Loading...
01-09-78 171 JANUARY 9, 1978 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was held in the Council Chambers at 7:05 P. M., Monday, January 9, 1978 with Mayor James H. Scheifley presiding and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, Assistant City Attorney Clifford Shandy and Council members Robert D. Chapin, David E. Randolph, Aaron I. Sanson, IV., and Leon M. Weekes, present. 1. The Lord's Prayer was recited in unison. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United~States of America was given. 3. Mr. Weekes moved for the approval of the minutes of December 12, 1977, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Sanson moved for the approval of the minutes of December 19, 1977, seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. 4.a.1. Mr. Sanson requested that the City Manager, place on a workshop agenda, an item for sible Council consideration on some appointments that need to%%Smade on the City Boards, one of which is the Financial Advisory Board and another is the Board of Adjustment. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. 4.a.2. Mr. Sanson requested that the City Manager give Council some assurance that the Building Department is adequately meeting the workload demand that must be placed on that department at the moment. He stated he has been led to understand that the building permits have tuipled this year in number; the department itself is relatively the same size as last year and there were complaints last year from some members of the department that they were having a hard time meeting the workload. If there are problems, he would consider putting on temporary help until this building boom sub- sides in order to be sure that proper service is being provided to the developers and the people of Delray. The City Manager acknowledged this and stated that it is only because of the length of the agenda that he does not plan to speak to that subject tonight. He acknowledged that there are pro- blems; there is nothing that money, space and personnel will not cure and it is his intention to make a recommendation to Council, in that regard, very shortly. 4.b.1. Mayor Scheifley proclaimed Sunday, January 15, 1978 as "DELRAY BEACH DAY" at the Norton Art Gallery~in West Palm Beach. 4.b.2. Mayor Scheifley stated that in October, 1972, the City Council approved a site plan for the area bounded on the south by Lowson Boulevard, and on the east by Homewood Boulevard and on the north by Atlantic Avenue on one condition; that condition was that there be only one entrance on Homewood Boulevard and that entrance be an extension of the entrance into the Delray Beach Country Club. Since that time, the developer went bankrupt or something happened and he sold the northern half of the property to a different developer. A new plat was approved without a public hearing and without any properties or neighbors being notified. That plat calls for several entrances on Homewood Boulevard. The Mayor requested that the City Manager make copies of the meeting that was held on October 24, 1972 and specifically pages 14, 15, 16, and 17. Apparently, when a new plat or final plat is approved, there is nothing in the ordinances which requires notification of the neighbors such as in rezoning. Council has a question to investigate and study and possibly make a decision on. The people on Homewood Boulevard are justly concerned because they were an innocent party to maybe a deficiency in the City's ordinances and suggests that this be put on the workshop agenda for next Monday night. This was agreed upon by Council and the City Manager. 5. There were no public requests from the floor. 6.a. The City Manager reported that he has a request from Anthony Canon, of the Regional Waste Water Treatment and Disposal Board, who is requesting Council's ratification, or approval, of an increase in the amount of the consulting service fees for the "201" Facility Plan in the amount of $16,320. He stated that Mr. Canon informed him that this has the approval of the Sewer Board but has to be ratified by each City Council. Mr. Weekes moved that Council ratify the Board's action in authorizing payment of this bill, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson stated that his feelings remain the same as expressed at the Sewer Board meeting and he feels they were paid amply, some $60,000, to do a job in the first place and they did not do it properly and instead of penalizing them Council is rewarding them with $16,000. The excuses that Council has heard on the basis of it being EPA mistakes are fallacies; he stated he intends to contact the EPA officials and allow them to tell their side of the story and he thinks that, when that comes down, Council will see that they strongly disagree that there was any fault on their part. 6.b.1. The City Manager reported that it was agreed sometime ago at workshop that Council is to give formal consideration tonight to the purchase of the Delray Beach Country Club. Mr. Chapin moved that Council's wish is to repurchase Tract I and shall give formal notice of that intention to exercise that option, in writing, to Mrs. Robert Bruce Harris, President of the Florida Golf Club, Inc., seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. Before roll call, the following discussion was had and presentations in favor of the purchase of the golf course were made from members of the public. Mayor Scheifley asked Mr. Chapin if he is correct in that this is just to approve the concept of buying the club to put the wheels in motion; not any ~of the details. Mr. Chapin replied that. that is correct; under the deed from the City to the Grimes Foundation, dated March 21, 1958, page 4, gives the City the option, in the 21st year, to exercise the option to repurchase Tract I. This motion does not speak to the details of 5.8 acres that the Financial Advisory Board has recommended; this would be part of the negotiations and any other suns, monies, appraisalS, estimates, etc.,are premature at this point. Mayor Scheifley stated that he agrees with Mr. Chapin and in his talk with Mrs. Harris she is perfectly willing to sell the club and the 5.8 acres. Jeff Hill, 101 N. W. llth Street, Delray Beach, President of the Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce, stated that the officers of the Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce have voted to support the concept of the purchase of the Delray Beach Country Club and the vote was unanimous. Huntley Parker, 725-B High Point Boulevard North, Delray Beach, stated he was speaking for many people in High Point who are in favor of purchasing the golf course, maintaining it, and opening it to the public. He read some points from an article, "Golf Courses for Sale", from the magazine called Recent Golf. He stated that he thinks it is important to the citizens of Delray are identified with golf and the Delray course could be one of the outstanding courses in this area if it was taken over by the town and developed properly. Kathi Sumrall, N. W. 16th Street, Delray Beach, asked that onc~ the~ ~ourse is purchased, if it is purchased, is the City at liberty to use that land for any other purpose other than a golf course? Mayor Scheifley stated that the deed restriction stated, in 1957, that this will be a golf course until the year 2007 - - 2 - 1/9/78. 173 a period of 50 years. Mr. Chapin stated that deed restriction applies to Tract I, which relates to, more or less, the original 18 holes. But, if additional property were purchased, that deed restriction would not apply to the additional property. Ms. Sumrall asked if there is any extra land that's not currently being used for the course on the original Tract I that could be used for other recreational facilities such as a pool? Mayor Scheifley stated he does not know, that this one of the questions that would have to be decided at a later date. John Harlan, 717-C High Point Boulevard North, spoke in favor of walkers being permitted on the course and that it should not be based upon the revenue from the carts, as indicated on the green sheet. Mayor Scheifley emphasized the point that the green sheets distributed with facts about the golf course are recommenda- tions by the Financial Advisory Board, which have not been acted upon by Council. Willard D. Young, Chairman of the Financial Advisory Board of the City of Delray Beach, stated that the questions and answers proposed on the green sheet are questions which have most often been asked of members of the Financial Advisory Board. It was with the intent of trying to put those questions before the Council that the list of questions and answers were prepared. He explained that they are not entirely adverse to walkers per se but they were trying to follow out what has been accomplished in previous years on the first 18 holes; walkers were allowed to operate on the new nine which is the 27th holes of the golf course itself and it was for this reason they recommended that no walkers be allowed on the course. Mrs. William James, 80 N. E. 4th Avenue, Delray Beach, spoke on the need for the golf course particularly for the young people, as well as the older people. She stated that it is wrong for the children of Delray Beach to have to go to other cities and private clubs to use their facilities for this sport. She pointed out that golf is a character and moral building sport as well as a sport that can be played throughout a lifetime. Henry H. Schechter, 3421 Spanish Trail, Delray Beach, stated he was surprised to read in the Monday Paper that the Delray Beach Golf Course was sold for racial reasons - that was a policy of exclusion - and, if there had been no policy of exclusion at that time, Delray would have had a municipal golf course throughout the years. He also spoke in favor of permitting walkers on the course. The following presentations were made in opposition to the purchase of the golf course. Irvin~ Kadet, 1020 Circle Terrace East, stated that all the information he has read, which is not a lot, neglected to explain to the taxpayers, the loss of revenue that the City will effect by taking over the golf course - how will it affect the senior citizens on fixed income and what will it cost them to join the club; how will the City make up the cost of the club plus what they plan to put into it to improve it, the cost of the employees which will have to be put on the City's payroll against the revenue they expect to receive above and beyond the total cost? Mayor Scheifley noted that 25 copies of this study has been made in three volumes (available at the City Clerk's Office) and all of the questions that Mr. Kadet asked have been answered by the Financial Advisory Board in that study. Anyone can go and get these and sign them out for a while. Mr. Kadet stated that he read the book and it gave figures but ~ot actualities and Council really does not know what the cost is going to be. The questions of how it is going to affect the senior citizens are not answered in that book. - 3 - 1/9/78. John Moffat, 108 N. W. 15th Street, Delray Beach, stated he is an avid golfer and he would like to see Delray Beach buy a golf course as long as it stays in the black or breaks even. lie stated he has looked at the numbers in Section 3 under Revenue and Disbursements and he thinks the revenues are completely out of this world, not only for this golf course, but for any golf course. With the projected $56,000 profit, he can easily see how that can go to a $2 or $3 hundred thousand deficit. Mr. Chapin replied to Mr. Moffat that he would very much like, if he (Moffat) would be so inclined, to confer and meet with the members of the Financial Advisory Board, six of which are avid golfers. He stated he thinks it would be very helpful if Mr. Moffat could give some assistance, based upon his expertise and knowledge of the sport, and operation of the game. Mr. Moffat stated he would be glad to talk with anybody - who would like to listen, but he is retired and does not have a secretary to put his figures in writing as requested by Mr. Sanson. Mr. Sanson stated that when decisions are voted on, regarding the purchase of this club, he will not really be con- sidering the argument of this club being self-sustaining. He stated he does not think Council should approached in that vein. in that Study, there is one thing that is dictated in the history of this club and that is, that it never was anything except in financial problems. However, there are many other considerations as to why he thinks there are good valid reasons for the purchase of this club. Dale W~goner, 101 Mockingbird Lane, Country Manors, Del- ray Beach, stated that his suggestion on something of this magnitude is that it should be taken to the citizens or the taxpayers of Delray Beach. He stated that the money that has been accumulated, or wherever/it is coming from, should be spent on some other little things thatarelneeded in Delray Beach ,such as bicycle paths for Country Manors. This concluded the public's presentation on this item. Mayor Scheifley asked the taxpayers how would they feel if they were to take on a recreation facility that cost $275,000 with no revenue; they have it now - the beach, lifeguards, etc., are costing the City $275,000 a year with no revenue involved but the golf course is a recreational facility that might be self- supporting. Mr. Weekes stated he thinks that the City should acquire the golf course property for a number of reasons. One of the pri- mary reasons is to maintain a large, green, open, recreational area in what will be the very heart of the City of Delray Beach. Whether or not it will cost the taxpayers money is open to question; however, he does not think it will be a great financial burden on the citizens and the assets to be derived from such a facility is well worth the revenue that may be required by the City to maintain the course. Secondly, on some of the cost figures that are in the Financial Advisory Board report must be remembered that all those costs do not have to be incurred within the first year or immediately after purchasing the course. Many of those costs can be spread anywhere from a period of one to ten years and amortized over a period of time so that they won't be burdensome at the outset. Mayor Scheifley stated that Mr. Hill, of the Chamber of Commerce, said that the Board of Directors unanimously went on record as supporting the concept of buying the club and they represent between 400 - 500 businesses in Delray Beach. Mayor Scheifley, also, stated that the Board of Directors of the Delray Beach Tennis Club went on record as supporting the Delray Beach Country Club by the City. The Mayor gave Council a copy of the letter signed by Ms. Patricia Dunbar, President of the Tennis Association. - 4 - 1/9/78. 175 Mr. Randolph stated he thinks the City of Delray Beach should be fortunate enough to have a municipal golf course and there are some people who are in the subfixed income bracket that are human beings and should also be given the opportunity to do the things that some others can do. The City of Delray Beach is sub in recreation - subpool, sub everything; some of this has been righted over the last four years with the building of the new Pompey Center, as an example, which is now going up in the western section of the City; this is an asset to the total City. The course itself, if purchased, can be worked in an area where even, if it is not totally revenue producing, at least the City may be able to break even. What is even more important is that, in the words of Mrs. James, the City is going to be able to give the youths of this City an opportunity to do something constructive. What has been done in the past is water under the bridge and the City should go ahead and purchase it because, in the long run, it is something that all the citizens of Delray will be equally proud of. Mr. Sanson stated he also concurs with the thoughts of his colleagues. The future existence of this area, is absolutely vital to the overall well-being of the community. He stated that Council recognizes the obvious enjoyments that can be derived from this course from the recreational needs and desires of the citizens but it also is a situation where the basic safety ~of all citizens, golfers or not, is protected by preserving this area as a green belt. This town is rapidly developing and, within the next three to four years, you will find very few vacant lots; it is becoming the unanimous' conclusion that, if there are not vast tracts of green area for water to get into the underground, water supplies for proper drainage and sewerage treatment, so to speak, no one is going to be able to survive in.this area. Mr. Sanson stated that he personally does not feel that the self-sufficiency of this club is that totally important; he would hate to think that they would get into a situation to where they were trying to make it self-supporting - the fees would become so astronomical that all the people could not use the course and would develop into a private golf course. He would like to think that they would take the attitude where certain contingencies are made for the youth and for other senior citizens, etc., so they can have special rates. He stated he supports the purchase; he does not see how they could go wrong. If it does prove to be a white elephant in the future, it can most certainly be sold at a tremendous profit over what they are paying for it now. Mr. Chapin stated that he has done some substantial study of the question and views this as the last, clear, chance that the City of Delray Beach has to exercise its option'to correct a very grievious, historical mistake that was made in 1957; they have the · opportunity to correct that mistake for the benefit of all the citizens, for the health of the community, for the recreation needs of this community, which has long been ignored; it will be beneficial to the economy of this community and most important, it will maintain this community as one of the premiere communities in the entire state of Florida. For these reasons he urges the adoption of the motion. At this point, the roll was called on the motion. 6.b.2. The City Manager reported that the City Attorney recommended, at a prior meeting, that the City retain the New York law firm of Mudge, Rose, Guthrie and Alexander, at a fee not to exceed $500, to review the proposed financial plan for the purchase of the Country Club. The City Manager stated that in a discussion he had with the City Attorney this afternoon, he advised that the action should be taken by Council, tonight, in a slightly modified form - the same firm but to expand the consideration of that firm to a review of the best financing plan rather than for them to look at it in a narrow sense; that could conceiveably raise the legal fees somewhat and the City Attorney suggested that a cap of $1,000 be set for the legal fee a~d if more is needed, it will come back to Council. Mr. Chapin moved that the Council engage the law firm of Mudge, Rose, Guthrie and Alexander to review the best financing - 5 - 1/9/78. methods available for the purchase of the Delray Beach Golf Club at a cost not to exceed $1,000, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. 6.c. The City Manager reported that it is recommended that Council retain the firm of Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., represented by Mr. Stanley Ross, to serve as Fiscal Agent for the City in connection with a Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Issue to finance the expansion of the water treatment plant and other water and sewer facilities and a General Obligation Bond Issue for financing a new Public Works facility. It is recommended that utility improvements, preliminary ~estimated cost of $7 million, be authorized; this would include the expansion of the water treatment plant, five new water wells, an elevated storage tank, and several miscellaneous water and sewer improvements. The City Manager stated that he is not suggesting that Council give approval to a bond issue in any specific amount tonight because that should be workshopped; however, he is asking that Council authorize the retaining of the fiscal agent so they, along with the consulting engineers and the City Administration, can get on with the job of developing the information on which Council's decision should ultimately be made. Looking first at just the utility improvements, there are two ways of financing - one would be by a single revenue bond issue; if that was done, the fiscal agents' fee would be a total of $15,000, if it is one issue; /however, should it be found to be to the City's advantage to have two bond issues - one secured by water and sewer revenue and the other by utility tax, or some other municipal source - the fiscal agent fees would be a total of $20,000. It is not known now which one would be the most advantageous to the City. The second recommendation is that the fiscal agent be authorized to perform the fiscal agent work in connection with a General Obligation Bond Issue, which is now estimated to be $1,200,000, but with more information prior to the time that Council would need to make a decision. It could be that that figure would be more or less and could be modified at'that particular time. Mr. Chapin asked what would be the cost of retaining the fiscal agent to advise Council on both items. The City Manager replied that the fiscal agent fees would come out of the bond issue in both cases. To answer Mr. Weekes' question, as to there not being a bond issue, the City Manager stated there would be no fiscal agent fee. Mr. Chapin asked if this is subject to the Competitive Negotiations Act; the City Manager replied, no it is not. Mr. Weekes stated that they have to move ahead with recommendations of fiscal agents on these matters but he has some very strong misgivings as to the dollar amounts, which have been mentioned by the City Manager. Mr. Sanson asked if the fees will be paid on a percentage basis? The City Manager explained that the fees will be paid in a lump sum amount. He noted that this firm has been doing the City's fiscal agent work for many years and the fee that he is quoting for doing the revenue bond issue, should it be one bond issue, is $15,000; this is exactly the same amount the City paid in 1973 for a $5 million issue. Mr. Sanson asked is it not advantageous to the citizens, or the taxpayers to, in any way, institute some kind of competitive situations to hear from other fiscal agents. The City Manager stated it would not hurt anything but he thinks it would not be advisable; first of all, the fee is very reasonable and can be checked out by any member of Council; secondly, the knowledge that Mr. Ross has of this City's financial affairs, by his having served as fiscal agent for so many years, is so advantageous to the City that even, if his fee was more than this, it would still be to the City's advantage up to a point. With regard to the General Obligation Bond Issue, should Council go that route for the public works facility, time is so short that a person not familiar with the City's financial structure would be hard-pressed to get that issue to referendum by the time that is needed. - 6 - 1/9/78. 177 Mr. Weekes moved that Council accept the recommendation of the City Manager and employ Mr. Ross's services for the purpose of getting together the necessary information for these two bond issues, seconded by Mr. Chapin. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager stated he would, also, like for Council to consider a companion motion to authorize Russell & Axon, the City's Water and Sewer Consulting Engineers, to work with the fiscal agent and with the City Administration, in developing the necessary financial and operating information that would be necessary for'the fiscal agent to have in order to put a proposed bond issue together for Council's consideration. Mr. Sanson asked what is the estimated cost? Mr. Klinck stated that it would be a sealing of $5,000 but the cost would be slightly under that; what they have to do is furnish the fiscal agent with cost information in order to size the scope of this proposed bond issue. Most of the work has been done on the plans for most of the facilities and would require some updating. Mr. Weekes asked Mr. Klinck, might not the scope of this bond issue vary considerably depending upon what method of treatment is used in expanding the plant. Mr. Klinck answered yes; in the list of projects there has been an estimated range somewhere between $3 3/4 and $4 1/2 million applied to this. The top figure was used in setting up the number for the overall scope of the bond issue. Mr. Klinck stated that the figures are not pure construction cost but total project cost, including all of the possible engineering and administrative cost that might be involved as well as construction. Mr. Weekes moved that Council authorize the City's con- sulting engineers to work with Mr. Ross in preparing the data at a cost not to exceed $5,000, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll.call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson asked if there is any reason why there wouldn't be sufficient data in the 1970 water and sewer study that was .compiled at a great expense by this firm? The City Manager stated yes, but there is no way that you could validly use that to float a bond issue in 1978. Mr. Sanson asked is there any reason why the information could not be compiled~by City staff. The City Manager answered, yes. 6.d. The City Manager reported that Council decided informally, at the January 4th workshop meeting, to appoint Daniel Kotulla to the Technical Advisory Committee. Mr. Randolph moved that Dan Kotulla be appointed to the Technical Advisory Co~nittee, seconded by Mr. Chapin. The motion passed unanimously. 6.e. The City Manager reported that, as discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting, Council is to formally consider authorizing expenditure of up to $3,000 for a fireworks display on July 4th. The Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors has requested the City to fund the 4th of July fireworks. Mr. Sanson moved that Council authorize the expenditure of up to $3,000 for the fireworks display this year with such money coming from the Contingency Fund, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. 6.f. The City Manager reported that the following quotations have been received for selling the City a pickup truck for the Public Works Department: BIDDER TRADE-IN NET Auto World of Delray $200.00 $3,965.00 (Datsun) Delray Beach - 7 - 1/9/78. Adams Chevrolet $200.00 $4,370.00 Delray Beach It is recommended that the award be made to the low bidder, Auto World of Delray in the amount of $3,965.00, for which funds are provided in the current budget. Mr. Sanson moved that the City accept the low bid of Auto World of Delray for the purchase of one Datsun for the Public Works Department in the amount of $3,965.00 with such money coming from the current budget, seconded by Mr. Weekes, said motion passing unanimously. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson stated that he noticed these funds are allocated for the Animal Control Department of the Public Works and questioned if that is still actively functioning? The City Manager stated yes, they have been for some years and this is what the pickup truck is for. 7.a. The City Manager reported that a-communication has been received from the Area Planning Board, dated December 16, 1977, requesting A-95 Clearinghouse review and comments relative to Veterans Administration Southridge Plat 91/Subdivision Feasibility Analysis. He stated that he has given administrative approval to it contingent upon comments made with respect to water and sewer service, a copy of which has been provided to members of Council; if Council also approves it, he suggests that this contingency be added. Mr. Sanson stated that the information he has states that this is a proposed development for single family homes but it reads "the size of this property is ten acres of land, number of lots - 115" and there is no way it could be single family. Mr. Weekes stated that they may be using the old plat with 50 foot lots in there, which would explain the number of lots, but the key to it is how many dwelling units there are. The City Manager stated that he inquired of the Planning Department whether or not this is within the Land Use and zoning of the City and was informed that that was the case. Mr. Weekes stated that this was probably a pre-existing subdivision which was filed back in the 20's when 50 foot lots were allowed. It was decided that Council would act on it based on single family and meeting the zoning ordinance and, if it isn't, there's no approval. Mr. Sanson moved that Council approve the correspondence, as replied to by the City Manager, subject to the reality that this is a single family development, consistent to the City's Land Use Plan and contingent upon the City's reply already filed with respect to water and sewer, seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. 7.b. Mayor Scheifley acknowledged the minutes of the Beautifica- ~ Committee for its December 7, 1977 meeting. 7.c. The City Manager reported that an application has been received from Eddie Newell of Delray Beach, for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity d/b/a New Safety Cab for operation of one taxicab within the City. In compliance with Section 26-7, Chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances, Council should fix a date for a public hearing to be held on this application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, notice of which shall be forwarded to all operators of taxicabs. At such public hearing, and as a result thereof, Council shall determine if further cab service, within the City, is needed. It is recommended that Council authorize a public hearing on the application to be held at the next regular Council meeting on January 23rd. - 8 - 1/9/78. Mr. Chapin moved that the recommendation of the City Manager setting the public hearing on the 23rd of January be approved by Council, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. 8.a. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 1-78, relative to endorsing the Performing Arts Center, is before Council for passage consideration. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 1-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ENDORSING THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AT PALM BEACH JUNIOR COLLEGE. (Copy of Resolution No. 1-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mayor Scheifley stated he talked to Mr. Cotterill, who is presently in the hospital; he opposed this resolution because he did not think that anything this Council does-to support or further this Performing Arts Center would be of help. It would possibly detract from the possibility of getting such a center in the south county. Mr. Cotterill recommended that Council vote against the resolution. Mr. Weekes stated that he supports Mr. Cotterill and the others who are attempting to get a facility in the south county and especially in the Delray Beach area; he cannot believe that this facility would hurt that effort - there is a need for one in the area of the Junior College, there is a need for one in the south county and, therefore, he supports the resolution. Mayor Scheifley stated that he wonders, if Council passed the resolution, whether they would be called upon for financial assistance. Mr. Weekes stated that there is nothing in the resolution about it and he would not be in favor of that; the request specifically stated that they were not asking for financial support. Mr. Weekes moved that Council adopt Resolution No. 1-78, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes -Yes; Mayor Scheifley - No. The motion passed with a 3 to 1 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Chapin stated that it occurred to him that he is a Director of the Delray Hall Association, Inc.,and it would be appropriate for him to not take a part in the passing of this resolution and absented himself from the room, time being 8:50 P. M. At this-point, time being 8:51 P. M., Mr. Chapin reentered the room and took his place on Council. 8.b. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 2-78, authorizing the execution of a contract with Municipal Code Corporation for the recodification of City ordinances, is before Council for passage consideration. The basic cost to the City for printing 75 copies of the Municipal Code is to be $9,875. Additional details with regard to charges is contained in the contract. This was discussed at the November 7th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 2-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION FOR THE RECODIFICATION OF CITY ORDINANCES. (A copy of Resolution No. 2-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) - 9 - 1/9/78. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 2-78, so that all those who do business with the City, hopefully, will understand what the City ordinances mean and will eliminate many of the conflicting, confusing, ambiguous provisions of the ordinances, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.c. The City Manager reported that it is recommended that Resolution No. 3-78, accepting the water and sewer utilities in Phase II, Tropic Palms and Phase III, Replat of Tropic Palms, comprising Gallinule Circle, Hummingbird Drive, Starling Court, Phoebe Lane, Cormorant Road South, Dunlin Road from Gallinule Circle South to Cormorant Road South and Cormorant Road East from Gallinule Drive to Cormorant Road South be approved as operational. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 3-78. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCPETING ALL THE SANITARY SEWERS AND WATER UTILITIES INSTALLED IN PHASE II, TROPIC PALMS, PLAT NO. 2 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 25, PAGE 136, AND PHASE III, REPLAT OF TROPIC PALMS, PLAT NO. 2 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 33, PAGES 144 THROUGH 146 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, COMPRISING THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: GALLINULE CIRCLE, HUMMINGBIRD DRIVE, STARLING COURT, PHOEBE LANE, CORMORANT ROAD SOUTH, DUNLIN ROAD FROM GALLINULE CIRCLE SOUTH TO CORMORANT ROAD SOUTH AND CORMORANT ROAD EAST FROM GALLINULE DRIVE TO CORMORANT ROAD SOUTH AS OPERATIONAL AND SETTING THE INITIAL SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND OTHER RELATED CHARGES TO BE IMPOSED FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY SAID UTILITIES. (Copy of Resolution No. 3-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Weekes moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 3-78, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson asked the City Manager to schedule for a future workshop a discussion of the City's policy towards sewer connection charges, when projects are completed - what are the rules in terms of people having to hook-up and what are the rules in terms of people being able to have the sewer charge forgiven, or waived, in certain instances, as was done out in west Delray. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. 8.d. The City Manager reported that it is recommended that Resolution No. 4-78, accepting streets and storm drains in Phase II of Tropic Palms, Plat No. 2, involving Hummingbird Drive, Cormorant Road South, Gallinule Drive, Starling Court, Dunlin Road, Cormorant Road East, Gallinule Circle and Phoebe Lane, be approved as operational. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 4-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING ALL THE STREETS AND STORM DRAINS INSTALLED IN PHASE II OF TROPIC PALMS, PLAT NO. 2 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 25, PAGE 136 AND PHASE III IN THE REPLAT OF TROPIC PALMS, PLAT NO. 2 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK NO. 33, PAGES 144 THROUGH 146 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS OPERATIONAL. (Copy of Resolution No. 4-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) - 10 - 1/9/78. 181 Mr. Randolph moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 4-78, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.e. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 5-78, accepting sanitary sewers and water utilities installed in Phase I of Delray Square Shopping Center located at Military Trail and West Atlantic Avenue, be approved as operational. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 5-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING ALL THE SANITARY SEWERS AND WATER UTILITIES INSTALLED IN PHASE I OF DELRAY SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT MILITARY TRAIL AND WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS OPERA- TIONAL AND SETTING THE INITIAL SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND OTHER RELATED CHARGES TO BE IMPOSED FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY SAID UTILITIES. (Copy of Resolution No. 5-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Weekes moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 5-78, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.f. The City Manager reported that the following bids have been received to award a contract for the resurfacing of Mallard Drive: BIDDER QUOTATION Hardrives, Inc. $3,977.60 Delray Beach Carr Soil & Sod-Driveways 4,474.80 Delray Beach It is recommended that the award be made to the low bidder, Hardrives, Inc.,in the amount of $3,977.60 for resurfacing Mallard Drive by passage of Resolution No. 6-78, with funding to come from the 1975 Street Improvement General Obligation Bond Issue. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 6-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING NEGO- TIATION OF A CONTRACT TO FURNISH ALL LABOR, MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT TO RESURFACE MALLARD DRIVE WITH APPROXIMATELY 2,486 SQUARE YARDS OF 1" TYPE II ASPHALT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY SPECIFICATIONS. (Copy of Resolution No. 6-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Sanson requested that the City Manager check into what the possibility would be in getting Lindell Boulevard, one of the major streets in town, resurfaced. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Resolution No. 6-78, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes ~ Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. - 11 - 1/9/78. 8.g. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 62-77, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to Board of Adjustment fees, is before Council for passage con- sideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the December 12th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 62-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION ~9~2.9 TO INCREASE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEES; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Copy of Ordinance No. 62-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 62-77 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes~ The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.h. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 77-77, concerning the opening, grading and paving of Sterling Avenue extending from Southridge Road to S. W. 4th Avenue, is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the December 12th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 77-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, LEVYING THE ASSESSMENTS AS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSMENT ROLL SUBMITTED BY THE CITY MANAGER OF SAID CITY, CONCERNING THE OPENING, GRADING, AND PAVING THAT PORTION OF STERLING AVENUE EXTENDING FROM SOUTHRIDGE ROAD TO S. W. 4TH AVENUE. (Copy of Ordinance No. 77-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) - The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in com- pliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 77-77, on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.i. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 78-77, concerning the opening, grading and paving of S.W. 2nd Terrace between S.W. 8th Avenue and S.W. 7th Avenue; S.W. 2nd Court ~between S.W. 8th Avenue and S.W. 7th Avenue; and S.W. 7th Avenue between S.W. 2nd Street and S.W. 3rd Street, is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the December 12th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. - 12 - 1/9/78. 183 The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 78-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, LEVYING THE ASSESSMENTS AS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSMENT ROLL SUBMITTED BY THE CITY MANAGER OF SAID CITY, CONCERNING THE OPENING, GRADING AND PAVING OF S.W. 2ND TERRACE BETWEEN S.W. 8TH AVENUE AND S.W. 7TH AVENUE; S.W. 2ND COURT BETWEEN S.W. 8TH AVENUE AND S.W. 7TH AVENUE; AND S.W. 7TH AVENUE BETWEEN S.W. 2ND STREET AND S.W. 3RD STREET. (Copy of Ordinance No. 78-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Weekes moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 78-77, on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8..j. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 80-77, relative to annexing a 25.62 acre tract of land located in Section 13-46-42 South of the Lateral 32 Canal between Military Trail and Barwick Road subject to RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District, is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the November 28th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 80-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 13., TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 80-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Sanson asked the Assistant City Attorney that by annexing in the property, if there are illegal, non-conforming signs, would they still have to conform with the City's grand- father clause. The Assistant City Attorney stated he believed so. Mr. Sanson then asked if there has to be any special verbage put in the motion to that effect; the Assistant City Attorney answered, no. Mr. Sanson moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 80-77, on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph- Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.k. ThE City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 81-77 is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading; if passed, it will annex a 21,545 square foot parcel of land located in Section 20-46-43 on the north side of Linton Boulevard - 13 - 1/9/78. 154 between S.W. 8th Avenue and S.W. 4th Avenue subject to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the December 12th meeting. Prior to consideration of passage of this ordinance on Second and FINAL Reading, a public hearing has been scheduled to be held at this time. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 81-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL LIMITS OF SAID CITY; REDEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY TO INCLUDE SAID LAND; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SAID LAND; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ZONING THEREOF. (Copy of Ordinance No. 81-77 is on file in the official Ordinance Book.) The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Chapin moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 81-77 bn Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.1. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 82-77, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to establishing additional platting requirements for multiple family lots, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the December 5th workshop meeting. At the December 12th Council meeting, the City Attorney requested that the ordinance be passed over. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 82-77: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 29-8.1 (D) (2) PRD-4 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT); SECTION 29-8.2(D) (2) PRD-7 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT); SECTION 29-~8~3(D) (2) PRD-10 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION (f) RELATIVE TO ESTABLISHING ADDITIONAL PLATTING REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY LOTS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. The Mayor asked the Assistant City Attorney, when a land is replatted, before the final plat is approved, should there be a notification of those neighbors in the immediate environment? Mr. Chapin stated that that has nothing to do with Ordinance No. 82-77. The Mayor then asked that if there should be such a require- ment would it not be in this ordinance; Mr. Chapin answered, yes and the Assistant City Attorney agreed with Mr. Chapin's answer. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 82-77 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vo~e. 8.m. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 2-78, establishing a policy for payment of travel expenses incurred by authorized persons traveling on behalf of the City and providing - 14 - 1/9/78. 185 a procedure for the advancement and/or reimbursement of travel expenses, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the December 5th workshop meeting. However, the ordinance has not been to workshop since it was drafted. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 2-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE PAYMENTS OF ACTUAL TRAVEL EXPENDITURES INCURRED BY AUTHORIZED PERSONS TRAVELING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING A PROCEDURE FOR THE ADVANCEMENT AND/OR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES; PROVIDING A SAFETY CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Sanson asked is it beneficial to specify $.15 per mile for travel? The City Manager stated that he called that to the City Attorney's attention and that should not be in because rates change from time to time. Mr. Weekes stated that his objection is that he does not see any necessity to require a sworn statement. The City Manager stated he had the same objection and raised that question to the City Attorney; and that he had suggested that the expense form be signed. Mr. Chapin stated that the intent of this ordinance was to supersede state law Which puts on an unrealistic, uneconomic, impractical limitation on travel expenses; this ordinance, as it now reads, would permit actual expenses. Mr. Chapin suggested substituting tb~ word "reasonable" for actual because the taxpayers should not have to support first class travel for people flying about the country or state; reasonable standard is far more businesslike in line with the business practice of this country. Mr. Chapin stated his second question is in Section l(a) where it says "incurred in connection with authorized City travel" - authorized by whom? He assumes, if it is a City employee, it is authorized by the department head or countersigned by the City Manager but if it is a member of Council or any of the City Boards who authorizes that? In Section I, subsection D it states" the Finance Director may in his discretion require a proof of expenditures actually being incurred". Mr. Chapin stated he might do it in some cases and he feels he should have a cross-the-board standard policy that he shall require proof of expenditures. This statement brought about some controversy from Council. Mr. Sanson moved that Council table this Ordinance No. 2-78 and refer it to workshop, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.n. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 3-78, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to displaying merchandise outside commercial establishments, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the December 5th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 3-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY REPEALING SECTION 29-11 GC (GENERAL COM~4ERCIAL) (N) SPECIAL REGULATIONS (1)) SECTION 29-12 SC (SPECIALIZED COMMERCIAL) (N) SPECIAL REGULATIONS (1); SECTION 29-13 CBD (CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) (0) SPECIAL REGULATIONS (1); SECTION 29-13.1 LC - 15 - 1/9/78. (LIMITED COS~ERCIAL DISTRICT) (M) SPECIAL REGULATIONS (1) AND ENACTING NEW SUBSECTIONS TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPLAY OF MERCHANDISE OUTSIDE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Weekes moved for the passage, on First Reading, of Ordinance No. 3-78, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - No. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. 9.a. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the Jordan/Suitak rezoning request of a 22,839 square foot parcel of land from ~4-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to SC (Specialized Commercial) District located in Section 29-46-43, at the northeast corner of the intersection of Lindell Boulevard and Old Dixie Highway be denied for the following reasons: (1) The change would be contrary to the City's land use plan which designates this area for multiple family, and as such, would have an adverse effect on the plan. The introduction of commercial zoning in this area would seriously handicap residential development. (2) The change would be contrary to the existing residential land use pattern in the area. (3) The change would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent districts (i.e. spot zoning). (4) The change would be a deterrent to the development of the area in accord with existing regulations. (5) The change is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood. With the large amount of SC zoning now available along U. S. #1, there is no need for additional SC. This was discussed at the~January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Weekes stated that this is a very difficult situation; this is the first time, in a matter of this nature, that he has had citizens come to him and say they wished that Council would make this change; the people are performing a service and there are no complaints from the neighbors about the rezoning; the surround- ing uses to the north and south are commercial uses and many of the arguments, which the attorneys for these gentlemen have given, are being voiced by private citizens who have no proprietary interest in it at all. He does not know what the answer is but he wishes there was some fashion in which Council could accommodate them. Mr. Chapin stated he is in sympathy with the people who operate that establishment and feels that, in balancing the equities of the matter, he would have to go along with the Planning & Zoning Board's recommendation. Mr. Chapin moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board. The motion died for a lack of a second. Mr. Sanson stated that the question he has in mind is the situation that would arise, in terms of recommendations out of the City's Planning & Zoning Board, if any of the County pocket areas to the north or south, which are approximately 90 percent commercial in nature, came to the City and asked for annexation, subject to commercial zoning, would they actually get turned down? He stated that, as far as he knows, no request has ever been denied by the Planning & Zoning Board. The second thing is, in view of the fact that the land use and zoning map now calls for multiple family zoning, he is less inclined to really be that concerned with a commercial zoning abutting the residential. - 16 - 1/9/78. 187 ~hatconcerns him is, in fact, this area is not currently multiple family in nature - there are single family homes on the north side of Lindell Boulevard. The land use plan is in error - multiple family is not the predominant use. If this area were, in fact, recreated into single family zoning he doubts very seriously that he would agree to change it to commercial. He has asked Mr. Kotulla his feelings on this and he stated he would recommend to the Planning & Zoning Board that they restudy the present uses in this City pocket and see whether it should be rezoned to single family. Mr. Weekes noted that to refer this back to the City Attorney is a cop-out beCause there is no legal determination of this. If you amend the law, as it applies to non-conforming uses, to permit expansion of those uses, then you defeat the purpose of continuing to allow non-conforming uses on the theory they will ultimately phase out because they can't expand and would have to move. Mr. Weekes added that he does not see this as any legal basis for permitting this and, failing that, he does not see any other basis other than to rezone it. Mr. Randolph stated he is swayed to the point that it is going to improve the particular area in appearance, it is going to help the residences in that area, when they look out, in that particular area, and see an improvement. It is tough to go against the unanimous recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, which is unusual for this Council; he dreads seeing this going back to the City Attorney for further study because he feels, when it comes back, he will have the same feelings he has at this particular point. Mr. Randolph moved that the rezoning request for Jordan- Suitak of the 22,839 square foot parcel of land be rezoned from RM-10 to SC (Specialized Commercial), and to authorize the City Attorney to draft the ordinance effecting the rezoning, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - No; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - No. The motion failed with a 3 to 2 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Weekes stated that his heart tells him that this is the proper thing to do but his mind tells him that Council is creating a serious problem in spot zoning; there is going to be one corner zoned Specialized Commercial and, everything around it will be zoned multiple family by the City, or the land use plan recommending multiple family. This piece will be spot zoned and every planning person that Council has ever talked to says this is something .that shouldn't be done and good planning doesn't dictate it. Mr. Sanson asked Mr. Carey or Mr. Wallin to respond as to what they would do if faced with an annexation request from the properties north or south subject to commercial zoning? Mr. Carey stated that that is pure speculation on his part and he cannot answer that question. Mr. Chapin stated maybe he was wrong in talking about referring this back to the City Attorney, but he has a feeling that the area should be studied in its entirety. If it is wrong as multiple family residential, perhaps the zoning should be studied; however, he cannot concur that it should be single family. Perhaps the solution would be to refer this back to the Planning & Zoning Board; he thinks that all parties would be served by more study on the question. Mayor Scheifley stated he concurs with Mr. Chapin. At this point, the roll call was had on the motion by Mr. Randolph. Mr. Sanson questioned if the motion invalidates.rthe petition; it was answered, no. - 17 - 1/9/78. 18,9 Mr. Chapin moved that this question be referred back to the Planning & Zoning Board with instructions that the Planning & Zoning Board consider this particular parcel together with the surrounding parcels relative to zoning proximity of the parcel to make an indepth study and report back to Council so they can decide the issue once and for all, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - No; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call, John O'Donnell, 2803 East Commercial Boulevard, Ft. Lauderdale, attorney for Jordan .and Suitak, the owners of the business who filed the petition, stated that when a decision is as hard as this one seems to be for Council to make, they should go with the petitioners, particularly, in light of one fact in this case that has been evident throughout; that is, - at the zoning hearing, at the workshop, and here this evening, everybody that has come before this Council has been in favor of that which has been requested. There has been absolutely no opposition to it whatsoever and none of it is contrived. This seems to be the perfect instance of when an elected body can be responsive to the wishes of the community. Mr. O'Donnell stated he does not exactly agree with Mr. Weekes that this is spot zoning; Council is faced with a situation of a non-conforming use based on some changes that were supposed to take place in this area, when the town was developing, that didn't take place. It comes close to spot zoning but this is not the classic spot zoning that planners are so dead-set against. What Jordan-Suitak wants to do is spend a lot more than 10 percent to increase the volume that they can do and, at the same time, increase or beautify the area surrounding. Mr. Sanson noted that there is really nobody on Council that has a bigger concern about this than he does because he lives less than three blocks away from this place and he has to pass it everyday many times. He would like the time to talk to the Home- owners Association of Tropic Palms, of which he is a member, to see how his neighbors feel about it. He thinks it is proper to see whether the Planning & Zoning Board, in fact, have any different perspective on the area, when they look at it as a total package, not just one spot. 9.b. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by a vote of 5 to 1 (Wallin dissenting) that the Milani-Thomas rezoning request of a parcel of land located east of Jaeger Drive between Curlew Road and Dotterel Road, be rezoned from RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District.to RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District for the following reasons: (1) The present RM-15 zoning is out.of !scale with the needs of the neighborhood and the City. As evidence to this, the Lake Ray Development, just north, which is zoned RM-15, lies in a semi-completed state to this day. Wenton Village just north of this property is also zoned RM-15 and although completed, there were serious problems in occupying these units. In addition, there was a project known as Delray Falls Townhouses approved in 1974 which was a combination of RM-15 and RM-10 zoning, that never got off the ground. As such, this is a clear indication that the high and medium density zoning is not appropriate and has not been successful in this area. (2) The present RM-15 zoning which allows up to 7 stories would seriously reduce light and air to the adjacent low density developments. The RM-6 zoning which allows a height of 3 stories would be much more compatible and harmonious to the adjacent and nearby single family develop- ment. (3) The proposed RM-6 zoning will decrease the load on public facilities such as schools, utilities and streets, thus bringing the load closer to that generated by the single family development. - 18 - 1/9/78. 189 (4) The proposed RM-6 zoning would provide a better transition and buffer area between the existing single family zoning to the south, and the RM-15 and RM-10 zoning to the east and north. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 4th. Mayor Scheiflev asked Mr. Wallin why he dissented. Mr. Wallin stated that his reasoning was that you have RM-15 along side of it and RM-10 would be reasonably buffered into the single family section. Mr. Chapin moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board regarding the Miiani-Thomas property, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - No; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - No; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. Before roll call, the following discussion was had. Mr. Milani noted that, if Council is trying to conform with the land use plan, on page 2, of the material he gave to Council, there is an RM-15 zoning of Lake Ray development which has been suspended for well over a year and nobody has down zoned them; if that's an argument to down zone him, he does not get the logic. He noted that sewer and water has been paid for and is hooked-up to the City. He stated that if Council is trying to down-zone for the good of the entire City, then do it all around - why take 9 units from him and none from the others. He noted that the zoning is RM-15 and he is entitled to 80 units but he came in looking for 45 units and that was voluntary. Ms. Elaine Olinger, 519 Curlew Road, Delray Beach, stated that the building looks like a very nice situtation but she is the Vice-President of the Tropic Palms Homeowners Association and she is trying to be responsive to her group. She stated they have been looking at a defunct condominium at the corner of Dotterel and Lindell for four years - it's been in a state of limbo; it is an eyesore. She asked what guarantee they have, that when Mr. Milani starts this project, if in fact Council agrees to go ahead with it, that it will not stop someplace along the way in a state of suspended animation and then they have to look at another eyesore. She wondered if Mr. Milani has investigated the possibility of putting single family homes because they seem to sell very rapidly in that area with Bass Creek as a good example. The rental apart- ments on Albatross have been a nemeses and the people at the City hear from the neighbors,p~riodically , two to three times a week, about the trash, litter, illegal parking, speeding, etc. Ms. Olinger asked when does Mr. Milani intend to develop this area? Mr. Milani stated that he told the Planning & Zoning Board, if they issued the permits, they will start and come in with the permits within 72 hours to start. He stated he intends to develop the recreation area first, and then maybe two buildings, and when they are sold out, then they will do the rest; they do have people waiting for them. Mayor Scheifley stated that one of the dangers in going to RM-10 is that Mr. Milani states he will build RM-8, but legally nothing will prevent him from selling this once it is zoned RM-10, or presenting a site plan for RM-10. There is no way Council can accept a letter binding him because if something should happen to him, or he should die, someone could come in and automatically build 10 units. Jack Thomas, 1325 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, stated they feel that they need a density of 8½ units to come out with a feasible townhouse type development - an RM-6 would force them to develop a duplex development, which would be the highest and best use under that density, and this would not be in harmony with the adjacent developments. Single family would probably sell well but they would not sell well next to the zoning they have to interface with and that is RM-10 to the east and RM-15 to the north. He noted that the owners of their property are willing to make the firm commitment to the City and they are willing to make it through deed restrictions or whatever method is proper and legal; they will deed restrict their property to - 19 - 1/9/78. 8% units per acre maximum; if legally possible, they would agree to develop a development that would be under condominium concept of the Homeowners Association operating so it would be properly maintained; they would stipulate that no building would be over two stories in height; they would stipulate that there would be maximum utilization of existing native vegetation on the side; they would also guarantee architectural compatibility with Mr. Milani's project and other single family neighborhoods to the west; they would instruct, within reasonable cost, construction of a wall to separate their property from the neighboring R-1 property, or the landscaping screen, if preferable to a wall. He stated that he thinks financial reality will prevent another white elephant if nothing else does. Mr. Sanson stated that he thinks single family homes would be very acceptable to that area to the extentlof being able to be sold easilyl the gentleman could have a good solid project in there, and it is what is compatible to that neighborhood. He would be happy to have single family in that area and would support what he assumes the Planning & Zoning Board is trying to do, which is a compromise position, and go for ~4-6. Frank Ellis, 553 Jaeger Drive, Delray Beach, spoke in favor of single family homes. 9.c. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the site and development plan approval request of Palm Trail Place, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of N.E. 8th Street and Palm Trail,be approved, subject to the following: (1) Compliance with the requirements of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their December 14th minutes. (2) Approval of the City Attorney's office as to documentation pertaining to common areas. (3) Availability of water. (4) A time limitation of 12 months be set for development of the project. This was discussed at the. January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Chapin moved that the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, relating to Palm Trail Place, be approved, subject to the four contingencies outline~ in the correspondence received from the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. 9.d. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the site and development plan approval request of Morrison's Cafeteria (Delray Mall Shopping Center), located north of Linton Boulevard between Old Dixie Highway and U.S. #1, be approved, subject to the following: (1) Compliance with the requirements of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their November 9th minutes. (2) A time limitation of 12 months be set for development of the project. (3) That the site plan for the building is conditioned upon all other aspects of the site plan, the landscaping, irrigation system, etc., being completed prior to the time the building is completed and occupied. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. - 20 - 1/9/78. Mr. Weekes moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson questioned that the petitioners received a variance from the Board of Adjustment for fewer parking spaces than is permitted and the reason being that they wanted to put in more landscaping. It was noted by Mr. Patterson, spokesman for Morrison's Cafeteria, that this is partially correct; there are also some other improvements in the mall they wanted to make to the interior but, basically, it is to rework the entire landscape situation of ~the mall. 9.e. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote, that the site and development plan approval request of Jasmine Villas, located on the west side of Spanish Trail, between Iris Drive and Avenue "L" be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed project which is designed as high density residential, is contrary to the City's land use plan which designates this property as medium density residential, and as such, approval of this project would have an adverse effect on the land use plan. (2) The proposed development at 15.255 units per acre is in violation of the existing RM-10 zoning which allows 10 units per acre. (3) There are no substantial reasons why this property cannot be used and developed in accord with the existing RM-10 zoning. (4) Approval of this project would be a deterrent to the improvement and development of adjacent property in accord with existing zoning regulations, and as such, approval cannot be granted. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Chapin moved that the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, relative to the site and development plan approval for Jasmine Villas, be sustained and that is that the site and development plan be denied, seconded by Mr. Sanson. The motion passed unanimously. 9.f. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the conditional use and sit~ and development plan approval request for Bermuda ~High Club West, located south of Del-Harbour Drive between the Intracoastal Waterway and A1A be approved, subject to the following: (1) Compliance with the requirements of the City Engineer as stated in his October 27th memorandum. (2) Compliance with the requirements of the Community Appearance Board as stated in their November 9th minutes. (3) Approval of the City Attorney's office as to documentation pertaining to common areas. (4) Availability of water. (5) A time limitation of 18 months be set for development of the project. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 4th. Mr. Weekes moved that the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board be sustained in this instance, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call, Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley ~ Yes. The motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson stated that he is against any buildings on A1A higher than four stories and the six-story building should be reworked and not approved as a conditional use. - 21 ~ 1/9/78. 19.2 9.g. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board at a meeting held on December 27th, recommended by unanimous vote, that the site plan modification request of Delray Oaks, located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Congress Avenue and the C-15 Canal, to allow the construction of a roof over the wood deck protruding into the lake, be approved as a minor modification. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Sanson moved for the approval of the site plan modification for Delray Oaks, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. At this point, Mr. Chapin absented himself, time being 10:15 P. M. for item 9.h. 9.h. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 27th, recommended by. unanimous vote that an extension of 18 months to October 27, 1978 for conditional use approval of Law Office Building for Gezelschap and Chapin, located in Section 9-46-43, at the northeast corner of the intersection of N. E. 8th Street and Andrews Avenue, be approved. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 4th. Mr. Weekes moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Chapin returned, the time being 10:16 P. M. 9.i. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the easement abandonment for Shadywoods Subdivision, located on the north side of Linton Boulevard between Military Trail and Dover Road be abandoned, subject to the following: (1) Compliance with the requirements of the City Engineer as stated in his November 22nd memo. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Sanson moved that the easement abandonment for Shadywoods Subdivision be.granted, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. 10. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize payment of the City's bills. Mr. Weekes moved that Council authorize payment of the City's bills, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The motion passed unanimously. General Fund ............ $1,718,510.08 Cigarette Tax Fund ......... 6,105.00 Utilities Tax Fund ......... 3,990.00 - Special Projects Fund ...... 3,540.00 Beach Restoration .......... 200,000.00 Federal Public Works Fund ..... 83,288.24 Water and Sewer Fund ........ 7,513.58 Mr. Sanson moved, at 10:18 P. M., for the adjournment of the meeting, seconded by Mr. Weekes. The motion passed unanimously. City Clerk - 22 - 1/9/78. 193 The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach and that the information provid, ed herein is the minutes of the meeting of said City Council of January 9, 1978 which minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Council on ~.~,~.~. .:.~i ty Clerk 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 the City Council. 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. - 23 - 1/9/78.