Loading...
02-13-78 FEBRUARY 13~ 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, February 13, 1978, with Mayor James H. Scheifley presiding and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, City Attorney Roger Saberson and Council members Robert D. Chapin, David E. Randolph, Aaron I. Sanson, IV., and Leon M. Weekes, present. 1. The opening prayer was delivered by Father Roszkowski of St. Vincent Ferrer Catholic Church. 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 the regular meeting of January 23, 1978, and the special meeting of January 30, 1978, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call, Mr. Sanson noted the following correction. On page 5, item 6.a.2. of the minutes of January 23rd, in the first sentence where it states "in the vicinity of Linton Boulevard and S.E. 10th Street", should be changed to in between Linton Boulevard and S.E. 10th Street, for clarification. Mr. Sanson noted that on page 17 of the minutes of January 23rd, Council discussed the Costa Del Rey Phase II development and there was some discussion about the possibility of being able to save some native vegetation by lessening the width of a road, which was referred to the City Manager and City Attorney and asked if any progress has been made in seeing whether or not this issue could be resolved. The City Manager answered, no. 4.a.1. Mr. Sanson noted that at the last Council meeting he brought up a discussion on Atlantic Dunes Park expressing some personal disappoint- ments, on his part, as to the method by which the land was being developed. Council has received a memo, dated February 3rd, from the City Manager stating he had a fairly extensive meeting with members of the County; the City Manager responded as to his impressions of what has taken place and the basic tenor of the remarks is the one which says "things are satisfactory although there is an admission that changes were made from the original plans". Mr. Sanson noted that he still is disappointed in the way the park has been developed. He feels that where were certain feelings expressed as to the method in which the park would be developed and that, in fact, the City has had some variations on that; damage has been done and it cannot be repaired. 4.a.2. Mr. Sanson stated that relative to the minutes of January 23rd, 1978, a motion was made permitting Russell and Axon to proceed with pilot plant studies. He stated he would still like to get a clarification from the City Manager as to exactly how that motion, on page 2 in the middle of the page, is interpreted; to what lengths the firm has been given permission to proceed on this subject. He stated the reason he is asking is it seems to him that one could interpret it to mean that they have been given permission, at this point, to build the plant. The City Manager stated that the pilot plant is the only thing he feels they have been given the authority to proceed with, at this time. He noted that the agreement between the City and Russell and Axon has an outgrowth of Council's approval from the minutes of January 23rd and listed the following items: (1) Conduct laboratory and pilot plant testing, as necessary, to develop the objectives of the Pilot Plant Program dated 1/24/78. (2) Maintain complete liaison with, and obtain approval from, Palm Beach County Health Department and D.E.R. (3) Prepare complete report of testing, results and recommendations for water treatment process and expansion. There is nothing else beyond this. Mr. Sanson asked if there was any other member of the Council who has had further thoughts between the last.meeting and now, whether this motion, was, in fact, proper and will be willing to accept a new motion. The other council members stated they have no reason to change. 4.a.3, Mr. Sanson questioned the new schedule outlined for the Bulldozer Operation on the beach and stated that if there are members of the publi~ being, in anyway, unfairly treated by this construction project, that' Council should have some reconsideration of the problem. The City Manager stated that he does not feel that the public is being treated unfairly and that, in fact, the public has been taken into ample consideration and he has not heard any complaints since this schedule has been instituted. 4.a.4. Mr. Sanson stated that since he has been on Council he has had some instances where he has discussed with Council the possibility of studying the question of requiring in the City's zoning ordinance that certain types of housing projects, residential developments or industrial or commercial parks, would require in their overall site plan, the dedication to the City of a certain amount of iand, as open-space, which the City would maintain for the benefit of the people in the development and the public. This seems to have some fine considerations on the basis of being able to pick up land at no capital outlay to the City and, in the same sense, providing land in badly needed areas particularly west of town. He stated he noticed an editorial in the Palm Beach Post about a week ago, referring to the success of a similar type of ordinance in Boca Raton. Mr. Sanson noted that Mr. Rick Miller, President of Arvida, said he thinks it is fair that subdivision regulations require developers to provide recreation facilities for those people who are going to be residents of the subdivision and it is also good business. Mr. Sanson requested that this item be scheduled for workshop; Council concurred. Mr. Chapin noted that there has also been articles about the red tape in Boca Raton, that boggs down, as a result of this requirement, and it penalizes and precludes developers from doing a lot of development. 4.b.1. Mr. Weekes noted that he talked to Commissioner Melden about the - possibility of the City acquiring the land south of and adjacent to Miller Park and he received a very warm reception from Comm. Medlen; he is going to submit that file to Comm. Medlen for consideration by the County Commiss n. He stated Comm. Medlen feels it might be possible to acquire the land with or without the $50 million Recreational Bond Issue Program. 4.b.2. Mr. Weekes stated that there has been a number of statements from the public regarding seeing the City's budget in some form that a layperson could understand. He stated that this is a very difficult thing to achieve because the budget is a complicated document to the degree that a layperson - 2 - 2/13/78 219 could not understand a set of engineering drawings. However, the City of Boynton Beach is going to put out a condensed handbook in lay terms for their budget. Mr. Weekes advised he is going to talk to Frank Kohl, City Manager of Boynton Beach, to see if he could get a copy for Council's consideration. Perhaps when the next budget is adopted, the City could have some type of hand book in condensed form to show the people, in lay terms, where their dollars are going. 4.c.1. The Mayor read a proclamation proclaiming the week of February 19 through 25~ 1978, as "BIG BROTHERS, BIG SISTERS APPRECIATION WEEK". Mayor Scheifley read a proclamation proclaiming Tuesday, March 7, 1978, as the First Nonpartisan and Referendum Election. He noted that there has been a change in Precinct 189; the polling place used to be Spanish River Inn but, due to the change in ownership, no arrangements could be made for this year; therefore, the polling place for Precinct 189 will be at the Adult Recreation Center, 801 N.E. 1st Street. 5.a. Anthony Canon, 640 S.E. 2nd Avenue, Boynton Beach, Chief Executive of the SCRWTD Board, stated he would like to be advised whether the City Manager or Council intends to bring up the letter he wrote February 6, 1978, to the City Manager to ratify certain actions of the SCRWTD Board. The City Manager answered yes, he has it on his agenda. 5.b. Oral Craft, 36 South Ocean Boulevard, Delray Beach, apologized to certain members of Council for disturbing them and complaining about the bulldozer at the beach and thanked the City Manager for keeping them from working after 9:00 P.M. 6.a.1. The City Manager stated that Mr. Sanson requested the City Attorney to prepare a resolution that he is sponsoring in opposition to the proposed Florida Business Development Act - 1978. Mr. Sanson apologized to Council, the press, and members of the public for an error on his part in adhering to one of the State laws. He noted the City Attorney brought to his attention that it is technically not within the scope of the proper interpretation of the Sunshine Law to pass around a memo asking for people's opinion, "yes or no, whether you would support a certain action". Mr. Sanson stated he had passed around a memo and informational material asking if Council felt that they would support, or oppose, the proposed Florida Business Development Act - 1978, which in effect would create a one-stop permitting. Council indicated, after reading the material, that they would, in fact, oppose the act as it was originally put forth to the public; subsequently Resolution No. 11-78 is before Council for consideration. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 11-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRA¥ BEACH, FLORIDA, OPPOSING THE PROPOSED "FLORIDA BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1978". (Copy .of Resolution No. 11-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book.) Mr. Sanson moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 11-78, 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call the City Attorney stated that the committee considering this bill has, in fact, amended the bill at this time to remove most of the objections; the resolution, as drafted, is addressed to the original bill itself. Mr. Weekes stated he thinks Council should submit the resolution anyway. - 3 - 2/13/78 6.a.2. The City Manager reported that the proposed improvement of Southridge Road, a portion of S.W. 4th Avenue between S.W. 10th Street and Dixie Boulevard, was initiated several years ago. In early 1975, the City received a petition requesting that 4th Avenue be improved for a greater distance than what is now under consideration., At that time, the proposed project began at 10th Street on the north and ended at Linton Boulevard on the south. Now, the proposal stops about midway between 10th Street and Linton Boulevard at Southridge Road. The City proposed to the County, in 1975, that the City pay for the improvement of the portion within the City and the County pay for the portion within the County;, the eastern half is in the City and the western half is in the County. At the time, the City was willing to do this in 1975 and Council considered it at workshop; the County responded by saying that they did not have money budgeted or otherwise provided for doing it; however, the County is pro- posing to the City now that they go ahead and develop this street jointly. The County is proposing that this be done by shellrock only - that it not - be asphalt, at an estimated total cost of $21,500; divided equally between City and the County. The County is agreeable to providing maintenance and, if this is approved, the City's portion of the cost could come from the $600,000 Street and Sidewalk Bond Issue and would not deplete the operating budget in any respect. Mayor Scheifley asked the City Manager how much more would it cost for hard surface. The City Manager replied that it would cost con- siderably more and both the County Engineering Department and the City Engineering Department thinks it should not be asphalted at this time and the people on the street are in favor of it being done with shellrock. Mr. Weekes asked the City Manager why this could not be continued all the way down to Linton. The City Manager replied that he has been told that the southern portion is now open to traffic and that it is not necessary to extend this project all the way. This will provide traffic access from 10th Street down to Linton Boulevard. Mr. Randolph stated he has only one objection to shell rocking and that is during the dry season it creates an awful dust bowl and he wonders if the people living in that area understand this. Mr. Sanson asked the City Manager if, at some future date, he could give Council a firm figure on the additional amount of money it would take to hard finish this. The City Manager acknowledged this. Mr. Sanson noted that on the southerly~ portion, which has already been done, two businesses have opened up; this land is in the County but he did not think that the County zoning back that far was of a commercial nature and would like for this to be checked into to see if those businesses are permitted. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. Mr. Weekes moved that the City cooperate with the County for the improvement of that portion of SoW. 4th Avenue known as Southridge Road, located between S.W. 10th Street and Dixie Boulevard, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.a.3. The City Manager reported that the A-95 Review for Southridge Subdivision Plat ~1, has been discussed by Council twice and, on the second discussion, Council referred it to Planning & Zoning Board for their re- action. The City Manager stated that he has a recent memo from the Planning & Zoning Board stating that the Board felt that the nature of the questions raised relative to lots of record with an existing recorded subdivision was not a Planning & Zoning matter but rather a legal matter and should go back to Council. Mr. Sanson stated that, assuming that the land is being developed as it is platted, it has been substantiated and verified that this project will be built in a single family fashion to some 13 units per acre. The City's single family zoning only allows 3.8 units per acre and that says - 4 - 2/13/78 221 something is very wrong. He thinks that any project that is going in there would not be of much benefit to anybody and most of all the people who are buying the houses and would have preferred to have seen, if it is possible, the land zoned multiple family where it could be properly developed with two or three stories and have some open space left where people could live comfortably. The whole reason this has come about was on the basis of the vote that was taken by this Council about a year ago to allow the Bass Creek development to build on undersized lots compared to the City's present zoning. Mayor Scheifley stated that after he talked to the American Association of Retired People on Saturday about the history and growth of Delray Beach, one of the questions he was asked was when will the street lights be installed in Bass Creek. He asked the City Manager to provide the information. Mr. Chapin noted the vast discrepancy between single family homes and the density of single family homes and stated he would have no objection if Mro Sanson would pursue the matter further to see what is being done and then it would be appropriate for Council to take appropriate action to improve the quality of life in this town. Mr. Sanson thanked Mr. Chapin for his support and stated, at this point, the Regional Planning Council, basically, is finished with the issue and, basically, the City is finished with it except for two alternatives: (1) that the land itself can be restudied and perhaps a reconsideration of its current zoning category could be considered, and (2) that the Council reconsider its vote that was made earlier to allow buildinq on previously platted lots that do not meet the City's p~esent zoning requirements and lot size requirements. The City Attorney advised that, in the event that they were rezoned to multi-family district, the multi-family district would permit them to develop at R-lA Single Family; this, in this case, would also permit lot sizes that are currently there that were platted as nonconforming lot sizes to exist and to be built on. Changing it to a multi-family classification would not really alleviate the problem. Also, the PRD zoning districts, which are a form of multiple family, permit a lot size for a single family, detached cluster zero lot line development of 4500 feet. Mr. Weekes stated he does not see how anyone on a 25 foot lot could comply with the setbacks. Mr. Sanson stated that if, in fact, that they can't do it, then the application to the Federal Agency was misrepre- sented, maybe not intentionally and somebody should have called that to somebody's attention. Mr. Carey corrected Council in that the lots are 50 foot size lots. 6.a.4. The City Manager reported that Council was presented a copy of a letter to him from Mr. Canon dated February 6, 1978. The Interlocal Agreement provides two lists among other things (1) a list of things the Board can do without having to be ratified by the Councils of the two cities and (2) the second list requires ratification by the two cities and this is the list Council is to discuss that this letter concerns. The City Manager stated that the four items contained in the letter are subject to ratification by the Councils of the two cities. He would like to divide them into two groups - taking items 1, 2 and 3 together and then item 4 separately. The first three items were approved by the SCRWTDB at a recent meeting; they are: (1) to return $10,000 of unexpended funds between 1974 and 1977 to the two cities; (2) an easement to Florida Power & Light Company be granted; (3) to authorize the Chief Executive Officer to sign an application for a permit as far as EPA requirements are concerned. - 5 - 2/13/78 The City Manager stated that it is his recommendation that Council ratify these three actions. Mr. Chapin moved that Council ratify the ac~ons of the Sewer Board with regard to items 1, 2 and 3 outlined in Mr. Canon's letter to the City Manager dated February 6, 1978, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. The City Manager advised that item 4 states that the Board voted to do three things: (1) approve the job description for the Chief sewerage plantoperator, (2) to approve the pay scale for that position, and (3) to approve page 27 of the WQMP. The Interlocal Agreement does not provide for the approval of any of these three things; the Interlocal Agreement does provide for the board to create positions of the SCRWTD Board. The Interlocal Agreement is silent to job description, the pay scale, and _~ silent with regard to page 27 of the WQMP. The City Manager stated that it might very well be that the operation agreement, that has yet to be hammered out and approved by the proper parties, could very well speak to the point of job description, pay scales and WQMP. It would not be appropr. for the City of Delray Beach, at this time, in the absence of the operation agreement, to assume that all of these items would be included in this fashion in the operational agreement. The City Manager suggested that the Council of Delray Beach approve the creation of the employee position of chief sewage plant operator, approve the job description, that is attached, and approve the pay scale that is contained in the City of Delray Beach Budget and recommended by Mr. Canon. He noted that Council should give their approval of the last two items with the expressed provision that in no way would doing such be setting a precedent, as far as any details might be concerned that would appear later in the operational agreement; these things should be discussed in working out the many details of the operational agreement. He suggested that Delray Beach's approval be completely silent on page 27 of the WQMP because that might be a 5th subject to include in the operational agreement. Mr. Chapin moved that the City of Delray Beach ratify the action of the Board in approving a position of the Chief Plant Operator with the clear understanding that we are doing so without creating any precedent for attachments as to restrictions of the City of Delray Beach to operate the plant; that the position of the chief plant operator be approved, as per the job description as set forth by Mr. Canon; as per the pay scale as set forth in the Delray Beach Budget and as confirmed and approved by Mr. Canon, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Randolph stated that he completely concurs with the City Manager in that Council should remain silent on the inclusion of the Copy of page 27, Section 3.2, Chapter C of the WQMP. At the SCRWDT Board meeting he posed objections to the inclusion of this particular page because it was too point directed in that it did not give the City of Delray Beach leeway in who it would hire for the operation of the plant. He concur- that the employees of the present Boynton plant should be given first prior~ but he does not want to see any documentation included which would point direct Delray Beach saying that they would have to hire any of these people. Mr. Sanson asked for clarification of Mr. Chapin's motion that, if they accept it, in fact are they adopting page 27? Mr. Chapin stated the answer is "no". He stated that they are going along with the City Manager's suggestion and, also, in the spirit of his motion, as made at that Sewer Board Meeting, which in no way includes Mr. Canon's suggestion that Council adopt the provisions of page 27. This is being done on an interim basis to cooperate with the Board and the City of Boynton Beach to move forward and to facilitate completion of this plant. The City Manager stated that as a person who does the hiring of new employees for the City of Delray Beach, he should speak specifically - 6 - 2/13/78 223 to this point so no one would construe the conversation and action ko be taken tonight by this Council, would in any way, indicate any lessening of their intent to employ all qualified employees of the utilities assistant presently working for the City of Boynton Beach. They have been told this in writing and verbally that they would be given top priority consideration; Delray Beach has maybe one or two employees that they would want to consider for this and, therefore, they would be needing a lot of employees and expect to look to Boynton Beach first. Mr. Sanson stated he also objected to the inclusion of page 27; it is superfluous to have this in and it gives an opportunity for further conflict down the road in interpretation and meaning. Mayor Scheifley stated that he feels if they were to adopt para- graph 4, as written, it would set them back from where they were approxi- mately 6 months ago. At this point, Mayor Scheifley left the meeting and Vice-Mayor Weekes took charge of the meeting, time being 7:55 P.M. 5.c. James Carstensen, 510 Kingsbird Circle, Delray Beach, appeared before Council and requested that he be heard regarding the ordinance that bans campers and boats in Delray Beach. He stated the ordinance is probably outdated as Boynton Beach's was and they did away with it last week. Most of the people in Delray Beach do work and they buy these things for recrea- tional purposes for their families on the week-ends and summer vacations, etc. He stated he is disabled and last week he was requested to move his camper off his property and there is no way possible he could do it. Mr. Weekes asked if this is a mobile home. Mr. Carstensen answered, no, that it is a slide in pick-up truck type camper, which is on blocks in his driveway. Mr. Weekes stated that the ordinance is enforced on a selective basis on complaints from neighbors and this is an extremely difficult thing to enforce in trying to be fair and equitable not only to the owners of recreational vehicles but to the abutting property owners in the neighborhood. Mr. Sanson stated that he also lives in Tropic Palms and part of the crack-down that is currently going on in that area has been precipitated by people who have called him and people of the Homeowners Association asking why doesn't the City enforce this ordinance. He has had two formal letters of complaints in the last week or so and he has referred them to the Administration asking that the ordinance be enforced and they have elected to do that to the extent that the ordinance is on the books and it should be enforced. Mr. Sanson stated he would rather see an ordinance taken off the books, if it is not going to be enforced all the time, equally, or have everybody abide by it. Mr. Chapin stated that the town has opted out by selective enforcement and the law says that is not a fair thing to do. To the extent that the City has the ordinance on the books, he would be glad to reconsider it and have it fairly enforced. The City Manager suggested that this go back to workshop after they have had a chance to inventory the current situation in town so that they can come into workshop and tell Council what the situation is and see whether or not they want to revise the ordinance. Mr. Sanson suggested that the City Manager contact the cities of Boca and Boynton, before the workshop, and give Council copies of their latest ordinances. This was acknowledged by the City Manager. At this point, the Mayor returned to his seat, time being 8:05 P.M. 6.b. The City Manager reported that it is recommended that Council consider authorizing installation of a solar energy system in the Pompey - 7 - 2/13/78 Park Building. The City has been exploring the possibility of a federal grant for this purpose since the inception of this project, but with prac- tically no encouragement from Washington that we would be successful. Within the last few days the City has been informed the chances for the grant now look favorable. On February 7th, the architect, Doug Dawson of the Community Development Program office met with him on this subject. The City's deadline for filing an application is March 10th. It will take two to three weeks to prepare an application, the cost of which would be approximately $2,500. Therefore, if Council wants to apply for the grant, such aCtion should be authorized tonight. The figures, as of now, appear to be approximately as follows: Application preparation $ 2,500 Building changes to accommodate solar 170,000 energy and installation cost of solar energy (net) TOTAL $172,500 Grant (6~ ±) $103,500 Local (4~ '± $ 69,000 The expenditure of $2,500 for application preparation is a gamble; however, this would be the extent of the City's gamble as it is planned to arrange construction scheduling to make this so. The City is still working on this and should they not be able to work it out satisfactorily, the City Manager stated he would not look with favor on giving further consideration to the propositions. The engineers estimate the City would recover its $69,000 dost in fuel savings over a 5 to 6 year period. Mr. Gonzales, the engineer on the project, stated that the equipment that is going to be used in the air conditioning on the project can be heldup under the present order until' February 28. If they have to extend that period beyond February 28th, it will be up $1,000 additional cost on the present air conditioning equipment. If council goes ahead with the proposal, they may end up having to pay an additional $1,000 for equipment if they, at a later date, go back to present type of system. The City Manager noted that the City does not have $69,000 presently, free money to allocate to it; however, he feels that it is a Worthy enough project - that ways could be devised to do it, if Council wishes. It could be done in two ways (that he can presently think of) (1) the possibility of using future Community Development funds for this - it is his feelings that the Community Development personnel does not look with high favor on this, considering the fact that this system would go into a $720,000 building that the City itself has about $5,000 in and the other $715,000 is Community Development money; (2) the second possible source of funding would be from next year's Federal Revenue Sharing Funds. As far as temporary financing is concerned, should that be needed, the City would have no trouble with raising the $69,000 cash to be repaid by a portion of next year's Federal Revenue Sharing Funds. Mr. Chapin asked Mr. Simon, Architect on the project, if he was on Council how would he solve this problem, or what would his recommendation be? Mr. Simon stated the system is primarily a demonstration of conserving energy and it could be a landmark demonstration to the area. He stated that he thinks it is worth the gamble, if the City could get the funds; he feels it is a finely designed project that will work and eventually save opera- tional funds. Mr. Chapin asked Mr. Gonzales how would he answer this question. Mr. Gonzales stated his point of view of this system is from the standpoint - 8 - 2/13/78 225 of energy conservation. The fact that the federal government is interested in the demonstrational solar energy could be used to the advantage of the City of Delray Beach, if the grants could be obtained. If eventually the City goes into the solar system, it will more than likely cost more money, so now is the time to take advantage of it. Mr. Randolph stated he thinks the application preparation and estimated cost of $2,500 plus the possible plus or minus of the additional $1,000 is a mere figure when you talk about something that has been endorsed by the federal government; it has been endorsed by the President of the United States and he would be remiss if he didn't think of all the billion dollars they spend on the space program; he would also be remiss if he didn't say that right now they are spending x number of dollars to renourish the beach which they are providing front money to do. The City has a golden opportunity to pioneer the solar system in the City of Delray Beach and he feels they would be remissful if they did not make an attempt at it for the initial minimum expenditure. Mr. Randolph stated he definitely favors the preparation and submission of this application and feels the City stands a very good chance of getting a 6~ grant. Mr. Weekes asked the city Manager how the City is going to make up its share of the funding out of Federal Revenue Sharing, if the other part of it is made up of federal funds? The City Manager stated, it is his understanding, that they can use Federal Revenue Sharing Funds and asked Mr. Dawson to speak to that point. Mr. Dawson stated no, not as far as Federal Revenue Sharing but through Community Development Funds, you can match federal funds. The City Manager stated he would much rather use Community Development funds to which there would be no question; Mr. Dawson agreed with this. Mr. Chapin asked Mr. Dawson if he could venture an opinion as to whether or not application for solar use and development at Pompey Park would be looked upon favorably by the federal government, the recipient of this application. Mr. Dawson answered, yes; they are present tonight to discuss this for the simple reason that the Community Development has recognized the need to apply solar energy to the building. They did not, in September, submit the application because they did not know who to send it to - their source of information was not available. They sent the draw- ings and specifications to the Department of Energy and it was only recently they received a response from them to make an application and, based upon the time frame, they had submitted it to them; they could not meet that time frame. By recognizing the need, they phoned Congressman Rogers and he has been in touch with the Department of Energy; through his efforts, they were able to get an extension of the deadline. Mr. Sanson stated he feels every effort should be made to have the governments throughout the United States, set the example for using solar energy products. He continues to support installing solar energy into the Pompey Park complex; the cost, at the beginning, seems substantial but he is convinced, from all the studies he has seen and read, that the savings will be returned in the operational cost and the capital outlay will more than pay for itself. Mr. Chapin moved that the City Manager be authorized, or Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Simon be authorized, to process an application not to exceed $2,500 for solar energy at the Pompey Park Building (because he does not know where the funds are going to come from it will be resolved later if the grant application should be successful), seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. At this point Mr. Chapin left the room temporarily. - 9 - 2/13/78 226 6.c. The City Manager reported that it is recommended that Council approve execution of a traffic control agreement with Palm Beach County to effect the County's assuming maintenance responsibility for the traffic signals at the intersections of West Atlantic Avenue and 1-95 and Linton Boulevard and 1-95. Mr. Sanson moved that Council approve the execution of a traffic control agreement with Palm Beach County to effect the County's assuming maintenance responsibility for the traffic signals at the intersections of West Atlantic Avenue and 1-95 and Linton Boulevard and 1-95, seconded by Mr. Randolph. The City Attorney requested that Council's approval include a termination clause of 60 days notice by either party; the Mayor asked that Mr. Sanson add to his motion that a cancellation clause be added to this agreement. Mr. Sanson also moved that a termination clause of 60 days notice by either party be added and that the agreement be conditioned that a can- cellation clause be added, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimous ly. 6.d. The City Manager reported that the following quotations have been received for selling the City two staff cars for the Fire Department: LESS BIDDER QUOTAT ION TRADE- IN NE T Adams Chevrolet $ 9,792.00 $ 250.00 $ 9,542.00 De lray Beach Earl Wallace Ford 11,982.00 2,332.00 9,650.00 Delray Beach Jack Nicklaus Pontiac 11,148.40 400.00 10,748.40 Delray Beach It is recommended that the award be made to the low bidder, Adams Chevrolet in the amount of $9,542.00, for which funds are provided in the current budge t. Mr. Weekes moved that Council purchase the vehicles from the low bidder, Adams Chevrolet of Delray Beach, for the net amount of $9,542.00 which is provided for in the current budget, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Sanson asked if these two cars are to re- place two existing cars or adding on? The City Manager stated that one car is being traded in and the other car is to replace a car that was used by the Fire Department for inspection use and fire hydrant use. The fire hydrant function has been transferred to the Utilities Department and the car along with it, therefore, another car is needed in the Fire Department. At this point Mr. Chapin returned to his seat on Council. 6.e. The City Manager reported that Council informally decided at the February 6th workshop meeting to appoint Alfred Carroccia as an Alternate Member of the Board of Adjustment to the unexpired term of Jack Pitts ending March 15, 1978, and to a three-year term ending March 15, 1981. - 10 - 2/13/78 227 Mr. Chapin stated that it has come to his attention that Mr. Toth's and Mr. DeRenzo's terms expire in February or March of this year, as members of the Board of Adjustment, and unless Council would like to have a workshop on this, he would like to expedite City business. Mr. Sanson stated that he would like to see this go to workshop. Mr. Chapin moved that Mr. Carroccia be appointed as an alternate member to the Board of Adjustment to the unexpired term of Jack Pitts ending March 15, 1978, and to a three year term ending March 15, 1981, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 6.f. The City Manager reported that in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 12 of the City's Code of Ordinances, Council should appoint Clerks and Inspectors to conduct the upcoming election. It is suggested that the list of possible appointees from which sufficient numbers of Clerks and Inspectors will be selected by the City Clerk, be approved. Mr. Weekes moved that Council accept the appointment of poll workers, clerks, and inspectors for the upcoming election as contained in item 6.f. attached to the agenda of tonight's meeting, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Sanson asked if they ever determined that the poll workers be citizens of Delray. Mayor Schiefley stated that they are in municipal elections but not for county and state elections. In the County and State elections, the City does not appoint workers and, therefore, you have outsiders working at the polls. To answer the question brought up by Mr. Sanson regarding Thomas Cherry, the City Clerk noted that this Mr. Cherry is a different one than the campaign manager for one of the candidates running for Council. 7.a. The City Manager reported a communication has been received from the American Cancer Society requesting permission to solicit funds from March 12th through March 26, 1978, approval of which is recommended by the Solicitations Committee. Mr. Chapin moved that the recommendation of the Solicitations Committee to grant· the American Cancer Society permission to solicit funds from March 12th through March 26, 1978, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. 8.a. The City Manager reported that the following bids have been re- ceived to construct a bicycle path to extend along northbound Federal Highway from the southern boundary of the City northward to S.E. 10th Street. BIDDER QUOTATION Carr Soil & Sod-Driveways $20,880.00 Delray Beach Oneman Engineering 24,360.00 Delray Beach Hardrives of Delray, Inc. 32,625.00 Delray Beach It is recommended that an award be made to the low bidder, Carr Soil & Sod-Driveways, in the amount of $20,880.00 by passage of Resolution No. 8-78, with 5~ city funding to come from previously allocated Federal Revenue Sharing Funds and the remainder to be paid by the County. - 11 - 2/13/78 The City Manager presented Resolution No. 8-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION OF A CONTRACT TO FURNISH ALL MATERIALS AND LABOR TO CONSTRUCT A BICYCLE PATH TO EXTEND ALONG NORTH- BOUND FEDERAL HIGHWAY (US-l) FROM THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE CITY NORTHWARD TO SOUTHEAST TENTH STREET, CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. (Copy of Resolution No. 8-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book. ) Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Resolution No. 8-78, 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.b. The City Manager reported that the following bids have been receive to construct a bicycle path on N.E. 8th Street to Beach Drive: BIDDER QUOTATION Carr Soil & Sod-Driveways $5,751.00 Delray Beach Oneman Engineering 6,390.00 Delray Beach Hardrives of Delray, Inc. 8,100.00 Delray Beach It is recommended that an award be made to the low bidder, Carr Soil & Sod-Driveways in the amount of $5,751.00 by passage of Resolution No. 9-78 with 5~/o City funding to come from previously allocated Federal Revenue Sharing Funds and the remainder to be paid by the County. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 9-78. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION OF A CONTRACT TO FURNISH ALL MATERIALS AND LABOR TO CONSTRUCT A BICYCLE PATH ON NORTHEAST 8TH STREET TO BEACH DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. (Copy of Resolution No. 9-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book. ) Mr. Weekes moved that Council adopt ~solution No. 9-78 subject - to clarifying the location of the bike path in that resolution, 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.c. The City Manager reported that Resolution No. 10-78, authorizing Russell & Axon to negotiate on behalf of the City, for such material and equipment as may be required to set up and operate one water treatment pilot plant, is before Council for passage consideration. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 10-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING RUSSELL & AXON, - 12 - 2/13/78 CONSULTING ENGINEERS, TO NEGOTIATE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, FOR SUCH MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT AS MAY BE REQUIRED TO SET UP AND OPERATE ONE WATER TREAT- MENT PILOT PLANT, AS PART OF THE PREVIOUSLY AUTHO- RIZED PILOT PLANT STUDIES AS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. (Copy of Resolution No. 10-78 is on file in the official Resolution Book. ) Upon question by Mr. Weekes, the City Manager stated that this has already been authorized but Council needs to specifically take further action, which could be done by passage of this resolution, with regard to making arrangements for bringing the pilot plant in. The estimated cost is $25~000 to $30,000 and there is a $25,000 maximum established by this resolu- tion;if it is going to cost more than $25,000, it will be necessary to come back to Council for additional approval according to the terms of this resolution. Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Resolution No. 10-78, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Chapin - Yes; Mr. Sanson - No; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call Mr. Sanson stated that, since Council has dis- cussed this, conversations he has had with other parties he considers to be very very knowledgeable on the subject, lead him to believe they are spending unnecessary money by proceeding down this path by using this firm. He stated he feels they are paying for their education and that the system by which they are obtaining this pilot plant is requiring the City to spend more than necessary money in terms of other alternatives that' would be available. He stated he would not support the resolution. 8.d. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 1-78, amending Chapter 13 - Division 2 "Delray Beach Community Antenna Television Franchise Ordinance" of the Code of Ordinances to change the "Grantee" of the franchise from Leadership Cable Television Systems, a Florida Limited Partnership, is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the January 23rd 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. 1-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13 - DIVISION 2. "DELRAY BEACH COMMUNITY ANTENNA TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE", SECTION 13-27 (e) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO CHANGE THE "GRANTEE" OF THE FRANCHISE FROM LEADERSHIP CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEMS, A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, TO LEADER- SHIP CABLEVISION ASSOCIATES, A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. (Copy of Ordinance No. 1-78 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. - 13 - 2/13/78 Mr. Sanson moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 1-78 on Second and FINAL Reading, 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.e. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 2-78 is before Council for passage consideration on Second and FINAL Reading. This ordinance, if passed, will establish a policy for payment of travel expenses incurred by authorized persons traveling on behalf of the City and providing a procedure for the advancement and/or reimbursement of travel expenses. This ordinance was passed on First Reading at the January 23rd 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. 2-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE PAY- MENTS OF REASONABLE TRAVEL EXPENDITURES INCURRED BY AUTHORIZED PERSONS TRAVELING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING A PROCEDURE FOR THE ADVANCE- MENT AND/OR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Copy of' Ordinance No. 2-78 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. 2-78 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.f. The City Attorney requested that this ordinance, Ordinance 6-78, relative to Civil Service/Labor Unions, be tabled until the next regular Council meeting. He stated there has been some serious question raised concerning the ordinance and the labor attorney who helped with the prepara- tion of the ordinance has been out of town since and they have not been able to have a conference with him concerning those questions. The City attorney stated that in the event that there has to be changes made, this will have to be deferred but the action to table this tonight does not have the effect of taking it off the ballot as of this time. Mr. Randolph moved that this item be tabled until the next regula Council meeting, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mr. Randolph- Yes; Mr. Sanson- Yes; Mr. Weeke~ - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.q. The city Manager reported that Ordinance No. 4-78, amending Ordinance No. 74-77, PERC, relative to a definition of managerial employees is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 4-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 74-77 BY MAKING CERTAIN DELETIONS IN THE CAPTION OF SAID - 14 - 2/13/78 ORDINANCE, AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES, AMENDING THE SECTION OF PRE-EXISTING STATE CERTIFICATIONS PROVIDING ACCEPTANCE BY THE DELRAY BEACH COMMISSION OF SUCH CERTIFICATIONS AS IF ISSUED BY THE DELRAY BEACH COMMISSION AND ADDING A SECTION 13A-31 PROHIBITING AMENDMENTS UNLESS SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. The City Attorney stated that these are the final amendments to the City's local option ordinance to bring it in compliance with the order issued by the commission to have it amended to comply with the State Statutes. He stated he spoke with one of the staff members today and was informed that this is the final amendment that he would require as a recommendation to the Public Employee Relations Commission. Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 4-78 on First 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 8.h. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 7-78, amending Chapter 15C "Landscaping" of the Code of Ordinances to provide periodic inspection of the landscaping, and use of surface or subsurface water for sprinklers, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This change was recommended by the Landscape Ordinance Review Committee. Council may either pass this ordinance on First Reading or refer to a future workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 7-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 15C "LANDSCAPING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 15C-5 (b) RELATIVE TO PERIODIC INSPECTION OF LANDSCAPING, USE OF SURFACE OR SUBSURFACE WATER FOR SPRINKLING AND USE OF CITY WATER; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Because of questions brought up by Mr. Weekes concerning this ordinance it was suggested that this be referred to workshop. Mr. Weekes moved that Ordinance 7-78 be referred 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. Said motion passed unanimously. 8.i~ The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 8-78, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to establishing a procedure for modification of approved conditional use is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. Council authorized preparation of the ordinance at the December 5, 1977 workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 8-78: - 15 - 2/13/78 AN ORDII~NCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELP~Y BEACH. FLORIDA, AMEITDING CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELtL~Y BEACH, FLORIDA, BY ~MENDING SECTION 29-21 CONDITIONAL USES BY CREATING A NEN SUBSECTION (F) ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR MODIFICATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE, PROVIDING THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER THE MODIFICATION IS MAJOR OR MINOR AND IF MINOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SHALL HAVE JURISDICTION AS THE FINAL DECISION MAKING BODY TO DECIDE THE MODIFICATION REQUEST; CHANGING EXISTING LETTERED SUBSECTION (F) TO SUBSECTION (G); PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved that Council adopt Ordinance No. 8-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mr. Randolph- Yes; Mr. Sanson- No; Mr. Weekes -Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes~ Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call Mr. Sanson stated that he is going to vote against this ordinance and the next one on the basis that he disagrees philosophically. He thinks Council should be taking on additional duties rather than giving them up. 8.j. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 9-78, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to establishing a procedure for modification of site and development plan approval is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. Council authorized preparation of the ordinance at the December 5, 1977 workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 9-78: 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 AMENDING SECTION 29-22 SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL BY CREATING A NEW SUB- SECTION (F) ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR MODIFICATION OF SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL, PROVIDING THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER THE MODIFICATION IS MAJOR OR MINOR AND IF MINOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SHALL HAVE JURISDIC- TION AS THE FINAL DECISION MAKING BODY TO DECIDE THE MODIFICATION REQUEST; CHANGING EXISTING LETTERED SUBSECTION (F) TO SUBSECTION (G); PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved that Council adopt Ordinance No. 9-78 on First Reading, 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. Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. 8.k. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 11-78, amending Chapter 23A "Subdivision" of the Code of Ordinances delineating the areas of responsibility and authority of the City Council, Planning and Zoning Board and Administrative Staff Personnel in the subdivision review process relative to preliminary and final plats, is before Council for passage - 16 - 2/13/78 consideration on First Reading. This .gas discussed at the December 5, 1977 workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 11-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 23A "SUBDIVISIONS" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, DELINEATING THE AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF PERSONNEL IN THE SUBDI-. VISION REVIEW PROCESS PROVIDING THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RATHER THAN THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL REVIEW SKETCH PLANS AND PRELIMINARY PLATS; PROVIDING THAT BOTH THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL SHALL REVIEW FINAL PLATS; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 11-78, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin- Yes; Mr. Randolph- Yes; Mr. Sanson- No; Mr. Weekes -No; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. Said motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. Before roll call the following discussion was had. Mr. Sanson stated that if this change is approved and Council does not review sketch plans and preliminary plats, what Council will be saying to the developer is that he can go ahead and expend great sums of money - putting together all his plans for a project and have no review whatsoever by Council until it comes up for final vote. Mr. Sanson stated he feels Council should take greater interest in reviewing site plans for many reasons. Eventually, there are going to be some times when Council is going to want some changes made and will force the developer to go all the way back, after he has received approval up through the lines, and make those changes at great expense. W~en a preliminary plat comes before Council, it is almost routine 95% of the time and it is done in a very quick manner; the other 5% is worth the convenience and expense saved by the developer, for Council to continue to review the preliminary plats. Mr. Weekes stated in this instance he agrees with Mr. Sanson. The City Manger stated that he also feels the same as Mr. Sanson. Mr. Chapin stated that during his 10 months on Council, never has there ever been a preliminary plat that has been disapproved and there has never been a final plat that has been changed, modified, or disapproved; therefore, in the spirit of effective, competent government, Council is not putting any burden upon the people who are doing business in the way of developing this community. Mr. Siemens stated that for the most part, rarely ever has the City Council taken issue, with approvals which have been, basically looked upon by the Planning & Zoning Board; the probability of it occurring is not great, however, the city Council has the ultimate responsibility for approving since the Planning & Zoning Board is purely advisory and there could come a time when a future Council could run contradictory in terms of their interpretation and their feelings as to the development within this city. Therefore, what could occur is that great sums of money can be spent on the part of applicants for approval and go through the entire process with the Planning Board and then come to the City Council and they - 17 - 2/13/78 have a different feeling with respect to the type of development they would like to see within that particular area. Mr. Chapin stated that under the procedure that he is avoCating with the adoption of Ordinance No. 11-78, the exact same thing could happen; there is no guarantee that having approved a preliminary plat that a subsequent Council, differently constituted, could not change it- subsequent Council is not bound by prior Council adopting a preliminary plat. Mr. Siemens stated that this would only occur when there is a change in Council between the time of preliminary plat'approval and final plat approval, which is very rare. Mr. Chapin stated that if Mr. Sanson wants Council to take a more indepth view of plats, it would make more sense to have it after it has gone through various technical channels of the Engineering Depart- ment, the Planning and Zoning staff, the Planning & Zoning Board and then brought to Council for final approval. Mr. Chapin stated he cannot see any additional expense the developer is going to incur by the possibility of some minor changes being made in a plat that Council may adopt. Theoretically, it is more time consuming for the developer to sit through the preliminary plat of Council and a final plat in another Council meeting and in the interest of good, efficient, competent, less time consuming government, this is a step forward. Mr. Siemens stated th@ ~ as this relates to the current Council and the current Planning Board, this is true. Philosophically, when there is a basic difference in philosophy in development between the City Council and the Planning Board, etc., that situation, then, could be a burdensome thing. Mr. Sanson stated that there are going to be, quite possibly, situations where you can have a different philosophical Council and Planning & Zoning Board such as with the City of Boca Raton. Roll call on the motion was had at this time. 8.1. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 12-78, amending Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to district boundary lines, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This ordinance which formerly was numbered 17-77, was referred by Council to the Planning & Zoning Board for restudy. Ordinance No. 12-78 has been revised to reflect the recommendations of the Planning & Zoning Board. This was discussed at the January 30th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 12-78: 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 BY REPEALING SECTION 29-17 (J) (1) (2) AND (3) AND REPLACING SAID SUBSECTIONS WITH THOSE CONTAINED HEREIN RELATING TO SPECIAL SETBACK REGULATIONS WHEN INDUSTRIALLY OR COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY EITHER DIRECTLY ABUTS RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY OR WHERE INDUSTRIALLY OR COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY IS NEAR BUT SEPARATED FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY; FURTHER PROVIDING FOR METHODS OF SCREENING THE INDUSTRIALLY OR COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY FROM THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. - 18 - 2/13/78 The City Attorney noted that on page three of the ordinance, a space is provided for the height of the Australian Pines that are to be planted as part of the screening device. The City Horticulturist is in the process now of surveying some of the nurseries in the area to see what height would be the general acceptable height but for the purpose of the first reading, he suggests that Council put in 8 feet, as is for the other screening, with the understanding that on second reading, there will be more definite information on that. Mr. Sanson asked that since this ordinance originally had a number of 17-77, does Council have to formally dispose of that ordinance. The City Attorney answered, no, that the ordinance can be tracked through the index in the City Clerk's office. It is not necessary to continue the same ordinance number - ordinance numbers are used to reflect the year they were adopted. The City Attorney noted that on page 1, under paragraph (1) (a) it should be "10 foot building setback". Mr. Chapin moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 12-78 on First Reading with the adoption of the amendments in the following discussion, 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. Said motion passed with a 4 to 1 vote. Before roll call the following discussion was had. Mr. Weekes questioned paragraph l(b) beginning on page 1. He asked why, if you have a concrete block w~ll separating the commercial property from the alley, which separates it from the residential property, you require that to be a landscaped area, nobody is going to see it but the person that owns the building. Mr. Weekes stated that he feels the ordinance should be silent on that point and let the owner or architect decide for themselves what they want to do with it. It was agreed by Council to cross out the last sentence "This shall be a landscaped area." Mr. Weekes also pointed out that he thinks it is a hazard to have a masonry wall abutting an alley; you're going to have trucks going down those alleys, garbage vehicles, etc., and on a narrow alley with a masonry wall abutting, it will create nothing but problems. Mr. Carey stated that when you have a commercial enterprise with residential directly behind it, even though there is a 16 foot separator or an alley, that 16 foot is not enough of a buffer and just a landscaped hedge is not a sufficient buffer. He stated that there is no problem with this in Boca Raton - they require it for all commercial properties backing up into residential areas. Mr. Chapin stated he agrees with the wall but would have the wall cut down at the intersections. Mr. Carey agreed with Mr. Chapin on this point and noted that this ordinance does not say in some fashion that you cannot bring the wall to the intersections. Mr. Weekes stated he is wondering if the question has been addressed and whether they feel like the benefit of the buffering is sufficient to out-weigh the possible hazard to traffic transversing the alley. Mr. Carey stated ~hat he thinks the benefit of the residential property owner is paramount in this case and the wall is required. To answer the question of how this could be worded in the ordinance, the City Attorney stated it would have to be subject to the approval of the City Engineer so that the subject wall in each subsection that is referred to in the ordinance, does not block the visibility from any approaching street to an intersection. To answer Mr. Chapin's question regarding the landscaping of the 10 foot strip, Mr. Carey Stated that that was obviously in there - 19 - 2/13/78. when they were talking about a hedge and he sees no reason to have it in as long as you are requ±rinq a wall. Mr. Wallin agreed with Mr. Carey. Mr. Weekes noted that on page 3 of the ordinance, about the fourth paragraph where it states "the required wall will be exempt", does not make any sense. He stated a better wording would be no wall shall be required. Roll call was had on the motion at this time. 8.m. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 13-78, repealing Chapter 25A "Trees and Shrubs" of the Code of Ordinances relative to removal of certain trees, is before Council for passage consideration on Fir st Reading. This change was recommended by the Landscape Ordinance Review Committee. Council may either pass this ordinance on First Reading or refer it to a future workshop meeting. - The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 13-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REPEALING CHAPTER 25A "TREES ~AND SHRUBS", ARTI'CLE II "REMOVAL OF CERTAIN TREES" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH AND SUBSTITUTING IN ITS PLACE A NEW CHAPTER 25A, ARTICLE II ENTITLED "REMOVAL OF SCRUB VEGETATION AND CERTAIN TREES"; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROV~ ING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 13-78, on First Reading, seconded by Mr. RandOlph. Because of questions raised by Mr. Weekes and the disagreements by Mr. Sanson, it was suggested that this ordinance be referred to workshop. Mr. Weekes moved that Ordinance No. 13-78 be referred to, workshop, 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. At this point, time being 9:43 P.M. Mr. Chapin and Mr. Weekes left the room temporarily. 8.n. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 14-78, amending Ordinance No. 61-77 which amended Chapter 29 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances relative to zero lot line developments, is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This ordinance, which formerly was numbered 72-77, was tabled at the December 12th meeting, pending further clarification between the City Attorney and the Planning & Zoning Board's language in the ordinance. This was discussed at the January 30th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 14-78: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 61-77 WHICH AMENDED CHAPTER 29 "ZONING" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES SECTIONS 29-6 RM-6 (P), 29-7 RM-10 (P), 29-8 RM-15 (P), 29-8.1 PRD-4 (R), 29-8.2 PRD-7 (R), 29-8.3 PRD-10 (R) SPECIAL REGULATIONS BY ADDING THE WORDS "IN ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT"; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Sanson moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 14-78 on First Reading, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call, Council voted -- 9A _ 9/lq/7R. 237 as follows: Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - Yes. The motion passed with a 3 to 0 vote. At this point Mr. Chapin and Mr. Weekes returned, time being 9:45 P.M. 8.o. The City Manager reported that Ordinance No. 15-78, amending Chapter 19 "Pensions" of the Code of Ordinances,is before Council for passage consideration on First Reading. This was discussed at the January 30th workshop meeting. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 15-78: AN ORDINANCE 0P THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE V "PENSION PLAN FOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES", BY REPEALING SECTION 19-84 (e)(1) AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 19-84 (e)(1) MONTHLY INCOME PAYABLE PRIOR TO NORMAL RETIREMENT DATE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The city Manager read the caption of the ordinance. Mr. Randolph moved for the passage of Ordinance No. 15-78 on First 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. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Before roll call, Mr. Chapin stated that although he has no substantial objection to this ordinance, he does feel the City's Retire- ment System Pension is a very generous one and would like at a future workshop meeting to discuss some minor adjustments which relates to the equity and fairness of this plan. 9.a. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 31st, recommended by unanimous vote that the site plan modification request of the First Baptist Church located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Swinton Avenue and S.W. 4th Street to allow a 4,290 square foot addition to be used for Sunday School classrooms and a youth center, be approved as a minor modification. Mr. Sanson noted that in making a'minor modification there would be no public hearing. He stated that the Trinity Lutheran School some time ago, wanted to build a basketball court and, Planning & Zoning-wise, supposedly, there were no problems but, politically, with the neighbors there was a big one. Another instance was with the Church of the Palms where they wanted to build a recreational field and there were some neighbors who wanted to be assured that screening would be put up. On these two instances it was valid that there should have been a major modification because the people wanted to be heard. Mr. Chapin moved that Council adopt the unanimous recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board regarding the First Baptist Church to allow a 4,290 square foot addition to be used as a Sunday School classroom and youth center to be approved as a minor modification, seconded by Mr. Randolph, said motion passing unanimously. 9.b. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 17th, recommended by unanimous vote that part of N.W. 2nd Street that runs from Lake Ida Road to the Railroad Depot, be changed from N.W. 2nd Street to Depot Avenue. - 21 - 2/13/78. Mr. Sanson moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board to change that part of N.W. 2nd Avenue that runs from Lake Ida Road to Railroad Depot, to Depot Avenue, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.c. The City Manager reported that an application has been received from Pebb Enterprises (Jeffrey Rosenberg) to annex a 28.11 acre parcel of land, subject to R-1AA (Single Family Dwelling) District. The subject property is presently vacant and the proposed use is for residential single family homes. The subject property is in Section 25-46-42, and is located west of the E-4 Canal, between Germantown Road and the L-37 Canal. It is recommended that the property be annexed subject to the R-1AA zoning district. This request is in conformance with the City's Land Use Plan. In preparing the annexation ordinance, the strip of Germantown Road located on the north side of this property should be included in the legal description for annexation, to make this area contiguous with the City land on the north side of Germantown Road. This property is presently zoned RS (Residential Single Family) in the County. The City Attorney stated that he was contacted by the County Attorney's office and Dan Kotulla was contacted by the County Planning Department concerning this particular piece of property. The County is now in the process of rezoning this from its residential classification to an Agricultural classification. Apparently, the applicant had gone to the County and requested single family zoning, a change from AG to RS; he was granted that residential zoning and a representation made to the County Commission that he was going to develop the property at one acre lot sizes. Subsequently, it came about according to the information received, that that representation was not correct and he was attempting to develop it at less than the one acre size that was represented to the County. Thereafter, the County has instituted rezoning proceedings and the matter of rezoning goes before the County Commission on February 23rd. Mayor Scheifley questioned if an ordinance should be prepared at this time or delay it. The City Attorney stated that that is Ieft up to Council; however, Dan Kotulla informed him that the County may wait until they see what Council does on it. If Council decides to annex it, they may hold off on the rezoning. Mr. Chapin stated that he feels Council should defer this matter in light of the fact that it is under review by the County and to maintain peaceful relations with the County, it would be improper for Council, at this time, to take action. Jeff Rosenberg, a member of Pebb Enterprises, stated that when they went to the County for rezoning they suggested that they show a plan and they showed a plan with half-acre lots, due to the fact that you were~not permitted to go under half-acre lots without having water and sewer to the property. It was brought to their attention that water and sewer was being provided to the property immediately north of them, Spanish Wells, and at that stage they started to work on their plan. They went to the County to get an extension of the zoning and they would not grant the extension because they wanted to see the new plan they were referring to. At this stage they started dealing with Mr. Kotulla, as far as becoming annexed into the City, because they will be getting their water and sewer from the City and the people living there would be using the City's ser- vices. They then went back to the County and mentioned this to them and they said "fine", go to the City and get the City's feelings, as far as the annexation, and present their feelings to the County Commissioners and give them an indication of what is happening on the City level. Mr. Rosenberg stated he feels the County would like to see this property in the City and he is asking the City to make some kind of commitment, as far as the annexation, to show the County there is interest in the annexation. At that stage the County still has the option to proceed with the rezoning or defer to the City's action and prevent a lot of duplication of work. - 22 - 2/13/78 Mayor Scheifley stated he thinks if Council took some specific action, and has the cooperation of the County, it would further the possibility of getting this property in as R-1AA. Mr. Sanson stated he can see no harm in taking under advisement Mr. Chapin's suggestion because they have repeatedly asked for the County's cooperation and they seem to be wanting to ask for ours here. Further, he would like to see this property zoned R-1AAA to try to put aside some area in the western part of Delray where you can have some homes of sub- stantial nature where a person could have some room to move around, build a tennis court, swimming pool, whatever, with no problems. Mr. Chapin moved that in light of the communication received by Mr. Kotulla, Mr. Saberson, and representation made by Mr. Rosenberg, that formal action be deferred pending any completion the County may have and, if the County has no objection, that this property be annexed into the City as R-1AAA, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. Mr. Chapin stated, in answer to Mr. Rosenberg's question, that this action taken would be communicated to the County Commission by the City Manager. 9.d. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 31st, recommended by unanimous vote that the preliminary and final plat approval request for Rainberry Bay (Section lA) in Section 7-46-43 at the northwest corner of the intersection of Lake Ida Road and Davis Road be approved, subject to the following: (1) Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his January 27th memorandum; (2) Comments of the South Florida Water Management District as stated in the'ir January 3rd letter; (3) Availability of water. Mr. Sanson stated that he thinks the records of neighboring communities, and throughout the United States that are involved deeply in planning for their communities, dictate that the Council, in approving plats, has certain rights that they can ask to insure that the developer provides for the impact of his development. In this town, Council has, basically, always taken an attitude, as well as the Planning & Zoning Board, of never really considering, what he considers to be corollary aspects of development. In Rainberry Bay, he sees a situation, three to four years from now, where Council is going to be faced with the situation exactly similar to Highpoint. There is one road in and out of Rainberry Bay, and the developer should be required to put in escrow, funds to pay for the erection of a traffic light in the future. Mr. Weekes left the room for possible conflict of interest on this item. Mr. Chapin moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board to approve the preliminary and final plat of Rainberry Bay (Section lA) subject to the items outlined in tonight's agenda item 9.d., seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll call Mr. Siemens stated that the issue of the traffic light and one being required in the future is a pertinent issue. However, in order to get approval for connection onto a County road, the plans for the entire development must be reviewed by the County Engineering Depart- ment - they must get a permit, and did. The County Engineering Department required them to expend $18,000 to improve Lake Ida Road in order to - 23 - 2/13/78 provide for acceleration and deceleration lanes out of this property. When the initial plans were submitted, they called off one-half of the improvement that the County ultimately required them to make. The reason for the change, on the part of the County, with respect to what was being submitted, is that they took into account the number of traffic movements that would be involved with respect to this development having one entrance. The purpose of it having one entrance is because the roads are private and the entire purpose is to have internal security. In terms of the requirement of a traffic light, it has been reviewed by the County and they have determined, that based upon all the engineering data available, the number of units, the number of anticipated cars and traffic movement per day, that a traffic light at this particular intersection is not necessary. Mr. Chapin stated that both Mr. Siemens and Mr. Sanson agreed with one point, that planning should have planned for the impact of the development in the future and, if the ordinances do not fully plan for the impact, in traffic analysis, etc., then perhaps Council should con- sider broadening the scope of the ordinances. He stated he would be willing to explore and refer this question to the Planning & Zoning Board so that they can again have government by forethought and not by crisis or afterthought. The City Manager stated he would communicate this thought to the Planning & Zoning Board. Roll call was had on the motion at this time. (Mr. Weekes returned at this time.) 9.e. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board recommended by unanimous vote, at a meeting held on January 24th, that the preliminary and final plat approval request for Lakewoode Subdivision, Section III (Hamlet - Phase VIII) in Section 24-46-42 on the north side of Hamlet Drive, between Military Trail and Dover Road, be approved, subject to the following: (1) Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his January 17th memorandum; (2) Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as stated in his memoranda of December 9, 1977; (3) Availability of water. (4) That the sidewalk requirement be waived on both sides of the street. Mr. Weekes moved to sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.f. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 24th, recommended by unanimous vote that the final plat approval request of Linton Center, located in Section 29-46-43 at the southeast corner of the intersection of 1-95 and Linton Boulevard be approved, subject to the following: (1) Comments of the City Engineer as stated in his January 17th memorandum; (2) Comments of the Director of Public Utilities as stated in his January 17th memorandum; - 24 - 2/13/78 (3) Conditions of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District as stated in their permit dated October 7, 1976; (4) Availability of water. Mr. Weekes moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board in regard to the Linton Center, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.q. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 24th, recommended by unanimous vote that the site plan modification request of Costa Del Rey (Phase I) located south of Del-Harbour Drive, if extended east, between A1A and the Ocean to enclose the balconies be approved as a minor modification, subject to approval by the Community Appearance Board. This was discussed at the January 30th workshop meeting. Mr. Randolph moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.h. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 31st, recommended by unanimous vote that the site plan modification request of the Primitive Baptist Church located on the east side of N.E. 2nd Avenue between N.E. 17th Street and N.E. 19th Street to allow the construction of a sidewalk along the north side of the existing church building be approved as a minor modification. Mr. Sanson moved that the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board be sustained, seconded by Mr. Weekes. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.i. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 17th, recommended by unanimous vote that the Tietig rezoning request of a parcel of land from RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District located in Section 20-46-43 on the north side of S.W. 10th Street between S.W. 15th Avenue and S.W. 12th Avenue be denied because the Planning & Zoning Board feels their previous recommendation for RM-6 zoning is proper, since RM-6 would be more marketable, there is more of a demand for duplexes in this location and, as a result, the city would end up with a better de- velopment under RM-6 zoning. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 30th. Mr. Weekes questioned the reason stated for a denial. He stated he could understand the statement being made but he cannot understand it being a formal reason for denying the request. Mr. Chapin noted that, when this came up before, it was a 3-2 vote for RM-10 and because of procedure it was sent back, it was thought to be resolved but in fact was not; it went back to the Planning & Zoning Board and they unanimously reaffirmed their position - P~M-6. It is before Council again to determine which is the appropriate zoning for this parcel- Delray Heights Extension. Mr. Tietig stated that, if this is going to be zoned RM-6, there isn't anything going to be built there because to build a product that could be afforded by people in that area, you cannot build. Mr. Weekes moved that Council deny the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board as to this item, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Chapin - No; Mr. Randolph - Yes; Mr. Sanson - Yes; Mr. Weekes - Yes; Mayor Scheifley - No. Said motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. - 25 - 2/13/78 Mr. Weekes moved that the C±ty Attorney be ±nstructed to prepare an ord±nance to rezone th±s property to R~-10, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Upon roll call Counc±l voted as follows: Mr. Chap±n - No: Mr. Randolph - Yes: Mr. Sanson - Yes: Mr. Weekes - Yes: Mayor $che±fley - mot±on passed w±th a 3 to 2 vote. 9.j. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 24th, recommended by unanimous vote that the site plan modification request of Pines of Delray West, located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Homewood Boulevard and Linton Boulevard to interchange two and four story buildings along the lake, be approved as a minor modification. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 30th. Mr. Chapin moved to sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board on this item, seconded by Mr. Sanson. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.k. The City Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on January 24th, recommended by unanimous vote that the conditional use and site and development plan approval request for Abbey Delray, located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Congress Avenue and Lowson Boulevard, be extended for 18 months to September 27, 1979. This was discussed at the workshop meeting on January 30th. Mr. Chapin moved that Council approve the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board for the extension of a~site plan approval for Abbey Delray for 18 months, seconded by Mr. Randolph. Said motion passed unanimously. 9.1.m.n. The city Manager reported that the Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the Hoffman - Parcel 1 rezoning request of a 6.59-acre parcel of land from RM-15 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to GC (General Commercial) District at the northeast corner of the intersection of U.S. No. 1 and Linton Boulevard be denied based on the reasons set forth in the memo- randum from the Planning Director to the City Manager dated December 22, 1977. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. The Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the Hoffman - Parcel 2 rezoning request of a 2.64-acre parcel of land from RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to GC (General Commercial) District at the southeast corner of the inter- section of U.S. No. 1 and Linton Boulevard be denied based on the reasons set forth in the memorandum from the Planning Director to the City Manager dated December 22, 1977. The Planning & Zoning Board, at a meeting held on December 20th, recommended by unanimous vote that the Hoffman - Parcel 3 rezoning request of a 3.05-acre parcel of land from RM-6 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District to GC (General Commercial) District south of Linton Boulevard between U.S. No. 1 and the Intracoastal Waterway be denied based on the reasons set forth in the memorandum from the Planning Director to the City Manager dated December 22, 1977. This was discussed at the January 4th workshop meeting. Mr. Chapin asked Mr. Slinkman, attorney for the applicant, if this is an'all or nothing proposition to the City, GC take it or leave it, or are they working toward a common solution toward SAD. The reason he raises this question is because careful reading of the Planning & Zoning Board - 26 - 2/13/78 243 minutes, as well as the transcript, '~ould indicate that there is unani- mous opinion to deny all three rezoning requests; however, there is a split Planning & Zoning Board with regard to Special Activities District and that seems to be the fertile ground on which this matter could be resolved. In light of the fact that there is litigation pending against the City in this case, it seems that that is the area in which this could be amicably resolved. Mr. Slinkman stated that he hopes that they are all working toward some kind of amicable resolution of the problem. In that regard, he has discussed this with Mr. Hoffman and with his land planners. With regard to parcel C (or parcel 3), they would like to withdraw their petition for rezoning (item 9.n. on tonight's agenda). Mr. Slinkman stated that with regard to the other two parcels, he feels that the Planning & Zoning Board has acknowledged that they feel that something needs to be done and that they are not adverse to some type of commercial zoning and it may work out in terms of Special Activity District. At the last meeting, on January 4, before the Planning & Zoning Board, which was informal, everyone was pretty much in agreement that if they could present to Council and the Board, all of the facts for review, that would help a great deal and there would not be a need for a full, formal, in person presentation by all of the people who presented their arguments and feelings to the Planning & Zoning Board. He stated that they have given to the Board, Mr. Bradshaw's report, the traffic study by Mr. Harold Vick, Mr. Moss's synopsis, and the transcripts of the two hearings before the Planning & Zoning Board, and, in addition, the minutes of the Planning & Zoning Board, one of the changes that has been made in reference to these parcels is that the property owner to the south no longer has any objections to the parcels A and B, or 1 and 2, being rezoned to GC. Mr. Sanson stated that he would hate to think that Mr. Slink- man's defense, or one of the avenues of it, is that Council has taken this subject matter in a light sense, that they are voting on something they are not educated about. Mr. Sanson noted that he attended the public hearings of the Planning & Zoning Board several times in the past and feels very well educated about what is going on. Mr. Weekes asked Mr. Slinkman if he would be willing to defer the resolution of this property to another day when Council has more opportunity to study the presentations? Mr. Slinkman answered, yes. At this time, the Mayor temporarily left the room. Mr. Weekes suggested that this be considered at a time when there isn't such a lengthy agenda, as tonight; Mr. Slinkman stated that is agreeable with him and Mr. Hoffman. Mr. Chapin stated that he feels that the "SAD" ordinances could be worked out and would be functional but he does not want to be put through the unnecessary three or four hour hearings of the sole presentation on GC; if he has to vote on the strict GC, he would have problems with that. Mr. Weekes concurred. Mr. Slinkman stated that the problem with the "SAD" ordinance is that they cannot apply for that because it has not passed and he does not know if it will ever pass. Mr. Chapin stated that in light of the fact that there is - 27 - 2/13/78 litigation pending against the City, that this is a relatively new con- cept, he would propose that, if it could be assumed hypothetically that a "SAD" ordinance is adopted, that would be acceptable to the applicant and the City, and further assume that the applicant is willing to withdraw his litigation, at no cost to the city, would be a potential amicable resolution to the matter. The whole issue relates to density, traffic con- trol and impact on this area and does not resolve the balance of the six and a fraction acres on the north side of Linton Boulevard. It seems there would have to be, if you're going to provide more density on those six acres, some give and take on the balance of the residential, which is now 15. The final resolution will have to be made by Mr. Slinkman and the City Attorney. Mr. Hoffman questioned if there is something in the ordinances which states that if action isn't taken by the Board within a certain period of time that it constitutes an automatic denial; the City Attorney answered, yes, 60 days and he believes February 13th was set up in light of the 60 day period. Mr. Hoffman stated that they are looking for certain uses on this property which the present zoning ordinances do not allow enough control to insure these uses; they have evidenced their agreement that they will confine these uses to those they propose. They withdrew their petition as to parcel C, or 3, on the recommendation of Mr. Bradshaw; he felt that this parcel in no way should be given to General Commercial uses and by going GC without control would not be a proper safeguard for the adjoining owners. Mr. Hoffman stated he will go with whatever posi- tion Council wishes to take on it, to vote on it, or table it, and let it become an automatic denial. He stated they are willing to work with the City in an attempt to work this out under the new ordinance. Paul Schnabel, President of Shore Construction Corporation, stated Jim Sommers and himself have formed a joint venture on the property which is designated R-1AA to construct 10 or 11 single family houses. The property has been transferred and the joint venture now owns the property in the name of Caroline Shore. Mr. Schnabel stated he is the managing partner of that property and they have no objections to the re- zoning of parcels 1 and 2, or A and B, into General Commercial. Jim Sommers made it clear that at no time did he ever object to the rezoning of A and B or Parcel 2; his principle and only objection has been the rezOning of parcel C, or 3. When questioned by Mr. Sanson, Mr. Slinkman stated they are content to leave parcel C, or 3, at R-1AA at this time; they would like to come back in on that under "SAD". The Mayor returned to the meeting at 10:50 P.M. Mr. Sanson noted that Mr. Schnabel has not addressed his feelings to parcel Number 3. Mr. Slinkman agreed. Mr. Weekes moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board on these two items, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said 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. Said motion passed unanimously. - 28 - 2/13/78 245 General Fund ................. $1,243,554.52 Federal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund ...... 110,000.00 Federal Public Works Fund ........ 198,131.74 Water and Sewer Fund ........... 505,303.76 Mr. Weekes moved, at 11:00 P.M., for the adjournment of the meeting, seconded by Mr. Chapin. Said motion passed unanimously. CITY CLERK APPROVED: //_ The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach aM that the information provided herein is the minutes of the meeting of said city Council of February 13, 1978 which minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Council on 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 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. - 29 - 2/13/78