08-02-88SpMtg164
aUGUST 2, 1988
A Special Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Doak S. Campbell in the
Commission Chambers at City Hall at 8:00 P.M., Tuesday, August 2, 1988.
Roll call showed:
Present - Commissioner Patricia Brainerd
Commissioner Marie Horenburger
Commissioner Mary McCarty
Commissioner Jimmy Weatherspoon
Mayor Doak S. Campbell
Absent - None
Also present were - City Manager Walter O. Barry and
Assistant City Attorney Jeffrey Kurtz.
Mayor Campbell called the meeting to order and announced that
this meeting has been called for the purpose of (1) Considering update
as to the status of the Auburn Trace Housing Development and the C%ty's
UDAG Grant Award (Commission direction on these items will be sought).
1. Mayor Campbell made reference to Assistant City Attorney
Kurtz's memorandum of July 29, 1988, and stated that it might be appro-
priate to discuss several points this evening. The Commission turned
down the zoning request as presented last Tuesday; they might want to
hear the Assistant City Attorney's opinion as to where the City stands
legally regarding the contract and the 'grant with Procacci Development.
Also, where does the Commission want to go now with a project and
clearly set forth any parameters as to the nature of the project, the
number of units, zoning, and how this might reflect with the ability to
comply with the apparent request from the School Board regarding the
increase of school children in that area.
Assistant City Attorney Kurtz reported there is a grant from
HUD which totals about five million dollars which is available if we
build 368 units; if we build less than that the City will have to get a
modification and there will be less money forthcoming in all likelihood.
He stated the first question for discussion is whether the City still
wants to pursue a housing development on that partigular piece of
property with the City being actively involved in some fashion or
another; also, what is the appropriate zoning classification for that
parcel.
Upon question by Mr. Weatherspoon, the Assistant City Attorney
advised that the City has not received an extension that the City
requested from HUD; the HUD staff has indicated that they would not
process those applications knowing there are more potential modifica-
tions out there. They want a time frame within which they know the City
will be getting them the various modifications and what the subject
matter would be before they would consider the first two extensions. We
basically have until September 6th under the present agreement before
they would consider us to be in breach.
Upon question by Ms. McCarty, the Assistant City Attorney
stated the grant agreement is from HUD to the City, the party who would
get their five million dollars. A City may request a modification of
who the developer is. Mr. Procacci has, through his attorney, asserted
they have certain rights under that agreement.
Discussion followed with regard to whether or not the Commis-
sion wished to pursue housing on this property. Mayor Campbell stated
his own commitment is that the City should have a housing project there
in connection with the Community Redevelopment Plan for relocation of
people for rather ambitious projects planned elsewhere in the City; he
believed it was the feeling of the Commission that they were not going
to aggravate the situation with regard to the desegregation of our
165
schools, but that every child who would live in the new development is
already here and we are not adding to the situation. Ms. McCarty stated
she would also like to see housing on that property but with a density
lower than previously discussed; she believed there should be a retired
or elderly element to this and this would also lessen the impact of the
school situation. Ms. Horenburger concurred, stating that with the kind
of planned project proposed there are one bedroom units planned and this
would only allow a certain number of people to live there and would not
accommodate a family, thereby eliminating the problem of increasing the
school boundary. With the reduction in density she would be very much
in favor of that rather than having that property developed in an
unplanned fashion. Mr. Weatherspoon advised he is certainly in favor of
continuing the project at this location; he did share the concerns
regarding the density but after visiting some other locations, the
question of density, in his opinion, is a moot issue. The question of
the School Board concern, in his opinion, is also a moot issue so he has
no problem with proceeding with the project.
Mayor Campbell clarified with the Assistant City Attorney that
it would be legal to limit the people in the project on a first priority
basis to City residents and in line with the ability to get the UDAG
Grant.
With regard to the density, the Assistant City Attorney advised
that currently there are 13 acres of the 38 that are zoned for up to 10
units per acre and he believed the other 25 are single family. He asked
for Commission direction on the density issue so they could begin City
initiated rezoning on that land. Mayor Campbell stated he would not
want to go above 7 units per acre. Mr. Weatherspoon stated they have
had other projects come forth which have failed because of financing; 7
units sounds good from a practical standpoint but we have to look at
whether it will be financially viable.
Mayor Campbell clarified that the general consensus of the
Commission is that they would entertain and would like to try a housing
project; the majority would like to see a development of 7 units per
acre. They would direct staff to zone the property accordingly.
Phil Procacci stated he is trying to put together a quality
housing development; he is proposing that they lower the density to 250
units. The Commission's rejection of the zoning of the Auburn Trace
property and suggesting that the density be reduced to 7 units or less,
has effectively reduced the potential income by an amount in excess of
$500,000 per year without proportionately reducing the cost of the
development. The' original amenity package is now financially infeasi-
ble. Mr. Procacci advised that he has had numerous conversations with
George Steele, Managing Partner of the Palm Beach County Housing Part-
nership and they have agreed, in concept, to.enter into a joint venture
for the purpose of developing Auburn Trace, providing he has the full
support of the Commission.
George steele gave a brief overview of the organization, the
partnership and the people involved, enumerating the 24 members of the
Board of' Directors. He stated that a private, public partnership such
as this is essential if they are to get the job of providing critically
needed affordable housing in Palm Beach County done. Mr. Steele advised
they have six suggested parameters that Procacci and the Housing Partner-
ship have agreed upon: (1) To become joint venture participants in the
proposed Auburn Trace project; (2) The Partnership believes Procacci is
acting in good faith and will make every effort to conclude a joint
venture agreement; (3) The revised development plan will propose no more
than 250 unit~ on th~ 38 ~cze ~i'te; (4) The joint venture reserves the
right to resubmit a final proposal as to how the net proceeds of the
project will be distributed; however, in no event will the return of the
City's cash contribution be afforded a lesser priority; (5) All docu-
ments between the Partnership and Procacci will be available to the
City; the total financial structure of the joint venture development
will be submitted to the City when it is finalized; and (6) Concurrent
with the completion of the new financing plan, the new joint venture
will submit a comprehensive proposal for the rehabilitation and manage-
ment of Carver Estates which they feel is essential to the financial
viability of the proposed new development.
-2- 8/2/88
166
Upon question by Ms. Horenburger as to child care facilities,
Mr. Steele advised they are concerned with the human, personal quality
of life aspects which encompass, not only child care, but education,
health care and the delivery of social services; they plan to hold as a
high priority those aspects to ensure that this is a viable community.
Mr. Weatherspoon stated that his concern is since the proposed
project has been cut by 100 units and the revenue reduced by about
$500,000, he believed that in order to make this a viable project, the
amenities would be first thing to get cut out. He felt that if the
amenities are cut, the project would be doomed to failure. With regard
to Carver Estates, he is concerned that the rehabilitation by a private
enterprise will cause the rents to escalate. Mr. Steele stated that
they are aware of the feeling and sensitivity level of Carver Estates;
however, they are also aware of the growing concern of the residents of
this community about such amenities as the security factor. Hopefully,
the Partnership will not approach this as a private developer but as a
non profit entity to sit down with management, the Housing Authority and
residents and explore how they may assist in putting the projects
together. Mr. Steele stated they have also had conversation with the
School Board; bringing in Carver Estates with the same amenity package,
specifically security, may change the face and may not impact as a total
Black community because they want a mixed income and racially mixed
development. They would like the opportunity to explore this. Also,
they are exceedingly interested in the elderly population.
Mayor Campbell asked if it is the Commission's feeling that
rather than to begin completely fresh at this time, that they do allow
Mr. Procacci and the Housing Partnership to formulate their plans a bit
more in detail and present them to the Commission as soon as possible.
In the meantime, the Commission may wish to contact them with any
questions relative to the nature of the housing, implementation, etc.
He stated the Housing Partnership could get with Lula Butler, the City
Manager and the Chairman and members of the Housing Authority. The
Commission does want to indicate that they wish a dialogue~ as soon as
possible to proceed.
L~onar.d Syrop, member of the Housing Authority, advised that
the contract between the City and the Housing Authority for the 20 acres
was supposed to be signed yesterday with a deposit; as it stands now the
contract is void. The Housing Authority would not be uncooperative, but
they do expect some consideration from the City administration. Mayor
Campbell apologized for the Commission. Assistant City Attorney Kurtz
advised the Mayor executed the contract more than a week ago; there has
not been a meeting at which he could have addressed the Commission
regarding an extension. The Housing Authority gave the direction that
we were to discuss the matter and make our communication through their
attorney, Mr. Federspiel.
Assistant City Attorney Kurtz clarified the consensus of the
Commission is that the City wants to be involved in the project at 7
units per acre and staff will begin to initiate a rezoning for that
entire parcel. The City still wants to go forward with acquiring the
entire parcel, including the 20 acres from the ~ousing Authority. Also,
the City is to consider Mr. Procacci's new proposal, rather than going
out with another RFP on the site, for the next 10 days. This may not
actually come up to a vote until August 23rd.
Ms. Horenburger moved to rescind the prior authorization to
enter into the contract previously developed with Mr. Procacci, seconded
by Ms. McCarty. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Ms.
Brainerd - Yes; Ms. Horenburger ~ Yes; Ms. McCarty - Yes; Mr.
Weatherspoon - No; Mayor Campbell - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to
1 vote.
Mayor Campbell declared the meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M.
-3- 8/2/88
167
ATTEST:
The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach
and that the information provided herein is the minutes of the meeting
of said City Commission of August 2, 1988, which minutes were formally
approved and adopted by the City Commission on~f~.~./~f~ .
NOTE TO READER:
If the minutes that you have received are not completed as indicated
above, then this means that these are not the official minutes of City
Commission. They will become the official minutes only after they have
been reviewed and approved which may involve some amendments, additions,
or deletions to the minutes as set forth above.
-4- 8/2/88