 $790.00 $745.00 $14,900.00
51 Sanitary c1eanout EA 3 $300.00 $900.00 $550.00 $1,650.00
52 Cut-in 15" sanitary wye EA 1 $495.00 $495.00 $6,675.00 $6,675.00
ALT Additional traffic maintenance L.S. 1 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $114,000.00 $114,000.00
,...t..ttlttttrOTAfUWIMS4>.JUtiflJ).'UOMtCpltrmM:l1ltttttttttf tttttttttt::$U2~'S$.jJ.lrttftttt"ttt :t:tttitt~tt:t$l"~~;OOttttttttttt
'::',:':r:,:liii,:.IIIIII\':III_I.!IIIIII.I!i!'~:~I'!:'\1\::; ........ .............. .. ...............................................................,..
................................................................................................ ..................................................................
...............5................ ..1Jr............................... ................... .:!r:.:r::::I::lw;III~III~~ll::::,i,.i:.:.:.::::
......... .. ...... . .. ..' .. -, ... .. ...........
........ ....... -, ." .. " ...........
~:?~:?}... "'~:: ::~::f. ::..: ,': ?t. \ ;r......~:~:: ~ -: :}~:}}~:~:~:
:.:,:,"'~""',::.:.::"I:'-IM,:::.::"I.I.I~ID:"",:,~,tt"
Page 2
,
.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
CHANGE ORDER TO ORIGINAL CONTRACT
aJANGE NO. 1 PROJEXJI' NO. 94-84 DATE:
PROJEXJI' TITLE: S. W. 10th st - Phase II & S. W. 10th Avenue
'lO <DN'IRACIOR: Hardri ves of Delray, Inc.
YOU ARE HEREBY REX;!UESTED 'lO MAKE '!HE FOILCMING aJANGFS IN '!HE PIANS AND SPEX:IFICATIONS FOR
'!HIS PROJEXJI' AND 'lO PERFORM '!HE WJRK ACCX>RDINGLY, ~ 'lO ALL CDNTRAcr STIPUIATIONS AND
aJVENANTS .
JUSl'IFICATION:
Maintain two way traffic throughout the entire construction period on SW 10th st fran
SW 17th Ave to the west ern of the Project (sta 15+31.5 to sta 20+20). '!here shall be no
road closures durirg construction in this area. All additional costs for equipment,
labor, materials, etc. required to maintain two way traffic shall be included. A detailed
maintenance of traffic plan detailirg t.enp:>rary pavement and traffic controls shall be
sul:mi.tted for approval. '!he traffic plan is subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
SUMMARY OF CDNTRAcr AMJUNT
ORIGINAL a:>NI'RAcr AM:>UNI' $1,467,078.00
COST OF CDNSTRUCl'ION aJANGFS PREVIOUSLY ORDERED $ 0.00
ADJUSI'ED CDNTRAcr AM:>UNI' PRIOR 'lO '!HIS OIANGE ORDER $1,467,078.00
COST OF CDNSTRUCl'ION aJANGFS '!HIS ORDER $ 0.00
ADJUSI'ED <DN'IRAcr AM:>UNI' INCllJDING '!HIS OIANGE ORDER $1,467,078.00
PER CENI' INrnFASE '!HIS aJANGE ORDER 0 %
'lUl'AL PER CENI' INrnFASE 'lO DATE 0 -%-
Contract time to be extended five- (Or calerxlar days for this work
CERl'IFIED srATEMENl': I hereby certify that the supportirg cost data included is, in my
considered opinion, accurate.
Hardri ves of Delray, Inc.
'lO BE FILLED our BY DEPARIMENI' INITIATING aJANGE ORDER
Environmental Services Department 228-3162-541-61.90 Decade of Excellence
FUNDS BUDGEI'ED CODE
DEmAY BEAOI, FIDRIDA by its City Camnission
REX:XJ.1MEND : By:
william H. Greenwood, Director '!homas E. Lynch, Mayor
of Environmental Services
ATl'FST:
APPROVED: By:
City Attorney City Clerk
,
'1/1 ,'-- C' ,
i ::, 4' ,I
,/ -c. ,. -\........c.'-
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: David T. Harden
City Manager Ar!/
FROM: William H. Greenwood ~~
Director of Environmental Services
DATE: August 26, 1994
SUBJECT: S.W. 10th Street
During our past discussions, you had raised some concerns
about the design details for S.W. 10th Street. Specifically
as I understand them, you are concerned about:
1) The two foot paved shoulders
2) The six inch pavement striping
3) Sidewalk and crosswalk locations
Our reasons for our design approach follow the presentation
made to City Commission on April 20, 1993. Our design is
based on the following considerations.
Paved Shoulder
Our original presentation to the commission showed a four
foot paved shoulder. After further study and conversations
with Palm County Engineering Dept. staff, we reduced the
width to two foot wide paved shoulder. We feel this
shoulder is necessary for the following reasons:
1) This is County standard (four feet or two feet). See
attached note 17 on County standards. In fact, the
County is now requiring two foot paved shoulders on all
collector roads into major subdivisions.
2) This paved shoulder aids in the clear recovery zone of
vehicles. With this we have an extended paved shoulder
to aid drivers in accident avoidance.
3) Reduces 'the problem of standing water on the road
surface, because of turf buildup. Runoff can collect
in this two foot area, instead of the travel way.
4) It provides a safer area for maintenance of the swale
area of such activities as mowing, litter removal, etc.
For instance, mowing equipment won't be so close to the
travel way with vehicles traveling at speeds upwards of
40 mph.
"
.
.
s. W. loth street
Aug. 26, 1994
Page two
5) Cracking and deterioration of the edge of pavement has
been a problem in certain cases. This two foot paved
shoulder should reduce this problem If cracking does
occur, it will be out of the travel way. Attached are
photographs of pavement edge deterioration within the
travel way. Not only is this a maintenance problem,
but could be a safety problem.
Based on the above considerations, Engineering staff
strongly recommends the construction of the two foot paved
shoulder. The cost of the shoulder would be $7,500. This
represents a 1/2 of one percent of the project cost and we
feel the benefits far outweigh the cost, from both a
maintenance and liability standpoint.
six Inch Pavement stripinq
six inch pavement striping was proposed, since this is a
standard that was adopted by both the state and the county
for major thoroughfares. The reason for'this adoption was
because a six inch stripe has greater visibility, which
greatly aids older drivers (the Elder Program) . As a point
of interest, the county, on a recent project, bid a six inch
stripe as an alternate to the four inch stripe and as it
turned out, the six inch striping cost less money. We feel
the paving striping specified will not have any significant
impact to the project cost.
Sidewalk and Crosswalk Locations
You had expressed concerns about the location of the
sidewalks and crosswalks. It is our recommendation that we
leave them as currently shown on the plans. It is our
intent to give vehicles entering s. W. loth Street from the
side streets as much sight distance as possible. Typical
County standards call for the stop bar to be four feet back
behind the crosswalk.
Attached are sheets one and two of the preliminary exhibit
that we presented to City commission and County standards.
Thank you for your concerns on the S.W. lOth Street project.
WG:RH:mm
cc: Ralph E. Hayden, P.E., City Engineer
File: Memos to City Manager
WG10825.MRM
"
,
~
>
z
---
. 'I ' f'\ ll:: ~ f
~ J! Jf" ~ ,/,
',I Ii II . "'~ n :'){.]
~.. ~ '.1 (l"}p l\;J/I:Hi. \! ( . : :
. '1\ IJ 1- ~ J l, l~.J" l' r"",'~ - ..... _ c-
. _. t:::, !\~C~ c .. -~, ,+~JL ~~ !! ~ tl~; r~)-=~~.rrTJ ,: : :C/ " .. _
. - --. I ~) ~ . I I
u,.. _'~ '''+~'.,~:}/~ .J) ~
.',/.. ; i" .'~t-;,,'c:"'~'~,-~' l ~ '.-
r. "~~'il'I'
// I,',' '.,\ ......_}I I,;' Ii, ',' 1,;,1 '. '"
(( . ,:" II " 'I" Ii :
i ,,~.:I J{', \ " ,U ,
0' "I'~.1"11I ':i,
, ,', "i_,1 II '. \
J I ! I i!~' ~I, '\, ,\ f _
() ~--=Uf:<"~',,-~ ,X" .. . ... . -...;~~l'-- it:
)> .,." ,-.. .'l.... .. ''r
."- -~ -- ~.. . fL
r ......,...:..u -- - -; I ~ :.l . --.: i :i
' J' - l' ~ w - ~,.-~ " "
I ~ .,. __ -H ':iI I..... .
--f I '< I; ,: ~ /' /~ 1 : I~_ c ~ _ j , ;'." ~ -;" ._. :~,I
- ! I' ".,1 /1: ".,. ,'I, IJ 1 ~ ' - -, ~~f 1---;;
O \<'-~ ~)~-''-1- ( '~ '~../" IIi .- ( JI .)jLJ~ : - -~: ... _ t :~ ~~~ ,t/.-;, _
/ ----'''"'. .,,~"'~ / '.' J" 11.__') '_.
Ir~=-::l--'l""lj::;,~&i"'F ~~~-~> ~\ , (---~ ~ ~lEl-- -
I ~--==.' Ji '-,~,\ -~1{" ~ 1 'I ,'--- -': ~i.--.l..:.:::..:r _
I" . -,' .~ h-0 , ,; ~ . ~ , ". __-:'" _" ~ J ..;' _..
I ..-.c - r' /\ --- - ,'?' '"', \. I, I .. ,....~ ,..L.,:.-.---
Z 1J[ ~L,;'.. - ~---l -, ~} "II f\ .-i1J=:" ~ ,I (IT _' ~3~, -1:- . .
' --,~ u (' I I l \ l"l ...... , II '~c.:::...:--\:..:_::D'r' __
~~-,~. (t- '\. I \1 I "-'"",,, \ !::=-...-: .-c ~'r - =_ , _' J_l JI_n.l~c_~~", _'
:::r--' I ~ '\ r II I k '\.: "", - I II I l( --t~i ~ I ~..__
7 rn~II;:;~ .11 ~ ~ L \J! Y t II f\~ ~ '>c_ ~I , : 1~r ~, ~# - , ~~IJ .'_ '-_0 I" f:j _ .
::::. ' .~,!I ri~/":j~U'!r 'Ii (7 - I, ",'j i ::-t:::"LL Ii I: J'" --jt:":;-j' ,~k =:::r~, 1.-j. ,
)> ii, ' 1f f{ Ai'\\ , ,'lJ" r \ ~~ 1,,r l' -~ ~~f-~:....r..::l~..-I'",
11,1 I I 4""1 ~',~ \ 1-1 '!' '-'~'_"_--' ~ _~ I:~.jf-... c-~ .
J <-"I "JI -J j II "-~ It ,. ~ L I, I 'I -r::--*-- ~, ----y----,I . j >----:
~r' ---. '~..' "V~:-, ..,~ " 1':' Ii- ... ,,'" - -~. -=''', -'1', =-.. E--
-0 -::-= ri ~ ~ -... I" J '~~ ,~t='~.. _ :-_.
-- ~- n . j: _... _..... , r ___ _ _ _ \
,.J/r - /1-.'" ::::""".:.' '__ _. : i ,I [I' _ ,\...~.J! ~ ~ '~--,.r-- 1:1 L:....-<.__
\JF)) J II' "'>-~__ '. 1['- i I' ,I,.;'--.f!-, ,} _....J._ ..-._. ,~- _ 'I ,. r
,,~ 11 . -,-'=-- '-.-- L.L \1 I I',' II ~ \ I 'f,
-lULJI ~; I (l~rt!- '- OCF-'~IT-'=~~-=- J-;.,I JI I ~ 1 ; ~ '. ,,-~ccJL-J1'_o~'"rC:"=:r A,.
l' -- - /, -- 11' '-- - 'lj . 'J' I' I",----.I'---r------r---I l r----
- "-~-~ - --- -....-_~.I _-""'"'::. L_ \~ _ 1_ _1,,-- _ __ _'- l. .i '....-_
. -. I,) I -{..-~......_,~,-...~ - 1( -- .....,..."L...~::...:...Jr- :C:Jrr--:;-J: .-
' -.,... :-.- -~ . - " I 1 ~- . -'L__ 1~l[. -1 '["c=,.LLL::'1. , .c .'
I _,' .....=:' -e ~r r- ,-., '" __, _...,~,-",,_ y --:. ,_ 'm _, __
j~ --. - -]{ t -- Jf Ir11. '. --. _ -'1 ~ _lir' , 11/1 ~:-=--..,.~G:;:.J'_-.T '.~p-c '_
,-==-- . "--c:- --J...=-_,..J i::-:J ~ - &, --I -~"ll ----- '..::;- ~___~ 1 _
...-=c=-;o= - .. ,- 'ImL ..fi ~ll I: --- -I I - ~..___ ..
[ JL - - r-=-:-- r;-- ;--,~ p" r--- 1t-u-l"Dl~'- ~fl ---r~----:""--:;-~_ ~r __-_~
-_..1lL., -: -.: 11 -- ! 'I -.. r, - : " . '----.J~ I~ . I _ " ..
~,~~ (\ (",~r~.." I J, II,~ 0, if, ~I;~~" Ii "";,, , :y.a~,.,...'..~'.'.",'.". J-2J I...J".F. J".,., "c~.+-,.-..C"f,t::-::i,..C.-.-.c.:,lb.,c.,..",i.. "
~ I' n ,~....,. ~.,. n ~ ,11 n ~ "'";----1 \--r- '.. .'--'"
l(~~I'l~' li~'JI M!r~) ~,Jrll~'r r'ii~' Ii ~ i) I '1" ~l ~ ~I: Jll,l Ii ~. rl ~",~~i~.x: JL..-..~..}\.I, F..~", .:r~. ~.-.:2.". =.. ...g,_,g.........i. .t,~F.~,~.,'_.::" :
','...=:J j 1~11..~lll.\ili,IO,1 ~ '~l"'\J .,.. I ~.~).""r" ',/lr:=j ,,':::.:J;--,
~j I I () ,I. jJi 1_-iL.-JL.il J.,ll..J./ : ~- ..,.._.._j\...J~..___....., ~I -'L .1;'...~ ,! l!..".._~' '1;--) "-=..i;'~"=>\r' ."C'I;" __"
..--.----.I.,..-~..-.- l__j".__ l'__I". ----..',.ik.~,.-~-...CO.ST.....,- ..."NA,lUfW,' "...,.. 'N..''', ^..';CAt.;,.'''' ,,'NA'I.RWAi,. --u, il.,:::...o.____);:~'--,...-ll ., ~i
'N1f-RAOOASTAi. WArfRWAY___ r---.j.., 1! Ir"..11 "1 ~f -'-1 '-. "I' 1.....11,>11,(, " --.~, _1 II ....
-"---'-=~":~-::.,~~':::-::~---~'._-..--.... C:,:J! LOII~l ~ V f~ u ,,If' ,.'~:OO ~~,i ~ JV,~__ . ,H ~:i I. "~'~'. .W'.'i t~; F
"'-- .-:",t "~ cJ: U ~ ,i ,.C. II ' 'f 1-";- i } ... " -",_ ~i ,.'
"'AN" -."'-- "-.. ',.... ..."1i,J. , I" ~..., ". '_'.. '.' w.",.., .."..i"'i. _.'. ,I., '. J " ,".,
'- (OCE^" ' . .... -.'., "'_ .. ,,>Or_ J' nn, _ .',;,,1' ''''-!C''f l L 1[" "1'-" i !.~,kJ
'... '.. . <>..' 'i". '-~'r"r".r" '~=, ......;.;.~i ·
"(.,, ',;11 ~ ,.'
-. "c (X'f ~N ~:: _a. 'f; ... _
A/iM: 1( ')Crfl'~ ~_ I " 1---" !:
".":'~ """(,~,-.>~I~_..':.:_.
,
r+> >' ~
o.....C?
""q--
I ~~p
Onr
~I~
~ ~~\Q
I " -
", "
1/ .3
/
12' 112, 2' I
2;....
"- ~OI
~~ ;o~
N .::l ,,-
<>> "''''' I:q
+ 0 vii
'"
0 N oq
0 ~ 1):(
I 0 oJ:
I n O=<
,'"
n
'",
Vi "
,: ii
'l: I
N "-
~ "
+
'"
~
1 I
I
~, I
I I~
-+
- 0
0
i I
I
:("1
I "- I
I "'0
"0
rc
viID
r
0'"
"'M
Or
'r
I N o~
q CO n
+
'l: 0
I 0
;;j I I I
~ I
no'
1> I
tt1 r
L>. ~ r
'2' I
Otj v
o ;:Q 1>
Zr'l <'
(; M
1> -1 :;,: I
r~ M I
r 0 Z
Z
'::J 1> -<
CJ r
m 1> --..., I
~ :;,: ;:0 -
fr1t1:1 v I
r'l M
-< ::0 t.-)
..,., I
r ;\J "
- r'l I
o ....., 1> I I
.-- r r N
'0 I'l r- ID I
f~ S -+
tJ:j 0
..., ~ fT1
Ti < 0
'Dr, iT.
~ "1J .: I
o :!'
:'T1 <. tj ..I
x r'l r..., -
,> :K
n fT1 '" I
--r:; z C I
-; -1 Z
r .
~3: M
Z ?:
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN
CITY MANAGER
FROM: WILLIAM H. GREENWOOD /)lIt/:;
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DATE: OCTOBER 12, 1994
SUBJECT: S. W. 10TH STREET - PHASE II
PROJECT NO. 94-84
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
As requested, Engineering has determined the cost savings on
S. W. 10th street if the 2' paved shoulders are eliminated.
Based on Hardrives bid the following are the cost savings:
Appropriate Area 2025' x 4'/9 = 900 S.Y.
Deduct:
1-1/2" Type S-111
Asphalt 900 S.Y. @ $ 12.50 = ($11.250)
Add:
6" Stabilized
Shoulder 900 S.Y. @ $ 1.60 = $ 1,440
Sod 900 S.Y. @ $ 2.15 = $ 1.935
Total Deduct $ 7,875
WHG:KB:kt
File: 94-84 (D)
WGKBDH.KT
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # qD - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CHANGE ORDER NO, 2/FLORIDA DESIGN CONTRACTORS, INC.
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is before the Commission to consider Change Order No. 2 for
a 30 day extension to the contract with Florida Design Contrac-
tors, Inc. for Golf Course production wells number 35 and 36.
Due to an oversight by the consulting engineer, Hazen and Sawyer,
Florida Design Contractors, Inc. are required to adjust the
location of the generator and fuel tank associated with this
project. The City, the contractor and the consultant have
prepared the modified plans and cost estimates to perform the
necessary work. Hazen and Sawyer has taken full responsibility
for the oversight and will be absorbing all expenses associated
with this change.
Recommend approval of Change Order No. 2 to the contract with
Florida Design in the amount of $29,500.00, with funding from
Water and Sewer - Golf Course Wells (Account No. 440-5179-536-
63.52) , as well as a 30 day extension in the contract time to
January 18, 1995.
~ 6-0
.
.
Agenda Item No.
AGENDA REQUEST
Date: November 10, 1994
Request to be placed on:
__X__ Regular Agenda
Special Agenda
Workshop Agenda When: November 15, 1994
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff request
the City Commission consider approval of Change Order #2 to the
contract with Florida Design Contractors on the Golf Course
Production Wells #35 $, in the amount of $29,500.00 and a 30 day
extension in contract time to January 18, 1995. No City funding
will be required, since the consulting engineers will absorb all
cost for this Change Order.
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: NOT REQUIRED
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Change Order #2 to
the contract with Florida Design on the Golf Course Well #35 & #36,
in the amount of $29,500.00 and a 30 day extension in contract time
to January 18, 1995. ~
Department head signature :(f 41)d ...... IlI/flCo);. :I
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
Ci ty Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable) :
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available:~NO (if applicable)
Funding alternatives
Account No. & Description 'tLfO -S/1'1 -S3b-tD3 .S.,......
Account Balance
City Manager Review: ~/NO
Approved for agenda: ~
Hold Until:
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
\esd\9224\agrqll15
.
.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Harden
City Manager ~
From: William H. Greenwood ~'
Director of Environmental Services
Date: November 10, 1994
Subject: AGENDA REQUEST
Golf Course Production Well 35 & 36
Change Order #2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Attached is a request for City Commission action for Change Order
#2 to the contract with Florida Design Contractors on the Golf
Course Production Wells #35 & #36, in the amount of $29,500.00.
Also, as part of this request, the Contractor is seeking a 30 day
extension in the contract time.
Due to an oversight on the part of Hazen and Sawyer, the consulting
engineer, the contractor is required to adjust the location of the
generator and fuel tank associated with this project. Over the
past several days, the City, the Contractor and the consultant have
met to prepare the modified plans and cost estimates to perform the
necessary work. Attached is a scope of work for this revision.
It should be noted that the consultant has taken full
responsibility for the oversight and corrective measures necessary,
and will be absorbing all expenses associated with this change.
Staff recommends approval of Change Order #2 to the Contract with
Florida Design in the amount of $29,500.00, a s we 11 as a 30 day
extension in the contract time to January 18, 1995.
cc: Jose Aguila
File 92-24 (0)
\ESO\9224\co2mem
.
.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
CHANGE ORDER TO ORIGINAL CONTRACT
CHANGE NO. two ( 2 ) PROJECT NO. 92-24 DATE: November 10, 1994
PROJECT TITLE: Golf Course Production Wells #35 & #36
TO CONTRACTOR: Florida Design Contractors
YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN THE PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT AND TO PERFORM THE WORK
ACCORDINGLY, SUBJECT TO ALL CONTRACT STIPULATIONS AND COVENANTS.
JUSTIFICATION: Contractor is to provide all labor, material and
equipment necessary for the complete relocation of the generator
and fuel tank on the referenced project, to the location indicated
in the revised document by Hazen and Sawyer, and as approved by all
agencies having jurisdiction.
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT AMOUNT
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $884,500.00
COST OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGES PREVIOUSLY ORDERED $ 10,530.00
ADJUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE $895,030.00
COST OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGES THIS ORDER $ 29,500.00
ADJUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT INCLUDING THIS CHANGE ORDER $924,530.00
PER CENT INCREASE/DECREASE THIS CHANGE ORDER 3.33 %
TOTAL PER CENT INCREASE/DECREASE TO DATE 4.53 %
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT TIME ALLOWED BY THIS CHANGE 30 CALENDAR DAYS TO 1/18/95
date
CERTIFIED STATEMENT: I hereby certify that the supporting cost
data included is, in my considered opinion,
accurate; that the prices quoted are fair
and reasonable and in proper ratio to the
cost of the original work contracted for
under benefit competitive bidding.
CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE (ENGINEER)
(seal)
TO BE BILLED OUT BY DEPARTMENT INITIATING CHANGE ORDER
Environmental Services N/A
DEPARTMENT FUNDS BUDGETED CODE
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
RECOMMEND: #//~ -.,-Jj/~'f By its City Commission
By:
ENGINEER/DIRECTOR MAYOR
ATTEST:
APPROVED: By:
City Attorney City Clerk
\esd\9224\co#2form
.
. ~C:~~-243"-~3J_4 DJC:; I r:EEP I r']I::i DEF'T ,;,(y,c FT)2 rjCiI,) 11 ' ',:;4 15: 51j
NOV 11 '94 It): 43 FRO~l HA:?EN SAI;JYER -BOCA PAGE,eel
&\ZEN AND SAwYER Hamn arld Sawy~. PC.
2101 Corporate Blvd.
fIOOa RaWn, R. 33431
Environmental Engineers 8. SCIentists 407 ~7-8070
f'o; 4CI7 991-&159
November 11, '994
Mr. WIlliam H. Greenwood
Dftector of Environmental Services
CITY OF DELRAY lEACH
434 South.SWInton AvenUe
Oetray Beach, Florida 33444
City of Delray Beach
Golf Courw Welle No. 85 & 38
and Cleaning Raw W.ter Main
Chanae Order No. 2
Dear Mr. Greenwood:
This letter S9rves to summarize the Issues surrounding relocation of the Golf Course Wells
emergency power generator and fuel tank from wttilfield protection zone one to pl'Otection ~one
two In accordance with Department of l':nvlronmental Resources Management (ERM) regulations.
The exISting Water Tr8atment Plant and assoCiated well fields are covertKf l,mder an EAM
operating permit No. WP-89-021 iSsued to the CIty of Detray Beach. A modification application
to this pennlt was overlooked which would have Involved ERM In the review process and would
have required relooatJon of the generator and fuel tank to zone two prior to bidding of the above
prOject.
Tne power system constructIon element has proceeded to the point of completion of the
foundation &1ab8 tor the generator and fuel tank and placement of the fuel tank on the slab. On
November 1" 1994, representatives of ERM, the City of Delra)' Seaeh and Hazttn I!lJld Sawyer,
p ,c. met at trle project site to determine the extent of the oversight and evaluate remedial
options.
A remedial scope-Of-work was prepared which essentially relocates the generator iIOd fuel tank
to a zone two area Of Influence approximately 155 feet dlmctfy north ot Well No. 36. Hue" and
Sawyer subsequently met wlth EAM on ~gv8mber 9. 1994 to rev!ew the proposed remBdiat10n
program and has recetved preliminary vertJal approval. A formBl pltffi1it modification is currently
being prepared. On November 10. 1994 Husn and Sawyer met and completed negotlatlons
WhiCh the Contractor - Florida Design CQntraotors to rermtdy the situation at an \lI9lltttd upon price
of $29,500, A 30 aay Ume extension to the Sl.Ibstantial oomplllttlon date is also rBquested by the
Contractor, This extensIon will not impact the date of tlnal completton and startup Of the well
system. To expedite this matter Hazen and Sawyer nas authorized the Contractor to proceed
with the AIm_1m work effective November 10. 1994.
4OIDL0til1.SCA
_VQIl<.JfV. _tl!I.l/Y. ,Ullo\I,!OodcjloR....r.'l.:. ~~'llI1,"IC' Cllolr'G:lI,~' Ri"''I>')(''; ,/". ~~I'VlI'O<<l.F1 . ijcc.:il~~1O/l.F,. ";""iolt.c.FL' J"~n~,'c, MItm, ~'_ .l!oo"-, ~',CD'O,1!O"
~1\='7--:2.j.? -73].~. ~:...~C~~. ~'..~EEP J_ r.~J3 DEF~ 7C17 pce t11]1,) 11 ' '34 1'5: 1::/3
NO') 11 '84 16:39 F ROf'l HHZEf~ SAW':E R.- BOCA PAGE,002
HAzENAND SAwYER
Mr. William Gf88nwood
November 11, 1994-
Page 2
In conslderatlon of the oversight by our staff regarding the requirements of the current ERM
w,lIfleld protection regulations, and to resolve this matter to the satisfaction of the City of Delray
f3each, Hazen and Sawyer wm absorb the cost at this additional work and reimburse the City of
De/ray Beach $29,500.00 at the tfme of completion and acceptance of the work by the City.
If you have any questions feel free to contact ffiS.
Very truly yours,
c: Jose Aguila
Richard Hasko
R.E. Hagadorn
A.F. Syl$s
4flSSI..0111.SCA
NOU 10 '94 14:23 FROM HAZEN SAWYER-BOCA PAGE,002
HAzEN AND SAWYER Hazen and s.wyer, P. C.
2101 Corporate 1lM1.
Boca Rldon, A. 33431
Environmental Engio..rs & Scientists 40799701070
fill 407 997-8159
Noven1ber 10, 1994
Mr. Phil Mintzer
FLORIDA DESIGN CONTRACTORS
1326 South Killian Drive
Lake Park, Florida 33405
City of Delray Beach
Golf Courae We". NO. 35 1& 36
.nd C'.nlng RIIW Water MaIn
Chanae O~o. 2
Dear Mr. Mintzer.
Please provide a writlen price and time extension proposal for, this potential Change Order No.
2 as described herein.
The fQHoWing Scope-of-Work is Intended to provide remedial measures in order to comply with
the Palm Beach County Depwtment of Environmental Management requirements for potable
water well safety in Zone two (2).
1. Fuel storage tank and generator concrete pads will be reconstructed approximately 1 ~e5
feet north of Wen No. 36. The fenced compound configuration will be similar for the two
new structures although rotated approximately 90 degrees clockwise from current
construded configurations.
2. The generator slab will Change In cross section due to tne deleuon of the trenCh detail.
The reYlsed slab wi" stay at 11 feet x 16 feet plan, but will be only 12-fnches thick. The
reinforcement will be #!5 bars at 12-lnch centers each way, top and bottom; no bending.
Slab elevation will be approximately six inches higher than the highest point of ~Istfng
surrounding grade.
3. The fuel tank stab will be the same in plan and cross $8Ctfon, as before,
4. Extend designed three 500 MCM {cu)and one 300 MCM and one No.1 (cu) equipment
ground in four-inch conduit from main cfrouft breaker to transfer switch.
5. Extend ~esigned three 4/0 (cu) and one No.1 (cu) eqU1Jment ground In three-Inch conduit
from DP panelboard to Well No. 35 control panel. Install pullbox with traffic rated cover
In conduit run as required.
8. Extend deefgned 1hree-3IQ (cu) and one No. 1 (au) eqUlpm.em ground In tnree-Imm conduit
from O~ panelboard to Wen No. 36 control pan..l.
409SL02B.SCA:
!IIeW yQlt. NY . ~ NY . l/slw s.ddtII ~. NJ . ~,IIC . ClIamle. Me . RiCII'llond. VA ' HllltfWOlI4. PI. . IIGC8 RIlon. fl . fort fII!rce. ft. . JIOiItr, R. ' MiiInl. fL . ..... tl.&. ~
.
NOV 10 '94 14:24 FROM HAZEN SAWYER-BOCA PAGE.003
II.w1iAND &\wER ...
Mr. Phil Mintzer
NoVtlmber 10t 1994
Page R
7. Extend Instrument and related power wires and conduits from Well No. 36 control panel
to new generator and fuer tank location.
a. Provfde addItIOnal .wlre set tor panic button clrcult from main circuit breaker to generator.
9. Provide . 12"iauge galvanized Ieak-pan under the generator motor gear box capable of
containing one , one h!llf times the rubricating 011 volume.
/I~. ~ Wsc,.t~ .au I ofr~~'fe
EM8Il'. at. pit adjJM:8At to &Ad ~wFy the current generator and tank slabs.
11. Inctude In your pr1Q8 breaklown II f1,000 allotment fgr potential optione 8lddreAlng
secondwy con1ali1ment~ These options will be USMSed based on status of fabrfcelUon
and ability to re1foflt and In acx:ordance with our dlscussions wfth the Department of
Environmental Resources Management (ERM) staff.
1,2. tnstan a nonnally clOsed solenoid valve wtth oon1rofs on th. fuel outlet at the daytank to
limit potential fuel losses from a broken tuellne. The solenoid valve shall open when the
engine stan8. l,-tall control WIres as required from the generator control to 1he sotenoid
valve. Provide 120 volt power to the solenoid valve from panelboard GPB.
All oUlar anotllary provisions of the current contract are to be provided-In-ldnd to the
revised generator compound.
Very truly yourS,
HAZEN AND SAWYER. P.C.
~(~~~
J M. HoDand, P .E.
Project Manager
c; Jose Aguila
Gary W. Bora
CharleS Deri
4093-6.1.3
4DI1Sl.t12B.llCA:
,
'.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 9c - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 91-94
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
Resolution No. 91-94 expresses strong opposition to the Florida
Department of Transportation's proposal to uniformly expand U.S.
Highway No. 1 from four to six lanes throughout certain areas of
Palm Beach County, including the City of Delray Beach.
From discussions held at the Municipal League and resolutions we
have received from other cities, the general consensus is that
uniform expansion would be extremely costly, and for some
segments of this highway may be an unnecessary waste of
taxpayers' dollars. It would significantly eliminate necessary
parking spaces for businesses located on the highway, creating a
detrimental effect on the economic community.
The form of this resolution was provided to us by the Palm Beach
County Municipal League. I am somewhat hesitant about adopting
the resolution in its present form because Federal Highway south
of Linton Boulevard is rated as over capacity. As a result,
redevelopment of vacant land in this area is being affected.
This section of Federal Highway, continuing into Boca Raton,
needs to be widened to six lanes and would not adversely affect
adjacent businesses. If the Commission wishes to adopt a
resolution to address the problem of DOT not allowing local
communities adequate participation in the planning of such
projects, then I suggest amending this resolution as follows:
l. In the fourth WHEREAS, after the word improvements on the
first line, add " such as six-Ianing from Linton Boulevard
,
south to Hidden Valley Road or beyond."
2 . In Sect ion I, amend the first line to read, "While the City
of Delray Beach recognizes the need and supports six-Ianing
of U.S. Highway No. 1 from Linton Boulevard south to Hidden
Valley Road or beyond, the City hereby expresses. ..."
Recommend consideration of Resolution No. 91-94.
~w/~
~9~~%~
-.$-0
.
.
'I RESOLUTION NO. 91-94
I,
d A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
" EXPRESSING STRONG OPPOSITION
" DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
li
II TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
II TRANSPORTATION'S PROPOSAL TO EXPAND U.S. HIGHWAY NO. I
11
i 1 THROUGH THE MUNICIPALITIES OF DELRAY BEACH, BOYNTON
'I
II BEACH, LANTANA, LAKE WORTH, HYPOLUXO, WEST PALM BEACH
I' AND ANY OTHER AFFECTED MUNICIPALITY WITHOUT
il
II COORDINATING THIS PROPOSED EXPANSION WITH THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS OF THOSE MUNICIPALITIES; REQUESTING THE
II FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO COORDINATE
!I WITH THE MUNICIPALITIES THROUGH WHICH EXPANSION OF
II STATE HIGHWAYS IS CONTEMPLATED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT
II OF SUCH EXPANSION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DA TE ; AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida Department of Transportation
I
(FOOT) is currently proposing to expand U.S. Highway No. 1 from four
, (4 ) lanes to six (6 ) lanes in certain areas of Palm Beach County; and
,
WHEREAS, this expansion to six (6 ) lanes would be extremely
I costly to taxpayers due to acquisition costs for additional road
II
!I right-of-way needs; and
!I WHEREAS, from discussions held at local municipal governing
II boards, it appears that the general consensus in the community is that
II the expansion of U.S. Highway No. 1 from four to six lanes uniformly
through the municipalities of Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lantana,
Lake Worth, Hypoluxo, West Palm Beach and other municipalities, within
II Palm Beach County, may be an unnecessary waste of taxpayers' dollars;
II and
II WHEREAS, while certain improvements, such as six-Ianing from
Linton Boulevard south to Hidden Valley Road or beyond, are necessary
I! to rehabilitate U.S. Highway No. 1 as it is an old and well-used
II highway, a blanket widening of the highway from four lanes to six
lanes is unnecessary and will significantly eliminate necessary
II parking spaces for existing businesses within the municipalities of
Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lantana, Lake Worth, Hypoluxo, West Palm
II Beach and other municipalities, creating a detrimental effect on the
I economic community while costing the taxpayers a significant amount of
money; and
I
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, member of the Palm
a I
Beach County Municipal League, strongly requests that the Florida
Department of Transportation coordinate with the various
I municipalities within Palm Beach County prior to commencing such I
I expensive expansion projects which may be entirely unnecessary and
, which may, in fact, be detrimental to the municipalities through which
I
I the expansion is projected.
I
ii
II
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. While the City of Delray Beach recognizes the
need and supports six-laning of U.S. Highway No. 1 from Linton
i Boulevard south to Hidden Valley Road or beyond, the City hereby
!
expresses its strong opposition to the State of Florida Department of
I Transportation's blanket proposal to widen U.S. Highway No. 1 from
!
i four (4 ) lanes to six (6 ) lanes uniformly through the municipalities
! of Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lantana, Lake Worth, Hypoluxo, West
I'
II Palm Beach and other municipalities, without considering the unique
;\ character and needs of each municipality and consulting with the local
!I governing body prior to implementing such an expansion.
II
"
I'
,I Section 2. That the City of Delray Beach hereby requests
Ii
q
!, that the Florida Department of Transportation coordinate with all
I'
II municipalities within Palm Beach County, and at this time,
specifically with Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lantana, Lake Worth,
I; Hypoluxo and West Palm Beach, when proposing expansion of State and/or
II Federal highways to make certain that the expansion does not cause a
" detrimental effect the economic community while costing the
II on
"
,I taxpayers significant amounts of money which may not be necessary.
II
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach
is hereby authorized and directed to submit a copy of this Resolution
to the Florida Department of Transportation and to any and all other
interested parties.
Section 4. That this Resolution shall become effective
i immediately upon passage.
; PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the 15th day
I
I of November, 1994.
I
,I ~c(r~
'I
:1
"
"
II
'I
Ii ATTEST:
;;
ii (h 1lff)i?)Jt'- }fj J~ !/()7!iy
Ii
II I
City C rk I
- 2 - Res. No. 91-94 i
I
I
II
II
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGERW1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 9F - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CEMETERY EXPANSION
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
At the November 2, 1993 workshop meeting, a discussion was had as
to whether the city should be in the cemetery business; and if
so, whether or not we should expand. An excerpt of that discus-
sion is included with backup material for this item.
At that time staff was looking for some direction on whether or
not the Commission wished to proceed with the cemetery expansion
and also on whether or not we should reestablish the Perpetual
Care Fund for future maintenance of the cemetery.
According to research done by staff, in 1902 the Florida East
Coast Railroad donated five acres of land to the Ladies Improve-
ment Association to be used as a town cemetery. In 1914/ the
Ladies Association voted to deed the cemetery over to the town of
Delray and the paperwork was completed. However, in 1926 the
City Clerk brought to the attention of the Association that no
deed had ever been drawn up. The City Attorney was to draw up
suitable papers to legally turn the property over to the City.
While no legal documentation existed, references to the cemetery
appear in the City's minutes prior to 1926. Thus, it appears
upkeep and maintenance were the City's responsibility from 1914
forward. A copy of Commission meeting minutes with regard to the
Cemetery are attached as backup material for this item,
Also attached are my October 29, 1993 analysis of various
alternatives, the Finance Director's financial analysis, and our
contract with Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. It appears that
Delray had a municipal cemetery for 80 years. Many long time
residents have strong feelings about wanting to be buried in
Delray Beach.
I strongly recommend that the City keep a municipal cemetery. I
also continue to believe, contrary to the Finance Director, that
the best long-term management approach would be to reactivate the
Perpetual Care Fund to provide long term funding for cemetery
maintenance.
I recommend that the Commission approve Service Authorization No.
4 to Michael B. Schorah & Associates, Inc. for $9,990 for
expansion of our cemetery, and also approve reactivation of our
Perpetual Care Fund to receive all revenues from lot, crypt and
niche sales. ~ ~!o-I
( /lJ2y-tJI X;/)M ~)
.
I
.
[ITY DF DELHA' BEA[H
. cc "'. .', '. ~ ":"', ::". iJ'= . :,':: '- .:;; .:. '( ,,::.:,:-. ~ _ :, .:;; : ::; A 0 J 444 . -1 ~J' _" -+ ~
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Commission
.
FROM: David T. Harden!-?<- 1
SUBJECT: DELRAY BEACH MUNICIPAL CEMETERY
DATE: October 29, 1993
The issue has been raised of whether we should be in the cemetery
business, and if so, whether we should expand our existing
cemetery. The purpose of this memorandum is to assist you in
making a decision on this issue.
One can say that the City has four alternative courses of action
regarding its cemetery. Briefly, these are:
1. Sell it.
2. Keep the existing cemetery, but do not expand it.
3. Expand the existing cemetery as previously planned, but
continue with current financial operating policies.
4. Expand the cemetery and establish a perpetual care fund.
My views on each of these alternatives follow:
1. The City could sell the entire cemetery. It is possible
that with the expansion area a cemetery company would be
willing to purchase the entire cemetery, both existing and
the expansion area, and operate it as a private cemetery.
One advantage of this approach is that we would eliminate
the current net operating cost of approximately $90,000
dollars a year from our budget. Disadvantages are that we
would lose control over servicing and pricing in the
cemetery, also many municipalities ended up with cemeteries
because a non-profit organization or private company went
out of business and stopped operating the cemetery. Under
those conditions the municipality felt compelled to take on
the responsibility. If we sold the cemetery now, there is
some possibility we might have to take it back some number
of years in the future, with a reduced opportunity for
making the cemetery self supporting.
2. We could keep the existing cemetery, but not expand it. The
operating budget for the cemetery is $147,000 dollars
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
.
.
annually in round numbers. We have projected revenues for
the coming year of $57,000 dollars. Once the cemetery is
filled up there will be no further opportunity for
generating revenues, therefore, the long term result of
keeping the existing cemetery, but not expanding it, would
be an annual operating cost, of $147,000 dollars plus
inflation. Another advantage of not expanding it is that
the 10 acres of land acquired for expansion could be sold or
used for other purposes. If it were sold the proceeds of
the sale could be used to establish a perpetual care fund
.
for the existing cemetery, or used' for other purposes.
Since this is the only cemetery in Delray Beach, not
expanding it would mean that our residents who chose to be
buried in our cemetery, would have to be buried elsewhere.
3. We could expand the cemetery as has been planned for five
year"s or more, but continue with our present financial
operating policies. This approach would minimize our
operating costs over the next 10 to 20 years. As was stated
above the total operating budget for the cemetery is
$147,000 dollars, with total revenues including lot sales of
$57,000 dollars. This means our net operating cost is
$90,000 dollars per year. With expansion area completed and
an improved entrance to the cemetery, one could reasonably
predict that the pace of lot sales would increase and our
net annual operating cost would be reduced. However, as in
alternative 2, when all of the lots in the expansion area
are sold, there would be no remaining revenue generated, so
the entire operating cost will fall on the City's general
fund operating budget.
4. Under this alternative we would proceed with expanding the
cemetery and would also reestablish the perpetual care fund.
Between the expansion area and the existing cemetery, we
would have approximately 4,000 spaces to sell. Based on
current prices for cemetery lots, these sales could generate
approximately $2,000,000 dollars in revenue. If we had
$2,000,000 dollars invested and earning 7 1/2' interest, it
would generate $150,000 dollars per year, which would pay
the current operating cost of the cemetery. I recognize
that inflation would increase costs in future years and the
expanded cemetery would probably require some additional
staff. One could reasonably expect, however, that the price
of cemetery lots would be increased over the years. These
increases together with the earnings from compound interest
on the perpetual care fund could reasonably be expected to
offset cost increases. The advantage of this approach, is
that, at some point in the future the perpetual care fund
should produce sufficient revenue to pay the operating cost
of the cemetery, thereby relieving the general fund of that
cost. A disadvantage is that, until the perpetual care fund
approaches the point where it is generating enough revenue
to pay the operating costs, lot sales would be placed in the
perpetual care fund, rather than being used to fund current
.
operating costs. Projected lot sales for the current fiscal
year are $22,000 dollars. If this money were being put into
a perpetual care fund our net operating cost to the general
fund would be $112,000 dollars instead of $90,000 dollars.
I personally believe that the best management practice for the
City is to reestablish the perpetual care fund. However,
municipalities are exempt from the requirement to provide a
perpetual care fund, since they have the power to levy taxes and
use them for cemetery maintenance. !
The question boils down to, whether you should increase your
current cost, somewhat, in order to greatly reduce your future
cost or whether you minimize your current cost and let the City's
residents who will be here 15 to 20 years from now deal with the
total cost of cemetery maintenance.
DTH: sk
,
MEMORANDUM
TO: David T. Harden
city Manager
THRU: Ralph E. ,Hayden, P.E.~/
city Eng1neer \~
FROM: Dan Bea~ty, P.~. '--:73 ~
Asst. C1ty Eng1nee~~
.
DATE: October 6, 1993
SUBJECT: Cemetery Expansion Project
Project No. 93-065
Attached is an agenda request for award of the attached service
authorization for engineering services for the Cemetery Expansion
project to Michael B. Schorah and Associates one of our
continuing contract engineering firms. The work which will be
conducted under this service authorization includes engineering
design, permitting and preparation of construction documents for
the subject project. A breakdown of the service authorization
amount is as follows:
$ 7,690.00 Engineering design
976.00 Permitting
1,324.00 Construction Documents
The funding source for this project is 667-4511-539-61.77
We have reviewed the service authorization amount from Michael B.
Schorah and Associates for the engineering work outlined above.
We have determined that the amount is fair and acceptable for the
work requested.
In order to proceed with the project as quickly as
possible, we. would like to request that this service
authorization be placed on the Commission Agenda on October 12,
1993.
DB: mm
cc: Robert Barcinski, Asst. City Manager
Ted Glas, Purchasing Officer
Sandee Mills, Exec. Administrative Assistant
File: Project No. 93-065 (D)
DB365006.MRM
_. .
,
MICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, INC
Michael B. Schorah & Associates, Inc.
City of Delray Beach
Consulting Service Authorization
..
DATE: September 20. 1993
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO.-L FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
CITY P.O. NO. CITY EXPENSe CODE
PROJECT NO. 91-103 (CITY) 93-748 MICHAEL B. SCHORAH . ASSOCIATES, INC.
TITLE: CEMETERY EXPANSION
This Service Authorization, when executed, shall be incorporated in and shall become an integral
part of the Contract, dated November 6. 1991 , between the City of Delray Beach and
Michael B. Schorah and Associates, Inc.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide professional engineering services for the preparation of contract drawing, technical
specifications and obtain related approvals for the expansion of Delray Beach Memorial
Gardens. Services are to be based on a Landscape Plan prepared by Jeny Turner and
Associates and presented to this office on September 7, 1993.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Prepare contract drawings and specifications, penn it applications, construction observations
and certifications for the construction of paving and drainage systems. The drainage system
is to be coordina~ed with a master area drainage study prepared by Mock Roos and
Associates, Inc. This assumes that the recommendation presented in that study (outfall to
City-owned canal adjacent to 1-95) will be implemented.
Coordinate design effort with the City of Delray Beach. Plans shall be submitted to the City
for review and approval a~ the 35%, 80% and 100% completion stage,
The cemetery improvements will be designed in its entirety. After 80% approval, phasing to
establish construction scope consistent with the project budget will be detennined. Phasing
must also consider existing stonnwater retention ditches for conformance with previous
approvals from South Florida Water Management District.
( continued)
.
I
MICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES. INC
City of Defray Beach
September 20, 1993
Page 2
Task 1 - Paving and Drainage Design
Prepare an engineering site plan/dimension plan to ensure proper horizontal control. This
plan will be used as a base map for the construction plans.
Design all necessary roadway and drainage systems to complete development of the
cemetery's southemmost land lying adjacent to S. W. 10th Street.
The original drainage study prepared by MBSA suggested that runoff from the cemetery
and adjacent residential areas be included as part of an overall area study. MBSA will
coordinate the' design to conform with the area study prepared by Mock Roos and
Associates, Inc.
Plans will be prepared at a 1" = 40' scale and include relevant information and details.
Roadway/Drainage profiles are not included. MBSA will prepare a comprehensive cost
estimate based on current construction prices. We will also determine development limits
to conform with the project's budget.
Task 2 - Permitting
A. Submit for review and obtain approval from the City of De/ray Beach Engineering
Department.
B. Submit for review and obtain approval for a Modification to General Permit from South
Florida Water Management District. An master permit was obtained by MBSA in the
"Cemetery Roadll phase.
Task 3 - Construction Documents
Prepare contract documents and technical specifications suitable for bidding purposes.
The City of Delray Beach shall provide standard bid document forms.
Task 4 - Conatructlon Obaervation and Certifications
Provide observations during construction to determine construction compliance with the
plans and contract documents. Certify to the permitting agencies, as necessary, and
furnish record drawin~.
(continued)
.
j
:-'lICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCLA. TES, INC
City of Delray Beach
September 20,1993
Page 3
III. BUDGET
Task I
Principal 2 HRS x $117.00 = $234.00
Engineer III 6 HRS x $87.00 = $522,00
Engineer II 38 HRS x $64.50 = $2,151.00
Engineer I 28 HRS x $45,00 = $1,260.00
Computer Tech 62 HRS x $46.50 = $2,883.00
Secretarial 8 HRS x $30.00 = $240.00
Printing = $100,00
TOTAL TASK I $7690.00
Task II - Permitting
Engineer II 8 HRS x $64,50 = $516.00
Engineer I 4 HRS x $45,00 = $180.00
Secretarial 6HRS x $30,00 = $180.00
Printing = $100,00
TOTAL TASK II $976.00
Task 111- Construction Documents
Engineer II 12 HRS x $64.50 = $n4,OO
Engineer I 10 HRS x $45.00 = $450.00
Printing = $100.00
TOTAL TASK III $1,324.00
. Task IV - Construction observation and certifications are phase dependent. MBSA will submit
an addendum for this task after establishment of the construction limits.
Travel Expenses - NO CHARGE
Testing - Testing may be required on various items throughout the design and construction
period. The engineer wiil prepare necessary information and provide it to a City-approved
testing firm. The City will be billed, through the engineer, AT COST for testing services
provided.
( continued)
I
MICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCLI\ TES, INC
City of Delray Beach
September 20,1993
Page 4
IV. Schedule
The following are estimated completion times for the various tasks (working days):
Task 1 ".,"",.,',......"...,',.,',.....,~..,.".....,",., 40 days
Task 2 ....,.......,.".,....,..,.,.".....,...".,......,.... 30 days
Task 3 "..,.",."....,.""".,..,.."".........,.."...". 20 days
Task 4 .,."..,...,..,......,..,.,...........,.."..,....,.". * days
.. See Note 4 below.
1, Task 1 will commence upon receiot of Notice to Proceed by Engineer. This item allows
for ten-day review periods by City for 35% and 80% submittals.
2. Task 2 will commence upon receipt of City's approval of 100% Task 1 submittal. Time
allowed for Task 2 estimate is based on anticipated agency review period.
3. Task 3 includes 15 days for a bid period. No estimate has been provided for final review
and approval by the City.
4, Task 4 will commence upon issuance of a Notice to Proceed to a Contractor by the City,
Construction time to be established as part of Task 3.
(continued)
.
.
~lICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCLA. TES, INC
City of OeIray Beach
September 20, 1993
Page 5
This service authorization is approved contingent upon the City's acceptance of and satisfaction
with the completion of the services rendered in the previous phase or as encompassed by the
previous service authorization. If the City in its sole discretion is unsatisfied with the services
provided in the previous phase or service authorization, the City may terminate the contract
without incurring any further liability. The CONSULTANT may not commence work on any service
authorization approved by the City to be included as part of the"contract without a further notice
to proceed.
Approved by:
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH: MICHAEL B. SCHORAH .. ASSOCIATES, INC.
Date: Date: SE~. '2oT'U 1~ce>3
By: J/~(J'/ Mchv~
Michael B. Schorah, P.E.
Thomas E. Lynch
Mayor Title: President
(CORPORATE SEAL)
,
Attest:
BEF M~nstrument. this
day of , 1993, ;{s .
acknowtedged by' , .t;:~; Ai/) Jt.., ~
on behalf of the Corporation and said p~rson
Approved as to Legal Sufflciency and executed the same free and voluntarily for the
Form purpose therein expressed.
Witness my h~ seal in the County and State
aforesaid this y o~~ ~16 1993.
Notary Public
JCWCIICIN8 State 01 FIo~a ~_
MY -- T mil Ct 1_ My com~res: b.lf -q(.,
!IlPIB: .1, _
......,.. ...., JIlMc
'.
.
o
+-I en It'l -0 -
~~ ~~O~ . . .
~~ ~~N~ 0 0 0
~~ ~~~~ ~:~ ~
~104 I~I~ t"') ~: t"')
~ to 10 I 10 ~ ~ ~
,'1.-4 c.ll ~ ~ ~ +-I
'-' to . \D 104 t"') to
~ e ~ 0..-4 -
104 ~ -~
~X
+J -
~ - to
to ~ .
~ 0~0104 0
() 0104010 It'l
10 CXlIOO . It'l .
>-~ ~.-4+J 0 ~ 0
~~ 1 ~~~ 0: I 0
to O~I~ qo 0: qo
Q~~ O~lt'le ~ 0 ~
o ~ It'l~~~ 10
104~ "'.-4lt'l~ .,.
~~ en~o
o - e
- "
en 0
~ 0
.c::~ \D. ...
+J~ ~ It'l It'l It'l
104104 I::: .-4:.-4 .-4
010 0 It'l ~: It'l
---3: c.ll 0 ~ ~ ~
~ It'l
V ~ . ~
~e
10 ~
~X
CJ]
~ 0
CJ ~ 0 ...
H +-1104 \D It'l It'l It'l
~ en 10 ~ .-4:.-4.-4
~ Ql ~ 1 : : : It'l ~: It'l
~I-I 0 ~ ~ ~
> ,I\( I () . 0
~ '-'.-4e It'l
~ .-4Ql ~
8 ~X
~ = -
X X
~ 0 ~
CJ ~~ 0
()I-I \D .t"')..
~ 1010 ~ 10 10 10
o Ql~ 1:-- .-41-1:.-4:.-4
~~ 0 IOQl ~ 10
Z "-J' 0 ~+-I ~ ~
o ee 10 ~
CJ] .-4Ql ~ 10
H lOX -
~ ~
< ... .
~ 0101 0010 1 0 I
X IO~ 01101 It'l1010 1 CXl 1 .
o ~()O CXl.-4 Nt"') CXl ~ ()
CJ ~O+J ~ ~ ~~ ~ +J
~IO Ql
~
..
en
o .. . 1-1
~ .10 O. 10 I It'l I 10 I It'l I ~
O.c:: NO'1 ~ I ~ I ~ I 10
-+J() N\D~ N t"') ~ .c::
~~IO ~~t"') ~ ~ ()
).Ql ~
O~ ..
~ +J
. .. .. e
0000 0 00 0 0 0 Ql
)..c:: ~ 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 t"') \D +J '^ \A
,....... 10 () ~~~.-4 t"'l ~qo 10 ~ ~ III q)
_ 1-1 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .c:: - - __
"-".-4 Ql +J ~ "
Ql~ .... ~ \) \l
Q . '.-4' ~ :I ~ ...1.-'"
~oe). 1-1 ~ ~~
I-I=~IO'~" a. t
+J. ~ ..CJ]~+JI'~ ~ \l
e en I . ..~ e . en 1-1 +J.I \)
QlQl .e '.-4QleQl~ Ql 'oJ ~
+J~a: e~+Jo~o~1 en 10
en e~1 OCJ]IO=~XI'? a.
+J Ql en e :e: .. en en e e en q", \l e
o ~QlO ,., Ql 00 Ql - ~ 0
.-4+J~a:z '+J. a: z:e: ~ \oJ I:S ()
~ e en" en 10 en " ~";;: '::0 e
Ql Ql +J +J Ql en Ql +J +J .-4 -. -- Ql
Ql'Oa:ee a:,a: e e ().::s <... ()
>~11G1O 1'1 IG ca e",,<2.... ..
caene~~ eene ~ ~ H ~
I-IQloee OQlO e e -.... _ Ql
c.lla:ZHH z~z H H . ~ ~ ~
,
.
Ch. 497 CEMETERIES
the enforcement of a temporary restraining order or an concern for the pnce or expressed interest In inexP8rl: aSsociation license,
InJunction, the circuit court may impound the property slve bunal merchandise or services is Improper, inap~ s deposited In a sa
of a cemetery company, Including books, papers, docu- pnate, or Indicative of diminished respect or affection felt
ments, and records pertaining thereto, and may appoint the deceased. . ' :G. gs account In a stat
a receiver or administrator to prevent further violation of (p) Falling to furnish, for retention, to anyone WIl& to an amount Insure,
this chapter. InqUires In person about bunal nghts, bunal merc ' rnment The provls
(2) A court-apPointed receiver or administrator may dise, or burial services, Itefore any discussion of se J to such savings ac,
take any action to Implement the provisions of the court tion, a printed or typewritten list specifying the re t fund exceeds the
order, to ensure the performance of the order, and to prices for such rights, merchandise, or services. The y of the Federal G,
remedy any breach thereof. shall include the name, address, and telephone nu ' shall establish and I
HI.lory.-ss, 10,40, en 80-238, ss, 2,3, en, 81-318. s, 1, ell 89-8 of the licensee and statements that the consumer pany operating pursl
'Note.-Aepealed effective Oetober " 1993. by s, 1, en, 8S-8, and seneduled lor
reView pursuant 10 s. 11.61 choose only the items he desires, that he will be char ional bank holding
Note.-Former s, 559374 for only those items purchased, and that there may The cemetery cor
1497,018 Disciplinary proceedings.- extra charges for other items or services such as t sa the trustee In thE
(1) The following acts constitute grounds for which provided by funeral directors or direct disposers. department must a~
the disciplinary actions in subsection (2) may be taken: (q) Failing to furnish, for retention, to each purch ' trustee, and any
(a) Violating any proVisions of this chapter. of burial rights, burial merchandise, or burial servic - t~ shall also be ap~
(b) Failing to comply With a rule or lawful order of the wntten agreement, the form of which has been p tery company refu~
department. au sly approved by the department, which lists the it 'ntain an adequat,
(c) Failing to pay the fees required herein. and services purchased together With the prices for in accordance With
(d) Failing to remit the required amounts to any trust items and services purchased; the name, address; , department, after rE
fund required by thiS chapter. telephone number of the licensee; the signatures of ' . nce. However, r
(e) Attempting to procure, or procuring, by bribery customer and the licensee or his representative; and which has been Ine
or fraudulent misrepresentations, a license to operate a date Signed. ' . 'tery bUSiness pnor
cemetery company. (2) When the department finds any licensee gui! which has current tr
(f) Having a license to operate a cemetery company any of the acts specified in subsection (1), it may en be required to des
revoked, suspended, or otherWise acted against. Includ- an order Imposing one or more of the follOWing penal fund agreement ~
ing having a license denied, by the licenSing authority (a) Denial of an application for licensure. ,locatIOn, and addr
of another Junsdictlon. (b) Revocation or suspension of a license. ee, shOWing the da
(g) Being convicted or found guilty in any jurisdic- (c) Imposition of an administrative fine not to ex rcentages reqUirE
tion, regardless of adjudication, of a cnme which directly $1,000 for each count or separate offense. 7.023.
relates to the operation of a cemetery. (d) Issuance of a reprimand. No person shall \
(h) Making or filing a report reqUired by this chapter (e) Placement of the licensee on probation f
which the licensee knows to be false or willfully failing period of time subject to such conditions as the de corpus of the ca
., t first obtaining '^
to make or file a report required by this chapter. ment may specify. t. Funds deposited
(i) Fraud, deceit. misrepresentation, negligence, (3) For purposes of this section, the acts or
Incompetency, or misconduct in the operation of a cem- sions of any person employed by or under contra , loaned to any ce
etery. the licensee shall be treated as acts or omissions of tly or Indirectly
Ul Advertising goods or services in a manner which licensee.
is fraudulent, false. deceptive. or misleading in form or (4) Any order Imposing any penalty pursuant to'
content. section shall recite the grounds upon which the
(k) Making any false or misleading statement of the is based.
legal requirement as to the necessity of any particular '-tory.-ss, 13.40, en 8()-238: sa. 2, 3. en. 81-318: s 1, en 8&-8:
'Note.-Aepealed effe<:b... Octobe< 1. 1993.lIy s. 1. en 8S-8. and
burial merchandise or services. reView pursuant 10 $. 11 61. ,,022
(I) Making any false or misleading statement Note.-Formel s 559 375 Disposition
regarding the sale of services or merchandise in connec- 1497.019 Disposition of f... and p.nalties. trust fund; notic.
tion with the operation of a cemetery. t income of the e
(m) Making any false or misleading statement that fees and penalties collected pursuant to this c . be used solely for
natural decompOSition or decay of human remains can shall be deposited in the Regulatory Trust Fund. tery, including ma
department. tenance shall not l
be prevented or substantially delayed by use of a sealed HIatory.-ss. 25, 40. ell 8()-238: sa, 2.3. en, 81-318: s \, ch 8&-8- efinishing, repair
or unsealed casket or outer burial container. 'Note.-Aepealed effact.... October " 1993. lIy s, 1, en ~, and
(n) Soliciting through the use of fraud, undue influ- re.- pursuanllo S, 11 61 .; for reasonable
Note.-Former s, 559491,
ence. intimidation. overreaching, or other form of vexa- ntenance; and
tious conduct. 1497,021 Car. and maintenance trust fund; the trust fund. }
(0) Discouraging the purchase of any burial mer- of department for noncomplianc..- ng an inItial dep<
chandise or service which IS advertised or oHered for (1) No cemetery company shall establish a to the person te
sale, with the purpose of encouraging the purchase of tery. or operate a cemetery if already established a deposit, a wntl
additional or more expensive burial merchandise or ser- out providing for the future care and maintenance state the purpos
vice, by disparaging its quality or appearance, except cemetery, for which a care and maintenance t nd shall be use
that factual statements concerning features, design, or shall be established. to be known as .the care -s 13. ell 59-363: s .
construction do not constitute disparagement, or by tenance trust fund of _.' The trust fund. 2.3, ell 81-318, s 9,
lied e"actlVe Oct<
suggesting directly or by Implication that a customer's established With a state or national bank or saVl 110 S 11 61
llnner S 559 42
868
.
.
CEMETERIES Ch. 497
ociatlon licensed In this state, provided that '497.023 Care and maintenance trust fund, percent-
posited, in a savings and loan association or age of payments for burial rights and monument main-
account In a state or national bank shall be Iim- tenance to be deposited,-
8i1 amount insured by an agency of the Federal (1) Each cemetery company shall set aSide and
. ent. The provisions of chapter 660 shall not deposit in its care and maintenance trust fund the fol-
such savings account. When the amount of the lowing percentages or amounts for all sums received
lid exceeds the amount that is insured by an from sales of bUrial rights and fr~m assessment of any
of the Federal Government, the cemetery com- monument maintenance fee as provided In s.
i I establish and transfer the trust fund to a trust 497.041(3):
operating pursuant to chapter 660 or to a state (a) For graves, 10 percent of all payments received;
however, for sales made after December 31, 1959, no
bank holding trust powers. deposit shall be less than $10 per grave. For each bUrial
e cemetery company may appoint a person to right, grave, or space which is provided without charge,
the trustee in the investment of the trust fund. the deposit to the fund shall be $10.
P.artment must apprttve the appointment of the (b) For mausoleums or cOlumbaria, 10 percent of
stee, and any subsequent changes of the payments received.
'shall also be approved by the department. If a (c) For general endowments for the care and main-
company refuses or otherwise fails to provide tenance of the cemetery, the full amount of sums
'tain an adequate care and maintenance trust received when received.
accordance with the provisions of this chapter, (d) For special endowments for a specific lot or
men!, after reasonable notice, shall enforce grave or a family mausoleum, memOrial, marker. or mon-
,ce. However, no nonprofit cemetery corpora- ument, the cemetery company may set aside the full
has been Incorporated and engaged in the amount received for this Individual special care in a sep-
ry business prior to and continuously since 1915 arate trust fund or by a depOSit to a savings account In
.. h has current trust assets exceeding $2 million a bank or savings and loan association located Within
required to designate a corporate trustee. The and authOrized to do business in the state; however, If
d agreement shall specify the following: the the licensee does not set up a separate trust fund or sav-
tion, and address of both the licensee and the Ings account for the special endowment, the full amount
I. showing the date of agreement, together with thereof shall be deposited Into the care and mainte-
entages required to be deposited pursuant to nance trust fund as required of general endowments.
(e) For monument maintenance, the full amount of
person shall withdraw or transfer any portion such sum when received.
corpus of the care and maintenance trust fund (2) Deposits to the care and maintenance trust fund
,first obtaining Written consent from the depart- shall be made by the cemetery company not later than
Funds deposited pursuant to this chapter shall 30 days following the close of the calendar month in
loaned to any cemetery company or person who which any payment was received; however, when such
payments are received in installments, the percentage
y or indirectly engaged in the cemetery busi- of the installment payment placed in trust must be iden-
. 12. ch, 59-363; s 7. ch 65-288; sa 12. 35. ch 69-H16; a, 3. ch, tical to the percentage which the payment received
(c:h.76-251.S,I,Ch 77-457,s9,ch 76-407;88 17, 39.40.ch 80-238; bears to the total cost for the burial rights. The entire
81-318; sa. 1,3, ch 82-7. s 1, ch 89-8. amount required to be deposited into the trust fund shall
lied effectIVe October " 1993, bya. 1. ch 89-8. and scheduled lor be paid within 4 years from the date of' any contract
Ita s, 1161,
S, 559,41 requiring such payment, regardless of whether all
Disposition of income of care and m.inte. amounts have been received by the cemetery company.
The care and maintenance trust fund shall be Invested
~st fund; notice to purch...... and depositors. and reinvested by the trustee pursuant to chapter 518.
Income of the care and maintenance trust fund The fees and other expenses of the trust fund shall be
~ sed solely for the care and maintenance of the paid by the trustee from the net income thereof and shall
. inclUding maintenance of monuments, which not be paid from the corpus. If the net income is not suffi-
ce shall not be deemed to include the' clean- cient to pay the fees and other expenses, the fees and
,finiShing, repairing, or replacement of manu- other expenses shall be paid by the cemetery company.
!or reasonable costs of administering the care (3) Any payments made to the care and mainte-
tenance; and for reasonable costs of adminis- nance trust fund on contracts which are canceled shall
trust fund. At the time of making a sale or be credited against future obligations to the care and
t an initial deposit, the cemetery company shall maintenance trust fund, provided they have been
o the person to whom the sale is made, or who refunded to the purchaser.
deposit, a written instrument which shall specif- (4) When a cemetery which is exempt from the pro-
e the purposes for which the income of the visions of this chapter pursuant to s. 497.003 changes
shall be used. ownership so as to lose its exempt status, it shall estab.
2,'3'3. ch. 59-363; s, 3, ch 76-168; s, " ch, 77-457; sa. 18.39.40, ch lish and maintain a care and maintenance trust fund pur-
. ch, 81-318; s, 9. ch 85-202; s, 1, ch, 89-8, suant to this chapter. The initial deposit for establish.
effective October ,. 1993. by s, 1, ch 89-8. and SCheduled lor ment of this trust fund shall be $10 per space for all
to a, 1161
a, 55942, spaces either previously sold or contracted for sale in
869
.
MEMORANDUM
To: David T. Ha~~Manager
From: Joseph M. Sa nance Director
Date: November 11, 19
Subject: Cemetery Expansion Analysis
The Finance Department has recently completed a financial
analysis of the Cemetery operations in order to evaluate the
proposed expansion of the Phase II section and to determine the
best financial structure that should be utilized to develop and
maintain that property as well as the current developed
property.
ALTERNATIVE 1 "PERPETUAL CARE" FINANCING BASIS
Provides an analysis whereby the plot, niche, and vault sales
proceeds of the Cemetery that are received by the City are
invested until the interest earnings alone will support the
entire annual cost of maintaining the Cemetery on a "perpetual
care" financing basis. The General Fund would support all costs
of the Cemetery until these investment levels are attained.
ALTERNATIVE 2 "PAY AS YOU GO" FINANCING BASIS
Provides an analysis whereby all the revenues of the Cemetery
are offset with Cemetery expenses within the General Fund on a
"pay as you go" method with the goal to break even or generate a
surplus.
ALTERNATIVE 3 "GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS" FINANCING BASIS
This alternative presumes that the City would choose to sell
both the property used for the existing Cemetery and the
adjacent Phase II property and not continue the cemetery
function as a City service in the future.
ALTERNATIVE 4 "SELL PHASE II, PROCEEDS TO PAY FOR PHASE I"
FINANCING BASIS
This alternative presumes that the City would choose to sell the
phase II property, invest the proceeds, and use the interest
income proceeds to provide maintenance funds for Phase I. The
General Fund would provide funding for all cemetery expenses
until the interest earnings equalled the cemetery expenses, At
that time the Cemetery Perpetual Care Fund would takeover the
maintenance of the cemetery.
In order to evaluate these alternatives, certain financial data
was accumulated or assumed as follows:
'I
Page 2
Present Financial Characteristics
1. The City is currently selling an average of 158 lots per
year based upon sales from 1991 to current. With only 80
lots remaining, the present cemetery lots (Phase I) will be
sold out within six(6) months. Phase II is projected to
include 3,100 lots.
2. Under a contract with Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. , the
City receives 50% of lot (plot) sales and 25% of crypt and
niche sales (15% average in other municipalities) and 100% of
the interment revenues, As they are above ground, crypt and
niche quantities are essentially endless if appropriate land
is set aside for the structures.
3. The City can expect $97,203 in total revenues this fiscal
year from the Cemetery operation as follows:
Cemetery Opening/Closing Fees $57,796
Crypt Sales $6,712
Niche Sales $0
Vault Sales $0
Memorial Sales $2,860
Cemetery Lot Sales $29,835
4. The City can expect $156,162 in total costs this fiscal year
for the three (3 ) employees and their operating expenses.
With assumed ground level markers instead of upright
tombstones, we would assume no increase in personnel for the
expansion to Phase II.
5. The City could expect a $125,000 cancellation cost if the
contract with Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. were terminated
prior to the end of the contract.
6. The present long-range plan includes opening up the cemetery
to S.W. 10th Street (Phase II) with maintenance standards
consistent with Phase I which is considered comparable to or
better than privately maintained cemeteries. Since the
cemetery would then receive high visibility from a highly
consistent traffic flow pattern and have access from a major
traffic artery, sales would be expected to increase in all
areas. For financial analysis purposes, we would assume 35%.
7. Present investment earnings rates are assumed at 8%.
8. The present prices for plots and interment services are below
comparable privately maintained cemeteries. For financial
analysis purposes, we would assume a 25% increase in prices.
9. phase II is zoned CF (Community Facilities) ,
The following pages represent the analysis of these various
financial alternatives.
2
!
Page 3
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 "PERPETUAL CARE" FINANCING BASIS
Description- Plot, niche, and vault sales proceeds would go to
the Cemetery Fund and be invested over a period of time until
the point that the interest income would be sufficient to cover
the maintenance costs. All other revenues collected by the City
involving the Cemetery (opening/closing fees) will be used to
support the present cost of maintenance. The General Fund would
fully fund all maintenance costs of the Cemetery until the
principal accumulation was sufficient to fund this cost level.
Pro Forma (General Fund)
Revenues
Opening/Closing Revenues $ 57,796
projected Revenue $ 57,796
Expenses
Present Expenses $156,162
Net Loss Covered by General Fund ($ 98,366)
Pro Forma (Cemetery Perpetual Care Fund)
Revenues
Present Revenues $ 29,835
35% Expected Improvement 10,442
25% Expected Rate Increase 10,070
Projected Revenue $ 50,347
At an 8% interest assumption, the Perpetual Care Fund would need
$1,952,025 invested at 8% to cover the $156,162 in present
expenses. At $50,347 per year earning 8% and accumulating, this
level of $1,952,025 would take 18 years.
ALTERNATIVE NO. 2 "PAY AS YOU GO" FINANCING CONCEPT
Description- The General Fund would receive all Cemetery
revenues and incur all expenses involving the maintenance of the
Cemetery and interment costs for burial services.
Pro Forma (General Fund)
Revenues
Present Revenues $ 97,205
35% increase in sales 34,022
Revised Revenues $131,227
25% increase in prices 32,807
Projected Revenue $164,034
Expenses
Present Expenses $156,162
Net Surplus or Reserve $ 7,872
The General Fund currently operates the Cemetery at a loss of
$58,957 ($97,205 revenues - $156,162 expenses). With the
expansion of Phase II to S.W. 10th St. and its assumed effect
upon sales and with the projected increase in prices, the
General Fund could project a Net Surplus of $7,872 in
approximately one fiscal year.
3
.,
Page 4
ALTERNATIVE NO. 3 "GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS" FINANCING BASIS
Description- Attempt to sell Phase I and Phase II properties and
have the City get out of the cemetery business altogether.
Pro Forma
Revenues $ 0
Projected Expenses $156,162
Contract Termination Charge 125,000
$281, 162
The City would not be able to sell phase II property without
selling Phase I if it desires to get out of the cemetery
business because the mausoleum is located within Phase I.
However, there is no financial incentive to acquire Phase I
since it is has substantial maintenance and record-keeping costs
with no further plot sales revenues.
The present zoning of CF (Community Facilities) would preclude a
buyer from commercial or residential development.
Therefore, there would be little chance of selling either Phase
I or Phase II property and the General Fund would be responsible
for continued funding of Phase I maintenance and no further
revenue (assuming no development of Phase II) or little revenue
since all plots will be sold within six (6 ) months and only
crypts and niches could be sold.
ALTERNATIVE NO. 4 "SELL PHASE II, PROCEEDS TO PAY FOR PHASE I"
FINANCING BASIS
The City would require $1,952,025 from the sale of phase II
invested at 8% to cover the current cost of maintenance. This
would require a per acre sales price of $200,000+ in this area
adjacent to the present cemetery. In addition to this, there
could be a potential cost of $125,000 if we have, in effect,
cancelled our contract with Prearrangements, Inc. by selling off
the land for Phase II.
CONCLUSIONS
The Cemetery is currently operating at a loss of ($58,957) to
the General Fund.
The direction of the long-range plan of the Cemetery, which
started several years ago with the hiring of the current
Director, was initially to improve the general condition and
appearance of the present (Phase I) Cemetery. Following this,
the Cemetery was to incorporate the mausoleum alternative into
the operation. And finally the Cemetery would open up and
expand to S.W. 10th St. and would offer ingress/egress from this
major artery. Phase II development would then progress and
improved overall sales were anticipated. All plan elements have
been completed with the exception of the development of Phase
II.
4
"
, .
Page 5
The remaining cemetery ground plots will be sold out within the
next six (6) months if sales continue on their present rate.
Phase II development could possibly be ready at the end of this
six-month term if started immediately.
The alternative for the City to cease providinq municipal
cemetery services (Alternative III) does not appear feasible and
qenerates more questions than answers. First, who would
purchase this land adjacent to the cemetery zoned CF without
purchasing the presently developed cemetery? Would they
continue to maintain a cemetery? At the standards that the City
has adopted? Would they develop a profitable cemetery business
or simply foreclose after a few years? Would the City take over
a foreclosed cemetery at this point? What would be the overall
condition and cost to restore? We would expect to incur a
$125,000 cost to close out the contract with Prearrangements,
Inc. if we chose this option. The General Fund would be
responsible for any financial impact created by this
alternative.
The alternative to develop a "peroetual care" financial position
(Alternative I) does not appear feasible and has an immediate
neqative impact upon the General Fund in that all expenses of
the Cemetery would be covered by the General Fund for almost 18
years until the Cemetery could support itself. This time period
is not considered acceptable and the financial impact upon the
General Fund is not acceptable.
The alternative to sell Phase II, invest the proceeds, and use
the interest to pay for the costs of Phase I does not appear to
be feasible since the per acre requirement of $200,000 is not
indicative of the sales in this area.
since the Cemetery has the funds to develop Phase II and could
be at breakeven or at a surplus within a short period of time
fOllowing the development, it would appear that the best
financial alternative at this time is to proceed with the "Pay
As You Go" financial position (Alternative II) and develop Phase
II and to continue to allow the General Fund to receive all
revenues to offset Cemetery expenses. Assuming a conservative
growth in sales (plots, crypts, and niches) and some cost
increases, the General Fund could produce a breakeven or surplus
position in the short term, possibly by the end of the first
year.
cc: Joe Weldon, Parks & Recreation Director
Milena Walinski, Assistant Finance Director
5
~
.
1
Minutes of the Workshop Meeting i
of 11/2/93 i
I
Page 7 I
Mr. Kovacs stated the recommendation is two (2 ) acres, 10,000 l
square feet on aggregate areas. This configuration provides direction
for a mix yet allows the market to dictate and has a very low
intensity. ,
.
The Mayor inquired if a person has 10 acres with a land use I
designation of Transitional, can two acres be designated as NC with I
the balance remaining in the original zoning. In response, Mr.
Kovacs stated yes. I
I
The Mayor stated in his opinion the term neighborhood I
commercial, is the little neighborhood grocery store. There used to
be a category of Limited Commercial (LC) zone district. It seems to
him it would make more sense to go back to that zoning designation.
He inquired if it would be better to have a NC zoning district, that
is truly in a neighborhood and a LC zoning district that would meet
more of the criteria that is currently proposed for the NC zone. I
I
j
Mr. Kovacs stated the Commission's record is replete with saying
that the basis for going to transitional from multiple family is to
be able to accommodate the potentiality of a mixed use development
where we can achieve the economies that we want by having a small
commercial center inside of the 35 acres so that people can walk to
it.
At this point there was discussion with regard to the strip
shopping centers.
The Mayor suggested that a condition be added to the NC, that if
it is neighborhood commercial then the development cannot front on a
major access. In response Mr. Kovacs stated there are already four
NC developments which front on major arterials.
The public hearing on this ordinance will be held on December 7,
1993.
4 . Delray Beach Municipal Cemetery Expansion.
The City Manager stated the last time this matter came before
the Commission there were some questions raised about whether the
city should be in the cemetery businessj and, if we stay in business
whether or not we should expand. When he received a request for an
authorization to go ahead with engineering design work on the
expansion, he felt it appropriate to bring this matter at a
worksession to talk about how the cemetery operates and talk about
the issues. What staff is looking for is some direction on whether
or not the Commission wishes to proceed with the expansion and also
on whether or not we should reestablish the Perpetual Care Fund for
future maintenance of the cemetery.
In response to a question from the Mayor, the City Manager
stated when we get the expansion and improve the cemetery and have
additional entrances to it (the entrance off of S.W. 10th Avenue), he
thinks that will cause an increase in lot sales. If you operate it
I
,. , I
.
Minutes of the Workshop Meeting 1
of 11/2/93
Page 8
i
,
as you do today, using lot sales revenues to help pay the operating !,',
costs, the net cost wou.ld be reduced. However, once the lots are
sold the overall cost will be greater than they are today and there
will be no revenue to help pay for it. I
In response to a question from Mrs. Smith, the City Manager
stated we have a Perpetual Care Fund which has approximately
$140,000. That money is proposed to be used to do the first part of
the expansion. The fund was discontinued in 1988/89.
In response to a question from Dr. Alperin, the City Manager
stated he is not sure how the city got into the cemetery business and
has to have someone research this. However, most cities are in it.
Dr. Alperin inquired if the cemetery was considered a city
service. If it is then the city has to get more land to provide this
service forever.
In response, Mr. Weldon stated he thinks the city got into the
cemetery business was when the city was a small village that needed a
cemetery. The citizens turned to the municipality and it grew from
there.
In response to a question from Dr. Alperin, Mr. Joe Weldon,
Parks and Recreations Director stated there a couple things that are
being done, marketing of the cemetery, fixing it up and offering
alternatives to below ground burials. There is a mausoleum which can
also be expanded. There are between 3,500 to 4,000 grave spots. We
average 160 burial per year. It would take about 20 years until it
is filled up.
Dr. Alperin stated his concern is does the tax payer want to
continue to subsidize the cemetery until the 20 years are up and then
pay all the associated costs thereafter. Or is it smarter to let
private industry handle it.
The City Manager suggested that we keep the Perpetual Care Fund
and put lot sale revenue into it. We should generate enough money to
pay the maintenance cost for the cemetery long term. That is with
the expansion. Without the expansion we will be spending about
$150,000 a year to maintain what we have. The other option is to
either sell the whole cemetery or selling the south 10 acres and
putting the proceeds from the sale into a fund to pay the maintenance
cost for the remainder. I f you do that then you end up with a
situation where there is no cemetery in Delray Beach.
In response to a question from Mr. Ellingsworth, the City
Manager stated our projected sales revenue is $22,000 per year. Mr.
Ellingsworth stated he was in favor of Suggestion No.4.
The City Manager stated opening and closing costs should
continue to be used to pay current operating costs. The current
revenues for the cemetery is $57,000. That includes opening and
I
Minutes of the Workshop Meeting I
of 11/2/93 I
Page 9 i
closing, overtime charges and all the different things we charge for.
The annual operating cost is $147,000.
At this point discussion ensued with regard to the costs of
maintaining the cemetery.
The Mayor requested that staff evaluate how much it will cost to
set up a perpetual care fund, how many years will it run based on
optimistic and pessimistic views. Then the Commission can look at it
again.
Mr. Ellingsworth suggested that staff look at the $440 resident
plot fee to balance out this year's cost.
The Mayor also requested the history and when the management
firm came in. In response, Mr. Weldon stated with regard to the
management firm the city wanted to build a mausoleum complex. The
rationale was to get a private company in to do that. We have
basically the same agreement that Boca Raton and Boynton has except
we took it one step further and got a higher percentage on the
mausoleum. In return we gave them a percentage of the burial spaces.
The contract is for 20 years. The city then owns the mausoleum once
it is completed.
5. Delray Beach Municipal Golf Course Club House.
The Assistant City Manager stated he is looking for direction on
a mode of selection for architectural services for design and
construction of the Golf Course Club House. Two alternatives have
been discussed in the past. He would also like to proceed with the
preliminary design and site planning under certain perimeters of
square footage, budget and seating capacity. In January 1993, the
Commission gave staff direction to develop a RFQ to send out to
private restaurant management firms to see if we could obtain
assistant from the private sector with regard to information of what
size or type facility should be built. There were three negative
responses j however they showed interest in responded to a RFQ for
lease.
Dr. Stronge, representing Regional Research Associates, gave the
methodology used in the marketing study for the Club House and the
conclusions. A survey was done of the demand for banquet facilities
and of the supply of facilities in the area. Organizations outside
of the Delray Area were not included in the study. Additionally,
banquet halls which did not have restaurants or restaurants which did
not have formal banquet facilities were excluded. Their overall
conclusion is that there is an excess capacity in the market for
banquet facilities. There is some shortage of facilities in the 250
to 400 seat range. Their study suggests that if the City decides to
pursue the banquet facility at the golf course then it should be
between 250 and 400 seats. The area chosen for the study was from
Yamato Road to Boynton Beach Boulevard, more of less. Within the
City limits of Delray the demand does exceed the supply.
'!
. IA/7 ~
MEMORANDUM
DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 1993
TO: CHERYL LEVERETT
I ; :;~/
FROM: PAT CAYCE .~
SUBJECT: PARTIAL HISTORY OF THE CITY CEMETERY
In November 1902 Mr. Dewey of the Florida East Coast railroad
donated five acres of land to the Ladies Improvement Association
be used as a town cemetery. A committee of three members was
elected to hold the cemetery property in trust for the
Association. In January 1903 two and one half acres adjacent to
the donated land were purchased by the Ladies Association for an
addition to the cemetery. In september of 1903 the cemetery was
incorporated and named Pine Ridge. The money secured from the
sale of lots in the cemetery was used to maintain it. A family
lot cost $5.00 and a single lot was $1.00.
In January 1914 the Ladies Association voted to deed the
cemetery over to the town of Delray and the paper work was
completed. In 1926 the City Clerk brought to the attention of
the Association the fact that no deed had ever been given. The
City Attorney was prevailed upon to draw up the suitable papers
to legally turn the property over to the City. However,
references to the cemetery appear in the City's budget prior to
1926, so its upkeep and maintenance must have been the City's
responsibility, legally or not, as of 1914.
Sources:
Eiqhty Year History of the Woman's Club of Delray Beach; Emma
Kernan
Political HistorY of Delray Beach; W.A. Jacobs, Helen F. Long
'r
'The regular meetlng or t.ne Ul'tY uouno~~ was ne~u on
.he above date and was oallen to order at 8.15 by
-resident Cason. Roll oall showed the ~ollowlng
lembers ~re8ent; J. R. Cason, L. H. Bradshaw, G. O.
~trlckla.nd a.nd J. W. Aoto!1. Absent T. MoRae.
The minutes of the preTioue meeting read and
~ppro.,.ed .
A letter from E. Ben Carter in reference to
'urnlshing enough rook to oomplete the work on Parrott
it. was read.
A motion by Mr. Bradshaw and seoonded by Mr.
.triokland that the letter be filed for referenoe. Carried.
A motion by Mr. Bradshaw and seoonded by Mr.
;trlakland that the bills for December be referred to the
'1n&noe oomml t tee f"or approY&l. Carried.
A motion by Mr. Aoton and 'aeoonded by Mr. .Bradshaw
.hat the olerk draw warranta-Cor all billa whioh had been
~pproyftd . Carr18d. "'5-!"
A motion by .Mr. Aoton and seoonded by Mr. Striokland
~hat the alerk issue to Mr. Sundy a warrant tor tROO .00 ""
)ut before doing 80 to haye Mr. Sundy to g1.. him his
~heok for $115.00 whiah was to be pta... to the town'e
~redl t . Carried.
... .,:~
...
A motion by Mr. Aoton and seoonded by Mr. Striokland
~hat the Olerk write the Ajax Engine Works and ask them to
;ive the best terms on the Maohines referred to in their
..tter of January 5th. Oarried.
There being no further business the meeting ad3ourned.
~(d/. (~'
~ppro...ed__" ' .' day of' ~ ,A. D. 1914.
f/ .- '~
2:X~ ~
", ,,' "..
~tte8t. _ r>: _.~. ,.., , c<...~' . ~_ ;':' ",
" ,
,~.. ':'AA'" __...___ 0----- -- ---- - -- -_.._-'~.'~ ",,',' " , -,",.."'1
~-~~ ' ' ",.
.
lappeQYM. . OARRIED.
L-
'opo.ad Ordinanoe of the West Palm Beach Telephone Co ,
~8 oarried oyer to the next regular meeting.
.F.Miller President 0' the Oouncil appointed the fol1ow1~
i W.. .BlaoJaD&r
'omm1ttleonr"~-at-ricklan4 .
f . Street. B.l.Sterling
~ W...BLackmer
Lnance '
I H.I.sterl1nc J.A.Zeder
Jater & Light J.AJleder
W.W.BlaoDer ~H.J.5terl!~
t
I <<.oJ .&tIrtck-llll1Ct Ord1D8noel' G.J .s'trtcsuana
~ I J.A.Zeder
******************.......**...........*....******...**.
r 111 tohelr"f-ddre8sed the C0\D'101J..~ lensth in reprtte to
he l'owna. ( i.
'- '
otion br\ 11.3, :~' .erling Uld:,Odlided '" G.I.Striokling
hat t.he Oo.lP1Ql ad~ to "'urdaJ' Octpber 30troDl
\. f .. ' 4J . ,..
~OOl80k A.a. '\0 t4 901ock: P.K. ''4'8 an equAtls8,'t,lon Board.
~_..~~~ .
,. ~ ~ ,,.J> ,,~."l< . ".. ~,' ~~ '....." ~. ,', ~ . , - ~ 1 -", '.~ .~..... '{;t~, -.... ~~J.*...v I . :'t;' .. -' .' ,,, , 'I! . '
..:r.,: , ,~...>>~,,:., ~'.'tt '~~el~&~~:',f"1::t~ ;~-::,~~tL~.tdCi:~~A~~~'t~~,~~t~'#t ~.r(-<1l-i' ~~~~i: ~ ~- ", ,~"..' oi~.~ ~t~~~~;~
'~ '
Oouncil Rooms !uno 12 ,1916
~e regular meet1~ "1' the Town Counoil w~e oalled to
~der at 7:30 P.~. with the following members present.
~irman A.F.Mil1~r J.A.ZedA~ H.3.8t3~li~Z G.J.Str1oklsnd
Lnutea o't the previous meetin&~ we:'9 read and approved.
16 Olerk presented the Taz sale Oertlf'ioateo't T.T.Reese
~lalning thatthe sale of the property was 111egal,Amotion
,s ma.de by J .A.Zeder and supported, by H.J .Sterllna that
.6 clerk be instruoted to clear the title. O~r1ed
a.:rence Walker ad~eBae~ the Council asking on what C0n-
tions the Oolord Sohool might have the use of the City
tar, The Council were if f'avor of pant1na the school f'ree
fhe Sohool Board
~er providina .ke,^made the conneotion to the water main.
,e resignation o't M&7or Oromers was presented and lIpon~, <'3':'.
. .
motion by G.J.Strickland and supported b1 J.A.Zeder the
~e was acoepted.
Resignation or Marshal Ramesy was presented
1d on motion b1 H.J.Sterlinl and 8uppoited by J.A.Zeder tb*t
16 resignation be aooepted,the same was oarried by roll oall.
le resignation or wmW .Bl&Oltmer was presented, Motion by
,A.Zeder and supported by G.J.Str1okland that Mr Blaokmers
~aicnation be acoepted,a oall or the Yeas and Naie the
~tlon oarried.
" "."... " ". .,,-'. ,>;'c. <w~'-
_'&1~~),'w..t ~t.;'\~f:; .~.~re'\ -14 b" the 8<m4
~tee. ~.t;."~-';"'.1r.', f' Oft. w~or the roll
Ie ~t~0110.,r~' ~;'''__p.o+#'
., '
//;,,//$'
! .
.
. 'Colm.iI'Rooms" J-anua:ry !8 191e
The reSUlaP mee'1A1 o. 'he Town Coun.l1 was .aIled \0
opder ~y Mayor 8.0'~ ~. e O'Olo.k P.E w1'h the tollow1ft!
'membe.e pre sell" .
r.M.Oneal A.I.Burt S.H.Allen
Absent T.J.Wl111amson L.L.Barw1ek
Minutes o~ the ppeYloua meettft& read and approyed.
. ft\~~~ t" - ~:;i~ . - i;1. ~ " _ ~ . '. : . :."' if .' "., ';~j:~~Y~~': .....~~'\\t ?;~;'_... '" _1,rr, '.. 'I:>-~"~~;._ ~ Jot "
".".. ,\~;. ,~".._~~";:t..~., ,:; ".0'" 1. ~
">" ' .
~~-~_.,.....,.< '
.',. .. - . .1 -. ~'. . ~ - "".... . - ~~ .. .. ,'~.... .' -.-"11'''"$1111
' - ~ _ __ f" r. ,," '~ ~ "':': >- ~,'- _ ~ ~:'''~ fi!. ift ;,;:'-' "" - ,~,~' " - ,,':' Ii - ^
. , ,,_:~~Z#1i~~~ll1l~"i .y.
'.~~,:::,.~~~~,.c;;:,.,;<"frfi,"~;:::;~:;;;"~;;;;:;,.....,.:y......".""j,'_.,.u;'.",.....,.,,,,.,"y,...."...~.".._:-.;l.;_ .~,,"-_... '''','C,"
'., ~;;$~~~'f~4~f~~_:~,J:;~;f~~(':\J~:~~,,:~~;~':~~f~~::~~~:~::i~:~~~~,";X,:' ,~~_~~. :-;~:::~c::" ""~:~~;::'~:::~:.::,:~, '_,,_,~ ,'~~'::::,-'::,:,,' ,''::
. '~::BI'q~ftiI.}Oom&ft".'i!i2spofit'ii'f'tSf._ af
_ .,,~..,' ", ' ~ _' ""'.'. .. -.-.\" '.; . .,~ "t'. , :. ;"':""-, ',,;':, ~'W" ~c""'" __""","'~"". .".c;,..""..,~r:". ,.'.;'",.,~~",:.,,,,,,,;,,:','~" II
0'1
y.
j__,,_~}~~.~:~W"fW~~:~liriiEiF~""~I.ilJ:n4
\:f::::':" ,. ",,'ll.,. 'M,' ..'.. ."il~-..... ".. ". "''''-"''''.4. ",.. Q. . '1
ot
:iIi\i"
.....'~,\'
Hot ~~,"::..,~,~~~.~.::.::"D'18lHj.~W 4. -pIl.w.l!J~J,J '} ._'",i(~rlL)~. or1f~
7-:--1
.,
1&___ ,. L 11 1 .l~~..g,
.~mI11.., -.I"L ,,'~- .- _ L_ -,.
Mr M.R.S...., ... p...... cad add,eseed the Ooune11 1.
peC&pds to Tax Bal. O.7'1~1.a'e., due on hie property.
Mo\ioft by B.H.All.. and sUpported by .&.B.B\I1'k that \he
'~
~-~r-~.3
,-" fl
,
reported back to the Council with the recommendation
that they be paid, and on roll oall the bills were ordered
paid by unanimous vote of the Council.
,
- ~" ~.*' ';i'1~.. _:_ J _ ~':_",'^d~"_~_'.: ~~;t~~_::;~t.~'~:~~":J,r>'0."~i-"~--:~_::;:.""""~~~)\,. ~ :~~ ~' ","., ~" f
"...l. ,,~,,~::,L;.'r. _ . ~ 1;1: . ~ "'~ "'1 0
,,~"',h"___
the
S up
tery. ......c. ":~.n...
..' '.. '" .,;"", ~' ~l;: .. "'-'l' : " ' ......
'<, 4.~ ' ...'" "t-. . " ....~ ~ -, ~ ... . . ~': .. ..
.;;0", Al'",\1M:.' "",.."'-. .... ~.
Mr. Scott, Chalrm9.n of ..he Ordinanoe Com-
mittee, submitted an ordinanoe entitled:
" AN ORDINANC15 PROHIBI'rING THE CONSTRUCTIOn
OF CESS POOLS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY.
REQUIRING THE INSTALLATION OF SEPTIC TANKS IN CONNEC-
TION WITH ALL IffiW CONSTRUCTION IN SUCH SEVTIONS OF THR
CITY AS ARE SUPPLIED WITH WATER, AND REQUIRlliG THE
OWNERS OR OCCUPANTS OF PR~dISES &~VING WATF~~ SUPPLY
'ro SUPERCEDE THE OPEN 'l'OILET 'i'lI'ri: SEPTIC TAl;XS JI'l'HIi~
(Jt'un W1'DO ^ lJT'\ 'Ot'f'ITTTnTUt'lll1THA 'TT I\'n~n nH'TT~rn~ T'T 'nT:\l/'i
'. '
.... 'I
.
COUNCIL CHAM13ER
J ..
Maroh 31at.1926
The oounc1l met at the oall of the Mayor.
Counoilmen, Barwick, bans, Jelks, Sunq- a.m O'Neal
were present. .
.
I~ was mOTed. seoonded, and oarried that
the street O~.t.. au4 Engineers be i~truot.d to
proceed with the pa.y1n8 in the north ..at ...t1on
of town reque.ted bJ' llr.J.C.K1tohell. Special
anancemen~. were to be mad. whereb7 Mr. Mitohell
would tJlo1ll4. th1s aIlO\Ult of p..n.ne in the program
of his 8ldJttT181on anI. __hat the 01 ty would asa...
thi. pa~ 1D. 1t8 fir8t pav1ns program. The motion
was oarrie .
Th, ~j~'.r ot tu.r.D1sh1ng power to Delrq .
Ooee.u Estat,.... referred to the Light. and Water
Oommit"...
lIr. Barnetrt ot the. 01ty Engineera was
pre..nt an4 &delreased "~.,oou.nol1 in regard to
difterent tJlles"o'f str.... pf-vins. Mr. Barnett wa.
reque.ted to obt~n oer$a1n other 1ntorma~1GD
on rM,1pt of whlOb tht oouno11 would oontinue the
. disou..ion ot the'paY1Dg progz'8Il.
"
1/.;; '?/.P.k
. ~eDtemoer ~~vnf L~~O.
COUNe IL CHAllliBH
The Counoil met in adjourned regular session with
Vioe-lmyor Sundy presiding. Councilmen Ba.rwick. Evans.
Jelks and O'Neal were present.
It wa.s regulFrly moved, seoonded and oarried that
the item of $11.546.18 for eleotrio line extensions SinB&
Maroh 1st, 1926 be referred t..> the Florida Power &: Light
:ompany tor payment.
It was moved by Mr. Jelks and seoonded b1 Mr. Barwiok
1i'hat the J{iayor be requested to desiillate the week from Oot-
obsr 4~ to October 11th as Clean Up Week and that the use
,of oity equipment to a.id in the olean up be authorized.
I
\ After oonsiderable disoussion it was moved that the
;toll~W\~ audget for the year 1926-27 be adopted and that the
I rnil;,ecCf'or the year be fixed at fourteen. The item of
Fiveh~u8a.n4. Dollars for the Chamber of Commeroe for ad-
'vertising was granted wit~ the restriotio~~hat the appro-
pri.ation be made monthl;y' subject to the [10. y approval of the
City C~il before se.idexpenditure is made.
Adverti8ing - Legal $ 600.00
Ad:vertising - e of C . 5, 000 ..pa'n
Audit 350.00
:&u1d 4,416.00
Ctt. a
'ir$ 'e par In ant 4,000.00
GOlf Gourse 6,000.00
)interest & Sinking Fund 69,916.00
, Park Maintenance 2,000.00
Police 1>epartment 5,000.00
Saluit.$ ... AdmtJIi.atrative 13,800.00
Sani tarT Department 16,000 '.00
i Street Llght.s 20,000.00
i street Repairs and Oiling 20,000.00 ,
Misoellaneous 0,000.00
r- TOTAL $164,082.00
<)
; On roll oall the above budget and mil~ge were unanimously
laA~pted.
,
I",:
t'.;;i'
,
I
MAUSOLEUM SALES AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Agreement made and executed this ~-d day of
p~ , 198W , by and between the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, a municipal corporation existing by virtue of the laws
of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as "City") and
TOTAL PREARRANGEMENT, INC. , a Florida corporation, (hereinafter
referred to as "Management".
WHEREAS, City owns and operates cemeteries located in
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, which contain certain vacant
real estate dedicated for cemetery purposes;
WHEREAS, City is interested in employing and Manage-
ment is interested in handling for City the sales program and
construction of a mausoleum project for City consisting of one
or more mausoleum buildings containing crypts and niches, for
entombment of deceased persons and cremated remains, and a
chapel for committal services only, on the real estate owned by
City at no cost or liability to City.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises,
covenants and agreements herein contained it is understood and
agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
Section 1. Definitions.
(al Below Ground Crypts - Interment space in
prep laced chambers, either side by side or multiple depth,
covere.d by earth and sod and known also as "lawn crypts",
"westminsters", or "turf top crypts".
(b) City Approved - Within this Agreement, whenever
the term or terms City approved, City preapproved, City
approval, approval by City, approved by City or any other
similar term is used, such term shall require that Management
receive formal notice, in writing, from the City Manager or his
designee, that'the particular action or item has been approved
by City. The City, in approving any item wi thin this Agree-
ment, may exercise whatever method it deems appropriate in
reviewing such item.
(c) Construction Escrow - Fund to be established
from which funds for construction will be disbursed. A per-
centage of proceeds from each sale of a crypt or niche shall be
deposited in such fund to insure construction of the respective
crypt or niche. The appropriate percentage shall be set by
Management after being approved by City.
(d) Crypt - Space wit~in a mausoleum which is
designed to hold a casket.
(e) Financed Accounts - Those sales contracts from
which Management has received payment from a third party and on
which said third party may have vested rights to collect the
contractual amount due, from the purchaser.
(f) Grave Space - A space of ground in a cemetery
intended to be used for the interment in the ground of human
remains.
(g) House Accounts - Those sales contracts on which
Management is accepting payments over time and whose collection
rights are solely vested in Management or City.
(h) Monument - Any product used for identifying an
entombment site and cemetery memorials of all types including
monuments, markers, vases, and the lettering or other
memorialization on crypts and niches.
(i) Niche - Spaces within a mausoleum which is
designed to hold the cremated remains of a body.
(j) Outer Burial Container - An enclosure into which
a casket is placed and includes, but is not limited to, vaults
made of concrete, steel, fiberglass, or copper; sectional
concrete enclosures; and crypts.
2
'.
.
(k) Pre-need sales - Pre-need sales are those sales
which are made for the future benefit of persons currently
living.
Section 2. Grant. subject to other provisions of
this Agreement as hereinafter set forth, City hereby appoints
Management as its exclusive sales and development company for
the mausoleum, below ground crypts and grave spaces. In such
capacity, Management will enjoy the exclusive right to handle
the mausoleum development and sales programs for City and to
arrange for the sale of all mausoleum crypts and niches for the
cemetery to be developed by Management. Management shall in
addition be permitted to conduct pre-need sales of outer burial
containers and monuments.
Section 3. Term. The initial term of this contract
is for twenty (20) years, corrmencing on 0-,..... ~. 4It..~7 ~- ,
r- oc' '~d {J
19ft and ending on .s- 20E/. This Agreement
shall be renewable by City and Management for an additional ten
(10) year term thereafter unless cancelled by either party
through written notice to the other party at least 180 days
prior to the termination of the initial term or any renewal
term thereafter, provided Management is not in default here-
under, or City has not exercised their termination right
hereunder.
Section 4. Sales Authority and Responsibilities of
Manaqement. As City's exclusive development sales company,
Management shall have the following obligations, riqhts and
privileges:
(a) To develop and sell the initial unit of the
mausoleum and any subsequent units. Management, in order to
begin the project, shall furnish to City within sixty (60) days
of the signing of this Agreement the following items:
1- Design of mausoleum complex additions;
.2. Building specifications of mausoleum
complex additions;
3
'.
-
The foregoing items must meet with the approval of
the City. Management shall have the right to take whatever
action is necessary to satisfy disapproval. Such disapproval
shall not be arbitrarily exercised;
(b) In addition to the mausoleum complex provided
for in paragraph 3 (a) ( 1) above, City grants to Management the
exclusive rights to sell and erect other mausoleum buildings on
cemetery lands now owned or hereinafter acquired by City and
the exclusive right to sell entombment rights in crypts and
niches in the mausoleum buildings erected by Management, such
exclusive rights to continue for a twenty (20) year period.
(c) City and Management shall agree on the specific
location, plans, building specifications, number of crypts and
niches, and total agreed sales price of all of the entombment
rights in such crypts and niches to be contained in each
additional building of the mausoleum complex, before any
entombment rights in crypts or niches to be contained in such
building are sold.
(d) The erection of any mausoleum or mausoleum
addition shall be done in two ( 2) stages. The first stage
shall be the survey and sales stage during which Management
will actively sell entombment rights in the mausoleum. The
second stage shall be the construction stage when Management
will, in addition to handling sales, be constructing the
mausoleum. Construction of the mausoleum shall be undertaken
as follows:
1- The construction of any mausoleum or addition
shall commence within six (6 ) months of such
time as 33 percent ( 33\) of the crypts to be
contained within such mausoleum or addition have
been paid for. Management may, with the consent
and approval of City, begin construction prior
to the time 33 percent (33\) of the crypts have
been paid for. When such a determination has
been made, Management shall have the right to
disburse funds from the construction escrow
accounts.
4
,
2. In any event Management shall start construction
of the mausoleum or addition within four (4 )
years after the date of the initial crypt sale
and construction of the mausoleum shall be
complete within five (5) years of such sale.
3. Prior to any sale, contract for sale, reserva-
tion for sale, or agreement for sale, of any
crypts or niches, within a mausoleum or addi-
tion, Management and City shall agree to the
amount to be deposited into the construction
escrow fund. The minimum amount so deposited
shall be equal to the cost per unit which will
be computed by dividing the cost of the project
plus ten percent (10\) of such cost, as computed
by a licensed contractor, engineer, or archi-
tect, by the number of crypts in the mausoleum
or addition. The cost per unit shall be divided
by the contract sales price of each unit to
obtain the minimum percentage of each payment
which shall be required to be deposited in the
construction escrow fund. Construction escrow
payments shall be deposited wi thin thirty (30 )
days after Management receives such payments.
Withdrawals from the construction escrow fund
account may be made by Management only after
receiving permission to do so from City.
Withdrawals from such account shall require the
signature of the City'S designated representa-
tive. Should Management default in their
Obligations under this contract, City shall have
the right to withdraw funds from the construc-
tion escrow fund in order to complete construc-
tion of a mausoleum or addition.
4. Pre-need sales of crypts for a particular
mausoleum or addition shall cease once 80
percent (80\) of the crypts to be contained
within a mausoleum or addition have been con-
tracted for. Management may continue to sell
the crypts on a pre-need basis beyond the 80
percent (80\) level if City has given its formal
written consent to such additional sales.
5. After a subsequent mausoleum or addition is
approved by City, Management may begin sales
therefore and construction shall follow pursuant
to Paragraphs 4d(1) and (2), above.
6. Prior to beginning construction of any mausoleum
or addition, Management shall supply City with
Performance and Payment Bonds on forms and
through sureties acceptable to the City. Such
Bonds shall run to City securing 100 percent
(100\) of the total anticipated cost for faith-
ful performance of constructing the mausoleum or
addition and for payment of all persons per-
forming labor or furnishing materials in con-
nection therewith. The Performance and Payment
Bonds shall have as the surety thereon only such
surety company or companies as are authorized to
write bonds of such character and amount under
the laws of the State of Florida and with a
resident. agent in Palm Beach County, Florida. .
.The Attorney-in-Fact, or other officer who signs
a Performance and Payment Bonds for a surety
5
"
company must file with such bonds a certified
copy of his Power-of-Attorney authorizing him to
do so.
(e) pr ior to the cormnencement of construction of a
mausoleum or addition, Management shall supply to City evidence
tha t the fOllowing insurance polices are in effect naming the
City as an additional insured. As to the following amounts and
types of insurance, these requirements are to be construed as
minimum requirements.
1- Workers Compensation, Coverage to apply for all
employees for Statutory Limits in compliance
with the applicable state and federal laws. In
addition, the policy must include the following:
a. Employers Liability with a limit of
$500,000 each accident.
b. Notice of Cancellation and/or Restriction.
The Policy must be endorsed to provide the
City with thirty (30) days notice of
cancellation and/or restriction.
2. Comprehensive General Liability: Coverage must
be afforded on a form no more restrictive than
the latest edition of the Comprehensive General
Liability Policy filed by the Insurance Services
Office and must include:
a. Minimum limits of $500,000 per occurrence
combined single limit for Bodily Injury
Liability and Property Damage Liability.
Minimum aggregate limits to be $1,000,000.
b. Premises and/or Operations.
c. Independent Contractor.
d. Products and/or Completed Operations.
e. XCU Coverages.
f. Broad Form Property Damage.
g. Broad Form Contractual Coverage appliCable
to this specific contract including any
hold harmless and/or indemnification
agreement.
h. Notice of Cancellation and/or Restriction.
The POlicy must be endorsed to provide the
City with thirty (30) days notice of
cancellation and/or restriction.
3. Builders Risk. Builders Risk coverage shall be
provided'as follows:
-
6
'~
a. Form - All Risk Coverage - Coverage is to
be no more restrictive than that afforded
by Insurance Services Office Form CF 11 02
05 77 and CF 10 04 05 77.
b. Amount of Insurance - Amount of insurance
is to be 100 percent (100\) of the com-
pleted value of the mausoleum or addition.
c. Maximum Deductible - $5,000 each claim.
d. Notice of Cancellation and/or Restriction -
The pOlicy must be specifically endorsed to
provide the owner with thirty ( 30) days
notice of cancellation and/or restriction.
(f) FOllowing conunencement of construction of any
mausoleum or addition, Management shall cause the same to be
completed within a reasonable time, if suspended or delayed as
a result of strike, riot, war, weather or causes beyond Manage-
ment's control, the time allowed for construction of that
building shall be extended accordingly.
(g) All engineering and building plans and practices
shall comply with and be approved by the proper local and state
authorities, compliance with the same to be the responsibility
of Management.
(h) All development fees not waived by the City
shall be paid by Management or its contractors.
(i) Management shall have the exclusive right to
sell and develop below-ground crypts within the confines of the
cemetery. The sale of such below-ground crypts is subject to
City approval as to design and location. Construction and
financing of below-ground crypts shall occur in the same
manners set forth for mausoleums and additions pursuant to
Paragraphs 4(dl, (e I, (f) , (g) , (h) .
( j ) Management shall have the right to sell on a
pre-need basis outer burial containers and monuments. City
shall preapprove the sales prices and types of outer burial
containers and monuments to be sold, prior to Management
engaging in any such . sales activity. Such sales shall be
subject to the 'following:
7
"
1. Management shall deposit into a merchandise
escrow fund 110 percent (110%) of the
wholesale purchase price of the outer
burial container or monument, the wholesale
purchase price shall be determined at the
time of the initial deposit of the trust
fund based upon the cost as determined and
annually published by the State of Florida
Department of Banking and Finance.
2. The deposit to the merchandise escrow fund
shall be made within thirty (30) days after
the end of the calendar month in which any
payment is received by Management. The
percentage of the 110 percent ( 110%)
wholesale cost placed into the fund must be
identical to the percentage which the
payment bearers to the total cost of the
items.
3. Any contract entered into between Manage-
ment and a purchaser for the sale of an
outer burial container or monument shall be
subject to cancellation and refund for good
cause, within one (1) year from the date of
execution only. Upon a showing of such
good cause, Management shall refund to
purchaser 100 percent (100%) of the pur-
chase price within thirty (30) days after
receipt by the authorized person of the
request for a refund. If Management
disputes the sufficiency of the Showing of
good cause, it must request a hearing
before the City Manager of City or his/her
designee wherein the Ci ty Manager or
his/her designee shall determine the
sufficiency of the Showing. Such determi-
nation by the City Manager or his/her
designee shall be binding upon Management,
however, nothing within this paragraph
shall be construed to limit purchaser's
right of recourse against Management. Any
contract entered into between Management
and a purchaser for the sale of an outer
burial container or monument shall be
subject to cancellation and a 70 percent
(70%) refund, within one (1) year from the
date of execution only, for any reason
whatsoever, upon the request of the pur-
chaser or the purchaser's agent. Such
refund shall be made within thirty (30 )
days after the receipt of the cemetery
company of the request for a refund. When
any such refund takes place, Management
shall be reimbursed the monies placed into
the merchandise escrow fund and the monies
paid to the City pursuant to Paragraph Sa
of this Agreement. Management may not
cancel the contract unless the purchaser is
in default.
The above paragraph on cancellation mirrors
Section 497.048(7) of the Florida Statutes
as to the time periods for a refund and
percentages of refund. Should Section
8
'~
497.048(7) be amended in the future as to
the relevant time periods and percentage of
refund, such amendment shall be applicable
to this Agreement.
4. Withdrawals from the merchandise escrow
fund account may be made by Management only
after receiving permission to do so from
City. Withdrawals from such accounts shall
require the signature of City's designated
representative. Should Management default
in their obligations under this contract,
City shall have the right to withdraw funds
from the merchandise escrow fund in order
to purchase any outer burial container or
monument that has been contracted for.
(k) Management shall have authority with the consent
and approval of City, to establish payment terms for their
customers.
(1) Management shall hire, train and supervisor the
sales personnel. Management shall instruct its sales personnel
in a manner so as to maintain and increase the good will and
reputation of City. Management and its sales personnel, when
conducting sales presentations or otherwise providing service
to members of the public at City's facilities, shall not
represent themselves to be associated with City. Management
shall be responsible for the conduct of any sales personnel it
hires, in such fashion so that the highest standards of ethical
practice are maintained. All sales personnel supervised by
Management who are selling shall be bound by and abide by all
Federal, State and Local laws, rulings, regulations and codes
of ethics that are appliCable to cemetery sales counselors as
well as the ethical standards of the American Cemetery Associa-
tion and Cremation Association of North America.
(m) All sales contracts (Purchase Agreements) and
advertising materials and methods used by Management and its
agents hereunder shall be first approved by a designated
representative of City, shall designate City as the seller and
shall be countersigned by a designated representative of City.
All sales cont~acts (Purchase Agreements). shall be in writing.
9
'I
.
(n) It is understood and agreed that all direct
sales expenses shall be paid by Management. Such expenses
shall include the cost of recruiting sales personnel, training
sales personnel, providing kits, and sales incentives, bonuses
and advances, salaries or cormnissions, office space, telephone
expenses, contracts, maps and deed forms.
(0) In connection with the collection by Management
of the Gross Selling Price with respect to any sales, Manage-
ment may service as fiscal agent and may receive and make
deposit of checks, notes, drafts, Bills of Exchange, accept-
ances, undertakings or other orders for the payment of money.
(p) It is understood and agreed that this Agreement
is intended to give, insofar as possible, exclusive rights and
privileges to Management for the development and sales of
crypts, niches, and below ground crypts for City, during the
life of this Agreement.
(q) Management shall devote its best efforts to the
successful operation of the terms of this Agreement and shall
in all respects, be considered an independent contractor. Any
sales personnel hired and trained by Management shall be Agents
of Management, and City agrees that they will not interfere
with hire or otherwise deal with Management's sales personnel.
It is understood and agreed that all' cormnissions paid to City
for its duties shall be paid directly to City without any
deductions.
(r) City shall make available to Management for use
in making sales and sales contracts any and all pre-need leac.s
which it has or hereafter receives with respect to mausoleum or
grave space sales. It is understood that all such inquiries
and leads are the property of City and upon termination of this
Agreement all such inquires, prospects, leads, and all other
cards, records of customers and/or prospective customers, are
10
'.
.
to be returned and delivered to City and shall be the sole
property of City.
(s) Management shall maintain a sales office within
the corporate boundaries of the City of Delray Beach. The
location, size, and general decor shall be subject to prior
approval by City. Within three (3 ) years of the execution of
this Agreement, Management shall have constructed a sales
office at the mausoleum site. The plans and specifications for
such office shall be subject to review and approval of the
Ci ty .
(t) In addition to the insurance contemplated under
Paragraph 4(e) Management shall at all times maintain the
following insurance pOlicies with minimum limits as follows:
( 1) Comprehensive general liabili ty pOlicy
coverage must be afforded on the form no
more restrictive than the latest edition of
the comprehensive general liability policy
filed by the Insurance Services office and
must include:
(a) Minimum limi ts of $500,000 per occur-
rence combined single limit for bodily
injury liability and property damage
liability minimum aggregate limits to
be $500,000.
(b) Premises and/or operation.
(c) Independent contractor.
(d) Products and/or completed operations,
(e) Broad form property damage.
(f) Broad form contractual coverage
applicable to this specific contract
inCluding any hold harmless and/or
indemnification agreement.
(g) Notice of Cancellation and/or restric-
tion. The policy must be endorsed to
provide the City with thirty (30) days
notice of cancellation and/or restric-
tion.
( 2) Workers compensation: Coverage to apply
for all employees for statutory limits in
compliance with the appliCable state and
federal laws. In addition, the policy must
include the fOllowing:
11
"
.
(a) Employer's liability with a limi t of
$500,000 each accident.
(b) Notice of Cancellation and/or restric-
tion. The policy must be endorsed to
provide the City with thirty (30) days
notice of cancellation and/or restric-
tion.
(3 ) Business Auto Policy coverage to include
all owned, non-owned, and hired automo-
biles.
(a) Minimum bodily injury limi ts of
$500,000 per occurrence.
(b) Minimum property damage limits of
$100,000 per occurrence.
(c) Notice of Cancellation and/or restric-
tion. The policy must be endorsed to
provide the City with thirty (30) days
notice of cancellation and/or restric-
tion.
(u) In a case where a pre-need purchaser dies prior
to the completion of his/her crypt or niche within the
mausoleum or below ground crypt, then Management shall provide,
at its own cost and expense, temporary entombment of the body
or cremains on the cemetery grounds.
Section 5. Compensation of Manaqement and City.
(a) Management shall receive seventy-five (75%)
percent of the proceeds from the sale of each lawn crypt,
mausoleum crypt or niche and City shall receive twenty-five
(25%) percent of the proceeds. Management shall received
eighty (80%) percent of the proceeds from the sale of any and
all cemetery goods and services (described in paragraph 4(i) )
and City shall receive twenty (20\) percent of such proceeds.
Management shall received fifty (50%) percent of the proceeds
from the sale of each grave space and City shall receive fifty
(50\) percent of such proceeds. Proceeds under this paragraph
are defined as being the gross selling price of any item or
uni t. If contracts are financed, then such amount shall be
paid to the City and Management when funds are received. If
contracts are qot financed and are held as house accounts, then
12
"
.
payments shall be made to Management and City and to the escrow
account from each payment on a proportionate basis as payments
are received.
Section 6. Management's Covenants. In discharging
his responsibilities hereunder, Management agrees that it will:
(al Comply with all of the laws of the federal,
state or local governmental authority with respect to Obtaining
for itself and/or its employees any licenses which may be
necessary in order to sell crypts and niches, including without
limitation any real estate sales and/or broker licenses;
( bl Not engage in any type of investment selling;
(cl Protect, defend, indemnify and save City harm-
less of, from and against any and all suits, claims, demands,
controversies, judgements, losses, costs, charges, or expenses
including reasonable attorneys fees arising out of or in any
way relating to Management's duties under this contract or as a
result of any actions, inaction or omissions of Management's
employees, agents or contractors.
(dl Not knowingly make issue, or circulate, or cause
to be made, issue or circulate, any estimate, illustration,
circular, statement, sales presentation, omission, or com-
parison which:
(1 ) Misrepresents the benefits, advantages',
conditions, or terms of any pre-need
contract;
(2 1 Misleads, or misrepresents the financial
condition of any person;
(3 1 Uses any name or title of any pre-need
contract misrepresenting the true nature
thereof;
( 4) Is a misrepresentation for the purpose of
inducing or intending to induce a lapse,
forfeiture, eXChange conversion or
surrender of any pre-need contract.
(el Not knowingly make, publish, disseminate,
circulate, place before the public, or cause directly or
13
" '
indirectly to be made, published, disseminated, circulated or
placed before the public:
( 1) In a newspaper, magazine or other publica-
tion;
( 2) In the form of a notice, circular, pam-
phlet, letter or poster;
(3 ) OVer any radio or television station; or
(4 ) In any other way; an advertisement
announcement, or statement containing any
assertion, representation, or statement
which is untrue, deceptive or misleading
with respect to any pre-need contract;
An advertisement announcement, or statement containing any
assertion, representation, or statement which is untrue,
deceptive or misleading with respect to any pre-need contract;
(f) Not knowingly make, publish, disseminate or
circulate, directly or indirectly, or aid, abet or encourage
making, publishing, disseminating or circulating of any oral or
written statement, or any pamphlet, circular, article, or
literature, which is false or maliciously critically of, or
derogatory to any person and which is calculated to injure such
person;
(g) Not knowingly;
(1 ) Make, publish, disseminate or circulate any
false statements;
(2 ) Deliver any false statement to any persons;
(3 ) Place any false statement before the
public;
( 4) Cause directly or indirectly any false
statement to be made, published, disseml.-
nated, circulated, delivered to any person,
or place before the public; or
(5 ) Make any false entry of material fact in
any book, report, or statement to any
person;
( h) Not attempt to settle a claim on the basis of a
material docwnent which was altered without notice to, or
14
'f
.
without knowledge or consent of the contract purchaser or his
legal representative or legal guardian.
(i) Not make a material misrepresentation to a
contract purchaser or his representative or legal guardian for
the purpose and with the intent of effecting settlement of
claim or loss under a prepaid contract unless favorable terms
and those provided in, and contemplated by the prepaid con-
tract.
(j) Not commit or perform such frequency as to
indicate a general business practice any of the following acts:
(1) Failing to adopt an implement standards for
the proper investigation of claims;
(2) Misrepresenting pertinent facts or prepaid
contract provisions relating to issues on
the sale of any i terns covered under this
agreement;
(3) Failing to acknowledge and act promptly
upon communications with respect to claims;
(4) Denying claims without conduct reasonable
investigations based upon available infor-
mation;
(5) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of a
claim upon written request of the contract
purChaser as representative or a legal
guardian within a reasonable time;
( 6) Failing to provide promptly a reasonable
explanation to a contract purchaser or his
representative or legal guardian of the
basis in the prepaid contract in relation
to the facts or applicable law, for denial
of a claim or for the offer of a compromise
settlement;
(k) Not fail to maintain a complete record of every
complaint received since the date of the last examination by
City. For purposes of this subsec~ion, the term "complaint"
means any written communication primarily expressing a griev-
ance;
(1) Not refuse to issue a contract solely because of
an individual's race, color, creed or marital status, sex, or
national origin.
15
., '
.
(m) Not knowingly solicit the sales of outer burial
containers or memorials to a perspective purchaser who has an
outstanding pre-need contract for such items, where the seller
under such contract is a licensed funeral director, under
Chapter 470 of the Florida Statutes.
(n) Not encourage in any manner any perspective
purchaser to cancel any contract said purchaser may have with a
licensed funeral director, under Chapter 470 of the Florida
Statutes.
Section 7. Covenants of City. City covenants,
represents, warrants and agrees:
(a) That City represents and warrants that it is the
owner in fee simple of the real property described in the legal
description heretofore furnished to Management as the site of
the mausoleum complex, and that said site is not burdened with
or subject to any mortgage, lien, or similar encumbrance
whatsoever. Ci ty shall have ninety (90) days after notice of
any title defect to cure the defect or provide an alternate
site.
(b) City will allow Management to conduct
preapproved promotions of the sales and entombment rights in
the proposed mausoleum by making appropriate announcements and
arranging permission of the distribution of pamphlets or other
literature.
(c) In good faith to render such other information
and assistance as may be reasonably possible to assist in the
success of the sales program and take no action which would
delay or inhibit any sale.
(d) To execute Certificate of OWnership conveying to
purchasers the right of entombment to any crypts and niches
sold by Management or the sales personnel hired, trained and
supervised by Management.
16
"
( e) To provide Management with information as to
City's crypt and niche owners and for all other records which
Management may deem necessary for the purpose of customer
relations.
(f) To transmit promptly to Management all inquires
and complaints received by City relative to Management's
activities pursuant to this Agreement.
(g) To allow Management the prudent use of City'S
name and letterhead (such letterhead to be pre approved by City
prior to its use) for customer relations and communications.
Section 8. Assiqnment. Management shall have the
right to assign this contract to an entity or individual with
similar expertise in the cemetery industry after giving City
sixty (60) days notice of such proposed assignment and after
receiving the written consent and approval of City to such
assignment.
Section 9. Maintenance of the Premises. City agrees
to perform all regular necessary maintenance to the mausoleum,
buildings, outside grounds, and landscaping surrounding the
mausoleum. Such maintenance shall include the opening and
closing of niches and crypts. City may wish to Charge an
independent fee to the purChasers of crypts and niches for such
openings and closings. Management shall not represent to any
prospective purchaser that such a fee fo~ opening and closing
of crypts or niches is included within the sales contract price
for the purchase of a crypt or niche. Nothing in the above
paragraph shall be construed to relieve Management of liability
for insuring that the construction of the mausoleum and addi-
tions is done in a professional and workman like manner.
Section 10. Utilities. Management shall pay for all
expenses relating to utilities at the mausoleum site.
Section 11. It is is understood that Management has
no ownerShip r~ghts in the mausoleum buildings other than the
17
.
rights conferred to Management by this Agreement. Fee simple
ownership of the buildings is hereby vested in City.
Section 12. Records. Management shall maintain
daily logs of all sales activities which shall be available for
inspection upon City's request. Within thirty (30) days of the
anniversary date of this Agreement, Management shall submit to
City a certified public accountant's statement of Management's
profits and losses related to this Agreement. Ci ty shall have
the right to inspect all records of Management and shall have
the right to audit any and all stat~ments, books, or records.
Section 13. Termination. On the fourth year anni-
versary of this Agreement and every year thereafter, City shall
have the right to terminate this Agreement if Management has
not averaged at least Five Hundred Thousand ($500,000) Dollars
per year in gross sales starting over the then transpired
period of the Agreement.
Should City determine that Management is in breach of
any covenant or obligation set forth in this Agreement, it may
terminate the Agreement if the breach has not been cured within
ninety (90) days of Management receiving written notice of said
breach.
City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement
should it determine that Management has committed or attempted
to commit a fraud on any person or City relating to any of its
duties under this Agreement. Termination upon this provision
may be made by giving notice to Management of said termination
within sixty (60) days after the year end on which this termi-
nation is based.
Termination of this Agreement for whatever cause
shall in no way jeopardize the entitlement to all payment due
Management, but such payments shall be paid to or retained by
Management in full as here and before provided. In the event a
sales contract is cancelled on which Management is owed any
18
"
monies and subsequently remade with the same customer than
Management shall be still entitled to its commission.
Section 14. Cancellation or Annulment of Contract
without Cause. The City may cancel or annul this contract
without cause at any time during the duration of this Agree-
ment, provided, however that in such event, the City shall
furnish Management with notice of its intent to cancel or annul
the contract, without cause, at least 120 days prior to the
actual effective date of the cancellation or annulment of said
contract. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of
such cancellation or annulment, without cause, City shall pay
to Management $500,000.00 in United States currency as liqui -
dated damages. In addition to the payment of $500,000.00,
Management shall be entitled to all payments due to Management
pursuant to Section 5 of the Agreement, related to Sales made
prior to the effective date of the cancellation or annulment.
Section 15. Waiver. No action other than a written
document from the City so stating shall constitute a waiver by
the City of any breach or default by Management, nor shall such
a document waive Management's full compliance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement, irrespective of any knOWledge
the City may have of such breach, default, or noncompliance.
The City's failure to insist upon full performance of any
provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to consent to
or accept such incomplete performance in the failure. No
waiver of any breach or default shall constitute or be con-
strued as a waiver of any subsequent like breach or default.
Section 16. Notices. All notices required under
this Agreement shall be in writing and sent by registered or
certified mail to:
Management: Al Vocke
Total Prearrangement, Inc.
P:O. Box 2522
Stuart, Florida, 33495.
19
, '
.
City: Parks and Recreation
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida, 33444.
Section 17. Entire Agreement. This Agreement con-
tains the entire Agreement of the parties, and any modifica-
tions hereof must be in writing and signed by the parties
hereto to be effective. Modification of this Agreement, which
would allow Management to practice funeral directing or direct
disposition, through the municipal cemetery, as those terms are
defined in Chapter 470 of the Florida Statutes may only be
accomplished following a minimum of two (2) public hearings on
the subject before the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach. Notice for such hearings shall be made by publication
thereof in a newspaper of general circulation at least two (2 )
weeks prior to the first public hearing and by direct notice
through certified mail sent at least ten (10) days prior to the
first public hearing to all licensed funeral directors who
maintain a place of business within the municipal boundaries of
the City of Delray Beach.
Section 18. Binding and benefit. This Agreement
shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of all successors
of City and Management.
Section 19. Laws of Florida. This Agreement and all
matters pertaining hereto shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of Florida.
Section 12. Arbitration. Whenever any provision of
this Agreement requires joint action or mutual agreement by ~hc
parties and the parties are unable to agree, the matter in
dispute shall be submitted to arbitration unless such dispute
amounts to a breach of this contract. If the City and Manage-
ment cannot agree on an arbitrator, one shall be appointed by
the American Arbitration Association. The decision of the
arbitrator shall be binding on the parties hereto. Any
20
" '
.
arbitration expenses are to be borne equally by City and
Management. Any disputes which rise to the level of breach of
contract may be litigated through a court of competent juris-
diction.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused
this Agreement and three counterparts to be executed and ~heir
seals attested by their duly authorized officers all on the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY ~ELRAY B~CH, FLORIDA
By:~~a~ 4'. r' ('/ ~~~f
By: ~ d' ~ "./:;d'...." J
C' Clerk
Appr
r
I
,+~~,JA#J C.
ATTEST: TOTAL PREAB.RANG~, INC.
By: /4u/ A :!~~ By. //~7~ ? -
. ' /' . /. ,,' , -
Witness
(~tJ{ "" ~ -/JO~~'J
W~t ss
(Corporate Seal)
21
'. ,
.
.~UGUST 9, 1989
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE MAUSOLEUM SALES AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Amendment No. 1 made to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement dated January 5, 1988 by and between the
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, a municipal corporation existing by the
virtue of the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter re-
ferred to as the "City") and PREARR>>fGEMENTS OF DELRAY, INC. , a
Florida corporation.
Whereas, the City owns and operates cemeteries located in
the City of Delray Beach, Florida which contains certain vacant
real estate dedicated for cemetery purposes.
Whereas, the City had previously, on January 5, 1988,
entered into a Mausoleum Sales and Development Agreement with
Total Prearrangement, Inc. , a Florida corporation, for the
purpose of conducting a sales program and construction of the
mausoleum for the City; and
Whereas, Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. has received an
assigrunent of that agreement from Total Prearrangement, Inc. ;
and
Whereas, in accordance with Section 8, Assignment, of this
agreement, the City approved Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. as
the assignee to this agreement; and
Whereas, Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. has assumed
certain liabilities of Total Prearrangement, Inc. running to
the escrow accounts contemplated and commissions due the City
pursuant to this Agreement; and
Whereas, the city has retained the accounting firm of
Ernst and Whinney to review the books of Total Prearrangement,
Inc. and prepare a report as to the amounts due in commission
to the City and escrow accounts;
NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the premises, cove-
nants and agreements herein contained, it is understood and
agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
'. '
.
1. That the City approves and consents to the assignment
of this Agreement from Total Prearrangement, Inc. to Prear-
rangement of Delray, Inc.
2. That Section 5, Compensation of Management, Paragraph
, a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
(a) Management shall receive seventy-five
percent (75%) of the proceeds from the sale of each
lawn crypt, mausoleum crypt or niche and City shall
receive twenty-five percent (25%) of the proceeds.
Management shall receive eighty percent (80\) of the
proceeds from the sale of any and all cemetery goods
and services (described in Paragraph 4ill and City
shall receive twenty percent (20%) of such proceeds.
Management shall receive fifty percent (50%) of the
proceeds from the sale of each grave space and City
shall receive fifty percent (50\) of such proceeds.
Proceeds under this paragraph are defined as being
the gross selling price of any item or unit. If
contracts are financed, t.hen such amount. shall be
paid to the City and Management when funds are
received. If contracts are not financed and are held
as house accounts, t.hen payments shall be made to the
Management and City and to the escrow account from
each payment on a proportionate basis as payments are
received.
3. That Section 12, Records is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Management shall maintain daily logs of all
sales activities which shall be available for inspec-
tion upon City'S request. Within thirty (30) days of
the anniversary date of this Agreement, Management
shall submi. t to the City an annual financial state-
ment audited by a Florida C.P.A. Certified Public
Accountant. which shall include a statement of
Management's profits and losses related to this
Agreement with such revenue and eXPenditure detail as
-2-
" '
required by the City. Ci ty shall have the right to
inspect all records of Management and shall have the
right to a ucli t any and all statements, books, or
records.
4. That Section 8, Assiqnment is hereby amended to read
as follows:
Management shall have the right to assign this
contract to an entity or individual with similar
expertise in the cemetery industry after giving City
Sixty (60) days notice of such proposed assignment
and after receiving the written consent and approval
of City to such assignment.
Assignment as referred to above shall include
any and all sales, assignment. transfer, collaterali-
zation. or other disposition of any and all stock
certificates. riqht title and/ or interest in and to
Prearranqements of Delray. Inc. to any person or
entity other than Russell Yeaqer.
3. Section 16. Notices shall be amended to reflect
that all notices shall be sent by registered or certified
mail to:
Management: Russell Yeager
Prearrangements of Oelray. Inc.
110 E. Atlantic Avenue. Suite 114
Delray Beach. Florida 33444
4. Section 12, Arbitration. is hereby amended to reflect
the correction of a typographical error and shall be renumbered
Section 20, Arbitration.
s. That a new Section 21 is hereby created to read as
follows:
Section 2l. Use of Escrow Accounts. The escrow
accounts required' pursuant to Section 4 of this
Agreement may not be drawn upon without the signa-
tures of both the authorized designee of the City and
Prearrangement of Delray, Inc. All the funds main-
tained in the escrow accounts shall be fUlly invested
-3-
9. That a new Section 25 is hereby created to read as
follow:
Section 25. Prearrangements of Delray, Inc.
shall pay all arrearages up to $80,000.00 due to the
City pursuant to Section 5 of this Agreement.
Repayment of commission amounts shall be as follows:
a. As to any commission that the City and Prear-
rangement of Delray determines that to be due in
excess of $60,000.00, such arrear ages in excess of
$60,000.00 will be paid to the City within thirty
(30) days of the date of the Ernst and Whinney
report.
b. The remainder of the commissions due at a rate
of be paid at a rate of $1,000.00 a month for a
period of up to five (5) years from the date of this
Agreement until such time as the principal amount due
has been satisfied.
c. To the extent there are pre-tax profits and
commission arrearages owed to City, the City shall
share in fifty percent (50\) of the year end pre-tax
profits, which shall be used to pre-pay the
arrearages until the principal sum, determined by the
City to be due, has been satisfied.
The obligations of Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. to
pay the arrearages on the commissions and escrow accounts shall
bear no interest. However, if default be made in the payment
of any of the sums mentioned herein then the entire prinCipal
sum, at the option of the City, become due and collectible and
said prinCipal sum shall bear interest from such time until
paid at the highest rate allowable under the laws of the State
of Florida. Failure by the City to exercise this option shall
not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise the same in
the event of any subsequent default.
-5-
" '
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the aforementioned parties
hereunder set their hand this day and year first above written.
ATTEST: p DELRAY,
-, ~
BY~~'~<~"~~ By:
Witbess
, ~:h~~ /l
{
ATTEST: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
By: ~~'8'~d.4~ By: ~,,/J&~//-?'
C' Clerk Mayor -
A~ed as to form,
Au;J~j C 9-o~eH
-6-
'. ,
.
I .
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE ~~SOLEUM SALES ~
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Amendment No. 2 made to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement dated January 5, 1988 by and between the
..
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, a municipal corporation existing by the
virtue of the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter re-
~ ferred to as the "City") and PREARRANGEMENTS OF DELRAY, INC., a.
-SE.P7e~6€A!?
Florida corporation this ~c day of February, 1990.
Whereas, the City owns and operates cemeteries located in
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, which contains certain
vacant real estate dedicated for cemetery purposes.
Whereas, the City had previously, on January 5, 1988,
entered into a lllausoleum Sales and Development Agreement with
Total Prearrangement, Inc. , a Florida corporation, for the
purpose of conducting a sales program and construction of the
mausoleum for the City; and
Whereas, Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. received an
assignment of fhat agreement from Total Prearrangement, Inc. ;
and
Whereas, said assignment was approved by the City and the
agreement and Amendment No.1 to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement was entered into on August 9, 1989, and
Whereas, the ci ty and Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. do
not at this time wish to construct a lawn crypt garden; and.
Whereas, the City wishes to allow Prearrangements of
Delray, Inc. to solicit conversion to mausoleum or grave' spaces
to those individuals who previously purchased lawn crypts;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, cove-
nants and agreements herein contained, it is understood and
agreed by the parties hereto as follows:
l. That Section 24 is amended to read as follows:
Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. , shall fully
fund any and all deficiencies the City finds to exist
in the escrow accounts required to be maintained by
'. '
I
r , -
.
f
Section 4 of this Agreement. Construction account
escrows related to mausoleum crypts and niches shal1
be funded within thirty (30) days of the date of this
Agreement. Merchandise escrow accounts as required
by Section 4 tH aftd ( j ) of the Agreement shall be
fully funded within 180 days of this Agreement. _.
Below ground crypt escrow accounts as required by
Section 4(i) of this Agreement shall be fully funded
by June 5, 1990.
2. That the first paragraph of Section 13 of the Agree-
ment is hereby amended to read as follows:
On the fourth year anniversary of this Agreement
and every year thereafter, City shall have the right
to terminate this Agreement if Management has not
averaged at least P~"e--HHftdred--'fl\eHSaftd.--Be:\:%ars
t$see,eeet Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
\ starting over the
i ($250,000) per year in gross sales
I
then transpired period of the Agreement.
3. That the other paragraphs of Section 13 of the Agree-
ment are unafficted by this change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the aforementioned parties
hereunder set their hand this day and year first above written.
~L ;Y~~,v .
By:
Witness '
t~.~
~itness
ATTEST, CITY OF D~2RIDA
BY:(]L..J07W''' /-II'IDhh.7Iy- By: ~/~. - - ~ /
CJ. ty C erk ayor
As.sf.....+c
-2-
'. '
. ,
AI.iENDMENT NO. 3
TO MAUSOLEUM SALES AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
DATED JANUARY 5, 1988
This Amendment No. 3 made to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement dated January 5, 1988 by and between the
crTl OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation existing
by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter
referred to as "City") and PREARRANGEMENTS OF DELRAY, INC. , a
Florida corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Management")
this f day of ~ , 1991.
WHEREAS, the City owns and operates cemeteries
located in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, which contains
certain vacant real estate dedicated for cemetery purposes;
and,
WHEREAS, the City had previously, on January 5, 1988,
entered into a l'-1ausoleum Sales and Development Agreement with
To'cal Prearrangement, I nc. , a Florida corporation, for the
purpose of conducting a sales program and construction of the
mausoleum for the City; and,
WHEREAS, Prearrangements of Delray, Inc. received an
assignment of that agreement from Total Prearrangement, Inc. ;
and,
WHEREAS, said assignment was approved by the City and
the agreement and Amendment No. 1 to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement was entered into on August 9, 1989; and,
1
'. '
.
>-
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 to the Mausoleum Sales and
Development Agreement was entered into on September 20, 1990;
and,
...'HEREAS , pursuant to Section 4 of the agreement,
Management has designed and the City has approved a mausoleum
complex consisting of 180 crypts and niches to be built in
Phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 i and,
WHEREAS, Management is required at the earlier occur-
~ence of the fourth anniversary of the Agreement or the sale of
thirty-three percent (33%) of the crypts to begin construction
on Phase 1 of the Complex; and,
WHEREAS, the sale of crypts has not yet reached
thirty-three percent (33%) of the total to be built in Phase 1;
and,
WHEREAS, the parties believe it to be mutually
advantageous in order to increase crypt and niche sales and
improve the cemetery to begin construction of the mausoleum as
300n as possible; and,
WHEREAS, the construction escrow fund contains
$27,152.00; and,
WHEREAS, the cost of constructing Phase 1 of the
mausoleum complex is $76,586.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises,
covenants and agreements herein contained, it is understood and
agreed by and between the parties as follows:
:
2
.. '
. ,
1. The City agrees to release of the monies con-
tained in the construction escrow fund to be used in construc-
tion of the mausoleum.
2. The City shall provide Management with
Forty-Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($49,800.00) to be
used to finance the construction of Phase I of the mausoleum.
In no event shall the monies the City provides to Management,
when added to the monies available in the construction escrow
fund exceed the actual cost of the construction of Phase I of
the mausoleum.
3 . The monies in the construction escrow fund and
additional monies to be provided by the City to Management
shall be made available in accordance with the draw schedule
contained in the contract between Management and Contractor.
4. Such contract shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Attorney's Office. Should the contract
between the Management and the Contractor not be acceptable to
the City Attorney's Office for any reason whatsoever, this
Amendment shall be null and void.
5. If total costs to complete Phase I of the
mausoleum are in excess of Seventy-Six Thousand Five Hundred
Eighty-six Dollars ($76,586.00), such excess cost shall be
borne solely by Management. Furthermore, Management shall have
no rights .to reimbursement for such costs through future monies
to be deposited in the construction escrow fund.
6. Payments contemplated by Paragraph 4(d)(3) of
the Agreement shall be paid directly to the City rather than
3
" '
the construction escrow fund until such time as the City has
recouped its principal investment into Phase 1 of the mauso-
leum.
7. r1anagemen t may not begin sales on approved
Phases ? 3 or 4 until such time as it receives City approval
- , to proceed with such a sales campaign.
8. Management is prohibited from entering into
finance account arrangements or agreements as such are defined
in Paragraph lee).
9. Section 14 is hereby. amended to read as follows:
Section 14. Cancellation or Annulment of
Contract Without Cause. The City may cancel or annul
this contract without cause at any time during the
duration of this Agreement, provided, however that in
such event, the City shall furnish Management with
notice of its intent to cancel or annul the contract,
without cause, at least 120 days prior to the actual
effective date of the cancellation or annulment of
sdid contract. Within thirty ( 30) days of the
effective date of such cancellation or annulment,
without cause, the City shall pay to Management One
Hundred Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($125,000) in
United States currency as liquidated damages. In
addition to the payment of One Hundred Twenty-five
Thousand Dollars ($125,OOO), Management shall be
entitled to all payments due to Management pursuant
to Section 5 of the Agreement, related to Sales made
prior to the effective date of the cancellation or
annulment. No other claims or damages may be assert-
ed against City should the City elect to cance 1 the
contract in accordance with this Section.
10. Paragraph 4(s) is amended to read as follows:
Management shall maintain a sales office within the
corporate boundaries of the City of Delray Beach.
The location, size and general decor shall be subject
to prior approval by the City. The effect of this
change is to eliminate the requirement that Manage-
ment maintain an office on the cemetery site but does
not preclude such a possibility if Management desires
such an office and the City approves such an office.
4
, '
11. Section 12, ~ecords, is hereby amended to read
dS follows:
t-1anagement shall maintain daily logs of all
sales activities which shall be available for inspec-
tion upon City's request. Within ninety (90) days of
the City's request, Management shall submit to the
City an annual financial statement audited by a
Florida C.P.A. Certified Public Accountant, which
shall include a statement of Management's profits and
losses related to this Agreement with such revenue
and expenditure detail as required by the City;
provided, however, that no audited statement need be
provided within two (2) years of a previously audited
statement. City shall have the right to inspect all
l-ecords of Management and shall have the right to
audit any and all statements, books, or records.
12. In addition to all other responsibilities and
covenants Management may have, they do further agree not to
make any direct telephone solicitations for the sale of crypts
or niches or engage in a phone bank sales operation.
13. All portions of the agreement and prior amend-
ments not hereby amended shall remain in full force and effect.
IN \-HTNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused
this Amendment and three counterparts to be executed and their
seals attested by their duly authorized officers all on the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST:
By :0 t';1CTJ~.JI1T Ildif.r By;
City CI rk
Cit
5
" '
ATIE~ cJl. PRE~ OF DELRAY, INC.
By: ~ ~
witness By, . ---<-<'1 ~
v
b~ {( (' I,
l. I ;'1,-Ct--c ~~ {c L--
Witn~ss (Corporate Seal)
6
, '
.
- , . <,
[IT' DF DELIA' BEA[H
DELRAY BEACH
f l () R I [) A,
t&ftd 100 NW. 1 sl AVENUE, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243-7000
AII.America City
, III I! MEMORANDUM
1993
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager [-"')1./\
SUBJECT: EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORT SERVICES
DATE: November 11, 1994
The City Commission has now received proposals from the Delray
Beach Fire Department. and Bethesda Ambulance Service concerning
emergency medical transportation. You have also been given an
evaluation of both proposals prepared by our Finance Director,
as well as Fire Department observations concerning some aspects
of Bethesda's proposal. Therefore, we are not providing any
additional backup material for this agenda item. The purpose
of this memorandum is to set forth the alternatives to be
considered by the City Commission.
As the Commission was advised last week, we are at the point
where the Commission needs to decide whether City staff should
continue seeking a Certificate of Need from Palm Beach County
to allow our Fire Department to provide emergency medical
transportation services. The City Commission can decide to
seek the Certificate of Need at this time, or not. If the city
Commission decides not to seek a Certificate of Need at this
time, the City would have the opportunity to again seek a
Certificate of Need in 1996. If you decide to Seek the
Certificate of Need and we receive the Certificate from the
County, then we would proceed to implement the plan outlined by
the Fire Department, except that I do not recommend adding any
additional staff at this time.
If the City Commission should decide not to seek a Certificate
of Need at this time, then you need to decide which of three
alternatives to pursue for the future. As I see it, we have
the following alternatives:
ff.J.IwuL ~ ci fWd '1-jdo-ur
~ IJJ-pSI-. A.-- ~
sto;;.
@ Printed on R&cycled Paper THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS (Ll{nM ~ 1l/~i7 1.(;,
0/, 'sScmi;x; )
'. ,
. '
- . .
Mayor and City Co~issioners
November 11, 1994
Page two
1. Maintain the status quo. The City would continue to
respond to all EMS calls as the first responder. We would
notify Bethesda through MedCom and Bethesda would respond
Code I without lights and sirens.
2. We could accept those elements of Bethesda's proposal,
which may improve EMS initial response times, but not
reduce our staff so that our fire fighting capacity is not
affected. Under this alternative, we would notify Bethesda
directly of all EMS calls and they could respond Code 3
with lights and sirens. If this alternative were chosen,
we could evaluate it over the next two years to see whether
the improvement in response times, if any, is worth the
additional cost of forgoing transportation revenues the
City would receive if our Fire Department were providing
transportation services.
3. This alternative would be to accept Bethesda's proposal
as presented, give up our capacity to provide emergency
medical transportation, and reduce the Fire Department
staff.
I recommend that the City proceed with its application for a
Certificate of Need. If, however, the City Commission does not
wish to stop using Bethesda Ambulance for emergency medical
transportation services, then I would recommend that we
implement the second alternative above, so that we can evaluate
over the next two years whether there is any significant
improvement in first response times.
If the City Commission wishes to reduce our fire fighting
capacity, then that decision should be made independent of any
decision regarding EMS transportation. There are certainly
many cities our size which are rated as Class 3 or Class 4,
however, this seems contrary to the tremendous investment the
City has made in fire fighting equipment and stations through
the Decade of Excellence Bond Issue.
DTH:mld
, '
.
. .
Mayor Lynch . . .
As requested, the following is a verbatim excerpt from the City
Commission meeting of November 15, 1994, re: Item 9. G. ,
Emerqency Medical Transport Services:
Dr. Alperin: II What I'm trying to bring up is the support of the
Fire Department's presentation. What is the general consensus of
the Commission? I am not in favor of it.1I
Mrs. Smith: III am in favor of it, based on alot of the facts
that we have been given, So, I am for it.1I
Mr. Ellinqsworth: III'm in favor of it.1I
Mr. Randolph: IIAnd I'm in favor of it.1I
Mayor Lynch: "I feel we haven't been given all the facts. I
guess I'd like to go over something that's been on my mind.
"I think, as Dr. Alperin just pointed out, the issue is not
whether the Fire Department does a good job or not. That has
never been a question. I think that everyone of us in this room
has had some emotional relationship or somebody was injured . . . a
family member, a friend . . . that the Fire Department did an
excellent job. They are very trained, professional people. We
are very proud of them as people in our city. That has never
been the issue.
IIWe, as taxpayers, are paying between eight to ten million
dollars a year to support the Fire Department. We spent millions
of dollars building stations and putting in good equipment so
that we can have the top Fire Department in the country. Those
are not really the issues and never have been the issues.
"There are really two issues at point here. The first one
is, should we switch to a one-tier method, and if so, then who
would be the outfit or the group that would function. There have
been statements that I'm against the Fire Department. I'm not
against the Fire Department. I'm trying to do what is right for
the city. When I look at the issues, I vote on the issues based
on the merit alone. I've voted for everyone of the Fire issues
and on the equipment we've put in to the city. I suggested five
years ago that we build a station on West Atlantic where it is
today for the role model purpose of the firemen to our community
and for it being a vital part of our community.
III do have concerns about the Fire Union. They have been
very difficult to deal with and I feel the more power we give
them, the more difficult it may be for us to deal with them as a
Commission. And I think citizens need to be aware of that. That
doesn't mean I'm against the Fire Department. I have concerns
about the Unions and the way they have worked with us as a
Commission over the past four and a half years.
III'm very upset about the way the issue was handled. When I
ran for office four and a half years ago, along with Commissioner
Randolph and Dr. Alperin, we all ran on basically two premises.
,
.
One was that we'd run the city as a business and, secondly, that
we would try to bring harmony to the city by good, honest
government. For the 4-1/2 years that I've been involved, I feel
we've tried to do that. And this issue has become probably the
most divisive ... it could have been the worst this city could
have ever faced. And I feel the cause of that needs to be
discussed because it could happen again.
"I feel that the Fire Department took this issue to the
public and made it an emotional issue that could have divided the
city and brought us back to where this city was ... headlines in
the newspaper, foolish looking ... ten years ago. Some of the
leading political activists were ready to sign up on one side
without even hearing the other side, which is something that's
always dangerous. Just think of this scenario: if Bethesda had
come in with an absolutely fantastic, great proposal, and we
already had other people already deciding the Fire Department was
the right way to go, we would have had other groups listening to
both sides, picking the other, and then we would have had the
city fighting each other. Does that sound familiar to where we
were years ago with the golf course and a lot of other things?
We didn't let both sides give their opinions. We weren't really
being honest about it.
"The Fire Department, or some people who were working on
their behalf, called homeowners associations around the city and
asked them to get together. Bethesda wasn't doing that to try to
gain political support to basically make it an emotional issue.
It shouldn' t have been an emotional issue. It was a business
issue. City staff was asked to evaluate the situation, to look
at the two proposals and give us their decision on what the
proposals actually were saying and how they basically were
factual or not. I felt City staff went too far. They went and
gave conclusions as a matter of fact. When they were looking at
those proposals, there were assumptions that they were making
that they didn' t go in and verify. They should have verified
those assumptions before they came up with conclusions. When the
report was done, the conclusive report supposedly, by City staff,
it was given to the Fire Department and not given to Bethesda. I
feel that was unfair on the part of our staff. Both sides should
have had that report; both sides should have been able to speak
at the last meeting and give their opinions on it.
"The way I look at it, we've pledged to you as a Commission
for the last 4-1/2 years that we would work together and treat
things as a business, and basically try to honestly provide a
good and stable government. This particular decision, and the
way it has been presented and the way it has been handled, could
have been the most divisive and most disruptive thing for Delray
in the last ten years. 1'm very disappointed in the way we've
handled it. I apologize on behalf of the staff, and I ask that
we really re-evaluate the way we handle things and address them
in a more businesslike and professional manner in the future.
Thank you."
Prepared by: AMH on 11/18/94
, '
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tf11
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # 9 If - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
APPOINTMENT TO THE DELRAY BEACH HOUSING AUTHORITY
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
The term of Gail Dillard, the resident member on the Delray Beach
Housing Authority, expired on July 14, 1994. Ms. Dillard was
appointed in March, 1993, to fill an unexpired term. She is
eligible and would like to be considered for reappointment. The
attendance record is attached.
Per statute, no commissioner of an authority may be an officer or
employee of the city for which the authority is created. Each
housing authority shall have at least one commissioner who shall be
a resident who is current in rent in a housing project or a person
of low or very low income who resides within the housing
authority's jurisdiction and is receiving rent subsidy through a
program administered by the authority or public housing agency that
has jurisdiction for the locality served by the housing authority,
The term is for four (4) years, ending July 14, 1998.
In addition to regular advertising procedures, notices were posted
at Carver Estates as well as with the Department of Community
Improvement. To-date, applications for the resident member
position have been received from the following:
Gail Dillard
Robin Preston
In accordance with Florida Statutes, members are appointed by the
Mayor and ratified by the Commission. By prior consensus of the
Commission, however, each member makes a recommendation to the
Mayor as to Housing Authority appointees based upon the rotation
schedule. For this appointment, the recommendation will be made by
Commissioner Randolph (Seat #4).
Recommend appointment of a resident member to the Delray Beach
Housing Authority, to a four-year term ending July 14, 1998.
f7Z;;. ~~ ~ ~ ~/lg(..
ref:agmemo1 & ~6) ~~
t; -Ii; / Ccllt/l9S ~
at :s.sen-kn?- )
I'
.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING _..III.U ~~>'-f;;i.I'1'1994 - 6: 00 p, M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
lfL_ llrta II ll~
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE:
a.p. SETTLEMENT/CITY OF DELRAY BEACH v. DECAPITO: Approve
settlement in the amount of $16,500 plus attorney's fees, for
the City v. Decapito, an eminent domain action regarding the
acquisition of right of way for S.W. 10th Avenue.
.
" ,:~!IIiIII,~'~'t'
' ,~. '. .."',';' "'Y".' .tf\, ..,;:".._" ,..-'"" ,""'.~'_ i-, "_ ;;," ,hI_." ,~"";',~~,e,-:,\_'" . .
"""'" "'Lt Consider
u~ es all costs
v. City of Delray
(/-0
(fI0. J?Rnd~ WQ.4/
~i:IIL /lrxm; )
:
, '
.
. 1V15'9~ Tte 11:28 F.~ ~07 278 ~755 DEL BeH en .1.ITY --- ern H..1.LL :i ill):::
[IT' DF alLAR' IEREM
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 200 ~w 1s1 AYI!:-:UE . DELRAY BEACH, FLOlUDA 3344<4
FACSIMILE 407/278.4755 Writer' s Direct Line
DELaAY BEACH (407) 243-7091
'ATE' MEMORANDUM
November 15, 1994
l'J'U
TO: City Commission
FROM: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Gloria Hilton vs. the City of Delray Beach
'I'his case stems trom an accident that occurred at the
intersection of s.w. 6th Avenue and s.w. 7th Street. The
accident occurred when a driver proceeded northbound on S.W.
6th Avenue through the intersection, colliding with Plaintiff,
Gloria Hilton. The stop siqn facing the driver was missing.
Plaintiff was able to produce testimony that the stop sign was
missing tor approximately 2 1/2 days prior to the incident
which occurred on Monday, April 19, 1993.
As a result of this accident, Ms. Hilton suffered a herniated
disk in the cervical spine and was diagnosed with some
compression ot the cord. Ms. Hilton had medical expenses in
the approximate amount of $11,000. In addition, at the time of
the accident, Ms. Hilton was working approximately thirty-two
hours per week at Publix. As . result of the herniation, she
was unable to lift more than ten pounds which was an essential
requirement ot her job at Publix. Ms. Hilton earned
approximately $10,000.00 per year from her job at Publix. In
addition to her lost wage. at Publix, she also had lost wages
at her other job at Envirotest Technology in the approximate
amount of $500.00.
Trial of this case is set for December 6, 7, and 8, 1994. Lee
Graham, the City's Risk Manager and myself met with Ms. Hilton
and her attorney to discu.. settlement on November 14, 1994.
As a result of this settlement discussion, our office would
recommend settlement of this case in the amount Of $39,SOO.OO
which includes all costs and attorney's tees.
ay copy of this memorandum to David Harden, City Manager, our
office requests that this settlement be placed on the November
15, 1994 City Commission agenda for approval. Our office
.'
(!) Prrnl<</ orr RecycJ~ ~DC' 9.7-,
'. '
"11' i 5~9 ~ Tl~ 11:28 F.t! ~07 278 ~755 DEL BCH CTY :\oTI!: ~-- CITY H.-\.LL 4J OUJ
City Commission
November 15, 1994
Page 2
apoloq1zes for this late aqenda item, however, the City's next
Commission meetinq of December 6, 1994 is after the scheduled
commencement of trial, and thus, we need a resolution prior to
~
SAR:ci
cc: David Harden, City Manager
Alison MacGreqor Harty, City Clerk
..
" '
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tJr1
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM * /0 A - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
SECOND READ ING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE NO. 84-94/
BEACH PARKING PERMITS
DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1994
On September 27, 1994, the City Commission passed Ordinance No.
70-94 on second and final reading. This ordinance provided that
only City residents would be able to obtain a parking permit for
the beach parking lots, continued the annual fee of $25.00 for the
permit, and provided for the transfer of a permit and issuance of a
substitute sticker to a permit holder for a substitute vehicle.
Subsequent to adoption, . concerns were raised about the
ramifications of prohibiting non-residents from obtaining beach
parking permits.
The City Attorney has researched this matter and and is
recommending that we proceed with the adoption of Ordinance No.
84-94 which provides for the availability of beach parking permits
for residents and non-residents alike upon equal terms for Anchor,
Sandoway and the Holiday Inn North parking lots. The Ingraham
Avenue parking lot will retain its previous "residents only"
status.
On November 1, 1994, Ordinance No. 84-94 was passed on first
reading with a permit fee of $75.00 per year. The vote was 3 to 2,
with Commissioner Alperin, Commissioner Ellingsworth and Mayor
Lynch voting for approval, and Commissioner Randolph and
Commissioner Smith voting against approval.
Attached is a survey of beach parking permit fees charged by other
cities in our immediate area. Also, as requested by the Mayor, we
have attached a summary of beach revenues and expenses. I
previously recommended that the permit fee be increased to at least
$40.00.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 84-94 on second and final
reading.
p~ 5-0 wJ<-$5o.oo ~
ref:agmemol0
'.
I
ORDINANCE NO. 84-94A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 71, "PARKING
REGULATIONS", BY REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 70-94 AND
FORMER SECTION 71.60 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND
ENACTING A NEW SECTION 71.060, "PARKING METER
PERMI TS" , OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, TO ESTABLISH THAT ALL PERSONS
MAY OBTAIN A PARKING PERMIT FOR ANCHOR, SANDOWAY, AND
! THE HOLIDAY INN NORTH PARKING LOTS, AND TO LIMIT THE
i PURCHASE OF PARKING PERMITS FOR THE INGRAHAM AVENUE
I LOT TO CITY RESIDENTS IN THE MANNER WHICH EXISTED
I PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF ORDINANCE NO 70-94,
I ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR THE PARKING PERMIT, TO PROVIDE
I
!
I FOR THE TRANSFERRING OF PARKING PERMITS AND THE
I ISSUANCE OF SUBSTITUTE STICKERS FOR A SUBSTITUTE
I VEHICLE ACQUIRED BY THE SAME PERMIT HOLDER SUBSEQUENT
I TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORIGINAL PARKING PERMIT;
PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE,
I AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. !
I I
I WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
j
I Florida, desires to repeal Ordinance No. 70-94 and prior Section
I
I 71.060 to reestablish the status quo existing prior to enactment; and
I
I
, WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to abide by all deeds
,
! and agreements which provide that there shall be equal access upon
I
I equal terms for parking lots in existence as of November 8, 1983, in
I
the vicinity of the municipal beach; and
i
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to make available
parking permits to all persons on equal terms and conditions for
Anchor, Sandoway, and the Holiday Inn North parking lots and to retain
the residents only parking lot at Ingraham Avenue, said lot being
established after November 8, 1983; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, through the issuance of
parking permits, desires to raise revenues for the continued upkeep
and maintenance of the aforesaid parking lots.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Ordinance No. 70-94 which repealed Title
VII, "Traffic Code" , Chapter 71, II Parking Regulations", Subheading
"Parking Meters", Section 71. 060, "Parking Meter Permits", of the Code
of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and former Section
71.060, be, and the same are hereby repealed in their entirety, and a
new Section 71.060, "Parking Meter Permits", is hereby enacted to read
as follows:
" '
I
i
I
I Section 71.060 PARKING METER PERMITS.
'i (A) A "parking meter permit.. may be purchased from the City
1\ by all persons which shall authorize the parking of the vehicle for
ii which the permit was acquired in any parking meter space except those
I,
Ii otherwise restricted, located within Anchor Park, Sandoway Park and
II the Holiday Inn North parking lots without requiring the payment of
I,
ii money into the space's parking meter.
II
Ii
jl (B) A "residents-only parking permit" may be purchased by
'i
II City residents from the City for their vehicles which shall authorize
;I the parking of such vehicles for which the permit was acquired in any
II parking meter space, except those otherwise restricted, located within
"
II Anchor Park, Sandoway Park, and the Holiday Inn North parking lots
without requiring the payment of money into the space's parking meter,
I and which shall also authorize the parking of such vehicles for which
the permit was acquired in .any parking space, except those otherwise
I restricted, located within the Ingraham Avenue parking lot.
I (C) The cost of a parking permit shall be fifty dollars
I ($50.00) per year, plus applicable taxes.
i (D) Each permit shall the period from October 1st
I cover
I
i through September 30th. There shall be no proration of the permit
I fee. The application procedure and the form of the permit shall be
I determined by the city administration. It shall be illegal to deface
I a parking permit or to transfer a parking permit from the vehicle for
II which it was acquired to any other vehicle. However, if the parking
ii permit sticker and other sufficient proof is submitted to the City,
,
i and when approved in advance by the City Manager or his designee, the
parking permit sticker may be exchanged for a new sticker and the
parking permit transferred to a substitute vehicle acquired by the
permit holder subsequent to the issuance of the original parking
permit.
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
i Section 3. That should any section or provision of this
I
I ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
- 2 - Ord. No. 84-94A
I
I
II
II
'.
I
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the 15th day of November , 1994.
~~;y- i
/ MAY R
ATTEST: i
flLNin-fllJi' k; l'IJ. J/nrJq
ity CI rk
First Reading November 1, 1994
Second Reading November 15, 1994
I
I
!
I
!I
Ii
I
I
I
I - 3 - Ord. No. 84-94A
II
,I
II
/,
II
, '
~K
~
[IT' IF DELIA' HEAEM
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 200 NW 1Sl AVENUE' DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA 33444
FACSIMILE 407/278-4755 Writer's Direct Line
DELRAY BEACH (407) 243-7091
f lOll I D "
...... MEMORANDUM
AI~America City
, ~ II J!OATE: October 26, 1994
1993 TO: City Commission
FROM: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Beach Parkinq Ordinance
Our office researched various deeds and agreements which
pertain to beach parki~g. Our research indicates that our
funding agreement with the State of Florida for Beach
Renourishment dated March, 1980 required that the vehicle
parkinq spaces remain open and available to all as equal terms.
The City's current agreement with the County dated October 13,
1992 in Paraqraph 4(k) and ( 1) provides that the City shall
maintain all vehicle parkinq spaces in the vicinity of the
beach project that are under the City's control which existed
on the date of the supplemental aqreement dated November 8,
1983, open to all members of the public on an equal basis and
on equal terms. This covenant applies for a period of ten (10)
years beyond the date that the City receives fundinq for beach
renourishment from the County.
Anchor Park was acquired jointly by the City and the County in
1974, however, the deed is in the County's name and the City
leases the property for five dollars ($5.00) per year. As part
of the lease, the City agreed to treat both residents and
non-residents equally.
Sandoway Park was purchased by the City in 1971. Sandoway Park
was a park in existence in the vicinity of the beach at the
time of beach renourishment aqreements and thus residents and
non-residents must be treated equally.
The original Holiday Inn north parkinq lot was also in
existence at the time the agreements with the State and the
County were entered into and therefore, residents and
non-residents must be treated equally.
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
, '
City Commission
October 26, 1994
Page 2
Ingraham Park was not established until after November of 1983,
and is therefore, not subject to the beach renourishment
agreement's requirements regarding parking for all residents.
Based on the foregoing, . it is our office's opinion that all
parking lots in the vicinity of the beach which existed as of
November 8, 1983 must be open to all on equal terms.
Therefore, it is our office's recommendation that the ordinance
passed by the City Commission should be repealed and all
parkinq lots be open on the same basis as existed prior to the
enactment of the recent ordinance.
Attached please find a new ordinance which provides for the
availability of beach . parking permits for residents and
non-residents upon equal terms for Anchor, Sandoway and the
Holiday Inn north parking lots. Ingraham Avenue parkinq lot
shall retain its previous residents only status as it was
established after November 8, 1983.
By copy of this memorandum and ordinance to the City Manager,
our office requests that the revised ordinance be placed on the
Cit Commission agenda.
Attachment
cc: David Harden, City Manager /
Alison MacGreqor Harty, City Clerk
park. aar
,
, '
~/
Survey of Beach Parking Permits
Palm Beach County and North Broward County
Delray Beach -
Resident Permit $25.00 per year
Permit allows parking at meters located at
Sandoway, Anchor and Ingram Parks.
Non-Resident $25.00 per year
Permit allows parking at meters located at
Sandoway and Anchor Parks only.
Deerfield Beach -
Resident Permit $35.00 per year
Non-Resident Permit No
Boca Raton -
Resident Permit $20.00 - $22.88 as of 10/01194 - $25.47 as of 10/01/95
Greater BR Beach
Taxing Dist. Perm/tl'l
Resident $35.00 - $37.88 as of 10/01194 - $40.47 as of 10/01/95
Permit allows entrance to all beach parks.
Restricted Permit $25.00 - $27.88 as of 10/01/94 - $30.47 as of 10/01/95
Permit anows entrance to South Beach Park only.
Non-Resident Permit" $35.00 - $37.88 as of 10/01/94 - $40.47 as of 10/01/95
Lake Worth -
Resident Permit $10.00
Seasonal Permit $30.00 Must own property in Lake Worth and live
there part of the year. If property is rented
owner does not qualify for a permit
Non-Resident No
Boynton Beach -
Resident Permit $10.00
Non-Resident $50.00 Good only from May to November
Lantana -
Resident $6.00
Non-Resident $100.00 $50.00 after April 1 of each year. Exp.
9/30/94
1" The Greater Boca Raton is the reserve area and extends to the Turnpike. Residents of the
reserve area may pll'Chase a beach permit as listed above.
(2l Residents of Palm Beach County may pwchase a non-resident permit which slows entrance
to South Beach Parte only. This permit was instituted as a condition for County participation in
the purcha6e of the land for South Beach Parte.
, '
,
.
M I M 0 RAN DUM
TO: City Commission
FROM: David T. Harden,t7" I
City Manager
SUBJECT: Beach Revenue. and Expense.
DATE: October 20, 1994
The overall listing of revenue. that can be attributed specifically to beach
operations (including parking facilities) is a8 follows:
. Beach Parking Fees $250,000
. Beach Parking Permits 15,450
. Beach Sailboat Permit. 5,000
. Beach cabana Franchise Fee. 42,000
Total Beach Revenue. $312,450
The various expenses related to our beach operation. (including parking
facilities) are as follow.:
. Beach Operation. $778,820
. Parking Meter operation. 50,000
. Sea Turtle Con.ervation Program 12,000
. Dune Maintenance Program 135,000
Total Beach Operating Expen.e. $975,820
The shortfall in revenue. is funded from other General Fund revenue., the
Sanitation Fund ($63,860) and the Beach Restoration Fund ($147,000).
DTH/jms/sam
cc: Jo.eph M. .afford, Director of Finance
.
"
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM * loB - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE NO.
87-94/TAHERI PROPERTY REZONING
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is second reading and public hearing for Ordinance No. 87-94
which rezones the Taheri property from POC (Planned Office
Center) District, in part, and A (Agricultural) District, in
part, to RM (Medium Density Residential) District or to a
specific RM density (between six and twelve units per acre) by
affixing a numerical suffix to the zoning designation. Please
refer to staff documentation for an analysis of the proposed
rezoning.
The applicant has requested a zoning classification of RM. The
Planning and Zoning Board, by a 4 to 3 vote, has recommended RM-8
zoning (limited to 8 units per acre). This rezoning petition
requires a quasi-judicial proceeding at second reading of the
ordinance, at which time a full discussion of the density issues
is anticipated. At first reading on November 1, 1994, Ordinance
No. 87-94 was passed by unanimous vote of the Commission.
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 87-94 on second and
final reading.
~w/~~
(brJ-IO)
1../&1
(D,~ ~)
ref:agmemo12
'.
I ORDINANCE NO. 87-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
I DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND
II PRESENTLY ZONED POC (PLANNED OFFICE CENTER) DISTRICT,
IN PART, AND A (AGRICULTURAL) DISTRICT, IN PART, TO
RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT, WHICH
j PROVIDES A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT WITH FLEXIBLE
DENSITIES HAVING A BASE OF SIX (6) UNITS PER ACRE AND
A RANGE TO TWELVE (12) UNITS PER ACRE, AND WHICH ALSO I
AUTHORIZES THE CITY COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH THE
DENSITY FOR A SPECIFIC RM DEVELOPMENT BY AFFIXING A I
NUMERICAL SUFFIX TO THE DESIGNATION TO LIMIT THE
DENSITY TO A SPECIFIC NUMBER BETWEEN SIX AND TWELVE I
UNITS PER ACRE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 4.4.6(H)(1) OF I
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; SAID LAND BEING
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF MILITARY TRAIL,
APPROXIMATELY 1,400 FEET SOUTH OF LINTON BOULEVARD,
AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; AND AMEND I NG
"ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1994";
PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the
Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April,
I 1994, as being zoned POC (Planned Office Center) District, in part,
and A (Agricultural) District, in part; and
WHEREAS, the RM (Medium Density Residential) District
! provides a residential zoning district with flexible densities having
i a base of six (6) units per acre and a range to twelve (12 ) units per
II acre; and
WHEREAS, Section 4.4.6, IIRM (Medium Density Residential)
I District, Subsection 4.4.6(H), "Special Regulations", of the Land
Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, provides
that the density for a specific RM development may be established by a
numerical suffix affixed to the designation; and
I WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning
I and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning
Agency, reviewed this item and recommended by a vote of 4 to 3 that a
density suffix of 118" be affixed to the RM zoning designation, thereby
limiting the ultimate density of the property to eight (8 ) units per
acre; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has
determined it to be appropriate that the Zoning District Map of the
City of Delray Beach,' Florida, dated April, 1994, be amended to
reflect a revised zoning classification of RM - ---1.0-. for the subject I
property. I
I
I
I
I'
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby
amended to reflect a zoning classification of RM- 10 for the
I following described property:
I
The Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest
Quarter (NW 1/4), LESS the West 40 feet thereof for
road right-of-way, and LESS the South Half (S 1/2) of
the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Southwest
Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4),
all in Section 25, Township 46 South, Range 42 East,
Palm Beach County, Florida;
TOGETHER WITH:
The South Half (S 1/2) of the South Half (S 1/2) of
the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of the Northwest
Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section 25, Township 46 South,
Range 42 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, LESS the
West 685.00 feet thereof.
The subj ect property is located on the east side of
Military Trail, approximately 1,400 feet south of
Linton Boulevard; containing 40.52 acres, more or
less.
Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall,
I upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the I
City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of I
Section 1 hereof.
Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
Ii conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 4. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
- 2 - Ord. No. 87-94
I
, '
Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
I reading on this the 15th day of NO~ . 1994.
~~
M A vii' R
AT~~
Acting City Clerk
First Reading 'Mn'7~mhjOr , . ,Q9.4
Second Reading November 15. 1994
II I
,
I
II- I
I'
II I
I
i
!
I
I
I
- 3 - Ord. No. 87-94
"
.
" ~~.~ r-y:1}). I 1. I.,,}?' .L.: !.. I
H~ I UJU I I ;,~~
~ ~I-=
// /1 (OEUlAY 0 S '-' __l.- 1 "Ql..Q r.1 .BfiB .,.1
, -::!/ L-J TOI'l~ Cf:NTrR) 'I (, I I I) '( I
, LINTON abUlEVARD
- -
~ '" '" '" '" '" t" \.i '" " " " " '\.~, '\. '\. ,,~~.((~ .
~~\
,,'\p~ ~ v-:v-"
~~" ''1/"'''- ~ ~..-< ~ ~,\r:i'~" ~ OF
~ 'r' '\....... lV ~ p$ f'\.. '"
~ \.\.~~ poe ~'\
" " " " " " ~ ~~ lPN'K 5\1<') ~L"
I- SOUll-( COUNTY OF ~ OSR ~~
PC "--- - I.4ENTAL HEALrn . (BLOOOS ~ ,,- '"
t>$~ ...J CROVES) "- '\. '
l'llfo.\....\,I.:< '. '" "'" '~
SOUTli COUNTY ... ~..1)" ~
- PROf'. PlAZA 0". t" "
(PHASE I) pet\' ~~ ~ -\
. - ~ ~'
~ ~ c.", ~ ~ OF ~~
.' ~~
A ~'~i
~~"
"-' ~r"
"- i,
W~ ..~. '~
"" II _ ~ ~ ".;;:.:", 0 S R _
....., 11 I I --: '-- ' ~~ - ~ J
I-<"'I::j- '-n':: "~T T I I T I I 1;>- ~
N
~ TAHERI PROPERlY
~ DO'AATltOll
CITY ~ ll(UAT 1CA04, n.
-- €XC"Al &4SC UAI' snnw --
"
. ,
cK.
l'" }
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: ~. ~ITY MANAGER
THRU: ANE ~N Z, ~~
~ OF PLANN~G
/~ \
FROM: JE PER INS, PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 1994
REZONING OF A 40.52 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND (TAHERI
PROPERTY) FROM POC (PLANNED OFFICE CENTER) AND A
(AGRICULTURAL) TO RM (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL -
MEDIUM DENSITY).
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the commission is the approval on first
readinq of the rezoning of the Taheri property from POC (Planned
Office Center) and A (Agricultural) to RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium Density).
The subject property is a 40.52 acre parcel, containing a
commercial nursery, located on the east side of Military Trail,
approximately 1400 feet south of Linton Boulevard.
BACKGROUND:
When the City's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1989,
approximately 35 acres of the subject property was under Palm
Beach County's jurisdiction, and was assigned an "advisory"
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Medium Density
Residential. In 1993 the owner of the 35-acre parcel, Dr.
Taheri, petitioned the city for voluntary annexation. The
annexation petition called for 10 acres of the property to be
assigned a FLUM designation and zoning of Community Facilities,
in order to accommodate a proposed school site. The request for
the remainder of the property was a General Commercial FLUM
designation and zoning. Subsequent to that submission, the
School Board instead selected a 10-acre portion of the adjacent
Blood's Grove property as the school site, and area residents
expressed objections to the proposed General Commercial
designation. In light of those circumstances, the property
owner agreed to annex into the City with a FLUM designation of
Transitional and an initial zoning of A (Agricultural). The A
designation was assigned to the parcel as a "holding zone"
pending the submission of a specific development proposal.
Ordinance 44-93 annexing the 35-acre Taheri parcel was approved
by the City Commission on August 10, 1993.
"
.
".
The remaining 5+-acre parcel that is a part of this rezoning
petition is Phase II of an existing 10-acre office development.
The entire 10-acre site was annexed into the City in 1989 and
assigned the Transitional FLUM designation and the POC (Planned
Off ice Center) zoning district. Phase I was approved in 1987
pursuant to County regulations and has been constructed (known
as the South County Professional Center) . In 1992, the Site
Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) approved a site and
development plan for the construction of Phase II of the center.
Phase II has not been constructed, and SPRAB approved an
extension of the site plan approval in 1992. The site plan is
valid until September 7, 1995.
The current development proposal is to rezone both the 35-acre
Agriculture parcel and the 5-acre POC parcel to RM, Medium
Density Residential. The rezoning would accommodate a multiple
family residential development at a proposed density that could
range between 6 to 12 dwelling units per acre. A detailed
analysis of the proposal is contained in the attached Planning
and Zoning Board staff report.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board considered this request at its
meeting of October 17, 1994. At that meeting a number of
residents of nearby properties expressed concerns over the
effects of the proposed density on their communities. They felt
that development at RM densities would be incompatible with the
nearby single family residential developments. Other concerns
related to possible increases in traffic on Military Trail and
Linton Boulevard, and the potential development of the parcel as
a rental community. After a lengthy hearing and discussion, the
Board recommended by a 4-3 vote that a density suffix of "8" be
attached to the RM designation, thereby limiting the ultimate
density of the property to 8 units per acre. The 3 members who
voted against the RM-8 indicated that they would prefer a
density of less than 8 units per acre.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
As noted, the applicant has requested a zoning designation of
RM' which would allow up to 12 units per acre. Staff
recommended that the RM zoning be approved. The Planning and
Zoning Board by a 4-3 vote has recommended RM-8.
Rezonings are considered to be quasi-judicial proceedings, which
require that a full hearing be conducted. The hearing allows
for presentations by the parties involved, admission of
evidence, and comment from the public. The City conducts its
quasi-judicial hearings during the second reading of a rezoning
" '
ordinance. Thus, this rezoning request should be approved on
first reading, with a full discussion of the density issues to
be reserved for second reading.
By motion, approve on first reading the rezoning of the
40.52-acre Taheri property from POC (Planned Office Center)
and A (Agricultural) to RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density).
Attachment:
* P&Z Staff Report of October 17, 1994
" '
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH --- STAFF REPORT ---
MEETING DATE: October 17, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.A.
ITEM: Rezoning froQ POC (Planned Office Center) in Part & A (Agricultural)
in Part to RM (Medium Density Residential). (Taheri Property)
GENERAL DATA:
""--
Owner.... .............. ..MDL Realty Co.
c\o Z. E. Taheri I
Applicant............. ...Kieran Kilday
Kilday and Associates
Location............... ..East side of Military (:ltUl Y
Trail, south of Linton
Boulevard. ~~ CO;~>
L I II rOil 1l0lJL[Vl~:
Property Size.......... ..40.52 acres
Future Land Use Plan... ..Transitional ./ .. ~I , .~
~~ /" ,v"< ~~~)
Current Zoning... .... ....A (Agricultural) and )- ...' ~~;.
POC (Planned Office "
. I
Center) .. SO\f1H 0t:XIIfTT I
IJI-(\ ... IlDCW 1C.AI.1ll
Proposed Zoning........ ..RM (Multiple Family ~~_v ;
Residential - Medium
Density)
Adjacent Zoning.. .North: POC and CF (Community
Facili ties)
East: AR (Agricultural
Residential - PBC)
South: AR
West: RS (Residential -
Single Family - PBC),
POC, and AR
Existing Land Use........Wholesale nursery.
Proposed Land Use. .......Rezoning from A and POC
to RM to accommodate a
multiple family residential
development.
Water Service... ... ......Existing 12" water main
along Military Trail.
Sewer Service.... ........Existing 8" sewer main
serving the South County
Professional Plaza, to
the" north of the site.
\"..-\.
" '
- .
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOA R D:
The action before the Board is making a recommendation on a
rezoning request f rom A (Agricultural) and POC (Planned Office
Center) to RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density).
The subject property is a 40.52 acre metes and bounds parcel,
located on the east side of Military Trail, south of Linton
Boulevard.
Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency shall
review and make a recommendation to the city Commission with
respect to rezoning of any property within the City.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
With the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 1989,
approximately 35 acres of the subject property (Taheri
Property) , which was under Palm Beach County jurisdiction at
that time, was assigned an advisory Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
Designation of Medium Density Residential. In 1993 the owner of
the' 35 acre' Taherf-'parcel--- 'peti tioned the city' for voluntary
annexation. The annexation petition called for 10 acres of
property to be assigned a FLUM designation and zoning of
Community Facilities to accommodate a proposed school site. The
remainder of the property was to receive General Commercial FLUM
designation and zoning. Subsequent to that submission, the
School Board selected a 10 acre portion of the adjacent Blood's
Grove property as the school site, and area residents expressed
objections to the commercial designation. Because of those
circumstances, the property owner agreed to annex into the City
with a FLUM designation of Transitional and an initial zoning of
A (Agricultural). The A designation was assigned to the parcel
as a "holding zone" pending the submission of a specific
development proposal. Ordinance 44-93, annexing the Taheri
parcel was approved by the City Commission on August 10, 1993.
The Taheri property is developed with two structures, a single
family residence and a barn used for the nursery operation (Boca
Growers, Inc. ) located on the site.
The remaining 5 acre parcel that is a part of this petition is
Phase II of an existing 10 acre office development. The enti re
lO acre site was annexed into the City in 1989 and assigned the
Transitional FLUM designation and the POC (Planned Office
Center) zoning district. Phase I was approved in 1987, pursuant
to County regulations and has been constructed. In 1992, Phase
II received approval from the Site Plan Review and Appearance
Board (SPRAB) of a site and development plan for the
construction of Phase II of the South County Professional
Center. The approved site plan consisted of eight medical
office structures with a total floor area of 50,400 square feet.
The project has not been constructed and SPRAB approved an
extension of the site plan approval in 1992, which will expire
on September 7, 1995.
"
.
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 2
PRO J E C T DES C RIP T ION :
The development proposal is to rezone 35.43 acres of the 40.52
acre parcel from A to RM and the remaining 5.09 acres from POC
to HM. The rezoning would accommodate a multiple family
residential development at a proposed density of 6-l2 units per
acre.
The applicant has submitted a sketch plan which shows a total of
fifty two-story structures containing 486 units built around a
private loop road serving the development. The sketch plan also
includes the following features; a guardhouse, tennis courts,
clubhouse, retention lake, tot lot, and associated parking and
landscaping. The sketch plan is not subject to approval or
denial at this time, and is submitted for illustrative purposes
only.
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S I S:
REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3)
Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the
approval of development applications, certain findings must
be made in a form which is part of the official record.
This may be achieved through information on the
application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall
be made by the body which has the authority to approve or
deny the development application. These findings relate to
the following four areas.
Future Land Use Map: The use or structures must be allowed in
the zoninq district and the zoning district must be consistent
with the land use designation.
The current Future Land Use designation for the subject
property is Transitional. The requested zoning change is
from A (Agricultural) and POC (Planned Office Center) to RM
(Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density). The
proposed zoning designation of RM is consistent with the
Transitional Future Land Use designation.
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.
Streets and Traffic:
The applicant has submitted a traffic study for the proposed
rezoning. Based on a maximum potential of 486 units of multiple
family housing, the site will generate 3,402 Average Daily Trips
(ADT). However, the site is currently vested for 248 ADT for
" '
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and poe to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 3
the existing nursery and 836 ADT for the approved site plan for
the former Phase II of the South County Professional Center.
The net trip generation for the proposed development would
therefore be 2,318 ADT.
The Transitional FLUM designation will permit a wide range of
uses which will generate differing amounts of traffic. Under
the current "A" zoning and nursery use 248 estimated trips are
generated. With a R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoning and a
density of 3 units per acre (121 units) 1,210 trips would be
generated. While both of these figures are considerably lower
than the 2,318 at 12 units per acre, the maximum trip generation
for the site could be considerably higher.
The highest intensity use for the parcel under the Transitional
FLUM designation would be a 38.52 acre office development with
POD (Professional Office District) or POC (Planned Office
Center) zoning and the 2 acre maximum parcel of NC (Neighborhood
Commercial) . Estimating a 0.3 floor area ratio (FAR) for the
office site and a 0.25 FAR for the commercial, the parcel would
support a total of 503,379 square feet of office and 21,780
square feet of neighborhood commercial uses. These two
developments would generate an estimated 4,761 AnT (Office) and
1,5l0 (Commercial), or a total of 6,271 ADT. That figure is
based on calculations for general office uses. If all or part
of the office site would be developed as medical office, the
number of ADT would increase.
The 2,318 trips which could be generated by development under
the RM district would affect several roadway links which
currently exceed Level of Service (LOS) liD" traffic volumes.
Among those links are Military Trail from Atlantic Avenue to
Linton Boulevard, and Military Trail from Linton Boulevard to
Clint Moore Road.
The applicant proposes to construct intersection improvements in
the form of left turn lane additions at the intersection of
Clint Moore Road and Military Trail which will enable that
intersection to meet concurrency requirements. Turn lane
additions at the intersection of Linton Boulevard and Military
Trail currently under way will allow that intersection to meet
LOS standards.
The remainder of the over capacity links are over 1 mile from
the site and are impacted by less than 1% of their design
capacity. Those links are therefore not considered
significantly impacted roadways and do not need to be addressed
by this development proposal.
The applicant has submitted a traffic study to the Palm Beach
County Engineering Department incorporating the trips added by
the development and the proposed roadway improvements. The
Department has accepted that the development will meet County
concurrency requirements through 1995. After January I, 1996,
with the addition of "background trips" to the Military Trail, a
"
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 4
positive finding can not be made until this segment of Military
Trail is widened to six lanes.
Based on the above a positive finding can be made at this time
with regard to traffic concurrency.
Water:
Water service is available to the site via an existing 12" water
main located on the east side of the Military Trail right-of-way
adjacent to the property. Development of the site will require
extension of a water main through the property to the eastern
boundary. Looping of the system north to the South County
Professional Center or south to the Del-Aire Country Club may
also be necessary. Responsibility for provision of on-site
mains and connections will fall on the developer, and will be
addressed at the time of Site Plan review.
Sewer:
The nearest sewer service to the site is an existing 8" sewer
main located in the South County Professional Center property.
Development of the site will require accessing City lift station
number 60A which is located west of the South County Mental
Health Center, approximately 800' feet north of the site.
Provision of on-site mains and connections, as well as upgrades
to the existing lift station (if required), are the
responsibility of the developer and will be addressed at the
time of Site Plan review.
Fire and Emergency Service:
Fire rescue service for any development of this property will be
provided by the City's Fire Station #5. Servicing the site will
not require any additional equipment or manpower to be added to
the station.
Police:
Police service for any development of this property will be
provided by the De1ray Beach Police. There is no need to expand
existing patrol areas as the Police currently pass by the site
during patrols of existing developments to the north and south.
Average response time to the property would be approximately 4
minute for an emergency call and 6 minutes for a non-emergency
call.
Parks and Recreation:
The Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan Parks and Recreation Element
indicates that the City meets the adopted level of service for
parks and recreation facilities for the ultimate build-out
population of the City. Required provision of on-site
recreation facilities and green space will be required with site
" '
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and poe to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 5
plan approval and payment of parks and recreation impact fees
will be required with the issuance of building permits.
Solid Waste:
A 486 unit multiple family residential development will generate
466.56 tons of waste per year according to Solid Waste Authority
figures. The Solid Waste Authority indicates in its annual
report that the established level of service standards for solid
waste will be met for all developments which have been accounted
for in their Comprehensive Plan. As this proposal is currently
reflected in the adopted Plan, concurrency will be met for the
proposed development of this parcel.
Consistency:
Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3.1.1
along with required findings in Section 2.4.5(E)(5) (Conditional
Use Findings) shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall
consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found
in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making of a
finding of overall consistency.
Chapter 3 findings include the required findings of Section
3.1.1 (Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Compliance with LORs
and Consistency). These Chapter 3.1.1 findings are discussed in
other sections of the report.
Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) in addition to provisions in
Chapter 3, the City Commission must make findings that
establishing the Conditional Use will not:
Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability
of the neighborhood within which it is to be located;
Nor that it will hinder development or redevelopment of
nearby properties.
The proposed development is located adjacent to an existing
medical office development and the South County Mental Health
Center to the north. Properties to the west of the site (across
Military Trail) are developed with a mix of uses, including
single family residential, low to medium density multiple family
residential, commercial, and a church.
To the east and south of the parcel is the III acre Blood's
Grove area, most of which is currently in USe as a commercial
orange grove. Sixteen acres of the area are currently under
construction for an elementary school and City park. The
remaining 95 acres are identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a
mixed use area, including up to 10 acres of commercial, up to
680 units of single family and multiple family housing, and a
conservation area.
"
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and PCC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 6
The change in zoning to RM will not have a negative effect on
the existing commercial and office developments to the north and
west. Those parcels may, in fact, benefit from the increase in
the population (i.e. potential market) of the surrounding area.
That increase in population should help to support businesses in
those locations.
The proposed development will be generally consistent in terms
of density with the residential properties to the west. As the
densities are generally consistent and the parcels are separated
by a major thoroughfare, the development of the Taheri property
according to the RM zoning district regulations will not have a
detrimental effect on the stability of those areas.
An important consideration regarding the proposed rezonings is
its possible effect on the future development of the remaining
95 acres of Blood's Grove. The Blood's property is designated
by the City's FLUM as an area with a mix of Medium and Low
Density Residential with small areas of Commercial and Open
Space and Conservation. Estimates of the development potential
of the site included with Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-l
(Future Land Use Element Table L-4) indicate 680 potential
residential units for the property. This represents an overall
density of 7.16 units per acre. A density of 7 units per acre
is consistent with the RM zoning district, which permits 6 to 12
units per acre. The portions of the Blood's property which are
identified on the FLUM as Medium Density Residential are
primarily those which are adjacent to the Taheri property. This
arrangement of land uses allows for a gradual decrease in
development intensity from commercial at the corner of Military
Trail and Linton to low density residential. The proposed RM
zoning district is appropriate adjacent to areas assigned the
Medium Density Residential FLUM designation.
Given recent events, there is a possibility that the Blood's
property will develop at a lower density than that permitted by
its current (advisory) FLUM designations. In addition, there
are areas where the Taheri parcel will be adjacent to the part
of the Blood's Property which is already designated Low Density
Residential on the FLUM. Special consideration with respect to
compatibility will be required at the time of site and
development plan review. Provision of adequate building
spacing, open space area, and landscape buffers will be required
to help buffer the use.
Within the RM zoning district regulations is a provision which
allows for the application of a density suffix. A suffix
establishes a set maximum density which could not be exceeded on
the property. I f the Board determines that a maximum dens i ty
less than 12 units per acre is necessary to ensure compatibility
with the adjacent lower density development, it may recommend
the application of a density suffix to the RM district.
However, if the intention is to accommodate rental apartments, a
suffix of less than 10 units per acre is not recommended.
" '
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and PCC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 7
While compatibility is an important site plan consideration for
areas of multiple family residential adjacent to single family,
the difference in densities does not make the uses inherently
incompatible. There are numerous areas in the city where RM
zoning coexists quite well with single family districts. An
instructive example is the Old Germantown Road area. The north
side of the road has been developed at densities consistent. with
the RM district:
Development Density (Units/acre)
Spanish Wells 8.0
Crosswinds (excluding Palm Cove) 7.1
Palm Cove 17.7
Spring Harbor/Landing 8.3
Abbey Delray South 9.7
The existence of RM densities on the north side of the road has
not hindered the development of the high-end single family areas
on the south side, such as Andover and Foxe Chase.
Furthermore, many Planned Unit Developments consist of a mix of
multiple family areas and single family areas. Within Delray
Beach the Sabal Lakes, Rainberry, Pelican Harbor, and Hamlet
developments all contain areas with planned or existing RM
densities, with no negative impacts on the development of the
single family parcels. Also, many other developments located in
nearby communities such as Boca West, Broken Sound, and P.G.A.
National incorporate portions with densities consistent with the
RM zoning district.
The proposed residential zoning district will in many ways be
more compatible with than the non-residential districts which
could be applied to the subject property under the Transitional
FLUM designation. Potential problems regarding the mix of
residential and non-residential traffic will be minimized and
land uSe incompatibilities between cornrnercUll and office
properties with residential developments will be avoided.
Based on the above, positive findings can be made with respect
to Section 2.4.5(E)(5) regarding compatibility.
Compliance with Land Development Regulations: The proposed use
is to be in compliance with the Land Development Regulations.
Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall
specifically be addressed by the body taking final action
on a land development application/request.
The applicant has submitted a Sketch Plan with this proposal.
While the submitted sketch plan is not being formally considered
at this time, the following comments are provided.
"
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 8
LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix:
The site's improvements, as proposed in the sketch plan, will
meet or exceed all requirements of this section.
LDR Section 4.4.6 RM Zoning Regulations:
The RM district permits a minimum density of 6 units per acre.
Increases up to 12 units per acre can be accommodated upon a
finding by the Board approving the Site and Development Plan
that the development is harmonious with adjacent properties and
does not adversely affect areas of environmental significance or
sensitivity. The submitted sketch plan proposes the maximum 12
units per acre for the site. The above finding will be required
wi th approval of any development proposal for the site with a
density of greater than 6 units per acre.
Multiple family developments in the RM district are also
required to provide recreation areas and tot lots. The sketch
plan shows three recreation areas with a total area of 2.86
acres and containing two pools, cabana, clubhouse, volleyball
court, racquetball court, tennis courts, and a tot lot. The
proposed recreation areas meet the intent of this requirement.
The following additional regulations are highlighted at this
time:
LDR Section 4.6.9 Parking:
The parking requirement for multiple family residential
developments is 1.5 spaces per one bedroom unit, 2.0 spaces per
two bedroom (or larger) unit, plus 0.5 space per unit for guest
parking. The proposed development has a total of 360 two and
three bedroom units and 126 one bedroom units, requiring a total
of 1,089 parking spaces. A total of 1,089 spaces are shown on
the proposed sketch plan for the development. Of the required
spaces 21 are required to be handicap spaces and 22 are shown on
the sketch plan. Parking spaces, aisleways, and roads on the
sketch plan generally meet City design standards. A more
thorough review of parking lot design will be conducted during
Site and Development Plan review.
LDR Section 4.6.16 Landscaping:
No . landscape plan has been submitted at this time. The
submission of a landscape plan meeting all requirements of
Section 4.6.16 will be required with the Site and Development
Plan submission.
ConSistency: Compliance with the performance standards set
forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoninq Actions) along
with required findinqs in Section 2.4.5(0)(5) (Rezonlnq
Findinqs) shall be the basis upon which a flndinq of overall
consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found
., .
.
'.
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning from A and poe to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 9
in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a
finding of overall consistency.
A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following was found:
Conservation Element Policy B-2.1: - Submission of ~ biological
survey and a habitat analysis shall accompany land use requests
for...rezonings... However this requirement shall not apply...
where it is that there are not such resources.
The subject parcel is in use as a commercial nursery and has
been extensively cleared. Thus, no significant biological
resources exist on the site.
Traffic Element Figure T-4: - Future Traffic Network
This figure consists of a map identifying existing and required
roadways for the City. One of the future roadways identified on
the map is a collector road with an 80' right-of-way connecting
Linton Boulevard and Military Trail through the subject property
and the adjacent Blood's property.
Based on Figure T-4 the applicant will be required to provide
the 80' right-of-way through the property with the development
of the site. No collector road or future right-of-way is shown
on the submitted sketch plan. The applicant has indicated that
provision of the collector road in the location indicated in
Figure T-4 would have a detrimental effect on the development of
the subject parcel and the Blood's parcel, but has expressed
willingness to provide an 80' collector right-Of-way along the
south property line. There is also a possibility that the
required road may be provided as a private road for USe only by
residents of the multi-family and Blood's parcels. Provision of
the necessary roadway will be addressed at the time of site and
development approval.
Traffic Element Policy A-2.2: Commensurate with approval of
development plans, provisions shall be made for dedication of
land for the ultimate planned right-Of-way of adjacent streets.
The survey submitted with this application shows the segment of
Military Trail adjacent to this parcel with a lIS' right-of-way.
Table T-S Street Network Classification and Improvements shows a
planned ultimate right-of-way of 120' . A 2.5' dedication will
be required at the time of Site and Development Plan and
Preliminary Plat approval.
Traffic Element Policy A-2.3: Commensurate with approval of
development plans, provisions shall be made for installation of
improvements which are necessary to maintain the adopted level
of service concurrent with the issuance of occupancy permits.
The submitted traffic study indicates that roadway improvements
for the intersections of Linton Boulevard and Military Trail and
'.
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and poe to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 10
Clint Moore Road and Military Trail will be necessary for the
project to meet traffic concurrency requirements. Required
improvements to the intersection of Linton Boulevard and
Military Trail are currently under way. Improvements to Clint
Moore Road will be required to be completed by the developer
prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
Housing Element Policy A-l. 5: Each neighborhood organization
shall be apprised of all land use matters which impact their
territory and which require review by the Local Planning Agency.
Courtesy notices have been sent to all neighborhood groups in
the area. See the Neighborhood Notice section under the Review
by others portion of this report.
Housing Element Policy C-2. 5: Development of remaining vacant
properties which are zoned for residential purposes shall be
developed in a manner which is consistent with adjacent
development regardless of zoning designations.
This requirement refers primarily to the Site and Development
Plan and Platting processes. Regardless of the zoning district
assigned to the parcel, compatibility with adjacent properties
will be of utmost importance when considering a Site and
Development Plan for this parcel.
Housing Element Policy C-3.1: Affordable housing shall be
achieved by the accommodation of a variety of housing types...
The proposed rezoning helps to fulfill the intent of this
policy. The proposed development will consist exclusively of
rental garden apartments. Although there is not a mix of unit
types within the development, rental garden apartments are a
housing type which is underrepresented in the City's housing
stock. Existing units in the western portion of the City are
predominantly single family and condominium multiple family.
The development will most likely occur in conjunction with the
Blood's property and share common access from the "Blood's Loop"
collector road. Given the City advisory FLUM designations on
the Blood's property, development of that parcel will likely
consist of primarily single family units (conventional and zero
lot line) with some low to medium density multiple family units
(i.e. villa or townhouse units). Thus, the overall development
of this large vacant area will help to fulfill this policy by
providing a mix of housing types.
Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): The applicable
performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which
apply are as follows:
B) Affordable housinq for moderate and middle income families,
particularly.first time home buyers, shall be achieved
through increases in density (rezoninq) when it can be
demonstrated that the increase will result in a more
'.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 11
affordable product provided that other Policies of the
Housing Element are maintained.
The proposed density of this site (6-12 units per acre) allows
for the type of development which caters to middle income
families. Based on a survey of area rental developments with
densities consistent with RM zoning, rent for a two-bedroom
apartment would be expected to fall in the $745 to $1200 per
month range (the average was $855) . Those rental costs are
consistent with the demographics referenced in the above policy.
As referenced in the preceding sections of this report, the
proposed rezoning is consistent with other policies of the
Housing Element.
D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land USeS which
are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses
both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility
may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly
mitigate adverse impacts from the new use.
Parcels adjacent to and near the subject parcel to the north and
west are primarily commercial (Wal-Mart, Delray Town Center,
etc. ) , office (South County Professional Center, Linton Office
Plaza), and community facilities (South County Mental Health
Center, Delray Baptist Church and Delray Community Hospital).
Some properties to the west of the site (across Military Trail)
are developed with single family residential and medium density
multiple family residential with lower density than the proposed
RM zoning. Compatibility with those parcels will be insured by
the separation of the parcels by Military Trail and the 30'
landscape buffer adjacent to Military Trail required for any
development of the subject parcel.
Adjacent to the parcel to the south and east is the remaining 95
acres of the Blood's property which are identified in the
Comprehensive Plan as Medium Density Residential, Low Density
Residential, and Conservation and Open Space. The RM district
is clearly compatible with Medium Density. Compatibility with
the Low Density Residential area is insured by the RM
regulations which permit a base density of only 6 units per
acre, while increases up to a maximum of twelve units per acre
can be approved pursuant to specific findings of compatibility
at the time of Site and Development approval.
Standards "A" and "c" do not apply to this proposal.
Section 2.4.5(0)(5) (Rezoning Findings):
Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(0){1) (Findings), in addition to
provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make .
finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which
the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the
followinq:
" '
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 12
a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was
originally established, in error;
b. That there has been a change in circumstances which
make the current zoning inappropriate;
c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as
allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is
more appropriate for the property based upon
circumstances particular to the site and/or
neighborhood.
The applicant submitted a justification statement as a part of
the rezoning application. The statement indicates that the
applicable reasons are "b" and "c." As the statement is too
lengthy to be included in its entirety, the following is a
summary of the justification statement. A copy of the
justification is attached as an appendix to this report.
The A zoning designation is intended to be utilized as a
"holding zone" which permits continued agricultural activities
until development is proposed. The "A" designation was assigned
to 35 acres of the site at the time of annexation for that
reason. When development is proposed "A" zoned parcels are to
be rezoned as appropriate under the FLUM designation. As this
parcel has a Transitional FLUM designation, it may appropriately
be assigned to any residential zoning district, POD
(Professional Office District), POC (Planned Office Center), CF
(Community Facilities), NC (Neighborhood Commercial), or RO
(Residential Office). Thus, reason "b" applies to this parcel.
Reason "c" is also appropriate for this portion of the subject
property. As the surrounding area is largely developed with
office, commercial, public, and res idential uses, RM zoning is
more appropriate than the current "A" designation.
The remaining five acres of the site are currently zoned POCo
The parcel is located to the west of an existing office plaza
and south of the South County Mental Health Center. When the
parcel is rezoned to RM, it will function as an area of
intermediate intensity between the office uses to the north and
west, and the residential useS to the south. As this is one
purpose of the Transitional FLUM designation, the RM district is
more appropriate in this location. Thus, reason "c" is
applicable to this parcel.
A copy of the submitted justification statement is attached to
this report.
REVIEW B Y o THE R S:
The rezoning is not in a geographic area requiring review by
either the HPB (Historic Preservation Board) , DDA (Downtown
Development Authority) or the eRA (Community Redevelopment
Agency) .
" '
..
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 13
Notification of Adjacent Local Governments:
Per Policy A-1.7 of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element
of the City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan notification must
be provided to an adjacent unit of government of any development
proposal which involves a private land use petition requiring
Local Planning Agency review and located within one-quarter mile
of the boundary of that unit of government.
Notice of this application has been sent to Palm Beach County.
Neiqhborhood Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within
a 500 I radius of the subject property. A special certified
notice has been sent to each of the property owners of record.
Courtesy notices have been sent to:
* Saul Weinberger * George Conley
Maxwell White Pines of Delray East
Del-Aire Country Club
* Ermino P. Giuliano * Jack Frieder
Fox Chase Pines of Delray West
* Joseph Maschella * Haag Management
Shadywoods Andover
* Shadywoods Homeowners * Dan Pase
Association Boca Delray
* Helen Coopersmith * Gretchen Bacon
PROD Oakmont Associates
* Lillian Feldman * Spanish Wells
United Property Owners Condominiums
* Bob Stump * Joy Binkowitz
Crosswinds Crosswinds
* Lenny Gonsalves * Dorothy Alport
Eastwinds of Crosswinds Southwinds of Crosswinds
* Bob French * Crosswinds - Office
Crosswinds Single Family
who have requested notification of petitions in that area.
Letters of objection, if any, will be presented at the P & Z
Board meeting.
" '
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and POC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page l4
ASS E SSM E N T AND CON C L U S ION:
The proposed rezoning of the 40.52 acre Taheri property to RM
can be recommended for approval based on the positive findings
outlined in this report and summarized below. However, by
recommending approval of the rezoning, the Board is not
necessarily endorsing development of the subject parcel
according to the submitted sketch plan or at a density of l2
units per acre. The RM district permits a base density of only
6 units per acre, while up to a maximum of twelve units per acre
can be approved pursuant to specific findings of compatibility
at the time of Site and Development approval.
While the Board has the option to apply a density suffix at this
time, staff does not recommend use of the suffix. The RM zoning
allows reasonable use of the property to help alleviate a need
for multi-family rental units in the city. Development of the
parcel at 6-l2 units per acre will be much more compatible with
surrounding properties than the commercial and office
developments also provided for in the Transitional FLUM
designation. Sufficient provisions exist in the RM district and
the Supplemental District Requirements to ensure compatibility
of the development without the application of a density suffix.
All required public facilities and services are available to
serve residential development at a density of up to twelve units
per acre. The RM zoninq district is consistent with the
Transitional FLUM designation. Required positive findings with
respect to Section 2.4.5(D)(1) (rezoning findings), Section
3.1.1, and the performance standards of Section 3.3.2 can be
made. Additionally, the proposed rezoning meets the intent of a
number of Comprehensive Plan policies including Housing Element
policies relating to provision of housing for middle income
families, and provision of a variety of housing types. Based on
the above, the proposed rezoning of the Taheri property to RM
can be recommended for approval.
A L T ERN A T I V E ACT ION S:
A. Continue with direction.
B. Recommend rezoning of the Taheri property from A and
POC to RM, based on positive findings with respect to
Section 2.4.5(D)(I) (rezoning findings), Section
3.1.1, and the performance standards of Section 3.3.2.
c. Recommend rezoning of the Taheri property from A and
POC to RM, with the application of a density suffix to
ensure compatibility with surroundinq lower density
residential properties, based on positive findings
with respect to Section 2.4.5(D)(I) (rezoning
findings) , Section 3.1.1, and the performance
standards of Section 3.3.2.
"
.
..
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning from A and PCC to RM for the Taheri Property
Page 15
D. Recommend denial of a rezoning of the Taheri property,
based on a failure to make positive findings.
S T A F F R E COM MEN D A T ION:
Recommend approval of the rezoning request for the Taheri
property from A (Agricultural) and poe (Planned Office Center)
to RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density), based upon
positive findings with respect to Section 3.1.1 (Required
Findings) and Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) of
the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive
Plan, and Section 2.4.5(0)(5).
Attachments:
* Location Map
* Justification Statement
Report prepared by : Jeff Perkins, Planner
Reviewed by DO on : t)ef. /3, 1'2'71 if/).
,
" '
-.
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
FOR
MILITARY TRAIL RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
The property owner is requesting a rezoning approval from Agricultural in part and Planned Office
Center in part to RM - Multiple Family Residential Medium Density. The property in question is
an existing wholesale nursery approximately 40.5 acres in size and is located on the east side
of Military Trail approximately 1,300 feet south of Unton Blvd. For your reference, a boundary
survey is included with this application identifying the configuration of the subject parcel.
This property was the subject of Annexation and a Future Land Use Plan Amendment in 1993.
The Future Land Use Plan Amendment involved an amendment from an existing City advisory
designation of Medium Density Residential to a City Transitional Land Use designation. Because
there was no development plans at that time, an Agricultural zoning designation was kept as a
holding zone until a realistic zoning/development approval was requested.
Pursuant to the City's Land Development Regulations, Section 2.4.5(0)(2), a statement of reason
for Rezoning must be included. In this case, the validity for approving a change in zoning
applies to letter B. and C. Item B. indicates whether a change in circumstances which makes
the current zoning inappropriate. In this case, the current zoning, which is predominantly
Agricultural, is inappropriate because this area is one that is rapidly growing with new residential
communities. This parcel is one of the few remaining vacanVundeveloped parcels along Military
Trail. In other words, this property represents in-fill development. Furthermore, this property
developed residential versus left in an agricultural use is appropriate because a residential
development makes more efficient use of existing infrastructure (e.g., water, sewer, drainage) and
public services (e.g.. solid waste, fire rescue, mass transit). Additionally, the proposed rezoning
will in effect eliminate an existing land use incompatibility between agricultural and residential
developments. Uses permitted as accessory to agriculture such as chipping and mulching,
composting and potting soil manufacturing are considered as accessory to the wholesale nursery
use. The use of pesticides and other chemicals may be incompatible with surrounding residential
development.
Item C. indicates whether the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future
Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances
particular to the site and/or neighborhood. The Transitional Land Use designation allows beth
Residential and Non.Residential Uses. The Transitional Land Use designation permits all
Residential Zoning Districts with the exception of the Rural Residential, and it allows
Neighborhood Commercial, Planned Office Center and Professional Office. For your reference.
a preliminary site plan has been submitted with this application. In this case, the property owner
is exclusively requesting an RM - Multiple-Family Rental Residential development at a density
of 12.0 dwelling units per acre to allow 486 dwelling units. This designation and rezoning request
"
'.
.
Justification Statement
Military Trail Residential Project
Page 2 of 2
will attempt to provide a transition between less intensive residential uses existing to the south
and existing commercial uses to the north. This Transitional category allows for a fairly dense
residential development which can make a good buffer between commercial and office uses to
the north and a single family residential development to the south.
With regard to compatibility, this property is adjacent to the existing Palm Beach County Mental
Health Center and the South County Professional Office Center Phase I project. The balance,
Phase II (rear 5.0 acres), is still approved but has never been developed and is now being
incorporated into this rezoning request for residential use. To the northwest is an existing Wal-
Mart Shopping Center; the property located to the south and east is the Blood's Grove property,
which is identified on the City's (Advisory) Land Use Map as Medium Density/Low Density
Residential Commercial, Community Facilities and Open Space. To the west is the Lynn Cancer.
Research Center, a Baptist Church, Country Lakes Planned Unit Development which includes
multi-family unit types and to the south of Country Lakes is the PUD known as Bel.Aire PUD
which includes single family unit types. As noted on the City of Delray Beach's Future Land Use
Plan Map, starting from the intersection of Linton Boulevard and Military Trail, on the east side
of Military Trail, the parcels are designated General Commercia', Hospital. Transitional (Planned
Office), then the subject property proposed Medium Density Residential and ultimately a Low
Density Residential. This gradual transition makes excellent Planning sense for Jess intense
development further away from the busy roadway intersections. This gradual transition also
occurs on the west side of Military Trail with properties directly across the street designated MR5
- Medium Density (Palm Beach County), which allows up to five (5) dwelling units per acres as
a Planned Unit Development.
With regard to traffic intensity, the proposed residential request will generate nearly 3,000 trips
per day less than if this project were developed under strictly a commercial designation utilizing
a Neighborhood Commercial zoning category and a Planned Office Center District. Additionally,
with regard to intensity, the City of Delray Beach responded to the Department of Community
Affairs via the Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report in 1993 as part of Plan
Amendment 93-2. As part of that response the City did a Public Facilities Analysis describing the
demand with regard to Medium Density Residential Development as compared to a Transitional
Land Use Development. In part of this analysis, it was determined that water and sewer
consumption was slightly higherfor a Medium Density Residential project, as well as the demand
for additional recreational area. However. traffic circulation impact and solid waste impact were
significantly less than the highest Transitional Land Use.
ALA W/jb/trail2. jus
" '
.
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT:
'_ . . ..' ." . .. ..' .~. . j., .-"",..D"--i'I.". f.
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is second reading and public hearing for Ordinance No. 90-94
which adopts Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1, as modified in
response to the Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC)
report from the Department of Community Affairs.
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed this item on October 17,
1994, and voted unanimously to recommend that Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 94-1 be adopted, subject to the following:
( 1 ) Modify the objectives and policies as detailed in the Response
to ORC Report.
(2 ) Modify the Five Year Schedule of Improvements to reflect the
adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
The attached exhibit reflects the Planning and Zoning Board's
recommendation. At first reading on November 1, 1994, the City
Commission passed Ordinance No. 90-94 by unanimous vote.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 90-94 adopting Comprehensive
Plan Amendment 94-1 on second and final reading.
fJOJJIYd 5-0
ref:agmemo11
'.
.
, 01(
&1
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
fu~'
THRU: Oi oo~nguez, i\"7or of Planning and Zoning
FROM: John Walker, Project coordinat~ tZJ~
SUBJECT:
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
ADOPTION OF PLAN AMENDMENT 94-1, PUBLIC HEARING
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
holding the required public hearing and adopting Plan
Amendment 94-l.
BACKGROUND:
First reading of the adoption ordinance occurred on November 1,
1994. At that time, complete background material and
documentation was provided along with an analysis.
Attached to this documentation is the adoption ordinance and its
exhibit. The exhibit contains only the specific changes to the
Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown through underlining
of new material and strike through of material which is deleted.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The attached exhibit reflects the previous recommendation made
by the Planning and Zoning board.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, after a public hearing, adopt Plan Amendment 94-1.
Attachments:
*Ordinance f 90-94 with exhibit
T:\advanced\ORC5.DOC
"
,
I
ORDINANCE NO. 90-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
I DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
I AMENDMENT 94-1 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE
'I "LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACTII, FLORIDA STATUTES
! SECTIONS 163.3161 THROUGH 163.3243, INCLUSIVE; ALL AS I
! MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ENTITLED
"COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 94-111 AND INCORPORATED
i HEREIN BY REFERENCE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
" GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
il WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach exercised the authority
I granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections
163.3161 through 163.3243, known as the II Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and I
I
WHEREAS, via Ordinance No. 82-89, the City Commission
adopted the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan - Delray Beach,
Florida" ; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning
Agency, did prepare an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan entitled
"Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1"; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning
Agency, following due public notice, held a public hearing on April
18, 1994, in accordance with the requirements of the "Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Actll; and
WHEREAS, after the above referenced public hearing, the
Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, recommended to
the City Commission that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
94-1 be transmitted; and
WHEREAS, proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1 was
submitted to and reviewed by the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, following due public notice, the first of two
required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1 was held
by the City Commission on May 17, 1994, at which time it was
authorized to be transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs
for required review; and
" '
.
WHEREAS, a report of Objections, Recommendations and
Comments (ORC) has been received from the State Department of
Community Affairs and said report has been reviewed by the Planning
and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, and is the basis for
modifications to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1j and
WHEREAS, following due public notice, the second of two
required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1 was held
on November 15, 1994, in accordance with statutory requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, hereby declares its intent to exercise the authority
granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections
163.3161 through 163.3243, inclusive, known as the IILocal Government
Planning and Land Development Regulation Actll.
Section 2. That in implementation of its declared intent as
set forth in Section 1 of this ordinance, there is hereby adopted the
document entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1", which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. That the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan -
Delray Beach, Florida" is hereby amended pursuant to the document
entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-1".
Section 4. That should any section or provision of this I
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be
I declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such I
I decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a i
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. I
Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which
are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
I Section 6. That this ordinance shall become effective upon
I issuance of a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in
I compliance in accordance with Florida Statutes Section 163.3184(9), by
I' the State Department of Community Affairs, or until the Administration
Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to
I' be in compliance in accordance with Florida Statutes Section
163.3184(10).
- 2 - Ord. No. 90-94
I
, '
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the 15th day of November , 1994.
I ~~
ATTEST:
OFNrn<flJ!:c fI; I ~/I(}lij
City C erk
First Reading November 1, 1994
Second Reading November 15, 1994
I
II
I
I
I
- 3 - Ord. No. 90-94
I
i
,
EXHIBIT "A"
(to Ordinance No. 90-94)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 94-1
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
,
1- Location: Pq. III-A-13, Policy A-1.4 (NEW)
Policy A-I. 4 The City shall encourage the
preservation of existing groundwater recharge
areas through sensitive site planning, including
maximizing open space, pretreatment of stormwater
runoff, etc. In the case of environmentally
sensitive lands, such preservation may include
development under "planned development" concepts,
exaction (public sites dedication provisions of
the Land Development Regulations), or acquisition
(including the County Environmentally Sensitive
Lands Acquisition Program).
2. Location: Pq. III-A-15, Policy A-4.2
..
'{'ILe1 Af.'7. 04141{,; 4 _t4~~4t~ {,f w4t4t ~_4 f_t
~4tL{'_. Z4ft~ ._4_ (4't' ~attLftt wLtH l{,t _L'l.4.1
~.~t{'{'I\_I e{,Ibti{,~ .t.41 .te', wHLeH .ft_4t.. t{'
Ill. {,f 4 t.~_etL{,ft tatt.t. 4~~ ...t.4>>IL.M It. a"
t.M. ILI\Lt. rDf 1t....rD~4>>1.' e{,~...;t.L{'~' TM.~
;t{,1L4. frDt 4 ;.~.lt.t ;4t1\4~t. (MLtM.t t4t.., trDt
w4t..t e{,~_..ptLrD~ 4~_1. tM. t.4"_~4~1. 41\{'_~t'
TML_ pt{,tt41\ _M.II ~4 L~_tLt_t.~ L~ rl '7./'31 It
tM" tat.. rDf wat.t erD~__l\ptL_~ LII ~_t t.~_e.~
tMt{,_tM 1{'1_~t4tt I\..~II' tell (Deleted by
Amendment 94-1)
'.
3. Location: Pg. III-A-l5, Policy A-4.6
Policy A-4.6 Water which flows in canals or
drainage lakes shall be used wherever possible
for irriqation of qolf courses and open space
areas. The possibility of such water use shall
be explored durinq the review of any development
plans which are in proximity of such a water
source. This submittal requirement shall be
included in the required updatinq of land use
regulations which follows adoption of the Plan.
(cl)
4. Location: Pq. III-A-l6, policy A-4.7a and Policy A-4.7b
POlicy A-4.7a The City shall continue its
pres~~t policy of requirinq a water source, other
,
than City water, for irrigation purposes in
geoqraphically defined areas of the City.
Policy A-4. 7b The City, through the Regional
Wastewater Treatment Facility Board, shall
, implement the "Northeast Quadrant Reclaimed Water
System" project to reclaim a portion of the
effluent from the Wastewater Treatment Plant for
irrigation purposes. The City, through the
Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility Board,
shall also explore the feasibility of the reuse
of wastewater effluent for groundwater recharge
in FY 93/94. Based upon the results of this
feasibility study, the City, through the Regional
Wastewater Treatment Facility Board, may develop
a program to fully implement the reclamation and
reuse of sewage wastewater effluent in the
future. (Also see Public Facilities Policy B-2.1
for related policy) _M411 41__ p~t_~e tMe ~_e _t
dl_tM4t.e .4tetJ tt_. tMe letl_ft41 W4_'e.4tet
Tte4t.elit '14litJ t_t lttlt4tl_1i p~tp__e_' TMl_
pt_.t4. _M411 ~e e.pl_t44 tMt_~tl tMe I_f~t
ett_tt_ _'I tMe If_ttftt a_4ttl 4litl tMe ~flfe_ _t
a_tlit_1i ae4tM 41i.. lelt4t 144tM' TMf_ fte. l_ fli
tIe letf_li41 a_4ttl PY .Z/.J ._tt pt-tt..,
5. Location: Pg. III-A-17, Policy B-l.2
Policy 8-1.2 The Delray Oaks area of the Alfieri
Puqliese Park of Commerce shall be preserved
through sensitive development under "planned
development" concepts, exaction (public sites
dedication provisions of the Land Development
Requlations) , or acquisi tion ( inCluding the
County Environmentally Sensitive Lands
AcquiSition Program). The City shall participate
with the County in seeking State funding for the
acquisition of the Delray Oaks site and its
development as a preservation area. 4litl Hurricane
Pine. along S.W. 10th Street should be preserved
~ in part throuqh sensitive site planning.
it.-
6. Location: Pg. III-A-17, Policy 8-1.4
'_lft1 a~l" W__ft 4t1_ptf_. _t tKf_ '14. 4ftd
IKt_~tK pt-tt..- _el t_tlM f. tMe
Z.tett_~et"e.t41 ~__ttlfft4If_ft Ile.e.lJ tKe ~ftt
_M411 _114fft IMe .eI14.tI 4te4 41_.t Z~'I' (tJl
.
Page 2
" '
7 . Location: Pq. III-A-17, Objective B-2
Ob1ective B-2:
To increase public awareness and provide for the protection
of flora, fauna, and wildlife through programs of education
and regulation. Regulatory measures shall ensure the
protection, preservation, conservation, and appropriate use
and protection of fisheries, wildlife and marine habitats
which serve as habitat for endangered and threatened plant
and animal species.
8. Location: Pq. III-A-18, Policy 8-3.2
Policy B-3.2 TMtth4tM f~t.tt~l.t~.~tal .tt~tt_
lIftM tM. taX. w~ttM Jtaf~at. Jf_ttf~t a~tl tM.
S~14tM 'l~tfda wat.t Ma~at.IIl.~t Jf_ttf~t' a
pt~ita. t~t tM. pt~t.~tf~~ ~t tM. _M~t. lf~. ~t
taX. Xda _Mall ~. ._ta~lf_M.tlJ TM. t.ftt _Mall
pt~lfd. tM. l.atl tMt~14tM ft_ t.~"14~ftt S.rlf~._
r&t;,14pJ TM. pt;,itaa _Mall ~. d.I.I;,p.tl ~t d~tf~i
" 'Z/'JJ' xt _Mall addt.__, aa~~t ;,tM.t ft...,
tM. t.i~latf~~ ~t ~;,at a~tflftt f~ ;,ttl.t t;,
t....~. lIal. fapa~t ;,~ tM. _M;,t. If~.J The City
supports Palm Beach County's program to restore
and protect the shoreline of Lake Ida. In
addition, the City supports continuing monitoring
of boating activity in the lake to assure that
this activity does not produce adverse impacts on
the shoreline.
"
Page 3
, '
.
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
l. Location: Pq. 1II-B-22, policy A-1.2
, Policy A-l. 2 Even though current standards for
ocean discharqe of effluent are beinq met, the
use of ocean discharqe may not, in the lonq term,
be an acceptable method of disposal for all, or
even the ma1ority, of effluent. A proqram to
fully implement the reclamation and reuse of
sewage effluent may be developed by the City,
through the Wastewater Treatment Facility Board,
in the future. This program would continue the
use of ocean discharge, on a limited basis, to
dispose of excess effluent, especially during the
rainy season. A ;tetta. let iH. te~~e el
.llX.elli lte. tHe lte,fellaX Wa_ie_aiet Tteat..llt
Plalli _Mall ~e pte_ellie4 ie iMe Itetfellal "at4 ~t
1.lle XI X"3/ (See Pelftt 1'<<2/1 ~ell~et1aifell
EZe.elli 'eZftt A'<<'/7~ 4114 _e. Zlltet,e~etJll\elli'Z
~eet4lllailell Ele.elli fet teZai44 ;.Iftfe~l'
.
2. Location: Pq. III-B-25, Policy B-2.1
Policy B-2.1 THe aZietllail~e el ellMallelll, tMe
waiet _~;;It iMte~,H iMe tetttZlll, ef 4l~tMat,e
It.. tMe Wa_ie_aiet Tteat..lli 'Zalli (WWT"1 altet
tetifat1 tteat.ellil alltl tMeJl ._etl efiMet .- a
_e~tee ef ;.ia~Xe waietl alltl/et lttf.aif.1l waietl
alltl/et a~ffet tetMat.e _MaZI ~e e~;letetl iMte.,M
ieeMllftaZ _i..Ue_' The City, through the
Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility Board,
shall develop a program to implement the
"Northeast Quadrant Reclaimed Water System"
pro1ect to reclaim a portion of the effluent from
the Wastewater Treatment Plant for irriqation
purposes. The City, throuqh the Regional
Wastewater Treatment FaCility Board, shall also
eXDlore the feasibility of the reuse of
- wastewater effluent for groundwater recharge in
~ FY 93/94. Based upon the results of this
feasibility study, the City, through the Regional
Wastewater Treatment FaCility Board, may develop
a program to fully implement the reclamation and
reuse of sewage wastewater effluent in the
future. (Also see Conservation Policy A-4.7b for
related policy)
3. Location: Pg. III-B-25~ Policy B-2.5 (New)
PoliCy B-2.5 The City shall develop a program
to construct at least one Aguifer Storage and
'ag_ 4
,.
Recovery (ASR) well to supplement water supply
during conditions of drought or well field
contamination and as a method of balancing the
demand on water supply wells during periodS of
high and low demand. This program shall include
feasibility studies, design, and construction as
warranted by the results of the feasibility
studies.
4. Location: Pg. III-B-25, Policy B-3.l
Policy B-3.1 The city shall maintain its program
of responsible consumption of water (per capi ta
basis) and shall decrease the overall per capita
consumption of water by 10' from 1989 levels
through continued implementation of the followinq
techniques and programs: (Also see Objective A-4
of the Conservation Element).
. maintaining its water rate structure
which establishes an inverted block
-rate structure to set high.r
consumption rates for increased wat.r
use Ih't~ 4 MfiMet ~,Uf~tIl t4te f~t
tt~Ji~.I\,tf~Ji 4Ji.. tlette4~e~ tt1i~t~l\et
tt4,4tftt ttM4tie~ in order to promote
reductions in water consumption as well
as establishment of conservation
surcharqes, based on South Florida
Water Manaqement District formulae, and
keyed to various levels of drouqht
alert;
. mandatory use of wells for irrigation
purposes where conditions permit [LDR
Section 7.7];
. continued eJiM4Jitt64 enforcement of water
use laws;
. The consideration of tt6C1iftelleJit~ t~t
xeriscape landscaping alternative. tIS
~e tt~Ji~ ftlett64 for all new development
durinq the review of site and
development plans [LOR Section
4.6.16(E)]; and
. continuation of t~e reqular preventive
maintenance proqraa for water mains,
pumps and meters (see related Policy
C-4.3)
.'
'ag. 5
'.
.
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION ELEMENT
1- Location: Pq. III-D-21, Policy B-2.5 (NEW)
. Policy B-2. 5 The City shall ensure that public
access is provided to publicly owned natural
areas that provide passive resource based
facilities (Le. trails, wildlife observation
areas, etc. ) for the public use and en10vment of
the site. For the Oelray Oaks site, access to be
provided by the County will include public
parking.
2. Location: Pg. 111-0-21, Policy B-2.6 (NEW)
Policy B-2.6 The City shall ensure that passive
resource based facilities (i.e. trails, wildlife
observation areas, etc.) will be provided for the
public use and. en10yment of publicly owned
natural areas. For the Oelray Oaks site,
facilities to be provided by the County will
include a trail and informational display.
<it
.f; .
.
Page 6 ~
"
HOUSING ELEMENT
1- Location: Pq. III-E-6, Figure H-1
~ This fiqure, "Major Residential Parcels", has been replaced
with a new fiqure, "Potential Residential Units", to
provide up to date (1994) information.
SEE FIGURE H-l ON PAGE 8
2. Location: Pq. III-E-7, Table H-l
Ta~l. iV I 0,,~t', J.1.1~~..'t_
iU"I.I- MMlttI-,..fIt
't~6.tt ,a.Ult ,..fIt T~tal
II Sa~l. ZaX._ - 3.. II' ..2
21 SM.N~~~ ,~t._t 121 1-1-1- 121
31 1_1._ ~t J.ltat I'" .. I"
.1 ~t~1._ ~t 04ltat I--fl- II' I"
II Ad~dt' Ttate -f-fl- 21. 21.
.1 Wat.tt~t~ Ytlla,4 I--fl- 23. 23.
71 H~d_tft' 'attftet_Mf~ 3. -fl-I- JJ
T~tal "d~et ~t .., .1. 11.1.
W,tt_ 'la',"",I
S~dtt.I Sttat.,ft 'Zaft't', ~t~_~I z'tJI 1"1
..
Page 7
,-
,.
"
FIGURE H-1
FIGURE L-4
L,-JO C.ucAL I ~
r I
... II
~
0. ,
UKl IDA lOAD ~
,
I 1
I
,
I . ,
I
, ,
ftllT 1
~
I I
-, ~WSOIl IOULEY..
I I
.
I ,
1
~--~_._- ,
4...
NOTE: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OUTSIDE THE CITY ARE ADVISORY.
N POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
- AGGRlCATl ,Mens (JI lNG. WHICH MI. V/OIIf OIl
UHDODl'<<\DPG). 4.1 MXS OIl GMAlEIt IN SIZE. Me
tM\C " ,....U.... DISIGNMIClN (JI LOW DINSnY. Mmut
DfHSIIY. 11WfSI1IONM. WDlID usr. OIl IUW. ItfSI)Df1IM.
CRY OF DElRAY BrACH. FL
PlANNIHC DEPAR"BIENT Llca,D: f:ft LIllI , ... J
· ...... e . ~NIGCIDI - -- .
... '1M ... ICU
_ . Page 8
,
.
3. Location: Pq. III-E-7, Table H-2
'1'a)Sle Mf2 Aialla)Sle r.arltl
,
Patte I ~Ute Zerl.-Itt
A 1.3 atl- . wrllt.-/atte 132 8lrltlefla.llt
tletatKetl (8'Zl
8 leI atl- . wrllt.-/atte .e. 8'Z/M'
(Z .e atl- 12 wrllt.-/atte 72. MJl.ltffA.flt (M'l
Z 3e atl- . wrllt.-/atte II' M'
E II atl- 12 wrllt.-/atte 132 Mr
, I atl- . wrlft.-/atte .1 Mr
fI 2e Atl- II wrllt.-/Atte 21. Mr
M 21 Atl- 1 wrlft.-/atte 12J S,e/Mr .f,te4
'1'~tAI P~terltlAI M~w'-lrl. ~rllt.-,
8~wtte' 8ttatetft PIArlrllrlt flt~w;' trltt, I'll
f
SEE TABLE B-2 ON PAGE 10
4. Location: Pq. III-E-18, Policy A-1.4
Policy A-I. 4: That these neiqhborhoods be
identified as "stable residential" on the Housinq
Map, that the most restrictive residential zoninq
district which is applicable is affixed on the
zoninq map, and that requests for rezoninq to a
different zone desiqnation, other than Community
Facilities and Open Space be denied.
5. Location: Pq. III-E-19, Policy A-2.4.
PoliCY A-2.4: That these neiqhborhoods be
identified as "stable residential" on the Housing
Map, that the most restrictive residential zoning
district which is applicable is affixed on the
zoning map, and that requests for rezoning to a
different zone desiqnation, other than Community
Facilities and Open Space be denied.
pag_ 9
"
-- TABLE H-2 AND TABLE L-4 --
POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
FEBRUARY 1994
CURRENT POTENTIAL
I ID' I DESIGNATION I ZONING I ACRES I UNITS
101 LOW DENSITY RIM 10.00 50.0
103 LOW DENSITY PRO 5.00 25.0
110 LOW DENSITY CNTY 20.32 101.6
124 LOW DENSITY SAD 31.08 155.4
128 LOW DENSITY R1A 9.99 50.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 76.39..... 382.0
104 MEDIUM DENSITY CNTY 4.94 59.3
105 MEDIUM DENSITY CNTY 6.47 77.6
107 MEDIUM DENSITY CNTY 14.23 170.8
116 MEDIUM DENSITY RM 20.18 242.2
117 MEDIUM DENSITY RR 14.79 177.5
118 MEDIUM DENSITY CF 36.80 441. 6
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 97.41 ..... 1,169.0
125 MIXED USE SAD 10.54 126.5
142 MIXED USE . CNTY 94.82 680.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 105.36 ..... 806.5
102 RURAL RESIDENTIAL CNTY 107.01 535.1
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 107.01..... 535.1
106 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 8.38 100.6
111 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 8.32 99.8
113 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 17.56 210.7
114 TRANSITIONAL A 6.21 74.5
123 TRANSITIONAL Pac 7.15 85.8
127 TRANSITIONAL RM 6.12 73.4
139 TRANSITIONAL Pac 18.83 262.0
143 TRANSITIONAL A 33.97 407.6
146 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 52.18 626.2
147 'J'RANSITIOJIAL Pac 10.00 120.0
------ -------
~~AL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 168.72 ..... 2,060.6
122 PREVIOUS APPROVAL RM-8 18.56 140.0
150 PREVIOUS APPROVAL PRO 0.00 138.0
151 PREVIOUS APPROVAL PRO 0.00 114.0
152 PREVIOUS APPROVAL SAD 0.00 292.0
153 PREVIOUS APPROVAL RM 0.00 158.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 18.56 ..... 842.0
....... -------
-------
GRAND TOTAL.. · . . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 573.45 ..... 5, 795 . 2
NOTE: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OUTSIDE THE CITY ARE ADVISORY.
SOURCE: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, 1994.
Page 10
" '
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
1. Location: Pq. III-F-9, second bullet under Hurricane
Evacuation
. Wi thin this area there is a population of
approximately 7353 1/.22 (1990 Z'81 Census
Tracts 64, 7401, 7402, 54.03).
2. Location: Pg. III-F-19, Policy A-2.3
Policy A-2.3: The City shall request of the City
of Boynton Beach, the Town of GulfstreUl, the
Town of Hiqhland Beach, and Boca Raton that
notice be qiven of any development which shall
impact the Intracoastal Waterway by diversion of
runoff, the increase in direct runoff, or the
introduction of a water-dependent use or
commercial or industrial use along the
Intracoastal Waterway. If it is not apparent
that there will be no adverse impacts upon the
Intracoastal Waterway, the item shall be referred
to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
for review and mediation as needed until such
time as the Palm Beach County Interlocal Plan
Amendment Review Committee expands its review
authority to this kind of Development Order
request. '4ZI1\ 1_4tM lZ~~lIt~f"_ 'Z411l1flli lZ~~lItfZ
t~t 411 4114Z1_f_ 411.. t_t~.._1I"4tf~1I ;~t_"4I1t t~
pt~1f_f~lI_ ~t ft_ lZM4tt_tJ (c13)
. 3. Location: Pq. III-F-20, Policy A-4.1
Policy A-4.1: The need for additional water
dependent uses in the area shall be addressed to
the Treasure Coast Reqional Planning Council
lZ~"f__f~lI. If needs in addition to those
identified in the City's Plan are identified, a
. sitinq program should be requested of the Council
; e~__f~Jl. (c13)
4. Location: Pg. III-F-21, Policy B-1.4
POlicy 8-1.4: Whenever development is proposed
east of Highway A-1-A a survey of the property
shall be required. Said survey shall identify any
public access to lands seaward of the ..an hiqh
tide or water line by prescription, prescriptive
easement, or any other legal means or a
survevor's note that no such access exists. No
Page 11 ~
"
such access shall be eliminated or replaced
except in compliance with F.S. 161.55(6).lllt ..tM
atte.. .Mall ~e ella\lJlatetl iJt te;latetl iJJllt III
eiJa\;llallte wltM '/8/ I'I/II('I/ (c9) [LOR
Section 4.5.5(c)]
,
5. Location: Pq. III-F-28, Policy D-1.1
Policy 0-1.1: Appendix I, Hurricane Evacuation;
to Annex V, Evacuation, (III-L) of Palm Beach
County's Peacetime Emergency Plan and its
attendant recommendations for hazard mitiqation
and interaqency hazard mitigation reports is
hereby adopted by the Ci ty of Oelray Beach and
the Coordinator of Emergency Services rlte
Mat.Mall is directed to provide for the effective
implementation and coordination required by those
recommendations. (c3)
6. Location: Pq. III-F-29, Policy 0-1.2
.
Policy 0-1. 2 : The Fire Chief shall annually
review the City's Emergency Operations Guide
H.ttltalle 0;etatl~'. 'lall (Aftlle~ II ~f tMe ~ltt"
E.et~e'tt 0;etatl~" 'lalll to insure that base
data is current and to insure that it is
consistent with the Palm Beach County Peacetime
Emergency Plan. (c4)
7. Location: Pq. III-F-30, Policy D-4.1
POlicy 0-4.1: That consistent with Goal Area "E"
of the Public Facilities Element, and more
specifically with Objective E-l, the following
drainage improvements shall have hiqh priority:
. the one block area south of Atlantic
Avenue adjacent to the Atlantic Avenue
- Bridge.
..to ~ tMe Matl'a Hl.t~ttt It.tttttl a'~
. Atlantic Avenue at Gleason, Venetian,
and Seabreeze Avenues.
.
'ag. 12
"
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
1. Location: Pg. III-G-2, Inventory
Upon adoption of this Comprehensive Plan, the
City's "reserve annexation area" will become
replaced by the boundaries of it's official
"Planninq Area". This area is shown on the maps
contained in this Element and is qenerally
described by the following boundaries:
. the Atlantic Ocean on the east;
. the Town of Hiqhland Beach and the City
of Boca Raton, and unincorporated Palm
Beach County, along the L-38 and C-15
canals, on the south;
. the Town of Gulfstream and the City of
Boynton Beach on the north;
. the E-3 Canal (one-half tSJl.,c"~.tt.t
mile west of Military Trail) on the
west with exceptions of territory which
is developed and served by County
'Utility System '3.
2. Location: Pq. III-G-5, Table L-1
Table L-l Existinq Land Use Inventory1
Category Acres , of Total
Residential 4,206 42.2
Commercial 786 7.9
Industrial 257 2.6
Aqricultural 391 3.9
Transportation 1,401 14.1
Recreation/Conservation 1,752 17.6
Educational/Public Buildings/
Grounds/Other Public Facilities 286 2.9
Va~ 878 8.8
'-
TO. 9,959 acres 100.0
15.56 square miles2
1 Include. City, unincorporated pocket. and reserve
planning area
2 This net area exclude. acreage devoted to the
Intracoa.tal Waterway, 1-95, Lake Ida, and aake.
allowance. for exce..ive riqht-of-way of aajor
arterial roadway.
,.
Source: City of Delray Beach, 1994
'age 13
"
3. Location: Pq. III-G-9, Figure L-4
This figure, "Major Residential Parcels", has been replaced
with a new figure, "Potential Residential Units", to
provide up to date (1994) information.
,
SEE FIGURE L-4 ON PAGE 15
4. Location: Pq. III-G-10, Table L-3
TalSZe 'Z';J 0~i~l~~ le~eZ~;.e~t.
Sl~iZe'; M~Ztl';'aUZt
't~6ett 'aUZt 'a.lZt T~taZ
ZI SalSZe 'ZaXe. J.I ZZ' ..2
21 8MeN~" '~te.t JJ. .;.;.; JJ
JI X'Ze. ~t leZtat ZI' .1 Z'I
.1 ~t~~e. ~t zeZtat . .;.;.; ZI. ZI.
T~taZ ..~a'alSet ~t .IZ JII 7"
"~lt. 'Za~~e'"
8~~tte' ~ltt ~f leltat leatHI Z"2
5. Location: Pq. III-G-IO, Table L-4
TalSZe r,.;. 17alZalSZe 'Za~"
'~te~tlaZ
'atteZ Sl~. I.~.ltt "..ft. rttP4
I I.J atl . ~"lt./att' IJ2 Sl"iZ..;t.-lZt
- -'1'1 atl ...tatHH (Srll
I . ~"lt./att' ... sri
~ -.. II atl 12 ~"lt./att' 72. M.Ztlt.-lZt (Mrl
I J. atl . ~"lt./att' II' Ml
I II atl 12 ~JUt./att' IJ2 Ml
, I atl . ~"lt./att. .1 MP
~ 71 atl- I' ~..lt./att. 71. MP
M ZI atl- I ~"lt./att' ,. S"/MP .U~"
2/11.
8~~tt., ~ltt ~t J4Ztat l4atMI 1"2
SII TABLI L-4 OR PAGI 11
Page 14
"
FIGURE H-1
FIGURE L-4
'--30 CNCAL Q
- ~ ~
i I
... I i
~
III G.
LUCl IDA IOAIt
I
I ... 2 If
I
I
Wllf
I
-I LGWSClN IOULEY-.
I
I ,
!
-~--L-~._- ;-'i.~ ,
NOTE: LAND US! DESIGNATIONS OUTSIDE THE CITY ARE ADVISORY.
N POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
- AGCttRA1'! PMCD.S Of WG. .... AM YIOH'I 011
UNDOOl'tUOPED. 4.1 AiCMS 011 GMA1IJt IN SID., NfO
*\11 A FLU.'" OI!IGNAnoN Of LOll DIHSm'. MGlUI
DrHSIfY, 11WtSI11ONM. .om USE. 011 llUIW. IIISIDOmM.
CI1Y OF DELRAY BrACH. A.
PlNINlHC DEPARNENr LECENO: t:ft &MIl , IIU (
D~e .
... ,... ... ~....... -.- -..
Page 15
,
-- TABLE H-2 AND TABLE L-4 --
POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
FEBRUARY 1994
CURRENT POTENTIAL
I ID' I DESIGNATION I ZONING r ACRES I UNITS
101 LOW DENSITY RIM 10.00 50.0
, 103 LOW DENSITY PRO 5.00 25.0
110 LOW DENSITY CNTY 20.32 101.6
124 LOW DENSITY SAD 31. 08 155.4
128 LOW DENSITY R'lA 9.99 50.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.......,.......... 76.39 ..... 382.0
104 MEDIUM DENSITY CNTY 4.94 59.3
105 MEDIUM DENSITY CN'l'Y 6.47 77.6
107 MEDIUM DENSITY C N'l'Y 14.23 170.8
116 MEDIUM DENSITY RM 20.18 242.2
117 MEDIUM DENSITY RR 14.79 171.5
118 MEDIUM DENSITY CF 36.80 441.6
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 97.41 ..... 1,169.0
125 MIXED USE SAD 10.54 126.5
142 MIXED USE . CN'l'Y 94.82 680.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 105.36 .,... 806.5
102 RURAL RESIDENTIAL CNTY 107.01 535.1
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 107.01 ..... 535.1
106 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 8.38 100.6
111 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 8.32 99.8
113 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 17.56 210.7
114 TRANSITIONAL A 6.21 74.5
123 TRANSITIONAL POC 7.15 85.8
127 TRANSITIONAL RM 6.12 73.4
139 TRANSITIONAL POC 18.83 262.0
143 TRANSITIONAL A 33.97 407.6
146 TRANSITIONAL CNTY 52.18 626.2
147 'l'RANSITIORAL POC 10.00 120.0
------ -------
JllrAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 168.72 ..... 2,060.6
122 ~IOUS APPROVAL RM-8 18.56 140.0
150 PREVIOUS APPROVAL PRO 0.00 138.0
151 PREVIOUS APPROVAL PRO 0.00 114.0
152 PREVIOUS APPROVAL SAD 0.00 292.0
153 PREVIOUS APPROVAL RM 0.00 158.0
------ -------
TOTAL FOR DESIGNATION.................. 18.56 ..... 842.0
--.-.- -------
-------
GRAND TOTAL.!......,..................... 573.45 ..... 5,795.2
NOTE: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OUTSIDE THE CITY ARE ADVISORY.
SOURCE: CITY or DELRAY BEACH, 1994.
pag_ 16
,
6. Location: Pq. III-G-33, Policy C-4.3
Policy C-4.3 A special CBD development plan
shall be developed jointly by the CRA and the
city. It shall be initiated subsequent to
, completion of the Atlantic Avenue Redevelopment
Plan (see Policy C-2. 4) . It shall address the
maximum development which can be accommodated in
a competi ti ve market while still retaining the
"villaqe like, community by-the-sea" character of
the CBD. It shall further identify the
infrastructure requirements, including parking,
which will be needed to accommodate such an
intensity of development. Such a plan shall be
formally processed as an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan. The plan shall be instituted
under the lead of the Community Redevelopment
Aqency f/.f.'/.tl. 'la,hUllt a.;att.."'t but conducted
throuqh close participation with the City's
Planninq Department f/.~...Ilf.tt ItH.I.I~;a.llt
AtI6lltt.
4
7. Location: Pq. III-G-33, Policy C-4.6
'~lf.t7 f/.~4" TM. f/.f.tt all~ tM. f/.'It'A' .Malll f.ll
r1 '1/'21 ~.I.I~; 4 .ttat.tt f~t atttattf.rit
;tf.lat. all~ ;.1Slf.t .~.tatf.~llal f.ll.tf.t.tf.~ll. tIS
tM. 'f.ll.a;;I. et~I. At.a .'i' att ari~ t.lf.llatt
.tM~~I. ~t a 1StalltM ~f '8f/.f/.'
8. Location: Pg. III-G-33, Policy C-4.9
Policy C-4.9 The following capit.l improvements
h.ve already been identified a. essential
compon.nt. of effort. .nd prograJU which are
n.c....ry to keep the CBD a vit.l .nd competitive
co...rcial marketplace. Th... are con.idered as
.hort term (first planning period FY 90/91 to FY
t 95/91) c.pital improvement. which should be a
part of any qeneral obliqation bond program which
i. created.
f .Ma.. II ~f tM. .l~ .tM~.1 .....t.
.t~,.tt
f 'atlf.lli at.a lI..t ~f .wf.llt~1l ~t
..fta1SI. ..1S.tft.t.. f~t tM. .,.,.,
.t~,.tt
f V.t.taJll. 'atl f.;t~I.I64Jltl lIf'/.M~.'/. .
tfl.tlfall ;et It.tt.atf~Jl41 II...Jlt
. Pha.. III of At.lantic Avenue
B.autification i... expan.ion of the
. beautification prograa .ast of the
bridge to the OC..n
,ag. 17 :
"
f AZZejWat eftKaftee.eftf ~to,ta.
. Reconstruction of H.E. 7th Avenue
,
.
-..
.-
r',
,
Page 18
,
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
1- Location: Pq. III-H-18, Policy A-l.l
Policy A-leI The need. for a new park in the
Southwest portion of the City a~~ a~ acc~.pa~1l~f
Flt. StatLe~ shall be addressed pte~LIl.~
concurrent with, or prior to, the development of
Blood's Hammock Grove.
2. Location: Pq. III-H-24, Policy A-3.10
'~llc1 AI-J/I' I~ ~t~.t t~ tl~a~c. ~..~.~ capltal
LlI\pte~..e~t. a. L~.~tLtl.tl L~ tHL.- II...~t a~~
wKLcK at. lI\e.t appteptLat.11 paltl let tte.
l~t.tptL.. F_~~'-I tH. ~lt1 .Mall _tlll~. pt~c..~.
tte. tM. Aptll II 1111/ Wat.t a~tl S.".t
E~t.tptl.. R.~.~_. le~~/
.
<ik.
,,;, .
.
"
'ag_ 19
,
"
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
1. Location: Pq. 111-1-19, Policy A-2.3
Policy A-2.3 Any conflicts emanating from Policy
A-2.1 Afl'Z and which are not resolved prior to
resubmission to D.C.A. shall be taken to the Palm
Beach Countywide Coordination Program and/or~
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council as
appropriate, P.Z. a..tM ~<<hblt tw lfl. PZ.JlJllJl,
~~wJlt1 for direction and/or mediation. (c2)
.
I.
.age 20
'.
REQUIREMENTS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION
1- Location: Pq. IV-12, Five Year Capital Improvement Schedule
Table IV-3, the Five Year Capital Improvement
Schedule for Projects > $100,000, has been
revised to reflect the City's Five Year Capital
Improvement Plan.
SEE TABLE IV-3 ON PAGES 22 AND 23
.
..
~.
III;
.'
P&9- 21
"
TABLE IV-3 FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT> $100,000
I PROJECT & FUND I FY 1994-95 I FY 1995-96 I FY 1996-97 I FY 1997-98 J FY 1998--99 I
WATERI~. .-rounA Y
WATER MAIN/LINE EXTENSIONS 0 75,000 0 200 000 200 000
SEWER MAIN/LINE EXTENSIONS 0 75,000 0 200.000 200.000
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 100,000 100,000 100 000 200 CXXI 200 000
OTHER MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 100.000 100,000 100,000 150,000 150.000
, FIRE STATION N03 WATER & SEWER 65,000 0 0 0 0
SLUDGE HANDLING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 125,000 0 0 0 0
BOYNTON BEACH INTERCONNECT
& PUMPSTATION 100 000 0 400.000 0 0
VAC-CON TRUCK ( NEW} 0 0 150 000 0 0
BRANDON DRIVE ( NA TER & SEWER} 0 210000 0 0 0
SILVER TERRACE WATER & SEWER 0 200 000 0 0 0
GREENBRIAR DR. WATER & SewER 135,000 0 0 0 0
TOTALS $625,000 $760,000 $750,000 I $750.000 I $750,000
WATERfSewER RENEWAL" REPLACEMENT
WATER DISTRIBUTION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 200,000 200.000 200 000 200 000 200 000
LIFT STATION CONVERSION TO SUBMERSIBLE 60 000 140,000 140 000 140 000 140 000
MANHOLE REHABILITATION PROGRAM 550 000 550 000 550 000 550 000 550 000
EAST AREA RD. RECONSTRUCTION
WATER/SEWER UPGRADES 220.600 0 0 0 0
WATER PlANT MEDIA REPLACEMENT 250.000 0 0 0 0
BULK ACID STRIPPING TOWER
MEDIA REPLACEMENT 0 200 000 0 0 0
INTRACOASTAL CROSSING REPLACEMENTS 200.000 200,000 200,000 50 ODO 0
EAST DRIVE (LOWERY TO ATlANTIC\ 115.000 0 0 0 0
TOTALS $1,595,600 I $1 290 000 1 $1,090 000 T S940 000 I S890,000
GENERAL CON~N=
~ RESURFACINGJR 1..0NSTRUCTI0 7::i.000 100.000 300, 350,000
GENERAL TRAFFIC/ALLEY WAY IMPROVMENTS 20.000 31,000 50.000 50.000 50,000
N.E. 4TH STREET (SWINTON TO N.E. 2ND sn 120.000 0 0 0 0
SCHOOL SITE .S. ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 150 000 0 0 0 0
EAST LAKE IDA BEAUTIFICATION 124,000 0 0 0 0
BEAUTIFICA TION-CITY A TIORNEY PROPERTY 0 0 51.000 0 0
POMPEY PARK POOL 170.000 0 0 0 0
BUILDING RENEWAL & REPLACEMENT 75.000 60.000 77.000 100,000 100,000
EQUIPMENT RENEWAL & REPLACEMENT 75000 60,000 77,000 100.000 100.000
CITY HAlUPlOICE HURRICANE SHUTTERS 0 0 250 000 0 0
SILVER TERRACE PAVING/DRAINAGE 0 300.000 0 0 0
CITY SEAWALL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 204.000 204,000 0 0 0
SANDOWAY LIFEGUARD BUILDING 225 000 0 0 0 0
BEAUTIFICATION (ATLANTIC TO A1Al 900.000 0 0 0 0
TOTALS $2.138,000 I $756 000 I $756.000 r S550.ooo $600,000
Page 22
r
"
.
TABLE IV-3 FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT> $109.000
I PROJECT & FUND I FY 1994.95 I FY 1995-96 I FY 1996-97 I FY 1997-98 I FY 1998-991
MUNICIPAL GOU: COURSE
IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS 01 100 000 I or 01 0
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 01 01 oT 01 100 000
PROJECTS LESS THAN $100 000 115.000 I 65 000 I 115000 I 1150001 95 000
TOTALS I $1150001 $165,000 I $115oooT $1150001 '195 000
,
DECADE OF EXCELLENCE /I
FIRE ADMINISTRATION 375,800 0 0 0 0
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS 275.100 0 0 0 0
N.W. DRAINAGE IPHASE III 175.000 0 0 0 0
STREET RECONSTRUCTION IPHASE III 617.900 0 0 0 0
S.W. 10TH STREET 1,317.800 0 0 0 0
BEAUTIFICATION.
W. ATLANTIC -> 1-95 TO MILITARY 186.100 0 0 0 0
BEAUTIFICATION. ATLANTIC E. TO OCEAN 800.000 0 0 0 0
TOTALS I SJ,747.700 I SOl soT SOl SO
BEACH RESTORATION I
SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION PROGRAM I 12.000 I 12,000 I 14.OOOT 14.000 I 14,000
SERVEYS DUNE MANAGEMENT OTHER I 135000 I 75.000 I 75 000 I 75 000 I 75 000
TOTAL I $147.000 I S87.000 I 589.000 1 $890001 S89 000
CEMETARY I
CEMETARY EXPANSION I 01 OT 01 01 o I
I
TOTALS I SOl SOl SOl SOl SOl
CITY GARAGE I
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM I 550.000 I 550 000 I 550000 I 550 000 I 550 000
TOTALS I 5550 000 I 5550.000 I S550 000 T S550 000 I 5550 000
1993 W&S REVENUE BOND
S.W. STORAGE TANK LAND 77.100 0 0 0 C
N.E. STORAGE TANKS {ATLANTIC H.S1 1.367.500 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN. BARWICK ROAD 12HSS 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN. LAKE IDA ROAD 192.700 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN - ANDREWS AvENue 409.700 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN - N.E. 3RDAVENUE 84200 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN. N. BARWICK ROAD 88.100 0 0 0 0
WATER MAIN. RIOGEWOOD ROAD 208.300 0 0 0 0
MORIKAMI WELLS 1St PIPING 2.114.100 0 0 0 0
N. RESERVOIR HIGH SERVICE PUMP 2152.600 0 0 0 0
TOTALS I 54.925.758 I SOl sor SOl SO
FES
406 000 0 0 0 0
225 000 0 0 0 0
28.000 500 000 500.000 500 000 500 000
2SO 000 0 0 0 0
TOTALS S9C9 000 5500.000 SSOO 000 5500 000 $500 000
STORMWATER UTILITY FEE
ATLANTIC AVENUE PUMP STATION 1 S3 000 0 0 0 0
BEACH DRIVE PUMP STATION 113000 0 0 0 0
HARBOR DRIve PUMP STATION 0 101.000 0 0 0
SEASAGE DRIVE PUMP STATION 0 184,000 0 0 0
S.W. 10TH ST. /DIXIE & SWINTON\ 0 100.000 0 0 0
LINDELL BLVD. IFED. HWV. TO DIXIE HWV-, 0 0 231.000 0 0
G. BUSH BLVD./FED. HWY, TO INTRACOASTAl\ 0 0 180400 0 0
SW 10TH S1 MAIN TRUNK ICONGRESS TO FED HWYl i 65 000 0 500.000 1 000 000 900 000
TOTALS . I 5341000 I $365.000 J 1911.00 I $1,000000 I $900 000
Page 23
"
.
PROCEDURES -FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE PLAN
1- Location: Pq. V-I, Implementation of goals, objectives, and
policies of the elements of the plan
/
1 aUiteeU at.. ....eell. , TM" t~ZZ~wfJli ft....- Mat.. ~""Jl
fdeJltftf"d a. ft....- wMfcM a\_.t ~.. addt".'-"d a'- .~oJl a.-
~~'-.f~Z"I
II 'te~.tat~tt w~tX t~t ...ta~Zf.)lJl\"Jlt ~t . 't~tJ\
Wat..t ,.cflft; ,.... ~t~it.. ~ll Af2/2 , " ~fl
21 'eJl"taZ 0~lliatl~Jl B~Jld 1'-._" ;t~ita. ~ll AfJ/'
JI 't~te'-'- tetl.l~Jl'- t.. ~lll ~1'1 ~IB ff ~ll Af.
Fiscal Year 91/92
1. Creation of "scenic street" program T 8-3.2
2. Lindell & Federal Hiqhway Redevelopment Plan LU
C-2.6 & H 8-3.1
3. Enhanced street marking program T e-2.1
4. Review of. street names & system T 8-2.2
5. conqested intersection inventory , program T
8-2.1
6. West Atlantic Redevelopment Plan LU e-2.4 & H
8-3.1
7. Germantown Road Redevelopment Plan LU e-2.5 & H
8-3.1
8. In-town shuttle, proqram development T A-l.3 ,
8each shuttle transportation program OSR 8-3.1
and eM 8-1.1
9. Resolve FIND property status/disposition CM ~~'Il
, 4.2
10. Comaunity Residential Home amendment to the LOR's
LU A-5.11
11. Neighborhood Information Exchange Program H A-I
"1 ~lt.t/~U .-t.tat...it t.. ;.r,Zlt/;tft.t.e "d.tat.l~Jl
tatLZft.f"'- fJl 'fJl...;;Z.. .t~te ~W ~f'I'
71 ~Lt.t/eU _.-.. ~t aZZ..t.- ;t~.t.. ~W ef./7
III Z4Jl4 W'-e l....Z.t.f~Jl t~t W..ZZtLeZd.- e Af2/J .Jld ,t
.. '~'/2
I.JI le~eJlLJli LJl4..-t.tf.l 1.Jl4 fJl Welltfel4 .t~t.ett.L~Jl
Z4Jle ,J ~f ,..tl...- 2. WellfLeld ~W B~I/2
I" tLt.t/tU At.I.Jlt.ft At..Jl... i~t..t~"Jlt.al t~._le_
.-t.tat...it ~W efJ/.
181 WeIlfLel4 ;t~tett.f4Jl "_paJl.-f4Jl t4 11 4ta~4wJl
.t..a A~2/2
1'1 l..t~JlLJlf ~f weZltfel4 ;t~t...tt.f~Jl t4Jle. 'I , '2 ,t
Bf./J
2.1 eft.t/tU .-tXet.LJli '-ftateit ~W e~J/I
..
'ag_ 24
"
Fiscal-Year 92/93
I. East of Woods of Southridqe Redevelopment Plan H
B-3.1
2. Study re ways to accommodate staffinq increases.
PF 0-3.1
3. Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan LU C-2.7
4. Report re mitiqation of impacts of point source
pollution PF A-I
5. Report re mitigation impacts of non-point source
pollution PF A-2
6. Public information exhibits PF F-l
7. Pole & obstruction removal proqram T C-2.2
8. C.B.D. Development Plan LU C-4.3
9. Sewer Master Plan, revisions & update PF C-l
10. Enhanced Code Enforcement proqram powers H A-5.3
II. "Rehabilitation Strateqy" proqram development H
B-2.3
12. Seawall ordinance review and modification eM
D-4.2
13. Housinq revolvinq loan fund program development H
A-5.1
14. Report re,collection and disposal of "waste." PP
A-3
15. Snorkel Park Study CM C-6.4
16. Discharqe in waterway. ordinance C C-2.2 & C
C-2.1 re proqram for termination of alc discharge
17. Post disaster redevelopment program preparation
CM 0-3
18. Pineapple Grove neiqhborhood plan LU C-4.8
19. Complete Tennis Center LU C-3.6
20. Drainaqe Master Plan PF E-1.1
2I. Amend caD zone district to accommodate 30 DUlAc
LU A-5.l3
22. Amend caD zone district to accommodate industrial
and commerce uses LU A-5.14
1.1 Meetf~t f4~fZftf._ _t~~t ~M ~~'/I
.1 ~t.4tfe~ ef 1_~.~f~ _tt..t, ;te.t.. T I~J/2
II AZt.t~4tf~._ t. ~4~4Z t.~M4t..I_tet4.. ,r 1~2/Z
1.1 !AX. 1~4 IMet.Zf~. 'tet.~tfe~ ,te.t4a ~
I~J/2
1'1 "~~f~t ;te.t4. ~e~.Ze;e4 fet tM. ~e.et.tt
..~~_fe~I ,r 1~2/11
III l.~e~f~t ef w.ZZffel~ 'I.' 4t.4 ~V 1~I/2
221 l~t.tte~.t~e~t41 4.t....~t wftM tM. ~e~~tt t.
Z4~~ ~_. f~ 4~~e.4tfe~ 4t.4 tV I~J/J
21J Alt.t~4tf~. te WWT' ~f_~M4tt. fet fttf.4tfe~ ,r
1~2/1
2.1 W4tet ~e~_ety4tfe~ (fet~e41 ;tett.. ,r I~J/I ,
;tett.. ..;4~_fe~ ~ A~'J2
21J 0>>t4f~ tftMt_ te Z4~~ fet ,t._ety., w.IZffeZ~ t~
IJJI ,r 1~2/'
2.1 ~te__ ~~~. >>e4~M 4~~e__ _t~~t eM A~IJI
.'
Page 25
"
FIscal Year 93/94
1- Assessment of user fees OSR A-3.2
2. Linton/S.W. 4th Avenue Redevelopment Plan LU
C-2.8a and H B-3.l
, 3. Redevelopment Plan, area south of the CBO H B-3.l
& LU C 2.9
4. Assessment of environmental impact of concrete
plants C A-3.4
5. Intracoastal Shoreline Protection proqram C B-3.3
6. Commence annexation proqram LU B-3.4
7. Feasibility study for wastewater effluent reuse
by qroundwater recharge PF B-2.l & C A-4.7b
Fiscal Year 94/95
1- Leon Weekes Interpretive Trail C B-l.3
Fiscal Year 95/96
l. EvaluatioR and Appraisal Report
Y:\OOC\ADOP94-1
.
'ag. 25
'r
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tJ1v{
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM * 10.l) - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE NO.
89-94
DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1994
This is second reading and public hearing for Ordinance No. 89-94
which annexes Lot 19 of Delray Beach Estates (Moenert property
located at 2706 North Federal Highway) and establishes initial
zoning of GC (General Commercial) District. It also provides for
a small scale land use plan amendment to change from the County's
designation of CIS (Commercial with a residential equivalent of 5
units per acre) to an official City designation of General
Commercial.
This annexation is by voluntary petition of the property owners.
Please refer to the staff report for further analysis.
The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item on
October 17, 1994, and voted unanimously to recommend that the
annexation, land use map amendment, and initial zoning be
approved. At first reading on November 1, 1994, the City
Commission passed Ordinance No. 89-94 by unanimous vote.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 89-94 on second and final
reading.
f~ 5-0
ref:agmemo9
,
.
ORDINANCE NO. 89-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH1 FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, LOT 19 OF DELRAY BEACH ESTATES LOCATED AT 2706
NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO
EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING
THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND;
PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID
LAND; AFFIXING AN OFFICIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR
SAID LAND TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AS CONTAINED IN
i THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; ELECTING
,I TO PROCEED UNDER THE SINGLE HEARING ADOPTION PROCESS
FOR SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING
j FOR THE ZONING THEREOF TO GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
DISTRICT; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A
I SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, George R. Moenert and Patricia F. Moenert, his
wife, are the fee-simple owners of Lot 19, Delray Beach Estates; and
II WHEREAS, George R. Moenert and Patricia F. Moenert, his
wifel have requested by their voluntary petition to have the subject
II property annexed into the municipal limits of the City of Delray
II Beach; and
I WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is
contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida; and
,
I WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach has heretofore been
authorized to annex lands in accordance with Section 171.044 of the
I Florida Statutes; and
I WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is
I
! presently under the jurisdiction of Palm Beach County, Florida, having
a County Future Land Use Map designation of C/5 (Commercial with a
residential equivalent of 5 units per acre); and
WHEREAS, the Advisory Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation
for the subject property in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is
General Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the City's Future Land Use Map designation of GC
(General Commercial) is consistent with the County FLUM designation of
C/5 (Commercial with a residential equivalent of 5 units per acre) for
the property hereinafter described; and
.
"
.
WHEREAS, the City's FLUM designations as initially contained
on the City's Future Land Use Map adopted in November, 1989, and as
I subsequently amended, are deemed to be advisory only until an official
I Land Use Amendment is processed; and
I
I WHEREAS, the designation of a zoning classification is part
I of this proceeding, and provisions of Land Development Regulations
Chapter Two have been followed in establishing the proposed zoning
I designation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, hereby annexes to said City the
following described land located in Palm Beach County, Florida, which
lies contiguous to said City to-wit:
Lot 19, DELRAY BEACH ESTATES, according to the Plat
thereof recorded in Plat Book 21 at Page 13 of the
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The subject property is located on the west side of
North Federal Highway, at 2706 North Federal Highway,
Delray Beach; containing a 1.09 acre parcel of land,
more or less.
Section 2. That the boundaries of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, are hereby redefined to include therein the above-described
tract of land and said land is hereby declared to be within the
, corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Section 3. That the land hereinabove described shall
immediately become subject to all of the franchises, privileges,
immunities, debts, obligations, liabilities, ordinances and laws to
which lands in the City of Delray Beach are now or may be subjected,
including the Stormwater Management Assessment levied by the City
pursuant to its ordinances and as required by Florida Statutes Chapter
197, and persons residing thereon shall be deemed citizens of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida.
Section 4. That this annexation of the subject property,
including adjacent road s , alleys, or the like, if any, shall not be
deemed acceptance by the City of any maintenance responsibility for
such roads, alleys, or the like, unless otherwise specifically
initiated by the City pursuant to current requirements and conditions.
- 2 - Ord. No. 89-94
I
" '
.
Section 5. That the Future Land Use Map designation of the
subject property is hereby officially affixed as General Commercial.
Section 6. That the City of Delray Beach elects to make
this small scale amendment by having only an adoption hearing,
pursuant to Florida statutes Section 163.3187(1)(c)4.
Section 7. That Chapter Two of the Land Development
Regulations has been followed in the establishment of a zoning
classification in this ordinance and the tract of land hereinabove
described is hereby declared to be in Zoning District GC (General
Commercial) as defined by existing ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach.
Section 8. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 9. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 10. That this ordinance shall become effective as
follows: As to the annexation and zoning, immediately upon passage on
I second and final reading; as to the small scale land use plan
I amendment, the date a final order is issued by the Department of I
Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the amendment
I in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes,
whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits,
i or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence
before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is
issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may
nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming
its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the
Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2740
Centerview Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the 15th day of NOVemb~994.
At?EST: JI I/r; M ~~./'"
j~/vrnflJ!.~ j ~ ~
City erk
First Reading November 1, 1994
Second Reading November 15, 1994
- 3 - Ord. No. 89-94
I
"
-
l-l-lJl 11TT J II , . U 11
J
GULF STRUM 8L YD. 'L 1
~. ~ . 4, a. 1==1 r r T-1 \-1
, II~ j~~ ~ t--- A~"'''''-'
cw n''''' 0.'" g A. 'ou>. N
'a~ IN
& 7~ ~ _\
. ~
. _ ~C :L "~
~~'" .,OrJ.- . J.. --@""M 'AY ~ I I
SC'''' ~ ~ r-' ~
'(.\G'(. · 1 LL
OF ~ J n'~
- ~
I {"^""~ ~
_ / R-1-AA ~ '------/ <
I RVI'Y/ ~ ~
I.. I -
I- .. ~ I~ i ....,
Jib ~l ts lk ~ ~ AC ~ AVL ,U $(CDL
'1:2' JI lA sn. ~ & / 1
~ 7~
I-I~ 1
C~ '-- c IU.. 21ST ST. '" " '\. '\.~'\. " "
'-I~ p, ... ~ 1;,1 all
~~I. ~ ~ '"'t'11 . Cr. - ~,,-{
rCLF ~ N.t. 10lH ST. r 1-- 1 L \)v sy..O~
.n ~ L J "'" s'<lt9
1 J L- I
OF I'A AC SAD !
111
/ I W, ~ I · 11H~
'- '<,~~ 5J G<f~: ~ : I ~~tJC'IFi!
'~ I "F ,..
,. ,-.. J
N
~
an~~~~ MOENERT ANNEXATION
-- CiCtTAJ. a.ur WJ' S'tS7DI --
. ,
. . ('!;
f~ 1
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: ~IJ~HA~TY MANAGER
THRU: lANE DOMINGUEZ, DI
~TMENT OF PLANN ZONING
w~
FROM: PAUL DORLING, P I CIPAL PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 1994
ANNEXATION, SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM
COUNTY C\5 TO CITY GC AND AN INITIAL ZONING
DESIGNATION OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR LOT 19 OF DELRAY
BEACH ESTATES ON NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY.
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval on first reading of an ordinance for a voluntary
annexation (pursua~t to Florida Statue 171.044), Small
Scale Future Land Use Map amendment from County CIS
(Commercial\Residential equivalent 5 units per acre) to
City GC (General Commercial), and the application of a
zoninq desiqnation of GC (General Commercial).
The subject property is located on the west side of Federal
Hiqhway approximately 383 feet south of Gulfstream
Boulevard.
SAC X G R 0 UNO:
This requested annexation is consistent with Policy B-3. 4, of
the City's Future Land Use Element which calls for the
annexation of eliqible properties. The property is shown within
the "de8iqnated annexation area '1", south of Gulfstream
Boulevard in the North Federal Highway corridor.
In 1993, the majority of the enclaves (10) in this area were
involuntarily annexed under ELMS III legislation which allowed
municipalities to annex enclaves under 10 acres in size throuqh
interlocal aqreement with the County havinq jurisdiction. The
subject property was oriqinally considered for annexation under
this leqislation yet was found to be ineliqible as it did not
meet the definition of enclave. After the consummation of the
annexations under ELMS III leqislation the owner of the property
contacted the City to seek voluntary annexation. The voluntary
annexation request is accompanied by a Future Land Use Map
amendment and initial zoninq.
,
. .
PRO J E C T DES C RIP T ION:
The subject property is Lot 19 of the Delray Beach Estates Plat.
The property contains two buildings, a . vacant commercial
structure located adjacent to Federal Highway and a residential
structure located internal to the property. The 100' wide' lot
extends from Federal Highway west to Dixie Highway.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoninq Board formally reviewed this item at a
public hearing on October 17, 1994. At the public hearinq no
members of the public spoke. The Planninq and Zoninq Board
unanimously recommended approval of the annexation, FLUM
amendment and initial zoning request on a 7-0 vote.
RECOMMENDED ACT ION:
By motion, approve on first readinq the annexation, small scale
Future Land Use Map amendment from County C/5 to City GC and
initial zoning of GC (General Commercial) for Lot 19 of Delray
Beach Estates based upon positive findinqs with respect to
Section 3.1. 1, Section 3.3.2, Section 2.4.5 (D)(1) and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan and the followinq:
* That the property is contiquous, reasonably compact and
does not create an enclave.
* That services will be provided to the property in a manner
similar to other similar properties within the City.
Attachment:
* Location Map
* Ordinance by others
,
"
.
. '
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tri<<
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # /O~ - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE NO.
86-94/REZONING eRA-OWNED PROPERTY (KWIK STOP AND
DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS)
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is second reading for Ordinance No. 86-94 rezoning a 0.79
acre parcel of land from CF (Community Facilities) District to GC
(General Commercial) District. The property is located on the
south side of West Atlantic Avenue, between S. W. 1st and 2nd
Avenues (Kwik Stop and Discount Auto Parts). It is owned by the
Community Redevelopment Agency.
In 1990 this property was zoned CF in anticipation of the future
expansion of the South County Courthouse. However, in 1993 the
interlocal agreement with the County was amended to state that
they will not request transfer of the property prior to December
31, 2000. As it now stands, occupancy of this property is
limited by its current non-conforming status. The purpose of
this rezoning is to accommodate the existing commercial uses and
to provide flexibility to lease existing vacant space to a
variety of commercial uses which are allowed in the GC zone
district.
At its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board
held a public hearing in conjunction with review of the rezoning
request. There was no public testimony opposing the request for
rezoning, and the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval.
At first reading on November 1, 1994, the City Commission passed
Ordinance No. 86-94 by unanimous vote.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 86 - 94 on second and final
reading, based on positive findings with respect to Chapter 3
(Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations,
policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and Section 2.4.5(D} (5), that
there has been a change in circumstances that make the existing
CF zoning inappropriate.
f~ 5-0
"
.
- ,
i
I ORDINANCE NO. 86-94
, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND
PRESENTLY ZONED CF (COMMUNITY FACILITIES) DISTRICT IN
THE GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICTj SAID LAND BEING
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE,
BETWEEN S. W. 1ST AVENUE AND S. W. 2ND AVENUE; AND
AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1994";
PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
!
! WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the i
: Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April,
i 1994, as being zoned CF (Community Facilities) District; and
I WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning
I and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning
II Agency, reviewed this item and voted unanimously to recommend approval
'I. of the rezoning, based upon positive findings; and
II WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of
II the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be amended to
II reflect the revised zoning classification.
II
:1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
Ii CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
:i
I
:; Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
II Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby
'i amended to reflect a zoning classification of GC (General Commercial)
i District for the following described property:
I
I
i Lots 3 and 4, Block 53, TOWN OF LINTON, according to
! the Plat thereof on file in the Office of the Clerk
i of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County,
II Florida, in Plat Book 1, Page 3. (The Town of Linton
!i is now known as Delray Beach), LESS that part of said
:i Lots conveyed to the State of Florida for
III right-of-way of State Road No. 806 in Official
! Records Book 1605, Page 228, of the Public Records of
II Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly
described as follows: The North 20 feet of Lots 3
! and 4, Block 53, according to the Plat of original
Town of Linton, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3,
in the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida,
I in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, and
that part of said Lot 4, which is included in the
external area. formed by a 25 foot radius arc, which
I
I
II
'.
is tangent to a line 20 feet South of and parallel to
the North line of said Lot 4, and tangent to the East
line of said Lot 4.
Lots 1 and 2, Block 53, TOWN OF LINTON, now known as
DELRAY BEACH, according to the Plat thereof as
recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Public Records of
Palm Beach County, Florida, LESS the North 20 feet of
Lots 1 and 2, Block 53, according to the Plat of
ORIGINAL TOWN OF LINTON, as recorded in Plat Book 1 ,
Page 3, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida,
in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 43 East and
that part of said Lot 1, which is included in the i
external area formed by a 25 foot radius arc, which
is tangent to a line 20 feet South of and parallel to
the North line of said Lot 1 and tangent to the West
line of said Lot.l.
The subject property is located on the south side of
West Atlantic Avenue, between S.W. 1st Avenue and
S.W. 2nd Avenue; containing 0.79 acres, more or less.
Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall,
upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of
Section 1 hereof.
I Section 3. That all ordinances of ordinances
or parts in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 4. That should any section or provision of this
! ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective
, immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
I PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
I reading on this the 15th day of NOV~ ' 1994.
I
i
I
I -~/~
I A'ljEST: 11 I-h
I M 1\
I 'j; Nm 'flJJ..I' - 1. tff1 i~
I City C erk
First Reading November 1, 1994
I Second Reading November 15, 1994
I
I - 2 - Ord. No. 86-94
I
I,
II
./
'.
.
r' r
I- I. I J---.:.
......
...... - ..... -
......
~ ~
II -- ..
I - - u _It::
- N,"== I- I-- 1- 11 c!
=- - ii_
- I-- C- ~~-
- .... I-- - _
__=~~'L::::::= F= ! =
- - ~ I-- - ....... _
-- - I-- ~
..... · I~ 1,1 I -tIT ~ h' - _ ~t:J1I
- .[1 lr : 1 p ;Y = t:
~, - -
~:.......-_ - z --
'I ~~.~ _=
-~ c_
- c _
II ,., \ T T L ~" r /lJJH. ::;
~ - U ~
IT ITIDJ ~ I l-J .. -
!:b, . ',_ ~__ CF ~~ ~H~ - =
/-'" ..- ..-
~ - "ClNJIII - I--
I . C~ ~ I . '-- I I == II llU j II I tIT
~ T LAN TIC ~ ~ '..-\ nfdiJ i! I - T If[] 1I
TIm__ ~ :=. == !_LL~ UU
~ ......... mini Z ~j -
~ t- r:=J," ~
;::: -- ..... -'l Ii ...
I-- ~...... ~
\-- L..- - I--
~_- ~T I--
I-- - ......
". ~ . I-- II . . I I'" ~
- 1--- w-
- -_ t-- ~ -
== - OF =
T T~~ I- IIII 111::ClEl =
[Illll] ~ I I II II I = lJ[J = II M T
· -- ~:- t::::IId=
. ~= PI!!J~
~- ...-
lIIIIIIIIlJ I I-- H n = I :: tI
~"'"'" .r- I .r -.. Ir---f Ih I . ~
ti C.R.A REZONINGS
"--1NI .,.MncvT (J<WIK STOP and DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS)
CtrY fIT 1lEUIIo' ~ n.
- - aorAl. ~ "'" S'\'S7DI --
.
(I\.
It-
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
THRU: ~:k~ DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
1
I
FROM:
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 1994
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. '5" -94 - REZONING OF
CRA OWNED PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WEST ATLANTIC
AVENUE, BETWEEN S.W. 1ST AVENUE AND S.W. 2ND AVENUE
FROM CF (COMMUNITY FACILITIES) TO GC ( GENERAL
COMMERCIAL) (XWIX STOP' DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS).
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval on first readinq of an ordinance rezoning 0.79
acres of land from CF (Community Facilities) to GC (General
Commercial). The purpose of this rezoninq is to
accommodate the existinq commercial uses as well as provide
the flexibility to lease existing vacant space to a variety
of commercial uses which are allowed in the GC zone
district.
The affected properties are located on the south side of
West Atlantic Avenue, between S.W. 1st Avenue and S.W. 2nd
Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
With the Citywide rezoninq and adoption of the City's Land
Development Requlations in 1990, the subject property was
rezoned from GC to CF, in anticipation of the future expansion
of the South County Courthouse (southwest corner of Atlantic
Avenue and S. W. 2nd Avenue). With the rezoninq, the existing
retail and laundry uses became nonconforminq. It is noted that
as the laundromat vacated the property in April, 1994, the
options for reoccupancy are limited by the nonconforminq status.
In 1993, the interlocal aqreement as it relates to the South
County Courthouse was amended to state that the County will not
request transfer of the property prior to December 31, 2000.
Thus, the buildinqs may remain vacant until 2002, with no
guarantee that the County will utilize the property. An
analysis of the request is found in the attached Planning and
Zoninq Board Staff Report.
.
City Commission Documentation
Meeting of November I, 1994
First Reading of Ordinance No. -94 - Rezoninq CRA Owned Property
from CF to GC (Kwik Stop & Discount Auto Parts)
Page 2
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
At its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning and Zoning
Board held a public hearing in conjunction with review of the
request. There was no public testimony regarding the proposed
rezoning. The Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the
rezoninq request.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approval of Ordinance No.~' -94 on First Reading and
settinq a public hearinq date of November 15th.
Attachment:
* Location/Zoning Map
* P & Z Staff Report and Documentation of October 17, 1994
* Copy of Ordinance No. -94
VICCCRA.DOC
",
'.
.
PLANNING & zr \JING BOARD
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH --- STAFF REPORT ---
MEETING DATE: October 17, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.F.
ITEM: P-ezoning fron CF (Community Facilities) to GC (Gener~l Conrnercial)
for the Strip Commercial Center Located on the South Side of
West Atlantic Avenue.
111m F II II I I . I I I 0:::;"' I I I I I III II if J /I I f+H ~ I
".. , -. M.L ,
IT II I - ~ ~ I ! .
C = !Ii '~
~ -_ i!
~i! jIi-! _ .
~.. ..- -- f
T '1IIII!fl l I IllIlliJt: I I == lilli'll']} I II II H
ATLANTIC AVENUE
~I ~~'l !.- /!!!!:=. is -.m:qJIIIITI[J[I)(]]IIf"J[[] II
~r--- -__ _ __ _......~~ [ '_
r--- ~I ell
~ jIi- . . JIJ. t~--
r- r-- lint::::: N
· II--TT ==
~r- I~ 3
GENERAL DATA:
Owner/Applicant..........City of Delray Beach Community
Redevelopment Agency
Location.................South .ide of W. Atlantic Avenue,
between S.W. 1.t Avenu. and S.W.
2nd Avenue.
Property Siz.............O.79 Acre.
City Land U.e Plan.......R.development Ar.a '1
Current City Zoning......CF (Community Faciliti..)
Proposed City Zoning.....GC (General Comm.rcial)
Adjacent Zoning...Morth: CF
Eaat: OS SHAD (Old SchoOl Square Hl.toric
Art. District)
. South: CP
W..t: CF
Existing Land. U..........An existing auto part. .tore and
a convenience atore with a vacant
bay.
Proposed Land U..........Same a. exi.ting with potential
to lea.e vacant bay to comaerclal
u....
Water S.rvic.............Exi.ting on-.ite
Sewer Service............Existing on-site v.r.
.
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOARD:
The action before the Board is that of makinq a
recommendation on a rezoning request from CF
(Community Facilities) to GC (General Commercial) for
property owned by the Community Redevelopment Aqency
(Kwik Stop & Discount Auto Parts), pursuant to Section
2.4.5(D).
The subject property is located on the south side of
West Atlantic Avenue, between S.W. 1st Avenue and S.W.
2nd Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
The rezoning request incorporates Lots 1 - 4, Block 53, Town of
Linton, consistinq of 0.79 acres. The existing convenience
store/vacant laundromat building on Lots 1 and 2 was constructed
in 1961. The existing automotive parts store on Lots 3 and 4
was constructed in 1979, with upgrades to the sit. occurrinq in
1990.
Pursuant to the inter local agre.ment of 1986, betw..n the City
of Delray Beach, the City's Community R.d.v.lopm.nt Ag.ncy (CRA)
and Palm Beach County, the CRA purchas.d Lots 1 and 2 in
October, 1987 (existing Kwik Stop & former Sp..-Dee Laundromat)
and lots 3 and 4 (Discount Auto Parts) in July, 1988. Per the
aqreement, the CRA was to transf.r ownership of the subject
property to the County by 1996, to accommodat. future expansion
of the courthous. (southwest corn.r of Atlantic Av.nue and S.W.
2nd Avenu.) . With the Citywide r.zoning and adoption of the
City's Land D.v.lopm.nt Requlations in 1990, the subject
property was r.zoned from GC (Gen.ral Comm.rcial) to CF
(Community Faciliti.s), in anticipation of that .xpan.ion. With
the rezoning, the existing r.tail and laundry u... became
nonconforming.
In 1993, the agr....nt was amended to stat. that the County will
not reque.t tran.f.r of the property prior to D.c.mber 31, 2000.
The agr_ent furth.r provide. that if the County does not
requ.st the property by Dec.mber 31, 2002, the CRA may retain
ownership. It i. noted that as the laundromat vacat.d the
prop.rtyin April, 1994, the option. for reoccupancy i. limited
by the nonconforaing statu..
On Sept.mber 9, 1994, an application was submitted to r.zone the
subj.c," property froll Cl' to GC to acco~ate .xi.ting and
proposed commercial u.... This r.zoning requ..t i. now b.fore
the Board for action.
PROJICT D I 8 C RIP T I 0 . I
Th. propo.ed rezoning fro. Cl' to GC i. to accommodate the
.xisting commercial.:u.e. a. well a. provide the flexibility to
lea.e exi.ting vacant .pace to a vari.ty of co_.rcial uses
which are allowed in the GC zone di.trict.
"
P , Z Board Sta1 Report
Rezoning from CF to GC for CRA Property -
Kwik Stop , Discount Auto Parts
Page 2
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S IS:
REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3)
Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Finding.), prior to the
approval of development applications, certain finding. mu.t
be mad. in a form which i. part of the official record.
This may be achieved through information on the
application, the staff report, or minutes. Finding. shall
be made by the body which has the authority to approve or
deny the development application. The.e findings relate to
the Future Land Use Map, Concurrency, Comprehen.ive Plan
Consi.tency and Compliance with the Land Development
Regulations.
IFuture Land U.e Map: I The u.e or .tructure. mu.t be allowed in
the zoning di.trict and the zoning
district must be consistent with the land u.e designation.
The subject property ha.. a Redevelopment Area t 1 Land Use Map
desiqnation and is currently zoned CF (Community Facilities).
The existinq commercial uses (Kwik Stop, Discount Auto Parts)
are not allowed under the current CF zoning district. The
proposed zoning of GC (General Commercial) is consistent with
the future land use map designation. Pursuant to Section
4.4.9(B)(1) (permi tted Uses and Structures Allowed) , the
existinq commercial uses i.e. auto parts store and convenience
store are allowed as permitted uses. Based upon the above, a
positive finding can be made with respect to consistency with
the land use map designation.
I Concurrency: I Faci1i tie. which are provided by, or through,
the City shall be provided to new development
concurrent with i..uance of a Certificate of OCcupancy. These
facilities shall be provided pursuant to level. of service
established within the Comprehensive Plan.
As the rezoning request to GC will accommodate the existinq
commercial uses on the property, and is of similar intensity as
the use. allowed under the current CF zoning, the level of
service standard. as they relate to Concurrency should not be
siqnificantly affected. Therefore, Concurrency findings do not
need to be made.
.
I Consistency: I Compliance with the performance .tandard. set
forth in Section 3.3.2 (Standard. for Rezoning
Actions) along with required finding. in Section 2.4.5(0) (5)
(Rezoning Finding.) shall be the ba.is upon which a finding of
overall con.i.tency i. to be made. Other objectives and
policies found in t~e adopted Comprehen.ive Plan may be used in
the making of a finding of overall consistency.
"
P , Z Board Stal Report
Rezonlnq from CF to GC for CRA Property -
Kwik Stop , Discount Auto Parts
Page 3
COMPREHENSIVE PLAM POLICIES
A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and no applicable objectives or
policies were found.
Section 3.3.2 Standard. for Rezonin Action. : The applicable
per ormance standard. of Section 3.3.2 and ot er policies which
apply are a. follows:
(C) Additional .trip commercial zoning on vacant properties
shall be avoided. Thi. policy .hall not preclude rezoning.
on land that at the time of rezoning has improvement. on
it. Where exi.ting .trip commercial area. or zoning exi.t.
along an arterial .treet, con.ideration .hould be given to
increasing the depth of the commercial zoning in order to
provide for better project design.
If the rezoninq is approved, the zoning of the properties
will have reverted back to GC which existed prior to
October, 1990, and .is more appropriate given the existing
commercial use of the properties. It is noted that the
Discount Auto Parts site is designed in a manner that
adequate parking facilities and traffic circulation have
been accommodated. With respect to the Kwik Stop site,
improvements can be made to the east portion of the
property and to the alley immediately south of the
building, to provide additional parking and improved
traffic circulation. If the GC zoning is retained after
December, 2002, and if the possibility exists for
aggregation of land to deepen the commercial development,
that potential should be explored.
(D) That the re.oning .hall re.ult in allowing land u.e. which
are de.ed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses
both exi.ting and propo.ed, or that if an incompatibility
may occur, that .ufficient regulation. exi.t to properly
mitigate adver.e impact. from the new u.e.
properties north, south and west of the site are zoned CF
(C~nity Pacilities) and east is zoned OSSHAD (Old School
Square Histor1c Art. Distr1ct). The land uses adjacent to
the property include the following: north is the Delray
Beach Tennis Center; south are multiple family dwellings
and a single family home; west is the South Palm Beach
County Courthouse; and east is a vacant commercial property
which was previously occupied by a take-out restaurant
(Burger Chin).
Compatibility with the residences should not be a concern
as the uses have co-existed since the 1960's. Rezoninq of
these existing commercial properties to GC will not have an
impact on the ~sidential neighborhood.
"
P , Z Board Sta1 aeport
Rezoning from CF to GC for CRA Property -
Kwik Stop , Oiscount Auto Parts
Page 4
s.ction 2.4.5(0)(5) (R.zonina Findinos):
Pursuant to S.ction 2.4.5(0)(5) (Findings), in addition to
provisions of S.ction 3.1.1, the City Commission mu.t make a
finding that the r.zoning fulfills on. of the r.ason. for which
the r.zoning chang. is b.ing sought. Th.s. r.asons includ. the
followingl
a. That the zoning had pr.viously b..n changed, or was
originally .stablish.d, in .rror;
b. That th.r. has b..n a chang. in circwutanc.s which
make the curr.nt zoning inappropriat.,
c. That the r.qu.st.d zoning is of similar int.n.ity a.
allow.d und.r the Futur. Land U.. Map and that it i.
more appropriate for the property based upon
circwutanc.. particular to the sit. and/or
n.ighborhood.
The applicant has subm~tted a justification statement which
states the followinq:
"The property requested to be rezoned is part of a 1986
tri-partite agre.m.nt between the City, the County and the
CRA for future courthous. expansion. Th. 1986 agre.ment
called for the CRA to give the property to the County in
1996. Subsequent to the siqning of this agree..nt, the
City rezoned the property from GC-General Comm.rcial to CF-
Community Facilities in anticipation of the future chanqe
of us.. In light of the agre.m.nt, the City's rezoninq of
the property to CF s.emed appropriate at the time.
.- Th. situation changed substantially in 1993 when the
tri-partite agree..nt was amended. The new agre.m.nt
allows the CRA to retain the Atlantic Avenue frontage in
the block (the property in qu.stion) if the County does not
reque.t the property by Oecember 31, 2002 for the purpose
of expanding the Courthouse Complex by adding structures to
the .abject property. OUr indications at this time are
that thi. probably will not happ.n.
In any .vent, the new agr.em.nt stat.. that the County will
not reque.t the property prior to Dec.mber 31, 2000. This
will give the CRA to December 31, 2001 to relinquish the
property. The effect of the new agree.ent is that the CF
zoning make this commercially developed property
nonconfo~ng for 6 ye.rs until .t lea.t Deceaber 31, 2001.
Th.refore, it i. the CRA's contention that the CP zoning is
at a aini.ua pr...ture and may ultimately not be needed.
Since the CP zoning limit. the CRA'. ability to 1.... the
space .nd iapr~ve the buildings on the property, the CRA
requ.st. that the property be r.zoned back to Ge. This 1s
a more appropriate zoning at this time. If the County does
ultimat.ly reque.t the property, we will rezone it to CF at
th.t ti..."
,
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # loF - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994 ,~
SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE NO}
85-94/REZONING OF ST. PAUL A.M.E. CHURCH "!t
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is second reading for Ordinance No. 85-94 rezoning 0.90
acres of land belonging to St. Paul A.M.E. Church from GC
(General Commercial) to CF (Community Facilities) District. The
subject properties are generally located on the east and west
sides of N.W. 5th Avenue, between N.W. 1st and 2nd Streets.
This rezoning is essentia11y a corrective action. When the Land
Development Regulations were adopted in 1990, churches were
eliminated as a conditional use in the commercial districts. St.
Paul A.M.E. Church, therefore, became a legally established non-
conforming use. In order for the church to become a conforming
use and have the ability to make alterations to the existing
structures, rezoning is necessary.
It would have been appropriate to place CF (Community Facilities)
zoning on the church properties at the time of the Citywide
rezonings in 1990. Hence, the zoning was established in error
and rezoning to CF is appropriate.
At its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Board
held a public hearing in conjunction with review of this rezoning
request. There was no public testimony opposing the request for
rezoning, and the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval.
At first reading on November 1, 1994, the City Commission passed
Ordinance NO. 85-94 by unanimous vote.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 85-94 on second and final
reading based on positive findings with respect to Chapter 3
(Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations,
policies of the Comprehensive Plan and LDR Section 2.4.5(D) (5),
that the Zoning has been established in error.
PQ;~ 5-0
"
.
ORDINANCE NO. 85-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND
if PRESENTLY ZONED GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT IN
THE CF (COMMUNITY FACILITIES) DISTRICT; SAID LAND
BEING GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF
N.W. 5TH AVENUE, BETWEEN N.W. 1ST STREET AND N.W. 2ND
STREET; AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH,
I FLORIDA, 199411; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE,
I A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
,
I
I
I WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the I
i
Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April,
1994, as being zoned GC (General Commercial) District; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning
and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning
Agency, reviewed this item and voted unanimously to recommend approval
of the rezoning, based upon positive findings; and !
I
i I
i WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of
j the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be amended to i
reflect the revised zoning classification. i
I
!
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
! CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby
amended to reflect a zoning classification of CF (Community
Facilities) District for the following described property:
I Lot 6, Replat of Part of Block 27, TOWN OF LINTON,
! I
! Delray Beach, Florida, as recorded in Plat Book 21 at i
!
Page 43 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County,
Florida; and Lots 5 and 6, Block 27, TOWN OF LINTON,
I Delray Beach, Florida, as recorded in Plat Book 1 at
I
Page 3, Sheet 2, of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida (east side of N.W. 5th Avenue); I
TOGETHER WITH the North 101 feet of the South 306 I
feet of the East 135 feet of Block 19, TOWN OF I
LINTON (now Delray Beach), as recorded in Plat Book 1 I
at Page 3 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, i
Florida (west side of N.W. 5th Avenue) . I
The subject properties are generally located on the I
I east and west. sides of N. W. 5th Avenue, between N.W.
1st Street and N.W. 2nd Street; containing 0.90
acres, more or less.
i
I
I
"
'I
L
"
.
I Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall,
I upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the
I City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of
i Section 1 hereof.
i
! Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
I conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
I
I Section 4. That should any section or provision of this
I
jl ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
II declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
I' decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
II whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. I
I'
!I Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective
I' immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
Ii
"
" PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session second and final
I on
I reading on this the 15th day of November , 1994.
I ~~~
I
I
I
I ATTEST:
! (JL".otmY'iN:_JtAJ~ /lruIy
I
I
City C rk
First Reading November 1, 1994
Second Reading November 15, 1994
I
i
- 2 - Ord. No. 85-94
r
I
"
.
-
-
-- ~ ~
nrn ffiffi ~= --
~
~ -lU _ u.. 1ir
-"-- --
"-- >--
~- - - ---
=- - -= -
t:::J --- =
H ~ - -
- -
I II H .Tr T --( -
.JI Ie I I
- 1---'. ~ I :) I
_ ~ ImIWL ~
rr II 1l ;f:=:ml I. '="
T f-~:J' I
_ - I
.....- ............ I J
I T rn m I T 1iliIID. - I I == - I
A T LAN 11 C A V E N U E lLL]1 ~
~ lIIIIIIl_ ~ ~ ~ =- = T T I ~DIITIl ITIITIl r
_........__.........1IlIM. i""'ii-
~ ~ -- -
cf--- - =-
--
-
, ....... -
~ ~ -
~~ ~ ~II
~ u
_ T ~ I I 1imIIIIIIIl: [[]]] ~~i--
........ - ~
- -- '-- -
~= -
:y
~ _ I - ~ II II I r 'I
U~ I mw _ ....:.' I II TilT:::; .. i11Tl I t:W
I:>: mIE. - -~ '--
,., -I- - ...-
I!I -f- -
If\ ').... II I", I I - =~
II I \ '\.1 I I I I I 1..IllllIIill:Il T ~ -trr I =~j f
N
-
~ IID'MTMDfT ST. PAUL A.M.E. CHURCH
em 17 IlI1.IAY KA~ n.
-- ar;tTAL /JASC ~ sn1DI -
,
. [eLl
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: CITY MANAGER
THRU:
ZONING
FROM: A. COSTELLO
PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 1994
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 94 - REZONING OF
PROPERTY FROM GC (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO CF (COMMUNITY
FACILITIES) FOR ST. PAUL'S A.M.!. CHURCH.
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval on first reading of an ordinance rezoninq 0.90
acres of land from GC (General Commercial) to CF (Community
Facilities). The purpose of this rezoninq is to apply the
zoninq classification which is most appropriate for the
existing church use and its holdinqs.
The affected properties are generally located on the east
and west sides of N.W. 5th Avenue, between N.W. 1st Street
and N.W. 2nd Street.
BACKGROUND:
Wi th the adoption of the City's Land Development Requlations
(LORs) in October 1990, churches were eliminated as a
conditional use in the GC zoninq district as well as other
commercial districts. Thus, the church is presently a leqally
established nonconforming use. Althouqh the church may continue
to conduct services and other associated activities, the
existinq church cannot be expanded to occupy any additional land
area.
Churches are allowed as a permitted use within the CF (Community
Facilities) zoninq district. At the time of the Citywide
rezoninqs and adoption of the LORs in 1990, it would have been
appropriate to place a CF zoninq desiqnation on the church
properties. In order for the church to become a conforminq use
and have the ability to make alterations to the existinq
structures, rezoninq to CF is necessary. A complete analysis of
the rezoninq is found in the attached Planninq and Zoninq Board
Staff Report.
"
.
City Commission Documentation
Meeting of November 1, 1994
First Reading of Ordinance No. -94 - Rezoning Property from
GC to CF f<;>r St. Paul's A.M.E. Church
Page 2
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
At its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planninq and Zoninq
Board held a public hearing in conjunction with review of the
rezoning request. There was no public testimony opposing the
request. The Board voted (7-0) to recommend approval of the
rezoning from GC to CF.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approve Ordinance No. -94 on First Reading, with
the public hearinq to be held on November 15th.
Attachment:
* Location/Zoninq Map
* P&Z Board Staff Report & Documentation of October 17, 1994
* Copy of Ordinance N9. -94
YICCPAUL.DOC
'.
,
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAPF REPORT
MEETING OF: OCTOBER 17, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.I - CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING RIQUEST FROM Ge
(GlNERAL COMMERCIAL) TO CF (COMMUNI'l'Y FACILITIIS)
FOR ST. PAUL'S A.M.E. CHURCH.
I TIM B I FOR I '1' H I BOA R 0 I
The action before the Board is that of making a recommendation
to the City Commission on a rezoning request from GC (General
Commercial) to CF (Community Facilities) for St. Paul's A.M.E.
Church, pursuant to Section 2.4.5(0). As this action is
corrective in nature, this report was prepared in a memorandum
format.
The affected properties are generally located on the east and
west sides of N.W. 5th Avenue, between N.W. 1st Street and N.W.
2nd Street, consisting of 0.90 acres.
PRO J I C'T o I S C RIP T I 0 . I
The affected properties include Lots 5 and 6, Block 27, Town of
Linton and Lot 6, re-subdivision of Block 27 (east side of N.W.
5th Avenue); and, the north 101 ft. of the south 306 ft. of the
east 135 ft. of Block 19, Town of Linton (west side of N.W. 5th
Avenue) . The properties on the east side of 5th Avenue contain
the church, rectory, and associated parking. The property on
the west side of 5th Avenue is vacant land.
BACKGROUND.
st. Paul's African Methodist Episcopal Church was founded in
1897. The Church purchased Lot 5, Block 27 (east side of N.W.
5th Avenue), and constructed a church on the property in 1911.
The congregation re-bui1t a church at the same location in 1958.
An addition was constructed in 1966 and a rectory was
constructed in 1976.
On April 11, 1989, the City Commission designated Lot 5 of the
Church'. property as a historical site. Prior to the adoption
of the Cit.y'. Land Dev.lopment Requlations (LORs) in October
1990, churches were allow.d as a conditional us. within a
majority of the co_.rcial zone districts (Ge, CBO, SC, LC) .
With t)1e adoption of the City's Land Development Requlations
(LORs) , churches were eliminated as a conditional use in the GC
zoning district as well as other co....rcial districts. Thus,
the church is pre.ently a l.gally .stablished nonconforming use.
Although the church may continue to conduct services and other
associated activiti.., the existing church cannot be expanded to
occupy any additional land area.
v. E.
,
Planninq and ZOL ~ Board Memorandum Staff i ~ort
St. Paul's A.M.E. Church - Rezoninq from GC to CF
Page 2
Churches are allowed as a permitted use within the CF (Community
Facilities) zoninq district. In order for the church to become
a conforming use and have the ability to make alterations to the
existinq structures, rezoninq to CF is necessary. On September
2, 1994, an application was submitted to rezone the subject
property from GC to CF to accommodate the church. This rezoning
request is now before the Board for action.
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S IS:
REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3)
pureuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findinge), prior to the
approval of development applicatione, certain findinge muet
be made in a form which ie part of the official record.
Thie may be achieved through information on the
application, the etaff report, or minutee. rindinge ehall
be made by the body which hae the authority to approve or
deny the development application. Theee findinge relate to
the Future Land Uee Map, Concurrency, Compreheneive Plan
coneietency and Cpmpliance with the Land Development
Regulatione.
As the rezoninq is corrective in nature and deals with an
existinq use, findinqs as they relate to Concurrency are not
required.
FU'l'URI LAND USI MAP : Pureuant to Land Development Regulatione
Section 3.1.1(A) (Future Land Uee Map) , all land ueee and
reeulting etructuree muet be allowed in the zoning dietrict
within which the land ie eituated and, eaid zoning muet be
coneietent with the land uee deeignation ae ehewn on the Future
Land Uee Map.
:
The subject property has a Redevelopment Area .1 Land Use Map
desiqnation and is currently zoned GC (General Commercial). As
previously stated, the proposed church use is not allowed under
the current GC zoning district. Pursuant to Section
4.4.21(B)(5) (Peraitted Uses and Structures Allowed), within the
CF zone district, religious establishments and their attendant
functiona i... churches are allowed as a permitted use. The
proposed zoning of CF (Community Facilities) is consistent with
all land use ..p de.ignations (except Con.ervation and Large
Scale Mixed U.e) , including the existing Redevelopment Area .1
desiqnation. sased upon the above, a positive findinq can be
made with respect to conaiatency with the land uae map
desiqnation.
CONSISTINCY: Compliance with the performance etandards eet forth
in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Action.) along with
required finding. in Section 2.4.5(0)(5) (Re.oning rindings)
ehall be the be.i. upon which a finding of overall coneietency
ie to be made. 01;her objecti ve. and policie. found in the
adopted Compreheneive Plan may be ueecs in ~he making of a
finding of overall con.i.tenay.
.
Planning and Zon ~ Board Memorandum Staff ~ ~ort
st. Paul's A.M.E. Church - Rezoning from GC to CF
page 4
Public Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within
a 500' radius of the subject property. Letters of objection, 'if
any, will be presented at the Planninq and Zoning Board meeting.
ASS E SSM E N T AND CON C L U S ION S
The rezoning will enable positive findinqs to be made with
Sections 3.1.1(A) (Future Land Use Map) and Section
2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings), that the use will now be
consistent with the zoning, and that the zoning was
established in error. The rezoninq action will place all the
Church's properties wi thin the CF zone district which is the
most appropriate designation for this facility which 1s
community related.
ALTERNATIVE ACT ION S I
A. Continue with direction.
B. Recommend approval of the rezoninq request from GC to CF
for St. Paul's A.M.E. Church based upon positive findings
wi th respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the
Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive
Plan, and Section 2.4.5(0)(5).
C. Recommend denial of the rezoning request from GC to CF for
St. Paul'. A.M.E. Church based upon a failure to make a
positive finding with respect LOR Section 2.4.5(0)(5), the
rezoning fails to fulfill at least one of the reasons
listed.
STAPP RICOMMINDATION I
Recommend approval of the rezoning request from GC to CF for
St. Paul's A.M.I. Church, based upon positive findings with
respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land
Develo~nt Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and
LOR Section 2.4.5(D)(5), that the zoning has been established in
error.
Attachment:
. Location/Zoning Map
. Survey
y....-r.AUL.DOC
"
.
r- h ._
',-
.
~ ~
" ,~, ~
) /~tfJ. t?v i
- eO. ,-,-__. ---"-:-7-'-'- .__ _~._ __-
I ~ """."" L/,Vt ~ ~I'
~~l. 4,,' .
,,~.... ~
...". .
- . " -
.... r-
~, '"
~ I ~.. ,
, \' .
....~ t:'~ ' ..
t:. ~." .
- ......." .
1", ~:
. "
~ , ',; " ..
~ ~~~~
n. \.. ...' " .
~l ~1 .,~ ~ ;
~ ~" ~.. .
~ ~\n ....
.. .. ..
, ~ ~, .
" '14
~ ~: ~
::l\ '"
~ :-):-. l'
.. :\.
~ ~ ~
~~. ~. "i ~
" .. t · , ~
~ ~~ ~ ~
,_~. \ ) ..... I :
~i1'.. /AA (/It!?' ;
, ,'~ ~
~- 1t_. M/{"c'. t',.". """'~..... "h"H'~ _,. ~wNj . . ~
\. ..
"ty.yr. NlII ,. "r"~
2'- ('fI,.:;""",,.,,,,,,,, I~Al S'~ Alp%l,. . --- ;~-26/.r ---
-'",yEP.....-' 1'4'_ 4v',~4'I/,.'" ,1"""P-; , ~UK"""I "",,,,..-K'N"" ~ ====\
~. ~. V~ (1;.._, ,,' " 4411le- AlAlr "-
,,,""., ~,_ "..,,.....,. A'".., \
I ~ ~". , . "'.. / ~~.r ,4,-;4
f _ ~~. ~ U ~~n" II 'p/I"'''''
! " '. '\ Vi ~~ J
' " "
l .. . , "....JIY
t r:
*." d' ~ - ":~. /,.". i
, I, 161'." \ \ ~~.,'
... ... I~: ... ~ ... \,.
. ) ~ "'" " "
~ \. ,'" ~ '\ ~, .. ~ I' ., l~tI,II"''''S ;
.. ~ 1 .' ~ ~ '" ,I "'" ~'~.I'I") I
~"''' , ~ lIo. 10. '" ~ Iy~ I
~,,~ ';i :". .'101,
-,' '-, ~ I~ ~ '" l ~ ~ ~ t ~ i~;~ t I
~ ", l~ ~ '" " ~ ~ ~ ' I I" '\
'\ ,~" \ ' .... "!.\i \ I~'~
"~ ' ,~ ~ '" ,., I~ "
"" ~ ~ \ r ,I ~ ~ 1"'1" :.,~, ~ ,',
i \ ~ I" '<</'"1 ,'. "~ \'
'..,"... ~ ~ i I ..''''Jioi " ":'. "
" ,'" ~ ~ . ....'," .. .
~ "":" ~ I " .. " , ' .;
... ..' \) , ...
.., -' / ...,.-. A# ..... ~,,) '.,
roO .. '\" ... ~,. ., '" I".
I I \'" , 'J-T~ I.:~..., ..... .
... . \ !.. /" ", JIrl: I " ,
.," .. I ~ I \
( . ',' ~ ~.~,... ..-, 0 "._ /, .'
I ~\,':: ,e ~-,/,_,....'(,....~ ~.'f' .: ~~
J ".~ . ~ 'I . , ',."- ,- tV
"'.vo ~":' .. ~ .,y".."", ,. '.' -' · \
... A _ ' ~",.4 ~ '.".7'"#hr,A' U/."~I"'1' .........,~~....p /' /".,41'
:4' A-4'.,,' . ,~ '~ 'A/,.. .
._",,,,.,., -........ " "... r.... I .... - ... ""'./"JI ,.1.<1'.~A~)
\ .....,.'-".,- /;;,.;;u~~~:,/ - .! ~.!!i.i:;1' r /~';f'U'~ 'I,Ao'rVW,tlJl. h-":--=r,~:2:;"~
- '- - - -~ - -~
~~/A 1/'
~ :.
,
Planninq and Zor. ~ Board Memorandum Staff l. .lort
St. Paul's A.M.E. Church - Rezoninq from GC to CF
paqe 3
As the rezoninq is corrective in nature, findings with respect
to the rezoning standards do not have to be made.
Comprehensive Plan policies:
A review of the objectives and policies ot the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and no applicable objectives or
policies were found.
Section 2.4. S (D) ( S ) ( RezoninQ F indinQs) : Pursuant to Section
2.4.S(D) (1) (Findings), in addition to provisions of Section
3.1.1, the City Commission must make a finding that the rezoning
fulfills one of the reasons for which the rezoning change is
being sought. ~hese reasons include the following:
a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was
originally established, in error,
b. That there has been a change in circwutance. which
make the current zoning inappropriate,
c. ~hat the reque.ted zoning is of similar inten.ity .s
allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is
more appropriate for the property ba.ed upon
circwutance. particular to the site and/or
neigh))orhood.
The Church has existed at this location since 1911. At the time
of the Citywide rezonings and adoption of the LORs in October
1990, it would have been appropriate to place a CF (Community
Facilities) zoning designation on the church properties as the
church was legally established and has existed at this location
for many years providing a community service. Based upon the
above the above information, it is appropriate to make a tindinq
that with the Citywide rezoning of 1990, the zoninq was
established in error and that the rezoninq to CF is appropriate.
REVII" BY OTRIRS:
The rezoning i. not in a qeoqraphic area requirinq review by the
DOA (DowDtown Developaent Authority).
Community Redevelo~nt Aqency
At its meeting on September 22, 1994, the CRA reviewed and
recommended approval of the rezoning request.
Special Courtesy Notice:
Courtesy notice. were provided to West Atlantic Property OWner's
Association (WAPOA), Delray Merchant A.sociation and the Visions
West Atlantic Steering Committee.
"
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM * / ~ A - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
FIRST READING FOR ORDINANCE NO. 88-94 (CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
FOR MOORE PROPERTY)
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is first reading for Ordinance No. 88-94 which corrects the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation and zoning classification
for a 0.34 acre parcel located at 800 North Andrews Avenue (known
as the Moore property and formerly known as Tison Realty) . The
site has a conflict between the current FLUM designation of Low
Density and current zoning of RM (Medium Density Residential). The
corrective action is to change the land use designation from Low
Density to Transitional and the zoning from RM to RO (Residential
Office) District.
The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at a
public hearing on October 17 , 1994, and voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the corrective actions.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 88-94 on first reading. If
passed, a public hearing will be held on December 6, 1994.
p~ 6/0
ref:agmemo14
"
-
/ ORDINANCE NO. 88-94
, ,
I AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, CORRECTING THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
TRANSITIONAL, AND CORRECTING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
DISTRICT TO RO (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE) DISTRICT, FOR A
PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED AT 800 NORTH ANDREWS AVENUE,
AS THE SAME IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN;
ELECTING TO PROCEED UNDER THE SINGLE HEARING ADOPTION
PROCESS FOR SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS; AND
CORRECTING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
1994"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING
CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the
Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, as being designated Low Density Residential; and
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the
Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April,
1994, as being zoned RM (Medium Density Residential) District; and
WHEREAS, during review of a privately sponsored petition for
the subject property, it was determined by the Planning and Zoning
Board that the request should be processed as a corrective action
inasmuch as a review of City records indicates that such land use
designation and zoning classification were inadvertently applied to
the property; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning
and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning
Agency, reviewed this item and voted unanimously to recommend approval
of the corrective actions, based upon positive findings; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Future Land Use Map in I
I
! the Comprehensive P Ian be corrected to reflect the revised land use
designation, and that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray I
Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be corrected to reflect the revised I
j
, zoning classification.
I'
r' I
, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE i
i CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: I
j.
" I
!
Ii
I
I
"
I
r Section 1. That the legal description of the subject
I property is as follows:
Parcel 1, of the Plat of Moore's Landing, as recorded
in Plat Book 42, Page 72, of the Public Records of
Palm Beach County, Florida.
The subject property is known as the Moore property
(f/k/a Tison Realty) and is looated at 800 North
Andrews Avenue (west side of Andrews Avenue, north of I
George Bush Boulevard) ; containing 0.34 acres, more
or less.
Section 2. That the Future Land Use Map in the
'Comprehens i ve Plan of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby
corrected to refleot a land use designation of Transitional for the
, subject property.
I Section 3. That the City of Delray Beaoh elects to make
,
this small scale amendment by having only an adoption hearing,
i pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 163.3187(1)(c)4.
i
, Section 4. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
i Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby
I
I oorrected to reflect a zoning classification of RO (Residential
Office) District for the subjeot property.
Section S. That the Planning Director of said City shall,
upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, to oonform with the provisions of
Section 4 hereof.
Section 6. That all ordinanoes or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Saetion 7. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of oompetent jurisdiotion to be invalid, such ,
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a I
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. I
t Section 8. That this ordinance shall become effective as ,
follows: As to the rezoning, immediately upon passage on second and
final reading; as to the small scale land use plan amendment, the date
, a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or
, I
! - 2 - Ord. No. 88-94
I
i
I
I Administration Commission finding the amendment in compliance in
! accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs
! earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses
I dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has
I become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made
effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, ,
a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Department of
Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2740 Centerview Drive,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100.
I
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final I
I
i reading on this the day of , 1994. .1
!
I MAYOR
I
)1 ATTEST:
I ~
,
i City Clerk
First Reading
I Second Reading
"
!i I
I
I
I
i
i i
" I
I
i I
!:
i'
I.
i
I
!
'I
!: i
I
- 3 - Ord. No. 88-94 I
I
i I
I
"
0;(
t'1
C I TOy COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO:
THRU:
~
FROM: PLANNER
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CORRECTIVE REZONING FROM RM (MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY) TO RO (RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE) AND FLUM AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL TO TRANSITIONAL FOR A PARCEL OF LAND
(PARCEL 1, MOORE'S LANDING SUBDIVISION A/K/A MOORE
PROPERTY F/K/A TISON REALTY).
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the commission is the approval on first
reading of a corrective rezoning of a parcel from RM (Multiple
Family Residential - Medium Density) to RO (Residential Office)
and a corrective FLUM amendment from Low Density Residential to
Transitional.
The subject property is the Moore property, Parcel 1, Moore'~
Landing (f/k/a Tison Realty), a 0.34 acre parcel containing an
office and residential structure. The property is located on
the west side of Andrews Avenue, north of George Bush Boulevard.
BACKGROU1m:
The protosed amendment was requested by the owner of the
property located at 800 N. Andrews Avenue (formerly Tison
Real ty) . This parcel currently contains a structure occupied by
a non-conforming office and a permitted residential use. In
addition to the non-conforming use, the site also has a conflict
between the current Future Land Use Map designation (Low Density
Residential) and zoning (RM).
The proposed FLUM amendment is being processed as Small Scale
Development pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. This statute
permits any local government comprehensive land use amendments
directly related to .proposed small scale development
City Commission Documentation
Corrective Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore
Page 2
activities to be approved without regard to statutory limits on
the frequency of consideration of amendments (twice a year) ,
subject to several conditions. All of those conditions are met
for the parcel. A more complete description of 163.3187 and the
subject parcel is contained in the P & Z Board staff report.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed corrective
rezoning and FLUM amendment at a public hearing during its regular
meeting of October 17, 1994. No objections or concerns were
raised by the Board or by the public at the meeting. However, one
letter of objection was received and is included as an attachment
to the P & Z staff report. The Board unanimously recommended
approval of the proposed rezoning and FLUM amendment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approve on first reading a corrective rezoning of the
0.34 acre Moore property from RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density) to RO (Residential Office) and a corrective FLUM
amendment from Low Density Residential to Transitional.
Attachment:
* P&Z Staff Report
I
i
.PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH --- STAFF REPORT ---
---_._._--_._--_.._-~~----
MEETING DATE: October 17, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.B.
ITEM: Corrective FLill1 Amendments from Low Density Residential & Medium Density Residential
to Transitional & Rezonings from RM (Medium Density Residential to RO (Residential
Office) .
~ ~ ~ fll t---fl I , J rJr I 'U. I I' I l----f
I--
L-- to-- V.~( I ---iL..- - ~ -
L-- to-- ITI:E:7, , /-t I
- I 11 I I '-
. I I
- J I I
I-- II~I
- ' !--- J
- I W4~'" ""~ ~ [I I
- C!:
~
- .; I \ ~ ! '"w ...
I
Z / <.>
-
ffiiffiffi 0
"" LV~ N.L I
II I 'l!. I .. .1-_ I <.>
~ l' .:rir- -
~G'!l of<:)'\ ~ ' 1 ...
~...eV I i 7 z
OJ] i1111 oC-~~ . ' <(
1 ! ! oJ
Wllll ,1 ----. r. ...
=i:=l J-ii "\J j 1 II I .. <(
I 1 I j i ~I
GENERAL DATA:
Owner, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edi th Moore
Robert Chapin
Agent....................David Harden, City Manager
City of Delray Beach.
Location.................North side of George Bush Boulevard at
Andrews Avenue.
Property Size............O.74 Acres.
City Land Use PIan.......Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Proposed Land Use PIan...Transitional
"~~.nt Zoning...........RM (Multiple Family Residential -
~'..' Medium Density)
j;~ -
~.ed Zoning..........RO (Residential Office)
Adjacent Zoning...North: RM
East: RM
South: RM and SAD (Special Activities
District)
Wes t: RM and SAD
Existing Land Use........Two parcels, each developed with an
office structure and associated parking
landscaping.
Development Proposal.....Corrective FLUM amendment from Low
Density Residential and Medium Density
Residential to Transitional and
corrective rezonings fro. RH to RO.
Water Service............Existing on site.
Sewer service............Existing on site.
V,B.
. .
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOA R D:
The action before the Board is making a recommendation on
corrective rezonings from RM to RO and Small Scale Future Land
Use Plan amendments from Low Density Residential and Medium
Density Residential to Transitional for two parcels.
The subject properties are Moore's Landing, Parcell, located on
the west side of Andrews Avenue, north of George Bush Boulevard
and Lot 6, with the south 54.5 feet of Lot 7, Blue Seas, located
on the northeast corner of Andrews Avenue and George Bush
Boulevard. The two parcels have a total area of 0.74 acres.
Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency shall
review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with
respect to rezoning and/or FLUM Amendment of any property within
the city.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
The proposed amendment was requested by the owner of the
property located at 800 N. Andrews Avenue (formerly Tison
Real ty) . This parcel currently contains a structure housing a
non-conforming office structure and a permitted residential use.
In addition to the non-conforming use, the site also has a
conflict between the current Future Land Use Map designation
(Low Density Residential) and zoning (RM).
While reviewing the history of this parcel, staff discovered
three adjacent properties which either have inconsistencies
between FLUM and zoning or have non-conforming structures.
Three of the four parcels were considered for a FLUM amendment
from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential with
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 91-1. However, the FLUM amendment
was not transmitted with 91-1. Of the four parcels, two will be
considered for small scale FLUM amendments at this time, while
the remaining two (the two parcels located to the north of the
Moore parcel, developed with single family residences and
assigned a FLUM designation of Low Density Residential with RM
zoning) will be considered as a portion of Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 95-1.
The prC)perty located at 800 N. Andrews Avenue (formerly Tison
Realty) was annexed into the City with initial zoning of R-3 in
1963, via Ordinance G-508. A single family residence was
constructed on the property in 1963. The site was subsequently
converted to office use. In 1979, a residential unit was added
to the non-conforming office. The parcel was given the FLUM
designation of Low Density Residential with the adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan in 1989 and assigned to the RM zoning
district with the Citywide rezonings in 1990. Thus, there is a
conflict between the FLUM designation and zoning for the parcel.
As the property is developed with an existing office structure,
a FLUM amendment. to Transitional and a Rezoning to RO
(Residential Office) may be appropriate. These actions will
eliminate the
-,
. , P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 2
conflict between the City's FLUM and zoning designations and bring
the current use of the property into conformity with the LDRs.
The Chapin parcel, located at the northeast corner of Andrews
Avenue and George Bush Boulevard (1201 George Bush Boulevard), was
annexed in 1975 with initial zoning of RM-15. At that time
offices were permitted in multiple family zoning districts as
conditional uses. Conditional Use and Site Plan approval for the
construction of an office building were granted in 1975 and the
approved structure was constructed in 1979. The site has been in
use as an office since that time. With the adoption of the LDRs
in 1990, offices were deleted as a Conditional Use in the RM
district. Thus the office use on the parcel is now
non-conforming.
COM PRE HEN S I V E P LAN A N A L Y S I S:
The proposed FLUM amendments are being processed as Small Scale
Developments pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187 as amended by
Senate Bill 1882, effective April 8, 1992. This statute permits
any local government comprehensive land use amendments directly
related to proposed small scale development activities to be
approved without regard to statutory limits on the frequency of
consideration of amendments (twice a year), subject to the
following conditions:
* The amendment does not exceed either 10 acres of
nonresidential land or 10 acres of residential land with a
density of 10 units per acre or less;
* The cumulative effect of the amendments processed under this
section shall not exceed 60 acres annually; and,
* The proposed amendment does not involve the same property
owner's property within 200' of property granted a change
within a period of 12 months.
The two ,subject parcels contain a total area of 0.74 acres,
contain existing office developme~ts. They will receive the
Transi tioaal FLUM designation and RO zoning. Nei ther of the
parcels ,have been considered for a FLUM amendment nor has by
either of the two property owners been granted an amendment on any
property within 200' of the subject parcels. These parcels, along
with all other small scale amendments processed by the City in the
last year do not exceed the 60 acre limit.
Land Use Analysis:
Pursuant to Land Development Regulations Section 3.1.1(A) all land
uses and structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the
zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation.
The existing struct~res are not permitted in the current zoning
designation for the site' (RM), which is inconsistent with the
current Low Density Residential FLUM designation for one of the
parcels.
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 3
The current Future Land Use designations for the subject parcels
are Medium Density Residential (Chapin) and Low Density
Residential (Moore). The proposed FLUM designation for the
parcels is Transitional.
According to the definition of the Transitional FLUM Designation
in the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, can "In
some instances... provide for a transition between less intensive
residential use and commercial uses." This is the function
provided by this site. As the subject parcels are located
between an existing residential area with a mix of single and
multiple family units to the north and west and an existing four
story office structure, the FLUM designation is appropriate.
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S I S:
REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3)
Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the
approval of development applications, certain findings must
be made in a form which is part of the official record. This
may be achieved through information on the application, the
staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body
which has the authority to approve or deny the development
application. These findings relate to the following four
areas.
Future Land Use Map: The use or structures must be allowed in the
zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with
the land use designation.
The requested zoning change is from RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium Density) to RO (Residential Office).
The Residential Office zoning district is identified as
appropriate under the Transitional designation in Table T-6
of the Comprehensive PIan.
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.
As the sites are currently developed, no additional demand
for service capacity will be generated by this action. No
future development of the sites is proposed. A positive
finding can be made with respect to concurrency.
Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set forth
in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with
required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings) shall
be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to b.
made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted
Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a finding of
overall consistency.
.,
. . P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 4
A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following policy was
found:
Coastal Management Element Policy C-3.2: There shall be no change
in the intensity of land use within the barrier island...
The Transitional FLUM designation does permit development. of a
higher intensity than permitted under the current Low Density and
Medium Density Residential designations. While no increase in
intensity could be accommodated under the proposed RO zoning
regulations, the Transitional FLUM designation could theoretically
permit rezoning to the NC, POC, or POD zoning districts. However,
the proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings are corrective and will
merely render the existing uses conforming. Furthermore, rezoning
of either of the parcels to a higher intensity is be prohibited by
this policy. No increase in intensity will be created by the
proposed action.
Section 3.3.2 ( Standards for Rezoning Actions): The applicable
performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which
apply are as follows:
D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which
are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both
existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may
occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate
adverse impacts from the new use.
The subject properties are currently zoned RM. The
properties are adjacent to other RM zoned properties with an
existing office structure zoned SAD (Special Activities
District) to the south. Properties to the north, east, and
west are zoned RM and developed with a mix of multi-family,
duplex, and some single family residential. According to the
Comprehensive Plan, areas designated Transitional on the
Future Land Use Map can "In some instances.. . provide for a
transition between less intensive residential use and
commercial uses." This is the function provided by the
subject parcels. The two existing offices in residential
sty~e buildings act as an intermediate intensity between the
higher intensity office structure to the south and west and
the nearby residential development. The RO zoning
designation is appropriate for the Transi tional FLUM
designation and for this site. The zoning change and FLUM
amendment will reflect existing conditions and will not
adversely affect the compatibility of the property with
adjacent uses.
Standards "A," "B," and "e" do not apply to this property.
Section 2.4.5(0)(5) (Rezoninq Findinqs):
Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(0)(1) (Findings), in addition to
provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 5
finding that the rezoning fulfills one ot-the reasons for which
the rezoning change is being sought. These reasons include the
following:
a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was
originally established, in error;
b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make
the current zoning inappropriate;
c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as
allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it 1s
more appropriate for the property based upon
circumstances particular to the site and/or
neighborhood.
The applicable reason is "a," pursuant to the following:
The subject properties were developed pursuant to former Multiple
Family Residential zoning districts which permitted office uses as
Conditional Uses. At the time of the Citywide rezoning associated
with the adoption of the LDRs in 1990, the site remained in the RM
district. However, the adopted LDRs removed office uses from the
RM district at that time. This rendered the existing office uses
and structures non-conforming. Since the two sites were developed
with office structures that were residential in appearance, it
appears that the most appropriate zoning designation for these
properties was and is RO.
Additionally, reason "c" would also be appropriate. The existing
office uses are, in some respects, more appropriate than multiple
family residential development on these small parcels which
provide for a more gradual change in intensity from commercial to
residential.
LDR Compliance - Use:
Section 4.4.17 Residential Office (RO) District:
"The Residential Office District (RO) is created in order to
provide a very limited application of professional, office, and
similar intensity use to small parcels on properties designated as
Transitional on the Future Land Use Map..."
The subject properties meet the above described Purpose and Intent
of theRO district.
All uses in the structures are permitted in the RO district.
LDR Compliance - Development Standards:
As this is a developed property and no additions or physical
changes to the site are proposed as a part of this zoning change,
upgrading the site- to current development standards is not
required. However the following information is provided for the
record.
.,
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 6
Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix:
Both sites meet most development standards for RO zoning, per LDR
Sections 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix, and 4.4.17
Residential Office (RO) District, including setbacks, building
height, lot coverage, open space minimum lot size and minimum lot
dimensions. The Tison Realty building has a non-conforming rear
setback.
Section 4.6.9 Parking Requirements:
Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(4)(c) general office uses are required to
provide 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area for buildings
under 3,000 square feet or 3.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet for
structures greater. The Tison Realty site has a 1,352 square feet
of floor area, requiring 6 spaces plus 3 spaces to meet the
requirement for the upstairs apartment. Nine spaces are provided.
The Chapin site consists of a 5,550 square foot office structure,
requiring 20 spaces. Twenty-eight spaces are provided. Design
standards for parking spaces and aisleways are generally met on
the Chapin property. However, several non-conformities regarding
aisle widths and maneuvering area exist on the Tison Realty site.
Section 4.6.16 Landscaping:
A full review of landscaping requirements for the two sites was
not undertaken for this review. Current landscape requirements
are probably not fully met for the two parcels. However, neither
of the parcels were cited for non-compliance with the October 1,
1993 perimeter landscape requirements.
REV I E W B Y o THE R S:
The proposed rezonings and FLUM amendment's are not in a
geographic area requiring review by either the HPB (Historic
Preservation Board) , DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the
CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
Neighborhood Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a
500' radius of the subject property. A special certified notice
has been sent to each of the property owners of record.
Courtesy notices have been sent to the following homeowners
associations and citizens groups:
* Sandra Almy
Beach Property Owners Association
who have requested notification of petitions in that area.
Letters of objectl~n, if any, will be presented at the P & Z Board
meeting.
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 7
ASSESSMENT AND CON C L U 5-1 0 N:- --
The existing Low Density Residential and Medium Density FLUM
designations appear to have been assigned to the existing office
uses in error with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and FLUM
in 1989. Likewise, the current RM zoning appears to have been
retained in error for the two parcels at the time of the Citywide
Rezoning. The proposed rezoning to RO will not affect the
intensity of development on the site or the compatibility of the
si te with surrounding properties. A rezoning of this property
from RM to RO would allow for the continuation of and necessary
improvements to the existing facilities without being subject to
restrictions imposed on non-conforming properties. All required
positive findings can be made. The proposed rezonings and FLUM
amendments for the two parcels are appropriate.
A L T ERN A T I V E ACT ION S:
A. Continue with direction.
B. Recommend approval of rezonings from RM to RO and FLUM
amendments from Low Density Residential and Medium
Density Residential to Transitional for of the Moore
(f/k/a Tison Realty) and Chapin parcels.
C. Recommend denial rezonings and FLUM amendments for the
subject parcels, based on a failure to make positive
findings.
S T A F F R E COM MEN 0 A T ION:
Recommend approval of rezonings from RM to RO and FLUM amendments
from Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential to
Transitional for the two office parcels (Moore and Chapin
parcels), based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3
(Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations,
policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and Section 2.4.5(D)(5).
Report prepared by: Jeff Perkins, Planner
Reviewed by DD on:
Attachments:
* Zoning Map
* Future Land Use Map
Y:\PLNZN\MOOREREZ
.,
. .
II I~ f
...~ I I 1
') / I I
I ...
_ ITIJ :=:n C ~ -- ----- ._--~-~-_._-- '<
I I '"""""'i ""
-
I Q
""
I 0
I Q:'
I L I ) ~ I
I J~
-
I I ..J. _ A ( , 1 I I
. . ~, .,.
LA. - .~ ___.L.-_ I
'1 l- I I
I
~. I I I H-;- '~M
... - ;r: ~
If TJ .0 III i
- -
f- - , ~ STREfl
I R~ ~~-~,I~I .,vll
f- '--- lL I I
I-- I .I
'''1'\' C'vu,. H.E. ~
r I
S AI)J 0
1Il
\&
~
);(JV' (J
0
CD I
I I---
U I I I I--- ~
. -
>- ,-1-- ~
-- IRIV -
<( L.J
.3 ~ :!:: ~ Y-' I~ -
~ ()
<( ...
C1. - 0
~ I- ct:: r-'-AA" .... "
~ tf) l.t.J A ~.. -
<( J- r I I u
~ -~-< - -
o <( I-
U ~ ( 1<:1 cNn Of lYE - ~
<( ~ r I I I
f/~ <(
0::' -J
l- I--
~
~ .~ r l I \~ <(
-
I I
N N. ANDREWS AVENUE
P\..NININQ DEl' AlI'NEHT REZONINGS
QlY OF llEUlA Y BEAO\ F\,
-- OXJITAI. S4SC UAP $YS1DI -
--'"
T 1 J T I I~I 1
AN
11 / ='.--
~-~. ~
ITIJD -c
\7 I I """" -
--- <(
, 0
~
JqJ~L~ a:
f ) ~ I
1 1 -If)
h. r--r'
I
J
I 'i-'p~ AE!. T
r ~'-Cl 'Y f-o--L--- J
I -/ "/ -: I I~
I /
I I I .~~~
~
~ . I ~__
;c , I' r7~,rt
NED. DE/IJMY ~ . I i
\ STREET
I'" I fflJJ$f(t>>VJL ~ r-r1 I I
f- I.... H.E. ...... J I I
~ ailii RD.
, ( ~n In.! W ,y :)
J r j'}J~J!J':t r ~ I
@.(;.
@~~~I R1V
,
oprg~ I
I ~~A{;rj I
~ .
; I 1 r I ! z
/ >- I r- - <{"
I- RIV I---
~ ( UJ
,.-- I I // '---
.3 ...J
f-- ~ ~ t u
<It -
L...-ll. I- 0: "'- 0
~ (I) W '----
1-1 ~~(ll 11 A fjrj/ 'rt u
-
- -
~~~ I-
(J ~ ( .a ,wn I~ ~
< t r I I I Il='.... Z
- ~ <
a:: -.J
I- - I-
~
.: r J- I I \~ <
I J J ~
N N. ANDREWS AVENUE
-
PI..M'I.."l/G DC' A/mIENT F.L.U.M. AMENDMENT
a1Y 0( DEUlA 'f ItAOi, F\,
- 0IGfTAJ. &Ul" UAP St'S'1DI -
.,
-
CHAPIN, ARMSTRONG & BALLERANO
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1201 GEORGE BUSl1 BOULEVARD
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA-:j0480-7203
TELEP'"'ONE (407)272.'225
TELECOPIER (407) 272.4442
ROBERT D. CHAPIN' LECAL ASS/STANoTS
DAVID G. ARMSTRONG'
f"AYE A. WILLIAMS
..JAMES A. BALLERANO. ..JR.
CYNTHIA C, SEAMAN
, CERT,r'EO BY rLORIOA BAR SUSAN M. M.o.NISCALCO
."'c. '"Um '_0 ",.n. ~~\\~\t~
October 13, 1994 ~~ \'1> \qq~ r_
~~ '\jC\ ....\\\~\:>
B Li"",P ~O\""
y~~u r.~~
~\'v
\~\\,
Diane Dominquez ~~~.
Director, Planning and Zoning Department '? .
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: PC # 12-43-46-09-05-000-0060
Dear Ms. Dominquez:
On September 15th I received a letter from Jasmin Allen
indicating that Edith Moore, owner of the property located at the
northwest corner of George Bush Boulevard and Andrews Avenue, is
seeking rezoning of her property to Residential Office (RO)
District. As a result of Mrs. Moore's request, the City seeks to
rezone my law office building to RO as well.
I oppose Edith Moore's request to rezone her property to RO.
When I purchased my property in 1973, the zoning of Mrs. Moore's
property and my property was RM-15.
While I was a member of the City Council from 1977 to 1979,
and with the assistance of the Planning and Zoning Board, the City
Council rezoned a majority of the properties in Delray Beach to
preserve the residential character of our community. Specifically,
I recommended that the properties on Northeast 8th Street, now
known as George Bush Boulevard, east of the Intracoastal be
downzoned from RM-15 to RM-10.
In 1979, RM-IO zoning authorized professional offices as a
conditional use. I applied for and obtained a conditional use to
construct a professional office building. As such, I have been a
conforming use ever since. In contrast to my conforming use, Mrs.
Moore's property has been a non-conforming use. Until March of
this year, Tison Realty occupied the downstairs of Mrs. Moore's
duplex property. The upstairs is leased as a residential
apartment. The commercial use of the downstairs portion of Mrs.
Moore's property ha~ been abandoned and thus the downstairs port ion
..
Diane Dominquez
October 13, 1994
Page 2
can only be used for residential purposes.
In addition, an examination .of Mrs. Moore's property will
indicate that commercial usage is inappropriate with the existing
residential usage. Specifically, there are 15 apartments at
Waterway North and three apartments immediately west of' Edith
Moore's property. Edith Moore sold both parcels west of her
property for residential development, granting an easement for
ingress and egress across her property.
In summary, commercial usage of the downstairs portion of Mrs.
Moore's property has been abandoned, and to permit continuing
commercial use of the downstairs portion of Mrs. Moore's property
is inconsistent with existing residential usage.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
.. ~;~
RDC : dlb
.,
I
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER~
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM I J~i1 - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15. 1994
FIRST READING FOR ORDINANCE NO. 93-94 (CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
FOR CHAPIN PROPERTY)
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is first reading for Ordinance No. 93-94 which corrects the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation and zoning classification
for a 0.40 acre parcel located at 1201 George Bush Boulevard (known
as the Chapin law offices). The site has a conflict between the
current FLUM designation of Medium Density and current zoning of RM
(Medium Density Residential) and the existing use. The corrective
action is to change the land use designation from Medium Density to
Transitional and the zoning from aM to RO (Residential Office)
District.
The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at a
public hearing on October 17, 1994, and voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the corrective actions.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 93-94 on first reading. If
passed, a public hearing will be held on December 6, 1994.
~~ 5/0
ref:agmemo15
"
.
.
Ii ORDINANCE NO. 93-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, CORRECTING THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
TRANSITIONAL, AND CORRECTING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM aM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
DISTRICT TO RO (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE) DISTRICT, FOR A
PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED AT 1201 GEORGE BUSH BOULEVARD,
AS THE SAME IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN;
ELECTING TO PROCEED UNDER THE SINGLE HEARING ADOPTION
PROCESS FOR SMALL SCALE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS; AND
CORRECTING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA,
1994"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING
CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I
I
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the
Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, as being designated Medium Density Residential; and
WHEREAS, the property hereinafter described is shown on the
Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April,
1994, as being zoned aM (Medium Density Residential) District; and 1
I
i
WHEREAS, during review of a privately sponsored petition, it !
was determined by the Planning and Zoning Board to initiate a I
I
corrective action to resolve a nonconforming situation created by an I
inadvertent action of the City; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Planning
I
and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as Local Planning I
Agency, reviewed this item and voted unanimously to recommend approval I
of the corrective actions, based upon positive findings; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that the Future Land Use Map in
the Comprehensive Plan be corrected to reflect the revised land use i
i
designation, and that the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be corrected to reflect the revised I
,
zoning classification. I
i
~OW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: I
!
Section 1. That the legal description of the subject !
property is as follows:
I
I
I I
I
I
"
I Lot 6 and the South 54.5 feet of Lot 7, of the Plat
I of Blue Seas as recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 185,
of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The subject property is located at 1201 George Bush
Boulevard, at the northeast corner of Andrews Avenue
and George Bush Boulevard (known as Chapin law
offices); containing 0.40 acres, more or less. I
!
i
Section 2. That the Future Land Use Map in the I
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby I
,
corrected to ref lect a land use designation of Transitional for the I
subject property.
I
Section 3. That the City of Delray Beach elects I
to make i
this small scale amendment by having only adoption hearing, 1
an I
pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 163.3187(1)(c)4.
Section 4. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, dated April, 1994, be, and the same is hereby I
corrected to reflect a zoning classification of RO (Residential
Office) District for the subject property.
Section 5. That the Planning Director of said City shall,
upon the effective date of this ordinance, amend the Zoning Map of the
City of Delray Be~ch, Florida, to conform with the provisions of
Section 4 hereof.
Section 6. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 7. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 8. That this ordinance shall become effective as
follows: As to the rezoning, immediately upon passage on second and
final reading; as to the small scale land use plan amendment, the date
a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or
Administration Commission finding the amendment in compliance in
accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs
earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses
dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has
I
i
! - 2 - Ord. No. 93-94
Ii
I: I
I
I
I
I
--
-'- -_.---
_..
i
I become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made
effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status,
a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Department of I
Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2740 Centerview Drive,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100.
I
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session sec'ond and final I
on I
reading on this the day of I 1994. I
I
I
MAYOR
ATTEST:
I
I
,
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
\
- 3 - Ord. No. 93-94
!: ;
Ii I
I
I
I
'1
#Pr
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO:
THRU:
ONING
FROM:
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
CORRECTIVE REZONING FROM RM (MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL - MEDIUM DENSITY) TO RO (RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE) AND FLUM AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL TO TRANSITIONAL FOR A PARCEL OF LAND
(LOT 6 AND THE SOUTH 54.5 FEET OF LOT 7, BLUE SEAS
SUBDIVISION A/K/A CHAPIN LAW OFFICE).
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the Commission is the approval on first
reading of a corrective rezoning of a parcel (Lot 6 and the
south 54.5 feet of Lot 7, Blue Seas subdivision) from RM
(Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) to RO
(Residential Office) and a corrective FLUM amendment from Medium
Density Residential to Transitional.
The subject property is the Chapin property, a 0.40 acre parcel
developed with an office structure. The property is located on
the northeast corner of Andrews Avenue and of George Bush
Boulevard.
BACKGROUND:
The parcel which is affected by this action is an existing
office located at 1201 George Bush Boulevard. The office was
established in 1975 with approval of a conditional use pursuant
to the' previous RM-15 zoning district. The site was rendered
non-conforming in 1990 when offices were removed as conditional
uses in the RM zoning districts with the adoption of the LDRs.
The proposed FLUM amendment is being processed as a Small Scale
Development pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. This statute
permits any local government comprehensive land use amendments
directly related to .proposed small scale development activities
.
city Commission Documentation
Corrective Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Chapin
Page 2
to be approved without regard to statutory limits on the frequency
of consideration of amendments (twice a year), subject to several
conditions. All of those conditions are met for the parcel. A
more complete description of 163.3187 and the subject parcel is
contained in the P & Z Board staff report.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed corrective
rezoning and FLUM amendment at a public hearing during its regular
meeting of October 17, 1994. No objections or concerns were
raised by the Board or by the public at the meeting. The Board
unanimously recommended approval of the proposed rezoning and FLUM
amendment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approve on first reading a corrective rezoning of the
0.40 acre Chapin property from RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density) to RO (Residential Office) and a corrective FLUM
amendment from Medium Density Residential to Transitional.
Attachment:
* P&Z Staff Report
.,
.PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH --- STAFF REPORT ---
.-- - .~- ._--"-- .-
MEE TING DATE: October 17, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.B.
ITEM: Corrective FLill1 Amendments from Low Density Residential & ~ledium Density Residential
to Transitional & Rezonings from RM (Medium Density Residential to RO (Residential
Office) .
.~ f-- -'- I; I r----i, I T I 'f I ]n~ 1 i I I I
I . V.-r I J ~ I \---+-_ ~ --I. - 7
, = ITI:E:7/ , I---( I I 1, i i '-
_: I - J J I 1 I I '-- ,. -:- I ,-
= ~,"- 7
== fWArrRWAY NORTH CONDO . I I:
_ \ S"'!Ll I...
= Z J I i m"" T I <.>
-J \ I I 0
C{:>RC[ ..~ ~~oc N L i 1
rrDJ~ffiffi . ~! T~"'!!.. ~ ~ .1.... == ~
liLT I I )l~d ~l :T ! >-
r:-.. ~" eV~ r I I. I Z
rItP I ! IT t 1 oc."~~ 'I' ~ ~
UllJ{11 i 1 ---.. ,,' j i · I-
~ ST I., I '<
~ 1-11 \J I 11 J / I I. .
GENERAL DATA:
Owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edi th Moore
Robert Chapin
Agent...~................David Harden, City Manager
City of Delray Beach.
Location.................North side of George Bush Boulevard at
Andrews Avenue.
Property She......... .. .0.74 Acres.
city Land Use Plan.. .....Low DensIty ResIdentIal
Medium DensIty Residential
Proposed Land Use Plan...TransItional
Current Zoning........ ...~~ (MultIple Family ResidentIal -
Medium Density)
Proposed zoning..........RO (Residential Office)
Adjacent Zoning...North: ~~
East: RM
South: ~~ and SAD (Special Activities
DistrIct)
West: ~~ and SAD
Existing Land Use... .....Two parcels, each developed wIth an
office structure and associated parking
landscaping.
Development Proposal.....CorrectIve FLUM amendment from Low
DensIty ResIdential and MedIum Density
ResIdential to Transitional and
corrective rezonings from RH to RO.
Water Service....... ... ..Existing on site.
Sewer ServIce............ExIstlng on sIte.
V. B.
.
. -
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOA R 0:
The action before the Board is making a recommendation on
corrective rezonings .. from RM to RO and Small Scale Future Land
Use Plan amendments from Low Density Residential and Medium
Density Residential to Transitional for two parcels.
The subject properties are Moore's Landing, Parcell, located on
the west side of Andrews Avenue, north of George Bush Boulevard
and Lot 6, with the south 54.5 feet of Lot 7, Blue Seas, located
on the northeast corner of Andrews Avenue and George Bush
Boulevard. The two parcels have a total area of 0.74 acres.
Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E), the Local Planning Agency shall
review and make a reconunendation to the Ci ty Conunission with
respect to rezoning and/or FLUM Amendment of any property within
the City.
B A C K G R 0 UNO:
The proposed amendment was requested by the owner of the
property located at 800 N. Andrews Avenue (formerly Tison
Real ty) . This parcel currently contains a structure housing a
non-conforming office structure and a permitted residential use.
In addition to the non-conforming use, the site also has a
conflict between the current Future Land Use Map designation
(Low Density Residential) and zoning (RM).
While reviewing the history of this parcel, staff discovered
three adjacent properties which either have inconsistencies
between FLUM and zoning or have non-conforming structures.
Three of the four parcels were considered for a FLUM amendment
from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential with
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 91-l. However, the FLUM amendment
was not transmitted with 91-1. Of the four parcels, two will be
considered for small scale FLUM amendments at this time, while
the remaining two (the two parcels located to the north of the
Moore parcel, developed with single family residences and
assigned a FLUM designation qf Low Density Residential with RM
zoning) will be considered as a portion of Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 95-1.
The property located at 800 N. Andrews Avenue (formerly Tison
Realty) was annexed into the City with initial zoning of R-3 in
1963, via Ordinance G-S08. A single family residence was
constructed on the property in 1963. The site was subsequently
converted to office use. In 1979, a residential unit was added
to the non-conforming office. The parcel was given the FLUM
designation of Low Density Residential with the adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan in 1989 and assigned to the RM zoning
district with the citywide rezonings in 1990. Thus, there is a
conflict between the FLUM designation and zoning for the parcel.
As the property i~ developed with an existing office structure,
a FLUM amendment to Transitional and a Rezoning to RO
(Residential Office) may be appropriate. These actions will
eliminate the
"
. , P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 2
- -.. --_._---
conflict between the City's FLUM and zoning designations and bring
the current use of the property into conformity with the LORs.
The Chapin parcel, located at the northeast corner of Andr~ws
Avenue and George Bush Boulevard (1201 George Bush Boulevard), was
annexed in 1975 with' initial zoning of RM-15. At that time
offices were permitted in multiple family zoning districts as
conditional uses. Conditional Use and Site Plan approval for the
construction of an office building were granted in 1975 and the
approved structure was constructed in 1979. The site has been in
use as an office since that time. With the adoption of the LDRs
in 1990, offices were deleted as a Conditional Use in the RM
district. Thus the off ice use on the parcel is now
non-conforming.
COM PRE HEN S I V E P LAN A N A ~ Y S I S:
The proposed FLUM amendments are being processed as Small Scale
Developments pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187 as amended by
Senate Bill 1882, effective April 8, 1992. This statute permits
any local government comprehensive land use amendments directly
related to proposed small scale development activities to be
approved without regard to statutory limits on the frequency of
consideration of amendments (twice a year), subject to the
following conditions:
* The amendment does not exceed either 10 acres of
nonresidential land or 10 acres of residential land with a
density of 10 units per acre or less;
* The cumulative effect of the amendments processed under this
section shall not exceed 60 acres annually; and,
* The proposed amendment does not involve the same property
owner's property within 200' of property granted a change
within a period of 12 months.
The two subject parcels cqntain a total area of 0.74 acres,
contain existing office developme~ts. They will receive the
Transi tlonal FLUM designation and RO zoning. Neither of the
parcels have been considered for a FLUM amendment nor has by
either of the two property owners been granted an amendment on any
property within 200' of the subject parcels. These parcels, along
with all other small scale amendments processed by the City in the
last year do not exceed the 60 acre limit.
Land Use Analysis:
Pursuant to Land Development Regulations Section 3.1.1(A) all land
uses and structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the
zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation.
The existing structures are not permitted in the current zoning
designation for the site (RM), which is inconsistent with the
current Low Density Residential FLUM designation for one of the
parcels.
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 3
Th~~c~rrent Future Land-Us-e~-designations for the subject parcels
are Medium Density Residential (Chapin) and Low Density
Residential (Moore). The proposed FLUM designation for the
parcels is Transitional.
According to the definition of the Transitional FLUM Designation
in the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, can "In
some instances... provide for a transition between less intensive
residential use and commercial uses." This is the function
provided by this site. As the subject parcels are located
between an existing residential area with a mix of single and
multiple family units to the north and west and an existing four
story office structure, the FLUM designation is appropriate.
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S I S:
REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3)
Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the
approval of development applications, certain findings must
be made in a form which is part of the official record, This
may be achieved through information on the application, the
staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body
which has the authority to approve or deny the development
application. These findings relate to the following four
areas.
Future Land Use Map: The use or structures must be allowed in the
zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with
the land use designation.
The requested zoning change is from RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium Density) to RO (Residential Offic:e).
The Residential Office zoning district is identified as
appropriate under the Transitional designation in Table T-6
of the Comprehensive Plan.
Concurrency. Facilities which are provided by, or through, the
City sball be provided to new development concurrent with issuance
of a C.,t1ficate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided
pursuan;" to levels of service established within the Comprehensive
Plan.
As the sites are currently developed, no additional demand
for service capacity will be generated by this action. No
future development of the sites is proposed. A positive
finding can be made with respect to concurrency.
Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set forth
in Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) along with
required findings in Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings) shall
be the basis upon ~hich a finding of overall consistency is to be
made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted
Comprehensive Plan may be used in the making of a finding of
overall consistency.
.,
. . P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 4
A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following policy was
found:
Coastal Management Element POlicy C-3.2: There shall be no change
in the intensity of land use within the barrier island...
The Transitional FLUM designation does permit development of a
higher intensity than permitted under the current Low Density and
Medium Density Residential designations. While no increase in
intensi ty could be accommodated under the proposed RO zoning
regulations, the Transitional FLUM designation could theoretically
permit rezoning to the NC, POC, or POD zoning districts. However,
the proposed FLUM amendments and rezonings are corrective and will
merely render the existing uses conforming. Furthermore, rezoning
of either of the parcels to a higher intensity is be prohibited by
this policy. No increase in intensity will be created by the
proposed action.
Section 3.3.2 ( Standards for Rezoning Actions): The applicable
performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which
apply are as follows:
D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which
are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses both
existing and proposed I or that if an incompatibility may
occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate
adverse impacts from the new use.
The subject properties are currently zoned RM. The
properties are adjacent to other RM zoned properties with an
existing office structure zoned SAD (Special Activities
District) to the south. Properties to the north, east, and
west are zoned RM and developed with a mix of multi-family,
duplex, and some single family residential. According to the
Comprehensive Plan, areas designated Transitional on the
Future Land Use Map can "In some instances... provide for a
transition between less intensive residential use and
commercial uses. .. This is the function provided by the
subject parcels. The two existing offices in residential
s~~a buildings act as an intermediate intensity between the
hJiher intensity office structure to the south and west and
the nearby residential development. The RO zoning
designation is appropriate for the Transitional FLUM
designation and for this site. The zoning change and FLUM
'amendment will reflect existing conditions and will not
adversely affect the compatibility of the property with
adjacent uses.
Standards "A," "B," and "c" do not apply to this property.
Section 2.4.5(D)(5) (Rezoning Findings):
Pursuant to Section 2~4.5(D)(1) (Findings), in addition to
provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a
.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 5
finding that the rezoning fulfills one- of-the reasons for which
the rezoning change 1s being sought. These reasons include the
following: -------
a. That the zoning had previously been changed, or was
originally established, in error;
b. That there has been a change in circumstances which make
the current zoning inappropriate;
c. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as
allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that 1 t 1s
more appropriate for the property based upon
circumstances particular to the site and/or
neighborhood.
The applicable reason is "a," pursuant to the following:
The subject properties were developed pursuant to former Multiple
Family Residential zoning districts which permitted office uses as
Conditional Uses. At the time of the Citywide rezoning associated
with the adoption of the LDRs in 1990, the site remained in the RM
district. However, the adopted LDRs removed office uses from the
RM district at that time. This rendered the existlng office uses
and structures non-conforming. Since the two sites were developed
with office structures that were residential in appearance, it
appears that the most appropriate zoning designation for these
properties was and is RO.
Additionally, reason "c" would also be appropriate. The existing
office uses are, in some respects, more appropriate than multiple
family residential development on these small parcels which
provide for a more gradual change in intensity from commercial to
residential.
LDR Compliance - Use:
Section 4.4.17 Residential Office (RO) District:
"The Residential Office District (RO) is created in order to
provid.:~C. ..,.ery limited application of professional, office, and
simila~~~ensity use to small parcels on properties designated as
Transit'.nal on the Future Land Use Map. . ."
The subject properties meet the above described Purpose and Intent
of the RO district.
All uses in the structures are permitted in the RO district.
LDR Compliance - Development Standards:
As this is a developed property and no additions or physical
changes to the site are proposed as a part of this zoning change,
upgrading the site to current development standards is not
required. However the following information is provided for the
record.
.,
P&Z staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 6
Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix: ---
Both sites meet most development standards for RO zoning, per LDR
Sections 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix, and 4.4.17
Residential Office (RO) District, including setbacks, building
height, lot coverage, open space minimum lot size and minimum lot
dimensions. The Tison Realty building has a non-conforming rear .
setback.
Section 4.6.9 Parking Requirements:
Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(4)(c) general office uses are required to
provide 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area for buildings
under 3,000 square feet or 3.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet for
structures greater. The Tison Realty site has a 1,352 square feet
of floor area, requiring 6 spaces plus 3 spaces to meet the
requirement for the upstairs apartment. Nine spaces are provided.
The Chapin site consists of a 5,550 square foot office structure,
requiring 20 spaces. Twenty-eight spaces are provided. Design
standards for parking spaces and aisle\-,Tays are generally met on
the Chapin property. However, several non-conformities regarding
aisle widths and maneuvering area exist on the Tison Realty site.
Section 4.6.16 Landscaping:
A full review of landscaping requirements for the two sites was
not undertaken for this review. Current landscape requirements
are probably not fully met for the two parcels. However, neither
of the parcels were cited for non-compliance with the October 1 ,
1993 perimeter landscape requirements.
REV I E W B Y o THE R S:
The proposed rezonings and FLUM amendment's are not in a
geographic area requiring review by either the HPB (Historic
Preservation Board), DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the
CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
Neiqhborhood Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a
500' radius of the subject property. A special certified notice
has been sent to each of the property owners of record.
Courtesy notices have been sent to the following homeowners
associations and citizens groups:
* Sandra Almy
Beach Property Owners Association
who have requested notification of petitions in that area.
Letters of objectipn, if any, will be presented at the P & Z Board
meeting.
P&Z Staff Report
Rezoning and FLUM Amendment for Moore and Chapin
Page 7
ASS E SSM E N T AND CON C L U S -I ON:-----
The existing Low Density Residential and Medium Density FLUM
designations appear to have been assigned to the existing office
uses in error with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and FLUM
in 1989. Likewise, the current RM zoning appears to have been
retained In error for the two parcels at the time of the Citywide
Rezoning. The proposed rezoning to RO will not affect the
intensity of development on the site or the compatibility of the
site with surrounding properties. A rezoning of this property
from RM to RO would allow for the continuation of and necessary
improvements to the existing facilities without being subject to
restrictions imposed on non-conforming properties. All required
positive findings can be made. The proposed rezonings and FLUM
amendments for the two parcels are appropriate.
A L T ERN A T I V E ACT ION S:
A. Continue with direction.
B. Recommend approval of rezonings from RM to RO and FLUM
amendments from Low Density Residential and Medium
Density Residential to Transitional for of the Moore
(f/k/a Tison Realty) and Chapin parcels.
C. Recommend denial rezonings and FLUM amendments for the
subject parcels, based on a failure to make positive
findings.
S T A F F R E COM MEN D A T ION:
Recommend approval of rezonings from RM to RO and FLUM amendments
from Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential to
Transitional for the two office parcels (Moore and Chapin
parcels), based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3
(Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations,
policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and Section 2.4.5(D)(5).
Report prepared by: Jeff Perkins, Planner
Reviewed by DD on:
Attachments:
* Zoning Map
* Future Land Use Map
Y:\PLNZN\MOOREREZ
I
1 lJ I ~
il'", I~ 1
[01 IJ -.. I I~I~----~ --~ -______n_ --- ~ ~
I \J' f) I -:: <
_ CJ I ~
J ~
L I I~'
1- rt I J~ /
~ ~~.;a A (1 1 I I
tAN&' . - l ~ ,- - - L- - 7
!, -
,1 ,
~: I I I 5 J\1""t. I
, --'-
- ~ -t-~- .....
'~ _ ~ W !IV.
rr TT ~, "' i
~,?" " : RMN~ ~~~,~Ism~ ~
SAI~ -- \~~, ~
JJ ~
~
L.l~V 0
I
CD I
~
U 11 'I -r' ~ ~
i-- >- (~"AAnli lRIV I I I ~ - = '<(
< rl - W
~~ ~~~ // ....c-- ()
:' ~::: F -t-J'A ~ .~ ~_ o.
~ ~ I- ( I I I .., ~ - ~
o <( ..~ I-
o;r: ( I~ ""n OF I\!( -~ - <:
;1 III J" 9:
: (I \~ / <
I I I
~ N. ANDREWS AVENUE
~~a DEPUlIlDfl REZONINGS
a T't cr DEI.IIA Y 8UO<<. ...
-- oarAl. &(SC I/AI' $YS7DI -
I J III~ I tJ::
i."
I ' ~~. (
[]]o <
- I I --=::
..... <(
-
, Q
I~
~ [TIJ~ j
I ........ I J I ~
/gj /:
I 1
... ~- ~'~rn>' I 'I 1 I
~, q~IJfi!!:ri
[ ~~ ~a. y,,;\. J '- -- - I 7
I I'F:W
( I ~ I I
-
I ^' ~t
~ J I .~ J~~
,~-- -i l... " .:.....,
~ ~ [I 1'~~J11
NEt), DElYSIn' I i
. STRUT
I ffl/J~()MlJL \J-r1 I I
..
I
,,, " ~o W.E. J I
, ( S( ITM W \ ,. =>
@,I). ~~/JI!J~ ~
@~~~I ~
RIV
I
(}p~~ II Ilil.
~~AC~ I
I
,
~ 111 I I 'IT~- ~
! >- '--- '<('
- ~ )RIVE -
< - lU
- .3 :~( I I 1// u
~ f--- 0
'-- .... lr "<
II) I.U -
- -
~: rL I III I nJ)rd 11 (J
:- I---
- -
~. S4 ....
(J 3:: ( I~ ,..,n DRIVE - ~
'< ~ r I I I I I - - <{"
lr ....J
.... - I-
L
~ r J- I I \~ <
, J I j
J
N N. ANDREWS AVENUE
---
PVJ-'IO/G OO'~'lIIon F.L.U.M. AMENDMENT
01Y or DEl.JlA 'f 8tAOi, FI.
- 0IGfT'A! BASE" IIAP S'fS1EJt -
..
-
CHAPIN, AR}{STRONG & BALLERANO
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
'201 GCORCC BUSH BOULCVARD
------ -- - DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA-33483-7203
TClC""ONC (4071 272"225
TCLECOPIE~ (4071272.4442
ROBERT D. CHAPIN' lECAlASSISTANTS
DAVID G. ARMSTRONG'
.JAMES A. BALLERANO. .JR. ,AYE A. WILLIAMS
CYNTHIA C, SEAMAN
· CE:~r,"'CO BY "LORIOA eAR SUSAN M. t,lANISCALCO
w,e". '"um..o ",.." t~\~'l'
October 13, 1994 ~~ \~ \~q~ G
~~ t;J\'\ ~\\~
D .~~~, ~O
D Y lu-u,u r. 9.... t..
~J"
. . .. ,,-\~0
Dl.ane DOml.nquez.. \.X,'\"
Director, Plannl.ng and Zonl.ng Department ~ .
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: PC # 12-43-46-09-05-000-0060
Dear Ms. Dominquez:
On September 15th I received a letter from Jasmin Allen
indicating that Edith Moore, owner of the property located at the
northwest corner of George Bush Boulevard and Andrews Avenue, is
seeking rezoning of her property to Residential Office (RO)
District. As a result of Mrs. Moore's request, the City seeks to
rezone my law ,office building to RO as well.
I oppose Edith Moore's request to rezone her property to RO.
When I purchased my property in 1973, the zoning of Mrs. Moore's
property and my property was RM-lS.
While I was a member of the City Council from 1977 to 1979,
and with the assistance of the Planning and Zoning Board, the City
Council rezoned a majority of the properties in Delray Beach to
preserve the residential character of our community. Specifically,
I recQJM\ended that the properties on Northeast 8th Street, now
known as George Bush Boulevard, east of the Intracoastal be
downzoned from RM-15 to RM-10.
In 1979, RM-lO zoning authorized professional offices as a
conditional use. I applied for and obtained a conditional use to
construct a professional office building. As such, I have been a
conforming use ever since. In contrast to my conforming use, Mrs.
Moore's property has been a non-conforming use. Until March of
this year, Tison Realty occupied the downstairs of Mrs. Moore's
duplex property. The upstairs is leased as a residential
apartment. The commercial use of the downstairs portion of Mrs.
Moore's property ha.s been abandoned and thus the downstairs portion
..
Diane Dominquez
October 13, 1994
Page 2
can only be used for residential purposes.
In addition, an examination .of Mrs. Moore's property will
indicate that commercial usage is inappropriate with the existing
residential usage. Specifically, there are 15 apartments at
Waterway North and three apal:tments imr:1ediately west of. Edith
Moore's property. Edith Moore sold both parcels west of her
property for residential development, granting an easement for
ingress and egress across her property.
In summary, commercial usage of the downstairs portion of Mrs.
Moore's property has been abandoned, and to permit continuing
commercial use of the downstairs portion of Mrs. Moore's property
is inconsistent with existing residential usage.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
.. ~~
RDC:dlb
'f
.
. .
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER tJJt1
SUBJECT: I~ C -
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is first reading for Ordinance No. 61-94 which annexes an
11.63 acre undeveloped portion of Rockland Park Subdivision with
initial zoning of RL (Low Density Residential - 3 to 6 units per
acre). The subject property is located on the west side of
Military Trail, approximately 2,800 feet north of Atlantic Avenue.
The applicant initially applied for annexation with initial zoning
of RM (Medium Density Residential - 6 to 12 units per acre). When
the petition was considered by the Planning and Zoning Board at
public hearing on July 18, 1994, the recommendation was to approve
the annexation with initial zoning of RL. On August 2, 1994, the
City Commission voted unanimously to transmit the associated land
use plan amendment from County Low Density (3 units/acre) to City
Medium Density for this property as part of Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 94-2. At the same time, the Commission indicated their
support for RL zoning as opposed to the requested RM zoning. The
applicant has since amended the annexation petition to reflect
initial zoning of RL (Low Density Residential).
On August 16, 1994, Ordinance No. 61-94 was presented to the
Commission for first reading. It was tabled, pending further
discussion of the City's annexation policy for properties in the
reserve area. At the October 4th workshop, staff was directed to
proceed with the annexation of the area west of Military Trail in
timely fashion and to process voluntary annexation petitions such
as Rockland Park as they are received. Inasmuch as we are now at
the adoption stage for Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2, it is
appropriate to proceed with concurrent annexation of the property
prior to affixing the official land use designation.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 61-94 on first reading. If
passed, a public hearing will be held on December 6, 1994.
p~ S-O
ref:agmem06
"
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 61-94
AN ORDI NANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, A PART OF ROCKLAND PARK SUBDIVISION, LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF MILITARY TRAIL APPROXIMATELY
2,800 FEET NORTH OF ATLANTIC AVENUE, AS MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, WHICH LAND IS
CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY;
REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE
SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
OF SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF TO RL
(LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT; PROVIDING A
GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Andre Baldanza, Richard Baldanza, Jessica Olmsted,
Philip Polizzotto, and Marie Salanitri are the fee-simple owners of a
part of Rockland Park Subdivision, as the same is more particularly
described herein; and
WHEREAS, Cari A. Podesta, Esquire, as duly authorized agent
for the fee-simple owners as hereinabove named, has requested by
petition to have the subject property annexed into the municipal
limits of the City of Delray Beach; and
WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is
contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida; and
I
WHEREAS, the designation of a zoning classification is part I
of the annexation proceeding, and provisions of Land Development I
Regulations Chapter Two have been followed in establishing the I
proposed zoning designation; and I
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach has heretofore been
authorized to annex lands in accordance with Section 171.044 of the
Florida Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY.OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, hereby annexes to said City the
following described land located in Palm Beach County, Florida, which
lies contiguous to said City to-wit:
I
.,
Lots 14 through 26, inclusive, Block 2 (less the
easterly 33.41 feet thereof for right-of-way for SR.
809) , and Lots 1 through 26, inclusive, Block 3 (less
the easterly 34.02 feet thereof for right-of-way for
sa 809), ROCKLAND PARK, according to the Plat thereof
recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 23, of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida;
TOGETHER WITH the unimproved 50 ft. road right-of-way I
I
for Mazza Drive, and the unimproved 25 ft. road
right-of-way (McGovern Lane) directly adjacent to the
south of Lots 14 through 26, inclusive, Block 3, and I
the unimproved 25 ft. road right-of-way lying west of
and adjacent to Lot 14, Block 2, Mazza Drive road I
right-of-way, Lots 13 and 14, Block 3, and McGovern I
Lane road right-of-way, all lying within the Plat of
ROCKLAND PARK, as recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 23,
of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The subj ect property is located on the west side of
Military Trail, approximately 2,800 feet north of
Atlantic Avenue; containing 11.63 acres, . more or I
less.
Section 2. That the boundaries of the City of Delray Beach,
I
Florida, are hereby redefined to include therein the above-described
parcels and said land is hereby declared to be wi thin the corporate
limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
Section 3. That Chapter Two of the Land Development
Regulations has been followed in the establishment of a zoning
classification in this ordinance and the parcels hereinabove described
are hereby declared to be in Zoning District RL (Low Density
Residential) as defined by existing ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach.
Section 4. That the land hereinabove described shall
immediately become subject to all of the franchises, privileges,
immunities, debts, obligations, liabilities, ordinances and laws to
which lands in the City of Delray Beach are now or may be subjected,
including .the Stormwater Management Assessment levied by the City
1 pursuant to its ordinances and as required by Florida Statutes Chapter
197, and persons residing thereon shall be deemed citizens of the City
of Delray Beach, Florida.
I
, - 2 - Ord. No. 61-94
,
i
I
I
II I
,I
,.~,-
I Section 5. That this annexation of the subject property,
I
i including adjacent roads, alleys, or the like, if any, shall not be
I deemed acceptance by the City of any maintenance responsibility for
I
such roads, alleys, or the like, unless otherwise specifically
initiated by the City pursuant to current requirement. and conditions.
Section 6. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 7. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 8. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the day of , 1994.
MAYOR
!'
ATTEST:
City Clerk I
First Reading I
Second Reading
-I
- 3 - Ord. No. 61-94
I
I
Ii
I!
-,
I r I i I T I 1Ir--'
0 -
j;::S 1- I i?=1
-
i ; v -. & I .. CT.
I I I I I I I I tJ
a ~ c
CONUI ~
I DII'4 I' .. I
J "
:JT. II.
af ~
..J
jlJ -
c(
a:
=1
-. .
pO' T OffIcE 'I .--;;"
~~r ~ DfI'lI I T
~ l ~ IINM
HIGHPOINT WEST -aTY~ ~l
I ~. _...:.... !
~ I
__11
r- I
I
SPENCE I ~'-'-'I ~ ._,.....
PROPERTY >-a a '
a: I, ~ 91 -
I jw.Nla
c(
... id
:;- I
P1WnIOClD
:::Ii IT
- ----- .-.
- ern lMTS - ~;;:r:
;;;; _ ~...~
~...-< ~ Q Sl-~
~~ ~\.....c sQvP'
~ v.p.f-~~ I
I
I
"I: I
\ \ -
0....1
U .... ,
I
I
I
.L - -
I 1 i
I . - I
-
( - aTY LMTS - ATLANTIC
-
N
-
PUMlN: 1lIP1lt1UDl1 ANNEXATION
aTY tit DWtAY KAQ4, ~
"
-- D/(JIfA/. 84.51' IIAI' Sl'$7DI --
_..",~_.-"_.._..._,"
CARl A. PODESTA, P.A.
11380 Prosperity Farms Road, Suite 210B
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410
Carl Sussman Podesta TeJepboae (407) 627.0469
Attorney at Law Pas (407) 624-4443
November 10, 1994
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Jasmin Allen, Planner
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W: 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Re: Rockland Park Subdivision/Applications for Annexation, Rezoning and Land Use Plan
Amendment
Dear Ms. Allen:
In response to your letter of October 25, 1994, enclosed please find the following
original documents which have been executed by Andre Baldan7.a, Richard BaJdan7.J1, Jessica
Olmsted, Phil Polizzotto, and Marie Salanibi, respectively, as the owners of the property
referenced above:
1. Owner's Affidavit Regarding Stormwater Management Assessment;
2. Owner's Consent and Agency Designation for Land Use Plan Amendment;
3. Owner's Consent and Agency Designation for Annexation Application; and
4. Owner's Consent and Agency Designation for Rezoning Application.
As the Owners have appointed me their agent for the purpose of processing the
referenced applications, they have authorized me to formally request that the City modify
the Rezoning Application to reflect the RL (residential low - 3 to 6 units per acre) zoning
classification in lieu of the RM designation originally requested by the prior applicant, Mr.
Jeffrey Kukes.
If you.~baft any questions regarding this letter or enclosures, please contact me
immediately... be in attendance at the City Commission hearing on November 15, 1994
and would ~te it if you will let me know whether any back up material will be
provided or available in connection with this hearing. Thank you.
Sincerely,
CaUQ.~
Carl A. Podesta
Enclosures
.'
'.
. oK.
~
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
~-
THRU:
".
FROM:
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
ANNEXATION OF A 11. 63 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND (A PORTION
OF ROCKLAND PARK SUBDIVISION) AND INITIAL ZONING OF RL
(MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - LOW DENSITY.
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the commission is the approval on first
reading of the annexation and initial zoning of RL (Multiple
Family Residential - Low Density) for a portion of the Rockland
Park Subdivision.
The subject property is a 11.63 acre vacant parcel, located on
the west side of Military Trail, approximately 2800 feet north
of Atlantic Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
The site is an 11. 63 acre undeveloped portion of the Rockland
Park subdivision (total acreage 20.8). It is located in
unincorporated Palm Beach County, within the City's designated
planning and service area.
In 1989, this property was given an advisory Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) designation of Medium Density Residential. It is
designated on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as LR-3
(Low Density Residential - 3 units per acre). The applicant has
applied for annexation of the parcel into the City with an
initial zoning of RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium
Densi ty) . An application for a Future Land Use Map amendment
from the current County designation of LR-3 (Low Residential - 3
units per acre) to the City's Medium Density Residential
designation is being processed simultaneously.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board considered a request for
annexation with initial zoning of RM at its regular meeting of
July 18, 1994. At that meeting a number of residents of
adjacent properties expressed concerns over the effects of the
,
City Commission Documentation
Rockland Park Annexation and Initial Zoning
Page 2
proposed density on their communities. They felt that
development at the RM maximum density of 12 units per acre would
be incompatible with the surrounding densities (Approximately
6-7 d.u./acre in High Point West and 3 d.u./acre in the
developed portion of Rockland Park). Other concerns related to
the possible height of structures developed pursuant to the RM
regulations and the possibility of development of the parcel as a
rental community. The Board agreed with the residents with
regard to the compatibility of the densities and recommended
approval of the annexation with an initial zoning of RL
(Multiple Family Residential - Low Density, 3-6 units per acre).
The annexation and initial zoning were considered in conjunction
with a change in the FLUM designation from County LR-3 to City
Medium Density Residential. The P & Z Board voted unanimously
to recommend transmittal of the amendment to Medium Density
Residential. On August 2, 1994 the City Commission voted
unanimously to transmit the amendment to Medium Density
Residential to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) as a
portion of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2. At that meeting,
the Commission heard comments from area residents regarding the
potential density, and indicated their support for an RL zoning
designation as opposed to the requested RM.
PREVIOUS CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERATION:
The Commission first considered the annexation and initial
zoning at its meeting of August 16, 1994. At that meeting, the
Commission again heard comments from area residents regarding
the potential density. The Commission raised concerns regarding
the City's policies for annexations west of Military Trail.
There was a concern that the annexation was occurring in a
"piecemeal" fashion. Direction was given to discuss the future
of the reserve annexation at a workshop session. In the
meantime the Commission voted unanimously to table the proposed
annexation and initial zoning.
The Commission considered the existing policies and
al ternati,ves regarding the reserve annexation area at its
Workshop Meeting of October 4, 1994. At the workshop the
Commission directed staff to proceed with the annexation of the
area west of Military Trail in a timely fashion. Regarding the
processing of voluntary annexations such as Rockland Park, the
Commission directed that they are to be processed as received.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approve on first reading the annexation of an 11.63
acre portion of the Rockland Park Subdivision with an initial
zoning of RL (Multiple Family Residential - Low Density).
Attachment:
* P&Z Staff Report
-,
PLANNING AN~ ZONING BOARr
-
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH --- STAFF REPORT ---
MEETING DATE: July 18, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: V.D.
ITEM: Annexation & Initial Zoning for Rockland Fark
GENERAL DATA:
Owners...................Andre Baldzana, Richard
Baldzana, Jessica Olmstead,
Phil Polizotto, and Marie
Salanitri
Contract Purchaser.......Jeffrey Kukes
Location.................Approximately 2800 feet north
of Atlantic Avenue, on the , (
west side of Military Trail. S
property Size............ll.63 Acres i
I
City Advisory Land Use
Map Designation..........Medium Density Residential
County Land Use Map
Designation..............LR-3 (Residential with a
maximum density of 3
units/acre)
Current County Zoning....AR (Agricultural
Residential) - PBC .
Proposed City Zoning.....RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium
Density) SPtNCE
Adjacent Zoning...North: AR PROPERTY
East: SAD (Special Activities
District), RM
South: RS (Single Family
Residential) - PBC -
West: RS - :2
Existing Land Us.........Vacant
Development Proposal.....Annexation of the parcel p...J.. d-
v#,~..jl
with initial zoning
designation of RM.
Water Service............Existing 12" water main
along the east side of
Military Trail with stub
outs to Conklin Drive and
McGovern Drive.
Sewer Service............Nearest City sewer service
Is an existing city lift
station at the northwest
corner of Military Trail and
Conklin Drive, approximately
300 feet to the north.
V.D.
--
I
-
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOA R D 1---
The action before the Board is making a recommendation to the
city Commission on a voluntary annexation (pursuant to Florida
Statute 171.~44) with initial City zoning of RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium Density).
Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E)(6), the Local Planning Agency
(Planning and Zoning Board) shall review and make a
recommendation to the City Commission with respect to all
annexations and rezonings.
The subject property is:
The south 420.01 feet of the south 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the
NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 46 south, Range 42 east,
less the Military Trail right-of-way;
A/K/A Lots 1-26 (less the easterly 34.02 feet SR 809 ROW),
Block 3 and Lots 14-26 (less the easterly 34.02 feet SR 809
ROW) , Block 2 Rockland Park, as recorded in the Public
Records Of Palm Beach County, Plat Book 24, Page 23;
a vacant parcel located on the west side of Military Trail,
approximately 2,800 feet north of Atlantic Avenue. The property
is currently under the jurisdiction of Palm Beach County.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
The site is an 11. 63 acre undeveloped portion of the Rockland
Park subdivision (total acreage 20.8). It is located in
unincorporated Palm Beach County, within the City's designated
planning and service area.
In 1989, this property was given an advisory FLUM designation of
Medium Density Residential. It is designated on the County's
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as LR-3 (Low Density Residential - 3
units per acre). The applicant has applied for annexation of
the parcel into the city with an initial zoning of RM (Multiple
Family Residential - Medium Density) . An application for a
Future Land Use Map amendment from the current county
designation of LR-3 (Low Residential - 3 units per acre) to the
City's Medium Density Residential designation is being processed
simultaneously.
ANN E X A T ION A N A L Y S I S:
Florida Statutes Governing Annexation:
Pursuant to Florida Statute 171. 044 "the owner or owners of real
property in an inc~rporated area of a county which is contiguous
'.
.-
P & Z staff Repc
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zoning.
Page 2
to a municipality and reasonably compact--may- peti tion the
governing body of said municipality that said property be
annexed into the municipality." Pursuant to F. S . 171.044 land
shall not be annexed through voluntary annexation when such
annexation results in the creation of enclaves.
The subject property is contiguous to the City, reasonably
compact, and the proposed annexation will not create any
enclaves. The owner of the subject parcel has petitioned
for annexation.
Consistency Between City and County Desiqnations:
The current Palm Beach County Future Land Use Map Designation
for the property is LR-3 (Low Residential - 3 units per acre).
The current City advisory Future Land Use Map designation is.
Medium Density Residential (5-12 units per acre) . The City's
designation will allow a higher density of residential
development. The proposed FLUM amendment will be discussed in a
separate report. Based on the findings contained in that
report, the City's FLUM designation will become effective upon
annexation and approval of Plan Amendment 94-2.
Consistency with Adjacent Future Land Use Map Designations and
Land Uses:
The subject parcel is bordered on the north by an existing
single family development (the remainder of Rockland Park) which
is designated as LR-3 (Low Res idential - 3 units per acre) on
the County's FLUM. To the south and west of the parcel is an
existing multi-family development designated (HR-8 High
Residential 8 units per acre) on the County's FLUM. All of
these parcels have been assigned a City advisory FLUM
designation of Medium Density Residential (5-12 units per acreJ.
To the east of the property and across Military Trail is an
existing multi-family development (High Point) which is
designated as Medium Density Residential and an existing
commercial development (the Extra Closet) designated as
Transitional on the City's FLUM.
Given the parcel's location adjacent to primarily residential
development at densities consistent with the city's Medium
Density Residential designation, this designation is appropriate
for the subject parcel.
Consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan:
Desiqnated Annexation Area: The requested annexation is
consistent with Policy B-3.4, of the Future Land Use Element of
which calls for the annexation of eligible properties. The
property is shown within the "designated annexation area" I 5,
west of Military T~ail.
_...._-~
,
P & Z Staff Repc ~
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zoning .
Page 3
Provision of Services: When--annexation of property occurs,
services are to be provided in a manner which is consistent with
those provided to similar properties already in the City (Future
Land Use Policy B-3.l). The following is a discussion of
provided services and potential provision levels.
This analysis will serve as the Urban Services Report for the
proposed annexation, as required by Florida Statute 171.042
Traffic:
The current proposal is to annex the property and apply the FLUM
and zoning designations which are consistent with the City's
advisory designation that has been in place since 1989. On that
basis, there is no traffic impact associated with the
annexation, FLUM amendment, and initial zoning. Technically,
however, there is a difference between the traffic generated by
development under the City's designation as compared to that
which could occur under the County LR-3 designation.
The applicant has submitted a traffic study for the proposed
amendment. This analysis is based on the figures included in
that study.
The number of trips which could be generated by the development
of the parcel under the County's FLUM designation is 348:
11.6 acres * 3 units/acre = 34.8 units
34.8 units * 10 ADT/unit = 348 ADT.
The maximum potential for traffic generation under the City's
designation is 973 ADT.
11.61 acres * 12 units/acre = 139.32 units
ADT = 139.32 units * 7 ADT/unit
ADT = 975
As indicated by the study, there is a potential net increase for
the site of 627 ADT. The traffic information submitted with the
current application addresses only the directly accessed link of
Military Trail, which has adequate capacity to serve any added
trips. Thus, a positive finding can be made with regard to the
FLUM amendment and initial zoning.
Per Palm Beach County Unified Land Development Code Section
7 .9(l) (D) (2) (E), projects which generate 501-1000 ADT require
the submission of a full traffic study addressing the impact of
the development on all roadway links within a maximum radius 1
mile from the site at the time of Site and Development Plan
submittal. That study must address a roadway link beyond a 0.5
mile distance only if that link will receive trips from the
project in excess of l' of the affected roadway's LOS "D"
volume.
-,
-
P & Z Staff Repc
Rockland Perk - Annexation and Initial Zoniny
Page 4
Palm Beac-h-County 1993- traffic counts indicate that Lake Ida
Road between Barwick Road and Congress Avenue, Atlantic Avenue
west of Military Trail and Military Trail south of Atlantic
Avenue all exceed the maximum permissible trips to meet Level of
Service "D.1l No widening of these links is proposed at this
time. These links are all within the 1 mile radius of maximum
influence, but more than 0.5 mile from the subject property. In
order for a positive finding of concurrency to be made at the
time of site and development plan submittal, the submitted
traffic study must demonstrate that the impact of the project
will be less than 1% of LOS "D" volume for these links.
Water:
Water is available to the site via an existing 12 " water main
located on the east side of Military Trail. There are existing
road crossings stubbed out to the McGovern Lane right-of-way
(unimproved) an to Conklin Drive. The size of those stubs has
not been verified at this time. Verification will be required
at the time of development, as well as upgrades if the stubs are
smaller than the minimum 6" diameter. A looped 8" system for
the site and fire flow calculations will also be required at
that time.
Sewer:
An existing lift station is located on the west side of Military
Trail, north of Conklin Drive. This lift station may have
enough capacity to service future development of the site with
multiple family residential at a density of 6-12 units per acre.
If not, upgrading of the lift station may be required.
Drainage:
The site is currently vacant and therefore not subject to
drainage requirements. Submission of drainage plans meeting
City, South Florida Water Management District, and Lake Worth
Drainage District requirements will be required with the site
and development plan.
Fire/EMS.
The subject parcel is currently serviced by Palm Beach County
fire station #42, located on Hagan Ranch Road, approximately 3.2
miles away. Average response time from the station is 5
minutes, 30 seconds at 35 MPH.
Upon annexation service will be provided by Delray Beach fire
station #4, located at the northeast corner of Barwick Road and
Lake Ida Road. The station is approximately 0.9 mile from the
site for a response time of I minute, 54 seconds at 35 MPH.
The fire departmen~ has reviewed the annexation petition and
indicated that service can be provided to the subject property
I
P & Z Staff Repc ~
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zoniny
Page 5
wH:.Ji--rrista 11 at ion of necessary on-site improvements (hydrants,
roads meeting minimum design standards, etc. ) concurrent with
the development.
police:
The subject parcel is currently serviced by Palm Beach County
Sheriff's Office, located at 345 S. Congress Avenue, which
serves the south County area. The property lies within the
Sheriff's office patrol zone 4. Zone four consists of an area
bounded by El Clair Ranch Road on the west, the Atlantic Ocean
on the east, Boynton Beach Boulevard on the north, and Atlantic
Avenue on the south. This area is patrolled by one officer per
shift. Additional response can be summoned from "cover cars"
which roam between zones in numbers which vary according to
availability.
The proposed annexation will not require additional manpower or
expansion of patrol areas as the site is located between areas
currently serviced by the Delray Beach Police Department.
Response times are currently 4 minutes for emergency calls and 6
minutes for non-emergency calls. These times represent an
improvement over the probable response times from the Sheriff's
Office and will not be increased by the annexation.
Solid Waste:
The property, if developed under County Jurisdiction, would
receive solid waste pick-up from County Sanitation. The City is
currently under contract with Waste Management, Inc. for
pick-up. The property would receive trash removal twice weekly,
plus recycling pick-up one a week from either provider. The
rate charged for service would increase from $129 per unit
annually to $172.76
In the preparation of the Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan, an
assessment of level of service and the provision of services
with regard to Solid Waste was undertaken. Thus, the act of
officially annexing the property and adopting the City's
advisory FLUM designation has no impact on Solid Waste Disposal
concurrency.
Parks:
As the property is currently vacant, no demand for parks is
generated by the property, upon annexation. Potential impacts
from the development of this property according to the proposed
FLUM were considered during the preparation of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. At that time the City determined that
existing parks, along with programmed improvements, were
sufficient to meet desired LOS for future development according
to theFLUM.
At the time of building permit issuance, parks and recreation
impact fees in the amount of $500 per unit will be assessed.
-.
....-.......
P & Z Staff Repc
Rockland Park - ~dnexation and Initial Zonin~
Page 6
Fiscal Impacts:
Impact on the Annexed Property: In the 1993 tax year the
property owners paid ad valorem taxes based. on. an. assessed value
of $339,850: With the change from County ]urJ.sdJ.ction to City,
the following rates will be affected:
Ad Valorem Taxes Millage With Annexation
Fire Rescue/MSTU -2.6201 Deleted
Library -0.3915 Deleted
City of Delray Beach +6.8600 Added
City of Delray Beach Debt +1.1400 Added
+4.9884 Difference *
* Total millage is 20.0772 in the County and 25.0656 in
the City
The increase in property taxes will be from approximately $6,824
to $8,519, an increase of approximately $1,695.
Additional charges, such as utility taxes, franchise fees,
stormwater assessments, etc. will be assessed once the property
is developed.
Impact on the City Revenues/Expenses: At the 1993 City millage
rate of 6.86 mills and debt service millage of 1.14 mills the
property will generate revenues of approximately $2,719 in
yearly ad valorem taxes. As the site is vacant, no additional
charges will be assessed by the City.
While the City will realize little additional revenue from the
annexation, no additional costs will be generated by the vacant
parcel.
However, when the parcel is developed with multiple family
housing, significant revenues for the Ci ty will be generated.
Ad valorem tax revenues will increase proportionally to the
increase in the property's value with development. Additional
revenue to the City will be gained through collection of
stormwater assessments, landlord permit fees, utility taxes and
franchise fees.
Development of the parcel has the potential to add up to
approximately 302 people to the population of the City, based on
a maximum unit count of 139 and the City average of 2.17
residents per unit. The State disburses revenue from cigarette
taxes, state sales tax, State revenue sharing funds, etc. In
1993, these per capita reimbursements amounted to approximately
$90.38 per resident. Thus the City would gain up to $27,294.76
annually from per capita reimbursements when the parcel is
developed.
I
P & Z Staff Repc. -
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zoniny
Page 7
Z 0 N I N G A N A L Y S I S:
REQUIRED FINDINGS:
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.
Pursuant to Land Development Regulations Section 3.1.1 (A) all
land uses and structures must be allowed in the zoning district
and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use
designation. There are no structures currently existing on the
parcel. A zoning designation of RM (Multiple Family Residential
- Medium Density) will be assigned to the parcel upon
annexation. The proposed zoning is consistent with the proposed
Future Land Use Map designation of Medium Density Residential,
which is being processed as a separate application.
Concurrency: Facilities which are provided by, or through, the
City shall be provided to new development concurrent with
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall
be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the
Comprehensive Plan.
The subject parcel is currently vacant. The maximum development
potential according to the current FLUM is 39 single family
dwelling units. The proposed FLUM designation and zoning would
permi t a maximum of 139 multiple family dwelling units. As
described above, little demand for service capacity will be
generated immediately upon annexation and application of initial
zoning.
However, the potential for future service demands will be
increased by this action. Although positive findings can be
made at this time, reevaluation of concurrency requirements will
be necessary with the site and development plan for the
property.
Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set
forth in Article 3.3.2 (Zoning), along with the required
findinge of 2.4.5, shall be the basis upon which a finding of
overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and
policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in
the making of a finding of overall consistency.
Section 3.3.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): The applicable
performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which
apply are as follows:
A) That rezoning to other than CF wi thin stable residential
areas shall be denied. (Housing Element A-2.4)
As the current proposal is initial zoning of the parcel to
a designation consistent with the City's Future Land Map
designation, this standard is not applicable.
-.
-
P & Z Staff Repc J
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zonin~
Page 8
D) That the rezoning shall result in allowing land uSis-...,hlch- -
are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses
both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility
may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly
mitigat~ adverse impacts from the new use.
The subject property is adjacent to land zoned AR
(Agricultural Residential) and RS (Single Family
Residential) in Palm Beach County, as well as SAD (Special
Activities District) and RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density) in the City. The surrounding land uses are
single family and multiple family residences, a self
storage facility, a post office, and various commercial
uses. Multiple family development in this location will be
compatible with surrounding properties.
Section 2.4.S(D)(S) (Rezoning Findings):
Pursuant to Section 2.4.S(D)(1) (Findings), in addition to
provisions of Section 3.1.1, the City Commission must make a
finding that the rezoning fulfills one of the reasons for which
the rezoning change is being sought.
As the petition is an initial zoning designation to a property
being annexed, this section does not apply.
A review of the goals, objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following additional
Goals, Objectives, and policies relevant to this action were
found.
Conservation Element Policy B-2.1:
The submission of a biological survey and a habitat analysis
shall accompany land use requests for plan amendments,
rezonings, and site plan approval.
Conservation Element Policy B-2.2:
Whenever and wherever significant or sensitive flora and fauna
communities are identified pursuant to Policy B-2.1, they shall
be preserved as if they were environmentally sensitive areas as
identified in Objective B-1.
Conservation Element Policy B-2.5:
Whenever new development is proposed along a waterway, a canal,
an environmentally sensitive area, or an area identified
pursuant to Policy B-2.1, an area equivalent to at least 10% of
the total area of the development shall be set aside in an
undisturbed state or 25% of the native communities shall be
retained pursuant to TCRPC Policy 10.2.2.2.
I
P & Z Staff Repc ::.-
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zonin~
Page 9
Although no biological surveyor habftat--anarysls-bas been
submitted at this time, native habitat in the form of Slash
Pine and Saw Palmetto has been noted on the site.
Submission of the biological survey and habitat analysis
will be required with the site and development plan.
Provision to preserve native communities according to the
above' policies will be required as a part of the site and
development plan.
Future Land Use Element Policy B-3.3a:
This policy requires consistency between County and City FLUM
designations within the Delray Beach Planning and Service Area.
The proposed FLUM amendment, along with a County FLUM amendment
being processed concurrently for the property achieves the
required consistency.
LDR Compliance:
As this is a vacant property and no development is proposed with
this annexation and initial zoning action, review of the site
with regard to current development standards is not applicable.
REVIEW BY OTHERS:
The proposed Annexation and initial zoning is not in a
geographic area requiring review by either the, HPB (Historic
Preservation Board), DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or the
eRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
On June 29, Notice of the proposed annexation was sent to the
Palm Beach County Planning Division. To date no formal response
has been received.
Neighborhood Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within
a 500' radius of the subject property. A special certified
notice has been sent to the property owner of record.
Courtesy notices have been sent to the following individuals and
groups who have requested notification of petitions in that
area:
'I\' Helen Coopersmith
Progressive Residents of Delray
* Jack Kellerman
High Point
* Art Jackel
United Pr?perty Owners
,
P & Z Staff Repc #
Rockland Park - Annexation and Initial Zoniny
Page 10
Letters of objection, if any ,wITI-uoe -.- presented at the P & Z
Board meeting.
ASS E SSM E N T AND CON C L U S ION S:
Annexation of this property and with an initial City zoning
designation of RM is consistent with the City's program for
annexation of territory in its Planning and Service Area. The
annexation is also consistent with the requirements of State
Statute 171.044, regulating voluntary annexations.
The annexation will provide the property with Police, Fire, EMS
and other required services at a level equal to that of other
properties in the City with response times superior to those
currently provided by the County.
The property will experience an increase in taxes of
approximately $1,695 annually.
The City will receive additional revenue from property taxes of
approximately $2,719 a year, with a potential for significantly
increased revenue with the development of the property. The
City will not have an increase in expenses at this time.
Regarding the initial zoning, the proposed RM zoning is
appropriate for the location and consistent with the City's
current Medium Density Residential Future Land Use Map
designation. A FLUM amendment from the County LR-3 designation
to Medium Density is being processed concurrently, as a portion
of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2. All required positive
findings can be made.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
A. Continue with direction.
B. Recommend approval of the proposed Annexation with
initial zoning of RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density) based on positive findings with
respect to Sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2, and 2.4.5(0)(1) and
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the following
findings:
That the property is contiguous, reasonably
compact and does not create an enclave; and
That services will be provided to the property in
a manner similar to other similar properties
within the City.
C. Recommend. denial of the proposed annexation and
initial zoning of RM (Multiple Family Residential -
.
P & Z Staff Repo
Rockland Park - h,lnexation and Initial Zonin~
Page 11
Medrum-Oens tty) , based on a failure to make positive
findings.
S T A F F R E COM MEN 0 A T ION:
By Motion:
Recommend to the City Commission approval of an Annexation
request with initial zoning of RM (Multiple Family
Residential - Medium Density) for:
The south 420.01 feet of the south 1/2 of the NE 1/4
of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 46 south, Range
42 east, less the Military Trail right-of-way;
A/K/A Lots 1-26 (less the easterly 34.02 feet SR 809
ROW) , Block 3 and Lots 14-26 (less the easterly 34.02
feet SR 809 ROW), Block 2 Rockland Park, as recorded
in the Public Records Of Palm Beach County, Plat Book
24, Page 23;
based on positive findings with respect to Sections 3.3.1,
3.3.2, and 2.4.5(D)(I) and the Comprehensive Plan, as well
as the following findings:
That the property is contiguous, reasonably
compact and does not create an enclave; and
That services will be provided to the property in
a manner similar to other similar properties
within the City.
Attachments:
* Location Map
Report prepared by :
Reviewed by PD on :
..
--- ~---- - 11
I I I ~
[I- I - - ~Fr=
---- -- -- - . . ;;..- I I
~ ' v . N" 3IlS)
:T.
. '
I--- , ; -
I I I I I I ' ~ - t I
CONIQJM Mno I ' - "
~ /I." ~ In.
-~.- 'Wi
') . l\
'IJ 01(1
jli ~~
1
-- - ---
~~~ po~ ~ . I I
DllI'4 , oFf CE · ~ IIAAOV .
.-:;,,;..-- I - art I.IITI - ~
HIGHPOINl WESl ----
BARRETT
) I ...
J-o Irri -
I ~ -
, ~... -, flU eEl
SPENCE I I
. . } I~
PROPERTY >' :1
~I WOOl
411 ~
- .
..oJ I fIWIWOOO
- I I I I
CANAl -..u :i ----------
. - a1'f' LAIl1 - ".u.
:-< -,-
~~"'. I
:-< Q ~~
I-; ~~... \J-C~ SQ'U
~ ~<? -
v.~~ ! .
~
I - I-- ::
i~21
,
i .---
I I \
______AJ-L A N Ie - .AVENUE
I (J - art I.IITI - I I
N ANNEXATION and
-
Pl.AInlINC DO' A1UloIENl -FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
CITY aF OOAAY lEACH. n.
-- DlCfTAL aur IIAP S'r$7EJI --
~._.._.-
.
. .
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER ~
SUBJECT:
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1994
This is first reading for Ordinance No. 94-94 which adopts
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2. The Plan Amendment makes
changes to three Comprehensive Plan elements, including eight
policies, one objective, and related background data. There are
also three amendments to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) . The major
areas addressed by the amendment include:
* Post-disaster reconstruction
* A text change to redirect the scope of the Silver Terrace
Redevelopment Plan
* A land use change for the S.W. 10th Street Area from
Transitional to Commerce to allow light industrial
development (north side of S.W. 10th Street, east of
I-9S)
* A land use change for Rockland Park Subdivision from
County LR-3 (Low Density Residential - 3 units per acre)
to City Medium Density Residential (5 to 12 units per
acre)
* A land use change for the Lee Property from County MR-S
(Medium Density Residential - 5 units per acre) to City
Low Density
Please refer to the Planning and Zoning Board staff report for
details. The Planning and Zoning Board wi 11 formally review this
item on November 14, 1994. The Board's recommendation will be
reported to the City Commission at Tuesday night's meeting.
Recommend consideration of Ordinance No. 94-94 on first reading.
If passed, a public hearing will be held on December 6, 1994. The
text of the plan amendment (which will be Exhibit "A" attached to
the ordinance) will be finalized by the Planning and Zoning Board
on Monday and attached to the ordinance prior to second reading.
ref:agmemo20 p~ 6-0
-.
,
.
I
ORDINANCE NO. 94-94 i
f
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF'
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT 94-2 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE
"LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT", FLORIDA STATUTES
:1 SECTIONS 163.3161 THROUGH 163.3243, INCLUSIVE; ALL AS
11 MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ENTITLED
II COMPREHENS IVE PLAN AMENDMENT 94-2" AND INCORPORATED
,I HEREIN BY REFERENCE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A
.i
11
Ii GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
II
II WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach exercised the authority
Ii
j! granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections
Ii 163.3161 through 163.3243, known as the "Local Government
il Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and
II
WHEREAS, via Ordinance No. 82-89, the City Commission
II
" adopted the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan - Delray Beach,
Ii
;\ Florida "; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning
Agency, did prepare an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan entitled
"Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2"; and
! WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning
Agency, following due public notice, held a public hearing on July 18 I
,[ 1994, in accordance with the requirements of the "Local Government
I; Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and
:!
WHEREAS, after the above referenced public hearing, the
Planning and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, recommended to
the City Commission that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
94-2 be transmitted; and
i' WHBREAS, proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2 was
il submitted to and reviewed by the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, following due public notice, the first of two
I
"
i required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2 was held
I by the City Commission on August 2, 1994, at which time it was I
authorized to be transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs
for required review; and i
,
I
I ."
I
I
I:
.,
I
I WHEREAS, a report of Objections, Recommendations and
Comments (ORC) has been received from the State Department of
!1 Community Affairs and said report has been reviewed by the Planning I
and Zoning Board, as Local Planning Agency, and is the basis for
I modifications to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2; and
: WHEREAS, following due public notice, the second of two 1
:: required public hearings on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2 was held !
)1 on December 6, 1994, in accordance with statutory requirements. I
I' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE I
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: I
I Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray !
Beach, Florida, hereby declares its intent to exercise the authority i
I granted pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes Sections I
163.3161 through 163.3243, inclusive, known as the "Local Government I
Planning and Land Development Regulation Act".
Section 2. That in implementation of its declared intent as
I set forth in Section 1 of this ordinance, there is hereby adopted the
document entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2", which is
j attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. I
I !
Section 3. That the document entitled "Comprehensive Plan - I
Delray Beach, Florida" is hereby amended pursuant to the document
entitled "Comprehensive Plan Amendment 94-2".
Section 4. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a I
! whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. :
! I
I i
:, Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which
ji are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
Ii Saetion 6. That this ordinance shall become effective upon
II issuance of a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in
Ii compliance in accordance with Florida Statutes Section 163.3184(9), by
I- the State Department of Community Affairs, or until the Administration
Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to
I be in compliance in accordance with Florida Statutes Section
163.3184(10).
I
- 2 - Ord. No. 94-94
1: I
!I' I
I
I
I_ i
II I
.
I I
I
I PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
I reading on this the day of 1994.
,
I
I
,I
i1
I
, MAYOR
i
-I
I
II ATTEST:
II City Clerk
11
;1 First Reading
I Second Reading
II
II
:1
II
Ii
i
!
- 3 - Ord. No. 94-94
.
i
.,
0(<
~
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: DAVID T. HAR~EN, CITY MANAGER
THRU: DI~~~TOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
FROM: JOHN WALKER, PROJECT COORDINATO~ tlJ~
SUBJECT: MEETING OF NOVEMBER l5, 1994 I
ADOPTION OF PLAN AMENDMENT 94-2, FIRST READING
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the Commission is that of approval
on first reading of an ordinance adopting Plan Amendment
94-2.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
Plan Amendment 94-2 proposes changes to three Comprehensive Plan
elements and contains three Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendments. Attached is the Planning and Zoning Board staff
report of November 14th, which provides further information
about the Amendment.
The City Commission transmitted the proposed Amendment to the
Department of Community Affairs ( DCA) , for mandatory review, by
action on August 2, 1994. The review process has been completed
and a report of Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC)
has been returned to the City. The ORC contains 4 objections,
requiring submission of additional data to support the
amendments. The major features of the Plan Amendment, and the
objections and recommended responses are addressed in the
accompanying Planning and Zoning Board staff report (November
14 th) .
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board will formally review this item at
its meeting of November l4, 1994. The Board recommendation will
be reported to the Commission at this meeting.
.
City Commission Documentation
Adoption of Plan Amendment 94-2, First Reading
Page 2
R E COM MEN D E D ACT ION:
By motion, approve the adoption ordinance on first reading, with
appropriate public hearing scheduled for December 6, 1994.
Attachments:
* Draft adoption ordinance
* P&Z staff report and documentation of November 14, 1994
T:\advanced\9420RC4.DOC
"
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF: NOVEMBER 14, 1994
AGENDA ITEM: II.A. RESPONSE TO ORC, AMENDMENT 94-2
I T E M B E FOR E THE BOA R D:
The item before the Board is that of review of the proposed
response to the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments
(ORC) report for Plan Amendment 94-2. The action to be
taken is in the form of a recommendation to the City
Commission.
B A C K G R 0 U N D:
Proposed Plan Amendment 94-2 was heard by the Planning and
zoning Board on July 18, 1994. It was transmitted to Florida
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) by action of the City
Commission on August 2, 1994. The DCA ORC Report was received
on October 24, 1994.
The Plan Amendment proposed changes to three Comprehensive Plan
elements, including 8 policies, one objective, and related
background data. There were also three amendments to the Future
Land Use Map (FLUM) . Refer to the Table of Contents within the
Amendment (attached) for an outline of the items which were
considered. The major areas addressed by the Plan Amendment
included:
* Post disaster reconstruction.
* A text change to redirect the scope of the Silver Terrace
Redevelopment Plan.
* A land use change for the S.W. 10th St. Area from
Transitional to Commerce to allow light industrial
development.
* A land use change for Rockland Subdivision from
Residential, 3 units/acre (County) , with a City advisory
designation of Medium Density Residential, to Medium
Density Residential (City) related to an annexation
proposal.
* A land use change for the Lee Property from Medium
Residential, 5 units/acre (County) , with a City advisory
designation of Low Density Residential, to Low Density
Residential (City) related to an annexation proposal.
The Board is to review the Response to ORC Report for Plan
Amendment 94-2. The City Commission will then consider the
Board's recommendation when it acts on the adoption ordinance.
The ordinance will be before the City Commission for first
reading on November 15th; and, second reading (adoption) on
December 6th.
"",.-
.
P & Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
Response to ORC 94-1
Page 1.1
A N A L Y S I S:
The ORC Report contains four multi-part objections. Three
relate to the FLUM amendments; one relates to the Silver
Terrace text amendment. All of the objections require submission
of additional data to further explain the amendments. . The
attached Response to ORC is an analysis and recommended
disposition for each of the objections. Based on the Response
to ORC, no changes are required to the amendments.
R E COM MEN D E 0 ACT ION:
By motion, accept the Response to ORC Report and recommend to
the City Commission that Plan Amendment 94-2 be adopted.
Attachments:
* Response to ORC Report Objections
* ORC Report
Report prepared by John Walker
Reviewed by Diane Dominguez I
T:\advanced\9420RC3.DOC
-,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 94-~
Page
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION ELEMENT
1 Policy B-2.3 Creation of OS and OSR Districts
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
2 Post Disaster Redevelopment
3 Policy C-3.4 Reconstruction Limitations
3 Policy C-3.6 Development Concurrency
3 Policy C-3.7 Grace Period After Disaster
4 Policy C-7.1 Shoreline Land Use Priorities
4 Policy D-3.2 Height Limitations
5 Policy D-3.4 Reconstruction Limitations
-
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
6 Policy C-2.7 Silver Terrace Area
8 Objective C-5 Coastal Area/Hurricane Coordination
8 Community Facilities Land Uses
9 Table L-6 Land Use Designation/Zoning Matrix
AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
12 Rockland Subdivision
12 S. W. 10th St. Area
12 Lee Property
SUPPORT DOCUMENTS
Appendix
1 Silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan
2 Open Space and Recreation Zoning District
3 Post Disaster Reconstruction
4 Rockland Subdivision Land Use Amendment
5 S. W. lOth St. Area Land Use Amendment
6 Lee Property Land Use Amendment
T:\advanced\coNTENTl
.
PLAN AMENDMENT 94-2
RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS OF THE ORC REPORT
GENERAL:
Plan Amendment 94-2 was heard by the Planning and Zoning Board
on July l8, 1994. It was transmitted to the Department of
Community Affairs ( DCA) , by action of the City Commission on
August 2, 1994. The DCA Objections, Recommendations and
Comments Report (ORC) was received on October 24, 1994.
Plan Amendment 94-2 proposes changes to three Comprehensive Plan
elements, including 8 policies, one objective, and related
background data. There are also three amendments to the Future
Land Use Map.
The ORC report contains four multi-part objections. Three
relate to the Future Land Use Map amendments; one relates to the
Silver Terrace text amendment. The objections request
additional data and analysis, all of which has already been
provided either in the staff reports or in. the adopted
Comprehensive Plan. It appears that DCA prefers to process data
formatted in very specific ways and the reviewers check that
information against the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Objection #1 requests public facilities analyses giving specific
capacity and demand quantities. The objection also requires a
needs analysis for the Rockland amendment, analyzing the
suitability of the site to support the proposed density and use.
Each of the staff reports specifies the existing water and sewer
service available to the site. In addition, each staff report
analyses the implications of services provision and concurrency.
In the cases of the Rockland and Lee amendments, the existing
planning area advisory designations are to be adopted as City
land use designations upon annexation. The staff reports state
that levels of service, provision of service, and the ability to
meet remaining land use needs were already considered when the
advisory designations were originally adopted in 1989. Since we
are adopting designations that have already been reviewed and
approved, there did not appear to be a need to reassess
potential impacts. The staff report for Rockland includes a
discussion of the sui tabili ty of the site to accommodate the
proposed use by analyzing surrounding land use designations and
uses for consistency and compatibility, and by analyzing
proposed traffic generation.
In the case of S.W. 10th St. Area, an actual land use
designation change is proposed. Therefore, the DCA objection
may have some validity. Service demand for water, sewer,
drainage, streets and traffic, recreation, and solid waste was
-,
assessed in the staff report and found to have no negative
impact, ~nowever-;--specific numbers were not given.
Apparently DCA is not satisfied with the City's statements
concerning our ability to provide service to the subject sites.
Instead, DCA wants the raw numbers and apparently intends to do
its own analysis of the suitability of the proposed land use
changes. We believe that this in opposition to the stated
philosophy of DCA which presumes that local governments are
properly evaluating their amendments for consistency with goals
and objectives in their Comprehensive Plans. We believe the
objection to be without merit and that it constitutes
micro-management of local affairs. However, in the interest of
time, we will satisfy the objection by the inclusion of
Projected Demand Tables for each land use amendment and a needs
analysis for Rockland.
Although not a part of the objection, DCA recommended that the
analysis of the S.W. 10th St. Area amendment provide additional
documentation that roadway improvements are scheduled. The Five
Year Schedule of Improvements lists the S. W. 10th St.
Reconstruction project as part of the Decade of Excellence Bond.
In the description of the bond items, the limits of construction
are given. Both of these items are found in the comprehensive
Plan. I n the staff report, the specific link is listed to be
under construction in October, 1994. That link is, in fact
under construction. It seems our documentation, in the
Comprehensive Plan and staff report, is clear enough.
Objection #2 requires maps for the Future Land Use Map
amendments to show the proposed and existing land use
designations for the subject site and adjacent properties and
information such as density and intensity of use.
Current Future Land Use Maps (FLUM) are sent to DCA with each
adopted Plan Amendment. The staff reports discuss in detail
existing and proposed land uses for subject properties and all
surrounding properties.
Based on the information already submitted, it appears this
objection has no merit. However, it is possible that the DCA
reviewer did not have access to their copies of our FLUM.
Therefore, we will satisfy the objection by the inclusion of the
FLUM with the subject properties highlighted.
Objection #3 requires an analysis and impact assessment of
soils, natural resources, and historic resources to determine
the suitability of the Rockland and S. W. 10th st. Area
amendments.
The City's adopted Comprehensive Plan states that there are no
wetlands in the planning area (Conservation Element). It states
that there are no acquifer recharge areas in the planning area
.
(Public Facilities Element) . Floodplains and wellfields are
addressed in the Conservation and Public Facilities Elements as
well as Future Land Use Elements. Wellfields are also addressed
specifically in the staff report for S.W. 10th st. Area, the
only amendment involving existing or proposed wellfields.
As in the discussion under Objection #1, apparently DCA intends
to perform an independent analysis of our amendments.
Therefore, we have added resources to the Project Demand Tables
to be submitted with our response. It should be noted that
portions of the S.W. 10th St.Area amendment are within Wellfield
Protections Zones 1, 2, and 3 as defined in the County Wellfield
Protection Ordinance. A copy of that ordinance is attached as
additional information.
Objection #4 requires additional information for the Silver
Terrace text amendment. The text change clearly does not
represent a completed redevelopment plan, but only redirects.
the scope of the plan. Therefore, the DCA request to know what
non-residential uses will be allowed is premature. At this
point, we expect those uses to be similar to those allowed in
the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district (small scale retail,
services and business offices).
In an effort to submit complete information, all work completed
to date for the Silver Terrace Redevelopment Area was submitted
with the text change. This apparently caused some confusion for
DCA since the analysis covered areas beyond the redevelopment
area. As stated in the policy, the actual Silver Terrace
Redevelopment Area includes only the Silver Terrace Subdivision
and the Floranda Mobile Home Park, for a total of 20.71 acres.
It does not include the Hurricane Pines Scrub or any other areas
supporting endangered plants or animals. Existing policies
relative to environmentally sensitive lands are, therefore,
sufficient without revision or expansion to specifically address
the sites adjacent to the redevelopment area.
In summary, the information submitted with the proposed Plan
Amendment is sufficient to determine consistency when read in
conjunction with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. To aid
the DCA review, we will submit the information compiled, to the
extent possible, in tabular form for the land use amendments.
We will also submit additional information for the Silver
Terrace text amendment. These additional submittals, along with
the above explanations, should allow Plan Amendment 94-2 to be
found in compliance.
T:\advanced\9420RC2.DOC
-I
ROCKLAND PARK FLUM AMENDMENT
Delray Beach Advisory Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
to
Delray Beach Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
City City
Impact Ext. Demand Prop. Demand Impact
Traffic Circulation 973 ADT 973 ADT 0 ADT
Sanitary Sewer 27,255 gpd 27,255 gpd 0 gpd
Potable Water 46,215 gpd 46,215 gpd 0 gpd
Solid Waste 782 ppd 782 ppd 0 ppd
Recreation .710 acres .710 acres 0 ppd
Drainage Controlled by Controlled by
SFWMD, LWDD SFWMD, LWDD No Change
No Impact No Impact
Wetlands N/A N/A No ChangE:.
Wellfields N/A N/A No change
Aquifer Recharge Area N/A N/A No Change
Flood Plain N/A N/A No Change
ROCKLAND PARK ANNEXATION
Traffic:
Parcel Size................. .11.63
Current City Advisory FLUM...Medium Density Residential (5 - 12
d.u./acre)
Proposed City FLUM...........Medium Density Residential (5 - 12
d.u./acre)
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 * 7 ADT/d.u.1 = 973 ADT
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
ll.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
l39 * 7 ADT/d.u.1 = 973 ADT
Impact:
973 - 973 = 0 ADT
1Traffic Generation Rate for Multiple Family units per Palm
Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance
-,
Sanitary Sewer: -
Parcel Size. .......... ...... .ll.63
Current City Advisory FLUM...Medium Density Residential (5 - 12
d.u./acre)
Proposed City FLUM.. ........ .Medium Density Residential (5.- 12
d.u./acre)
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 237 persons
237 persons * 115 gpd/person3 = 27,255 gpd
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = l39 units
l39 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 237 persons
237 persons * 115 gpd/person3 = 27,255 gpd
Impact:
27,255 gpd - 27,255 gpd = 0 gpd
1Average City Vacancy Rate per 1990 Census
2persons per occupied housing unit average per 1990 Census =
total population / estimated occupied housing units
3Level of Service of City of Delray Beach Public Facilities
Element of the Comprehensive Plan, 1989
.
potable Water:
Parcel Size............... ...11.63
Current City Advisory FLUM...Medium Density Residential (5 - l2
d.u./acre)
Proposed City FLUM...........Medium Density Residential (5 - 12
d.u./acre)
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 237 persons
237 persons * 195 gpd/person3 = 46,215 gpd
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 237 persons
237 persons * 195 gpd/person3 = 46,215 gpd
Impact:
46,215 gpd - 46,215 gpd = 0 gpd
1Average City Vacancy Rate per 1990 Census
2persons per occupied housing unit average per 1990 Census =
total population / estimated occupied housing units
3Level of Service of City of Delray Beach Public Facilities
Element of the Comprehensive Plan, 1989
..
Solid Waste: -------~-
Parcel Size.. ................11.63
Current City Advisory FLUM...Medium Density Residential (5 -,12
d.u./acre)
Proposed City FLUM...........Medium Density Residential (5' - 12
d.u./acre)
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 * .777051 * 1.36 tons/d.u./year2 = 142.67 tons/year
142.67 tons/year / 365 days/year = .391 tons/day
.391 tons/day * 2000 lbs./ton = 782 lbs./day
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 * .777051 * 1.36 tons/d.u./year2 = 142.67 tons/year
l42.67 tons/year / 365 days/year = .391 tons/day
.391 tons/day * 2000 lbs./ton = 782 lbs./day
Impact:
782 - 782 = 0 lbs./day
1Average City Vacancy Rate per 1990 Census
2Solid Waste Authority, Technical Memo, August 3, 1993
(waste generation rates in tons/year for land use types -
multiple family residential, 1993)
.
Recreatlon-:
Parcel Size................. .11.63
Current City Advisory FLUM...Medium Density Residential (5 - 12
d.u./acre)
Proposed City FLUM...........Medium Density Residential (5. - 12
d.u./acre)
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
l39 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 236.5 persons
236.5 persons * 3 acres/1,OOO persons3 = .71 acres
Medium Density Residential (5 - 12 d.u./acre)
11.63 Acres * 12 d.u./acre = 139 units
139 d.u * .777051 * 2.19 persons/d.u.2 = 236.5 persons
236.5 persons * 3 acres/1,OOO persons3 = .71 acres
Impact:
.71 acres - .71 acres = 0 acres
10ccupancy rate according to City of Delray Beach Population
Tracking System, 1993
2persons per household according to City of Oelray Beach
Population Tracking System, 1993
3Level of Service of City of Delray Beach Recreation and Open
Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan, 1989
-.
ORC COMMENT: The City should not adopt the land use changes of
amendments V.D. and V.E. prior to formal annexation (by
ordinance) of the parcels. If the City wishes to change the
land use of these parcels, it should submit a plan amendment
after the parcels have been formally annexed into the City. The
annexation and land use amendment can occur at the same adoption
hearing. If the city chooses to adopt these changes prior to
annexation; the City should provide the Department a copy of the
joint-planning agreement the City has with Palm Beach County
which specifies the Joint Planning Area and the annexation
process of County and City land.
RESPONSE: The City will not adopt the land use change prior to
formal annexation (by ordinance) . A voluntary annexation and
initial zoning request to RM (Multiple Family Residential -
Medium Density) is accompanying the land use amendment. First
reading of the annexation and initial zoning request has been
heard by the City Commission on August 16, 1994 (Ordinance
61-94). The second and final reading of the annexation and
initial zoning will be at the same meeting as the adoption of
the land use amendment. The anticipated sequence of events will
be the adoption of the annexation, adoption of the land use
change and application of the initial zoning designation.
---..
.
LEE PROPERTY FLUM AMENDMENT
Delray Beach Advisory LD - Low Density (0-5 d.u./acre)
to
Delray Beach LD Low Density (0 - 5 d.u./acre)
Existing City Proposed City
Impact LD (5 u.p.a) LD (5 u.p.a) Impact
Traffic Circulation 800 ADT 800 ADT 0 ADT
Sanitary Sewer l5,640 gpd l5,640 gpd 0 gpd
Potable Water 26,520 gpd 26,520 gpd 0 gpd
Solid Waste 685 ppd 685 ppd 0 ppd
Recreation .408 acres .408 acres 0 ppd
Drainage Controlled by Controlled by
SFWMD, LWDD SFWMD, LWOD No Change
No Impact No Impact
Wetlands N/A N/A No Change
Wellfields N/A N/A No change
Aquifer Recharge Area N/A N/A No Change
Flood Plain N/A N/A No Change
..
T R A F FIe G ENE RAT ION
Existinq Land Use Desiqnation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x 10 TPD1 = 800 TPD (Trips Per Day)
Proposed Land Use Desiqnation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x 10 TPD1 = 800 TPD
1. Accepted single family generation rate per Palm Beach
County Traffic Division under TPO (Traffic Performance
Ordinance).
I
SAN I TAR Y SEW E R F LOW
Existing Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = 136 persons
136 persons x ll5 gpdc3 = 15,640 gallons per day
Proposed Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.l5 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = 136 persons
136 persons x 115 gpdc3 = 15,640 gallons per day
1- Average City vacancy rate per 1990 Census.
2. Persons per occupied housing unit average per 1990 Census =
total population - estimated occupied housing units.
3. Level of service ascribed to Delray Beach - Public
Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
"
WATER ( POT A B L E )
Existinq Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = l36 persons
136 persons x 195 gpdc3 = 26,520 gallons per day
Proposed Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = 136 persons
136 persons x 195 gpdc3 = 26,520 gallons per day
1- Average City vacancy rate per 1990 Census.
2. Persons per occupied housing unit average per 1990 Census =
total population - estimated occupied housing units.
3. Level of service established in the Public Facilities
Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
.
--,,~--- ---- --
R E C REA T ION ARE A
Existinq Land Use Desiqnation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = 136 persons
136 persons/1,000 x 33 acres = .408 acres
Proposed Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 2.192 = 136 persons
136 persons/l,OOO x 33 acres = .408 acres
1- Average City vacancy rate per 1990 Census.
2. Persons per occupied housing unit average per 1990 Census =
total population - estimated occupied housing units.
3. Established level of service in the Open Space & Recreation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
.,
SOL I D WAS T E
Existinq Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 11.05~ Ibs per unit per day = 685 Ibs per day
Proposed Land Use Designation: Low Density (maximum 5 units per
acre)
16.15 acres x 5 = 80 units
80 units x .77705%1 = 62 units
62 units x 11.05~ Ibs per unit per day = 685 lbs per day
1- Average City vacancy rate per 1990 Census.
2. Solid Waste Authority, technical memo of August 3, 1993
(waste generation rate volumes in lbs per units per year) -
single family unit 1.99 tons per year or 11.05 lbs per unit
per day.
ORC COMMENT: The City should not adopt the land use changes of
amendments V.D. and V.E. prior to formal annexation (by
ordinance) of the parcels. If the City wishes to change the
land use of these parcels, it should submit a plan amendment
after the parcels have been formally annexed into the City. The
annexation and land use amendment can occur at the same adoption
hearing. If the City chooses to adopt these changes prior to
annexation; the City should provide the Department a copy of the
joint-planning agreement the City has with Palm Beach County
which specifies the Joint Planning Area and the annexation
process of County and City land.
RESPONSE: The City will not adopt the land use change prior to
formal annexation (by ordinance) . A voluntary annexation and
initial zoning request to R-lA (single family) is accompanying
the land use amendment. First reading of the annexation and
initial zoning request has been heard by the City Commission on
August l6, 1994 (Ordinance 62-94). The second and final reading
of the annexation and initial zoning will occur at the same
meeting as the adoption of the land use amendment. The
anticipated sequence of events will be the adoption of the
annexation, adoption of the land use change and application
of the initial zoning designation.
'.
p ~R-O J E C TEl:> O-E-KA N D COM PAR ISO N
S. W. 10TH STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Delray Beach - Transitional
to
Delray Beach - Commerce
Existing City Proposed City
Impact Transitional Commerce Impact
Traffic Generation 2,484 ADT 1,907 ADT -577 ADT
Sanitary Sewer 14,340 gpd 4,320 gpd -10,020 gpd
Potable Water 14,340 gpd 4,320 gpd -10,020 gpd
Solid Waste 1,522 ppd 1,462 ppd -60 ppd
Recreation N/A N/A No Change
Drainage Controlled by Controlled by
SFWMD, LWOD SFWMD, LWDD No Change
No Impact No Impact
Wet,lands N/A N/A No Change
Wellfieldsl. YES YES No change
Aquifer Recharge Area N/A N/A No Change
Flood Plain N/A N/A No Change
1. The city of Delray Beach's Wellfields are protected by the Palm Beach County
Wellfield Protection Ordinance.
.
T R A F F I C G ENE RAT ION
----~------
S.W. 10TH STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Existing Land Use Designation: Transitional - The existing
Transitional land use designation is also consistent with zoning
designations which allow residential development for Single Family,
Medium Density Residential (6-12 d.u./ac.), Office and Neighborhood
Commercial. The maximum intensity potential would result from 2
acres of Neighborhood Commercial and 4.72 acres of Office
development. The following are the projected flows of maximum
development potential:
Neighborhood Commercial:
43,560 X 2 = 87,120 sq.ft. (site area)
87,l20 X 0.25 FAR = 21,780 sq. ft. (buildable floor area)
LN(T)1 = 0.625 LN(X) + 5.985
T = Total Daily Trips
X = Area in 1,000 Gross Sq.Ft.
LN(T) = . 625 LN ( 21. 78 ) + 5.985
T = 2,726 trips
- 1,216 (44.61% passer by rate2)
T = 1,510 net trips per day
1. General Commercial Rates, ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Trips
Generation Manual 5th Edition
2. passerby Rate, Contained in Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards.
3. Office Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
4. General Light Industrial Rates, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
.,
Office Development:
43,560 X 4.72 = 205,603 sq. ft. (site area)
---_._~--,.._._--.- .30 FAR = 61,681 sq. ft. (buildable floor area)
205,603 X
LN(T)3 = 0.756 LN(X) + 3.765
T = Total Daily Trips
X = Area in 1,000 Gross Sq.Ft.
LN(T) = . 756 LN ( 6 1. 6 8 ) + 3.765
T = 974 net trips per day
Total Trips Generated:
1,510 (Commercial) + 974 (Office) = 2,484 Total Trips Generated
Proposed Land Use Desiqnation: Commerce - The proposed Commerce
land use designation is consistent with zoning designations which
allow a mix of 25% Commercial and 75% Industrial, which would be the
maximum intensity potential. The following are the trip generation
rates based upon the maximum development intensity:
25% Commercial:
43,560 X 6.72 acres = 292,723 sq. ft. (site area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,817 buildable sq. ft.
87,817 X .25 (25% of floor area) = 21,954 sq. ft.
LN(T)1 = 0.625 LN(X) + 5.985
T = Total Daily Trips
X = Area in 1,000 Gross Sq. Ft.
LN(T) = .625 LN(21.95) + 5.985
T = 2,739 trips
- 1,222 (44.61% passer by rate2)
~ = 1,517 net trips per day
1- General Commercial Rates, ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Trips
Generation Manual 5th Edition
2. Passerby Rate, Contained in Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards.
3. Office Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
4. General Light Industrial Rates, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
.
75% Industrial:
43,560 X 6.72 acres = 292,723 sq. ft. (site area)
292,723 X .30 (FAR) = 87,8l7 sq.ft. (buildable floor area)
87,817 X .75 (75% of floor area) = 65,863 sq. ft.
T = 7.468{x) - 101.921
T = Total Daily Trips
x = Area in 1,000 Gross Sq. Ft.
4
T = 7.468(65.86) - lO1.921
T = 390 trips per day
Total Trips Generated:
1,517 (25% Commercial) + 390 (75% Industrial) = 1,907 TPD
1. General Commercial Rates, ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Trips
Generation Manua~ 5th Edition
2. Passerby Rate, Contained in Palm Beach county Traffic Performance Standards.
3. Office Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
4. General Light Industrial Rates, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
..
SAN I TAR Y SEW E R F LOW
S.W. 10TH STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Existing Land Use Designation: Transitional - The existing
Transitional land use designation is also consistent with zoning
designations which allow residential developme~t for Sin~le Family,
Medium Density Residential (6-l2 d.u./ac.), Offlce and Nelghborhood
Commercial. The ~maximum intensity potential would result from 2
acres of Neighborhood Commercial and 4.72 acres of Office
development. The following are the projected flows of maximum
development potential:
Neighborhood Commercial:
43,560 X 2 = 87,120 sq.ft. total land area
87,120 X 0.25 FAR = 21,780 sq. ft. bu~ldable floor area
21,780/10,8901 X 1,000 = 2,000 gallons per day
Office Development:
43,560 X 4.72 = 205,603 sq. ft. total land area
205,603 X .30 FAR = 61,681 sq. ft. buildable floor area
61,681/l00 = 617 employees1
617 employees X 20 gallons per person per day = 12,340
gallons per day
Total Usage:
2,000 (Commercial) + 12,340 (Office) = 14,340 gallons per day
Proposed Land Use Designation: Commerce - The proposed Commerce
land use designation is consistent with zoning designations which
allow a mix of 25% Commercial and 75% Industrial, which would be the
maximum intensity potential. The following are the projected flows
based upon the maximum development intensity:
1. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional consultants, Wastewater Flow Projection School
Site "S" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993.
* Commercial - 1,000 gallons per week or 1,000 gallons per 10,820 sq. ft.
buildable area (43,560/.25 FAR = 10,890)
* Office - 20 gallons per person per day (1 person per 100 sq. ft. of
o~fice) .
2. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Wastewater Flow Projection School
Site "5" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993. Utilized commercial
rates at 1,000 gallons per
acre or 1,000 gallons per 13,068 sq.ft. buildable area (43,560/0.30 F-'R .
13,068).
3. Employees per 1,000 sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area (1 per 500 sq.ft.), General
Light Industrial Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
25% Commercial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,8l7 buildable sq.ft.
87,817 sq. ft. X .25 (25% of floor area) = 21,954 sq. ft.
21,954/13,0682 X 1,000 = 1,680 gallons per day
75% Industrial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,817 sq. ft.
87,817 X .75 (75% of floor area) = 65,862
65,862/5003 = l32 employees
132 employees X 20 gallons per person per day = 2,640
gallons per day
Total Usaqe:
1,680 (Commercial) + 2,640 (Industrial) = 4,320 gallons
per day
1. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Wastewater Flow Projection School
Site "S" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993.
* Commercial - 1,000 gallons per week or 1,000 gallons per 10,820 sq .ft.
buildable area (43,560/.25 FAR = 10,890)
* Office - 20 gallons per person per day (1 person per 100 sq. ft. of
office) .
2. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Wastewater Flow Projection School
Site "S" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993. Utilized commercial
rates at 1,000 gallons per
acre or 1,000 gallons per 13,068 sq. ft. buildable area (43,560/0.30 FAR =
13,068).
3. Employees per 1,000 sq. ft. of Gross Floor Area (1 per 500 sq.ft.), General
Light Industrial Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
.t
W ATE R ( POT A B L E ) 1
S. W. 10TH STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Existing Land Use Designation: Transitional - The existing
Transitional land use designation is also consistent with zoning
designations which allow residential development for Single Family,
Medium Density Residential (6-l2 d.u./ac.), Office and Neighborhood
Commercial. The-maximum intensity potential would result from 2
acres of Neighborhood Commercial and 4.72 acres of Office
development. The following are the projected flows of maximum
development potential:
Neighborhood Commercial:
43,560 X 2 = 87,120 sq.ft. total land area
87,120 X 0.25 FAR = 21,780 sq.ft. buildable floor area
21,780/10,8901 X l,OOO = 2,000 gallons per day
Office Development:
43,560 X 4.72 = 205,603 sq.ft. total land area
205,603 X .30 FAR = 6l,681 sq. ft. buildable floor area
61,681/1001 = 617 employees
617 employees X 20 gallons per person per day = 12,340
gallons per day
Total Usage:
2,000 (Commercial) + 12,340 (Office) = 14,340 gallons per day
1- Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Potable Water Flow Projection
School Site "5" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993.
* Commercial - 1,000 gallons per week or 1,000 gallons per 10,820 sq. ft.
buildable area (43,560/.25 FAR = 10,890)
* Office - 20 gallons per person per day (1 person per 100 sq. ft. of
office) .
2. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Potable Water Flow Projection
School Site "s" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993. Utilized
commercial rates at 1,000 gallons per
acre or 1,000 gallons per 13,068 sq. ft. buildable area (43,560/0.30 FAR =
13,068).
3. Employees per 1,000 sq. ft. of Gross Floor Area (1 per 500 sq.ft.), General
Light Industrial Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
.
Proposed Land Use Designation: Commerce - The proposed Commerce
land use designation is consistent with zoning designations which
allow a mix of 25% Commercial and 75% Industrial, which would be the
maximum intensity potential. The following are the projected flows
based upon the maximum development intensity:
25% Commercial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,8l7 buildable sq. ft.
87,817 X .25 (25% of floor area) = 21,954
2l,954/13,0682 X 1,000 = 1,680 gallons per day
75% Industrial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,8l7 sq.ft.
87,817 X .75 (75% of floor area) = 65,862 sq.ft.
65,862/5003 = l32 employees
132 employees X 20 gallons per person per day = 2,640
gallons per day
Total Usage:
1,680 (Commercial) + 2,640 (Industrial) = 4,320 gallons
per day
1- Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Potable Water Flow Projection
school Site "S" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993.
* Commercial - 1,000 gallons per week or 1,000 gallons per 10,820 sq. ft.
buildable area (43,560/.25 FAR = 10,890)
* Office - 20 gallons per person per day (1 person per 100 sq. ft. of
office) .
2. Hazen & Sawyer, Professional Consultants, Potable Water Flow Projection
school Site "S" Area, Technical Memo of November 3, 1993. Utilized
commercial rates at 1,000 gallons per
acre or 1,000 gallons per 13,068 sq. ft. buildable area (43,560/0.30 FAR =
13,068).
3. Employees per 1,000 sq. ft. of Gross Floor Area (1 per 500 sq.ft.), General
Light Industrial Rate, ITE Trip Generation Manual 5th Edition.
.,
SOL I D WAS T E
S.W. 10TH STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Existing Land Use Designation: Transitional - The existing
Transitional land use designation is also consistent with zoning
designations which allow residential development for Single Family,
Medium Density Residential (6-12 d.u./ac.), Office and Neighborhood
Commercial. The maximum intensity potential would result from 2
acres of Neighborhood Commercial and 4.72 acres of Office
development. The following are the projected generation rates of
the maximum development potential:
Neighborhood Commercial:
43,560 X 2 = 87,120 sq.ft. total land area
87,120 X 0.25 FAR = 21,780 sq. ft. buildable floor area
21,780 X 10.21 = 222,156 lbs. per year/365 = 609 lbs. per day
Office Development:
43,560 X 4.72 = 205,603 sq. ft. total land area
205,603 X .30 FAR = 61,681 sq. ft. buildable floor area
61,681 X 5.41 lbs. = 333,077 lbs. per year/365 = 913 lbs.
per day
Total Volume:
609 (Commercial) + 913 (Office) = 1,522 lbs. per day
1. Solid. Waste Authority, Technical Memo of August 3, 1993, (Waste Generation
Rate Volumes in lbs. per sq.ft. per year).
.
Proposed Land Use Designation: Commerce - The proposed Commerce
land use designation is consistent with zoning designations which
allow a mix of 25% Commercial and 75% Industrial, which would be the
maximum intensity potential. The following are the projected flows
based upon the maximum development intensity:
25% Commercial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,8l7 buildable sq. ft.
87,817 X .25 (25% of floor area) = 21,954
21,954 X lO.21 = 223,931 lbs. per year/365 = 614 lbs. per day
75% Industrial:
43,560 X 6.72 = 292,723.2 sq. ft. (total land area)
292,723 X .30 FAR = 87,817 buildable sq. ft.
87,817 X .75 (75% floor area) = 65,862
65,862 X 4.7 lbs./sq.ft./yr'1 = 309,551 lbs. per year / 365 =
848 lbs. per day.
Total Usage:
614 (Commercial) + 848 (Industrial) = 1,462 lbs. per day
1- Solid Waste Authority, Technical Memo of August 3, 1993, (Waste Generation
Rate Volumes in Ibs. per sq.ft. per year).
"
R E eRE A T ION ARE A
S.W. 10TH STREET INDUST~IAL AREA FLUM AMENDMENT
Existing Land Use Designation: Transitional - The existing
Transitional land use designation is also consistent with zoning
designations which allow residential development for Single Family,
Medium Density Residential (6-l2 d.u./ac.), Office and Neighborhood
Commercial. The. maximum intensity potential would result from 2
acres of Neighborhood Commercial and 4.72 acres of Office
development. Recreation dedication requirements do not apply to
commercial and office developments.
Neiqhborhood Commercial:
2 acres = N/A
Office Development:
4.72 acres = N/A
Proposed Land Use Designation: Commerce - Recreation dedication
requirements do not apply to industrial developments as they do not
have an impact on parks and recreation facilities and will not
affect the City's ability to provide this service.
Total Land Area = 6.72 acres
25% Commercial = N/A
75% Industrial = N/A
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: John Walker, Project Coordinator
FROM: Janet Meeks, Senior Planner
DATE: October 31, 1994
SUBJECT: PLAN AMENDMENT 94-2 RESPONSE TO ORC REGARDING SILVER
TERRACE REDEVELOPMENT AREA
1. Specify the maximum total land area the redevelopment plan
will address.
Redevelopment Area #4 contains approximately 20.71
acres (Silver Terrace Subdivision = l3.3 Acres,
Floranda Mobile Home Park = 7.41 Acres).
2. Discuss the non-residential uses to be allowed.
The commercial uses to be allowed with the
redevelopment of Silver Terrace are similar to those
uses found in the NC (Neighborhood Commercial) zone
district. The commercial uses involve limited retail
and service uses as listed below:
* Retail sales such as: convenience foods;
household supplies; garden and lawn supplies;
drugs and medicine; small appliance sales and
repairs; baked goods; delicatessen goods.
* Provision of services such as: barber and beauty
shops; dry cleaning; banks (excluding
drive-through); laundromats; sit down restaurants
including takeout and ice cream parlors
(excluding drive-through) ; equipment rentals;
newsstands.
* Business and Professional Offices which provide
direct services to customers such as: travel
agencies; outpatient medical offices; real
estate; finance and accounting; community service
(outreach) offices.
3. Discuss the relationship of the Hurricane Pines to the
redevelopment area. Also cite the existing policies and
how they are affected by the redevelopment plan.
Redevelopment Area #4 as designated on the Future Land
Use Map includes the Silver Terrace Subdivision and
Floranda Mobile Home Park. The Hurricane Pine Scrub
is located north of the mobile home park and is
outside the redevelopment boundaries.
.,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES - CONSERVATION ELEMENT:
Under the Inventory and Analysis section of the Conservation
Element, the Hurricane Pine Scrub is noted as "being in private
ownership and is subject to development. Portions of the sites
can be preserved through acquisition (including the County
Environmentally Sensitive Lands Acquisition Program), extraction
(public site dedication provisions of the subdivision
regulations), or through sensitive development under "planned
development" concepts.
Objective a-I:
The City shall undertake efforts, through the following
policies, to protect the following natural reservations and
environmentally sensitive areas:
* Hurricane Pines scrub community along SW 10th Street
Policy a-I. 1 The environmentally sensitive area identified in
Objective B-1 have been identified on the Future Land Use Map by
an "Open Space - Conservation" symbol.
Policy B-1. 2 . . . Hurricane Pines along S. W. 10th Street should
be preserved in part through sensitive site planning.
The Hurricane Pine scrub will not be directly affected by the
redevelopment plan as it is outside the redevelopment
boundaries. However, the redevelopment plan should take into
consideration its close proximity and be complimentary to the
environmentally sensitive area.
.
.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECO~f~IENDA nONS AND CO;"f~fENTS
FOR THE
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH
A men d men t 94-2
October 20 1994
Division of Resource Planning and Management
,-- Bureau of Local Planning
(
'--
This l'e?Ort is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010
"
INTRODUCTION
The following objections, recommendations and comments
are based upon the Department's review of the City of Delray
Beach proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant to
s.163.3184, F.g.
Objections relate to specific requirements of relevant
portions of Chapter 9J-S, Florida Administrative Code, and
Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommend-
ation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited
objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific
situations. Some of these objections may have initially been
raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is
a difference between the Department's objection and the external
agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection
would take precedence.
Each of these objections must be add~essed by the local
government and corrected when the amendment is resubmitted for
our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may
result in a determination that the amend~ent is not in compli-
ance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding
missing data and analysis items which the local government
considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case,
a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-
5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a
determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if
the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered
addressed.
The comments which follow the objections and recommendations
section are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of
a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call
attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be
substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or
logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar,
organization, mapping, and reader comprehension.
Appended to the back of the Department's report are the
comment letters from the other state review agencies and other
agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are
advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental
objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in
this report.
(
.
objections, Recommendations, and comments Report
City-of Delray Beach Proposed Amendment 94-2
I. FLUM Amendments V.C., V.D., and V.E.
(The following FLUM amendments represent the city's agenda items.)
Objection 1.
These proposed land use amendments are not supported by adequate
data and analysis. A public facilities analysis for sanitary
sewer, potable water, solid waste, traffic circulation, and
stormwaterjdrainage including existing capacity, impacts upon the
adopted levels of service, and the demand generated by the proposed
land uses is not provided. A description of the demand on all
public facilities has not been included. Additionally, the city
has not provided a needs analysis for amendment V. Do' consisting of I
the increase in density for the amendment sites, including site
suitability analysis for the proposed use.
Rules 9J-S.OOS(2) (a), (S)(b); 9J-S.OO6(1) (a), {b)l., 3.,4.,5.,
(l)(c), and (f)l.; 9J-S.006(2) (a), (b), (c)l., 2., and (e);
9J-S.006(3)(b) 1. , 4., (c)l., 2., 4., 6., and 7.; 9J-S.06(4)(a),
(b)l., 3.,4., and 5.; 9J-S.007(2)(a) and (b); 9J-S.Oll(1)(a) -
(f); 9J-S.Oll(2)(b)S., (c)S.a.; 9J-S.016(1)(a), (2)(a), (4)(a)1.;
9J-ll.006(1) (b)4; and 9J-ll.006(3). F.A.C.
Recommendation
The City should revise the data and analysis to include a public
facilities analysis for sanitary sewer, potable water, solid waste,
traffic circulation, and stormwaterjdrainage indicating the
existing capacities, levels of service, and demand generated by the
proposed land use changes. The data should demonstrate how demand
for public facilities affect existing public facility capacities
and levels of service. The analysis should also include a needs
analysis to support the increase in density for amendment site V.D.
and site suitability for the proposed use.
Additionally, amendment V.C. indicates that roadway improvements
are needed for S. W. lOth Street, therefore the analysis should also
include an assessment of the roadway condition; the availability of
roadway capacity; the average daily trips generated by the proposed
land use, its affect on the surrounding roadway network, and
adopted levels of service. The City should also provide
documentation to demonstrate that the roadway is listed in the
schedule of capital improvements within the Capital Improvements
Element.
C..
,
objection 2.
The maps included for amendments V. C., V. D., and V. E. do not depict
the present land use designations of the subject properties and
abutting properties, including land use intensities and densities,
legends, map scale, and date of preparation or adoption.
Rules 9J-S.005(1) (d)6., and (e); 9J-S.006(1) (a), (b)l., 3., 4.,5.;
9J-S.006(2)(a), and (c)1.; 9J-S.006(4) (a), (b)l., 3.,4., and S.;
9J-ll.006(1) (b) 1. I 2., 4.; and 9J-ll.006(3), F.A.C.
Recommendation
Revise the maps to depict the present and future land use
designations of the subject properties and adjacent properties.
The maps should have legends, scales, and adoption dates. The data
and analysis, with supporting maps should indicate land use
intensities and densities for all land use designations pertaining
to the amendment sites and adjacent land uses consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Objection 3.
An analysis of soils, natural resources, and historic resources has
not been provided to determine whether the sites of amendment V.C.
and V. D. are suitable to support the land use change. Additionally
an impact assessment of the land use changes upon those resources
, is not provided.
, Rules 9J-S.OOS(2) (a), (5) (b); 9J-S.006(1) (b) 1., 3., 4., S.;
9J - S . 006 ( 2) (b) 1 ., 2., 4., 5., ( c) 1 ., 2., and ( e) ;
9J-S.006(4)(b)1., .3., 4., and S.; 9J-S.Oll(2) (b)S.;
9J-l1.006(1) (b)4; and 9J-ll.006(3), F.A.C.
Recommendation
The city should provide an analysis of soils, natural resources,
and historic resources, to include wetlands, wellfield, and
flOOdplains. The suitability analysis should demonstrate whether
the site is suitable for the land uses proposed.
comments
The City should not adopt the land use changes of amendments V.D.
and V.E. prior to formal annexation (by ordinance) of the parcels.
If the city wishes to change the land use of these parcels, it
should submit a plan amendment after the parcels have been formally
annexed into the city. The annexation and the land use amendment
can occur at the same adoption hearing. If the city chooses to
adopt these land use changes prior to annexation; the City should
provide the Department a copy of the joint-planning agreement the
city has with Palm Beach County which specifies the Joint Planning
Area and the annexation process of County and City land.
'-'
~
Land uses can be adopted prior to annexation as long as it is
clearlysta_ted___that these uses are only advisory in nature.
Subsequent annexation of these land uses will require that a plan
amendment be submitted to reflect the City's annexation.
II. Future Land Use Element Text Revision
Comment
The City should specify in the plan what is the maximum total land
area for the Silver Terrace Area and what non-residential uses will
be allowed. Additionally, the City should establish policies
within the silver Terrace Redevelopment Plan for the protection of
Hurricane pine Scrub and other endangered plants and animals. The
protection policies of the redevelopment plan should be established
pursuant to those objectives and policies outlined in the Delray
Beach Comprehensive Plan, Conservation Element.
consistency with the state Comprehensive Plan (SCP)
The proposed FLUM amendments are inconsistent with the following
goals and policies of the state Comprehensive Plan.
Goal (8), Water Resources: Policy 10.
Goal (18), Public Facilities: Policy 1.
"
,
Consistency with the Comprehensive Regional policy Plan (CRPP)
The proposed FLUM amendments are inconsistent with the following
goals and policies of the Treasure Coast Regional Policy Plan.
Goal (8), Water Resources: Regional Goal 8.2.1: Policies 8.2.1.3.,
8.2.1.4., and 8.2.1.6.
Goal (17), Public Facilities: Regional Goal 17.1.1: Policies
17.1.1.1., and 7.1.1.6.
"-
.,
.
.
, .
[ITY DF DELIA' BEA[H
Oil ~.\, 8(<\CH
tIa.d 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243-7000
u-a.nca City
, 1111' MEMORANDUM ~ ~0Y1
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager~ (u)I~oJv-f)
~
SUBJECT: REVISED ALARM ORDINANCE
DATE: November 11, 1994
Attached is a revised version of our proposed new Alarm
Ordinance prepared by Eric Hightower. He has also included
copies of the Boynton Beach and the Boca Raton ordinances.
During the fiscal year just ended, the Fire Department received
551 false alarms. Our Police Department received 9,938 burglar
alarms. Of this number, 2,374 were accidental trips and 6,399
were system malfunctions. Handling these false alarms is
consuming a tremendous amount of staff time which needs to be
used more productively. The City's present Alarm Ordinance
imposes a fee of $25.00 for in excess of three false alarms in
anyone month. This provision in our code was brought forward
from the 1980 code, so it has been in effect probably for over
15 years. Obviously, the penalties are not severe enough to
deal with the problem, if they ever were. The Boca Raton
ordinance imposes penalties after two false alarms in anyone
year. The Boynton Beach ordinance uses a threshold of three
per year, which is what we propose for Delray.
Our existing ordinance also requires the City Clerk's office to
do the actual billing. This has proven to be cumbersome and a
source of problems since the Clerk is unable to answer
questions from individuals billed for false alarms. They must
be referred to either the Fire Department or the Police
Department. This ordinance also repeals provisions of our
existing code, which regulate alarm businesses. Alarm
businesses are now regulated by other 19vels of government and
regulation by the City is an unnecessary duplication.
DTH:mld
Attachment
@ Pnnrec or RecycleC1 Pape, THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
.,
. ,
.
.
[ITY DF DELIA' BEA[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 31)0 W A TIA,'HIC A VE:-;UE . DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33-H4
TELEPHO:\E 407, 2-U-7823 . FACSI~IlLE 40C' 243- 7816
POLICE LEGAL ADVISOR
HBMORUDUM
TO: David Harden, City Manager
FROM: Eric D. Hightower, Police Legal Advisor
DATE: November 8, 1994
SUBJECT: Revised Alara Ordinance
========================================================================
Pursuant to the City Commission comments, I have made revisions to
the Alarm Ordinance. The changes are as follows:
1- 112.20(C) - The renewal fee has been eliminated. Instead, a late
charge of $50.00 will be assessed if a person does not renew
within the time period allowed~ plus ten days after notice.
2. 112.27(B) - Six (6) false alarms will result in a $150.00 fee.
Seven (7) or more will be $200.00.
3. Section 4 - The effective date will be January 1, 1995.
Additionally, I have attached the City of Boca Raton and the City
of Boynton Beach ordinances. Regarding the Boynton Beach ordinance,
their fee for a permit is $30.00 without a renewal fee. Also, they do
not require yearly updates (Section 2.5-5). Section 2.5-8 states a
person li.ted by the property owner to respond must come to the sight
within one (1) hour or face a $50.00 fine. Section 2.5-13 states the
service f_ schedule for false alarms. As you can tell the rate is
lower than ours.
The Boca Raton burglar ordinance only cites a $27.00 service fee
for each false alarm after two (2) under Section 9-33(1). There is no
fee for permits and no permit required for burglar alarms.
Under the Boca fire alarm ordinance, there is a $100.00 service
fee after two (2) false alarms. There is no fee for a fire alarm
permit.
/2E
.,
SUBJECT: Revised Alarm Ordinance
November 8, 1994
Page 2
I have spoken to Police Legal Advisor Steve Melnick of Boca Raton
and he stated to me that Boca is revamping their alarm ordinances and
instituting a $50.00 permit fee. No other details as to charges is
presently available.
Please let me know at your earliest convenience any other changes
you wish to make in the ordinance if they are needed.
EDH: lbg E.fll
c: Fire Chief Rehr
ORDINANCE NO.9.L-94 .
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING TITLE
XI, "BUSINESS REGULATIONS", OF TIIE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, BY REPEALING CHAPTER 112, "ALARM
SYSTEMS", IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND ENACTING A NEW
CHAPTER 112, "ALARM SYSTEMS", TO PROVIDE FOR
THE REGULATION OF ALARM SYSTEMS WITHIN THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE, ~. SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
finds that a high incidence of false alarms and/or malfunctions causes a significant misuse
of the manpower and resources of the Police and Fire Departments by causing the
dispatch of units to the scene of a false alarm or alarm malfunction, thereby rendering units
out of service and unavailable to respond to legitimate emergency situations; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that the continued high incidence
of false alarms and/or malfunctions are a threat to the health, safety and welfare of the
citizens of the City ofDelray Beach; and
WHEREAS, reasonable regulation of all alarm systems and their users
should result in a significant decrease in false alarms with a resultant savings in public
resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that the revision of current
procedures and fees for multiple false alarms and malfunctions would serve the public
health, safety and welfare.
, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Sec;Cjon 1. That Title XI, "Business Regulations", Chapter 112, "Alarm
Systems", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby
repealed in its entirety, and a new Chapter 112, "Alarm Systems", is hereby enacted to
read as follows:
CHAPTER 112: ALARM SYSTEMS
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 112.01 SHORT TITLE.
This chapter shall be known and cited as the "Alarm Systems Ordinance."
"
Section 112.02 PURPOSE. .
This chapter is enacted to provide minimum standards and regulations
applicable to alann systems, and alarm users. Both society in general and public safety in.
particular will be aided by providing a useful and usable system of private security or fire
response which properly balances quick response by the Police and Fire Departments with
minimization of public resources spent on alarms which are false or otherwise not the
intended function of such systems.
Section 112.03 DEFINITIONS.
For the purpose of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless
the context clearly indicates or requires a different m~aning:
"ALARM". The sound or signal of an alarm system.
"ALARM MALFUNCfION". The activation of any alarm which resUlts
in the response of the Police Department or the Fire Department, caused by mechanical
. failure, malfunction, improper installation or lack of proper maintenance or any other
response for which Police or Fire Department personnel are unable to gain access to the
premises for any reason, or are unable to detennine the apparent cause of the alarm
activation.
"ALARM REGISTRATION". A registration issued by the City
Manager or his designee allowing the operation of an alarm system within the City of
Delray Beach and signifying compliance of the alarm system with the provisions of this
chapter.
"ALARM SYSTEM". Any mechanical, electrical or radio- controlled
device which is designed for the detection of smoke, fire, unauthorized entry or other
activity requiring urgent attention, and which when activated emits a sound or transmits a
signal or message beyond the premises to alert others of an emergency situation.
..
"ALARM TECHNICIAN". Any person who inspects, installs, repairs or
perfonns maintenance on alarm systems and is licensed by the State of Florida or works
under a"State licensed alarm contractor.
It ~ LJ\RM USER". Any individual, partnership, corporation or other
entity in control of any building, structure, facility or premises, or portion thereof, where
an alarm system is located and maintained.
"AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE DIALING DEVICE OR DIGITAL
ALARM COMMUNICATOR". An alarm system which automatically transmits a
recorded message or coded signal over regular telephone lines by direct connection or
otherwise, indicating the existence of the emergency situation that the alarm system is
designed to detect.
2
"ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL". As to securitylburglar alarm sYstems,
the Chief of Police or his designated representative; as to fire alarm systems, the Fire Chief
or his designated representative.
"FALSE ALARM". An alarm for which a governmental agency has
made an inspection of the premises within a reasonable time after the activation of $11
alarm and finds no apparent reason for the alarm except a possible alarm malfunction, or
an activation falsely indicating that an emergency exists. An alarm is not considered a
false alarm if the alarm is activated by unusually violent conditions of nature or due to
malicious causes beyond the control of the alarm user.
"REGISTRA nON PERIOD". On an annual basis, the period from
October 1st to the 30th day of September of the next year.
"PREMISES". Any building, structure or facility and adjoining pro~rty
which is protected by and upon which is installed an alarm system.
"REOUlRED OPERATIVE ALARM SYSTEM". An alarm system
which the owner of a premises is required to maintain in an operative condition pursuant
to statute, law, ordinance, rule or regulation of any governmental entity.
"SMOKE DETECTOR". A device which detects the visible or invisible
particles of combustion.
Section 112.04 PROHIBITIONS.
(A) No person, partnership, corporation or other entity shall use or
cause to be used any automatic telephone dialing alarm device or digital alarm
communicator system over any telephone lines exclusively used by the public to directly
request emergency service.
~ (B) Audible securitylburglar alarm systems which do not automatically
deactivate within thirty (30) minutes after activation are prohibited.
,
(C) Fire alarm systems which automatically deactivate are prohibited.
(D) Alarms which activate in the event of a power restoration after a
power failure are prohibited.
Section 112.05 EFFECT ON FIRE CODES.
Nothing herein shall be construed as repealing or modifying any provisions
of the applicable fire codes, and to the extent that the provisions of this chapter conflict
with applicable fire codes, those fire codes shall control.
3
.,
Section 112.06 EXEMPTIONS. .
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to:
(A) Alarm systems affixed to motor vehicles, mobile conveyances or
equipment; or
(B) Alarms which are not intended to be heard outside the premises.
REGULATION OF ALARM SYSTEMS
. Section 112.20 ALARM REGISTRATION REOUlRED: FEE: TERM OF
REGISTRATION: NONTRANSFERABLE.
(A) (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to install, operate or
maintain an alarm system without a valid alarm registration. Any new system shall be
required to have a sepearte installation permit.
(2) For any alarm system existing prior to the effective date of
. this chapter, an alarm registration application shall be made within ninety (90) days of the
effective date hereof. A person with an installed alarm system without a registration from
the city shall be issued a notice of violation and that person shall have ten (10) days from
the date of the notice of violation to make application for the registration. If application
for an alarm registration is not made within ten (10) days of the notice of violation, the
person shall be in violation of this section and shall result in a late charge of fifty dollars
($50.00) or an appearance before the Code Enforcement Board.
(B) A registration fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) shall be charged
the alarm user by the city for each alarm registration issued. The registration fee shall not
be prorated based upon when, during the registration period, the alarm registration
application is made or the fee is paid.
(C) Alarm registrations must be renewed each year and shall be in effect
from October 1st to the 30th day of September of the next year. A renewal registration
will be issued after completion of an application form. A person with an installed alarm
system witlout a renewal registration from the city shall be issued a notice of violation and
that persoti shaU have ten (10) days from the date of the notice of violation to make
application for the renewal registration. If application for an alann renewal registration is
not made within ten (10) days of the notice of violation, the person shall be in violation of
this section and shall result in a late charge of fifty dollars ($50.00) or an appearance
before the Code Enforcement Board.
(0) Applicants having more than one alann system protecting two or
more separate structures shall be required to obtain separate alann registrations for each
structure, unless the structures are protected by the same alann system.
4
.
(E) Any alarm registration issued pursuant to this chapter shall' not be
transferable or assignable. Any change in ownership of residential or commercial property
to which an alarm registraton is assigned shall require a new registration application and a
fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00).
Section 112.21 APPLICATION FOR ALARM REGISTRATION: REPORTING
CHANGES TO REOUlRED INFORMATION.
(A) Application for an alarm registration shall be made by a person
having control over the property on which the alarm system is to be operated. Such
application shall be made in writing to the Chief Building Official on a form designated by
the city for that purpose. Each application shall be. accompanied by a registration fee of
twenty-five dollars ($25.00).
(B) On such application, the applicant shall set forth:
(1) The name, address and telephone number of the applicant's
. property to be serviced by the alarm, including any business name used for the premises.
(2) The name, address and telephone number of the applicant, if
different from the property to be serviced.
(3) The make and type of the alarm system.
(4) The name, address and telephone number of the alarm
business installing or maintaining the alarm system, if any.
(5) The date of activation of the alarm system.
(6) Emergency Notification. The names, addresses and
telephone numbers of at least two (2) persons or entities who can be contacted at any time
for the following purposes:
(a) To receive notification of alarm activation~
, ~
(b) To arrive at the alarm site within thirty (30) minutes
after receiving a request from the Police Department or Fire Department to do so; and
(c) To grant access to or enter the premises and
deactivate the alarm system.
(C) The information set forth in subsection (B) shall be kept current by
the registration holder, and the registration holder shall notify the Police
Department/Communications Center within ten (10) days of any changes in this
information. Failure to so notify shall constitute a violation of this chapter and shall result
in a late charge often dollars.($10.oo).
5
..
(0) Immediately upon receipt of a registration and prior "to the
activation of any alarm system, the Chief Building Official or his designee shall forward a
copy of the application to the Police Department/Communications Center.
SECTION 112.22 DUTY OF PERSON NOTJ.l4'lED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
PREMISES. RENDER ASSISTANCE.
Any person who is notified by any member of the Police Department or
Fire Department of the activation of an alarm system and who is able to give access to the
alarm site shall come to the alarm site within thirty (30) minutes of the time such person is
notified of such activation and shall provide the Police and/or Fire Department any
necessary access or assistance. Failure to respond as provided shall be grounds for and
result in the city taking reasonable action to deactivate the alarm as provided in Section
112.28 and, if applicable, to suspend or revoke an alarm business authorization. as
provided in Section 112.44.
Section 112.23 ISSUANCE OF ALARM REGISTRA nON: DECAL REOUIRED.
(A) An alarm registration shall be issued by the Chief Building Official
upon receipt of a completed application and payment of the $25.00 registration fee.
(B) The Chief Building Official or his designee may inspect the alarm
equipment and planned installation and may require the submission of additional and
specific information.
(C) Each alarm registration holder shall be issued a decal which shall
contain the alarm user's registration number. This decal must be prominently posted at or
near the front entrance of the premises covered by the registration so that the decal is
visible from the outside of the structure.
(0) An application for an alarm registration may be denied if:
~
(1) The requested information is not supplied on the application
or such additional information as required is not furnished.
,
(2) Material information on the application is incorrect, or an
applicant falSifies any statement on the application.
(3) If the equipment is found to be inferior and not capable of
proper performance.
Section 112.24 APPEAL OF DENIAL OF REGISTRATION.
Any applicant who is denied an alarm registration may request, in writing, a
6
.
hearing before the City Manager or his designee within fifteen (15) calender days of
receipt of the denial. The City Manager or his designee shall hold a hearing within a
reasonable time of receipt of the written request. After taking into consideration all
relevant facts and circumstances, the City Manager or his designee may either affirm the
denial or order the Chief Building Official to issue the alarm registration in writing. Such
decision shall be mailed to the applicant by regular mail.
Section 112.25 FALSE ALARMS PROHIBITED: EXCEPTIONS.
(A) No person shall intentionally activate an alarm system for any
purpose other than an emergency or threat of emergency of the kind for which the alarm
system was designed to give notice.
(B) No alarm system shall be tested or demonstrated without first
notifying the Police Department or Fire Department and receiving pennission from the
appropriate enforcement official.
Penalty, see Section 112.99
. Section 112.26 RESPONSE TO ALARM: ALARM USER RESPONSmILITY:
ALARM MALFUNCTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION.
(A) A response to an alarm activation shall result when any officer or
member of the Police or Fire department shall be dispatched to the premises where the
alarm has been activated or learns of the activation of the alarm system( s), by any means
whatsoever, and responds thereto by traveling to that premises.
(B) After responding to an alarm activation, the enforcement official
shall notify any person identified in the alarm registration application pursuant to Sec.
112.21 of the activation of the alarm system and such person shall thereupon travel to the
premises to ascertain the status thereof. Should the person notified fail to appear at said
premises within thirty (30) minutes after being notified to do so, the City shall charge the
alarm user a fee of seventy-five dollars ($75.00). The officer or member of the Police
Department or Fire Department who responded to said premises shall serve the alarm user
or authorized representative with an "Alarm Activation Report".
, (C) In the event of an alarm activation deemed by the enforcement
official to be a false alarm as the result of an alarm malfunction, the alarm user or
authorized representative will be served an "Alarm Activation Report" indicating that the
activation was deemed to be the result of a malfunction, and requiring the alarm user or
authorized representative to return a completed "Affidavit of ServicelRepair" within thirty
(30) days of said alarm activation which can verify to the satisfaction of the enforcement
official that the alarm system in question has actually been examined by an alarm
technician and that a bona fide attempt has been made to identify and correct any defect of
design, installation or operation of the alarm system which was identifiable as the cause of
the alarm malfunction. Failure to return an "Affidavit of ServicelRepair" within said
fifteen day period which is satisfactory to the enforcement official will result in a
7
.,
disconnection per Section 112.28 or enforcement action in the event of a reqiuired Fire
Alarm System per F.S. 633.025(3).
Section 112.27 MULTIPLE ALARM MALFUNCTIONS OR FALSE ALARMS
DECLARED A PUBLIC NUISANCE: FEE CHARGES.
(A) It is hereby found and determined that the emission of more than
three (3) false alarms within a single registration period at the same premises is excessive
and constitutes a public nuisance.
(B) No fee shall be assessed for the first three (3) false alarms at the
same premises responded to by the Police Department or the Fire Department during each
registration period. Thereafter, the following fees sh~ be paid by the alarm user for each
false alarm responded to by the Police Department or the Fire Department at the same
premises during each registration period.
Number of False Alarms or Alarm Malfunctions E=
Fourth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ 50.00
Fifth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.00
Sixth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 150.00
Seventh and above . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 200.00 each
(C) Once a false alarm or alarm malfunction has been responded to by
the Police Department or the Fire Department, it shall be unlawful for the alarm panel to
be reset by the alarm user or authorized representative, until the authorization of the
enforcement official has been obtained.
(D) Should any fee assessed pursuant to this chapter remain unpaid in
excess of 120 days from the date the charge is billed, a collection fee in the amount of
eight percent (8%) of the outstanding balance shall be assessed and shall be payable by the
alarm user in addition to the original fee. The alarm user shall also be responsible for any
legal fees or costs incurred by the City ofDelray Beach in enforcement of this chapter.
Section 112.28 DISCONNECTION OF ALARM SYSTEM.
,
(A) Except for premises protected by a required operative alarm
system, either of the Police Department or Fire Department enforcement officials are
authorized to order the disconnecting or deactivation of any alarm system, by written
notice to the alarm user at the premises wherein an alarm system is installed, for any of the
following reasons:
(1) Failure to meet all requirements provided for in this chapter
within thirty (30) days of the charging of the fee; or
(2) Failure of the alarm user to provide a written "Affidavit of
ServicelRepair" required by tJris chapter; or
8
.
(3) A false alarm or alarm malfunction at a premises for which a
fee is charged pursuant to this chapter is the result of the failure of the alarm user to take
corrective action to eliminate the cause of the false alarm; or
(4) The failure of a person notified pursuant to this chapter to
appear within thirty (30) minutes after being notified to respond, if such failure to timely
appear occurs four or more times within a registration period.
(B) The written notice to disconnect or deactivate shall be mailed to the
alarm user, by certified mail, and shall specify the date on which the alarm user shall be
required to disconnect or deactivate the alarm system, which date shall be at least fifteen
(15) days following the date of mailing of the notice. The alarm user may appeal the order
of the enforcement official pursuant to Section 112.29.
Section 112.19 APPEAL.
An alarm user to whom a notice to disconnect or deactivate an al8rm
system was mailed, pursuant to Section 112.28, shall be entitled to appeal the order of the
. enforcement official to the City Manager or his designee. An appeal must be in writing,
stating the reasons why the order to disconnect or deactivate should be withdrawn, and
shall be made within fifteen (15) days of the date of receipt of the notice to disconnect.
The. City Manager or his designee shall review the facts and circumstances and shall
determine whether the alarm user has shown good cause why the order should be
withdrawn. The City Manager or his designee shall notify the alarm user of the decision in
writing. If the City Manager or his designee affirms the order to disconnect or deactivate
an alarm system, the alarm user shall have five (5) days following mailing of the written
decision of the City Manager or his designee within which to comply with the order. The
appeal of an order to disconnect or deactivate shall suspend the effective date of the order
until the appeal has been acted upon by the City Manager or his designee.
Section 112.30 FAILURE TO DISCONNECT OR UNAUTHORIZED
RECONNECTION OF ALARM SYSTEM.
-,
It shall be unlawful for any person to fail to disconnect or deactivate an
alarm system which has been ordered disconnected or deactivated pursuant to Section
112.28, 'including those situations in which the City Manager or his designee affirmed the
order to diIconnect or deactivate; and it shall be unlawful for any person to reconnect an
alarm system which has been disconnected or deactivated pursuant to the order of the
enforcement official, unless reconnection of the alarm system is authorized pursuant to
Section 112.31. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be subject to
penalties provided for in Section 10.99, the penalty being cumulative to other
administrative remedies provided for in this chapter.
Section 112.31 RECONNECTION OF ALARM SYSTEMS.
Any order to disconnect or deactivate an alarm system may be rescinded by
9
0'
either the Police Department or Fire Department enforcement official upon a finaing by
said enforcement official that the alarm user has taken corrective action which it is
reasonable to conclude will remedy the cause of the false alarms or alarm malfunctions at
the premises. In making a request for such a rescission, the alarm user shall have the
burden to show what corrective action has been taken and that same is sufficient to
support a finding that the cause of the false alarms or alarm malfunctions has been
remedied. The enforcement official shall have the right to inspect the alarm system and
test same prior to rescinding the order to disconnect or deactivate. Before any
reconnection af an alarm system, after the order to disconnect said system, a reconnection
fee offifty dollars ($50.00) shall be assessed. The enforcement official shall not rescind an
order to disconnect or deactivate if the alarm user has failed to pay any fee charged
pursuant to this chapter.
Section 112.32 NEWLY INSTALLED ALARM SYSTEMS.
The provisions of this chapter relative to false alarms shall not apply to any
newly installed alarm system for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of the activation
of that alarm system, but shall apply from and after the expiration of the initial sixty (60)
. day period following activation. The time limit provided for in this section shall be
measured from the date shown on the application for alarm registration required by
Section 112.21(B)(5). The exemptions set forth in this section shall not apply to any
person who has failed to comply with Section 112.20.
ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Section 112.50 NONCOMPLIANCE WITH PROVISIONS.
In addition to the violations specifically set forth herein, any noncompliance
with the provisions of this chapter shall be decreed a violation of this chapter, punishable
as provided herein.
Section 112.51 ENFORCEMENT THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD.
The enforcement official may initiate action before the Code Enforcement
Board. of the city to obtain compliance with this chapter and payment of service charges or
fees assessed by the city pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The Code
Enforcement Board shall have the authority to place a lien against the premises served by
an alarm system in the amount of all assessed service charges and fees.
Section 112.52 ALARM SYSTEM OPERA nONS.
The City, its officers, employees and agents, shall not assume any duty or
responsibility for the installation, maintenance, operation, repair or effectiveness of any
privately owned alarm system, those duties or responsibilities being solely those of the
alarm user. Additionally, it shall be the responsibility of the alarm user to silence an
10
activated alann and thereafter reset same. .
Section 112.53 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.
The City, its officers and agents shall not be under any obligation or duty to
an alann user or to any other person hereunder by reason of this ordinance. The C~ty
specifically disclaims liability for any damages which may be caused by failure to respond
to an alann. Nothing herein shall be deemed to waive any immunities granted pursuant to
Section 768.28, Florida Statutes.
Section 112.54 REMEDIES TO BE CUMULATIVE.
The remedies of the city provided in this chapter shall be cumulative with
each other and other remedies existing according to law.
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith
be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 3. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any
portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof
as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective January 1, 1995 after
its passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading
on this the day of , 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
~
City Clerk
,
First Retlding
Second Reading
11
"
---
~~~'Be-~
.
Chapter 2.5
.
ALARM SYSTEMS.
Sec. 2.5-1. Short title.
This chapter shall be known and cited as the "Burglar and Fire
Alarm Ordinance." (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ I, 7-19-88)
Sec. 2.5-2. Definitions.
For the purpose of this chapter, whenever any of the following
words or terms are used herein, they shall have the mean~ngs
ascribed to them in this section:
Alarm: Any device which is used in a building or premises for
the detection. of fire, unauthorized entry, burglary or any other
criminal activity, and which when activated emits a sound, Big-
\ nal or message to alert others, whether emitted on or off the
premises or to the central office of an alarm business.
Alarm business: Any person engaged in the business of selling,
leasing, monitoring, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering,
replacing, moving or installing any alarm for any building, place
or premises.
A larm user: Any person using an alarm or occupying and con-
trolling a premises or building, or a portion of a premises or
building, served by an alarm.
Audible alarm: An alarm that sounds a warning bell, buzzer, or
other sounding device that can be heard for fifty (50) feet or more
beyond the protected premises.
,
Class "A" alarms: All those alarms activated by illegal entry,
in response to criminal activity or fire and includes alarms acti-
vated solely by an act of nature not contributed to by faulty
design, maintenance, installation or use.
-
'Editor's note-Ord. No. 86.36. H 1-16. adopted July 19. 1988. did not
S~l(\' manner of codification; hence. such provisions have been desill'1'ated as
Ch ~ s. ~~ :2:';1-:2 5.16. by lhp ..du(lJ'
Supp. No. 61 257
---
-
I
I
. (
t 2.5.2 BOYNTON BEACH CODE
False alarms: All activated alarms. responded to by the police
and/or fire department, which do not qualify as class "A" alarms,
including but not limited to alarms activated through inadver-
tence, neglect, accident, alarm testing. and faulty installation or
maintenance, and excessive vibrations or power failure.
Government: Any direct agency of any federal, state, county, or
city government including schools and the U.S. Postal Service.
Person: Shall mean any natural person, individual or any firm,
partnership, association, limited partnership, sole proprietorship,
corporation, apartment complex, condominium association, or any
business entity whatsoever.
Premises: Shall mean the building or structure and acijoining
property which is protected by and upon which is installed an
emergency alarm or alarm system. COrd. No. 88-36, f 2, 7-19-88;
Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 1,9.18-90)
See. 2.5-3. Alarm operating permit required. (
No person shall have an alarm installed to be operational, or
use an existing alarm serving a premises, or a building. or portion
thereof, occupied or controlled by such person. unless an alarm I
operating permit in the form of a decal has been issued here- I
j .
under, and is in force, authorizing the use of such alarm. Such I
alarm operating permit shall constitute a regulatory license. For I
I
any alarm existing prior to the effective date of this chapter an I
alarm operating permit application shall be made within sixty I
(60) days of the effective date hereof. A person with an installed
alann system without a permit from the city shall be issued a
notice of violation and that person ahall have ten (10) days from
, the date of the notice of violation to make application for a permit.
If application for a permit is not made within ten (10) days of the
notice of violation the person shall be in violation of this section.
, (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 3, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 2,9.18-90; Ord. No.
92-5, ~ I, 3.3-92; Ord. No. 94.29, ~ I, 9.9.94\
Sec. 2.5-4. Application for permit.
(a\ Application for an alann operating permit for the operation of
an alarm system shall be made by a person having control over
Supp. No. 61 258
"
-
.
ALARM SYSTEMS f2.~
the property on which the alarm system is to be operated. Such
application shall be made in writing to the building official on a
form designated by the city for that purpose. On such application,
the applicant shall set forth:
(
~
.
"-
(
Supp. No. 61 258.1
I ALARM SYSTEMS ~ 25.4
I
.
(1) The name, address and telephone number of each person
in controlof the property.
(2) The street address of the property on which the alarm
system is to be or has been installed and.operated.
(3) Any business name used for the premises on which the
alarm system is to be installed and operated.
(4) Whether the alarm system or systems are or are not local
alarms and whether the alarm system or systems are de.
signed to give notice of a burglary. fire, hold.up or of other
type of emergency_
(5) The name of the person or alarm system business who will
install t~e alarm system.
(6) The names and telephone numbers of two (2) persons which
are able to and have ~ as follows:
a. To receive notification of alarm activation at any time;
b. To arrive at the alarm site within one (1) hour after
receiving a request from a member of the communica-
tions center. police department or fll"e department to
do so; 'and .
c. To grant access to the alarm site and to deactivate the
alarni system if such becomes necessary; or
- .
The name and telephone number of an alarm system busi-
ness which is able and has agreed to provide as follows:
. .d. The names ,of two (2) persons listed with that company
who are able to arrive within one (1) hour after re-
ceiving a request from a member of the communica.
tions division. police department or fll"e department to
do 'so; and to grant 'access to the alarm site and to
deactivate the alarm. system if necessary,
e. When necessary. the permit holder shall give the alarm
- system business the name and telephone number of
another person who is able and is willing to perform
the above described duties so that at least two (2) per-
sons are listed with the alarm system business at all
~ times,
I Supp. No. 47 259
", ~
'.
~ 2.5.4 BOYNTON BEACH CODE (
.
f. The person having control over the property has au-
thorized the alarm system business to provide the names
listed with that business pursuant to subsections d
and e above to the police and/or fire department or the
communications center whenever that department(s) or
the communication~ center has requested that infor-
mation in order to obtain assistance after an alarm
has been activated. .
(b) Immediately after receipt of the alarm operating permit
application, the building official or his designee, shall forward a
copy of the application to the communications division. (Ord. ~o.
88~36, ~ 4, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 91-6, ~ 1, 2-19-91)
Sec. 2.5.5. Term of permit; fee; nontransferable.
(a) Fee. A fee of thirty dollars ($30.00) shall be charged the
alarm user by the city for each alarm operating permit issued, to
defray the cost of regulation. Successive renewal fees shall not be
required of a residential or commercial permit holder except as
provided in subsection (b). (
(b) Term and renewal. An alarm operating permit shall have
an indefinite term from date of issuance; provided however, the
term shall expire and the permit [shall be] deemed invalid with
any change in ownership of residential or commercial property to
which the permit is assigned. Compliance with subsections (1)
and (2) shall revalidate the alarm permit.
(1) An alarm permit holder is required to notify the city within
. . seven (7) days of any change of alarm permit registration
information.
(2) Any change in ownership of residential or commercial prop-
erty to which an alarm permit is assigned shall require a
new registration application and a fee of thirty dollars
($30.00).
.. (c) Permit nontransferable. Any alarm operating permit issued
pursuant to this article shall not be transferable or assignable
and shall cover only one (1) building or premises or portion thereof.
, (Ord. No. 88-36; ~ 5, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 3, 9-18-90; Ord. No.
90-59, ~ 1, 12-18-90)
Supp. No. 47 260
ALARM SYSTEMS ~ 2.5-8
( -
Sec. 2.5-6. Issuance of alarm. operating permit.
An alarm permit will be issued by the building official upon
receipt of said completed application, and the building official or
his designee may inspect the alarm equipment and planned in-
stallation and may require the submission of additional and spe-
cific information.
An alarm operating permit shall be denied if:
(a) The requested information is not supplied on the applica.
tion or such additional information as required [is not fur-
nished.]
(b) Material information on the application is incorrect.
(c) Any person' or entity listed on the application under items
(a)(4), (5) and (6) of section 2.5-4 of this chapter does not
possess any required occupational or regulatory license to
conduct the activities required by said items (a)(4), (5) and
(6), unless the person or entity is the alarm user.
(d) If the equipment is found to be inferior and not capable of
\ proper performance. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 6, 7-19-88; Ord. No.
90-43, ~ 4, 9-18-90)
Sec. 2.5.7. Decal required.
Each alarm operating permit holder shall be issued an alarm
decal by the building official. Said decal shall be displayed at the
main entry or a conspicuous place visible at the front of the pre-
mises or all business, commercial establishments, and residential
premises, covered by said permit. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 7, 7-19.88;
Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 5, 9-18-90)
Sec. 2.5-8. Duties of property owner.
For the purpose of this chapter, both the owner and lessee of an
office or commercial premises shall be considered to be the owners
- of the premises and shall be held jointly and severally responsible
for the registration of the alarm system and liable to the city for
all service fees charged for false alarms. The owner of an apart
ment complex or multifamily residence is responsible for the rf'g
,
I Supp. No. 46 261
"
!i 2.5-8 BOYNTON BEACH CODE (
.
istration of all alarm systems and shall be liable to the city for
service fees charged for false alarms.
The person in control of the property on which an alarm system
is installed shall:
(a) Ensure that any person listed with the city is able:
(1) To receive notification at any time;
(2) To come to the alarm site within one (1) hour after
receiving a request from a member of the police de-
partment, fire department or communications depart.
ment to do so; and
(3) To grant access to the alarm site and to deactivate the
alarm system if such becomes necessary.
(4) To inspect the alarm system after each activation to
ensure proper operation.
(b) Train all persons who may activate the alarm system in
the proper operation of the alarm system.
(c) Failure to respond as provided shall result in a fme of fifty
dollars ($50.00). The police department or fire department (
shall indicate on their false alarm report the failure to
respond. The fmance department shall be responsible for
assessing the f1fty dollar ($50.00) fme.
(d) Notify the city within thirty (30) days of any changes of
information contained on the original application.
(e) Properly maintain the alarm system to ensure malfunc-
tions due to faulty maintenance will not occur. (Ord. No.
88-36, ~ 8, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 6, 9-18-90)
Sec. 2.5.9. Duty of person notified to provide access to pre-
mises, render assistance.
Any person who is notified by any member of the communica-
tions division, police department or flIe department of the acti-
vation of an alarm system and who is able to give access to the
~ alarm site shall come to the alarm site within one (1) hour of the
time such person is notified of such activation and shall provide
the police and/or flIe department any necessary access or assis-
, tance. Failure to respond as provided shall be grounds for and
Supp. No. 46 262
.
ALARM SYSTEMS ~ 2.5-10
result in the city taking reasonable action to deactivate the alarm.
(Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 9, 7-19-88; Ord. No. 90.43. ~ 7, 9.18-90)
Sec. 2.5.10. Operation of system.
No person shall install, cause to be installed or permit to be
installed any alarm system unless the requirements of ~his sec-
tion are met.
(a) Any alarm system which may be activated as a result of
different types of emergency situations shall give a unique
signal to designate activation as a result of a hold-up, a
burglary, a fITe, or any other different type of emergency
situation so that the proper notification and proper re-
sponse can be made.
(b) Any local alarm system shall have a twenty-minute shutoff
and must not make a sound similar to that of a siren, an
emergency vehicle or a civil defense warning system. For
purposes of this subsection any alarm system which emits
any variable tone (as opposed to a steady pitch or a ringing
sound as is made by a bell) shall be considered to be emit-
ting a sound which is similar to that of a siren, an emer-
gency vehicle or a. civil defense warning system.
(c) Any hold-up alarm shall be designed so that it may be
activated only by intentional and deliberate human action;
and any owner found in violation of subsection (a), (b) or (c)
shall be fined f1fty dollars ($50.00).
(d) The police department .or fire department shall indicate
any violation of subsection (a), (b) or (c) on the alarm report
and code enforcement division shall be responsible to take
the appropriate action by issuing a notice of violation of
this section. The owner of the alarm system will have ten
(10) days from the date of the notice of violation to correct
the violation. If the violation is not corrected within ten
(10) days, the owner shall be fined f1fty dollars ($50.00).
~ Code enforcement s~all notify the finance department to
mail the notice of fine (invoice) if the violation is not cor.
rected. If the fine is not paid within ten (10) days the alarm
owner will be in violation of section 2.17 of this chapter.
,
Supp. No. 48 263
"
~ 2.5.10 BOYNTON BEACH CODE (.
The city m.ay set reasonable standards and procedures to
(e)
be followed by any alarm system business or telephone
answering service when giving notice to the communica-
tions division of activation of an alarm system. Such stan-
dards and procedures shall be set out in writing and made
available to any alarm system business or telephone an-
swering service requesting same. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 10,
7-19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 8, 9-18-90)
Sec. 2.5.11. False alarms prohibited; exceptions.
No person shall intentionally activate an alarm system for any
purpose other than an emergency or threat of emergency of the
kind for which the alarm system was designed to give notice. The
owner or person responsible for testing a fire, burglary or emer.
gency alarm system shall be required to notify the communica-
tions division a minimum of one (1) hour prior to the alarm system
test. It shall then be an affirmative defense to prosecution under
this section that the alarm system sounded solely for the purpose
of testing the alarm, and the person who tested the alarm took
reasonable precautions to avoid any request being made to the (
police department or fire department to respond to such alarm.
(Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 11, 7-19.88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 9, 9-18-90)
Sec. 2.5-12. Excessive false alarms declared a public nui-
sance; exceptions.
0.. -- - -
(a) The emission of more than three (3) false alarms within any
twelve-month period of time is excessive and constitutes a serious
nuisance, and is hereby declared to be unlawful and a violation of
this section. No person shall allow, permit, cause or fail to pre-
vent the emission, for any reason, by any alarm used by such
person, or any alarm serving a premises or a building occupied
and controlled by such person, of more than three (3) false alarms
within any twelve-month period of time.
(b) All new fire alarm systems shall be exempt from the appli-
. cation of this section for the first three (3) months from the date
of initial installation.
(Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 12, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 89-6, ~ 1,4.4-89; Ord. No.
, 90-43, ~ 10, 9-18-90; Ord. No. 91-64, ~ 2, 9-19-91)
-
Supp. No. 48 264 (
~. ~
,
ALARM SYSTEMS - ! 2.5-14
Sec. 2.5-13. False alarm response service fee; collection.
For response to excessive false alarms by the police department
or fire department, the alarm user shall be charged a service fee
by the City as follows: .
Four (4) false alarms in any twelve-month period $25.00
Five (5) false alarms in any twelve-month period 50.00
Six (6) false alarms in any twelve-month period. . 100.00
Each successive false alarm, after six (6), in any
twelve-month period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . 100.00
The chief of police or his/her designee, shall determine whether
a false burglar alarm has occurred, and the fue chief, or his/her
designee, shall determine whether a false flre alarm has occurred
and the frequency of such false alarms. The city sh~ notify alarm
users of amounts owed to the city and shall make demand therefor,
pursuant to the provisions of this section.
( The city attorney may proceed by a suit in a court of competent
jurisdiction to collect said charge after demand therefor has been
made by the city and the payment thereof refused by the alarm
user. (Ord. No. 88.36, ~ 13, 7.19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 11, 9.18-90)
Sec. 2.5-14. Interference with city telephone tnmk lines pro-
hibited; alarm business central office required;
identification required.
(a) No person shall use or cause to be used any telephone or
electronic device or attachment that automatically selects a pub-
lic primary telephone trunk line of the communications center,
police department, fire department or any other departm.ent or
bureau of the city, and then reproduces any prerecorded message
to report any burglary, unauthorized entry or other emergency.
, (b) No person shall provide a private alarm service system
programmed to a central alarm reception office unless it shall
have the central office staffed at all times. twenty-four (24) hours
a day. including holidays_
,
(cl Any staff member of a private alarm service system report-
( in~ an alarm activation to which police department and/or fire
Supp. No 61 265
.....;
"
(
~ 2.5-14 BOYNTON BEACH CODE .
department response is requested shall identify himself and state
the name and telephone number of the alarm business by whieh
such response is requested. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 14, 7-19-88)
Sec. 2.5-15. Audible alarmS.
All alarms which may be heard in any public place shall be
equipped and maintained to automatically cut off no longer than
twenty (20) minutes after being set off. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 15,
7-19-88; Ord. No. 91-64, ~ 3, 9-19-91)
Sec. 2.5-16. Enforcement through codes enforcement board.
The building official,' police chief, fire chief or their designees
may initiate action before the codes enforcement board of the city
to obtain compliance with this chapter and payment of service
charges assessed by the city pursuant to section 2.5-13. The board
shall have the authority to place a lien against the property served
by a burglar and/or fire alarm in the amount of all assessed ser-
vice charges. (Ord. No. 88-36, ~ 16, 7-19-88; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 12, (
9-18-90; Ord. No. 92-5, ~ 2, 3-3-92; Ord. No. 93-29, ~ 2,9-9-94)
Sec. 2.6-17. Service charge, fines; fallure to .pay.
The owner of an alarm system in violation of a specified section
of this chapter shall have ten (10) days from the date of the vio-
lation notice to pay the service charge and/or fme.
(a) If the owner fails to pay the service or fine within ten (10)
days the city shall notify the owner or person in charge of
the alarm system by certified mail that the payment is past
due in violation of this section and demand payment in
seven (7) days of the date of the notice of violation.
(b) If the owner or person in charge of the alarm system fails
to pay the past due amount within seven (7) days, the city
, attorney may proceed by a suit in a court of competent
jurisdiction to collect said unpaid service charges and/or
fines from an alarm system owner, and the city attorney
, shall have the authority to place a lien against the prop-
erty served by a burglar and/or fire alann in the amount of
all the assessed service charges and/or fines.
Supp. No. 61 266
,.~
,
ALARM SYSTEMS - t 2.5-17
(c) The owner of the alarm system and/or premises the alarm
system serves shall be responsible for all costs incurred in
collecting the service fee including attorney's fees. (Ord.
No. 90-43, ~ 13,. 9-18-90; Ord. No. 92.5, ~ 3,3.3.92)
(
~
,
(
Supp. No. 61 267 ~The next page l~ 2871
'~'-'l
"
t-OJ-03-1994 113:05 FRCI'1 CITY CF ~ _TGl TO 92437816 P.02
.'
..r--" MIS~US OFFENSES . f 9 32
.,
8eCL 8-1-1-80. B.lIleh.d. .... .
'.
AJtTICLE n. BUBGLA.B:ALARMs* ,
Bee. 8-81. Short title.
Thia article may be cited as the "" ~n Burglar Al~ Oldmance."
(Code 1966, f 15-64)
. '
Sec. B-8I. DeflDitions.
For .the purpose of this article, the following words. termI and phrue$ shall have
tnli'lAningsa given bQlow unless the ccmtext icarJ,y indicate.. otherwise;
l'Alarm.. shall mean any device OEl ayIt.em of devices designed and used.in. a. building
.trueture tor the dtl~LlUJ1 and alertIDg 01 others of unauthorized entry, or any. other .
which emits a sound. fri8nal or message, when activated. excludin, rU'e alarms..
. .'
...-""", nAJ.arm busineutt shall mean ~ perIOD engaged in the ~, leUing, installation,
tenance or service of alarm syitemS or who, in any mann~, cause. the sale, leasing, ins .
lation. maintenanClR 01' AAMc:e of alarm Iyftema in or on any building structure or tacUU,,)'.
alarm business shall possess a burgiar!fire alarm instaUa~ certU1eate at compe~ fro
the county. An alarm husiDeaa shall alaa posaeu an occupationallice,pae (rom the city.
"Alarm information notice" shalllltMD a noace or decal posted in.a prominent -location
a Duild1nr at which an alarm. is opera~ which shall contain. at a minimwti.. the nam "
address and telephone number of a company or individual to. whom the alarm user has
signed the responsibility to respond to alarms at the building for the purpose of'deactivati
tbe alArm and ohPn1ri1'\8 the prcmi4ee.
. .
..
"~uer't aha11 mean any perslb. usiDi an alarm,
~..;,.
"FalH ...." ehall mean the acti....uon of an alarm thr.ough mechanical. ftUlure, ma .
function, implC)per installation, the nerliPnce 'of an a1ann user, or aDy oth~r cause whie
results in a response by the police when a situation requiring' a response by the police' where'
it is determined that no criminal activity or attempted crin'1inal'activity occurted at th
location of the response. It ~h811 hA prima lae!. evidence that no criminal acti:vity or'aiternVlA:l
cr1miMl actt.vity occurred if no report statingthat the alarm was the result of c::rimi~ aetivi
or attempted criminal aetmty i8 filed by the pollee officer who responded to the alarm.
(Code 196GJ f 15.t1t1; Ord. No. 3822, t 1, 1.~3-90)
/,.... .......'" *Crosa refereuces-Juriadiction of the cOde enforcement .~, ! 2.91 et seq.j polio
I dAI>>'t'tment, I ~521 et Mq.; 1hc olanns, ! 7-61 et eeq. ' '
OSG
.
1'OJ-03-1994 10:06 FR01 CITY CF BJCR Rl=IT~ TO 92437816 P.03
i 9-33 .... BOCA RA',t'O~ PODE
. ."', .' . :',.. )". . .: .. :. ': . .
l...."":.:- "'.
See. 9-38. Fable a1a:rms; admiDistratn. review. . . ,.... - .
. , o . ' . ,
','e . ,. .
. ,
(1) It is bereby found and determined tJ:W false burahn' alarms requiring the pollce
respond constitute a public nuisance. The elarm ualr ,ball be subject to a $27.00 service f.. t1 r
~ false alarm. to which tl.1e ~~~ ~~~ ~~f.2:~~ in a fiscal year of e
.ty.
(2) The failure to pay service fees aaessed puflU8l1t to this ~ .~~ ~4)J:~. I
wr11.1Aw 110c.ice from. the city of the bnpoaitiou or the fa th.ll rHUlt in an 'ttdditinnfu tee f
$16.00 for each false alarm for ,which a HZ:V1ce charp hu ~ assessed: puia~t. to. s
. .... ." " ....
section. In the event it'shtill beCome n~ for 'the city to initiate Uti~on or incur
coat whatsoever in order to collect any delinquent fees ~\11'I\W1t to this aeet10D, the alarm
shall be liable for the payment or such costs, including the payment o~ ~eTl f~~
(3) An alarm UH1' may seek a review by the police chief of the determinatiOn otthe' om
relpo~to the alarm tha~ a false ~ has.occurred.To obtain this review, a ~ writ
by tho a1ann uur or the alStMn h1]~iness resPonsible for the IDa1i1te~ce of'the alarm, i
forth facts and cireum&tUces tendinc to show that the activaUon of the alarm waS the res t
of criminal activity or attempted criminal activity, shall be Wed with the police chief wi n
5 business days of the date on wbich the alarm was activa.te4. It the police chief dtlIMnm.l1
that ,the facU and ~tances set f'orth in the report are valid, he .hall then 8XCUIe e
oeeu1'1'EI"".A, Rnd the occurrence shall Dot constitute a false alarm Cor the purposes o! t . s
ar.ticle. The police chiefshall issue his written determination within 10 worldngdays ofrecei t . , . .....
oCthe report froUt the ~ user or the alarm bu.tfness. Untill1ic:h time.. the po~ chi~
made,bis.determination. the occ:urrenc:e upon wwcb the ~ ia baaed ehall be CODOidcr d . '. ,"
genuine and will not be considered a false alarm. .
(4) If an ahtrm WHIr ia diAatiafied with the detezmiDati.on modo by the poJi.ag chief e-
garding the activation of the alarm, the permit holc1er may seek. a review by the eocIe enf'o e.
ment board by filing a written nquest for a. bearing betore ,the code enforcement board. .
the city within 1& bulin... days of the date ofibe determination by the police dUet. The ma
shall be scheduled for the next avan,ble board eaenda. The ~ shall determine whether t e
falae 81..nn occurnd. If the board detemUl\88 that th..Jarm. 'WILl a raIse alarm, thR sURnn u. r
shall be aleI_ the service fee. plus the additional $15.00 fee.
(Ord. Np. 812, f 8(15-56), 1.23-90)
See. S.a4. AJ.m lDformation noUce; failure to po8t.'
(ll It 11 h~ found and determined that the te1lUl'e to dlsplay tbe'.utum uuunu~t.i n
notice d~ecl in section 9.32 of this Code constitutes a public nuisance. The alarm user eh
be subject to a service fee of $27.00 for each occurrence in exceaa of 2 in each tiscal year or
which th~ police departtnent responds tQ au a1an:n at ,8 builcUne in which an alarm is a.
tional, but no information notice ia polted. This fee ah811 be coUectecI irrespective of wh er
the alarm to which the police department reepondocl WOO 0. fbko Gla1-m. If the alarm. to w h
the pollce department 1:'eSPOnded was a false alarm, this fee thall be in addition to the
fee ,imposed pursuant to section 9-33.
636
0"
.
t-OJ-03-1994 10:06 FRCl'1 CITY CF ElOCA ~ TO 924378i6 P.04
/'-', MISCEL~OUS OFFENSES
(2) The failure to pa;y service fees ts-.ed pursuant to this section within 30
written notice from the city ot the impDsititm of the fee shall result in an additional f1
$15.00 for each occurrence,.for which ~.1erVice charge has been assessed. In the event it
bec;ome necetrary tor the city to ini~ U~ 01' incur ~ cost whatsoever in
co1lect any delinquent feu pursuant to this section, the alarm user 8hal1 be liable for e
payment of such costa, including the pqment of attorney's fees.
(Ord. No. 8822, I 4(15-57), 1.2S.90}
Sec. 8-81. Prohiblticms.
(1) Audible alarmB which do not deacttPate within 30 minutes after activation are
hibited.
(2) Alarms which automatically dial the txilice department over lines excl~ively
the public or request emergency service and information are prohibited.
(3) Alarms which do not have an auxiliary power supply which activates in the even of
a power failure or electrical outap are prohibited.
(Code 1966, f 115-66)
Sec. 9-38. Penaltiett.
'~" The violation of any provision of this l1't1c1e Jha11 be punishable. in addition to . he
provisious set forth herein, as prescribed in tection 1.16.
(Code 1966, i 15-67)
Sec. 9-87. IJmitatloa of UabUity.
Neither the city m.Deger nor the city f1t any of its officers and agents shall. be under
nbliption or ~uty to an alarm Wl81' or to any other person hereunder by reason of this am Ie.
The city mRnager specifically discl,im~ liability for any damaps which may be caused by
failure to respond to an alarm.
(Code. J.966, f 1~68)
,
/''',.
I
~..
[Tho next pege J.. 1}
637
,
FROM: 8O"'....A RATON FIRE RESCtE TO: 407 243 7461 t-OJ 2, 1994 10:41AM **478 P.02
. : .
-
.
* 7.4] BOCA M'rON CODl~
display shall bo handled by a comJlotcnt operator and shall be! of such composition aud ch~r. (,.
actor ~l1'1d .sholl be so located. discharged or fired in a manner not to be hoZ{lroous to property
or endanger any person. Alter the issuance of such a permit, sales, po88CSsion. use and dist.ti.
buUon or fireworks within the city for such display shal! be lawCul for that purpose only: No
permit granted hereunder shall be f.ransferable.
(4) A bond shall be required from the applicant in a sum not less than $1.000.00 condi.
tioned on compliance with tho provisions of this section and the regulatiolls of tho cil.,y fire
chief adopted h~rounder.
(5) Before the issuance of a permit for a display of fireworks, the applicant shall furnish
proof of rmaneial responsibility to satisfy claims Cor damages to property or personal injuries
arising out of-any act or'OUl~ion"On.the part oftbe applicant; or.enyegonti)remployee tbereof,-. ., . -
in such amount, charactcr,and form' as the city'firo chief determines to be necessary for.tho
protection .of tho public.
(6) No permit shall be issuod under tho provisions of this sect.ion to an applicant llot
having an establishod place of business within thestat.e for conduct. of a display of fireworks
until the applicant has fulfilled ,the legal requirements Cor scrvico of p~s upon the person
or enUty seeking a permit. In the case of 11 corporation, proof of regi8trat~on with thc socretary
of state as It nonresident corporation ahall be required.
(7) The city fire.chief or. the chier.atpoli~shllll.sei~e._take. rcUlov.~ Of ~uso to be removed (f'
at the expense of the owner all stocks oCfIreworks st9red or held in Violation of this section. and .::: ~: J :'~~;: ~' .
. ".' '..:
shall dispose of the fireworks' in the mim~er deemed safc bY.'the city fire ~hief when the ,. ,,:.::,:.:.:.:.'
. ,', ;...:....
fireworks are no.longer required 'as evidonce of a'violation ottliiB section. '.i:;:> .
(8) Any perAon or entity violating the p:rovisions of this 8CCtion' shall be punishable as
provided in section 1.16.
(Code 1966, fi 11.S8)
Sees. 7-42-7.60. Reserved.
, ARTICLE III. FIRE ALARMS'"
Sec. 7-61, Short tlUo.
'fhis article may be cited as "Tho Boca Raton Fire Alarm Ordinance."
(Codo 1966, ~ 11-39)
Sec. .7-62. DeCinltlolUJ.
I"or the purpose of this article, tho following words, terms and phrases shall have the
mcnllings given in this scction, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
"Alarm business" shall mean any person engaged in the sale, leasing, installation, main-
tena.nce or service of alarm systems or who in any manner causes the sale, leasing, installa.
tion, maintenance or sQrvice of illarm syst.<uns in Or on any building, ab'ucturc or facility or n
.
.Cross references-Miscellaneous of'fenses, eh. 9; burglar alarms,. f 9.31 at. seq. (~
,
~nA
'.
FROM: BOCA RATON FIRE RESCLE TO: 407 243 7461 tCJV 2, 1994 10:42A-1 **4?8 P.03
."
.
. '. ",
. '_n
. .
'\ .'lRE PREVENTION AND P.ROTECTION f 7.64
i
"".
person who~ principal business is the furnishing and maintaining of a supervised signaling
service known all Ii ccntral.,aUlt.ion system. An alarrn business shull po8se5S a burglar/fire
alarm installation certificate of competency from t.he county. An alarm bUsincs~ shall also
possess nn occupationallioonso from the city.
"Alarm user" shall mean any person occupying or contioIlinJ;: the premises of an occu-
pancy whiell is protected by a fire alarm.
"False alann" shall mean the activation of a uro alarm signal through mechanical railure.
malfunction. improper installation. or negligence or an alarm user indieatine a fU'e emergency
requiring the immediate response of rue department apparatus when a fire emergency does
not exist and no evidence thoroof ia apparellf, to the senior f1l'e department officer arriving on
the scene.
.
"Fire alarm" shall mean a system of devices, excluding single-station smoke detectors.
designed llnd used in a building or structure for the detection of fire or smoke, water now Crom
a fire sprinkler or standpipe system, or manual pull station for the purpose of alertini others,
which omits a sound, signal or me&&aiEt when activated.
"Permit" shall mean a pormit issued by the fire department which shall signify compli.
ance of the fire alarm with tho provisions of this article.
i) (Code 1966. 111-40)
',',-. .
i-~ .~ .
" "
Seo. 7.83. ~ alarm permit-Required.
(1) It ,ball bo unlawful, with the exception of a 8ingle~r8mi1y residonce. tor any person to
install or ttlaintain a'fire alarm in operational order unless that person fu:st obtains a fire
alarm pennlt from the fire department.
(2) In addition to satisfaetory completion of tho application required in section 7-64, a fire
Dlannpermit fof' an installation at a non-single.family reaidentiallocation may be issued to an
applicant only if it is demonstrated that the fire alarm ia installed by an alarm business under
current fu-edopartment. fire alarm code standards, and only if the installation is of equipment
_ which is~approved by UL <Underwriters' Laboratories}, ~"M (Factory Mutu_a)), or. an approved
testing laboMC,ory for its intended usa~.
(3) Fire alarm pcnnits must be renewed each year and shall be in effect from October 1
to September 30 of tho next. year.
(Code 1966. ~ 11.41; Ord. No. 8823, i 1, 1-23.90)
See. 7.64. Same-Application.
(1) Application for fire alarm permits shall be made on forms provided by the fire depart-
ment. Each applicanf, shall state:
') . (n) The namc, address, tclcphol\o numbcl' and owner of the property to be lServiced by the
firo olarm;
505
FR01: BOCA RATON FIRE RE5a.E TO: 40? 243 7461 t-llU 2, 1994 1B;'43A'1 **478 P.B4
.
.
. . ',. . ..
fi 7-64- BOCA UATON CODE (
,
,
(b) The nnme, address nnd telephone number of tho applicant, if different from t.he
property owner to bo servicodj
. (c) The name, address and c.elephone number or the person in charge of the premises or
buildings sorved by the fire alamt and no less than 3 persons or entities, ad~resscs
and telephone numbers to be contacted in t.he event of an alarJI:l if required by the fire
depe.rtment;
(d) The name, IUJdreas and 24.hour telephone number and state license number of the
person or entity installing tho ru-e alannj
(e) Tho name, address and 24.hour telephone number and state license number or th!
penon or entity monitoring the fire alarm;
(n The name, address and 24-hour telephone number and state license number of the
person or entity providing maintenanoo and repair service to the fire alarm; .
. .. (g) Tho'signature of the property owner. alarm user and an authorized representative of
the alarJn business.
(2) 'rhe information sot forth in (1) above shall be kept current by the permit bolder, and
the permit boldOT shall immediately notify the fire department of any changes in the infor-
mation. Failure to 60 notify shall.constitute..aYiolationd..thls.article....__....:....--....:._-_. -G---
(Code 1966. f 11-42; Ord. No. 8828, 6 2, 1.~90) ... >
-..'
Sec. 7.65. Same-Iauancc, postin, of decal.
(1) The rlre department shall i.sue a fire alarm permit only after receiving a completed
.application cmd only after it i. determined that the fire alarm moets the criteria of this article
and current fire code standards. Any denial shall be made in writina, with a statomentof
definite reasons for denial. An application for a rU"e alarm permit may'bCJ denied if an applicant
falsifies any statement on tho application. and a knowing falsification shall be a violaLion of
this article.
(2) Upon iuuanco of a permit, the firo department shall also issue a decal to the applicant,
which shall oontain tho permit number and the permit address. This decal shall be promi-
nently posted at. OJ' near thn front entrance of the premises so that the decal is visible from
outside the structure.
(Code 1966, f .11-43)
Sec. 7.66. Appeals.
(1) Any applicant who is denied a fire alarm permit may appeal such denial by filing a
writt.cn request for hearing before t.he city council within 30 days (If the denial.
(2) At the hearing, the applicant may present evidence and witnesses to support. the
issuance of the permit, and the city Illanaaer may present evidence and wit.nC$ses to support
the denial of the issuance of the permit.. Tho applicant. shall have the burden of proving that (0:~;::"
...,~. . '..'
the fire department erred in denying the issuance of the permit. ':::,:: I
'.
RE RESClE TO' 407 243 7461 NOU 2, 1994 10:43AM ~78 P.05
. FRCJ1: BOCA RAT~ Fl'
. . 't,
. .
'~) FIRE rREVENTION AND PRO'rECTION ~ 7.70
I
'. .,'
(a) After hearing the flrcsenlations, nnd all.cr taking into oonsideration all other relevant
facts and circumstances, tho ~ity coullcil may either affirm tho denial or order the fire depart-
ment to issue the permit.
(4) Review or cit.y council'acLion shall be by certiorari to the circuit court.
(Code 19136, fi 11-44)
, ' .
Soc. 7-67. Permit revocation.
/!. fire alarm permit may bo revoked by tho ure 'department if the alarm user or his
designated agent.:
(a) Fails to rcspond to his activated fire alarm wi~hin 1 hour when requested to do so by
tho rue dcpnrtmenti
(b) Allows moro than 20 false alarms to which the fire dopartment responds within a
})CI'Jllit period;
(e) Has been found to have violated any of tbe provisions of this article.
(Codc 1966, i 11-(5)
~~ Sec. '7.68. Revocation hearing.
'~::lJ) (1) Any alarm user whose permit has been rovoked may appeal such action by ming a
j~ :' written requost Cor hearing beCore the city council within 15 days oC tho revocation.
(2) At the hearing, tho user may present evidence and witne&888 to support his claim that
tho revocation was unwarranted, and tho city manager may present evidence and witnesses to
support the revocation. The burden of proving that tho rrre department erred in revoking the
permit shall be on the user.
(3) Aft.er hearing the presentation, and after taking into consideration all other relevant
facts aIlef circumst.ancos, the city council may either affirm or rescind the revocation.
(Code 1966, i Uo4{6)
,
See. '7.80. R...tement or ponnit..
If a permit hu been revoked duo to excessive fnIse alarms, reinstatement can be obtained
only if a licensed alarm company inspects and repairs tho alann and submits a report to the
fire department stating what has been done to correct the problem and certifies t.hat the alarm
is in working order.
(Code 1966, f 11.47)
Sec. 7-'70. Firo alarm without permit.
(1) It is hereby round and detonnincd that operation of a fire alarm, with the exception of
). single-family residences, witllin. tho city without a permit constitutes a public nuisance. The
. .... operation of a fire alarm, with t.he exception of single-family residences, for which no permit
....
507
FROM: BOCA RATo-l FIRE RESCLE TO: 40? 243 7461 1'0.) 2, 1994 10:44AM **478 P.06
. ' , . .
,. :
"
.' ;. .
* 7-70 BOCA RATON CODE ("'" ,
, I
:;,.,
has been issued is a violation off-his article and shall subject Lhe property owner to t11e service
fees established in this article. .,
(2) It is hereby detennined that the occurrence ot a false alarm caused by an alarm, with '
tho exception of sjngle.fa~i1y residonces, for which no permit haa been issued constitutes a
public nuisance. The ocCurrence of a false alarm caused by a rU'e alarm for which no permit has
been issued is a violation of this article and shall subject the property owner to the service fees '
established in this arUcle. I
i
(Code 1966, i 11.48; Ord. No. 3823. i 3, 1.23.90) ,.J
-
See. 7.71. Fine for false alarms; ad,"lnitl:trattve review. ','
(1) It is hereby found and determined that falsc alarms requiring the fire department to 1
respond, including single.family residences. const.itute a public nuisance. The alarm user shall
be subject to a $100.00 servicc fee for each falso alarm to which the fire deparlnlent responds
in excess of 2 fal,e alarms during the fiscal year of.the city.
(2) The failure to pay service fees assessed pursuant to this section, within 30 day; of
written notice f~m,t~.cif,y.o€the imposit.f.on or..tbe.fee,.shallrosult.ln aILadditional,fec.of. ','" "
$15.00 for oach fal$e oIornt for which a _ charga has been .....-..d PW'6Uut to this ~\'" )
section. In the evont it ,hall become necessary for the city to initiate litigation or'incur any;;;:ltm:' "
cost whatsoeVer in order to collect any delinquent fees pursuant to uu. .ecUOl1, the alarm user
shall be liable for the payment of BUch cost.s. including the payment of attorney's fees.
(3) A permit holder may seek a r.3View by the fU'e chief ef the determination of the fire
officer responding to a fire alarm that a false alarm hl1& occurred. To obtain this review. a
report written by the alarm business responsible for the maintenance of tho fire alarm, setting
forth facts and circumstanCC8 tending to show that the activation of the fire alarm was the
result of fire, sball be filed with the firo chief within 5 business days of the date on which the
lire alarm \VRI aetivated. If tho fire chieC determines that the facts and circumstances set forth
in the report are valid, he shall then cxcuse the occurrence, and the occurrence shall not
constitute a false alarm for the purposes of this I1rticJe. Until such time as the fire chief has
made his determination, the occurrence upon which the report is based shall be considered
genuine and shall not be considered a false alarm.
(4.> If an alarm user is dissatisfied with tho dct.crmination made by t.he fire chief regarding
thc activation of the alarm, tbe pOl'mit holder may seclt a review by the code enforcement
board by filing a wril.Leu request Cor a hearing before the code enforcement board within 15
business days ofthu date ofihe determination by the fire chief. The maU.er shall be scheduled
for tho next available board a~nda. Tbe board shall determine whether t.he false alro:m
oceu'Tcd. If the board determines that the alarm was a false alarm, the alarm uscr shall be
assessed the service fee. plus the additional $16.00 fce. c::!;;;:.
. >~ ;.:..
(Code 1966, ~ 11-4.9; Ord. No. 3823, fi 6, 1.23.90)
,
FROM: BOCA RAT(t.I FIRE RESCUE TO: 4e7 243 7461 t-()U 2,. 1994 10:44~ "478 P.0?
. , .
- . .-
,
. . .
.
"\, Fml'~ l'REVEliTION AND PROTECTION i 7.81
\
I
: . .1
.';.:. :,.'
Sec. 7.72. ProhibitJon.q.
(1) Alarms which automatically dial the Lire depart.Jpent over lines exclusively used by
the public to request emergone:Y service and infonnation are prohibited.
(2) Alarms which do not have an auxiliary power supply which activates in the event of
a power failure or electrical outage arc prohibited.
(3) Alarms reported to the fire department by an alarm business that is other th8.l1 a fire
al&2'm are prohibited. .
(Code 1966, ~ 11.60)
Sec. 7.78. Penalties.
The violation of any provision of this article shall be punishable, in addition to the
provisions set forth' herein, as prescribed in section 1.16.
(Code 1966, f 1l.61l
Sec. 7.74. Limitation or liability.
. Neithor the city manager nor the city or any of its officers and agents shall be under any
obligation or duty to an w&2'm user or to any other person hereunder by reason of this article.
)> . The city manager specifically disclaims liability for any damages which may be caused by
. . failure to respond to an alarm.
(Code 1966, t 11-62)
SeC8. 7.76-7.79. Reserved.
ARTICLE IV. FmE PROTECTION SYSTEMS
Sec. 7-80. Applicability.
The requirements of this article shall apply to all buildings, structures and installations
.constl11ct.ed after November 28, 1993.
. ,~. .
:The r~ent.l oHhis article shall also apply to any existing building or st.ructures if:
(a) Within any 12 month period altorations or repairs arc made costing in excess of 50 .
percent of the then physical value of. the building or
(b) If repairs are made to nn existing building which has been dAmaged by fire or oth.
erwise in excess of 50 percent of its tllen physical value before such damage is rc-
paired.
(Ord. 4137, ~ 2, 11.23.9:.n
Sec. 7.81. ))efinitiolls.
')
}4'or the purpose of this article, the foilowing words, terms and phrases shall have t.he
....:'100 '. meanings givcn in this section, unlefts the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Supp. No, 12 509
.
... ~
[ITY DF DELIAY IEA[H
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 200 NW 1s1 AVENUE . DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA 33444
FACSIMILE 407/278.4755 Wr~t.r'. D~r.ct L~n.
OflI4'.llA.C~ (407) 243-7090
.....
tI...iclCity
, 1111' MEMORANDUM
Date: October 26, 1994
To: City Commission
From: David N. Tolces, Assistant City Attorn~
Subject: Ordinance Correctinq Sewer Connection Fee
This proposed ordinance is necessary to correct a scrivner's
error which occurred when Ordinance 22-94 was passed earlier
this year. Ordinance 22-94 contained an incorrect con-
nection fee charge. This ordinance will correct the
connection fee and allow the code to reflect the fee that is
correctly being charged.
The other provisions which are being removed are no longer
applicable to the City's sanitary sewer system. Please call
if you have any questions.
DNT:smk
Attachment
cc: David T. Harden, City Manager
8It&!t'..~ 'I6c)~A,~' Clerk 'sor-rtee
Richard Hasko, Deputy Director of Public Utilities
BBWer.dnt
61 .
f~ ~ Iq'l
11/1-5
@ Pnnted on Recycled Paper /2.F
.,
... .
. . ,
ORDINANCE NO. 92-94
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 53.130, "USER
CHARGES; WHOLESALE SEWER RATES; CALCULATION OF SEWER
SURCHARGE" , TO PROVIDE FOR CORRECTIONS IN THE
CONNECTION FEE WHICH WAS INADVERTENTLY AMENDED BY
PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 22-94; TO PROVIDE FOR REPEAL
OF SECTIONS 53.130(B), "CONNECTION CHARGE II , AND
SECTION 53.130(C), "EXCEPTIONS TO CONNECTION CHARGE";
PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on May 3, 1994, the City Commission passed
Ordinance No. 22-94 which amended Chapters 53 and 54 of the City of
Delray Beach Code of Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 22-94, as adopted, contained
inaccurate connection fee charges; and
WHEREAS, adoption of a corrective ordinance is necessary to
have the current code reflect the current charges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Title V, "Public Works" , Chapter 53,
"Sanitary Sewers", Section 53.130, "User Charges; Wholesale Sewer
Rates; Calculation of Sewer Surcharge", of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Section 53. 130 USER CHARGES; WHOLESALE SEWER RATES; CALCULATION OF
SEWER SURCHARGE.
(8) Connection Charges.
(1) In addition to the rates set forth in Section
54.130(0), there ia established a sewer connection charge for each
connection to the City sewage collection system. The sewer connection
charge sh~ll be 81.084 t.;/_;t~_~/;~.t'/~.~;./._./~;;./~;t.t_~._~/~y
t)1; /~tt;~'tf/Jt /f/Jt /'}l~1.t~ /JI'tt1.t'tt". /'tf/J /~" /'~'~/~~ for each separate
residential unit or par Equivalent Residential Connection for
non-residential units. A residential dwelling unit is defined in
Section 53.004. ;~."t;t_~ /llJitt /~)1"t" /._~;t /~_t;t_1. /1.tJt". /.~t.t /t/Jt
"'~/~~ Itf/Jt I__;)t I.,,__t_t; It".t~.Jttt_1.I}lJttt I~t 1_~__.t_t.1.I}lJltt l\f)t;t;
..~;tIJ_t.t_J/JtJi../_t;I_~.;Jltl
.
.,
/ , .
.
: .
(2) Connection charges by users of the City sewage
system wholly outside the corporate limits of the City are fixed at
sums equal to the rates shown in the above schedule in division (A) of
this section. plus twenty-five percent (25\) of each respective
I classification. $_~tt~Ji/'~/t~~IJJltJI The connection charge shall be
paid to the City at the time of obtaining a permit for a connection
! and shall be in addition to the permit fee. The size of the
connection shall be determined by the Plumbing Inspector in accordance
with Articles 7.6 and 7.7 of the Land Development Regulations.
t_JII'~tl;~t;~._./~tlt~_I_;;~t~_tt~_/~tlt~_I_~~1._
P\_Jitt~Ji_~ 1~~JiJi_~tt~Ji I~~_t._.' It~_ l~tt1 I.~_~~ I)S" I~tyt~"~ ItJit~ It~~
~t_ttt~t.1
ttJIIPt.ttt~t/~~lltl.~_~~/~~_;tt."I_~~/~t/t~_
_t,,_./;t"."Jit~1ItJi/t~"/~~t;~t_t,,/~t_tt./~tlt~"/~tt1'1"~~";tlt~tlt~_t
_t;_/~;.~tt)s;~/)s;~~~1
t1.J I 11~" 1."~~Ji~ l~t.ttJ._t I"~_~~ I~" I)tJi~JIJ1 1_"
t)1; 1$~~t)1"_,,t 17.Jit"t~,,;t~t I_Ji~ I'~t~" 1)t,UJi IPJ."ttt~t 1~)1;!_)1 1.)1_~~ I~;
_~~;t;~/)s1It"t"t"Ji_"I_Ji~/__~"I_I;_tt/)1"t"~tl
fYJI I 17.Ji It)1~." 1;~ttt~Ji" I~t IP;!"tt;!~t IJ~I I J. I~~;t"
__Jitt_t1 I I."~"t" I I_t" I I_Y_;!~_~~'" I It)1" I 1_~JiJi"_t;!~_ I I~~_t.; 11)1"t;tJi
".t_~~t_~,,~ 1.)1_~~ I)S; I_;;~t~_)s~" It~ I_~~ 1~~JiJi"_tt;_. IJIl_~" I.tt"t 1)t.t~)1
~J.'IJ.~_~III7.Ji/t)1"I;;ttt~_"/~tIPt_ttJ.~t/~;IIJ./~)1"t"/Ji~1"_Jitt.t11._~"t.
_t"l_y.t~_~~"'lt)1;."I;t;;"ttt".I")1.~~/Ji;tl)s"I"~~'''_tlt;It)1''I_~JiJi''_tt~Ji
_)1_t."I;t;YJ.~"~/t)1"11_t"/~~Ji_"_t"~/t~/t)1"I._JiJ.t_t11."~"t/~tt)1tJi/.t~t1
t_~J/~.1"I.tt"tl._~".t__~"/~tlt)1"J.tl;_ttt~~~.tl_;~~"_tt~Ji/.1.t"P\/_"
~;"t.tt.;_.~ 1~1 It)1" 1~;__J.""t~_1 I 17.t 1__11."t.~_ I~)st_t_" 1_ 1_~JiJi"ll!tt~Ji
P"tV&tt./.tJ.~t It; I "tt)1"t I;t It~" I_~~Y" I~"_~~t_"'" lJi; 1~;__"~tt~Ji 1_)1.t.;
")1.~~/~"/V&.~"/~~tt_i/t)1"/Jtt"l;tlt)1"I;"t_tt/~)1t~)1/")1.~J/)s"lt)1ttt1It~~J
~-Y.I
ttjl I 17._ It~" 1$~~t)1"..t 17.Jit"t~".t;t I.Ji~ I'~t~" 1)t;(tJi
~t.ttt~t'I_JJlt_.t;Y"~/.t;."ttt".I.t"""_t~Ylt_lt~"/~tt11_.I;tl/.Ji~.t1
1.1.'lt~_"I"__JJI)s_I_~_ti"~/t_I_tjtj;t~__tj"/~tt~/$"tjtt;Ji/'~/J.~~tJlt1.1t~1
.~~Y"I I IJJJ I.t;."tt.t". IJ;tj_t"~ ItJi It~t. I~t.ttttjt. 1~~t_)1 I_t" ItV&pt~Y;~
.tt"tl/_Ji~_ttl1.1.IIJ.'_"I.~_J~/)s"lt__"~t_t"JY/.~)s'''tjtlt;1t~;ltj~JiJi"ll!tt~Ji
ll!)1.ti;"/~"YJ."_/~"t"tJiI
t~lIIIJ~JII.t;;"ttt".II.__"~"_llt;llt)1"II~~tP;t;(t"
~t_tt. I;t It)1t" Ifttty I.tt"t 1)t;(ttj)1 I~J.I IJ.~." 1")1;(~~ I~" 1.J4)s'''tjt It~ It~"
~;JiJi,,~tt~Ji 1~)1.ti"_ 1)1"t"tJi 1"_t.)s~J.")1'" I.Ji' 1'''_tJ.;Ji 1'~/J.~9tJlt1.1t~1
.Ji~/ttjll.)s;Y"I.)1_~~/Ji;t/)s"/;(..Jttj.)s~"lt;lt)1;"_I.t;."tt1._'1
- 2 - Ord. No. 92-94
.
'. .
1.}IIIY~tll~~t~~...II~tllt~t.II..~tt~~lllt_~t~y.~
~t~tJ.ttt It. It~_t I~JS~~ Ilt~1.~~ 1_ 1J6~1.;r~1.~i 11.. l;r~~_t.~ I_~~ It~t Ilf~1.~~ I_
I ~_ttttt~_t./~t/~~~~~_~~t/~_.IJ6._~/t..~.~/
i (C) There shall be a non-residential sewer connection
I charqe which shall be based on S 1.084 per Equivalent Residential
I' Connection (E.R.C.) . Eauivalent Residential Connection shall be
II
II calculated as follows:
II
L Estimated Flow in Gallons Per Month
I
I
I E.R.C. Units = 7.000
I Where an estimated flow is not available. the followinq formula shall
be used with reference to the standard Plumbinq Code adopted by
reference in Article 7.6 of the Land Develo~ment Requlations.
Total Fixture Units
I , E.R.C. Units = 16
II l~}IIJ~~.~t1.~~.lt~/~~~~.~t1.~~/~~_ti./II~_tl.tt~~t~t_.1t~.t
lt~~;r~/~t~1.__t1.;rtIJ6.I.~J6j.~tlt~/t~./~~~~.~tt~_/~~_ti..1..tlt~tt~/.J6~Y.
.~.;r;r/J6.I.~._JStlttl
II I1.} 111~" l.tt~~t}4t" 11..I1.~ 1_ I~",.;r~;_"_t 11._ l}t~tll!~ It~.
II ~lt~_t/~t/~.y.;r~JS_tl_t/~1..I.~JS._../~../~~_.tt~ll!t.~/__~1t~t_.~/~y.t/t~
I'
II t~.II~tttlll;"t_._"_tll."}t"tlltt._t_"~tll~tlltt._._1...t~_/lt.ll!1.;rtt1...
.~"ft~.t. It~ I."ty" It~.t I;t~~"ttt I._~ It. I. I~.tttlt~ It~" /~~~t~lf".t
'1 ~"y.;r~~"t. l~it""_"Jit I_t It~. l)f~tt)(lf".t I~"y,,;r_;"t. 1~;t""_"Jit /~t /t~"
I .tt~~t~t" I It. I ItJi 11.11~"y,,;r_;_"Jit I It~.t 111.. /I.t I l;r"..t I Itlt"_ttft1.Y"
~"t~"~t II.,."} 1ll!~_JS;r"t" I~_ 1/_~}4.tt 1'J1.1 I 1.fJ77 / I IYt/Jt It~" 1;}4t;~.". I~t
t)(t. 1..ll!tt__1 It)(; 1_";'_1._; I_t It~. Ilf_t~ 1~;y;;r~;_;Jit I.)(;.;r;r It_ll!;r}4~.
J6~t I_~t 116" l;rt_1.t,,_ It_ l.tt~~t~t..1 1}4~tt. I_t ItJit"t".t. It~.t I.t"
~tt.t.~ I.. I;' IIS;.tt I_t I;' 1~____Ji /tJt~__t1.~_;.;r /;;r;.Ji /_t 1;._y.tt;t:.1.~; I.Jl~
..;r./
t'/.lll/Jjllt_/I.//JS.tt;t:ll!~;r.t/l.tt~~tJ4t"III.;r;r//JS"t_1.t.
t~~;r~~t_; 1J6~t lJi_t 1;r1._1.t;_ It~ /J6J41.;r~;t:Ji; I;;t_tt., Ilf;.t;t 1;'__ I."lt.t
P.t_1.t.1 1~;'1; /);;Ji 11...J4;_ I_t/Jt l;r;.t;t It)(;._ 1/;.JiJ4;.tt I"'~I I1.fJ7JI I.Jl~
t)(. I_"t"t 11.~.t;.;r;r;.t1.__j /;._~ /If.t''t /~~__"~t1.~_ /tt/Jt Itttt/Jj; /.tt~~t~t..
~ll!~J4t/~~tl;r_t.tlttt;.JiI/J4;rY/'/.~'/1.fJ7J/
tJl / /1tt; /;~~;_t1.~_j /~t,,;.t;_ /~"t;1._ /.~;.;r;r /_t/Jt I;.__;rt /t.~
_~tl;"t_;t:tl;t:..J4"_/;t1.t/Jtltt/J//._~.ttIJ1.'/1.fJ77'It/JJi;rY/t~t/J."/.ttJ4~tJ4t;./t~t
lt~t~~ /P.t_1.t. I;.t; l1.jjJ4"_ /j~)j;~;Jit /t~ I/;._~.tt IJ1.I 11.'77 J /._~ Ilf)(1.~~
_t){"t}t1.."/_;,,t/t)("/.J6_'''/~t1.t''t1..JI.)(.;r;r/J6,,/,,~,,__t/tt__/t)(;/~_Ji_.~t1.~Jl
~)(.ti"./
.
- 3 - Ord. No. 92-94
'.
- . .
.
.
Section 2. That should any section or provision of this
ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. -
Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the day of , 1994.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
.
City Clerk I
First Reading I
Second Reading
I
I
- 4 - Ord. No. 92-94
.'
I
COMMENTS FROM CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1994
11. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Aqenda Items from the
Public-Immediately followinq Public Hearinqs.
11.B. From the Public:
11.B.l. Jean Beer reported that miscellaneous debris such as
roofing material, a truck and dumpster have been placed on a
residential lot in Tropic Isles. After placing a call to Code
Enforcement, Ms. Beer was informed that a building permit had
been issued. She pointed out that there is currently no
construction being conducted on the site and expressed concerned
that these items were being allowed to remain on the property.
She felt that these items were not necessary for building on a
vacant lot and thought that perhaps the builder was storing
these materials until they are needed for construction. Ms.
Beer felt that some sort of restrictions should be placed upon
the issuance of building permits against the storage of building
materials, particularly on vacant lots in residential areas.
Mayor Lynch concurred with Ms. Beer's comments. He
pointed out that a similar situation exists at the north end of
Ocean Boulevard and that it has taken approximately three years
to complete the construction of several homes in this area.
13. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Aqenda Items.
l3.A. Commission
13.A.1. Mayor Lynch reported that he had received a request
from Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council for Commission
support of AMTRAK passenger service along the Florida East Coast
Railway corridor. The City Manager advised that the Commission
had adopted a resolution in support of this concept at the last
regular meeting on November I, 1994.
Mayor Lynch stated that during the year 1996, Israel
will be celebrating three thousand years since King David first
named Israel's capital. The Consulate General of Israel has
requested that the City of Delray Beach consider honoring
Israel's celebration by proclaiming a special name for a street
in the City. The Mayor provided information on this matter to
the City Manager.
In response to Mayor Lynch's inquiry regarding a
survey on Prevailing Prejudice and Hate Crimes, the City Manager
advised that the Police Department will be taking care of the
matter.
Mayor Lynch stated that he had received a newspaper
article which notes that Harry Smith, a former public relations
.
individual with IBM, is now employed with a consulting firm that
desires to do business with the City. He requested that the
City Manager distribute the article among City staff.
Mayor Lynch's made reference to Mr. Tom Haenlon's
criticism of the condition of trees along North Federal Highway
and asked if the City was at fault.
The City Manager responded that the majority of trees
were being destroyed because of individuals opening their car
doors and the fact that guard rails were not placed around the
trees for protection against weed eaters. He emphasized that
the landscaping strips are very narrow, thus contributing to the
poor condition of the trees.
Mayor Lynch commented that perhaps staff should have
reacted when the situation was first brought to our attention by
Mr. Haenlon, and that in the future he hoped we would take a
more proactive position.
13.A.l. Mrs. Smith stated that she has received several
telephone inquiries regarding traffic congestion at the
intersection of Linton Boulevard and Military Trail. Although
this area is under the County's jurisdiction, Mrs. Smith asked
if the City could offer police assistance to help handle the
flow of traffic.
The City Manager advised that he would check into the
matter.
Mrs. Smith congratulated Matt Gracey and the Delray
Tennis Patrons on receiving the IIMember Organization of the
Yearll award from the United States Tennis Association. She felt
that this is good example of the community's effort of extending
a lot of time toward the City's young people.
l3.B. The City Attorney did not have any comments or
inquiries.
13.C. City Manaqer:
The City Manager noted that the IIAdopt-A-Highwayll
program, which addresses the maintenance of highways in the
State, will be placed on the Commission's January workshop
agenda.
In response to Mr. Randolph's inquiry relative to
water puddling on N.W. 7th Avenue at the end of the alley, the
contractor will be at the site on Friday and will flatten out
the high spots for better drainage.
In regard to the overgrowth along the F.E.C. Railroad,
the City Manager stated that F.D.O.T. is responsible for the
maintenance. He explained that the mowing begins at the north
-2-
end of the State and continues to the south end and then the
process is repeated. The City Manager noted that at the end of
October the City had complained of the overgrowth, as did the
City of Boca Raton, and that he anticipated all the right-of-way
maintenance should be complete by the end of November. The City
Manager pointed out, however, that there is very little
flexibility in F.D.O.T.'s routine.
-3-
'I
P 1& Z Board sta~ Report
Rezoning from CF to GC for CRA Property -
Kwik Stop 1& Discount Auto Parts
Page 5
Comment: The justification statement addresses Item B as the
basis for which the rezoning should be granted. There has been
a change in circumstances that make the current Community
Facilities (CF) zoning inappropriate, in that the amended
inter local agreement (1993) states that the County has until
December 31, 2002 to request the property from the CRA,
otherwise the CRA has the ability to sell the property. Under
the current CF zoning, the property cannot be leased to other
commercial uses and the ability to improve the structures is
limited. Thus, the buildings may remain vacant until 2002, with
no guarantee that the County will utilize the property. Based
upon these circumstances, it appears to be appropriate to rezone
the property to GC in the interim.
R ! V I ! W B Y o T H ! R S .
The rezoning is not in a geographic area requiring review by the
DDA ( Downtown Development Authority) or the HPS (Historic
Preservation Board).
Community Redevelopment Agency
The subject property is located within the geographic area
requiring review by the CRA. However, as the CRA Board
initiated the rezoning, a recommendation is not nece..ary.
Special Courte.y Notice:
Courtesy notice. were provided to the We.t Atlantic Property
Owner's A.sociation, Delray Merchant A..ociation and the Vision.
West Atlantic Steering Committee.
Public Notice:
Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within
a 500' radius of the .ubject property. Letter. of objection, if
any, will be pre.ented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
ASS.SSII.NT ARD CONCLUSIOR.
The rezoning will enable po.itive finding. to be made with
Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulation., polici.. of the
Compr.h.n.iv. Plan, and S.ction 2.4.5(0)(5) (R.zoning Finding.),
that there h.. been . ch.nge in circumstanc.. which make the GC
zoning more .ppropriat. in th.t the County h.s until December
31, 2002 to reque.t the property. Under the current CF zoning,
the ability to 1.... the property to commercial u.e. and to make
improvem.nts to the structur.. i. limited a. the u... are
nonconforming. Rezoning the property to GC would allow the
fl.xibili ty to 1.... the building to other co_.rci.l tenants
and improvem.nt of the .tructur.. in the interia.
A 1. ~ I,R N A T I V I ACTIONSI
A. Continue with dir.ction.
"
P (, Z Board stat Report
Rezoning from CF to GC for CRA Property -
Kwik Stop (, Discount Auto Parts
Page 6
B. Recommend approval of the rezoning request from CF to GC
for the CRA property (Kwik Stop (, Discount Auto Parts)
based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3
(performance Standards) of the Land Development
Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and
Section 2.4.5(0)(5).
C. Recommend denial of the rezoning request from CF to GC
for the CRA property (Kwik Stop (, Discount Auto Parts)
based upon a failure to make a positive finding with
to Section 2.4.5(0)(5), the rezoning fails to fulfill at
least one of the reasons listed.
S T A F F R I COM M I N D A T ION :
Recommend approval of the rezoning request from CF to GC for
the CRA property (Kwik Stop (, Discount Auto Parts) based upon
positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance
Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the
Comprehensive Plan, and Section 2.4.5(0)(5), that there has been
a change in circumstances that make the existing CF zoning
inapproriate.
Attachments:
* Location/Zoning Map
* Survey
YIKW:EKaTO..DC)C
.
:
.,
s. W. 2~ AVENU~
LC!IOW~~ "'''''\.JU~) ~~
~~
t,
,f-' " ", :# ....,.
/, ._'- --,.. .---
r;- I' '" 1'2Q.14' -
P-
I .1 f
I : \. . ;s-
Ift'" '!to.
i
.
~
.!i) ~
~ I
r
. .
--r-- %
~
;. - -..,. --. ~~!\ I
-r---
L...- I ~ f ~
LIT"
,.
r-
-. .J
.... ...
Je~ ~
;.;~ .
;;. ~
--
I
...~' JA"
,
,.," ~
~
I !!I;dRI' ~8.s. ~
~
('''M,.,r,(lt'/A~ .' ~ ~
,8P/JP/A/, " ~I 'S
~~
. . ..... ~~
I , .II " 'ttf"r,l'
t. l": ~:
f? ,,..,,,,
,..,-h,..."...,
.~ . "'.A'~$
," .-.-...,..,
. ,\ ~' ~"
:>" ~
'-"" .~ ~ ~',i ~ '\
I."; ,: . , ',~ ' ...
~-:-:.-~-';; .~ " }
~, ~,; "
. '\
~ " ~:.~ .'
.,. .,
.II " .- "
\e.... :.............. .~~.....:-..... " .,.
. .""". ",,." "
. ~"',/ 'N" hII' ~1Mt' "'# I
., '4. ~K'II"'" I~/ NtIIIII
kif""""'" I,
"",r"
.~_.-
.. ---
""'tfIt;l' ~ ..
I~
- -to
. I.
_....."~~. fl
~
. .>- '.~
.