02-04-92 Workshop
~ITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA - CITY COMMISSIO~
WORKSHOP MEETING - FEBRUARY 4, 1992 - 6:00 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
---~-
AGENDA
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision
made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered
at this meeting or hearing, such persons will need a record
of these proceedings, and for this purpose such persons may need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is
to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record.
@. Presentation of Financial Audit - Ernst and Young.
2. Review of Development Plan for Veteran's Park - Currie Schneider
and Associates.
3. Presentations by CH2M Hill:
A. Request for Amendment No. 2 to Service Authorization No. 4
in the amount of $31,176 for engineering services to provide
water and sewer services in former enclave areas.
B. Request for Additional Payment in the amount of $27,131 for
additional engineering services required in conjunction with
the Emergency Wellfield Remediation Project.
4. Policy discussion with land use review bearcs/direction re~arding
(DISCUSSION TO COMMENCE AT 7:3. P.M.):
A. Issue of compliance with cede enforcement actiens prier t.,
or in conjunction with, land use application processing.
B. "Accommodation" of "as-.uilt" situations; how much "help"
(direction, guidance, design) is previded.
1~y~ Presentation on preliminary findings with regard te the Water and
~~ ewer Master Plans - Hazen and Sawyer.
~ Pr.vld. direction/ideas "'ith. regard to Sign Cede Issues
"(Commissioner Andrews).
.~ Provide direction/ideas with regard to Resort and Teuri sm Issues
Commissioner Andrews).
~ Commission Comments.
..
" --_.-- __n_
--- ------.------ -'-'- ...---.-.------ ------- ~..._.-
...-.....- - - . ",:::"t~f, . r . , - -,-'. ,
~-'.-.....-.
'.~~;~'2:..:... ,.":" As.d . ." j I ,
.., , 1 es
, .~" :' ~ ..,.' . ,
, ..,' ,',:, ....;'. -, " '.:
Pre-emptiw Term Limit!'; "15 simple: A.'citlzens. group called
"Eight Is Enough" is close to getting
rrerm-l1m1t opponents like to c1aIm Its own stricter eight-year l1m1t on the
. '. tha,t Congress wU1 never approve such' ballot. This measure would extend the
Urraits. because its. Members would term 11mltatlon to the state's congres-
nenr agree to' restrict their own ca- sional delegation. Fearing that term
reers. They forget the pressure a weU- 11mits would be a likely winner, state
or'gan1zed cit1zeDs' movement can put legislators want topffer their own wa-
01.1 pol1tlclans. Yesterday, Florida's . tered-down version in hopes that it
State House voted 92 to 25 in favor of will satisfy voters. When legislators
puttin&' a proposal on the November debate not whether term limits should
ballot that would 11m1t all state be imposed but on whom and for how
elected off1claJs to 12 years in office. long, you can bet that the idea of a ctt-
The re&IOD for th1a unusual behavior 1zen leJislature bas a bright future.
... .'
'Wo..Ll ~.~ f..l (....(tee )',
~
. '
..;............. .....:'_......-'f _......... I.',.....................,........ '" -, ""'_......,;,.",...~.,.._~,PtoohlF, ~ "'. .~... "'_.. "', ...~... ."0 .......__ . ...,........
.~
:J-I i-IuJJPf
r
City of Delray Beach
Overview for City Commission
Year Ended September 30, 1991
BERNST&YOUNG
I
,..
I
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH
I SEPTEMBER 30, 1991
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Introductory Section
Financial Section
I Statistical Section
Auditors Reports
General Purpose Financial Statements
Single Audit Act
Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance
Compliance with General Requirements Applicable to Major
Federal Financial Assistance Program
Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Nonmajor
Federal Financial Assistance Program Transactions
Compliance with Specific Requirements Related to Major
Federal Financial Assistance Programs
Accounting and Administrative Internal Controls Based on a
Study and Evaluation Made as Part of an Audit of the General
Purpose Financial Statements and the Additional Tests Required
By the Single Audit Act
Compliance with the Rules of the Auditor General for the State of Florida
Compliance with State and Local Laws and Regulations Based on an
Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements
Internal Accounting Controls Based Solely on a Study and Evaluation
Made as Part of an Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements
Management Letter
l ~r~'X
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
General Fund - Revenue and Other Sources vs. Expenditures and other Uses
(Budget Basis)
$40,000,000
$35,000,000
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$0
Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
. Revenue and Other Sources o Expenditures and Other Uses
~ ~ ~ ...., '~-:!,:.:-;,.",..,~z._
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
General Fund Revenues As A Percent Of Total
1991 1990
I 9.81% 11.94%
I 13.05%
13.80%
44.42%
I 4.20% 49.85%
5.47%
I
23.10%
24.36%
. Ad Valorem Taxes
o Other Taxes
. Licenses and Permits
II Intergovernmental
ill] Other
1989 1988
11 .51 %
14.89% 14.92%
42.57% 42.55%
4.71% 5.55%
25.85% 25.4 7%
\r-
.
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
General Fund Expenditures As A Percent Of Total
1991 1990
9.95% 10.38% 11 .32%
17.08%
11 .02%
10.34%
I
. General Government
o Public Safety
II Parks & recreation
II1II Debt Service
lIT] Other
1989 1988
11 .23% 11 .73%
~
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
General Fund Fund Balance
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
. Unreserved Undesignated Fund Balance 0 Total Fund Balance
\r-
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
General Fund Undesignated Fund Balance as a Percent of Total Expenditures
and Other Uses
14.0% 12.5%
12.0% 11.5%
10.0%
8.0% 7.3%
6.3% *
6.0% 5.3%
4.0%
I 2.0%
0.0%
Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
*Excludes $3,280,000 Principal Paid on 1989 Utility Tax Revenue Notes
~
I
I
I
I
! City of Delray Beach
I
September 30, 1991
General Long-Term Debt Account Group
$40,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------------
$35,000,000 ---------------------------------------
$30,000,000 -------------------------------- --------------------------
-.
$25,000,000 ----------------- ---------------------------------------
. .-
$20,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------------
$15,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------------
$10,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------------
$5,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------------
$0
Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
I
~
City of Delray Beach
September 30, 1991
Water & Sewer Fund
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000 Revenue Available
for Debt Coverage
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Fiscal Year
I
I
Management Letter Comments
September 30, 1991
1. Undesignated Fund Balance
2. Expenditures Over Appropriations
3. Fund Deficits
4. Travel and Training Reimbursements
5. Cancellation of Outstanding Checks
6. Insurance Actuary Report
7. Employee Vacation and Sick Accumulation
8. Grant Program
9. City Garage Inventory
10. Cash Receipts - City Golf Course
11. Utility Accounts Receivable
12. Interest Capitalization
13. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements
14. Old School Square Grant
15. Programmer Access to Production Files
16. Documentation of Computer Program Changes
I'
I
I
~-
A1UHIIO A'8II!
-------------------------
--------,
I
I
I
I
I
I
q
,
--.
-I
----f
I
=t
I
9
---'
. .
I =1
I
~ , ,
I ~
.
.
I
.
. ---t
I =t
--.
=31
,
I ~~
~
~
---1
I I~i ---i
. ---t
. t
I =t
,
. =t
I
. ~
.
I
I I
, =t
I
, I
, --1
I ~
I
, I
I . =t
.
t .
. d
I .
.
. I
. . I
I . =t
. ~ .
. I
I . . =1
.
, . I
, .
I ---t
. . -I
. . .
. ---'
I . I
.. . . . . . . . ---1
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. --,
L_________________________________ __~
-- --------------------------------
HI!. _11,.._,
I D.~ ~I ~ i ! ~ II ' II I I '!fli 11I~!li .
I t! J
i i: ~~ i I 0( I~
i I dl
I.! i I !: .. f ~
i
JII i
.
.
0_ Engineers CllVinO\ ',; :F:! of,';., ~~:_ r:If\CE~;
- Planners 92 JF'.N 22 D" \. \ 3
I i I .
~ Economists "
- Scientists ~. " '_'I
\'\, 1 T, .. io 'J t.....1I
January 21, 1992
SEF30787.D1
Mr. William H. Greenwood
Director of Environmental Services
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Bill:
Subject: Water and Sewer Service to the former Enclaves
Service Authorization No.4
As mentioned in my letter of November 19, 1991, by deciding to have two separate
construction contractors for the Enclaves, it is necessary to provide additional engi-
neering services during construction. We enclosed a draft amendment to the Service
authorization for an additional $31,176, which included fees to redesign a portion of
the Germantown enclave.
Since the construction has proceeded, we have been performing these additional
services, including the redesign at the request of the City in order to keep the project
on track. We have utilized fee from our original authorization, but are accruing costs
at a greater rate than anticipated. We will run out of available fee before the project
is completed, unless the amendment to the Service Authorization is approved. Please
advise.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
$s.~
Brian A. Shields, P .E.
Project Manager
lOOlO158.DFB
cc: George Abou-JaoudelDelray Beach ~s/~
John Curtiss/CH2M HILL
CH2M HILL Southeast FlorIda OffIce Hl/lsboro ExecutIve Center North, 800 FaIrway Drive, Suite 350 305,426.4008
Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441 407. 737,6665
..
..
. ' -
. .
'" . . .
CI'IY OF DELRAY BEACH
CONSULTING SERVICE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENT
DATE: , 1991
AMENDMENT 2 TO SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO.4 FOR
CONSULTING SERVICES II/ililllll
:11:-" .!fll
ll:!ll' d(
CITY P.O. NO. , CITY EXPENSE CODE ."..,.;i:"";!!'io,'II"!!!!;1
II. '" .111 Iii
I ,lliill '~llilll . Ilis I,)
,il 'il, -1,- 1'1
PROJECf NO. 91-25 (CITY OF DELRA Y BE~CJ;ljl SEF307'S7,..Dp (CH2M HILL)
91-25 (CITY OF DELRAY Bli&.AcQI)I,S5F30787.Dl (CH2M HILL)
Ilil!:;1 '1liftl: .filll'
Ol:l!; 'Ji~
TITLE: Provision of Water and Se'y.~f>;,Jelh_~he"'f;'~~hl,~r Enclave Areas
,''''',", \,:~:;~:::,:~::>;l
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION;;>"'''''',;, Ili!i "iih.'(
'ii::::" ,<::, ,;".}I"::::::::'h';li;!i,,,'\i>i'
The City requires addition~~ sef.v,jC'~~!;;durlhg!;aesign and construction for the Water
1....1......, ",. .J.
and Sewer service to 'l1t(fQr.m~r En.Cla.ve Areas-Lake Ida, Germantown, and North
I" 1.'..I....!.. I", I... '...
Federal Highway a.~~~~liprojeb.'I~ 'Iliili; -'lhll,;;,)!1
'1Iii.. fifil Oli. Oil
'Ii!, Ihi_ Ii '"
II. SCOPE OF SIm:V1CESi! }'
"1' 'i'. Wi!'
JJllj_. I!!lll!!o .d,l.
Ililll' '1;,11"
Amend Task 1, Desimt, to I!trl'clude:
1. Redesign of sheets 20, 21, and 22 to redirect sanitary flow from Royal Palm
Drive, west of Lime Lane to another manhole in vicinity to eliminate the need
for an easement.
Amend Task 4, Services During Construction, to include:
'1. Preparation of additional conformed contract documents for execution by
Contractor and review executed Contract Documents and bonds before
forwarding to the City for execution.
2. Prepare for and conduct an additional preconstruction conference.
Ol dbt1201019.S1 1
<Xl
M
:E
a:
0
LL
Ol
<Xl
00
'.
.
..... -; ,v _
" .,
3. Prepare for and conduct an additional monthly progress meeting for the
estimated 8 months of construction.
4. Review an additional set of shop drawings, diagrams, illustrations, catalog data,
schedules and samples, the results of tests and inspections, and other data
which the Contractors are required to submit.
5. Review, recommend modifications as appropriate, and submit to the City for
payment the monthly payment requests of an additional Contractor.
6. Conduct an additional substantial completion review ,9f!!~~~ construction and
prepare an additional letter of substantial complet\fJu. 'j:;;,
. i!l!~!!:;li!i!:i:!!!!!:h Oll!'!iilh
, 7. Make a final review of the construction and ~s:~:~H'in negq!~!i1ti.pg final payment
and submit a final letter report for an addj~ib,pal ~pp.tract.otl;!!I')"
ii!;,!" '!li!i", ,,;;rl'!!!:,!!i/
m. BUDGET ESTIMATE OF SERVICES 'Iillll". '.!," '!i:""'
ii;il!!H;;:!%i''',!,,,,,,, "!l!!!!!!!!!,:!!!i!!!!!!;,
Compensation for professional consulting 's~fVi'ce$::"as'!s.p..t~cified in Task 1 Service
. . i, -;. ,. ..;:-
AuthonzatlOn 4 shall be modified as followS;, '\ ",.." ."I''''I:;"",;;!"
./l::.;:j~:::::::l!!i;i' 'i!h: '!liliil!!!!!!'
,Il" :t:mh;!I.1i Iii ':
Task 1-Design: Add $4,570 'lii!!IF'I!/' II; .IL"l:i' iii, \
lili!!!"I'/!I\"I:,,;II!/',,!P''''fjih'II!!IIIoII!'>'!!''
Compensation for profes~ion~! caQsiII~:ing ~~ces as specified in Task 4 Service
Authorization 4 shall.pe,'II~oQu:t;eq" ~s!'jf.dl~pws:
-Ii' Iii! 11!1 ~!i, o'if. jV
'il'" 4i! III' 'Ii, i,'
Task 4-Services DUI1~g"~onstrytc~on: add $26,606
'l!h'l liif_. II" ti!ff
liii" ti'!hl!!' dl!
!III; , ,I!!!'
"!!r!lii!!!f'
dbl120/019.S1 2
Ol
co
M
:2
0:
0
u.
Ol
co
03
'.
'.
, ;. . , ~
"
~..'
IV. COMPLErION DATE
Add two (2) weeks to the schedule specified in Service Authorization 4 for items not
yet completed.
APPROVED BY THE CITY CONSULTANT
OF DELRA Y BEACH CH2M HILL SOUTHEAST, INC.
_ day of , 19 _ By: <to..
Gre.goryIIT. Mcintyre, P.E.
Vicb P{esident and
, I~Qgi~lihManager
, 'llllilf "Iifl' 'Ii. lih.
'H Ii. Ilh "11
.:ii'" .11:" 'f'itlt 11!!!1
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, aJltily.'I!au,~prized :6ijic:er of CH2M
a municipal corporation of the State of rlU.bll~VfHEAST, INC., on behalf
Florida of ih~, 'CQ'rporation and said person
lilll;llI!hh!i'hlq,~cufe~i"t~~ same freely and volun-
\i '\;i;;'''iota~lYhlfQrhth~ purpose therein
By: /lli "I!j,pXpl'essed.
Th EL M ..II...., I,ll'.".
omas . ~ch, ayor 1",1". 'Iii '''IIl; 'Ii/, 1('
,I,li il!iff.1I lilk n Ii, As.
.:ifil ,ili lj! ,;i:rUhttl If I .,.TIE T.
'ii" illll dli' 11IIi 'liJI'-
Illlij. 11!IiUI,iJ' ..~!,,!!J;hllillhl h::JW'
11th! :11' "I!fll""
ldfdl!lliillh' III lfhl
111'1 "Ilil' IIII ","
A TIEST: lillll ,ldlUlltlli!f" Ilill_ Illlt. ~!llli
.j,1 ilfl Ill! I!J. Uff ,.j I .
.llii!' ,,~II II!", "ii, 1111,1 WITNESS my hand and seal in the
'h., ~ 'I ::
'llilill, Illq"ll ill County and State aforesaid this day
'11'1111 _jl i' -
By: Ihll Ilill,. ,;!II ""II of 19 .
hI. 'II':' ...' , _
City Clerk'lililh, 'oil/III"
'lId" Notary Public
State of Florida
APPROVED AS TO FORM: My Commission Expires:
(Seal)
By:
City Attorney
BEFORE ME, the foregoing instru-
ment, this day of , 19 , was
acknowledged by Gregory T. McIntyre,
Vice President and Regional Manager, I
-
_.
Ol dbt1201019.51 3
co
M
~
a:
0
\L
Ol
co
co
'.
.
.. . . , .
,
,
.....
CUENT CITY OF DELAAY BEACH
PROJECT NAME PROVISION OF WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO FORMER ENCL6.VE AREAS
PROJECT NUMBER AMENDMENT NO.2
>;,}::,}}'\::'::um::;:jm;:;::::::::('::}':::m/:}m',:;:':':::::::::::,{::%::;:j::{::{(Hil')\::,/\}::::,/:U:::',:U:}'::'?:::\::::t:'~c:>>$t:'E)ETAIt:'i'i::)::}}:m:'ti{!{m;:?:{:{:}m'm')f:Wf:::fH::HmHmm:}}:,/:,::::m:,::}Ht,'}Um':::::??;:',))'::::})?:'iW):
TASK 3 TASK 4
RAW TASK 1 TASK 2 ASSISTANCE SERVICES
HOURLY SPEC'S SPECIAL DURING DURING TOTAL DIRECT MULTl
CATEGORY (NAMEl RATE & DRAWINGS SERVICES BIDDING CONSTRUCTION HOURS LABOR LABOR
8 VP/SENIORCONSULTANT $33.30i'IIIIIII 0 SO SO
:I' I
7 SENIOR MGRlSENIOR CONSl1..TANT $33~ // 0 SO SO
6 PROGRAM. DEPT. OR DIV MGRITECH CONSULT i' 'Iil 8 $268 $70ll
$33.30 ,I' : III 8
oI!1 ,'IHlb, III'.
5 SENIOR PROJECT MGRlTECH CONSULT $32.60 'II . "" 'HI. "'1 8 8 $281 $782
ffib 'IUljIJ llh It!,
I il' 'Ij' '11 III
4 PROJECT MGRlSR PROJECT PROFESSIONAL $28.10 1IIIIi 1,'11" 111!il;" Illil'h, 0 SO SO
3 SR. PROJECT PROFESSIONAL $25.00 6 (11111 i/II IIIIII,!,. "'1111./172 178 14,450 $13.350
,II 'III III 01"
2 PROJECT PROFESSIONAL II $21.55 24 Ihl1 ' 111111/!II/1 III 124 148 $3.189 $9.568
Ifl. Iii
1 PROJECT PROFESSIONAL I ~8n ~ ~ 0 SO SO
. ., b" III
liPfbbl I, Iii
5 LEAD TECHNIC1ANISUPERVISOR II $22.90 2 ,'// ""IIlh' IIII !III' 2 S48 $137
'I: if.tlu "'hhllll liltt ,;11
4 SENIOR TECHNICIAN $1895 II, 'il' """'''' """,",, blli,., 0 SO SO
. I 'i un lUll
3 CERTlFlED TECHNICIAN $17.35 I'l!. '.1'1 11"'" """'''''';'1/111 0 SO SO
j.mIUllit:,.. 'I Jfll .:I'
2 TECHNICIAN S ,:,: '!Iii. '.j .:!':' 0 SO SO
14.55 ..' .11'11, 'II .1. Ii"
1 JUNIOR TECHNICIAN .f!li" IJ:!'" 'Iiii, :i Ii; Ii 48 $812 $1,836
$12.75 ,;1' ,/1 4<<" II... ',I.
-ii' r:I' .il =tH II!:, I; IiI
Itl, Iii. li!l JII! ifli,l
o TECHNICAL AIDE $11.20 II1I I." "I' .01"''''', 'II... , 0 SO SO
Ilii. 'fib;l .:i:!'. th~l ,;111
OFFICE SUPPORT $t1'- 1'1, I'''' .'101' 64 64 $736 $2,208
. .lIntl.. 11z. l!ll.
"IGb. 1111, Ii j:
.. . ....... ...... . .;.;.;.:. .':-.<':',;. :.....-..;.;.;-:...;.:.;....;;.....,..:.;...;...;.;.:.; .':':-: : :.:.:.' .:> .::..., ~. . ..:." :;';:::::{:::::::' :;'::: :::;::::;:;:;:::;:;::;:-::;
" :'. ':':;':\:.>-: .:::.:;::::<::;: :',;:::::; .....:.:/t:.. :i.::....::::::;::;~:::::: :~:::t;~:~:/;;Wj~~~~f~j:~ Uf: . .".. -- , . "... ... ..........
./.: :':;"':;';.:.< ;.::;:;::::;;.:::.::;:::::;:;::.::;;' :-::;,.;>:....::.;.:::.:.:.;.:.::::-::.::-.;
AC1\JAL MUL Tl
ITEM DESCRIPTION TASK 2 TASK 3 TASK 4 DIRECT DIRECT
COMPUTE~AUTOCADD $500 $750 $1.250 $1,250
PRINTING. REPROGRAPHICS, AND GRAPHICS $50 S400 $450 $450
WORD PROCESSING $250 $250 $250
SURVEYING SO SO
SOILS SO SO
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY SO SOl
I
AIR FARE SO SOl
I
AUTO MILEAGE SO SOl
I
MEALSJLODGING SO SO,
TELEPHONE $10 $150 $160 $160 .
POSTAGE/FREIGHT $10 $150 $160 $160
SUPPLIES S25 $200 $225 S225
co
M
~
a: ::::::::r[9I~q~9R'~Ng:Plfflgf:U1;!ERY!9g'=:l!~:m\r\I::;:::::::::;:::::;:::::::;::::::}::::\:!;:':::;~,57i)'::::::::::::;;;::::':::::::}:t:;::;'~::::::/{::::::::::::::::':::":::?:t:1:::::::::::::::::::,};:::::.~;@6::::'::':<:.:.::,,:t1~~9S5';r:~~;j76
0
u.
Cl
co
--
co
.
.
.' '"
.
.~..... I
.- Engineers
,,- Planners
8I1J:lllJ Economists
- Scientists
November 19, 1991
SEF30787.D1
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Attention: Mr. William H. Greenwood
Director of Environmental Services
Subject: Provision of Water and Sewer Service to the Former Enclave Areas-
Lake Ida, Germantown, North Federal Highway Areas
Service Authorization No.4
As mentioned in my letter of October 30, 1991, if the City decides it is in its best
interest to have two construction contractors for the Enclaves water and sewer work it
will be necessary to provide additional engineering services during construction.
Specifically, the additional services related to the second contractor will include the
following:
. Preparation of additional conformed contract documents for execution
by Contractor and review executed Contract Documents and bonds
before forwarding to the City for execution.
. Prepare for and conduct an additional preconstruction conference.
. Prepare for and conduct an additional monthly progress meeting for the
estimated 8 months of construction.
. Review an additional set of shop drawings, diagrams, illustrations,
catalog data, schedules and samples, the results of tests and inspections,
and other data which the Contractors are required to submit.
. Review, recommend modifications as appropriate, and submit to the
City for payment the monthly payment requests of an additional
Contractor.
CH2M HILL Southeast Florida Office Hillsboro Executive Center North. 800 Fairway Drive. Suite 350 305,426,4008
Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441 407.737.6665
'.
.
.. .
" \.,
City of Delray Beach
Page 2
November 19, 1991
SEF30787.D 1
. Conduct an additional substantial completion review of the construction
and prepare an additional letter of substantial completion.
. Make a final review of the construction and assist in negotiating final
payment and submit a final letter report for an additional contractor.
Enclosed is a cost estimate for $26,606 for completing the above additional services.
This estimate represents less than 50 percent of the original fee for a single
contractor.
In addition, George Abou-Jaoude has brought to our attention that a utility easement
leading to an existing sanitary manhole on Royal Palm Drive, west of Lime Lane
(Germantown area) has been vacated by the City. If this easement cannot be obtain-
ed by the City, it will be necessary to redesign the sanitary collection system depicted
on Sheets 20, 21, and 22 to redirect the flow elsewhere in this portion of the enclave.
We are also enclosing a cost estimate in the amount of $4,570 to revise these
particular drawings during construction.
We are prepared to draft an amendment to the Service Authorization, at your
direction. If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
13-.~
Brian A. Shields, P.E.
Project Manager
dbt 120\024.51
Enclosures (2)
cc: George Abou-JaoudelDelray Beach
John Curtiss/CH2M HILL
..
,.
~ "
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /tJ/9/?tJ
PAGE 1 OF 9
- -
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION UNDER THE AGREEMENT TO FURNISH
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DATED 07-11-90 BETWEEN THE CITY OF
DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AND CH2M HILL SOUTHEAST, INe.
TITLE: PROJECf NO. 90-53--PROVISION OF WATER AND SEWER
SERVICE TO THE FORMER ENCLAVE AREAS--LAKE IDA,
GERMANTOWN, WORm FEDERAL HIGHWAY AREAS
CATEGORY OF WORK:
GENERAL:
This SERVICE AUTHORIZATION shall modify the professional services agreement
referenced above and shall become part of that AGREEMENT as if written there in
full.
This SERVICE AUTHORIZATION represents the provision of water and sewer
service to enclave numbers 31, 24, and 13, also known as Germantown, North Federal
Highway, and Lake Ida areas, respectively. The provisions for the Germantown area
will include approximately 7,750 feet of new 6-inch and S-inch water mains and
8,700 feet of 8-inch and lO-inch sewer lines and manholes. The provisions for the
North Federal Highway area include approximately 9,700 feet of new 6-inch and S-inch
water mains and 15,900 feet of 8-inch and 10-inch sewer lines, manholes and a lift
station. The provisions for the Lake Ida area include approximately 6,300 feet of
6-inch water mains and 9,200 feet of 8-inch sewer lines, manholes, and a lift station
with design based on the CITY's standards. The scope of this SERVICE
AUTHORIZATION is limited to: preparation of specifications, contract drawings,
permit applications; cost opinion, assistance in bidding and services during construction
for the above-referenced improvements. A single set of contract documents will be
prepared for receiving competitive bids for the three enclave areas described
previously. A tentative drawing count for the project is 36 sheets at l-inch equals
50 feet for plan drawings and l-inch equals 5 feet for sewer profiles.
I. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY mE CONSULTANT
A. DESCRIPTION OF WORK TASKS
CONSULTANT will provide specific services to the CITY in accordance
with the following Task descriptions.
dbp019/057.51
.
.
'.
CH2M HILL
SER VICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /0/9/9&
PAGE 2 OF 9
- -
Task l--Design Services - Prepare Drawings, Specifications and Contract
Documents.
CONSULTANT will prepare drawings, specifications, and Contract
Documents, including proposal forms, notice to bidders, general and
special conditions, bond forms, etc., for bidding and construction.
CONSULTANT will submit three (3) sets of plans for the City's review
of the following: Predesign layout showing proposed preliminary
alignment on available I-inch equals 200-feet scale water and sewer atlas
maps and based on existing available information about the utility system;
and the 50 percent and 80 percent completion stage of the final design
drawings. Three meetings to coincide with the review of these documents
will be conducted with City staff.
CONSULTANT will prepare an opinion of construction cost based on
the completed construction drawings and specifications.
In providing opinions of cost and schedules for the project, the
CONSULTANT has no control over cost or price of labor and materials;
unknown or latent condition of existing equipment or structures that may
affect operation or maintenance costs; competitive bidding procedures
and market conditions; time or quality of performance by third parties;
quality, type, management, or direction of operating personnel; and other
economic and operational factors that may materially affect the ultimate
project cost or schedule. Therefore, the CONSULTANT makes no war-
ranty that the CITY'S actual project costs or schedules will not vary from
the CONSULTANT'S opinions, analyses, projections, or estimates.
Task 2--Special Services - Surveying, Soil Borings and Permitting
CONSULTANT will furnish survey and mapping and photogrammetric
personnel and equipment required to obtain field information necessary
to prepare satisfactory plans and specifications for the PROJEcr.
CONSULTANT will prepare one legal description for the lift station site
in the Lake Ida area. Surveys for easements and rights-of-way are not
included but can be provided and paid for as additional services.
CONSULTANT will perform soils investigation to establish nature of
subsurface materials and water table elevations at the two lift station sites
with a 3D-foot boring for each station.
In soils, foundation, groundwater, and other subsurface investigations, the
actual characteristics may vary significantly between successive test points
and sample intervals and at locations other than where observations,
dbpOI9/057.51
'.
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /()/f~
< PAGE 3 OF 9
- -
explorations, and investigations have been made. Because of the
inherent uncertainties in subsurface evaluations, changed or unanticipated
underground conditions may occur which could affect total PROJECf
cost and/or execution. These conditions and cost/execution effects are
not the responsibility of the CONSULTANT.
CONSULTANT will assist with up to 86 labor hours of effort in
obtaining necessary permits for construction by:
· Preparing permit applications for wastewater collection and
water distribution, and submitting to Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation through Palm Beach County
Health Department for approval and FOOT for work
adjacent to Dixie Highway.
· Responding to review questions from reviewing agencies
· Meeting with reviewing agencies to discuss review
comments (one such meeting is assumed).
Task 3--Assistance During Bidding
CITY will utilize standard procurement procedures for the formal
advertising and receipt of bids.
CONSULTANT will furnish 6 copies of final drawings and specifications
for the City's use.
CONSULTANT will provide document mailing and pre-bid services, such
as preparation of advertisements for publication by the CITY,
distribution of planholder lists, issuing of addenda, answering technical
questions during the bidding period, attending the bid opening, evaluating
bids, and making a recommendation for award.
CONSULTANT will prepare 10 copies of conformed contract documents
for execution by Contractor and review executed Contract Documents
and bonds before forwarding to the City for execution.
Task 4--Services During Construction
CONSULTANT will conduct a preconstruction conference including the
CITY, Contractor, Contractor's subcontractors, and regulatory agencies.
db pO 19/057.51
"
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /tJ/?7?O
PAGE 4 OF 9
- -
CONSULTANT will provide technical interpretations of the drawings,
specifications, and Contract Documents, and evaluate requested
deviations from the approved design or specifications.
CONSULTANT will conduct a monthly progress meeting with the
Construction Contractor's(s) representatives and the CITY as necessary
to assist in implementing the construction process.
CONSULTANT will act as initial interpreter of the requirements of the
Contract Documents and judge of the acceptability of the work
thereunder and make decisions on all claims of CITY and Contractor( s)
relating to the acceptability of the work or the interpretation of the
requirements of the Contract Documents pertaining to the execution and
progress of the work. CONSULTANT shall not be liable for the results
of any such interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith.
CONSULTANT will assist in negotiating with the Contractor the scope
and cost of any necessary contract change orders. Prepare such change
orders as may be required and submit them to the CITY for approval.
One change order is assumed for this proposal.
CONSULTANT will make 28 periodic visits to the site of the PROJECf
to observe the progress and quality of the work and to determine, in
general, if the work is proceeding in accordance with the intent of the
Contract Documents.
The presence or duties of the CONSULT ANT'S personnel at a
construction site, whether as onsite representatives or otherwise, do not
make the CONSULTANT or its personnel in any way responsible for
those duties that belong to the CITY and/or the construction contractors
or other entities, and do not relieve the construction contractors or any
other entity of their obligations, duties, and responsibilities, including, but
not limited to, all construction methods, means, techniques, sequences,
and procedures necessary for coordinating and completing all portions of
the construction work in accordance with the Contract Documents and
any health or safety precautions required by such construction work. The
CONSULTANT and its personnel have no authority to exercise any
control over any construction contractor or other entity or their
employees in connection with their work or any health or safety
precautions and have no duty for inspecting, noting, observing, correcting,
or reporting on health or safety deficiencies of the construction
contractor or other entity or any other persons at the site except
CONSULTANT'S own personnel.
dbp019/057.51
.r
.
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /tJ#/l'tI
PAGE 5 'OF 9
-
CONSULTANT will review shop drawings, diagrams, illustrations, catalog
data, schedules and samples, the results of tests and inspections, and
other data which the Contractor is required to submit. These shall be
reviewed for general conformance with the design concept of the
PROJECf and general compliance with the information given in the
Contract Documents. Such review is not intended as an approval of the
submittals if they deviate from the Contract Documents or contain errors,
omissions, and inconsistencies, nor is it intended to relieve the Contractor
of his full responsibility for Contract performance, nor is the review
intended to ensure or guarantee lack of inconsistencies, errors, and/or
omissions between the submittals and the Contract requirements.
CONSULTANT will coordinate the work of inspection bureaus and
laboratories in the observation and tests of materials used in the
construction; receive and evaluate reports by such laboratories or
bureaus.
CONSULTANT will review, recommend modifications as appropriate,
and submit to the CITY for payment the monthly payment requests of
the Contractor. By recommending any such payment, ENGINEER will
not thereby be deemed to have represented that title to any work,
materials, or equipment has passed to OWNER free and clear of any
liens.
ENGINEER will make a final review of the construction to determine, in
general, if the work has been completed in conformance with the intent
of the contract documents. Assist in negotiating final payment for
construction and submit a final letter report upon which final settlement
and termination of the Construction Contract(s) can be based. The
CITY and appropriate regulatory agencies may furnish a representative
to jointly make the final observation of the construction. Document
proceedings of all final settlement negotiations and record basis for final
payment.
CONSULTANT will revise original drawings and submit to the CITY and
regulatory agencies completion of the work, one (1) Mylar set to the
CITY and two (2) blueprints to the regulatory agency showing record
information of the work, using available information supplied by the
Contractor( s), onsite representative personnel, suppliers and other
sources.
Task S--Additional Services
Pro~de additional services relating to the provision of water and se~er
servIces to the enclave areas. These additional services may be reqUIred
dbp019/057.51
'.
~
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /C/?/97
PAGE 6 OF 9
-
due to uncertainties discovered during survey, soils, investigations, field
verification of existing facilities and conditions, and potential property or
easement acquisitions. Services performed under this task will be on an
as-directed basis in accordance with a written Notice to Proceed from the
City Manager. Each Notice to Proceed issued shall contain the following
information and requirements.
. A description of the work to be undertaken
. A budget establishing the amount of the fee to be paid in
accordance with Article VII.A.2 of the Agreement.
. A time established for completion of the work.
B. ASSUMPTIONS
Work described herein is based upon the assumptions listed below. If conditions
differ from those assumed in a manner that will affect schedule or scope of
work, CONSULTANT will advise the CITY in writing of the magnitude of the
required adjustments. Changes in completion schedule or compensation to the
CONSULTANT will be as negotiated with the CITY.
1. CITY will provide to CONSULTANT record drawings of all existing
facilities which shall serve as the basis for modifications included in this
project.
2. CITY will return to CONSULTANT within 10 working days after receipt
from CONSULTANT, one copy of the pre design layout and of the
50 percent and 80 percent complete draft contract documents containing
all comments to be considered for incorporation into the final documents.
3. CONSULTANT has assumed that all water and sewer pipe line
alignment is within CITY rights-of-way.
4. CITY will be responsible for acquisition, surveying, and legal description
of easements or property required for facilities.
5. CITY will provide to CONSULTANT records on all existing pump
stations, impacted by the enclave improvements showing depth,
horsepower, pump capacity and number of pumps.
6. CITY will observe the construction on a day-to-day basis and will provide
the CONSULTANT with information on a daily basis concerning the
progress of the work. The CITY will give prompt written notice to the
CONSULTANT wherever CITY'S staff become aware of any actual or
dbp019/057.51
,
eo
CH2M HILL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /~/f7iJ
. PAGE 7 OF 9
- -
suspected defect in the work of the CONSULTANT so that the
CONSULTANT will have the maximum opportunity to mitigate any
damages from such defect.
7. The wastewater in the North Federal Highway area will flow or be
pumped to the collection system adjacent on the south side of the
enclave and that no crossings for Federal Highway have been included.
Additionally, the developer of the Anchorage has prepared a site plan
which includes the dedicated easements for the utility services and lift
station.
8. The wastewater in the Lake Ida area will flow or be pumped to the
collection systems adjacent on the east and south sides of the enclave.
9. The wastewater in the Germantown area will flow by gravity to the
existing collection systems in the area.
10. Redesign or rehabilitation of existing lift stations is not included in this
scope of work.
11. CONSULTANT has not included preparation of operation and
maintenance manuals or startup services in this scope of work. .
12. There are no railroad, canal, U.S., County or State highway crossings
required.
13. Services during construction are based on an 8-month construction
period.
14. Water services and sewer laterals will be located in the field by the
Contractor.
II. COMPENSATION TO mE CONSULTANT
Compensation for professional consulting engineering services as described herein is
estimated as follows:
dbp019/057.51
'.
CH2M HILL
SER VICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: /~/9lf4
PAGE 8 OF 9
-
Total
Task 1-- Design Services - Prepare Drawings, $99,726 ..-
Specifications and Contract Documents
Task 2--Special Services - Survey, Soils and
Pennitting (Palm Beach County Health Department,
FDER and FDOT) 39,149 ~
Task 3--Assistance During Bidding 6,434 ,-'
Task 4--Services During Construction 53,503 -- .
Task 5--Additional Services (If Authorized by
City Manager) 20,000 -
TOTAL $218,811 '
Compensation for services shall be in accordance with Article VII.A2 of the
AGREEMENT.
III. PROJECf SCHEDULE
CONSULTANT agrees to perform the services required herein within the following
time periods unless otherwise extended in writing by the CITY. Time as stated to
herein refers to calendar days from the date of execution of this SERVICE
AUTHORIZATION.
Task l--Design Services - Prepare Drawings, 150 Days.
Specifications and Contract Documents
Task 2--Special Services--Surveying, Soil 180 Days.
Borings and Permitting
Task 3--Assistance During Bidding 210 Days.
Task 4--Assistance During Construction 450 Days.
Task 5--Additional Services As Negotiated
*Based on no delays due to property acquisition.
dbp019/057.51
. .-
. ".
CH2M HilL
SERVICE AUTHORIZATION 4
DATE: IO/?F
PAGE 9 OF 9
-
APPROVED BY THE CITY
OF DELRA Y BEACH
If. day ofLKM9~
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, a
municipal corporation of
the State of Florida ATIEST:
/~~ .tJ~
EFORE M the foregoing instrument,
B~ '
, Ma this L day of,~ , 19 ~ was
acknowledged by Gregory T. McIntyre,
ATTEST: Vice President and Regional Manager,
By: ~ O'~VI'&A a duly authorized officer of CH2M
HILL SOUTHEAST, INC., on behalf of
^c.~ City Clerk the Corporation and said person exe-
cuted the same freely and voluntarily
for the purpose therein expressed.
WITNESS my hand and seal in the
County and State aforesaid this Z day
of ttJ.+Lu, 19~
Notary Public ~ Jb u2dU"f
State of Florida ..
N i'uu\it:' \ihlO l.o I II\'; "'AI
M Co. Expo IllillY' \'19\
Y omnusslOn ues:M Commi15ion Expires lune 1'1.
II .... DIll Jill ilia:....... ~
(Seal)
dbp019/057.51
.,
. "
7
I . 1
...../CH2Mi~HIIlli,PR()aEe1!;casm:~'eSl'1MA.TE:::
CUENT CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
PROJECT NAME PROVISION OF WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO FORMER ENCLAVE AREAS
PROJECT NUMBER
lABORCOSTDETAlt/>( .'
TASK 3 TASK 4
RAW TASK 1 TASK 2 ASSISTANCE SERVICES
HOURLY SPEC'S SPECIAL DURING DURING TOTAL DIRECT LABOR @
CATEGORY (NAME) RATE & DRAWINGS SERVICES BIDDING CONSTRUCTION HOURS LABOR MULTIPLIER
8 VPISENIOR CONSULTANT $33.30 0 SO $0
7 SENIOR MGRlSENIOR CONSULTANT $33.30 0 SO $0
6 PROGRAM. DEPT, OR DIY MGRlTECH CONSULT $33.30 49 6 3 35 93 $3.007 $9,291
5 SENIOR PROJECT MGRITECH CONSULT $32.60 159 20 10 114 303 $U78 $29.633
,'POJECTMGRlSR PROJECT PROFESSIONAL $28.10 0 SO $0
:< PROJECT PROFESSIONAL $25.00 296 32 36 269 633 $15.825 $47,475
l PROJECT PROFESSIONAL II $21.55 184 170 354 $7,6a $22.886
1 PROJECT PROFESSIONAL I $18.75 0 $0 $0
5 LEAD TECHNICIANlSUPERYISOR II $22.90 0 SO $0
4 SENIOR TECHNICIAN $18.;5 134 18 152 $2,880 $8.641
3 CERTIFIED TECHNICIAN $17.35 0 $0 $0
2 TECHNICIAN $14.55 0 $0 $0
. JUNIOR TECHNICIAN $12.75 332 10 342 ....311 $13.082
.. TECHNICAL AIDE $11.20 356 78 434 ....881 $14.582
OFFICE SUPPORT $11.50 167 18 55 268 53,082 $0,246
. .....DlRecrcosr,:DETAll$'?>'..
AClUAL MULTI
ITEM DESCRIPTION TASK 1 TASK 2 TASK 3 TASK 4 DIRECT DIRECT
COMPUTERlAUTOCADD $3.600 $200 $200 S600 ....600 ....600
PRINTING. REPROGRAPHICS. AND GRAPHICS $950 $200 $1.000 $goo $3.050 $3.050
WORD PROCESSING $2.000 $250 $250 $200 $2.700 $2.,700
SURVEYING $25.000 $25.000 $25,000
SOILS $1.500 $1.500 $1.500
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY $6,000 $8.000 $6.000
AIR FARE $0 $0
AUTO MILEAGE $0 $0
MEALSlLOOGING SO $0
TELEPHONE $20 $20 $210 $210
POSTAGElFREIGHT $75 $75
SUPPLIES $840 $840
.......TOTALlABORAND OIREcrSER.yi9~~:~:!~::::::::'::' (.';..:.....: >:'..._i1iG:::::/{,..t.::}:::,:,.,ii,:::::"I~}mu ::::j:',$5@OG)).: '~'lfiii:,i:$t~B
..
~
. .
. .
I
'- Engineers
- Planners
lEIlJllllI Economists
- Scientists
November 11, 1991
SEF24708.E1
Mr. William H. Greenwood, P .E.
Director of Public Utilities
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Bill:
Subject: Emergency Well Field Remediation, City Project No. 90-10
Services Beyond the Scope of Addendum No.6.
We have completed our professional services, specifically Services During
Construction and Resident Observation, for the subject project. We have been
successful in managing a project with initial high potential for claims. This potential
for change orders stemmed from an initial adversarial relationship between the
Contractor and the City, resulting from the Contractor's unsuccessful $100,000 bid
error claim. In fact, the final Contract Price, pending City approval of the final credit
change order which includes deleting the $20,000 allowance, is $859,565. The result is
a savings of $11,351 on the original Contract Price of $870,916. Both contracting
parties have expressed satisfaction with the outcome of this project.
As indicated in our letters of December 19, 1990, and January 31, 1991, (copies
attached), the level of effort required to complete the work described in Addendum
No.6, exceeded that so described. The increased effort was mostly due to the
adversarial situation described above and changes in DERM regulations subsequent
to design. Some changes in City preferences, partly driven by the effect of changes in
DERM regulation, also contributed.
Conditions that differed from those assumed (paragraph B. ASSUMPTIONS of
Addendum No.6) are as follows (References to Item Numbers pertain to the
attached breakdown of cost):
. Several changes, initiated by the City of Delray Beach as a result of post
design changes in DERM regulation and some City management
CH2M HILL Sou'hea.' "oddo Office HIIIsba<a Execull... Cent., Norlh. eGO FalrNOY Dt/.... Suite 350 305.426.4008 I
Deerfleld Beach. Florida 33441 407,737,Cj)s ~
.,
..
Mr. William H. Greenwood, P.E.
Page 2
November 11, 1991
SEF24708.E1
preference, both occurring early in the project resulted in a multiple
item change order which included a 39-day delay to the project
completion date. The changes and associated delay resulted in
increased effort for resident obseIVation (see Item 1), increased effort
for project management, submittal review, clarification, design, drafting,
and change order related work (see Item 2), and increased project
management directly related to the 39-day time extension associated
-- with the changes (see Item 3).
. Increased resident obseIVation (see Item 1) and project management
(see Item 4) effort required in the early stages of the project as a result
of an adversarial Contractor attitude concerning their claimed bid error
of $100,000. The Poole and Kent Company, in their letter dated
September 12, 1990, stated, "...we will execute and perform the contract
in strict accordance with the contract plans and specifications." After a
while we were able to establish a teamwork approach to the project and
mitigate this affect.
Specific changes and their causes are as follows (See also attached breakdown of cost
for Item Nos. 1 through 4):
Item No.1:
Resident Inspection increased from 550 hours assumed to 731 actually required, t 169
increasing our level of effort and corresponding cost by $12,338. J
Increased resident inspection was caused by an initial adversarial relationship
between the City and the Contractor, described above, which required closer
monitoring of Contractor quality control and an increased number of field
clarifications as the Contractor attempted posture for change orders.
Additional resident services were also caused by the changes described under
Item No.2 below.
Item No.2:
City initiated changes included in a single change order (Change Order No.1)
increased our change order level of effort and corresponding cost by $11,125.
Specifically, these changes and their causes are as follows:
'.
~
Mr. William H. Greenwood, P.E.
Page 3
November 11, 1991
SEF24708.El
a. Replace underground storage tanks with aboveground storage tanks at
the North Pump Station and South Pump Station.
This change was caused by changes in DERM regulation which
prohibits underground storage tanks in proximity to wells.
b. Replace aboveground storage tank at North Pump Station with
SSO-gallon skid mounted tank.
This change was initiated by City staff to provided flexibility in fueling
generators. This was not an option when the North Pump Station
storage tank was underground as designed prior to change in DERM
regulation.
c. Relocate generator and storage tank at 20 Series Wellfield.
This change was initiated by a dispute with an adjacent property owner
and complicated by a change in DERM regulation regarding placement
of generators and storage tanks in Zone 1 (the closest area) of an
individual well. While this required additional effort for the Engineer,
the final solution did not affect the Construction Contract Price.
d. Relocate Golf Course generator and storage tank from Wells Nos. 31
and 32 to Well Nos. 27 and 28 (See attached sketch).
The original location, adjacent to the clubhouse parking lot for
accessibility, was initially approved by golf course management. New
golf course management requested relocating the generator and storage
I tank for aesthetical reasons. We understand that management received
negative response from golfers after the structures were staked.
e. Relocate storage tank from north side (street exposure) to south side
(back yard) of Pump Station No. 50.
Initially this storage tank was designed as an underground storage tank
with no affect on the appearance of the pump station. Since changes in
DERM regulation resulted in changing the storage tank from
underground to aboveground, City staff decided to relocate the storage
..
.
Mr. William H. Greenwood, P.E.
Page 4
November 11, 1991
SEF24708.El
tank to the backyard of the pump station, out of view from the street to
maintain the desired aesthetic appearance of the pump station.
f. Delete overflow tank and pump at the existing generator west of the
treatment plant chemical building.
This change was a result of changes in DERM regulation that requires
all storage tanks to have containment. In lieu of containment City staff
opted to delete the day tank and associated pump.
g. Delete removal and disposal of the three chemical storage tanks south
of the water treatment tank chemical building. Change providing and
installing three 1.:'" <:torage tanks to providing and installing one new
storage tank. OI;,;1:;;tl:: uay tank ano associated transfer pump.
A leak (failure) in one of the sodium aluminate tanks prompted City
staff to remove the leaking tank with another contractor. City staff
opted to continue with the other existing sodium aluminate storage tank
without improvements to remove moisture even though there is a risk
of tank failure. The reason to not replace the existing tank is that it will
become obsolete with pending treatment plant improvements (lime
softening). However, if the tank fails, temporary measures will have to
be implemented until the new system is commissioned (reason for the
initial design improvements). The City felt this was an acceptable risk.
Item No.3:
Additional project management associated with the 39-day contract time extension
granted by e.O. No. 1 increased our cost by $938.
The 39-day time extension required additional routine project management
activities, Le., meetings, billings, etc.
Item No.4:
Additional project management associated with the initial contractor bid error claim
increased our level of effort and corresponding cost by $2,729.
.
. .
.
Mr. William H. Greenwood, P.E.
Page 5
November 11, 1991
SEF24708.E1
The initial adversarial relationship between the City and the Contractor
resulted in the Contractor challenging the Contract Documents in an attempt
to generate change orders. Meetings were required to establish a teamwork
approach to the project.
The differing conditions from those assumed increased our cost of providing
professional services by an estimated $27,131. We look forward to the City
Commission's approval of an amendment to our contract in that amount. This
request for additional compensation represents the final closeout of the services
associated with Addendum No.6. It has been a pleasure to work with the City in
completing this successful project.
Sincerely,
{.,L..,..IL..- .
hn F. Curtiss
oject Administrator
dbt072\066.51
Enclosures
cc: Jerry Bahn/CH2M HILL
'.
.
.
DELRAY BEACH EMERGENCY WELLFIELD PROJECT
BREAKDOWN OF EXTRA COST BASED ON ADDITIONAL SERVICES
CH2M HILL I J.BAHN I NOVEMBER 11, 1991
ACTIVITY HOURS RATE SUBTOTAL TOTAL
fii~lQ.WiqMtmBgqnQN}f:l::::t::::mmmmmmm}:~~:m%:::~\:::::}::}::::}:::::%t:::::}~:m:::m:
ITEMNO.1:>>';. .... ... ....x/..
'd .. '. ,,_..
..... '.",. ". .., "........- '.
EXTRA RESIDENT OBSERVATION .
CURTIS WILLIS 362
MIKE FURDOCK 315
LEN DRAGO 20
OTHERS 34
TOTAL LABOR HOURS 731
ANTICIPATED LEVEL OF EFFORT 550
- EXTRA RESIDENT INSPECTION EFFORT 181 $61 $11,041
EXPENSES $1 .297
TOTAL RESIDENT EXTRA COST $12,338
e.6~igPMAN.~gMiN](::t::~:::::tt:::JfJf:tttt}tJKfl}:fff::l::}::i,
ITEMNO.2:',,'.{<i ;.".~'.... '.>< <.x i..> .... .... .
-.- '" -.. ..., . , - '.", .. ,.. ... '. .... ... ..., ,. .. '."" - -, .
....""..... ..... '."', _................____....,... .. ,.. '.. _, .'. d.
REGutATiONCHA.NGESAND. ... ..
.. . -.. "," ,..
.....",' - -' .. ..."...... -, -" . ',' .... .... .
.". .... .. .. ._.._.. ,.,." _. ....__.. "d... ,__,,,,,
.... ... ,., -'. .. -_.-....., -, - .. .... ,-.
CrrvINmATEOCHANGES.. .
PROCESSING, COORDINATING &
NEGOTIATION 84 $85.31 $7,166
REDESIGN 19 $71.22 $1.353
ESTIMATING 20 $50.53 $1 ,011
REDRAFTING 30 $43.89 $1,317
WORD PROCESSING 8 $34.75 $278
TOTAL COST PROCESSING CHANGES $11,125
ITEM~ ......,..,..... .... ............ ...........
.. .... ;3i.,x>'::'}"{{'}>'::" ............,.:::;.;.;....{,<:{.:.>......,....,...;;.},i.::'..}.'
. ....... .........".,..-...,., ... .... .........<.......... ......."...........".
, . . . . . .. - ." . .... - . . . . . . . . . , . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . - . . , , . - - , , . . , . . . . - . . . . - . - - . . . - . . . . ., ,'...,......,.. .
~p.brT'1Q~p~ijgJ~g,.~ANAGE'f.t~t'ft'.};\
ASSdCIATEDWItH3~DA 'YiIMeEXTl:NSIONYU
11 $85.31 $938
~M~ .....,.."..............................................,........
.. . . ;.4....'...........).);...,........... ...........,..........::.........,............ '............<.......).'.\))\.....
. . - . . . - - ... . . . . - . . . . . . - . . . . . . . - . - -. -". . . . . ...... .... .... - . . . . . . . " .. - . . . . . . . . - . . - - .
.".......... .._".. ..--"...--. -"....... ....." , .. ."--. .""" "'" -.... """......" .'"
~P.bl'T'I()~l..p~CHEC,....~A~GI:Mr:tfrASSOc;l~fEt>....
WI"l1iINITIALC9~RACTOF\BIDERROR CLAIM)...
MEETINGS 8 $85.31 $682
MANAGMENT OF INTITIAL ADVERSARIAL RELATIONS 24 $85.31 $2,047
TOTAL PM EXTRA COST $14,793
:f:j:j:tf{@rttlrltf%lMw:w:trtjnt:\f!;fjrttQ.TAb.::matd~p.$t,:::HlmtNi:J::nh trt$.~'M:~1.~m
,.
.
.
.- Engineers
- Planners
~ Economists
- Scientists
January 31, 1991
SEF2470S.El
Mr. William Greenwood, P .E.
Director of Public Utilities
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Mr. Greenwood:
Subject: Emergency Well Field Remediation, City of Delray Beach Project
No. 90-10--Services Beyond the Scope of Addendum ~o. 6.
Representatives of the City of Delray Beach have requested changes to the subject
project which require additional design and permitting effort.
Specifically, these changes and additional effort are as follows:
1. Replace underground storage tanks (USTs) with aboveground storage
tanks (ASTs) at the North Pump Station and South Pump Station
resulting in the following additional effort:
a. Design a 3000 gallon AST and containment area
b. Obtain DERM permit
c. Modify plans
d. Prepare City building permit drawings
2. Relocate Golf Course generator and storage tank from Well Nos. 11
and 12 to Well Nos. 27 and 2S, resulting in the following additional
effort:
a. Modify electrical design
b. Obtain DERM permit
c. Prepare City building permit drawings
d. Conduct well capacity evaluation
CH2M HIll Southeast Florida Office HII/sboro Executive Center North. 800 Fairway Drive. Suite 350 305.426.4008
"- Deert/ald Beach. Florida 33441 407.737.6665
.-
..
.
Mr. William Greenwood, P.E.
Page 2
January 31, 1991
SEF2470S.E1
3. Relocate AST from north side (street exposure) to south side (back
yard) of Pump Station No. 50 resulting in the following additional effort:
a. Obtain DERM permitting
b. Modify electrical design
c. Modify mechanical design
d. Prepare City building permit drawings
4. Modify chemical storage layout resulting in the following additional
effort:
a. Modify electrical design
b. Modify mechanical design
c. Obtain DERM permitting
d. Prepare City building permit drawings
In order to initiate Change Orders to the Construction Contract by issuing Requests
for Quotations to the Contractor, we must complete the additional design and
permitting work indicated above.
We believe the effort described above to be beyond that normally required for
change order preparation and constitutes a condition differing from those assumed in
Addendum No.6. . We hereby request that a change to Addendum No. 6 be
negotiated before commencing with the additional work.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
~~~
Jerome E. Bahn
Project Manager
dbt072/048.51
cc: Ernie Kaeufer/City of Delray Beach
John Curtiss/CH2M HILL
Jay Ameno/CH2M HILL
Robert Wright/CH2M HILL
Mike Furdock/CH2M HILL
.-
.
.
.
.
.- Engineers
- Planners
~ Economists
- Scientists
December 19, 1990
SEF24708.E1
Mr. William H. Greenwood
Director of Public Utilities
City of Delray Beach
434 S. Swinton Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Mr. Greenwood:
Subject: Emergency Well Field Remediation, City of Delray Beach Project
No. 90 - lO--Addendum No.6, Article LB. ASsumptions
In accordance with Addendum No.6, Article LB. ASSUMPTIONS, to the Standard
Agreement for Professional Services dated February 11, 1988, we are advising you of
potential differing conditions from those assumed to be a basis of agreement.
The Poole and Kent Company (P &K), in its letter dated September 12, 1990, took
exception to the City of Delray Beach's decision to award the Contract without
consideration to P&K's claimed error of $100,000. In the same letter, P&K stated,
"...we will execute and perform the contract in strict accordance with the contract
plans and specification." We feel that P&K will aggressively pursue Contract
Modifications through Requests for Clarifications in order to attempt to recover its
alleged loss.
At this time, we anticipate that changes will be required to the Assumptions on which
the Agreement is based. These anticipated changes are the following:
1. We anticipate the number of change orders will exceed the two change orders
assumed.
2. We anticipate the presence of our construction resident may increase beyond
the SSO manhours assumed in order to more closely monitor Contractor quality
control and to expedite field clarifications so that delay and associated claims
are minimized. This additjonal presence may be required in conjunction with
increased project management time, to enable us to more effectively assist the
CH2M H/ll Southeast Flor/da Office H/IIsboro Executive Center North. 800 Fairway Dr/ve. Suite 350 305.426.4008
Deertle/d Beach. Florida 334A1 407.737.6665
.
.
.
.
.
Mr. William H. Greenwood
Page 2
December 19, 1990
SEF24708.E1
City in its relations with the Contractor, especially with respect to change
orders and claims.
3. We fully expect additional project management time to manage increased
legitimate claims. and anticipated frivolous claims. This trend is evident from
the onset of the project.
- We will keep you informed during the project and give prompt notice when
adjustments may be required for potential differing conditions relative to the
Assumptions. At this time we are expending our budget at a rate in excess of
planned because of frequent requests for clarification and direction.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
~/"~L
Jerome E. Bahn
Project Manager
dbt072/043.51
cc: John Curtiss/CH2M HILL
"
.
. .
[IT' DF DELRA' BEA[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 200 NW 1st AVENUE' DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
FACSIr,lILE 407i278-4755
Writer's Direct Line
(407) 243-7092
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 31, 1992
To: city Commission
From: Jeffrey S. Kurtz, City Attorney
Subject: Linkage Between Land Development Approvals and Code
Compliance; Our File #25-92.001; 25-89.001;
25-92.600
The Commission will be discussing whether it is appropriate to
deny or condition land development approvals on the land's
and/or applicants' code compliance history and if so, the most
effective method of linking the two.
This is an area that I feel the Commission should tread very
carefully into as most land development approvals will have the
effect of improving the condition of the premises. Therefore,
the Commission or any of the boards who would have this linkage
responsibility must always balance whether code compliance
would prevent or reduce the improvements contemplated by the
requested land development approval.
There are several different types of approvals one may petition
the City for. Such approvals consist of (1) land use designa-
tion, (2) zoning designation, (3) site plan approval (4)
condi tional use approval, (5) permit approval, (6) variance
approval, and (7) certificate of appropriateness.
The linkage or conditioning of code compliance with respect to
the grant or denial of a zoning or land use designation would
in all likelihood constitute contract zoning. Contract zoning
refers to a governing body extending a zoning land use
designation in exchange for some consideration on the part of
an applicant. Very often that consideration is a specific
improvement to the parcel of land being zoned. Such a contract
has been uniformly determined by the courts to be illegal and
void. Therefore it is our office's opinion that it is inappro-
priate to consider a property or applicant's code compliance
history when determining whether to grant or deny a land use or
zoning designation on it.
W~ L/-A
.
- .
,
Memo to City Commission
January 31, 1992
Page 2
The granting of the permit is a ministerial act on the part of
the City and does not involve discretion on our part. As such,
the Commission would have to provide by ordinance a provision
requiring full code compliance prior to the granting of any
permit. In our office's view, such an action would be counter-
productive and therefore we do not recommend that the Commis-
sion consider linkage at that level. If the Commission desires
to consider linkage at that level, further research by our
office will have to be done with respect to constitutionality
of such a provision.
Site plan and conditional use approval are somewhat discretion-
ary. The discretion that is involved is limited by the
parameters set forth in our codes. The consideration of code
compliance history is most easily defensible when linked to
these approvals. If the Commission desires to link the grant-
ing of a site plan or conditional use on code compliance, it
would be recommended that such linkage be set forth in an
ordinance with ultimate administrative review at the City
Commission.
The granting of a variance, although very often subject to
conditions, is tied to criteria related specifically to
qualities of the land or structures. Therefore, the conditions
imposed relate to those such qualities of the structures and
the land. It is not recommended that we attempt to link code
compliance with the variance procedure.
Likewise, the certificate of appropriateness which applies to
our historic districts relates to the specific nature of the
property and/or structures and therefore our office would not
advise it to be linked directly to code compliance.
In conclusion, it is our office's opinion that the most appro-
priate approvals to link to code compliance would be those for
site plan and conditional use and the ramifications and goals
of such linkage should be fully discussed during the ordinance
process.
Should any Commissioner have any questions concerning this
matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
JSK: jw
cc: David Harden, City Manager
David Kovacs, Director of Planning and Zoning
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement
Rich Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator
linkage.jsk
,
..
- '. ....
~
NARRATIVE RE STAFF ASSESSMENT OF CONSIDERATION OF CODE
ENFORCEMENT MATTERS IN LAND USE PROCESSING:
DJK/LB 1/8/92
Staff Perspective: The Director of Community Improvement and
Director of Planning offer the following perspective.
Code Violations: Most code violations noted during land use
review reflect non-conforming situations. Little effort is made
to determine if the situation is, indeed, non-conforming or may
be illegal. There is an assessment made of the current
condition and often conditions are imposed for some upgrading.
These assessment may be very casual with "non-impacting" type of
requests.
Code Citations: There is not a practice to review Code
Enforcement records as a part of project review. This step
could be instituted and the status of any such violations noted
in the staff report.
Resolution Prior to Acceptance of an Application: This
requirement may be quite onerous. In some instances, the
application may have been generated in response to a Code
citation. A similar type of submission prerequisite which dealt
with a clean tax payment record was considered when the LDRs
were prepared. However, such a concept was rejected due to
the various situations which may occur such as property being in
out of control of the property owner, etc.
Resolution a. a Part of the Land Use Review Proces.: As stated
above, current citations could be a part of the staff report.
However, it would require a specific policy (ordinance?) if
compliance were to be required as a condition of approval,
especially if the citation did not relate directly to the
development order.
., 1"1
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
ALISON MACGREGOR HARTY, CITY\C:E~\ .
FROM: DIANE DOMINGUEZ, PLANNER II~vJl ~,~~
DATE: JANUARY 28, 1992
RE: LETTER TO BOARD MEMBERS RE: CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP
FOR TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M.
The attached letter has been sent to all Planning and Zoning
Board, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, and Historic
Preservation Board members.
DD/dlm
Attachment
* Letter of January 28, 1992
.,
.
.
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H
100 NW. 1st AVENUE . DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . 407/243- 7000
January 28, 1992
Mark Krall, Esq.
616 E. Atlantic Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33483
Dear Mr. Krall:
The City Commission has scheduled a special workshop to discuss
several issues relating to the role and responsibilities of the
City's development review boards. Among the issues to be
covered in the workshop are the following:
-- Consideration of a policy which would require that any
code violations which exist on a property be corrected
prior to, or as a condition of, development approval.
-- Dealing with "as-built" and after-the-fact variances
and adjustments.
-- An assessment of the level of input which the City's
boards provide into the design and layout of
development projects.
The workshop will be held at City Hall on Tuesday, February 4,
1992 at 7:30 p.m. Members of the Planning and Zoning Advisory
Board, Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, and Historic
Preservation Board are encouraged to attend.
If you have any questions regarding this meeting, please call me
at 243-7040.
:g:~
Di ne Dominquez, A~1
Planner III
Current Planning Division
THE E;::FOP.T ALWAYS MATTERS -
'1
.
~-_._--_._-- n
'"
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
~'fvl
FROM: CITY MANAGER {I I
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # <16 - MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 1992
APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD DECISION
DATE: January 10, 1992
At their December 4, 1991 meeting the Site Plan Review and Appearance
Board approved building elevations for a freezer addition and
landscaping plan modifications for Dunkin Donuts located on Federal
Highway and Tropic Boulevard.
This appeal action resulted from the review of appealable land use
items at the December 10, 1991 regular meeting. The appeal was
raised by Dr. Alperin. He cited the situation wherein the subject
property had several code violations which were not resolved. Those
violations are:
-Improper storage of outside refuse.
-Handicapped parking spaces not properly striped.
-Improper fill in public right-of-way.
Currently, liens and accrued fines total $26,800.
This appeal opens up another issue, whether or not compliance with
code violations or citations should be resolved prior to, or as a
part of, the granting of land use approvals. Currently, no policies
exist which direct such actions.
Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission not take any action
on the appeal and allow installation of the freezer and the
modifications to the landscaping.
Further, direction is sought with regard to requiring code compliance
as part of the land use review process. The City Attorney should
also be consulted as to whether it is proper to link decisions on
land use requests with resolution of code violations. A detailed
staff report is attached as backup material for this item.
LL~611'O fT5 P '-! AcJYY1 ,I d..I ,
- D'$C:-~ LMuP- 1-6 ~ ~~
) ,
roli&1 wo~Ho cL~ . how fnW!-h hf--(p / r!C/1!(1/€J77-
;L. Y q d-- . I 7} ,'s PR.c0;O'C-~ kIT) -th€.. BC/reD5
/0 ' . ,q
( . 1 I L.1 ,
(-/~ - .s i8 f1 ACj f__ Frs t=r hnE5 TO OUeefOI fr-,pf.::
) [me. AnDI?fw5 )
..
.
.
..
.. .
,
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
J~QoL-
FROM: AVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 1992
CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF SPRAB ACTION PERTAINING TO
SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS AT DUNKIN DONUTS ( S. FEDERAL
HIGHWAY)
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
considerinq an appeal of the SPRAB action which approved
modifications at Dunkin Donuts on South Federal Highway.
The action taken by SPRAB was approval of:
* building elevations for a freezer addition; and,
* landscaping plan modifications.
However, a policy direction issue also surfaces in
consideration of this item.
BACKGROUND:
This appeal has resulted from the review of appealable items at
the City Commission meeting of December 10, 1991. The appeal
was raised by Commissioner Alprin. He cited the situation
wherein the subject property had several code violations which
were not resolved.
The code citations which existed involved four cases; the
subjects of which includes:
* improper storage of outside refuse;
* handicapped parking spaces not properly striped;
* improper fill in public right-of-way.
This property is scheduled for a January 28, 1992 hearing before
the Code Enforcement Board. Since the December action, the City
has undertaken some regrading of the alleyway. Please refer to
the memorandum from Jeff Costello, dated December 17th, for a
more detailed accounting of the citations.
Defininq the Issue: It appears that this appeal is not of what
was approved, but of whether or not compliance with code
violations or citations should be resolved prior to, or as a
part of, the granting of land use approvals.
..
.
City Commission Documentation ,..
. ~
Consideration of Appeal of SPRAB Action Pertaining to Site Plan ,
Modifications at Dunkin Donuts (S. Federal Highway)
Page 2
Attached is a narrative from the Director of Community
Improvement and the Director of Planning regarding this broader
issue.
Assessment: It is thought that the Dunkin Donuts situation is a
rather isolated instance (with respect to code compliance
matters) and does not represent the norm; thus, looking at code
enforcement matters may not create excessive bureaucracy.
In order to get a better understanding of the situation, it may
be appropriate to operate for three months worth of project
where we do determine if there are outstanding citations and
include them as a part of the project review.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
With respect to the site plan modification action of SPRAB it
seems most appropriate to not take an action and allow
installation of the freezer and the modifications to the
landscaping.
With respect to the issue of seeking code compliance as a part
of the land use review process, it is necessary that the City
Commission provide direction. Choices which are available
include:
1- Direct that we continue as we have in the past and make no
changes.
2. Direct that a three month trial period be used during which
the state of Code Enforcement citations are considered in
the review process.
3. Direct that a more aggressive program be pursued.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1- Take no action on the appeal, thus allowing the freezer
addition to go forward.
2. Regarding the broader issue, Commission discretion.
Attachment:
* Narrative re Staff Assessment of consideration of Code
Enforcement matters in land use processing
* Costello memo re Code Enforcement actions on the subject
property.
* SPRAB Staff Report and Minutes re Dunkin Donuts freezer
addition and landscaping changes
.
.
-I
.
NARRATIVE RE STAFF ASSESSMENT OF CONSIDERATION OF CODE
ENFORCEMENT MATTERS IN LAND USE PROCESSING:
DJK/LB 1/8/92
Staff Perspective: The Director of Community Improvement and
Director of Planning offer the following perspective.
Code Violations: Most code violations noted during land use
review reflect non-conforming situations. Little effort is made
to determine if the situation is, indeed, non-conforming or may
be illegal. There is an assessment made of the current
condition and often conditions are imposed for some upgrading.
These assessment may be very casual with "non-impacting" type of
requests.
Code Citations: There is not a practice to review Code
Enforcement records as a part of project review. This step
could be instituted and the status of any such violations noted
in the staff report.
Resolution Prior to Acceptance of an Application: This
requirement may be quite onerous. In some instances, the
application may have been generated in response to a Code
citation. A similar type of submission prerequisite which dealt
with a clean tax payment record was considered when the LDRs
were prepared. However, such a concept was rejected due to
the various situations which may occur such as property being in
out of control of the property owner, etc.
Resolution as a Part of the Land Use Review Process: As stated
above, current citations could be a part of the staff report.
However, it would require a specific policy (ordinance?) if
compliance were to be required as a condition of approval,
especially if the citation did not relate directly to the
development order.
..
.
t.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING ~~
FROM: JEFF COSTELLO, PLANNING TECHNICIAN I~ .
RE:
GATEWAY SHOPPING CENTER
DATE: DECEMBER 17, 1991
As you are aware, the Planning Department has processed a
request for a non-impacting site plan modification to
install a freezer in the rear of the existing Dunkin' Donuts
at the Shopping Center. The elevations and landscape plan
were approved by S.P.R.A.B. subject to conditions and was
appealed by a t the City Commission meeting by Commissioner
Alperin. The basis for the appeal was that the shopping
center has been cited for a number of code violations that
have not been corrected. The following is a list of Code
Violations associated with the Gateway Shopping Center that
are pending:
A. Code Enforcement Board Case No. 91-6624:
1. LDR Section 4.6.6(B)(2), refuse areas and outside
storage to be screened from public right-of-way.
Gates must remain closed.
2. LDR Section 4.6.9(C), requires handicapped spaces
shall be provided (designed, signed & striped) per
Florida Statutes.
STATUS: Since 11/22/91 being fined $200 per day,
thus accruing $5,000 in fines.
B. Code Enforcement Board Case No. 91-6350:
1. Code of Ordinances Section 102.01(B), Permit to
perform work in public right-of-way. Fill was
placed in the alley east of the subject property
causing drainage problems.
STATUS: $3,600 LIEN ASSESSED. Since 7/24/91
accrued $4,025 in fines. Scheduled for hearing at
the January 28, 1992 Code Enforcement Board
meeting.
C. Code Enforcement Board Case No. 91-6303:
1. Code of Ordinances Section 51. 35, requires
adequate trash containers on-site for holding
waste materials.
.
.
.
2. Code of Ordinances 51.41(B) , requires trash to be
properly placed in containers so as not to become
wind blown.
3. Code of Ordinances Section 51. 42, requires trash
containers to have lids.
4. Code of Ordinances Section 98.04, requires
premises to be free of litter.
STATUS: $1,400 LIEN ASSESSED. Since 6/16/91,
accrued $4,725 in fines. Scheduled for hearing at
the January 28, 1992 Code Enforcement Board
meeting.
D. Code Enforcement Board Case No. 90-6163:
1- Code of Ordinances 159.27(A,B,D).
STATUS: $2,875 LIEN ASSESSED. Since 5/29/91
accrued $5,175 in fines.
LIENS + ACCRUED FINES = $26,800
If you would like to discuss the above with me or need
additional information, let me know.
..
.
MINUTES: Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting .-
.
December 4, 1991
\ Page 3
IV. PROJECT PLANS
A. Scarlett O'Hara
335 East Linton Boulevard
James Sharon .
Elevations & Landscaping
Represented by James Sharon, one of the owners of the restaurant and
of the center. Mr. Taylor review the staff report. Hr. Sharon stated
the deck will be in a "cranberry bog" with the awnings in a pink-peach
color. Some of the parking spaces will be removed to accommodate the
deck and Mr. Taylor stated there was sufficient parking area. Some
of members were concerned about safety with cars travelling close to
the seating area. It was noted there was a railing. Four (4) parking
spaces will be eliminated. One member expressed some concern
regarding noise and setting precedent. Hr. Sharon assured the board
there would be no bands playing music. A recommendation was made to
reduce the railing height. After discussion, Hr. LaSalle moved to
accept the plans as submitted with the reduction in the height of the
railing to 36" and with the width of the deck reduced to 16' make the
landscaping island 4' wide instead of 3'. Seconded by Hr. Fisher.
Mr. Marsh noted that in, effect, people have been placed in a parking
lot and recommended that the issue of safety be reviewed by staff.
Mr. DeOto noted the lack of car stops by the railing. Also, the
applicant was informed he needed to provide a sample of the awnings.
The vote was as follows:
Tom LaSalle Yes
Gene Fisher Yes
Sam DeOto Yes
Jess Sowards Yes
Debora Oster Yes
Rett Talbot Yes
Mark Marsh Yes
B. Dunkin Donuts
1911 South Federal Highway
Bill Salera
Non-impacting Site Plan Hodification
Represented by Bill Salera. Some of the members expressed concern
with the compressors located atop the freezers. Also. Hrs. Oster
questioned the Ligustrum and suggested a shadow-box type fencing with
a vine. Mr. Marsh felt the freezer should be treated as would a
dumpster and questioned if the hedge screening would be sufficient.
After discussion, Mrs. Oster moved to approve the Dunkin Donuts plans
as submitted with the condition that an 8' wooden fence be added
. behind the hedge and be painted to match the Dunkin Donuts walls.
- Seconded by Mr. Sowards with the vote as follows:
sPt~& ~
~it!t.,. ~,~
.
.
. .
, \
MINUTES: Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Heeting ,
December 4, 1991
Page 4
C
Gene Fisher Yes
Sam DeOto Yes
Tom LaSalle Yes
Jess Sowards Yes
Rett Talbot Yes
Debora Oster Yes
Mark Marsh Yes
Discussion
Mrs. Meeks briefly informed the members that Sherwood Pontiac, Pompey
Park Press Box and the Barwick Middle School ~ould be before the Board
for review. Also, The Groves was scheduled for January 8, 1992.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Note To Reader
--
If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, (~
'-'
these are not the official Minutes of the Site Plan Revie~ and
Appearance Board. They will become official Minutes only after they
have been reviewed and approved ~hich may involve some amendments or
additions or deletions of the Minutes as set forth above.
The undersigned is the secretary of the Site Plan Review and
Appearance Board of Delray Beach and the information is the Minutes of
the meeting of said Site Plan Review and Appearance Board of December
4, 1991, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the Site
Plan Review and Appearance Board on , 1991.
{urjJ-~ l3c:1Jlh
Anita Barba
Recording Secretary
spI2-491.txt
(
.. H,
- .
~
~
---------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
------------------------------------------------------------------
..
AGENT: Bill Salera
PROJECT NAME: Dunkin' Donuts - Non-Impacting Site Plan
Modification
PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast corner of Federal Highway and
Tropic Boulevard, within the Tropic Square
Shopping Center.
ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD:
The item before the Board is that of approval of the building
elevations and landscape plan associated with a non-impacting site
plan modification for Dunkin' Donuts. The site plan will be
approved administratively.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The development proposal is to construct a 36 sq. ft. walk-in
freezer underneath the building overhang in the rear of the
Dunkin' Donut building. In addition, a ligustrum hedge with a
height of 3 ft. at the time of planting is proposed on the east and
north sides of the freezer. The proposal indicates that the hedge
will be maintained at 6 ft. The height of the freezer will be 7.5
ft. high with an air compressor unit on top of the freezer. Thus,
the overall building height will be 8.5 ft.
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
The proposed freezer will be a prefabricated aluminum structure
with a silver color. As the prefabricated freezer will be
inconsistent with the Dunkin' Donut building with respect to
building material and texture, Staff recommends that the height of
the hedge be 4.5 ft. at the time of planting.
RECOMMENDATION:
By separate motions:
A. Approve the building elevations for Dunkin' Donuts based upon
positive findings with respect to Section 4.6.18.
B. Approve the landscape plan based upon positive findings
pursuant to Section 4.6.16 subject to the condition that the
proposed Ligustrum hedge be 4.5 ft. at the time of planting.
AGENDA ITEM: IV. B
DATE: DECEMBER 4, 1991
S? ~"\e <:"j, ~ '"
.;.z ."'0.1 -
d -
'.
. . .-
.
. --
----
~ 1 i 11
I, I
I III
II I
! 1'1
I II
.. II II
~ I II
.
.
II II I
z I I I
<
...J : ! ! II
a.
I..lJ
a.
<
0 ! III
- (/)
.0
z
<
...J 111 I
.......
l
Z
0 II I ~
(
r- .
< 1'1' I L
0
. 0
...J I I
! III
I, I . I
I' I I --
I III
II . I I
I i I
I I' I 8
I I
I. I i
! 1'1
I Ii I.
I I
,.
.
. . .
-
.
r...:/.7.J~
. ~
~~67 rch
r
. .,
REPORT ON TOURISM
IN PALM BEACH COUNTY
FOR NOVEMBER 1991
DECEMBER 20, 1991
"
PREPARED FOR:
DISCOVER PAlM BEACH COUNTY
&
THE PALM BEACH COUNTY TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
PREPARED BY:
REGIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
2491 NW BOCA RATON BLVD, SUITE B
BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33431
(407}750-6761 BOCA (407)736-6688
REFERENCE NUMBER: R:\PROJECTS\DPBC\REPORTS\REP1991\TOCT91.RPT
; {;;C!- !
.
'.
.
CONTENTS
SUMMARY 1
HOTEL OCCUPANCY 4
OCCUPIED ROOM NIGHTS 5
ROOM RATES 6
ORIGIN CHARACTERISTICS OF TOURIST PARTIES 7
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TOURIST PARTIES 8
OCCUPANCY AND ROOM RATES IN BROWARD
AND PALM BEACH COUNTIES 9
EMPLOYMENT IN TOURIST RELATED INDUSTRIES 10
TAXABLE SALES IN TOURIST RELATED INDUSTRIES 10
'.
~ SUMMARY OF OCCUPANCY SURVEY
1. The average occupancy rate for all properties in November 1991 was 57.5%:
an INCREASE of 1.7 points from the 55.8% reported in November
1990. Occupancy in November 1991 was UP by 7.2 points over
October 1991 figure of 50.3. On a Fiscal Year to Date basis through
November, occupancy rates are UP 0.2 points to 53.9 as
compared with 53.7 the previous period one year ago. Hotel
rooms INCREASED by 3.5% in November 1991 over November 1990.
2. OccupiedroomnightsforNovember1991 were 259,285 compared to 243,132
for November 1990; an INCREASE of 6.6 PERCENT. Compared to
October 1991, occupied room nights are UP 3.7 % from 234,378
to 243,132. On a Fiscal Year to Date basis through November,
occupied room nights are UP 3.8% over the same period one year
ago, from 475,458 to 493,663.
\ . 4.- .v<--t
~'\ 3. The average daily room rate for all~:':;;:rties in November 1991 was
\..~{ $76.24; a 7.6 PERCENT DEgREASE over the $ 70.88 in November
\'!?'t.>L... . 1990. Compared to October 1991, room rates are UP from $67.42
~~' I '\... \;; or 13.1%. On a Fiscal Year to Date basis, room rates through
/ ,) November are down 1.0 percent from $69.94 to $69.23.
. j'
4. Lodging revenues were $19,767,869 in November 1991 compared to~,
$17,233,179 in November 1990; a 14.7 PERCENT INCREASE. /
Compared to October 1991, lodging revenues are UP 25.1% from /
$15,801,791. On a Fiscal Year to Date basis through November,
lodging revenues are UP 8.0% over the same period one year ago
from $32,931,440 to $35,569,660.
5. * Conference/convention bookings generated 44.9% of room nights for the
November 1991 sample or an estimated 50,254 room nights in 28
hotels with convention facilities.
6. Conference/convention bookings generated 105,984 room nights for the
Fiscal Year 1992 through November 1991 and 93,710 for the same
period one year ago.
7. u An estimated 7,988 TouTistsfrom Other Countries stayed in the County
during November, of which 1,322 were from Canada, 1,609 from
England, 2,529 from Germany, 746 from Scandinavian countries,
and 1,782 from other countries. On a Fiscal Year to Date basis
through November, tourists are UP 13.1 percent from 25,078 to
28,356.
*. ..
Convent1on/conference book1ngs are est1mated from a sample of
reporting hotels. The hotels who report each month will vary
and can affect the estimate. The hotels on the list were
revised October 1990. Hotels reporting in both November 1990
and 1991 had 46.4% convention roomnights in 1991 compared to
43.7% in 1990.
.. These estimates are generated from the responses provided by
hotels in the property survey. Groups who do not stay in
hotels/motels will be underestimated relative to their actual
numbers in the county.
1
.
'.
,
SUMMARY OF OCCUPANCY DATA CONTINUED
8. Tourists from NY, NI, and P A reportedly accounted for 72,600 room
nights and 16,091 tourists, while Tourist/rom other states accounted
for 58,624 room nights and 12,995 tourists.
9. An estimated 95,369 tourists stayed in houls in the county during
November 1991 compared to 84,619 in November 1990. Tourists
stayed for a significantly greater nights per party and thus
the number of tourists is not UP sUbstantially even though
occupied roomnights are UP substantially. During November 1990
occupied roomnights per party were 6.1, while in November 1991
they were 8.7 a rise of 42.6 percent. On a Fiscal Year basis
the number of hotel tourists is UP from 165,749 to 215,934.
2
~
SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC DATA
1- Total passengers enplaned and deplaned at Palm Beach International
Airport were DOWN 9.~% in October 1991 over the same month
one year ago and DOWN 10.9% calendar YTD. Total passengers
enplaned and deplaned at AfwmilmenwtwnalAi~nwere UP 4.6% in
October and UP 4.5% year-to-date. Total passengers enplaned
and deplaned at Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport
were DOWN 13.0 percent in October 1991 and DOWN 11.8 percent
for the calendar YTD.
2 . EmploymenJ in tourist reltzud industries was up 3.3% in October 1991 over
the same month one year ago.
3. Taxable sales of tourist related businesses were DOWN 4.5% as reported for
October 1991 over the same month one year ago.
4. Taxable sales for lodging places reported by the Department of Revenue
for October 1991 were DOWN 27.7% over October 1990 AFTER BEING
UP 15.57% in september 1991. Lodging revenues reported by RRA
were up 0.7 in October 1991 over October 1990. State data on
taxable sales of lodging places include restaurant, bar and
gift shop sales in hotels. Sales in any month by
establishments who file late are reported in the subsequent
month totals.
5. Taxable sales of lodging places compiled by the Department of Revenue
were DOWN 27.7% on a fiscal year-ta-date basis reported for October
1991 over the same period one year ago from ~o, 598 to
$19,095,342. ..!!.ote1 lodging revenues w~ up 0.7. in this
period from $15,698,261 to $15,801,791 as ated by
Regional Research Associates. / "\
(v
Tourist bed ttlXJ!S are --=
6. estimated at $575,245 for November, 1991
compared to estimated taxes of $501,485 in November 1990 and
$459,832 for October, 1991- These are before adjustments.
3
,
"
,
TABLE 1
AVERAGE OCCUPANCY RATES BY PROPERTY SIZE NOVEMBER 1991
AND CHANGE FROM SAME PERIOD 1990
Property Nov Nov % Rooms % Rooms
Size In 1990 1991 Report Report
Rooms (R) (P) Change Low High 1990 (R) 1991 (P)
All Prop. 55.8 57.5 1.7 17.6 80.9 58.3 52.0
1 - 50 50.9 64.0 13.1 63.0 66.8 7.5 2.5
1 - 100 51.2 60.4 9.2 17.6 67.0 27.6 21.5
SAME 52.4 58.2 5.8 37.8 75.5 20.4 20.4
220 - 500 54.3 54.8 0.5 34.8 80.9 81.2 77.5
101 + 58 . '0 56 . 2 - 1. 8 3 4 . 8 8 0 . 9 7 3 . 0 65 . 7
Note: Ind~v~dual propert~es are we~ghted by number of rooms. CHANGE is
computed by taking the difference in occupancy rates for the two months.
R=Revised. P=Preliminary. SAME= those hotels who reported in both years.
TABLE 2
AVERAGE OCCUPANCY RATES BY PROPERTY SIZE
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE NOVEMBER
Property Fiscal Fiscal
Size In Year Year
Rooms 1991(R) 1992(P) Change
All Properties 53.7 53.9 .2
1 - 50 49.9 55.9 6.0
1 - 100 49.4 53.6 4.2
SAME PROPERTIES 49.9 51.2 1.3
220 - 500 57.2 52.2 5.0
101 + 55.8 54.0 1.8
Note: Ind~ v~dual propert~es are we~ghted by number of rooms.
CHANGE is computed by taking the difference in occupancy rates
for the two months. R=Revised. P=Preliminary. SAME PROPERTIES=
Those hotels who reported in both years.
4
.
TABLE 3
AVERAGE OCCUPANCY RATES BY REGION FOR NOVEMBER 1991
AND CHANGE FROM SAME PERIOD 1990
Region November 1990 November 1991 Change
(R) ( P)
North 57.8 60.3 + 2.5
Central 53.6 51.6 - 2.0
South 57.9 61.1 + 3.2
The Northern reg10n conta1ns R1v1era Beach and S1nger Island and
areas north to the Martin County border. The Central region runs
from West Palm Beach to Lake Worth. The Southern region runs from
Boynton Beach southward. Properties in the Glades region are not
included to avoid disclosure on individual properties. CHANGE is
computed by taking the difference in occupancy rates for the two
appropriate periods. R=Revised. P=Preliminary.
TABLE 4
OCCUPIED ROOM NIGHTS AND LODGING REVENUES NOVEMBER 1991
AND PERCENT CHANGE FROM SAME PERIOD YEAR AGO
OCCUPIED LODGING
PERIOD YEAR NIGHTS REVENUES
NOVEMBER (R) 1990 243,132 $17,233,J.79
( P) 1991 259,285 19,767,869
PERCENT CHANGE IN ROOMNIGHTS 6.6
PERCENT CHANGE IN LODGING REVENUES 14.7
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CALENDAR
YTD: NOVEMBER(R) 1990 2,870,146 $225,301,974
( P) 1991 2,900,257 237,068,968
PERCENT CHANGE IN ROOMNIGHTS 1.1
PERCENT CHANGE IN LODGING REVENUES 5.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FISCAL
YTD: NOVEMBER(R) 1991 475,458 $ 32,931,440
( P) 1992 493,663 $ 35,569,660
PERCENT CHANGE IN ROOMNIGHTS 3.8
PERCENT CHANGE IN LODGING REVENUES 8.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FISCAL
YTD: OCT TAXABLE SALES LODGING REVENUES
LODGING PLACES OF HOTELS
(R) 1991 $ 26,400,598 $ 15,698,261
( P) 1992 $ 19,095,342 $ 15,801,791
PERCENT CHANGE IN TAXABLE SALES -27.7
PERCENT CHANGE IN LODGING REVENUES 0.7
R= Revised. P=Preliminary. Taxable sales reported by Department
of Revenue, State of Florida.
5
..
TABLE 5
AVERAGE ROOM RATES BY PROPERTY SIZE
FOR NOVEMBER 1991
AND CHANGE FROM SAME PERIOD 1990
Property $ Amount $ Amount
Size In November November of Change of Change
Rooms 1990(R) 1991 (P) Change Down Up
All Properties $ 70.88 $ 76.24 $ 5.36 - 5.33 10.00
1 - 100 46.71 50.03 3.32 -22.37 10.45
SAKE PROPERTIES 49.43 49.00 - 0.43 -22.37 10.45
101 - 500 64.72 73.27 8.55 -12.41 22.67
220 - 500 61. 86 82.39 20.53 - 5.35 22.67
501 + 181. 41 176.15 -5.26 -12.04 NA
Note: Ind1v1dual propert1es are we1ghted by number of rooms. CHANGE is
computed by taking the difference in occupancy rates for the two months.
R=Revised. P=Preliminary. SAME PROPERTIES= Those hotels who reported in
both years.
TABLE 6
AVERAGE ROOM RATES BY PROPERTY SIZE
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE NOVEMBER
Property Fiscal Fiscal
Size In Year Year
Rooms 1991 (R) 1992 (P) Change
All Properties $ 69.94 $ 69.23 $ -.71
1 - 100 45.91 46.76 .85
SAME PROPERTIES 46.14 46.00 .14
101 - 500 64.15 68.48 4.33
220- 500 63.34 78.81 15.47
501 + 175.64 170.41 -5.23
Note: Ind1v1dual propert1es are we1ghted by number of rooms.
CHANGE is computed by taking the difference in occupancy rates
for the two months. R=Revised. P=Preliminary. SAME PROPERTIES=
Those hotels who reported in both years.
6
TABLE 7
ORIGIN OF TOURIST PARTIES
NOVEMBER 1991
Origin Source Hotel 1991 Airport 1991
Florida 10.9 2.9.
New York 23.6 31.4
New Jersey 5.5 11.4
Illinois 3.6 5.7
Connecticut 9.1 2.9
Deleware 1.8 0.0
Pennsylvania 5.5 5.7
Massachussetts 5.5 8.6
Michigan 3.6 11.4
California 1.8 5.7
SUBTOTAL 70.9 85.7
other states 19.1 14.3
Other Countries 0.0 0.0
England 0.0 0.0
Canada 0.0 0.0
Germany 0.0 0.0
TOTAL 100.00 100.0
Source: Hotel surveys, Reg~onal Research Assoc~ates.
7
..
TABLE 8: GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TOURIST PARTIES
NOVEMBER 1991
CHARACTERISTICS HOTEL 1991 AIRPORT 1991
Average Party Size 3.2 1.9
Average County Nights 6.4 14.8
Average Hotel Nights 5.8 0.0
Average Hotel Rooms 1.5 0.0
visitor by Purpose (%)
visit Friends/Relatives 13.8 33.3
Vacation 51.7 60.0
Convention/Conference 3.5 0.0
Business 31. 0 6.7
Other 0.0 0.0
Reasons Vacation in County (%)
Convenient Flights 14.9 15.8
Beaches 22.9 26.3
Close to Friends/Relatives 36.5 31. 6 .
Ads/Promotions 0.0 0.0
Recommended 12.1 10.5
Golf/Tennis/Recreation 13.6 15.8
County Main Destination (%) 79.8 80.8
First Visit to County (%) 50.0 7.7
Plan Return to county (%) 96.0 96.6
Used Vacation Package (%) 8.9 7.7
Booked Trip with (% )
Travel Agency 53.1 47.8
Hotel 2.6 0.0
Other 44.3 52.3
Advance Planning (%)
1 Month or Less 47.6 45.8
2 - 3 Months 34.7 29.3
More than 3 Months 17.7 25.0
Facilities Enjoyed (%)
Golf and Tennis 16.1 34.6
Boating, Diving, Fishing 26.6 19.2
Pari-Mutuels 11. 3 15.4
Bars & Nightclubs 44.4 42.3
Cultural Events 11. 3 19.2
Attractions 36.3 42.3
Restaurants 100.0 84.6
Shopping 87.9 88.7
Sidetrips 19.4 15.4
Beaches
Water Activities 30.6 34.6
Sunbathing 55.6 73.1
Walking/Jogging 50.8 65.4
8
TABLE 8 (CONT" D)
CHARACTERISTICS HOTEL 1991 AIRPORT 1991
Average Spending Per Party
Lodging $ 379 $ 168
Restaurant/Bars 331 273
Gifts/Shopping 254 264
Entertainment/Recreation 141 151
Travel while in the County 133 107
Side Trips 247 89
Other Expenditures 83 46
Total $1,568 $1,098
Source: Hotel and A~rport Surveys, Reg~onal Research Assoc~ates.
TABLE 9
OCCUPANCY AND ROOM RATES IN BROWARD
AND PALM BEACH COUNTIES
September October
1990 (R) 1991 (P) 1990 (R) 1991 (P)
Occupancy Broward 50.3 50.9 56.5 56.4
Rates Palm Beach 48.1 47.6 51. 6 50.3
Average Broward $ 42.93 $ 46.09 $ 49.66 $ 44.61
Room Rates Palm Beach 59.09 60.54 67.57 67.42
Source: Broward data ~s from the Broward County Tour~st
Development Council. R=Revised. P=Preliminary.
9
.,
TABLE 10
EMPLOYMENT IN TOURIST RELATED INDUSTRIES OCT 1991
AND PERCENT CHANGE YEAR AGO MONTH
Types of Employment Oct Oct % Change
1990(R) 1991(P) Year Ago
Eating & Drinking Places 24800 25400 2.4
Hotels & Lodging Places 8600 9100 5.8
General Merchandise Stores 8300 8700 4.8
Food Stores 13600 13900 2.2
Apparel & Accessory Stores 5700 6100 7.0
Personal Services 4900 4900 0.0
TOURISM RELATED TOTAL 65900 68100 3.3
Source: Flor~da Department of Labor and Employment Secur~ty.
(R) Revised employment estimates using Benchmark data.
( P) Preliminary estimates based on survey of employers.
TABLE 11
TAXABLE SALES IN TOURIST RELATED INDUSTRIES REPORTED
OCT 1991 AND PERCENT CHANGE YEAR AGO MONTH
MILLION OF DOLLARS
Type of Oct Oct % % of
Establishment 1990 1991 Change Total
Eating Places $ 61,488 $ 59,990 - 2.4 56.1
Drinking Places 8,462 8,762 3.5 8.1
Hotels & Related 26,401 19,095 -27.7 17.9
Service Stations 5,121 6,162 20.3 5.8
Admissions & Related 10,496 12,907 23.0 12.1
TOURISM RELATED $111,968 $106,916 -4.5 100.0
MAJOR CATEGORIES
General Merchandise $ 72,800 $ 92,666 27.3 13.7
Apparel Group 27,039 27,437 1.5 4.1
Construction 51,840 44,767 -13.6 6.6
Food Group 30,121 39,942 32.6 5.9
Auto Dealers 63,674 75,663 18.8 11. 2
Commercial Leases 58,149 61,854 6.4 9.2
Other $326,704 $225,653 -30.9 33.4
TOURISM RELATED $111,968 $106,916 -4.5 15.8
ALL TAXABLE SALES $642,294 $674,898 5.1 100.0
Source: Flor~da Department of Revenue
10
. -
OCCUPIED ROOM NIGHTS PER HOTEL PARTY
FISCAL YEARS 1986-1991
MONTH 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
OCT 4.88 4.47 8.03 6.52 6.06 6.30
NOV 5.12 5.92 6.20 4.81 4.59 6.12
DEC 7.68 6.91 8.37 4.84 5.39 6.63
QUARTER 5.89 5.77 7.53 5.39 5.35 6.35
JAN 8.34 7.65 7.52 8.85 8.24 8.85
FEB 4.99 8.24 8.52 6.23 7.84 8.06
MAR 7.07 6.94 6.56 7.56 7.02 7.00
QUARTER 5.35 7.61 7.53 7.55 7.70 7.97
APR 6.24 4.36 10.65 6.00 8.70 7.28
MAY 7.98 5.71 5.46 6.16 7.28 5.98
JUN 7.49 7.66 6.00 6.02 5.28 5.28
QUARTER 7.24 5.91 7.37 6.06 7.09 6.18
JUL 5.76 6.72 5.62 6.29 5.11 6.80
AUG 6.67 5.79 4.62 4.93 5.20 4.94
SEP 5.28 7.69 6.19 5.10 4.68 5.28
QUARTER 5.90 6.73 5.48 5.44 5.00 5.67
FISCAL
YEAR 6.09 6.51 6.98 6.11 6.29 6.54
Source: Regional Research Associates.
.,