02-13-07 Agenda Spec/WS
DELRAY BEACH
~
CITY COMMISSION All-AnBtcaClty
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA , IIII '
REVISED SPECIAL/WORKSHOP - TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13.2007 .
6:00 P.M. CITY COMMISSON CHAMBERS @
1993
2001
The City will furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with
a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity
conducted by the City. Contact Doug Smith at 243-7010, 24 hours prior to the program or activity in
order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for
meetings in the Commission Chambers.
CJf<
~
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Mayor Jeff Perlman has instructed
me to announce a Special Meeting of the City Commission to be held for the following purposes:
1. APPEAL OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD
DECISION/SANTA FE SALON: Consider an appeal of the Site Plan Review and
Appearance Board's decision regarding the Santa Fe Salon, located at the Southwest corner of
NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue.
2. FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT/NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS
PCS. LLC: Consider the First Amendment to the lease agreement with New Cingular Wireless,
PCS, LLC providing for an increased monthly rental fee from $1,700.00 to $1,850.00 per month
and to change the annual escalator back to 3.00% for the use of the Police Department radio
tower.
3. PROPOSAL FOR FEDERAL LOBBYING SERVICES: Consider the federal lobbying
proposals from Alcalde and Fay, Artemis Strategies, Marlowe and Company, and Governance
Inc./Ben Barnes Group and provide direction on whether to pursue an agreement with one of
the firms and the list of priority issues for federal lobbying.
WORKSHOP AGENDA
1. Proposed Police and Firefighters' Pension Ordinance regulating investments
2. Additional recommendations re: Historic Preservation Design Guidelines - REG Architects, Inc.
3. Pineapple Grove Main Street, Inc. Funding Request
4. Regulation of Smoking on the Municipal Beach
5. Commission Comments
...............................................................................
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with
respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City neither provides nor
prepares such record.
0/\
pIV\
City Of Delray Beach
Department of Environmental Services
MEMORAN
D
u
M
www.mydelraybeach.com
TO:
David T. Harden, City Manager
~
FROM:
Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Director
SUBJECT: SANTA FE SALON SPRAB APPEAL
DATE: February 9,2007
As directed by City Commission at their February 6, 2007 regular meeting, staff has met with the
applicant for the Santa Fe Salon project located at the southwest comer ofN.E. 2nd Street and N.E.
4th Avenue. We reviewed the scope of the project in the context of the applicability of LDR
requirements for the Class III site plan process and associated technical comments from the
Engineering department that were waived by the SPRAB action on January 10,2007.
The applicant and Engineering staff have agreed to the following conditions of project approval:
1. The existing concrete sidewalk abutting the site on N .E. 2nd Street will be repaired as
required.
2. A new paver block sidewalk will be constructed along the site frontage on N.E. 4th Avenue
in accordance with City Standards.
3. A silt fence will be installed and maintained around the site perimeter in accordance with
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
The attached letter from the applicant confirms this agreement and further requests consideration
of waiving other conditions placed on the SPRAB approval. Also attached is a copy of the project
staff report and SPRAB action notification letter to the applicant. Conditions of the approval
related to engineering comments that have been agreed to be removed are struck through.
Conditions of the approval not related to engineering comments from which the applicant is
seeking relief are bold underscored text.
The applicant has requested that this item be reconsidered by City Commission at the Special
Meeting of February 13,2007.
Cc: Paul Dorling, Planning & Zoning Director
Randal Krejcarek, P.E., City Engineer
Tracie Lutchmansinhg, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
Jose Aguila, SPRAB Chair
George Brewer, Applicant
Sf I
The action before the Board is approval of the following aspects of a Class III site plan request
for the Santa Fe Salon, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F):
LI Site Plan;
LI Landscape Plan; and,
LI Architectural Elevations
The subject building and fourteen (14) space parking lot is located on the south side of NE 2nd
Street, adjacent to the east side of the Florida East Coast (F.E.C.) railroad. There is an
additional forty-eight (48) space parking lot associated with this use on the north side of NE 2nd
Street running north along the east side of F.E.C. Railroad.
The subject property is zoned Central Business District (CBD) and contains a combined 0.8775
acres. The parcel south of NE 2nd Street was formerly occupied by the Crossroads Club
constructed in 1948 as a meeting facility, which received Conditional Use approval on January
6, 1996. The property was severely deficient with regard to required parking (88 required, 18
provided). One of the conditions of approval was that within one year of occupying the site the
parking issues would be resolved, either through the execution of agreements for off-site
parking or limitations on meeting times and attendance so as not to exceed the existing parking
capacity. The Crossroads Club occupied the premises on July 22, 1996. Shortly afterwards the
conversion of the four space parking lot on the north side of the property to an outdoor
seating/smoking area was approved by the City Commission. Once in 1997, and twice in 1998,
the City Commission granted time extensions for compliance with the parking conditions of
approval. In 2000, the Crossroads Club purchased the northern property and constructed a 48
space parking lot to satisfying the condition.
The Crossroad Club has relocated to a new facility on Lake Ida Road just west of the CSX
Railroad. A site plan has now been submitted to convert the Crossroads Rehabilitation Club
building to a salon and is now before the Board for action.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by
the body taking final action and the development application/request.
LDR Chapter 4.6 Supplementary District Reaulations:
Reauired Parkina:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(g), personal service provider uses shall provide parking at
a rate of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in buildings up to 5,000 square
feet and 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area plus 0.5 spaces per work station in
buildings greater than 5,000 square feet (Note: Work stations that providing manicure services
which includes both manicure and pedicure chairs shall be calculated as one (1) work station for
each table and chair combined). The building contains 5,995 square feet of floor area and
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 2
twenty-two individual suites. The applicant does not have firm commitments as to the end uses
within each suite so the number of work stations are unknown. However, the combined site
provides 62 spaces that include the adjacent parking area to the north and three (3) handicap
accessible spaces. These 62 parking spaces would accommodate the required 27 spaces for
the gross floor area square footage plus 34 work station spaces resulting in the ability to have 3
work stations per suite. As the applicant anticipates a maximum of 2 work stations per suite,
with a parking demand of 22 spaces adequate parking will be provided.
Site Liahtina:
On-site lighting currently exist and no new lights are required. A condition of approval has been
attached that the applicant provides spun concrete light poles within NE 2nd Street and NE 4th
Avenue right-of-way. These improvements are required to establish a consistent streetscape
with the balance of NE 4th Avenue to the south and NE 2nd Street to the east and west.
ODen SDace:
Within the CBD zoning district a minimum of ten percent (10%) non-vehicular open space is
required. The proposed parking lot will provide eighteen percent (18%) open space, thus
exceeding the requirement.
Bike Rack:
Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(c)(3), bicycle parking facilities shall be provided at any
non-residential uses within the City's TCEA. A bike rack has been indicated on the plans. Thus,
the development proposal meets the LDR requirement.
Other Items:
Florida East Coast Railwav Easement:
A portion of the formerly known Crossroads Club facility exists within the F.E.C. Railroad
easement. The applicant informed staff that a 100 year agreement exists with F.E.C. for a fee of
a $100 per year. The agreement is subject to termination F.E.C. at anytime but does not effect
this application of a change of use.
Riaht-of-wav Dedication:
The right-of-way dedications noted on the site plan and survey are inconsistent. The applicant's
site plan shows that 25' dedication is provided from the centerline of NE 2nd Street and NE 4th
Avenue. The survey shows right-of-way dedication of 25' and 20' for the respective roads.
Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1 (D) 60' is required unless a reduction is supported by the City
Engineer and Department Services Management Group (DSMG). DSMG, which includes the
City Engineer, determined that 50' right-of-ways are adequate for NE 2nd Street and NE 4th
Avenue. As a condition of approval, the applicant needs to verify that 25' has been dedicated. If
not, an additional dedication of 5' must be made.
Allev: The structure abuts an alley to the south. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1 (D) (2), the
required width of an alley is 20' or the existing dominant width. Further, pursuant to LDR
Section 5.3.1 (0) (3), additional right-of-way width may be required to promote public safety and
welfare; to provide for storm water management; to provide adequate area for street trees; and
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 3
to ensure adequate access, circulation and parking in high intensity use areas. The existing
alley right-of-way width is 25'; thus, meeting the LDR requirement.
Streetscape Improvement:
The streetscape that abuts the development property along NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue is
not consistent with the adjacent and surrounding streetscape. Pursuant to LDR Sections
5.31.(E), 5.3.1 (C), and in conjunction with LDR Sections 6.1.2 and 6.1.3, the applicant needs to
provide improvements along NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue to correspond with the existing
abutting streetscape. As a condition of approval, the applicant need to provide pavers block
sidewalks along the back of the existing parking spaces along with on street lighting (spun
concrete light poles) along NE 4th Avenue coupled with landscaping in the newly constructed
landscape nodes and to the west of the new pavers sidewalk. The applicant should also replace
the broken sidewalk along NE 2nd Street with pavers block sidewalks and spun concrete light
poles to match the streetscape improvements to the east and west. Furthermore, the applicant
must revise the site plan and landscape plan to reflect the proper location of the FPL poles
and/or existing parking spaces along NE 4th Avenue and to show the above streetscape
improvements.
Site & Enaineerina Plan Technical Items:
The applicable preliminary technical items contained in Appendix A must be addressed with the
submittal of revised plans prior to plan certification. The applicable final technical items
contained in Appendix A must be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit.
A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City Horticulturist. The plan
provides for improvement to the existing plant material along the perimeter and interior of the
site. A variety of large plants, shrubs, exotics, and groundcover materials are employed to
enhance the development coupled with the relocation of three Sabal Palms on the site.
The main front entry/plaza area is enhanced by an assortment of new plant materials consisting
of Bismark Palm, Desert Cassia accented with Silver Buttonwood, Monterey Bay, Dracaena
Marginata, Spineless Yucca, Zamia, and Silverstone. These plant materials are complemented
with groundcover consisting of Florida Lantana, Dwarf Shore Juniper, Moonglo, Bulbine
Frutescens, and Muhley and Fakahatchee grass.
The Landscape Calculations, on the Landscape Plan, indicate that the proposed landscape
design provides the material necessary to meet the requirements for commercial development.
Based on the above analysis, the Landscape Plan complies with the LDR Section 4.6.16 subject
to the following technical comment are addressed.
Landscaoe Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will
need to be addressed prior to certification of the plan:
1. The Landscape Plan indicates Sabal Palms will be relocated from elsewhere on the
property, please show their current location;
2. That all streetscape improvements are indicated on the Landscape Plan; and,
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 4
3. The parking lot on the north side of NE 2nd Street has not been included in the submittal.
Please provided plans and address any current deficiencies in the landscaping.
LOR Section 4.6.18(E) - Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered,
by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB), in the review of plans for building
permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved:
(1) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and
in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness,
harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality.
(2) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality
such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to
materially depreciate in appearance and value.
(3) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in
the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria
which may be set forth for the Board from time to time.
The proposed architectural elevations involve painting the building a sand paper brown and
adding a new wood trellis at the main entrance. These elevations changes will be
complemented by the new diamond stone (marble chips) plaza area with a 39.5" X 55"
decorative fountain at the center of the plaza coupled with 40 linear feet of 2' high stacked stone
wall at the northwest corner of the site. Verification from F.E.C. that this additional structure can
be constructed within its easement is required. The proposed architectural changes to the
structure and plaza area, accented with the landscaping, will be an enhancement to the
neighborhood and will not negatively impact the surrounding properties and therefore positive
findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18(E).
Pursuant to LOR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(c)(Class III Site Plan Modification), a Class III site
plan modification is a modification to a site plan which represents either a change in
intensity of use, or which affects the spatial relationship among improvements on the
land, requires partial review of Performance Standards found in LOR Sections 3.1.1 and
3.2.3, as well as required findings of LOR Section 2.4.5(G)(5).
Pursuant to LOR Section 2.4.5(G)(5) (Findinas), with a Class III site plan modification
formal findings under Section 3.1.1 are not required. However, a finding that the
proposed changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made
concurrent with approval of a Class III modification.
The development proposal involves the change of use from an assembly facility to a salon.
Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), this minor modification does not significantly impact the
previous findings. However, the applicable Future land Use Map, Concurrency, and
Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions) items as they relate to this development
proposal are discussed below:
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 5
Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map:
The subject property has a Commercial Core (CC) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation
and is currently zoned Central Business District (CBD). The CBD zoning district is consistent
with the CC FLUM designation. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4. 18(B)(3), a beauty salon is a
permitted use in the CBO zoning district. Based upon the above, a positive finding can be made
with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation.
Section 3.1.1(B) - Concurrency:
Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the
Future Land Use Elements of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination
made that 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.
The proposed improvements will not have a significant impact on water and sewer demands,
drainage, parks and recreation facilities or schools. Concurrency findings as they relate to
Streets and Traffic and Solid Waste are most relevant and are discussed below.
Streets and Traffic:
The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Transportation Concurrency Exception
Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, OSSHAD, and West Atlantic Avenue Business
Corridor. The TCEA exempts the above-described areas from complying with the Palm Beach
County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. Therefore, a traffic study is not required for
concurrency purposes for this project. However, the applicant is required to provide a traffic
statement. The applicant's traffic statement indicates the salon total A.M. Peak Hour Trips are 6
and total P.M. Peak Hour Trips are 23 with a total Daily Trips of 507. The traffic statement for
the Crossroads facility utilizes the health fitness club generating rates with total A.M. Peak Trips
of 7 and total P.M. Peak Trips of 21 with a total Daily Trips of 186, which is 321 fewer trips than
the proposed salon. Based on the applicant traffic statement, a slight increase in traffic would
result with the conversion to the salon.
Solid Waste:
The proposal is a conversion/change of use from assembly facility to a salon. The solid waste
produced by the salon use is more than that of the assembly use. The assembly facility
generated 4.80 tons of waste a year (1.6 x 5,995 S.F.l2000) and the salon will generate 30.57
tons of waste a year (10.2 x 5,995 S.F.l2000). The salon produces an estimate 25.77 tons of
more solid waste than the prior assembly use. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its
facilities have sufficient capacity to handle all development proposals until the year 2021. Thus,
the waste generated with the subject development proposal will not have an impact with respect
to this level of service standard.
Section 3.1.1 (D) - Compliance with the Land Development Reaulations:
As described under the Site Plan Modification Analysis of this report, a positive finding of
compliance with the LDRs can be made.
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 6
Department Services Manaaement Group:
The development proposal was reviewed by DSMG to determine if additional right-of-way
dedication is needed for NE 2nd Street, NE 4th Avenue, and the alley way to the south. A
reduction to 50' right-of-way for NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue was recommended and no
addition right-of-way for the alley way was required.
Downtown Development Authority
The development proposal is scheduled for reveiw at the January 8,2007 meeting.
Community Redevelopment Aaency
The development proposal is scheduled for review at the January 11, 2007 meeting.
The development proposal is for a conversion/change of use for 5,995 square feet assembly
facility to a salon. The change will be consistent with the LDR Section 3.1.1 and Section
2.4.5(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan once
conditions of approval have been addressed. This approval is conditioned on the installation of
streetscape improvements along NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue to make the parcel consistent
with adjacent properties. Positive findings can also be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16
(Landscape) and 4.6.18(8) and (E) [Architectural Elevations] when conditions of approval
related to those areas are met.
A. Continue with Direction.
8. Move approval of the request for a Class III site plan modification and architectural
elevations for Santa Fe Salon, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff
report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(G)(5), 4.6.16, 4.6.18(E)
and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the attached conditions of
approval.
C. Move denial of the request for a Class III site plan modification and architectural elevations
for Santa Fe Salon, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report,
and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and do not meet
criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(G)(5), 4.6.16, 4.6.18(E) and Chapter 3 of the Land
Development Regulations.
SPRAB Staff Report - Meeting Date January 10, 2007
Santa Fe Salon - Class III Site Plan Modification, Conversion of use
Page 7
By Separate Motions:
Site Plan:
Move approval of the Class III site plan approval for Santa Fe Salon, by adopting the findings of
fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(G)(5) and Chapter 3 of the
Land Development Regulations, subject to the following condition:
1. That the applicable Site Plan and Engineering Preliminary Technical Items attached in
Appendix A are addressed and three revised plans are provided;
2. That three revised site plans and landscape plans are modified to include all streetscape
improvements for NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue to include: pavers block sidewalks,
concrete spun street lights, and landscape materials behind the sidewalks and in the
landscape nodes along NE 4th Avenue;
3. That plans be modified to accurately reflect location of FPL poles and/or parking spaces
along NE 4th Avenue;
4. That the inconsistencies between the site plan and survey be corrected and verification
of 25' right-of-way from the centerline is provided for both NE 2nd Street and NE 4th
Avenue; and,
5. That verification from F.E.C. is received that the proposed wall is acceptable pursuant to
the F.E.C. easement agreement.
LandscaDe Plan:
Move approval of the Class III site plan modification landscape plan for the Santa Fe Salon, by
adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request
and approval thereof meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(G)(5), 4.6.16 and Chapter 3 of the
Land Development Regulations with the following conditions addressed:
1. The Landscape Plan indicates Sabal Palms will be relocated from elsewhere on the
property, please show their current location;
2. That all streetscape improvements for NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue are indicated on
the Landscape Plan; and,
3. That the parking lot on the north side of NE 2nd Street be included in the submittal and all
deficiencies in the landscaping be addressed.
Architectural Elevations:
Move approval of the architectural elevations for Santa Fe Salon, by adopting the findings of
fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development
Regulations.
i 02/08/2007 15:53 5612723722
~
Bl'EWEl'
111111
BREWER ARCHITECTURE
PAGE 01/01
ARCHITECTURE
85 S.E. 4TH A VENUE
DELRAV BEACH, FL 33483
PHONE: 561,272.7301
FAX: 561.272.3722
BREWERAI~CH ITECTU Rf;.COM
February 8, 2007
Richard Hasko, P.E.
Director of environmental services
434 S. Swinton Ave.
Delray Beach, FL 33444
RE: Santa Fe Salon conditions of approval
Dear Dick:
As per our meeting today with yourself, Randal Krejcarek and Ken Van Arnem in attendance we
shall continue to appeal the conditions of approval by staff and S.P .R.A.B. for the purpose of
satisfying our mutual agreements. We agree with all of the conditions of approval as outlined in
Derrick Cook's approval and appeal letter dated January 23, 2007 with the followlng exceptions:
1. item No.4 we have agreed is not required.
2. item NO.5 we still don't agree with, since photometric standards have not changed and
lighting is installed as per Class V approval dated 8-23-2001 signed by Paul Dorling.
3. item NO.7a we have agreed is not required.
4. item No.7d we have agreed is not relevant since no new meter is proposed.
5. item NO.7e we have agreed is not relevant since irrigation will be connected to existing
meter.
6. Architectural elevations note No.1 was never a condition of approval or made into a motion.
This was added by staff without justification and shall be addressed with the building
department.
In addition we have agreed to provide a 5' wide brick paved sidewalk running the full length of the
East side property line of N.E. 4th Avenue as per City standard color mix (to match) City shall be
responsible for the coordination of moving of the FPL pole if found not to comply with ADA
required clearances. We shall provide a silt fence barrier per city standard detail 09.1 b in all areas
of the site being disturbed during sidewalk repair and construction.
orge Brewer
Project architect
Cc. Ken Van Arnem
January 23, 2007
Mr. Geor~e Brewer
85 S.E. 4 Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33483
Re: Santa Fe Salon (306 N.E. 2nd Street) - Class III Site Plan Modification
Conversion of Use, Conditional Approval Letter and Appeal Notice
Dear Mr. Brewer:
The Planning and Zoning Department has completed its review of your application
for Santa Fe Salon, a Class III Site Plan modification associated with a conversion of
use of an assembly building to a salon. At it January 10, 2007 meeting, the Site Plan
Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) approved the site plan with the following
conditions:
Site Plan:
1. That plans be modified to accurately reflect location of FPL poles
and/or parking spaces along NE 4th Avenue;
2. That the inconsistencies between the site plan and survey are
corrected and verification of 25' right-of-way from the centerline is
provided for both NE 2nd Street and NE 4th Avenue;
3. Repair all existing damage sidewalk area on NE 2nd Street to match
existing concrete;
4. That a current survey is provided reflecting the existing dedication off
NE-2A9 Street and NE 4tA Avenue. If 25' dedioation is not provided, the
appropriate dedication to meet the 25' is required;
5. That a photometric plan is provided for the entire siaht includina
the parkina area on the north side of NE 2nd Street and the plan
also should complv with LOR Iiahtina reauirements;
6. That the applicant attempt to get F.E.C Railroad approval to place the
landscaping stack stone wall within its easement by sending a letter to
F.E.C. and providing a copy of letter to the Planning and Zoning
Department; and,
7. That all Engineering Preliminary Technical items are removed except:
a. Provide copy of certified boundary and topographio survey
meeting requirement of LDR Section 2.4.3(/\), (8), and (D).
SPRAB Conditional Approval Letter & Appeal Notice
Santa Fe Salon Class III Site Plan Modification
Page 2
Existing grades should be t3ken approximately 10 feet outside
all subject property lines for all adjacent properties. Survey sh311
provide sufficient information to determine historical dmin3ge
patterns;
b. Provide sidewalk adjacent to right-of-way line. all sidewalks shall
be minimum of 5' wide and located l' off the right-of-way line,
Le. repair NE 2nd Street with concrete;
c. Provide location of existing water service;
d. Provide proposed 'N3ter meter locations;
e. Indicate location of irrigation water meter (east of I 95 only);
and,
f. Show all easements on Landscape Plans.
8. All Typical Final Engineering Comments are removed.
Landscape Plan:
1. That the Landscape Plan indicates Sabal; Palms will be relocated
elsewhere on the property, please show their current location; and,
2. Confirm and verify the landscape is consistent with the approved
Landscape Plan associated with the Class V Site Plan to construct the
48 space parking area. If not consistent, all landscape materials are
replaced to match approved plan.
Architectural Elevations:
1. That more information is provided about the installation of the
trellis at the front entrance. product information. how it is
attached. etc.
The City of Delray Beach via the Planning and Zoning Department will appeal Site
Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) January 10, 2007 approval of the
Santa Fe Salon Class III site plan modification at the February 6, 2007 City
Commission meeting. The City's appeal will concern SPRAB's removal of the
Engineering Department technical comments conditions and the streetscape
improvements for N.E. 2nd Street and N.E. 4th Avenue conditions.
Should you have any questions regarding this information please contact me at
(561) 243-7047 or via e-mail cook<.Q>.mvdelravbeach.com.
Sincerely,
Derrick L. Cook, Planner
cc: Van Arnem Properties
Project File 2007-054
c
o
-
CO
en
Q)
U-
co
+-'
C
co
en
1:' i
. . ...:2...J.......
ns
tJ)
G)
LL
ns
...
c
ns
tJ)
en
(9
..c
o
co
Q)
al
>-
co
....
Q)
o
..
..
..
r--.
o
o
~
m
-
N
[ITY DF DELIAY IEA[H
DELRAY BEACH
tr.e.d
AII.America City
, III J!
1993
2001
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
~
100 N.W. 1st AVENUE. DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444.561/243-7000
MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Commission
David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM:
Amanda Solomon, Telecommunications Systems Manager
DATE:
February 8, 2007
SUBJECT:
First Amendment to Lease Ae:reement with Cine:ular Wireless
Location WP095/Delrav Beach Police DeDartment
On January 16, 2007 City Commission was asked to approve an amendment to the
agreement that the City has with Cingular Wireless. It was recommended that we go back
to Cingular Wireless and reopen discussions on the requested lease amount and terms.
Based on this direction, staff contacted Cingular Wireless and they have agreed to raise the
rent from $1700.00 to $1850.00 per month and to change the annual escalator back to 3%
from the 2% previously requested. Cingular Wireless indicated that these will their final
offer. If the City is not willing to approve the amendment to the Lease Agreement
requested by Cingular, a 30 day notice will be given by Cingular and all lease payments
will cease. This would result in a lost of revenue to the City in the amount of $117,862.82
over the five (5) year term of the agreement.
Staff has been contacted by Unison Site Management Group regarding a possible lease for
this location, but at this time we are waiting to hear what their offer will be. From my brief
conversation with Unison Site Management Group, I do know that their starting offer
would be less than the $1,800.00 monthly, but at this time I have no further details
regarding what their agreement will offer.
Staff has contacted multiple Municipalities and has found that we are doing better than
some with by getting Cingular Wireless to agree to $1,850.00 per month with the 3%
annual escalation. I had submitted a Request for Information from these governmental
agencies that were currently or who have recently been in negotiations with cellular
companies for tower leases, and even though we did not receive as many responses as I
would have hoped for, those that did respond were either getting substantially less or just
around the $1,800.00 monthly rate.
I am requesting that this item be placed on the February 13, 2007 agenda. Staff is also
recommending that the City Commission approved this amendment with the above changes
as stipulated by Cingular Wireless.
Please call if you have any questions.
Attachment
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
SP2
LEASE EXTENSION TERM SHEET
To:
Brian Shutt
Bill Randoll, Lease Consultant
From:
Subject: N12795632712
Date: January 18, 2007
At the terms and conditions set-forth herewith. Cingular Wireless would consider extending its wireless communications facility lease
agreement for the site located at 300 W Atlantic Ave, Delray Beach, FL 33444. This proposal will expire at the close of business 5
days from the date of this letter..
Current Lease Term(s)
A. Current Base Rent
B. Current Rent Frequency
C. Current Escalation
D. Current Escalation Frequency
$2,318.55
Monthly
3.00%
Annual
New Term
A. New Initial Term (mo)
B. Number of Renewal Terms
C. Additional Term Length (mo)
60
5
60
New Rent
A. New Base Rent
B. New Rent Frequency
C. New Escalations
D. New Escalation Frequency
$1,850.00
Monthly
3.00%
Annually
New Termination & Guarantee
A. New Termination Notice (days)
B. New Termination Fee (mo)
C. Abatement Period (mo)
D. Rent Guarantee Period (mo)
30
12
o
24
Other
A.
Please verify or write in the correct legal ownership for this Site. Is this correct? Yes / No
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, a municipal corporation in the County of Palm Beach and State of Florida
B.
Please verify or write in the correct physical address for this Site. Is this correct? Yes / No
300 W Atlantic Ave, Delray Beach, FL 33444
c.
Please verifY or write in the correct address for notice and correspondence. Is this correct? Yes / No
100 NW 1st Ave, Delray Beach, FL 33444
Landlord Initial:
D.
Effective date of New Amendment?
Tenant Initial:
"This proposal is not a binding commitment and is subject to review and approval of documentation by alI parties and wilI expire at the close of
business 5 davs from the date of this letter. Participation in this program is not required and Cingular will continue to abide by the terms of your
original Lease Agreement, including exercising termination rights where they exist.
Cell Site No: N127956/ WP095/Delray Police Tower_32712
Site Address: 300 W Atlantic Ave, Delray Beach, FL 33444
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT ("First Amendment") dated as of the date
below is by and between CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, a municipal corporation in the County of Palm Beach
and State of Florida, having a mailing address at 100 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444 (hereinafter
referred to as "Landlord") and New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
successor in interest to AT&T Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, having a mailing
address at 6100 Atlantic Boulevard, Norcross, Georgia 30071 (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant").
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant entered into a Lease Agreement dated June 6, 2001; whereby
Landlord leased to Tenant certain Premises, therein described, that are a portion of the Property located at 300
W Atlantic Ave, Delray Beach, FL 33444 ("Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to extend the terms of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to modify, as set forth herein, the Rent payable under the
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to modify, as set forth herein, the Tenant's obligations to pay
Rent to Landlord for a Rent Guarantee Period; and
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant, in their mutual interest, further wish to amend the Agreement as set
forth below.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Landlord and Tenant agree as follows:
1. Term. The Term of the Agreement shall be amended to provide that the Agreement has a new
initial term of 60 months ("New Initial Term"), commencing on February 1, 2007. The Term will be
automatically renewed for up to 5 additional 60 month terms (each an "Extension Term"), unless, 90 days prior
to such renewal, the Landlord Tenant gives written notice to Tenant Landlord of its intent to not renew the
Agreement.
2. Termination. In addition to any rights that may exist in the Agreement, after the Rent Guarantee
Period, as defined below, Tenant may terminate the Agreement at any time with 30 days prior written notice to
Landlord; provided, that Tenant pays to Landlord an amount equal to 12 months of the then current Rent.
3. Modification of Rent. Commencing on February 1, 2007, the Rent payable under the
Agreement shall be $1,700.00 $1.850.00 monthly, and shall continue during the Term, subject to adjustment as
provided below.
Landlord Initial:
Tenant Initial:
4. Modification of Tenant's Obligation to Pay - Rent Guarantee. Notwithstanding Tenant's
obligations to pay Rent set forth under the Agreement, for a 24 month period commencing February 1, 2007 and
ending January 31, 2009 ("Rent Guarantee Period"), Tenant hereby agrees that Tenant's obligation to pay Rent
is guaranteed and such obligation will not be subject to offset or cancellation by Tenant. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, if Landlord exercises any of Landlord's rights to terminate the Agreement, if any, Tenant will be
released from any and all of its obligations to pay Rent during the Rent Guarantee Period as of the effective date
of the termination.
5. Future Rent Increases. The Agreement is amended to provide that commencing on February 1,
2008, Rent shall be increased by 3.00% and every year thereafter.
6. Acknowledgement. Landlord acknowledges that: 1) this First Amendment is entered into of
the Landlord's free will and volition; 2) Landlord has read and understands this First Amendment and the
underlying Agreement and, prior to execution of the First Amendment, was free to consult with counsel of its
choosing regarding Landlord's decision to enter into this First Amendment and to have counsel review the terms
and conditions of the First Amendment; 3) Landlord has been advised and is informed that should Landlord not
enter into this First Amendment, the underlying Agreement between Landlord and Tenant, including any
termination or non-renewal provision therein, would remain in full force and effect.
7. Notices. Section 16 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following: NOTICES. All notices, requests, demands and communications hereunder will be given by first
class certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized overnight courier,
postage prepaid, to be effective when properly sent and received, refused or returned undelivered. Notices will
be addressed to the parties as follows: As to Tenant, New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, c/o Network Real
Estate Administration, Cell Site # N127956, Cell Site Name WP095/Delray Police Tower, 6100 Atlantic
Boulevard, Norcross, Georgia 30071, with a copy to Cingular Wireless Attn.: Legal Department, Re: Cell Site #
N127956, Cell Site Name WP095/Delray Police Tower, 15 East Midland Avenue, Paramus, NJ 07652; and as to
Landlord, 100 NW 1 st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444. Either party hereto may change the place for the
giving of notice to it by thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other as provided herein.
8. Other Terms and Conditions Remain. In the event of any inconsistencies between the
Agreement, and this First Amendment, the terms ofthis First Amendment shall control. Except as expressly set
forth in this First Amendment, the Agreement otherwise is unmodified and remains in full force and effect.
Each reference in the Agreement to itself shall be deemed also to refer to this First Amendment.
9. Capitalized Terms. All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the same
meanings as defined in the Agreement.
[NO MORE TEXT ON THIS PAGE- SIGNATURES TO FOLLOW ON NEXT PAGE]
Landlord Initial:
Tenant Initial:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused their properly authorized representatives to
execute and seal this First Amendment on the date and year below.
LANDLORD:
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, a municipal
corporation in the County of Palm Beach and State
of Florida
By:
Name:
Title:
Tax Id
WITNESSED BY:
By:
Name:
Title:
TENANT:
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company
By:
Name:
Title:
Date
By:
Name:
Title:
LANDLORD ACKNOWLEDGMENT
INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
)
)
)
SS.
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is/are the
person(s) who appeared before me, and said person(s) acknowledged that said person(s) signed this instrument and
acknowledged it to be their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
Notary Seal
(Signature of Notary)
(Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary)
Notary Public in and for the State of
My appointment expires:
REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
)
)
)
SS.
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who
appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said
person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the of
, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
Notary Seal
(Signature of Notary)
(Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary)
Notary Public in and for the State of
My appointment expires:
PARTNERSHIP (consisting of corporate partners) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
)
) ss:
)
I CERTIFY that on _, 200_, personally came before me
and this/these person(s) acknowledged under oath to my satisfaction, that:
(a) this/these person(s) signed, sealed and delivered the attached document as
[title] of [name of corporation] a corporation of the State of
, which is a general partner of the partnership named in this document;
(b) the proper corporate seal of said corporate general partner was affixed; and
(c) this document was signed and delivered by the corporation as its voluntary act and deed as [a]
general partner( s) on behalf of said partnership [by virtue of authority from its Board of Directors].
Notary Public:
My Commission Expires
CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF
)
)
)
COUNTY OF
I CERTIFY that on , 200_,
representative] personally came before me and acknowledged under oath that he or she:
(a) is the [title] of
corporation], the corporation named in the attached instrument,
(b) was authorized to execute this instrument on behalf of the corporation and
(c) executed the instrument as the act of the corporation.
[name of
[name of
Notary Public:
My Commission Expires:
TENANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF
)
) SS.
)
COUNTY OF
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person
who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was
authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Executive Director of New Cimrular Wireless PCS. LLC.
to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
Notary Seal
(Signature of Notary)
(Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary)
Notary Public in and for the State of
My appointment expires:
~
[ITY DF DELIAY BEA[H
DELRAY BEACH
F lOR I D A
D.eaIII
All-America City
, III I!
1993
2001
@ ennt(}cJ Otl f-iE.:{;}'
56:/2..43-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Commission
FROM:
David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE:
FEBRUARY 9, 2007
AGENDA ITEM - WORKSHOP MEETING OF FEBRUARY 13,
2007, FEDERAL LOBBYING PRESENTATIONS AND SELECTION
SUBJECT:
This item is before City Commission to hear presentations from federal lobbying firms
and to potentially select one to represent the City of Delray Beach.
A proposal from Marlowe and Company for federal lobbying services was discussed by
the Commission at the February 6 regular meeting. The Commission directed staff to
conduct additional research. Staff contacted the following firms who will make
presentations on their services (15 minute maximum) at the February 13 meeting. The
order for the presentations will be as follows:
1. Alcalde and Fay
2. Artemis Strategies
3. Marlowe and Company
Proposals from the firms are attached. Alcalde and Fay represent the City of Boca Raton
and the City of Riviera Beach. The City of Boynton Beach and Palm Beach County are
represented by U.S. Strategies. U.S. Strategies elected not to submit a proposal due to
the timing of the request and because they already represent Boynton Beach and Palm
Beach County.
The City Commission may wish to enter into- an agreement for federal lobbying services
with one of the above firms. If the Commission does wish to pursue a federal lobbying
agreement, staff requests direction regarding the Commission's list of priority issues for
federal lobbying.
Staff recommends Commission consideration of the lobbying proposals and direction
regarding whether to pursue an agreement for federal lobbying services and the list of
priority issues for federal lobbying.
DTH/DES/gb
THE EFFORT ALVVAYS MA.TTERS
oR3
ARTEMIS
I STRATEGIES
February 8, 2007
Mr. Doug Smith
Assistant City Manager
City of Delray Beach, Florida
100 NW 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Doug:
On behalf of the professional team at Artemis Strategies (Artemis), we would like to express our
gratitude for the opportunity to assist the city of Delray Beach in representing your interests
before the federal government and other constituencies.
We have reviewed the specifics outlined in our conversations and have prepared the following
response outlining our qualifications, experiences and strategies that we believe will effectively
expand the city's profile and effectiveness in securing support for key city projects within the
Administration, Congress, Federal Agencies, and in the State of Florida.
Your foresight and proactive approach to the government marketplace is commendable, and your
efforts to get "ahead of the curve" are vital to winning an ever-greater role in the federal markets.
We believe that Artemis can help the City of Delray Beach make a significant impact in
Washington, DC through the implementation of a well-designed government relations program.
Based upon our experience and successful track record of representing municipalities, county
governments and others, we are confident that Artemis is well-suited to assist the city in
developing substantive arguments and goal-oriented solutions to support the city's needs.
The Artemis team of professionals has many years experience working with government officials
on many different issues where politics and policy converge and it is our belief that the Artemis
team would bring real benefit to the city's profile and ongoing development of your overall
government relations strategy. While there are a number of firms in Washington well equipped to
simply arrange meetings, we at Artemis believe that we can maximize our value by working daily
to ensure that the City of Delray Beach is strategically positioned to meet your goals.
Please direct all inquiries requires regarding this proposal to the project representative, Jim
Dornan, Artemis Strategies, 1401 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 1010, Washington, DC 20005.
Phone: (202) 783-1080/ Cell: (202) 306-0141
We are excited about the potential opportunity to work with City of Delray Beach and appreciate
your time and consideration of our firm
Sincerely,
Ari Storch
Co-Chairman
THE ARTEMIS TEAM. QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED
Artemis Strategies, co-founded by Timothy Powers and Ari Storch, was founded with a
specific purpose in mind: To provide unique strategic counsel, personalized service and
attention to detail that can go wanting in larger and older firms. This "out of the box"
approach allows the fresh ideas and alternative approaches required to win in the ever-
changing situation in Washington. That is why clients such as eBay, HJ Heinz, GE
Capital, PSEG Energy, Motorola, Erie County, PA, Teva Pharmaceuticals and others turn
to Artemis to get results.
Artemis Strategies brings together a team of nine public affairs and government
professionals uniquely familiar with and ready to assist Delray Beach in navigating the
budget and regulatory processes from beginning to end. Whether working Capitol Hill,
the Administration or other regulatory agencies, Artemis is unparalleled in its ability to
achieve the key objectives for our clients.
PROJECT STAFFING
The proposed Artemis team that would work on behalf of the City of Delray Beach in
Washington would include:
Ari Storch - Co-Chair - Ari comes to Artemis Strategies from RhoadslWeber
Shandwick Government Relations. He has served as a senior consultant to Cassidy and
Associates and as vice president of National Strategies, Inc., and was political and
Congressional Affairs Director for the National Jewish Coalition. Ari also served four
Prime Ministers of the State of Israel in various roles, including as the in-house lobbyist
at the Embassy of Israel for both the Peres and Netanyahu governments where he focused
on securing the annual foreign aid and defense appropriations for the Government of
Israel. A veteran of numerous political campaigns, in 2001 President George W. Bush
appointed him to serve as a member of the U.S. Commission for the Preservation of
America's Heritage Abroad. Some of Ari's clients have included the Government of
Pakistan, PSEG Energy and the Koby Mandell Foundation.
Jim Dornan, Senior Vice President (proposed team lead) - a 20-year veteran of the
national legislative and political process, Jim has managed Congressional races from
Florida to Washington state, but is perhaps best known for his work on Capitol Hill for
six different Members of Congress and other key posts in state and federal government.
Jim is our senior Appropriations lobbyist and represents municipalities such as Erie
County (PA). When he held a similar position for the Russ Reid Company, Jim was
responsible for developing and executing government affairs strategies for clients such as
Nye County (NY), the City of Green River (WY), Abilene Christian University, and the
Tiger Woods Foundation.
Ryan Modlin, Vice President - Ryan joins Artemis Strategies after serving in various
legislative and government affairs positions in Michigan and Washington, D.C. A former
staff member for House Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell (D-MI), he has
represented clients on appropriations, chemical security, commerce, energy, the
Delray Beach, Florida
Proprietary & Confidential
Page 2 of6
environment, intellectual property rights, judiciary and trade as well as general legislative
activities. Before coming to Washington, D.C., Ryan spent four years as the Staff
Director to Michigan State Representative, George W. Mans. He also served as Legal
Staff Assistant at the American Automotive Manufacturers Association and was a Legal
Clerk at Bodman, Longley & Dahling, LLP. Ryan also served as a Staff Assistant in the
Chrysler Corporation's Office of Government Affairs.
Catherine A. Caponi - Vice President - Cathy brings more than 23 years of corporate
expertise to Artemis serving most recently as Vice President of Government Relations
and Economic Development at the H.J. Heinz Company. In this capacity she was well-
known among Members of Congress, committee and subcommittee staff on Capitol Hill,
and within the Administration. Cathy also managed the Heinz Political Action Committee
(P AC57), increasing its employee participation rate by 700% within a two-year period, and
maintaining that rate until her retirement from the Company. As importantly, Cathy is a
recognized expert in the field of economic development, serving as Heinz's chief
negotiator with state and local economic development authorities. Cathy is a graduate of
Robert Morris University holding a Bachelor's Degree in Business Administration and a
Master's Degree in Taxation.
OTHER TEAM MEMBERS AS NEEDED
Timothy F. Powers - Co-Chair - Formerly the deputy director of the Republican
National Committee's (RNC) Congressional Affairs and Strategic Planning operation,
Tim is a veteran political organizer. In the 2000 election cycle, Powers served roles on
the Bush for President Campaign teams in Iowa and Pennsylvania and, after the election,
was appointed to the Bush/Cheney transition team at the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Powers also served as senior advisor to Don Clay, Assistant Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response
(OSWER). A veteran of national, state and local campaigns was named by Campaigns
and Elections magazine as one of 2002's "Top Rising Stars" of Politics -- an honor
reserved for only a handful of individuals from each party. Before joining Artemis, Tim
spent six years as a principal at the PodestaMattoon government relations firm, where
clients included the MP AA, Phrma, RIAA, and Genentech.
Joe Davis, Senior Vice President - Joe is a 16-year veteran of government relations,
political and public affairs campaigns with extensive crisis management, budget and
strategic planning experience at the senior executive level. He served as chief of strategic
communications for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the
Office of the Administrator and was Principal Deputy Director of Public Affairs for the
United States Department of Energy (DOE), serving as the spokesperson for Secretary of
Energy Spencer Abraham and the Department of Energy. Prior to the executive branch,
Joe served as Communications Director for then U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI)
and as Communications Director for the Senate Republican Conference, chaired by then
U.S. Senator Connie Mack (R-FL). While in the Senate, Davis directed public affairs and
media outreach on a variety of initiatives impacting budget, commerce, legal, tax and
regulatory issues
Delray Beach, Florida
Proprietary & Confidential
Page 3 of6
John Van Fossen, Vice President - John Van Fossen has more than a decade of
experience in local and federal government experience with an extensive background in
organizational leadership and project management. Previously, John served as Chief of
Staff to Congressman Peter Hoekstra (R-MI), where he was responsible for advising the
Congressman on all political and public policy matters, developing the office's legislative
agenda and strategy, and managing the day-to-day operations of four congressional
offices in Michigan and Washington, D.C. During his tenure with Congressman
Hoekstra, who is currently the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence,
John worked as the primary staff liaison for the Congressman to the House Budget
Committee, House Education and Workforce Committee, House leadership offices,
Republican Study Committee, the White House and Federal Agencies, local and national
labor unions, education reform groups and city, county and state governments.
Laura Perrin, Associate - Laura brings to Artemis a wealth of Hill experience and an in-
depth knowledge of the legislative process. She has a background in a broad array of
public policy issues having served as the senior legislative assistant for Representative
Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) spearheading the Member's work on health care and energy
issues for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. She also served as the chief aid
for the Congresswoman in her position on the House Education and Workforce
Committee. Prior to working for Congresswoman Blackburn, Laura was the senior
legislative assistant for Representative Ed Bryant (R- TN) where she advised the
Congressman on telecommunications, the Internet, intellectual property and consumer
protection issues for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Laura also provided
assistance to Representatives Blackburn and Bryant in the areas of transportation, trade,
international affairs, and financial services. During her time on Capitol Hill, she also
spent time on the staffs of Representatives Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Zach Wamp (R-
TN).
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE FIRM - SETTING A STRATEGY FOR SUCCESS
The City of Delray Beach will be competing for federal support and attention to their
regulatory issues with others cities.
This requires a strategy to set the city apart from others and be represented by a firm that
can focus on the city's requirements, message and position by providing sound legislative
and regulatory counsel. Not only do we bring a comprehensive understanding of the
legislative, appropriations and regulatory process to this relationship, we understand that
the city cannot focus its efforts with just one or two Members of Congress or executive
branch personnel.
While maintaining and building key relationships with the Florida delegation, we believe
we can achieve greater success by expanding your reach beyond Florida with access and
key messages that speak to the concerns of decision makers across Congress and the
Administration.m
Delray Beach, Florida
Proprietary & Confidential
Page 4 016
Client Relationship Management & Tasks:
For each city initiative, we will work with key officials and political leaders to develop
compelling messages that will generate support for your objectives and motivate leaders
toward action. Accordingly, we would work with you to develop briefing materials for
federal and state relations activities. Weare aware that different audiences may require
emphasis on different message points. These materials will incorporate strategic
messages designed to appeal to the various target audiences.
Key members of our team either lived in or have worked within your community. That
provides our firm a unique understanding to the challenges of the city. Beginning
immediately, we will arrange meetings with city senior executives, council members,
project managers, and others to develop unique strategies to position the city for success
based on your list of priorities and projects. This analysis will include examining both
the tangible and intangible assets that might assist Delray Beach in achieving its goals,
including your existing professional relationships with Washington, past City interactions
(both successes and failures) in dealing with government agencies, regulators and
Congress, and cataloging key data about Delray Beach's business development and
regulatory activities. This information is critical to assisting us in developing targeted
strategies to achieving regulatory decisions that benefit the city and funding for continued
economic development activities.
Gaining Federal Support
Many changes to the appropriations process are possible in the near future and regulatory
agencies continue to set budgets and make key decisions that could impact Delray
Beach's priorities. Therefore, it is critical that we move immediately to position the city
for success. In reviewing the areas outlined in our conversations, we have identified an
initial list of key departments and committees we need to reach, beyond the Florida
delegation:
1. Administration Officials
a. Environmental Protection Agency
b. Department of Transportation
c. Department of Justice
d. Department of Housing and Urban Development
e. Office of Management and Budget
f. Department of Commerce
2. United States Congress
a. Senate Committees
1. Appropriations
11. Commerce, Science and Transportation
111. Energy and Natural Resources
IV. Environment and Public Works
v. Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
b. House Committees
Delray Beach, Florida
Proprietary & Confidential
Page 5 of6
1. Appropriations
11. Energy and Commerce
111. Transportation and Infrastructure
IV. Judiciary Committee
v. Financial Services
COST / PRICING FEE
Artemis is committed to providing a comprehensive federal government relations strategy
at a competitive price consistent with your goals and our efforts. While we have serviced
clients under both an hourly and monthly retainer basis, our clients have consistently
found a monthly retainer arrangement to be the most predictable and cost-effective for
budgeting purposes. We will work with the City of Delray Beach on a monthly fee that
is acceptable to both parties.
CONCLUSION
Nothing substitutes good hard work - going to key decision makers and their staff to tell
your story and make your case. We believe Artemis is uniquely qualified to represent
Delray Beach because of our familiarity with Florida, the capabilities of our team of
professionals, and our ongoing involvement and experience with the federal and state
legislative and regulatory processes. Our philosophy is simple: Weare part of your
team, helping to create opportunities and assisting in solving your problems.
Delray Beach, Florida
Proprietary & Confidential
Page 60f6
ALCALDE & FAY
GOVERNMENT & PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTANTS
Arlington, Virginia. Washington. D.C. . Miami, Florida
February 7, 2007
Doug Smith
Assistant City Manager
100 Northwest First Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Doug:
Per your request, I have enclosed a proposal, and six copies, for Alcalde &
Fay's Washington Representation of the City of Delray Beach. I have also
enclosed some brochures.
In the attached proposal you will see that our firm has over 33 years of
proven success in effectively managing issues and representing municipal clients
before the federal government. We currently represent over 70 public bodies
from across the Country, many of which are from Florida.
We bring a strong bipartisan orientation to our public and government
affairs activities and have extensive experience in advising public bodies and
securing federal funding for them in the areas of economic development and
transportation infrastructure, among other areas. I trust you will agree our
Samples of Successes document at Tab F speaks well for our ability to represent the
City in its specific needs.
I will contact you soon to further discuss our services. Please feel free to
contact me at 703-841-0626 with any questions.
We at Alcalde & Fay would be honored to have the opportunity to
represent the City of Delray Beach in Washington and know that our
representation will produce meaningful results for the City.
.
Enclosures
2111 WILSON BOULEVARD 8TH FLOOR ARLINGTON, VA 22201 PH (703) 841-0626 FAX (703) 243-2874
bout the Firm
Alcalde & Fay is a government and public affairs firm with offices in
Arlington, Virginia. For over 33 years, Alcalde & Fay has successfully managed
issues and represented varied clientele before the United States Congress and the
executive branch. The firm has built a distinguished reputation for effective
public policy representation on behalf of numerous municipal governments, as
well as a myriad of corporations including those in the transportation,
environmental, communications, home-building, health care, energy and defense
industries.
Since its establishment, the firm has grown to approximately 45 personnel
who reflect a rich diversity in both background and expertise. The partners of
Alcalde & Fay include a former Member of Congress, senior staff from Capitol
Hill, and presidential appointees. Also included are partners and associates with
backgrounds in public relations, journalism, marketing and law.
Alcalde & Fay is privileged to provide services to more than 120 clients,
many of which have economic development and infrastructure needs. On their
behalf, we work diligently to secure legislative appropriations and federal grants
and to affect broad national policy.
Drawing on the expertise of our staff, we are able to provide effective
advocacy on behalf of clients with Congress, regulatory agencies, the White
House and various executive agencies. Over the years, we have worked closely
with many members of Congress, several of whom have now reached positions
of seniority and leadership. These relationships combined with our
understanding and experience in the process by which public policy decisions
are made in Washington, enables us to present our client's agenda to influential
people at the most opportune time.
Based upon Alcalde & Fay's experience and accomplishments, we have
been successful in recommending innovative strategies to assure the
achievement of our clients' federal initiatives. Our firm combines past
experience, knowledge of the federal legislative and administrative processes,
and reputation among legislators and staff, with hard work, creativity and
professionalism to achieve success on behalf of our clients.
2
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Our Approach to Seroice
Identifying Opportunities and Pursuing Legislative Appropriations
Alcalde & Fay is well-prepared to provide a full spectrum of federal
governmental relations services for the City of Delray Beach. Upon
commencement of our contract, we would immediately begin working toward
establishing a federal legislative agenda for the City to present to Congress,
which would be based on the City's objectives. This process will involve us
having multiple conversations with you during the early stages of the
commencement of our contract in which we will gather specific information
about your projects. Then we would perform a candid appraisal of the potential
for success for each specific objective and determine the best means for
accomplishing your goals.
This appraisal will enable us, in cooperation with the City, to prioritize
projects for the City's federal legislative agenda. Further, we would strategize
the potential availability of federal funding for each of your designated projects
and prioritize them accordingly. After determining potential federal funding
opportunities to support each of the City's specific objectives, we will prepare
suggested draft letters to the pertinent appropriations subcommittees. Following
this effort, we will schedule meetings with the subcommittee chairmen, ranking
members, and senior staff.
Congress approves 12 appropriations bills that provide discretionary
spending allocations for most federal programs. Many of these bills allow
opportunities for earmarking funds directly to local governments for specific
purposes. At Alcalde & Fay, we have utilized these bills as vehicles for
accomplishing the goals of many of our clients. As a result, we are familiar with
those senior Congressional Members and staff who can best assist with meeting
these objectives.
We are accustomed to representing our clients in meetings with Members
of Congress, agency officials and senior staff. Ideally, it is helpful for City
officials to participate in these meetings at least once a year. We would arrange a
day or two for you to come to Washington to discuss your priorities with your
3
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Congressional Delegation, other pertinent Members of Congress, and federal
agency officials. Prior to the meeting, we would prepare necessary documents
that articulate the City's objectives.
Authorizing Legislation
In addition to the appropriations cycle, specific policies or projects can be
secured through authorizing legislation. All federal programs must be
authorized by Congress, and reauthorization bills are generally offered every
two to six years. The process for securing legislative language is similar to the
appropriations process. The primary distinction is that authorization bills
provide the additional opportunity to shape and change federal policy. For
example, when local governments discover their needs do not fit federal
eligibility requirements and/or its priorities, the authorization process allows an
opportunity to modify the law to satisfy a community's needs.
Identifying and Pursuing Federal Grants
Concurrent with our efforts to secure line item legislative appropriations,
we monitor grant opportunities in each of the federal departments. Independent
of the congressional earmarking process, we would assist you in identifying
grant opportunities and securing funding through these grants. We will research
programs at various agencies to determine whether specific programs support
your activities, and then work to develop congressional support for the applicant
to participate in the designated programs. We will send our Grant Alert for Local
Governments to you, which is a compilation of pending federal grant solicitations,
on a regular basis.
Identifying and pursuing federal grants for our clients involves routine
contact with agency and congressional staff. Our long-term relationships with
career staff will prove beneficial to the City and enable it to more aggressively
pursue this type of federal funding. As new programs are made known to us,
we will bring these initiatives to the attention of the City staff. Advance
notification of an upcoming grant solicitation is important in providing a head
start in developing the application.
4
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Fonnulating Public Policy
Our public clients will generally be interested in securing specific funding
earmarks or grants. However, we also know how important it is to understand
the impact on your City of pending federal legislation. If chosen to represent the
City, we would monitor pertinent pieces of federal legislation and inform the
City of significant legislative developments as they occur. We are prepared to
promote passage of any legislation of particular interest to the City and work to
affect the final bill to assure your maximum benefit.
Our relationships with federal officials and staff will also be an asset to the
City if and when it finds itself encountering a problem that falls under a federal
agency's jurisdiction. Often, a public client will need to cut through bureaucratic
red tape and meet with the appropriate federal agency employee in order to
solve a problem expeditiously.
5
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
~ Congressional Relationships
Recognized as a bipartisan firm, the partners and personnel of Alcalde &
Fay are drawn from both political parties and have among them close working
relations with key legislators and staff on both sides of the aisle. These
relationships extend to the ranks of political appointees and senior career staff in
the federal agencies.
In addition to a rapport with the City's Congressional Delegation, it is
critical that your lobbyist has solid working relationships with key chairmen,
ranking members, and senior staff. At Alcalde & Fay, that is our strength. For
over three decades, we have worked with key leadership and senior staff of
many of the congressional committees. These long-standing relationships based
on professionalism and mutual respect enable us to "stay ahead" of
developments that might be a priority to our clients. These relationships allow
us an opportunity to provide input while legislative initiatives are in their
earliest evolutionary stages. Because the broad range of activities congressional
staff must monitor often overburdens them, it is not uncommon for us to learn of
funding opportunities and policy developments before they are known by your
Congressional Delegation.
Florida Senators Bill Nelson (D) and Mel Martinez (R) along with House
Members Alcee Hastings (D), Robert Wexler (D), and Ron Klein (D) will provide
the base of support for implementing the City's federal legislative agenda.
However, through our representation of clients from across the country, we are
capable of promoting the City's initiatives to other key leaders on Capitol Hill
who are not from Florida. Perhaps most importantly, the firm is well acquainted
with key committee chairmen and ranking members of Congress who will be
instrumental in achieving the goals of the City.
6
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
I Proposed Client Team
To ensure effective representation on behalf of our clients, we have found
it useful to take a team approach. As with any good organization, our greatest
strength, and your best assurance of our successful service on behalf of the City,
resides in the team that we would assemble to represent your interests in
Washington. Client teams are comprised of individuals selected from among the
firm's partners and associates to complement the various issue areas of
significance to the proposed entity. The proposed client team for the City of
Delray Beach is L.A. iSkip' Rajalis, Jim Davenport and Maurice Kurland.
Although different members of the client team may take the lead on
various projects, each of the team members would be knowledgeable about the
City's issues. The objectives of the City would be paired with the skills and
experience of the firm's partners and associates to maximize the likelihood of
success in implementing your federal legislative agenda. Through our
representation, you will have the assurance that the "main contact" for the client
team will always provide timely and appropriate attention to the goals of the
City. In addition, a client team member familiar with your issues and our
activities on your behalf will always be available.
The following are resumes of the Proposed Client Team for the City of
Delray Beach. The resumes provide a description of their qualifications,
credentials and relevant experience. Each of these individuals has substantial
experience in representing public bodies in Washington.
L.A. ~Skip' Bafalis
A former five-term Congressman from Florida, L. A. "Skip" Bafalis
has a background that includes business and government representation.
He began his political career in Palm Beach County with election in 1964
to the Florida House of Representatives and then served in the Florida
Senate for two terms. He was elected to the U.s. Congress in 1972 and
served until 1982. He was the Republic~n nominee for Governor of
Florida in 1982.
7
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Elected to Congress from Florida, Mr. Bafalis first was assigned to
the Public Works Committee, now the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. He then moved to the Ways and Means Committee. An
active member of the Trade Subcommittee and the Ranking member of
the Public Assistance and Unemployment Compensation Subcommittee,
he became known for his expertise in trade and tax matters and authored
and managed passage of wide-ranging estate and gift tax legislation.
Mr. Bafalis has been lobbying in Washington for over 20 years,
and has extensive experience working on behalf of public clients,
particularly those in Florida. He maintains close working relationships
with Members of the House and Senate, many whom are former
colleagues.
After Mr. Bafalis left Congress, he was associated with the law
firm of Shapo, Freeman and Freedman and later was an executive vice
president of a Washington government affairs firm. He served in the U.S.
Army during the Korean War with the rank of Captain and has also been
an investment banker, a real estate developer and active in numerous
civic organizations.
He holds a bachelor's degree from St. Anselm's College in
Manchester, New Hampshire. His alma mater has honored him with its
"Alumni A ward of Merit" for his contributions to the school and to the
nation.
Jim Davenport
Jim Davenport, Partner, manages many of the firm's public clients
from Florida on a wide array of issues including economic development,
transportation, education, environmental issues, and criminal justice. In
this role, he works closely with pertinent Members of Congress, the
Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Corps of Engineers, the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
the Department of Commerce and many other Federal agencies.
8
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Mr. Davenport has been responsible for securing millions of dollars
in congressional earmarks for local governments in Florida ranging from
bridges, roads, beaches and waterways to water and sewer systems, senior
centers, homeless shelters, and technology for law enforcement personnel.
He is an experienced tactician in navigating the congressional
appropriations process and the federal agencies to obtain funding and
legislative language on behalf of his public body clients.
Mr. Davenport has been active in government and public affairs for
eleven years. Prior to joining Alcalde & Fay, he served as Legislative
Assistant in the office of the late Congressman Gerald B. Solomon of New
York where he worked on a broad range of issues including economic
development and transportation. He also served as an associate for
Wehner & York, LLP, handling election law.
Mr. Davenport graduated cum laude from St. Lawrence
University in New York with a bachelor's degree in government. He
obtained a law degree from The Catholic University of America in
Washington, DC and is licensed to practice law in the State of Maryland.
Maurice Kurland
Maurice Kurland, Associate, has been active in government and
public affairs since 1991. He has extensive experience on behalf of
numerous clients in economic development, federal appropriations,
foreign policy, homeland security, broadcast telecommunications, and
education technology.
Mr. Kurland applies his legal and political skills for local
governments, international, and education clients to secure federal
funding, shape foreign policy, and provide new business opportunities.
Prior to joining Alcalde & Fay, he served on the legislative staff of
Congressman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX). Starting in 1997, he worked on a
broad range of issues, including agriculture, energy, economic
development, criminal justice, affordable housing, labor, small business,
tribal, veterans, and appropriations. In 2000, as the Congressman's Senior
9
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Legislative Assistant, he specialized in trade and foreign policy issues, and
served as the Congressman's Telecommunications and Technology liaison
for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus working on mergers, mass media,
and technology in schools.
Mr. Kurland has been involved in grassroots campaigns,
fundraising, advance, and field operations for State, Congressional and
Presidential campaigns. He worked in New Hampshire, Texas and New
Mexico on the 2000 Presidential election, and in Virginia, Pennsylvania
and Ohio during the 2004 election.
He hold's a bachelors of business administration from the
University of Texas in Austin, and a juris doctor from Washington
University in St. Louis, Missouri, where he was a member of the Moot
Court Board. He is licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, the
United States Supreme Court, and is a Board Certified Attorney by the
Texas Board of Legal Specialization.
10
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Fee Proposal
For the scope of services described herein, we would propose a monthly
retainer of $5,000. This monthly retainer is exclusive of out-of-pocket expenses
for services such as telephone tolls, copying, messenger service, parking,
transportation, and postage, which are billed at the actual cost expended. We
would not anticipate the average costs to exceed $100 per month.
Other partners and associates of Alcalde & Fay may be utilized on an as-
needed basis, to complement the efforts of our City of Delray Beach client team
when such efforts would benefit the client. There will be no additional charge
for such work.
11
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Samples of Successes
At Alcalde & Fay, we have a demonstrated history of effective
representation on behalf of our public and private sector clientele. A partial
record of our clients' successes is highlighted below.
Alger County, Michigan
Obtained a congressional directive prioritizing the County's application to
the Office of Rural Development to fund water and sewer system
improvements.
$50,000 for a Geographic Information System (GIS) for the County Sheriff's
Department.
$13.2 million to pave Highway 58.
Alonzo Mourning Charities, Florida
$450,000 for the Overtown Youth Center.
American Maglev Technology, Virginia
$2 million for the Maglev Deployment Project on the campus of Old
Dominion University.
Art of Leadership Foundation, Michigan
$175,000 for curriculum development and training.
$100,000 for mentoring programs.
12
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
City of Atlantic City, New Jersey
$150,000 for the development of a manufacturers business park.
Bay County, Florida
$8.25 million to construct the US 98/Thomas Drive Interchange.
$1 million to resurface County Road 390.
$5.75 million for an Automated Traffic Management System (ATMS).
$6.2 million for the Grand Lagoon Bridge.
$500,000 for development of the Deer Point Reservoir.
$1.006 million for deepening and maintenance dredging of the Panama City
Harbor.
$800,000 for maintenance on the East Pass Open.
City of Boca Raton, Florida
$1.39 million for a Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Facility.
Extended federal participation in beach renourishment project for up to 50
years.
$6.3 million for beach renourishment.
$200,000 reimbursement for the preparation of a Design Memorandum for
Central Beach.
$500,000 for city traffic calming.
$950,000 for the Pearl City Master Plan.
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
13
Secured a Special Temporary Authorization from the Federal
Communications Commission for continued use of the City's police, fire and
rescue wireless services, relieving the City of large fines while the City
finished its application materials.
Secured language for the specific designation for the Contract Tower
Program.
$11.4 million for the I-95/Yamato & Glades Road Interchange.
$1.6 million for an Automated Traffic Management System.
Cargill, Florida
$7.5 million for the Alafia Channel.
Chippewa County, Michigan
$1 million for construction of a new terminal at the Chippewa County
Airport.
$280,000 for law enforcement technology.
City of Clearwater, Florida
$3.5 million to assist the City's implementation of an Intelligent
Transportation System (ITS).
$1.4 million for the development of a regional stormwater retention facility.
$22 million for construction of the City's Memorial Causeway Bridge.
$5 million after acquiring authorization for the Stevenson Creek Estuary
Restoration Program.
14
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$1.95 million for law enforcement technology enhancements.
$1.5 million for neighborhood policing initiative.
$9.39 million for the City's "Beach by Design" Initiative.
$2.35 million for wastewater and reclaimed water infrastructure
improvements.
City of Cocoa, Florida
$600,000 for the reconstruction of Dixon Boulevard.
$400,000 for the extension of Industry Road.
Computer Sciences Corporation
$73.3 million from FAA facilities and equipment budget for an air traffic
management project.
Contra Costa County, California
$725,000 over two years in funds unbudgeted by Administration to study
levee improvements.
Authorization of new rail start.
$5.988 million over four years for maintenance dredging, $2.668 million above
Administration request, by the Administration.
$3 million over four years in construction funding for a dredging project
unbudgeted by the Administration.
15
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$18.678 million over four years, $1 million above Administration request, for
maintenance dredging.
$1.325 million over three years for a Countywide police communications
system.
$438,000 over two years for unbudgeted "new start" of flood control project.
$400,000 over two years for flood control study, $100,000 over Administration
request.
$72,000; entire amount requested, for youth literacy program.
$14 million for construction of new highway.
$1 million for bike/hike trail.
Council of Michigan Foundation, Michigan
Secured language in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, under the Expanded Character Education Program, to include
philanthropy for the Council of Michigan Foundation.
City of Dallas, Texas
$54.774 million, ($52.774 million above Administration requests) over six
years, including "new start" not requested by Administration, for flood
control project, with statutory language each year requiring Corps to fund
project opposed by Administration.
$8 million for construction of a new bridge.
$13.925 million for construction of a replacement bridge.
$82.15 million over three years for construction of a replacement bridge.
$6.805 million over six years, $3.567 million over Administration request, for
study of major flood control project.
16
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
City of Deerfield Beach, Florida
$2.8 million for State Road A-1-A improvements.
Successfully challenged the 1996 Census increasing the population to over
50,000, enabling the City to become eligible for federal funding for which they
were not previously considered.
$450,000 Universal Hiring Program grant from the Department of Justice.
$490,000 for a Hurricane Mitigation Operation Center.
$1.5 million for the Dixie Highway Flyover Bridge.
$800,000 for the preparation of a General Reevaluation Report for Beach
Segment 1.
$224,834 in grant funding for equipment for the City's fire department from
the U.s. Fire Administration.
Edward Waters College, Florida
$725,000 for technology and communications upgrades.
$3 million for the Electronic Engineering Technology Program.
$225,000 for environmental research.
Fairfax Water, Virginia
$600,000 for a feasibility study of the Stony River Dam in West Virginia.
$1.61 million for infrastructure and physical security enhancements.
17
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$400,000 for drinking water infrastructure improvements associated with the
Electric Reliability Project.
Florida A&M University, Florida
$1.4 million for Future Affordable Multi-Utility (FAMU) Materials for the
Army Combat System.
$2 million for the Biological Control and Agricultural Research Program.
Received language directing FEMA to work with the State University System
to fund the Hurricane Mitigation Project.
Florida Inland Navigation District, Florida
$14.8 million for the operation and maintenance of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway in Florida.
$3 million for emergency operation and maintenance of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway in Florida as a result of the 2004 hurricanes.
Obtained approval from the U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Coastal
Barrier Resources Act to allow for maintenance dredging in the Intracoastal
Waterway in a CRRA unit.
Fresno County, California
$500,000 for improvements to a local highway.
$225,000 for Rural Vocational Training Centers.
$310,000 for the Fresno County District Attorney's Methamphetamine
Initiative.
$1.2 million for Friant Road.
18
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$4.3 million for improvements to County roads.
$100,000 for the District Attorney's Methamphetamine Initiative.
$900,000 for maintenance and improvements to State Highway 180 E.
Glendale Community College, California
$750,000 for the Cimmarusti Science Center (equipment, technology,
teacher training and outreach).
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, California
Secured policy revision to permit nonfederal monies spent on seismic retrofit
of bridge work to count toward local share of any federal funds utilized in
future. This provision was critically needed to allow retrofit work to
commence.
Worked with Department of Transportation/W ashington headquarters to
overturn decision made in region and so allow transportation monies to be
used for rail restoration of immediate importance to freight railroad.
$167.11 million through legislative earmarks and/or the Secretary's
discretionary program for seismic retrofit of Golden Gate Bridge.
$3.34 million in unbudgeted funding for the Army Corps of Engineers to
dredge a ferry channel.
$500,000 for the Golden Gate Bridge Ferry Berth Facility.
Grand Valley State University, Michigan
$750,000 for the development of a Teacher Academy.
19
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$250,000 for the Michigan Alternative and Renewable Energy Center (MAREC).
Hendry County, Florida
$1 million for improvements to County Road 833.
$72,750 for improvements to the Hendry LaBelle Community Civic Park.
$150,000 for books and technology for the Harlem Library.
$6.6 million for improvements to State Road 80.
Hillsborough Community College, Florida
$340,000 for the Information and Instructional Technology and Innovative
Technology Program (IT3).
$200,000 for the Veterinary Technology Program.
$100,000 for Community Oriented Police Training Facility equipment.
Hillsborough County, Florida
$56.5 million for widening and safety improvements to 1-4.
$2.2 million for farm worker housing.
Doubled the size ($75 million to $156 million) of federal AIDS-HIV Housing
program, with County enjoying commensurate increase in its apportionment.
$1 million earmarking for community-based multi-use AIDS-HIV housing.
$6 million startup for Tampa Bay Regional Rail Project.
$681,000 for Justice Department Weed & Seed grant.
20
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Assisted in making ornamental tropical fish eligible for federal disaster
insurance.
Assisted in obtaining an appropriation of $950,000 in capital funding for an
ornamental tropical fish research center located in the County. Also helped
secure enactment of an amendment declaring ornamental tropical fish
research a high-priority item as part of the agriculture research bill.
$100,000 in unbudgeted funds for initial planning of a water reuse project.
$500,000 authorization to fund wetlands research/exhibit at museum.
$614,000 in funding for the Ruskin Tropical Aquaculture facility.
Assisted in securing language that directed the Corps of Engineers to deposit
dredged sand on Egmont Key.
$1.7 million for moving materials to Egmont Key.
$1.5 million for an Army Corps of Engineers study to investigate the
feasibility of federal improvements to the shoreline in Egmont Key.
$411,000 for Ruskin Laboratory research.
$485,000 for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements.
$1 million for a new start highway improvement project.
$200,000 for an alternative water project.
$3.2 million for Platt Street Bridge.
$2.4 million for Columbus Street Bridge.
City of Hobbs, New Mexico
$1,550,000 for infrastructure associated with the development of the Hobbs
Industrial Air Park (HIAP).
21
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
City of Homestead, Florida
$750,000 for the East-West Bus Connector over several years.
$1,050,000 for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements.
$500,000 for facilities and equipment at the William F. "Bill" Dickinson Senior
Center.
$5.6 million for the widening of SW 328 from SW 137 Avenue to 152 A venue.
$2 million for the widening of SW 320 (Mowry Drive) from Flagler Avenue to
SW 187 A venue.
Houston Independent School District, Texas
$1 million for the School District's youth violence prevention initiative.
$770,000 to support multi-purpose early childhood education centers.
$680,000 to provide advanced telecommunications systems for district
schools.
Worked to secure $500,000 appropriation for improving the School District's
technology infrastructure.
Secured language in both the House and Senate Labor, Health and Human
Services and Education Appropriations bill urging the Secretary to give
consideration to school districts like HISD with "aggressive plans to utilize
education technology."
Successfully directed an effort to obtain an exemption from H1-B visa filing
fees for elementary and secondary institutions.
22
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Jacksonville International Airport, Florida
Worked with officials in the Federal Aviation Administration to secure a $2.2
million discretionary grant for runway improvements.
Worked to secure designation of the Jacksonville Airport within the FAA's
Military Airport Program. This makes the airport eligible for grants for
capital improvements for a five-year period.
Received report language directing the FAA to fund a new taxiway.
$6.6 million for airport access road.
Jacksonville Port Authority, Florida
$20 million over three years for a special highway demonstration project.
Secured direct appropriations without a corresponding authorization
expediting the project by at least two years.
$7 million for 1-295jDuval road interchange improvements.
$9.5 million for access road to Talleyrand Seaport.
Secured preliminary funding for the deepening of the St. John's shipping
channel to a depth of 41 feet.
Through our work with the US Customs Service and the Trade Subcommittee
of the House Ways and Means Committee, our firm was successful in
designating additional customs inspectors to the Port of Jacksonville.
Secured legislation authorizing the Corps of Engineers to widen the Blount
Island Turning Basin.
Made improvements to the Mill Cove Channel a Federal responsibility, and
secured $4 million for the project.
$750,000 earmark to assist with expanding the docking area at Talleyrand.
23
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$3 million for construction of dredge disposal site at Bartram Island.
Secured authorization for deepening of Jacksonville Harbor.
$1 million for new start construction for Jacksonville Harbor.
$7.5 million for the dredging of the Jacksonville Harbor.
$300,000 for the general cleanup of the Talleyrand dock and for the building
of a cruise ship terminal.
Received language authorizing a new Army Corps of Engineers study.
Kinder Morgan, Florida
$500,000 for the dredging of the Port Sutton Channel.
Lake County, California
$250,000 for investigation and planning of a marsh restoration project.
Secured provision authorizing no-cost transfer of 773 acres of Coast Guard
property to the County, allowing reconveyance of land after five years.
$150,000 for an aquatic plant control system.
Lake County, Florida
$11.6 million for the widening of State Road 50.
$200,000 for construction of the Citrus Ridge Library.
Obtained a congressional directive that makes the County eligible to receive
grant funding through the Department of Agriculture's Rural Development
24
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Programs even though the County does not technically meet program
criteria.
Obtained a congressional directive to fund the County's drinking water
study.
City of Las Vegas, Nevada
$5 million for the Sahara A venueJI-15 interchange.
$2.5 million to conduct a feasibility study on building a 40 - mile mag-lev
train from Las Vegas to the state border.
$44.87 million for various transportation infrastructure projects.
$575,000 allocation for intelligent transportation systems.
$450,000 for combating Methamphetamine labs.
$155 million for the Las Vegas corridor fixed guideway system.
$2 million to upgrade mobile and in-vehicle computers.
$750,000 for downtown development initiatives.
Las Vegas Convention Authority
$56.25 million to widen and improve interchanges on 1-15 in Nevada and
California.
Lea County, New Mexico
$1.2 million for design and engineering of Route 128.
$350,000 for detention center.
25
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
TABLE of CONTENTS
About the Finn
II
Tab A
Our Approach to Service
II
TabB
Congressional Relationships
II
TabC
Proposed Client Team
II
TabD
Fee Proposal
II
TabE
Samples of Successes
II
TabF
$6 million for construction of Route 128.
$2 million for construction of US Highway 62/180.
$250,000 for Juvenile Corrections Education Program.
Liquidmetal Technologies Inc., Florida
$3.4 million for Liquidmetal Alloy-Tungsten (LA- T) Armor Piercing
Ammunition.
$1 million for a corrosion study for the U.S. Air Force.
$4.2 million for the DARPA Kinetic Projectile for the U.S. Army.
City of Maitland, Florida
$240,000 for a Senior Citizens Center.
$3 million for a traffic mitigation project at US 17-92/Horatio Avenue.
$200,000 for law enforcement technology upgrades.
Marin County, California
$2.5 million to remove abandoned dry-docks which represented a hazard to
navigation.
Authorization of $15.1 million to acquire freight rail right of ways which are
suitable for conversion to passenger use.
$12 million interest free federal loan to purchase additional freight rail right
of way for public transit purposes and changed program crIteria to make this
project eligible.
Authorization, and subsequent reauthorization, of rail new start.
26
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$4 million to expand a national recreation area.
$5.75 million for an HOV gap closure project.
$1 million for 80 units of housing for the low-income elderly.
Assisted in securing modest grant for acquisition of computer equipment for
police department.
$3.107 million over several years for study of ecosystem restoration study of
lagoon project, $2.767 million over Administration requests.
$34.1 million over several years for study and construction of ecosystem
restoration project of wetlands, including "new start" funding, $8.6 million
over Administration requests.
$1.05 million for small flood control project not requested by Administration.
$750,000 to reconstruct the Tennessee Valley Bridge, a bicycle/pedestrian
project.
$1.03 million to study high incidence of breast cancer.
$50,000 for Safe Routes to Schools.
Secured authorizing language for a boundary adjustment to expand a
national park facility.
$1.175 million to purchase property for expansion of a national park facility.
$325,000 earmark to assist with an airport runway extension. Worked with
Administration to address bureaucratic holdup of funding release, and
secured additional $1.175 million, for $1.5 million total.
$4.478 million to establish shuttle service and improve access to parks.
$16 million to combat Sudden Oak Death
27
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$425,000 for a wastewater treatment project.
$800,000 for cultural and community center
$2.738 million for flood control project over several years, $788,000 above
Administration requests.
$900,000 for construction of new bicycle path.
$500,000 secured from the Federal Highway Administration's Innovative
Bridge Research and Construction Program for the construction of a new
bridge.
$25 million to carry out a nonmotorized transportation pilot program - one of
four communities nationwide to receive this designation and funding.
$27 million to construct highway widening.
Melbourne International Airport, Florida
Assisted in securing $800,000 from the Department of Transportation's Small
Communities Air Service Development Program to help bring commercial air
service to the airport.
Mendocino County, California
Received congressional designations for a wastewater treatment project.
$100,000 for new start of watershed study not requested by Administration.
Received congressional designation for land acquisition at airport.
Received congressional designation for project to improve watershed by
improving gravel road.
$500,000, for study to increase capacity at dam, $150,000 above
Administration requests.
28
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$175,000 for land acquisition at airport.
$400,000 for road improvements accessing Bureau of Land Management
property .
$5.6 million for construction of highway bypass.
$225,000, $197,000 over Administration budget, for dredging of small harbor.
City of Miami, Florida
$2 million for a new rail start.
Secured a $50 million authorization for a new rail start.
Miami-Vade County, Florida
$25 million for East-West Rail Corridor.
$5 million for the North Rail Corridor.
$9.5 million for buses and bus facility.
$8 million for construction of Miami-Palmetto Metrorail.
Enabled U.s. Customs Service to continue to use the surplus in the customs
user fee account to fund up to 50 inspector positions.
$10.889 million for the Miami Harbor Dredging Project.
Assisted in establishment of the McKinney/Homestead homeless facility with
funding under the Defense Base Closure Act.
Assisted in identifying unspent HUD dollars which were targeted for
rescission by Congress and ensured that the dollars were obligated so that the
County did not lose them.
29
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Successfully struck rescission provision that would have reduced Port of
Miami Tunnel funding by $5.8 million of the total $10.3 million project
amount.
Restored $19 million in targeted assistance funding for immigration support
programs in welfare reform legislation.
Stripped provision adverse to County, which would have reduced assistance
for legal aliens from immigration reform bill.
Secured authorization for credit & reimbursement for costs of work related to
the Agricultural & Rural Lands Retention Plan & the South Biscayne Bay
Watershed Study which are contained within the Everglades & South Florida
Ecosystem Restoration Critical projects.
$500,000 for Biscayne Bay Feasibility Study.
$18.45 million for Miami Harbor dredging.
$3.55 million for the Dade County Juvenile Assessment Center over several
years.
$4 million for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements.
$1 million for a mosquito helicopter.
$30 million in reprogrammed funds from the Army Corps of Engineers.
$3 million for Miami port tunnel.
Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Florida
Secured $19 million over several years under the "Refugee and Entrant
Assistance" program for communities with a large concentration of
immigrant youth.
$2 million to enhance technology equipment for the school policing initiative.
30
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$638,000 to establish "career academies."
$500,000 for Marine Junior Reserves Officers' Training Corps Program.
$250,000 for a literacy teacher training program.
Worked cooperatively with the School District's Congressional Delegation to
revise legislative language to more accurately describe the population of
immigrants predominantly served by the School District.
Worked to increase funding by $6 million for the Magnet Schools Programs.
Worked to eliminate provisions that would have hindered the School
Districts ability to participate in the Medicaid Reimbursement Program.
Worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency to resolve a $6.1
million debt.
Secured language which deleted the fiscal year limitation on the use of the
school district's grant from the Economic Development Agency.
Miami-Dade County Water and Sewer Department, Florida
$1 million for preliminary work on proposed water reuse facility.
$1.3 million for sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) study.
Miami-Dade Seaport, Florida
Secured language directing the Army Corps of Engineers to dredge the port.
$23 million for the completion of high-span bridge connecting downtown
Miami to the seaport.
$300,000 for a General Reevaluation Report (GRR) to study further channel
improvements.
31
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$15 million for reimbursement to the Seaport Department for dredging work
already completed at the Seaport's expense.
$3.9 million for specific environmentai mitigation work which has already
been accomplished at the Seaport's expense.
$400,000 for the Biscayne Bay Feasibility Study.
Mitretek Systems, Virginia
$13.985 million for a Center for Criminal Justice Technology.
Obtained an authorization to reform the Department of Homeland Security's
first responders program that would allow the Center for State Homeland
Security to partner with states to qualify for grant funding.
Obtained an authorization in the 2005 Department of Justice Appropriations
Authorization Act allowing the Department of Justice to utilize the services of
the Center for Criminal Justice Technology (CCJT) and for Congress to
appropriate $25 million to the CCJT over three years for this purpose.
Transportation Agency for Monterey County, California
Authorization of new rail start.
$1 million for a new rail start.
Worked with State agency to successfully address bureaucratic obstacle, thus
allowing release of $4.2 million for a highway project.
$6.436 million for road improvements critical to major tourism industry.
$5 million for interchange improvements critical to agricultural industry.
$1.65 million in statutory redesignation of highway bypass funds necessary to
allow preferred use of previously authorized funds.
32
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Morris Brown College, Georgia
$97,000 for the renovation of a building.
Navajo Agricultural Products Industry, New Mexico
$1 million for irrigation operations and maintenance.
$750,000 for operation and maintenance.
New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, New Mexico
$7.1 million for the ILEA program.
City of North Las Vegas, Nevada
Successful In terminating the Department of
demonstration project, which would have allowed
transfers of low-level nuclear waste in the City.
Energy's proposed
multiple rail-to truck
$200,000 for an Army Corps flood control project.
Worked with the U.s. Postal Service to secure funding for, and accelerate the
construction of, the new North Las Vegas Post Office.
Intervened on the City's behalf with the Las Vegas Office of the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) to assist in its request to use 160 acres of federal
land.
$3 million to relocate families impacted by fault line subsidence.
Successful in procuring funding for the Cheyenne A venue Interchange
through the State DOT office.
33
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Assisted in negotiation of cooperative agreement to construct improved
Interstate interchange.
Worked with State DOT to secure $4.6 million for interchange improvements.
$2 million to widen Craig Road.
Secured $300,000 to support law enforcement officers and to train local and
state law enforcement officers on the proper recognition, collection, removal
and destruction of methamphetamine.
$5 million for the Craig Road Overpass.
$1.8 million for Intelligent Transportation Systems.
City of North Miami Beach, Florida
$500,000 for drinking water, wastewater and sewer infrastructure
improvements in the Highland Village neighborhood.
$2.85 million for wastewater and sewer infrastructure improvements.
Secured $950,000 for wastewater infrastructure improvements, which would
replace septic tanks in a mobile home park.
Worked to delete language that would have denied funding for disaster relief
to parks, recreation departments, beaches and other similar entities under the
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.
$1.2 million to construct a bicycle path.
$100,000 for law enforcement initiatives.
$2.2 million for the reconstruction of Hanford Boulevard
34
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Operation Warm, Pennsylvania
$125,000 for the Pennsylvania Youth Coat Distribution Project.
Orlando-Sanford International Airport, Florida
$1 million for a runway extension.
$500,000 for airport improvements.
$400,000 for entranceway streetscaping.
Osceola County, Florida
$18.75 million to widen US-192.
$3.5 million to treat invasive aquatic plants that are a nuisance to the County's
water system.
$500,000 for the Osceola County Agriculture Center.
$500,000 for courthouse restoration.
$500,000 for drainage basin improvements.
$1 million for an Instrument Landing System at Delray Beach Airport.
$400,000 for public safety center communications upgrades.
$350,000 for homeless shelters.
$100,000 for construction of the New Council on Aging Facility.
City of Oviedo, Florida
$180,000 for law enforcement technology upgrades.
35
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Worked to secure $140,778 for a Firefighters Assistance Grant.
$1.6 million for State Road 426/County Road 419.
Palm Beach County School District, Florida
$600,000 for an after school and evening bilingual language instruction
program for immigrant students and their parents.
$825,000 for a family literacy project including bilingual education,
counseling services and distance education, and for professional
development.
$500,000 for security upgrades.
$200,000 to expand curriculum and professional development.
$150,000 for a gang prevention program.
City of Palm Springs, California
$3 million for the Belardo Bridge Project.
City of Pembroke Pines, Florida
$2 million for the Pembroke Road Overpass.
$1 million for 1-75 & Pines Boulevard Interchange.
$200,000 for the Water Treatment Plant Expansion.
$3 million for 1-75 & Pines Blvd Improvements.
$7.8 million in Highway Reauthorization Bill for 1-75 Improvements.
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
36
City of Petaluma, California
Authorization of $32 million for a flood control project, not requested by the
Administration, allowing for reimbursement of funding already expended by
the City.
Secured Appropriations committee report language instructing the Army
Corps to reprogram funding for the flood control project, which resulted in
an administrative reprogramming of $3.1 million.
$23.3 million for construction of flood control project, $14.9 million above
Administration requests.
$5.695 million for maintenance dredging, $4.695 million above
Administration requests.
Philadelphia School District, Pennsylvania
$3.5 million for the district's professional development and related services.
$900,000 for the College Opportunity Resources for Education initiative for
disadvantaged students.
City of Plantation, Florida
$500,000 for the Multi Use Recreational Trail (MURT) system.
$337,500 for a community amphitheater.
Obtained a congressional directive that makes the City eligible to receive
grant funding through the Department of Agriculture's Rural Development
Programs even though the City does not technically meet program criteria.
Obtained a congressional directive to fund the City's stormwater
management plan.
37
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$1,288,000 for the Central Transit Greenway System.
Pointe Coupee Parish School System, Louisiana.
$200,000 for computer technology and infrastructure.
Port of Palm Beach, Florida
$16.03 million for the Route 710 connector construction and improvements.
$500,000 in initial funds for Skypass at the Port.
$3.9 million congressional authorization for the Lake Worth Inlet Sand
Transfer Plant.
$1.81 million for summer dredging at the Harbor with initial placement of
material on Peanut Island with subsequent transfer to the beaches.
$1.511 million for engineering and construction of the Sand Transfer Plant.
$18.177 million for the operation and maintenance of Palm Beach Harbor.
$300,000 for a feasibility study and the deepening and widening of Lake
Worth Inlet.
$100,000 secured to proceed with an authorized Reconnaissance study on the
Harbor dredging.
Obtained congressional language to help expedite the construction of a sand
transfer plant
Obtained congressional language to protect the Port from a loss of Customs
Service inspectors after U.s. Customs threatened with a layoff of numerous
inspectors.
38
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Congressional language making ferries operating out of the Port of Palm
Beach eligible for collection of user fees even though current law prevents
such fee collection.
PrimlandlPatrick County, Virginia
$5.25 million to improve highway access to land critical to County's economic
development program.
Port of Sacramento, California
$8.3 million to construct a bridge to allow development of property necessary
for port expansion.
Powerlinx
$800,000 for powerline rearvision motor carrier backover motor carrier safety
research.
City of Rio Rancho, New Mexico
$4 million for engineering and planning for Paseo de Volcan between Unser
Blvd. and Iris Road.
Rio Rancho Public Schools, New Mexico
$500,000 for a Teacher Academy of Excellence.
City of Riviera Beach, Florida
$750,000 for police communications equipment.
$1.3 million for a traffic calming project.
39
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$600,000 for a stormwater management plan.
$502,500 for an urban retail development project.
$500,000 in grant funding from EP A for operation of the City's airstrippers.
Reversed position of Environmental Protection Agency mandating that they
adopt and implement a plan to actively treat and remove contamination from
the City's drinking water. The estimated cost of the remedy is $865,000.
Initiated an investigation by the EP A Ombudsman of the EP A's handling of
the City's contaminated water problem. This action led to the EP A's decision
to cover the operation and maintenance costs of the City's air strippers,
relieving the City of an $880,000 expense.
$2 million for Blue Heron Boulevard improvements.
San Bernardino City Unified School District, California
$1.1 million for a vocational training and work opportunities program.
$500,000 for a program for developing English and academic skills for English
learners.
San Juan County, New Mexico
$1,000,000 for redecking of County Bridge #5722.
$900,000 for the City of Kirtland, New Mexico, for Phase 1 of a sewer system
project.
$150,000 Juvenile Services.
$1 million for Kirtland Sewer.
40
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$575,000 for resurfacing CR 4990.
$800,000 to pave CR #7950.
City of San Rafael, California
$1.8 million for a canal dredging project not requested by Administration; this
was 100% of amount requested, in first year of their request.
Sandoval County, New Mexico
Three soft marks in Agriculture, the Rural Development Community
Advancement Program and the Rural Development Distance Learning,
Telemedicine and Broadband Program for Sandoval Health Commons.
$250,000 in Transportation-HUD, EDI account for construction and
equipment for the Sandoval Health Commons
$240,000 in Commerce Justice State COPS account for communications
equipment.
$1.6 million for development of Paseo del Volcan corridor from Iris Road to
US Highway 550.
Sonoma County, California
$2.75 million over three years for construction of park and ride lots.
$6 million for intermodal transportation facilities.
$1.5 million for construction of Visitor's Center.
$37.85 million to widen Highway 101.
Authorization of new rail start for the County.
Secured funding for installation of radar at County airport.
41
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$1 million to assist with construction of a bus garage.
$500,000 for a landfill gas conversion facility.
$500,000 for a CNG fueling facility upgrade.
$225,000 for sewage improvements for local community.
$500,000, for sewage improvements for local community.
$1.218 million for purchase of CNG transit buses.
$1 million, discretionary grant for airport runway improvements.
$635,000, discretionary grant to attract service to airport, from the Small
Airport Assistance Program.
$5.6 million for highway widening.
Sonoma County Regional Parks, California
$5.6 million for preparation of dredge material site, with a statutory
requirement that old dredge materials be used to construct a new public park,
and dredging of a bay. Administration had requested $1.9 million for a
dredging project.
Sonoma County Water Agency, California
$1 million to replace septic systems with sewage hookups.
$750,000 for expansion of capacity at a sewage treatment plant.
Initiated effort to establish Pacific Salmon Recovery Program. Worked
extensively with Administration, and developed coalition with other coastal
states and their congressional delegations. The Program was funded at $58
million its first year.
42
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Have secured $600.5 million over six years for Pacific Salmon Recovery
Program
$500,000 for a Bureau of Reclamation Project to reuse recycled water, not
requested by the Administration.
$8.12 million to study four ecosystem restoration projects, budgeted by
Administration at $6.695 million. Each project was initially a new start not
requested by the Administration.
$38.093 million in operations and maintenance funding of a dam, including
substantial additions over the budget request to fund improved fish hatchery
operations.
$3.35 million for environmental restoration of salt marsh, compared to
Administration requests of $1.975 million.
$1.495 million for a regional water reuse project of the Bureau of Reclamation,
not requested by the Administration.
$32.297 million in operations and maintenance funding of a dam and dam
facilities.
City of St. Cloud, Florida
Obtained a congressional directive that makes the City eligible to receive
grant funding through the Department of Agriculture's Rural Development
Programs even though the City does not technically meet program criteria.
Obtained a congressional directive to fund the City's stormwater
management plan.
$200,000 for the Lakefront Improvement project.
43
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
South Seminole & North Orange County Wastewater Transmission
Authority, Florida
$150,000 for wastewater pipes and mechanical equipment.
Stevens Institute of Technology, New Jersey
$52 million for the Institute's Munitions MANTECH Program.
$10 million for mine clean-up research.
$1.25 million for construction of the Laboratory for Business Innovation.
$4.3 million for the Rangesafe Program.
$7.5 million for an Information Assurance Center.
$500,000 for the expansion and enhancement of an ocean-based science and
mathematics education project.
$3 million for landmine detection.
$1.4 million for the Center for Maritime Systems.
$2.1 million for Armament Systems Information Assurance.
$6.8 million for the Center for Critical Infrastructure Protection.
City of Tampa, Florida
Worked with HUD to expedite approval of three section 108 loan applications
totaling over $10 million critical to City's economic development efforts.
$35 million HOPE VI grant.
$1 million for intermodal transportation center.
44
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$900,000 for refurbishment of the West Tampa El Centro Espanol Building
$500,000 for vehicle law enforcement video cameras.
Secured authorization language for aquifer storage and recovery
infrastructure.
$315,000 for the South Tampa Area Reclaimed Project.
Tampa Port Authority, Florida
The Main Channel deepening project was, upon its completion, the largest
public works project in the state of Florida. This was completed at 100
percent federal government expense, with a total cost in excess of $200
million.
An exemption from limitations placed on the use of tax exempt bonds for the
acquisition of property for the Tampa Port Authority.
$175,000 for improvements to the Alafia Channel, despite the opposition of
the Army Corps of Engineers.
$2 million grant from the Economic Development Administration for
navigational improvements necessary for business expansion at the Seaport.
$1 million grant from the Federal Highway Administration for the
construction of ferry docks.
$1 million for economic development and revitalization efforts at the
Garrison Seaport.
Secured $3.2 million for dredging the Ybor Turning Basin.
$70 million authorization for federal improvements to the Alafia Channel,
despite Administration's opposition.
45
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Secured an authorization for improvements to the Port Sutton Channel.
Secured the conveyance of the Department of Navy property to the Tampa
Port Authority.
$500,000 for improvements to the disposal areas.
$12 million for the dredging of the Big Bend Channel.
$200,000 for continuing the General Re-evaluation Report (GRR).
$202,000 for a terminal expansion.
$2.5 million for the widening of a portion of the main channel. Also secured
language directing the Army Corps of Engineers to widen portion of
channel.
Obtained authorization for new construction work at CUT B.
City of Treasure Island, Florida
$50 million for the Causeway Bridge.
$500,000 for wastewater and sewer system upgrades.
$375,000 for a beach access project.
$450,000 for signalized crosswalks to increase pedestrian safety.
TREX Enterprises, San Diego, California
$7.5 million for the Target Acquisition and Targeting Systems (RTATS)
Program.
$7.4 million for the Geosynchronous Light Imaging National Testbed
(GLINT) Program.
46
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Tulare County, California
Secured congressional directive to the Department of Agriculture to assist
with construction of farm to market roads essential for economic
development.
$12.45 million for construction of farm-to-market roads.
$500,000 for establishment of an international agricultural trade center.
Secured congressional directive to Department of Justice to fund a Rural
Crime Prevention Demonstration Program.
$6.45 million over several years for Rural Crime Prevention Program.
$1.2 million for safety-related construction improvements to local highway.
Secured new start construction funding, not requested by the Administration,
for a flood control project, with $20.5 million in funding to date compared to
$14 million requested by Administration.
$2.4 million for road improvement projects.
$500,000 for a vocational training center.
$4.5 million to increase capacity at an Army Corps dam.
University of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada
Secured $1,500,000 for advanced planning for a building on the UNL V
campus that would house several federal and state agencies as well as UNL V
research staff.
$7.5 million for nuclear waste transmutation.
$8 million for defense wide electronic records management.
$200,000 for study of the biological effects of low level radiation exposure.
47
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$1.5 million for the environmental restoration of Lake Mead.
$650,000 for the Center for Workforce Development and Occupational
Research.
Secured appropriations language for the Biotech/Bioengineer Research
Facility and Cancer Center.
$2.605 million for UNL V telemedicine network.
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
$112 million authorization for beach erosion control and hurricane protection
project.
$100.06 million appropriation for construction of a Beach Erosion Control and
Hurricane Protection Project.
Waived general law to allow previously expended local funds to count
toward local share of project.
Secured 50-year authorization of federal participation for a project, exempted
from existing funding cap.
Coordinated efforts leading to a Commerce Department decision to allow
construction of the Lake Gaston water pipeline.
$800,000 for funding of innovative homeless activities.
$1 million for the study of a new intermodal center.
$4.86 million for channel maintenance of Rudee Inlet.
$7 million for construction of Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt.
Secured $250,000 to initiate construction of a marine mammal stranding
center.
48
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$198,000 appropriated to reimburse City for unauthorized fees imposed by
the Department of Interior, and secured a congressional authorization for this
action in the WRDA.
$1.1 million for beach renourishment reimbursement.
$4 million in Construction funds for the Virginia Beach Hurricane Protection
project's 79th Street Outfall.
$1.053 million for the dredging of the Rudee Inlet.
$753,000 for the feasibility study of Sandbridge Beach.
$10.78 million for the renourishment of Sandbridge Beach.
$400,000 for the Norfolk A venue Bike Trail.
$800,000 for the Atlantic Avenue Trails.
$150,000 for the Providence Road Trail Project.
$425,000 for the Marine Science Museum Science Camp.
$2.942 million for the Lynnhaven Inlet.
Secured language that would allow the City to use sand from a nearby
channel to finish the hurricane protection project.
Secured language that would continue to fund the Sandbridge Beach project
periodically for 50 years.
$920,000 for the Lynnhaven River Basin.
$1 million for the Virginia Beach Emergency Communications and
Operations Center.
$200,000 for para-transit for the handicapped.
49
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
$500,000 for traffic light signalization projects.
$960,000 for police technology, equipment, and general law enforcement
expenses.
$6 million from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services's
Interoperable Communications Technology Grant Program for the purchase
of communications equipment, enhancements to communications
infrastructure, and project management expenses.
$6 million in 2004 for the purchase of communications equipment and
enhancements to communications infrastructure for an integrated
communications system from the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services's (COPS) Interoperable Communications Technology Grant Program.
$77,806 in 2003 for the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Museum's
Chesapeake Bay Champions (CBC) project under the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) B- W et Program.
$74,000 in 2002 for the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Museum's
Chesapeake Bay Champions (CBC) project under the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) B-Wet Program.
$181,950 in 2002 and 2003 for the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science
Museum's Stranding Program from the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal
Rescue Assistance Grant Program under the National Marine Fisheries
Service.
$112,500 in 2002 for the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Museum's general
operations under the General Operating Support grant from the Institute for
Museum and Library Services.
Worked with officials at HUD to remove the City of Virginia Beach from the
Administration's FY 2003 Budget list of communities targeted for 50%
reductions in Community Development Block Grant Funding. Such a
designation would have had a devastating effect upon the communities'
critical local low-income housing and affordable housing for military
personnel programs.
50
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
Alcalde & Fay successfully included language in the 2005 National Defense
Authorization Act ensuring that a study would be done on the state of
TRICARE and its ability to provide health and support services for
11 exceptional family member program" enrollees in high-density military
areas such as Virginia Beach.
$11.4 million for 1-264/Lynnhaven Parkway/Great Neck Road Interchange.
$300,000 for Lynnhaven Watershed Restoration.
Washington Workshops Foundation
$2.5 million for the Pepper Scholarship Program.
West Coast Inland Navigation District, Florida
$1.4 million for maintenance dredging of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
Town of Windennere, Florida
$750,000 for traffic calming measures.
$200,000 for a stormwater management plan.
$240,000 for bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
City of Winter Park, Florida
$500,000 for traffic calming measures.
$500,000 for construction of new intersections.
$418,000 to construct an intermodal facility.
Alcalde & Fay, Government and Public Affairs Consultants
51
Page 1 of 1
Bauer, Gerri
From: Smith, Douglas
Sent: Thursday, February 08,200710:51 AM
To: Bauer, Gerri; Harden, David
Cc: Nubin, Chevelle
Subject: FW: Alcalde & Fay Proposal
Attachments: DelrayBeach Proposal1-07, doc
Here a proposal from one of the other lobbying firms to go with the agenda packet for the workshop. I will have more information to
send later.
From: James Davenport [mailto:davenport@alcalde-fay.com]
Sent: Wed 2/7/2007 5:35 PM
To: Smith, Douglas
Subject: Alcalde & Fay Proposal
Doug - Attached is our proposal for Delray Beach. We plan to send them to you via Fed Ex
tonight. Please contact us with any questions.
Thanks
- Jim
***
eSafe scanned this email for malicious content ***
IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders
***
***
2/8/2007
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
CITY MANAGER t1M
AGENDA ITEM # - REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6 2007
MARLOWE AND COMPANY/PROPOSAL FOR FEDERAL LOBBYING
SERVICES
SUBJECT:
DATE:
FEBRUARY 2, 2007
This item is before the City Commission for consideration of a proposal from Marlowe and Company
to provide federal lobbying services for the City.
The City has secured lobbying services for state issues, but not for federal. Marlowe and Company
specializes in federal lobbying for public entities, and they have been successful in obtaining funding
for other jurisdictions in Florida.
A proposal from Marlowe and Company is attached. The estimated fee for their services is $45,000
to $60,000 per year. The fee amount would be finalized once the City's list of federal lobbying issues
is identified.
Requests for federal funding will be due in late February or early March. If the Commission desires to
pursue an agreement with Marlowe and Company, Mr. Marlowe may be able to attend the
Commission workshop meeting on February 13 to discuss his services and the federal issues that are
important to the City. Any direction from the Commission regarding important issues for federal
lobbying can also be communicated to Mr. Marlowe in advance of the February 13 meeting.
Staff recommends Commission consideration of the proposal with Marlowe and Company for federal
lobbying services.
S:\City Oerk\AGENDA COVER MEMOS\City Manager Memos\city manager's memo Proposal from Marlowe and Company.02.06.07.doc
?/(
UJt1
MARLOWE & COMPANY
Government Affairs Consultants
Washington, DC
Proposal to Provide
Federal Lobbying Services
to the
City of Delray Beach, Florida
1667 K Street, NW. Suite 480 . Washington, DC 20006 . (202) 775-1796 . Fax (202) 775-0214
e-mail: marlowe@maMoweco.com.www.maMoweco.com q. ~
J.
MARLOWE & COMPANY
Government Affairs Consultants
Washington, DC
December 15, 2006
Doug Smith
Assistant City Manager
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1 st Street
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Doug:
Thank you for meeting with me last week to discuss how Marlowe & Company can help
the City in Washington, DC. After our conversation, we have prepared the following proposal
based on the items we discussed you so may understand exactly how we would help the City.
Marlowe & Company, LLC proposes to provide Delray Beach with complete and
comprehensive federal government affairs representation, including - but not limited to -
direct lobbying services, strategic planning, a constant flow of information and analysis of
federal events, briefings, and other aid for the effective achievement of goals set by the City in
coordination with Marlowe & Company.
For more than two decades, Marlowe & Company has provided effective, results-driven
representation in Washington, D.C. for government entities from across the country. Our clients
value our distinctive service, which is built on a solid foundation of knowledge and results. At
the heart of every relationship with our clients is the personalized service that makes Marlowe &
Company unique in Washington. We provide the level of attention and advocacy that you need
in order to succeed in today's competitive environment.
Marlowe & Company's sole commitment is to serving public entities. We know how
important it is for government officials to show taxpayers that their investment in federal
legislative consulting services has paid off. Therefore, we operate with a level of transparency
that enables our clients to know what we are doing on their behalf while being effective partners
in our work. We also know the many pressures faced by government staff and are used to taking
work off their hands, not adding more work to their burdened days.
Weare a firm with a 23-year record of accomplishment and credibility whose size
enables us to treat each of our clients as the most important client we serve. At the same time,
1667 K Street, NW. Suite 480 . Washington, DC 20006 . (202) 775-1796 . Fax (202) 775-0214
e-mail: marlowe@marloweco.com . www.marloweco.com
we have the experience necessary to cover a breadth of issues including water resources,
economic development, surface transportation, environmental preservation, and aviation issues
with a level of personalized service that is unmatched by other firms. We currently have over 40
government entities as clients and consider it a niche we are proud to represent and in which we
are especially proficient.
Our success rate exceeds 90% on municipal appropriations requests, and in Fiscal Year
2006, we returned over $145 million for our clients, an average return of $140 for every dollar
invested in our services.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to present this proposal. We hope to have the
opportunity to work on behalf of the City in the near future.
Sincerely,
~ l0.~c..->-
Howard Marlowe
President
Page 3 of 15
1) Marlowe & Company Credentials
Related Previous Experience
Marlowe & Company has a wealth of experience serving municipal, local, and regional
government entities, primarily in the areas of water resources, economic development, surface
transportation, environmental preservation, and aviation. We currently have over 40 government
entities as clients and consider it a niche we are proud to represent and in which we are
especially proficient.
We provide valuable representation for our clients to highlight their interests for the
legislators who are important to them. Our firm has been highly successful in helping our clients
utilize Congress to achieve their goals, whether that means securing funding for important
infrastructure projects, working with Congress and federal agencies to solve policy problems, or
ensuring our clients' views are heard via congressional testimony. Our work with Congress only
tells half the story, though. Marlowe & Company has experience working with a large segment
of the Executive Branch, including the White House, the Corps of Engineers, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration,
and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
We engage these agencies at all levels, from the Department head to the regional and
local levels. Our strong relationship with these agencies helps us smooth implementation of
federal projects for our clients, as well as keeping us "in the know" on special funding
opportunities for localities. Quite often, misunderstandings and misrepresentations between
different levels of government lead to problems. The measure of our success will not only be in
dollars obtained, but also in time saved and costs reduced.
Marlowe & Company Profile
Of all the high stakes challenges facing our country, developing and maintaining funding
sources for your priorities may be the most difficult. You want solutions now, not years down
the road. Yet the costs involved are typically far beyond the ability of one single entity to
shoulder alone.
At Marlowe & Company, we have been helping officials and groups from across the
country succeed at meeting their challenges since 1984. We apply a combination of a broad
understanding about government processes, an ability to build and mobilize powerful coalitions,
and effective advocacy efforts before elected officials and their staffs, regulators, and others.
We are proud of the results we deliver to our clients, including passage of vital
legislation, securing appropriations of federal funds for local projects, overcoming obstacles with
federal agencies, and a host of other outcomes. With a success rate of over 90%, we are more
than a strategic extension of our clients in Washington - we are their go-to resource for key
issues affecting their community.
Service: At the heart of our philosophy is our dedication to providing you with the
attention and service you deserve. We know how important these issues are to you, so we keep
Page 4 of 15
you up-to-date on all the latest developments. In Washington, situations are often volatile and
can change overnight. To help you take advantage of the process, we make sure you know
exactly what is going on - without bogging you down with minor details. And with our tight-
knit team approach, you can be sure a staff member who is knowledgeable about your issues will
be available when you need us.
Knowledge: Developing federal support for your issues can be a confusing and
frustrating task, unless you know how the system works - and the key individuals involved.
Each staff member of Marlowe & Company working on your project brings to bear years of
personal experience on Capitol Hill. In addition, we have strong professional relationships with
staff at the White House and a long list of federal agencies.
Results: From securing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal appropriations, to
getting legislation passed that overturned a U.S. Supreme Court decision, to taking a lead role in
negotiating a major authorization bill, we do what it takes to help you achieve your goals. We
have earned the respect and trust of members of Congress and their staffs as a reliable resource
for helping them understand their constituents' issues. The bottom line? We do not stop until
your needs are completely addressed, whether in the form of funding, legislation, or other
remedies.
2) Marlowe & Company Accomplishments and Experience
The chart below shows in a graphical format our successes in securing federal funding for
our clients over the past several years. We have consistently delivered results for our clients
with a success rate of over 90% and a rate of return for FY 2006 of roughly $140 for every $1
invested in our services.
Page 5 of 15
At Marlowe & Company, we specialize in helping government entities and non-profits
secure federal appropriations and legislative victories. We have successfully secured funding for
projects as varied as historic building rehabilitation, streetscape improvements, business park
development, road construction, economic redevelopment initiatives, aviation needs, and
environmental water quality issues. We have also secured tens of millions of dollars for
environmental restoration and beach nourishment projects on the shores of our municipal clients.
In addition, we have been able to successfully obtain millions of dollars in funding for non-profit
interests.
Following is a representative list of our accomplishments over the past several years. It is
by no means a complete list, however. Howard Marlowe and Greg Bums led the lobbying
efforts on each ofthese initiatives unless otherwise listed below.
Relating to economic development initiatives and historic preservation, we have recently
obtained funding and legislative language for the following projects:
· $475,000 to the City of Fort Myers, Florida for the restoration of the Edison &
Ford Winter Estates;
· Another $200,000 to the City of Fort Myers, Florida for the continued
implementation of the Edison & Ford Winter Estates Master Plan;
· $200,000 to the City of Sarasota, Florida for the Fredd "Glossie" Atkins park
expanSIOn;
. Another $250,000 to the City of Sarasota for the Robert Taylor Community
Center; and
· Secured language in the Agriculture Appropriations bill to waive certain
restrictions for a client in North Carolina so they may be eligible for Rural
Community Development loans and grants through the Department of
Agriculture. Howard Marlowe and Paul Ordalled the firm efforts on this success.
To be more specific about some of our water infrastructure and water ecosystem
accomplishments, we have recently secured funding for water storage, quality, and ecosystem
restoration projects that include:
· $800,000 for a comprehensive regional water storage and quality project in
southwest Florida;
. Obtained over $2.8 million to study the feasibility of restoring a fragile lagoon
ecosystem in southern California;
· Secured over $16.5 million in funding for environmental restoration projects that
will protect essential migratory bird refuges and horseshoe crab nesting areas in
New Jersey. Howard Marlowe and Paul Ordalled the firm efforts on this success.
. $400,000 and authorizing language for a local water quality project in North
Carolina. Howard Marlowe and Paul Ordalled the firm efforts on this success.
· We followed that success up with $210,000 in Planning Assistance to the States
funding through the Army Corps of Engineers for the same local water quality
and storage project. Howard Marlowe and Paul Ordalled the firm efforts on this
success.
Page 6 of 15
In terms of other water resource infrastructure projects, we have successfully secured
recent funding for the following projects:
. $23,025,000 to make Operations and Maintenance repairs to a major Texas ship
channel connecting multiple ports and other facilities to the Gulf of Mexico.
. $985,000 to continue a Corps of Engineers feasibility study to widen and deepen a
40- foot ship channel to 48- feet.
Marlowe & Company has also represented several municipal clients with surface
transportation requests, both large and small. Some of our most recent transportation
accomplishments include:
. $5 million for the construction of a new bridge at Indian Street, Martin County,
Florida;
. $1 million for the acquisition of Americans with Disabilities Act compliant buses
in St. Lucie County, Florida;
. $4 million for the West Virginia Corridor Expansion Project between I-95 to US
Highway 1 in St. Lucie County, Florida;
. $2 million for the I-95 interchange at Becker Road in St. Lucie County, Florida;
. $4.5 million for an inter-modal facility in Galveston, Texas;
. $4 million for land acquisition and construction of the Englewood Interstate
Connector, a vital evacuation route for Sarasota, Charlotte and Lee Counties,
Florida;
. $2 million for the construction and engineering of the Central Sarasota Parkway
Interchange at I-75, an evacuation route for Sarasota and the barrier islands,
Florida; and
. $48 million for improvements to Interstate 75 between Daniels Parkway in Lee
County, Florida, and Golden Gate Parkway in Collier County, Florida.
We have also been successful in securing funding for safety personnel and first-responder
technology upgrades. For example:
. $100,000 for Jefferson County, TX, for law enforcement technology upgrades.
The successes we have achieved for our clients go beyond delivering federal funds. We
have also worked to pass legislation of importance to our municipal clients interested in their
public infrastructure. For example, we have secured passage of legislation to protect America's
coastal environmental resources and have also drafted and achieved passage of legislation to give
the Army Corps of Engineers authority to fund environmental restoration projects throughout the
nation.
Saving Our Clients Time and Money & Cutting Red Tape
Marlowe & Company saves our clients time and money. For example, we saved one of
our municipal clients over $100,000 (20% of the purchase price) on the purchase price of a
Page 7 of 15
surplus federal building. Similarly, we secured legislative language allowing a municipal client
to trade one of their buildings for a federal building; a transfer that benefited both the client and
the federal government.
We have also worked extensively to process federal reimbursements of funds related to
disaster recovery. For instance, most recently we ensured $7 million in reimbursement to a
County client for road reconstruction of a major thoroughfare that was badly damaged during a
hurricane. We worked with both the Federal Highway Administration in Washington and the
local office in the state to ensure our client received all the funds they were entitled to as quickly
as possible.
In other areas, we secured federal flood insurance premium discounts for the residents of
a client by obtaining federal funding for a solution to the flooding problem. In another example,
we worked closely with a federal agency to come up with a creative solution to a project-related
problem that saved our client over $1 million.
In another example, we worked with a federal agency to restart a local project that had
been stopped due to regulatory issues, allowing the project to continue and saving the client
millions in fees it would have owed to the contractor.
In our day-to-day activities, we work with our clients to cut through red tape, find
innovative solutions to bureaucratic dead-ends, and creatively find sources of federal money for
our clients' needs.
3) Marlowe & Company Project Management Organization
Marlowe & Company's team is comprised of experienced professionals who are
committed to winning for you. Howard Marlowe, with over 30 years of experience as a lobbyist
in Washington, founded the firm in 1984. Greg Bums and Paul Ordal bring varied
Congressional experience to the firm and act as lead lobbyists for many of the firms' clients.
Thomas Bradshaw, Chris Wagner, and James Alfano, along with three additional seasoned
consultants, bring a new dimension of Capitol Hill experience to our ten-person team that also
includes our Office Manager, Teresa Jamison, a veteran of another lobbying firm.
The City of Delray Beach will have access to each member of our firm, but the team will
be led by President Howard Marlowe and Senior Vice President Greg Bums, and will be directly
assisted by Public Affairs Advisor Thomas Bradshaw. We report to our clients as often as
necessary, knowing that each desires different amounts of contact, and via different means of
communication. For all of our clients, we are in at least weekly contact via email and phone
calls. We are also in Florida often, and would expect to have face-to-face meetings with the City
in Florida at least two times per year, as well as at least once in Washington.
Page 8 of 15
Marlowe & Company Resumes - Delray Beach Team
Howard Marlowe, President
Howard Marlowe is president of Marlowe & Company, a Washington, D.C. lobbying
firm established in 1984. He has over 30 years of experience as a lobbyist working with
Congress and the executive branch.
Mr. Marlowe spent four years working on Capitol Hill as the Legislative Director for a
United States Senator and a counsel to a subcommittee of the Senate Finance Committee. That
was followed by five years as an energy and transportation economist, after which he served
another four years as Deputy Director of Legislation for the AFL-CIO.
At Marlowe & Company, he has taken the lead in the firm's representation of cities and
counties, as well as nonprofit organizations. In addition to his work with the firm, Mr. Marlowe
served two terms as president of the American League of Lobbyists, followed by two terms as
president of the League's Educational Fund.
Mr. Marlowe received his Bachelor of Science in Economics from the Wharton School of
Finance and Commerce of the University of Pennsylvania, and his Juris Doctor from New York
University Law School. He has also served as a member of the Adjunct Faculty of The
American University in Washington, DC.
Gregory Burns, Senior Vice President
Greg Bums is a Vice President of Marlowe & Company. Since joining the firm in 2002,
he has lobbied Congress and the Executive Branch on a wide range of issues, including
appropriations, coastal issues, transportation, economic development, law enforcement, and not-
for-profit issues. He also leads the firm's business development efforts.
Mr. Bums has an extensive background in politics, having served on the legislative staff
of a member of Congress and supporting the Member on issues such as telecommunications,
health care, campaign finance reform, judiciary, and science. He also spent additional time in
the Member's office working on issues as varied as financial services, transportation, foreign
affairs, defense, and the environment.
Mr. Bums has also had extensive experience implementing and executing a lobbying
agenda for a non-profit organization in Washington, DC.
Mr. Bums graduated from the University of Virginia with a Bachelor of Arts in
Government and English where he focused on campaign finance reform and 20th Century
literature.
Page 9 of 15
Thomas Bradshaw, Public Affairs Advisor
Thomas Bradshaw serves as a Public Affairs Advisor for Marlowe and Company clients,
a position which encompasses a number of roles. Mr. Bradshaw helps represent the firms'
clients in Florida, Texas, and California, monitors congressional developments in various areas
of interest, and researches federal funding opportunities. In addition, Mr. Bradshaw is actively
involved in the business development efforts of the firm.
Mr. Bradshaw previously worked for over three and a half years on the legislative staff of
a member of Congress who sat on the Appropriations Committee. In that office he acted as a
liaison to the Member's constituency, researched federal legislation, and supported the Member
on a wide array of legislative issues, including telecommunications, the environment,
transportation, and Social Security.
Mr. Bradshaw graduated from the University of the South with a Bachelors of Arts in
English.
4) Proposed Outline of Marlowe & Company Tasks
At Marlowe & Company, our specialty is representing municipal clients on behalf of all
their public infrastructure needs. We have successfully secured funding for projects as varied as
economic redevelopment initiatives, historic building rehabilitation, streetscape improvements,
business park development, road construction, aviation needs, water supply and treatment, and
environmental water quality issues. We have also secured tens of millions of dollars for
environmental restoration and other Corps of Engineers projects.
Specifically, for the City of Delray Beach, we have discussed a few specific issues where
we may be able to help the City in Washington. These include monitoring the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and its funding outlook, working to maintain
funding for the CDBG program, and securing economic development (or earmarked CDBG)
funding for specific Delray Beach projects that have yet to be determined. We would also work
with the City to identify areas that may be eligible for federal transportation funding, and then
work with Congress to fund those City priorities. Finally, we understand the City is preparing a
major new mixed-use development. We will identify ways in which the federal government can
partner with the City to ensure that development has the highest chances of long-term success.
This may include funding auxiliary projects surrounding the development, such as park
development nearby, or it may come in some other form of federal support. We will need to
know more about the development before recommending any specific action.
Our success in securing federal appropriations on behalf of our clients is well-
documented. What follows is a general guideline of the appropriations-related activities we
would perform on behalf of Delray Beach during a typical congressional cycle. What we
actually do for the City, however, will be far more involved and in-depth than this summary.
Page 10 of 15
Also, please keep in mind that we will spend an equal amount of time working closely with
various federal agencies that play a role in shaping policy and funding decisions for the City.
This commitment to work with federal agency personnel at the field, regional, and headquarters
levels is a unique feature of the services provided by Marlowe & Company.
1. January: Prepare supplemental materials to be used throughout the year to support our
lobbying efforts. Also, meet with the staff of your congressional delegation to update
them on the status of your project(s) and give them a heads-up as to what requests we
expect will be made of them during the year.
2. February: Draft appropriations request letters and fill out appropriations request
forms to be sent to your congressional delegation. Also, meet with members of your
congressional delegation to go over these requests in person.
3. March: One or more elected officials or other local representatives should come to
Washington, D.C. for appointments we will set up with the congressional delegation and
others. We will brief those who travel to Washington on what points need to be made as
well as prepare written materials to be used during the visits.
4. April and May: The House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees are likely to
mark-up and pass their respective versions of the appropriations bills that would contain
funding for your project(s). We will work with the subcommittees and your
congressional delegation to make sure all questions are answered related to your
project(s) and that there are no loose ends. At the same time, we will make sure the
subcommittee staff understands the importance of your project(s).
5. June: The House of Representatives is likely to begin acting on passage of its versions
of the appropriations acts. The funds you are seeking hopefully will be in these bills.
6. July: The Senate is likely to begin acting on passage of its version of the
appropriations acts. Based on a variety of historical factors, it is less likely that the funds
you are seeking will be in these bills. However, we will be doing our best to beat the
odds.
7. August and September: During all of August and some of September, Congress is
out of session and only staff is left in Washington. This is actually some of the best time
to affect change in Washington and real progress can be made on funding issues when
working directly with committee and subcommittee staff, often alone or with the help of
your congressional delegation.
8. October to the end of the year: The differences between the House and Senate
appropriations acts will be resolved and final bills should be passed by Congress and
signed into law by the President. We will work the "conference committee" process to
make sure that the funds you need are included in these final acts.
Page 11 of 15
6. November: We review with Delray Beach what has occurred during the past several
months and get your evaluation of our performance. We also prepare thank you letters
and other follow-up materials for you to send to your congressional delegation.
7. December: We begin to prepare for the appropriations process again.
5) Information on What Other Communities in SE FL are Getting
From Congress
As we discussed during our meeting and subsequent email conversation, here is a list of
what other communities in southeast FL are receiving from Congress in the broad area of
economic development. This information is from FY 2006 and the proposed FY 2007 bill
funding the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
· $500,000 to Miami-Dade County, Florida for construction of a new building for the
Centro Mater Foundation;
· $250,000 to the City of Boca Raton, Florida for infrastructure improvements for Pearl
City;
· $96,300 to the City of Coral Gables, Florida for the renovation of historic Biltmore Hotel;
· $200,000 to the City of Hollywood, Florida for the construction and development of the
Young Circle Arts Park project;
· $150,000 to the City of Homestead, Florida for upgrades to the Dade County water and
sewer infrastructure;
· $250,000 to the City of Miami Gardens, Florida for revitalization ofthe business district;
· $100,000 to the City of Miami Springs, Florida for the construction of a hurricane shelter;
· $250,000 to the City of Miami, Florida for the elderly assistance program;
· $250,000 to the City of Naranja, Florida to construct a facility at Camillus House;
· $300,000 to the City of Riviera Beach, Florida for site acquisition and improvements for
commercial revitalization;
· $250,000 for Miami Dade College and the construction of a library at their Hialeah,
Florida campus;
· $250,000 for Nova Southeastern University in Florida for the Center for Collaborative
Bio-Medical Research;
· $600,000 for the City of Coral Gables, Florida for the Biltmore Complex Restoration
Project;
· $250,000 for Miami Dade County, Florida for the Miami Performing Arts Center;
· $200,000 for the Florida Memorial University, Miami, Florida: West Augustine
Initiative;
· $250,000 to Miami-Dade College in Miami-Dade County, Florida for the construction of
a library.
· $200,000 to Florida A & M, Miami Dade College, Florida for renovation and build out of
facilities.
· $200,000 to the Holocaust Documentation and Education Center in Hollywood, Florida
for facility renovation and build out.
Page 12 of 15
. $100,000 to the Centro Mater Foundation in Hialeah, Florida for the construction of a
facility.
· $100,000 to the City of Tamarac, Florida for construction, expansion, renovation, and
build out of a multipurpose facility.
. $200,000 to the City of West Palm Beach, Florida for planning and design, and
construction of the West Palm Beach Black Heritage Trail.
. $500,000 for Miami Dade College in Miami-Dade County, Florida for the design and
construction of the Cuban American Historical Museum at the Miami Dade College
Freedom Tower;
· $300,000 for the city of Coral Gables, Florida for the renovation of the Historic Biltmore
complex;
. $200,000 for the city of Miami, for the Performing Arts Center;
. $200,000 for the city of Hollywood for the renovation of the Holocaust Education and
Documentation Center;
· $200,000 for the city of Miami for the Elderly Assistance Program
The list below discusses what other communities in your area are receiving in terms of
funding for transportation projects.
. 2nd Street! Andrews A venue/3rd Street Enhancements, Ft. Lauderdale, FL -- $500,000
· Sistrunk Boulevard Streetscape Improvements, Ft. Lauderdale, FL -- $750,000
· State Road AlA S-Curve Improvement project, Deerfield Beach, FL -- $2,000,000
· Grade crossing improvements, Palm Beach Gardens, FL -- $375,000
· 2nd St!Andrews Ave/3rd St Enhancements, Fort Lauderdale, FL -- $500,000
. 7th Avenue Transit Hub, FL -- $400,000
. Broward County Alternative Fuel Buses, FL -- $115,000
· Broward County Southwest Bus Facility, FL -- $1,000,000
· Homestead East- West Bus Connector, FL -- $500,000
. Palm Tran, Palm Beach County, FL -- $250,000
· Treasure Coast Connector, St. Lucie County, FL -- $500,000
. Trolley Shelter, West Palm Beach, Florida -- $250,000
. Trolley System, Boynton Beach, FL -- $250,000
. Atlantic Boulevard Bridge Replacement, Pompano Beach, FL -- $2,000,000
. Coconut Creek Education Corridor, FL -- $1,000,000
· Hollywood Boulevard Roadway Improvements, FL -- $200,000
. Miami Beach Atlantic Corridor, Greenway, FL -- $500,000
. Palm Bay Parkway, Palm Bay, FL -- $3,000,000
· Plantation Multi-Use Recreational Trail (MURT), FL -- $500,000
. US 441/SR 7 Interchange, City of Lauderhill, FL -- $300,000
. US Highway 90 East Widening, FL -- $250,000
. FL 7th Avenue Transit Hub, Miami -- $600,000
. FL Additional40-Foot Buses, Palm Beach County -- $200,000
. FL A VL and UAFC Palm Tran, Palm Beach County -- $250,000
. FL Broward County Southwest Transit Facility -- $1,000,000
Page 13 of 15
. FL Bus and Bus Facilities, St. Lucie County -- $1,500,000
. FL Miami Lakes Transit Program -- $500,000
. FL Palm Beach Gardens Public Transportation Program -- $750,000
. West Virginia Drive, City of Port St. Lucie, Florida -- $1,000,000
. Broward County Alternative Fuel Buses, Florida -- $1,000,000
6) Marlowe & Company Client List
Marlowe & Company represents over forty city and county governments, two non-profit
entities, and two membership associations. No other lobbying firm in Washington only
represents government entities and non-profits, and that sets us apart from the rest.
Town of Ahoskie, North Carolina
American Shore and Beach Preservation Association
Town of Atlantic Beach, South Carolina
Borough of Avalon, New Jersey
Beach Erosion Authority for Clean Oceans and Nourishment, California
Town of Bethany Beach, Delaware
Brazoria County, Texas
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Cape May Point, New Jersey
City of Carpinteria, California
Carteret County, North Carolina
Town of Creedmoor, North Carolina
Town of East Hampton, New York
Fire Island Association, New York
City of Flagler Beach, Florida
Florida Arts
City of Fort Myers, Florida
City of Fort Pierce, Florida
City of Galveston, Texas
Galveston County, Texas
Horry County, South Carolina
City of Imperial Beach, California
Indian River County, Florida
Town of Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina
Lee County, Florida
Borough of Mantoloking, New Jersey
Martin County, Florida
Middle Township, New Jersey
City of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
New Hanover County, North Carolina
City of Norfolk, Virginia
North Carolina Beach, Inlet, & Waterway Association
City of North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
Town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina
Page 14 of 15
Okaloosa County, Florida
Town ofPawleys Island, South Carolina
Pender County, North Carolina
City ofPismo Beach, California
City of San Clemente, California
City of Santa Maria, California
City of Sarasota, Florida
City of Solana Beach, California
Town of South Bethany Beach, Delaware
St. Johns County, Florida
St. Lucie County, Florida
Town of Surf City, North Carolina
Town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina
Town of Topsail Beach, North Carolina
City ofTybee Island, Georgia
City of Venice, Florida
Walton County, Florida
7) Marlowe & Company Fees
While we have not presented a final scope of work for the City to consider, we expect
fees for this type of work would range between $45,000 and $60,000 per year. Our fees are all-
inclusive, so the City should not expect to be charged more than that if we were hired.
Page 15 of 15
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR AND CITY~.. MMISSIONERS
CI1Y MANAGER .~ -
.",,~.
AGENDA ITEM # SPECIAL/WORKSHOP MEETING OF FEBRUARY 13. 2007
PROPOSAL FOR FEDERAL LOBBYING SERVICES
SUBJECT:
DATE:
FEBRUARY 12,2007
An additional presentation from Governance Inc./Ben Barnes Group is pending confirmation of attendance
by the fIrm. If the fIrm does present, additional information may be provided at the meeting.
S:\City Clerk\AGENDA COVER MEMOS\City Manager Memos\Proposal Federal Lobbying Services Comm Workshop Agenda 02. 13.07.doc
573
D~
..............cM
[ITY DF DElRAY
EA[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
'J, I r~\\ hi \\1-'1 I
11'1}11\1
'!\Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
. f ,\e'SI i\tILE: 561/278-4755
Writer's Direct Line: 561/243-7091
DELRAY BEACH
F lOR IDA
lIJltd
AII.America City
" III! DATE:
1993 TO:
2001
MEMORANDUM
February 7, 2007
FROM:
City Commission C/1.u
David Harden, City Manager ~
Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney
SUBJECT:
Police/Fire Ordinance
Enclosed is a draft ordinance, e-mails and statutes governing Police/Fire Pension
Plans and existing investment policy of the Police and Fire Pension Board.
The Police and Fire Pension Board desires broad authority and does not want the
limitations spilled out in the ordinance as presented.
Please place this on the February 13, 2007 workshop agenda for City Commission
consideration.
SAR:ci
Enclosures
cc: Steve Cypen, Esq.
Officer Charles Jeroloman
Jim Linn, Esq.
/
w~ I
1-29-07
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING
CHAPTER 33, "POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS",
SUBHEADING "PENSIONS", OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 33.66, "FINANCES
AND FUND MANAGEMENT", REVISING INVESTMENT
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Chapter 33, "Police and Fire Departments", subheading,
"Pensions", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach is hereby amended by
amending Section 33.66 " FINANCES AND FUND MANAGEMENT", subsection (E), to read
as follows:
Sec. 33.66. FINANCES AND FUND MANAGEMENT.
*
*
*
(E) The Board of Trustees shall have the following investment powers and authority:
(1) The Board of Trustees shall be vested with full legal title to the Fund; subject however and
in any event to the authority and power of the City Commission to amend or terminate this trust;
provided that no amendment or fund termination shall ever result in the use of any assets of this
Fund except for the payment of regular expenses and benefits under this system. All
contributions from time to time paid into the Fund, and the income thereof, without distinction
between principal and income, shall be held and administered by the Board or its agent in the
Fund and the Board shall not be required to segregate or invest separately any portion of the
Fund.
(2) The Board and each trustee thereof is a fiduciary with respect to the Trust Fund, and shall
exercise investment authority under this Section solely in the interest of plan members and
beneficiaries, for the exclusive {>urpose of providing benefits to members and their beneficiaries
and defraying the reasonable expenses of administering the plan. The Board shall exercise its
investment authority with the care, skill, prudence and diligence under the circumstances then
1
1-29-07
prevailing that a prudent person in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the
conduct of an enterprise with like character and like aims.
ill The Board of Trustees may invest and reinvest the assets of the Trust Fund in bonds, stocks,
or other evidences of indebtedness issued or guaranteed by a corporation organized under the
laws of the United States, any state, or organized territory of the United States or the District of
Columbia, or in foreign securities, in accordance with the provisions of this Section.
(3) The Board shall exercise its ill'/estment authority under this Section solely in the interest of
plan members and beneficiaries, for the exclusiye purpose of proyiding benefits to members and
their beneficiaries and defraying the reasonable expenses of administering the plan. The Board
shall exercise its investment authority 'lIith the care, skill, prudence and diligenee under the
circumstances then preyailing that a prudent person in a like capacity and familiar with such
matters 'Nould use in the conduct of an onterprise with like character and like aims.
(4) The Board shall adopt a written investment policy in accordance with F.S. Section 112.661,
incorporating the following requirements for specific investments:
(a) Investments in U.S. stocks and corporate bonds must be in corporations that are listed on
anyone or more of the recognized national stock exchanges or on the National Market System of
the NASDAQ Stock Market, and, in the case of bonds only, holds a rating in one of the three (3)
highest classifications by a major rating service. Investments in U.S. stocks and corporate bonds
may be made directly or through pooled or commingled funds, or fund of funds.
(b) Obligations of the United States or obligations guaranteed as to principal and interest by the
government of the United States or by an agency of the government ofthe United States.
(~b) The Board of Trustees shall not invest more than five (5) percent of Trust Fund assets in
the common or capital stock of anyone issuing company, nor shall the aggregate investment in
common or capital stock in one company exceed five (5) percent of the outstanding common or
capital stock of that company; nor shall the aggregate of the Fund's investments in common or
capital stock using the market value method exceed seventy (70) percent of the Fund's assets, as
measured on the last business day of each quarter. The Board of Trustees shall rebalaRee the
Fund's assets by the last business day of the f-ollowing quarter, unless the Board determines that it
would not be economically feasible because rebalancing vlOuld cause an economic loss, in which
case the Fund's assets shall be rebalanced as soon as it is economically feasible to do so.
(ge) The Board may invest and reinvest the assets of the Fund in time or savings accounts of a
national bank, a State bank insured by the Bank Insurance Fund, or a savings, building, and loan
association insured by the Savings Association Insurance Fund which is administered by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or a state- or federal-chartered credit union whose share
accounts are insured by the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund.
(~El) The Board may invest up to ten (10) percent of Fund assets, at cost, in foreign securities,
and may also invest in bonds issued by the State of Israel. If state law is amended to allow
investments in foreign securities of fifteen (15) or more percent of Fund assets, the Board may
invest up to fifteen (15) percent of Fund assets, at cost, in foreign securities.
2
1-29-07
(D The Board may invest UP to fifteen (15) percent of Fund assets, at market value, in real
estate limited partnerships or trusts.
(g) The Board may invest up to fifteen (15) percent of Fund assets, at market value, in
structured mortgage products issued by the U.S. government and mortgage-related or asset
backed securities issued by a non-government entity.
(h) To ensure compliance with the above limitations, the Board of Trustees shall examine the
all Fund investments as of the end of each quarter, and rebalance the Fund's investments as
necessary to comply with the above limitations by the end of the following Quarter, unless the
Board determines that it would not be economically feasible to do so because rebalancing would
result in an economic loss, in which case the Fund's investments shall be rebalanced as soon as it
is economically feasible to do so.
(i) Investments in private placements, hedge funds and derivatives are prohibited.
(5) The Board may retain in cash or unproductive of income an amount of the Fund as it may
deem advisable, having regard for the cash requirements of the system.
(6) Neither the Board nor any person or entity shall be liable for the making, retention, or sale of
any investment or reinvestment made as herein provided, nor for any loss or diminishment of the
Fund, except that due to his own negligence, willful misconduct, or lack of good faith.
(7) The Board may cause any investment in securities held by it to be Registered in or
transferred into its name as trustee or into the name of the nominee as it may direct, or it may
retain them unregistered and in form permitting transferability, but the books and records shall at
all times show that all investments are part of the Fund.
(8) The Board is empowered, but is not required, to vote upon any stocks, bonds or securities of
any corporation, association or trust and to give general or specific proxies or powers of attorney
with or without power of substitution; to participate in mergers, reorganizations,
recapitalizations, consolidations and similar transactions with respect to those securities; to
deposit stock or other securities in any voting trust or any protective or like committee or with
the trustees or with depositaries designated thereby; to amortize or fail to amortize any part or all
of the premium or discount resulting from the acquisition or disposition of assets; and generally,
to exercise any of the powers of an owner with respect to stocks, bonds or other investments,
comprising the Fund which it may deem to be to the best interest of the Fund to exercise.
(9) The Board shall not be required to make any inventory or appraisal or report to any court,
nor to secure any order of court for the exercise of any power herein contained.
(10) Where any action which the Board is required to take or any duty or function which it is
required to perform either under the terms herein or under the general law applicable to it as
trustee under this subchapter, can reasonably be taken or performed only after receipt by it from a
member, the City or any other entity of specific information, certification, direction or
instructions, the Board shall be free of liability in failing to take any action or perform any dutyior function until that information, certification, direction or instruction has been received by it.
3
1-29-07
(11) Any overpayments or underpayments from the Fund to a member or beneficiary caused by
errors of computation shall be adjusted with interest at a rate per annum approved by the Board.
Overpayments shall be charged against payments next succeeding the correction. Underpayments
shall be made up from the Trust Fund.
(12) The Board shall sustain no liability whatsoever for the sufficiency of the Fund to meet the
payments and benefits herein provided for and shall be under no obligation to inquire into the
sufficiency of the payments made into the Fund by the City.
(13) In any application to or proceeding or action in the courts, only the City and the Board shall
be necessary parties, and no member or other person having an interest in the Fund shall be
entitled to any notice of service or process. Any judgment entered in that proceeding or action
shall be conclusive upon all persons.
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be,
and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 3. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence or word or other
provISIon of this ordinance, or any portion thereof, or its application to any person or
circumstance, be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional,
such decision shall not affect the validity of any other section, subsection, paragraph, sentence or
word or provision or its application to other persons or circumstances and shall not affect the
validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be
invalid.
Section 4. 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
day of , 200_.
the
ATTEST:
MAYOR
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
4
Message
Page 1 of 1
Ruby, Susan
From: Jim Linn Olinn@lIw-law.com]
Sent: Monday, January 29,20074:13 PM
To: Ruby, Susan
Subject: Police Fire Pension Ordinance - Investments
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Attachments: PF Ord Investments 1-29-07.doc
Susan - a revised ordinance is attached, This contains the expanded fiduciary language and the specific limits on
investments, as discussed. It also has the repealer, savings clause etc. language you sent. Please call me if you
have any questions.
Jim
James W. Linn
Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.
Post Office Box 10788
Tallahassee, FL 32302
(850) 222-5702
(850) 224-9242 (Facsimile)
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IS ATIORNEY WORK PRODUCT AND
A TIORNEY/CLlENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF
THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE
INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR
COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS
COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE OR E-MAIL AND
DELETE THIS MESSAGE. THANK YOU.
2/7/2007
Page 1 of2
Ruby, Susan
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Joe Bogdahn Doeb@bogdahnconsulting.com]
Wednesday, January 31, 20074:44 PM
Stephen Cypen; Ruby, Susan; Jeroloman, Charles; Perlman, Jeff (personal email)
Harden, David; Schroeder, Larry; Koen, Kerry; Jim Linn; Alison Bieler; Mike Welker; Dave
West
Subject: RE: Police/fire ordinance.
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Red
From:
The consultants concur
Joseph Bogdahn, CIMA
BOGDAHN CONSULTING, LLC.
simplifying your investment & fiduciary decisions
telephone 863.293.8289
facsimile 863.292.8717
From: Stephen Cypen [mailto:scypen@cypen.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:55 PM
To: Ruby, Susan; Jeroloman, Charles; Delcommish@hotmail.com
Cc: Harden, David; Schroeder, Larry; Koen, Kerry; Jim Linn; Alison Bieler; Joe Bogdahn; Mike Welker; Dave West
Subject: RE: Police/fire ordinance.
I adhere to my prior position, with which, I believe, the Board concurs. Delete all the specific restrictions. They are
unnecessary and difficult to monitor. The Board, with input from its consultants, can put restrictions in the
investment policy under 112.661, Florida Statutes, These matters are fluid, and should not be ingrained in an
ordinance. Steve Cypen
Stephen H. Cypen, Esq.
Cypen & Cypen
777 Arthur Godfrey Road, Suite 320
Miami Beach, Florida 33140
Telephone: 305.532.3200
Facsimile: 305.535.0050
scypen@cypen.com
www.cypen.com
Click on the following link for a free subscription to our newsletter: httD:/Iwww.cvpen.com/subscribe.htm
This communication, together with any attachments, may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use ofthe
above person or persons. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication ofthis
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately either by telephone,
305.532.3200, or reply e-mail, and immediately destroy all copies of this communication and any attachments.
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT NOTIFICATION
You are hereby notified that in accordance with Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from public employees or
officials regarding public business are public records and are available to third parties upon request. Accordingly, this e-mail communication may be
subject to public disclosure in accordance with Chapter 119, Florida Statutes.
From: Ruby, Susan [mailto:Ruby@ci.delray-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31,20073:14 PM
To: Stephen Cypen; Jeroloman, Charles; Delcommish@hotmail.com
Cc: Harden, David; Schroeder, Larry; Koen, Kerry; Jim Linn
Subject: Police/fire ordinance.
2/7/2007
Page 2 of2
Please review the attached ordinance. I am hoping to put the ordinance on the agenda for February sixth.
Please give me your comments by tomorrow if possible so that we can meet the agenda schedule. If you
feel you need more time we could put it on for the February 20th agenda. Thanks
Susan A. 'Ruby
City Attorney
200 N. W. 1 st Ave.
Delray Beach, FI. 33444
Telephone: 561-243-7091
Facsimile: 561-278-4755
ruby@ci.delray-beach.f1.us
2/7/2007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 1 of3
Select Year: 12006..::.1
The 2006 Florida Statutes
Title X
PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES,
AND RECORDS
Chapter 112
PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES:
GENERAL PROVISIONS
View Entire
Chapter
112.661 Investment policies.--Investment of the assets of any local retirement system or plan must be
consistent with a written investment policy adopted by the board. Such policies shall be structured to
maximize the financial return to the retirement system or plan consistent with the risks incumbent in
each investment and shall be structured to establish and maintain an appropriate diversification of the
retirement system or plan's assets.
(1) SCOPE. -- The investment policy shall apply to funds under the control of the board.
(2) INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES.--The investment policy shall describe the investment objectives of the
board.
(3) PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT.--The investment policy shall specify performance measures as are
appropriate for the nature and size of the assets within the board's custody.
(4) INVESTMENT AND FIDUCIARY STANDARDS.--The investment policy shall describe the level of
prudence and ethical standards to be followed by the board in carrying out its investment activities with
respect to funds described in this section. The board in performing its investment duties shall comply
with the fiduciary standards set forth in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 at 29
U.S.c. s. 11 04(a)(1 )(A)-(C). In case of conflict with other provisions of law authorizing investments, the
investment and fiduciary standards set forth in this section shall prevail.
(5) AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS.--
(a) The investment policy shall list investments authorized by the board. Investments not listed in the
investment policy are prohibited. Unless otherwise authorized by law or ordinance, the investment of
the assets of any local retirement system or plan covered by this part shall be subject to the limitations
and conditions set forth in s. 215.47(1)-(8), (10), and (16).
(b) If a local retirement system or plan has investments that, on October 1, 2000, either exceed the
applicable limit or do not satisfy the applicable investment standard, such excess or investment not in
compliance with the policy may be continued until such time as it is economically feasible to dispose of
such investment. However, no additional investment may be made in the investment category which
exceeds the applicable limit, unless authorized by law or ordinance.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index. cfm ?mode= View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 2/712007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 2 of3
(6) MATURITY AND LIQUIDITY REQUIREMENTS.--The investment policy shall require that the investment
portfolio be structured in such manner as to provide sufficient liquidity to pay obligations as they come
due. To that end, the investment policy should direct that, to the extent possible, an attempt will be
made to match investment maturities with known cash needs and anticipated cash-flow requirements.
(7) PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION.--The investment policy shall establish guidelines for investments and
limits on security issues, issuers, and maturities. Such guidelines shall be commensurate with the nature
and size of the funds within the custody of the board.
(8) RISK AND DIVERSIFICATION.--The investment policy shall provide for appropriate diversification of
the investment portfolio. Investments held should be diversified to the extent practicable to control the
risk of loss resulting from overconcentration of assets in a specific maturity, issuer, instrument, dealer,
or bank through which financial instruments are bought and sold. Diversification strategies within the
established guidelines shall be reviewed and revised periodically, as deemed necessary by the board.
(9) EXPECTED ANNUAL RATE OF RETURN.--The investment policy shall require that, for each actuarial
valuation, the board determine the total expected annual rate of return for the current year, for each
of the next several years, and for the long term thereafter. This determination must be filed promptly
with the Department of Management Services and with the plan's sponsor and the consulting actuary.
The department shall use this determination only to notify the board, the plan's sponsor, and consulting
actuary of material differences between the total expected annual rate of return and the actuarial
assumed rate of return.
(10) THIRD-PARTY CUSTODIAL AGREEMENTS.--The investment policy shall provide appropriate
arrangements for the holding of assets of the board. Securities should be held with a third party, and all
securities purchased by, and all collateral obtained by, the board should be properly designated as an
asset of the board. No withdrawal of securities, in whole or in part, shall be made from safekeeping
except by an authorized member of the board or the board's designee. Securities transactions between a
broker-dealer and the custodian involving purchase or sale of securities by transfer of money or
securities must be made on a "delivery vs. payment" basis, if applicable, to ensure that the custodian
will have the security or money, as appropriate, in hand at the conclusion of the transaction.
(11) MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT . --The investment policy shall require all approved institutions
and dealers transacting repurchase agreements to execute and perform as stated in the Master
Repurchase Agreement. All repurchase agreement transactions shall adhere to the requirements of the
Master Repurchase Agreement.
(12) BID REQUIREMENT.--The investment policy shall provide that the board determine the approximate
maturity date based on cash-flow needs and market conditions, analyze and select one or more optimal
types of investment, and competitively bid the security in question when feasible and appropriate.
Except as otherwise required by law, the most economically advantageous bid must be selected.
(13) INTERNAL CONTROLS.--The investment policy shall provide for a system of internal controls and
operational procedures. The board shall establish a system of internal controls which shall be in writing
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 21712007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 3 of3
and made a part of the board's operational procedures. The policy shall provide for review of such
controls by independent certified public accountants as part of any financial audit periodically required
of the board's unit of local government. The internal controls should be designed to prevent losses of
funds which might arise from fraud, error, misrepresentation by third parties, or imprudent actions by
the board or employees of the unit of local government.
(14) CONTINUING EDUCATION.--The investment policy shall provide for the continuing education of the
board members in matters relating to investments and the board's responsibilities.
(15) REPORTING.--The investment policy shall provide for appropriate annual or more frequent
reporting of investment activities. To that end, the board shall prepare periodic reports for submission
to the governing body of the unit of local government which shall include investments in the portfolio by
class or type, book value, income earned, and market value as of the report date. Such reports shall be
available to the public.
(16) FILING OF INVESTMENT POLlCY.--Upon adoption by the board, the investment policy shall be
promptly filed with the Department of Management Services and the plan's sponsor and consulting
actuary. The effective date of the investment policy, and any amendment thereto, shall be the 31 st
calendar day following the filing date with the plan sponsor.
(17) VALUATION OF ILLIQUID INVESTMENTS.--The investment policy shall provide for the valuation of
illiquid investments for which a generally recognized market is not available or for which there is no
consistent or generally accepted pricing mechanism. If those investments are utilized, the investment
policy must include the criteria set forth in s. 215.47(6), except that submission to the Investment
Advisory Council is not required. The investment policy shall require that, for each actuarial valuation,
the board must verify the determination of the fair market value for those investments and ascertain
that the determination complies with all applicable state and federal requirements. The investment
policy shall require that the board disclose to the Department of Management Services and the plan's
sponsor each such investment for which the fair market value is not provided.
History.--s. 2, ch. 2000-264.
Copyright @ 1995-2006 The Florida Legislature. Privacy Statement. Contact Us
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm ?mode= View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 2/7/2007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 1 of6
Select Year: 12006..:1
The 2006 Florida Statutes
Title XIV Chapter 215 View Entire Chapter
TAXATION AND FINANCE FINANCIAL MATTERS: GENERAL PROVISIONS
215.47 Investments; authorized securities; loan of securities.--Subject to the limitations and
conditions of the State Constitution or of the trust agreement relating to a trust fund, moneys available
for investments under ss. 215.44-215.53 may be invested as follows:
(1) Without limitation in:
(a) Bonds, notes, or other obligations of the United States or those guaranteed by the United States or
for which the credit of the United States is pledged for the payment of the principal and interest or
dividends thereof.
(b) State bonds pledging the full faith and credit of the state and revenue bonds additionally secured by
the full faith and credit of the state.
(c) Bonds of the several counties or districts in the state containing a pledge of the full faith and credit
of the county or district involved.
(d) Bonds issued or administered by the State Board of Administration secured solely by a pledge of all
or part of the 2-cent constitutional fuel tax accruing under the provisions of s. 16, Art. IX of the State
Constitution of 1885, as amended, or of s. 9, Art. XII of the 1968 revised State Constitution.
(e) Bonds issued by the State Board of Education pursuant to ss. 18 and 19, Art. XII of the State
Constitution of 1885, as amended, or to s. 9, Art. XII of the 1968 revised State Constitution, as
amended.
(f) Bonds issued by the Florida Outdoor Recreational Development Council pursuant to s. 17, Art. IX of
the State Constitution of 1885, as amended.
(g) Bonds issued by the Florida State Improvement Commission, Florida Development Commission,
1Division of Bond Finance of the ZDepartment of General Services, or Division of Bond Finance of the
State Board of Administration.
(h) Savings accounts in, or certificates of deposit of, any bank, savings bank, or savings and loan
association incorporated under the laws of this state or organized under the laws of the United States
doing business and situated in this state, the accounts of which are insured by the Federal Government
or an agency thereof and having a prime quality of the highest letter and numerical ratings as provided
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfin ?mode= View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 2/7/2007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 2 of6
for by at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization, provided such savings accounts
and certificates of deposit are secured in the manner prescribed in chapter 280.
(i) Notes, bonds, and other obligations of agencies of the United States.
(j) Commercial paper of prime quality of the highest letter and numerical rating as provided for by at
least one nationally recognized rating service.
(k) Time drafts or bills of exchange drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank, otherwise known as
banker's acceptances, which are accepted by a member bank of the Federal Reserve System and are of
prime quality of the highest letter and numerical ratings as provided for by at least one nationally
recognized statistical rating organization.
(l) Negotiable certificates of deposit issued by'domestic or foreign financial institutions in United States
dollars of prime quality of the highest letter and numerical ratings as provided for by at least one
nationally recognized statistical rating organization.
(m) Short-term obligations not authorized elsewhere in this section to be purchased individually or in
pooled accounts or other collective investment funds, for the purpose of providing liquidity to any fund
or portfolio.
(n) Securities of, or other interests in, any open-end or closed-end management type investment
company or investment trust registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940,15 U.S.c. ss. 80a-1
et seq., as amended from time to time, provided that the portfolio of such investment company or
investment trust is limited to obligations of the United States Government or any agency or
instrumentality thereof and to repurchase agreements fully collateralized by such United States
Government obligations and provided that such investment company or investment trust takes delivery
of such collateral either directly or through an authorized custodian.
(2) With no more than 25 percent of any fund in:
(a) Bonds, notes, or obligations of any municipality or political subdivision or any agency or authority of
this state, if the obligations are rated investment grade by at least one nationally recognized statistical
rating organization.
(b) Notes secured by first mortgages, insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration or
the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.
(c) Mortgage securities which represent participation in or are collateralized by mortgage loans secured
by real property. Such securities must be issued by an agency of or enterprise sponsored by the United
States Government, including, but not limited to, the Government National Mortgage Association, the
Federal National Mortgage Association, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.
(d) Group annuity contracts of the pension investment type with insurers licensed to do business in this
http://www.leg.state.f1.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 21712007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 3 of6
state which are rated investment grade by at least one nationally recognized rating service.
(e) Certain interests in real property and related personal property, including mortgages and related
instruments on commercial or industrial real property, with provisions for equity or income participation
or with provisions for convertibility to equity ownership; and interests in collective investment funds.
Associated expenditures for acquisition and operation of assets purchased under this provision or of
investments in private equity or other private investment partnerships or limited liability companies
shall be included as a part of the cost of the investment.
1. The title to real property acquired under this paragraph shall be vested in the name of the respective
fund.
2. For purposes of taxation of property owned by any fund, the provisions of s. 196.199(2)(b) do not
apply.
3. Real property acquired under the provisions of this paragraph shall not be considered state lands or
public lands and property as defined in chapter 253, and the provisions of that chapter do not apply to
such real property.
(f) Fixed-income obligations not otherwise authorized by this section issued by foreign governments or
political subdivisions or agencies thereof, supranational agencies, foreign corporations, or foreign
commercial entities, if the obligations are rated investment grade by at least one nationally recognized
rating service.
(g) A portion of the funds available for investment pursuant to this subsection may be invested in rated
or unrated bonds, notes, or instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the government of Israel.
(h) Obligations of agencies of the government of the United States, provided such obligations have been
included in and authorized by the Florida Retirement System Defined Benefit Plan Investment Policy
Statement established in s. 215.475.
(i) United States dollar-denominated obligations issued by foreign governments, or political subdivisions
or agencies thereof, supranational agencies, foreign corporations, or foreign commercial entities.
(j) Asset-backed securities not otherwise authorized by this section.
(3) With no more than 80 percent of any fund in common stock, preferred stock, and interest-bearing
obligations of a corporation having an option to convert into common stock, provided:
(a) The corporation is organized under the laws of the United States, any state or organized territory of
the United States, or the District of Columbia; or
(b) The corporation is listed on anyone or more of the recognized national stock exchanges in the
United States and conforms with the periodic reporting requirements under the Securities Exchange Act
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm ?mode= V iew%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 2/7/2007
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 4 of6
of 1934.
(c) Not more than 75 percent of the fund may be in internally managed common stock.
The board shall not invest more than 10 percent of the equity assets of any fund in the common stock,
preferred stock, and interest-bearing obligations having an option to convert into common stock, of any
one issuing corporation; and the board shall not invest more than 3 percent of the equity assets of any
fund in such securities of anyone issuing corporation except to the extent a higher percentage of the
same issue is included in a nationally recognized market index, based on market values, at least as
broad as the Standard and Poor's Composite Index of 500 Companies, or except upon a specific finding
by the board that such higher percentage is in the best interest of the fund.
(4) With no more than 80 percent of any fund, in interest-bearing obligations with a fixed maturity of
any corporation or commercial entity within the United States.
(5) With no more than 25 percent of any fund in corporate obligations and securities of any kind of a
foreign corporation or a foreign commercial entity having its principal office located in any country
other than the United States of America or its possessions or territories, not including United States
dollar-denominated securities listed and traded on a United States exchange which are a part of the
ordinary investment strategy of the board.
(6) With no more than 5 percent of any fund to be invested as deemed appropriate by the board,
notwithstanding investment limitations otherwise expressed in this section. Prior to the board engaging
in any investment activity not otherwise authorized under ss. 215.44-215.53, excluding investments in
publicly traded securities, options, financial futures, or similar instruments, the board shall present to
the Investment Advisory Council a proposed plan for such investment. Said plan shall include, but not be
limited to, the expected benefits and potential risks of such activity; methods for monitoring and
measuring the performance of the investment; a complete description of the type, nature, extent and
purpose of the investment, including description of issuer, security in which investment is proposed to
be made, voting rights or lack thereof and control to be acquired, restrictions upon voting, transfer, and
other material rights of ownership, and the existence of any contracts, arrangements, understandings,
or relationships with any person or entity (naming the same) with respect to the proposed investment;
and assurances that sufficient investment expertise is available to the board to properly evaluate and
manage such activity. The Investment Advisory Council may obtain independent investment counsel to
provide expert advice with regard to such proposed investment activity by the board, and the board
shall defray such costs.
(7) For the purpose of determining the above investment limitations, the value of bonds shall be the par
value thereof, and the value of evidences of ownership and interest-bearing obligations having an option
to convert to ownership shall be the cost thereof.
(8) Investments in any securities authorized by this section may be under repurchase agreements or
reverse repurchase agreements.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfin ?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 2/712007
Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 5 of6
(9) Investments made by the State Board of Administration shall be designed to maximize the financial
return to the fund consistent with the risks incumbent in each investment and shall be designed to
preserve an appropriate diversification of the portfolio. The board shall discharge its duties with respect
to a plan solely in the interest of its participants and beneficiaries. The board in performing the above
investment duties shall comply with the fiduciary standards set forth in the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 at 29 U.S.c. s. 1104(a)(1 )(A) through (C). In case of conflict with other
provisions of law authorizing investments, the investment and fiduciary standards set forth in this
subsection shall prevail.
(10) The board is authorized to buy and sell futures and options, provided the instruments for such
purpose are traded on a securities exchange or board of trade regulated by the Securities and Exchange
Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, unless the board by rule authorizes a
different market.
(11) The board is authorized to invest in domestic or foreign notional principal contracts.
(12) The State Board of Administration, consistent with sound investment policy, may pledge up to 2
percent of the assets of the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund as collateral for housing bonds issued
by the State of Florida or its political subdivisions under chapter 159, part V of chapter 420, or chapter
421 as a supplemental income program for the system. With regard to any collateral program, the State
Board of Administration is authorized to coordinate or retain other governmental entities of the State of
Florida or private entities to administer this program, as well as receive fees for the use of the
designated collateral.
(13) The State Board of Administration, consistent with sound investment policy, may invest the
earnings accrued and collected upon the investment of the minimum balance of funds required to be
maintained in the State Transportation Trust Fund pursuant to s. 339.13.5(6)(b). Such investment shall be
limited as provided in s. 288.9607(7).
(14) With no more than 5 percent of any fund in private equity through participation in limited
partnerships and limited liability companies.
(15) The State Board of Administration is authorized to invest in domestic and foreign group trusts.
(16) Securities or investments purchased or held under the provisions of this section may be loaned to
securities dealers or financial institutions, provided the loan is collateralized by cash or securities having
a market value of at least 100 percent of the market value of the securities loaned.
(17) The State Board of Administration may sell short any of the securities and investments authorized
under this section.
History.--s. 5, ch. 57-353; s. 1, ch. 61-462; s. 1, ch. 63-341; s. 1, ch. 63-446; s. 1, ch. 65-551; s. 2, ch.
67-354; ss. 22, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 18, ch. 69-216; s. 1, ch. 70-47; ss. 1, 2, ch. 73-183; s. 65, ch. 73-333;
s. 14, ch. 77-301; s. 2, ch. 79-262; s. 1, ch. 80-317; s. 123, ch. 81-259; s. 3, ch. 82-45; s. 35, ch. 83-3; s.
http://www.leg.state.f1.us/statutes/index.cfin?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu= 1 &App _'" 21712007
City of Delray Beach Police and
Firefighters Retirement System
Statement of Investment
Policies and Objectives
September 15, 2004
~lO/'[OO~
};':;IN~O'];'];'l };''];10--- 991Lf:~Z19S X'ld lS :~1 I~d LOOZ/60/Z0
City of Delray Beach Police and
Firefighters Retirement System
STA TEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES
I. Scope & Purpose
This investment policy shall apply to all funds under the control of the Board of
Trustees ("Board") of the DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS
RETIREMENT SYSTEM ("Fund"). The Board has the power and authority to
invest and reinvest the moneys of the Fund, and to hold, purchase, sell, assign,
transfer, and dispose of any securities and investments held in the Fund, including
the power and authority to employ counseling or investment management services.
The purpose of this Statement is to establish a clear understanding between the
Trustees of the Fund and the Fund's investment manager(s) of the policies and
objectives of these assets. This statement will outline an overall philosophy that is
specific enough for the Fund's investment manager(s) to know what is expected.
but flexible to allow for changing economic conditions.
n. Investment Objectives
The investment objectives of the Fund are:
A. To achieve a favorable rate orreturn using absolute and relative measures
against inflation and appropriate capital market indices over market cycles;
B. Preservation of capital;
C. Long term growth;
D. An absolute rate of return that meets or exceeds the actuarial assumption of
eight and one half percent (8.50%), net of fees, to ensure the Fund is actuarially
sound. This return is expected on a regular basis: annually and over the five and
seven year periods. The portfolio mix of approximately sixty-five per cent equities
and thirty-five per cent fixed income and the use of actuarial smoothing should
accomplish this goal.
E. A relative rate of return of 3% greater than the rate of inflation as measured by
the consumer price index.
III. Performance Measurement
Both absolute and relative measures of investment performance should be
monitored. The basic objective of the Fund is to attain a reasonable rate of return,
which will keep the Fund actuarially sound.
Each investment manager will be evaluated for such time horizon as the Trustees
feel appropriate. The performance for the total Fund and each investment manager
will be measured each quarter. Comparisons will include the most recent quarter,
fiscal year to date, trailing twelve months, trailing three years, trailing five years, and
any other agreed upon time horizon. Nothing in this statement shall restrict or
prohibit the Board from terminating, in whole or in part, any individual manager.
A. Total Fund
1
nO/2:00'"
^gN~O~~~ ^~IO ~~~ 991LE~Zt95 XVd t5:~1 I~d LOOZ/60/Z0
i
I
i
I
I
nO/Eooll!
1. The equity portion of the portfolio will be measured against the
Standard & Poor's 500 Index.
2, The fixed income portion will be measured against the Lehman Brothers
Government/Credit Bond Index.
3. Risk adjusted returns will be shown for the total portfolio and compared
with other risk adjusted returns.
4. The total portfolio will be compared against a benchmark portfolio
utilizing the 65% Standard and Poor's 500 Index, 30% Lehman Brothers
Government/Corporate Bond Index and 5% 90 Day T-Bills over the same
time horizons.
B. Individual Managers
1. Each manager will be compared with the top fifty percent of the
appropriate manager universe.
2. The asset allocation of each portfolio will be representative of any
specific asset allocation restriction given that manager.
3. Risk adjusted returns will be shown for each manager's portfolio and
compared with other risk adjusted returns.
4. Each manager will be compared with equity and/or fixed income indices
reflective of each manager's respective style.
IV. Investment and Fiduciary Standards
In accordance with Florida Statute 112.661 (4), the Board and its
investment managers and investment monitor shall comply with the
fiduciary standards set forth in the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974 at 29 U.S.C. s. 1104 (a) (1) (A) - (C), set forth below:
Section 1104 - Fiduciary duties
(a) Prudent Man Standard of Care
(1) Subject to Sections 1103 (c) and (d), 1342 and 1344 of the
title, a fiduciary shall discharge its duties with respect to a plan solely
in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries and -
(A) For the exclusive purpose of:
(i) providing benefits to participants and their
beneficiaries; and
(ii) defraying reasonable expenses of administering the
plan;
(B) With the care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the
circumstances then prevailing that a prudent man acting in a
like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the
conduct of an enterprise of a like character and with like aim;
(C) By diversifying the investments of the plan so as to
minimize the risk of large losses, unless under the
circumstances it is clearly prudent not to do so.
V. Authorized Investments
2
X:!l:N~O.L.L'\l' X.LIO
991LE~~19~ X'\l'd 1~:~1 I~d LOO~/60/~O
The following authorized investments are subject to the limitations set forth in
Section 33.66 of the City of Delray Beach Ordinances:
A. All cash wherever and whenever possible should be invested in interest
bearing securities. These securities should be free of loss or risk of
price fluctuations and should be freely salable.
B. Time or savings accounts of a national bank, a state bank insured by
the Bank Insurance Fund, or a savings, building, and loan association
insured by the Savings Association Insurance Fund which is
administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or a state or
federal chartered credit union whose share accounts are insured by the
National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund; obligations of the United
States Government or obligations guaranteed as to principal and
interest by the United States Government or an agency thereof.
C. Equities, fixed income instruments, including bonds or other evidences
of indebtedness, given the following restrictions:
1. Equities:
a. are traded on one or more of the recognized national
exchanges.
b. Foreign securities are limited to ten percent (10%) at cost.
c. Not more than five percent (5%) of the Fund's assets shall be
invested in the common stock or capital stock of anyone issuing
company, nor shall the aggregate investment in common or
capital stock in one company exceed five percent (5%) of the
outstanding common or capital stock of that company; nor shall
the aggregate of the Fund's investments in common or capital
stock using the market value method exceed seventy percent
(70%) of the Fund's assets, as measured on the last business day
of each quarter. The Board of Trustees shall rebalance the
Fund's assets by the last business day of the following quarter,
unless the Board determines that it would not be economically
feasible because rebalancing would cause an economic loss, in
which case the Fund's assets shall be rebalanced as soon as it is
economically feasible to do so.
2. Fixed Income:
The minimum quality of all fIXed income securities purchased for
the Fund shall be one of the three highest classifications of a
major rating service. Should the security drop below the lowest of
those three classifications in all major ratings services, it is the
manager's responsibility to notify the board immediately to advise
the board of the manager's recommendation. Bonds issued by
the State of Israel are also authorized. Foreign securities are
limited to ten percent (10%) 3t oost.
D. Generally, any investment not specifically authorized in this document
shall be prohibited. Without in any way limiting generality of the
foregoing, prohibited investments shall include short sales, margin
purchases, borrowing, commodities. letter stock, any foreign
3
t'to/toolll
^aN~O~~V ^~I~ ~--
991LEt~19S XVd IS:tl I~d LOO~/60/~O
corporation, or any investment that is prohibited under Florida Statutes
175, 185 and 112.661.
VI. Maturity and Liquidity Requirements
The Fund's Investment Manager(s) shall be kept informed of the liquidity
requirements of the fund. The Fund's investment portfolio shall be structured
so as to provide sufficient liquidity to pay obligations as they come due. To the
extent possible, cash needs and anticipated cash-flow requirements shall be
matched with the maturity schedule of the portfolio.
4
no/soolll
X:!IN'liO.:&,tV X.:&IO
991LE~Z19S ~d lS:~l I'lid LOOZ/60/Z0
VII. Portfolio Composition
The Trustees believe that it should be the function of the investment managers
to allocate the Fund's assets among common stocks, fixed income instruments
and cash reserves. Accordingly, it is the philosophy of the Trustees that the
asset mix of the Fund should, at market, be:
Equities
Approximate
Lower
Limit
60%
Median
Strategic
Allocation
65%
Approximate
Upper
Limit
70%
Fixed Income 25.00/0 35.0% 45.0%
Cash & Equivalents 0.0% 1.0% 30.00/0
Large Cap
ICC Capital Growth 20% 25% 30%
Large Cap
NWQ Value 20% 25% 3001'0
Private Mid Cap
Capital Value 5.50/0 7% 8.5%
SmalVMid
Cap
William Blair Growth 5.5% 7.001'0 8.5%
Rittenhouse Fixed Income 25.0% 35.00/0 45.0%
Percentages shall be based on market value at the end of each quarter, and
the above shall serve as a guideline only, with the general intention to rebalance half
way to the target if a limit is exceeded. The Board shall reserve the right of final
determination of all rebalancing.
VIII. Risk and Diversification
The Fund shall have a properly diversified portfolio, as outlined in Section V of
this investment policy.
IX. Expected Annual Rate of Return
5
"Tn IQnn~
X:;rN"/l:OoLoLY1i.,I;I:> ............ 9~TLE~ZT9S XY.iI TS:~T I"/l:.iI LOOZ/60/Z0
X.
Xl.
XII.
XIII.
I
XIV.
xv.
- -.. , . .. ........
The Board has determined, in consultation with its actuary, consultant and
investment professionals, to use eight and one half percent (8.50%) as the
expected annual rate of return for the current year, for each of the next several
years, and for the long term thereafter.
Third-Party Custodial Agreements
The Board has retained a third-party to custody the fund's assets, as
documented by the agreements between the Board and its custodian. All
securities shall be designated as an asset of the Board, and no withdrawal of
securities, in whole or in part, shall be made from safekeeping except by an
authorized member of the Board or the Board's designee. Securities
transactions between a broker-dealer and the custodian involving purchase or
sale of securities by transfer of money or securities must be made on a
"delivery vs. payment" basis, if applicable, to ensure that the custodian will have
the security or money, as appropriate, in hand at the conclusion of the
transaction.
Master Repurchase Agreement
All approved institutions that transact master repurchase agreements on behalf
of the Fund, including short-term investments by the Fund's custodian, shall
execute and adhere to the requirements of the Master Repurchase Agreement.
Bid Requirement
The Board requires that the Investment Manager(s), in accordance with their
fiduciary relationship to the Board, competitively bid securities as appropriate
and to select the most advantageous bid. The relationship between the Board
and its investment managers is documented in the agreements between the
Board and its money managers.
Internal Controls
the Fund shall be governed by a set of written internal controls and operational
procedures, which shall be periodically reviewed by an independent Certified
Public Accountant.
The Fund is audited annually by an independent Certified Public Accountant
(CPA). The audit includes a review of all financial statements, actuarial reports,
third party procedures and administration. The CPA is required to issue a
"Weakness Statement" if any area is found to be deficient, and the City of
Delray Beach must respond to the State of Florida with an explanation if such a
statement is issued.
This policy is designed to safeguard the Fund from losses that might arise from
fraud, error or misrepresentations by. third parties, or imprudent actions by the
Board or employees of the plan sponsor.
Continuing Education
The Board acknowledges the importance of continuing education. To that end,
board members are encouraged. to attend educational conferences in
connection with their investment duties and responsibilities as trustees.
Reporting
The Fund's Investment Consultant shall provide quarterly reports of the Fund's
investment activities. The board shall prepare periodic reports for submission
6
T~UV~ rTT~ ___ QQTJC~7TQC ~~ TC:bT T~~ Jnn7J~n/?n
to the governing body for the unit of local government which shall include
investments in the portfolio by class or type, book value, income eamed, and
market value as of the report date. These reports shall be public records and
shall be submitted to the plan sponsor as required by law. The relationship
between the Board and its investment consultant is documented in the
agreement between the Fund and Smith Barney.
XVI. Filing of Investment Policy
Upon adoption by the board, the investment policy shall be promptly filed with
the Department of Management Services and the plan's sponsor and
consulting actuary. The effective date of the investment policy, and any
amendment thereto, shall be the 31 $I calendar day following the filing date with
the plan sponsor.
XVII. Valuation of Illiquid Investments
Illiquid investments are prohibited.
XVIII. Communications
The Board requires continual awareness of the Fund's activity and position,
both absolute and relative. To accomplish this:
A. On a reasonable schedule the manager(s) shall provide an analysis of
the quality of the assets, a summary of common stock diversification, and
other pertinent information. In addition, the manager(s) shall deliver each
quarter a report detailing the Fund's performance, portfolio analysis and
current assets of the Fund; The report shall contain certification that the
Fund's investments comply with this statement of investment policy and
guidelines. Each manager shall apprise the monitor and custodian of all
transactions.
B. The Board will meet quarterly with the monitoring service's
representative to review the Performance.Report. On a reasonable
schedule, meetings will be held with the investment manager(s) to discuss
performance results, economic outlook, investment strategy, organizational
changes, and any other pertinent matters affecting the Fund.
C. Immediate
The manager(s) shall immediately notify the Performance Monitors with the
following information:
. Any investment that does not meet this statement of investment policy
and guidelines
. Market activity resulting in abnormal changes in the Fund, etc.
. Any change in senior investment personnel.
. Any significant change in basic investment style or approach.
. Anytime manager(s} assets reach or exceed 25% in cash or
cash equivalents.
. Any change in ownership of the firm of 10% or higher.
7
-
.._....................'L5'_.~T'T..... ~~~
t\t\-r I ,...."" "'I" ^r V't2',. "7'" ...,. "'I""-Y:r I n^7 I~n J"7n
. Any adverse regulatory developments affecting its license or ability to
do business, including, but not limited to, the issuance of a "deficiency
letter" by the SEC
D. Immediate response by Monitor
The monitor shall immediately notify the Trustees upon the knowledge of
the existence of any problem covered in Section C above and recommend
corrective action. Such notification shall be followed up in writing by
certified mail to the Chairman.
XIX. Discretionary Authority
The manager(s) have full discretion to invest in any particular investment,
subject to this statement, the pension ordinance, and applicable State law.
XX. Proxy Voting
In general, proxies shall be voted in accordance with the Trustees proxy policy,
which is:
"The Board of Trustees of the DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND
FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM recognizes that proxy voting
powers are an asset of the Fund and must be exercised for the exclusive
benefit of the participants in the Fund. ~ On a regular basis, no less
frequently than annually, each manager shall report a record of his or her
proxy vote.
XXI. Policies and Guidelines Review
The Board may review this Statement of Investment Objectives and Guidelines
at its discretion from time to time.
8
~ . _ _ _ rra.
T o:T..TVr\ T TY-__~ T 'T"......
QQT J C""7TOr. vv:r '7C ."T T'VOI' J nn'7 1&:.(\ J'7n
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FOR
RITTENHOUSE FIXED INCOME ACCOUNT
J. PURPOSE
The purpose to outline the performance measurement comparison benchmarks and
asset allocation parameters, at market, for the above manager.
II. ASSET ALLOCATION RESTRICTIONS
Equity
Equity
0%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Fixed Income
Fixed Income
100%
50%
Maximum
Minimum
Cash Equivalents
Cash Equivalents
50%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
III. TARGET BENCHMARKS
The following benchmarks shall be used to compare investment performance:
A) Total Portfolio will be measured against a target benchmark portfolio utilizing
95% of the Lehman Brothers Government/Credit Bond Index and 5% of the 90 Day
Treasury Bill Index.
B) Fixed income will be measured against the Lehman Brothers Government! Credit
Bond Index and other fixed income managers.
9
- . - -....
T I:Tt.T"-J'1'\ T TV .__T_-1~
nnTJr$o~Tnr ~3 .,.r...T T~:.r J^n.."J~I\I"'1\
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FOR
ICC Laroe Cao Growth Eauity Account
I. PURPOSE
The purpose is to outline the performance measurement comparison benchmarks
and asset allocation parameters, at market, for the above manager.
II. ASSET ALLOCATION RESTRICTIONS
Eq uity
Equity
100%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Fixed Income
Fixed Income
0%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Cash Equivalents
Cash Equivalents
50%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
II J. TARGET BENCHMARKS
The following benchmarks shall be used to compare investment performance:
A) Total Portfolio will be measured against a target benchmark portfolio utilizing
95% of the Russell 1000 Growth Index, and 5% of the 90 Day Treasury Bill Index.
B) Equities will be measured against benchmarks utilizing the Standard and Poor's
500 Index, an appropriate large capitalization growth index and other large
capitalization growth managers.
10
...^ J...... ftr711
x~~xnx.T.H~~___ QQTJ~b7TQC ~~ 7C:bT T~~ Jnn7/~n/7n
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FOR
NWQ Laroe Cap Value Eouity Account
I. PURPOSE
The purpose is to outline the performance measurement comparison benchmarks
and asset allocation parameters, at market, for the above manager.
II. ASSET ALLOCATION RESTRICTIONS
Equity
Equity
100%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Fixed Income
Fixed Income
0%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Cash Equivalents
Cash Equivalents
50%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
III. TARGET BENCHMARKS
The following benchmarks shall be used to compare investment performance:
A) Total Portfolio will be measured against a target benchmark portfolio utilizing
95% of the Russell 1000 Value Index, and 5% of the 90 Day Treasury Bill Index.
B) Equities will be measured against benchmarks utilizing the Standard and Poor's
500 Index, an appropriate large capitalization value index and other large
capitalization value managers.
11
."rn /.,....nrJJil
..x:;[!l}l'nxxw XXI:'!......... QQT/.f17.TQC; 'XWd 7.C; ;f1T ]:'lId 1007./60/7.0
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FOR
Private Capital ManaQement
I. PURPOSE
The purpose is to outline the performance measurement comparison benchmarks
and asset allocation parameters for the above manager.
II. ASSET ALLOCATION RESTRICTIONS
Equity
Equity
100%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Fixed Income
0%
Maximum
Cash Equivalents
Cash Equivalents
5%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
III. TARGET BENCHMARK
The following benchmarks shall be used to compare investment performance:
A) The total portfolio will be measured against a target benchmark utilizing 95% of
the Russell Mid Cap Value Index and 5% of the 90 Day Treasury Bill Index.
B) Equities will be measured against benchmarks utilizing the Standard and Poor's
500 Index, an appropriate mid capitalization value index and other mid capitalization
value managers.
12
_.^ J,.....^~
x~~~nXXW1~Li_--- QQT/C~7TQC ~~ 7C:~T T~A Inn7/~nl7n
CITY OF DELRA Y BEACH POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FOR
William Blair
I. PURPOSE
The purpose is to outline the performance measurement comparison benchmarks
and asset allocation parameters for the above manager.
II. ASSET ALLOCATION RESTRICTIONS
Equity
Equity
100%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
Fixed Income
0%
Maximum
Cash Equivalents
Cash Equivalents
5%
0%
Maximum
Minimum
III. TARGET BENCHMARK
The following benchmarks shall be used to compare investment performance:
A) The total portfolio will be measured against a target benchmark utilizing 95% of
the Russell 2500 Growth Index and 5% of the 90 Day Treasury Bill Index.
B) Equities will be measured against benchmarks utilizing the Standard and Poor's
500 Index, an appropriate small/mid capitalization growth index and other small/mid
growth managers.
13
l'ITn'l'ITnl'2ll
X:!IN'l:I:OoLoLW XoLJ:::>......... 99tLf"Zt9C;; XWd ZC;; ;"t J:'l:I:d LOOZ/60/Z0
,.
ORDINANCE NO. 68-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITI COMMISSION OF THE
CITI OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITI OF
DELRA Y BEACH BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1.4.3,
"ENFORCEMENT" AND 1.4.4, "PENALTI", PROVIDING
THAT NEGLECT SHAll CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE AND
PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES;
AMENDING SECTION 2.2.6, "THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION BOARD", SUBSECTION (C), "MEETING
AND QUORUM", PROVIDING FOR VOTING; AMENDING
SECTION 2.4.6, "PROCEDURES FOR OBTAINING
PERMITS", SUBSECTION (H), "CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR HISTORIC SITES, STRUCTURES,
AND IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS", BY PROVIDING
DOCUMENTATION FOR DEMOLITIONS; AMENDING
SECTION 3.2.4, "STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OR
PURPOSES", SUBSECTION 3.2.4(E), "HISTORIC DISTRICTS
AND SITES", PROVIDING FOR AND INCORPORATING
THE DELRA Y BEACH HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE SECRETARY OF THE
INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION;
AMENDING SECTION 4.1.4, "USE OF LOTS OF RECORD",
SUBSECTION 4.1.4(E), TO PROVIDE FOR VARIANCES;
AMENDING SECTION 4.3.3, "SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR SPECIFIC USES", SUBSECTION (Q), "GUEST
COTTAGE" TO PROVIDE THAT HEIGHT SHAll NOT
EXCEED THAT OF MAIN STRUCTURE IN HISTORIC
DISTRICTS; AMENDING SECTION 4.4.17, "RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE (RO) DISTRICT", SUBSECTIONS 4.4. 17 (A),
"PURPOSE AND INTENT", AND 4.4. 17 (G),
"SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS",
PROVIDING FOR CONVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES INTO OFFICE USE IN HISTORIC
DISTRICTS; AMENDING SECTION 4.4.24, "OLD SCHOOL
SQUARE HISTORIC ARTS DISTRICT (OSSHAD)",
SUBSECTIONS 4.4.24(D), "CONDITIONAL USES" AND
4.4.24(H), "SPECIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS",
PROVIDING PUBLIC PARKING LOTS NOT ASSOCIATED
WITH A USE ARE AllOWED AS CONDITIONAL USES
AND CLARIFYING SPECIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS;
wS.~
,.
AMENDING SECTION 4.5.1, "HISTORIC PRESERVATION
SITES AND DISTRICTS", SUBSECTION 4.5.1(B), "CRITERIA
FOR DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC SITES OR DISTRICTS",
4.5.1 (E), "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS", 4.5.1 (F),
"RESTRICTIONS ON DEMOLITIONS", 4.5.1(1), "HISTORIC
PRESERVATION BOARD TO ACT ON SITE PLANS,
LANDSCAPE PLANS AND ARCHITECTURAL
ELEVATIONS", AND 4.5.1 (L), "DESIGNATIONOF
HISTORIC DISTRICTS", BY PROVIDING CLARIFICATION
REGARDING FENCES AND PARKING IN HISTORIC
DISTRICTS, COMP A TIBILITI STANDARDS, ADDITIONAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS
AND NAMES OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS; AND AMENDING
APPENDIX "A", "DEFINITIONS", TO PROVIDE A NEW
DEFINITION FOR "HARDSCAPE" AND AMENDING THE
DEFINITIONS FOR "CONTRIBUTING" AND "NON-
CONTRIBUTING" STRUCTURES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has the authority to protect the
health, safety and welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has the authority to make
regulations pertaining to land use and development within the City of Delray Beach; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach believes that protecting and
preserving historic properties/districts furthers its goals of promoting health, safety and welfare by
preserving the history of the City for the welfare of future generations; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach desires to preserve the
property values of all land owners in historic districts and/or individually designated historic
properties; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach desires to clarify the language
in its Land Development Regulations pertaining to historic properties/districts in order to provide
guidance for those citizens that live or own property in historic properties/ districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITI COMMISSION OF THE
CITI OF DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOllOWS:
Section 1. That Section 1.4.3, "Enforcement", of the Land Development Regulations of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
2
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 1.4.3 Enforcement:
(A) Code Enforcement Board/Hearing Officer and County Court: When
The City Code Enforcement Board/Hearing Officer and County Court in Palm Beach County
shall have concurrent jurisdiction to hear and decide cases seeking compliance with these
regulations or an order to correct a violation and when a hearing is sought with respect to an
alleged violation, the matter shall be decided by the Code Enforcement Board/Hearing
Officer pursuant to Chapter 37 of the City Code.
.all A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for any building, or structure,
or portions thereof, that fails to meet all applicable requirements of these Land Development
Regulations. The use of a building without proper issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is a
violation of Code and shall be grounds for issuance of a stop work order or cease and desist
order by the Chief Building Official, and other remedies set forth herein.
.(Q. Nothing herein shall prevent the City of Dekay Beach from taking such other
lawful action deemed necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
CD) The neglect of individually designated historic structures and/or structures
located within historic districts shall constitute a "nuisance" violation of the Cit;y's Code of
Ordinances pursuant to Section 100.10.
Section 2. That Section 1.4.4, "Penalty", of the Land Development Regulations of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Dekay Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1.4.4 Penalty:
(A) Violation of the provisions of these Regulations, or failure to comply with any
of its requirements, including violations of conditions and safeguards established in
connection with grants of variances or conditional uses shall constitute a punishable
violation. Any person who violates these Regulations, or fails to comply with any of its
requirements, may be issued a civil citation pursuant to Section 37.45 of the City Code
or a notice of violation pursuant to Chapter 37 of the City's Code of Ordinances. and
shall upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned for not more
than 60 days, or both, and shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the case. Each day such
violation continues shall be considered a separate offense.
(B) The owner or tenant of any building, structure, premise, or part thereof, and
any architect, agent, builder, contractor, or other person who knowingly commits, participates
in, assists in, or maintains such violation, may each be found guilty of a separate offense, and
suffer the penalties provided herein.
(C) In addition to any and all other penalties, any person who carries out or causes
3
ORD. NO. 68-06
to be carried out any work in violation of Section 4.5.1 shall be required to restore the
subject improvement, building, site, structure, appurtenance, or landscape feature,
either to its appearance prior to the violation or in accordance with its certificate of
appropriateness required by the Historic Preservation Board.
(0) Structures that are individually designated as historic or are located in historic
districts shall be maintained in a secure and attractive manner. Neglect of historic
structures/ structures in a historic district shall constitute a "nuisance" violation pursuant to
Section 100.10 of the City's Code of Ordinances and shall result in maximum penalties.
f91.(.E). Nothing herein shall prevent the City of Delray Beach from taking such other
lawful action deemed necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
Section 3. That Section 2.2.6, "The Historic Preservation Board", Subsection 2.2.6(C),
"Meetings and Quorum", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
(C) Meetings and Quorum:
(1) The Historic Preservation Board shall hold at least one regularly
scheduled
business meeting each month and it shall be held in the evening hours.
(2) Four members of the Board shall constitute a quorum.
(3) Ne An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be denied
except by the vote of fOM voting membef3 approved by a majority of the members
present and voting.
Section 4. That Section 2.4.6, "Procedures for Obtaining Pennits", Subsection (H),
"Certificate of Appropriateness for Historic Sites, Structures and in Historic Districts", of the Land
Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 2.4.6 Procedures for Obtaining Pennits:
(H) Certificate of Appropriateness for Individually Designated Historic
Structures, Properties 8ites and all Properties Located within itt Historic Districts:
(1) Rule: A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required for the
following activities which occur on a designated historic site, designated historic
interiors, or within designated historic districts:
4
ORD. NO. 68-06
(a) l..ay site plafl aevelopmeftt applieatioft whieh ~ proeessed
\lade! these reg\llatioas for which actio a is required by the Plaaaiag Mid
Zoning Board.
fb7W Any development application which is processed under these
regulations for which action is required by the Site Plan Review and
Appearance Board or the Board of Adjustment; and in such case, the Historic
Preservation Board shall act in-lieu of such Board.
W.(hl Any building, structure, appurtenance, improvement,
or landscape feature, which will be erected, altered, restored, renovated,
excavated, relocated, or demolished and which regards any exterior
architectural features (and interior architectural features in the case of
designated historic interiors), landscape features, or site improvements, except
for those items specifically exempted by a list promulgated by the Director.
{tlJW A Certificate of Appropriateness shall also be required for any
material change in existing walls, fences, roofs. windows. doors. sidewalks,
hardscape features. and changes of color.
A Certificate of Appropriateness is not required for general, occasional
maintenance of any historic building, interior, structure, or site, or any building or structure
within a historic district. General, occasional maintenance shall include, but not be limited to
lawn and landscaping care and minor repairs that restore or maintain the historic site or
current character of the building or structure. General, occasional maintenance shall not
include any of the activities described and defined in divisions (l)(a) through (l)(d) of this
Section. A Certificate of Appropriateness will not be required for any interior
alteration (except for designated historic interiors), construction, reconstruction, restoration,
renovation, or demolition. General, occasional maintenance and repair shall also include any
ordinary maintenance which does not require a building permit from the City.
(2) Required Information:
(a) Referred De..~lol'me&t fa.pplieatioas: Whea aa item ~ before
the Board thro1:1gh referral from !laother approval or review body, the
soornissioa material pro"oocd with the application supplemented with
additional infofftlation required by the BOMd shaH be provided. }.. sepltlate
application is not reqt1ired.
~W Staatl ..\laae Application: When an item goes before the
Historic Preservation Board or is reviewed administratively and it is not
associated with any land development application, the following information in
the form of photographs or plans shall be provided. as applicable:
W .l. Site plan and/or survey;
5
ORD. NO. 68-06
{bt 2. Building elevations, and/or architectural drawings,
and/ or artistic sketches or renderings;
{e7 3. Landscaping plan;
{tl14. Floor planes);
{e7 5. Samples of building materials and color chips;
({t 6. Engineering reports, as applfeable;
tg) 7. Other material as may be requested by the Hi3toftt:
Preservatioft Board. Demolition Plans:
8. Window and door schedule providing specifications to
include but not be limited to window type. material. configuration.
dimensions. and profile drawings:
9. Photographs of all existing elevations of the subject
property. labeled with cardinal direction and address:
10. Other material as may be requested by the Planning
and Zoning Department or Historic Preservation Board.
11. Infill Compatibility Survey Area Form.
Also, a standard COA application form, accompanied by payment of a
processing fee per 2.4.3(K) must be provided.
(b) Class I-Class V Site Plan Applications: Applications for
Class 1- Class V Site Plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 2.4.3
in conjunction with additional information as required for a COA provided in
(a). above.
(3) Procedure:
(a) Refertes DevdopmeBt ApplieatiaRs: The CertitieaEe of
-L\ppropnateftess proeess shaH be ineorpolilted with the ftormal processifig of a
develop meat llpplieatiOB.. DpoB. reeeipt of a wmplete applieatioft, the Plaftniftg
and Zoaiftg Department shall notify the Histonc Preservation Board of
re~d CO.}.. aetiofts. The applieation shaH be placed before the Boaraat its
next available meetiftg. An action on the CO.A.. must precede tiftallletiOft Oft
the developmeftt applieatioB..
{btW StaBS MaRe Applications that go before the Historic
Preservation Board: An application for a COA whieh does not reqtJire review
or action by another Board that requires Board approval as provided in the
6
ORD. NO. 68-06
matrix set forth in the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines
shall be scheduled for review and action at the next available meeting of the
Historic Preservation Board, at which time an action of approval, defllill, or
approval of a modified application. continuance with direction. or denial may
be taken. The Historic Preservation Board shall apply applicable ordinances.
Historic Preservation Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards for
Rehabilitation.
(b) Administratively-Reviewed Applications: An application for a
COA which does not require approval by the Historic Preservation Board as
provided in the matrix in the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines may be
approved administratively in accordance with applicable ordinances. Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines. and Secretary of the Interior Standards for
Rehabilitation.
(4) Conditions: Conditions may be imposed pursuant to 2.4.4(C) and to
insure compliance with the Standards contained in 4.5.1.
(5) Findings: The BOaM mtl3t make Prior to approval. a finding must be
made that any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent
with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1..
the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. and the Secretary of the
Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
Section 5. That Section 3.2.4, "Standards for Specific Areas or Purposes", Subsection
3.2.4(E), "Historic Districts and Sites", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 3.2.4 Standards for Specific Areas or Purposes:
(E) Historic Districts and Sites: That the proposed development is consistent
with the purpose and provisions of the Historic Preservation Overlay District pursuant to
LDR Section 4.5.1. and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the
Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
Section 6. That Section 4.1.4, "Use of Lots of Record", Subsection 4.1.4(E), of the Land
Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
7
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 4.1.4 Use of Lots of Record:
Any lot, or parcel, which qualifies as a lot of record as set forth in these Regulations, but which
does not comply with respect to minimum lot area and minimum lot dimensions specified for
the zoning district in which it is located, may nevertheless be used (for purposes as allowed in
that zoning district), as long as it complies with all other requirements of that zoning district,
subject to the following limitations:
(E) A variance for lot size. dimension and setbacks may be granted for the
relocation of an historic structure onto a lot regardless of the zoning district in order to protect
the structure and assist with protection of historic structures. If the relocation lot is not
desigpated historic. then historic desigpation shall be required in accordance with Section
4.5.1 (C) and shall be reviewed concurrently therewith in order for a variance to be granted. All
variance requests for relocation of historic structures must be submitted to the Historic
Preservation Board in accordance with Sections 4.5.1 (I)) and Q) for consideration.
Section 7. That Section 4.3.3, "Special Requirements for Specific Uses", Subsection (Q),
"Guest Cottage", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 4.3.3 Special Requirements for Specific Uses:
(Q) Guest Cottage:
(1) Can only be used by members of the family occupying the principal
dwelling, their nonpaying guests, or persons employed for service on the premises.
(2) The structure shall not occupy more than 1/20th of the lot area and in
no case shall exceed a floor area of 700 square feet.
(3) The structure shall be located to observe the setback requirements as
imposed for the principal structure.
(4) When located on individually designated historic properties or within
desigpated historic districts. the structure shall not exceed the height of the principal
structure.
Section 8. That Section 4.4.17, "Residential Office (RO) District", Subsections 4.4.17(A),
"Purpose and Intent" and 4.4.17(G), "Supplemental District Regulations", of the Land Development
Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, are hereby amended to
read as follows:
8
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 4.4.17 Residential Office (RO) District:
(A) Purpose and Intent: The Residential Office (RO) District provides for mixed
use of a neighborhood office and residential nature. The RO District is appropriate as:
(1) A transitional land use between a commercial or industrial area and a
residential area.
(2) An incentive zoning in older residential areas which are in the need of
redevelopment or revitalization or are in a state of transition.
(3) To accommodate professional offices which will meet needs of nearby
neighborhoods.
(4) An incentive land use for historic districts and/or individually
designated historic properties to provide for the rehabilitation of residential structures
into office use.
(G) Supplemental District Regulations: The supplemental district regulations
as set forth in Article 4.6 shall apply except as modified and added pursuant to the following:
(1) All uses shall be in completely enclosed buildings and any outdoor
storage is expressly prohibited.
(2) Parking required for business and professional offices shall be at the
standard of one space per three hundred square feet of total floor area (1/300).
However, this requirement may be reduced to 1/400, or at least by one parking space,
when there is a mix of residential and office use in the same structure or when there is
an existing structure on a proper1;y located within a designated historic district or an
individually designated historic site.
Section 9. That Section 4.4.24, "Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD)",
Subsections 4.4.24(D), "Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed" and 4.4.24(H), "Special District
Regulations", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, are hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 4.4.24 Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD)
(D) Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed: The following uses are allowed
as conditional uses within the OSSHAD:
DBLE1BD (1) .L1ND (2) .L1ND RENU},IBBRED.
(1) Outdoor dining which operates at night or which is the principal use or
purpose of the associated restaurant.
(2) Adult Congregate Living Facilities, Residential Licensed Service
9
ORD. NO. 68-06
Provider Facilities subject to restrictions set forth in Section 4.3.3(D), Child Care,
Adult Day Care, Continuing Care, Convalescent Homes, and Nursing Homes.
(3) Public Parking lots not associated with a use.
(4) Residential-type inns, not to exceed more than eighteen (18)
individually leased suites or rooms per acre.
(5) Group Home, Type 2, and Community Residential Homes, pursuant
to restrictions set forth in Section 4.3.3(1).
(H) Special District Regulations:
(1) The gross floor area of residential units within a structure containing
permitted non-residential use(s) shall not exceed more than 50% of the gross floor
area of the entire structure within which they are located.
Section 10. That Section 4.5.1, "Historic Preservation Sites and Districts", Subsections
4.5.1(B), "Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts", 4.5.1 (E), "Development Standards",
4.5.1 (F), "Restrictions on Demolitions", 4.5.1 (I), "Historic Preservation Board to Act on Site Plans,
Landscape Plans, and Architectural Elevations", and 4.5.1(L), "Designation of Historic Districts" of
the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida,
are hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 4.5.1 Historic Preservation Sites and Districts:
(B) Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts:
(1) To qualify as an historic site, or historic district, or historic interior, or
historic structure. individual properties, structures, sites, or buildings, or groups of
properties, structures, sites, or buildings must have significant character, interest,
or value as part of the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and architectural heritage of the
city, state, or nation. To qualify as a historic site or historic district, the property or
properties must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) or (3) below;
to qualify as a historic interior the interior must fulfill one or more of the criteria set
forth in division (2) and meet the criteria set forth in divisions (3)(b) and (3)(d).
(E) Development Standards: All development of individually designated historic
properties and! or properties located within historic districts. shall comply with the goals.
objectives. and policies of these regulations. the Comprehensive Plan. the Delray Beach Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines. and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
(1) Exterior Architectural Features. For the purpose of this Section,
exterior architectural features will shall include, but not be limited to the following:
10
ORD. NO. 68-06
(a) The architectural style, scale, general design, and general
arrangement of the structure's exterior;
(b) The type and texture of building material; and
(c) The type and style of all roofs, windows, doors, and signs.
(2) Survey Area. For the purposes of this section. the survey area shall be
confined to the historic district. and the term survey area shall mean:
(a) The two (2) nearest homes on each side of the lot to be
developed. if homes are across public right-of-way. they are to
be utilized:
(b) Any home directly to the rear of the lot to be developed: and
(c) The four (4) nearest homes across the public tight-of-way to the
front of the lot to be developed.
(d) If any of the lots on either side of the subject lot. or across the
public right-of-way is a vacant lot or a commercial lot. then it is to be removed
from the calculation. and replaced by the next nearest lot that is not a vacant or
commercial lot.
(e) In the event that strict compliance with 4.5.1 (E) (2) (a). (b). or (c)
above is determined to be impossible due to topography. zoning or historic
district boundaries. ci1;y limits. or other logistical matters. the Director of the
Planning and Zoning Department shall determine the Survey Area as strictly as
possible in compliance with 4.5.1 (E) (2) (a). (b). (c). and Cd) above.
(3) Average. For the purposes of this section. the term "average" is hereby
defined as the sum of the square footage for the existing homes located in the survey
area. excluding the homes with the highest and lowest square footage (unless there are
four (4) or less existing homes in the survey area). respectively. divided by the number
of homes for which square footage are included in the sum.
(4) Infill Development. Infill development standards shall not apply to
individually designated properties. sites. buildings and structures. For the
purposes of this section. the term infill development shall mean:
Ca) construction of a new structure on a vacant lot: or
(b) additions involving the construction. reconstruction. or repair
11
ORD. NO. 68-06
of any part of the front elevation: or
(c) the construction. reconstruction. or alteration of at least twenty-
five percent (25%) or more of the exterior of an existing structure and all
appurtenances thereto.
~)(5) BuildiOJtS. Structures. Appurtenances and ParkiDR. The foll~
Buildings. structures. appurtenances and parking shall only be moved, reconstructed,
altered, or maintained, in accordance with this chapter, in a manner that will preserve the
historical and architectural character of the building, structure, site, or district:
(ll.) B~3, 3tr1:1eMes, appurteftll.ftees.
~w Appurtenances~ Appurtenances includes, but is are not limited
to, stone walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, sidewalks, signs, and
accessory structures.
a.1. Fences and Walls:
i: a. Chain-link fences shall be clad in a green or
black vinyl and shall only be used in rear yards. or where they are
not visible from the street.
it: b. All other provisions in Section 4.6.5 shall apply.
2. Garages and Carports: Where a majority of existing
structures have garages or carports within the survey area. the infill may
include a garage or carport. Where a majority of existing structures do
not have garages or carports. those elements are to be discouraged from
view of the public right-of-way.
a. The following compatibility standards shall apply
to infill development:
i. The garage frontage shall not vary more
than ten percent (10%) from the average garage fronta,ge
within the survey area.
ii. The orientation of gara,ges and carports
shall be consistent with the majority of such structures
within the survey area. Where possible. gara,ges and
carports shall be oriented and entered from the side or
rear of the infill home. and out of view from the public
ri.e;ht of way.
111.
Each home shall not have more than
12
ORD. NO. 68-06
one wm~ with a holding capacity of two (2) vehicles.
Garages shall have single bay doors only.
~(b) Parking:
1. Where feasible. alternative methods of meeting
minimum parking standards contained in Sections 4.6.9(c)(8) and/or
4.6.9GE)(8)(a) shall be explored to avoid excessive use of historic
properties and/or properties located in historic districts for parking.
Parking lots shall strive to contribute to the historic nature of the
properties/ districts in which they are located rather than detract by use
of creative design and landscaping elements to buffer parking areas from
historic structures. At a minimum. the following options shall be
considered:
a. Locate parking adjacent to the building or in the
rear.
b. Screen parking that can be viewed from the
public right-of-way with fencing. landscaping, or a combination
of the two pursuant to Section 4.6.5.
c. Utilize existing alleys to provide vehicular access
to buildings.
d. Construct new curb cuts and street side
driveways only in areas where they are appropriate or existed
historically.
e. Use appropriate materials for driveways. such as
concrete poured in ribbons.
f. Avoid driveway expansions and circular drives.
2. Waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation
Board for relief of a literal interpretation of Section 4.6.9 upon
presentation of confirmation that adequate parking for a proposed use
may be achieved by alternate means. as confirmed by the City Engineer.
and which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of
the Dekay Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
-@7.(0 Alterations. In considering proposals for alterations to the exterior of
historic buildings and structures and in applying development and preservation
13
ORD. NO. 68-06
standards, the documented, original design of the building may be considered, among
other factors.
{47 ill Standards and Guidelines. A historic site, or building, structure, site,
improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall be altered, restored,
preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Dekay Beach Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time.
~.(ID Relocation. Relocation of historic buildings and structures to other sites
shall not take place unless it is shown that their preservation on their existing or original
sites is not consistent with the purposes of this Section or would cause undue economic
hardship to the property owner.
(6J.(2) Demolition. Demolition of historic sites, archaeological sites, or
buildings, structures, improvements, and appurtenances within historic districts will be
regulated by the Historic Preservation Board in the manner described in Section
4.5.1 (F). Applications submitted for a demolition shall be accompanied by a complete
application for redevelopment of the property. Approvals for demolition shall not be
granted and the demolition shall not occur until the redevelopment application has been
approved and a building permit has been issued for the redevelopment.
(7) The eOft3truction of new hWldffigs Of strucmre3, or the rdocation,
lllt:t:ration, reeon3tructiofl, or ffift'jor repair or ffimtenaflce of a non contributing buildiftg
or structure within a desigtlated historic district shaR fficet thc same eompatibility
sfllnoods as aft)' ffiateri:M ch~ in the ext:t:rior appearance of 8:fi eJft3tiftg non
eontfib\:lting building. Aft)" ffiat:t:rial chaRge in the exterior appeaanee of aft)' e~sting
noa contrib\:ltfag bWlclffi.g, structure, Of apptlftcnMlce in a desigaated m3tooc di3trict
shaR be generaRy compatible \\>~ thc form, proportion, ffia3S, coaiigtm.tion, building
ffiat:t:riti, texttlfe, color, ltftd locatiofl of historic bWldings, structures, or sites adjoiffing or
reasonably approximat:t: to the non COfttributifig bWlding, structure, or sit:t:.
f81D..ID Visual Compatibility Standards. Visual compatibility of infill
development within a desiWlated historic district shall be determined by comparison to
structures within the survey area. Visual compatibility of all non-infill development and
ftH-improvements to buildings, structures, and appurtenances within a des~at:t:d
historie district shall be determined by comparison to structures within the entire
historic district ".:i:3wUly eoffif'atible. Visual compatibility shall be determined in terffi3 of
by all of the following criteria. (a) through (n) inclusive:
(a) Heig-ht: The height of proposed development b1:1ildin~ or
ffiodifit:atiofts shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of
existing stmcmres llnd btHldin~ historic buil~ stock. All development proposals shall
meet the following height requirements:
14
ORD. NO. 68-06
1. Building Height Plane: The building height plane
technique helps set back the overall height of a building from the front
property line. The higher the building the more setback is required.
a. The building height plane line is extended at an
inclined angle from the intersection of the front yard property
line and the zero datum grade for a lot. or seven and one half
feet above mean sea level whichever is higher. The inclined
angle shall be established at a 2:1 ratio for single-family
residential and duplex uses. and a 2:1.5 ratio for Commercial.
Mixed-Use and Multi-Family structures. See examples below.
1
~i
::;1
;:1
ffii
:5i
~i
>-1
151
~I
MAX 35' HT
I
__~5~:~=_______.__.___. 150 0 -.-...-.---------~J
I~~~~ACK
250. --
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
AT 2:1 RATIO
I
\\!I
::;1
;:1
ffil
f),
lI,
,.1
51 ,,~
ftl <b)
{NO BUILD
lONE
.MAX 35 Hr
22_5'~ H:srOAIC
-"i".STORY-H"T ".
/~~~~ACK
g-25o'.---1
- 30 0'.. ..
._.~5_0.. .....
"" ------150.0.
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
AT 2:15 RA TIQ
2. First Floor Maximum Height:
a. Single-story structures or first floor limits shall
be established by:
i. Height from finished floor elevation to
top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed 12'.
15
ORD. NO. 68-06
11. Mean Roof Height shall not exceed 16'.
111. Any portion exceeding these dimensions
shall be considered a multi-story structure.
lV. See example below:
------ MEAN ROOF HT.
4'-- TOP OF BEAM
)(
c(
2
F.F.E.
3. Upper StOl)" Height and Setbacks:
a. Height from finished floor elevation to finished
floor elevation or top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed 12'.
b. To respect the current neighborhood scale and
space between buildings. an increased upper floor side setback
of five (5) feet on each side shall be required. except for those
architectural s1;yles that require a flush wall from one floor to the
next (i.eo, mission). in which case the additional five (5) foot
setback shall be required for all floors.
4. Number of Stories: Number of stories for infill
development shall be within a half story of the average number of
stories of existing single-family structures within the survey area. The
number of stories shall be represented as an average measure of wholes
and halves (i.e. a home built with one (1) story at the front building line
and two stories in the rear. or a "split level" home. shall be considered as
a one and a half-story house).
(b) Front Fa~ade Proportion: The front fac;:ade of each building
or structure shall be visually compatible with and in direct relationship to the
width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other adjacent
or adjoining buildings within a historic district.
16
ORD. NO. 68-06
(c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The
openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible
with the openings exemplified by the prevailing historic architectural styles
within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the
height of windows and doors among buildings within the district shall be
visually compatible.
(d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids; ProM Paeades: The relationship
of solids to voids in the &Oftt faeade of a building or structure will shall be
visually compatible with the froftt faeaae3 of historic buildings or structures
within the district. with particular attention paid to the front facades.
(e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings
to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible
with the relationship between historic sites, buildings, or structures within a
historic district.
(f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The
relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building
shall be visually compatible with the prevalent architectural styles of entrances
and porch projections on historic sites, buildings, and structures within a historic
district.
(g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The
relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or
hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in
the historic sites, buildings, and structures within a historic district.
1. All exterior finishes shall be either brick. stone. masonry.
wood. masonry composite. or such other similar exterior finish as may
be approved by the Historic Preservation Board in the reasonable
exercise of their professional opinion.
(h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape. including type and slope. of a
building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of the
existing historic building stock of a mstorie site, buildffig, Of stroetw'e within the
subject a-historic district or survey area. as applicable.
1. For infill development. where a majority of existing
homes within the survey area have a roofline that is parallel to the street.
the infill structure shall be so oriented. Where the main roofline of a
majority of the existing homes in the survey area runs perpendicular to
the street. the infill home shall be so oriented.
17
ORD. NO. 68-06
(i) Walls of Continuity: Appearances of a building or structure
such as walls, wrought iron, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building
facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to insure visual
compatibility of the building to historic buildings, structures, or sites to which it
is visually related.
1. Swimming pool fences shall be designed in a manner
that integrates the layout with the lot and structures without exhibiting a
utilitarian or stand-along appearance.
2. Fences and walls over four feet (4') should not extend
past the Building Plane where visible from the public right-of-way.
G) Scale of a Building: The size of a building, the building mass in
relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies,--Mttl porches. and
lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and building mass of
historic sites, buildings, and structures within a historic district. To determine
whether the scale of a building is appropriate. the following shall apply:
1. Ang-Ie of Vision: The building angle of vision regulation
is used to manage the bulk of a building at or near the front setback line
and is applied to achieve compatibility. The wider the house. the more it
will have to be set back. 1bis technique helps to reduce the shape of the
building as it is perceived from the street. The angle of vision shall be
determined as follows:
a. Create a line perpendicular to the front yard
property line.
b. Create two (2) 40 degree angles on either side of
the line extending from the intersection of the front property
line and the perpendicular line.
1. The vertex of the angle can slide
anywhere along the front property line to
establish/identify any areas of impact where a structure
cannot be built.
ii. For lots exceeding 100' in width. the base
angles of vision (40 degrees on either side) shall both be
increased by two (2) degrees for each (10) ten feet of
increased lot width up to a maximum of 140' wide. See
18
ORD. NO. 68-06
example below.
.-_.. G..:.J--f- . 110 MaD.......
(k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall
be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites in its directional
character, whether vertical, horizontal, or nondirectional.
L For infill development. the infill structure shall have a
similar orientation to the street as the majority of the existing structures
within the survey area.
0) Lot Coverage: Lot Coverage is the area or "foot print" in the
ground plane within the building envelope occupied by the principal structure
and any accessory structures. Usually expressed as a percentage. the following
lot coverage requirements shall be applied to achieve compatibility and be
determined by dividing the total square feet under roof on the ground plane
(building footprint) by the lot size (converted to square feet):
1. Example: 2.625 Sq. Ft. on the ground plane -:- 7.500
Sq.Ft.(75' x 100' lot size)= 35% Lot Coverage.
2. The maximum lot coverage for infill development shall
be limited to the lesser of the average of the survey area or one (1) of the
following:
19
ORD. NO. 68-06
a. Thirty-five percent (35%) for Nassau Street
Historic District.
b. Thirty percent (30%) for Del-Ida Park. Marina.
West Settlers. and Old School Square Historic Districts.
3. Additions to contributing structures may increase lot
coverage to forty percent (40%) for Nassau Street Historic District and
thirty-five percent (35%) for Del Ida Park. Marina. West Settlers. and
Old School Square Historic Districts.
em) Additions to Existing Structures. Visual compatibility of
additions to existing structures shall be accomplished as follows:
a. Additions shall be located as inconspicuously as possible
and to the rear or least public side of a building.
b. Additions or accessoty structures shall not be located in
front of the established front wall plane of a historic building.
c. Characteristic features of the origjnal building shall not
be destroyed or obscured.
d. The addition shall be designed and constructed so that
the basic form and character of the historic building will remain intact if
the addition is ever removed.
e. Additions shall not introduce a new architectural style.
mimic too closely the style of the existing building nor replicate the
original design. but shall be coherent in design with the existing building.
f. Additions shall be secondar.y and subordinate to the
main mass of the historic building and shall not overwhelm the otigjnal
building.
t97 Vi3tlftl eompatibility s1ll:ftOOth will be further diseussed in gt'eater
dettil in the Ddrll'Y Beaeh Preservatioft and Coftservatfoft Mltftual. Said Maaual
wtil be developed as a gI:1:itk to assist property ~'ners as they seek to flOmfflate
their properties for desigaatioft as a historie site or to desigaate aft Mea within
the city as a historie district.
(11) In order to provide design flexibility for structures that
otherwise satisfy the Visual Compatibility Standards outlined in Section
20
ORD. NO. 68-06
4.5.1 GE) (1 0). incentives for additions to contributing structures and/ or
conforming new construction shall include the following:
a. The ratio of the Angle of Vision for single family
structures can increase from 2:1 to 2:1.5 for open air spaces limited to:
first or second floor front porches (separation must be provided
between floors). first or second floor side porches (separation must be
provided between floors). balconies. and overlooks with open railings:
and
b. Up to twenty five percent (25%) of the front elevation(s)
of single family structures can extend above the Building Height Plane
to a maximum height of thirty five feet (35'). provided twenty five
percent (25%) or more of the front elevation(s) remains one story. The
total width of extension along the front elevation(s) shall not exceed
eighteen feet (18'). See example below.
**(INSERT INCENTIVE GRAPHICS HERE)
(F) Restrictions on Demolitions: No structure within an Historic District or on
an Historic Site shall be demolished without first receiving a Certificate of Appropriateness
pursuant to Section 2.4.6(H) for that ptltpo~e. The Historic Preservation Board shall be guided
by the following in considering such a request.
(1) The Historic Preservation Board upon a request for demolition by a
property owner, shall consider the following guidelines in evaluating applications for a
certificate of appropriateness for demolition of designated historic sites, historic
interiors, or buildings, structures, or appurtenances within designated historic districts;
(a) Whether the structure is of such interest or quality that it would
reasonably fulfill criteria for designation for listing on the national register.
(b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmanship, or
material that it could be reproduced only with great difficulty or economically
nonviable expense.
(c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of
its kind in the designated historic district within the city.
(d) Whether retaining the structure would promote the general
welfare of the city by providing an opportunity to study local history,
architecture, and design, or by developing an understanding of the importance
and value of a particular culture and heritage.
21
ORD. NO. 68-06
(e) Whether there are definite approved plans for immediate reuse
of the property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect those
plans will have on the eha-raetef of the surrounding area.
(2) No decision of the Board shall result in undue economic hardship for
the property owner. The Board shall have authority to determine the existence of such
hardship in accordance with the definition of undue economic hardship found in
Subsection (H).
(3) The Board's refusal to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness requested
by a property owner for the purpose of demolition will be supported by a written
statement describing the public interest that the Board seeks to preserve.
(4) The Board may grant a Certificate of Appropriateness as requested by a
property owner, for demolition which may provide for a delayed effective date. The
effective date of the certificate will be determined by the Board based on the relative
significance of the structure and the probable time required to arrange a possible
alternative to demolition. the Board may delay the demolition of designated historic
sites and contributing buildings within historic districts for up to six months while
demolition of non-contributing buildings within the historic district may be delayed for
up to three months.
(5) During the demolition delay period, the Board may take such steps as it
deems necessary to preserve the structure concerned. Such steps may include, but are
not limited to, consultation with community groups, public agencies, and interested
citizens, recommendations for acquisition of property by public or private bodies, or
agencies, and exploration of the possibility of moving one or more structures or other
features.
(6) The Board may, with the consent of the property owner, request that
the owner, at the owner's expense, salvage and preserve specified classes of building
materials, architectural details and ornaments, fixtures, and the like for reuse in the
restoration of the other historic properties. The Board may, with the consent of the
property owner, request that the Delray Beach Historical Society, or the owner, at the
owner's expense, record the architectural details for archival purposes prior to
demolition. The recording may include, but shall not be limited to photographs,
documents, and scaled architectural drawings to include elevations and floor plans. Two
(2) copies of such recordings shall be submitted to the City's Planning and Zoning
Department. One (1) to be kept on file and the other to be archived with the Delray
Beach Historical Society. At the Board's option, and with the property owner's consent,
the Board or the Delray Beach Historical Society may salvage and preserve building
materials, architectural details, and ornaments, textures, and the like at their expense,
22
ORD. NO. 68-06
respectively.
(7) The owner shall provide the following information on his Iher
application for any contributing structure in a historic district or individually designated
historic structure:
(a) A certified report from a registered architect or engineer which
provides documentation explaining that the building is structurally unsound and
is damaged beyond the ability to repair it at a reasonable cost. The report must
include photographs to substantiate the damage.
(b) A certified report from an engineer. architect general contractor.
or other qualified professional which documents the projected cost of repairing
the structure and returning it to a safe and habitable condition.
(c) An appraisal of the property in its current condition. its value as
vacant land and its potential value as a preserved and restored historic property.
(d) Documentation that reasonable efforts have been made to find a
suitable alternate location for the structure within the City of Dekay Beach to
which the contributing I individually designated historic structure could be safely
relocated.
(I) Historic Preservation Board to Act on Site Plans, Landscape Plans, and
Architectural Elevations: Pursuant to the powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the Historic
Preservation Board shall act on all development applications, within a Historic District or on a
Historic Site, subject to processing under Sections 2.4.5(F),(G),(H), and (I) which otherwise
would be acted upon by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board or the Phmning and
Zoning Board.
(L) Designation of Historic Districts: The following Historic Districts are hereby
affirmed or established:
(1) THE NASSAU STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT which consists
of Lots 2-19 of Nassau Park, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 67 of Palm Beach
County, Florida; Lots 1-12 of Wheadey Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 16,
page 98 of Palm Beach County, Florida; and Block E, Lot 4 and Block F, Lot 1 of
John B. Reid's Village as recorded in Plat Book 21, page 95 of Palm Beach County,
Florida. (Original designation by Ordinance 97-87 adopted on January 12, 1988)
(2) ~ MARINA DISTRICT which consists of Block 125, excluding
the south 350' of the north 488.6' of the west 100' of Block 125, along with that part
of Block 133 lying west of the Intracoastal Waterway, together with the east half of
23
ORD. NO. 68-06
Block 118, along with all of Block 126, together with that portion of Block 134 lying
west of the Intracoastal Waterway, along with east half of Block 119, together with all
of Block 127, along with the east half of Block 120, and all of Block 128, all within the
Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County Records
(Original designation by Ordinance 156-88 adopted on December 20, 1988)
(3) DEL-IDA PARK which consists of Blocks 1 through 13, inclusive,
along with Tracts A, B, and C DEL-IDA PARK, according to the Plat thereof on file
in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida
recorded in Plat Book 9 at Page 62 (Original designation by Ordinance 9-88 adopted
on March 22, 1988)
(4) OLD SCHOOL SQUARE which consists of the south one-half of
Block 57 and Blocks 58-62, Blocks 65-70, the west half of Blocks 74 and 75, and Lots
1-6 of Block 76, Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach
County Records. (Original designation by Ordinance 1-88 adopted on February 9,
1988).
(5) +HE WEST SETTLERS HISTORIC DISTRICT is bounded on
the north by Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (N.W. 2nd Street). The eastern
boundary is as follows: the alley running north and south in Block 43; N.W. 3rd
Avenue between N.W. 1st Street and the east-west alley of Block 36. The southern
boundary is N.W. 1st Street between N.W. 3rd Avenue and the alley in Block 43; the
east-west alley in Block 36 and Block 28 and the south property line of Lot 13, Block
20. The western boundary is the north-south alley and the eastern one-half (1/2) of
the block south of the alley of Block 19; the north-south alley in the north half of
Block 20.
Section 11. That Appendix "A", "Definitions", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code
of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
CONTRIBUTING BUILDING - A building contributing to the historic significance of a
district which is typically more than fifty (50) years old and which by virtue of its location,
design, setting, materials, workmanship, or association with local historic events or personalities
lends to the district's sense of time and place within the context of the intent of historic
preservation. A building that is more than fifty (50) years old shall be presumed to be
contributing whether listed as such on a surveyor not.
HARDSCAPE - Consists of the inanimate elements of landscaping. especially masonry or
wood work such as concrete or brick patios. tile paths and wooden decks.
NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING - A building within a historic district which is typically
24
ORD. NO. 68-06
less than fif1;y (50) years old and which does not add to a historic district's sense of time and
place and historical development; or a building where the location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, and association have been so changed or have so deteriorated that the overall
integrity of the building has been irretrievably lost.
Section 12. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof,
any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the
part declared to be invalid.
Section 13. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same
are hereby repealed.
Section 14. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on
second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this _ day of
,2006.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
25
ORD. NO. 68-06
ORDINANCE NO. 68-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITI COMMISSION OF THE CITI OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITI OF DELRA Y
BEACH BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1.4.3, "ENFORCEMENT" AND
1.4.4, "PENALTY", PROVIDING THAT NEGLECT SHALL
CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE AND PROVIDING FOR
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES; AMENDING SECTION 2.2.6,
"THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD", SUBSECTION (C),
"MEETING AND QUORUM", PROVIDING FOR VOTING;
AMENDING SECTION 2.4.6, "PROCEDURES FOR OBTAINING
PERMITS", SUBSECTION (H), "CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR HISTORIC SITES, STRUCTURES, AND IN
HISTORIC DISTRICTS", BY PROVIDING DOCUMENTATION FOR
DEMOLITIONS; AMENDING SECTION 3.2.4, "STANDARDS FOR
SPECIFIC AREAS OR PURPOSES", SUBSECTION 3.2.4(E),
"HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND SITES", PROVIDING FOR AND
INCORPORATING THE DELRA Y BEACH HISTORIC
PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE SECRETARY
OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION;
AMENDING SECTION 4.1.4, "USE OF LOTS OF RECORD",
SUBSECTION 4.1.4(E), TO PROVIDE FOR VARIANCES;
AMENDING SECTION 4.3.3, "SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
SPECIFIC USES", SUBSECTION (Q), "GUEST COTTAGE" TO
PROVIDE THAT HEIGHT SHAll NOT EXCEED THAT OF MAIN
STRUCTURE IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS; AMENDING SECTION
4.4.17, "RESIDENTIAL OFFICE (RO) DISTRICT", SUBSECTIONS
4.4. 17 (A), "PURPOSE AND INTENT", AND 4.4.17(G),
"SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS", PROVIDING FOR
CONVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES INTO OFFICE USE
IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS; AMENDING SECTION 4.4.24, "OLD
SCHOOL SQUARE HISTORIC ARTS DISTRICT (OSSHAD)",
SUBSECTIONS 4.4.24(D), "CONDITIONAL USES" AND 4.4.24(H),
"SPECIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS", PROVIDING PUBLIC
PARKING LOTS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A USE ARE AllOWED
AS CONDITIONAL USES AND CLARIFYING SPECIAL DISTRICT
REGULATIONS; AMENDING SECTION 4.5.1, "HISTORIC
PRESERVATION SITES AND DISTRICTS", SUBSECTION 4.5.1 (B),
"CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC SITES OR
DISTRICTS", 4.5.1 (E), "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS", 4.5.1 (F),
"RESTRICTIONS ON DEMOLITIONS", 4.5.1(1), "HISTORIC
/!SlIid ,kk-t(a1J~ Ar 1-hrI WS.2
PRESERVATION BOARD TO ACT ON SITE PLANS, LANDSCAPE
PLANS AND ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS", AND 4.5.1 (L),
"DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS", BY PROVIDING
CLARIFICATION REGARDING FENCES AND PARKING IN
HISTORIC DISTRICTS, COMPATIBILITI STANDARDS,
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION
APPLICATIONS AND NAMES OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS; AND
AMENDING APPENDIX "A", "DEFINITIONS", TO PROVIDE A
NEW DEFINITION FOR "HARDSCAPE" AND AMENDING THE
DEFINITIONS FOR "CONTRIBUTING" AND "NON-
CONTRIBUTING" STRUCTURES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE, A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Dekay Beach has the authority to protect the health,
safety and welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Dekay Beach has the authority to make regulations
pertaining to land use and development within the City of Dekay Beach; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Dekay Beach believes that protecting and preserving
historic properties/districts furthers its goals of promoting health, safety and welfare by preserving the history
of the City for the welfare of future generations; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Dekay Beach desires to preserve the property values
of all land owners in historic districts and/or individually designated historic properties; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Dekay Beach desires to clarify the language in its Land
Development Regulations pertaining to historic properties/districts in order to provide guidance for those
citizens that live or own property in historic properties/ districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITI COMMISSION OF THE CITI OF
DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOllOWS:
Section 1. That Section 1.4.3, "Enforcement", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Dekay Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1.4.3 Enforcement:
(A) Code Enforcement Board/Hearing Officer and County Court: When The City
Code Enforcement Board/Hearing Officer and County Court in Palm Beach County shall have
concurrent jurisdiction to hear and decide cases seeking compliance with these regulations or an order
to correct a violation and when a hearing is sought with respect to an alleged violation, the matter shall
be decided by the Code Enforcement Board/Hearing Officer pursuant to Chapter 37 of the City Code.
2
ORD. NO. 68-06
all A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for any building, or structure, or portions
thereof, that fails to meet all applicable requirements of these Land Development Regulations. The use
of a building without proper issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is a violation of Code and shall be
grounds for issuance of a stop work order or cease and desist order by the Chief Building Official, and
other remedies set forth herein.
<<4 Nothing herein shall prevent the City of Delray Beach from taking such other lawful
action deemed necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
CD) The neglect of individually designated historic structures and/or structures located
within historic districts shall constitute a "nuisance" violation of the City's Code of Ordinances
pursuant to Section 100.10.
Section 2. That Section 1.4.4, "Penalty", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 1.4.4 Penalty:
(A) Violation of the provisions of these Regulations, or failure to comply with any of its
requirements, including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of
variances or conditional uses shall constitute a punishable violation. Any person who violates these
Regulations, or fails to comply with any of its requirements, may be issued a civil citation
pursuant to Section 37.45 of the City Code or a notice of violation pursuant to Chapter 37 of
the City's Code of Ordinances. and shall upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $500 or
imprisoned for not more than 60 days, or both, and shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the
case. Each day such violation continues shall be considered a separate offense.
(B) The owner or tenant of any building, structure, premise, or part thereof, and any
architect, agent, builder, contractor, or other person who knowingly commits, participates in, assists in,
or maintains such violation, may each be found guilty of a separate offense, and suffer the penalties
provided herein.
(C) In addition to any and all other penalties, any person who carries out or causes to be
carried out any work in violation of Section 4.5.1 shall be required to restore the subject
improvement, building, site, structure, appurtenance, or landscape feature, either to its
appearance prior to the violation or in accordance with its certificate of appropriateness required by the
Historic Preservation Board.
CD) Structures that are individually designated as historic or are located in historic districts
shall be maintained in a secure and attractive manner. Neglect of historic structures/structures in a
historic district shall constitute a "nuisance" violation pursuant to Section 100.10 of the City's Code of
Ordinances and shall result in maximum penalties.
3
ORD. NO. 68-06
~(El Nothing herein shall prevent the City of Delray Beach from taking such other lawful
action deemed necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
Section 3. That Section 2.2.6, "The Historic Preservation Board", Subsection 2.2.6(C), "Meetings
and Quorum", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
(C) Meetings and Quorum:
(1) The Historic Preservation Board shall hold at least one regularly scheduled
business meeting each month and it shall be held in the evening hours.
(2) Four members of the Board shall constitute a quorum.
(3) Nt, An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be denied exeel't by
the vote of four voting members approved by a majority of the members present and voting.
Section 4. That Section 2.4.6, "Procedures for Obtaining Permits", Subsection (H), "Certificate of
Appropriateness for Historic Sites, Structures and in Historic Districts", of the Land Development Regulations
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 2.4.6 Procedures for Obtaining Permits:
(H) Certificate of Appropriateness for Individually Designated Historic Structures,
Properties Sites and all Properties Located within in Historic Districts:
(1) Rule: A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required for the following
activities which occur on a designated historic site, designated historic interiors, or within
designated historic districts:
4
ORD. NO. 68-06
(a) ~'\aJ site plftfl devdopmeat llf'plieat1oa which is processed tlftder these
regulatiofls f-or whieh aetioa is required by the Plaftfiifig aad Zo~ Board.
W-W Any development application which is processed under these regulations
for which action is required by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board or the
Board of Adjustment; and in such case, the Historic Preservation Board shall act in-lieu
of such Board.
W.(.Ql Any building, structure, appurtenance, improvement, or
landscape feature, which will be erected, altered, restored, renovated, excavated,
relocated, or demolished and which regards any exterior architectural features (and
interior architectural features in the case of designated historic interiors), landscape
features, or site improvements, except for those items specifically exempted by a list
promulgated by the Director.
{d1.(0 A Certificate of Appropriateness shall also be required for any material
change in existing walls, fences, roofs. windows. doors. sidewalks, hardscape features.
and changes of color.
A Certificate of Appropriateness is not required for general, occasional maintenance
of any historic building, interior, structure, or site, or any building or structure within a historic district.
General, occasional maintenance shall include, but not be limited to lawn and landscaping care and
minor repairs that restore or maintain the historic site or current character of the building or structure.
General, occasional maintenance shall not include any of the activities described and defined in
divisions (1) (a) through (l)(d) of this Section. A Certificate of Appropriateness will not be
required for any interior alteration (except for designated historic interiors), construction,
reconstruction, restoration, renovation, or demolition. General, occasional maintenance and repair shall
also include any ordinary maintenance which does not require a building permit from the City.
(2) Required Information:
(a) ReferreEl Development }....pplieations: ~'hefi llfi item is before the
Board through referf'lll from another appf<Y;al or re-.rfe"i body, the submission material
provided with the llppHcatiofl supplemeated ",.,ith additioflal iafofftlation reqt1ired by the
Board shllll be provided. }~ separate application i3 fiot reqtMed.
WW StanEl Alane Application: When an item goes before the Historic
Preservation Board or is reviewed administratively and it is not associated with any land
development application, the following information in the form of photographs or plans
shall be provided. as applicable:
W .1. Site plan and/or survey;
W- 2. Building elevations, and/or architectural drawings, and/or
artistic sketches or renderings;
5 ORD. NO. 68-06
W 3. Landscaping plan;
{tl7 4. Floor planes);
W 5. Samples of building materials and color chips;
ffl 6. Engineering reports, llS applicable;
fgJ 7. Other lftlltenllla3 lftftY be reqtlested by the Historic Preservlltioa
Board. Demolition Plans:
8. Window and door schedule providing specifications to include
but not be limited to window type. material. configuration. dimensions. and
profile drawings:
9. Photographs of all existing elevations of the subject proper11.
labeled with cardinal direction and address:
10. Other material as may be requested by the Planning and Zoning
Department or Historic Preservation Board.
11. Infill Compatibilit;y Survey Area Form.
Also, a standard COA application form, accompanied by payment of a
processing fee per 2.4.3(K) must be provided.
(b) Class I-Class V Site Plan Applications: Applications for Class 1-
Class V Site Plans shall be submitted in accordance with Section 2.4.3 in conjunction
with additional information as required for a COA provided in (a). above.
(3) Procedure:
(ll) Referred De'\oTelopmeat ......a:PI'lieatiaas: The Certifiellfe of
ApprOpnllteaeSS proeess ShllH be incorporllted with the aotmlll processing of II
devdoplfteat appliclltion. Upoa reeeipt of II complete appliclltion, the Phtftflffig llfld
Zoning Depllrtmeat ShllH flOUfy the Histonc Preservlltfoa BOllrd of reqe:ired e.O.A.
llCtiOfl3. The llPplielltioa shaH be placed before the BOllrd llt its flext ltVa-illlble meetiag.
}..a lletioa oa the e.O.}... 1ftU8t preeede flfllllaeUofl. on the devclopment llpplieatioa.
~W Staad Aloae Applications that go before the Historic Preservation
Board: An application for a COA which docs not require reT-few or lletion by llaother
~ that requires Board approval as provided in the matrix in the Dekay Beach
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines shall be scheduled for review and action at the
next available meeting of the Historic Preservation Board, at which time an action of
approval, denial, or approval of a modified application. continuance with direction. or
denial may be taken. The Historic Preservation Board shall apply applicable ordinances.
Historic Preservation Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
6
ORD. NO. 68-06
(h) Administratively-Reviewed Applications: An application for a COA
which does not require approval by the Historic Preservation Board as provided in the
matrix in the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines may be approved administratively
in accordance with applicable ordinances. Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. and
Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
(4) Conditions: Conditions may be imposed pursuant to 2.4.4(C) and to insure
compliance with the Standards contained in 4.5.1.
(5) Findings: The BOlM'd ffitlst Malle Prior to approval. a finding must be made that
any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent with Historic
Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1.. the Delray Beach
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for
Rehabilitation.
Section 5. That Section 3.2.4, "Standards for Specific Areas or Purposes", Subsection 3.2.4(E),
"Historic Districts and Sites", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 3.2.4 Standards for Specific Areas or Purposes:
(E) Historic Districts and Sites: That the proposed development is consistent with the
purpose and provisions of the Historic Preservation Overlay District pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1.
and the Dekay Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior
Standards for Rehabilitation.
Section 6. That Section 4.1.4, "Use of Lots of Record", Subsection 4.1.4(E), of the Land
Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to
read as follows:
7
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 4.1.4 Use of Lots of Record:
Any lot, or parcel, which qualifies as a lot of record as set forth in these Regulations, but which does not
comply with respect to minimum lot area and minimum lot dimensions specified for the zoning district
in which it is located, may nevertheless be used (for purposes as allowed in that zoning district), as long
as it complies with all other requirements of that zoning district, subject to the following limitations:
(E) A variance for lot size. dimension and setbacks may be granted for the relocation of an
historic structure onto a lot regardless of the zoning district in order to protect the structure and assist
with protection of historic structures. If the relocation lot is not desigpated historic. then historic
designation shall be required in accordance with Section 4.5.1 (C) and shall be reviewed concurrendy
therewith in order for a variance to be granted. All variance requests for relocation of historic structures
must be submitted to the Historic Preservation Board in accordance with Sections 4.5.1 CD) and (J) for
consideration.
Section 7. That Section 4.3.3, "Special Requirements for Specific Uses", Subsection (Q), "Guest
Cottage", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Dekay Beach,
Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 4.3.3 Special Requirements for Specific Uses:
(Q) Guest Cottage:
(1) Can only be used by members of the family occupying the principal dwelling,
their nonpaying guests, or persons employed for service on the premises.
(2) The structure shall not occupy more than 1/20th of the lot area and in no case
shall exceed a floor area of 700 square feet.
(3) The structure shall be located to observe the setback requirements as imposed
for the principal structure.
(4) When located on individually designated historic properties or within desigpated
historic districts. the structure shall not exceed the height of the principal structure.
Section 8. That Section 4.4.17, "Residential Office (RO) District", Subsections 4.4.17 (A), "Purpose
and Intent" and 4.4.17 (G), "Supplemental District Regulations", of the Land Development Regulations of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, are hereby amended to read as follows:
8
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 4.4.17 Residential Office (RO) District:
(A) Purpose and Intent: The Residential Office (RO) District provides for mixed use of a
neighborhood office and residential nature. The RO District is appropriate as:
(1) A transitional land use between a commercial or industrial area and a residential
area.
(2) An incentive zoning in older residential areas which are ill the need of
redevelopment or revitalization or are in a state of transition.
(3) To accommodate professional offices which will meet needs of nearby
neighborhoods.
(4) An incentive land use for historic districts and/or individually designated
historic properties to provide for the rehabilitation of residential structures into office use.
(G) Supplemental District Regulations: The supplemental district regulations as set forth
in Article 4.6 shall apply except as modified and added pursuant to the following:
(1) All uses shall be in completely enclosed buildings and any outdoor storage is
expressly prohibited.
(2) Parking required for business and professional offices shall be at the standard of
one space per three hundred square feet of total floor area (1/300). However, this requirement
may be reduced to 1/400, or at least by one parking space, when there is a mix of residential
and office use in the same structure or when there is an existing structure on a property located
within a designated historic district or an individually designated historic site.
Section 9. That Section 4.4.24, "Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD)",
Subsections 4.4.24(D), "Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed" and 4.4.24(H), "Special District
Regulations", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, are hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 4.4.24 Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD)
(D) Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed: The following uses are allowed as
conditional uses within the OSSHAD:
DELEIED (1)11ND (2)11ND RENU}.lBERED.
(1) Outdoor dining which operates at night or which is the principal use or purpose
of the associated restaurant.
(2) Adult Congregate Living Facilities, Residential Licensed Service Provider
Facilities subject to restrictions set forth in Section 4.3.3(D), Child Care, Adult Day Care,
Continuing Care, Convalescent Homes, and Nursing Homes.
9
ORD. NO. 68-06
(3) Public Parking lots not associated with a use.
(4) Residential-type inns, not to exceed more than eighteen (18) individually leased
suites or rooms per acre.
(5) Group Home, Type 2, and Community Residential Homes, pursuant to
restrictions set forth in Section 4.3.3(1).
(H) Special District Regulations:
(1) The gross floor area of residential units within a structure containing permitted
non-residential use(s) shall not ttse exceed more than 50% of the gross floor area of the entire
structure within which they are located.
Section 10. That Section 4.5.1, "Historic Preservation Sites and Districts", Subsections 4.5.1 (B),
"Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts", 4.5.1 (E), "Development Standards", 4.5.1 (F),
"Restrictions on Demolitions", 4.5.1 (I), "Historic Preservation Board to Act on Site Plans, Landscape Plans,
and Architectural Elevations", and 4.5.1 (L), "Designation of Historic Districts" of the Land Development
Regulations of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, are hereby amended to read as
follows:
Section 4.5.1 Historic Preservation Sites and Districts:
(B) Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts:
(1) To qualify as a historic site, or historic district, or historic interior, or historic
structure. individual properties, structures, sites, or buildings, or groups of properties,
structures, sites, or buildings must have significant character, interest, or value as part of
the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. To
qualify as a historic site or historic district, the property or properties must fulfill one or more of
the criteria set forth in division (2) or (3) below; to qualify as a historic interior the interior must
fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) and meet the criteria set forth in
divisions (3)(b) and (3)(d).
(E) Development Standards: All development of individually designated historic properties
and/ or properties located within historic districts. shall comply with the goals. objectives. and policies of
these regulations. the Comprehensive Plan. the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
and the Secretat:}' of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
(1) Exterior Architectural Features. For the purpose of this Section, exterior
architectural features wtil shall include, but not be limited to the following:
(a) The architectural style, scale, general design, and general arrangement of
the structure's exterior;
10
ORD. NO. 68-06
(b) The type and texture of building material; and
(c) The type and style of all roofs, windows, doors, and signs.
(2) Survey Area. For the purposes of this section. the survey area shall be confined to
the historic district. and the term survey area shall mean:
(a) The two (2) nearest homes on each side of the lot to be developed. if
homes are across public right-of-way. they are to be utilized:
(b) Any home directly to the rear of the lot to be developed: and
(c) The four (4) nearest homes across the public right-of-way to the front of
the lot to be developed.
(d) If any of the lots on either side of the subject lot. or across the public
right-of-way is a vacant lot or a commercial lot. then it is to be removed from the
calculation. and replaced by the next nearest lot that is not a vacant or commercial lot.
(e) In the event that strict compliance with 4.5.1 (E) (2) (a). (b). or (c) above is
determined to be impossible due to topography. zoning or historic district boundaries.
city limits. or other logistical matters. the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Department shall determine the Survey Area as strictly as possible in compliance with
4.5.1 (E) (2) (a). (b). (c). and (d) above.
(3) Average. For the purposes of this section. the term "average" is hereby defined
as the sum of the square footage for the existing homes located in the survey area. excluding the
homes with the highest and lowest square footage (unless there are four (4) or less existing homes
in the survey area). respectively. divided by the number of homes for which square footage are
included in the sum.
(4) Infill Development. Infill development standards shall not apply to
individually designated properties. sites. buildings and structures. For the purposes of this
section. the term infill development shall mean:
(a) construction of a new structure on a vacant lot: or
(b) additions involving the construction. reconstruction. or alteration of
any part of the front elevation: or
(c) the construction. reconstruction. or repair of at least twenty-five percent
(25%) or more of the exterior of an existing structure and all appurtenances thereto.
11
ORD. NO. 68-06
~)(5) BuildiDJtS, Structures. Appurtenances and ParkitlR'. The fon~ BuildinW;.
structures.appurtenances and parking shall only be moved, reconstructed, altered, or maintained,
in accordance with this chapter, in a manner that will preserve the historical and architectural
character of the building, structure, site, or district:
(-a) Buildiftgs, stmetufes, appurteflll.flees.
WW Appurtenances~ Appurtenances includes, but ~ are not limited to, stone
walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, sidewalks, signs, and accessory structures.
11:.1. Fences and Walls:
i:- a. Chain-link fences shall be clad in a green or black vinyl
and shall only be used in rear yards. or where they are not visible from the
street.
ii:- b. All other provisions in Section 4.6.5 shall apply.
2. Garages and Carports: Where a majority of existing structures
have garages or carports within the survey area. the infill may include a garage or
carport. Where a majority of existing structures do not have garages or carports.
those elements are to be discouraged from view of the public right-of-way.
a. The following compatibility standards shall apply to infill
development:
i. The gflra~ frontage shall not vary more than ten
percent (10%) from the average Wlr~e frontage within the survey
area.
ii. The orientation of gflrages and carports shall be
consistent with the majority of such structures within the survey
area. Where possible. Wlrages and carports shall be oriented and
entered from the side or rear of the infill home. and out of view
from the public right of way.
111. Each home shall not have more than one gflrage
with a holding capacity of two (2) vehicles. Garages shall have
single bay doors only.
~(b) Parking:
1. Where feasible. alternative methods of meeting minimum parking
standards contained in Sections 4.6.9(c)(8) and/or 4.6.9(E)(8)(a) shall be explored
to avoid excessive use of historic properties and/or properties located in historic
districts for parking. Parking lots shall strive to contribute to the historic nature of
12
ORD. NO. 68-06
the properties/districts in which they are located rather than detract by use of
creative design and landscaping elements to buffer parking areas from historic
structures. At a minimum. the following options shall be considered:
a. Locate parking adjacent to the building or in the rear.
b. Screen parking that can be viewed from the public right-
of-way with fencing. landscaping. or a combination of the two pursuant to
Section 4.6.5.
c. Utilize existing alleys to provide vehicular access to
buildings.
d. Construct new curb cuts and street side driveways only in
areas where they are appropriate or existed historically.
e. Use appropriate materials for driveways. such as concrete
poured in ribbons.
f. A void driveway expansions and circular drives.
2. Waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation Board for
relief of a literal interpretation of Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation
that adequate parking for a proposed use may be achieved by alternate means. as
confirmed by the Cit;y Engjneer. and which are found to be in keeping with the
provisions and intent of the Dekay Beach Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines.
~.(0 Alterations. In considering proposals for alterations to the exterior of historic
buildings and structures and in applying development and preservation standards, the
documented, original design of the building may be considered, among other factors.
t41 m Standards and Guidelines. A historic site, or building, structure, site,
improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall be altered, restored, preserved,
repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Dekay Beach Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines, as amended from time to time.
~.au Relocation. Relocation of historic buildings and structures to other sites shall not
take place unless it is shown that their preservation on their existing or original sites is not
consistent with the purposes of this Section or would cause undue economic hardship to the
property owner.
13
ORD. NO. 68-06
(67.(2) Demolition. Demolition of historic sites, archaeological sites, or buildings,
structures, improvements, and appurtenances within historic districts will be regulated by the
Historic Preservation Board in the manner described in Section 4.5.1 (P). Applications submitted
for a demolition shall be accompanied by a complete application for redevelopment of the
propert;y. Approvals for demolition shall not be granted and the demolition shall not occur until
the redevelopment application has been approved and a building permit has been issued for the
redevelopment.
(J) The eoftstmctiOft of ftew bttildings or stmcmres, or the l'elocati:Oft, a:lteratiofl,
recoflstroction, or major repair or ffiala:tefMlftee of a non cofttribtltiag batldiflg or stmctt1:re ",'ithffi
a desigfl:ated historle distftct shaY. fficet the same compatibility standards as aft)' ffiateriftl chaRge ift
the exterior a-ppelltanee of llR ext:,ting flOfl WflttibUtiflg building. }~tty ffiaterW cllilage ift the
exterior a-ppellrltflCe of aft}T cxistiflg non wRtrilmttng buildiflg, structure, or apptlftenanee in a
designated histOrle district shaR be geReraRy compatible with the form, proportioR, mass,
configuration, building ffi:2lteMI, texture, color, and loCfttion of historic batiding3, stft1ctt1:res, or
sites adjoiftiftg or rcasoflably appl'O~te to the nOfl WRtftlmtiflg beildiflg, st1'ucmre, or site.
f81illU Visual Compatibility Standards. Visual compatibility of infill development
within a desi,gnated historic district shall be determined by comparison to structures within the
survey area. Visual compatibility of all non-infill development and til-improvements to buildings,
structures, and appurtenances within a de3~ated lmtOrle district shall be determined by
comparison to structures within the entire historic district visWllly coffif'fttible. Visual
compatibility shall be determined in terms of by all of the following criteria. (a) through (n)
inclusive:
(a) He~ht: The height of proposed development bati~ or modifit:lltiOflS
shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures ltfld
buil~ historic building stock. All development proposals shall meet the following he~ht
requirements:
1. Building Height Plane: The building height plane technique
helps set back the overall height of a building from the front propert;y line. The
higher the building the more setback is required.
a. The building height plane line is extended at an
inclined angle from the intersection of the front yard property line and the
zero datum grade for a lot. or seven and one half feet above mean sea
level. whichever is higher. The inclined angle shall be established at a 2:1
ratio for single-family residential and duplex uses. and a 2:1.5 ratio for
Commercial. Mixed-Use and Multi-Family structures. See examples below.
14
ORD. NO. 68-06
1
~I
31
~I
:51
g;1
[I
.-1
51
[I
250-J !
--)I
MAX 35' HT
NO BUilD
ZONE
175
/' 22 S'! HISTORIC
:;7'- -- --- ..--- -2"SrORYHT - - - - ---
REAR
I SETBACK
1500'
15'
"-., '25
150 0' -,,~--
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
AT 2:1 RA TIO
MAX 35 HT
22S! HISTORIC
~------~-2Sf6RYHT----------
REAR
SETBACK
I
- 1
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
AT 2:1.5 RATIO
2.
First Floor Maximum Height:
a. Single-story structures or first floor limits shall be
established by:
i. Height from finished floor elevation to top of
beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed 12'.
11. Mean Roof Height shall not exceed 16'.
111. Any portion exceeding these dimensions shall be
considered a multi-story structure.
IV. See example below:
12 ROOF PITCH MAY VARY
6L..//
fD
...
MEAN ROOF HT.
4"-'., TOP OF BEAM
x
<(
~
F.F.E.
3. Upper Story Height and Setbacks:
a. Height from finished floor elevation to finished floor
elevation or top of beam (tie or bond) shall not exceed 12'.
b. To respect the current neighborhood scale and space
15 ORD. NO. 68-06
between buildings. an increased upper floor side setback of five (5) feet on
each side shall be required. except for those architectural styles that
require a flush wall from one floor to the next (i.e.. mission). in which case
the additional five (5) foot setback shall be required for all floors.
4. Number of Stories: Number of stories for infill development
shall be within a half story of the average number of stories of existing single-
family structures within the survey area. The number of stories shall be
represented as an average measure of wholes and halves (i.e. a home built with
one (1) story at the front building line and two stories in the rear. or a "split level"
home. shall be considered as a one and a half-story house).
(b) Front Fas:ade Proportion: The front fa<;ade of each building or
structure shall be visually compatible with and in direct relationship to the width of the
building and to the height of the front elevation of other adjacent or adjoining buildings
within a historic district.
(c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any
building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings
exemplified by the prevailing historic architectural styles within the district. The
relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors
among buildings within the district shall be visually compatible.
(d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids; From FaeaEles: The relationship of solids
to voids in the [tORt fllt:llde of a building or structure will shall be visually compatible with
the: a.Oflt faeade:3 of historic buildings or structures within the district. with particular
attention paid to the front facades.
(e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open
space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the
relationship between historic sites, buildings, or structures within a historic district.
(f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of
entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible
with the prevalent architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on historic sites,
buildings, and structures within a historic district.
(g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of
materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be
visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic sites, buildings,
and structures within a historic district.
1. All exterior finishes shall be either brick. stone. masonry. wood.
16
ORD. NO. 68-06
masonry composite. or such other similar exterior finish as may be approved by
the Historic Preservation Board in the reasonable exercise of their professional
opll11on.
(h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape. including t;ype and slope. of a building or
structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of the existing historic building
stock of a historic site, htlildffig, or stroetl:lre within the subject il-historic district or survey
area. as applicable.
1. For infill development where a majority of existing homes within
the survey area have a rooiline that is parallel to the street the infill structure shall
be so oriented. Where the main rooiline of a majority of the existing homes in the
survey area runs perpendicular to the street. the infill home shall be so oriented.
(i) Walls of Continuity: Appearances of a building or structure such as
walls, wrought iron, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall fonn
cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to insure visual compatibility of the building to
historic buildings, structures, or sites to which it is visually related.
1. Swimming pool fences shall be designed in a manner that
integrates the layout with the lot and structures without exhibiting a utilitarian or
stand-along appearance.
2. Fences and walls over four feet (4') should not extend past the
Building Plane where visible from the public right-of-way.
G) Scale of a Building: The size of a building, the building mass in relation
to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies,-1tfitl porches. and lot size shall be
visually compatible with the building size and building mass of historic sites, buildings,
and structures within a historic district. To detennine whether the scale of a building is
appropriate. the following shall apply:
1. Angle of Vision: The building angle of vision regulation is used
to manage the bulk of a building at or near the front setback line and is applied to
achieve compatibility. The wider the house. the more it will have to be set back.
'Ibis technique helps to reduce the shape of the building as it is perceived from the
street. The angle of vision shall be detennined as follows:
a. Create a line perpendicular to the front yard property line.
b. Create two (2) 40 degree angles on either side of the line
extending from the intersection of the front property line and the
perpendicular line.
17
ORD. NO. 68-06
i. The vertex of the angle can slide anywhere along
the front property line to establish/identify any areas of impact
where a structure cannot be built.
ii. For lots exceeding 100' in width. the base angles of
vision (40 degrees on either side) shall both be increased by two
(2) degrees for each (10) ten feet of increased lot width up to a
maximum of 140' wide. See example below.
r
~
[
t'~ L
BUILDABU!
AREA
@
. SfTfL4CK A.RFA
8~OA8lf AREA . NO BUfI,O AREA
(k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually
compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites in its directional character,
whether vertical, horizontal, or nondirectional.
.L For infill development. the infill structure shall have a similar
orientation to the street as the majority of the existing structures within the survey
area.
0) Lot Coverage: Lot Coverage is the area or "foot print" in the ground
plane within the building envelope occupied by the principal structure and any accessory
structures. Usually expressed as a percentage. the following lot coverage requirements
shall be applied to achieve compatibility and be determined by dividing the total square
feet under roof on the ground plane (building footprint) by the lot size (converted to
square feet):
18
ORD. NO. 68-06
1. Example: 2.625 Sq. Ft. on the ground plane + 7.500
Sq.Ft.(75' x 100' lot size)= 35% Lot Coverage.
2. The maximum lot coverage for infill development shall be limited
to the lesser of the average of the survey area or one (1) of the following:
a. Thirty-five percent (35%) for Nassau Street Historic
District.
b. Thirty percent (30%) for Del-Ida Park. Marina. West
Settlers. and Old School Square Historic Districts.
3. Additions to contributing structures may increase lot coverage to
fo~ percent (40%) for Nassau Street Historic District and ~-five percent
(35%) for Del Ida Park. Marina. West Setders. and Old School Square Historic
Districts.
(m) Additions to Existing Structures. Visual compatibility of additions to
existing structures shall be accomplished as follows:
a. Additions shall be located as inconspicuously as possible and to
the rear or least public side of a building.
b. Additions or accessory structures shall not be located in front of
the established front wall plane of a historic building.
c. Characteristic features of the origjnal building shall not be
destroyed or obscured.
d. The addition shall be designed and constructed so that the basic
form and character of the historic building will remain intact if the addition is ever
removed.
e. Additions shall not introduce a new architectural style. mimic too
closely the style of the existing building nor replicate the origjnal design. but shall
be coherent in design with the existing building.
f. Additions shall be secondary and subordinate to the main mass of
the historic building and shall not overwhelm the original building.
~ Viln:lftl compatibility standa:r6s will be fur.her dilJetlsscd ift greater detftil ift
the Delft}. Beach. Preserntioft and COftSefVatiOft Maft\:Htl. Sa:id Mllftt:lal will be developed
as a guide to assist property OWflets as they seek to ftomtftate their properties for
de3igaatioft as a historic site or to designate aft area within the city as a historit: distftet.
19
ORD. NO. 68-06
(11) In order to provide design flexibility for structures that otherwise satisfy
the Visual Compatibility Standards outlined in Section 4.5.1 (E) (1 0). incentives for
additions to contributing structures and/ or confonning new construction shall include the
following:
a. The ratio of the Angle of Vision for single family structures can
increase from 2:1 to 2:1.5 for open air spaces limited to: first or second floor front
porches (separation must be provided between floors). first or second floor side
porches (separation must be provided between floors). balconies. and overlooks
with open railings (see example below): and
BUILDING HEIGHT PLANE
NORTH (SIDE) ELEVATION
b. Up to twenty five percent (25%) of the front elevation(s) of single
family structures can extend above the Building Height Plane to a maximum
height of thirty five feet (35'). provided twenty five percent (25%) or more of the
front elevation(s) remains one story. The total width of extension along the front
elevation(s) shall not exceed eighteen feet (18'). See example below.
20
ORD. NO. 68-06
SIDE VIEW
0= ALLOWED ABOVE BHP,
NOT TO EXCEED 35' MAX
c:Jl = MUST BE UNDER BHP
I!IIl\III = 25% OR MORE OF FRONT
FACADE(S) MUST REMAIN
1 STORY
......-,
I"
FRONT VIEW
(F) Restrictions on Demolitions: No structure within an Historic District or on an Historic
Site shall be demolished without first receiving a Certificate of Appropriateness pursuant to Section
2.4.6(H) for that f'UfJ'03C. The Historic Preservation Board shall be guided by the following in considering
such a request.
(1) The Historic Preservation Board upon a request for demolition by a property
owner, shall consider the following guidelines in evaluating applications for a certificate of
appropriateness for demolition of designated historic sites, historic interiors, or buildings,
structures, or appurtenances within designated historic districts;
(a) Whether the structure is of such interest or quality that it would
reasonably fulfill criteria for designation for listing on the national register.
(b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmanship, or material that it
could be reproduced only with great difficulty or economically nonviable expense.
(c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in
the designated historic district within the city.
(d) Whether retaining the structure would promote the general welfare of the
city by providing an opportunity to study local history, architecture, and design, or by
developing an understanding of the importance and value of a particular culture and
heritage.
21
ORD. NO. 68-06
(e) Whether there are definite approved plans for immediate reuse of the
property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect those plans will have
on the dillftetet of the surrounding area.
(2) No decision of the Board shall result in undue economic hardship for the
property owner. The Board shall have authority to determine the existence of such hardship in
accordance with the definition of undue economic hardship found in Subsection (H).
(3) The Board's refusal to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness requested by a
property owner for the purpose of demolition will be supported by a written statement describing
the public interest that the Board seeks to preserve.
(4) The Board may grant a Certificate of Appropriateness as requested by a property
owner, for demolition which may provide for a delayed effective date. The effective date of the
certificate will be determined by the Board based on the relative significance of the structure and
the probable time required to arrange a possible alternative to demolition. the Board may delay
the demolition of designated historic sites and contributing buildings within historic districts for
up to six months while demolition of non-contributing buildings within the historic district may
be delayed for up to three months.
(5) During the demolition delay period, the Board may take such steps as it deems
necessary to preserve the structure concerned. Such steps may include, but are not limited to,
consultation with community groups, public agencies, and interested citizens, recommendations
for acquisition of property by public or private bodies, or agencies, and exploration of the
possibility of moving one or more structures or other features.
(6) The Board may, with the consent of the property owner, request that the owner,
at the owner's expense, salvage and preserve specified classes of building materials, architectural
details and ornaments, fixtures, and the like for reuse in the restoration of the other historic
properties. The Board may, with the consent of the property owner, request that the Delray
Beach Historical Society, or the owner, at the owner's expense, record the architectural details for
archival purposes prior to demolition. The recording may include, but shall not be limited to
photographs, documents, and scaled architectural drawings to include elevations and floor plans.
Two (2). copies of such recordings shall be submitted to the City's Planning and Zoning
Department. One (1) to be kept on file and the other to be archived with the Delray Beach
Historical Society. At the Board's option, and with the property owner's consent, the Board or
the Dekay Beach Historical Society may salvage and preserve building materials, architectural
details, and ornaments, textures, and the like at their expense, respectively.
(7) The owner shall provide the following information on his/her application for any
contributing structure in a historic district or individually designated historic structure:
22
ORD. NO. 68-06
(a) A certified report from a registered architect or engineer which provides
documentation explaining that the building is structurally unsound and is damaged
beyond the ability to repair it at a reasonable cost. The report must include photographs
to substantiate the damage.
(b) A certified report from an engineer. architect. general contractor. or other
qualified professional which documents the projected cost of repairing the structure and
returning it to a safe and habitable condition.
(c) An appraisal of the property in its current condition. its value as vacant
land and its potential value as a preserved and restored historic property.
(d) Documentation that reasonable efforts have been made to find a suitable
alternate location for the structure within the City of Dekay Beach to which the
contributing/ individually designated historic structure could be safely relocated.
(I) Historic Preservation Board to Act on Site Plans, Landscape Plans, and
Architectural Elevations: Pursuant to the powers granted in Section 2.2.6(D), the Historic Preservation
Board shall act on all development applications, within a Historic District or on a Historic Site, subject to
processing under Sections 2.4. 5 (F), (G), (H), and (I) which otherwise would be acted upon by the Site Plan
Review and Appearance Board or the PlMiniflg aad Zoning Board.
(L) Designation of Historic Districts: The following Historic Districts are hereby affIrmed
or established:
(1) +HE-NASSAU STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT which consists of Lots 2-
19 of Nassau Park, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 67 ofPahn Beach County, Florida; Lots
1-12 of Wheadey Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 16, page 98 of Pahn Beach County,
Florida; and Block E, Lot 4 and Block F, Lot 1 of John B. Reid's Village as recorded in Plat
Book 21, page 95 of Pahn Beach County, Florida. (Original designation by Ordinance 97-87
adopted on January 12, 1988)
(2) +HE MARINA DISTRICT which consists of Block 125, excluding the south
350' of the north 488.6' of the west 100' of Block 125, along with that part of Block 133 lying
west of the Intracoastal Waterway, together with the east half of Block 118, along with all of
Block 126, together with that portion of Block 134 lying west of the Intracoastal Waterway,
along with east half of Block 119, together with all of Block 127, along with the east half of
Block 120, and all of Block 128, all within the Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1,
Page 3, Pahn Beach County Records (Original designation by Ordinance 156-88 adopted on
December 20, 1988)
(3) DEL-IDA PARK which consists of Blocks 1 through 13, inclusive, along with
Tracts A, B, and C DEL-IDA PARK, according to the Plat thereof on file in the Office of the
23
ORD. NO. 68-06
Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida recorded in Plat Book 9 at
Page 62 (Original designation by Ordinance 9-88 adopted on March 22, 1988)
(4) OLD SCHOOL SQUARE which consists of the south one-half of Block 57
and Blocks 58-62, Blocks 65-70, the west half of Blocks 74 and 75, and Lots 1-6 of Block 76,
Town of Linton Plat, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 3, Palm Beach County Records.
(Original designation by Ordinance 1-88 adopted on February 9, 1988).
(5) +HE WEST SETTLERS HISTORIC DISTRICT is bounded on the north
by Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (N.W. 2nd Street). The eastern boundary is as follows:
the alley running north and south in Block 43; N.W. 3rd Avenue between N.W. 1st Street and
the east-west alley of Block 36. The southern boundary is N.W. 1st Street between N.W. 3rd
Avenue and the alley in Block 43; the east-west alley in Block 36 and Block 28 and the south
property line of Lot 13, Block 20. The western boundary is the north-south alley and the
eastern one-half (1/2) of the block south of the alley of Block 19; the north-south alley in the
north half of Block 20.
Section 11. That Appendix "A", "Definitions", of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:
CONTRIBUTING BUILDING - A building contributing to the historic significance of a district which
is typically more than fifty (50) years old and which by virtue of its location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, or association with local historic events or personalities lends to the district's sense of time
and place within the context of the intent of historic preservation. A building that is more than fifty (50)
years old shall be presumed to be contributing whether listed as such on a surveyor not.
HARDSCAPE - Consists of the inanimate elements of landscaping, especially masonry or wood work
such as concrete or brick patios. tile paths and wooden decks.
NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING - A building within a historic district which is typically less than
fif~ (50) years old and which does not add to a historic district's sense of time and place and historical
development; or a building where the location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, and association
have been so changed or have so deteriorated that the overall integrity of the building has been
irretrievably lost.
Section 12. That should any section or proVlslon of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any
paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 13.
hereby repealed.
That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are
24
ORD. NO. 68-06
Section 14.
final reading.
That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on second and
PASSED AND ADOPTED 10 regular seSSIon on second and final reading on this _ day of
,2006.
ATTEST:
MAYOR
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
25
ORD. NO. 68-06
~
A
'lIP
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
David T. Harden, City Manager
pi) Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
TO:
DATE:
February 6, 2007
SUBJECT:
Agenda Item - City Commission Workshop, February 13,2007
Funding Request - Pineapple Grove Main Street, Inc.
Attached is a letter the Mayor received from Gene Fisher, President of Pineapple Grove
Main Street, Inc., requesting funding assistance for their annual administrative costs. A
detailed administrative budget is attached. They are anticipating an approximate
shortfall in the administrative budget of $18,714.00. A letter was sent to them at the
start of last year's budget process instructing them to submit a funding application for
FY06-07 if they were going to request funding, but none was received.
Options for consideration of the request include:
1. Instruct Pineapple Grove Main Street to submit a request for the FY07-08
funding cycle.
2. Consider approving a portion of or the entire projected deficit.
3. Request that the CRA fund all or a portion of the projected deficit.
4. Request that the DDA fund all or a portion ofthe projected deficit.
Staff is requesting Commission's direction on this funding request.
RAB/db
Attachment
U:\wwdata\Agenda\Agenda Item Funding Request Pineapple Grove Mainstreet.doc
W5.3
~
4ft
PIBnnL(
/............._'------~--
b R 0 V (
~,-,"".-.....~
!l I I I I I " II
2006-2007
Board of
Directors
Gene Fisher
President
Jimmy Deitch
ExecutiVe
Vice President
David Beale
Vice President
General Counsel
Alicia Lomba
Secretary
Fatima Grady
Treasurer
Cecelia Boone
Past President
Board Members
Liaison
Bill Branning
Melissa Carter
Paul Dorling
George Maso
Suzy Sims
Board Members
At Large
Lee Adams
Brian Cauff
Steven Cohen
Bob Currie
Ivan Ladizinsky
Debbie Reilly
Janice Vaccaro
STAFF
Sue Keleher
Program Manager
PINEAPPLE GROVE MAIN STREET, INC.
298 Pineapple Grove Way, Delray Beach, FI 33444
Telephone: 561.279.9952, E-Mail: pineapplegrovedelray@hotmail.com
February 2, 2007
Jeff Perlman, Mayor
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1st Avenue
Delroy Beach, Florida 33444
Re: Proposal for Funding for Administration
Dear Mayor Perlman:
,
l ';1
FEB - 5 '
Per our previous conversation, please accept this as Pineapple Grove
Main Street, Inc.'s request to the City of Delray Beach for further
administrative funding.
We have initiated several projects under our PGAS (Pineapple Grove
ArtScape) Program. We currently have over$tOO,OOO committed for
these projects and they are in various stages and ready to begin
implementation. We are also hiring a grant-writer for further funding
for these projects.
We are appreciative of the monies we currently receive from the eRA.
However, we have been running a negative cash flow for the past several
years on the administrative side of our operation. Our funds will shortly
run out and we will have to cease operation (see the Expense Budget
attached).
It is at the administrative level that we need assistance. Our
administrative operational expenses run approximately $42,000 annually.
This includes ongoing, physical and payroll expenses:
General approximate annual income
CRA contribution
Total Income:
$ 8,000.00
,$15.000.00
$23,000.00
The above leaves us with a $19,000 annual deficit.
(2)
With the hard work and many volunteer hours over the past years, Pineapple
Grove has proven to be a tremendous asset to the development of the City's
downtown area. Taxable value and the monies it generates to the City has
been more than tenfold since its conception.
Viability of our organization in the future strongly depends on the City's
support.
Thank you for your consideration,
~ -~
~C/~~
Gene Fisher
Board President, PGMS, Inc.
GF:sk
End:
PROJECT LIST
PINEAPPLE GROVE ARTSCAPE PROGRAM:
. Mural Project Funded For Initial Stage
. Artistic Bike Racks Funded
. Sidewalk Art Open
. Design of the North Entrance Feature Mostly Funded
. South Arch Mosaic Project Funded
Working with Randy Welker, Business Recruitment Director, Delray Beach
Chamber of Commerce on the possible development of a warehouse area in
Pineapple Grove as an artist's incubator.
EVENTS:
.
Annual Bed Race
.
Artist Display on Pineapple Grove Way on Art and Jazz dates
.
Take It Easel Program (four separate events) (New Program this year)
MARKETING:
· We are in a campaign to re-claim Pineapple Grove as an Arts District.
· Working with merchants to identify Pineapple Grove as a "destination within a
destination" as stated in the Cluster Study
PGMS ADMINSTRATlVE BUDGET
One:oine: exuenses:
Advertising/promotion
Bank: service charges
Memberships: Main Street and Chamber
Membership meetings
Office supplies
Membership socials
Petty cash
Miscellaneous office
Insurance
Total:
$ 900.00
115.00
520.00
400.00
600.00
300.00
300.00
100.00
$ 4349.00
$ 7604.00
Physical:
Rent
Storage
Phone/CelllInternet
Total:
$ 3834.00
1176.00
1900.00
$ 6910.00
Payroll:
$27,500.00
TOTAL BUDGET:
$42.014.00
GENERAL INCOME:
$ 8,300.00
CONTRIBUTIONS (eRA)
$15,000.00
TOT AL REVENUE:
$23.300.00
NET OPERATING:
<$18.714.00>
City of Delray Beach
Memo
To: City commissi~_ /l.
From: City Manager vrv ,
CC:
Date: February 12, 2007
Re: Regulation of Smoking on the Municipal Beach
Following City Commission adoption of an ordinance restricting smoking on the municipal
beach to certain designated areas, the Ocean Rescue Division was asked to recommend
areas where smoking would be allowed. Their recommendations are attached.
I am concerned that the recommended smoking areas, measuring 30 feet square on the
north and south ends of the beach are too small. I believe that having such small areas
would greatly increase our enforcement challenge. I would suggest areas in about the same
locations as recommended by Ocean Rescue, but about 100 feet wide and extending from
the dune to the water. Ocean Rescue has a concem with that approach in that someone
wanting to go from one part of the beach to another would have to pass through an area of
concentrated smokers.
I am also concerned about the enforcement approach outlined in the attached memo. The
recommended approach would require purchase of an additional A TV and the hiring of at
least one additional staff person. Ocean Rescue is concemed that if life guards are tasked
with enforcing this restriction they would have to take their attention off the water and
swimmers, and could easily miss someone having difficulty in the water. Both the Police and
Code Enforcement are concerned that enforcing this restriction will take them away from
other duties which many residents see as more important. I suggest enforcement to the
extent we can with existing staff, which will mean limited enforcement.
Request of Direction: Staff requests direction from the Commission on two points.
1. How large an area should be set aside for smoking and is two areas enough or should
there be more?
2. How much effort should be put into enforcement of these regulations?
Vis. 4
RECEIVED V1
JAN 1 2 2007
CITY MANAGER. .
Delray Beach Ocean Rescue
340 South Ocan Blvd. . o.lray Beach, Florida 33483. (561}243-7352 · FAX(561}243-7270
Through: Joe Weldon
From: Robert Taylor-
Subject: Recommendations for smoking ban on the beach
Date: January 9,2007
Recommendations for the implementation of the City of Del ray Beach ordinance banning
smoking on the beach:
. Set up 2 designated smoking areas in specified areas on the Municipal Beach (see
attachment A), clearly marked by roping off boundaries at ground level.
Designated smoking areas should be at the back (west) side of the beach, in area
approximately 30 feet by 30 feet.
. Each smoking area should have a cigarette butt receptacle within its boundary.
. New beach rules signs reflecting the new ordinance(s) should be posted at each
beach access. This would require 68 new signs for the 34 beach entrances (signs
posted face both east and west). See attachment B.
. Enforcement of ordinance will require daily patrolling of beach area especially
during the initial implementation of ordinance and possibly on a permanent basis.
Since the penalty for smoking is a monetary fine, additional personnel (park
Rangers or Code Enforcement) would needed with some additional training to
issue citations with fines.
. An All Terrain 4 Wheel Vehicle would be required to patrol the 1 mile stretch of
the Municipal Beach. If a designated smoking area is also placed at Atlantic
Dunes Park, this vehicle would allow access to patrol the additional area. Other
ordinances including No AnimalslDogs and No Littering on the beach could also
be enforced on a daily basis.
obert Taylor
Ocean Rescue Sup
Daily Beach Conditions on the Wortd Wide Web: httD://www.mydelraybeach.com
Email: oceanrescue@ci.delray-beach.fI.us
. Enforce current no littering ordinance with additional resources on all terrain
vehicle issuing citations for littering on a daily basis.
. Form partnerships with Palm Beach County, other area municipalities, beach-
front hotels, Chambers of Commerce, Tourism Boards to educate residents and
visitors on the effects and penalties of litter on the beach and within all parts of
the city/county. This would be in various forms including: flyers/pamphlets,
signage, Public Service Television Spots, educating in local schools, and
consistent enforcement of ordinances.
. Purchase and install cigarette butt receptacles at locations throughout city/county.
. Purchase and install litter/cigarette butt bags dispensers at beach access points.
A:
'7 (OP6Y j) f\d2A.AJ 'b.l ~d ~v iA- S2~
DELRA Y BEACH MUNICIPAL BEACH
Swim Only In Lifeguard Supervised Area
Stay Within 50 Yards of the Shoreline
Obey All Lifeguard Instructions
NO Alcoholic Beverages
NO Vehicles, Dogs, or Animals
NO Glass, Fires, or Littering
NO Skim Boarding
NO Surfmg except in Designated Areas
NO Ballgames or Airborne Objects except in
Designated Recreation Areas
NO Kite Surfing or Parasailing Within 300
Feet of the Municipal Beach
NO Smoking on Beach except in Designated
Smoking Areas
8
. Interstate Products, Inc. : SafeSmoker Cigarette Receptacle Gray 4gal
IPI
Interstate Products. Inc.
-Quality Environmental Solutions-
PRGDUCT CATEfiGljES
Spill Containment
Weed Control
safety Cabinets
patching. sealing
CleBner/Degreaser
RoofIng
Facility Products
Fuel Containment
AbsOrbents
COatings
Cooling
Drum Storage
Pesticide
Safety Cans
Hard Tanks
Storage Buildings
Ice Control
Done Shopping? . .
~..
Any questions? Please
caU 1-800-474-7294
, HACKER SAFE
TESTED ONLY 04-JAN
O IllCUlIEtI 8"
GedIhIat'
lliall to "eriIy
04J..n-07 17:44 GMT
DMA
00-:1 Ma.keling Auoc..........
SafeSmoker Cigarette Receptacle Gray 4gal
Qty. in Basket: None
Price: $6S.95
Code: EM-120S-Gray
Shipping Weight: 15.00 Ibs.
Page 1 of2
BASKET
Qty in Ba!
Order Minir
Recentlv Vi
rff[:
tUG
. Top 5 Sellin
1. "1" Step Ru~
2. Turf Kina # ~
3. Triple Threat
4. 45 aal. Cabh
5. Beiae SafeS I
For questions or bulk discounts, pleaSe caII1-800-474-n94. Thank you
in advance.
You must dick -ADD TO BASKET'" at least once before dicking
http://www.ipisafetystore.com/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=IPI...1/4/2007
Qty:L
(ADD TO l!!:')
.BASKET . '.
Description:
With the increase of smoke free buildings, many non industrial facilities
have created outdoor designated smoking areas. Eagle introduced the
SAFESMOKER as an attractive product to complement any building or
facility. They are available in two sizes - 4 gallon and the smaller 5qt.
size. 5afeSmokers are made of high density polyethylene with UV
inhibitors and have a galvanized steel collection bucket. Designed to
restrict oxygen to quickly extinguish burning butts. The top of the
container removes easily to access and empty the intemal bucket. Rain
protective design keeps water out and reduces waste smells. Includes
integrated hold-down tabs for security and wind protection. Available in
beige, gray, brown or black. Ships unassemblecl for reduced shipping
cost and inventory space requirements.
Specifications:
Capacity: 4 gallons
Diameter: 17.25"
Height: 43.25""
Weight: 10 Ibs.
Color: Gray
Price is for a Gray Safesmoker #1208.
Freight will be added before your order is complete.
. .Eagle Cigarette Butt Cans & Receptacles ~ Freund Container
Page 1 of2
Freuf'llf'l'
CONTAINER
A DMaIon oIS<<fn ~
800.363.9822
Search: IKeywOrdor item # ~oo
Browse by: Market/Application: (-select-
Free Newsletter
Receive specials and
discounts via email!
I'l'_~~r~man .00
On Sale
Glass Bottles a. Jars
Bottles
Jars
Jugs
Vials
Plastic Bottles a. Jars
Bottles
Jars
Jugs
Vials
Caps a. Labels
Metal Caps
Plastic Caps
Dispensers & Pumps
Customlzable labels
Palls a. Drums
Plastic Pails & Drums
Steel Pails & Drums
Stainless Steel Drums
Metal Cans a. Tins
Cans
Tins
. Specialty Containers
Cans & Tubes
Media Containers
Packaging Supplies
Bags
Boxes & Cartons
Mailers
Haz. Shipping Systems
Shipping Supplies
Material Handling
Cabinets & Containers
UtIlity Carts & Trucks
Waste Cans
Loading Ramps
Spill Containment
i Funnels
, Clearance
'New
c
t
laos. 120$YEL
~ VIEW LARGER
Lo-
Home
Shoppi
o items
. Clearance
!tt
--~ging'1deas-o
,_.' ....__.n.._.....__..__.__......._..._
.. Ne""
Capacity
5 gal
5 gallon
Bottle Type: l~select~
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS - EAGLE II
TUBE'
~ TaLA FRIEND
~ REQUEST FOR QUOTE
~ SAMPLE POUCY
Indicate quantities to order below, then dick Add to Cart
We Also Recommend:
._ sCuoot
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS ~
EAGLE 'SAFESMOKER'
A
Color
Yellow
Diameter
12.00"
Height
40.00"
Price each
$77.70
$77.70
Item No.
120SYEL
120SBE
Beige
12.00"
40.00"
A
iii
- -
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS ~
RUBBERMAID 'CLASSIC'
CIGARETTE BUl
RUBBERMAID '
http://www.fteundcontainer.comIproduct.asp_Q.pn _ E _1205YEL _A_en _ E _ 300
1/4/2007
, .Interstate Products, Inc. : Nautical Smoke Stop
Page 1 of 1
IPI
Interstate Products. Inc.
.Ouality Environmental Solutio.-
PRGDUCT CATEalD
Spill Containment Nautical Smoke Stop
Weed Control
5afety cabinets
Patching a. Sealing
Cleaner/Degreaser
Roofing
Facility Products
Fuel Containment
Absorbents
Coatings
Cooling
Drum Storage
Pesticide
5afety Cans
Hard Tanks
Storage Buildings
Ice Control
Done Shopping?
~\li
My questions? Please
caU 1-800-474-7294
, HACKER SAFE
TESTID DAILY 04-~
~ ~eo8't
~~
04J..1Ml7 17:33 GMT
DMA
oro-<t Mo<~ Asaac"",*,
Qty. in Basket: None
P1ice: $97.50
Code: FP-CEP-1540
Shipping Weight: 20.00 Ibs.
Qty:L
[=K~~)
BASKET
Qty in Ba:
Order Minir
ffITi
lUl!;
. Top 5 Sellin
1. "1" Step Ru~
2. Turf Kina #~
3. Triole Threa1
4. 45 aal. Cabil
5. Beige SafeSI
Features:
. Altractive designs oompIement any office, fadoty or plant space.
. No maintenance required. Polyethylene construcI:ion will not rust or corrode.
. Large, 4-gaUon, steel pail catches at cigaretb5 - easily removed, cleaned and
replaced.
. Design minimi2es smoke exit and water eruy.
. Odor-Absorbing Alter option (Part # 1535) fits inside d pail - reduces oopIeasant
odors. uses 2 1/2 Ibs. of baking soda far maxinun, Iong-lasting odor control.
Price is for a Nautical Smoke Stop at $89.95 per. Freight will be added
before your order is complete. Please allow a maximum of two to three
weeks for delivery due to somtimes unexpected high volume on this unit.
For questiOns or buIk<lscooots, please call1-800~74-7294. Thank you in advance.
You must dick -ADP TO BASKET' at least once before going to checkout.
Interstate Products, Inc. @2000-2006
http://www.ipisafetystore.comlmerchant21merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=IPI...1/4/2007
. .Eagle Cigarette Butt Cans & Receptacles - Freund Container
Page 1 of2
FreulVl'
CONTAINER
A DMaIon oIB8r'1n ~
800.363.9822
Lo,
Home
Shoppi
o items
. Clearance
:1Z!.i
-.Pac:ikagingft1eas~
. New
Search: IKeyword or item #. ~GO
Browse by: Marketl Application: I-select-
Free Newsletter
Receive specials and
discounts via email!
IYour email ~GO
On Sale
Glass Bottles &. Jars
Bottles
Jars
Jugs
Vials
Plastic Bottles &. Jars
Bottles
Jars
Jugs
Vials
Caps &. Labels
Metal Caps
Plastic Caps
Dispensers &. Pumps
Customlzable labels
Palls &. Drums
Plastic Palls &. Drums
Steel Pails &. Drums
Stainless Steel Drums
Metal Cans &. Tins
Cans
TIns
Specialty Containers
Cans &. Tubes
Media Containers
Packaging Supplies
Bags
Boxes &. Cartons
Mailers
Haz. Shipping Systems
Shipping Supplies
Material Handling
Cabinets &. Containers
Utility Carts &. Trucks
Waste Cans
Loading Ramps
Spill Containment
Funnels
Clearance
New
" GeIon
Gl VIEW lARGER
Bottle Type: I-select-
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS - EAGLE
'SAFESMOKER'
SafeSmoker™ dgarette receptacles are made of high
polyethylene with W inhibitors for years of service. R
include a galvanized steel collection bucket inside to c
refuse. Rain protective design keeps water out and eli
odors normally associated with receptacles. Cans are
5 Quail
121 TEllA FRIEND
~ REQUEST FOR QUOTE
~ SAMPLE POUCY
Indicate quantities to order below, then dick Add to Cart
Item No. Color Capacity Diameter Height
1205B Black 5qt 15.25" 37.75"
1206B Beige 5 qt. 15.25" 37.75"
1208B Black 4 gal. 17.25" 43.25"
1209B Beige 4 gal. 17.25" 43.25"
Price each
$36.86
$36.86
$52.53
$52.53
A
We Also Recommend:
C'
r
til,
.,.'..........,.....'.::...,;'1
,.'il::,.,
III
- ,-
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS -
EAGLE 'POLY TUBE'
- -
CIGARETTE BUTT CANS -
RUBBERMAID 'CLASSIC'
CIGARETTE Bl11
RUBBERMAID .
http://www.freundcontainer.com/product.asp_Qj>n_E_1205B_A_en_E_300
1/4/2007