Loading...
07-09-13 Regular MeetingCity of Delray Beach Regular Commission Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2013 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. Delray Beach City Hall RULES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1. PUBLIC COMMENT: City Commission meetings are business meetings and the right to limit discussion rests with the Commission. Generally, remarks by an individual will be limited to three minutes or less. The Mayor, presiding officer or a consensus of the City Commission has discretion to adjust the amount of time allocated. Public comment shall be allowed as follows: A. Comments and Inquiries on Non - Agenda and Agenda Items (excluding public hearing or quasi-judicial hearing items) from the Public: Any citizen is entitled to be heard concerning any matter within the scope of jurisdiction of the Commission under this section. The Commission may withhold comment or direct the City Manager to take action on requests or comments. B. Public Hearings /Quasi- Judicial Hearings: Any citizen is entitled to speak on items under these sections at the time these items are heard by the Commission. 2. SIGN IN SHEET: Prior to the start of the Commission Meeting, individuals wishing to address the Commission should sign in on the sheet located on the right side of the dais. If you are not able to do so prior to the start of the meeting, you may still address the Commission. The primary purpose of the sign -in sheet is to assist staff with record keeping. Therefore, when you come up to the podium to speak, please complete the sign -in sheet if you have not already done so. 3. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION: At the appropriate time, please step up to the podium and state your name and address for the record. All comments must be addressed to the Commission as a body and not to individuals. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the Commission shall be barred by the presiding officer from speaking further, unless permission to continue or again address the Commission is granted by a majority vote of the Commission members present. APPELLATE PROCEDURES Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City neither provides nor prepares such record. The City will furnish auxiliary aids and services to afford an individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Contact the City Manager at 243 -7010, 24 hours prior to the event in order for the City to accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone: (561) 243 -7000 - Fax: (561) 243 -3774 www.mydelraybeach.com REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ROLL CALL 2. INVOCATION 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG A. NONE 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. June 11, 2013 - Workshop Meeting B. June 18, 2013 — Regular Meeting 5. PRESENTATIONS: A. Recognizing the Reverend Canon William H. Stokes for his dedicated service to the City of Delray Beach B. Police and Fire Retirement Plan Presentation - Lewis Longman & Walker, P.A. 6. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON AGENDA AND NON - AGENDA ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC- IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING PRESENTATIONS: A. City Manager's response to prior public comments and inquiries. B. From the Public. 7. AGENDA APPROVAL CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval A. RESOLUTION NO. 15 -13 (TAX EXEMPTION REQUEST FOR ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS /124 NORTH SWINTON AVENUE): Approve a tax exemption request for eligible improvements to the property located at 124 North Swinton within the Old School Square Historic District; and approve Resolution No. 15 -13. B. REQUEST FOR A SIDEWALK DEFERRAL /701 N.W. 71H-- STREET: Approve an agreement to defer installing a sidewalk in front of the property located at 701 N.W. 7th Street. C. REQUEST FOR A SIDEWALK DEFERRAL /218 N.W. 161H-- STREET: Approve an agreement to defer installing a sidewalk in front of the property located at 218 N.W. 16th Street. D. ADDITIONAL SCOPE /LANZO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: Approve additional scope for 1,000 gallons of roadway crack seal and a fire hydrant relocation in the amount of $27,571.00 with Lanzo Construction Company for the Reclaimed Water, Area 12A Project. Funding will be provided by the contract's Undefined Underground Allowance. E. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to the lowest responsive bidder, South Florida Construction Services, Inc. for 30 S.W. 131h- Avenue in the amount of $28,163.85. Funding is available from 118 -1963- 554 -49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges /Housing Rehabilitation). F. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to the second lowest responsive bidder, CJ Contracting, LLC. for 609 S.W. 5th Avenue in the amount of $26,095.63. Funding is available from 118- 1963 -554- 49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges /Housing Rehabilitation). G. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to the lowest responsive bidder, Cordoba Construction, Co. for 231 N.W. 141h- Avenue in the amount of $36,879.10. Funding is available from 118- 1963 -554- 49.19 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges /Housing Rehabilitation). H. SCHOOL READINESS CHILD CARE PROVIDER AGREEMENT/EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC: Approve the School Readiness Child Care Provider Agreement between the City of Delray Beach and the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. to provide subsidized child care funding for the Afterschool Program located at Pompey Park and the Community Center. AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM PROVIDER AGREEMENTS /EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC.: Approve Continue -to -Care Afterschool Program Provider Agreements between Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. and the City, to continue reimbursable funding through the Continue to Care - Afterschool Scholarship pram for the Afterschool Program located at Pompey Park and the Community Center. J. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS /PALM BEACH COUNTY; BEACH RENOURISHMENT: Approve an Interlocal Agreement between Palm Beach County and the City to provide a mechanism for construction, monitoring and funding of the Beach Renourishment project and set forth the terms, conditions and oblivations of each of the respective parties. K. GRANT APPLICATION /EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG): Approve retroactively submission of an application for funding in the amount of $39,868.00 through the U.S. Department of Justice Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) promo ram which will support the Holiday Robbery Task Force, which reduces crime during the Holiday season. L SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /101H-- ANNUAL FAMILY FUN DAY AT POMPEY PARK: ADDrove a special event reauest for the 10th Annual Familv Fun Dav at Pompey Park, produced by the Parks and Recreation Department, to be held on August 17, 2013 from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and authorize staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, trash removal and clean up assistance, trash boxes, and use of the large City stage, and preparation and installation of event si2na2e. M. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /ON THE AVE: Approve a special event request for On the Ave to be held on August 8, 2013 from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m; lzrant a temporary use permit per LDR's Section 2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of S.W. 5th Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to S.W. lit Street, as well as the Elizabeth "Libby" Jackson Wesley Plaza and authorize staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, trash removal and clean up assistance, trash boxes and event signalze. The event sponsor will pay 50% for all overtime costs and an administrative fee for an estimated charge of $1,180.00. N. PROCLAMATIONS: 1. Recognizing and Commending the Delray Divas Step Dance Teams O. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period June 17, 2013 through June 28, 2013. P. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Bid award to Rosso Site Development, Inc. in the amount of $135,982.23 for the construction of alleys as part of the Osceola Park Alleys -Phase I Project. Funding is available from 334 - 3162 -541 -65.85 (General Construction Fund: Capital Outlay /Osceola Park) and 448 - 5461 -538 -65.85 (Storm Water Utility Fund: Other Improvements /Osceola Park). 2. Purchase award to Watson Dispatch in the amount of $69,715.69 for replacement of the 911 Dispatch Center workstation consoles for the Police Department. FundinLy is available from 334 - 2111 -521 -64.90 (General Construction Fund: Machinery /Equipment /Other Machinery /Equipment). 3. Purchase award to CDW- Government in the amount of $65,928.72 for the purchase of 12 in -car video cameras for the Police Department. Funding is available from 334 - 2111 -521 -64.90 (General Construction Fund: Machinery /Equipment /Other Machinery /Equipment). 9. REGULAR AGENDA: A. SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /15TH ANNUAL GARLIC FESTIVAL: Consider approval of a special event reauest for the 15th Annual Garlic Festival to be held February 7 -9, 2014, and grant a temporary use permit per LDR Section 2.4.6(F) for use of City rights -of -way to include N.E. lit Avenue from Atlantic to the grass area at Delray Beach Center for the Arts, Swinton Avenue from Atlantic to N.E. 18 Street and Old School Square Park and N.E. 211d Avenue from the north side of the east /west alley north of Atlantic to a line at the south end of the Old School Square Garage, from 6:00 a.m., February 6 through 11:00 p.m., February 9, 2014 and use of the Old School Square Parking Garage and the South County Parking Garage, authorize staff support for traffic control and security, EMS assistance, fire inspection, barricading, banner han2in2, si2na2e preparation and installation, use of a City2enerator, the event producer to pay an administrative fee and 100% of overtime, sienna e, barricade, and park rental costs; and waiver of the two (2) hour parking limit in the downtown area during the event, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. B. DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE /PALM BEACH COUNTY LEAGUE OF CITIES: Desimnate a voting delemate and alternate(s) to the Leamue of Cities to vote on behalf of the City. C. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION /CITY ATTORNEY TO JOIN CITY OF DELRAY BEACH WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE FRANCHISE FEE PAYMENTS FROM FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY: Consider authorization to allow the City Attorney to join Delray Beach with other municipalities in a lawsuit challenginm the franchise fee payments from Florida Public Utilities Company from 2010 through the present. D. SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL IN DENISE RYDZEWSKI V. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: Consider a Settlement Proposal in the total amount of $20,000.00 in Denise Rydzewski v. City of Delray Beach. Staff recommends approval. E. APPOINTMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Appoint two (2 ) regular members to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to serve four (4) year terms ending July 1, 2017. Based upon the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Petrolia (Seat #1) and Commissioner Frankel (Seat #3). F. APPOINTMENTS TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD: Appoint two (2) regular members to the Public Art Advisory Board to serve two (2) year terms ending July 31, 2015. Based upon the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Frankel (Seat #3) and Commissioner Gray (Seat #4). 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 (SECOND READING /SECOND PUBLIC HEARING): Consider a privately- initiated rezoning request from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place located at 1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway. (Quasi- Judicial Hearing) WAIVER REQUESTS: Consider approval of two (2) waiver requests to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "Development Standards ", for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, and Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), "Stacking Distance ", which requires a stacking distance of 50' for parking areas that contain 51 or more parking spaces for Delray Place located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. (Quasi- Judicial Hearin 11. FIRST READINGS: A. NONE 12. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: A. City Manager B. City Attorney C. City Commission WORKSHOP MEETING JUNE 11, 2013 A Workshop Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Cary Glickstein in the Commission Chambers at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, June 11, 2013. Roll call showed: Present - Commissioner Shelly Petrolia Commissioner Alson Jacquet Commissioner Adam Frankel Commissioner Angeleta E. Gray Mayor Cary Glickstein Absent - None Also present were - Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager Brian Shutt, City Attorney Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk Mayor Glickstein called the Workshop meeting to order and announced that it had been called for the purpose of considering the following Items. WORKSHOP MEETING AGENDA 1. Discussion of Noise Ordinance Commission discussed allowing public comment on this item. It was the consensus of the Commission that public comment would be allowed on this particular item. Mrs. Lula Butler, Community Improvement Director, stated staff hosted an input meeting for residents on May 13, 2013 at the Library and it was well attended. She stated she has had a number of conversations and emails from those who were not able to be present. Mrs. Butler stated staff has summarized those comments and they have been provided to the Commission. The issue is balance: residents would like to have some assurance that they have a quality of life late in the evenings and the city would like to protect the vibrancy of the downtown as well. Ms. Janice Rustin, Assistant City Attorney, discussed the noise ordinance in detail, its standards and the ten (10) noise factors that assist in determining what is considered as unreasonable. She discussed the Ordinance that was passed in October 2012 and the proposed Ordinance No. 6 -13 that was tabled in February 2013. She highlighted the options for Commission. Mr. Jacquet asked what legal precedent does the city have as far as limiting the sounds within certain times of the day and for limiting it within certain areas of town. He asked about the times and restraints in the proposed ordinance. Ms. Rustin commented regarding case law and stated the ordinance should be tailored to the problem the city is facing and is trying to solve. She asked what the goal of the city is and what does the city want to address regarding noise. Ms. Rustin stated the ordinance would have to be narrowly tailored to the city's purpose and reasonable in order to be upheld. Mrs. Petrolia stated the "plainly audible" factor seems subjective and asked if there is a sound meter that can be used. She discussed the ordinance section that addresses emergency equipment i.e. generators and asked if there is anything in the ordinance that addresses this for personal use. Mrs. Petrolia stated there needs to be a middle ground. She suggested 11:00 p.m. as the time. Mrs. Gray stated she is in favor of the proposed ordinance and there needs to be a middle ground. She stated Commission had previously made recommendations regarding the times and asked if there have been many complaints. Mrs. Gray discussed residential communities and stated Commission has to be concerned about businesses as well as residents. Mr. Frankel stated he was in agreement with the ordinance as proposed. He discussed discretion, the factors and balance; and stated he likes the factors. Ms. Rustin asked if Commission would like to see the ten factors placed in the ordinance. Mayor Glickstein stated he looked at several ordinances from other cities and has heard the statements about decibels and the courts, etc. He asked if they are court tested and about success and failure. Mayor Glickstein asked for someone from the Police Department to speak regarding the decibel application or use of a meter. Police Chief Anthony Strianese spoke regarding decibel meters and stated that is a difficult application in regards to pinpointing where the sound is coming from when you have overlapping establishments within fifty (50) or sixty (60) feet less of each other. He stated regarding going out to a single house party in a residential neighborhood it is very effective. Mayor Glickstein commented regarding the "reasonable" standard. Chief Strianese stated it can be applied with training; and spoke regarding public safety. Mayor Glickstein asked the Chief to explain the enforcement of citations and commented regarding the 1:00 a.m. time. Chief Strianese discussed the different times certain establishments stay open throughout the county. Mrs. Gray asked about complaints in the last couple of months. Chief Strianese stated the complaints vary throughout the city. Mrs. Gray asked what time most of the city's restaurants close. She also asked why code enforcement is not issuing the citations versus the Police Department. She stated she would like to see the Police doing something different. Chief Strianese stated it is a necessary function. Mr. Frankel asked if the complaints can be traced to a handful of businesses. At this time, Mayor Glickstein opened up the meeting for public comments. 2 June 11, 2013 Public Comments: 1. Steve Blum — stated that he is finding a trend that when Commission makes decisions it is based on their age group and asked where the 11:00 p.m. time came from. He stated that he would like to see the Commission consider more of the age groups and look for another way to solve this problem. 2. Victor Kirson — thanked the Mayor for opening this item up for discussion and stated he likes the Ordinance. He urged Commission to stick to the ordinance the city has at hand. 3. Kevin Rouse — owner of Kevro's Art Bar, spoke regarding tourist season and tax revenue. He urged Commission to be careful with how they do this because it will be for the whole year and not just the locals. He stated he agrees with the Police Chief and feels he has a good plan. 4. Claudia Willis — stated she has received phone calls from her tenants regarding noise. She stated it is not one size fits all and stated it is very different downtown on Atlantic Avenue. She feels the meter reading can be used on Palm Square, in the Historic District or other areas of town; and stated she would like to have the meter reading and the reasonable factor as well. Ms. Willis feels that it is too objective. She stated the problem is outdoor music and feels the city should be more proactive and long sighted with this: it is a quality of life issue. 5. Alice Finst — stated an approach of each business being respectful might help and suggested that if each business would turn their music down a little this would not be an issue. 6. Tom McMurrian — works with Ocean Properties, stated they have the Marriott, Boston's and the Sand Bar. He stated the Police Department comes and hears the complaints and then, talks to the restaurants and bars. He discussed the Sandbar and what changes they have made to their system regarding volume control. He commented regarding creating a specific district and stated there will still be the same sound (noise). Mrs. Gray stated the city needs to be careful with creating districts and she supports the Ordinance that was proposed in February and asked if they were other restaurant owners in the audience. Mrs. Gray stated she supports 12:00 midnight as the cutoff time. Mayor Glickstein asked questions in terms of drafting the ordinance and stated he feels there is a distinction between the areas west of US 1 and east of Swinton. He mentioned the amount of single family homes in the Marina District and the beach area that backup to the district. He stated the ability to enforce this fairly will be in lock step to how well the city prepares the ordinance in terms of the criteria and the reasonable standards in that area. Mayor Glickstein stated he supports breaking out a portion of the Central Business District (CBD) but asked Ms. Rustin if this would work. He stated it should not be one size fits all. 3 June 11, 2013 Mr. Jacquet stated the concerns the Mayor has are the same as his questions he wanted to ask earlier. He asked what are the issues the city is trying to solve and feels the city should start with identifying the issues (whereas clauses) and then narrowly tailor the ordinance. Mr. Jacquet stated it should not be a one size fits all and discussed differences regarding restaurants and bars. He stated there are maybe two places in the central core that are causing the issues. Ms. Rustin stated it will take additional research regarding some other areas and asked Commission if they want the factors included in the ordinance. The Commission decided to not include the ten factors in the ordinance and for them to be administrative in nature. Mayor Glickstein asked what is it that the city wants downtown -what should it look like? He referenced Code Section 99.03, reviewed criteria and discussed specific areas where the time of 11:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight can be applied. He stated to the extent where the plainly audible standard will be employed he would like to limit it to 12 midnight west of US 1 and east of Swinton. Ms. Rustin asked about those residents who abut the Central Business District at Southwest 9`h and Northeast 7`h and 8`h and should the Central Business District be limited from not only the east and west but the north and south. Ms. Rustin stated they will look at the map based on the objectives for single family residents. Mr. Jacquet stated this is a good idea and asked what would happen regarding new businesses. Mayor Glickstein stated given this is a complex issue he suggested that a "look back" date be set to review how this is working. Mr. Frankel reiterated that he was in agreement with the ordinance as proposed in February with no objections to what has been suggested regarding the Central Business District and he supports a 1:00 a.m. cutoff time. Mrs. Gray stated she supports 12:00 midnight but asked how would this effect special events. Mrs. Petrolia stated she too supports 12:00 midnight and limited areas especially north and south as well. Mr. Jacquet stated he has no problem with 1:00 a.m. but can go along with 12:00 midnight. He discussed fines, etc. Mr. Frankel asked if anything can be done regarding repeat offenders. Mayor Glickstein stated there is nothing after the 5`h violation and stated ultimately as a result someone should lose their license. The City Attorney stated they can take a look to see what Miami Beach has done. 4 June 11, 2013 2. Review of Advisory Boards and Commission Liaison Annointments Mr. Douglas E. Smith, Assistant City Manager, presented the information regarding advisory boards i.e. summary chart, absenteeism, purpose and authority for how the boards were established. He stated the Commission previously reviewed the advisory boards in 2007. Ms. Nubin presented information regarding the Commission Liaison Assignments. Mrs. Petrolia commented regarding absenteeism and conflicting schedules. She asked if Commission can consider the absences when making board appointments. Mrs. Gray stated she is fine with the Commission Liaison Assignments but Commission needs to revisit the advisory boards. She stated some of the boards could be changed to task forces. She spoke regarding certain boards i.e. Financial Review Board, Neighborhood Advisory Council and the Green Implementation Advancement Board. Mr. Frankel stated there are some boards with extreme absences and asked about the process for removal. The City Clerk explained the process. He stated regarding the liaison assignments, Commissioners cannot always make it to everything. He discussed the Financial Review Board resignations and asked if they are back on track. Mr. Frankel also mentioned the Green Implementation Advancement Board. Mr. Jacquet stated that some boards should be consolidated, eliminated or turned into task forces. He stated the absences and resignations should be reviewed as well as duplication of efforts and the amount of staff time involved. Mr. Jacquet stated the Neighborhood Advisory Council, Code Enforcement Board, Board of Adjustment and Nuisance Abatement Board should possibly be combined. He stated the Financial Review Board should be utilized on an as needed basis. Mayor Glickstein stated the liaison appointments are voluntary and there is no need to keep a running list regarding those. He asked that staff provide Commission with the meeting times of the boards and Commission can attend the meetings as they wish. He asked why the Police Advisory, Nuisance Abatement and Code Enforcement Boards are not combined. Mr. Jacquet asked why the Kids and Cops Committee does not meet in the summer. Chief Strianese stated the committee members are representatives from various schools and lay out plans during the school year. Since they are representatives from the schools, they are off in the summer. Mrs. Gray asked the City Manager if he could meet with the Community Redevelopment Agency Director regarding what they are working on, etc. Mayor Glickstein adjourned the Workshop Meeting at 8:14 p.m. City Clerk 5 June 11, 2013 ATTEST: MAYOR The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of the City Commission held on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Commission on uJ�l T 9, 2013. City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they are not the official Minutes of the City Commission. They will become the official Minutes only after review and approval, which may involve amendments, additions or deletions to the Minutes as set forth above. 6 June 11, 2013 JUNE 18, 2013 A Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Cary Glickstein in the Commission Chambers at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, June 18, 2013. 1. Roll call showed: Present- Commissioner Shelly Petrolia Commissioner Alson Jacquet Commissioner Adam Frankel Commissioner Angeleta E. Gray Mayor Cary Glickstein Absent - None Also present were - Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager Brian Shutt, City Attorney Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk 2. The opening prayer was delivered by Reverend Ron Arflin with Abbey Delray South. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was given. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mrs. Petrolia moved to approve the Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of May 14, 2013, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mrs. Gray moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 4, 2013, seconded by Mrs. Petrolia. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 5. PRESENTATIONS: S.A. Honoring posthumously Bruce John Koeser Human Resource Director, for his dedicated service to the City of Delray Beach and the community Mayor Glickstein read and presented a proclamation hereby extending our heartfelt thanks and appreciation posthumously to Bruce John Koeser and call upon all present to acknowledge and applaud his outstanding and exemplary dedication to the City 06/18/13 of Delray Beach, its employees and its residents. Linda Koeser came forward to accept the proclamation and gave a few brief comments. 6. Comments and Inquiries on Agenda and Non - Agenda Items from the Public Immediately Following Presentations 6.A. City Manager's response to prior public comments and inquiries. The City Manager had no response to prior public comments and inquiries. 6.B. From the Public. 6.B.1. Alice Finst, 707 Place Tavant, Delray Beach, FL 33445, commented about the emergency radio station 1620 which is supposed to be using for emergency circumstances heard all over the city when there is an emergency. Mrs. Finst stated she lives west of Congress Avenue and it does not usually kick in until she gets to Spady School coming down Lake Ida Road and tonight it did not kick in at all. She stated hurricane season is upon us and suggested that if the city relies on that as an emergency resource it be fixed. 6.B.2. Sue Ann Levy, 603 Lakewood Circle West, Delray Beach, FL 33445, commented about the Seagate HHC application to rezone a tract of land behind her home from open space to open space recreational. She stated the consideration of the application was postponed at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting last night. Mrs. Levy stated as a lack of information provided to residents by Seagate and the homeowners association the opposition is growing every day within the Hamlet community. She stated they first found out about the Seagate's plans to renovate the golf course and create a massive facility behind their home in late April. Ms. Levy stated the information came today as a fellow resident bumped into a former employee of the country club at a gas station. She stated to this date they have never been advised of the changes by the Seagate and have not seen any drawings even though they live within 500 feet of the area proposed for this facility. Mrs. Levy stated the parcel was zoned open space under an ordinance passed by planners and City Commission in 1994 to keep it a nature preserve. 6.B.3. Denise Alexander, 603 Lakewood Circle West, Delray Beach, FL 33445, stated she specifically bought her home for the view and the peacefulness of the trees, birds, etc. Ms. Alexander stated she would have never bought a house that backs onto a golf course because what she wanted was privacy and peace and quiet. She stated in 1994 the City Commission talked about environmental impact, protecting the boundaries of neighboring properties and the OS being the proper designation not OSR and that it stay a passive area. Ms. Alexander stated the mature trees are about 64 inches in diameter each. She stated there are already two practice areas that the Seagate has and suggested if they need a third area it can be properly located where the other two are where food and bathrooms are available for people. Ms. Alexander asked if the residents 2 06/18/13 are going to have bathrooms, concession stands, etc. in their backyards. She stated the character of their community is a Hamlet; it is open space and there are no sidewalks. 6.B.4. Gloria Hulnick, 604 Lakewood Circle West, Delray Beach, FL 33445 (lived at the Seagate Country Club for 21 years), stated they are very distressed with the plans that Seagate Country Club is making renovations for the golf course. Mrs. Hulnick stated the main reason she and her husband bought their home is to enjoy the beauty and tranquility of the space in the back of their home and noted they paid an additional $7,000 for this piece of property. She expressed concern over the Seagate's plans to take down trees; there are nesting grounds for many native birds as well as wild life. Mrs. Hulnick stated this proposal will destroy everyone and she urged the Commission to do whatever they can to make sure that does not happen. 6.B.5. Mark Kaye, 7145 Huntington Lane, Delray Beach, FL 33446, thanked Mayor Glickstein for responding so quickly to his email. Mr. Kaye stated he has been a resident of Delray Beach for 18 months having relocated from New York City. He stated it is his morning ritual to ride his bike 30 miles a day on his bike along Jog Road and during those 30 miles during the school year he sees hundreds of children riding their bicycles to school and 95% of them are not wearing bicycle helmets. He stated for many years he worked as a paramedic mostly in level 1 trauma units in emergency rooms and has seen first -hand the devastations without bicycle helmets can cause. Mr. Kaye stated he has had conversations with crossing guards and they have confirmed that there is no compliance whatsoever with regard to the bicycle helmet law. Mr. Kaye stated Florida Statutes since 1994 in Florida stipulates every person under 16 years old must wear a bicycle helmet and is a difficult statute to enforce. He stated as a community we need to do better and distributed information to the Commission to consider getting some initiative started to keep our children safe. 6.B.6. Peter Sachs, Managing Partner with Sachs, Sax Caplan, 6111 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Boca Raton, FL 33487, registered representatives of Waste Management (City's vendor for many years) and stated under Item 9.B. the Commission is going to have a discussion of a report the Commission will receive. Mr. Sachs stated the following: (1) in all the discussions that Waste Management and the City has had that there has ever been a complaint about the services that Waste Management provides to the city both under the contract and its good neighboring partner in all the city and community events that occur in Delray Beach, (2) Waste Management took under certain responsibilities under the contract and have fulfilled each and every responsibility to date and continue to do so, (3) on behalf of Sachs, Sax Caplan they have examined the report and contract and in their opinion the contract is valid and enforceable. 6.B.7. Pauline Moody, 609 S.W. 8th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33445, asked how many law firms did the City hire to approve the Police and Fire Actuarial Agreement. Ms. Moody inquired about the status of the Police and Fire Actuarial Agreement and who is going to pay for these law firms to do that. 3 06/18/13 Secondly, Ms. Moody inquired about Waste Management and asked if the City is going to appoint another outside counsel to go over the report. She commented about all the different law firms the City has hired to work on certain issues but someone has to pay for it. 7. AGENDA APPROVAL. The City Manager requested to add Item 8.S., Approval to re -open Delray Beach Swim and Tennis Pool Facility. Mrs. Petrolia moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval. 8.A. RIGHT -OF -WAY DEED/ COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA): Approve and accept a sidewalk easement and right -of -way deed for the Community Redevelopment Agency office located at 20 North Swinton Avenue. 8.11. ACCEPTANCE OF A WATER EASEMENT DEED/ LA FITNESS: Approve and accept a water easement deed for the installation of a new water and fire service line at LA Fitness located at 1668 South Federal Highway. 8.C. ACCEPTANCE OF A WATER EASEMENT DEED/BANYAN CREEK ELEMENTARY: Approve and accept a water easement deed for a fire service extension at Banyan Creek Elementary located at 4243 Sabal Lakes Road. 8.D. ADDITIONAL SCOPE /LANZO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: Approve additional scope for the installation of additional water services by Lanzo Construction Company in the amount of $25,250.00 for the Reclaimed Water, Area 12A Project. Funding will be provided by the contract's Undefined Underground Allowance. 8.E. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENTS /THE HANNAH BUILDING: Approve Hold Harmless Agreements for building encroachments (canopy, overhangs, wing walls, doors, entry gate and column) into the right -of -way for The Hannah Building (f /k/a Mercer Wenzel) for the property located at 401 East Atlantic Avenue. 8.F. AMENDMENT NO. 1 (CHANGE ORDER NO. 1) /PROLIME CORPORATION: Approve Amendment 1 (Change Order No. 1) to Prolime Corporation in the amount of $35,000 for disposal of wet lime sludge from the Water Treatment Plant. Funding is available from 441 - 5122 -536 -34.90 (Water and Sewer Fund: Other Contractual Services). 4 06/18/13 8.G. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD FOR 513 S.W. 15 AVENUE: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) to the lowest responsive bidder, C J Contracting, LLC. for 513 S.W. 15th Avenue in the amount of $31,941.00. Funding is available from 118 - 1935 - 554 -62.12 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation). 8.11. HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT /CONTRACT AWARD FOR 808 S.M731117 COURT: Award one (1) Housing Rehabilitation contract through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) to the lowest responsive bidder, C J Contracting, LLC. for 808 S.W. 3rd Court in the amount of $26,775.00. Funding is available from 118 - 1935 -554 -62.12 (Neighborhood Services: Other Current Charges/Housing Rehabilitation). 8_I. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT /2475 SUNDY AVENUE: Approve the Landscape Maintenance Agreement between the property owner at 2475 Sundy Avenue and the City for landscape installation within the right -of- way of SW 8th Avenue. 8_J. MODIFICATION #4 TO SUBGRANT AGREEMENT/ NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM (NSP): Approve Modification #4 to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) Subgrant Agreement to extend the contract date to December 31, 2013. 8.K INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT /COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)/MICROENTERPRISE PROGRAM: Approve an Interlocal Agreement with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to establish the Delray Beach MicroEnterprise Program and adopt the Program Guidelines for the CRA and City Non -CDBG MicroEnterprise Loan Fund. Funding is available from 001 - 1212 -559 -49.59 (General Fund: Other Current Charges/Micro Lending) and 118 - 1966 -554 -83.01 (Neighborhood Services: Other Grants and Aids). 8.L. REJECTION OF PROPOSALS /FIRE HEADQUARTERS PUBLIC PLAZA ARTWORK PROJECT: Approve a recommendation to reject all proposals received from the Fire Headquarters Public Plaza Artwork Project Call to Artists and authorize staff to issue a new Call to Artists. 8.M. RENEWAL AGREEMENT/HEALTH CAREER INSTITUTE HCI : Approve a renewal agreement with Health Career Institute (HCI) for the City to provide a clinical training site for EMT and paramedic students. 8.N. PROPOSED AGREEMENT /GABRIEL ROEDER SMITH & COMPANY (GRS h Approve a proposed agreement with Gabriel Roeder Smith & Company (GRS) for actuarial consulting services regarding the Police and Fire Pension Plan. 06/18/13 8.0. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COMMISSION MEETING DATES: Approve alternate dates for the regularly scheduled meetings in July. 8.P. PROCLAMATIONS: 1. Parks and Recreation Month — July 2013 8.Q. REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period June 3, 2013 through June 14, 2013. 8.R AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Bid award to Pro Courts in the amount of $52,904 for the resurfacing of twenty four (24) clay courts at the Swim and Tennis Club and relining eight (8) clay courts at the Tennis Center. Funding is available from 334 - 4145 -572 -46.90 (General Construction Fund: Repair & Maintenance Services /Other Repair/Maintenance Costs). 2. Purchase award BoundTree Medical for six (6) recertified Zoll E Series 12 -Lead EKG Cardiac Monitor/Defibrillators with one (1) year warranty. Funding is available from 334 - 2311 -522 -64.90 (General Construction Fund: Machinery/ Equipment/ Other Machinery/ Equipment). 3. Purchase award to AG- Tronix in the amount of $22,609.50 for four (4) Computerized Irrigation Systems to be installed at Robert P. Miller Park's Little Fenway and Sergio baseball fields, Merritt Park, and Fire Station #5. Funding is available from 119 -4151- 572 -64.90 (Beautification Trust Fund: Machinery/Equipment/Other Machinery/ Equipment). Mrs. Gray moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9. REGULAR AGENDA: 9.A. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE CONTRACT FOR SERVICESBALLARD PARTNERS, INC.: Consider approval of Amendment No. 1 to the Contract for Services with Ballard Partners, Inc. to extend the term of the current agreement through June 30, 2014 for the state lobbying contract. The City Attorney stated last year the City engaged Ballard Partners, Inc. through Joe McMann who did lobbying for the City on behalf of the sober house issue at 6 06/18/13 the state level. Mr. Jacquet stated he understands the City did not get the piece of legislation passed; however, Mr. Jacquet asked if the City was able to get some administrative things accomplished. Brief discussion between Mr. Jacquet and the City Attorney followed regarding what the City actually accomplished. Mr. Jacquet asked if there is any increase in cost. The City Attorney stated there is no increase in cost. Mrs. Petrolia asked the City Attorney to review the goal of what the City is having the lobbying firm do for us. The City Attorney stated what the City would like the lobbying firm for to do is to speak with DCF representatives and have DCF be more amenable to some of the changes that the City would like to see made in State law as far as providing for the ability of the State to regulate sober homes. The City Attorney stated when legislature is in session they will meet with the individual legislators and this is why staff is trying to get this amendment in place now because there is a lot of work that has to be done to try to get this accomplished before the October 1, 2013 deadline or "proviso" for DCF to get information back to the legislator. The City Attorney stated when the City initially engaged this law firm they talked to 3 or 4 other law firms as well and the Commission selected this law firm. At this point, the City Attorney stated he is looking at this as a personal services contract because of all of the contacts that Joe McCann has made with DCF where they contact him and he contacts the City. The City Attorney stated if we try to change that at this point we would be starting over. Mrs. Petrolia stated this is going to be a two -fold problem and she feels it is going to be this part of the deal but that we also have to focus on how we can get more people on the street through Code Enforcement or Police officers in order to work on the issue of the sober houses. Mrs. Gray commented about the enforcement of the sober houses and asked if there enough staff in place to work on this issue to make sure these houses are in compliance. The City Manager stated until it hits a neighborhood it ends up falling below the radar in many regards. He stated some of them go through it asking for reasonable accommodations when they end up asking for the conversion of a unit from single family to something else. The City Manager stated a three bedroom house under reasonable accommodation is requested to service six (6) unrelated adults so they do not have to go through the same process that an individual would have to go through if they were to rent their house. He stated it has become a very voluminous issue for the City. The City Manager stated the City has estimated that the inventory of sober houses is approximately 500 houses but cannot say that this is an absolute correct number. Mrs. Gray supports Amendment No. 1 to the Contract for Services with Ballard Partners. 7 06/18/13 Mr. Frankel stated Ballard Partners, Inc. has done a great job and supports this. Mr. Frankel suggested hiring Marc Woods full -time and have him train people. Mayor Glickstein stated his conversations with Joe McCann have been productive and feels there are clear benefits to keeping that momentum going with the same contacts. Mayor Glickstein stated although the City did not achieve what they were hoping to there was some progress. However, Mayor Glickstein expressed concern over the methodology of this contract and stated if staff is categorizing this as a personal services contract he needs some definitive clarification of that. Mayor Glickstein stated there are clear benefits to keeping Mr. McCann on this case but feels the City needs to be consistent. The City Attorney suggested that the City go out to bid and see what comes back. Mayor Glickstein asked if there is an expedited way to accomplish that. The City Attorney suggested that staff request quotes and when the quotes come back in that staff present to the City Commission at their regular meeting on July 9, 2013. Mayor Glickstein asked what has been paid to date. The City Attorney stated he believes Ballard Partners, Inc. has been paid $15,000. Mr. Jacquet inquired about this being a personal services contract. Mr. Frankel asked what the difference is between this and the hiring of the Weiss Serota law firm which is the next issue because that firm was selected and it was not put out to bid for the legal work on that issue. The City Attorney stated the City wants to try to be consistent and go with someone that we are well aware of their qualifications. The City Attorney stated with regard to the lobbying firms it is a little bit different and when the City hired Mr. McCann it was based on the fact that the City solicited quotes. The City needs clarification in the purchasing code to help address some of these things that maybe we can spell it out a little clearer. The City Attorney stated the personal services are open to interpretation. He stated the past practice the City has had very rarely has the City solicited quotes; however, when the City selected outside labor counsel the City did solicit quotes from 2 -3 law firms that were very well known and whatever decision the Commission made on that would have been acceptable. In his opinion, Mr. Frankel stated it is important to be consistent. Mayor Glickstein stated there is urgency to this and feels it can be clarified in the purchasing ordinance with regard to what is considered personal services and what is not personal services. He stated the City needs to be conservative and does not see where three weeks is going to put the City in that much of a disadvantage. Mayor Glickstein stated part of that discussion on whom the City uses is how they performed in the past. He stated Mr. McCann has done a great job and support him continuing. The City Attorney stated staff will start the process and get this back to the Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to obtain quotes and bring back to the City Commission at their regular meeting of July 9, 2013. 8 06/18/13 9.B. DISCUSSION OF REPORT AND POSSIBLE APPOINTMENT OF WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN PASTORIZA COLE & BONISKE REGARDING WASTE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT Jamie Cole, Weiss Serota Helfman Pastoriza Cole & Boniske, P.L., Attorneys at Law, 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite #1900, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33401, stated they looked at this project to try to see if there was any way to defend what the City did more than to try and find a violation. Mr. Cole stated they reviewed the Purchasing ordinance and policies which require bidding for $15,000 and up. Mr. Cole stated they did conclude as did the Inspector General (IG) that this was something that did need to be bid. Mrs. Petrolia asked what was the likelihood that the City would prevail in a declaratory judgment. Mr. Cole stated he can never guarantee a victory and stated the law is very clear in that if you violate the purchasing code the contract is void. He stated there is also a chance that the court could void the contract but decide that the City needs to continue with it nevertheless that the City has waived their ability to cancel the contract. Mr. Cole stated it is the job of the Circuit Court Judge to make that decision. Mrs. Petrolia asked if Waste Management could sue after a declaratory judgment is determined. Mr. Cole stated once they have their lawsuit parties need to bring any claims that they have as part of that lawsuit. Mr. Cole stated the City of Delray Beach would be the plaintiff and Waste Management would be the defendant and any claims arising from the same transaction are required to be brought in the same lawsuit. Mr. Cole stated the Court could determine that Amendment 5 as a whole is void and the City would have to revert to the status quo before that Amendment. Mr. Cole stated most likely if the City had been paying less on those bus stop shelters the City would have to pay the difference that they would had to pay. Mr. Cole stated with respect to the solar powered compactors they would revert back to Waste Management and the City would not be able to keep them because the City cannot void the contract and take the benefit of the contract. Furthermore, Mr. Cole stated the City's expectation would be that they would have to give the solar powered compactors back to Waste Management. Mr. Frankel stated he read Mr. Cole's memo and asked him how much it has cost the City for the legal work that he has done so far. Mr. Cole stated it is hourly and he does not know how many hours they have spent. Mr. Frankel inquired about the potential cost of litigating this lawsuit. Mr. Cole stated it depends on Waste Management and how they choose to defend it. Mr. Cole stated based on their analysis and the Inspector General's analysis they could go through a competitive process and it would cost very little; however, if Waste Management chooses to fight it and devote substantial resources and hire very expensive law firms it could be very expensive. Mr. Frankel asked if they distinguish the cases in the memo from the situation at hand. Mr. Cole stated you can always distinguish a case but the question is can you do a distinction that makes a difference. Mr. Cole stated based on the policy on competitive bidding in Florida, based on the cases as to void contracts, and other cases they have cited in the 9 06/18/13 memo, they believe their position is very strong. Mr. Frankel stated in Mr. Cole's memorandum it explains what is going on with Waste Management and the contract; in a similar fashion as a contract to repair city streets where the City is actually spending money to perform these services to a contractor and asked if this is a different situation. Mr. Cole stated the City is spending money and writing a check to Waste Management for services; they do collect money also from the residents if the residents pay. However, Mr. Cole stated if the residents do not pay the City pays nevertheless. Therefore, the pass - through concept does not apply; however, if this was a situation where the City was just giving a franchise to Waste Management and they could go to the residents and enter into contracts and the residents would pay them directly and the City had nothing to do with it then that would not cost the City any money and it would trigger the City's procurement code. Mr. Cole stated this however does because the City is writing a check. Mr. Cole stated he represents many cities and cities routinely bid out these types of contracts and has never seen a city take the position that they do not have to bid out a waste hauling contract because it is a pass - through. Mr. Cole stated he has seen cities that have provisions in their purchasing codes that allow them to waive competitive bidding but the City of Delray Beach does not have that so the City of Delray Beach is required to follow its code and therefore the city had to bid this out. Mr. Cole stated he has represented four municipalities in a lawsuit against a subsidiary of Waste Management. Mr. Jacquet stated with regard to the four municipalities that Mr. Cole represented and the one that went on for years he asked if what was recovered was more than what was spent. Mr. Cole stated they recovered approximately $635,000 and legal fees were less than that but they also got out of a long -term contract; the goal of the lawsuit was to get out of a long -term contract. Mr. Jacquet made reference to the City Code Section 36.02 where it states "whenever the City shall seek to acquire contractual services it shall implement these rules." Mr. Jacquet also made reference to Section D "for acquisitions of $15,000 and up" and commented about the definition of "acquisition ". He asked how the Court will look at this subsection and say that the City violated it if it can be argued that there was no acquisition. Mr. Cole stated looking at the course of history of the city and the only real reasonable interpretation of this provision for acquisition is when you are acquiring goods or services in excess of $15,000. Mr. Jacquet asked if the Court cases speak of whether a check is written from the General Fund and when the City writes that check where does it come from. Mr. Jacquet stated in none of the case law does it identify that the check must be written from the General Fund in order for it to apply. Mr. Cole stated he has never seen any case law that says that; theoretically the City could have the Code say that it only applies to the General Fund then there would be an argument but the City's Code does not say that; the City's Code talks about any acquisitions by the City in any of the funds; it does not limit it to any particular fund. Mr. Frankel stated this was voted on several months ago and asked why the City has not been sued by a competitor, resident, or anyone regarding this. Mr. Cole stated he does not know why no one else has challenged this. 10 06/18/13 Mrs. Gray asked for clarification on the franchise fees being passed on to the residents. The City Attorney stated there is an Exhibit to the bid and stressed that the City may be going towards litigation and if the Commission wants to speak with Mr. Cole one -on -one he strongly urges them to do that. However, the City Attorney stated on the franchise fees there is an Exhibit that says the franchise fee is paid by the residents and there is language in the initial 2001 agreement that says the contractor shall pay contract fees and the administrative fees. The City Attorney stated this is not to take away any rights that the City may have if we want to challenge anything but it is the set- up of it. Mrs. Gray briefly spoke about the City Attorney's opinion and the former City Manager's recommendation. Mrs. Gray stated Waste Management has provided excellent service to the City, our residents, and business owners and staff provided the Commission with a cross comparison study and we are saving revenues for our residents with the curbside costs and multi - family cost. Mrs. Gray stated she supports following the recommendation to seek the Declaratory Judgment. Mrs. Gray stated the City would save $1.7 million over the life of this contract and stated she did vote for the Waste Management contract. Mayor Glickstein stated the metric of how much this is going to cost is an important questions because it is taxpayer money; however, the flip side to that is to restore public trust in City Hall which he feels was fractured by this decision. He stated whether or not there are any substantial cost savings is less important than the integrity of the process. Mr. Cole stated under Florida Statutes Declaratory Judgment actions are supposed to be expedited. He stated how long it takes depends on how much discovery there is and how limited the issues are. For example, Mr. Cole stated if the City wants to raise the issue of franchise fee or has other claims that would expand this lawsuit and this scope. The City Attorney emphasized that the City needs to make changes to the Purchasing guidelines. Mayor Glickstein clarified that the City Attorney's suggestion to speak directly to Mr. Cole individually is after the Commission makes a recommendation to proceed or not proceed. Brief discussion between Commissioner Gray and the City Manager ensued. Mrs. Gray expressed concern over what this is going to cost the City. Mayor Glickstein stated as Mr. Chapman and Mr. Cole said they cannot determine these costs in advance and if the Commission goes this direction it is part of the collateral damage of when bad decisions are made for the wrong reasons. Mayor Glickstein suggested that the City move forward with this and it is about restoring public trust. Mayor Glickstein clarified that this is not a franchise; FPL is a franchise and they bill the City's customers and they are paid; the City of Delray Beach is not involved other than getting a franchise fee from FPL and the same goes for Comcast and other utility providers. Mayor Glickstein suggested that the City move forward with this and reiterated that this is about restoring public trust. 11 06/18/13 Mrs. Petrolia commented about the indemnification clause where Waste Management indemnifies the City for any legal action coming against them specifically for what they are talking about. Mr. Cole stated if a third party sued the City of Delray Beach to try to do what the City is suggesting doing then Waste Management has agreed to pay for the City's attorney fees and indemnify the City to defend the action that was taken. Mr. Cole stated in this situation it is not a third party and the City is not defending; the City is on the opposite side so the indemnification is not going to help the City in this situation. Mrs. Petrolia stated in Amendment No. 1 there was language about Waste Management not being able to sue the City of Delray Beach and asked if that is specific to one item or in general. Mr. Cole stated it talks about if the City chose to not renew it Waste Management could not sue the City. However, Mr. Cole stated this does not apply here also because the City of Delray Beach chose to renew it; the City did not choose not to renew it. Mrs. Petrolia asked the City Attorney if he trusts in the legal opinion of Mr. Cole before the Commission. The City Attorney stated he trusts in the opinion that is before the Commission. Mrs. Petrolia asked who initially recommended the indemnification clause. The City Attorney stated he wanted to have an unlimited indemnification clause and Waste Management would not agree with that so they came back to $1 million. The City Attorney stated the reason he wanted that is because he was concerned that someone might file suit on this basis. Mrs. Petrolia asked when the last bid was on this waste hauler contract. The City Attorney stated he believes it was 2001. Mrs. Petrolia stated it is her understanding that the solar powered compactors were purchased by the City from Waste Management (one of their subsidiaries) and asked the City Manager to check into whether or not the City has expended that money. Mr. Frankel stated this was not an easy decision but he feels he made the right decision to keep on with Waste Management. Mr. Frankel stated he does not support going out to bid. Brief discussion between Mayor Glickstein and Commissioner Frankel ensued. Mayor Glickstein stated this has never been about the service of Waste Management and feels this whole thing could have been avoided if the City followed what the ordinance said. Mayor Glickstein stated when you go through the procurement process it is a learning experience; you get information from the bidders that further define the scope of work that allows you to refine the scope of work that you need; it is not just about price. Mayor Glickstein stated the City eliminated all of the benefits of the bidding process with the make believe pass - through. Mayor Glickstein stated he cannot come up with one reason why the City should have not followed the ordinance. Brief discussion followed between Mr. Frankel and the City Attorney and the City Attorney agrees there needs to be some changes to the Purchasing Code. The City Attorney stated he supports Mr. Cole's opinion. Mr. Frankel asked with the agreement and the amendment was there other financial and in -kind benefits that the City received from Waste Management. The City Attorney stated Waste Management agreed not to charge the City for the pickup at the bus shelters and they also agreed to give the 12 06/18/13 City the solar powered compactors. Mr. Frankel expressed concern over the cost of this and the fact that if the City is going out to bid and although he recognizes that it is not a law firm in his opinion this is offering professional lobbying services which this Commission just gave direction to put out to bid (Item 9.A.). Mr. Frankel stated he feels this is the same thing and does not support going forward with this. The City Attorney recommended that the Commission sit down with Mr. Cole one -on -one after the motion because he believes it would be more productive where they can get better information from Mr. Cole at that time. Mr. Jacquet stated a comment was made about saving $1.7 million if the City were to stay in this contract and asked if this is accurate. The City Manager stated he does not know where the number came from. Mr. Jacquet stated the City Attorney suggested that if the Commission has questions that they have a one -on -one discussion with Mr. Cole and if that is a possibility he would like to take that opportunity. The City Attorney stated previous Commissions have complained about the complexity and length of the RFP that the City has for garbage collection and suggested to seek Mr. Cole's input on trying to narrow that down to make it clear and address those issues. In addition, the City Attorney emphasized that the City needs to make changes to the Purchasing guidelines. Mayor Glickstein clarified that the City Attorney's suggestion about speaking directly to Mr. Cole individually is after the Commission makes a recommendation to proceed or not proceed. Brief discussion between Commissioner Gray and the City Manager ensued. Mrs. Gray expressed concern over what this is going to cost the City and the City Manager explained that the City will never know the cost. The City Manager stated it is not one of those things where you get an estimate and have the person be bound to plus or minus 10 %. Furthermore, the City Manager stated when you procure professional services you are buying the expertise of a firm; it is not the same as going out and saying "give me the lowest hourly rate." Mayor Glickstein stated as Mr. Chapman and Mr. Cole said they cannot determine these costs in advance and if the Commission goes this direction it is part of the collateral damage of when bad decisions are made for the wrong reasons. Mrs. Petrolia moved to approve to proceed with a Declaratory Judgment action or other causes of action that the attorneys may deem reasonable and to appoint the law firm of Weiss Serota Helfma Pastoriza Cole & Boniske, P.L. as outside counsel at the rate of $215 an hour and that they look at the City's RFP; and also seek their input on the City's Purchasing Policy, seconded by Mr. Jacquet. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — No; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote, Mr. Frankel dissenting. At this point, Commissioner Petrolia left the dais. 13 06/18/13 At this point, the time being 7:41 p.m., the Commission moved to the duly advertised Public Hearings portion of the Agenda. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10.A. ORDINANCE NO. 11 -13: Consider an amendment to Chapter 35, "Employee Policies and Benefits ", Section, 35.105, "Administration by Retirement Committee ", Subsection (C), "Action by Committee ", to remove the requirement that the City Commission must approve changes to the General Employees' Pension Board investment policy. The caption of Ordinance No. 11 -13 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 35, "EMPLOYEE POLICIES AND BENEFITS ", SECTION, "35.105, ADMINISTRATION BY RETIREMENT COMMITTEE ", SUBSECTION (C) "ACTION BY COMMITTEE ", TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY COMMISSION MUST APPROVE CHANGES TO THE INVESTMENT POLICY AS ADOPTED BY THE COMMITTEE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 11 -13 is on file in the City Clerk's office.) A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance and stated this ordinance removes the requirement that if the General Employees' Pension Board makes changes to their investment policy that they would have to come in front of the Commission to have this Commission ratify those changes. Mayor Glickstein declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 11 -13, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Jacquet asked if the General Employees' Pension Board can have five (5) members with no union representation whatsoever. The City Attorney stated it is five (5) and believes there is a requirement that the Director of Finance is one of the members but there are at least 3 or 4 other members that the Commission appoints and there is no requirement on those members. 14 06/18/13 Mrs. Gray moved to adopt Ordinance No. 11 -13 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 11. FIRST READINGS: A. None At this point, the time being 7:44 p.m., the Commission moved back to Item 9.C. of the Regular Agenda. 9.C. PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT IN THOMAS VOLPE v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: Consider a Settlement Offer in the total amount of $150,000.00 in Thomas Volpe v. City of Delray Beach. Staff recommends denial. The City Attorney stated in this case the Plaintiff alleges he hit an orange cone that had been set out by City workers and is claiming that he suffered injuries and initiated a proposal for settlement for $150,000. Staff recommends denial. Mr. Frankel moved to deny the Proposal for Settlement in Thomas Volpe v. City of Delray Beach, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion to DENY the proposal for settlement was passed with a 4 to 0 vote. At this point, Mrs. Petrolia returned to the dais. 9.1). PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT IN ELIZABETH A. BROWN & BARNETT BARRY BROWN v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: Consider a Settlement Offer in the total amount of $215,000.00 in Elizabeth A. Brown & Barnett Barry Brown v. City of Delray Beach. Staff recommends denial. The City Attorney stated this is a lawsuit after a trip and fall on East Atlantic Avenue. Mrs. Brown is doing a proposal for settlement for $200,000 and Mr. Brown has a consortium claim and he did a proposal for settlement for $15,000. Staff recommends denial of both proposals of settlement. Mr. Frankel moved to deny the Proposal for Settlement in Elizabeth A. Brown & Barnett Barry Brown v. City of Delray Beach, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel - Yes. Said motion to DENY the proposal for settlement was passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 9.E. APPOINTMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Appoint four (4) regular members to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to serve four (4) year terms ending July 1, 2017. Based upon the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Petrolia (Seat #1), 15 06/18/13 Commissioner Jacquet (Seat #2), Commissioner Frankel (Seat #3) and Commissioner Gray (Seat #4). Mayor Glickstein stated after the nominations are made and recognized he wants to ask the Commission to open it up for comments regarding these nominees. The City Attorney stated in the memo it states "The City Attorney has determined that anyone who resides within the city limits is eligible for appointment." The City Attorney stated that is actually not the case. The City Attorney stated it is by LDR Section and State Statute "that anyone who resides or is engaged in a business in the CRA area is eligible for appointment." He stated in conversing earlier with the City Clerk's office he had been informed that all of the applicants on the list also meet that criteria. Mrs. Gray stated the Commission has never had discussions or any disapproval of anyone being appointed and asked if there is a reason Mayor Glickstein is requesting this tonight. Mayor Glickstein stated these are important board appointments and feels the public is entitled to hear any questions or comments from the Commission regarding these nominations. The City Attorney stated pursuant to the Local Rules if a Commissioner makes a nomination and that nomination fails to receive a second or does not receive three (3) votes in favor of that then that Commissioner can make a subsequent nomination at this same meeting or defer until the next meeting. Mrs. Petrolia stated she would like to defer her appointment to the next regular meeting of July 9, 2013. Mr. Jacquet moved to appoint Joseph Bernadel as a regular member to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to serve a four (4) year term ending July 1, 2017, seconded by Mr. Frankel. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Prior to the vote, Mr. Jacquet stated Major Bernadel is a long -time resident and worker in town and owns Toussaint L'Ouverture (Charter School), 22 years in the U.S. Army and retired Major; Chief Operating Officer of the charter school and is a man of integrity. Mr. Jacquet stated he believes that Major Bernadel would bring a new perspective and carry forward the mission of the CRA. Mr. Frankel thanked everyone who applied. Mr. Frankel moved to appoint Nelson McDuffie as a regular member to the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to serve a four (4) year term ending July 1, 2017, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Petrolia — No; Mr. Jacquet — No; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein 16 06/18/13 — No. Said motion was DENIED with a 3 to 2 vote, Mr. Frankel and Mrs. Gray dissenting. Commissioner Petrolia read a brief statement into the record supported in other parts of our county about past elected officials applying for volunteer positions. Mr. Jacquet stated he is a Commissioner for the people of Delray Beach. Mr. Jacquet expressed concern about immediate past elected officials being put on such an important board immediately after leaving office; he would not have had that problem had it been a year. He stated the County has a two -year rule and the City has a one -year rule for running for election again and suggested that the Commission implement the one -year rule as opposed to a two -year. Mayor Glickstein stated the County ordinance is sound and is reasoning. Mayor Glickstein stated he respects Mayor McDuffie's many years of public service which is extensive and thankless hard work; however, he feels that the Commission is fortunate to have a list of qualified applicants. Mayor Glickstein deferred to the County rule that this is a bad practice and he does not support the nomination. Mr. Frankel stated he would like to defer his appointment to the next Regular Meeting of July 9, 2013. Mr. Frankel asked for a legal opinion whether the blockage of his fellow Commissioners in essence takes away his right to appoint someone to this board that is duly qualified just because they are following some county policy that is not in effect to this city. Mayor Glickstein clarified that was not the reason for his opinion and reiterated that there are a list of qualified applicants who are perhaps more independent. Mayor Glickstein stated for him personally he would like to get to more value added business in this town. Mrs. Gray moved to reappoint Herman Stevens as a regular member to the Community Redevelopment Agency to serve a four (4) year term ending July 1, 2017, seconded by Mrs. Petrolia. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Jacquet — Yes; Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Prior to the vote, Mrs. Petrolia stated Mr. Stevens has done strong work with the CRA Commission balancing the needs of the various areas of our community and he understands what needs to be done to bring the West Atlantic Avenue Corridor up to the levels it deserves. Mr. Jacquet stated Mr. Stevens has a business in the CRA district and he has represented this community very well. Mr. Jacquet stated he fully supports the nomination of Mr. Stevens. Mayor Glickstein stated Mr. Stevens is an attorney by training and feels this is important skill sets to have on the board. Mayor Glickstein fully supports the nomination. 17 06/18/13 9.G. APPOINTMENT TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: Appoint one (1) regular member to the Downtown Development Authority Board to serve a three (3) year term ending July 1, 2016. Based upon the rotation system, the appointment will be made by Commissioner Petrolia (Seat #1). Mrs. Petrolia moved to reappoint Seabron Smith as a regular member to the Downtown Development Authority Board (DDA) to serve a three (3) year term ending July 1, 2016, seconded by Mrs. Gray. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Frankel — Yes; Mrs. Gray — Yes; Mayor Glickstein — Yes; Mrs. Petrolia — Yes; Mr. Jacquet — Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 12. COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS. 12.A. City Manager The City Manager had no comments or inquiries on non - agenda items. 12.B. City Attorney The City Attorney had no comments or inquiries on non - agenda items. 12.C. City Commission 12.C.1. Mr. Jacquet Mr. Jacquet cheered "Go Heat!" 12.C.2. Mrs. Petrolia Mrs. Petrolia stated she was surprised at the City Attorney's response and apologized for asking the question three times. She stated they are trying to get to the end of this with regard to Waste Management and it looks like they are heading down that track. Mrs. Petrolia stated she appreciates the support of this Commission because she believes it is imperative that we shine good governance into the population and as important as it is to make sure we are watching the dollars of our taxpayers it is equally important that we have trust coming from the public to the public officials. Secondly, Mrs. Petrolia cheered "Go Heat!" 12.C.3. Mrs. Gray Mrs. Gray had no comments or inquiries on non - agenda items. 18 06/18/13 12.C.4. Mr. Frankel Mr. Frankel stated with regard to Mayor Glickstein's comments he stated it is not just tonight but it has been every consecutive meeting where derogatory shots are being taken. He apologized for his abruptness but stated he will not stand for it anymore. Secondly, Mr. Frankel stated he will not be attending the Goal Setting meeting. Mayor Glickstein stated there is a distinction between substantive debate and difference of opinions and the ability to agree to disagree. He stated unanimity on any board or commission is not healthy. Mr. Frankel stated things have been slipping little by little and it is culminated by the blockage of an appointment of his of someone duly qualified who has served this city as a Mayor and Commissioner for six (6) years, served on boards prior to that, and the Delray Little League, etc. Mr. Frankel feels to question Nelson McDuffie's character and for a prepared statement to be written is disgraceful in his view. Mrs. Petrolia stated it is sometimes easier for her to have something prepared to come to the meetings. Mrs. Petrolia stated she is looking specifically at the CRA Board and who can best serve our city on that Board and she did not feel it was Mr. Frankel's selection. Mrs. Petrolia explained that she did not feel it would be proper of her to say "no" without having reasons backing it and that is what she did. Mayor Glickstein stated regarding that discussion he does not recall anything that anybody said that in any way impugned the character of Nelson McDuffie. Mayor Glickstein stated it is a substantive discussion and is up to each individual Commissioner to express their views and reiterated that the Commission can agree to disagree and he does not believe it was personal. 12.C.5. Mayor Glickstein Mayor Glickstein stated in the Goal Setting meetings although the Commission did not get to address many of the goals they did agree that they would work very hard to keep these meetings civil and non - personal. He stated to the extent that his comments were taken out of context, Mayor Glickstein explained that his remarks were not meant to be personal but were about the process. Mayor Glickstein apologized if he offended anyone and stated his comments were not intended to be personal to anybody. There being no further business, Mayor Glickstein declared the meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m. 19 06/18/13 ATTEST: MAYOR City Clerk The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting held on June 18, 2013, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Commission on City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they are not the official Minutes of the City Commission. They will become the official Minutes only after review and approval which may involve some amendments, additions or deletions as set forth above. 20 06/18/13 WHEREAS, The Reverend Canon William H. "Chip" Stokes the Rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church since January 1999, graduated in 1990 with his Masters from The General Theological Seminary; and WHEREAS, he is married to Susan and through this union they have four children and two grandchildren; and WHEREAS, The Reverend Canon Stokes is active in The Episcopal Church at all levels as a parish, diocesan and denominational. Presently he serves on several boards and is a prominent leader in the clergy community. He educates the youth and adults using innovative approaches to strengthen the partnership of the home and the clergy. The Reverend Canon Stokes has volunteered to provide the invocation at the City Commission meeting on numerous occasions; and WHEREAS, for his parishioners and clergy colleagues he bestows sensitive pastoral care for those that seek his guidance and care. The Reverend Canon Stokes is a "change agent" that celebrates diversity and cultural change; and WHEREAS, on May 4h he was elected to be the Twelfth Bishop of the Diocese of New Jersey. He will assume the position of Bishop of New Jersey on August 1, 2013. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARY D. GLICKSTEIN, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, on behalf of the City Commission and the citizens of Delray Beach, do hereby extend our heartfelt thanks and appreciation to: TIDE REVEREND CANON WILLIAM H. "CHIP" STOKES and call upon all present to acknowledge and applaud his longtime outstanding and exemplary dedication, multitudinous contributions and accomplishments to the City of Delray Beach, its residents and this community and wish him well in his future endeavors. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 9h day of July, 2013. CARY D. GLICKSTEIN MAYOR City of Delray Beach Police Officers' and Firefighters' Retirement Plan Overview &Options July 9, 2013 by James W. Linn and Jennifer Cowan Lewis Longman &Walker, P.A. Big Picture • Delray Beach, like many Florida cities, is facing the challenge of increasing pension costs for police officers and firefighters • Pension costs, especially for public safety employees, have risen dramatically in recent years • Local government defined benefit pension plans cost more than anyone expected City Police /Fire Pension Contributions— Last Year (FY2011 -12) $7.41 million (35.2% of payroll) City Police /Fire Pension Contributions— This Year (FY2012 -13) $8.2 million (49.3% of payroll) Year over year increase: $787,000 0 City Police /Fire Pension Contributions— Next Year (FY2013 -14) $9.71 million (57.6 % of payroll) Year over year increase: $1.51 million City Police /Fire Pension Contributions 2008 -2014 HE 9 30 City Contribution 2014 $9.71 M 2013 $8.76 M 2012 $7.41M 2011 $7.1M 2010 $5.4M 2009 $5.6M 2008 $5.2M Increase +87% Average City Cost Per Active Police Officer /Firefighter (FY 2012 -13) $35,184 7 Pension Cost Components 1. Normal Cost — annual cost of current benefits, without unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) payment 2. UAAL Amortization Payment [UAAL = assets minus liabilities =debt] ➢ Actuarial losses ➢ Plan improvements ➢ Changes in actuarial assumptions &methods 0 Cost Components — FY 2012 -13 Police /Fire Pension Plan Normal Cost $4.6M UAAL Amort, $5.OM 9 Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 2007-2012 Date UAAL 10/1/12 $ 92.8M 10/1/11 $ 91.5M 10/1/10 $ 75.4M 10/1/09 $ 64.7M 10/1/08 $ 49.1M 10/1/07 $ 33.6M %Increase +276% 10 Why Have Unfunded Liabilities Grown Even in the "Good" Years? The unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) increases as a result of: • Actuarial losses • Assumption &Method Changes • Benefit Enhancements The Delray Beach Police and Fire Pension Plan had actuarial losses in 8 of the last 10 years. Pension Legacy Cost -The UAAL Issue • Total unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) as of 10/1/12 was $92.8 million. • Bylaw the City is responsible for funding the UAAL — even if employees are transferred to other employers, and even if the current pension plans are closed, frozen or terminated. 12 Impact of the 2008 Market Meltdown • Most public pension plans had investment losses of between 10% and 15% for the year ending 9/30/08. • The Delray Beach pension plans had investment losses (based on market value of assets) of (- 17.68%) for the Police and Fire for year ending 9/30/08. What does this mean for the Delray Beach Police /Fire Pension Plan? 13 4 Year Smoothing - Example • Assumed rate of return = 8.4% (now 8.0 %) • Actual return =minus 17.68% (for FYE 9/30/08) • Actuarial loss =minus 26.08% 26.08/4 = 6.52 • Minus 6.52% recognized each year for the next 4 years • Result: City contributions will increase unless actual return exceeds 14.5% (8.2% + 6.52 %) 14 Investment Return Market &Actuarial (2008 — 2012) FYE Market Actuarial Assumed 10/1/08 -17,68% 13% 8.4 10/1/09 - 1.72% -1,2% 83% 10/1/10 8.26% - 13% 8.2% 10/1/11 1.20% - 3.0% 8.1% 10/1/12 15.95% 5.71% 8.0% 5 Year Avg. 1.2% 03% 8.2% Funded Percentage — Police /Fire Plan (10/1/12) Funded Percentage = Actuarial Value of Assets /Actuarial Accrued Liability Assets = $123.5 million Liabilities = $216.3 million Funded Percentage = 57.09% 16 FSU Collins Institute Report November 2011 • Analyzed pension plans in Florida's 100 largest cities • Assigned letter grades based on plan funded ratios and other indicators: ➢ A — 90% or better ➢ B — 80% to 90% ➢ C — 70% to 80% ➢ D — 60% to 70% ➢ F —below 60% 17 Key Benefit Provisions • Formula: Members hired before 4/9/13 -- 3.50 % x AFC x yrs of service for 20 or more yrs of service (2.5% for less than 20 yrs service); maximum benefit = 87.5 %; Members hired on or after 4/9/13: 3.0% x AFC x yrs of service for 20 or more yrs of service (2.5% for less than 20 yrs service); maximum benefit = 75 %; [FRS = 3.0% x AFC x years of service] • Average Final Comp: highest 3 yrs of salary [FRS = highest 8 years] • Normal retirement: age 55 w /10 yrs service or 20 yrs of service regardless of age [FRS: age 60 w/8 yrs service; or 30 yrs servicE regardless of age] • Early retirement: 50 w /10 yrs of service; 3% benefit reduction for each year early retirement precedes normal retirement [FRS: after 8 yrs service; 5% benefit reduction for each year early retirement precedes normal retirement w W V O IOL O O L NOOO O U C O .E E O U U C: O O +� E Q Q E E2 0-0 v C: .N cn .. C: O ca �. �E Q E O > V O • E -+ i 0 II ca `n N N i Q C: fa � •- � Q � C: �- O o r o tj a E O •O . _ Q Q O E E II i r ca � — 0 Ln i • 4— O i L � >a J 'C: O C: V un N C: o bn �_ N X 'U — C: Q �--+ N ,;� E Ev E �� U� Ln o >- 4-J M � C: � • U i Ln CU Mo v� O ca C: (2) >% o ! II Q N c I= J Ln LL V r-I • ri r\i L ca Q) LIn m J O V a CC LL O N Q E o 4- C: O O o =3 O O1 4-) .. C: O Ou O }+ Q O E v � � M _O II Q W u • 4 'r, , I O Q O N a O N O Q Q N E > O r Ch. 175 / 185 Premium Taxes • Chapters 175 & 185, F.S. provide for a rebate of the state excise tax on property and casualty insurance premiums to cities that have firefighter and police pension plans. • The premium tax monies must be used exclusively for fire and police pensions, and the local pension plan must comply with the requirements of Chapters 175 & 185. • Under current law the City will lose premium tax monies if: ➢ The current plan is closed or terminated; or The City joins FRS; or ➢Current plan benefits are reduced below minimum benefits required by Chapter 175/185 (unless premium taxes above 1998 level exceed value of minimum Ch. 175/185 benefits. 20 Ch. 175/185 Premium Taxes • In 2012 the City received a total of $1.84 million in Ch. 175/185 premium tax revenues. • The City is able to use $ to reduce the City's required pension contributions (per 1993 Agreement). • Premium tax revenues in excess of $504,922 must be used for a pension COLA above the 1.0% COLA guaranteed by the City, and for inclusion of police overtime in pensionable compensation (now 25 hours). • The 1993 Agreement was nullified by a 2010 court decision, but the terms of the Agreement remain in effect until a new agreement is negotiated. Ch. 175/185 Premium Taxes Before 8/14/12 Naples Letter • Premium tax revenues above 1998 amount must be used first to meet Ch. 185 minimum benefits; then for "extra benefits" • Premium tax revenues that may be used to reduce City annual required contribution = "adjusted base" or "frozen amount" • Premium tax revenues in excess of "frozen amount" must be used for extra benefits once minimum benefits are met (or held in reserve) • If any benefit is reduced below 1999 level, plan is not eligible for future premium taxes Ch. 175/185 Premium Taxes After 8/14/12 Naples Letter • If plan meets Ch. 175/185 minimum benefits it is eligible for premium taxes • Benefits may be reduced below 1999 level without loss of premium taxes • Benefits may be reduced below Ch. 175/185 minimums if value of benefits equals or exceeds "additional premium taxes" (amount in excess of 1998 amount) 23 2011 Florida Retirement System Changes Changes for current members: • 3% employee contribution eff. 7/1/11 (was zero) • No COLA for service after 7/1/11 (was 3 %) Changes for new hires: • Delayed normal retirement age ➢ Regular: age 65 or 33 years (was age 62 or 30 years) ➢ Special Risk: age 60 or 30 years (was age 55 or 25 yrs) • Average final compensation: highest 8 years (was high 5) • 8 year vesting period* (was 6 years) • DROP interest = 1.3% for members who enter DROP after 7/1/11 (was 6.5 %) ME Florida Retirement System Employer Contribution Rates 2012 - 2013 Regular 4.91% Special Risk 14.1% 5.18% 7.0% 14.9% 19.11% Senior M n age e t m n 6.27% 6.49% 18.36% a Above rates include the additional 1.14% health insurance subsidy contribution and administrative /education fee 25 2013 Retirement Legislation Passed: • SB 534 — Public Pension Plan Disclosure • HB 1810 —FRS Contribution Rates Did Not Pass: • SB 458 / HB 1399 — Police &Firefighter Pension Plans • HB 7011— Florida Retirement System 26 2013 Legislation SB 534 — Public Retirement Plan Disclosure — passed. Creates new reporting requirements for local government defined benefit pension plans. • Long -term funded ratio of the plan calculated in compliance with GASB 67 and 68, including the market value of plan assets, the value of the plan's actuarial liabilities, and the amount of any unfunded accrued liability; • Dollar value of any unfunded accrued liability; • Number of months or years for which the current market value of assets are adequate to sustain the payment of expected retirement benefits; and 2013 Legislation SB 534 (cont.) • Recommended contributions to the plan stated as an annual dollar value and a percentage of valuation payroll, using actuarial assumptions and cost methods specified in the legislation: — Entry Age Normal actuarial cost method. — An assumed rate of return two percent less than that plan's assumed rate of return. — RP -2000 Mortality Tables — Asset valuation method -- market value less the value of DROP accounts; — Actuarial accrued liabilities, excluding the value of DROP accounts; and — All other assumptions and methods used by the local plan in its latest valuation. W 2013 Legislation SB 534 (cont.) • Plan sponsor must publish the required information, on any website that contains budget or actuarial information relating to the plan. Local government plans also must provide the information on any municipal website when tentative budgets are published. • Required information for reporting purposes only — not for determining plan funding requirements. 29 2013 Legislation HB 1810 -- FRS Employer Contribution Rates Effective 7/1/13 -- passed: • Regular Class -7.0% (was 5.18%) • Special Risk: 19.11 (was 14.9 %) • Senior Mgt — 18.36% (was 6.49%) • Local Elected Officers — 33.08% (was 10.23 %) • DROP —11.64 (was 4.33%) 30 2013 Legislation SB 458 / HB 1399 — Police &Firefighter Pension Plans —did not pass • Would have revised rules on use of Ch. 175/185 premium tax revenues • Would have required a greater portion of premium taxes to be used for enhanced benefits for police officers and firefighters 2013 Legislation HB 7011— Florida Retirement System —did not pass • would have closed FRS defined benefit pension plan to new members, and required all new hires to participate in defined contribution plan • passed House; defeated in Senate on 22 -18 vote 32 What Are the Options to Reduce City Pension Costs? • No "silver bullet" • Keep current City pension plan, but: ➢ Reduce benefits, and /or ➢Increase employee contributions • Terminate, freeze or close current pension plan, and set up lower cost plan 33 Pension Reform Options • Join FRS • Set up Defined Contribution (DC) plan • Reduce Benefits for New Hires • Reduce Benefits for All Employees • Hybrid DB + DC Plan • Increase Employee Contributions and /or Cost - Sharing 34 Key Concepts • "Close" — existing plan closed to new members; current members stay in existing plan until they retire or leave the city; future employees join new plan. • "Freeze" - accrued benefits of current employees in existing plan "frozen" and paid out at retirement; all current and future employees join new plan. • "Terminate" — existing plan liquidated; accrued benefits paid out to plan members; City responsible for any deficit; all current and future employees join new plan. 35 Legal Guidelines • Changes in retirement benefits and employee contributions are mandatory subjects of collective bargaining. • Accrued pension benefits (benefits earned in the past) cannot be reduced or taken away. • Future benefits can be reduced for current employees who have not reached retirement status. • City is ultimately responsible for unfunded pension liabilities, even if current plans are closed, frozen or terminated. 36 . Join FRS for New Hires Advantages Reduced cost over time (FRS rates going up) Standardized FRS benefits 3% employee contribution Portability — easier for City to attract employees from other FRS agencies Gets City out of pension business (eventually) Disadvantages • No immediate savings -- may take many years to achieve cost savings; City still must pay off current plan liabilities • Lose premium tax revenues immediately • Portability — City employees can move to another FRS employer and take their pension with them • State legislature sets benefits and contributions 0 0 0 0 0 Join FRS for All Employees Advantages Reduced city cost in shorter time (but FRS rates are going up) Standardized FRS benefits 3% employee contribution Portability — easier for City to attract employees from other FRS agencies Gets City out of pension business (eventually) Disadvantages • Current City pension plans must be terminated or frozen • City still must pay off current plan liabilities • Lose premium tax revenues immediately • Portability — City employees can move to another FRS employer and take their pension with them • State legislature sets benefits and contributions M Reduce Benefits for New Hires Advantages (2 Tier Plan) Disadvantages • Reduced cost over time • No immediate savings -- • Current employees keep may take many years to current benefits achieve cost savings • Can be designed to keep • Creates lower level of premium tax revenues benefits for new hires • New hires can be expected to press for greater benefits • City stays in pension business 39 Reduce Future Benefits for All Employees Advantages Disadvantages • Immediate cost savings 0 Reduces future benefits for • Reduces UAAL current employees • Same benefits for all (employees keep what they employees going forward have already earned) • City stays in pension business M 0 0 0 0 0 0 Defined Contribution Plan Advantages Disadvantages Predictable employer costs • Employees bear investment risk City does not bear 0 Possible that DC benefits will investment risk run out while employee is still Appeals to younger, mobile alive employees 0 No inflation protection (COLA) Portability — DC account Portability— employees can balance may be "rolled over" easily move to another to an IRA or other retirement employer and take their DC plan balance with them Lower admin. Costs Loss of premium tax revenues No actuarial liabilities 41 Hybrid Plan • Hybrid plan results in sharing of risk and cost between the City and employees • Variable Benefit — benefit not fixed or guaranteed — automatically adjusts as City contribution increases or decreases. • DC plan on top of DB plan ➢ DB plan provides guaranteed benefit DC plan reduces risk and cost to City 42 Pension Plan Comparison Item Multiplier Salary Final Avg. Comp. Normal Ret. Early Ret. Vesting COLA Employee Contribution Delray Beach PF Ch. 175/185 FRS 3.5%/3.0% 2.0% 3.0% Base pay* Base Pay W -2 Best 3 yrs Best 5 yrs Best 8 yrs Age 55 w /10 yrs Age 55 w/ Age 60 or or 20 yrs service 10 yrs or 30 & out regardless of age Age 52 w/25 yrs Age 50 Age 50 After 8 yrs 3% reduction 3% reduction 5% reduction 5 years 10 yrs 8 yrs 2.5% per year None None 9% 5% 3% PENSION REFORM: WHAT FLORIDA CITIES HAVE DONE Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Ft. Lauderdale (2007) - General • Closed general employee defined benefit pension plan • Set up defined contribution plan for new hires • More thanFlorida cities have replaced defined benefit pension plans with defined contribution plans —but only for general employees 47 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Delray Beach (2010) — General Employees • Final average comp period extended from 2 to 5 years • Normal retirement date delayed to age 62 (was 60) • Employee contributions increased from 2.5% to 3.05% • Standard benefit changed to single life annuity (was 60% joint & survivor annuity) • Line of duty disability benefit reduced from 75% to 60% Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Miami (2010) — Pension Changes (All Employees)* [Financial urgency declared —City Commission adopted wage and benefit reductions 8/31/10]: • Later normal retirement age (to "Rule of 70" with min. age 50 from Rule of 64/68) • 5 year average final compensation (was highest year) • Reduce benefit formula for future service (to 3% from 3.5% after 15 yrs) • Normal form of benefit: life and 10 years certain (PF); life annuity (General) • $100,000 cap on benefits * litigation pending Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Coral Gables (2011) — General [Settlement approved by union members and City Commission in July 2011] • Pension benefits frozen; reduced benefits for future service • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ Reduced multiplier for future service (from 3.0 % to 2.25 %) ➢ Increase employee pension contribution by 5% (to 10 %) ➢ 5 year final averaging period (phased in from 3 year average) ➢ Delay retirement age to age 65 or Rule of 85 (from age 52 or Rule of 70) ➢ Reduced disability benefits • Future pension cost increases shared by City and employees • City may establish DC plan in the future for new hires. 50 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Hollywood (2011) — All Employees [City declared financial urgency; pension changes approved by referendum on 9/13/11]* • Pension benefits frozen for all employees • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ Delayed normal retirement date (Police /Fire -age 55 w /10 yrs or age 52 w/25 yrs; General —age 65 or age 62 w /25yrs or age 60 w /30yrs) ➢ Reduced benefit multiplier (2.5% - police /fire; 2.0% - general) ➢ 5 year final averaging period (was 3 years) ➢ No COLA for future service ➢ No DROP * Litigation pending — police /fire 51 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Naples (2012) — Police [Agreement with FOP ratified 10/11; pension changes implemented in March 2012] • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ Benefits frozen ➢ Multiplier reduced from 3.63% to 3.0% ➢ Final averaging period lengthened from 3 to 8 years ➢ COLA eliminated (was 3% per year from age 55 to 62) ➢ Salary reduced to exclude leave payouts ➢ Normal retirement delayed for future employees to age 60 with 8 yrs service or 30 yrs service (was age 50 or 25 yrs service) ➢ New DROP plan —1.3% interest on DROP account 52 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Town of Palm Beach (2012) —All Employees • Pension benefits frozen • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ "Hybrid Plan " - Defined contribution plan on top of DB plan ➢ Reduced multiplier for future service under DB Plan (to 1.25 %) ➢ Delayed normal retirement date (from age 50 with 10 yrs service or 20 yrs service for police &fire, and age 55 or 30 yrs service for general; to age 65 for all employees (but DC plan distributions may begin earlier) ➢ Automatic joint & survivor annuity replaced with life annuity (member may purchase survivor benefit) ➢ No COLA ➢ Town has withdrawn from Ch. 175 & 185 53 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Sarasota (2012) — Police [City Commission took final action to resolve impasse on 10/17/11; implemented July 2012] • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ 5 year final averaging period (was 3 years) ➢ Reduce COLA from 3.2% beginning one year after retirement to 1.0% beginning at age 65 ➢ Overtime pay included in pensionable earnings limited to 300 hours per year ➢ Standard form of benefit: 10 years certain & life (was 67% automatic spouse survivor benefit for life of spouse) ➢ Reduce DROP interest to 2.0% (was 6.5 %) 54 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Palm Beach Gardens (2012) —Fire [Changes agreed to by IAFF and implemented in 2012] Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ Redefine pensionable compensation to base pay (was total comp.) ➢ Reduce COLA from 3.0% at age 55 to 1.5% for future service ➢ 75% maximum benefit cap (was 100 %) ➢ Premium tax transfer from share plan - $507K ➢ First year savings (reduction in City contribution): $1.15 million 55 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Palm Beach Gardens (2012) — Police [Changes imposed by City Council and implemented in 2012] Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ Reduce multiplier from 3.5% to 2.75% for future service ➢ Redefine pensionable compensation to base pay (was total comp.) ➢ Eliminate COLA (was based on actuarial gains) ➢ 75% maximum benefit cap (was 100%) ➢ Defer normal retirement to age 59 with 10 years (was 20 and out) ➢ First year savings (reduction in City contribution): $1.1 million 56 Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done Coral Gables (2012) — Police [City Commission took final action to resolve impasse on 9/11/12] • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ 5 year final averaging period (was 3 years) ➢ Reduce multiplier to 2.5% after 10 years of service (was 3%) ➢ Reduce definition of pensionable earnings to exclude all OT and leave payouts ➢ Defer normal retirement date to age 55 w /10 years of service or 25 years of service regardless of age (was "Rule of 70 ") ➢ Eliminate early retirement ➢ 5% Reduction in pay (in lieu of increase in member pension contribution Pension Reform: What Florida Cities Have Done City of St Pete Beach (2013) — Firefighters • Pension benefits frozen • Pension changes for current and future employees: ➢ "Hybrid Plan " - Defined contribution plan on top of DB plan ➢ Reduced multiplier for future service under DB Plan (to 1.25 %) ➢ Delayed normal retirement date to age 60 with 10 yrs of service or 30 yrs of service ➢ Vesting: 10 years ➢ No COLA ➢ No DROP ➢ Employee contribution: 3% M Questions? 59 YOU ARE INVITED To ATTEND A MIDSUMMER EDUCATION FORUM Wednesday, July 24, 2013 from 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm At Village Academy Elementary School Cafeteria 400 SW 126' Avenue, Delray Beach PANEL Maria Sachs, State Senator ........ .............. ............................... spe aker Jennie Prior Brown, School Board .................... ........................speaker Janet Meeks, Education Coordinator, City of Delray Beach ..............speaker Al Jacquet, Vice Mayor, Delray Beach and Mentor .....................speaker Guarn Sims, Principal, Village Academy Elementary School......... panelist Marcia. Andrews, School Board .............. ............................... panelist C. Ron Allen, Mentor KOPMN .............. ............................... panelist Vern Crawford, Education Lobbyist ........ ............................... panelist TOPICS New legislation and its impact on students, families and the community. Causes for concern including, suspension and graduation rates. (update). Grade level reading initiative. Mentoring programs /opportunities. The presentation will be followed by questions, concerns and suggestions from the audience. Handouts from the Palm Beach School Board are available for parents to help them prepare for the school year. Light refreshments will be served. *vtppUIE ppc,�� o- m` o _ � n Memorandum June 3, 2413 TO: Florida Municip Officials FROM: Lynn Tiptoe Director, Membership Development SUBJECT: Copies of FLC 2013 -14 Municipal Directory Enclosed is a copy of the Florida League of Cities 2012 Florida Municipal Directory, which is a listing of the 410 municipalities in the state.. We appreciate your municipality's help with keeping this information up to date, and also appreciate your membership in the Florida League of Cities. Please let us know when there are changes to your city's listing. Updates are published in the League's bimonthly magazine, Quality Cities, in the "Report from City Hall" section. To view the online version of this publication, please visit the League website at: htt ://wr ww. floridalea,ueofcities .com/Director .as x If we can be of assistance to your municipality in any way, please feel free to contact us. There is a list of member services with staff contacts at the back of the directory. To speak with a member of our staff, call 1 -(800) 342 -8112. Or, feel free to call and ask for me or another staff person in the Membership Development Department. We encourage you to also visit our website and Facebook page to learn more about our services and programs. Enclosure 301 South Bronough Street ♦ Post Office Box 1757 ♦ Tallahassee, FL 32302 -1757 Telephone (850) 222 -9684 ♦ Fax (850) 222 -3806 ♦ Website:www.flcities.com MEMORANDUM 'A Z TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman. Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 RESOLUTION NO. 15 -13 (TAX EXEMPTION REQUEST FOR ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS/ 124 NORTH SWINTON AVENUE) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission is reconsideration of a tax exemption request for improvements to the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, in the Old School Square Historic District. The subject exemption was previously approved by the City Commission via Resolution 07 -12, and forwarded to the Palm Beach County Planning and Zoning Department in November 2012. However, the item was not placed on an agenda for approval by the Board of County Commissioners in a timely manner. Therefore, the County has requested that the City Commission reconsider the item, and revise the applicable tax exemption dates from 2013 -2022 to 2014 -2023. BACKGROUND The subject property originally consisted of a circa 1910 frame vernacular style, two story structure, converted from a single - family residence to retail use in 1993, as well as a circa 1983 detached garage. The property is designated as contributing to the Old School Square Historic District. At its meeting of November 18, 2009, the HPB approved a Class III Site Plan Modification for the demolition of a circa 1983 one - story, detached garage, and construction of a two -story accessory structure containing approximately 1,000 square feet for additional office space. No additional on -site parking spaces were constructed as the City Commission previously approved a request for four (4) in- lieu of parking spaces at its meeting of May 19, 2009. ANALYSIS The improvements (1,000 square foot accessory structure), both interior and exterior, are complete, and a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) was issued on July 15, 2011. The HPB considered the tax exemption request at their January 18, 2012 meeting and recommended approval of the Ad Valorem Tax Exemption Application Parts 1 and 2. The tax exemption will apply only to the difference in assessed value after the eligible property improvements. The request contains qualifying improvements under LDR Section 4.5. 1 (J)(5)(a) and is compliant with the City's Land Development Regulations, the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The expenditures associated with the qualifying improvements total approximately $380,000. The tax exemption will be limited to the increase in assessed value (as determined by the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser) and result in an abatement of taxes on the City and County portions for a period of ten years from the date of exemption approval. If approved, the request will be forwarded to the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's Office and the Palm Beach County Planning and Zoning Department for recordation and final appraisal of the improvements. Additional background and an analysis of the request are provided in the attached HPB Memorandum Staff Report. RECOMMENDATION Approve the tax exemption request, "Application Request for Review of Completed Work" for site improvements to the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Sections 4.5. 1 (M)(5)(a)(iii) and (M)(5)(b) and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. RESOLUTION NO. 15 -13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, GRANTING AN AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTION TO ISABELLA I. INVESTMENTS, LLC. FOR THE HISTORIC REHABILITATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 124 NORTH SWINTON AVENUE, AS FURTHER DESCRIBED HEREIN; DETERMINING THAT THE COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION (LDR) SECTION 4.5.1(M)(5); PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Program of the City of Delray Beach, Florida (the "City "), is designed to preserve, protect, enhance, and perpetuate resources which represent distinctive and significant elements of the City's historical, cultural, social, economic, political, archaeological, and architectural identity; and /or serve as visible reminders of the City's culture and heritage; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Florida amended the Florida Constitution, Article VII, Section 3, to authorize counties and municipalities to grant a partial ad valorem tax exemption to owners of historic properties for improvements to such properties which are the result of the restoration, renovation, or rehabilitation of the historic properties; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach City Commission has approved an ordinance providing for an ad valorem tax exemption for the restoration, renovation, and /or improvement of historic properties (Ordinance No. 50 -96); and WHEREAS, the ad valorem tax exemption is one means of offering a financial incentive to increase interest in restoring, renovating, and improving the City's historic structures; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 50 -96 provides that on completion of the review of a Final Application/Request for Review of Completed Work, the Historic Preservation Planner shall present such Final Application in a regularly scheduled meeting of the Historic Preservation Board and shall recommend that the Historic Preservation Board grant or deny the exemption; and WHEREAS, the property owners filed a Preconstruction Application and Completed Work Application for review by the Historic Preservation Board on January 18, 2012, of an ad valorem tax exemption for the historic restoration, renovation, and improvement of the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, and the Historic Preservation Board determined that the completed improvements were consistent with LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(5) and recommended approval to grant an ad valorem City tax exemption to Isabella I. Investments, LLC. for the restoration, renovation, and improvement to the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Commission hereby determines that the completed improvements to the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, as described in the application for ad valorem tax exemption filed with the City, were consistent with LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(5). Section 2. The City Commission hereby approves an ad valorem tax exemption to the property owner, Isabella I. Investments, LLC., for a ten year period, commencing on 1/1/14, from that portion of ad valorem taxes levied on the increase in assessed value, between the years 1/1/14 — 12/31/23, resulting from the renovation, restoration, and rehabilitation of the property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, which property is legally described as follows and which improvements are described in HP13 Certificate of Appropriateness No. 2009 -197: South 4.5' of Lot 11 and the North 70.5' of Lot 12, Block 59, Town of Delray Section 3. Prior to the ad valorem tax exemption described herein being effective, Isabella I. Investments, LLC, shall execute and record a restrictive covenant in a form established by the State of Florida, Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, requiring the qualifying improvements be maintained during the period that the tax exemption is granted. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the City's Historical Preservation Planner. Section 4. This resolution shall take effect in accordance with law. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on the day of , 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk MAYOR 2 Res No. 15 -13 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Applicant: Isabella 1. Investments, LLC Property Address: 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: January 18, 2012 File No.: 2012-063 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action requested of the Board is to approve the final Tax Exemption application for the new construction of an accessory structure on a contributing property located at 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.5.1(M). BACKGROUNDIPROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of the south 4.5' of Lot 11 and the north 70.5' of Lot 12, Block 59, Town of Delray and is zoned OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District). A circa 1910 frame vernacular style, two story structure was converted from a single- family residence to retail use in 1993, Located on the west side of North Swinton Avenue, between NW 1St and NW 2nd Streets, the property is classified as contributing within the Old School Square Historic District. At its meeting of November 18, 2009, the HPB approved a Gass III Site Plan Modification for the demolition of a circa 1983 one - story, detached garage, and construction of a two -story accessory structure containing approximately 1,000 square feet for additional office space. No additional on -site parking spaces were constructed as the City Commission approved a request for four (4) in -lieu of parking spaces at its meeting of May 19, 2009. At its meeting of July 7, 2010, the HPB recommended approval of a tax exemption for alterations to the contributing structure consisting of the replacement of all of the wood windows, installation of impact rated, white, aluminum windows, removal of vinyl siding, restoration of original wood siding, as well as significant restoration improvements on the interior including all trim work, floors, railings, stairs, etc.. The tax exemption was further processed and accepted by the Board of County Commissioners; it will expire on December 31, 2020. The applicant is now before the Board to request review of the Tax Exemption Application for the new construction of the accessory structure. Landscaping associated with this project is not permitted as a legitimate expenditure as it is not interpreted as a "site improvement," pursuant to the Florida Administrative Code 1A -38. Based on State regulations, an Ad Valorem Tax Exemption can be approved for a project before, during, or after it has been undertaken. The applicant therefore requests consideration of the final ad valorem tax exemption as the project is complete. AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTION LDR Section 4.5.1(M), Tax Exemption for Historic Properties Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(1), Tax Exemption for Historic Properties, the City Commission hereby creates a tax exemption for the restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of qualifying historic ', 24 .'forth Swinton Avenue; Final Tax Exen. i Application 2012 -063 HPB Meeting January 18, 2012; Page 2 of 5 properties designated. Qualifying properties shall be exempt from that portion of ad valorem taxation levied by the City of Delray Beach on 100% of the increase in assessed value resulting from any renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the qualifying property made on or after the effective date of this ordinance. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(2), clarifies that the exemption does not apply to the following: (a) Taxes levied for payment of bonds; (b) Taxes authorized by a vote of the electors pursuant to Section 9(b) or Section 12, Article 7 of the Florida Constitution; or (c) Personal property. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(3), explains the duration of the exemption: (a) The exemption period shall be for ten (10) years, beginning January 1st following the year in which final approval is given by the City Commission and the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser has been instructed to provide such exemption. However, the City Commission shall have the discretion to set a lesser term. (b) The term of the exemption shall be specified in the resolution approving the exemption and shall continue regardless of any changes in the authority of the City to grant such exemption or change in ownership of the property. To retain an exemption, the historic character of the property and the improvements which qualified the property for an exemption must be maintained in their historic state over the period for which the exemption was granted. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(5)(a -b), provides the parameters for qualifying properties and improvements. The subject property qualifies as it is considered contributing within the Del -Ida Park Historic District. The following, (5)(b), identifies qualifying improvements: (b) For an improvement to a historic property to qualify the property for an exemption, the improvement must: (i) be consistent with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as amended; (ii) be determined an improvement by the Historic Preservation Board as established in rules adopted by the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, FAC 1A -38, as amended which defines a real property improvement as changes in the condition of real property brought about by the expenditure of labor and money for the restoration, renovation, or rehabilitation of such property. Improvements shall include, but are not limited to: modifications, repairs, or additions to the principal contributing building and its associated accessory structures (i.e. a garage, cabana, guest cottage, storage /utility structures, swimming pools), whether existing or new, as long as the new construction is compatible with the historic character of the building and site in terms of size, scale, massing, design, and materials, and preserves the historic relationship between a building or buildings, landscape features, and open space. The exemption does not apply to improvements made to non- contributing principal buildings or their non - contributing accessory structures. (iii) be consistent with Section 4.5.1(E), "Development Standards'; of the City's Land Development Regulations; and (iv) include, as part of the overall project, visible improvements to the exterior of the structure. STAFF COMMENT: The project meets criteria (i) and (ii) through previous approval by the Board of the associated improvements outlined above which constituted its compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as well as the rules of Florida Administrative Code 1A -38, promulgated by the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources. The development project meets criterion (iii) per the COA approval which applied the LDR Development Standards in the assessment of the proposal. Finally, the project meets criterion (iv) as the project encompasses visible improvements to the exterior of the building and related property. i24 North Swinton Avenue; Final Tax Exert';, i Application 2012 -063 HPB Meeting January 18, 2012; Page 3 of 5 LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(7), Application for Exemption, provides that Part 1, Construction Application, may be submitted before, during, or after qualifying improvements are initiated, and Part 2, the Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work, shall be submitted upon completion of the qualifying improvements. STAFF COMMENT: The qualifying improvements were completed prior to submittal of Part 2 as the Certificate of Occupancy was issued on July 15, 2011. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(8)(a), Part 1, Construction Application, requires that the submitted application contain information concerning the estimated cost of the qualifying improvement and be accompanied by a copy of the most recent tax bill from the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser for the property. STAFF COMMENT: The submitted estimated cost of the toal project is noted as $379,699. The historic exemption value resulting from the improvements will be determined by the Property Appraiser's office. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(9), Review of Construction Application by the Historic Preservation Board, requires that the Historic Preservation Board review the Construction Application within 60 days of the Historic Preservation Planner's determination of eligibility, and, that if Part 1 of the Construction Application is submitted after the project has been completed, the application must be submitted within 18 months from the date of issuance of a CO. Further, if the HPB determines that the work as proposed is a qualifying improvement and is in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the Construction Application and, if applicable, the COA shall be approved by the HPB. However, if the HPB determines that the work as proposed is not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), corrective measures shall be prescribed by the Board. STAFF COMMENT: As previously noted, the property received a Certificate of Occupancy on July 15, 2011 which was within eighteen (18) months of the application submittal date. Therefore, the project is eligible for review and, if the Board deems the request to be in compliance, it is recommended that the application be approved. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(10)(a -c), Part 2, Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work, provides criteria for review of the final application: (a) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work is a qualifying improvement and is in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the Board shall approve the Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work and the Historic Preservation Planner shall issue a written order to the applicant. (b) The Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work shall be accompanied by documentation of the total expenditures of the qualifying improvements. Appropriate documentation may include, but is not limited to, paid contractor's bills, AIA Forms 702 -704, canceled checks, copies of invoices, and an approved building permit application listing the cost of work to be performed. Upon the receipt of a Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work and all required supporting documentations, the Historic Preservation Board shall conduct a review at a regularly scheduled public meeting to determine whether or not the completed improvements are in compliance with the work described in the Construction Application, approved amendments, if any, and Section 4.5.1(E). After the above mentioned review, the Historic Preservation Board shall recommend that the City Commission grant or deny the exemption. (c) If the Historic Preservation Board determines that the work as completed is either not a qualifying improvement or is not in compliance with the review standards contained in Section 4.5.1(E), the applicant shall be advised that the Final Application has been denied. The Historic 124 North Swinton Avenue; Final Tax Exerr, i Application 2012 -063 HPB Meeting January 18, 2012; Page 4 of 5 Preservation Planner shall provide a written summary of the reasons for the determination to the applicant. STAFF COMMENT: The "Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work," Part 2, has been submitted as the work is complete. The City's Community Improvement Department has confirmed that a Certificate of Occupancy CO was issued for the property on July 15, 2011. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(12), Approval by the City Commission, notes that the approved Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work by the Historic Preservation Board shall be placed by resolution on the agenda of the City Commission for approval. The resolution of the City Commission approving the Final Application shall provide the name of the owner of the property, the property address and legal description, a recorded restrictive covenant as provided in Section 4.5.1(M)(13) in the official records of Palm Beach County as a condition of receiving the exemption, and the effective dates of the exemption, including the expiration date. STAFF COMMENT: Should the HPB make a recommendation to approve the subject request, the item will be placed on the February 7, 2012 City Commission agenda for approval and subsequently forwarded to the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's Office and the Planning and Zoning Department for recordation. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(13), Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant, explains the covenant required in order to qualify for the exemption: (a) To qualify for an exemption, the applicant must sign and return the Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant with the Final Application /Request for Review of Completed Work. The covenant as established by the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, shall be in a form approved by the City of Delray Beach City Attorney's Office and applicable for the term for which the exemption is granted and shall require the character of the property and qualifying improvements to be maintained during the period that the exemption is granted. (b) On or before the effective date of the exemption, the owner of the property shall have the covenant recorded in the official records of Palm Beach County, Florida, and shall cause a certified copy of the recorded covenant to be delivered to the City's Historic Preservation Planner. Such covenant shall be binding on the current property owner, transferees, and their heirs, assigns and successors. A violation of the covenant shall result in the property owner being subject to the payment of the differences between the total amount of the taxes which would have been due in March of each of the previous years in which the covenant or agreement was in effect had the property not received the exemption and the total amount of taxes actually paid in those years, plus interest on the difference calculated as provided in Sec. 212.12(3), Florida Statutes. LDR Section 4.5.1(M)(16)(a -d), Revocation Proceedings, provides guidelines to revocation of the tax exemption upon violation of the recorded covenant. (a) The Historic Preservation Board may initiate proceedings to revoke the ad valorem tax exemption provided herein, in the event the applicant, or subsequent owner or successors in interest to the property, fails to maintain the property according to the terms, conditions and standards of the Historic Preservation Exemption Covenant. (b) The Historic Preservation Planner shall provide notice to the current owner of record of the property and the Historic Preservation Board shall hold a revocation hearing in the same manner as in Section 4.5. 1 (M)(10), and make a recommendation to the City Commission. (c) The City Commission shall review the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board and make a determination as to whether the tax exemption shall be revoked. Should the City Commission determine that the tax exemption shall be revoked, a written resolution revoking the exemption and notice of penalties as provided in Paragraph 8 of the covenant shall be provided to the owner, the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser, and filed in the official records of Palm Beach County. 124 North Swinton Avenue; Final Tax Exen., .n Application 2012 -063 HP13 Meeting January 18, 2012; Page 5 of 5 (d) Upon receipt of the resolution revoking the tax exemption, the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser shall discontinue the tax exemption on the property as of January 9st of the year following receipt of the notice of revocation. The Sections noted above regarding the "Restrictive Covenant" and "Revocation Proceedings" are provided to demonstrate that the tax exemption is binding, and if violated, the property owner would have to comply with the consequences. ANALYSIS The tax exemption request complies with the criteria contained in LDR Section 4.5.1(M) as the Board approved the associated improvements by making positive findings with respect to the applicable LDR Sections, Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Therefore, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(M). ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the complete Ad Valorem Tax Exemption Application for improvements to the property at 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(M). C. Recommend denial to the City Commission of the complete Ad Valorem Tax Exemption Application for improvements to the property at 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(M), Motion to be phrased in the affirmative. See above. RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval to the City Commission of the complete Ad Valorem Tax Exemption Application (2012 -063) for improvements to the property at 124 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(M). Report Prepared by: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Attachments: Photographs of Before and After, approved plans. PART TWO - PROPERTY INFORMATION: Property Control Number: 11 - y3 ° O I 1 Legal Description (attach separate sheet if necessary): ('roc 0 ..5 C i CAS Lo+ li 2 V, SC Zoning Designation: r kI f) 0 OL,b S'a oDu SDuAll V�'LS -k "LC Property is: ' in a Local Historic District individually Listed on Local Register in a National Register District Individually Listed on National Register Use of Property Prior to Improvements: Co (Y-) A,) QC&_ �� �e I LNkL s"o�-�) Use of Property After to Improvements: cC- -6 "5) Original Date of Construction: C_V1\S - FncC "O&P- Dates of Previous Alterations: Mfwq -Ail C- 2-20 � - -� h:�rne ���►r�y- Has the building ever been moved or relocated? ( )Yes (-)No If so, when? From Where? Description of Physical Appearance Prior to Improvements: Provide information about the major exterior and interior features of the building. Describe the building in its existing condition (before improvement) -- not as it was when first built (unless unchanged) or as it will be after improvement. Note the architectural style, exterior construction materials (wood, brick, etc.), type of roof (flat, gable, hipped, etc.), number of stories, basic plan (rectangular, irregular, L- shaped, etc.), and distinguishing architectural features (placement and type of windows, chimneys, porches, decorative interior features or spaces). Describe any changes that have been made to the building since its original construction (i.e., additions, porch enclosures, new storefronts, relocation of doors and windows, and alterations to the interior). Other buildings on the property such as carriage houses, barns and sheds should also be described. Finally, discuss the way in which the building relates to others in the district in terms of siting, scale, material, construction, and date of construction. - U"006 ��{ZuCiv(e J2. L I1:�}� L�Oonc�� Vf- ,nV, Color -­ A o R - G A n- \- was VON n� �T_A VVS �A( n)eme'r S es h�►�e were I4� ,� Statement of Significance: Summarize how the building contributes to the significance of the district. This summary should relate to the significance of the district (including the district's period of significance) as identified in the National Register nomination or district designation documentation. Is it similar to other buildings in the district in scale, building materials, style, and period of construction? Note important persons from the past associated with the building, former uses of the property, and the name of the architect or builder,, if known. ­t V \G' �} }y rlL \ V)i3`� �" � U 1' 1C1 1IS V\,_� 1�C,C� 1Sucs y &k *Z E i Co. A�_L � Al�, CG- l k( 5 �f Nl G + N 2- LPL\ i u o PART THREE — PROJECT INFORMATION Type of request: (rid Exemption under 196.1997, F.S. (standard exemption) ( } Exemption under 196.1998, F.S. (exemption for properties occupied by non- profit organizations or government agencies and regularly open to the pubic) Project Start Date: 3t N, Project Completion Date: '-I 16\ k (Certificate of Occupancy Issued by Building Department) Total Estimated Project Costs: 3.7 I , �M . Total Project Cost Attributed Solely to the Historic Structure: PART FOUR: APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Please provide one complete of all applicable items noted below. ❑ Survey -- Provide a copy of a survey from both before and after the improvements when the building footprint(s) has changed. ❑ Site Plan, Exterior Elevations, Floor Plans — As approved by the HPD. ❑ Other Plans - i.e. Demolition Plan ❑ Engineering or Other Reports ❑ Attachment Sheets — When necessary. ❑ Photographs — Provide a before and after photo of each exterior elevation, all new construction, and all interior improvements. Each page should contain a before and after photo of the same item; provide a corresponding description of the photos and the improvements. Photographs are not returnable. Polaroid photographs are not acceptable. Such documentation is necessary for evaluation of the effect of the improvements on the historic structure. Where such documentation is not provided, review and evaluation cannot be completed. This shall result in a recommendation for denial of the request for exemption. NOTE: All features should be identified with the approximate date, a description, and impact of work on existing feature. All pages should include the property address. ❑ Most Recent Tax Bill ❑ Applicable Fee, payable to the City of Delray Beach - See cover sheet. ❑ Executed Agent Authorization Form PART FIVE: APPLICATION REVIEW For Historic Preservation Planner Use Only. The Historic Preservation Planner has reviewed the Historic Preservation Property Tax Exemption Application for the subject property and hereby: — Certifies that the above referenced property qualifies as a historic proper consistent with the provisions of s. 196.1997 (11), F.S. ( ) Certifies that the above referenced property does not qualify as a historic property consistent with the provisions of s. 196.1997 (11), F.S. ( ) Certifies that the above referenced property qualifies for the special exemption provided under s._196.1998, F.S., for properties occupied by non - profit organizations or government agencies and regularly open to the public. ( ) Certifies that the above referenced property does not qualify for the special exemption provided under s.196.1998, F.S. The Historic Preservation Planner has reviewed the Historic Preservation Property Tax Exemption Application for the subject property and hereby: Determines that improvements to the above referenced property are consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, and the criteria set forth in Chapter 1A -38, F.A.C. ( ) Determines that improvements to the above referenced property are not consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, and the criteria set forth in Chapter 1A -38, F.A.C. All work not consistent with the referenced Standards, Guidelines and criteria are identified in the Review Comments. Recommendations to assist the applicant in bringing the proposed work into compliance with the referenced Standards, Guidelines and criteria are provided in the Review Comments. The Historic Preservation Planner has reviewed the Historic Preservation Property Tax Exemption Application for the subject property and hereby: v-4 Determines that the completed improvements to the property are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, and other criteria set forth in Chapter 1A -38, F.A.C., and, therefore, recommends approval of the requested historic_preservation tax exemption. ( ) Determines that the completed improvements to the above referenced property are not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, and other criteria set forth in Chapter 1A -38, F.A.C., and, therefore, recommends denial of the requested historic preservation tax exemption for the reasons stated in the Review Comments below. Signature Typed or printed name Aw Title D/2lG /OW /I�f�= , 1-0 PART SIX: OWNER ATTESTATION hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the best of my knowledge, correct, and that I own the property described above or that I am legally the authority in charge of the property. Further, by submission of this Application, I agree to allow access to the property by the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Delray Beach, Planning and Zoning Department, and appropriate representatives of the local government from which the exemption is being requested, for the purpose of verification of information provided in this Application. I also understand that, if the requested exemption is granted I will be required to enter into a Covenant with the local government granting tho ex mpf in which I must agree to maintain the character of the property and the qualifyynipro nts for the term of the exemption. Name Sig e" Da e Complete the following if signing for an organization or multiple owners: Title Organization name I hereby apply for the historic preservation property tax exemption for the restoration, rehabilitation or renovation work as approved by the Historic Preservation Board. I attest that the information provided is, to the best of my knowledge, correct, and that in my opinion the completed project conforms to The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitatin Historic Building s, and is consistent with the work approved by the Historic Preservation Board. I also attest that I am the owner of the property described above or, if the property is not owned by an individual, that I am the duly authorized representative of the owner. Further, by submission of this Application, I agree to allow access to the property by Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Delray Beach, Planning and Zoning Department, where such office exists, and appropriate representatives of the local government from which the exemption is being requested, for the purpose of verification of information provided in the Application and this Request. I understand that, if the requested exemption is granted, I will be required to enter into a Covenant with the local government granting the exemption in which I must agree to maintain the character of the property and the qualifying improvements for the term of the exemption. I also understand that falsifigaWn of factual representations in this Application or Request is subject to criminal spnc ' ursuant to the Laws of Florida. Y6 Name S Complete the following if signing for an organizati Title or multiple owners: Organization name � � 6� la-- Date PART SEVEN: OWNER'S CONSENT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENCY (This form must be completed by ALL property owners) 1 14 t.] LV-u y 1 C S _ , the fee simple owner of the following described (Owner's Name) property (give legal description): lowm 01-- -Oet 6qq S � S F1 Lr I 1� `?o 5 rr o f Lo T- hereby petition to the City of Delray Beach for approval of a Tax Exemption Application for the property located at l :N 0 Sw -n ivn (-�r b . d ,6 FL -33L#4nd affirm that -j-(Y-0 4 ACS is hereby designated (Applicants /Agent's Name) to act as agent on my behalf to accomplish the above. I certify that I have examined the application and that all statements and diagrams submitted are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Further, I understand that this application, attachments and fees become part of the Official Records of City ofJ�" Beach, Florida, and are not returnable. Owner's °Qignature) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ?' day ofof u(3+�L� -I 20 t)' by \n Z CVO W ,C , who i personally known e' me or has produced (type of identification) as identification and who did take an oath. (Printed Name of Notary Public) (Signature of Notary Public) Commission # 0 CQC 00 , My Commission Expires f5-- q - (NOT"% yjj, % E/ AL) 0 ID QQ',�tissloN;''�0 U. �y pg, 2o��p;•, #DD989971 O��pQ``�. BEFORE !11111 . 124 N Swinton Ave New Building i POW .l AFTER 1 11 ,1 1� UpPull q�umd Au�,du I j - g 8 anuaAv uoluims qtjoN 4z1 15 CD CD C) E)0!40 Alneaq ue:DiAewV leoj!D n: U low ligli R JA �flg 5 J-0, age A - .P3 anueAv uoluims qVON t7Z: 1, 0 E CD C) IN Gogo V2 U) fi4neag ueopowV leaj!D 1� it A Imp t 4, It 11, IN I'l nil ",mgt in H' 64 WIMP 1,1111111 j1hu I A al- -J L ------------- ------ ------ 110 A0 ffio -- - ---------- - IL % 11-9 7 iH, g X; A - J-- Eli ------------ ------------------------------------------- - ------- A*-, -- --------- - ---------------- BP!JOI=l 'q3COE] h,,IE)(3 c enueAV uoluimS 41JON 17Z C EL 0 L� co Alneag UL-01jewv Jeaj!D I I PI jR r 2 1 nj -1 H I F HH, q4 kMI q, 2 jm 1� a MUIR M, i I is MI tl H. Nil 1, Yid F Mm M - '-- — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — 7-0 aff HO 01 01 - --- ------ - - - - -- S P BF! hli 'TH' €AM1 5 �a`a 5,0, nz, eppol:1 'qoeaq Aejleci m EL anuaAVuojui SIPONVZ� C%j �•� ) \ ;� '% C) E GOL40 < 0 Any g ueoijawV jeojC) ; I I � a- Jim w m |[ § %h� |�_ \©� / h| Ell U5H 'Hil H, UPPOIJ '1401399 - ---lea anumv uoluims WON t?Z co Q c GOL40 a) > < Alneog ueopowV jeejC) 2 ; I I - I a- 110 — 4 1.1 His J lei R1111 UPPOIJ '1401399 - ---lea anumv uoluims WON t?Z co Q c GOL40 a) > < Alneog ueopowV jeejC) 2 ; I I - I a- 110 — 4 1.1 J E H Him - ---------- j P: It epljolj 'Ljoeaq Aejle(] anUGAV UOJU!MS WON t?Z3 CD 93140 HE fqneaq ueopawV jeajE) nj it loaf m 4T :i in U 0- 61 ENE w k ib H IT > 0 U- ���� M_ 1 Md MM� __ _ m jai°- ����� I� GJ == -.- II I'M MOW i aim RIMIN MIN m ilommillisms . . . . . . . . . . M. RON PRIME I I I ©����� � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIeslll � 11011111111111111011111111 c r s! ie enueny uoaulmS WON bZ 4 10 N 10 f N Qeag ueaiaawy Jeaa!D $ &!k yy gg x g mill ¢ S €�� I 6. E$y ne v 9' 4 L. i ; °c 5 € = L,,, a ea=Si�R�+t e�. � � g ¢�" e ff! d SY iF 9 {S ii WON #' '' -i�F in g 9g� tl c3,! € §r� ' g S' s MIN �i #��� �° � # F`� I fill a m i fie; �Fa�O . FFGA - a a a ! _ { ,e •, iiat.. 1' ;[�i�txK .4 =_ 5.. E: W a, 1�F� _ 9 YE : S f� �E op I l 7E 1 � �� � psi � � �� � 1 � .; � �� �t� IMF ,� ► t �' � � � �� � t� � � . �fx �s a� �, � � � �� �� ��. eppol -A qolaag Aejjq(3 anueAV uoiusmS qIJON 17Z4 C) C\I GOL40 0 fi4nea8 ueoijewV leaj!D III O Mvu It JE N p III O eppoj� '4ouaj3 Aejlo(i anuaAV uoluimS 14PON VZ C14 N CY) L v I ; LLJ R GOL40 f4neaI3 ueoijawV jeajLZ) w % E Ivll lit NEI PEI 9p �I P C4 � a c ;t ► � ; ° WON VU N 1 �O Q u W ¢ eaj `d� W I &aII -6k Id6, �a c 6 eppoj:� '43888 €; anuany uoauieng i s' WON VU N 1 �O Q u W ¢ eaj `d� W I &aII -6k Id6, �a c 0: It I ep!jol=l 'peae Aeiloc] enueAv uoluimS 114-ION VZ CD U) C) CY) Alneaq ueoijawV jeajE) il. c c ep!jol.A 'LlI AUJII CO 2 GnUIBAV UOJU!MS UPON VZ 1 i a p ll is Alp. �1' I U) ce) R 0 I I ODL40 Alneaq ueoij@wV jeajE) OL JE Al ------- ---- - - I IT - oil I F 11111111 1 110 t I Ili- t Hit t U\ d$ "�( � | ƒ { \} I'M IRMi H I uppoIj 'Ljoego Awle(] 0 anueAV uolu!mS WON VZL e {�j LL Alneaq ueoijawV jeeig LU IN 2 Hill I IR u TH; ll Holl 11! ilp 1411 1 P. 11 E N :1 N �F , L ir.wr, wwffl� 6MMUM, IM M 1111 IM" I'M -- m epu01=1 ayoeee ReJIap -0 m { 4 ¢ g anuany ualuimS poN tZl o �, U 1 O Goujo aa) CO Alnea8 ueaijau V jeaa!D 6 [ a sy° 3 : � y � 4$ i fig q pE§ 33aEp}7§ Yg& i 3 n �{ � � � Et�S il3= F,7 FYyE;��77EF�F "�`9 F `- 3 Epp HIM- EE 2 j �tHIM -[ S .yLLy QQ n i y ji+ jee S!i ¢�i14 If i�� 1,10 �lmul6l §j�Yiv'yi �§ q !, 9. 888.: Sz .dd :, i a .: .. ., • -- m G ni RY € R a= F: f E g 4� s k.I` _r'4a ElJ9y� e 6 kG $ S•y E /6:E Oil pin! fei_Y4 f = S= oa 6 3 5 s epu01=1 ayoeee ReJIap -0 m { 4 ¢ g anuany ualuimS poN tZl o �, U 1 O Goujo aa) CO Alnea8 ueaijau V jeaa!D # ! G ni RY € R a= F: f E g 4� s k.I` _r'4a ElJ9y� e 6 kG $ S•y E /6:E Oil pin! fei_Y4 f = S= oa 6 3 5 s MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Tamara Genius, Plan Reviewer Victor Majtenyi, Interim Director of Environmental Services THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: June 28, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 REOUEST FOR A SIDEWALK DEFERRAL /701 N.W. 7TH STREET ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Deferral of sidewalk installation in front of 701 N.W. 7th Street. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the north side of N.W. 7th Street, west of N. Swinton Avenue and north of Lake Ida Road. Refer to location map. The proposed project is a vacant lot, in which the Owner will construct a single family residence. Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along the north side of N.W. 7th Street in the vicinity of the subject residence. The deferral request was approved by DSMG at the May 30, 2013 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral. I w � y � t 4 rflj iii '�' ,i f= 'M J jol pol 0 IWI l nUl`� . AM MR-5; G .'Ow r. , , —, . , , f r Y , !t I ' ' JII # r _ a ' I T * � aR s FL I w � y � t 4 rflj iii '�' ,i f= 'M J jol pol 0 IWI l nUl`� . AM MR-5; G .'Ow Prepared By: RETURN TO: R. Brian Shutt, Esq. City Attorney's Office 200 N.W. 1 st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 AGREEMENT FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of 2013, between the City of Delray Beach (hereinafter the City) and Lake Ida NW 7th Street, LLC (hereinafter the Owners), for the purpose of waiving the requirement of the installation of a sidewalk along 701 NW 7th Street until such time as the City requests the construction of the sidewalk by the Owner. WHEREAS, Land Development Regulation Section 6.1.3(C) requires the installation of a sidewalk, within the NW 7th Street right-of-way immediately abutting the subject property, by the Owner prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy; and, WHEREAS, the Owners have requested a waiver from the requirement of the installation of a sidewalk pursuant to Land Development Regulation Section 6.1.3(D)(1)(b); and, WHEREAS, in order to provide conformity along the street the City Commission voted to waive the requirement for the installation of a sidewalk until such time as the City requests the Owner construct the sidewalk. C: IUserslchuckhlDesktopl701 NW 7th StreetWdewalk deferral *mt 701 NW 7th Street,doc WITNESSETH NOW, THEREFORE, in witness of the above and in consideration of the City agreeing to waive the requirement for the installation of a sidewalk, at this time, for the property located at: 701 NW 7th Street SID OF 8 -46 -43 E 114 FT OF N II2 OF W 112 OF SW 114 OF TR 3 LYG N OF & ADJ TO NW 7TH ST RIW 12- 43- 46- 08 -21- 003 -0180 1. The Owner agrees to construct a sidewalk, at its sole cost and expense, along the NW 7th Street right -of -way abutting the subject property, within a time period that is acceptable to the City, after being requested to do so by the City. The sidewalk, when constructed, shall meet all of the current ordinances of the City of Delray Beach. 2. It is the intent of the parties that this Agreement shall run with the land. This Agreement shall be recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida and shall be binding on the parties legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this agreement set their hands and seals this day of , 200_. ATTEST: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA LOW City Cleric Approved as to form and sufficiency: City Attorney Mayor C:VserslchuckhlDesktopl701 NW 7th Stree4sidewallc deferral a mt 701 NW 7th Street.doe (Please type or print name) STATE OF Florida COUNTY OF Palm Beach OWNER: By: Charle alberg, Member BEFORE ME personally appeared Charles Halberg who [is] personally known to me and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged before me that [he] executed said instrument for the purposes expressed therein. WITNESS my hand and official seal this 10'1' day of June 2013 My commission expires: Notary Public (Seal) agt/sidewalk deferral agreement C.,I Users lchuckhDesktop1701 NW 7th StreetWdewalk deferral aymt 701 NW 7th Street.doc MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Tamara Genius, Plan Reviewer Victor Majtenyi, Interim Director of Environmental Services THROUGH: Louie Chapman Jr., City Manager DATE: June 7, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 REOUEST FOR A SIDEWALK DEFERRAL/ 218 N.W. 16TH STREET ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Deferral of sidewalk installation in front of 218 N.W. 16th Street. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the south side of N.W. 16th Street, west of N Swinton Avenue and north of Lake Ida Road, at 218 N.W. 16th Street. Refer to location map. The proposed project is a previously demoed lot, in which the Owner will construct a single family residence. Currently, there are no plans to install a sidewalk along the south side of N.W. 16th Street in the vicinity of the subject residence. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the sidewalk deferral. CL m c 0 0 J Prepared By: RETURN TO: R. Brian Shutt, Esq. City Attorney's Office 200 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 AGREEMENT FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of 20_, between the City of Delray Beach (hereinafter the City) and Kennedy Collin Building, LLC (hereinafter the Owners), for the purpose of waiving the requirement of the installation of a sidewalk along 218 N.W. 16"' Street until such time as the City requests the construction of the sidewalk by the Owner. WHEREAS, Land Development Regulation Section 6.13(C) requires the installation of a sidewalk, within the 200 block of N.W. 16'�' Street right -of -way immediately abutting the subject property, by the Owner prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy; and, WHEREAS, the Owners have requested a waiver from the requirement of the installation of a sidewalk pursuant to Land Development Regulation Section 6.1.3(D)(1)(b); and, WHEREAS, in order to provide conformity along the street the City Commission voted to waive the requirement for the installation of a sidewalk until such time as the City requests the Owner construct the sidewalk. S. IEngAdminlSidewalk Deferralslsidewalk deferral agmt. doc I WITNESSETH NOW, THEREFORE, in witness of the above and in consideration of the City agreeing to waive the requirement for the installation of a sidewalk, at this time, for the property located at: 218 NW 16tb Street (PCN #: 12- 43- 46 -08 -11 -003 -0041) 1. The Owner agrees to construct a sidewalk, at its sole cost and expense, along the NW 16a` Street right -of -way abutting the subject property, within a time period that is acceptable to the City, after being requested to do so by the City. The sidewalk, when constructed, shall meet all of the current ordinances of the City of Delray Beach. 2. It is the intent of the parties that this Agreement shall run with the land. This Agreement shall be recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida and shall be binding on the parties legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this agreement set their hands and seals this day of , 20 . ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form and sufficiency: City Attorney EXURTIUMMI S: IEngAdminl Sidewalk Deferrals lsidewalk deferral agmt .doc 2 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA Mayor OWNER: WIT�ESSES: _ OWNER: By: � l Kathlee Kennedy, Managing ber _E Collin le se type or prin (Please type or print name) STATE OF Florida ) COUNTY OF Palm Beach ) BEFORE ME personally appeared Kathleen Kennedy who [is] [are] personally known to me or [has] [have] produced - ;j .; 6 [and , respectively] as identification, and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged before me that [he] [she] [they] executed said instrument for the purposes expressed therein. WITNESS my hand and official seal this My commission expires: ag�sidewalk deferral agreement C. l Usersl&' ricl4ppDatalLocallTemplsidewalk deferral agent -l. d* March , 2013. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Rafael Ballestero, Deputy Director of Construction Victor Majtenyi, Interim Environmental Services Director THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: June 19, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 ADDITIONAL SCOPE /LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO. /RECLAIMED WATER AREA 12A ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before the Commission to approve additional scope, in the total amount of $27,571.00 for roadway crack seal and a fire hydrant relocation; and approval for the amount to be paid from the contract's Undefined Underground Allowance; for the Reclaimed Water, Area 12A Project #11 -036. BACKGROUND On February 5, 2013, Commission approved a contract award to Lanzo Construction Co. The scope of the project involves continuing construction of the reclaimed transmission and distribution system on the barrier island, from Atlantic Avenue south to Casuarina Road, and from Gleason Street east to AlA. The project includes the installation of 10 ", 6" and 4" PVC pipe throughout the residential neighborhoods. On May 15, 2013, the City Manager approved additional scope, in the amount of $7,448.53, to maintain a fire hydrant at the intersection of Nassau St. and Gleason St.; which included the tapping of a 10" water main and installation of a new city supplied hydrant; along with the removal of approximately 1 10 linear feet of 6" water main, which is no longer needed. On June 18, 2013, Commission approved additional scope, in the amount of $25,250.00, for the installation of twenty -five (25) additional water services, to provide service to all of the residences and buildings on the project corridor. This additional scope is for 1,000 gallons of roadway crack seal, in the amount of $21,000.00; and a fire hydrant relocation, in the amount of $6,571.00; for a total cost of $27,571.00. Staff is recommending performing the crack seal work to improve the final result of pavement restoration. This work will fill and seal the existing cracks in the pavement, and will help prevent them from returning. As such, this will provide additional longevity to the pavement surface. The crack seal item was included in the original bid as an alternative bid item, with the intent of possibly performing said work upon final pavement assessment, after pipe installations. Staff and consultant have assessed the pavement condition, and deem this work to be beneficial. The unit price for the work is the Contract's Alternate Bid Item #A1 unit price. In addition, part of the additional scope of work includes the relocation of a fire hydrant approximately 70 feet (to the east at the vicinity of 1120 Nassau Street), rendering placement between the nearest property lines, making its placement more acceptable to the neighboring residents. A cost breakdown, Exhibit A, is attached. Also attached are copies of the Contract's Allowances Spreadsheet, and a Location Map. The City has received grant funding for this project in the amount of $170,000 through the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). FUNDING SOURCE Cost to be funded out of the contract's Undefined Underground Allowance; available balance is $117,301.47. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of additional scope, in the total amount of $27,571.00 for roadway crack seal and a fire hydrant relocation; and approval for the amount to be paid from the contract's Undefined Underground Allowance; for the Reclaimed Water, Area 12A Project. LANZO - 2L,\ �'A1 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY adr=ffiftk1* khn for hommirw DwWN &S June 17, 2013 Rafael Bal[estero City of Delray Beach 434 South Swinton Aveue Delray Beach, Florida, 33444 Reference: City of Delray Beach Project No. 2011 -036 Reclaimed Water Expansion — Area 12A (Phase [} L.anzo Job No. F414 Rafael, As discussed and requested please -add to our contract, tine item Al Roadway Crack Sealing as shown in Alternate Bic{ Items. This is a unit price gallon with estimated quantity of 1,640 gallons @ $21.00 per gallon extended price of $21,000.00 Please feel free to call with any questions f comments (954) 931 -6564 Sincerely, Mark Garrett L arizn Construction Co., FI_ CC: F414, IVIRB An Equal Opportunity Employer 125 SE 5"' Court.Deerfield Beach, FL 33441 -4749 Pie {954) 97M,902 Fax(954)979-0902 www.las zoz[et for fawnu"byt emmuldfies June 27, 2013 Rafael Ballestero City of Delray Beach 434 South Swinton Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Reference: City of Delray Beach Project No. 2011 -036 Reclaimed Water Expansion — Area 12A (Phase 1) Lanzo Job No. F14 Relouadon Fire hydrant, Nassau Street Rafael, As per our conversation we propose to flu -nish all materials and labor to remove and relocate Fire Hydrant on Nassau Street as. required. For the amount listed below: I Tapping Sleeve, Tapping Valve, and onsite tap $4,200.00 2 Total Cost for Labor $1,585.00 3 Total Cost for Equipment $ 786,00 4 For the Lump Sum Amount $5,571.00 Sincerely, i J�� Dark Garre-t Lanzo Construction Co., Florida cc: File 125 SE 5TH Court Deerfield Beach FL 33441-4749 Phone (954) 979 -0802 Fax(954)979-9897 www.lanzo.net Construction Project Detailed Allowances Spreadsheet Project information: Contractor: Reclaimed Water, Area 12A PIN 11 -036 Lanzo Construction Go., Florida Contract Allowance Amount Line Item 990 - Undefined Underground $150,000.00 Allowance June 29, 2013 Allowance Current Item Allowance Date Date Amount Balance Requested Approved $O. DO $150,DDO.00 AddT scope to maintain a sire hydrant at the intersection of Nassau St. and Gleason St.; tapping of a 10" water main and installation of a new city supplied hydrant along with the removal $7,448.53 $142,551.47 5/13/2013 5/15/2013 of approximately 110 linear feet of 6" water main; which is no longer needed. Approved by City tanager 05115113. AddT scope for the installation of 25 additional water services; to provide service to all $25,250.00 $117,301.47 residences and buildings on the project corridor. Approved by Commission 0611 5113. TOTAL ALLOWANCE AMOUNTS $150,000.00 $32,698.53 $117,301.47 Additional Information: In addition to the above items, the following has been added to the Contract; Additional Proiect Expenses Not Added to the Contract: - Mathews Consulting, inc.- SA #07 -17.3 for construction administration services and specialty inspection services required to complete the project. Approved by Commission on 03105113. - Testing Services - Specialty Engineering Consultants; Inc.; Approved by City Manager 003129113, $64,118.00 $10,962.00 $75,080.00 S16. TWP 46S. RNG 43E =UMffS OF PRCUECT AREA . PHASE I =UMffS OF PRCMECT AREA .FHASEII PROJECT L MAP N.T.S. R r S � 7AM�&7 FAST A B f � & cp ■ �K NLR&AR ST. /� - COCOMuT $ Mmmm AYE J AAM% 6WW �] coi EAGER . � � SE ,m ST. Ko»14D� K a c f w � � S16. TWP 46S. RNG 43E =UMffS OF PRCUECT AREA . PHASE I =UMffS OF PRCMECT AREA .FHASEII PROJECT L MAP N.T.S. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT/ CONTRACT AWARD FOR 30 S.W. 13TH AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval is requested for a Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $28,163.85. Funding for the project is through the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation grant. BACKGROUND Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder for the following project: 30 SW 13th Ave, South Florida Construction Services, Inc /$26,295.00 = Total Rehab Cost: $28,163.85 Grant awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost also includes lead inspection, lead abatement, lead clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, and recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost may be incurred for lead clearance test(s). The contingency may be used for change orders and all unused funds will remain with the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation program. Inspection of work is done by the Department of Community Improvement's Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services Divisions. Contracts are executed between the building contractor and the property owner. The City remains the agent and this office monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require both contractor and homeowner's signatures. Grant recipients have met all eligibility requirements as specified in the approved Policies and Procedures. The rehabilitation activities will bring the homes to minimum code requirements by repairing the roof, electric and plumbing systems and correcting other incipient code violations. Detailed work write -ups and individual case files are available for review in the Neighborhood Services Division office. The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible for ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts are awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, as a result of a formal bid process. Therefore, an in -house policy was created to limit awards to the lowest responsive bidder as it relates to the Division's professional in -house estimate. This serves to disqualify unreasonably low bids and therefore, protect against the resulting change order requests. FUNDING SOURCE Community Development Block Grant 118 - 1963 -554 -49.19 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding a Housing Rehabilitation grant award to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $28,163.85. Ck i DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DN N HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET BID/QUOTE #: 06- 2013NS APPLICANT: Jenkin Washington PROJECT ADDRESS: 30 SW 13th Avenue DATE OF BID LETTERS. May 17, 2013 DATE OF BID OPENING: June 10, 2013 GENERAL CONTRACTORS $ BID AMOUNT BID BOND Abisset Corporation $ $ Alf Phase Roofing $ 450.00 AMR Properties Group $ 85.00 Termite Inspection Built Solid Construction, LLC $ 42,265,00 no Citywide Construction Services, Inc. $ - 19.10 CJ Contracting, LLC $ 30,145.00 yes Cordoba Construction Co. $ 28,070.00 yes CSB Construction, Inc, $ 27,950.00 no JIJ Construction Corp. $ 34,000.00 yes MacDonald Construction Company of Palm Beach $ - Ray Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. $ - South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $ 26,295.00 yes Stacy Bomar Construction, LLC. $ 34,050,00 yes Sunband Builders Construction Inc. $ - In -House Estimate: $ 27,969.00 RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: ISouth Florida Construction Services, Inc. BIDICONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 26,295.00 5% Contingency $ 1,314.75 $ 27,609.75 Lead inspection 450.00 Lead Clearance 85.00 Termite Inspection NIA Termite Treatment NIA Recording Fees 19.10 GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 28,163.85 FUNDING SOURCE: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account # 115- 1963 - 554 -49.19 COMMENTS: Staff recommends project to be awarded to the lowest bidder one /suo� � �4/ V U0j %shy ��as yy�''0s n✓�S�o" vo. a4op ✓o °� : . bu/ "sa ap /ki °Li �0jj�apa✓ b asn p 0 rn � W 0 L Q M _ Q 0 0 ca w z w p Or W z W w � Q LLJ O z 7 w Q O o o w o m C `G T O o Q o W 0 o H a o Q 0 0 ca w z w p Or W z W w � Q LLJ O z 7 w Q O o o w o ¢ m m Q o 4 0 o a a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 O O O O O O a C7 O O O O O O O O O O O a O a Lt ] O O O O O O O O O O C7 q CD O O O O O U-J O Q N ti U7 O CD Lfi v-� to 0) U7 co Q N a� O- Li) P a N s N Lh M LL7 l� O CO O oc Lf)' N O ti L(') M N M O GO � V M r CN M r ff9 69 64 ER ba' E9 6y 6y 6v fit fit 64 b`# 6416q Vi l tri Va 6y O O O C7 O C, a O O O P 'O :O O �O O a. a C? P O - P C? C? O O O Q O' 0 0 0 0 0 0 O' O. Q a C7 C•'? O O- C7 L[i O Ln O. LCJ tih C7 D O Lo) LC] O :.D L[7 .Lc O © O © a a QY Q u7 N N - O o0 W O ti' 1�- ti O CO' 6) N CV P .N L() CA 7't N � m co co M (� ?.Ci r M '�' CA 00 CV c i cV' - N Lo N co N EH Q�l 61), U. , 64 l-Fi' VD' 64 fi} 63 64 o> "3 & - oFr- 6y 6y f-a Eq 6a 69 COY O O O O a a 4 C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 C? C;7 Q O C7 O a a 0 4 Cl O O O a a 0 0 0 CD 0 a a Q O 0 0 0 X) CD 0 0 O CD d O 4 O L() Q P O O Q Q O a n D7 00 m 4 .- N 00 U) CO U) CD Lo O . O S V o 'd' o N CD C] � N M o V o UD Ln IT P f-- Co r M C7 c M 6F3 6y 6-J, 6.t d� ER FO� C4 S� 64 61) 61) EH sv 64 Gs EA a V> o Q o 0 0 0 o CD o o a a 4 C D C 7 C� o a o 0 o n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CJ O a 0 C] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C5 O O O O O O O O a a O O O O O a a 4 Cz;> O O Q x lC] 0 c0 0 O 0 Oc 0 co 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 Col 0 00 U7 M O O C] M O m" O O Lo? a U7 a co a F 4 0 Co] N N N r r CN r ti N ER 63 63 63 64 63 Ef} E9 Ef} Cam' 6y 69 Uy to 69, ff} GO ER El* fl* LID by _ 4 0 6 O 0 0 0 O O O O O O Q O O a a Q C> C5 O C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C7, CD o C7 C7 O O O a 0 a a a a 4 O CD 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 6 O O C� o u7 CD 0 40 o a a �P,, 4 oa N o N O Cl P GV o t 0 CO 0 r o 00 a --t- CV tY N o M n a M N r M N (--} 63 63 by fH 6y Cf3 by E9 EH C13 ca ca to (f) 6-T 63 H-} 6y ca E'} 63 67 a o a o 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 C) 0 C) Z0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a oC�V0000000 C�l C� N O O O O O O 000CD00000 N O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 un V cry M m cc! N d' CQ O_ c M r O r M co CD c0 co r .- O N r O 63 6} ff} 6y GGI 691 6y 631 (A C' t 63 63 63 Hi tli 63 63 63 b3 E-F O O a a a Q a a a a a a C> O C7 CD C] C) 4 O O O O O O a 0 a 0 a 0 a a a Q a 0 0 0 CD CD O C) C? Lc) LC) O Lo U.) Lo Co) O O O Co') O L<7 Lo U7 O Lo LO U7 U7 to' L6 f- 00 f+ 00 LO CX] f- N ti Ch t• Cn ti CD O 00 O O] O r N (�'� O CD ti CD CD Ci] (Si N N (J) N co M r I L CD r C N N d' 64 63 fig 63' 63 63 63 6191 fft fft 63 fft Eft 63 61) b4 69 63 63 El* 64 I,' 6y Ca o o Lr) C7 C7 Lo CD Q LO a 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a C7 C7 O f,- C7 cn C-> O I` C? C, r- a O Q O O P O P O oC:l2MCDCD LiCD cy LOCDtiLriapo[pocio of O N U7 r� CD M oc CD LO Lo CD O C­ V O -Y M CD i1 cr 4 LCJ co N N M LC) O a LC) c0 m- 'r M N i� r c co O EN .- t- CN " LC] N 6y 6y e3 H} O'J- (f3 6F1 61 Gr3 G% 1191 V)- E+i 6'. F- L L Y C Ca 3 N CL O~ 3 N O 0 Q E Y a) L p Cn _ O LL _ J O O LL_ .O N 0 .� E N LL. O ilk � �' Q O U ..... � w O C N Q CL O E � L_ N �^ `= Y p 'c U {�} 0 p QJ Cp Cll x 2 . m m C p N IL �Z� cw �QUU ���Y j L) UCnw c W ro°roro' E�;� -mQ Rapti Q 0 co a) CCD C C(D O C C �•^ N M d- CC J cc h Cb O] O r N M L! l CA I+ CX7 C� a r N M V M CO I� 00 I *- N N N N N N N N N Z 1 Z C (U d a E O Z �a L MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 HOUSING REHABILITATION/ CONTRACT AWARD FOR 609 S.W. 5TH AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval is requested for a Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the second lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $26,095.63. Funding for the project is through the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation grant. BACKGROUND Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the second, lowest responsive bidder for the following project: . 609 SW 5th Avenue, CJ Contracting /$23,599.00= Total Rehab cost: $26,095.63 This grant is being awarded to the second, lowest bidder because the lowest bidder had just been awarded two (2) projects and will not be able to meet the program guidelines, which state he must start and complete a project within a specific timeframe. He, therefore, withdrew his bid. Grant awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost also includes lead inspection, lead abatement, lead clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, and recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost may be incurred for lead clearance test(s). The contingency may be used for change orders and all unused funds will remain with the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation program. Inspection of work is done by the Department of Community Improvement's Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services Division. Contracts are executed between the building contractor and the property owner. The City remains the agent and this office monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require both contractor and homeowner's signatures. Grant recipients have met all eligibility requirements as specified in the approved Policies and Procedures. The rehabilitation activities will bring the homes to minimum code requirements by repairing the roof, electric and plumbing systems and correcting other incipient code violations. Detailed work write -ups and individual case files are available for review in the Neighborhood Services Division Office. The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible for ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts are awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, as a result of a formal bid process. Therefore, an in -house policy was created to limit awards to the lowest responsive bidder as it relates to the Division's professional in -house estimate. This serves to disqualify unreasonably low bids and therefore, protect against the resulting change order requests. FUNDING SOURCE Community Development Block Grant 118 - 1963 -554 -49.19 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding the Housing Rehabilitation grant award to be awarded to the second lowest responsive bidders in the amount of $26,095.63. Termite Treatment 847.58 Recording Fees 19.10 GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 26,095.63 FUNDING SOURCE: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account# 115-1963-554 -49.19 COMMENTS: lowest bidder was awarded two other projects and could not meet time requirements to finish project. recommend awarding to next lowest responsive bidder CI1 . DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DN A HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET BID /QUOTE #: BID # 06.2013NS APPLICANT: McKinley Johnson PROJECT ADDRESS: 609 SW 5th Avenue DATE OF BID LETTERS: May 17, 2013 DATE OF BID OPENING: June 10, 2013 GENERAL CONTRACTORS BID AMOUNT BID BOND Abisset Corporation $ 22,285,00 Yes All Phase Roofing $ statement of no bid AMR Properties Group $ Built Solid Construction, LLC $ 24,500 00 No Citywide Construction Services, Inc. $ - CJ Contracting, LLC $ 23,599,00 Yes Cordoba Construction Co. $ CSB Construction, Inc, $ 32,912,00 No JIJ Construction Corp. $ 24,475,00 Yes MacDonald Construction Company of Palm Beach $ Ray Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. $ - South Florida Construction Services, Inc. $ 24,025.00 Yes Stacy Bomar Construction, LLC. $ 30,030.00 Yes Sunband Builders Construction Inc. $ - In -House Estimate: $ 20,647.38 RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR: JCJ Contracting, LLC BIDICONTRACTAMOUNT: $ 23,599.00 5% Contingency $ 1,179.95 $ 24,778.95 Lead Inspection 450.00 Lead Clearance NIA Termite Inspection N/A Termite Treatment 847.58 Recording Fees 19.10 GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT 26,095.63 FUNDING SOURCE: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account# 115-1963-554 -49.19 COMMENTS: lowest bidder was awarded two other projects and could not meet time requirements to finish project. recommend awarding to next lowest responsive bidder I 0�1aaS pA /Jp �5�0 a\ 40 /IJj� %S aU� L 40j� °4�awp e4o� ✓o o� up /fah ✓�S as. aoiy�Gol� U01�I> A / /pao ✓IS�jO� , 6� ✓p °d'aseya //c bass /q� asho � o Z � LU C � a 0 0 0 0 O � 0 0 W Lij m O F- z w L o 0 0 LU C D a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W Lij m O F- z w L o z O U, SOZ z O JCD O N � w Q °¢ w w O O c O ra O Q m m 0 0 C D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O SOZ O JCD O .1.1. Q O O O CD 0 O C 0 0 0 0 0 616 0 0 In 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 o Lr? O Ln N Ln o d' LCJ Ln 7 r v �- co Ln CO o N r Ln r CO Ln ti N m o W N N N Ln O) Ln m o Ln N O m .. 64 69 6ci 64 fR EA fH £9 EA f�T 64 ER EPr ff3 64 A Efi U � C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 L LCD LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LTj O O 0 0 N N m 004o r m W .-- I'- N~ r F N N r O 3� m N m N N VD- b4 C ". 6Fi 67 119 e-T (13 64 69 69 !) 64 6- 64 64 b} E!i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C o 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CCD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 LO 0 0 un (D O LiJ C9 O I- 0 0 'q 0 Ln t l.L) CO O O LCJ O m I- 00 C.O d- O m 7 Lc C N r r r 't, r' V N EfY 64 fH 69 ff} CF} EF3 E/} 69' ER fA 64 {f? 64 N} Ef3 6<} 4T - O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O r O O O o O O O O e o m O O O LIJ O N 4 O 0 �? -° O c° m O co LO r as L.i r LO ti LC) m r CO r r — -n Ga �� t, �v9 ��� 6� ° 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o O O O O O a O M C> O O O O O m O Oa co N CN 0 N 0 I- 0 O d- N m OJ 0 r ti N O O 07 r O of CO 0 .- 0 r 0 °) LI] co d� r N N f!) tf-- Efi HT 69' � C� 64 64 64 Ef3 Efi fA fA' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 Lo O LO O CJ O LO C) Lo LC] Ln Lo CD if] LCj O VL O m co O O LCJ O 00 O N N Cc ti O N N co °) N N m ° Lf) d CJ c0 r I� N °) m d' d_ m E co m �= N r r N N [R EFl Hi 6 T 64 69 61) c-A 63 fA 64 64 64 69 69 64 64 (f} C 0 O O o O O O 4 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55-C 0 0 0 0 0 LC) O Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 O L(J 0 0 0 0 Ln N -. Co O N N Ln LL) Ln C° u) Oo LC) N O .^- Ln .^ N I-) N °) O r O O O N O LCJ Lri r W V N co EPr E�7 �} Eq (s} 6q EF} Er} EA EA 1�s E a 64 64 64 64 &a 69 ,:D co 0 (n o LC) O O LCJ O o a 0 0 0 0 0 N LC) G O O N I� O O n O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 m cirnoori vo.am ri "iai oo r o Li m N LO co m N r O c0 L.CJ m Lo O N N CO CO LC) Lo m O O I-- m N d' may= m r N N N - �} EF3. �.} �T Ef3 6A 64 4fJ 64 � EA tiY 69 64 6A 64 EA 64 � N � o � U ro °� LL 70 12 Q o� L N E E O 0 J .0 ~ �z ° Lu Z wZ Q cu p�DomU�FD~ — N ,V — •� •� •� CO •� N 6 N I; Q a� o in cv a� as w n in L n O 7n CD �dSSn [ALL c c cx — U cw LO CO r- m °) o N m Lt) cU I` c0 O O r N 7: r N N N MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Lula Butler, Director, Community Improvement THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.G. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANUCONTRACT AWARD FOR 231 N.W. 14TH AVENUE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Approval is requested for a Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $36,879.10. Funding for the project is through the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation grant. BACKGROUND Approval is requested for one (1) Housing Rehabilitation grant to be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder for the following project: . 231 NW 14th Avenue, Cordoba Construction Co./$34,230.00 = Total Rehab Cost: $36,879.10 Grant awards are based on the actual cost of the rehabilitation, as determined by the low responsive bidder(s), plus a 5% contingency. Total rehab cost also includes lead inspection, lead abatement, lead clearance, termite inspection, termite treatment, and recording fees, if applicable. Additional cost may be incurred for lead clearance test(s). The contingency may be used for change orders and all unused funds will remain with the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation program. Inspection of work is done by the Department of Community Improvement's Building Inspection and Neighborhood Services Divisions. Contracts are executed between the building contractor and the property owner. The City remains the agent and this office monitors all work performed by the contractor, ensuring compliance according to specifications and program guidelines. Pay request forms require both contractor and homeowner's signatures. Grant recipients have met all eligibility requirements as specified in the approved Policies and Procedures. The rehabilitation activities will bring the homes to minimum code requirements by repairing the roof, electric and plumbing systems and correcting other incipient code violations. Detailed work write -ups and individual case files are available for review in the Neighborhood Services Division office. The Neighborhood Services Division is responsible for ensuring that the housing rehabilitation contracts are awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, as a result of a formal bid process. Therefore, an in -house policy was created to limit awards to the lowest responsive bidder as it relates to the Division's professional in -house estimate. This serves to disqualify unreasonably low bids and therefore, protect against the resulting change order requests. FUNDING SOURCE Community Development Block Grant 118- 1963 -554 -49.19 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends awarding a Housing Rehabilitation grant award to the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $36,879.10. Gil DELRAY BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DN _N HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM BID INFORMATION SHEET BIDIQUOTE #: 06- 2013NS APPLICANT: PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE OF BID LETTERS: DATE OF BID OPENING: Supreme Michel 231 NW 14th Ave May 17, 2013 June 10, 2013 GENERAL CONTRACTORS Abisset Corporation All Phase Roofing AMR Properties Group Built Solid Construction, LLC Citywide Construction Services, Inc. CJ Contracting, LLC Cordoba Construction Co. CSB Construction, Inc. JIJ Construction Corp. MacDonald Construction Company of Palm Beach Ray Graeve & Sons Construction, Inc. South Florida Construction Services, Inc. Stacy Bomar Construction, LLC. Sunband Builders Construction Inc, In -House Estimate: RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR', BID/CONTRACT AMOUNT 5% Contingency Lead Inspection Lead Clearance Termite Inspection Termite Treatment Recording Fees GRANT CONTRACT AMOUNT BID AMOUNT BID BOND $ -I $ Statement of no bid $ No $ 40, 555.00 35,941.50 $ 450.00 $ 34,230.00 yes no $ 50,762.00 $ 35,530,00 yes yes $ 36,650.00 $ 44,085,00 yes a _ $ 34,209.30 Cordoba Construction Co, $ 34,230.00 $ 1,711.50 $ 35,941.50 $ 450.00 $ 468.50 $ 19.10 $ 36,879.10 FUNDING SOURCE Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Account # 118 -1963- 554 -49.19 COMMENTS: Staff recommends awarding to lowest responsive bidder " Item #6 removed due to cost estimate (Exceeding program limits) - 40.9an �pr��yya s 4o / /jns o 00 auk ?4a E ?SUO 9op�o�o .: UO �)7 �4�oa ydIlk aS co M 0 N O i MEMORANDUM 'A Z TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Alberta Gaum, Recreation Superintendent Tim Simmons, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: May 24, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.H. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 SCHOOL READINESS CHILD CARE PROVIDER AGREEMENT/ EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Request City Commission approval of the School Readiness and Summer Camp Child Care Provider Agreement between the City of Delray Beach and the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. to provide subsidized child care funding for the Afterschool Program located at Pompey Park and the Community Center. BACKGROUND The term of the attached School Readiness and Summer Camp Provider Agreement between the City of Delray Beach and the Early Learning Coalition, Inc. is School Readiness Services July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 and Summer Camp Services June 7, 2013 through August 16, 2013. This Agreement continues to provide subsidized child care funding for the City's Afterschool and Summer Camp Program. Children enrolled through the program will be subsidized at a reimbursable rate (less the applicable parent fee) to the City at $10.44 /child /part-time day and $13.00 /child/full -time day. RECOMMENDATION Approve the School Readiness and Summer Camp Provider Agreement between the City of Delray Beach and the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. to provide subsidized child care funding for the Afterschool and Summer Camp Program located at Pompey Park and the Community Center. SCHOOL READINESS CHILD CARE PROVIDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. AND x❑ School Readiness Services: Term of this agreement is July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 0 Summer Camp Services: Term of this agreement is June 7, 2013 through August 16, 2013 This Provider Agreement ( "Agreement ") is entered into between the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Coalition ") and the Provider of School Readiness (SR) Program services and /or Summer Camp services, City of Delray Beach D /B /A Delray Beach Community Center , (hereinafter referred to as the "Provider ") with its principal offices located at 50 North West 1st Avenue to provide school readiness /summer camp services for the period of the term in accordance to the service type being provided as noted above. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the method by which a Provider will receive payment available through the school readiness program and other programs for children eligible for financially- assisted school readiness services or subsidized child care that are in the Provider's care and to ensure that Provider meets all criteria required to receive such payments. The Parties acknowledge that the Provider is not a subcontractor of the Coalition, the Coalition has no control over the day -to -day operations of the Provider, and that the existence of this Agreement does not require or guarantee enrollment of children in the Provider's child care program. The Coalition contracts with an agency to perform many of the functions of the Coalition as set forth below and Provider shall cooperate and comply with Coalition's agency as if the action, request or service were by the Coalition itself. The Parties agree as follows: I. Provider Responsibilities. The Provider shall: A. Retain all client records, financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents (including electronic storage media) pertinent to this Agreement for five (5) years after expiration or termination of this Agreement, or if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. The Provider shall further comply with all record retention requirements of Sections 119.021 and 411.011, Florida Statutes, and all other requirements of law, and shall retain records for the period of time required by this Agreement or required by law, whichever is longer. The Provider will cooperate with The Coalition to facilitate the duplication and transfer or any said records or documents upon request of the Coalition. B. Ensure that all records pertinent to this Agreement, including but not limited to sign -in /sign -out and attendance records, are available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, copying or audit by Federal auditors, representatives of the Comptroller of the State of Florida or the Auditor General of Florida, or other personnel duly authorized by the Coalition, Department of Education, or Florida's Office of Early Learning. C. Permit persons duly authorized by the Coalition to access, inspect and /or copy any papers, documents, facilities, goods or services of the Provider which are relevant to this Agreement and to interview any clients or employees of the Provider to ensure the satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Failure to allow access to duly authorized persons may result in non - payment for that day and provider termination from the School Readiness Program. D. Not discriminate against participants in the school readiness program or employees because of age, race, creed, color, disability, national origin, handicap, marital status or gender. 9 Comply with the Pro - Children Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. 6083. Failure to comply with the provisions of this law may result in imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and /or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. Not hold itself out, nor should its employees hold themselves out, as employees, agents, servants, joint venturers, partners or representatives of the Coalition. G. Participate in the developmental screening /assessment process as designated by the Coalition for 100% of those children, ages birth to five prior to entry into Kindergarten, for whom the Provider receives financially - assisted school readiness funding and for whom a parent and /or guardian has consented in writing to the developmental screening /assessment. The Provider is responsible for submitting information to the Coalition as required in connection with developmental screening /assessment. Records relating to any screening or assessment coordinated or administered by the Provider, including but not limited to developmental screenings, shall be maintained for the longer of three years after the date the child is last enrolled with the Provider or the retention period in Section I.A. above. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps H. Comply with the requirements of Section 411.0106. Infants and toddlers in state - funded education and care programs; brain development activities. - --Each state - funded education and care program for children from birth to 5 years of age must provide activities to foster brain development in infants and toddlers. A program must provide an environment that helps children attain the performance standards adopted by the office of Early Learning under s. 411.01(4)(d)8. and must be rich in language and music and filled with objects of various colors, shapes, textures, and sizes to stimulate visual, tactile, auditory, and linguistic senses in the children and must include classical music and at least 30 minutes of reading to the children each day. A program may be offered through an existing early childhood program such as Healthy Start, the Title I program, the School Readiness program, the Head Start program, or a private child care program. A program must provide training for the infants' and toddlers' parents including direct dialogue and interaction between teachers and parents demonstrating the urgency of brain development in the first year of a child's life. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps J. Keep confidential all information concerning all children and their families required to be kept confidential by law and provide adequate security in its record keeping. K. Return to the Coalition all sums expended for costs associated with this Agreement which were paid contrary to the terms of this Agreement. In the event the Provider or its independent auditor discovers that an overpayment has been made, but the Coalition is unaware of the overpayment, the Provider shall repay said overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after determining the existence of the overpayment. In the event that the Coalition first discovers that an overpayment has been made, the Coalition shall notify the Provider in writing. The Provider shall repay the overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after the receipt of written notice from the Coalition. Should repayment not be made in a timely manner, the Coalition shall be entitled to charge interest at a lawful rate of interest on the outstanding balance beginning thirty (30) days after the date of notification or discovery. Any such interest shall be remitted to the Coalition. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the Coalition reserves the right to deduct from the Provider's reimbursement payment any overpayment discovered through a monitoring, audit or through any other means. If the Coalition makes such a deduction from a reimbursement payment, it shall provide the Provider with notice in writing of the reason for the deduction and the amount of the deduction at the time the reimbursement payment is made. L. Submit the final invoice for payment to the Coalition no more than twenty (20) calendar days after termination or expiration of the Agreement; if the Provider fails to do so, all right to payment is forfeited, and the Coalition will not honor any requests for payment submitted after the aforesaid time period. Any payment due under the terms of this Agreement may be withheld until all evaluation and financial reports due from the Provider and necessary adjustments thereto, have been approved by the Coalition. M. Comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, as well as policies and requirements of the Coalition including but not limited to: rules and regulations of local fire and health authorities; the Palm Beach County Child Care Ordinance; applicable Workers' Compensation laws; the background screening requirements contained in Chapters 402 and 435; Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida; and Chapters 60613 -4, 65C -20 and 65C -22, Florida Administrative Code. The Provider represents and warrants that it has complied with 10 all applicable background screening requirements under Florida law including those required by Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida. Failure to comply with federal, state or local laws or regulations may result in termination and /or non - payment of child care services. N. Accept a School Readiness funded /summer camp child only after receiving authorization from the Coalition. Initial authorization may be by phone. D. Maintain current documentation on each child, including authorization, enrollment, attendance, immunization, an annual physical, and termination records. Providers not subject to child care licensing inspections such as informal providers and other licensed exempt providers must collect and retain immunization and an annual physical records for review by the Coalition for each child ages birth to S who have not yet entered kindergarten. Maintain a manual or electronic sign -in /sign -out system and ensure parents /guardians or other authorized persons utilize the system each day their children) are in attendance. Sign -in /out sheets are only used by the Coalition to verify attendance for enrollment and payment purposes. In order for the Coalition to verify attendance for payment purposes, parents /guardians or authorized persons using a manual sign -in /sign -out sheet must sign their children) in at time of arrival at the site and out upon leaving the site every day by signing their full signature and time in /out (including AM and PM. for those providers offering extended care). Parents /Guardians or authorized persons using an electronic sign -in /sign- out system must sign their full signature and date on a printed version of the electronic record within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month. No individual may sign in or sign out a child other than a child's parent or guardian, or an individual for whom the Provider has obtained and maintains written authorization from the parent or guardian that such individual may sign the child in or out. In no event may any officer, employee or volunteer of the Provider sign a child in or out except where it is logistically impossible for the parent /guardian to physically sign the child in or out (such as where the child rides the bus) and where the parent /guardian has expressly consented in writing to an officer, employee, or volunteer of the Provider signing the child in or out. In such cases, the parent /guardian must sign a statement at least weekly verifying their child's attendance for the preceding week for payment purposes. In addition, the Provider must comply with all licensing requirements relating to sign -in /sign -out sheets for licensing purposes which may differ from the requirements in this Agreement for sign -in /sign -out sheets to verify attendance for payment. iii. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must remain on --site at the Provider's location for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available for inspection and /or pick -up by individuals authorized by the Coalition. In the event that the Provider is unable to produce sign an /sign -out sheets on -site in accordance with this paragraph, reimbursement shall not be made for any days for which a completed sign -in /sign -out sheet is not immediately available on -site at the Provider's location. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must be kept for a minimum of five years or the retention period in Section I.A. above, whichever is longer, and must be available for inspection by the Coalition, and /or other subsidized child care funding sources. In the event of a discrepancy between a sign -in /sign -out sheet and an Enrollment /Attendance Certification, the sign -in /sign -out sheet shall control. Exceptions must be preapproved in writing by the Coalition. Q. Be liable for prosecution under State law for fraudulently misrepresenting a child's attendance and /or sign -in /sign- out roster. This includes, but is not limited to, deliberately claiming children for reimbursement who are not attending, falsifying Enrollment Attendance Certification sheets, and falsifying sign -in /sign -out sheets. R. Maintain hours of operation in accordance with and not exceeding the scope of the Provider's child care license. S. Notify the Coalition in writing a minimum of 14 calendar days in advance of any changes to its location. T. Be liable for and indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Coalition and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees from all claims, suits, judgments or damages, including attorneys' fees and costs arising out of any act, actions, neglect or omissions by the Provider, its agents or employees during the performance or operation of this Agreement or any subsequent modification of this Agreement, whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or tangible or intangible property. The Provider's inability to evaluate its liability shall not excuse the 11 Provider's duty to defend and indemnify within seven (7) calendar days after notice by the Coalition. After the highest appeal is exhausted, only an adjudication or judgment specifically finding the Provider not liable shall excuse performance of this provision. The Provider shall pay all costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to these obligations and their enforcement by the Coalition. The Coalition's failure to notify the Provider of a claim shall not relieve the Provider of these duties. The Provider shall not be liable for the sole negligent acts of thep� Coalition. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver of any right of defense which Provider may possess and limited by provisions of See. 768.28, Fla. Stat. U. Maintain any liability and /or accident insurance as required by law, including but not limited to, any insurance required by child care licensing regulations. Any insurance coverage beyond that required by law is optional, but encouraged. If the Provider is a child care facility or family child care home and maintains liability and /or accident insurance covering its business: (a) the Coalition shall be named as an additional insured, (b) the Provider shall furnish the Coalition with written verification supporting the existence of such insurance coverage, and (c) the Provider shall notify the Coalition in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of any anticipated material change in coverage or cancellation. The Coalition need not be named as an additional insured on any Workers Compensation policies. The Provider must comply with the insurance requirements of this paragraph before reimbursement payments will be made. This provision does not apply to the extent the Provider is self - insured, including but not limited to, a state agency or subdivision that is self - insured pursuant to Section 768.28(16), Florida Statutes. V. Submit to monitoring by the Coalition to ensure compliance with this Agreement. Monitorings may occur randomly throughout the year and are unannounced. If deficiencies are noted, they shall be corrected by the Provider in accordance with a written corrective action plan that includes time lines for correcting deficiencies. Recurring lack of availability for monitoring shall constitute a violation of this Agreement, and is grounds for termination of the Agreement. W. Immediately report any known or suspected child abuse or neglect to the Florida Department of Children and Families through the Child Abuse Registry (1- 800 -96- ABUSE). X. Report any unexcused absence or seventh consecutive excused absence of an At Risk child of any age to the Florida Department of Children and Families' (DCF) hotline at toll free 1 (866) 325 -5323 by noon on the day of the child's first unexcused absence, or the day of the child's seventh consecutive excused absence. In addition any provider serving At Risk children whose site has a temporary closure shall report that closure to the above hotline. If you cannot reach someone at the hotline, please call Child Net (561) 352 -2460. An At Risk child is defined as a child with a BG1 billing category as reported on the Child Care Certificate. Y. Report any temporary closures of the Provider's facility to the Coalition in advance if the temporary closure is planned, or by the close of business on the day of the closure if the temporary closure is not planned in advance. If the closure is extended the Provider must notify the Coalition within 2 days of reopening the facility as to the status and availability. Z. Agree to attempt to settle any dispute relating to this Agreement or the services provided hereunder through the Coalition Grievance process as described in Attachment A Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure which may be amended from time to time at the discretion of the Coalition or Florida's Office of Early Learning. In the event the provider fails to first go through the Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure, the Provider shall pay all Coalition costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to any action the provider may take. AA. Notify the Coalition in advance, if a change is known to be occurring, and in no event later than 14 calendar days of a change in Director. Using Attachment B — Change of Director form. Failure to notify the Coalition within the time frame of this change may result in corrective action. BB. Providers offering the School Readiness program shall be required to utilize a developmentally appropriate curriculum designed to enhance the age - appropriate progress of children in attaining the performance standards adopted by Florida's Office of Early Learning Rule 6- M.701. The Provider will conform and comply with all requirements for curriculum use and approval as designated by the Office of Early Learning. For information regarding curriculum use and approval the Provider may review the process on the Coalition's website at www.elcpaimbeach.or.g and /or call the Provider Warmline at 561- 214 -7426. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps 1.2 CC. To the extent that the Provider receives reimbursement for subsidized child care funded by any source other than the Coalition, comply with all applicable requirements of the funding source as communicated by the Coalition to the Provider. DD. Provider will identify and monitor a working E -mail address required by this agreement. Regular communication including but not limited to communication from the Coalition and early learning partners. The Coalition Responsibilities. The Coalition shall: A. Conduct monitoring of the Provider to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. B. Process payment to the Provider for child care services provided by the Provider under the school readiness program or other subsidized child care programs, subject to the availability of funds. The payment obligations under this Agreement are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Florida Legislature, and funding by the Coalition and other funding sources, as applicable. C. Notify the provider of At -Risk children. D. Forward the names of any child care provider suspected of committing fraud to the Florida Office of Early Learning and to law enforcement for further investigation as appropriate in the discretion of the Coalition. III. Termination. A. The Coalition will provide technical assistance and /or assist the Provider in developing a compliance plan for Provider's found to be in non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement or in violation of Class I or Class 11 child care licensing standards. The Coalition will monitor such compliance plan, and in the event of Provider's continued non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, will issue Provider a Final Warning Notification indicating the Coalition's intent to terminate this Agreement for Cause. The Final Warning Notification shall provide for 30 days notice of revocation of funding, and will allow the provider to trigger the appeal process. Failure to comply with the Final Warning Notification within the set time period will result in immediate termination of funding. B. Coalition Decisions to Terminate. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, Provider understands that, subject to Provider's right to appeal, the Coalition has the right to terminate this Agreement for Cause. Cause is defined as: 1. The failure to materially comply with terms of this Agreement or policies, laws, rules, or regulations referenced herein, or the violation of any laws, rules, or regulations regarding SR promulgated by the State of Florida; 2. Repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard; 3. Acts of fraud or other forms of misconduct that materially threatens the integrity of the SR Program or Coalition; or 4. A Class I violation (or the equivalent thereof with respect to public Providers) committed by Provider that resulted in death or serious harm to a child. C. Provider's Right to Appeal for Cause Determinations. 1. In determining whether Provider's non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or Provider's repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard, rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature and severity of the breach or violation, the repetition of the breach or violation, the Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the imminent threat to the health, safety, or well being of the children in care. 13 2. In determining whether Provider's Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature of the violation, Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the culpability of the Provider, its principals and officers, relative to that of Provider's staff involved in the violation. D. Termination Without Cause. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, upon the vote of 2/3 of the then present members of the Board, this Agreement shall be terminated with or without cause upon no less than 15 calendar days notice for reasons including, but not limited to: 1. Funds to finance this Agreement become unavailable; or 2. The Provider breaches this Agreement. E. Emergency Suspension Order. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event Provider commits either a material fraud, a Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child, or any other act that the Board of the Coalition, in its sole discretion, deems so egregious in nature so as to be an imminent threat to the health, safety or well being of the children in care, then the Coalition May at any time, enter an Emergency Suspension Order that suspends this Agreement for a period of time, not to exceed 45 days, so as to allow the Coalition to make a final determination as to the termination of this Agreement for Cause. IV. Method of Payment. A. Negotiated Rates. Payment for subsidized child care services shall be based upon the School Readiness Negotiated Rate Sheets attached here to as Attachment C which are expressly made a part hereof and incorporated by reference herein. In no event will the Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum reimbursement rate designated by the Coalition, or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. Increases in the negotiated reimbursement rate will be effective, as applicable, the first of the month following notification in writing by the provider to the Coalition. B. Parent Fees. Rule 6M- 4.401, Florida Administrative Code (FAC), requires SR providers to collect parent co- payments. A School Readiness provider's failure to collect parent co- payments may result in corrective action or termination. The Coalition reserves the right to refer a School Readiness provider in flagrant violation of rule for a fraud investigation. The authorized sliding scale parent fee shall be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent fee. C. Child Care Executive Partnership. If the Provider participates in the Child Care Executive Partnership Program, the Provider's portion of matching funds may be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. Monthly Invoices. The Provider will be paid by the Coalition on the basis of monthly invoices that report the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. The invoices shall be submitted on the Enrollment /Attendance Certification sheet and Request for Approval of Payment - Extended Absence forms provided by the Coalition for this purpose. The Provider shall submit monthly invoices consisting of these forms to the Coalition not later than the fourth (4th) calendar day of the month following the month in which services were provided. If the 4th calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday the due date shall be the business day prior to the 4th calendar day of the month. Monthly attendance and reimbursement forms received after that day will be included in the following month's report thus delaying the Provider's reimbursement until the next reimbursement period. The Provider forfeits all rights to payment for any monthly attendance report submitted more than 45 days following the end of the service period. Requests for reimbursement adjustments must be submitted in writing to the Coalition within 21 calendar days of receipt of reimbursement. Fraudulent conduct by the Provider in reporting information to the Coalition in connection with receiving payment hereunder will result in termination of this Agreement and will be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authority or authorities. 14 Invoice Due Dates August 2, 2013 September 4, 2013 October 4, 2013 November 4, 2013 December 4, 2013 January 3, 2014 February 4, 2014 March 4, 2014 April 4, 2014 May 2, 2014 June 4, 2014 July 3, 2014 D. Payments. Reimbursement payments will be mailed or released for direct deposit by the Coalition no later than the sixteenth (16th) calendar day of the month or on the first business day following the sixteenth depending on weekends and holidays, following the month for which a completed and accurate invoice (including all required attendance information) is submitted to the Coalition, subject to availability of funds. This is not necessarily the date providers will have access to the payment, depending on bank regulations. Reimbursement shall be made for the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. E. Gold Seal. Reimbursement at Gold Seal rates will be made only if proper documentation is submitted to the Coalition. Proper documentation includes a current Gold Seal certificate from the State of Florida and a current accreditation certificate from an accrediting body recognized by the State of Florida. In no event will a Gold Seal Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum Gold Seal rate as designated by the Coalition or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. If the Provider ceases to qualify at any time for payment of Gold Seal rates, the Provider will be reimbursed at the non -Gold Seal rates which shall not exceed the maximum rates for non -Gold Seal providers as designated by the Coalition. During the month when a Gold Seal certificate expires and the renewal certificate has not been received by the Coalition, care will be reimbursed at non -Gold Seal rates, with the Gold Seal differential being paid the following month provided that the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the renewal certificate. Gold Seal rates for renewed certification will be effective from the date of renewal provided the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the Gold Seal renewal certificate. Otherwise, the Gold Seal rates for the renewed certification will be effective when the certificate is received by the Coalition. Gold Seal rates for newly Gold Seal certified facilities will be effective the first of the month following receipt of the Gold Seal Certificate by the Coalition. Funding Source. Reimbursement will not be made for children being paid for through a funding source other than the source of funding under this Agreement. G. Termination of Service to Client. If a child ceases to be eligible for financially- assisted school readiness services or other subsidized child care, the Coalition will notify the Provider of the child's termination date. The Provider shall not be entitled to reimbursement beyond the termination date as indicated on the child care certificate or the date on which the Provider is notified by telephone or in writing of a child's termination, whichever is earlier. H. VPK Wrap - around rates. The Payment rate for wrap - around readiness services is calculated in accordance with guidelines established by the Office of Early Learning, regardless of whether the private pre - kindergarten provider or public school delivering the VPK program for the child is the same or different than the school readiness provider delivering the wrap - around readiness services. V. Reimbursement Policies. A. Program Holidays The Provider will be paid for Holidays as designated in their Agreement application. Any changes to floating holidays must be submitted in writing at least 45 calendar days prior to the first day of the month in which the holiday change will occur. Children are not eligible for holiday reimbursement if they are not normally scheduled to attend that day. Part time rates will be paid for afterschool children for Memorial Day. Additional floating holidays selected by the provider as described above may also be paid at the part time rate for afterschool children if the day before or after the additional holiday is paid at a part time rate. 15 A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any holidays. The Provider will also close for the following days and time periods. The Provider will not be reimbursed for these days. N/A Providers must notify the Coalition in the event they are closed any days not listed in this Agreement. B. Reimbursement for Absences Reimbursement may be made for a total of 3 absences during a calendar month for each child. Under extenuating circumstance and with proper documentation up to an additional 7 (seven) absences within a month may be paid at the discretion of the Coalition. This documentation shall be collected by the provider and must be submitted to the Coalition. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any absences. Reimbursement will not be made for each day entered on the attendance log as "N" or not reimbursable If the day before or the day after a holiday is marked "N" (not reimbursable), the Provider will not be reimbursed y. and/or floating holidays is marked "N ", the far the holiday. If the day before or the day after a series of holidays a ,_. provider will not be reimbursed for any of the holidays and/or floatine holidays. If the Provider determines that a parent does not intend to return a child to the child care program, then the child must be terminated from the child care program, and future days are non - reimbursable. These non - reimbursable days must be coded as "T" on attendance sheets. If a child is absent for five (5) consecutive days and the parent does not contact the Provider, the Provider shall notify the Coalition and the Coalition shall determine whether continued care is needed. C. Summary of Enrollment /Attendance Codes E- Excused Absence X - Enrolled / Present (a day a child is present) A - Authorized Absence beyond 3 days (excused absence beyond three (3) days, which has been approved by the Coalition) H - Reimbursable Holiday T - Terminated (day child is disenrolled) N - Enrolled, not reimbursable. D. No Reimbursement In Excess of Licensed Capacity No Reimbursement will be made for children in excess of the Provider's licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to limit future enrollment when a Provider has been found to be over its licensed capacity at any given time. Under no circumstances will the Coalition enroll children with a Provider that the Coalition knows will cause the Provider to exceed its licensed capacity at any given time. 16 VI. Renegotiation /Modification. Modifications to this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed. The parties agree to renegotiate this Agreement if federal, state and /or county revisions of any applicable laws or regulations make changes in this Agreement necessary. VII. Notice. Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by hand delivery with a request for a written receipt of acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall be as set forth below, until changed in writing. The name and mailing address of the official payee to whom the Coalition shall make payment: Program Contact: Program Name:, .. a m� ".Me_ � Program Address: Nf,Ifs" ; b Telephone Number: The name of the contact person and street address for notice and where financial and administrative records are maintained: Program Contact: . M. " OW &WO Program Name: ; Program Address: MAL ., :. �F% Telephone Number: ONNN The Provider will provide services under this Agreement at the following location: n*^:°° °?�4 3 °:ara,»:.: • .. - iig, ;m:ei.%:e: h°° .. ?'�ga.°�.»:«rs NEW— : a ' �' - . �® : O Vlll. Miscellaneous. A. Term. This Agreement is effective as of July 1, 2013 or on the date on which the Agreement is signed by the last party required to sign the Agreement, and will automatically terminate on June 30, 2014 for the School Readiness Program and effective as of June 7, 2013 and will automatically terminate on August 16, 2013 for the Summer Camp program. The outlined term is hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement Period" unless terminated earlier as provided herein. Assignment. Neither Party may assign its interest under this Agreement except with the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Without limiting or restricting the generality of the foregoing, it shall not be unreasonable for a party to deny its consent where, in its opinion, acting reasonably, the proposed assignee, purchaser or transferee lacks the capacity or resources necessary to ensure the proper conduct and completion of its obligations under this Agreement over the remaining portion of the Agreement Period. No assignment shall operate to release the assigning Party from its obligations hereunder unless such Party is expressly released from its obligations by the other Party. C. Inurement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing contained in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer upon any other person or entity any benefits, rights or remedies. D. Waiver. No waiver by any Party of one or more defaults by any other Party in the performance of any provisions of this Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any future default or defaults, whether of a like or a different character. E. Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience or reference only and shall not affect the meaning or construction hereof. 17 F. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding between the Parties relative to the matters addressed herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings other than those set forth or referred to herein. G. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended without the execution of a written document by all Parties hereto. Except as contemplated in Section I. below. All parties agree however, that an amendment may be required due to change of State rules and regulations. In this case, all Parties agree to execute an amendment to this Agreement H. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Venue for purposes of any action brought to enforce or construe this Agreement shall be in Palm Beach County, Florida. Statewide Agreement. If the State of Florida issues a standard provider contract during the life of this Agreement, the Coalition may, at its sole discretion, require that the State of Florida contract be executed by both parties rendering this Agreement null and void. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this 21 page Agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized. The undersigned represents and warrants that he /she has full and complete authority to execute the agreement on behalf of By EARLY LEARNING COALITION PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. Warren Eldridge, Executive Director day of 12013. PROVIDER By the signature below, Provider hereby certifies that 1.) to the best of their knowledge and belief, after diligent inquiry, he /she /it is not under investigation for ANY matters, including BUT NOT LIMITED To, fraud and /or other financial malfeasance, which if proven, would or could result in criminal action or termination of this Agreement and 2) by signing this Agreement and agreeing to accept financially- assisted school readiness funds and subsidized child care funding available from other sources, you are acknowledging that you understand the terms of this Agreement and agree to abide by these terms stated. (If Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST: Corporate Secretary (Please Print Name of Secretary) (CORPORATE SEAL) By President /Vice President (Please Print Name of President /Vice President) day of 2013. (if Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) By 1St Witness Signature Witness Signature FedAr *fedk t legal sufficiency. 18 icy: � « � Ch Attorney " r / Signature (Print Provider Name) day of , 2013. Attachment A Early Darning Coalition of Palm $eac}i County Number:OP1 -2011 Subject File: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE Issue Date: 11/1/11 Originating Unit: Operations Department ELC Staff Contact: Chief Operating Officer Subject: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE Purpose: The Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (Coalition) is committed to providing high - quality early learning services and desires that any provider or parent who is not in agreement with any of its services or procedures be afforded a dispute resolution process to ensure that all disputes are handled in a fair, efficient and timely manner. The Coalition will provide opportunity for individuals to express grievances and concerns and to appeal decisions made through a formal grievance and appeals process. Reason: To give a clear and specific written course of action for resolving disputes within the Palm Beach County early learning system. Dispute Resolution Procedure: 1. Disputant submits grievance to the Coalition's Executive Director in writing to the following address: 2300 High Ridge Road, Suite 115 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 2. All grievances shall include: the name and contact information of the disputant; specifics of dispute; C. actions taken to resolve dispute including all actions previously mentioned in this procedure; and d. any supporting documents. 3. The Coalition's Executive Director will contact the disputant directly within (2) business days to attempt to resolve the concerns. a. The Executive Director will record all contact attempts and dates, as well as the outcome of the contact attempts. b. If a resolution is reached, it will be documented. C. If a resolution is not reached, the dispute and all documentation will be submitted by the Executive Director to the Coalition's Executive Committee, The Executive Director will notify the disputant within three (3) business days of the next Executive Committee Meeting during which the Executive Committee will hear the appeal. The Coalition Executive Director shall inform the Executive Committee of the dispute and provide committee members with all applicable information. The Committee shall attempt to convene within thirty (30) days of receipt of the dispute to make a determination. 4. The Executive Committee shall act as an appeals committee and hear all disputes that are unresolved through the Service Provider Grievance Procedure, Coalition staff process, or Executive Director. 5. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for making all written findings and recommendations based upon: a. Testimony from the Executive Director b. Written findings from Service Provider Grievance Procedures C. Coalition staff findings and reports d. Other relevant information 6. The disputant and /or his /her representative will be provided with the opportunity to present his /her concerns. 7. All decisions of the Executive Committee are final and the disputant shall be notified in writing of this decision within 30 days from the date of the appeals hearing. 8. All appeals hearings are open to the public, unless otherwise provided by law, rule or regulation 19 Attachment B CHANGE OF DIRECTOR FORM The information listed below is an update to the Application /Renewal Data Sheet submitted for the current contract year. LEGAL NAME OF PROVIDER: ADDRESS CITY, STATE & ZIP: TELEPHONE: ( ) NEW DIRECTOR'S NAME: DATE NEW DIRECTOR HIRED: NEW DIRECTOR'S E -MAIL ADDRESS: FORMER DIRECTOR: By signing below, the PROVIDER indicates that the new director is authorized to inquire about and sign documents relating to payment, attendance, Agreement application or renewal, Agreement contract and Agreement amendment(s). (If Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST: By Corporate Secretary President /Vice President (Please Print Name of Secretary) (Please Print Name of President /Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL) day of 2013. (If Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) 1St Witness Signature Witness Signature Return To: FAMILY CENTRAL, INC. 3111 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, SUITE 222 ATTN: PROVIDER SERVICES WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33405 -1548 Approved as to P�QE /: 561 -514 -3338 legal sufficiency: City Attorney � 1 `l 20 By Signature (Print Provider Name) day of 2013. 1sF ?Tr7 Date Received: Processed by: Date: Attachment C RATE SHEET Program's Name Child care reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate per child. Parent fees shall be deducted from this rate before payment is made to the Provider. *If Gold Sea! Differential is included in these rates the rates will be reduced when the Gold Sea! is no longer applicable. Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate. Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULLTIME Sibling Rate PARTTIME Sibling Rate Infants $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 0 -12 months Toddler $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 13 -23 months Two year olds $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 24 -35 months $N /A $N /A $N /A $N /A Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 36 -47 months Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 48 -59 months Preschool 60 -72 months $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A (not in School) School Age /summers $13.00 $13.00 $ 10.44 $ 10.44 Holidays Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate. Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Approved as to form and Prov4ci�lf?tigmy. 21 ,`, y City Attorney Date: Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULL TIME SIBLING PART TIME SIBLING Preschool $N /A $N /A $N /A $N /A 36 -47 months Preschool $N /A $N /A $N /A $N /A 48 -59 months Preschool 60 -72 months $N /A $N /A $N /A $N /A (not in School) Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Approved as to form and Prov4ci�lf?tigmy. 21 ,`, y City Attorney Date: SCHOOL READINESS CHILD CARE PROVIDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. AND Ci#y of Delray Beach D/BjA Pnrngey► Park Community Center ❑x School Readiness Services: Term of this agreement is July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 0 Summer Camp Services: Term of this agreement is June 7, 2013 through August 16, 2013 This Provider Agreement ( "Agreement ") is entered into between the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Coalition ") and the Provider of School Readiness (SR) Program services and /or Summer Camp services, City of Delray,Beach,,D /B /A Pompey Park Community Centers (hereinafter referred to as the "Provider ") with its principal offices located at 1101 North West 2nd Street to provide school readiness /summer camp services for the period of the term in accordance to the service type being provided as noted above. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the method by which a Provider will receive payment available through the school readiness program and other programs for children eligible for financially- assisted school readiness services or subsidized child care that are in the Provider's care and to ensure that Provider meets all criteria required to receive such payments. The Parties acknowledge that the Provider is not a subcontractor of the Coalition, the Coalition has no control over the day -to -day operations of the Provider, and that the existence of this Agreement does not require or guarantee enrollment of children in the Provider's child care program. The Coalition contracts with an agency to perform many of the functions of the Coalition as set forth below and Provider shall cooperate and comply with Coalition's agency as if the action, request or service were by the Coalition itself. The Parties agree as follows: Provider Responsibilities. The Provider shall: A. Retain all client records, financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents (including electronic storage media) pertinent to this Agreement for five (5) years after expiration or termination of this Agreement, or if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. The Provider shall further comply with all record retention requirements of Sections 119.021 and 411.011, Florida Statutes, and all other requirements of law, and shall retain records for the period of time required by this Agreement or required by law, whichever is longer. The Provider will cooperate with The Coalition to facilitate the duplication and transfer or any said records or documents upon request of the Coalition. B. Ensure that all records pertinent to this Agreement, including but not limited to sign -in /sign -out and attendance records, are available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, copying or audit by Federal auditors, representatives of the Comptroller of the State of Florida or the Auditor General of Florida, or other personnel duly authorized by the Coalition, Department of Education, or Florida's Office of Early Learning. C. Permit persons duly authorized by the Coalition to access, inspect and /or copy any papers, documents, facilities, goods or services of the Provider which are relevant to this Agreement and to interview any clients or employees of the Provider to ensure the satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Failure to allow access to duly authorized persons may result in non - payment for that day and provider termination from the School Readiness Program. D. Not discriminate against participants in the school readiness program or employees because of age, race, creed, color, disability, national origin, handicap, marital status or gender. 9 E. Comply with the Pro - Children Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. 6083. Failure to comply with the provisions of this law may result in imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and /or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. Not hold itself out, nor should its employees hold themselves out, as employees, agents, servants, joint venturers, partners or representatives of the Coalition. G. Participate in the developmental screening/assessment process as designated by the Coalition for 100% of those children, ages birth to five prior to entry into Kindergarten, for whom the Provider receives financially- assisted school readiness funding and for whom a parent and /or guardian has consented in writing to the developmental screening/assessment. The Provider is responsible for submitting information to the Coalition as required in connection with developmental screening /assessment. Records relating to any screening or assessment coordinated or administered by the Provider, including but not limited to developmental screenings, shall be maintained for the longer of three years after the date the child is last enrolled with the Provider or the retention period in Section I.A. above. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps H. Comply with the requirements of Section 411.0106. Infants and toddlers in state - funded education and care programs; brain development activities. —Each state - funded education and care program for children from birth to 5 years of age must provide activities to foster brain development in infants and toddlers. A program must provide an environment that helps children attain the performance standards adopted by the Office of Early Learning under s. 41�.01(4)(d)8. and must be rich in language and music and filled with objects of various colors, shapes, textures, and sizes to stimulate visual, tactile, auditory, and linguistic senses in the children and must include classical music and at least 30 minutes of reading to the children each day. A program may be offered through an existing early childhood program such as Healthy Start, the Title I program, the School Readiness program, the Head Start program, or a private child care program. A program must provide training for the infants' and toddlers' parents including direct dialogue and interaction between teachers and parents demonstrating the urgency of brain development in the first year of a child's life. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps Keep confidential all information concerning all children and their families required to be kept confidential by law and provide adequate security in its record keeping. K. Return to the Coalition all sums expended for costs associated with this Agreement which were paid contrary to the terms of this Agreement. In the event the Provider or its independent auditor discovers that an overpayment has been made, but the Coalition is unaware of the overpayment, the Provider shall repay said overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after determining the existence of the overpayment. In the event that the Coalition first discovers that an overpayment has been made, the Coalition shall notify the Provider in writing. The Provider shall repay the overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after the receipt of written notice from the Coalition. Should repayment not be made in a timely manner, the Coalition shall be entitled to charge interest at a lawful rate of interest on the outstanding balance beginning thirty (30) days after the date of notification or discovery. Any such interest shall be remitted to the Coalition. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the Coalition reserves the right to deduct from the Provider's reimbursement payment any overpayment discovered through a monitoring, audit or through any other means. If the Coalition makes such a deduction from a reimbursement payment, it shall provide the Provider with notice in writing of the reason for the deduction and the amount of the deduction at the time the reimbursement payment is made. L. Submit the final invoice for payment to the Coalition no more than twenty (20) calendar days after termination or expiration of the Agreement; if the Provider fails to do so, all right to payment is forfeited, and the Coalition will not honor any requests for payment submitted after the aforesaid time period. Any payment due under the terms of this Agreement may be withheld until all evaluation and financial reports due from the Provider and necessary adjustments thereto, have been approved by the Coalition. M. Comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, as well as policies and requirements of the Coalition including but not limited to: rules and regulations of local fire and health authorities; the Palm Beach County Child Care Ordinance; applicable Workers' Compensation laws; the background screening requirements contained in Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida; and Chapters 60BB -4, 65C -20 and 65C -22, Florida Administrative Code. The Provider represents and warrants that it has complied with 10 all applicable background screening requirements under Florida law including those required by Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida. f=ailure to comply with federal, state or local laws or regulations may result in termination and /or non - payment of child care services. N. Accept a School Readiness funded /summer camp child only after receiving authorization from the Coalition. Initial authorization may be by.phone. O. Maintain current documentation on each child, including authorization, enrollment, attendance, immunization, an annual physical, and termination records. Providers not subject to child care licensing inspections such as informal providers and other licensed exempt providers must collect and retain immunization and an annual physical records for review by the Coalition for each child ages birth to 5 who have not yet entered kindergarten. P. Maintain a manual or electronic sign -in /sign -out system and ensure parents /guardians or other authorized persons utilize the system each day their children) are in attendance. Sign -in /out sheets are only used by the Coalition to verify attendance for enrollment and payment purposes. In order for the Coalition to verify attendance for payment purposes, parents /guardians or authorized persons using a manual sign -in /sign -out sheet must sign their children) in at time of arrival at the site and out upon leaving the site every day by signing their full signature and time in /out (including AM and PM. for those providers offering extended care). Parents /Guardians or authorized persons using an electronic sign -in /sign- out system must sign their full signature and date on a printed version of the electronic record within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month. No individual may sign in or sign out a child other than a child's parent or guardian, or an individual for whom the Provider has obtained and maintains written authorization from the parent or guardian that such individual may sign the child in or out. ii. In no event may any officer, employee or volunteer of the Provider sign a child in or out except where it is logistically impossible for the parent /guardian to physically sign the child in or out (such as where the child rides the bus) and where the parent /guardian has expressly consented in writing to an officer, employee, or volunteer of the Provider signing the child in or out. In such cases, the parent /guardian must sign a statement at least weekly verifying their child's attendance for the preceding week for payment purposes. In addition, the Provider must comply with all licensing requirements relating to sign -in /sign -out sheets for licensing purposes which may differ from the requirements in this Agreement for sign -in /sign -out sheets to verify attendance for payment. iii. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must remain on -site at the Provider's location for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available for inspection and /or pick -up by individuals authorized by the Coalition. In the event that the Provider is unable to produce sign -in /sign -out sheets on -site in accordance with this paragraph, reimbursement shall not be made for any days for which a completed sign -in /sign -out sheet is not immediately available on -site at the Provider's location. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must be kept for a minimum of five years or the retention period in Section I.A. above, whichever is longer, and must be available for inspection by the Coalition, and /or other subsidized child care funding sources. In the event of a discrepancy between a sign -in /sign -out sheet and an Enrollment /Attendance Certification, the sign -in /sign -out sheet shall control. Exceptions must be preapproved in writing by the Coalition. Q. Be liable for prosecution under State law for fraudulently misrepresenting a child's attendance and /or sign -in /sign- out roster. This includes, but is not limited to, deliberately claiming children for reimbursement who are not attending, falsifying Enrollment Attendance Certification sheets, and falsifying sign-in/sign-out sheets. R. Maintain hours of operation in accordance with and not exceeding the scope of the Provider's child care license. S. Notify the Coalition in writing a minimum of 14 calendar days in advance of any changes to its location. Be liable for and indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Coalition and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees from all claims, suits, judgments or damages, including attorneys' fees and costs arising out of any act, actions, neglect or omissions by the Provider, its agents or employees during the performance or operation of this Agreement or any subsequent modification of this Agreement, whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or tangible or intangible property. The Provider's inability to evaluate its liability shall not excuse the 11 Provider's duty to defend and indemnify within seven (7) calendar days after notice by the Coalition. After the highest appeal is exhausted, only an adjudication or judgment specifically finding the Provider not liable shall excuse performance of this provision. The Provider shall pay all costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to these obligations and their enforcement by the Coalition. The Coalition's failure to notify the Provider of a claim .; shall not relieve the Provider of these duties. The Provider shall not be liable for the sole negligent acts of the -� Coalition, This provision shall not be construed as a waiver of any right of defense which Provider may possess and is limited by provisions of Sec. 768.28, Fla. Stat. U. Maintain any Liability and /or accident insurance as required by law, including but not limited to, any insurance required by child care licensing regulations. Any insurance coverage beyond that required by law is optional, but encouraged. If the Provider is a child care facility or family child care home and maintains liability and /or accident insurance covering its business: (a) the Coalition shall be named as an additional insured, (b) the Provider shall furnish the Coalition with written verification supporting the existence of such insurance coverage, and (c) the Provider shall notify the Coalition in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of any anticipated material change in coverage or cancellation. The Coalition need not be named as an additional insured on any Workers Compensation policies. The Provider must comply with the insurance requirements of this paragraph before reimbursement payments will be made. This provision does not apply to the extent the Provider is self - insured, including but not limited to, a state agency or subdivision that is self - insured pursuant to Section 768.28(16), Florida Statutes. V. Submit to monitoring by the Coalition to ensure compliance with this Agreement. Monitorings may occur randomly throughout the year and are unannounced. If deficiencies are noted, they shall be corrected by the Provider in accordance with a written corrective action plan that includes time lines for correcting deficiencies. Recurring lacl,�`of availability for monitoring shall constitute a violation of this Agreement, and is grounds for termination of the Agreement. W. Immediately report any known or suspected child abuse or neglect to the Florida Department of Children and Families through the Child Abuse Registry (1- 800 -96- ABUSE). X. Report any unexcused absence or seventh consecutive excused absence of an At Risk child of any age to the Florida Department of Children and Families' (DCF) hotline at toll free 1 (866) 325 -5323 by noon on the day of the child's first unexcused absence, or the day of the child's seventh consecutive excused absence. In addition any provider serving At Risk children whose site has a temporary closure shall report that closure to the above hotline. If you cannot reach someone at the hotline, please call Child Net (561) 352 -2460. An At Risk child is defined as a child with a BG1 billing category as reported on the Child Care Certificate. Report any temporary closures of the Provider's facility to the Coalition in advance if the temporary closure is planned, or by the close of business on the day of the closure if the temporary closure is not planned in advance. If the closure is extended the Provider must notify the Coalition within 2 days of reopening the facility as to the status and availability. Z. Agree to attempt to settle any dispute relating to this Agreement or the services provided hereunder through the Coalition Grievance process as described in Attachment A Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure which may be amended from time to time at the discretion of the Coalition or Florida's Office of Early Learning. In the event the provider fails to first go through the Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure, the Provider shall pay all Coalition costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to any action the provider may take. AA. Notify the Coalition in advance, if a change is known to be occurring, and in no event later than 14 calendar days of a change in Director. Using Attachment B — Change of Director form. Failure to notify the Coalition within the time frame of this change may result in corrective action. BB. Providers offering the School Readiness program shall be required to utilize a developmentally appropriate curriculum designed to enhance the age - appropriate progress of children in attaining the performance standards adopted by Florida's Office of Early Learning Rule 6- M.701. The Provider will conform and comply with all requirements for curriculum use and approval as designated by the Office of Early Learning. For information regarding curriculum use and approval the Provider may review the process on the Coalition's website at �yyLa �.c iGlmbeach.oT. and /or call the Provider Warmline at 561 - 214 -7426. "Not Applicable for Summer Camps 12 CC. To the extent that the Provider receives reimbursement for subsidized child care funded by any source other than the Coalition, comply with all applicable requirements of the funding source as communicated by the Coalition to the Provider. DD. Provider will identify and monitor a working E -mail address required by this agreement. Regular communication including but not limited to communication from the Coalition and early learning partners. II. The Coalition Responsibilities. The Coalition shall: A. Conduct monitoring of the Provider to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. B. Process payment to the Provider for child care services provided by the Provider under the school readiness program or other subsidized child care programs, subject to the availability of funds. The payment obligations under this Agreement are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Florida Legislature, and funding by the Coalition and other funding sources, as applicable. C. Notify the provider of At -Risk children. D. Forward the names of any child care provider suspected of committing fraud to the Florida Office of Early Learning and to law enforcement for further investigation as appropriate in the discretion of the Coalition. III. "termination. A. The Coalition will provide technical assistance and /or assist the Provider in developing a compliance plan for Provider's found to be in non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement or in violation of Class I or Class 11 child care licensing standards. The Coalition will monitor such compliance plan, and in the event of Provider's continued non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, will issue Provider a Final Warning Notification indicating the Coalition's intent to terminate this Agreement for Cause. The Final Warning Notification shall provide for 30 days notice of revocation of funding, and will allow the provider to trigger the appeal process. Failure to comply with the Final Warning Notification within the set time period will result in immediate termination of funding. B. Coalition Decisions to Terminate. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, Provider understands that, subject to Provider's right to appeal, the Coalition has the right to terminate this Agreement for Cause. Cause is defined as: 1. The failure to materially comply with terms of this Agreement or policies, laws, rules, or regulations referenced herein, or the violation of any laws, rules, or regulations regarding SR promulgated by the State of Florida; Repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard; 3. Acts of fraud or other forms of misconduct that materially threatens the integrity of the SR Program or Coalition; or 4. A Class I violation (or the equivalent thereof with respect to public Providers) committed by Provider that resulted in death or serious harm to a child. C. Provider's Right to Appeal for Cause Determinations. 1. In determining whether Provider's non- compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or Provider's repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard, rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature and severity of the breach or violation, the repetition of the breach or violation, the Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the imminent threat to the health, safety, or well being of the children in care. 13 2. In determining whether Provider's Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature of the violation, Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the culpability of the Provider, its principals and officers, relative to that of Provider's staff involved in the violation. D. Termination Without Cause. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, upon the vote of 2/3 of the then present members of the Board, this Agreement shall be terminated with or without cause upon no less than 15 calendar days notice for reasons including, but not limited to: 1. Funds to finance this Agreement become unavailable; or 2. The Provider breaches this Agreement. E. Emergency Suspension Order. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event Provider commits either a material fraud, a Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child, or any other act that the Board of the Coalition, in its sole discretion, deems so egregious in nature so as to be an imminent threat to the health, safety or well being of the children in care, then the Coalition may, at any time, enter an Emergency Suspension Order that suspends this Agreement for a period of time, not to exceed 45 days, so as to allow the Coalition to make a final determination as to the termination of this Agreement for Cause. IV. Method of Payment. A. Negotiated Rates. Payment for subsidized child care services shall be based upon the School Readiness Negotiated Rate Sheets attached here to as Attachment C which are expressly made a part hereof and incorporated by reference herein. in no event will the Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum reimbursement rate designated by the Coalition, or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. Increases in the negotiated reimbursement rate will be effective, as applicable, the first of the month following notification in writing by the provider to the Coalition. B. Parent Fees. Rule 6M- 4.441, Florida Administrative Code (FAC), requires SR providers to collect parent co- payments. A School Readiness provider's failure to collect parent co- payments may result in corrective action or termination. The Coalition reserves the right to refer a School Readiness provider in flagrant violation of rule for a fraud investigation. The authorized sliding scale parent fee shall be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent fee. C. Child Care Executive Partnership. If the Provider participates in the Child Care Executive Partnership Program, the Provider's portion of matching funds may be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. Monthly Invoices. The Provider will be paid by the Coalition on the basis of monthly invoices that report the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. The invoices shall be submitted on the Enrollment /Attendance Certification sheet and Request for Approval of Payment - Extended Absence forms provided by the Coalition for this purpose. The Provider shall submit monthly invoices consisting of these forms to the Coalition not later than the fourth (4th) calendar day of the month following the month in which services were provided. if the 4th calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday the.due.date..shall be the business day prior to the 4th calendar day of the month. Monthly attendance and reimbursement forms received after that day will be included in the following month's report thus delaying the Provider's reimbursement until the next reimbursement period. The Provider forfeits all rights to payment for any monthly attendance report submitted more than 45 days following the end of the service period. Requests for reimbursement adjustments must be submitted in writing to the Coalition within 21 calendar days of receipt of reimbursement. Fraudulent conduct by the Provider in reporting information to the Coalition in connection with receiving payment hereunder will result in termination of this Agreement and will be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authority or authorities. 14 Invoice Due Dates August 2, 2013 September 4, 2013 October 4, 2013 November 4, 2013 December 4, 2013 January 3, 2014 February 4, 2014 March 4, 2014 April 4, 2014 May 2, 2014 June 4, 2014 July 3, 2014 D. Payments. Reimbursement payments will be mailed or released for direct deposit by the Coalition no later than the sixteenth (16` ") calendar day of the month or on the first business day following the sixteenth depending on weekends and holidays, following the month for which a completed and accurate invoice (including all required attendance information) is submitted to the Coalition, subject to availability of funds. This is not necessarily the date providers will have access to the payment, depending on bank regulations. Reimbursement shall be made for the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. E. Gold Seal. Reimbursement at Gold Seal rates will be made only if proper documentation is submitted to the Coalition. Proper documentation includes a current Gold Seal certificate from the State of Florida and a current accreditation certificate from an accrediting body recognized by the State of Florida. In no event will a Gold Seal Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum Gold Seal rate as designated by the Coalition or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. if the Provider ceases to qualify at any time for payment of Gold Seal rates, the Provider will be reimbursed at the non -Gold Seal rates which shall not exceed the maximum rates for non -Gold Seal providers as designated by the Coalition. During the month when a Gold Seal certificate expires and the renewal certificate has not been received by the Coalition, care will be reimbursed at non -Gold Seal rates, with the Gold Seal differential being paid the following month provided that the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the renewal certificate. Gold Seal rates for renewed certification will be effective from the date of renewal provided the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the Gold Seal renewal certificate. Otherwise, the Gold Seal rates for the renewed certification will be effective when the certificate is received by the Coalition. Gold Seal rates for newly Gold Seal certified facilities will be effective the first of the month following receipt of the Gold Seal Certificate by the Coalition. Funding Source. Reimbursement will not be made for children being paid for through a funding source other than the source of funding under this Agreement. G. Termination of Service to Client. If a child ceases to be eligible for financially- assisted school readiness services or other subsidized child care, the Coalition will notify the Provider of the child's termination date. The Provider shall not be entitled to reimbursement beyond the termination date as indicated on the child care certificate or the date on which the Provider is notified by telephone or in writing of a child's termination, whichever is earlier. VPK Wrap- around rates. The Payment rate for wrap- around readiness services is calculated in accordance with guidelines established by the Office of Early Learning, regardless of whether the private pre - kindergarten provider or public school delivering the VPK program for the child is the same or different than the school readiness provider delivering the wrap- around readiness services. V. Reimbursement Policies. A. Program Holidays The Provider will be paid for Holidays as designated in their Agreement application. Any changes to floating holidays must be submitted in writing at least 45 calendar days prior to the first day of the month in which the holiday change will occur. Children are not eligible for holiday reimbursement if they are not normally scheduled to attend that day. Part time rates will be paid for afterschool children for Memorial Day. Additional floating holidays selected by the provider as described above may also be paid at the part time rate for afterschool children if the day before or after the additional holiday is paid at a part time rate. 1.5 A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any holidays. The Provider will also close for the following days and time periods. The Provider will not be reimbursed for these days. N/A Providers must notify the Coalition in the event they are closed any days not listed in this Agreement. B_ Reimbursement for Absences. Reimbursement may be made for a total of 3 absences during a calendar month for each child. Under extenuating circumstance and with proper documentation up to an additional 7 (seven) absences within a month may be paid at the discretion of the Coalition. This documentation shall be collected by the provider and must be submitted to the Coalition. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any absences. Reimbursement will not be made for each day entered on the attendance log as "N" or not reimbursable. If the day before or the day after a holiday is marked "N" (not reimbursable), the Provider will not be reimbursed for the holiday. If the day before or the day after a series of holidays and /or floating holidays is marked "N ", the provider wilLnot_be.reimbursed for any of the holidays and or floating holidays If the Provider determines that a parent does not intend to return a child to the child care program, then the child must be terminated from the child care program, and future days are non - reimbursable. These non - reimbursable days must be coded as "T" on attendance sheets. If a child is absent for five (5) consecutive days and the parent does not contact the Provider, the Provider shall notify the Coalition and the Coalition shall determine whether continued care is needed. C. Summary of Enrollment /Attendance Codes _ -..Excused . Absence X - Enrolled / Present (a day a child is present) A - Authorized Absence beyond 3 days (excused absence beyond three (3) days, which has been approved by the Coalition) H - Reimbursable Holiday T- Terminated (day child is disenrolled) N - Enrolled, not reimbursable. D. No Reimbursement In Excess of Licensed Capacity No Reimbursement will be made for children in excess of the Provider's licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to limit future enrollment when a Provider has been found to be over its licensed capacity at any given time. Under no circumstances will the Coalition enroll children with a Provider that the Coalition knows will cause the Provider to exceed its licensed capacity at any given time. 1.6 Vl. Renegotiation /Modification. Modifications to this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed. The parties agree to renegotiate this Agreement if federal, state and /or county revisions of any applicable laws or regulations make changes in this Agreement necessary. VII. Notice. Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by hand delivery with a request for a written receipt of acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving,. notice shall be as set forth below, until changed in writing. The name and mailing address of the official payee to whom the Coalition shall make.payment: Program Contact: Ton a Smith Program Name: City of.Delrav Beach D /e /A Pomnev Park Community Center Program Address: 50 North West. 1st Avenue Delray Beach FL 33444 Telephone Number: 551 - 243.7249 The name of the contact person and street address for notice and where financial and administrative records are maiaai€teci_- Program Contact: Tonva'Smith Program Name: City of'f7elrav Beach D /B /A Po:rnpev Bark Community Center Program Address: 50 North West iA Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Telephone Number: 551- 243: -7'249 The Provider will provide services under this Agreement at the following location: 17011hiorth West 2nd Street Delra Beach FL 33444 VIII. Miscellaneous. A. Term. This Agreement is effective as of July 1, 2013 or on the date on which the Agreement is signed y the last party required to sign the Agreement and will automatically terminate on June 30, 2014 for the School Readiness Program and effective as of June 7, 2013 and will automatically terminate on August 16, 2013 for the Summer Camp program. The outlined term is hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement Period" unless terminated earlier as provided herein. Assignment. Neither Party may assign its interest under this Agreement except with the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Without limiting or restricting the generality of the foregoing, it shall not be unreasonable for a party to deny its consent where, in its opinion, acting reasonably, the proposed assignee, purchaser or transferee lacks the capacity or resources necessary to ensure the proper conduct and completion of its obligations under this Agreement over the remaining portion of the Agreement Period. No assignment shall operate to release the assigning Party from its obligations hereunder unless such Party is expressly released from its obligations by the other Party. C. Inurement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing contained in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer upon any other person or entity any benefits, rights or remedies. D. Waiver. No waiver by any Party of one or more defaults by any other Party in the performance of any provisions of this Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any future default or defaults, whether of a like or a different Character_ E. Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience or reference only and shall not affect the meaning or construction hereof. ]7 F. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding between the Parties relative to the matters addressed herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings other than those set forth or referrer! to herein... G. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended without the execution of a written document by all Parties hereto. Except as contemplated in Section I. below. All parties agree however, that an amendment may be required due to change of State rules and regulations. In this case, all Parties agree to execute an amendment to this Agreement H. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Venue for purposes of any action brought to enforce or construe this Agreement shall be in Palm Beach County, Florida. I. Statewide Agreement. If the State of Florida issues a standard provider contract during the life of this Agreement, the Coalition may, at its sole discretion, require that the State of Florida contract be executed by both parties rendering.. this Agreement null and void. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this 21 page Agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized. The undersigned represents and warrants that he /she has full and complete authority to execute the agreement on behalf of By EARLY LEARNING COALITION PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. Warren Eldridge, Executive Director day of ., . 2013. PROVIDER By the signature below, Provider hereby certifies that 3.) to the best of their knowledge and belief, after diligent inquiry, helshe /it is not under investigation for ANY matters, including. BUT NOT LIMITED TO, fraud andjor other financial malfeasance, which if proven, would or could result in criminal action or termination of this Agreement and 2) by signing this Agreement and agreeing to accept financially- assisted school readiness funds and subsidized child tare funding available from other sources, you are acknowledging that you understand the terms of this Agreement and agree to abide by these terms stated. (if Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST'.. Corporate Secretary (Please Print Name of Secretary) (CORPORATE SEAL). By President/Vice President (Please Print Name of President /Vice President) day of 2013. (if Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally outhorized to bind Provider is to sign below) f' Witness Signature 2nd Witness Signature Fed r iR�i��r Aatojorm and legal �ucle Y: A ,,• i -, Git)l Attorney w s y I& By Signature (Print Provider Name) day of 2013. Attachment A ry Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County Number:OP1 -2011 Subject File: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE Issue Date: 31/1/11 Originating Unit: Operations Department ELC Staff Contact: Chief Operating Officer Subject: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE Purpose: The Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (Coalition) is committed to providing high - quality early learning services and desires that any provider or parent who is not in agreement with any of its services or procedures be afforded a dispute resolution process to ensure that all disputes are handled in a fair, efficient and timely manner. The Coalition will provide opportunity for individuals to express grievances and concerns and to appeal decisions made through a formal grievance and appeals process. Reason: To give a clear and specific written course of action for resolving disputes within the Palm Beach County early learning system. Dispute Resolution Procedure: 1. Disputant submits grievance to the Coalition's Executive Director in writing to the following address: 2300 High Ridge Road, Suite 115 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 2. All grievances shall include: a. the name and contact information of the disputant; b. specifics of dispute; c. actions taken to resolve dispute including all actions previously mentioned in this procedure; and d. any supporting documents. 3. The Coalition's Executive Director will contact the disputant directly within (2) business days to attempt to resolve the c nrernsa. a. The Executive Director will record all contact attempts and dates, as well as the outcome of the contact attempts. b. If a resolution is reached, it will be documented. c. If a resolution is not reached, the dispute and all documentation will be submitted by the Executive Director to the Coalition's Executive Committee. d. The Executive Director will notify the disputant within three (3) business days of the next Executive Committee Meeting during which the Executive Committee will hear the appeal. e. The Coalition Executive Director shall inform the Executive Committee of the dispute and provide committee members with all applicable information. The Committee shall attempt to convene within thirty (30) days of receipt of the dispute to make a determination. 4. The Executive Committee shall act as an appeals committee and hear all disputes that are unresolved through the Service Provider Grievance Procedure, Coalition staff process, or Executive Director. S. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for making all written findings and recommendations based upon: Testimony from the Executive Director Written findings from Service Provider Grievance Procedures C. Coalition staff findings and reports d. Other relevant information 6. The disputant and /or his /filer representative will be provided with the opportunity to present his /her concerns. 7. All decisions of the Executive Committee are final and the disputant shall be notified in writing_ of this decision within 30 days from the date of the appeals hearing. 8. All appeals hearings are open to the public, unless otherwise provided by law, rule or regulation 19 Attachment 0 CHANGE OF DIRECTOR FORM The information listed below is an update to the Application /Renewal Data Sheet submitted for the current contract year. LEGAL NAME OF PROVIDER: ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP: TELEPHONE: ( ) - NEW DIRECTOR'S NAME: DATE NEW DIRECTOR HIRED: NEW DIRECTOR'S E -MAIL ADDRESS: FORMER DIRECTOR: By signing below, the PROVIDER indicates that the new director is authorized to inquire about and sign documents relating to payment, attendance, Agreement application or renewal, Agreement contract and Agreement amendment(s). (If Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST: Corporate Secretary (Please Print Name of Secretary) By President /Vice President (Please Print Name of President/Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL) day of .2013. (!f Provider is NOT a corporation- person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) 15T Witness Signature Witness Signature Return To: FAMILY CENTRAL, INC. 3111 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, SUITE 222 ATTN: PROVIDER SERVICES WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33405 -1548 PHONE /FAX: 561 -514 -3338 Approved as to form and legal sutiicloncy: City Attorney ppp f,: F ?0 By Signature (Print Provider Name) day of ELC Use Only: Date Received: Processed by: Date: Attachment C RATE SHEET City of Delray Beach D /B /A Pompey Park Community Center Program's Name Child care reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate per child. Parent fees shall be deducted from this rate before payment is made to the Provider. *If Gold Seal Differential is included in these rates the rates will be reduced when the Gold Seal is no longer applicable. Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following- negotiated fixed rate. Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULL TIME FULLTIME Sibling Rate PARTTIME Sibling Rate infants $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 942 months Toddler $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 13 -23 months Two year olds $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 24-35 months $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 36-47 months Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 48 -59 months - Preschool 60 -72 months $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A (not in School) School Age /summers $ 13.00 $13.00 $ 10.44 $10.44 Holidays Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following- negotiated fixed rate. * Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: 21 Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULL TIME SIBLING PART TIME SIBLING Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 36-47 months Preschool $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A 48 -59 months Preschool 60 -72 months $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A $ N/A (not in School) * Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: 21 MEMORANDUM 'A z TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Alberta Gaum, Recreation Superintendent Tim Simmons, Interim Director of Pakrs and Recreation THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.I. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM PROVIDER AGREEMENTS/ EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Request City Commission approval of a Continue -to -Care Afterschool Scholarship Agreement between Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. and the City of Delray Beach to continue reimbursable funding through the CTC -A Scholarship program for the Afterschool Program located at Pompey Park and Community Center. BACKGROUND The term of the attached Continue -to -Care Afterschool Scholarship Agreement between Early Learning Coalition and the City of Delray Beach is July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014. This agreement continues to provide reimbursable funding through the CTC -A Scholarship program.for the afterschool and summer camp programs. Children enrolled through the program will be funded at a reimbursable rate (less the applicable parent fee) to the City at $10.44 /child /part-time day and $19.86 /full -time day. RECOMMENDATION Approval of the Continue -to -Care Afterschool Scholarship Agreements. Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County CONTINUE TO CARE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM PROVIDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. AND City o0elray Beach D /B /A Delray Beach Community Center The term for this agreement is from July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 ❑x Continue to Care - Afterschool ❑ Continue to Care — Scholarships This Provider Agreement is entered into between the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County (hereinafter referred to as the "Coalition ") and the Provider of Continue -to -Care Afterschool Scholarship ( "CTC -A Scholarship ") services and the Provider for Continue to Care Scholarships, City of Delray Beach D /B /A Delray Beach Community Center (hereinafter referred to as the "Provider ") with its principal offices located at 50 NW 1st Avenue to provide afterschool and scholarship program services for the period of July 1, 2013 to June 30,2014. The purpose of this Provider Agreement is to establish the method by which t h e Provider will receive payment available through the CTC -A and Scholarship programs and to ensure that the Provider meets all criteria required to receive such payments. The Parties acknowledge that the Provider is not a subcontractor of the Coalition, the Coalition has no control over the day -to -day operations of the Provider, and that the existence of this Provider Agreement does not require or guarantee enrollment of children in the Provider's childcare program. The Coalition contracts with an agency to perform many of the functions of the Coalition as set forth below and the Provider shall cooperate amply with Coalition's agency as if the action request or service were by the Coalition itself. The Parties agree as follows: I. Provider Responsibilities. The Provider shall: A. Retain all client records, financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents (including electronic storage media) pertinent to this Provider Agreement for five (5) years after expiration or termination of this Provider Agreement, or if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. The Provider shall further comply with all record retention requirements of Sections 119.021 and 411.011, Florida Statutes, and all other requirements of law, and shall retain records for the period of time required by this Provider Agreement or required by law, whichever is longer. The Provider will cooperate with the Coalition to facilitate the duplication and transfer or any said records or documents upon request of the Coalition. B. Ensure that all records pertinent to this Provider Agreement, including but not limited to sign -in /sign- out and attendance records, are available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, copying or audit by Federal auditors, representatives of the Comptroller of the State of Florida or the Auditor General of Florida, or other personnel duly authorized by the Coalition, Department of Education or Florida's Office of Early Learning. C. Permit persons duly authorized by the Coalition to access, inspect and /or copy any papers, documents, facilities, goods or services of the Provider which are relevant to this Provider Agreement and to interview any clients or employees of the Provider to ensure the satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Provider Agreement. Failure to allow access to duly authorized persons may result in non - payment for that day and provider termination from the CTC -A and Scholarship Programs. D. Not discriminate against participants in, or employees working with, any Program funded through this Provider Agreement because of age, race, creed, color, disability, national origin, handicap, marital status or gender. E. Comply with the Pro- Children Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. 6053. Failure to comply with the provisions of this law may result in imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and /or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. F. Not hold itself out, nor should its employees hold themselves out, as employees, agents, servants, joint venturers, partners or representatives of Family Central, Inc. or the Coalition. G. Participate in the developmental screening /assessment process as designated by the Coalition for 100% of those children, ages birth to five prior to entry into Kindergarten, for whom the Provider receives financially - assisted scholarship funding and for whom a parent and /or guardian has consented in writing to the developmental screening /assessment. The Provider is responsible for submitting information to the Coalition as required in connection with developmental screening /assessment. Records relating to any screening or assessment coordinated or administered by the Provider, including but not limited to developmental screenings, shall be maintained for the longer of three years after the date the child is last enrolled with the Provider or the retention period in Section LA. above. ** Not applicable for CTC -A providers H Comply with the requirements of Section 411.0106. Infants and toddlers in state - funded education and care programs; brain development activities. —Each state - funded education and care program for children from birth to 5 years of age must provide activities to foster brain development in infants and toddlers. A program must provide an environment that helps children attain the performance standards adopted by the Office of Early Learning under s. 411.01(4)(d)8. and must be rich in language and music and filled with objects of various colors, shapes, textures, and sizes to stimulate visual, tactile, auditory, and linguistic senses in the children and must include classical music and at least 30 minutes of reading to the children each day. A program may be offered through an existing early childhood program such as Healthy Start, the Title I program, the School Readiness program, the Head Start program, or a private child care program. A program must provide training for the infants' and toddlers' parents including direct dialogue and interaction between teachers and parents demonstrating the urgency of brain development in the first year of a child's life. Family day care centers are encouraged, but not required, to comply with this section. * *Not applicable for CTC -A providers Keep confidential all information concerning all children and their families required to be kept confidential by law and provide adequate security in its record keeping. J. Return to the Coalition all sums expended for costs associated with this Provider Agreement which were paid contrary to the terms of this Provider Agreement. In the event the Provider or its independent auditor discovers that an overpayment has been made, but the Coalition is unaware of the overpayment, the Provider shall repay said overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after determining the existence of the overpayment. In the event that the Coalition first discovers that an overpayment has been made, the Coalition shall notify the Provider in writing. The Provider shall repay the overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after the receipt of written notice from the Coalition. Should repayment not be made in a timely manner, the Coalition shall be entitled to charge interest at a lawful rate of interest on the outstanding balance beginning thirty (30) days after the date of notification or discovery. Any such interest shall be remitted by Family Central, Inc. to the Coalition. Notwithstanding any provision in this Provider Agreement to the contrary, the Coalition reserves the right to deduct from the Provider's reimbursement payment any overpayment discovered through a monitoring, audit or through any other means. If the Coalition makes 10 such a deduction from a reimbursement payment, it shall provide the Provider with notice in writing of the reason for the deduction and the amount of the deduction at the time the reimbursement payment is made. K. Submit the final invoice for payment to the Coalition no more than twenty (20) calendar days after termination or expiration of the Provider Agreement; if the Provider fails to do so, all right to payment is forfeited, and the Coalition will not honor any requests for payment submitted after the aforesaid time period. Any payment due under the terms of this Provider Agreement may be withheld until all evaluation and financial reports due from the Provider and necessary adjustments thereto, have been approved by the Coalition. L. Comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, as well as policies and requirements of the Coalition and Family Central. Inc., including but not limited to: rules and regulations of local fire and health authorities; the Palm Beach County Child Care Ordinance; applicable Workers' Compensation laws; the background screening requirements contained in Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida; and Chapters 6M-4., 65C -20 and 65C -22, Florida Administrative Code. The Provider represents and warrants that it has complied with all applicable background screening requirements under Florida law including those required by Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida. Failure to comply with federal, state or local laws or regulations may result in termination and /or non - payment of child care services. M. Accept a CTC -A /CTC scholarship funded child only after receiving authorization from the Coalition. Initial authorization may be done by phone. Applicable for CTC -A /CTC providers N. Maintain current documentation on each child, including authorization, enrollment, attendance, immunization, an annual physical, and termination records. Providers not subject to child care licensing inspections such as informal providers and other licensed exempt providers must collect and retain immunization and an annual physical record for review by the Coalition for each child ages birth to 5 who have not yet entered kindergarten. O. Maintain a manual or electronic sign -in /sign -out system and ensure parents /guardians or other authorized persons utilize the system each day their child(ren) are in attendance. Sign -in /out sheets are only used by the Coalition to verify attendance for enrollment and payment purposes. The Coalition does not monitor for or verify the child's arrival to and departure from the Provider's facility for the purposes of determining safe arrival and return home or to the custody of a parent or guardian. i. In order for the Coalition to verify attendance for payment purposes, parents /guardians or authorized persons using a manual sign -in /sign -out sheet must sign their children) in at time of arrival at the site and out upon leaving the site every day by signing their full signature and time in /out (including AM and PM for those providers offering extended care). Parents /Guardians or authorized persons using an electronic sign -in /sign -out system must sign their full signature and date on a printed version of the electronic record within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month. No individual may sign in or sign out a child other than a child's parent or guardian, or an individual for whom the Provider has obtained and maintains written authorization from the parent or guardian that such individual may sign the child in or out. ii. In no event may any officer, employee or volunteer of the Provider sign a child in or out except where it is logistically impossible for the parent /guardian to physically sign the child in or out (such as where the child rides the bus) and where the parent /guardian has expressly consented in writing to an officer, employee, or volunteer of the Provider signing the child in or out. In such cases, the parent /guardian must sign a statement within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month verifying their child's daily attendance and the accuracy of the officer, employee or volunteer's recording of their child's attendance for the preceding month for payment purposes. These statements must remain on -site for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available for inspection, review or copying by individuals authorized by the Coalition. The statements shall be retained by the Provider in accordance with Paragraph I.A. of this Provider Agreement. In addition, the Provider must comply with all licensing requirements relating to sign - in /sign- out sheets for licensing purposes which may differ from the requirements in this Provider Agreement for sign -in /sign -out sheets to verify attendance for payment. 11 iii. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must remain on --site at the Provider's location for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available for inspection and /or pick -up by individuals authorized by the Coalition. In the event that the Provider is unable to produce sign -in /sign -out sheets on -site in accordance with this paragraph, reimbursement shall not be made for any days for which a completed sign -in /sign -out sheet is not immediately available on -site at the Provider's location. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must be kept for a minimum of five years or the retention period in Section LA. above, whichever is longer, and must be available for inspection by the Coalition and /or other subsidized child care funding sources. In the event of a discrepancy between a sign - in /sign -out sheet and an Enrollment /Attendance Certification, the sign -in /sign -out sheet shall control. Exceptions must be preapproved in writing by the Coalition. P. Be liable for prosecution under State law for fraudulently misrepresenting a child's attendance and /or sign -in /sign -out roster. This includes, but is not limited to, deliberately claiming children for reimbursement who are not attending, falsifying Enrollment Attendance Certification sheets, and falsifying sign -in /sign -out sheets. Q. Maintain hours of operation in accordance with and not exceeding the scope of the Provider's child care license. R. Notify the Coalition in writing a minimum of 14 calendar days in advance of any changes to its location. 5. Be liable for and indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Coalition and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees from all claims, suits, judgments or damages, including attorneys' fees and costs arising out of any act, actions, neglect or omissions by the Provider, its agents or employees during the performance or operation of this Provider Agreement or any subsequent modification of this Provider Agreement, whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or tangible or intangible property. The Provider's inability to evaluate its liability shall not excuse the Provider's duty to defend and indemnify within seven (7) calendar days after notice by the Coalition. After the highest appeal is exhausted, only an adjudication or judgment specifically finding the Provider not liable shall excuse performance of this provision. The Provider shall pay all costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to these obligations and their enforcement by the Coalition. T he Coalition's failure to notify the Provider of a claim shall not relieve the Provider of these duties. The Provider shall not be liable for the sole negligent acts of the Coalition.This provision shall -Uotdb construeonsso rive f ny ighg of defense which Provider may possess and y p ec. 69.2, FYa. ta. T. Maintain any liability and /or accident insurance of such type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the services to be provided under this Provider Agreement. In all cases, the Provider must maintain insurance as required by law, including but not limited to, any insurance required by child care licensing regulations. With respect to the insurance maintained by Provider covering its business: (a) The Coalition shall be named as an additional insured, (b) the Provider shall furnish the Coalition with written verification supporting the existence of such insurance coverage, and (c) the Provider shall notify the Coalition in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of any anticipated material change in coverage or cancellation. The Coalition need not be named as an additional insured on any Workers Compensation policies. The Provider must comply with the insurance requirements of this paragraph before reimbursement payments will be made. This provision does not apply to the extent the Provider is self- insured, including but not limited to, a state agency or subdivision that is self - insured pursuant to Section 768.28(16), Florida Statutes. U. Submit to monitoring by the Coalition to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. Monitoring may occur randomly throughout the year and are unannounced. If deficiencies are noted, they shall be corrected by the Provider in accordance with a written corrective action plan that includes time lines for correcting deficiencies. Recurring lack of availability for monitoring shall constitute a violation of this Provider Agreement, and is grounds for termination of the Provider Agreement, V. The Children's Services Council of Palm Beach County (CSC) provides funds to the Coalition under this Contract. CSC requires that Contractor and all of its subcontractors and lower tier subcontractors comply with any audit inquiry and records request by the Inspector General of Palm Beach County regarding all of its rights 12 and obligations under this Agreement. Failure to comply shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement W. Immediately report any known or suspected child abuse or neglect to the Florida Department of Children and f=amilies through the Child Abuse Registry (1- 800 -96- ABUSE). X. Report any unexcused absence or seventh consecutive excused absence of an At Risk child of any age to the Florida Department of Children and Families' (DCF) hotline at toll free 1 (866) 325 -5323 by noon on the day of the child's first unexcused absence, or the day of the child's seventh consecutive excused absence. In addition any provider serving At Risk children whose site has a temporary closure shall report that closure to the above hotline. if you cannot reach someone at the hotline, please call Child Net (561) 352 -2460. An At Risk child is defined as a child with a BG1 billing category as reported on the Child Care Certificate. Y. Report any temporary closures of the Provider's facility to the Coalition in advance if the temporary closure is planned, or by the close of business on the day of the closure if the temporary closure is not planned in advance. If the closure is extended the Provider must notify the Coalition within 2 days of reopening the facility as to the status and availability. Z. Agree to attempt to settle any dispute relating to this Provider Agreement or the services provided hereunder through the Coalition Grievance process as described in Attachment A Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure which may be amended from time to time at the discretion of the Coalition or Florida's Office of Early Learning. In the event the provider fails to first go through the Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure, the Provider shall pay all Coalition costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to any action the provider may take. AA. Notify the Coalition in advance, if a change is known to be occurring, and in no event later than 14 calendar days of a change in Director. Using Attachment B — Change of Director form. Failure to notify the Coalition within the time frame of this change may result in corrective action. BB. Provider will identify and monitor a working E -mail address required by this agreement. Regular communication including but not limited to communication from the Coalition and early learning partners CC. Be an active participant in Prime Time's QIS (Quality Improvement System). * *CTC Afterschool only Remain active in Prime Time's QIS. Active Participation in Prime Time's QIS is defined by: completion of annual external assessments; quarterly progress checks documented by a Prime Time Quality Advisor; full participation in Parts I and 11 of self- assessment and completion of a Program Improvement Plan within 90 days of external assessments. The Provider shall not be eligible for new CTC -A Scholarship funds if it fails to comply with this paragraph. DD. Be an active participant in Quality Counts and remain active for the duration of the terms of this agreement. * *CTC Scholarships only H. The Coalition Responsibilities. The Coalition shall: A. Conduct monitoring of the Provider to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. B. Process payment to the Provider for services provided under the CTC A f t e r s c h o o I / Scholarship program, subject to the availability of funds. The payment obligations under this Provider Agreement are contingent upon funding by the Coalition and other funding sources, as applicable. C. Notify the Provider of children whose parents choose the Provider for C T C s c h o l a r s h i p services. Ill. Termination. 13 A. The Coalition will provide technical assistance and /or assist the Provider in developing a compliance plan for Provider's found to be in non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement or in violation of Class I or Class II child care licensing standards.. The Coalition will monitor such compliance plan, and in the event of Provider's continued non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, will issue Provider a Final Warning Notification indicating the Coalition's intent to terminate this Agreement for Cause. The Final Warning Notification shall provide for 30 days notice of revocation of funding, and will allow the provider to trigger the appeal process. Failure to comply with the Final Warning Notification within the set time period will result in immediate termination of funding. B. Coalition Decisions to Terminate. Provider understands that, subject to Provider's right to appeal, the Coalition has the right to terminate this Agreement for Cause. Cause is defined as: 1. The failure to materially comply with terms of this Agreement or policies, laws, rules, or regulations referenced herein, or the violation of any laws, rules, or regulations regarding SR promulgated by the State of Florida; 2. Repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard; 3. Acts of fraud or other forms of misconduct that materially threatens the integrity of the SR Program or Coalition; or 4. A Class I violation (or the equivalent thereof with respect to public Providers) committed by Providerthat resulted in death or serious harm to a child. C. Provider's Right to Appeal for Cause Determinations. 1. In determining whether Provider's non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or Provider's repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature and severity of the breach or violation, the repetition of the breach or violation, the Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the imminent threat to the health, safety, or well being of the children in care. 2. In determining whether Provider's Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature of the violation, Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the culpability of the Provider, its principals and officers, relative to that of Provider's staff involved in the violation. D. Termination Without Cause. Upon the vote of 2/3 of the then present members of the Board, this Provider Agreement shall be terminated with or without cause upon no less than 15 calendar days notice for reasons including, but not limited to: 1. Funds to finance this Provider Agreement become unavailable; or 2. The Provider breaches this Provider Agreement. E. Emergency Suspension Order. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event Provider commits either a material fraud, a Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child, or any other act that the Board of the Coalition, in its sole discretion, deems so egregious in nature so as to be an imminent threat to the health, safety or well being of the children in care, then the Coalition maV, at any time, enter an Emergency Suspension Order that suspends this Agreement for a period of time, not to exceed 45 days, so as to allow the Coalition to make a final determination as to the termination of this Agreement for Cause. 14 IV. Method of Payment. A. Payment for afterschool and scholarship services shall be based upon the Rate Sheet attached here to as Attachment C which is expressly made a part hereof and incorporated by reference herein. B. Co- Payment. 1. Afterschool: The required co- payment is $1.80 per day, regardless of full or half day, for the first child in the family and $.90 per day for each additional child in the family. The Coalition will deduct the co- payment from the rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent co- payment. 2. Scholarship The authorized sliding scale parent fee shall be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent fee. C. Monthly Invoices. The Provider will be paid by the Coalition on the basis of monthly invoices that report the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. The invoices shall be submitted on the Enrollment /Attendance Certification sheet and Request for Approval of Payment- Extended Absence forms provided by the Coalition for this purpose. The Provider shall submit monthly invoices consisting of these forms to the Coalition not later than the fourth (4th) calendar day of the month following the month in which services were provided. If the 4thcalendar day falls on a weekend or holiday the due date shall be the business day prior to the 4thcalendar day of the month. Monthly attendance and reimbursement forms received after that day will be included in the following month's report thus delaying the Provider's reimbursement until the next reimbursement period. The Provider forfeits all rights to payment for any monthly attendance report submitted more than 45 days following the end of the service period. Requests for reimbursement adjustments must be submitted in writing to the Coalition within 21 days following receipt of reimbursement. Fraudulent conduct by the Provider in reporting information to the Coalition in connection with receiving payment hereunder will result in termination of this Provider Agreement and will be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authority or authorities. Invoice Due Dates August 2, 2013 September 4, 2013 October 4, 2013 November 4, 2013 December 4, 2013 January 3, 2014 February 4, 2014 March 4, 2014 April 4, 2014 May 2, 2014 June 4, 2014 July 3, 2014 D. Payments. Reimbursement payments will be mailed or released for direct deposit by the Coalition not later than the sixteenth (16th) calendar day of the month or on the first business day following the sixteenth depending on weekends and holidays, following the month for which a completed and accurate invoice (including all required attendance information) is submitted to the Coalition, subject to availability of funds. This is not necessarily the date providers will have access to the payment, depending on bank regulations. Reimbursement shall be made for the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. E. Gold Seal. Reimbursement at Gold Seal rates will be made only if proper documentation is submitted to the Coalition. Proper documentation includes a current Gold Seal certificate from the State of Florida and a current accreditation certificate from an accrediting body recognized by the State of Florida. In no event will a Gold Seal Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum Gold Seal rate as designated by the Coalition or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. if the Provider ceases to qualify at any time for payment of Gold Seal rates, the Provider will be reimbursed at the non -Gold Seal rates which shall not exceed the maximum rates for non -Gold Seal providers as designated by the Coalition. During the month when a Gold Seal certificate expires and the renewal certificate has not been received by the Coalition, care will be reimbursed at non -Gold Seal rates, with the Gold Seal differential being paid the following month provided that the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the 15 renewal certificate. Gold Seal rates for renewed certification will be effective from the date of renewal provided The Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the Gold Seal renewal certificate. Otherwise, the Gold Seal rates for the renewed certification will be effective when the certificate is received by the Coalition. Gold Seal rates for newly Gold Seal certified facilities will be effective the first of the month following receipt of the Gold Seal Certificate by the Coalition. F. Funding Source. Reimbursement will not be made for children being paid for through a funding source other than the source of funding under this Provider Agreement. G. Termination of Service to Client. If a child ceases to be eligible for CTC Scholarship funding, the Coalition will notify the Provider of the child's termination date. The Provider shall not be entitled to reimbursement beyond the termination date as indicated on the child care certificate or the date on which the Provider is notified by telephone or in writing of a child's termination, whichever is earlier. V. Reimbursement Policies. A. Program Holidays The Provider will be paid for Holidays as designated in their Provider Agreement application. Any changes to floating holidays must be submitted in writing at least 45 calendar days prior to the first day of the month in which the holiday change will occur. Children are not eligible for holiday reimbursement if they are not normally scheduled to attend that day. Part time rates will be paid for afterschool children for Memorial Day. Additional floating holidays selected by the provider as described above may also be. paid at the part time rate for afterschool children if the day before or afterthe additional holiday is paid at a part time rate. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any holidays. The Provider will also close for the following days and time periods. The Provider will not be reimbursed for these days. N/A Providers must notify the Coalition in the event they are closed any days not listed in this Service Agreement. B. Reimbursement for Absences Reimbursement may be made for a total of 3 absences during a calendar month for each child. Under extenuating circumstance and with proper documentation up to an additional 7 (seven) absences within a month may be paid at the discretion of the Coalitions This documentation shall be collected by the provider and must be submitted to the Coalition. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any absences. Reimbursement will not be made for each day entered on the attendance log as "N" or not reimbursable. If the day before or the day after a holiday is marked "N" (not reimbursable), the Provider will not be reimbursed for the holiday. If the day before or the day- after a series of holidays and /or floating holidays is marked "N ", the provider will not be reimbursed for any of the holidays and /or floating holidays. 16 If the Provider determines that a parent does not intend to return a child to the child care program, then the child must be terminated from the child care program, and future days are non- reimbursable. These non - reimbursable days must be coded as "T" on attendance sheets. If a child is absent for five (5) consecutive days and the parent does not contact the Provider, the Provider shall notify the Coalition and the Coalition shall determine whether continued care is needed. C. Summary of Enrollment /Attendance Codes E - Excused Absence X- Enrolled / Present (a day a child is present) A- Authorized Absence beyond 3 days (excused absence beyond three (3) days, which has been approved by The Coalition) H - Reimbursable Holiday T - Terminated (day child is disenrolled) N - Enrolled, not reimbursable. D. No Reimbursement In Excess of Licensed Capacity The Coalition is not responsible for licensing of the Provider. However, the Coalition cannot, and will not, reimburse the Provider for services provided to any child in excess of the Provider's licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to limit future enrollment when a Provider has been found to be over its licensed capacity at any given time. Under no circumstances will the Coalition enroll children with a Provider that the Coalition knows will cause the Provider to exceed its licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition further reserves the right to seek the return of any payment made to the Provider to reimburse the Provider for services provided to a child at a time when the Provider was out of compliance with its licensed capacity. V1. Renegotiation /Modification. Modifications to this Service Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed. The parties agree to renegotiate this Service Agreement if federal, state, and /or county revisions of any applicable laws or regulations make changes in this Service Agreement necessary. VII. Name. Mailing and Street Address of Pave e. The name and mailing address of the official payee to whom the Coalition shall make payment: Program Contact: Program Name: ru,,v$ . Program Address: W Telephone Number: The name of the contact person and street address where financial and administrative records are maintained: Program Contact: ((cfC;i(CC Program Name -r -0 Program Address:v`�.�5 Telephone Number: 2 17 The Provider will provide services under this Provider Agreement at the following location: 50 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Vlll. Miscellaneous. A. Term. This Provider Agreement is effective as of July 1, 2013 and will automatically terminate on June 30, 2014 hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement Period" unless terminated earlier as provided herein. Notices. Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by hand delivery with a request for a written receipt of acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth in Section VI, until changed in writing. B. Assignment. Neither Party may assign its interest under this Provider Agreement except with the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Without limiting or restricting the generality of the foregoing, it shall not be unreasonable for a party to deny its consent where, in its opinion, acting reasonably, the proposed assignee, purchaser or transferee lacks the capacity or resources necessary to ensure the proper conduct and completion of its obligations under this Provider Agreement over the remaining portion of the Agreement Period. No assignment shall operate to release the assigning Party from its obligations hereunder unless such Party is expressly released from its obligations by the other Party. C. Inurement. This Provider Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing contained in this Provider Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer upon any other person or entity any benefits, rights or remedies. D. Waiver. No waiver by any Party of one or more defaults by any other Party in the performance of any provisions of this Service Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any future default or defaults, whether of a like or a different character. E. Headings. The headings in this Provider Agreement are inserted for convenience or reference only and shall not affect the meaning or construction hereof. Entire Agreement. This Provider Agreement represents the entire understanding between the Parties relative to the matters addressed herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings other than those set forth or referred to herein. G. Amendment. This Provider Agreement may not be amended without the execution of a written document by all Parties hereto. All parties agree however, that an amendment may be required due to change of Local and /or State rules and regulations. In this case, all Parties agree to execute an amendment to this Agreement H. Governing Law and Venue. This Provider Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Venue for purposes of any action brought to enforce or construe this Provider Agreement shall be in Palm Beach County, Florida. 18 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this 24 page Agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized. The undersigned represents and warrants that he /she has full and complete authority to execute the agreement on behalf of By EARLY LEARNING COALITION PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. Warren Eldridge, Executive Director day of 2013. PROVIDER By the signature below, Provider hereby certifies that 1.) to the best of their knowledge and belief, after diligent inquiry, he /she /it is not under investigation for ANY matters, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO, fraud and /or other financial malfeasance, which if proven, would or could result in criminal action or termination of this Agreement and 2j by signing this Agreement and agreeing to accept financially- assisted school readiness funds and subsidized child care funding available from other sources, you are acknowledging that you understand the terms of this Agreement and agree to abide by these terms stated. (if Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST: By Corporate Secretary President /Vice President (Please Print Name of Secretary) (Please Print Name of President/ Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL) day of 12013. (If Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) By 1St Witness Signature 2"d Witness Signature Federal I.D. or SS #: Appfoved as to form and legal sufiency, . By: v bZ) L ' 19 L' City Attorney l ` �, Signature (Print Provider Name) day of 2013. Attachment A early Learning Coalition Number:OP1 -2011 Subject File: Issue Date: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE 11/1/11 Originating Unit: Operations Department ELC Staff Contact: Chief Operating Officer Subject: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE Purpose: The Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (Coalition) is committed to providing high - quality early learning services and desires that any provider or parent who is not in agreement with any of its services or procedures be afforded a dispute resolution process to ensure that all disputes are handled in a fair, efficient and timely manner. The Coalition will provide opportunity for individuals to express grievances and concerns and to appeal decisions made through a formal grievance and appeals process. Reason: To give a clear and specific written course of action for resolving disputes within the Palm Beach County early lea rning system. Dispute Resolution Procedure: 1. Disputant submits grievance to the Coalition's Executive Director in writing to the following address: 2300 High Ridge Road, Suite 115 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 2. All grievances shall include: a. the name and contact information of the disputant; b. specifics of dispute; c. actions taken to resolve dispute including all actions previously mentioned in this procedure; and d. any supporting documents. 3. Th a Coalition's Executive Director will contact the disputant directly within (2) business days to attempt to resolve the concerns. a. The Executive Director will record all contact attempts and dates, as well as the outcome of the contact attempts. b. If a resolution is reached, it will be documented. c. If a resolution is not reached, the dispute and all documentation will be submitted by the Executive Director to the Coalition's Executive Committee. d. The Executive Director will notify the disputant within three (3) business days of the next Executive Committee Meeting during which the Executive Committee will hear the appeal. e. The Coalition Executive Director shall inform the Executive Committee of the dispute and provide committee members with all applicable information. The Committee shall attempt to convene within thirty (30) days of receipt of the dispute to make a determination. 4. The Executive Committee shall act as an appeals committee and hear all disputes that are unresolved through the Service Provider Grievance Procedure, Coalition staff process, or Executive Director. 5. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for making all written findings and recommendations based upon: a. Testimonyfrom the Executive Director b. Written findings from Service Provider Grievance Procedures c. Coalition staff findings and reports d. Other relevant information 6. The disputant and /or his /her representative will be provided with the opportunity to present his /her concerns. 7. All decisions of the Executive Committee are final and the disputant shall be notified in writing of this decision within 30 days from the date of the appeals hearing. 8. All appeals hearings are open to the public, unless otherwise provided by law, rule or regulation. 20 Attachment B CHANGE OF DIRECTOR FORM The information listed below is an update to the Application /Renewal Data Sheet submitted for the current contract year. LEGAL NAME OF PROVIDER: ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP: TELEPHONE: NEW DIRECTOR'S NAME: DATE NEW DIRECTOR HIRED: NEW DIRECTOR'S E -MAIL ADDRESS: FORMER DIRECTOR: By signing below, the PROVIDER indicates that the new director is authorized to inquire about and sign documents relating to payment, attendance, Agreement application or renewal, Agreement contract and Agreement amendment(s). (if Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) ATTEST: Corporate Secretary By President /Vice President Please Type Name of Secretary) (Please Type Name of President /Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL) day of .2013. (!f Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) By 1St Witness Signature 2 "" Witness Signature Return To: The Coalition's Contractor: FAMILY CENTRAL, INC. 3111 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, SUITE 222 Approved as to form arWrTN: PROVIDER SERVICES legal fflci- agcy, IWE T PALM BEACH, FL 33405-1548 t z�. Cri$9i Aftorne d G t ter.. Signature (Print Provider Name) day of 2013 Attachment C FIXED RATE SHEET Program's Name CTC -A Scholarships provide funding for afterschool programs in accordance with the school year calendar. Children will be eligible to receive Part Time care during regular school days and Full Time care during summer, school closure days (which do not include weekends and non - reimbursable holidays or other days the Provider is closed) and early release days. Afterschool reimbursement shall be based upon the following fixed rate per child: FULL TIME DAILY Summer, School Closure Days; Early Release Days $ 19.86 PART TIME DAILY Regular School Days $10.44 The required co- payment is $1.80 per day, regardless of full or part day, for the first child in the family and $.90 per day for each additional child in the family. The Coalition shall deduct the co- payment from the rate before payment is made to the Provider. Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: Approved as to form and -gal sufficiency: ,i < City Attorney 22 Attachment C RATE SHEET Program's Name Child care reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate per child. Parent fees shall be deducted from this rate before payment is made to the Provider. *if Cold Seal Differential is included in these rates the rates will be reduced when the Gold Sea! is no longer applicable. Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency; j .L City Attorney .; _�c . r 23 Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULLTIME Sibling Rate PART TIME Sibling Rate Infants N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 -12 months Toddler N/A N/A N/A N/A 13 -23 months Two year olds N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 -35 months Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 -47 months Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 -59 months Preschool 60 -72 months N/A N/A N/A N/A (not in School) School Age /summers N/A N/A N/A N/A Holidays Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency; j .L City Attorney .; _�c . r 23 Attachment C RATE SHEET Program's Name Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following negotiated fixed rate. Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: Approved as tO lorm end �ien�y� j py: A,ttorn�y City 24 Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULL TIME SIBLING PARTTIME SIBLING Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 -47 months Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 -59 months Preschool 60-72 months N/A N/A N/A N/A (not in School) Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: Date: Approved as tO lorm end �ien�y� j py: A,ttorn�y City 24 CONTINUE TO CARE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM PROVIDER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. AND City of Delray Beach D B A Pompey Park Community Center The term for this agreement is from July 1 2013 through June 30 2014 9 Continue to Care - Afterschool ❑ Continue to Care — Scholarships This Provider Agreement is entered into between the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County (hereinafter referred to as the "Coalition ") and the Provider of Continue -to -Care Afterschool Scholarship ( "CTC -A Scholarship ") services and the Provider for Continue to Care Scholarships, CiLy of Delray Beach D B A Pompey Park Community Center (hereinafter referred to as the "Provider ") with its principal offices located at 1101 North West 2nd Street to provide afterschool and scholarship program services for the period of July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014. The purpose of this Provider Agreement is to establish the method by which t h e Provider will receive payment available through the CTC -A and Scholarship programs and to ensure that the Provider meets all criteria required to receive such payments. The Parties acknowledge that the Provider is not a subcontractor of the Coalition, the Coalition has no control over the day -to -day operations of the Provider, and that the existence of this Provider Agreement does not require or guarantee enrollment of children in the Provider's childcare program. The Coalition contracts with an agency to perform many of the functions of the Coalition as set forth below and the Provider shall cooperate amply with Coalition's agency as if the action request or service were by the Coalition itself. The Parties agree as follows: Provider Responsibilities. The Provider shall: A. Retain all client records, financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents (including electronic storage media) pertinent to this Provider Agreement for five (5) years after expiration or termination of this Provider Agreement, or if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. The Provider shall further comply with all record retention requirements of Sections 119.021 and 411.011, Florida Statutes, and all other requirements of law, and shall retain records for the period of time required by this Provider Agreement or required by law, whichever is longer. The Provider will cooperate with the Coalition to facilitate the duplication and transfer or any said records or documents upon request of the Coalition. B. Ensure that all records pertinent to this Provider Agreement, including but not limited to sign -in /sign- out and attendance records, are available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, copying or audit by Federal auditors, representatives of the Comptroller of the State of Florida or the Auditor General of Florida, or other personnel duly authorized by the Coalition, Department of Education or Florida's Office of Early Learning. C. Permit persons duly authorized by the Coalition to access, inspect and /or copy any papers, documents, facilities, goods or services of the Provider which are relevant to this Provider Agreement and to interview any clients or employees of the Provider to ensure the satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Provider Agreement. Failure to allow access to duly authorized persons may result in non - payment for that day and provider termination from the CTC -A and Scholarship Programs. 9 D. Not discriminate against participants in, or employees working with, any Program funded through this Provider Agreement because of age, race, creed, color, disability, national origin, handicap, marital status or gender. E. Comply with the Pro - Children Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. 6083. Failure to comply with the provisions of this law may result in imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and /or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. F. Not hold itself out, nor should its employees hold themselves out, as employees, agents, servants, joint venturers, partners or representatives of Family Central, Inc. or the Coalition. G. Participate in the developmental screening/assessment process as designated by the Coalition for 100% of those children, ages birth to five prior to entry into Kindergarten, for whom the Provider receives financially- assisted scholarship funding and for whom a parent and /or guardian has consented in writing to the developmental screening/assessment. The Provider is responsible for submitting information to the Coalition as required in connection with developmental screening /assessment. Records relating to any screening or assessment coordinated or administered by the Provider, including but not limited to developmental screenings, shall be maintained for the longer of three years after the date the child is last enrolled with the Provider or the retention period in Section I.A. above. ** Not applicable for CTC -A providers H Comply with the requirements of Section 411.0106. Infants and toddlers in state - funded education and care programs; brain development activities. —Each state - funded education and care program for children from birth to 5 years of age must provide activities to foster brain development in infants and toddlers. A program must provide an environment that helps children attain the performance standards adopted by the Office of Early Learning under s. 411e01,(4)(d)& and must be rich in language and music and filled with objects of various colors, shapes, textures, and sizes to stimulate visual, tactile, auditory, and linguistic senses in the children and must include classical music and at least 30 minutes of reading to the children each day. A program may be offered through an existing early childhood program such as Healthy Start, the Title I program, the School Readiness program, the Head Start program, or a private child care program. A program must provide training for the Infants' and toddlers' parents including direct dialogue and interaction between teachers and parents demonstrating the urgency of brain development in the first year of a child's life. Family day care centers are encouraged, but not required, to comply with this section. "Not applicable for CTC -A providers Keep confidential all information concerning all children and their families required to be kept confidential by law and provide adequate security in its record keeping. J. Return to the Coalition all sums expended for costs associated with this Provider Agreement which were paid contrary to the terms of this Provider Agreement. In the event the Provider or its independent auditor discovers that an overpayment has been made, but the Coalition is unaware of the overpayment, the Provider shall repay said overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after determining the existence of the overpayment. In the event that the Coalition first discovers that an overpayment has been made, the Coalition shall notify the Provider in writing. The Provider shall repay the overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days after the receipt of written notice from the Coalition. Should repayment not be made in a timely manner, the Coalition shall be entitled to charge interest at a lawful rate of interest on the outstanding balance beginning thirty (30) days after the date of notification or discovery. Any such interest shall be remitted by Family Central, Inc. to the Coalition. Notwithstanding any provision in this Provider Agreement to the contrary, the Coalition reserves the right to deduct from the Provider's reimbursement payment any overpayment discovered through a monitoring, audit or through any other means. If the Coalition makes such a deduction from a reimbursement payment, it shall provide the Provider with notice in writing of the reason for the deduction and the amount of the deduction at the time the reimbursement payment is made. K. Submit the final invoice for payment to the Coalition no more than twenty (20) calendar days after termination or expiration of the Provider Agreement; if the Provider falls to do so, all right to payment is forfeited, and the Coalition will not honor any requests for payment submitted after the aforesaid time period. Any payment due under the terms of this Provider Agreement may be withheld until all evaluation and financial reports IT4] due from the Provider and necessary adjustments thereto, have been approved by the Coalition. L. Comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, as well as policies and requirements of the Coalition and Family Central. Inc., including but not limited to: rules and regulations of local fire and health authorities; the Palm Beach County Child Care Ordinance; applicable Workers' Compensation laws; the background screening requirements contained in Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida; and Chapters 6M-4., 65C -20 and 65C -22, Florida Administrative Code. The Provider represents and warrants that it has complied with all applicable background screening requirements under Florida law including those required by Chapters 402 and 435, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010 -114, Laws of Florida. Failure to comply with federal, state or local laws or regulations may result in termination and /or non - payment of child care services. M. Accept a CTC -A /CTC scholarship funded child only after receiving authorization from the Coalition. Initial authorization may be done by phone. Applicable for CTC -A /CTC providers N. Maintain current documentation on each child, including authorization, enrollment, attendance, immunization, an annual physical, and termination records. Providers not subject to child care licensing inspections such as informal providers and other licensed exempt providers must collect and retain immunization and an annual physical record for review by the Coalition for each child ages birth to 5 who have not yet entered kindergarten. 0. Maintain a manual or electronic sign -in /sign -out system and ensure parents /guardians or other authorized persons utilize the system each day their children) are in attendance. Sign -in /out sheets are only used by the Coalition to verify attendance for enrollment and payment purposes. The Coalition does not monitor for or verify the child's arrival to and departure from the Provider's facility for the purposes of determining safe arrival and return home or to the custody of a parent or guardian. In order for the Coalition to verify attendance for payment purposes, parents /guardians or authorized persons using a manual sign -in /sign -out sheet must sign their children) in at time of arrival at the site and out upon leaving the site every day by signing their full signature and time in /out (including AM and PM for those providers offering extended care). Parents /Guardians or authorized persons using an electronic sign -in /sign -out system must sign their full signature and date on a printed version of the electronic record within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month. No individual may sign in or sign out a child other than a child's parent or guardian, or an individual for whom the Provider has obtained and maintains written authorization from the parent or guardian that such individual may sign the child in or out. ii. In no event may any officer, employee or volunteer of the Provider sign a child in or out except where it is logistically impossible for the parent /guardian to physically sign the child in or out (such as where the child rides the bus) and where the parent /guardian has expressly consented in writing to an officer, employee, or volunteer of the Provider signing the child in or out. In such cases, the parent /guardian must sign a statement within ten (10) calendar days after the end of each month verifying their child's daily attendance and the accuracy of the officer, employee or volunteer's recording of their child's attendance for the preceding month for payment purposes. These statements must remain on -site for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available for inspection, review or copying by individuals authorized by the Coalition. The statements shall be retained by the Provider in accordance with Paragraph I.A. of this Provider Agreement. In addition, the Provider must comply with all licensing requirements relating to sign - in /sign- out sheets for licensing purposes which may differ from the requirements in this Provider Agreement for sign -in /sign -out sheets to verify attendance for payment. iii. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must remain on -site at the Provider's location for the current and previous three months and shall be immediately available . for inspection and /or pick -up by individuals authorized by the Coalition. In the event that the Provider is unable to produce sign -in /sign -out sheets on -site in accordance with this paragraph, reimbursement shall not be made for any days for which a completed sign -in /sign -out sheet is not immediately available on -site at the Provider's location. Sign -in /sign -out sheets must be kept for a minimum of five years or the retention period in 11 Section I.A. above, whichever is longer, and must be available for inspection by the Coalition and /or other subsidized child care funding sources. In the event of a discrepancy between a sign - in /sign -out sheet and an Enrollment /Attendance Certification, the sign -in /sign -out sheet shall control. Exceptions must be preapproved in writing by the Coalition. Be liable for prosecution under State law for fraudulently misrepresenting a child's attendance and /or sign -in /sign -out roster. This includes, but is not limited to, deliberately claiming children for reimbursement who are not attending, falsifying Enrollment Attendance Certification sheets, and falsifying sign -in /sign -out sheets. Q. Maintain hours of operation in accordance with and not exceeding. the scope of the Provider's child care license. R. Notify the Coalition in writing a minimum of 14 calendar days in advance of any changes to its location. S. Be liable for and indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Coalition and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees from all claims, suits, judgments or damages, including attorneys' fees and costs arising out of any act, actions, neglect or omissions by the Provider, its agents or employees during the performance or operation of this Provider Agreement or any subsequent modification of this Provider Agreement, whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or tangible or intangible property. The Provider's inability to evaluate its liability shall not excuse the Provider's duty to defend and indemnify within seven (7) calendar days after notice by the Coalition. After the highest appeal is exhausted, only an adjudication or judgment specifically finding the Provider not liable shall excuse performance of this provision. The Provider shall pay all costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to these obligations and their r: enforcement by the Coalition. T he Coalition's failure to notify the Provider of a claim shall not relieve the Provider of these duties; The Provider shall not be liable for the sole negligent acts of the Coalition. This provision isa�imited�''�ycoonstrued aso� �aiver�6$f��ny�riigh�toat. defense which Provider may possess and T. Maintain any liability and /or accident insurance of such type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the services to be provided under this Provider Agreement. In all cases, the Provider must maintain insurance as required by law, including but not limited to, any insurance required by child care licensing regulations. With respect to the insurance maintained by Provider covering its business: (a) The Coalition shall be named as an additional insured, (b) the Provider shall furnish the Coalition with written verification supporting the existence of such insurance coverage, and (c) the Provider shall notify the Coalition in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of any anticipated material change in coverage or cancellation. The Coalition need not be named as an additional insured on any Workers Compensation policies. The Provider must comply with the insurance requirements of this paragraph before reimbursement payments will be made. This provision does not apply to the extent the Provider is self- insured, including but not limited to, a state agency or subdivision that is self- insured pursuant to Section 768.28(16), Florida Statutes. U. Submit to monitoring by the Coalition to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. Monitoring may occur randomly throughout the year and are unannounced. If deficiencies are noted, they shall be corrected by the Provider in accordance with a written corrective action plan that includes time lines for correcting deficiencies. Recurring lack of availability for monitoring shall constitute a violation of this Provider Agreement, and is grounds for termination of the Provider Agreement. V. The Children's Services Council of Palm Beach County (CSC) provides funds to the Coalition under this Contract. CSC requires that Contractor and all of its subcontractors and lower tier subcontractors comply with any audit inquiry and records request by the Inspector General of Palm Beach County regarding all of its rights and obligations under this Agreement. Failure to comply shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement W. Immediately report any known or suspected child abuse or neglect to the Florida Department of Children and Families through the Child Abuse Registry (1- 800 -96- ABUSE). X. Report any unexcused absence or seventh consecutive excused absence of an At Risk child of any age to the Florida Department of Children and Families' (DCF) hotline at toll free 1(866) 325 -5323 by noon on the day of 12 the child's first unexcused absence, or the day of the child's seventh consecutive excused absence. In addition any provider serving At Risk children whose site has a temporary closure shall report that closure to the above hotline. If you cannot reach someone at the hotline, please call Child Net (561) 352 -2460. An At Risk child is defined as a child with a BG1 billing category as reported on the Child Care Certificate. Y. Report any temporary closures of the Provider's facility to the Coalition in advance if the temporary closure is planned, or by the dose of business on the day of the closure if the temporary closure is not planned in advance. If the closure is extended the Provider must notify the Coalition within 2 days of reopening the facility as to the status and availability. Z. Agree to attempt to settle any dispute relating to this Provider Agreement or the services provided hereunder through the Coalition Grievance process as described in Attachment A Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure which may be amended from time to time at the discretion of the Coalition or Florida's Office of Early Learning. In the event the provider falls to first go through the Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure, the Provider shall pay all Coalition costs and fees including attorneys' fees relating to any action the provider may take. AA. Notify the Coalition in advance, if a change is known to be occurring, and in no event later than 14 calendar days of a change in Director. Using Attachment B — Change of Director form. Failure to notify the Coalition within the time frame of this change may result in corrective action. BB. Provider will identify and monitor a working E -mail address required by this agreement. Regular communication including but not limited to communication from the Coalition and early learning partners CC. Be an active participant in Prime Time's QIS (Quality Improvement System). * *CTC Afterschool only Remain active in Prime Time's QIS. Active Participation in Prime Time's QIS is defined by: completion of annual external assessments; quarterly progress checks documented by a Prime Time Quality Advisor; full participation in Parts I and II of self - assessment and completion of a Program Improvement Plan within 90 days of external assessments. The Provider shall not be eligible for new CTC -A Scholarship funds if it fails to comply with this paragraph. DD. Be an active participant in Quality Counts and remain active for the duration of the terms of this agreement. * *CTC Scholarships only II. The Coalition Responsibilities. The Coalition shall: A. Conduct monitoring of the Provider to ensure compliance with this Provider Agreement. B. Process payment to the Provider for services provided under the CTC A ft e r s c h o o I / Scholarship program, subject to the availability of funds. The payment obligations under this Provider Agreement are contingent upon funding by the Coalition and other funding sources, as applicable. C. Notify the Provider of children whose parents choose the Provider for C T C s c h o l a r s h i p services. III. Termination. A. The Coalition will provide technical assistance and /or assist the Provider in developing. a compliance plan for Provider's found to be in non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement or in violation of Class I or Class II child care licensing standards.. The Coalition will monitor such compliance plan, and in the event of Provider's continued non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, will issue Provider a Final Warning Notification indicating the Coalition's intent to terminate this Agreement for Cause. The Final Warning Notification shall provide for 30 days notice of revocation of funding, and will allow the provider to 13 trigger the appeal process. Failure to comply with the Final Warning Notification within the set time period will result in immediate termination of funding. B. Coalition Decisions to Terminate. Provider understands that, subject to Provider's right to appeal, the Coalition has the right to terminate this Agreement for Cause. Cause is defined as: 1. The failure to materially comply with terms of this Agreement or policies, laws, rules, or regulations referenced herein, or the violation of any laws, rules, or regulations regarding SR promulgated by the State of Florida; 2. Repeated violations of a previously cited progressive enforcement standard; 3. Acts of fraud or other forms of misconduct that materially threatens the integrity of the SR Program or Coalition; or 4. A Class I violation (or the equivalent thereof with respect to public Providers) committed by Provider that resulted in death or serious harm to a child. C. Provider's Right to Appeal for Cause Determinations. 1. In determining whether Provider's non - compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or Provider's repeated violations of a previously cited child care licensing standard, rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature and severity of the breach or violation, the repetition of the breach or violation, the Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the imminent threat to the health, safety, or well being of the children in care. 2. In determining whether Provider's Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child rises to the level of Cause to terminate this Agreement, the Coalition's determination shall be based on the nature of the violation, Provider's progressive enforcement history, and the culpability of the Provider, its principals and officers, relative to that of Provider's staff involved in the violation. D. Termination Without Cause. Upon the vote of 2/3 of the then present members of the Board, this Provider Agreement shall be terminated with or without cause upon no less than 15 calendar days notice for reasons including, but not limited to: 1. Funds to finance this Provider Agreement become unavailable; or 2. The Provider breaches this Provider Agreement. E. Emergency Suspension Order. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event Provider commits either a material fraud, a Class I violation that resulted in death or serious harm to a child, or any other act that the Board of the Coalition, in its sole discretion, deems so egregious in nature so as to be an imminent threat to the health, safety or well being of the children in care, then the Coalition may, at any time, enter an Emergency Suspension Order that suspends this Agreement for a period of time, not to exceed 45 days, so as to allow the Coalition to make a final determination as to the termination of this Agreement for Cause. IV. Method of Payment. A. Payment for afterschool and scholarship services shall be based upon the Rate Sheet attached here to as &ttgGhment C which is expressly made a part hereof and incorporated by reference herein. 14 B. Co- Payment. 1. Afterschool: The required co- payment is $1.80 per day, regardless of full or half day, for the first child in the family and 5.90 per day for each additional child in the family. The Coalition will deduct the co- payment from the rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent co- payment. 2. Scholarship The authorized sliding scale parent fee shall be deducted from the negotiated rate before payment is made to the Provider. It shall be the responsibility of the Provider to collect the parent fee. C. Monthly Invoices. The Provider will be paid by the Coalition on the basis of monthly invoices that report the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. The invoices shall be submitted on the Enrollment /Attendance Certification sheet and Request for Approval of Payment - Extended Absence forms provided by the Coalition for this purpose. The Provider shall submit monthly invoices consisting of these forms to the Coalition not later than the fourth 4th calendar day of the month following the month in which services were provided. If the 4thcalendar day falls on a weekend or holiday the due date shall be the business day rior to the 4thcalendar day of the month. Monthly attendance and reimbursement forms received after that day will be included in the following month's report thus delaying the Provider's reimbursement until the next reimbursement period. The Provider forfeits all rights to payment for any monthly attendance report submitted more than 45 days following the end of the service period. Requests for reimbursement adjustments must be submitted in writing to the Coalition within 21 days following receipt of reimbursement. Fraudulent conduct by the Provider in reporting information to the Coalition in connection with receiving payment hereunder will result in termination of this Provider Agreement and will be reported to the appropriate law enforcement authority or authorities. Invoice Due Dates August 2, 2013 September 4, 2013 October 4, 2013 November 4, 2013 December 4, 2013 January 3, 2014 February 4, 2014 March 4, 2014 April 4, 2014 May 2, 2014 June 4, 2014 July 3, 2014 D. Payments. Reimbursement payments will be mailed or released for direct deposit by the Coalition not later than the sixteenth (151") calendar day of the month or on the first business day following the sixteenth depending on weekends and holidays, following the month for which a completed and accurate invoice (including all required attendance information) is submitted to the Coalition, subject to availability of funds. This is not necessarily the date providers will have access to the payment, depending on bank regulations. Reimbursement shall be made for the eligible enrollment on a daily basis. Gold Seal. Reimbursement at Gold Seal rates will be made only if proper documentation is submitted to the Coalition. Proper documentation includes a current Gold Seal certificate from the State of Florida and a current accreditation certificate from an accrediting body recognized by the State of Florida. In no event will a Gold Seal Provider be reimbursed at a rate that exceeds the lower of the maximum Gold Seal rate as designated by the Coalition or the Provider's maximum private pay rate. If the Provider ceases to qualify at any time for payment of Gold Seal rates, the Provider will be reimbursed at the non -Gold Seal rates which shall not exceed the maximum rates for non -Gold Seal providers as designated by the Coalition. During the month when a Gold Seal certificate expires and the renewal certificate has not been received by the Coalition, care will be reimbursed at non -Gold Seal rates, with the Gold Seal differential being paid the following month provided that the Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the renewal certificate. Gold Seal rates for renewed certification will be effective from the date of renewal provided The Coalition receives the certificate within 10 days of the issuance of the Gold Seal renewal certificate. Otherwise, the Gold Seal rates for the renewed certification will be effective when the certificate is received by the Coalition. Gold Seal rates for newly Gold Seal certified facilities will be effective the first of the month following receipt of the Gold Seal Certificate by the Coalition. 15 F. Funding Source. Reimbursement will not be made for children being paid for through a funding source other than the source of funding under this Provider Agreement. G. Termination of Service to Client. If a child ceases to be eligible for CTC Scholarship funding, the Coalition will notify the Provider of the child's termination date. The Provider shall not be entitled to reimbursement beyond the termination date as indicated on the child care certificate or the date on which the Provider is notified by telephone or in writing of a child's termination, whichever is earlier. V. Reimbursement Policies. A. Program Holidays The Provider will be paid for Holidays as designated in their Provider Agreement application. Any changes to floating holidays must be submitted in writing at least 45 calendar days prior to the first day of the month in which the holiday change will occur. Children are not eligible for holiday reimbursement if they are not normally scheduled to attend that day. Part time rates will be paid for afterschool children for Memorial Day. Additional floating holidays selected by the provider as described above may also be paid at the part time rate for afterschool children if the day before or after the additional holiday is paid at a part time rate. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any holidays. The Provider will also close for the following days and time periods. The Provider will not be reimbursed for these days. -N/A Providers must notify the Coalition in the event they are closed any days not listed in this Service Agreement. B. Reimbursement for Absences Reimbursement may be made for a total of 3 absences during_ a calendar month for each child. Under extenuating circumstance and with proper documentation up to an additional 7 (seven) absences within a month may be paid at the discretion of the Coalition. This documentation shall be collected by the provider and rn.ust be submitted to the Coalition. A child must attend at least one day during the month for a provider to be paid for any absences. Reimbursement will not be made for each day entered on the attendance log_ as "N" or not reimbursable. if the day before or the day after a holiday is marked "N" (not reimbursable), the Provider will not be reimbursed for the holiday. if the day before or the day after a_series of holidays and/or floating holidays is marked "N ", the provider will not be reimbursed for any of the holidays and /or floating holidays If the Provider determines that a parent does not intend to return a child to the child care program, then the child must be terminated from the child care program, and future days are non- reimbursable. These non - reimbursable days must be coded as "T" on attendance sheets. If a child is absent for five (5) consecutive days and the parent does not contact the Provider, the Provider shall notify the Coalition and the Coalition shall determine whether continued care is needed. 16 C. Summary of Enrollment /Attendance Codes E- Excused. eexnrep X - Enrolled / Present (a day a child is present) A - Authorized Absence beyond 3 days (excused absence beyond three (3) days, which has been approved by The Coalition) H - Reimbursable Holiday T - Terminated (day child is disenrolled) N - Enrolled, not reimbursable. No Reimbursement In Excess of Licensed Capacity The Coalition is not responsible for licensing of the Provider. However, the Coalition cannot, and will not, reimburse the Provider for services provided to any child in excess of the Provider's licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to limit future enrollment when a Provider has been found to be over its licensed capacity at any given time. Under no circumstances will the Coalition enroll children with a Provider that the Coalition knows will cause the Provider to exceed its licensed capacity at any given time. The Coalition further reserves the right to seek the return of any payment made to the Provider to reimburse the Provider for services provided to a child at a time when the Provider was out of compliance with its licensed capacity. VI. Rene otiation Modification. Modifications to this Service Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed. The parties agree to renegotiate this Service Agreement if federal, state, and /or county revisions of any applicable laws or regulations make changes in this Service Agreement necessary. VII. Name. Mailing and Street Address of Payee. The name and mailing.address of the official payee to whom the Coalition shall make payment: Program Contact: Tonjla Srrtith Program Name: City of Delray Beach.D /B /A:Pompey'Park; CommunityCe.nter Program Address: 50 North West 31st Avenue Delray. Beach, FL 33444 Telephone Number: 561-m71249 The name of the contact person and street address where financial and administrative records are maintained: Program Contact: Tonya Smith Program Name: City of Delray. Beach b /B /A P.:ompey•. Park Community Center Program Address: SQ North West 1st Avenue Delray Beach; FL 33444 Telephone Number: 561- W-7249 The Provider will provide services under this Provider Agreement at the following location: 11o17North West 2nd Street Delray .Beach FL 33444 17 VIII. Miscellaneous. A. Term. This Provider Agreement is effective as of July 1, 2013 and will automatically terminate on June„ 30, 2014 hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement Period" unless terminated earlier as provided herein. Notices. Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by hand delivery with a request for a written receipt of acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth in Section VI, until changed in writing. B. Assignment. Neither Party may assign its interest under this Provider Agreement except with the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Without limiting or restricting the generality of the foregoing, it shall not be unreasonable for a party to deny its consent where, in its opinion, acting reasonably, the proposed assignee, purchaser or transferee lacks the capacity or resources necessary to ensure the proper conduct and completion of its obligations under this Provider Agreement over the remaining portion of the Agreement Period. No assignment shall operate to release the assigning Party from its obligations hereunder unless such Party is expressly released from its obligations by the other Party. C. Inurement. This Provider Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing contained in this Provider Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer upon any other person or entity any benefits, rights or remedies. D. Waiver. No waiver by any Party of one or more defaults by any other Party in the performance of any provisions of this Service Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any future default or defaults, whether of a like or a different character. E . Headings. The headings in this Provider Agreement are inserted for convenience or reference only and shall not affect the meaning or construction hereof. F. Entire Agreement. This Provider Agreement represents the entire understanding between the Parties relative to the matters addressed herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings other than those set forth or referred to herein. G. Amendment. This Provider Agreement may not be amended without the execution of a written document by all Parties hereto. All parties agree however, that an amendment may be required due to change of Local and /or State rules and regulations. In this case, all Parties agree to execute an amendment to this Agreement H. Governing Law and Venue. This Provider Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Venue for purposes of any action brought to enforce or construe this Provider Agreement shall be in Palm Beach County, Florida. 1g IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this 24 page Agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized. The undersigned represents and warrants that he /she has full and complete authority to execute the agreement on behalf .of By EARLY LEARNING COALITION PALM BEACH COUNTY, INC. Warren Eldridge, Executive Director _.._ . - day of .2012. PROVIDER By the signature below, Provider hereby certifies that 1.1 to the best of their knowledge and belief, after diluent inquiry, he /she /it is not under investigation for ANY motters, including 8UT NOT LIMITED TO, fraud and /or other financial malfeasance, which if proven, would or could result in criminal action or termination of this Agreement and 2) by signing this Agreement and agreeing to accept financially- assisted school readiness funds and subsidized child care funding, available from other sources, you are acknowledging that you understand the terms of this Agreement and agree to abide by these terms stated. Ilf Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any., ATTEST: By Corporate Secretary President /Vice President (Please Print Name of Secretary) (Please Print Name of President/ Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL). _.........._.... day of ._..__._ ..._. 2013. (If Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) 1St Witness Signature 2nd Witness Signature Federal I. D. or SS #: Appfoyed as to form and legal sufficiency: .. -City Attorney�r;`a 19 By_ ............ . Signature (Print Provider Name) -- -_ day of 2013. Attachment A .,.�-:,�Early Learning Coalition cif P altri 13c.ze_1e C.[)llllty Number:OP1 -2011 Subject File: Issue Date: DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY & PROCEDURE 11/1/11 Originating Unit: Operations Department ELC Staff Contact: Chief Operating Officer Subject: Purpose: The Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc. (Coalition) is committed to providing high - quality early learning services and desires that any provider orparent.who is. not in agreement with any of its services o.r_p.rocedures be afforded a dispute resolution process to ensure that all disputes are handled in a fair, efficient and timely manner. The Coalition will provide opportunity for individuals to express grievances and concerns and to appeal decisions made through a formal grievance and appeals process. Reason: To give a clear and specific written course of action for resolving disputes within the Palm Beach County early learning system. Dispute Resolution Procedure: 1. Disputant submits grievance to the Coalition's Executive Director in writing to the following address: 2300 High Ridge Road, Suite 115 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 2. All grievances shall include: a. the name and contact information of the disputant, b, specifics of dispute; c. actions taken to resolve dispute including all actions previously mentioned in this procedure; and d. any supporting documents. 3. Th Coalition's Executive Director will contact the disputant directly within (2) business days to attempt to resolve the concerns. a. The Executive Director will record all contact attempts and dates, as well as the outcome of the contact attempts. b. If a resolution is reached, it will be documented. c. If a resolution is not reached, the dispute and all documentation will be submitted by the Executive director to theiCoaRtign's- Execwtive iirtee. d. The Executive Director will notify the disputant within three (3) business days of the next Executive Committee Meeting during which the Executive Committee will hear the appeal. e. The Coalition Executive Director shall inform the Executive Committee of the dispute and provide committee members with all applicable information. The Committee shall attempt to convene within thirty (30) days of receipt of the dispute to make a determination. 4. The Executive Committee shall act as an appeals committee and hear all disputes that are unresolved through the Service Provider Grievance Procedure, Coalition staff process, or Executive Director. 5. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for making all written findings and recommendations based upon: a. Testimony from the Executive Director b. Written findings from Service Provider Grievance Procedures c. Coalition staff findings and reports d. -Other- relevant - information. 6. The disputant and /or his /her representative will be provided with the opportunity to present his /her concerns. 7. All decisions of the Executive Committee are final and the disputant shall be notified in writing. of this decision within 30 days from the date of the appeals hearing. S. All appeals hearings are open to the public, unless otherwise _provided by law, rule or regulation. 2.0 Attachment B CHANGE OF DIRECTORTORM The information listed below is an update to the Application /Renewal Data Sheet submitted for the current Contract year. LEGAL NAME OF PROVIDER: ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP: TELEPHONE: L— I — ---- NEW DIRECTOR'S NAME: DATE NEW DIRECTOR HIRED: - NEW DIRECTOR'S E-MAIL ADDRESS: FORMER DIRECTOR:— By signing below, the PROVIDER indicates that the new director is authorized to inquire about and sign documents relating to payment, attendance, Agreement application or renewal, Agreement contract and Agreementamendmenift. (if Provider is a Corporation sign below with President or Vice President and Corporate Secretary, if any.) -A.T--r—FST, By Corporate Secretary President./Vice President Please Type Name. of Secretary-I )Please Type Name of President/Vice President) (CORPORATE SEAL) day of 2013 (if Provider is NOT a corporation, person legally authorized to bind Provider is to sign below) 15c Witness Signature 2 nd Witness Signature Retu-m– T-4o--* The C FAMILY CENTRAL, INC. 3111 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, SUITE 222 ATTAL! PA.-.oVMEPS"—u!C1-ES Approved as to form and WEST PALM BEACH, FL33405-1548 legal sufficiency: 21 Attorney Ii By- r. city Signature (Print Provider Namel day of 2013 Attachment C RXED RATE SHEET Program's Name CTC -A Scholarships provide funding for afterschool programs in accordance with the school year calendar. Children will be eligible to receive Part Time care during regular school days and Full Time care during summer, school closure daus [which do not include weekends and non-reimbursable holidays or other days the Provider is closed) and early release days. Afterschool reimbursement shall be based upon the following fixed rate per child: FULL TIME DA LY Summer, School Closure Days; Early Release Days 1 $19.86 PARTTIME DAILY Regular School Days $ 10.44 The required co- payment is $1.80 per day, regardless of full or part day, for the first child in the family and $.90 per day for each additional child in the family. The Coalition shall deduct the co- payment from the rate before payment is made. to the Provider. Rates Effective: JuIV is 2013 Provider's Signature: Date:, Approved as to form and legal suf�oiency: ; Ly '•�, �.,,��)` !ter �° "" .,�,_ . City Attorney -; Attachment C -AT S T Program's Name Child cme reimbursement shall :be- based-upon the tolio.wAng negotiated -axed- rate per �f�al.d=. -Past fees sW.�Ze deducted from this rate before payment is made to the Prodder. *If Gold Seal Differential is included in these rates the rates will be reduced when the Gold Seal is no longer Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: -_ ,_Date: Approved as to form and Segal sufficiency: Gy- city Attorneyf:: . 7:4 -Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULLTIME Sibling Rate PARTTiME Sibling Rate Infants IA 441-A 0 -12 months Toddler N/A N/A N/A N/A 13 -23 months Two year olds N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 -35'mznths Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 36-47 months Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 -59 months Preschool 60 -72 months N/A N/A N/A N/A [ di in Sihaol). School Age %comers N/A N/A N/A N/A Holidays Rates Effective: July 1, 2013 Provider's Signature: -_ ,_Date: Approved as to form and Segal sufficiency: Gy- city Attorneyf:: . 7:4 Attachment C Q ATF H. Citu of 6.61!Ay Beach DIBLA Pombev Park Community Center Prop-ram's dame Wrap Around Rate for VPK Children (For the same child attending a VPK program and school readiness funded program) Child care wrap around rate for VPK children's reimbursement shall be based upon the following ne .votiated fixed rate. •,,..��s r •y r, Provider's Signature: _– _ - - -_ -- Dater_ pprcved as to form and legal sutficiency: 4V 3' ,,City Attorney 14 Full Time Daily Part Time Daily 6 Hours or More Less than 6 Hours FULLTIME SIBLING PARTTIME SIBLING Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 36-47 months Preschool N/A N/A N/A N/A 4181--5-9 Tno: uhs- Preschool 6Q- -72 months- N/A N/A N/A N/A (not in School) •,,..��s r •y r, Provider's Signature: _– _ - - -_ -- Dater_ pprcved as to form and legal sutficiency: 4V 3' ,,City Attorney 14 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: PAUL DORLING, AICP, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING THROUGH: LOUIE CHAPMAN, JR., CITY MANAGER DATE: July 3, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT/ PALM BEACH COUNTY. BEACH RENOURISHMENT ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of City Commission is that of approving an interlocal agreement between Palm Beach County and the City of Delray Beach. The purpose of the agreement is to provide a mechanism for construction, monitoring and funding of the beach renourishment project and set forth the terms, conditions and obligations of each of the respective parties. BACKGROUND An original interlocal agreement was executed between the County and the City on February 27, 1973 and amended by addendum agreement dated August 16, 1977, and supplemented by agreements dated November 8, 1983 and October 13, 1992 and October 4, 1994 (See attached copy). This interlocal agreement is in conjunction with a proposed 2013 fill event involving placement of 500,000 cubic yards of sand at the north end of the beach (north of Atlantic Avenue north to just north of George Bush Blvd) (See Exhibit A attached). The County will enter into a PPA (Project Partnership Agreement) with the Federal Government (Army Corps of Engineers) which provides that the federal government will construct all iterations of the project during the term of the PPA and will cost share with the county for project expenses. The County has agreed to pay the entire nonfederal share of this fill event and that commitment requires modification of the existing interlocal agreement. This interlocal differs from the one currently in effect (October 4, 1994) as it limits the County reimbursement participation to the Engineering, Design, and Construction elements of the project. The prior interlocal (1994) also covered monitoring costs which included the local share of annual yearly survey costs (approximately $11,000 a year). Under this interlocal this annual local share will now be the responsibility of the City. While this interlocal is less beneficial for the city as it relates to long term monitoring functions, it is more favorable than other interlocals executed between the County and Boca Raton and Palm Beach County (municipalities with their own beach renourishment programs) which requires those municipalities to contribute up to 25% of the local construction costs of their renourishment projects. The interlocal agreement has been reviewed and approved as to legal sufficiency and form by the City Attorney. RECOMMENDATION By motion, approve the interlocal agreement between the City of Delray Beach and Palm Beach County for the upcoming Beach Renourishment Project. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN PALM BEACH COUNTY AND THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on the day of , 2013 by and between PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (the "COUNTY "), and the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, a municipal corporation in the State of Florida, (the "CITY "), each one constituting a public agency as defined in Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, hereinafter referred to collectively as the "parties ". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, known as the "Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969" authorizes local governments to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide services and facilities that will harmonize geographic, economic, population and other factors influencing the needs and development of local communities; and WHEREAS, Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, permits public agencies as defined therein to enter into interlocal agreements with each other to jointly exercise any power, privilege, or authority that such agencies share in common and that each might exercise separately; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 125.01, Florida Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is empowered to establish administer programs of beach erosion control and to enter into agreements with other governmental agencies within or outside the boundaries of the COUNTY for joint performance, or performance of one unit on behalf of the other, of any of either governmental entity's authorized functions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, the CITY is empowered to exercise any governmental, corporate, and proprietary power for municipal purposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY intend to make the most efficient use of their powers by cooperating with each other in the maintenance and repair of the Delray Beach Segment of the Palm Beach County, Florida Shore Protection Project (PROJECT) which includes the area described in attached Exhibit "A ", within the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army (Federal Government) and Palm Beach County, acting as the Non - Federal Sponsor, entered into an agreement dated January 23, 1973 pursuant to Section 102 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, Public Law 87-874, providing for Federal participation in the costs incurred for construction of the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement on February 27, 1973, as amended by Addendum Agreement dated August 16, 1977, and supplemented by agreements dated November 8, 1983 and October 13, 1992, and October 4, 1994 which provide for joint funding of the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, in 1973 the CITY completed the first beach restoration PROJECT for the City of Delray Beach municipal beach. Thereafter, the CITY performed maintenance nourishments in 1978, 1984, 1992, 2002, and 2013; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government and COUNTY entered into an agreement dated September 23, 1992 pursuant to Section 102 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, Public Law 87 -874 that includes the extension. of Federal participation in the PROJECT for a period of 50 years beginning from the date of initiation of construction; and WHEREAS, the CITY and the COUNTY previously entered into an Interlocal Agreement on October 4, 1994 (R94- 1357D) to provide a mechanism for construction, monitoring and funding the PROJECT, and this Agreement replaces said Interlocal Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration. of the mutual covenants, promises and representations herein, the parties agree as follows: I. Purpose of the Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism for construction, monitoring and funding of the PROJECT and to set forth the terms, conditions and obligations of each of the respective parties hereto. The parties agree that this Agreement is contingent on the COUNTY entering into the Project Partnership Agreement (PPA) attached hereto as Exhibit `B ", which provides that the Federal Government will construct all iterations of the PROJECT during the term of the PPA and will cost -share with the COUNTY for the PROJECT expenses. 2. The PROJECT. The PROJECT consists of the restoration of the City of Delray Beach municipal beach, which is more particularly described in Exhibit "A ". 3. Term, This Agreement shall commence upon execution by both parties and shall expire on June 1, 2023 unless otherwise terminated as provided herein. 4. COUNTY Obligations. A. The COUNTY shall enter into the PPA attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", which provides for Federal construction of the Delray Beach Segment of the PROJECT for the remaining authorized period of periodic nourishment as described in the PPA. B. The COUNTY shall enter into the Cooperation Agreement (CA)attached hereto as Exhibit "C" with the Federal Government to provide for PROJECT rehabilitation in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 701n. C. The COUNTY shall serve as the non - federal sponsor under the PPA and public sponsor under the CA and assume the responsibility for local cooperation in the PROJECT. D. The, COUNTY shall appropriate funds and be responsible for the non - Federal costs as detailed in the PPA and CA. E. The COUNTY shall reimburse the CITY for any expenses incurred by the CITY that are eligible for cost share under the terms of the PPA or CA. 5, CITY Obligations. A. The CITY shall establish and maintain a dedicated funding source to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, B. The CITY shall cooperate with the COUNTY and shall take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that the COUNTY is able to timely and satisfactorily comply with all terms and conditions of the PPA and CA. C. The CITY shall obtain all state and federal permits necessary for the PROJECT unless notified in writing by the Director of Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management that the Federal Government will handle permitting for an iteration of the PROJECT and shall fully comply with any permits obtained by the CITY, including but not limited to completing all monitoring, surveys and reporting. 6. Joint Responsibilities. The CITY and the COUNTY shall endeavor to be joint applicants for State funding for the PROJECT. The COUNTY will support CITY's funding requests in the same manner as if the request came from the COUNTY, and the CITY will support the COUNTY's funding requests in the same manner as if the request came from the CITY. 7. Party Representatives. The COUNTY's representative /contract monitor during the term of this Agreement shall be the Director of the Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management, whose telephone number is (561) 233 -2400. The CITY's representative /contract monitor during the term of this Agreement shall be Mr. Paul Dorling, whose telephone number is (561) 243 -7040. 8. Notices. All formal notices between the parties shall be hand - delivered or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following recipients: Chairperson Board of County Commissioners Palm Beach County 301 N. Olive Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 City Manager City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1St Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 And Director Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management 2300 N. Jog Road, 4th Floor West Palm Beach, FL 33411 With a copy to: Palm Beach County Attorney's Office ERM Attorney 301 N. Olive Ave., 6th Floor West Palm Beach, FL 33401 With a copy to: City Attorney City of Delray Beach 100 N. W. I" Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 All notices required by this Agreement shall be considered delivered upon receipt. Should any Party change its address, written notice of such new address shall promptly be sent to the other Party. 9. Funding Contingency. The County's performance and obligations under this Agreement and any amendment hereto are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Board of County Commissioners. The City's performance and obligations under this Agreement and any amendment hereto are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the City Council. 10. Termination for convenience. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience by giving ninety (90) days prior written notice to the other party. If the CITY terminates this Agreement for convenience, the CITY shall compensate the COUNTY for all costs incurred by the COUNTY as a result of such termination. 11. Default and Opportunily Opportunity to Cure. If a Party fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement in a timely and proper manner, the Party not in default shall have the right to terminate this Agreement and/or to bring an action for breach by giving written notice of any deficiency and its intent to terminate and /or to bring an action for breach. The Party in default shall then have thirty (30) days from receipt of notice to correct the stated deficiency. If the defaulting Party fails to correct the deficiency within such time and unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the Party not in default may terminate this Agreement and/or bring an action for breach. 12. Indemnification. Each party shall be liable for its own actions and negligence and, to the extent permitted by law, the CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the COUNTY against any actions, claims or damages arising out of the CITY's negligence in connection with this Agreement, and the COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY against any actions, claims or damages arising out of the COUNTY's negligence in connection with this Agreement. The foregoing indemnification shall not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the limits set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, nor shall the same be construed to constitute agreement by either party to indemnify the other party for such other party's negligent, willful or intentional acts or omissions. 13. Insurance. Each party shall maintain a fully funded program of self - insurance pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 14. Maintenance of Records. The parties shall maintain, in accordance with generally - accepted governmental auditing standards, all financial and nonfinancial records and reports directly or indirectly related to the negotiation or performance of this Agreement or any amendment hereto, including supporting documentation for any service rates, expenses, research or reports. The parties shall have the right to examine in accordance with generally- accepted governmental auditing standards all records directly or indirectly related to this Agreement or any amendment hereto. Such examination may be made only upon reasonable notice, time and place. In the event the parties should become involved in a legal dispute with a third party arising from performance under this Agreement or any amendment hereto, the parties shall extend the period of maintenance for all records relating to this Agreement or any amendment hereto until the final disposition of the legal dispute, and all such records shall be made readily available to the other party. 15. Enforcement Costs. Except as otherwise provided herein, any costs or expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) associated with the enforcement of the terms and/or conditions. of this Agreement shall be borne by the respective parties. This provision pertains only to the parties to the Agreement. 16, Delegation. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to authorize the delegation of the constitutional or statutory duties of state, county, or city officers. 17. Filing. A copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County. 18. Equal Opportuni1y. The COUNTY and the CITY agree that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, sex, age, national origin, disability, religion, ancestry, marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression be excluded from the benefits of, or be subjected to any form of discrimination under, any activity carried out by the performance of the Agreement. 19. Severabilit . In the event that any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, or provision hereof is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such shall not affect the remaining portions of this Agreement and the same shall remain in full force and effect. 20. Waiver of Breach. The failure to insist on strict performance of or the waiver of any covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement by any party shall not relieve the other party from performing any other obligation strictly in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. No waiver shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. Such waiver shall be limited to provisions of this Agreement specifically referred to therein and shall not be deemed a waiver of any other provision. No waiver shall constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing states otherwise. 21. Legal actions; remedies. Any and all legal actions to enforce this Agreement and any amendment hereto shall be brought in Palm Beach County, Florida. This Agreement and any amendment hereto shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. No remedy herein conferred upon any party is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any party of any right, power, or remedy hereunder shall preclude any other or further exercise thereof. No provision of this Agreement is intended to, or shall be construed to, create any third party beneficiary or to provide any rights to any person or entity not a party to this Agreement, including but not limited to any citizen or employees of the County and /or the City. 22. Independent Contractor. Each party recognizes that it is an independent contractor and not an agent or servant of the other party. No person employed by any party to this Agreement shall, in connection with the performance of this Agreement or any services or functions contemplated hereunder, at any time, be considered the employee of the other party, nor shall an employee claim any right in or entitlement to any pension, worker's compensation benefit, unemployment compensation, civil service, or other employee rights or privileges granted by operation of law, except through and against the entity by whom they are employed. 23. Construction. No party shall be considered the author of this Agreement since the parties hereto have participated in drafting this document to arrive at a final agreement. Thus, the terms of this Agreement shall not be strictly construed against one party as opposed to the other party based upon who drafted it. 24. Captions. The captions and section designations herein set forth are for convenience only and shall have no substantive meaning. 25. Palm Beach Count Office of the Inspector General. Palm Beach County has established the Office of the Inspector General in Palm Beach County Code, Section 2 -421 - 2 -440, as may be amended. The Inspector General's authority includes but is not limited to the power to review past, present and proposed County contracts, transactions, accounts and records, to require the production of records, and to audit, investigate, monitor, and inspect the activities of any party contracting with the COUNTY and its officers, agents, employees and lobbyists in order to ensure compliance with contract requirements and detect corruption and fraud. Failure to cooperate with the Inspector General or interfering with or impeding any investigation shall be in violation of Palm Beach County Code, Section 2 -421 - 2 -440, and punished pursuant to Section 125.69, Florida Statutes, in the same manner as a second degree misdemeanor. 26. Entirety of Agreement. The CITY and COUNTY agree that this Agreement, together with any attached exhibits, sets forth the entire agreement between the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. None of the provisions, terms or obligations in this Agreement may be added to, modified, superseded, or otherwise altered, except by written instrument executed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County of Palm Beach, Florida has caused this Agreement to be signed by the Mayor of the Board of County Commissioners and the seal of said Board to be affixed hereto and attested by the Clerk of said Board, pursuant to authority granted by said Board, and the City of Delray Beach has caused this Agreement to be signed in its corporate name by its mayor and its corporate seal to be affixed hereto, attested by its City Clerk, the date and year first above written. ATTEST: Sharon R. Bock, Clerk & Comptroller BY: Deputy Clerk DATE: (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Steven L. Abrams, Mayor DATE: APPROVED AS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS: BY: Assistant County Attorney Robert Robbins, Director Palm Beach County Dept. of DATE: ATTEST: BY ITS COMMISSION C DATE: City Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorney DATE: Environmental Resources Management CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, WA DATE: Mayor Exhibit A City of Delray Beach Beach Nourishment Project Legend • DEP Monument = City Parks 2013/14 Project Limits = Authorized Project Limits ♦..!ls `.: .'� __.4174 0.25 0.5 ■ Miles 4122113 BWM PROJECT PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AND PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR PERIODIC NOURISHMENT OF THE DELRAY BEACH SEGMENT OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 2013, by and between the Department of the Army (hereinafter the "Government "), represented by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), and Palm Beach County, Florida (hereinafter the "Non- Federal Sponsor "), represented by the Chair of its Board of County Commissioners. WITNESSETH, THAT: WHEREAS, construction of the shore protection project at Palm Beach County from Martin County line to Lake Worth Inlet and from South Lake Worth Inlet to Broward County line, Florida at Palm Beach County, Florida (hereinafter the "Authorized Project ") was authorized by Section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962, Public Law 87 -874; WHEREAS, Section 102 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, Public Law 87 -874 authorizes the Secretary to reimburse non- Federal interests for work they perform on beach erosion projects authorized in Section 101 of said Act provided the work performed is approved by the Government and that such reimbursement shall be subject to appropriations and shall not take precedence over other pending projects of higher priority for improvements; WHEREAS, the Government and Non - Federal Sponsor entered into an agreement dated January 23, 1973, providing for Federal participation, subject to the terms of the agreement, in the costs incurred by the Non - Federal Sponsor for initial construction of the Authorized Project, and the future periodic nourishment of the Authorized Project for a period not to exceed 10 years following completion of the initial construction; WHEREAS, construction of the Delray Beach Segment, a separable element of the Authorized Project, was initiated and completed in 1973 by Palm Beach County, Florida, as authorized bySection 102 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962, Public Law 87874; WHEREAS, Section 156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976, Public Law 94 -587, as amended by Section 934 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law 99 -662, authorizes the Secretary of the Army to extend participation in shore protection projects, as he deems necessary, for a period not to exceed fifty years from the date of initial construction; WHEREAS, on March 1, 1991, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) approved extension of the period of Federal participation in the Delray Beach Segment of the Authorized Project for an additional 35 years, in accordance with Section 934 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law 99 -662; WHEREAS, the Government and Non - Federal Sponsor subsequently entered into an agreement dated September 23, 1.992, providing for the extension of Federal participation in the Delray Beach Segment of the Authorized Project for a period of 50 years beginning from the date of initiation of construction; WHEREAS, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor desire to enter into a Project Partnership Agreement (hereinafter the "Agreement") to provide for Federal construction of the Delray Beach Segment of the Authorized Project for the remaining authorized period of periodic nourishment (hereinafter the "Project ", as defined in Article I.A.. of this Agreement); WHEREAS, Section 103(c)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law 99 -662, as amended, specifies the cost sharing requirements applicable to the Project; WHEREAS, Section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970, Public Law 91 -611, as amended, (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. § 1962d -5b) and Section 1030) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Lava 99 -662, as amended (codified at 33 U.S.C. § 22130)), provide, inter alia, that the Secretary of the Army shall not commence construction of any water resources project, or separable element thereof, until each non - Federal sponsor has entered into a written agreement to furnish its required cooperation for the project or separable element; WHEREAS, the Government and Non - Federal Sponsor have the full authority and capability to perform as hereinafter set forth and intend to cooperate in cost sharing and financing of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; WHEREAS, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, in connection with this Agreement, desire to foster a partnering strategy and a working relationship between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor through a mutually developed formal strategy of commitment and communication embodied herein, which creates an environment where trust and teamwork prevent disputes, foster a cooperative bond between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, and facilitate the successful implementation of the project; NOW, THEREFORE, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor agree as follows: ARTICLE I - DEFINITIONS A. The term "Project" shall mean the periodic nourishment of as generally described in the Panama City Beaches, Florida, General Reevaluation Report and Environmental Assessment, Beach Erosion Control and Storm Damage Reduction Project, dated September 1994, and approved by Chief, Planning Division, Directorate of Civil works on May 29, 1996 (hereinafter the GRR). B. The term "initial construction" shall mean the placement of suitable beach fill material , as generally described in the GRR referenced in paragraph A above. C. The term "periodic nourishment" shall mean the placement of suitable beach material within the areas of initial construction or any functional portion of the initial construction, as generally described in the GRR referenced in paragraph A. of this Article. D. The term "total project costs" shall mean the sum of all costs incurred by the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government in accordance with the terms of this Agreement directly related to periodic nourishment of the Project. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, the term shall include, but is not necessarily limited to: advanced engineering and design costs; preconstruction engineering and design costs; engineering and design costs during periodic nourishment; the Non - Federal Sponsor's and the Government's costs of investigations to identify the existence and extent of hazardous substances in accordance with Article XIV.A. of this Agreement; the Government's costs of historic preservation activities in accordance with Article XVII.A. and Article XVII.B.1. of this Agreement; the Government's actual construction costs; the Government's supervision and administration costs; the Non - Federal Sponsor's and the Government's costs of participation in the Project Coordination Team in accordance with Article V of this Agreement; the Government's costs of contract dispute settlements or awards; the value of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material for which the Government affords credit in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement or for which reimbursement by the Government is required pursuant to Article II.C.3. of this Agreement; and the Non - Federal Sponsor's and the Government's costs of audit in accordance with Article X.B. and Article X.C. of this Agreement. The term does not include any costs for operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, or rehabilitation; any costs due to initial construction of the Project under the 1973 Agreement; any costs due to betterments under Article II.H.2. of this Agreement; any costs of dispute resolution under Article VII of this Agreement; the Government's costs for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation in accordance with Article XVII.B.2. and Article XVII.B.3 of this Agreement; or the Non - Federal Sponsor's costs of negotiating this Agreement. E. The term "financial obligations for periodic nourishment" shall mean financial obligations of the Government, other than obligations pertaining to the provision of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and borrow and dredged or excavated material disposal areas, that results or would result in a cost that is or would be included in total project costs. F. The term "non- Federal proportionate share" shall mean the ratio of the non - Federal Sponsor's total cash contribution required under Article H.C.2. of this Agreement to total financial obligations for periodic nourishment, as projected by the Government. G. The term "authorized periodic nourishment period" shall mean the authorized duration for Federal participation in periodic nourishment, which is a period of 50 years from the date of initiation of initial construction of the Project in 1973. H. The term "highway" shall mean any highway, roadway, street, or way, including any bridge thereof, that is owned by a public entity. I. The term "relocation" shall mean providing a functionally equivalent facility to the owner of a utility, cemetery, highway, railroad, or public facility, when such action is authorized in accordance with applicable legal principles of just compensation; or providing a functionally 3 equivalent facility when such action is specifically provided for, and is identified as a relocation, in the authorizing legislation for the Project or any report referenced therein. Providing a functionally equivalent facility may take the form of alteration, lowering, raising, or replacement and attendant demolition of the affected facility or part thereof. J. The term 'functional portion " shall mean a portion of the Project for which construction has been completed and that can function independently, as determined by the U.S. Army Engineer, Jacksonville District (hereinafter "District Engineer ") in writing, although the remainder of the Project is not complete. K. The term "betterment" shall mean a difference in the construction of an element of the Project that results from the application of standards that the Government determines exceed those that the Government would otherwise apply to the construction of that element. The term does not include any construction for features not included in the Project as defined in paragraph A. of this Article. L. The term "Federal program funds" shall mean funds provided by a Federal agency, other than the Department of the Army, plus any non - Federal contribution required as a matching share therefor. M. The term "fiscal year" shall mean one year beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30. ARTICLE I1 - OBLIGATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THE NON - FEDERAL SPONSOR A. The Government, subject to receiving funds appropriated by the Congress of the United States (hereinafter the "Congress ") and using those funds and funds provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor, expeditiously shall construct the Project (including periodic nourishment at such times during the authorized periodic nourishment period as the Government, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, determines such placement to be necessary and economically justified), applying those procedures usually applied to Federal projects, in accordance with Federal laws, regulations, and policies. 1. The Government shall not issue the solicitation for the first contract for construction of the Project or commence construction of the Project using the Government's own forces until the Non - Federal Sponsor has confirmed in writing its willingness to proceed with the Project. 1 The Government shall afford the Non - Federal Sponsor the opportunity to review and comment on the solicitations for all contracts, including relevant plans and specifications, prior to the Government's issuance of such solicitations. To the extent possible, the Government shall afford the Non - Federal Sponsor the opportunity to review and comment on all proposed contract modifications, including change orders. In any instance where providing the Non- Federal Sponsor with notification of a contract modification is not possible prior to execution of the contract modification, the Government shall provide such notification in writing at the earliest date possible. To the extent possible, the Government also shall afford the Non - Federal Sponsor the opportunity to review and comment on all contract claims prior to resolution thereof. The Government shall consider in good faith the comments of the Non - Federal Sponsor, but the contents of solicitations, award of contracts or commencement of construction using the Government's own forces, execution of contract modifications, resolution of contract claims, and performance of all work on the Project shall be exclusively within the control of the Government. 3. At the time the District Engineer furnishes the contractor with the Govermnent's Written Notice of Acceptance of Completed Work for each contract awarded by the Government for the Project, the District Engineer shall furnish a copy thereof to the Non - Federal Sponsor. 4. As of the effective date of this Agreement, $ of Federal funds is currently projected to be available for the Project. The Government makes no commitment to request Congress to provide additional Federal funds for the Project. Further, the Government's financial participation in the Project is limited to the Federal funds that the Government makes available to the Project. B. The Government shall assign all costs in total project costs, including all contributions provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor, to hurricane and storm damage reduction, to recreation, or to privately owned shores where use of such shores is limited to private interests. C. For each iteration of periodic nourishment, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall contribute 35 percent of total project costs assigned by the Government to hurricane and storm damage reduction, plus 50 percent of total project costs assigned by the Government to recreation plus 100 percent of total project costs assigned by the Government to privately owned shores (where use of such shores is limited to private interests) in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. 1. In accordance with Article III of this Agreement, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide all lands, easements, and rights -of-way, including those required for relocations, the borrowing of material, and the disposal of dredged or excavated material, shall perform or ensure performance of all relocations, and shall construct improvements required on lands, easements, and rights-of-way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material that the Government determines to be required or to be necessary for such iteration of periodic nourishment. 2. The Non- Federal Sponsor shall provide funds in accordance with Article VI.B. of this Agreement in the amount necessary to meet the Non - Federal Sponsor's required share of total costs ofperiodic nourishment for such iteration ofperiodic nourishment if the Government projects at any time that the collective value of the following contributions that are determined by the Government to be attributable to such iteration ofperiodic nourishment will be less than such required share: (a) the value of the contributions provided by a non - Federal interest pursuant to the terms of a design agreement; (b) the value of the Non- Federal Sponsor's contributions under paragraph H.1. of this Article, as determined in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement; and (c) the value of the Non - Federal Sponsor's contributions under Article V, Article X, and Article XIV.A. of this Agreement. 3, The Government, subject to the availability of funds, shall refund or reimburse to the Non - Federal Sponsor any contributions in excess of the Non - Federal Sponsor's required share of total costs ofperiodic nourishment for such iteration ofperiodic nourishment if the Government determines at any time that the collective value of the following contributions that are determined by the Government to be attributable to such iteration of periodic nourishment has exceeded such required share: (a) the value of the Non - Federal Sponsor's contributions under paragraph H.2. of this Article; (b) the value of the contributions provided by a non - Federal interest pursuant to the terms of a design agreement; (c) the value of the Non- Federal Sponsor's contributions under paragraph H.I, of this Article, as determined in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement; and (d) the value of the Non - Federal Sponsor's contributions under Article V, Article X, and Article XIV.A. of this Agreement. After such a determination, the Government, in its sole discretion, may acquire any remaining lands, easements, and rights -of -way required for such iteration of periodic nourishment, perform any remaining relocations necessary for such iteration of periodic nourishment, or construct any remaining improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of- way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material required for such iteration of periodic nourishment on behalf of the Non - Federal Sponsor. Notwithstanding the acquisition of lands, easements, and rights -of -way, performance of relocations, or construction of improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material by the Government under this paragraph, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall be responsible, as between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, for any costs of cleanup and response in accordance with Article XIV.C, of this Agreement. D. When the District Engineer determines that an iteration of periodic nourishment, or a functional portion of an iteration of periodic nourishment, is complete, the District Engineer shall so notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with copies of all of the Government's Written Notices of Acceptance of Completed Work for all contracts for such iteration of periodic nourishment that have not been provided previously. Upon such notification, the Government also shall furnish to the Non - Federal Sponsor a copy of all final as- built drawings for such iteration of periodic nourishment or such completed portion if such drawings are available. Not later than 6 months after such notification by the Government that such iteration of periodic nourishment is complete, the Government shall furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with all final as -built drawings for such iteration of periodic nourishment. In the event all final as -built drawings for such iteration of periodic nourishment cannot be completed within the 6 month period, the Government shall provide written notice to the Non - Federal Sponsor, and the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall negotiate an acceptable completion date for furnishing such documents. E. Upon notification from the District Engineer in accordance with paragraph D. of this Article, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall operate, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, and replace such iteration of periodic nourishment, or the functional portion of an iteration of periodic nourishment as the case may be, in accordance with Article V111 of this Agreement. F. Upon conclusion of each iteration of periodic nourishment, the Government shall conduct an accounting, in accordance with Article V1.C. of this Agreement, and furnish the results to the Non - Federal Sponsor. G. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall not use Federal program funds to meet any of its obligations for the Project under this Agreement unless the Federal agency providing the funds verifies in writing that such funds are authorized to carry out the Project. H. The Non - Federal Sponsor may request the Government to perform or provide, on behalf of the Non - Federal Sponsor, one or more of the services (hereinafter the "additional work") described in this paragraph. Such requests shall be in writing and shall describe the additional work requested to be performed or provided. If in its sole discretion the Government elects to perform or provide the requested additional work or any portion thereof, it shall so notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in a writing that sets forth any applicable terms and conditions, which must be consistent with this Agreement. In the event of conflict between such a writing and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall be solely responsible for all costs of the additional work performed or provided by the Government under this paragraph and shall pay all such costs in accordance with Article VI.D. of this Agreement. 1. Acquisition of lands, easements, and rights -of -way; performance of relocations; or construction of improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material for the Project. Notwithstanding acquisition of lands, easements, and rights -of -way, performance of relocations, or construction of improvements by the Government, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall be responsible, as between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, for any costs of cleanup and response in accordance with Article X1V.C, of this Agreement. 2. Inclusion of betterments in the construction of the Project. In the event the Government elects to include any such betterments, the Government shall allocate the costs of the Project features that include betterments between total project costs and the costs of the betterments. I. Not less than once each year the Non - Federal Sponsor shall inform affected interests of the extent of protection afforded by the Project. J. The Non - Federal Sponsor agrees to participate in and comply with applicable Federal floodplain management and flood insurance programs in accordance with Section 402 of Public Law 99 -662, as amended. K. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall comply with Section 402 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, as amended (33 U.S.C. 701b -12), which requires a non - Federal interest to prepare a floodplain management plan within one year after the date of signing this Agreement, and to implement such plan not later than one year after completion of construction of the Project. The plan shall be designed to reduce the impacts of future flood events in the project area, including but not limited to, addressing those measures to be undertaken by non - Federal interests to preserve the level of flood protection provided by the Project. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide an information copy of the plan to the Government upon its preparation. L. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall publicize floodplain information in the area concerned and shall provide this information to zoning and other regulatory agencies for their use in adopting regulations, or taking other actions, to prevent unwise future development and to ensure compatibility with protection levels provided by the Project. M. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall prevent obstructions or encroachments on the Project (including prescribing and enforcing regulations to prevent such obstructions or encroachments) such as any new developments on Project lands, easements, and rights -of -way or the addition of facilities which might reduce the level of protection the Project affords, hinder operation and maintenance of the Project, or interfere with the Project's proper function. N. For so long as the Project remains authorized, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall ensure conditions of public ownership and public use of the shores upon which the amount of Federal participation is based. O. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide and maintain necessary access roads, parking areas, and other associated public use facilities, open and available to all on equal terms. P. In the event the Project is damaged or destroyed by a storm or other natural forces, the Government, subject to the availability of funds and Article ILA, of this Agreement, shall place suitable beach and dune fill material within the area of the completed initial construction, as periodic nourishment of the Project. The costs of such placement shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with Article ILC. of this Agreement. Nothing in this paragraph shall relieve the Non - Federal Sponsor of its obligations under Article VIII of this Agreement. Further, nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the Government from using Public Law 84 -99 to accomplish any emergency repair and restoration work of the Project. ARTICLE III - LANDS, EASEMENTS, RIGHTS -OF -WAY, RELOCATIONS, DISPOSAL AREA IMPROVEMENTS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 91 -646, AS AMENDED A. The Government, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, shall determine the lands, easements, and rights -of -way required for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project, including those required for relocations, the borrowing of material, and the disposal of dredged or excavated material. The Government in atimely manner shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with general written descriptions, including maps as appropriate, of the lands, easements, and rights -of -way that the Government determines the Non - Federal Sponsor must provide, in detail sufficient to enable the Non - Federal Sponsor to fulfill its obligations under this paragraph, and shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with a written notice to proceed with acquisition of such lands, easements, and rights -of -way. Prior to issuance of the solicitation for each contract for each iteration of periodic nourishment or prior to the Government incurring any financial obligations for periodic nourishment of a portion of the Project, as applicable, using the Government's own forces, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall acquire all lands, easements, and rights -of -way the Government determines the Non - Federal Sponsor must provide for that work and shall provide the Government with authorization for entry thereto. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall ensure that lands, casements, and rights-of-way that the Government determines to be required for the Project and that were provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor are retained in public ownership for uses compatible with the authorized purposes of the Project. B. The Government, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, shall determine the relocations necessary for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project, including those necessary to enable the borrowing of material or the disposal of dredged or excavated material. The Government in a timely manner shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with general written descriptions, including maps as appropriate, of such relocations that are necessary for periodic nourishment in detail sufficient to enable the Non - Federal Sponsor to fulfill its obligations under this paragraph, and shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with a written notice to proceed with such relocations. Prior to issuance of the solicitation for each contract for each iteration of periodic nourishment or prior to the Government incurring any financial obligations for periodic nourishment using the Government's own forces, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall prepare or ensure the preparation of plans and specifications for, and perform or ensure the performance of all relocations required for the periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project as set forth in such descriptions. C. The Government, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, shall determine the improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material associated with periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project. Such improvements may include, but are not necessarily limited to, retaining dikes, wasteweirs, bulkheads, embankments, monitoring features, stilling basins, and de- watering pumps and pipes. The Government in a timely manner shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with general written descriptions, including maps as appropriate, of such improvements in detail sufficient to enable the Non - Federal Sponsor to fulfill its obligations under this paragraph, and shall provide the Non- Federal Sponsor with a written notice to proceed with construction of such improvements. Prior to issuance of the solicitation for each Government contract for each iteration of periodic nourishment or prior to the Government incurring any financial obligations jor periodic nourishment of a portion of the Project, using the Government's own forces, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall prepare plans and specifications for all improvements the Government determines to be required for the disposal of dredged or excavated material under that contract, submit such plans and specifications to the Government for approval, and provide such improvements in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. D. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law 91 -646, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4601- 4655), and the Uniform Regulations contained in 49 C.F.R. Part 24, in acquiring lands, easements, and rights -of -way required for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project, including those required for relocations, the borrowing of material, or the disposal of dredged or excavated material, and shall inform all affected persons of applicable benefits, policies, and procedures in connection with said Act. ARTICLE IV - CREDIT FOR VALUE OF LANDS, EASEMENTS, RIGHTS -OF -WAY, RELOCATIONS, AND DISPOSAL AREA IMPROVEMENTS A. The Government shall afford credit toward the Non - Federal Sponsor's share of total project costs for the value of the lands, easements, and rights -of -way that the Non - Federal Sponsor must provide pursuant to Article III.A. of this Agreement for periodic nourishment; for the value of the relocations that the Non - Federal Sponsor must perform or for which it must ensure performance pursuant to Article III.B. of this Agreement for periodic nourishment; and for the value of the improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material that the Non - Federal Sponsor must provide pursuant to Article III.C. of this Agreement for periodic nourishment. However, no amount shall be included in total project costs, no credit shall be afforded, and no reimbursement shall be provided for the value of any lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, or improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of- way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material that have been provided previously as an item of cooperation for another Federal project. In addition, no amount shall be included in total project costs, no credit shall be afforded, and no reimbursement shall be provided for the value of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, or improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material that were acquired or performed using Federal program funds unless the Federal agency providing the funds verifies in writing that such funds are authorized to carry out the Project. B. The Non - Federal Sponsor in a timely manner shall provide the Government with such documents as are sufficient to enable the Government to determine the value of any contribution provided pursuant to Article III.A., Article III.B., or Article III.C. of this Agreement. Upon receipt of such documents, the Government in a timely manner shall determine the value of such contributions for the purpose of including such value in total project costs and for determining the amount of credit to be afforded or reimbursement to be provided .in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. C. For the purposes of determining the value to be included in total project costs and the amount of credit to be afforded or reimbursement to be provided in accordance with this Agreement and except as otherwise provided in paragraph G. of this Article, the value of lands, easements, and rights-of-way, including those required for relocations, the borrowing of material, and the disposal of dredged or excavated material, shall be the fair market value of the real property interests, plus certain incidental costs of acquiring those interests, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. 1. Date of Valuation. The fair market value of lands, easements, or rights -of -way owned by the Non - Federal Sponsor on the effective date of this Agreement shall be the fair market value of such real property interests as of the date the Non- Fcderal Sponsor provides the Government with authorization for entry thereto. The fair market value of lands, easements, of rights-of-way acquired by the Non - Federal Sponsor after the effective date of this Agreement shall be the fair market value of such real property interests at the time the interests are acquired. 2. General Valuation Procedure. Except as provided in paragraph C.3. or paragraph C.5. of this Article, the fair market value of lands, easements, or rights -of -way shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. a. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall obtain, for each real property interest, an appraisal that is prepared by a qualified appraiser who is acceptable to the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government. The Non- Federal Sponsor shall provide the Government with the appraisal no later than 6 months after the Non - Federal Sponsor provides the Government with an authorization for entry for such real property interest. The appraisal must be prepared in accordance with the applicable rules of just compensation, as specified by the Government. The fair market value shall be the amount set forth in the Non - Federal Sponsor's appraisal, if such appraisal is approved by the Government. In the event the Government does not approve the Non - Federal Sponsor's appraisal, the Non - Federal Sponsor may obtain a second appraisal, and the fair market value shall be the amount set forth in the Non - Federal Sponsor's second appraisal, if such appraisal is approved by the Government. In the event the Government does not approve the Non - Federal Sponsor's second appraisal, the Non - Federal Sponsor chooses not to obtain a second appraisal, or the Non - Federal Sponsor does not provide the first appraisal as required in this paragraph, the Government shall obtain an appraisal, and the fair market value shall be the amount set forth in the Government's appraisal, if such appraisal is approved by the Non - Federal Sponsor. In the event the Non- Federal Sponsor does not approve the Government's appraisal, the Government, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, shall consider the Government's and the Non - Federal Sponsor's appraisals and determine an amount based thereon, which shall be deemed to be the fair market value. 10 b. Where the amount paid or proposed to be paid by the Non- Federal Sponsor for the real property interest exceeds the amount determined pursuant to paragraph C.2.a. of this Article, the Government, at the request of the Non - Federal Sponsor, shall consider all factors relevant to determining fair market value and, in its sole discretion, after consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, may approve in writing an amount greater than the amount determined pursuant to paragraph C.2.a. of this Article, but not to exceed the amount actually paid or proposed to be paid. If the Government approves such an amount, the fair market value shall be the lesser of the approved amount or the amount paid by the Non - Federal Sponsor, but no less than the amount determined pursuant to paragraph C.2.a. of this Article. 3. Eminent Domain Valuation Procedure. For lands, easements, or rights -of -way acquired by eminent domain proceedings instituted after the effective date of this Agreement, the Non - Federal Sponsor, prior to instituting such proceedings, shall submit to the Government notification in writing of its intent to institute such proceedings and an appraisal of the specific real property interests to be acquired in such proceedings. The Government shall have 60 calendar days after receipt of such a notice and appraisal within which to review the appraisal, if not previously approved by the Government in writing. a. If the Government previously has approved the appraisal in writing, or if the Government provides written approval of, or takes no action on, the appraisal within such 60 day period, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall use the amount set forth in such appraisal as the estimate of just compensation for the purpose of instituting the eminent domain proceeding. b. If the Government provides written disapproval of the appraisal, including the reasons for disapproval, within such 60 day period, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall consult in good faith to promptly resolve the issues or areas of disagreement that are identified in the Government's written disapproval. If, after such good faith consultation, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor agree as to an appropriate amount, then the Non - Federal Sponsor shall use that amount as the estimate of just compensation for the purpose of instituting the eminent domain proceeding. If, after such good faith consultation, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor cannot agree as to an appropriate amount, then the Non- Federal Sponsor may use the amount set forth in its appraisal as the estimate of just compensation for the purpose of instituting the eminent domain proceeding. c. For lands, easements, or rights-of-way acquired by eminent domain proceedings instituted in accordance with paragraph C.3. of this Article, fair market value shall be either the amount of the court award for the real property interests taken, to the extent the Government determined such interests are required for initial construction, periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project, or the amount of any stipulated settlement or portion thereof that the Government approves in writing. 4. Incidental Costs. For lands, easements, or rights-of-way acquired by the Non - Federal Sponsor within a five year period preceding the effective date of this Agreement, or at any time after the effective date of this Agreement, the value of the interest shall include the documented incidental costs of acquiring the interest, as determined by the Government, subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. In the event the Government modifies its 11 determination made pursuant to Article ULA, of this Agreement, the Government shall afford credit for the documented incidental costs associated with preparing to acquire lands, easements, or rights- of-way identified in the original determination, subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. Such incidental costs shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, closing and title costs, appraisal costs, survey costs, attorney's fees, plat maps, mapping costs, actual amounts expended for payment of any relocation assistance benefits provided in accordance with Article III.D. of this Agreement, and other payments by the Non - Federal Sponsor for items that are generally recognized as compensable, and required to be paid, by applicable state law due to the acquisision of a real property interest in accordance with Article III of this Agreement. The value of the interests provided by the Non- Federal Sponsor in accordance with Article III.A. of the Agreeement shall also include the documented costs of obtaining appraisals pursuant to paragraph C.2. of this Article, as determined by the Government, and subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of the Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. 5. Waiver of Appraisal. Except as required by paragraph C.3. of the Article, the Government may waive the requirement for an appraisal pursuant to this paragraph if it determines that an appraisal is unnecessary because the valuation is uncomplicated and that the estimated fair market value of real property interest is $10,000 or less based upon a review of available data. In such event, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor must agree in writing to the value of such real property interest in an amount not in excess of $10,000. D. After consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, the Government shall determine the value of relocations in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. 1. For a relocation other than a highway, the value shall be only that portion of relocation costs that the Government determines is necessary to provide a functionally equivalent facility, reduced by depreciation, as applicable, and by the salvage value of any removed items. 2. For a relocation of a highway, the value shall be only that portion of relocation costs that would be necessary to accomplish the relocation in accordance with the design standard that the State of Florida would apply under similar conditions of geography and traffic load, reduced by the salvage value of any removed items. 3. Relocation costs shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, actual costs of performing the relocation; planning, engineering and design costs; supervision and administration costs; and documented incidental costs associated with performance of the relocation, as determined by the Government. Relocation costs shall not include any costs due to betterments, as determined by the Government, nor any additional cost of using new material when suitable used material is available. Relocation costs shall be subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. E. The value of the improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material shall be the costs of the improvements, as determined by the Government, subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.0 of the Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. Such costs 12 shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, actual costs of providing the improvements; planning, engineering and design costs; supervision and administration costs; and documented incidental costs associated with providing the improvements, but shall not include any costs due to betterments, as determined by the Government. F. Any credit afforded or reimbursement provided under the terms of this Agreement for the value of relocations, or improvements required on lands, easements, and rights-of-way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material, performed within the Project boundaries is subject to satisfactory compliance with applicable Federal labor laws covering non - Federal construction, including, but not limited to, 40 U.S.C. 3141 -3148 and 40 U.S.C. 3701 -3708 (revising, codifying and enacting without substantive change the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276a etseq.), the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 327 et seq.) and the Copeland Anti - Kickback Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276c)). Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, credit or reimbursement may be withheld, in whole or in part, as a result of the Non - Federal Sponsor's failure to comply with its obligations under these laws. G. Where the Government, on behalf of the Non - Federal Sponsor pursuant to Article ILL. of this Agreement, acquires lands, easements, or rights -of -way, performs relocations, or constructs improvements required on lands, easements, or rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material, the value to be included in total project costs and the amount of credit to be afforded or the amount of reimbursement provided in accordance with this Agreement shall be the costs of such work performed or provided by the Government that are paid by the Non - Federal Sponsor in accordance with Article VLE. of this Agreement. In addition, the value to be included in total project costs and the amount of such credit to be afforded or the amount of reimbursement provided in accordance with this Agreement shall include the documented costs incurred by the Non - Federal Sponsor in accordance with the terms and conditions agreed upon in writing pursuant to Article ILL. of this Agreement subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, allowability of such costs. ARTICLE V - PROJECT COORDINATION TEAM A. To provide for consistent and effective communication, the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government, not later than 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement, shall appoint named senior representatives to a Project Coordination Team. Thereafter, the Project Coordination Team shall meet regularly during each iteration of periodic nourishment. The Government's Project Manager and a counterpart named by the Non - Federal Sponsor shall co -chair the Project Coordination Team. B. The Government's Project Manager and the Non - Federal Sponsor's counterpart shall keep the Project Coordination Team informed of the progress of construction and of significant pending issues and actions, and shall seek the views of the Project Coordination Team on matters that the Project Coordination Team generally oversees. C. During each iteration of periodic nourishment, the Project Coordination Team shall generally oversee the Project, including matters related to plans and specifications; scheduling; real property and relocation requirements; real property acquisition; contract awards and modifications; contract costs; the application of and compliance with 40 U.S.C. 13 3141 -3148 and 40 U.S.C. 3701 -3708 (revising, codifying and enacting without substantive change the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276a et seq.), the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 327 et seq.) and the Copeland Anti - Kickback Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276c)) for relocations and improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material; the investigations to identify the existence and extent of hazardous substances in accordance with Article XIV.A. of this Agreement; historic preservation activities in accordance with Article XVII of this Agreement; the Government's cost projections; final inspection of each iteration of periodic nourishment or functional portions thereof; anticipated requirements and needed capabilities for performance of operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and rehabilitation of the Project, including issuance of permits; and other related matters related to the Project. This oversight of the Project shall be consistent with a project management plan developed by the Government after consultation with the Non- Federal Sponsor. D. The Project Coordination Team may make recommendations to the District Engineer on matters related to the Project that the Project Coordination Team generally oversees, including suggestions to avoid potential sources of dispute. The Government in good faith shall consider the recommendations of the Project Coordination Team. The Government, having the legal authority and responsibility for construction of the Project, has the discretion to accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Project Coordination Team's recommendations. E. The Non - Federal Sponsor's costs of participation in the Project Coordination Team shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. The Government's costs of participation in the Project Coordination Team shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE VI - METHOD OF PAYMENT A. In accordance with the provisions of this paragraph, the Government shall maintain current records and provide to the Non - Federal Sponsor current projections of costs, financial obligations, contributions provided by the parties, and the value included in total project costs for the value of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material determined in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement. 1. As of the effective date of this Agreement, total project costs are projected to be $ the Non - Federal Sponsor's contribution of funds required by Article II.C.2, of this Agreement is projected to be $ ; the non - Federal proportionate share is projected to be percent; the Non - Federal Sponsor's contribution of funds required by Article XVII.B.3. of this Agreement is projected to be $0; the value included in total project costs for the value of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material determined in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement is projected to be $0; and the Government's total financial obligations for the additional work to be incurred and the Non - Federal Sponsor's contribution of funds for such costs required by Article II.H. of this Agreement are projected to be $ These amounts and percentage are estimates subject to adjustment by the Government, after 14 consultation with the Non - Federal Sponsor, and are not to be construed as the total financial responsibilities of the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor. 2. By October 1, 2013, and by each quarterly anniversary thereafter during each iteration of periodic nourishment, the Government shall provide the Non - Federal Sponsor with a report setting forth all contributions provided to date and the current projections of the following: total project costs; the Non - Federal Sponsor's total contribution of funds required by Article ILC.2. of this Agreement; the non - Federal proportionate share; the Non - Federal Sponsor's total contribution of funds required by Article XVILB.3. of this Agreement; the total contribution of funds required from the Non - Federal Sponsor for the upcoming fiscal year; the value included in total project costs for the value of lands, easements, rights -of -way, relocations, and improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material determined in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement; and the Government's total financial obligations for additional work incurred and the Non - Federal Sponsor's contribution of funds for such costs required by Article ILH. of this Agreement. B. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide contribution of funds required by Article II.C. and Article XVILB. of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. 1. Not less than 30 calendar days prior to the scheduled date for issuance of the solicitation for the first contract for periodic nourishment or commencement of construction using the Government's own forces, the Government shall notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing of such scheduled date and the funds the Government determines to be required from the Non - Federal Sponsor to meet (a) the projected non - Federal proportionate share of financial obligations for periodic nourishment to be incurred in the first fiscal year; or, if use of a continuing contract has been approved pursuant to Federal laws, regulations, and policies, the projected non - Federal proportionate share of financial obligations for periodic nourishment through the first fiscal year; and (b) the Non - Federal Sponsor's share of the projected financial obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVILB.3. of this Agreement to be incurred in the first fiscal year; or, if use of a continuing contract has been approved pursuant to Federal laws, regulations, and policies, the Non - Federal Sponsor's share of the projected financial obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVII.B.3. of this Agreement through the first fiscal year. Not later than such scheduled date, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide the Government with the full amount of such required funds by delivering a check payable to "FAO, USAED, Jacksonville" to the District Engineer, or verifying to the satisfaction of the Government that the Non - Federal Sponsor has deposited such required funds in an escrow or other account acceptable to the Government, with interest accruing to the Non- Federal Sponsor, or by presenting the Government with an irrevocable letter of credit acceptable to the Government for such required funds, or by providing an Electronic Funds Transfer of such required funds in accordance with procedures established by the Government. 2. For the second and subsequent fiscal years of periodic nourishment, the Government shall notify the Non- Federal Sponsor in writing, no later than 60 calendar days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year in which the Government projects that it will make financial obligations for periodic nourishment of the Project or financial obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVILB.3. of this Agreement, of the funds the Government determines to be required from the Non - Federal 15 Sponsor to meet: (a) the projected non - Federal proportionate share of financial obligations for periodic nourishment to be incurred in that fiscal year; or, if use of a continuing contract has been approved pursuant to Federal laws, regulations, and policies, the projected non - Federal proportionate share of financial obligations for periodic nourishment for that fiscal year; and (b) the Non - Federal Sponsor's share of the projected financial. obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVII.B.3. of this Agreement to be incurred in that fiscal year; or, if use of a continuing contract has been approved pursuant to Federal laws, regulations, and policies, the Non - Federal Sponsor's share of the projected financial obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVII.B.3. of this Agreement for that fiscal year. No later than 30 calendar days prior to the beginning of that fiscal year, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall make the full amount of such required funds for that fiscal year available to the Government through any of the payment mechanisms specified in paragraph B.l . of this Article. 3. The Government shall draw from the funds provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor such sums as the Government deems necessary to cover: (a) the non - Federal proportionate share of financial obligations for periodic nourishment as financial obligations for periodic nourishment are incurred; and (b) the Non- Federal Sponsor's share of financial obligations for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation pursuant to Article XVII.C.2. of this Agreement as those financial obligations are incurred. If at any time during the authorized periodic nourishment period the Government determines that additional funds will be needed from the Non - Federal Sponsor to cover the non - Federal proportionate share of projected f nancial obligations for periodic nourishment for the current fiscal year, the Government shall notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing of the additional funds required and provide an explanation of why additional funds are required. Within 60 calendar days from receipt of such notice, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide the Government with the full amount of such additional required funds through any of the payment mechanisms specified in paragraph B.1. of this Article. C. Upon conclusion of each iteration of periodic nourishment or termination of this Agreement during the authorized periodic nourishment period, and upon resolution of all claims and appeals and eminent domain proceedings, the Government shall conduct a final accounting for such iteration of periodic nourishment and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such final accounting. If outstanding relevant claims and appeals or eminent domain proceedings prevent a final accounting for such iteration of periodic nourishment from being conducted in a timely manner, the Government shall conduct an interim accounting and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such interim accounting. Once all outstanding relevant claims and appeals and eminent domain proceedings are resolved, the Government shall amend the interim accounting for such iteration of periodic nourishment to complete the final accounting and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such final accounting. The interim or final accounting, as applicable, for such iteration of periodic nourishment shall determine total project costs for that iteration of periodic nourishment and the costs of any data recovery activities associated with historic preservation for that iteration of periodic nourishment. In addition, for each set of costs, the interim or final accounting, as applicable, shall determine each party's required share thereof, and each party's total contributions thereto as of the date of such accounting. Should the interim or final accounting, as applicable, for such iteration of 16 periodic nourishment show that the Non - Federal Sponsor's total required shares of total project costs for that iteration of periodic nourishment and the costs of any data recovery activities associated with historic preservation for that iteration of periodic nourishment exceed the Non - Federal Sponsor's total contributions provided thereto, the Non - Federal Sponsor, no later than 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice from the Government, shall make a payment to the Government in an amount equal to the difference by delivering a check payable to "FAO, USAED, Jacksonville" to the District Engineer or by providing an Electronic Funds Transfer in accordance with procedures established by the Government. 2. Should the interim or final accounting, as applicable, for such iteration of periodic nourishment show that the total contributions provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor for total project costs for that iteration of periodic nourishment and the costs of any data recovery activities associated with historic preservation for that iteration of periodic nourishment exceed the Non - Federal Sponsor's total required shares thereof, the Government, subject to the availability of funds, shall refund or reimburse the excess amount to the Non - Federal Sponsor within 90 calendar days of the date of completion of such accounting. In the event the Non - Federal Sponsor is due a refund or reimbursement and funds are not available to refund or reimburse the excess amount to the Non - Federal Sponsor, the Government shall seek such appropriations as are necessary to make the refund or reimbursement. D. The Non- Federal Sponsor shall provide the contribution of funds required by Article ILH.2. of this Agreement for additional work in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. 1. Not less than 60 calendar days prior to the scheduled date for the first financial obligation for additional work, the Government shall notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing of such scheduled date and of the full amount of funds the Government determines to be required from the Non - Federal Sponsor to cover the costs of the additional work. No later than 30 calendar days prior to the Government incurring any financial obligation for additional work, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide the Government with the full amount of the funds required to cover the costs of such additional work through any of the payment mechanisms specified in paragraph B.1. of this Article. 2. The Government shall draw from the funds provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor such sums as the Government deems necessary to cover the Government's financial obligations for such additional work as they are incurred. If at any time the Government determines that the Non- Federal Sponsor must provide additional funds to pay for such additional work, the Government shall notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing of the additional funds required and provide an explanation of why additional funds are required. Within 30 calendar days from receipt of such notice, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide the Government with the full amount of such additional required funds through any of the payment mechanisms specified in paragraph B.1. of this Article. 3. At the time the Government conducts the interim or final accounting, as applicable, for each iteration of periodic nourishment, the Government shall conduct an accounting of the Government's financial obligations for additional work incurred during the applicable period and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such accounting. If outstanding relevant claims and appeals or eminent domain proceedings prevent a final accounting of additional work performed or provided during the applicable period from 17 being conducted in a timely manner, the Government shall conduct an interim accounting of additional work performed or provided during the applicable period and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such interim accounting. Once all outstanding relevant claims and appeals and eminent domain proceedings are resolved, the Government shall amend the interim accounting of additional work performed or provided during the applicable period to complete the final accounting of additional work performed or provided during the applicable period and furnish the Non - Federal Sponsor with written notice of the results of such final accounting. Such interim or final accounting, as applicable, shall determine the Goverrnnent's total financial obligations for additional work incurred during the applicable period and the Non - Federal Sponsor's contribution of funds provided thereto as of the date of such accounting. a. Should the interim or final accounting, as applicable, show that the total obligations for additional work incurred during the applicable period exceed the total contribution of funds provided by the Non- Federal Sponsor for such additional work, the Non - Federal Sponsor, no later than 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice from the Government, shall make a payment to the Government in an amount equal to the difference by delivering a check payable to "FAO, USAED, Jacksonville" to the District Engineer or by providing an Electronic Funds Transfer in accordance with procedures established by the Government. b. Should the interim or final accounting, as applicable, show that the total contribution of funds provided by the Non - Federal Sponsor for additional work performed or provided during the applicable period exceeds the total obligations for such additional work, the Government, subject to the availability of funds, shall refund the excess amount to the Non - Federal Sponsor within 90 calendar days of the date of completion of such accounting. In the event the Non - Federal Sponsor is due a refund and funds are not available to refund the excess amount to the Non - Federal Sponsor, the Government shall seek such appropriations as are necessary to make the refund. ARTICLE VII - DISPUTE RESOLUTION As a condition precedent to a party bringing any suit for breach of this Agreement, that party must first notify the other party in writing of the nature of the purported breach and seek in good faith to resolve the dispute through negotiation. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute through negotiation, they may agree to a mutually acceptable method of non - binding alternative dispute resolution with a qualified third party acceptable to both parties. Each party shall pay an equal share of any costs for the services provided by such a third party as such costs are incurred. The existence of a dispute shall not excuse the parties from performance pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII — OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REHABILITATION, AND REPLACEMENT (OMRR &R) A. Upon receipt of the notification from the District Engineer in accordance with Article II.D. of this Agreement and for so long as the Project remains authorized, the Non - Federal Sponsor, pursuant to Article II.E. of this Agreement, shall operate, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, 18 and replace each iteration of periodic nourishment, or functional portion of an iteration of periodic nourishment, as applicable, at no cost to the Government. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall conduct its operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement responsibilities in a manner compatible with the Project's authorized purposes and in accordance with applicable Federal and State laws as provided in Article XI of this Agreement and specific directions prescribed by the Government in the interim or final OMRR &R Manual and any subsequent amendments thereto. 1. At least twice annually and after storm events, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall perform surveillance of the beach, at no cost to the Government, to determine losses of nourishment material from the Project design section and advance nourishment section and provide the results of such surveillance to the Government. 2. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall grade and reshape the beach and dune profile using material within the Project area and maintain other Project features associated with the beach and dune. B. The Non- Federal Sponsor hereby gives the Government a right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon property that the Non - Federal Sponsor now or hereafter owns or controls for access to the Project for the purpose of inspection and, if necessary, for the purpose of completing, operating, maintaining, repairing, rehabilitating, or replacingthe Project. If an inspection shows that the Non - Federal Sponsor for any reason is failing to perform its obligations under this Agreement, the Government shall send a written notice describing the non - performance to the Non- Federal Sponsor. If, after 30 calendar days from receipt of such written notice by the Government, the Non - Federal Sponsor continues to fail to perform, then the Government shall have the right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon property that the Non - Federal Sponsor now or hereafter owns or controls for the purpose of completing, operating, maintaining, repairing, rehabilitating, or replacingthe Project. No completion, operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, or replacement by the Government shall relieve the Non - Federal Sponsor of responsibility to meet the Non - Federal Sponsor's obligations as set forth in this Agreement, or to preclude the Government from pursuing any other remedy at law or equity to ensure faithful performance pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICLE IX — HOLD AND SAVE The Non - Federal Sponsor shall hold and save the Government free from all damages arising from periodic nourishment, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement and rehabilitation of the Project and any betterments, except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the Government or its contractors. ARTICLE X - MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS AND AUDIT A. Not later than 60 calendar days after the effective date of this Agreement, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall develop procedures for keeping books, records, documents, or other evidence pertaining to costs and expenses incurred pursuant to this Agreement. These procedures shall incorporate, and apply as appropriate, the standards for financial management systems set forth in the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments at 32 C.F.R. Section 19 33.20. The Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall maintain such books, records, documents, or other evidence in accordance with these procedures and for a minimum of three years after completion of the accounting for which such books, records, documents, or other evidence were required. To the extent permitted under applicable Federal Iaws and regulations, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall each allow the other to inspect such books, records, documents, or other evidence. B. In accordance with 32 C.F.R. Section 33.26, the Non - Federal Sponsor is responsible for complying with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C. 7501- 7507), as implemented by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A -133 and Department of Defense Directive 7600.10. Upon request of the Non - Federal Sponsor and to the extent permitted under applicable Federal laws and regulations, the Government shall provide to the Non- Federal Sponsor and independent auditors any information necessary to enable an audit of the Non- Fedcral Sponsor's activities under this Agreement. The costs of any non - Federal audits performed in accordance with this paragraph shall be allocated in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circulars A -87 and A -133, and such costs as are allocated to the Project shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. C. In accordance with 31 U.S.C. Section 7503, the Government may conduct audits in addition to any audit that the Non - Federal Sponsor is required to conduct under the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996. Any such Government audits shall be conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the cost principles in OMB Circular No. A -87 and other applicable cost principles and regulations. The costs of Government audits performed in accordance with this paragraph shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE XI - FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS In the exercise of their respective rights and obligations under this Agreement, the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government shall comply with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, including, but not limited to: Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Public Law 88 -352 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) and Department of Defense Directive 5500.11 issued pursuant thereto; Army Regulation 600 -7, entitled "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Assisted or Conducted by the Department of the Army "; and all applicable Federal labor standards requirements including, but not limited to, 40 U.S.C. 3141 -3148 and 40 U.S.C. 3701 -3708 (revising, codifying and enacting without substantive change the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276a et seq.), the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 327 et seq) and the Copeland Anti - Kickback Act (formerly 40 U.S.C. 276c)). ARTICLE XII - RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES A. In the exercise of their respective rights and obligations under this Agreement, the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor each act in an independent capacity, and neither is to be considered the officer, agent, or employee of the other. B. In the exercise of its rights and obligations under this Agreement, neither party 20 shall provide, without the consent of the other party, any contractor with a release that waives or purports to waive any rights the other party may have to seek relief or redress against that contractor either pursuant to any cause of action that the other party may have or for violation of any law. ARTICLE XIII - TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION A. If at any time the Non - Federal Sponsor fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) shall terminate this Agreement or suspend future performance under this Agreement unless he determines that continuation of work on the Project is in the interest of the United States or is necessary in order to satisfy agreements with any other non - Federal interests in connection with the Project. B. In the event the Government projects that the amount of Federal funds the Government will make available to the Project through the then - current fiscal year, or the amount of Federal funds the Government will make available for the Project through the upcoming fiscal year, is not sufficient to meet the Federal share of total project costs and the Federal share of costs for data recovery activities in accordance with Article XVII.C.2. and Article XVILD. of this Agreement that the Government projects to be incurred through the then - current or upcoming fiscal year, as applicable, the Government shall notify the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing of such insufficiency of funds and of the date the Government projects that the Federal funds that will have been made available to the Project will be exhausted. Upon the exhaustion of Federal funds made available by the Government to the Project, future performance under this Agreement shall be suspended. Such suspension shall remain in effect until such time that the Government notifies the Non - Federal Sponsor in writing that sufficient Federal funds are available to meet the Federal share of total project costs and the Federal share of costs for data recovery activities in accordance with Article XVII.C.2. and Article XVII.D. of this Agreement the Government projects to be incurred through the then - current or upcoming fiscal year, or the Government or the Non - Federal Sponsor elects to terminate this Agreement. C. In the event that the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor determine to suspend future performance under this Agreement in accordance with Article XIV.C. of this Agreement, such suspension shall remain in effect until the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor agree to proceed or to terminate this Agreement. In the event that the Government suspends future performance under this Agreement in accordance with Article XIV.C. of this Agreement due to failure to reach agreement with the Non - Federal Sponsor on whether to proceed or to terminate this Agreement, or the failure of the Non - Federal Sponsor to provide funds to pay for cleanup and response costs or to otherwise discharge the Non - Federal Sponsor's responsibilities under Article XIV.C. of this Agreement, such suspension shall remain in effect until: 1) the Government and Non - Federal Sponsor reach agreement on how to proceed or to terminate this Agreement; 2) the Non - Federal Sponsor provides funds necessary to pay for cleanup and response costs and otherwise discharges its responsibilities under Article XIV.C. of this Agreement; 3) the Government continues work on the Project; or 4) the Government terminates this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Article XIV.C. of this Agreement. D. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Article or Article XIV.C. of this Agreement, both parties shall conclude their activities relating to the Project and conduct an accounting in accordance with Article VI.C. or Article VI.D. of this Agreement. To provide for this eventuality, the Government may reserve a percentage of total Federal funds made available 21 for the Project and an equal percentage of the total funds contributed by the Non - Federal Sponsor in accordance with Article II.C.2. and Article XVII.D. of this Agreement as a contingency to pay costs of termination, including any costs of resolution of contract claims and contract modifications. E. Any termination of this Agreement or suspension of future performance under this Agreement in accordance with this Article or Article XIV.B.3. of this Agreement shall not relieve the parties of liability for any obligation previously incurred. Any delinquent payment owed by the Non - Federal Sponsor shall be charged interest at a rate, to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, equal to 150 per centum of the average bond equivalent rate of the 13 week Treasury bills auctioned immediately prior to the date on which such payment became delinquent, or auctioned immediately prior to the beginning of each additional 3 month period if the period of delinquency exceeds 3 months. ARTICLE XIV - HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES A. After execution of this Agreement and upon direction by the District Engineer, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall perform, or ensure performance of, any investigations for hazardous substances that the Government or the Non - Federal Sponsor determines to be necessary to identify the existence and extent of any hazardous substances regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (hereinafter "CERCLA "), 42 U.S.C. Sections 9601 — 9675, that may exist in, on, or under lands, easements, and rights -of -way that the Government determines, pursuant to Article III of this Agreement, to be required for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project. However, for lands, easements, and rights -of -way that the Government determines to be subject to the navigation servitude, only the Government shall perform such investigations unless the District Engineer provides the Non - Federal Sponsor with prior specific written direction, in which case the Non - Federal Sponsor shall perform such investigations in accordance with such written direction. 1. All actual costs incurred by the Non - Federal Sponsor for such investigations for hazardous substances shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, subject to an audit in accordance with Article X.C. of this Agreement to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of such costs. 2. All actual costs incurred by the Government for such investigations for hazardous substances shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. B. In the event it is discovered through any investigation for hazardous substances or other means that hazardous substances regulated under CERCLA exist in, on, or under any lands, easements, or rights -of -way that the Government determines, pursuant to Article III of this Agreement, to be required for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project, the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government, in addition to providing any other notice required by applicable law, shall provide prompt written notice to each other, and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall not proceed with the acquisition of the real property interests until the parties agree that the Non - Federal Sponsor should proceed. C. The Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor shall determine whether to initiate periodic nourishment of the Project, or, if already in periodic nourishment, whether to continue 22 with work on the Project, suspend future performance under this Agreement, or terminate this Agreement for the convenience of the Government, in any case where hazardous substances regulated under CERCLA are found to exist in, on, or under any lands, easements, or rights -of.- way that the Government determines, pursuant to Article III of this Agreement, to be required for periodic nourishment, operation, and maintenance of the Project. Should the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor determine to initiate or continue with periodic nourishment after considering any liability that may arise under CERCLA, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall be responsible, as between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, for the costs of cleanup and response, including the costs of any studies and investigations necessary to determine an appropriate response to the contamination. Such costs shall not be considered a part of total project costs. In the event the Non - Federal Sponsor does not reach agreement with the Government on whether to proceed or to terminate this Agreement under this paragraph, or fails to provide any funds necessary to pay for cleanup and response costs or to otherwise discharge the Non - Federal Sponsor's responsibilities under this paragraph upon direction by the Government, the Government, in its sole discretion, may either terminate this Agreement for the convenience of the Government, suspend future performance under this Agreement, or continue work on the Project. D. The Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government shall consult with each other in accordance with Article V of this Agreement in an effort to ensure that responsible parties bear any necessary cleanup and response costs as defined in CERCLA. Any decision made pursuant to paragraph C. of this Article shall not relieve any third party from any liability that may arise under CERCLA. E. As between the Government and the Non - Federal Sponsor, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall be considered the operator of the Project for purposes of CERCLA liability. To the maximum extent practicable, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall operate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate the Project in a manner that will not cause liability to arise under CERCLA. ARTICLE XV - NOTICES A. Any notice, request, demand, or other communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be deemed to have been duly given if in writing and delivered personally or sent by telegram or mailed by first class, registered, or certified mail, as follows: If to the Non - Federal Sponsor: Chairman Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County, Florida 301 North Olive Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 If to the Government: District Engineer Jacksonville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 4970 23 Jacksonville, Florida 32232 -0019 B. A party may change the address to which such communications are to be directed by giving written notice to the other party in the manner provided in this Article. C. Any notice, request, demand, or other communication made pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee at the earlier of such time as it is actually received or seven calendar days after it is mailed or transmitted. ARTICLE XVI - CONFIDENTIALITY To the extent permitted by the laws governing each party, the parties agree to maintain the confidentiality of exchanged information when requested to do so by the providing party. ARTICLE XVII - HISTORIC PRESERVATION A. The Government, as it determines necessary for the Project., shall perform any identification, survey, or evaluation of historic properties. Any costs incurred by the Government for such work shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. B. The Government, as it determines necessary for the Project, shall perform or ensure the performance of any mitigation activities or actions for historic properties or that are otherwise associated with historic preservation including data recovery activities. 1. Any costs incurred by the Government for such mitigation activities, except for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation, shall be included in total project costs and shared in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. 2. As specified in Section 7(a) of Public Law 86 -523, as amended by Public Law 93 -291 (16 U.S.C. 469c(a)), the costs of data recovery activities associated with historic preservation shall be borne entirely by the Government and shall not be included in total project costs, up to the statutory limit of one percent of the total amount authorized to be appropriated to the Government for the Project. 3. The Government shall not incur costs for data recovery activities associated with historic preservation that exceed the statutory one percent limit specified in paragraph B.2. of this Article unless and until the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) has waived that limit and the Secretary of the Interior has concurred in the waiver in accordance with Section 208(3) of Public Law 96 -515, as amended (16 U.S.C. 469c- 2(3)). Any costs of data recovery activities associated with historic preservation that exceed the one percent limit shall not be included in total project costs but shall be shared between the Non - Federal Sponsor and the Government consistent with the cost sharing in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Further, any costs of archeological data recovery activities on lands not subject to Federal cost sharing (undeveloped private lands and privately owned shores that do not provide public benefits) that exceed the one percent limit shall not be included in total project costs but shall be paid by the Non - Federal Sponsor. 24 C. If, during its performance of relocations or construction of improvements required on lands, easements, and rights -of -way to enable the disposal of dredged or excavated material in accordance with Article III of this Agreement, the Non - Federal Sponsor discovers historic properties or other cultural resources that have not been evaluated by the Government pursuant to this Article, the Non - Federal Sponsor shall provide prompt written notice to the Government of such discovery. The Non - Federal Sponsor shall not proceed with performance of the relocation or construction of the improvement that is related to such discovery until the Government provides written notice to the Non - Federal Sponsor that it should proceed with such work. ARTICLE XVIII - THIRD PARTY RIGHTS, BENEFITS, OR LIABILITIES Nothing in this Agreement is intended, nor may be construed, to create any rights, confer any benefits, or relieve any liability, of any kind whatsoever in any third person not party to this Agreement. ARTICLE XIX - NON - LIABILITY OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES No officer, agent, consultant, or employee of the Non - Federal Sponsor, nor any officer, agent, consultant, or employee of the Government, may be charged personally, or held liable, under the terms or provisions of this Agreement because of any breach, attempted breach, or alleged breach thereof, except as provided in Section 912(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law 99 -662, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1962d -5b note), or other applicable law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, which shall become effective upon the date it is signed by the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WM Jo -Ellen Darcy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) Chairman DATE: DATE: 25 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY 1, [NAME], do hereby certify that I am the principal legal officer of Palm Beach County, Florida, and that Palm Beach County, Florida, acting by and through its Board of County Commissioners, is a legally constituted public body with full authority and legal capability to perform the terms of the Project Partnership Agreement between the Department of the Army and Palm Beach County, Florida for the Periodic Nourishment of the Delray Beach Segment of the Palm Beach County, Florida Shore Protection Project, and to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of the failure to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, as required by Section 221 of Public Law 91 -611 (42 U.S.C. Section 1962d -5b), and that the person who has executed this Agreement on behalf of Palm Beach County, Florida has acted within his statutory authority. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have made and executed this certification this day of of 200 TITLE DATE: NAME ORGANIZATION 26 CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the malting of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. DATE: 27 Chairman Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and PALM BEACH COUNTY for REHABILITATION OF THE DELRAY SEGMENT OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 2013, by and between the Department of the Army (hereinafter referred to as the "Government ") represented by the District Engineer, Jacksonville District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Palm Beach County, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "Public Sponsor "), represented by the Mayor of its Board of County Commissioners. WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the Public Sponsor constructed a Hurricane /Shore Protection Project (hereinafter referred to as the HSPP) authorized by Sections 101 and 102 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962, Public Law 87 -874, as modified by Section 156 of the [mater Resources Development Act of 1976, Public Law 94 -587, and Section 934 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, Public Law 99 -662, and governed by the Project Partnership Agreement dated _and entitled Project Partnership Agreement Between the Department of the Army and Palm Beach County, Florida for Periodic Nourishment of the Delray Beach Segment of the Palm Beach County, Florida Shore Protection Project which remains in full effect; WHEREAS, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 701 n, the Government is authorized to assist in the repair and restoration of any federally authorized hurricane or shore protective structure damaged or destroyed by wind, wave, or water action of other than an ordinary nature; WHEREAS, via written correspondence, the Public Sponsor has requested the Government to repair or restore the HSPP which was damaged by wind, wave, or water action of an other than an ordinary nature, in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 701 n, and established policies of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and, WHEREAS, the Public Sponsor hereby represents that it has the authority and legal capability to furnish the non - Federal cooperation hereinafter set forth and is willing to participate in the HSPP Rehabilitation Effort in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, the Government and the Public Sponsor agree as follows; ARTICLE I - DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS For purposes -of this agreement: A. The term "Rehabilitation Effort" shall mean providing a single beach fill placement of approximately 150,000 cubic yards of fill, extending from Florida Department of Environmental Protection monument R175 to 8188, as generally described in a report entitled Project Information Report Rehabilitation Effort for the Palm Beach County Hurricane /Shore Protection Project Delray Segment prepared by the District Engineer, U.S. Army Engineer District Jacksonville, dated February, 2013 and approved by the Director of Continqency Operations, Homeland Security on March 28, 2013; B. The term "Rehabilitation Effort costs" shall mean all costs incurred by the Public Sponsor and the Government directly related to construction of the Rehabilitation Effort. Such term shall include, but is not necessarily limited to: actual construction costs, including supervision and inspection costs; costs of contract dispute settlements or awards; and the cost of investigations to identify the existence of hazardous substances as identified in Article XII. The term shall not include any costs for operation and maintenance; any costs that correct deferred or deficient maintenance; any increased costs for betterments or Public Sponsor- preferred alternatives; periodic nourishment under the project authorization; or the costs of lands, easements, rights -of- way, borrow, or relocations. C. The term "betterment" shall mean the design and construction of a Rehabilitation Effort feature accomplished on behalf of, or at the request of, the Public Sponsor, in accordance with standards that exceed the standards that the Government would otherwise apply for accomplishing the Rehabilitation Effort. ARTICLE II - OBLIGATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SPONSOR A. The Government, subject to receiving funds appropriated by the Congress of the United States and using funds provided by the Public Sponsor, shall expeditiously construct the Rehabilitation Effort, applying those procedures usually followed or applied in Federal projects, pursuant to Federal laws, regulations, and policies. The Public Sponsor shall be afforded the opportunity to review and comment on all solicitations for all contracts, including relevant plans and specifications, prior to the issuance of such solicitations. The Contracting Officer will, in good faith, consider the comments of the Public Sponsor, but award of contracts, modifications or change orders, and performance of all work on the Rehabilitation Effort (whether the work is performed under contract or by Government personnel), shall be exclusively within the control of the Contracting Officer. B. As further specified in Article III, the Public Sponsor shall provide all lands, easements, and rights -of -way, including suitable borrow and dredged or excavated material disposal areas, and perform all relocations determined by the Government to be necessary for construction, operation, and maintenance of the Rehabilitation Effort and the HSPP. C. As further specified in Article IV, the Public Sponsor shall contribute, in cash, in -kind services, or a combination thereof, a contribution toward construction of the Rehabilitation Effort in an amount equal to 0 percent of Rehabilitation Effort costs. D. The Public Sponsor shall not use Federal funds to meet its share of Rehabilitation Effort costs under this Agreement unless the 2 expenditure of such funds is expressly authorized by statute as verified in writing by the Federal granting agency. E. The Public Sponsor shall hold and save the Government free from all damages arising from the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Rehabilitation Effort, the HSPP, and any related betterments, except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the Government or the Government's contractors. F. The Public Sponsor agrees to continue participate in and comply with the policies and procedures of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Rehabilitation and Inspection Program and the Local Cooperation Agreement cited above. G. The Public Sponsor may request the Government to accomplish betterments. The Public Sponsor shall be solely responsible for any increase in costs resulting from the betterments and all such increased costs will be paid in advance by the Public Sponsor in accordance with Article IV. ARTICLE III - LANDS, RELOCATIONS, AND PUBLIC LAW 91 -646 A. The Government shall provide the Public Sponsor with a description of the anticipated real estate requirements and relocations for the Rehabilitation Effort. Thereafter, the Public Sponsor shall furnish 'all lands, easements, and rights -of -way, including suitable borrow and dredged or excavated material disposal areas, and perform any relocations, as may be determined by the Government in that description, or in any subsequent description, to be necessary for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project and the Rehabilitation Effort. The necessary lands, easements, and rights -of- way may be provided incrementally for each construction contract. All lands, easements, and rights -of -way determined by the Government to be necessary for work to be performed under a construction contract must be furnished prior to the advertisement of that construction contract. B. The Public Sponsor shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policy Act of 1970, Public Law 91 -646, as amended by Title IV of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (Public Law 100 -17), and the Uniform Regulations contained in 49 CFR Part 24, in acquiring lands, easements, and rights of way, required for construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project and the Rehabilitation Effort, including those necessary for relocations, borrow materials, and dredged or excavated material disposal, and shall inform all affected persons of applicable benefits, policies, and procedures in connection with said Act. ARTICLE IV - METHOD OF PAYMENT A. The Public Sponsor shall provide, during the period of construction, cash payments, in -kind services, or a combination thereof, required to meet the Public Sponsor's obligations under Article lI of the Agreement. Rehabilitation Effort costs are currently estimated to be $1,699,334 and the Public Sponsor's share (cash and services in kind) of Rehabilitation Effort costs is currently estimated to be $0. In order to meet the Public Sponsor's cash payment 3 requirements, the Public Sponsor must provide a cash contribution estimated to be $0. The dollar amounts set forth in this paragraph are based upon the Government's best estimates that reflect projections of costs, price level changes, and anticipated inflation. Such cost estimates are subject to adjustments based upon costs actually incurred and are not to be construed as the total financial responsibilities of the Government and the Public Sponsor. E. The required cash contribution shall be provided as follows: At least ten calendar days prior to the award of the first construction contract, the Government shall notify the Public Sponsor of the Public Sponsor's estimated share of the Rehabilitation Effort costs including the Public Sponsor's estimated share of the costs attributable to the Rehabilitation Effort incurred prior to the initiation of construction. Within five calendar days thereafter, the Public Sponsor shall provide the Government the full amount of the required contribution by delivering a check payable to "FAO, USAED Jacksonville" to the Contracting Officer representing the Government. The Government shall draw on the funds provided by the Public Sponsor such sums as the Government deems necessary to cover contractual and in -house fiscal obligations attributable to the Rehabilitation Effort as they are incurred, as well as Rehabilitation Effort costs incurred by the Government. In the event that total Rehabilitation Effort costs are expected to exceed the estimate given at the outset of construction, the Government shall immediately notify the Public Sponsor of the additional contribution the Public Sponsor will be required to make to meet the Public Sponsor's share of the revised estimate. Within ten calendar days thereafter, the Public Sponsor shall provide the Government the full amount of the additional required contribution. C. During the period of construction, the Government will provide periodic financial reports on the status of the total Rehabilitation Effort costs and status of contributions made by the Public Sponsor. Upon completion of the Rehabilitation Effort and resolution of all relevant contract claims and appeals, the Government shall compute the total Rehabilitation Effort costs and tender to the Public Sponsor a final accounting of the Public Sponsor's share of total Rehabilitation Effort costs. 1. In the event the total contribution by the Public Sponsor is less than the Public Sponsor's required share of total Rehabilitation Effort costs, the Public Sponsor shall, no later than 90 calendar days after receipt of written notice, make a cash payment to the Government of whatever sum is required to meet the Public Sponsor's required share of the total project costs. 2. In the event total contribution by the Public Sponsor is more than the Public Sponsor's required share of total Rehabilitation Effort costs, the Government shall, no later than 90 calendar days after the final accounting is complete, subject to the availability of funds, return the excess to the Public Sponsor; however, the Public Sponsor shall not be entitled to any refund for in -kind services. In the event the existing funds are not available to repay the Public Sponsor for excess contributions provided, the Government shall seek such appropriations as are necessary to repay the Public Sponsor for excess contributions provided. 4 ARTICLE V - CREDITING OF IN -KIND SERVICES The Government has approved a credit for In -Kind Services, compatible with the Rehabilitation Effort, in the estimated amount of $0 for implementation of such services by the Public Sponsor. The affording of such credit shall be subject to an onsite inspection by the Government to verify that the work was accomplished in a satisfactory manner and is suitable for inclusion in the Rehabilitation Effort. The actual amount of such credit shall be subject to an audit conducted to determine reasonableness, allocability, and allowability of costs. The Government shall apply the credit amount toward any additional cash contribution required under this Agreement. The Public Sponsor shall not receive credit for any amount in excess of such additional cash contribution, nor shall the Public Sponsor be entitled to any reimbursement for any excess credit amount. ARTICLE VI -- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE A. The Public Sponsor maintains responsibility for operating and maintaining the HSPP at all times. After the Contracting Officer has determined that construction of the Rehabilitation Effort is complete and provided the Public Sponsor with written notice of such determination, the Public Sponsor shall operate and maintain the HSPP, to include those areas restored by the Rehabilitation Effort, at no cost to the Government, in accordance with specific directions prescribed by the Government in Engineer Regulation 500 -1--1 and any subsequent amendments thereto and other applicable authorities. B. The Public Sponsor hereby gives the Government a right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon land that the Public Sponsor owns or controls for access to the HSPP for the purposes of inspection, and, if necessary, for the purpose of completing, operating, and maintaining the HSPP. If an inspection shows the Public Sponsor for any reason is failing to fulfill the Public Sponsor's obligations under this Agreement without receiving prior written approval from the Government, the Government will send a written notice to the Public Sponsor. If, after 30 calendar days from receipt of such notice, the Public Sponsor continues to fail to perform, then the Government shall have the right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon lands the Public Sponsor owns or controls for access to the Project for the purposes of completing, operating, and maintaining the project, or to deny further assistance under Public Law 84 -99. No action by the Government shall operate to relieve the Public Sponsor of responsibility to meet the Public Sponsor obligations as set forth in this Agreement, or to preclude the Government from pursuing any other remedy at law or equity to assure faithful performance pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICLE VII - FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS In the exercise of the Public Sponsor's rights and obligations hereunder, the Public Sponsor agrees to comply with all applicable Federal and state laws and regulations. 5 ARTICLE VIII - RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES The Government and the Public Sponsor act in an independent capacity in the performance of their respective functions under this Agreement, and neither party is to be considered the officer, agent, nor employee of the other.. ARTICLE IX - OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT No member of or delegate to the Congress, or resident commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement, or to any benefit that may arise therefrom. ARTICLE X - COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The Public Sponsor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Agreement upon agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Public Sponsor for the purpose of securing business. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Government shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability, or, in the Government's discretion, to add to the Agreement or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee. ARTICLE XI - TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION If at any time the Public Sponsor fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, the District Engineer shall terminate or suspend work on the Rehabilitation Effort, unless the District Engineer determines that continuation of work on the Rehabilitation Effort is in the interest of the United States or is necessary in order to satisfy agreements with any other non- - Federal interests in connection with this Rehabilitation Effort and the HSPP. However, deferral of future performance under this agreement shall not affect existing obligations or relieve the parties of liability for any obligation previously incurred. In the event that either party elects to terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Article, both parties shall conclude their activities relating to the rehabilitation Effort and proceed to a final accounting in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement. In the event that either party elects to defer future performance under this Agreement pursuant to this Article, such deferral shall remain in effect until such time as either the Government or Public Sponsor elects to proceed with further construction or terminates this Agreement. ARTICLE XII - HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES A. After execution of this Agreement and upon direction by the Contracting Officer, the Public Sponsor shall perform, or cause to be performed, such investigations for hazardous substances as are determined necessary by the Government of the Public Sponsor to identify the existence and extent of any hazardous substances regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. Sections, 9641 -9675, an lands I necessary to Rehabilitation Effort construction, operation, and maintenance. All actual costs incurred by the Public Sponsor that are properly allowable and allocable to performance of any such investigations for hazardous substances shall be included in total Rehabilitation Effort costs and cost shared as a construction cost. B. In the event it is discovered through an investigation for hazardous substances or other means that any lands, easements, rights - of -way, or disposal areas to be acquired or provided for the HSPP or the Rehabilitation Effort contain any hazardous substances regulated under CERCLA, the Public Sponsor and the Government shall provide prompt notice to each other, and the Public Sponsor shall not proceed with the acquisition of lands, easements, rights -of -way, or disposal areas until mutually agreed. C. The Government and the Public Sponsor shall determine whether to initiate construction of the Rehabilitation Effort, or, if already in construction, to continue with construction of the Rehabilitation Effort, or to terminate construction of the Rehabilitation Effort for the convenience of the Government in any case where hazardous substances regulated under CERCLA are found to exist on any lands necessary for the Rehabilitation Effort. Should the Government and the Public Sponsor determine to proceed or continue with the construction after considering any liability that may arise under CERCLA, the Public Sponsor shall be responsible, as between the Government and the Public Sponsor, for any and all necessary clean up and response costs, to include the costs of any studies and investigations necessary to determine an appropriate response to the contamination. Such costs shall not be considered a part of the total Rehabilitation Effort costs as defined in this Agreement. In the event the Public Sponsor fails to provide any funds necessary to pay for clean up and response costs or to otherwise discharge the Public Sponsor's responsibilities under this paragraph upon direction by the Government, the Government may either terminate or suspend work on the Rehabilitation Effort or proceed with further work as provided in Article XI of this Agreement. D. The Public Sponsor and Government shall consult with each other to assure that responsible parties bear any necessary clean up and response costs as defined in CERCLA. Any decision made pursuant to paragraph C of this Article shall not relieve any party from any liability that may arise under CERCLA. E. As between the Government and the Public Sponsor, the Public Sponsor shall be considered the operator of the HSPP (which the Rehabilitation Effort is repairing and restoring) for purposes of CERCLA liability. To the maximum extent practicable, the Public Sponsor shall operate and maintain the HSPP in a manner that will not cause liability to arise under CERCLA. ARTICLE XIII - NOTICES A. All notices, requests, demands, and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be deemed to have been duly given if in writing and delivered personally, given by prepaid telegram, or mailed by first -class (postage prepaid), registered, or certified mail, as follows: 7 If to the Public Sponsor: Mayor Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County, Florida 301 N. Olive Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 If to the Government: District Engineer Jacksonville District 701 San Marco Blvd. Jacksonville, Florida 32207 B. A party may change the address to which such communications are to be directed by giving written notice to the other party in the manner provided in this Article. C. Any notice, request, demand, or other communication made pursuant to this Article shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee at such time as it is either personally delivered, or, seven calendar days after it is mailed, as the case may be. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, which shall become effective upon the date it is signed by the District Engineer. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PALM BEACH COUNTY BY; Colonel Alan M. Dodd District Engineer Jacksonville District District DATE: 8 BY Steven Z. Abrams Mayor Board of County Commissioners DATE: CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) if any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who falls to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. DATED this day of 2013 Steven L. Abrams Mayor Board of County Commissioners Palm Beach County, Florida 0 R94 1357D INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN PALM BEACH COUNTY AND THE CITE' OF_DELRAY BEACH THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on the day of OCT 0 4 1994 1994, by and btMeen PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (the "COUNTY "), and the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, a municipal corporation in the ">Late of Florida, (the "CITY "), each one constituting a public agency as defined in Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, known as the "Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969" authorizes local governments to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide services and facilities that will harmonize geographic, economic, population and other factors influencing the needs and development of local communities; and WHEREAS, Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, permits public agencies as defined therein to enter into interlocal agreements with each other to jointly exercise any power, privilege, or authority that such agencies share in common and that each might exercise separately; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 125.01, Florida Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is empowered to establish and administer programs of beach erosion control and to enter into agreements with other governmental agencies within or outside the boundaries of the COUNTY for joint performance, or performance of one unit on behalf of the other, of any of either governmental entity's authorized functions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, the CITY is empowered to exercise any governmental, corporate, and-proprietary power for municipal purposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, in 1973 the CITY completed a beach restoration project for the City of Delray Beach municipal beach through the use of hydraulic dredging. Thereafter, the CITY also performed maintenance nourishments in 1978, 1984, and 1992 in order to maintain the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project. A more complete history of the project is found in attached Exhibit "A "; and AUG 2 4 1994 ENRONMENTAL RESOURCES 0 L - QFMPNT WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement on February 27, 1973, as amended by Addendum Agreement dated August 16, 1977, and supplemented by agreements dated November 8, 1983 and October 13, 1992, which provide for joint funding of the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY have a long - standing partnership in the prese y,ation, maintenance and enhancement of the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project; and WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Agreement expired September 30, 1993: and WHEREAS, on September 23, 1992, pursuant to Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, the COUNTY entered into an agreement with the United States of America, Army Corps of Engineers, to become the local cooperating agency for shore protection projects 'Within Delray Beach for a period of fifty (50) years from the date of the initial restoration; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY intend to make the most efficient use of their powers by cooperating with each other in the maintenance and repair of the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project, which includes the area described in attached Exhibit "B ", within the municipal limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the CITY and COUNTY desire to establish their respective roles in the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project to make the most efficient use of their respective resources. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises and representations herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. PuEpose of the A reement. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism for the funding and maintenance of the Delray Beach Shore Protection Project (the "PROJECT "), and to set forth the terms, conditions and obligations of each of the respective parties hereto. 2. The Project. a. Description. The Project to be undertaken consists of the initial restoration of the City of Delray Beach municipal beach, as legally described in Exhibit "B and subsequent repairs and maintenance nourishments thereto. Repairs and maintenance nourishments shall be designed and scheduled to retain the "Project Design Section" as defined herein, and to satisfy the conditions and standards of any and all required permits. b. Project Com onents. Project components include, but are not limited to, construction, design, beach performance monitoring, and environmental monitoring. A typical list of the Project components from the completion of one maintenance nourishment through the completion of another maintenance nourishment is provided in attached Exhibit 11 CIT. C. Project Design Section. The Project Design Section is defined as that beach area described in attached Exhibit "D ". 3. Terra. The term of this Agreement shall be from October 1, 1993 up to and through September 30, 2023 unless otherwise terminated as provided herein. 4. Funding. The parties agree that given the extensive scope of the Project, the timely availability of funding is of critical concern. Funding for a portion of the Project is currently available, on a reimbursement basis, by appropriation from the Federal and State governments. These funding sources will be used to the maximum extent possible to defray Project costs. a. CITY Obli ations. (1) No later than January 15th of each year, the CITY shall submit to the COUNTY a list of the anticipated tasks to be undertaken in the succeeding fiscal year, including estimated costs. (2) The CITY shall establish and maintain a dedicated funding source for implementation of the Project. This funding source is currently called the Beach Restoration Fund. (3) The CITY shall pay all expenses of the Project from the Beach Restoration Fund in anticipation of reimbursement from the Federal and State governments, and the COUNTY. (4) The CITY shall maintain adequate records to justify all charges, expenses, and costs incurred in performing the Project for at least three (3) years after completion of the Project or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs last. The COUNTY shall have access to all books, records and documents related to the Project as required in this paragraph for the purpose of inspection or audit during normal business hours. (5) The CITY shall submit requests for State and Federal funding assistance. The CFI`Y shall timely notify the COUNTY of the submittal of such requests and seek the COUN'I`Y's support. -3- (6) The CITY shall cooperate ,p=ith the COUNTY to assure ... the the requirements and standards contained in the agreement between the COUNTY and the United States of America, Array Corps of Engineers are complied with and maintained. (7) The CITY shall properly prepare and submit in a timely manner any and all applications for State and Federal permits required for the Project. b. County Obligations. (I) The COUNTY shall serve as cooperating agency pursuant to its agreement with the United States of America, Army Corps of Engineers, (see attached Exhibit "E ") and assume the responsibility for local cooperation in the Project. (2) The COUNTY shall appropriate funds to cover the local share cxTenses on an annual basis in order that the funds. are available to pay for expenses associated with the Project. The amount of funding by the COUNTY will depend upon the physical condition of the Project, which the parties acknowledge will change. Therefore, the COUNTY shall draft a yearly funding memorandum. The yearly funding memorandum will include a list of the anticipated tasks, along with estimated costs for each task, and a commitment to include the funding request in the proposed budget_ (3) The COUNTY shall submit to the CITY a memorandum of commitment indicating that COUNTY has appropriated the required funds that the CITY requests in the neat year's budget. Notwithstanding any other provision herein, the COUNTY's obligation to pay under this Agreement is contingent upon an appropriation for its purpose by its Board of County Commissioners in its annual Fiscal Year budget. (4) The COUNTY shall be responsible for all local share (e.g., non - Federal and non - State) expenses of the Project, including design, construction and monitoring, by way of reimbursement to the CITY. (S) For reimbursement to occur, the CITY shall submit invoices to COUNTY that shall include a reference to this Agreement, identify the Project, and identify the amount due and payable to the CITY. Invoices shall be itemized in sufficient detail for prepayment audit thereof. The CITY shall supply any further documentation deemed necessary by the COUNTY. Invoices received from the CITY shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Environmental Resources Management, shall indicate that expenditures have been made in conformity with this Agreement, and will be sent to the COUNTY's Finance Department for final approval and payment. Invoices will normally be paid within sixty (64) days following receipt. -4- C. Joint Resnonsibiliti_es, The CITY and the COUNTY shall endeavor to be joint applicants for State and Federal funding for the Project. The COUNTY -will support CITY's funding requests in the same manner as if the request came from the COUNTY, and the CITY will support the COUNTY's funding requests in the same manner as if the request came from the CITY. 5. Project Permittin Z. The parties recognize that prior to the commencement of any construction affecting the Project that both the State and Federal governments will require permits and approvals. Acquisition of Federal and State permits and approvals is part of the design component of the Project. At this time, such permits and approvals include: a. Dredge and fill permit from the Army Corps of Engineers; b. Dredge and fill permit(s) from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection; and, C. Submerged Lands Easement from the Florida Bureau of State Lands. The CITY and COUNTY shall endeavor to be joint applicants for any and all permits required by the State and Federal governments. The COUNTY shall assist the CITY in negotiating the terms and conditions for permits, and shall assist the CITY in efforts to gain timely issuance of the required State and Federal permits. The parties acknowledge that, as a County project, the Project is exempt from applicable COUNTY ordinances. 6. Project Timing. The CITY, in consultationwith the COUNTY, shall establish the schedule for implementing the various Project tasks, including design, monitoring and construction. The CITY shall provide the COUNTY with a copy of the Project schedule once the schedule is complete. 7. Design and Monitorin . The CITY shall provide design and monitoring services for the Project, including but not limited to those listed and defined on attached Exhibit "C ". At such time when the COUNTY has sufficient resources to perform all or part of the design and monitoring services in a more cost - efficient and time efficient manner, the CITY shall endeavor to have the COUNTY perform said design and monitoring services. $. Bidding and Construction. a. The CITY shall secure competitive bids by advertisement for all work to be performed by contractors, except as provided for in previously executed agreements. The CITY will endeavor to combine the bidding and construction of the Project with -5- COUI TI Y prnjeCts for the purpose of secs -jri,hg a more coir�pPtdtatle bld £torn contractors. The CITY shall meet with the COUNTY six months prior to the proposed date of project construction to examine the potential cost savings for joint bidding of multiple projects. b. The CITY shall submit to the COUNTY a detailed estimate of cost, a tabulation of all bids received, and a copy of the contract of the lowest, responsible, resoousive. bidder as Well as any amendments or modlffimtin -m; fiiP,- ce-nf. 9. Party Representatives. The COUNTY's representative /contract monitor during the term of this Agreement shall be Mr. Richard E. Walesky, whose telephone number is (407) 355 -4011. The CITY's representative/ contract monitor during the terra of this Agreement shall be Mr. John Walker, whose telephone number is (407) 243 -7321. 10. Notices. All notices required under this Agreement shall be forwarded, in writing to: Board of County Commissioners City Manager of Palm Beach County City of Delray Beach Governmental Complex 100 N.W. 1st Avenue 301 N. Olive Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 e Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management 3111 S. Dixie Hwy., Site 146 West Palm Beach, FL 33405 with a copy to: County Attorney Palm Beach County P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-1989 with a copy to: City Attorney City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 11. Default and Opportunity to Cure. The parties hereto expressly covenant and agree that in the event either party is in default of its obligations herein, the party not in default shall provide to the party in default thirty (30) days written notice to cure said default before exercising any of its rights as provided for in this Agreement. rol 12. Delegation. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to authorize the delegation of the constitutional or statutory duties of state, county, or city officers. 13. Filin A copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County. 14. Liabilt. The parties to this Agreement and their respective officers and employees shall not be deemed to assume any liability for the acts, omissions, or negligence ZD of the other party. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity by either party, pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 15. Indemnification. Each party shall be liable for its own actions and negligence and, to the extent permitted under Florida law, COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY against any actions, claims or damages arising out of COUNTY's negligence in connection with this Agreement, and CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless COUNTY against any actions, claims or damages arising out of CITY's negligence in connection vrith this Agreement. However, nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted as a waiver of CITY's or COUNTY's sovereign immunity. 16. Insurance. The CITY shall, during the term of this Agreement, and any extensions hereof, maintain in £uli force and effect general and property insurance, which specifically covers all exposures incident to the intent and responsibilities under this Agreement. Such insurance shall be in an amount to support the CITY's agreement of indemnity. The CITY's insurance shall not be canceled, limited or non- renewed until after thirty (30) days' written notice has been given to the COUNTY. Current certificates of insurance or other document evidencing required coverage must be on file with the COUNTY at all times. CITY expressly understands and agrees that any insurance protection furnished by CITY shall in no way limit its responsibility to indemnify and save harmless COUNTY under the provisions of paragraph 15 of this Agreement. 17. Equal Opportunity. The COUNTY and the CITY agree that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, sex, national origin, disability, religion, ancestry, marital status, or sexual orientation be excluded from the benefits of, or be subjected to any form of discrimination under, any activity carried out by the performance of this Agreement. 18. SeverabiIi1y. In the event that any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, or provision hereof is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such shall not affect the remaining portions of this Agreement and the same shall remain in full force and effect. 19. Waiver of Breach. It is hereby agreed to by the parties that no waiver of breach of any of the covenants or provisions of this Agreement shall be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same of any other covenant. -7- 20. Termination and Revision. Either party may terminate_ this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice. In the event the COUNTY revises its polic -• relating to the funding of shore protection projects, either party may request that this Agreement be modified to reflect said change in policy. 21. Entirety. of Agreement. The CITY and COUNTY agree that this Agreement, together with any attached exhibits, sets forth the entire agreement between the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. None of the provisions, terms or obligations in the Agreement may be added to, modified, superseded, or otherwise altered, except by written instrument executed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County of Palm Beach, Florida has caused this Agreement to be signed by the Chairperson of the Board of County Commissioners and the seal of said Board to be affixed hereto and attested by the Clerk of said Board, pursuant to authority granted by said Board, and the City of Delray Beach has caused this Agreemen to be. signed in its corporate name by its mayor and its corporate seal to be affixed hereto, attested by its City Clerk, the date and year first above written. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 2�2- By: Thomaetynch, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DATE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICII�NCY City Attorney l� PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ITS BOARD OF COU�'TY COMMIS TONERS: By: CH-A I * Mctcamv T 0 4 1994 R94 13577 ATTEST: Dorothy H. Wilk en, Clerk ::-7,,_a J Deputy Clerk DATE OCT U 4 1994 ;0; CCU14 T t, ouA r OR By: �� G MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 4, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.K. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 GRANT APPLICATION /EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The Police Department requests retroactive approval of the 2013 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant application (JAG -13) in the amount of $39,868. If awarded, these funds will assist in funding police overtime for the annual Holiday Robbery Task Force. BACKGROUND This is an annual renewal of a grant we have received for the last several years, and there is no match requirement. Funding eligibility is based on a formula, and the Delray Beach Police Department is requesting the full allocation available to us this year. The Holiday Robbery Task Force has been in operation since 1997 and runs annually from Thanksgiving through New Year's Day to provide saturation of patrol units in all shopping centers within the City and for First Night. This patrol effort has reduced crime during the holiday season, and has historically been funded through this JAG award. The application due date necessitated submission prior to the Commission meeting, however, the application was emailed, in advance, to the Commissioners. FUNDING SOURCE Funding is provided through the U.S. Department of Justice's Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. No match is required. RECOMMENDATION The Police Department recommends approval. Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG) 2013 Local Solicitation CFDA #16.738 Delray Beach Police Department Abstract Attachment #1 Applicant Name: City of Delray Beach Implementing Organization: Delray Beach Police Department Project Title: Holiday Robbery Task Force In order to support the Department's operational plan for the Holiday Robbery Task Force, we are requesting funding for the cost of overtime for officers who will be deployed in the targeted areas. These officers will work to provide crime prevention through high visibility patrols and community policing strategies. The goal of the project is to reduce crime and the risk of victimization as well as to make citizens and visitors feel more secure. If a crime should occur, officers are on site and available to intervene. Based on prior years, we anticipate the program will cost in the range of $60,000 in overtime and FICA. We are requesting the full allocation of $39,868 to support this program. Of that, $37,035 would directly fund overtime costs and $2,833 would support the cost of FICA. All additional costs, including other benefits, will be funded by the City. Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG) 2013 Local Solicitation CFDA #16.738 Delray Beach Police Department Program Narrative Attachment #2 The Delray Beach Police Department's Holiday Robbery Task Force has been operational since 1997. This Task Force runs annually from Thanksgiving through New Year's Eve and provides a saturation of patrol units in all shopping centers within the City of Delray Beach for crime prevention purposes. The Police Department provides high profile visibility, utilizing approximately 100 different officers throughout the holiday season. During the course of the program in 2012, over one thousand, one hundred and twenty hours were dedicated to this project. The Holiday Robbery Task Force serves as an important deterrent, reducing the number of serious crimes during the Holiday Season when crimes of opportunity tend to increase. In addition, the presence of officers, employing community policing techniques, is expected to make citizens and visitors feel more secure. If a crime should occur, officers are on site and available to intervene. During the 2013 holiday season, we expect the Holiday Robbery Task Force to be deployed in the following commercial areas: Delray Crossings Plaza (with the anchor stores of Target, Outback, and Steak -n -Shake restaurants), Super Walmart, Delray Square, Boca/Delray Plaza, Delray West Plaza, Pines West Plaza, Plaza Delray (with the anchor stores of Publix Supermarket, Regal Cinemas, and Staples), and the Downtown Delray Beach business /art district with 1 specialty shopping and restaurants (inclusive of Atlantic Avenue from Swinton Avenue to the Intracoastal Coastal Waterway). In recent years, the City of Delray Beach has faced economic hardships, similar to other municipalities nationwide. Each year, the City faces increasing costs and funding restrictions. Funding through this JAG award is necessary to continue operating the Holiday Robbery Task Force at its current level. The projected cost to continue the Holiday Robbery Task Force for 2013 is anticipated to remain on par with the prior year, and the number of officers needed for this project will remain approximately the same. Last year's total cost was $56,348, with $42,212 funded through the FY 2012 JAG and the remainder being funded by the City. For the upcoming FY 13/14, we are requesting that the full JAG allocation of $39,868 go towards funding this important program. All additional program costs, including other benefits, will be funded by the City. 2 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG) 2013 Local Solicitation CFDA #16.738 Delray Beach Police Department Budget and Budget Narrative Attachment #3 Budget Narrative: In order to support the Department's deployment plan for the Holiday Robbery Task Force, we are requesting funding for the cost of overtime for officers who will be deployed in the targeted areas. These officers will provide high visibility patrols and serve as a crime deterrent. In addition, the presence of officers is expected to make citizens and visitors feel more secure. If a crime should occur, officers are on site and available to intervene. We anticipate the program's cost to be on par with the prior year's cost, with the number of officers needed for this project remaining approximately the same. We are requesting the full allocation of $39,868 to support this program. Of that, $37,035 would directly fund overtime costs and $2,833 would support the cost of FICA. See below for a budget summary. Budget: The following is an outline of estimated project expenses needed to support the Delray Beach Police Department's Holiday Robbery Task Force. Requested JAG Funds PERSONNEL Overtime for officers assigned to the Holiday Robbery Task Force and deployed in targeted areas as a crime prevention tool $ 37,035 FRINGE BENEFITS FICA (7.65% of salary) $ 2,833 TRAVEL $ 0 EQUIPMENT $ 0 SUPPLIES $ 0 CONSULTANTS/ CONTRACTS $ 0 OTHER $ 0 Total federal funding requested from JAG: $ 39,868 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.L. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /10TH FAMILY FUN DAY AT POMPEY PARK ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to approve a Special Event Permit for the l Oth Annual Family Fun Day at Pompey Park produced by the Parks and Recreation Department proposed to be held August 17, 2013 from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Commission is also requested to approve staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, trash removal and clean up assistance, trash boxes, use of the large City stage, and preparation and installation of event signage. BACKGROUND Attached are a special event permit application, site plan, budget, and activity schedule received from Rashad Smith, Site Supervisor, for this event. Family Fun Day will include a variety of scheduled events and activities throughout the day. A few of the activities include health screenings, youth and adult games, other vendors and live entertainment. Parks and Recreation will be responsible for overall event management, vendor approval and other site management tasks. The estimated costs are as follows: staff overtime is $3,160, administrative fee of $158, stage rental $530 and trash box costs $175, for a total cost estimate of $4,023. Per Event Polices and Procedures, since this is a City sponsored event, there are no charges for City services or equipment. Also, a Hold Harmless Agreement and Certificate of Insurance are not required. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special event permit, staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, trash removal and clean up, providing trash boxes, set up and use of the large City stage as requested. RECEIVED JUN 17 2013 City of Delra dl�l# MESERMES L LPL 0,41 CH Special Event Permit .nim,oE Application Y I REVISED 11.2.11 0 PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT 1993 E-mail Address: s,-nilhra J rat 2001 EvantName/Title: 1041' rAmrL�r FL2A,) 6A EventDate(s): c +} Times: )DAM " it) n,.,,, Requesting street closure: ' yes no ✓ (if yes, need titne/date for closure and reopening) Event Sponsor/Producer: - 'RA,5bop, Sr" , ; H + TF- J21-r rtv:so /L I Event Contact/Coordinator: 1�i�s i tole s�� +' x A�rrruc� S rrE Svf3 n vrs, r= _LlL- Name; o r'j pe !� Rg e l" Address: i }, U �eVt5 Telephone Dumber: Z13 -', .j s6 Cetlular Number: E-mail Address: s,-nilhra J rat ra Jr 6��, �h, c tam Event Descrlption/Plupose: ?R0V,7rfv4- A c21_75, A+vb S��u,Crr s 7t1� CjPj�p r1f71`ji,V t�� +- t.i�4i4-1r7 TM4006114 `r '!; lY11~ikr[f� 6 0 U T2A b + I A o,V—� Azv s -- -05 , Brief History of Event (If applicable): 'k EA M l w( FvA) b ti W " wAS G2EA T F__b f 1) As Ar.) 1,1JNJ 1. t1�V1rnPrZ �Ev i1i tV �t��lvi r i 92rNC:•-s 'i .m�v, r �?Efr►2RY 8���,ra c�vT �IZ(JF/i 7Fr r+Z Rorng t, Aid - TArrc; _ A Planned Activities (outline of Activities /number of activities, Ie, entertainment, children's rides, games, other programs): ' a., A6 6 A HJr~ 1_rr c �z- C v+.v s, SE�ir�r Se�r.a� Sr�sron�s+ LLu as Mow-, F'a t3� +vaoes- Apvs+ tuveLb� ��iIGK 5� a Lkf iii Iry c.rva - FAGC.v Page I of 5 Page 2 of 5 Number of individuals Served Previous Year (if applicable); 4400 Describe the targeted population and expected attendance: a w-r F u � A Y T e,--5J- �ft'CO� iJfLL 1'PL+� l�rS} ! k 4 � �cr4GN Gaf•'I 9J�J ! i Y. --- ,��rPGLTt=l� i{'�'r'E= Nt3AN.'�- 1S - ��° -5�• - Describe how the program or project addresses community needs: t rr r Fu:v -il " - °- .itSnS tT�. AGTtc�a rr� f nJn �YlLer,�7 # .•rc yr Y 6A? 9:6212 v }n7 `r 7r _ .5d, f jA'r Jc4Y Describe your Marketing/Promotions Program (Hour will you market/promote, i.e. TV, radio, posters, flyers, web sites, other); "FA w1t-Y -- Fow �A " Wit— ' RdY (1 jr!'rF PA-t Ks Ay?j RFfA_ r1 Cfafy '; PDr/FD i lo, ^lt3t- L�f�i'O!L +3rlyr i fFC s�,tf� �a1 ALAti f)Tr�r'A in)Rk77�UG As:?or�r� Sponsor Category (please check) City /Non- Profit/Charitable ❑ Private 0 Co- Sponsor -- Non- Profit/Private 0 (If Novi -profit attach proof of 501 c(3), c(4), c(d), C(10), or c(19) or (d) Event Location (Describe area boundaries of event/location); Site plat'; attached: yes no (Site plan required for entire event site, Include locations of tents, stage, portale s, dumpsters, portable lighting, and barricade location if applicable.) Rental of Old School Square: yes no (If yes, attach proof of approval) Rental of Old School Square Park: yes no (If yes, attach proof of rental agreement with Parks & Recreation)) Private Property Use; yes no ✓ Of yes, attach letter giving authorization from property owner) Event budget Revenue, & Expenses attached: yes V no (Required for all events) UANY %datalSpeoial `~Pent RequesWeciaf Es ent Permit Appl icetton REVISED PINEAL FYI (W ] M-doo Page 3 of S Previous year Revenue/Expense suminary attached; yes no (Required for all events) Arts and Economic Impact Calculator attached: yes no ` Obtained on line ativmv.AmerfeansForTheNds,org (Required for all events except minor events and 5KRuns) Do you have cash sponsors for the event: yes no (Indicated on budget) Do you have inkind sponsors for the event: yes no (Indicated on budget.) Serving or selling alcoholic bevexages; yes 110 if yes, what entity is obtaining the Alcohol License permit? (If yes, copy of license and alcohol liability insurance required hvo (2) )peeks prior to event) Event certificate of insurance attached: yes no (Required two (2) Iveeksprior to event ranting the City as additional insured, also requh,ad for vendors) Playing of amplified music: yes no (Waiver required) Will there be entertainment: yes V/ no (If yes, attached list of Performers an(/or DJ's) If yes, sponsor agrees all entertainment will be f fly oriented and contain no obscenities: yes no Requesting Police assistance; yes ✓ no (traffic control /security) Will supplement with private security: yes V no. (. f yes, needplan attached) Requesting Emergency Medical assistance; yes no ✓ Requesting barricade assistance: yes no of no, how are you handling?) Requesting trash removal/clean up assistance: yes no (If no, how are you handling ?) Requesting trash boxes /containers and liners: yes no Requesting stage use; yes ✓ no (1f yes, cheek type) Large stage (14' x 36') Small stage (16' x 21') o Half small stage (8' x 21') n U.% w% ydatOpeciak Event Rtqucs1 %Spcnla[ .EventPennitApplicationR VMRDFINALFY10- 11(3).doc Page 4 of 5 Requesting signage. yes 110 Type: 4'x4Tvent sign Parking Signs flanner banging _ Indicate dates required, 3_ f 3 (Waiver required f more than two (2) )veekprlor to event) Requesting City Portable Generator: yes ✓ no (If yes, size & power) Food and beverage vendors- yes ✓ no_ __ . If yes, approximate number (Health Department approval required) yes no Other vendors: yes ✓ no (Indicate type) F-r-s qtvp S2rtir e4- St4&gg r r� Tents; yes no If yes, How many What size or size required (Ifyes, tentpermits atulfire hispectioin may be needed) Will The event include amusement rides; yes no r/ (1f yes, type and location and copy of liability Insurance required, also requires state Ilcense and inspection.) Will the event be gated: (Sholy ort -site ]trap) yes no Will there be a charge for the event. yes no ff yes, indleate ticket prices) Will there be fireworks or other pyrotechnics. yes no Vz- (ffyes, contact Fire Marshal to oblain an(l eortmplete permit application) Will there be cooking with compressed gas: yes ✓ no (If yes, contact Fire Marshal for inspections) Will you be providing port -a -lets for the event. yes no (If yes, locate on-site map. If no, indicate how you will handle restroom needs) Is reserved parking requested: yes � no (lf yes, indicate locations apd purpose for rise) LS;llv�vdata�Speciol% vent tiequtsiLSpecial Event Yetmit Application REVISED TTRAL FY10 -t 1(3).doc Page 5 of 5 Event Permit Attachments: Revenue/Expense Budget Revenue/Expense Recap Last Years Event Site Plan Arts and Economic Impact Calendar Letter Requesting Noise Ordinance' Waiver Letter Requesting Waiver Consumption AIcohol Beverages Proof of Non -Profit Status General Liability insurance Certificate Alcohol Beverage Liability Certificate Proof of Rental Agreement or Authorization better from Private Property Owner Hold Harmless Agreement, notarized, Submittal Date Requirements: • Minor Event 45 days prior to event • Intermediate Event 90 days prior to event • Major Bvent 120 days prior to event • Neighborhood Block Party 30 days prior to event Event Contractor /Coordinator D to Please print :sttnia -S"-) f Please enclose the appropriate non - refundable application fee payable to the City of Delray Beach, 100 -N.'W. I" Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444. Required with permit application. .,or,Staff Use 0111y n Date Received Application fee received U %V?%Yd4L1\SptC1AI EVenl XOJUCSI SNOW $vent Pmni3 App[ieadonREVISED FINAL FYI 0-1 IP doe 4 � vV. A 1p R 4 =_ V. aU7 W04 AiIH fV; I a I y D �1 awtl N�i#RN 4 � vV. A 1p R 4 i� 9 C av p a y .S y N } c .1 — M A � � ] � C +°• ry Q � 'y I � N A v vim+ e p c 41 •' w !p v SCHEDULE OF EVENTS DJ: AK Biggwagon Book Bag Giveaway: 10am —12pm Senior Social Session: 12pm -- 2pm Kidz zone: 2pm — 6pm Health Fair: 12pm -- 4pm Food Vendors: 12pm — 9pm Bar B Que Contest: 4pm — 5pm Family Fun Day Showcase 5pm —10pm Rocks Pep Rally Delray Divas Diamonds and Pearls Jazz in Delray Beach Live Entertainment (Rap, R &B, Dance Groups) Event: 10th Annual Family Fun Day Ages All Ages Days Saturday, August 17, 2013 Season Summer Location Pompey Park, 1101 NW 2nd Street Contact Person Rashod Smith Contact # Phone: 561- 243 -7356 Fax: 561 -243 -7342 Program Description Family Fun Day was created to serve as a Summer Reunion Event that brings the community of Delray Beach out into a fun filled atmosphere. Family Fun Day is to provide youth, adults, and senior citizens the opportunity to fellowship through the means of cultural fun, traditional values, and societal aspects. Program Objectives Family Fun Day is a free event to the public that was created for the community of Delray Beach. Activities are offered for family filled fun and excitement. Food, games, live entertainment, and contests are offered for enjoyment for the citizens of Delray Beach. Budget Description Revenue Expenses Entertainment DJ, Live Band $2000.00 Live Band $1000.00 DJ (All Day) BBQ Contest 1st, 2 "d, 3`d place trophies $50.00 Trophies $175.00 Cash Prizes Kid Zone Youth Activities $999.60 Vendors 17 Food vendors@ $50 per parking space 10 Health Vendors @ $25 per table $850 food Vendors $250 Health Vendors $1100 Total BBQ Contestants 10 contestants @ $45 per entry $450 Total BINGO Prizes Senior Social Session $150.00 Advertisement Flyers $75.00 Total $1550 $4349.60 Special Event Budget $5050 FAMILY FINN DAY 2012 Revenues City Budget $ 3,500.00 Collected $ 1,310.00 TOTAL $ 4,810.00 Expenses Arts & Craft Vendor Inflatable Slide Band Signs for Event T- Shirts Trophies Rock Wall & Dunk Tank D! Movie Rights for Outside Flyers for Event Security Guards $ 830.00 $ 350.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 275.00 $ 1,194.90 $ 509.00 $ 785.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 326.50 $ 399.00 $ 1,188.00 TOTAL $ 9,057.40 Arts & Economic Prosperity IV: Calculator Page 1 of 2 POPULATION of your community: STEP 2: TOTAL EXPENSES Your Organization's TOTAL EXPENSES (please do not use commas): TOTAL ATTENDANCE to your organization's arts events (again, do not use commas): CALCULATE Reset 50,000 to 99,999 $ 4350 350 DEFINITIONS Total The total dollars spent by your nonprofit arts and culture organization and its audiences; event - Expenditures: related spending by arts and culture audiences is estimated using the average dollars spent per person by arts event attendees in similarly populated communities. FTE Jobs: The total number of full -time equivalent (FTE) jobs in your community that are supported by the expenditures made by your arts and culture organization and/or its audiences. An FTE can be one http:// www. americansforthearts .org/iiiformation_sei vices /research/services /economic inip... 6/25/2013 Total Expenditures HE Jobs Household Income Local Government Revenue State Government Revenue Nonprofit Arts and Culture $4,350 0.2 $3,660 $152 $179 Organizations: Nonprofit Arts and Culture $7,109 0.2 $4,291 $373 $404 Audiences: Total Industry Impact: Sum Organizations Audiences) $11,459 0.4 $7,951 $525 $583 (The of and Print Your Results I Please see the fine print below. DEFINITIONS Total The total dollars spent by your nonprofit arts and culture organization and its audiences; event - Expenditures: related spending by arts and culture audiences is estimated using the average dollars spent per person by arts event attendees in similarly populated communities. FTE Jobs: The total number of full -time equivalent (FTE) jobs in your community that are supported by the expenditures made by your arts and culture organization and/or its audiences. An FTE can be one http:// www. americansforthearts .org/iiiformation_sei vices /research/services /economic inip... 6/25/2013 Arts & Economic Prosperity IV: Calculator Page 2 of 2 full -time employee, two half -time employees, four employees who worn quarter -time, etc. Household The total dollars paid to community residents as a result of the expenditures made by your arts and Income: culture organization and/or its audiences. Household income includes salaries, wages, and proprietary income. Government The total dollars received by your local and state governments (e.g., license fees, taxes) as a result Revenue: of the expenditures made by your arts and culture organization and/or its audiences. When using estimates derived from this calculator, always Keep the following caveats in mind: (1) the results of this analysis are based upon the averages of similarly populated communities, (2) input/output models were customized for each of these similarly populated communities, providing very specific employment, household income, and government revenue data, and (3) your results are therefore estimates, and should not be used as a substitute for conducting an economic impact study that is customized for your community. O Copyright 2012 by Americans for the Arts. www.AmericansForTheArts.org llttp:// www. americansforthearts .org /infortllation services lresearchlservices /ecoDontic _imp... 6/25/2013 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.M. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /ON THE AVE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to approve a Special Event Permit for On the Ave scheduled for August 8, 2013 from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., to grant a temporary use permit per LDR's Section 2.4.6(F) for the closure and use of SW 5th Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to SW 1 st Street, as well as the Elizabeth "Libby" Jackson Wesley Plaza, and to authorize staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, barricading, event signage, trash clean up and trash boxes. BACKGROUND Attached are the special event permit request, site plan, budget, Economic Calculator for this event received from Stephanie Immelman, Interim Director of the Delray Beach Marketing Cooperative. The DBMC is partnering with Sister Cities, who is hosting a delegation from Moshi Tanzania, Spady Museum, WARC, Arts Garage and the CRA. The estimated overtime cost for this event is $2,245. Per Event Policies and Procedures, the DBMC is required to pay the City 50% for all overtime costs and a 5% administrative fee for an estimated charge of $1,180. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Event Permit and staff support for security and traffic control, fire inspection, event signage, barricading and trash clean up with payment of costs to the City per the Special Event Policies and Procedures. RECEIVED City of Delray Beach JUN 21 2013 DELRA� r BEACH Special Event PermitADMINISTRATIVESERViCi� '�ricacity� Application REVISED 11.2.11 � PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT 1993 2001 Event Name/Title: V n 'T hel U�- Event Date(s): Times: i Requesting street closure: . yes i/ no (If yes, need time /date for closure and reopening) qM - S_64 dyf- Cam' _ ! sr , Sm. Event Sponsor/Producer: DW&C Event Contact /Coordinator: Nance: �-Td —o d "Crk, q Telephone Number: Y-11- Cellular Number: S (of ?,60'05" t9 E -mail Address: 'v AIi. ta P— rl a I r7,.M-eartr) I R,,A Planned Activities (Outline of activities /number oftactivities, i.e. entertainment, Page 1 of 5 eS Page 2 of 5 Number of Individuals Served Previous Year (if applicable): D, O00 Describe Ilie targeted population and expected attendance: how the program ol• project addresses_ T,cnnrit�p ��n�io• A��ai•Irof inrs/�rnnin4innc T%1•nclVat" (14mu i rill umi mnA-i-t/f1Wlmnto i f- TV Sponsor Category (please check) City o Non-Prof tt/Charitable Ck( Private 0 Co- Sponsor -- Non- Proftt/Private Ei (If Non peof,t attach pt•oof of 501c(3), c(4), c(6), C(10), or c(19) ot• (d) Event Location (Describe area boundaries of event/location): See- site- rvt,-,n Site plan attached: yes no (Site plait required for entire event site. Include locations of tents, stage, portalets, dumpsters, portable lighting, and barricade location if applicable.) Rental of Old School Square: yes no (If yes, attach proof of approval) Rental of Old School Square Park: yes no If yes, attach proof of rent�a reetne t with Pate Recreation) u 5 e- ���.���,{ Private Property Use: yes no (If yes, attach letter giving authorization from properly owner) Event budget Revenue & Expenses attached: yes_ no (Required foi- all events) U_ Nv%ydiWSpecW Event Requestl.Speciat Event Permit Application REVISED FINAL FYI 0- 1 1(3).d" Y5 G Previous year Revenue/Expense summary attached: yes (Required for all events) Arts and Economic Impact Calculator attached: yes Obtained on line at wvwvwv.AmericanslrorThcArts.org (Required for all events except minor events and 5K Runs) Do you have cash sponsors for the event: yes ✓ ►io. (Indicated on budget) Do you have inkind sponsors for the event: yes no (Indicated on budget) no no Page 3 of S Serving or selling alcoholic beverages: ye- s,µ V - no If yes, what entity is obtaining the Alcohol License pernrit'1 '166 - -- (If yes, copy of license and alcohol liability Insurance required two (2) weeks prior to evert) Event certificate of insurance attached: yes V/ no (Required two (2) weeks prior to event naming the City as additional insured, also required for vendors) Playing of amplified music: (Waiver required) yes V no Will there be entertainment: yes ✓ no, (If yes, attached list of Performers and /or DJ's) If yes, sponsor agrees all entertainment will be family oriented and contain no obscenities: yes ✓ no_ Requesting Police assistance: yes no (traffic control /security) Will supplement with private security; yes no ✓ (If yes, need plan attached) Requesting Emergency Medical assistance: yes no Requesting barricade assistance: yes no (If no, how are you handling?) Requesting trash removal/clean up assistance: yes ✓ no (If no, how are you handling ?) Requesting trash boxes /containers and liners: yes '� no Requesting stage use: yes no (If yes, check type) Large stage (14' x 36') © Small stage (16' x 211) ❑ Half sn ►all stage (8' x 211) o UANv %vdata%pec1a1 Event Requast\Special Event Pennit Application REVISED FINAL EY►O -i I(3),doc Requesting signage: yes ✓ no Type: 4'A'Event sign Parking Sighs_, Banner hangin. Indicate dates required (Vaiver required if more than two (2) week prior to event) Requesting City Portable Generator: (If yes, size & power) Food and beverage vendors: 1I If yes, approximate number `1 (Health Department approval required) Other vendors: (Indicate type) yes no Yes no, yes rro Page 4 of S Tents: yes e/ no If yes, How matry What size or size required (If yes, tent Permits and fire inspections may be needed) Will the event include amusement rides: yes no (If yes, type and location and copy of liability insurance required, also requires state license and inspection.) Will the event be gated: (Show oil-site snap) yes na Will there be a charge for the event: yes lio (If yes, indicate Picket prices) $ Will there be fireworks or other pyrotechnics: yes no (If yes, contact Fire Marshal to obtain and complete permit application) Will there be cooking with compressed gas: yes ✓ no (If yes, contact Fire Alarshal for inspections) Will you be providing port -a -lets for the event: yes ✓ na ___ (If yes, locate on-site snap, If no, indicate how yore will hand[e restroom needs) Is reserved parking requested: yes (Ifyes, indicate locations and purpose for use) no EJAwwdatntSpeciol Event RcquestLSpecinl went Pennit AppllcoOn REVISFB MAL FYIp -€ €(3),doe Page 5 of 5 Event Permit Attachments: Revenue /Expense Budget Revenue/Expense Recap Last Years Event Site Plan Arts and Economic Impact Calendar Letter Requesting Noise Ordinance Waiver Letter Requesting Waiver Consumption Alcohol Beverages Proof of Non -Profit Status General Liability Insurance Certificate AIcohol Beverage Liability Certificate Proof of Rental Agreement or Authorization Letter from Private Property owner Hold Harmless Agreement, notarized. Submittal Date Requirements: • Minor Event 45 days prior to event • Intermediate Event 90 days prior to event • Major Event 120 days prior to event • Neighborhood Block Party 30 clays prior to event Event ontractgr /Coordi ator Date Please print: b l wrAd mch Please enclose the appropriate non- refi €ndable application fee payable to the City of Delray Beach, 100 N.W. I5t Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444. Required with permit application. For Staff Use Ont o Date Received— �ol� Application fee received $ f U: wwdata'Special Event Rcques1\SNcial Fvent Permit Application REVISED FINAL FYI Q- 1 €(3),doc R ��4 �4 o o ra v � o ar 04 Q1 � � • � rn O J +� N •rl � L� i W c� 2 o � Z - W-4. + 1; f l! r f 1 Z r 1 - A r .� AR 'r' t� .4A 74* L ,;+f- • :: •� , y �y =,�,� .may, 1 cc AL ui 0 0 3 o a a a �f a C 0 0 0 0 C C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t C� 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 U o C� C! rt; o C= O O O c o O C] = N 1!'G D rA O CD C 0 Ln � I 7 Ln 1r C CD. LL O e O r� m © Tye W D_ � C N { O i N i r 7 N r-0 U � RD � C C c+[ m Z y ao m d c cv 0 E 0 u C 64 0 0 3 o a a a �f a C 0 0 0 0 C C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t C� 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 U o C� C! a o C= O O O c o O C] = N 1!'G D lE O CD C 0 0 � I 7 Ln 1r C CD. LL e O r� m © Tye cis ». R 4 a r N y U It � a un N 4 En C d o y W D_ � C N { O i N i r 7 N r-0 U � RD � C C c+[ m Z y ao m d c cv 0 E 0 u C 64 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 3 o a a a �f a o 0 0 0 0 V O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t C� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C� C! a o C= O O O c o O C] = N 1!'G D OC] O CD C 0 0 � I Ln C CD. LL e O r� m © Tye cis ». R 4 a r N U It CU N 4 Q C U O C r0 rc m CJ E Q rt 7' �, ra E ra u a�i m 0 P O Lh w D m > ro LL �- u ;� C CL c IliL m LL a c c ° C Q E rY Z r� nro' LM m h c p L OJ C N CL 2m G c G!7 "0 R C � � u N In tl� C .>r �� .� .a a a o Q a a as Q a © .� c e o 1f o Lo ,I I O N C O n 41 O O O O O O O O O n O O O O 0 0o o a -� cn a a o 0 0¢ a o a m o CR C3 d' O O N N O O O Lr1 O L11 O © N a O '�' O O Li f L�*T O� + -I - in 0�1� 4 4 C] N �' O r'S .--r M O N M O W N M [�E I 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 3 o a a a a o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t C� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C� C! a o C= O O O c o O C] = N 1!'G D OC] O CD C 0 0 O I Ln CD. LL r� m © a cis ». a N CU N �° I! i� I�R° R° Na V k0 4 I� 15,1 114 1° �° 1� Emr Y� IL �� I Im N ry n N n a �I t CD. LL a CU is CJ E 7' �, ra E ra u a�i m 0 w m ro LL �- u ;� c IliL m LL a c c ° C nro' p L OJ C N CL 2m G c G!7 "0 R C � � u N In tl� C .>r �� .� .a a a o Q a a as Q a © .� c o a� o Lo CL ry n N n a N 4 72 a P C Z Ln M C, Ln N fN a a Lr� i% V� 4A. C C Ul y O� oZF o m v M 3 z cr sn c �i E m c IU i o c N c cn n w as a !, m > L © a m U a u� a L 5 m U o N A r`�a LA •� � n, _ 8 o V ti L 0 L an 1 N y, a UT Y Z' O tN I- Y P m G u G u'f 47 ilr. ti i/1 O cn n3 �' LIT T ? m i O 0 ¢ O7 wN-. C C Cp Q2 N C a CO Q c� Q C C c N c O a, p7 4J 2 n rA r a ? of cn C o CC 'C al Q1 C p _4 U E O Q _ l� N aj O C] 4L L!1 A / U L U tJJ lf7 VI LL j { j �y .� C 111 tLnt�� to tQNrpp7 rh 10 tQ1 eNepp F rtl�ppJ y 0�1 O r n F a N O E rro m m N O rt rt o� z p c� °gyp 0 �p m cc A�7 rq Cp C CO ri�pp U L3 r o et 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �n M o o w Qt a G O vi V' O �c O C? N �o 00 a Ln m V' CS fV �O c O +� `p_ MM-I m C11 ^ N >` Ci7 r-I ri V. CD LD h rl O dy © M lO M M 6) al V- - Q L! lc r l Q Q a - o N ri o N c° i M fV co r6 m It eq L O O C a O O C a a a O M p p G C7 4 ol p 6 a p O v o o a o o o a o 0 0 0 o p o o a o o Qi Q o o L ue o o N Q o ^ o io © o d c o 'c o o© o o ti� M o • 0 m © V' p C7 d a a C] p a C7 C a a c CD ++ A C Q a N r o o Ln o o Ln 0 O C �n; C) o a; Ln © - SE Ln N V- •-•� R N -4 LM EV ca ri rL C� I Ir1 --y Ln r\ O p M O Ln Li 7 C] In C if'S .•a 1,;r .-i l0 Ln '$ .-i I� a O Q3 V" V" V' .. Cr r Q M I Q M V` M \Y M V- M '�. V' W V" l0 4 v C' Z V' lfl V• N 4 P C Z M C, a Lr� oZF o m v E c �i E m �, IU i o c N c cn n w c !, m > L © a m U a u� a L 5 m U N A r`�a LA •� � n, _ o V ti L 0 L an u N y, a UT In Z' O w I- Y P m G u G u'f 47 ilr. ti i/1 O cn n3 �' cn T ? m i C 0 ¢ O7 wN-. C C Cp Q2 N C a CO Q c� Q C C c N c O a, p7 4J 2 n rA ro a ? of °' C o CC pp al Q1 C p _4 U E O Q _ l� i` w 'i aj O C] 4L L!1 U L U tJJ lf7 VI LL U L7 { j �y .� F Q r n F a N 4 C a 3 r'1 H RQ 3 eK C.1 � N � +�! 00 e w rl ¢ ri C N a CIS y N � O N L!) p O O C5 O C) O! {„^ tt' l0 n O .M Lr1 N O N l0 M d- O p O C? Q C? 4 C7 a n 111 n M C7 4 n N O V C") 00 C3j Q p C7 C7 O C7 O O R7 .-1 M = n N O Q lA w 0 Lt•} b M Lf) CT DS ! N N CM1 11'3 t:p LT) N C % M CD N V. C 4 N Q C*' C CT Lr3 « 7D N Lf3 LO Lfl Lf7 co N o � N lC N d ki I �a CL's 0o c l 0 0 0 0 0 o (u a o c c p n o 0 0 ti 61 0 0 o Q a C3 Q O O O O O p p u o CD Lr Lri N C] O `o r^ ! p O O p p c o L O O O C3 C 0 O C7 O. O C7 hl O M N CIA -W� N O C? cz p p p p p O f\ LA a C' r" 1 Sl, c O Ln c cl, C7 L11 r6 Qj _ Ln O d] O Ln Ld � r`B i t1 m M 00 N Z O Q [] L� Z O Q pp U O O L li U LM n O o ` l U ` N U M = N C CJ U U cn U th r t Cfl H RQ 3 eK C.1 � N � +�! 00 e w rl ¢ ri C N a CIS y N � O N i 0 0 Q p O O C5 O C) O! {„^ tt' l0 n O .M Lr1 N O N l0 M d- O p O C? Q C? 4 C7 a n 111 n M C7 4 n N O V C") 00 C3j Q p C7 C7 O C7 O O R7 .-1 M = n N O Q lA w 0 Lt•} b M Lf) CT DS ! N N CM1 11'3 t:p LT) N C % M CD N V. C 4 N Q C*' C CT Lr3 « N Lf3 LO Lfl Lf7 co N +--r N lC N d I �a CL's 0o c l 0 0 0 0 0 o O o c Q p n o 0 0 0 0 0 o Q a C3 Q O O O O O p p O O C] O M p O O p p Q O O O C3 C 0 O C7 O. O C7 hl O M C7 O_ N O C? cz p p p p p O f\ 1.P1 C' r" 1 4z p C7 L11 O O O l0 � R M 00 h M V rl lz Lo O O Ln 1O '� M LD N LA r'i H N RCS N Rri N CCk tG - ,may 4'S i I Ln Ln Cl o 0 0 Ln Ln o Ln O n -MK LLU O lD C, p O C' «-[ C� N N N 02 .�� d :T ,�-i V, Z r E Lfl Lf1 .--i L!1 ,--I Ln .--i L 7 .-i n .--i lf5 ,-+ Ln .--i Ln Ln N Ln N Ln N V) N Ln I i LL v Q N NLL C C u R j C X liJ a. W C N W- 0 c v to ro U- U v v o U a - C — U C 9 N 6 i �. P c c v � '� p L'I w d C U- m a t H 47 I— nci us cul � CTI o a ti . a�i Y d— Ru �y a `3Ra a m 5. v c is m m v v m w V (� V C] C7 r n f.e rz Vn N a D' a ¢ d R o a m F CL ?C 11d i 0 0 c a 3 n H R R C�i U � N � a � .-f C C ifl � QJ e'C r4 r-0 O N Np O O co a� In M LI) d b Lr1 O v ON ' O O d- O N ¢ O O O l6 M 4 p] O O O ,•-� {+•1 4 ` n N Q C 00 O LO O? C. O O c 4 c vG .-1 .- I LP1 O N D1 h O Oi O O C] 4 1LS LI) O N 01 4 N Ch O Oi I� Ci lhO lfl M Ln W Q' lf5 m ro h N n'1 w�-I CO M N � a� I co I 'O a I I I � O 10 O p - O 'O O O O 10 c O 4 p O O O O 'C d p O O O d C? O O I G d . O C 1 C O O O ' O ro d G p. ' O O O O d d O O O d d O 0 O C O O O CD O 4 4 O O O C CD d Ln L O ry p Cd O C O 4n vi O O O q O --� h Ol V m c v = C E Ln m > u u � vd's fE u � c �� o Q I Q] V cu d [$ U i V L"�SI 'a" i 71� 0� N L!5 .-a L1'S M .-i Np O O co In M LI) d b Lr1 O v ON ' O O d- O N ¢ O O O l6 M 4 p] O O O ,•-� {+•1 4 ` n N Q C 00 O LO O? C. O O c 4 vG .-1 .- I LP1 O N D1 h O Oi O O C] 4 1LS LI) O N 01 4 N Ch O Oi I� Ci lhO lfl M Ln W Q' lf5 m h N n'1 w�-I CO M N � I co I 'O I I I I O 10 O p - O 'O O O O 10 O O 4 p O O O O 'C d p O O O d C? O O I G d . O C 1 C O O O ' O d d G p. ' O O O O d d O O O d d O 0 O C O O O CD O 4 4 O O O C CD d Ln L O ry p Cd O C O 4n vi O O O q O --� h Ol C) V L"�SI N L!5 .-a L1'S M .-i Ln �-�I O O 4f> ® ,--i h d ti .--�. .--i Lf1 d ,,-i Ln w Lm M M O 4 -: N N N 4 +--I M +C1' O O �, m LM h h Ln �n Ln Ln Ln u1 Ln Ln 4n ID tip � lfl Qy Ln Ln N Ln N Ln N Ln I LD LL7 LD V� I i G.P I u1 c C G li7J c w LL C c W C 7 y, S a " C C LLI N p7 QJ to � 4J W CS N ' to C O � w Vl [p m � J I O) ' � y a O� C) t y� }I W `�. 61 O }�11 Qom: •9 Q U_ L > C O u m VI d C C � QJ p w 6 t Q Ln L!9 O m G d 2' iO ,C i U Ln (n C UJ7 Y cu u M L.6 L/S N W i a�'S, V o ozs u C m C a III CY N I °� Y c. rs I C �- a �. C CJ C+1 Ln x LIJ of N `v'i q Q In y C Cll Of i U� ['b Ln C 7 V E C C C Q U a° I°—' c°s w w .`�+ oa b 3 o m o a c cu c� o a` a a v a cn cn r I Np O O C Q V u � y• Q m G ,6 � d :V eQ C e�i L � i a n as H m fY d P ©, p'{ Q ;- .n„s- q I'V 7' - _ di I L �---LL O N i'. O D C3 CD N O O Ln Ln p O O Q d O -•+ O di C7 N O d h N d d O t7: LO d d '--i d tY CS >T © O O O tp Ln 1� Ln PlP O O M w Ln O C7 Ul Ln CD O ID ,-+ 1\ O O h -1 C7 LO Ln p N h Ln O Ln h N O ql N Cn 0 C7 O O Lfl h u © m ,--I Q M Ln Cl —, N N Ili Lc V) M M M R Ln h I i s n I I , d O a O O O Ca C C> a 4 In q q q o O O O C] ® O O D O q C? q o C� .o a o f o c 0 0 0 0 0 to a ,C ! a C� o a d o n o l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 © 0 0 0 0 Io 0 0 c 0 C d o 0 0 CD Cn C) Ln q o C 0 o 0 d o d q LIT d Ln a d Ln R 0 0 --+ �o Ln d v h Ln lt'Y .-i C N M •r-i N Ln I I d .-, h C 10 IZ Ln Ln ,-1 .w Ln u"P w Ln O h O +--i .-, G Ln N p N .•� nS N N N �' N C7 C] —I —I N In [t' C' Ln i� W L.f7 Ln Ln N Ln 1i 1 Ln «•-i t0 a .--I *-� Lj] ,--I lO .-I LO +-a l6 .--i QC .-1 LO �--� 1D IL7 .-y km N Ln N Ln N Ln LG lD lC V y I I C I w 3 L„ c , i C 3 J L ICU C QJ I W U N L 1 V) ro v iJJ f0 U y LU W In C C 91 ZM C L u 4 i Q7 c y 4 1 aci ry cu w L 5 n v = n v _C U N v U a v U v j W _ c U c �' V N Ln N CL - = c O J Lx i1G cp In J Q v 1J. 'O PO Ln i, W -py N CC S Q 6 O � y• Q m G ,6 � d :V eQ C e�i L � i a n as H m fY d P ©, p'{ Q ;- .n„s- q I'V 7' - _ N O L �---LL O N i'. O D C3 CD N O O Ln Ln p O O Q d O -•+ O di C7 N O d h N d d O t7: LO d d '--i d tY CS >T © O O O tp Ln 1� Ln PlP O O M w Ln O C7 Ul Ln CD O ID ,-+ 1\ O O h -1 C7 LO Ln p N h Ln O Ln h N O ql N Cn 0 C7 O O Lfl h Ln © m ,--I Q M Ln Cl —, N N Ili Lc V) M M M Ln h I i n I I , d O a O O O Ca C C> a 4 In q q q o O O O C] ® O O D O q C? q o C� .o a o 0 o c 0 0 0 0 0 to a ,C ! C� o a d o n o l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 © 0 0 0 0 Io 0 0 c 0 o d o 0 0 CD Cn C) Ln q o C 0 o 0 d o d q LIT d Ln a d Ln 0 0 0 --+ �o Ln d C7 h Ln lt'Y .-i C N M •r-i N Ln I I d .-, h C I Ln IZ Ln Ln ,-1 .w Ln u"P w Ln O h O +--i .-, G Ln N p N .•� nS N N N �' N C7 C] —I —I N In [t' C' Ln i� W L.f7 Ln Ln N Ln 1i 1 Ln «•-i t0 lD .--I *-� Lj] ,--I lO .-I LO +-a l6 .--i QC .-1 LO �--� 1D IL7 .-y km N Ln N Ln N Ln LG lD lC V I I C I i C 3 J L ICU C QJ W U N L 1 iJJ f0 U y LU W In C C 91 ZM C L 0 N ry CT N v j W _ N ra } C CL - = c O J Lx i1G cp J Q v 1J. 'O PO Ln i, W -py N CC S Q �j ;B la l.i_ t7i 7 L1 OA LS8 In Oi C O C U O S x y L J O7 Vj_ C V Q U VY U N ?- C a i O. rL C Pn U Q u aJ ,� N �,, O t C C r0 CD N aJ Ll1 C QJ MV 0.7 ? m UJ C d p� Lfl oi5 C Q1 x ¢5 4 2 2 ut N i = — 4k Cl tt7 .V Y C!7 C as C iL m tG Ln W r, rs x W N p2p ro a u '� •� O A. c r.+ V7 O. t ja aCi �.. 6] - Pn C vi }r c O N c M13 7 7 �' 'C y y W U i d Z7 Q d U I +C Q W rZ LP1 L=n H LS o R W U 0. Q O C.S Cr W O I I 0 N O c.i c ti m 0 Q � J D C O CL 1G a C7 CSI T v Q G 0 i t4 4i 'w H 3 �^1 Q O m O I C7 t17 � N O 4 &I i o N Ln N Q° cC o .-1 O O � 6 Ll'f n cc N �. M Ln n O 0 G N Ch +--I � N n I c � I N N N eK O i In L, O M 1c, L! i [+F oo °o ° ° y o L a N LD m 0 x n v c v v U 0 u O .V N L V) o r`c ip m ro ro m m m r`v rLo Lo v rt m a a a p OJ m v v a a p 2 a N a m v w C C C G C C G C C C � C C C C m " a U V U U U W C U V V V C U u V U U V V p `o a o a v o p o 0 o - o 0 0' 0 0 0 0 : Q O m O 4 C7 t17 N O 4 &I i o N Ln N Q° cC o .-1 O O lL LnQ 6 Ll'f n cc N �. M Ln n O 0 G N Ch +--I � N n I c � I N N N eK O i In L, O M 1c, L! i [+F oo °o ° ° y o L a N LD m 0 n Q O m O O C7 t17 N O 4 r� O 07 Jam, o o q Dti Ln O C1 N C Lq N M Ln n O 0 G N Ch +--I .-w N n M N N N LM O I'= W In L, Ln M 1c, L! i N LD I'= °ILI °I°IQI�I °lo I o o Ln o 0 o c o 0 0 0 0 rn o °o N 4r Ln N � °o °o Lo.� a 0 00 Ln Ln c o o � o n iO rn Ln Ln --� Ln 111,00 I.-� 1'--' o Ln Ln .� N o Ln --, Ln o Ln Ln Ln d' Lf1 n n N •--i N M N O O O O +-i ,--i N M d' 10 1, n Its .-� Lr, .--I .••-, E N N N N M O 4 •--i ,--, .-�. � LD LD LP1 W Ln V1 LM LM Ln Ln Ln Lp LO tip lD tiD LD tics L" Lp Lp 8P Z a Ln 0 W p W N C Ln LU cn ro ; L o w L> a y lT C- to w yam, X lu G r6 X R LLJ R Ai V QJ p LT O C?I J LL V W C l a w LL V, a LA z cm v u �° x v p! c y n n i _ u ¢ a5 x c m a Lu CL ` LU � �" � G1 L� � m W p1 L4 a1 cn rn �, � d5 v - 2 W 6�7 � v, cas w g m c ° C c F" z z o i n v g n tau, u aI1 o a L a m v .a y c is = `° A m °t�i y a� o Lss 3 o at"i a aci t Lo a CL Ln Ln M ® W C 3 a a Ln ii ii ¢ ¢ v n Lu a Ln Ln I-- Ln 0 0 5 h J LZ _ i l C I W I Y rq I I O i �? r W i i C W N i 0 rt rz of 3: ,-+ p _ rr, cri r`d Q O Y N 0 ro o O W _ rn cl ? m d c C ro CL C N O O O O O O O E N © G d 4 G O .O G M ° 0 x w uur lN J4 J LZ _ _ C W Y rq O i —r W N i N ,-+ p rr, O1 Q O O o O O O O O m O O O O O O O O E N © O G d 4 G O .O G M ° x w cr y u u c a m "- o ° i o x a o p'3 m a .� A cn 0 C aJ x s a rC C a L vs a'S N cn d.., u C G 'a c O O 4 q 4 O O q y u w p UI C Q I° a •� Qy C 0 0 o Ci o o G M LL Cn m = I R io u] y Q g 'a � R c a (� a g � W W c n i p] �• C c C o � e; c O Cl � ,c c O a C C a cn s y N w o to C u1 u �u � n. u� C a �r, C R a u° I N a° 0. O Ic' 1,3 O � 1,:, � N 4 Ln �1`3 O O a O m O �. !\ O O d- M O O O O O C � O O �. � O Ci N p O OO Ln N 0 M I � - ,--i O O Co CC Co o 0 p o o I':, o ° I':, o 0 0 G °GGGGGGG GG9i GmiGGG� G�fI9GGGrGG LZ C W Y O Ic' 1,3 O � 1,:, � N 4 Ln �1`3 O O a O m O �. !\ O O d- M O O O O O C � O O �. � O Ci N p O OO Ln N 0 M I � - ,--i O O Co CC Co o 0 p o o I':, o ° I':, o 0 0 G °GGGGGGG GG9i GmiGGG� G�fI9GGGrGG ry 0 rl n' 0 C W Y —r W w i N ,-+ p O1 C1i C u a m E o vi c �e c 0 �v ° x w cr y u u c c� m "- o ° i o x a o p'3 m a .� A cn a�i C aJ x s a rC C a L vs a'S R IV cn d.., u C G v cu c O a yr W a Y U- p1 u w p UI C Q C, L Qy C m u Z L tv :m M LL Cn m = F' R u] Q g 'a � R c a (� a g � W W c n i p] �• C c C o � e; c O Cl � ,c c O a C C a cn s y N w o to C u1 u �u � n. u� ++ a �r, C R a u° a° 0. la ¢ ry 0 rl n' 0 % \ k \ |\ |\ |\ > ~\ 7 / \ \ \ \ \ LU \ / \ \ 2 � ! ƒ 0 2 ƒ / f .! # ; / U L a u \ } / ƒ CD ƒ \ 2 fu uj � @ 0 2 @ ; C�,� / $I/ .. _ � S � .0 / CL ) LU © _ m \ \ 9. /, � E � G C 8 § \ / ■/ d s § w \ k ® \ �ƒ § CL $� \ \ 2 E x � q . A J / y . \ |\ |\ |\ > ~\ 7 / \ \ \ \ \ LU \ / 2 \ 2 � ! ƒ 0 2 ƒ / f .! # ; / U L a u \ } / ƒ CD 2 fu uj R ,R @ 0 2 @ ; C�,� / $I/ � wl � S � \ � CL ) LU © _ m % 9. ( � E � G C 8 § / ■/ d s § w k ® a �ƒ § CL $� x � q � � \ |\ |\ |\ > / > % / LU \ / 2 \ 2 / \ ƒ 0 2 ƒ / f k # ; / U L a u \ } / ƒ 2 uj ; � § 8 d c \ \ \ \ \ a 5 � x § 2 K @ 0 u - © 2 2 2 2 0 0 u # , 2 u 2 ; � § CL ) LU % 9. ( � a CL $� x e \ 7 $ R % / 0 ƒ e § 7 S \ / Q / � & & P- } , V- R � 2 � c o� _ CD k { e k co C%j a / ( 2 o� _ • n M o q 5 - ; co o ƒ } s w j \ 2 � LO § g z ± \ \ 2 q 04 Q = m / \ \/ 69 \ \ § _ / \ c o / 2 ■ » \ \ cu c ; £ k \ cn � \ ) � » £ ± \ ° \ Z! MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Alberta Gaum, Recreation Superintendent Tim Simmons, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: June 24, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.N.1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 DELRAY DIVAS STEP DANCE TEAMS PROCLAMATION ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Proclamation recognizing the City of Delray Beach Delray Divas for their accomplishments throughout the year and for ranking 1st and 4th in the Break the Stage South National Championship on June 18, 2013 in Atlanta, Georgia. WHEREAS, the Delray Divas participated at the Plantation High School Step Off on February 4, 2012 in Plantation, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Delray Divas participated at the Trojan Classic Step Show on March 2, 2012 in Lake Worth, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Delray Divas participated at the Miramar High School Step Show on March 29, 2012 in Miramar, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Delray Divas participated at the Dillard High School Step Show on April 6, 2012 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Junior Divas and the Delray Divas participated at the Boynton High School Step Competition on April 28, 2012 in Boynton Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Delray Divas participated at the Eustis High School Heritage Step Competition on February 16, 2013 in Eustis, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Junior Divas and Delray Divas participated at the Break the Stage South Regional Competition on February 23, 2013 in Miramar Florida; and WHEREAS, the Junior Divas and Delray Divas participated at the Break the Stage South Regional Championship on April 20, 2013 in Sanford, Florida; and WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach Junior Divas, and Delray Divas advanced to the final round of the competition in their divisions; and WHEREAS, the Junior Divas and Delray Divas participated at the Break the Stage South National Championship on June 15, 2013 in Atlanta Georgia; and WHEREAS, the Baby Divas led by Krystal Hull is dedicated to providing a wide variety of community services, recreational activities and special events; and WHEREAS, the Junior Divas led by Chaquana Darrisaw ranked 1St in the Middle School Break the Stage National Division where they were awarded $1,500.00 in scholarships; and WHEREAS, the Delray Divas led by Coach Tia Renee Dobard ranked 4th in the High School Break the Stage National Division and 2nd in the South Florida Division. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARY D. GLICKSTEIN, Mayor of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, on behalf of the City Commission, do hereby recognize and commend: THE DELRAYDIVAS DANCE STEP TEAMS for their representation of the City of Delray Beach Parks and Recreation Department and offer them congratulations on an outstanding job in the aforementioned Step Show Competitions in 2012 and 2013. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to be affixed this 9th day of July, 2013. CARY D. GLICKSTEIN MAYOR MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Jasmin Allen, Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr. City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.0. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The action requested of the City Commission is review of appealable actions which were taken by various Boards during the period of June 17, 2013 through June 28, 2013. BACKGROUND This is the method of informing the City Commission of the land use actions, taken by designated Boards, which may be appealed to the City Commission. After this meeting, the appeal period shall expire (unless the 10 day appeal period has not occurred). Section 2.4.7(E), Appeals, of the LDRs applies. In summary, it provides that the City Commission hears appeals of actions taken by an approving Board. It also provides that the City Commission may file an appeal. To do so: The item must be raised by a Commission member. By motion, an action must be taken to place the item on the next meeting of the Commission as an appealed item. REVIEW BY OTHERS Planning and Zoning Board Meeting of June 17, 2013 No appealable items were considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. The following items which were considered by the Board will be forwarded to the City Commission for action: A. Received public comments pertaining to Citywide infrastructure improvements for future consideration. B. Recommended approval with conditions (4 to 0, Clifford Durden Dr. Craig Spodak and Gerald Franciosa absent), of a conditional use request to allow outside entertainment limited to a Disc Jockey in an open -air porch of the Sandbar at Boston's on the Beach, located on the west side of South Ocean Boulevard, south of Atlantic Avenue (40 South Ocean Boulevard). C. Recommended approval (4 to 0) of a City- initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations by amending Section 2.4.3 "Submission Requirements ", Subsection (D) "Preliminary Engineering Plans" and Subsection (F) "Final Engineering Plans" to provide for bus shelters; enacting a new Section 6.1.14 "Transit" to provide for bus shelters. D. Recommended approval with conditions (3 to 1, Thuy Shutt dissenting), of a City- initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations by amending Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c) to reduce the stacking distance for parking lots with 51 or more spaces when there are multiple access points. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Meeting of June 26, 2013 1. Postponed (5 to 0, James Knight and Scott Porten absent), an amendment to the master sign program for Rocky's Retail Building, located on the west side of SE 5th Avenue, south of East Atlantic Avenue (20 SE 5th Avenue). 2. Approved (4 to 1, Alice Finst dissenting), a request for a color change for the entrance awning material for Juice Buzz, located on the west side of NE 5th Avenue, north of East Atlantic Avenue (6 NE 5th Avenue). 3. Approved (5 to 0), a request for a color change for Direct Auto Body, an existing commercial building, located on the west side of NE 6th Avenue, between NE 6th Street and NE 7th Street (640 NE 6th Avenue). 4. Approved (3 to 1, Mark Gregory stepped down and Rustem Kupi dissenting), a request for a color change for Atlantic Office Suites, an existing commercial building, located at the southeast corner of East Atlantic Avenue and SE 5th Avenue (502 -506 East Atlantic Avenue). 5. Approved (5 to 0), a Class I site plan modification associated with the installation of an awning above the front of the entryway for A & H Automotive, located at the southwest corner of SE 5th Avenue and SE 1st Street. (102 SE 5th Avenue). 6. Approved (5 to 0), a Class II site plan modification and landscape plan associated with replacing landscape islands with concrete pavers and changing the asphalt pavement to concrete pavers for the Seagate Country Club, Clubhouse Facility, located at 3600 Hamlet Drive within the Seagate Country Club Subdivision, which has its entrance at the intersection of West Atlantic Avenue and Hamlet Drive. 7. Postponed (5 to 0), a Class IV site plan modification, associated with replacing a 2,240 sq. ft. body shop building with a new 2,180 sq. ft. office building and reconfiguration of parking in the southeast corner of the site for Ed Morse Cadillac, located on the west side of South Federal Highway, south of Linton Boulevard (2238 South Federal Highway). Historic Preservation Board Meetiniz of June 19. 2013 8. Approved with conditions (5 to 0, Anna Maria Aponte and Iris McDonald absent), a Class III site plan modification and a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Big Time Boxing, associated with the conversion of use from retail to exercise facility within the southern -most bay of the Hammad Shoppes, located at the southeast corner of NW 5th Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Drive (139 NW 5th Avenue). 9. Approved with conditions (5 to 0), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new single family residence located at 313 NW 1st Avenue, within the Old School Square Historic District. Concurrently, the Board approved a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.24(F)(4) to permit the width of the front elevation to measure 71' 11" whereas a maximum of 60' is required. RECOMMENDATION By motion, receive and file this report. Attachment: Location Map • CITY COMMISSION MEETING - _ _ _ CITYLIMITS . _ _ _ N APPEALABLE ITEMS ONE MILE LOCATION MAP PLANNING AND ZONING GRAPHIC SCALE DEPARTMENT JULY 9, 2013 SPRAB: HPB: 1. ROCKY'S RETAIL BUILDING 5. A & H AUTOMOTIVE 8.139 NW 5TH AVENUE 2. JUICE BUZZ 6. SEAGATE COUNTRY CLUB 9. 313 NW 1ST AVENUE 3. DIRECT AUTO BODY 7. ED MORSE CADILLAC 4. ATLANTIC OFFICE SUITES -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- -- DLS -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \File— Cab \CC— DDC \7 -9 -13 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Begofia Krane, Engineer Randal Krejcarek, P.E., City Engineer Victor Majtenyi, Interim Environmental Services Director THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: June 25, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.P.1 -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 BID AWARD/ ROSSO SITE DEVELOPMENT, INC. ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Requesting Commission approval /authorization for the Mayor to execute a contract with Rosso Site Development, Inc. for the construction of alleys as part of the Osceola Park Alleys -Phase I Project, P/N 2012 -080. The total award is in the amount of $135,982.23. BACKGROUND The project was originally bid on April 9, 2013 which netted four responses. The lowest bidder, Rosso Site Development, Inc., at $114,115.50, was not prequalified under the City's prequalification criteria. The second bidder, at $162,996.50, did not acknowledge one of the addendums. The third and fourth bidders were at $182,170.00 and $186,482.00 respectively. Upon staff's recommendation, City Commission at the May 7, 2013 meeting approved rejection of all bids with authorization to re -bid the project. The project was re- advertised on May 19, 2013 and bid June 24, 2013. The City received four bids; Rosso Site Development, Inc. in the amount of $135,982.23, Hardrives, Inc. at $163,768.50, Mancil's Tractor Service, Inc. at $177,432.00, and Sealand Contractors Corp. in the amount of $195,134.00. With this re -bid, all bidders met the City's requirement of contractor pre - qualification. Staff recommends award to Rosso Site Development, Inc. as the lowest responsive bidder in the amount of $135,982.23. The scope of work under the contract documents include the following improvements: construction of asphalt paving of approximately 1,820 square yards of unpaved alleys and approximately 1,250 linear feet of valley gutter, construction of 6" deep roadside swales, and the implementation of associated maintenance of traffic at several places throughout Osceola Park Neighborhood (refer to attached location map). As part of this re -bid, modifications were made to the bid documents which included additional bollards to protect hydrants, pavement reflectors, and a pay item for adjustment of manholes. Attached are the bid tab and location map. FUNDING SOURCE Funding in the total amount of $135,982.23: 334 - 3162 -541 -65.85 in the amount of $94,012.41; funded by the CRA. 448 - 5461 -538 -65.85 in the amount of $41,969.82; after a budget transfer. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends award of contract to Rosso Site Development, Inc. for the construction of Osceola Park Alleys -Phase I project. W � O O 0.. N � O WN �F Wo N a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 W O O 01 O O t O r- O V � V O Vl O O O O O O O R V O O 7 O M t � N N O c � N N m M Vl O A M � O � � Vl N �D Vl r QI , NN f3 U f3 f3 f3 f3 f3 r0 � O U O O O O Vl O O O O O O O O O O O CC �+ W Cl O O O 01 7 O O O O O Cl O Cl O C !7 01 � N Vl F I-I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 W o Cl 0 O 0 O o N N vi w o 0 O o vi N o Cl 0 Cl 0 Cl 0 Cl 0 O o cV M U O- O O n O li w N O O In - O C� o N N a, o N ,N�" •d F O O O O O Vl O O O O O Cl O ID p p O O O O O O Fw y Cl O Oi O O N O Vl O Vl C1 p p O O O F U O O � A A A Ic � O O A !y W 01 A A O 7 N A A r7 Cl O Cl O Cl O Cl O Cl O Cl O r- Cl O Cl O Cl O Cl n r- Cl O Cl O Cl O O O O O O O 0 Cl Cl O Cl O Cl O Cl O l- 7 7 N O - - r- Ic O O O O - N O Cl O O O W O Vl Vl N Vl C1 N i M A O Vl Vl Vl O A W � F F Cl O O O O 0 0 0 0 �oo 0 0 Cl 0 000 0 0 V 0 O 0 Vl 0 Vl 0 N H A a A M a N A 0 Vl 0 Vl 0 O H �j Fw I..I I� w O O O O O O O O O O O O M o I Ic o - - - N Ic O Ic - r- M_ o N Ic 0 O 0 O 0 N V Vl N Vl N 7 01 s Vl N Vl O H QQ 0 F 6R d � d F Q O N o O �n N O Vl �n l� a' lD n Vl �n N O M _ 01 o O O � o O 0 O 0 O W QI O ID Ic �_ ID 7 01 A 7 A Vl ID - ID s H O N N O O O O O Vl N Vl H A ID Vl 7 Vl O H 01 01 W V F n bq � b�q � i" VJJ] rC3C 65 '� o W V] A W cC N a .� t z N a S.E. 5th STREET -- -- ---------------- iT ! I ! II R Efi -- - - -- I SITE id W I I II 1, I II - -' - -- '� -I - -' -' I li ! ! ii i .i i I iI I Iii --II �I I I ICI I I i Ci� i I --j 1 iii' Y"4 �I Iw •' -- �ii i i •i i i i�i -- i i T i ! ! r _ ._ _ :E_nth�F E i -, r'-- '-- ' - -' -� r'- -' - -'- ' -i r' 1 r'- -' - -'- 1'-- '- -' - -'- '-- '- -' - - -' I i I I I i I I I ! ! I i ! ! ! I ! ! ! ! ! L.-- .-- . - -. -J L.-- .-- . - -._J L_. ._ J __. - J - ' . §T EST- - - - - -- i r'-- '-- ' - -' -� r'-- '-- ' - -' -� r-' 7 r- '--'-- '-- ',- '-- ' - -' -- I I ; !! ! ! !! i L --- --- --- -.J L --- --- --- .J L --- --- --- -.J L- '-- '- -' - -'J S._E.l.Oth_.STREET CITY of DELRAY BEACH OSCEOLA PARK ALLEYS DATE: 04/02/2013 $ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP 12 -080 494 SOUTH V NTCN AVENUE, DELRAY BEACH, FLORDA 30444 12 -080 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: June 22, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.P.2 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 PURCHASE AWARD/ WATSON DISPATCH ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The Police Department seeks Commission approval to enter into a Purchasing Agreement with Watson Dispatch to purchase replacements for our work station consoles in the 911/ Dispatch center. The cost is $69,715.69 (quote attached). REVIEW BY OTHERS Replacement of our Dispatch consoles is reimbursable through County 911 funding. The up -front cost has been budgeted in this year's CIP plan. New consoles are needed for the Communications Center. The current ones are more than ten years old and do not fit properly with the new CAD (computer aided dispatch) and telephone systems. The new systems have touch screens, and the current consoles are too deep, which causes the screens to be too far back to touch effectively. Watson is a trusted vendor for Dispatch supplies, and pricing is off of Florida State Contract # 425 - 001 -12 -1. FUNDING SOURCE Funding for this project was budgeted in the CIP, project #13 -018, account #: 334 -2111 -521- 64.90. RECOMMENDATION The Police Department recommends approval. QUOTATION Quote #: QFO1- DelrayBeachPDI.11 Date: 6/24/2013 Valid Until: 8/12/2013 Contract: FL State Contract: 425 - 001 -12 -1 Prepared By: Rep: Mark Horn Thom Morrow Net 30 Project Coordinator King Carter & Associates, Inc. Watson Dispatch FL 26246 Twelve Trees Lane NW USA Poulsbo, WA 98370 (727) 786 -3862 360 - 394 -1303 tmorrow @tdinc.biz 360 - 394 -1322 $264.60 mhorn @watsonfurniture.com Prepared For: Ship To: Katie Hartmann Katie Hartmann Communications Manager Communications Manager Delray Beach Police Department Delray Beach Police Department 300 West Atlantic Avenue 300 West Atlantic Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Delray Beach, FL 33444 USA USA 651 - 243 -7857 651 - 243 -7857 Project: Delray Beach Police Department Installation based on live cut -over, 2nd floor, one phase. No union, no prevailing wage requirements. Teardown and removal of existing positionsis included. $94.50 Part Number Qty Purchase Ext Purchase F01- Delray Beach Police Department I Item 1. (6) Synergy 3 3048 90° Center Lift Consoles QOD24 3 $88.20 $264.60 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 24" WIDE QOD30 2 $91.88 $183.76 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 30" WIDE QOD30 6 $91.88 $551.28 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 30" WIDE QOD31 2 $94.50 $189.00 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 31" WIDE QOD36 3 $106.58 $319.74 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 36" WIDE F01 - Del rayBeachPDI.12.visual.sp4 Page 1 of 4 6/24/2013 Part Number Qty Purchase Ext Purchase QOD48 3 $174.30 $522.90 SYNERGY OUTSIDE DOOR, 48" WIDE QECECG48L 1 $357.00 $357.00 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT END CAP (POWER PRIMARY), GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, LEFT HAND QECECG48R 1 $357.00 $357.00 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT END CAP (POWER PRIMARY), GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, RIGHT HAND QECXTS4224G48L 3 $1,221.68 $3,665.04 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT EXTENSION (POWER PRIMARY), SINGLE, 42" DEEP x 24" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, LEFT HAND QECXTS4224G48R 1 $1,221.68 $1,221.68 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT EXTENSION (POWER PRIMARY), SINGLE, 42" DEEP x 24" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, RIGHT HAND QECXTS4236G48L 1 $1,318.28 $1,318.28 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT EXTENSION (POWER PRIMARY), SINGLE, 42" DEEP x 36" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, LEFT HAND QECXTS4236G48R 3 $1,318.28 $3,954.84 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT EXTENSION (POWER PRIMARY), SINGLE, 42" DEEP x 36" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH, RIGHT HAND QECXTD4230G48 1 $2,026.50 $2,026.50 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT EXTENSION (POWER PRIMARY), DUAL, 42" DEEP x 30" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH QECPPS304SG48 4 $4,537.58 $18,150.32 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT POWER PRIMARY, SINGLE, 30" DEEP x 48" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH QECPPD304SG48 1 $9,919.35 $9,919.35 SYNERGY 3 CENTER LIFT POWER PRIMARY, DUAL, 30" DEEP x 48" WIDE, GLASS PANEL, 48" HIGH $43,001.29 Item 2. Storage & Accessories TXXTS2 1 -1 6 $390.60 $2,343.60 SYNERGY MONITOR ARM - TABLE STAND, FIXED HEIGHT, 2 ea. MONITORS (UP TO 21" - VERTICAL), NO FOCAL ADJUSTMENT S13 -0521 4 $945.53 $3,782.12 MODIFIED QDAA3, SYNERGY DEPTH ADJUSTMENT ARRAY 3 ea. UP TO 21" MONITORS, * *WITH WIDESCREEN ARRAY BAR, 069283 ** F01 - Del rayBeachPDI.12.visual.sp4 Page 2 of 4 6/24/2013 Part Number Qty Purchase Ext Purchase TXXTECHLNK 6 $288.75 $1,732.50 SYNERGY TECH LINK- POWDER: Black TXXMSIHDC 4 $358.58 $1,434.32 SYNERGY MONITOR ARM - DESK CLAMP, 1 ea. MONITORS (UP TO 21 "), HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE, DUAL ARM EXTENSION QDAA3_2 -24 2 $898.80 $1,797.60 SYNERGY DEPTH ADJUSTMENT ARRAY 3 ea. UP TO 21" MONITORS DADL 2 $3.68 $7.36 DUAL LOCK - SET OF THREE TXXPAPER 12 $26.25 $315.00 PAPER TRAY (SYN3) TXXCUPHOLDER 6 $26.25 $157.50 CUP HOLDER FOR DISPATCH CONSOLES - POWDER: Black TXXBINDER 6 $42.00 $252.00 BINDER TRAY (SYN3) S13 -0948 1 $391.13 $391.13 MODIFIED ZSBKO153042L, ZO STORAGE BOOKCASE, OPEN, * *12 "D x * *33 "W x * *39.75'H, LEFT HAND, * *W/ MAIL SHELVES ** ZSBKO153054L 1 $372.75 $372.75 ZO STORAGE BOOKCASE, OPEN, 15 "D x 30 "W x 54 "H, LEFT HAND ZSBKD153042 4 $501.38 $2,005.52 ZO STORAGE BOOKCASE, DOORS, 15 "D x 30 "W x 42 "H $14,591.40 Item 3. Installation DNI 1 $12,123.00 $12,123.00 INSTALL CHARGE $12,123.00 Sub Total: $69,715.69 Grand Total: $69,715.69 F01 - Del rayBeachPDI.12.visual.sp4 Page 3 of 4 6/24/2013 Part Number Approved By: Name Title PO: Qty Purchase Ext Purchase 1. State andLocal Taxes will apply unless proof of exemption is provided with the Purchase Order. 2. Deposit may be required with order; Net 30 days of Shipment ofProduct. 3. Chairs are for representational purposes only. 4. Lead time 45 -60 days after receipt of Purchase Order issued to Watson Furniture Group. 5. Completed Order consist of signed Contract or Purchase Order, Signed Drawings, Signed Color Selection Sheet, and Deposit. 6 Change Order Fee (minimum $500) may be applicable after 5 business days of Complete Order submission. 7. Re- Scheduled Delivery &Installation requires 4 week notification. 8. There will be a $500 (Net per order) Finish Configuration Fee addedlF a color scheme is chosen outside of the eight (8) standard color schemes. 9. Pricing will be validfor four (4) months after receipt ofPurchase Order any orders that have not been manufactured within this time frame will be subject to a price change. F01 - Del rayBeachPDI.12.visual.sp4 Page 4 of 4 6/24/2013 WATSON DISPATCH TI Synergy 3 A Critical Edge for the Most Critical Personnel Empower your emergency response personnel to perform at their peak with the console system designed and built with the dispatcher in mind. Synergy1m consoles from Watson Dispatch combine advanced ergonomics, unmatched structural quality, superior technology integration, and the industry's best warranty into a package that delivers outstanding return on investment. a T � rr: f� l fr Watson's Synergy Consoles - Linear, Center Lift and Full Lift configurations - Fixed and adjustable height surfaces - Full ergonomic capabilities v 02 40 �. I. ' fi a� kftlt ti F � Designed to Perform With Your People in Mind Synergy consoles were designed from the ground up to withstand a decade or more of 24/7 use in the rigorous environments of emergency- response centers. Console positions feature rigid, unified -frame construction, integrated technology cavities, heavy -duty extruded aluminum frame, and ergonomically designed height - adjustable platforms stress - tested to 40,000 duty cycles. 03 Synergy consoles are available in three configurations (from left to right) Linear, Center Lift and Full Lift, to meet broadly ranging architectural, mission, and budget requirements. A Visible Difference The transparent upper segments of the Synergy 3 console provide enhanced visibility between telecommunicators. Segments are field reconfigurable. IMS 12- low "Mow Y y or Integrated User Organization Tools Synergy 3 improves the usable surface area by organizing work tools along the console's horizontal framework. Personal Whiteboard • Swivel -to -stow cup holder • Paper tray • Phone Mount • CD Holder • Binder storage 04 ■' *��� •■ GeV see a *It 004 a •06 Its • . ■ 80* * • lm**• i r � s # . • r . 4 [ � .i• +� ;4 +iii *+. Putting the User in Control Watson Dispatch's Total Comfort SystemTM places command of console adjustment at a user's fingertip. A single device containing height adjustment, lighting, and temperature controls can be positioned anywhere on the worksurface. Precision instrumentation provides feedback on surface height so multiple users can quickly adjust to their preferred positions. The patented microprocessor -based system provides full up /down switching for ADA compliance, instant maintenance access, and offers energy savings with an optional infrared activity sensor (sleep mode). 05 t -.1, Watson's Total Comfort SystemTM - Single Point Interface - Surface height adjustment w/ digital readout - Controls airflow, heating, and dimmable lighting - Mobile fan positioning, scalable to three fans 06 ■ a PP"..O The Ergonomic Answer Synergy consoles are purpose -built for the emergency dispatch industry. Consoles surpass the latest ergonomic standard (ANSI /HFES 100 - 2007), comfortably accommodating the 5th to 95th percentile of male and female users. The monitor and keyboard surfaces feature soft, rounded edges and can be equipped with an optional focal depth adjustment platform for simultaneous adjustment of the monitor array. Consoles are engineered for user safety, encompassing mechanical and electronic features to ensure accident free operation. 07 The Synergy family of consoles incorporate 12 inches of user controlled focal depth adjustment. The focal depth platform supports monitor arrays from one to twelve screens. Height Adjustability Integrated primary and input platforms provide full leg clearance beneath the keyboard and the ability to simultaneously lift both platforms, maintaining exact positioning relationships when shifting between seated and standing positions. - Adjust primary platform from 27 to 52 inches - Primary surface anti - collision software - Input platform achieves 22 to 57 inches Dimmable LED Lighting Watson's Task Light features a 50,000 hour lamp life, requires minimal power, and generates no heat. LED lights are dimmable using the Total Comfort System. Non - dimming options are also available. 08 Easy Access for Technology Support All Synergy consoles feature ample room for multiple CPU storage. Front and /or rear doors ease maintenance access to minimize operator disruption during equipment service and repair. 09 Technology + Power Integration - Multiple electrical J -Box mounting points - Three 8- outlet surge suppressors - Six raised floor access points Improved Technology Integration TechlinkT" provides easy user connectivity at the work surface for up to 10 input devices, like keyboard and mouse. Wire management is conveniently organized at the rear for tech - access. Techlink is fully compatible with all Synergy consoles. M a Fixed, lockable technology cabinets provide ample room for multiple large CPUs and support both front and rear access, enabling easy installation and service. Pre -Wired Cable Management The Vertical Energy Chain connects to the underside of the work surface cavities directing cables from CPUs to surface area ports, like USB, VGA, keyboard and mouse. Simple and Efficient Cabling Routing Horizontal wire management is accomplished through the use of cable trays and wire management cleats mounted to the underside of the worksurface, making the task of managing cables simple for technicians and operators. 12 - -- ll rA a + J + + F ...� :. .. 4. N l With over 50 years of manufacturing expertise Watson has the knowledge and products to outfit your entire facility. 1 : + : A or /10 O U 1. Communications Floor Consoles 2. Collaborative Storage /meeting areas 3. Training Facilities 4. Lockers 5. Private Offices 6. Conference Applications 7. EOC Furnishings GSA Contract # GS- 29F -0109G NAVY BRA. # N001 89-11 -A-0030 Watson TM is one of the few thriving west coast furniture manufacturers still in existence today. We have built agile workplace solutions for some of the biggest and most dynamic companies in the world and have done so for over fifty years. We make each product in our manufacturing facility near Seattle using methods rivaling the best. Our designs are user - driven and delivered with a modern environmental sensibility. For organizations valuing environmental assurances, sustainable practices are bedrock for Watson. Our factory sits on a 30 acre forested site near a protected watershed. The manufacturing facility has no floor drains and we aggressively pursue practices to minimize our impact on the planet. Watson is a recipient of the GSA Evergreen Award and Washington Governor's Award for sustainable leadership. WatsonTM 26246 Twelve Trees Lane NW, Poulsbo, Washington 98370 1 800.426.1202 1 www.watsonfurniture.com o � m1b°e m o` _ 8 � B o � m P m 3 o` P � � z 0 3 �4 a v d 3 � o O Q c 3 Ll c m m A -1Z d Q a E m O a L m O ¢ 3 ~ _ c m � N �C Z U d O a O LL ❑ � O U N Qr) O C a > N E L LL i a. Q Y N U c .. O f o Q m F O N Z LLI Z N 7 d Lc Q U7 N C 3 N O N� L N 7 N O L c J (h � � Q � ❑ Y o � N N E c Y m c O LL N (6 N o L E co � 6 O LL CO O O y0 N m > N N U C C = m C N � U � m N E LL 'p N a� O a a N � N N ,........, O '� m LL O C 0 U C N C z w p N ® N O N U 0 O d c N c0 rn co • • U 00 >i C2o r? T L N Y Q 4 0 c 3 0 m a w O O U Q U.2 a O — On L a) CD O O .O D c _ QN LLCM N c 0 C O C r2 7 V a 45 '... 'E CJ O l E V% L u I ow o m d � � \ � � � D ] (,� D � : : V \ :L O \ FIR 1p/ \ : -2 } \\ r 6[ j:E ES_ §�{R E 20 ��>@ \ \ —/ LLI k/ }{ E �) {§ Cl 2= Cl c 7 , /} , . 0 k 2 ƒ± ƒ ® � \0 7 5 \ e , .c U) \ � CO 3 /o c \2 E)\ 25& ` C) OI° \ o .c : > \\ 27 % ° 2 2)3 / \_ >a § (/ � \ 1 /r E) § \ £s \\ e \§ LL ± O o] 5 \ §a § 2 51 ga = 0- 0 \ e ƒ / )0 / 0 o= \/ o m § _ (� 0 6 / )) \ 1 O / 7/ ±r \) {/ EE C\l _ 24 } 2 6[ 5 ES_ § \ \ \ —/ \e E e � Cl 2= Cl c 7 , \ , . 0 k 2 ƒ± ƒ ® � 0. 7 5 \ e , \ � CO 3 /o E)\ 25& j/ C) OI° \ o PCO : , \\ 27 % ° 2 2)3 � \_ >a \2 1 ± 4� E) \\ E2 \\ 51 {ƒ /ƒ (L � 0 o= 24 \ � . � ILr — � Y// A \ \ b «:o _���� \ � � \ -2 } \\ r 6[ 5 ES_ §�{R E 20 ��>@ \\ —/ LLI k/ }{ ) / �) {§ .0 c /} \ , . 2 . E ƒ± ƒ ® \\ 7� 0 e co .c U) \E 3 /o c \2 E)\ 25 & ` � e O0 \o .c � > \\ 27 % ° 2 a3 / __ >a § (/ � \ 1 /r E) § \ £s \\ e \§ LL ± O o] 5 \ §a (D 2 51 ga = 0- 0\ e a) / )} / \) // § _ (� 0 6 / )) \ 7/ ±r \) {/ EE C\l _ } 2 6[ 5 ES_ § \ \\ —/ ) / e .0 c \ \ , . 2 . E ƒ± ƒ ® \z 7� 0 e co (0 \E 3 /o E)\ 25 & j/ � e O0 \o PJ) � , \\ 27 % ° 2 a3 __ >a \2 1 ± 4� E) \\ E2 \\ 51 {ƒ // (L LL \) // -2 \\ r §�{R E 2 0 LLI z` :: k/ z /} �)( : \� c` > § � \ /r \ £s e \ § ± O o] 5 \ §a § 2 . 2a m E / \ e ƒ / / .) > § _ � (� 0 6 / )) \ . ±r \) {/ EE C\l � }\ } 6[ 5 ES_ § \ \ \ — / }V-1�9 = \ k 0 . 2 � \z §\ — e 5 co (0 \0 3 E)\ 25& c< 9 \/ f�J % 2 \\ 0 /) = >a 1 ± 4� \\ E2 \ ( . ® :m: \\ 5� ° Q /ƒ CO §} U- \) // DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT RICIZ ScoTr JOHN P. MILES Governor SERVICES Secretary 4050 Esplanade Way I Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0950 I Tel: 850.488.2786 I Fax: 850.922.6149 March 2, 2012 MEMORANDUM NO.: (425-001-12-1)-1 TO: User Agency FROM: Director, State Purchasing SUBJECT: Contract No. 425- 001 -12 -1 Title: Office Furniture and Files Effective March 2, 2012, the Contract Manager has been changed to Shameka Smith. Please direct questions to Shameka Smith at (850) 488 - 414 -6740 or Shameka .Smith(a�dms.MyFlorida.com. Any questions or problems in delivery or service that may arise regarding this contract should be directed to the Contract Manager. www.dms.MyFlorida.com DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT RICIZ ScoTr JOHN P. MILES Governor SERVICES Secretary 4050 Esplanade Way I Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0950 I Tel: 850.488.2786 I Fax: 850.922.6149 CERTIFICATION OF CONTRACT TITLE: Office Furniture and Files CONTRACT NO.: 425- 001 -12 -1 ITB NO.: 17- 425 -001 -F EFFECTIVE: March 2, 2012 through March 1, 2016 SUPERSEDES: 425-001-06-1 CONTRACTOR(S): See Attached List A. AUTHORITY — Upon affirmative action taken by the State of Florida Department of Management Services, a contract has been executed between the State of Florida and the designated contractors. B. EFFECT — This contract was entered into to provide economies in the purchase of Office Furniture and Files by all State of Florida agencies and institutions. Therefore, in compliance with Section 287.042, Florida Statutes, all purchases of these commodities shall be made under the terms, prices, and conditions of this contract and with the suppliers specified. C. ORDERING INSTRUCTIONS — All purchase orders shall be issued in accordance with the attached ordering instructions. Purchaser shall order at the prices indicated, exclusive of all Federal, State and local taxes. All contract purchase orders shall show the State Purchasing contract number, product number, quantity, description of item, with unit prices extended and purchase order totaled. (This requirement may be waived when purchase is made by a blanket purchase order.) D. CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE — Agencies shall report any vendor failure to perform according to the requirements of this contract on Complaint to Vendor, form PUR7017. Should the vendor fail to correct the problem within a prescribed period of time, then form PUR7029, Request for Assistance, is to be filed with this office. E. SPECIAL AND GENERAL CONDITIONS - Special and general conditions are enclosed for your information. Any restrictions accepted from the supplier are noted on the ordering instructions ATTACHMENT www.dms.MyFlorida.com Contractors Awarded: Affordable Interior Systems (AIS), Hudson, MA (A) Allseating Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, CANADA (A) Allsteel, Inc., Muscatine, IA (A) Artopex, Inc., Granby, Quebec, CANADA (A) Berco Industries, Inc. Saint Louis, MO (R) CF Group (Commercial Furniture Group) St. Louis, MO (A) Chromcraft Corporation, Senatobia, MS (A) Compatico, Inc., Grand Rapids, MI (A) DAR /RAN Furniture, High Point, NC (A) Dauphin North America, Boonton, NJ (A) David Edward Company, Ltd. Inc., Baltimore, MD (A) Encore Seating, Inc., Cerritos, CA (A) Endura LLC, Waukesha, WI (A) ErgoGenesis, LLC, Navasota, TX (A) ESI Ergonomic Solutions, LLC, Mesa, AZ (R) Evans Consoles, Inc., Calgary, AB, Canada (A) Exemplis Corporation/SitOnIt Seating, Cypress, CA (A) Fulmarque DBA EKO, Cleveland, TN (A) Great Openings, Ludington, MI (A) Groupe Lacasse, LLC, St. Pie, Quebec, CANADA (A) Gunlocke Company, LLC, the, Wayland, NY (A) Harter, Middlebury, IN (A) Haworth, Inc., Holland, MI (A) Herman Miller, Inc., Zeeland, MI (A) High Point Furniture Industries, Inc., High Point, NC (A) Highmark, Huntington Beach, CA (A) HON Company, the, Muscatine, IA (A) Hoover Panel Company, Rockwall, TX (A) Humanscale Corporation, Piscataway, NJ (A) Indiana Furniture DBA Indiana Desk, Jasper, IN (A) Integra, Inc., Walworth, WI (A) Inwood Office Invironments, Jasper, IN (A) Jasper Seating, Jasper, IN (A) Jofco, Inc., Jasper, IN (A) K &A Manufacturing, Inc., Schofield, WI (A) Kimball International Marketing DBA Kimball Office, Jasper, IN (A) Knoll, Inc., East Greenville, PA (A) Krueger International (KI), Greenbay, WI (A) Krug, Inc., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada (A) La -Z -Boy, Ferdinand, IN (A) Logiflex (Mobilier de Bureau), Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada (A) Magnuson Group Inc., Woodridge, IL (A) Martin Brattrud, Inc., Gardena, CA (A) Maxon Furniture, Kent, WA (A) Mayline Company, Sheboygan, WI (A) National Office Furniture, Jasper, IN Neutral Posture, Inc., Bryan, TX (A) Nevers Industries, Inc., Minneapolis, MN (A) Nucraft Furniture, Comstock Park, MI (A) Page 3 Office Master, Inc., Ontario, CA (A) OFS Brands, Inc., Huntingburg, IN (A) Paoli, Inc., Orleans, IN (A) Richards - Wilcox, Inc., Aurora, IL (A) Safco Patrician Furniture Co., High Point, NC (C) Source International, Shrewsbury, MA (A) Spec Furniture, Inc. Toronto, Ontario, CANADA (A) Steelcase, Inc., Grand Rapids, MI (A) Symmetry Office, Tampa, FL (A) Teknion, LLC, Mount Laurel, NJ (A) Trendway Corporation, Holland, MI (A) Trinity Furniture, Trinity, NC (A) Versteel, Jasper, IN (A) Watson Furniture Group, Inc., Poulsbo, WA (A) Workrite Ergonomics, Petaluma, CA (A) Wright Line, LLC, Worcester, MA (A) Zoom Seating, Middlebury, IN (A) Page 4 CONTRACT BETWEEN FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND [Contractor Name] This Contract is by and between the State of Florida, Department of Management Services (Department), Division of State Purchasing (Division), an agency of the State of Florida with offices at 4050 Esplanade Way, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0950, and (Contractor). Whereas, the Contractor replied to the Division's Invitation to Bid (ITB) No.:17- 425 - 001 -F- Office Furniture and Files; Accordingly, and in consideration of the mutual promises contained in the Contract documents, the Department and the Contractor do hereby enter into this Contract. 1.0 NAME OF PROJECT Office Furniture and Files 2.0 SUMMARY OF THE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES / SCOPE OF WORK This state term contract includes for the purchase of office and conference /public area furniture, including lateral and vertical steel files, dispatch /911 furniture, conference or training tables, mail processing furniture, conference or training chairs, map files, storage and presentation accessories, reception desks, single and multiple seating units, sofas and loveseats (public areas), and occasional tables. Fireproof files, art work and decorative lamps and accessories are not part of this contract. 3.0 DELIVERABLES All products offered under this Contract shall be new and unused and in current production - remanufactured or refurbished products are not part of this offering. No series shall be considered for award under this Contract if already awarded or in conflict with another State Term Contract. Eligible products include, but are not limited to: Office Furniture Dispatch /911 Furniture Mail Processing Furniture Map Files Reception Desks Sofas & Loveseats (Public Areas) Lateral, Vertical and Fireproof Steel Files Conference or Training Tables Conference or Training Chairs Storage and Presentation Accessories Single & Multiple Seating Units Occasional Tables 4.0 SUMMARY OF PENALTY FOR FAILURE OF CONTRACTOR TO MEET DELIVERALBES Delay in delivery beyond the time specified must be justified to the ordering agency, in writing, and if required, the Contractor shall provide temporary furniture on a rent -free basis. Furthermore, items not delivered within the required delivery schedule may result in the Contractor being found in default by the Department in accordance with contract conditions. 5.0 EFFECTIVE DATE This Contract shall begin on March 2, 2012, or on the last date in which it is signed by all parties, whichever is later. 6.0 EXPIRATION DATE This Contract shall expire on March 1, 2016 unless cancelled earlier in accordance with its terms. Page 5 7.0 RENEWAL In accordance with Section 4.26 of the State Term Contract No. 425 - 001 -12 -1, upon mutual written agreement, the Customer and the Contractor may renew the Contract, in whole or in part, for a period that may not exceed 4 years at the same price, terms and conditions, allowed by Chapter 287, Florida Statutes. 8.0 EFFECT OF A REPLACEMENT CONTRACT A replacement contract may be established under a new solicitation process prior to March 1, 2016. In such case, the Department may terminate this Contract prior to March 1, 2016. 9.0 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY The parties do not anticipate that any intellectual property will be developed as a result of this contract. 10.0 PREFERRED PRICE The Contractor agrees to submit to Customer at least annually an affidavit from an authorized representative attesting that the Contractor is in compliance with the preferred pricing provision in Section 4(b) of form PUR 1000. 11.0 SCRUTINIZED COMPANY LIST In executing this contract, Contractor certifies that it is not listed on either the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List, created pursuant to section 215.473, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to section 287.135(5), F.S., Contractor agrees the Department may immediately terminate this contract for cause if the Contractor is found to have submitted a false certification or if Contractor is placed on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List during the term of the contract. 12.0 EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION Pursuant to State of Florida Executive Orders Nos.: 11 -02 and 11 -116, Contractor is required to utilize the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's E- Verify system to verify the employment of all new employees hired by the Contractor during the contract term. Also, Contractor shall include in related subcontracts a requirement that subcontractors performing work or providing services pursuant to the state contract utilize the E- Verify system to verify employment of all new employees hired by the subcontractor during the contract term. 13.0 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Section 5.7 of the ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F, is superseded and entirely replaced with the following: Each Contractor shall submit a sales report on a Quarterly basis. Reporting periods coincide with the State Fiscal Year: • Quarter 1- (July- September) • Quarter 2 - (October- December) • Quarter 3 - (January- March) • Quarter 4 - (April -June) Each Quarterly Sales Report must be in Excel format and shall include: • Contractor's Name and contact information as required on the Department of Management Services "Contract Quarterly Report" • Detail of time period covered by included data Page 6 • Total sales including detail of list price and contract price • Transaction detail will include: Part Number /SKU Your product part number if applicable Item / Service Name Given name of Item or Service MFG Manufacturer, Publisher, Service Provider Item Category Description of the product category, according to attached table Item Subcategory Additional grouping for item Product Description Additional detail for item Customer Name State Agencies, Universities, Political Subdivisions, Other Eligible Users NIGP Code National Institute of Government Procurement code Florida Commodity Code Florida Commodity Code UOM Unit of Measure UOM Desc Description of unit of measure see example) Volume Qty Number of items /services purchased/ provided Order Date Order date Date Delivered Delivered date to customer Purchase Type Purchase Order, Payment Card, Other List Price List price Market + fee contracts use market rice Contract Price Contracted price with state per contract terms Additional Fields Any new information related to your company's products /services Failure to provide quarterly and annual sales reports, including no sales, within thirty (30) calendar days following the end of each quarter (January, April, July and October) and /or contract year may result in the contract supplier being found in default and termination of the contract by the Department. Upon request, the Contractor shall report to the Department, spend with certified and other minority business enterprises. Reports must include the period covered, the name, minority code and Federal Employer Identification Number of each minority vendor utilized during the period, commodities and services provided by the minority business enterprise, and the amount paid to each minority vendor on behalf of each purchasing agency ordering under the terms of this contract. Initiation and submission of the Contract Sales Summaries are to be the responsibility of the Contractor without prompting or notification by the Contract Manager. The Contractor will submit the completed Contract Sales Summary forms by email to the Contract Manager. 14.0 MYFLORIDAMARKETPLACE (MFMP) CATALOG REQUIREMENTS Section 5.25 of the ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F, is supplemented with the following specific detail: The Contractor shall provide a Line -item catalog containing all awarded items and contracted final prices using the format supported by the system. The awarded supplier ( "Contractor ") hereby agrees to cooperate with DMS and MyFloridaMarketPlace (and any authorized agent or successor entity to MyFloridaMarketPlace) in the event DMS selects this statewide contract to be exhibited on the MyFloridaMarketPlace. At a minimum, the Contractor agrees to the following: Page 7 1.0 Contractor agrees, upon DMS' request, to deliver a line item catalog. The line item catalog content must be limited to the Contractor's statewide contract offering. 2.0 Line Item Catalog. By providing a line item catalog, Contractor is providing a list of its products /services and pricing within a specific template format for MyFloridaMarketPlace through a catalog repository tool used for MyFloridaMarketPlace called Aravo *. In this scenario, Contractor must submit an updated electronic catalog from time to time to maintain the most up to -date version of its product /service offering under the statewide contract. As a result, DMS will have an opportunity to confirm the accuracy of the electronic catalog that was loaded into Aravo before the electronic data file is loaded into the MyFloridaMarketPlace eProcurement System (MFMP). In addition, DMS will have the ability to define when the electronic catalog and any subsequent revisions thereto "go live ". 3.0 The Contractor agrees to meet the following requirements: a. Catalog must contain the most current pricing, including all applicable administrative fees and or discounts, as well as the most up -to -date product /service offering the Contractor is authorized to provide in accordance with the statewide contract; and The accuracy of the catalog must be maintained by Contractor throughout the duration of the statewide contract; and b. The catalog must include a State - specific contract identification number; and c. The catalog must include detailed product line item descriptions; and d. The catalog must include pictures when possible; ** and e. The catalog must include any additional DMS content requirements 4.0 Contractor agrees that DMS controls which statewide contracts appear in MFMP and that DMS may elect at any time to remove any Contractor's offering from MFMP. 5.0 Contractor must be able to accept Purchase Orders via fax, e-mail, cXML or EDI INT AS 12. *Aravo is a catalog repository tool used by MFMP. Contractors maintain their line item catalog offerings through this online tool. Contractor's catalog content is reviewed and approved by DMS in Aravo before being migrated into the MyFloridaMarketPlace eProcurement System. These services will be provided by MFMP at no additional cost to the Contractor. * *Details regarding the submission of image files and catalog content will be discussed during the enablement process; however, the following represents key information regarding the submission of product image files: • Provide actual image files (in gif, jpeg and other commonly used formats) for all of the items in the Contractor's catalog that will be hosted by the MyFloridaMarketPlace system. These images are displayed to the customer directly in search results as well as in the product details window. • Provide the actual image files in a `zip archive'. Please go to www.winzip.com to download the WinZip® application that is needed to create such an archive as well as additional details about using WinZip® application. • Provide only one image per product. • Color pictures are preferred; however, black and white pictures or drawings are acceptable if this is the current standard for the Contractor's business marketing. • Please note the MyFloridaMarketPlace prefers jpg format for image files (280X280 pixels) although images in many other formats are accepted. • When an image is in jpg format, it is resized to 280X280 pixels, if necessary, to maintain a consistent appearance MFMP. • When an image is in a format other than jpg, it will be converted to jpg and resized to 280X280 pixels to maintain a consistent appearance for MFMP. • As products change, updated image files must be submitted to update the MyFloridaMarketPlace Catalog. Page 8 In rare instances where an image is not available, DMS will work with the Contractor to determine the best solution for advertising the Contractor's offering. 15.0 ELECTRONIC INVOICE The Contractor shall supply electronic invoices in lieu of paper -based invoices for those transactions processed through the MFMP. Contractor agrees, upon DMS' request, to establish electronic invoicing within ninety (90) days of written request. Electronic invoices shall be submitted to the agency through the Ariba Supplier Network (ASN) in one of three mechanisms as listed below. Suppliers can select the method that best meets their capabilities from the following list: cXML (commerce eXtensible Markup Language) This standard establishes the data contents required for invoicing via cXML within the context of an electronic environment. This transaction set can be used for invoicing via the ASN for catalog and non - catalog goods and services. The cXML format is the Ariba preferred method for elnvoicing. EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) This standard establishes the data contents of the Invoice Transaction Set (810) for use within the context of an Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) environment. This transaction set can be used for invoicing via the ASN for catalog and non - catalog goods and services. PO Flip via ASN The online process allows suppliers to submit invoices via the ASN for catalog and non - catalog goods and services. Suppliers have the ability to create an invoice directly from their Inbox in their ASN account by simply "flipping" the PO into an invoice. This option does not require any special software or technical capabilities. For the purposes of this section, the Contractor warrants and represents that it is authorized and empowered to and hereby grants the State and the third party provider of MFMP, a State Contractor, the right and license to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, and publicly display within the system the information outlined above. In addition, the Contractor warrants and represents that it is authorized and empowered to and hereby grants the State and the third party provider the right and license to reproduce and display within the system the Contractor's trademarks, system marks, logos, trade dress, or other branding designation that identifies the products made available by the Contractor under the Contract. The Contractor will work with the MFMP management team to obtain specific requirements for the Electronic Invoicing upon contract award. 16.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS This Contract, together with the following attached documents, set forth the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter. In case of conflict, the terms of this Contract shall control. If a conflict exists among any of the attached documents, the documents shall have priority in the order listed: A. ATTACHMENT I: THIS DOCUMENT B. ATTACHMENT II: ITB, No.: 17- 425 - 001 -F, as amended. C. ATTACHMENT III: Contractor's Response to the ITB. 17.0 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT A. Contract Manager The Department employee who is primarily responsible for overseeing the Contractor's performance of its duties and obligations pursuant to the terms of this Contract and for maintaining the Contract administration file. The Contract Manager shall be as follows: Shameka Smith Page 9 Contract Manager Department of Management Services 4050 Esplanade Way #360 Tallahassee, FL 32399 -0950 Telephone: (850) 414 -6740 Fax: (850) 414 -6122 E -mail: shameka .smithCa)dms.mvflorida.com The Department may appoint a different Contract Manager, which shall not constitute an amendment to the Contract, by sending written notice to Contractor. Any communication to the Department relating to the Contract shall be addressed to the Contract Manager. B. Contractor's Representative [Representative Name] [Contractor Name] [Street Address] [City, State, Zipcode] Telephone: [number] Fax: [number] E -mail: [address] 18.0 WARRANT OF AUTHORITY Each person signing this Contract warrants that he or she is duly authorized to do so and to bind the respective party. State of Florida, Department of Management Services: By: Name: Kelly Loll, C.P.M. Chief Procurement Officer & Title: Director of State Purchasing Date: Approved as to form and legality By: Office of the General Counsel Department of Management Services [Contractor Name] By: Name: Title: Date: Date Page 10 .ICIZ Sco1T Governor 4050 Esplanade Way I Talla JOHN P. MILES Secretary Fax: 850.922.6149 INVITATION TO BID (ITB) For OFFICE FURNITURE AND FILES ITB Number 17- 425 -001 -F ITB Issue Date: December 20, 2010 Responses Due: January 24, 2011 (2:00 pm ET) STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIVISION OF STATE PURCHASING 4050 ESPLANADE WAY, SUITE 360 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 -0950 www.dms.MyFlorida.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS [PUR1001 (10/06)] 3.0 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS 4.0 GENERAL CONTRACT CONDITIONS [PUR1000 (10/06) 5.0 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 6.0 PRICE SHEET [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] Page 12 SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION CONTENTS: 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Event Timeline [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] Page 13 1.1 Introduction The State of Florida's current Office Furniture and Files State Term Contract #425- 001 -06 -1 has an average annual sales volume of $73,000,000.00.* Customers include 34 State agencies and other Eligible Users. Current Eligible Users consist of local governmental entities such as cities, counties, colleges, universities, and school boards in the State of Florida, as defined in 60A- 1.005, Florida Administrative Code. *(The figures listed are for informational purposes only and should be used as a guide for responding purposes.) 1.2 Event Timeline Respondents should review and become familiar with the Event Timeline. The Dates and Times within the Event Timeline may be subject to change. It is the responsibility of the Respondent to check for any changes. All changes to the Event Timeline will be through an Addendum to this solicitation. Event Timeline Activity for ITB #17- 425 -001 -F Date Notice of Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted to the Vendor Bid System (VBS) and the complete Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted in the December 20 2010 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Solicitation will initially be in "Preview" status ' where Respondents can view /download all information and ask questions, but cannot input or submit responses. Deadline to submit Questions, or request for specification change via the January 4, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing tool Q &A Board (Respondents must monitor Message 5 pm ET Board for communications). Department will post Answers to Respondents' questions as an addendum to the January 11, 2011 solicitation within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Respondents must monitor Message Board for communications. Deadline to submit Response, including all required documents in the January 24, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Utilize the Response Preparation Checklist to 2 pm ET make sure all required documents and responses are completed. (Section 7.7) Deadline for submittal of State Term Contract dedicated web site URL Address. (Section January 24, 2011 3.12) 2 pm ET Notice of Intent to Award posted on Vendor Bid System (VBS). March 29, 2011 Deadline for development of eProcurement catalog within MyFloridaMarketPlace. To Be Determined Prior to Contract Contract Award Per Section 2.17 Contract Formation Page 14 EF—sECTION TWO: GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS PUR 100110/06) CONTENTS: 2.1 Definitions 2.2 General Instructions 2.3 Electronic Submission of Responses 2.4 Terms and Conditions 2.5 Questions 2.6 Conflict of Interest 2.7 Convicted Vendors 2.8 Discriminatory Vendors 2.9 Respondent's Representation and Authorization 2.10 Manufacturer's Name and Approved Equivalents 2.11 Performance Qualifications 2.12 Public Opening 2.13 Electronic Posting of Notice of Intended Award 2.14 Firm Response 2.15 Clarifications /Revisions 2.16 Minor Irregularities /Right to Reject 2.17 Contract Formation 2.18 Contract Overlap 2.19 Public Records 2.20 Protests 2.21 Limitation on Vendor Contact with Agency During Solicitation Period [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] Page 15 2.1 Definitions The definitions found in s. 60A- 1.001, F.A.C. shall apply to this agreement. The following additional terms are also defined: (a) "Buyer" means the entity that has released the solicitation. The "Buyer" may also be the "Customer' as defined in the PUR 1000 if that entity meets the definition of both terms. (b) "Procurement Officer" means the Buyer's contracting personnel, as identified in the Introductory Materials. (c) "Respondent" means the entity that submits materials to the Buyer in accordance with these Instructions. (d) "Response" means the material submitted by the respondent in answering the solicitation. (e) "Timeline" means the list of critical dates and actions included in the Introductory Materials. 2.2 General Instructions Potential respondents to the solicitation are encouraged to carefully review all the materials contained herein and prepare responses accordingly. 2.3 Electronic Submission of Responses Respondents are required to submit responses electronically. For this purpose, all references herein to signatures, signing requirements, or other required acknowledgments hereby include electronic signature by means of clicking the "Submit Response" button (or other similar symbol or process) attached to or logically associated with the response created by the respondent within MyFloridaMarketPlace. The respondent agrees that the action of electronically submitting its response constitutes: an electronic signature on the response, generally, an electronic signature on any form or section specifically calling for a signature, and an affirmative agreement to any statement contained in the solicitation that requires a definite confirmation or acknowledgement. 2.4 Terms and Conditions All responses are subject to the terms of the following sections of this solicitation, which, in case of conflict, shall have the order of precedence listed: • Technical Specifications, • Special Conditions and Instructions, • Instructions to Respondents (PUR 1001), • General Conditions (PUR 1000), and • Introductory Materials. The Buyer objects to and shall not consider any additional terms or conditions submitted by a respondent, including any appearing in documents attached as part of a respondent's response. In submitting its response, a respondent agrees that any additional terms or conditions, whether submitted intentionally or inadvertently, shall have no force or effect. Failure to comply with terms and conditions, including those specifying information that must be submitted with a response, shall be grounds for rejecting a response. 2.5 Questions Respondents shall address all questions regarding this solicitation to the Procurement Officer. Questions must be submitted via the Q &A Board within MyFloridaMarketPlace and must be RECEIVED NO LATER THAN the time and date reflected on the Timeline. Questions shall be answered in accordance with the Timeline. All questions submitted shall be Page 16 published and answered in a manner that all respondents will be able to view. Respondents shall not contact any other employee of the Buyer or the State for information with respect to this solicitation. Each respondent is responsible for monitoring the MyFloridaMarketPlace site for new or changing information. The Buyer shall not be bound by any verbal information or by any written information that is not contained within the solicitation documents or formally noticed and issued by the Buyer's contracting personnel. Questions to the Procurement Officer or to any Buyer personnel shall not constitute formal protest of the specifications or of the solicitation, a process addressed in paragraph 20 of these Instructions. 2.6 Conflict of Interest This solicitation is subject to chapter 112 of the Florida Statutes. Respondents shall disclose with their response the name of any officer, director, employee or other agent who is also an employee of the State. Respondents shall also disclose the name of any State employee who owns, directly or indirectly, an interest of five percent (5 %) or more in the respondent or its affiliates. 2.7 Convicted Vendors A person or affiliate placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime is prohibited from doing any of the following for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list: • submitting a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity; • submitting a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work; • submitting bids on leases of real property to a public entity; • being awarded or performing work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with any public entity; and • transacting business with any public entity in excess of the Category Two threshold amount ($25,000) provided in section 287.017 of the Florida Statutes. 2.8 Discriminatory Vendors An entity or affiliate placed on the discriminatory vendor list pursuant to section 287.134 of the Florida Statutes may not: • submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity; • submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work; • submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity; • be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, sub - contractor, or consultant under a contract with any public entity; or • transact business with any public entity. 2.9 Respondent's Representation and Authorization In submitting a response, each respondent understands, represents, and acknowledges the following (if the respondent cannot so certify to any of following, the respondent shall submit with its response a written explanation of why it cannot do so). • The respondent is not currently under suspension or debarment by the State or any other governmental authority. • To the best of the knowledge of the person signing the response, the respondent, its affiliates, subsidiaries, directors, officers, and employees are not currently under investigation by any governmental authority and have not in the last ten (10) years been convicted or found liable for any act prohibited by law in any jurisdiction, involving conspiracy or collusion with respect to bidding on any public contract. • Respondent currently has no delinquent obligations to the State, including a claim by the State for liquidated damages under any other contract. • The submission is made in good faith and not pursuant to any agreement or discussion with, or inducement from, any firm or person to submit a complementary or other noncompetitive response. • The prices and amounts have been arrived at independently and without consultation, communication, or agreement with any other respondent or potential respondent; neither the prices nor amounts, actual or approximate, have been disclosed to any respondent or potential respondent, and they will not be disclosed before the solicitation opening. Page 17 • The respondent has fully informed the Buyer in writing of all convictions of the firm, its affiliates (as defined in section 287.133(1) (a) of the Florida Statutes), and all directors, officers, and employees of the firm and its affiliates for violation of state or federal antitrust laws with respect to a public contract for violation of any state or federal law involving fraud, bribery, collusion, conspiracy or material misrepresentation with respect to a public contract. This includes disclosure of the names of current employees who were convicted of contract crimes while in the employ of another company. • Neither the respondent nor any person associated with it in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, principal, investigator, project director, manager, auditor, or position involving the administration of federal funds: • Has within the preceding three years been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them or is presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a federal, state, or local government transaction or public contract; violation of federal or state antitrust statutes; or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; or • Has within a three -year period preceding this certification had one or more federal, state, or local government contracts terminated for cause or default. • The product offered by the respondent will conform to the specifications without exception. • The respondent has read and understands the Contract terms and conditions, and the submission is made in conformance with those terms and conditions. • If an award is made to the respondent, the respondent agrees that it intends to be legally bound to the Contract that is formed with the State. • The respondent has made a diligent inquiry of its employees and agents responsible for preparing, approving, or submitting the response, and has been advised by each of them that he or she has not participated in any communication, consultation, discussion, agreement, collusion, act or other conduct inconsistent with any of the statements and representations made in the response. • The respondent shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Buyer and its employees against any cost, damage, or expense which may be incurred or be caused by any error in the respondent's preparation of its bid. • All information provided by, and representations made by, the respondent are material and important and will be relied upon by the Buyer in awarding the Contract. Any misstatement shall be treated as fraudulent concealment from the Buyer of the true facts relating to submission of the bid. A misrepresentation shall be punishable under law, including, but not limited to, Chapter 817 of the Florida Statutes. 2.10 Manufacturer's Name and Approved Equivalents Unless otherwise specified, any manufacturers' names, trade names, brand names, information or catalog numbers listed in a specification are descriptive, not restrictive. With the Buyer's prior approval, the Contractor may provide any product that meets or exceeds the applicable specifications. The Contractor shall demonstrate comparability, including appropriate catalog materials, literature, specifications, test data, etc. The Buyer shall determine in its sole discretion whether a product is acceptable as an equivalent. 2.11 Performance Qualifications The Buyer reserves the right to investigate or inspect at any time whether the product, qualifications, or facilities offered by Respondent meet the Contract requirements. Respondent shall at all times during the Contract term remain responsive and responsible. In determining Respondent's responsibility as a vendor, the agency shall consider all information or evidence which is gathered or comes to the attention of the agency which demonstrates the Respondent's capability to fully satisfy the requirements of the solicitation and the contract. Respondent must be prepared, if requested by the Buyer, to present evidence of experience, ability, and financial standing, as well as a statement as to plant, machinery, and capacity of the respondent for the production, distribution, and servicing of the product bid. If the Buyer determines that the conditions of the solicitation documents are not complied with, or that the product proposed to be furnished does not meet the specified requirements, or that the qualifications, financial standing, or facilities are not satisfactory, or that performance is untimely, the Buyer may reject the response or terminate the Contract. Respondent may be disqualified from receiving awards if respondent, or anyone in respondent's employment, has previously failed to perform satisfactorily in connection with public bidding or contracts. This paragraph shall not mean or imply that it is obligatory upon the Buyer to make an investigation either before or after award of the Contract, but should Page 18 the Buyer elect to do so, respondent is not relieved from fulfilling all Contract requirements. 2.12 Public Opening Responses shall be opened on the date and at the location indicated on the Timeline. Respondents may, but are not required to, attend. The Buyer may choose not to announce prices or release other materials pursuant to s. 119.071(1) (b), Florida Statutes. Any person requiring a special accommodation because of a disability should contact the Procurement Officer at least five (5) workdays prior to the solicitation opening. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the Buyer by using the Florida Relay Service at (800) 955 -8771 (TDD). 2.13 Electronic Posting of Notice of Intended Award Based on the evaluation, on the date indicated on the Timeline the Buyer shall electronically post a notice of intended award at http://fcn. state .fl.us /owa_vbs /owa/vbs www.main menu. If the notice of award is delayed, in lieu of posting the notice of intended award the Buyer shall post a notice of the delay and a revised date for posting the notice of intended award. Any person who is adversely affected by the decision shall file with the Buyer a notice of protest within 72 hours after the electronic posting. The Buyer shall not provide tabulations or notices of award by telephone. 2.14 Firm Response The Buyer may make an award within sixty (60) days after the date of the opening, during which period responses shall remain firm and shall not be withdrawn. If award is not made within sixty (60) days, the response shall remain firm until either the Buyer awards the Contract or the Buyer receives from the respondent written notice that the response is withdrawn. Any response that expresses a shorter duration may, in the Buyer's sole discretion, be accepted or rejected. 2.15 Clarifications /Revisions Before award, the Buyer reserves the right to seek clarifications or request any information deemed necessary for proper evaluation of submissions from all respondents deemed eligible for Contract award. Failure to provide requested information may result in rejection of the response. 2.16 Minor Irregularities /Right to Reject The Buyer reserves the right to accept or reject any and all bids, or separable portions thereof, and to waive any minor irregularity, technicality, or omission if the Buyer determines that doing so will serve the State's best interests. The Buyer may reject any response not submitted in the manner specified by the solicitation documents. 2.17 Contract Formation The Buyer shall issue a notice of award, if any, to successful respondent(s), however, no contract shall be formed between respondent and the Buyer until the Buyer signs the Contract. The Buyer shall not be liable for any costs incurred by a respondent in preparing or producing its response or for any work performed before the Contract is effective. 2.18 Contract Overlap Respondents shall identify any products covered by this solicitation that they are currently authorized to furnish under any state term contract. By entering into the Contract, a Contractor authorizes the Buyer to eliminate duplication between agreements in the manner the Buyer deems to be in its best interest. 2.19 Public Records Article 1, section 24, Florida Constitution, guarantees every person access to all public records, and Section 119.011, Florida Statutes, provides a broad definition of public record. As such, all responses to a competitive solicitation are public records unless exempt by law. Any respondent claiming that its response contains information that is exempt from the public records law shall clearly segregate and mark that information and provide the specific statutory citation for such exemption. 2.20 Protests Any protest concerning this solicitation shall be made in accordance with sections 120.57(3) and 287.042(2) of the Florida Statutes and chapter 28 -110 of the Florida Administrative Code. Questions to the Procurement Officer shall not constitute formal notice of a protest. It is the Buyer's intent to ensure that specifications are written to obtain the best value for the Page 19 State and that specifications are written to ensure competitiveness, fairness, necessity and reasonableness in the solicitation process. Section 120.57(3) (b), F.S. and Section 28- 110.003, Fla. Admin. Code require that a notice of protest of the solicitation documents shall be made within seventy -two hours after the posting of the solicitation. Section 120.57(3) (a), F.S. requires the following statement to be included in the solicitation: "Failure to file a protest within the time prescribed in section 120.57(3), Florida Statutes, shall constitute a waiver of proceedings under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes." Section 28- 110.005, Fla. Admin. Code requires the following statement to be included in the solicitation: "Failure to file a protest within the time prescribed in Section 120.57(3), Florida Statutes, or failure to post the bond or other security required by law within the time allowed for filing a bond shall constitute a waiver of proceedings under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes." 2.21 Limitation on Vendor Contact with Agency During Solicitation Period Respondents to this solicitation or persons acting on their behalf may not contact, between the release of the solicitation and the end of the 72 -hour period following the agency posting the notice of intended award, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and state holidays, any employee or officer of the executive or legislative branch concerning any aspect of this solicitation, except in writing to the procurement officer or as provided in the solicitation documents. Violation of this provision may be grounds for rejecting a response. [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] Page 20 SECTION THREE: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS CONTENTS: 3.1 Definitions 3.2 Purpose and Scope 3.3 Contact Person 3.4 Who May Respond 3.5 MyFloridaMarketPlace Overview 3.5.1 MyFloridaMarketPlace Vendor Registration Application 3.5.2 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool Training 3.5.3 Sourcing Tool Tips 3.5.4 Email Notification 3.5.5 Questions & Answers 3.6 Amendments or Addendums to the Solicitation Documents 3.7 Order of Precedence 3.8 Submittal of Response 3.8.1 Price Sheet 3.8.2 Ordering Instructions 3.8.1 Authorized Dealers & Manufacturer Representatives 3.8.2 Savings /Price Reductions 3.8.3 Product List 3.8.4 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace 3.9 Purchase Orders or Invoices for Reference 3.10 Environmental Requirements 3.11 Recycled Content Requirements 3.12 Manufacturer's URL Address for Dedicated Website Address 3.13 Cost Savings Objective 3.14 State Objectives 3.14.1 Diversity 3.14.2 Environmental Considerations 3.14.3 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Program Page 21 3.14.4 Products Available from the Blind or Other Handicapped (RESPECT) 3.14.5 Prison Rehabilitative Industries and Diversified Enterprises, Inc. (PRIDE) 3.15 Basis for Award 3.16 Special Accommodation [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] 3.1 Definitions The definitions found below (alphabetical order) and referenced in General Instructions to Respondents, (PUR 1001) Section 2.1 and General Contract Conditions, (PUR 1000) Section 4.1 of the ITB shall apply. Delivery Methods — Definition of Terms Drop -Ship: FOB Destination. Orders shipped directly y a manufacturer to the purchaser or user. Items delivered to the ordering agency shall be unloaded by the delivering carrier and placed on the agency's loading dock. If there is no loading dock, items shall be unloaded by the delivery carrier and placed in a space immediately adjacent to the carrier's vehicle at the delivery location. Delivered Not Installed: On delivered non - installed orders items delivered to the ordering agency shall be unloaded by the delivering carrier and placed on the agency's loading dock. If there is no loading dock, items shall be unloaded by the delivery carrier and placed in a space immediately adjacent to the carrier's vehicle at the delivery location. Inside Delivery, Non - Installed: On orders specifying inside (non - installed) delivery, items shall be unloaded and delivered, in the shipping carton, to the ordering agency by the delivering carrier and placed inside the door on the first or ground level floor of the building. Installed Delivery: On installed orders, (open, set in place, ready for use) the Contractor or the delivering carrier, acting as the Contractor's agent, shall be responsible for receipt, inspection, and assembly of items delivered in the area designated by the ordering agency, as well as prompt removal and disposal of all debris which is a result of the delivery. The ordering agency shall be responsible for the immediate removal of any existing furniture from the area in which the contract items are to be installed. Elevator(s) must be made available if more than one story. If no elevator is available, delivery will be made to the ground floor, or additional delivery fees may be negotiated. Department (http:Hdms.myflorida.com): The Department of Management Services for the State of Florida. DMS provides administrative support for state agencies and state employees. Page 22 Eligible User of the Contract: Eligible users are defined in Rule 60A- 1.005, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) as: (i) all 34 State agencies, (ii) all other governmental agencies, as defined in Section 163.3164, Florida Statutes, which have a physical presence in the State of Florida, and (iii) any independent, nonprofit college or university located in Florida and accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Specific Authority 287.042 (12) FS. Law Implemented 287.012(12)F.S. History —New 8- 24 -04. Environmentally Preferable Product (EPP): A product or service that has a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared with competing products or services that serve the same purpose. Such products or services may include, but are not limited to, those which contain recycled content, minimize waste, conserve energy or water, and reduce the amount of toxics either disposed of or consumed. Environmental Policy or Mission: A statement or philosophy by the organization of its intentions and principles in relation to its overall environmental performance, which provides a framework for action and for the setting of its environmental objectives and targets. GSA: Acronym for the U.S. General Services Administration. GSA leverages the buying power of the federal government to acquire best value for taxpayers and federal customers. For additional information about GSA, please visit the U.S. General Service Administration at: http: / /www.gsa.gov. ITB: Acronym for Invitation to Bid. Manufacturer(s): The original producer of a commodity and /or contractual service. MSRP: Acronym for the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price. It represents the Manufacturer's recommended retail selling price, list price, published price or other usual and customary price that would be paid by the purchaser for specific commodities and contractual services without benefit of a Contract resulting from the solicitation. It must publically listed, available, and verifiable by the Department. Post - Consumer Content: Materials in a recycled product which are derived from businesses or consumers after having served their intended uses, and which have been separated or diverted from solid waste for the purpose of collection, recycling and disposition. Post - Industrial Content: Materials generated by manufacturers or product converters, such as trimmings, overruns and obsolete products, that are incorporating back into the manufacturing process of the same or different products are considered post - industrial materials or scraps. Recycle (www.epa.gov): Collecting recyclable materials that would otherwise be considered waste, sorting and processing recyclables into raw materials such as fibers, manufacturing raw materials into new products, and purchasing recycled products. SCS Indoor Advantage m: The Scientific Certification Systems (SCS) organization was founded in 1984 as an internationally recognized, neutral third party to certify environmentally safe indoor products. The SCS Indoor Advantage certification program identifies those products that meet specific indoor air quality emission requirements. These standards are set by the Business and Institutional Furniture Manufacturer's Association (BIFMA) and the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). The program applies to any non - flooring product generally used within an enclosed indoor environment including wall coverings, systems furniture, casegoods, and insulation. SCS Indoor Advantage mGold: The program tests and certifies products for compliance with the indoor air quality emission requirements of BIFMA, LEED, and California Section 01350, an environmental standard specification to cover key environmental performance issues. State: means the State of Florida. 3.2 Purpose and Scope Page 23 The State of Florida, Department of Management Services, invites interested Respondents, to submit proposals in accordance with the solicitation documents. The purpose of this ITB is to establish a forty-eight month (48) State Term Contract for the purchase of Office Furniture & Files with the potential option for renewals as allowed by Chapter 287, Florida Statutes for purchase by all State Agencies and other eligible users. 3.3 Contact Person The following person is the Department's SOLE point of contact from the date of release of this ITB until selection of successful provider(s). Brenda Wells, CPPB, FCPM, FCPA, FCCM Purchasing Analyst, Team Lead State of Florida Interior Design License #0002922 Department of Management Services Division of State Purchasing 4050 Esplanade Way, Suite 360 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Telephone: (850) 488 -6904 Fax: (850) 414 -6122 Email: Brenda.Wells(adms.MyFlorida.com 3.4 Who May Respond The Department seeks Responses from manufacturers holding current Federal (GSA) Contracts for products offered on this Contract. Though the Department intends to contract directly with manufacturers, the Department encourages the participation of certified minority business enterprises (CMBE). Information on CMBEs is available from the Office of Supplier Diversity at http://osd.dms.state.fl.us. Each Respondent must be authorized to conduct business with the State of Florida, and possess the experience and personnel resources to provide the products and services described in this ITB. The Department retains the right to request additional information pertaining to the Respondent's ability and qualifications to accomplish all services described in this ITB as deemed necessary during the ITB or after contract award. 3.5 MyFloridaMarketPlace Overview The Department uses the MyFloridaMarketPlace system (MFMP) to receive Responses electronically. This solicitation will be conducted using the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. 3.5.1 MyFloridaMarketPlace Vendor Registration Application Vendors must have a revised, current, and complete Vendor Registration Application identified on the MyFloridaMarketPlace Vendor Registration System at: https:// vendor.myfloridamarketplace.com/. If you have not registered or have requested a registration update, please be advised that a minimum of forty-eight (48) hours will be required for access to the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Completion of this registration is mandatory for those Vendors who wish to submit a Response. 3.5.2 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool Training This solicitation will be conducted using the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool at: https:H sourcing .myfloridamarketplace.com /. Optional training on how to respond to this solicitation electronically is offered at: http: // marketplace.myflorida.com/ vendor /vendor_ solicitation help. While training is optional, we strongly recommend you take advantage of this offer. Download and review the document titled "ITB Event User Guide." For all technical questions about the Sourcing Tool, Vendors should contact the MyFloridaMarketPlace Customer Service Desk at 866- FLA -EPRO (866- 352 -3776) or: vendorhelp gmyfloridamarketplace.com. For additional information or assistance on using the Sourcing Tool, please visit the MyFloridaMarketPlace website at the following link: ht tp: / /markeWlace.myflorida.com/vendor /vendor solicitation help.htm. Page 24 This site includes: a. Solicitation User Guides b. On Demand web -based Sourcing training link c. WinZip FAQs d. Vendor FAQs e. 3.5.3 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool Tips When working in the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool, be aware of the twenty (20) minute time -out function in the tool. This means that you should save your work (click the SAVE button) at intervals of less than twenty (20) minutes to ensure your entries since you last saved are not lost. Please note that clicking the SAVE button within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool only saves your solicitation Responses. The SAVE button does not transmit your solicitation Response to the State. In order to transmit your solicitation Response to the State, you must click the SUBMIT button on the SUMMARY page of the solicitation Response. After clicking the SUBMIT button, it is the Respondent's responsibility to check any submitted Response within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool to verify that the Response is accurately and completely captured within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Respondents must do this while there is sufficient time remaining in the solicitation period in the event you discover an error and need to resubmit a revised Response. To validate your Response, you should do the following before the solicitation period ends: • Go to the "My Bids / My Responses" tab within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool after you submitted your Response. • Click on the Response ID number of your last submitted Response. • Review entire Response to make sure all responses are complete, accurate, and as you intended to submit. • Minimum areas to check are: • Text boxes — Is your entire answer viewable? • Yes/No questions — Is the displayed answer correct? • All uploaded document files — Can you open attached document(s) and clearly view entire content? Does the content of the file(s) match your intended Response within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool (e.g., not an earlier version, incomplete copy, or working copy)? • Pricing and Other Information — Are all Prices and other information you intended to submit visible and accurately captured within MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool? • Required Items - Are all items listed in the solicitation completed as required within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool? DO NOT RELY ON THE MYFLORIDAMARKETPLACE SOURCING TOOL'S TIME REMAINING CLOCK. THE OFFICIAL SOLICITATION CLOSING TIME SHALL BE AS REFLECTED IN SECTION 1.2, EVENT TIMELINE. The Response deadline(s) shall be as reflected in Section 1.2, Event Timeline, of this solicitation. The MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool's time remaining clock is not the official submission date and time deadline, it is intended only to approximate the solicitation closing and may require periodic adjustments. It is strongly recommended that you submit your response as early as possible. You should allow time to receive any requested assistance and to receive verification of your submittal; waiting until the last hours of the solicitation could impact the timely submittal of your response. 3.5.4 Email Notification Respondents are reminded that the Sourcing Tool's email notifications are an option provided to Respondents as a courtesy. The State of Florida is not under any obligation and does not guarantee that Respondents will receive Page 25 email Notifications concerning the posting, amendment or close of ITB's. Respondents are responsible for checking the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool and the Vendor Bid System for information and updates concerning this ITB. 3.5.5 Questions and Answers Respondents shall examine this solicitation to determine if the Department's requirements are clearly stated. If there are any requirements which are unclear or objectionable, Respondents should submit notice to the Department using the Sourcing Tool's Q &A Board by the due date for Respondents to submit questions listed in the Event Timeline. Please note that questions will NOT be answered via telephone or fax. The Department shall post the answers to the questions via the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool by the date stated on the Event Timeline. Each Respondent is responsible for monitoring the MyFloridaMarketPlace system for new or changing information. The Department shall not be bound by any verbal information or by any written information that is not either contained within the solicitation documents or formally noticed and issued by the ITB sole point of contact. Questions shall not constitute formal protest of the specifications or of the solicitation. The formal protest process is described in Section 2.20 Protests. 3.6 Amendments or Addendums to the Solicitation Documents The Department reserves the right to issue amendments or addendums to the solicitation. Notice of any amendment or addendum will be posted within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool and the Vendor Bid System. Such notice, if required, will contain the appropriate details for identifying and/or reviewing the formal changes to the solicitation. Each Respondent is responsible for monitoring the sites for new or changing information concerning this solicitation. 3.7 Order of Precedence Respondents are encouraged to carefully review all materials contained herein and prepare responses accordingly. In the event any conflict exists between the Special and General Instructions, the Special Instructions shall prevail. In the event any conflict exists between the Special and General Conditions, the Special Conditions shall prevail. This Section, 3.7, supersedes and replaces Section 2.4, General Instructions Terms and Conditions. All responses are subject to the terms of the following sections of this ITB which, in case of conflict, shall have the order of precedence listed: a) Introduction b) Special Contract Conditions c) Special Instructions To Respondents d) General Contract Conditions (PUR 1000) e) General Instruction to Respondents (PUR 1001) f) Price Sheets g) Forms The Department objects to and shall not consider any additional terms or conditions submitted by a Respondent, including any appearing in documents attached as part of a Respondent's Response. In submitting its Response, the Respondent agrees that any additional terms or conditions, whether submitted intentionally or inadvertently, shall result in the disqualification of the Respondent's Response for any offers associated with the additional terms or conditions. Failure to comply with the solicitation requirements, specifications, terms, and conditions, including those specifying information that must be submitted with a Response, may be grounds for rejecting a Response. 3.8 Submittal of Response Respondents shall submit their offer online via the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool at: https: Hsourcing.myfloridamarkeWlace. com. OFFERS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN THE MYFLORIDAMARKETPLACE SOURCING TOOL BY THE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED ON THE EVENT TIMELINE. Offers not submitted within MyFloridaMarketPlace shall be rejected. Page 26 The Department shall not consider late offers and the Sourcing Tool will NOT accept offers after the closing date and time specified in the Event Timeline or as amended by the Department. Each Respondent is responsible for ensuring that its response is submitted at the proper time. In the event a Respondent submits more than one response in the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool, only the last Response received by the system shall be considered for award. Previous responses will not be visible to the State of Florida. The Response Preparation Checklist is provided to assist submittal but does not relieve the Respondent of responsibility for ensuring that all Requirements of the ITB are included with the Response submittal. The followinp- documents must be unloaded into the Respondent's Response within the MvFloridaMarketPlace Sourcinp- Tool*: 1. Price Sheet 2. Ordering Instructions Form 3. Authorized Dealers & Manufacturer Representatives Form 4. Savings /Price Reductions Form 5. Product List Form 6. Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Form *IT IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED THAT YOU SUBMIT YOUR RESPONSE AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. YOU SHOULD ALLOW TIME TO RECEIVE ANY REQUESTED ASSISTANCE AND TO RECEIVE VERIFICATION OF YOUR SUBMITTAL; WAITING UNTIL THE LAST HOURS OF THE SOLICITATION COULD IMPACT THE TIMELY SUBMITTAL OF YOUR RESPONSE. DO NOT RELY ON THE "MYFLORIDAMARKETPLACE" SOURCING TOOL'S TIME REMAINING CLOCK. THE OFFICIAL SOLICITATION CLOSING TIME SHALL BE AS REFLECTED IN THE EVENT TIMELINE OF THIS ITB. Additionally, the following information must be received by the contact person below no later than the Response Opening Date & Time. Please refer back to the Event Timeline for Dates and Times. 1. Current Manufacturer Published Price List /Book* (compact disc — CD) (Section 5.10) Cover page and table of contents must be included with price pages. *Consistent with GSA Contract. 2. Current Federal GSA Catalog /Price Book (compact disc — CD) (Section 5.10) Cover page, terms and conditions, table of contents must be included with price pages. 3. Copy of your GSA Contract (compact disc- CD) (Section 5.10) Documentation of the price, discount and tiers offered must be submitted with the Response. 4. Purchase Orders or Invoices for Reference (Section 3.9) 5. Environmental Requirements (Section 3.10) 6. Recycled Content Requirements (Section 3.11) 7. Manufacturer's URL Address for dedicated website address (Section 3.12) Failure to provide all requested information within the Response may result in rejection of the Response. Outer packaging shall clearly state Bid Title, Bid (solicitation) Number, Bid Opening Date and Time. 3.8.1 Price Sheet Price Sheet Responses shall be submitted on the Price Sheet Form, Section 6.1. All pricing shall duplicate GSA price lists and discounts for every item offered. Reference Prices/Discounts, Section 5.10 and Balance -of -Line Price/Products, Section 5.11. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Failure to comply with this requirement shall result in disqualification of Response. 3.8.2 Ordering Instructions Form (Section 7.1) On the Ordering Instructions Form Respondents shall identify persons responsible for answering questions about the Response and administering the Contract, and shall provide information necessary for placing orders under the Contract. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Page 27 Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.8.3 Authorized Dealers & Manufacturer Representatives Form (Section 7.2) Respondents are required to name at least a minimum of two (2) different servicing dealers for the State of Florida. Respondents are encouraged to use certified Minority Business Enterprise dealers. Reference Authorized Dealers & Manufacturer Representative, Section 5.27. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Failure to comply with this requirement shall result in disqualification of Response. 3.8.4 Savings /Price Reductions Form (Section 7.5) Respondents shall submit one (1) accurately completed Savings/Price Reductions Form with their Response containing the required savings information offered to the State of Florida. The Savings/Price Reductions Form will be submitted electronically using the MFMP Sourcing Tool, per Section 3.5 of the solicitation. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.8.5 Product List Form (Section 7.6) The Product List Form is an example of furniture products offered under this ITB which will be available on the State of Florida Office Furniture & Files Contract. Eligible users of this Contract will be able to view the contractors name for each listing checked on the State Purchasing Contract website. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.8.6 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Form (Section 7.3) Respondents shall submit one (1) accurately completed Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Form with their Response certifying the Respondent has a drug -free workplace program. The Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Form will be submitted electronically using the MFMP Sourcing Tool, per Section 3.5 of the solicitation. This document must be uploaded into Respondent's Response within MvFloridaMarketPlace. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.9 Purchase Orders or Invoices for Reference All Respondents shall furnish a minimum of three (3) projects sold to "Eligible Users" (see Definitions, Section 3.1) completed in Florida in the last 24 months including the name of the Customer responsible personnel and phone number where this specific type of furniture is installed. Copies of the purchase orders or invoices must be legible and identify the date, Customer, specific furniture type and price. Three (3) purchase orders or invoices shall be submitted with the mailed Responses and received by the contact person no later than the Deadline to submit Response. The State of Florida reserves the right to contact the customer regarding the services provided. Failure to comply with this requirement shall result in disqualification of Response. 3.10 Environmental Requirements The State of Florida is committed to reducing waste and promoting energy conservation. To that effort, Respondents responding to this ITB are required to meet minimum recycled content standards AND to submit information relating to their company's environmental policy and implementation process. Respondents shall submit a detailed environmental policy. This policy shall explain the Respondent's environmental mission and shall include detailed information on initiatives or procedures related to the realization of the environmental mission, for example: Pollution prevention opportunities Disposal of solid and/or hazardous waste Energy conservation Recycling of scrap Water conservation Health and safety issues Green House Gas (GHG) reductions Community involvement Page 28 Environmentally preferable products (EPPs) are listed for this Contract on the Florida Climate Friendly Products List, pursuant to Executive Order 07 -126, titled "Leadership by Example: Immediate Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Florida State Government ". Upon award, Contractors will be encouraged to submit a list of their qualifying products for review and posting to the Florida Climate - Friendly Preferred Products List. The current list can be viewed at the following DMS website link: 2. Respondent shall submit any prepared and /or approved documentation or certifications for GSA products submitted in relation to the BIFMA Sustainability Guidelines, BIFMA level TM Certification from Scientific Certification Systems (SCS), ISO 14001, and EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines. If awarded, Respondents shall provide a link to this information on the State Contract Web Page as described in this Section 5.24, Dedicated State Term Contract Website Requirement. Environmental Requirements shall be submitted with the mailed Response and received by the contact person no later than the Response Opening Date and Time. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.11 Recycled Content Requirements Respondent shall confirm that all corrugated cardboard materials and containers used in the packaging and transport of office furniture products will be made with a minimum of 35% recycled material (post- consumer and /.or post - industrial) and meets standard performance requirements. Verification of the recycled material content shall be confirmed in writing by the product supplier or through documented specifications from the product supplier. Respondent shall identify all product lines (or products) including recycled content and/or post consumer recycled content. Awarded contractor shall provide the content percentage of the recycled materials in the identified product lines no later than 30 days after contract award date. Recycled Content Requirements shall be submitted with the mailed Response and received by the contact person no later than the Response Opening Date and Time. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.12 Manufacturer's URL Address for Dedicated Website Address The Department displays contract and product information online for customer's use. Each Contractor shall develop and maintain a State Contract web page on the Internet to post approved contract information. Respondent shall submit the Universal Resource Locator (URL) address for this Contract. This URL link may remain hidden while the responses are under evaluation. Reference Section 5.24, Dedicated State Term Contract Website Requirement for specific requirements. URL Address shall be submitted with the mailed Response and received by the contact person no later than the Response Opening Date and Time. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in disqualification of Response. 3.13 Cost Savings Objective Chapter 2010 -151, Laws of Florida, Section 47, provides the following: Each state agency, as defined in s. 216.011, Florida Statutes, shall review existing contract renewals and reprocurements with private providers and public - private providers in an effort to reduce contract payments by at least 3 percent. It is the statewide goal to achieve substantial savings; however, it is the intent of the Legislature that the level and quality of services not be affected. Each agency shall renegotiate and reprocure contracts consistent with this section. Any savings that accrue through renegotiating the renewal or reprocurement of an existing contract shall be placed in reserve by the Executive Office of the Governor. In order to achieve this objective, the Department seeks to achieve a cost savings of at least 3 percent when compared to the pricing contained in the Department's most recent state term contract for these commodities. Current and previous contracts can be accessed through the Division of State Purchasing website at: htt2:Hdms.Myflorida.com/ business _operations /state purchasing. Page 29 3.14 State Objectives Within thirty (30) calendar days following award of the Contract, if awarded, the successful Respondent shall submit plans addressing each of the State's five (5) objectives listed below, to the extent applicable to the items / services covered by this solicitation. 3.14.1 Diversity The State of Florida is committed to supporting its diverse business industry and population through ensuring participation by minority- and women -owned business enterprises in the economic life of the state. The State of Florida Mentor Protege Program connects minority- and women -owned businesses with private corporations for business development mentoring. We strongly encourage firms doing business with the State of Florida to consider this initiative. For more information on the Mentor Protege Program, please contact the Office of Supplier Diversity at (850) 487 -0915. It is vital that small, minority, women -owned and veteran -owned business enterprises participate in the State's procurement process as both prime Contractors and Subcontractors under prime Contracts. Small, minority, and women -owned businesses are strongly encouraged to submit replies to this solicitation. The Contractor shall submit documentation addressing Diversity and describing the efforts being made to encourage the participation of small, minority, women -owned and veteran -owned businesses. Information on Certified Minority Business Enterprises (CMBE) is available from the Office of Supplier Diversity at: http://dms.myflorida.com/other programs /office_of supplier diversity osd/. 3.14.2 Environmental Considerations The State supports and encourages initiatives to protect and preserve our environment. The Department encourages the Contractor to submit as part of any response the Contractor's plan to support the procurement of products and materials with recycled content. The Contractor shall also provide a plan for reducing and or handling of any hazardous waste generated by Contractor's company. Reference Rule 62- 730.160, Florida Administrative Code. It is a requirement of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection that a generator of hazardous waste materials that exceeds a certain threshold must have a valid and current Hazardous Waste Generator Identification Number. This identification number shall be submitted as part of Contractor's explanation of its company's hazardous waste plan and shall explain in detail its handling and disposal of this waste. 3.14.3 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Program The State supports and encourages initiatives to keep the workplaces of Florida's Suppliers and Contractors drug free. Section 287.087 of the Florida Statutes provides that, where identical tie bids are received, preference shall be given to a response received from a Respondent that certifies it has implemented a drug -free workforce program. If applicable, Respondent shall certify that the Respondent has a drug -free workplace program using the Certification of Drug -Free Workplace form included in Section 7.4 of the solicitation. The Contractor shall describe how it will address the implementation of a drug free workplace in offering the items of the solicitation. 3.14.4 Products Available from the Blind or Other Handicapped (RESPECT) The State supports and encourages the gainful employment of citizens with disabilities. It is expressly understood and agreed that any articles that are the subject of, or required to carry out, this Contract shall be purchased from a nonprofit agency for the blind or for the severely handicapped that is qualified pursuant to Chapter 413, Florida Statutes, in the same manner and under the same procedures set forth in Section 413.036(1) and (2), Florida Statutes; and for purposes of this Contract the person, firm, or other business entity carrying out the provisions of this Contract shall be deemed to be substituted for the state agency insofar as dealings with such qualified nonprofit agency are concerned. Additional information about the designated nonprofit agency and the products it offers is available at h= / /www.respectofflorida.orf4. The Contractor shall describe how it will address the use of RESPECT in offering the items of the solicitation. 3.14.5 Prison Rehabilitative Industries and Diversified Enterprises, Inc. (PRIDE) The State supports and encourages the use of Florida correctional work programs. It is expressly understood Page 30 and agreed that any articles which are the subject of, or required to carry out, this Contract shall be purchased from the corporation identified under Chapter 946, F.S., in the same manner and under the same procedures set forth in Section 946.515(2), and (4), F.S.; and for purposes of this Contract the person, firm, or other business entity carrying out the provisions of this Contract shall be deemed to be substituted for this agency insofar as dealings with such corporation are concerned. Additional information about PRIDE and the products it offers is available at http:/ /www.pride- entgMrise�. The Contractor shall describe how it will address the use of PRIDE in offering the items of the solicitation. 3.15 Basis for Award Award shall be made statewide for each manufacturer's office furniture product offering currently available on GSA schedule. The Department intends to award to responsible vendor per brand offering GSA pricing or better. Respondents whose bids, past performance, or current status do not reflect the capability, integrity or reliability to fully and in good faith perform the requirements of the Contract may be rejected as non - responsible. The Department reserves the right to make awards as determined to be in the best interest of the State of Florida, and to accept or reject any and all offers, or separable portions, and to waive any minor irregularity, technicality, or omission if the Department determines that doing so will serve the State of Florida's best interest. 3.16 Special Accommodation Any person requiring a special accommodation at State Purchasing because of a disability should call State Purchasing at (850) 488 -8440 at least five (5) workdays prior to the bid opening. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact State Purchasing by using the Florida Relay Service at (800) 955 -8771 (TDD). SECTION FOUR: GENERAL CONTRACT CONDITIONS - PUR 1000 10/06 CONTENTS: 4.1 Definitions 4.2 Purchase Orders 4.3 Product Version 4.4 Price Changes Applicable Only to Term Contracts Page 31 4.5 Additional Quantities 4.6 Packaging 4.7 Inspection at Contractor's Site 4.8 Safety Standards 4.9 Americans with Disabilities Act 4.10 Literature 4.11 Transportation and Delivery 4.12 Installation 4.13 Risk of Loss 4.14 Transaction Fee 4.15 Invoicing and Payment 4.16 Taxes 4.17 Governmental Restrictions 4.18 Lobbying and Integrity 4.19 Indemnification 4.20 Limitation of Liability 4.21 Suspension of Work 4.22 Termination for Convenience 4.23 Termination for Cause 4.24 Force Majeure, Notice of Delay, and No Damages for Delay 4.25 Changes 4.26 Renewal 4.27 Purchase Order Duration 4.28 Advertising 4.29 Assignment 4.30 Antitrust Assignment 4.31 Dispute Resolution 4.32 Employees, Subcontractors, and Agents 4.33 Security and Confidentiality 4.34 Contractor Employees, Subcontractors, and Other Agents 4.35 Insurance Requirements 4.36 Warranty of Authority 4.37 Warranty of Ability to Perform 4.38 Notices 4.39 Leases and Installment Purchases 4.40 Prison Rehabilitative Industries and Diversified Enterprises, Inc. (PRIDE) 4.41 Products Available From the Blind or Other Handicapped 4.42 Modification of Terms 4.43 Cooperative Purchasing 4.44 Waiver 4.45 Annual Appropriations 4.46 Execution in Counterparts 4.47 Severability 4.1 Definitions The definitions contained in s. 60A- 1.001, F.A.C. shall apply to this agreement. The following additional terms are also defined: (a) "Contract" means the legally enforceable agreement that results from a successful solicitation. The parties to the Contract will be the Customer and Contractor. Page 32 (b) "Customer" means the State agency or other entity identified in a contract as the party to receive commodities or contractual services pursuant to a contract or that orders commodities or contractual services via purchase order or other contractual instrument from the Contractor under the Contract. The "Customer" may also be the "Buyer" as defined in the PUR 1001 if it meets the definition of both terms. (c) "Product" means any deliverable under the Contract, which may include commodities, services, technology or software. (d) "Purchase order" means the form or format a Customer uses to make a purchase under the Contract (e.g., a formal written purchase order, electronic purchase order, procurement card, contract or other authorized means). 4.2 Purchase Orders In contracts where commodities or services are ordered by the Customer via purchase order, Contractor shall not deliver or furnish products until a Customer transmits a purchase order. All purchase orders shall bear the Contract or solicitation number, shall be placed by the Customer directly with the Contractor, and shall be deemed to incorporate by reference the Contract and solicitation terms and conditions. Any discrepancy between the Contract terms and the terms stated on the Contractor's order form, confirmation, or acknowledgement shall be resolved in favor of terms most favorable to the Customer. A purchase order for services within the ambit of section 287.058(1) of the Florida Statutes shall be deemed to incorporate by reference the requirements of subparagraphs (a) through (f) thereof Customers shall designate a contract manager and a contract administrator as required by subsections 287.057(15) and (16) of the Florida Statutes. 4.3 Product Version Purchase orders shall be deemed to reference a manufacturer's most recently release model or version of the product at the time of the order, unless the Customer specifically requests in writing an earlier model or version and the contractor is willing to provide such model or version. 4.4 Price Changes Applicable Only to Term Contracts If this is a term contract for commodities or services, the following provisions apply. (a) Quantity Discounts. Contractors are urged to offer additional discounts for one time delivery of large single orders. Customers should seek to negotiate additional price concessions on quantity purchases of any products offered under the Contract. State Customers shall document their files accordingly. (b) Best Pricing Offer. During the Contract term, if the Customer becomes aware of better pricing offered by the Contractor for substantially the same or a smaller quantity of a product outside the Contract, but upon the same or similar terms of the Contract, then at the discretion of the Customer the price under the Contract shall be immediately reduced to the lower price. (c) Sales Promotions. In addition to decreasing prices for the balance of the Contract term due to a change in market conditions, a Contractor may conduct sales promotions involving price reductions for a specified lesser period. A Contractor shall submit to the Contract Specialist documentation identifying the proposed (1) starting and ending dates of the promotion, (2) products involved, and (3) promotional prices compared to then - authorized prices. Promotional prices shall be available to all Customers. Upon approval, the Contractor shall provide conspicuous notice of the promotion. (d) Trade -In. Customers may trade -in equipment when making purchases from the Contract. A trade -in shall be negotiated between the Customer and the Contractor. Customers are obligated to actively seek current fair market value when trading equipment, and to keep accurate records of the process. For State agencies, it may be necessary to provide documentation to the Department of Financial Services and to the agency property custodian pursuant to Chapter 273, F.S. (e) Equitable Adjustment. The Customer may, in its sole discretion, make an equitable adjustment in the Contract terms or pricing if pricing or availability of supply is affected by extreme and unforeseen volatility in the marketplace, that is, by circumstances that satisfy all the following criteria: (1) the volatility is due to causes Page 33 wholly beyond the Contractor's control, (2) the volatility affects the marketplace or industry, not just the particular Contract source of supply, (3) the effect on pricing or availability of supply is substantial, and (4) the volatility so affects the Contractor that continued performance of the Contract would result in a substantial loss. 4.5 Additional Quantities For a period not exceeding ninety (90) days from the date of solicitation award, the Customer reserves the right to acquire additional quantities up to the amount shown on the solicitation but not to exceed the threshold for Category Two at the prices submitted in the response to the solicitation. 4.6 Packaging Tangible product shall be securely and properly packed for shipment, storage, and stocking in appropriate, clearly labeled, shipping containers and according to accepted commercial practice, without extra charge for packing materials, cases, or other types of containers. All containers and packaging shall become and remain Customer's property. 4.7 Inspection at Contractor's Site The Customer reserves the right to inspect, at any reasonable time with prior notice, the equipment or product or plant or other facilities of a Contractor to assess conformity with Contract requirements and to determine whether they are adequate and suitable for proper and effective Contract performance. 4.8 Safety Standards All manufactured items and fabricated assemblies subject to operation under pressure, operation by connection to an electric source, or operation involving connection to a manufactured, natural, or LP gas source shall be constructed and approved in a manner acceptable to the appropriate State inspector. Acceptability customarily requires, at a minimum, identification marking of the appropriate safety standard organization, where such approvals of listings have been established for the type of device offered and furnished, for example: the American Society of Mechanical Engineers for pressure vessels; the Underwriters Laboratories and /or National Electrical Manufacturers' Association for electrically operated assemblies; and the American Gas Association for gas- operated assemblies. In addition, all items furnished shall meet all applicable requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act and state and federal requirements relating to clean air and water pollution. 4.9 Americans with Disabilities Act Contractors should identify any products that may be used or adapted for use by visually, hearing, or other physically impaired individuals. 4.10 Literature Upon request, the Contractor shall furnish literature reasonably related to the product offered, for example, user manuals, price schedules, catalogs, descriptive brochures, etc. 4.11 Transportation and Delivery Prices shall include all charges for packing, handling, freight, distribution, and inside delivery. Transportation of goods shall be FOB Destination to any point within thirty (30) days after the Customer places an Order. A Contractor, within five (5) days after receiving a purchase order, shall notify the Customer of any potential delivery delays. Evidence of inability or intentional delays shall be cause for Contract cancellation and Contractor suspension. 4.12 Installation Where installation is required, Contractor shall be responsible for placing and installing the product in the required locations at no additional charge, unless otherwise designated on the Contract or purchase order. Contractor's authorized product and price list shall clearly and separately identify any additional installation charges. All materials used in the installation shall be of good quality and shall be free of defects that would diminish the appearance of the product or render it structurally or operationally unsound. Installation includes the furnishing of any equipment, rigging, and materials required to install or replace the product in the proper location. Contractor shall protect the site from damage and shall repair damages or injury caused during installation by Contractor or its employees or agents. If any alteration, dismantling, excavation, etc., is required to achieve installation, the Contractor shall promptly restore the structure or site to its original Page 34 condition. Contractor shall perform installation work so as to cause the least inconvenience and interference with Customers and with proper consideration of others on site. Upon completion of the installation, the location and surrounding area of work shall be left clean and in a neat and unobstructed condition, with everything in satisfactory repair and order. 4.13 Risk of Loss Matters of inspection and acceptance are addressed in s. 215.422, F.S. Until acceptance, risk of loss or damage shall remain with the Contractor. The Contractor shall be responsible for filing, processing, and collecting all damage claims. To assist the Contractor with damage claims, the Customer shall: record any evidence of visible damage on all copies of the delivering carrier's Bill of Lading; report damages to the carrier and the Contractor; and provide the Contractor with a copy of the carrier's Bill of Lading and damage inspection report. When a Customer rejects a product, Contractor shall remove it from the premises within ten days after notification or rejection. Upon rejection notification, the risk of loss of rejected or non - conforming product shall remain with the Contractor. Rejected product not removed by the Contractor within ten days shall be deemed abandoned by the Contractor, and the Customer shall have the right to dispose of it as its own property. Contractor shall reimburse the Customer for costs and expenses incurred in storing or effecting removal or disposition of rejected product. 4.14 Transaction Fee The State of Florida has instituted MyFloridaMarketPlace, a statewide eProcurement System ( "System "). Pursuant to section 287.057(23), Florida Statutes (2002), all payments shall be assessed a Transaction Fee of one percent (1.0 %), which the Contractor shall pay to the State, unless exempt pursuant to 60A- 1.032, F.A.C. For payments within the State accounting system (FLAIR or its successor), the Transaction Fee shall, when possible, be automatically deducted from payments to the Contractor. If automatic deduction is not possible, the Contractor shall pay the Transaction Fee pursuant to Rule 60A- 1.031(2), F.A.C. By submission of these reports and corresponding payments, Contractor certifies their correctness. All such reports and payments shall be subject to audit by the State or its designee. Contractor shall receive a credit for any Transaction Fee paid by the Contractor for the purchase of any item(s) if such item(s) are returned to the Contractor through no fault, act, or omission of the Contractor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Transaction Fee is non - refundable when an item is rejected or returned, or declined, due to the Contractor's failure to perform or comply with specifications or requirements of the agreement. Failure to comply with these requirements shall constitute grounds for declaring the Contractor in default and recovering reprocurement costs from the Contractor in addition to all outstanding fees. CONTRACTORS DELINQUENT IN PAYING TRANSACTION FEES MAY BE SUBJECT TO BEING REMOVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES' VENDOR LIST AS PROVIDED IN RULE 60A- 1.006, F.A.C. 4.15 Invoicing and Payment Invoices shall contain the Contract number, purchase order number if applicable, and the appropriate vendor identification number. The State may require any other information from the Contractor that the State deems necessary to verify any purchase order placed under the Contract. At the State's option, Contractors may be required to invoice electronically pursuant to guidelines of the Department of Management Services. Current guidelines require that Contractor supply electronic invoices in lieu of paper -based invoices for those transactions processed through the system. Electronic invoices shall be submitted to the Customer through the Ariba Supplier Network (ASN) in one of the following mechanisms — EDI 810, cXML, or web -based invoice entry within the ASN. Payment shall be made in accordance with sections 215.422 and 287.0585 of the Florida Statutes, which govern time limits for payment of invoices. Invoices that must be returned to a Contractor due to preparation errors will result in a delay in payment. Contractors may call (850) 413 -7269 Monday through Friday to inquire about the status of payments by State Agencies. The Customer is responsible for all payments under the Contract. A Customer's failure to pay, or delay in payment, shall not constitute a breach of the Contract and shall not relieve the Contractor of its obligations to the Department or to other Customers. 4.16 Taxes The State does not pay Federal excise or sales taxes on direct purchases of tangible personal property. The State will not Page 35 pay for any personal property taxes levied on the Contractor or for any taxes levied on employees' wages. Any exceptions to this paragraph shall be explicitly noted by the Customer in the special contract conditions section of the solicitation or in the Contract or purchase order. 4.17 Governmental Restrictions If the Contractor believes that any governmental restrictions have been imposed that require alteration of the material, quality, workmanship or performance of the products offered under the Contract, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Customer in writing, indicating the specific restriction. The Customer reserves the right and the complete discretion to accept any such alteration or to cancel the Contract at no further expense to the Customer. 4.18 Lobbying and Integrity Customers shall ensure compliance with Section 11.062, FS and Section 216.347, FS.The Contractor shall not, in connection with this or any other agreement with the State, directly or indirectly (1) offer, confer, or agree to confer any pecuniary benefit on anyone as consideration for any State officer or employee's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, other exercise of discretion, or violation of a known legal duty, or (2) offer, give, or agree to give to anyone any gratuity for the benefit of, or at the direction or request of, any State officer or employee. For purposes of clause (2), "gratuity" means any payment of more than nominal monetary value in the form of cash, travel, entertainment, gifts, meals, lodging, loans, subscriptions, advances, deposits of money, services, employment, or contracts of any kind. Upon request of the Customer's Inspector General, or other authorized State official, the Contractor shall provide any type of information the Inspector General deems relevant to the Contractor's integrity or responsibility. Such information may include, but shall not be limited to, the Contractor's business or financial records, documents, or files of any type or form that refer to or relate to the Contract. The Contractor shall retain such records for the longer of (1) three years after the expiration of the Contract or (2) the period required by the General Records Schedules maintained by the Florida Department of State (available at: http:Hdlis. dos. state. fl. us / barm /genschedules /gensched.htm). The Contractor agrees to reimburse the State for the reasonable costs of investigation incurred by the Inspector General or other authorized State official for investigations of the Contractor's compliance with the terms of this or any other agreement between the Contractor and the State which results in the suspension or debarment of the Contractor. Such costs shall include, but shall not be limited to: salaries of investigators, including overtime; travel and lodging expenses; and expert witness and documentary fees. The Contractor shall not be responsible for any costs of investigations that do not result in the Contractor's suspension or debarment. 4.19 Indemnification The Contractor shall be fully liable for the actions of its agents, employees, partners, or subcontractors and shall fully indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the State and Customers, and their officers, agents, and employees, from suits, actions, damages, and costs of every name and description, including attorneys' fees, arising from or relating to personal injury and damage to real or personal tangible property alleged to be caused in whole or in part by Contractor, its agents, employees, partners, or subcontractors, provided, however, that the Contractor shall not indemnify for that portion of any loss or damages proximately caused by the negligent act or omission of the State or a Customer. Further, the Contractor shall fully indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the State and Customers from any suits, actions, damages, and costs of every name and description, including attorneys' fees, arising from or relating to violation or infringement of a trademark, copyright, patent, trade secret or intellectual property right, provided, however, that the foregoing obligation shall not apply to a Customer's misuse or modification of Contractor's products or a Customer's operation or use of Contractor's products in a manner not contemplated by the Contract or the purchase order. If any product is the subject of an infringement suit, or in the Contractor's opinion is likely to become the subject of such a suit, the Contractor may at its sole expense procure for the Customer the right to continue using the product or to modify it to become non - infringing. If the Contractor is not reasonably able to modify or otherwise secure the Customer the right to continue using the product, the Contractor shall remove the product and refund the Customer the amounts paid in excess of a reasonable rental for past use. The customer shall not be liable for any royalties. The Contractor's obligations under the preceding two paragraphs with respect to any legal action are contingent upon the State or Customer giving the Contractor (1) written notice of any action or threatened action, (2) the opportunity to take over and settle or defend any such action at Contractor's sole expense, and (3) assistance in defending the action at Contractor's sole expense. The Contractor shall not be liable for any cost, expense, or compromise incurred or made by the State or Customer in any legal action without the Contractor's prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably Page 36 withheld. 4.20 Limitation of Liability For all claims against the Contractor under any contract or purchase order, and regardless of the basis on which the claim is made, the Contractor's liability under a contract or purchase order for direct damages shall be limited to the greater of $100,000, the dollar amount of the contract or purchase order, or two times the charges rendered by the Contractor under the purchase order. This limitation shall not apply to claims arising under the Indemnity paragraph contain in this agreement. Unless otherwise specifically enumerated in the Contract or in the purchase order, no party shall be liable to another for special, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages, including lost data or records (unless the contract or purchase order requires the Contractor to back -up data or records), even if the party has been advised that such damages are possible. No party shall be liable for lost profits, lost revenue, or lost institutional operating savings. The State and Customer may, in addition to other remedies available to them at law or equity and upon notice to the Contractor, retain such monies from amounts due Contractor as may be necessary to satisfy any claim for damages, penalties, costs and the like asserted by or against them. The State may set off any liability or other obligation of the Contractor or its affiliates to the State against any payments due the Contractor under any contract with the State. 4.21 Suspension of Work The Customer may in its sole discretion suspend any or all activities under the Contract or purchase order, at any time, when in the best interests of the State to do so. The Customer shall provide the Contractor written notice outlining the particulars of suspension. Examples of the reason for suspension include, but are not limited to, budgetary constraints, declaration of emergency, or other such circumstances. After receiving a suspension notice, the Contractor shall comply with the notice and shall not accept any purchase orders. Within ninety days, or any longer period agreed to by the Contractor, the Customer shall either (1) issue a notice authorizing resumption of work, at which time activity shall resume, or (2) terminate the Contract or purchase order. Suspension of work shall not entitle the Contractor to any additional compensation. 4.22 Termination for Convenience The Customer, by written notice to the Contractor, may terminate the Contract in whole or in part when the Customer determines in its sole discretion that it is in the State's interest to do so. The Contractor shall not furnish any product after it receives the notice of termination, except as necessary to complete the continued portion of the Contract, if any. The Contractor shall not be entitled to recover any cancellation charges or lost profits. 4.23 Termination for Cause The Customer may terminate the Contract if the Contractor fails to (1) deliver the product within the time specified in the Contract or any extension, (2) maintain adequate progress, thus endangering performance of the Contract, (3) honor any term of the Contract, or (4) abide by any statutory, regulatory, or licensing requirement. Rule 60A- 1.006(3), F.A.C., governs the procedure and consequences of default. The Contractor shall continue work on any work not terminated. Except for defaults of subcontractors at any tier, the Contractor shall not be liable for any excess costs if the failure to perform the Contract arises from events completely beyond the control, and without the fault or negligence, of the Contractor. If the failure to perform is caused by the default of a subcontractor at any tier, and if the cause of the default is completely beyond the control of both the Contractor and the subcontractor, and without the fault or negligence of either, the Contractor shall not be liable for any excess costs for failure to perform, unless the subcontracted products were obtainable from other sources in sufficient time for the Contractor to meet the required delivery schedule. If, after termination, it is determined that the Contractor was not in default, or that the default was excusable, the rights and obligations of the parties shall be the same as if the termination had been issued for the convenience of the Customer. The rights and remedies of the Customer in this clause are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under the Contract. 4.24 Force Maj eure, Notice of Delay, and No Damages for Delay The Contractor shall not be responsible for delay resulting from its failure to perform if neither the fault nor the negligence of the Contractor or its employees or agents contributed to the delay and the delay is due directly to acts of God, wars, acts of public enemies, strikes, fires, floods, or other similar cause wholly beyond the Contractor's control, or for any of the Page 37 foregoing that affect subcontractors or suppliers if no alternate source of supply is available to the Contractor. In case of any delay the Contractor believes is excusable, the Contractor shall notify the Customer in writing of the delay or potential delay and describe the cause of the delay either (1) within ten (10) days after the cause that creates or will create the delay first arose, if the Contractor could reasonably foresee that a delay could occur as a result, or (2) if delay is not reasonably foreseeable, within five (5) days after the date the Contractor first had reason to believe that a delay could result. THE FOREGOING SHALL CONSTITUTE THE CONTRACTOR'S SOLE REMEDY OR EXCUSE WITH RESPECT TO DELAY. Providing notice in strict accordance with this paragraph is a condition precedent to such remedy. No claim for damages, other than for an extension of time, shall be asserted against the Customer. The Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in the Contract price or payment of any kind from the Customer for direct, indirect, consequential, impact or other costs, expenses or damages, including but not limited to costs of acceleration or inefficiency, arising because of delay, disruption, interference, or hindrance from any cause whatsoever. If performance is suspended or delayed, in whole or in part, due to any of the causes described in this paragraph, after the causes have ceased to exist the Contractor shall perform at no increased cost, unless the Customer determines, in its sole discretion, that the delay will significantly impair the value of the Contract to the State or to Customers, in which case the Customer may (1) accept allocated performance or deliveries from the Contractor, provided that the Contractor grants preferential treatment to Customers with respect to products subjected to allocation, or (2) purchase from other sources (without recourse to and by the Contractor for the related costs and expenses) to replace all or part of the products that are the subject of the delay, which purchases may be deducted from the Contract quantity, or (3) terminate the Contract in whole or in part. 4.25 Changes The Customer may unilaterally require, by written order, changes altering, adding to, or deducting from the Contract specifications, provided that such changes are within the general scope of the Contract. The Customer may make an equitable adjustment in the Contract price or delivery date if the change affects the cost or time of performance. Such equitable adjustments require the written consent of the Contractor, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. If unusual quantity requirements arise, the Customer may solicit separate bids to satisfy them. 4.26 Renewal Upon mutual agreement, the Customer and the Contractor may renew the Contract, in whole or in part, for a period that may not exceed 3 years or the term of the contract, whichever period is longer. Any renewal shall specify the renewal price, as set forth in the solicitation response. The renewal must be in writing and signed by both parties, and is contingent upon satisfactory performance evaluations and subject to availability of funds. 4.27 Purchase Order Duration Purchase orders issued pursuant to a state term or agency contract must be received by the Contractor no later than close of business on the last day of the contract's term to be considered timely. The Contractor is obliged to fill those orders in accordance with the contract's terms and conditions. Purchase orders received by the contractor after close of business on the last day of the state term or agency contract's term shall be considered void. Purchase orders for a one -time delivery of commodities or performance of contractual services shall be valid through the performance by the Contractor, and all terms and conditions of the state term or agency contract shall apply to the single delivery/performance, and shall survive the termination of the Contract. Contractors are required to accept purchase orders specifying delivery schedules exceeding the contracted schedule even when such extended delivery will occur after expiration of the state term or agency contract. For example, if a state term contract calls for delivery 30 days after receipt of order (ARO), and an order specifies delivery will occur both in excess of 30 days ARO and after expiration of the state term contract, the Contractor will accept the order. However, if the Contractor expressly and in writing notifies the ordering office within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the purchase order that Contractor will not accept the extended delivery terms beyond the expiration of the state term contract, then the purchase order will either be amended in writing by the ordering entity within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the contractor's notice to reflect the state term contract delivery schedule, or it shall be considered withdrawn. The duration of purchase orders for recurring deliveries of commodities or performance of services shall not exceed the expiration of the state term or agency contract by more than twelve months. However, if an extended pricing plan offered in the state term or agency contract is selected by the ordering entity, the contract terms on pricing plans and renewals shall govern the maximum duration of purchase orders reflecting such pricing plans and renewals. Page 38 Timely purchase orders shall be valid through their specified term and performance by the Contractor, and all terms and conditions of the state term or agency contract shall apply to the recurring delivery/performance as provided herein, and shall survive the termination of the Contract. Ordering offices shall not renew a purchase order issued pursuant to a state term or agency contract if the underlying contract expires prior to the effective date of the renewal. 4.28 Advertising Subject to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, the Contractor shall not publicly disseminate any information concerning the Contract without prior written approval from the Customer, including, but not limited to mentioning the Contract in a press release or other promotional material, identifying the Customer or the State as a reference, or otherwise linking the Contractor's name and either a description of the Contract or the name of the State or the Customer in any material published, either in print or electronically, to any entity that is not a party to Contract, except potential or actual authorized distributors, dealers, resellers, or service representative. 4.29 Assignment The Contractor shall not sell, assign or transfer any of its rights, duties or obligations under the Contract, or under any purchase order issued pursuant to the Contract, without the prior written consent of the Customer. In the event of any assignment, the Contractor remains secondarily liable for performance of the contract, unless the Customer expressly waives such secondary liability. The Customer may assign the Contract with prior written notice to Contractor of its intent to do so. 4.30 Antitrust Assignment The Contractor and the State of Florida recognize that in actual economic practice, overcharges resulting from antitrust violations are in fact usually borne by the State of Florida. Therefore, the contractor hereby assigns to the State of Florida any and all claims for such overcharges as to goods, materials or services purchased in connection with the Contract. 4.31 Dispute Resolution Any dispute concerning performance of the Contract shall be decided by the Customer's designated contract manager, who shall reduce the decision to writing and serve a copy on the Contractor. The decision shall be final and conclusive unless within twenty one (21) days from the date of receipt, the Contractor files with the Customer a petition for administrative hearing. The Customer's decision on the petition shall be final, subject to the Contractor's right to review pursuant to Chapter 120 of the Florida Statutes. Exhaustion of administrative remedies is an absolute condition precedent to the Contractor's ability to pursue any other form of dispute resolution; provided, however, that the parties may employ the alternative dispute resolution procedures outlined in Chapter 120. Without limiting the foregoing, the exclusive venue of any legal or equitable action that arises out of or relates to the Contract shall be the appropriate state court in Leon County, Florida; in any such action, Florida law shall apply and the parties waive any right to jury trial. 4.32 Employees, Subcontractors, and Agents All Contractor employees, subcontractors, or agents performing work under the Contract shall be properly trained technicians who meet or exceed any specified training qualifications. Upon request, Contractor shall furnish a copy of technical certification or other proof of qualification. All employees, subcontractors, or agents performing work under the Contract must comply with all security and administrative requirements of the Customer and shall comply with all controlling laws and regulations relevant to the services they are providing under the Contract. The State may conduct, and the Contractor shall cooperate in, a security background check or otherwise assess any employee, subcontractor, or agent furnished by the Contractor. The State may refuse access to, or require replacement of, any personnel for cause, including, but not limited to, technical or training qualifications, quality of work, change in security status, or non - compliance with a Customer's security or other requirements. Such approval shall not relieve the Contractor of its obligation to perform all work in compliance with the Contract. The State may reject and bar from any facility for cause any of the Contractor's employees, subcontractors, or agents. Page 39 4.33 Security and Confidentiality The Contractor shall comply fully with all security procedures of the United States, State of Florida and Customer in performance of the Contract. The Contractor shall not divulge to third parties any confidential information obtained by the Contractor or its agents, distributors, resellers, subcontractors, officers or employees in the course of performing Contract work, including, but not limited to, security procedures, business operations information, or commercial proprietary information in the possession of the State or Customer. The Contractor shall not be required to keep confidential information or material that is publicly available through no fault of the Contractor, material that the Contractor developed independently without relying on the State's or Customer's confidential information, or material that is otherwise obtainable under State law as a public record. To insure confidentiality, the Contractor shall take appropriate steps as to its personnel, agents, and subcontractors. The warranties of this paragraph shall survive the Contract. 4.34 Contractor Employees, Subcontractors, and Other Agents The Customer and the State shall take all actions necessary to ensure that Contractor's employees, subcontractors and other agents are not employees of the State of Florida. Such actions include, but are not limited to, ensuring that Contractor's employees, subcontractors, and other agents receive benefits and necessary insurance (health, workers' compensations, and unemployment) from an employer other than the State of Florida. 4.35 Insurance Requirements During the Contract term, the Contractor at its sole expense shall provide commercial insurance of such a type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the Contract. Providing and maintaining adequate insurance coverage is a material obligation of the Contractor. Upon request, the Contractor shall provide certificate of insurance. The limits of coverage under each policy maintained by the Contractor shall not be interpreted as limiting the Contractor's liability and obligations under the Contract. All insurance policies shall be through insurers authorized or eligible to write policies in Florida. 4.36 Warranty of Authority Each person signing the Contract warrants that he or she is duly authorized to do so and to bind the respective party to the Contract. 4.37 Warranty of Ability to Perform The Contractor warrants that, to the best of its knowledge, there is no pending or threatened action, proceeding, or investigation, or any other legal or financial condition, that would in any way prohibit, restrain, or diminish the Contractor's ability to satisfy its Contract obligations. The Contractor warrants that neither it nor any affiliate is currently on the convicted vendor list maintained pursuant to section 287.133 of the Florida Statutes, or on any similar list maintained by any other state or the federal government. The Contractor shall immediately notify the Customer in writing if its ability to perform is compromised in any manner during the term of the Contract. 4.38 Notices All notices required under the Contract shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, by reputable air courier service, or by personal delivery to the agency designee identified in the original solicitation, or as otherwise identified by the Customer. Notices to the Contractor shall be delivered to the person who signs the Contract. Either designated recipient may notify the other, in writing, if someone else is designated to receive notice. 4.39 Leases and Installment Purchases Prior approval of the Chief Financial Officer (as defined in Section 17.001, F.S.) is required for State agencies to enter into or to extend any lease or installment- purchase agreement in excess of the Category Two amount established by section 287.017 of the Florida Statutes. 4.40 Prison Rehabilitative Industries and Diversified Enterprises, Inc. (PRIDE) Section 946.515(2), F.S. requires the following statement to be included in the solicitation: "It is expressly understood and agreed that any articles which are the subject of, or required to carry out, the Contract shall be purchased from the corporation identified under Chapter 946 of the Florida Statutes (PRIDE) in the same manner and under the same procedures set forth in section 946.515(2) and (4) of the Florida Statutes; and for purposes of the Contract the person, firm, or other business entity carrying out the provisions of the Contract shall be deemed to be substituted for the agency insofar Page 40 as dealings with such corporation are concerned." Additional information about PRIDE and the products it offers is available at http: / /www.pridefl.com. 4.41 Products Available from the Blind or Other Handicapped Section 413.036(3), F.S. requires the following statement to be included in the solicitation: "It is expressly understood and agreed that any articles that are the subject of, or required to carry out, this contract shall be purchased from a nonprofit agency for the Blind or for the Severely Handicapped that is qualified pursuant to Chapter 413, Florida Statutes, in the same manner and under the same procedures set forth in section 413.036(1) and (2), Florida Statutes; and for purposes of this contract the person, firm, or other business entity carrying out the provisions of this contract shall be deemed to be substituted for the State agency insofar as dealings with such qualified nonprofit agency are concerned." Additional information about the designated nonprofit agency and the products it offers is available at http: / /www.respectofflorida.org. 4.42 Modification of Terms The Contract contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties, which terms and conditions shall govern all transactions between the Customer and the Contractor. The Contract may only be modified or amended upon mutual written agreement of the Customer and the Contractor. No oral agreements or representations shall be valid or binding upon the Customer or the Contractor. No alteration or modification of the Contract terms, including substitution of product, shall be valid or binding against the Customer. The Contractor may not unilaterally modify the terms of the Contract by affixing additional terms to product upon delivery (e.g., attachment or inclusion of standard preprinted forms, product literature, "shrink wrap" terms accompanying or affixed to a product, whether written or electronic) or by incorporating such terms onto the Contractor's order or fiscal forms or other documents forwarded by the Contractor for payment. The Customer's acceptance of product or processing of documentation on forms furnished by the Contractor for approval or payment shall not constitute acceptance of the proposed modification to terms and conditions. 4.43 Cooperative Purchasing Pursuant to their own governing laws, and subject to the agreement of the Contractor, other entities may be permitted to make purchases at the terms and conditions contained herein. Non - Customer purchases are independent of the agreement between Customer and Contractor, and Customer shall not be a party to any transaction between the Contractor and any other purchaser. State agencies wishing to make purchases from this agreement are required to follow the provisions of s. 287.042(16) (a), F.S. This statute requires the Department of Management Services to determine that the requestor's use of the contract is cost - effective and in the best interest of the State. 4.44 Waiver The delay or failure by the Customer to exercise or enforce any of its rights under this Contract shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver of the Customer's right thereafter to enforce those rights, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any such right preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right. 4.45 Annual Appropriations The State's performance and obligation to pay under this contract are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature. 4.46 Execution in Counterparts The Contract may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 4.47 Severability If a court deems any provision of the Contract void or unenforceable, that provision shall be enforced only to the extent that it is not in violation of law or is not otherwise unenforceable and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. Page 41 SECTION FIVE: SPECIAL CONDITIONS CONTENTS: 5.1 Eligible Products 5.2 Exclusions 5.3 Qualifications 5.4 Doing Business with the State 5.5 Ethical Business Practices 5.6 Sales Requirement 5.7 Quarterly Contract Sales Summary Requirement 5.8 Purchasing Card Program 5.9 Preferred Pricing Compliance 5.10 Prices/Discounts 5.11 Balance -of -Line Price /Product 5.12 Fill -In Pricing 5.13 Addition/Deletion of Vendors and Products Offered 5.14 Quantity Discounts 5.15 Delays & Complaints 5.16 Compliance with Laws 5.17 Conformance to Codes 5.18 Delivery Requirements 5.19 Delivery /Installation Recommendations for Steel Files 5.20 Installation Costs / Reconfiguration 5.21 Space Planning / Design Fees 5.22 Change Orders 5.23 Contract Revisions 5.24 Dedicated State Term Contract Website Requirement 5.25 MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP) Electronic Catalog Requirement 5.26 Requirements of Contractors 5.27 Authorized Servicing Dealers and Manufacturer Representative 5.28 Intellectual Property 5.29 Warranty 5.30 Insurance, Worker's Compensation Page 42 [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information)] 5. 1 Eligible Products All products offered under this Contract shall be new and unused and in current production - remanufactured or refurbished products are not part of this offering. No series shall be considered for award under this Contract if already awarded or in conflict with another State term contract. Eligible products include, but are not limited to, Office Furniture Dispatch/911 Furniture Mail Processing Furniture Map Files Reception Desks Sofas & Loveseats (Public Areas) Lateral, Vertical and Fireproof Steel Files Conference or Training Tables Conference or Training Chairs Storage and Presentation Accessories Single & Multiple Seating Units Occasional Tables The Department reserves the right to require Respondents to submit samples of the proposed products before making a final determination of acceptability. 5.2 Exclusions The following items are specifically excluded and not within the scope of this Contract: Art work Decorative lamps and accessories 5.3 Qualifications Only Responses submitted by product manufacturers will be considered for evaluation. Respondents must have the capability to provide products and services in accordance with the solicitation documents. Contract orders may be directed to a manufacturer's representative or to servicing dealers, but only those Responses signed and presented by the product manufacturer will be considered for contract award. 5.4. Doing Business with the State — Other State Agencies Requirements Vendors doing business with the State of Florida are required to register in the MyFloridaMarketPlace (HEMP) system. In addition, to conduct business in Florida, a vendor must register /obtain licenses with particular state agencies such as the Department of State, Division of Corporations, the Department of Revenue, and the Department of Financial Services. To Page 43 review these requirements, click on the following link: http:Hdms.Myflorida.com/ business _operations /state purchasing/myflorida _marketplace /mfmp vendors /vendor toolkit /doi n,;4 business with the—state—of florida 5.5 Ethical Business Practices Contractor shall work in partnership with the State to ensure a successful and valuable contract, and ethical practices are required of State employees, Contractors, and all parties representing the contractor. All work performed under this Contract will be subject to review by the Inspector General of the State of Florida, and any findings suggesting unethical business practices may be cause for default proceedings and/or contract termination. Reference General Contract Conditions, PUR 1000, Lobbying and Integrity, Section 4.18 for additional requirements. 5.6 Sales Requirement Sales will be reviewed on a quarterly basis. Should no sales be recorded in two consecutive contract quarters, the Contractor may be placed in probationary status or may be subject to termination for convenience. 5.7 Quarterly Contract Sales Summary Requirement The Contractor is required to provide Quarterly Contract Sales Summary reports to the Contract Manager. Reports shall include: • Contractor's Name • Reporting Period • Total dollar value of purchases per quarter differentiating between Eligible User types, State Agencies and Political Subdivisions. • Listing total dollar of Environmentally Preferred Products sales and contract sales through Certified Minority Business Enterprises. Initiation and submission of the Contract Sales Summaries are to be the responsibility of the Contractor without prompting or notification by the Contract Manager. The Contractor will submit the completed Contract Sales Summary forms by email to the Contract Manager as stipulated. The Department shall distribute, in electronic format, the Contract Sales Summary forms to be used by the Contractor upon Contract Formation, Section 2.17. The Department reserves the right to require Contractors to submit more detailed reports as necessary. Reference General Contract Conditions, PUR 1000, Transaction Fee, Section 4.14 for reporting requirements. Failure to provide a quarterly report, including no sales, within thirty (30) calendar days following the end of each quarter may result in the default proceedings and/or termination of the Contract by the Department. 5.8 Purchasing Card Program The State of Florida and numerous Eligible Users have adopted and implemented various Purchasing Card programs using different universal card formats (e.g., American Express, MasterCard, and Visa). Accordingly, the Contractor and the Manufacturer's authorized Dealers must have the ability to accept universal card format Purchasing Cards, including American Express, MasterCard, and Visa, during the Contract term. Contractors and Manufacturer's authorized Dealers may receive payments from Eligible Users by universal card format Purchasing Cards in the same manner as other credit / debit card purchases. Universal card format Purchasing Cards (e.g., American Express, MasterCard, and Visa) acceptance is mandatory, but is not the exclusive method of payment (e.g., Purchase Order). The method of ordering and payment (e.g., Purchase Order, Purchasing Card) shall be selected by the Eligible User. The Eligible User will not fill out any Contractor or Manufacturer's authorized Dealer forms or separate contracts in association with the Contractor or Manufacturer's authorized Dealer accepting a Purchasing Card payment. Contractors and Manufacturer's authorized Dealers are not allowed to charge a fee for accepting a Purchasing Card payment. Surcharges or convenience fees are prohibited. On -line billing or payment systems maintained by the Contractor, Manufacturer's authorized Dealer, or their respective agent will not store the card holder's name, account number, and expiration date for re -use. Card holders will provide the Contractor or Manufacturer's authorized Dealer, as applicable, with card account information at each Purchasing Card transaction. Page 44 5.9 Preferred Price Compliance In accordance with Chapter 2010 -151, Laws of Florida, Section 48(2), the Contractor is required to submit, at least once during each year of the Contract, an Affidavit from an authorized representative of the Contractor attesting that the Contract is in compliance with Section 4.4(b), Best Pricing Offer. Contractor's failure to comply with Section 4.4(b) may be grounds for terminating the Contract, at the Department's sole discretion. The Department shall distribute the Affidavit form to be used by the Contractor upon Contract Formation, Section 2.17. 5.10 Prices/Discounts All pricing shall duplicate GSA price lists and discounts for every item offered. Prices shall be submitted in the form of- 1.) A discount off manufacturer's current published price list with the GSA - approved discount structure or better, in effect at the time of bid opening. A copy of your GSA Contract verifying the price and discount offered must be submitted with the Response. AND 2.) The published GSA discounted price lists, in effect at the time of bid opening. Adjustments to address a difference between the GSA industrial Funding Fee and the MyFloridaMarketPlace Transaction Fee may be listed on the Price Sheet as a percentage of the total applicable charge, and shall not exceed the exact difference of the two fees (.25 %). Reference General Conditions (PUR 1000), Section 4.14 Transaction Fee Reports for additional information. Reference Special Instructions to Respondents, Price Sheet, Section 3.8.1. Reference Special Conditions, Contract Revisions, Section 5.23 for price adjustments. 5.11 Balance -of -Line Price /Products Contractor may offer additional products, parts or items for series that have not been included on the Contractor's GSA Contract but expand additional offering and options to the State of Florida. Any Balance -of -Line series or products approved by GSA during the contract term must be submitted to the State for consideration or remove them from the Balance -of -Line category. Balance -of -Line items may be added or removed during the contract term and the process will not impact your GSA product offering on the state term contract. Pricing submitted for Balance -of -Line items shall be within 5% of the discount offered for similar items already on the current contract. The request to increase prices for Balance -of -Line must meet the criteria for an Equitable Adjustment. The only price increases considered outside of GSA modifications (for approved products) Equitable Adjustments. For more details on the Equitable Adjustment process, please reference (General Conditions (PUR 1000) Section 4. Price Changes Applicable only to Term Contracts, paragraph (e) Equitable Adjustments: http: / /dms.myflorida.com/ business _operations /state purchasing/vendor _ information/state _ contracts_agreem ents_and price_lists /state term _ contracts/furniture _ office_ and files. The Department reserves the right to accept or reject any balance of line items submitted for the Contract. This provision is not intended to allow an abundance of non -GSA approved items on the Contract. The majority of items approved on this Contract for any Contractor should be GSA approved items. 5.12 Fill-In Pricing The Contractor must honor "fill -in" orders at the same pricing and discount for 90 days after substantial completion of a single job, delivered to a single location. 5.13 Addition/Deletion of Vendors and Products Offered The Department reserves the right to add or delete products, and delete vendors, within 180 days after such action by GSA, as published in the Federal Supply Schedule and all "Supplements ". 5.14 Quantity Discounts Contractor is encouraged to offer additional discounts for one time delivery of large single orders of any assortment of items. Page 45 5.15 Delays & Complaints Delivery delays and service complaints will be monitored on a continual basis. Documented inability to perform under the conditions of the Contract (via the established Complaint to Vendor process (PUR 7017)) may result in default proceedings and /or contract termination. 5.16 Compliance with Laws The Contractor shall comply with all laws, rules, codes, ordinances, and licensing requirements that are applicable to the conduct of its business, including those of federal, State, and local agencies having jurisdiction and authority. By way of non - exhaustive example, Chapter 287 of the Florida Statutes and Chapter 60A -1 of the Florida Administrative Code govern the Contract. By way of further non - exhaustive example, the Contractor shall comply with section 247A(e) of the Immigration and Nationalization Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, creed, national origin, handicap, marital status, or veteran's status. Violation of such laws shall be grounds for contract termination. 5.17 Conformance to Codes The installing dealer shall be responsible for verifying furniture space plan/configuration fits the given space and all aisles and openings and doors meet the local fire and safety codes and are in conformance with ADA regulations. Also, upon the request of the Department or Customer, the Contractor shall be responsible for providing written verification of their product's conformance to current fire and flammability codes, as regulated by the State of Florida. 5.18 Delivery Requirements The delivery requirements below are specific to this contract. Reference General Contract Conditions, PUR 1000, paragraph 4.11 for additional information. Delivery and shipping costs shall mirror charges as approved by GSA. All charges for freight, delivery, and installation shall be noted on the Price Sheet(s), Section 6.1. The Department reserves the right to reject any additional charges. Delivery of all contract items (with the exception of special finish, custom fabric, or customized orders) is required within 90 days from receipt of purchase order containing complete ordering information (contract number, commodity number, item description, manufacturer's model number and street delivery address (not Post Office Box)). It is highly recommended that the Ap-encv confirm receipt of the Purchase Order with the manufacturer and servicinp- dealer. If orders are sent directly to the manufacturer, the servicing dealer may not always be aware of pending orders and the time frame. Any known factors (including vacation period, factory inventory, etc.) that may disrupt this delivery schedule must be clearly presented to the Customer along with the specific information on how orders will be processed during such periods. Delay in delivery beyond the time specified must be justified to the ordering agency, in writing, and if required, the Contractor shall provide temporary furniture on a rent -free basis. Furthermore, items not delivered within the required delivery schedule may result in the Contractor being found in default by the Department in accordance with contract conditions. 5.19 Delivery /Installation Recommendations for Steel Files The stability of steel files is assured if they are properly installed and loaded, therefore THE STATE OF FLORIDA HIGHLY RECOMMENDS users to consider purchasing steel files "DELIVERED AND INSTALLED" from the approved manufacturer. If steel files are ordered "Drop- ship" or "Delivered Not Installed "; it is highly recommended that the user note on the order to the Contractor or servicing dealer that a delivery carrier must be equipped with a way to remove the files from the truck (see "Drop- ship" or "Delivered Not Installed" under Section 3.1 Delivery Methods — Definitions of Terms). Follow the instructions that are shipped with the files to ensure that they are properly installed to provide safe performance. Instructions should include information about leveling files and ganging files together. Counterbalance for lateral file units is recommended unless cabinets are ganged from most manufacturers. There may be an additional charge for counterbalance. 5.20 Installation Costs/Reconfiguration Page 46 Installation charges shall be listed as a per -item fee, percentage of price fee, or negotiable on the price sheets. Installing agent shall be responsible for receipt, inspection, and assembly of items at the location listed on the purchase order. The installation charges shall also apply to any required reconfiguration of systems furniture during the term of the contract. 5.21 Space Planning/Design Fees Space planning fees for systems and modular furniture shall be listed as an hourly fee, percentage of price fee or negotiable per project on the price sheet. Customer shall approve space planning or design fees in writing prior to any services being performed by the Contractor or servicing dealer. 5.22 Change Orders Issuance of a purchase order under a contract resulting from this Response is a binding agreement. Purchasers should carefully check the accuracy of the order. Change orders or revisions are thereafter subject to the following: ❖ All requests for changes must be submitted in written form or entered in the Ariba System (per format of the purchase order). Changes in the number of units (additions or deletions), commodity number, description, features of colors can only be made subject to the approval of the Contractor. ❖ Changes or revisions in the method of delivery or the designated delivery destination can only be made subject to the approval of the Contractor. ❖ Multiple delivery points must be clearly indicated on the purchase order. When multiple delivery locations are required, enter "See Below" in the "Ship To" box on the purchase order. List delivery locations and instructions in the body of the purchase order, as well as the commodity number and quantity for each location. ❖ Orders may be cancelled ONLY by obtaining approval from the Contractor, and may be subject to a 25% (or greater) re- stocking fee, plus freight charges. Most furniture orders are considered custom and cannot be cancelled or returned. 5.23 Contract Revisions Revisions to the contract are allowed during the term of the contract. Any revisions to the originally approved contract information must be authorized in writing by the Department prior to implementation. A contract revision authorization form will be sent to awarded Contractors and must be submitted with any request to revise pricing and/or terms,ordering instructions, or servicing dealer listing. Any GSA revision of pricing and products shall be submitted to the Department with the Department reserving the right to accept or reject within 30 days, or cancel the Contract. Any increase shall not become effective until approved by the Department. The Department reserves the right to reject items offered whose discounts are less favorable than those offered to other entities in the State (i.e., city or county contracts), and reject items that do not offer the best value to the State. PRICE OR PRODUCTS CHANGES New or revised price lists or additional /deleted products may be considered for addition/deletion to the contract after GSA approval. All requests must include the following: 1. Contract Revision/Authorization Form (may submit one form for all requests). 2. Revised Price Sheet Form. Any line item not completed, example - installation or space planning fees, we assume no charges are incurred for Customers. 3. Copy of the Federal GSA Modification approving any price changes or adjustments, add/deletion of products — in its entirety. All pages, attachments and letters referenced in the modification must be included in your request. 4. Current manufacturer published price listibook consistent with GSA Contract referenced in the GSA modification- compact disc format (CD). Cover page, terms and conditions, table of contents must be included to confirm pricing. 5. Manufacturer's current Federal GSA Catalog (if it's applicable and you are submitting a new GSA Contract during this contract) - compact disc format (CD). Cover page, terms and, table of contents must be included to document GSA discount and tiers. 6. Literature of product or series requested for addition. SERVICING DEALER CHANGES Page 47 Addition or deletions of servicing dealers may be requested at any time during the Contract. All requests must include the following: 1. Contract Revision/Authorization Form (may submit one form for all requests). 2. Letter or email information from the manufacturer requesting addition/deletion of the dealer(s). 3. Updated Distributor Template — if they will be receiving orders on behalf of the manufacturer in MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP). See Authorized Dealers and Manufacturer Representative Form for additional information. (Section 7.2) ORDERING INSTRUCTION CHANGES Changes to the Ordering Instructions may be requested at any time during the contract effective dates. All requests must include the following: 1. Contract Revision/Authorization Form (may submit one form for all requests). 2. Letter or email information from the manufacturer clarifying the requested change - if needed. 3. Revised Ordering Instructions Form 5.24 Dedicated State Term Contract Website Requirement The contract resulting from this ITB will become a public document. The Department is using the Florida Communities Network (FCN) on the Internet World Wide Web (WWW) to distribute contract and product information to users of State Term Contracts outside of MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP). The Department shall link the Contractor's web page and Price Sheet (Section 6.1) to the contract site: hn2:Hdms.myflorida.com. Approved revised Price Sheet(s) from the Contractor will be sent to the Contract Manager in Microsoft Word version for posting to the contract site. Contractors shall develop and maintain a State Contract Web Page on the Internet WWW to post approved contract information to enable access to and ordering of Customers' specific items. The Contractor's web page will be linked from the State Contract website and dedicated to the State of Florida Contract. Contractors are responsible for maintaining the contract information below through their State Contract Web Page for the life of the contract. Each Contractor's State Contract Web Page must include the following information: Ordering Instructions ❖ Authorized Servicing Dealers & Manufacturer Representative ❖ Commercial Price Book or GSA Price Book, PDF or HTML Environmental Requirements ❖ Recycled Content Requirement ❖ Additional links may be included to access additional product literature, the Contractor's home page, or any other pertinent information. Any revisions to the originally approved contract information must be authorized in writing by the Department prior to implementation. If unauthorized information is discovered within the site, the contract link may be immediately suspended until the information is appropriately revised, or until the contract is terminated. Except in the event of unforeseen technological interruptions or forces of nature, continued disruption of service or inadequate access may be grounds for default proceedings and/or contract termination. Final award is contingent on completion of submitted Universal Resource Locator (URL) for the State Term Contract Web Page. See Event Timeline. 5.25 MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP) Electronic Catalog Requirement. The MyFloridaMarketPlace ( "MFMP ") third -party service provider is responsible for converting Contract catalog information into a format supported by the system. To accomplish this conversion, the Contractor, if requested, shall provide certain information in electronic format directly to the service provider (Note: This format is generally Microsoft Exce1TM ) Page 48 Within ten (10) business days of written notice from the MFMP service provider, Contractor shall provide all information necessary to facilitate electronic purchases from this Contract. Such information may include, but is not limited to, Contractor Name, Manufacturer / Brand Name, SKU, Commodity Description, unit of measure. Contractor shall provide this information in the format required by the MFMP service provider. No costs or expenses associated with providing this information shall be charged to the State, Department, Eligible Users, or MFMP service provider. With the Contractor's timely assistance, the MFMP service provider shall create and maintain web -based placement of the requested Contract information. Final award is continp-ent on completion of and submittal of MvFloridaMarketPlace electronic catalog. See Event Timeline. 5.26 Requirements of Contractors ❖ Printed paper copies of this contract will not be automatically distributed to contractors or users. Contractors can view their current contract through the State Purchasing website at http: / /purchasing. state.fl.us. ❖ Color brochures and fabric /finish cards must be provided to all users upon request. ❖ All price lists and literature will be provided at no charge to the Department or Customers. ❖ The Department shall review and approve all literature, price lists, and promotional materials before distribution to agencies and political subdivisions. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in default proceedings and /or contract termination. 5.27 Authorized Servicing Dealers and Manufacturer Representative Contractors are required to name at least a minimum of two (2) different servicing dealers for the State of Florida. Contractors are encouraged to use certified Minority Business Enterprise dealers. It is the Contractor's responsibility to insure that all customers will be given equal representation and service with the approved dealers. Each dealer named will be responsible for delivery and installation of products, as well as providing needed assistance to Eligible Users, as defined in Special Instructions, Eligible Users, Section 3.1. All servicing dealers participating in this contract are required to register in MyFloridaMarketPlace if they will be receiving orders on behalf of the manufacturer. 5.28 Intellectual Property The parties do not anticipate that any Intellectual Property will be developed or created as a result of the Contract. However, in such case as it is developed or created, any Intellectual Property developed or created as a result of the Contract will belong to and be the sole property of the State of Florida. This provision will survive the termination or expiration of the Contract. 5.29 Warranty All equipment including material used therein shall be warranted by the Contractor against mechanical, electrical, and workmanship defects. In the event defects become evident within the warranty period, the Contractor shall either repair or replace the defective parts and materials at no additional cost to the Customer. The Contractor shall be liable to the Customer for supply of information and material necessary for mandatory revisions determined by the manufacturer at no additional cost to the Customer for the duration of the warranty period. The duration of this full parts warranty period shall be at least 5 years (except for fabric and pneumatic cylinders, which shall be warranted for a minimum of 1 year), or the manufacturer's standard warranty period, whichever is longer. The warranty period shall start with the date of equipment acceptance and shall be extended to include times during which the equipment is out of service for warranty repair. The warranty shall apply to all equipment provided under this contract. 5.30 Insurance, Worker's Compensation The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this agreement, Worker's Compensation Insurance for all of his employees connected with the work of this project and, in case any work is sublet, the Contractor shall require the subcontractor similarly to provide Worker's Compensation Insurance for all of the latter's employees unless such employees are covered by the protection afforded by the Contractor. Such insurance shall comply fully with the Florida Worker's Compensation law. In case any class of employees engaged in hazardous work under this contract at the site of the project is not protected under the Workmen's Compensation statute, the Contractor shall provide, and cause each sub - contractor to provide, adequate insurance, satisfactory to the Customer, for the protection of his employees not Page 49 otherwise protected. INSURANCE, CONTRACTOR'S PUBLIC LIABILITY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this agreement COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY AND COMPREHENSIVE AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY INSURANCE as shall protect him from claims for damage for personal injury, including accidental death, as well as claims for property damages which may arise from operating under this agreement whether such operations are by himself or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by him, and the amount of such insurance shall be the minimum limits as follows: A. CONTRACTOR'S COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL $300,000.00 LIABILITY COVERAGES, BODILY INJURY Each Occurrence, & PROPERTY DAMAGE Combined Single Limit B. AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY $100,000.00 COVERAGES, BODILY INJURY Each Occurrence, & PROPERTY DAMAGE Combined Single Limit Insuring clause for both BODILY INJURY and PROPERTY DAMAGE shall be amended to provide coverage on an OCCURRENCE BASIS SECTION SIX: PRICE SHEET CONTENTS: 6.1 Price Sheet [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information) Page 50 Page 51 ITB No. 17- 425 - 001 -F, Office Furniture and Files sk Section 6.1 Price Sheet Respondent's Name: Respondent's Brand Name: Price List Name / Number / Date (be specific): Series Bid: Each series shall be listed separately by name and /or number. Quantity Discount Tiers' GSA Discount2 ( # #. # # %) State of Florida Discount Offered3 ( # #. # # %) State of Florida Offer Status4 [Example: $0 - $5,000] 50.00% 49.75% Mmpuam [Example: $5,000 - $10,000] 50.00% 49.00% Non - Compliant [Example: $10,000 - $25,000] 50.00% 50.25% Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant Additional Quantity Discounts: [List additional discounts applicable to any Single Order of any combination of awarded contract items to be delivered at one time to one destination.] Page 52 Balance -of -Line Price /Products (if applicable): [List Product Names, Price List/Name/Number /Date (be specific) and discounts.] Installation: [Charges may be listed as cost per item, % of net cost of items, or negotiable per project. List any installation charges.] Space Planning / Design Fees: Fees may be listed as an hourly fee, percentage of price fee, or negotiable per project. List space planning / design fees.] Shipping / Delivery Costs: [If there are additional costs not already listed in the basic discount price, please detail those here.] Section 6.1. Notes: i - Quantity Discount Tiers: Enter the list quantity discount tiers as approved in your GSA Contract. 2 - GSA Discount ( # #. ## %): Enter the GSA Discount including Industrial Funding Fee. Percentages provided in the template form are examples and can be replaced with your contract discount information. 3 - State of Florida Discount Offered ( # #. ## %): Enter the State of Florida Discount offered including Transaction Fee (Fixed Discount). See Section 5.10 Price /Discount 4 - State of Florida Offer Status: For each Discount Tier, enter the State of Florida Discount offered (including Transaction Fee). The discount must be no less than 0.25% below the GSA Discount including Industrial Funding Fee. Compliance / Non - Compliance status will be automatically calculated and displayed. See Section 5.10 Price/Discount Any additional charges or fees must be noted on this form OR the State expects that there are no charges. PLEASE DUPLICATE ON ADDITIONAL TABS IF NEEDED. Page 53 SECTION SEVEN: FORMS CONTENTS: 7.1 Ordering Instructions Form 7.2 Authorized Servicing Dealer & Manufacturer Representatives Form 7.3 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Program 7.4 Quarterly Sales Report Form 7.5 Savings /Price Reductions Form Page 54 7.6 Product List Form 7.7 Response Preparation Checklist [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank (other than footer information) ITB No. 17- 425 -001 -F Office Furniture and Files Section 7.1 Ordering Instructions Form Respondent Information RESPONDENT NAME: [Enter Respondent's Name] Page 55 RESPONDENT [Enter Respondent's Federal Employer Identification Number] FEID NO.: MFMP / SPURS [Enter Respondent's MFMP / SPURS Vendor Number, if Known] VENDOR NO.: STREET ADDRESS: [Enter Respondent's Street Address] CITY, STATE and [Enter Respondent's City, State and ZIP] ZIP: INTERNET [Enter Respondent's Internet Address] ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: [Enter Respondent's Main Telephone Number] TOLL -FREE NO.: [Enter Respondent's Main Toll -Free Telephone Number, if Available] FAX NO.: [Enter Respondent's Main Fax Number] Person Responsible For Administering The Contract NAME: [Enter Contact's Name] TITLE: [Enter Contact's Title] STREET ADDRESS: [Enter Contact's Street Address] CITY, STATE and [Enter Contact's City, State and ZIP] ZIP: E -MAIL ADDRESS: [Enter Contact's E -Mail Address] TELEPHONE NO.: [Enter Contact's Telephone Number] TOLL -FREE NO.: [Enter Contact's Toll -Free Telephone Number, if Available] CELL PHONE NO.: [Enter Contact's Cell Phone Number (Optional)] FAX NO.: [Enter Contact's Fax Number] Ordering and Remit -To Information Please provide information where Customers should direct orders. You must provide a regular mailing address and email address. If equipped to receive purchase orders electronically, you may also provide an Internet Address. REMIT -TO: [Enter Respondent's Remit -To Name] Or Enter "See Servicing Dealer List" REMIT -TO STREET [Enter Respondent's Remit -To Street Address] ADDRESS: REMIT -TO CITY, [Enter Respondent's Remit -To City, State and ZIP] STATE and ZIP: REMIT -TO EMAIL and /or INTERNET [Enter Respondent's Remit -To Email and /or INTERNET Address] ADDRESS: Note: Please make sure the Ordering Instructions information provided above matches the MyFloridaMarketPlace ( "MFMP ") Vendor Registration account information (http: // vendor .myfloridamarketplace.com/). PLEASE DUPLICATE ON ADDITIONAL TABS IF NEEDED. Page 56 ITB No. 17- 425 -001 -F Office Furniture and Files Section 7.2 Authorized Servicing Dealer & Manufacturer's Representatives Form Servicing Dealer Information DEALER NAME: [Enter Dealer's Name] DEALER FEID NO.: [Enter Dealer's Federal Employer Identification Number] MFMP / SPURS VENDOR NO.: [Enter Dealer's MFMP / SPURS Vendor Number, if Known] STREET ADDRESS: [Enter Dealer's Street Address] CITY, STATE and ZIP: [Enter Dealer's City, State and ZIP] INTERNET ADDRESS: [Enter Dealer's Internet Address] TELEPHONE NO.: [Enter Dealer's Main Telephone Number] TOLL -FREE NO.: [Enter Dealer's Main Toll -Free Telephone Number, if Available] FAX NO.: [Enter Dealer's Main Fax Number] Manufacturer Representation MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE NAME: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Name] TITLE: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Title] STREET ADDRESS: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Street Address] CITY, STATE and ZIP: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative City, State and ZIP] E -MAIL ADDRESS: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative E -Mail Address] TELEPHONE NO.: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Telephone Number] TOLL -FREE NO.: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Toll -Free Telephone Number, if Available] CELL PHONE NO.: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Cell Phone Number (Optional)] FAX NO.: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Fax Number] GORAPHIC AREA OF TERRITORY: [Enter Manufacturer's Representative Geographic Area of Territory] NOTES: Note: Please make sure the Ordering Instructions information provided above matches the MyFloridaMarketPlace ( "MFMP ") Vendor Registration account information (http: // vendor .myfloridamarketplace.com /). PLEASE DUPLICATE THIS FORM ON ADDITIONAL TABS AS NEEDED Page 57 Certification of Drug -Free Workplace: Section 7.3 Section 287.087 of the Florida Statutes provides that, where identical tie bids are received, preference shall be given to a bid received from a bidder that certifies it has implemented a drug -free workforce program. Please sign below and return this form to certify that your business has a drug -free workplace program. 1) Publish a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition. 2) Inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, the business's policy of maintaining a drug -free workplace, any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs and the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. 3) Give each employee engaged in providing the commodities or contractual services that are under Bid a copy of the statement specified in Subsection (1). 4) In the statement specified in Subsection (1), notify the employees, as a condition of working on the commodities or contractual services that are under Bid, the employee will abide by the terms of the statement and will notify the employer of any conviction of, or plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, any violation of Chapter 893 or of any controlled substance law of the United States or any State, for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction. 5) Impose a sanction on, or require the satisfactory participation in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program if such is available in the employee's community by any employee who is so convicted. 6) Make a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug -free workplace through implementation of this section. As the person authorized to sign the statement, I certify that this firm complies fully with the above requirements. False statements are punishable at law. BIDDER'S NAME: IN Authorized Signature Print Name and Title Page 58 Section 7.4 Quarterly State Term Contract Sales Summary Report Vendor Name: FElD#: Contact Person: Phone Number: _ Email: _ Contract Title: Contract #: Fax or Email form to: Brenda Wells Fax: 850- 414 -6122 Email: brenda.wells@dms.myflorida.com all sales for the ❑ Quarterly Period Ending March 31st ❑ Quarterly Period Ending September 30th (;ALL'NDAR OUARIL'K: Check One ❑ Quarterly Period Ending June 30th ❑ Quarterly Period Ending December 31st ENTITY TOTAL DOLLARS STATE AGENCIES: Report dollar amount sold to all State Agencies. $ POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS: Report dollar amount sold to other Political Subdivisions [including but not limited to, Counties, Cities, Schools, Universities, Colleges and Utilities]. S Environmentally Preferred Products $ Report dollar amount sold to agencies: Report dollar amount sold to political subdivisions: $ GRAND TOTAL: $ Under penalties of perjury, I declare that this is a true and accurate report of all sales due under the terms and conditions of this state term contract for the specified quarterly reporting period. AUTHORIZED TYPED SIGNATURE: AUTHORIZED ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE: Notes: ' ' 1) A quarterly report is required even if there are no sales for the specified quarter; please enter zero dollars where applicable. 2) This form is for the reporting of quarterly sales only. It is not related to reporting and payment of vendor transaction fees. 3) To enter electronic signature, click text box, click "Insert" (on tool bar), select "picture ", and select picture type to paste or enter signature. 4) For information concerning the use of this form, please contact the Contract Administrator named above. (Rev. 7/15/08) Page 59 Quarterly State Term Contract Sales Summary Report Commodity /service Category (as listed on the Contract —in Agency \Eligible User Quantity Sold P -Card Payments I P. O./D. O. Payments Total Sales I Detail by commodity /service category, and /or by customer. May be formatted to accommodate company reporting system. Page 60 SAVINGS /PRICE REDUCTIONS: Section 7.5 Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. Respondent is required to furnish the percent ( %) savings in prices offered compared to retail, list, published or other usual and customary prices that would be paid by the purchaser without benefit of a contract resulting from this bid. DATE COMPETITIVE PRICES OFFERED AVERAGE % SAVINGS. HOW CAN WE VERIFY THE CLAIMED SAVINGS (example: retail or other usual and customary prices published at [url], or other source of benchmark prices)? AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: TELEPHONE NUMBER: RESPONDENT NAME: IF CONTRACT AWARDED, STATE PURCHASING ANALYST /SPECIALIST TOOK THE FOLLOWING STEPS TO VERIFY SAVINGS: WHAT WERE THE RESULTS? PURCHASING ANALYST /SPECIALIST: PUR 7064 (Rev 2/04) Page 61 PRODUCT LIST FORM: Section 7.6 The Product List Form is an example of furniture products offered under this Solicitation which will be available on the State of Florida Office Furniture and Files Contract. Please check the products you offer. MANUFACTURER NAME: SYSTEMS FURNITURE ❑Open Office Systems Furniture ❑Desking Systems ❑Communications Ctr. Workstations ❑Stacking Open Office Systems ❑Floor -to- Ceiling Partitions ❑Computer Stations TECHNOLOGY /RISK MANAGEMENT ❑Dispatch/911 ❑LAN Furniture ❑ WAN Furniture ❑Server Racks ❑Lateral Files -Metal ❑Keyboard Supports ❑Cable Management ❑CAD Workstations ❑Adjustable Height Work Surfaces ❑Ergonomic Accessories FILES /STORAGE ❑Lateral Files - Steel ❑Vertical Files - Steel ❑Lateral Files -Wood ❑Vertical Files -Metal ❑Vertical Files -Wood ❑Fireproof Files ❑ADP /Data Storage ❑Metal Storage Cabinets ❑Plan Storage ❑Media Storage ❑Shelving /Personal Storage ❑Conference Storage & Training Storage SEATING ❑Ergonomic Seating ❑Task Seating ❑Multi -Shift Seating ❑Big & Tall Seating ❑Big & Tall Multi -Shift ❑Executive Seating ❑Side Chairs ❑Lounge Seating ❑Training Room Seating ❑Stack Chairs ❑Multi - Purpose Seating ❑Wood Seating ❑Conference or training chairs CASEGOODS ❑Executive Wood Office Furniture ❑Laminate Office Furniture ❑Metal Office Furniture ❑Computer Desks ❑Laminate Bookcases ❑Wood Files ❑Wood Bookcases CONFERENCE /TRAINING /PUBLIC AREA ❑Training Tables ❑Wood Conference Tables ❑Occasional Tables ❑Laminate Conference Tables ❑Laminate Conference Accessories ❑Presentation Accessories ❑Computer Training Tables ❑Multi - Purpose Tables ❑Audio/Visual Accessories ❑Reception Desks Page 62 ❑Map Files ❑Sofas & Loveseats ❑Mail Processing Furniture ❑Single & Multiple Seating Units Response Preparation Checklist: Section 7.7 The Response Preparation Checklist is a guide to assist Respondents in verifying the completeness of their response. The Response Preparation Checklist does not relieve the Respondent of the responsibility of ensuring that all requirements of this solicitation are included with submittal of Response. The following section pertains to the electronic portion of the response that will be submitted via the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool: Reviewed the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool Online Training Guide. All documents requiring a Yes/No answer have been fully read and answered. All required documents have been fully completed and uploaded into Respondent's response. (Price Sheet(s), Ordering Instructions, Authorized Dealers & Manufacturer Representatives, Savings /Price Reduction, Product List, and Certification of Drug -Free Workplace Form) Submitted all questions to the MyFloridaMarketPlace Q &A Board, no later than date and time listed in Section 1.2 Event Timeline. Viewed answers to submitted questions as posted in addendum to solicitation. Submitted the electronic portion of the response using the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing tool. The following section pertains to the portion of the response that must be received by the contact person below no later than date and time listed in Section 1.2 Event Timeline. Dedicated Website URL Address Purchase Orders or Invoices Environmental Requirements Recycled Content Requirements Federal GSA Catalog /Price Book (CD format) Current Price Book (CD format) GSA Contract (copy) Contact Person: Brenda Wells, CPPB, FCPM, FCPA, FCCM Purchasing Analyst, Team Lead Department of Management Services Division of State Purchasing 4050 Esplanade Way, Suite 370 Tallahassee, FL 32399 -0950 Outer packaging shall clearly states the Response Title, Number, Opening Date and Time along with Respondent's Name and Address. Page 63 ADDENDUM NO. 1 State of Florida Department of Management Services INVITATION TO BID ( "ITB ") 17- 425 -001 -F Office Furniture and Files January 11, 2011 The Department hereby answers Questions posted by interested Vendors, and provides additional guidance for completing Price Sheets. Unless expressly indicated, the answers included herein do not amend the terms of the solicitation documents. Failure to file a protest within the time prescribed in §120.57(3), Florida Statutes, or failure to file a bond or other security within the time allowed for filing a bond shall constitute a waiver of proceedings under chapter 120, Florida Statutes Please Note: This addendum does not need to be returned with the Response. Question No. 1 Due to restructuring within our company, our current GSA contract is scheduled to expire this year. However, our parent company intends to secure a new GSA contract under the parent company's name and FID #. If awarded a contract with the State of Florida, are we able to transfer the Florida contract to the new GSA contract awarded to our parent company at the prices on the new GSA contract? Answer No. 1. Awarded Contractors may request revisions at any time during the contract term in accordance with Prices /Discount, Section 5.10, Addition /Deletion of Vendors and Products Offered, Section 5.13 and Contract Revisions, Section 5.23. Question No. 2 Can a vendor /manufacturer be included on 2 contracts? Example: if a vendor has an E &I contract which does not include conferencing and desk, will this vendor be able to submit those products on this contract? Thanks Answer No. 2 Yes, a vendor can be included on two contracts; however, the products must not be in conflict. Please reference Basis for Award, Section 3.15 and Eligible Products, Section 5.1. Question No. 3 Good afternoon, I would like to respond to this bid, however, I do not see anywhere in this package an itemized list indicating product, descriptions and quanitities. Will there be a separate addendum? Answer No. 3 No. The contract resulting from this solicitation is a state term contract and will be used for many projects throughout the state. Specific project requirements will be provided by contract customers, per project. Please reference Introduction, Section 1.1. Question No. 4 1 notice that only Manufacturers who hold a GSA Contract can submit a bid. Does the GSA Contract held at the time of submitting a bid have to remain in effect for the entire term of the Florida Contract? Answer No. 4 Awarded Contractors may request price and product changes at any time during the contract term in accordance with Prices /Discount, Section 5.10, Addition /Deletion of Vendors and Products Offered, Section 5.13 and Contract Revisions, Section 5.23. ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F; Office Furniture and Files: Addendum No. 1 Question No. 5 1 am requesting that the deadline for questions be extended. This bid was issued just before Christmas break and many of the manufacturers I represent are just getting back as they were closed the last two weeks. Another few days to a week would be helpful to be sure we have reviewed and asked all relevant questions. Answer No. 5 The Event Timeline is comparable to previous solicitations for this commodity. The Department does not intend to amend the timeline. Question No.6 As a continuation of my question on GSA Pricing- our current GSA catalog is out of date (and) has several line items that are obselete. The new GSA catalog has several new line items - we would like to submit the new price list as the basis for our bid, even though it has not been approved by GSA yet (should be within a month). Can we do that? Answer No. 6 The Basis for Award, Section 3.15, specifies products currently available on GSA Schedule. Awarded Contractors may request price and product changes at any time during the contract term in accordance with Prices /Discount, Section 5.10, Addition /Deletion of Vendors and Products Offered, Section 5.13 and Contract Revisions, Section 5.23. Question No. 7 Can you please clarify what "Series Bid" means (on Section 6.1 Price Sheet). We sell Console furniture and millwork but have several types of consoles. Are each of our console products considered a different series? Is Millwork a different series? Answer No. 7 "Series Bid" means the name and /or number your company assigns or refers to a group of products to identify the products. Question No. 8 (Company name removed) recently submitted a request for a price change to our GSA catalog. I expect this to be accepted by GSA in the next month. Can I use this new GSA pricing as the basis for our bid? Our current GSA price is based off our old Price catalog, not the current one. Answer No. 8 Please refer to Answer No. 6. Question No. 9 RE; "Copy of GSA Contract "; Are you wanting the award pages and mods or are you wanting the entire solicitation offer award and mods which runs over 400 pages? Answer No. 9 Reference Section 3.8 Submittal of Bid. We need the specific pages which detail the Respondent's GSA award that confirm manufacturer name, contract number, effective dates, and pricing discounts. Question No.10 The ITB has a Responses Due date of January 24, 2011 (2:00 pm ET), but the online timer indicates only 6 days left. Which is correct. Answer No. 10 The solicitation was in Preview Status at the time of this question. The timer would have shown how many days were remaining in the Preview phase. Responses are due January 24, 2011, 2:00 PM ET. Question No. 11 1 need your advice on how or if I should bid for the contract. We are (Company Name) the Florida distributor for Ergonomic Office Chairs. We sell quite a few 24/7 chairs to 911 and power companies in Florida. Ergonomic Office Chairs has the Ironhorse line of chairs under a GSA contract. Normally when I sell to GSA in my territory, the transaction has to go through Ergonomic Office Chairs and then I am the direct contact for the GSA customer if a warranty issue arises. The pricing is all the same in my territory under the GSA pricing. My ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F; Office Furniture and Files: Addendum No. 1 question is can I bid on the Florida contract? All the pricing will be the same whether you purchase from me or direct through Ergonomic Office Chairs. I would appreciate your input. Thank you very much and have a good day. Answer No. 11 Please reference Who May Respond, Section 3.4. Question No.12 Can you tell me where the Prepare Response button is located? It is not at the top of the page, thank you very much. Answer No. 12 Please refer to Answer #10. Question No.13 Good morning, Are all manufacturers eligible that meet the GSA and state specs? Answer No. 13 Please reference Who May Respond, Section 3.4 and Basis for Award, Section 3.15. Question No.14 Good morning, Will you need a seperate product list for each manufacturer? Answer No. 14 Yes. Please reference Submittal of Response, Section 3.8. Question No.15 Good morning, In order to give you pricing I will need more specs on the product list form. There are no specifications about size, finish or needs. Will you publish a spec sheet? Answer No. 15 No. Please refer to Answer #3. Question No.16 Section 4.11 Transportation and Delivery - Will the order acknowledgement with the actual ship date be satisfactory to comply with potentional delivery delays beyond the 30 day requirement notification? Answer No. 16 Section 5.18 Delivery Requirements takes precedence over Section 4.11. Section 5.18 specifies 90 days delivery for furniture. Delays must be clearly presented to the Customer and justified to the ordering agency in writing. If a delay is noted on the Order acknowledgement, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer or servicing dealer to notify this delay to the Customer and obtain acceptance. Question No.17 Section 4.4 (d) Trade -In. Please confirm that the term equipment is strictly meaning things like copiers and fax machines, etc. Not, furniture. Answer No. 17 Trade -In, Section 4.4, paragraph (d) is not applicable for furniture. Please reference Order of Precedence, Section 3.7. Question No.18 5.10 prices /Discounts: (Company name removed) is a State of Florida corporation. We manufacture and install Full Height Demountable wall systems. We do not have a GSA price list with discount. We have a Miami -Dade County contact for materials, labor and freight included with a discount schedule. Can we provide this contract in lieu of the GSA pricing under 287.042 (16) (a), F.S.? Answer No. 18 Please reference Section 3.4, Who May Respond. Responses are requested from manufacturers holding current Federal (GSA) Contracts for products offered on this contract. Section 287.042(16), F.S., references an alternate contract source approval process. This process is separate from this competitive process outlined in Section 287.057 ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F; Office Furniture and Files: Addendum No. 1 (1) (a), F.S. Question No.19 Even though our current contract was just extended through March 2012 we should still participate in this bid? Answer No. 19 Yes. The current state term contract for Office Furniture and Files has been renewed through March 1, 2012, and will be in effect until a new contract has been implemented. FAILURE TO FILE A PROTEST WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED IN §120.57(3), FLORIDA STATUTES, OR FAILURE TO FILE A BOND OR OTHER SECURITY WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED FOR FILING A BOND SHALL CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER CHAPTER 120, FLORIDA STATUTES ITB 17- 425 - 001 -F; Office Furniture and Files: Addendum No. 1 ITB 17- 425 -001 -F Office Furniture and Files Addendum No. 2 The referenced solicitation is amended as follows: The Notice of Intent to Award will be posted on the Vendor Bid System (VBS) on May 17, 2011. FAILURE TO FILE A PROTEST WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED IN § 120.57(3), FLORIDA STATUTES, OR FAILURE TO FILE A BOND OR OTHER SECURITY WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED FOR FILING A BOND SHALL CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER CHAPTER 120, FLORIDA STATUTES. Section 1.2 Event Timeline is amended as follows: Event Timeline Activity for ITB #17- 425 -001 -F Date Notice of Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted to the Vendor Bid System (VBS) and the complete Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted in the "Preview" December 20 2010 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Solicitation will initially be in status ' where Respondents can view /download all information and ask questions, but cannot input or submit responses. Deadline to submit Questions, or request for specification change via the January 4, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing tool Q &A Board (Respondents must monitor Message 5 pm ET Board for communications). Department will post Answers to Respondents' questions as an addendum to the January 11, 2011 solicitation within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Respondents must monitor Message Board for communications. Deadline to submit Response, including all required documents in the January 24, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Utilize the Response Preparation Checklist to 2 pm ET make sure all required documents and responses are completed. (Section 7.7) Deadline for submittal of State Term Contract dedicated web site URL Address. (Section January 24, 2011 3.12) 2 pm ET Notice of Intent to Award posted on Vendor Bid System (VBS). May 17, 2011 Deadline for development of eProcurement catalog within MyFloridaMarketPlace. To Be Determined Prior to Contract Award Contract Award Per Section 2.17 Contract Formation Office Furniture and Files March 29, 2011 ITB 17- 425 -001 -F Page 1 of 1 Addendum No. 2 ITB No. 17- 425 -001 -F Office Furniture and Files Addendum No. 3 The referenced solicitation is amended as follows: The posting of the Notice of Intent to Award scheduled for May 17, 2011 is postponed. All updates will be posted on the Vendor Bid System. Questions should be directed to Brenda Wells, Purchasing Analyst, at Brenda.Wells @dms.myflorida.com. FAILURE TO FILE A PROTEST WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED IN § 120.57(3), FLORIDA STATUTES, OR FAILURE TO FILE A BOND OR OTHER SECURITY WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED FOR FILING A BOND SHALL CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER CHAPTER 120, FLORIDA STATUTES. Section 1.2 Event Timeline is amended as follows: Event Timeline Activity for ITB #17- 425 -001 -F Date Notice of Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted to the Vendor Bid System (VBS) and the complete Office Furniture & Files solicitation is posted in the "Preview" December 20 2010 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Solicitation will initially be in status ' where Respondents can view /download all information and ask questions, but cannot input or submit responses. Deadline to submit Questions, or request for specification change via the January 4, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing tool Q &A Board (Respondents must monitor Message 5 pm ET Board for communications). Department will post Answers to Respondents' questions as an addendum to the January 11, 2011 solicitation within the MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Respondents must monitor Message Board for communications. Deadline to submit Response, including all required documents in the January 24, 2011 MyFloridaMarketPlace Sourcing Tool. Utilize the Response Preparation Checklist to 2 pm ET make sure all required documents and responses are completed. (Section 7.7) Deadline for submittal of State Term Contract dedicated web site URL Address. (Section January 24, 2011 3.12) 2 pm ET Notice of Intent to Award posted on Vendor Bid System (VBS). To Be Determined Deadline for development of eProcurement catalog within MyFloridaMarketPlace. To Be Determined Prior to Contract Award Contract Award Per Section 2.17 Contract Formation Office Furniture and Files May 17, 2011 ITB 17- 425 -001 -F Page 1 of 1 Addendum No. 3 Office Furniture and Files May 17, 2011 ITB 17- 425 -001 -F Page I of I Addendum No. 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Anthony W. Strianese, Chief of Police THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr. City Manager DATE: June 29, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 8.P.3 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 PURCHASE AWARD/ CDW -G ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The Police Department seeks Commission approval to enter into a Purchasing Agreement with CDW -G for the purchase of 12 in -car video cameras for $65,928.72. BACKGROUND Additional in -car video cameras are needed to advance the City's plan to have this equipment in all key patrol and supervisory vehicles. This equipment will be used daily during routine traffic enforcement and community patrols. It has the ability to secure solid evidence for criminal prosecution, real time recording of events, and enhanced officer safety. It also reduces the likelihood of civil liability claims. In order to contain costs, the plan included purchasing a limited number of cameras each year until all of the appropriate vehicles were fully equipped. This year, 12 cameras were approved in the CIP budget. CDW -G is offering pricing for the equipment from the Western States Contracting Alliance contract ( #B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS) for most of the items. Additionally, they are the vendor who has been supplying the cameras since the inception of the project, and it's necessary to remain with the same vendor for consistency. FUNDING SOURCE Funding for this project was budgeted in the CIP, project #12 -046, account #: 334 -2111 -521- 64.90. RECOMMENDATION The Police Department recommends approval. Page 1 ` Right Technology. yf�f�AAay 49 SALES QUOTATION WWW.CDWG.00t11 SL70- 808.4239 L565490 5516432 6/21/2013 MARLO DAHL CITY OF DELRAY BEACH B100 NW 1ST AVE S 100 NW 1ST AVE L MANGT INFO SYSTEMS I MANGT INFO SYSTEMS L CITY OF DELRAY BEACH P MARLO DAHL DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 -2612 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 -2698 T T 0 0 Contact: MARLO DAHL 561- 243 -7865 Customer Phone # 5612437865 Customer P.O. # ARBITRATORS QUOTE ACCOUNT •D TERMS EXEMPTION MIKE ZORICA 866- 339 -3535 FEDEX Ground Request Terms 71 858012621559C4 DESCRIPTION QTY ITEM NUMBER • PRICE 12 1786726 PANASONIC ARBITRATOR KIT MK2.0 4429.00 53148.00 Mfg #: PNB- ARBTR- KIT -360 Contract: FLORIDA PANASONIC WSCA B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS 12 2009219 PANASONIC 1YR ARBITRATOR 360 SW MNT 283.01 3396.12 Mfg #: PAW- CF- SVCARB2AMAlY Contract: FLORIDA PANASONIC WSCA B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS 12 2887685 PAN ARBITRATOR REAR SEAT CAM F/360 120.00 1440.00 Mfg #: PNB- CN358IR -P Contract: FLORIDA PANASONIC WSCA B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS 12 1466390 PANASONIC ARBITRATOR G -FORCE SENSOR 228.00 2736.00 Mfg #: PNB- TGS -3DP Contract: FLORIDA PANASONIC WSCA B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS 12 1603456 LIND ARBITRATOR DETECTOR CABLE 38.00 456.00 Mfg #: LND- CBLMS- F00200 Contract: NATIONAL IPA TECH SOLUTIONS 083052 -01 12 1917171 PANASONIC 2YR ARBITRATOR 360 EXT WTY 396.05 4752.60 Mfg #: PAW- CF- SVCARB2EX2Y Contract: FLORIDA PANASONIC WSCA B27172 250 - WSCA -10 -ACS SUBTOTAL 65928.72 Terms and Conditions: TOTAL http: / /www.cdwg.com/ content /terms- conditions /default.asp Continued CDW Government Please remit payment to: 230 North Milwaukee Ave. CDWGovernment Vernon Hills, IL 60061 75 Remittance Drive General Phone: 847 - 371 -5000 Fax: 847 - 419 -6200 Suite9595 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312 - 705 -8218 Chicago, IL 60675 -9595 Page 2 Right Aw ���Irrrotog SALES QUOTATION W WW..CDW0.COrrk QUOTE NO. ACCOUNTNO. DATE SL70- 808.4239 L565490 5516432 6/21/2013 MARLO DAHL CITY OF DELRAY BEACH B100 NW 1ST AVE S 100 NW 1ST AVE L MANGT INFO SYSTEMS I MANGT INFO SYSTEMS L CITY OF DELRAY BEACH P MARLO DAHL T DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 -2612 T DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 -2698 0 0 Contact: MARLO DAHL 561- 243 -7865 Customer Phone # 5612437865 Customer P.O. # ARBITRATORS QUOTE ACCOUNT •D TERMS EXEMPTION MIKE ZORICA 866- 339 -3535 FEDEX Ground Request Terms 71 858012621559C4 DESCRIPTION QTY ITEM NUMBER • PRICE FREIGHT .00 SALES TAX .00 Terms and Conditions: TOTAL US Currency http: / /www.cdwg.com/ content /terms- conditions /default.asp 65,928.72 CDW Government Please remit payment to: 230 North Milwaukee Ave. CDWGovernment Vernon Hills, IL 60061 75 Remittance Drive General Phone: 847 - 371 -5000 Fax: 847 - 419 -6200 Suite9595 Account Manager's Direct Fax: 312 - 705 -8218 Chicago, IL 60675 -9595 Page 3 Total 65,928.72 FMV Lease Option 1,897.43 /Month Total 65,928.72 $BO Lease Option 2,097.85 /Month Monthly payment based on 36 month lease. Other terms and options are available. Contact you Account Manager for details. Payment quoted subject to change. ** Why finance? • Lower Upfront Costs. Get the products you need without impacting cash flow. Preserve your working capital and existing credit line. • Flexible Payment Terms. 100% financing with no money down, payment deferrals and payment schedules that match your company's business cycles. • Predictable, Low Monthly Payments. Pay over time. Lease payments are fixed and can be tailored to your budget levels or revenue streams. • Technology Refresh. Keep current technology with minimal financial impact or risk. Add -on or upgrade during the lease term. And choose to return or purchase the equipment at end of lease. • Bundle Costs. You can combine hardware, software, and services into a single transaction! Which means you can pay for your software licenses over time. We know your challenges and understand the need for flexibility. General Terms and Conditions: * *This quote is not legally binding and is for discussion purposes only. The rates are estimate only and are based on a collection of industry data from numerous sources. All rates and financial quotes are subject to final review, approval, and documentation by our leasing partners. Payments above exclude all applicable taxes. Financing is subject to credit approval and review of final equipment and services configuration. Fair Market Value leases are structured with the assumption that the equipment has a residual value at the end of the lease term. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST /15TH ANNUAL GARLIC FESTIVAL ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION City Commission is requested to approve a special event permit for the 15th Annual Garlic Festival to be held on February 7 through 9, 2014, to grant a temporary use permit per LDR's Section 2.4.6(F) for use of City rights -of -way to include NE 1St Avenue from Atlantic to the grass area at Delray Beach Center for the Arts, Swinton Avenue from Atlantic to NE 1 st Street, Old School Square Park and NE 2nd Avenue from the north side of the east/west alley north of Atlantic to a line at the south end of the Old School Square Garage, from 6:00 a.m., February 6 through 11:00 p.m., February 9, 2014; and use of the Old School Square Parking Garage and the South County Parking Garage for vendor, entertainer and event parking. The City is also being requested to supply staff support for traffic control and security, EMS and inspection assistance, barricading, banner hanging, signage preparation and installation, use of a City generator and a waiver of the two (2) hour parking limit in the downtown area during the event. BACKGROUND Attached is a letter, the special event permit, budget, site plan and Economic Prosperity Calculator received from Nancy Stewart- Franczak, Executive Director of Delray Beach Arts, Inc., requesting City Commission to approve the 15th Annual Garlic Festival, to use City rights -of -way as requested, to make and install event signage, hang banners and to provide staff support for security, EMS assistance, fire inspection, barricading and other assistance including parking as outlined in the permit. The event sponsor will be responsible for liability insurance, event management, site set up, vendor approval and site cleanup. The event producer is also requesting that 50 parking spaces be reserved in the Old School Square Parking Garage for staff and vendor parking. The proposed site plan shows NE 1 st Avenue open from Atlantic to the alley with an alley closure. We recommend moving the site boundary north to the grounds, keeping the alley access open. Staff also has a concern closing a portion of NE 2nd Avenue at 6:00 a.m. on Thursday, February 6th and is recommending this street not close until 4:00 a.m. on February 7, 2014. Also, due to complaints received last year that on site restrooms facilities were not adequate for the crowds; staff feels at least ten (10) portalets be added to the site. In addition, based on last year's observations, we are recommending as a condition that the City Crowd Manager in consultation with the event producer have the authority to limit site access. The overtime cost for this event is approximately $18,275, administrative fee $915, signage costs $250, barricade rental $350 and park rental of $2,080 for a total estimate of $21,870. Based the Special Events Policies and Procedures, the event sponsor will be required to pay 100% of overtime costs and a 5% administrative fee, plus 100% of signage, barricade and park rental costs. Proceeds from the event will again be shared with volunteer organizations. The event producer has requested use of a portion of NE 2nd Avenue again this year per the event permit. The event producer is in the process of obtaining adjacent business support for this closure. We will have to obtain permission for use of the South County Courthouse Garage. All paid garage lots will be manned by the Police Explorer Scouts with proceeds split between the City and the Scouts on a percentage as may be agreed to. In the past this has been a 50150 split. All other lots will be manned by the City's parking contactor and we will be charging $5 per car to park. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special event permit, granting the temporary use permit for use of rights of way, signage, staff assistance as requested, parking lot use and generator use as requested and waiver of the two (2) hour parking limit downtown with the following conditions: • Receipt of event Certification of Liability Insurance no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the event. • Receipt of Certificate of Liquor Liability Insurance no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the event. • Receipt of signed Old School Square Park rental agreement with Parks and Recreation no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the event. • Liquor cannot be served prior to noon on Sunday. • Event sponsor be required to provide on -site dumpster service for vendors. • Event sponsor be required to provide grease disposal barrels and disposal system on -site for vendor use. • Installation of event signage and banners to be hung no earlier than fourteen (14) days prior to the event, sharing poles with the ITC /Champions Tournament. • Require all vendor equipment and fencing to be removed from City right -of -way no later than February 10, 2014. • Require all other items to be removed from the Delray Beach Center for the Arts site by 5:00 p.m., February 10, 2014. • All trash and garbage to be removed from the event area by 7:00 a.m., February 11, 2014. • That the fence location on NE 1 st Avenue at the alley be moved north to the grounds, keeping the alley open. • That the portion of NE 2nd Avenue between the alley north of Atlantic Avenue to the south end of the garage not be closed until 4:00 a.m. on February 7, 2014. • Producer is required to supply ten (10) additional portalets on site. • City Crowd Manager will have right to limit site access in consultation with event producer if deemed a public safety issue. April 3, 2013 Mr. Bob Barcinski City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1 Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Dear Bob, RECEIVED APR 10 2013 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Attached please find our application requesting approval of the 15th Annual Delray Beach Garlic Fest, We are requesting the following items to be added to the City Commission agenda at your earliest convenience: Use of Swinton Avenue from Atlantic Avenue North to NE 15' Street and NE 2nd Avenue from the alleyway north to the south end of the Old School Square Parking Garage. These portions of the streets will be closed from 6:00 am Thursday, February 6th through midnight Sunday, February le 2014. " Once again this year we are asking for permission of expansion of our site plan granted to us last year. Due to the larger crowds last year, it is crucial that we be able to keep our Garlic Chef Stadium located on NE 2 "d again. This worked extremely well for us last year, enabling us to move our gate to the street on NE 2 "d Avenue, opening up more room in the park in which to spread out and increase the number of exhibitors we have. Use of Old School Square Parking Garage and Court House Parking Garage for event parking and have the Police Explorers staff garages with 50% proceeds going towards their organization. Requesting that 50 spaces in the Old School Square parking garage reserved for Garlic Fest sponsors all three days. (With Old School Square Grounds closed beginning Wednesday, Feb. 7tt' to begin setup.) Our handicap access and vendor entrance will be on NE 1st Avenue between the main stage and the Old School Square parking garage again this year. Vendors, located on Swinton will tear down completely after close of the event on Sunday, Feb. 9th, 2014. This festival will again be a gated event with an admission fee of $10 per person ($15 after 6 PM). This admission fee is charged in order to guarantee monetary contributions to volunteer and non - profit organizations working our event. We recorded charitable contributions to date of $479,107 for the non -profit organizations. PARKING: 1) Courthouse /Library Parking Garage 2) Old School Square Parking Garage 3) City Attorney lot Thank you for your consideration and support! Sincerely, Nancy Stewart- Franczak Executive Director GF City Req Ur 2014.doc Delray Beach Arts 64B SE 5th Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 279 -0907 City of Delray Beach Special Event Permit DELRAY BEACH Application a F PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT 11ii 1993 RECEIVED 2001 Event Name/Title: 15`h Annual Delray Beach Garlic Fest APR 10 2013 Event Date(s): Feb 7, 2014 / Times: 5 pm --11 pm (11:30 pm police) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Feb 8, 2014 / Times: 11 am — 11 pm (11:30 pm police) Feb 9, 2014 /Times: 11 am-8 pm (8:30 pm police) Please note that alcohol will be served until 15 minutes before the event closes each day. We are requesting police presence on site until approximately 30 minutes after the event closes each day (see above). Requesting street closures: yes _X_ no (If yes, need time /date for closure and reopening) Swinton Ave north to Is` Street; NE 1't Avenue to alley; 4O,NE 2 " Ave from alley south of Atlantic north to south side of Old School Square Parking-Garage to include park area beginning Thursday, Feb. 6, 2014 (a, 6 am; reopen Sunday, Feb. 9 at 11:00 PM. Event Sponsor/Producer: Delray Beach Arts, Inc. Event Contact/Coordinator: Nancy Stewart - Franczak Name: Nancy Stewart- Franczak Address: 64 -B SE 51h Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33483 Telephone Number: 561- 279 -0907 Cellular Number: 561 -703 -7028 E -mail Address: nancy@avenucereative.com avenueereative.com Event Description/Purpose: Gourmet food & entertainment event featuring National Act entertainment, cooking demos & competitions, over 180 craft & specialty vendors, children's area /rides, full liquor bars. beer gardens; designed as a community fund- raiser for 11 local non - profit organizations in support of arts and /or education for youth. Brief History of Event (If applicable): Now in it's 15t" year, the event is one of the top 3 events in Delray, generating national attention, featured on the Food Network's program "Unwrapped" and has raised over $479,107 to date for community organizations. Planned Activities (Outline of activities /number of activities, i.e. entertainment, children's rides, games, other programs): Garlic Chef competition, national act entertainment, cooking demos, beer & wine garden, children's rides & activities, Gourmet Alley, full liquor bar and specialty vendors Number of Individuals Served Previous Year (if applicable) :40,000 Describe the targeted population and expected attendance: Palm Beach, Broward & Dade County attendees primarily, small percentage from west coast and Martin county. Describe how the program or project addresses community needs: Economic engine for downtown businesses and restaurants drives traffic to downtown businesses and hotels fund - raiser for 11 local non - profit organizations. Describe your Marketing/Promotions Program (How will you market/promote, i.e. TV, radio, posters, flyers, web sites, other): Street signage, TV (WPBF -25), Radio (Palm Beach Broadcasting: WRMF, SUNNY, WI Newspapers he Pineapple), Magazines Atlantic Ave Delray Beach Magazine, Boca Raton Magazines), Billboard on I -95 Posters Flyers, Web exposure, street signs, street banners email blasts. Sponsor Category (please check) City ❑ Non- Profit/Charitable X Private ❑ Co- Sponsor — Non - Profit/Private ❑ (If Non-profit attach proof of 501c(3), c(4), c(6), C(10), or c(19) or (d) Event Location (Describe area boundaries of event/location): Grounds of Old School Square, Swinton Avenue beginning at Atlantic Ave to NW 1st Street; NE 1" Avenue north to alley, NE 2 °d Avenue from alley south of Atlantic north to south side of Old School Square parking garage (to include park area) Site plan attached: yes X no (Site plan required for entire event site. Include locations of tents, stage, porta lets, dunipsters, portable lighting, and barricade location if applicable.) Rental of Old School Square: yes (attached) no _X_ (Requested from OSS 3/29/13) (If yes, attach proof of approval) Rental of Old School Square Park: yes X no (If yes, attach proof of rental agreement with Parks & Recreation) Private Property Use: yes no X (If yes, attach letter giving authorization from property owner) Event budget attached: yes X (attached) no (Required for all events) Previous year Revenue /Expense summary attached: yes X no (Required for all events) Arts and Economic Impact Calendar attached: yes X (attached) no Obtained on line at www.AmericansForTheArts.org (Required for all events except minor events and 5K Runs) Do you have cash sponsors for the event: yes X no (Indicated on budget) Do you have in -kind sponsors for the event: yes X Ito (Indicated on budget) Serving or selling alcoholic beverages: yes X no (If yes, copy of license and alcohol liabilio? insurance required two (2) weeks prior to event) PLEASE NOTE. You cannot apply until 30 days prior and not guaranteed to get 2 Iveeks prior. 2013 GARLIC FEST SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION.DOC PG# 2 Event certificate of insurance attached: yes no X (Required two (2) iveeks prior to event naming the City as additional insured, also required for vendors) Playing of amplified music: (Waiver required) yes X no Will there be entertainment: yes X no (If yes, attached list of Performers and /or DJ's) If yes, sponsor agrees all entertainment will be family oriented and contain no obscenities: YES X NO Requesting Police assistance: yes X Plus outsource no. (traffic control/security) Will supplement with private security: yes X no, (If yes, need plan attached) Requesting Emergency Medical assistance: yes X no Requesting Street Closure: yes X no (If yes, need time /date for closure and reopening) Swinton Ave north to 1St Street; NE Ist Avenue to alley, NE 2nd Avenue from alley south of Atlantic north to south side of parking garage beginning Thursday, Feb. 6, 2014 (a) 6 am; reopen Sunday, Feb. 9, 2014. Requesting barricade assistance: yes X no (If no, how are you handling ?) Requesting trash removal /clean up assistance: yes no X (Will be billed to sponsor) Requesting trash boxes /containers and Iiners: yes no X Requesting stage use: yes no X (If yes, check type) Large stage (14' x 361) ❑ Small stage (16' x 211) ❑ Half small stage (8' x 21') Requesting signage: yes X no Type: 4'x4' Event sign X Parking Signs X Banner hanging X Indicate dates required Jan 24 — Feb 10, 201_4 (Waiver required if more than one (I) week prior to event) Requesting City Portable Generator: yes IC (Whatever is available) (If yes, size & power) Food and beverage vendors: yes X no, If yes, approximate number 20 (Health Department approval required) yes X na 2013 GARLIC FEST SPECIAL EVENT PERMrr APPLICATIONDDOC PG# 3 Other vendors: yes X no (Indicate type) Craft, specialty, food Tents: yes X no_ If yes, How many 180 What size or size required 10'x 10' and I Clear Span tent by main stage (60'x 80') (If yes, teat permits and fire inspections may be needed) Will the event include amusement rides: yes X no (If yes, type and location and copy of liability insurance required, also requires state license and inspection) Will the event be gated: yes X no Will there be a charge for the event: yes X($101$15) no (If yes, indicate ticket prices) Will there be fireworks or other pyrotechnics: yes no X (If yes, contact Fire Marshal to obtain and complete permit application) Will there be cooking with compressed gas: yes X no (If yes, contact Fire Marshal for inspections) Will you be providing port -a -lets for the event: yes X no (If yes, locate on -site map. If no, indicate how you will handle restroom needs) Is reset ved parking requested: yes X no (If yes, indicate locations and purpose for use) Event Permit Attachments: • Revenue/Expense Budget • Revenue /Expense Recap Last Years Event • Site Plan • Letter Requesting Noise Ordinance Waiver • Letter Requesting Waiver Consumption Alcohol Beverages • Proof of Non- Profit Status to come General Liability Insurance Certificate (Show on site map) to come _Alcohol Beverage Liability Certificate to come—Proof of Rental Agreement or Authorization Letter fi-onl Private Property Owner X Hold Harmless Agreement Submittal Date Requirements: • Minor Event 45 days prior to event • Intermediate Event 90 days prior to event • Major Event 120 days prior to event • Neighborhood Block Party 30 days prior to event 2013 GARLIC FEET SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATIONDOC PG# 4 Event Contractor /Coordinator Date Please print: Nancy Stewart- Franczak Please enclose the appropriate non - refundable application fee payable to the City of Delray Beach, 100 N. W. I" Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444. Required with permit application. Tor Staff Use Only l I Date Received ` fI I- Application fee received $ � 2013 GARLIC FEST SPECIAL, EVENT PERMIT APPLICATIONDOC PG4 5 Gy AI C.Al NTickets Tickets � Garlic Chef ' (D OL 19 41 TallI 2nd Entr oil] [ IlNA t1 l rA:I WV a l II bTci:11111111 INCOME DESCRIPTION ACTUALS i 13 TOTALS 2014 IN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE Miscellaneous Income $ 557,484.78 $ 600,000.00 Admissions $ 23,867.92 Admissions $ 84,811.32 Admissions $ 94,500.00 Groupon $ 2,641.91 Groupon (minus sales tax) $ 7,529.23 New Times $ 2,000.00 Gottahalfit.com $2,538.90 ATM Transactions $ 541.00 Alcohol Sales $ 217,719.81 Mercantile $ 6,174.53 Tent /Table Rental $ 1,00454 Vendor Fee income $ 46,658.98 Exhibitor Fee Income $ 3,858.44 Food % Income $ 47,169.81 Rides /Children's Area $ 12,693.39 Jumbo Tron Ads $ 5,775.00 Online Ticket sales- PayPal $ 8,640.08 $ 8,640.08 $ 9,000.00 Event Sponsor Revenue $ 44,600.00 $ 45,000.00 Anthony's Coal Fired Pizza $1,000.00 Atlantic Ave Magazine (2 full pages & 6 Page section) $10,000.00 Bermuda Landscaping $1,500.00 Budweiser $ 7,500.00 Christopher Ranch Garlic $500.00 Coca Cola (rebate) $2,000.00 Colony Hotel $1,250.00 Delray Honda $ 7,500.00 Florida Power & Light $ 500.00 Guy Harvey $ 2,000.00 Hammerstahl Cutlery $1,250 $ 1,500.00 Home Depot $2,000.00 House of Appliances $6,500.00 On the Ave Marketing -New York Times $ 1,500.00 Palm Beach Broadcasting (radio) $ 40 500.00 Pizza Rustica $1,000.00 Publix $ 1,000.00 Proforma (canvas bags) $1,000.00 Republic Liquor $ 7,500.00 San Francisco Puffs & Stuff $ 6,000.00 E=lSeaside Builders $ 3,500.00 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget 7ni d [;ARI IC FFST PRnPnc%F17 RHnrFT 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget DESCRIPTION Seminole Casino Coconut Creek DETAIL ACTUALS $ 2,500.00 2013 TOTALS i r IN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE Stuart & Shelby $ 1,500.00 Sunshine Golf Carts $ 100.00 $2,500.00 The Pineapple $1,390.00 Waste Management $ 500.00 $6,650.00 WPBF -25 $46,000.00 Vacation Village Resorts $ 1,500.00 TOTAL INCOME $ 610,724.85 $ 610,724.86 $ 654,000.00 EXPENSES TOTAL "1N- KIND" INCOME $ 125,790.00 Advertising Fee $ 8,442.06 $ 8,000.00 Atlantic Ave Magazine $ 2,000.00 Real Time Marketing $ 5,862.06 AT &T Yellow Pages $ 400.00 New Times $ 180.00 City Services $ 22,113.33 $ 25,000.00 Police, Fire, P &R, Public Works 19,248.33 Board of Health Permit $ 100.00 Event Permit $ 250.00 Liquor License $ 50.00 The Pressure's On $ 2,465.00 Banking Fees -Svc chgs $ 12,143.40 $ 12,150.00 Credit Card Processing Fee $ 6,000.00 Balance due Citicard $ 6,143.40 Booth Fee Refunds Repairs (Computer equip) $ 1,630.09 $ 1,500.00 Atlantic Network Solutions $ 675.00 Dell Computers (bal due) $ 955.09 Office Expense $ 12,868.02 $ 13,000.00 Wand's (supplies) $ 196.00 Office Depot (supplies) $ 2,572.02 Sprint (phones) $ 8,000.00 Windstream (phone) $ 2,100.00 Dues & Subscriptions $ 4,121.00 $ 8,000.00 ASCOP (Music licensing) $ 450.00 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget 7nla GARI If FFST PROPoun R1jnr.FT 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget DESCRIPTION BMI (Music Licensing) 2013 ACTUALS $ 236.00 i • TALS 2014 BUDGET IN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE Chamber Member Dues $ 300.00 FFEA $ 400.00 IFEA Intuit (QuickBooks) $ 400.00 Go Daddy (web hosting) $ 200.00 Tracinet.com $ 260.00 Constant Contact $ 1,875.00 Printing & Stationary $ 18.00 $ 50.00 Bob's Printing (sponsor book) $ 18.00 Insurance $ 1,530.00 $ 1,530.00 $ 1,530.00 Tax Expense $ 49,177.47 $ 52,000.00 Payroll Tax $ 4,200.00 Sales Tax Expense (vendors) $ 16,000.00 Sales Tax Expense (alcohol) $ 13,063.19 Sales Tax Expense (admission) $ 1,132.08 Sales Tax Expense (merch & rides) $ 1,132.08 Sales Tax Expense (food %) $ 2,830.19 Sales Tax Expense (admission) $ 5,088.68 Sales Tax Expense (admission) $ 5,670.00 Annual Report Filing $ 61.25 Misc Expense $ 2,677.12 $ 2,650.00 Brown Dist (Beer glasses) $ 283.53 Winners Circle Awards (GCS) $ 187.76 GCS Cash Awards ($1,000 Chuck Gittleman /$500 Chris Miracola) $ 1,500.00 GCS (competition food) $ 80.97 GCS (competition food) $ 147.16 GCS (competition food) $ 139.82 GCS (competition food) $ 337.88 Web Design $ 1,601}.01] $ 500.00 Erika (Green Chile) $ 600.00 Realtime (new site) $ 11000.00 Commission $ 1,740.00 $ 500.00 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget M14 GARLIC FFST PROPOSFD RI`1DGFT 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget DESCRIPTION J Aracri Consulting, LLC (Jumbo Tron ads) 2013 DETAIL ACTUALS $ 1,140.00 2013 TOTALS i IN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE J Aracri Consulting, LLC (Nancy & Suzanne assist) $ 600.00 Outside Professional Services Artistic $ 94,238.30 $95,000.00 AEG Live (Booking Fee) $ 3,500.00 Andy Childs (Main Stage) $ 2,000.00 Dana Donaty (Poster Artist) $ 500.00 Cheryl Smith $ 1,055.00 Donna Schwartz $ 397.50 Georgia Handy (Photography) $ 1,000.00 Gina Biggs (OPS) -Will Call $ - Jack Hammer (Sound & Lights) $ 18,015.00 Michael Giletto (GCS Emcee) $ 750.00 Production Toolbox (jumbo trop) $ 4,770.00 Production Toolbox (power) $ 12,854.80 Volunteer Contribution $ 43,896.00 Banyan Creek Elementary SD Spady Elementary CROS Ministries Atlantic High Eagle -ettes Boy Scout Troup 301 Old School Square Kiwanis Sister Cities Atlantic High Bond Boosters Boynton Beach High Rotary Club Wendy Feldman (Graphic Design) $ 5,500.00 National Act Entertainment $ 75,082.00 $ 90,000.00 W9 Andy Childs Band $ 1,500.00 W9 (Andy Childs Band airfare) $ 1,482.00 W9 Captain Reese $ 750.00 W9 Fabulous Fleetwoods $ 750.00 W9 Jay Blues Band $ 750.00 W9 Killbillies $ 750.00 W9 Lifehouse $ 30,000.00 W9 Lifehouse (backline) $ 1,500.00 W9 The Long Run $ 1,200.00 W9 Turnstiles $ 1,400.00 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget 7fllA GARI it I:Fr%T PRC pnc%Fn Rl InGFT W9 DESCRIPTION Pepper ACTUALS $ 35,000.00 • IN -KIN© INCOME OUTLINE Ads, Marketing & Signage- Events $ 2,087.80 $ 2,000.00 DFS Graphics $ 1,856.10 DFS Graphics $ 206.70 Where the Shows Are $ 25.00 Outside Professional Services Other $ 8,368.75 $ 3,000.00 Ed Zuraw (accounting) $ 8,368.75 CONTRACTORS: Personnel- Admin- Marketing $ 140,738.76 $ 148,000.00 Margaret Graham (bathroom attendee) $ 1,350.00 Sarah Vallely $ 2,000.00 Carolyn Farnham (Mercantile) $ 500.00 Charlie Staff: Todd $1,200, Paulie $1,200, Howard $1,200 $ 3,600.00 Bern Ryan (CFO) $ 20,000.00 Bern Ryan (Reimbursed van rental) Jimmy Peluso ($366 air) $ 1,366.00 Jimmy Boyle (OPS) $ 2,095.65 Judy DeNucci $ 1,500.00 Melissa Wakefield $ 1,500.00 W9 Owen Ryan $ 625.00 Doobie Sullivan $ 1,500.00 Justin Thompkins $ 1,200.00 Justin Mazzella $ 750.00 Ross Vallely $ 200.00 Marianne Ryan (Bar) $ 1,500.00 MGMT4 Personal Services $ 10,348.00 Nancy Stewart (Executive Director) $ 20,000.00 Office Staff Person -Full Time $ 36,000.00 Operations Staff $ 14,640.00 Sunshine Golf Cart $ 100.00 Suzanne Haley (Vendor Coord) $ 7,500.00 Tom Endrizzi (OPS) $ 1,873.40 Bern Ryan (Van $207.68, U- Haul 412.11 $ 1,451.11 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget 7ni,d [;ORI iC FFST PRCIPnr%Fn RIInr.FT W9 DESCRIPTION Volunteer Coordinator - Jennifer Costello i DETAIL ACTUALS $ 2,250.00 2013 i t IN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE Volunteer Coordinator helpers (2 @ $12) - James Miller $ 250.00 Volunteer Coordinator Asst- Tom Colon $ 750.00 Jack Ryan (OPS) $289.60 airfare $ 1,889.60 Jeff Shores (OPS) $ 2,500.00 Patty Reed $ 850-00 John Franczak $ 650.00 Equipment Rental / Lease $ 24,185.92 $ 25,000.00 Neff Rental (scissor lift) $ 346.14 Regency Party Rental $ 14,958.00 Regency Party (clear span) $ 3,906.30 Friendly John (fencing /port -a- lets) $ 4,736.98 Scaleman $ 238.50 Space Rental - Venue Expense $ 26,147.70 $ 27,000.00 City of Delray Beach -Parks & Rec $ 2,080.00 Office Rent $ 6,360.00 Delray Beach Center for the Arts $ 15,307.70 Storage Rental $ 2,400.00 Misc. Expense - Events $ 9,380.03 $ 9,500.00 Hotel Cost (Pepper & Lifehouse) $ 4,314.57 Cheney Brothers (reimbursed Carefree Catering) $ 3,350.35 Ice Postage - Mailing $ 300.00 Bern Ryan (Reim: gas, food, alcohol, UHAUL, van) $ 1,415.11 Printing Expense - Events $ 3,079.66 $ 3,000.00 National Ticket (Single rolls) $ 132.77 National Ticket (wrist bands) $ 37.05 National Ticket (50% dep on script) $ 1,160.57 National Ticket (addl script) $ 588.70 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget 7ma r.ARII if FFST ppnpngF:n m InE;FT 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget DESCR I PTI s National Ticket (Bal on script) 2013 DETAIL - ACTU;6J& $ 1,160.57 2013 • : BUDGETIN -KIND INCOME OUTLINE Sales Expense - Beverage $ 69,235.15 $ 73,000.00 Brown Distributing $ 39,597.00 Republic Nat'l $ 22,921.15 Republic Nat'l $ 6,717.00 Sales Expense - Merchandise $ 5,805.02 $ 6,500.00 Proforma (Vol shirts) $ 2,943.24 Proforma (Staff shirts) $ 43235 Proforma (Hats) $ 308.09 Proforma (Poster tshirts) $ 1,136.60 Proforma (Tiles) $ 588.74 NobleHaus (Garlic Shirts) $ 396.00 Supplies Purchased- Events $ 518.55 $ 600.00 Kwik- Covers $ 518.55 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 576,928.13 $ 576,928.13 $ 607,480-00 2013 PROFIT $ 33,796.73 2014 Garlic Fest Proposed Budget Arts & Economic Prosperity IV: Calculator Page 1 of 2 POPULATION of your community: Your Organization's TOTAL EXPENSES (please do not use commas): TOTAL ATTENDANCE to your organization's arts events (again, do not use commas): CALCULATE Reset 50,000 to 99,999 V $ 576928 40000 l ittp:// www. aniericaiisforthearts. orgl inforination _serviceslresearchlseiviccs /economic impa,.. 4/9/2013 Total Household Local State Expelutitures FTE Jobs Income Government Government Revenue Revenue NonprofilArts and Culture $576,928 21.3 $485,381 $20,129 $23,706 Organizations: NonproiitArts and Culture Audiences: $812,400 22.5 $490,454 $42,578 $46,120 Total Industry Impact: (The Sum of Organizations and Audiences) $1,389,328 43.8 $975,835 $62,707 $69,826 Print Your Results Please see the fine pLirit below. DEFINITIONS Total The total dollars spent by your nonprofit arts and culture organization and its audiences; event - Expenditures, related spending by arts and culture audiences is estimated using the average dollars spent per person by arts event attendees in similarly populated communities. FTE Jobs: The total number of full -time equivalent (FTE) jobs in your community that are supported by the exponditures made by your arts and culture organization andlor its audiences. An FTE can be one l ittp:// www. aniericaiisforthearts. orgl inforination _serviceslresearchlseiviccs /economic impa,.. 4/9/2013 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 1, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.B. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 VOTING DELEGATE/ PALM BEACH COUNTY LEAGUE OF CITIES ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before Commission to designate a voting delegate and alternate(s) to vote on behalf of City at any League of Cities general membership meeting, special general membership and/or function of the general membership. BACKGROUND The Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc. was chartered in 1969 as a non - profit corporation. The purpose of the Palm Beach County League of Cities is to promote and advance the collective interest of the municipalities of Palm Beach County; to study municipal issues and seek desired results through cooperative efforts; to respect the principles of Home Rule; and to encourage and enhance the quality of life of citizens of Palm Beach County. The General Membership meets once per month (normally the 4thWednesday) at 11:30 a.m. at different host cities around the county. The Board of Directors meets once per month (normally the 4th Wednesday) at 10:00 a.m., at various locations in Palm Beach County. RECOMMENDATION Designate a voting delegate and alternate(s) to the League of Cities to vote on behalf of the City. MEMORANDUM 'A Z TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Terrill Pyburn, Assistant City Attorney THROUGH: Brian Shutt, City Attorney DATE: June 17, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.C. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ALLOW CITY ATTORNEY TO JOIN DELRAY BEACH WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE FRANCHISE FEE PAYMENTS FROM FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This is a request for authorization to allow the City Attorney to join Delray Beach with other municipalities in a lawsuit challenging the franchise fee payments from Florida Public Utilities Company from 2010 through the present. BACKGROUND The City of Delray Beach enacted Ordinance No. 32 -90 on August 14, 1990, which granted Florida Public Utilities Company ( "FPUC ") the right to use the City's rights -of -way for the purpose of supplying natural gas. This ordinance was accompanied by an agreement dated August 20, 1990. This agreement does not expire until September 1, 2020. Under the terms of our agreement, FPUC is obligated to pay a 6% franchise fee (based on 6% of its revenues from the sale of gas to residential and general service commercial customers) to the City. The City noticed a reduction in payments beginning in 2010. Around that same time, FPUC re- classified a majority of its general service commercial customers as Large Volume Service customers, thereby this reclassification by FPUC resulted in no franchise payment to the City for these newly classified Large Volume Service customers and large reductions in franchise fees for the City of Delray Beach and as well as other cities in Palm Beach County. The affected cities have decided to pursue an action in state court asserting allegations of breach of contract and requesting declaratory relief, asking the court to clarify the cities' rights regarding the franchise fee calculations based on this re- classification without our consent and requesting declaratory relief regarding FPUC's practice of deducting the property taxes paid from the franchise fee amounts remitted to the cities. The cities believe that this is an unlawful tax exemption and are requesting the court's clarification and direction on this issue as well. The Town of Palm Beach is taking the lead on the lawsuit (a draft of which is attached) and they have asked all affected municipalities to participate. Participation in the suit comes with costs for legal fees up through trial. The estimated costs are $115,000 total (up through trial only, not including costs for any possible appeal). The City's portion of these costs is estimated at 11.1% or $12,759.59. This estimate is based on the franchise fee revenue that we received in 2009 compared with the other affected cities. All of the participating cities have been asked to sign an interlocal agreement agreeing to participate and fund their portion of the lawsuit, which includes funding the Tallahassee law firm of Gardner, Bist, Wiener, Wadsworth, Bowden, Bush, Dee, LaVia & Whight, P.A., a firm that specializes in utilities litigation issues as well as the firm of Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., a local West Palm Beach firm that will coordinate the filings and information between the cities. The litigation is estimated to take up to 1 year to conclude and we are hopeful that we will prevail and that the court will make FPUC pay us damages in the amount of the unpaid franchise fees not collected for the re- classified customers, which we estimate to be approximately $50,000+ as well as clarify that FPUC cannot re- classify a group of customers without first amending their contract with us. RECOMMENDATION The City Attorney's office recommends City Commission approval. AGREEMENT COMES NOW, FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY, a public utility organization organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, hereinafter the Company, and the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, hereafter the City, and agree: 1. That the City has agreed to adopt, and the Company has agreed to accept, an ordinance granting a franchise to construct or otherwise acquire and to own, maintain, equip and operate plants and works, and all necessary or desirable appurtenances thereof, for the manufacture, purchase, transmis- sion and distribution of artificial, natural and /or mixed gas (hereinafter referred to generally as "gas "), including the right without the payment by Grantee of any special tax, assessment or charges therefore to construct, lay, extend, maintain, renew, remove, replace, repair, use and operate gas pipes and gas mains, and all appurtenances and appendages thereto, in, under, or or across the present and future public streets, avenues, alleys, highways, bridges, easements and other public places within the present or any future corporate limits of Grantor or its successors, for the purpose of dis- tributing, supplying and selling gas to Grantor or its successors, and to persons and corporations inhabitants thereof, as well as to persons or corporations beyond the present or future corporate limits thereof. 2. That contemporaneously with the adoption of the franchise by the City and the acceptance of that franchise by the Company, the City and the Company have entered into this separate agreement that during the term of the franchise, and any renewal or extension thereof, when and if the Company negotiates a gas franchise after the effective date of the acceptance of the franchise, which increases the percentage of the franchise fee payable above the 6% provided by the ordinance, the City shall have the right to amend the franchise ordinance during the 30 year term to provide for the applica- tion of such increased percentage to collections made for the sale of gas within the city limits of the City of Delray Beach and the Company hereby irrevocably consents to any such amend- ments adopted pursuant hereto. Annually, as of January 1 of each year, the Company will furnish the City a list of all of its gas franchises including the name and address of the franchisor, the date of the franchise, the percentage of the franchise fee, and the length of the term of the franchise, including both those negotiated after the date of acceptance of the franchise, which are r covered by this Agreement, and those which are excluded. Should any of the franchises covered by this Agreement provide a franchise fee above the 6% provided by the amended ordinance, the City may, in its sole discretion, elect to amend the existing franchise ordinance upon giving the Company at least 30 days advance written notice prior to the September 1 effective date in order to give the Company sufficient time to implement the increased franchise fee. 3. Further provided the increase referred to above shall be implemented at the beginning of the franchise year which shall be the anniversary of the effective date of the franchise referred to above in each succeeding year. 4. Further provided that the amendment shall: a. apply only to a change in the applicable franchise fee percentage and not to any change in class of service to which it applies. b. apply only to gas franchises negotiated by the Company after the date set forth above and not to gas fran- chises acquired by the Company through acquisition, purchase or merger. DATED this a20 day of AL6667— , 1990. Florida lic Utilities Company By: F. C. Cressman, President VICE- Witnesses: City of Delray Beach Mayor -MA McCARTY Attest: ACTING -City Clerk -SUSAN 0' BRIEN A ROVED AS TO FORM LEGALITY: 74 d el` __S__ -u� CL&4A rCity Attorney 2 CERTIFICATE C?F INSURANCE ISSUE DATE (MM /DD /YV) PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, SI r GWI CIS JAI %IItES OF FLORIDA, INN EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW 1'. O. BUY, 296i) _ ... !� �1:S.j. PA!_.hi 1 +EACFIr F =L_ 33�IOr? COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE CODE SUB -CODE INSURED I laT'ida Public Utilities Co. 1`10--Gas Corporation "01 S. Dixie Highway I-h -st Prilm Boesch F] 33401 i COMPANY LETTER A THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD COMPANY LETTER B r11P �T'r3L'a'1Pi't: COMPANY LETTER C Aegis COMPANY D ' LETTER the 1T'c3Vflc7'Ea COMPANY E PRODUCTS- COMP /0138 AGGREGATE; $ CLAIMS MADE X, OCCUR.: LETTER Y OWNER'S b CONTRACTOR'S PROT �. r .. EACH OCCURRENCE COVERAGES.. :. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. T TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER LTR POLICY EFFECTIVE ,POLICY EXPIRATION ALL LIMITS IN THOUSANDS DATE (MM /DD/YY) DATE (MM /DD/YY) i� GL 1.'73T77,'1?W) ENERAL LIABILITY 371 B/90 3/18/91 GENERAL AGGREGATE S 1000 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PRODUCTS- COMP /0138 AGGREGATE; $ CLAIMS MADE X, OCCUR.: PERSONAL & ADVERTISING INJURY S rr�} Y OWNER'S b CONTRACTOR'S PROT �. r .. EACH OCCURRENCE 50 FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) $ MEDICAL EXPENSE (Any one person) ; S "AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY TR l ?.gT77 5r 90 !' 371 8/90 3, 1 V %9 3COMBINED y ANY AUTO i SINGLE It •)r ;) f LIMIT ALL OWNED AUTOS ; BODILY ;INJURY 5 SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) HIRED AUTOS BODILY y , INJURY S NON -OWNED AUTOS : (Per accident),' GARAGE LIABILITY PROPERTY $ DAMAGE r EXCESS LIABILITY EACH AGGREGATE 'i 'UNTIREI 1. A FORM 00�}'�Rt�1 ' $ :` )"; ► r OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM _ }I i UB 1 73 I.7a 3 ] U 3/ 1 3190 311 Ell i :1. STATUTORY WORKER'S COMPENSATION t ) r : y (') $ (EACH ACCIDENT) AND y 7_0(jDISEASE— POLICY LIMIT) EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY 't`yil i S `' (DISEASE —EACH EMPLOI OTHER IDESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/ LOCATIONS /VEHICLESIREITRIUONS /SPECIAL ITEMS CERTIFICATE HOLDER <: CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATIO DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO 1 � 7 - TY O UFI. RAY DFACl-1 i� 100 N. W. .154' AS,JEN(j[;= MAIL DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE 1!II._RFlY L�Fl;t'iIr FL.. 33��J1 LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. g AUTHORIZED REPRES MT f1V 77 ACORD 2 5 -S (3/88) - ®ACORD CORPORATION 1988 ORDINANCE NO. 32-90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE RENEWAL OF A GAS FRANCHISE WITHIN THE CITY; GRANTING TO FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS A GAS FRANCHISE; IMPOSING PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS RELATING THERETO; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVID- ING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the grant by the City of Delray Beach of a gas franchise for a term of thirty (30) years to Florida Public Utilities Company expired on July 10, 1989, and is. currently being extended through mutual agreement of the parties; and, WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that it is in the best public interest to renew and update the gas franchise grant to Florida Public Utilities Company. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA THAT: Section 1. The City of Delray Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida (hereinafter "Grantor "), hereby grants to Florida Public Utilities Company, a corporation of the State of Florida (hereinafter "Grantee "), its successors and assigns, for the term of thirty (30) years, beginning the first day of the first full calendar month following the date of filing by the Grantee of acceptance of this franchise grant the right, privilege and authority or franchise to construct or otherwise acquire and to own, maintain, equip and operate plants and works, and all necessary or desirable appurtenances thereto, for the manufacture, generation, purchase, transmission and distribution of artificial, natural and /or mixed gas (herein referred to generally as "gas "), including the right without the payment by Grantee of any special tax, assessment or charges therefore to construct, lay, extend, maintain, renew, remove, replace, repair, use and operate gas pipes and gas mains, and all appurtenances and appendages thereto, in, under, on or across the present and future public streets, avenues, alleys, highways, bridges, easements and other public places within the present or any future corporate limits of the Grantor or its successors for the purpose of distributing, supplying and selling gas to Grantor or its successors and to persons and corporations inhabitants thereof, as well as to persons or corporations beyond the present or future corporate limits thereof, but nothing herein contained shall relieve Grantee from meeting all applicable requirements of the Grantor's Code of Ordinances including Building and Zoning Codes (which are not in conflict with the Florida Administrative Code and /or the Code of Federal Regulations requirements) and payment of any fees, licenses or ad valorem taxes ordinarily imposed by Grantor on similar business activities. Section 2. Grantee's facilities shall be so located or relocated and so erected as to interfere as little as possible with traffic over said streets, avenues, alleys, highways, bridges, easements and other public places, and with reasonable egress from and ingress to abutting property. The location or relocation of all facilities shall be made under the supervision and with the approval of such representa- tives as the governing body of Grantor may designate for the purpose, but not so as unreasonably to interfere with the proper operation of Grantee's facilities and service. When any portion of the Grantor's property is excavated or disturbed by Grantee in the location or reloca- tion of any of its facilities, the portion of the Grantor's property so excavated shall, within a reasonable time and as early as practicable after such excavation, be replaced by the Grantee at its expense and in as good condition as it was at the time of such excavation or distur- bance. In addition, such work shall be done only in the manner and pursuant to the regulations established by the ordinances of the Grantor. Upon failure of Grantee to do so after twenty (20) days notice in writing shall have been given to said Grantee by Grantor, the Grantor may repair such portion of the Grantor's property that may have been excavated or disturbed by Grantee. Nothing in this section shall be construed to make the Grantor liable to the Grantee for any cost or expense in connection with the construction, reconstruction or reloca- tion of the Grantee's facilities in streets, alleys, bridges, and public places of the Grantor made necessary by widening, paving, or otherwise improving such streets, alleys, bridges and public places, except that the Grantee shall be entitled to reimbursement of such costs and expenses from funds available from sources other than the Grantor as may be provided by law. Section 3. At all times during the term of this franchise Grantee shall promptly and without discrimination furnish an adequate supply of gas of standard quality and pressure to Grantor and its succesors, and to persons, corporations and inhabitants thereof who request the same and agree to abide by Grantee's reasonable rules and regulations, and shall acquire, construct, maintain, equip and operate all necessary facilities for the manufacture, purchase, generation, transmission, supply and distribution of gas for the benefit and conve- nience of Grantor and its inhabitants. In any case where there is interruption or impairment of service or failure to supply gas or pressure, Grantee shall promptly remedy such condition; provided that any interruption or impairment of service resulting from a strike, accident, an act of God, or other cause beyond the control of the Grantee shall, if remedied within a reasonable time period agreed to by the parties hereto, not constitute grounds for revoking and canceling any rights hereunder. Section 4. Grantee shall have the right to adopt and enforce rules and regulations with respect to the extension, initiation and rendering of gas service, including rules providing for the discontinu- ance of service to any customer for nonpayment of bills when due, or for failure to comply with the Grantee's other rules and regulations. All rates for gas and rules and regulations established by Grantee from time to time shall be those prescribed and approved by the Florida Public Service commission. Section 5. Grantor, and its officers, employees and agents shall not be liable or responsible for any accident or damage that may occur in the construction, operation, conduct or maintenance by the Grantee of its facilities or services hereunder, and the acceptance of this franchise grant shall be deemed an agreement on the part of the Grantee to protect, defend and indemnify the Grantor, and its officers, employees and agents and hold it harmless against any and all liability, claims, demands, expenses, fees, fines, penalties, suits, proceedings, actions, costs of actions, including attorney's fees and costs of appellate proceedings of whatsoever kind or nature arising out of the negligence, default, misconduct or otherwise of Grantee in the ORD. NO. 32 -90 construction, operation, conduct or maintenance of its facilities or services hereunder, excepting only the negligence of the Grantor. Section 6. Grantee shall carry in full force and effect during the entire term of this agreement, and any extension thereof, the following insurance coverages: (a) Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, including products, contractual, and hazard, with a minimum combined single limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000). Current insurance certificates shall be submitted to the Grantor by Grantee, and each insurance policy shall contain a provision whereby the company executing the same shall endeavor to notify the Grantor in writing as least thirty (30) days before any cancellation of such policy is to become effective. (b) Worker's Compensation Insurance and Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance as required under the Florida Statutes for the benefit of the employees of Grantee. Section 7. In consideration for the rights and privileges granted herein, Grantee agrees to pay Grantor a privilege tax equal to six percent (6$) of its gross revenues (gross revenues being the amount collected less charge -offs for uncollectible accounts and adjustments) and which shall exceed the amount of any other taxes, licenses or other impositions levied or imposed by Grantor against Grantee's property, business or operations for the tax year preceding the beginning of the applicable privilege tax year from the sale of gas to residential and general service commercial customers within the corporate limits of Grantor within a twelve month period (i.e. the applicable "privilege tax year "). The first privilege tax year shall commence on the first day of the first full calendar month following the adoption of this Ordinance. Payments shall be made quarterly on or before the final day of each three calendar month period based upon one - fourth (1/4) of the total payments made in the preceding privilege tax year, except for the first privilege tax year where each quarterly payment shall equal one and one -half percent (1.5 %) of gross revenues from the sale of gas to residential and general service customers for the twelve calendar months preceding the effective date of this Ordinance. At the close of each privilege tax year, an accounting shall be made to determine whether Grantee owes additional monies, which shall be paid not less than thirty (30) days after the close of said privilege tax year, or whether Grantee is owed a refund, which shall be collected by offsetting the total amount of the refund from the next succeeding quarterly payment made to Grantor. Section 8. Grantor hereby reserves the right at and after the expiration of this grant to purchase the property of Grantee used under this franchise grant at a valuation to be determined by negotiation between the parties, or failing such agreement, the price shall be determined pursuant to F.S. Section 180.16. Section 9. In consideration of the Grantee's undertakings hereunder as evidenced by its acceptance hereof, the Grantor agrees not to engage in the business of distributing and selling gas during the life of this franchise or any extension thereof in competition with the Grantee, its successors and assigns. Section 10. Failure on the part of Grantee to comply in any substantial respect with any of the provisions, covenants, terms or conditions of this ordinance, shall be grounds for a forfeiture of this ORD. NO. 32 -90 grant, but no such forfeiture shall take effect if the reasonableness or propriety thereof is protested by Grantee until a court of competent jurisdiction (with right of appeal in either party) shall have found that Grantee has failed to comply in a substantial respect with any of the provisions of this franchise, and the Grantee shall have six (6) months after the final determination of the question, to make good the default before a forfeiture shall result with the right in Grantor at its discretion to grant such additional time to Grantee for compliance as necessities in the case require. Section 11. Grantee by its acceptance hereof, which shall be filed with the Grantor's City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the final passage of this ordinance, agrees to observe, perform and keep all of the agreements, covenants, terms and conditions hereof to be observed, performed and kept by Grantee including related agreements. All of the terms, provisions and conditions hereof including related agreements shall inure to and be binding upon the respective successors and assigns of the Grantor and Grantee. Section 12. No assignment or transfer of the franchise rights granted hereby, shall be effective unless the Grantee shall have noti- fied the Grantor in writing prior to the scheduled date of said assignment or transfer, and unless, after the filing of said notice, the Grantor shall have by ordinance approved and consented to such assign- ment or transfer, such approval and consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The assignment or transfer of the franchise rights shall be subject to any additional provisions and conditions, as agreed to between the parties, and as set forth in the ordinance approving the assignment or transfer. Section 13. In the event of a final adjudication of bankrupt- cy of the Grantee, the Grantor shall have full power and authority to terminate, revoke, and cancel any and all rights granted under the provisions of this ordinance. Section 14. Minor changes in the terms and conditions hereof may be made by written agreement between the Grantor and the Grantee, provided, however, that this section shall not be construed as confer- ring authority to make changes in or modification of the provisions of this ordinance which would be repugnant to or inconsistent with the basic grant, factors or principles underlying the terms and conditions hereof. Section 15. The accounts and records of the Grantee pertain- ing to gas service rendered under this franchise shall be maintained within the State of Florida, and Grantor may, at its option, upon reasonable notice to Grantee, at any time during the ninety (90) days after the close of each fiscal year of this grant, or at such other times as mutually agreed to between the parties, examines said accounts and records and as such relate to the calculation of the franchise payment to the Grantor. Such examination of accounts and records of Grantee by Grantor shall be made during the regular business hours of the Grantee at the General Office of the Grantee. The Grantee shall maintain its records in sufficient detail that revenues within the corporate limits of the Grantor are readily discernible from other revenues for auditing purposes. All examinations shall be at the sole expense of the Grantor. However, if the Grantor conducts an audit of the Grantee's books and records, and substantial discrepancies are ORD. NO. 32 -90 discovered which result in sums which should have been paid to Grantor, then the cost of such audit will be paid by Grantee. Section 16. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 17. Should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the -L z::::aizde: hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 18. This ordinance shall take effect upon the first day of the first full calendar month following the date upon which the Grantee files its acceptance. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 14tn day of August 1990. 'WA -Y Attest: Asst. City Clerk •.J First Reading July 24, 1990 Second Reading August 14, 1990 5 ORD. NO. 32-90 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY PURSUE A COMPLAINT AGAINST FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION (FPUC) FOR PAYMENT OF FRANCHISE FEES The City of The City of The City of The Town of The Town of The Town of The City of Dated the th day of , 2013 By, Between, and Among Atlantis, Florida Boca Raton, Florida Delray Beach, Florida Gulf Stream, Florida Lake Park, Florida Palm Beach, Florida West Palm Beach, Florida 1 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS RECITALS TERMS OF AGREEMENT Article 1. Definitions Article 2. Purpose and Authorized Activities Article 3. Duration, Term, and Termination Article 4. Organization Article 5. Manner of Funding Article 6. Manner of Disbursements Article 7. Method of Allocating Cost Responsibility Article 8. Manner of Employing, Engaging, Compensating, and Discharging Necessary Personnel and Firms, Including Purchasing Services and Entering Into Contracts Article 9. Reserved for Future use Article 10. Provision for Return of Any Surplus Funds to Participating Parties Article 11. Reserved for Future Use Article 12. Reserved for Future Use Article 13. Indemnification; Manner of Responding to Any Claims for Liability; Insuring Against Such Liability Article 14. Dispute Article 15. Accountability for Funds; Audit 2 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 Article 16. Representations and Warranties Article 17. Miscellaneous Provisions DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY PURSUE A COMPLAINT AGAINST FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY (FPUC) FOR PAYMENT OF CORRECT FRANCHISE FEES This Interlocal Agreement to Jointly Pursue a Complaint Against Florida Public Utilities Company for Payment of Correct Franchise Fees, dated as of the th day of 2013 ( "Agreement "), is entered into by, between, and among the following: The City of The City of The City of The Town of The Town of The Town of The City of Atlantis, Florida Boca Raton, Florida Delray Beach, Florida Gulf Stream, Florida Lake Park, Florida Palm Beach, Florida West Palm Beach, Florida The foregoing entities are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties" or as the "Local Governments," and each may also be referred to individually as a "Party" or as a "Local Government." For purposes of entering into transactions pursuant to this Agreement, the Local Governments agree to do so in the name of the Florida Local Governments Consortium for Proper Franchise Fees (hereinafter referred to as the "Governments Franchise Fee Consortium" or simply as the "Consortium "). The purpose of the Agreement is to provide a means, pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, for the Local Governments to mutually support claims for payment of the correct and proper franchise fees due from FPUC to each of the participants to this Agreement pursuant to the franchise agreements between FPUC and each of the Local Governments relating to FPUC's provision of retail natural gas services within each Local Government's corporate limits. The activities contemplated by this Interlocal Agreement include, without limitation, participating (a) as named plaintiffs in a civil complaint seeking damages for under -paid franchise fees in the past and declaratory relief that would require FPUC to pay the correct and proper franchise fees 'in the future; (b) in negotiations 4 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 with FPUC for the payment of proper franchise fees; (c) in negotiations with FPUC for new franchise agreements that would clarify and resolve all issues arising under the existing franchise agreements; (d) in any other relevant proceedings and activities before any court, tribunal, regulatory agency, or other governmental entity having jurisdiction; and (e) in any other related activities in furtherance of the Local Governments' goals of ensuring that they receive the correct and proper franchise fees from FPUC. RFY'TTAT..q WHEREAS, each Party to this Agreement is a political subdivision of the State of Florida, each having the police power and each committed to exercising that power in the interests of the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, each of the Local Governments has adopted an ordinance embodying a franchise agreement with Florida Public Utilities Company relating to FPUC's provision of retail natural gas utility service to customers located within each Local Government's corporate limits; and WHEREAS, franchise fee revenues are an important source of funding for the operations of and services provided by each Local Government; and WHEREAS, it is critical that franchise fee payments be correctly and properly calculated and remitted to the Local Governments so that they can fulfill their obligations to their citizens without having to raise taxes or resort to other funding means; and WHEREAS, the Local Governments to this Interlocal Agreement, based on research and analysis of the franchise fee revenues received from FPUC and of the franchise agreements pursuant to which those franchise fees are calculated, have come to believe that FPUC has not correctly and properly calculated and remitted the correct amount of franchise fees due to the Local Governments; and WHEREAS, the Local Governments wish to enter into this Interlocal Agreement for the purpose of jointly funding 5 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 efforts to recover franchise fees that they should have received and to ensure that all franchise fees are properly calculated and remitted in the future, and also to provide a vehicle for the purpose of participating, as provided for herein, in relevant legal proceedings and other activities consistent with the Local Governments' goals, provided specifically, however, that no individual Local Government shall be limited by this Agreement to participating in any such activities only through this Agreement, it being the intent of all Local Governments that any individual Local Government shall be free to participate in any such proceedings to promote its own interests as it deems appropriate; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the mutual promises and covenants set forth in this Agreement, the mutuality and mutual value of which is hereby acknowledged by each Party to this Agreement, the Parties do hereby agree as follows. TERMS OF AGREEMENT Article 1 - Definitions 1.1 "Consortium" or "Florida Local Governments Consortium for Proper Franchise Fees" or "Governments Franchise Fee Consortium" shall mean the Parties to this Interlocal Agreement, acting collectively. 1.2 "Gas Franchise Agreements" means those ordinances and related agreements between each of the Local Governments and Florida Public Utilities Company embodying each Government's agreement with FPUC regarding the grant of a franchise and the payment of franchise fees relating to FPUC's provision of retail natural gas service within the Local Government's corporate limits. 1.3 "Law Firm" or "Law Firms" means either or both of Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., Post Office Box 3475, West Palm Beach, Florida 33402 -3475, and Gardner Bist Wiener Wadsworth Bowden Bush Dee LaVia & Wright, P.A.,1300 Thomaswood Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32308. 2 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 1.4 "Legal Services Agreement" means a written agreement engaging the Law Firm to perform certain legal services in furtherance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, preparing and filing the complaint against FPUC contemplated by this Interlocal Agreement, negotiating with FPUC to resolve the issues raised in the complaint on behalf of the Parties to this Interlocal Agreement, and any other services that the Parties agree to engage either or both of the Law Firms to perform in furtherance of the purposes of this Agreement. Copies of the Legal Services Agreements with each Law Firm are attached to this Agreement as Appendix 1. Article 2 - Purpose and Authorized Activities 2.1 The purpose of the Agreement is to pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, Governments to mutually support claims for correct and proper franchise fees due from the participants to this Agreement pursuant franchise agreements between FPUC and each Governments relating gas services within limits. to FPUC's provision of each Local Government's provide a means, for the Local payment of the FPUC to each of to the of the Local retail natural corporate 2.2 Specific activities contemplated by this Agreement include, without limitation, the following: a. Participating as named plaintiffs in a civil complaint seeking damages for under -paid franchise fees in the past and declaratory relief that would require FPUC to pay the correct and proper franchise fees in the future; b. Participating in negotiations with FPUC for the payment of proper franchise fees; C. Participating in negotiations with FPUC for new franchise agreements that would clarify and resolve all issues arising under the existing franchise agreements; 7 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 d. Participating in any relevant proceedings and activities before any court, tribunal, regulatory agency, or other governmental entity having jurisdiction; and e. Participating in any other related activities in furtherance of the Local Governments' goals of ensuring that they receive the correct and proper franchise fees from FPUC. f. Participating in defending any action that may be brought against either the Consortium or any of the Local Governments individually as a result of the activities of the Consortium in seeking proper franchise fee payments as contemplated by this Agreement. 2.3 Authorization to enter into the Legal Services Agreement is granted by all of the Local Governments upon the execution of this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, as of , 2013, the Local Governments recognize, understand, and agree that the only costs to be shared under the Legal Services Agreement are the costs associated with the Legal Services Agreements, including the proposed budget attached thereto. 2.4 The Local Governments agree that this Agreement shall provide the legal vehicle and framework for the Law Firms hired pursuant to the Legal Services Agreement to provide additional services in connection with future activities pursuant to this Agreement, i.e., activities beyond those expressly identified herein. The Parties contemplate and intend, however, that any such further activities shall be subject to the shared - funding provisions of this Agreement only upon the written execution of a written "memorandum of understanding and authorization" or similar document by each Local Government electing to participate in such activities on a shared - funding basis. 2.5 The Parties specifically agree that this Agreement shall be construed such that no individual Local Government shall be limited by this Agreement to participating in any such activities only through this Agreement, and that it is 8 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 the intent of all Parties to this Agreement that any individual Party (Local Government) shall be free to participate in any proceedings before any tribunal, court, executive agency, legislative or quasi - legislative body, or any other government agency, to promote its own interests as it deems appropriate. 2.6 The Parties hereby authorize the Town of Palm Beach to enter into the Legal Services Agreements with the Law Firms on behalf of the Consortium and the Parties to this Agreement, and pursuant to the shared - funding provisions of this Agreement. Article 3 - Duration, Term, and Termination 3.1 This Agreement shall be effective as between all of the Parties as of the day of , 2013, and shall continue in effect until there remains at most only one (1) Local Government that has not submitted a Notice of Termination of Participation in this Agreement as provided in Section 3.2. 3.2 Termination of a Party's participation in this Agreement shall be effected by the Party submitting a written Notice of Termination to each other Party. Termination shall not relieve a Party of the obligation to provide any funds that it has committed to provide, and termination shall not entitle a Party to a refund of any amounts paid in, except as provided in Section 10.3 below. Article 4 - Organization 4.1 The Florida Local Governments Consortium for Proper Franchise Fees shall be an organization, whether incorporated or not, organized and existing for the purposes set forth in this Interlocal Agreement. 4.2 It is the desire and intent of the Parties that decisions made under this Agreement shall be by consensus. However, if a consensus is not fully achievable in any particular instance, then decisions shall be made by the affirmative vote of at least three - fifths of all of the 9 DRAFT — VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 Parties to this Agreement that have agreed to participate in funding the activity with respect to which the decision is being made. 4.3 It is the desire and intent of the Parties that decisions made under this Agreement, relating to matters and issues other than activities for which the Parties have contributed funding support, shall also be made by consensus of those Parties who have contributed funding pursuant to this Agreement. If in a particular instance, a consensus is not fully achievable, then decisions regarding such issues or matters shall be made by the affirmative vote of three - fifths of all of the Parties to this Agreement that have contributed funding toward any activity of the Consortium pursuant to this Agreement within two years preceding the date on which the decision is being made, providing that such Parties have not terminated their participation in this Agreement pursuant to Section 3.2 above. 4.4 If the Parties decide to form a corporate entity to carry out the purposes of this Agreement, they hereby agree that the Bylaws of such corporate entity shall reflect the decision rules set forth in Sections 4.2 and 4.3 above. Article 5 - Manner of Funding; Initial Funding; Funding Subsequent Activities 5.1 Funding for the litigation and negotiation activities contemplated by this Agreement shall be made by direct contributions by each Party to the Town of Palm Beach, which the Parties agree shall be the entity having responsibility to make disbursements. 5.2 Having considered the proposed budget submitted by the Law Firms, the Parties agree that the initial budget for the activities contemplated by this Interlocal Agreement shall be $115,000. Each Party's share is set forth in Appendix 2 to this Agreement. Each Party to this Agreement further agrees to pay its share of the fees and costs, as shown in Appendix 2, to the Town of Palm Beach within 20 days following each Party's execution of this 10 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 Agreement, or within such other time as is reasonable and practicable for a Party under its particular circumstances. Article 6 - Manner of Disbursements 6.1 Disbursements made directly on behalf of the Consortium shall be made by checks drawn on the accounts of the Town of Palm Beach, which may include designated sub - accounts for the Consortium, or on accounts of any Party authorized to receive and disburse funds pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of the Parties. Article 7 - Method of Allocating Cost Responsibility 7.1 Funding shall be shared by the Local Governments participating in the Florida Local Governments Consortium for Proper Franchise Fees as set forth in Appendix 2. 7.2 For each future activity (i.e., any activity beyond the initial scope of activities and legal services contemplated by this Agreement and by the budget appended to the Legal Services Agreements) undertaken by the Parties pursuant to this Agreement, each Party may elect to participate or not participate in funding the activity. For those Parties that elect to participate in funding any such future activity, the following shall be a non - binding guide to determining each Party's share of the funding (cost) of the activity: each Party's share shall be computed as the total agreed -upon funding level for the activity multiplied by a factor calculated by (a) dividing the Party's 2009 FPUC franchise fee revenue by the sum of the 2009 FPUC franchise fee revenues of all participating Parties. 7.3 Unless otherwise agreed by the participating Parties, funding for future activities shall be made via direct contributions by each Party participating in any such activity to either the Town of Palm Beach, or to either or both of the Law Firms, if applicable, or to any other entity that the Parties may designate to be the recipient of such contributions and disburser of funds. Funding for specific activities may be made in any other 11 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 manner mutually agreed upon by the Parties participating in funding such activity, provided that any such other funding method shall be incorporated in a written "memorandum of understanding and authorization" or similar document executed by all Parties participating in such activity. Article 8 - Manner of Employing, Engaging, Compensating, and Discharging Necessary Personnel and Firms, Including Purchasing Services and Entering Into Contracts 8.1 The Parties, acting through the Consortium, shall engage the Law Firms pursuant to an appropriate written letter or agreement memorializing the terms of that engagement, such as or similar to the Legal Services Agreements. 8.2 The Parties designate Thomas G. Bradford, Deputy Town Manager for the Town of Palm Beach, as their authorized agent for purposes of signing any agreements authorized by the Local Governments, including, without limitation, the Legal Services Agreements pursuant to this Interlocal Agreement and any future authorizations granted by the Parties. 8.3 The Law Firms and any other necessary providers of contract services shall be engaged by written agreement in the name of the Consortium. To the extent authorized pursuant to the shared - funding provisions of this Agreement, payments to the Law Firms shall be made directly by the Town of Palm Beach. Article 9 - Reserved for Future Use Article 10 - Provision for Return of Any Surplus Funds to Participating Parties 10.1 once a Party has committed in writing to participate in the Florida Local Governments Consortium for Proper Franchise Fees, its payment shall be made to the Town of Palm Beach within twenty (20) days following the Party's execution of this Agreement. Except as provided in 12 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 this Article 10, no part of any such payment shall be refundable, including if and when the Local Government withdraws from the Consortium. 10.2 Once a Party has committed in writing to participate in any other activity of the Consortium, its payment shall be made to the Town of Palm Beach (in the case of an agreement to fund activities by a Law Firm), to one of the Law Firms, or to another entity as designated in writing by the Parties, forthwith. Except as provided in this Article 10, no part of any such payment shall be refundable, including if and when the Local Government withdraws from the Consortium. 10.3 If there are undisbursed funds remaining in connection with any activity authorized by the Parties at the conclusion of such activity, and after all invoices and costs have been duly paid, then any such undisbursed funds shall be refunded by the entity then in possession of such funds (e.g., the Town of Palm Beach in the case of funds held by the Town of Palm Beach in connection with anticipated payments to the Law Firm) to each Local Government that contributed funds to such activity, pro rata, according to the percentage that each respective Local Government contributed to the total amount of funds contributed toward the shared funding support of such activity. Article it - Reserved for Future Use Article 12 - Reserved for Future Use Article 13 - Indemnification; Manner of Responding to Any Claims for Liability; Insuring Against Such Liability 13.1 Indemnification. Each Party shall be liable for its own actions and negligence. To the extent permitted by law, each Party shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other Parties against any actions, claims, or damages arising out of the Party's negligence of actions. The foregoing indemnification shall not constitute a waiver of 13 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 sovereign immunity beyond the limits set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, nor shall it be construed to constitute an agreement by any Party to indemnify any other Party for such other Party's negligent, willful, or intentional acts or omissions. 13.2 Responding to Claims for Liability. Each Party shall respond on its own behalf for any claims involving its own actions and negligence. If a claim is made against the Consortium or against all Parties together, then the Parties shall first meet to discuss and negotiate among themselves as to how best to respond to any such claims and as to how to fund any expenses associated with such response. If the Parties do not reach another agreement as to funding any response to a claim made against the Consortium or against all Parties together, then the Parties shall make any relevant decisions pursuant to the decision - making provisions of Sections 4.2 or 4.3 above, as either section may be applicable in a particular instance. 13.3 Survival of obligations. This Article 13 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. Any other term, condition, covenant, or obligation that requires the performance by a Party, relative to its obligations under this Article 13, subsequent to the termination of this Agreement shall remain enforceable against such Party subsequent to such termination. Article 14 - Dispute Resolution 14.1 Resolution Of Disputes Relative to Parties' Payment obligations to Support the Joint Efforts Contemplated In This Agreement. In the event that any dispute, controversy or claim relating to the Parties' payment obligations arising out of or relating to this Agreement or relating to the breach, termination or validity thereof should arise between the Parties (a "Dispute "), the Party or Parties asserting the existence of a Dispute shall deliver to the other Parties a written notice identifying the disputed issue. The Parties shall first meet, through designated representatives having authority to resolve any such Dispute, for the purpose of resolving such Dispute informally. In such meetings and 14 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 exchanges, a Party shall have the right to designate as confidential any information that such Party offers. No confidential information exchanged in such meetings for the purpose of resolving a dispute may be used by a Party in litigation against another Party or Parties. In the event that the Dispute cannot be resolved informally, then any Party may initiate binding arbitration proceedings, which shall be conducted in accordance with the then - current American Arbitration Association's ( "AAA ") Large, Complex Commercial Rules or other mutually agreed upon procedures. Each Party that participates in arbitration proceedings pursuant to this Agreement shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs, and all other costs incurred by such Party, in connection with the arbitration. 14.2 Resolution of All Other Disputes. In the event that any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach, termination or validity thereof should arise between the Parties (a "Dispute "), the Party or Parties asserting the existence of a Dispute shall deliver to the other Parties a written notice identifying the disputed issue. The Parties shall first meet, through designated representatives having authority to resolve any such Dispute, for the purpose of resolving such Dispute informally. In such meetings and exchanges, a Party shall have the right to designate as confidential any information that such Party offers. No confidential information exchanged in such meetings for the purpose of resolving a dispute may be used by a Party in litigation against another Party or Parties. In the event that the Dispute cannot be resolved informally, then any Party may initiate binding arbitration proceedings, which shall be conducted in accordance with the then - current American Arbitration Association's ( "AAA ") Large, Complex Commercial Rules or other mutually agreed upon procedures. Each Party that participates in arbitration proceedings pursuant to this Agreement shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs, and all other costs incurred by such Party, in connection with the arbitration. 14.3 It is the Parties, intent that any arbitration proceedings conducted under this Agreement be held in Palm Beach County, Florida, or in another location that is 15 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 mutually acceptable to all Parties involved in the arbitration proceedings. Article 15 - Accountability for Funds; Audit 15.1 Accounting. Each entity that receives funds from the participating Local Governments in furtherance of the activities contemplated by this Agreement, including, without limitation, the Town of Palm Beach and the Law Firms, as applicable, shall be accountable for the prudent handling of funds received and for disbursing funds only for authorized purposes pursuant to this Agreement. Each such entity shall, upon completion of its duties with respect to such funds received, provide an unaudited accounting of receipts of such funds and expenditures made from such funds. Such unaudited accounting shall be of the type and scope that such entity normally prepares for its own internal records of such transactions, and such accounting may, if practicable, be accomplished simply by the respective entity's furnishing copies of its accounting records and bank statements with the receipts and expenditures indicated. 15.2 Audit. Any Party may, at its sole expense, have an audit of the receipts and expenditures pursuant to this Agreement conducted by a Certified Public Accounting firm licensed to practice in the State of Florida. Article 16 - Representations and Warranties 16.1 By the signature of its authorized representative below, each Local Government confirms, represents, and warrants to all other Parties to this Agreement that it has the requisite approval of its governing council, commission, board, or other governing body to enter into this Agreement, and that the person signing on behalf of each Local Government is duly authorized to bind the Local Government to all of the terms, provisions, and conditions of this Agreement. Article 17 - Miscellaneous Provisions DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 17.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement is intended by the Parties as the final expression of their agreement, is intended also as a complete and exhaustive statement of their agreement with respect to the subject matter contained herein, and supersedes any previous agreements or understandings between the Parties. 17.2 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement should be held by any court or other authority of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, unenforceable or against public policy, the remainder of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect and will in no way be adversely affected; provided, however, that the severance of such term or provision does not render the performance of a Party's material obligations pursuant to this Agreement impracticable or impossible. 17.3 Amendments. This Agreement shall only be modified or amended by a written agreement, which may include a memorandum of understanding and authorization as contemplated in Sections 5.2 and 7.3 above, duly signed by the persons authorized to sign agreements on behalf of each respective Party. Any such amendments to this Agreement shall be identified appropriately so as to avoid any confusion. 17.4 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, all of which will be considered one and the same Agreement and each of which will be deemed an original. 17.5 Notices. All notices or other communications to be given or made hereunder shall be in writing, shall be addressed for the attention of the Persons indicated on the attached Appendix 3, and shall be delivered personally or sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service or facsimile. 17.6 Force Majeure Events. A " "Force Majeure Event" shall mean an event or circumstance that is not reasonably foreseeable, is beyond the reasonable control of and is not caused by the negligence or lack of due diligence of the affected Party or its contractors or suppliers. Such 17 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 events or circumstances may include, but are not limited to: actions or inactions of civil or military authority (including courts and governmental or administrative agencies), acts of God, war, riot or insurrection, terrorism, blockades, embargoes, sabotage (including, but not limited to, arson and vandalism), epidemics, explosions and fires not resulting from the negligence or lack of due diligence on the part of the affected Party, hurricanes, floods, strikes, lockouts or other labor disputes (not caused by the failure of the affected Party to comply with the terms of a collective bargaining agreement). Other than the obligation to pay money, which shall not be suspended in or due to a Force Majeure Event, no Party shall be liable to any other Party or Parties for any failure or delay in performance of any obligation under this Agreement due to the occurrence of a Force Majeure Event. Whenever a Force Majeure Event occurs, the Parties shall, as quickly as possible and to the extent consistent with the affected Party's or Parties' best commercially reasonable efforts, eliminate or cure the cause of the Force Majeure Event and resume performance in full compliance with this Agreement. 17.7 Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, without reference to its conflict of laws rules or any principles that would trigger the application of any other law. The Parties agree that any arbitration proceedings conducted under this Agreement shall be held in Palm Beach County, Florida, or in another location that is mutually acceptable to all Parties involved in the arbitration proceedings. 17.8 Assignment. It is expressly understood and agreed that this Agreement is made by, between, and among the Parties who have executed the Agreement. No Party shall have the right to assign any rights, duties, benefits, or other interests that it may have pursuant to this Agreement without the express written consent of all other Parties to the Agreement. 17.9 Survival. The provisions of Article 1 (Definitions), Article 13 (Indemnification; Manner of Responding to Claims for Liability and Insuring Against 18 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 Liability), Section 14 (Resolution of Disputes), and this Article 17 (Miscellaneous Provisions), together with any other provisions of this Agreement relating to the handling of confidential information, shall survive the termination of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed and delivered this Agreement as of the date first above written. [SIGNATURE BLOCKS - EACH PARTY PLEASE PROVIDE] 19 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 APPENDIX 1 LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CONSORTIUM FOR PROPER FRANCHISE FEES AND THE LAW FIRMS 20 DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 APPENDIX 2 FUNDING SHARES FOR EACH PARTY IN SUPPORT OF INITIAL LITIGATION AND NEGOTIATION EFFORTS OF THE FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CONSORTIUM FOR PROPER FRANCHISE FEES Local Government The City of The City of The City of The Town of The Town of The Town of Atlantis, Florida Boca Raton, Florida Delray Beach, Florida Gulf Stream, Florida Lake Park, Florida Palm Beach, Florida The City of West Palm Beach, 21 Funding Share Florida DRAFT - VERSION 1.3 APRIL 12, 2013 APPENDIX 3 PARTIES AND NOTICE INFORMATION FOR PARTIES TO THAT CERTAIN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY PURSUE A COMPLAINT AGAINST FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION (FPUC) FOR PAYMENT OF FRANCHISE FEES, Dated the th day of , 2013, By, Between, and Among The City of Atlantis, Florida The City of Boca Raton, Florida The City of Delray Beach, Florida The Town of Gulf Stream, Florida The Town of Lake Park, Florida The Town of Palm Beach, Florida The City of west Palm Beach, Florida 22 TOWN OF PALM BEACH, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Florida Plaintiff, vs. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY, Defendant. COM'P'LA,1NT Plaintiffs, the TOWN OF PALM ,BEACH ( "Palm Beach "), the CITY OF ATLANTIS ( "Atlantis "), the CITY OF BOCA RATON ( "Boca Raton "), the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ( "Delray Beach "), the TOWN OF GlfLF STREAM ( "Gulf Stream "), the TOWN OF LAKE PARK ( "'Lake Park "), and the C.I.TY OF WEST PALM BEACH ( "West Palm Beach "), each such Plaintiff being a municip al corporation and a political subdivision of the State of Florida, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby sue Defendant, FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY ( "FPUC "), and allege as follows: 1. This is an action for damages for breach of contract in an amount that exceeds $15,000 and for declaratory relief. 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this claim for breach of contract and declaratory relief pursuant to sections 26.012(2)(a) and 86.011, Florida Statutes. 3. The Plaintiffs in this action are the TOWN OF PALM BEACH ( "Palm Beach "), the CITY OF ATLANTIS ( "Atlantis "), the CITY OF BOCA RATON ( "Boca Raton "), the CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ( "Delray Beach "), the TOWN OF GULF STREAM ( "Gulf Stream "), the TOWN OF LAKE PARK ( "Lake Park "), and the CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ( "West Palm Beach "). Each of the Plaintiffs is a municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, and each Plaintiff is a political subdivision of the State of Florida with the power and authority to bring this action. These Florida municipalities are collectively referred to herein as the "Plaintiff Municipalities," or simply as the ``i "'tin,icipalities." 4. FPUC is a natural .gas utility company ,providing gas service and gas transportation service to customers in Broward, MaMon, Martin, Palm Beach, Seminole, and Volusia counties. 5. FPUC is headquartered in West Palm Beach, Florida. 6. Venue is- proper in Palm Beach. County, Florida because it is where the cause of .action aarose:and because it is Where FPUC is headquartered. 7 All conditions precedent to this civil action have been performed, waived or otherwise occurred. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8. This action arises under certain ordinances of each of the respective Plaintiff Municipalities, specifically their ordinances embodying franchise agreements with Defendant FPUC through which FPUC uses the Plaintiff Municipalities' rights of way for the purpose of supplying natural gas service to customers located in each of the Municipalities, and pursuant to which FPUC is obligated to pay franchise fees to each of the Plaintiff Municipalities. These ordinances are referred to herein as the "Gas Franchise Agreements," or simply as the "Agreements." The respective Agreements are listed below, and copies of each of these Gas Franchise Agreements are included in Exhibit A to this Complaint. a. City of Atlantis Ordinance No. 230, adopted on July 24, 1991 and accepted by FPUC on July 24, 1991, with an effective date of August 1, 1991. b. City of Boca Raton Ordinance No. 4149, adopted on February 22, 1994 and accepted by FPUC on March 10, 1994, with an effective date of April 1, 1994. C. City of Delray Beach Ordinance No. 32-0, adopted on August 14, 1990 and accepted by FPUC on August 23, 1990, with an effective date of September 1, 1990, d. Town of Gulf Stream Ordinance No. , adopted on and accepted by FPUC on , with an effective date of and amended by an Agreement dated December 1, 1997. [STILL NEED GULF STREAM'S ORDINANCE AND FPUC'S ACCEPTANCE.; HAVE THEIR AGREEMENT, WHICH IS DATED 12/1/1997] e. Town of Lake Park Ordinance No. 14 -2009, adopted on October 21, 2009 having been accepted by FPUC on October 7, 2009, with an effective date of November 1, 2009. f. Town of Palm Beach Ordinance No. 93 -10, adopted on April 13, 1993 and accepted by FPUC on May 5, 1993, with an effective date of June 1, 1993. g. City of West Palm Beach Ordinance No. 2319 -89, adopted on September 18, 1989 and accepted by FPUC on or about October 1, , 1989, with an effective date of October 1, 1989. [I CAN USE THE FOREGOING LANGUAGE, BUT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE WPB'S FINAL ACCEPTED AGREEMENT OR FPUCS ACCEPTANCE LETTER] 9. By virtue of FPUC's acceptance, each of the 'Gas Franchise Agreements between the Municipalities and FPUC is a contract. 10. The Gas Franchise Agreements. gave, 'FPUC the right, privilege, and authority to construct and maintainits. gas pipelines and other facilities in the streets, alleys, and public places within the corporate: boundaries of the Municipalities for the purpose of supplying natural tgas (including manufactured gas) customers within the respective Municipalities. 11 'Under the Gas Franchise'Agreement, FPUC was obligated to pay to each of the Plaintiff Municipalities a Franchise Fee in accord with the following: a tax equal to the amount -by which six (6) per cent of the amount of its revenues from';the sale of gas to residential and general service commercial customers, less charge -off for uncollectible accounts and adjustments,, Within the corporate limits of the Town of Palm Beach for the twelve (12) calendar months preceding the applicable anniversary date, shall exceed the amount of any other taxes, licenses, or other impositions levied or imposed by the Town of Palm Beach against Florida Public Utilities Company's property, business or operations for the tax year preceding the beginning of the applicable tax year, and previously paid by grantee to grantor." (the "Franchise Fee ") (emphasis added). The quoted language is from Section 7 of the Gas Franchise Agreement between the Town of Palm Beach and FPUC as a representative example. The wording varies slightly among the Plaintiffs' specific franchise agreements, but the substantive provisions are identical. 12. The Franchise Fee required under the Gas Franchise Agreements was to be paid by FPUC to each of the Municipalities once a year. 13. The Gas Franchise Agreements were (are) to remain in effect for thirty (30) years from their respective effective dates. Pursuant to the Gas Franchise Agreements and normal practice, FPUC charged its residential and general service customers for the Franchise Fees and remitted the Franchise Fees to each of the Municipalities. 14. FPUC's Franchise Fee payments fluctuated somewhat over the years, but beginning in 2009, the Plaintiff Municipalities noticed generally significant reductions in the amount of Franchise Fees received from FRUC. A summary of the Franchise Fee * 4w "916 payment/remittance history for the Plaintiff Municipalities follows. (Exhibit B presents complete franchise fee payment information for FPUC's natural gas operations to the Plaintiffs, and to another Florida municipality, the City of Riviera Beach, which is not a plaintiff in this action.) a. For the 12- month period ending July 31, 2008, FPUC paid Atlantis a Franchise Fee of $9,248.46, and for the 12 -month period ending July 31, 2009, FPUC paid Atlantis a Franchise Fee in the amount of $11,083.67. However, for the 12 -month period ending July 31, 2011, FPUC only paid Atlantis a Franchise Fee of $5,871.69, and for the corresponding "franchise year' ending on July 31, 2012, FPUC only paid Atlantis a Franchise Fee of $8,083.57. b. For the 12 -month period ending March 31, 2008, FPUC paid Boca Raton a Franchise Fee of $196,962.00, and for the 12 -month period ending March 31, 2009, FPUC paid Boca Raton a Franchise Fee of $237,500.00. However, for the 12 -month period ending March 31, 2011, FPUC only paid Boca Raton a Franchise Fee of $142,400.00, and for the corresponding "franchise year" ending on March 31, 2012, FPUC only paid Boca Raton a Franchise Fee of $169,200.00. C. For the 12 -month period ending_ August 31 ',7,008, FPUC paid Delray Beach a Franchise Fee of $85,516.11, and for the '12 -month period ending August 31, 2009,. FPUC paid "Delray` Beach a Franchise Fee of $100,217.55. However, fdr the 12- month. period ending August 31, 2011, FPUC only paid DelrayYB!each a Franchise Fee of $74,245.91, and for the r, corresponding "franchise year" ending an August 31, 2012, FPUC only paid Delray Beach a Franchise: Fee of $61,086.36. d:. -For th 12- mo.nth, "franchise..:year" . ending on the anniversary date of the Gulf StreamF PU'Gis Franchise Agreement in, 2008, FPUC paid Gulf .Stream a Franc rise Fee of $5,481.00, and for the comparable period in 20ft, FPUC paid Gulf Stream a Franchise Fee of $6,748.00. However, for the corresponding "franchise years" of 2011 and 2012, FPUC only paid Gulf Stream Franchise Fees of $946.00 and $2,549.00, respectively. e. For the 12 -month period ending October 31, 2008, FPUC paid Lake Park a Franchise Fee of $2,420.00, and for the 12 -month period ending September 30, 2009, FPUC paid Lake Park a Franchise Fee of $715.00. For the corresponding "franchise years" of 2011 and 2012, FPUC paid Lake Park Franchise Fees of $6,483.00 and $3,031.00, respectively. f. For the 12 -month period ending May 31, 2008, FPUC paid Palm Beach a Franchise Fee in an amount of $230,046.12, and for the 12 -month period ending May 31, 2009, FPUC paid Palm Beach a Franchise Fee in the amount of $229,065.84. However, for the 12 -month period ending May 31, 2011, FPUC only paid Palm Beach. a Franchise Fee of $144,418.28, and for the same "franchise year'' ending on May 31, 2012, FPUC only paid Palm Beach a Franchise Fee of $139,727.35. g. For the 12 -month period ending September 30, 2008, FPUC paid West Palm Beach a Franchise Fee of $131,3:01.00, and for the 12 -month period ending September 30, 2009, FPUC paid West Palm Beach a Franchise Fee of $237,134.00. However, for the corresponding "franchise years" of 2011 and 2012, FPUC only paid West Palm Beach Franchise Fees of $96,872.00 and $133,843.00, respectively. 15. From the foregoing, it is apparent that, for all but Lake Park, the Franchise Fees remitted by FPUC to each of the Plaintiff Municipalities were significantly less in 2011 and 2012 than they were in 2008 and 2009. For example, the Franchise Fees remitted to the Town of Palm Beach and to the City of Boca Raton declined by approximately 30 percent between the 2008 and 2009 franchise years and the 2011 and 2012 franchise years. This led the Municipalities to investigate the cause or causes of these declines. The Municipalities' investigations revealed the following. 16. In or around June 2009, FPUC unilaterally reclassified significant numbers of FPUC's customers located within the Municipalities from a rate classification known as General Service ( "GS ") into a rate classification known as Large Volume Service ( "LVS "). As one example, based on a review of FPUC's billing records for customers located in Palm Beach, in or around June 2009, FPUC unilaterally reclassified more than 50 of FPUC's customers located within Palm Beach from the GS rate class into the LVS rate class. 17. The GS and LVS classification labels are created and used solely by FPUC. 18. FPUC's LVS classification had been ip exi tence as early as 1991. 19. FPUC historically collected the applicable. Franchise Fee from customers in the GS class and remitted the Franchise Fees thus collected to the Plaintiff Municipalities, along with the Franchise Fees collected from Residential customers. 20. After uhil terally •'reclassifying numerous customers into the LVS rate classification i ar around June 2009, FPUC u- nilaterally exempted those customers from the Franchise Fee and thus, ceased remitting Franchise Fees previously collected from these customers to the. Plaintiff Municipalities. 21. The Gas Franchise Agreements apply by their terms to revenue generated from the sale of gas to all `'residential and general service commercial customers in the Town." No exception is made for either residential or general service commercial customers based on the volume of gas used. 22. The customers reclassified by FPUC include hotels, restaurants, and other general service commercial businesses located within the Town. Such customers are commonly understood to be "general service commercial customers," and it was and remains the intent and understanding of each of the Plaintiff Municipalities that such customers were included within the meaning of "general service commercial customers" as that term is used in the Gas Franchise Agreements. Indeed, FPUC had performed its duties under the Gas Franchise Agreements by collecting and remitting to the Municipalities the Franchise Fee from the subsequently transferred customers for many years preceding June 2009. Neither the commercial nature of these customers' business activities nor the basic purposes for which they used gas purchased from FPUC changed as the volume of gas that they used grew over the years, and accordingly, there was no lawful basis for FPUC to Oniaterally reclassify the status of such customers so as to cease collecting the Franchise. Fee from them. �-1111 23. FPUC's tariff (Second Revised Sheet No. 8) defines "Commercial Service" service to Customers engaged in selling, warehousing, or distributing a commodity, in some business activity or in a profession, or in some form of economic or socia) activity (offices, stores, clubs, hotels, etc.) and for purposes that do not come directly under another classification of service. 24. The Gas Franchise Agreements also provide that FPUC may reduce the amount of the Franchise Fee that would otherwise be due by the amount of "any other taxes, licenses, or other impositions levied or imposed by" each of the Plaintiff Municipalities. The deductions claimed and applied by FPUC over the years included deductions for ad valorem property taxes paid by FPUC to each of the Municipalities. 25. The amounts thus deducted by FPUC are summarized in Exhibit C to this Complaint. For example, for the franchise year ending on May 31, 2010, FPUC deducted $6,493.98 from its Franchise Fee payment to the Town of Palm Beach, and for the franchise year ending on March 31, 2012, FPUC deducted $12,569.91 from its Franchise Fee payment to the City of Boca Raton. COUNT 1— BREACH OF CONTRACT — FRANCHISE FEE CALCULATIONS 26. The Town realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 23 as though fully set forth herein. 27. The customers unilaterally reclassified by FPUC as LVS customers are "general service commercial customers" as set forth. in the Gas Franchise Agreements. As a result, the revenue generated from the LVS customers. must be included when calculating the Franchise Fee. Moreover, based on the definition of "Commercial Service" set forth in FPUC's official tariff, the Municipalities believe that . UC's practice of exempting Large Volume Service customers from paying the Franchise Fee has generally been incorrect and inconsistent with_ -the Plaintiff Municipalities' understanding and intent, in that! ;on inform.etion and belief, the vast majority of such customers are entities such as the restaurants, hotels, and other commercial business establishments that FPUC reclassified from, to LVS inr 2009. The Municipalities believe that the correct distinction, as contemplated by the plain language of the Gas Franchise Agreements,'sbould be between general service commercial customers who use gas in the course of "sell'ing, warehousing, or distributing a commodity, in some business activity or in a profession,; grin some form of economic or social activity (offices, stores, clubs, hotels, etc.)" and other, "large volume service" customers who use the gas that they purchase for other purposes, e.g., for industrial, streetlighting, or area lighting applications. 28. By exempting the revenue generated by LVS customers (including both those customers transferred from GS to LVS in June 2009, and those LVS customers whose usage is in fact "Commercial Service" usage as opposed to industrial or lighting usage) in the Plaintiff Municipalities from the Franchise Fee, FPUC has breached the Gas Franchise Agreements. 29. The Plaintiff Municipalities have been damaged in the amount of the underpaid Franchise Fees by varying amounts, ranging from relatively small amounts in Municipalities with few customers to hundreft of thousands of dollars in the larger cities and towns. Further discovery will be necessary to calculate the total amounts of damages claimed by each of the Plaintiff MunicipalitieS. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Mulnici;palities demand judgment against FPUC for damages, interest and costs, and pray this Court to grant any other relief that the Court deems just and proper. COUNT II , DECLARATORY REL[EF - EWNCHISE FEE CALCULATIONS 30. The Plarrrtff Municipalities reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 23 as though fully set forth herein. The Municipalities are in doubt regarding their rig=hts,. status and legal relations under the Gas Franchise Agreements and accordingly, the Municipalities seek declaratory relief pursuant to Section 86.011, et seq., Florida Statutes. 31. At least one of the Plaintiff Municipalities, the Town of Palm Beach, has informed FPUC that it objects to FPUC's practice of exempting all LVS customers from the Franchise Fee. The Municipalities contend that the nature of a customer's usage of gas that it purchases, and not the volume of gas that it purchases, determines whether it is a general service customer. Thus, a hotel, office, store, club, or other business engaged in selling or distributing a commodity, is a general service commercial customer whose usage is subject to paying the franchise fee pursuant to the Gas Franchise Agreements, regardless of the customer's usage level. The Municipalities would agree that customers whose usage is for a bona fide industrial purpose (and for lighting usage) would properly be exempted from paring the franchise fee. 32. FPUC contends that LVS customers do not constitute "general service commercial customers" under the Gas Franchise Agreements and':Ore thus not subject to the Franchise Fee. 33. There is a bona fide; actual, .present, and practical need for a declaration regarding the parties' rights under the Gas Franchise Agreements. 34. The .declaration sought concerns a present ascertained or ascertainable state of facts or present. controversy regarding these disputes. 35... . The declaration: is necessary for the parties to be certain of their respective.;rights and obligations under the Gas Franchise Agreements. 36. The parties have an actual present adverse and antagonistic interest in the subject matter of these declarations. 37. The relief being sought is not merely the giving of legal advice or answers to questions propounded by curiosity. 38. The Plaintiff Municipalities reserve the right to seek supplemental relief, including, but not limited to, damages and injunctive relief, upon the Court's declaration. 39. The Plaintiff Municipalities are entitled to recover their reasonable costs if successful in this action pursuant to section 86.081, Florida Statutes. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Municipalities demand a judgment declaring that: A. Any and all customers classified by FPUC as Large Volume Service customers, whose usage is for purposes associated with business activities, professions, or economic or social activities, such as those activities normally carried on in selling, warehousing, or distributing commodities, or in operating offices, stores, clubs, hotels, and the like, are "general service commercial customers" under the Gas Franchise Agreement, and their revenue must be included by FPUC when calculating and remitting the Franchise Fee; B. FPUC is in violation of its implied duties of good faith and fair dealing; and, C. The Plaintiff Municipalities are entitled to recover their costs pursuant to section 86.081, Florida Statutes. COUNT III — DECLARATORY RELIEF- PROPERTY TAX DEDUCTIONS 40,: The. Plaintiff Municipalities realiege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 25 as though fully set forth herein. The Plaintiff Municipalities are in doubt regarding their rigtvts, status and legal relations under the Gas Franchise Agreements and seek declaratory relief pursuant to section 86.011, et seq., Florida Statutes. 41. The Municipalities believe and contend that FPUC's practice of deducting the amount of property taxes paid from the franchise fee amounts remitted to each of the Plaintiff Municipalities is unlawful, in that this deduction of property taxes from the franchise fee (franchise tax) due pursuant to the Gas Franchise Agreements constitutes. an unlawful tax exemption that none of the Municipalities' governing commissions or councils, sitting in earlier years between 1989 and 1997 , did not have the power to grant. See City of Hollywood, Florida v. Florida Power & Light Co., 624 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1993). At least one of the Plaintiff Municipalities, the Town of Palm Beach, has informed FPUC that it objects to FPUC's practice of deducting property taxes from the franchise fee payments that it remits to the Town .and has demanded that FPUC henceforth pay the Town the full amount of franch=ise fees-, due, based on the calculation of six percent of all residential and general service commercial revenues with no deduction of property taxes paid. 42. There is a bona fide, actual, present, an_d practical need for a declaration regarding the parties' rights under the Gas Franchise.Ag,reements. 43. The declaration sought .concerns , present ascertained or ascertainable state of facts or present controversy regarding these disputes. 44. The declaration is necessary_, for the parties to be certain of their respective: rights,and.obligations under thg Gas Franchise Agreements. 45.; The part ies have an actual, present, adverse and antagonistic interest in the subject matter of these declarations. 46. The relief being sought is not merely the giving of legal advice or answers to questions propounded'by curiosity. 47. The Plaintiff Municipalities reserve the right to seek supplemental relief, including, but not limited to, damages and injunctive relief, upon the Court's declaration. 48. The Plaintiff Municipalities are entitled to recover their reasonable costs if successful in this action pursuant to section 86.081, Florida Statutes. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Municipalities demand a judgment declaring that: A. The annual franchise fee payments made by FPUC to each of the Plaintiff Municipalities may not lawfully be reduced by the amount of property taxes and any other ad valorem assessments paid by FPUC, and that FPUC must hereafter pay franchise fees accordingly, i.e., without any offset for property taxes or other ad valorem assessments paid. B. The Plaintiff Municipalities are entitled to recover their costs pursuant to section 86.081, Florida Statutes. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL The Plaintiff Municipalities dernand a jury trial on all issues to which they are so entitled. JONES. FOSTER, JOHNSTON & STUBBS, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561- 659 -3000 Fax: 561 -6.50 -5300 John C. Randolph Florida Bar No. 129000 a randolph(aa'ones- foster.com Joanne M. O'Connor Florida Bar No. 498807 0oconnor Tones- foster.com pAdocs1131561003541pld11 ea7192.docx MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Terrill Pyburn, Assistant City Attorney THROUGH: Brian Shutt, City Attorney DATE: June 21, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.D. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL IN DENISE RYDZEWSKI V. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Proposal for Settlement filed by Plaintiff, Denise Rydzewski. BACKGROUND This is an offer by the Plaintiff to settle a case pending against the City. The case involves a complaint wherein Plaintiff alleges she injured her right knee and incurred medical expenses in the treatment of her injury as well as lost wages as a result of a slip and fall incident that occurred on July 31, 2008 on the sidewalk along Germantown Road east of the former Office Depot headquarters. The Plaintiff alleges there was a pothole in the sidewalk that caused her fall and work orders confirmed that there were about 20 such potholes (that have since been repaired). To date, the Plaintiff has incurred over $65,000 in medical expenses including arthroscopic surgery of the right knee and she may have another surgery scheduled in the near future to include a total knee replacement. Plaintiff has made a proposal for settlement in the amount of $20,000.00. RECOMMENDATION The City Attorney's office recommends approval at this time. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.E. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 APPOINTMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before the City Commission for appointments to the Community Redevelopment Agency. BACKGROUND The terms for regular members, Ms. Veronica Covington and Ms. Cathy Balestriere will expire on July 1, 2013. Ms. Balestriere will have served an unexpired term, is eligible and would like to be considered for reappointment. Ms. Covington will have served one (1) full term, is eligible and would like to be considered for reappointment. Appointments are needed for two (2) regular members. Per Florida Statute, any person may be appointed to the Community Redevelopment Agency if he or she resides in or is engaged in business (which means owning a business, practicing a profession or performing a service for compensation, or serving as an officer or director of a corporation or other business entity) within the area of the agency which is coterminous with the municipality and is otherwise eligible for such appointment. A person cannot hold any other public office other than his/her commissionership or office with respect to the Community Redevelopment Agency. The following individuals have submitted applications and would like to be considered for appointment: (See Exhibit "A" attached) A check for code violations and /or municipal liens was conducted. None were found. Voter registration verification was completed and all are registered. Based on the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Petrolia (Seat #1) and Commissioner Frankel (Seat #3) for two (2) regular members to serve four (4) year terms ending July 1, 2017. RECOMMENDATION Recommend appointment of two (2) regular members to serve four (4) year terms ending July 1, 2017. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4 YEAR TERM 20 N. Swinton Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 07/13 TERM REGULAR MEMBERS OCCUPATION EXPIRES 07/01/2017 Joseph Bernadel Chief Operating Appt 06/18/13 Officer 07/01/2015 Annette Gray Real Estate Broker Appt 06/21/11 07/01/2013 Veronica Covington Unexp Appt 02/20/07 Security Reappt 06/16/09 Surveillance 07/01/2014 Howard Lewis, Chair Business Owner Unexp Appt 04/15/03 Reappt06 /20/06 Reappt07 /06/10 07/01/2016 William Branning, Treasurer Unexp Appt 05/02/06 Contractor Reappt07 /01/08 Reappt06 /05/12 07/01/2013 Cathy Balestriere, Vice Chair Unexp Appt 10/06/09 General Manager 07/01/2017 Herman Stevens Attorney Appt 06/16/09 Reappt06 /18/13 S /City Clerk /Board 13 /CRA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXHIBIT A Cathy Balestriere Managing Director Incumbent Bruce Bastian Business Development Manager Thomas F. Carney Attorney Veronica Covington Security/Regional Director Incumbent Reginald Cox Architect (currently serving on the Historic Preservation Board) Christopher Davey Self- employed/Real Estate Broker Deborah Dowd Educator Diane Franco Business Owner /Land Development (currently serving on the Downtown Development Authority) Frank Frione Engineering -Chief Executive Officer Ronald Gilinsky Sales & Marketing (currently serving on the Code Enforcement Board) Bruce Gimmy Self-employed/Business Owner (currently serving on the Parking Management Advisory Board) Jordana Jarj ura Law Frederick Kaub President /Co- Owner/Environmental Services Nelson S. McDuffie Manager /Information Technology John Miller Merchandising Director Christina Morrison Self- employed /Commercial Realtor Loren Rubenstein Educator Alan Weitz President/Mortgage Banking David Stein Solar Contractor/Business Owner Paul Zacks Law i i I H a -C�j W CA E � H � 0 00 ooNO T o oo / �o 00 t \ �000 00 00 O 0 / ra \ , o 0 CD \ / Qn o Qn Qn Qn i W � 0 00 ooNO oo �o 00 �000 00 00 U W t� O z U 0 H w 00 �000 ooNOOO �o i..l � V � Q% i.q i i I H a i z A w � i O � U \ O / N i i,A MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9.F. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 APPOINTMENTS TO THE PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION This item is before the City Commission for appointments to the Public Art Advisory Board. BACKGROUND The terms for regular members, Mr. Daniel Bellante and Mr. Jerry Rabinowitz, will expire on July 31, 2013. Mr. Bellante and Mr. Rabinowitz will have served unexpired terms, are eligible and would like to be considered for reappointment. Appointments will be made for two (2) regular members. Per Ordinance No. 15 -12, the appointed member shall be allowed to serve the following full regular term without reappointment because the unexpired term is for a period of time less than six months. On February 1, 2005, the Delray Beach City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 77 -04 establishing the Public Art Advisory Board for the purpose of advising and making recommendations to the City Commission with respect to public art policy and related issues including, but not limited to, the selection, construction and placement of public art in/on City right -of -way and City owned property. The Public Art Advisory Board shall consist of seven (7) members. Three (3) seats on the Board must be filled with either an artist, architect, landscape architect or engineer. Laypersons of knowledge, experience and judgment who have an interest in public art shall make up the balance of the Board. The following individual has submitted an application and would like to be considered for appointment: Danielle Bellante President /Environmental Restoration Incumbent Geraldine Biller Museum Curator /Retired Mary- Elizabeth Cohn Educator /Consultant /Sales Representative Shirl Fields Retired/Jewelry Designer (currently serving on the Neighborhood Advisory Council) Christopher Metzger Executive Director/Marketing Jerry Rabinowitz Business Owner/Photographer Incumbent Chris Stray Landscape Designer A check for code violations and /or municipal liens was conducted. None were found. Voter registration verification was completed and they are registered. Based on the rotation system, the appointments will be made by Commissioner Frankel (Seat #3) and Commissioner Gray (Seat #4) for two (2) regular members to serve two (2) year terms ending July 31, 2015. RECOMMENDATION Recommend appointment of two (2) regular members to serve two (2) year terms ending July 31, 2015. PUBLIC ART ADVISORY BOARD 06/13 TERM EXPIRES REGULAR MEMBERS 07/31/13 Daniel Bellante Unexp Appt 03/20/12 07/31/14 Sharon Koskoff Appt 07/17/12 07/31/13 Jerry Rabinowitz Unexp Appt 11/06/12 07/31/14 Sandi Franciosa Appt 07/20/10 Reappt07 /17/12 07/31/14 Kevin Rouse Appt 07/17/12 07/31/14 Carolyn Pendelton- Parker Appt 08/07/12 07/31/15 Patricia Truscello Appt 05/21/13 Unexp Appt + 2 yr S/ City Clerk /Board 13 /Public Art Advisory Board i i N i �. � o CA un \ un / �:2 \ u = \ C�j / N \ C / N / Qn Qn i 0 wN w w w w w �N ZO �W WE -�ZC7 zo �wwH�z� rWN ti N M M M O M O M M O M o � N i i N i �. � o CA un \ un / �:2 \ u = \ C�j / N \ C / N / Qn Qn i U W Q O z U 0 H w ti N M M M O M O O O O O 0 O O p 0 O 0 O I� 1 CC y„ i i. i i M N � / i a / O O A� 0 U Qn O O N i MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.A. - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 (SECOND READING/ SECOND PUBLIC HEARING) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission is adoption of Ordinance No. 41 -12 to approve a privately - initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND The 9.95 acre property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. The application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action which would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. On October 15, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing associated with the rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District). Although the Board recommended approval of the rezoning on a 4 -3 vote, it is noted that the Board did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. On November 6, 2012, the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 1 st Reading, but did not endorse the related site development plan, which was to be reviewed by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board prior to second reading of the Ordinance. On December 12, 2012, the site plan was reviewed by SPRAB and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On March 13, 2013, the site plan for Delray Place was reviewed again by SPRAB. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with direction that the applicant address an issue the board had with the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. The Board approved the following five associated waivers: • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (13 5) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb. Eight (8) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet, and four (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips. The Board also recommended approval to the City Commission of the following two waivers: A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty-three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. The site plans were subsequently modified to reduce the size of the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway, by approximately 500 square feet and to add a decorative landscape entry feature with a fountain. The revised plans were reviewed again by SPRAB on June 12, 2013. The Board approved the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with conditions as shown in the attached Exhibit "A ": Development Proposal & Site Plan Issues A complete analysis of the required findings for the rezoning and the site plan can be found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board and SPRAB Staff Reports. A synopsis of the major issues is included below: Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor" along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. Properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that need to be addressed to ensure compatibility include the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. After multiple revisions of the site plan and three reviews by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, the current site plan for Delray Place does address these issues. Some of the major changes that have occurred since first reading of the ordinance by the City Commission include: • The total building area was reduced by 14.8 % (20,241 square feet); • The FAR (floor area ratio) was reduced from 0.32 to 0.27; • The maximum percentage of restaurants was reduced form 50% to 31% (see parking section below); • Open space was increased from 16.2% to 25.3 %; • The parking deficit (based on standard shopping center requirements) was reduced from 109 spaces to 54 spaces (See parking section below) • The landscape setback along Linton Boulevard was increased from 8' to 9'; • Sound absorption material was added to 14 feet in height on the south and east walls of Buildings 500 -504, and the north wall of Buildings 506 -510; • Truck traffic is now forced to exit onto Federal Highway instead of Linton Boulevard; • Screen walls and roofs were added between buildings 600 -900 to minimize sounds from the outdoor seating to the adjacent residents; • The height of buildings 600 -900 was decreased by lowering parapet adjacent to neighbors from 22' to 18' and mechanical equipment was moved 16' north further away from the neighbors and provided with addition screening; • Rear doors and rear sidewalks were eliminated from buildings 600 -900; • The depth of buildings 600 -900 was reduced from 60' to 50' to allow raised planters along the sidewalk facing Linton Boulevard and was designed to encourage outdoor seating between the north face of these buildings and the raised planters. • The loading docks were enclosed; • All trash enclosures were enclosed and air conditioned; • The daycare center with outdoor play area was eliminated; • Pedestrian amenities were added in six locations along the public streets which include trellises, benches, trash receptacles and bicycle racks; • Areca Palms were added to increase screening along all property lines abutting Tropic Isles; • Green walls were added on three sides of all free standing dumpster enclosures and on numerous building walls visible to the public streets; • A pedestrian connection was added on Eve Street to facilitate neighborhood access; and • The Gateway Feature was added at the Linton/Federal corner to include a water feature with fountain jets and a colonnade. Also, a clock tower was incorporated in the building behind. Parking: Parking requirements for SAD zoned properties are established on the site and development plan. While there are no standard parking requirements for SAD zoned properties, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size in other zoning districts is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City. This would result in a requirement of 455 spaces for the 113,907 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 403 spaces, a reduction (11.4 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 52 spaces. An alternative plan for the 100 building would require 464 spaces for the 116,089 square foot shopping center, while 410 have been provided, a deficit of 54 spaces or (11.6 %). The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. A parking study has been provided by Traffech to support this figure. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4th Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approximately 1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this was added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway- oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This was added as a condition of approval. The attached SAD Rezoning Ordinance includes a "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix" which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses. To minimize the potential impact of higher parking generators, such as restaurants, the ordinance initially allows only 20% (23,218 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be utilized for restaurants. For comparison purposes, Palm Beach County uses 25% restaurants as the standard figure for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. A parking utilization study must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied. If supported by the study and approved by the City, the developer may then lease the remaining 1 I% of building area for restaurants (bringing the total to approximately 31 % (36,147 square feet), which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. If the study indicates that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then the developer shall alleviate the parking shortage through any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, (b) off -site valet parking, (c) off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking (f) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (e) any other reasonable programs. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor caf6 areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. REVIEW BY OTHERS At its meeting of October 15, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing associated with the rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District). Staff presented its analysis of the applicant's submittal, including the proposed site plan for the project, and recommended that the Board move a recommendation of denial based on a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan, due to the inability to make positive findings with respect to compatibility with surrounding development. Note: the complete analysis is included in the attached Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report. The applicant made a presentation of the proposal and members of the public spoke on this agenda item —both in favor of and in opposition to the proposed rezoning. After a discussion, the Board recommended approval of the proposal on a 4 -3 vote. The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Linton Woods • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Pelican Pointe • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Pelican Harbor • Banyan Tree Village • Spanish Trail Condo • Domain Delray • Tropic Bay • Harbour's Edge • Tropic Harbor • Harbourside Public Notices: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. The letters and emails received to date are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and /or support, if any, will be presented at the City Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Commission approve Ordinance No. 41 -12 for rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and fording that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(D)(5), 3.1.1 and 3.2.2 of the Land Development Regulations. ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED OFFICE CENTER (POC) DISTRICT TO SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT (SAD); SAID LAND BEING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ESTABLISHING THE USES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES UNDER THE SAD ZONING; AMENDING THE "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012 "; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.S ", TO ADD SUBSECTION (11), " DELRAY PLACE" TO THE LIST OF APPROVED S.A.D.S; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Delray Place, LLC is the fee simple owner ( "Owner ") of the subject property as more particularly described herein; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is within the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described presently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional); and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E)(6), the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as local planning agency held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of October 15, 2012 and voted 4 to 3, to recommend that the requests be approved, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.3, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for the City of Delray Beach, held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of June 12, 2013 and voted 5 to 0, to approve the Site Plan, the Architectural Elevations, and the Landscape Plan, as well as various waivers, and recommended approval to the City Commission of other waivers, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and ORD. NO. 41 -12 WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the findings in the Planning and Zoning Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. Subject Property. That the Subject Property affected by this Ordinance is described in Exhibit "A ". Section 3. Rezoning. That the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, shall be rezoned from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) and the City's Zoning Map shall be amended accordingly. Section 4. Site Plan Approval. That the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", is the approved site plan ( "Site Plan ") for the Subject Property as of the date of this Ordinance, subject to the conditions of approval imposed by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on June 12, 2013. Section 5. Permitted Uses. That the development of the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, is approved for: (a) General retail uses including grocers and pharmacies; (b) Restaurants, at the locations as identified on the Site Plan; (c) Business, professional and medical offices and labs; (d) Personal services limited to: barber and beauty shops and salons; nail salons; caterers; dry cleaning limited to on -site processing for customer pickup only; dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations; financing, e.g. banks and similar institutions including drive - through facilities; Laundromats limited to self - service facilities; pet grooming; tailoring; tobacconist, vocational schools; gyms, health and athletic clubs; dancing schools; martial arts studios; small item repair, and rental of sporting goods and equipment; and (e) Indoor movie theaters. Total restaurant uses permitted on the Subject Property shall initially be allowed up to 23,218 leasable square feet, which is based on twenty percent (20 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square 2 ORD. NO. 41 -12 footage as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", subject to revision as determined by the Parking Utilization Study required within Section 7 of this ordinance. Additional uses within the Subject Property may be allowed but only after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by the City Commission through the adoption of an ordinance. Section 6. Shared Parking Analysis Matrix. That the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is hereby adopted. Any desired reallocation of the mix of permitted uses within the Subject Property shall be allowed upon demonstration of consistency with the established parking ratios set forth within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and with the established amounts of concurrency approval from Palm Beach County Traffic Concurrency, but in all instances shall not otherwise exceed the total number of provided parking spaces on the approved Site Plan. Section 7. Parking Utilization Stud (a) Requirement. No sooner than six (6) months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy by the first tenant of the Subject Property and when at least 89% of the leasable space is occupied, Owner shall cause a parking utilization study (the "Parking Utilization Study ") to be performed by a licensed traffic engineer selected by the developer to determine whether the overall parking provided is sufficient and whether a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, as well as to determine whether the conclusions and presumptions set forth in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are accurate. The results of the Parking Utilization Study shall be submitted to the City by Owner. (b) ParkinMitigation. If the Parking Utilization Study concludes that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then Owner shall provide to City a parking mitigation plan implementing one or more of the following parking mitigation measures: (i) on -site valet parking; (ii) off -site valet parking; (iii) off -site employee parking; (iv) off -site customer parking with shuttle or van service to the Subject Property; (vi) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management ( "TDM ") Programs, such as car, van, and bus pooling and ride sharing; increased bicycle parking; preferential car and van pooling parking programs; a fair -share contribution to a programmed shuttle service; or (vii) any other reasonable program approved by the City. The parking mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City reserves the right to not renew any or all annual sidewalk cafe permits issued for the Subject Property until such time as a subsequently prepared parking utilization study demonstrates that the identified parking deficiency has been mitigated. Should any proposed mitigation require a revision to the approved Site Plan (such as the establishment of a valet queue), such revision(s) may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by 3 ORD. NO. 41 -12 the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (c) Requested Increase in Restaurant Use. If supported by the Parking Utilization Study and approved by the City as set forth herein, restaurant use area may be increased up to 36,147 square feet, which is approximately thirty -one percent (31 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage, as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", which is also the maximum restaurant area calculated within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C ". Such request for increased restaurant use shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (d) Bicycle Parking. The Parking Utilization Study shall also assess whether the number of bicycle racks provided on the Site Plan are adequate to meet demonstrated bicycle parking demand. Should any further bicycle parking facilities be suggested by the Parking Utilization Study which require revisions to the approved Site Plan, the siting of such additional facilities may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 8. Future Modification of Approved Site Plan. That any future requested modification to the Site Plan or development plans which does not seek to increase overall project size, total building area, or building height, and which modification otherwise remains within the confines of an approved building footprint as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. In all other instances, any requested modification shall be considered an amendment to this ordinance. Section 9. Trade Dress. That the City Commission hereby recognizes that specific tenants of the project have distinctive, branding identities, established through unique aesthetic design features associated with their business and commonly referred to as "Trade Dress" and that any modification to the approved Architectural Elevations for the project which seeks to incorporate a tenant's established "Trade Dress" shall be processed as Class I or Class II site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and 4 ORD. NO. 41 -12 Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 10. Property Restrictions. That the uses of the Subject Property shall be further limited as follows: (a) Restaurant Uses Adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Restaurants which may be located within the structures identified as Buildings 600, 700, 800 and 900 shall not be permitted to have live outdoor entertainment but shall be permitted to provide pre- recorded music not to exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single - family residential zoned districts and shall terminate all such music by no later than 9:00 pm daily. (b) Loading Hours. All loading /unloading /delivery of goods to the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 7:00 am and shall terminate by 7:00 pm daily, with the exception of supermarket /grocery store uses, for which all loading /unloading /delivery of goods may begin no earlier than 6:00 am and shall terminate by 9:00 pm daily. The loading doors of all enclosed loading bays associated with Buildings 500 -510 shall remain closed at all times when delivery vehicles are loading and mechanical engines and/or refrigeration equipment is turned on. Delivery vehicles utilizing backup beepers shall not be permitted to unload into Buildings 500- 510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:00 am. Any delivery vehicles parked at the rear of Buildings 500 -510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:00 am waiting to unload shall ensure all engines and mechanical /refrigeration equipment are turned off. (c) Trash Collection Hours. All trash collection from the Subject Property shall not occur before 7:00 am or after 6:00 pm daily. Violation of any of these restrictions shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance, subject to enforcement by City. Section 11. That Section 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.s ", of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to add Subsection (11), Delray Place, Ordinance 41 -12. Section 12. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 13. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. ORD. NO. 41 -12 Section 14. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on the second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the day of , 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk First Reading Second Reading MAYOR 6 ORD. NO. 41 -12 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A: All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. LESS and EXCEPT therefrom that parcel of land described as Parcel 103 in that Order of Taking on Palm Beach County Petition filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court under Case No. CL99 -229AN and recorded March 30, 1999 in Official Records Book 11016, Page 226, being more particularly described as follows: A parcel of land lying in Section 28, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: That portion of the Plat of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Plat; thence North 89 °47'57" East, along the Northerly boundary line of said Plat, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence South 57 °26'45" West, a distance of 42.24 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary line of said Plat and on the arc of a circular curve to the right, where the radial line bears South 65 °17'42" East; thence Northeasterly along said Westerly boundary line and the arc of said curve, having a radius of 1850.08 feet and a central angle of 00 °46'27 ", a distance of 25.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY II, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 62, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. ORD. NO. 41 -12 / �Q 9 ME m (;B,�"G 100A INSET M-10 x.11 e U P, E P, -1 ------ -TP---- T- -1,7,7 L SAL' MCMIN SITE PLAN WE GRAPHIC SITE LOCATION MAP 111 11 3 1 GAH �g Ry 11,51, 1". 1,- -2 GTE -N SUEMII ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS MATRIX TABLE 1 Shared Parking Analysis Matrix (Based on Delray Beach Code of Ordinances Section 4.6.9 (C) (8) a) Delray Place, Delray Beach, Florida Square Feet: 113,907 116,089 WEEKDAY WEEKEND 410 Parking Spaces Required under Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements 280 Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided above Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements Night (Midnight to 6AM) Day (9AM -6PM) Evening (6PM to Midnight) Day (9AM -6PM) Evening (6PM to Midnight) Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided above maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use Parking Requirements (14) shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking per 1,000 sfw /o square Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Weekly Use Shared Parking Footage Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Average Medical Office (1) 5.00 0 5.0% 0 100.0% 0 10.0% 0 10.0% 0 5.0% 0 Office (1) 4.00 0 5.0% 0 100.0% 0 10.0% 0 10.0% 0 5.0% 0 Commercial /Retail (2) 2.94 106,589 5.0% 16 70.0% 219 90.0% 282 100.0% 313 70.0% 219 Restaurants (1) 12.00 9,500 10.0% 11 50.0% 57 100.0% 114 50.0% 57 100.0% 114 To be Determined To be Determined Total Spaces Required 116,089 27 276 396 370 333 1 280 NOTES: (1) Parking requirements based on Delray Beach Code of Ordinances (2) Parking requirements based on ITE Parking Generation (4th Edition) - ConsistentwRh Parking Study conducted byTrafTech Engineering, Inc. dated November 2012. Additionally, the 106,589 square feet of general commercial /retail use includes up to 25% restaurants (26,647 squarefeet), consistent with Palm Beach County practice relativeto non - merchandising uses such as restaurants that are part of the commercial /retailbuildings. Hence, the total allowed restaurants under this analysis is 36,147 square feet (26,647 + 9,500). This is consistent with ITE standards, as documneted in ITE's LUC 820 -Shopping Center definition. PARKING OVERVIEW SUMMARY With Outparcel Concept 100 (with Drive -Thru Bank) or with Outparcel Concept 100A (without Drive -Thru Bank and Commercial /Retail) 100 100A Square Feet: 113,907 116,089 Approved Parking Spaces: 403 410 Parking Spaces Required under Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements 280 Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided above Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements (130) Parking Spaces Required under maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use 396 Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided above maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use (14) Traf Tech ENGINEERING, INC. ORD. NO. 41 -12 Jill' .01 op 46 . . . . . . . . .... 3;o ¢ LEWIS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. P Q COLLINS AVENUE *BROOKS LN. 2 c� 2 WHITE DR. o` W 4 x O RHODES -VILLA AVE. BANYAN Q TREE LANE O' Of DEL -HAVEN D . LLJ C7' Q o J Q L I N T 0 N B O U L E V A R D Q o D z _� MC CLEARY ST. S �77A DEL HARBOUR DR. EVE STREET J � ¢ Q Q ~ H � TROPIC BOULEVARD J TT = Q Q Z O ¢ Ld va U LLJ Q W L, BOLENDER STREET �. ~ H � z BER UDA RDA ALLAMANDA DRIVE o ¢ m � BANYAN DRIVE AVE. C CYPRESS DRIVE x -- N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \Fil — Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1310 Delray Place �� �� �F4 6-)' J' BANYAN TREE LANE R M PC D o /Z J 0 L E A R D L I N T 0 N B 0 U 7 71 C D _S� MC CLEARY ST. I p POC DEL J_ EVE STREET Q TROPIC BOULEVARD J Q LLJ ° W R LL ACBOLENDER STREET 3 2 C7 = ALLAMANDA DRIVE BANYAN DRIVE P C AVE C CYPRESS z a DRIVE DOGWOOD DRIVE O Z N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING EXISTING ZONING MAP DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \Fil — Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1310A Delray Place Existing Zoning �� PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT I11� ■'■ ■ ■ ■. � �� NCl1,11 � PROPOSED ZONING MAP - � IKKIG�al.fa 1 � RM 1 - r =i ■ ■■■■moon ■ ■� ;; C ■ . ■ ■■ ■NONE ■ ■■rte . Y�Iiii�Liii:i ■ ■ ■� ■IIIIN MENEM ■■■� 1 „ �naauae on MEN ■■■■■■■■■■■ N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE .. .. pill � PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT PROPOSED ZONING MAP SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING .tune 12, 2013 DATE: ITEM: V. C. Delray Place: Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations associated with construction of a 125,927 sq. ft. shopping center consisting of multiple commercial buildings, parking and landscaping on a 9.95 acre site located on the southeast corner side of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). GENERAL DATA: Agent .... ............................... Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .......................... 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ......................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ........................ POC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ..................... SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ............ North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Proposed Land Use ............. I Water Service .................... Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ..................... Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the approval of the following aspects of a Class V site plan request for Delray Place, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.5(F): • Site Plan; • Landscape Plan; • Architectural Elevations; and The subject parcels are located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The 9.95 acre property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach in the early 1980's. The existing development on the property, which was constructed in 1983, is known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, and consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. A policy requiring that a redevelopment plan be prepared for South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2008 -1, adopted on December 9, 2008. In March of 2011, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Redevelopment Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 2 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. The Plan recommended that the subject property retain its original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed by SPRAB on December 12, 2012 and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, which included denials of a Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and associated Waivers, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On December 20, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the appeal be withdrawn and that the second reading of the ordinance be deferred. At its meeting of January 3, 2013, the City Commission agreed to defer second reading of the ordinance to no later than May 5, 2013. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed again by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with direction that the applicant address the issue with the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. The Board approved the following five associated waivers: A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b)(1), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 3 • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb. Eight (8) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet, and Four (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips. The Board also recommended approval to the City Commission of the following two waivers: • A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. On, March 26, 2013, the City Commission approved a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25©(2), Alternative Processing" for the establishment of an SAD zoning district, to allow second reading of Ordinance No. 41 -12 to occur greater than 180 days after first reading, but before July 18, 2013. The site plans have been modified to reduce the size of the 100 building at the corner by approximately 500 square feet and to add a decorative landscape entry feature with a fountain. Now before the Board for consideration is the Class V Site Plan proposal for the project which includes construction of a 123,745 sq. ft. (125,927 sq. ft. with alternative layout) shopping center consisting of ten buildings, parking and landscaping on the subject property. This is Step 3 in the SAD rezoning process. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the SAD rezoning on October 15, 2012 and the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 1St Reading on November 6, 2012. Second and Final reading of the Ordinance is scheduled for July 9, 2013. It is noted that both the P &Z Board recommendation and the City Commission approval on first reading did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the following elements: O Building "100 ": 3,474 sq. ft. bank with drive -thru lanes; or alternative plan with 5,656 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 4 • Building "200 ": 5,600 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "300 ": 5,694 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "400 ": 7,882 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "500 - 504 ": 32,015 sq. ft. of retail use with enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "506 - 510 ": 46,882 sq. ft. of retail use and enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "600 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "700 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "800 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "900 ": 5,476 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Construction of a 403 space parking lot (410 with alternative Building 100 layout) • Installation of associated landscaping and design elements, including trellises, benches and trash compactor enclosures. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached). Staff has one concern with the underlined section of Section 5 of the Ordinance which has an impact on the site plan approval: Section 5. Permitted Uses. That the development of the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, is approved for all uses set forth in LDR Section 4.4.9, General Commercial (GC), with the exception of residential -type uses, and shall include but not be limited to commercial, general retail, banks, office, business, professional, medical, dental, personal services and facilities, restaurants, food stores, supermarkets, health clubs /gyms, pharmacies, movie theatres, and all other commercial related uses. Additional uses within the Subject Property may be allowed but only after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. Total restaurant uses permitted on the Subject Property shall initially be allowed up to 23,218 leaseable square feet which is based on twenty percent (20 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage as set forth on the site plan, subject to an increase in such restaurant and other uses to be determined after submittal to and approval by the City of a parking utilization study performed by a licensed traffic engineer selected by the developer, which parking utilization study demonstrates that the actual overall parking used is less than the provided parking or the conclusions and presumptions set forth in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are satisfied. Said parking utilization study must be prepared and submitted after the first peak season and at least (6) months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Subject Property. If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased up to 35,988 square feet which is approximately thirty -one percent (31 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage as set forth on the site plan, which is SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 5 the maximum restaurant area shown in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C ". Staff recommends that the parking study be prepared during (not after) the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied. That will allow the developer to lease the remaining 11 % for restaurants (bringing the total to 31 %) if the study supports it. Section 4.4.25 Special Activities District (SAD) Regulations Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street. " SPRAB recommended approval of a waiver to this requirement to the City Commission on March 13, 2013. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." The parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] This would result in a requirement of 455 spaces for the 113,907 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 403 spaces, a reduction (11.4 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 52 spaces. The alternative plan for the 100 building would require 464 spaces for the 116,089 square foot shopping center, while 410 have been provided, a deficit of 54 spaces or (11.6 %). The site plan has been revised since the last submittal to reduce the total building area by 493 square feet to accommodate the landscape feature at the corner. The SAD Rezoning Ordinance includes A "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix ", which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses. The current ordinance will allow only 20% (23,218 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be restaurants until a parking utilization study is prepared after the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. This was reduced from 25 %in the previous ordinance. The 25% figure is based on the standard figure used by Palm Beach County for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased to approximately 31% (35,988 square feet) of the total leasable building area, which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. As noted above, staff recommends that the parking study be performed during the peak season and that the shopping center be at least 89% occupied when the study is performed. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor cafe areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. This could include a change of use in one or more of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 6 the buildings with a lower parking demand or employing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives to reduce automotive dependence. While a waiver is not required for the SAD zoning District, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. A parking study has been provided by TrafTech to support this reduction. The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4`" Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates thru wholly owned separate affiliated companies without any partners, 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approx.1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida which have been successfully developed by RPG from ground up and /or thru major redevelopment. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place and an affiliated wholly owned company of RPG designated as Delray Place, LLC, is the owner of Delray Place. RPG is putting its reputation and money on the line that this project will be successful. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this has been added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway- oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This has been added as a condition of approval. LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix — Nonresidential Zoning Districts: The following address the Development Standards of LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to the Special Activities (SAD) zoning district: Building Height: The maximum height in the SAD zoning district is 48 feet. Although all the proposed buildings are 1 -story with the top of roof at 18 feet, they appear much higher from the front and sides adjacent to the parking areas with decorative parapets, towers, and entry features projecting up to 40 feet in some instances. It is noted, however, that these elements do not occur in the rear of the buildings, adjacent to the residential area to the east. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 7 The parapets are 23 feet in height in the rear of the 500 buildings with the 500 -504 building located approximately 30 feet from the rear property line. While the 506 -510 building is located only 15 feet from the rear property line, it is further buffered from the residential area by Spanish Trail and a 10' park reservation. At the request of the residents on McCleary Street, the parapet has been eliminated in the rear of the 600 -1000 buildings and an aluminum screen placed further towards the front of the building to screen mechanical equipment. This reduced the height of the buildings in this area from 23 feet to 18 feet and improved compatibility with the adjacent residential development. Building Setbacks: The required perimeter building setback in the SAD zoning district is 15 feet, and all of the proposed buildings meet this requirement. The front and side street setbacks vary throughout the site with the four outbuildings creating an urban edge along South Federal Highway. These buildings are set back 15 feet. To maximize the available parking area, the larger 500 buildings are positioned to the rear of the parcel with the 500 -504 building approximately 30 feet from the rear property line and the 506 -510 building at the rear 15 foot setback line. The 600 to 900 buildings facing Linton Boulevard are also positioned at the rear 15 foot setback line in order to provide adequate area in the front for parking and pedestrian connectivity along this narrower section of the property. Open Space: The required open space in the SAD zoning district is 25% and 25.3% (25.2% with the alternate layout) has been provided. In order to provide the required open space for the project, the existing parking area in the eastern portion of the property along Linton Boulevard is being removed and the area landscaped. While it would be better if the required open space could be distributed throughout the site, it is acknowledged that this dogleg area does present challenges to redevelopment, and the proposed solution does meet the requirements of the LDRs. LDR Article 4.6 — Supplemental District Regulations: Bicycle Parking: LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(c) and Transportation Element Policy D -2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that a bicycle parking facility be provided. The minimum requirement for shopping centers is 5 spaces per 100,000 square feet of gross floor area, which means that a total of 6 spaces are required for the project. Five (5) bike racks, each with 4 spaces, are proposed for the project, thereby meeting the minimum number of spaces required. These racks are all located along pedestrian connections to the perimeter sidewalk system which provide convenient access points to all buildings on the site. Since, this project does not meet the City's standard minimum automotive parking requirements for shopping centers, the use of bikes as an alternative transportation method, especially for employees at the shopping center should be encouraged as much as possible. Therefore, an assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. This has been added as a condition of approval. Handicap Accessible Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(b), special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Pursuant to the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction, the nine (9) of the parking spaces serving the development must be handicap accessible. A total of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 8 thirteen (13) handicap accessible parking spaces are proposed. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. SPRAB recommended approval of a waiver to reduce the stacking distance from the fifty feet (50') for parking lots with fifty -one (51) or more spaces required pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1) to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and to thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street.to the City Commission on March 13, 2013. Bank Drive -thru Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(2), provisions must be made to provide for one hundred feet (100') of clear stacking from the first point of transaction for each lane of a drive -thru facility. The development proposal consists of a two (2) lane drive -thru facility in which each lane provides the minimum 100' of stacking. Thus, this standard has been met. Site Visibility Triangles: Although site visibility triangles have been indicated on the site and landscape plans, the triangle for the intersection of Eve Street and South Federal Highway is shown in the wrong location. Additionally, pursuant to Section 4.6.14(B)(5), "Sight visibility measurements at the intersection of a right -of -way, access way, or driveway and a right -of -way under County, State or Federal jurisdiction are subject to sight visibility requirements from those authorities." Provide modify the site visibility triangles shown on the plans for the driveway connections and roadway intersections involving South Federal Highway to meet the requirements of Florida DOT. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. This has been added as a condition of approval. Refuse Enclosures: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.6(C)(1), dumpster, recycling containers and similar service areas must be enclosed on three sides and have vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless such areas are not visible from any adjacent public right -of -way. 11 foot high free - standing trash compactor enclosures with roll up doors have been proposed for the 100 to 400 buildings. The enclosures have green walls and design elements to match the architectural features and colors of the adjacent buildings. Enclosed trash compactors have been integrated into the 500 -504, 506 -510, 800 and 900 buildings. Therefore, this LDR requirement has been met. Lighting: A submitted photometric plan and details of the light pole and wall mounted light fixtures have been submitted. Wall mounted, under overhangs, and under canopy light fixtures will be LED units (light- emitting -diode fixtures). Metal halide fixtures mounted on light poles at a height of 25' are provided throughout the parking lot. The illumination levels for the parking area as well as for the buildings at the entrances and under canopies, drive -thru and overhangs comply with the standards of Section 4.6.8. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 9 Based on the CPTED review, it is recommended that the parking lot fixtures be changed to LEDs, as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. A note to this effect must be included on the site plan. This has been added as a condition of approval. Also note that Florida Statutes include certain requirements with regard to the lighting of automated teller machines (ATM). These requirements are as follows: O F.S. 655.962(1)(a): There shall be a minimum ten (10) footcandle power whereat the face of the automated teller machine and extending in an unobstructed direction outward five feet (5). O F.S. 655.962(1)(b): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power within 50' in all unobstructed directions from the face of the ATM. O F.S. 655.962(1)(c): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power in that portion of the defined parking area within 60' of the ATM. If the bank is to have an exterior ATM, the photometric plan must be consistent with the above Florida Statutes, as well as meet the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.8. Signs: The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. OTHERISSUES Special Landscape Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b), "Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be erected, altered, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks leading to structures on the premises. Such driveways and walkways shall be generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways." Linton Boulevard: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b)(4), a special landscape area shall be provided along Linton Boulevard, from A -1 -A to the western City limits. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10'). Therefore, a 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is required along the deeper portion of the property to the west. A waiver to reduce the special landscape setback required from 15.5 feet for the narrow portion of the property and 30 feet for the deeper portion of the property to nine (9) feet was approved by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. South Federal Highway: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b)(1), a 25' special landscape area must be provided along Federal Highway (U.S. Highway 1), including the one way pairs (5th and 6th Avenues), extending from the south City limits to S.E. 10th Street. A waiver to reduce the special landscape setback from 25 feet to 15 feet was approved by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. South Federal Highway /Linton Boulevard Intersection: At its meeting of December 12, 2012, SPRAB expressed concerns about the bank building located in the corner of the property at this intersection. The Board felt that the building crowded SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 10 the corner too much and should be removed to provide a more open vista into the property. The applicant did not make this modification prior to resubmittal for the March 13, 2013 meeting. Based on SPRAB's strong objections to the location of this building at the earlier meeting, staff added a condition of approval that the building be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. At its March 13, 2013 meeting, SPRAB again expressed concerns about this corner and tabled the item to give the applicant time to address the issue. The building at the corner has been reduced by approximately 500 square feet and a landscape feature, including fountains, has been provided on the revised plans. The applicant has stated that the large roadway intersection at this corner provides views into the interior of the property. Undergrounding of Utilities: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities serving the development shall be located underground throughout the development. Therefore, it is attached as a condition of approval that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground and that a note be provided on the site plan to this effect. Right -of -way Dedication: Pursuant to Table T -1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the required right -of -way for Linton Boulevard is 120 feet where only 106 feet exists on the north side of the subject property. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(5), a reduction in the required right -of -way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). On October 4, 2012, the City Engineer and DSMG considered and approved the reduction of right -of -way for Linton Boulevard to the existing width. No additional dedications are required. Bus Shelters: As noted in the Findings section of this report, pursuant to Transportation Element A -1.5 of the Comprehensive Plan, a City approved bus shelter and Mass Transit easement may be required. Work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Plat: As the development proposal necessitates the dedication of utility easements, the property must be replatted. The recordation of a plat prior to the issuance of a building permit is attached as a condition of approval. Sidewalk Cafes: Many paved outdoor areas surrounding the various buildings in the project have been designated as potential sidewalk cafes on the plans. Pursuant to LDR Section 6.3.3, Sidewalk Cafe, "A sidewalk cafe is a group of tables with chairs and associated articles approved by the City situated and maintained outside whether on public or private property (excluding interior courtyard seating which is subject to parking requirements) and used for the consumption of food and beverages sold to the public from an adjoining business. All tables and chairs and associated articles must be located within the sidewalk cafe permit area. Sidewalk cafes allowed only when in compliance with this Section." While additional parking is not required for SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 11 areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. (Also see the Parking Section related to sidewalk cafes.) Preliminary Engineering Technical Items: While revised plans have accommodated most of staff's concerns, the items attached in Appendix "C" remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. CPTED REVIEW The following review was provided by Officer G. Wesner of the Delray Beach Police Department. Note: since this CPTED review was based on the earlier site plan submittal, notations have been added to denote chanaes in the current site clan. Overview: The site is situated at the busy S. Federal Hwy and E. Linton Blvd intersection, and extends all the way to the Intracoastal Waterway [ICW]. On the adjacent North side of E. Linton is a successful strip mall containing a popular Carrabas Restaurant, and several retail businesses. Diagonally across S. Federal Hwy the "Plaza at Delray" contains several restaurants and retail businesses including an (18) screen Regal theatre. Upscale homes along McCleary and Eve Streets in the "Tropic Isles" neighborhood will sit less than 100 feet from the rear of the "500 " and `506 "buildings once completed. Currently, the site contains two four story office buildings facing S. Federal Hwy with a third building to the East along E. Linton Blvd. Most recently, one of the four story buildings had been home to a regional banking center; both four story buildings have been largely empty for several years. Delray Place will be completed in several phases; eventually with existing buildings being demolished to make room for new construction. The project will also get a reconfigured parking lot. It will accumulatively encompass (12) separate one -story buildings; over 106,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space. For the most part, the site will be a "medium high risk" location for patrons and employees because (11) of the buildings will be suited for a restaurant; they will likely serve alcohol. The 100 building will be high risk location once it is occupied as a bank. This CPTED review was provided using following resources: Several visits to the location during daytime lighting conditions; Delray Beach Police Department Records (available upon request); site plans containing a comprehensive Photometric Study [PS] and certified by Mark Satz on 11/19/12; and accepted Crime Prevention Thru Environmental Design [CPTED] standards. Natural Surveillance: Natural Surveillance [NS] for each building will be greatly enhanced by the large floor to ceiling windows for each building. overall NS will also be enhanced by the broad stroke of sidewalk cafes areas, and trellis covered benches located throughout the project. Securitv and CCTV.- Historically, crime trends for the site have been at acceptable levels. However, a project such as this will see patronage at levels far higher than those previously seen at the site. Additionally, SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 12 restaurants will bring higher numbers in the evening hours than those seen during the site's previous uses. Therefore, there should be management onsite during normal business hours. Each vender should make use of the latest digital CCTV technology. Building entrances and all "points of purchase" should have facial recognition cameras as well as "anti- shoplifting" alarm devices. Retail users should make use of a cash - control system; have signs indicating that cashiers have limited cash on hand. Additional CCTV systems at the management office(s) will provide coverage at parking lot entrances, as well as store front areas. These should be able to record images of approaching vehicles and their license plates. Lighting and Landscaping: The PS indicates that most of the outdoor spaces will receive between 1 and 8 Foot candles [Fc]. Overall Fc levels are acceptable; however, Fc levels should be increased to a minimum of 2 Fc along the East end of the property. This secluded area of the parking lot sits next to the ICW, has an ongoing history for homeless activity. (Note: This parking area next to the ICW was eliminated in the revised site plan. Since, it is now a landscaped area, the comment is not applicablel "Shoe -box" type fixtures mounted on 15 and 25 foot poles will have L.E.D. fixtures. These L.E.D. fixtures will deter glare, and provide the best visual quality of color available. Furthermore, their high initial cost will be offset in a matter of months by the formidable energy savings that are common with their use. (Note: This was reported in error, LED fixtures are only being used on wall mounted fixtures only, not in the parking lot fixturesl Much of the existing landscaping will be relocated or completely replaced; an important point made readily obvious by the poor condition of the current landscaping. The landscape plan indicates that appropriate trees, shrubs, and ground cover will be used. Proper maintenance will ensure that new landscaping will not inhibit natural surveillance; create ambush points in the parking lot. Natural Access Control [NACI: Egress from the parking lot has always been a concern at this site. The main entrance -exit will continue to be at S. Federal Hwy; it only provides right turn egress from the lot. Furthermore, the entrance along E. Linton Blvd has always been a difficult place to turn left for those wishing to exit West bound; towards 1 -95. Those who chose to exit on Eve St. will only be able to turn right once they are at S. Federal Hwy. Once inside the parking lot, renovations will enhance NAC for all users, and improve safety for pedestrians moving to and from parking areas. Fencing and walls along the southern perimeters will make quick access on foot difficult for abnormal users. The "enclosed truck wells" to the rear of the 500 and 506 buildings will be accessed from the main entrance. Once delivery trucks negotiate customer vehicles, they will be able to easily access loading areas. However, they will also be less than 100 feet from the exclusive "Tropic Isles" Therefore, truck engine noise will be a chronic issue for nearby residents if large trucks are left running in the truck wells. Even covered truck wells project noise several blocks away. (Note : this has been addressed in the SAD Ordinancel CPTED Technical Items: Based on the above CPTED review, the following items need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 13 1. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 2. It is recommended that the light fixtures used in the parking lot be LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR section 4.6.16(C)(1)(a), prior to the issuance of a building permit for a structure or a paving permit, compliance with the requirements of Section 4.6.16 shall be assured through the review and approval of a landscape plan submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.3(C). A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City's Senior Landscape Planner. The plan provides for some building foundation, site perimeter, and parking area landscaping to address the landscaping needs for the proposed commercial development. The total landscape area required for the proposed project is 19,304 sq. ft. and 20,441 sq. ft. are being provided. The proposed development requires a total of 154 interior shade trees and 179 interior shade trees are being provided. The total number of perimeter trees required for the project is 160 trees and the applicant is providing 160 perimeter trees. It is noted that the project will provide a total of 333 trees. All proposed trees along the r -o -w meet "The Right Tree — Right Place as defined by the Florida Power Light company. It is important to mention that the applicant has made an effort to save a total of 11 existing trees that will be relocated on site. The landscape material proposed for the project appears to be abundant and diverse. It is noted that a total of 333 trees which include Verawood, Gumbo Limbo trees, Italian Cypress, Japanese Fern Trees, Jatropha trees, Japanese Privet, Lignum Vitae, High -rise Live Oak, Southern Live Oak, Golden Cassia, and Pink Tabebuia will be planted. Regarding Palm trees the landscape material for the project includes Areca Palms, Alexander Palms, Wild Date Palms, Christmas Palms, Pygmy Date Palms, and Montgomery Palms. A variety of large accents, shrubs, groundcover materials and vines are employed to enhance the proposed development. Accents and Shrubs include Variegated Shell Ginger, Red Ti Plant, Queen Emma Crinum Lily, Bird of Paradise, Red Tip Cocoplum, Muhly Grass, Podocarpus, Wild Coffee, Viburnum and others. The proposed under plantings include Blue Flax Lily, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lilly, Pentas, and Dwarf Podocarpus. Vines include Confederate Jasmin and Bleeding Heart Vine. The City's Senior Landscape Planner has evaluated the landscape plan and found that the plan partially complies with the LDR Section 4.6.16. There are two landscape technical items that the applicant needs to address. These items have been listed below and will be attached as conditions of approval. Thus, once these technical items are addressed, the Landscape Plan will be in compliance with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan item remains outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. There is still a deficiency of approximately 640 inches in caliper between the trees that are required to be mitigated for and the new mitigation trees that have been provided. The difference in caliper inches will either have to be made up in the form of money ($100 /caliper inch) or donated trees (equal to the number of caliper inches deficient). The other alternatives are to plant larger trees or relocate additional existing trees that are currently proposed for removal and mitigation. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 14 2. There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will be minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. Based upon the aforementioned landscaping comments, a positive finding of compliance with the requirements of LDR section 4.6.16 can be made when all outstanding Landscape Technical items are addressed. Parking Lot Islands: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), "Landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, shall be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces. One shade tree shall be planted in every island with a minimum of seventy -five (75) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Tree specifications shall adhere to those listed in Section 4.6.16(E)(5) and 4.6.16(E)(6). Where approval for the use of compact parking has been approved, islands may be placed at intervals of no less than one (1) island for every fifteen (15) compact parking spaces." SPRAB approved waivers to these requirements on March 13, 2013. Landscape Strips Between Parking Tiers: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), "Whenever parking tiers abut, they shall be separated by a minimum five (5) foot wide landscape strip. This strip shall be in addition to the parking stall and be free of any vehicular encroachment, including car overhang. In addition, a two foot (2) hedge shall be installed within this landscape strip and run the entire length of the strip. Pedestrian walkways are permitted to allow passage through the hedge. Nonmountable curbs are not required for these landscaping strips, providing carstops are provided. " SPRAB approved a waiver to this requirement on March 13, 2013. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.6.18(E) — Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered, by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board ( SPRAB), in the review of plans for building permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved: The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 2. The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. 3. The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. The architectural design style utilized in the design of the proposed commercial development is an eclectic representation of a modern contemporary style with architectural design elements typically featured in the southeast Florida area. Four outbuildings have been located close to the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 15 South Federal Highway frontage with parking areas shielded behind the buildings. Two major anchor tenants for the development are located to the rear, opposite the main parking area. Six buildings are located towards the rear property line with the parking lot area facing Linton Boulevard. The concept of an eclectic style of architecture can be defined as the borrowing of various architectural styles to create a functional and cohesive look through color, texture, physical volumes and shapes. The style of Architecture of the proposed commercial development building is an eclectic cotemporary combination of the Caribbean style and colors with a renovated Old Florida Vernacular style of architecture. The architectural elevations include many features and design elements, such as: white translucent laminated glass with aluminum finish mullions, standing seam metal roof, manufactured stone, stucco texture, cantilever wire suspended overhangs, decorative medallions, suspended awnings, metal roofs, decorative wall mounted light fixtures, score lines, stucco texture finishes, smooth stucco banding around the windows, cornice finished flat roofs, various shapes of roofs including flat, arched, and asymmetric roof shapes, decorative brackets to support the roof of some portions of the buildings. Eight different colors are incorporated into the buildings of the commercial development including white, light yellow moonraker, light green, artichoke green, threshold taupe, light brown, robust orange, light blue scandal and van dyke dark brown. The proposed colors will help distinguish among different retail bays and portions of the proposed buildings. The proposed colors combined with different roof shapes and roof lines will create a visually attractive streetscape both along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The proposed commercial development is a high quality design product and will improve the aesthetics of this important double frontage site and will be in harmony with developments in the area; thus, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 (E). REQUIRED FINDINGS REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(A), the resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent' for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 16 with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area." Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(8)(1), "Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, was amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use is controlled by the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached to the ordinance. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Article 3.2 and required findings in appropriate sections of LDR Section 2.4.5 shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. As described in Appendix "B ", a positive finding of Consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway / Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 17 southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor' along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of the rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single - family residential development since properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that needed to be addressed to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. As discussed below, the revised site plan has addressed these issues with a substantial reduction in building area, a decrease in the maximum potential restaurant area and an increase in open space on the site. Additional issues of compatibility are being addressed in the SAD ordinance. Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) (Total Building Area /Total Land Area) Delray Place 116,580* 0.27 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 0.19 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 0.21 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard * To present a fair comparison, the building area does not include enclosed loading areas, which are not normally provided. The applicant has continued to work with staff and the neighboring residents to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. While not everyone is completely happy, significant strides have been made to and the revised site plan represents a significant reduction in building area from the prior submittal. The parapets on the back of the buildings adjacent to the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 18 single family lots on McCleary Street have been eliminated to reduce the overall height of the buildings to 18 feet in order to be more compatible. The trees in this area have been selected to fit in the narrow setback area and the applicant has agreed to a request by the adjacent residents to provide areca palms between the trees along the rear property lines to provide a more effective screen of the buildings. The developer has also agreed to provide sound baffles along the south and east sides of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 506 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. The previous elimination of the doors in the rear of the 600 -900 buildings for loading functions and enclosing the outdoor dining areas between the buildings addressed staff's previous concern that noise would impact the adjacent homes; and the revised SAD ordinance does not permit live outdoor entertainment in this area. Although pre- recorded music is allowed, it shall not exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single - family residential zoned districts and shall terminate no later than 9:00 pm daily. Future Land Use Element Policy C -1.12: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard. In Fiscal Year 2010111, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Redevelopment Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. Transportation Element Policy A -1.5: New residential projects over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops shall provide an easement and install a city- approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution shall be made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Subject to it being addressed at that time, the development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A -1.5. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 19 As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can only be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed and the two waivers which require approval by the City Commission are either approved or the plans are modified to eliminate the need for said waivers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F)(5), In additions to provisions of Chapter Three, the approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and /or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM Old Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (Planned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and /or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 20 Public Notices: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. A substantial number of emails and letters have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and /or support, if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board ( SPRAB) meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that needed to be addressed with the revised site plan to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. The currently proposed site plan for Delray Place has adequately addressed these issues subject to conditions of approval. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property and it will be a catalyst for redevelopment of the South Federal Highway corridor. There are still a number of outstanding issues that will be addressed as conditions of approval, including a number of Landscape and Engineering items. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Move postponement of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by electing to continue with direction. B. Move approval of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the attached conditions of approval. C. Move denial of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 21 STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 2. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground. 3. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 4. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 5. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C' of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 7. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 8. Light fixtures used in the parking lot shall be changed to LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. 9. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 10. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator(s) shall not be located outside the building on the ground in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof, appropriately screened and no closer than 16 ft to the rear of the buildings. 11. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 900 and 500- 504 and 506 -510 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood and no closer than 16 ft from the rear of the buildings. 12. Delray Place shall, by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts Delray Place internal southbound exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street. In the event that, at some point in the future, and after all applicable City of Delray Beach process, and after all applicable public hearings, including but not limited to those before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Commission, a final development approval is issued by the City for the adjacent (on the south) Tropic Square shopping Center, which approval allows a cross - access across Eve Street with Delray Place, then SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 22 the aforesaid island, upon the completion of said Tropic Square cross - access, may be removed. Removal of the island shall not be considered an amendment to the Delray Place Ordinance and /or amendment to the Site Plan Approvals such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for site plan approval and /or rezoning ordinances and shall control in all instances to the extent of any inconsistency with any other approval granted by the City. 13. A Parking Utilization must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied outlining that all parking spaces are not being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is not occurring, to justify the adequacy of the provided parking. 14. If the Parking Utilization Study condition 13 above provides that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then developer shall provide to alleviate the parking shortage any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, (b) off -site valet parking, (c) off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking (f) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (e) any other reasonable programs. 15. An assessment must be made during the first peak season budgeted to be approx. 12/1- 5/1/2014 after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 16. The developer shall meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate over capacity parking shortage demand at the shopping center. 17. Provide a traffic concurrency equivalency letter from project traffic engineer that demonstrates the mix of proposed uses falls within the approved 2/13/2013 Palm Beach County project number 1200911 Traffic Performance Standards Review Letter proposed uses and other allowed allocations. 18. The developer shall provide sound mitigation for the nearby rear neighbors by providing Sound Wall Absorption Material up to 14 feet high on the south wall elevation of building 500 -504 and the north wall elevation of building 506 -510 and on the east wall elevation of building 500 -504 as shown in detail within the Development Plans on architectural sheet A -10 building 500 -504 Elevation Plans prepared by Saltz Michelson Architects. . 19. The Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the south residential area are to have (a) an overall height of no more than 18' as measured from grade level of Delray Place, (b) air conditioning and other mechanical equipment placed on the roof no closer than 16ft to the rear of the buildings, (c) a parapet or screening wall installed no closer than 16' to the rear of the buildings and such parapet or screening wall shall have a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment and shall run parallel to the east & west width of the buildings to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the south thereof. 20. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof along the rear of buildings 500 -510 are to be located only on the roof. 21. The existing landscaping, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, will not be disturbed by any construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Should any of the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 23 existing landscaping located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, die due to developer's disturbance, the developer will replace the dead plant material with that of like density and size based on the current availability of plant materials and code requirements. 22. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the north corner intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street which are partially located on Delray Place property and the adjacent neighbor's property, are not to be disturbed other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to care for and to trim and modify branches that overhang onto the Delray Place property. In the event the activities of the developer during constructing Delray Place injure either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing the death of either or both of the two Banyan trees, the developer will fully remove the dead tree(s), including the root systems thereof as reasonably possible and replace in the same general area either on the Delray Place property and /or the adjacent residential property with tree(s) based on current availability which can reasonable fit in the same general place and as are allowed by code. 23. The Developer shall incorporate mature Areca Palms that are approx. 14' in height based on reasonable availability into the landscape plans which are to be planted within the boundary of the Delray Place rear landscape buffers behind building 500 -504 & building 506 -510, on the south side of building 506 -510, and behind Linton Blvd. buildings 600 -900 and all the way to the east property line near and next to the Tropic Isle residential community as shown on the landscaping plans. 24. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed as shown on the plans. 25. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the Eve Street gate, or from within any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 26. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed as shown on plans. 27. A southbound Federal Highway No U -turn sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, if approved by FDOT and other required approval parties. 28. There are to be no rear doors, except for emergency, fire access, and /or code required rear doors, for the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 29. All mops, grease carts, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 24 Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations. Attachments: • Appendix °A" • Appendix `B" • Appendix "C • Location Map • Aerial • Reduced Plans • Parking Study and Support Documents • Public Comments /Correspondence • SAD Rezoning Ordinance No. 41 -12 • Color Board SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 25 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by TrafTech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 4,817 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 225 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 398 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. Although a letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County has been provided, the mix and intensity of uses is not consistent with the current site plan. Since the intensities given in the letter exceed the current proposal, traffic concurrency can be met. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. However, a revised letter will be required prior to certification of the site plan. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3(D)(7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. The 25% minimum open space requirement for the project has been met. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 26 Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Solid Waste: As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 618.4 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J -5- 005(4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibs /sf = 152.6 tons /year 80,101 SF Retail @10.2 Ibs /sf = 409.6 tons /year 29,366 SF Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibs /sf = 67.5 35,988 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibs /sf = tons /year 451.6 tons /year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibs /sf = 22.7 tons /year Total: 242.8 tons /year Total: 861.2 tons /year SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 27 APPENDIX "B" STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D -1 and D -2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B -1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 28 F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subiect to conditions of Does not meet intent G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B -2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent 1. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 29 APPENDIX "C" PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ITEMS 1. Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. 2. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1) and (D) (1). 3. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. Site, Civil and Landscaping Plans need to include Drainage, Water and Sewer Easements. 4. It was not clear whether the off -site drainage connection on Linton Boulevard was still being used. If it is, clearly indicate location and permission from Palm Beach County is required. 5. Indicate location of required FPL easements on all plans, including Site, Civil and Landscaping Plans. 6. Indicate location for relocated pole at driveway on Eve Street on all plans. 7. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d). Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. Actual copies of the drainage and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 8. Provide Demolition Plans at the 1" = 30'. 9. On Demolition Plans, indicate existing easements to be abandoned. 10. Please revise drainage summary to include how the surface water management system is designed for a minimum of a 10 yr. /24 hr. storm event, as this is a requirement in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9. 11. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. 12. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. 13. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. ¢ LEWIS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. P Q COLLINS AVENUE *BROOKS LN. 2 c� 2 WHITE DR. o` W 4 x O RHODES -VILLA AVE. BANYAN Q TREE LANE O' Of DEL -HAVEN D . LLJ C7' Q o J Q L I N T 0 N B O U L E V A R D Q o D z _� MC CLEARY ST. S �77A DEL HARBOUR DR. EVE STREET J � ¢ Q Q ~ H � TROPIC BOULEVARD J TT = Q Q Z O ¢ Ld va U LLJ Q W L, BOLENDER STREET �. ~ H � z BER UDA RDA ALLAMANDA DRIVE o ¢ m � BANYAN DRIVE AVE. C CYPRESS DRIVE x -- N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \Fil — Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1310 Delray Place �� Jill' .01 op 46 . . . . . . . . .... 3;o EXTERIOR COLOR BOARD DELRAY PLACE SALTZ MICHELSON DERAY NAM FL A R C H I T E C T S 2012 -166 09 -M -11 OSHERWIN-WILLIAMS SW 6168 MODERN WHITE O SW 67011 MOIONRAKER O SW 61,78 CLARY SAGE O SW 61179 ARTICHOKE SW 7 O SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 501 THR SHOLD TAUPE © SW SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 8 ROBUS 6 ORANGE MS SW 529 SCANDA ® SW 041 VAN DYKE BROWN WHITE TRANSLUCENT LAMINATED GLASS STANDING SEAM ROOF SYSTEM: MILL FINISH: 'DREXLUME' W/ BRONZE COLORED MULLIONS BY'DREXEL METALS Inc.' WHERE INDICATED GREEN GLASS WIALUMINUM FINISH ► °� MULLIONS WHERE INDICATED 5 ; .. -- DECEUVE SEP Q i 2012 _ - -. �:��.- " Irk., 4 Ls.✓J 1 PLANNING R ZONING MANUFACTURED STONE Y - BY `CORONADO' Q11ICK STACK` ' (-ocoa: ASPEN DELRAY PLACE SALTZ MICHELSON DERAY NAM FL A R C H I T E C T S 2012 -166 09 -M -11 EXHIBIT "A" DELRAY PLACE SPRAB MOTIONS WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The Board approved the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with the following motions: Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 2. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground except around perimeter where if affects mature trees. 3. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 4. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in- lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 5. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C' of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 7. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. 8. Consider the use of LED light fixtures in the parking lot. If so, the photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised accordingly. 9. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 10. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator(s) shall not be located outside the building on the ground in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof, appropriately screened and no closer than 16 ft to the rear of the buildings. 11. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 900 and 500 -504 and 506 -510 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood and no closer than 16 ft from the rear of the buildings. 12. Delray Place shall, by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts Delray Place internal southbound exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street. In the event that, at some point in the future, and after all applicable City of Delray Beach process, and after all applicable public hearings, including but not limited to those before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Commission, a final development approval is issued by the City for the adjacent (on the south) Tropic Square shopping Center, which approval allows a cross - access across Eve Street with Delray Place, then the aforesaid island, upon the completion of said Tropic Square cross - access, may be removed. Removal of the island shall not be considered an amendment to the Delray Place Ordinance and /or amendment to the Site Plan Approvals such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for site plan approval and /or rezoning ordinances and shall control in all instances to the extent of any inconsistency with any other approval granted by the City. 13. A Parking Utilization must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied outlining that all parking spaces are not being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is not occurring, to justify the adequacy of the provided parking. 14. If the Parking Utilization Study condition 13 above provides that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then developer shall provide to alleviate the parking shortage any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, (b) off -site valet parking, (c) off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking (f) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (e) any other reasonable programs. 15. An assessment must be made during the first peak season budgeted to be approx. 12/1- 5/1/2014 after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 16. The developer shall meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate over capacity parking shortage demand at the shopping center. 17. Provide a traffic concurrency equivalency letter from project traffic engineer that demonstrates the mix of proposed uses falls within the approved 2/13/2013 Palm Beach County project number 1200911 Traffic Performance Standards Review Letter proposed uses and other allowed allocations. 18. The developer shall provide sound mitigation for the nearby rear neighbors by providing Sound Wall Absorption Material up to 14 feet high on the south wall elevation of building 500 -504 and the north wall elevation of building 506 -510 and on the east wall elevation of building 500 -504 as shown in detail within the Development Plans on architectural sheet A- 10 building 500 -504 Elevation Plans prepared by Saltz Michelson Architects. 19. The Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the south residential area are to have (a) a rear height of no more than 18' as measured from grade level of Delray Place, (b) air conditioning and other mechanical equipment placed on the roof no closer than 16ft to the rear of the buildings, (c) a parapet or screening wall installed no closer than 16' to the rear of the buildings and such parapet or screening wall shall have a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment and shall run parallel to the east & west width of the buildings to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the south thereof. 20. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof along the rear of buildings 500 -510 are to be located only on the roof. 21. The existing landscaping, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, will not be disturbed by any construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Should any of the existing landscaping located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, die due to developer's disturbance, the developer will replace the dead plant material with that of like density and size based on the current availability of plant materials and code requirements. 22. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the north corner intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street which are partially located on Delray Place property and the adjacent neighbor's property, are not to be disturbed other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to care for and to trim and modify branches that overhang onto the Delray Place property. In the event the activities of the developer during constructing Delray Place injure either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing the death of either or both of the two Banyan trees, the developer will fully remove the dead tree(s), including the root systems thereof as reasonably possible and replace in the same general area either on the Delray Place property and /or the adjacent residential property with tree(s) based on current availability which can reasonable fit in the same general place and as are allowed by code. 23. The Developer shall incorporate mature Areca Palms that are approx. 14' in height based on reasonable availability into the landscape plans which are to be planted within the boundary of the Delray Place rear landscape buffers behind building 500 -504 & building 506 -510, on the south side of building 506 -510, and behind Linton Blvd. buildings 600 -900 and all the way to the east property line near and next to the Tropic Isle residential community as shown on the landscaping plans. 24. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed as shown on the plans. 25. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the Eve Street gate, or from within any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 26. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed as shown on plans. 27. A southbound Federal Highway No U -turn sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, if approved by FDOT and other required approval parties. 28. There are to be no rear doors, except for emergency, fire access, and /or code required rear doors, for the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 29. All mops, grease carts, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 30. The Developer shall provide a provision in all restaurant leases that all outdoor seating areas are subject to the City of Delray governmental regulations. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. The landscape plan technical items are as follows: • There is still a deficiency of approximately 640 inches in caliper between the trees that are required to be mitigated for and the new mitigation trees that have been provided. The difference in caliper inches will either have to be made up in the form of money ($100 /caliper inch) or donated trees (equal to the number of caliper inches deficient). The other alternatives are to plant larger trees or relocate additional existing trees that are currently proposed for removal and mitigation. • There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will be minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following condition: 1. That the canopy over the clock tower be proportionate with said clock tower in relation to the other canopies in the project. W U Q nJ J W D J LL Q LL m J LL r) p - O vu L IA dff1 AVV %l dQ !!777 Ovid d a(l Z 5 i U Fti rc W U Q nJ J W D J LL Q LL m J LL r) p - O vu L IA 7D V 1(1 11 V d 1 a a I I 1 0 Q W J F m` 111:4 U 1lJ r I I � c 1 TFFFFFFFTI� , a I I 1 0 Q W J F m` 111:4 U 1lJ ?I 1�1W LLd I I _ I I I - I I I I a I I I I I INML FlSINVdS I �I , I III', ■ is G w � o 7 0 m- ze �' ppp 3� N�k gz� x N U = = [—� r U.ss�.. �is�a n�...s3uc �eunnnai cci m,w m,s:�+...mwi iicnaonr.eAm�s ua ¢<,cccinn W - z - - 0 N, w w ? LLd I I _ I I I - I I I I a I I I I I INML FlSINVdS I �I , I III', ■ is G w � o 7 0 m- ze �' ppp 3� N�k gz� x Ud k !!77 �..773 H. �7I7tla7N 4�F.'�TI�l79a7�7 F^���� U - - _ _ _ g - �J w at Q Q) LU ofr _ Y d��Soo auVi LU Q _ H II � ❑ ® d= Of - a os= w�a LU Q a J p ¢ z o �i ❑ " n z ❑ a _ w aU J w gd Q U a �? o N a z QJ £ UQo 8 � a n � �Q �a3 o,s �=o � � 3 � w W w Ln- s �d g Z O � � U u3 r_ >H W Z a O O LL Lu co co O U Z w w O H U a O U U Q � o F 8g � a g i z O w J W J J zo W W r d' U U � �w aSL °a� 14 IMV IR .AVE]�G HDV'I(l kvx l3Q SNV'Id DNISdHd - _ - - III I � w � �l ti i a V a w F- U) a J a d w 8 G ~ W co a W U) w z W 8 H w G W O U disyz.v, O w w 'Cl - I�III d W - � - o H - - - W - f U) ¢ - - a - 7' -� L ¢ a -rozi J = I (L a W= U)� G 7 W---------- a� n „J Ili - Ili a L� Illlli i I _flli I ; (j) II II x w D o . III _ — G� I IIw, � I I a w iu` e /. w D Id ¢ s.f . Y � z III ' I r6 �1 w U V a w F- U) a J a d w 8 G ~ W co a W U) w z W 8 H w G W O U disyz.v, O w w t .i co z O Q w w U w } W � d'a 4 z O m w } �o w� o u z O w Q W d U W^ Ka co d 14,11waa U co z O Q w w U w } W � d'a 4 z O m w } �o w� o u z O w Q W d U W^ Ka co Q w - d S U z z Q d K O O LL 0 00 m 4 z 3 a K 0 0 LL a 0 m z zo w. Q� 4 z 3 a K 0 O 0 o, Oo 2l d U Q w - d S U z z Q d K O O LL 0 00 m 4 z 3 a K 0 0 LL a 0 m z zo w. Q� 4 z 3 a K 0 O 0 o, Oo 2l wl° 0000 oi� 14'11waa A"IRG aDvId AvldlaQ S wLL a ¢U w� J w H 7� O 0 o, p� Di m' plP „lo �i z O Q w H n o J °_q O� O� L m = 4 00 0 I ■ Iriu,:r 1 u-qq Ijj ■ ;1::;1'pIN;I �I`�16i1i!4i li lle �1�13::1■ �!I'�AAli�l 111' ° °I■ • ! i 'A O I1 • ® • Ij ®f1.liA♦fl m m ®m m® z O Q W H Q w 0 O� m= 4 z O a w T D 0 O 0 00 m= 4 m m Jim I.® I iii z QO ooh O � m W Qw �S4 J � i Q0= 4 G �N s 1 i LIGI �� lmin I.I:ssl.� .GI .I Iai „lo �i z O Q w H n o J °_q O� O� L m = 4 00 0 I ■ Iriu,:r 1 u-qq Ijj ■ ;1::;1'pIN;I �I`�16i1i!4i li lle �1�13::1■ �!I'�AAli�l 111' ° °I■ • ! i 'A O I1 • ® • Ij ®f1.liA♦fl m m ®m m® z O Q W H Q w 0 O� m= 4 z O a w T D 0 O 0 00 m= 4 m m Jim I.® I iii z QO ooh O � m W Qw �S4 J � i Q0= 4 1 i LIGI �� lmin I.I:ssl.� .GI .I Iai P1 e® �I. ■llkyg__ !7��11t.14,11 vaa ntv.7a��iaa D V ICI 1� V u as I Z a d K O O LL / w i U � w 0 o, a ° C7 O o-� C C 3 a 0 0 LL 1 w LL a n� U �J J a a � p 0 � o U i O� m 14 `uwaa H� ...n.m.,t<z.:,.. non•.. �,. s 3A�,., ��a„ , ,,,. a�,m.,,,,..n.,,,w.n,P�n,,m.s, �a : :: t�,oz Cw °� by yh by by °o k9rco�o 'oka �gGC�� RRR p ;LL ;p `��0000000 o� ��rm° o o� Ell FI r I rc, rc, rc, Yugo, o 00 w w w [YIy[YIy rc n n °woWrym ° ° �n pPof r r r ¢ a r a a r � a w r - Z Z I I� O Z O Q Q w w > 3 = w w w - w - > w ¢ w w � w w a w m w � w w o, c+J ° m- .,n U I I Ir Y I I I I I I I ° old �I` pPo OI o w w w w p ° - � Z Z o O O I I ¢ z z O w w Q W > _ w O O = z co I x I I O to z s ❑2 ZE EE o, o, O � O m5 m5 I I I �C w I I Ili � I I I z w w o 0 D J O o w w _w w z z w w w a z 0 o w J a o� o� m= m= vaa ntv.7a��iaa !714,11 D t. V id 1� V dlaa e �o os (L LL N J O � H V W ID O O �Lo(n O O LO Lo LO AM Q d K O O LL 0 N O, N ° HM V Lu I I `mil I I I I I I I I LL I I I J C O _ O LO O LO W O M O I I I I I I I I Z I I I I K O LL I I I I I O mez,. O= N_° !!77 14,11 7waa n�v.7a�I7aa7!7�7 7Dv 1C1 1� V d 1 a fi �fi fi �R I Z O Q w cn < s N O , go R o r °oA z Z O � Q > J W O Z O � o m m 1 H I O O N O m= O Q J W 0 N O � o � a i r e G O 1 ) h jo J � 7 O Q W Q Q O W W W p w w ' O N i LLaro mz a�w N O I I N <O o�„ *� o p o Q N;�emmsPoa &$^ z° w w S O Z 1 ) h jo J � 7 O Q W Q Q O W W W w w ' O N _ N O I I N <O Q o p o Q z° w w S O Z N ° �o 1 ) h jo J � 1) 4 O O Q Q W W W W w w _ N O I I N <O I p o p o 1) 4 _.,__� 2 aDYid&vldlaQ )E H� ) ƒ \ | - i _ - f\ i -1 TAM ( \ 11171 _\ . \ , -- - , , - d \ \ \, \ \ |' � • \ \ : \ _, \ \ } \ ) �\ |� � ( i? I 14,11waa A"IRG aDvid AvldlaQ 00 o g- � r. i Z LL U I O w � U Y I 0 0 o o Z co g J C9 O ` (3 gg 0 z Z a a w w w w m m 0 0 a a w � w a= a= 14,11wgs A"IRG aDYid Avldlaa 0 (n z T (3) \\ � : co z 0 T 0 3 \)� \ 0 co z T D 0 I? 07 4 !: { ƒ ;, (: \ ): ,: j • \ \)� \ 0 co z T D 0 I? 07 4 14 ILIVIRAVEI�G HDV'I(l kvxlgcl Z LL 0 0 W C) U) CD CD CP Cl Cl (D U) (D z Z 0 W (i) L) W U) CD C) I C) C) O t I I C, Ln U) O Z 0 C) w U) C) w C) U) 1� w 0 a_ F- 0 z 0 w U) 0 t I I C, Ln U) O Z 0 C) w U) C) w C) U) 1� 14,11waa t S U on �= W ❑ z W ¢ LL z o w Q � Y a WF > i t� U Z 7 W U K d H 7 O O w z w LLi � w w z S O S w w LL w� r� Z U w ! U ti o k� w Z } ❑ ¢ J = Z O Q O Z w ❑ Z_ ¢ U � _ w LL U U U S w Z ¢ � ❑ K Z � ❑ 7 � m LWi L� � O ¢ wF wF wF f �fl � 17i G m - Z 00 U^ we Z O U w U K w H Z_ 2 O K LLo w� a 14,11waa yI f �fl � 17i G m - Z 00 U^ we Z O U w U K w H Z_ 2 O K LLo w� a 14,11waa A"IRG Ho is 1kVdl3Q -t-- G - N Y�. y s. � w >o Z- 3a i �1 ,9 ZE I 07 � — 14 HDV'1d Avx'1q(1 Ul 1 11A 11 i z 1 1 no ff'fj UHI 1N 1 .1 -1 IM nil 1NI Mh 121 i 11 it IN H1 11 U11 IN ga MR if 1 101 imp! U 1*4 0 10i PH it 11 11 00 1 lu 0 "'" 11 !Hill! U 1 R MIR M vul W jH R 1H 1 -U -, H 11 11 � a a lul Mu M • A H1 lus h 1, 10 .1 H lu U, xi Hag- -1 W. 1 Mi Ham -0 .&U, il, in-211 10 11 lop DU 11 1 1L 0.1 — ' '- IN -F 1 i i 1 1 dLdL � I Tlu nil ill rM &9$ 11 tul it IN H1 11 1 1 i j DIN hL dLdL � I lui nil ill rM &9$ 11 tul it IN H1 11 2 W MR if 1 101 imp! U 1*4 !if!! 1 10i PH it 11 11 00 11 M !IN 11 !Hill! U 1 R MIR M vul 111111 M. 111 , lid! IN A H1 lus h 1, H1. IH..� xi Hag- -1 W. 1 Mi 0 1110 .&U, 1 1 i j DIN hL dLdL � I lui ill rM &9$ 11 tul it IN H1 11 2 W MR if 1 101 imp! U 1*4 !if!! 1 10i PH it 11 11 Mu !IN 11 !Hill! U 1 R MIR M vul 111111 M. 111 , lid! IN H1 lus h 1, W, IN IH..� -1 W. 1 Mi in-211 10 11 lop DU 11 1 1 1 i j DIN dLdL � I was ill = ��'© 1 1 i j 1� DIN 1� a� - 99'll]VHa.itl89�4 H U -3131 evo.� �u�o �e ui ��i�'N.ou 3us34c ww�i�,000 e5 uol }o{lodsuoJj sa UlNas �D }uaU111 oJ1nu3 aun {oa {iya�y adoaspuo� 6uiuuo�d `H7V38 sswG i � � o� o�� — _ �il ^ O ^ I I `J b'OlbOlj J.b'11�30 `dnodD z DNI A11d3dObd lIV13d'dOd (13Wd3dd CL' N E) I SI Q 3DVId ),V'dl34 = =p sag 4 NbI ;g 3 a F z O a� U - uoiloliodsuoij I SGDIAJSS jOlUeWUOJIAU3 iv II I�III11 g ; IIIM­, adoo,puo� I f3umiold Gk MR H inos VC]NOI3'HDV39 W�113(1 5'! III Ln DNI dnodE) ),I'd3dO'dd 1IV13d 'dOJ 43'dVd3dd CL NSISICI _1 3DVId ),Vd 3(l ------- imm(INVI oo H E HUE ......... ......... ---------- 0 u '.5T 'on LL M N2 R 2, w of IN6--­2 5_-_„., a-,7 N6 NI 0 CL .2 21, E 2 Z z T 'E i 7c Q 0 Z u Q < 0 Z Z Z P sor 2 X I "2 t 8, iMd M a I I E C u z U 0 2H z ED < > < U 22! O iv II I�III11 g ; IIIM­, Gk MR III sor 2 X I "2 t 8, iMd M a I I E C u z U 0 2H z ED < > < U 22! O z z iv II I�III11 g ; IIIM­, Tim MR III z z PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING DATE: October 15, 2012 ITEM: VI. B. Privately initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the property located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). Quasi - Judicial Hearing. GENERAL DATA: Agent ..... ............................... Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ....... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .............................. 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ........................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ............................ POC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ........................ SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ................North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ..................... Proposed Land Use .................. Water Service ....................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ........................ Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation to the City Commission on a privately initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the property located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Board shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to the rezoning of any property within the City. BACKGROUND The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway and is approximately 9.95 acres in size. The existing development, known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings: two multiple -story office buildings (one located to the north of the property and the other to the south), and a one -story office building located on the east side of the property along Linton Boulevard. The property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach from unincorporated Palm Beach County in the early 1980's. The property was originally assigned the Future Land Use Map designation of Transitional (TRN) and a zoning of SAD (Special Activities District). The three office buildings and associated parking were constructed in 1983. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. The Future Land Use Map Designation of TRN (Transitional) was retained. In 2008, as the country was heading into an economic recession, city leaders saw how volatile the automotive industry had become and became concerned that the large amount of automotive dealerships on South Federal Highway would not be sustainable in the long term. If the industry imploded and dealers began to withdraw from the area, there would be a major economic impact on the corridor and the City as a whole. The City Commission wanted the area to be evaluated and a Plan prepared that would help the area to become more sustainable. A Policy dealing with South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2008 -1, adopted on December 9, 2008. Following a series of visits to the area to collect land use and environmental data, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. These workshops occurred in March of 2011, and those people who attended the workshops were enthusiastic and generally supportive of the planning effort. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. The Future Land Use Map amendment would be required in either Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 2 case. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. At its meeting of July 16, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on the proposed South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. Staff presented the Plan and several members of the public spoke about the various components of the Plan, including the proposed rezonings, the maximum tenant size, buffer requirements and restrictions on the west side of South Federal Highway. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the Redevelopment Plan with a number of recommended changes, including that rezoning of the subject property be limited to SAD. The Plan was amended to retain the original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. The Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 3 REZONING ANALYSIS REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: The resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent" for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area. " Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(B)(1), "Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, must be amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use. These uses can be general use categories such as retail, restaurant, services, office, etc. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3 and required findings in LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) for the Rezoning request shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 4 Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway / Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor' along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east must be assured at the time of rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single - family residential development. Properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that need to be addressed to ensure compatibility include the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. Unfortunately, as discussed below, the currently proposed site plan for Delray Place does not adequately address these issues. Due to the excessive amount of building area, the proposed site plan does not meet the minimum open space requirements or provide adequate parking for the proposed uses. Nor is there room to provide adequate buffering in some areas. These issues, which are identified in the attached technical comments in Appendix "B ", have been discussed with the applicant over a more than 6 month period. The applicant's response to these concerns is that the overall building area cannot be reduced without rendering the entirety of the project economically infeasible, and that relief will be sought. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property, but not at the level of intensity proposed. For comparison purposes, Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 5 the intensity of other Delray Beach commercial shopping centers on South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard were reviewed. As shown in the table below, the level of intensity proposed for Delray Place significantly exceeds that of these other centers. At a more consistent FAR of 0.24, the total building area of Delray Place would be reduced to approximately 104,000 square feet. The least open space provided in the alternative scenarios included on the site plan is 16.2 %, while 25% is required. If a reduction of 34,000 of building floor area was moved to open space, the total open space would be increased to 24.1 % and the total parking requirement reduced to 416 spaces, as opposed to the 552 spaces required with the current plan (444 spaces provided). A subsequent reduction in parking from 444 to 416 spaces would increase open space to the required 25 %. A reduction in building intensity and subsequent increase in open space would also allow buffering to be better addressed. As noted in the technical comments, the proposed site plan has a much greater impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east than the current office development, especially as it relates to the adjacent single family lots on McCleary Street. The extreme length of the proposed buildings with limited buffering in this area is a concern. Except for the lower connections between buildings, the (5) interconnected 600 to 1000 Buildings present a continuous 700+ feet long, 22 feet high wall located 15 feet from the rear property line of the single family houses. Architecturally, the essentially blank wall of the south elevation of these buildings is reminiscent of a self- storage facility. The 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to adequately buffer the back of these buildings. The closeness of the loading areas for the 500 Buildings is also a concern. Even though the loading docks are enclosed, trucks backing into these spaces will generate noise. An increase in the buffers at these locations is appropriate. This analysis is provided to show what the intensity of the project would have to be to comply with open space and parking requirements with little or no relief. This is not to say that the ultimate intensity cannot be approved above an FAR of 0.24. Maintaining economic feasibility is a concern and some relief may still be needed. Staff is concerned that the current proposal pushes the envelope too far to make a finding of compatibility with the neighborhood. Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) (Total Building Area /Total Land Area) Delray Place 138,130 0.32 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 0.19 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 0.21 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard Future Land Use Element Policy C -1.12: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard. In Fiscal Year 2010111, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 6 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately - initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. LDR SECTION 2.4.5(D)(5) - REZONING FINDINGS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5), in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the City Commission must make findings that the rezoning fulfills at least one of the reasons listed under Subsection (2): (a) That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; (b) That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; or (c) That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and /or neighborhood. The Applicant submitted a statement and supporting documentation addressing this requirement, attached as Appendix "C ". The applicant's statement seeks to justify the rezoning based on all three of the reasons. Staff does not agree with the statement that the original zoning was established in error (item a), since the POC zoning was appropriate given the existing use of the property. The fact that the office development proved not to be economically sustainable and viable over time does not demonstrate an error, it reflects a change in circumstances (item b). Staff concurs that a rezoning to SAD is appropriate based on items "b" and "c" identified above, indicating that there has been a change in circumstances which make the current Planned Office Center (POC) zoning inappropriate. The property is bordered on three sides by commercial zoning districts. The long term operation of an office center (Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility) is less compatible than commercial uses given development that has occurred along both of these corridors, and is not sustainable based on market conditions. This change in circumstances supports the change to allow commercial development similar to the other three corners of the intersection. All zoning districts permitted within the TRN (Transitional) Future Land Use Map designation are subject to a maximum FAR of 1.00, and the proposed shopping center is significantly below that maximum level. Within the TRN designation, the SAD zoning district is the clear choice to allow development of a commercial center while ensuring compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 7 Final approval of the rezoning to SAD will require the inclusion of an approved site plan in the SAD rezoning ordinance. The Site Plan must be approved by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) prior to the second and final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. However, if the site plan is not approved by SPRAB, an appeal must be approved by the City Commission, overturning the SPRAB decision, prior to second and final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. Staff reviewed the applicant's site plan submittal for compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Although revised site plans have not been submitted due to time constraints, the applicant has submitted responses indicating how each comment will be addressed. Staff's comments and the applicant's responses are attached as Appendix "B ". These items must be addressed prior to scheduling review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. From staff's review of the proposed site plan and applicant's responses, it was determined that one variance and five waivers will be required. These include the following: A variance to the 25% open space required (16.2% provided) required by LDR Section 4.3.4(K); 2. A waiver for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(D), "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." 3. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, requiring a 25 foot landscape buffer along South Federal Highway. 4. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, requiring a special landscape area at the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. 5. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, requiring a stacking distance of 50 feet is required between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisleway in a parking lot. 6. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring, landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Although relief can be sought for these identified deficiencies, the applicant maintains that relief is not required for many of the deficiencies due to language in Section 4.4.25(F), "Special Regulations" of the SAD zoning district, which states that any special regulations may be applied through the SAD review and approval process. The "Special Regulations" section is included in all zoning districts and is used to denote special requirements for each zoning district. All zoning districts must comply with the requirements in other sections of the LDRs unless specific provisions, which exempt the district from these requirements, are included in the zoning district. The applicant argues that the "Section F" language gives the unique ability to approve a deficient site plan without appropriate relief to other sections of the LDRs. This is not the case, and staff maintains that relief will be required for the items identified in the technical comments. An additional point of contention between staff and the applicant is related to relief for a deficiency in open space. Pursuant to Section 2.2.4(D), "Duties, Powers, and Responsibilities" of the Board of Adjustment, the Board has the authority to grant variances and hear appeals Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 8 from the provisions of the General Development Standards set forth in Section 4.3. Since required open space is included in Section 4.3.4 "Base District Development Standards" of the LDRs, relief to this section of the LDRs will require a variance. The applicant contends that relief from this section can be accomplished by a waiver. This issue will be needed to be resolved. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." However, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] The proposed site plan shows a substantial reduction (19.7 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 109 spaces. While a waiver is not required, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. Therefore, a parking study must be provided to support this reduction. Additionally, with respect to parking balance, the spaces provided for the buildings along Linton Boulevard have a 28% deficit of 43 spaces from the typical shopping center requirements. Given that four of the five buildings in this area are labeled as potential restaurants, this is a concern. In fact, the number of potential restaurants in the entire shopping center is a concern. Given the limited parking, a reduction in the number of restaurants should be considered. As noted elsewhere in this report, the major issue with the site plan is the level of intensity. There is a direct relationship and balance between building area, open space, and parking. When one component is out of balance, the other components are compromised. This is what is happening with the proposed site plan. The property is just not large enough to accommodate the proposed building area without sacrificing these other components. The result is a project that staff feels is not compatible with the surrounding area. This one issue also has a direct impact on many of the other technical comments identified by staff, such as an 8.8% deficiency in open space, a 19.7% deficiency in parking, failure to meet special landscape setbacks, and inadequate buffering of adjacent residential development. If the SAD rezoning moves forward from this point, the site plan must be modified or relief sought to address the technical comments attached in Appendix "B" prior to consideration by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached) in response to technical comments. Section 4 of the proposed Ordinance states the following: "That any future requested modification to the site plan or development plans which the City would customarily classify as a Class / or Class 11 site plan modification, or any requested amendment which does not change the approved uses, densities, intensities or height for the project, may be approved administratively consistent with the City's land development regulations existing as of the date of this ordinance and such modification shall not be deemed an "amendment" of this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with the public notice and hearing procedure." While this revised ordinance language does address some of staff's concerns with the previous version, it still needs to be revised. Up to this point, the rezoning process has been very inclusive and the developer has had extensive meetings with neighborhood residents to obtain support for this project. The City Commission's suggestion to consider SAD zoning instead of the previously requested PC zoning was specifically aimed at providing the adjacent neighborhood with a level of certainty of what to expect with redevelopment of the site. The SAD language, as proposed, could allow some site plan modifications, which directly impact the neighborhood to be approved administratively. This is in direct opposition to what the SAD Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 9 district was meant to achieve. At a minimum, the revised Ordinance should include the following items: 1. Some Class I and II Site Plan modifications require review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board and cannot be approved administratively. 2. All Site Plan modifications which directly impact the surrounding properties should go to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. These would involve buffering or changes to the rear of buildings adjacent to the neighborhood. 3. A list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use. These uses can be general use categories such as retail, restaurant, services, office, etc. 4. Changes of use or intensity will require modification of the SAD through the rezoning process. 5. Specific items which will ensure compatibility with the adjacent residential development should be listed, such as limiting hours of delivery and service at the rear of the buildings. Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): Standards "A ", "B ", "C ", and "E" are not applicable with respect to this rezoning request. An evaluation of the applicable standards is discussed below: Standard "D" requires that the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land use both existing and proposed, or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, staff does not feel that the proposed site plan for this project is compatible with the surrounding area. The intensity is just too high to allow adequate open space and buffering. The applicant's response is that a reduction in intensity will make the project economically infeasible; relief will be sought to address LDR compliance; and in some cases, the applicant maintains that no relief is required for the SAD district. Since this response does not address the underlying concern with respect to the development intensity depicted on the proposed site plan, a positive finding with respect to Section 3.2.2 cannot be made. Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM Old Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (Planned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, staff does not feel that the proposed site plan for this project is compatible with the surrounding area. The intensity is just too high to allow adequate open space and buffering. The applicant's response is that a reduction in intensity will make the project economically infeasible; relief will be sought to address LDR compliance; and in some cases, the applicant maintains that no relief is required for the SAD district. Since this response does not address the underlying concern with respect to the development intensity depicted on the proposed site plan, a positive finding with respect to Section 3.2.2 cannot be made. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 10 REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and /or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside Public Notices: • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. To date, three emails have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and /or support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The requested rezoning from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), for the subject property is to allow development of the property as a commercial shopping center. Positive findings cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan due to the inability to make positive findings with respect to compatibility with surrounding development. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings), with the condition that the site plan be modified and /or relief be sought to address the technical comments attached in Appendix "B" prior to review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. C. Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings). Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings). (Motion to be made in the affirmative) Attachments: • Location Map • Existing Zoning Map • Proposed Zoning Map • Reduced Plans • SAD Rezoning Ordinance • ULI Report - Ten Principals for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail • Public comments on the project via email Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 12 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by Traf Tech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 3,262 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 82 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 316 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. A letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County is required prior to final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 13 Solid Waste: As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 829.7 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J -5- 005(4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibs /sf = 152.6 tons /year 88,056 SF Retail @10.2 Ibs /sf = 449.1 tons /year 29,366 SF Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibs /sf = 67.5 50,074 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibs /sf = tons /year 623.4 tons /year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibs /sf = 22.7 tons /year Total: 242.8 tons /year Total: 1,072.5 tons /year Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 14 APPENDIX "B" SITE PLAN TECHNICAL COMMENTS AND APPLICANT'S RESPONSES Planning and Zoning Technical Comments: SAD Ordinance: The proposed SAD Ordinance, as it relates to future modifications, does not conform to the normal procedures the City has taken in the past to modify SADs and must be revised. Since the SAD is linked to a specific site plan, modifications of the approved site plan will require the processing of a rezoning. The comment is noted. We would like to further explore the opportunity to limit extensive and otherwise unnecessary duplicitous public hearings for otherwise minor site plan modifications which the City's Land Development Regulations may allow staff to handle administratively. We do not believe that the plain language of the SAD zoning code requires, nor is it the intent of the City Commission, to require such minor revisions to go through the entire rezoning process anew. 2. Compatibility: Pursuant LDR Section 4.4.25(A), Purpose and Intent, "The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing development, and with the proposed character of the area. Additional findings of compatibility are also required under LDR Sections 3.2.2, Standards for Rezoning Actions, and 3.2.3, Standards for Site Plan and /or Plat Actions. The proposed site plan has a much greater impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east than the current office development, especially as it relates to the adjacent single family lots on McCleary Street. The extreme length of the proposed buildings with limited buffering in this area is a concern. Except for the lower connections between buildings, the (5) interconnected 600 to 1000 Buildings present a continuous 700+ feet long, 22 feet high wall located 15 feet from the rear property line of the single family houses. Architecturally, the essentially blank wall of the south elevation of these buildings is reminiscent of a self - storage facility. The 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to adequately buffer the back of these buildings. The closeness of the loading areas for the 500 Buildings is also a concern. Even though the loading docks are enclosed, trucks backing into these spaces will generate noise. Consider reducing the overall building area on the site and increase the buffering in the rear. This will also serve to reduce the parking and open space deficits. RPG held another meeting with the Tropic Isle homeowners, specifically those living along McCleary and Eve Streets, at the Delray Beach Public Library on Wednesday, October 10, 2012, from 6:30pm to 8 :00pm. The intent of the meeting was to ensure their concerns were heard and, to the extent feasible, incorporated into the Delray Place site plan upon resubmittal in response to the City's TAC comments. The various issues presented in the TAC comments were discussed and are addressed individually below: A. Rear Elevations It appears from the meeting that the residents are requesting the removal of the lower connections between buildings facing Linton Boulevard so that there is a continuous wall adjacent to the Tropic Isle neighborhood. The intended goal of this design is to mitigate noise from the patrons of those specific businesses, which noise may otherwise be channeled towards Tropic Isle based upon the present site plan layout. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 15 The residents also appear to have preferred this design to deter patrons from otherwise wandering behind the buildings. Overall, the reduction in height of the existing structure (from 3 stories to 1) coupled with the extensive landscape buffering utilizing very mature existing trees and additional landscaping (as depicted on the Landscape Plan) will sufficiently - if not entirely - screen the project from the view of the neighbors. The assumption therefore that the 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to provide an adequate buffer is sufficiently addressed and mitigated by the extensive landscaping being added as well as the reduced scale and location of the existing buildings in relation to the Tropic Isle homes. B. Loadin_g Areas To accommodate the requests of Tropic Isle residents, RPG designed the loading areas to consolidate as many potential loading zone areas as possible into fewer locations in an attempt to noise from the property. This noise reduction plan had been previously presented to the Tropic Isle Civic Association and over 100 of its residents, all of whom approved of this concept and were appreciative of the additional expense being incurred by RPG to accommodate the neighbors. The McCleary Street and Eve Street residents continued to express concern regarding the location of the loading docks and anticipated noise generated from trucks backing into such locations. RPG has assumed considerable voluntary expense in providing 14 -foot high walls (18 feet from _ground to top inside the loadin_g area) with noise- dampenin_g wall treatments to minimize any noise which may be generated. The McCleary Street and Eve Street residents desire a fully- enclosed loading area, which RPG previously represented to the residents it would explore. However, after review by RPG as to the effectiveness of such a fully- enclosed structure, it has been determined that the extreme cost far outweighs any perceived benefit. Moreover, the need to fully ventilate such a structure with mechanical fans would actually create more noise on a continuous basis than the intermittent noise perceived from deliveries. However, the trash areas for the businesses adjacent to Linton Boulevard will be, as previously represented to the community, fully enclosed. Reason dictates an acknowledgment that ambient commercial noise is a natural part of the South Federal Highway makeup and can ever be eliminated in its entirety from any commercial project. However, this has been appropriately addressed by the City's Land Development Regulations regulating limited hours of permissible and prohibited loading times and strikes the proper balance. C. Reducing Overall Building Area During the most recent neighborhood meeting held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012, the residents suggested a preferred reconfiguration of the buildings facing Linton Boulevard that did not require a reduction of overall building area. RPG's design team is currently intensely evaluating the feasibility of this design suggestion as it relates to the Florida Building Code and Florida Life Safety Code. It must be noted that the existing width of the property adjacent to Linton Boulevard is constrained. It does not allow for relocation of proposed buildings or a reduction in overall building area without rendering the entirety of the project economically Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 16 infeasible and would actually hinder appropriate and necessary pedestrian traffic flow throughout the site as anticipated by retail tenants. 3. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), Development Standards Matrix, the minimum open space required for a project in the SAD zoning District is 25 %. The proposed site plan provides for alternative concepts which provide between 16.2% and 17.12% open space. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a variance. A waiver will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. A suggestion is made for consideration of significant landscape improvements (including an ongoing and perpetual maintenance obligation) relating to Eve Street to augment open space. With regard to all waivers to be submitted, the following is a general statement that we respectfully ask the City to consider as we move forward with this endeavor to replace the aging and mostly vacant office complex on the southeast corner of South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard with a modern retail and dining destination. RPG's principals and development team has a collective 100 years of significant retail site planning experience and have successfully built, own, and continue to manage and operate a portfolio of seven Florida significant retail properties totaling approximately 1.25 million square feet of retail space. Using this successful business experience, coupled with being local residents themselves, the principals of RPG are dedicated to bringing this prominent gateway of the City of Delay Beach back to prominence with a project of quality in every aspect, from exceptional architecture to an exceptional tenant mix. In such regard, and utilizing the intent of the Special Activities District zoning paradigm as suggested by the City Commission, RPG believes site planning elements for this particular project should be judged based upon form and the utilitarian aspect, rather than a zoning paradigm which the SAD construct seeks to avoid. All modern economic development surveys point to the rather long and uncertain land development process as the primary inhibitor to sustainable economic development, particularly in the retail sector. In shopping and dining projects, this long approval process often causes quality tenants to hesitate about coming into new markets when adjacent municipalities may be more inviting or when the immediate surrounding business environment (i.e., South Federal Highway) does not have a proven track record of success. However, working directly in concert with the greater Tropic Isle neighborhood to create a consensus site plan, quality tenants are beginning to feel more confident that they can commit to the South Federal Highway corridor and the Delray Place project. For the residents of the Tropic Isle Civic Association, RPG has taken a close look to court the right mix of tenants by beginning to "put the pieces of the puzzle together" in identifying quality retailers, quality dining options, and neighborhood services and amenities that best meet the present and future needs of the greater South Federal Highway community. This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, RPG worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of quality retail and dining tenant RPG seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 17 RPG remains committed to the continued collaboration with the leadership of the Tropic Isle, Tropic Bay, and the other neighborhood associations to develop a project that is financially feasible and economically sustainable for such an important corner of our City. 4. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), Development Standards Matrix, the minimum perimeter setback required for a project in the SAD zoning District is 15 feet. The 100 Building encroaches into this setback at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway; and it appears that a portion of the loading dock (Loading Area #1) also encroaches. Remove these encroachments or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a variance. The north end of Building 100 on Linton Blvd. will be reduced 5 ft. to provide for the required 15 ft. setback. Loading Area # 1 does not encroach within the 15 ft. setback requirement. 5. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(D), Development Standards, "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." An outdoor dining area is located within the required landscape area adjacent to the 400 building. Remove this encroachment or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. For Building 400, it may be desired to locate a dining tenant at that location, if ultimately feasible. To the extent an outdoor dining area is included within a pedestrian way permitted within a required landscape area, no waivers should be required as this meets code. 6. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, a 25 foot landscape buffer is required along South Federal Highway. Provide the required buffer or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. Dimension the landscape buffer adjacent to the parking areas along South Federal Highway and the distance from the property line to the dumpster adjacent to the 400 Building. Consistent with the elimination of the "Special Landscape Setback" endorsed by the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, RPG has worked with planning staff to meet the intent of this code provision wherever an "urban edge" of buildings has not been provided. Notwithstanding, LDR Section 4.4.25(F) provides that such Special Regulations "may be applied" in SAD projects but are not required. Therefore, seeking relief is not necessary as this is not a "requirement" applicable to the project and may be otherwise addressed through the SAD review and approval process by the City Commission. 7. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, "Along Linton Boulevard, from A - 1 -A to the western City limits, a special landscape area shall be provided. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10). "A 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is required along the deep portion of the property. Provide the required buffers or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. While a 10' buffer is indicated, it appears that the parking overhang encroaches into Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 18 this area. Provide additional dimensioning that clearly shows the dimension of the provided buffer. Additional dimensioning that clearly shows the dimension of the provided buffer will be provided. As stated above, LDR Section 4.4.25(F) provides that such Special Regulations "may be applied" in SAD projects but is not required. Therefore, seeking relief is not necessary as this is not a "requirement" applicable to the project and may be otherwise addressed through the SAD review and approval process by the City Commission. 8. As indicated in the Landscape Comments, an Existing Tree Survey must be provided. The proposed plans seek to remove all of the existing vegetation on the site. There are quite a few mature trees on this site. Where possible, these trees should be incorporated into landscape islands in the parking areas. A tree survey will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 9. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." However, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] The proposed site plan shows a substantial reduction (19.7 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 109 spaces. While a waiver is not required, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. Therefore, a parking study must be provided to support this reduction. Additionally, with respect to parking balance, the spaces provided for the buildings along Linton Boulevard have a 28% deficit of 43 spaces from the typical shopping center requirements. Given that four of the five buildings in this area are labeled as potential restaurants, this is a concern. In fact, the number of potential restaurants in the entire shopping center is a concern. Given the limited parking, a reduction in the number of restaurants should be considered. A parking study will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 10. Parking along the main access drive from South Federal Highway should be minimized to avoid conflicts and improve traffic flow. The handicapped accessible space in this aisle should be relocated. The HC space will be relocated. After reviewing various permutations, the design professionals have determined that the balance of the parking has been designed to be optimized for the usefulness of the site without further reducing parking count. 11. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, a required stacking distance of 50 feet is required. This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. Eve Street is not a "thru street" and therefore we do not believe that the concerns with stacking distance exist. The effective stacking distance is to Federal Highway. The entrances on Linton, as proposed, match existing stacking distances which are twenty -six feet (26). 12. The dumpster enclosures for the 200, 300 and 400 buildings are located adjacent to designated outdoor dining areas for these buildings. This may not be practical due to odor issues. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 19 The areas designated as "outdoor dining areas" on the site plans are for reference only. Actual tenant location is not yet feasible to be determined until final approvals are obtained and requires an examination of desired patron foot traffic circulation. 13. Indicate how trash is handled for the 600,700 and 1000 buildings. There are enclosed trash rooms in buildings 800 and 900 which will be used for all the tenants in buildings 600 -1000. 14. Indicate where grease traps might be located for the potential restaurants. All grease traps will be located under paving in the parking lot. No grease traps will be located behind buildings 500 -510 and 600 -1000. 15. Indicate how loading is handled for the frontage buildings along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The South Federal Highway buildings will primarily use smaller box trucks for loading and temporary loading areas have been provided in between each of the South Federal Highway outparcels next to the trash enclosures. The Linton Boulevard buildings will similarly utilize smaller box trucks due to the limited size of the stores and temporary loading for these smaller premises will be primarily through adjacent loading zones utilized for the larger stores. Delivery of goods will then occur either through the front entrances or, as feasible or necessary under conditions then existing, through the rear tenant entrances. 16. There are only two connections to the external sidewalk system for the entire development. Provide sidewalk connections to all buildings. All other buildings are connected to one another other which satisfy ADA requirements for shopping centers. 17. Provide a sidewalk along Eve Street and connect it to the sidewalk in front of the 506 -510 Building. The Tropic Isle community has expressed a strong concern against the removal the gate on Eve Street. RPG has no plans to remove or relocate, or to request to remove or relocate, the Eve Street gate without the express consent of the Tropic Isle Civic Association. While a sidewalk can be provided on Eve Street, connection of the sidewalk to the front of the 506 -510 building will require modifications to the Tropic Isle security wall and /or Eve Street gate, neither of which RPG has control over. 18. The proposed monument signs will require separate action and site plan approval. Noted. A master sign package will be submitted for the project. 19. It is anticipated that egress from the driveway on Eve Street will cause traffic problems for the adjacent neighborhood if the proposed redesign of the Tropic Square shopping center is not constructed. Redesign this connection to restrict exiting traffic to right -turn only. An alternative design with full turning movements can be provided as an alternative on the site plan approved with the SAD zoning and conditioned on the construction of the Tropic Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 20 Square connection. This alternative design should be coordinated with the Tropic Square proposal. The current design appears to be slightly offset. While RPG agrees in concept, RPG is requesting that the currently proposed site plan depicting the connection with Tropic Square with full turning movements be approved as the primary egress from the driveway on Eve Street, with the alternative design that restricts exiting traffic to right -turn only movements be required only if the Tropic Square cross access connection point is not constructed. 20. Show sight visibility triangles for all driveway connections. Sight triangles will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 21. Indicate the location of bicycle racks on the site plan. Bicycle racks will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 22. Indicate the number of children for the proposed daycare center and provide documentation that the requirements of LDR Section 4.3.3(E), Child Care Facilities, are being met. The location of the daycare center with the outdoor play area adjacent to the single family lots on McCleary Street is problematic. A less impacting location for this use should be sought. The presently identified location of the proposed pre- school facility is problematic for some of the residents of McCleary Street, as expressed to RPG on October 10, 2012, because they did not want to hear children during the day. Assuming the desired use of the premises as identified on the site plan for the proposed pre- school is ultimately sought, RPG will continue to work with the residents to endeavor to find a feasible solution. That being said, provisions for quality pre- schools in Delray Beach are a desired amenity which benefits not only Tropic Isle, but the greater South Federal Highway corridor in general. RPG agrees to comply with the provisions of LDR Section 4.3.3(E), as applicable. 23. Generators are required for all new grocery stores and pharmacies in the City. If these uses are anticipated, consideration should be given where they might be located now to avoid future compatibility issues with adjacent residential development. In the current site configuration, the generator would have to be located on the roof. As a general premise, the intent behind the requirement of a generator for both grocery stores and pharmacies was in response to past power outages resulting from hurricanes and the need to protect the public by preserving perishable goods. The intended food store for Delray Place overwhelmingly does not carry many perishable items but rather mainly dry goods. Likewise, there are no current plans to have a pharmacy use included within the project. 24. Provide a point by point response on how these items are being addressed. Respectfully provided and contained herein. Landscape Technical Comments: 1) A Special Landscape Setback is established for this property along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The Special Landscape Setback along Federal Highway is twenty -five (25') feet. The Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard is fifteen and four /tenths (15.4') feet for the narrow portion (eastern -half) of the site and thirty (30') feet for the wider Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 21 portion (western - half). The City would support building frontage along Federal Highway, however, the Overhead Lines that power the street lights along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard would have to be buried underground. This will allow for more growing space to plant larger canopy trees within the landscape buffer. The project is designed with the "urban edge" building form suggested (but not required for this project) by the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan). Therefore, the Special Landscape Setback should not be applicable for both Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. Burying the power lines is cost - prohibitive. The Landscape Architect will coordinate with the project's Engineer to alleviate possible conflicts between landscaping and utility lines. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 2) An Existing Tree Survey was not submitted. Submit this plan on a separate sheet. All existing trees that have a caliper of 4" or greater must be documented on the plan. Each tree shall be properly identified with a number that can be referenced to a table that lists each species name (botanical and common names), caliper, size (height and spread), condition and proposed action (remain in place, relocate or remove). City staff may or may not agree with all proposed removals and may institute mitigation requirements. More comments will be generated upon review of this submitted document. An existing tree survey will be submitted with the required tabular data as requested. 3) Document on plans where the temporary holding area for all relocated trees will be. Show temporary watering source. Provide a note detailing proper root pruning procedures. The temporary holding area and note will be provided on the resubmitted plans. 4) There are a few instances where the Engineer has placed fire hydrants in landscape islands. Coordinate with Engineer on alternate locations that will not pose a conflict for required canopy trees. All islands are required to contain one (1) canopy tree with specifications of sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven (7') foot spread. The LA will coordinate with the project engineer to alleviate possible conflicts between landscape and utility lines. Fire hydrant locations in landscape islands will be coordinated with the Fire Department to relocate fire hydrants out of the landscape islands if possible. Additionally, an alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 5) All landscape islands are required to contain a canopy tree with the above specifications. Canopy trees are defined as a tree that will attain a minimum spread of twenty (20') feet. Green Buttonwoods, East Palatka Hollies and Sabal Palms are NOT considered canopy trees. Switch to larger growing trees such as Live Oak (many varieties are available), Gumbo Limbo, etc. `Highrise' and `Cathedral' Oaks are popular choices because they grow more vertically before branching out allowing better storefront visibility. The landscape plans will be revised to include alternate species as suggested. 6) All required parking lot trees must be in the form of canopy or shade trees. Palm trees will not be credited towards the interior tree count. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 22 7) Several required landscape islands are missing. Pay particular attention to the parking rows in front of Buildings 600 thru 1000, between Buildings 100 and 200 and along the north side of Eve Street. Parking rows are allowed thirteen (13) standard parking spaces between islands. Parking rows are also required to begin and terminate with a landscape island. All islands are to be curbed and have minimum dimensions of nine (9') in width, exclusive of curbing. Each island shall have a minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF) and contain seventy -five square feet (75 SF) of shrubs and groundcovers and one (1) canopy tree that is sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven (7') foot spread. Make sure all islands are of proper dimensions and contain the required plant material. An alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 8) Several of the required landscape islands do not meet the required minimum width of nine feet (9'), exclusive of curbing. Thus, they do not meet the minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF). Revise all plans and adjust planting plan as needed. An alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 9) All landscape islands are required to contain a minimum of seventy -five (75 SF) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Shrubs shall be placed at the back of the island with low groundcovers in the nose to eliminate sight visibility issues. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. 10) All landscape areas adjacent to vehicular use areas are required to be curbed with Type `D' curb or better. Show on all plans. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. The landscape islands will be curbed with Type D curb. 11) Per LDR 4.6.16(H)(4), all buildings shall have foundation trees spaced so that their canopies will be touching at maturity. Size specifications are to adhere to the chart listed within this regulation. This requirement has not been met for Buildings 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 500- 504 and 506 -510. No Foundation trees have been proposed. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 12) All existing soil within landscape areas adjacent to vehicular use areas is required to be removed (to 30" below grade), inspected and then replaced with a sixty to forty (60/40) mix of sand to topsoil, native soil that has been screened of rock or another mixture suggested by the Landscape Architect. Provide note on plans. Include in plans the illustration found in LDR 4.6.16(H)(3)(n). Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 23 13) Show sight triangles on landscape plans and modify design to accommodate visibility between 3' -6' above grade within triangles. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 14) Show light poles on landscape plans. Coordinate with Engineer to move light poles so that potential conflict between tree canopy and light pole is minimized. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 15) A Landscape Maintenance Agreement will be required for those plantings outside the property line. This applies particularly to the plantings along Eve Street. This agreement shall be submitted prior to submittal of building permits to be executed by City Commission. Noted. RPG is further suggesting significant landscape improvements (including an ongoing and perpetual maintenance obligation) relating to Eve Street to further satisfy open space requirements. 16) The plant palette along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard lacks vivid colors. Incorporate more flowering and colorful plants into these areas. For example, use Muhly or Red Fountain Grass instead of Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass. Croton varieties such `Mammy' will add a splash of red. Trinettes and Variegated Ginger will help make the landscape pop with their greens and yellows. In other words, use plants that add a variety of colors (reds, yellows, purples) in addition to green. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 17) Specify Crinum augustum `Queen Emma' as the Crinum of choice. It performs much better and is more attractive. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 18) Extend the landscape beds along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard outward to incorporate the proposed trees so that the landscape is completely unified rather than throwing trees out in an oasis of sod. Typically, trees incorporated within landscape beds of shrubs and groundcovers looks much better than those planted in an area surrounded by sod. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this suggestion. Preliminary Engineering Technical Comments: Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. Contained herein. 2. Provide copy of certified boundary and topographic survey meeting requirements of LDR Section 2.4.3 (A), (B) and (D). Existing grades should be taken at least 10 -feet outside all subject property lines for all adjacent properties per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20). Survey shall provide sufficient information to determine historical drainage pattern. Survey shall include all existing easements. This will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 24 3. Provide Survey completed within the last 6 months per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (5). This will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 4. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1) and (D) (1). Civil plans will be resubmitted at the same scale as the survey, site plan, and landscaping plans. Due to the size of the center and in and in effort to avoid match lines, the planner has agreed to a 1 " =50' scale. 5. Provide Civil Plans with existing and proposed spot elevations showing changes of elevations of not more than 2 -feet, throughout the site and at a minimum distance of 10 -feet into all adjacent properties per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20) and (D) (2). Provide sufficient elevations to ensure proposed improvements will not have a negative impact on surrounding drainage and to establish historical storm water flow. Complete site grading will be provided on final engineering plans. 6. Provide existing elevations on existing roadway including edge of pavement and center line. This will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 7. Clearly indicate limits of right -of -way and center line of the right -of -way of any adjacent streets with the basis of the center line clearly stated; the center line of the existing pavement; the width of the street pavement; the location and width of any adjacent sidewalk; and the identification of any improvements located between the property and any adjacent street per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (5). This will be provided with the resubmittal of p 8. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. The existing easements are shown on the survey. Proposed easements will be added to the engineering plans. 9. Indicate sight distances at all ingress /egress points and all intersections. Sight triangles must be indicated on Landscape and Engineering plans per LDR Section 4.6.14. All visual obstructions within the site visibility shall provide unobstructed cross - visibility at a level between 3 -feet and 6 -feet, this includes tree trunks. Sight triangles are to be measured from the edge of pavement for driveways and from the ultimate right -of -way line for alleys and streets. The sight distances at ingress / egress points will be added to the engineering plans. 10. Indicate sight visibility triangles in accordance with the FDOT Design Standard Index 546, Sight Distance at applicable FDOT intersections. Sight visibility triangles per FDOT Index 546 will be added to the engineering plans. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 25 11. Provide a minimum 10 -foot General Utility Easement (GUE) through the property for all other utilities. This GUE is not allowed in public right -of -way. Water, sewer or drainage system(s) cannot occupy or share this GUE. The required 10' GUE will be provided at final engineering. 12. Indicate location of required FPL easements. The required FPL easements will be provided at final engineering. 13. If project phasing is proposed, such phases need to be clearly shown on the plans and a narrative describing the phasing program provided per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (22). Please indicate phasing plan on Civil Plans and clearly indicate how this would affect proposed improvements; specifically water and sewer improvements. This project is not expected to be phased at this time. 14. Please take into consideration constructability, health department releases, road closures, re- paving, inconvenience to local residence, etc. when developing a civil phasing plan. Acknowledged. 15. Palm Beach County Health Department permits required for this project. Permits will have to be phased in accordance with construction phasing so Health Department releases do not hold -up Certificate of Occupancy issuance by the Building Permit Department. Palm Beach County Health Department permits for water and sewer will be obtained prior to final engineering approval. 16. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d). Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. A Palm Beach County Right -Of -Way Permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval for the existing drainage connection to the Linton Boulevard drainage system. 17. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) permit(s) required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (c). Submit copy of FDOT pre - application letter. An FDOT Drainage permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval because the project is adjacent to the FDOT right -of -way of Federal Highway. No driveway connection permit is required because we are not proposing any improvements within the FDOT right -of -way of Federal Highway. 18. South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD) permit, permit modification or Letter of "No Notice" required for this project in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.6(J). Provide Letter of "No Notice" from SFWMD or pre - application correspondence with SFWMD regarding proposed project. If project qualifies for a "No Notice General Permit for Activities in Uplands," submit specific criteria in accordance with Section 40E- 400.315 and Section 40E- 400.316 of the Florida Administrative Code to City of Delray Beach Engineering Division for consideration; otherwise, submit to SFWMD for determination. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 26 This project has already been submitted to SFWMD as application 120906 -4. The SFWMD permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval. 19. Provide Demolition Plans at a scale to match Civil Plans. Include any underground utilities to be removed or abandoned in place. Provide notes that state the disposition of all existing facilities including service lines and cleanouts. Demolition plans for the site will be provided at final engineering. 20. Clearly dimension driveway width on Civil Plans. The driveway dimensions will be provided on a horizontal control plan at final engineering. 21. Indicate handicap spaces are to be provided in accordance with LDR Section 4.6.9 (D)(8)(d); City of Delray Beach Construction Standard Detail RT 4.2; and the Florida Building Code, Chapter 11, Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Handicapped parking spaces need to be paved, properly marked, and ramp and curb cuts provided if required. Handicap spaces that are paved, marked, and with curb ramps will be provided in accordance with LDR Section 4.6.9 (D) (8)(d), City of Delray Beach Construction Detail RT 4.2, and the Florida Building Code Chapter 11 at final engineering. 22. Provide ADA compliant access from the parking space to the building. ADA compliant access will be provided from the parking space to the building at final engineering. 23. Provide note that parking layout and striping needs to follow City of Delray Beach current standards. Provide latest Parking Lot Detail RT 4.1 and Typical Parking Space Details RT 4.2 A thru C, as applicable on Civil Plans. On plan view, indicate double striping at parking spaces. Parking and striping layout will follow City of Delray Beach current standards at final engineering. 24. Provide finished floor elevation. In accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 (B) (2), if finished floor elevation is less than 18- inches above centerline of adjacent road, but above the 100 - year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above the flooding level. It must be shown that the property will have adequate drainage to ensure that flooding will not occur in a 100 - year, 3 -day storm event. A letter from a professional engineer will be provided at final engineering that certifies the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed finished floor elevation is above the 100yr -3day flood stage. 25. Provide finish floor elevations for nearest adjacent structures / buildings abutting all property boundaries. This will be provided on the revised survey. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 27 26. Provide signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. /24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10yr -24hr storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. 27. Show nearest existing drainage structures per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (3). This will be provided on the revised survey. 28. Provide note indicating that no landscaping shall be planted over any exfiltration trenches on Civil Plans. A note will be provided on the final engineering plans that states "No landscaping shall be planted over any exfiltration trench ". 29. Provide drainage easements for all proposed private drainage systems in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. Drainage easements will be shown over the private drainage system on the final engineering plans in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. 30. Provide a separate tap for irrigation, domestic water and fire lines. Separate taps are shown for the irrigation, water, and fire lines on the Conceptual Water and Sewer Plan (C2) submitted. 31. Provide separate tap from water main for single or double water service connections per City standard detail PW 9.2, revise accordingly. The water service connections will be provided per City standard detail PW 9.2 on the final engineering plans. 32. Provide a second valve at fire hydrant for runs that exceed 20 -feet, per City Standard detail PW 5.1 (see note #7). A second valve will be added to the fire hydrant runs that exceed 20'. 33. Provide double valves at connection points for new mains to existing mains, not at service lines. Double valves will be provided at the connections to existing mains. 34. Indicate typical configuration and location of proposed sewer services with cleanouts. A cleanout will be required on the existing sewer service at a maximum distance of 18- inches from the right -of -way line and /or easement line per City of Delray Beach Standard Detail Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 28 WW 4.1. At locations where this cannot be obtained, an exclusive sewer easement will be required up to the first clean -out. The location of proposed sewer services with cleanouts will be provided. 35. Provide on the detail sheet City of Delray Beach Standard Detail WW 4.1, WW 5.1 or 5.2 (as applicable). The applicable City details will be provided with final engineering plans. 36. Indicate grease trap(s) will be installed in accordance with City of Delray Beach Minimum Construction Standards and Specifications. Grease traps will be provided in accordance with the City of Delray Beach Minimum Construction Standards and Specification on final engineering plans. 37. Provide 12 -foot exclusive water and 12 -foot exclusive sewer easement over water and sewer mains, respectively. Water and sanitary sewer lines cannot share a 12 -foot easement. Separate 12' water and sewer easements will be shown. 38. Provide the following note on both the Engineering Plans and the Landscape Plans that, "any trees or shrubs placed within water, sewer or drainage easements shall conform to the City of Delray Beach Standard Details; LD 1.1 & LD 1.2." These Details are to be shown on the Landscape Plans. The note "Any trees or shrubs placed within the water, sewer, or drainage easements shall conform to the City of Delray Beach Standard Details LD 1.1 and LD 1.2" will be added to the engineering plans. 39. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 10 -feet between water mains and storm or sanitary sewers; refer to City Standard Detail PW 2.1 for other City design criteria. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' will be provided between water mains and storm / sanitary sewers. 40. Provide note indicating, "No proposed improvements, buildings or any kind of construction can be placed on or within any water, sewer or drainage easements, unless approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer." A note indicating "No proposed improvements, buildings, or any other kind of construction can be placed on or within any water, sewer, or drainage easements, unless otherwise approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer" will be added to the engineering plan. 41. Provide note indicating, "No proposed structures shall be installed within a horizontal distance of 10 -feet from any existing or proposed water, sewer or drainage facilities, unless approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer." A note indicating "No proposed structures shall be installed within a horizontal distance of 10' from any existing or proposed water, sewer, or drainage facilities, unless otherwise approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer" will be added to the engineering plan. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 29 42. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 6 -feet between water main / connection and right - of -way and /or easement line. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' between water mains and the easement / right - of -way line will be provided. 43. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 6 -feet between sanitary sewer main / connection and right -of -way and /or easement line. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' between sanitary sewer mains and the easement/ right -of -way line will be provided. 44. Provide details for all water, sewer and drainage conflicts. Provide both bottom and top elevations at all conflict locations on profile sheets. This will be checked during the Building Permit review process. Details for water, sewer, and drainage conflicts will be provided on final engineering plans. 45. Provide signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated flows into existing or proposed lift station and force main. Written approval from the Deputy Director of Public Utilities stating that the City's system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows is required. Signed and sealed calculations indicating the current and proposed flows into the existing City system will be provided. 46. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. A composite utility plan will be provided. 47. The Composite Utility Plan (or Composite Overlay Plan) needs to include all existing and proposed overhead and underground utilities; all existing and proposed light poles; all existing and proposed easements; all existing and proposed improvements to hardscape and landscape. The Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features and existing or proposed utilities do not conflict with each other. A composite utility plan will be provided. 48. Indicate City approved bus shelter and mass transit easement will be provided per City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan, Policy A -1.5. New residential projects with over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet which are adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops are required to provide an easement and install a City approved bus shelter on site. If project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or bus shelter already exist, a contribution made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site is required. Acknowledged. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 30 49. If bus shelter required, please indicate on plans a City approved bus shelter will be installed in accordance with Palm Tran and ADA requirements (eg. 5' x 8' landing area, 30' from intersection, direct access to site, etc). Acknowledged. 50. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. Acknowledged. 51. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. Acknowledged. 52. Final Engineering comments will also be generated after submittal of Final Engineering Plans for the Building Permit. Acknowledged. Fire Department Technical Comments: 1. Indicate fire code reference — Florida Fire Prevention Code 2010 Edition, NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition, NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, 2009 Florida Edition. 2. Maintain inside turning radius of 25 feet in fire lanes for fire apparatus. 3. Post of symbols on buildings for light frame truss type construction. 4. Identify fire hydrant locations. Commercial and business districts not more than 300 feet between hydrants. As measured by way of road travel. Provide clearances of seven and one half feet (7' 6 ") in front of and to the sides of the fire hydrant, with a four feet (4') clearance to the rear of the hydrant. 5. Maximum 100' distance from Fire Department Connections to a fire hydrant. Fire Department Connections shall be identified by a sign stating "No Parking. Fire Department Connection" and shall be designed in accordance with FDOT standards for information signage. Provide clearances of seven and one half feet (7'6") in front of and to the side of these appliances. 6. Knox Box access at main entrance for all buildings. 7. Fire Sprinkler and fire alarm systems — central station monitored for buildings B — 500 — 504 and B — 506 — 510. Separate permits required. 8. Show fire lanes in front of retail buildings 500 - 504 and 506 - 510. See Section 18.2.3.5.3 NFPA 1 Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition. 9. Building 1000 - New Day - Care Occupancy - Remote supervising station fire alarm system required. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 31 10. Dead end fire department roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for fire apparatus to turn around. See Section 18.2.3.4.4 NFPA 1 Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 32 APPENDIX "C" APPLICANT'S STATEMENT - SECTION 2.4.5(D)(5) REZONING FINDINGS 1. OVERVIEW OF SAD (SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT) ZONING. The new Delray Place neighborhood commercial retail center is the next evolution of modern urban redevelopment that seeks to amenitize surrounding residential uses in an appropriate scale, taking into consideration that the quality of retail tenant is the strongest driver in sustaining the quality of any given project. Retail Property Group ( "RPG "), the project's developer, is very excited to be able to implement the City Commission's desire to utilize the SAD (Special Activities District) zoning for this site as a way to design the center, tied to a site plan, which the adjacent Tropic Isle /Tropic Bay community has had extensive collaborative input. Rather than simply performing the Euclidean zoning function of "separating incompatible land uses," the City's SAD zoning is a modern zoning and land use regulatory processes utilized in both urban centers and outlying suburban areas that is intended to promote the public welfare by attempting to shape the creation of integrated, functional, and aesthetically pleasing communities. Further, SAD zoning allows the City to incorporate, rather than be at odds with, proven market -based realities. Through innovative regulatory techniques such as SAD zoning, RPG intends to implement a host of diverse uses complimentary to the desired economic vibrancy of the South Federal Highway corridor and remain respectful to the social, cultural, environmental and aesthetic concerns of the adjacent Tropic Isle /Tropic Bay communities. See generally, Meshenberg, "The Administration of Flexible Zoning Techniques" 3-4 (1976) (American Planning Association, PAS Rept. No. 318). The adoption by communities of flexible zoning design incorporating site plan specific review has proven to be an important land use regulatory device in facilitating high quality, innovative and integrated development projects which traditional Euclidian zoning often cannot accommodate. Also, the design flexibility afforded by SAD zoning (which is analogous to planned development review) allows of responsiveness to changing consumer preferences and economic and fiscal conditions as well as in controlling public service and infrastructure costs by generally providing better planning for and increased control over new development has led to widespread utilization of this regulatory technique. See generally, Moore & Siskin, "PUDS In Practice," 3 -12 (1985) (Urban Land Institute). See also Baers, "Zoning Code Revisions to Permit Mixed Use Development', 7 Zoning & Plan. L. Rep. 81, 82 (1984), wherein the author notes the following as potential benefits of flexible development: (1) provide a transition zone between single purpose land use districts; (2) achieve close proximity among employment centers, cultural and recreational uses, and residential areas; (3) enhance the vitality which comes from the interplay among various activities; (4) use space efficiently and economically, relieving development pressure on rural and agricultural land; (5) preserve older, but sound housing, which is often located within or adjacent business districts. In short, the City's SAD zoning ordinance acknowledges the need to embrace the evolutionary change and the natural process of land development that juxtaposes older, imbedded land uses and newer, more profitable ones as well as local shopping activities, which create the need for commercial uses in even relatively stable neighborhoods. It is within this paradigm that RPG proposes the new Delray Place retail development to compliment the neighborhood and to serve as the catalyst for the revitalization of the entire South Federal Highway corridor. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 33 2. COMPLIANCE WITH REZONING STANDARDS OF LDR SECTION 2.4.5(D)(2). City of Delray Beach Land Development Regulation Section 2.4.5(D) sets forth the requirement that "a statement of the reasons for which the change is being sought" to accompany any application for rezoning of property. (a) That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error. The City's records regarding the property reveal the following to be correct: The property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach from unincorporated Palm Beach County in the 1970's. The property was assigned the Future Land Use Map designation of Transitional (TRN) and a zoning of SAD (Special Activities District) and it was developed with three office buildings and associated parking simultaneously with the annexation. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center) and retained the Future Land Use Map Designation of TRN (Transitional).' It therefore appears that the prior rezoning by the City from SAD to POC was predicated upon the fact than an office building existed on the property at the time of its annexation and that such a use was economically sustainable and viable. This has proven to be untrue. See, e.g., Mayor and Council of Rockville v. Stone, 271 Md. 655, 319 A.2d 536, 541 (1974) ( "On the question of original mistake, this Court has held that when the assumption upon which a particular use is predicated proves, with the passage of time, to be erroneous, this is sufficient to authorize a rezoning."). (b) That there has been a change in circumstances which makes the current zoning inappropriate. The City's Planning & Zoning staff has identified that changing the zoning at this location "will formally acknowledge what the market trend has already indicated." 2 It has been repeatedly acknowledged, as recently as the City Commission hearing on this application on April 3, 2012, that this corner at Linton Blvd. and South Federal Highway has been unable to sustain office - type uses and the repeated demand for new, complimentary retail to amenitize and serve the adjacent Tropic Isle community, the beach property owners, and their respective environs, remains great. Staff has agreed, stating: Residential and general commercial uses are both compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Existing trends repeatedly point to the need to have this property's zoning designation returned to its former SAD to allow an economically sustainable neighborhood retail center to be developed. The City's Planning & Zoning staff has again acknowledged the need for this zoning map change in its prior staff report of February 27, 2012, when it was concluded: "The commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and the Federal Highway /Linton 1 See, City of Delray Beach, Staff Report to Planning & Zoning Board, February 27, 2012. 2 See, City of Delray Beach, Staff Report to Planning & Zoning Board, February 27, 2012, pg. 3. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 34 Boulevard intersection has become a robust commercial hub. An office use at this location represents an economically unfeasible use of the property that the market trend has clearly identified as suited for commercial use." C. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and /or neighborhood. Objective A -1 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that property shall be redeveloped in a manner so that the use and intensity is appropriate and complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. The proposed SAD zoning designation would be complimentary to the surrounding commercial and residential properties. Moreover, the change in zoning to SAD will provide an appropriate and necessary land pattern for the South Federal Highway corridor with the implementation of a neighborhood retail center. The Urban Land has repeatedly recognized the need for neighborhood serving retail centers near residential communities :3 The decline of neighborhood retailing has had a profound effect on the desirability of many urban neighborhoods and communities. The convenient availability of goods and services is a key factor that people consider when choosing a place to live, and neighborhoods without suitable retailing are dramatically weakened. Residents who can afford it, leave, and potential new residents choose to live somewhere else. In this type of environment, communities cannot be sustained over the long term. By the tailoring of more specific and distinct restrictions to particular land areas, particularly when coupled with a development review process that provides for specific site -plan and design review, the utilization of the SAD zoning district significantly enhances the project and the neighbor by affording a measure of flexibility and discretion in regulating land use and development not found in traditional Euclidean zoning regimes. 3 See, "Ten Principles for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail' (2003). The Urban Land Institute, is a 501(c) (3) nonprofit research and education organization supported by its members. Founded in 1936, ULI has members worldwide, representing the entire spectrum of land use and real estate development disciplines working in private enterprise and public service. As a multidisciplinary real estate forum, ULI facilitates an open exchange of ideas, information, and experience among industry leaders and policy makers dedicated to creating better places. Delray Place Correspondence Hoggard, Ron From: Peggy Paterra <ppaterra @gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:22 PM To: Breto, Estelio; Hoggard, Ron; Dorling, Paul; Alan Margolis Cc: Joe Carosella; Kelli Freeman Subject: Proposed shopping center - Delray Place I recently attended a presentation proposing the construction of Delray Place by Retail Property Group, Inc. As a 12 -year resident of Tropic Isle, I personally welcome the proposed shopping center which will be an asset to the community in my opinion. After the meeting I spoke to both their lawyer and directly to Joe Carosella, the developer, regarding my concerns about traffic in the area. I made the suggestion that there should be an alternate entrance to the new shopping center that would accommodate both Tropic Isle and Tropic Bay communities (as well as the other residences in that neighborhood) by giving access to shopping without having to join the traffic on Federal Highway or Linton Blvd. This could be from either Tropic Blvd. or Spanish Trail and would accommodate 3 types of traffic - auto, bicycle and pedestrian - from this area. One excellent solution would be to utilize the existing entrance into Delray Square from Tropic Blvd. and create a pass- through road to Delray Place. I would think it would make access much more convenient and far safer for our residents, as well as alleviating the traffic load on the highways for others coming to the new area merchants, making those highways safer as well. At the same time, there would be no traffic increase to Tropic Isle streets since residents would have to go onto Tropic Blvd. anyway to get to Federal Highway. A Spanish Trail alternative would make for more congestion on that street - and I'm not sure of the status of the road with a gate that exists there now. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I believe there are 450 residences in Tropic Isle, and hundreds of condos in Tropic Bay and other communities in this section of town (East of Federal.) The proposed traffic pattern of having one entrance on Federal Hwy. and one exit on Linton Blvd. would be prone to excessive congestion at the peak times of day or season (think Christmas ?) The volume of traffic at that busy intersection (Federal and Linton) varies from season to season and from hour to hour, but with all the new development going on at that intersection - new stores coming in to all four corners, I've heard, it would seem to me that the traffic volume is going to increase substantially, including many tractor trailers which we rarely have now. The patterns of having traffic making u- turns on Federal Hwy. and / or Linton Blvd. are also a concern to me. We currently have some vehicles making u -turns at Tropic Blvd. and it becomes a problem when drivers don't always follow the rules of safety and courtesy (or the law!) So, please consider the above in planning for upgrading of this area. We have a lovely, quiet waterfront community in here and take great pride in our neighborhood. In order to make the proposed project a true enhancement to the community, I hope you will take a long hard look at what will make the project one which we can all be proud to support. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Peggy Paterra 915 Dogwood Drive Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cell Phone: 561 - 702 -0428 z Hoggard, Ron From: Truxell, Rebecca Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 4:29 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place Please see email below sent to PZ Mail. Rebecca Truxe# Administrative Assistant /Secretary to SPRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning & Zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning & Zoning Department City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone: 561.243.7040 Fax: 561.243.7221 truxel l@mydelraybeach.com From: csmith727 [ma ilto :csmith727(abellsouth.net] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 8:18 AM To: PZmaikaMyDelrayBeach.com Subject: Delray Place I attended the meeting in Tropic Isles recently to learn about the proposal for a new development at the corner of Linton & Federal Hwy. I was extremely impressed by the presentation given by the architect and engineers involved! There has been a great deal of thought put in with regard to providing up -scale tenants for'Delray Place' (an asset to our community), and details as to the limitation of noise /odors (which could potentially affect Tropic Isles). I am in favor of this development 100 %. The rendering provided is not only cosmetically beautiful but it affords a retail outlet that has long been awaited. This will be a great asset to our community. I look forward to the building of Delray Place. Sincerely, Christine Smith Cypress Drive Truxell, Rebecca From: R. Van Gernert <superone @ix.netcom.com> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:12 AM To: aaaa - TEST TO MYSELF Subject: FAILURE TO GIVE PROPER NOTIFICATION UNDER THE LAW I am forwarding the following letter to you so you are aware what is happening. 1 delivered this letter yesterday Oct. 11, 2012, to Mayor McDuffie; City Attorney, Brian Shutt; Planning and Zoning Board Director, Paul Dorling; and City Manager, Harden. I also copied the letter and filed a complaint with the State Attorney General, Pam Bundi, since State law is involved. Thank you for your continued dedication to a better Delray Beach. Your efforts on behalf of the residents are deeply appreciated. Richard Van Gemert URGENT - READ IMMEDIATELY Oct. 11, 2012 Mr. Paul Dorling Director of Planning & Zoning Board City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Ave. Delray Beach, FL Re: Notification of Rezoning Hearing for Delray Place (Corner Linton Blvd. & Fed. Hwy.) Dear Mr. Dorling; Under Section 2.4.2 (A) (1) of the City of Delray Beach Ordinances, it states as follows: (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (b) Privately Initiated Rezoning: Notice Requirements contained within the applicable sections of Florida Statutes Chapter 166 shall apply. Additional notice shall be given before the Planning and Zoning Board hearing in accordance with Section 2.4.2(B)(1)(j) (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv). [Amd.Ord.78 -04 1/18/051; [Amd. Ord. 60 -95 10/24/95] (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (j) Additional Public Notice: When a section of these Land Development Regulations requires additional notice pursuant to this section, 'the additional notice shall be sent in accordance with one or more of the following: [Amd.Ord. 78 -04 1/18/051; [Amd. Ord. 8 -97 2/18/971 (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (j) Additional Public Notice (iii): Notice posted by the City on the affected property by placing one placard visible from each adjoining right -of- way or on each street block face, at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing. The placard shall be prepared by the City and shall identify the action to be considered and state the time and place of the hearirig. The placard shall be removed by the City within five (S) business days after the date the public hearing is held. Photographic documentation of the posted placard shall be placed in the file to document the posting of the placard. [Amd.Ord. 78- 041/18/05] Page 2, Letter to Paul Dorling, Delray Planning & Zoning Board, Oct. 11, 2012, This letter is my formal notification to you that the above requirements have not been met as set forth in the laws of the City of Delray Beach and the State of Florida. Although placards were posted on Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., no placards were posted on the property facing Eve Street, Spanish Trail, or at the head of McCleary Street, as required by law. The placards must be up seven days before the meeting. Therefore the public hearing for Delray Place, scheduled to be held before the Planning and Zoning Board on Oct. 15, 2012, must be withdrawn since it is not in compliance with the legal requirements set forth by the laws of the City and State. I ask that you comply with the regulations, by notifying all parties concerned, that this item has been withdrawn from the agenda for that date, and a new date will be set, to be announced. I empathize with your staff and the applicant for this postponement but it is important that you comply with every aspect of the law to avoid further complications. I have taken the liberty to copy this letter to the Attorney General, State of Florida, along with the City of Delray Mayor, City Manager, and City Attorney, to make them aware of-this situation. Sincerely, Richard Van Gernert 912 Eve Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cc: Attorney General, State of Florida, Pamela Jo "Pam" Bondi Mayor, Nelson S. "Woodie" McDuffie City Manager, Mr. David T. Hardin City Attorney, R. Brian Shutt, Esq. Truxell, Rebecca From: FRANCIOSA4DELRAY @ aol.com Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 7:35 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca; Harden, David; McDuffie, Woodie; Shutt, Brian Subject: Re: Paul Dorling's Response Letter to Richard Van Gemert Rebecca, Please pass this email on to the other P & Z board members and to Paul Doi-ling: Paul: I received an email from Richard Van Gemert stating in essence that the public notification of the upcoming meeting for the'Delray Place rezoning was not properly posted. My question is can you provide documentation that all the requirements of the LDR's were meet concerning public notice of the public hearing for the Delray Place. In the letter Mr Van Germert stated "no placards were posted on the property facing Eve Street, Spanish Trail, or at the head of McCleary Street, as required by law" and further the LDR requirement as asserted by Mr. Van Gemert... "Notice posted by the City on -the affected property by placing one placard visible from each adjoining right -of -way or on each street block face, at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing. As I mentioned has this been done and do you have documentation as required by the LDR... Photographic documentation of the posted placard shall be placed in the file to document the posting of the placard. [Amd.Ord. 78 -04 1/18/05]. Thank you, Gerald Franeiosa In a message dated 10/12/2012 4:23:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truxell mydelra beach.com writes: Good afternoon, Attached please find a copy of Mr. Dorling's response letter to Mr. Richard Van Gemert regarding Notification of Rezoning Hearing for Delray Place. Please let us know if you have any questions. Regards, Administrative Assistant /Secretary to SPRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning & Zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning & Zoning Department City of Delray Beach Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Delray Place South Federal Highway From: Robert Wiebelt [mai Ito: bob@delrayl2laza.com] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 12:20 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Cc: Bob Wiebelt Subject: Delray Place South Federal Highway To -the Delray Beach Planning & Zoning Dept: My name is Robert Wiebelt. I live at 955 Jasmine Drive in Tropic Isles. Also, I am the owner of the Delray Plaza located at 2275 South Federal Highway. The Delray Plaza is located in the heart of the South Federal Highway corridor, which is being considered in the current Redevelopment Plan. I have many important concerns regarding what has been proposed for the area in which I live and have worked for over 60 years. OF PRIME IMPORTANCE is the shopping center proposed by the Retail Property Group for the corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway. Considering that over 50% of the commercial property in the corridor is zoned automotive, their proposed shopping center is an ideal asset to South Federal Highway. Further, I think this center would be just the catalyst for change that we have long needed in our area! My wife and 1 attended the neighborhood workshop that the Retail Property Group sponsored. They provided a detailed rendering of the proposed shopping center and revealed the names of tenants that are considering opening in the center. Also, they assembled their whole group of professionals to consider and thoughtfully answer everyone's concerns. Clearly, the Retail Property Group have seriously considered the issues of commercial deliveries and trash pick -up. They have come up with logical solutions. The proposed elevations of the buildings are not offensive, nor do they detract from neighboring properties. The Retail Property Group is a "hands on" group of professionals. Their proposed shopping center will be the catalyst for a vibrant revitalization of South Federal Highway. PLEASE VOTE TO APPROVE THE DELRAY PLACE SHOPPING CENTER! Sincerely, Bob Wiebelt Tropic Isles Resident Owner of the Delray Plaza Truxell, Rebecca From: Nancy Richards <nd rich @bellsouth,net> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 11:13 AM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com Subject: Delray Place re- zoning I am writing to voice my support for the re- zoning of the SE corner of Federal Hwy and Linton Blvd from General Office to SAD so that the Delray Place project can move forward. The city of Delray Beach needs quality re- development on this lot, and I believe RPG's plans will give the city just this. They have a good reputation, from what I've gathered, and will be managing the development themselves. That self - management tells me that they want to keep their good name clean, and keep the quality high. Also, there is a small group of Tropic Isle residents who are very vocal in their opposition to this plan. If you talk to them, they are opposed to anything and everything that has been proposed. They do not want retail, as you are certainly aware. They do not want the complex razed and developed into Class A office space, since taller and bigger buildings would be called for. They do not want State government offices and telemarketers to move into the current office complex. In my opinion, they like a run -down, nearly empty, quiet_ office building and pretend that it does not attract the homeless element during the night. I want to stress that these people in opposition, from discussions I've had with neighbors, are a very small minority of Tropic Isle residents. The rest of the people I speak with want quality development on the corner that complements our neighborhood and enhances our quality of life. To sum, please do not be swayed by -the vocal minority. Best regards, Nancy Richards 934 Cypress Drive Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 702 -0550 Truxell, Rebecca From: Jilly Cammisa < Jilly @premierestateproperties.com> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 3:29 PM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; McDuffie, Woodie; Carney, Tom Subject: For Delray Place Dear Commissioners, I'm writing to give my support for the Delray Place proposed plans on the SE Corner of Linton Blvd. As a residential Estate Agent, who lives and works in Tropic Isle, I believe this is a sound project for our neighborhood. i like the architectural plans, I like the fact they aim to appeal to high end retail companies and would be very happy to see Trader toes as one of their Tenants. This would be the best market place for all of us. I'm also encouraging a high end personal training gym to choose this location for their premises as I believe it will be an asset for everyone living on the Island side and for residents south of Atlantic Avenue. We have been waiting for a high end Mall -- remember in Tropic Isle, Boca Raton promised us another "Mizner" where the now failed Theatre is. Given the surge of rental developments in the area, traffic is definitely on the increase. As long as we can get sufficient off road parking, I believe the location is perfect for Retail space. On the other hand, the "shed" development of the Ralph Buick property is of great concern and I will oppose plans for that. I'm sorry I'm not able to attend this evening's meeting. Yours sincerely, Jilly Cammisa Estate Agent 561.665.8181 Direct 561.278.8188 Office 561,271,7010 Mobile 561.278.7188 Facsimile premierestateproperties.com Jllynprcm ieres tafeproperties. com 900 East Atlantic Avenue, Boutique 4, Delray Beach, Florida 33483 Presenting Properties Exclusively In Excess Of One Million Dollars Notice of Confidentiality; This e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and use oft he addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which is legal I privileged from disclosure and /or otherwise confidential_ If a recipient oft his a -mail communication is net an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re- transmission or other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited_ If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender either by reply e -mail or by telephone at 561, 394,7700, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same Thank you. A4M/AE0 OU 7` HEM H. UURAN NIEMI, P.A. ESQUIRE 7634 NW 6T" AVE, BOLA RAf'ON FL 33487 PHONE 561 - 994 -0280 FAX 561- 994 -0270 Date: October 15, 2012 To: Kelli A. Freeman, President 1730 S. Federal Highway, Unit 145 Delray Beach, FL 33483 Ronald Hoggard Planning and Zoning Department City Hall 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Re: Proposed Rezoning for Delray Place initiated by the property owner Dear Ms. Freeman and Mr. Hoggard, Please be advised that I have been asked to represent Stroms, LLC in certain legal matters. Stroms, LLC recently purchased a property located at 1801 Spanish Trail, Delray Beach, FL 33483 on June 20, 2012. The owners were out of the country at that time and arrived here at this home on September 28, 2012. Upon moving in, it was brought to their attention by neighbors about the proposed rezoning for Delray Place initiated by the property owner. Stroms, LLC strongly opposes this rezoning, as this action would cause unpleasant noise, dust, trash, and traffic and the unsightly presence of large work vehicles. This greatly diminishes the value of their property and interferes with their quiet enjoyment and use of the property. Please feel free to contact me with any questions and concerns and let me know of any new developments. .1k fW - . '�-�7' -, ' _ � '��� ' .tea.-,+. �� , . . _ ,.. ' �} `!i +' _ PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change_ I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it Would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading-and unloadinca), smelly Iciarbacie dumaasters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intrudinci commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our qualily of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date try � Ak-Z18 000 -b14o Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. neighborhood In order to protect the integrity of our single family the only • of action is to deny .: • application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residen-fial neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION * THE CITY OF To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy,_ _gtrucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage deumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our duality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties, In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action . is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Date j�?­43Ji 69-9-d /ocool&- Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy. (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 5ig� na a here Address Date /,'), k3 �-L 9E- D 10oe) Ll �L4y Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at -the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I Find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding- commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign naniAhere Date �?jjr� / A �3 J-A6 ze 19 0 0 0 - 0'V- 7 WAA Address I I Property identification number PF1'Il'ION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy,_ trucks loading and unloading), smelly_ _(garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic,__ (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect -the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compa41ibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. M n name Address f�) i Date r 3 �-6 aeO-� 230 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 10 � � -1z Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. n name here Address 9 I1 Date /J- i-3 # a"3 -0 3-20 Property identification number PEl'I"PION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. I)adi Sign nam ere Address 16 -13­1 Z Date Y-cl.,2 g,6 , i e/ 3 � Property identification number TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I 'find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy. (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 110 d /W� 16f f t Sign name here Date -2EA _Z yii h " f X- 33 6ad�®,;� eye) ® ®��® Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 13;J- 0 Sign nam re Date 7- Address / V3 ,C .2S- 0/ 0e9 6,0,5­0 0 '33 C5 Property identification number PETITION TO -FHE CITY. OF..DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board, Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smell (garbage dumpsters), disturbing_, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to -our cluality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, i Sign name e e Date -2��, ihr Address ,/,1-9 -� � e, az r e % d eO D 744d Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy. (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing,, hectic. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of comp tib ity with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. J Sign noe here Address Date AL13L-c xg61 0000�10- Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition 'the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoninq of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recornmend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of comp,, 'bility with -the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date 7.11 7-W <t 134V4--) Addres / : 3lj�_4 U_rai doa aY_-YV Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here elvle_ 1�t�:r �- Address — Date /A4�-041, a?01 0000BYO Property identification number PEl "ITI()N TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning. and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, {traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. i Sign me her Address Date 49-x- V-'5�'�. s e / e6o 6 �- cd Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durripsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Date Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen, and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address /� V_ � 0-6 _ k0140 ® 016 0 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that -the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding- commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of 'the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at -the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility —the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign "-)-z,✓ Address Date/ !,;1 413 �-oC cP p! r 00 0 )/ra Property identification number PFTITInN TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: "rhe following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition -the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign nam ere Date Address Property identification number PFTITInN TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at -the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here -q,31 EVE Address Date �-4 J_e-6 / 0000 !p a& Property identification number PIFTITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is y this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with thus o n ing single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address Date l J_ V3�46 .:zo`®i eC700 3 �/ Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I Find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy., (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. a Sign name here Date Address Property identification number C PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Bivd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. -this would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address /d -J�- ,/ Date 1 _& Y- 3 S-6 ap 0 / e? 47 J2 90 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I -find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading ), smelly (garbage dumpsters) disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here '1 0 4_�' V Address `0 , e- /.2-- Date "7 e) Property identification number i :J Witr•l-Y TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition -the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. nuui caa Date /-,)- �-3V-6 �_ko /oc;-,oc,3 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing. hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name herh Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. /o Sign name here Date q V� stt /"� V3 �L6.112_rr 0 Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding- commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address Property identification number r�r"r. TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that -the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters) disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. -rhis would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. name here Date Address Pr rty identification number Y-3 �-6 �2_ke 003_S;V i� if MGENI TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at -the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezonina of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that -the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic.. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 46 Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted au'thori'ties to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here C�So �'ve SJc- 'Z)-e' Address 0 � . &0 2- Date f -� 6 k 0 /" 0 C, a 8 LA Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of -the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. l Sign name here /o /v/j .-z- Date 3 �-6 Address Property identification number PETITION T0'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our . le family neighborhood the on course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. I o a&JW i0 - Sign name here Date _ah � Address Property identification number a k, To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch, Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. • I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. course In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only of •:t' is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the sur• • •; le family residential neighborhood. Sign "re re Date G LeAk � ST- D1 cLkA�1'5_-'* Address 5-34 /�,'t3 416 o1g 3 g- Gl 0 Oz61 J_ 6) Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumosters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address / A�Jls I - c- 7 3yJ �o lC1 �2 Date ESL T% 13 Property identification number e ►! To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durnpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residen'tial neighborhood. Date � 3 � -t e e / eroQo /30 - (V t 1 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy. trucks loading and unloading), smelly Warbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here �C L Address I 3 S Y '8 (0 4 (� Date (PT/3 Property identification number • ►,; To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen, and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of neighborhood. compatibility with the surrounding single family residential Si n name here Address J37 d �Pz /� . L Date � � e000 f C� Property identification number PETITION TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: `Fhe following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend deniial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAID) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. t is requested that the PIanning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the 'Zu^ a E`° Fib " -�e.n= - f:R°?P4 the- proposed change i_9 sFsS °m°o3 €% s 3 1 i.e - — v ILh the surrour ding single family community since it wcufld dram at! chan2te tt n- ,aa °r .,.......�ri r ye,- €a_�4,�� _ °:? -�°str _a,. -a in °-, �s r��.�e�' _ awng -rte - -s t3U �B�rs -r -'psi --- s-e��- -i- nre, sli-i'-� - - --�_ T; Ei�y __ 7nsf= :s s= -„ .-�- 5 '_w�<m - - - -- - - >r - _ - - - loagin g smelly garbage d err: stern , d isturbing, hectic, (traffic) and in$rudir�g -- g3� srsr 1Nye4 ®likpe i resHen Qr' r-a��e :a? ag cy and disco. -r—e s _r- Inn _... - -9= - - - -_ ire!_ H'SLAa..r.s - -- - -_ - - -- with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of lifm and ®� €II t ie +gip :rge Vie - - gP-e � E`:� y. Mau °�-A r to protect the integrity of our iregle family neighborhood the only . m AT Qcfi.541 � FOXO "cg. application ls� ed upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood_ T Vr)" a / C) hn Sign name here Date 717 l ou &" � "--, Address J�LV 3 1/ -6 3 k 0 0 d c0 osy Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City -of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., 'From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. l find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood neighborhood. course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential Sign name here Date Address Property identification number N*Ik0[e7►1 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change -the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic,_ (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date / :7'? enl e 0,0 e7 `p_ D Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: "fhe following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly _(garbage durnpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. f '1177yaja S�g'7rr a e here 7 i Address L l �) - rC) i -,,) _ Date 4s ae-0 00 /X0 Property identification number To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, -the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted au'thori'ties to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy. (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durnpsters), _disturbing, hectic. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect - integrity of our single family neighborhood -.ourse of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single residential neighborhood. Sigrf name here Date Address J�_5LgV-60a�o10000 //40 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. MW . , . I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial_ area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action based compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name hew- e Date 00®0 Ito r Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading) smelly (clarbaae durnpsters)9 disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. integrity In order to protect the •• course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durnpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect of our . neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here i�%" Address Date %)-V- 3 � X93 0 000 '� Property identification number PETITION TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpstersL disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. �e .�- Si name here Date Address f ,1V'3LI6�2x'3900000E-/ Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only based course of action is to deny this rezoning application upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. I/ &_J4, Sign name here 3.� .1 a 6 &dl J, Address I d —1 0 � Date / A � 3 �-6z�_ff3g-000C9 ®1�0"l Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy,_ (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage du_mpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application leased upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. l S' n name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, €o -ated at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office nP; I ;Av4i iti��i�trir•f 1 . t eas?�'s�a_ t lialraer Center (POC) to Special v District ,SRI) as request � y h applican , , P1= ce through their n o -ne -, Jeffrey It is request ®d that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recomrr;end to the °_f ®Z �eB.PS ate- -,--4 9 �-sv �¢ �- ,4a axe€ P,+�py i a.o $ =�sg- @. ds ;�. ..: `:aa = l find hie fl ae eFz°a�'e���a.. -. a°a.x��n sue' 9 ®Er� � �'' t i i en- ','i e� 3a. `1 e-; e ° ,A_o.EI e n e E? e�Qas !'-a � vaeL¢e heirai?i ei �_ _ a �.� p ¢�€� U ra �et-sP__e =.� =r� �. � Qna n .nn_ - -_— u �ioad ®g gt smelly garbage dumosters). disturbing. hectic= ItrafficE and intruding — _ f, —.t E —_ _ =- :3Fa- -- _- '.1`g___°'e eve IE- f °e i-° Si.i. - e -? °5�. _..,_ •!'.• =•s. as ....i .�R�e �e' =_. e` %_ti e� —id— - _ _ � with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our gualily of life and will reduce the market value of our pnoperties. in order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only =e UA a - u-51 r- VV '---a u ,,erling ��jo2l _U_ Vased, Upon US lack Of compatibility with the surrounding singgle family residential nalghborho-od Sign n me here Date 4-6 `r 224 Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Mayor, Nelson S. McDuffie; Vice -Mayor Thomas Carney; Deputy Vice- Mayor, Adam Frankel; Commissioner, Angeleta Grey; and Commissioner, Al Jacquet. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to deny the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by -the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to duly this rezing application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address (J Property identification number v PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn_ It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Si ame here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against suvit change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change tha i q nti i a E ec e d: 1_0 a n ce. fr=a_ character o our peaceful aside Fa n�sghL,ur coQ g.. oig g�aclss ^sin imeffy 'jgarbage dumpstersh disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding t _ e :$ P - j4LA with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will e A :�,� a �ronerteOU� ������ sse� :nor °mot �se�€� �4 ��E� �° �� -�� aa�17. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only S 'th' aa�sgAa4ra e��lz� �' o® tea asr� s �� �� ���� �a�e� �a,�oaaaa� �s�r�aazl.���a�9 ��i��aa agave® its sea�.a4 �'si compatibility A i!t a the surrounding single farnily residential neighlborl-lood. Sign na, a here f��T a L i j,,,l Address Date Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage du ripsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail - shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. y -z— Sign name here G� Date Address A-1/1 Property identification number 00 PETITION TO THE CITY OF OELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; .tan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traff) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use_ This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. { ��l 5 f %� Sign name h Date cv, � � /'-:� Om3.3 � Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic-, Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here T13-15 Oil- 0 Address Date /�- �'3 �_ "y- �- o00 6 /a Property identification number From: Jeffrey Lynne [mailto:ilvnne(azonelaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:30 AM To: nd rich @bellsouth.net; kellifreeman@bellsouth.net; hanuschakm @aol.com; balbert315 @vahoo.com; bddeaner @vahoo.comet; arandpabobbvlew @aol.com; scubarepsilvia @att.net; tarheel bill @bellsouth.net Cc: sea sidebldrs @belI south. net; superone @ix.netcom.com; Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia; Joe Carosella; Louis Carosella; Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com Subject: Delray Place - Tropic Isle Input Dear Board of the Tropic Isle Civic Association, Mr. Schnabel, and Mr. Van Gernert: Our clients continue to desire to find a solution that works for you. When we met with you last week, we listened to what you wanted and heard that you would be satisfied if our clients incorporated your desired redesign of the buildings along Linton Blvd. as requested, to eliminate the perpendicular pathways and move the potential outdoor dining closer to Linton. RPG then paid their architects to start drawing those redesigned buildings at their expense. But then, at the P &Z meeting, you all came out unequivocally opposed to the project. So now, we are confused. If you could provide some clear direction as to reasonable requests, we will be more than happy to consider them. Thanking you in advance for your time, " �Rlll ", =1 JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. Hoggard, Ron From: Bill Schnabel <tarheel_bill @bellsouth.net> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:03 PM To: 'Jeffrey Lynne'; ndrich @bellsouth.net; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; hanuschakm @aol.com; balbert315 @yahoo.com; bddegner @yahoo.comet; grandpabobbylew @aol.com; scubarepsilvia @att.net Cc: seasidebldrs @bellsouth.net; superone @ix.netcom.com; Hoggard, Ron; 'Ashlee Coosaia'; 'Joe Carosella'; 'Louis Carosella'; Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com Subject: RE: Delray Place - Tropic Isle Input Attachments: Kohl's Sheridan St..jpg Yes, we have had several meetings but we don't see any evidence that you have taken our concerns seriously. Our discussions with Joe and Louis were met with "can't be done," "won't work" and "not economically feasible." We never agreed that eliminating the perpendicular pathways and moving the outside dining closer to Linton was our only concern. The 22' height of the buildings along Linton Blvd. that would create a concrete monolith just 15 feet from our property line is unacceptable. The height of these buildings is almost 4 times as high as the existing 6' wall and would tower over our property eliminating all view of the sky to the north for the eight homes on the north side of McCleary St. and it would be visible to the homes on the south side of McCleary St. over the tops of the north -side homes. You listened to us but I don't think you heard us. At the P &Z meeting, staff enlightened the group that you would need at least seven variances to build this project according to the site plan submitted to P &Z. I don't think that the City of Delray Beach has any obligation to change zoning regulations and negatively impact existing residential properties just to make your project economically feasible. Here are some other concerns: • Restaurants and a day -care center should not be located behind the houses on the north side of McCleary St. These are not compatible with the surrounding residential property. • Your suggested traffic pattern, which now includes a u -turn on Federal Hwy instead of Linton Blvd, for trucks poses a danger for the 25,000 cars you claim go past your site each day. Southbound 18- wheelers making a U- turn on Federal Highway at Tropic Blvd. will create a traffic hazard to all vehicles traveling north and south on Federal Hwy in that area and make it even more difficult to exit Tropic Isle at the traffic signal. • Landscape buffers are not adequate on two sides of the project. How can you plant mature 25' canopy trees in a 10' wide planting area on the Linton Blvd. side of the project? • I have personally visited the Kohl's store on Sheridan St. in Hollywood that you stated used the same sound muffling wall materials that you are proposing for the loading docks in Delray Place. I did not see that any extra sound proofing was installed in these walls and, as you can see in the attached photo, the trailers are higher than the existing wall. Is this what you are planning for Delray Place? • The other project that you showed with a Michael's store should not be compared with Delray Place because that center is completely surrounded by streets with no part of the property directly abutting residential property. We are not against re- developing this site — but it needs to be done with less impact on the surrounding residential properties. Please show us how you have taken our concerns seriously and made changes that will minimize the impact on McCleary St., Eve St. and Tropic Blvd. The residents of McCleary St., Eve St. and Tropic Blvd. are always available to meet to discuss these issue again. Bill and Nancy Schnabel O'C121 2012 4q PLANNING d ZONII' -JO October 22, 2012 LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 Paul Dorling, Director City of Delray Beach Planning & Zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board RE: Proposed Delray Place shopping center SAD Land Use .submittal Dear Mr, Dorling and /or To Whom It May Concern: Tropic Isle residents were initially receptive to the 8/13/12 SAD Land Use presentation provided by Joe Carosella, President of Retail Property Group and his staff. The following is a comparison of Promises made (versus) actual_ 9/7/12 site plan submittal reflecting a classic Bait and Switch approach in dealing with adjacent Tropic Isle Association, representing hundreds of affected adjacent residents. All of the below misrepresentations reflects developer /RPG's credibility which, if approved as submitted, would rob every Tropic Isle resident the quiet, peaceful enjoyment of their waterfront home, and negatively impact home values. Tropic Isle residents do not approve of the 9/7/12 SAD Land Use site plan. Mr. Carosella on. 8130/12 arrogantly advised everyone that the Delray Beach Mayor and City Commissioners loves us, and will give us anything we want ? ?? He further stated Tropic Isle approved his site plan at the 8/13/12 HOA meeting. Unfortunately most of RPG's promises have been withdrawn, and many other unacceptable demands made. 1. Promise — totally enclosed loading docks for 500 building, roof vented for diesel fumes and noise. Site olan — withdraws enclosed loading dock in favor of less expensive open docks, 30 feet From Tropic Isles homes. 2. Promise — -Front only deliveries — 600 through 1,000 building on Linton. Site plan — withdraws front door only deliveries, in favor adding rear building deliveries 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 3. Promise — limited rear door use on 600 through 1,000 building fire exit only. Site plan — withdraws limited fire door only use in favor of general use 15 feet Tropic Isle homes. 4. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan -- withdraws quiet use of directly adjacent Tropic Isles Domes by eliminating 17 needed parking spaces in favor of 6,000 sq. ft. outdoor school playground for 1,000 building nursery school directly adjacent Tropic Isle homes. S. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues, for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws quiet use of adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating required 9% open area, and 109 parking spaces in favor of four large restaurants along Linton Blvd. containing an additional 2,700 sq. ft. outdoor dining entertainment area, 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 6. Promise — height reduction of the 3 story (BOA) office building being replaced with one story retail providing much lower profile. Site plan — no reduction, both 500 building and Bank of America buildings are same height, only reduce number of stories. Tropic Isle wants to be a good neighbor, support an acceptable Bank of America property redevelopment. In return we do not wish our peaceful enjoyment of our home taken away, so developer increase profit as a result of Tropic Isle loss. Sincerely, Lisa Malloy cc: Hand Delivered • Ron Hoggard, AICP Principal Planner Planning &. Zoning Dept. • Mayor Nelson "Woodie" McDuffie • Vice -Mayor Thomas Carney • Deputy Vice -Mayor Adam Frankel • Commissioner Angeleta Gray • Commissioner Al Jacquet • City Manager David Harden • Tropic Isles HOA • President, Retail Property Group, Joe Carosella • Fred Fetzer, Tropic Isles resident/Retired Delray Beach City Commissioner • Tropic Bay HOA • Tropic Harbor HOA cc: E -mail Delivery Truxell, Rebecca From: Kelli Freeman <kellifreeman @bellsouth.net> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 4:25 PM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com Subject: Attention Paul Dorling Hi Paul I would like your professional opinion on the Delray Place issue as it relates to the current zoning request and possible outcome if NOT approved. If -the Delray Place request for SAD zoning does not pass the Commission, what then happens to that property? Would it automatically revert to PC zoning based on the new S. Federal Highway Redevelopment plan (SFHRP) that has been adopted? And, if it does revert to PC would the property have to follow all of the setback/buffers within the SFHRP? I'm trying to determine if our residents could be more negatively impacted if the SAD is not approved. Please feel free to email me or call me with your thoughts. Thanks so much, Kell i Kelli Freeman (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Truxell, Rebecca From: Hoggard, Ron Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 11:25 AM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW; Proposed Tropic Square Cross Access with adjacent North planned Delray Place Ronald Hoggard, Jr., AICP Principal Planner Planning & Zoning Department 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone - 561- 243 -7325 Fax: 561 - 243 -7221 From: Joe Carosella [ mailto:JCarosella(arpg123.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 5:20 PM To: Peggy Paterra Cc: Breto, Estelio; Hoggard, Ron; Darling, Paul; Alan Margolis; Louis Carosella; Kelli Freeman; Mark Saltz (Msaltz(&saltzmichelson.com); Joaquin Vargas oa uin @traftech.biz); Dennis Shultz ( dshultz @i'lynnengineerinc.com); Alan Margolis (alanm (cbleases.net); Lorraine; Michele Burns; Linda Lewis (Ilewis (asmith- knibbs.com); Andrea Knibbs (aknibbs(&smith- knibbs.com) Subject: Proposed Tropic Square Cross Access with adjacent North planned Delray Place We appreciate your below proposed email suggesting cross access between our planning delray place and the adjacent south tropic square and we will start to review same with all the parties involved We appreciate all our planning progress with the nearby tropic isle and tropic bay neighborhoods and the neighborhood support for same and look forward to providing this quality delray place project to the neighbors Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: jcarosella@rpgl23.com From: Peggy Paterra [mailto:ppaterra(cbQmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:22 PM To: Estelio Breto; Ron Hoggard; Paul Dorling; Alan Margolis Cc: Joe Carosella; Kell[ Freeman Subject: Proposed shopping center - Delray Place I recently attended a presentation proposing the construction of Delray Place by Retail Property Group, Inc. As a 12 -year resident of Tropic Isle, I personally welcome the proposed shopping center which will be an asset to the community in my opinion. After the meeting I spoke to both their lawyer and directly to Joe Carosella, the developer, regarding my concerns about traffic in the area. I made the suggestion that there should be an alternate entrance to the new shopping center that would accommodate both Tropic Isle and Tropic Bay communities (as well as the other residences in that neighborhood) by giving access to shopping without having to join the traffic on Federal Highway or Linton Blvd. This could be from either Tropic Blvd. or Spanish Trail and would accommodate 3 types of traffic - auto, bicycle and pedestrian - from this area. One excellent solution would be to utilize the existing entrance into Delray Square from Tropic Blvd. and create a pass - through road to Delray Place. I would think it would make access much more convenient and far safer for our residents, as well as alleviating the traffic load on the highways for others coming to the new area merchants, making those Highways safer as well. At the same time, there would be no trof f is increase to Tropic Isle streets since residents would have to go onto Tropic Blvd. anyway to get to Federal Highway. A Spanish Trail alternative would make for more congestion on that street - and I'm not sure of the status of the road with a gate that exists there now. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I believe there are 450 residences in Tropic Isle, and hundreds of condos in Tropic Bay and other communities in this section of town (East of Federal.) The proposed traffic pattern of having one entrance on Federal Hwy. and one exit on Linton Blvd. would be prone to excessive congestion at the peak times of day or season (think Christmas?) 2 The volume of traff is at that busy intersection (Federal and Linton) varies from season to season and from hour to hour, but with all the new development going on at that intersection - new stores coming in to all four corners, I've heard, it would seem to me that the traffic volume is going to increase substantially, including many tractor trailers which we rarely have now. The patterns of having traffic making u- turns on Federal Hwy. and / or Linton Blvd. are also a concern to me. We currently have some vehicles making u -turns at Tropic Blvd. and it becomes a problem when drivers don't always follow the rules of safety and courtesy (or the law!) So, please consider the above in planning for upgrading of this area. We have a lovely, quiet waterfront community in here and take great pride in our neighborhood, In order to make the proposed project a true enhancement to the community, I hope you will take a long hard look at what will make the project one which we can all be proud to support. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Peggy Paterra 915 Dogwood Drive Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cell Phone: 561- 702 -0428 3 Truxell, Rebecca From: Thuy Shutt <TShutt @pbcgov.org> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:49 PM To: David Dipino Cc: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: RE: Delray Forum Staff Writer David DiPino with a quick question Importance: High Hi, David, It has been a long time and hope this finds you well. I have not had a chance to see my personal emails since this weekend and some may have been spammed out if they are not on my frequent contact list. In addition, I understand that many of these residents are acting on emotions and may not have had the history of the downtown redevelopment or knowledge in the development review processes. With that in mind, I feel there is no need to legitirriitize references to our integrity. As a board member, I need to weigh the code requirements, the testimonies given at the meeting, and the mitigation strategies /conditions that will be in place once the project has been through the development review processes. These are not taken lightly as we all are volunteers who are also stakeholders in the community. The hours I spend on reviewing these items and at the meeting are hours away from my family and that is priceless. I would be more than willing to speak to you on my decision but not during work hours. I would appreciate it if you contact me by phone in the future on these matters versus my work email. Thank you. Thuy ( "Twee ") T. Shutt, AIA, CRA Assistant Director Westgate /Belvedere Homes CRA 1280 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 215 West Palm Beach, FL 33409 (561) 640 -8181 (561) 640 -8180 fax www.westgatecra.org From: David Dipino [ddipino @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:23 AM To: Thuy Shutt Subject: Delray Forum Staff Writer David DiPino with a quick question Good Morning Mrs. Shutt, Delray Forum reporter David DiPino here... It's been awhile, how are you? I received a few emails after the last P &Z board meeting concerning Atlantic Plaza II changes in density and how it would affect Tropic Isles. Did you receive the emails below? Does the P &Z dept, staff or the P &Z Board have a comment concerning the email below? Have any residents gone ahead and asked for resignations of any P &Z Board Members? Thanks for your time, David DiPino Delray Forum Staff Writer From: Judy Craig <judyna judycraig.com> To: delrayneighbors < delrayneihborsnaooglegroups .com> Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11:15 am Subject: RE: P &Z Meeting last night: Atlantic Plaza II It appears two neighborhoods got thrown under the bus last night at the P & Z meeting. First was Tropic Isle. It was amazing to sit there & listen to why they need to destroy a large office building for which it is currently zoned, and sits some distance from the east property line, therefore not right up against residential back yards, and build more retail /restaurants & position them right up against residential properties. (We kept telling Walmart to go away until they finally did, we're not going to stop speaking out now.) There must be a dozen or more restaurants at Old Harbor Plaza & Delray Plaza combined, not to mention clothing, grocery, pharmacy, movies. One Tropic Isle resident in favor of the project got up & said he was excited to be able to ride his bike to shopping & restaurants, as if there were none available! He can't cross the intersection of Linton/Federal ? ?? You think it's dangerous now? Wait till those tractor trailers start with -the U -turns which they admitted they would need to do to get in & out! The second was Atlantic Plaza development, stunning is all I can say. After just approving getting rid of the office building at Linton & Fed — they determined we are desperate for more office space so we need to approve this developer's plan to build more office space! Do the board members all have a short term memory problem? Or did they think the residents wouldn't notice that contradiction? Next, I fail to understand why raising -the density from 30 to 51 per acre is not a huge "NO, not going to happen "! We have limits in place for a reason. I have not heard a good reason to throw them out the window. It seems all the developer condescended to do was lower the height slightly in a portion of the project, but spread the footprint to make up -the difference, therefore taking away green space. When he started his presentation, the developer's representative stated they had added more green space. Apparently it's a wash — all smoke & mirrors. How this P & Z board can sit there & pat these guys on the back for throwing us a bone (but they took it back by slight of hand!) is beyond me. Donating a bus just doesn't cut it. Apparently they have been "gotten to ", I don't know what else to think. No mention at all was made of the "step backs" of the buildings that have been required by other projects, so the site line is more palatable. They apparently are unconcerned about the block of empty new buildings that sit in the 200 blk of NE 5th Ave. I imagine there is lots of "Class A" office space waiting there. Mizner (which is widely reported to be a failure) was brought up a number of times by the proponents. Two of the parking garages are entered from Federal Hwy, the other two from the rear service road, Mizner Blvd. Why is this parking garage not on Federal, in the first phase of this development? I still don't know where these occupants will park while phase 2 is being built has anyone addressed that? Can we ask for some resignations? I don't know how that works, but it seems the current P & Z board are not upholding their fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of Delray Beach. We are who they are supposed to represent, not developers who appear in town with their vision for this town, which has no relation to ours. I have no problem with anyone making a profit, it's what everyone who works strives for. But do it with integrity. When the property was purchased, the owners were well aware of the zoning regulations. Live with it, or don't buy it, but don't misrepresent your intentions & then expect us to give you carte blanche to do whatever suits your purposes. Let's flood some email inboxes at city hall for starters. Please feel free to share these thoughts with others who might want to be included. Judy Craig, (Palm Trail Neighborhood resident of 26 years) David DiPino Delray Forum Staff Writer S un- Sentinel. com Reporter Delray Beach Forum Food Critic Hometown Downtown Column Co- Writer ddipinoAgmail.com or dddipinogtribune.com 954- 621 -5000 Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e -mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing. Truxell, Rebecca From: Fred Fetzer <fbfetzer @bellsouth.net> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 9:52 AM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityManager @MyDeirayBeach.com; Kelli Freeman; C ityAtto rney @My Delray Beach.com-, wmduffie @mydelraybeach.com; Carney, Tom; frankel @mydelayeach.com; Gray, Angeleta; jacquet @myelraybeach.com; Gary Eliopolus; mweiner @zonelaw.com Subject: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning Attachments: wakeup.tropicisle. pdf Mr. Dorling: As a resident of Tropic Isle, I want to give you my concerns regarding the rezoning and proposed site plan for the Delray Place redevelopment project at the southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and South Federal Highway. I believe most Tropic Isle residents, including myself, are in favor of this property being redeveloped and feel this redevelopment will help revitalize the South Federal Highway corridor. However, I also believe that many Tropic Isle residents, including myself, have some major concerns with the proposed site plan as it is presently configured. Most Tropi Isle residents would welcome redevelopment of this property as long as this plan is respectful of the Tropic Isle homes which are very close to this proposed development. understand your staff has documented numerous issues with the proposed site plan, as it is presently configured. I believe there are additional issues that need to be addressed before this site plan is approved. Please read the attached letter from a Tropic Isle resident whose home backs up to the proposed development. This letter reflects my concerns that the present site plan does not adequately buffer the the proposed development from the adjacent Tropic Isle homes. I am copying this letter regarding to the Mayor and City Commission in order to make them aware of the concerns of many Tropic Isle residents, since I understand this will be on the next City Commission agenda. I would appreciate any assistance that you and you staff can provide in this matter. Thanks, Fred Fetzer LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 October 22, 2012 Paul Dorling, Director City of Delray Beach Planning & Zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board RE: P'roposed Delray Place shopping center SAD Laird Use.s;ubmittal Dear Mr. Dorling and /or To Whom It May Concern: Tropic Isle residents were initially receptive to the 8/13/12 SAD Land Use presentation provided by Joe Carosella, President of Retail Property Group and his staff. The following, is a comparison of promises made '( versus) ,:`actua[ 9/7/12 site plan submittal reflecting a classic Bat and Switch approach :,i dealing,with. adjacent Tropic [sle ,4ssociation, representing hundreds of affected adjacent residents. All of the below misrepresentations reflects developer /RPG's credibility which, if approved as submitted, would rob every Tropic Isle resident the quiet, peaceful enjoyment of their waterfront home, and negatively Impact home values. Tropic Isle residents do not approve of the 9/7/12 SAD Land Use site plan. Mr. Carosella on $/30/12 arrogantly advised everyone that the De.l.ray Beach Mays r and City Coiftm.is:�ione s loves us, and will give us anything we want ? ?? He further stated Tropic Isle approved his site plan at the 8/13/12 HOA meeting. Unfortunately most of RPG's promises have been withdrawn, and many other unacceptable demands made. 1. Promise — totally enclosed loading docks for 500 building, roof vented for diesel fumes and noise. Sit"lan —withdraws enclosed loading dock in favor of less expensive open docks, 3.0 feet from Tropic Isles homes. 2. Promise — front only deliveries — 600 through 1,000 building on Linton. Site plan — withdraws front "door only d:el'iveries, in favor adding rear building deliveries 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 3. Promise — limited rear door use on 600 through 1,000 building fire exit only. Site plan — withdraws limited. fire door only' use, in favor of general use 15 feet Tropic Isle homes. 4. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues for �dla eInt. Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws' quiet use of directly adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating 17 needed parking spaces in favor of 6,000 sej ft ,outdoor sthobl plpyground for 1,000 building nursery school directly adjacent Tropic Isle homes. 5. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues, for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws quiet use of adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating required 9% open area, and 109 parking spaces in favor of f4dr, large restauirants along Linton Blvd. containing an additional 21700 sq. ft.' outdpbr-"dining entertainment area, 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 6. Promise — height reduction of the 3 story (BOA) office building being replaced with one story retail providing much lower profile. Site plan — no reduction, both 500 building and Bank of America buildings are same height, only reduce number of stories. Tropic Isle wants to be a good neighbor, support an acceptable Bank of America property redevelopment. In return we do not wish ourpeaceful enjoymeit of our home taken away, so developer increase profit as a result of`Tropic`>lsle loss. Sincerely, Ir Asa Malloy LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 October 29, 2012 Delray Beach Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Jose Aguila Jason Bregman Alice Finst Rustem Kupi Scott Porten Mark Gregory James Knight RE: SAD Land Use Delray Place Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: 2012 OCT a U I �J PLANNING & ZONING As long -time residents of Tropic Isle we realize the Bank of America property is going to be revitalized. We lust don't want our quiet, secure Tropic Isle lifestyle drastically altered so developers can make more money at Tropic Isle residents' expense. Please honestly ask yourselves if you would accept any of the following proposed, intense commercial land uses to take place in your families' backyard. If you answer no, then please do not force these objectionable /unwanted uses on us Tropic Isle residents. 1) Four additional lame Linton Blvd. restaurants with 3,000 sq. ft. of additional outdoor seating /entertainment, with paying patrons, doing what paying patrons do, eat - drink -have a good time, loud competing conversations over each other on top of restaurant music entertainment. All of the above is perfectly acceptable for downtown Atlantic Avenue or Boston On The Beach, but not compatible 15 feet from Tropic Isle families. 2) 6,000 sq. ft. school playground full of exuberant children doing what children love to do, scream in their high pitched voices. Once again screaming is perfectible, acceptable in the middle of nowhere, but not compatible right next to Tropic Isle families trying to enjoy their quiet Tropic Isle homes. 3) Rear building deliveries, general access to anyone behind 600 feet of Linton Blvd. building, 10 feet from Tropic Isle families. • Employees /patrons ducking behind buildings for cigarette or loud cell phone conversations. • Potential homeless —transients hanging out. • Potential petty theft /home burglary staging area. • This above use doesn't exist in current Linton Blvd. buildings, only in proposed RPG current Site Plan Land Use request. Again we beg the City Commission to treat us like you would want your family treated, i.e. 1) cut back on so many Linton Blvd. restaurants, and eliminate all outdoor seating /entertainment; 2) keep people out From behind Linton Blvd. building, fire alarm doors use only, and deliver through front as promised; 3) Have outdoor playground moved somewhere allowing kids to make all the noise they want without driving neighbors crazy. Tropic Isle quiet, secure neighborhood has been here for over fifty years; please do not sell us out so a commercial intense shopping center developer can make more money at Tropic Isle families' expense. Sincerely, eA Lisa Malloy cc: • Ron Hoggard, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Zoning Dept. Paul Dorling, Director Planning & Zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Acceptance Board • City Manager David Harden • Tropic Isles HOA • President, Retail Property Group, Joe Carosella • Fred Fetzer, Tropic Isle resident/Retired Delray Beach City Commissioner • Tropic Bay HOA • Tropic Harbor HOA Truxell, Rebecca From: Joe Smith <delrayjoe1999 @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:02 PM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityAttorney @MyDelrayBeach.com; wmduffie @mydelraybeach.com; Carney, Tom; frankel @mydelayeach.com; Gray, Angeleta; jacquet @myelraybeach.com; Harden, David; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net,- ndrich @bellsouth.net; gersan2 @aol.com; tarheel_bill @bellsouth.net; balbert315 @yahoo.com; bddegner @yahoo.com; grand pabobbylew @aol.corn; hanuschakm @aol.com; scubarepsilvia @att.net; seaside bldrs @bellsouth.net; djr @crosstecsoftware.com; info@ friend sofdelray.corn Subject: Gerald Franciosa - Potential Illegal Voting Conflict of Interest - Delray Place Attachments: RQO- 12- 063.pdf; RQO- 12- 061pdf Dear Commissioner Harden and Members of the City Commission: I am writing out of concern that Mr. Gerald Franciosa may have had an undisclosed conflict of interest when voting on the Delray Place project as a member of the City's Planning & Zoning Board on October 15, 2012. He lives in the adjacent residential Tropic Isle community and clearly stated he was opposing the project, As a matter of law and the County's Ethics regulations, I do not know whether he should have recused himself. I believe the City has a fiduciary duty to inquire with the Commission on Ethics and let that body make a fair, impartial, and independent decision. Attached are opinions from the Commission which would seem to indicate he had to step down or, at a minimum, file the required paperwork with the clerk. Commissioners h he� Chair h County 7ob1n N. flpm, Vice Chak Ronoid E. Rubisofi Commission o Ethics Pat kaLAcher EKecutive Director Alan S_ Johnwri September 13, 2012 Jahn C_ Randolph, Esquilm Town. of Palm Beach Town Attorney Janes, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. 505 South Hagler DrIve, Suite 1100 West Palau Beach, FL 33401 lte: ROO12 -063 Voting Conflicts Dear Nor. Randolph, The Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics (COE) considered your request for an advisory oplrllon, and rendered its opinion at a public meeUing held on September 12, 2012, YQU ASKED In your submission dated August 28, 2012 whether an employee of a corporation that owns property within a study area may serve on an advisory board czeated to review potential development proposals for the 4tudy area and If so, whether he may participate and vote on any ultimate recommendallon submitted to the Town. IN SUM, advisory board members are prohibited from using their official aosmon, partiel pati ng or voting on an issue that would give a Flnantial benefit bD their outside employer, not shared with simllarly Situated members of the general public. There is no bright lime as to whether a contingent financial benefit creates a conflict. In evaluating conflict of interest under the Palm.Beach County Code of Ethics, the Commission considers 11 the Dumber of peMas who Stand to &aIn from a decIs!on grid 2) whether the gain or loss is remote and Speculative. Where the chass of persons who stand to Rain from a detlsion is small, It is more likely that a member will have a conflict, Similarly, where a gain or loss w an offlclal or his or her employer is not subject to significant corttiingcfncies, it may result In a conflict of Interest render the Palm Beach County Cade of Ethics. THE FACTS as we understand ahem are as Follows: You are the Town Attorney for the Town of PaIrn Beach (Town), The Town Council (Council.) recently appointed an ad hoc committee to consider the future development of a five acre commercial area on Royal Poinciana Way (the study areal. The Royal Poindano W'ay Study Committee (FtPU1+SC) has 7 members, The Chair was appointed by the full tounCll, each cai,ntilpersan appointed an APWSC member and the final member, also appointed by the full council, Is the Chair of the Town Planning and Zorning Corn mission, Members were selected from town residents and businesses who hwe expressed a special interest in the area or who. based upon special knowledge or interest, may lend a particular contribution to the RPWSC, The committee does not have authorlty to make changes to the zoning code, but ran make recommendations to the Town Council, The Town dW not provide the RPWSC w1th much direction regardl rig future develupmant of the study area. Accordingly, the RPUUSC alone wlth Town skaff have discussed traditlonai planning mechanisms such as potential Increases in density, height, setbacks, etc, to the area_ The RPWSC has heard various presentations and each member of RP SC expressed individual opinions in regard to potential development In the area. At some point In time in the future, the RPSC will Vote on a reromroendation to the Town Council_ 2633 Vista Parkway, West Palm Beath, FL 334'11 561,233,0724 FAX- 561,233,0735 Hotline: 877.766.59211 E-mail: ethksopahnbeachcou ntyethits.cam Website: wwwpalmbeachcotlmgethles.com One of the 7 appointees is an employee of the Breakers PB, Inc. (Breakers). The Breakers owns an office building located within the study area. In total, based upon the study area legend prepared by Town staff and submitted to COE staff, there are 15 property owners who may be affected by changes in the study area. In addition, the Breakers owns property on the south side of Royal Poinciana Way as well as resort and golf club properties not included in the study area in the Town. As mentioned above, the RPWSC has heard presentations detailing potential development options and has discussed these presentations at their meetings. Recommendations ultimately could include land use changes affecting density, height restriction and permitted uses within the study area. Changes could have a significant impact on property values, however, it is unknown at this time whether the recommendations will have a financial impact on the area. The RPWSC's next meeting is on September 14, 2012. The question has arisen as to 1) whether it is a conflict of interest for an employee of the Breakers to sit on the RPWSC and /or 2) to vote on any ultimate recommendation which may be made to the Town Council in an advisory capacity. THE LEGAL BASIS for this opinion is found in the following relevant sections of the revised Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics Ordinance and Code of Ethics, which took effect on June 1, 2011: Sec. 2 -443. Prohibited conduct. (a) Misuse of public office or employment. An official or employee shall not use his or her official position or office, or take or fall to take any action, or influence others to take or fail to take any action, in a manner which he or she knows or should know with the exercise of reasonable care will result in a special financial benefit, not shared with similarly situated members of the general public, for any of the following persons or entities: (1) Himself or herself; (4) An outside employer or business of his or hers, or of his or her spouse or domestic partner, or someone who is known to such official or employee to work for such outside employer or business; Section 2- 443(a) prohibits advisory board members from using their official position to take or fail to take any action if they know or should know with the exercise of reasonable care that the action would result in a special financial benefit not shared with similarly situated members of the general public, for certain entities or persons including themselves or their employer. Section 2- 443(c) Disclosure of voting conflicts, similarly requires an advisory board member to abstain and not participate in any matter coming before his or her board which would result in a special financial benefit, not shared with similarly situated members of the general public, to themselves or their employer. Under state statute, to constitute a prohibited voting conflict, the passibility of a financial gain must be direct and immediate, rather than remote and specuiative.1 Where an official's gain or lass would require many steps and be subject to many contingencies, any gain or loss is remote and speculative and cannot be said to inure to one's special financial benefit. Similarly, for a financial benefit to be "special ", the benefit must inure uniquely to the voting member, rather than benefiting the Town as a whole. There is no bright line in determining the number of individuals who would need to be affected to transform a personal gain or loss into a gain or loss shared with similarly situated members of the general public. Where a class is large, a prohibited financial gain would result only if there are circumstances unique to the voting official which would enable him to gain more than the other members of the class. However, where the class of persons benefiting is small, the likelihood of prohibited financial benefit is much greater.3 Each advisory opinion is based upon a unique set of facts and circumstances. Whether a matter rises to the level of a voting conflict will be based upon the facts and circumstances presented to the COE. For example, the COE has previously opined that a municipal advisory board member was prohibited from presenting his client's project to his advisory board, participating in discussions regarding the project or voting on a matter financially benefiting his ' George v. City of Cocoa, Florida, 78 F.3d 494 (1996). a CEO 0S -15, CEO 91 -61, CEO 12 -19 3 CEO 77 -129 2633 Vista Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33411 561.233.0724 FAX: 561.233.0735 Hotline: 877.766.5920 E -mail: ethics @palmbeachcountyethics.com Website: palmbeacheountyethics.com customer or client.4 Under the facts presented the gain to the board member's customer or client was direct and immediate. First, the board member's employer is one of 15 property owners than would be subject to any changes recommended by the RPWSC. The number of persons or entities directly affected by potential changes is too small a class to be considered similarly situated to members of the general public. Second, the RPWSC was established to provide input and recommendations to the Town concerning a proposed ordinance that would, if adopted, make changes to the land use code in the study area. For example, should the Committee recommend a land use change resulting in an increase in density and that recommendation is adopted by the Town Council, the value of the Breakers property may be increased, regardless of whether or not the current owner takes advantage of the changes. The sole purpose of the RPWSC is to consider changes to the study area containing these 15 properties, Therefore, any discussion, recommendation or vote of the Committee would present a conflict of interest for the board member. Because the Code prohibits participation as well as voting on the matter, the COE is of the opinion that the board member should resign from the Committee. That being said, the Code does not prohibit business owners, their employees or citizens with a vested financial interest in development of their property from providing meaningful and valuable comment to the Committee or Town Council provided they do not do so while serving as an official in an appointed advisory capacity. IN SUMMARY, an advisory board member may not use his official position, including participation and voting on issues before the RPWSC, affecting the financial interests of his employer, where his employer is one of 15 landowning entities within an affected study area. Based upon the facts and circumstances provided, including the limited class of persons or entities that stand to gain from the RPWSC process and the absence of significant contingencies to obtain that gain if changes are approved, the potential financial benefit to a board member's employer is not so remote and speculative as to eliminate a conflict of interest under the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics. This opinion construes the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics Ordinance and is based upon the facts and circumstances that you have submitted, It is not applicable to any conflict under state law. Inquiries regarding possible conflicts under state law should be directed to the State of Florida Commission on Ethics. Please feel free contact me at 561- 233 -0724 if i can be of any further assistance in this matter. 5incerei , Alan S. JQQ n,,��on Executiz irector ASJ /mcr /gal cc-. William 0. Cooley `Rao a -067 2633 Vista Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33411 561.233.0724 FAX: 561.233.0735 Hotline: 877.766.5920 E-mail: ethics@palmbeachcountyethics .coin Website: palmbeachcountyethics.com Hoggard, Ron From: Truxell, Rebecca Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 4:01 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning and associated site plan Attachments: Malloy letter regarding Delray Place Nov 9 2012.docx Please see below sent to PZ mail. Rebecca Truxell Administrative Assistant /Secretary to SPRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning & Zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning & Zoning Department City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone: 561.243.7040 Fax: 561.243.7221 truxell@mydelraybeach.com From: Fred Fetzer [ mai Ito: fbfetzer(ObelI south. net] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 1:58 PM To: Michael Weiner Cc: miaman911 @vahoo.com; cleanslaterk @amail.com; PZmail @MvDelravBeach.com; Gary Eliopolus; Kelli Freeman; PAB (Jack Malloy) Subject: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning and associated site plan Mr. Weiner: As a Tropic Isle resident, I have been working with some other Tropic Isle residents to evaluate the latest proposed site plan for Delray Place and try to determine what changes could be made to the site plan that would allow the Developer to move forward with a qualit business development, but one that does not adversely impact the Tropic Isle homes that are immediately adjacent to the proposed Delray Place development. I would appreciate you reviewing the attached letter from a Tropic Isle resident whose homf backs up to the Delray Place property. They are particularly concerned with the presently configured restaurant outdoor seating. They have made some suggestions on how this issue could be addressed. I would appreciate an opportunity to meet with the Developer (prior to submission of any additional site plans to the City) to further discuss how this concern be addressed to the mutual satisfaction of the Developer and the adjacent Tropic Isle homeowners. Please feel free to contact me (via email or at 561- 715 -9030) or Jack Malloy (561 - 573 - 5596), if you require further information or would like to have further discussion on these issues. Thank you, Fred Fetzer 932 Evergreen Dr. Delray Beach, FL 33483 November 9, 2012 To Whom It May Concern: Re: Delray Place proposed SAD Rezoning and associated site plan I have reviewed the latest (11/2/2012) site plan submitted to the City and was pleased to see some progress being shown with regard to some of the concerns previously mentioned by Tropic Isle residents. For example: Rear Area of 600 to 1100 Buildings - Sidewalk removed -Rear doors removed -Any remaining side doors kept locked (Fire Code Use only) -Rear landscaped area gated and locked (only lawn maintenance people to access) - Additional landscaping added While the above changes to the proposed site plan are a step in the right direction, a remaining major concern (particularly of Tropic Isle whose properties are immediately adjacent to the development) is the proposed use of outdoor restaurant seating between the 600 to 1100 buildings. The outdoor seating, as presently configured, will still channel all the noise directly south into the rear of adjacent Tropic Isle homes. We had requested (at the meeting recently held at the library) that the outdoor seating be moved to the front of the 600 to 1100 buildings and the vacated seating area be made part of the 600 to 1100 building interior. By making those changes, the building would act as a 600 ft., 22 ft. high buffer to help offset restaurant noise that would now be captured in front of the restaurants facing Linton Blvd. and directed toward Linton. In addition to the above concerns regarding the proposed outdoor restaurant seating, we still feel that the City's Planning Department documented concerns (i.e., for open space, parking, landscape buffers, traffic, etc.) must be addressed and resolved before the site plan is approved by the city. We appreciate the opportunity to state our concerns with the existing site plan proposal. Hopefully, the Developer will help us resolve those concerns and move forward with a plan that will provide a quality business development that does not adversely impact the adjacent Tropic Isle homes. Sincerely, Jack Malloy and Lisa Malloy 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 LISA MALLDY ,I H ! MALLO"Y 925 McCleary greet Delray Beach, FL 33493 (561) 573 -559 November 14. 2012 Mr. Patel Dorling Mr. lion Hoggard Del ray Beach PIannirig & Z,oning FEE: Delray Place Gentlemen: LE 5 � N' �`j NOV l 9 11112 11 Have met (aUyiointly with Retail Property Group o ne- r_ Louis Carosella, architect Mark Salt- Platmer Dori Gl s and their attorneys Michael Weiner and Jeffery Lynne and former City Commissioner Fred Feder and discussed genera P&Z Review and 1 the Outdoor Seating Areas for the 600 (c) 1 100 huildings. SpeQitt cal Iy how the noise From I w Id ugs, Current Outdoor Seating configuration channels noise directly into the 4acent 'tropic Isle homes. It was my understanding, the following changes would be considered as everyone felt it was feasible Ouldo r Sweating c�:uld be reloc:ated to the Front of the 600 to i WO buildings. sod the vacated Outdoor Seating Area made part of the buildings' interior, allowing some of the, noise generated from the 600 to 1 100 buildings to be eapptured on the north side of the building and directed toward Linton Blvd. Tine 600 to l 100 buildings would tact os an cffecdve noise barrier in conjunction with landscaped rear set back area. Sege attached mndi -, t gs. It was also discussed that the 22 foot high firow and rear elevations would have improved architectural features to break lip any U- Storage -It look of t heT Site Flan submittals, Hope staff will frnd this concept for dealing uwrtb noise from Outdoor Seating Area of 600 to 1100 buildings acceptable, and allow f6tuxe revised Site Plan with above revision given favorable consideration, c 1 n alloy cr hael Weint7r Jeffrey .[ ynne Attorneys At Lair,+ Fax 561 -272 -6831 Louis Garosella R.etai I Property Group Fn 561 -961 -1744 Mark Saltz., AlA Sa Itz Michelson Architects Fax 954- 266 -2701 Dori Glass GGHO & Associates Fax 561- 575 -5260 Fred Fetzer 1 I I I I K I � I 1 I Y I I 1 L' r I { L L z M w I .I I I &vm'c'+MFfC.4'C 3 1YI+3 ea-a I � !f � __ - - -_— -- K a 1k O � d I � s Ir k 3 I 6 I < uj Y I � L + 1 nL- =a I I p 4� VI pt 4 1 I I I I K I � I 1 I Y I I 1 L' r I { L L z M w I .I I I &vm'c'+MFfC.4'C 3 1YI+3 ea-a I � !f � __ - - -_— -- K a 1k O � d I � s Ir k 3 I 6 I < uj Y I � L + 1 nL- =a I I p LA [{fir 4 1 C 1 J � I I 47--I oe �I L �, A•+�� *o,r Y� T rl r__ _ - _ __ hj G 4 { ' fs �r o � L a Y Ja 0 V r F. I � t} Z Ail I o� 4� SOL of i -- ..f�.rr •r- +.+ -��4 w -ravrw rw��- ry��s�YIVf�1+�4 #Y�■ ��fk�+- Al, ILU{f} �YJ Cn Cn CIO C cl a forh k/ R J- 4 uj O II � f d 0. o +I w November 15, 0.1 RONALD K. IOLIN 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 313 West Palm Beach, Florida 33441 Brian Shutt, Esq- ffice of City Attorney Delray Beach, Florida 200 N.W, I st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re, Delray Place Dear Mr_ Shutt: 111, NOV Y 6. X 7 PLAWNG As you are aware, I represent eleven homeowners within the Tropic Isles residential community, which oommunity is adjacent to the site of the proposed commercial development commonly referred to as Delray Place My clients own homes along, and reside on, the two streets which immediately abut the proposed oommercial site. and thus are the people to be most impacted should the City approve and the developer build the commercial enter. I will appear on behalf of my clients at all hearings and proceedings related to this matter, including, among others, hearings before the City Commission. I am writing this letter to you as per our telephone conversation, wherein you suggested I do so to clearly establish my standing to participate and represent the interests of my clients- If you require anything further, please advise, cc: Paul Dorling Michael Young Very truly yours, onaW . /Kolins LISA MALLOY 101 N MALLOY 925 McCicary Street Delray Beacb L 33483 (Sfi l) 5 73 -5596 Novcmbcr 20, 2012 Retail ProWly Group, Louis (:orosella. icamsel ?3.c Ameh -)Wct. atk Salty rngal 0& ltjinicJ! xD co A uormcy Michul VMle,=r. L we � Ammncy leff Lynne. ilynac,rr.".uI I cl+ w,C UM Plannrr Doti Glass. _ RF: Defray Nam Drar I,..adies and Gentlemen: Rcvie,,%•td yotir l of Sale Plan muhrnidaJ znd could not find any noticeable rmovemem of the hemcca hutiIdi n 0vId001. ScJtlan hein } reItw-ste+d to Lhe from of 600 to 1 100 buildi and the Y icai4d area Ixin F niadc ,trn of a,L- (3 00 to 1 l buildings wicrior, c�renin noiscmzr and dwnneling not tr ward irimon �t,id I w+ay rram Tropic Isle harms � At tour Iasi meeting at your ofri on I i11411?, the PMhlem of the Meg phone Effect as a resull of having Outdoor Sra i i n q nol h-- %%%rrn 6W io I I x!) buiIdings wcre again d iscwscd and the W} aphonc FfIrc- t acts to IntenoW the Ouldor csh mobw mu_sfc. canversa6o � wid diners it in1a the rear of ad- jneelti 'rraPic i N i reside:, hi.) �e3.�iVc we at awue of how nom gravels oTi writer. Wr arc all 41 W Are of Cnnim i on= 1' ra nkcljcornm ent,, at d h e 111602 commi s%ion mceting o!' no one wards A party in their Your be- twc n buriIdina Qt) xs,r Dia n ,ltanitonc Wcet asps Lt very loud a rly in Trypiic Ulle hama backvard backyard evuy nithitJ I - — Your faiiurc Io be considemic of Trnpic Isle repeated requras, which could so W'I cnrmcted makes the Delray Placc a bad neighbor. who appears to he pniftit preM ahead or dcriug tWr right tieing to be rampaliblr rr ith Tropic Isles your 'site PhAn. %flint you rearinue to der will rob imm Tropic ,Isle family the pemeeful caj «kymrmr of their home- Tropic We agma ask you to plew be # guod neighbft dhAl we ':1W 7.uPF'Onr Climin me ar mov`e Outdoor Dint" fiom hew, -een 6N to I 100 huildings- close off the Mcgaplmine 1, ffect morimcr you have created Please advise xw we kno% how to dal W1 h sp T!F Pl�eaxs_tc:� intcfitir�n �l ' '�c�n i LiL i�ct sq MW ana or, '1*royic r asa± — Ple govern ynursettaccordingJy. N W rt lay yOr ood a r- Duffir- wmcduffi ' rr i cd_ xc flavor Torn C arncy.`arnr~, rri clrav om is urcr Angcicta Gray, v;u Corn issi otter Adam F rankcj, • + ,' Commi.-uwner Al J Wit, r. - raI City ll�M"ger Davi�ar m h arwrr: Ron Floggard, Ptaauin� & Z,r t _, �- rd't+ Kelh 1`rrmnati, i riff x;ixutri `bc sou th1rt Find Fever. 1'BFe cr' ---.Jsuu isns1 Hoggard, Ron From: Dodi Glas <Dodi @2gho.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 4:03 PM To: pabinc; Icarosella@rpg 1 23.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne Cc: McDuffie, Woodie; Carney, Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel, Adam; Jacquet, Al; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Hoggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place Dear Mr. Malloy; Your letter of November 20t" 2012 clearly tells me we have failed in showing you what we changed in response to your comments on November 14t ". You did in fact discuss how far we have come, and, that you had one more concern. Specifically, you wanted the area between the buildings to have a higher wall to eliminate the "megaphone effect." You may recall you and I discussed the continuous wall effect that Mr. Hoggard had a concern over and how that may conflict with your suggestions. You had even said that you had already discussed that with Mr. Hoggard. What you apparently did not read in the revised plans is that we have redesigned that space to address both Mr. Howard's and your concerns. We have a included a roof over the area extending from the buildings, at a level below the overall building height, to address your concern to capture sound (while maintaining the solid rear wall that you like but using some glass blocks to allow interest and light but no vision through it to continue to provide the articulation that Mr. Hoggard wanted.) This was also done in an way to maintain the varied rear architecture to avoid the continuous "wall " effect that Mr. Hoggard noted he wanted to avoid. This redesign was in direct response to your last request. In our presentation materials, we will work harder to better demonstrate the design. I know that there is has been a lot of conversation and time invested in the project. On behalf of the team, I want to thank you for your time and tell you that our meeting truly did impact the design and your comments were heard. Very Truly, Dodi Glas Dodi Buckmaster Glas, AICP, LEED®AP Partner, Director of Planning Cell: 561- 310 -7325 dodik,2ghoxom Landscape Archi tecls Planners a En%imnmendl CwmdW * GENTILE GLAS HOLLOWAY O'MAHONEY & Associates, Inc 1907 Commerce Lane, Suite 101 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561 -575 -9557 x121 The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. All attached drawings, specifications and other documents, including those in electronic form, prepared by the consultant and the Consultants Sub - consultants are Instruments of Service for use exclusively to this Project. The Consultant and the Consultants Sub - consultants shall be deemed the authors and owners of their respective Instruments of Service and shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights. From: pabinc [mailto:pabincCd)bellsouth.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: Ica rosella(arpa123.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; Dodi Glas Cc: woody mcduffie; thomas carney; angeleta gray; adam frankel; al jacquet; CityManaaerC�MvDelravBeach.com; hog_aard mydelraybeach.com; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in regards to the Delray Place project and I have attached a letter for everyone to review and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zone law. com> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:40 AM To: pabinc; Iarosella@rpg123.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; dodi @2GHO.com; Joe Carosella Cc: McDuffie, Woodie; Carney, Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel, Adam; Jacquet, Al; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Hoggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place Ire Thank you for your letter. I think there continues to be ongoing misunderstanding of which I do not know the source. Your "opening statement" to the group during our meeting on 11/14 was how pleased you were that the overwhelming number of site plan changes you had requested were implemented into the project and you commented as to your appreciation of same. Your 11/20 letter to the City, before contacting us, or having Commissioner Fetzer contact us, therefore comes as a complete surprise. Unfortunately, I believe the net result of your letter, albeit unintentionally, will be to further entrench distrust. Stated otherwise, you were personally invited, at your request, to review the site plan and meet with the design team. You left that meeting very happy. Nothing has changed. But your letter to the City attempts to discredit the project in the eyes of the City's leaders without factual justification (we are unsure what the "megaphone effect" is). That is the reason why I feel compelled to write this lengthy e -mail for my clients. We stand by the honest and sincere representations made to you at the meeting with our clients on 11/14 and your ability to rely upon it. Though you live many blocks away from the project to the south, we understand your desire to protect what you perceive to be a threat to your daughter's property. That is admirable and respected. We also appreciate that you have drafted former City Commissioner Fred Fetzer, your neighbor, to be your advocate. He is very well- versed in economic development and the land development process. Commissioner Fetzer will be able to also confirm that we discussed with you the difference between "heavy" restaurant uses, where alcohol is served, outdoor table seating dining is provided, and the area is designed for purposes of allowing people to "congregate ". This is different than "light" dining uses such as a yogurt shop or a deli /take out which is not designed for those purposes and, for the most part, are not open as late as formal dining establishments. Because the City's land development regulations sometimes treats these "light" food service establishments as "retail uses" in other instances as "restaurants ", this is why the site plan shows both as being viable opportunities for each specific parcel. But with that comes the implicit understanding, and the explicit representation made to you, that compatibility of uses were designed into the site, to which you agreed. More specifically, we explained to you, and you expressed your understanding, that outdoor seating areas would exist along Linton Blvd. uses for purposes of continuing the "pedestrian experience" and "sense of place" for residents to enjoy being outdoors during the more pleasant months such as now. I continue to strongly believe that those distinctions we very clearly expressed to you, you understood them, and had no issue. So now, we are at a loss to understand your letter to the City. 1 No personal attacks. Just the facts. r *1 �Im , i JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: pabinc [mailto:pabincCa)bellsouth.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: Ica rosella @rpa123.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; dodi @2GH0.com Cc: woody mcduffie; thomas carney; angeleta gray; adam frankel; al jacquet; CityManaaer MyDelrayBeach.com; hoaaardCd)mvdelravbeach.com; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in regards to the Delray Place project and I have attached a letter for everyone to review and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy Hoggard, Ron From: Truxell, Rebecca Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:22 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place The proposed use of "Delray Place" is extremely inappropriate for the adjacent homeowners. I live on Eve Street and am very concerned about a probable decline in enjoyment of my home that will occur with the noise, smells, traffic etc. that will occur at the proposed site. I know something will be going up other than the non - intrusive office buildings. But the project should be scaled back to allow the residents of McCleary, Spanish Trail and western section of Eve Street to continue to live in their quiet, restful environment. The properties are accessed on the value of their waterfront lots and we pay property taxes reflecting the privilege of living there. The value of properties will be diminished if this project is allowed to use the site in an inappropriate matter. Traffic flow is another huge concern. There are only 2 entrees and exits. This in itself should limit the use of this site. Linton and Fed Hwy is already a high volume area. Delray Place, if developed as the owners request, will cause major traffic problems. The owners of Delray Place presented their plan site to the Tropic Isles residents in hopes of gaining support for the site. Their initial proposal was nice, but they have repeatedly changed all that was presented and now they want to increase the square footage, setbacks, activities sound barriers etc. Please consider the residents adjacent to this site and do what is right for them. Thank you, Judith Colvard 918 Eve St too. d-y �,bellsouth.net December 3, 2012 RONALD K. KOLINS 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 013 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 City Clerk City of Delray Beach 200 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 RE- Delray Place Dear Madam Clerk: r Jai � E � l I DEC 0 21 PLANNING & zoNitor, I represent eleven families, each of which owns and resides in a home in Tropic Isles which lies immediately adjacent to the property line of the property. commonly referred to as Delray Place, which is the subject of development applications to be heard by SPRAD on December 12, 2012 and then by the Delray Beach City Commission of January 3, 2013. By this letter, I hereby formally apply for "party status" for my clients, who I will collectively refer to as the" Tropic Isles Resident Group ". I submit this request pursuant to, and consistent with. section 3(B) of the City's Procedures for Quaasi- Judicial Hearings, The Tropic Isles residents th at comprise the tropic Isles Resident Group ", which represent, together with their addresses, are as follows: 1. Michael E_ Young, 1 807 Spanish Trail 2_ I aj Strom, 1801 Spanish Traill _ Bill & Nancy SchnaW. 901 McCleary Street A Andy & Gayle Ross, 943 McCleary Street 5. Marc & Lanl Rosenberg, 902 Eve Street B, Barbara Jayne De loyer, 1909 Spanish Trail 7_ Cheryl Bandhoff, 1919 Spanish Trail 8. Bruno & Erarma Pellegrini, 937 McCleary Street Cary & Toni Rockis, 936 McCleary Street 10. Bob & Cyndy Le ando ski, 928 McCleary Street 11. Charlie & Ether young, 935 McCleary Stfoet The property owned, respectively, be each of the above namod residents, lies within 800 feel of the Delray Beach property, The applications pending before the Ditty to redevelop Delray Place propose unique impacts upon each of those named above, comprising the "Tropic Isles Resident Group". Because each of their properties lies not only close to the Delray Place property, but Indeed immediately adjacent to it, the impacts of the proposed retail commercial development will have a protouna impact upon, and a disproportional im par- I upon their respective }properties and their respective qualities of life. Among other things, the proposed development will brined wittl it, and to samie extent unavoidably, noise, fumes and odors, light ng. and visual impacts which will, unless fully and properly mitigated, grossly undermine my clients' quality of lite3. Because of the unique and sever impacts whIch will be imposed upon my clients, people and families who have lived a number of +ears in their Tropic isles homes and who have been long - standing citizens and residents of Delray Beach, they should be granted "party status" as called far by your codified rules, all of which have been satisfied and addressed by this letter - applfoafion. If Vou required anythinq further, VIease advise. Very truly yours,. Ron ld _ Kollns PH: 551- 202 -1$41 CC Paul Dorling &ian Shuh, Esq. Michael Young CITY OF DELRAY BEREV CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DELRAY BEACH i All-Amerlep0ty December 5, 2012 [Ronald K. I olins 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 313 z -DD, Vilest Palm Beach, Ft_ 33401 WRITER'S NREC�T LINE; 5611243 -7491 Re. Pasty Status for Quasi-Judicial Hearing on De--ray- Plac Dear Mr- Kolins; Our office has received your request for party status and in accordanoe with the adopted quasi - judicial rules our opinion, based an the facts you submitted, is that you should be granted party status on behalf of your clients_ The ultimate decision as to the granting of party status shall be made by the City Commission or Site Plan Review and Appearance Board when you appear in front of t,h -ern. Please call if you have any questions, Sincerely, OFFICE OF THE C ITYATT RNEY CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA R. Brian Shutt. Esq. City Attorney CC" Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning Hoggard, Ron From: Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:55 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: Dorling, Paul; Hoggard, Ron; M. Young Subject: Delray Place Jeffrey: I am in receipt of your letter to Paul Dorling advising of your intention, on behalf of your client, the proposed developer of Delray Place, to appear before SPRAB tomorrow evening for the purpose of requesting that it reconsider its denial of your client's proposed site plan and to continue the matter to allow your client the time to modify the proposed site plan. Given your representation to me yesterday that your client intends to address the concerns with the site plan of my clients as set forth at the SPRAB hearing last week, my initial inclination, subject to discussions with my clients, is to support your effort to gain the time to address those issues in the site plan. However, your letter goes on to say that, assuming SPRAB takes the action you request tomorrow, your client will withdraw it appeal of last week's SPRAB decision and then appear before the City Commission on January 3, 2013, to request a continuance to a date certain. Upon reflection, I am of the belief that, should your client withdraw its appeal, the scheduled hearing before the City Commission on January 3, 2013 automatically becomes moot and there would be nothing for the Commission to consider. Thus, there is no vehicle available for which the Commission could continue anything to a subsequent date certain. Assuming the correctness of my position on this issue, the process would be as follows: Assuming that, tomorrow evening, SPRAB takes the deferral action you request, after your client redesigns and modifies the site plan it will submit that plan to the City's professional staff for review, after which a hearing on that new plan will be scheduled before SPRAB. After action thereon by SPRAB, a hearing date before the City Commission will be set, be it to consider the SPRAB recommendation in light of both the rezoning question and the site plan, or, should SPRAB deny the new site plan, then no doubt to consider an appeal of that denial you will file on behalf of your client. I therefore urge that you modify your request to the City consistent with the above. Should you disagree with my analysis, please advise me of the basis for that disagreement. Let me be clear that nothing herein is to be interpreted as committing my client's to a position concerning your request, nor should anything herein be interpreted to suggest that my client's in any way waive the belief that some of your requested "waivers" must be considered as variances and thus must be the subject of variance applications and the consideration thereof by the City's Board of Adjustment. Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne@zonelaw.com> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 12:49 PM To: Ron Kolins Cc: M. Young; Joe Carosella; Louis Carosella; dodi @2GHO.com; Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Michael Weiner; Ashlee Coosaia; Hoggard, Ron; kellifreeman@bellsouth.net-, pabinc Subject: RE: Tropic Isle Clients Thank you Ron. It is always good to see you. And I thought the dialogue was productive. I do feel the need to clarify your assessment of the meeting. You came in with "non- negotiables" and we said we would listen. You presented three "deal breakers" that you demanded else your clients would oppose the project: (a) a 10' wall (13' on your clients' side) surrounding the entire property, in addition to the existing wall; (b) all buildings pushed out 25' from said wall; and (c) no outdoor music. We said that we would always entertain reasonable requests and that we could not, respectfully, agree to your demands since they were unreasonable. On the other hand, I am proud to say that our client has incorporated other reasonable requests proposed by the neighbors, before you were hired. They include, but are not limited to: • Relocating ALL potential outdoor dining areas to the front of buildings and other outdoor seating areas to be away from the residents; • Removing ALL rear access doors (and ALL access) to and from the buildings along Linton; • Fully enclosing and air conditioning ALL trash compactors • Full enclosing and air conditioning ALL loading areas (which we have confirmed, no Class 8 delivery trucks which will be using the loading areas make any "beeping noise") • Articulating the rear facade along Linton (which no one is going to see anyway because of landscaping); • Limiting any full service, table seating, heavy use restaurants to the Federal Highway portion of the project, and reserving those Linton Blvd. parcels for less intensive dining uses such as a Jamba Juice, Starbucks, Subway, PeiWei, etc.; and • Not removing any mature trees which exist on either our property or your clients property which straddle the property line (such as the large tree behind Mr. Schnabel's residence). So I have to respectfully disagree that we are not willing to help your clients. To the contrary, RPG has spent an unprecedented amount of time and money (again, long before you were hired) to satisfy their requests over the past year. Overwhelmingly, the residents of Tropic Isle (even to the north) have been appreciative and collaborative. We continue to maintain an open door policy should you wish to explore other matters with us. But we must respectfully decline to entertain the "non- negotiable" site plan elements you state your clients are demanding. Please do not hesitate to e-mail or call if there is anything I have said which misconstrues your position. 1 JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEER AP WEINER, LYNNE Ft THOMPSON, P.A. 10 5E 1st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 I Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 HEAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION jlynne@zonelaw,com I www.zoneLaw.com APlease consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e -mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you muss not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561 - 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: Ron Kolins [mailto:cleanslaterk @gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 11:42 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: M. Young Subject: Re: Tropic Isle Clients I represent the following: Young (Spanish Trail); Strom; Schnabel; Ross; Rosenberg; DeGloyer; Sandhoff-, Pellegrini; Rockis; Lewandowski; and Young (McCleary St.). Of course, you will have no meetings or discussions with any of the foregoing without my participation. Thank you for meeting with me the other day and for lunch. I am sorry that your client was not willing to be helpful to my clients regarding the issues that are key to them. However, it never hurts to meet and have a dialogue. On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Jeffrey Lynne <ilynnegzonelaw.com> wrote: Ron — Attached is a list of those residents whom live on Eve Street, McCleary Street, and a few on Spanish Trail. Please help us by identifying whom you represent so we can respond to inquiries appropriately without violating attorney /client privilege. Thanks. I I rl JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Ft THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (5611 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (5611 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonetaw.com Please consider the emiroomenl before printing this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message ana any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. Hoggard, Ron From: Dodi Glas <Dodi @2gho.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 4:03 PM To: pabinc; Icarosella @rpg123.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne Cc: McDuffie, Woodier Carney, Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel, Adam; Jacquet, Al; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Hoggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place Dear Mr. Malloy; Your letter of November 20fh 2012 clearly tells me we have failed in showing you what we changed in response to your comments on November 14th. You did in fact discuss how far we have come, and, that you had one more concern. Specifically, you wanted the area between the buildings to have a higher wall to eliminate the "megaphone effect." You may recall you and I discussed the continuous wall effect that Mr. Hoggard had a concern over and how that may conflict with your suggestions. You had even said that you had already discussed that with Mr. Hoggard. What you apparently did not read in the revised plans is that we have redesigned that space to address both Mr. Hoggard's and your concerns. We have a included a roof over the area extending from the buildings, at a level below the overall building height, to address your concern to capture sound (while maintaining the solid rear wall that you like but using some glass blocks to allow interest and light but no vision through it to continue to provide the articulation that Mr. Hoggard wanted.) This was also done in an way to maintain the varied rear architecture to avoid the continuous "wall " effect that Mr. Hoggard noted he wanted to avoid. This redesign was in direct response to your last request. In our presentation materials, we will work harder to better demonstrate the design. know that there is has been a lot of conversation and time invested in the project. On behalf of the team, I want to thank you for your time and tell you that our meeting truly did impact the design and your comments were heard. Very Truly, Dodi Glas Dodi Bucknnaster Glas, AICP, LEED@AP I'ariner, Director of Plaiin-iiig Cell: 561- 310 -731-) dodina,2gho.com E Ji l` 4 b 1: La,�d�ra,c n:'� =1Cc�� Pi�iu��r_ :. - �iirunmenL *I {:�siml��int� GENTILE GLAS UOL,LOWAY UM AI3C NEY & Associates. Inc 1';07 Commerce Lane, Saire, 101 .lupiter, Florida 3'.,4_58 561 - 57:9 -9557 x121 The information contained in this transmission may contain pritdlet;ed and confidi:ntial information, It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient. ynu are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is shictly prohibited. If you are not the intcnded recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. All attached drawings, specifications and other documents, including those in electrouic form, prepared by the oxisultant and the Consultants Sub - consultants are Ins trumonts of Service for use exclusively to this Project_ The Consultant and the Consultants Sub - consultants shall be deemed the authors and owuers of Their respective Irt4rumenis of Service and shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights. From: pabinc fmailtc:pabinc @bellsouth.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: Icaresella(drpg123,ccm; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; Dodi Glas Cc, woody mcduffte; thomas carney; angeleta gray; adam frankel; al jacquet; CityMana_er MyDelrayBeach.com; hoggard(@mydelraybeach.com; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in regards to the Delray Place project and I have attached a letter for everyone to review and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy Nk -: TLVJIOI _1't!,l ill] kyj l TO: Delray Beach Site Plan & Appearance Board FROM: Ron Kolins: Attorney for Tropic Isles Resident Group RE: Proposed Delray Place Commercial Development I represent eleven families, each of which owns and lives in a home which directly abuts and is adjacent to the proposed Delray Place development. These homes lie along Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street. For ease of reference, I have named my clients, collectively, the Tropic Isles Resident Group ("the Group "). The Group does not oppose the application in its entirety, and indeed believes that some form of commercial use is appropriate for the site. My client's interest is to be protected from the unavoidable impacts of such a development, particularly since my clients are the ones with Tropic Isles who, because of the location of their homes, will suffer the greatest impact from said development. The issues of concern are: 1. Location of wall to be constructed at rear of development parallel to Spanish Trail. It must be build 5' west of development property line to preserve existing landscaping. 2. Height of wall to be constructed at rear of development parallel to Spanish Trail. It must be no less that 12 feet high to protect from visual, noise, fumes, lights, and other impacts. 3. Buffer along that property line to be no less than 20'. 4. Side of wall facing Spanish Trail should be "green ", with vines and vegetation flush with exterior of wall for visual protection of residents along Spanish Trail. 5. Existing 6' high wall along property line shared by the development site and McCleary Street must be made 4' higher by the addition of wood lattice or aluminum baffles to protect immediately abutting residents from impacts from the proposed adjacent line of restaurants. 6. Said wall to be "green" with vegetation on its exterior. 7. No music allowed outside of the restaurants. 8. Outdoor restaurtant table service to cease no later than 9 P.M. 9. Single story buildings proposed adjacent to McCleary Street to be no high than 18'. 10. HVAC units to be to quietest type made today. 11. Trash compactors screened and hours of use limited to 9 A.M. to 7 P.M. 12. No U -turns allowed by trucks or cars at intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic. 13. If proposed landscaping shown on site plan is, to any extent, precluded because of existing or subsequent easements, including the existing utility easement at the property line along McCleary Street, the easements must be moved or other satisfactory landscaping provided. 14. If development is to be done in more than one phase, all walls, landscaping, and related screening requirements must be complete for the ENTIRE proposed development as part of Phase 1 and prior to the issuance of any ground clearance or vertical construction permits. 15. Please note that, as discussed in the comments of the City's professional staff, there are legal issues with some of the waivers requested in that they should be variance requests not waiver requests. The Group agrees with those comments. 16.The Group supports the very thorough comments of the Staff report. ub�ted by: n D e Hoggard, Ron From: Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:55 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: Dorling, Paul; Hoggard, Ron; M. Young Subject: Delray Place Jeffrey: I am in receipt of your letter to Paul Dorling advising of your intention, on behalf of your client, the proposed developer of Delray Place, to appear before SPRAB tomorrow evening for the purpose of requesting that it reconsider its denial of your client's proposed site plan and to continue the matter to allow your client the time to modify the proposed site plan. Given your representation to me yesterday that your client intends to address the concerns with the site plan of my clients as set forth at the SPRAB hearing last week, my initial inclination, subject to discussions with my clients, is to support your effort to gain the time to address those issues in the site plan. However, your letter goes on to say that, assuming SPRAB takes the action you request tomorrow, your client will withdraw it appeal of last week's SPRAB decision and then appear before the City Commission on January 3, 2013, to request a continuance to a date certain. Upon reflection, I am of the belief that, should your client withdraw its appeal, the scheduled hearing before the City Commission on January 3, 2013 automatically becomes moot and there would be nothing for the Commission to consider. Thus, there is no vehicle available for which the Commission could continue anything to a subsequent date certain. Assuming the correctness of my position on this issue, the process would be as follows: Assuming that, tomorrow evening, SPRAB takes the deferral action you request, after your client redesigns and modifies the site plan it will submit that plan to the City's professional staff for review, after which a hearing on that new plan will be scheduled before SPRAB. After action thereon by SPRAB, a hearing date before the City Commission will be set, be it to consider the SPRAB recommendation in light of both the rezoning question and the site plan, or, should SPRAB deny the new site plan, then no doubt to consider an appeal of that denial you will file on behalf of your client. I therefore urge that you modify your request to the City consistent with the above. Should you disagree with my analysis, please advise me of the basis for that disagreement. Let me be clear that nothing herein is to be interpreted as committing my client's to a position concerning your request, nor should anything herein be interpreted to suggest that my client's in any way waive the belief that some of your requested "waivers" must be considered as variances and thus must be the subject of variance applications and the consideration thereof by the City's Board of Adjustment. MICEit zL S. WEINFrR J�-EERE,Y C. LYNNE. 1 A=,A.'MONfPSON JUSTIN M. CLAL'D L. DLa:NAHiiFMAN February 20, 2013 VIA E -MAIL & L.S. MAIL LAM C)FFICV5 WEINER, LYNNE & THOMP ON, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 10 SE F" AVT.NL.T,, SUITE C 1)F.LRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 Chairlan and Members of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board City of Delray Beach I00 NW 1 `t Avenue Delray Beach, 'Florida 33444 Re: Delray PIace Dear Mr. Chairman and Board Members of SPRAB: TEL,EFRO:NE (561) 265 - 2666 rAcsrmii,E (561) 272 - 6831 JL.YNNE @ZONELAW.COM WWW.ZONE1.VV,C,0 I On behalf of our client, Retail Property Group and its principals; Joe and Louis Carosella, we thank you again for allowing us to continue to March 13, 2013, our site plan review public hearing for the Delray Place retail shopping center project (on the southeast corner of S, Federal I-lio,hway and Linton Boulevard). This additional time has allowed the project's design team the opportunity to further work with the City's planning staff, the Tropic Isle Civic Association, Safety as Floridians Expect (SAFE), and most importantly, the residents directly abutting the proj ect. Admittedly, designing this site has proven to be a daunting task, even for seasoned and experienced retail developers as Retail Property Group. Unlike prior projects, there has been great pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the national tenants they have been negotiating with to design the site to meet those tenant's specific retail needs. There has been equal if not greater pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the owners of residential property adjacent to the project to not diminish the qualit}Y of life those residents have enjoyed for a period of years. Then, there is the inherent pressure to create an economically sustainable urban infill redevelopment project that is anticipated to serve as the catalyst for the resurgence and renaissance of the entire South Federal Highway eomidor. Meeting each of these colnpeiilsg demands and achie,�,ing consensus has proven to be an art and not a science, But we believe we are there. At the first SPRAB hearing on the Delray Place project; there was not sufficient time during the public heaving process for the project's consultants to fully explain the intentions behind the project's design.. In an effort to ensure your time is best sewed during the March 13, 2013 ]tearing, our clients are making thernselves and their desig 7 consultants, as well as the site irsel available to vou, at all hours and at your convenience to ansiver any cfiresttorrs you raacry have. The goal of this offer is to endeavor to answer as many of your questions and concc;rns in O 1CAR(J {)Oi�Cor espondei�cclLel[er To SPRAB Doex Site Plan Rcvsev, and Appearance Board February 20, 2013 Re, Delray Place Page 2 advance so that the Board -will be able to use its time efficiently and effectively during the hearing on March 13tt'. Their direct contact information is contained below, We certainly appreciate that you may be concerned about the appearance of impropriety by having such discussions. Everyone is very sensitive in today's age of ultra- transparency and ethics reform. Such discussions with the project's design professionals are lawful pursuant to state law and local ordinances, subject only to disclosure during the public hearing itself, Please feel free to confer with the City Attorney's Office if you have any concerns. You are also free to decline this offcr. We also understand that serving on SPRAB is voluntary and not your regular employment. This offer is therefore meant to provide you with a sufficient opportunity to fully explore the site plan at your convenience. Our clients are the developers, owners and managers of similar projects across southeast Florida. They live locally. They are committed to this property, to this project, and to the City of Delray Beach. They are therefore willing to provide you with whatever resources you need to make the best decision possible. your time and consideration. ,JEFFREY C. LYNNE JCL:mmi Mr. Joe Carosella Project Developer caroseila. a7r 1,23.corn (954) 647 -6790 (cell) Mark Saltz, AIA Project Architect nasal tzCasa ltzmi the ISQn.corn (954) 266 -2700 (office) Jeff Brophy, RLA, ASLA Project LaMscape Architect JBro h ' Land Design South.coin (561) 309 -1525 (cell) Joaquin Vargas, P.E., PTOL Project Traffic Engineer oaquin@traRcch, biz (954) 5 82-09 88 (office) Mr. Louis Carosella Project Developer larosella r 123.com (954) 873 -4597 (cell) Dodi Glas, AICP Project Planner dodi a72GHO.corn (561) 310 -7325 (cell) Dennis Schultz, PE Project Engineer d sliuliz @flyli nen2ineeritig.coin (954) 522 -1004 (office) Jeffrey C. Lynne, Esq, Project Agent j lynne(q]xonelaw.com (561) 239 -0839 (cell) MICEAEL S. WUN R JEFb'IlEY C. LYNNE LAumA. TrIOMI'SON JUSTIN M. CL.AUA L. DIANA HI LEMAN March 6, 2013 VIA E -MAIL & U.S. MAIL Ron Kolins, Esq. 701 S, Olive Avenue Apt, 313 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re: Delray Place Dear Ron: l,ANV OI -TICIS WEINER, LYNNE & THOMPSON, F.A. ATroRNEYs AT LAW 10 SE 1° AvEsuE, Surm C DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 334,44 ,r'F LEmoNE (561) 265 - 2666 FAcsrvuE (561) 272 - 6831 JL'YN` OZONEI-AW.CONI WWW.ZONELAW.COM 1 am writing on behalf of my clients, who have asked that I gather all of the responses from their various consultants to your clients' requests and provide their response accordingly. A sincere and significant effort has been undertaken to review the impacts of the proposed Delray Place development upon your specific clients' properties and every reasonable effort has been made to implement each requested accommodation. For those requests which could not be accommodated, please know that all cfforts were made to otherwise find another solution or, should no solution exist, to provide an honest and complete response, Your requests, and our clients' responses, are as follows: Request # 1: Building Heights: Maximum height at rear of buildings along Linton Blvd. to be no greater than 18'. The parapets are to be moved north to point approximately mid - building, with air-conditioning and other building equipment to be located north of said parapets. Response: Agreed. More specifically, the rear height of Buildings 600 - 900 have been reduced to eighteen feet (18') as requested. The air conditioning and other building equipment will need to be located no closer thmi sixteen feet (161) to the rear wall and enclosed with a wall /screening no higher than the tallest piece of equipment in compliance to the City code. Request # 2: Loading Docks_ The loading docks proposed for the rear of the large buildings which are parallel to Federal Highway and just to the west of Spanish `[rail are to be enclosed, including roof: with exhaust fans to be on the roof and directed 0:I CAR0003 %Corre3pondence,Responsc "fo Ron Kdins 16.B.Doex Ron Kolins, Esq. March 6, 2013 Page 2 upward. No exhaust fans are to be located so as to face or be directed east towards Tropic Isle. Response: Agreed, This design was previously implemented into the site plan per request of the Tropic Isle Civic Association for Buildings 500 -510, The site plan remains unchanged in that regard and therefore complies with this request. Request # 3: Existing Vegetation: The existing vegetation located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street within City owned easements is not to be disturbed, including the roots thereof, Walls and the footers therefore, must not be placed so as to disturb said vegetation, some of which are very mature trees. Response: Agreed. Request 4 4: Sound Baffles: The rear walls of the large buildings running parallel to Federal Highway are to have sound baffles, as are the parallel walls between both of said buildings. This is to mitigate the noise from trucks that will travel between the two buildings and to the rear of those buildings. Response: Agreed, in part. Sound absorbing panels will be provided on the south wall of Building 504 and the north wall of Building 506 so as to mitigate the noise from trucks that will travel between these two buildings and to the rear of those buildings. Request # 5: Administrative Changes; There are to be no adrninislratively approved changes to the site plan or any element thereof, with the exception of changing the use of a particular building, and then only so long as the change in use will not cause an increase in traffic or the need for additional parking spaces. Response: Agreed. Any reallocation of approved uses within established buildings which change in tenant category is consistent with the Shared Parking Equivalency Matrix and PBC traffic concurrency will be handled administratively; any change of site design or architectural elevations that does not seek an increase in height or intensity may be either approved administratively or via public hearing by SPRAIB at the discretion of the Zoning Director. Request # 6: Banyan Tree_: The large Banyan tree at the corner of the Schnabel house (corner of Spanish trail and McCleary Street) is not to be disturbed in any way, including the roots thereof, with the singular exception that, to the extent its branches may overhang the Delray Place property, those branches may be trimmed, but only to O: 1C AR00031Correspondenc:CTGsponse To Ron Kohns 3.6.13.Docx Ron Kolins, Esq. March 6, 2013 Page 3 the minimum extent necessary, and in no event beyond the property line of Delray Place. Response: Agreed. Request # 7: Truck Deliveries: Delivery times to be limited to between 7 A.M. and 7 P.M., Monday through Saturday. Response: Delivery times shall: be pursuant to commercially reasonable standards for shopping centers, taking into consideration the enormous expense undertaken by the property owner to create fully enclosed, air conditioned, and properly ventilated shared loading bays, which is not otherwise a requirement of the Land Development Regulations. As currently anticipated, all loading/unloading/delivery of goods shall begin no earlier than 6.00am and shall terminate by no later than 9pm daily. However, should the national specialty chain food store known as "Trader Joe's" become a tenant of the property, and pursuant to anticipated mandatory operating procedures for said specific tenant, loading/unloading/delivery of goods for this tenant alone shall begin no earlier than 5:00am and shall terminate by 10:00pm daily, with all said loading/unloading/delivery to occur entirely within the fully enclosed loading bays. In all instances, all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays shall remain closed at all times that delivery vehicles occupy these spaces. Though unlikely, any vehicle required to wait in queue to enter the enclosed loading bays shall be required to turn off its engine. The sound absorbing panels will further mitigate the noise from said trucks. Request # 8: Areca Palms: Areca Palm trees of significant maturity .are in he planted by developer on the Tropic Isle side of all landscape buffers (in addition to other previously proposed landscaping) running the entire Perimeter of the Delray Place property (from the easternmost boundary along the Linton Blvd, side to Spanish Trail, then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street, then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street). The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the Banyan tree or its roots at the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be placed as close to that tree as possible without so disturbing the tree. Response: Agreed, if approved by the City and not otherwise opposed by the Tropic Isle Civic Association for those portions of the property boundary not adjacent to a residence but otherwise adjacent to public right -of -way. The Areca Palms will need to be planted in between the 25' spacing of the required canopy trees as shown on the currently submitted landscape plan, and will be a O;1 CAR00031CorrespondericelResporise To Ron Kolms 3.6J 3.Docx Ron Kohns, Esq, March 6, 2013 Page 4 substitute species for the currently proposed smaller canopy trees in order to accommodate the landscape material adequately. Request # 9: Wood Fence: The existing wood fence lying along the developer's property and Just outside of the City easement, and parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, is to be removed. Its condition is very poor and it is an eyesore. Response: Agreed. All perimeter wood fencing is intended to be replaced with a pre- cast concrete wall. Request # 10: External Music and Outdoor Table Service: Should any of the buildings running parallel to Linton Blvd, be occupied by, and operated as, restaurants and%or bars, outdoor music and outdoor table service, if any, must cease at 9 P.M. Response: Restaurants and/or bars which may he located within the structures identified as Buildings 600, 700, 800 and 900 shall not be permitted to have live outdoor entertainment but shall be permitted to provide prc- recorded music not to exceed City noise limits and shall terminate all such music by no later than 10:06 pm daily, consistent with commercially reasonable standards for shopping centers and taking into consideration the complete redesign of said buildings to create enclosed alcoves, at the request of the Tropic Islc Civic Association and specific residents not represented by counsel. Request # 11: Construction Access: There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of Tropic Isle. Response: Agreed. Request # 12: Building Relocation: The westernmost proposed building rurming parallel to Linton Blvd. is to be modified in such a way so as to remove and relocate the two westernmost bays of said building. This will result in the row of buildings running parallel to Linton Blvd. to start further to the east by the width of two bays. Those two bays may be relocated by the developer elsewhere along that row of buildings to a place to be determined by the developer, It should be noted that the westernmost of said buildings, as presently reflected on the proposed site plan, extends westward of the house at 901 McCleary Street, thereby subjecting that corner property to development impacts on two. sides, and dramatically impacting the quality of life at that property. Response: After detailed analysis, it has been determined that this request is unfortunately not feasible. Design of the entire site has been strictly scrutinized to reasonably mitigate all adverse impacts from the existing OACAR00031CoiTespor don ce \Response To Ran Kolirs3.6,13.Docx Ron Kolins, Esq, March 6,2013 Page 5 commercial parcel being redeveloped adjacent to the existing residential neighborhood. Relocation of the two western most bays of Building 600 would have significant adverse impact upon the entire project. Buildings 600 thru 900 were specially designed to create a direct pedestrian connection to the major anchor tenant in Building 500. Relocating Building 600 would undermine the cohesiveness of the center and its overwhelmingly pedestrian friendly and integrated design. Relocating Building 600 further east for the benefit of the single lot owner identified would have to therefore come at the detriment of other homeowners who did not purchase their property immediately adjacent to an existing commercial use. While suggestions from this lot owner that support of the project could be obtained in exchange for purchase of their residence, the economics of such a transaction are not practical and would set an unhealthy precedent for the greater Tropic Isle community, Notwithstanding, and in contemplation of the redevelopment of this existing commercial site, the developers of the project have met with this specific lot owner on various occasions at both public and private meetings, The developers have critically examined every requested mitigation measure proposed by this specific resident (including the request for a twenty -foot (20') high wall between the properties) and have incorporated every feasible option at each opportunity, including highly expensive fully enclosed loading bays for Buildings 500 -510, as well as fully enclosed and air conditioned trash compaction rooms, Sound baffling has now been additionally requested and agreed to. Any further accommodation to this lot owner by way of relocation of Building 600, unfortunately, causes an unbalanced and unfair burden upon the developer and the project as a whole. Regrettably, the developers cannot agree to this request. Request 4 13: Trash Areas: Trash Areas are to be air- conditioned and enclosed. Response. Agreed, with regard to all buildings adjacent to Tropic Isle (Buildings 500- 510, and 600 -900). The buildings immediately fronting S. Federal Highway are not designed to have enclosed, air - conditioned trash areas. Request 4 14: No "U" Turn Signs: Developer is to work with Tropic Isle and the City to have a No "U" Turn sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, 0LC,6, RC )0031CorrespondencelResponse'To Ron Kolins 3.6,13.Docx Ron Kolins, Esq, March 6, 2013 Page 6 Response: Agreed. Request 9 15: Vertical Construction: All walls, landscaping; and related screening requirements located between Delray Place and Tropic Tsle must be installed and completed for all said portions of the Delray Place development before the start of vertical construction. Response: While the developer respects and appreciates the concern expressed, it is not commercially realistic or practical to phase any construction in this manner. There is a phasing plan on file with the City which depicts anticipated demolition and construction phases. Due to irrigation requirements and the potential for injury to landscaping from construction activity, trees, shrubs, bushes and the like are one of the very last items to be installed in any project, residential or commercial. However, these items shall be installed prior to Certificate of Occupancy, per City code. Request # 16: Rear Doors: There are to be no rear doors for the buildings facing and running parallel to Linton Blvd. The large buildings facing Spanish Trail may have emergency rear doors only. Response: Agreed. This design was previously implemented into the site plan per request of the Tropic Isle Civic Association. The site plan remains unchanged in that regard and therefore complies with this request. Request # 17: )lquipment: All mops, grease traps, buckets, and the like are to be internally stored within the buildings. Response: Agreed. Request # 18: Access Points: There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the latest site plan filed on behalf of the developer as of the date hexeof, namely 2126111 Response: Agreed. Request # 19: Site Plait Modifications: Developer will promptly amend its site plan to the extent necessary to reflect the matters which, hopefully, will be agreed to herein. Response: The site plan, landscape plan, and architectural elevations already reflect most of the responses contained herein. If further additions are required to be consistent with these responses, same will be made as "Conditions of approval" by staff and confirmed via the Site Plan Certification process. 0: 1CAR0003 1CorrespondencelResponse To kon Kolins 3.6.13.Doex Ron Kolins, Esq. March 6, 2013 Page 7 Request #220: This "request " was in the form of a generalized comment and therefore no response is warranted. However, as stated above, the responses set forth herein have either already been previously made a part of the site plan submittal or, as appropriate, and with the City's consent, may be memorialized within Ordinance 41 -12 or made a condition of site plan approval by SPRAB and confirmed through the City's standard Site Plan Certification process, Respectfully submitted, Cc: Ron Hoggard, AICP. Principal Planner, City of Delray Beach Brian Shutt, Esq., City Attorney Ashlee L. Coosaia, EI, Project Manager Mr, Joe Carosella Mr. Louis Carosella Mark Saltz, AIA Dodi Glas, AICP Jeff Brophy, LSA Joaquin Vargas, PE 0 1CAROOi 331Ccrrespondence\Respense To flan Kolins 16- 13_Docx Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 6:47 PM To: kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; Ray Kempf Cc: Joe Carosella; Louis Carosella; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael S. Weiner; Dodi Glas; AIA Mark L. Saltz; Michele Burns; Dennis Shultz; Jeff Brophy; Hoggard, Ron; Jim Smith; Ronald Kenneth Kolins Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Hi Kelli. Your timing is good. The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith /SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard. However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodal transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the points that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal. By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, " Kelli Freeman" <kellifreemangbellsouth.net> wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, I haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednesday night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kelh Kelli Freeman (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 5:41 PM To: James EJIMCHAR @aol.com; kellifreeman @bellsouth. net; ray_kempf @hotmail.com Cc: JCarosella @rpg123.com; LCarosella @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi@ 2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin @rpg123.com; dshultz @flynnengineering.com; JBrophy @Land DesignSouth.com; Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia Subject: RE: Delray Place Update ?? Illii� As always, thank you for your e -mail and for being a great advocate. I have responded, in kind, below. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com [mailto:JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 3:55 PM To: Jeffrey Lynne; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; ray_kempf @hotmail.com Cc: 3Carosella @rpg123.com; LCarosella @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi @2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin @rpg123.com; dshultz @flynnengineering.com; JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.com; Hoggard @mydelraybeach.com; cleanslaterk @gmail.com Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Jeff It was very welcomed news to discover that the applicant has eliminated the two buildings on the Linton Blvd side of the project which will increase the number and reduce the demand for parking spaces. How many total parking spaces will now be provided in the project? APPROXIMATELY 407- 410, WHICH EQUATES TO 3.5 SPACES /1000 S.F. As a point of reference, based on info SAFE has received from Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, " Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,000SF of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates...." It seems likely that a Trader Joes would require at least that number of parking spaces. There have been too many horror stories about Trader Joes parking /traffic problems all over the USA to ignore (see attached). A TYPICAL PUBLIX OR WHOLE FOODS IS WELL OVER 50,000 S.F. IN FACT WHOLE FOODS BEGAN SCALING BACK STORES FROM ITS PROTOTYPE 80,000 S.F. TO 35K -50K S.F. TRADER JOES IS MUCH SMALLER, AND THE ONE CONTEMPLATED FOR DELRAY PLACE (ASSUMING THEY DON'T BACK OUT AND GO TO BOCA AT THIS POINT) IS LESS THAN 13,000 S.F., WHICH IS OVER SEVENTY -FIVE PERCENT (75 %) SMALLER IN SCALE AND USE. THE PICTURES YOU SENT SHOW A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ON- STREET PARKING. ALL OF OUR PARKING IS OFF - STREET AND ON -SITE. THE AREAS REFERENCED ARE ALSO IN HEAVILY URBANIZED AREAS (CHICAGO; LOS ANGELES). I DO NOT BELIEVE A PROPER COMPARISON CAN BE MADE. As SAFE mentioned during our joint meeting with South Florida Commuter Services and our follow - up "Thank you" email, we hope that the applicant will provide secure inside employee bicycle storage, lockers, and separate shower facilities for males and females. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE MET WITH YOU AND WITH CHARLIE BONFIELD; THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE FROM "SAFE" PRESENT. WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND "SAFE" OR ANY EQUIVALENT ORGANIZATION REGISTERED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE COUNTY OR THE CITY. UNDER THE NEW COUNTY ETHICS RULES, WE ARE NOT SURE IF THIS APPLIES TO "SAFE ". WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND A WEBSITE THAT HAD ANY OTHER INFORMATION AS TO WHO "SAFE" IS. I ALSO BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU LIVE NEAR THE PROJECT AND THEREFORE I BELIEVE YOU RIGHTFULLY HAVE A PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT, ABOVE WHAT THE TYPICAL "SAFE" MEMBER MAY HAVE. NOTWITHSTANDING, I PERSONALLY RECOGNIZE YOUR PASSION FOR SAFETY AND MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION AND APPLAUD YOU FOR SAME. I WISH OTHERS WOULD DO AS MUCH AS YOU. WITH THAT SAID, THE SITE IS HAS MULTIPLE CONVENIENTLY LOCATED BIKE RACKS, STRATEGICALLY PLACED THROUGHOUT THE SITE BOTH FOR BUSINESS INVITEES AND EMPLOYEES. BUILDING INTERNAL BIKE STORAGE, LOCKERS, AND SHOWER FACILITIES, AS YOU PRESENTED BY COMPARISON TO US FOR THE ATLANTIC PLAZA PROJECT, WERE PART OF A LARGER RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, WHICH AMENITIES WILL ALSO BE SHARED, AS WE UNDERSTAND, BY RENTERS. OUR CLIENT'S PROJECT IS COMPRISED OF SINGLE - STORY STRUCTURES, UNLIKE ATLANTIC PLAZA, AND THEREFORE THIS ADDITIONAL "AMENITY" IS NOT FEASIBLE. WE HAVE ALREADY REMOVED 30,000 S.F. OF GROSS LEASABLE AREA. Since an employee occupies a parking space 8 hours or more, having one employee ride a bicycle to work, means that approximately 34 customers can parking in that employee "saved" parking space over an employee shift. In addition to this obvious reduction in parking demand, employers will discover that employees will be more attracted to work for an employer who provides for such facilities as one who does not. WE AGREE, WHICH IS WHY WE COMMITTED IN WRITING TO WORKING WITH SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUTER SERVICES TO EDUCATE ALL EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT BUS STOP, CONVENIENT BUS ROUTE, AS WELL AS THE TRI -RAIL ROUTE. WE ALSO FULLY SUPPORT THE FEC RAILWAY STUDY WHICH WILL BRING COMMUTER PASSENGER SERVICE TO THE AREA IN THE FUTURE. SAFE continues to have concerns about exiting, left turn traffic onto Linton Blvd. Currently, there is considerable left- turning traffic from Linton Blvd. into Harbours Edge and the Harbor Plaza shopping center on the north side of Linton Blvd; and, left- turning traffic exiting from the north side of Linton Blvd., headed east over the bridge. SAFE believes that without a new traffic signal the introduction of semi - tractor trailers turning left onto Linton Blvd. from Delray Place will exasperate the situation to an unsafe level. Linton Blvd. is a five lane highway with a median where traffic speeds sometimes exceed 50 mph. As far as SAFE knows there has been no traffic study prepared by either the City or the applicant that would project peak left turning traffic onto Linton Blvd. Also, SAFE calculates that the distance from the Federal Highway traffic signal is 510'- more than enough distance to qualify for a traffic signal, if traffic warrants. SAFE points out that this distance is greater than the distance between the two existing traffic signals on Federal Highway /Linton Blvd. and Banyan Tree Lane /Federal Highway. If the applicant would be willing to provide the name and contact info of the person in the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering Department who told the applicant that a new traffic signal "does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection," SAFE will have an easy way to satisfy itself that a new traffic signal will not be allowed. THE SPACING OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SHOULD ALLOW EFFICIENT SIGNAL PROGRESSION AT THE PREVAILING SPEEDS AND CYCLE LENGTHS. THIS NORMALLY REQUIRES RELATIVELY UNIFORM SPACINGS BETWEEN SIGNALS, AND SUFFICIENT DISTANCES BETWEEN THEM. I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO FDOT REGULATIONS, THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN TRAFFIC SIGNALS IS 750 FEET, AND IDEALLY 1,320 FEET. THE EXISTING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE MEDIAN CUT YOU REFERENCE AND THE EXISTING LIGHT AT FEDERAL HIGHWAY IS ACTUALLY APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET. IF YOU BELIEVE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WRONG REGULATIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW. However, if the applicant believes the info obtained from the County to be correct, why doesn't the applicant simply agree to a promise to pay for a new traffic signal on Linton Blvd for up to 1 year after the project is occupied, subject to City and County assessment? ASSUMING YOU WERE ALSO INVOLVED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT APPROVAL OF THE STILES DEVELOPMENT ON THE NE CORNER, WHICH IS BUILDING THE NEW FRESH MARKET, WAS THIS A CONDITION OF THEIR APPROVAL? I DO NOT KNOW. SUCH AN EXCESSIVE FINANCIAL BURDEN SHOULD BE SHARED BY EVERYONE. AS IS, THE TROPIC ISLE COMMUNITY HAS REQUESTED FULLY ENCLOSED AND AIR CONDITIONED SHARED LOADING BAYS AND TRASH COMPACTORS, COSTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. OUR CLIENT IS NOT A DEVELOPER WITH DEEP POCKETS LIKE STILES. AGAIN, PLEASE ACCEPT THIS E -MAIL AS A RESPONSE TO YOU AND CHARLIE AND HOPE IS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. Please ask the applicant to respond to all of SAFE's questions and suggestions. SAFE wants to support this project, but as of now it cannot. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 3 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iameseiimchar(cDaol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" In a message dated 2/4/2013 6:47:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jlynneLzonelaw.com writes: Hi Kelli. Your timing is good. The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith /SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard. However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodal transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the points that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal. By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, " Kelli Freeman" <kellifreemana-bellsouth.net> wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, I haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednesday night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kelli Kelli Freeman (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 6:45 AM To: ctbonfield @aol.com Cc: James EJIMCHAR @aol.com; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; ray_kempf@hotmail.com; JCarosella @rpg123.com; LCarosella @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi@ 2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin @rpg123.com; dshultz @flynnenginee ring. com; JBrophy @Land Des ignSouth.com; Hoggard, Ron; Dorling, Paul Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? We have integrated each of your requests to the maximum extent possible. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 Sent from my iPad On Feb 11, 2013, at 6:08 AM, "ctbonfieldLaol.com" <ctbonfield&aol.com> wrote: Jeff The "no truck ingress /egress on Linton" for the Delray Place project is appropriate and a relief. Those of us who drive on Linton Boulevard regularly could envision considerable traffic congestion at this junction particularly when the Linton Bridge has opened and then closed. We already have traffic congestion at the Atlantic Avenue Bridge when it has opened and closed. During season, traffic at this bridge can back up to A1A on the east and 5th Avenue on the west after an opening /closing. It will become even worse when Atlantic Crossing is built out. This could happen at Linton should there be much egress traffic from Delray Place. Thanks for your consideration on this request. Charlie Bonfield 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1203 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield(a)aol.com In a message dated 2/10/2013 3:08:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ilynne(a-)-zonelaw.com writes: You are correct re no truck ingress /egress on Linton. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "James EJIMCHARa- aol.com" <JamesEJIMCHARa- aol.com> wrote: Jeff et al: Thanks for your email response and for your kind words about me and the SAFE organization. As you know, SAFE President Charlie Bonfield and I arranged the meeting and prepared the meeting agenda that you, the brother of the developer, and two staffers from South Florida Commuter Services attended. So, I would say that SAFE was very much involved in that effort. For those of you who are unfamiliar with SAFE, please let me explain what SAFE is, and what our mission is: SAFE is an email based, non -dues, advocacy organization that connects with individuals, elected officials, government leaders, governmental departments /agencies, businesses, clubs, the media, etc., to promote safety on Florida roadways. SAFE periodically sends out a free, email newsletter. SAFE's long -term goal is to change Florida's reputation from being known as a "killing zone" for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, to being known as the safest state in the nation for travelers. SAFE will not have accomplished its mission until Florida is universally recognized as the # 1 motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA. SAFE was founded in 2004. At that time, SAFE's sole mission was to influence the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to build bicycle lanes and additional sidewalks on AlA in Delray Beach. At that time, our membership was confined, for the most part, to Delray Beach residents. Since that time, SAFE has enlarged the scope of its mission to include safety on all Florida roads (not just confined to AIA), and to include motorist safety, as well as pedestrian and bicyclist safety. SAFE has few membership meetings, but instead, relies on email to communicate. SAFE advocacy activities include writing emails to elected officials /government leaders, emailing "letters to the editor ", working on special projects, proposing law changes, preparing research reports, and attending public meetings. We hope you agree with SAFE's mission, and offer your support by becoming a member. To become a new SAFE member, please send a "YES" email to jamesejimchar2aol.com. If at any time you want to stop receiving P1 SAFE's free newsletter, just let us know, and SAFE will delete your email address. Thanks. SAFE has three continuing problems with Delray Place: adequate parking, appropriate TDM initiatives, and truck traffic exiting onto Linton Blvd that is headed west, south, and east. First, let's address the parking issue. In your email you stated that after eliminating two buildings on the Linton Blvd. side of the project, there will now be between 407- 410 parking spaces which equates to 3.5 spaces /1,000 S.F. vs. the City minimum of 4.0 spaces /1,000 S.F. Based on SAFE's analysis of parking spaces at The Boys on S. Military, SAFE does not believe that City's minimum parking requirement for a shopping center will be adequate to prevent congestion and spill -over traffic to the surrounding neighborhoods. SAFE counted 173 parking spaces at the Boys. Customer parking totals 141 parking spaces and employee parking adds another 32. Included in the 141 spaces are 8 spaces along the south perimeter where there are "No parking signs ". However, this morning at 11:30, when we took the survey, these spaces were occupied as were the rest of the customer parking spaces. SAFE suggests that the applicant and the City audit our numbers. The owner of The Boys wasn't exactly sure of the square footage of the building since he has added on several times. His estimate was 12,000 S.F. From my own experience in the retail industry, I would have estimated 11,000 to 12,000 S.F The question that must be addressed by the City is whether the formula of 4.0 for Delray Place is sufficient. The City must weigh the actual experience of The Boys with a formula approach for Delray Place. The formula would require 4 X 13,000 S.F., or 52 parking spaces for Delray Place vs. the 173 actual parking spaces at The Boys. Some people even believe that the 173 parking spaces provided at The Boys is inadequate. As a result of our count of parking spaces at The Boys, and from blogging stories about the high volume of shoppers at existing Trader Joes and resulting parking problems, SAFE believes that applicant needs to either provide more parking or or reduce the demand for parking. It seems to us that the developer has three ways to make that happen - either to reduce density further or implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives that will reduce employee parking, or some combinations of the two. Jeff, referring to another of your points, SAFE will require that bicycle showers, lockers, and inside bicycle storage be provided. Atlantic Crossing will be providing for these facilities for its employees. Residents at Atlantic Crossing will have separate inside bicycle storage and will not need showers or lockers. As far as a traffic light on Linton Blvd is concerned, Linton Blvd is a County road and not a State road. So, "yes" you are looking at the wrong regulation. Please exam the County code, 2009 Edition — Revision I, Section 1A.09. That regulation states that "...this Manual should not be considered a substitute for engineering judgement." However, SAFE has learned that the applicant may be considering a change in the directional flow of exiting truck traffic by moving it to Federal Highway so this point may be mute. If this is correct, we applaud that decision. Since the BPOA similarly disapproved of exiting trucks on Linton Blvd, they may be pleased as well. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iameseiimchar(a)aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" PS: Attached are a few horror stories about parking at The Boys and other Trader Joes. See you can tell which are which. Note: some of the Trader Joes are located in shopping centers. In a message dated 2/6/2013 5:40:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ilynnekzonelaw.com writes: Jim — As always, thank you for your e -mail and for being a great advocate. I have responded, in kind, below. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 4 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com [mailto:JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 3:55 PM To: Jeffrey Lynne; kellifreeman@bellsouth.net; ray kempf @hotmail.com Cc: Karosella @rpa121com; LCarosella @rpa123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi @2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin @rpa123.com; dshultz(aflynnengineering.com; JBrophy(aLandDesianSouth.com; Hog_aard mydelraybeach.com; cleanslaterk(d)amail.com Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Jeff: It was very welcomed news to discover that the applicant has eliminated the two buildings on the Linton Blvd side of the project which will increase the number and reduce the demand for parking spaces. How many total parking spaces will now be provided in the project? APPROXIMATELY 407 -410, WHICH EQUATES TO 3.5 SPACES /1000 S.F. As a point of reference, based on info SAFE has received from Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, " Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,000SF of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates...." It seems likely that a Trader Joes would require at least that number of parking spaces. There have been too many horror stories about Trader Joes parking /traffic problems all over the USA to ignore (see attached). A TYPICAL PUBLIX OR WHOLE FOODS IS WELL OVER 50,000 S.F. IN FACT WHOLE FOODS BEGAN SCALING BACK STORES FROM ITS PROTOTYPE 80,000 S.F. TO 35K -50K S.F. TRADER JOES IS MUCH SMALLER, AND THE ONE CONTEMPLATED FOR DELRAY PLACE (ASSUMING THEY DON'T BACK OUT AND GO TO BOCA AT THIS POINT) IS LESS THAN 13,000 S.F., WHICH IS OVER SEVENTY - FIVE PERCENT (75 %) SMALLER IN SCALE AND USE. THE PICTURES YOU SENT SHOW A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ON- STREET PARKING. ALL OF OUR PARKING IS OFF - STREET AND ON -SITE. THE AREAS REFERENCED ARE ALSO IN HEAVILY URBANIZED AREAS (CHICAGO; LOS ANGELES). I DO NOT BELIEVE A PROPER COMPARISON CAN BE MADE. As SAFE mentioned during ourjoint meeting with South Florida Commuter Services and our follow -up "Thank you" email, we hope that the applicant will provide secure inside employee bicycle storage, lockers, and separate shower facilities for males and females. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE MET WITH YOU AND WITH CHARLIE BONFIELD; THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE FROM "SAFE" PRESENT. WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND "SAFE" OR ANY EQUIVALENT ORGANIZATION REGISTERED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE COUNTY OR THE CITY. UNDER THE NEW COUNTY ETHICS RULES, WE ARE NOT SURE IF THIS APPLIES TO "SAFE ". WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND A WEBSITE THAT HAD ANY OTHER INFORMATION AS TO WHO "SAFE" IS. I ALSO BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU LIVE NEAR THE PROJECT AND THEREFORE I BELIEVE YOU RIGHTFULLY HAVE A PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT, ABOVE WHAT THE TYPICAL "SAFE" MEMBER MAY HAVE. NOTWITHSTANDING, I PERSONALLY RECOGNIZE YOUR PASSION FOR SAFETY AND MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION AND APPLAUD YOU FOR SAME. I WISH OTHERS WOULD DO AS MUCH AS YOU. WITH THAT SAID, THE SITE IS HAS MULTIPLE CONVENIENTLY LOCATED BIKE RACKS, STRATEGICALLY PLACED THROUGHOUT THE SITE BOTH FOR BUSINESS INVITEES AND EMPLOYEES. BUILDING INTERNAL BIKE STORAGE, LOCKERS, AND SHOWER FACILITIES, AS YOU PRESENTED BY COMPARISON TO US FOR THE ATLANTIC PLAZA PROJECT, WERE PART OF A LARGER RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, WHICH AMENITIES WILL ALSO BE SHARED, AS WE UNDERSTAND, BY RENTERS. OUR CLIENT'S PROJECT IS COMPRISED OF SINGLE -STORY STRUCTURES, UNLIKE ATLANTIC PLAZA, AND THEREFORE THIS ADDITIONAL "AMENITY" IS NOT FEASIBLE. WE HAVE ALREADY REMOVED 30,000 S.F. OF GROSS LEASABLE AREA. Since an employee occupies a parking space 8 hours or more, having one employee ride a bicycle to work, means that approximately 34 customers can parking in that employee "saved" parking space over an employee shift. In addition to this obvious reduction in parking demand, employers will discover that employees will be more attracted to work for an employer who provides for such facilities as one who does not. WE AGREE, WHICH IS WHY WE COMMITTED IN WRITING TO WORKING WITH SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUTER SERVICES TO EDUCATE ALL EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT BUS STOP, CONVENIENT BUS ROUTE, AS WELL AS THE TRI -RAIL ROUTE. WE ALSO FULLY SUPPORT THE FEC RAILWAY STUDY WHICH WILL BRING COMMUTER PASSENGER SERVICE TO THE AREA IN THE FUTURE. SAFE continues to have concerns about exiting, left turn traffic onto Linton Blvd. Currently, there is considerable left- turning traffic from Linton Blvd. into Harbours Edge and the Harbor Plaza shopping center on the north side of Linton Blvd; and, left- turning traffic exiting from the north side of Linton Blvd., headed east over the bridge. SAFE believes that without a new traffic signal the introduction of semi - tractor trailers turning left onto Linton Blvd. from Delray Place will exasperate the situation to an unsafe level. Linton Blvd. is a five lane highway with a median where traffic speeds sometimes exceed 50 mph. As far as SAFE knows there has been no traffic study prepared by either the City or the applicant that would project peak left turning traffic onto Linton Blvd. Also, SAFE calculates that the distance from the Federal Highway traffic signal is 510'- more than enough distance to qualify for a traffic signal, if traffic warrants. SAFE points out that this distance is greater than the distance between the two existing traffic signals on Federal Highway /Linton Blvd. and Banyan Tree Lane /Federal Highway. If the applicant would be willing to provide the name and contact info of the person in the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering Department who told the applicant that a new traffic signal "does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection," SAFE will have an easy way to satisfy itself that a new traffic signal will not be allowed. THE SPACING OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SHOULD ALLOW EFFICIENT SIGNAL PROGRESSION AT THE PREVAILING SPEEDS AND CYCLE LENGTHS. THIS NORMALLY REQUIRES RELATIVELY UNIFORM SPACINGS BETWEEN SIGNALS, AND SUFFICIENT DISTANCES BETWEEN THEM. I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO FDOT REGULATIONS, THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN TRAFFIC SIGNALS IS 750 FEET, AND IDEALLY 1,320 FEET. THE EXISTING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE MEDIAN CUT YOU REFERENCE AND THE EXISTING LIGHT AT FEDERAL HIGHWAY IS ACTUALLY APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET. IF YOU BELIEVE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WRONG REGULATIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW. However, if the applicant believes the info obtained from the County to be correct, why doesn't the applicant simply agree to a promise to pay for a new traffic signal on Linton Blvd for up to 1 year after the project is occupied, subject to City and County assessment? ASSUMING YOU WERE ALSO INVOLVED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT APPROVAL OF THE STILES DEVELOPMENT ON THE NE CORNER, WHICH IS BUILDING THE NEW FRESH MARKET, WAS THIS A CONDITION OF THEIR APPROVAL? I DO NOT KNOW. SUCH AN EXCESSIVE FINANCIAL BURDEN SHOULD BE SHARED BY EVERYONE. AS IS, THE TROPIC ISLE COMMUNITY HAS REQUESTED FULLY ENCLOSED AND AIR CONDITIONED SHARED LOADING BAYS AND TRASH COMPACTORS, COSTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. OUR CLIENT IS NOT A DEVELOPER WITH DEEP POCKETS LIKE STILES. AGAIN, PLEASE ACCEPT THIS E -MAIL AS A RESPONSE TO YOU AND CHARLIE AND HOPE IS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. Please ask the applicant to respond to all of SAFE's questions and suggestions. SAFE wants to support this project, but as of now it cannot. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iameseiimchar(cD-aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" In a message dated 2/4/2013 6:47:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jlynnegzonelaw.com writes: Hi Kelli. Your timing is good. The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith /SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard. However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodal transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the points that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal. By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, "Kelli Freeman" <kellifreemana- bellsouth.net> wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, I haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednf night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kelli Kelli Freeman 10 (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iameseiimchar(a)aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" <Boys.TraderJoes. Parking.docx> 11 Hoggard, Ron From: Dorling, Paul Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 9:56 AM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Insufficient Parking at Delray Place fyi Paul Dorling, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning City Of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st. Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 561- 243 -7040 dorlingpa- ci.delray- beach.fl.us From: JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com [mailto:JamesE]IMCHAR @aol.com] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 7:52 AM To: Dorling, Paul Subject: Insufficient Parking at Delray Place Paul After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407- 410 parking spaces, or 3.5/1.000 S.F. will be woefully inadequate to support the proposed development. According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S.F., the parking ratio of The Boys is a whopping 15.0/1,000 S.F. Therefore, if the planned for Trader Joes is as popular as The Boys — and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations - applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Of course, since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefiting from shared parking since the restaurants and Trader Joes peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 6,000, the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime parking needs of both Trader Joes (195) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be mayhem in the parking lot during peak times. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking lot for employees. In any event, the P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition. Click here: 1401 California: Trader Joe's And CVS Authorization This Week at SocketSiteTM Other SAFE concerns: 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10:00 PM? 3. Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Thank you for your consideration. Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iameseiimchar(a)aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" z After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407- 410 parking spaces, or 3.5/1.000 S.F. will be woefully inadequate to support the proposed development. According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S.F., the parking ratio of The Boys is a whopping 15.0/1,000 S.F. Therefore, if the planned for Trader Joes is as popular as The Boys — and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations - applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross, leasable floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Of course, since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefiting from shared parking since the restaurants and Trader Joes peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 6,000, the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime parking needs of both Trader Joes (195) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be mayhem in the parking lot during peak times. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking lot for employees. In any event, the P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition. See attached for more info. Other SAFE concerns: 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10:00 PM? 3. Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Thank you for your consideration. Mr. Carosella Thank you and Jeff for your emails and for the Shared Parking Analysis, Matrix and Third -Party Justification for Delray Place prepared by Traf Tech and the supplement to that report prepared by Gentile, Glas, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates. These, indeed, are comprehensive studies and well reported. First, let me say that SAFE understands the limitations that you have for installing bicycle lockers and showers in the facilities you have planned. SAFE therefore withdraws its recommendations that you install such facilities at Delray Place. Particularly, since you will not have on -site personnel to care for and maintain such facilities. And, we can see that with mixed -use tenants you will likely have it is not a feasible option. SAFE's remaining concern is parking. We will, of course, concur with whatever the Delray Beach P &Z Department decides regarding parking. Some types of businesses have more parking demand than others. For instance, someone picking up clothes from a cleaners will be parking for perhaps 15 minutes, whereas persons visiting a restaurant for dinner may need parking for 3 -4 hours. So, the mix of businesses at Delray Place will determine parking demand. We would still like to have you meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site plan has been approved to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. We hope you will do whatever possible to limit employee parking at the site. Some possibilities would be to encourage employee use of public transportation, commutating by bicycle or walking, and perhaps off -site parking for employees. SFCS has effective information on these possibilities. Charlie Bonfield President, SAFE 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1203 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield @aol.com Parking around Trader Joe's sparks "vigilante" action January 5, 2012 Handmade signs affixed to trees between Milvia and Bonita on December 20th warned of the risk of being ticketed. Photo: D.H. Parks By Linda Hemmila If you've received a parking ticket near Trader Joe's on University Avenue in Berkeley, you're in good company. So many people have been ticketed there over the past year and half it's become a neighborhood cause, has provoked defiant action from a "parking vigilante ", and is up for renewed discussion at the next scheduled City Council meeting on January 17th. The trouble stems from parking signs in the area, which, according to councilmember Jesse Arreguin, are "very confusing ". The city has acknowledged as much by dismissing most contested citations because, it says, the signage is not sufficiently clear to visitors. It all started in June 2010 when, as part of the redevelopment of the downtown area and with the June 11 opening of Trader Joe's — the city altered parking signs in the neighborhood that designated one side of the street as resident -only parking and the other side two -hour parking. The signs on the residential side were adorned with red and white city -made stickers denoting "no parking" that were placed directly over the old sign which said "two- hour parking ". The streets in questions include Berkeley Way, Addison Street, Bonita Avenue and Grant Street. ,a// c;� e ss e Y IS/— 7I �o Far help ye 1 /1n1 '1) a7aa Fo r a C, o n Fas' rvI ui�v r * l cod, A sign by a "parking vigilante" offers advice. Photo: Linda Hemmila That's when councilmembers started to receive phone calls complaining of unfair parking citations. "These aren't just scofflaws," said Anthony Sanchez, legislative aid to councilmember Arreguin. "There is a hodgepodge of signs in that area making it hard for people to know what to do. The stickers just made that worse. Is it two -hour parking or no parking? People aren't sure." Calls from citizens seeking help with traffic citations aren't new to Arreguin's office. "That's what we do," said Sanchez. But he said he is currently receiving up to three calls a day on this problem alone. "Such a disproportionate number of tickets are coming from this one area, so you know the signage isn't working," he said. In November 2011, a City Council information item raised the issue of the clarity and effectiveness of the Trader Joe's area parking signs. A memo from Andrew Clough, Director of Public Works, concluded the signs met all legal standards. However the memo went on to suggest revisiting the design of the signs and possibly making modifications which would state more clearly where parking was allowed. One "dramatic alternative" suggested in the memo was to completely eliminate the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) modification and restore the entire area to allow 2- hour visitor parking. "The city, the mayor and council are very sympathetic to people and are working to resolve this problem," said Arreguin this week. "But this takes time and resources." Arreguin and his staff have drafted a consent item for the January 17 City Council meeting which recommends the city manager move to temporarily enforce the previous two -hour parking limit until the new signs are installed. But relief isn't coming quickly enough for some residents in the neighborhood. In recent months the tickets have continued to pile up and so have complaints. Frustrated by the city's lack of swift action, some neighbors have taken matters into their own hands by fashioning signs warning drivers not to park in particular areas, or risk being ticketed. When the busy holiday season brought more shoppers to the area, one person became known as the "parking vigilante ". A psychotherapist with a practice in the neighborhood (who wishes to remain anonymous), she said she was so irate she began scrawling notes and leaving them on cars informing drivers where to get help with the violations. A Hudstead's truck on MLK between Berkeley Way and Hearst in November What appears to be a Hudstead's employee removes handmade signs next to his truck "It's evil. The city and the tow company are benefiting from these bad signs. They're making thousands of dollars off of poor people who cannot afford the tickets," she said. Berkeley's policy is that any car on a city street found to have five or more parking violations is subject to be towed. "I've had my sessions interrupted by the clanking of the tow truck and the screams of those who are being towed. This is outrageous," said the "vigilante ". "Something had to be done, so a bunch of us got together and asked if we could put signs on our property telling people to not park there, but drivers from [towing company] Hustead's started coming around and yanking them down so they could continue to benefit from the problem," she said. Hustead's manager, Janice Lee, says that's not happening. "Our drivers would never do that. It sounds illegal and that would be grounds for termination. They would never go on private property and remove anything, there's just no reason to do it." However a photo taken in the first week of November appears to show a Hustead's employee removing handmade pink signs on Martin Luther King Jr. Way near Hearst. Meantime, Arreguin and his staff hope the temporary resolution they are suggesting to Council eases the parking situation while waiting for the real signs to arrive — and they say they can offer assistance to those with violations still within the 21 -day appeal period. "We are committed to helping people overturn their tickets," Sanchez said. Trader Joe's traffic troubles continue Submitted by Nikki Bussey, News Producer Friday, December 7th, 2012, 7:42am he parking problems for those who live near Trader Joe's continues. WILMINGTON, NC (WECT) – The parking problems for those who live near Trader Joe's continues. In fact, one man who lives behind the supermarket, says it's a nightmare. He says since the grand opening traffic has been non -stop on 47th Street. So, he put up some cones to keep people from parking in his yard. Kerry Gower says he hopes things will slow down in his neighborhood once the newness of Trader Joe's wears off Trader Joe's Lyn -Lake proposal squashed By Emily Weiss Published Mon., Jul. 16 2012 at 1:16 PM City Council opposes plans for Trader Joe's in Uptown See Also: Trader loe's Coming to Lyn -Lake? Residents and business owners in the Lyn -Lake area who worried about the added congestion, parking problems, and competition that a proposed Trader Joe's store might bring to their neighborhood can breathe a sigh of relief. The Minneapolis City Council rejected the property developer's request for rezoning, which was required to move forward on building the 14,000- square -foot grocery with attached liquor store. Jeff Minea, a representative from the family that owns the lots where the store would be built, says this rejection by the council likely means the project is dead, reports the Southwest Journal. Several small businesses at 27th Street and Lyndale Avenue South would have been disrupted, displaced, or otherwise affected negatively by this proposal, which was a large factor in the decision- making process. The project's developers were also unsuccessful in courting the Lowry Hill East's Neighborhood Association. Maybe it's time to look to the suburbs? News10 Live • No Text Zone • Trip Check • �� , �► . - . •'a Je i r ;s • Community To Drive bar N 6Y ` A Petco owl' _ •'a IMMMIMIMWI Saturday, October 20 2012, 01:52 AM CDT Northgate Marketplace parking problems By Molly Trotter /Ktvl.com MEDFORD, Ore. -- On Friday, October 19, Trader Joe's opened its doors. Eager shoppers filled the parking lots before the store was even open. Northgate created an additional gravel lot West of the shopping center, to provide extra parking. Shoppers weren't impressed with the extra parking. Liz Gibbons told News 10 that she tried to park in the gravel lot, but at one point her car got stuck and she had to go back to the main parking lot until a spot opened. She said that when the rain comes, that parking lot will be a big problem. Regency Centers owns the Northgate Marketplace. Leaders on the project say they have no intentions of expanding parking anything soon. They said they will keep an eye on parking to see if it becomes a real issue, but they said it was busy today because of the opening of Trader Joe's. V Chicago, IL Parking here sucks, hence the missing star. I normally don't mind walking, but the only other option to parking is taking the L which I'm not a huge fan of. Love the choices and inexpensive prices. This is the place to go for quick, healthy meals! Loses a star because of their parking lot. It's really tiny and I'm always scared I'm going to ding a car when I'm trying to get out of a parking space or when I'm trying to leave the lot. Love Trader Joe's... I was happy to see that there is parking but a bit cumbersome... We like going during the week because it is less busy... No, this place will not have everything. But Jewel is right across the street and Whole Foods down the street if you need a ton of food. And yes the parking is a little scary, but seriously. Deal with it Chicago. will agree with the other reviews that have pointed out the parking situation. Driving in can sometimes be reminiscent of descending into the seventh ring of hell but a little patience and perseverance goes a long way. No parking lot is going to stop me! This Trader Joe's is definitely worth the trip. This review would not be complete without a mention of the parking. It sucks. Though it turns over fast. I am no expert, but my gut tells me, it could be improved if it was one way. Then people come in on the Wabash side and exit into the alley. Cause really, the aisle is BARELY wide enough for two cars. he downside? Parking and general store access. At 8:30 in the morning on a Saturday had to deal with multiple pedestrians, numerous cars, and the terrible parking layout. It's hard to fit more than one car through the entrance. I foresee major traffic issues along Roosevelt and Wabash for years to come. Parking here is nothing less than a pain in the ass. This will definitely keep me away from any daytime shopping. mean, this is really incredible. I've never seen a worse parking situation. It's not tenable for a Walgreens much less a massively popular grocery store. There will be accidents. There will be rage. San Diego, CA 1211 Garnet Ave (between Everts St & Fanuel St) San Diego, CA 92109 Neighborhood: Pacific Beach (858) 272 -7235 http: / /www.traderjoes.com Hours: Mon -Sun 8 am - 9 pm Truly the only thing "bad" about this Trader Joe's location is the parking. Every so often finding a spot is a chore, but it's usually fitting for the store. Super- super -super frindly, generous, attentive and kind Stuff. These people are always ready to help. The only advice I have is try to park 2 -3 blocks away, because it's really difficult to get a parking, unless you live nearby. love Trader Joe's. The staff is always very helpful and friendly. The only reason I am giving it 4 stars instead of 5 is because parking there is next to impossible. Also, Trader Joe's does not have a very good produce selection. Other than that I love Trader Joe's. The only problem here is that sometimes you cannot find parking if you go on the weekdays between 5 and 630pm. Otherwise, this place is great and II the cashiers are very friendly and tell you the good things they have tried that you bought. What's to say about TJ's that hasn't already been said? LOVE. What's to say about this location? +1 friendly +1 cleanliness +1 selection +1 good looking shoppers! -1 PARKING. Try your luck on the side streets and walk. What a nightmare!! - its a pretty small parking lot which makes it hard to maneuvere around, especially during busy hours Only downside is the parking lot always seems to be packed, but a spot or two is usually available. You would get the much sought after FIVE STAR award but I docked you due to the parking... horrible! Be very careful, patient and calm when attempting to parking in that tiny very dangerous parking lot. This can be bumper car madness! This store has parking issues and a rear exit that forces you to cross an alley so don't rush out the back door as you might be in the path of a moving car. Regardless, it's still a great bet if you can manage to park on the street. I swear, this lot has to have a million and a half accidents a day. It's crazy. WARNING: THEY TOW AFTER HOURS!!! So, if you're going out in PB DO NOT park in the lot!!! YES, the parking lot sucks monkey balls, but the store rocks. I ride my cruiser there just to avoid this cluster... Everyone just ride your bike or walk because the parking situation can get a little stressy. Hey its better for the environment anyway! Ft. Worth, TX Monday, Jul 2, 2012 1 Updated 7:32 PM CST More than two weeks after its opening, Trader Joe's and its parking lot still jam - packed on a daily basis. Neighboring lots and businesses have installed signs warning Trader Joe's customers not to park there. "Every time I come over here, I find it difficult to find a place to park," Mary Rayfield said. Rayfield and a group of friends were eating lunch at Brix Pizzeria and Wine Bar in the Stonegate Crossing shopping center on Monday and planned to go to Trader Joe's after their meal. The group says it understands why the California -based grocery store is so popular but also said customers should respect the neighboring businesses. "I don't think it's fair," Julie Berman said. "I think these businesses have a business to run and they want their clients to be able to park in front of their business and not have to fight with Trader Joe's customers." The Stonegate Nursing Center, which is located behind Trader Joe's, has spent hundreds of dollars on signs around its property warning the store's customers not to park there. Sue Hayes, executive director, said she plans on extending a fence and adding speed bumps in her lot to keep her residents safe. She said she simply wants people to not park in emergency access ways, saying Trader Joe's is trying to be a good neighbor and often brings food and flowers over for her clients. At Brix Pizzeria, employees said things have improved but said some of their customers still have trouble at times finding parking. "Our loyal fan base is pretty loyal, but if there's no place to park, I don't think they're going to walk from home, so parking for them has been pretty paramount," manager Mischa Astroff said. Trader Joe's expected to be busy in its first few weeks in the Metroplex, even hiring off - duty Fort Worth police officers to direct traffic at times. "Trader Joe's cares about our neighbors and being part of the Fort Worth community," said Alison Mochizuki, Trader Joe's spokeswoman. "Typically, when a new store opens, traffic is higher than normal and eventually lessens. Presently, we have crew members helping to direct the flow of traffic in our parking lot. We appreciate the community's patience with our new location, and we look forward to being a positive addition to the neighborhood for years to come." Most neighboring businesses told NBC 5 they expect to have increased traffic in their stores because of Trader Joe's and want to be good neighbors. But they said they also have some frustration with Trader Joe's customers who park in their spaces. "This is our parking lot," Astroff said. "Trader Joe's has its own. We just want to keep things fair." Astroff and other business employees and owners said they expect things to improve as the novelty of the store wears off and others open across the Metroplex. However, even Trader Joe's customers say the parking mess is something they don't want to deal with. "I'm not surprised that it's packed because it's such a great place," Joy Rosen said. "But if the parking continues like this, I'm not going to make the trip. It's not going to be worth it." Three more Trader Joe's stores are expected to open on the eastern side of the Metroplex over the next two years. San Franciso, CA Three weeks after a contentious meeting it held with Castro residents, Trader Joe's is abandoning plans to open a store in San Francisco's gay neighborhood, the Bay Area Reporter has learned. The national grocery chain informed city officials today that it would no longer pursue opening at the Market and Noe Center on Market Street, currently the site of a Goodwill store. The project had been met with concerns from residents that customers would clog nearby streets since there is a limited parking garage at the site. Others had rallied behind seeing Trader Joe's come into the neighborhood, and Planning Department staffers had been working with the retailer to resolve the parking issues. "They were finding it challenging to make the model work here given the parking constraints. Unfortunately, in the end, they decided they couldn't make it work," District 8 Supervisor Scott Wiener told the Bay Area Reporter late Monday, March 7. As of last month Trader Joe's officials, including the store's general counsel Doug Yokomizo (seen at right), had told Castro residents they would likely seek approval for the store in April. They attended the February 14 meeting of the Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association to once again present their plans and discuss the parking issues. In a letter Planning Director John Rahaim sent to Trader Joe's management February 22, he informed the grocery chain that it should agree to a wide range on requirements intended to ease its impact on vehicular traffic. Among the items Rahaim suggested that Trader Joe's agree to was paying for improvements to the intersection of Market and Noe Streets costing upwards of $600,000; working with a delivery /shuttle operator to reduce car trips to the Castro store; and hiring parking control officers to stop customers from queuing up to enter the parking lot. Apart from the traffic impacts, other problems had bedeviled Trader Joe's plans since they were first disclosed several years ago. The grocer wanted the entire bottom space of the shopping center, including the storefront now housing a Radio Shack. The electronics retailer had resisted entreaties it move to a vacant space across the street. The family that owns the site had reportedly agreed to pay for Radio Shack to relocate and had been working to move out several other tenants. The Jeffrey family has been seeking a long -term tenant since Tower Records closed in late 2006. Wiener said he was "very disappointed" with the news that Trader Joe's was walking away from the location. He said he plans to continue working with the building owners to find a retailer for the site. Goodwill had signed a short -term lease; it is unclear if it will want to extend its lease. But it only moved into the lower - level, leaving a second floor space empty. "I will be working closely with the owner of the property to make sure we get that space filled," said Wiener, who wouldn't rule out seeing another grocery store move into the space. "I know it is disappointing for a lot of people not to have Trader Joe's there. I am confident we will get that space filled with a good retailer." Albany, NY 1. StricO says: July 31, 2012 at 2:34 pm They've leased parking spaces ACROSS Wolf Road? Really? That'll be interesting to see — TJ's shoppers scurrying across Wolf Road with grocery carts in tow. And what about the other businesses in that plaza, like the mattress store? What a bummer for their customers. 2. silvfx says: July 31, 2012 at 2:38 pm Get used to tough parking, my local Ti's parking lot here in NC is always full and its alot bigger than 80 cars. This is 5+ years after it opened. 3. bocuse says: July 31, 2012 at 4:11 pm 0a Strick9 — most shop owners I know would give their left leg to have Trader Joe's as a neighbor. Retail is all about driving traffic to your store, with one store complimenting another in plazas. Does anyone drive traffic better than TJ? 4. hotrod 107 says: July 31, 2012 at 4:27 pm editing needed NBT 5. zack says: July 31, 2012 at 4:51 pm Terrible, terrible planning from the word go. I can't wait for Bruce Roter to start a "We Want Trader Joe's Parking" group. Now THAT'S something even this hater could get behind. 6. K says: July 31, 2012 at 4:51 pm You beat me to it. ACROSS THE STREET? ITS WOLF ROAD! 7. BiBi Upstate Ukie says: July 31, 2012 at 5:05 pm "At La- a -ast" — to paraphrase the great Etta James:) plan on biding my time (although the pantry is in dire need of restocking), b/c I believe that it'll be a nightmare getting in and out of that particular plaza the first several days of opening. Finally, the end of transporting groceries up /down the Mass Pike! 8. Strick9 says: July 31, 2012 at 5:38 pm bocuse — I would generally agree with you, but where the heck are all these people that TJ's attracts going to park? People in the suburbs just get P.O'd if there's no place to park. That's why I rarely if ever go to downtown Albany. I can't stand having to search for a parking spot. They would have been so much better putting this in at the Wolf Road Shopper's Park just up the road — there's a huge parking lot there that is almost never even half full. 9. Dominick Purnomo says: July 31, 2012 at 5:47 pm A video preview of what it will be like! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UFcl pr2yU U 10. mattydread says: July 31, 2012 at 7:00 pm love TJ's but I won't be going near this place for a long while. 11. williepitt says: July 31, 2012 at 7:01 pm I've never yet had problems parking at any Trader Joe's (out of peak hours, admittedly), and I've parked at 6 of them in this general area. Basingstoke, people. Wait out the rush, and shop at reasonable hours. You won't be disappointed.) Of course, I have nothing to say to the Tj haters. I just hope they stay away from the area forever. 12. JT says: luly 31, 2012 at 7:30 pm Get real! This is a little podunk store that only appeals the snobs with the big $. It is not a Shop Rite or Wegmans. If you have the Dough -GO! but I'll be putting my bucks where I get the biggest bang, not here! 13. Burnt My Fingers says: luly 31, 2012 at 9:00 pm From the comments it appears there will be ample parking this weekend: everybody expects mayhem and so plans to stay away. Or else this board is inhabited by provincial, nattering nabobs of negativism... no, couldn't be. 14. a says: luly 31, 2012 at 9:14 pm I'm hoping everyone will stay away on opening day because of parking jitters. Me, I'm planning on being there! Wouldn't miss it! BTW, I believe they are only having the extra parking for the opening mad rush and have hired the local police to direct traffic and help people cross the street. 15. zack says: luly 31, 2012 at 11:39 pm 0a You believe? Or you read the article linked in this post? just wondering. 16. store says: August 1, 2012 at 6:37 am thought I heard there was an access road /path behind it going to Colonie Center. Did I just dream that or does that really exist? I don't plan on using Wolf road ever again after Friday... 17. Z says: August 1, 2012 at 7:58 am I'll bite on this store some time in the near future. Used it as sort of a neat "boutique grocery" back in the days when I lived /worked in the greater DC area. oil, "Basingstoke ?" Really? You're really reaching on that one! I gotta admit, got an audible laugh out of me. Do you speak that way in 'real life ?' (not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that, of course...) 18. potrzebie says: August 1, 2012 at 8:00 am Prediction: More than one incident of parking- space -rage and /or car - pedestrian accident. 19. Harry S says: August 1, 2012 at 8:20 am understand that they will be selling food in cans and boxes, why didn't anyone else think of that? 20. pw says: August 1, 2012 at 8:37 am Stay away ...................not worth the hype. Not a local or solely owned small store. Owned by huge evil corporation 21. Bruce Roter says: August 1, 2012 at 8:42 am Zack 0 #5 Don't look for me to help find more parking. I want to see a more efficient public transportation system. I want CDTA to offer an app that tells riders in real time when the bus is going to be at their stop. Think of it. No more senseless waiting at a bus stop (especially in summer or winter). CDTA has this for the Central Ave. line. It's time they opened this to the entire system! I hope you can get behind this. We've waited long enough. Bruce Roter 22. williepitt says: August 1, 2012 at 8:55 am Z ( 917), do you know anything about Gilbert & Sullivan? Mad Margaret, a character in "Ruddigore ", tends to go off the deep end frequently. She and her main squeeze finally agree that when that happens, he will say "Basingstoke" to her and she will calm down. It works! 23. non_foodie says: August 1, 2012 at 9:50 am You people really can't do anything else but complain, can you? We begged for a Trader Joe's and the company finally came to Albany, thanks largely to Bruce Roter (thank you, thank you, thank you). Now, you're complaining about the traffic and parking? personally wish they would simply knock down the old Friendly's building for additional parking, but they haven't so stop whining. 24. Stephen says: August 1, 2012 at 10:58 am Oh what I wouldn't pay to see Old WilliePit trying to cross Wolf Road with a fist full of cans of crappy sauce in her hands........ Oh my .......... Hope you all enjoy fighting each other for all those boxes and cans of food ........... JUST LIKE ANYWHERE ELSE oh except these boxes and cans have the name Trader Joe's on them so they must come from some special place on earth that no other grocery store has access too........ Lame you all are. 25. williepitt says: August 1, 2012 at 11:08 am Stephen ( 924), some of us are intelligent enough to know how to cross Wolf Road without endangering ourselves. Seems like maybe you aren't in that camp. But then it doesn't really matter, does it, since you dislike TJ's so much. Besides, not having you there will make shopping there much more pleasant. 26. zack says: August 1, 2012 at 11:28 am @23 There's a big difference between whining and commenting on what is an obvious and serious problem. 27. Jim says: August 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm While I remain skeptical about Trader Joe's, it appears that they have come up with a fair plan to alleviate the initial rush of shoppers and are considerate by paying Colonie for the extra police officers.The only suggestion I have is that they also arrange with Colonie Center to designate an overflow parking area in their lot, maybe on the northeastern end of Macy's, and to provide shuttle bus service for the first few days. A longer term solution should be considered for additional parking, though, as Wolf Road is highly congested as it is. 28. Parma Ham says: August 1, 2012 at 2:18 pm 9 23's comment is well taken. Nothing is ever good enough for the blog posters. They will find negativity in everything. 29. Albany Mom says: August 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm After helping my teenage daughter scout out the bus and walking in the Wolf Rd area earlier this summer so she and I would feel comfortable with her going it alone, I can say that: 1. Yes, store (916), there is an access road that goes to Colonie Center. There is no good pedestrian path at the moment or an easy way to take a grocery cart, but perhaps that will be improved in the near future. 2. Wolf Road seems daunting to cross, but it's not bad at all since they installed sidewalks and walk lights a few years ago. There is a light and cross walk not far from Trader Joe's. 30. GOOSECOUS © says: August 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm Plenty of parking at the Brooklyn location, where I'll continue to shop. 31. non_foodie says: August 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm 927's solution makes sense, especially now that NBT is not allowing Trader Joe's customers to use their lot. Problem is, Colonie Center itself doesn't have enough parking. Clifton, NJ 1. I've come to the conclusion that Clifton doesn't look at traffic flow or parking space when it approves new development. just take a look at Clifton Commons. Try going there on a Friday Night and park. The new development just up the road from where Trader Joe also has parking issues. You can also look at the cluster fuck that is Costco. Another disaster when it comes to traffic flow. Basically anything along Route 3 that Clifton has approved doesn't have enough parking or a safe traffic flow. Trader Joes will also be a parking and Traffic disaster. Clifton is just looking at the dollars and doesn't care about anything else. But hey I guess we have to put up with poor parking and traffic to have things close by. I just think they should a least consider it. 2. 3. POSTED BY jerseygurl I October 13, 2012 @ 7:49 am Maybe Montclair will have shuttles from the new assisted living facility on Church. 4. qt� POSTED BY eventhorizon I October 13 2012 @ 10:46 am You could also ride a bicycle the with some saddlebags to go with your re- usable shopping bags for a double -dose of TJ's goodness. 5. Oh happy day! I put this on my calendar yesterday. But now I'm thinking about waiting a few days to go —the opening of the new Fairway was too intense for me, and I know I'm not the only TJ's fan in the area. The place is going to be mobbed. As to size —even a mini -TJ's is better than no TJ's at all, and I'm tired of driving to the others! 6. qt� POSTED BY frobnitz I October 12 2012 @ 9:3Z pm agree that the parking will probably not be ample enough. But the trip from my house to the new TJs will be easier than it is to Fairway. We're certainly lucky to have so many great food markets in our area. Shops at Stonefield Customers Run into Parking Problems - NBC29 WVIR Charlottesville, VA News, Sp... Monday Nov 19 judged: Native Holl, Rage, NC There are plenty of shopping centers who followed the rules on parking spaces relative to the buildings. Why is this the only center with different rules? Buildings opening without all work complete? Landscape not complete? Rules other developers painfully follow or the doors don't open. WHY ? ?? Re I Report Abuse ud e it! #2 Monday Nov 19 judged: County 4 Resident Charlottesville, 4 VA Albemarle screws up AGAIN! Not only is there not enough parking but the lanes are too narrow. We can expect to see some side mirrors missing if cars are allowed to park along the lanes as they were when I was there this weekend. Thank you Board of Supervisors and the ARB for making such an ugly corner on our ''Main Street ''. I guess this was another ''midnight'' decision when you were half asleep! Reply Report Abuse ud e it! Rex #3 United States Monday Nov 19 Judged: 3 1 think the whole place is confusing. I won't be going there on Saturdays. Although, I did get a good parking space at Trader Joes! Got there at the right time! Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #4 Monday Nov 19 Yuuup Judged: Charlottesville, VA 5 5 Just a newer version of Barracks Road springing up. Overpriced shopping and horrendous parking. Just wait until all the shops open and even now with the holidays approaching the body shops are sure going to be busy. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #5 Arthur Monday Nov 19 Charlottesville, Judged: VA What cracked me up was even the bicycle racks were way out on the outside of the shopping center near the outer parking lots. Guess they didn't want to see a lot of bikes locked up conveniently near the business the cyclist might want to patronize either... what a bunch of goof ball planners. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! heh #6 Monday Nov 19 Charlottesville, judged: VA 2 Traffic may or may not subside after the lookey lookers have seen the stores and written home, but it is a bit of a maze, the lanes & intersections are cramped with stop signs slowing everything down. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #7 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: Ernest Morris Richmond, VA 6 There should have been traffic circles installed for that volume of cars. Its like we took Barracks Road Shopping center and compacted it into the Old Navy Parking lot. Im probably going to avoid that place at all costs. Reply Report Abuse Crackerjack Allentown, PA ludge it! #8 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: 5 3 2 give it two years (tops) and there will be plenty of parking. All the stores will close and it will look just like Albemarle Square. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! Eaglescout1964 Tuesday Nov 20 Charlottesville, judged: VA 2 I'm going to just point out Trader Joe's is a grocery store and this past weekend was the last weekend before Thanksgiving. I'm sure all the other grocery stores in town saw large crowds as well. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #10 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: It Is Too Soon 5 Staunton, VA M 2 For shoppers to complain. Although EVERY complaint in this thread is spot -on! Traffic will get worse, especially after Friday, and as stores open. Driving our family auto (small crossover)- it was horrible trying to get into the shopping area and worse trying to get out. I only saw TWO entrances - agree - the approvals must have been given after midnight, with ALL the members nodding off. Stupidity & Greed ..... as usual for C'Ville. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #11 Tuesday Nov 20 Freedom of Judged: Choice Charlottesville, 2 VA 2 Went the other night. It was a nightmare! Got a parking at Trader Joe's, then no one would let us back out of the spot. Cars were lined up at each row and some people got impatient and actually started started going the wrong way in the opposite lane so that no one could turn in toward Trader Joe's. I won't be going back there anytime soon, that's for sure! Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #12 Tuesday Nov 20 Um No Judged: Atlanta, GA 5 M When they first talked about putting so many shops in there, I wondered if there would be enough space for the shops and ample parking. I went there one time and got my answer - not nearly enough parking. Re I Report Abuse GC Citizen ud e it! Fredericksburg, VA #13 Tuesday Nov 20 Judged: I E Is anyone really surprised at this? But we had to have it. Had to put a shopping center with too many stores, not enough parking at the intersection that's the most congested all day. Sounds like a fun shopping trip. I won't be going out there any time soon, no matter how many stores open up. Re I Report Abuse ud e it! #14 buyerbeware Tuesday Nov 20 Charlottesville, judged: VA 4 3 We now have our own little slice of Northern Va. Welcome to Fairfax county south! Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #15 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: Megan Charlottesville, 2 VA Good lord. The place just opened. If you're expecting that you're going to zip right up to a brand new Trader Joe's and park quickly and easily the week before Thanksgiving, you're deluded. You got along in Charlottesville just fine before Stonefield opened ... if you don't like it, don't take your business there. I've only been there once, and I did find getting to TJ's from Hydraulic Road to be someone convoluted. But I'll wait until the crowds die down and the construction's over to say for sure. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #16 Tuesday Nov 20 Anonymouse fudged: Charlottesville, 3 VA It's not a matter of excitement, it's a matter of there being a giant movie theatre with not enough spaces for their clientele. Just looking at spaces per store, with —10% of the stores open now, we are not going to see parking woes decrease by any stretch of the imagination. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #17 Tuesday Nov 20 Judged: common sense Charlottesville, 3 VA 2 of course parking and traffic flow is a disaster; it's Charlottesville and Albemarle's MO. Why would you think putting a shopping center at one of the worst intersections in town wasn't going to be problematic? It's typical Charlottesville, we can't have something functional we have to have something that's visually appealing. It's all about the look and perception... no depth. Reply quit crying Crozet, VA Report Abuse ud e it! #18 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: 2 If you don't like the traffic or bad parking, don't go! No one is making you visit those stores. Reply Report Abuse ud e it! #19 Tuesday Nov 20 Sarg fudged: Charlottesville, 5 VA 2 2 There is no excuse for inadequate parking and blocked lanes. What happens if an emergency vehicle has to get through? I guess we have an "Architectural Review Board" that is more concerned about the visual aesthetics of the buildings, rather than customer and employee safety, to thank for this. Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:44 AM To: ctbonfield @aol.com Cc: Joe Carosella Subject: Re: Shared Parking Analysis for Delray Place. Charlie: We have committed to you and recommit again to meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site plan has been approved to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. Thank you very much for your support. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.coin Sent from my iPhone On Mar 7, 2013, at 1 1:37 AM, "ctbonfield aol.com" <ctbonfield aol.com> wrote: Mr. Carosella Thank you and Jeff for your emails and for the Shared Parking Analysis, Matrix and Third -Party Justification for Delray Place prepared by Traf Tech and the supplement to that report prepared by Gentile, Glas, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates. These, indeed, are comprehensive studies and well reported. First, let me say that SAFE understands the limitations that you have for installing bicycle lockers and showers in the facilities you have planned. SAFE therefore withdraws its recommendations that you install such facilities at Delray Place, Particularly, since you will not have on -site personnel to care for and maintain such facilities. And, we can see that with mixed -use tenants you will likely have it is not a feasible option. SAFE's remaining concern is parking. We will, of course, concur with whatever the Delray Beach P &Z Department decides regarding parking. Some types of businesses have more parking demand than others. For instance, someone picking up clothes from a cleaners will be parking for perhaps 15 minutes, whereas persons visiting a restaurant for dinner may need parking for 3 -4 hours. So, the mix of businesses at Delray Place will determine parking demand, We would still like to have you meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site plan has been approved to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. We hope you will do whatever possible to limit employee parking at the site. Some possibilities would be to encourage employee use of public transportation, commutating by bicycle or walking, and perhaps off -site parking for employees. SFCS has effective information on these possibilities. Charlie Bonfield President, SAFE 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1203 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield(a)-aol.com Truxell, Rebecca From: Jason Bregman <jab450 @hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:05 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca; Rustin, Janice; Pyburn, Terrill Subject: FW: Delray Place Hi All, For the record, please see below. Also I received the letter from Mr. Lynn (which you have on file). Mr. Caressello called my cell phone today but I am not available to speak with anyone at this time. I am taking care of a friend in the hospital in addition to my job. I will be attending tomorrow at 6pm and pray the meeting does not run all night. I will be sure to mention these communications at the hearing. Thanks Jason From: JamesFJIMCHAR @aol.com [mailto:JamesEJTMCHAR @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 6:34 AM To: jab450Cfhotmail.com Subject: Delray Place Delray Place After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407- 410 parking spaces, or 3.5!1.000 S.F. will be totally inadequate to support the proposed development. According to Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, "Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,000 S.F. of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates ". According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S .F., the parking ratio of The Boys is a whopping 15.0!1,000 S. F. Therefore, if Delray Place's tenant Trader Joe's is as popular as The Boys (and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations) applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefit fully from shared parking since the restaurants' and Trader Joe's peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If the center were a mixed use development, with condos /apartments shared parking would apply better. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 6,000, the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 parking spaces (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime pa . needs of both Trader Joes (195) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be considerable congestion in the parking lot during peak times and this will cause troublesome traffic backup onto Federal Highway and Linton Blvd. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and /or 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Other SAFE concerns: 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10 :00 PM? 3. Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking lot for employees. In any event, Delray Beach P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition that would apply if traffic backs up on Federal Highway. Click here: 1401 California: Trader Joe's And CVS Authorization This Week at SocketSiteTM Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax lamesejimchar(a-).aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" 2 Truxell, Rebecca From: ajfinst <ajfinst @earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:06 PM To: rebecca; Truxell, Rebecca Subject: Fw: Delray Place; CAR0003 Attachments: Letter to SPRAB, Feb 20 2013.pdf Please send over to the City Attorney. -- - - -- Forwarded Message---- - From: Elizabeth Kolowich Sent: Feb 20, 2013 3:53 PM To: "aifinst(d)earthlink.com" Cc: Jeffrey Lynne , Ashlee Coosaia Subject: Delray Place; CAR0003 Ms. Finst — Please see the attached letter from Jeffrey Lynne, Esquire. If you should have any questions, please contact Jeffrey directly. Thank you, Elizabeth Kolowich Legal Assistant WEINER, LYNNE Ft THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Tel (561) 265 -2666 1 Direct (561) 900 -0712 National (877) 901 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 ekolowich@zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e -mail message and any attachment to this e -mail message contains confidential information that may be legaily privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e -mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e -mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. MICTIAFIL S. WEINER JF=Y C. LYNNE LAIMIE A. MOMPSON JUSTIN M. CLAUD L. DLAN& RII -EMAN February 20, 2013 VIA. E -MAIL & U.S. MAIL Chairman and Members of the I,r W Ol'I CCi:S WEINER, /� LYNNE Q� E lJ�.'THOMPSON, P.A. A` PORNFYS NT LAW 10 SL F AVENUE, SurrF C DFLR.AY 13F.AcH, 110Ii1T)A 334¢¢ Site Plan Review and Appearance Board City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Delray Place Dear Mr. Chairman and Board Members of SPRAB: TELEPHONE (561) 265 - 2666 FACSIM7.I.E (561) 272 - 6831 .TLYNNF, @ZONF,LAW.COM WWW.ZONFJ- A4v.COM On behalf of our client, Retail Property Group and its principals, Toe and Louis Carosella, we thank you again for allowing us to continue to March 13, 2013, our site plan review public hearing for the Delray Place retail shopping center project (on tl -ie southeast corner of S. Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard). This additional time has allowed the project's design team the opportunity to further work with the City's planning staff, the Tropic Isle Civic Association, Safety as Floridians Expect (SAFE), and most importantly, the residents directly abutting the proj ect. Admittedly, designing this site has proven to be a daunting task, even for seasoned and experienced retail developers as Retail Property Group. Unlike prior projects, there has been great pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the national tenants they have been negotiating with to design the site'to meet those tenant's specific retail needs. There has been equal if not greater pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the owners of residential property adjacent to the project to not duninish the quality of life those residents have enjoyed for a period of years. Then, there is the inherent pressure to create an economically sustainable urban inflll redevelopment project that is anticipated to serve as the catalyst for the resurgence and renaissance of the entire South Federal Highway corridor. Meeting each of these competing demands and achieving consensus has proven to be an art and not a science. But we believe we are there. At the first SPRAB hearing on the Delray Place project, there was not sufficient time during the public hearing process for the project's consultants to fully explain the intentions behind the project's design. In an effort to ensure your time is best served during the March 13, 2013 hearing, our clients are making themselves cznd their desi consultants as well as the site itself, avallable to yo and questions you inay have. The goal of this offer is to endeavor to answer as many of your questions and concerns in 0:1CAR00031Corresponden ,ce\Letter To SPRAB.hoex Site Plan Review and Appearance Board [Zebruary 20, 20[3 Re; Delray Piace Page 2 advance so that the Board will be able to use its time efficiently and effectively during the hearing on March 13`t'. Their direct contact information is contained below. We certainly appreciate that you may be concerned about the appearance of impropriety by having such discussions. Everyone is very sensitive in today's age of ultra - transparency and ethics reform. Such discussions with the project's design professionals are lawful pursuant to state law and local ordinances; subject only to disclosure during the public hearing itself. Please feel free to confer with the City Attorney's Office if you have any concerns. You are also free to decline this offer. We also understand that serving on SPRAB is voluntary and not your regular employment. This offer is therefore meant to provide you with a sufficient opportunity to fully explore the site plan at your convenience. Our clients are the developers, owners and managers of similar projects across southeast Florida. They live locally. They are committed to this property, to this project, and to the City of Delray Beach. They are therefore willing to provide you with whatever resources you need to make the best decision possible. We thank you for your time and consideration. I JEFFREY C. LYNNE JCIl:mmi Mr. Joe Carosella Project Developer acarosella ,rpr12 ..coin (954) 647 -6790 (cell) Mark Saltz, AIA Project Architect msaltz ssaltzmichelson,com (954) 266 -2700 (office) Jeff Brophy, RLA, ASLA Project Landscape Architect JBro h LandDesignSouth.com (561) 309 -1525 (cell) Joaquin Vargas, P.E., PTOE Project Traffic Engineer Lo uin traf tech,biz (954) 582 -0988 (office) Mr. Louis Carosella Project Developer [carosella(Rr p 123.corn (954) 873 -4597 (cell) Dodi Glas, AICP Project Planner dodi@2GHO.corn (561) 310 -7325 (cell) Dennis Schultz, PE Project Engineer dshultz fl ranee ineerin .coin (954) 522 -1004 (office) Jeffrey C. Lynne, Esq. Project Agent ine(d�zonelaw.com (561) 239 -0839 (cell) LAW OFFICES WEINER, LYNNE &. THOMPSON, P.A. MICHAEL S. WRV,TF -R JEFFREY C. LYNNE LAURIEA. TIxOMPSON JUSTIN M. CCAUD December 11, 2012 Via Hand Delivery Mr. Ron Hoggard City of Delray Beach 100 NW I" Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Delray Place Our File No.: CAR0003 Dear Ron: PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 10 SE 1' AvEN uE, Su= C DEL.RAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 TELEPIIoNE (561) 265 - 2666 FACSIMILE. (561) 272 - 6831 MWEINER @ZONELAW.COM WWW.ZONELAW.COM With respect to the above referenced project, we are confirming that the justifications set forth in our waivers shall be incorporated by reference into our presentation to SPRAB. We also enclose for the record the Staff Report, approval letter and Order of the City Commission relating to the Yacht Club at Delray Beach which project was granted a waiver from the requirement that relief otherwise be obtained via variance. Therefore, no special privilege will be ;ranted if the waivers were approved. Sincerely, r4 Michael S. We' r MSW: ek Enclosures Cc: Jeffrey Lynne, Esquire Ms. Ashlee L. Coosaia 0 :ICAR00031Correspondence\Letter to Ron Hoggard re waivers-Dec 11 2012.docx IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR THE YACHT CLUB AT DELRAY BEACH ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 1. These waiver requests have come before the City Commission on October 3, 2005. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for the development known as the Yacht Club at Delray Beach. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection 1. 1, WAIVER: a. Pursuant to Section 30.15 of the Code of Ordinances the Commission may grant a waiver to a Section of the Land Development Regulations in which a waiver is not allowed under the LDR's. The Applicant has requested a waiver to Section 4.3.4(K) to allow an increase in height for the Yacht Club at Delray Beach Project, located in the RM zoning district, from 35' to 41'. In order to consider this waiver the Commission must waive the following: b. LDR Section 2.2.44(D)(3) — provides no variance to height regulations may be granted by the Board of Adjustment. C, LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(1)(b)(iii) -- provides that no waiver may granted, under LDR Section 2.4.7(B), by the Commission for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided. d. LDR Section 4.3,4(J)(4)(a) -- provides that the Board of Adjustment may not grant an increase in height to any structure located in the RM zoning district. The Applicant has asserted that the street, MacFarlane Drive in which the height measurement will be made from the crown of the road, has an uncharacteristically low crown and is prone to flooding. The Applicant also asserts by allowing the increase in height the finished floor elevation will be raised to a height that is more consistent with the neighboring property. Should the waiver requests be granted based on the assertions listed above? Yes 4 No 1 1 CITY C014�1�ISSION ,'DQ.GUilAENTAT1Qld g TO: DAVID 7 WRD C17Y �PIANA R 7HRU: P L DO P.1C i' R�� OF PLANNING AND ZQNIi`1C FROM: ESTELIO BRETO, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT; MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 2006 CONSIDERATION OF WAIVER REQUESTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDR) SECTIONS 4.3.4(K), 2.2.4(D)(3), 2.4.7(B)(1)(b)(iii) AND 4.3.4(J)(4)(a) FOR THE YACHT CLUB AT DELRAY BEACH, PURSUANT TO LDR SECTION 2.4.7 B)(5). B�C G#QUf�D l ANALYSIS On April 26, 2006, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) approved a Class V site plan and landscape plan associated with the construction of twenty (20) three - bedroom residential condominiums units in a 4 -story building, 82 guest & resident parking spaces (lower level parking garage and surface parking), a 3,610 square foot yacht clubhouse, and 44' boat slip. The applicant is seeking an increase in allowed height in the RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) zoning district, which will require approval of four waivers to the Land Development Regulations. The first waiver is to LDR Section 4.3.4(x) to allow the increase in building height from 35' to 41'. The other three waivers, to LDR Sections 22.4(D)(3), 2.4,7(13)(1)(b)(iii) and 4.3.4(J)(4)(a), are to waive the prohibitions against seeking a waiver for a regulation for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided, as it pertains to an increase in the maximum building height for property zoned RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density). The applicable code sections are described below: LDR Section 4.3.4(K) — Development Standards Matrix Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(x), the Development Standards Matrix for Residential Zoning Districts depicts the maximum height for buildings in the RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) zoning district as 35 feet. LDR Section 2.2.4 (D) (3) — Duties, Powers and Resuonsibilities of the Board ofAdlustmenf: Pursuant to LDR, Section 2.2.4(D)(3), no variance to height regulations may be granted by the Board of Adjustment. LDR Section 2.4.7 B) (1) (b) (iii) — Special Power to the City Commission: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7 (B) (1) (b) (iii), the City Commission may grant a waiver to any provision of the LDRs when there is no other avenue for relief available in the regulations. However, waivers shall not be considered with respect to a regulation for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided. LDR Section 4.3.4 (J) (4) (a) -- Increases to Height Regulations: There are no provisions which allow, nor is the Board of Adjustment empowered to grant, an increase of height for any purpose in the RM (Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density) zoning district_ Waiver Findin s: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The following excerpts are taken from the applicant's justification for the waiver requests: I IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR THE YACHT CLUB AT DELRAY BEACH ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 1. These waiver requests have come before the City Commission on October 3, 2006. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for the development known as the Yacht Club at Delray Beach. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection 1. 1. WAIVER: a. Pursuant to Section 30.15 of the Code of Ordinances the Commission may grant a waiver to a Section of the Land Development Regulations in which a waiver is not allowed under the LDR's. The Applicant has requested a waiver to Section 4.3.4(x) to allow an increase in height for the Yacht Club at Delray Beach Project, located in the RIM zoning district, from 35' to 41'. In order to consider this waiver the Commission must waive the following: b. LDR Section 2.2.4(D)(3) — provides no variance to height regulations may be granted by the Board of Adjustment. C. LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(1)(b)(iii) -- provides that no waiver may granted, under LDR Section 2.4.7(B), by the Commission for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided. d. LDR Section 4.3.4(J)(4)(a) — provides that the Board of Adjustment may not grant an increase in height to any structure located in the RM zoning district. The Applicant has asserted that the street, MacFarlane Drive in which the height measurement will be made from the crown of the road, has an uncharacteristically low crown and is prone to flooding. The Applicant also asserts by allowing the increase in height the finished floor elevation will be raised to a height that is more consistent with the neighboring property. Should the waiver requests be granted based on the assertions listed above? Yes No 1 I2 ATLANTIC ir a S -E. i ST ST- W t- m co Q li cri S -E. 2ND ST, M Q 1-- S.E. 3RD ST. Q 0 O z n 4 U aQ Q Z Z -E. 4TH ST. WATERWAY EAST COMMERCIAL CONDO BAR ° HARBOUR CONDO ° A V E N U E 1lIIJ DOVER HOUSE CONDO < OCEAN PLACE CONDO Q Q COCONLJT Row O INGRAHAM A NU JAPDIN DEL MAR CONDO OCEAN - TER R. SEAGATE Q 0 TO WERS -7m 7m S T. Q WINDEMERE HOUSE z CONDO � BAY STREET � LANIKAI VILLAS CONDO N DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB CITY OF DFiRAY BEACH, FL PLANNNG do ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL a4SE AMP SYSTEM -- LWP REF: LFM903 DELRA Y ¢ ST k ATLANTIC VLTERANS SUMMIT +� PARK CONDO W GROVES CONDO PLAZA BARR TERRACE CONDO w m SPANISH DELRA BTT a � RIVER kiARRlOTT U' RESORT ATLANTIC ir a S -E. i ST ST- W t- m co Q li cri S -E. 2ND ST, M Q 1-- S.E. 3RD ST. Q 0 O z n 4 U aQ Q Z Z -E. 4TH ST. WATERWAY EAST COMMERCIAL CONDO BAR ° HARBOUR CONDO ° A V E N U E 1lIIJ DOVER HOUSE CONDO < OCEAN PLACE CONDO Q Q COCONLJT Row O INGRAHAM A NU JAPDIN DEL MAR CONDO OCEAN - TER R. SEAGATE Q 0 TO WERS -7m 7m S T. Q WINDEMERE HOUSE z CONDO � BAY STREET � LANIKAI VILLAS CONDO N DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB CITY OF DFiRAY BEACH, FL PLANNNG do ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL a4SE AMP SYSTEM -- LWP REF: LFM903 e w ■ f �E RIMMEN 11W IAIn� ` r'll! IIIIIIIII Illll �rl i,lk IOiI 1 -� - ■'t, ulna EIIIIII�: L="- - 1♦� ii.l • F t�- i rl�wl�_ :. � S ��� � .7 � fRl n.t 1 t. rjli . i nls vi 1_�1 nett ii °. �^IIfSliii .al I,a — ,■.rte, n R Mg rrl 'llllilfl 1NIf,;.aR:1 f3.�r l,1 I_...®• °: . €.. �1�wkf ! � E �ifE11111 ql €EC_ �tss E,. _ = s - a s,� ElpffliHH Ill,lll 'J—if Rol _ Idllll[lyli .. "s''r lilllll��— �.fi�iE3i111 .��.,r r� rs■"11EIYIfIf Jill �'. I •.•. 111111.f�; a i1�1111II �;ti n eu u. r� ti =� F ial2}�R�11= _ _. ■rl ._■'�� 111'_. 1� Truxell, Rebecca From: Economic Solution Services Inc <esservices 1 @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 4 :52 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Please consider this prior to tonight's meeting at City Hall I received this letter Derline Pierre -Louis Economic Solution Services, Inc "Solution for Your Financial &Tax needs" 322 NW 1st Ave Delray Beach, FL 33444 (561) 251- 1265(P) (866) 923- 0403(F) esservicesl(@2mail.com www.economicsoiutio n.o IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. Any tax advice expressed above was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any taxpayer to avoid U.S. federal tax penalties. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. From: Judy Craig [maiIto:iudy @iudycraig.com} Sent. Monday, October 15, 2012 3:14 PM To: cinch @pllastridge.com; hansen.ianc @gmail.com; dreraia(aspodakdental.com; shutts40att.net; esservicesl(&gmail.com; franciosa4delray(a)aol.com; sa45ftaol.com; wmcduffie m delra beach.com; carne m delra beach.com; aq ray @mydel ray beach. com; frankel @mydelraybeach.corn; 'ac uek m delra beach.com Subject: Please consider this prior to tonight's meeting at City Hall Heads up, "Village by the Sea ", this Atlantic Plaza proposed development is looking more like City Place than Delray! Arc they kidding? (For those who have not viewed the video attached below, please take a look!) West Palm Beach is a city, that is their vision. Delray Beach has put a lot of thought, effort and money into our Village atmosphere. It's one of the reasons we were declared "All American City" twice, and designated as "Most fun Town" recently. Some of the major issues I would like to bring up with the current proposal are as follows: Where are the building step backs? Other developers were required to graduate back as they went up, so there was not this canyon effect going up from the sidewalk. And why the need for the dramatic increase in density, from 30 to 51 per acre? That's huge! Looks like a nightmare for delivery drivers, too. Imagine Mayflower moving vans trying to get around that little circle at 1" & 7th delivering furniture to —what —400 or so apartments - as well as restaurant & goods delivery trucks, beer trucks, on & on. I'm not seeing much green space either, except for Veterans Park — do they get to count that? Which by the way, will be devoid of afternoon sun if this gets built. Parking garage (not sure but seemed to be positioned on the east side of the property) appears to have the prime views of ICL? Hummm ? ?? What happens if the economy tanks & the second phase is delayed for a considerable period (of course that could never happen! —but?) —where is phase one parking until phase two, which includes this parking garage, gets built? Why not have the parking garage built first, in phase one, positioned between Federal Hwy & 7'�' Ave near 1' Street & not have all that traffic going back into the more residential area? Has anyone taken into consideration studies that point out shared parking only works in cities that depend heavily on mass transit, which we have none. I can't really foresee a large percentage of these proposed residents giving up their cars to ride the little "Downtowner" bus, even if it is free, The massive scale does not fit in with the one and two story buildings along Atlantic Avenue. (Exception is Colony Hotel, 3 stories — it adds so much charm to our Village atmosphere!) I'm sure there are other issues I have left out, but these are the ones that came to mind during the P & Z meeting this week. How about someone, maybe an attorney, draft a petition that cites a valid legal issue we could use to defend our community against bad development? I'll bet if Palm Trail, and other neighborhood associations have the chance, we could mobilize to circulate it and get hundreds, maybe thousands, of signatures. I don't know anyone, with the exception of the developers, who say they are in favor of this particular massive development. We need to do more than attend P & Z meetings, it's time we mobilize. As a long time Palm Trail Association resident and Realtor in Delray Beach, I'm in favor of smart development but not massive, inappropriate development that would destroy what we have here. Delray Beach has come a long way since 1986, when I moved here. Most of it is good, and much of it was done with the community's input and support. We have a very special community, we need to keep itthat way. Let's put our headstogether & find a smart way to fight this. project and the right way to do it, one that fits OUR Delray Beach. Let's not bow to a developer who's primary interest is their "bottom line" profit, our community can do better; we can choose to do better! This is a sincere plea for our ELECTED OFFICIALS TO DO THE RIG HT THING! Thank you Judy Craig 2 DELRAY PLACE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P'ROP'OSED BY TROPIC ISLE GROUP 3/12/13 The following are conditions of approval prepared by the undersigned, Counsel to the group of Tropic Isle residents living adjacent to the Tropic Isle /Delray Place property line which I have publicly referred to as the "Tropic Isle Group ". This list of conditions are and have been heretofore, to my best knowledge and belief, found agreeable by the Developer /Applicant per communications between me and its attorney. These conditions should be, and the Tropic Isle Group hereby requests be, incorporated into any approval for the proposed Delray Place commercial developed, assuming that said proposed development is ultimately approved by the Delray City Commission, Should SPRAB decide to recommend approval of said development, we request that these conditions of approval be included in its recommendation to the City Commission. The requested conditions of approval are as follows: 1. The buildings lying along and parallel to Linton Boulevard are to have a total and overall height of no more than 13' as measured from grade. Any and all air - conditioning and other mechanical equipment to be placed on the roof of any such building shall be placed no closer to the rear of the building than 16'. A parapet or screening wall shall run parallel to the east/west width of the building to screen said equipment no closer than 16' to the rear of the building. 2. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof (buildings 500 -510) are not to face east towards the Tropic Isle residential community. 3.. The existing vegetation, including the root systems thereof, with City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street is not to be disturbed by the construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Included in this prohibition are walls and the footers therefore. Violation hereof will require the developer to promptly replace any such disturbed vegetation with that of like density and size. 4. Sound baffles (sound absorbing panels) are to be integrated along the parallel walls of the two large buildings (buildings 504 and 506) where a driveway between those two buildings is shown on the site plan. 5. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street are not to be disturbed in any way other than the right of the owner of he Delray Place property to trim branches that overhang onto its property, and only to the extent of any such overhang. 6. Mature Areca Palms are to be integrated into the landscape plans for Delray Place so as to be planted within and along the boundary of the landscape buffers closest to the Tropic Isle residential community. These Areca Palms are to be in addition to all other proposed landscaping and are to run along the entire perimeter of the Delray Place property, from the easternmost boundary along the Linton Boulevard side to Spanish Trail; then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street; then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street. The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the two Banyan trees, or their root systems, at or proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be place as close to those Banyan trees as possible without causing any such disturbance. 7. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed. B. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 9. All trash areas are to be air- conditioned and enclosed. 10. Developer is to work in good faith with Tropic Isle and the City to have a "No `U' Turn" sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, 11, There are to be no rear doors for the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard. The large buildings running parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail are to have emergency rear doors only. 12, All mops, grease traps, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the buildings. 13, There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the site plan submitted to the City for its review on 212613. Submitted by: Ron Kobns PH: 561 - 202 -1841 Cell: 561 - 346 -4555 Email: CieanS late RK @Gmail,com DELRAY PLACE ADDITIONAL PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BY TROPIC ISLE GROUP 3112113 Listed below are "additional" conditions of approval requested by the Tropic Isle Group represented by the undersigned, said additional conditions not having been agreed to by the developer /applicant. Like the previously submitted agreed upon conditions, these are submitted because they are necessary for the protection of the quality of life of the residents of Tropic Isle who live adjacent to the proposed Delray Place commercial development. These additional conditions are as follows: 1. Sound baffles (sound absorption material) are also to be put on and integrated into the rear wall of the northernmost large building lying parallel to Federal Highway and parallel to Spanish Trail. 2. Developer shall enter into a mitigation agreement with the Tropic Isle Group (resident of Tropic Isle living adjacent to Delray Place on Spanish trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street), agreeable to the members of said Group, setting forth what is to be planted in replacement for one or both of the Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, in the event that the activities of the developer in constructing Delray Place injures either or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing or likely to cause its or their death. In such event, it shall also be the obligation of the developer, at its sole cost, to fully remove the dead or dying tree (s), including the root systems thereof. 3. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any ordinance /resolution of the City of Delray Beach approving the Delray Place commercial development, truck deliveries to Delray Place establishments are to be limited to between the hours of 7 A.M. and 7 P.M. 4.. External music associated with the operation of any of the uses within the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard shall cease at 9 P.M. Submitted by: Ron Kolins PK 561 -202 -1841 Cell. 561-346-4555 Email: CleanSlateRK @Gmail.com March 13, 2013 RONALD K. KOLINS 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 313 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Mr. Scott Porten Porten Companies 333 Northeast 2nd Street Delray Beach, FL. 33483 Re: Delray Place Dear Mr, Porten: �ECEflWEQ MAR 2 0 2013 PLANNING & ZONING I am writing to you in your capacity as Chair of SPRAS. You will recall that I represent the Tropic Isle Group, a group of Tropic Isle residents whose homes are along Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street, all adjacent to the property lines of the proposed commercial development commonly referred to as Delray Place. Consideration of the revised site plan application and matters related thereto were the subjects of SPRAB's last meeting on March 13, 2013. I need not remind you that that hearing was lengthy and complex. The matter was ultimately continued until SPRAB's next regular meeting to give the applicant the opportunity to further revise its plan. Given the complexity of the last hearing, I am writing to be as certain as l can that I fully understand the outcome of the last hearing and the status of the matter. We are, as you know, at a critical stage where all parties are working in an attempt to narrows, if not eliminate, their differences. It is in that regard that I want to try to memorialize where matters stand crow, and to set forth the remaining issues as best as I understand therm. This will allow me, and perhaps others, to direct attention to those remaining matters. It is for that reason that I am sending a copy of this letter to all participating SPRAB members; members of the City's professional staff; the attorney representing the applicant; and my own clients. Previously, I submitted, on behalf of Tropic Isle Group, a list of conditions of approval. I have now revised that list and enclose the revised list herewith. This mvised list sets forth IS conditions that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, both my client and the developer have gone on record as agreeing to, and which also reflect what I believe to be the consensus of SPRAB. unless contradicted in that regard, I request that those conditions all be incorporated into any recommendation/decision SPRAB may make approving the Delray Place plan. In addition to the matters reflected on that list of conditions, from the standpoint of the Tropic Isle {group, the only additional condition we request which SPRAIS has not shown a clear consensus about and to which the developer has not agreed, Is the requested movement of a portion of the westernmost building along Linton Boulevard (building 600) on the site plan a distance of 50', or the width of its two westernmost bays, to the east. The relocation of those bays would not in any way diminish the square footage of the proposed development, nor would it reduce the amount of green apaoe. It would only relocate the two bays eastward, and would take some of the green space at the eastern end of the Linton Boulevard portion of the protect and relocate it westward to the west side of the 600 building. I will not take the opportunity of this letter to set forth the arguments that support this request, for I am here only trying to accurately set forth the remaining issues. SPRAB also Indicated a consensus not to incorporate the condition suggest in the staff report to the effect that children's play equipment and picnic tables and the like be placed in the proposed green space located at the easternmost portion of the Linton Boulevard section of the site plan. Further, the record should now be clear that nothing about any decision to approve the plan for Delray Place is to be interpreted to mean that, in the future, should this applicant or any other applicant come before the City with a proposal to redevelop Tropic Square, that there can be any interconnection between Tropic Square and Delray Place without full site plan consideration by SPRAB and the City Commission, including the public hearings that attend such consideration. In addition to the foregoing, SPRAB has at least one additional waiver request to vote upon; is still considering the issue of the shortage of parking spaces, and awaits revisions to the site plan showing some relocation of the proposed bank building on the corner of Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. I do not, by this letter, attampt to restrict the prerogatives of SPRAS, but givers the myriad issues that attend this application, 1 thought all involved would be better served if the present status of things was set forth. I therefore ask that anyone getting a copy of this letter and the enclosed conditions advise me and other recipients of this letter should there be any disagreement with what is set forth herein. If, on the ether hand, we are in agreement with what is set forth herein, we can all devote our attention to the relatively few, albeit important, issues that remain. Thank you for your consideration. -- rufy Ronald K. Kolins cc: Rustem Gupl Ms. Alice First Jose Aguila Jason Bregman James Knight Paul Qorling Rory Hoggard Michael Young Dr. Andy Ross William Schnabel Kai Strom Marc Rosenberg Barbarajayne ®eGloyer Cheryl Sandhoft Bruno Pellegrini Cary Rockis Bob Lewandowski Charlie Young Steve Camp Todd Kumnick Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. DELRAY PLACE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Submitted By TROPIC ISLE GROUP 3117113 DEC E1�WEA i �E hA, `' 0 " 1:13 PLAlVi'V& G ZONING It is the position of the Tropic Isle Group, to its best knowledge and belief, that the following conditions of approval reflect the consensus of SPRAB based upon the discussions during Its meeting of March 13, 2013; are agreeable to the applicant; and are agreeable to the members of the Tropic Isle Group. 1. The buildings lying along and parallel to Linton Boulevard are to have a total and overall height of no more than 18' as measured from grade. Any and all air - conditioning and other mechanical equipment to be placed on the roof of any such building shall be placed no closer to the rear of the building than 16'. A parapet or screening wall, no closer than 16' to the rear of the building and of a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment, shall run parallel to the east/west width of the building to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the south thereof. 2. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof (buildings 500 -510) are not to face east towards the Tropic Isle residential community. 3. The existing vegetation, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street, Is not to be disturbed by the construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Included in this prohibition are walls and the footers therefore. Violation hereof will require the developer to promptly replace any such disturbed vegetation with that of like density and size. 4. Sound baffles (sound absorbing panels) are to be integrated along the parallel walls of the two large buildings (buildings 500 -504 and 506 -510) lying parallel to Spanish Trail where a driveway between those two buildings is shown on the site plan. Sound baffles are also to be integrated along the rear of building 506 -510 beginning at its southernmost point and running northward to the northern terminus of the loading bays. 5. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, and their root systems, are not to be disturbed in any way other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to trim branches that overhang onto its property, and only to the extent of any such overhang. 6. Mature (no less than 14' in height) Areca Palms are to integrated into the landscape plans for Delray Place so as to be planted within and along the boundary of the landscape buffers closest to the Tropic Isle residential community. These Areca Palms are to be in addition to all other proposed landscaping and are to run along the entire perimeter of the Delray Place property, from the easternmost boundary along the Linton Boulevard side to Spanish Trail; then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street; then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street. The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the two Banyan trees, or their root systems, at or proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be placed as close to those Banyan trees as possible without causing any such disturbance. 7. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed. 8. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 9. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed. 10. Developer is to work in good faith with Tropic Isle and the City to have an "No `lJ' Turn" sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard. 11. There are to be no rear doors for the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard. The large buildings (buildings 500 -510) running parallel to federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail are to have emergency rear doors only. 12. All mops, grease traps, bucket, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the buildings. 13. There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the site plan submitted to the City for its review on February 26, 2013. 14,Developer shall enter into a mitigation agreement with the Tropic Isle Group (residents of Tropic Isle living adjacent to Delray Place on Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street), agreeable to the members of said Group and consistent with City Code requirements, setting forth what is to be planted in replacement for one or both of the jBanyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, in the event that the activities of the developer in constructing Delray Place injures either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing or likely to cause its or their death. In such event, it shall also be the obligation of the developer, at its sole cost, to fully remove the dead or dying tree(s), including the root systems thereof. 15. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any ordinance /resolution of the City of Delray Beach approving the Defray Place commercial development, truck deliveries to Delray Place establishments are to be limited to between the hours of 7 A.M. and 7 P.M. The only exception to the foregoing is that deliveries to a grocery store establishment within Delray Place may have its deliveries between the hours of 6 A.M. and 9 P.M. 16. External music associated with the operation of any of the uses within the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard shall cease at 9 P. M. Submitted By: Ronald K. Kolins, Esq. Attorney for Tropic Isle Croup PH: 561 -202 -1841 Cell: 561- 346 -4555 Email: CleanSlateWgGmail.com C�GX'K� Fc/7i/J� l L.. Zoo;� Ll vU T00 p, tc l liL' C�GJ�� Jeffrey Lynne 7ue, Apr 2, 2013 at <jlynne@zonelaw.com> 5 :31 ISM To- Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk @gmail.com> Cc: W. Young" <migmangl 1 @yahoo.com> Lawyers are wordy by nature, aren't weir J zooms YH.P bT "RA n'rnT i�-r is .. Ok, let's try this format; My client does not oppose the right turn out of Delray Place onto [Eve Street] nor does my client oppose that the curbing which would so direct the traffic would be of a type relatively easily removed IF, ultimately, a pass through from Delray 'lace to /from Tropic Square were to be approved. THANK YOU. However, the question of whether or not the pass through is to be authorized is to be subject to public hearings and the complete regulatory approval process through the City of Delray Beach. That consideration will be part of the process, if and when it happens, of your client or any other applicant seeking authority from the City to redevelop Tropic square. AGREED. coo In YVJ VT:60 £TOZ /6T /60 This would include site plan approval; zoning if necessary; any waivers or variances, etc. AGREED. Thus, approval of the redevelopment of Tropic Square would NOT carry with it any sort of automatic approval to remove the said curbing and create the pass through. AGREED. However, we do agree that that issue, while a full part of any proceedings involving Tropic Square, would not involve a reopening of the site plan approval, should it happen, for Delray Place. AGREED. My client, and for that matter, others of whom I am aware, are VERY concerned about the traffic impacts and quality of life impacts to their residential community should the pass through be created, and they thus reserve the right to 170001 VV4 IfT:Rn OTn7iaT/i,A Fully participate in any such proceedings and to oppose the pass through. AGREED. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, Esq., LEED AP WEimER, LywHE & THompsoN, P.A. 14 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Detray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -4839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -5831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GowmmENT Amens � i dTicwm jlynneezonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com 900 n YVA 15T van t'Tn7 /aT /r,n Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Delray Place & House at 901 McCleary St. - - - -- Forwarded Message---- - From: Nancy Schnabel Sent: Jun 5, 2013 10:46 AM To: "a7finst[ earthlink.net" Subject: Delray Place & House at 901 McCleary St. Good morning Ms. Finst, My husband and I are the homeowners at 901 McCleary St, which abuts the Delray Place project on two sides. I appreciated your support at the last SPRAB meeting and you seemed to understand and be sympathetic to our situation with the devastating effect that this site plan as proposed will have on our home. We are the homeowners most affected by this project. We have lived in our home for over 30 years and we did our due diligence and knew we were buying adjacent to a PDC (Planned Office Center). Over the 30+ years, there have been no conflicts with the office complex. Offices are open primarily 8:00 am to 5:00 pm with generally no weekend or holiday hours. The proposed commercial complex is quite a different story. Retail establishments such asthe proposed grocery store are open from 7:00 am until 10:00 pm or later and the developers have pushed for earlier and later delivery hours than are the norm for Delray Beach. This will have a severe impact on the peaceful enjoyment of our property. Building 600 of the proposed site plan will be 18' high and just 15' off our back property line. The developer now proposes that the wall behind the grocery store be increased by two feet. If this is approved, we will have a 10' concrete & stucco wall along the entire west side of our property and, from our grade level which is 2 feet lower than the grade level of Delray Place, a 20' high building just 15' from the entire length of our north property line. This will totally enclose our property on two sides -- we will have no view to the west or to the north. It might as well be a prison. During the SPRAB process, the developer eliminated two of the buildings along Linton Blvd. that were directly behind houses on McCleary St. He did not, however, eliminate Building 600 even though we have asked him countless times to consider doing this to give us relief on at least one side of our property. We countered with the compormise of moving Buiding 600 and the other remaining buildings half the distance of the building east (50') just to give us some relief on part of one side of our property. This is not ideal for us and he refused. Since the developer did not agree, this compromise is off the table. Please help us retain the peaceful enjoyment and value of our home. Delray Beach LDF 2.4.5(F)(5) requires that the approving body must make findings that: 1. Development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties (I don't believe it is compatible and harmonious with the McCleary St. homes) 2. 5o as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values (If Building 600 is allowed to be constructed according to the current site plan, this will have a devasting effect on the value of our home) I would like to meet with you to discuss this prior to the SPRAB meeting on June 12th. I am available at any time and will meet you anywhere. I would be happy to have you come to my house so that you can see the situation. We are not trying to stop this project -- we just want to protect our home. Building 600 must be eliminated from this site plan. This space could be used for additional green space or for much - needed parking that would be ideally located to serve both the grocery store and the shops along Linton. Please help us save our home. Nancy Schnabel Vice President - Finance Associated Builders & Contractors Florida East Coast Chapter, Inc. 3730 Coconut Creek Pkwy., Suite 200 Coconut Creek, FL 33066 Phone: 954 - 984 -0075, Extension 819 Cell: 561- 859 -3963 nschnabelCa)abceastflorida.com L._ Please consider the environment before printing this e -mail The information fn this email and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely For the addressee(s).Access to anyone eise is unauthorized. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If this message has been sent to you in error, do not review, disseminate, distribute or copy it. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this email. Truxell, Rebecca From: Jim Knight ykncalco @g mail. com> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 7:57 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Attachments: Gateway Feature Elevation & Overhead Sketch Delray Place Feature 4- 16- 13.pdf; Jim Knight.vcf Rebecca below is correspondence I received from Joe Carosella. J i rY. Jinn Knight The Knight �Srobrp Licensed Real Estate Brol.er (561) 279 -8601 :'de r (561) 756 -2833 Pct W bde trl!r° j 4cn ca I o C°; iii a i4 , co in 10 SE1.st:.Ave DeI ray Bea.ch, FL 33444 From: Joe Carosella [mailto:JCarosella @rpg123.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 1:49 PM To: jkncalco @gmail,com Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com)'; 'Victor Alvarez (Valvarez @saltzmichelson.com)'; Louis Carosella; 'Jeff Brophy (JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.com)' Subject: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Hi Jim As you requested today, since we are not going to be able and meet this week, i am sending you our attached planned gateway feature Please consider that we have worked thru many hours and with different parties to provide this significant gateway feature material enhancement This gateway feature now provides intersection focus on the water fountain, colonnades, landscaping, stonework, project signage and other related features, and not the required outparcel building behind same 1 We have even modified this rear of gateway feature outparcel to have a corner centered tower with stone and signature clock that will tie into and coordinate properly with the gateway feature The attached has a detailed section view to understand heights and shows the plan view on each of the two sheets showing the gateway feature without rear outparce and gateway feature with rear outparcel Our project architect designed this gateway feature and we are all very proud of the high quality presentation this overall project will provide the city We look forward to your continuing support and i will follow up with you on Monday to further explain our overall progress to proceed further Thank you very much Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 -647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: 'carosella r 123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:54 AM To: 'jkncalco @gmail.com' Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltnasaltzmichelson.com)'; 'Victor Alvarez (Valvarez@saltzmichelson,com)'; Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good morning Jim I hope you wife is feeling better We will be in east delray today from 5 -6pm z If your schedule permits, we can meet with you today after at about 6:15pm or prior at 4pm Please let us know what you suggest is best Thank you very much Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 -961 -1732 Cell: 954 -647 -6790 Fax: 561 - 961 -1744 Email: iarosella @rpg123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:24 PM To: 'jkncalco @gmail.com' Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com )'; 'Victor Alvarez (Valvarez saltzmichelson.com }'; Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Hi Jim As we discussed today, we are going to be going to another meeting with our design and principal architect owner this Thursday from 5 -6pm about two blocks walking distance from your east delray office to further present and explain our revised gateway feature design I understand your wife has not been feeling well so you need to further work thru your scheduling this week, however, please consider that i am bringing our design and principal architect owner up from Hollywood florida to delray this Thursday afternoon at 5pm, so if your schedule permits, we would like to meet at your office this Thursday at about 4pm or about 6:15pm If you can't meet this Thursday, i will work to accommodate meeting you with another time later this week or early next week 3 Please let us know what scheduling works out best for you Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561 -961 -1744 Email: icarosella@rpg123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 5:03 PM To: 'jkncalco @gmail.com' Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltz saltzmichelson,corn)'; Victor Alvarez (Va Iva rez@saltzmichelson . com); Louis Carosella Subject: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Jim Knight I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy. and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval. We have met many times over the last 18 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our 4 project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be able to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 -647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: iarosella @rp,, 12 9 V01801j 'H�V33 AVel30 N01133sa31w1 CAN Na14110" AMH l W 3033 i"'n 33VId AVU130 IV AVM31VO z. o r U w Ld W z z_ i O it l b 0_ 0 Q w 7q z� a° 0 c z. o r U w Ld W z z_ i O it l b 0_ 0 Q w 7q z� a° 0 yamoi�'uoy�e Avdi3a Noll�3s 3 ',Z, eme Hawn arm ,vnH �ve303a �-sn O „ 33VId AVU130 IV JLVM31VO W �V i z LUO_q L 4 M�5 � g Truxell, Rebecca From: ajfinst <ajfinst @earthlink.net> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 5:41 PM To: rebecca; Truxell, Rebecca Subject: Fw: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Alice Finst to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Could you send this over to legal? Would it be legal for me to have them to e-mail me their gateway design plans? - - - -- Forwarded Message---- - From: Joe Carosella Sent: Apr 12, 2013 5:05 PM To: "aifinst@earthlink.net" Cc: "'Mark Saltz (Msaltz - saltzmichelson.com) , "Victor Alvarez (Va Iva rezesaltzmichelson.com)" , Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Alice Finst to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Alice Finst I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy. and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval. We have met many times over the last 18 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be able to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. >_ While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: jcarosellaC@rpQ123.com 2 Truxell, Rebecca From: Jason Bregman <jab450 @hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:26 PM To: 'Joe Carosella' Cc: 'Mark Saltz'; 'Victor Alvarez'; 'Louis Carosella'; Pyburn, Terrill; Rustin, Janice; Truxell, Rebecca Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jason Bregman to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Joe, Thank you for your email. I have to decline your offer to meet. I am very busy taking care of an ill friend who just got out of the hospital. Trying to juggle that while working and my normal commitments to SPRAB have been a challenge. As I have stated in the various meetings my concerns- in addition to those which you are addressing with your neighbors, are primarily about parking mitigation should your parking plan fail to meet demand. Your mitigation plans in writing as a commitment are critical. I have also mentioned a layered screening of landscape along Federal Highway, saving as many existing mature trees on site as possible, naturalizing and protecting the open space at the east end of your property, considering LED lights for glare reduction and reduced energy consumption, and connecting your underground water storage tanks to your irrigation system (which will save potable water and reduce your water bill). Regarding the 'gateway' my only consideration is that the corner not be completely visually dominated by the bank pushed very close to the edge of your property. I am very open to how you accomplish this visual mitigation and frankly I am not a huge fan of 'p[op art' placed at intersections. That said I am one vote, and if the other board members like the idea of art I am open to that. Take care, Jason From: Joe Carosella [mailto:]Carosella@rpg123.com] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 4:56 PM To: jab450(ahotmail.com Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltzoasaltzmichelson.com); Victor Alvarez (Valvarez(&saltzmichelson.com); Louis Carosella Subject: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jason Bregman to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Jason Bregman I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy, and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval. We have met many times over the last 18 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be able to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida z 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561 - 961 -1744 Email: icarosella @rpg123.com Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:56 AM To: Ron Kolins; Joe Carosella Cc: M. Young; tarheel_bill @bellsouth.net; Dr. Andrew Ross; Bill Schnabel (seasidebldrs @bellsouth.net); Nancy Schnabel (nschnabel @abceastflorida.com); Louis Carosella; Michele Burns; Mark Saltz (Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com); Dodi Glas (dodi@ 2GHO.com); Jeff Brophy (JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.com); Dennis Shultz (dshultz @flynnengineering.com); Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia Subject: RE: proposed final developer plans, conditions of approval and ordinance for planned Delray Place SPRAB 6/12/13 and Commission 7/2/2013 final hearings Attachments: Comments from Ron Kolins.pdf Ron — Just so we can be clear and understand each other— Your clients wanted a 20 foot wall; the City said it could not support. We explored other sound mitigation techniques and suggested the sound baffling, which everyone agreed to. We then spent a lot of money and time working with a sound engineer to design the baffling to make sure we get it right. The sound engineer then said that the sound baffling as proposed is not going to mitigate any noise as desired by your clients, and actually increasing the wall height from 6' to 8' is superior and preferred, which is also consistent with your client's initial desires (see your demands in writing, as attached). Now your clients are saying that they do not want a wall, that they want sound baffling that a well - regarded sound engineer said is not going to do what your client's think it is going to do (except cause our clients to unnecessarily spend even more money). You had said Mr. Young had his own sound engineer review our consultant's information. We are asking that you immediately provide his /her written report. Let's not proceed based upon mistrust, supposition and emotion but based upon empirical facts and data. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Ft THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Celt (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION itynne@zonelaw.com I www.zonetaw.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e -mail message and any attachment to this e -mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments io it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e -mail or by telephone at 561 - 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, same or all of the conients of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: Ron Kolins [mailto:cleanslaterk @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9;08 AM To: Joe Carosella Cc: Jeffrey Lynne; M. Young; tarheel_ bill @bellsouth.net; Dr. Andrew Ross; Bill Schnabel (seasidebldrs @bellsouth.net); Nancy Schnabel (nschnabel @abceastflorida.com); Louis Carosella; Michele Burns; Mark Saltz (Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com); Dodi Glas (dodi @2GHO.com); Jeff Brophy (]Brophy @Land DesignSouth.com); Dennis Shultz (dshultz @flynnengineering.com) Subject: Re: proposed final developer plans, conditions of approval and ordinance for planned Delray dace SPRAB 6/12/13 and Commission 7/2/2013 final hearings My client has reviewed your sound report and is not in agreement therewith and still wants the sound suppression we previously agreed to. If you would like to have a call or meeting to discuss this, we will make ourselves available at the earliest mutually convenient time. Please also advise when you will be going again to SPRAB. Thank you. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Joe Carosella <JCarosella nog123.com> wrote: Good Evening We have reviewed all our last SPRAB hearing notes and our discussions, and based on same, we have this week submitted to the city our attached final SPRAB drawings, sound engineer report, conditions of approval and ordinance and for your review and final comments We went line item by line item through the last plans, last conditions and last ordinance and for items that have been resolved and/or incorporated into our revised plans, we removed such items from our conditions and/or modified same into our ordinance Instead of a long email outlining all our revised plans items, satisfaction of conditions and revised ordinance, we are available to meet or have a call in conference call to work thru any questions with our revised plans, sound report, conditions of approval, and ordinance 2 Our group has left their early summer schedule open for our proposed final 6/12/2013 sprab hearing and final 7/2/2013 commission hearing, so we are available prior to continue working together We have all put our best efforts into designing this exceptional project the approx past 2 years and we are encouraged that with all our joint resolutions, we will obtain final city approvals as outlined above and deliver this successful project we all will enjoy and be proud of Please feel free to call my or louis carosella cell at 954 - 873 -4597 any time Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct; 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561 - 961 -1744 Email: jcarosella @rpg123,com 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Hoggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Dorling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.A1 - REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2013 WAIVER REOUESTS/DELRAY PLACE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Consideration of two waiver requests from the following Land Development Regulations associated with the Class V site plan for the Delray Place project: 1. A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district. 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), which requires a stacking distance of 50 feet for parking areas that contain 51 or more parking spaces. BACKGROUND At its meeting of March 13, 2013, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) considered a site development plan and associated waivers for the Delray Place project. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations for the project (later approved on June 12, 2012). However, the Board approved five associated waivers for the project, and recommended approval to the City Commission of the two waivers which are the subject of this document. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. SAD Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15') setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to this requirement. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "A ": Waiver Analysis: The first pavement encroachment into the required landscape area involves the parking aisle along Linton Boulevard. The existing office development has a parking aisle in this location with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right -of -way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required 15' landscape area, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk/landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the situation, the trade -off is appropriate and the waiver should be granted. The second encroachment involves an outdoor dining area along Eve Street on the south side of the 400 building. The outdoor dining adjacent to this building is an extension of the perimeter sidewalk on Eve Street and will be utilized for a sidewalk cafe. Under these circumstances, a waiver to the requirement at this location is appropriate. Reduction of the landscaping in these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required landscape areas in these two locations as indicated on the site plan. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(13)(3)(c)(1), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. The applicant has requested a waiver from the stacking requirements. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "B ": Waiver Anal Based upon the provision of four (4) access points to the site, including the primary access on South Federal Highway, which has adequate stacking, the requested waiver is supportable. The stacking provided will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings can be made for the reduction of the stacking distance requirement at the entrances on Linton Boulevard and Eve Street with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: 1. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building, based on positive findings with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), "Stacking Distance ", to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty-three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street, based on positive findings with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE CLASS V SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR DELRAY PLACE 1. These waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place came before the City Commission on July 9, 2013. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection I. I. WAIVER: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. A. Waiver #1 — Pavement Encroachment into the Required 15' Perimeter Landscape Setback: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25 (D)(1) "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(B)(5)? Yes No B. Waiver #2 — Vehicular Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), the minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space for a parking area that has fifty one (51) or more parking spaces is fifty feet (50') for all driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and Eve St. The applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Blvd. and for the driveway connection off of Eve St., by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27') for the driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33') for the driveway connection off of Eve St. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(8)(5)? Yes No 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the original development application was submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves denies the waiver requests to LDRs. 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 9th day of July, 2013, by a vote of in favor and opposed. ATTEST: Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk 2 Cary D. Glickstein, Mayor ¢ LEWIS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. P Q COLLINS AVENUE *BROOKS LN. 2 c� 2 WHITE DR. o` W 4 x O RHODES -VILLA AVE. BANYAN Q TREE LANE O' Of DEL -HAVEN D . LLJ C7' Q o J Q L I N T 0 N B O U L E V A R D Q o D z _� MC CLEARY ST. S �77A DEL HARBOUR DR. EVE STREET J � ¢ Q Q ~ H � TROPIC BOULEVARD J TT = Q Q Z O ¢ Ld va U LLJ Q W L, BOLENDER STREET �. ~ H � z BER UDA RDA ALLAMANDA DRIVE o ¢ m � BANYAN DRIVE AVE. C CYPRESS DRIVE x -- N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \Fil — Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1310 Delray Place �� 7D V 1(1 11 V d 1 a a I I 1 0 Q W J F m` 111:4 U 1lJ r I I � c 1 TFFFFFFFTI� , a I I 1 0 Q W J F m` 111:4 U 1lJ ?I 1�1W LLd I I _ I I I - I I I I a I I I I I INML FlSINVdS I �I , I III', ■ is G w � o 7 0 m- ze �' ppp 3� N�k gz� x N U = = [—� r U.ss�.. �is�a n�...s3uc �eunnnai cci m,w m,s:�+...mwi iicnaonr.eAm�s ua ¢<,cccinn W - z - - 0 N, w w ? LLd I I _ I I I - I I I I a I I I I I INML FlSINVdS I �I , I III', ■ is G w � o 7 0 m- ze �' ppp 3� N�k gz� x Exhibit A Applicant's Justification Waiver to SAD Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (16) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to this requirement. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "A ": This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B) (2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.4.25(D), which provision requires a fifteen foot (15) setback which is landscaped with no pavement other than for access which is generally perpendicular to the abutting street. We are requesting a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, we believe the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The proposed design is the result of numerous neighborhood meetings, particularly with the Tropic Isle community, and is intended to improve the community feel and optimize the pedestrian retail experience. Since all design possibilities could not have been captured by the City's LDR, Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) provides that pedestrian ways may be allowed within the setback "which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The pedestrian experience within the perimeter setback is intended to compliment and be a part of the "urban edge" design sought by the City as a continuation of the existing public sidewalks. The project's design enhances the pedestrian connections by locating benches and refuse receptacles under a landscaped trellis at the urban edge at each connection from within the project. In addition, a bicycle rack is located at each of their connections to encourage bicycle use by the patrons. This design is allowed by LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) as such pedestrian ways are not required to be perpendicular, simply preferred. However, the policy of the City is to allow for creative flexibility in design which provides for a superior project and in this instance, retail experience by the community. To only permit perpendicular pedestrian ways would otherwise undermine the urban feel of the project, which both the city and the developer are endeavoring to create, consistent with modern retail redevelopment projects within an urban corridor like South Federal Highway. See the enclosed article, "National Retailers Adapt Stores for South Florida Urban Areas," Daily Business Review, February 7, 2013. Therefore, the developer strongly urges a finding that the proposed design will not adversely affect the neighboring area but rather will lend to a sustainable retail plaza that is a community asset. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. Approval of the Waiver would significantly add to the provision of public facilities. This request improves the aesthetic feel and experience for people along the corridor. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can be made as well. C. Aoorova/ of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Allowing separate vehicle and pedestrian connections between the plaza, the public right of way and the parking lot as depicted on the site plan is intended to create a more safe and predictable situation, including the retention of the parking adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Patrons will be able to access the property via multiple points on designated walks rather than walking through the landscaping. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can also be made. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. The approval of similar waivers has been granted for the Alta Congress project and the Delray Community Pharmacy project. Both were proposed and ultimately approved to increase the use and functionality of the site, for which the LDR could not have otherwise contemplated. Exhibit B Applicant's Justification Waiver to Stacking Distance: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B) (2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1) which requires a stacking distance of fifty feet (50) for all driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. The developer is requesting a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Boulevard and for the driveway connection off Eve Street, by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27) for the driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33) for the driveway connection off Eve Street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The driveways as proposed on Linton Boulevard are existing and are functioning adequately as they exist. The depth of the property would prohibit any meaningful building configuration if strict application of the land development regulation section was applied. The current and proposed stacking distance is approximately twenty -seven feet (27) as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver to keep existing conditions should not adversely affect the neighboring area. Similarly, the Eve Street curb cut effectively affords a real stacking length of approximately two hundred sixteen feet (216) feet to the property line on South Federal Highway as there is no through- traffic on this street. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver also should not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. As referenced above, though the request is to reduce the stacking distance measured from the property line, the actual effect of this waiver will cause the stacking distance to only be reduced slightly less along Linton Boulevard (approximately 31 ) and greater than required (approximately 56) along Eve Street when measured respectively from the edge of pavement as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. In fact, this permits for redevelopment of a currently underutilized property within the city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. For the same reasons set forth above, approval of this waiver will not create an unsafe condition. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Relief from this LDR requirement are commonplace and are routinely granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Therefore, the developer is not seeking any special privilege not afforded to similarly situated properties throughout Delray Beach. SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING March 13, 2013 DATE: ITEM: II. B. Delray Place: Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations associated with construction of a 126,418 sq. ft. shopping center consisting of multiple commercial buildings, parking and landscaping on a 9.95 acre site located on the southeast corner side of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). GENERAL DATA: Agent .... ............................... Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .......................... 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ......................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ........................ POC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ..................... SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ............ North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Proposed Land Use ............. I Water Service .................... Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ..................... Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the approval of the following aspects of a Class V site plan request for Delray Place, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.5(F): • Site Plan; • Landscape Plan; • Architectural Elevations; and • Waivers The subject parcels are located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The 9.95 acre property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach in the early 1980's. The existing development on the property, which was constructed in 1983, is known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, and consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. A policy requiring that a redevelopment plan be prepared for South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2008 -1, adopted on December 9, 2008. In March of 2011, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Redevelopment Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 2 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. The Plan recommended that the subject property retain its original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed by SPRAB on December 12, 2012 and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, which included denials of a Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and associated Waivers, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On December 20, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the appeal be withdrawn and that the second reading of the ordinance be deferred. At its meeting of January 3, 2013, the City Commission agreed to defer second reading of the ordinance to no later than May 5, 2013. Now before the Board for consideration is a Class V Site Plan proposal for the project which includes construction of a 124,238 sq. ft. (126,418 sq. ft. with alternative layout) shopping center consisting of twelve buildings, parking and landscaping on the subject property. This is Step 3 in the SAD rezoning process. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the SAD rezoning on October 15, 2012 and the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 1St Reading on November 6, 2012. Second and Final reading of the Ordinance is scheduled for April 9, 2013. It is noted that both the P &Z Board recommendation and City SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 3 Commission approval did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the following elements: • Building "100 ": 3,967 sq. ft. bank with drive -thru lanes; or alternative plan with 6,147 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use. • Building "200 ": 5,600 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "300 ": 5,694 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "400 ": 7,882 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "500 - 504 ": 32,015 sq. ft. of retail use with enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "506 - 510 ": 46,882 sq. ft. of retail use and enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "600 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building 700 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "800 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "900 ": 5,476 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Construction of a 403 space parking lot (410 with alternative Building 100 layout) • Installation of associated landscaping and design elements, including trellises, benches and trash compactor enclosures. The following requests for relief are associated with this Class V application 1. A waiver for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." Final approval of this waiver is by the City Commission. 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1), requiring a 25 foot landscape buffer along South Federal Highway. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. 3. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), requiring a special landscape buffer at the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. 4. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, requiring a stacking distance of 50 feet between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot. Final approval of this waiver is by the City Commission. 5. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 4 6. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached). Staff has one concern with the following section of the Ordinance which has an impact on the site plan approval: Section 10(c) Loading Hours. All loading /unloading /delivery of goods to the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 6:OOam and shall terminate by 9:OOpm daily, except as further modified, allowed and limited as follows: (i) All loading /unloading /delivery of goods to the enclosed loading bays associated with Buildings 500 -510 of the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 7:OOam and shall terminate by 8pm daily with the exception of a supermarket /grocery store, for which all loading /unloading /delivery of goods may begin no earlier than 6:OOam and shall terminate by 9:OOpm daily; however, should a specialty food store to be determined prior to the date this Ordinance is effective, and known as " " become a tenant or occupant of the Subject Property, then all loading /unloading /delivery of goods for such specific specialty food store tenant may begin no earlier than S:OOam and shall terminate by 10:OOpm daily (ii) If loading occurs after the loading trucks are in the enclosed loading bays stopped and loading, and the trucks engines, refrigeration, and /or beeping mechanical forklifts are operating, then all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays in Buildings 500 -510 shall be required to remain closed at all times that delivery vehicles occupy these spaces; (iii) Delivery vehicles which have backup beepers shall not be permitted to unload at the rear of Buildings 500 -510 between the hours after 7:00 pm and before 7:00 am; (iv) any delivery vehicle on the Subject Property for the purpose of loading /unloading /delivery to the rear of Buildings 500 -510 before 7:OOam and which vehicle is not in the process of operating to load within an enclosed loading bays, shall turn off its engine and disable any additional noise - generating mechanical equipment associated therewith; (v) notwithstanding the forgoing Section 10(c)(ii) to the contrary, if loading occurs whereas after the loading trucks are in the loading bays stopped and loading or unloading and the loading trucks engines, refrigeration, and /or beeping mechanical forklifts are not operating, then all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays in Buildings 500 -510 shall not be required to remain closed at all times that delivery vehicles occupy these spaces; and (vi) the overhead doors shall remain closed when loading /unloading operations are not taking place. The early morning and late hours are a concern for a grocery store or specialty food store adjacent to the residential community to the east. These delivery times should be adjusted to prohibit deliveries before 7:00 am or after 7:00 pm for any use in the 500 -510 buildings. Section 4.4.25 Special Activities District (SAD) Regulations Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 5 pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street. " This requirement has not been met (see waiver analysis below). Waiver to Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: A waiver has been requested to allow pavement to encroach into the required landscape areas of the perimeter setback along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.4.25(D), which provision requires a fifteen foot (15) setback which is landscaped with no pavement other than for access which is generally perpendicular to the abutting street. We are requesting a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, we believe the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The proposed design is the result of numerous neighborhood meetings, particularly with the Tropic Isle community, and is intended to improve the community feel and optimize the pedestrian retail experience. Since all design possibilities could not have been captured by the City's LDR, Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) provides that pedestrian ways may be allowed within the setback "which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The pedestrian experience within the perimeter setback is intended to compliment and be a part of the "urban edge" design sought by the City as a continuation of the existing public sidewalks. The project's design enhances the pedestrian connections by locating benches and refuse receptacles under a landscaped trellis at the urban edge at each connection from within the project. In addition, a bicycle rack is located at each of their connections to encourage bicycle use by the patrons. This design is allowed by LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) as such pedestrian ways are not required to be perpendicular, simply preferred. However, the policy of the City is to allow for creative flexibility in design which provides for a superior project and in this instance, retail experience by the community. To only permit perpendicular pedestrian ways would otherwise undermine the urban feel of the project, which both the city and the developer are SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 6 endeavoring to create, consistent with modern retail redevelopment projects within an urban corridor like South Federal Highway. See the enclosed article, "National Retailers Adapt Stores for South Florida Urban Areas," Daily Business Review, February 7, 2013. Therefore, the developer strongly urges a finding that the proposed design will not adversely affect the neighboring area but rather will lend to a sustainable retail plaza that is a community asset. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. Approval of the Waiver would significantly add to the provision of public facilities. This request improves the aesthetic feel and experience for people along the corridor. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can be made as well. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Allowing separate vehicle and pedestrian connections between the plaza, the public right of way and the parking lot as depicted on the site plan is intended to create a more safe and predictable situation, including the retention of the parking adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Patrons will be able to access the property via multiple points on designated walks rather than walking through the landscaping. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can also be made. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. The approval of similar waivers has been granted for the Alta Congress project and the Delray Community Pharmacy project. Both were proposed and ultimately approved to increase the use and functionality of the site, for which the LDR could not have otherwise contemplated. Staff Review of Waiver: The first pavement encroachment into the required landscape area involves the parking aisle along Linton Boulevard. The existing office development has a parking aisle in this location with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right -of -way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required 15' landscape area, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk /landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the situation, the trade -off is appropriate and the waiver should be granted. The second encroachment involves an outdoor dining area along Eve Street on the south side of the 400 building. The outdoor dining adjacent to this building is an extension of the perimeter sidewalk on Eve Street and will be utilized for a sidewalk cafe. Under these circumstances, a waiver to the requirement at this location is appropriate. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 7 Reduction of the landscaping in these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required landscape areas in these two locations as indicated on the site plan. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." The parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] This would result in a requirement of 458 spaces for the 114,400 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 403 spaces, a reduction (12 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 55 spaces. The alternative plan for the 100 building would require 466 spaces for the 116,580 square foot shopping center, while 410 have been provided, a deficit of 56 spaces or (12 %). The site plan has been revised since the last submittal to reduce the total building area by 11% (14,302 square feet); and the SAD Rezoning Ordinance has been modified to reduce the maximum potential restaurant area in the shopping center. A "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix", which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses, has also been included in the ordinance. The previous ordinance would have allowed up to 50% (65,441 square feet) of the total building area to be restaurants. The current ordinance will allow only 25% (29,145 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be restaurants until a parking utilization study is prepared during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. This 25% figure is based on the standard figure used by Palm Beach County for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased to approximately 31% (36,270 square feet) of the total leasable building area, which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor cafe areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. This could include a change of use in one or more of the buildings with a lower parking demand or employing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives to reduce automotive dependence. While a waiver is not required for the SAD zoning District, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. A parking study has been provided by TrafTech to support this reduction. The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4`" Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 8 The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates thru wholly owned separate affiliated companies without any partners, 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approx.1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida which have been successfully developed by RPG from ground up and /or thru major redevelopment. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place and an affiliated wholly owned company of RPG designated as Delray Place, LLC, is the owner of Delray Place. RPG is putting its reputation and money on the line that this project will be successful. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this has been added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway- oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This has been added as a condition of approval. LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix — Nonresidential Zoning Districts: The following address the Development Standards of LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to the Special Activities (SAD) zoning district: Building Height: The maximum height in the SAD zoning district is 48 feet. Although all the proposed buildings are 1 -story with the top of roof at 18 feet, they appear much higher from the front and sides adjacent to the parking areas with decorative parapets, towers, and entry features projecting up to 40 feet in some instances. It is noted, however, that these elements do not occur in the rear of the buildings, adjacent to the residential area to the east. The parapets are 23 feet in height in the rear of the 500 buildings with the 500 -504 building located approximately 30 feet from the rear property line. While the 506 -510 building is located only 15 feet from the rear property line, it is further buffered from the residential area by Spanish Trail and a 10' park reservation. At the request of the residents on McCleary Street, the parapet has been eliminated in the rear of the 600 -1000 buildings and an aluminum screen placed further towards the front of the building to screen mechanical equipment. This reduced the height of the buildings in this area from 23 feet to 18 feet and improved compatibility with the adjacent residential development. Building Setbacks: The required perimeter building setback in the SAD zoning district is 15 feet, and all of the proposed buildings meet this requirement. The front and side street setbacks vary throughout the site with the four outbuildings creating an urban edge along South Federal Highway. These SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 9 buildings are set back 15 feet. To maximize the available parking area, the larger 500 buildings are positioned to the rear of the parcel with the 500 -504 building approximately 30 feet from the rear property line and the 506 -510 building at the rear 15 foot setback line. The 600 to 900 buildings facing Linton Boulevard are also positioned at the rear 15 foot setback line in order to provide adequate area in the front for parking and pedestrian connectivity along this narrower section of the property. Open Space: The required open space in the SAD zoning district is 25% and 25.3% (25.2% with the alternate layout) has been provided. In order to provide the required open space for the project, the existing parking area in the eastern portion of the property along Linton Boulevard is being removed and the area landscaped. While it would be better if the required open space could be distributed throughout the site, it is acknowledged that this dogleg area does present challenges to redevelopment, and the proposed solution does meet the requirements of the LDRs. It is recommended that this large landscaped area be modified to provide opportunities for employees of the shopping center to use it as an outdoor break /lunch area (picnic tables) and for the children of customers to play (tot lot). This has been added as a condition of approval. LDR Article 4.6 — Supplemental District Regulations: Bicycle Parking: LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(c) and Transportation Element Policy D -2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that a bicycle parking facility be provided. The minimum requirement for shopping centers is 5 spaces per 100,000 square feet of gross floor area, which means that a total of 6 spaces are required for the project. Five (5) bike racks, each with 4 spaces, are proposed for the project, thereby meeting the minimum number of spaces required. These racks are all located along pedestrian connections to the perimeter sidewalk system which provide convenient access points to all buildings on the site. Since, this project does not meet the City's standard minimum automotive parking requirements for shopping centers, the use of bikes as an alternative transportation method, especially for employees at the shopping center should be encouraged as much as possible. Therefore, an assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. This has been added as a condition of approval. Handicap Accessible Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(b), special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Pursuant to the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction, the nine (9) of the parking spaces serving the development must be handicap accessible. A total of thirteen (13) handicap accessible parking spaces are proposed. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. (see waiver discussion below): SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 10 Waiver to Stackinq Distance Requirement: A waiver has been requested to reduce the stacking distance from the fifty feet (50') for parking lots with fifty -one (51) or more spaces required pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1) to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and to thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1) which requires a stacking distance of fifty feet (50) for all driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. The developer is requesting a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Boulevard and for the driveway connection off Eve Street, by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27) for the driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33) for the driveway connection off Eve Street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The driveways as proposed on Linton Boulevard are existing and are functioning adequately as they exist. The depth of the property would prohibit any meaningful building configuration if strict application of the land development regulation section was applied. The current and proposed stacking distance is approximately twenty -seven feet (27) as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver to keep existing conditions should not adversely affect the neighboring area. Similarly, the Eve Street curb cut effectively affords a real stacking length of approximately two hundred sixteen feet (216) feet to the property line on South Federal Highway as there is no through - traffic on this street. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver also should not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. As referenced above, though the request is to reduce the stacking distance measured from the property line, the actual effect of this waiver will cause the stacking distance to only be reduced slightly less along Linton Boulevard (approximately 31) and greater than required (approximately 56) along Eve Street when measured respectively from the edge of pavement SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 11 as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. In fact, this permits for redevelopment of a currently underutilized property within the city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. For the same reasons set forth above, approval of this waiver will not create an unsafe condition. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Relief from this LDR requirement are commonplace and are routinely granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Therefore, the developer is not seeking any special privilege not afforded to similarly situated properties throughout Delray Beach. Staff Review of Waiver: Based upon the provision of four (4) access points to the site, including the primary access on South Federal Highway, which has adequate stacking, the requested waiver is supportable. The stacking provided will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings can be made for the reduction of the stacking distance requirement at the entrances on Linton Boulevard and Eve Street with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Bank Drive -thru Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(2), provisions must be made to provide for one hundred feet (100') of clear stacking from the first point of transaction for each lane of a drive -thru facility. The development proposal consists of a two (2) lane drive -thru facility in which each lane provides the minimum 100' of stacking. Thus, this standard has been met. Site Visibility Triangles: Although site visibility triangles have been indicated on the site and landscape plans for the driveway entrances at Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway, they have not been depicted for the driveway entrance at Eve Street on the landscape plan; and while they are shown for the intersection of Eve Street and South Federal Highway, the visibility is shown in the wrong location. Additionally, pursuant to Section 4.6.14(B)(5), "Sight visibility measurements at the intersection of a right -of -way, access way, or driveway and a right -of -way under County, State or Federal jurisdiction are subject to sight visibility requirements from those authorities." Provide modify the site visibility triangles shown on the plans for the driveway connections and roadway intersections involving South Federal Highway to meet the requirements of Florida DOT. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. This has been added as a condition of approval. Refuse Enclosures: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.6(C)(1), dumpster, recycling containers and similar service areas must be enclosed on three sides and have vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 12 such areas are not visible from any adjacent public right -of -way. 11 foot high free - standing trash compactor enclosures with roll up doors have been proposed for the 100 to 400 buildings. The enclosures have green walls and design elements to match the architectural features and colors of the adjacent buildings. Enclosed trash compactors have been integrated into the 500 -504, 506 -510, 800 and 900 buildings. Therefore, this LDR requirement has been met. Lighting: A submitted photometric plan and details of the light pole and wall mounted light fixtures have been submitted. Wall mounted, under overhangs, and under canopy light fixtures will be LED units (light- emitting -diode fixtures). Mercury halide fixtures mounted on light poles at a height of 25' are provided throughout the parking lot. The illumination levels for the parking area as well as for the buildings at the entrances and under canopies, drive -thru and overhangs comply with the standards of Section 4.6.8. Based on the CPTED review, it is recommended that the parking lot fixtures be changed to LEDs, as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. A note to this effect must be included on the site plan. This has been added as a condition of approval. Also note that Florida Statutes include certain requirements with regard to the lighting of automated teller machines (ATM). These requirements are as follows: O F.S. 655.962(1)(a): There shall be a minimum ten (10) footcandle power whereat the face of the automated teller machine and extending in an unobstructed direction outward five feet (5). O F.S. 655.962(1)(b): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power within 50' in all unobstructed directions from the face of the ATM. O F.S. 655.962(1)(c): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power in that portion of the defined parking area within 60' of the ATM. If the bank is to have an exterior ATM, the photometric plan must be consistent with the above Florida Statutes, as well as meet the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.8. Signs: The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. OTHERISSUES Special Landscape Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), "Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be erected, altered, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks leading to structures on the premises. Such driveways and walkways shall be generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways." Linton Boulevard: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1­1)(6)(b)(4), a special landscape area shall be provided along Linton Boulevard, from A -1 -A to the western City limits. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10'). Therefore, a 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 13 required along the deeper portion of the property to the west. This requirement has not been met (see waiver discussion below) Waiver to Special Landscaoe Setback Reauirement for Linton Boulevard: A waiver has been requested to reduce the special landscape setback required pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4) from 15.5 feet for the narrow portion of the property and 30 feet for the deeper portion of the property to nine (9) feet. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant submitted the following justification in support of the waiver This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4) which requires a special landscape buffer at the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. We are requesting a waiver to allow the property to maintain the existing nine foot (9) buffer so as to preserve the existing mature tree canopy and to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways as indicated on the site plan. A waiver from this provision is authorized by LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), which provides Special Landscape Setbacks: Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be altered, erected, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks which lead to structures on, or provide access to, the site and then only when generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways. (Emphasis added). As has been discussed and refined with staff, the intent is to provide a community context to this redevelopment project. The direction of discussion for the corridor, and as permitted by current code, is an ability to provide interaction along the public right of way to activate the area. The revised site plan for the project includes such interactive features that not only provide physical interest but serve to activate the site for patrons and pedestrians. There are multiple landscape features, with interconnected pedestrian ways that are amenitized with trellises, and street furniture like benches, trash receptacles and bike racks. Linton is a continuation of the interaction that is also planned for S. Federal Highway to create an improved sense of place to encourage pedestrian activity as intended under the Special Setback requirements. Therefore, the project is eligible for this waiver consideration. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 14 For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. This is an existing developed parcel that is being redeveloped to be consistent with the City's desire to create a more active and inviting corridor. Staff and the City's Landscape Plan Reviewer have determined that maintaining the existing nine foot (9) buffer was preferable to alternative action so as to preserve the existing mature tree canopy. Removal of the tree canopy for purposes of otherwise meeting this LDR requirement itself would adversely affect the neighboring area, which has expressed a strong desire to maintain the existing trees to the maximum extent feasible. It is also recognized, as a redevelopment site, that there are inherit constraints to parcels within the area. The depth of the parcel along Linton is such the case. The extremely narrow and odd - shaped parcel adjacent to Linton Boulevard competes not only with trying to redevelop the parcel, but with the special landscape setback which further limits opportunities to create "a more urban feel at the street front. Furthermore, it is in conflict with "principles of new urbanism" to have more interaction between the people and the places that form our built environment. The uses along Linton are designed to "address" the street as well as be compatible to the neighboring residents. This is consistent with the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, that: "Parking areas must be distributed around large buildings and shopping centers in an attempt to balance the parking and shorten the distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, and transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic distances from the buildings that it services should be prohibited." Requiring the implementation of this special landscape setback would be inconsistent with that intent by off - setting the natural flow of the uses. Therefore, the developer believes the site plan design as submitted will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The reduction of the Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard was intentionally designed to enhance and reinforce the idea of bringing the urban edge and character of the Project closer to the roadway as a continuation of the existing corner development, which is also consistent with spirit of Ordinance 17 -99 which eliminated the special setback for the North Federal Highway corridor "to hasten the revitalization of the area." More specifically, the staff report to Ordinance 17 -99 justified the elimination of the special landscape setback as follows: "The typical strip center development scenario with parking up front and buildings set towards the back of the lot is designed for the automobile. This arrangement is destination - oriented and does not promote pedestrian movement between businesses along the corridor. Future development of this type is discouraged in the North Federal Highway area. Instead a neo- traditional approach consisting of buildings located closer to the roadway's edge with wide, shade - covered sidewalks, and pedestrian scaled lighting and other street furniture is recommended. Although on- street parking will be located in the front of business for convenience, the bulk of the required parking will be located in the rear. This arrangement will promote rather than inhibit pedestrian flow between adjacent businesses. The current regulations require that a special landscape setback be provided along the entire Federal Highway frontage. This requirement makes it impossible to move storefronts close to the roadway's edge. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, this setback must be eliminated except where off - street parking directly abuts the roadway." SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 15 Therefore, approval of this waiver is actually encouraged for this area so as to "provide a more urban feel at the street front" and to be consistent with "principles of new urbanism. "As such, it will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. While the special landscape setback itself is not an aspect of public facilities such as water, sewer and drainage, granting this waiver will allow existing utilities to be utilized more efficiently and effectively, which is the intent behind urban infill redevelopment. The request also permits for the enhancement of the pedestrian system along Linton. C. Aoorova/ of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Elimination of the special landscape waiver does not create an unsafe situation. Therefore, this criteria is also inapplicable to the analysis. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. This waiver is supported by the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this corner as being "a catalyst for economic development in the City." Consistent with the anticipated land development regulations to implement the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, future redevelopment in this corridor will not need to seek such a similar waiver. While not currently subject to the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, the design is in keeping with the intent of its provisions. Therefore, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the project a special privilege. Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "[t]he private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area." More specifically, the Plan itself states: "It is the intent of this [P]Ian to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that it will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan. " The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations." The Applicant is seeking to provide a project that not only implements proven designs for retail centers but to kick off excitement for the area and its redevelopment. This Applicant has been willing to take the risk of being first for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as further refined with staff is proposed to be directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 16 This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, the Applicant has worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of quality retail and dining tenant the Applicant seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Such design requires needed relief from the existing land development regulations to allow for the "urban edge" design. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(8), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver: The existing office development on the property has a parking aisle adjacent to Linton Boulevard with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right -of -way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required special landscape setback, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk /landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the narrowness of the dogleg portion of the property, staff supports this waiver with the existing nonconformity maintained. Since requiring an increased buffer in this area would cause a reduction in the landscape /pedestrian area being provided in the interior of the site, the trade- off is not warranted. It is also noted that the existing landscape buffer is consistent with that along the north side of Linton Boulevard where nine feet is provided for Old Harbor Plaza. Additional landscape materials and design features, including trellises, seating, bike racks and sidewalk connections to the interior of the property have been added along the existing sidewalk to enhance the pedestrian experience along Linton Boulevard. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b), the provision of these elements is also justification for the waver. Based on the above, the requested waiver is supportable. The reduced special landscape setback will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that the waiver would be granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required special landscape setback from 15.5 feet and 30 feet to 9 feet. South Federal Highway: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6)(b)(1), a 25' special landscape area must be provided along Federal Highway (U.S. Highway 1), including the one way pairs (5th and 6th Avenues), extending from the south City limits to S.E. 10th Street. This requirement has not been met (see waiver discussion below). SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 17 Waiver to Special Landscape Setback Reauirement for South Federal Hiahwa A waiver has been requested to reduce the special landscape setback required pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1) from 25 feet to 15 feet. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant submitted the following justification in support of the waiver This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1) which requires a twenty -five foot (25) Special Landscape Setback along South Federal Highway. We are requesting a waiver to reduce the Special Landscape Setback to provide a fifteen foot (15) setback along South Federal Highway in order to create the desired "urban edge" as set forth in the City's adopted South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan and to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways as indicated on the site plan. A waiver from this provision is authorized by LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), which provides: Special Landscape Setbacks: Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be altered, erected, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks which lead to structures on, or provide access to, the site and then only when generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be -granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meanderin-g sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways. (Emphasis added) As has been discussed and refined with staff, the intent is to provide a community context to this redevelopment project. The direction of discussion for the corridor, and as permitted by current code, is an ability to provide interaction along the public right of way to activate the area. The revised site plan for the project includes such interactive features that not only provide physical interest but serve to amenitize the site for patrons and pedestrians. There are multiple landscape features, green walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways with trellises, seating and bike racks throughout the perimeter, both along S. Federal Highway and continuing eastbound adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Therefore, the project is eligible for this waiver consideration. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the nei-ghboring area. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 18 The reduction of the Special Landscape Setback along South Federal Highway is to enhance and reinforce the idea of bringing the urban edge and character of the Project closer to Federal Highway, consistent with the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. This is also consistent with Ordinance 17 -99 which eliminated the special setback for the North Federal Highway corridor "to hasten the revitalization of the area." More specifically, the staff report to Ordinance 17 -99 justified the elimination of the special landscape setback as follows: The typical strip center development scenario with parking up front and buildings set towards the back of the lot is designed for the automobile. This arrangement is destination - oriented and does not promote pedestrian movement between businesses along the corridor. Future development of this type is discouraged in the North Federal Highway area. Instead a neo- traditional approach consisting of buildings located closer to the roadway's edge with wide, shade - covered sidewalks, and pedestrian scaled lighting and other street furniture is recommended. Although on- street parking will be located in the front of business for convenience, the bulk of the required parking will be located in the rear. This arrangement will promote rather than inhibit pedestrian flow between adjacent businesses. The current regulations require that a special landscape setback be provided along the entire Federal Highway frontage. This requirement makes it impossible to move storefronts close to the roadway's edge. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, this setback must be eliminated except where off - street parking directly abuts the roadway. Therefore, approval of this waiver is actually encouraged for this area so as to "provide a more urban feel at the street front" and to be consistent with "principles of new urbanism. "As such, it will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. While the special landscape setback itself is not an aspect of public facilities such as water, sewer and drainage, granting this waiver will allow existin utilities to be utilized more efficiently and effectively, which is the intent behind urban infill redevelopment. C. Aoorova/ of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Elimination of the special landscape waiver does not create an unsafe situation. In fact, the waiver provides for additional considerations that promote and improve the pedestrian experience. Therefore, this criterion is also inapplicable to the analysis. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. This waiver is supported by the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this corner as being "a catalyst for economic development in the City." Consistent with the anticipated land development regulations to implement the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, future redevelopment in this corridor will not need to seek such a similar waiver. While not currently subject to the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, the design is in keeping with the intent of its provisions. Therefore, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the project a special privilege. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 19 Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "[t]he private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area." More specifically, the Plan itself states: "It is the intent of this [P]lan to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that it will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan. " The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations." The Applicant is seeking to provide a project that not only implements proven designs for retail centers but to kick off excitement for the area and its redevelopment. This Applicant has been willing to take the risk of being first for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as further refined with staff is proposed to be directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, the Applicant has worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of quality retail and dining tenant the Applicant seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Such design requires needed relief from the existing land development regulations to allow for the "urban edge" design. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(8), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver As described in the applicant's justification statement, the reduced landscape setback is to allow four outbuildings to be located closer to South Federal Highway. The parking areas between these buildings will maintain the required 25' deep special landscape setback. As with the reduction requested for Linton Boulevard, this waiver is also supported pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b) through the provision of additional landscape materials and design features, including trellises, seating, bike racks and sidewalk connections to the interior of the property to enhance the pedestrian experience along South Federal Highway. This type of reduction of the special landscape setback was specifically recommended in the recently adopted South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. Although the provisions of the Plan have not yet been coded into the Land Development Regulations, processing of the text SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 20 amendment is scheduled later this year. Since the City Commission fully adopted the Plan, no issues with the text amendment are expected. Based on the above, the requested waiver is supportable. The reduced special landscape setback will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that the waiver would be granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required special landscape setback from twenty -five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet between the four outbuildings and the property line. The 25 feet special landscape setback will be maintained where parking is adjacent to the roadway. South Federal Highway /Linton Boulevard Intersection: At its meeting of December 12, 2012, SPRAB expressed concerns about the bank building located in the corner of the property at this intersection. The Board felt that the building crowded the corner too much and should be removed to provide a more open vista into the property. Staff discussed this issue with the applicant during the process to modify the site plan, but the applicant felt that this building was too important to the economic feasibility of the project and that the building design complemented the corner. The applicant has since indicated that he already has a bank that is interested in this location and that the building size is at the minimum size that the bank needs. Based on SPRAB's strong objections to the location of this building at the earlier meeting, staff has added a condition of approval that the building be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. To be fair, it is noted that given the larger issues with the overall site plan, the applicant did not attempt to defend this building at the earlier meeting. Since the applicant does not agree with this condition, this issue can be discussed at the meeting and the Board can make a decision based on the applicant's presentation. Undergrounding of Utilities: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities serving the development shall be located underground throughout the development. Therefore, it is attached as a condition of approval that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground and that a note be provided on the site plan to this effect. Right -of -way Dedication: Pursuant to Table T -1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the required right -of -way for Linton Boulevard is 120 feet where only 106 feet exists on the north side of the subject property. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(5), a reduction in the required right -of -way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). On October 4, 2012, the City Engineer and DSMG considered and approved the reduction of right -of -way for Linton Boulevard to the existing width. No additional dedications are required. Bus Shelters: As noted in the Findings section of this report, pursuant to Transportation Element A -1.5 of the Comprehensive Plan, a City approved bus shelter and Mass Transit easement may be required. Work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 21 approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Plat: As the development proposal necessitates the dedication of utility easements, the property must be replatted. The recordation of a plat prior to the issuance of a building permit is attached as a condition of approval. Sidewalk Cafes: Many paved outdoor areas surrounding the various buildings in the project have been designated as potential sidewalk cafes on the plans. Pursuant to LDR Section 6.3.3, Sidewalk Cafe, "A sidewalk cafe is a group of tables with chairs and associated articles approved by the City situated and maintained outside whether on public or private property (excluding interior courtyard seating which is subject to parking requirements) and used for the consumption of food and beverages sold to the public from an adjoining business. All tables and chairs and associated articles must be located within the sidewalk cafe permit area. Sidewalk cafes allowed only when in compliance with this Section." While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. (Also see the Parking Section related to sidewalk cafes.) Preliminary Engineering Technical Items: While revised plans have accommodated most of staff's concerns, the items attached in Appendix "C" remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. CPTED REVIEW The following review was provided by Officer G. Wesner of the Delray Beach Police Department. Note: since this CPTED review was based on the earlier site plan submittal, notations have been added to denote chanaes in the current site olan. Overview: The site is situated at the busy S. Federal Hwy and E. Linton Blvd intersection, and extends all the way to the Intracoastal Waterway [ICW]. On the adjacent North side of E. Linton is a successful strip mall containing a popular Carrabas Restaurant, and several retail businesses. Diagonally across S. Federal Hwy the "Plaza at Delray" contains several restaurants and retail businesses including an (18) screen Regal theatre. Upscale homes along McCleary and Eve Streets in the "Tropic Isles" neighborhood will sit less than 100 feet from the rear of the "500 " and `506 "buildings once completed. Currently, the site contains two four story office buildings facing S. Federal Hwy with a third building to the East along E. Linton Blvd. Most recently, one of the four story buildings had been home to a regional banking center; both four story buildings have been largely empty for several years. Delray Place will be completed in several phases; eventually with existing buildings being demolished to make room for new construction. The project will also get a reconfigured parking lot. It will accumulatively encompass (12) separate one -story buildings; over 106,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space. For the most part, the site will be a "medium high risk" location for patrons and employees because (11) of the buildings will be suited for a restaurant; SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 22 they will likely serve alcohol. The 100 building will be high risk location once it is occupied as a bank. This CPTED review was provided using following resources: Several visits to the location during daytime lighting conditions; Delray Beach Police Department Records (available upon request); site plans containing a comprehensive Photometric Study [PS] and certified by Mark Satz on 11/19/12; and accepted Crime Prevention Thru Environmental Design [CPTED] standards. Natural Surveillance: Natural Surveillance [NS] for each building will be greatly enhanced by the large floor to ceiling windows for each building. overall NS will also be enhanced by the broad stroke of sidewalk cafes areas, and trellis covered benches located throughout the project. Security and CCTV. - Historically, crime trends for the site have been at acceptable levels. However, a project such as this will see patronage at levels far higher than those previously seen at the site. Additionally, restaurants will bring higher numbers in the evening hours than those seen during the site's previous uses. Therefore, there should be management onsite during normal business hours. Each vender should make use of the latest digital CCTV technology. Building entrances and all "points of purchase" should have facial recognition cameras as well as "anti- shoplifting" alarm devices. Retail users should make use of a cash - control system; have signs indicating that cashiers have limited cash on hand. Additional CCTV systems at the management office(s) will provide coverage at parking lot entrances, as well as store front areas. These should be able to record images of approaching vehicles and their license plates. Lighting and Landscaping: The PS indicates that most of the outdoor spaces will receive between 1 and 8 Foot candles [Fc]. Overall Fc levels are acceptable; however, Fc levels should be increased to a minimum of 2 Fc along the East end of the property. This secluded area of the parking lot sits next to the ICW, has an ongoing history for homeless activity. (Note: This parking area next to the ICW was eliminated in the revised site plan. Since, it is now a landscaped area, the comment is not applicablel "Shoe -box" type fixtures mounted on 15 and 25 foot poles will have L.E.D. fixtures. These L.E.D. fixtures will deter glare, and provide the best visual quality of color available. Furthermore, their high initial cost will be offset in a matter of months by the formidable energy savings that are common with their use. (Note: This was reported in error, LED fixtures are only being used on wall mounted fixtures only, not in the parking lot fixturesl Much of the existing landscaping will be relocated or completely replaced; an important point made readily obvious by the poor condition of the current landscaping. The landscape plan indicates that appropriate trees, shrubs, and ground cover will be used. Proper maintenance will ensure that new landscaping will not inhibit natural surveillance; create ambush points in the parking lot. Natural Access Control (NACI: Egress from the parking lot has always been a concern at this site. The main entrance -exit will continue to be at S. Federal Hwy; it only provides right turn egress from the lot. Furthermore, the entrance along E. Linton Blvd has always been a difficult place to turn left for those wishing to SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 23 exit West bound; towards 1 -95. Those who chose to exit on Eve St. will only be able to turn right once they are at S. Federal Hwy. Once inside the parking lot, renovations will enhance NAC for all users, and improve safety for pedestrians moving to and from parking areas. Fencing and walls along the southern perimeters will make quick access on foot difficult for abnormal users. The "enclosed truck wells" to the rear of the 500 and 506 buildings will be accessed from the main entrance. Once delivery trucks negotiate customer vehicles, they will be able to easily access loading areas. However, they will also be less than 100 feet from the exclusive "Tropic Isles" Therefore, truck engine noise will be a chronic issue for nearby residents if large trucks are left running in the truck wells. Even covered truck wells project noise several blocks away. rNote : this has been addressed in the SAD Ordinancel CPTED Technical Items: Based on the above CPTED review, the following items need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. 1. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 2. It is recommended that the light fixtures used in the parking lot be LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR section 4.6.16(C)(1)(a), prior to the issuance of a building permit for a structure or a paving permit, compliance with the requirements of Section 4.6.16 shall be assured through the review and approval of a landscape plan submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.3(C). A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City's Senior Landscape Planner. The plan provides for some building foundation, site perimeter, and parking area landscaping to address the landscaping needs for the proposed commercial development. The total landscape area required for the proposed project is 19,304 sq. ft. and 20,441 sq. ft. are being provided. The proposed development requires a total of 154 interior shade trees and 155 interior shade trees are being provided. The total number of perimeter trees required for the project is 160 trees and the applicant is providing 202 perimeter trees. It is noted that the project will provide a total of 357 trees. All proposed trees along the r -o -w meet "The Right Tree — Right Place as defined by the Florida Power Light company. It is important to mention that the applicant has made an effort to save a total of 7 existing trees that will be relocated on site. The landscape material proposed for the project appears to be abundant and diverse. It is noted that a total of 357 trees which include Gumbo Limbo trees, Pitch Apple, Japanese Fern Trees, Jatropha trees, Japanese Privet, Lignum Vitae, High -rise Live Oak, Southern Live Oak, Golden Cassia, and Pink Tabebuia will be planted. Regarding Palm trees the landscape material for the project includes Alexander Palms, Wild Date Palms, Christmas Palms, and Montgomery Palms. A variety of large accents, shrubs, groundcover materials and vines are employed to enhance the proposed development. Accents and Shrubs include variegated Shell Ginger, Red Ti Plant, Mammey Croton, Bird of Paradise, Red Tip Cocoplum, Muhly Grass, Podocarpus, Wild Coffee, Viburnum and others. The proposed under plantings include Blue Flax Lily, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lilly, Pentas, and Dwarf Podocarpus. Vines include Confederate Jasmin and Bleeding Heart Vine. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 24 The City's Senior Landscape Planner has evaluated the landscape plan and found that the plan partially complies with the LDR Section 4.6.16. There are still a number of landscape technical items that the applicant needs to address. These items have been listed below and will be attached as conditions of approval. Thus, once these technical items are addressed, the Landscape Plan will be in compliance with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan item remains outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. A Special Landscape Setback is established for this property along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The Special Landscape Setback along Federal Highway is twenty -five (25') feet. The Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard is fifteen and five /tenths (155) feet for the narrow portion (eastern -half) of the site and thirty (30') feet for the wider portion (western - half). Note: Waivers to the Special Landscape Setback requirements for Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway are discussed on the "Site Plan Analysis" section of this report. 2. There are still discrepancies with the Existing Tree Survey. During a site visit with the Landscape Architect, we had agreed to mitigate for several trees. Tree numbers 88, 102, 104, 219 and 229 were all agreed to be mitigated for (in addition to those already listed in the chart). Revise the chart to show these as being mitigated with their respective caliper measurements. Without these trees, the total number of caliper inches that would need to be mitigated for is 1,324 inches. Based upon the caliper dimensions for the proposed trees, it appears that the total number of inches provided is 728.5 inches. This is a deficiency of 595.5 inches. This is a substantial deficiency. I would suggest to increase the caliper size of the trees that are being proposed for the site. We also need a letter stating how you intend to make up the difference. You may elect to pay $100 per caliper inch deficient or donate trees that would collectively make up the number of caliper inches that you are deficient. The City would have to agree to the size and type of trees donated. 3. All landscape islands are required to contain a canopy tree with the above specifications. Canopy trees are defined as a tree that will attain a minimum spread of twenty (20') feet. Green Buttonwoods, East Palatka Hollies and Sabal Palms are NOT considered canopy trees. Switch to larger growing trees such as Live Oak (many varieties are available), Gumbo Limbo, etc. 'Highrise' and 'Cathedral' Oaks are popular choices because they grow more vertically before branching out allowing better storefront visibility. Significant progress has been made, however, there are a few instances where flowering trees and /or palms or located in a landscape island. The Landscape Code requires that shade trees only be used in these islands. Either revise plan or seek a waiver. 4. All required parking lot trees must be in the form of canopy or shade trees. Palm trees will not be credited towards the interior tree count. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. (Also see comment #3) 5. Several required landscape islands are missing. Pay particular attention to the parking rows in front of Buildings 600 thru 1000, between Buildings 100 and 200 and along the north side of Eve Street. Parking rows are allowed thirteen (13) standard parking spaces between islands. Parking rows are also required to begin and terminate with a landscape island. All islands are to be curbed and have minimum dimensions of nine (9') in width, exclusive of curbing. Each island shall have a minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF) and contain seventy -five square feet (75 SF) of shrubs and groundcovers and one (1) canopy tree that is sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven (7') foot spread. Make sure all islands are of proper dimensions and contain the required plant material. Progress has been made, but there are still five (5) landscape islands that are SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 25 missing. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the heading "Landscape Waivers ". 6. Several of the required landscape islands do not meet the required minimum width of nine feet (9'), exclusive of curbing. Thus, they do not meet the minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF). Revise all plans and adjust planting plan as needed. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the heading "Landscape Waivers ". 7. All landscape islands are required to contain a minimum of seventy -five (75 SF) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Shrubs shall be placed at the back of the island with low groundcovers in the nose to eliminate sight visibility issues. Shrubs are not allowed to be used throughout the entire island (as proposed on the plan). They are only allowed at the back of the island with the nose planted with low groundcovers. 8. Per LDR 4.6.16(H)(4), all buildings shall have foundation trees spaced so that their canopies will be touching at maturity. Size specifications are to adhere to the chart listed within this regulation. This requirement has not been met for Buildings 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 500- 504 and 506 -510. No Foundation trees have been proposed. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. Although some progress has been made, the requirements of this section have not been met. See comment #11. 9. Show light poles on landscape plans. Coordinate with Engineer to move light poles so that potential conflict between tree canopy and light pole is minimized. This comment was addressed, but has now resurfaced as an issue during this re- design. There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. 10. Two required landscape strips between parking tiers are missing. The applicant has chosen to install a sidewalk and trellises. While this can be a nice decorative feature, our code requires this landscape strip along with interior shade trees and hedges. The proposed feature will not offer any shade benefits to the customers or the surrounding parking lot. Therefore, the plans must be changed to address this code requirement. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the heading "Landscape Waivers ". 11. There are excellent opportunities for foundation plantings directly adjacent to the building walls along the storefronts of building #'s 500, 600, 700, 800 and 900. There is a vast area of pavers proposed with very little foundation landscaping. The creation of landscape beds directly adjacent to the building edge will allow for additional foundation plantings that will lessen the impact of all the hardscape features. These landscape beds can be utilized in between the proposed tree cutouts and the planter boxes and located up against the building edge. Small palms and understory plants can do very well in these tight spaces. A minimum of a three foot (3') bed would be adequate enough to support these plantings. 12. Move the proposed fire hydrant located adjacent to Linton Boulevard closer to the edge of the sidewalk. This will allow for the proposed hedge to run continuously along the parking lot without interruption. Based upon the aforementioned landscaping comments, a positive finding of compliance with the requirements of LDR section 4.6.16 can be made when all outstanding Landscape Technical items are addressed. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 26 Landscaoe Waivers: Waivers have been requested by the applicant to address two of the above Landscape Technical items. Both of these involve requirements for parking lots. The first is for landscape islands and the second is for the required landscape strip between adjacent parking tiers. The following analysis addresses these waivers: Parking Lot Islands: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), "Landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, shall be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces. One shade tree shall be planted in every island with a minimum of seventy -five (75) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Tree specifications shall adhere to those listed in Section 4.6.16(E)(5) and 4.6.16(E)(6). Where approval for the use of compact parking has been approved, islands may be placed at intervals of no less than one (1) island for every fifteen (15) compact parking spaces." (see waiver discussion below): Waiver to Parking Lot Island Requirement: A waiver has been requested to eliminate the requirement that five internal parking lot islands be provided; the minimum width for 8 islands be reduced to 8 feet, exclusive of the required curb; and the minimum planting area for 4 islands be reduced from 135 square feet to 100 square feet, as depicted on the site plan. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i) regarding the requirements for landscape islands. LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i) requires landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five square feet (135 s.f.) of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine feet (9), exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. The waivers requested are as follows: 1. The LDR requires a total of sixteen (16) landscape islands. We are requesting a waiver to provide fifteen (15) landscape islands, one (1) less than required. 2. We are also requesting a waiver from the spacing /locational requirement to allow the islands to be sited within the project at flexible intervals other than one (1) island per 13 spaces (or SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 27 15 compact spaces) so as to allow for additional tree canopy over the proposed pedestrian walkways. 3. The LDR also requires a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area. We are requesting a waiver to provide a minimum of one hundred square feet (100 s.f.) of planting area. 4. Last, the LDR requires landscape islands to have a minimum dimension of nine feet (9), exclusive of the required curb. We are requesting a waiver to reduce this dimension for eight (8) of the landscape islands by one foot (1) to eight feet (8), exclusive of the required curb. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The current design seeks to eliminate various parking islands and alter their configuration in a way to provide for an improved project design for the public. This waiver requests the allowance of an internal interconnected pedestrian circulation system that the applicant believes to be important to the safe and convenient operation of the center. The proposed waiver serves to improve and enhance the center for the use and enjoyment of patrons, thus, there are no adverse impacts on the neighboring community. The waiver request is in keeping with the desire to grant consideration that improves upon the standard design provisions of the code. Specifically, two paver lined trellised walks intersect the parking areas to provide direct pedestrian connection through the parking areas. There are technically five (5) fewer islands than required by code (as a result of the spacing requirement) and eight (8) islands that have altered dimensions by reducing the width up to one foot (1) to accommodate the design of the center to while maintain efficiency in the parking field for circulation. The remainder of the parking field is designed to the typical code standards. The applicant has coordinated with staff to balance the circulation of the pedestrians and vehicles with the intent to prevent the parking field from being a "sea of asphalt." The site design emphasizes not only standard landscape requirements for plantings, but endeavors to create a sense of place and experience. Paved walks with trellises, benches, open plaza areas with wall planters, punctuated with landscaping permit gathering and seating areas that serve the public. Landscape islands and planted areas in themselves do not provide any true amenity for people by incorporating the desired design into the flow of the center, a people - oriented experience is created. Therefore, the current design is not only preferred but strongly suggested by other design professionals as a more appropriate approach. This request is also consistent with the Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, large buildings and shopping centers in an distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, distances from the buildings that it services better connectivity with the parking itself. stated intent of the South Federal Highway that. "Parking areas must be distributed around attempt to balance the parking and shorten the nd transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic should be prohibited." This waiver provides for Therefore, approval of this waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. The alternative landscape design including spacing of parking islands is not an aspect of public facilities such as water, sewer and drainage and therefore is inapplicable to the analysis. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 28 Though it should be recognized that that providing improved pedestrian circulation should be considered an important public facility to expand and maintain in a city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. As stated above, the proposed alternative design to standard code provisions is intended to take into consideration the need of pedestrians and the visiting public by implementing recognized design techniques for how people and vehicles circulate through the site, as well as the type of experience visitors to the project will have. Standard landscape islands often break up parking fields requiring patrons to walk longer distances or behind and among the cars. The current design is preferred in modern urban infill projects where sites are constrained and actually make for a safer experience for all. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. LDR Section 4.4.25, governing SAD -zoned properties, and by its own language, provides that the zoning is meant for "large scale and mixed projects for which conventional zoning is not applicable." The uses and design of each SAD project are established by ordinance, adopted by the City Commission, as a rezoning and as set forth on the site - specific development plan, per LDR 4.4.25(C). The developer strongly believes the site design is supported by the intent of the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this corner as being "a catalyst for economic development in the City." Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "[t]he private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area." More specifically, the Plan itself states: "It is the intent of this [P]Ian to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that it will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan. " The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations." The Applicant is seeking to implement proven designs for retail centers for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as proposed is directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(8), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 29 Staff Review of Waiver: Staff does not support this waiver as it relates to elimination of the 5 required landscape islands. Shade trees are an important component to make parking areas more comfortable. This is South Florida -- we should be trying to put in more trees, not less. Shaded parking spaces are premium spaces, which becomes quite evident upon entering almost any parking lot. Due to the limited parking, the applicant is resistant to eliminate any spaces to provide the required islands. The applicant describes this development as a high -end center. The site design needs to reflect that high -end status. Therefore, the five islands should be provided as required. To reduce the number of parking spaces affected by the provision of these islands, staff would support reducing their width to 8 feet so that only one parking space is eliminated for each island. Under these circumstances with the site being completely redeveloped, it is unlikely that this waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Therefore, granting of the waiver would result in the grant of a special privilege and positive findings cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(13)(5). To minimize the effect on the total parking count, staff supports a minor reduction in width from 9 feet to 8 feet for the 8 islands requested in the waiver as well as the additional 5 islands mentioned above; and the reduction in size of 4 islands from a minimum of 135 square feet to 100 square feet. This minor adjustment will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that a waiver would be granted to other projects on a similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made. Landscape Strips Between Parking Tiers: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), "Whenever parking tiers abut, they shall be separated by a minimum five (5) foot wide landscape strip. This strip shall be in addition to the parking stall and be free of any vehicular encroachment, including car overhang. In addition, a two foot (2) hedge shall be installed within this landscape strip and run the entire length of the strip. Pedestrian walkways are permitted to allow passage through the hedge. Nonmountable curbs are not required for these landscaping strips, providing carstops are provided." (see waiver discussion below): Waiver to Landscape Strip Requirement: A waiver has been requested to eliminate the requirement that landscape strips be provided in two areas where they are required between abutting parking tiers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(13)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 30 This written request is for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs) is intended to supplement the same request, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), which requires five foot (5) wide landscape strips and two foot (2) wide hedges whenever parking tiers abut. We are requesting to waive this requirement for two (2) of the required landscape strips and provide in lieu of the planting area and hedge a five foot (5) wide pedestrian walkway, as further indicated on the site plan. This waiver is authorized pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(C) (4). For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. This waiver provides for a more pedestrian oriented design element that has not yet been incorporated into the Land Development Regulations for the South Federal Highway Corridor. Traditionally, parking areas are designed for cars and to prevent the sea of asphalt that large parking lots for shopping area have been known to resemble. The next progression is to have more pedestrian friendly elements. These considerations go beyond providing shade to a parked car to considering how a parent with a stroller and /or young child can walk from the main center to an outparcel without being in the parking lot. This goes "hand -in- hand" with the requested waivers relating to setback considerations and the landscape island placement. The proposed site design provides interconnected pedestrian walkways for all patrons in a location where the otherwise required landscaping strip and hedges would be placed. However, this does not mean the site will be barren at these locations; trellises with plantings are provided along paver walks that permit for safer, directed access routes. This also permits for points for people to interact instead of standing in the drive aisle to talk. This pedestrian amenity still serves the purpose of breaking up the sea of asphalt as well. By meeting code alone, the typical landscaping would come at the expense of proving a safer experience for the patrons throughout the entire site. To that end, the site design is consistent with improved pedestrian safety, parking lot aesthetics and is consistent with national trends to encourage walk - ability. Additionally, the developer remained sensitive to the demands from the City to maintain a minimum twenty -five percent (25%) open space green area in the project. Significant retail gross leasable area has to be eliminated in the process which was the preferred City direction over higher utilization of this site. However, this more forward- thinking design feature has been maintained to support the integrity of the developer's desire to create a community- oriented project. This request is also consistent with the stated intent of the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, that: "Parking areas must be distributed around large buildings and shopping centers in an attempt to balance the parking and shorten the distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, and transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic distances from the buildings that it services should be prohibited." Therefore, approval of this waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. The landscaping in question is not a public facility however, to the extent parking lots are intended for the public, this optimized and safer pedestrian experience should be considered an important public facility which is not significantly diminished but rather substantially expanded SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 31 where otherwise not required. The requested waiver facilitates public purpose by providing a continuation of walks and interconnected pedestrian circulation. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. The proposed design is intended to better address the needs of the public by implementing current recognized design techniques for people and vehicles to best circulate through the site, as well as the type of experience visitors to the project will have to maintain project sustainability by increasing repeat visitors. Standard landscape islands often break up parking fields requiring patrons to walk longer distances around or behind and among the cars. Landscape areas in parking lots often become subject to trampling as patrons prefer a more direct route, further defeating the purpose of the installed landscape material. The current design is preferred in modern urban infill projects, having people as the primary focus of the design. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. This waiver is necessary to alleviate the burden that is created by the additional effort to provide a safer and more aesthetic pedestrian experience. The project endeavors to reach beyond quantities of landscaping and meeting of code requirements to instead provide a sense of place and destination through the built environment. As stated before, additional hardscape and amenities have been added to provide thoughtful pedestrian circulation and added visual qualities to the center. The Land Development Regulations acknowledge the ability to provide for simple pedestrian crossing but not for the level of interconnected pedestrian circulation that is provided by this design. SAD zoning contemplates unique, site - specific site design to meet such contemporary and progressive developments. SAD zoning allows for waivers which are unique to a specific project based upon an overall policy decision that a certain project, as designed, merits such attention. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(8), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver As stated in the previous landscape waiver, shade trees are an important component to make parking areas more comfortable. Staff agrees that the two pedestrian connections provided between parking tiers are important. A strong pedestrian connection is needed to connect the major anchors in the rear of the site to the outbuildings in the front. This connection is so important that staff agrees that if space only permits one or the other to be provided, the pedestrian connection should trump the landscape strips. However, this does not mean that shade should be sacrificed. Therefore, two landscape islands have been placed on either side of the each walkway instead of the one required, and these islands have been offset to provide more shade coverage in the area. Additionally, three trellises along the northern walkway and four along the southern walkway will be covered in vines to add shade and enhance the pedestrian experience. Substitution of the required landscape strips with walkways at these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as staff SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 32 believes that a waiver would be granted to other projects on a similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.6.18(E) — Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered, by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board ( SPRAB), in the review of plans for building permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved: 1. The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 2. The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. 3. The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. The architectural design style utilized in the design of the proposed commercial development is an eclectic representation of a modern contemporary style with architectural design elements typically featured in the southeast Florida area. Four outbuildings have been located close to the South Federal Highway frontage with parking areas shielded behind the buildings. Two major anchor tenants for the development are located to the rear, opposite the main parking area. Six buildings are located towards the rear property line with the parking lot area facing Linton Boulevard. The concept of an eclectic style of architecture can be defined as the borrowing of various architectural styles to create a functional and cohesive look through color, texture, physical volumes and shapes. The style of Architecture of the proposed commercial development building is an eclectic cotemporary combination of the Caribbean style and colors with a renovated Old Florida Vernacular style of architecture. The architectural elevations include many features and design elements, such as: white translucent laminated glass with aluminum finish mullions, standing seam metal roof, manufactured stone, stucco texture, cantilever wire suspended overhangs, decorative medallions, suspended awnings, metal roofs, decorative wall mounted light fixtures, score lines, stucco texture finishes, smooth stucco banding around the windows, cornice finished flat roofs, various shapes of roofs including flat, arched, and asymmetric roof shapes, decorative brackets to support the roof of some portions of the buildings. Eight different colors are incorporated into the buildings of the commercial development including white, light yellow moonraker, light green, artichoke green, threshold taupe, light brown, robust orange, light blue scandal and van dyke dark brown. The proposed colors will help distinguish among different retail bays and portions of the proposed buildings. The proposed colors combined with different roof shapes and roof lines will create a visually attractive streetscape both along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The proposed commercial development is a high quality design product and will improve the aesthetics of this important double frontage site and will be in harmony with developments in the area; thus, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 (E). SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 33 REQUIRED FINDINGS REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(A), the resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent' for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area." Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(B)(1), "Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, was amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use is controlled by the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached to the ordinance. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Article 3.2 and required findings in appropriate sections of LDR Section 2.4.5 shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 34 As described in Appendix "B ", a positive finding of Consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway / Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor' along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of the rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single - family residential development since properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that needed to be addressed to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. As discussed below, the revised site plan has addressed these issues with a substantial reduction in building area, a decrease in the maximum potential restaurant area and an increase in open space on the site. Additional issues of compatibility are being addressed in the SAD ordinance. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 35 Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) (Total Building Area /Total Land Area) Delray Place 116,580* 0.27 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 0.19 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 0.21 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard * To present a fair comparison, the building area does not include enclosed loading areas, which are not normally provided. The applicant has continued to work with staff and the neighboring residents to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. While not everyone is completely happy, significant strides have been made to and the revised site plan represents a significant reduction in building area from the prior submittal. The parapets on the back of the buildings adjacent to the single family lots on McCleary Street have been eliminated to reduce the overall height of the buildings to 18 feet in order to be more compatible. The trees in this area have been selected to fit in the narrow setback area and the applicant has agreed to a request by the adjacent residents to provide areca palms between the trees along the rear property lines to provide a more effective screen of the buildings. The developer has also agreed to provide sound baffles along the south side of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 506 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. Staff concurs with the necessity of this sound mitigation and recommends that it be expanded to include the east side of the 500 -504 building. This has been added as a condition of approval. The previous elimination of the doors in the rear of the 600 -900 buildings for loading functions and enclosing the outdoor dining areas between the buildings addressed staff's previous concern that noise would impact the adjacent homes; and the revised SAD ordinance does not permit live outdoor entertainment in this area. Although pre- recorded music is allowed, it shall not exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single - family residential zoned districts and shall terminate no later than 10:00 pm daily. Future Land Use Element Policy C -1.12: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard. In Fiscal Year 2010111, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Redevelopment Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 36 development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. Transportation Element Policy A -1.5: New residential projects over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops shall provide an easement and install a city- approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution shall be made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Subject to it being addressed at that time, the development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A -1.5. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can only be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed and the requested waivers are either approved or the plans are modified to eliminate the need for said waivers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F)(5), In additions to provisions of Chapter Three, the approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM Old Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (Planned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 37 significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and /or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside Public Notices: • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. A substantial number of emails and letters have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and /or support, if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board ( SPRAB) meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that needed to be addressed with the revised site plan to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. The currently proposed site plan for Delray Place has adequately addressed these issues subject to conditions of approval and approval of six waivers. The required positive findings cannot be made for one of the landscape waivers (elimination of 5 landscape islands in the parking lot) and the plans must be modified to add those landscape islands. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property and it will be a catalyst for redevelopment of the South Federal Highway corridor. There are still a number of outstanding issues that will be addressed as conditions of approval, including a number of Landscape and Engineering items. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 38 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Move postponement of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by electing to continue with direction. B. Move approval of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), 2.4.7(B)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the attached conditions of approval. C. Move denial of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), 2.4.7(B)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations. [Motion to be stated in the affirmative] STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waivers: 1. Recommend approval to the City Commission of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 3. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet, based positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 4. Recommend approval to the City Commission of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 5a. Move denial of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces, based on a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. (Motion to be stated in the affirmative) 5b. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Thirteen (13) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet (including 5 above in proposed waiver 5a.) and Four SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 39 (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. 6. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 1.6.16(H)(3)(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. The building at the corner of Linton and Federal Highway shall be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. 2. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 3. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground. 4. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 5. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 6. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C" of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 8. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 9. Light fixtures used in the parking lot shall be changed to LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. 10. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 11. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator(s) shall not be located outside the building in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof and appropriately screened. 12. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 1100 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 40 13. If the adjacent Tropic Square shopping center proposed cross access is not in place by the time the 1st major tenant in Delray Place buildings 500 -510 opens, then Delray Place shall by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street, which shall stay in place until the date that the Tropic Square proposed cross access is built and in place, and at that time the island may be removed. 14. If approved by DOT, a no u -turn for trucks sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard. 15. Modify the SAD Ordinance to prohibit deliveries before 7:00 am or after 7:00 pm for any use in the 500 -510 buildings. 16. A parking utilization study must be prepared during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. 17. An assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 18. The developer shall honor his commitment to meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand at the shopping center. 19. It is recommended that the large landscaped area on the east side of the property be modified to provide opportunities for employees of the shopping center to use it as an outdoor break /lunch area (picnic tables) and for the children of customers to play (tot lot). 20. Sound baffles shall be provided along the south and east sides of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 506 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. 21. The landscape plan shall be modified to install areca palms between the shade trees along the rear property lines of the site adjacent to the single - family neighborhood. 22. Provide an updated letter from Palm Beach County that the project meets traffic concurrency based on the mix of uses in the revised site plan. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. 2. That the five missing landscape islands be provided. (Note: If the proposed waiver is approved by the Board, this condition can be eliminated) Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations. Attachments: • Appendix °A" SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 41 • Appendix `B" • Appendix "C • Location Map • Aerial • Reduced Plans • Parking Study and Support Documents • Public Comments /Correspondence • SAD Rezoning Ordinance No. 41 -12 • Color Board SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 42 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by TrafTech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 4,817 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 225 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 398 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. Although a letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County has been provided, the mix and intensity of uses is not consistent with the current site plan. Since the intensities given in the letter exceed the current proposal, traffic concurrency can be met. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. However, a revised letter will be required prior to certification of the site plan. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3(D)(7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. / 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. The 25% minimum open space requirement for the project has been met. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 43 Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Solid Waste: As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 618.4 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J -5- 005(4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibs /sf = 152.6 tons /year 80,310 SF Retail @10.2 Ibs /sf = 409.6 tons /year 29,366 SF Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibs /sf = 67.5 36,270 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibs /sf = tons /year 451.6 tons /year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibs /sf = 22.7 tons /year Total: 242.8 tons /year Total: 861.2 tons /year SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 44 APPENDIX "B" STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D -1 and D -2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B -1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 45 F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subiect to conditions of Does not meet intent G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B -2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent 1. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 46 APPENDIX "C" PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ITEMS 1. Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. 2. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1) and (D) (1). A proper Engineering review cannot be done at a 1" = 50' scale. 3. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. Please label easement on all plans. 4. Clearly indicate all improvements which are proposed and which are existing. 5. Rename proposed water and sewer main easements to "Water Easement" and "Sewer Easement ", respectively, remove "main ". 6. Clearly indicate location of drainage connection to off -site system on Linton Boulevard. 7. Indicate sight distances at all ingress /egress points and all intersections. Sight triangles must be indicated on Landscape and Engineering plans per LDR Section 4.6.14. All visual obstructions within the site visibility shall provide unobstructed cross - visibility at a level between 3 -feet and 6 -feet, this includes tree trunks. Sight triangles are to be measured from the edge of pavement for driveways and from the ultimate right -of -way line for alleys and streets. 8. Indicate sight visibility triangles in accordance with the FDOT Design Standard Index 546, Sight Distance at applicable FDOT intersections. 9. Provide a minimum 10 -foot General Utility Easement (GUE) through the property for all other utilities. This GUE is not allowed in public right -of -way. Water, sewer or drainage system(s) cannot occupy or share this GUE. 10. Indicate location of required FPL easements. 11. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d). Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. Actual copies of the drainage and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 12. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) permit(s) required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (c). Submit copy of FDOT pre - application letter. Actual copies of the drainage, driveway and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 13. Provide Demolition Plans at a scale to match civil plans. Include any underground utilities to be removed or abandoned in place. Provide notes that state the disposition of all existing facilities including service lines and cleanouts. 14. Clearly dimension driveway width on civil plans. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 47 15. Provide note that parking layout and striping needs to follow City of Delray Beach current standards. Provide latest Parking Lot Detail RT 4.1 and Typical Parking Space Details RT 4.2 A thru C, as applicable on Civil Plans. On plan view, indicate double striping at parking spaces. 16. Provide finished floor elevation. In accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 (B) (2), if finished floor elevation is less than 18- inches above centerline of adjacent road, but above the 100 - year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above the flooding level. It must be shown that the property will have adequate drainage to ensure that flooding will not occur in a 100 - year, 3 -day storm event. 17. Provide finish floor elevations for nearest adjacent structures / buildings abutting all property boundaries on civil plans. 18. Provide signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. /24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. 19. Show nearest existing drainage structures per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (3) on civil plans. 20. Provide drainage easements for all proposed private drainage systems in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. 21. Location of existing 12" water main on Federal Highway will need to be confirmed. It is advised to determine the exact location of this line since City has been unable to locate in the past. 22. On Eve Street, indicate proposed fire connection will be a straight run into DDCV, no 90 degree bends. 23. At intersection of Eve Street and Spanish Trail, indicate a new sanitary sewer manhole will be installed, outside drop connection not possible at existing manhole. 24. Indicate a Hydro Guard automatic flusher will be installed at hydrant end for all hydrant leads greater that 50 -feet (only for hydrants on a dead end line). 25. Confirm location of two 6" water mains running perpendicular to Linton Boulevard, only one line exist. 26. Indicate existing 6" water main running parallel to Linton Boulevard will be extend in order to provide straight service connections to Building 900. 27. Confirm a sanitary sewer cleanout is provided a maximum distance of 18- inches from the easement line, two locations identified, refer to service line close to McCleary Street. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 48 28. Please revise sanitary sewer design at proposed Buildings 500 and 600, sanitary sewer mains need to be at least 10' away from building foundations. 29. Provide updated signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated flows into existing system. Submit to my attention at the Engineering Division. Upon review and approval, a letter from the Deputy Director of Public Utilities stating that the City's system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows will be issued. This is a requirement in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.3 (D) for the Off -Site Impact Assessment to the City's water and sewer systems. 30. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. 31. Indicate City approved bus shelter and mass transit easement will be provided per City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan, Policy A -1.5. New residential projects with over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet which are adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops are required to provide an easement and install a City approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site is required. 32. If bus shelter is required, please indicate on plans a City approved bus shelter will be installed in accordance with Palm Tran and ADA requirements (e.g. 5' x 8' landing area, 30' from intersection, direct access to site, etc.). 33. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. 34. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. ¢ LEWIS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. P Q COLLINS AVENUE *BROOKS LN. 2 c� 2 WHITE DR. o` W 4 x O RHODES -VILLA AVE. BANYAN Q TREE LANE O' Of DEL -HAVEN D . LLJ C7' Q o J Q L I N T 0 N B O U L E V A R D Q o D z _� MC CLEARY ST. S �77A DEL HARBOUR DR. EVE STREET J � ¢ Q Q ~ H � TROPIC BOULEVARD J TT = Q Q Z O ¢ Ld va U LLJ Q W L, BOLENDER STREET �. ~ H � z BER UDA RDA ALLAMANDA DRIVE o ¢ m � BANYAN DRIVE AVE. C CYPRESS DRIVE x -- N SUBJECT PROPERTY D E L RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S: \Planning & Zoning \DBMS \Fil — Cab \Z —LM 1001 - 1500 \LM1310 Delray Place �� Jill' .01 op 46 . . . . . . . . .... 3;o "��-l3 A IL t. lk I = 21 i e.' WS` "t II I ,-