03-02-89 Special/Workshop
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager tJ[J
SUBJECT: "CHANGE OUT PERMIT FEES"
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
This item is pursuant to your regular commission meeting of February
27th. Options include elimination of permit fees for certain
activities and a decision as to when th~ification should go into
effect (now or October 1st). ~
WOB,e1 iJr);'''
J,,$i
~ 1'1
~/k \' \gl\ . ~
/ W r .I
/(""1 t
I.P vA.
~ ~)/ ,
e,(1;\ ~ r Y
rJ~
"
~ ,
'--I
~
ORDINANCE NO. 12-89
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CI OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING TITLE XV, "BUILDING
REGULATIONS", CHAPTER 150, "BUILDING REGULA'rIONS",
"BUILDING CODE", SECTION 150.016, "AMENDMENTs AND
ADDITIONS TO CODE", SUBSECTION 107.4, "SCHEDULE OF
PERMIT FEES", PARAGRAPH Ic), BY ENACTING A NEW
SUBPARAGRAPH 107.4 IC)XI, "CHANGE-OUT PERMITS";
AMENDING TITLE XV, "BUILDING REGULATIONS", CHAPTER
155, "ELECTRICITY", "PERMIT AND INSPECTIONS",
SECTION 155.18, "PERMIT FEES", BY ENACTING A NEW
PARAGRAPH 155.18ID); AMENDING TITLE XV, "BUILDING
REGULATIONS" , CHAPTER 157, "GAS CODE", SECTION
1 5 7 . 02, "AMENDMENTs AND ADDITIONS TO CODE" ,
SUBSECTION 113 . 4, "SCHEDULE OF PERMIT FEES", BY
ENACTING A NEW PARAGRAPH 113.41 d); AMENDING ~ITLE
XV, "BUILDING REGULATIONS", CHAPTER 160, "MECHANICAL
CODE", SECTION 160.02, "A.'mNDMENTS AND ADDITIONS TO
CODE", SUBSECTION 106.3, "SCHEDULE OF PERMIT FEES",
BY ENACTING A NEW PARAGRAPH 106.3IC); AMENDING TITLE
XV, "BUILDING REGULATIONS", CHAPTER 161, "PLUMBING
CODE", SECTION 161.02, "AMENDMENTS AND ADDITIONS TO
CODE", SUBSECTION 113.4, "SCHEDULE OF PERMIT FEES",
BY ENACTING A NEW PARAGRAPH 113.4Id) TO PROVIDE FOR
CHANGE-OUT PERMIT FEE:t:IN THE AFOREMENTIONED
I CHAPTERS; PROVIDING A ERAL REPEALER CLAUSE;
I PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUS ; PROV~DIi AN EFFECTIVE.
I DATE. ~~'" L ~lf'NJ
I, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY CITY COMMISSION OF THE
, CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Title XV "Building Regulations", Chapter 150,
"Building Regulations", "Building Code", Section 150.16, "Amendments and
Additions to Code", Subsection 107.4, "SChedule of Permit Fees",
Paragraph (c), of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, be and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
Subparagraph 107.4Ic)XI, to read as fOllowE:
Xl. Change-out Permits. A Change-out Permit request is a
request made by a Sub-trade contractor or qualified
owner-builder, to obtain a permit to either repair or replace
minor components with the value of one thousand dollars
1$1,000.00) or less, inClUding, but not limited to, water
closets, lavatories, tubs, showers, sinks, water heaters,
air-condi tioning condenser units, air-handlers, heat strips,
- ~- mino::- duct repair, electrical fixtures, electrical service
upgrades, pool pumps, irrigation pumps and accessories. The
I fee for a change-out permit shall be a flat fee of thirty-five
I dollars ($35.00).
Ii
Ii
MEMORANDUM
TO: WALTER O. BARRY - CITY ~R
FROM: FRANK R. SPENCE~~OR, DEvEt~PMENT SERVICES
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 12-89
REDUCTION OF CHANGE-OUT ~
DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 1989
.
BACKGROUND
In response to a number of complaints from the citizenry that the
City's change-out permit fee of $53.90 is excessive, it is proposed
that the fee be reduced to a flat fee of $35.00. It should be noted
that the recommended change-out repairs are for those costing $1,000
or less.
The Standard Building Code, Section 103, defines "permit" as follows:
"A person, firm or corporation shall not erect, construct, enlarge,
alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish any building
or structure in the applicable jurisdiction, or cause the same to be
done, without first obtaining a building permit for such building or
structure from the Building Official."
The definition for "change-out" would be the request made by a sub-
trade contractor (plumbing, electrical, air conditioning) to obtain a
permit to either repair or replace minor components such as those
items listed previously including such common change-out for: air
conditioning components, water heaters, plumbing components (water
closets, lavatories, tubs, showers, sinks); change of electrical
service; change of electrical fixtures; change of pool pump; change of
irrigation pump; and other pieces of equipment. Of the current
$53.90 charge, $36.30 is for the permit and $17.60 is for each
required inspection.
A survey of the surrounding jurisdictions which charge for change-out
permits show the following: Boca Raton $25.00; Boynton Beach $30.00;
Palm Beach County $20.00. These entities do not charge any additional
amounts for inspections.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
A survey reviewing the previous 3-month period shows that a total of
145 permits were issued, generating $9,570.80 in revenue. Had the
amount of $35.00 been charged during this period, revenue generated
would have been approximately $5,040.00 or a loss of approximately
$4,530.00. Annualized, the projected revenue for this fiscal year at
the current rate is $36,000; under the $35.00 fee, the annualized
estimate would be $20,300, or a reduction in revenue in the amount of
$13,700. Another consideration is that the reduction in change-out
permit fees would create the incentive for more compliance by
residents, thus possibly increasing the number of permits being
applied for and issued.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending that the Commission reduce the change-out permit
fee to repair or replace minor components with an estimated cost value
of $1,000 or less to a flat fee of $35.00 effective-10/1/89. Proposed
Ordinance 12-89, drafted by the City Attorney's office, is attached
for Commission consideration. "
A:228.CC Fls
r
;
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manage~ ~
SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The City and the Housing Authority have had an ~greement over the past
several years to provide additional police security at Carver Estates.
This has involved an expenditure of funds which the Housing Authority
is now finding is beyond their budget. They have requested
consideration of additional support in the form of overtime or
additional police service.
Previously an agreement had been reached between the Housing Authority
and the City which was found to be satisfactory. Two options exist.
One is to continue the present level of service with the Commission
offsetting the additional sum or all of the additional costs for the
additional police services. A second involves reducing the level of
additional service to meet the Housing Authority's budget capability.
I have attached support information from the Police Department and the
request from the Housing Authority for your information.
WOB:cl
Enc1
w{s:tl:-7-
[Iry DF DElRAY BEA[H
100 N,W. 1st AVENUE OELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7000
"
February 21, 1989
Ms. Rosetta Rolle
Chairperson
De1ray Beach Housing Authority f
770 S.W. 12th Terrace
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Ms. Rolle:
Thank you for your letter dated February 16, 1989.
I support the efforts of the Housing Authority to improve the quality
of life for the people of Carver Estates by increasing security efforts.
"
I feel we should not forfeit your successes to date and if the City needs
to increase its cooperation and support, we need to_pursue that as soon as
possible.
By copy of this letter I am requesting the Manager and the Chief of
Police to be prepared to review and discuss the matter at the next scheduled
City Commission workshop.
Sincerely,
(J-~( a7'~#
DOAK S. CAMPBELL, III
MAYOR
DSC:iam
cc: Mr. Walter Barry, City Manager
Chief Kilgore
TH~ FCCr)RT AlWAYS MATTFRS
, ..-.------.
!
i I
;
,
....
DELRAY BEACH HOUSING AUTHORITY
770 S.W_ 12th TERRACE . DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 . (305) 272.6766 - 272.6767
February 16, 1989
.
The Honorable Mayor Doak Campbell
and City Commissioners
City of Delray Beach
100 Northwest 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Security Services Carver
Estates
Dear Mayor and Commissioners:
The Delray Beach Housing Authority Commissioners have resolved to
request the City's assistance in providing a level of subsidy for
the security needs at Carver Estates. Currently as you may be
aware. the Delray Beach Housing Authority has contracted with the
Police Department for off-duty officers to provide security
services. Since the inception of the police patrols, the crime
rate has dropped significantly within Carver Estates.
Unfortunately, the Delray Beach Housing Authority is without
adequate funding to continue the current level of expenditures on
the security services and are fearful that a lessened intensity
of security will result in crime returning to its former level.
The Delray Beach Housing Authority is able to fund approximately
Three Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($3,60'0.00) per month for
security services and that would leave approximately One Thousand
Four Hundred Dollars ($1,400.00) as a deficit to be subsidized by
the City.
We feel that it is in the best interest of the City to provide
the additional security to the Carver Estates area, not only for
the safety and well being of the residents of Carver Estates, but
also to help ensure the success of the Auburn Trace project.
The Housing Authority, being mindful of its fiscal constraints,
has recently reorganized its personnel in order to reduce its
administrative expenses. Unfortunately, under HUD guidelines a
line item in our budget for security at the current level has
been rejected by HUD. In that the funding of the Delray Beach
Housing Authority's Public Housing project C om'e 8 from and through
m. n. '00';;007' constrained to limit its
. ,uJJ I
~. \~ ,
~ II jvCU~ .
I
I
~
Mayor Doak Campbell
and City Commissioners
February 16. 1989
Page 2
expenditures for any line item to that which is approved by HUD
in the budget.
Several alternatives might be considered by the City Commission
to assist in subsidizing the security requirements of Carver
Estates. One alternative would be to create a specific patrol
beat for the Carver Estates project and perhaps a smill adjoining
neighborhood. Another alternative would be to simply provide a
direct subsidy in the form of funding the actual deficit incurred
between the security services required and the level of
expenditures approved by HUD in the budget. In any event, this
is a serious matter of public concern and needs to be resolved
quickly.
We the Board of Commissioners of the Delray Beach Housing
Authority would sincerely request your earliest attention to this
matter and perhaps a joint meeting would be beneficial to discuss
the problem in depth.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
R~~~
Rosetta Rolle, Chairman
I
,
.
. 0
;.
if>>
~d\~
. ORDINANCE NO. 9-89 /' c1\._f~."
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMHISslON OF\~HE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA. REZONING AND
PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM-15 (MULTIPLE
FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT IN SAD (SPECIAL
ACTIVITIES) DISTRICT FOR THE SOUTH 100 FEET
OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF (N 1/2) OF SECTION 28,
TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH. RANGE 43 EAST. LYING WEST
OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN AND EAST OF THE BAST
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE INTRACOASTAL WATER-
WAY. LESS THAT PORTION DEDICATED TO STATE
ROAD A-1-A. DELRAY BEACH. PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA; SAID LAND IS LOCATED BETWEEN THE
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY AND THE ATLANTIC OCEAN.
APPROXIMATELY 2.750 FEET SOUTH OF LINTON
BOULEVARD; AND AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY
BEACH. FLORIDA. 1983"; PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA. AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 That the following described property in
the City of De1ray Beach. Florida. is hereby rezoned and placed
in the SAD (Special Activities) District as defined in Cbapter
173 of the Code of Ordinances of the Ci~y of Delray Beach.
Florida. to-wit:
The South 100 feet of the North One-Half (N
1/2) of Section 28. Township 46 South. Range
43 East. lying West of the Atlantic Ocean and
East of. the East right-Of-way line of the-
Intracoas,!:-al Waterway, less that portion
dedicated to State Road A-1-A; said lands
situate. lYing and being in Palm Beach
County, Florida.
The subject property is located between the
Intracoastal Waterway and the Atlantic Ocean,
approximately 2,750 feet south of Linton
Boulevard.
The above described parcel contains a 1. 637
acre parcel of land, more or less.
Section 2. That~the Planning Director of said City
shall. upon the effective?' date of this ordinance, ohange the
Zoning Map of Delray Beach. Florida. to oonform with the provi-
sions of Section 1 hereof.
Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances
in oonflict herewith be, and tne same are hereby' repealed.
Section 4. That should any section or provision of
this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence.
or word be deo1ared by a Court of oompetent 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.
~=*l
J ,-.,.
--'
SAt!t, i nn !i That this ordinanoe shall become effective
immediately upon passage on seoond and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on seoond and
final reading on this the day of . 1989.
.
KAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
First Reading
Seoond Reading
"
-
. '.
I'
N
1'(
- 2 - Ord. No. 9-89
MEMORANDUM
.
TO: Walter O. Barry, City ~er
~ .. ~~
FROM: Frank Spence, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: FLOHR REZONING RM-15 TO S.A.D.
DATE: March 3, 1989
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The applicant originally requested the Commission to approve on first
reading an enacting ordinance to rezone the Flohr property from RM-15
to S.A.D.
The applicant's agent Mr. Bob Currie, AlA, has requested that this
matter be referred back to the Planning & Zoning Board for
reconsideration in view of the fact that they wish to amend their
original request to reduce the number of units proposed for that site.
proposed.
BACKGROUND:
This rezoning is privately initiated. The S.A.D. zoning designation is
sought for this specific project for a 100 unit hotel. The applicant
now advises that they do not intend to construct any new or additional
units on the east side (ocean side). The original proposal was to
demolish the 18 existing units and construct 76 new units on the east
side of AlA. This is an attempt on the applicant's part to reduce the
request for a higher density development in response to the concern of
the neighboring properties. They do, however, wish to pursue their
original request to construct 24 units on property located on the west
side of AlA.
Tile property under consideration is currently the site of Cote' de
Azure, an existing hotel/resort. The purpose of the rezoning is to
accommodate an expansion of the current use to the west side of AlA.
The current motel facility and current use is nonconforming.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
At it's meeting of January 23, 1989 the Planning and Zoning Board held
a public hearing on this request. Fourteen individuals spoke against
the rezoning. Several petitions, in opposition, were presented. The
City of Highland Beach registered it's formal opposition. The Board on
a 6-1 vote, recommended DENIAL based upon an inability to make
supportive findings on five of the standards which are used for
evaluating rezoning request.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
In view of the applicant's agent request to have this matter referred
back to the Planning & Zoning Board for amendment and his desire to
reduce the number of proposed additional units, it is recommended that
the City Commission remand this request back to the Planning & Zoning
Board for further consideration.
A complete copy of the Planning and Zoning staff report is available
for review in the City Manager's office.
~
FS:nr
Encl
I ~I II 'II '4 J. I '4l.:l (> .JI'"l.l....~ ounr\U
CITY OF DEL~AY BEACH
--- STfFF REPORT ---
..eElING DUE: January 23. 1989
AGeo=t ITEM: TTT 1\
ITEM: FLOHR lEZONING RM-lS TO SAD
- .
~
'0
- .0
,
. '.
GENERAL DATA: .
c::.-r..~~"_"..'...................IIr. . lII'a. .J.-o noIaz'
A90B~...........................Larry N. Scbaoldar
CUrrie, Sc:.hDe1du .
A8aoc:lat.e1 AlA. 'A
LDcatloe........................l&at aDd w.8t aides of AlA ..
(0ce&I\ UvoI.l. _0 ~
AtlaDUc 0cMII _ ~ .
IDuacoalt.al Vetuw,.. 'ZbIl
propeny 1. oaatlguou: to
81ghl&nd _.
IToportr 51.....................1.137 Aaree (71.301 Sq. f~.1
City L&Dd u.. rl.&D............ ..Ilr-. (Ia&lU-r..ul' at. _l~yl
C1cr 1oalDg.....................aM-1S (1Ult1p1e-r-.11yaw.111Ag
Dlatdc~1
Ad'aceDt 1oa.1.ftg............................... .JIorth of the ""ect. propertY' 1.
.0Ded "-15. SOuthla atllbl_
".ch, ....t 18 the Atll.Dtlc OOean
&Ad wat 1. t.be IDtzaoout.&l
Waterway_ --~
latracoaatal 1. .0Ded a-lAA-.
(SlDgl.-raalll' DoelllDg Dl.trle~1 .
EalnlDg Lan4 u.................AD 11 lID1t lIOul wlth . ....u~y
aalOll
'roposed Land U.................A 100 roo. relort With . 200
aq. ft. private reataurant.
Twenty-flY. por"D~ (25\1 of ~
1'0<aIi to recel ft oooJt1al
f.ell1U...
Waul' ..rvlce................................... .b1atlnt .. vater ..1D located OIl
the Wit .1de of AlA ..nlea. tile ITEM:.zzz, ~
pucel Oft t.be ....t .1de.
b1.tlft9 ,": water ..lD loc.ted _
t.bIl e..t .s.4. of AlA .."lee.
~ pare.l OIl ~ aut alde.
Sewer ..rvloe...................Ia1.tlft9 12- aan1tary ~r
. toc.tad .1_ AlA.
:
l -"
"
, -~. ......- . .... ....
,
I
.
.
~
I
.-
ORDINANCE NO. 14-89
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLOR IDA. REZONING AND
PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED RM-6 (MULTIPLE
FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT IN GC (GENERAL
COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT FOR A PARCEL OF LAND
LYING AND BEING IN SECTION 17. TOWNSHIP 46
SOUTH. RANGE 43 EAST. DELRAY BEACH. PALM
BEACH COUNTY. FLORIDA; SAID LAND IS LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF S.W. 5TH AVENUE, APPROXI-
MATELY 200 FEET SOUTH OF ATLANTIC AVENUE; AND
AMENDING "ZONING MAP OF DEL RAY BEACH. FLORI-
DA. 1983" ; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLOR IDA. AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following described property in
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby rezoned and placed
in the GC (General Commercial) District as defined in Chapter 173
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
to-wit:
Parcell - Beginning at a point 200 feet
South of the Northwest corner of Block 29 of
the Town of Delray (formerly Linton) accord-
ing to the Plat thereof on file in the Office
of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for
said County, recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3;
thence run South along the West line of said
Block 29 a distance of 50 feet; thence run
East 135.6 feet to an alley; thence run North
50 feet; thence run West 135.6 to the Point
of Beginning; together with,
Parcel 2 - Lot 41. Block 29, RESUBDIVISION OF
BLOCKS 29 AND 37. according to the Plat
thereof on file in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach
County. recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 66;
together with,
Lots 39 and 40, Block 29, RESUBDIVISION OF
BLOCKS 29 AND 37, Delray Beach, a Subdivision
as recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 66, in the
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The subject property is located on the east
side of S. W. 5th Avenue, approximately 200
feet south of Atlantic Avenue.
The above described parcels contain a 0.403
acre parcel of land, more or less.
Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City
s ha 11 , upon the effective date of this ordinance, change the
Zoning Map of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provi-
sions of Section 1 hereof.
Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances
in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
S"'0.t. j nn 4 That should any section or provision of
this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence,
or word be declared by a Court of competent Jurisdiction to be
invalid, such decision s ha.ll not affect the validity of the
remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part
declared to be invalid.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and
final reading on this the ______ day of , 1989.
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
- 2 - Ord. No. 14-89
MEMORANDUM //bY
Walter O. Barry, City Manager
TO:
9-< ~ 8 -,L'
FROM: Frank Spence, Development Service Director
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 14-89 - REQUEST FOR REZONING (BUTLER- ARRINGTON
PROPERTY) FROM RM-6 TO GC.
-
DATE: March 2, 1989
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The applicants are requesting the City Commission rezone from RM-6
(Multiple-family residential) to GC (General Commercial) individual
parcels comprising a total of 0.403 acres. The subject property is
located on the east side of S.W. 5th Avenue between Atlantic Avenue and
S.W. 1Th Street. (A location map is attached).
BACKGROUND:
The City's zoning records reveal that in 1970 and 1971 the subject site
was zoned C-2 (General Commercial District), which is in fact extended
just south of S.W. 2st Street. A lack of data and records between 1971
and 1973 make s it unclear as to subsequent zoning changes which
occurred within this period, but the records show that prior to
September 1973, the West Atlantic area was designated RM-15 (Multiple
Family) on the City's zoning map.
In September 1973, the Planning and Zoning Board considered a
Comprehensive rezoning of the west Atlantic Avenue frontage. The
zoning change to C-1 ILimited Commercial) applied to a strip of land
approximately 200 to 250 feet on either side of West Atlantic Avenue.
This action was followed by a City initiated petition, which was
considered by the Planning and Zoning Board in December 1973, to rezone
portions of N.W. and S.W. 5th Avenue. Approval of this petition would
extend the commercial designation from Atlantic Avenue to lst Street.
The Board recommended to change the zoning designation for the N.W.
5th Avenue area, but recommended against changing the zoning to
commercial for the S.W. 5th Avenue site, and the RM-15 zoning remained.
In 1977, with the Comprehensive City Rezonings attendant to the Land
Use Plan adopted in Jun 1977, the subject site was rezoned from
RM-15 to RM-6.
More recently the Planning and Zoning Board heard a request for
conditional use and site plan proposal by the Christ Missionary Church
for the southern two lots. The Board recommended that the petition be
denied. The petition was subsequently withdrawn as an arrangement was
worked out with the City and Palm Beach County School Board which
allowed the congregation to meet on a temporary basis in the De1ray
Elementary School. the subject property was subsequently purchased by
Bernadette Butler, one of the petitioners in this request. This
petition was triggered by Ms. Butler's proposal to use the site for a
beauty salon, a commercial use not permitted within the RM-6 (Multiple
Family District). In addition, rezoning of only this site would create
a "spot zoning" (as the property to the north was also zoned RM-6) and
in order to avoid this si tua-tion, it was necessary for the zoning
petition to include all the property up to Atlantic Avenue which is not
currently zoned General Commercial. The petition before the Commission
is a joint petition from two property owners incorporating all the in
residentially zoned lots, and if approved will extend the commercial
zoning from Atlantic Avenue southward approximately to mid-block.
:::P ~ 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The petition at hand encompasses a joint petition from two' property
owners Willie and Ernestine Arrington and Bernadette Butler for
individual parcels comprising four lots. The northern two lots (the
Arrington parcel) is currently developed and consists of barbershop
(Stines Hair World) and an attendant parking lot. On the southern two
lots, the Butler property, there is an existing commercial structure,
which in the past was utilized as a gasoline station (permits records
1951) and a tire repair store. However, the structure is vacant and
has been gutted and vandalized to an extent that substantial renovation
will be required.
Since 1973, the commercial uses have been non-conforming uses in the
Multiple Family District, but were allowed to continue. With the
continued commercial activity on the Arrington property, the current
use is allowed to remain by its "grandfather" status. However, certain
restrictions exists on expansions and improvements. No change in the
commercial activity nor external changes are proposed to this site.
A different scenario applies to the Butler property where the
commercial use has lost its "grandfather" status (since the activity
has ceased for a period exceeding 180 days). The reestablishment of
any use must be in conformance with the current zoning regulations.
The development proposal is to utilize the existing structure.
Although the applicant has not stated what site upgrading is proposed,
util~zation of the site will necessitate improvements to correct code
deficiencies.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
At it's meeting of February 27, 1989 the Planning and Zoning Board held
a public hearing on this item. No one spoke in opposition.
The Board then recommended on an unanimous vote (5-0 two absent), to
approve the rezoning as proposed in the staff report.
The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) had no objection.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approval of the enacting ordinance on first reading and setting of
public hearing for second reading on March 28, 1989.
A complete copy of the Planning and Zoning staff report is available
for review in the City Manager's office.s
FS:cl
Encl
t-'LHNN1NG 8 ~ONING BOARD
CITY OF OELRAY BEACH
--- STAFF REPORT ---
MEETING DnE: FEBRUARY 27, 1989
AGENDA ITEM: III. A.
REZONING FROM RM-6 TO GC GENERAL COMMERCIAL ON S.W. 5th AVENUE,
ITEM: SOUTH OF ATLANTIC (BUTLER AND. ARRINGTON)
',11,,- .
.
-, " ..
.
~
~ .
.. .
.. . .. ~
. ~
"
.. ~
.. '. . ..
.. ,. . .'
w ..
.,. --.
. .. .~ .. ,
, " ~_. ..
. . .. ~ . -
.'
GENERAL DATA:
OWner...........................Bernadette Butler and Willie B.
and Ernestine Arrington
Aqent...........................aernadette Butler and Ernestine
Arrington
Location.........~..............East side of S.W. 5th Avenue,
between W. Atlantic Avenue and
S.W. 1st Street
Property Size...................17.554 Sq. ft. (0.403 Acres)
Community Development Plan......Hixed Use Residential/Commercial
Existing City Zoni~g.......~....RK_6 (Multiple-Family Dwelling
District)
Proposed City Zoning............GC (General Commercial)
Adjacent Zoning.................North of the subject property is
zoned GC. South, east and west
of the subject property is zoned
RK-6.
Existing Land Use...............A parking lot, a Barber Shop and
a vacant bUilding.
Proposed Land Use...............Renovate the vacant structure to
accomodate a beauty salon. ITEM: III. A.
Water Service...................Existing on-site
Sewer Service...................Existing on-site
-- .- -
t
.
. FOR THAT PART OF BLOCKS 2,1 & 29
--'.
DELRA y BEA~ FL 1989-
ATLANTIC AVENUE
AIlANDONEO BULDING
ABANDONED GAS
. 10. .
STATIOtt
VACANT
STRAGHN .. SON RElTUARANT
FUNERAL HOME & (hAW
W
APARTMENTS ::;) ,
z VACANT :1
W' -I
>
<
~ PARKING LOT
'- ...
10- .,.... ~ WOIIU - BAit_lit _HOP
.
~
VACANT ~ -!lUnER
RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FA MIL Y DUPLEXES
- --.
.- CLEANERS VACANT
,
RESIDENTIAL
,
.
,
r . _.
-"_.":'.."..:i. ...--: ......,. '" ' ...::::.:..... -'
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager vvL3
SUBJECT: OLD SCHOOL SQUARE
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
At your February 28th Commission meeting the contract with Abel-Garcia
was authorized for termination. The Old School Square, Inc. was to
negotiate with other architects to complete the design drawing for
improvements to Old School Square and return to the Commission with a
recommendation.
WOB:cl
.. sff~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
FROM: ~obert A. Barcinski, Asst. City Manager/Community Services
DATE: March 2, 1989
SUBJECT: Documentation - City Commission Meeting - March 7, 1989
Construction Design Contract - Old School Square
-
Action
City Commission is requested to consider waiving the competitive
negotiation process and authorize Old School Square, Inc., with City
staff assistance, to negotiate a contract with local architectural
firms and those who bid previously to complete construction design
documents and documents for Phase I - Old School Square Project.
Background
At your meeting on February 28, 1989, the abo'[~ seated action was
discussed. Commission consensus was to bring this item back for
consideration this week, allowing Commissioners the opportunity to
discuss this item with the City Attorney. This action is requested in
order to avoid further delays in project implementation.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of waiver and authorization for Old School
Square, Inc. and City staff to negotiate a contract to complete
construction design documents and bid documents for Phase I - Old School
Proj ect.
RAB/sfd
I
.---~- ".-.---. "--.
.j
.
I
I
.
.
j
~ '-/i. .
-' ..- .. .. .""
" .;;
,~
,~:;",""':""~:''''.~........e' -- ,.... ,--: -. ;....~~'":":.:D.:.;...';~.~.
.... .-
f
: i
.
.
'.
'I
,~
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H ,
--
It
~.
.-j
100 N.W. 1st AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7000
MEMORANDUM .
TO: Walter Barry, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth Arnau, Ci ty Clerk
DATE: March 3, 1989
SUBJECT: Meeting to Canvass Returns and Declare Results of March
14th Election.
Pursuant to Section 5.05 "Returns of Elections", of the Code of
Ordinances, the City Commission shall meet at a called meeting to
be held not later than three days after such election; therefore,
the date and time should be determined to enable me to prepare
for the meeting.
spf~
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
----- ~_._--- --
.
I
"
.,
( ~:)-;.
.. .~
,'3-.
=
-~:'1.""..4I!'::"t~.......~' .......... ~. ....t'7;....~j~,;' "-. , .0. ._~'-:.a.:.:....'"':':.::.:..;.;:.~,-
--
.
.
11 DELRA Y BUCll CHARTER S.ction 5.c
t.rm .. prov1d.d for in th1. chart.r. lb) Th. city cl.rk. not lat.r than
lOrd. 4-7.. p...ed 2-23-76. App. .t R.f., noon the ..cond d.y th.r..ft.r. .h.ll
2-2,..76) furn1.h . c.rt1f1c.t. of .l.ction to .acr
C.nd1dat.. for ..cond perlon shown to be eleeted.
lC) lOrd. 4-7.. p....d 2-23-76. App. .t R.f.,
nonpart1.an .1.ct1on. 2-2-7., Am. Ord. 2-82. p....d 1-26-82.
(1) In the ..cond nonpart1.an App. .t R.f.. 3-2-82)
.1act1on. th.r. .h.ll b. on the ballot Saction 5.06. JlIDG!: OF ELECTION AND
thOl. c.ndidat.. for ..at. for the offic. QUALIPICATION.
ot comai..ion.r or for the ottic. ot
mayor tor tho.. offices wherein a Th. comm1..1on.r. .hall b. the judge
candidate did not reeeive votes trem I ot the quaUUc.tion. ot It. own ....b.r.,
".jor1ty ot .11 .l.ctor. ca.ting ballot. and the city cl.,k .hall b. the judge of
for th.t ..at or offic. In the tir.t the election and election return. tor thE
nonparti.an election. The nam.. ot the otfic. ot ...yor and for the offic.. of
candidat.. to be voted ~pon at the second commi..ion ..aes.
nonparti..n electIon .hall be the two lOrd. 4-76. pa...d 2-23-76. App. at R.t..
h1gh..t vote g.tt.r. of the f1r.t 2-2-76, Am. Otd. 101-85. p....d 9-24-85.
nonpartisan electIon. In the event ot App. .t R.f.. 11-5-85)
two (2) or ..or. candidat.s r.C.ivlng an
equal number of vote. whIch are either Section 5.07. SPECIAL ELECTIONS.
the high.st or ..cond highest votes In
the first nonpartisan election, then all (a) Th. co....i..1on .h.ll provld. .th.
.udb tied cand1dat.. .hall qualify for tIme, manner and _.an. of holding any
the '.cond nonpartisan election. epoc1al .l.ction. prov1d.d that no
In the eVlnt a candidate .p.c1.1 .l.ction .h.ll be c.ll.d 1...
(2) than thirty (30) d.y. fOllowing.th.
withdraws or di.. before the .econd adoption of . r..olution calling for .ucl
nonpartisan election and leaves only on. .lection.
candidate for each vacancy for a ..at for
the otfic. of co....i..1oner or for the (b) Th. co....i..1on .hall pr..cr_1be
offic. at ...yor to b. fill.d. then the by ordin.nc. the ...thod .nd ...nn.r ot
..cond nonp.rti.an .l.ction .hall not b. holding .11 .1ect1on. in the city. .nd
h.ld. E.ch candidat. .hall b. d....d to .hall provide wh.n .nd how .poci.l
have vot.d for h1....1f/h.r..lf. .l.ction. .h.ll b. c.ll.d .nd h.ld which
are not prov1d.d by the t..... of thi.
ld) M.thod of el.ct1on in . s.cond char t.r. All .l.ction. .h.ll b.
nonparti.an el.ction. In the s.cond conduct.d in .ccord.nc. with th1. ch.rte
nonpartisan election, the remaining and with the provi.1on. ot g.n.r.l l.w.
offic.. .h.ll b. fill.d by the (Ord. 4-76. p....d 2-23-76. App. .t R.f.
candidat. C.) r.ceivlng the high..t numb.r 2-2-76 )
of vot.. for .ach ..at for the offic. of
oo....1..1on.r or for the off1c. of ..yor. Section 5.08. STRAW Von: ELECTIONS.
COrd. 4-76. pa...d 2-23-76. App. .t R.f..
2-2-76, All. Ord. 68-78. pa...d - - 78. Th. co....i..1on 11 .110 ..power.d .nd
App. at Rat.. 11-7-781 Am. Ord. 7-83. .uthori..d to .pend public fund. for the
pa...d 1-25-83. App. at R.t.. 3-1-83, Am. conduct of straw vote electionl u~n a
Ord. 99-85. p....d 9-24-85. App. .t R.f.. d.t.rmin.t1on by the co....i..lon t .t It
11-5-85) i. in the be.t 1nt.r..t ot the city to
obt.in .n .xpr...ion of the p.opl. with
Section 5.05. RETURNS OF ELECTIONS. r..pect to a part1cul.r .uniclral
qu..tion. Th. cOll..1..ion .hal h.v. tho
C.) Th. re.ul ta at the voting. wh.n right to hold. .tr.w vote .l.ction at
..c.rt.in.d by the .up.rvi.or of .ny ti.... .nd ...y pr..cr1b. li~it.tloQ.
.l.ctiona. .h.ll b. r.turn.d in r.l.ting to the .lig1b11ity -ot tho.. who
duplic.t., on. oopy to be d.liv.r.d to .h.ll b. qu.lifi.d to partic1p.t.. Th.
the .ayor .nd the oth.r to the City r..ulu ot .dd el.ction .hall not b.
clerk. both at whaa -.hall tun...it .uch binding onth. 00...1II1on.
r.turna to the comai..1on at . c.lled (Ord. 4-76, p....d 2-23-76. App. .t R.f.
....ting to be h.ld not lat.r th.n thr.. 2-2-76)
(3) d.y. .tt.r .uch .l.ction. At .uch
....ting the co...i..ion .hall canv... the S.ction 5.09. R!CALL.
return.. and in the ab..nce of .
d.cl.r.tion at . cont..t by anh ot the Th. qu.l1ti.d vot.r. ot the City
candid.t.. in .uch .l.ction. . all .h.ll h.v. the ~w.r to r.call and to
d.cl.r. the r..ulta of the .1.ct1on .. rellov. trOll oft c. any el.ct.d ofUcial
shown by the r.turn. ...d. by the of the city.. provid.d by g.n.r.l law.
supervilor of electionl. lOrd. 4-76, pa...d 2-23-76. App. at R.f.
2-2-76)
.---- 1
.
,
_/ I
..-
,
'"
MEMORANDUM
TO: Walter o. Barry, City Manager
~~
FROM: Frank Spence, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL - R&N ENTERPRISES
DATE: March 2, 1989 .
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The applicant, R & N Enterprises is requesting site plan approval for
property located on the east side of Congress Avenue between W.
Atlantic Avenue and Lake Ida Road, just north of the Exxon station.
BACKGROUND:
This parcel was annexed into the City as part of Enclave No. 66, under
the Enclave Act on November 8, 1988. The zoning designation affixed to
the parcel is LI (Light Industrial).
The proposed project is a two phased development. Phase I includes the
construction of one 18,096 square foot building which will contain 18
individual, 1,034 square foot bays. Phase I improvements will include
the installation of two driveways onto Congress Avenue, construction of
59 parking spaces and installation of the required 28 foot landscape
buffer adjacent to Congress Avenue. Phase II development will include
construction of a second building containing 15,221 square feet which
16 1,034 square foot bays. Each bay will include an office and
bathroom similar to Phase I. Phase II development will provide an
additional 19 parking spaces and completion of internal circulation
system.
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
At it's meeting of February 27, 1989 the Planning and Zoning Board
unanimously voted (4-0/one abstained, two absence), recommended
approval of this request subject to Standards A-J of the Site and
Development Standards and subject to Technical Items 1-7 contained in
the staff report.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approval of the site plan for R & N Enterprises subject to Standards
A-J of the Site and Development Standards and subject to Technical
Items 1-7 contained within the staff report.
A detailed copy of the Planning and Zoning staff report is available
for review in the City Manager's Office. "
FS:cl
Encl
s\?* \"?-
PLANNING 8. 7.:0NING BOARD
~-
. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
--- STAFF REPORT ---
_.
tEET ING ~TE: February 27. 1989
AGeIJA ITEM: IV. B
CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR R & N ENTERPRISES ON THE EAST
ITEM : SIDE OF CONGRESS AVENUE. JUST NORTH OF THE EXXON STATION AT ATLANTIC AND CONGRESS.
,
,..,.... .
~ i
, I
I C >fl~ .~
--~; ,
. . I
-
. !
~~ L r I.
'T
. ." ~:
t;~~
GENERAL '0 .',
()wDar. ............
AgeJlt...............................,;.. 10 eo......... .Diqby' Ir.1.av-_
D1;by Br1d;... IIanh &114
A..octat.., Inc. P.A.
Loc.tion........................E..t a1de of Con~r... Avenue,
between W.. At.lantic Avenu.e &b4
LAk. 101a acao1. ju.t north of the
Exxon atation.
Property S1.....................95.100 Sq. ft. (2.18 Acra.)
City L&n4 v.. .lan..............! (Induatrial)
Cl~ ZOllia9..-....................LI (UGh" IDdu.a~1.1)
Adjacut.- 1oD1Dg:................. . Horth &DIll weat of the 8\Ib;lHt.
';_ ,. ~,'. property 1. 10_ Lt. -.at 18
. _ . .. 10_ HI (~IIII Illdund&11 ad
.....th 1. 10MCl ClC (_&1
c-rc1all.
.,
"
Rx1atiDg LaD4 V.................v.C&D~ L&D4 .;,",
.t'"
Propo.ecS Land U.................TWO bui1cSin;a tot&111D; 33.111 .' "...-
aq. ft. with Itt_t puJUq .y~
&114 10a41Jl; faa1UU... 'fila
builcUllp -will be _1_ bS' ....
..... U.te4 .. .peJ:ll1tte4 ......
111 the Lt 1011111; cUltdce (COda
secUOII 173.5811.
Water Service.................. .b.1atiDfJ ,. v.tel:' aa1u 1ocat.ll4. ,~"ITEM: ::JJ1 2
011 the ...t dele of convn..
AVlII... &IllS 011 the ...e dele of
the property. ,I.';.':.;, .
-
sewer ..rY1oe...................IX1.t1Dg.. a&D1tarr..wee '.
locle_ 011 the ...e dele Of- .A-'~"U '-.; -
COIlqrU. 1....-. ....r:~?i~F _";'._,--.,.::~,.~.- .
.."......... I_Y'''''_ ': ,,,,"',-..
- .- .-..... - ----. .n .__.__ ::.-;=---__ _ -'~;~ _';"":y;.~.,\ :'~ . _ ~~~........__ --.
.
- .
~;' I II;
....71
. . I' -- -- - - - 'l: - - - - - -- l
~ (- ~ I
. II ~ \.r I H 0
~;: U J) L-. I -
':; 'r-.. L; u.!.~ ~ . \:
I . --':'r.IiiI o~., I
. ,",'" .....' ~', ..... "':'" ',- : ~~.. ..... '.".. '. . ..,..,'. ..' "":.
:? I .~~~~'~..-. ,.~.. .;.'(.:~~..;-."._.\..:,.,... j....-::.' ,'-';:..
.. I I ,I I
;-,- I 1 ,- I I I,
' ", I I I I 'f
.- __04" I I I I I 1 I
.'i, ' I, I I I I J .JE1I.
'" ~, ~ I, I. ~o..'
:-,:/ I T fL -- - 1'- - -- T - -2- -i - - - r - - -~ -- - f - - -1!1 - f 1 T
:! I I I I I I J ! f.
:.; J ~......,. I i, ~ I I~,
-./ . '1 I I, _
. '.'-' I I I I I ,! , t..:"-
. I J - 't __. ". _
;i.. n .. ~ " .'''. ~ . ..~ -.'" ._.'0 . . It. . . ... :~. -,,-..... ~.).. ~I".. I'M
,,' I I 11 ~ I" 1J1k' I'M
)., f ',;~' '-:" ,rt, ~ . J-Ii ", /.
.~_Ie-l 1 ( J 0-
~ i~~ I l ) - 1
Nj ~.~ _! .. or ~C::;: uw._",,-. . '\
.'-' I IVLI.,.j n
;:, f ttI:l.1
. . .... . . M ',: . ,'. ", .... .". A ....',..... ~ .. t .. ~. .
~:'-'II I -- ~~;;~~-; ';'" ..' I ,.,~,,;.>.... ,--........ ""---1": ..'.-:.----'" ~
I I I : I 1 I I
',I I I I I I I I
...., I I I I I I
~ '~- I :! i ! : i i : ",
...~ I I I I I I I I _,
11.": :: I,'" I I I IT
..., :~ I I ~ I I I I I I
~ '; I r----'<---- ..1'1-- --''I- ~--'~ ---'4- - J't-- - ..10-1- _ --'q __.Jl I
'( ".- I I I ~ I I . I " I f
.,.;, I I I I I 1 ,"-. I
v f. t ' ~ .. __ I I I I . I I
\) ~;:: ------- ~., _t 1 I : I I I I ~..L
',,: I ,".., I I I I IN /
~ ," ,+- " I I
~.,. . ".,:...-. ~I ' I I ".
. .", ~~..,' I I I I I 1.1
,'" J[:t: .-... ._, .....:c:..;: .~~::'" :,_.~.. '. ;!.'-:'4":,'_' ,-...-.....~.'"..,~.~'.~!..2.'. ~i,.....,~ .'
.. -.- - ~ - - 0:"" ,. , - I'~'; - ~ ". I
I~) filJ,.. oE:Ir- III - ....,Y':\.,)
IR" f;'~:o. ..10' - ....~ H r ~t .. ,;y J
~\ UI - r- - - - ",,' L
. ,( - - '" ,..., 1'- ..---
1 1 , _ -- ~ -~"""1
'. I --' .L.....J
'. ........----- ~
r ,. -- .. . u -- -- -- -. ___ ~
"-" '''.10 l
,. r......._
~
,.
[ITY DF DELRAY BERtH.~ ~.." ( )
\ ,
CiTY t~TTORNEY'S OFFICE .~.,.. .~'... ",-.. ..,..,
J I 0 S.1-:. 1,,1 STR EFT. SUITE 4 lJU,RA Y BEACII, I-LORIDA 33483 3u.'1/143.7090
\
"1EiIIQR;1>jmur1
March 1, 198,1 .
Date:
To: Cit.y Comi11issi::>n
Fre,rn : Susan A. "Ruby, Assistant City Attorney
Subject: N.C.N.B. FORECLOSURE/NUISANCE
AJ3;',TEMENT LIEN SETTLEMENT OFFER
N.C.N.B. has brought a foreclosure action against property
locaten within the City, which is subject to Nuisance
Abatement liens imposed by the City in the amount of
$5,894.22.
Attorneys on behalf of N.C.N.B. have presented a settlement
offer in the amount of $1,700.00 to satisfy the liens. Our
office recommends acceptance of the settlement offer.
By copy of this memorandum to the City Manager, our office
requests that this matter be placed on the City Commission's
March 7, 1989 agenda as a special meeting item due to time
constraints imposed by the court to obtain a final resolution
of this issue.
S-J~ ,
SAR:rg
cc: Walter O. Barry, City l>lanager
Elizabeth Arnau, City Clerk
Cheryl Leverett. Secretary I/Records Retention
'.
,..-
Sp:ft. I~
-..'-- .. ---.
'~.:::.:.:.:;.~ :~.~....... .~n .. , __:~~~";::.I:oIo.:. "~':"_:'-h~;:-;a.
: i
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City ~~~
FROM: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
SUBJECT: Langton and Associates - Contract Modifications
DATE: March 3, 1989
Upon verification with Denise Froelich of Langton and Associates this
morning, the following modifications will be made to the Langton and
Associates contract (copy attached):
A. Page 1, Item 3, will be revised to read:
" ...Client agrees to pay Langton the sum of Twelve Thousand Dollars
($12,000.00). This sum shall include all travel expenses related to
travel to and from the Client.... "
B. Page 1, Item 4, will be revised to read:
"
"Client agrees to pay iH/t'M. expenses of Langton in conjunction with
his services directly relating to Client up to One Thousand Eight
Hundred Dollars ($1,800). This shall include,... "
C. Page 2, Item 4, will be revised to read:
" ...Langton will submit the invoice for these expenses which shall be
paid together with the salary by the next month. Lan~ton must receive
prior written approval from the City Manager or Director of Finance to
incur travel expenses other than to and from the Client. Said
approval must be approved fifteen (15) days in advance of incurring
any travel expenses."
A revised copy of the contract will be received on Monday, March 6th.
WOB/dmh/sam
Attachment
cc: David M. Huddleston, Director of Finance
__n_n ~---_..__._- ---...
. 2-P:iL tif
j
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
This consulting agreement made this day of
March, 1989 by and between Langton Assoc1'ati;s, Inc. ,
hereinafter referred to as "Langton", and the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, hereinafter referred to as "Client"
On the fOllowing terms and conditions:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Langton is a corporate engaged in the
business of offering consulting support for municipal-
ities, cities and other governmental bodies, and
WHEREAS, Client is in need of profesaional services
of consulting for the purpose of obtaining various
governmental grants and assistance offered by various
governmental agencies and bodies, and
WHEREAS, the parties are desirous to enter into this
contract, to establish a contractual relationship and
set up the fees to be charged b)' Lflngton to Client for
the services to be rendered and to establish the guidelines
of consulting work to be performed,
IT IS THEREFORE agreed as follows:
l. Langton agrees to provide professional consult-
ing services to Client for the term of six (6) months,
commencing , 1989 and ending ,
1989. Langton agrees to exercise his best efforts to obtaIn
governmental grants and benefits for Client. It is
understood, ho\{ever, that Langton cannot guarantee r.esults
that any certain amount of funds will be obtained for
Client.
2. The consulting propose1 that was previously
furnished to Client is attached hereto and made a part
of this contract as Exhibit "A".
3. In exchange for Langton performing the services
as establi_shed hend n and devuting his time, Client llgrees
to pay Langton the sum of Twelve Thousand Dollars
($12,000.00). Client agrees that payment herein shall
be made monthly by the 10th day of the fOllowing month
after the invoice rendered by Langton.
4. Client agrees to pay all the expenses of Langton
in conjunction wI th his services directly relating to
Client. This shall inclt;de, but not he limi ted to; t.ravel
. . --- +-
:
.
" \
1
expenses to and from locations other than Client, as stipu-
la t ed in Exhibit "A". Travel expenses shall be air expense
on coach flights, car rental, hotel (at commercial rates),
food (maximum of $25.00 per day). Langton will submit
the invoice for these expenses which shall be paid together
with the salary by the next month. If desired, Client
can require a prior approval for travel expenses to be
incurred by Langton. If Clien t so desires, such request
shall be made in writing separate from this agreement.
The notice shall require Langton to notify Client fifteen
(15) days in advance of any necessary travel expenses,
unless said time is waived in a particular case.
5. Langton agrees to devote the necessary time and
performance of his duties for Client. Inasmuch as the
professional services rendered are of a subjective nature,
subject to differences of opinion, mutual confidence and
respect is necessary. Accordingly, this contract can
be terminated by either party without calise .upon the giving
of a thirty (30) day written notice as fol10lls:
A. As to Langton
4244 St. Johns Avenue
Jacksonville, Florida 32210
B. As to Client
The City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delary Beach, Florida 334/.4-2698
6. Should litigation be necessary to enforce ony
provision of this agreement, then the prevailing party
shall be entitled to recover a reasonable attorney's fee
from the other side.
Witnesses: LANGTON ASSOCIATES, INC.
By
Michael
Witnesses: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
By
Approved as to Form:
(City Attorney) (2)
. ---.---
;
t
, ,
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
FROM: ~Robert A. Barcinski, Asst. City Manager/Community Services
DATE: March 2, 1989
SUBJECT: Documentation - City Commission Meeting - March 7, 1989
Payment Approval - Industrial Pretreatment Program
.
Action
City Commission is requested to approve final payment in the amount of
$84,971.88 to the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment and
Disposal Board for the City's share of the costs for the Industrial
Pretreatment Program. Commission is also l'equested to approve the
transfer of funds from Water and Sewer Project Reserve Account $30,000
and transfer of funds from Operating Costs - Wastewater Treatment $65,500
to the Industrial Pretreatment Account #441-5142-536-33.36.
Background
The Regional Wastewater Board hired CDM Camp, Dresser and McKee to
develop an industrial pretreatment program for the Wastewater Plant;
Boynton Beach and Delray Beach. The cost of the program for the plant is
to be shared 50/50 by both cities, and individual city program costs are
to. be borne by each city separately.
Camp, Dresser & McKee was utilized to perform all ~re1iminary sampling of
each industry in the City to determine violations of the parameters of
our pretreatment ordinance. All samples collected were analyzed by
certified laboratories to determine concentrations of possible
pollutants. Wastewater flows were determined to calculate total pounds
of those parameters.
"
All of the preliminary testing was done to satisfy specific time
limitations specified by USEPA. Every contributor which was suspected of
ordinance violations were investigated as part of this initial scan.
Funding for this program and the required monthly monitoring program were
not included in the operating budget. Funding is available in the
proj ect reserve account, and the Operating Share - Wastewater Treatment
Plant account. The transfer will provide funding in the proper cost
account code.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of payment to the Wastewater Regional Board in
the amount of $84,971.88 for the Industrial Pretreatment Program,
Funding to come from account #441-5142-536-33.36, and approval of the
transfer of funds from Project Reserve and Operating Share - Wastewater
Treatment accounts to the Industrial Pretreatment account.
RAB/sfd
.
, ---- --
i
,
I
i
':
t .. ; ~\19~
1
.
, "...._ ~v_.. .___.. _"-'_'4 - , . --
SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL wASTEWATER
TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL BOARD
1801 Norlh Congress Avenue. Delray Beach, Florida 33445
BOARD Telephone
Cily Council Memt)fm~ of 272.7061 734-25,
noynlon ReaCh & nl.'lray Beach
INV. 88/89-263 January 31, 1989
City of De1ray Beach .
200 N.W. 1st Avenue
De1ray Beach, Florida
33444
REQUISITION FOR FINAL PAYMENT- PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
COSTS TO BE SHARED 50/50 BOTH CITIES
$48,910.90
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DELRAY BEACH ONLY
$60,615.43
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE:
$84,971.88
THANK YOU. ..
,. ..
,
.
'.
ITi ..'" , . q. ,:; '. ....-:~...:,~ ,.........,.._, -:' ~/~...;: ~/2',.;);:~,:;~t+-~
.. .',\. .' ~:, '; .. :,\~' .: . : '.' ;-
,
., :~}l.~.;<\.(,
, ,.
CIn OF DILIl.U IBACH
DepartmeDtal Budlet !rau.fer I
(1) DepartaeDta1 LiDe frau.fer (3) ADJumwrr IlUHBn c-Jj/~U
(2) IDterfuDd/IDterdepartaeDtal frauefer (4) tiDI' Februarv22. 1989
(5) UQUESflll ITI Larrv Martin
.
.
.,
(6) ~OUIl1' IlDIID (7) DBSCIlIPTIOH (8)1'IAHSFUOur (9) nAHSFBIl
441-5142-536-33.74 Operating Share - $65.500
~ Wastewater Treatment
. 441-9111-581-90.44 Project Reserves 30.000
441-5142-536-33.36 Industrial Pretreatment $95,500
.
C1 0) TOrAL $95.500 $95.500
JVSTIFlCATlO.: The Industrial Pretreatment Program was not funded. The funds are
necessary to satisfy the program submittals which were completed by Consultin~
.
Engineers; also continuing analyses being done to conform to EPA requirements.
\. L/ 2~/
DB1'r. DAD}:: . /." P' ./-- ASSIst. CIn Hell.
BUDC~~' / / eln KAJW;n
(11) BUDCEr UVISlO. DATI (12) eOIlnOL BO.
.
.
.. --,_.-
.
"
.
1.
i, -.
f
..~;.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Robert A. Barcinski
Asst. City Manager/Community Services
FROM: Larry Martin
Acting Director of Public Utilities
.
SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM INVOICE
DATE: March 2, 1989
The request for payment of invoice 88/89-263 in the amount of
$84,971.88 covers the cost of implementation of the Industrial
Pretreatment Program as mandated by USEPA.
The firm of [camp, Dresser & McKee was utilized to perform all
preliminary sampling of each industry in the city to determine
violations of the parameters of our pretreatment ordinance. All
samples collected were analyzed by certified laboratories to
determine concentrations of possible pollutants. Wastewater
flows were determined to calculate total pounds of those parame-
ters.
All of the preliminary testing was done to satisfy specific time
limitations specified by USEPA. Every contributor which was
suspected of ordinance violations were investigated as a part of
this initial scan.] The Wastewater Collection Pivision is imple-
menting the follow-up work necessary to continue the program.
The total of $95,500 includes funds necessary to perform analyses
on samples to be taken throughout this budget year which is
approximately $1000 per month.
LM: jo
.
.---.--.--.-
I
t.
1L ~;y DF DELRAY BER[H
:~y ATTORNEY'S OFFICE .~II\S,1 1.,'SI!{11T.SIIIT4 ur:L1{/\Ylll.\C)l.!,LORll):\J3483 )05/243.709
'\~EM0~Q.l>,NDUM
----.
Da te: ~1.'u-ch ;), 198')
To: City Commission
From: Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Assistant City Attorney
Subject: Nostalgic Siqns
A committee consisting of William Wilsher (Corronun.i.ty Appearance
Board member) ,Alice Finst (Hist_oric Preservation Board
member), Frank Spence, f"ula Butler, Joyce Desmoreau and myself
met on February 21, 1989 to discuss nostalgic signs wi thin t_he
City of Delray Beach. This meeting was in accordance with the
City Corronission's directive to look at the nonconforming signs
which presently exist within the City and analyze which si~ns,
if any, remain in their present configuration despite their
nonconformi ty. Further, if any such signs do exist, what was
the rational thiit would distinguish those signs from other
signs within the City that violated the same aspects of the
sign code.
During the course of the discussion and after !:eviewing the
list of all nonconforming signs, a consensus was reached within
the cornmi ttee that all .signs which were nonconforming due to
setback violations should be brought into conformity. The
corronittee came to this conclusion based primarily on two
factors. Fi.rst, the City Corronission, in the Fall of 1988,
considered nonconforming signs within special setback areas
(1. e. Lint_on Boulevard) and the Corronission came to the conclu-
sion that revisions to the sign code to accorronodate those
setback violations were inappropriate. With that decision in
mind, the comnlittee reasoned that setba_ck violations could be
cured simply by moving the signs back 011 the property. If the
owners \<'1.5h to preserve such signs, they can do SO simply by
moving the signs, which in all likelihood would be less expen-
sive then removing the sign, fabricating and cl-ecting a new
sign.
There were t\~O other broad groupings of sign violations consid-
ered by the committee, they being the existence of too many
signs at a bw,iness, and the excessive space wall signs took
up. It was the committee's consensus that to the extent
wf"*q
City Commission
Iv!arch 2, 1989
Page 2
business owners with too many signs wanted to preserve a sign,
they could maintain the best sign that was otherwise conforming
and simply eliminate the rest. As to wall signs which took up
to much space, it was felt that the same style sign could be
maintained simply by eliminating excess verbiage or reducing
letter size and therefore those signs could be accommodated
within our codes and keep their character and integrity.
In coming to its conclusions, the committee reviewed nine
specific signs, t:o which it gave special consideration. These
signs, along with the type of violation, are listed below:
l. Rosella's Delicatessen - too many signs.
2. Florida Publ_Lc Utili t_ies - rooftop sign and lettering
extends more than eight inches from the wall.
3. Carteret Savings Bank - rooftop sign.
4. Doc's Soft Serve - rooftop sign.
5. Love's Drugs - rooftop sign.
6. Sail Inn - roof to}) sign.
7. The Tr'opical Barber Shop - rooft.op sign.
S. Westside Lig.'_lor-s ,- rooftop sign.
9. Paradise Club -. rooftop sign.
E'our were recommended for disapproval; four were recommend for
approval; and there \-Jas no consensus on the ninth. Each of
those are discussed below.
Most of these signs were rooftop signs and within that
grouping, there were four signs which the committee felt were
worth maintaining and all of them had some similar characteris-
tics. A sign is ~onsidered to be a rooftop sign if it is
affixed tc the building and any portion of the sign extends
above th(~ roof line. The four signs which were recommended for
approval are; Carl:eret Savings Bank, Doc's Soft Serve, Love's
Drugs and Sail Inn. '1'he four signs wi.thin the above grouping
that were rejected we.re Rosella's, Florida Public Utilities,
Tropical Barber Shop and Westside Liquors. The committee could
!lot come to a consensus on the Paradise Club sign.
Rosella's remaining nonconformity was that there is an excess
of signs on the walls of the building, as rOOftop sign has been
City COllunission
!1arch 2, 1989
Page 3
eliminated. It was the committee's feeling that the signage
aspect on Rosella's that was worthy of maintaining was Rose and
the "Rosella' 5" under it. That portion could actually be in
compliance if the delicatessen/bakery signs were eliminated.
This is because the problem with the rose portion of the sign
is not t_he size of t_he wall sign, but an excess of signs.
Therefore, since the portion that was deemed to have some
nostalgic or artistic esthetic value was a sign that could be
saved it was deemed inappropriate to grant any special consid-
erations to Rosella's.
As to Florida Public Utilities, the committee's consensus was
that it should be struck down, however, Alice Finst thought
that it was a sign that reflected a particular period of the
City's history and was worthy of keeping. The consensus of the
committee was that the basic character of the sign could be
maintained simply by moving the lettering back, thus curing the
violation that a sign shall be no more than 8 inches from the
wall and that the little water drop was insignificant and could
be removed without effecting the overall aesthetic quality or
historic value of the sign. 'Ehe water drop is in violation
because it const! tutes a rooftop sign, since it is above the
roof line.
As to the 'Eropical Barber sign which is a violation because it
is a rooftop sign. It was felt that the sign could be pre-
served simply by moving it to the wall and therefore since that
could easily be accomplished, the City could have the best of
both worlds which is maintaining the old sign, but preserving
the integrity of our code.
As to the Westside Liquors signs, it was in violation because
it is a rooftop sign. The committee felt that there was
nothing especially redeeming about this particular sign, as it
was rather plain and did not have much history associated with
it. Moreover, there is adequate room on the walls to allow the
rooftop sign to be moved onto the walls or other appropriate
signage could be affixed to the bUilding.
The four signs that the committee would recommend that the
Commission allow to remain had considerable historic or nostal-
gic appeal and were of a unique design constituting expressions
of art rather than simple advertising, or served some general
public benefit. Those signs are Doc's Soft Serve, due to the
snow cone on the rooftop sign; Love's Drugs due to the mortar
and pestle on its rOOftop sign; the sailboat on the Sail Inn;
and the Carteret Savings Bank clock because it served a public
purpose. These four signs could not remain in their present
shape if they were moved. It is recommended that those signs
B
i:
,
,
- l-
City Corrunission
t-larch 2, 1989
Page 4
be given a special exemption from the sign code because of
their artistic and historic of public service value. These
signs were in existence prior to the passage of our current
sign code. The last sign considered by the corrunittee was the
Paradise club sign and no consensus was reached as to it.
Staff members of the corrunittee felt that the sign was rather
plain and ordinary and did not have the characteristics associ~
ated with Doc's Soft Serve, Love Drugs or the Sail Inn, whereas
other members of the conuni t tee felt that the sign was consis-
tent in character with a past time period and had some nostal-
gic value and was worthy of preservati.on.
This item will be placed on the Corrunission's agenda for their
consideration and direction. The procedure the corrunittee felt
was most appropriate to accomplish the preservation of the
signs the Commission feels worthy of preservation is by speci-
fic waiver of the sign code ordinance's applicability to those
particular signs. Such waiver would be accomplished by adver-
tising the waiver of the or.dinances and passage of the same by
the City Corrunission at an upcoming regularly scheduled meeting.
JSK:sh
cc: Walter o. Barry, City Manager
Members,
~
,.
t
,
,. ..,~
,
MEMORANDUM
-
TO: Mayor and Commission ~
FROM: Ci ty Managev$c.t/--y/<~
SUBJECT: NOSTALGIC SIGN COMMITTEE
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The Nostalgic Sign Committee which consisted of representatives from
the Community Appearance Board and Historic Preservation Board along
with staff members including the Director of Development Services, City
Attorney's office, and Community Improvement department met to review
the 100 plus signs which are presently in violation of our Sign Code
provisions. The Committee has determined that five of these signs
should be made legal non-conforming on the basis of their compatibility
with adjacent neighborhoods and their aesthetic quality. A summary
memo of the Committee's work will follow from the City Attorney's
office.
WOB:cl
Enc1
~
"
~s ~~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Walter O. Barry, City Manager ~
FROM: ~Robert A. Barcinski, Asst. City Manager/Community Services
DATE: March 2, 1989
SUBJECT: City Commission Workshop - March 7, 1989
Street Auction - Old School Square Request .
Old School Square, Inc. is proposing to conduct a street auction on
May 3, 1989. This auction would be open to the public and is a means to
raise funds for capital improvement costs (less auction expenses) for
the renovation of Old School. The successful bidder would be able to
rename a street or alley. Attached is a listing of proposed streets and
alleys to be considered.
Items for discussion include:
1. Permission to hold the auction, with Old School Square, Inc.
retaining funds for Capital Improvements.
2. Approval of streets and alleys for auction.
3. Renaming criteria - proper names, proper places, business names.
4. Procedures to be followed, i.e. hearings, notification, approvals,
rep1atting.
City Code does not address renaming of streets directly. City Code,
Section 102.25 specifies that it is the duty of the Planning and Zoning
Board to make recommendations to the City Commission for designating
street names. It is the responsibility of the Commission to approve
designated names. The Code does not address a need for public hearings
or notification to property owners. " '
RAB/sfd
~~Q(l,--\~rz,C
,
.
.
.
/ ,. ~s4: ~
.'
Suggestions for Renamed Streets
l. Alley located between East Atlantic Avenue and N.E. 1st Street, I
A~ from the railroad to N.E. 4th Avenue.
2. Railroad Avenue from East Atlantic north to N.E. 2nd Street.
~
3. Germantown Road from Linton north to N.W. 10th Street.
4. N.E. 8th Street from Nor~h Ocean Avenue west to Swinton Avenue.
~ Ihlll!- n,.i"a f,.~_ I..Slf..Y ~t-na' .~ "nglll'eu.~ .\.~.,~A ("ngaR '..ftn"a)..
~ Lamat Boulevard from South Dixie Highway to Florida Boulevard.
7. Avenue G from Fredrick Boulevard west to South Dixie Highway.
8. N.W. 3rd Street east of Congress (about 1 block).
9. N.W. 1st Street east of Congress (about 3 blocks).
10. Highland Avenue, east of Homewood Boulevard to Delray Country Club.
11. S.W. 2nd Street east of Congress (about 1 block).
12. S.W. 18th Avenue south of Atlantic to Congress Avenue (about 1
block).
13. S.W. 1st Avenue from S.W. 4th Street to Atlantic Avenue.
14. N.W. 1st Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.W. 3rd Court.
15. S.E. 1st Avenue from S.E. 4th Street to Atlantic Avenue.
16. N.E. 1st Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.E. 4th Street.
17. N.E. 3rd Avenue from N.E. 1st Street to N.E. 8th Street.
18. S.E. 3rd Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to S.W. 10th Street.
19. S.E. 4th Avenue from S.E. 10th Street to Atlantic Avenue.
20. N.E. 4th Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.E. 3rd Street.
21. N.E. 7th Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to N.E. 11 th Street.
22. S.E. 7th Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to South of S.E. 4th Street.
l
T
,
,
I
(
..
IW~~~
12-/ ~! f?{
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H ::'j;
CITY ""'TORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E_ 1,1 STREET, SUITE 4 DEL RAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
HI 407/243-7090 TELECOPIER 407/278-4755
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 5, 1988
To: Walter o. Barry, City Manager-/ ~/.J~
From: Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Assistant City Attorney j~
Subject: Newsrack Ordinance
During 1987, the City Conunission held several workshops re-
garding newsracks wi thin the City. Staff, members of the
pUblic and the newspapers, prepared a draft ordinance which was
never formally considered by the Commission (a copy of which is
attached hereto). I believe the reason no modifications to the
present newsrack ordinance Section 102.40 et seq. of the Code
of Ordinances were made was because of strong opposition to the
changes expressed by newspapers and the pendency of the
Lakewood v. Plain Dealer case in the Un! ted States Supreme
Court. That case involved the Cleveland Plain Dealer's chal-
lenge of the newsrack permitting ordinance instituted by the
City of Lakewood, Ohio. There was a concern that the outcome
of that case might impact upon our proposed ordinance and might
necessitate further revisions once it was decided. Therefore,
rather than modify the ordinance twice, the matter was tabled.
..
That case has now been decided by the Supreme Court and can be
used as a guide in the revamping of our current ordinances.
Another related matter has occurred, that being the Fort
Lauderdale News and Sun Sentinel's appeal of a Code Enforcement
Board determination which supported our Engineering Depart-
ment's ruling that the newsrack near the intersection of Lake
Ida and Barwick Roads was endangering the safety of property
(namely the destruction of the grass in the swale area).
The Conunission may wish to revisit the newsrack issue in light
of the decision rendered in the Plain Dealer case and the
appeal taken from our ordinance by the News and Sun Sentinel.
Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not
hesitate to contact our office.
~:~:s:ity conunission tvl5 #- (p
Charles Axelrod, Civil Engineer
Rich Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator
Lula Butler, Director of Conununity Improvement
Frank Spence, Interim Development Service Director
. . --.----- 1 - -- ---
.
,
,
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
i
~-:.;;.,..:::!; :~.~ ......~. .,- << ' ': I ~:.~;::.&il..:h :':'=-:.~~:"':-~
. . i
, P
ORDINANCE NO. . ':
p
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AME:lDING CHAPTER 23, "STREETS
AND SIDE\'IALKS" , ARTICLE IV, "NEViSRACK REGULATIONS",
BY AMENDING SECTION 23-51, "LOCATION AND PLACE~lENT
OF NEWSHACKS", BY ENACTING A NEW SUBSECTION 23(E),
'1'0 PROVIDE FOR A MINHlUM DISTANCE BETWEEN NEWSRACKS
CONTAINING THE SAME PUBLICATION; BY ENACTING A NEW
SECTION 23-56, "SIZE OF NEWSRACKS", TO PROVIDE A
MAXIMU~I SIZE FOR NE\'ISRA':KS; BY ENACTING A NE~~
SECTION 23-57(A-E), "STANllARDS FOR MAINTENANC~ AND
INSTALLATION", TO PROVIDE FOR STANDARDS AS TO
ADVERTISING, REFUNDING OF COINS, MAINTENANCE AND
COLORING OF NEWSRACKS; BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION
23-58, "HOLDING CITY HARllLESS", PROVIDING FOR THE
OWNERS OF NEWSRACKS TO HOLD THE CITY HARMLESS AS TO
AllY CLAIMS RELATED TO NEW~;RACKS; PROVIDING A SAVING
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A GENEfiAL REPEALER CLAUSE; PRO-
VIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Sect ion ....l. That Chapter 23, "Streets and Sidewalks", Article
IV, "Newsrack Regulations", Section 23-5l, "Location and Placement of
Newsracks", be amended by enacting a new Subsection 23-51(e) to read as
fellows:
Sec. 23.5l(e)
No more than one (1 ) news rack containing the same issue or edition
of the same publication shall be located within the same block or 1,00O
feet, whichever is the lesser distance, on the same side of the street,
provided however, a distributor may locate newsracks closer to each
other if a public need is determined to exist. A public need may be
e[:tablished by the following method, but such method is not exclusive.
A distributor desiring to establish a public need, may place a newsrack
at the proposed location afte r notice to the City for a period of one
(1 ) month. If dur ing that one (l) month test period, the average
c.i rculation from that newsrack equals or exceeds 75 percent of the
cupacity of the newsrack, the pt:blic need is established and the
newsrack may remain at its location.
Section 2. That Chapter 23, "Streets and Sidewalk", Article
IV, "Newsrack Regulations", is hereby amended by enacting a new Section
::::1-56, "Size of Newracks", to read uS follows:
Sec. 23-56. Size of Newsracks. ..
No single news rack shall excf'ed 4 feet, 6 inches in height, 32
inches in width or 24 inches in depth.
Section...]. That Chapter 23, "Streets and Sidewalks", Article
IV, "Newsrack Hegulations", is amended by enacting a new Section
23-57 (a-e), "Standards for Mainterance and Installation", to read as
follows:
Sec. 23-57. Standards for Maintenance and Installation.
Any news rack which in ~Ihole or in part rests upon in or over any
swale or sidewalk shall comply with the following standards:
(a) No news rack shall be used for advertising or publicity pur-
poses other than that dealing with the display, sale or
purchase of the newspaper or news periodicals sold or
.
distributed therein. Not more than one (1) advertising sign
(not exceeding 2 feet by 1 foot) may be placed on a newsrack.
(b) Each coin operated newsrack, except where news~aper or period-
icals f,re distributed free, shall be equipped with a coin
return mechanism to permit a person using the machine to
secure an immediate refund in the event he is unable to open
the newsrack. The coin return mechanism shall be maintained
in good working order.
(c) Each newsrack shall have affixed to it in a readily visible
place so as to be seen by anyone us ing the newsrack, the
telephone number of a working telephone service to call and
report a malfunction, or to secure a refund ir;the event of a
malfunction of the coin return mechanism, and' shall feature
clearly on its face, the name and address of the distributor
to give the notices provided for in this chapter.
(d) Each newsrack shall be maintained in a neat and clean condi-
tion and in good repair at all times.
(e) All news racks shall have a uniform dark brown finish.
Section 4. That Chapter 23, "Streets and Sidewalks", Article
IV, "tJewsrack Regulations", is amended by enacting a new Sect;ion 23-58,
"Holding City Harmless", to read as follows:
Sec. 23-58. Holding City Harmless.
The owner of each newsrack shall execute a document, approved as to
form by the City Attorney, agreeing to hold the City its officers,
en~loyees and agents free and harmless from any claim, demand or judg-
ment in favor of any person, arising out of the location of any newsrack
located upon in or over a public right-of-way or other public property.
Section 5. 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 invaiid.
Section 6. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 7. That this ordinance shall become effective six (6)
months after its passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the ____ day of _______________, 1987.
"
--------------------------------
HAY 0 R
ATTEST:
~ity-cierk--------------------
First Reading_________________
Second Rea0ing________________
2
ORD. NO.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: MASTER PARKING PLAN STUDY
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The CRA and the Downtown Development Authority have solicited a
proposal from Wilbur Smith and Associates to conduct a long range
parking master plan for the City's central business district. The plan
is detailed in the attached proposal concentrating in the areas bounded
by Swinton Boulevard on the west, the Ocean on the east and the one-way
pairs.
As the attached cover memo indicates it is imperative that for a
parking study to be valid, it be conducted during the "season" and
therefore this item has some considerable priority. While there has
been some discussion about the merits of parking facilities located in
various areas of the downtown, there is a general agreement that in
order for a successfully implemented downtown parking facility(s) to
exist a detailed analysis and documentation of present and future
demands will be necessary. This demand will be developed by study of a
combination of existing land uses and likely land availability as well
as traffic patterns.
Funding for this $25,000 study is proposed to come from the Downtown
Development Authority. The DDA has been generally seen most recently
as the CBD's "planning agency" while the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) has been generally agreed to be the "implementer of those plans".
This funding scheme is consistent with that role division.
WOB: c I
Encl
1A/S ~rr
. [ITY DF DELIAY BEA[H
100 NW, 1s1 AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 305/278.2841
M!?i10RANDUM
Date: F';br-uiu'y 2 -4, 1989 .
To: Frank Spence, Director of Development Services
From: Herbert W.A. Thiele, City Attorney
SUbject: CBD "In Lieu Of" Parking Funds
The only restriction placed on the use of the collected "in
lieu ofn parking funds is that they be used for parking pur-
poses as the Commission shall deem appropriate. Therefore,
since the Wilbur Smith Master Parking Study involves parking,
the Commission may deem it to be an appropriate use of the
funds. (See copy of Section 173.533(b)(1) attached hereto).
Pursuant to Code of Ordinance Section 173.S33(b)(1), the City
Cormnission ;::ould allocate the funds to either the CRA or the
DDA for the purpose of facilitating the stUdy. However, in
order for those entities to fund such an activity, the study
would have to be limited either to the DDA or the CRA area,
depending on which entity is used as the facilitator, and they
~ould not do a Master Parking Study for the entire City.
In conclusion, the use of the in lieu of parking funds for any
purpose must be formally approved by the Commission, and if so
approved, the expenditure would be appropriate.
Should you have any que~tions concerning this matter, please do
not hesitate to contact our office.
.tff
'HT:sh
cc: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
David M. Huddleston, Finance Director
Tom Lynch, Community Redevelopment Authority Chairperson
Roy Simon, Downtown Development Authority
"
. :11
f
17
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
Community Downtown
Redevelopment Development
Agency Authority
To: Board of the CRA .
Board of the DDA
City Manager and Staff
From: Bill Finley, Executive Director, CRA/DDA
The attached proposal from Wilbur Smith Associates is to
prepare A MASTER PARKING PLAN fOv the CBD. This firm did
the brief study endorsing the demand for the garage near
Atlantic Plaza. This work could be a continuation of
that effort.
It is critical that they start in February or March to
capture survey material from during the season. Any
dela~ caused by another RFP could result in losing the
seasonal data so essential to the quality of the test
results. These data will be the very foundation of the
long-range plan for parking.
They propose a 10 week study and planning period for
$25,000. They will use the projections of Laventhol and
Horwath and Mel Levine to set the floor space demands
and project the parking requirements from that data.
However, they will rely on City Leadership to identify
alternative revenue and financing methods for future
acquisitions and improvements.
~
/pI> #7
"--- _u_ ____
.
.
.17
. WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS' ARCHITECTS' PLANNERS
, I!H I( 'Will' pC! eox 92' cr illll._lll1A '; ( ;"))(1;" I/,;r, . (P,O:J) 7380580' CABLE WILSMITlI' I AX (803)251 20M' T[I IX 573.119. WllSMlll1 U
February 6, 1989
Mr. William E. Finley
Executive Director .
Community Redevelopment Agency
64 S.E. Fifth Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Mr. Finley:
In response to your recent request, Wilbur Smith Associates is
pleased to submit this professional services proposal relative to
the conduct of certain studies and analyses, and the formulation
of a parking development plan and program for the Delray Beach
central business district. The work proposed herein would extend
and expand on similar studies conducted in a small part of the
area during the summer of 1988.
Study Purpose and Scope
The prinCipal goal of the studies proposed herein is to develop a
long-range master parking plan for the Delray Beach central busi-
ness district. Such a plan would document and consider existing
relationships between parking space supply and demand, and would
forecast future parking needs that will accompany CBD growth and
development. We understand that two other studies are underway
that will contain information that will be used in forecasting CBD
growth potential. These include a Retail Assessment Study of the
Delray Beach CBD, and an assessment of the economic benefits of
adding a major department store in the area. We further under-
stand that the City is giving consideration to amending zoning
ordinances to remove or modify current requirements that the
private sector include ancill1ary off-street parking in CBD
developments.
To address these basic issues and goals, we propose to undertake
the series of work tasks outlined below. These studies would be
concentrated in the area bounded by Swinton Boulevard on the west,
N.E. First Street on the north, S.E. First Street on the south,
and the ocean on the east. This area contains most of the land
uses traditionally considered as included in the Delray Beach
Central Business District.
AlIY\NY, NY- ALlI'rNCE. 00. CAIRO. EGVPT - CHAIlLESTON. SC. COLUMBI'r. SC. COlUMBUS. 00. FAlLS CHUIlCH. VA. HONG KONG. HOUSTON. 1)( _ KNOXVILLE. TN
KUALA LUMPUR. MALAYSI'r . lEXINGTON, KY. LONOON. ENGLAND. MI'rMI, Fl' NEW HAVEN. CT. OIllANOO, FL. PHOENIX. foJ. PlnseUIlGH, PA. PORTSMOUTH. NH
PIlOV1DENCE. ~ - AALEIGH. NC 'IllCHMOND. VA . ROSELLE. ~ - St<N FAANCISCO. CA. SINGAPQIlE .10fl0NTO. CAWrDA'WASHINGTON. DC,WOODllIlIDGE. NJ
EMPlOYEE-ClWNED COMPANY
------..----
;
"
t
.
Task I - Field Studies and Investigations
Task II - Parking Demands and Needs Analysis
Task III - Formulation of a Park ing Development Plan and
Program
Task IV - Study Documentation and Reports
These studies would utilize, update and expand on parking work con-
ducted in a small portion of the proposed study area ~ast summer.
Task I - Field Studies and Investiqations
Initial efforts will be placed on gaining an in-depth knowledge of
existing parking conditions. This will include compiling and
reviewing all existing available information about the parking
system and its usage characteristics. An initial project meeting
would be requested . It should include detailed discussions of
study procedures and administrative arrangements to ensure thor-
ough and timely completion of the work.
The basic objectives of Work Task I are to collect and appraise
resource information related to the existing parking system and
its usage characteristics and to review and quantify existing land
use and plans or proposals for future development activity. There
follows a br ief discussion of the types of research to be under-
taken.
Parkinq Svstem Inventorv - A detailed field inventory would be
conducted to determine the extent of the present parking system
within the study area and any appropriate fringe area. This wou ld
yield information related to the location, number of spaces,
method of operation, type of usage (public or restricted use),
time limits, hours of operation, and rate schedules for all curb
and off-street facilities. Findings would be depicted in graphic
and tabular form.
Parkinq Svstem Usaqe Levels - Parking accumulation counts
would be made at all study area spaces at hourly intervals
throughout a normal business day. Resulting findings would be
summarized by block and type parking, and depicted in graphiC and
tabular form. It is intended to use the peak observed accumula-
tion as a parking demand control total for subsequent work related
to determining parking demands for individual study area blocks.
2
"-'~-- -.--
f
.
.
I
.
,
:1
.
,
Parking space turnover studies would be conducted at represen-
tative curb and off-street facilities to estimate total parking
activity on a typical business day. These findings will be useful
in preparing estimates of parking usage and revenue potentials of
needed new facilities. Traditional methods of data collection
will be employed to supplement existing available information.
These include periodic license plate checks, and observations of
in/out activity.
Parker Characteristics - A series of interviews will be con-
ducted to establish a data base to descr ibe travel and parking
characteristics unique to the study area. Subject areas include
vehicle occupancy, trip origin, destination and pulpose, parking
duration, walking distance between parking location . and destina-
tion, and parking fee paid, if any
Three types of interviews are proposed. A post-card interview
form will be prepared and placed on parked vehicles throughout the
study area. Recent studies have shown this to be a cost-effective
means of acquiring a great deal of useful information. Survey
forms will be coded to identify parking location. Information
will be solicited regarding trip origin, destination and pu rpos e ,
parking duration and fee paid. Walking distances can be cal-
culated and related to durations, purposes and parking charge.
Personal interviews will be conducted with a sample of parkers at -
representative curb and pUblic off-street facilities. Information
collected from this study will be used to verify the post-card
results, and to correlate parking characteristics with facility
type.
Personal interviews will also be scheduled at several .generators.
in the study area. They will provide information on travel mode,
auto occupancy, trip purpose and duration and. parking location.
Attitudinal questions about travel/parking matters could also be
included, if desired. This study phase will provide important
inpu t data to the parking demand model. Selected generators
should include typical retail establishments and office employment
centers.
Land Use Inventorv - Existing land use would be quantified by
study area block. The amounts of occupied floor space (square
feet) would be determined by retail and office uses. Other types
of use (hotel, dwelling units, etc.) would also be listed as
"special uses.. These data are important input items to the
parking demand model described in a subsequent section.
3
1-
.
.
-
j
..
/
Task II - Parkinq Demands and Needs Analvsis
The field data collected during Work Task I would be thoroughly
analyzed to establish relationships between land use type and
intensity, and parking space demands. The relationships are
important input to the parking demand model that will be used
during this study phase. The model proposed for use was developed
during the Pittsburgh CaD Parking Study conducted for the
Pittsburgh Parking Authority by Wilbur Smith Associates in 1984.
The model has been used successfully in several subsequent studies
of both large and small central business districts.
-
The model accepts as input, measures of land use activ~ty by block
and major use categories (office, retail and other), modal split,
and car occupancy by long-term and short-term parking categories.
Land use data (building area) are translated into employee popu-
lation on a typical day through analysis of building occupancy and
average employee absenteeism. Other input data items include
adjusted parking space supply by block and long-term/short-term
categories, and parking demand factors (spaces per square feet)
for major land use classifications and ,long-term/short-term
categories.
Successive runs of the computer model are made (following neces-
sary adjustments in variables) until the total study area demand
closely approximates the observed peak hour accumulation at
facilities that supply parking to the study area. The model is
then considered calibrated, and suitable for use in forecasting
parking demands that will accompany future development.
The model produces tabular comparisons of adjusted supply and
demand by short and long-term components for each block of the
study area.
Once the magnitude of existing parking supply and demand is listed
by study area block, they will be compared to yield parking space
needs (surpluses or deficiencies) for each block. Needs will then
be posted to a study area map, and a balancing process undertaken.
This involves offsetting deficiencies in some blocks against sur-
pluses that exist in other blocks that are within a reasonable
walking distance. Walking distance criteria will be extracted
from the data collected in Work Task I, and adjusted, as necessary
to reflect desirable quality of service. Space deficiencies that
remain after the balancing process reflect the magni tude and de-
sirable location of system expansion needs.
The parking demand model will be updated by inserting land use
measures that will result from planned new development, or from
in-fill of under-utilized buildings. Then, the model will be
solved for this forecasted short-range growth projection. Fore-
casted parking needs will be determined and the balancing process
4
~._--
!
i .',
; .
.
repeated. Resulting findings will express the location and mag-
nitude of unmet demand.
It is most desirable to exercise the model for future conditions
at two separate levels of development. The initial run should
include only those land use changes that are committed for devel-
opment. Conclusions from this analysis will be used in formu-
lating plans for new or expanded parking facilities that are
considered to be an immediate need. Then a subsequent analysis
would be made, with other potential development projects in-
cluded. The results would be valid for system planning, and would
become the basis for a long-range Master Parking Pla~.
Following completion of Work Tasks I and II, a technical report
will be prepared and submitted for review. This report is en-
visioned as including the initial chapters of the study report --
Introduction, Parking Inventory, Existing Parking Characteristics,
and Parking Space Demands and Needs. A meeting would be scheduled
to discuss the completed work following City review of the sub-
mission. This meeting should include a full discussion of study
findings. It would also be used as a sounding board for reactions
to a preliminary parking development plan and program.
Task III - Formulation of Parkinq Development Plan and Proqram
Estimates of existing and forecasted short and long-range demands
and needs developed during Work Task II will provide the basis for
formulating and evaluating a parking plan to meet the identified
needs. Candidate parking development sites will be selected and
evaluated, considering site capacity potential, proximity to
deficient areas, land use compatibility, vehicular and pedestrian
access opportunities, likely per space development costs, and
other relevant considerations. This preliminary assessment of
candidate sites will identify those components judged to be
superior.
Then, recommendations will be formulated as to the content of a
parking master plan. This will include site definition, type of
facility (lot, garage) and capacity.
Functional plans will be prepared for each recommended new or ex-
panded parking facility. These plans will depict the number and
arrangement of parking levels and stalls, interfloor circulation
features, pedestrian and vehicle ingress/egress locations, loca-
tion of elevators and stairways, and parking entry/exit control
features. They will be developed in sufficient detail to serve as
a basis for estimating order-of-magnitude costs of construction
and operation.
5
._"___~n -
0,
J
During the functional planning process, appropriate consideration
will be given to operational methods. Candidate strateg ies in-
clude cashier control, automated pay stations, valet parking,
parking meter control, and slot box control.
Should the master plan include several facilities, a priority of
development will be suggested. This wi.ll be based on the nature
and ex ten t of present needs, site availability, timing of future
developments and financial considerations.
Once the various elements of a parking development plan are
identified and arranged in prior ity order, t.he cost of
implementing the plan will be estimated. Cost estimates will
include: land acquisition, construction; architectural and
engineering fees; and parking revenue collection equipment. We
will rely on City staff for input as to land value estimates for
this work phase. Costs will be expressed in 1989 values,
regardless of the time frame for implementing tbe various plan
components.
We will also explore the need for instituting a parking develop-
ment fund in Delray Beach. It could serve .~s a repository for
parking revenues that would accrue to the system, should pay
parking be instituted. In this connection, we will explore tbe
need for and desirability of installing parking meters along
street curbs and in off-street lots, and will prepare recom-
mendations for such actions, should they be deemed warranted.
Such recommendations would include a schedule of fees, along with
estimates of the potential gross annual revenues such a system
would earn. We will also estimate the annual cost of operating
the parking system components, and of the total system.
Task IV - Studv Documentation
Following completion of all studies and evaluations, we will pre-
pare and submit five copies of a draft report of study procedures,
findings and conclusions. This draft report will include pre-
liminary copies of all data tabulations, and blue-line prints of
illustrations.
Following your review and approval of the draft report, we will
prepare and submit 50 copies of a final study report along with
one reproducible master copy. It would fully explain study
findings and conclusions and would be appropriately documented.
6
-.-_._-- - --- ---
.""
.
Other Services
We have not included any work tasks related to financial
feasibili ty for plan elements, as we understand prog ram financing
alternatives are being investigated by the City's staff. Parking
facility financial feasibility evaluation is a highly specialized
area of work, and we have been retained to conduct such work for
numerous projects that rely on user revenue fundings. Should you
decide to employ parking revenue bonds as a financing mechanism,
and should you need an independent opinion as to financial
feasibility, we will welcome an opportunity to be considered for
such additional service. _
Proposed Work Schedule and Fee
We can begin work on this study within one week after receipt of
notice of acceptance of our proposal, and your specific authori-
zation to begin the work. We understand the seasonal nature of
CBD activities, and will strive to complete all field data col-
lection activities during February and early March, 1989. Given
the amount and nature of work to be undertaken, we believe all
work, including preparation and submission of the draft report can
be completed in a 10-week period. An additional week will be
required to prepare and submit the final report, following your
authorization to do so.
We propose that compensation for our services be a lump sum fee of
twenty-five thousand ($25,000) dollars. Invoices would be
submitted monthly, based on an estimate of the amount of work
completed during the billing period. The final invoice would be
forwarded following submission of the final report.
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal,
and trust it is fully responsive to your needs. We will be
pleased to answer any questions you may have regarding the
proposal. We look forward to again being of service to Delray
Beach.
Respectfully submitted,
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
JI!f//tl!/ f Jl()-~-J
6~~ald P. Ingdld
Vice President
DPI:gbm
7
1 I,
':(.
~..::.:..:::.~ :~.~. ....._~. .~'.. . I ::"':',~::~~. ':':'_:.;..;.':';:~
.
.
. -
.
i
.
.
f
f
!
-
',i
,
~::'
~:
DEPARTMENTAL [tTY DF
CORRESPONDENCE DELRAY BEA[H
rr, ~ ': ""0'. "'0' ....,.. ~(i
lA~ ~'UClC~
J.:nO",,1 Dav d J. 0 acs, Directo
Department of Planning and Zoning
CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
MEETING OF MARCH 8. 1988 - DATE March 1. 1988
SUBJECT CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH ^ STEERING COMMITTEE
OR COORDINATING COMMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO C.B.D. MATTERS
ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION:
The City Commission is being asked to provide policy direction
and to formally establish a body which will be a formal
"clearinghouse" of matters affecting the Central Business
District (CBD) of Delray Beach.
BACKGROUND:
The Planning and Zoning Board has hosted three "roundtable"
discussions which have focussed on the CBD. Evolving from those
discussions has been an organizational structure which is
intended to provide for the coordination of information. The
resulting committee (or group) may also serve in an advisory
capacity to the City Commission.
Attached is an outline and description of the proposed structure.
Also attached are formal responses from the CRA, DDA, Historic
Preservation Board, and Chamber of Commerce. Each letter
endorses the proposal to some degree. The Planning and Zoning
"'- its meeting of February 22nd formally endorsed the
Board at
proposal. One aspect of the proposal which is not endorsed is
that of having the "Executive Committee" functioning as the
administrator of any staff personnel. The Chamber also suggested
a reduced role for the group.
Since the City Commission will be the body which will officially
recognize and establish any such coordinating function, it should
take this matter under advisement and provide direction.
"
Tllf E-r:.,,:r ALW.'Y~ MATrrHS
"- -~ ,-. _______n___
..
1.
r
.v
.. ~}
, '.'
<:0:"-"--' ..,
.r
;'.
.. ... ..
~::
'~'.
i\'
~." ,
"'"
'f:'
..,I,
(~:
".,
To: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
Re: Consideration Of A Proposal To Establish A Steering Committee
Or Coordinating Committee With Respect To C.B.D. Matters
Page 2
.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
l. Defer consideration to a work session.
2. Direct the City Manager to prepare formal documents
which are necessary to establish a committee with the
general function, purpose, and composition as contained
in the proposal less the staff administration aspect. .
3. Direct that one representative of each of the
potentially participating groups work with the City
Manager, or his designee, in developing the formal
documents identified above.
4. Table the request without direction.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Since this is a policy related matter dealing with the Commission
and its relationship to its appointed Boards, there is no staff
recommendation.
Attachments:
- initial proposal
- letter of endorsement/comment
....
"
~- ,. ,
f
~:;
., ..'",
.....
',',
r -r
::;
ik
~~.:
'f:'
:'.~
, .
DISCUSSION HANDOUT
C.B.D. ROUNDTABLE #3
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
-
PROPOSAL: that the City Commission formally recognize the "Central Business
District Steering Committee". The Committee,while not having any
approval or veto powers,would be consulted by all parties involved
in C.B.D. matters prior to embarking Upon significant programs or
projects. The main function of the Committee would be than of
communication and coordination. The Committee would establish a
set of bylaws, would meet on regular basis of at-least once a
month, and would be assisted by an executive Committe.
The monthly agenda would consist of, at a minimum, the following: "
- verbal report from each entity as to the status/activity of
that entity in C.B.D. matters
- executive committee status reports on projects and programs
affecting the C.B.D.
- review and comment on items referred to the Steering Committee
by participating entities
- comments and discussion.
The Executive CO~ittee would be comprised of the chief admtnts~c.tor
or designee, of each participating entity. It will provide for record
keeping and will Supervise staff activities. It will establish its own
rules for internal decision-making.
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
, t"'.;.... BUst''', >>"m" '_IN' COMMITTEE I
I
- Community Redevelopment Agency
- Downtown Development Agency
-I - Avenue Merchants Association
-.
L - Chamber of Commerce
- Planning and Zoning Board "
- Community Appearance Board
- Historic Preservation Board
.. -----.-.. .
i r'ixi:;-CUTIVE COMMITTEE !
I
I ~ - C.R.A. Director ,
'-
I - Chamber Director ,
,-' --, - City Manager (designee);
I-
Ii. STAFF I
I. . .
- -. - Downtown Coordinator; I
I _ Other
-
-.. ..
.. ,
.... f
-.
..;.
~:;
:::~:
. " .t
....
... ...
.ir ,. .. ,
"
.\
.{ ."
-, ,
:':-.
....
~f.;
f.::
~~.
CD Community RECEiVED
Redevelopment
-a Agency FEB 29 1988
Delroy Beach !-'LAi' . Ir_-~
..,., I t \J .
February 25, 1988
Hr. David Kovacs
Director
Department of Planning and Zoning
City of De1ray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue .....
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear David,
At their meeting of February 24 the Board of the Community
Redevelopment Agency unanimouSly approved the concept of creating
a Central Business District Steering Committee as presented to
the C.B.D Roundtable. The CRA Board did join with various other
organizations in requesting that the reference to staff reporting
to the Executive Committee, as indicated in your proposal, be
deleted.
We look forward to participating with you and the other
members of the Steering Committee in this effort.
Very truly yours,
,
--~
~homas ~YnCh .,
Chairman
cc: Hr. Ken Simback, Executive Director
64 $,[ ~th Avpntrf"lo r\nlr,....., f'ln""",...k r."',i........ 11A,< < . ~ - -. - ~
- .---....
f'
-'
.0;.
~;:
..-
.'
.....-.1.. .if
- ".":"".
,-
..... -,
':::
t,.
f;~<
'~'
'.'.
~<;
<<,
',:.
/)t'I.RA l' IJtACI/
. .'.. ."'..... ; I .., ,,' "
~~.-"'."t... .. -, 1
. I' -. .' .' r-- . . " ~~. I'
~. -. pi ....' , . .
rID 0 W N TOW Nt,." :'" ~_ (, ",. _
fIDEVELOPMENT Fa'~~~J
illu THO R IT Y
pt~'~ '., '- " . .
69S,E,FIFTHAVENUE . -n~~,:,..,"
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
Attp.ntlon Davld Kova~s,
"'
1'he Downtown Develooment Authorlty endorses the "Central 9us1ness
Dlstrl~t Steering Commlttee" 1n concept made uo of the var10us
organlzatlons In C3D for the sole ourpose of communlcat1on and
~oordlnatlon wlth the stloulatlon that the bY-laws or other rules
be aooroved by all members of the steerin~ committee and that the
staff oostlon of the or~anlzatlon be drooped.
l\ J \0 j ..J.
1'/ ,I, d'l ;!U-:t.l<'
I -,'1 '/) L( 1'-0- vf'. r.-t
" VI-" ")' J... tA.l. fjce.teL -7.t,tA/X.(-'H~'(,-oJ Z. <I-U.. 5 ~~'-<>
D DA CALh'l.'}'<'o,u [cv
. .
"
: " . '. ':.
---- -- f'
,"
~~L
.~:::::;:_~.. .t
~ .,.
-1 ..
.:::'
.;;~
.'
.
C/~
,_,J, ., O. .."..' -..'t ,~t',
/.<:',.' , :~t I; ,~, ~:-.. '..- ~\i~, ...
, . .' I .. \ .'
. \; '.- ...~;, ~ \.... ",1
.... GREATER DEL RAY
BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
i'1 n . . .. .
64 SOUT"EAST FIFT" AVENUE - TELEPHONE 278-042' OELRAY 8EAC". FLORIDA 3344'
" ~ \~ ~:~,.!.-.
" 'I" ..:).:...
February 23. 1988
.
Hr. William Andrews
Chairman, CBD Roundtable
201 S. E. 5th Avenue
Delray Beach. Florida 33483
Dear Mr. Andrews: "
The Chamber's Executive Committee has reviewed the Central
Business District Steering Committee concept discussed at the last
roundtable meeting and wishes to provide the following comments:
Firstly, the group felt that the need to have better comm-
unications between the many groups working for the betterment of
our downtown area is a pressing one and heartily endorses the con-
cept of having representatives of these various groups meet ~n a
regular basis tq exchange ideas and to provide updates on their
activities.
The Executive Committee would delete reference to staff as
shown in the chart and also delete the line calling for by-laws.
since it is their feeling that this group shpuld remain an in-
formal one working in cooperation with each other to make Delray
a better community,
Sincerely,
...
Ken Ellingsworth
Executive Vice President
KElbf
.,
lEI
AC ' '~'~<D
~.._-
~. -.. :'...~:";:
'" ~ -....-..-.
,- '::.
."
1::.
r
--
.'
.v
~\
...... ',:<.
':':';':_,L'~ ..". J
.}
..-.
,,-
-..
" ...,....
[ITY DF DElRAY BEA[H~' t \
. ',J:;:!t:./
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ;;;;:"'l~S~REET. SUITE 4 f)ILRA Y BEACH. nORIDA J3483 30';243-7090
HEMORANDUM
Da te: March 2, 1989
To: City Commission
From: Herbert W.A. Thiele, City At.1:orney
Subject: Community Redevelopment Agency's Request for City
Attorney's Office to Act as Aqency Counsel
This memorandum is to inform the COImnission that. our office was
formally requested, by the Community Redevelopment Agency at
their March 1 meeting, to act. as counsel for the agency. The
eRA feels that it is important for them to have counsel present
a.t the meetings and available to aid them in accomplishing
their mission. In the past t_hey have retained Bob Federspiel
to a.ct as counsel, but because of bUdgetary problems caused by
extraordinary legal expenses incurred in the garage bonding
effort, they are unable to continue to pay for an attorney's
services on a regular basis.
Our office has advised the CRA Director that we would be
willing to act as their counsel" for the remainder of their
fiscal year, if such action was approved by the City Commis-
sioll. The Community Redevelopment Agency has been further
advised that in areas of conflict or potential conflict between
the eRA and the City, our office would naturally be acting in
accordance with our primary duty, that being to the City and
therefore they may have to.re.tain .outside counsel to represent
their interests in those instances. .
This matter will be placed on an upcoming City Commission
agenda for your consideration. If you should have any ques-
tions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact
our office.
~
HT:sh
cc: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
Bill Finley, Community Redevelopment Agency
ujs 11'1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: ALLAMANDA GARDEN SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING REQUEST
.
DATE: March 3, 1989
The Allamanda Gardens development under the sponsorship of the Palm
Beach County Housing Partnership have requested additional City funding
to offset infrastructure preparation costs. These costs were
originally estimated to be $130,000 and have now been revised upward to
an estimated $278,348. City staff have reviewed the site plan
presented by Allamanda Gardens and has some concerns about the project
and a commitment of funding at this time. A staff memorandum is
attached for your review.
WOB:cl \
Encl
I
;
" W{tlO
MEMORANDUM
"
TO: Walter O. Barry, City Man~
~ c &-_
FROM: Frank Spence, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING - ALLAMANDA GARDENS (PALM
BEACH COUNTY HOUSING PARTNERSHIP)
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The City has received a request from the Palm Beach County Housing
Partnership to provide additional funding for their Allamanda Gardens
project. Allamanda Gardens is being planned as a 36 unit subdivision
located on a vacant tract of land of approximately 8.9 acres, bordered
by S.W. 2nd and 3rd Streets and S.W. 8th and 10th Avenues.
In response to their request for financial assistance last year,
$130,000 was placed in the budget to assist with the cost of providing
infrastructure improvements. The Partnership is now saying that this
amount in inadequate to provide all of the improvements that they say
need to be done. The amount of additional funds requested is $148,348,
for a total assistance package of $278,348.
Inasmuch as these funds are not currently available at this time staff
recommends that this request be considered during budget preparation
time and if Commission so approves funding would be included in next
year's budget and be available October 1, 1989.
FS:cl
Encl
,
tI THE
HOUSING
PALMBEACHCOUNTY PARTNERSHIP
George Steele, Managing Partner
February 13, 1989
The Honorable Doak Campbell, ill, Mayor
and Members of the Delray Beach City
Commission ~
100 N. W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Mayor Campbell and Commissioners:
It is our pleasure to once again present to you our plans for the Allamanda Gardens
single-family subdivision in the City of Delray Beach.
As you are aware, Allamanda Gardens will be developed by the Palm Beach County
Housing Partnership in conjunction with the City, Palm Beach County, and various
private sector participants on 8.9 acres of vacant land between S.W. 2nd and 3rd
Streets and S.W. 8th and 10th Avenues. The 36-unit subdivision plan is presently in
the preliminary plat review process within the City, a builder has been selected for
the project, and a mortgage plan is in place to provide financing to qualified buyers.
The homes will contain three bedrooms and two baths with a one-car garage, and
two separate floor and elevation plans will be offered (at 1,165 and 1,149 livable
square feet).
During August and September of 1988, the Partnership -completed an extensive
analysis of market and demographic conditions within the Delray Beach target area
(as designated by the City for its Community Development Block Grant program).
This analysis was undertaken to determine an appropriate sales price for the homes
considering the income levels of persons in the target area, and the requirement
that persons defined as "low- and moderate-income" purchase these homes due to
the federal assistance involved in this program.
The Partnership's "Band of Qualification Analysis" discovered that if .homes in
Allamanda Gardens were priced at $49,900, approximately 77 families in the Delray
Beach target area would exist that could qualify for and purchase these homes, an
acceptable level of market demand in Delray Beach. However, if the price were to
increase to $55,000, it is estimated that only 25 families would qualify, and the
market viability of the project in Delray Beach would be endangered, forcing the
Partnership to greatly expand its marketing efforts outside the City.
777 East Atlantic Averua . Suite 224 · Delray Baach, Rorida 33483 · [407J 276-6231
/ L....r
f
"
"
2
In negotiations with the builder and other private sector partners, the Partnership
has stressed the need to hold the sales price of these homes at $49,900 to ensure the
feasibility of the project. This sales price assumes no construction costs for any
infrastructure improvements, and the waiver and/or payment using public funds of
impact and permi~ fees, as the City indicated it would contribute to the project
through passage of Resolution 8-88 on January 26, 1988. The City, based upon an
estimate of these costs by City staff, subsequently budgeted $130,000 for Allamanda
Gardens.
The engineering firm of Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc. was contracted by the
Partnership to provide engineering, planning and surveying services for
Allamanda Gardens. After initial indications suggested that the budgeted amount of
$130,000 would not be sufficient to pay for infrastructure improvements and related
expenses, and to pay the water and sewer impact fees for the project (which cannot
be waived), Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc. were asked to compile a detailed cost
estimate for infrastructure. As a result of their report to the Partnership on January
18,1989, it has been determined that City funds have been under-budgeted by a total
of $148,348.
~ .
-
These costs, if added on to each unit in Allamanda Gardens, would force the sales
price to increase to $54,021. This price would greatly endanger the marketability of
these homes, and would at the very least damage the planned efforts by the
Partnership, reflecting the desires previously expressed by the City Commission, to
concentrate its marketing efforts at De1ray Beach residents.
We believe the efforts by the Partnership to develop Allamanda Gardens
appropriately represent the desires of the local community and all its public and
private partners. We are therefore requesting that the City examine its available
financial resources and allocate the additional funds necessary to ensure that
Allamanda Gardens meets these expectations. The Partnership stands ready to work
with the City to examine any innovate solutions possible to providing these
additional funds with the lowest possible fiscal impact upon the City.
I welcome the opportunity to further discuss this matter before the Delray Beach
City Commission at its February 21, 1989 regular meeting. Thank you for your
ongoing support as a partner in the development of a quality, affordable community
in Delray Beach.
Sincerely,
P'6~(~
George teele /-rf?w--
Managing Partner
Enclosures
_._-~ . ~
-,
Comparison of Independent Engineer Versus City Staff Estimates for
Infrastructure ·
Allamanda Gardens "
Independent
City Staff Engineering
I!ml Estimate Estimate
I. Engineering! Not Included $ 19,516
Consulting Expenses .
II. Drainage Not Included 29',724
III. Water Dlstnbu1ion $ 48,000 76,621
IV. Wastewater Collection 37,500 32,042 ..
V. Interior Road Work
Earthwork Not Estimated 18,330
CurbslGutters Not Es1im~ted 6,543
Paving Not Estimated 22,287 ...
Sidewalks Not Estimated 26,665
SUBTOTAL 45,200 73,825
TOTAL INFRASTRUCIURE $ 130,700 $ 231,728
Water!Sewer Impact Fee 46,620 46,620
TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS $ 177,320 $ 278,348
. Estimates prepared by Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc. dated January 18, 1989. Firm was
hired by Partnet5hip at City's request, utllizIng City funds.
.. Assumes all sewer services are in place and operational as stated by City. Alternate plan
suggested by Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc. if service does not exist would cost an estimated
$7,650 additional.
... Assumes no overlay of existing streets to be required by the City.
---- ----
..
..;:".
.
Comparison of City Estimates Versus Actual Costs
Infrastructure Improvements
Allamanda Gardens
-
L City Estimates for Infrastructure
Off-site Utilities (water, $ 85,500
wastewater and drainage)
Roadway Construction 45,]()0
TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS $ 130,700
n City Budget for Allamanda Gardens $ 130,000
This budget also includes payment of the Water/Sewer Impact
Fees ($46,620) which cannot be waived, and payment of
engineering/consulting expenses for the project.
fiL Engineering Estimates for Infrastructure $ 212,212
Improvements
- (from Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc.)
This estimate assumes no preparation costs (earthwork, fill,
grading, sodding) beyond that required for the interior road, that
all on- and off-site services indicated by the City exist and are
operational, and that no additional requirements are placed
upon site development by the City (existing street overlay, etc.).
IV. Total Additional Funds Needed from City
Engineering Estimates $ 212,212
Water/Sewer Impact Fee 46,620
Engineering/Planning Costs 19,516
SUBTOTAL $ 278,348
Less Existing City Budget (130,000)
'> TOTAL ADDITIONAL FUNDS NEEDED $148,348 <
ADDmONAL COST PER HOME IF FUNDS NOT $ 4,121
PROVIDED BY CTY
-------.1:.. ,,- .----
.
.
. .
,
,
Estimate of Per-Unit Costs
Allamanda Gardens
~ % of Total
L Development Costs
Builder "Soft Costs" $ 6,065 . 12.2
Builder "Hard Costs" 36,520 73.2
Construction Finance 1,000 2.0
..
Builder Overhead 3,315 6.6
Partnership Administrative Fee 3,000 6.0
(from lot sales to builder)"
SUBTOTAL - PER UNIT HOME COST $ 49,900 100.0
n. Total Home Cost, Including
Excess Funds Needed for
Infrastructure
Per-Unit Home Cost $ 49,900 92.4
(from Section I)
Total Additional Funds Needed 4,121 7.6
PROJECfED SALES PRICE $ 54,021 100.0
WITHOUT ADDmONAL SUBSIDY
.. This revenue will used to support the ongoing administrative activities of the
Partnership, a non-profit corporation, and will specifically allow the Partnership to
cover the costs for administration of the Allamanda Gardens Homeowners'
Association for two years.
-----."--- _uJ_. __~
,
~THE
. HOUSING
PAlMBEACHCOUNTY PARTNERSHIP
George Steele, Managing Partner
Executive Summary
Band of Qualification Analysis
-
The Palm Beach County Housing Partnership contemplates the development of
single-family homes for low- and moderate-income persons on 8.89 acres in the City
of Delray Beach. Two programs of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) will be used in the development and mortgage financing of this
project.
HUD underwriting requirements for their Section 203(b) mortgage insurance program
dictate that families pay no more than 30% of their income for housing.
HUD's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has a comparable
restriction, and in addition, it has a requirement that families served by CDBG-funded
projects have incomes no higher than 80% of Palm Beach County's median Income
(adjusted for family size). These families are considered "Iow- and moderate-income."
Since low- and moderate-income families typically do not have funds for a substantial
down payment, the amount of the mortgage must be nearly the same as the purchase
price of the home. Modest housing standards together with today's construction costs
force the minimum price for new housing units in Palm Beach County at around
$50,000 plus land and infrastructure.
The Partnership's analysis of these facts in regard to the Oelray Beach single-family
project reveals that small families (three persons per household or less) cannot qualify
for home purchase because the minimum income required by underwriting standards
is greater than the maximum income allowed by the COBG restrictions. A thin band of
larger families can qualify, those whose incomes are not greater than the CDBG
maximum and not less than the underwriting standard.
The cost of the home is very important in determining how many families can qualify
within this narrow band. If the sale price of homes is $55,000, then the Partnership
estimates that approximately 25 families in the Oelray Beach Target Area can qualify. If
the sale price is reduced to $49,900, then the number of families who can qualify Is
increased to approximately 77.
777 East Atlantic Averue . Suite 224 . Delrey Beech, Roride 334B3 . [407] 276-6231
--u-__-r, " ~ -
.
"Allamanda Gardens"
Allamanda Gardens is a thirty-six (36) unit subdivision to be developed by the Palm
Beach County Hpusing Partnership, Inc. in the City of Delray Beach. This
subdivision is planned on 8.9 acres of vacant land two blocks south of West Atlantic
Avenue, bordered by S.W. 2nd and 3rd Streets and S.W. 8th and 10th Avenues.
The Palm Beach County Housing Partnership, Inc. is a non-profit corporation and
community development corporation dedicated to producing affordable housing in
Palm Beach County. Its Board of Directors and membership m composed of
socially-committed business and community leaders who recoghize that the
provision of affordable housing to very low-, low- and moderate-income citizens is
necessary for the orderly growth and quality of life in the County. Allamanda
Gardens is the Partnership's first public/private venture to produce affordable
housing in the County.
..
Allamanda Gardens is a partnership involving the City of Delray Beach, Palm Beach
County in addition to building and financial providers. The Partnership received
the land at no cost from Palm Beach County on July 12, 1988. The Delray Beach City
Commission passed Resolution 8-88 on January 26, 1988, to commit City
Community Development Block Grant funds for requisite infrastructure, and to
waive permissible impact and permit fees for the project. Through a competitive
proposal process, the Partnership has selected the Babcock Company as the builder
for the project, and the firm of Heller - Weaver and Cato, Inc. for engineering and
site planning.
Potential purchasers of these homes will be low- and moderate-income, defined by
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as families earning no
more than eighty percent of area median income (adjusted for family size), or
families with annual incomes roughly between $27,750 and $31,200. Financing will
be FHA, HUD Section 203(b) insured, provided at four percent down plus closing
costs by the Waters Mortgage Corporation.
All homes will contain three bedrooms, two baths with a one car garage. Two
different floor plans (1,165 and 1,149 square feet heated and cooled, respectively) and
elevations will be offered. The targeted sales price for these homes is $49,900. The
subdivision will contain a central park of .64 acres for the residents in the
development. Pedestrian access will be provided for residents living in the units
facing outward onto existing streets (see Preliminary Plat).
The Partnership will form a Homeowners' Association which it will manage for the
first two years of its existence. The Homeowners' Association will assume
ownership of the park and other common space, and will be responsible for
maintaining these areas. In addition, maintenance easements will be declared
within each lot, which the Homeowners' Association will maintain for the resident.
. .
t
The Homeowners' Association will prohibit the fencing of front yards or any other
improvement which could restrict access to the maintenance easement.
The Partnership will also establish a series of rules and regulations for the
subdivision to be ~nforced by the Homeowners' Association. These covenants and
restrictions will preserve the quality of the community, ensure its long-term benefit
to targeted income levels, prevent speculation by purchasers, and guarantee the
units remain owner-occupied except in extreme circumstances.
It is believed that Allamanda Gardens will be a quality subdivision that will instill
pride and a sense of community in its owners, many of whom would be denied the
opportunity to own their own affordable home. The Partnership is convinced
Allamanda Gardens will benefit the residents of the immediate neighborhood and
the City as a whole, and will provide a model affordable housing community that
can be replicated throughout the City and Palm Beach County.
Q
.-. ,- ~
"
.
.
.
~
.:,
,;
~.
.~-:,,~~:"U:....i....~' .... -. . ,. ; , ::":~:~::.':;.;..-...;.:.:..:..;:.~
-.
;
:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lula Butler ~
Director of Community Improvement
-
FROM: Larry Martin
Acting Director of Public Utilities
SUBJECT: ALLAMANDA GARDENS
DATE: March 1, 1989
I have reviewed the information which you gave to me concerning
the Allamanda Gardens project.
The city cannot waive the water and sewer (impact) fees due to
the language contained in our bond covenants.
The off-site utility fees are required to provide service from
the existing utility locations to the development. My budget
would not be able to absorb a shortfall in the amount of
_$85,500.00 I am very concerned with being able to fund existing
proJects.
I fully understand the concerns of the developers and the
marketability of the finished product.
~
/
,
I
----,-""
~
.<::6:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: CHATELAINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION REQUEST
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The Chatelaine Homeowners Association has requested City consideration
of purchase of an abandoned home in their neighborhood. The
circumstances of the abandonment make it difficult for improvements to
be conventionally made. A staff memo is attached and photographs will
be available Tuesday evening.
WOB:cl
Encl
t
"
~fsJ11 .
MEMORANDUM
TO: Walter o. Barry, City Manager "
~ ~. ~-"
FROM: Frank Spence, velopment Services Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM CHATELAINE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCI-
ATION
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The City has received a request from the Chatelaine Homeowners
Association for the City to acquire a home located at 3530 Boulevard
Chatelaine which had a severe fire in it and is currently abandoned and
boarded up.
The Code Enforcement Administrator has ruled that the house does not
qualify for condemnation in that it is still structurally sound. The
house sustain extensive interior damage including a hole in the roof
and was subsequently boarded up to prevent unauthorized access.
The City Attorney has given the opinion that there is not sufficient
grounds for the City to foreclose on the property. If taxes are not
paid on the property over a three year period then the County has a
right to sell the property to recoup it's tax liens. Next in line is
the mortgage company which as of September 9, 1988 held a mortgage on
the property in the amount of $67,500. After the above is satisfied
and if there are any monies left from the sale then the City is next in
line to collect on it's liens against the property which now total
$1,344.45. To quote the City Attorney, "nuisance abatement liens do
not have priority over nor parity with taxes or mortgages, nor do they
have priority over previously filed judgement liens. Thus, an action
by the City to foreclose this lien would mean that the City would take
title subject to the mortgage and would be responsible for paying the
tax certificate holder as well."
The last known owner of the property was convicted of a first degree
felony for trafficking in cocaine on March 12, 1988 and is currently
incarcerated. Attempts to contact the previous owner to attempt a
resolution to this problem or disposition of the property have been
unsuccessful.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff does not recommend the City acquiring this property. One
suggestion might be that the Chatelaine Homeowners Association attempt
to acquire the property itself, have it renovated and sell it for the
best price it can. The City can only continue to cite the property
owner in accordance with the Code, have the lawn mowed and the weeds
cut and place additional liens against the property for some future
hope of repayment.
FS:cl
Encl
HOMEOWNERS LEAGUE OF CHATELAINE Inc.
January 3, 1989
City Managel-
City Cc,mmission
Delray Beach, Florida
Re:3530 Blvd. Chatelaine
To whom it may concern: -
I am writing to you about the above property which is known
in our neighborhood as "the burnt out house on Blvd.
Chatelaine.1I
The condition of this boarded up house is not in keeping
with our neighborhood and seen by some as depr~ciating
adjacent property values.
At present, there is a hole (left during fire fighting
activity) in the roof, which needs repair. There is also a
need for paint and other exterior care. Since the fire,
several years ago, neighbors have taken the reponsibility to
see that the lawn is mowed and bushes pruned rather than wait
fc.,- 'the manditory 12" c.f g,-owth required for the City tc, take
action. Unfortunately, those neighbors are now unable to
contine the care of the property.
The letter attached from Rich Baue,- concerning this ~q-c.pe-,-ty
seems to indicate that the owner of record is unavailable to
assume the responsibility to maintain this ~remise.
We have contacted Mortgage Associates, Inc. who say they
have no knowledge of holding the mortgage on this property.
The City Clerk's office says that their records show that
there is no mortgage on this property.
The City Clerk's records show that the house has not been
homesteaded and that taxes have not been paid on this
p,-c'perty.
We have discussed this matter on numerous occasions with Rich
Bauer and Susan Ruby. Foreclosure and resale seem to be the
only way out of this situation. These actions require City
Commission action and so the Homeonwer's League is requesting
that action.
An early workshop scheduling of this matter is requested.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Since,-ely iY~'1-s.
rJiu".(. /I J.U-r . .
Alice ~;inst Inclusions:Bauer letter
For the President and the Ruby lett.r
~oard of Directors Assessment
~ --- ------
"
l
.:,'::/:~.:1tq{~~&~~:.;~~\~
. .l~.,f~ /
[ITY DF DElARY BER[H,;F .',,'.
<'",!i!I ~_ ,_
, . J' .., ..
September 9,. 1988 100 NoW. 1.. AVENUE DELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 33444 305/243-7000
I
,
.
Ms. Alice Finst .
707 Place Tavant
Delray Beach, Florida
Dear Alice:
..
The subject of this letter is 3530 Boulevard Chatelaine and is written in response to
your inquires about subject property. According to information provided to us by our
title company:
1. Property in question was purchased by one Higinio Gago on July 20, 1984. At
the time of purchase, Gago was unmarried, but subsequently, married one
Lillian Genorio (on or about October 16, 1986).
2. A mortgage on subject property, in the amount of $67,500 at origination, is
held by Mortgage Associates, Inc., 8447 West Mc Nab -Road, Tamarac, Florida-
33321 (registered agent: Harold Smith).
3. The City currently has liens recorded against the property in the total
amount of $1,344.45.
-
4. Property taxes for 1987, in the amount of $1463.52, were not paid and tax
certificate number 88-08773 is held by one John Ellison.
5. Mr. Gago pleaded guilty to a first degree felony-for trafficing in cocaine
around May 12, 1988.
6. Mr. Gago's marriage was dissolved and the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court
barred Mr. Gago from visiting or picking up his minor child. The court
order, dated December 24, 1987, indicates Gago is incarcerated for
trafficing in cocaine and for possession of cocaine with intent to sell.
(Apparently, Gago was previously married prior to his marriage to Lillian
Genorio as this court order pertains to Alba M. Gago, now known as Alba M.
Martinez.)
I spoke to the Assistant City Attorney, Susan Ruby, about the City perhaps foreclosing
on the property. Susan's opinion, which I agree with, was that this type of action
would be a policy decision matter for the City Commission.
Yours very truly, .
~/J'---- -
Rich d Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator
RB:mh
~~. c::..C'"... '0..1-.... THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTI'R!:
--". --
''''''.
-
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H
CITY ft"'TORNEY'S' OFFICE 310 S_E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
HI 407/243.7090 TI'LE('OPIER 407/278-4755
MEMORANDUM
.
Date: December 21, 1988
To: City Commission
-Walter o. Barry, City Manager
From: Herbert W.A. Thiele, City Manager
Subject: Foreclosure of Nuisance Abatement Liens
A request to foreClose certain nuisance abatement. liens has
been brought to our office's attention by Mrs. Alice Finst
through the Code Enforcement Administrator. .
Nuisance abatement liens in the amount of $1,436.98 Iplus
interest) exist on an apparently abandoned _property at 3530-
Boulevard Chatelaine in the City. of Delray -Delray Beach. A
title search indicates there is a. mortgage of approximately
$60,000.00, a tax certificate held by John Elison in the amount
of $1,463.52 Iplus interest) as well as a jUdgment lien on the
property.
Nuisance abatement liens do not have priority over nor parity
with taxes .or mortgages, nor do they have priority over
previously filed judgment liens. Thus, an action by the City
to foreclose this lien, (assuming it is not homestead property)
would mean that the City would -take title subject to the
mortgage and would be responsible for paying the ,tax
certificate holder as well.
The City'.s policy in- the past has been to collect nuisance
abatement liens at the time the property is sold. The City has
not regularly sought to foreclose these liens' due to their low
pr ior i ty , which would in many cases subj ect the City to the
possibility of paying off the mortgages, etc.
It would be appreciated if you would. place this foreclosure
policy matter on an upcoming agenda for discussion if you wish
our office to deviate from the current pOlicy in thIS case, or
in any other subsequent nuisance abatement lien cases.
~ .
HT:ci
cc Frank Spence, Development Service~ Director
Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement
Richard Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator
Elizabeth Arnau, City Clerk
Alice Finst
"
.
.
.
.
~
;
~-
~-.:.::--:-.:l1!;,:,!';.~.......!!!;' ".-:--.,".. f 'I '~'~::~.:--:.:.:.:_.'._...;.;;~,
. . i
.
I _
J. ~
f
PROPERTY NO.
ASSESSED VALUATION
EXEM~TIONS
YEAR LAND BUILDINGS TOTAL MISC. WIDOWS VETIE"AHs TOTAl. HOMIESTIEAn NET VI
.
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
DESCRIPTION PEllSONAL PROP
. .
YIIu NBT y,
CHATEIAINE PLAT 1 1976
BLOCK 4 1877
LOT 7 1978
1879
1880
1981
RECEf~ r-AYMENT RECORD
tEAR TOTAL TOTAL .ALAI
VALUE TAX NUMBER DISCOUNT PEN-INT ANT-PAID DAn:
1976
1977
1978 .
.
1979
1980
.
:981
OWNER AND ASSESSM ENT RECORD
'Chen. . b. Ii. Bebbie M. Ce t tri-l-l-- 8 }.lGK Itw\oo'll:O~ (IO 6 80
3~.30 .,lvd.-ehatclaine-,-Delray-BeaOO-.-- 3530 Boulevard Chatelaine
rlo~iaa ))444 WID 6-6-78 Delray Beach, FL 33444
~:A.~~w, ~I. l\I1:.l'i\,--_ B~. Per Res. 10 ,
No. '!iI~~1M,,"~f _ Per Res. No.23-
3-88,$990.00 Int. starts 2/l7/88 (6%) - .~
$127.13 Int. starts SvI9',88.
.,11'1----- .bA~PUfi'I\lwJfrt'er Res. No. 29-88, 12 ..~P{~""'d-i\lIllaNllf Per Re s . No . 70-8
$227.32, Int. starts 6/17/88. $92.53 Int. starts l2/l5/88
". -.
.,;.
~.
~, ''4)4011U 'U.... "11 ...) ~l
-- ..... . ----------.-- ~ -----._- ------.- --..-. .;. I
~ ~
.... , .. .. .. .. I
, , . .. .. .... .. ,;;
...... . .... .. .. .. ....
.... , ,.. .. , .. ,.. .. , ,.. .. z.
...... n. n n. n n. "VI
. . . ... .. .. - .. : r ... ..
.... , .. .. .. ..
...n . -i
:n: . 0... " ~ ".. ~ 0 - f 0< 'l>
..... . .. 00 .. .. 0 .. .. o~ OJ .. 0 .. .. ! o~ ..
... . . ~.. . ~ , ~o . ~ , -.. ..-f
:'!'r- . ... 0 .. 0 .. 0 .. 0 1/ 0
- . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 00 .. m
. ~ ~ ~
: . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 0
. .. . 0 . ~ . 0 0 0
, .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.... .. 0 .. .. ...
.... . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 0
.... ~ .. 0 . 0 .. 0 0
... 0 .. . .. .. ...
"''''III' 0 0 0 0 0 ....
.
. .. ..... .. ..... ~ .we .. =~~:s 15 :1:"" 0
,.. n ........ n ....... ....... n ....
... . "0'" . ,...... . ,..... . r-w.... ,..... ;IC
,.. n ..... ... ...... ... .... ... .000 ......
. , .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. ... .. !:l!..g .. . -
--l"l. .... ..n ..n. ..n.. 0
....x. ,.... ..... .. "'0 ..
..... , .e ...,. ...,. .....0 =~I l>
....c. ....n ......,. ......... ...."
"'Ul~. .. ... ........ ........ .. .. " .....,.
"..r-, nnn n,... n,.. "n... ( ",...
. ....... z.. ....... ...... .......
. ..,. - ..... .. ...,. ..
, ...... ..... ..... ...... ..... '"
. ,...... ,.... ,..... ,.... r'",,.. "
... ,. .. ,. c
... .... . ... .. ... ,.
..' ... ,. ,.... ... ,- ..
~- . ... .. ... .. ..'" ..
N"'''', ...'" 0 . '" ...
_-.lK. . .. ... ..
.... . . ... '"
.. -4' .. ~ . ..
0->>. . .. .. .. .. .. ,.
O'l.<<.)( , ,. ...
, . 00 00 00 00 00 ,. ..
, 00 00 00 .. 00 .. ..
, .. .. .. .. .. "
, .. .. .. .. .. ..
. .. .. .. .. .. '"
. "ear-n ..,." ..,." ",.n ..,." .
O. :"o~ ....'" ...... ...... ...." ...
o. ,...... ,...... ,..... ,..... ,..... c
. '" .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ...
o. ..c;~j ..... .... ..... .....- ...
.... .. ,. .. ,. .. ,. c ,. ..
0 .. . .. .... ..... .... .... )(
0 .... .... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,....
, .,... _JICZ I ...... ..... ...." ..
. ....... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ..
. .. .. .. .. r-
. .... " .. .. .. r-
. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
- o. . . . . .
.. . - .. - . ~ . ~ . -
.
.. :s. .. .. .. .. ..
.. ... 'r ~ .. ..
.... .. <> .. 0 ~
.. .., - - .. .. ..
.. - .
.
, .. " .. .. ,
.
, ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ..
. w . .. .. .. ..
. . . . .. .. r-
. .0 .. . 00 00 ..
,..
.. . - ---- --~- .
., " )(0,. " "... " ".,. ..... ...
.. ~ ...... ~ .,=~ - ...... 0"" ...... ..
- :..' ~. ~-.. ~. ., -- "
0 .. ...... .. ...,. ..".. ! ...,. ...... i ...,. .." ...,. ...... .. ...,. , ..
0 c. n"'r. a 9:;1 "..." SSI "..." SSI "... SSI ".." .. ..c:..
. ...... ...... ...... .. .... ...... .. .......
. .. ~,.. .. It,. .. ..,.. It:;. .. Itr-.
. ....... .. =: ....... . ....... ... ,.. .... ....... . .'
. JZ~ JJ= .. ~J= .. .. .. ...... ..
II IA .-.. -.-
.
...,
00 ...
0 ....
. ~: ""W-
oo II;WN , ...... .. ....~ ...... .. ....~ .... ....~ .,.... .. ....~
. 00.. ...... ...... .. :I.... ...... .. ...... -~ -.... :I.... .. ..ow I
.. ", ....0 () ....0 ....0 0 ... ....0 g ...... 00 0". "0 0 ...... I
.. ... ....0 0 '::::, ....0 0 ..-.. ...... 00." .. ..... ....0 " "0"
....0 0 ....0 0 ...... ....0 .. "0" -- ..... ....0 0 .....
-------+--
.
. I
, .. .. ... .. .. .... .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. ...
,.. .. .. .. .. , . ..
c. 0 .... 0 .... g .... 0 .... 0 ....
- .. 0 .. .... 0 .. .... .. .... 0 .. .... 0 ~ ....
... 0 .. .... " .. .... .. .... 0 ~ .,.. 0 ....
____u . , -- . ... . ... ........-~.-. ---.,..- - --- -- .
.. ... .. ,. .... .. ,. ,. .... .. i! I .... ... ,. :a .,.... -4 :a ,. .... .
~ . .. c: .. "... .. C .. n... .. "... .. C . n", 0 c .. "... j
.. ... .... .. ... .... .. .. ... .... .. .. M .... .. .. ... .... ... .. ... .... I
.. )(, .. .. .. .. .. .. It .. .. ..
r- .. ..... ,. .. .... ,.. .. .... .... .... ,. .. ...... ..
. .... .... .... .... .... ..
"".. ..~ --- --<- ..........,.,..- .... .. i
.... '"
...
.... ..
... ..
.. ,., ~
.. . .. ..~ .. .. .... .. ~ .... l: .. .... .. ..~
.. .... .. . .. .... .. .. .. ... g .. ~ .." .. .. -.. .. " .. .... .. t
- ... . .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ..0 '!' I
)(. i. :.
.... 0 .. ... .. .. ..0 ::: .. ... .. .. ~ .... " .. .. .... ..
.. ... .. .. .. ... 0 .. .. .... .. .. ~.. .. .!!' -"~!!.." w .. .. ~~ 0
..
'.
......
.
-.
:
:
.
,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT: CIVIL SERVICE BOARD PROCTORS
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
The Civil Service Board is requesting funding to allow payment to
non-board member proctors so that civil service test can be
administered with other than City staff and at the same time not tie up
Civil Service Board members time inordinately. A discussion as to
whether Civil Service Board members could in fact be paid for this
service has resulted in a finding that in fact it would not be proper
to pay board members.
There has been no funding allocated for this activity and the
Commission has been requested to review the request so that funding can
be identified and appropriated.
WOB:cl
l
M s ~ J:J...
~s1fU
-.
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H ct.:!.
-,
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.I. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRA Y BEACH, nORIDA 33483
407/243- 7090 TELECOPJER 407/278-4755
MEMORANDUM
-
Date: February 8, 1989
To: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
From: Herbert W. A. Thiele, City Attorney
Subject: Request by Civil Service Board for Paid Proctors
The City Attorney's Office is in receipt of a copy of a memorandum to your-
self from the Civil Service Board dated January 20, 1989 with regard to their
regard to their request to have the City Commission authorize the Civil
Service Board to commence paying proctors for examinations which are admin-
istered by the Civil Service Board.
It would be appreciate if you could schedule this matter for consideration by
the City Commission at their workshop meeting of February 21, 1989, and
further to contact the Civil Service Board with regard to the scheduling of
this matter so that one or more of the members can attend to discuss this
matter directly with the City Commission.
If you have any questions, please contact the City Attorney's Office.
::/"
HT:ci
cc Civil Service Board
015 4fit---
- -
'."
:
..
.
t
.
MEMORANDUM
Walter O. Barry, City Manager -
TO:
FROM: Civil Service Board
SUBJECT: COMPENSATION FOR PROCTORS FOR EXAMINATIONS
DATE: January 20, 1989
At a recent Civil Service Board meeting, the Board unanimously approved
a request for an item to be placed on a Commission Agenda. The Board is
requesting the approval of having paid proctors for the examinations which
are administered by the Civil Service Board; the Board requests a budget of $2,400
and that the proctors be compensated at the rate of $10.00 per hour.
Thank you for your consideration.
"
~ ~I(V~-
LEO KIERSTEIN, Chairman
Civil Service Board
~-- << ----..- -~
I
,
;
.' .' ~ai
MEMORANDUM
To: Lula Butler, Community Improvement Director 'IP- ~
-
From: Joyce A. Desormeau, Occupational License & Sign Administrator~
Date: February 16, 1989
Subject: ARCHWAY SIGNAGE BOCA RAY PLAZA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference sign code change request for Boca Ray Plaza, allowing signs to be
placed on the arcade front. -
The sign code for shopping centers limits the location and size of the tenants
signs based on 15% of the building face of each tenants' unit. The sign is to
be placed at the location where the calculations are computed and each tenant
is permitted one flat wall sign.
Proposed arcade signage would not be able to follow the calculation
guidelines.
Upon discussion of such arcade signage with the Asst. City Attorney, it was
determined a code restricting size snd number of signs on shopping center
arcade fronts was not easily regulated by code, as each shopping center is
distinctly different and thus leaves the possibility of completely covering an
arcade front.
If such a proposal were to be implemented, it is suggested the tenants flat
wall sign be eliminated at the business location in place of the arcade sign,
in order to maintain a overall code consistency of one flat wall sign per
business. The store owner may replace the flat wall sign at the business
location with an under canopy and/or projecting sign, per existing code.
I
.
It is suggested the Community Appearance Board then aesthetically determine
the size and total number of signs allowed on each shopping center arcade, and ,
be allowed the option to determine if aesthetically arcade signs are
appropriate by viewing each shopping center architecturally on an individual
basis.
"
c: Martin O'Shea
..
~s, :jt (3
, '.
LA W OFFICES OF i\.t:.t f\# liEn
ROGER G. SABERSON, P.A.
DELRA Y EXECUTIVE MALL FEB 1 6 1989
110 EAST ATt.ANTIC AVENUE
DELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 33444 CITY MANAGeR'S OFFICE
(40') Z7Z.a818
February 16, 1989
.
Mr. Yalter Barry, City Manager
City of Delray Beach
100 N.Y. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Boca Ray Plaza - Sign Code Amendment
Dear Yalt: ~.
In accordance with your prior confirmation, it is my understanding
that the above item will be on the workshop agenda for February 21,
1989. In that regard I enclose a proposed draft of the sign code
amendment which has been submitted to the City Attorney's office.
S17?Ih~"
ROGER G. SABERSON
RGS/sms
Enclosure
"
~C
"
d. ..""'..
:
I
,
.
(1) Shopping centers only.
(a) One main use sign which may be either: a freestanding sign,
fixed projection sign, or flat sign subject to the dze limitations for
signs contained in division (F) (3) and (4) of this section. The main use
sign may display the name of he shopping center, list some or all of the
names of the retail stores and service establishments ~ontained therein, or
may combine the shopping center name with the list'of'separate stores and
establishments provided that in all instances the above referred to size
limitations are observed.
(b) In addition, each unit of a shopping center shall be allowed
one flat sign not to exceed lOt of a unit front face area which shall be
limited to the first 12 feet from floor level times the width of the
building (subject to decrease in size or area by the Community Appearance
Board) and window lettering not to exceed St of a unit front face area,
Any building or premises bordering on two public streets is allowed one
flat sign for each bordering street.
<r}1 ~ (c) In addition. in shotltlinl!: centers Wi;: ~ ~~~~:': ac~:~~~ of
six (6) acres. each unit of the shotltlinl!: ce~ r __~_ w....... a
breezewav. shall be'allowed one additional ai2n n~t ~~ e;eee * *
utlon the followine terms and conditions:
1... The additional sip:n for each unit within a breezew~v
~) shall be located at the front entrance of the
breezewav:
2.... The sisrn shall be located above the entrance to the
breezewav:
.l.. This naralZranh (c) shall not be 8'Onlicable to any
~
enclosed mall:
h tlotwithstandinlZ anv other .crovistons in this Chanter
f{;.~ 162. the additional si2nalZ8 nermitted herein shall not
be construed to be an "off-nremises silZn" or anv other
tVtle of sil!:n which mil!:ht otherwise be tlrohibited under
'''JR"''" 16~
V). ~ vI,1t "
~~~1
b
'_n. .._____ .-...... i ._n'_'
~
i
,
. .J
"
: ~
'...::...
:1/'
. ~'_:::...;;.:~~ : i':.~. ..... .~.. ..- ..t. : " ., ~.~~.~:-.'~.:.~
.-. .
,. ~...
:
.t-'
-- .c. .
, '...N-" I V" j.V~ #.:".-"') - /{
1/25/89 To: Fran" Spence - FYI ~trlJ. ()In
IV . f /J ..,.. V..-,/I- ~ ~_ .
0C1.~ """ r - - - I
~ ~~
[ITY Df D~l~Mi~ rJ~RkJI .~ ~CC ,:
~~. :t1 ~ e.--
."":,, .,\I""E ~[~:\J:l"~'" J05/24J-7C
MEMORANDUM ~/I
TO: LULA BUTLER, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DIRECTOR "
. 9rfl
FROM: JOYCE A. DESORMEAU. OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE & SIGN ADHINISTRATOR '~C ~
DATE: JANUARY 24, 1989
SUBJECT: ARCHWAY SIGNAGE BOCA RAY PLAZA
Reference letter January 5, 1989 from Roger G. Saberson to Walter Barry
regarding illegal flat wall sign (Allstate) placed above the Boca Ray
Plaza archway.
Subject sign was submitted to this department July '88 and not issued
a permit due to the location of sign not being oyer the place of the
business per 1.62.035(0) (F) (1) (b). The sign was thereafter installed
without permit at subject location.
The Ass't. City Attorney, Jeff Kurtz, and I reviewed the shopping plaza
plans, after receiving an inquiry from Roger Sabers on and found objections
to proposed sign code change. The City Commissioners subsequently agreed ~
not to review subject sign code changes.
The sign size is based on 15% of the building face of the tenant's unit,
making the sign size harmonious with the unit face on which it is placed.
These calculations would become meaningless if the sign was placed other
than the business location.
The Ass't. City Attorney determined a code restricting size and number
of signs on shopping centers arcade fronts was not easily regulated by
code and could not prevent the complete arcade f~ont from being completely
covered with signage, therefore it was strongly urged not to pursue the
code change request. .
~
,
I.
. ; .:. '. r . " fd > I I ~ I:::
.-.. ..._._ ._n'
(
.,
.
"
....
.
;
-$~
[ITY OF DElRAY BEA[H .. ",~
100 N_W. ht AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/:
MEMORANDUM
-
TO: Frank Spence, Director
FROM: City Manager if:)
SUBJECT: SIGN CODE VIOLATION-- BOCA RAY PLAZA
DATE: January 10, 1989
Attached is a letter from Roger Saberson regarding a sign c
enforcement action at the Boca Ray Plaza located a~ the Southe
corner of Military Trail and Linton. Saberson is asking for abeya
of enforcement action pending consideration of a sign c
mOdification. I have not reviewed the sign code amendment but J
Kurtz indicates that the amendment, if approved by the City Commissi
would in fact resolve this code enforcement violation.
WOB:cl
r;~:'L~l;~~~~i~;~
Encl
RECEIVED
Jm 1 3 89
, , 'u 'PAOVEMENT
C;-",' . . ,."TV. DIVIIION
ADMINISTRATION
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
I
" .f
.,
,
., -.
,
t
. .,
: R.t:C f.:rvED
LAW OFFICES OF
ROGER G. SABERS ON, ,P.A. JAN 9 1989
OELRA Y EXECUTIVE MALL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
110 EAST ATLANTIC AVENUE
OELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 33444
14071272-8818
January 5, 1989
Mr. Walter Barry, City Manager
City of Delray Beach .
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
De1ray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Boca Ray Plaza Southeast Corner of Military Trail and
Linton Blvd. . Proposal to Amend Sign Code and
Abatement of Enforcement in the Interim
Dear Walt:
This will confirm our phone conversation of January 5. 1989 in
regard to the above subject. I enclose herewith a copy of the
Violation Notice received by my client which cites two violations; (1)
undercanopy signs, and (2) flat wall sign over archway.
My client has directed his property manager to take care of the
undercanopy sign issue by applying and' paying for the appropriate
permits.
As to the flat wall sign above the archway, I have discussed with
some Commissioners (and will speak to the others) and with Mr. Kurtz,
in the City Attorney's office, a possible amendment to the sign code
which would allow this type of sign. We would appreciate -you abating
any enforcement action against my client in regard to this type of sign
until the City Commission has had an opportunity to review the proposed
sign code amendment and decide either for or against it.
In that regard, we would appreciate ~ou schedulin& for the first
available workshop a discuss~~n item with the city commissiulI"rs
regarding the proposed si~n C "I!m"nrlment. It is my understanding
that the next workshop agenda of January 17, 1989 is .already full and
that, in all probability, we would be schedu1ad for either January 31,
1989 or the next workshop thereafter.
Thank you for your cooperation in this regard.
S~'Y YO~',
R GER ~~RSON
"
RGS/sms
cc: Mr. Seth Gadinsky
--...-.-- '.-_0-.... -....
~;
,-
..
.
.f.
'!".
:
"I" 3--3
'~
[ITY DF DELAAY BEA[H "~.-,
, .-v
-<-
100 N.W. 1st AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 305/243- 7000
MEMORANDUM
.
TO: Walter O. Barry, City Manager
FROM: John W. Elliott, Jr., Assistant City Manager/
Management Services ~
DATE: March 2, 1989
SUBJECT: DOCUMENTATION - CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING
MARCH 7, 1989 - REQUEST FROM TWO CHIROPRACTORS
Items Before The City Commission:
The City Commission is requested to consider the ~ppointment of a chiro-
practor as an additional City Physician, Dr. Michael J. Ehrmann and Dr.
Andre Fladell.
Background:
The City has been petitioned by two Delray Beach Chiropractors, who desire
to offer their services to City employees. Both are interested in becoming
an additional physician for the City. The initial request was made in June
of 1988, by Dr. Michael J. Ehrmann and followed in January 1989, by Dr.
Andre Fladell.
Currently, the City has two appointed physicians, Dr. Fredric Swartz,
General Practice Physician, who conducts all of the City's pre-employment
physicals and Dr. Joseph Yates, Medical Director, appointed to the Fire
Department. specifically to monitor the City's paramedics, in compliance
with State Statute requiring a Medical Director be assigned to the Fire
Department.
Recommendation:
Management Services Staff and the City Attorney recommend not to expand the
list of physicians. On the other hand should the City's present physicians
believe it appropriate, they may refer staff to an appropriate specialist,
including Dr. Ehrmann or Dr. Fladell. Should the Commission determine it
is appropriate to expand the list of City Physicians to include Chiroprac-
tors, that both Dr. Ehrmann and Dr. Fladell should be added, as both have
many patients in the City.
The staff also suggests that both doctors contact Gulf Life, the City's
insurance carrier, to request to be placed in the City's Preferred Provider
Organization (P.P.O) list.
JWE:sk
attachment
Wk 1+
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
- .-
DR. MICHAEL J. EHRMANN
CHIROPRACTIC PHYSICIAN
TElEPHONE: (305) 272-4100
MA YF AIR PLAZA 885 S.E. 6lli AVE. (FEDERAL HWY_)
SUITE "C" DELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 334S3
May 11, 1988
Mr. Walter Barry
City Manager
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1st Ave. .
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Mr. Barry:
I have been a Chiropractic Physician in Delray Beach since 1982 and have had the
opportunity to treat hundreds of local residents including a number of city
employees.
I have recently learned of a position nth the city known as "City Physician". There
are presently two doctors at this post, one is a surgeon and the other is an internist.
I would like to be considered for addition to this post. There is no question as to
the competence of the present physicians or the continued need for their specialties
in caring for city employees. I do feel, however, that canprehensive health care
cannot be provided without the inClusion of a Chiropractic Physician on this medical
board to jointly perform pre-employment evaluations and to treat employees for injuries
and conditions related to neuromuscular and skeletal disorders.
..
Pre-employment physicals involve the evaluation of a potential employees general
health. A medical history is taken, vital statistics are recorded, observations
are made regarding the persons physical appearance, reflexes, speech, sight, hearing,
and perhaps a urine test is performed. That's about the extent of it. Is this
sufficent? Perhaps not.
Take for example a person being considered for the position of meter reader. He has
the ability to read and record the readings, has a valid drivers license, no history
of medical problems, and "appears" to be in good health. What if he has a chronic
lumbar instability as a result of any number of conditions such as spondylolysthesis,
spondylolysis, disc degeneration, asymetrical facets, hyperlordosis or psuedoarthrosis:
This employee is going to spend a significant amount of his day sitting in his city
truck or bending over reading and recording data from the meters. wi th any of the
above conditions, there is a better than average chance this employee would develop
chronic symptoms of back pain and stiffness, leg pain or any number of symptoms within
a 6 month period of time. This, of course, results in a workers' compensation claim
which in turn means not only payment of medical bills, but time off work and payment
of lost wages.
A basic pre-employment physicial would not detect a problem unless it was acute. As
a Chiropractic Physician, I specialize in neuromuscular and skeletal disorders. Not
only are Chiropractors akno"ledged as experts in structural/functional disorders, but
have extensive training in the detection of even the most subtle structural abnormaliti
which could lead to problems later. Recognition of this has resulted in full insuranCE
equality for Chiropractic.
-1-
.-----. ....._ ..n. _.
/
--
,
DR. MICHAEL J. EHRMANN
CHIROPRACTIC PHYSICIAN
TELEPHONE: (305) 272-4100
MAYFAIR PlAZA 885 S.E. 6TH AVE. (FEDERAL HWY_)
SUITE "C" DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
May 11, 1988
Mr. Walter Barry
Page 2
Countless studies have concluded that back-related injuries account for the most
significant number of injuries on the job. It has been further established that
these injuries are often the most disabling and consequently the most costly in
terms of payment of claims and time lost on the job. With Chiropractic as the
preferred treatment for these kinds of problems (as shown br the enclosed study),
a Chiropractic Physician on staff makes sense. . ,
I have completed post-graduate studies leading to certification in Spinal Industrial
Disability Evaluation, Diagnosis-Mechanisim and Treatment of Low Back, Managing
Disorders of the Lumbar Spine including Intervertebral Disc Syndrome, Compression!
Torsion Injuries, Failed Back Surgery, and Back Schools.
In addition to Chiropractic, I have an extensive background in the field of Vocational
Rehabilitation with specialization in Work Evaluation. Working closely with Federal,
State, and local governments as well as private agencies, my experience inCludes
administration of various psychometric tests and work samples to determine client's
aptitUde and ability and performing jOb analysis to determine whether or not this
person is going to be able to perform all aspects of a particular job. In performing
these evaluations, both mental and physical capabilities were considered. Extensive
training in the use of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (D.O.T.) has given me the
advantage of understanding what specifically is required to be successful at any
given jOb or task. ,.
Included in my practice, I presently perform physical examinations for students of
Atlantic High SchOOl, Carver Middle SchOOl, Spady Elementary School, and Pine Grove
Elementary School. Besides the regular cases I see in my practice, I have also had
a number of direct referrals from Judge Arthur P. Pumpian, Deputy commissioner, State
of Florida, Dept. of Labor and Employment. These referrals were the result of
decisions handed down by Judge Pumpian in which these cases were long-term and difficul
and he wanted them resolved once and for all. He stated his decision to refer to this
office was based on his knowledge of my competance and professionalism. Additionally,
at the request of Dr. John Kaufman (M.D.), Medical Director, I have accepted the duties
of staff Chiropractor for the Harbour's Edge Retirement and Life Care Community on
Linton Blvd. and the intracoastal.
I have enclosed for your perusal, a curriculum vitae and other material inCluding a
1988 study entitled Analysis of Florida Workers' Compensation Medical Claims for
Back Related Injuries. I think the efficacy of a Chiropractor as a City Physician is
aptly supported by the findings.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal and I look forward to hearing from
you.
.,~
(/.Pf.I.- ) ~
1 'Mel J. Ehnna ,B A.,M.S.,D.C. -
Diplomate NBCE
MJE/mae
...~-_. .. .-.... .-
"
.
I
tJ onlt-i.r~
~ ~elra~ QIqirnpracli.c QIenter
'668 S, FEDERAL HIGHWAY. OELRA Y BEACH, Fl.O,RIDA 334B3
TELEPHONE: 272.Q800
,
DR. ANDRE FIADELL
.Ti'lNLIARY 1 e, 1989
TO, MAYOR DOA~ CAMP~ELL
~
Ff<OM, DR. ANDRE FLADELL
RE: INCLUSION OF CHIROPRACTIC CARE
IT ~.s COME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE CITY MAY BE CONSIDERING THE
INCL.USION OF CHIROPRACTIC CARE IN ITS WOR~MEN Ct;l/'IPENStlTION POl.ICY,
l'lJ::LiIC'-AL SCREENING AJ'JD/OR THE GENERAL HEALTH PROGRAM. THIS IS A FORMAL
REQU~ST THAi DEL RAY CHIROPRACTIC CENTER AND MYSELF, DR. ANDRE FLADELL,
BE INCLUDED AS ONE OF THE CHIROPRACTORS IN THIS PROGRAM. AS I HAVE
PRACTICED IN DELRAY FOR TEN YEARS AND AS I HAVE TREATED IN EXCESS OF
100 CITY EMPLOYEES AND FAMILY MEMBERS WITH GREAT SUCCESS AND AS I HAVE,
A-r NO EXPENSE, PROVIDED CONSIDERABLE TIME, EFFORT AND TREATMENT TO CITY
PIiRSONNEL IN ALL DEPARTMENTS AT NO COST FOR OVER TEN YEARS. I WOULD
THINK THIS REQUEST TO BE FAIR AND REASONABLE.
"
..
1 ~JDULD HAVE- NO PROBLEM BEING THE SOLE CHIROPRACTOR OFFERED BY THE: CITY
TO ITS EMPLOYEES, ALTHOUGH IT HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE THAT TwO
iCl,-_TiEkNATIVr,:S. ~iOULD BETTER SERVE CITY EMPLOYEES. COMPETITION UTILIZING A
CHOICE OF ..iO, TENDS TO PROMOTE COST EFFlCENCY, IMPROVE QUALITY OF WORK
AND IlLLO.JS PERSONALITY VARIATION IN DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION. I AM FULL Y
PREPARED TO WOR~ UNDER ANY GUIDELINES OR CONDITIONS SET FORTH 9Y THIS
N~W POLICY IF IS IS INITIATED.
FOR ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT ME.
S>NCER")ylot{ ! /J J' JJ
DR. ~OR" FC=_LL, 'l!:
AF"/t.",
C'C'.: CITY MANANGER
"
---------. .-.--. .-_..- ....
~
I
<<
,
^
.
DEP AR' 'MENT AL [ITY DF
CORRESPONDENCE
oElRRY BER[H
TO John W. Elliott, Assistant City Manager ~Ci
FADM Lee R. Graham, Risk Management Director
Proposal for Appointment as City Physician 3-3-89
SUBJECT DATE
.
The therapy of Chiropractic takes the approach that many pains and dysfunc-
tions originate in the misalignment of the spine.
It is an approach to back pain treatment and other related ai1m~nt allevia-
tions which has become increasingly popular in recent years. There are
several employees of the City who contend that they have been helped much by
Chiropractic treatment. ,
In the case of an injured City employee, I would not hesitate to recommend
treatment by Chiropractors for either work-related injuries or other non-work
related ailments. The City's Group Health Plan now recognizes Chiropractic
care much in the same light as other curative treatments, as does the
Workers' Compensation carrier.
As to the issue of a specific assignment as an additional City health care
practitioner, it is my opinion that the City's current needs for services are
currently being served adequately and that another practitioner does not need
to be added. This would not preclude assigning employees to Chiropractors for
treatment when the circumstances indicate that such treatment would be
beClial.
LRG / sm
CM 362 THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
._--."
"
U
I
H
'.
.
,
,
tJ~ ~ {.k
[ITY DF DELRAY BEA[H t~1(1
,: ~"
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ] I [I S.I. I" STRUT. SUITE 4 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33483 305/243-7090
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 18, 1988
To: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
From: Herbert W.A. Thiele, City Attorney
Subject: City Physician
I have reviewed the materials submitted from Michael Ehrmann,
the chiropractic physician in Delray Beach, with regard to his
proposal that he be appointed as an additional city physician.
It is my initial review position that the needs of the City
have been adequately served by the appointment of the internal
Medicine/Cardiologist physician, Dr. Thomas Lynch, and the
General Practice physician, Dr. Fredric Swartz, and that there
appears at this time no need to include a third physician, no
matter what their speciality.
In any event, it has been our past practice and pOlicy that
::;hould a specific matter arise wherein these two designated
ci ty physicians do not believe that their" expertise suffi-
ciently covers the subject, that they would consult with the
Ci ty and then recommend or provide for referral to an appro-
pr .late speciality, which could include the services of Dr.
Michael Ehrmann.
Should require any additional information on the subject or
wish to discuss the mat_ ter further, please contact me person-
ally at your convenience.
~--=
~
H :sh
cc: Marty Buben, Personnel/Labor Relations Director
Lee Graham, Risk Management Director
David Huddleston, Finance Director
. I
.
. ~
[ITY DF DElAAY BEA[H:
i
".ol,_
CITY ""'TORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S-E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 334B3
HI 407/243-7090 TELECOPIER 407/27B-4755
MEMORANDUM
.
Date: February 15, 1989
To: Doak Campbell, Mayor
From: Herbert W. A. Thiele, City Attorney
Subject: FOLLOW-UP TO DISCUSSION CONCERNING LEGISLATION
PERTAINING TO CITATIONS FOR CODE VIOLATIONS
As a follow-up to our recent conversation, the City Attorney's
Office has done further research on the subject of endeavoring
to have a special act adopted for Palm Beach County or the City
of Delray Beach in particular which would allow enforcement of
the garbage and trash regulations, and water and sewer
regulations, at a minimum by our Code Enforcement officers and
which would authorize the enactment of Municipal or County
Ordinances establishing procedures to implement that type of
enforcement action.
A similar procedure is utilized in Brevard County by a special
act adopted in 1986.
It would be our recommendation that we enact a special act for
the City or Palm Beach County that would allow the Board of
County Commissioners or the City commission to designate
certain of its employees to act as Code Enforcement Officers
under this special act. These Code Enforcement Officers would
be designated as Enforcement Officers to enforce certain
provisions of our Code of Ordinances.
The manner by which such ordinances would be enforced would be
through the issuance of non-criminal infraction citations for
violations of these particular sections. The citation would be
based upon the personal investigation of the officer and a
finding that the officer had reasonable and probable ground to
believe that a violation of these chapters had occurred.
Any person cited for such a violation would be deemed to be
charged with a non-criminal infraction and cited to appear
in County court. The person so cited for an infraction under
this law could either post a bond, sign and accept the citation
b-I,:il (j
----- ......, ..---- -------
,
,
Doak Campbell, Mayor
February 15, 1989
Page 2
indicating a promise to appear, or to pay ii Civ'll penalty
within ten (10) days of the date of receiving the citation (or
to forfeit the bond if they do not appear).
The Civil penalties required for this act would be set by the
City Commission and would not exceed the Civil penalties
provided elsewhere in the Code of Ordinances.
The legislation would also contain provisions stating that it
did not authorize or permit such Code Enforcement Officers to
perform any functions of a Law Enforcement Officer. Further,
such Code Enforcement Officers would not be permitted to make
physical arrests or take any persons into custody.
This information is supplied to you then for your further
consideration in light of our ongoing interest in bettering the
City's code enforcement procedures and policies. If you or any
members of the City Commission have any interest in pursuing
this further, perhaps this matter can be scheduled for an
upcoming City Commission Workshop session to provide
authorization and direction to the City Attorney's Office to
draft any necessary legislation or documents. In the interim
if you have questions concerning this issue, please contact me
personally.
~
cc: City Commission
Walter O. Barry, City Manager
I ..
~
,I
1
/
(
"
MEMORANDUM
.
TO: Mayor and Commission
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: FIRE STATION NO. 1 RELOCATION
.
DATE: March 2, 1989
We expect to sell City owned property presently used as a tennis
center. From a marketing point of view, advisable to also add the Fire
Station No. 1 property. This would combine the two parcels and likely
would generate a more attractive development for the City. This
relocation decision necessarily involves consideration of alternate
sites.
Attention has thus far been focussed along Atlantic Avenue between 4th
Avenue and 8th Avenue and along 2nd Street/Martin Luther King between
1st Avenue and 2nd Avenue on either of two City owned parcels.
A decision whether to relocate both Fire Administration and Fire
response activities in the same building or not also needs to be made.
Administrative and Inspection offices could be moved to City Hall,
adjacent to Code Enforcement and Building Inspection departments.
Members from the West Atlantic Avenue Property OWners Association have
been approached for input on this item as has the CRA. Both groups
prefer the West Atlantic Avenue. Neither has taken a position on
whether or not the faciE ty should be a joint administration/fire
response facility or fire response only, leaving this instead to us for
resolution. Depending upon the costs involved, I would prefer to
relocate Fire Administration and Inspection Services to the City Hall
location so as to allow better interaction with Development Services
department staff. A staff memorandum is attached for your information.
WOB:cl
Encl
..
V:;s d:11
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: WALTER O. BARRY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: KERRY B. KOEN, FIRE CHIEF
DATE: MARCH 2, 1989
SUBJECT: FIRE STATION LOCATION ANALYSIS - HEADQUARTERS
FACILITY
.
The City of Delray Beach purchased a computer based fire
station location model in July of 1986 to assist the Fire
Department in evaluating the efficiency of current fire station
locations. The model permits both present and projected community
fire protection and emergency medical service requirements to be
systematically evaluated.
REASONS FOR ANALYSIS
One of the main reasons leading to the implementation of the
fire station location model was the imminent need to replace two
existing fire stations, both constructed in 1955, and to
determine an appropriate site for a future fire station in the
southwestern portion of the city. The additional fire station
location is needed to reduce excessive response times in that
portion of the community, and to provide additional system
capacity for both fire operations and emergency medical services
on a city wide basis. The two older existing fire stations are
extremely small and no longer adequately serve the needs of the
community. Neither site lends itself to expansion. One of these
older stations, Fire Station No. 2 presently at 23 Andrews
Avenue, is approved in the current capital improvements program
budget for reconstruction. A replacement for Fire Department
Headquarters, presently at 101 West Atlantic Avenue, has been
requested by the Fire Department and the City Administration and
has been included in the current five year infrastructure plan.
Similarly, future Fire Station No. 5 in the southwest area of the
city has also been requested and is included in the same capital
improvements program. Neither of these two projects is currently
funded, but both are presently included in the proposed "Decade
of Excellence" bond issue. Fire Station No. 2 is now in the
preliminary design phase and proposed Fire Station No. 5 is still
in the planning phase, although a tentative site recommendation
may be forthcoming as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
At this point, it is recommended that a site be selected by
the City Commission for a new fire headquarters facility. This
facility is presently envisioned to include both a fire station
element and an administration element. However, other options
and alternatives will be explored with the city's consulting
engineers, Gee and Jenson, as part of their work to conduct a
needs analysis for this project. As a result of the work of the
consultants, a more precise construction budget and site plan can
be developed to aid the Administration in finalizing the planning
phase for the facilities themselves, the land acquisition phase,
and refining construction estimates for the bond issue.
..
Fire Station Location Analysis Page 2
Headquarters Facility
FIRE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS
Fire Department Headquarters (Fire Station No.1) primarily
serves the central portion of the city. Due to its location,
units from this facility also provide secondary response and
supplemental coverage for most incidents throughout the
community. This facility also houses all departmental
administrative functions and staff. In addition to the present
site at 101 West Atlantic Avenue, thirteen alte~ate sites
(intersection designations) were included in the .street and
highway network:
1. 101 West Atlantic Avenue (current site)
2. West Atlantic Avenue and 3rd Avenue
3. West Atlantic Avenue and 4th Avenue
4. West Atlantic Avenue and 5th Avenue
5. West Atlantic Avenue and 6th Avenue
6. West Atlantic Avenue and 8th Avenue
7. West Atlantic Avenue and 12th Avenue
8. N.W. 2nd Street and N.W. 1st Avenue
9. N.E. 2nd Avenue and N.E. 1st Street
10. N.E. 5th Avenue and N.E. 1st Street
11. N.E. 4th Street and Swinton Avenue
12. S.E. 4th Street and Swinton Avenue
13. North Federal Highway and Lake Avenue S.
14. N.E. 2nd Avenue and 16th Street
Analysis of the data generated from the study indicates that
the present site is generally well suited to provide primary and
secondary emergency response to designated areas of the
community. Accordingly, it would be desirable to locate the
replacement facility in close proximity to the present facility
as possible in order to maintain approximately the same service
levels. Since travel time is largely dependent upon achieved
travel speeds and congestion levels found on "local" streets it
is desirable to locate a fire station on, or very close to a
major east-west and north-south arterial system:
Typically, alternate sites were not included for analysis
which were located east of the Federal Highway corridor due to
the close proximity of Fire Station No.2; or south of Atlantic
Avenue, with one exception, due to the proximity of Fire Station
No.3. Another major consideration pertaining ~o site selection
for a replacement facility is the maintenance of effective access
to the central business district, an area containing a
concentrated portion of the community's fire risk potential.
Further, review of travel time and risk potential, both fire and
emergency medical service, suggests that a replacement facility
should not be located too far from the present location due to
the need to respond expeditiously to northern portions of the
city. This area contains a large number of public and private
schools, a redeveloping and expanding commercial area, and
numerous residential areas. Response to these are~ depends
heavily upon the use of North Swinton Avenue, Seacrest Boulevard,
and Northbound Federal Highway. Therefore, proximity
relationship to these north/south corridors is especially
important.
The purpose of the following section of the report is to
identify a range of site options which will achieve desired
travel times, and at the same time maintain rapid and efficient
access to those portions of the community which have some of the
highest demands for service, are somewhat remote, and contain
some of the highest relative levels of risk.
o.
..
Fire Station Location Analysis Page 3
Headquarters Facility
The replacement facility for Fire Department Headquarters
could effectively be located on West Atlantic Avenue between the
present site and 8th Avenue or at N.W. 2nd Street and N.W. 1st
Avenue without a negative impact on present service levels.
However, should an Atlantic Avenue site be selected it is not
recommended to locate the facility further westward than 8th
Avenue to avoid unacceptable increases in average response times
to northern portions of the city. These recommended sites also
consider the desirability of maintaining a functional and
operational relationship between this facility "ll.nd other
governmental agencies in or near the Civic Center. The' following
table indicates the average travel times for various sites
relative to the current location. Those marked with an asterisk
(*) are recommended for City Commission consideration for this
new faCility.
AVERAGE TRAVEL TIMES - EXISTING AND ALTERNATE SITES
SITE LOCATION AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME
I. 101 West Atlantic Avenue (current site) 2.74 min.
8. N.W. 2nd Street & N.W. 1st Avenue 2.74 min. *
2. West Atlantic Avenue & 3rd Ave. 2.78 min. *
3. West Atlantic Avenue & 4th Ave. 2.80 min. *
4. West Atlantic Avenue & 5th Ave. 2.80 min. *
1I. N.E. 4th Street & Swinton Ave. 2.80 min.
5. West Atlantic Avenue & 6th Ave. 2.85 min. *
9. N.E. 2nd Ave. & N.E. 1st Street 2.90 min.
6. West Atlantic Avenue & 8th Ave. 2.98 min. *
7. West Atlantic Avenue & 12th Ave. 3.15 min.
10. N.E. 5th Avenue & N.E. 1st Street 3.20 min. I
12. S.E. 4th Street & Swinton Ave. 3.26 min.
13. N. Federal Hwy. & Lake Avenue S. 3.86 min.
14. N.E. 2nd Avenue & 16th Street 4.22 min.
Should you require additional information on this matter,
please advise me.
~:::.1~' I~
Fire Chief
KBK/ew
cc: Asst. Chiefs
Captains
..