The URL can be used to link to this page

03-06-06 Minutes Reg Commissioner Jeff Perlman MARCH 6, 2006 A Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Jeff Perlman in the Commission Chambers at City Hall at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, March 6, 2006. 1. Roll call showed: Present - Commissioner Patricia Archer Commissioner Rita Ellis Commissioner Jon Levinson (arrived at 6:24 p.m.) Mayor Jeff Perlman Absent - Commissioner Alberta McCarthy Also present were - David T. Harden, City Manager Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager Douglas Smith, Assistant City Manager Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk 2. The opening prayer was delivered by Father Thomas Skindeleski with St. Vincent Ferrer Catholic Church. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was given. 4.AGENDA APPROVAL. Items 8.M.2, Awards of Mayor Perlman stated there is additional information for Bids and Contracts (vehicle purchases), 9.C., Waiver Requests/Coda Property and 9.J., Moratorium/Development Proposals/Historic Districts. Item 8.I., Third Amendment to Contract for Sale and He noted Purchase/Auburn Trace has been removed from the Agenda. Also, Mayor Perlman stated Item 8.H., Request for Proposal/Multi Space Meters has been moved to the Regular Agenda Item 9.A.1. as Item 9.K. U.S. Conference of Mayors. Mayor Perlman noted the addition of Mrs. Ellis moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs. Archer. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. 03/06/06 5.APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mrs. Archer moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 21, 2006, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. 6. PROCLAMATIONS: 6.A. Commending multiple medal winners - Delray Beach 2006 Senior Games Mayor Perlman read and presented a proclamation hereby proclaiming that Herbert Furash, Loring Holmes, Marshall Johnson, Justin Langsner, Robert Larsen, Margaret Locken, Robert SpauldingAbe Ulanoff , and are to be commended for their many triumphs in this competition, and for their spirit and enthusiasm. 6.B.Recognizing American Red Cross Month – March 2006 Mayor Perlman read and presented a proclamation hereby proclaiming March 2006 as American Red Cross Month in the City of Delray Beach. Jennifer Witt and Sue Tauriello came forward to accept the proclamation. 6.C.Recognizing Fair Housing Month – April 2006 Mayor Perlman read and presented a proclamation hereby proclaiming April 2006 as Fair Housing Month in the City of Delray Beach. Lula Butler, Director of Community Improvement, came forward to accept the proclamation. 7. PRESENTATIONS: ? NONE 8.CONSENT AGENDA: City Manager Recommends Approval. 8.A.LEASE AGREEMENT EXTENSION/FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: Approve a lease agreement extension request to First Presbyterian Church for the Gleason Street Parking Lot. 8.B.CONTRACT RENEWAL/PARKING PROS: Approve the renewal of a contract with Parking Pros for the staffing of the South County Courthouse Garage on weekend evenings. Funding is available from 001-3151-545-34.90 (General Fund/Other Contractual Services). 8.C.PUBLIC PARKING FEE SPACES/CODA DEVELOPMENT: Approve the purchase of nineteen (19) public parking fee spaces in the amount of $304,000.00, in accordance st with Ordinance No. 79-05, by the Coda Development, located on S.W. 1 Street, between S.W. stnd 1 Avenue and S.W. 2 Avenue. - 2 - 03/06/06 8.D.SERVICE AUTHORIZATION NO. 32.1/DAVID MILLER & ASSOCIATES, P.A.: Approve Service Authorization No. 32.1 to David Miller & Associates, P.A. in the amount of $121,000.00 for consulting services in the design of future expansion areas and interior renovations as part of the City Hall Space Study Project. Funding is available from 334-6112-519-31.30 (General Construction Fund/Engineering & Architectural). 8.E.COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) SUB- RECIPIENT FUNDING AGREEMENT: Approve and authorize the execution of the funding agreement with sub-recipient, The Center for Technology, Enterprise, and Development, in the amount of $30,000.00. Funding is available from 118-1965-554-83.01 (Community Development Fund/Other Grants & Aids). 8.F.GRANT AWARD WAIVER/STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (SHIP): Approve a one time waiver of the maximum $8,000.00 grant award established for the disaster relief strategy under the City’s Local Housing Assistance Plan; and approve a payment of $8,750.00 to the Henry Cooper household. 8.G.RESOLUTION NO. 13-06: Approve Resolution No. 13-06 opposing the removal of local cable franchise authority, which would preempt the City’s authority over cable and video services; abrogate the franchise agreement with Adelphia; lower the City’s revenue for cable services; reduce the City’s public, educational, and government (PEG) capacity, and the City would lose the capital grant from Adelphia. The caption of Resolution No. 13-06 is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, URGING CONGRESS, THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO ENSURE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE LOCAL FRANCHISES FOR THE PROVISION OF VIDEO SERVICES WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION, TO PROTECT EXISTING CABLE FRANCHISES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FRANCHISING AUTHORITY, AND TO PROTECT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS' AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, AND DIRECTING THAT THIS RESOLUTION BE FORWARDED TO APPROPRIATE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE, THE GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA, THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES, AND THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Resolution No. 13-06 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) 8.H.THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA AS ITEM 9.A.1. 8.I.THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA. - 3 - 03/06/06 8.J.HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT/STRUCTURES IN RIGHT-OF-WAY: Approve and accept a hold harmless agreement between the City and Samuel L. Hagan, Jonathan A. Fuchs, and Christina Hagan to allow a fence to be placed in the alley right-of-way. 8.K.FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)/ RESOLUTION NO. 14-06/HURRICANE WILMA: Approve a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for funding in an amount up to $287,440.59 for the City’s removal of debris and police maintenance of traffic along roads classified by the Federal Highway Administration to be damaged by Hurricane Wilma; and approve Resolution No. 14-06. 8.L.REVIEW OF APPEALABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ACTIONS: Accept the actions and decisions made by the Land Development Boards for the period February 21, 2006 through March 3, 2006. 8.M.AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Purchase award to Taylor Data Systems, Inc. in the amount of $26,074.95 for the purchase of five (5) additional in-vehicle Mobile Data Terminals with software and wireless service for the Fire-Rescue Department. Funding is available from 334-6111-522-64.11 (General Construction Fund/Computer Equipment). 2. Various bid awards in the amount of $625,555.00 via the Florida Sheriffs’ Association Contract #04-12-0823 Rollover, State of Florida Contract #007-001-05-1, GSA Contract GS-30F-1029D, and the Florida State D.O.T. Contract #FVPP-05-CA-5 for the replacement of City vehicles. Funding is available from 501-3312-591-64.20 (Central Garage Fund/Automotive). 3. Contract award to Hardrives, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $60,000.00 for the excavation, hauling, and disposal of excess lime sludge from the sludge overflow lagoon at the Water Treatment Plant. Funding is available from 442-5178-536-46.90 (Water/Sewer Renewal & Replacement Fund/Other Repair & Maintenance). Mrs. Ellis moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, seconded by Mrs. Archer. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. 9.REGULAR AGENDA: 9.A.1.REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL/MULTI SPACE METERS: Approve the Request for Proposal for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of multi space meters as advertised. Scott Aronson, Parking Management Specialist, stated at the January 10, 2006 City Commission Workshop meeting staff did a presentation with regard to multi space meters. - 4 - 03/06/06 Direction of the City Commission was to proceed with the advertising of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to utilize pay and display technology, payment options to be with credit card, coin, smart cards, debit cards, and phone payments. The item has been moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda because the Police Department would like to emphasize some of their concerns with the pay and display technology and challenges that they oppose to the Parking Enforcement Specialist. Larry Schroeder, Police Chief, stated he would like the Commission to hear some of their concerns from Phil Goldstein, Parking Enforcement Specialist. Phil Goldstein, Parking Enforcement Specialist (volunteer) for approximately 12 years, stated the City recently issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the new parking meter system. The RFP calls for pay and display features which would mean that a citizen would received a receipt for their payment and then place it on their dashboard. Mr. Goldstein urged the Commission to not support this proposal and stated the success of the volunteer program for parking enforcement is because it is made up of senior citizens who volunteer their services free of charge and feels the City needs to consider the impact on these volunteers as part of any decision to replace the current meters implementing a change to the proposed master meter system which requires receipt on the dashboard. This new system would require the volunteers to essentially walk the entire north and south of South Ocean Boulevard and cannot ride because every dashboard would need to be checked. Mr. Goldstein stated the impact of the change to the tourists when they park and a meter is located at the space, they automatically feed the meter because the meter is there. If they park in a space that has no meter they become confused. Mr. Goldstein suggested that the City install single digital head meters in all spaces and briefly discussed the costs. Mr. Goldstein stated this system will be cheaper to install and is shown to be less expensive to maintain. Chief Schroeder suggested that the Commission amend the current RFP and include the proposals to be accepted which would included replacing all the single head meters with the new digital single head meters as proposed. Mrs. Archer stated she would like know what staff’s recommendation is on this. In response, Mr. Aronson stated staff has a concern for the parking enforcement specialist and the encumbrances that it places for them to check each vehicle. From a safety standpoint, making sure that the meters on A-1-A advise the customers to place them on the passenger-side dashboard to keep them off of A-1-A as a main safety concern of oncoming traffic. From a cost perspective, Mr. Aronson stated there is significant savings and the electronic single head meters are limited to coin and smartcard only. Staff could do a successful smartcard program on Atlantic Avenue and by the diagonal spaces in the CBD area of the beach; however, between Thomas Street and Casuarina Road there would need to be smartcard kiosks because there is no place for them to go and buy the smartcard. Mr. Aronson stated the cost of the smartcard is $3.75 for rechargeable smartcards (almost four hours of parking before recouping the cost of the card). Mrs. Archer asked if it would be easier for the volunteer staff to handle if we did a pay by space instead of pay and receipt. In response, Mr. Aronson stated he would have to check - 5 - 03/06/06 that the technology would not show the time left on the space and this could be written as an addendum into the RFP and noted that this would be a substantial change to the RFP. Brief discussion followed by the Commission with regard to taking a look at proposals of the single head meters as opposed to the multi-head; and, weigh the difference in what the costs are. It was the consensus of the Commission to amend the Request for Proposal (RFP) and obtain information on the full scope of options so that staff can evaluate and work with Chief Schroeder to figure out the balance, cost, and personnel concerns, etc. Martin Tenser, Parking Enforcement Specialist (volunteer), commented about the complaints from the public regarding parking. Mr. Tenser stated he does support this proposal. 9.A.NATIONAL INDOOR FOOTBALL LEAGUE/TENNIS CENTER: Provide direction and authorize staff to finalize a contract with Image Sports Management, Inc., a member of the National Indoor Football League, for use of the Tennis Stadium and other facilities, including parking lots, for the Palm Beach Phantoms. Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, stated staff is seeking direction and authorize staff to finalize a contract with Image Sports Management, Inc. for the National Indoor Football League Team (The Phantoms) for the use of the Tennis Stadium and other facilities including parking lots. Mike Lind, Team Owner Image Sports Management, Inc., came forward and introduced members of the Palm Beach Phantoms and thanked Brahm Dubin and Sharon Painter for their support. Ray Berger, Head Coach, stated he moved here from Cleveland, Ohio and started his teaching and coaching career at Atlantic High School in 1988. Coach Berger stated he is very happy that they were able to get this venue at the Delray Beach Tennis Stadium and noted there are outstanding players on this team who played for Atlantic High School (AHS) and Florida Atlantic University (FAU) and those that have gone on to play for major universities around the country and some even having an opportunity in the National Football League (NFL). He thanked Mike Lind for giving him the opportunity to coach at a professional level and feels everyone in the community as well as Palm Beach County is going to be very happy with this team. Mr. Lind stated this will be structured as a family zone/kid zone and noted they will be doing special things for several charities throughout the community (i.e. Boys and Girls Club, Make a Wish Foundation). Mr. Lind stated 95% of their players are from this area and noted that each week the NFL receives game tapes of the players. In addition, Mr. Lind stated there will be 14 lady phantoms some of which are former Miami Dolphin cheerleaders and the only modifications to the stadium other than laying artificial turf which will not damage the stadium (plastic will be laid below the artificial turf). There will be a few games televised through the Sci-Fi channel and the NFL is negotiating next year full time television coverage. - 6 - 03/06/06 Mr. Lind clarified that this league is not the Arena Football League. Jim Grimmel, Executive Vice President of Team Potential for NIFL, stated his background is marketing national radio and noted he is doing all the marketing for the Phantoms. He stated they will be working with some local television stations next year and will have local radio for home and away games. Mr. Grimmel stated they are very excited to be with Delray Beach. Mr. Lind stated the NIFL has given him permission to talk to the City of Delray Beach about holding five consecutive pro-bowls here so they have an opportunity not just for the Phantoms but also to bring in other teams throughout the United States. He stated there are 34 teams in the league; 25 of which are playing this year and the rest of them are new franchises for next year. He stated the Phantoms will be exposed as far as Texas, Ohio, and North Carolina and thanked the Commission for allowing them this opportunity. Mr. Levinson stated the estimated attendance is between 5,000-8,000 people. Mr. Levinson asked what some of the other teams are doing with regard to attendance. In response, Mr. Lind stated some of the arenas are smaller seating approximately 3,000-4,000; however, there is a team in South Dakota that gets up to 23,000 people in attendance. Mr. Lind stated they will have a procedure that if they do not sell so many tickets by the Wednesday before game day there will be some allocated to charities, etc. and stated they will fill the stands. Mrs. Ellis stated this is not the standard size field that they normally play on and asked how much of difference is there. In response, Mr. Lind stated there is a total of ten feet that is in question but this has been approved by the NIFL. He stated the NIFL has a 10% rule which states you cannot go over or below that and noted they are within regulations. Mrs. Ellis asked what kind of facilities the other teams play in. Mr. Lind stated they mainly play in convention centers and indoor facilities. Mr. Lind stated although there is no roof on the stadium the NIFL approved it this year for this be held at the Delray Beach Tennis Stadium. Mr. Levinson moved to approve to finalize a contract with Image Sports Management, Inc. a member of the National Indoor Football League (NIFL) for use of the Tennis Stadium and other facilities, including parking lots, for the Palm Beach Phantoms, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 9.B.CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB: Consider a request to allow a new yacht club with facilities (Yacht Club at Delray Beach) by allowing the demolition and reconstruction the current Delray Beach Yacht Club, located at 110 MacFarlane Drive, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Sections 4.4.6(D)(9), “Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed; Yacht Club with Facilities”, and 2.4.5(E)(5), (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) “Conditional Use Required Findings”. Mayor Perlman read into the record the City of Delray Beach procedures for a Quasi-Judicial Hearing for this item and all subsequent Quasi-Judicial items. - 7 - 03/06/06 Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor Perlman asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mr. Levinson stated he had no ex parte communications. Mayor Perlman stated he had a meeting with several trustees of the Beach Property Owners’ Association. Mrs. Ellis and Mrs. Archer stated they had no ex parte communications to disclose. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2006-062 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this proposal currently contains the existing two-story 4,890 square foot yacht club with dining facility, pool and outdoor snack bar. The yacht club was constructed in 1963 and has had several accessory building and parking additions since that time. The applicant is seeking a complete demolition of the existing Delray Beach Yacht Club which will include a 3,610 square foot yacht clubhouse, and 44 boat slip docking spaces. The new yacht club will contain a dock, master’s office, social hall, exercise room, men’s and women’s locker rooms/restrooms, sundeck and pool and will be part of a larger redevelopment of the site which will include twenty (20) 3 bedroom, 3 bath residential condominiums in a 4-story building along with 82 parking spaces and associated landscaping. Mr. Dorling stated each condominium unit owner would have the option to purchase one of these slips. The remaining boat slips will be available to the public with a yacht club membership. The required findings of the LDR’s Section 3.1.1, 2.4.5(E)(5) are made in the staff report. At its meeting of January 23, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing in conjunction with the request. After discussing the proposal, the Board unanimously voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the conditional use to establish the yacht club. This facility does not exceed density or height and reiterated that this is for the use of a yacht club only and the actual density of this project is 6.4 units to the acre. Michael Weiner, Attorney with Weiner & Aronson, P.A., 102 N. Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach, speaking on behalf of Capex Properties, L.L.C., briefly discussed the project. Mayor Perlman stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in favor or in opposition of the conditional use request, to please come forward at this time. Valerie Smith, 127 MacFarlane Drive, Delray Beach, is strongly opposed to the condominium being built and stated she is confused when staff talks about a yacht club. She stated she moved from Boca Raton to Delray Beach 4 ½ years ago because MacFarlane Drive is a charming quiet street with a great view of the Intracoastal. Mrs. Smith stated there are ten single family homes that are all attached and noted it is not a condo and she owns her land. She expressed concern over the sewers and feels this project will be a detriment to everyone. Mrs. Smith stated during the construction huge trucks will be traveling down this narrow street and she expressed concern over the vibration damage to her home (i.e. cracks to the foundation and walls, etc.) and expressed concern over the traffic flow. Mrs. Smith reiterated that her concerns - 8 - 03/06/06 are the increased traffic because of 20 additional people living there, streets, sewer systems, and the damage to her home during the construction in addition to the noise, dirt, and change in the lifestyle. She asked for clarification from staff regarding the condominium and the yacht club. Mr. Weiner gave a brief rebuttal. Mr. Dorling clarified that the item before the Commission tonight is for the use of a yacht club. The 20 residential units are a permitted use and do not exceed and do not have any issues with respect to density or height nor are they requesting any special permission for the residential units themselves. The City Attorney reviewed the Board Order with the Commission who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an official part of the minutes). Mrs. Ellis moved to approve the Board Order, seconded by Mrs. Archer. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. At this point, the time being 7:12 p.m., the Commission moved to the duly advertised Public Hearings portion of the Agenda. 10.PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10.A.ORDINANCE NO. 11-06 (FIRST READING/FIRST PUBLIC HEARING): City initiated amendment to Land Development Regulations Section 2.4.4(E)(2), “Expiration of Approvals; Conditional Uses, Site Plans, Landscaping Plans, Architectural Plans, Preliminary Subdivision Plats”, to clarify the timeframes for development approvals. If passed, a second public hearing will be scheduled for March 21, 2006. The caption of Ordinance No. 11-06 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BY AMENDING SECTION 2.4.4, “GENERAL PROCEDURES PERTAINING TO APPROVAL OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS”, SUBSECTION 2.4.4(E), “EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS”, TO CLARIFY TIMEFRAMES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 11-06 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) - 9 - 03/06/06 The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated this is an LDR amendment to clarify initial approval periods for Site Plans, Conditional Use approvals, landscape plans, architectural plans, and preliminary subdivision plats are valid for 24 months. If Class I, II, and III site plan modifications or minor conditional use modifications are made to the approved plans before they are considered established by LDR Section 2.4.4(D), the modification approvals do not extend the expiration date of the original approval. The amendment also clarifies that if a Class IV site plan modification or major conditional use modifications are made to the approved plans before they are considered established the approval would modify the original approval date an additional 24 months. The clarification is being recommended to address an applicant’s recent assertion that an intervening Class III site plan modification automatically extended a Class V site plan approval that was nearing its expiration date. The Class III site plan modification findings differ from those required of a Class V extension. At its meeting of January 23, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing and recommended approval of the amendment with a vote of 7 to 0. Mayor Perlman declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 11-06, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Levinson moved to approve Ordinance No. 11-06 on First Reading/First Public Hearing, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 10.B.ORDINANCE NO. 12-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 37, "Delray Beach Code Enforcement", Section 37.45, "Supplemental Code Enforcement Procedures", of the Code of Ordinances, to include enforcement by Law Enforcement Officers of all non-criminal City ordinances. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The caption of Ordinance No. 12-06 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 37, “DELRAY BEACH CODE ENFORCEMENT”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 37.45, “SUPPLEMENTAL CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES”, TO EXPRESSLY INCLUDE ENFORCEMENT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OF ALL NON-CRIMINAL CITY ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A - 10 - 03/06/06 SAVING CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 12-06 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) Mayor Perlman passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Levinson and left the dais. The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Catherine Kozol, Police Legal Advisor/Assistant City Attorney, stated this ordinance is to amend the Code Enforcement procedures to allow law enforcement to actually violate someone by a citation as opposed to an arrest procedure. Vice Mayor Levinson declared the public hearing open. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Ordinance No. 12-06, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Archer moved to adopt Ordinance No. 12-06 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Archer – Yes; Vice Mayor Levinson – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. Item 11, Comments and Inquiries on At this point, the Commission moved to Non-Agenda Items from the City Manager and the Public. 11.A.City Manager’s response to prior public comments and inquiries. The City Manager had no comments or inquiries on non-agenda items. 11.B.From the Public. 11.B.1.Alice Finst, 707 Place Tavant, Delray Beach, representing Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD), suggested that the city make some slight modifications in the notices mailed to the public. One modification would be to do the notices in the prevailing languages in Delray Beach or place a sentence on each document in the language of the cities’ residents in Delray Beach stating “For Information Call …” Mrs. Finst stated this would make it much clearer and be useful to all the residents of Delray Beach and their understanding of the community’s government. Item 12, First At this point, the time being 7:19 p.m., the Commission moved to Readings. - 11 - 03/06/06 12.FIRST READINGS: 12.A.ORDINANCE NO. 13-06: An ordinance amending Chapter 36, "Finance; City Property Transactions”, Section 36.01, "Compliance with Standard Practice Instructions”, of the Code of Ordinances, to provide that personal services contracts are exempt from the requirements of Chapter 36. If passed, a public hearing will be held on March 21, 2006. The caption of the Ordinance No. 13-06 is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 36, “FINANCE; CITY PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTION 36.01, “COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARD PRACTICE INSTRUCTIONS”, TO PROVIDE THAT PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS ON CHAPTER 36; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (The official copy of Ordinance No. 13-06 is on file in the City Clerk’s office.) At this point, Vice Mayor Levinson passed the gavel back to Mayor Perlman who returned to the dais. The City Attorney read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Levinson moved to approve Ordinance No. 13-06 on FIRST Reading, seconded by Mrs. Archer. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Levinson – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. Item 9.C. of the Regular Agenda. At this point, the Commission moved back to 9.C.WAIVER REQUESTS/CODA PROPERTY: Consider a request for waiver of Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 4.4.17(H)(1), “Residential Office (RO) district; Special Regulations”, and Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), “Design Standards; Stacking distance” associated with the Class V site plan for the CODA (fka Lighthouse) project, located at the stst (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) southwest corner of S.W. 1 Street and S.W. 1 Avenue. Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor Perlman asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mr. Levinson stated he had a brief conversation with Jeff Costello. Mayor Perlman stated he never returned Jeff Costello’s telephone call today and apologized for not returning the call. Mrs. Ellis stated she spoke with Jeff Costello and Mrs. Archer stated she also had a telephone - 12 - 03/06/06 conversation with Jeff Costello. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2005-236 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated on February 22, 2006, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board approved the Class V development proposal to construct a 3-story mixed-use building that contains 19,448 square feet of office floor area in the first and second floors and four 2-bedroom loft units together with 36 standalone townhouse units. He stated there are two waivers before the Commission this evening. One waiver relates to a 50 feet stacking distance between the right-of-way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot. The other waiver talks about a requirement that all buildings and structures shall appear to be residential in character regardless of the actual use therein. Mr. Dorling stated LDR Section 2.2.3 the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) is only given the authority to grant relief for the number of parking spaces in Section 4.6.9 as well as granting relief to Section 4.6.16 which is the landscape code. There is a stacking distance of 33 feet and 32 feet provided at both entrances and staff is supporting the waiver given the multiple entrances and the uses having different peak hours and staff does not believe there will be a stacking issue at the two driveways. Mr. Dorling stated the second waiver relates to the requirement of LDR Section 4.4.17(H)(1) which requires that all buildings and structures in the RO District shall appear to be residential in character. Mr. Dorling stated the architectural style of the mixed-use building is more appropriate if it were a similar to the Sundy House or Bermuda Style. Staff feels this is clearly not residential in character and do not recommend approval of the waiver. th Jeff Costello, New Urban Communities, 398 N.E. 6 Avenue, Delray Beach, ststnd stated this is located on the south side of S.W. 1 Street between S.W. 1 Avenue and S.W. 2 Avenue immediately south of the South County Parking Garage. The north portion of the property has been rezoned to RO (Residential Office) in anticipation of this proposed mixed use development. Mr. Costello stated they appeared before the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) in January and the Board had some concerns with regard to the layout and the mixed use elevations and noted these concerns have been addressed. Mr. Costello stated there is now plenty of stacking distance and the landscape buffers has been increased along the north side of the townhomes (the parking lot was shifted to the north to accommodate this) and they ndst also increased the building separation along 2 Avenue and 1 Avenue. SPRAB wanted to see the relationship with the mixed use building with the townhomes. Mr. Costello stated this is a st redevelopment project that is now occurring at S.W. 1 Street and it is a pioneering effort and commented it is great to see things starting to happen in this neighborhood. He stated in LDR Section 4.6.18(B) there is extensive criteria and referenced LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(1) and feels they have met the requirements in the LDR’s. SPRAB considered these two waivers and recommended approval. Juan Caycedo, 137 W. Royal Palm Beach Road, Boca Raton, FL 33432, Architect for the project, stated when the building was designed they felt very strongly about the idea of respecting the character and the scale of the surrounding areas and the building that is being proposed carries the scale, elements, and the articulation on the facades to make it comfortable for pedestrians. - 13 - 03/06/06 Mayor Perlman stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in favor or in opposition of the waiver requests, to please come forward at this time. At this point, the City Clerk swore in the following individual: Alice Finst, 707 Place Tavant, Delray Beach, asked the Commission to review the building elevations and stated at the end of the courtyard where the residential units is an ultra modern building and feels there is no continuity when going through the courtyard with this structure which is part of this site plan. She urged the Commission to look at whether we are looking at two different architectural designs, buildings/projects or if we are dealing with one piece of land with the continuity of construction. Mrs. Finst stated for the people who will be living in the residential unit there should be something that fits in more with their buildings. Mr. Costello gave a brief rebuttal. th Tim Hernandez, New Urban Communities, 398 N.E. 6 Avenue, Delray Beach, briefly discussed contemporary architecture and the City’s code. Mr. Dorling stated this property was zoned residential and was rezoned to a Residential Office District (RO). He emphasized that this architecture and this elevation is not residential and staff does not support. Brief discussion by the Commission followed. The City Attorney reviewed the Board Order with the Commission who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an official part of the minutes). Mr. Levinson moved to approve the Board Order as amended, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 9.D.CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/MAROONE FORD: Consider a request to establish a parking and storage lot for vehicles within the MIC (Mixed Industrial and Commercial) district for Maroone Ford, located on the west side of Wallace Drive, between (Quasi-Judicial Hearing) Georgia Street and Milfred Street. Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor Perlman asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. The Commission had no ex parte communications to disclose. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning Department, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2006-125 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this is a 1.923 acre parcel located off Wallace Drive. The proposal is for the construction of a 246 space parking and storage lot to be utilized in - 14 - 03/06/06 association with the Maroone Ford car dealership to the south and east. The parcel will serve as an overflow bullpen parking lot for the existing dealership for its new and used dealer stock. Outdoor storage of new and used vehicles is allowed as a conditional use within the MIC (Mixed Industrial and Commercial) Zone District. Mr. Dorling stated the required findings of Chapter 3 and 2.4.5(E) are made in the staff report. At its meeting of February 27, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on this request and the Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval. At this point, Mr. Dorling displayed the site plan (“Bullpen” parking configuration). Enrique Gomez, ARC Avenue, Inc. Architects, stated he is present this evening if the Commission has any questions. Mrs. Archer stated as a parking lot this looks really great; however, she feels as though the car dealership is taking over Delray because it keeps growing. She suggested that this area be redeveloped. Mr. Levinson commented about recommended condition #6 - “Materials and equipment stored outside must be screened from view from adjacent public rights-of-way in a manner approved by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB).” Mr. Levinson asked Mr. Gomez what materials and equipment are intended to be stored here other than cars. In response, Mr. Gomez stated it is just going to be for car inventory. Mr. Levinson stated across the street from this is a good size parking lot used by the Chevrolet dealer so there is quite a bit of acreage going north on Wallace Drive behind these two car dealers with a lot of car inventory. He asked staff if there are provisions for providing structured parking. In response, Mr. Dorling stated there is actually a site plan modification for the parcel across the street that does involve some structured parking above their service bays. Mrs. Archer asked if this will be above existing service bays. In response, Mr. Dorling stated this will be a new building with an upper level of parking for inventory. Mr. Ellis moved to approve the Board Order approving the conditional use adopting all the findings in the Planning and Zoning staff report as to consistency, concurrency, etc. and the appropriate findings as set forth in Section 2.4.5(E) and 4.4.19(D) subject to conditions as amended, seconded by Mr. Levinson. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – No; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – No; Mr. Levinson – Yes. Brief discussion continued between the Commission and Mr. Gomez. The City Attorney suggested that the Commission make a substitute motion or postpone this item until the entire Commission is present. - 15 - 03/06/06 postpone Mr. Levinson moved to approve to the conditional use request for Maroone Ford to the March 21, 2006 City Commission meeting, seconded by Mrs. Archer. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes. Said motion to postpone passed with a 4 to 0 vote. TH 9.E.CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST/14 AVENUE TOWNHOMES: Consider a request to allow a density in excess of 12 units per acre (12.4 dwelling units per acre proposed) in the Southwest Area Neighborhood Overlay District in accordance with the provision of the th City’s Family/Workforce Housing Ordinance, for 14 Avenue Townhomes, a proposed 24-unit th townhome residential development, located on the east side of S.W. 14 Avenue, between S.W. stnd (Quasi Judicial Hearing) 1 Street and S.W. 2 Street. Mayor Perlman declared a conflict of interest, passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Levinson and stepped down from the dais. Chevelle D. Nubin, City Clerk, swore in those individuals who wished to give testimony on this item. Mayor Perlman asked the Commission to disclose their ex parte communications. Mrs. Ellis and Mrs. Archer had no ex parte communications to disclose. Vice Mayor Levinson stated he has had some communications with the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) staff, Joe Gray and Diane Colonna because this is will be a Communities Land Trust (CLT) property. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, entered the Planning and Zoning Department project file #2006-104 into the record. Mr. Dorling stated this is a conditional use to establish a 24-unit townhouse th residential development to be known as 14 Avenue Townhomes. The development proposal consists of demolition of six (6) existing duplex structures (12 units; the construction of 24-unit workforce housing residential townhomes with two car garages, 12 parallel parking spaces along th S.W. 14 Avenue, and the associated landscaping. The requested density exceeds 12 units per acre (12.40 du/ac is proposed) and under the workforce housing ordinance this is required to go through a conditional use. The Workforce Housing density bonus program would award for the increased density and would have to provide one unit as a workforce unit. At its meeting of February 27, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing in conjunction with the conditional use request. One member of the public spoke and expressed concerns on how the proposed on street parking would affect the current street configuration. After brief discussion, the Board moved to recommend approval of the conditional use request (allowing a density of 12.40 du/ac) on a unanimous vote of 7 to 0, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report. Francisco Perez-Azua, Architect with Perez Design, Inc., 4205 W. Atlantic Avenue, #304, Delray Beach, for the project, stated this is a great project for the community and is present to answer any questions the Commission may have. - 16 - 03/06/06 Vice Mayor Levinson stated if anyone from the public would like to speak in favor or in opposition of the conditional use request, to please come forward at this time. There being no one from the public who wished to address the Commission, the public hearing was closed. The City Attorney reviewed the Board Order with the Commission who made findings according to their consensus (attached hereto is a copy and made an official part of the minutes). Mrs. Archer moved to approve the Board Order (approving the conditional use request), seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. 9.F.AGREEMENT/CGI COMMUNICATIONS, INC.: Consider approval of an agreement with CGI Communications, Inc. to provide an online community video program for the City. At this point, Mayor Perlman returned to the dais. Douglas Smith, Assistant City Manager, stated at a previous City Commission meeting staff discussed two proposals; CGI being the original proposal that has worked in partnership with the Florida League of Cities and the second proposal from Scripted Improv Media, Inc. Mr. Smith stated since that meeting, staff has obtained additional proposals. One proposal is from CoMatrix (a local company) in the amount of $22,500 and another proposal from Dorsia in the amount of $14,900 and they have agreed to lower the proposal by $3,000 if the City were to make a decision fairly quickly. Mr. Smith stated that Dorsia uses a mapping technology and displays a list of cities that one can click on and see a video of that particular city. However, he expressed concern that Dorsia is still under development. Mr. Smith stated the CGI proposal has no charge but does have the business sponsorship as part of the agreement. Staff has been working with the City Attorney’s on putting together a new agreement and has worked with CGI regarding the termination of the agreement so that it could be with or without cause. CGI was not willing to accept this but did agree to the language “termination for cause only”. He stated the City would approve the content of the video and agree to allow them to use the City’s name in the program (upon the City’s approval which can be revoked). Mr. Smith stated with the CGI program the City would receive an additional five minutes per month that they will stream additional videos that the City creates in-house. In addition, he stated some of the other sites were researched (where there were no business sponsors) and apparently these would be the ones that are still in the development stages of obtaining their business sponsors. There are no communities that have paid for this outright and the production cost is approximately $21,000. Mr. Levinson stated he is less concerned about bad sponsors then he is with a competitive situation with sponsors. He suggested that this be opened to a broader amount of people in the community and if the City is going to use it as a way to pay for the video then he feels it should be made available to any business in the city. - 17 - 03/06/06 Mr. Smith stated there is a limited amount around each panel; however, you can have different businesses on different video screens. Brief discussion by the Commission followed. The City Attorney stated they have exclusive streaming video rights during the term of the agreement for videos they create. The Commission will speak to Michael Sittig, Executive Director of the Florida League of Cities, Inc. and hold off another week or so. 9.G.SPECIAL EVENT REQUEST/DELRAY AFFAIR: Consider approval of a th special event request from the Chamber of Commerce to endorse the 44 Delray Affair to be held on April 21-23, 2006; contingent upon the staff recommended exceptions, receipt of a certificate of general liability insurance, liquor liability insurance, and a hold harmless agreement. Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, stated this is a request for the th Commission to endorse the 44 Annual Delray Affair being held April 21-23, 2006 to grant a temporary use permit for use of the City property and rights-of-way as requested, allow signage to be installed more than one week prior to the event, to provide staff support as outlined in staff’s memo. Mr. Barcinski stated staff supports the request from the Chamber of Commerce except for the following conditions: (1) approve use of parks with the stipulation that the Parks and Recreation Director has input concerning the events proposed on park property; (2) allow banners to be placed within confines of the event site as may be approved by the Community Improvement Director; (3) allow signage for the event to be put up no earlier than April 7, 2006 instead of March 27, 2006; approve the use of the Old School Square parking lot except for the area that will be reserved for the parking garage construction site. Prior to the vote, Mr. Levinson inquired about the costs for the Fire Chief to have a Station on the south. Mr. Barcinski stated this will include a full-time inspector on-site for all three days. Mrs. Archer moved to approve the special event request from the Chamber of th Commerce to endorse the 44 Delray Affair to be held on April 21-23, 2006, subject to the conditions, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Levinson – Yes; Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 9.H.SPECIAL EVENT ASSISTANCE REQUEST/PALM BEACH INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL: Consider approval of request from the Palm Beach International Film Festival to prepare and put up event signage, hang 30 banners on our decorative light poles, and allow the use of seven (7) metered parking spaces on A-1-A, across from the Marriott, at no charge. Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, stated this is a request from Palm Beach International Film Festival to put up welcome signs, to hang 30 banners on the City’s - 18 - 03/06/06 decorative light poles and to allow the use of seven (7) metered parking spaces on A-1-A across from the Marriott at no charge. Mr. Levinson moved to approve the Special Event Assistance Request from the Palm Beach International Film Festival, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 0 vote. 9.I.SPECIAL EVENT SIGNAGE REQUEST/WAYSIDE HOUSE: Consider approval of a request from the Wayside House to allow the placement of five (5) event signs for the Spring Boutique fundraiser to be held March 7-9, 2006 at the Colony Hotel. Staff recommends denial. Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager, stated this is a request from the Wayside House to allow them to put up five (5) event signs for their Spring Boutique fundraiser to be held March 7-9, 2006 at the Colony Hotel. Staff recommends denial of the request. Jill Reece, Executive Director of Wayside House, has requested Commission consideration of the request. If Commission decides to approve this request, staff suggests that it be for only 4 feet x 4 feet signs to be placed at the regular event sign locations. Mrs. Ellis moved to approve the Special Event Request for the Wayside House to allow placement of five (5) event signs for the Spring Boutique to be held March 7-9, 2006 at the Colony Hotel, seconded by Mr. Levinson. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – No; Mrs. Ellis – No; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – No. Said motion was DENIED with a 3 to 1 vote, Commissioner Archer dissenting. 9.J.MORATORIUM/DEVELOPMENTPROPOSALS/HISTORIC DISTRICTS: Consider a six (6) month moratorium on the demolition and large scale construction in the historic districts. Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning, stated recently there have been several large homes that have been proposed along Swinton Avenue; four of those homes were in conjunction with a subdivision that was recently approved (reduction of six lots to four). Throughout that process the related Boards did emphasize that the resulting structures needed to be of a neighborhood scale, style and massing which is consistent with the neighborhood. Mr. Dorling urged the Commission to approve a 6 month moratorium achieving this through maximum lot coverage, floor area ratios and requiring additional open space or adding additional requirements for setbacks on second floors similar to the Beach Overlay District. Mrs. Archer in general she would be opposed to a moratorium; however, she feels the historic district is part of what makes Delray special and stated it is very upsetting to see what is happening in the historic district. Mrs. Archer stated in this instance she would definitely support the six month moratorium. Mrs. Archer moved to approve a six (6) month moratorium on the demolition and large scale construction in the historic districts, seconded by Mrs. Ellis. Upon roll call the - 19 - 03/06/06 Commission voted as follows: Mayor Perlman – Yes; Mrs. Ellis – Yes; Mrs. Archer – Yes; Mr. Levinson – No. Said motion passed with a 3 to 1 vote, Commissioner Levinson dissenting. Prior to the vote, the City Attorney stated the ordinance will have to be sent to the Planning and Zoning Department and it will come back for two readings so this is direction to go forward with the moratorium and to clarify that the LDR’s do give the Historic Preservation Board the ability to determine capability and architectural size and scale. However, the City Attorney stated staff can look at this for more definitive regulations as well. Brief discussion by the Commission and the City Attorney followed. Mayor Perlman stated he dislikes moratoriums; however, he feels the advantages is not having to have a spade of these come through the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) and feels there is an advantage in this limited instance. Mr. Levinson stated he will not support the moratorium and does not feel the City will gain anything by imposing a moratorium if in fact there is no difference between the process of getting staff to review. Mrs. Ellis stated she supports the moratorium. 9.K.U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS: Supporting CDBG Program. Mayor Perlman stated this is a request from the United States Conference of Mayors to call and urge our Senators to co-sign a letter from Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota and Patrick Leahy of Vermont to fight cuts in the CDBG Program. Mayor Perlman stated the first step would be to call the Senators and urge them to sign the “Dear Colleague” letter supporting the $4.3 billion for CDBG in the fiscal year 2007 budget. It was the consensus of the Commission to call Senators urging them to sign the “Dear Colleague” letter and that staff also write a letter. Mrs. Butler, Director of Community Improvement, stated the professional organization for the Community Development community is lobbying also. Item 13, Comments and Inquiries on At this point, the Commission moved to Non-Agenda Items. 13.COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. 13.A.City Manager The City Manager expressed concern over the demolition of historic homes and disclosed that he lives across the street from the Del-Ida Park Historic District. He stated he has a great interest in historic preservation. He noted that the home he previously lived in was placed on the National Register of Historic Places and the home he lives in now is a 1926 - 20 - 03/06/06 Mediterranean Revival. The City Manager stated he does have a personal interest as well as a professional interest in this. Secondly, he informed the Commission that City Clerk Chevelle D. Nubin has earned the designation of Certified Municipal Clerk (CMC) as well as Deputy City Clerk Janet K. Whipple. Lastly, the City Manager stated the Commission should have received the invitations to the Board Appreciation Reception. 13.B.City Attorney The City Attorney commented on the Auburn Trace closing and stated they will be closing shortly. 13.C.City Commission 13.C.1.Mrs. Archer Mrs. Archer commented about the Roast on March 3, 2006 and stated it was very nice. Secondly, she stated it was very nice to have the opportunity to pitch a baseball on Opening Day. 13.C.2.Mrs. Ellis Mrs. Ellis stated she had a good time at the Roast. In addition, she stated it is important to take a look at the historic neighborhoods. 13.C.3.Mr. Levinson Mr. Levinson stated the Swinton Avenue beautification looks good. Secondly, he stated there were approximately 50-60 people in attendance at the CLT meeting and many of them want to be applicants in the first pool for CLT homes. He commented about Palm Beach County days in Tallahassee. Mr. Levinson stated there are certain “bottlenecks” in the system in Building Department and Planning and Zoning Department that we need to expedite. He suggested that we utilize some of the surplus to help expedite some of these things so that the level of top quality city services is maintained. - 21 - 03/06/06 13.C.4. Mayor Perlman Mayor Perlman stated the group from Punta Gorda was here on Friday which was exciting. He stated they put together a group called “Team Punta Gorda” and they raised $200,000 and hired Jaime Correa who also worked on the City’s Design Guidelines. He stated the Vice Mayor from Punta Gorda was here and came to one of the panels that featured Delray Beach. Mayor Perlman stated they invited the Commission to visit in the spring so that they could meet more people. Secondly, Mayor Perlman stated he was invited to speak at the Winter Art Institute hosted by the University of Massachusetts which was held in Palm Beach Gardens. He stated they talked about how Delray Beach built off of historic preservation and arts and culture particularly around Old School Square and how the Spady Museum is fueling the revitalization th of 5 Avenue. He stated this was great exposure and a worthwhile event. In addition, he stated he was invited to speak at the New Jersey Tourism Board in April in Atlantic City regarding Downtown Revitalization. He stated the Roast was very good. Mayor Perlman commented about the newspaper article regarding the one year anniversary of the Jerrod Miller shooting and they did an overview of where Delray Beach is in the R.A.C.E. Relations initiative. He stated the article did not capture what is really happening in the city especially in that area of endeavor. Mayor Perlman stated the City of Delray Beach has made significant process. He stated in one year the city formed a Police Advisory Board, did a survey of the community, and has a commitment from the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to invest $40 million over the last three years on top of the millions that have been committed. He stated the City of Delray Beach is not using eminent domain and commented about the study circles. He stated Delray Beach is also doing workforce planning which is going to have a big impact on diversifying the workforce. He stated with the housing initiatives that are being done with the CDC’s, and the efforts of Dorothy Ellington and Joe Gray, he challenges the reporter to go out and tell the story. Mayor Perlman stated he is very proud of how far the City of Delray Beach has come and he thinks there is a very bright future. Mayor Perlman stated former Mayors David Schmidt, Jay Alperin, and Tom Lynch stopped by City Hall today and they were very upset over the campaign literature being sent out that is misrepresenting the growth and development in Delray Beach. Mayor Perlman stated he will continue to correct the record and expressed concern over the Burt Harris Act. He asked the City Attorney to look into this and give the Commission some guidance on this particularly since Treasure Coast is coming back. Lastly, he stated he was at Opening Day for the National Little League and encouraged everyone to talk to Woody. Mayor Perlman expressed concern over some safety issues and would like to make sure the kids do not get hurt. There being no further business, Mayor Perlman declared the meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m. - 22 - 03/06/06 ~S),~ City Clerk ATTEST: ~o~~ The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the Regular City Commission Meeting held on March 6, 2006, which Minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Commission on April 4. 2006 ~~~~. ~~~ City Clerk NOTE TO READER: If the Minutes you have received are not completed as indicated above, this means they are not the official Minutes of the City Commission, They will become the official Minutes only after review and approval which may involve some amendments, additions or deletions as set forth above. ,.-- - 23 - 03/06/06 ,..-. ~ - IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 1. This conditional use request has come before the City Commission on March 6. 2006. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the conditional use request for Delray Beach Yacht Club, LLC. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsections I and II. I. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN a. Future Land Use MaD: The subject property has a Future land Use Map designation of MD and Is zoned RM which is consistent with the future land use map. b. Concurrency: Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires a determination that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or needed capital improvements in the following areas: Are the concurrency requirements met as respect to water, sewer, drainage. streets and traffic. parks, open space. solid waste and schools? Yes 4 No o c. Consistencv: Will the granting of the conditional use be consistent with and further the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? Yes 4 No o II. LOR REQUIREMENTS: a. LDR Section 2.4.5(E) Reauired Flndlnas: (Conditional Use): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(E)(5), in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the conditional use will not: i. Have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located; Ii. Nor that it will hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. Will Section 2.4.5(E)(5) be met? Yes 0 No 4 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LOR requirements In existence at the time the conditional use request was submitted and finds that the determinations made herein are consistent with the Comprehensive PJan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses to the extent they support the findings set forth herein. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves X denies _ the conditional use request, subject to the conditions contained in the staff report on page 8 and hereby adopts this Order this C9 ~ay of March, 2006, by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 OPr:~ · ... Q... (i:.1QLQ ~ Jeff Pe man, Mayor ATTEST: ~\-L~'~~~~ Chevelle Nubin City Clerk 2 -- LOR Section 4.4.6(1) (I) Performance Standards: (1) These standards shall apply to aU site plans approved subsequent to October 7. 1997, and for modifications to existing developments which involve the creation of additional residential units. In order to increase a project density beyond six (6) units per acre, the approving body must make a finding that the development substantially complies with the performance standards listed in this section. The intent of the standards is to mitigate the impacts of the additional density both internal and external to the site. The extent to which a project meets the standards will determine the number of units per acre that will be permitted. For example, if a project meets or exceeds all of the standards, and is otherwise consistent with applicable standards and policIes of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development RegulatIons, the maximum density is permitted. Projects which only partially achieve these standards will be permitted a correspondingly lower density. The performance standards are as follows: (a) The traffIC circulation system is designed to control speed and reduce volumes on the interior and exterior street network. This can be accomplished through the use of traffic calming devices; street networks consisting of loops and short segments; multiple entrances and exists into the development; and similar measures that are intended to minimize through traffic and keep speeds within the development at or below 20 m.p.h. (b) Buildings are placed throughout the development in a manner that reduces the overall massing, and provides a feeling of open space. (0) Where immediately adjacent to residential zoning districts having a lower density, building setbacks and landscape materials along those adjacent property lines are increased beyond the required minimums in order to provide a meaningful butter to those lower density areas. Building setbacks are increased by at least 25% of the required minimum; at least one tree per 30 linear feet (or fraction thereof) Is provided; trees exceed the required height at time of planting by 25%_or more; and a hedge, wall or fence is provided as a visual butter between the properties. (d) The development otters a varied streetscape and building design. For example, setbacks are staggered and offset, with varying roof heights (for multi-family buiJdings, the planes of the facades are offset to add interest and distinguish individual units). Building elevations incorporate diversity In window and door shapes and locations; features 3 such as balconies. arches. porches. courtyards; and design elements such as shutters. window mullions. quoins, decorative tiles, etc. (e) A number of different unit types, sizes and floor plans are available within the development in order to accommodate households of various ages and sizes. Multi-family housing will at a minimum have a mix of one, two and three bedroom units with varying floor plans. Single family housing (attached and detached) will at a minimum offer a mix of three and four bedroom units with varying floor plans. (f) The development is designed to preserve and enhance existing natural areas and/or water bodies. Where no such areas exist, new areas which provide open space and native habitat are created and incorporated into the project. (g) The project provides a convenient and extensive bicycle/pedestrian network. and access to available transit. (2) It is acknowledged that some of the above referenced standards may not be entirely applicable to small. infiJl type residential projects. For those types of projects, the ultimate density should be based upon the attainment of those standards which are applicable, as well as the development's ability to meet or exceed other minimum code requirements. (3) For vacant property that is proposed for rezoning to RM with a density suffix, the approving body must made a finding that the proposed density is appropriate based upon the future land use map designations of surrounding property as well as the prevailing development pattern of the surrounding area. ---. 4 "..., IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR CODA PROPERTY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 1. These waiver requests have come before the City Commission on March 6, 2006. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for the Coda Property. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection I. I. WAIVERS: a. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.17(H)(1), all buildings and structures shall appear to be residential in character regardless of the actual use therein; shall be kept in a sound and attractive condition; and in established neighborhoods, shall be generally compatible in architectural style and scale with the surrounding area. The applicant has requested a waiver to allow the architectural style as designed. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(8)(5)? Yes 1 No 3 b. Pursuant to LOR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), a 50' stacking distance is required from the public right-of-way to the first aisleway or parking space in a parking lot. The applicant proposes a stacking distance of 33' to the first parking spaces along SW 2nd Avenue and 32.5' to the first parking space (11.5' to dumpster enclosure) along SW 1st Avenue. The applicant has requested a waiver to the stacking requirements. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving bod shall make a finding of fact that the granting of the waiver: t2; :\~ t>;~-\li . C ." ).~:q'O ~.~\ ~ .~~. . . . -J' c;'t r+eivl q ~ e.- , .:">>.... 1 . '. (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(8)(5)? Yes 4 . No 0 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LOR requirements in existence at the time the original development application was submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves _ denies X the waiver request to LOR Section 4.4.17(H)(1). 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves X denies _ the waiver requestto LDRSection 4.6.9(D){3){c). 7. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 6th day of March, 2006, by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 opposed. ATTEST: ~~~~~ Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk 2 FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFlICT- FOR -~OUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER lOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS I r NAME-FIRST NAME-MIOOLE NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. Al.1THORlTY. OR COMMITTEE Perlman. Jeffrev L. Delray Beach City COll\lllission MAIlING ADDRESS THE BOARCi. 00UNCIl, COMMISSION, Al1THORITY OR COMMITTEE ON 971 Delrav Lakes Drive WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: CITY COUNTY (l"CI1Y . a COUNTY a OTHER lOCAlAGENC'f Delray Beach, Florida 334.44 Palm Beach NAME OF POUTlCAl SUBOMSIOt-t Beach City of Delray DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURReD MY POsmoN IS: 3/6/06 liElECTlVE a APPOitmvE WHO MUST FILE FORM'SS This form Is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission. authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-adviSOl}' bodies who are presented with a voting'. conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. . Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greaUy depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECnON 112.3143, FLoRIDA STATUTES ~rson hoIdlng elective or appointive county. municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which )s to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a'mea- .....6 which inures to the special gain or loss of a priricipaf (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S.. and offICers of independent special tax diStricts elected on a one-acre. one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. . For purposes of this law, a -relative- includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband. wife. brother, sister. father-in-law. mother-in-law. son-in-law. and daughter-in-law. A "business associate- means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner. joint venturer. cooWner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). . . . . . . . . . . . . ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER TI:tE VOTE oCcURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should ~~ ~ form in the minutes. . ". .: ; '\... .A. . . . . . ". . . . . . . . .' APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you o~iwiSe may participate in these matters. However. y~ r t discloSe the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision. whether orally or in writing and whether !1l8d8 . ou or atyoordirection. . .. . au iNTEND To"MAkE ANYA1-teMPTTO INFLUENCe THE DECISiON PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WlLL.BEd.. . TAKEN: · You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible lor recording the minutes of the meeting. who win Incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) CE FORM 8B - EFF. 1f2000 ~...\n__ j~ c: PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) . A copy of the form must be provided irrimediatelY to the other memil6rs of the agency. . The fonn must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOV MAKE NO ATTEMpt TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: . You must disclose orally the nature of your c.onflict in the measure before participating. . You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person respOnsible for recording. the minutes of the meeting. who must incorporate the fonn in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. ~ DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I. Jeffrey L. Perlman . hereby disclose that on 3/6 .20~: (a) A measure came orwlll come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate. 1 inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, Diana Colonna inured to the special gain or loss of whom I am retained; or inlnd to the ~.gain or loss of Is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure befOfe my agency and the nature of Rl)" conflicting interest In the measu';6 Is as followS: . . . . . , ,by . which . . - . Diane C6loima.my wife. isDire~t:or of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) I have . a conflict voting on items that directly affect the Co~unity Redevelopment Agency. ~\sl\~U \ " ~-'./ . Date Filed NOTICE: UNDER .PROVlSION$OF FLQRIDA STATUTES ~112.317. A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTitUTES GROUNDS FOR AND "MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IM~~CHMENT. REMOVAl OR SUSPENSIO~. FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT. DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SAlARY, REPRIMAND, OR ^. CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO exCEED $10,000; CE F<>Rt.4 88 - EFF. 1flQOO PAGE 2 IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR 14th AVENUE TOWNHOMES ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 1. This conditional use request has come before the City Commission on March 6, 2006. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the conditional use request for 14th Avenue Townhomes. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsections I and II. I. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN a. Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use and Map: Is the future use and intensity of the development consistent with the future land use map and comprehensive plan and is it appropriate in terms of soil, topqgraphic, and other applicable physical considerations, complementary to adjacent land uses,and fulfills remaining land use needs? Yes 3 No 0 b. Concurrency: Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Are the concurrency requirements met as respect to water. sewer. drainage. streets and traffic. parks. open space. solid wasle and schools? Yes 3 No 0 : c. Consistency: Will the granting of the conditional use be consistent with and further the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? -r +-t' bv-. 1 Yes 3 No o ...:..- II. lOR REQUIREMENTS: a. LOR Section 2.4.5(E) Reauired Findinas: (Conditional Use): Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(E}(5}, in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the conditional use will not: i. Have a significantly detrimefltal effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located; ii. Nor that it will hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. Will Section 2.4.5(E)(5} be met? Yes 3 No 0 b. Performance Standards for Oensitylncrease: Does the applicant meet the requirements set forth in Section 4.4.6(1), attached hereto, to allow a density in excess of 6 dwelling units per acre to 12 dwelling units per acre? Yes 3 No o c. Consistency with Article 4.7 (Workforce Housina): Is the development consistent with and meets the criteria set forth In Article 4.7 (Workforce Housing) of the LOR's in order to allow the applicant a density bonus? Yes 3 No o If you answered "yes", what is the amount of the density bonus? .4 of unit dwelling units per acre The total density. based upon (b) and (c). is 12.40 dwelling units per acre. 3. The comments and notes set forth in the staff report are hereby incorporated herein. 2 4. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LOR requirements in existence at the time the conditional use request was submitted. 5. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves ~ denies _ the conditional use request subject to conditions set forth in the staff report and hereby adopts this Order this ~~day of March, 2006, by a vote of 3 in favor and 0 opposed. ~~~ ~ ff Perlman, Mayor ~~~~:~~ . '~.~\~~~I Chevelle Nubin City Clerk 3 LOR Section 4.4.6(1) ..:.-- (I) Performance Standards: (1) These standards shall apply to all site plans approved subsequent to October 7, 1997, and for modifications to existing developments which involve the creation of additional residential units. In order to increase a project density beyond six (6) units per acre, . the approving body must make a finding that the development substantially complies with the performance standards listed in this section. The intent of the standards is to mitigate the impacts of the additional density both internal and external to the site. The extent to which a project meets the standards will determine the number of units per acre that will be permitted. For example, if a project meets or exceeds all of the standards, and is otherwise consistent with applicable standards and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, the maximum density is permitted. Projects which only partially achieve these standards will be permitted a correspondingly lower density. The performance standards are as follows: (a) The traffic circulation system is designed to control speed and reduce volumes on the interior and exterior street network. This can be accomplished through the use of traffic calming devices; street networks consisting of loops and short segments; multiple entrances and exists into the development; and similar measures that are intended to minimize through traffic and keep speeds within the development at or below 20 m.p.h. (b) Buildings are placed throughout the development in a manner that reduces the overall massing, and provides a feeling of open space. (c) Where immediately adjacent to residential zoning districts having a lower density, building setbacks and landscape materials along those adjacent property lines are increased beyond the required minimums in order to provide a meaningful buffer to those lower density areas. Building setbacks are increased by at least 25% of the required minimum; at least one tree per 30 linear feet (or fraction thereof) is provided; trees exceed the required height at time of planting by 25%_or mor~; and a hedge, wall or fence is provided as a visual buffer between the properties. (d) The development offers a varied streetscape and building design. For example, setbacks are staggered and offset, with varying roof heights (for multi-family buildings, the planes of the facades are offset to add interest and distinguish individual units). Building elevations incorporate diversity in window and door shapes and locations; features such as balconies, arches, porches, courtyards; and design elements such as shutters, window mullions, quoins, decorative tiles, etc. 4 (e) A number of different unit types, sizes and floor plans are available within the development in order to accommodate households of various ages and sizes. Multi-family housing will at a minimum have a mix of one, two and three bedroom units with varying floor plans. Single family housing (attached and detached) will at a minimum offer a mix of three and four bedroom units with varying floor plans. (f) The development is designed to preserve and enhance existing natural . areas and/or water bodies. Where no such areas exist, new areas which provide open space and native habitat are created and incorporated into the project. (g) The project provides a convenient and extensive bicycle/pedestrian network, and access to available transit. (2) It is acknowledged that some of the above referenced standards may not be entirely applicable to small, infill type residential projects. For those types of projects, the ultimate density should be based upon the attainment of those standards which are applicable, as well as the development's ability to meet or exceed other minimum code requirements. (3) For vacant property that is proposed for rezoning to RM with a density suffix, the approving body must made a finding that the proposed density is appropriate based upon the future land use map designations of surrounding property as well as the prevailing development pattern of the surrounding area. r I I I 5