The URL can be used to link to this page

11-02-93 Special/Workshop ,. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL/WORKSHOP MEETING - NOVEMBER 2. 1993 - 6:00 P.M. COMMISSION CHAMBERS AGENDA Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made I 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 does not provide or prepare such record. Pursuant to Section 3.07 of the City Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, Mayor Thomas E. Lynch has instructed me to advise you of a Special Meeting of the Commission to be held in the Commission Chambers at 6 P.M. on Tuesday, November 2, 1993. This meeting has been called for the purpose of considering the following: SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 1. Pension Settlement Agreement. ~~ Barbara Garito Acting City Clerk WORKSHOP AGENDA 1. Urban Form Study - Dennis Foltz, Palm Beach County Planning Department. 2. Ordinance No. 55-93 amending Chapter 52, "Water" , of the Code of Ordinances to provide for miscellaneous text revisions, increasing water deposits for tenants, changing water rate structure to an inverted block schedule, and adding fees for various services. 3. Ordinance No. 65-93 amending Section 4 .4. 11, "Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District of the Land Development Regulations. 4. Delray Beach Municipal Cemetery Expansion. 5. Delray Beach Municipal Golf Course Club House. I I 6. Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Vacancy - Alternate Position. 7. Commission Comments. . . , [IT' DF DELIA' BEA[H CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 2ijiJ ~w ["t AVE~UE . DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 F,,\CSIMJLE 40ï/278,lï¿:.S Wr~~_r·. D~r_a~ L~n_ (40'7) 243-'7081 MEMORANDUM Date: October 28, 1993 To: City Commission From: Susan A. Ruby, Assistant City Attorney Subject: Agreement Between the City, I.A.F.F., P.B.A, and the Pension Board The Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach, Local 1842 of the I.A.F.F., Police Benevolent Association, and the Board of Trustees of the City of Delray Beach Police Officers and Firefighters Retirement System have approved the attached agreement. In addition, all the members of the Police and Fire Pension System have voted to enter into this agreement. The Pension Board met on October 27, 1993 to accept the agreement. It was a unanimous vote. The Board also rescinded its vote to file a lawsuit. In addition, the Board voted to change the salary assumption to 7% for the year ending September 30, 1993 and directed that actuarial reports and impact statements be formulated for the new plan. The Pension Board's votes are contingent upon agreement by the City. If you have any questions, please call. By copy of this memorandum to David Harden, our office requests that this matter be placed on the special meeting agenda for November 2, l~CitY Commission consideration. , y/7 SAR: j¡ C Attachment cc: David Harden, City Manager pens1onl.sar 6~O Wf~I~lq3 SF/l '. AGREEMENT The City of Delray Beach (City), Board of Trustees of the City of Delray Beach Police Officers and Firefighters " Retirement System ( Board) , Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach, Local 1842, IAFF (IAFF), and the Police Benevolent Association (PBA) enter into this Agreement to resolve all issues related to the use of insurance premium tax revenues in connection with the City of Delray Beach Police Officers and Firefighters Retirement System. 1. "DROP" Plan -- The City, IAFF and PBA agree that effective January 1, 1994, the City will institute a Deferred Retirement Option Plan ("DROP") in conjunction with the police/ firefighter pension plan. Plan members with at least 20 and not more than 30 years of credited service may elect to '- participate- in the DROP by providing at least 30 days advance written notice to the Board. On the effective date of the employee's election, the employee will stop making contributions to the pension plan, and the City's contributions on behalf of the employee will also stop. The employee will "retire" for purposes of the pension plan, but will continue City emploYment for up to five years from the effective date of the employee's election; provided, that if at the effective date of the employee's election there are less than five years before the employee attains 30 years of service as a City police officer/firefighter, the employee may participate in the DROP only until 30 years of service is attained. The employee's normal retirement benefit, calculated in accordance with the pension plan, will be paid into a separate DROP account on the employee's behalf during participation in the DROP. The DROP account will be credited with interest equal to the overall net rate of return on pension fund assets during " the DROP period. At the conclusion of the DROP period and as a condition of participating in the DROP, the employee will retire and leave City emploYment. The employee will continue to receive a normal retirement benefit calculated in accordance with the pension plan based on average monthly earnings and credited service as of the effective date of the employee's election to participate in the DROP. The employee's DROP account will thereafter be distributed in accordance with the pension and applicable IRS regulations. 2. Early Retirement Incentive -- The City, PBA and IAFF agree th~ the police/firefighter pension plan will be amended ......- to provide an early retirement incentive for plan members with 18 or more years of credited service. The incentive would be the addition of two years of credited service in the calculation of the pension. Eligible members would be given an opportunity to decide within a limited time period (30 to 90 days) whether they wish to retire. The early retirement incentive could be offered on a year-to-year basis as determined by the City, and may not be offered every year. The City will provide at least 60 days advance notice of each "window" option period. An employee who elects to exercise the "window" option cannot also participate in the DROP. 2 '. 3. Retirement Benefit Enhancement - The City, IAFF and PBA agree that effective January 1, 1994, the police/firefighter pension plan will be amended to provide an annual increase in benefits for eligible retirees of between ,; one percent and four percent, payable on October 1, based on the amount of insurance premium tax revenues received by the City for the preceding plan year pursuant to Chapter 175 and 185, Florida statutes. "Eligible retirees" are those who retire after 9/30/93 whose date of hire as a City police officer/firefighter is 25 or more years prior to the benefit enhancement date. A minimum benefit increase of one percent per year will be provided, regardless of the amount of premium tax revenues received. To the extent annual premium tax revenues exceed the current amount ($504,922), the annual one percent minimum adjustment will be increased in increments of ---- one-tenth of one percent, based on the actuary's determination that the amount of the excess premium tax revenues is sufficient to fund the benefit increase on an actuarially sound basis. The maximum amount of the total annual benefit increase will not exceed four percent, regardless of the amount of premium tax revenues received. The annual benefit increase provided under this paragraph shall be compounded annually (i.e., the increase shall be based on the benefit received by plan members at the end of the preceding plan year). 4. Disability Benefits -- The current assumption for disability retirements is that five plan members would retire with disabilities during the ten year period ending October 1, 3 '. '. 1992. However, there were actually 15 disability retirements during that ten year period. The actuary has stated that the recent ten year disability experience is cause for concern. The assumed level of disability retirement will have to be ,J increased unless steps are taken to reduce the rate of future disability retirement and/or disability benefits. The City, IAFF and PBA agree that the issue of disability retirement shall be addressed through the Labor Management Committee format commencing January 1, 1994. 5. Pension Issues Removed from Collective Bargaining -- The City, IAFF and PBA agree that pension benefits will not be subject to the collective bargaining process in the future and that this agreement shall be binding on their successors and assigns; provided, should premium tax revenues cease, the retirement benefit enhancement referred to in paragraph 3, ---- above, will be subject to reopener negotiations. 6. Salary Increase Assumption -- The Board agrees that the current salary increase assumption will, based upon the recommendation of the plan actuary, be reduced to a maximum of seven percent (7%) effective for the year ending September 30, 1993. It is understood that this Agreement shall not become effective unless and unti I the salary increase assumption is changed as provided in the preceding sentence. The salary increase assumption is subject to change in future years based on the plan actuary's recommendation that a change is necessary in light of actual experience. 4 '. 7. Placement of Premium Tax Revenues -- All parties agree that insurance premium tax revenues received by the City pursuant to Chapters 175 and 185, Florida Statutes shall .. continue to be placed in and become an integral part of the " existing policy/firefighter pension fund for the sole and exclusive use of plan members and beneficiaries, and shall not hereafter be used for any other purpose. 8. Release of Claims -- The parties agree that this Agreement resolves all issues related to the use of insurance premium tax revenues in connection with the police/firefighter pension fund. The Board, IAFF, and PBA hereby release, acquit, satisfy and forever discharge the city, its agents, insurers, employees, successors and assigns from any and all manner of legal action, causes of action, suits, grievances, claims and demands of any kind, including, but not limited to suits under ---- Chapters 175 and 185, Florida Statutes, pertaining to the police/firefighter pension plan and the past, present and future use of Chapter 175/185 insurance premium tax revenues in connection with the plan, provided the City continues to comply with the terms of this Agreement. This release of claims is binding upon the Board, IAFF, PBA, their agents, employees, members, successors and assigns. 9. Effective Date of Agreement -- This Agreement shall take effect when approved by all parties and by a majority of police/firefighter pension plan members, except as otherwise expressly provided herein. 5 '. lO. Severability -- Should any provision or part of this Agreement be declared illegal, invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining parts and - provisions shall have no force and effect unless otherwise " mutually agreed by the parties. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Date .-.- /(-,') '7- (/3 Date .---~--- PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS OF DELRAY BEACH, LOCAL 1842, IAFF Date POL ION Approved by a majority of police/firefighter pension plan members on . pens1on3.agt 6 '. " PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS OF DELRAY BEACH LOCAL 1842 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS P.O. BOX 583, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33447-0583 - ~ " October 21. 1993 Deer .Ms. Ruby: This letter is to infora you that the Professional Firefighters of Delray Beach, Local 1842, held a ratification vote regarding the Pension Settleaent Agreement ill on Friday 10/15/93, 10/16/93, and 10/17/93. The aajority of the .eabers voted in favor of accepting the teras of the Agreeaent. If you have any questions conc~ng this aatter please feel free to contact .e. Sincerely, /~~~ ~ Lt. Bill Adaas v. Pres. Local 1842 Hoae: 274-8398 Pager: 936-7821 ,. , I i ~ '. ., PALM BEACH COUNTY POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC. MAILING ADDRESS ADMINlSTRA TIYE OFFICES P.O. Box \48\ 1501 Whitehall Rœd West Palm Beach, FL 33402 West Palm Beach. FL 33405 (407) 689-3745 (407) 689-3745 (407) 687-0\54 Fax ~ ,J October 19, 1993 Me. Ned Gusty Human Resource Director City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Mr. Gusty: On Friday, October 8, 1993, a ratification vote was held for all sworn members of the Delray Beach Police Department pertaining to the re~olution of Premium Tax Revenues and the adoption of an extra benefits package for the pension plan. The results of that vote were overwhelmingly in favor of the proposed changes and settlement. We look forward to finalizing the agreement by participating in drafting the necessary legislative docum~. Sincerely, ~~Jd04!J Glenn F. Goss, Lead Representative Delray Beach P.B.A. GFG:pda S3JB\,/ì~'~' q\f~·.\f1H ~~\ OS: \\ H~ \ Z lJJ £b6\ .. ',.' ¡;,.,,;\'..\~ a ;;j j " ~ :)1 v .~~ The Voice of Palm Beach County's Law Enforcement Ernest W. George.. President - Robert Provost, Vice-President - Arthur Apicella.. Secretary-Treasurer .. " DElRAY BEACH tl . , II ~ ~!~~tf'5ach Police Department tr.ftd AlI-AmericaCity aOQ West Atlant.i<;: Avenue · Delray Beach, Florida 33444-3695 , IIII.~ 1993 Jtl '9 PH4Wfjð3-7888 Fax (407) 243-7816 HUMAi!l~OURCES 1 r¡q ~ - MEMORANDUM " i TO: Ned Gusty, Interim Human Resources Director FROM: Edward M. Morley, Captain ß~~~~ Investigative Division --- ----- , ..-c::~ ' DATE: October 19, 1993 '-., SUBJECT: 175/185 PENSION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Command staff members of the Police Department (non-bargaining unit members) , who are members of the City of Delray Beach Police Officers and Fire Fighters Retirement System, have considered the Pension Settlement Agreement and we, as a group, unanimously agree with the settlement offered. I write this letter with the authority of the Police Captains and Police MaJor of the Delray Beach Police Department. EMM/ppt cc: Command Staff ! i ,. .. . R E C F I \,f E D,~?~~Jo~"::'_:,,· - ~.t_-"" :.". ..;~ffi~·.';· .':'{: [IT' DF DELIAY BEA[H _ :~:¿,< "~l\;<'\ 1993 fiC I 1 I AM 9='[5 2 .}>"'~ ~'. '-:~ ' HUMAN ;¡[SOURCES' FIRE DEPARTMENT ~ MEMORANDUM , TO: NED GUSTY, INTERIM HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR FROM: JOHN TOMASZEWSKI, ASSISTANT CHIEF MICHAEL WIGDERSON, ASSISTANT CHIEF MICHAEL HENDRICKS, BATTALION CHIEF FRANK RYNCARZ, BATTALION CHIEF CHARLES STRAVINO, BATTALION CHIEF MICHAEL CATO, DIVISION CHIEF JOSEPH KOPEL, DIVISION CHIEF DOUGLAS TRAWICK, DIVISION CHIEF DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1993 SUBJECT: PROPOSED RETIREMENT PACKAGE " !. ,> On this date, the non-bargaining unit members of the Fire :i Department, who members of the Police and Fire Fighters " are Pension System, voted on the proposed retirement package. The result of thi.ft vote was unanimously in favor of accepting the proposed package. " 't This memorandum serves as notification to your committee the results of our vote. fL~ ~ffU~ John Tomaszewski Michael Wigderson Assistant Chief Assistant Chief \-h~~~~ cIak JiÞ-- Michael Hendricks Frank Ryncarz Charles Stravino Battalion Chief Battalion Chief Battalion Chief ~K i~~w'~¿~ Michael Cato Jos ph Kope , Douglas Trawick Division Chief Division Chief Division Chief F IRE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS. 101 WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE. DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7400. FAX 407/ 2654660 '. . '. BOë .<1 (f County Commissioners 9/17/83 c: Commission County Administrator City Manager . Mary McCarty, Chair David Kovacs Robert Weisman Ken 1. Foster, Vice Chairman Karen T. Marcus RAB:m1d Carol A. Roberts Warren H. Newell Burt Aaronson " .I 1993 Maude Ford Lee September 15, 1993 The Honorable Thomas E. Lynch Mayor, City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. First Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Mayor Lynch: As you are aware, the County is conducting an Urban Form Study which is looking at establishing a future vision for Palm Beach County. During the past several months, county staff in coordination with various municipalities, task forces, and other interested parties, have been compiling data and information, and examining strategies to reduce urban sprawl. The information has now been synthesized and alternative land use patterns or scenarios have been developed. We would appreciate the opportunity to present the alternative land use patterns at your next available meeting. The scenarios present options for all the municipalities as well as the unincorporated area, and therefore, your input and involvement is critical. The Urban Form Study is intended to result in a conceptual plan that would be of sufficient detail to test the impact of the land use scenarios, but not so detailed as to identify specific parcels. As noted, the intent is to create a long-range vision for the entire county, which is based on data and analysis, and incorporates greater creativity and flexibility into the planning process. Moreover, the long-range plan will provide a context to assist the County and 37 municipalities in updating and refining their plans during the next state-mandated update, which is set for 1996. "An Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer" \NS II @ p,inted on ,ecycled pape' P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-1989 (407) 355-2001 FAX: (407) 355-3990 <', ,. Mayor Lynch Page 2 Please contact Dennis Foltz, Planning Director, at 233-5308 to set up a time for a presentation or for more information. We look forward to working with you on guiding Palm Beach County's future. Sincerely, 1~~ Mary cCart Chair Board of u ty Commissioners MM:mpg @ printed on recycled papet " . µ- 4 ~ t~:e1+ 9/17/83 c: Commission r:- >t:. .. '.. ' Board of County Commissioners ß ~:t' / n A m;<¡istr:tf, City Manager . ... L (0 5" ¿' ~~ Mary McCarty, Chair ~ ~.1 IT................,... co obe r m , Ken L. Foster, Vice Chairman Karen T. Marcus RAB:m1d Carol A. Roberts C"V~\q3 Warren H. Newell ~ Burt Aaronson c¡\ ø /þ ~:JoP Maude Ford Lee uJ° .k> ŒQ(1 ç~ ¿ D· to\~) )\Y wr;¡Ji/r¡3 September l5, 1993 \ ,/ rr 11> The Honorable Thomas E. Mayor, City of Delray B~ 100 N.W. First Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Mayor Lynch: As you are aware, the County is conducting an Urban Form Study which is looking at establishing a future vision for Palm Beach County. During the past several months, county staff in coordination with various municipalities, task forces, and other interested parties, have been compiling data and information, and examining strategies to reduce urban sprawl. The information has now been synthesized and alternative land use patterns or scenarios have been developed. We would appreciate the opportunity to present the alternative land use patterns at your next available meeting. The scenarios present options for all the municipalities as well as the unincorporated area, and therefore, your input and involvement is critical. The Urban Form Study is intended to result in a conceptual plan that would be of sufficient detail to test the impact of the land use scenarios, but not so detailed as to identify specific parcels. As noted, the intent is to create a long-range vision for the entire county, which is based on data and analysis, and incorporates greater creativity and flexibility into the planning process. Moreover, the long-range plan will provide a context to assist the County and 37 municipalities in updating and refining their plans during the next state-mandated update, which is set for 1996. "An Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer" @ printed on recycled paper P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-1989 (407) 355-2001 FAX: (407) 355-3990 '. " .. . Mayor Lynch Page 2 Please contact Dennis Foltz, Planning Director, at 233-5308 to set up a time for a presentation or for more information. We look forward to working with you on guiding Palm Beach County's future. Sincerely, Mary 1!:~~ Chair Board of C u ty Commissioners ( MM:mpg @ printed on recycled paper '. ,. ,. I I MEMORANDUM i TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGERltJ&1 l I AGENDA ITEM it WS/a I SUBJECT: - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 2. 1993 ORDINANCE NO.55-~3 DATE: October 29, 1993 For several weeks now we have been considering an ordinance amending I Chapter 52, "Water" , of the Code Ordinances to provide for miscellaneous text revisions, increasing water deposits for tenants, I changing the water rate structure to an inverted block schedule, adding fees for various services, and establishing a surcharge to be added when water use is restricted by the Water Management District. I I There has been a great deal of debate concerning two features of this ordinance (1) the inverted block structure and (2) the Water I Conservation Surcharge. The attached ordinance has been changed in I response to comments made by the members of the public at hearings I on the ordinance. The dividing points between the blocks have been ! ¡ adjusted so that residential customers using less than 24,000 per I month, which is over 60% of our customers, will see some decrease in i their rates. Only customers using 24,000 gallons month I or more per ¡ will have increased water rates. Also, we propose to raise the threshold for adding the surcharge from 7,000 gallons to 15,000 I gallons. I ¡ I have placed this ordinance on the workshop agenda in order to I receive further direction from the Commission. I The Commission may accept these proposals, or decide on further I changes. We do need to proceed with adoption of an inverted block I rate structure and a Conservation surcharge in order to get permits for the Morikami Wellfield. i ~ I I ! \ '. ¡ " . (B) Monthly rates. The monthly rates (except for fire hydrants as set forth in Section 52.03) for water furnished by the water facilities or plant of the city to customers within and outside the corporate limits of the city, which unless otherwise indicated shall include the appropriate customer charges, capacity charges, and commodity charges for all custom- ers, are fixed as shown in the following schedule: Inside Outside Type of Customer City City Residential Customer charge (per meter) $ 1. 55 $ 1.93 Capacity charge (charged to all customers, per residential dwelling unit) $ 7.62 $ 9.53 Commodity charge (all metered consumption-per 1,000 gallons): 1.Iø~ 1.1 ~ f, Zero to 3,000 gallons 1.00 1. 25 4,000 to 20,000 gallons 1.10 1.38 - 21,000 to 35,000 gallons 1.20 1. 50 36,000 to 50,000 gallons 1. 30 1. 63 Above 50,000 gallons 1. 50 1.88 Nonresidential and té~étitløn Irrigation Customer charge (per meter) $ 1.55 $ 1.93 Capacity charge (based upon meter size): 3/4-inch meter $ 7.62 $ 9.53 1-inch meter 12.73 15.91 1-1/2-inch meter 25.38 31.73 2-inch meter 40.63 50.78 3-inch meter 88.95 111.19 4-inch meter 160.07 200.08 6-inch meter 355.73 444.66 Commodity charge (all metered consumption-per 1,000 gallons): 1.Iø~ 1.10 1.I~f, 1.38 Note: Whenever both residential and nonresidential users are on the same meter, the capacity charge is to be computed i~/lf/éii~/nønté~ldéntl~l/~~ét/øn t~é/øétét/w~~/i/té~ldéntl~l/dwéllln~/~nlt'/øt/~ll/t~é/~~ét~/~~~ll/~é/t~it~éd ~~~éd/øn/t~é/nønté~ldéntlil/tipitltf/i~~t~é/tité'/w~lt~éiét/l~/t~é/~téitét at the nonresidential rate. ORD. NO. 55-93 '. ·, (C) Emergency Rate Adjustment for Water Conservation. During periods of mandated water restrictions by the South Florida Water Management District, an automatic surcharge shall be added to the commodity charge according to the following schedule for all water used in excess of 15,000 gallons by any customer in anyone month: . Overall Reduction Percent Surcharge Restriction Phase in Use Applied I 15% 15% II 30% 30% III 45% 45% IV 60% 60% (D) Fire hydrant/standpipe charges (annual). Fire hydrant rental (per fire hydrant) charges Inside city, annually $165.00 Outside city, annually 206.25 Standpipes and sprinklers charge (per separate system) Inside city, annually $165.00 Outside city, annually 206.25 ill The customer charges and capacity charges as set forth in this section shall be due and payable each and every month, for as long as the meter is installed, regardless of whether or not the meter is actually turned on or off, and without regard to usage or occupancy. Section 6. That Section 52.36, "Charge for each Time Water is Turned On", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows: There shall be a service charge of $15 for each time water is turned on, except when the provisions of Section! 52.18 or 52.52 apply regarding turn on as a result of a shut-off notice. Sect ion 7. That Section 52.37, "Temporary Use; Tapping Charges and Deposit", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby redesignated to be Section 52.38. Section 8. That Section 52.38, "Service Charge for After Hour Calls", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby redesignated to be Section 52.37. ORD. NO. 55-93 '. ·. . COMPARISON RESIDENTIAL WATER BILL Present Rate - Proposed Rate % Change l~ PRE1 PR01 INC1 USA:L PRES PROP INC] 000' RATE RATE -DEC OOO'S RATE RATE -DEC -- ------ ----- -- 1 $10.25 $10.17 -0,88% 28 $39.59 $40.17 1.21% 2 11,35 11.17 -1,59% 29 40.78 41.37 1.45% 3 12.44 12.17 -2.17% 30 41.87 42.57 1.67% 4 13.53 13.27 - 1 .92% 31 42.95 43.77 1.89% 5 14.62 14.37 -1.71 % 32 44.05 44.97 2.09% 5 15.71 15,47 -1.53% 33 45,14 45,17 2.28% 7 15.80 15.57 -1.37% 34 45.23 47.37 2.47% 8 17.89 17.57 - 1 .23% 35 47,32 48.57 2.54% 9 18.98 18.77 -1,11% 35 48.41 49,77 2.81% 10 20,07 19.87 ~ 1 ,00% 37 49.50 50.97 2.97% 11 21,16 20.97 -0,90% 38 50,59 52.17 3.12% 12 22.25 22.07 -0,81 % 39 51,58 53.37 3.27% 13 23.34 23,17 - 0, 73% 40 52,77 54,57 3.41% 14 24.43 24.27 -0.55% 41 53,85 55.77 3.55% 15 25.52 25.37 -0.59% 42 54.95 55.97 3,68% 15 25.51 25.57 -0,15% 43 55,04 58,17 3,80% 17 27.70 27.57 -0,47% 44 57,13 59.37 3,92% 18 28.79 28.57 -0,42% 45 58.22 50.57 4,04% 19 29.88 29,77 -0,37% 45 59,31 51.77 4.15% 20 30,97 30,87 -0,32% 47 50.40 62,97 4,25% 21 32.05 31,97 - 0,28% 48 51 .49 64.17 4.35% 22 33.15 33.07 -0,24% 49 52,58 55.37 4.45% 23 34.25 34.17 - 0,23 % 50 53,57 56.57 4,55% 24 35.33 35.37 0.11 % 55 69,12 72,57 4,99% 25 36.42 35,57 0.41% 60 74.57 78.77 5.63% 26 37,51 37,77 0.69% 70 85.4 7 91,77 7.37% 27 38,60 38,97 0,96% 75 90.92 98.27 8,08% '. ., . CUMULATIVE BILLED USAGE MULTI-FAMILY EXCLUDED (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) CUlulative Total Use of CUI. Use of Total Use All Cuaulative CUlulative Usage Block . Bills Bills thru Bills stopping Bills stopping bills passing Billed Osage Billed Usage lGAL in block Block in Block [GAL' in Block [GAL thru Block [GAL Percent (X) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.----- 0 90 152,550 0 0 0 1 8,068 152,460 8,068 8,068 144,392 152,460 6.5% 2 10,848 144,392 21, 696 29,164 261,088 296,852 12.6% 3 12,454 133,544 31,362 67,126 363,210 430,396 18.3% 4 13,661 121,090 54,644 121, 710 429,716 551, 486 23.5% 5 12,981 101,429 64,935 186,105 472,210 658,915 28.0% 6 11,Ò21 94,442 66,126 252,831 500,526 753,357 32.0% 1 9,540 83,421 66,780 319,611 511,167 836,778 35.6% 8 7,904 73,881 63,232 382,843 527,816 910,659 38.7% 9 6,455 65,977 58,095 440,938 535,698 976,636 H.5% 10 5,330 59,522 53,300 494,238 541,920 1,036,158 ((.IX 11 4,518 54,192 49,698 543,936 546,414 1, 090,350 46.n 12 3,834 49,614 46,008 589,944 550,080 1, 140,024 48.5% 13 3,327 45,840 43,251 633,195 552,669 1.185,864 50.4% 14 2,876 42,513 40,264 613,459 554,918 1, 228,377 52.2% 15 2,521 39,631 37,815 711.214 556,140 1. 268,014 53.9% 16 2,280 37,116 36,480 147,754 557,376 1, 305,130 55.5% 17 2,130 34,836 36,210 783,964 556,002 1, 339,966 57.0% 18 1,910 32,706 35,460 819,424 553,248 1. 372,672 58.4% 19 1,737 30,136 33,003 852,421 550,981 1, 403,408 59.7X 20 1, 627 28,999 32,540 884,967 547,440 1, 432,407 60.9% 21- 25 6,437 27,372 160,925 1,045,892 523,375 1, 569,267 66.7% 26-30 4,567 20,935 137,010 1,182,902 491,040 1, 673,942 71.U 31-50 9,351 16,368 374,040 1, 556,942 280,680 1,837,622 78.2% 51-100 5,054 7,017 379,050 1,935,992 147,225 2,083,217 88.6% 101-250 1.511 1,963 302,200 2,238,192 90,400 2,328,592 99.0% >250 452 452 113,000 2,351,192 0 2,351,192 100.0% 152,550 (1) Usage blocks (2) NUlber of bills generated last year within block (3) CUlulative bills in block; i.e. 152,350 accounts were billed for at least 1,000 gallons of water. SOURCE: (4) Coluln (1) tiles Coluln (2) BILL TABULATION (5) CUlulative billed usage with lonthl} usage </= to usage in block MKTHODOLOGY (6) Total water used within block including usage in block by custolers whose usage exceeds the block. Provided by (7) Coluln (5) plus Coluln (6) Sa. Langhaa (8) Percent cUlulative billed usage: i.e. 18.3% of custolers use 3,000 gallons or less. ,. · 5CHEDlLE OF INSIDE CITY WATER RATES SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES Residential Only Ci1v of Boca Raton - Inverted block rate s\-uc'D-lre Base Rate -CusiDmer Charge $2,11 Note: All commodity rates -Capacity Charge 9,48 are per 1 ,000 gallons -------. TOTAL BASE RATE $11 ,59 COMMJOITY CHARGE $0.35 OM - 25M 0,95 25M - 50M $1,10 5Otv1 and higher Ci1v r:i Bovnton Beach - Inverted block rate s1ructure (Effective 10l1193) TOTAL BASE RATE $5,65 includes 3,000 gallons consumption C.oMMOOITY C.HARC,E $1.58 4M -6M 1.00 7M - 9fv1 1,75 10M - 12M 1.95 13M - 15M 1,00 16M - 25M 2.00 26M - 50M 2.21 51M -75M $2,35 76M and higher Broward Countv utilities - Inverted block rate s'lructure TOTAL BASE RATE $4,21 COMMODITY Œ-IARGE $1.41 OM-8M 1.70 9M - 13M $2.37 13M and higher Ci1v r:i Coral Serines - Inverted block rate s'lructure TOTAL BASE RATE $13.59 COMMODITY CHARGE 0.93 OM-8M $1.~ 8M and higher Citv of Deerfiald Beach - Inverted block rate 5'1ructure TOTAL BASE RATE $6.56 CCMMr..DrrY a-lARGE $1.01 OM-5M 1,14 6M - 12M $1,31 13M and higher CllY OF DELRA.Y BEACH - Unifcrm rate 5'1ructure (PRESENT RATB Base Rate -CustDmer Charge $1,55 -Capacity Charge 7.62 -------, TOTAL BASE RATE $9.17 COMMODITY CHARGE $1,09 Rate per 1 ,000 gallons " , - CliY OF DB-RAY BEACH - Inverted block rata :s1ructure (PROPOSED RATE) Base Rate -Customer Charge $1,55 -Capacity Charge 7,fQ -------. TOTAL BASE RATE $9,17 COMMCOITY CHARGE $1,00 OM-3M 1.10 4M - 20M 1.2) 21 M - 35M 1.3) 36M - 50M 1.00 51 M and higher Citv ~ Fort Lauderdale - Inverted block rate s1ructure /Effective 10/1/93\ TOTAL BASE RATE $6.65 COMMODITY CHARGE 1.23 Rate per 1.roo gallons Palm Beach County utilities - InverlBd block rate structure (Effective 10/1/93) TOTAL BASE RATE $12,30 I:::;QM~JOITY CHARGE $0.75 OM-4M 1.35 5M -10M $3.40 11 M and higher Seacoast utilities - Uniform rate structure TOTAL BASE RATE $15,83 COMMODITY CHARGE $1.84 Rate per 1.000 gallons Citv of Wintar Park - Inverted block rate 51-UCtl Ire TOTAL BASE RATE 9.43 COMMODITY CHARGE 0.54 OM-5M 1.03 7M - 12M 1,54 12M and higher --------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON OF INSIDE CITY WATER BILLS SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES 5,roo 10,000 15,000 30,000 50.000 Com mLm ity gallons gallons gallons gallons gallons -------~ ------------------------------------- City of Boc.a Raton $13.34 $15.09 $16,84 $24,59 $41,84 City of Boyn1Dn Beach 9,81 18,12 27,17 46,77 98,77 Brovvard County Utilities 11,26 18,89 28,73 64.28 111 ,68 City ~ Coral Springs 18.24 25.21 31.89 47.87 72,27 City of Deerfield Beach 11.61 17.18 23.39 43.17 69,37 City of Fort Lauderdale 12,95 19,25 25.55 44 .45 69,65 Pal m Beach County Uti! ities 15,65 22,50 40.40 91.40 159.40 Seacoast Utilities 25,03 34,23 43.43 71.03 107,83 City of Wini:er Park $12,13 $15.91 $23,65 $45,75 $77,93 DELRAY BEACH - PRESENT $14.52 $20,07 $25,52 $41 .87 $53.67 DELRAY BEACH - PROPOSED $14.37 $19.87 $25,37 $42,57 $00,57 '. " I . . MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGERtrJ0( SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM ~ ~/~ - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 2. 1993 ORDINANCE NO.65-93 DATE: October 29, 1993 I At the October 26th regular meeting, the Commission, by consensus, I requested that this item be placed on a workshop agenda for I discussion. ¡ This is an ordinance amending Section 4.4.11, "Neighborhood Commercial I (NC) District, of the Land Development Regulations to provide for the I display and sale of lawn furniture, playground equipment, sheds and accessories as a conditional usej to delete the dispensing of gasoline ¡ directly to a vehicle as a conditional usej to delete veterinary I I offices as a conditional usej to reduce the maximum site area from four (4) acres to two (2 ) acreSj and to reduce, from 35,000 to 10,000 square feet, the maximum floor area for single tenant retail, office or service uses and single principal uses. The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its meeting of September 20th. Public testimony was taken and the matter was continued to October 18th. At the October 18th meeting, the firm ! of Weiner and Associates restated its opposition to a maximum floor , , I area greater than 4,000 square feet per tenant or use category in any ¡ circumstances. The Board forwarded the proposed amendment with a I I recommendation of approval, based upon a finding that the changes were I not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. I ¡ I I '. .. J I I ~ I ORDINANCE 65-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION ÐF THE CITY OF I DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 4, "ZONING REGULATIONS", SECTION 4.4.11 "NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) DISTRICT" , OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 4.4.11(D), "CONDITIONAL USES AND STRUCTURES ALLOWED" , TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPLAY AND SALE OF LAWN FURNITURE, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, SHEDS AND ACCESSORIES AS A CONDITIONAL USE; TO DELETE THE DISPENSING OF GASOLINE DIRECTLY TO A VEHICLE AS A CONDITIONAL USE; TO DELETE VETERINARY OFFICES AS A CONDITIONAL USE; BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 4.4.11 ( F) , "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS", TO REVISE THE MAXIMUM SITE AREA TO TWO (2) ACRES; BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 4.4.11 ¡ ( H) , "SPECIAL REGULATIONS", TO PROVIDE FOR A MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR SINGLE TENANT OFFICE OR SERVICE USES AND SINGLE PRINCIPLE USES; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the subject matter at its meeting of October 18, 1993, and has forwarded the change with a recommendation of approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(1)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the subject as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the change is consistent with, and furthers the objectives and policies of, the Comprehensive Plan. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE I CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS; I Section 1. That Chapter 4, "Zoning Regulations", Article 4.4, I "Base Zoning District", Section 4.4.11, "Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District", Subsection 4.4.11(D), "Cond~tional Uses and Structures Allowed", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby I amended to réad as follows: I (D) Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed: The following I I uses are allowed as conditional uses with the NC District: (1) Child care and adult day care , , , '. .. I I I ( 2 ) ~tø~Ø~Øt~g/ØtlgøØØ~t~Ø/~ttØ¢t~ýltØlølý¢~t¢~¢ Display & Sale of lawn furniture. playqround equi~ment. sheds and accessories I ( 3 ) Veterinary clinics ø~~/Øttt¢Øø I Section 2. That Chapter 4, "Zoning Regulations", Article 4.4, "Base Zoning District", Section 4.4.11, "Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District", Subsection 4.4.11(F), "Development Standards", of the Land i , Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray I ~each, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: I (F) Development Standards: In addition to the I development standards set forth in Section 4.3.4, the following shall apply: ¡ (1) Maximum site area of tØ~t/l~J two (2) acres l I Section 3. That Chapter 4, "Zoning Regulations", Article 4.4, "Base Zoning District", Section 4.4.11, "Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District", Subsection 4.4.11(H), "Special Regulations", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: (H) Special Regulations: ( 1 ) ~Øtl¢ØtØ/t~_~/twØll~J//_t¢t¡øt/~tØtØ__tØ~_¡/Øt ~~_t~ø__/Øttt¢Ø_/_~_¡¡/~Ø/_¡¡ØWØ~/wtt~/_/_t~g¡Ø/~~ ~øýØ¡Ø~¢ø~t/~Øt/_~ø¡¡/_~ý/_~¢~/Øttt¢Ø/~_Ø The maximum area devoted to a single tenant for office or service uses shall not exceed 2,000 sq. ft. in floor area. The intent tt 2! these restrictions is to maintain I the center at the neighborhood scale. : (2 ) The maximum floor area which can be allocated to a single retail use. or qroups of similar (retail. j office. services) principal uses rétáï!/téßáßt/ør/tø I I ø~éœïfïœ/rétáï!/~øéøi/øfß,~!ár!ý/ør/ïß/t~é i ár¡frér¡átéé. shall not exceed 1¡iQQQ 10.000 square , feet. 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 I as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. -2- ORD. NO. 65-93 '. .. I " Section 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 6. That this ordinance shall be come 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 , 1993. I MAYOR ATTEST: Acting City Clerk First Reading: Second Reading: I I i ¡ I -3- ORD,' NO. 65-93 '. '. C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION TO: QD T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER ~~ ¥ø\.)q,ð' FROM: ID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 26, 1993 LDR TEXT AMENDMENT - NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION: The action requested of the City Commission is that of approval on first reading of an ordinance which effects changes to the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District. B A C K G R 0 U N D: Please refer to the attached P&Z Staff Report for a historic perspective on the NC Zone District. Within the past year specific instances dealing with interpretation as to whether or not a gasoline station is an allowable use; and, the intensity of retail uses have placed the need to review and modify the NC District regulations. The geographic areas affected by the proposed amendment include: * the northwest corner of Seacrest and 22nd; * the northeast corner of Seacrest and 22nd; * parcels along Atlantic Avenue, west of Barwick; * the Hamlet Shoppes & adjacent land (Atlantic Avenue); * the Discount Auto Parts parcel (West Atlantic Avenue) which is currently being annexed with NC zoning; and, * the recently annexed Taheri property on Military Trail which has a potential for application of NC zoning. The issues/items addressed by the proposed amendment include: A. Deletion of use which may have been construed to accommodate a gasoline station; B. Addition of the use conducted at The Hitching Post (West Atlantic Ave) as a conditional use; C. Reduction of intensity by reducing allowable lot area from four (4) acres to two (2) acres; D. Reduction of intensity by reducing allowable floor area allocated to retail use from 35,000 sq. ft. to 10,000 sq. ft. , and applying the new limitation to office and service uses; '. .. City Commission Documentation LDR Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District Page 2 " E. Elimination of a restriction on the number of similar office and business uses; and of a 2,000 sq. ft. limitation on the aggregate for office and business uses; and, F. Removal of the words "and offices" from the listed conditional use of "veterinary clinics". PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION: The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its meeting of September 20, 1993. Public testimony was taken (see Dominguez memo of October 12th) and the matter was continued to the meeting of October 18th. Please refer to the P&Z Staff Report (memo) for the October 18th meeting for the analysis and response to points raised at the public hearing. At the October 18th meeting, the firm of Weiner & Ass,ociates restated its opposition to a maximum floor area greater than 4,000 sq. ft. per tenant or use category in any circumstance. A rationale was provided by the Director in support of the 10,000 sq. ft. requirement. All supported the reduction in intensity by reducing the allowable lot area. The Board then forwarded the proposed amendment with a recommendation of approval, based upon a finding that the changes were not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment as recommended by the Board is as follows: (D)(2) DELETE Dispensing of gasoline directly to a vehicle (D)(2) NEW (add) Display & Sale of lawn furniture, playground equipment, sheds, and accessories (D)(3) PARTIAL DELETE Delete the words "and office" (F)(l) Change maximum site area to two (2) acres (H)(l) REWORD to: "Jføt Jiøtl6· tKáJi twt6 (21 _t.Jit.Zát ptt6tl6__t.t6JiáZ t6t »._t.Ji~__ t6ttt.é~_ _KáZZ »16 áZZt6wl6d wt.tKt.Ji á _t.JitZ~ Jf~ dl6iI6Zt6pJi~Jit Jit6t _KáZZ áJit _.éK t6ttt.él6 ._16 The maximum area devoted to a sinqle tenant for office or service uses shall not exceed 2,000 sq.ft. in floor area. The intent t.t of these restrictions is to maintain the center at the neighborhood scale. (H)(2) REWORD to: "The maximum floor area which can be allocated to a single retail use, or qroups of similar (retail, office, services) principal uses tl6tát.Z tl6JiáJit t6t tt6 _p~ét.tt.é tl6tát.Z ._16_1 _t.Jit.ZátZt t6t t.Ji tKI6 átttl6tátl6l shall not exceed 3J/ØØØ 10,000 square feet. " City Commission Documentation LDR Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District Page 3 In addition to the above, the Board directed the Staff to proceed with rezoning actions affecting areas zoned NC in both the northeast and northwest quadrants of the intersection of Seacrest and 22nd Street. R E COM MEN D E D ACT ION: By motion, approval of the amending ord~nance on first reading and set 2nd reading and public hearing consideration for November 9, 1993. Attachment: * Ordinance by others * P&Z Staff Report & Documentation of October 18, 1993 * Dominguez memo of October 12, 1993 * P&Z Staff Report of September 20, 1993 DJK\CCNC " . . .~~~ '.' -., . . , . . . " PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT FOR L.D.R. AMENDMEN'I' MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: III.B. . ,- '. . SUBJECT a CHANGES TO THE N.C. ZONE DISTRICT LDR REFERENCEa 4.4.11 (0)(2) and (H)(2) I T E M B E r 0 R B T H ! BOARD The item before the Board ill that of making a . recommendation to the City Commission on" the proposed modifications to the City's Land DevelopMent Regulationll ( LDRs) . - - , '. ~ " . Pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, no amendment may be made until a recommendation is obtained from the Planning and Zoning Board. Pursuant to F.S. 163.3194(2), the Planning and Zoning Board is to review the proposed amendment with respect to its relationship to the adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City. Since the proposed amendment may substantially affect the use of property which is presently zoned N.C., each owner of N.C. property has been given notice of this consideration. The consideration ill to be made after a public hearing. BACKGROUND The N. C . Zone District existed prior to 1976. At that time, there were only a few principal uses. Retail use was allowed only as a conditional use. The purpose IItatement provided that the N.C. zone was ~o accommodate neighborhood needs based upon. a 3/4 mile service area. . In revisions (1976-1980) , retail of convenience goods was moved to a principal use; and, in general, the range of uses was increased. In preparation of the LDRs (1990), two changes of substance were recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board. * One was that "gasoline stations" be changed to "dispensing to ¿ 'gasoline directly to a vehicle". The intent was that while a ~ . normal gasQline station was not appropriate, the ability to "gas . up" at a convenience store should be retained. III.B. '. ., . P&Z Staff Report Changes to the N.C. Zone District page 2 * The other involved placing a restriction on the use area allocated to similar office/professional uses (see subsection 4.4.11(H}(1)]. Also, the reference to a 3/4 mile service radius was deleted and language was provide which accommodates the H.C. zone within the Transitional Land Use designation. During the hearing associated with the new zoning map, a change in zoning fO,r property located at the corner of Seacrest and 22nd raised another issue. Previously, the Future Land Use Map classified the site as "Transitional"; thus, the (then) existing zone designation of Limited Commercial (LC) was no longer applicable. The proposed zoning was RM, the owner'. ðgent sought N. C. The P lanning an~ _Zoning B<?~rd declined to rec::~end a change to the N.C. zone in that they _~eeme~_ th~ ,'~cale -of '-the-" project (Food Lion) being considered for this p~rticular 8if~,- a Land Use Map designation oL General Commercial would be necessary as opposed to the underlying designation of Transitional. At the City Commission hearings, the Commission was receptive to the request for N. C. zoning. In order to accommodate the situation, the Commission added subsection (H)(2) which placed a limitation on retail users at 35,000 sq. ft. per N.C. development. During the past three years concerns have been raised with the application of the gasoline dispensing use and with the scale of retail which is allowed. Thus, proposed changes to the' H. C. Zone District are now before the Board. PRO P 0 S ! DAM END M ! M T DELETE from Section 4.4.11(D) Conditional Uses Allowed, subsection (2); to wit: l21 Øl~~~ri_lri~ ~f é~~~11~4 ~lt~ttlt t, A 14Mltl4 CHANGE with Section 4.4 .11,(M) Special Requlations, a portion of aubsection (2); to wit: (2) The maximum floor area which can be allocated to 4 single retail tenant or to specific retail uses, sinqularly or in the aggregate, shall not exce~~_ ¡S/SSI 10,000 square feet. " . A If A L 'y S I S Re: Gasoline Service: The"problem with 'the use as described J~ that a petitioner sought to interpret the item as allowi. typical, high-volume qasoline outlets. Th~ land use petition was accepted and processed, and the Planning ~nd Zoning Board in addition to recommending denial found the interpretation to be '. P&Z Staff Report ~ ~ Changes to the N.C. Zone District ~ Page 3 inappropriate. (The petition was later withdrawn at the City Commission level). During debates, it was claimed that the use of gasoline pumps at a convenience store is no· longer a practice. Thus, if indeed that is the situation, the original intent of inclusion for the gasoline service use does not exiåt¡ . and, to avoid future confusion, the use shoul~be stricke~~ .' Re: General Retail' 35,000 sq.ft.: ,In 1990, it was clear to the Planning and Zoning Board that a 35,000 retail (food) outlet would not be proper in the N.C. zone district and that General Commercial zoning was required. The City Commission in it. last meeting for action upon adoption of the LDRs, inserted the area restriction so as to set a limit on the extent of retail· which could be established on any single N.C: property. That City Commission action was done to accommodate a proposed food store at Seacrest and 22nd Street. Since that time, Commissioners have expressed second thought on that previous action. Both at the Planning and Zoning Board and City Commission level 'there" has been direction to re-visit this matter. The ite. has recently had further exposure when N.C. zoning was discussed a. a possible future zoning for a portion of the Taheri property off Military Trail. From the historic record (Background Section), it is clear that the N.C. zone district was not intended to accommodate a use, which would have a service area based upon 35,000 sq. ft. of retail or food store. The proposed floor area of 10,000 sq. ft. is more in keeping with convenience stores and the complimentary similar uses which may be found in a neighborhood center. Re: Affected Properties: At this time there are four (4) N.C. zone districts located in the City. Another property (Discount Auto on West Atlantic) is soon to be annexed with that zoning. Attached is a report which identifies each location, the current usage, and comments on its zoning history. A brief description of the use at each site is as follows. 11 Northwe.t Corner of Seacreat and 22nd: Except for the corner buildings ·this property has not been used for several years. A former office complex and a fonier gasoline station ,remain in dilapidated states. The total land area is 4.32 acres (including the occupied corner). - The former gasoline station was zoned to·N~~; (from C-2)~ 'The balance of the site was annexed In 1985 with L.C. zoning to accommodate the proposed Shoppes of Seacrest, a 35,OOO+.sq.tt. retail center. While a site plan had been approved, the use was not established. For several years thereafter, it was rumored that a Food Lion was to occupy the site; but there has riot been a site plan approved, nor have there been any retail inquiries for quite awhile. The existing uses were proposed for N.C. zoning and the balance of the property as R.M. with the LDRs; however, the entire site was placed in the H.C. category at the property owners' request. '. .. . . P&Z staff Report .. Changes to the N.C. Zone District page 4 12 Northeast Corner of Seacrest and 22nd. The corner parcels (6) were annexed prior to 1962 with C-l zoning. N.C. zoning was applied in 1976. The balance of the properties (7 parcels) were annexed in 1988 with R-1AA zoning. With the LDRs adoption, all the parcels were zoned N.C. One non-conforming non-residential use (Dance Studio) exists and two non-conformin.9 residences exist. The basis and appropriateness of the N.C. zoning on the former R-lAA properties needs to be explored. 13 Strip parcell along West Atlantic Avenue, welt of Barwick. This property was developed as a commercial strip under the County. Upon annexation in June, 1992, the N.C. zoning was applied in that it was appropriate as to the intensity of the current use. There are three (3) separate parcels with a total land area of 1.6 acres. .. - ~ - - -.. 14 The Hamlet Shoppe. , Adjacent Land: A portion of this area is a typical Neighborhood Commercial center. The center is 1.3 acres. The other property contains the Hitching Post which sells outdoor play and storage equipment. This is a non-conforming use. The Hitching Post is on 1.9 acres of land. These properties were annexed in 1983 with G.C. zon1ng. The N.C. zone district was applied to these parcels in 1990 following adoption of the LDRs. The FLUM designation is General Commercial; but, consideration of a "corrective" amendment to "Transitional" is in processing. .. . ASS E SSM E N T AND CON C L U S ION 8 The proposed amendments to the N.C. District are appropriate given the desired scale (intensity) of the uses to be accommodated in it. The uses being deleted ~~ ,t1ot presently.._ exist on any N.C. zoned property; thus, no non-conforming situations will be created. There are no active land use applications which would be impacted by the proposed changes. Given the above assessment, it is proper to make the proposed changes at this time. Also, since the N.C. District is before the Board for consideration, it is also appropriate to consider any other changes which may be appropriate. Thus, additional changes may be raised by the Board, or through the public hearing process. . A L T ERN A T I V E ACTIONS L Recommend denial in that the proposed modifications: a) are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, specifically with regard to (identify specific policies or direction); and/or '. '. P'Z Staff Report , Changes to the N.C. Zone District " .' , " " Page 5 b) are not necessary, nor appropriate in that the inclusion of the items in October, 1990, was based upon sound reasoning and circumstances which have not changed. -- :' 2. Recommend approval based upon a finding that the proposed modifications: - ' - . . , a) are not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plans and b) are consistent with and further the Comprehensive Plan by providing a greater degree of protection for adjacent and nearby residential neighborhoods. 3. Continue with direction. - .. .- , . - - - '. - - , . R E COM MEN D E D ACTION By motion: a recommendation per Alternative Action '2 as stated above. 0 Report prepared by: ..;~.t~~~~ Date i..¡;'¡ I Report reviewed by: Date Attachments: . - . - - * N.C. Zone District Text - * Report by Jeff Perkins, Assistant Planner, re existing conditions of NC zoned property . . DJJt/PZHCDIST '. 1 '.. \ PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: DAVID KOVACS (,- . FROM: DIANE DOMINGUE~ ~ Ù,\~ ~,\!; 'Î\JL; SUBJECT: P & Z BOARD DIRECTION RE: CHKNGES TO NC DISTRICT DATE: OCTOBER 12, 1993 At its meeting of September 20, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed amendment to the NC (Neighborhood Commercial) zoning district regulations. During the public hearing on the item, the following comments were made from the floor: Randy Cooper, resident on 22nd Lane: Single family homes annexed in 1988 (4 lots) and given NC zoning. Wants single family zoning. Debra Dowd, representing Seacrest Homeowners Assoc. : Wanted to know the reason for the changes and was upset that the association wasn't notified. Mike Weiner, representing Del Aire H.O. Assoc.: Scale of NC uses should be reduced. 10,000 sq. ft. too large for single tenant. 4,000-5,000 sq. ft. probably more appropriate. Lori Cohen, representing The Hamlet H.O. Assoc.: Supports changes. Roger Saberson, representing Art Mirandi, owner of the Hitching Post: Asked the Board to consider adding his client's use as an allowable use in order to make it conforming. Tt).e Board discussed the item and tabled it to the October meeting with the following direction: That it is probably appropriate to reduce the maximum allowable tenant size to 5,000. sq. ft. or so, but that existing uses should be evaluated to determine if any would become nonconforming as a result. Jean Beer felt that the code should not be changed to accommo~ate one person such as the Hitching Post. That the zoning of the residential properties should probably be changed to single family. '. . . . . . " PLANNING , ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 18, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: V.A. SUBJECT: MODIFICATIONS TO THE NC ZONE DISTRICT . BAC!CGROUND Proposed amendments to the NC Zone District were considered at a public hearing before the Board on September 20, 1993. The staff report for the item and the NC Zone District regulations (with proposed modifications) as presented on September 20th are attached. Also attached is a staff memorandum (Dominguez 10/12/93) which recaps testimony and direction from the public hearing consideration. CURRENT SIT U A T ION , I S SUE S 1- The proposed changes to delete the use "Dispensing of gasoline directly into a vehicle" is not at issue; and, is supported. 2. The deletion of the words "and office" in association with the use of Veterinary Clinics is not at issue; and, is supported. - 3. A change in zoning from NC to R-l-A (or other appropriate residential zone district) along N.E. 22nd Street cannot be forwarded at this time; however, the Board may direct that such a rezoning be initiated and the processing commence. 4 . The request to include the use category for the Hitching Post appears appropriate given the zoning history of' the property (at one time the GC designation was shown on the zoning map) and the presence of "equipment rental" as an allowable use. It is suggested that the use be added to the District as a conditional use. S. The final item is the request to reduce the maximum allowable floor area for a single retail tenant or specific retail uses, singularly or in the aggregate, from 10,000 sq. ft. to 4-5,000 sq. ft. Of the present uses on property zoned HC, we have the following allocations for floor area: - V.A. '. · P&Z Staff Report , Modifications to the NC Zone District Page 2 * 5,000 sq. ft. and greater - The Hitching Post on West Atlantic (1,300 office, 6,000 outside sales area) (non-conforming) - Delray Farmers Market on West Atlantic (5,100) - The aggregate of the Hamlet Shoppes (8,800) - One structure in the former office complex on Seacrest (11,269) and the,aggregate @ 23,627 * 4,000 - 5,000 sq.ft - Newton's Radio & TV (4,080) * 3,000 ~ 4,000 sq. ft. - Domino's' Kwlk Stop on Seacrest (3,800) - Grand Rental on Seacrest (3,040) - Handi Mart on W. Atlantic (3,000) The balance of the uses are less than 3,000 sq. ft. Thus, at 5,000 sq.ft. one allowable use would be affected. At 4,000 sq. ft. another allowable use would be affected. The effect is that neither would be allowed to expand; and, if destroyed, would not be allowed to be re-established at more than 5,000 (or 4,000) sq. ft. As another part of our research we selected some "typical" neighborhood centers to determine their land area and floor coverage. The following was ascertained: * Pelican Harbor Shoppes @ S. Federal and Tropic Isles Dr Parcel Size of 64,300 sq.ft 1. 48 acres Total Floor Area 14,000 sq. ft. 0.22 FAR Largest Tenant 3,000+sq.ft. * Sherwood Plaza @ Lowson and Congress Parcel Size of 132,000 sq. ft. 3.04 acres Total Floor Area 30,700 sq. ft. 0.23 FAR Largest Tenant 10,000 sq. ft. Stern's * Mayfair Plþza @ SE 6th Ave , SE 9th St Parcel Size of 27,000 sq. ft. 0.62 ac Total Floor Area 8,200 sq. ft. 0.30 FAR Largest Tenant 1,000 sq. ft. +/- * The Hamlet Shoppes @ W. Atlantic Ave Parcel Size of 56,620 sq.ft 1. 30 ac Total Floor Area 8,800 sq. ft. 0.16 FAR From the above information, a different approach to the issue of size and intensity might be considered. This approach is to reduced the allowable land area to two (2 ) acres. With a FAR of .3 to .22, the resulting floor area per devèlopment would be 19,200 to 26,000 sq. ft. Within such a complex a single principal use (retail sales, '. · . '. · P&Z Staf f Report Modifications to the HC Zone District " Page J services, offices) would be restricted to 10,000 sq. ft. as would the aggregate of such uses. There would be no maximum set for conditional use items; however, during the conditional use process a maximum could be imposed if appropriate. The resulting text language (changes) to accommodate the above suggestion would be as follows: (F)(I) Maximum site area of f~~t ~ ('2) acres. (H)(2) The maximum floor area which can be allocated to a single principal use, or group of similar (retail, office, services) principal uses t~titZ t~riiri~ ~t t~ ~p~étfté t~tÁtl 'liøéøl illi@t'lilitlt r/Jit tri tX~ i~~t~~it~1 shall not exceed 3J/ØØØ 10,000 square feet. There has been a question as to where the number 4,000 sq. ft. per tenant (which was aired during annexation hearings on the Taheri property) came from. The statements made by the Director were in error as he confused the requirement for a free-standing building to have a minimum floor area of 4,000 sq.ft. [(F)(J)] with the maximum floor area required for users. A L T ERN A T I V B ACT ION S 1. Continue with further direction. 2. Forward with a recommendation supportive to the Director's recommendations. 3. Forward a different recommendation. R E COM MEN D E D ACT ION . By motion, based upon a finding that they are not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, forward the following proposed changes to the City Commission for enactment: (D){2) DELETE Dispensing of gasoline directly to a vehicle . (D)(2) NEW (add) Display & Sale of lawn furniture, playground equipment, sheds, and accessories. (D){3) PARTIAL DELETE Delete the words "and office" (F){l) Change maximum site area to two (2) acres '. ,. . P&Z Staff Report Modifications to the NC Zone District Page 4 , (H) (2) Reword to: "The maximum floor area which can be allocated to a single principal use, or group of similar (retail, office, services) principal uses shall not exceed 10,000 square feet." ALSO, direct the Staff to proceed with rezonings from NC to appropriate zone di ts for land in the area northeast of the intersecti of Se crest and 22nd Sereet. Report prepared Date: $ltJ Attachments: . September 20th Staff Report with N.C. Text (inventory is not included) . Dominguez Memorandum re 9/20/93 Hearing. D.n/PZNC18TB . '. Section 4.4.11 ~ ~ 1.\~T' '" ,.tr - -- -- Section 4.4.11 Heiqhborhood Commercial (HC) District: (A) Purpose and Intent: The Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District provides the opportunity to locate limited retail and service uses in a manner convenient to and yet not disruptive to residential areas. The NC District may be located in areas designated as Transitional on the Fu t:.ure Land Use Map when a nonresidential use is appropriate for the location. (B) Principal Uses and Structures Permitted: The following types of use are allowed within the HC District as a permitted use: ( 1 ) Retail sales such as: convenience foods; household supplies; garden and lawn supplies; drugs and medicine; small appliance sales and repairs; baked goods; delicatessen goods. ( 2 ) Provision of services such as: barber and beauty shops; dry cleaning limited to on-site processing for customer pickup only; dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations; financing e.g. banks and similar institutions excluding drive-through facilities; laundromats limited to self-service facilities; " dining at sit down restaurants including takeout and ice cream parlors but excluding drive-in, drive-through facilities; equipment rental; newsstands. ( 3 ) 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. With limitations per Subsection (H) . (C) Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted: The following uses are allowed when a part of, or accessory to, the principal use: ( 1) Parking areas for employees and customers (2 ) Refüse and storage areas (D) Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed: The following uses are allowed as conditional uses within the NC District: ( 1) Child care and adult day care \ 1'\~"c\o...:{.o..O ~ 01,;" ~ 'S~\~ (2 ) , . ÐispenGing of-9ðßolinc di~tly Lv a ve~e- ( 3) Veterinary clinics and offices . - 4431 '. Section 4.4.11 (E) (E) Review and Approval Process: 4 ( 1 ) In established structures, uses shall be allowed therein upon application to, and approval by, the Chief Building Official for a certificate of occupancy. (2 ) For any new development, approval must be granted by the Site Plan Review and Appearance ~oard pursuant to Sections 2.4.5(F), (G) , and (I). ( 3) 'Conditional uses must be approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.4.5(E). (F) Development Standards: In addition to the development standards set forth in Section 4.3.4, the following shall apply: ( 1 ) Maximum site area of four (4) acres ( 2 ) Special Landscape Area: Within the first ten feet ( 10' ) of the front yard setback area (abutting the property line) full landscaping shall be provided. Driveways and sidewalks shall be accommodated only when generally perpendicular to the property line. ( 3 ) Any free-standing structure which accommodates a 4 principal or conditional use shall have a minimum floor area of 4,000 square feet. (G) Supplemental District Regulations: The supplemental district regulations as set forth in Article 4.6 shall apply. (H) Special Regulations: ( 1) Not more than two (2) similar professional or business offices shall be allowed within a single NC development nor shall any such office use exceed 2,000 sq. ft. in floor area. The intent i~ these restrictions is to maintain the center at the neighborhood scale. . , (2) The maximum floor area which can be allocated to a single retail tenant or to specific retail uses, singularly or in the aggregate, shall not exceed 35,000 square feet. . t 4432 '. " I , MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER 9?Vl SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM i Ws/~ - MEETING OF NOVEMBER 2. 1993 DELRAY BEACH MUNICIPAL CEMETERY EXPANSION DATE: October 29, 1993 At the September 14, 1993 regular meeting, there was a discussion with regard to the cost of operating our cemetery and whether or not the cemetery is a municipal responsibility and/or if it is a loser from a financial standpoint. Mayor Lynch asked if the percentage received from the independent marketing firm is enough to maintain the cemetery. The City Manager responded that it is not. Should the City want to operate it like a private cemetery, it would be necessary to place part of the revenues into a perpetual care fund to build it up over the years. Then, at the time it has been sold out, there will be money available, earning interest, that will pay for the maintenance. Subsequently, we have received a proposed engineering services authorization for the Cemetery Expansion project. Prior to taking action and awarding those services, I have placed this item on the ' workshop agenda in order to receive direction from the Commission as I to how to proceed with this item. I I Attached for your information is a memo outlining the pros and cons of having a perpetual care fund, a copy of the service authorization to the contract with Michael B. Schorah and Associates, a comparison of prices for private and municipal cemeteries, and an excerpt from the state law regarding perpetual care funds for cemeteries. I ! " [IT' OF DELIA' BEA[H 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE . DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243-7000 MEMORANDUM TO: City Commission FROM: David T. Harden ð1<-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 $l47,OOO dollars THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS '. ,., I~ .. 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,OOO 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 years 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 $l47,OOO 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 ---- -,:--- ----- ----- -- ..-- - - , -._-- ----- ~ - - -~------ - - - - - - -- -- - .... - --- MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden City Manager THRU: Ralph E. Hayden, P.E.~/ city Engineer ~ FROM: Dan Beatty, P.E. --¡-;),~ Asst. City Enginee~~ 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 Jerry Turner and Associates and presented to this office on September 7, 1993. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES Prepare contract drawings and specifications, permit applications, construction observations and certifications for the construction of paving and drainage systems. The drainage system is to be coordinated 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 at 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 determined. Phasing must also consider existing stormwater retention ditches for conformance with previous approvals from South Florida Water Management District. (continued) MICHAEL B. SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, INC City of Delray 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 southernmost 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 Delray 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 Road" 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 - Construction Observation 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 drawings. (continued) MICHAEL B. SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, 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 H RS 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 6 HRS x $30.00 = $180.00 Printing = $100.00 TOTAL TASK II $976.00 Task III - Construction Documents Engineer II 12 HRS x $64.50 = $774.00 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 will 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) MICHAEL B, SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, 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 receipt 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) .. ',,, MICHAEL B SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, INC City of Delray 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 DELRAY BEACH: MICHAEL B. SCHORAH & ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: Date: SEØT. '2o""u 1~CS'>3 By: --Y~(J¿1/ .McI&v~ Michael B. Schorah, P .E. Thomas E. Lynch Mayor Title: President (CORPORATE SEAL) Witness: , Attest: BEF ME, the foregoing instrument, this ~day Of,~~' ,1993, f:'fs , acknowledged byt/' .,~ .:..'0:;/JitAUlJv, f~ on behalf of the Corporation and said pérson Approved as to Legal Sufficiency and executed the same free and voluntarily for the Form purpose therein expressed. Witness my h~5tMd seal in, the County and State aforesaid this ( ÌC1ay ot;::S vrt'1ùn< 1wJ.. 1993. Notary Public State of Florida ..¡:¡¡.!t....... JOYCE KING ( f.~:Æ::š MY COI.1S81JN , CC 1110556 I ~" .:..j EXPIftES: ApIIIt. 1996 \ -..'if'" ';"~~ IIoDdId 1IIu '**" NIIIc lJndiIIMIIn lj- q ¿p ",w.,.,.' ... .. 0 . 'µIn U") -0 - ..c::s:: r--'OO'O iC iC iC t¡1() r--()N() 0 0 0 .f"'i "0 (ß-(){ß-() -=r : -=r -=r -:-:\ H ~ I S::I s:: M '<2' : M U")U") {ß- {ß- (ß- ðr-iC) r--()r--.µ CO . \0 \.1M CO s:: e {ß- ~,.... - \.I () -{ß- ()::E: .µ - ~ - CO CO () iC () O()O\.l 0 U 0\.10 CO U") CO co COO iC 10 iC ~() {ß- .-.µ 0 {ß- 0 "O~ I (){ß-S:: 0 : I 0 CO o t¡1 () -=r 0 : -=r ~HS:: O"OU")e {ß- 0 (ß- '0\.1æ 1O::sr--::S U") {ß-r-iIOS:: (ß- ::s ::s 1n{ß-0 0 - e - In 0 s:: 0 ..c:() \0 iC iC iC 'µ'O (ß- 10 10 10 \.I \.I I : : : .- : .- .- o CO 0 10 r-- : U") ----:3: C) 0 {ß- {ß- (ß- t'( U") V(). (ß- ~e CO() ~::E: 00 ~ 0 U .!<:: 0 iC iC iC H .µ \.I \0 10 10 10 ø:: In CO (ß- ,.... : ,.... ,.... ~ ()~ I : : : 10 r-- : U") fQ'~ . 0 {ß- {ß- (ß- ~ 0 0.-1e 10 ti .-I() {ß- E-i ..-I::E: ~ :I: - ::E: ::E: ~ 0 ~ U ..c:.!o( 0 U \.I \0 iCM iC iC ~ CO CO (ß- U") U") U") 0 ~() ~ I : : : .- \.I : ,.... : ,.... ~tO . 0 IO() r-- 10 Z 0 {ß-'µ {ß- (ß- 0 e e 10 ~ 00 .-I() {ß- CO H CO::E: - ø:: ~ ~ iC iC iC iC ~ 0101 0010 I 0 I ::E: COS:: 01U")1 1l11l110 I CO I . 0 -U 0 CO ....¡ NM CO {ß- U U VO'µ {ß- {ß- {ß- {ß- {ß- .µ to CO () ø:: ... In 0 iC iC iC \.I s:: 1l101l11 Il1 110 I Il1 I .f"'i O..c: NO . I r-- I r-- I r-- I CO ----.µU N\Or-- N M {ß- ..c:: ;::Js::CO {ß- {ß- M {ß- {ß- U ~() {ß- otO ... to .µ iC iC iC iC iC s:: 0000 0 00 0 0 0 () ~..c: '<2'01l10 0 00 0 M \0 .µ V\ ~ r-- CO U '<2'r--{ß-""¡ M '<2'-=r 10 {ß- {ß- ~ _\.I CO {ß- {ß- {ß- {ß- {ß- {ß- (ß- ..c:: -- -- '-'....¡() .µ i. <- ()to · ... . .f"'i ~ ~ Q . . r-i . .f"'i ~ ~ or-ios::~ \.I ~ \.I:I:::sCO.......~....... . ~ .1 .µ . ~ ...00'O'µ1 . .f"'i ::s \) s:: In · ....f"'i s:: . In \.I ~ \J \) () () . s:: .....¡()s::()~ \J .µ'Oø::: S::::S'µO'OOø:::1 In CO In s::.f"'i OooCO:I:'f"'i::E: I . d ~ .µ () In s:: ::E: "'00 In s:: s:: In ~~ e 0 'O()O ....... · ....... () 00 () 0 r-i .µ.f"'i ø::: Z ..µ . ø::: Z::E: '0 .~ ~ U ~ s::tn.............. In CO In ....... ....... ::s ~ :~ e ()().µ.µ ()oo() .µ .µ ....¡ () ()'Oø:::s::s:: ø:::.......ø::: s:: s:: U .'::S <... U >.f"'i I CO CO I · I CO CO s:: ~ «..... .. COInS::~~ s:: In s:: ~ ~ H ~ \.I()OS::S:: o () 0 s:: s:: '"""' ~ () C) ø:::ZHH Zø:::Z H H iC '0 ø::: '. '. Ch. 497 CEMETERIES the enforcement of a temporary restraining order or an concern for the price or expressed interest in inex " ' InJunction, the CIrCUit court may Impound the property sive burial merchandise or services is improper, inat ", ,aSsociation license: of a cemetery company, Including books, papers, docu- priate, or indicative of diminished respect or affectio~~~ S deposited m a sa ments, and records pertaining thereto, and may appoint the deceased, '. ngs account In a stat, a receiver or administrator to prevent further violation of (p) Failing to furnish, for retention, to anyone I., 'to an amount insure. this chapter, , , , , inquires in person about burial rights, burial merch' o~rnment. The provls (2) A court-appointed receiver or administrator may dise, or burial services, before any discussion of sel ¡ý to such savmgs ace take any action to Implement the provIsions of the court tion, a printed or typewritten list specifying the ra t fund exceeds the order, to ensure the performance of the order, and to prices for such rights, merchandise, or services, The ~cy of the Federal G( ref!ledy any breach thereof, shall include the name, address, and telephone nu shall establish and t HISIOty.-ss, 10,40, ch, 80-238, ss, 2, 3, ch, 81-318; s, 1, ch, 89-8, f h ' ' l' 'Note.-Repealed elfective October 1, 1993, by s, " ch, 89-8. and scheduled for 0 t e licensee and statements that the consumer pany opera Ing purSL review pursuant to s, 11,61, choose only the items he desires that he will be char tional bank holding Nole.-Former s, 559,374, " for only those Items purchased, and that there may ) The cemetery con 1497.018 Disciplinary proceedings.- extra charges for other items or s~rvices such as t ¡Se the trustee in thE (1) The following acts constitute grounds for which provfded?y funeral directors or direct disposers. , ,department must a~ the disciplinàry actions in subsection (2) may be taken: (q) , Fallmg to furnish, for rete~tlon, to ea?h pur~hà' al trustee, and any (a) Violating any provisions of this chapter, of bUrial rights, bUrial merchandise" or bUrial service lee shall also be ap~ (b) Failing to comply with a rule or lawful order of the written agreement, the form of which has been pr etery company refu~ department. ously approved by the department, which lists the ite aintain 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 numberof the licensee; the signatures of þ1iance, However, n (e) Attempting to procure, or procuring, by bribery customer and the licensee or his representative; and.which has been inc or fraudulent misrepresentations, a license to operate a date signed, \ ëtery business prior 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 ~n I, be required to des revoked, suspended, or otherwise acted against, includ- an order Imposing one ormore of th~ following penaltt fund agreement s Ing having a license denied, by the licensing authority (a) Denial of an application for licensure, ' location and addr of another jurisdiction, (b) Revocation or suspension of a license., le'e, shoWi~g the da ,(g) Being convicted or found guilty in any jurisdic- (c) Imposition of an administrative fine not to exC ' rcentages requirE tlon, regardless of adjudication, of a crime which directly $1,000 for each count or separate offense, I 7,023. relates to the operation of a cemetery, (d) Issuance of a reprimand, ,,' ~' No erson shall v (h) Making or filing a report required by this chapter (e) Placement of the licensee ,on probation f. e cor Pus of the ca which the licensee knows to be false or willfully failing period of time subject to such conditions as the de, . t f Pt bt' , to make or file a report required by this chapter, ment may specify, " ,u F Ir~ 0 d alnln~ ~ (i) Fraud, deceit, misrepresentation negligence (3) For purposes of this section, the acts or 0 'e lun Sd teposl e , " , 'oane 0 any ce Incompetency, or misconduct in the operation of a cem- slons of any person employed by or under contra~ i tl 'd' I etery, the licensee shall be treated as acts or omissions OJ. ec y or In \rect y , ,(j) Advertising goods or services in a manner which licensee, " ',-s, 12, ch, 59-363; s, ¡ IS fraudulent, false, deceptive, or misleading in form or (4) Any order Imposing any penalty pursuant I. ",8.ch, 76-251; s, 1, ch, 77 content. section shall recite the grounds upon which the pe ch, 81-318; ss, 1,3, ch, 8; , 'b d . . , Repealed eftective Octol (k) Making any false or misleading statement of the IS ase , ~rsuant to s, 11.61. legal requirement as to the necessity of any Particular Hlsloty.-ss, 13,40, Ch, 80-238: ss' 2, 3, ch, 81-318; s, 1. ch, 89-8, -:-Former s, 559.41, " 'Nole.-Repealed e11ec\1Ve October 1, 1993, by s, 1, ch, 89-8, and SC 1. bUrial merchandise or services, review pursuant to s, 11.61. f. (I) Making any false or misleading statement NOle,-Former s, 559,375 01.022 Dispositi~n regarding the sale of services or merchandise in connec- 1497.019 Disposition of fees and Penalties; ,'~st fund; noticE tlon With the operation of a cemetery , ' Le Income of the c (m) M k' a f I 'I d" t t t th t fees and penalties collected pursuant to thiS c, De used solely for < a Ing ny, a se or mls ea Ing s a emen a shall be deposited in the Regulatory Trust Fund 'I ' , natural decomposition or decay of human remains can d t t n" ery, including ma b ' epar men, \enanc h II t t e prevented or substantially delayed by use of a sealed Hlsloty,-ss, 25, 40, ch, 80-238; ss' 2. 3, ch, 81-318; s. 1, ch, 89-8, ' , , e s a no, or unsealed casket or outer burial container, 'NOle.-Repealed etfeclive October 1,1993. by s, 1, ch, 89-8, and sc elinlshlng, repal! (n) Soliciting through the use of fraud, undue influ- re~~7e~.'::~~~~~~0:5~~~~1 .;!or reasonable ence, intimidation, overreaching, or other form of vexa. alntenance; and tious conduct. 1497.021 Care and maintenance trust fund; ,~the trust fund, J (0) Discouraging the purchase of any burial mer- of department for noncompliance.- ng an initial de pc chandise or service which is advertised or offered for (1) No cemetery company shall establish a r to the person tc sale, with the purpose of encouraging the purchase of tery, or operate a cemetery if already established. a deposit, a writt additional or more expensive burial merchandise or ser· out providing for the future care and maintenance .s~ate the purpos Vice, by disparaging its quality or appearance, except cemetery, for which a care and maintenance tNS ._nd shall be use' that factual statements concerning features, design, or shall be established, to be known as "the care and '2',13. ch, 59-363; s, 2 construction do not constitute disparagement, or by tenance trust fund of _," The trust fund ,sh .' ;':~I~~:~;~t~~~~~ suggesting directly or by implication that a customer's established with a state or national bank or saVIn t to s, 11,61. Ormer s, 559,42, 868 " - CEMETERIES Ch. 497 ociation licensed in this state, provided that 1497.023 Care and maintenance trust fund, percent- eposited 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 lim- tenance to be deposited.- n 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 nd exceeds the amount that is insured by an from sales of burial rights and from assessment of any cof the Federal Government, the cemetery com- monument maintenance fee as provided in s, . II establish and transfer the trust fund to a trust 497,041(3): 'yoperating pursuant to chapter 660 or to a state (a) For graves, 10 percent of all payments received; al bank holding trust powers, however, for sales made after December 31, 1959, no , he cemetery company may appoint a person to deposit shall be less than $10 per grave, For each burial the trustee in the investment of the trust fund, right, grave, or space which is provided without charge, ~artment must approve the appointment of the the deposit to the fund shall be $10. (b) For mausoleums or columbaria, 10 percent of stee, and any subsequent changes of the payments received, fshall 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 'artment, 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 Ich has been incorporated and engaged in the amount received for this individual special care in a sep- ery business prior to and continuously since 1915 arate trust fund or by a deposit to a savings account in ich 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 ,r1d agreement shall specify the following: the the licensee does not set up a separate trust fund or sav- ,ocation, and address of both the licensee and the ings account for the special endowment, the full amount '. showing the date of agreement, together with thereof shall be deposited into the care and mainte- ,centages required to be deposited pursuant to nance trust fund as required of general endowments, 923. (e) For monument maintenance, the full amount of ~o person shall withdraw or transfer any portion such sum when received, ,orpus of the care and maintenance trust fund (2) Deposits to the care and maintenance trust fund t,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 tly or indirectly engaged in the cemetery busi- of the installment payment placed in trust must be iden- ,s, 12, ch, 59-363; s, 7, ch. 65-288; ss, 12, 35, ch, 69-106; s. 3, ch, tical to the percentage which the payment received è,ch, 76-251; s, 1, ch, 77-457; s, 9, ch. 78-407; SS, 17, 39, 40, ch. 80-238; bears to the total cost for the burial rights, The entire ,81-318; ss, 1, 3, ch, 82-7; s, 1, ch 89-8 amount required to be deposited into the trust fund shall pealed effective October 1, 1993, by s, 1, ch, 89-8, and scheduled for be paid within 4 years from the date of any contract I to s, 11,61, r""'r s, 559.41, requiring such payment, regardless of whether all .122 Disposition of income of care and mainte- amounts have been received by the cemetery company, The care and maintenance trust fund shall be invested ~st fund; notice to purchasers 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 ,used solely for the care and maintenance of the paid by the trustee from the net income thereof and shall ¡y, including maintenance of monuments, which not be paid from the corpus, If the net income is not suffi- .nance shall not be deemed to include the clean- cient to pay the fees and other expenses, the fees and ,finishing, repairing, or replacement of monu- other expenses shall be paid by the cemetery company, Jor reasonable costs of administering the care (3) Any payments made to the care and mainte- hntenance; and for reasonable costs of adminis- nance trust fund on contracts which are canceled shall , e trust fund, At the time of making a sale or be credited against future obligations to the care and t9 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, f deposit, a written instrument which shall spec if- (4) When a cemetery which is exempt from the pro- ate the purposes for which the income of the visions of this chapter pursuant to s, 497,003 changes ,d shall be used, ownership so as to lose its exempt status, it shall estab- 2s,;3, ch, 59-363; s, 3, ch, 76-168; s, 1, ch, 77-457; SS, 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- . pet1ed effective October 1, 1993, by s, 1, ch, 89-8, and scheduled for ment of this trust fund shall be $10 per space for all to s, 11,61, mer s, 659.42, spaces either previously sold or contracted for sale in 869 '. ·, . Agenda Item No.: AGENDA REQUEST Date: October 6, 1993 Request to be placed on: ~ Regular Agenda I(/~ Special Agenda i- Workshop Agenda II/v When: october 12, 1993 Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Staff reauests approval of a service authorization to Michael B. Schorah and Associates for enaineerina services for the Cemeterv Expansion Pro;ect. which includes enaineerina desian. permittina and preparation of construction documents for biddina. Pro;ect No. 93-065 Contract Amount: S7.690.00 Enaineerina Desian 976.00 permittina 1.324.00 Construction Documents Fundina Source: 667-4511-539-61.77 ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO Reconunendation: Staff reconunends approval of the service authorization to Michael B. Schorah & Associates in the amount of S9.990.00 for enaineerina services of the Cemeterv Expansion Pro;ect. Department Head Signature:~~1f/J?~ Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: City Attorney Review/Reconunendation (if applicable) Budget Director Review (~red on all items involving expenditure of funds): Funding available: YES)NO Funding alternative ~ applicable) , 'p Account No. & De~Z«fo~on ~fl" 4~ 1- t3'fl. 017/t r t:Kftí\AAG C~ ft)-C~fJ1~ít~y t-]! , Account Balance_I \ a) City Manager Review: Approved for agenda: @NO w1 Hold Until: Agenda Coordinator Review: Received: Placed on Agenda: Action: Approved/Disapproved AG365006.MRM '. .. . C/\ . ðYì [IT' OF DELIA' BEA[H 100 NW, 1st AVENUE . DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243-7000 ...... AI.....cny , IUI! 1993 MEMORANDUM TO: David T. Harden, City Manager FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager ~ SUBJECT: CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP 11/2/93 GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE DATE: October 28, 1993 1. BACKGROUND/CURRENT STATUS Commission last met to discuss the Golf Course Clubhouse on July 29, 1993. At that meeting, a report on the public input meetings was presented to Commission with a recommendation to complete a market study. Commission, due to cost, rejected the recommendation to complete a market study, but directed staff to prepare an RFQ to try to obtain input and information to assist in making a determination on the Clubhouse from restaurant management firms. An RFQ was prepared, advertised, and sent to 32 individual firms. The RFQ was opened on October 8, 1993, and we received three negative responses. Those that responded indicated that when, and if, we bid out management of the restaurant they would submit a bid. A copy of the RFQ and bid list is attached. II. MARKET ANALYSIS A. General In early August I was contacted by Regional Research Associates, Inc. , a marketing research firm, about doing a market analysis for the Golf Course Clubhouse. The firm is located in Boca Raton and they are a member of the Chamber of Commerce. They agreed to do a market analysis for minimum cost, i.e., printing and telephone costs. We agreed with their proposal and I received the marketing analysis on October 25, 1993. Regional Research Associates, Inc. have done a market economic analysis for the Delray Affair and tourism modeling and market studies for Palm Beach County. ~S/5 ® p..-/ntO(1 on Recycled Paper THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE Page 2 B. Market Analysis/Report A copy of the report is attached. Regional Research and Associates, Inc. analyzed supply and demand for the banquet market within our immediate geographical area, i.e., Boca Raton, Delray Beach, and Boynton Beach. The firm analyzed seating capacity of facilities in the area to determine supply and surveyed various organizations and groups to try to determine demand. These numbers were then adjusted to reflect market reality. The report shows that overall supply for all size facilities is twice the demand. The analysis shows that there is a surplus of facilities with seating under 250 seats, a shortage of facilities in the 250-400 seat range, and a slight surplus of facilities in the 400 plus range, based on demand. The report concludes that a larger facility (400 plus seats) would run at a loss. It also concludes that building a smaller facility, less than 250 seats, due to supply, would also not be beneficial. An economic analysis was not done at this time due to excess supply, and the need to have a specific recommendation with cost estimates on the facility to be built. III. CURRENT MARKETING TRENDS MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Attached is a breakdown of bookings for banquets, meetings, and parties for the current fiscal year at our facility. This only reflects bookings made for the year as of 10/25/93. Of the 15 bookings we were not able to close on, only 2 were for over 300 seats. The other 13 were for under 300 seats (greater than 175). In discussions with Mr. Dubin, the average seating requirements for the banquets we had to turn down was between 200 and 250 seats. This analysis shows higher demand under 150 seats, a tapering off between 150-250 seats, and a slight increase between 250-300 seats. IV. DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATIVES As we have discussed in the past, one of two basic alternatives could be selected for the design and construction of the facility, 1) Standard Process utilizing the Competitive Negotiations Act, 2) the Design Build Process. Steps to be followed for each method are as follows: - Standard Process (Competitive Negotiations Act) - Develop and Advertise RFQ - Select Architect - Preliminary Design/Site Plan Approval - Final Design/Bid - Construction Advantaqe - Up front elements can be done quicker. '. - GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE Page 3 - Design/Build Process - Amend our Ordinance to allow process - Select Design Criteria Professional to Develop Design Criteria Package - Develop Design Criteria Package - Site Plan Approval - Bid out Design Criteria Package - Select Design/Build Firm through Negotiations or Bid - Construction Advantaqes - One firm completes final design, selects subcontractors, manages project. - Receives a fixed price, no change orders. In our discussions with other cities and various architects, it is not clear whether the Design/Build Process reduces project costs. V. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on staff analysis of needs, staff experience, informal discussions with other architects and designers, the market analysis, public meetings and other pro forma revenue/expense projections, the following recommendations are being made: 1. Facility Construct a one story facility to include a pro shop, men's and ladies locker rooms with both half and full lockers and shower facilities, a lounge/bar area, dining area to seat 250-300 that can be sub-divided easily for smaller group meetings, a kitchen with adequate equipment to service either a sit down or buffet arrangement, adequate storage areas for restaurant equipment, supplies, food and beverages, storage area for pro shop sales items, general storage, and adequate office space. We would propose using the existing cart shed and the existing pro shop building for bag storage, if it is economical to convert and remodel for this purpose. The estimated square footage needed for the facility based on staff estimates is between 15,000-17,000 square feet. A final estimate would be made after a space needs analysis is done with an architect. We also recommend that a facility be sited in such a manner so as to allow the existing facility to operate. '. · GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE Page 4 Recommend initially that restaurant be managed by our current management firm. Other improvements which would be needed include water and sewer improvements to the site and parking lot improvements. 2. Costs/Funding - Based on discussions with various architects and designers we think that a furnished facility could be built for between $110-$120 a square foot. - Based on our pro forma analysis we think that a budget of $2,000,000 ± $200,000 should be targeted for planning purposes. Final seating capacity to be a factor of budget, but not less that 250 seats. Seating number to be adjusted upward as budget permits. We think that the course revenues could handle the debt service associated with this budget without hurting the golf operation or affecting capital improvement needs. - Approximate debt service for $2,000,000, 20 year term @ 6% = $172,000. - Combine debt issue for the Clubhouse with the Tennis Facility to save issuance costs ($2 million budget estimate does not include issuance costs). Use utility tax as pledge to secure debt; payments, however, to be made from golf course revenues. 3. Architect Selection/Desiqn/Construction - Recommend using Standard Competitive Negotiation Process to select architect to prepare space needs assessment, prepare preliminary design and site plan, obtain board approvals, complete design, prepare bid specs and analyze bids, and provide construction management services. We proposed that price should be fixed and not based on % of construction. We feel the time to complete the project under this method would be shorter than the Design/Build method. VI. DIRECTION Based on the above, staff is seeking direction on the following: Method of architect selection, standard vs. design build; Authority to proceed with the project either under the proposed budget, square footage and facility parameters as outlined; or Authority to proceed under other parameters; or Other direction. .. , . ',' REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RFP #93-49 MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA The City of Delray Beach Florida is considering the construction of a new municipal golf course clubhouse which will include a full service dining facil i ty. In order to assist in the determination of the size and type of dining facil ity to bu il d as part of the clubhouse, the Commission is seeking proposals from professional restaurant management firms. Firms are requested to analyze market and economic conditions and make a recommendation as to size, seating capacity, space allocation and equipment and furnishing needs for a dining faci 1 ity/l ounge and include conditions under which the firm would be willing to lease and manage the dining operation for the City. The proposal is to include monthly lease payments and term of lease. Proposal information will be ut il i zed by City Commission in determining size and type of faci 1 i ty to be bu il t, equipment and furnishing needs, and whether or not it is economically feasible to lease out the restaurant operation. In preparing the proposal certain assumptions are to be made: 1) The lessee will pay all utility costs - water, sewer, garbage, electric, gas. 2) The lessee will pay all state, federa 1 , and local taxes associated with the dining facil ity, i e; property taxes, sa 1 e s taxes, etc. 3) The lease, if awarded, would be a sublease with the current management firm. 4) A performance bond would be required. 5) Lessee would have to provide it IS own expendable items, i e; tableware, silverware, etc. 6) Lessee would be expected to cooperate wi th the go 1 f course in scheduling and pricing for golf tournaments. 7) Lease payments needs to be at least sufficient to offset the dining facil ity portion of the building debt. (20 year bond payment) 8) Leasee would be required to maintain interior of the facility including restrooms. 9) Leasee would be responsible for the purchase of non fixed equipment. '. .. Proposals are to include: 1) Market study methodology 2) Monthly lease payments 3) Term of agreement 4) Seating size, space allocation, equipment furnishing needs 5) Profit/Loss statements for the company over the last 5 years 6) Information on company experience and qualifications 7) Reference List Interested parties may contact Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, at City Hall, (407) 243-7011 for additional information. Respondents shall submit one (1) original and four (4) copies (Total Five) of their proposal package to the Purchasing Division, Attention Ted Glas, Purchasing Offi cer, City of Delray Beach, City Ha 11, 100 N.W. First ~ Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, 33444, on or before 5:00 P.M., October A<f . 1993. Proposal Check Off Sheet 1. Marketing methodolgy 2. Size facility; square feet and seating capacity 3. Space allocations, i e; dining, bar/lounge, kitchen, cold and freezer storage, other storage, office space 4. Equipment and furnishing lists 5. Profit/Loss statements 6. Experience and qualifications list 7. References 8. Monthly lease payments 9. Terms and conditions '. .. r~OM $c ~ 00 l Óða (cl MAILING LIST: INVITATION NO. SB 93C- T TITLE: FOOD SERVICES FOR DISTRICTADMINISTRA TIVE CENTER RETURN: BOARD DATE: ARA SERVICES ED'S QUALITY CATERING Attn: Ron Faschini 3921 10th Avenue N 5775 Peachtree Dunwoody Road Lake Worth, FL 33461 Building C, Suite 500 Atlanta, GA 30342 FLAVOR MASTERS CATERING* Attn: Johnny Jones BTW EXPRESS, INC. * P. O. Box 381521 Attn: Thxra Sturr Miami, FL 33150 100 PBJA Box 106 West Palm Beach, FL 33406 FLORIDA REGIONAL PURCHASING COURIAL * CANTEEN DIVISION OF TVV SERVICES Attn: Wendell Paige 855 Sunshine Lane 7900 N. E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 202 Altamonte Springs, FL 32741 Miami, FL 33138 CATERING TO YOU* GOURMET GALLEY Attn: Carla Frey 139 N. County Road 5686 Wattham Way Palm Beach, FL 33406 Lake Worth, FL 33463 GRILLOS CATERING COVTEES CO. TW SERVICES 1300 N. Florida Mango Road Attn: Devida Lemaster West Palm Beach, FL 33416 16350 N. W. 48th Avenue Hialeah, FL 33014 GI LUIGIS 1662 S. Congress Avenue CROWN FOOD SERVICE Palm Springs, FL 33461 68 11 th Street W. Riviera Beach, FL 33404 HOMESTYLE FAMILY BUFFET 7817 S. Dixie Highway DAKAlGTE DATA SERVICES West Palm Beach, FL 33405 P. O. Box 290152 B1-L Temple Terrace, FL 33687-0152 JOSE'S INTERNATIONAL 517 E, Michigan Avenue DON RAMON'S Orlando, FL 32805 502 S. Military Trail West Palm Beach, FL 33415 LACKMAN'S FOOD SERVICES P. O. Box 109600 EBONY'S FOOD COMPANY* West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600 Attn: Winston Reid 1260 N. E. 159th Street LE VAN'S GLORIOUS FOODS Miami, FL 33162 643 Orange Avenue Winter Park, FL 32789 ECONOMIC FOODS, INC. * Attn: Roger Coyle MARRIOTT 567 N. E. Solida Circle 283 N. Noorth Lake Blvd. Port St. Lucie, FL 34983-1777 Suite 260 Altamonte Springs, 32701 '. '. .' . . INVITATION TO BID NO. SB 93C- x . Page 2 MID-AMERICA FOOD SERVICE MINORITY BUS. DEV. CENTER 1748 Australian Avenue 2001 Broadway, Suite 301 Riviera Beach, FL 33404 Riviera Beach, FL 33404 MORRISONS HISPANIC HUMAN RESOURCES 7448 Internatinal Drive COUNCIL Orlando, FL 32819 Attn: Jorge Avellana 2330 S. Congress, 1-C OGDEN SERVICE CORPORATION West Palm Beach, FL 33406 1610 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33401 LA TIN AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COM. Attn: Dulce Grimes PROFESSIONAL FOOD SERVICE MGT. 5818 S. Dixie Highway, Suite 8 4715 N. Congress Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33405 Boynton Beach, FL MR. AL JONES SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD Minority Contract Coordinator COUNTY Attn: David Foster 1320 S. W. 4th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312 SUB-DIVISION 3359 F Belvedere Road West Palm Beach, FL 33406 TOOJA YS 3654 Georgia Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33405 WOMETCO FOOD SERVICES 2705 Ace Road Orlando, FL 32804 VL-070- T.VL I certify that the above listed bid was mailed to the vendors listed above. Date Signature '. ,. "'''' Golf & Tennis Management, Development & Consultation MEMO To: Bob Barcinski From: Brahm Dubin Date: October 27, 1993 Re: Regional Research Associates Inc. Report I would like to give you my thoughts in regards to the Market Feasibility report submitted to you by Regional Research Associates Inc. As you know I be,[ ieve it to be imperative that we expand our present seating capacity of approximately 175 to at least 250. This would allow us to accommodate our MGA & LGA functions as we 11 as our regular customers. I can not comment on their methodology or their assumptions, since they are the experts. I t was interesting to read that they believed that a banquet facility in the 400 range would lose money. I believe that it is a good business decision to build a clubhouse in the range of 15,000 - 17,500 sq ft, allowing for restaurant seating between 250-300. I suggest that we design it now allowing for future expansion if business warrants it. Attached I have enclosed and Operating Budget that reflects a reasonable range of surplus on an annual basis. We based our budget on a debt service of $2 million financed at 6% over 20 years. 1177 N.E. 8th Street, Suite 309 . Delray Beach, FL 33483 . (407) 243-8008 . Fax (407) 243-8011 .. Regional Research Associates, Inc. Economic Consulting. Comprehensive Planning. Market Research October 25, 1993 Mr. Robert A. Barcinski City of Delray Beach Assistant City Manager 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Dear Bob: Attached is a preliminary report of the market study that we have undertaken of additional banquet facilities at the Delray Beach Municipal Golf Club. It is our conclusion that construction of a separate banquet facility in a new Delray Beach Golf Clubhouse is not warranted in terms of unfulfilled market needs. There is some evidence that a facility larger than 250 seats would help meet market demand, but there is such an excess supply of smaller facilities that the larger facility might draw very few small banquets and other parties. Of course, a new facility could compete for market share and bring extra dollars into the City, but we believe that it would operate at a loss. Please review the enclosed report and feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, /~ IWilliam B. President WBS:adm enclosure 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX " ~Idl' ,. Market Feasibility of Additional Banquet Facilities in Delray Beach Overall Demand and Supply Our analysis of demand and supply in the banquet market shows that there is an annual supply of such facilities that is at least twice as large as the demand, assuming that the facilities are occupied on average one day per week over the course of a year. As such, we conclude that there is no need for additional banquet facilities at this time. Our analysis shows that there is a demand for 80,690 seat days generated in the Delray area (TABLE 1). This demand was estimated by surveying a population of 138 civic, service, educational and other organizations in the greater Delray area. The list of organizations was obtained from the Chamber of Commerce and the Delray Beach Golf Club. Responses were received from 54 organizations, and the results were extrapolated to the population from this sample. Demand was also increased for facilities with 250 or fewer seats by 25 percent to allow for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs and other private parties. The survey instrument is in the appendix. The supply of publicly available restaurant banquet facilities in the area between Yamato Road (south) and Boynton Boulevard in the north have 3,145 seats exclusively available for banquets. These would provide 1,147,925 seat days. Of course not all demand would originate in the Delray area, and banquet facilities are not occupied every day of the year. To 1 Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. " allow for these factors, an occupancy rate of 14.3 percent was applied to the supply, to reflect an assumption that Delray area demand would occupy banquet space on average one day per week. The revised supply is 163,989 which is about twice the estimated level of demand. There is no need for additional facilities to meet unmet demand. Demand and Supply for Larqer Facilities There is a stronger case for adding a larger facility than for adding a smaller facility in terms of market needs. Our analysis shows that there is a shortage of facilities in the 250-400 seat range, relative to demand, and the surplus in the 400+ range is relatively small (TABLE 2). Overall, there is a relatively small surplus in the 250+ range of banquet facilities. What this means is that a case could be made for building a larger facility, if there was no need to put smaller banquets (below 250 in size) in order to break even. However, the situation in the smaller banquet range is even less favorable than our numbers suggest because of the willingness of many public restaurants to close their doors for private parties on "slow nights" if the party will fill the restaurant. Even the case of the larger facilities, however, is problematic, because there are some large facilities in Delray Beach that have not been factored into supply. In particular, there are two facilities in Delray Beach (Del ray Bingo Hall 402 seats and Temple Sinai with 700 seats) that can be used for 2 Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. " banquets provided a catering firm is hired. There is also a proposed civic center with 500 seats. Conclusion Our analysis of market demand and supply suggests that construction of a separate banquet facility in a new Delray Beach Golf Club House is not warranted in terms of unfulfilled market needs. Obviously, a new facility could compete for market share in a relatively over-supplied market. The new facility could attract market share if it is relatively more attractive than the competition. Additionally, the facility might be able to undercut the prices of commercial facilities which have land costs and, perhaps, less favorable tax situations. An economic analysis at this time, was not conducted as our market study indicated that there is an excess of banquet seats. Additionally, a new facility at the Golf Club would have to compete to obtain market share in an over supplied market. To do this, we would need more information on the nature of a golf course facility and the extent of interest in the City in using some of the local halls for banquets such as the Delray Bingo Hall, the proposed civic Center and Old School Square. Finally, it is worth noting that demand within the city limits of Delray Beach is substantially greater than supply, so that a local facility would capture "lost" dollars to facilities outside the city. However, the analysis suggests that this facility would be run at a loss. 3 Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. " APPENDIX TABLE 1: MARKET DEMAND AND SUPPLY FOR BANQUET FACILITIES TABLE 2: MARKET DEMAND AND SUPPLY FOR LARGER BANQUET FACILITIES TABLE 3: RESTAURANT BANQUET FACILITIES, YAMATO ROAD TO BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD SURVEY INSTRUMENT 4 Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. ,,~ ". ,. TABLE 1 Market Demand and Supply for Banquet Facilities Up to 100 101-250 251-400 400+ Seats Seats Seats Seats Cumulative De- mand (Seat-Days) 4,721 35,134 61,935 80,690 Restaurant Supply (Seat Days) 317,550 855,925 965,425 1,147,925 Occupancy Rate (%) 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 Cumulative Supply (Seat Days) 45,364 122,275 137,918 163,989 TABLE 2 Market Demand and Supply for Larger Facilities 250 - 400 400+ Non-Cumulative Demand (Seat-Days) 27,801 18,755 Restaurant Supply (Seat Days) 109,500 182,500 Occupancy Rate (%) 14.3 14.3 Non-Cumulative Supply (Seat Days) 15,643 26,071 5 Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. ,.". '. TABLE 3 Restaurant Banquet Facilities Yamato Road to Boynton Beach Boulevard Restaurant/Club Number of Banquet Seats Aberdeen Golf and Country 250 Arturo's Restaurant 80 Boca Teeca Country Club 105 Boca Raton Country Club 300 Boston's on the Beach 80 Braman's Bar and Grill 60 Canton Garden Restaurant 50 Crown Sterling Suites 60 Cypress Creek Country Club 100 Embassy Suites 500 Gleneagles Country Club 100 Holiday Inn Highland Beach 140 Holiday Inn Catalina #1 100 Holiday Inn Catalina #2 140 Holiday Inn Catalina #3 40 Holiday Inn Camino Real 200 Hunter's Run Brasserie 120 Luna's Ristorante 150 Rod 'n Gun Restaurant 100 Sea gate Beach Club 50 Streb's Restaurant 250 Sun Wah Restaurant 150 6 '. ., DELRAY BEACH MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE RESTAURANT SURVEY HELLO, I'M CALLING FOR THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, AND WE ARE CONDUCTING A TELEPHONE SURVEY OF LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD POSSIBLY USE THE MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE RESTAURANT BANQUET FACILITIES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS, PARTIES, ETC. WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS. 1. What type of organization are you? o Service/Civic Organization o Educational o Condo/Homeowner Assoc. o Other 2. Would you use the banquet facilities for future meetings, parties, etc.? DYes o No o Not Sure If YES, What purpose would you use the facilities? 0 Entertainment (weddings, parties, etc., o Business Meetings 0 Civic/Services Assoc. Meetings o Clubs & Fraternal Organiz. o Educational o Other Approximately how many seats would you desire? o Less than 100 o 100 - 250 o 250 - 400 o Greater than 400 3. How many times a year does your organization require banquet facilities? o Only once a year o 2 - 3 times a year o 4 - 5 times a year DOver 5 times a year Regional Research Associates, Inc. 2481 NW. Boca Raton Boulevard. Suite B. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 407-750-6761 Boca Raton. 407-736-5688 Boynton. 407-750-6762 FAX '. O.CT':"':27-93 WED 15::27 DUB I .N 8< ASSOCIATES ,- ...IT .....-.. P_0:2 FROM : DeLRAY 8CH GOLF COURSE PHONE NO. : 4Ø7 243 7386 P01 M'MJfd by D&zbln . Auoc/.tø DQNALO FlOSS. 1923 ~~. -,- TO: BRAHM FROM: COLLEEN ~' DATE:: OCTOBER 26, 1993 .' '! ' RF.: BANQUETS BOOKED : ,) 1'hi IS i,e¡ a broakdown of the ba.nquets I hav4iiI bookQð for this yQar. . , ¡ * OF PARTIES j OF PBOPLE ao o - SO 15 SO - 100 .!, r, .. 27 '00 - 150 5 150 - 175 II ", .' Al.o for your information we havQ lost approximately 12-15 ' ~ b~nquGt. beoause cur fa~ility is to small. .;; 6'1H-Å '5ÐD ' :~ ¡ I~ £.1 _.' ¡¿ tJt..., .:3 00 ~ ., " I' " ¡ ~I L . , L 'I 1,1' 'I 'I "I .¡; ¡·b f1 I¡ '~'II, ~ . . t¡ ., ;'j ,..j~. '.' , " ~ . ,;:~~¡,::,,', ".:,¡,~~~:~ I : '. · , en~~7.055. Acquisition of professional architectural, ,urv:~enn9, landscape architectural, or land- (c) Each agency shall adopt rules or ordinances for gent lln9 services; definitions; procedures; contin- the award of design-build contracts For municipalities, " ees prohibited; penalties.- political subdiviSIOns, school districts, and school boards, such procedures shall Include as a minimum the (h) A "design-build firm" means a partnership. cor- following: 1, The preparation of a design criteria package for poration. or other legal entity which: the design and construction of the public construction 1, Is certified under s 489,119 to engage In con- project. tracting through a certified or registered general con- 2, The qualification and selection of no fewer than tractor or a certified or registered buildl[lg Gontractor as three design-build firms as the most qualified. based on the qualifYing agent, or 2, Is certified under s 471 ,023 to practice or to offer the qualifications. availability. and past work of the firms, to practice engineering, certified under s 481.219 to Including the partners or members thereof practice or to offer to practice architecture; or certified 3 The criteria. procedures, and standards for the under s, 481,319 to practice or to offer to practice land- evaluation of design-bUild contract proposals or bids, scape architecture, based on price, technical. and design aspects of the (I) A "design-build contract" means a single con- public construction project. weighted for the prOject tract with a design-build firm for the design and con- 4, The solicitation of competitive proposals. pursu' struction of a public construction project. ant to a design criteria package, from those qualified (j) A "design criteria package" means concise. per- design-build firms and the evaluation of the responses formance-orlented drawings or specifications of the or bids submitted by those firms based on the evalua, public construction proJect. The purpose of the design tion criteria and procedures established prior to the solicitation of competitive proposals. criteria package IS to furnish sufftcient information so as 5, For consultation with the employed or retained to permit design-build firms to prepare a bid or a design criteria professional concerning the evaluation of response to an agency's request for proposal, or to per- the responses or bids submitted by the design-build mlt an agency to enter Into a negotiated design-build firms. the supervision or approval by the agency of the contract. The design criteria package shall specify such detailed working draWings of the project: and for evalua, performance-based criteria for the public construction tlon of the compliance of the project construction with project, including. but not limited to, the legal descrlp- the design criteria package by the design criteria profes tion of the site, survey Information concerning the site, slonal. Interior space requirements. material quality standards. 6 In the case of public emergencies. for the agency schematic layouts and conceptual design CrIteria of the head to declare an emergency and authorize negotla project, cost or budget estimates, design and construc, tlons with the best qualified design-build firm available tlon schedules, site development requirements, provl- at that time, sions for utilities. storm water retention and disposal, and parking requirements. as may be applicable to the project. (k) A "design criteria professional" means a firm who holds a current certificate of registration under chapter 481 to practice architecture or landscape architecture or a firm who holds a current certificate as a registered engineer under chapter 471 to practice engineering and who is employed by or under contract to the agency for the providing of professional architect services. land, scape architect serVices, or engineering services in con- nection with the preparation of the design criteria pack- age, (10) APPLlCABtLlTY TO DESIGN-BUILD CON- TRACTS,- ,(a) Except as provided in this subsection, this sec- tion IS not applicable to the procurement of design-build contracts by any. agency, and any such agency shall award design-build contracts in accordance with the procurement laws, rules, and ordinances applicable to the agency, (b) The design criteria package shall be prepared and sealed by a design criteria professional employed by or, retained by the agency, If the agency elects to enter Into a professional services contract for the prepa- ration of the design criteria package, then the design criteria professional shall be selected and contracted with In accordance with the requirements of subsec- tions (4) and (5), A design criteria professional who has been selected to prepare the design criteria package shall not be eligible to render services under a design- build contract executed pursuant to the design criteria package, ,. "I .I~ ' œ MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE REPORT PUBLIC MEETINGS I. GENERAL Two public meetings were held to obtain input for the development of a golf course clubhouse. One meeting was held on July 8, 1993, at the Municipal Golf Course and was primarily directed to the golfers. Approximately 70 people attended. The second meeting was held on July 12, 1993, in the City Commission Chambers for the general public. Approximately 40 people attended. Both meetings followed the same general format, with input being obtained on the cart shed, pro shop, locker rooms, bag storage, and dining facilities. In most cases, general consensus on each item was reached. A summary of the meetings and general consensus follows. II. MEETING - MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE (JULY 8) A. Cart Storaqe - It was the general opinion that the existing cart storage area was adequate to meet our needs and that the existing structure should be utilized, i.e., not build a new cart storage area. It was felt that this structure should remain separate from the main building, possibly adding a covered bag drop-off area and closing in the sides. B. Baq Storage - It was generally felt that bag storage was adequate but should be expanded to accommodate those on the waiting list. C. Pro Shop - It was the general consensus that a full-service pro shop be maintained carrying a variety of items but increase the display area, add office space and storage space, and reconfigure the counter area to improve customer access and flow. D. Locker Rooms - It was the general consensus that the locker room should contain 1/2 lockers with some full lockers, have fewer lockers than they now have based on utilization, contain enough room for card tables, be handicapped accessible, (contain enough fixtures to accommodate the use) and contain minimal shower facilities. It was also noted that the locker rooms should be properly maintained and cleaned more frequently. '" .... \D ~ \D '" N ~ 00 .... ø '" \Q ..:t ~ .... 0 \Q ~ N ø \Q C"\ \Q ~ ..... 0 '" · N ø 00 '" C"\ · C"\ C"\ ..:t · N ø N N ..:t ~ '" 00 N ~ N ø 0 C"\ ..... · 0 \D C"\ · N ø .Q ::I C"\ .... 00 U .... ~ .... ..:t .... 00 0 0 L? · N .c ø () to .... Q¡ .... a:I \D · >- 00 to .... .. .... .... · C N 0 ø N 0 N · .... '" 00 · .... ø 111 uJ 111 ~ C"\ c.. C7'I X "- UJ '" N ...:¡ "- < 0 ¡.... ..... 0 ¡.... g: !! ;; ::I ¡¡ ~ [¡ -< · Golf & Tennis Management, Development & Consultation NOTES NOTE I All income and expense accounts were projected to increase at a rate of 5% p.a. except for restaurant, capital and debt service. NOTE 2 RESTAURANT INCOME (Seating Capacity 300) We project to increase food and beverage income, except for food and beverage catering, at a rate of 5% p.a. We project to increase food and beverage catering above present levels by 25% p.a. to reach a stabilized year in fiscal year 1996/1997. At that point we project to increase sales 5% p.a. NOTE 3 RESTAURANT EXPENSES We project expenses to approximate 94% of sales in 1994/1995, 1995/1996 and 1996/1997. Starting in 1997/1998 we expect expenses to approximate 90% of restaurant revenue. NOTE 4 DEBT SERVICE 1 . Goldstein note is paid off in 1995 $190,000 p.a. $190,000 2. Land debt continues at $183,000 p.a. 183,000 3. We assumed a new clubhouse debt of $ 2 mi 1 financed over 20 years at 6'Æ, _LL£LO 0 Q, _$ 54 5--,-,9 QiJ_ 1177 N.E. 8th Street. Suite 309 . Delray Beach, FL 33483. (407) 243-8008 . Fax (407) 243-8011 , ~I ~I g § ~I ~I ~I ..-- Cf.I ~I ~ 0 .,-i ~ I cd U)'"C µ:¡ ~ ~I E-< () ;:J ~ H 0 E-< U U) () µ:¡~ ~I µ:¡44 :Z;44 H cd H~ U) . µ:¡ ~I ~ ~ HO E-< "'1j () Cf.I . cd ~I ~ '-' ~I I ~I I - G Hu) u)H µ:¡U) ç:¡;.-< H ;.-<~ ~:z; ~~ E-< :z; U H U) U) ¡.:¡ ::E;ç:¡ ~ E-< E-< Hµ:¡ U H Hµ:¡ :> :z; z µ:¡ ::I:: µ:¡Z 0 '-' 0 E-< U ~- ~ H H H ~ ~~ ~ U) ~ E-< ::I:: ~ µ:¡ U U ~H ç:¡ ~ ~ E-< O~ ~ ~ ~ u H § ~ E-< ~I µ:¡ µ:¡¡.:¡ U) 0- H :>E-< ~ :z; ç:¡ :z; J't.< ¡.:¡ µ:¡H 0 H H 0 ~ U) AU) ~ J't.< ~ U '. -- RECEIVED OCT 2 9 1993 CITY MANAC'ER'S OFF1CE P8110 Beach County MUNICIPAL LEAGUE P.O, BOX 15189. GOVERNMENTAL. CENTEA, WEST PAL.M BEACH, FlORIDA 33A02 (.07) 355-4484 ,»~, MBMORABDUM, o~ o~ O)'j- l' ¡J /þ~. 'lO: Mayors and Managers ~~ .9 ~ (. ~(1(,p. '(f 0: Jack Born~cutive Director \r 0- ~ Palm Beach y Municipal Leaque ~!' D'1' : October 28, 1 93 RB: TRBASURB COAST RBGIORAL PLADIBG COUIICIL AL'1'BRRATB POSI'1'IOB **************************************************** This is to inform you that there is a vacancy for an alternate member to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council replacing Lantana Councilman Chuck Potter who has been moved to a full voting member. If you have an elected offioial from your municipality you would like to nominate, please contact the League office at 355- 4484 no later than Mondav, li..ovember 8th so that the Board of Directors oan take action at its ~ov.mber Ibth meeting. Your prompt reøponse to this matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. - \~ lIP '.